By Ellesse Sorbonne, Contributing Editor
Thursday’s meeting at the UN Security Council marked the fifth time that all five permanent Security Council heads have convened at summit level since the UN’s birth in 1945. What’s more, the assembly marked the first ever Security Council chaired by an American President.
Obama proclaimed his interest in heading the fifteen-member summit last April while speaking in Prague. In that address, he emphasized how much has changed since the original 1970 ratification of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT): India, Pakistan, and Israel have each attained nuclear weapons; North Korea—an original NPT signatory—is now brazenly testing weapons of mass destruction; and nuclear materials are seeping onto the black market , threatening to empower independent terrorist networks. In answer to these heightening threats, Obama urged a ramped-up global commitment to two duties: nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament and declared his dream to see “a world without nuclear weapons” in his lifetime.
Obama’s two objectives provided the structure of the U.S.-drafted resolution presented at the Security Council yesterday morning. In his opening statements, the U.S. president insisted their convening was “not about singling out an individual nation,” but rather because, “international law is not an empty promise, and treaties must be enforced. ''
While the proposed measure did not mention any nation specifically, many of its tenets are not-too-subtle responses to nuclear-problematic countries. For example, the motion legalized nuclear export inspections even after a country abandons the NPT. Such measures would deter countries from pulling a North Korea—withdrawing from the treaty, transforming its civilian nuclear potential into a military one, and thereafter defying UN inspection.
The resolution also insinuated at Iran by resolving to make a country’s development of peaceful nuclear program dependent upon its adherence to NPT regulations. Additionally, it called out India, Pakistan, and Israel, in its push for the NPT’s universality to be achieved, “at an early date.” Other demands included full compliance with International Arms Agreements and a lock-down of all vulnerable nuclear materials within four years.
After each of the Security Council’s 15 members commented on international nuclear responsibilities, the resolution was voted upon. Its ratification was unanimous. The UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon touted the event as, “A historic moment.” Obama was equally sanguine. As soon as the votes were counted, he asserted that they had achieved a bold step towards his goal of nuclear disarmament: "The historic resolution we just adopted enshrines our shared commitment to a goal of a world without nuclear weapons."
But there remain a number of significant hurdles standing between the present ratification and complete disarmament. Israel still denies its possession of nuclear weapons. India, Pakistan—and now Iran—seethe against nuclear armament being limited to just permanent Security Council members, and North Korea shows no sign of any reconciliation. Even a number of NPT signatories are already balking at the resolution’s tougher nuclear export policies. Even if these nations were to concede their nuclear pursuits, strategic intelligence firm, STRATFOR, terms complete disarmament a “pipe dream.” According to its analysis, not only can existing nuclear weaponry in no way be un-invented, there simply is too much international mistrust to allow for a comprehensive laying down of nuclear arms.
Obama is not naïve to the manifold challenges facing nuclear disarmament. While chairing the Security Council he admitted, “We harbor no illusions about the difficulty.” Yet after a brief pause, he proclaimed, “but there will also be days like today that push us forward—days that tell a different story.” Ultimately, the Security Council’s Resolution 1887 marks a significant step forward, but on a long, daunting road.
