Alissa Tabirian
NS&D Monitor
2/5/2016
As the United Nations’ Conference on Disarmament (CD) begins its 2016 session, one nonproliferation expert doubts the likelihood of significant progress in the body’s long-stalled arms control negotiations. The multilateral forum, which held its first public plenary meeting of the year last week, faces a stalemate of almost two decades due to a lack of consensus on a fissile material cutoff treaty. Pakistan in particular withdrew its support for the treaty because the mandate would restrict production of highly enriched uranium and plutonium without including restrictions on existing fissile material stocks, causing asymmetry in the nation’s stockpile versus that of longtime rival India.
William Potter, director of the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies, said by email that the U.S. proposed a new approach at the meeting, “which they hoped might be acceptable to Pakistan and break the deadlock, but that proved not to be the case.” A State Department official said by email that the U.S. “informally shared ideas” with conference members in an effort to reach a “compromise negotiation mandate,” and that the discussions are ongoing.
Potter said it is “especially difficult to persuade Pakistan to be more flexible at the CD when many countries appear ready to support India’s quest to join the [Nuclear Suppliers Group], while dismissing any similar action toward Pakistan.” The U.S. has expressed its support for India to join the Nuclear Suppliers Group, which controls the export of material that could be used in nuclear weapons development. Pakistan is not a member of the partnership. However, according to the State Department official, “There should be no connection between prospective Indian membership in the NSG and Pakistan’s actions in the CD.”
U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon’s statement at the opening session called on states to “accelerate the reduction of existing stockpiles” and break the conference’s deadlock. Ban called the fissile material cutoff treaty “a prerequisite for sustainable nuclear disarmament” and said that failing progress on negotiating the treaty, “this Conference risks becoming completely marginalized.” However, Pakistani Ambassador Tehmina Janjua said in her plenary statement that an asymmetry in stockpile size would work against Pakistan’s security interests and that “politically motivated, discriminatory revisionism of the global nuclear order will continue to stand in the way of genuine progress.”
The U.N.’s Open-Ended Working Group (OEWG) on multilateral nuclear disarmament negotiations also held its organizational meeting last week. “It is my understanding that none of the P5 participated in the organizational meeting,” Potter said. “I was told that one P5 diplomat—not from the US—characterized the situation as one in which the door had not fully closed on the issue of his country’s participation, but that it was closing rapidly.”
“We regret that the sponsors have not structured this OEWG in a way that reflects the need for wide-ranging discussion of practical ways to achieve progress on disarmament and for a consensus final report that reflects the views articulated by all participants,” the State Department official said. “We hope a way can be found to maintain a dialogue on nuclear disarmament issues and not cut it off through pursuit of non-inclusive and quixotic agendas.”
The working group set a provisional agenda to discuss legal measures toward attaining a world without nuclear weapons, transparency measures for existing nuclear weapons, risk reduction measures for accidental or intentional nuclear weapon detonations, and raising awareness on the humanitarian consequences of nuclear detonation. According to the official, the U.S. “has yet to make a decision regarding if it will attend the OEWG and is closely monitoring developments.”
