The CTBT’s Importance for U.S. National Security

The CTBT’s Importance for U.S. National Security
Q&A
Summary
The treaty calling for a global ban on nuclear tests was rejected by the United States Senate ten years ago. Ratifying the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) now will provide greater leverage over states of concern and enhance international peace and security.
Related Media and Tools
 

The treaty calling for a global ban on nuclear tests was rejected by the United States Senate ten years ago. Over 180 countries have signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), but nine countries still need to ratify the treaty in order for it to come into force. Deepti Choubey describes the treaty’s importance and how it impacts U.S. national security.

“If the United States is to credibly reclaim its leadership position in preventing the further spread and use of nuclear weapons, taking steps like ratifying the CTBT will start to create the conditions by which other non–nuclear-weapons states, particularly more skeptical members of the non-aligned movement, would be willing to consider additional nonproliferation obligations,” explains Choubey.

Ratifying the CTBT will provide greater leverage over states of concern and enhance international peace and security. “That is in the interest of the United States. And in that way disarmament is not altruism—disarmament by the United States is very key for our own security interests.”

Choubey addresses the following questions:

What is the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty?  

The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty is a global ban on all nuclear test explosions. There are 44 countries that are required to sign and ratify the treaty before it enters into force. Out of those 44, all of them have ratified except for nine. And those nine include the United States, China, India, Pakistan, Israel, Iran, Egypt, Indonesia, and North Korea.

How will the CTBT impact the United States?

The past decade has brought about a lot of progress that helps answer three of the key criticisms that were raised ten years ago when the Senate last considered the treaty. Those three criticisms were: 1) will cheaters be detected? 2) will the United States have the capacity it needs to assure that its arsenal works correctly without nuclear tests? And 3) if the United States ratifies, will others?

In terms of the first concern, which is will cheaters be detected, we now have empirical evidence that that will be the case and that’s because of the North Korean test. As the international monitoring system’s stations have come online, we have greater assurance that we will be able to detect any nuclear test of military significance.

Secondly, in terms of the United States’ own capacity to ensure that its arsenal works, this has largely been a question of supercomputing speeds. Thankfully we have now entered, in the last few years, into the range of what is actually necessary to ensure that our nuclear weapons simulations work the way that we need to so that we don’t have to conduct nuclear tests.

And third, in terms of the other states that are required to ratify, we have already seen some great progress, largely due to President Obama’s pledge to seek U.S. ratification. For instance, this past June Foreign Minister Wirajuda of Indonesia promised that Indonesia would immediately ratify after the United States does. Secondly, it is largely speculated that China would ratify either right before or right after the United States does. So, in a very tight time period, if the United States seriously moves towards ratification, out of the nine hold-out states one-third of them will have ratified. That’s progress. 

Will the United States ratify the treaty?

There is renewed support for the CTBT in the United States. President Obama, in a landmark speech delivered in Prague on April 5 of this year, called immediately and aggressively for seeking U.S ratification. He will put it before the Senate, but that does not mean it will be easy. In fact, a lot of hard work will have to go into securing the Senate’s advice and consent before the United States can ratify.

Some of the challenges have to do with our political system, in that a lot of the Senators who have to weigh in on this issue were not in the Senate ten years ago when it was previously considered. Also, a lot of education needs to happen to bring them up to speed on a lot of the scientific and technical progress that has been made in the last decade.

What are the prospects for the treaty entering into force?

Entry into force of the treaty is very important. Once the treaty is in force there are additional measures that can be applied by countries to ensure that there is no cheating happening. For instance, there are on-site inspections that can be requested if there are suspicious activities.

As states have become more aware of the proliferation threats of our current international security environment, the global demand for this ban on nuclear testing has only grown. This is not to say that it will be easy to get the nine hold-out states to ratify. However, with U.S. leadership and some of the initial effects that we hope to see both in Chinese and Indonesian ratification, there can be a secondary effects on the other states.

For instance, if China ratifies one would hope that India would take greater steps toward ratification. With Indian ratification it might be easier to also persuade Pakistan. Also, with a renewed emphasis on the Middle East and efforts to resolve regional conflict there, and a very specific effort at the May 2010 review conference to make progress on the 1995 resolution calling for a WMD-free zone in the Middle East, it might be possible to start laying the conditions where Israel, Egypt, and Iran could also be brought into the fold.

North Korea, of course, is also a challenge, but if they are brought back to the six-party talks, and also once China ratifies, perhaps there is some leverage to be exerted there to have the North Koreans join in this global demand or they would risk further isolation.

How does the treaty relate to President Obama’s goal of a world free of nuclear weapons?

When President Obama spoke in Prague, he declared his vision of a world free of nuclear weapons. The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty is key to that vision and that’s because it is seen as one of the most important steps for states to show their commitment to disarmament.

