Justice and Injustice in the Fissile Material (Cutoff) Treaty

in International Negotiation
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?

Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.


Have Institutional Access?

Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?


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.

Justice and Injustice in the Fissile Material (Cutoff) Treaty

in International Negotiation



AchesonRay “The Conference on Disarmament in 2009: Could Do Better.” Disarmament Diplomacy 2009 91 Summer 2009

Becker-JakobUnaMüllerHaraldSeidler-DiekmannTabea MüllerHaraldWunderlichCarmen “Regime Conflicts and Norm Dynamics: Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Weapons,” Norm Dynamics in Multilateral Arms Control: Interests Conflicts and Justice 2013 Athens, GA University of Georgia Press 51 81

BidwayP.VanaikA. “After the ctb . . . India’s intentions.” The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 1997 March/April 1997: 49

BraginVictorCarlsonJohnHillJohn “Viewpoint: Verifying A Fissile Material Production Cut-Off Treaty.” The Non-proliferation Review 1998 Fall 97 107

ChellaneyBrahmah “If pushed over Test Ban Pact, India could really ‘Go Nuclear’.” iht 1996 September 7 8 1996

CowanSimon “Future Submarine Project Should Raise Periscope for Another Look.” cis Policy Monographs 2012 130

EwingPhilip “Nuclear submarines for Canada?” DoD Buzz Online Defense and Acquisition Journal 2011 October 28 http://www.dodbuzz.com/2011/10/28/nuclear-submarines-for-canada/

FranceschiniGiorgioSchaperAnnette Nuclear Weapons Research and Modernization without Nuclear Testing. The ctbt in Danger? 2006 PRIF Report No. 77 Frankfurt/M. 2006

FischerWolfgangSteinGotthard “On-Site Inspections: Experiences from Nuclear Safeguarding,” Disarmament Forum: On-site Inspections: Common Problems Different Solutions 1993 3 45 54

HarveyCole J. At Sea Over Naval heu: Expanding Interest in Nuclear Propulsion Poses Proliferation Challenges 2010 nti Website Nov. 29 http://www.nti.org/analysis/articles/expanding-nuclear-propulsion-challenges/

HibbsMark The Plan for iaea Safeguards 2012 Carnegie Endowment Article November 20 online publication: http://www.carnegieendowment.org/2012/11/20/plan-for-iaea-safeguards/ekyb

HosseinianZaharaDahlFrederick “Iran Plans Nuclear-Powered Submarine: Report.” Reuters 2012 June 12 www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/12/us-iran-nuclear-submarine-idUSBRE85B17Q20120612

iaea Website International Atomic Energy Agency The Safeguards System of the International Atomic Energy Agency iaea-Website: http://www.iaea.org/OurWork/SG/documents/safeg_system.pdf

iaea Website International Atomic Energy Agency A 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 Alternatives 1995 presented at the Workshop on a Cut-Off Treaty Toronto Canada 17–18 January

infce International Nuclear Fuel Cycle Evaluation 1980 137 180 Working Group 8 Advanced Fuel Cycle and Reactor Concepts International Atomic Energy Agency 1980 p 43 see also Chapter 4: Research Reactors: Subgroup 8C

ipfm International Panel on Fissile Material Global Fissile Material Report 2008: Scope and Verification of a Fissile Material (Cutoff) Treaty 2008

ipfm International Panel On Fissile Materials A Fissile Material (Cut-Off) Treaty (fmct) – A Treaty Banning the Production of Fissile Materials for Nuclear Weapons or Other Nuclear Explosive Devices 2009 February 5 2009

JohnsonRebecca “Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty: The Endgame.” Acronym 1996 April No. 9 1996

KellerStefan “Some striking similarities and some telling dissimilarities between a cutoff convention and a ctbt.” prif Reports 1997 No. 48 Presentation 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

KesslerChristian “Technical negotiations and a political environment – Why the Hexapartite Safeguards Project Succeeded.” Non-proliferation Review 2013 20 3 493 508

KupermanAlanvon HippelFrank “Highly Enriched Danger.” The New York Times 2014 March 21

McGoldrickFred “United States, in: International Panel on Fissile Material,” in International Panel on Fissile Materials Banning the Production of Fissile Materials for Nuclear Weapons: Country Perspectives on the Challenges to a Fissile Material (Cutoff) Treaty 2008 54

McGoldrickFred “The Road Ahead for Export Controls: Challenges for the Nuclear Suppliers Group.” Arms Control Today 2011a January/February

McGoldrickFred Limiting Transfers of Enrichment and Reprocessing Technology: Issues Constraints Options 2011b Report Cambridge, MA Project on Managing the Atom, Harvard University

MeierOliver “The US-India Nuclear Deal: The End of Universal Non-Proliferation Efforts?” Internationale Politik und Gesellschaft 2006 4 28 43

MianZiaNayyarA.H. “Playing the Nuclear Game: Pakistan and the Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty.” Arms Control Today 2010 April

MITRE/JASON Drell (Chair)S.DysonF.EardleyD.GarwinR.JeanlozR.LeLevierR.PanofskyW.SchwittersR.TreimanS. Subcritical Experiments 1997 Report MITRE/JASON jsr-97-300 http://www.fas.org/rlg/jsr97300.htm

MoltzJames Clay “Viewpoint: Closing The npt Loophole on Exports of Naval Propulsion Reactors.” The Non-proliferation Review 2008 Fall 110 114

MüllerHarald Multilateral Nuclear Fuel-Cycle Arrangements 2006 Paper commissioned by the Weapons of Mass Destruction Commission No. 35

nti on fmct Proposed Fissile Material (Cut-off) Treaty (fmct) online-publication: http://www.nti.org/treaties-and-regimes/proposed-fissile-material-cut-off-treaty/

nti on Brazil Submarines Brazil Submarine Import and Export Behaviour 2013 July 18 online-publication: http://www.nti.org/analysis/articles/brazil-submarine-import-and-export-behavior/

Pakistan Pakistan’s views pursuant to resolution 67/53 entitled: “Treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons and other explosive devices,” 2013 adopted by the un General Assembly on 03 December 2012 (on Website of unog 2013)

Pakistan Statement by Ambassador Zamir Akram at the Conference of Disarmament Informal 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 scope 2014 June 05 Geneva

RaufTariqDesjardinsMarie-France Canada’s Nuclear Submarine Program: A New Proliferation Concern Arms Control Today 1988 December 13 18

SchaperAnnette A Treaty on Fissile Material: Just Cutoff or More? 2011 prif Report No. 109 Frankfurt/M

SchaperAnnette Highly Enriched Uranium a Dangerous Substance that Should Be Eliminated 2013 prif Report No. 124 Frankfurt/M

Spiegel WünscheBegehrliche Der Spiegel 2008 April 28 http://magazin.spiegel.de/EpubDelivery/spiegel/pdf/56756336

TapeJames The State-Level Approach: Moving Beyond Integrated Safeguards 2008 la-ur-08-6/14 inmm/esarda Workshop Tokyo October 2008

TannenwaldNina “Justice and Fairness in the Nuclear Non-proliferation Regime.” Ethics & International Affairs 2013 27 299 317

uk MoD Ministry of Defence Historical 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 programmes 2006 March 2006

unog Views of Member States on a treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices 2013 http://www.unog.ch/unog/website/disarmament.nsf/%28httpPages%29/384E4AAF5A1D7189C1257B7C003140CA?OpenDocument&unid=B8A3B48A3FB7185EC1257B280045DBE3

u.s. DoE 1996 United 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. DoE 2006 United 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 Review 2004 87 754 767

YudinYury “Multilateralization of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle – A Long Road Ahead,” unidir 2011 2011/5


In 2013the 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).


In 2005the 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.


Tannenwald 2013p. 307 emphasis added by the author.

Index Card

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 8 8 7
Full Text Views 4 4 4
PDF Downloads 0 0 0
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0