DOCSLIB.ORG

Non-Proliferation ‘Clubs’ Vs

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Non-Proliferation ‘Clubs’ Vs Author: Harald Müller Carmen Wunderlich Marco Fey Klaus-Peter Ricke Annette Schaper Research 2014:04 Non-proliferation ‘Clubs’ vs. the NPT Report number: 2014:04 ISSN: 2000-0456 Available at www.stralsakerhetsmyndigheten.se SSM perspective Background The Swedish Radiation Safety Authority (SSM) is among other things an administrative authority for issues of nuclear non-proliferation. SSM contribute to withholding and developing national competence for cur- rent and future needs within the authority’s area of responsibility and therefore takes initiative to research. In terms of nuclear non-proliferation, the Authority shall seek to ensure that nuclear material and technology are not used for nuclear weapons. The Authority oversees the nuclear material in Sweden and Swedish nuclear facilities, equipment and technology is used as declared in ac- cordance with Sweden’s international commitments. The study is the result of a call for tenders which took place in autumn 2013. Objectives The purpose of this study is to gather and disseminate knowledge, to support SSM in the international work, and to build knowledge in the long term in nuclear non-proliferation. Results The study analyses the relationship between the Nuclear Non-Prolifera- tion Treaty, NPT and various initiatives and institutions (‘clubs’) based outside the NPT framework, which aims to improve and strengthen the Treaty. The study identifies conflicts and possible synergies and propo- ses options for developing and improving the interaction between the NPT and ‘clubs’ in order to increase the overall efficiency. The report describes facts about the various non-proliferation ‘clubs’, and also analyses and formulates conclusions about the various interna- tional initiatives in non-proliferation. The subject is vast and the report therefore cannot naturally go in depth but provides useful information for those working in the area, but also for those generally interested. The report contains several ideas that can be studied further. Project information Contact person SSM: Henrik Moberg Reference: SSM2013-3347 SSM 2014:04 Authors: Harald Müller, Carmen Wunderlich, Marco Fey, Klaus-Peter Ricke and Annette Schaper PRIF/HSFK, Frankfurt, Germany 2014:04 Non-proliferation ‘Clubs’ vs. the NPT Date: Januari 2014 Report number: 2014:04 ISSN: 2000-0456 Available at www.stralsakerhetsmyndigheten.se This report concerns a study which has been conducted for the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority, SSM. The conclusions and view- points presented in the report are those of the author/authors and do not necessarily coincide with those of the SSM. SSM 2014:04 Content List of Figures .......................................................................................... 3 List of Abbreviations ............................................................................... 4 Summary ................................................................................................... 6 Sammanfattning ..................................................................................... 10 Chapter I: Introduction .......................................................................... 14 1. Plan of the Study ............................................................................... 17 2. Methodological Approach ................................................................ 19 Chapter II: Case Studies ....................................................................... 20 1. The Nuclear Suppliers Group ........................................................... 20 1.1. Description ................................................................................... 20 1.1.1. Mission ................................................................................. 20 1.1.2. Membership ......................................................................... 21 1.1.3. Structure and Organization .................................................. 21 1.1.4. Decision-Making Structure................................................... 22 1.1.5. Outreach .............................................................................. 23 1.1.6. Confrontational versus Cooperative Instruments ................ 23 1.2. Assessment ................................................................................. 24 1.2.1. Internal and External Evaluation .......................................... 24 1.2.2. Reasons for Success or Shortcomings ............................... 25 1.2.3. The Outliers’ Criticism .......................................................... 25 1.3. What’s next? ................................................................................ 28 1.3.1. Involvement of Companies/Best Practices .......................... 28 1.3.2. Post-Shipment Control ......................................................... 28 2. The Proliferation Security Initiative ................................................. 30 2.1. Description ................................................................................... 30 2.1.1. Mission ................................................................................. 30 2.1.2. Membership ......................................................................... 32 2.1.3. Structure and Organization .................................................. 32 2.1.4. Decision- Making Structure.................................................. 34 2.1.5. Outreach .............................................................................. 34 2.1.6. Confrontational versus Cooperative Instruments ................ 37 2.2. Assessment ................................................................................. 38 2.2.1. Internal Evaluation ............................................................... 