Nuclear Disarmament and the Challenges Facing Obama
By Kazem Sajjadpour.
Every five years, signatories to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) gather to review the status of the treaty, put forth recommended amendments, and discuss its future prospects. But this year’s conference may have a different implication for its attendees, as it is held at a time when U.S. President Barack Obama has set himself a nuclear mission.
Since his arrival in the White House, Obama has evinced an interest in international security in general, and nuclear security specifically. And in doing so, he has chosen a different path from that of his predecessor George W. Bush, supporting a multilateral approach that will ultimately serve the national security concerns of the United States.
To have a better understanding of Obama’s plans for international nuclear mechanisms, a look at some of the efforts he has made so far seems necessary:
1. Improving ties with Moscow is regarded by Obama as a prerequisite to improving global security. Since January 2009, when Obama started his term as the new U.S. president, Washington has pursued closer engagement with Moscow. The U.S. president met his Russian counterpart, Dmitri Medvedev, ahead of the London G20 Conference. The two parties discussed nuclear disarmament and shortly after, released a joint statement centered on international security. Obama’s April 2009 speech in Prague further elaborated his approach towards international security and Russia’s role in its dynamics. Global security has gradually turned into the lynchpin of U.S.-Russia ties, culminating in the signing of the START II treaty.
2. The Nuclear Security Summit in Washington in mid-April was the first post-World War II conference to witness a gathering of world leaders in such large numbers. In two years, a sequel to the conference will be held in South Korea, paving the way for the development of an international nuclear material control system most likely headed by the Americans.
3. To advance his disarmament cause, Obama has returned to existing international institutions. The Conference on Disarmament (CD) in Geneva is one of these institutions, which during Bush’s presidency had become paralyzed by a stubborn American delegation, unable to develop new treaties. Obama’s new and different approach, however, has invigorated CD and new disarmament conventions are about to be developed and implemented.
4. Unlike during the Bush era, the NPT has now become the primary source for prompting the international community towards disarmament. Nominally at least, the NPT has newfound value in the eyes of the United States. American officials are now not even frowning at Article VI of the treaty—which states that each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament—or at the Treaty in general (and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control).
Perhaps wishing to be known as one of the “celebrity” U.S. presidents, Obama sees himself bestowed with a historic mission. His health care bill, which registered his name beside the likes of Theodore Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson, is the domestic equivalent of his international agenda. Multilateral efforts on the international scene, though, do not appear to be any easier than overcoming bipartisan politics in Washington.
Challenges for Obama are more than a few. The key stumbling block: the record of the nuclear powers (first in line the United States itself) involves dual standards when it comes to Israel. Is Obama ready to force Israel to join the NPT? If the U.S. president demands to be a legitimate patron of nuclear disarmament, he must engage Israel to that end, an almost Sisyphean task considering the unique nature of Washington-Tel Aviv relations.
Kazem Sajjadpour is a university professor and Iran-U.S. affairs analyst.
Since his arrival in the White House, Obama has evinced an interest in international security in general, and nuclear security specifically. And in doing so, he has chosen a different path from that of his predecessor George W. Bush, supporting a multilateral approach that will ultimately serve the national security concerns of the United States.
To have a better understanding of Obama’s plans for international nuclear mechanisms, a look at some of the efforts he has made so far seems necessary:
1. Improving ties with Moscow is regarded by Obama as a prerequisite to improving global security. Since January 2009, when Obama started his term as the new U.S. president, Washington has pursued closer engagement with Moscow. The U.S. president met his Russian counterpart, Dmitri Medvedev, ahead of the London G20 Conference. The two parties discussed nuclear disarmament and shortly after, released a joint statement centered on international security. Obama’s April 2009 speech in Prague further elaborated his approach towards international security and Russia’s role in its dynamics. Global security has gradually turned into the lynchpin of U.S.-Russia ties, culminating in the signing of the START II treaty.
2. The Nuclear Security Summit in Washington in mid-April was the first post-World War II conference to witness a gathering of world leaders in such large numbers. In two years, a sequel to the conference will be held in South Korea, paving the way for the development of an international nuclear material control system most likely headed by the Americans.
3. To advance his disarmament cause, Obama has returned to existing international institutions. The Conference on Disarmament (CD) in Geneva is one of these institutions, which during Bush’s presidency had become paralyzed by a stubborn American delegation, unable to develop new treaties. Obama’s new and different approach, however, has invigorated CD and new disarmament conventions are about to be developed and implemented.
4. Unlike during the Bush era, the NPT has now become the primary source for prompting the international community towards disarmament. Nominally at least, the NPT has newfound value in the eyes of the United States. American officials are now not even frowning at Article VI of the treaty—which states that each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament—or at the Treaty in general (and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control).
Perhaps wishing to be known as one of the “celebrity” U.S. presidents, Obama sees himself bestowed with a historic mission. His health care bill, which registered his name beside the likes of Theodore Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson, is the domestic equivalent of his international agenda. Multilateral efforts on the international scene, though, do not appear to be any easier than overcoming bipartisan politics in Washington.
Challenges for Obama are more than a few. The key stumbling block: the record of the nuclear powers (first in line the United States itself) involves dual standards when it comes to Israel. Is Obama ready to force Israel to join the NPT? If the U.S. president demands to be a legitimate patron of nuclear disarmament, he must engage Israel to that end, an almost Sisyphean task considering the unique nature of Washington-Tel Aviv relations.
Kazem Sajjadpour is a university professor and Iran-U.S. affairs analyst.