Cover Image


View/Hide Left Panel

Recent military-political developments and trends in the proliferation of nuclear weapons suggest a growing nuclear threat to the world community from several Islamic countries in the Middle East and in South-East Asia. One has to consider the possibility of the formation of new military blocs in these world regions that could be integrated with the Islamic states of the former USSR. Moved not only by their geostrategic interests, but also by their religious-fanatical motives, these blocks may become extremely dangerous to the southern regions of Russia. The commonality of their social-historical, national, and religious characteristics, and the one-dimensional socio-political structure of the states in the Middle East and the Islamic states of the former USSR, are worrisome to the West European countries and United States. This creates favorable conditions for cooperation with Russia and other Slavic countries in military-political, strategic and scientific areas. It is pertinent to note that United States and its NATO partners are worried not so much about the possibility of proliferation of strategic weapons to potentially dangerous countries (which can be controlled by national technical measures and covert intelligence), but by "brain drain" from the former USSR. These apprehensions further increase the necessity of a radical review of previous agreements on nuclear issues. From these circumstances quite naturally grows the number of UN members who support strict adherence to the provisions of the treaty on non-proliferation of nuclear weapons and who suppose that it should resolve the following problems:

  • to establish a barrier to proliferation of nuclear weapons in other countries;

  • to promote a reduction of nuclear and conventional weapons;

  • to safeguard peace-loving countries from international nuclear terrorism and blackmail;

  • to widen peaceful nuclear cooperation between states.

The Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons was approved by the UN General Assembly in June 1968 and entered into force March 5, 1970. It was signed by the United States, USSR, Great Britain, France, and 49 other states. By the end of 1988 the number of such states reached 186. Certain states, however, declined to sign it and covertly or overtly are trying to develop nuclear weapons. This means that the treaty is not specific enough; it is too declarative and liberal, although it contains political, legal, economic, logistical-technical and other assurances on the global, regional and national levels. Specifically, these assurances include monitoring based on the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) agreements on the principles of nuclear exports, on rendering mutual technical assistance, and consultations on problems of peaceful nuclear use. At the same time, the physical commonness of peaceful and military nuclear technologies harbors obvious dangers and requires a more precise definition of scientific, design, trade and military aspects of implementation of this treaty. This will allow the most advanced nuclear states (primarily the United States and Russia) to conduct a common purposeful policy of controlling the non-proliferation of nuclear technologies in potentially dangerous states, including states that did not sign the non-proliferation treaty. Without these measures the international policy to limit and reduce nuclear weapons

The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement