Showing posts with label nuclear weapons. Show all posts
Showing posts with label nuclear weapons. Show all posts
By Navneet Binning

Picture: Globe License: Public Domain

In 2017, the Law of War saw many new developments. These include: the closure of the ICTY, the increased threat of cyber warfare, attempts to eliminate nuclear weapons, and a movement to fight the spread of chemical weapons.

ICTY
The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Republic of Yugoslavia (ICTY) formally closed on December 21st 2017.  The ICTY was created to adjudicate claims of war crimes that occurred in the Balkans in the 1990’s. The ICTY was open for twenty-four years, delivered 161 indictments, and sentenced ninety individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, and other crimes.

The closure is particularly significant because it marks a shift in international law away from specific criminal tribunals; previously, individual criminal tribunals have been used to prosecute war crimes in the Balkans and Rwanda. International law experts hope that the closure of ICTY will be a catalyst towards the goal of establishing universal jurisdiction for war crimes in the International Criminal Court (ICC).

Cyber Warfare
In recent years, there has been an increasing fear of the threat of cyber warfare. In 2017, cyber warfare has threatened physical destruction of civilian and military assets. For example, terrorist groups could gain control of cyber switches and use them to derail trains.

However, most of cyber warfare has focused on undermining institutional integrity. In 2017, allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential election created mass distrust in the American political system. Cyber warfare used to undermine institutional integrity is particularly concerning because it is difficult to defend oneself from and retaliate against such attacks.

Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons
In March and July 2017, the United Nations General Assembly met for a conference aimed to prohibit and, eventually, completely eliminate nuclear weapons. The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons was approved on July 7th.

The treaty requires signatories to abstain from developing, possessing, and threatening the use of nuclear weapons. The treaty would also prohibit nations from transferring nuclear weapons between one another.

122 nations signed the treaty, but the nine nations who are known or believed to possess nuclear weapons did not. These nine nations are the United States, Russia, United Kingdom, China, France, India, Pakistan, North Korea, and Israel. A joint statement from the United States, United Kingdom, and France states that the nations do not intend to join the treaty.

Opponents of the treaty believe that it “disregards the realities of the international security environment” and fails to address the growing threat of North Korea’s nuclear programs. Opponents instead propose strengthening the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, which was enacted in 1970 prohibits nations other than the five original nuclear powers (United States, Russia, United Kingdom, France, and China) from pursuing nuclear weapons and directs the five original nuclear powers to work towards nuclear disarmament.

Syria Missile Attack
On April 7, the United States, directed by President Trump, carried out a missile strike in Syria that killed more than eighty civilians. The attack was in response to the Syrian government’s use of chemical weapons against its civilians and to signal the United States’ disapproval of Syria’s use of chemical weapons.

The attack prompted wide criticisms, particularly from Russia. A spokesman for President Putin stated that the strike was a “significant blow” for the relationship between the United States and Russia and had no impact on combating international terrorism. Rather, the attack undermined efforts to establish an international coalition to fight the use of chemical weapons.

By April Kent

In February, the United States presented a draft resolution negotiated with China to the U.N. Security Council to impose restrictions aimed at frustrating North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs. The proposed sanctions have been widely hailed as the toughest U.N. sanctions regime in over two decades, with one U.S. official quoted as saying, “this resolution will be felt, it will have an impact... The DPRK (North Korea) has never been subject to the kind of pressure that is in the resolution.” However, others have expressed doubts. The New York Times reported that analysts in South Korea and China are less than certain that sanctions will be sufficient to force North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons. The Wall Street Journal also recently published an article elaborating on the loopholes and oversights that will allow China to continue playing “a double game of rhetorically deploring North Korea’s nuclear program while propping it up in practice.” Whether the sanctions will have their intended effect remains to be seen.
By Olga Symeonoglou

"North Korea - Pyongyang" by stephan  is licensed under CC BY 4.0
On January 5, North Korea announced that it had tested a hydrogen bomb. The claim was met with skepticism because the size of the earthquake produced by the detonation – with a reported magnitude between 4.2 and 5.1 – did not reach the strength that a hydrogen bomb would cause.  

Hydrogen (or thermonuclear) bombs are far more powerful than atomic bombs. Atomic bombs create energy through fission (atoms splitting in half), while hydrogen bombs use the energy released from atomic fission to spark fusion (atoms fusing together). Only the United States, Russia, China, France, and Britain are known to have tested hydrogen bombs. 

By Olga Symeonoglou

On February 18, the American Society of International Law, George Washington University Law School, and the American Bar Association’s Section of International Law will host a webcast with the U.S. Department of State Office of the Legal Adviser. The program – “Live from L: The Iran Nuclear Deal” – will feature speakers from the Office of the Legal Adviser, including Principal Deputy Legal Adviser Mary McLeod. The program is free, but registration is required to attend in person or to listen to the webcast.   


