my text version for IO presentation
follow up.
-
i didn t finish this until 4 in the morning, 5 hours to begin my topic in
class with two eyebags. -
it worked as a charm. that people start to attack me, i like it.
3, my dear laosion classmate forgot to press the record button of my DV, what
happen next, I need to say no more!
4, the darkness before dawn, the storm is coming. we are always in rushing.
It takes me a whole day for this piece of paper……. Till now 2:31 in the
morning, and I havn’t finish the ppt yet. That made me start ponder myself,
what did I do before?
IAEA, NPT, Safeguard Agreements And analysis to Iran issues.
----- Lin Pengxuan
According to a recent United Nations High-Level Panel identified five
categories of threats that we face:
-
Poverty, Infectious Disease, and Environmental Degradation;
-
Armed Conflict - both within and among States;
-
Organized Crime;
-
Terrorism; and
-
Weapons of Mass Destruction.
My group topic today is largely dealing with the 5th one. Weapons of Mass
Destruction, or WMD. The term WMD means different things to different people.
The most widely used definition is that of nuclear, biological or chemical
weapons. And one of the main jobs of IAEA is to prevent the circulation and
spreading of such weapons in related with atomic energy.
Thanks to my group members excellent performance, which left me almost
nothing else to cover within the statute of IAEA, I would like to talk about
the current issues of IAEA. What are happening now? That is the interactivity
among Iran, IAEA and International Community. My first part includes Nuclear
Non-proliferation Treaty, Safeguard Agreements and their relations with IAEA,
which is essential in understanding the following part, the Iran Nuclear
Incident, where I will examine the legal basis of their dispute about the so-
called right of peaceful use of nuclear power. Then it is followed by the
third part, future development in perspective of reforming.
what so many coutries want to rush into Nuclear Clubs?
The true meaning about holding nuclear weapons is not to use it, it is only
been done once, but to show one state s ability in retaliating to the
attacking country which uses nuclear weapons, in other sense, it is by
possessing such weapons, assume a nuclear deterrence, thus gaining more chips
playing in International Community. A country that thinks it can withstand a
nuclear war is more likely to start one. Better to show your enemy you can hit
back after a strike, than to show him you can survive one. Let me give you two
examples, I can t recall any Indian now, but because they have such weapons,
their voice in International Community is much louder than Japan, and several
very important post were help by Indian, despite they have a large number of
poor people who starve and strive. Also, recently, In January 2006, Jacques
Chirac of France indicated that an incident of state-sponsored terrorism on
France could trigger a small-scale nuclear retaliation aimed at destroying the
rogue state s power centers. I don t think this would happen, but by saying
such words, by posing such threatens, those rogue states have to take a second
thought before they make the move. Such words are typical nuclear deterrence.
on NPT, Safeguard Agreements.
Why these two?
As we have been observed before, one of the main functions for IAEA is to
establish and apply safeguards to ensure that any nuclear assistance or
supplies with which the IAEA was associated should not be used to further any
military purposes. This confirms with the objectives of the Nuclear Non-
Proliferation Treaty.
The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT or, much more rarely, NNPT) is a
treaty, opened for signature on July 1, 1968, restricting the possession of
nuclear weapons. By ensuring 3 pillars it focuses, the initiate states to the
treaty hope it can dramatically reduce the risk of using Nuclear Weapons.
First pillar:Non-proliferation
Five states are permitted by the NPT to own nuclear weapons: France (signed
1992), the People s Republic of China (1992), Soviet Union (1968; obligations
and rights assumed by Russia), United Kingdom (1968), and the United States
(1968). These were the only states possessing such weapons at the time the
treaty was opened to signature, and are also the five permanent members of the
United Nations Security Council. These 5 Nuclear Weapons States (NWS) agree
not to transfer nuclear weapons technology to other states, and the non-NWS
state parties agree not to seek to develop nuclear weapons. According to what
happened recently, I see no signs of such commitment binding either those
states have nuclear weapons or those don t.
Second pillar: disarmament
Article VI and the preamble indicate that the NWS parties pursue to reduce and
liquidate their stockpiles; Article VI also calls for ...a Treaty on general
and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control. I
believe this international control refer to the topic we discuss today, IAEA.
In Article I, the Nuclear Weapon States declare not to induce any non-
nuclear-weapon State to ... acquire nuclear weapons.
Third pillar: the right to peacefully use nuclear technology
This one is most controversial. In scientific terms, it is feasible that one
state could peacefully use nuclear technology without taking a further step,
but when it comes into reality, states are induced by the power of possessing
nuclear weapon when all the efforts only are needed a little bit more.
However, thinking this is one thing while doing it could be another.
Since very few of the nuclear weapons states and states using nuclear
reactions for energy generation are willing to completely abandon possession
of nuclear fuel, the third pillar of the NPT provides other states with the
possibility to do the same, but under conditions intended to make it difficult
to develop nuclear weapons.
