Reaching Critical Will

Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)

Conference on Disarmament

General Assembly First Committee

UN Disarmament Commission

Special Session on Disarmament

News in Brief
Ray Acheson and Beatrice Fihn | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

News in Brief section from the NPT News in Review, the daily NGO newsletter from the
2010 nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference
Wednesday, 12 May 2010

Complete PDF of this edition

Main Committee I

Action plan for nuclear disarmament

Brazil, South Africa, Norway, Egypt, Algeria, Nigeria, Venezuela, and Indonesia said the RevCon should reaffirm the 13 steps but also go beyond them, adding benchmarks and timelines for implementation.
The Netherlands said the RevCon should build on the 13 steps.
Mexico said the 13 steps should be the minimum basis for agreement.
Cuba called on the RevCon to carry out a review of compliance with what was agreed on in 1995 and 2000 and to discuss on corrective actions designed to ensure full compliance and to take new practical step. It called for the start of negotiations of a phased programme leading to the complete elimination of nuclear weapons by 2025 at the latest.
Algeria argued that a disarmament action plan should include a mechanism to ensure follow-up of implementation.
Libya said all NWS should place all of their nuclear installations under IAEA safeguard as part of a negotiated agreement concluded with the IAEA in accordance with the NPT and IAEA Statute in order to verify the implementation by NWS of their commitments to achieve full and complete nuclear disarmament as quickly as possible.
China called for a phased approach resulting in a NWC.
Norway argued that a nuclear weapon free world will need an additional legal instrument as the “ultimate implementation” of article VI.

Reductions

The Netherlands urged Russia and the US to include non-strategic nuclear weapons in their reductions.
Malaysia said reductions cannot replace irreversible cuts and elimination.
South Africa and Ireland emphasized that reductions do not necessarily reflect a commitment to the complete elimination of nuclear weapons, as reductions can be undertaken for many reasons, including strategic stability, financial constraints, or safety issues.

Vertical proliferation

Cuba criticized NWS for continuing to perfect their arsenals and trying to downplay the dangers of vertical proliferation.
Egypt called on NWS to refrain from modernizing their arsenals or creating new types of nuclear weapons.
Norway said the process to achieve the total elimination of nuclear weapons would imply that NWS should refrain from developing new categories of nuclear arms.

Doctrine

Cuba argued that security doctrines based on nuclear weapons are unjustifiable.
New Zealand said a diminishing role for nuclear weapons in security strategies must be a guiding principle for the RevCon's work.
Egypt said that retaining a role for nuclear weapons in security doctrines is one of the biggest challenges to nuclear disarmament.
Norway said nuclear weapons should be seen as irrelevant and counterproductive in future security strategies.
China, Mexico, and South Africa encouraged NWS to adopt no first use policies.

De-alerting

The “De-alerting Group” explained its three frontal process on this subject: UNGA resolutions, engaging foreign ministers of P5, and WP.10, which recommends the RevCon: recognize that reductions in alert levels will contribute to nuclear disarmament by signalling reduced reliance on nuclear weapons; urge NWS to take additional measures to reduce alert levels of nuclear weapon systems; and call on NWS to report regularly on measures they have taken.
Egypt called on NWS to take further steps to de-alert their weapons pending their elimination.
Malaysia said de-alerting is a qualitative step to disarmament.
New Zealand and Norway said de-alerting is a positive way to reduce the role of nuclear weapons.

Nuclear sharing

Cuba, Egypt, China, and Iran called on NWS that deploy nuclear weapons abroad to withdraw them.

Negative security assurances

Cuba, Egypt, Malaysia, Algeria, Venezuela called for the negotiation of a legally-binding, non-discriminatory, comprehensive treaty on NSAs.
Malayisa voiced support for the re-establishment of an ad hoc committee in CD on NSAs with a mandate to negotiate.
China called on NWS to grant unequivocal assurances to NNWS and to not target anyone.

Nuclear weapon free zones

China said it has reached agreement in principle with ASEAN regarding the Southeast Asian NWFZ and that it is ready to sign relevant protocols of the Central Asian NWFZ.

Transparency

New Zealand said ad hoc reporting does not serve the NPT and called for a systematic approach to article VI reporting.

CTBT

The Netherlands, New Zealand, Algeria, China, Norway called for entry into force of CTBT.
New Zealand welcomed Indonesia and Papua New Guinea's intentions to ratify the CTBT.

FMCT

The Netherlands, Cuba, New Zealand, Malaysia, Algeria, China, Norway, and France called for negotiations of FM(C)T.
Cuba said the treaty must take into account disarmament and non-proliferation objectives.
Norway said the treaty should address the issue of existing stocks.

