![[Cover]](back.gif){kind=small}
By: M.Bright
January 7, 1997
After five months of crisis, deadlock, and with success, or defeat daily riding a roller coaster of international politics, the Test-ban Treaty was finally opened for signing at the United Nations on September 24. United States President Clinton was the first world leader to sign, and by day's end over 70 nations had joined Clinton in signing the treaty. More nations signed over the next few days. Among the early signers were the other four members of the Perm -5 nuclear weapons states, Russia, Britian, France, and China.
Absent from the list of nations rushing to sign the long awaited Treaty were two nations critical to the Treaty becoming a reality, India and Pakistan. India which exploded a nuclear device underground in 1974, and Pakistan which is considered by some experts to already have developed nuclear weapons, or by others to be on the verge of developing them, are among the 44 nations required to have joined the Treaty before it can ever enter into force of international law. It was India's opposition to the Test-ban that caused the crisis that followed the treaty talks all summer. India has repeatedly stated it will not sign the agreement, "not today, not tomorrow, not next week, next year, not ever." Pakistan has refused to join the treaty until India has done so first.
The refusal of India and Pakistan to formally sign the Test-ban still leaves a serious obstacle in the way of the Test-ban ever entering into force. Under the terms of the Test-ban Treaty approved by the United Nations, Article XIV requires the formal ratification by a list of 44 nations before it can enter into force. All 44 must become parties, not a simple majority, or the 42 that have either now signed or have promised to, but all of them, all 44! Without all 44 the situation must be resolved in three years at a special conference. This remains one of the key questions remaining as to whether the Test-ban will ever become a reality.
In his speech to the U.N General Assembly following the signing ceremony, President Clinton said the treaty, "points us toward a century in which the roles and risks of nuclear weapons can be even further reduced -- and ultimately eliminated."
Despite its historic significance, after a four decade long quest for a Comprehensive Test Ban, the signing ceremony was brief, serving primarily as a well deserved photo opportunity for President Clinton who had served as the driving force behind the completion of the treaty. For the occasion Clinton used the same pen that U.S. President John F. Kennedy used to sign the 1963 Limited Test Ban Treaty. Some 15 prime ministers and foreign ministers followed Clinton to the small table to place their signatures in a large leather bound volume
Among the first world leaders to follow Clinton were Chinese Foreign Minister Qian Qichen, French Foreign Minister Herve de Charette, Russian Foreign Minister Yevgeny Primakov, British Foreign Minister Malcolm Rifkind, and Japanese Prime Minister Ryutaro. During the opening ceremony a host of other countries joined in signing the treaty. Among them were Australia, the Netherlands, Germany, Denmark, Italy, Canada, Austria, Iceland, Chile, and South Africa -- the only nation to have developed nuclear weapons and then destroyed them.
The Secretary General of the U.N. Boutros Boutros Ghali said of the newly signed treaty;
"We are privileged today to witness a turning point in the history of efforts toward nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation... A major milestone has been reached on the road to making the world a safer and more secure place for generations to come... This treaty has been produced in a new international environment. A new era has opened. The adoption of this treaty meets the demand of the great majority of the world's people for a clear signal that the nuclear arms race is coming toward its end."
Similar sentiments and praise was offered by many other world leaders. The signing was likewise seen as a victory and time for celebration by treaty proponents and anti-testing activists. Yet amidst the joy and profound sense of pride and relief that world leaders were finally walking forward to end the deadly spector of nuclear testing, lingering doubts still hung over the treaty's ever entering into force. While many deeply involved in efforts to seccure a Test-ban chose to downplay the hurdles the Test-ban still must overcome, the problems still remain.
First of all, there remains the problem of India. Under the terms of the just signed Test-ban, terms that the Perm-5 nuclear club steadfastly refused to change prompting India's veto of the treaty at the Conferrence of Disarmament (CD), all 44 world nations having research reactors must sign and ratify the Test-ban before it can legally enter into force. Since India is one of the 44, India's steadfast refusal to sign must be taken seriously. Pakistan which also is on the list of 44 must also be brought on board.
At first it appeared India's veto of the Test-ban at the CD was the end of the Test-ban for this year at least. But world leaders, primarly members of the Perm-5 lead by the United States, chose to ignore the seriousness of India's refusal to sign and cut around its veto and took the treaty directly to the U.N. General Assembly for a vote. They convinced Australia, long fed up with near-by French nuclear testing, to call for a special session of the U.N. to vote on the Test-ban. The response to Australia's request was overwhelming and the U.N. ignoring India's objections approved the Test-ban 165 to 3, opening the way for the signing that took place on September 24. In spite of the U.N. vote, and the signing, the problem of India still remains.
Potentially even more serious than India's refusal to sign, is the question if the treaty will ever be ratified by either the United States Senate, or the Russian Duma? All ready the U.S. Senate has failed to ratify the Chemical Weapons Treaty, forcing Clinton to pull the treaty before a formal vote against ratification would have killed it.
Likewise the Russian Duma has yet to ratify it as well. Now with the 65 nations having ratified the Chemical Weapons Treaty for it to go into force next April, the two key players have not as of yet ratified it, and should they fail to do so, or outright vote against ratification, the Chemical Treaty will be no more. Furthermore, the Duma has also refused to vote on ratification on the all important START Treaty reducing nuclear missile and warhead levels between the U.S. and Russia. With present Russian politics it is doubtful they will anytime soon, potentially threatening all ready announced nuclear arms reductions.
On the U.S. side there has already been strong opposition to a Test-ban in both houses of Congress. During the summer an effort by Senators Kyl and Reid to resume testing was narrowly defeated 55-45, far short of the number of votes needed to ratify the Test-ban. Opposition to ANY Test-ban was a formal part of the Republican Party's 1996 Platform, and with the Republicans maintaining their control of the Senate in November's election hopes for ratification remain dim at best.