Nonproliferation is not a part of HIS story (Rev 16)

 
The lost cause of nuclear non-proliferation

There is little that can be done to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons

Every five years, representatives of countries from around the world meet in New York and assure themselves that they are doing all they can to keep a delusion alive: the delusion of nuclear non-proliferation.

This year the Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) began its session in April and will end its deliberations on 22 May after reaffirming its commitment to preventing the “spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology, to promote co-operation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and to further the goal of achieving nuclear disarmament and general and complete disarmament”.

In theory, the idea of nuclear non-proliferation seems prudent from a security perspective: a binding commitment to prevent more countries from acquiring nuclear weapons

In reality, such prudence could be translated into action, if it was a fair and actionable plan. Unfortunately, it isn’t. NPT, which came into force on 5 March 1970, is a deeply flawed treaty. And with each passing year the gap between these design flaws and global political realities becomes unbridgeable.

Consider the premise of how NPT came into being. First, an arbitrary date was selected to determine which countries could legitimately possess nuclear weapons. This was 1 January 1967. These countries were designated as nuclear weapons states and did not have to be signatories to NPT. Second, look at the countries which have this privileged status: the US, the UK, China, France and Russia. That these countries are also the permanent five members of the UN Security Council with veto power is not a coincidence.

Consider also how successful the treaty has been in preventing the spread of nuclear weapons. After 1970, when the treaty came into effect, four more countries acquired nuclear weapons. These were India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea. Of these, India, Pakistan and Israel were never signatories to NPT while North Korea withdrew in 2003. So compliance isn’t mandatory and non-compliance doesn’t have costs, or at least costs that can deter countries from acquiring these weapons. In addition, there is a factor much stronger than professing commitment to nuclear non-proliferation that pushes countries towards acquiring nuclear weapons: their individual security.

This became evident most recently in the case of Iran. Iran’s relentless pursuit of nuclear weapons has at its root its perceived security threat from nuclear-armed Israel and its unstated competition with Saudi Arabia in West Asia. The US, with all its might can at best only delay Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, not prevent it indefinitely. This has serious implications for Iran’s competitor Saudi Arabia which may feel compelled to enter the nuclear arms race once Iran crosses a threshold.
Something similar played out in the Indian subcontinent as well. India acquired nuclear weapons, threatened by nuclear-armed China. Soon, Pakistan followed suit in reaction to India’s weapons programme.

This in essence was the real life demonstration of the Nth country experiment conducted by the US to assess the risk of nuclear proliferation. If the US was the first to acquire nuclear weapons, the Soviet Union the second, then which would be the Nth country?

It is ironic that this experiment was concluded the same year as the one which was set as the cut-off date for legitimately possessing nuclear weapons: 1967.

In December 1953, then US president Dwight D. Eisenhower gave his famous Atoms for Peace speech at the UN General Assembly urging peaceful dissemination of nuclear technology. He made a prescient remark then, “I feel impelled to speak today in a language that in a sense is new—one which I, who have spent so much of my life in the military profession, would have preferred never to use. That new language is the language of atomic warfare.”

Today, the world is becoming increasingly conversant in this language and there is no stopping its spread.

Will nuclear non-proliferation become a reality? Tell us at views@livemint.com