Preconditions

Egypt expressed concern with some attempts to link nuclear disarmament with the establishment of certain political situations or the implementation of new non-proliferation obligations, which put the onus for disarmament on states that do not possess nuclear weapons and are not compatible with legal obligations inherent in the NPT.
Mexico argued that compliance with article VI is not simply a desire but an obligation, that parties must always comply with their obligations, and that is unacceptable to say that compliance with article VI depends on whether or not there are favourable conditions in global security.

PAROS

China called for a multilateral treaty on preventing an arms race in outer space as a contribution to creating conditions conducive to nuclear disarmament.

Machinery

Norway said the international community has to address the relevance of the CD as a disarmament forum.

International humanitarian law

Norway said the international community should look at how nuclear weapons related to international humanitarian law.

Civil society

New Zealand said raising awareness and educating the general public is vital.

Japan introduced its working paper on disarmament and non-proliferation education, highlighting the role of education in eliminating nuclear weapons and empowering people to make contributions and informed choices.

Main Committee III

“Inalienable right”

Iran called on the RevCon to reaffirm article IV and urged the removal of limitations pursued in contravention of the Treaty.
Lebanon argued that one has to be careful not to blur the frontiers between what is legally-binding, what is voluntarily agreed, and what could seem desirable as confidence-building measures.

Technical cooperation

Ukraine, Norway, Colombia, Iran, and Republic of Korea called for the IAEA Technical Cooperation Programme to be adequately and predictably funded.
Malaysia said that the Technical Cooperation Programme should continue to be developed in a professional, impartial, and non-discriminatory manner, in line with the IAEA Statute and implemented based on the needs of member states.
Lebanon argued that the RevxCon needs to steer away from any initiative or set of measures that would dwarf the technical cooperation activities in favour of other activities.

Export controls

Iran called for the establishment of a mechanism within the framework of the NPT review process in order to address the challenge of existing export control regimes that create undue restrictions on the transfer of nuclear materials and technologies in contravention of the letter and spirit of article IV.
Iran described the Nuclear Suppliers Group as “exclusive and non-transparent” and said that its decision to engage in nuclear trade with non-NPT states parties was in defiance of paragraph 12 of the 1995 decision on principles and objectives.
Iran called on the RevCon to emphasize that the NPT does not prohibit the transfer or use of nuclear material or equipment for peaceful purposes based on their “sensitivity” and only stipulates that it must be subject to full scope IAEA safeguards.

Fuel cycle

Iran pointed out that article IV, the IAEA's Statute, and comprehensive safeguards agreement, and additional protocol do not provide for the restriction of the right of states parties to fuel cycle activities.
Iran argued it is premature for multilateralization of the fuel cycle to be considered.
Lebanon noted that in the absence of thorough analysis and consensus over nuclear fuel supply, half measures or hasty initiatives may create more problems than they solve.
Ukraine and the Republic of Korea welcomed the agreement between the IAEA and the Russian Federation to establish a LEU reserve for supply to the IAEA.
New Zealand called for multilateral approaches to the fuel cycle to address the back end of the cycle, such as reprocessing, spent fuel, and waste management and for any assurance mechanism to be transparent, independent, inclusive, and equally applied, using defined criteria, and come under the auspices of the IAEA.
Sweden stated that a multilateral nuclear fuel assurance mechanism would be a useful instrument to ensure supply to a state where need for LEU has arisen, and argued that recourse to such assurances, as a backup mechanism, would be entire voluntary. Sweden also suggested that the Conference should take note of such important work done by the IAEA.
Malaysia called for the establishment of an open-ended working group to discuss all aspects of the issue of assurances of nuclear fuel supply.

Nuclear safety and security

Iran said the IAEA should play the key role in the development of international nuclear safety and security standards
Ukraine called on all states to accede to all IAEA conventions on safety and security.
New Zealand called on states to improve their national measures against illicit trafficking in nuclear materials and to enhance international partnerships and capacity-building. New Zealand also called on states to strengthen international cooperation on radioactive material shipments and to address gaps in existing nuclear liability regimes.`
New Zealand and Norway urged states to join the relevant safety conventions.

Nuclear waste

Finland argued that each nation should have a strategy on how to plan the final disposal of spent nuclear fuel and nuclear waste.

Withdrawal

Republic of Korea noted that though the right to withdrawal existed, an abuse of that right, especially combined with treaty violations, would be detrimental to the undiminished security of all. The Republic of Korea also stated that the RevCon should reach a common understanding on an effective response mechanism.
Colombia stated that they would oppose any modification of the text of the NPT, including article X, as well as any attempt to abuse the interpretation of its clauses that amounts to a weakening of the regime.