It is in the security interests of states to live in a peaceful and secure world. The pursuit of peace and security is, consequently, the desire of all states and often this finds place in their domestic policies. One of the ways in which states of the international community have sought to protect their security interests is by seeking military superiority over others and this invariably leads to conflict of interests among them. In the quest for global hegemony and military superiority, the United States of America and the Former Soviet Union in the mid-1940s developed the most destructive explosive device ever, the nuclear weapon and immediately commenced a nuclear arms race which motivated other states of the international community, United Kingdom, France and China, to produce their own nuclear weapons before 1968. In 1968, these five states sought to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons among other states of the international community and accordingly set a framework for the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons with the stated intent of eventual elimination of these weapons. The most significant treaty in this framework came into effect in 1970. The Dissertation is an appraisal of the body of laws that constitute the international legal framework for the elimination of nuclear weapons and the implications of such elimination for world peace and security. The research problem that the work confronts is the failure of the international community to achieve the elimination of nuclear weapons despite the existence, since 1970, of a legal regime for that purpose. The security of the world is currently jeopardized by the proliferation of terrorist networks globally. If nuclear weapons are not completely eliminated and their means of production effectively blocked, terrorist groups could eventually gain control of them and use them to destroy the world. The primary objective of the dissertation is, accordingly, to examine the existing legal framework for the elimination of nuclear weapons with the ultimate aim of contributing solutions to nuclear weapons elimination. The research scope specifically covers the laws and policies of the nine nuclear weapon states; U.S.A, Russia, China, U.K, France, India, Pakistan, North Korea and Israel. The subject is, however, generally examined under the framework of international law and policy. The dissertation makes three significant findings; foremost, that the laws which constitute the international legal framework for the elimination of nuclear weapons are inadequate to achieve the goal of elimination, secondly, that a significant obstacle to the realization of the extant nuclear weapons law is the inefficiency of the enforcement mechanism of the law, thirdly, that the elimination of nuclear weapons is embroiled in power politics and therefore very difficult to achieve. Based on the findings, the dissertation recommends that a specialized agency be established under the United Nations for the sole purpose of elimination of nuclear weapons. It also recommends that international pressure should be intensified for the adoption of the proposed nuclear weapons convention as the substantive law on nuclear weapons elimination.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page.i
Declaration..ii
Certification.iii
Dedication.iv
Acknowledgement..v
Abstract vii
Abbreviations..viii
Table of Treaties and Statutesx
Table of Casesxii
Table of Contents.xiii
CHAPTER ONE
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the Research1
1.2 Statement of the Problem.8
1.3 Aims and Objectives of the Research..9
1.4 Scope of the Research9
1.5 Research Methodology10
1.6 Literature Review10
1.7 Justification for the Research.32
1.8 Organization Layout..33
CHAPTER TWO
CLARIFICATION OF KEY TERMS, HISTORY AND EFFECTS OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS
2.1 Clarification of Key Terms 34
2.1.1 Nuclear Weapon. 34
2.1.2 Nuclear Proliferation. 37
2.1.3 Nuclear Non-Proliferation 37
2.1.4 Nuclear Disarmament38
2.1.5 Nuclear Deterrence38
2.1.6 Nuclear Weapon States and Non-Nuclear Weapon States.40
2.1.7 World Peace and Security..40
2.2 History of Nuclear Weapons.45
2.2.1 The United States of America46
2.2.2 Russia (Former Soviet Union).47
2.2.3 United Kingdom48
2.2.4 France.50
2.2.5 China50
2.2.6 Other Members of the Nuclear Club and the Anti-Proliferation Regime.51
2.2.7 The Cold War Arms Race..61
2.2.8 Second Nuclear Age64
2.3 Effects of Nuclear Weapons..65
2.3.1 Effects of Nuclear Weapons Explosion65
2.3.2 Effects of Nuclear Weapons Production.69
