Josh Rotkvich Delegate portfolio

NPT RevConIssue Analysis

Advancing Technical Cooperation in the Peaceful Use of Nuclear Energy

One of the issues to be discussed at the upcoming Non-Proliferation Review Conference

of 2015 (2015 NPT RevCon) is the issue of technical cooperation in the peaceful use of nuclear

energy. This is a very important issues, and is addressed in the treaty under Article IV of the

treaty. Article IV of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) states:

1) Nothing in this treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable rights of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production, and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty.2) All the Parties to the Treaty undertake to facilitate, and have the right to participate in, the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials, and scientific and technological information for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Parties to the Treaty in a position to do so shall also co-operate in contributing alone or together with other States or international organizations to the further development of the applications of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, especially in territories of non-nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty, with due consideration for the needs of the developing areas of the world.1

The purpose of this Article is to show that the Parties to the Treaty recognize that while nuclear

technology can be used as a weapon, there are also a significant amount of peaceful applications

for nuclear technology that can help benefit mankind. Nuclear energy is not only beneficial to

mankind, but is essential in order for mankind to continue to develop sustainably in today’s

industrial civilization.

Currently, 85% of the world’s energy is provided by fossil fuels, coal, oil, and gas.2 The

burning of fossil fuels injects 23 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere every year,

and half of this carbon dioxide is absorbed into the seas and vegetation.3 This constant output of

1 http://www.un.org/disarmament/WMD/Nuclear/NPTtext.shtml2 http://ecolo.org/documents/documents_in_english/BENEFITS-of-NUCLEAR.pdf3 Ibid.

carbon dioxide by the fuels we use today is having unprecedented impact on the environment,

and this trend must be reversed in order to sustain life on this planet and combat global warming.

About 1.3 billion people today do not have access to electricity.4 These people are deprived of

the opportunities energy enables in areas like education, agriculture, business, industry, and

healthcare. On top of that, half the worlds population has no access to clean cooking fuels, and

must rely instead on biomass such as wood or coal.5 These people are forced to rely on coal to

live their lives, and coal is the most polluting energy source on the planet and is one of the

greatest contributors to global warming.6

Nuclear power could help alleviate these problems and contribute to the elimination of

global poverty, while also help combat the growing issue of global warming. Nuclear energy

produces almost no carbon dioxide, nuclear waste is about a million times smaller than fossil fuel

waste, and if used following strict protocols and procedures is safe.7 While there have been

accidents such as Chernobyl in the Ukraine or the Fukushima incident in Japan, there are over

435 operable civil nuclear power reactors that have not experienced any serious accidents.8 It

should also be noted that in the case of the Fukushima incident that the problem was due to a

major tsunami knocking out power to the plant, and that there have been no deaths or causes of

radiation sickness due to the incident.9

One of the major problems involved in the use of nuclear energy is the risk that nuclear

energy can be potentially misused to pursue and develop nuclear weapons.10 While this risk may

4 http://www-naweb.iaea.org/na/resources-na/factsheets/Nuclear%20Applications%20Overview/Rio%20brochure.pdf5 http://www-naweb.iaea.org/na/resources-na/factsheets/Nuclear%20Applications%20Overview/Rio%20brochure.pdf6 http://ecolo.org/documents/documents_in_english/BENEFITS-of-NUCLEAR.pdf7 Ibid.8 http://www.world-nuclear.org/Nuclear-Basics/Global-number-of-nuclear-reactors/9 http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Safety-and-Security/Safety-of-Plants/Fukushima-Accident/10 http://www-naweb.iaea.org/na/resources-na/factsheets/Nuclear%20Applications%20Overview/Rio%20brochure.pdf

seem extreme, it should be noted that to combat this risk the international community,

specifically the United Nation (UN) through the International Atomic Energy Association

(IAEA), has set up safeguards to ensure that States with nuclear energy are not also using this

nuclear technology to procure nuclear weapons.

