Scribd
Upload
52 views1 page

Aon

The document discusses the differences between the compliance structures of the nuclear weapons regime and the chemical weapons regime. It notes that while there is a global convention and implementing agency like the OPCW that monitors and verifies compliance for chemical weapons, the nuclear nonproliferation treaty (NPT) has a more restricted and incoherent compliance structure. Specifically, it lacks an implementing agency and relies more on the IAEA and UN Security Council for compliance actions. For the NPT to remain effective in today's integrated and challenging world, it will need greater cooperation and a compliance structure that is less discriminatory and better able to address issues like nuclear terrorism from non-state actors.

Uploaded by

Sudarshan Agarwal
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as RTF, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
Download as rtf, pdf, or txt
52 views1 page

Aon

The document discusses the differences between the compliance structures of the nuclear weapons regime and the chemical weapons regime. It notes that while there is a global convention and implementing agency like the OPCW that monitors and verifies compliance for chemical weapons, the nuclear nonproliferation treaty (NPT) has a more restricted and incoherent compliance structure. Specifically, it lacks an implementing agency and relies more on the IAEA and UN Security Council for compliance actions. For the NPT to remain effective in today's integrated and challenging world, it will need greater cooperation and a compliance structure that is less discriminatory and better able to address issues like nuclear terrorism from non-state actors.

Uploaded by

Sudarshan Agarwal
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as RTF, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
Download as rtf, pdf, or txt
Download as rtf, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 1

A central problem with the nuclear weapons regime is its incoherent compliance structure.

The contrast
with the regime for chemical weapons is instructive.

For chemical weapons, there is a global convention requiring their prohibition and elimination. It
establishes an implementing agency, the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW),
which carries out monitoring and verification tasks. An Executive Council of States Parties, based on
reports, makes determinations concerning compliance. The Conference of States Parties is empowered
to take collective enforcement measures, e.g. economic sanctions. In cases of particular gravity, the
Conference is required to refer the matter to the UN General Assembly and Security Council.

With 189 signatories, the NPT is the most influential treaty that concerns nuclear issues. But the world
has changed in the 42 years since the treaty came into force. If the treaty is to survive, it must be
implemented more comprehensively and verification procedures must become less discriminatory. All
this requires greater global cooperation.

Terrible prospect. For the treaty to remain an influential document in an integrated world, it will need to
come to terms with major challenges. The treaty regime must become more adept at confronting
nuclear terrorism. The emergence of non-state actors has called into question whether a
nonproliferation regime that was fashioned during the Cold War is capable of addressing contemporary
threats. According to Article I of the treaty, "each nuclear weapon state … undertakes not to transfer to
any recipient whatsoever nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices or control over such
weapons or explosive devices." But there is no guarantee that this principle can be upheld in a world
where non-state actors are increasingly challenging the authority of the state.

In recent years, countries like Libya and Syria have been accused of seeking to develop nuclear weapons;
evidence has emerged of nuclear smuggling from the former Soviet Union; and cities like New York and
London have been targets of terrorism. All this contributes to fears of nuclear attacks carried out by
terrorists. The power of non-state actors is gradually coming to par with state power, but the NPT cannot
exert control over non-state actors. This highlights the importance of international initiatives such as the
Nuclear Security Summit, which can help build a more coordinated, committed global effort against the
menace of nuclear terrorism. The underlying goal of the summits is to secure all vulnerable nuclear
materials; in order for this to be achieved, countries must honor the pledges of money and resources
that they have made to the effort, and in many cases should increase the levels of funding and personnel
that they devote to nuclear security.

In contrast, NPT states parties have very restricted means and practices for ensuring compliance. The
real action regarding non-proliferation takes place in the IAEA and its Board of Governors and in the
Security Council. As to disarmament, there is nothing in place at all except for an important forum – the
review conferences and their Prep

You might also like