DOCSLIB.ORG

NPR 16.1: Jean Du Preez Interviews Ambassador Yukiya Amano on The

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
NPR 16.1: Jean Du Preez Interviews Ambassador Yukiya Amano on The INTERVIEW MAKING THE AGENDA STICK Lessons Learned From the 2007 NPT PrepCom Jean du Preez interviews Ambassador Yukiya Amano After the conclusion of the 2008 Preparatory Committee (PrepCom) for the 2010 Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), the Nonproliferation Review interviewed Ambassador Yukiya Amano of Japan, who presided over the 2007 session of the PrepCom in Vienna. He provided valuable insights into his preparations for the PrepCom and shared his thoughts on some of the most pressing issues that confronted his chairmanship and the PrepCom as a whole. The interview also provides useful perspectives on the future of the strengthened review process. KEYWORDS: Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons; nuclear nonproliferation; nuclear disarmament The legacy of the 2007 Preparatory Committee (PrepCom) for the 2010 Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) is one of deep disputes among delegations on how to reflect the significance of past agreements and the implementation of the treaty. Despite vigorous efforts by PrepCom Chairman Yukiya Amano to consult widely with delegations prior to the start of the meeting, these differences prolonged the adoption of the agenda until the second week. This in turn limited substantive discussion of some of the treaty’s most significant challenges. Ambassador Amano is the permanent representative of Japan to international organizations in Vienna and has served as Japan’s governor on the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Board of Governors since September 2005. He has held increasingly senior positions in the Japanese Foreign Ministry, notably as director- general of the Disarmament, Nonproliferation, and Science Department. Ambassador Amano has extensive experience in disarmament, nonproliferation, and nuclear energy policy and has been involved in negotiating major international nonproliferation measures, including the indefinite extension of the NPT, the Comprehensive Nuclear- Test-Ban Treaty, and the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention verification protocol. He represented Japan as a governmental expert in the UN Expert Group on Disarmament and Nonproliferation Education, and was a diplomat-in-residence at the Center for Nonproliferation Studies in 2001. The 2007 PrepCom, held in Vienna from April 30 to May 11, 2007, was the first of three sessions to be held prior to the 2010 Review Conference. Under the terms of the ‘‘improved’’ strengthened review process (agreed to at the 2000 Review Conference), Nonproliferation Review, Vol. 16, No. 1, March 2009 ISSN 1073-6700 print/ISSN 1746-1766 online/09/010015-10 – 2009 Monterey Institute of International Studies, James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies DOI: 10.1080/10736700802645577 16 JEAN DU PREEZ INTERVIEWS YUKIYA AMANO the first two sessions (in 2007 and 2008) considered ‘‘principles, objectives and ways in order to promote the full implementation of the [NPT], as well as its universality.’’ The third session, which will be held in New York City from May 4Á15, 2009, will make recommendations to the 2010 Review Conference, taking into account the deliberations and results of the two previous PrepComs. One hundred and six states parties, as well as IAEA representatives, participated in the PrepCom. Representatives from the Agency for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean, the Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization, the European Commission, the League of Arab States, and the Organization of the Islamic Conference attended as observers. Unlike previous years, when all but the plenary meetings were closed to nongovernmental participants, representatives of sixty-six civil society organizations were allowed to attend all the meetings of the committee. Although Amano discouraged parties from proposing amendments to the agenda* noting that the draft agenda represented a fine balance of various positions based on prior consultations and that a single amendment would invite other parties to propose changes, thereby delaying work on substantive issues*the agenda was nevertheless contested. Specifically contested was the absence, in the paragraph that frames the work of the PrepCom, of any reference to the 2000 Review Conference agreement. While an appropriate reference was eventually agreed upon, France and the United States insisted that references to the 1975, 1985, and 2005 Review Conferences also be included, thereby diluting the significance of the 2000 outcome. The major point of contention, however, surrounded agenda item VI, which called for states parties to ‘‘reaffirm the need for full compliance of the treaty.’’ Iran insisted that the text be changed to clarify that ‘‘full compliance’’ entailed compliance with all provisions of the treaty, a position that was intended to prevent a formalized and official censure of its enrichment activities. A proposal from South Africa, offered on the final day of the first week, presented a compromise that led to an agreed agenda, which included a footnote defining ‘‘full compliance.’’ The agenda was used for the 2008 PrepCom session and will again be used in 2009. Although the delayed adoption of an agenda limited the discussions during the last three days of the PrepCom, Amano managed to extract a comprehensive Chairman’s Summary that covered all the issues raised at the PrepCom in a balanced manner. However, some delegations, most notably Iran, supported by some non- aligned states, criticized the summary because it did not include every issue discussed during the committee’s session. Given the emphasis placed on Iran during the PrepCom debate, Iran also objected to be singled out in the summary. Instead of forming part of the final report, the summary was submitted in the Chairman’s Working Paper. Jean du Preez, director of the International Organizations and Nonproliferation Program at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies, sat down with Amano after the conclusion of the 2008 PrepCom. Their conversation follows. MAKING THE AGENDA STICK 17 Preparations and Expectations Jean du Preez: What were your initial expectations about the outcome of the PrepCom? Were these expectations met? Yukiya Amano: Following our experiences at the 2005 Review Conference, I hoped to resolve a number of procedural issues, including the adoption of the agenda, from the very outset of the 2007 PrepCom. My aim was to allow for a sufficient amount of time to conduct discussions on substantive matters and also for the preparation of the summary at the end of the meeting. As the chair, I felt it was my responsibility to achieve these goals. Fortunately, most of the objectives were attained, although the adoption of the agenda took longer than expected. JdP: During the period between your nomination as the PrepCom chairman- designate and the start of the 2007 PrepCom, how did you consult, and with whom? What do you think of using a mechanism such as an informally constituted ‘‘Friends of the Chair’’? Did you ever feel the need for such a mechanism, as was employed in the past by some review conference presidents and PrepCom chairs? YA: I initiated a series of consultations with states parties as soon as the Western Group endorsed me as the chair-designate. In Vienna, New York, and Geneva, I had the opportunity to hold meetings with three groups, namely the Western Group, the Group of Eastern European States, and the Group of Non-Aligned States (also known as the Non- Aligned Movement, or NAM), in addition to other states parties on numerous occasions. Bilateral consultations were also held with participating countries at a number of NPT seminars and conferences, which I attended. Meetings with the NAM troika were very helpful, as were the exchanges of views with group coordinators. As for the ‘‘Friends of the Chair’’ mechanism you mention, I am fortunate to have very good relationships with representatives of the states parties, and I consider them, and in particular the group coordinators, as good friends of mine. As such, I did not feel there was a great need for a mechanism of this type to be put in place at the time. JdP: Disagreements over the PrepCom agenda delayed the start of deliberations until the second week. What was your strategy in consulting delegations to resolve the differences over the agenda? YA: I conducted intensive consultations, primarily with coordinators from each regional group, and also with other key players. If and when discussions among the parties showed signs of becoming overly protracted, I worked to identify options that would potentially be helpful in reaching an agreement. I would then call a meeting and ask the floor whether or not the options on the table were acceptable. If one of these options was not fully supported by all parties concerned, it was removed from the table, and I would then re-consult in order to identify and propose further options until agreement was reached. My aim in opting for this approach was to demonstrate that I wanted, and was prepared 18 JEAN DU PREEZ INTERVIEWS YUKIYA AMANO for, thorough consultations. On the other hand I also wanted to make clear that discussions would not be left to continue indefinitely if there was a way of bringing an item on the agenda to a close sooner. JdP: What other procedural issues had to be resolved prior to the start of the PrepCom? For example, were there any differences among delegations about the indicative timetable, and how was the question about North Korea’s status at the PrepCom handled? YA: There was some disagreement relating to the identification of ‘‘specific issues’’ and regarding the allocation of time for these. Nevertheless, I would say that at the time, the aforementioned agenda-related issues were probably the trickiest. Regarding the status of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), I listened carefully to the views of a number of countries and to those of civil society.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Iran's Nuclear Program: Tehran's Compliance with International
    Iran’s Nuclear Program: Tehran’s Compliance with International Obligations Updated August 18, 2021 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R40094 SUMMARY R40094 Iran’s Nuclear Program: Tehran’s Compliance August 18, 2021 with International Obligations Paul K. Kerr Several U.N. Security Council resolutions adopted between 2006 and 2010 required Iran to Specialist in cooperate fully with the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA’s) investigation of its Nonproliferation nuclear activities, suspend its uranium enrichment program, suspend its construction of a heavy- water reactor and related projects, and ratify the Additional Protocol to its IAEA safeguards agreement. Iran did not comply with most of the resolutions’ provisions. However, Tehran has implemented various restrictions on, and provided the IAEA with additional information about, the government’s nuclear program pursuant to the July 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which Tehran concluded with China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. On the JCPOA’s Implementation Day, which took place on January 16, 2016, all of the previous resolutions’ requirements were terminated. The nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) and U.N. Security Council Res olution 2231, which the Council adopted on July 20, 2015, compose the current legal framework governing Iran’s nuclear program. The United States attempted in 2020 to reimpose sanctions on Iran via a mechanism provided for in Resolution 2231. However, the Security Council did not do so. Iran and the IAEA agreed in August 2007 on a work plan to clarify outstanding questions regarding Tehran’s nuclear program. The IAEA had essentially resolved most of these issues, but for several years the agency still had questions concerning “possible military dimensions to Iran’s nuclear programme.” A December 2, 2015, report to the IAEA Board of Governors from then-agency Director General Yukiya Amano contains the IAEA’s “final assessment on the resolution” of the outstanding issues.