The Iran Nuclear Deal, which was reached on July 14, 2015, was implemented on January 16. The deal reduces sanctions on Iran in exchange for a reduction of nuclear capabilities.
By Catherine Kent

Reuters reported on April 6, 2015 that Russia does not fear that the preliminary deal with Iran on Tehran’s nuclear program will lead to a new arms race. According to Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, the delay in the deal-making is the fault of the United States and Europe. The deal, reached –between Iran and the U.S., Britain, France, Germany, China, and Russia–involves curbing Tehran’s nuclear research for at least 10 years and slowly lifting the Western sanctions. Lavrov commented that lifting these sanctions will help Russia, as Iran can now pay in full for deals with Russia’s nuclear agency.
By Catherine Kent

Thirty years have now passed since North Korea joined the international Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in 1985. As nuclear weapons have come to the forefront, the rhetoric and hostility between North Korea and the United States has been escalating. It seems, however, that neither the U.S., nor North Korea can gain the upper hand.

The U.S. has made its presence known to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), and kept the country on notice that if need be, the U.S. will come to the defense of South Korea. Each year, South Korea hosts joint U.S.-South Korea military exercises. These drills, lasting several weeks, mainly focus on maintaining preparation for a North Korean assault against South Korea. The annual joint exercises do not typically put North Korea in a pleasant mood; in fact, the reaction is generally pretty poor. Last year, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) stated that the U.S. and South Korea would “have to pay a dear price” for the exercises. 
By Stephen Levy 

The Joint Plan of Action, the interim agreement made between the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (UNSC) and Germany (P5+1) and Iran in 2013 set the final deadline on a permanent agreement on Iran’s nuclear program on November 24, 2014. On that date, however, the two sides were unable to reach an agreement, and extended the deadline to March 24, 2015.

The continuation of negotiations has angered two influential parties with additional political motives. First is Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu, whose party is clinging to a narrow lead in the polls for a March Knesset election primarily due to Netanyahu’s national security credentials. Netanyahu has consistently opposed striking a deal with Iran, and warned the West that only continued sanctions would end the crisis. U.S. Republicans in Congress, joined by multiple Democrats, have also proposed additional sanctions against Iran should it fail to negotiate in good faith. House Speaker John Boehner invited Netanyahu to give a speech in front of a Joint Session of Congress, setting off fierce discussions on whether the President can meet with leaders up for election, whether Congress and the White House should coordinate on speeches by foreign diplomats to Congress, and the relationship between Israel and Iran itself.
By Jenny Park

After talks to end UN sanctions in exchange for Iran to scale back its nuclear program had been extended, BBC illustrates the history of the international tension surrounding Iran’s nuclear crisis. World powers suspect that Iran is developing nuclear weapons technology. In addition to UN resolutions requiring Iran to cease enriching uranium, the US and EU have imposed additional sanctions on Iran's energy and financial sectors. However, Iran defends its defiance of the UN resolutions by its right to nuclear energy under the Non-Proliferation Treaty. 
By Jenny Park

When North Korea makes belligerent threats of nuclear annihilation and actually carries out nuclear tests and ballistic missile launches, the world’s response is surprisingly lukewarm. This is an odd phenomenon considering the tougher sanctions against Russia for supporting the separatists in Ukraine, and against Iran for a multitude of transgressions, including continued illicit nuclear activities. 

But North Korea’s violations of international law are quite extensive. To name a few, North Korea developed nuclear weapons after withdrawing from the international Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and tested them out not only once in 2006, but also in 2009 and in 2012. Mind you, China, the U.S., Japan, Russia, and the two Koreas have engaged in six-party talks from 2003 to 2007 to try to resolve North Korea’s nuclear issue to no avail. Furthermore, the multiple UN sanctions (UNSecurity Council Resolutions 1718, 1874, and 2094) that imposed economic and commercial pressures against North Korea also proved to be ineffective. 
By Abraham Shanedling

An effort to impose additional sanctions on Iran’s nuclear program has likely stalled in Congress amid pressure from President Obama, who threatened to veto the measure, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who refused to put the bill to a vote.

The bipartisan bill, which has 58 cosponsors, including 15 Democrats, would implement sanctions on Iran unless it agrees to halt all of its uranium enrichment. However, the White House has been openly against the move, warning that it could thwart the current deal in place with Iran and the P5+1.

Instead members of the House and Senate are considering a weaker non-binding resolution expressing concern about Iran’s nuclear ambitions and calling for negotiators to set stricter conditions on the negotiations.

On Tuesday, February 4, at 10 a.m., the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations is hosting a hearing on the current negotiations on Iran’s nuclear program. Set to testify is Wendy Sherman of the Department of State; David Cohen of Department of Treasury; David Albright of the Institute for Science and International Security; and Mark Dubowitz of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

Head to Reuters for more on the issue. 

By Abraham Shanedling

The United States and five other world powers announced late Saturday night that they had reached an agreement with Iran that would temporarily freeze much of Iran’s nuclear program in return for $6 to $7 billion in sanctions relief.

The full text of the agreement, which is to last six months, can be found here.

