By Luka Čekić
On February the 26th, the International Institute for Peace (IIP) hosted the panel discussion “Arms Control and Disarmament: Challenges and Opportunities for the European Union”. This public event was hosted within the framework of a larger project, sponsored by the European Union, which the IIP hosted in Vienna. The panel discussion focused on issues and recent developments regarding arms control and disarmament - in particular the challenges and opportunities that the European Union faces.
The research assistant from the IIP, Marylia Hushcha, opened this panel discussion by stating that the 2015 review conference of the NPT ended without any final document and that the world is facing the abrogation of the INF Treaty, the withdrawal of the US from the JCPOA and the uncertainty regarding further extension of the New START Treaty after it expires in 2021. All those recent developments represent a security challenge for the European Union.
Angela Kane, the former UN High Representative for Disarmament Affairs and the Vice-President of the IIP, argued that there is a remarkable increase in military and especially nuclear hardware which was caused not only by the rising aggressive foreign politics but also by the setback in negotiating new and extending existing arms control agreements.
Kane stated that arms control agreements have played a key role in sustaining global peace during the Cold War but also afterwards – the geopolitical strategies of both the US and the Russian Federation (Soviet Union) could be maintained without getting involved in a war with each other. Yet, the US recently decided to extend their definition for the cases in which nuclear weapons would be used: a non-nuclear strategic or nuclear attack on US, allied or partner civilian population infrastructure. As response to this, Russia announced that they will invest in the development of new nuclear weapons and a new hypersonic missile.
Kane defines three fundamental priority actions which can be considered by the European Union regarding the recent events on nuclear security issues:
- Stepping up diplomatic efforts where others rely only on the law of “jungle”
- Stepping in where the US will not uphold multilateral commitments anymore
- Continuing to speak out in favour of arms control, disarmament and non-proliferation
As a result of this, the EU could start a dialogue with Russia, as they were against the unilateral – by the US - abrogation of the INF. Also, the EU should signal to the US that its responses to similar developments must be consulted in NATO because the deployment of nuclear weapons should only happen on the basis of a collective NATO decision. Collective decision-making, a broader dialog and strategic stability is needed.
Heinz Gärnter, member of the Advisory Board of the IIP and lecturer at the University of Vienna, focused on four topics: the INF Treaty, the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), the JCPOA and the Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone in the Middle East.
In the 1960s it became clear that the Mutual assured destruction (MAD) strategy was not a sustainable option. This led to the development of smaller nuclear warheads – medium range missiles. This represented a huge threat to Europe, considering that it could become a theatre for a nuclear exchange. In the 1980s Soviet and American diplomats held several meetings and negotiated a new arms control agreement – the INF Treaty banning the use of intermediate range nuclear missiles. With this treaty suspended in 2019, intermediate range nuclear weapons can now be deployed again by Russia and the USA in Europe, the Middle East and the Asian region. As China was not part of the INF Treaty, it was able to produce and deploy medium range missiles in the meantime. Gärnter suggested that this could be a potential explanation of the true reason for the suspension of the INF treaty.
Speaking of the TPNW, Gärtner noted that it consists of three main pillars:
- Total elimination of nuclear weapons
- Humanitarian consequences of the use of nuclear weapons
- Full implementation of the Treaty on the Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT)
The TPNW created a new norm in the non-proliferation and disarmament policies. It argues that the world is safer without nuclear weapons. This represents a totally different approach in defining the use of nuclear weapons. Gärtner describes the TPNW as a response by the non-nuclear states to the non-implementation of Article 6 of the NPT by the nuclear-weapon states.
What concerns the nuclear deal with Iran, or the JCPOA, it can be considered a success of the Austrian diplomacy because its final stage was negotiated in Vienna. It is also the best arms control agreement ever to be negotiated, according to Gärtner. It has no expiration date, and in its preamble, it is written that Iran will never acquire nuclear weapons. It can be considered as a masterpiece of effective multilateralism by the European Union. For Iran it meant the loosening of economic sanctions and more foreign investments.
After President Trump’s withdrawal from the JCPOA, the tensions in the Middle East started rising again. The Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone (NWFZ) in the Middle East represents one solution to the crisis; however, it has proven hard to implement. At the same time, while, the NWFZ in the Middle East remains a remote prospect, Gärtner suggested that the states of the region could join other already existing NWFZ. Iran could join the Central Asia NWFZ, while North African states could join the African NWFZ.
Ramses Wessel, Professor and the Head of the European Law Department, at the University of Groningen, gave a brief summary of the EU policy regarding disarmament and non-proliferation. He stated that the European Union has become one of the most active international actors dealing with the non-proliferation issues and arms control. This can be demonstrated by the positions which the EU takes in the international organizations and at international conferences. The number of papers which have been published by the EU and non-proliferation activities at least influenced the discussion about non-proliferation. Many trade deals of the EU include non-proliferation and arms embargoes. Combined with economic sanctions, they can be used as tools to solve potential crises and to strengthen the position of the EU in international discussions.
Clara Portela, Senior Associate Analyst at the European Institute for Security Studies, stated that the EU has already practiced common decision making in terms of the NPT even before the CFSP was established. In 1995 a catalogue of measures was put together by the EU in the run-up to the NPT Review Conference and since then its contribution to non-proliferation and disarmament issues was constantly rising until 2015 when no catalogue of measures was put together. Yet the main aim of the European Union is the preservation of the NPT framework and the promotion of a successful outcome of the next conference. Portela also stated that the EU has become better in managing proliferation crises. The EU played a remarkable role in during the negotiation of the JCPOA with Iran. It seems that the EU has started to take a more cohesive approach to disarmament and non-proliferation, according to Portela.
Questions and comments from the audience addressed such issues as the effectiveness of the NPT and the Article 6, the P5 and their participation in non-proliferation and disarmament, the gap between the P5 countries and the ones who do not poses nuclear weapons and nuclear disarmament in general.
You can watch the full discussion below.