For some states, this third pillar of the NPT, which allows uranium enrichment
for fuel reasons, seems to be a major loophole. However the treaty gives every
state the inalienable right to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, and
as the commercially popular light water reactor nuclear power station designs
use enriched uranium fuel, it follows that states must be allowed to enrich
uranium or purchase it on an international market. Peaceful uranium enrichment
can arguably be considered a small step away from developing nuclear warheads,
and this can be done by withdrawing from the NPT. But, in fact, No state has
successfully constructed a nuclear weapon in secret while subjected to NPT
inspection. Some would argue Pakistan and Indian have nukes; the true is they
are not the members to NPT.
Countries that have signed the treaty as Non-Nuclear Weapons States and
maintained that status have an unbroken record of not building nuclear
weapons. In some regions, the fact that all neighbors are verifiably free of
nuclear weapons reduces any pressure individual states might feel to build
those weapons themselves, even if neighbors are known to have peaceful nuclear
energy programs that might otherwise be suspicious. In this, the treaty works
as designed.
The relation between NPT and IAEA
The IAEA is not a party to the Treaty but is entrusted with key roles and
responsibilities under it. Under the NPT, the IAEA has specific roles as the
international safeguards inspectorate and as a multilateral channel for
transferring peaceful applications of nuclear technology: according to the
following article, IAEA is entitled to ensure prevention to the spread of
nuclear weapons. And this laid the legal foundation for IAEA’s activities.
NPT Article III: The IAEA administers international safeguards to verify that
non-nuclear weapon States party to the NPT fulfill the non-proliferation
commitment they have made, with a view to preventing diversion of nuclear
energy from peaceful uses to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive
devices.
NPT Article IV: The Agency facilitates and provides a channel for endeavors
aimed at the further development of the applications of nuclear energy for
peaceful purposes, especially in the territories of non-nuclear-weapon States
Party to the Treaty, with due consideration for the needs of the developing
areas of the world.
In practical terms, the IAEA also is seen as having roles in connection with
verification of nuclear-weapon-free zones and in the context of verifying ex-
nuclear weapon material.
IAEA Safeguards Agreements
Safeguards are activities by which the IAEA can verify that a State is living
up to its international commitments not to use nuclear programmes for nuclear-
weapons purposes. The global Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and other
treaties against the spread of nuclear weapons entrust the IAEA as the nuclear
inspectorate. Today, the IAEA safeguards nuclear material and activities under
agreements with more than 140 States.
Within the world’s nuclear non-proliferation regime, the IAEA is safeguards
system functions as a confidence-building measure, an early warning mechanism,
and the trigger that sets in motion other responses by the international
community if and when the need arises.
Article III.A.5To establish and administer safeguards designed to ensure that
special fissionable and other materials, services, equipment, facilities, and
information made available by the Agency or at its request or under its
supervision or control are not used in such a way as to further any military
purpose; and to apply safeguards, at the request of the parties, to any
bilateral or multilateral arrangement, or at the request of a State, to any of
that State s activities in the field of atomic energy.
Fundamentally, by combining these two measures together, so far, IAEA do does
a really good job in preventing the nuclear expansion while not hinder the
development of civil use such huge power. That is so far. Also this is the
reason the General Director of IAEA won the laurel of Nobel Peace Prize.
Then…
The timeline of Iran event.
August 14, 2002
Sources revealed the existence of two secret nuclear sites, a uranium
enrichment facility in Natanz and a heavy water facility in Arak.
Later
The U.S. has since late 2003 claimed that Tehran is seeking to build nuclear
arms in violation of its agreements under the NPT, and also that Iran is
seeking to develop nuclear missiles.
November 14, 2004
Iran s chief nuclear negotiator announced a voluntary and temporary suspension
of its uranium enrichment program after pressure from the United Kingdom,
France, and Germany acting on behalf of the European Union (known in this
context as the EU-3 or EU3).
November 24, 2004
Iran sought to amend the terms of its agreement with the EU to exclude a
handful of the equipment from this deal for research work. This request was
dropped four days later.
January, 2005
IAEA Secretary General Mohamed ElBaradei remarked that after three years of
inspections, the IAEA could not confirm that Iran s nuclear technology program
is for peaceful purposes.
August 8 and August 10, 2005
Iranian officials said they had lost much of their confidence in the IAEA, the
Iranian government resumed its conversion of uranium at the Isfahan facility,
allegedly with continued suspension of enrichment activities.
September 19, 2005
the European Union pressuring the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to
bring Iran s nuclear program before the United Nations Security Council.
February 4, 2006
The 35 member Board of Governors of the IAEA voted 27-3 to report Iran to the
Security Council. Such action’s legal basis comes from ARTICLE XII: C, In the
event of failure of the recipient State or States to take fully corrective
action within a reasonable time, the Board may take one or both of the
following measures: direct curtailment or suspension of assistance being
provided by the Agency or by a member, and call for the return of materials
and equipment made available to the recipient member or group of members. The
Agency may also, in accordance with article XIX, suspend any non- complying
member from the exercise of the privileges and rights of membership.
Then the result would be up to the Security Council s decision. According to
UN Charter, Article 26: In order to promote the establishment and maintenance
of international peace and security with the least diversion for armaments of
the world s human and economic resources, the Security Council shall be
responsible for formulating, with the assistance of the Military Staff
Committee referred to in Article 47, plans to be submitted to the Members of
the United Nations for the establishment of a system for the regulation of
armaments.
Also, under Article 41 of the UN Charter, The Security Council may decide what
measures not involving the use of armed force are to be employed to give
effect to its decisions, and it may call upon the Members of the United
Nations to apply such measures. These may include complete or partial
interruption of economic relations and of rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic,
radio, and other means of communication, and the severance of diplomatic
relations.
the Security Council may call upon Member States to apply measures not
involving the use of armed force in order to maintain or restore international
peace and security. Such measures are commonly referred to as sanctions.
Security Council s decision will probably come as sanction if Iran keep its
way on, like treatment Iraq got after invading its neighbor Kuwait if it is
regarded to solve this issue as necessary and urgent.
Or really does it necessary?
There are only two assumptions for Iran s own assertion.
A to develop civil use of nuclear technology.
B by disguise with this, Iran is enticed to develop its own weapon of mass
destruction.
A, the first one is preferable to second. Actually, apart from the other
entire international Pressures either from US, EU or Russia, Iran does have a
right in developing it for civil use. As I have said before, one of three
pillar of the NPT is the right to peacefully use nuclear technology. Since
Iran join the NPT in as early as 1968, there is no doubt Iran is entitled to
develop it for civil use. The question raised here is it can develop nuclear
technology to what extent and in what forms. Also, what we have observed here
is that it has fail to comply with the safeguard agreement between IAEA, the
directive result of which is Director General of IAEA will turn to UN security
council.
Iran claims that,
-
Iran claims that nuclear power is necessary for a booming population and
rapidly industrializing nation. It points to the fact that Iran s population
has more than doubled in 20 years. -
Iran questions why it shouldn t be allowed to diversify its sources of
energy, especially when there are fears of its oil fields eventually being
depleted. -
It continues to argue that its valuable oil should be used for high value
products, not simple electricity generation.
Those reasons, at least I think are sound.
B. then let us assume Iran s real intention is to develop its own WMD. That
would be a worst result of all. We better put out the flame before it becomes
fire. The western society believe so because the following reasons,
1, it is better to have a tiger without teeth than a cat with untrimmed claw,
even what Iran said is true, Western society just wants it to keep away from
nuclear club.
-
A war break out between Iran and Israel. In Iran s constitution, they don t
recognize the sovereignty right of Israel, and also, in various public
instances, President of Iran asserted to wipe Israel out from the map. Since
Israel s ability to develop the nukes has been proved for a long time, it is
not difficult to guess Iran has to develop its own for counter-nuclear
deterrence. -
Probably it would result in an US invasion into Iran, at least by air
force to take out the nuclear research invasion. Think about what Mr. George
Bush did to Iraq when there were no evidence at all of the WMD found
aftermath. It is not hard to take a second guess on Iran issue, at least,
according to some recently news, there were voice about bombing nuclear
facilities in Iran from Pentagon. -
A new round of arm race will begin in Middle East, which would darken the
already hazed peace perspective in Middle East. -
Raise the already skyrocketed oil price thus burdening the world economy.
The situation has to take into account is that Iran, is the world s fourth
biggest oil exporter, among the amount of Oil imports from Iran by EU, 33%
comes from Iran. Either sanction or invasion would no doubt result in a much
higher oil price thus render a unidentified and unstable factor to world
economy.
The options of Iran
After I have done a lot of googling, I see no signs or reasons that Iran will
give up its own nuclear project. So far, to keep on its own plan, it might
withdraw from NPT.
According to NPT, ARTICLE X Each Party shall in exercising its national
sovereignty have the right to withdraw from the Treaty if it decides that
extraordinary events, related to the subject matter of this Treaty, have
jeopardized the supreme interests of its country.
Sum Up
We are not sure, by playing this dangerous game, what is real intention of
Iran, either for peaceful use, or gaining political windfall, or even the
power of nuclear deterrence. So far, what I did before is just part of whole
events. Part of my personal views and might not be true.
To conclude my presentation, I would quota words from Director General of
IAEA, Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei, to feed world’s hunger, we only need 1% amount of
money that is invested in arm race every year.