The Fissile Material (Cutoff) Treaty (fm(c)t) has been on the negotiation agenda since 1996, but has seen little progress. This is due to a fundamental disagreement over whether emphasis should be placed on nuclear disarmament or nuclear non-proliferation. Several delegations perceive the fm(c)t as a tool to draw in states from outside the non-proliferation regime, while others understand it to be a disarmament measure that reduces quantities of fissile materials for nuclear weapons. They however, regard the unwillingness of nuclear weapon states to engage toward this end as deeply unjust. Additional disagreements also concern justice: Should there be different standards of verification? May some states continue to produce unverified military fuel? As long as the nuclear weapon states only push their interests through pure power instead of respecting the notion of justice, no progress can be expected and the non-proliferation regime will further erode.
Becker-JakobUnaMüllerHaraldSeidler-DiekmannTabeaMüllerHaraldWunderlichCarmen“Regime Conflicts and Norm Dynamics: Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Weapons,”Norm Dynamics in Multilateral Arms Control: Interests Conflicts and Justice2013Athens, GAUniversity of Georgia Press5181
iaea WebsiteInternational Atomic Energy AgencyA Cut-off Treaty and Associated Costs – An iaea Secretariat Working Paper on Different Alternatives for the Verification of a Fissile Material Production Cut-Off Treaty and Preliminary Cost Estimates Required for the Verification of these Alternatives1995presented at the Workshop on a Cut-Off Treaty Toronto Canada 17–18 January
infceInternational Nuclear Fuel Cycle Evaluation1980137180Working Group 8 Advanced Fuel Cycle and Reactor Concepts International Atomic Energy Agency 1980 p 43 see also Chapter 4: Research Reactors: Subgroup 8C
ipfmInternational Panel On Fissile MaterialsA Fissile Material (Cut-Off) Treaty (fmct) – A Treaty Banning the Production of Fissile Materials for Nuclear Weapons or Other Nuclear Explosive Devices2009February52009
KellerStefan“Some striking similarities and some telling dissimilarities between a cutoff convention and a ctbt.”prif Reports1997No. 48Presentation at the workshop on “The Cut-Off-Convention – Interest Scope Verification and Problems” Session “Questions and Problems” Bonn December 12 1996 reprinted in Annette Schaper: A Treaty on the Cutoff of Fissile Material for Nuclear Weapons What to Cover? How to Verify?1997
McGoldrickFred“United States, in: International Panel on Fissile Material,” in International Panel on Fissile MaterialsBanning the Production of Fissile Materials for Nuclear Weapons: Country Perspectives on the Challenges to a Fissile Material (Cutoff) Treaty200854
PakistanPakistan’s views pursuant to resolution 67/53 entitled: “Treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons and other explosive devices,”2013adopted by the un General Assembly on 03 December 2012 (on Website of unog 2013)
PakistanStatement by Ambassador Zamir Akram at the Conference of DisarmamentInformal Discussions on agenda items 1 and 2 with a general focus on the ban of the production of fissile materials for nuclear weapons and other nuclear explosive devices – on the issue of scope2014June05Geneva
uk MoDMinistry of DefenceHistorical Accounting for uk Defence Highly Enriched Uranium A report by the Ministry of Defence on the role of historical accounting for Highly Enriched Uranium for the United Kingdom’s Defence Nuclear programmes2006March2006
unogViews of Member States on a treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices2013http://www.unog.ch/unog/website/disarmament.nsf/%28httpPages%29/384E4AAF5A1D7189C1257B7C003140CA?OpenDocument&unid=B8A3B48A3FB7185EC1257B280045DBE3
u.s. DoE1996United States Department of Energy National Nuclear Security Administration Plutonium: The First 50 Years: United States Plutonium Production Acquisition and Utilization from 1944 through 1994 1996
u.s. DoE2006United States Department of Energy National Nuclear Security Administration “Highly Enriched Uranium: Striking A Balance. A Historical Report on the United States Highly Enriched Uranium Production Acquisition and Utilization Activities from 1945 through September 30 1996” January 2001 publicly released 2006
WelshNancy“Fairness: Perceptions of Fairness in Negotiation.”Marquette Law Review200487754767
In2013the General Assembly of the United Nations requested the Secretary-General to seek the views of Member States on a treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices including possible aspects thereof and to submit a report on the subject to the General Assembly at its sixty-eighth session. 36 delegations submitted statements on their views (unog 2013).
In2005the u.s. decided to engage in nuclear trade with India despite the principle of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (nsg) not to trade with countries outside the npt. The nsg followed the u.s. decision which was heavily criticized by non-proliferation advocates.
Tannenwald2013p. 307 emphasis added by the author.