Although the agreement requires Iran to stop enriching uranium beyond 5 percent, the deal does not require Iran to completely cease enrichment, including to low levels of 3.5 percent or to dismantle any of its existing centrifuges.

Appearing on live television shortly after the announcement of the deal, President Obama said the agreement includes "substantial limitations that will help prevent Iran from creating a nuclear weapon."

White House statement called the nuclear agreement an "initial, six-month step," and noted that the accord includes limits on Iran's ability to "produce weapons-grad plutonium" from its heavy water reactor in Arak.

On Sunday however, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has consistently expressed his distrust with Iran, called the agreement a "historic mistake," likening the agreement to that reached with North Korea in 2005.

Meanwhile, with the agreement in place, Congressional efforts to ratchet up sanctions will now be on pause at least for the six-month window.
By Abraham Shanedling

As the White House claims it is nearing a diplomatic deal with Iran over its nuclear program, the U.S. Senate remains split on whether to impose more sanctions on the Islamic republic.

On Friday, Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein said she will strongly oppose any new sanctions on Iran. However senators from both parties, including Foreign Relations Chairman Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), and Senator Mark Kirk (R-IL), have expressed support for imposing tighter restrictions on the Iranian regime.

The administration meanwhile has intensely lobbied against new sanctions, claiming they could hinder the negotiating strategy and lead the U.S. on a “march to war.”

The Senate is expected to vote this week.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry shakes hands with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Rome, Italy, on October 23, 2013.
 Photo courtesy of the U.S. State Department. 
By Abraham Shanedling

Secretary of State John Kerry met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Wednesday in Rome, seeking to assure Israel of the Obama administration’s resolve in negotiating with Iran.

However, as The New York Times reported, Kerry’s comments did little to persuade Netanyahu, who demanded that any deal with Iran must include a ban on uranium-enriching centrifuges and the dismantling of a plutonium heavy water plant in Arak.

“We will pursue a diplomatic initiative with eyes wide open,” Kerry told reporters, adding that Iran would be held to the same standards as other states if it was to prove its nuclear program is peaceful.

Netanyahu stressed to Kerry that Iran’s nuclear program poses an existential threat to Israel. “They should get rid of the amassed fissile material, and they shouldn’t have underground nuclear facilities,” Netanyahu told reporters.

The next round of nuclear negotiations between Iran and the P5+1 are scheduled for early next month in Geneva.
Under Secretary for Political Affairs Wendy Sherman leads the U.S. delegation for the P5+1 talks with Iran in Geneva, Switzerland, on October 15, 2013. Also pictured in the photo are E.U. High Representative Catherine Ashton and Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif. Photo courtesy of the U.S. State Department.  

By Abraham Shanedling

Last week, Iran and six world powers concluded two days of talks about Tehran’s nuclear program—the first formal negotiations between Iran and the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council since the Iranian President Hassan Rouhani took office in August.

Despite a lack of details about the discussions, Iran’s foreign minister and the European Union’s foreign policy chief, issued a rare joint statement following the meetings, calling the talks “substantive and forward looking.” Further discussions are scheduled in Geneva for November 7 and 8. However, government officials and nuclear experts among the United States and its allies remain sharply divided on whether the negotiations represent a positive shift in relations with Tehran warranting “cautious optimism” or whether the world community should increase pressure on the regime to prevent Iran from using yet another round of negotiations as a delay tactic while the country strengthens critical nuclear capabilities.

Now that the government shutdown/debt-ceiling “debate” has been punted until next year, Iran sanctions legislation will likely resurface as a key issue in Congress. Appearing two weeks ago before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Wendy Sherman, the chief U.S. negotiator in Geneva, urged Congress to delay imposing stringent new Iran sanctions legislation until after the negotiations in Switzerland. The bill, which passed overwhelmingly (400-200) in the House in July and is now pending in the Senate, aims to cut Iran’s oil exports by another million barrels per day over the course of a year, decreasing the country’s oil exports to near nothing.

By Abraham Shanedling

On Tuesday, China posted a list of restricted goods for export to North Korea, including military-like hardware and chemical substance as part of international sanctions against Pyongyang’s nuclear program.

As the New York Times reported, the list was released two weeks after new satellite images revealed that North Korea may be resuming plutonium production at its reconstructed nuclear reactor at Yongbyn.

Items included on the 236-page list, released Tuesday by the Chinese Ministry of Commerce, were labeled “dual-use technologies” because they can be used for both civilian and military applications.

VOA News also has more on the story.
By Abraham Shanedling

A new report has disclosed that Cuban weapons found on board a ship bound for North Korea violated United Nations sanctions on North Korea.

The report, posted by 38 North, includes pictures of weapons and a scanned cargo manifest of the North Korean-flagged Chong Chon Gang, which was intercepted on July 15 in the Panama Canal with 25 containers of Cuban military equipment. The military equipment was not listed on the ship’s manifest and included two MiG-21 jet fighters, anti-aircraft systems, and missile parts.
Current UN sanctions ban North Korea from trading arms in order to deprive the regime of resources because of its pursuit of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles.

Check out The Miami Herald for more on this story.