Latest news with #NuclearNonproliferationTreaty
Asahi Shimbun
4 days ago
- Politics
- Asahi Shimbun
Sanseito hopeful supports Japan entering nuclear arms race
An Upper House election candidate from the rising opposition party Sanseito is championing a nuclear-armed Japan, a provocative idea generally endorsed by the party leader. Saya, who is running in the Tokyo constituency on the July 20 ballot, was asked about nuclear armament and the Japan-U.S. alliance on an online program Nippon Television Network Corp. distributed on July 3. 'By acquiring nuclear weapons, even North Korea has become able to talk with U.S. President Donald Trump in the international community,' said Saya, who goes by only one name. 'Nuclear armament is one of the most inexpensive and effective measures to ensure safety,' she said after noting that it is her personal view. Speaking to reporters in Kobe on July 17, Sanseito leader Sohei Kamiya said Japan should consider arming itself with nuclear weapons. 'I do not think we should immediately possess them,' he said. '(But) we must not shy away from a discussion.' Japan must first withdraw from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty should it decide to go nuclear. Saya has come under fire on social media not only for her remarks on nuclear armament but also for her pro-conscription comments made in 2023. 'In military service, the educational role played by conscription and what cannot be learned in school education can be taught and experienced,' she said on a YouTube program. Still, she expressed a negative view of immediately restoring the draft. Kamiya asked reporters on July 17 why they questioned the comments on conscription that Saya made before joining Sanseito. The Russian state-owned news agency Sputnik posted a video interview with Saya on social media on July 14. Kamiya demanded a party staff member resign for arbitrarily giving permission for the interview. Sanseito also apologized for Saya's 'inappropriate' action on the social media account X on July 12 after she replied to and thanked a poster who apparently called on others to vote for her and her party in exchange for food and drink. The Public Offices Election Law prohibits provision of food and drink to voters in election campaigns, in principle.
New York Times
6 days ago
- Business
- New York Times
Europeans Threaten to Reimpose Tough U.N. Nuclear Sanctions on Iran
Britain, France and Germany have agreed to restore punishing U.N. sanctions on Iran by the end of August if there is no concrete progress on a deal to limit its nuclear activities, according to Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot of France. The announcement was part of an effort to push Tehran into renewed negotiations on restricting its nuclear program. Mr. Barrot said France and its partners that remain in the 2015 Iran nuclear deal were 'justified in reapplying global embargoes on arms, banks and nuclear equipment that were lifted 10 years ago' under the deal, which expires in mid-October. 'Without a firm, tangible and verifiable commitment from Iran, we will do so by the end of August at the latest,' Mr. Barrot said on Tuesday in Brussels. After Israel and the United States bombed Iranian nuclear sites last month, Iran suspended cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency, whose inspectors left. They try to monitor Iran's nuclear program and its stockpiles of highly enriched uranium, some of which is near-bomb-grade and could eventually produce up to 10 nuclear weapons, the agency has said. Iran must allow inspections under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, but the inspectors also monitored its compliance with the 2015 nuclear deal, and its violations of that agreement. The Europeans are hoping that the prospect of restored multilateral sanctions will persuade Iran to restore its cooperation with the agency and also renew serious negotiations on restricting or eliminating its ability to enrich uranium. So far, there has been no progress since the bombings to renew talks between Iran and the United States on a new nuclear deal. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Bangkok Post
04-07-2025
- Politics
- Bangkok Post
Nuclear proliferation cannot be bombed away
In 1966, the United States, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, France, and China not only were the only countries that possessed nuclear weapons; they also had enough wisdom to recognise the dangers posed by nuclear proliferation. Despite their many and deep political differences, they arrived at a consensus to halt the further dissemination of "nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices". Under the resulting 1970 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), non-nuclear states agreed not to pursue nuclear weapons and to accept International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards on all their nuclear activities. In return, the five nuclear-weapon states committed to negotiate "in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race … and to nuclear disarmament". With 191 signatories, the NPT is the most widely adopted international agreement after the United Nations Charter. The only countries not to adhere to it were India, Pakistan, and Israel. Each went on to develop nuclear weapons. North Korea, which initially joined the treaty, later withdrew to build its own nuclear arsenal. The five original nuclear-weapon states did not keep their end of the bargain regarding disarmament. On the contrary, they have been using AI and other technologies to modernise their arsenals. The world's nuclear warheads total more than 12,000 and have become the preeminent sign of a country's power and prestige. Just listen to Russia's leaders. Throughout their war in Ukraine, they have brandished their nuclear arsenal as a badge of invincibility. They know that the risk of a nuclear holocaust will deter all other powers from challenging them directly. Similarly, because North Korea has armed itself with nuclear weapons, the US has taken a softer approach in dealing with it, relying on diplomacy and economic incentives. By contrast, in Libya, Moammar Gadhafi agreed to abandon his nascent nuclear programme and ended up dead, following a Nato aerial campaign against his regime. Among the lessons that have emerged in recent decades are that nuclear-weapons states have no intention of fully disarming. Worse, there is now only one nuclear arms-control treaty between Russia and the US (New Start), and it is due to expire next February. The most powerful deterrent for any state is possession of nuclear weapons or membership in an alliance that offers a nuclear umbrella (like Nato). Around 30 states either have nuclear weapons or enjoy such protection. The rest of the world, meanwhile, must hope that the nuclear powers remain on their best behaviour. The situation is especially fraught in the Middle East, a region plagued by wars, violence, instability, and a lack of comprehensive security arrangements. Add the fact that Israel is the only state in the region known to have nuclear weapons, and you have the makings for chronic insecurity. The wild card, of course, has been Iran, a country that has endured violence and