HOME
DV NEWS
SERVICE ARCHIVE SUBMISSIONS/CONTACT ABOUT DV
China
Upstages US at Nuclear Non-Proliferation Conference
by
Heather Wokusch
September
15,2003
China was the undisputed
star of last week's Comprehensive
Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) conference in Vienna, leaving Uncle Sam hiding
in the wings.
The US has always
been somewhat impatient with international non-proliferation agreements.
Despite a 1992 self-imposed moratorium, in the past six years the States has
conducted 19 nuclear tests, dismissing them as sub-critical and therefore
acceptable.
But the Bush
administration has upped the nuclear ante considerably. It plans another
sub-critical nuclear test for 2004, and has authorized the nation's weapons
labs to resume full-on nuclear
testing with as little as six-months' notice.
And that's bad news
for the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. The UN-sponsored organization was set up
in 1996 to ban nuclear-test explosions and to establish a corresponding global
monitoring system. But there's a catch - the treaty can't go into effect until
all 44 of the nuclear-capable countries that joined in 1996 have ratified it, a
prospect looking increasingly unlikely as holdouts point to US intransigence as
justification for their own burgeoning nuclear weapons programs.
Take Iran, which as
one of the original signatories, permitted five monitoring stations to be built
on its soil. In January 2002, soon after the US began withholding funds from
the CTBT's on-site inspection program, Iran began withholding monitoring data
from the international community, thus rendering its stations useless.
With America pulling
back from the CTBT, other countries have been expected to join Iran in
withdrawing their support as well. According to Daryl Kimball of the US-based
arms Control Association, "The US is risking that possibility, and that
may indeed be what the US wants."
After all, Armageddon
is big business stateside. The US
budget for nuclear-weapon activities in fiscal 2004 tops $6 billion,
over half a billion more than in 2003. Expenditures for nuclear-test readiness
alone surged by 39% in the same period, and in a major policy shift, the Bush
administration is poised to seek Congressional authorization for
"usable" nuclear weapons.
So expectations have
been understandably low for the CTBT, which to enter into force must be
ratified by the "dirty dozen" holdouts (including the US, Iran,
China, North Korea and Israel, among others) from the original group of 44
nuclear-capable signatories. Many predicted the recent conference would produce
little more than platitudes and hand-wringing.
Then in walked China.
Rumors had circulated
that Beijing may be making a major announcement at the conference. Its
diplomatic flurry in hosting recent six-way talks over North Korea's nuclear
program suggested a newfound sense of urgency in confronting proliferation, so
when China's Ambassador Yan Zhang assumed the podium, the room fell silent.
Zhang began by
issuing China's strong support for the CTBT. With a veiled reference to North
Korea, he cited "the absence of a sense of security" as a strong
motivation for non-proliferation, and then discreetly railed against the US and
other countries that have withdrawn CTBT funding by demanding every member
state pay "in full and in time."
In a jab at the Bush
administration's pre-emptive strike policy, Zhang went on to say members should
"unconditionally undertake not to use or threaten to use nuclear weapons
against non-nuclear weapon states." He concluded by reaffirming the
Chinese government's strong commitment to completing the "ratification
procedure ... by an early date."
The impact was
profound: cameras flashed and pens raced even though Zhang had not specifically
committed to anything new.
Meanwhile, the US
observer to the CTBT conference was unavailable for comment because the person
had failed to even identify him/herself to anyone.
The upshot: China
came off as a responsible, upstanding world citizen and the US came off as a
detached oaf.
Not that the Bush
administration minds. Its isolationist policies were laid out quite clearly in
the Nuclear Posture
Review (NPR), a classified Pentagon document leaked in January 2002.
The review recommends beefing up the nation's nuclear weapons program as a way
of providing "credible military options to deter a wide range of
threats," and goes on to list contingencies in which a US nuclear strike
would be justified; examples include "an Iraqi attack on Israel or its
neighbors, a North Korean attack on South Korea, or a military confrontation
(with China) over the status of Taiwan."
Pyongyang's response
to the NPR was predictable: "Now that the nuclear lunatics are in office
in the White House, we are compelled to examine all agreements with the
U.S." North Korea then struck down the 1994 Agreed Framework commitment to
end its nuclear program.
North Korea admitted
to having a secret nuclear weapons program last October, then kicked out UN
monitors, and started reprocessing spent fuel rods, a critical component of
nuclear weapons. And at the conclusion of recent 6-way talks in Beijing,
Pyongyang said it might conduct a nuclear test as early as this month since the
US had refused to sign a non-aggression pact.
But it was exactly
this nuclear tit-for-tat escalation that the CTBT was set up to discourage.
Admittedly, China has
hardly been a non-proliferation role model in the past; its nuclear and missile
sales to Iran, Syria, Pakistan and others were dangerous and irresponsible. But
Beijing's apparent newfound commitment to end the nuclear arms race can be
applauded, and if China actually does ratify the CTBT, pressure will increase
on other holdouts to follow suit.
Hopefully, Uncle Sam
won't still be hiding in the wings.
Heather Wokusch is a free-lance writer with
a background in clinical psychology. Her work as been featured in publications
and websites internationally. Heather can be contacted via her website: http://www.heatherwokusch.com
*
Lawsuit
for Gulf War Veterans Targets WMD Businesses
*
Trading
on Terror: Linking Financial Markets and War
*
Deceit,
Danger Mark US Pursuit of New WMD
*
America's
Shameful Legacy of Radioactive Weaponry