    [Show full text]
  • Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization
    Statement to the 63rd regular session of the General Conference of the International Atomic Energy Agency Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization 19 September 2019 Madam President, Excellencies, Distinguished delegates, Ladies and Gentlemen, Allow me to express my congratulations on your election, Madam President, and to wish you, the IAEA Member States and the Secretariat, a productive conference. I am pleased to deliver this statement on behalf of the Executive Secretary of the Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban-Treaty Organization. At the outset, I would like to join others in conveying our deepest sympathy to the International Atomic Energy Agency for the passing of its Director General, Yukiya Amano. While this is a great loss for the international community, we know that Mr Amano’s legacy as an exemplary diplomat and respected leader will remain. It was largely during his term that the IAEA and CTBTO came to work more closely together, addressing some of the pressing issues facing the international community. Indeed, while the mandates of the two organizations are distinct, the CTBTO Preparatory Commission and the International Atomic Energy Agency have always had much in common: we both work towards the creation of a safe and secure world, free of the threat of nuclear weapons. We both contribute to the global nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament regime. The principles and methods that underpin our work also bring us together. Multilateralism, verification and cooperation have formed the basis for many of the Agency’s accomplishments. Both our organizations enjoy large memberships and rely on science and technology to serve and support our Member States.
    [Show full text]
  • Board of Governors on the Developments
    IAEA INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY (IAEA) Board of Governors General Cornel Feruta acting Director General of In accordance with the statute and the existing the International Atomic Energy Agency. practice, the Board is responsible for approving safeguards procedures and safeguards 2018: The Chair of the Board of Governors for agreements, and for the general supervision of 2017-2018 was Ambassador Darmansjah the Agency’s safeguards activities. The board Djumala of Indonesia. generally meets five times a year: March, June, before and after the regular session of the On March 5-9, the Board of Governors convened General Conference in September, and in Vienna, Austria. Director Amano stated that immediately after the meeting of its Technical Iran is meeting its nuclear-related commitments Assistance and Cooperation Committee in and the IAEA has access to all necessary sites. December. At its meetings, the board also examines and makes recommendations to the The Board will also consider the 2018 IAEA General Conference on the IAEA's accounts, Nuclear Safety Review and the 2018 Nuclear Technology Review. program, and budget and considers applications for membership. From 4-8 June, the Board of Governors met in The Board of Governors has 35 members, of Vienna for its second meeting of the year. which 13 are designated by the board and 22 are Director Amano addressed the Board on the elected by the General Conference. subject of North Korea, inspections of Iranian The elected Member States on the board for facilities under the Additional Protocol and JCPOA, and highlighted sustainable 2017-2018 are: Algeria, Argentina, Armenia, development projects undertaken by the IAEA.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Law Bulletin No. 101
    Legal Affairs 2018 N uclear Law Bulletin No. 101 Volume 2018/2 NEA Legal Affairs Nuclear Law Bulletin No. 101 © OECD 2018 NEA No. 7427 NUCLEAR ENERGY AGENCY ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT The OECD is a unique forum where the governments of 36 democracies work together to address the economic, social and environmental challenges of globalisation. The OECD is also at the forefront of efforts to understand and to help governments respond to new developments and concerns, such as corporate governance, the information economy and the challenges of an ageing population. The Organisation provides a setting where governments can compare policy experiences, seek answers to common problems, identify good practice and work to co-ordinate domestic and international policies. The OECD member countries are: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Chile, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, the Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States. The European Commission takes part in the work of the OECD. OECD Publishing disseminates widely the results of the Organisation’s statistics gathering and research on economic, social and environmental issues, as well as the conventions, guidelines and standards agreed by its members. This work is published on the responsibility of the OECD Secretary-General. The opinions expressed and arguments employed herein do not necessarily reflect the official views of the Organisation or of the governments of its member countries.
