Nuclear Nonproliferation Objectives of Permanence with Accountability at Stake: The Role of International Law in the Interlude Between the Tenth and the Eleventh Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons

2021 ◽  
pp. 37-112
Author(s):  
Dirk Roland Haupt
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
Nuclear Nonproliferation

Supply to Deny: The Benefits of Nuclear Assistance for Nuclear Nonproliferation

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 282-298 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Davis Gibbons
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
Nuclear Explosion ◽  
Nuclear Proliferation ◽  
Nuclear Nonproliferation ◽  
Nuclear Technology ◽  
Recent Scholarship ◽  
Nuclear Assistance

Abstract Recent scholarship on nuclear proliferation finds that many forms of nuclear assistance increase the odds that recipient states pursue nuclear weapons programs. While these studies may help us understand select cases of proliferation, they overshadow the role of nuclear supply in bolstering global nonproliferation efforts. After the risks of nuclear assistance became well-known following India's nuclear explosion in 1974, most major suppliers conditioned their assistance on recipients joining nonproliferation agreements. Case studies of states’ decision-making regarding these agreements illustrate how the provision of nuclear technology has been an effective tool in persuading states to join such agreements, the most important of which is the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). By joining the NPT, states strengthen the global nonproliferation regime and increase the costs of any potential future decision to proliferate. The offer of nuclear assistance has done far more to bolster global nuclear nonproliferation efforts than recent research suggests.

The Role of Persistent Objection in International Humanitarian Law

2008 ◽  
Vol 77 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 51-86 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camilla Guldahl
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law

AbstractThe publication of the ICRC Customary International Humanitarian Law encouraged a debate on the role of the doctrine of persistent objection in international humanitarian law. After setting out the background and meaning of this doctrine, this article will use the examples of belligerent reprisals against civilians and the protection of the environment in light of the use of nuclear weapons to show that although persistent objection is relied upon in international humanitarian law, the dictates of the principles of humanity and public conscience mean that it is less accepted and respected than in other areas of international law. This despite the fact that there are no express limitations on the application of this doctrine to international humanitarian law.

scholarly journals World Peace - Role of UN

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. 245-247
Author(s):  
Himanshu Srivastava
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Adverse Effect ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
World Peace ◽  
The World ◽  
Peace And Security

Abstract: When we talk about world peace and issues that are to be addressed then we are talking about all the big and small issues which are directly or even indirectly related to human rights, health, international law, justice, migration, oceans and seas, peace and security, population, refugees, water, gender equality, democracy, climate change, e.t.c. The Purpose of the study is that we have to understand the cause of armed conflicts. We have to develop the ways to prevent the war like situations, genocide, terrorism, e.t.c. Furthermore, we have to develop some systems and societies which can take care of all these. We have to educate ourselves and others to increase the awareness of mutual survival. We have to work on the elimination of all biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons in the world. Furthermore, we have to promote democracy with education because democracy without education is dangerous. The adverse effect of this can be remembered by how the dictatorship of Hitler came to an end in Germany.

Law as discursive resource: the politics of the nuclear/non-nuclear distinction in the Non-Proliferation Treaty

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 545-568
Author(s):  
Sidra Hamidi
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
Nuclear Weapon ◽  
State Power ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Textual Interpretation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Sociological Approaches ◽  
Nuclear Diplomacy

Realist approaches to international law conceptualize the law as epiphenomenal to state interest, whereas liberal institutionalist approaches theorize the ability of law to curb state power. Through the example of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, this article challenges these approaches by arguing that law’s power comes from its productive and constitutive effects. Despite perennial conflict, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons endures because it has ordered nuclear politics by constituting a legal distinction between “nuclear weapon states” and “non-nuclear weapon states.” Instead of assuming that this distinction reflects self-evident material differences, this article shows how states actively construct nuclear status through international law. The dynamics of this construction reflect significant actions on the behalf of conventionally disempowered states and not merely great powers. An analysis of the meeting documents of the Eighteen Nation Disarmament Committee finds that the participants used the forum to perform a burgeoning “non-nuclear” identity. The politics of this distinction also generated the discourse of “nuclear apartheid,” which was subsequently used by states outside the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons regime to justify their pursuit of nuclear weapons. Taken together, the role of non-nuclear diplomacy and the discourse of nuclear apartheid demonstrate that the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons does not simply endure because the powerful have sanctioned it, but because it created a space for the disempowered to expand their influence from below. Though the article builds on existing sociological approaches to the law, it also moves beyond conflicts over legal and textual interpretation to demonstrate the diplomatic practices around the constitution of legal categories.

I. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN INTERNATIONAL LAW REGARDING NUCLEAR WEAPONS

2011 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 209-224 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel H Joyner
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
Nuclear Weapon ◽  
The United States ◽  
Nuclear Nonproliferation ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
The Past ◽  
Recent Developments

This article examines a number of major developments in international law and State policy regarding nuclear weapons which have occurred over the past two years.However, in order to understand the context and significance of these developments, I must first very briefly address what has gone on previously in this area of international relations.I have argued elsewhere that over the course of the decade ending in 2008 the original balance of principles underlying the 1968 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), which comprises the cornerstone of the nuclear non-proliferation legal regime, has been distorted, particularly by nuclear-weapon-possessing governments, led by the United States, in favor of a disproportionate prioritization of non-proliferation principles, and an unwarranted under-prioritization of peaceful use and disarmament principles.1 I also argue that this distortion of principled balance by nuclear weapon states has resulted in a number of erroneous legal interpretations of the NPT's provisions.

Deniability in the Nuclear Nonproliferation Regime: The Upside of the Dual-Use Dilemma

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reid B C Pauly
Keyword(s):  
South African ◽  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
Nuclear Nonproliferation ◽  
Dual Use ◽  
Energy Agency ◽  
Audience Costs ◽  
Policy Debates ◽  
Us Government ◽  
To Come

Abstract Nuclear technology is often “dual-use,” having both peaceful and military applications. This is widely regarded as a lamentable fact, as states can pursue nuclear weapons under the guise of peaceful intentions. However, this article proposes an upside to the nuclear dual-use dilemma: the deniable nature of dual-use technology makes it more amenable to coercive counterproliferation. Caught proliferators are more likely to come into compliance if they can elude audience costs by denying that they were ever out of compliance. Thus, the dual-use dilemma is both the bane of the nonproliferation regime and a boon to its coercive enforcement. Poor knowledge of past nuclear programs can hamper future verification. Counterintuitively, however, the effectiveness of nonproliferation regime institutions created to promote transparency—the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)—may be enhanced by not directly challenging the denial of past nuclear activities. This research uses interviews and archival evidence from the IAEA, US government, and South African apartheid government. At a time when ongoing nuclear disputes revolve around questions of transparency and admissions of guilt, this article contributes to scholarly and policy debates about secrecy, face-saving, counterproliferation strategy, and the role of international institutions in coercive bargaining.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document