Contents

Introduction to the committee 3

Agenda A: The Yemini Crisis
1. Introduction 4
2. History 6
3. Belligerents and other combatants 7
a. The Supreme Political Council 7
b. The Hadi government 8
c. Saudi-Arabia and the coalition 8
d. Iran and the Hezbollah 9
e. Islamic terrorist groups 11
4. Humanitarian crisis 12
5. Role of the UN and the Security Council 14
7. Conclusion and points to address 15
8. Sources 15
Agenda B: Nuclear Non-Proliferation

1. History 18
2. Articles of NPT 19
3. Pros and Cons of NPT 19
4. Sources of Search 22

1
Introduction of the Committee:

The First Committee deals with disarmament, global challenges and threats to peace that
affect the international community and seeks out solutions to the challenges in the
international security regime. It considers all disarmament and international security matters
within the scope of the UN Charter or relating to the powers and functions of any other organ
of the United Nations; the general principles of cooperation in the maintenance of
international peace and security, as well as principles governing disarmament and the
regulation of armaments; promotion of cooperative arrangements and measures aimed at
strengthening stability through lower levels of armaments. It is the only Main Committee of
the General Assembly entitled to verbatim records coverage. The Disarmament and
International Security Committee (DISEC) is the First Committee of the United Nations
General Assembly. DISEC deals with issue regarding the promotion, establishment, and
subsequent maintenance of global peace while simultaneously working to prevent weapons
proliferation. Under the UN Charter, all member states and observers of the United Nations
are automatically part of the first committee of the General Assembly, and have an equal
vote. Documents drafted by this committee require a simple majority to be passed. Like the
other committees of the United Nations General Assembly, DISEC is unable to impose
sanctions, authorize armed intervention, or pass binding resolutions. With the increase of
weapons and growing security threats, DISEC continues to grow in importance and becomes
a significant part of resolving international crises.

2
Agenda A: The Yemini
Crisis

1. Introduction

Since the 19th March 2015 the Arab country of Yemen is caught up in a devastating civil
war. Three major factions are involved in the conflict, the so-called Supreme Political Council
led by Ali Abdullah Saleh and mainly consisting of Houthi forces, the Hadi government led
by Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi and security forces loyal to him. The third party is the Al-Qaeda
in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) exerting influence on around 30% of the country. The
Islamic State is also involved controlling minor territories. Furthermore, foreign
powers are involved
supporting the different
factions. The
Supreme Political Council
is supported by Iran and
the Hezbollah and the
Hadi government by the
Saudi coalition led by
Saudi - Arabia and
supported by other
Arab countries like
Egypt, Morocco, Sudan, Green: Houthi forces
Red: Hadi-led government
Senegal, Jordan White: AQAP

and other countries from the Arab peninsula. Making it a proxy war between the two major
powers in the region Saudi-Arabia and Iran.

The humanitarian situation in Yemen is very critical at the moment due to the conflict.
According to Amnesty International, around 4600 civilians have been killed and 8000 injured
in the conflict mainly by bombings of the Saudi coalition. About 18.8 million people in
Yemen rely on humanitarian aid. Additionally since 2016 the country suffers from a

3
major cholera outbreak hitting half a million cases in August 2017 and killing 2000 citizens.
The WHO is already working with UNICEF and local health authorities to tackle the crisis.
As you can see the civil war has severe consequences for the Yemeni people. In
the following chapters we will discuss the different aspects of the conflict in more depth. 1,2,3

4
2. History

The beginning of this conflict can be dated back to 2009. From 2009 to 2011 the
government of Yemen was engaged in a conflict with the AQAP which escalated in 2011. In
January 2011 the ruling party announced to remove term limits for the current president
Saleh. Inspired by the Arab spring, this announcement triggered heavy protests forcing then
acting president Saleh to sign a deal negotiated by the Gulf Cooperation Council to resign.
Vice-president Hadi was appointed interim president for two years early 2012. However
in September 2014 Saleh took control of the capital Sanaa with the help of Houthi
rebels, overthrow the government of Hadi and claimed government power. After Saleh’s
seizing of power, the conflict escalated quickly and grew into the civil war we see today.
Since then the two parties fight for control of the country especially in the region of Aden and
the capital Sanaa.

