|
Time to Scrap the NPT
By Mike Whitney
02/03/06 "ICH"
-- --
“Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the
inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop
research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful
purposes without discrimination.” Article 4 of the 1968 Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)
There’s only one country that has ever used nuclear weapons.
There’s only one country that has used nuclear weapons on
civilian population centers.
There’s only one country that has ever threatened to use nuclear
weapons on non-nuclear countries.
There’s only one country that has over 10,000 nuclear weapons
many of which are on hair-trigger alert for enemies real or
imagined.
There’s only one country that has developed a regime of
low-yield, bunker-busting, “usable” nuclear weapons; suggesting
that they could be legitimately used, not to deter aggression or
to stave off an imminent threat, but simply to eliminate the
“suspicion” of weapons programs.
There’s only one country that justifies unprovoked aggression
(preemption) in its National Security doctrine; allowing it to
attack any potential rival to its global dominance.
There’s only one country that currently occupies a Muslim nation
of 25 million inhabitants without any proof of an imminent
threat, weapons-systems, or territorial aggression.
The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)
The purpose of the NPT (Nonproliferation Treaty) is to reduce or
eliminate the development of nuclear weapons. If it is to have
any meaning at all it must be directed at nations that not only
have weapons, but that demonstrate a flagrant disregard for the
international laws condemning their use. The IAEA should focus
its attention on those states that have a clear record of
territorial aggression, military intervention, or who
consistently violate United Nations resolutions.
In its present form the IAEA and the NPT are utterly
meaningless. Rather than leading the world towards nuclear
disarmament, the agency and the treaty have simply ignored the
misbehavior of the more powerful nations and humiliated the
non-nuclear states with spurious accusations and threatening
rhetoric.
The NPT was never intended to be a bludgeon for battering the
weaker nations; nor was it set up as a de-facto apartheid system
whereby the superpower and its allies can lord above the non
nuclear states coercing them to act according to their diktats.
It was designed to curb the development of the world’s most
lethal weapons; eventually consigning them to the ash-heap.
The political maneuvering surrounding Iran’s “alleged” nuclear
weapons-programs demonstrates the irrelevance and hypocrisy of
the current system. As yet, there is no concrete evidence that
Iran is in non-compliance with the terms of the treaty. That
hasn’t deterred the Bush administration from intimidating its
allies and adversaries alike to assist them in dragging Iran
before the Security Council. The Bush administration is asking
the Security Council to enforce “additional protocols” which
will preclude Iran from enriching uranium for use in electric
power plants, a right that is clearly articulated in the NPT.
Article 4 section 2 states:
“All the Parties to the Treaty undertake to facilitate, and have
the right to participate in, the fullest possible exchange of
equipment, materials and scientific and technological
information for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy.”
Iran’s determination to enrich uranium is protected under
international law and should not be abridged to accommodate the
regional ambitions of the United States. To concede their legal
rights would strike a blow to the principle of international
agreements; implying that the Bush administration alone has the
final say-so on issues of global concern.
Why should Iran accept a standard for itself that is different
than that for every other signatory of the NPT?
No nation should willingly accept being branded as a pariah
without evidence of wrongdoing.
The fact that the United States is occupying the country next
door and has yet to provide a coherent justification for the
invasion is a poignant reminder of the irrelevance of both the
United Nations and the IAEA. The two organisations have remained
resolutely silent in the face of the massive incidents of human
rights abuses, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. While
Iran is roundly condemned by heads-of-state and the corporate
media, the greatest crime of our generation continues into its
third year without reproach from the world body. The
international community simply looks away in fear.
This alone should illustrate the ineffectiveness of the
institutions that are designed to keep the peace.
If the ruling body at the IAEA is to have any relevance, it must
direct its attention to the real threats of nuclear
proliferation posed by those nations that consider nuclear
weapons a privilege that should be limited to a certain group of
elite states. If the IAEA cannot perform its duties in a neutral
manner that respects the rights of all nations equally, it
should disband and abolish the NPT without delay.
If the IAEA is uncertain about the real threats to regional
peace, they should take note of the many recent polls which
invariably list the same belligerent nations as the leading
offenders. It is these countries that should be scrutinized most
carefully.
It is not the purview of the IAEA to keep the weaker nations out
of the nuclear club. That simply enables the stronger states to
bully their enemies with threats of using their WMD. In fact,
it’s plain to see that the current disparity in military power
has created a perilous imbalance between nations which is
rapidly spreading war throughout the world.
One only has to look at Haiti, Afghanistan, Iraq or Kosovo to
see the glaring failures of the unipolar model; where the
military prowess of one country is so great it is emboldened to
resolve its differences through conflagration. The NPT was not
created to facilitate the imperial ambitions of the superpower,
but to protect the innocent from the increasing likelihood of
nuclear holocaust.
If the NPT cannot decrease the threat of nuclear war from
conspicuously hostile nations, it should be abandoned
altogether.
Translate
this page
(In accordance with Title 17
U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to
those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational purposes.
Information Clearing House has no affiliation whatsoever with the
originator of this article nor is Information Clearing House
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) |
