Parliamentary
Network for Nuclear Disarmament
October 2003 Update
Updates and parliamentary actions on key nuclear weapons issues.
We welcome contributions and feedback.
Table of Contents
1)
Parliamentary Conference, November 7-9. 2003
a) Update
b) Iranian officials hint at rejecting IAEA ultimatum
c) Iranian Supreme Leader Brags about Enrichment of Nuclear Material
d) Top cleric: Iran should consider leaving NPT
e) Rafsanjani warns Israel against attacking
f) Dutch parliamentary questions on Iran’s nuclear enrichment technology
a)
United Nations and Iraq
b) House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee Inquiry on Iraq
c) Early Day Motions on Iraq
a) North Korea up in arms
b) Korea learns from Iraq’s mistakes?
c) The Proliferation Security Initiative: The Legal Challenge
d) Letter to US President from parliamentarians and NGOs
e) US Congress
f) Australian Senate resolution
g) Other
information
5) Saudi Arabia
a) Saudis reviewing nuclear option
6) United States
a) Congress and new nuclear weapons
b) Appropriations committee trims US Administration funding request.
c) Contact information for US Congressional actions on nuclear weapons
7)
Non-Proliferation Treaty
a) 2003 NPT meeting in Geneva
b)
Parliamentary actions
8) Japan PNND
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1)
Parliamentary Conference:
From Nuclear Dangers to Cooperative Security:
Parliamentarians and the Legal Imperative for Nuclear Disarmament
Liu Institute for Global Issues
University of British Colombia
Vancouver, November 7-9, 2003
PNND is pleased to announce an exciting conference in November on the topic From
Nuclear Dangers to Cooperative Security. The conference will include briefings
for parliamentarians from top disarmament experts, reports of successful
disarmament initiatives by parliamentarians, consideration of international
arenas in which parliamentarians can become more engaged, and discussion of
strategies for parliamentary actions - nationally and internationally.
Speakers at the conference will include (among others):
Alexa McDonough MP Senator Eduardo Suplicy Issam Makhoul MP Senator Douglas
Roche
(Canada) (Brazil) (Israel) (Canada)
Mani Shankar Matt Robson MP Malcolm Savidge MP Lloyd Axworthy
Aiyar MP (New Zealand) (United Kingdom) Former Foreign Minister
(India) (Canada)
For more information contact PNND Business
Office, 300 Broadway, #26
San Francisco, CA, USA 94133, Ph: (1) 415 775-6760 Fax: (1) 415 775-6761.
alyn@pnnd.org
2) Iran
a) Update
There are growing concerns that Iran is using its nuclear energy program to
produce highly enriched uranium which could give it a nuclear weapons potential.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has given Tehran until the end of
October to dispel doubts it is secretly developing nuclear arms.
The US has indicated that it might seek a UN Security Resolution to address the
issue if Iran does not comply. Israel has indicated that it would keep all
options open, raising concerns in Iran about a possible military strike similar
to the one Israel made against a Iraq nuclear reactor in 1981. Iran is in
consultations with the IAEA but has reacted negatively to the pressure from the
US and Israel, both of which have nuclear arsenals themselves and nuclear
facilities not monitored by the IAEA. Iranian officials have indicated that Iran
may not comply with the IAEA directive, and one top cleric has suggested that
Iran withdraw from the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Daily updates on the Iran situation are available from the Project on Managing
the Atom at the Kennedy School of Government, contact Annaliis Abrego Canty,
annaliis_abrego@harvard.edu. A selection of items
from this service is included below.
b) Iranian officials hint at rejecting IAEA ultimatum (Daily Times Pakistan)
TEHRAN: Iranian officials gave fresh signals on Wednesday that they do not
intend to comply with a resolution passed by the UN’s nuclear watchdog giving
Tehran until the end of next month to come clean on its atomic programme.
“At the beginning of the (1979 Islamic) revolution, we stood up to identical
pressure and we are used to it. The Islamic republic has no intention of giving
in to pressure,” powerful former president Akbar Hashemi Rafsandjani was quoted
as saying in his latest comment on the deadline.
