NPT conference must show resolve for nuclear-arms reduction

The Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) recently kicked off a meeting that takes place every five years. During the nearly month-long session, conference participants must clarify their determination to advance nuclear arms reduction and nonproliferation.

The NPT, which took effect in 1970, obliges countries possessing nuclear weapons to attempt to reduce their stockpiles and prohibits the spread of such arms to non-nuclear nations. There are now more than 190 signatories to the pact, which was extended indefinitely in 1995.

But limits to the NPT regime have surfaced. It failed to stem the nuclear development programmes of India and Pakistan – neither of whom has joined the accord – or prevent North Korea’s withdrawal from it. A mounting pile of tasks has yet to be accomplished, including the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which has not yet entered into force, and the challenge of strengthening the inspection capabilities of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

It is particularly worth noting that there are no signs whatsoever of reaching an accord to adopt any written agreement at the current NPT conference.

The biggest factor behind the impasse is the confrontation between the United States and Russia, which together have more than 15,000 nuclear warheads. The two countries did reach an agreement in 2010 to cap the number of deployed strategic nuclear warheads at 1,550 each. However, bilateral relations have been soured over US plans to establish a missile defense system in Europe.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has been quoted as saying, “I want to remind you that Russia is one of the leading nuclear powers,” hinting at readiness to put nuclear weapons on standby during the crisis over the annexation of Crimea. Rumors swirled that Russia was considering nuclear deployment on the Crimean Peninsula. Moscow’s self-righteousness in the matter will hardly win over non-nuclear countries.

Nonaligned countries such as Egypt have strongly opposed the idea of unilaterally imposing stricter nonproliferation requirements. Middle East nations, for their part, have been deeply concerned about the possibility of Israel and Iran possessing nuclear weapons. Amid the complex web of conflicting interests, forming a consensus on a new NPT agreement has become a formidable challenge.

Japan’s Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida, a House of Representatives member whose constituency is in Hiroshima Prefecture, delivered a speech at the current conference. He said he was “determined to achieve progress toward a world free of nuclear weapons”, bearing in mind the sentiments of people in atomic-bombed areas. In the speech, he also called for world leaders to visit Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

With this year marking the 70th anniversary of the end of World War II, Japan — the only country to ever have suffered atomic bombings — is in a position to press the five nuclear powers of the United States, Russia, Britain, France and China to enhance transparency regarding their nuclear arsenals and arms reduction.

Japan cannot ignore the fact that China has failed to make public the actual number of nuclear warheads in its possession, which is estimated to be 250. Ascertaining the figure is a starting point in nuclear arms reduction negotiations. Japan must press China to disclose information on the matter.

Another menace is the steady progress that North Korea has made in nuclear weapon and ballistic missile development. In cooperation with the United States and other countries concerned, Japan must realize the goal of making Pyongyang agree to IAEA inspections and abandon its nuclear development program.

A group of 12 non-nuclear countries such as Japan, Australia and Canada has sought to bolster the NPT’s three main pillars: disarmament, nonproliferation and peaceful use of nuclear energy. Serving as a bridge between nuclear and nonaligned nations, the group must strive to achieve those goals.