Ratifying the CTBT for the United States will be an important part of the U.S. effort to reclaim its leadership in efforts to prevent the further spread and use of nuclear weapons.

If the United States is able to credibly reclaim its leadership position in preventing the further spread and use of nuclear weapons, taking steps like ratifying the CTBT will start to create the conditions by which other non–nuclear-weapons states, particularly more skeptical members of the non-aligned movement, would be willing to consider additional nonproliferation obligations. That is in the interest of the United States. And in that way disarmament is not altruism—disarmament by the United States is very key for our own security interests.

Does the CTBT influence U.S. national security?

President Obama’s vision of a world free of nuclear weapons calls for specific steps. They are steps like the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, like further reductions in the stockpiles between the United States and Russia, and also a fissile material cut-off treaty. What some of President Obama’s critics seem not to understand is that these steps are actually reinforcing. In that way, they will enhance international peace and security and not detract from it.

One of the other differences in the last ten years is that the linkage between the CTBT and proliferation threats has grown only stronger. For instance, after the United States ratifies the CTBT, it and its partners will have additional leverage for managing some of the challenges that we’re struggling to address today.

Once the United States ratifies the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty it will have another tool to address proliferation threats of today. For instance, in the case of Iran, if we are concerned that they are further developing a nuclear weapons capability, getting them to ratify the CTBT would be a real obstacle in their ability to do so. Specifically, without being able to test they would have no assurance that any device that they had created would reliably work. They would also be unable to fit any nuclear device onto the tips of missiles or whatever their delivery systems might be.

This is a tool worth having and because of that the United States should ratify the CTBT.   

End of document

About the Nuclear Policy Program

The Carnegie Nuclear Policy Program is an internationally acclaimed source of expertise and policy thinking on nuclear industry, nonproliferation, security, and disarmament. Its multinational staff stays at the forefront of nuclear policy issues in the United States, Russia, China, Northeast Asia, South Asia, and the Middle East.

 

Comments

 
 
Source http://carnegieendowment.org/2009/10/14/ctbt-s-importance-for-u.s.-national-security/rnn

More from The Global Think Tank

In Fact

 

45%

of the Chinese general public

believe their country should share a global leadership role.

30%

of Indian parliamentarians

have criminal cases pending against them.

140

charter schools in the United States

are linked to Turkey’s Gülen movement.

2.5–5

thousand tons of chemical weapons

are in North Korea’s possession.

92%

of import tariffs

among Chile, Colombia, Mexico, and Peru have been eliminated.

$2.34

trillion a year

is unaccounted for in official Chinese income statistics.

37%

of GDP in oil-exporting Arab countries

comes from the mining sector.

72%

of Europeans and Turks

are opposed to intervention in Syria.

90%

of Russian exports to China

are hydrocarbons; machinery accounts for less than 1%.

13%

of undiscovered oil

is in the Arctic.

17

U.S. government shutdowns

occurred between 1976 and 1996.

40%

of Ukrainians

want an “international economic union” with the EU.

120

million electric bicycles

are used in Chinese cities.

60–70%

of the world’s energy supply

is consumed by cities.

58%

of today’s oils

require unconventional extraction techniques.

67%

of the world's population

will reside in cities by 2050.

50%

of Syria’s population

is expected to be displaced by the end of 2013.

18%

of the U.S. economy

is consumed by healthcare.

81%

of Brazilian protesters

learned about a massive rally via Facebook or Twitter.

32

million cases pending

in India’s judicial system.

1 in 3

Syrians

now needs urgent assistance.

370

political parties

contested India’s last national elections.

70%

of Egypt's labor force

works in the private sector.

70%

of oil consumed in the United States

is for the transportation sector.

20%

of Chechnya’s pre-1994 population

has fled to different parts of the world.

58%

of oil consumed in China

was from foreign sources in 2012.

$536

billion in goods and services

traded between the United States and China in 2012.

$100

billion in foreign investment and oil revenue

have been lost by Iran because of its nuclear program.

4700%

increase in China’s GDP per capita

between 1972 and today.

$11

billion have been spent

to complete the Bushehr nuclear reactor in Iran.

2%

of Iran’s electricity needs

is all the Bushehr nuclear reactor provides.

78

journalists

were imprisoned in Turkey as of August 2012 according to the OSCE.

Stay in the Know

Enter your email address to receive the latest Carnegie analysis in your inbox!

Personal Information
 
 
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
 
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NW Washington, DC 20036-2103 Phone: 202 483 7600 Fax: 202 483 1840
Please note...

You are leaving the website for the Carnegie-Tsinghua Center for Global Policy and entering a website for another of Carnegie's global centers.

请注意...

你将离开清华—卡内基中心网站,进入卡内基其他全球中心的网站。