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/print.asp?page=story_18-9-2003_pg7_47
c) Iranian Supreme Leader Brags about Enrichment of Nuclear Material (RFE/RL)
Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei (17 September) warned that Iran's enemies
are trying to discourage and misportray young people working in the scientific
field. Khamenei said: "Today, one example of their amazing work is the
enrichment of nuclear material. This is the most secret component of world
knowledge and technology. The world powers have exclusively claimed this to be
theirs, yet our young people, relying on their talent, knowledge and skills,
have achieved this great task."
http://www.rferl.org/newsline/2003/09/6-SWA/swa-180903.asp
d) Top cleric: Iran should consider leaving NPT (Middle East Online)
A top Iranian cleric said Friday that the Islamic Republic should consider
leaving the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, amid international pressure over
its nuclear programme. "What harm would it do to get out of the NPT, to
reconsider it?" Ayatollah Ahmad Janati, an influential leading conservative,
told worshippers at Friday prayers at Tehran University. http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=7065
e)
Rafsanjani warns Israel against attacking (Daily Times Pakistan)
TEHRAN: Israel will be given a “slap it will never forget” if it dares attack
Iran’s nuclear facilities, the Islamic republic’s former president Akbar Hashemi
Rafsanjani said in an interview broadcast here Thursday. “We are not worried
about Israel and its threats,’ Rafsanjani said when asked about the possibility
of the Jewish state launching a pre-emptive strike against Iran’s nuclear
facilities. “If Israel committed such an error, we would give it a slap it would
never forget — not only during several years but for all its history,” he said.
—AFP
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/print.asp?page=story_19-9-2003_pg7_54
f) Questions on Iran’s nuclear enrichment technology in the Netherlands
parliament
Reply by Mr De Hoop Scheffer, Minister for Foreign Affairs, to questions put by
member Wilders (VVD) on the Iranian nuclear programme, 14 April 2003 (excerpts).
Contact Karel Koster for full transcript.
Question 2
Can you confirm the reports that Iran has hundreds of centrifuges for uranium
enrichment and is much closer to the production of a nuclear bomb than was
assumed until recently? What are your views on this issue?
Reply
Among the places ElBaradei inspected when he visited Iran in February this year
was the construction site for the Natanz enrichment plant. As stated, ElBaradei
said he was surprised at the advanced state of the plant’s centrifuge
technology. A test installation is currently being built at the enrichment site
and this will have a thousand centrifuges. Some of these have already been
installed, but have not yet been loaded. At Natanz they have also started work
on a much larger enrichment plant that will eventually house many thousands of
centrifuges. Iran itself says that the whole enrichment plant will be
operational in two years’ time. Its enrichment technology is suitable for the
enrichment of uranium for use in nuclear power stations. The same technology,
however, can also be used to produce highly enriched uranium for use in nuclear
weapons.
Question 6
Will you inform the House of Representatives as soon as possible on how the EU
intends to deal with any future breaches of the non-proliferation treaty by
Iran?
Reply
This is not an opportune time to comment on the serious situation that would
arise if Iran were to breach its obligations under the non-proliferation treaty.
3) Iraq
a) United Nations and Iraq
On May 22 the UN Security Council adopted resolution 1483 on Iraq granting wide
interim governing powers to the United States and its coalition partners,
including a role for a UN Special Representative working with this provisional
authority, and lifting sanctions imposed almost 13 years ago following the
invasion of Kuwait. On August 14 the UN Security Council adopted resolution 1500
establishing the UN Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI)
Following the death of Sergio Vieira de Mello, the United Nations appointed
Ramiro Lopes da Silva as the acting UN Special Representative for Iraq.
Information on the role of the UN in Iraq
b) UK Foreign
Affairs Committee Inquiry on Iraq
The House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee is conducting an inquiry into the
UK’s decision to go to war against Iraq. The inquiry has become controversial
due to a) inconclusive evidence to substantiate the UK government claim of
Iraq’s potential to use WMD within minutes – a claim which provided the
justification for a speedy use of force against Iraq, and b) the death of David
Kelly, Special Adviser to the Director, Counter-proliferation and arms control,
Ministry of Defence, which appeared related to this controversial claim.
