Commentary
Ongoing uncertainty in the Middle East allows Moscow to both increase its influence in Tehran and continue to enjoy the financial windfall of higher oil prices.
Nikita Smagin
{
"authors": [],
"type": "pressRelease",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [
"U.S. Nuclear Policy"
],
"englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "NPP",
"programs": [
"Nuclear Policy"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"United States"
],
"topics": [
"Nuclear Policy"
]
}
REQUIRED IMAGE
Press Release
Managing expectations key for success of 2010 Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference
With growing fears about Iran and North Korea’s nuclear programs, conventional wisdom holds that the nonproliferation regime is on the verge of collapse. The upcoming 2010 Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference is an opportunity to strengthen the regime, but it is in danger of being overloaded by expectations.
Published on Nov 16, 2009
WASHINGTON, Nov 16—With growing fears about Iran and North Korea’s nuclear programs, conventional wisdom holds that the nonproliferation regime is on the verge of collapse. The upcoming 2010 Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference is an opportunity to strengthen the regime, but it is in danger of being overloaded by expectations, contends a new report by Deepti Choubey.
Choubey identifies achievable goals for the Review Conference and outlines steps that nuclear-weapon states—including recommendations tailored for the United States—and non–nuclear-weapon states should take to avert failure.
Recommendations:
- All states should recognize that restoring the NPT is a joint endeavor—each state’s security is affected by the outcome of nonproliferation efforts, so all states have a stake in fixing problems. States must raise the political profile of the Review Conference and engage NGOs that can provide expertise and create accountability.
- The United States should secure domestic and international support for its agenda to reduce and eliminate nuclear dangers by demonstrating how all of the elements of that agenda are mutually reinforcing and imperative. The United States must reconcile its Nuclear Posture Review with its NPT commitments.
- Non–nuclear-weapon states should seize the window of opportunity opened by President Obama’s forward-leaning leadership. These states must reconcile policy inconsistencies, choose friends wisely, and plan for the future by anticipating what progress on disarmament will mean for them.
“Averting failure and achieving some modest success at the 2010 NPT Review Conference will require action by all states—nuclear-weapon states and non-nuclear-weapon states alike,” says Choubey. “Although ambitious steps are welcome, small steps will do.”
###
NOTES
- Deepti Choubey is the deputy director of the Nonproliferation Program at the Carnegie Endowment. Her research interests include the calculations of non–nuclear-weapon states, U.S. nonproliferation and disarmament policies, U.S. nuclear security spending, Iran’s nuclear ambitions, the U.S.–India civilian nuclear cooperation deal, and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. She has provided commentary for CNN, MSNBC, National Public Radio, BBC, and CBS Radio, and has written for the Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, and U.S. News and World Report, among others.
-
The Carnegie Nonproliferation Program is an internationally recognized source of knowledge and policy thinking on efforts to curb the spread and use of nuclear weapons. Carnegie’s analysis consistently stays at the forefront of proliferation developments and nonproliferation policy debates.
- Carnegie Proliferation News provides synopses of top news stories related to preventing the spread and use of nuclear weapons every Tuesday and Thursday.
- Press Contact: David Kampf, 202/939-2233, dkampf@ceip.org
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 Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
- Simmering U.S.-Iran Conflict Is Moscow’s Ideal Outcome
- As Trump Threatens to Quit NATO, the Baltic States Are Playing for TimeCommentary
Governments in Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania want to ensure that a U.S. military withdrawal would not leave them dangerously exposed to a Russian attack.
Sergejs Potapkins
- What Does Nuclear Proliferation in East Asia Mean for Russia?Commentary
Troubled by the growing salience of nuclear debates in East Asia, Moscow has responded in its usual way: with condemnation and threats. But by exacerbating insecurity, Russia is forcing South Korea and Japan to consider radical security options.
James D.J. Brown
- Russia Is Meddling for Meddling’s Sake in the Middle EastCommentary
The Russian leadership wants to avoid a dangerous precedent in which it is squeezed out of Iran by the United States and Israel—and left powerless to respond in any meaningful way.
Nikita Smagin
- Lukashenko’s Bromance With Trump Has a Sell-By DateCommentary
Lukashenko is willing to make big sacrifices for an invitation to Mar-a-Lago or the White House. He also knows that the clock is ticking: he must squeeze as much out of the Trump administration as he can before congressional elections in November leave Trump hamstrung or distracted.
Artyom Shraibman
