×

News

NPT Watch: Are negotiations being conducted in good faith?

by Yumi Kanazaki, Staff Writer, dispatched from New York

The initial draft for the final document of agreements, presented by the chair of Main Committee 1, the body focused on nuclear disarmament issues, has generally been viewed very positively by experts and NGO personnel who have been watching the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference.

Among them is Jayantha Dhanapala, president of the Pugwash Conferences. He also served as president of the 1995 NPT Review Conference, which agreed on the indefinite extension of the NPT, previously bound by a 25-year duration.

On May 18, U.S. NGOs organized a meeting to exchange views at U.N. Headquarters. Mr. Dhanapala noted and praised as "welcome" such proposals as an international conference to create a road map for nuclear abolition and negotiations for a nuclear weapons convention.

Unfortunately, a "good proposal" for those seeking the abolition of nuclear weapons is not necessarily viewed positively by the nuclear weapon states. As some of the nuclear powers have displayed a reluctance to approve actions included in the draft, it seems inevitable that the draft will gradually be watered down.

In this regard, Mr. Dhanapala stressed the obligation to "pursue negotiations [on nuclear disarmament] in good faith," which is stipulated in Article VI of the treaty. Furthermore, the 1996 advisory opinion by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) stated that "There exists an obligation to pursue in good faith and bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament…"

Discussions in pursuit of amending the initial draft of agreements have begun to pick up momentum. Is there "good faith" in the process of negotiations as well as the results to be presented to the international community? I believe this is important criteria for judging the success of the conference.

(Originally published on May 20, 2010)

Archives