Rule of Law, Politics and Nuclear Nonproliferation

{
  "authors": [
    "Pierre Goldschmidt"
  ],
  "type": "other",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [
    "Korean Peninsula"
  ],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "NPP",
  "programs": [
    "Nuclear Policy"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "Middle East",
    "Iran",
    "South Korea"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Nuclear Policy"
  ]
}

Other

Rule of Law, Politics and Nuclear Nonproliferation

Legal ambiguities and contractual loopholes in provisions of the NPT and IAEA safeguards agreements usually serve the purpose of those who wish to evade their obligations while claiming that they are doing nothing illegal.

By Pierre Goldschmidt

Published on Sep 7, 2007

Source: Presentation to the Ecole Internationale de Droit Nucléaire (International School of Nuclear Law) at the University of Montpellier in France

Legal ambiguities and contractual loopholes in provisions of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and IAEA safeguards agreements usually serve the purpose of those who wish to evade their obligations while claiming that they are doing nothing illegal. It is therefore the task of legal professionals, not influenced by political considerations, to correct legal misinterpretations or misunderstandings and to prevent the re-occurrence of crises similar to those experienced with North Korea and Iran.

About the Author

Pierre Goldschmidt

Former Nonresident Senior Associate, Nuclear Policy Program

Goldschmidt was a nonresident senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment.

Recent Work

Article
A Realistic Approach Toward a Middle East Free of WMD
- Pierre Goldschmidt
Article
Serious Deficiencies Exposed by Latest IAEA Safeguards Implementation Report
- Pierre Goldschmidt

Nuclear Policy Middle East Iran South Korea

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center

Commentary
Diwan
The Greatest Dangers May Lie Ahead
In an interview, Nicole Grajewski discusses the military dimension of the U.S. and Israeli attacks on Iran.
Michael Young
Commentary
Diwan
Firepower Against Willpower
In an interview, Naysan Rafati assesses the first week that followed the U.S. and Israeli attack on Iran.
Michael Young
Commentary
Diwan
What Is Israel’s Plan in Lebanon?
At heart, to impose unconditional surrender on Hezbollah and uproot the party among its coreligionists.
Yezid Sayigh
Commentary
Emissary
Bombing Campaigns Do Not Bring About Democracy. Nor Does Regime Change Without a Plan.
Just look at Iraq in 1991.
Marwan Muasher
Commentary
Diwan
Axis of Resistance or Suicide?
As Iran defends its interests in the region and its regime’s survival, it may push Hezbollah into the abyss.
Michael Young

More Work from Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center