Documents relating to the inquiry
c) UK Early Day Motions on Iraq
There are a number of Early Day Motions relating to the UK decision to go to war
against Iraq and the current situation in Iraq. They include:
Need for a judicial inquiry, Alex Salmond
Prohibition of Cluster Bombs, Austin Mitchell
Iraq and WMD, Peter Kilfoyle,
Legal basis for military action, Lynne Jones
4) North Korea
a) North Korea Up In Arms, By Robert T. Grey Jr. The Washington Times, August
14, 2003
This article on North Korea is a useful summary of the issues surrounding North
Korea’s withdrawal from the Non-Proliferation Treaty and an examination of
possible routes to a peaceful resolution of the crisis.
http://www.gsinstitute.org/archives/000186.shtml#000186
b) Korea learns from Iraq’s mistakes? (extract from IALANA News, October 2003)
The irrational war of nerves currently taking place between the United States
and North Korea is raising the level of danger on the Korean peninsula. North
Korea has withdrawn from the Non-Proliferation Treaty and acknowledged a nuclear
weapons program, while the United States is refusing to conduct direct
negotiations with North Korea on the crisis and has not retracted from its
description of North Korea as a 'rogue' State, against which the use of force is
possible.
The Korean Committee for Solidarity with World Peoples, a government supported
'people's committee' tasked with informing international civil society about
North Korean perspectives on security issues, has indicated that a major reason
for North Korea's recent steps to solidify its nuclear weapons program was
because they ‘learned’ from the US-led invasion of Iraq that submitting to
disarmament leaves one vulnerable to attack.
The Iraqi war taught the lesson that “nuclear suspicion,” “suspected development
of weapons of mass destruction” and suspected “sponsorship of terrorism” touted
by the U.S. were all aimed to find a pretext for war and one would fall victim
to a war when one meekly responds to the IAEA’s inspection for disarmament.
Neither strong international public opinion or big country’s opposition to war
nor the UN charter could prevent the U.S. from launching the Iraqi war. It is a
serious lesson the world has drawn from the Iraqi war that a war can be averted
and the sovereignty of the country and the security of the nation can be
protected only when a country has a physical deterrent force, a strong military
deterrent force capable of decisively repelling any attack to be made by any
types of sophisticated weapons.
The US doctrine or pre-emptive attack, and the new proposal to intercept North
Korean ships on the high seas – reminicent of the 1962 blockade of Cube which
nearly ended in nuclear catastrophe – only heighten tensions further and risks
erupting into war.
However, international attention to Korea, particularly with the 50th
anniversary of the armistice on July 27, has opened up a number of possibilities
for negotiations which could lead, not only to denuclearization of the Korean
peninsula, but also pave the way for negotiations for a Peace Treaty to replace
the uneasy armistice, and eventually to possible reunification
c) The Proliferation Security Initiative: The Legal Challenge, By Ben Friedman
The Proliferation Security Initiative is an 11-nation plan to interdict ships on
the high seas and territorial waters in an effort to prevent the trafficking of
weapons of mass destruction components by states unfriendly to the United States
and its allies. The plan raises serious legal questions, which are addressed in
this brief. http://www.gsinstitute.org/docs/09_03_PSI_brief.pdf
d) Letter to President Bush and others from over 215 parliamentarians and
organizations calling for a peaceful resolution to the Korea crisis.
e) US Congress: House resolutions accessible at http://thomas.loc.gov/
H.CON.RES.81.IH
House resolution condemning the Democratic People's Republic of Korea for its
announcement that it has restarted a nuclear reactor at Yongbyon.
H.CON.RES.18.IH
House resolution calling on the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and the
United States to return to an interim level of compliance with the Agreed
Framework of 1994
(See also PNND Update 5)
f) Australian Senate resolution
The Australian Senate adopted a resolution introduced by Leader of the
Australian Democrats Senator Andrew Bartlett on June 26:
That the Senate:
(a) Notes:
(i) the USA and USSR decision to partition the Korean peninsula in 1945.
