WMD & GLOBAL SECURITY:

Time for Reform

The international collective system of security
must be reinvigorated to combat the spread of
weapons of mass destruction.

by Mohamed ElBaradei

fter the war in Iraq, a central question the

A international community will have to face

is whether the pre-emptive use of force
should be the model to address threats of
nuclear weapons and other weapons of
mass destruction (WMD), or whether alternatives exist that
are less unpredictable in outcome and less costly in terms
of human life.
Until the end of the Cold War, a bipolar world
maintained international security through a combined
system of alliances, spheres of influence, global and
regional multilateral institutions — including the United
Nations — and ultimately a balance of power through
IAEA Director General ElBaradei interviewed on CNN.
nuclear deterrence. With the disintegration of the Soviet
empire, however, a uni-polar world has emerged that has
dramatically changed the landscape of international
security, with the disappearance of the Cold War rivalries independent societies of many formerly suppressed
and many of the associated old alliances and spheres of countries and peoples, it has also reawakened old ethnic
influence. conflicts and cultural disputes that, as a result of the
And while in the immediate aftermath of the Cold War restraint imposed by the superpower rivalries, had lain
many preached the advent of a new world order — and dormant both between and within nations. And with the
expressed hope of a new paradigm of security that would United Nations unable to adjust its system of collective
be rooted in the UN system of collective security — these security to cope with the changing realities and the new
hopes have not fully materialized. For while the end of the threats, some of the more recent conflicts have been badly
Cold War has permitted the emergence into free, handled, as in Burundi, Rwanda and Somalia, or dealt with

4 IAEA BULLETIN 45/1

outside of the UN, as in Kosovo. And all the while, old economic powers in today’s world. In addition, new
conflicts such as those in the Middle East and Jammu and working concepts, tools and methods are needed to ensure
Kashmir continue to fester. that the Council can effectively shoulder its role as the
But with all the changes in international relations since body with “the primary responsibility” for the maintenance
the end of the Cold War, nuclear weapons have continued of international peace and security. For example,
to have a position of prominence as the currency of mechanisms are needed for early intervention to settle
ultimate power. And although a number of countries such emerging disputes, and forces should be at the disposal of
as South Africa have given up their nuclear weapons or the Security Council that are adequate to deal with the
nuclear weapons ambitions, the nuclear umbrellas of myriad post-Cold War situations and disputes — from
NATO and other alliances continue to expand. More supervising elections to maintaining law and order and
importantly, the objectives embodied in the Treaty on the controlling borders. Sanctions should also be developed
Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), developed that target governments rather than the governed. And use
in the early 1970s to control the spread of nuclear weapons of the veto power should be subject to agreed limitations —
and to move us towards nuclear disarmament, are under confined possibly to those situations in which the use of
growing stress. Several thousands of nuclear weapons force is to be authorized — to prevent having the entire
continue to exist in the five nuclear weapon States party to Council fall victim to squabbling among its permanent
the NPT (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and members. The Council should also agree to broaden its
the United States). And of the three countries that remain definition of what situations “constitute a threat to
outside the NPT, two — India and Pakistan — have in the international peace and security” to cover efforts to acquire
last few years demonstrated their nuclear weapons WMD, as well as the brutal suppression of human rights, in
capability, while the third — Israel — is generally presumed order to be able to intervene early and effectively in these
to have such weapons. Most recently North Korea, a party situations.
to the NPT, has decided to walk away from the Treaty and, 2. We must create an environment in which the use
not unlike some other parties to the Treaty, is suspected of of force, as foreseen in the UN Charter, is limited to
working to acquire nuclear weapons. Other States, on the situations of self-defence or enforcement measures
other hand, have opted for the “poor man’s alternative” by authorized by the Security Council. Pre-emptive strikes,
pursuing the acquisition of chemical and biological however tempting, can send the global community into
weapons. And in the aftermath of the events of 11 uncharted and dangerous territory. Only action by the
September 2001, the threat of WMD proliferation gained a Council will bring legitimacy and international support to
new dimension: the prospect of sub-national groups such a measure. More importantly, these limitations will
seeking to acquire and use these weapons. restrict the use of force to those situations where force is
Faced with this reality, must we conclude that it is futile the last and only alternative.
to try to combat the spread of WMD through a collective, 3. We must take concrete steps to delegitimize the
rule-based system of international security — and that we acquisition or use of WMD, and develop alternative
have to acquiesce to living in a world plagued with the security doctrines that do not rely on them. As with the
constant threat of a nuclear holocaust or other disasters? I NPT, the Chemical Weapons Convention and the
do not believe so. But reliance on a system of collective Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention both lack
security to curb the proliferation of WMD will require bold universal membership, and the latter has no verification
thinking, a willingness to work together, and sustained mechanism.
effort. The following steps, among others, are in my view Clearly, a new approach is needed — an approach that
urgently required: applies to all WMD, with a number of essential features:
1. We must modernize the collective security system universal adherence to conventions that ban WMD; robust
of the United Nations Charter — in terms of both and intrusive systems of verification for all WMD
preventive diplomacy and enforcement action. This conventions; a detailed plan and the determination to
system, built half a century ago to establish world order on eliminate WMD in all States to abolish over time the
the basis of common values and principles, has not fully divide between the “haves” and “have nots”; new doctrines
matured and has not worked as planned. On the other hand, of security that do not rely on the deterrent effect of nuclear
to destroy it is to go back to a Hobbesian world. weapons; and reliable enforcement measures, under the
What must be changed? To start, the Security Council aegis of the Security Council, to effectively counter efforts
should be reconstituted to include the major political and by any country to illicitly acquire WMD.

