Monday 03 May 2010 - MILMUN

5
MILMUN CHRONICLE
The world is perched on a
dangerous ledge, the end of the Cold
War marked a thawing in relations
and the coming of a “Nuclear Spring”,
the unstable world that emerged is
characterized by events like the attacks
on the United States on 9/11,
uncertainty of North Korea’s intentions
and Iranian scamper for nuclear
capabilities. Though the context has
changed dramatically, the words of
John F. Kennedy in his speech to the
United Nations in 1961, have never
been more pertinent, "Every man,
woman and child lives under a nuclear
sword of Damocles, hanging by
the slenderest of threads. . . The
weapons of war must be abolished
before they abolish us”.
The world watches with an
eye on the past and with great expectations
for the future as the United
Nations Security Council deliberations
commence. The past months have
been punctuated with accords on
nuclear disarmament and proliferation,
bringing to the attention of the
world the very serious connotations
of an issue long overlooked as a diverting
incident of international security.
The delegates must seize upon
this impetus in approaching the forthcoming
Security Council, and seek to
deliver a unified and progressive
strategy.
President Obama hosted a
Nuclear Security Summit in Washington
D.C. this month, attended by 37
heads of state and an additional 10
delegates. Amidst renewed partisan
squabbles and limited expectations
from the American public, the president
secured individual commitments
to stop nuclear proliferation and support
disarmament. Governments
agreed to bolster international security
efforts and protect nuclear materials
used for military as well as civilian
purposes. Of particular importance
were the promises made by
countries such as Mexico, Chile and
Ukraine who declared that they
would eliminate their stockpiles of
enriched uranium. The summit is a
promising start, but binding commitments
and further reductions are
required, in combination with the
discontinuation of the development
of fissile materials for military purposes.
In complement (or perhaps
in contrast) to Obama’s Nuclear Security
Summit, Iranian President Mahmud
Ahmadinejad hosted his own
summit in Tehran, a mere four days
later, inviting 60 international delegations
to participate. The meeting
comes during a time of renewed efforts
to secure a fourth round of
United Nations sanctions against Iran
over its nuclear program. Mr. Ahmadinejad
responded critically to the U.S.
hosted summit, labeling it as
“humiliating to humanity”. In response
to President Obama’s announcement
that states not in compliance
with the Nuclear Proliferation
Treaty would not be spared a U.S.
nuclear response, The Iranian Ambassador
to the U.N., Mohammad
Khazaee, formally complained to the
Security Council that these statements
were “tantamount to nuclear
blackmail against a non‐nuclear
weapon state”. Neither the United
States nor the Islamic Republic of Iran
extended reciprocal invitations to
their summits.
Perhaps the most important
development in the international
nuclear security agenda over the past
months was the signing of the socalled
New START treaty between the
United States and Russia. The treaty
promises to reduce nuclear weapons
stockpiles and bring about new procedures
for verifying which weapons
each country possesses. David Miliband,
the British Foreign Secretary
praised the treaty as a “break of a
culture of cynicism”. The nuclear
status quo is not desirable yet, to
some extent, may be necessary as a
means of deterrence and in order not
to disturb
the balance of powers.
The momentum gained during
the past months must now be seized
by the delegates of the forthcoming
United Nations Security Council session
in their discussions on nuclear
disarmament and proliferation. Of
utmost importance is the review of
the Treaty on the Non‐proliferation of
Nuclear Weapons (NPT). First, export
controls must be strengthened, primarily
through further integration of
international agencies and reinforcement
of international coordination.
Second, conditions of supply must be
assured as demands for fuel increase,
as an incentive to nonproliferation.
Third, Article IV, discussing the right
of states to develop nuclear energy
for peaceful means, must be reviewed
as it has served in the past as
a loophole in the process to develop
nuclear weapons. Also Article X must
be considered, the article establishing
terms for withdrawal from the NPT.
Any amendments to the treaty are
however subject to a complex process,
with success ultimately relying on
consensus among the members.
There are great expectations for the
United States. The U.S., as a permanent
member of the Security Council
and a nuclear weapon state, has an
inherent interest in the regime and
must recognize the needs for reform
and strategically manage them. It is
necessary to negotiate solutions with
Iran and North Korea in an effort to
take a step back from the ledge that
we are precariously perched upon.
Essentially connected to the
process is the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA), an international
organization that seeks to promote
the peaceful utilization of nuclear
energy, it reports directly to the
U.N General Assembly and Security
Council. On the Security Council
agenda no doubt, will be discussions
of the increased purview of the organization
and hopefully provisions
for greater funding.
The coming United Nations
Security Council session is critical for
addressing nonproliferation and disarmament
concerns. At a time of
uncertainty between Western nuclear
powers and states such as Iran and
North Korea, the eyes of the world
are pinned to the delegates in the
hope that they will emerge with a
strong foot forward in the next step
of the process of disarmament. It is a
time when transparent diplomatic
conversation is of utmost importance
and must be supported, in order for
the people of the world to look forward
to a new age without the threat
of weapons of mass destruction. At a
time when emerging countries are at
a critical point and development
needs to be encouraged, spending on
weapons must be curtailed. The
emergence of new nuclear countries
paradoxically mars the decrease in
current nuclear states’ stockpiles. The
question of nuclear disarmament is a
question of morality. As the United
Nations Secretary‐General, Ban‐Ki
Moon said in his address to the East‐
West institute in October, 2008, “A
world free of nuclear weapons would
be a public good of the highest order”.
Going into this conference, the
question remains: will the nuclear
club allow for real change, or will the
naysayers be proved correct?
NEXT PAGE:
FOLLOW UP ON SC ‐
RIGHT OF SELF‐DETERMINATION