(ii) the involvement of several countries including Australia in the 1950-1953
Korean war which ended in an Armistice and the stationing of around a million
troops on the North / South Korean border to this day.
(iii) Australia's political and financial support for the 1994 KEDO Agreement
with aid being given to the Democratic People's Republic of Korea
(DPRK) in return for the dismantling of any potential DPRK nuclear weapons
program.
(b) Expresses concern:
(i) at the DPRK decision to withdraw from the Nuclear non Proliferation Treaty (NPT)
announced on the 10 January 2003.
(ii) that the proliferation of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction
represents a growing threat to Australian and regional security.
(iii) at the effect that a North Korean nuclear arsenal may have on regional
governments' compliance with the NPT.
(iv) at the catastrophic effect that an exchange of nuclear weapons or even a
conventional military exchange on the Korean peninsula, would have on the region
and Australia's interests in it.
(v) at the humanitarian crisis in North Korea due to a lack of food and medical
supplies and previous problems of aid being diverted to the DPRK military.
(c) Calls on the Government to:
(i) increase aid to NGOs and UN agencies providing food and medical supplies to
the North Korean people.
(ii) support the use of multilateral diplomatic means to arrive at a peaceful
solution without military action.
(iv) express Australia's hopes for the eventual peaceful reunification of Korea.
g) Other information.
North Korea Special Reports by the Nautilus Institute.
Friends Committee on National Legislation site on North Korea
5) Saudi Arabia
Saudis reviewing nuclear option, Daily Times Monitor
LAHORE: Saudi Arabia, in response to the current upheaval in the Middle East,
has embarked on a strategic review that includes looking at the option of
acquiring nuclear weapons, according to a report in the Guardian.
The report says Riyadh is considering a strategy paper that sets out three
options: to acquire a nuclear capability as a deterrent; to maintain or enter
into an alliance with an existing nuclear power that would offer protection; or
to try to reach a regional agreement on having a nuclear-free Middle East.
6) United States
a) US Congress Approves Research - But Not Development - of New Nuclear
Weapons
On May 20 and 21, 2003, Congress took action on the fiscal year 2004 defense
authorization bill, H.R.1588/S. 1050. This annual bill authorizes funds for the
Defense Department and for the nuclear weapons activities of the Energy
Department. Two key developments were contained within the bill: repeal of the
Spratt-Furse provision banning research and development of low-yield (under 5
kiloton) nuclear weapons, and funding for the high yield Robust Nuclear Earth
Penetrator (RNEP).
Spratt-Furse ban on "Mini-Nukes"
The Senate rejected an amendment by Senators Feinstein (CA) and Kennedy (MA) to
block the repeal of the Spratt-Furse ban on low yield nuclear weapons, and
adopted instead Senator Warner’s amendment that would require congressional
authorization prior to the development of new, low yield nuclear weapons, was
adopted. The House of Representatives adopted a proposal, offered by Reps.
Spratt (SC) and Weldon (PA) and which allows research, but not development, of
low-yield nuclear weapons.
Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator (RNEP)
The Senate rejected an amendment by Sen. Dorgan (ND) prohibiting funds to the
Energy Department for development, testing, or engineering on a nuclear earth
penetrator weapon, and adopted instead an amendment offered by Sen. Bill Nelson
(FL), which prohibits the Energy Department from beginning development on the
RNEP without authorization from Congress. However, this amendment allows the
Energy Department to conduct research on these nuclear "bunker busters". The
House of Representatives rejected and amendment by Reps. Tauscher (CA), Markey
(MA) and others to transfer $15 million for the RNEP and $6 million for advanced
nuclear weapons concepts to conventional "bunker busters".
b) Appropriations committee trims US Administration funding request.
In July, the House Appropriations Committee trimmed the US administration
funding request for nuclear weapons research and development programs including:
-Cut all but $5 million from the $15 million the Bush administration has
requested to study the development of an earth-penetrating nuclear warhead,
-Eliminated $6 million requested for early research into smaller, advanced
concept nuclear weapons, including so-called mininukes, at three federal
research labs.
