Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-dnltx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T11:35:12.926Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Justice and Fairness in the Nuclear Nonproliferation Regime

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 September 2013

Nina Tannenwald
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Today, the nuclear regime is widely perceived to be in crisis. While part of this crisis has to do with direct challenges to the regime posed by the illicit nuclear programs of North Korea and Iran, from the perspective of much of the developing world, the issues facing the nonproliferation regime are overwhelmingly about the justice and fairness of the regime's norms, rules, and procedures. Indeed, it is difficult to identify a security regime today where equity issues are more central to debates about its future than the nuclear nonproliferation regime. Of the three regimes for controlling weapons of mass destruction (chemical, biological, and nuclear), it is in the nuclear regime that issues of justice and fairness appear most critical to long-term sustainability and viability.

Type
Roundtable: Nonproliferation in the 21st Century
Information
Ethics & International Affairs , Volume 27 , Issue 3 , Fall 2013 , pp. 299 - 317
Copyright
Copyright © Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

NOTES

1 Perkovich, George et al. , Universal Compliance: A Strategy for Nuclear Security (Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, June 2007)Google Scholar. See also Mueller, Harald, “Between Power and Justice: Current Problems and Perspectives of the NPT Regime,” Strategic Analysis 34, no. 2 (2010), pp. 189–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2 Sugden, Bruce, “Assessing the Strategic Horizon: Nonproliferation, Security, and the Future U.S. Nuclear Posture,” The Nonproliferation Review 15, no. 3 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Christopher A. Ford, “Nuclear Disarmament, Nonproliferation, and the ‘Credibility Thesis,’” Hudson Institute Briefing Paper (September 2009).

3 Christopher A. Ford, “Haves and Have-Nots: ‘Unfairness’ in Nuclear Weapons Possession,” New Paradigms Forum (January 10, 2011), www.newparadigmsforum.com/NPFtestsite/?p=658.

4 Albin, Cecilia, Justice and Fairness in International Negotiations (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2001)Google Scholar, p. 184.

5 Ibid.

6 Ibid., p. 197.

7 Ibid., p. 195.

8 Dhanapala, Jayantha with Rydell, Randy, Multilateral Diplomacy and the NPT: An Insider's Account (Geneva: United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research, 2005).Google Scholar

9 Walker, William, A Perpetual Menace: Nuclear Weapons and International Order (New York: Routledge, 2012).Google Scholar

10 Ibid.

11 Ford, Christopher A., “The Nonproliferation Bestiary: A Typology and Analysis of Nonproliferation Norms,” NYU Journal of International Law and Politics 39, no. 937 (2007)Google Scholar, p. 957.

12 Ibid., p. 962.

13 “Powerful Japanese Politician Backs Nuclear Arms,” Global Security Newswire, November 20, 2012.

14 Steinbruner, John, Principles of Global Security (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 2000).Google Scholar

15 Preparatory Committee for the 2015 Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, NPT/CONF.2015/PC.II/WP.14, “Nuclear disarmament: Working paper presented by the Group of Non-Aligned States,” March 21, 2013. See also “Nuclear Disarmament: Working Paper Submitted by Brazil on Behalf of the New Agenda Coalition,” April 15, 2013.

16 Thomas Graham, “123 Agreement for Nuclear Energy in the UAE: An Unprecedented and Responsible Step,” Huffington Post, June 2, 2009, www.huffingtonpost.com/thomas-graham/123-agreement-for-nuclear_b_210232.html.

17 Besides the five nuclear-weapon states, a few nonnuclear-weapon states enrich uranium (Germany, the Netherlands, Brazil, Argentina, Japan, and Iran) and only one nonnuclear weapon state—Japan—reprocesses spent fuel. States outside the NPT—North Korea, Pakistan, India, and Israel—have these capabilities.

18 “Iran Calls Fuel Bank ‘Nuclear Apartheid,’” CNN, December 4, 2010, articles.cnn.com/2010-12-04/world/iran.nuclear_1_nuclear-fuel-nuclear-apartheid-nuclear-watchdog?_s=PM:WORLD.

19 “Argentina Announces Production of Enriched Uranium for 2011,” Merco Press, October 26, 2010, en.mercopress.com/2010/10/26/argentina-announces-production-of-enriched-uranium-for-2011.

20 Choe Sang-hun, “U.S. and South Korea Fail to Reach Deal on Nuclear Energy,” New York Times, April 24, 2013, www.nytimes.com/2013/04/25/world/asia/south-korea-and-us-fail-to-reach-nuclear-energy-deal.html.

21 Audrey Yoo, “Looming Clash Between Seoul and Washington Over Nuclear Technology,” Time, April 30, 2013, world.time.com/2013/04/30/looming-clash-between-seoul-and-washington-over-nuclear-technology/#ixzz2UiDbsDlf.

22 Robert Koehler, “U.S. Attitude on Nuclear Agreement No Way to Treat an Ally: Chosen Ilbo,” The Marmot's Hole, April 22, 2013, www.rjkoehler.com/2013/04/22/us-attitude-on-nuclear-agreement-no-way-to-treat-an-ally-chosun-ilbo/.

