The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty - Case Study Example

The nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Name: Code+ course name Instructor’s Name University Name City, State Date of Submission Introduction Historical Context The Non-proliferation treaty is a global treaty with the main objective revolving around prevention of nuclear weapon increase and spread. Additionally, the treaty focuses on promoting cooperation through nuclear energy and furthering accomplishment of disarmament agenda. The treaty was signed in 1968 but started to function in 1970 and was extended indefinitely in 1995. 191 states supports the treaty with only N. Korea withdrawing in 2003 with some United Nations members such as India, Israel and Pakistan remaining non-members[Wol94]. The treaty only recognizes five states as nuclear weapon states such as United State, Russia, France, China, and the UK. The non-members of this treaty such as Pakistan, India, and North Korea declared and tested the possession of the nuclear weapons. The treaty revolves around three articles consisting of three pillars system that implicitly balances among them. This includes non-proliferation, disarmament and the right to peaceful use of nuclear technology. The Non-proliferation treaty objectives lie on a central bargain that involves non-nuclear state accepting never to acquire nuclear weapons while the nuclear state to share the benefits of peaceful nuclear technology. Moreover, the nuclear state needs to pursue disarmament of nuclear weapons as a mechanism to control and eliminate nuclear arsenals. The treaty is always reviewed after every five years during Review Conference of the Parties to the treaty of the Non-Proliferation of nuclear weapons meetings. The meeting mainly focuses on reviewing the operation, reaffirming and strengthening the treaty as a vital element of the global security. The paper aim at analyzing the Non-proliferation Treaty in all aspects as reflected in the three pillars. In terms of international legal and normative frameworks, the existence of indeterminate system fails to guide behavior making it seem a myth. Considering the ideological and politics, the international law presents biasness since it serves as a tool for political attainment ends. The law experts disguise political purpose due to indeterminacy by upholding the alleged objectivity of legal reasoning. In this consideration, the non-proliferation treaty reflects this argument of indeterminacy as there exist the nuclear weapon states and the non-nuclear states. This shows that some states focus on power and control of other states through upholding the laws of the treaty. In this case, the retaining of Non-Proliferation treaty as a legal and authoritative regime adoption of a system that uphold the interest of both parties remains critical. The system would provide focus on rights and obligation that that favors both parties[Bel11]. Moreover, the international legal framework of nuclear weapon security reflects characteristics that seem to limit the scope of and adherence to the legal binding obligations. The international laws are supplemented by non-legally binding instrument facilitated by a body that is developed through the supports of IAEA. The need to adapt to changing circumstances and flexibilities revolves around the establishment of uniform standards as reflected by the existing structures. However, article III of 1968 reflects Non-Proliferation Treaty obliging to non-nuclear weapon state parties to finalize an agreement with IAEA to enhance prevention of diversion of nuclear material from activities that reflects non-peaceful purposes. Other measures upheld by the article after the conclusion of the agreement with IAEA and non-nuclear states revolves around the significance of protecting theft and sabotage of nuclear material to both non-proliferation and radiation safety. Political Context In terms of political aspects, Article IV of Non-Proliferation Treaty highly reflects the provision of international politics. The article reflects collisions that exist between the two parties that exist in Non-Proliferation Treaty. The two parties revolves around the state with the mandate to possess while others do not have the possession mandate[Phi08]. Major States in Treaty The key states in the Non-Proliferation Treaty are nuclear weapon states and non-nuclear weapon states. The nuclear weapon states purposes in ensuring the objectives of the treaty is adhered to on the basis of ensuring the promotion of cooperation and peaceful utilization of nuclear energy. Moreover, furthering the objectives and goals of accomplishing disarmament and general disarmament. The nuclear weapon state has a role in preventing the spread of uranium enrichment and the reprocessing of plutonium[Die08]. The non-nuclear weapon state role encompasses ensuring it does not indulge in the production of nuclear weapons or uphold activities that sabotage the peace of countries or regions. Role of organizations Considering organization such as United Nations it plays a vital role in enhancing disarmament objective is accomplished. In this consideration, the organization focus on overseeing