A Clear Path Forward For the UN on Nuclear Disarmament

This week, President Obama will chair a UN Security Council meeting on nuclear nonproliferation - the first time a U.S. President has ever done this. Over the years, the Security Council has spent many hours debating this issue, but this speech has the possibility to mark a new beginning.

In April, the U.S. president called for a nuclear free world in a keynote speech in Prague. At the time, many dismissed the remarks as the dreamy notions of a young administration with little national security experience. But President Obama's speech was not a lone shot in the dark. Several months earlier, four Cold War era American elder statesmen - Henry Kissinger, William Perry, George Shultz and Sam Nunn - had issued a similar call.

There is a new consensus forming around the nuclear issue and a new willingness for countries to act. For years, the nuclear debate revolved around those few countries that had nuclear weapons and those - equally small in number - trying to get them. Today, the security paradigm for the nuclear world has altered. The imminent threat no longer comes from a handful of superpowers, but the potential for the acquisition of nuclear weapons by unstable regimes and non-state entities. This reality affects us all. This status quo is not acceptable.

However, the international consensus required to resolutely address this challenge was significantly eroded over the previous decade because of the setbacks to the global non-proliferation regime. Despite the limited progress achieved in reducing overall nuclear inventories between the US and Russia, the previous decade saw the increased reliance on nuclear weapons, especially with regards to the United States defense posture. Little if any progress was achieved in ratifying the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty or negotiating a cessation of fissile material for nuclear weapons use. Perhaps most significantly, the Middle East continues to pose the most serious challenge to global non-proliferation. Israel remains the one country that is not a full party to any major non-proliferation treaty, and Iran's continued drive towards nuclear acquisition threatens to seriously destabilize the regional security order, with broader consequences for global security. Additionally, there are multiple concerns about nuclear weapons falling into the hands of non-state entities in the region.

When President Obama takes the stage to address the UN Security Council, he should seize the moment to turn the world's attention to this crisis. He must go beyond highlighting the issue's urgency and provide a clear path forward.

The UN Security Council can play a key role in changing how the world deals with the nuclear issue, and the moment is ripe to act. Nuclear issues are already high on the international calendar. This year, United States and Russia are sitting down to the table to discuss a revised START agreement. In 2010, the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty is due for review. And next year, President Obama has committed to resubmit the Comprehensive Test Ban Treat for ratification.

It is time for the United Nations to do its part. At a minimum, the United Nations should seek:

• A resolution calling for a nuclear weapon free world by 2030 and the creation of an expert group to present a roadmap for that purpose by 2010. To ensure its credibility this roadmap has to include benchmarks toward reductions to less than 1000 warheads for any nuclear weapon states.
• A legally binding resolution under chapter VII of the UN Charter prohibiting the use of nuclear weapons against non nuclear weapon states party to the NPT.
• The creation of regional nuclear free zones and a coordinator to lead the effort.
• A move to assure non-nuclear weapon states that their right to peaceful nuclear technology will be preserved and unhindered by political issues as long as they are fully compliant with their safeguard agreements.

Nuclear non-proliferation is a defining issue of our time. The deliberations of the Security Council this week should fire the starting gun on how the international community will address this issue for the next decade.

Ambassador Nabil Fahmy is the Dean of the School of Public Affairs at the American University in Cairo and Chair of the Center for Nonproliferation studies in the Middle East. He was until recently Egypt's Ambassador to the United States.

 

 

Comments

[Ishmael1]

Here's my idea. Site the negotitations for the Non-Proliferation Treaty review in either Hiroshima or Nagasaki. Require, as a condition of ratification, that the heads of state of ALL nuclear weapons states, including Pakistan, India, Israel, Iran and North Korea, attend and talk to the survivors of the bombings while those survivors are still alive. As a former NUCWEPS guy, going to both places was a pilgrimage for me and seeing shadows burned into the walls of the few buildings left standing was a moment of clarity. In fact, I'm going to visit the Trinity Site here in New Mexico early next month for the "Places That Got A-bombed" hat trick on one of the two days annually that it's open for visitors.

[legalclubs]

Completely unrealistic and dangerous. The United States will never disarm as long as any enemy or potential enemy has the power to obtain and use nuclear weapons against the U.S. or simply blackmail us by threatening to use the weapons against us and since these weapons can be created at any time with just a little know how (this is 1940s technology people) and resources which can be purchases the threat will never end. It's a nice dream, but trying to implement it would be near impossible, trying to enforce it would be impossible, and the likely result -- a stike on the U.S. who would be unable to retaliate -- would be a nightmare. No thanks.

[edva]

Yes. When will we out- grow this madness?