23 “Middle East States Frustrated by Nuclear Treaty, Egyptian Delegate Says,” Agence-France Presse, March 10, 2010. For a useful analysis of the role of the nonaligned movement in the nonproliferation regime, see Potter, William and Mukhatzhanova, Gaukhar, Nuclear Politics and the Non-Aligned Movement (New York: Routledge, 2012).Google Scholar

24 Mutimer, David, The Weapons-State: Proliferation and the Framing of Security (Boulder, Colo.: Lynn Rienner, 2000).Google Scholar

25 Total warheads includes both deployed weapons and those in storage awaiting dismantlement. See Norris, Robert and Kristensen, Hans M., “Global Nuclear Stockpiles: 1945–2006,” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 62, no. 4 (2006), pp. 64–66Google Scholar; Norris, Robert and Kristensen, Hans M., “Nuclear Notebook: Russian Nuclear Forces, 2013,” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 69, no. 3 (2013), pp. 71–81Google Scholar; and Norris, Robert and Kristensen, Hans M., “Nuclear Notebook: U.S. Nuclear Forces, 2013,” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 69, no. 2 (2013), pp. 77–86.Google Scholar

26 Sarah Cornwell and Phil Stewart, “Obama Wants $80 Billion to Upgrade Nuclear Arms Complex,” Reuters, May 13, 2010.

27 Patrick Wintour, “Britain and France Sign Landmark 50-year Defence Deal,” Guardian, November 2, 2010.

28 Knopf, Jeffrey, “Nuclear Disarmament and Nonproliferation: Examining the Linkage Argument,” International Security 37, no. 3 (2013), p. 116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

29 Nevertheless, former U.S. Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Robert Joseph said the U.S. State Department made it “very clear that we will not recognize India as a nuclear-weapon state.” See Boese, Wade and Pomper, Miles A., “Reshaping U.S. Nonproliferation Strategy: An Interview with Undersecretary of State Robert Joseph,” Arms Control Today 36 (June 2006).Google Scholar

30 Price, Richard, “Nuclear Weapons Don't Kill People, Rogues Do,” International Politics 44 (2007), pp. 232–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

31 In April 2013, Andrew Shapiro, a high ranking U.S. official, said in a news briefing that the United States had already made “tremendous progress” in expanding weapons sales to India since 2008. Such sales had grown from zero in 2008 to around $8 billion. He predicted “billions of dollars more” in the next few years. See Andrea Shalal-Esa, “U.S. Aims to Expand India Arms Trade by ‘Billions of Dollars,’” Reuters, April 19, 2013.

32 “Pakistan Demands Atomic Trade with Japan,” Global Security Newswire, February 22, 2011.

33 Rajiv Nayan, “Pakistan's Annual Deception,” Institute for Defense Studies and Analyses, February 23, 2011, www.idsa.in/idsacomments/PakistansAnnualDeception_RajivNayan_230211.

34 Zahir Kazmi, “Letter from Pakistan: How an Unfair Nonproliferation Regime Undermines Nuclear Security,” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, August 30, 2012.

35 Interview with Mohamed ElBaradei, “Mohamed ElBaradei Warns of New Nuclear Age,” Guardian, May 14, 2009, www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/may/14/elbaradei-nuclear-weapons-states-un.

36 Barack Obama, “Remarks by President Barack Obama” (Hradcany Square, Prague, Czech Republic, April 5, 2009), www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-By-President-Barack-Obama-In-Prague-As-Delivered.

37 Rebecca, Johnson, “Assessing the 2010 NPT Review Conference,” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 66, no. 4 (2010), pp. 1–10.Google Scholar

38 Hisham Badr, “Statement by H.E. Ambassador Hisham Badr Assistant Minister of Foreign Affairs for International Organizations and Multilateral Affairs of The Arab Republic of Egypt Before The Second Session of the Preparatory Committee to the 2015 NPT Review Conference” (Geneva, April 29, 2013), www.reachingcriticalwill.org/images/documents/Disarmament-fora/npt/prepcom13/statements/29April_Egypt.pdf.

39 Assistant Secretary of State Thomas Countryman, “Remarks to the Elliott School of International Affairs” (George Washington University, June 18, 2013).

40 Antonio Guerreiro, “Statement by Ambassador Antonio Guerreiro, Permanent Representative of Brazil to the Conference on Disarmament, at the General Debate of the NPT PrepCom” (Geneva, April 23, 2013).

41 Hurd, Ian, “Legitimacy and Authority in International Politics,” International Organization 53, no. 2 (1999), pp. 379–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

42 Rathbun, Nina Srinivasan, “The Role of Legitimacy in Strengthening the Nuclear Nonproliferation Regime,” The Nonproliferation Review 13, no. 2 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, p. 233.

43 Grotto, Andrew, “Why Do States That Oppose Nuclear Proliferation Resist New Nonproliferation Obligations? Three Logics of Nonproliferation Decision-making,” Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law 18, no. 1 (2010), pp. 1–44Google Scholar; and Knopf, “Nuclear Disarmament and Nonproliferation,” pp. 99, 128.