Strategic Panorama 2009 - 2010 - IEEE

The future of the nuclear non-proliferation regime: the 2010 NPT review conference
during the denuclearisation negotiations with North Korea which forced
Pyongyang to make a full declaration on its military nuclear programme. In
his biography, entitled «In the line of fire», Pervez Musharraf disclosed that
Dr Khan sold nearly «two dozen» P-1 and P-11 prototype centrifuges for
uranium enrichment to North Korea, and that «to the Iranians and Libyans,
through Dubai, he provided nearly eighteen tons of materials, including
centrifuges, components and drawings».
Finally, Israel is the only non-declared nuclear state, as its nuclear policy is
based on refusing to officially confirm or deny if it possesses a nuclear arsenal,
has developed nuclear weapons or has a programme of nuclear weapons.
Although it has never conducted a nuclear test, the consideration of Israel as
a de facto nuclear power is based on the statements made in 1986 by one
of the architects of the programme, Mordechai Vanunu and, specifically, on
the Dimona installations in the Negev desert(29). Israel, which has not signed
the NPT either (although it is a party to the CTBT) requires as a condition for
doing so the establishment of a weapons of mass destruction-free zone in the
region, which would involve putting an end to the programmes for the development
of chemical and biological weapons of many of what Israel regards
as its hostile neighbours. In May 2008 the former US president James Carter
declared that Israel possessed 150 or more nuclear weapons.
Many non-nuclear states (especially those belonging to the Non-Aligned
Group) regard the NPT not as an end in itself but as a means of transition
along the path leading to total nuclear disarmament, in accordance with
article VI of the Treaty itself. This article contains a general, abstract clause
whereby the nuclear states undertake (as a minimum commitment to
keep the non-nuclear states happy) to «pursue negotiations in good faith
on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an
early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and
complete disarmament under strict and effective international control».
However, in the view of the nuclear states (especially the United States)
which gave an a posteriori interpretation of this article, the obligation to
desist from the arms race neither refers solely to the nuclear countries nor
explicitly requires the conclusion of agreements on disarmament, since
the Treaty neither indicates the manner of conducting such negotiations
(save «in good faith») nor even establishes a specific date (beyond «early»).
(29) The (almost only) reference book on the Israel nuclear programme, although not without
controversy, is HERSH, Seymour, The Samson Option: Israel’s Nuclear Arsenal and
American Foreign Policy, Ramdon House, 1991.
— 194 —