NPT146;s midlife crisis

As the NPT celebrates its 40th anniversary this week, the non-proliferation regime of which it is part has come under such tremendous strain....

As the NPT celebrates its 40th anniversary this week, the non-proliferation regime of which it is part has come under such tremendous strain recently that it might not be salvageable. Strains began to show when India and Pakistan tested nuclear devices in 1998, but the international community led by the United States found that challenge manageable; that same community seems to have no idea of how to respond to newer challenges that have since arisen. North Korea is a nuclear-weapon state while Iran seems to be moving steadfastly in the same direction.

Increasing complicity between the so-called 8220;rogue8221; states is creating a second-tier of nuclear states that refuse to play by Cold War nuclear norms. Iran may have provided North Korea with data from its missile tests; North Korea in turn may be supplying Iran with engineering suggestions for further testing. It may also be trying to raise hard currency by peddling nuclear missile technology in the global black market. It was already known that the A.Q. Khan network sold uranium enrichment technology to Iran, North Korea and Libya; it now emerges that it may have even sold blueprints for a sophisticated and compact nuclear weapon, though it is not clear who received these blueprints.

The US has repeatedly claimed that it would not tolerate a nuclear-armed Iran or North Korea, but it does not have a clear strategy to deal with either. If nothing is done with regard to Iran and North Korea, other states like Syria, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Taiwan, Japan and Brazil may be tempted to go nuclear. Moreover, when nations are willing to trade their nuclear and missile technologies in the global black market, those technologies might fall into the hands of terrorists.

The US tried to tackle the North Korean problem by relying on its neighbours 8212; China, South Korea, Russia, and Japan. Those talks yielded little as different countries have different interests and a unanimous position did not evolve. The North Koreans insisted on a bilateral engagement with the Americans, which they seem to be getting now. In return for a long-delayed declaration of its nuclear programme to the outside world, the first step in a long process intended to lead to a nuclear-free Korean peninsula, the Bush administration has decided to take North Korea off its list of state sponsors of terrorism. It is anybody8217;s guess if this process will be successful or is just a ploy by the North Korean regime to get the best possible bargain from a dying administration.

Iran is being dealt with primarily by Europe; the Bush administration has refused to rule out military action, though the Europeans are more interested in a negotiated settlement.

In none of these cases has the NPT been useful. In fact, Iran has used its rights, under the treaty, to nuclear energy for peaceful purposes to move towards nuclear weapons, and North Korea casually walked out of the NPT when it realised that the treaty was beginning to impede its acquisition of nuclear weapons.

The NPT was always a flawed document and, unless replaced with a bolder arrangement, will soon become a paper tiger 8212; if it has not already. India has always been dissatisfied with a global non-proliferation and arms control regime that constrained its autonomy over foreign policy decisions. The argument was that an inequitable regime that gave only a few countries the permanent right to have nuclear weapons, and denied others this right, was inherently unstable. There are reasons for India to feel vindicated by its long-held stance on these issues. As the global nuclear non-proliferation regime crumbles under the weight of its own contradictions, India can rightfully claim that it was one of the first states to draw the attention of the world community to these challenges.

Story continues below this ad

Radically new global security architecture is needed to tackle the problem of proliferation and terrorism. The old security architecture has failed and it is time this got recognised if the world hopes to tackle the emerging challenges. India, along with the older nuclear powers, should rise to the challenge and offer ideas on a new framework for international security suitable for the 21st century. Typically, world powers not only challenge the status-quo that is inimical to their interests but also provide responsible alternatives to manage the challenges facing the world. It is time for India to respond to its rising global profile.

The writer teaches at King8217;s College, London

harsh.pantkcl.ac.uk