Letter to New York Times:
Regards “Can 50 years of minimising nuclear proliferation continue” ( March 5, 2020; https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/05/opinion/minimizing-nuclear-proliferation.html) Ambassador Daalder makes the positive case for the 1970 nuclear nonproliferation treaty ( NPT).
He is right to insist that the U.S. and Russia must be joined by NPT members China, France and the U.K. in the next round of multilateral global nuclear disarmament negotiations, to fulfill the NPT Article 6 obligations which have largely been ignored by these five Permanent members (P5)of UN Security Council.
Indeed, last week Ambassador Jonathan Allen, the U.K. Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN, told a special meeting to mark the fiftieth anniversary of the NPT coming into force, that the U.K. had co-ordinated the work of the P5 on nuclear control issues.
(“The Non-Proliferation Treaty remains essential
to maintain peace and security,” Statement by Ambassador Jonathan Allen, UK Deputy
Permanent Representative to the UN, at the Security Council briefing on the
Non-Proliferation Treaty, 26 February 2020; https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/the-non-proliferation-treaty-remains-essential-to-maintain-peace-and-security)
But the day before the British Defense Secretary, Ben Wallace , told the Parliament that the U.K. was collaborating with the U.S. to modernise the plutonium warheads on the Trident strategic missile system.
In so doing, both nations would be violating Article1 of the NPT that bans such transfers of nuclear warheads. “To any recipient whatsoever, directly or indirectly.”
States cannot be in partial treaty compliance and tell the other treaty members that is sufficient.