Dialogue: The Cold War is over - long live the Cold War

GUY WILSON-ROBERTS* says nuclear arms control remains at the whim of big-power paranoia, despite recent concessions to international opinion.

In the middle of last month, the nuclear-weapon states agreed to nuclear disarmament during the review conference for the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons in New York.

This rather dramatic concession to international opinion passed without too much notice. To their credit, New Zealand's diplomats from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs played a major role brokering the deal.

Buried deep in the final document of the conference, agreed to by more than 150 states, is the key paragraph. The five nuclear-weapon states - the United States, Russia, Britain, France and China - agreed to "an unequivocal undertaking to accomplish the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals."

While there is no schedule for this undertaking, it was a major concession. The nuclear-weapon states gave up linkage between nuclear disarmament and general disarmament and, in doing so, accepted the 1996 judgment of the World Court. They also agreed to a "diminishing role for nuclear weapons in security policies."

Before the conference, the participants had been pessimistic. The outcome was, therefore, regarded as a success for the treaty and a validation of the approach taken by New Zealand and its friends in the New Agenda Coalition. Diplomatic pressure from a group of like-minded states had gained concessions from nuclear-weapon states.

Nuclear arms control has now shifted from lofty rhetoric to implementation. Presidents Clinton and Putin met in Moscow last week and their strategic relationship was high on the agenda.

Clinton will decide at the end of next month whether to start pouring the concrete for a national missile defence system to protect the US against ballistic missile threats from North Korea, Iran and Iraq. Such a system will contravene the provisions of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty the US and Russia have agreed is the "cornerstone of strategic stability."

Clinton is looking to broker a trade-off. The US will agree to go lower in reductions to its nuclear arsenal, which Russia wants, if Russia will agree to amend the Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty to allow the US to build a national missile defence system. The bargaining should begin in Geneva soon.

In a 16-point statement on principles of strategic stability signed by Clinton and Putin, there is, surprisingly, no mention of the unequivocal undertaking to achieve nuclear disarmament agreed in New York. Instead, they agreed that the "capability for deterrence remains a key aspect of stability in the international security environment."

In the talking points for the negotiations, the US and Russia suggest they "will possess under the terms of any future arms reduction agreements, large, diversified, viable arsenals of strategic offensive weapons."

Therefore, we have two conflicting sets of statements. At New York, they agreed to nuclear disarmament in the future and a diminished role for nuclear weapons in security policies. In Moscow, they agreed on retaining nuclear weapons as a key aspect of stability and the intention to retain nuclear weapons well into the future.

The relationship between the US and Russia is the key determinant for nuclear arms control. Despite the end of the Cold War, little has changed. Their nuclear arsenals are still linked and reductions must take place while maintaining the notion of "stability."

Bilateral proposals for shared data and cooperation on missile test launches and early warning show that Cold War paranoia has yet to be banished. Strategic competition between the US and Russia has now emerged from the disappearing shadow of ideology.

Presidential contender George Bush has suggested the nuclear relationship between the US and Russia should be uncoupled, although his proposal would probably include a US rejection of the Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty and Russia's marginalisation.

The old notion of strategic stability remains the driver in the US-Russia bilateral relationship. Despite the success of the review conference in New York, the main game of nuclear arms control will take place between the US and Russia. Unfortunately, it will remain mired in outdated rhetoric.

* Guy Wilson-Roberts is deputy director of the Centre for Strategic Studies at Victoria University.

Our national defence – Herald story archive

Discuss this issue in our online forum.