International Atomic Energy Agency

Transcription

1 International Atomic Energy Agency Background Guide Written by: Austin Thomas, Baldwin Wallace University The International Atomic energy Agency (IAEA) is the primary international organization devoted to ensuring the safe advancement and use of nuclear technology across the globe. Founded in 1957 as an organization independent of the United Nations through an international treaty, the organization still reports to both the General Assembly and the Security Council on issues pertaining to nuclear proliferation, technology, and use. The main function of the IAEA is to serve as a monitoring and reporting group for nuclear issues. To achieve this mission, the organization works directly with member states to ensure compliance with international law and promote best practices regarding the use of nuclear technology. I. Addressing the Growing Concern of Nuclear Proliferation in the Middle East Since the discovery of nuclear energy and the defensive capabilities that can be utilized with the energy source, the world has quickly expanded its nuclear arsenal. In the world today, there is an estimated 14,935 nuclear weapons spread out among 9 countries, a majority within the United States of America and the Russian Federation. 1 The stockpile of nuclear arsenals has gone down since the establishment of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) created in 1968 but the technology still threatens to expand to other state actors known as nuclear proliferation. 2 The Middle East is the most feared to undergo nuclear proliferation and with two state actors already in control of nuclear arms, the fear has become more plausible. Though the creation of the NPT has resulted in a drastic decline in nuclear arsenal development, there are still state actors who do not abide to the treaty s regulations this includes four non-signatories. These four states who have abstained from meeting the treaty s 1 Global Nuclear Weapons: Modernization Remains the Priority. Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, 3 July Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs. 1

2 demands include Israel, India, North Korea and Pakistan. The two non-signatories of Israel and Pakistan have threatened the balance of power within the Middle East. Rumors of nuclear weapon development in Israel and confirmed nuclear tests conducted by Pakistan have created an uneven balance of power in the Middle East. This shifted balance towards the two countries created concerns of a domino effect that would result in an increase of nuclear arms development in the Middle East. Fear of nuclear proliferation increased when Israel bombed an Iraqi nuclear reactor believed to be used for weapon purposes and when the IAEA in 2003 discovered Iranian development of fissile material polonium Iraq was issued Resolution 687 by the United Nations and ordered to destroy its stockpile overseen by the IAEA. Development of potential weaponized nuclear materials resulted in heavy sanctions to be placed on Iran by the UN Security Council in 2007 under resolution Fortunately, proliferation has only been isolated to Pakistan and Israel but the threat of nuclear development is still readily available in the Middle East. The problem with preventing nuclear proliferation in the Middle East is the inability to successfully garner global support to unify over the issue and take successive action towards stripping nuclear arms from established countries. Imbalance of power has led to other countries taking the liberty to create arms to successfully counteract potential attacks. Pakistan attributes the development of its nuclear weapons to the same technology being produced in India a country that has been engaged in conflict with Pakistan for centuries. Iranian development of its nuclear program has also been believed to be a result of the Israeli nuclear threat. 5 State support for the push of Pakistan and Israel to join the NPT or to take measures to remove their nuclear arsenal is small due to their associated allies. Both Pakistan and Israel are supported by the United States of America deterring a push for other state involvement. Without the signature on the NPT, the two countries are permitted to develop and acquire nuclear arms and due to the lack of state resistance to their non-signatories position, the threat of nuclear proliferation becomes alarming. Recently, state support on preventing nuclear proliferation has been hindered with the United States withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). The JCPOA was established on July 14 th 2015 by China, France, Germany, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom, the United States, the High Representative of the European Union, and the Islamic Republic of Iran under Resolution The resolution reaffirms the commitment from Iran towards following IAEA standards with their nuclear plants including the deconstruction of 3 Pan, Esther. Iran: Curtailing the Nuclear Program. Council on Foreign Relations, 16 February Security Council Tightens Sanctions Against Iran Over Uranium Enrichment. UN News, 24 March Mizokami, Kyle. Iran Fears Israel for One Reason: Nuclear Weapons. The National Interest, 30 April Resolution 2231 (2015). United Nations Security Council. 2

3 central centrifuges seen in United States withdrawal from the program and the reapplication of sanctions threatens to remove the agreement as a whole. Destruction of the JCPOA prevents the IAEA from conducting in-depth evaluations of the nuclear facilities potentially allowing the development of enriched nuclear materials to be formed. Even with the European signatories staying steadfast against the United States for backing out of the agreement, the troubled economy of Iran threatens to make the possibility of proliferation a realistic outcome. No deal and sanctions could push the regime to an economic edge that could result in an overwhelming Iranian population to demand resumed nuclear energy plans regardless of United States involvement. 8 With lack of IAEA intervention due to a threatened JCPOA, the ability to construct nuclear weapons without supervision is a realistic outcome for Iran if the JCPOA continues to fail. The international community has acknowledged the fear and threat of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East but has been reluctant to deal with the issue. Public support for Israel s rumored nuclear program and Pakistan s nuclear arsenal has shown an overwhelming lack of non-proliferation ideals for western allies. This has resulted in countries to develop nuclear programs in retaliation of the imbalance of power threatening increased proliferation and a continued domino effect. The current situation under the JCPOA must also be resolved to further negate a nuclear armed Iran from developing in the Middle East. If the international community does not come together to resolve these issues of the threat of proliferation, the consequences of inaction will be felt throughout the global community. Questions to Consider What is your country s involvement with nuclear proliferation in the Middle East? Does the nuclear possession by Middle Eastern countries threaten your country s domestic security? How has your country aided in the fight to contain nuclear proliferation? Does your country support the JCPOA? 7 Implementation of the NPT Safeguards Agreement and Relevant Provisions of Security Council Resolutions in the Islamic Republic of Iran. IAEA, 18 November Slavin, Barbara. The Dangerous Consequences of US Withdrawal from the Iran Nuclear Deal. Atlantic Council, 7 May

