Building Global Nuclear Security Architecture
Session: Grand Ballroom 3
Date/Time: February 20, 2013 / 09:00-10:15
Moderator: Shin Chang-Hoon, The Asan Institute for Policy Studies
John Bernhard, Former Danish Ambassador to the IAEA and CTBTO
Kenneth Brill, Independent Consultant and former U.S. Ambassador to the IAEA
Mona Dreicer Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Jun Bong-geun Korea National Diplomatic Academy
Rapporteur: Shawn Fitzgerald, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Shin Chang-Hoon, director of the Asan Nuclear Policy and Technology Center at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies, introduced the session by saying that building global nuclear security architecture is one of the most important topics within the conference.
Kenneth Brill, independent consultant and former US Ambassador to the IAEA, opened his discussion by observing that the threat of nuclear terrorism is so grave, it must be prevented. He listed four reasons why a global architecture is necessary: 1) nuclear energy will likely be more widely used in the future around the world; 2) terrorists have stated that they want nuclear material for malicious purposes; 3) a nuclear event would disrupt the world economy, political system, and stability; and 4) states have obligations to their citizens as well as to the international community in order to ensure security of their nuclear material and infrastructure. He noted that while there are many international agreements in place, a true global nuclear security regime does not exist. Ambassador Brill concluded his piece by stating that there exists a mismatch between the nature of the nuclear security threat and the effort put forth toward the problem at the global level.
John Bernhard, former Danish Ambassador to the IAEA and CTBTO, commented on the issues facing successful implementation of a global nuclear security regime. He observed that while global architecture may impact national sovereignty, states should recognize that these minor concessions on the issue of sovereignty would translate into increased nuclear security benefits for all states. He listed various characteristics that a successful nuclear security framework might exhibit: 1) a common set of nuclear security standards; 2) the ability to measure the performance of states by domestic and international assessors; 3) the responsibility for implementation of any framework rests with the state, but should highlight the obligation of states to the international community as well as their citizens; and 4) continued and increased information exchange between party states.
Jun Bong-Geun, director-general of the Department of National Security and Unification Studies at the Korea National Diplomatic Academy, highlighted the concept of a unified “global governance” approach to building global nuclear security architecture. Dr. Jun argued that just as corporations exist to build profit, they also have social responsibility. In the same way, each state, regardless of size, bears responsibility for the global public goods of peace, stability, and nuclear security. Dr. Jun concluded his remarks by noting that efforts in this area should focus on balancing national sovereignty and the concept of shared international responsibility.
Mona Dreicer, acting program director for Non-Proliferation at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, remarked about practical aspects of implementing global nuclear security architecture. She listed three elements needed to maintain such a global regime: 1) global governance; 2) capability at the state and regional level; and 3) security culture. She also highlighted challenges to implementing current international agreements, namely resources, sustainability, and maintaining communication between and within governments. Dr. Dreicer concluded her talk by highlighting the fact that defining success within the framework of existing international nuclear security agreements remains a challenge.