With just five days left in a month-long conference, diplomats from more than 180 nations faced an uphill challenge yesterday as they searched for agreement on concrete ways to toughen treaty controls on the spread of nuclear arms.
It's a week when the need for tightening may become more apparent, as European negotiators try to salvage talks with Iran over suspending its nuclear program, which has bombmaking potential, and as North Korea considers its next move in the slow-motion international showdown over its weapons plans.
For almost three weeks, the UN conference to review the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, a twice-a-decade event, has been bogged down in bickering over the agenda. That backroom squabble left delegations little time for substantive negotiation before Friday's closing session.
"It's an opportunity we cannot afford to squander," said disarmament advocate Daryl Kimball, of the Washington-based Arms Control Association. But at a consensus gathering where agreement must be unanimous, the gaps between nations looked too wide to produce major arms-control initiatives.
Under the 1970 treaty, 183 nations renounce nuclear arms forever, in exchange for a pledge by five nuclear-weapon states -- the United States, Russia, Britain, France and China -- to move toward disarmament. The nonweapon states, meanwhile, are guaranteed access to peaceful nuclear technology.
North Korea announced its withdrawal from the treaty in 2003 and claims to have built nuclear bombs -- all without penalty under the nonproliferation pact. Many here want the conference to endorse measures making it more difficult to exit the treaty, and threatening sanctions against any who do.
Many delegations also favor action to prevent future Irans. The Tehran government, saying it's pursuing civilian nuclear energy, obtained uranium-enrichment equipment that can produce both fuel for power plants and material for atom bombs. Washington contends the Iranians have weapons plans.
Experts now propose limiting access to such fuel technology, despite the treaty guarantee, and possibly bringing all such production under international control.
Consensus on these proposals is unlikely, however, without concessions by the nuclear-weapons states -- particularly the US and France -- on the other treaty "pillar," disarmament.
Those without the doomsday arms contend that those with them are moving too slowly toward eliminating the weapons, and point to Bush administration proposals for modernizing the US nuclear arsenal. A congressional committee last week approved US$29 million to study new nuclear warheads.
Even allies, such as South Korea, question the American moves and want a conference final document to pressure the nuclear powers.
"We expect deeper cuts and further engagements by nuclear-weapon states," Seoul's delegate Park In-kook told a conference committee on Thursday.
But the Americans showed no sign of bending, insisting that Iran and North Korea must be the priority here.
Linking action on such cases with greater progress toward disarmament is "dangerous in the extreme," because it tends to excuse nuclear proliferation, US Ambassador Jackie Sanders told the same committee the following day.
RSS