During that conflict between the two rivaling governments, the IS got involved by carrying out
its first attack in Yemen on the 20th of March. Two suicide bombers killed 137 people at an
attack against Shia mosques. AQAP also profited from the chaos increasing their influence
in the South and midland parts of the country. However they also lost some of their territory
to the IS and the United States began to commit drone strikes against AQAP in 2017.
On the 26th of March 2015 a Saudi-led coalition announced their support for the
Hadi government and launched operation “Decisive Storm” consisting of airstrikes and a
naval blockade against the Saleh government. This operation ended in May and was
followed by a new operation called “Restoring Hope” continuing the fight against the Houthi
rebels with airstrikes and support for Hadi loyal forces. August the same year coalition ground
forces helped Hadi loyal forces to secure the region of Aden and drive the Houthi out of the
region. However since then the fight is in a stalemate. The coalition is active until
today and supports the Hadi forces with planes, ships, equipment and training.

There were three peace talks (Switzerland June and December 2015, Kuwait April 2016)
supported by the UN and the US but all of them failed. After the failing of the peace talks in
2016 the coalition continued their airstrikes against the Houthi rebels. Besides that
seven truces were established but all of them were broken. 1,2,3

5
3. Belligerents and other combatants

As mentioned above, several different parties are involved in the conflict. We will now take
a closer look at the different actors.

a. The Supreme Political Council

Before the Supreme Political Council came to power, the Houthi rebels formed the
so called Supreme Revolutionary Council which should act as an interim authority for
the country. It was given the task to form a new parliament which should then vote on a new
government. The new parliament General People’s Congress (GPC) then formed the
Supreme Political Council as the new presidential body of the country led by former
president Saleh. The Supreme Revolutionary Council handed over the power to the new
body on the 15th of August 2016. However until today the Council is not recognized
internationally as the government.

In October 2016 the Council also appointed a new government (National Salvation
government) with Abdel-Aziz bin Habtour as prime minister. The ministers were appointed
in November the same year but also this new government is not internationally
recognized. The formation of the government was heavily criticized because the UN tried to
form a unity government and the new government violates the constitution in view of the UN.
The Special Envoy of the UN for Yemen called the formation “a new and unncessesary
obstacle.”

Another speciality to consider is that the Houthi rebels belong to the Shia faith in contrast to
the Sunni dominated government of Hadi. However even though most of the Yemeni people
are Sunni, the Houthi rebels and it allied government have support among the Sunni
population probably due to the general severe situation in the country.

It is clear that with the formation of a new government only consisting of pro-Saleh
members and Houthi rebels will not be able to unify the country. Therefore it is up to the
delegates how to deal with the internationally not recognized Houthi government because
ignoring is no longer a option. 4,5,6,7,8,9

6
 b. The Hadi government

When the Houthi rebels attacked the capital Sanaa in 2014, president Hadi fled to Aden
and later was forced to leave the country and found exile in Saudi-Arabia. After Yemeni
forces loyal to him secured the region of Aden in August 2015 with support of coalition
forces, Hadi an his government established a temporary home in the city of Aden
claiming to rule the country.

Even though the government is internationally recognized in contrast to the counter

government from the Houthis, Hadi struggles to control the country because of missing
resources and especially missing control over the capital. Furthermore his government
has to deal with a secessionist movement in the South led by former governor of Aden
Aidaroos al-Zubaidi. In May this year they declared their interest secede which was
dismissed by the Hadi government. The government said that a secession of the country
would further strengthen the Houthi rebels and raise the tensions in the country. The
coalition of Saudi-Arabia supported the Southern Movement with equipment for their
struggle against the Houthi rebels however they don’t support the secession.

The government tries to work closely with the UN in solving the conflicts. The new
Secretary-General Antonio Guterres expressed its support for the Hadi government.
Besides the search for a peaceful solution, the Yemeni forces loyal to Hadi and some
tribal forces continue fighting against the Hothi rebels controlling the north of the country.
10,11,12,13,14

c. Saudi-Arabia and the coalition

As mentioned before, the coalition intervened in the conflict on the sight of Hadi in March
2015. The main motivational factor is the power struggle between Sunni and Shia
countries in the region. The Houthi rebels are Shia forces and threaten to replace a former
Sunni and therefore pro Saudi-Arabia government with a Shia and pro Iran government.
Therefore it is in the countries interest to intervene and help Hadi and his government to take
back control over the country.

The methods used by the coalition are often criticized since the airstrikes also hit civilian
targets. In a bombing of a village of Mastaba in March 2016 killed around 100 civilians, in
August 2016 an airstrike killed around 15 Yemeni students. Therefore the coalition

7
was criticized heavily by the international community and the UN for their ruthless approach
to fight against the Houthi rebels. Human Rights Watch even claims that the airstrikes are
against international law.

Since the coalition is active until today, Saudi-Arabia is key player. If the Security Council
wants to solve this conflict, they have to come to a conclusion to how to deal with the coalition
actions. 15,16,17,18

d. Iran and the Hezbollah

Iran is the other big player in the region besides Saudi-Arabia and is accused of helping the
Shi’ite Houthi rebels in their fight. There is no rock-solid evidence that the Iran is
involved but based on some hints and the geopolitical strategy of the Irani government in the
region in the past we can assume that Iran supports the rebels in some way.

The scale of support is debated among the different actors, Saudi-Arabia and the US
argue that the increasing influence of Iran justifies the large military intervention
happening right now, others say that the influence of Iran on the Houthis is exaggerated. For
example one of the Houthi commanders admitted, that Iran and the Hezbollah were training
his fighters after he surrendered. Furthermore some interrupted weapon shipments
were likely supported by the Irani government. So in contrast to Saudi-Arabia, Iran is not
directly involved in the conflict but supports the Houthi with weapons, training and technology
according to different sources. This is also more likely since US president Donald Trump

8
makes aggressive statements about the Irani regime and therefore the regime is
clutched between a Saudi-Arabia and US coalition against it forcing it to act.
19,20,21,22

9
 e. Islamic terrorist groups

The last actor to address are the Islamic State and AQAP (Al-Qaeda in the Arabian
Peninsula). As you can see on the map in point 1 AQAP controls or exerts influence on a
large part of the country in the South and East. The United States security organizations say
that AQAP is the most active branch of the Jihadist group formed by Osama bin
Laden. They estimate that the group has around 4000 supporters.

The conflict between AQAP and the Yemeni government is raging since the organization
formed in 2009, when the al-Qaeda branches of Yemen and Saudi-Arabia merged.

In 2011 the militia was able to conquer large parts in the south of the country only to be
driven back by a large offensive by a Yemeni offensive in 2012.
Before the civil war, the group was focused on organizing attacks on Western countries.
For example they claimed responsibility for the attack on the magazine Charlie Hebdo in
Paris.

After the beginning of the civil war, AQAP was able to increase its influence in the country
heavily however not uncontested. The United States under then president Obama began

10
drone strikes against the group with one killing the leader Nassar al-Wuhaysi in 2015. He
was succeeded by Qasm al-Rimi. Since Trumps presidency the drone campaign was
expanded heavily. The coalition of Saudi-Arabia, especially forces of the United Arab

Emirates, launched an offensive against AQAP driving them back significantly.

Another contestant is the Islamic State, even though both have the goal of establishing a
Sunni caliphate in the country. The IS announced 2014 that they expand their plans to form
a caliphate in the region into Yemen. AQAP refused to obey to the Islamic State
creating a conflict between the two groups. Furthermore the group fights against the
Shi’ite Houthi forces because of the ideological rivalry between the groups.

As you can see, AQAP is heavily contested in the region by all different sides. The
influence of AQAP had its peak at the beginning of the conflict, since then the
groups influence declined. However some of the tribes and parts of the population
don’t see AQAP as occupiers and are allies or supporters of the militia. They are perceived
by some as moderate Sunni militia because of their careful actions compared to other groups
like the IS or al-Qaeda under bin Laden. 23,24,25,26,27

4. Humanitarian crisis

Even though as the Security Council our focus is to resolve the conflict and mediate, we will
take a short look at the humanitarian issue since it is a driving motivational factor to get active
in the conflict. The delegates have to decide how far they want to take it into account during
the discussion and in the final resolution.

As mentioned earlier, the Yemeni civilians are experiencing a humanitarian catastrophe.

So far around 7600 people were killed and 46000 injured according to the UN. Amnesty
International estimates that 4600 of the victims were civilians. Furthermore they claim that
3 million lost their homes, and around 18.8 million Yemeni are in need of humanitarian aid.
This includes medical aid and basic needs like food, water and sanitation. The Cholera
outbreak was the latest major incident effecting the population.

The responsibility for that situation is difficult to assess regarding the number of actors
involved in the conflict. However the coalition was often accused to attack civilian targets like
11
hospitals. Furthermore the Houthi rebels limit the entry of medical or humanitarian aid into
their controlled territory. 28,29

12
5. Role of the UN and the Security Council

So far the United Nations Human Rights Council and the Security Council have issued
different resolutions regarding the civil war. Resolution A/HRC/RES/30/18 calls upon the
states involved, especially the government of Yemen to implement measure to secure
civilians in the conflict. However it doesn’t implement any specific measures by itself. The
High Commissioner for Human Rights is regularly reporting to the HRC about the current
situation and is involved by providing technical assistance for governmental institutions and
civil society organizations like the judiciary sector, development and economic, social and
cultural rights. 30,31

However more important are the actions taken by the Security Council. They have issued
seven resolutions concerning the crisis, Resolution 2014, 2051, 2140, 2201, 2216, 2266 and
2342. However since most of this resolutions only express the concern of the council about
the current and demand a ceasefire, we will only discuss those resolutions which called for
specific actions. Though it is encouraged that the delegates have a look at all of the
resolutions. You will find the links to those resolutions in the sources section of this guide.
The resolution 2140 from February 2014, shortly before the outbreak of the civil war, was the
first to call for specific actions by the Council and the international community to
tackle the crisis. First of all, the resolutions established a Committee of the Security
Council (Sanctions Committee) to monitor the freezing of assets or other resources in the
member countries owned by persons designated by this same committee because of
their involvement in the destabilization and manipulating the country and the ongoing
political transition . Furthermore it called for a travel ban for those people.

Resolution 2201 was the first resolution to specifically condemning the actions of the
Houthi rebels in the country and calls for an stop of violence and participation of all
parties in UN-brokered negotiations. Additionally and Arms embargo against the Houthi
rebels, other loyal forces to Saleh and AQAP was established with resolution 2216.
The last two resolutions 2266 and 2342 just renew the measures imposed before (travel ban,
asset freezing and arms embargo), condemning the actions undertaken by the Houthi
rebels and calling for the implementation of the political transition process.
32,33,34,35,36,37,38

13
7. Conclusion and points to address

The civil war in Yemen is one of the most complicated conflicts currently going on with 5
different belligerents each following their own interest. It is the task of this council to
define a path for this conflict to be solved. So far there are already measures in place but
they didn’t achieve lasting peace or a drop of violence. Therefore you as delegates have to
think if there are other possible measures to implement or if you’re in a dead end
without any possibilities left. Some questions the delegates should answer in a resolution:
- How to deal with the Irani government presumably supporting the rebels?
- How to deal with the activity of AQAP in the region?
- Support the coalition bombings harming civilians, condemning them as warcrimes like
other humanitarian organizations or trying to exercise control?
- Is there a possibility to extent the scale of the current measures already employed?
- Would the establishing of an Observation mission (like during the Yemeni civil war
1962), a peacekeeping or training mission by the UN help?
- Is there any possibility to force the Houthi rebels to negotiate and follow the political
transition process established after the resignation of Saleh?

These questions only summarize some problems mentioned in this study guide but have no
claim for being complete. We look forward seeing you and how you as delegates will tackle
the issue.

8. Sources

1: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-14704951
2 : http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/interactive/2015/03/timeline-yemen-houthis-
150326163406556.html
3: https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/indepth/2017/3/26/timeline-after-two-years-of-war-yemen- in-
crisis
4: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Revolutionary_Committee
5: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/07/yemen-houthi-saleh-council-formation- criticised-
160728194157722.html
6: http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/yemen-rebels-give-salvation-govt-line-912745231
7: https://www.menas.co.uk/blog/yemen-spc-legitimacy/

14
8: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-yemen-security-government/yemens-houthis-form-
government-in-setback-to-peace-process-idUSKBN13N1ZQ
9: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Political_Council
10: http://gulfnews.com/news/gulf/yemen/un-reiterates-support-for-hadi-government-in- yemen-
1.2007228
11: https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20170308-hadi-government-controls-85-of-yemen/
12: https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/news/2017/6/18/yemens-hadi-government-accepts-un-
hodeidah-plan
13: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-yemen-security-south/southern-yemen-leaders-launch-
body-seeking-split-from-north-idUSKBN18724T
14: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-yemen-security-south/yemen-government-dismisses-
southerners-secessionist-bid-idUSKBN18813W
15: https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/03/26/yemen-attack-refugee-boat-likely-war-crime
16: http://www.dw.com/en/why-is-saudi-arabia-interested-in-yemen/a-36000785
17: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/07/six-major-attacks-in-yemen-in-2016-by-
saudi-led-coalition-timeline
18: http://www.ibtimes.com/saudi-operation-restoring-hope-yemen-seeks-restore-hadi-power- still-
includes-1892339
19: https://www.pri.org/stories/2017-03-25/if-yemens-houthis-werent-iranian-proxies-they-could-
be-soon
20: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-yemen-iran-houthis/exclusive-iran-steps-up-support-for-
houthis-in-yemens-war-sources-idUSKBN16S22R
21: https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2017/08/iran-saudi-arabia-war-yemen-houthis-
outflanking.html
22: http://www.thetower.org/4440-report-houthi-commander-admits-iran-hezbollah-training-
fighters-in-yemen/
23: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-11483095
24: https://www.crisisgroup.org/middle-east-north-africa/gulf-and-arabian-peninsula/yemen/174-
yemen-s-al-qaeda-expanding-base
25: https://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21723159-it-may-have-lost-its-
territory-its-fighters-and-ideas-live-al-qaeda
26: https://www.criticalthreats.org/analysis/al-qaedas-base-in-yemen
27: http://edition.cnn.com/2015/06/16/middleeast/aqap-fast-facts/index.html
28: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-34011187
29: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2015/09/yemen-the-forgotten-war/
30: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Countries/MENARegion/Pages/OHCHRYemen.aspx
31: http://www.securitycouncilreport.org/atf/cf/%7B65BFCF9B-6D27-4E9C-8CD3-
CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/a_hrc_res_30_18.pdf

15
32: http://unscr.com/en/resolutions/doc/2014
33: http://unscr.com/en/resolutions/doc/2051
34: http://unscr.com/en/resolutions/doc/2140
35: http://www.securitycouncilreport.org/atf/cf/%7B65BFCF9B-6D27-4E9C-8CD3-
CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/s_res_2201.pdf
36: http://www.securitycouncilreport.org/atf/cf/%7B65BFCF9B-6D27-4E9C-8CD3-
CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/s_res_2216.pdf
37: http://www.securitycouncilreport.org/atf/cf/%7B65BFCF9B-6D27-4E9C-8CD3-
CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/s_res_2266.pdf
38: http://www.securitycouncilreport.org/atf/cf/%7B65BFCF9B-6D27-4E9C-8CD3-
CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/s_res_2342.pdf

16
Agenda B: Nuclear Non-
Proliferation

1. History:
Since World War II, the devastating effects of nuclear weapons and total warfare
have become apparent to the international community and weapons themselves
have grown in number dramatically.

The dropping of atomic bombs on Japan in 1945 began the age of a new and terrible
weapon. During the period from
1945 to 1949, when the United States was the sole nuclear- weapon state, the Chile
Government supported the idea of establishing an international control system that
could give states an assurance that internationally agreed limitations and prohibitions in
the nuclear field were being universally observed. The concept was overtaken by the
Cold War when the Soviet Union and later the People’s Republic of China also
developed a nuclear capability. By the early 1960s there were five nuclear-weapon
states (China, France, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom and the United States) and
the possibility that many more states would join their ranks. To limit further nuclear
proliferation, a Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty was negotiated and opened for
signature on 1 July 1968. Essentially, the treaty committed nuclear-weapon states not to
transfer nuclear weapons or other nuclear weapon devices to non-nuclear-weapon
states. It also committed non-nuclear- weapon states not to accept them and to
undertake safeguards for the purpose of preventing diversion of nuclear energy from
peaceful uses to nuclear weapons.

Nuclear Proliferation is a deadly aspect of the chemical warfare with many countries in
this calamitous procurement. After the development of nuclear weapons by the super
powers, The USA and Russia, there has been spurt in the pursuit of nuclear weapons
by the countries in Middle East like Iran. Being a victim of nuclear brutality, Japan is
certainly against nuclear proliferation in either part of the world. The atomic bomb blasts
on Hiroshima and Nagasaki are the greatest example of the security problems tending
to rise due to nuclear proliferation.

The Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) is effective from

1970 and is signed by 190 states agreeing to cease the spread of nuclear technology.
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is another organization established in 1957
after the World War II to counter the growing nuclear weapons throughout the world and
160 countries have already ratified the agency. Iran and North Korea are one of the
greatest threats to the global prosperity as they are gaining access to nuclear weapons
and there violent military background further alarms the misuse or even loss of these
destructive weapons to other militant groups.
17
2. Articles of NPT:

Non-Proliferation:
Under Article I of the NPT, nuclear- weapon states pledge not to transfer nuclear
weapons or other nuclear explosive devices to any recipient or in any way assist,
encourage or induce any non-nuclear-weapon state in the manufacture or acquisition of
a nuclear weapon. Under Article II of the NPT, non-nuclear-weapon states pledge not to
acquire or exercise control over nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices
and not to seek or receive assistance in the manufacture of such devices. Under Article
III of the Treaty, non-nuclear-weapon states pledge to accept IAEA safeguards to verify
that their nuclear activities serve only peaceful purposes.

Peaceful use: This clause of NPT allows all nations to use nuclear energy for
peaceful purposes, only. And encourages the development of nuclear power
for the purpose of electricity etc.
Non-Proliferation Treaty has issued an order of all- abiding states to
ensure complete disarmament. Therefore achieving "Global Zero".

3. Pros and Cons of NPT:

The issues involving Iran are quite exceptional, focusing primarily on these issues gives
a rather misleading picture about the NPT. So, let's start with considering what the
whole point of the NPT is.

When nuclear technology was developed after WWII, it was clear that the vast majority
of the countries in the World would not be able to develop this technology on their own,
which would mean that they would not be able to enjoy the benefits of nuclear energy
unless they would be given access to it by the few countries that had developed it. Note
that at that time, the public image of nuclear image was different from what it is now, it
was seen as a miracle energy source, with only a small amount of enriched uranium
needed to power a giant 1000 megawatt plant.

There was one big obstacle standing in the way of realizing this nuclear utopia, and
that was that the same technology could be used to produce nuclear weapons. The
NPT treaty is a solution to this specific problem, it imposes restrictions on how a
country can use the acquired nuclear technology. It imposes an inspections regime
and transparency rules to verify that a country is sticking to the rules. These
transparency rules mean that the member state cannot pursue any nuclear weapons
related activities.

However, at heart, the NPT is not a restrictive treat that can prevent countries from
produce nuclear weapons on their own. One can see that most clearly from article ten of
the NPT that allows countries to leave the NPT after giving a 3 months notice. So,
signing the NPT is not an irreversible act that would irreversibly revoke a countries

18
sovereign right to develop nuclear weapons, it's just that a country is barred from using
whatever it gets by virtue of being part from the NPT, to pursue a weapons program.

But for transparency purposes, this means that the country cannot pursue a nuclear
weapons program as long as it is part of the NPT even if it were able to keep
weapons related activities separate from what it would get from its NPT
membership. In case of India, a special arrangement was made to allow the US to
sell civilian nuclear technology to India. In this case India had to implement certain
measures to keep its weapons related activities separate from its civilian
infrastructure.

The issues involving Iran are quite exceptional, focusing primarily on these issues
gives a rather misleading picture about the NPT. So, let's start with considering what
the whole point of the NPT is.

Since in practice, the only realistic way things could spiral out of control leading to a
World where we would have wars breaking out fought with nuclear weapons, would be
due nuclear technology spreading, and not due to countries developing nuclear
technology on their own. Therefore, the NPT is a very important treaty to make sure
this does not happen and to get to nuclear disarmament. To achieve the latter aim, the
NPT asks the declared nuclear power to
engage in negotiations to reduce their nuclear stockpiles. The treaty has been updated
several times to make it stronger, e.g. the Additional Protocol has been added to
strengthen the transparency about nuclear activities of member states.

Now, as mentioned at the start, Iran's case is exceptional, it has little to do with how
the NPT is supposed to work. It's a good example of how it is not supposed to work
and how things can spiral out of control due to distrust. Basically, the problem started
back in the 1980s when the US was worried that Iran's access to nuclear technology
via the NPT could be abused for a weapons program even if Iran were never to violate
any rules. So, the scenario that the US feared was that Iran simply sticks to all the
rules, Iranian scientists and engineers get familiar with nuclear technology and then
Iran can later decide to leave the NPT by invoking Article ten during some conflict.
Obviously the Iran-Iraq war going on at that time was such a conflict that led to the
suspicions that Iran would likely be motivated to pursue nuclear weapons. This
thinking led to the US to impose diplomatic pressure on countries involved in Iran's
nuclear program, leading to delays in the construction of the Bushehr nuclear
powerplant: According to Moscow Defense Brief, until 2005 Washington exerted
considerable diplomatic pressure on Russia to stop the project, as the US
administrations viewed it as evidence of Russia's indirect support for the alleged
Iranian nuclear arms program. The United States also tried to persuade other
countries to ban their companies from taking part. For example, Ukraine's Turboatom
was to supply a turbine, but cancelled the deal after the US Secretary of State
Madeleine Albright's visit to Kiev on 6 March 1998. The United States lifted its
opposition to the project in 2005, partly due to the deal signed by Moscow and
Tehran, under which spent fuel from the plant would be sent back to Russia.

19
This attitude likely led to Iran to make the decision to pursue an enrichment program in
the late 1990s. Obviously if you can hardly get access to nuclear technology to get the
Bushehr reactor finished, getting fuel for it would probably be impossible. And in the
1990s, Iran could not know that in the 2000s Putin would be Russia's leader who would
steer Russia a bit clear from Western pressure. For all Iran could know in the 1990s,
Russia was well on its way to become more integrated with the West, so it would likely
become more under pressure from the US to stop being involved in its nuclear program.

Now, the way Iran decided to get the nuclear technology needed for enrichment
violated some aspects of the transparency rules, but there were no breaches of the
safeguard agreements. Inspections performed later by the IAEA never found
evidence of activities related to a weapons program. Also Iran did not violate any
rules for having build the Natanz enrichment facility and not a priori notified the IAEA
about it, as under the rules, Iran was only supposed to notify the IAEA 6 month's
before it would become operational.

But, obviously, the US plan to prevent Iran from operating any large nuclear
powerplants lay in tatters after it was found out that Iran had constructed an
enrichment facility. Also it was fuel to the US' original suspicion that Iran's access to
nuclear technology was actually a problem regardless of whether or not this was done
by "by the book". Rather than recognize that its efforts to restrict Iran from having
access to nuclear technology had backfired, the US wanted to impose new
restrictions. But the only way forward was to get international support for the US
position.

This was the start of a decade long back and forth fight involving Iran's rights and
international obligations that has nothing whatsoever to do with the NPT. It's far more
about how the US despite being a superpower failed to get its way. It has been a long
retreat from its original aim to prevent Iran from operating nuclear powerplants to
prevent it from having the technology to enrich uranium, to prevent it from actually
operating centrifuges to prevent it from operating an industrial scale enrichment program
to where we are today, which is basically what Iran proposed back in 2003, i.e. a system
that ensures Iran's right to all technology including industrial scale enrichment while
making sure that Iran does not produce nuclear weapons.

So, you cannot consider the whole issue between Iran and the West in terms of just the
NPT, the NPT was just invoked to fight out a conflict that would also have existed had
Iran never signed the NPT. Note that the US applied pressure on the IAEA to refer Iran
to the UNSC, so that the UNSC could impose restrictions on Iran's nuclear program that
went beyond Iran's obligations under the NPT. The IAEA's role from that point onward
was changed, it had to check if Iran was sticking to the UNSC demands. Clearly an Iran
outside of the NPT would only have meant that the IAEA route not been available to the
US. But nothing would then have stopped the US from raising Iran directly at the UNSC.
The UNSC would have been free to impose restrictions on Iran's nuclear activities
regardless of its NPT membership.

20
4. Sources for Research:

1. General Stances of P5 on the deal:

(http://www.un.org/en/conf/npt/2015/statements/pdf/ P5_en.pdf )
2. Pros and Cons of NPT : ( https://occupytheory.org/list-of-pros-and-cons-of-
nuclear-proliferation/ )

Happy Researching.

21