    [Show full text]
  • Iran's Nuclear Steps and the New IAEA Chief | the Washington Institute
    MENU Policy Analysis / PolicyWatch 3208 Iran’s Nuclear Steps and the New IAEA Chief by Simon Henderson, Elana DeLozier Oct 30, 2019 Also available in Arabic / Farsi ABOUT THE AUTHORS Simon Henderson Simon Henderson is the Baker fellow and director of the Bernstein Program on Gulf and Energy Policy at The Washington Institute, specializing in energy matters and the conservative Arab states of the Persian Gulf. Elana DeLozier Elana DeLozier is the Rubin Family Fellow in the Bernstein Program on Gulf and Energy Policy at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, where she specializes in Yemen, the Gulf states, and nuclear weapons and proliferation. Brief Analysis The steady weakening by Tehran of its international nuclear commitments will be the most immediate challenge for the next head of the world’s nuclear watchdog. n October 29, board members of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), meeting in Vienna, made O their choice for the next director-general, replacing Yukiya Amano of Japan, who died in July after a long illness. The winning candidate, who still has to be approved by the full membership, is Rafael Mariano Grossi of Argentina, who secured the necessary two-thirds majority in the third ballot. His competition was acting director- general Cornel Feruta of Romania. Both are very experienced in nuclear diplomacy, but the Wall Street Journal reported Feruta had wanted to continue the deliberate, careful approach of Amano, while Grossi prefers to shake up the agency, including a “firm but fair” approach to Iran. Tehran’s Plans T he challenge of Iran is both technical and diplomatic.
    [Show full text]
  • Strengthening and Reform of the Iaea Strengthening and Reform of the Iaea
    PRAISE FOR TREVOR FINDLAy’s UNLEASHING THE NUCLEAR WATCHDOG: STRENGTHENING AND REFORM OF THE IAEA UNLEASHING THE NUCLEAR WATCHDOG: STRENGTHENING AND REFORM OF THE IAEA “It is an exceptionally good piece of work that covers the key issues comprehensively and captures the key nuances that shape the Agency and its work. I am vastly impressed by the author’s command of the institution and the subject matter.” Mark Gwozdecky, Canadian ambassador to Jordan and former IAEA spokesperson UNLEASHING “Unleashing the Nuclear Watchdog is insightful, comprehensive and accessible. It will be useful to people who are in a position to make changes, and useful to analysts who want to understand both how the IAEA works and how it doesn’t work.” THE NUCLEAR Martin B. Malin, Executive Director, Project on Managing the Atom, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University WATCHDOG “This is a very strong piece of work, with a very good descriptive review of the Agency’s activities, a vigorous discussion and numerous interesting recommendations.” STRENGTHENING AND James Keeley, Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Calgary REFORM OF THE IAEA TREVOR FINDLAY TREVOR FINDLAY UNLEASHING THE NUCLEAR WATCHDOG: STRENGTHENING AND REFORM OF THE IAEA Trevor Findlay CIGI’s Strengthening and Reform of the International Atomic Energy Agency project is conducted in partnership with the Canadian Centre for Treaty Compliance (CCTC) at the Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, Carleton University, Ottawa. The project is directed by Trevor Findlay, Senior Fellow at CIGI and Director of the CCTC. Copyright © 2012 by The Centre for International Governance Innovation CIGI would like to thank the Government of Ontario for its support.