38 2.2.2. External Evaluation and Reasons for its Success and Shortcoming ................................................................................... 39 2.2.3. The Outliers’ Criticism .......................................................... 40 2.3. What’s next? ................................................................................ 40 3. The G8 Global Partnership Against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction .............................................................. 42 3.1. Description ................................................................................... 42 3.1.1. Mission ................................................................................. 42 3.1.2. Membership and Organization ............................................ 43 3.1.3. Decision-Making Structure................................................... 45 3.1.4. Outreach .............................................................................. 45 3.1.5. Confrontational versus Cooperative Instruments ................ 46 3.2. Assessment ................................................................................. 47 3.2.1. Internal and External Evaluation .......................................... 47 3.2.2. The Outliers’ Criticism .......................................................... 49 3.3. What’s next? ................................................................................ 49 4. GTRI Global Threat Reduction Initiative ......................................... 51 SSM 2014:04 4.1. Description ................................................................................... 51 4.1.1. Mission ................................................................................. 52 4.1.2. Membership ......................................................................... 54 4.1.3. Structure and Organization .................................................. 54 4.1.4. Decision-Making Structure................................................... 54 4.1.5. Outreach .............................................................................. 55 4.1.6. Confrontational versus Cooperative Instruments ................ 55 4.2. Assessment ................................................................................. 56 4.2.1. Internal Evaluation ............................................................... 56 4.2.2. External Evaluation .............................................................. 58 4.2.3. Reasons for Success and Shortcomings ............................ 59 4.3. What’s next? ................................................................................ 61 5. Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism ............................... 63 5.1. Description ................................................................................... 63 5.1.1. Mission ................................................................................. 63 5.1.2. Membership ......................................................................... 64 5.1.3. Structure and Organization .................................................. 65 5.1.4. Decision-Making Structure................................................... 66 5.1.5. Outreach .............................................................................. 67 5.1.6. Confrontational versus Cooperative Instruments ................ 67 5.2. Assessment ................................................................................. 68 5.2.1. Internal and External Evaluation .......................................... 68 5.2.2. Reasons for Success and Shortcomings ............................ 69 5.2.3. The Outliers’ Criticism .......................................................... 69 5.3. What’s next? ...............................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Comparative Connections, Volume 14, Number 3
    Pacific Forum CSIS Comparative Connections A Triannual E-Journal on East Asian Bilateral Relations edited by Carl Baker Brad Glosserman September – December 2012 Vol. 14, No.3 January 2013 http://csis.org/program/comparative-connections Pacific Forum CSIS Based in Honolulu, Hawaii, the Pacific Forum CSIS operates as the autonomous Asia- Pacific arm of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1975, the thrust of the Forum’s work is to help develop cooperative policies in the Asia- Pacific region through debate and analyses undertaken with the region’s leaders in the academic, government, and corporate arenas. The Forum’s programs encompass current and emerging political, security, economic/business, and oceans policy issues. It collaborates with a network of more than 30 research institutes around the Pacific Rim, drawing on Asian perspectives and disseminating its projects’ findings and recommendations to opinion leaders, governments, and publics throughout the region. An international Board of Governors guides the Pacific Forum’s work. The Forum is funded by grants from foundations, corporations, individuals, and governments, the latter providing a small percentage of the forum’s annual budget. The Forum’s studies are objective and nonpartisan and it does not engage in classified or proprietary work. Comparative Connections A Triannual E-Journal on East Asian Bilateral Relations Edited by Carl Baker and Brad Glosserman Volume 14, Number 3 September – December 2012 Honolulu, Hawaii January 2013 Comparative Connections A Triannual Electronic Journal on East Asian Bilateral Relations Bilateral relationships in East Asia have long been important to regional peace and stability, but in the post-Cold War environment, these relationships have taken on a new strategic rationale as countries pursue multiple ties, beyond those with the US, to realize complex political, economic, and security interests.
