Southern Flows: WMD Nonproliferation in The

SOUTHERN FLOWS WMD Nonproliferation in the Developing World Edited by Brian Finlay A Project of The Stanley Foundation and Stimson 2014 2 | Southern Flows Contents Foreword / 5 Ellen Laipson and Keith Porter Introduction / 8 Brian Finlay Chapter 1 / 27 Nonproliferation in the Caribbean Basin O’Neil Hamilton Chapter 2 / 50 Nonproliferation in Central America Alexander Chacón Chapter 3 / 66 Nonproliferation in Eastern Africa Ochieng Adala Chapter 4 / 81 Nonproliferation in the Middle East Al-Sharif Nasser bin Nasser Chapter 5 / 106 Nonproliferation in the Andean Region Ana Maria Cerini WMD Nonproliferation in the Developing World | 3 Chapter 6 / 127 Nonproliferation in Southeast Asia Noramly bin Muslim UN Security Council Resolution 1540: The Next 10 Years / 153 Brian Finlay Acknowledgments / 161 Appendix Resolution 1540 (2004) / 163 Resolution 1673 (2006) / 168 Resolution 1810 (2008) / 170 Resolution 1977 (2011) / 175 Resolution 2055 (2012) / 183 About the Authors / 184 About the Project / 189 About the Stanley Foundation / 190 About Stimson / 191 4 | Southern Flows WMD Nonproliferation in the Developing World | 5 Foreword Dear Reader, We are pleased to present to you Southern Flows: WMD Nonproliferation in the Developing World, an important study that captures the insights of several years of collaborative work to develop an effective approach to preventing the spread of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in the Global South. Over the course of the last seven years, Stimson and the Stanley Foundation have worked together to help the global community implement United Nations Security Council Resolution 1540 (2004). The resolution’s mandate calls on all member states to control sensitive weapons, materials, and technologies of mass destruction in order to prevent terrorist acquisition of these deadly capabilities. This volume is the culmination of the work our two institutions have undertaken together. Its relevance has been validated by a continued terrorist inter- est in obtaining weapons of mass destruction and, more recently, by the crisis in Syria and the resulting importance of preventing extrem- ists and terrorists from gaining access to Syria’s chemical weapons. Resolution 1540 has led to many efforts to inform, influence, and cajole all UN member states to comply, even as it met with challenges stemming from a perceived lack of legitimacy and enforcement authority. Perhaps 6 | Southern Flows most distressing is the endemic absence of implementation capacity among most countries to fully comply with the mandate. Like many UN resolutions, Resolution 1540 set broad standards for all countries but offered little preparation or allocation of resources for the varied needs of countries to comply with its provisions. This challenge has been most acutely felt in the countries of the Global South. Recognizing the widening gulf between objectives and reality on the ground, Stimson developed a creative approach to the implementation dilemma by listening to the needs of countries with little or no history or experience with policies to counter WMD and subsequently identifying positive synergies between their national-development and soft-security goals, and the global obligations of Resolution 1540. The Stanley Foundation brought to this effort more than 50 years of relationships with UN member states and an incomparable convening authority to operationalize the Stimson model. Through this cooperative endeavor, we were able to develop and hone a flexible and bottom-up approach to understanding the unique security and development challenges in six regions of the Global South: the Caribbean, Central America, Eastern Africa, the Middle East, the Andean region, and Southeast Asia. Critically, the effort was put into operation as a result of the willingness of the government of Finland to experiment with innovative approaches to bridging the policy divide between security objectives and development imperatives. In so doing, Helsinki became a pioneer and model in better leveraging assistance resources to help meet proliferation threats around the globe. The ensuing work entailed extensive research, a series of workshops and field interviews with a wide range of government officials and regional specialists, and six regional assessments prepared in a close collaboration between the two institutions. Our teams also developed an informal network of national governments, regional organizations, and civil society groups to test and deepen the concept of this “whole- of-society” approach to development and security. Most importantly, the project led to tangible new activities in many of these regions that pay direct dividends to economic development and security. All of these activities have demonstrably aided the