this goal accomplishment through creation of United Nation Disarmament Commission (UNDC). The commission main creation objective remain consideration and making recommendations regarding disarmament activities. Moreover, the commission focus on overseeing the relevant decisions and recommendation in the field of disarmament is well implemented. In the case, of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) enhances the goal of Non-Proliferation is accomplished through the provision of confidence building measures that exist between different states parties[Bel11]. In this case, the treaty aims at safeguarding the system through the responsibility of IAEA. The organizations ensures the states that have signed as non-nuclear weapons do not involve in nuclear activities. In the event, a member state indulges in nuclear activities sanctions by the UN are upheld due to a violation of the Non-Proliferation obligations. Role of non-governmental organization The non-governmental organization remains vital in enhancing the accomplishment of Non-Proliferation Treaty. Typically, the global governance undergoes various stages from identification to implementation and enforcement of the policies. With the high revolution being experienced globally, the NGOs have emerged as the effective centers of policy researches, investigation and advocacy[Bel11]. For instance, the International Organization & Non-proliferation (IONP) focus on disarmament nonproliferation and upholding arm control measures. In the case, of NTI it keeps the information of all information regarding treaties and the organization members with continuous review done to enhance update as event warrant. For instance, NTI have maintained Convention on Nuclear Safety document that acts as an incentive instrument to enhance commitment of States upholding operation of nuclear energy plants to devise a mechanism that focus on regulating and governing the safety of nuclear installations. In this case, the information it provides revolves around the nuclear safety, radiological, response and preparedness[Boo12]. Moreover, NTI contains information regarding Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material (CPPNM) that involves the legal international agreement that binds the physical protection and upholding of peaceful utilization of nuclear material. The accomplishment of this objective revolves around the plutonium, highly enriched uranium, nuclear trade, commerce and nuclear material security subjects[Oli13]. Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) assist in the international implementation of treaties and also participates as NGOs representatives during the international process of treaty reviews in national delegations[Bel11]. Current Affairs analysis Current affairs that remain vital for an individual to know regarding NPT encompasses the current reviews of NPT of 2015. The review conference was presided over by the ambassador of Algeria Taous Feroukhi of Algeria. The treaty and specifically article VIII concerns review of the operation after every five years in 1995 and in 2000 it involved Extension Conference of the NPT review. Though a conclusion was not reached in 2015 Review Conference, the present state parties examined the implementation of the treaty since 2010[Jef15]. During this Review Conference, the report by Islamic Republican of Iran regarding the establishment of Middle East zone of free nuclear weapons was submitted. The report submission arises in pursuant to section IV paragraph 9 of the conclusion and recommendation of the Review and Conference 2010 upheld by the parties to the treaty of Non-Proliferation of nuclear weapons. This led to reaffirmation during the Conference that nuclear weapon state and the state within the region should continue to report on steps taken in implementation of 1995 resolutions. The report should be given to the United Nation Secretariat, to President of 2015 Review Conference and the Chairperson of the Preparatory Committee of the meeting to be held before the conference. The report contains the measure upheld by the Republican of Iran as a sign of adherence and implementation to 1995 resolutions of Middle East[Bel11]. Challenges facing NPT There exist challenges as Non-proliferation Treaty focus on implementation of the various policies. For instance, despite Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) termed as a flexible approach in terms of coordinating the international responses on issues of proliferation, there exist no legal authority for ship boarding granted by PSI beyond the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Moreover, ships of non-members cannot be interdicted unless master consents are allowed such as Iran and Pakistan. Additionally, there exist a challenge on global proliferation despite being an example of international law since it has failed to prevent various states such as India and Pakistan on continuous involvement in nuclear power. Moreover, the PSI is not a firmer institution that can foot without the folding to a formalized institution and thus strengthening the legal foundation of PSI would control the challenge. Additionally, the organization faces the challenge