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    Table of Contents Chapter 1 1 Country Overview 1 Country Overview 2 Key Data 3 Korea, South 4 Asia 5 Chapter 2 7 Political Overview 7 History 8 Political Conditions 10 Political Risk Index 72 Political Stability 87 Freedom Rankings 102 Human Rights 114 Government Functions 117 Government Structure 118 Principal Government Officials 123 Leader Biography 126 Leader Biography 126 Foreign Relations 128 National Security 269 Defense Forces 272 Chapter 3 274 Economic Overview 274 Economic Overview 275 Nominal GDP and Components 278 Population and GDP Per Capita 280 Real GDP and Inflation 281 Government Spending and Taxation 282 Money Supply, Interest Rates and Unemployment 283 Foreign Trade and the Exchange Rate 284 Data in US Dollars 285 Energy Consumption and Production Standard Units 286 Energy Consumption and Production QUADS 288 World Energy Price Summary 289 CO2 Emissions 290 Agriculture Consumption and Production 291 World Agriculture Pricing Summary 294 Metals Consumption and Production 295 World Metals Pricing Summary 298 Economic Performance Index 299 Chapter 4 311 Investment Overview 311 Foreign Investment Climate 312 Foreign Investment Index 317 Corruption Perceptions Index 330 Competitiveness Ranking 341 Taxation 350 Stock Market 351 Partner Links 351 Chapter 5 353 Social Overview 353 People 354 Human Development Index 356 Life Satisfaction Index 359 Happy Planet Index 371 Status of Women 380 Global Gender Gap Index 382 Culture and Arts 392 Etiquette 392 Travel Information 395 Diseases/Health Data 405 Chapter 6 411 Environmental Overview 411 Environmental Issues 412 Environmental Policy 413 Greenhouse Gas Ranking 414 Global Environmental Snapshot 425 Global Environmental Concepts 436 International Environmental Agreements and Associations 451 Appendices 475 Bibliography 476 Korea, South Chapter 1 Country Overview Korea, South Review 2016 Page 1 of 487 pages Korea, South Country Overview SOUTH KOREA In August 1948 the Republic of Korea (R.O.K.) was established, with Syngman Rhee as the first president.
    [Show full text]
  • The Expanding U.S.-Korea Alliance Hearing Committee
    THE EXPANDING U.S.-KOREA ALLIANCE HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ASIA AND THE PACIFIC OF THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION OCTOBER 26, 2011 Serial No. 112–71 Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/ U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 70–948PDF WASHINGTON : 2011 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:09 Dec 01, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 F:\WORK\AP\102611\70948 HFA PsN: SHIRL COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida, Chairman CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey HOWARD L. BERMAN, California DAN BURTON, Indiana GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York ELTON GALLEGLY, California ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American DANA ROHRABACHER, California Samoa DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey EDWARD R. ROYCE, California BRAD SHERMAN, California STEVE CHABOT, Ohio ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York RON PAUL, Texas GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York MIKE PENCE, Indiana RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri JOE WILSON, South Carolina ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey CONNIE MACK, Florida GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas DENNIS CARDOZA, California TED POE, Texas BEN CHANDLER, Kentucky GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida BRIAN HIGGINS, New York JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio ALLYSON SCHWARTZ, Pennsylvania BILL JOHNSON, Ohio CHRISTOPHER S.