tumult since the 1950s, when a US- and UK-organised coup ousted the country's first democratically elected government. In the 1980s, Iraq invaded Iran with the support of Western powers and neighbouring countries determined to crush its fledgling Islamist regime. Following eight years of brutal violence, with Iraq deploying chemical weapons extensively, the Islamic Republic came to the predictable conclusion that it needed to master nuclear-weapons technology. According to the IAEA, US, and other intelligence agencies, however, that programme essentially ended in 2003. For the last 20 years, the challenge has been to get Iran to come clean about its past undeclared activities. After a period of sanctions, US President Barack Obama decided to pursue diplomacy. The idea was to use economic incentives and various technical measures to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons and pressure it to reveal its past undeclared nuclear activities. These were the main features of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which Iran and the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (China, Russia, France, the UK, and the US), plus Germany and the European Union, signed in 2015. This framework was functioning as intended, with full compliance by Iran, until President Donald Trump abruptly withdrew the US from the agreement in 2018. Arguing that the JCPOA was only a stopgap measure, he insisted on a deal that would control not only Iran's nuclear programme but also its "disruptive" activities in the Middle East (such as its support for Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis in Yemen). As a result, Iran refused to implement some of the JCPOA's key inspection measures and started to enrich uranium to a level approaching weapons-grade. During Joe Biden's term as president, the US tried unsuccessfully to revive the JCPOA. When Mr Trump returned to the White House this year, he demanded that Iran "surrender" its right to enrichment altogether. Following a few rounds of desultory talks between the US and Iran, Israel and the US, lacking credible evidence of a nuclear-weapons programme, launched their illegal attack against Iranian nuclear and military targets. The ostensible aim was to destroy all of Iran's nuclear fuel-cycle facilities, though there have also been murmurings about triggering regime change in Iran -- a stark reminder of the rationale for the similarly illegal military interventions in Iraq and Libya. The root cause of nuclear proliferation is a state's sense of insecurity or aspiration to increase its power and influence. Iran's focus on nuclear capability stems from a yearning to prevent foreign interference, a sensitivity to the region's security imbalance, and a desire to be recognised as a regional power. Far from curtailing its nuclear ambitions, the use of force and humiliation is just as likely to strengthen its resolve. We saw this in Iraq after Israel destroyed its research reactor in 1981. The only solution to Middle East nuclear proliferation is to engage in dialogue based on mutual respect, meaningful security assurances (which can be achieved through stringent technical and inspection protocols), and economic incentives (be it the threat of sanctions or a promise to lift them). In other words, resolving the Iran nuclear question ultimately will require a return to a JCPOA-like agreement -- albeit one of unlimited duration, perhaps supplemented with an agreement on the scope of Iran's missile programme. Addressing the longstanding challenges to peace and security across the Middle East ultimately will also require a comprehensive agreement that deals with the Palestinian question, Israel's nuclear weapons, and economic and social development needs. A just peace and an inclusive security architecture are the best defences against nuclear proliferation. Since knowledge cannot be "obliterated", bombing your way to a deal will invariably prove counterproductive, threatening to bring our world one step closer to nuclear Armageddon. ©2025 Project Syndicate
Edmonton Journal
03-07-2025
- Politics
- Edmonton Journal
Iran suspends cooperation with UN nuclear watchdog 'until certain conditions are met'
Article content Iran's decision drew an immediate condemnation from Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar. Article content 'Iran has just issued a scandalous announcement about suspending its cooperation with the IAEA,' he said in an X post. 'This is a complete renunciation of all its international nuclear obligations and commitments.' Article content Saar urged European nations that were part of Iran's 2015 nuclear deal to implement its so-called snapback clause. That would reimpose all UN sanctions on it originally lifted by Tehran's nuclear deal with world powers, if one of its Western parties declares the Islamic Republic is out of compliance with it. Article content Israel is widely believed to be the only nuclear-armed state in the Middle East, and the IAEA doesn't have access to its weapons-related facilities. Article content Tammy Bruce, a spokesperson for the U.S. State Department, separately said it was 'unacceptable that Iran chose to suspend cooperation with the IAEA at a time when it has a window of opportunity to reverse course and choose a path of peace and prosperity.' Article content Article content Iran's move so far stops short of what experts feared the most. They had been concerned that Tehran, in response to the war, could decide to fully end its cooperation with the IAEA, abandon the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and rush toward a bomb. That treaty has countries agree not to build or obtain nuclear weapons and allows the IAEA to conduct inspections to verify that countries correctly declared their programs. Article content Iran's 2015 nuclear deal allowed Iran to enrich uranium to 3.67 per cent — enough to fuel a nuclear power plant, but far below the threshold of 90 per cent needed for weapons-grade uranium. It also drastically reduced Iran's stockpile of uranium, limited its use of centrifuges and relied on the IAEA to oversee Tehran's compliance through additional oversight. The IAEA served as the main assessor of Iran's commitment to the deal. Article content Article content But Trump, in his first term in 2018, unilaterally withdrew Washington from the accord, insisting it wasn't tough enough and didn't address Iran's missile program or its support for militant groups in the wider Middle East. That set in motion years of tensions, including attacks at sea and on land. Article content Iran had been enriching up to 60 per cent, a short, technical step away from weapons-grade levels. It also has enough of a stockpile to build multiple nuclear bombs, should it choose to do so. Iran has long insisted its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, but the IAEA, Western intelligence agencies and others say Tehran had an organized weapons program up until 2003. Article content Israeli airstrikes, which began June 13, decimated the upper ranks of Iran's powerful Revolutionary Guard and targeted its arsenal of ballistic missiles. The strikes also hit Iran's nuclear sites, which Israel claimed put Tehran within reach of a nuclear weapon.
