 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
Wang Ling
Senior Research Professor
China Institute of Contemporary International Relations
Speech at the Symposium
INESAP Conference, Shanghai
8-10 September 1997
I would like to say a few words on the function and limit of the international non-proliferation regime.
Since the end of the cold war, the United States has regarded the proliferation of massive destruction as the No. 1 threat to international security. In recent years, the U.S. have taken two measures to guard against proliferation: 1) to reinforce international non-proliferation regime, such as the indefinite NPT prolongation, promotion for the conclusion of CTBT and CWC, revision of MTCR, negotiation on Cut-off, etc.; 2) to develop some new kinds of military capabilities, mainly as TMD, to counter against the new threat.
Objectively speaking, above-mentioned international non-proliferation regime is playing a positive role in hindering, delaying the proliferation of weapons of massive destruction and promoting nuclear disarmament. For example, South Africa, Brazil and Argentina have stated explicitly that they waive the option of developing nuclear weapons; Ukraine, Kazakhstan have already become non-nuclear countries. However, the existing international non-proliferation regime can not fundamentally halt nuclear proliferation. The reasons are as follows:
First, the U.S. disarmament policies are dual. They on one hand intend to prevent other countries from acquiring weapons of massive destruction and on the other aim at safeguarding U.S.' nuclear superiority. In other words, the U.S. disarmament policies have dual characters as to protect world peace and to ensure U.S.' global leadership by upholding its military superiority. Consequently, the U.S. never abandons its strategy of nuclear deterrence and is not willing to eliminate its nuclear arsenal. Further more, the U.S. keeps on developing high-tech conventional weapons and missile defense systems. Such hegemonic practice has brought about some shadows upon international non-proliferation efforts.
Second, the United States adopts a double standard in non-proliferation towards its allies and those so-called "dangerous nations". The United States keeps a stony silence over and gives assistance to Israel's verified nuclear program. By contrast, it condemns, warns and even resorts to sanction on Iran, Iraq, Libya and the DPRK for their suspected attempts to acquire nuclear weapons. The same is true with the transfer of missiles. America strictly forbids the transfers of missile and related sensitive skills to Pakistan and some other countries. By contrast, it works with Israel in producing the Arrow missiles and with Taiwan in producing the Patriot missiles. Such unjust manner has naturally aroused widespread resentment and rejection in many countries. This is disadvantageous to non-proliferation.
Third, there are still some problems remaining unsolved in terms of regional security. The proliferation of weapons of massive destruction has much to do with global and regional security. For instance, the nuclear proliferation in South Asia and Middle East is more or less under the background of regional security. Therefore, in order to solve the issue of nuclear proliferation, we must ensure peaceful resolution of regional disputes and hence create a better regional security environment for all.
Thank you!
This
material is produced independently for NTI by the James Martin Center for
Nonproliferation Studies at the Monterey Institute of International Studies and
does not necessarily reflect the opinions of and has not been independently
verified by NTI or its directors, officers, employees, agents. Copyright © 2007
by MIIS.
