Advertisement

Building an Effective WMD Control Regime

  • Berhanykun Andemicael
  • John Mathiason
Part of the Global Issues Series book series (GLOISS)

Abstract

The history of the WMD control regime began in the early years of the United Nations with the most ambitious plan, the Baruch Plan, to create an international authority responsible for the development and peaceful use of nuclear energy. It would take custody of all fissionable material and technological information essential for producing nuclear weapons. It would also verify the freeze on weapons production and the destruction of existing stockpiles of nuclear weapons. Although the plan was not accepted, it launched a process that broadened the arms control objective to include chemical and biological weapons and classified them all together as weapons of mass destruction, a concept used to distinguish them from conventional weapons. All the proposals that evolved during the first decade were then pulled together to form a comprehensive model for General and Complete Disarmament (GCD). The model was then considered to be unrealistic as a basis for negotiating a convention for phased across-the-board disarmament to be implemented by a single international disarmament and verification organization. However, it established a firm conceptual foundation and an outline of partial or collateral measures that would be separately negotiated as building blocks towards verified disarmament in all areas.

Keywords

Security Council Nuclear Weapon Mass Destruction Chemical Weapon Biological Weapon 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    Lewis A Dunn, Peter R. Lavoy and Scott D, Sagan, ‘Conclusions: Planning the Unthinkable’, in Peter R. Lavoy, Scott D. Sagan and James J. Wirtz, Planning the Unthinkable: How New Powers Will Use Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Weapons (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 2000), pp. 239–40.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    George Perkovich, Joseph Cirincione, Rose Gottemoeller, Jon B. Wolfsthal and Jessica T. Mathews, Universal Compliance: A Strategy for Nuclear Security (Washington, DC, 2004), pp. 9–13.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sam Nunn, Keynote Address at the Carnegie International Nonproliferation Conference, Washington, DC, 21 June 2004.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Perkovich, Cirincione, Gottemoeller, Wolfsthal and Mathews, Universal Compliance, pp. 15–22.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hans Blix, ‘International Law Relating to Disarmament and Arms Control; with Special Focus on Verification and Compliance’, in F. Kalshoven (ed.), The Centennial of the First International Peace Conference (Kluwer Law International,Google Scholar
  6. 2000).
    2000), pp. 128–9; also Keynote Address by Hans Blix to the Carnegie International Nonproliferation Conference, Washington, DC; 21 June 2004.Google Scholar
  7. 6.
    Mohamed ElBaradei, ‘Nuclear Non-Proliferation: Global Security in a Rapidly Changing World’, Keynote Address, Carnegie International Nonproliferation Conference, Washington, D.C., 21 June 2004. Many of the ideas were officially presented to the IAEA Board of Governors in his statement on 8 March 2004. 7. John Simpson, ‘The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Regime: Back to the Future?’, Disarmament Forum, no. 1, 2004, p. 14.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jonathan B. Tucker, ‘Introduction’, in Jonathan B. Tucker (ed.), The Chemical Weapons Convention: Implementation Challenges and Solutions (Monterey Institute of International Studies, 2001), p. 5.Google Scholar
  9. 11.
    Michael L. Moodie, ‘Issues for the First CWC Review Conference’, in Tucker (ed.), ibid., pp. 62–3.Google Scholar
  10. 12.
    See Perkovich, Cirincione, Gottemoeller, Wolfstal and Mathews, Universal Compliance, pp. 63–9 on US nuclear policy, and pp. 18–19, 73–6 on South Asia.Google Scholar
  11. 14.
    Robert Kirk, ‘A Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty: A New Verification Role for the International Atomic Energy Agency’, Occasional Paper Series, The Atlantic Council of the United States, Washington, DC, May 1995, pp. 1–18.Google Scholar
  12. 16.
    Perkovich, Cirincione, Gottemoeller, Wolfsthal and Mathews, Universal Compliance, pp. 63–72.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Berhanykun Andemicael and John Mathiason 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Berhanykun Andemicael
    • 1
  • John Mathiason
    • 2
  1. 1.Energy Agency to the United NationsUSA
  2. 2.Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public AffairsSyracuse UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations