Five Decades of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty: Time to Pass the Baton to the UN Security Council?

G. Barrie
{"title":"Five Decades of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty: Time to Pass the Baton to the UN Security Council?","authors":"G. Barrie","doi":"10.25159/2521-2583/9561","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) came into force in 1970. After renouncing its nuclear weapons programme, South Africa became a party to the NPT in 1991. The NPT is the principal international instrument aimed at preventing the spread of nuclear weapons. The NPT has generated various other treaties with similar aims, which, together with the NPT, constitute the ‘nuclear non-proliferation regime’. The NPT has, for various reasons, not been a success. Whether the NPT has achieved nuclear non-proliferation is a moot point–a concept which implies nuclear disarmament. For example, there is evidence of a network of covert operations marketing nuclear technology; some non-NPT states have clandestinely embarked on nuclear weapons programmes, and some NPT states have threatened to adopt a policy of actual or pre-emptive use of nuclear weapons even against non-nuclear weapons states for its deterrent value. Alarm bells are ringing regarding the interpretation of ‘peaceful’ and ‘non-peaceful’ uses of nuclear energy. Despite the NPT, nothing prohibits the testing and refinement of existing nuclear weapons technology. Certain questions need to be answered. Has the NPT not become an instrument of rhetorical posturing by the five major nuclear weapon states–the ‘Club of Five’? Why has none of the Club of Five given their nuclear weapons up? Where do the Club of Five get the moral authority to declare that introducing new members on the Club is unacceptable? Instead of concentrating on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons as the NPT does, should there not rather be an emphasis on the total prohibition of all nuclear weapons? It is submitted that a more active role for the UN in nuclear non-proliferation issues be considered. All UN Secretaries-General have made nuclear non-proliferation one of their top priorities. Kofi Annan concluded that the NPT was the victim of insufficient progress in not only nuclear non-proliferation but also nuclear disarmament and that the world was sleepwalking towards a nuclear disaster. The basis for greater involvement of the UN Security Council in nuclear non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament is to be found in the Statute of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the Statute of the NPT, the UN Charter and in Security Council Relations 1540 of 2004 and 1929 of 2010. The argument is put forward that as the Security Council has the legal authority to determine threats to the peace or acts of aggression and make recommendations or decide what measures shall be taken regarding it, utilising that body may be a more meaningful route to follow than the NPT which appears to have reached its sell-by date.","PeriodicalId":185651,"journal":{"name":"South African Yearbook of International Law","volume":"55 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African Yearbook of International Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25159/2521-2583/9561","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) came into force in 1970. After renouncing its nuclear weapons programme, South Africa became a party to the NPT in 1991. The NPT is the principal international instrument aimed at preventing the spread of nuclear weapons. The NPT has generated various other treaties with similar aims, which, together with the NPT, constitute the ‘nuclear non-proliferation regime’. The NPT has, for various reasons, not been a success. Whether the NPT has achieved nuclear non-proliferation is a moot point–a concept which implies nuclear disarmament. For example, there is evidence of a network of covert operations marketing nuclear technology; some non-NPT states have clandestinely embarked on nuclear weapons programmes, and some NPT states have threatened to adopt a policy of actual or pre-emptive use of nuclear weapons even against non-nuclear weapons states for its deterrent value. Alarm bells are ringing regarding the interpretation of ‘peaceful’ and ‘non-peaceful’ uses of nuclear energy. Despite the NPT, nothing prohibits the testing and refinement of existing nuclear weapons technology. Certain questions need to be answered. Has the NPT not become an instrument of rhetorical posturing by the five major nuclear weapon states–the ‘Club of Five’? Why has none of the Club of Five given their nuclear weapons up? Where do the Club of Five get the moral authority to declare that introducing new members on the Club is unacceptable? Instead of concentrating on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons as the NPT does, should there not rather be an emphasis on the total prohibition of all nuclear weapons? It is submitted that a more active role for the UN in nuclear non-proliferation issues be considered. All UN Secretaries-General have made nuclear non-proliferation one of their top priorities. Kofi Annan concluded that the NPT was the victim of insufficient progress in not only nuclear non-proliferation but also nuclear disarmament and that the world was sleepwalking towards a nuclear disaster. The basis for greater involvement of the UN Security Council in nuclear non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament is to be found in the Statute of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the Statute of the NPT, the UN Charter and in Security Council Relations 1540 of 2004 and 1929 of 2010. The argument is put forward that as the Security Council has the legal authority to determine threats to the peace or acts of aggression and make recommendations or decide what measures shall be taken regarding it, utilising that body may be a more meaningful route to follow than the NPT which appears to have reached its sell-by date.
《核不扩散条约》50年:是时候把接力棒交给联合国安理会了?
《不扩散核武器条约》(不扩散条约)于1970年生效。在放弃其核武器方案之后,南非于1991年成为《不扩散条约》的缔约国。《不扩散条约》是旨在防止核武器扩散的主要国际文书。《不扩散条约》产生了具有类似目标的各种其他条约,这些条约同《不扩散条约》一起构成了“核不扩散制度”。由于各种原因,《不扩散条约》没有取得成功。《不扩散条约》是否实现了核不扩散是一个没有实际意义的问题,这一概念意味着核裁军。例如,有证据表明存在一个销售核技术的秘密行动网络;一些《不扩散核武器条约》缔约国已秘密启动核武器计划,一些《不扩散核武器条约》缔约国威胁要采取实际或先发制人使用核武器的政策,甚至对无核武器国家也采取这种政策,以发挥其威慑作用。关于“和平”和“非和平”利用核能的解释,警钟正在敲响。尽管有《不扩散条约》,但没有任何东西禁止试验和改进现有的核武器技术。有些问题需要回答。《不扩散核武器条约》难道没有成为五大核武器国家——“五国俱乐部”——装腔作态的工具吗?为什么五国俱乐部没有一个国家放弃核武器?五国俱乐部从哪里获得道德权威来宣布引进新成员是不可接受的?与其像《不扩散核武器条约》那样把重点放在不扩散核武器上,难道不应该强调全面禁止所有核武器吗?有人提出,应考虑联合国在核不扩散问题上发挥更积极的作用。历任联合国秘书长都将核不扩散作为其首要任务之一。科菲·安南的结论是,《不扩散条约》不仅在核不扩散方面,而且在核裁军方面都是进展不足的受害者,世界正在梦游般走向一场核灾难。《国际原子能机构规约》、《不扩散核武器条约规约》、《联合国宪章》以及2004年第1540号和2010年第1929号《安理会关系》是联合国安理会进一步参与核不扩散和核裁军工作的基础。有人提出的论点是,由于安全理事会具有确定对和平的威胁或侵略行为并就其提出建议或决定应采取何种措施的法律权力,因此利用该机构可能是比似乎已到保质期的《不扩散条约》更有意义的途径。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信