    [Show full text]
  • South Korea Manages Globalization
    SOUTH KOREA MANAGES GLOBALIZATION: STRATEGIES OF SELF-DEFINITION AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION A Thesis by EVAN WILLIAM STEWART Submitted to the Office of Graduate and Professional Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Chair of Committee, Cynthia Werner Committee Members, Norbert Dannhaeuser James Petrick Head of Department, Cynthia Werner May 2014 Major Subject: Anthropology Copyright 2014 Evan William Stewart ABSTRACT The nation of South Korea transitioned from being one of the poorest countries worldwide to becoming the 15th largest economy. South Korea has attempted to manage globalization by actively developing and supporting cultural based entertainment, such as film and music while also promoting cultural and historical preservation, such as elements of the Han brand and other traditional and national elements. This study counters views against theoretical frameworks of cultural imperialism and particularly media imperialism. Theories of cultural and media imperialism delineate globalization as the hegemonic takeover by American popular culture, which can lead to various forms of cultural demise in non-Western countries. However, this does not seem to be the case for South Korea. Instead, I argue that South Korea has successfully managed globalization, guarding against Western hegemony and has not succumbed to American cultural or media imperialism. This paper’s methodology uses a combination of primary and secondary sources. As a result, two main strategies have been identified in this paper’s thesis which account for South Korea’s success, both of which are endorsed by governmental support and cultural policy: self-definition and cultural preservation. Self- definition entails the global and local proliferation of South Korea’s cultural industry, which primarily encompasses South Korean film and music (K-Pop).
    [Show full text]
  • Comparative Connections
    Pacific Forum CSIS Comparative Connections A Triannual E-Journal on East Asian Bilateral Relations edited by Carl Baker Brad Glosserman September – December 2012 Vol. 14, No.3 January 2013 http://csis.org/program/comparative-connections Pacific Forum CSIS Based in Honolulu, Hawaii, the Pacific Forum CSIS operates as the autonomous Asia- Pacific arm of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1975, the thrust of the Forum’s work is to help develop cooperative policies in the Asia- Pacific region through debate and analyses undertaken with the region’s leaders in the academic, government, and corporate arenas. The Forum’s programs encompass current and emerging political, security, economic/business, and oceans policy issues. It collaborates with a network of more than 30 research institutes around the Pacific Rim, drawing on Asian perspectives and disseminating its projects’ findings and recommendations to opinion leaders, governments, and publics throughout the region. An international Board of Governors guides the Pacific Forum’s work. The Forum is funded by grants from foundations, corporations, individuals, and governments, the latter providing a small percentage of the forum’s annual budget. The Forum’s studies are objective and nonpartisan and it does not engage in classified or proprietary work. Comparative Connections A Triannual E-Journal on East Asian Bilateral Relations Edited by Carl Baker and Brad Glosserman Volume 14, Number 3 September – December 2012 Honolulu, Hawaii January 2013 Comparative Connections A Triannual Electronic Journal on East Asian Bilateral Relations Bilateral relationships in East Asia have long been important to regional peace and stability, but in the post-Cold War environment, these relationships have taken on a new strategic rationale as countries pursue multiple ties, beyond those with the US, to realize complex political, economic, and security interests.
    [Show full text]
  • Inter-Korean Relations, It Is Hardly Surprising
    Comparative Connections A Triannual E-Journal on East Asian Bilateral Relations South Korea-North Korea Relations: Will “Trustpolitik” bring a Thaw? Aidan Foster-Carter University of Leeds Writing as a new year begins it seems apt to look forward as much as back. If the past four months saw little movement on inter-Korean relations, it is hardly surprising. South Korea’s current president (since 2008), Lee Myung-bak, is detested by the North – but he is on the way out. Formally, Lee’s term of office ends on Feb. 25, but the way the electoral cycle works in Seoul – presidents are allowed only a single five-year stint – has rendered him a lame duck for the past year, as attention shifted to the hard-fought race to succeed him. In that contest, despite deep overall ideological rivalries, the one certainty was that Seoul’s policy towards Pyongyang will change going forward. Both major candidates, as well as the independent progressive Ahn Cheol-soo, who made much of the running before eventually withdrawing, had promised to end Lee’s hard line and try to mend fences with the North. With her victory, the task of defining that changed policy falls to Park Geun-hye. Fences to mend That said, the detail among the candidates differed substantially. In a useful service, the [US] National Committee on North Korea (NCNK) – whose website is a valuable and perhaps insufficiently known resource generally – put together summaries of the candidates’ positions on the Northern question. The most radical was Moon Jae-in of the opposition Democratic United Party (DUP), who in effect was ready to resume and deepen the “Sunshine” policy practiced for a decade (1998-2007) by the late Kim Dae-jung and Roh Moo-hyun.
    [Show full text]