    [Show full text]
  • USAF Counterproliferation Center CPC Outreach Journal #727
    USAF COUNTERPROLIFERATION CENTER CPC OUTREACH JOURNAL Maxwell AFB, Alabama Issue No. 727, 07 July 2009 Articles & Other Documents: Russia Needs New Arms Reduction Deal as much as ISRAEL 'FREE TO ATTACK IRAN' U.S. - Diplomat Russia Calls on U.S. to Compromise on Missile Defense ‗Saudis Give Nod to Israeli Raid on Iran‘ Defence Review Puts Trident in Doubt US Denies Giving Israel 'Green Light' to Attack Iran The Long, Hard Road to Nuclear Safety Pak N-weapons face threat from insiders: Former CIA official President Barack Obama‘s Nuclear-free Vision began as Attack in Pakistani Garrison City Raises Anxiety about a Student Safety of Nuclear Labs and Staff U.S., Russia Agree on Framework to Reduce Nuclear 'Insiders Biggest Threat to Pak Nukes' Arsenal US Ready for NKorean Missile: Military Commander Chemical Weapons Incinerator Now in Final Phase Experts Find Soviet Parts in North Korean Missile Is Lashkar the New Al-Qaida? Scrutinized N. Korean Freighter Likely Carrying Rifles, Pirates 'Smuggling Al-Qaeda Fighters' into Somalia Launchers: Source N. Korea Fires Six Ballistic Missiles in Violation of Mali Army Fights Again with Al-Qaeda Elements U.N. Resolutions N. Korean Missile Launches Aimed at Improving Japan‘s Amano Wins IAEA Ballot to Succeed ElBaradei Accuracy: Official Saudis Give Nod to Israeli Raid on Iran FACTBOX: Who is New Head of IAEA, Yukiya Amano? Biden Suggests U.S. Not Standing in Israel‘s Way on No Sign Iran Seeks Nuclear Arms: New IAEA Head Iran Pak Nuke Programme Under Assault Welcome to the CPC Outreach Journal. As part of USAF Counterproliferation Center’s mission to counter weapons of mass destruction through education and research, we’re providing our government and civilian community a source for timely counterproliferation information.
    [Show full text]
  • Uncorrected Transcript
    1 IRAN-2014/10/31 THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION CHALLENGES IN NUCLEAR VERIFICATION: THE IAEA’S ROLE ON THE IRANIAN NUCLEAR ISSUE Washington, D.C. Friday, October 31, 2014 Speaker: YUKIYA AMANO Director General International Atomic Energy Agency Moderator: ROBERT EINHORN Senior Fellow, Arms Control and Non- Proliferation Initiative The Brookings Institution * * * * * ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100 Alexandria, VA 22314 Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190 2 IRAN-2014/10/31 P R O C E E D I N G S MR. EINHORN: Good morning. My name is Bob Einhorn. I'd like to welcome you to Brookings and to today's event which is part of the Alan and Jane Batkin International Leaders Forum Series. Our speaker today is Yukiya Amano, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the IAEA. Years when I spoke to groups or I briefed reporters I would simply use the initials IAEA, then I'd catch myself and remember to sound out, you know, the full name of the Agency. Today you don't have to do that anymore. The IAEA has practically become a household word. It's an indispensible effort; it's an indispensible player in international efforts to prevent nuclear proliferation. It's a safeguard system. It's highly sophisticated monitoring system is an essential element for providing assurance that nuclear programs are truly peaceful and for detecting possible violations of non-proliferation obligations. The Agency has been at the center of compliance controversies with North Korea, Iraq, Libya, and Syria. And now it's heavily involved in the Iranian nuclear issue.
    [Show full text]
  • Iaea-Topic-Synopsis.Pdf
    BACKGROUND “The step toward energy availability is a step toward a better future for all.” Such a sentiment is clearly stated in the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals outlined in the September 2015 United Nations General Assembly, stating the goal of the United Nations: to pursue a world without need, want, hunger, poverty, and energy deficiency. As such, in order to address modern demands for energy in an increasingly technology-based society, it is important to consider the long term viability of nuclear energy when used to deliver power. In the past, the discussion of sustainable energy infrastructure development has come up frequently and without fail. The introduction of new energy-technologies has called into question the practicality of old energy infrastructure, namely coal power plants. Newer, renewable, and sustainable alternatives including wind, solar, and nuclear energy have only recently been made available to governments worldwide, and only a small fraction of traditional coal energy has been replaced. In 2016, the average high-income nation relied on about 60% of coal energy to sustain its energy operations, dedicating only a small portion of research, funding, and investment into renewable sources due to their unreliable and expensive tendencies. Most commonly, there are four major sustainable energy practices that dominate the energy industry in terms of the most political support and rapport: wind, solar, hydro, and nuclear power. These four primary methods of sustainable energy practices produce the best results when applied on a national industrial scale. However, the three practices of wind, solar, and hydropower do not generate energy on a level consistent with nuclear: in wind energy, for example, the amount of energy produced is directly correlated with the presence of wind in the 1 environment, which can fluctuate depending on season, temperature, and time of day.