June 2003 5
 4. We must develop a comprehensive
regime to ensure that WMD and their
components will not fall into the hands of
GLOBAL REGIME FOR
terrorists. This demands an effective global NUCLEAR ARMS CONTROL
approach to the physical protection of nuclear

P
arties to the global Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
and other radioactive material and associated (NPT) – a cornerstone of the efforts to prevent the
facilities, better controls for chemical and spread of nuclear weapons and advance
biological agents, and an effective approach to disarmament — met at the United Nations in Geneva in April
export controls worldwide. and May 2003 to continue laying the groundwork for the
5. We must address decisively chronic Treaty’s next Review Conference in 2005. Another
disputes that create the greatest incentives for preparatory meeting is planned for 2004.
acquiring WMD. It is instructive that the majority
of suspected efforts to acquire WMD are to be The NPT entrusts the IAEA with specific roles as the
found in the Middle East, a hotbed of instability for international safeguards inspectorate and as a multilateral
over half a century. In any future Middle East channel for transferring peaceful applications of nuclear
settlement, it is essential that regional security technology. In an IAEA statement to the latest NPT
arrangements — including the establishment of a Preparatory Committee session, Mr. Piet de Klerk, Director
of the Office of External Relations and Policy Coordination,
region free from WMD — be pursued as part and
cited “critical challenges” facing the multilateral regime.
parcel of such a settlement. The same should apply
They include the effort to verify Iraq’s nuclear capabilities;
in any future settlement of such disputes, including
the Democratic People Republic of Korea’s (DPRK’s)
the one on the Korean Peninsula.
defiance of its NPT safeguards obligations; failure of some
6. Finally, we must work collectively to
countries to conclude and bring into force NPT safeguards
address global sources of insecurity and agreements and slow progress on the conclusion and entry
instability, including the widening divide into force of additional protocols that grant the IAEA greater
between rich and poor, in which two-fifths of inspection rights; and stagnation on moving towards nuclear
the world’s population lives on less than two disarmament and towards universality. “For the nuclear
dollars per day; the chronic lack in many parts of arms control regime to maintain its integrity, progress must
the world of good governance and respect for occur on all these fronts,” the statement said.
human rights, with despots taking refuge under
the cloak of “sovereignty”; and the increasingly Iraq: Regarding nuclear inspections in post-war Iraq, the
perceived schisms between cultures and statement noted that the IAEA mandate in Iraq remains valid
civilizations. Effective alleviation of these causes and has not changed, and that the IAEA is the sole body
of insecurity will require adequate financial with legal authority to verify Iraq’s nuclear disarmament.
assistance by the developed countries — The Agency continues to stand ready to resume its Security
assistance that now shockingly stands at only Council and NPT-mandated verification activities in Iraq, as
0.23% of the combined gross national income of well as other projects, when circumstances permit.
those countries. Effective remedy will also
DPRK: Regarding the DPRK, the statement noted that,
require the dynamic involvement of international
among other developments, IAEA safeguards inspectors
institutions, governments and civil society to
are no longer in the country, and that the IAEA Board has
encourage interaction among cultures and people;
reported the DPRK’s continuing non-compliance with its
to disseminate practices of good governance and safeguards agreement to the UN Security Council and
to monitor respect for human rights. General Assembly.
This is a tall order. But if our aim is to spare
the next generation the scourge of a new century For more information, including the full text of the IAEA
of war in which humanity could self-destruct, we statement, visit the IAEA web pages reporting on
have no other alternative. developments related to the NPT, Iraq, and the DPRK at
http://www.iaea.org/worldatom/.
Mohamed ElBaradei is Director General of the
International Atomic Energy Agency. The essay
expresses his personal views.

6 IAEA BULLETIN 45/1