4 II. Increasing the Remediation of Zones Contaminated by Radiation In the past, many countries mined uranium or tested nuclear arms with no consideration of environmental safety issues. Over 2056 nuclear weapons tests have been conducted since the year 1945 leaving large areas of the Earth contaminated by the copious amounts of radiation left by the tests. 9 More recently, the issue of nuclear power plant accidents such as the Japanese Fukushima meltdown has resulted in even more concerns and spread of nuclear residue. Contamination of land by radiation from nuclear energy has been a problem that the world has not unified together on solving. The IAEA in 1999 took the initiative to find ways to combat the issue and had its first meeting over the issue in Arlington Virginia to discuss the remediation of lands that were witness to these tests as well as accidents caused by nuclear energy. The Arlington Conference started a public dialogue about remediation efforts of contaminated land areas resulting in a second conference to be held in Astana Kazakhstan in 2009 to discuss the cleanup of uranium mining areas that still held contaminated tools and uranium deposits. 10 Before the IAEA s meeting, there was no global consensus on radiological principles and no plan on how to address clean-up of contaminated areas but because of these meetings, a plan was developed. Though substantive efforts from the IAEA and the global community have been made to aid in the restoration of contaminated areas, issues still arise from the overall cost of these areas. During the Cold War, a majority of Uranium mining took place in Africa and even more recently, mining continues resulting in 16.8% of the world s uranium to be from the continent. These mines are subject to poor infrastructural conditions and threaten to be on brink of collapse but there is a lack of incentive to take care of the issue. This is because the costs are exponential to remediate an area exposed to radiation where the United States spends billions annually to control their own uranium mines. 11 African countries that are exposed to the 46% of the world s nuclear waste are unable to provide economic funds towards helping remediate these lands. Also, many countries exploited for their Uranium mining have little knowledge about radiation cleanup efforts and the tools necessary for remediation. IAEA during the Astana Conference tried combatting this issue by creating the Environmental Management and Remediation Network (ENVIRONET). 12 ENVIRONET is an initiative to organize training, provide coordinated support and overall be a tool of international information exchange for countries seeking remediation efforts in their country. This not only helps start dialogue about restoration options and techniques but it also helps countries potentially acquire the necessary tools or funding for the remediation process to occur. Even with initiatives like ENVIRONET, the lack of ability or incentive to combat the issue persists as issues of radiation are not understood or affected the populace yet. Remediation, though being the most suitable option for cleanup operations, tends to be a lengthy process. When the Fukushima reactor underwent a meltdown in 2011, it labeled 6 cities uninhabitable. After 6 years of decontamination efforts were initiated under the IAEA and the Japanese 9 Kimball, Daryl. The Nuclear Testing Tally. Arms Control Association, September Remediation of Land Contaminated by Radioactive Material Residues. IAEA, May Fighting Radioactive Contamination in Africa. Tufts, 18 December IAEA, May

5 government, evacuation orders for four towns have been lifted. 13 Even with the resulting efforts of the IAEA and the Japanese government, it took 6 years to get 4 out of the 6 towns accessible for human use once again. Without these safety efforts established, it may have taken longer as seen with the most extreme nuclear meltdown of Chernobyl. Chernobyl is an example of when too much radiation prevents a well-organized restoration attempt to be initiated. The collapsed reactor released 5200 PBq into the atmosphere radiation reaching all the way into Western Europe to Germany. 14 Unfortunately, during this time, the IAEA s remediation focus and practices were not available preventing an effective response to the crisis that lead to the deaths of 50 people and the spread of radiation that could result in deaths of roughly 4000 people overtime. 15 Necessity of the increased spread of remediation is optimal for maintaining the safety of citizens across the globe. Radiation does not go away and lasts up to years seen recently when the Democratic Republic of Algeria called the IAEA to investigate a site of nuclear arms testing by the French. The location was in the Sahara and testing of nuclear arms beneath the surface started in 1960 and lasted until Algeria was concerned of potentially high contaminated sands spreading to urban cities or even across borders. 16 Tests proved the sand to be very radioactive even after the 50 year span since the tests had first been conducted. Concerns of radiation poisoning was small due to location of tests but nomads and small villages did lay close enough for the sand particles affected by the radiation to spread, damaging public health. 17 Though the IAEA has made large gains in the spread of awareness and treatment of areas exposed due to radiation, various countries are facing radiation problems due to uranium mining or nuclear weapon testing. This radiation has proven to be problematic and a threat to the populace of member states. Without increased support and intervention by the IAEA into these areas, contamination zones could result in health issues or the spread of radiation to potential water sources. The international community needs to come together to help spread awareness of the issues of nuclear contamination aiding in the support of programs like ENVIRONET to help remediate these areas by offering education and resources for containment. Questions to Consider Does your country have radiation containment problems? Does public support of remediation programs further your foreign policy goals? Has your country dealt with radiation issues in the past? Was your country present at the Arlington or Astana conferences? 13 Takenaka, Kiyoshi; Teppei, Kasai. Six Years After Fukushima Nuclear Disaster, Residents Trickle Back to Deserted Towns. Reuters, 7 March Timeline The Chernobyl Gallery. 15 Chernobyl: the True Scale of the Accident. World Health Organization, 5 September Radiological Conditions at the Former French Nuclear Test Sites in Algeria: Preliminary Assessment and Recommendations. IAEA, IAEA,