Boston Globe
02-07-2025
- Politics
- Boston Globe
Iran suspends cooperation with UN nuclear watchdog
Advertisement Iran has repeatedly insisted that its nuclear program is for civilian purposes. The IAEA has said that while it had no evidence that Iran was building a weapon, the country was stockpiling around 882 pounds of highly enriched uranium, which could enable the government to build 10 bombs. It is unclear how badly the strikes damaged Iran's nuclear program. President Trump insisted it was 'obliterated,' while Rafael Grossi, the IAEA director general, said Iran could begin enriching uranium again in a 'matter of months.' One of the IAEA's main purposes is to monitor the nuclear activity of countries that have signed on to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and to try to prevent the building of nuclear weapons. Iran is a party to the treaty. Israel, which is widely believed to have nuclear weapons but has never confirmed it, is not. Advertisement The IAEA said that it was aware of the reports that Iran was suspending its cooperation and that it was waiting for further official information. Iran's hawkish parliament passed the law last week. But it had not been clear whether President Masoud Pezeshkian, considered a political moderate, would put the law into effect or try to block it. There has been widespread outrage in the Iranian government since the IAEA issued a declaration last month that Iran was not complying with its nuclear nonproliferation obligations. The agency released its findings the day before Israel launched its June 13 attack. Iranian officials argue the censure gave Israel political cover for its strikes. Iranian officials also criticized Grossi for saying there was no evidence of a systematic effort to build nuclear weapons only after Israel began its strikes. Israel's foreign minister, Gideon Sa'ar, called on Germany, France, and Britain to reimpose sanctions on Iran in response to the new law under a provision in the 2015 deal that limited the country's uranium enrichment. The deal was agreed to by the Obama administration, the other four permanent members of the UN Security Council, the European Union, and Germany. Trump pulled the United States out during his first term, but European countries have continued to adhere to it. Under a so-called 'snap back' provision in the agreement, sanctions can be reimposed if Iran is found to have violated the nuclear provisions. 'There's justification for snap back. But I don't think we're there yet,' said Sanam Vakil, the director of the Middle East and North Africa program at Chatham House in London. 'Iran is trying to calibrate the escalation. It doesn't have too many cards to play, but this is the first opening salvo.' Advertisement Germany's Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Martin Giese, called the new law a 'disastrous signal.' 'Iran's cooperation with the IAEA is essential for a diplomatic solution,' he told reporters Wednesday, urging Iran to reverse course. Iranian lawmakers have stipulated two conditions for resuming cooperation, according to Iranian state media: that the safety of its nuclear program and scientists is secured, and an acknowledgment of what it says is its right under international law to enrich uranium. Whether those conditions have been met would be decided by Iran's Supreme National Security Council, which shapes the country's security and foreign policy. During the war, Iranian lawmakers also threatened to pass a law that would withdraw Iran from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. The agreement requires transparency over its nuclear program, and a commitment not to build a nuclear bomb. By focusing on its relationship with the nuclear watchdog, Iranian officials appear to have put that threat aside. Trump has said that negotiations over Iran's nuclear program could resume as soon as this week, but Iran's foreign minister said they could start only if the United States guaranteed that it would not attack the country during talks. 'In order for us to decide to reengage, we will have to first ensure that America will not revert back to targeting us in a military attack during the negotiations,' the minister, Abbas Araghchi, told CBS News. Under its agreement with Iran, the IAEA is supposed to inspect the nuclear facilities that Iran has publicly declared, including those at Natanz and Fordo, which the United States bombed. Israeli officials say there may be secret nuclear sites that Iran has not disclosed. Advertisement