fuller and more effective implementation of Resolution 1540 in the developing world. This new volume gives voice to experts in each of the regions who were asked to evaluate how this approach—linking development and security WMD Nonproliferation in the Developing World | 7 assistance for win-win outcomes—has worked in their respective neighborhoods. The results vary. In the Western Hemisphere and in Africa, the judgments are largely positive, and local governments, regional organizations, and the international donor community have embraced our innovative approach. The outcomes are more mixed in the Middle East and Southeast Asia. In the former case, governments failed to adopt the model for reasons more fully detailed in this volume. And in the latter case, efforts have yet to fully mature, making a full assessment of long-term effectiveness difficult. We hope you will find this new book a stimulating read. It is our belief that Resolution 1540 remains perhaps the world’s only equi- table multilateral framework to counter WMD terrorism that, if implemented more innovatively, would bolster national, regional, and global security. We are particularly proud of the work done by our colleagues, ably led by Stimson Managing Director Brian Finlay, to demonstrate the effectiveness of a new form of public-private partnership in which two nongovernmental organizations were able to make an important contribution to the UN mandate by finding smart ways to implement this ambitious objective. We have been gratified to hear from UN officials as well as national political leaders and heads of regional organizations that this approach led to more successful compliance with the spirit and the letter of the resolution. Sincerely, Keith Porter Ellen Laipson President President and CEO The Stanley Foundation Stimson 8 | Southern Flows Introduction Brian Finlay Almost everyone in today’s world feels insecure, but not everyone feels insecure about the same thing. Different threats seem more urgent to people in different parts of the world. Probably the largest number would give priority to economic and social threats, including poverty, environmental degradation and infectious dis- ease. Others might stress inter-State conflict; yet others internal conflict, including civil war. Many people—especially but not only in the developed world—would now put terrorism at the top of their list. In truth, all these threats are interconnected, and all cut across national frontiers. We need common global strategies to deal with all of them, and indeed, Governments are coming together to work out and implement such strategies, in the UN and elsewhere. The one area where there is a total lack of any common strategy is the one that may well present the greatest danger of all: the area of nuclear weapons. —UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, November 28, 20061 In April 2004, gathering in New York City, the 15 members of the United Nations Security Council voted unanimously to pass Resolution 1540.2 The measure mandated an array of global supply- side controls over sensitive weapons, materials, technologies, and WMD Nonproliferation in the Developing World | 9 know-how. Three years after the events of September 11—and on the heels of astonishing revelations that rogue Pakistani scientist A.Q. Khan had shared weapons of mass destruction (WMD) technologies with North Korea, Iran, Libya, and potentially even Al Qaeda—the resolution intended to rectify the inadequacies of the existing control regime and the particular challenge of WMD proliferation to nonstate actors. Yet even as each of the 15 Security Council members cast a vote in favor of the resolution, for the 80 percent of the world’s popula- tion living on less than $10 a day, far more immediate security and development threats were rightly being prioritized.3 For instance, in the same month that Resolution 1540 was promulgated, more than 100 suspected Jemaah Islamiah militants were killed during attacks on security outposts in Thailand’s Muslim-dominated southern prov- inces. In Damascus, Syria, a bomb explosion and gun battle between security forces and a terrorist group killed four people and left a UN building badly damaged. In a village in southern Kyrgyzstan, a landslide left 33 people dead and a nation struggling to recover. That year in sub-Saharan Africa, 1 in 12 adults was newly infected with HIV/AIDS, as life expectancy trends continued to plummet.4 Also in 2004, Colombia retained its rank as the largest producer of cocaine, and homicide rates across the country remained among the highest in the world—upwards of 490,000 deaths resulted from armed violence in that year alone.5 Amid pervasive economic deprivation, human insecurity, deteriorating public health, lack of access to basic education, poverty, hunger,

Load more