United Nations Attempting to outlaw nuclear weapons
Ellen Powell
In addition, effects of a nuclear bomb video series
The
United Nations says it’s time to take another look at eliminating
nuclear weapons. But the countries that have them are united by one
thing: their desire to keep the weapons.
On
Thursday, UN member states voted on a resolution that would create a
pathway to banning nuclear weapons. There was substantial support for
the measure, with 123 countries voting in favor. All nine countries that
have nuclear weapons, however, opposed the potential ban.
A
split this early in the process highlights the challenges inherent in
eliminating nuclear capability. Nations like the United States, Russia,
and China see maintaining nuclear capabilities as essential to securing
their citizens – and their allies – against outside threats. But
supporters of the ban say that, even if it started out without universal
adherence, a treaty would create international pressure on nuclear
countries to draw down and destroy their stockpiles.
“Given the tremendous humanitarian consequences of any nuclear explosion, we have to take action,”
explained Thomas Hajnoczi, Austria’s ambassador to the UN, according to
Bloomberg. “Nuclear weapons states always say it’s too early for such a
treaty but we think the time is right to create legal norms to ban
weapons of mass destruction.” Austria was one of the sponsors of
Thursday’s resolution.
The
nuclear nonproliferation treaty already helps prevent non-nuclear
countries from acquiring the weapons and limits the production of new
nuclear weapons. The United States also has a bilateral treaty with
Russia, signed in 2011, to mutually draw down their stockpiles to 1,550
warheads. The new resolution also comes one year after the deal curbing
Iran’s nuclear program.
But
for countries with nuclear weapons, those sorts of measures are about
as far as they are willing to go. A “ban treaty runs the risk of
undermining regional security,” said Robert Wood, US special
representative to the UN Conference on Disarmament, on October 14. He
said that the US would refuse to participate in any conference that
aimed to eliminate nuclear weapons completely.
Current
tensions between the US and Russia, as well as Chinese aggression in
the South China Sea, and the uncertainties surrounding the advancing
North Korean nuclear program, may contribute to the sense that now is
not a good time to try for a ban. That’s a position supported by some allies of nuclear weapons powers, such as Australia.
Yet
the UN resolution suggested that mistrust and simmering conflict
between the powers mean that this is exactly the moment to act. Recent
comments by a US presidential candidate have also raised international
concerns that the United States might soon consider using its nuclear
arsenal.
“The
current international climate makes increased political attention to
disarmament and non-proliferation issues, the promotion of multilateral
disarmament and the achievement of a world without nuclear weapons all the more urgent,” it reads.
Proponents
of the treaty note that nuclear weapons are the only weapons of mass
destruction not currently banned. They point to the success of a treaty
banning landmines as evidence that the international community can
pressure countries to stop using certain weapons, even if these
countries are not part of the initial treaty-elaboration process.
“Today’s
vote demonstrates very clearly that a majority of the world’s nations
consider the prohibition of nuclear weapons to be necessary, feasible
and urgent. They view it as the most viable option for achieving real
progress on disarmament,” said Beatrice Fihn, executive director of
ICAN, the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons.
Since
the resolution passed, it will go to a General Assembly vote in
December. If that is successful, a UN conference will convene in March
to start work on a treaty to ban nuclear weapons.
West ‘Can’t Afford to Stumble Into Military Conflict’ Between US, Russia and China
“The first foreign policy priority of the next American president will be to work out how to avoid direct conflict with China or Russia. Both countries, in different ways, now challenge US dominance. War between the great powers is once again a possibility. For better or worse, we are returning to a world of great power balance,” Sawers emphasized in his op-ed for The Financial Times. READ MORE
