Trident and the Non Proliferation Treaty - October 2010

On Saturday I was asked by the local branch of the United Nations Association to give them a talk on the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty. This is not an area of my expertise so I had to plough through a substantial briefing paper in the library in order to prepare. I had always thought that the treaty -which came into force in 1970- was just to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons to countries other than the original 5 nuclear powers: USA; Russia; China; France; and UK. I discovered, however, that it is much more. Actually, it is a treaty for total nuclear disarmament. At the heart of the treaty is a bargain between the 184 non nuclear signatory states, which are to get access to nuclear technology and expertise for peaceful use (supervised by the International Atomic Energy Authority) and the nuclear powers who will provide the expertise and technology, and which are allowed to continue to possess nuclear weapons temporarily on the condition that they work towards total disarmament.

The articles in the treaty are quite explicit:
“Each of the parties undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to the cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date,  and to  a treaty on general and complete nuclear disarmament under strict and effective international control.”
If you think that this is just some dated document from the nineteen seventies then consider that it is reviewed and renewed every five years, most recently in May of this year when the government reiterated the UK’s commitment to total nuclear disarmament once again in  unequivocal language.

Many of my correspondents do not believe that the renewal of our Trident submarines and missiles is compatible with our commitment to disarmament in accordance with the Non Proliferation Treaty. I disagree.  The renewal of our aging submarines and missiles does not extend their capability and destructive power. On the contrary the number of missiles and warheads will actually be reduced.

Under what circumstances will we actually disarm in accordance with the Treaty?
I would say it comes down to our assessment of the risks that we face. The fundamental weakness of the Non Proliferation Treaty is the states that are currently outside its provisions: Israel; India; Pakistan; and North Korea. Also, Iran which is on the threshold of becoming  a nuclear power. The response of the world community to Iran’s breach will be critical in determining whether the treaty can survive. As a UK politician I will not vote for disarmament whilst what I consider to be ‘pariah’ states might still acquire nuclear weapons. There will, therefore, have to be a much tougher international regime of scrutiny and enforcement if the Treaty is to achieve its entirely desirable objective of a nuclear weapons free world.