    [Show full text]
  • Proliferation Alert! the IAEA and Non-Compliance Reporting
    Project on Managing the Atom Proliferation Alert! The IAEA and Non-Compliance Reporting Trevor Findlay October 2015 Project on Managing the Atom Report No. 2015-04 Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs Harvard Kennedy School 79 JFK Street Cambridge, MA 02138 617-495-4219 [email protected] http://www. belfercenter.org/mta The author of this report invites liberal use of the information provided in it for educational purposes, requiring only that the reproduced material clearly cite the source, using: Findlay, Trevor. “Proliferation Alert! The IAEA and Non-Compliance Reporting.” Project on Managing the Atom, Report #2015-04, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School, October 2015. Design & Layout by Andrew Facini and Josh Anderson Cover photo: Satellite photograph of Yongbyong nuclear facility from September 11, 2005, prior to North Korea’s demolition of the reactor cooling tower on June 27, 2008 in compliance with the Six Party Talks Agreement of February 13, 2007 (Digital Globe) This report was funded by the Carnegie Corporation of New York and the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation. Copyright 2015, President and Fellows of Harvard College Printed in the United States of America Project on Managing the Atom proliferation Alert! The IAEA and Non-Compliance Reporting Trevor Findlay October 2015 About the Author Dr. Trevor Findlay was a Senior Research Fellow with the International Security Program and the Project on Managing the Atom (MTA) at the Belfer Center from 2011 to 2014 and remains an MTA Associate. He is a former Australian diplomat, with a Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • CTBTO Spectrum
    CTBTO SpectrumCTBTO Spectrum CTBTO NEWSLETTER ISSUE 8 | JUNE 2006 Who we are IMS: The pioneering years The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty bans all nuclear weapon test explosions. It opened In the early days of August 1997, I chaired the fi rst meeting of the initial International for signature in New York on 24 September Monitoring System (IMS) team. Some of our team members were seasoned veterans 1996 and enjoys worldwide support. from the Geneva negotiations, but most of us were completely new to the Treaty and to the world of multilateral diplomacy. Coming from nine countries and very different The CTBTO Preparatory Commission was backgrounds, we faced the daunting task of building the global IMS network of 321 established to carry out the necessary arrangements stations and 16 laboratories within three years. At that time it was thought that the Treaty for the implementation of the Treaty and to could get the number of ratifi cations needed for entry into force within three years, and prepare for the fi rst session of the Conference the monitoring system had to be ready by then. of the State Parties to the Treaty after its entry into force. It consists of all States Signatories Before coming to Vienna, many of us assumed that a complex and challenging and the Provisional Technical Secretariat. project like building the IMS would go through the normal phases of project development such as design, proof of concept, testing and implementation. The instructions from the governing bodies, however, made it very clear that the build up of the monitoring system Inside this issue had to start as rapidly as possible.
    [Show full text]
  • NPR 9.1: a Japanese View on Nuclear Disarmament
    YUKIYA A MANO Viewpoint A Japanese View on Nuclear Disarmament YUKIYA A MANO Yukiya Amano is a career diplomat in the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs. His previous postings have Included Deputy Director General for Arms Control and Science Corporation from 1999 to 2001, Minister at the Japanese Delegation to the Conference of Disarmament from 1994 to 1997, and Director of Nuclear Energy Division from 1993 to 1994. he world is changing very rapidly as it enters the draw from the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty, a de- new century and the transitional era following the cision whose impacts are still to be determined. Tend of the Cold War comes to an end. The events Looking back at history after World War II, disarma- of September 11, 2001, have made clear that a dramati- ment has always reflected the security trends of the era. cally new international security environment is now at After the end of that war, the world was broken into two hand. Among other major changes from the past is that camps, and a fierce arms race took place. At the begin- the nuclear threat from Russia is no longer the highest ning of 1960s, the international community realized that danger in the current security agenda. it could not continue the arms race endlessly and entered In the disarmament field, however, negotiations have a period of “competition and arms control.” The achieve- been in gridlock for several years. (The term disarmament ments during this period included the Partial Test Ban here includes arms control, reductions in classes of arma- Treaty (PTBT) in 1963; the Treaty on the Non-Prolif- ments, and their total elimination.) No negotiations, for eration of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) in 1968; the BWC in example, are taking place in the Conference on Disarma- 1972; the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty in 1972; ment, in Geneva.
    [Show full text]