![Visit MIIS [ Image: MIIS Logo ]](/_navimages/logos/miis_logo_white_260x55_80percent.png "Visit MIIS [ Image: MIIS Logo ]"){kind=logo}
James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies
|
| You are here: HOME > Publications > Global Partnership > Page |
Global Partnership Resource Page
Summit Summaries
On June 1, Presidents Putin and Bush announced that they had exchanged instruments of ratification and signed a protocol regarding the Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty, bringing the treaty into force.[1] They also discussed post-war Iraq, cooperation on missile defense, amending the Jackson-Vanik amendment (restricting US trade with Russia), and strengthening cooperation to promote international strategic stability. The two leaders discussed joint efforts to strengthen the nonproliferation regime and create more serious barriers in the path of a possible spread of weapons of mass destruction, particularly of nuclear weapons.[2] They urged North Korea to dismantle its nuclear weapons program, and agreed on the importance of preventing Iranian development of a nuclear weapon. However, Putin noted that he was "against using the pretext of" a nuclear weapon program in Iran as "an instrument of unfair competition against us."[3] Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs Igor Ivanov explained that this statement referred to "groundless complaints ... made against Russian companies ... not ... because those companies were really in violation of something, but just in order to create artificial difficulties and thus obtain advantages in the competitive struggle."[4] A senior White House official, however, explained the remarks as meaning "everybody ought to be equally concerned about [Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons], and not just Russia ... everybody ought to be concerned about not allowing the Iranians to use civilian nuclear programs" to pursue a weapon program.[5] Despite this difference, Putin said that Russian and US views on Iran were quite close. As for nuclear assistance programs for Russia, there were no media reports indicating how far any talks on this issue might have gone. Before Bush left on his European trip, members of the House Subcommittee on International Terrorism and Subcommittee on Europe sent the president a letter urging him to emphasize the issue of safeguarding the old Soviet arsenal during his discussions with Putin. However, these talks appear to have been largely left for discussion at Evian, during the annual G8 summit. In a final indication of their cordial relations, Bush invited Putin to come to Camp David in September.[6] [View the text of the letter]
The summit of G8 leaders in Evian-les-Bains, France, focused a lot of attention on nonproliferation issues. The Leaders' Statement issued at the end of the summit made a strong declaration regarding North Korea and Iran, urging the former to "visibly, verifiably and irreversibly dismantle any nuclear weapons programs," and stating that the leaders "will not ignore the proliferation implications of Iran's advanced nuclear program."[7] A new initiative to improve the security of radioactive sources was launched at the summit. The G8 Statement and G8 Action Plan on the initiative indicate that the G8 will be involved in efforts to track radioactive sources and recover orphaned sources, improve export controls, increase physical protection, and ensure the safe disposal of spent sources, providing international assistance and technical support for these efforts. A progress report on the Global Partnership was also presented at Evian. The Global Partnership Senior Officials Group, established to review progress and coordinate projects, focused on four goals during the past year. The goal of expanding participation has broadened the partnership to include non-G8 countries, such as Finland, Norway, Poland, Sweden, and Switzerland. A second goal, to obtain financial contributions, has resulted in a total of $17.85 billion in commitments (see chart). The third goal, of initiating and developing concrete projects, has also begun to move forward (concrete project commitments are also listed in the chart). The final goal, of translating the Global Partnership Guidelines (see "The 10 plus 10 over 10 Initiative") into concrete actions and agreements, has been a primary task of the Senior Officials Group, since these actions and agreements are crucial to the initiation of projects. The annual report noted progress on the issue of tax exemption, but pointed out that agreements have yet to be tested in practice. As for liability protection, the report noted progress, but there is as yet no final agreement. The report also observed that "Partners agreed that there should be uniform treatment of donors." This is presently not the case, as the United States receives more liability protection under the CTR Agreement than do other assistance providers. Access has also remained a problem.[8] The latest proposal, to reduce prior notification from 45 to 30 days through a procedure of annual lists, is still judged insufficient by some Partners. US President George Bush presented a new proposal, the Proliferation Security Initiative (which he initially announced two days earlier during his trip to Poland), to allow the interception of ships and airplanes if they were suspected of carrying weapons destined for terrorism.[9] The United States had consulted on the matter with the United Kingdom, Spain, Poland, Australia, and others before announcing the initiative, which would involve both "legal and actual capabilities," according to a senior White House official.[10] France indicated that it would have to study the matter, so no agreement was made at Evian. The White House has indicated that it would like to see a conference on the initiative held in July. Agreement on counterproliferation was similarly lacking at Evian. In the run-up to the summit, Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Aleksandr Yakovenko spoke out against counterproliferation, saying that any attempts to oppose WMD proliferation by force or by a threat of force would only provoke an acceleration of the nuclear arms race.[11] Although the summit statements on Iran and North Korea used tough language, French President Jacques Chirac, Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi and others later said that the statements did not imply that the use of force was possible. Nonetheless, a senior Bush administration official said the tough language was supported by France, Germany, and Russia. He also said it was the Russians who suggested the declaration that North Korean behavior was undermining agreements curbing nuclear arms.[12] According to one administration official, the Evian statement did indeed imply that the use of force was possible.[13] The final
important announcement coming out of Evian was Putin's apparent promise
that Russia would not send nuclear fuel to Iran until Tehran had signed an
agreement regarding the return of such fuel to Russia, and indicating that
Moscow would push Tehran to sign the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Additional Protocol. This, together with the G8 leaders' statement on
Iran, should give the IAEA a stronger hand when it takes up the Iranian issue on
June 16. However, on June 4 the Russian Ministry of Atomic Energy said that
nuclear fuel shipments were still scheduled to go ahead. The Russian Ministry
of Foreign Affairs has indicated that it would issue a statement, clarifying
Putin's Evian promise, on June
5.[14]
|
| Return to Top |
@CNS Updates