Greenpeace CTBT Updates
Special Update from the Conference on Disarmament
19th June 1996

Yesterday (Tuesday June 18) in a 'closed-door' meeting, China formally introduced its proposal on Peaceful Nuclear Explosions. In addition to Greenpeace's general criticisms against any proposal to specifically make reference to PNEs in the CTBT, the specific wording of the Chinese proposal also presents some new and additional problems.

1. Description and Specific Critique

The Chinese proposal is to amend the draft Chairman's CTBT text (CD/NTB/WP.330) by introducing a new Article 2 entitled 'Peaceful Nuclear Explosions' immediately after Article 1 (Scope or Basic Obligations).

The core of the proposal is that the Review Conference (the first of which is to take place 10 years after the CTBT enters into force) should consider the issue of PNEs and, if it agrees to the concept, it should make recommendations on amending the CTBT. The Conference of States Parties should then begin work 'without delay' on arrangements for the approval and conduct of PNEs.

In addition to the entire notion of PNEs, the proposal contains three further specific problems:

• the possibility of conducting PNEs is required to be considered by the Review Conference AUTOMATICALLY unless the Parties decide against this (the burden is on the opponents of PNEs to exclude them from the agenda of the Review Conference);
• one of the Treaty amendments which would be required is an amendment to the Scope article, which could completely reopen the entire debate on zero-yield;
• by stating that the 'arrangements... shall be consistent with the obligations of States under other international agreements', the proposal would allow PNEs to be CONDUCTED only by the 5 official Nuclear Weapon States and the three threshold States (India, Pakistan and Israel). This is because the actual conduct of PNEs is prohibited to Non- Nuclear Weapon States by the NPT.

2. Complete Text of Chinese Proposal:

18th June 1996
China
Article 2
Peaceful Nuclear Explosions

Notwithstanding the provision of Article 1, the possibility of permitting the conduct of underground nuclear explosions for peaceful purposes shall, unless otherwise decided, be considered by the Review Conference of States Parties. In the event of a Review Conference decision by consensus that such nuclear explosions may be permitted, the Review Conference shall recommend any appropriate amendment to the Treaty, and the Conference of States Parties shall, without delay, commence work with a view to agreeing arrangements for the possible approval and conduct of such nuclear explosions. The arrangements shall preclude any military benefits and shall be consistent with the obligations of States under other international agreements.

3. Country Reactions to Chinese Proposal:

The Chinese proposal was completely rejected by the following States:

• Mexico,
• Canada,
• Japan, and
• Australia.

The proposal was PARTIALLY opposed by Germany, who 'left the door open' for PNEs to be explicitly included in the Review provisions of the Treaty.
We have no information on any positions taken by other States.

4. General Greenpeace Position on PNEs

Greenpeace does not agree with the concept of so-called peaceful nuclear explosions. We oppose completely any EXPLICIT incorporation of this concept in a CTBT in whatever form.

Even explicit incorporation of PNEs in the CTBT - even if restricted to the article on Review provision would, at the least, give the concept renewed and updated formal recognition and, at the most, might well encourage ongoing interest in, if not research and development of this concept in order to undermine a CTBT. A specific mention of PNEs in the review is unnecessary, as the review explicitly provides the basis for any relevant topic to be introduced by any State Party.

Simon Carroll monitors the CTBT negotiations for Greenpeace and can be contacted at:

phone: +41.21.728.52.25 or mobile +41.79.213 .70.67

or via Greenpeace International at:

phone:+31.20.523.62.16 or at fax: +31.20.523.62.00. 99