of dual –use item making difficult to control the proliferation of nuclear. The challenge arises from differentiation of states with the intention of peaceful or military purposes becomes a problem. Critique of NPT Non-proliferation Treaty faces critique for failing to facilitate the implementation of Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty with United State and other nuclear weapon state resisting. Moreover, the efforts to enhance conclusion of Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty remains futile due to the United States blocking the issues. The treaty objective focus on banning the production of nuclear weapons grade material. Criticism also arises on PSI being manipulated by the developed economies thus failing to address the problem of increasing independence among developing and non-state actors from the control undertaken by the traditional supporters of nuclear power establishment[Dan06]. Moreover, the Psi does not provide a legal framework that can assist in long-term, verifiability and irreversibility of the member state commitment. The organizations and institution bodies accomplish their objective regarding the Non-Proliferation treaty through implementing the outlined policies. For instance, the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) have facilitated progress in terms of nuclear weapon state installing a nuclear radiation detection. China and United States jointly installed the detection system at Yang Shan port in 2011. State support on NPT In terms of the state supporting the development of the international law and international organization great have been accomplished since the initiation of Non-proliferation of nuclear material. For instance, the United State and Russia efforts since 1991 led to securing of 92% of the sites of the former Soviet Union with usable nuclear weapon material by 2011. In this case, United States funded various programs such as Cooperative threat Reduction and global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism as a mechanism to show the commitment to disarmament[Dan06]. Future prospects of NPT Non-Proliferation treaty needs to focus on various issues to ensure competence in future. In consideration of irreversibility of North Korea in 2003 and noncompliance of Iran according to nonproliferation policies and obligation, NPT observers and official seems to conclude it seems to fail. In this case, upholding irreversible obligations once a member state sign to commit itself to the non-Proliferation treaty would ensure all the member states abides by the obligations. In the case of Iran, the nuclear weapon state and IAEA need to effectively exercise the existing IAEA verification authorities[Jam13]. In this case, IAEA should focus on accounting for nuclear materials through strengthening the agency authority without delays to ensure effective mechanism are adopted making the member state comply with the existing obligations. The existence of dual purpose in Non-proliferation leads to a complication of upholding to the obligation in terms of determining the honesty of a state in using the nuclear energy in indulging in constructive measures or military involvement. In this case, upholding measures that regulate the non-nuclear weapon to access nuclear material could facilitate easy detection and exposure of noncompliance to the treaty obligations. In this consideration, the IAEA would be in a position to realize the undeclared nuclear activities in terms of detection. Moreover, the non-compliance according to the safeguards would lead to the state being reported to the IAEA board of governors. In this case, the agency needs to be conversant with the information regarding transfers and procurement of nuclear material as a mechanism to ensure the treaty remain competent[Jam13]. Conclusion Non-proliferation Treaty plays a vital role in the regulation of nuclear energy on activities that are not peaceful. The accomplishment of this treaty obligation revolves around the various organization such as IAEA as it focuses on ensuring member states comply with the obligation of the treaty. The objective of the Non-proliferation treaty has enabled the world to maintain peace through effective safeguards. The analysis has reflected on the significance of disarmament as it focuses on accomplishing the objective of the treaty. The continuous review of the NPT through a conference assist in ensuring the member state present reports on various steps towards compliance with the obligation of the treaty. Various state and specifically nuclear weapon state reflect a commitment to disarmament through supporting various programs aimed at controlling nuclear production. For instance securing of Soviet Union areas that had the ability to produce nuclear material reflects the commitment of the states. Moreover, NPT requires strengthening to ensure it universal compliance with NPT and disarmament standards. References Wol94: , (Kötter, 1994), Bel11: , (Bellany, et al., 2011), Phi08: , (Margulies, 2008), Die08: , (Diehl & Moltz, 2008), Boo12: , (Boon, et al., 2012), Oli13: , (Meier, 2013), Jef15: , (Knopf, 2015), Dan06: , (Joyner, 2006), Jam13: , (Fry, 2013), Read More