-Rejected $25 million requested to shorten the lead time necessary to resume
underground nuclear bomb testing from the current 36 months to 18 months, should
the president determine that testing, which has been suspended since 1992, be
resumed.
- cut in half, to $11 million, a request for $22 million to continue
environmental studies for a manufacturing plant to make plutonium triggers for
nuclear warheads.
c) Contact information for US Congressional actions on nuclear weapons
For more information on US Congressional actions on nuclear weapons see:
Friends Committee on National Legislation and the
Bipartisan Security Group
7)
Non-Proliferation Treaty
a) 2003 NPT meeting in Geneva
The States parties to the NPT met in Geneva in April-May 2003 in preparation for
the 2005 review of the NPT. New Zealand Minister of Disarmament Marian Hobbs, in
the opening presentation of the meeting, underscored global concerns with the
fate of the NPT arising from North Korea's withdrawal from the Treaty,
instability in the Middle East including Israel's possession of nuclear weapons,
the development of nuclear weapons by India and Pakistan, the development of new
generations of nuclear weapons and the lack of implementation by the nuclear
weapon states of disarmament obligations agreed to at previous NPT conferences.
Some small positive steps were taken at the meeting in the following areas:
- Transparency. Canada initiated a process at the 2002 NPT Prep-Com to
encourage implementation of transparency and accountability obligations by the
development of guidelines for reporting by all States at NPT Prep Coms and
review Conferences. States responded favourably at the 2003 Prep Com with many
making reports on activities they were undertaking in order to fulfill their NPT
obligations. At this 2003 Conference, there was also the beginning of an
interactivity process, whereby States could question others on their reports.
- Verification. The UK reported on its ongoing study on the verification
of nuclear disarmament, a study prompted by their assumptions, welcomed by most,
that the UK will at some stage be engaged in negotiations for complete nuclear
disarmament, that in order to succeed, verification processes, mechanisms and
capabilities will be required, and that starting work on these verification
elements now will aid the negotiations. Some non-nuclear States indicated an
interest in collaborating with the UK especially in the development of
multilateral verification measures.
- Security Assurances. The New Agenda took the standard call for the
adoption of legally binding negative security assurances (NSAs) one step further
at the Conference by introducing a working paper on the topic which included, as
an annex, a draft protocol. A number of NGOs gave support to the suggestion that
NSAs could replace nuclear energy assistance as the institutional “carrot” which
could attract States to join or remain in the NPT.
- Disarmament and Non-Proliferation Education. Egypt, Hungary, Japan,
Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Poland and Sweden introduced a working paper
encouraging States to implement appropriate recommendations from the United
Nations Study on Disarmament and Non-Proliferation Education. This
recommendation made its way into the Chair’s Summary.
- NPT Emergency Mechanism
Germany suggested that there should be a mechanism to deal with any State
intending to withdraw from the NPT. Aaron Tovish (Middle Powers Initiative) went
further and proposed the establishment of a mechanism that could deal with any
NPT compliance crisis – whether that be a threat of horizontal proliferation or
a threat of vertical proliferation (such as the resumption of nuclear testing or
development of new nuclear weapons).
For full documentation of the 2003 NPT Prep Com Meeting see
www.reachingcriticalwill.org
b) Parliamentary actions
Alan Simpson MP (United Kingdom) has introduced an Early Day Motion on UK policy
regarding the Non-Proliferation Treaty in order to enforce crucial
non-proliferation and disarmament aims of the NPT and thus ensure its
preservation. The EDM focuses on efforts that could be made at the 2005 NPT
Review Conference.
8) Japan PNND
The Japan Section of the Parliamentarians for Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament is
organizing a forum for parliamentarians entitled the Role of Parliamentarians in
the Time of New Crisis of Nuclear Weapons.
The forum, part of the 2nd Nagasaki Global Citizens’ Assembly for the
Elimination of Nuclear Weapons, Nov 22-24, 2003, will include parliamentarians
from New Zealand, the United States, and Japan.
For more information contact Hiromichi Umebayashi.