It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Blix: U.S. Not Committed to Nuclear "Bargain" (NPT) (moved from ATSNN)

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 10 2005 @ 05:44 AM
Washington is not taking its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty as seriously as it once did according to former chief U.N. weapons inspector, Hans Blix. "Why are you complaining about (North Korea) breaching the treaty if treaties are not binding?" he, an international lawyer asked rhetorically. Blix's comments came at the twice a decade review of the NPT which is currently stalled due to a lack of a stated agenda.
UNITED NATIONS - Washington isn't taking "the common bargain" of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty as seriously as it once did, and that's dimming global support for the U.S. campaign to shut down the North Korean and Iranian nuclear programs, the former chief U.N. weapons inspector said.

Undersecretary of State John R. Bolton, by questioning the value of treaties and international law, has also damaged the U.S. position, Hans Blix said.

"There is a feeling the common edifice of the international community is being dismantled," the Swedish arms expert said.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

This is an extremely topical story and needs to be addressed. It pertains to the current U.S stand-offs with Iran and North Korea. Mr.Blix points to an extremely important fact, the Bush administration does not view its obligations in pre-existing international treaties as legally binding and concrete yet demands that states such as North Korea and Iran should.

The United States currently has a schizophrenic policy of international treaties. It will not adhere to them itself yet demands, with threat of force, that every other nation on the globe does.

Just what exactly is the United States requirements under the NPT? It agreed that in exchange for the non-nuclear states not striving for nuclear weapons that the United States will negotiate with the other nuclear states to dismantle and disarm its nuclear arsenal. To this date it has not negotiated to disarm itself of nuclear weapons. Why should the non-nuclear states hold up their end of bargain if the nuclear equiped nations (U.S, Britain, Russia, France and China) fail to disarm. The NPT has been in effect for over 35 years, they cant say that they havent had enough time to disarm.

As an addendum its interesting to see how well the United States regards the NPT, which it is forcing North Korea and Iran to adhere to.

The NPT is the most widely accepted arms control agreement. As of early 2000 a total of 187 states were Parties to the NPT. Cuba, Israel, India, and Pakistan were the only states that were not members of the NPT.

3 of only 4 non-NPT signatories nations in the entire World are close U.S allies. Interesting...

Cake and eat it too? You be the judge.

Related News Links:

Related Discussion Threads:

[edit on 10/5/05 by subz]

posted on May, 10 2005 @ 12:16 PM
The lies and propaganda are permeating to Reuters already. Some sort of military action is going to happen in Iran, its inevitable.

Raising the stakes ahead of the June 17 vote, a senior official said Tehran had decided to resume some weapons-related nuclear work very soon, a move the United States and the EU have said would see
Iran's case sent to the U.N. Security Council.

Thats a complete and utter lie. They have not carried out ANY weapons related nuclear work. Who was this "senior official" and why the hell would he contradict his government and put them in the firing line??

Iran, which rejects U.S. claims it is seeking nuclear arms, said it will resume processing uranium into a gas that can be used to make fuel for either atomic reactors or atom bombs.

That doesnt sound too concrete does it? They were so certain in the first paragraph now they are not. Now they are saying "Iran" has said it will resume processing Uranium for either fuel or bombs. Who writes this crap?

Yahoo! Article

[edit on 10/5/05 by subz]

new topics

log in