2.3.3 Effects of Nuclear Weapons Testing70
2.3.4 Chernobyl and Fukushima..70
2.4 Analysis72
CHAPTER THREE
AN EXAMINATION OF THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE ELIMINATION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS
3.1 Overview of International Treaties on Nuclear Weapons..74
3.2 The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) 1968.75
3.2.1 Structure of the Treaty76
3.2.2 Elements of Elimination in the NPT..81
3.2.3 State Parties’ Adherence to the Treaty..81
3.2.4 Challenges to the Attainment of the Objectives of the NPT83
3.2.5 NPT Review Conference88
3.3 The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT).98
3.3.1 Obligations of State Parties.99
3.3.2 Measures for Attaining the Objectives of the Treaty.102
3.3.3 Implementation of the Treaty104
3.3.4 Challenges to the Attainment of the Objectives of the CTBT..104
3.3.5 The CTBT and the Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty.110
3.4 The Nuclear Weapon Free Zone Treaties (NWFZ)..113
3.4.1 The African NWFZ Treaty (Treaty of Pelindaba).115
3.4.2 Other NWFZ Treaties..115
3.4.3 Significance of NWFZ Treaties..116
3.4.4 Implications of NWFZ Treaties118
3.4.5 Challenges of the NWFZ Treaties119
3.4.6 Is a Middle-East Nuclear Weapon Free Zone Realizable?.120
3.5 The Statute of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)123
3.6 Bilateral Treaties between Russia and the United States of America.126
3.7 The Advisory Opinion of the ICJ on the Legality of Nuclear Weapons.127
3.8 Soft Laws on the Elimination of Nuclear Weapons..130
3.9 The Proposed Model Nuclear Weapons Convention141
CHAPTER FOUR
AN EXAMINATION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS ELIMINATION UNDER THE FRAMEWORK OF INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW (IHL)
4.1 Overview of International Humanitarian Law (IHL)..152
4.2 Relationship between IHL and Nuclear Weapons.152
4.2.1 Scope of IHL on Nuclear Weapons..153
4.2.2 Analysis162
4.3 Prohibition of the Use of Nuclear Weapons and IHL162
4.4 The Arguments of the USA and the UK before the ICJ for the Validity of the Use of Nuclear
Weapons165
4.4.1 Arguments for the Permissibility of the Use of Low-Yield Nuclear Weapons166
4.5 Permissibility of the Threat to Use Nuclear Weapons..169
CHAPTER FIVE
AN EXAMINATION OF THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE ELIMINATION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS TO WORLD PEACE AND SECURITY
5.1 Introduction..172
5.2 Has the World Been More Peaceful Since the Emergence of Nuclear Weapons in 1945?173
5.3 Does the Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Increase or Decrease the Probability of Nuclear War?178
5.3.1 Analysis185
5.4 Challenges to World Peace and Security Posed by Nuclear Weapons186
5.4.1 Nuclear Terrorism.187
5.4.2 Proliferation and Spread of Nuclear Weapons.191
5.4.3 Illicit Spread of Nuclear Materials192
5.5 Implications of the Elimination of Nuclear Weapons193
5.6 Are There Other Theories on Preservation of World Peace and Security?.193
5.6.1 The Democratic Peace Theory.194
5.6.2 Peace through Free Trade/Capitalism Theory..196
5.6.3 Peace through Law..199
5.6.4 Analysis200
CHAPTER SIX
AN EXAMINATION OF THE ENFORCEMENT OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS LAW
6.1 Conceptual Analysis of the Enforcement of Nuclear Weapons Law..202
6.1.1 What laws are to be enforced and who enforces them?202
6.2 The International Atomic Energy Agency’s Verification of Compliance with Nuclear Weapon Treaties.203
6.2.1 Iraq and the IAEA206
6.2.2 Verification in Nuclear Weapon States.209
6.2.3 The IAEA’s Safeguards System: Impartial Verification Mechanism?.211
6.3 The United Nations Security Council: The Second Component of the Enforcement Mechanism..214
6.3.1 The Efficacy of the United Nations Security Council as an Enforcement Mechanism of Nuclear Weapons Law..217
6.4 Enforcement of Disarmament in Nuclear Weapon States229
6.5 Jurisprudential and other problems with the enforcement of Nuclear weapons law234
6.5.1 The Consensual character of International law: An Impediment to Enforcement.236
6.5.2 The Weakness of the Components of the International Law Enforcement System..239
6.5.3 The States that refuse to be Party to the Nuclear Weapon Treaties246
6.5.4 The Intertwining of International Law with International Politics246
6.5.5 The Conflict between Disarmament and Proliferation.248
6.6 Profiling Potential Enforcement Facilitators,,..249
CHAPTER SEVEN
CONCLUSION
7.1 Summary263
7.2 Findings.267
7.3 Recommendations269
Bibliography.272
