| ID | 079623 |
| Title Proper | Debating disarmament |
| Other Title Information | interpreting article VI of the treaty on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons |
| Language | ENG |
| Author | Ford, Christopher A |
| Publication | 2007. |
| Summary / Abstract (Note) | The author offers a close analysis of Article VI of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), the treaty's only article dealing with disarmament, focusing upon both its text and negotiating history, and assesses its applicability as a standard for judging treaty compliance. The author critiques comments on Article VI made by the International Court of Justice in a 1996 case as legally ill founded and conceptually incoherent as a compliance yardstick. The only interpretation of Article VI consistent with its text and history, the author argues, is that it - as it says - merely requires all states to pursue negotiations in good faith; specific disarmament steps are not required. Claims that the 2000 NPT Review Conference imposed new legal obligations for disarmament or altered the meaning of Article VI are found to be mistaken; although the conference could theoretically have adopted interpretive criteria for understanding the meaning of Article VI, it did not in fact do so. Applying his Article VI compliance standard to the case of U.S. compliance, and comparing modern circumstances with those during the Cold War, the author also describes what he says is an excellent U.S. record of Article VI compliance |
| `In' analytical Note | Nonproliferation Review Vol. 14, No.3; 2007: p401 - 428 |
| Journal Source | Nonproliferation Review Vol. 14, No.3; 2007: p401 - 428 |
| Key Words | Nuclear Weapons ; Nonproliferation Regime ; Article VI ; International Court of Justice ; Disarmament ; Treaty on the NOn-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons |