Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG)

Nuclear Suppliers Group is an international organization aimed at supporting the international nonproliferation norms. Nuclear Suppliers Group plays an important role in reinforcing the compliance with non-proliferation norms on the international level among the participants and non-participants of this organization for improving the human rights and ensuring the global security.

Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) is an international organization which works to improve the human rights for safety by regulating and restricting the commercial trade in nuclear weapon as well as in goods and materials which can be used for producing it (Suid 1990). Citizens’ reasonable fears of the nuclear neighborhoods have made the regulation of the nuclear proliferation an international problem included into the programs of international organizations (Eiser et al 1995).

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

The NSG was established in 1974 after India successfully tested nuclear weapon and the number of the states owning nuclear weapons was noticeably expanded regardless of the 1968 Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). In contrast to NPT which attempted to regulate the nuclear proliferation through the countries’ promises and signatures, the NSG controls the supply of materials and technologies which are required for building the nuclear weapon.

With the end of the Cold War by 1991, Iraq was close to producing a nuclear weapon and Wassenaar Arrangement (WA) was created to restrict the trade of dual-use materials. The main goals of NSG and WA include support of the nonproliferation norms, reinforcement of compliance with these norms and improvement of the human rights (Goodby and McGoldrick 2009).

NSG published guidelines aimed at regulating the nuclear transfers and ensuring that the exported materials are used for the peaceful purposes only. NSG created two lists of materials and technologies which can be used for producing nuclear weapon, including the Part I and Part II.

The Part I contains the equipment and technology which are specifically intended to be used for building nuclear weapons. The Part II contains the dual-use materials which can be diverted and used for producing the atomic weapon (Kerr 2010). Apart from the atomic weapon, the use of nuclear technologies as the basis for the electric utilities can be rather dangerous as well.

The negative consequences of the nuclear adoption can be seen from the catastrophe at Three Mile Island in 1979 and other tragedies (Farbe 1991). The 46 member states of the NSG not only comply with the established rules of non-proliferation and restrictions in commercial trade in the related goods and equipment, but also try to influence the situation in the international arena and develop the alternative strategies for using the nuclear power for the peaceful purposes.

Regardless of the fact that the importance of governing the trade of nuclear reactors and the related technologies is obvious, some states still continue to pursue their local goals by looking for the gaps in the NSG guidelines. For instance, when the President Bush insisted on a special exemption for India, this strategy was confronted by France, the United Kingdom and Russia which might have been driven with their narrow interests.

However, an exemption for India was agreed. Another example of attempts to take the advantages of certain flaws in the international jurisdiction is China’s additional nuclear plants in Pakistan. However, not to lose Pakistan’s support in Afghanistan, the member states of NSG agreed not to take cardinal measures. Therefore, the strategies implemented by the NSG should be viewed in the international historical, political and economical contexts.

In general, the efforts of NSG in restricting the trade of the equipment and materials which can be used for building nuclear weapon have been successful for regulating the international situation.

Reference List

Eiser, Richard, Joop Van Der Pligt, and Russell Spears. 1995. Nuclear neighbourhoods: Community responses to reactor siting. University of Exeter Press.

Farbe, Stephen. 1991. Nuclear power, systematic risk, and the cost of capital, in contemporary policy issues. Contemporary Economic Policy 9 (January): 73-82.

Goodby, James, and Fred McGoldrick. 2009. Reducing the risks of nuclear power’s global spread. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists May/June: 40-47.

Kerr, Paul. 2010. US nuclear cooperation with India: Issues for Congress. CRS Report for Congress. February.

Suid, Lawrence H. 1990. The army’s nuclear power program: The evolution of a support agency. Westport: Greenwood Press Inc.

x

Hi!
I'm Malcolm!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out