Outside of nuclear energy, nuclear technology can be used to in other ways that help

benefit mankind. In todays increasingly industrialized world, the need for higher agricultural

production is leading to the contamination of water bodies all around the world, but especially in

developing countries. A process known as electron beam or gamma irradiation can treat

pollutants in water, allowing wastewater to be reused for irrigation, industry, and cleaning

purposes.11 Nuclear medicine is yet another peaceful application for nuclear technology and can

be extremely beneficial to doctors and patients all around the world. Nuclear medicine uses

radiopharmaceuticals to identify and treat illnesses and disease. Radioisotopes release energy in

the form of radiation, which is then detected and transformed into images. The therapeutic

applications of nuclear medicine release energy from radioisotopes to kill cancerous cells in

malfunctioning cells.12 Nuclear technology is also used in the agricultural sector. Isotope

measurements identify and trace the efficiency of crop inputs such as water and fertilizer, gamma

rays sterilize male insects so that when they are returned to the wild they are unable to produce

progeny, and irradiation stops the growth of pests and expands the shelf life of grains, spices, and

processed foods.13 All this helps to ensure higher and more reliable yields that improve farmer

livelihoods and produce better quality and safer foods for consumption. So as it can be seen,

11 http://www-naweb.iaea.org/na/resources-na/factsheets/Industry/Efficient%20Industry,%20Cleaner%20Environment.pdf12 http://www-naweb.iaea.org/na/resources-na/factsheets/Human%20Health/Nuclear%20Medicine%20Improving%20Health%20Around%20the%20World.pdf13 http://www-naweb.iaea.org/na/resources-na/factsheets/Food%20and%20Agriculture/NA-Factsheets_Food%20and%20Agriculture.pdf

nuclear technology has the potential to revolutionize the world as we know it, but this technology

can only benefit mankind if it is used properly.

While the IAEA has set up a number of different protocols or safeguards, such as the

quality audit process (QUANUM) for nuclear medicine14 or the Action Plan on Nuclear safety

for nuclear energy,15 the international community must also do its part in ensuring that nuclear

technology is used peacefully. On top of the commitment to the peaceful use of nuclear

technology, Parties to the Treaty should also be committed to advancing the use of nuclear

technology in the developing world. As stated before, nuclear technology can help to eliminate

poverty by providing those in need of access to energy with a clean, sustainable, and reliable

source of energy. However, nuclear technology, specifically nuclear reactors, are expensive to

build. Companies in the U.S. Alone who are planning to build new nuclear units in the near

future are predicting costs of between $6 billion to $9 billion for each 1,100 MW plant.16 What

this translates to is that there is no way developing countries can afford nuclear technology on

their own. That is why the Parties to the Treaty must take their commitment to the NPT,

specifically Article IV, seriously. Parties to the Treaty, especially the developed Parties, must

work closely with developing countries to help expand the peaceful use of nuclear technology

worldwide.

Article X and Measures to Withdrawal From the NPT

The second issue to be discussed at the 2015 NPT RevCon is the issue of Article X and

the right to withdrawal from the NPT. Article X section one of the NPT states:

14 http://www-naweb.iaea.org/na/resources-na/factsheets/Human%20Health/Nuclear%20Medicine%20Improving%20Health%20Around%20the%20World.pdf15 http://www-naweb.iaea.org/na/resources-na/factsheets/Nuclear%20Applications%20Overview/Rio%20brochure.pdf16 http://www.psr.org/nuclear-bailout/resources/nuclear-power-plant.pdf

Each Party shall in exercising its national sovereignty have the right to withdraw from the Treaty if it decides that extraordinary events, related to the subject matter of this Treaty, have jeopardized the supreme interests of its country. It shall give notice of such withdrawal to all other Parties to the Treaty and to the United Nations Security Council three months in advance. Such notice shall include a statement of the extraordinary events it regards as having jeopardized its supreme interests.17

One of the NPT’s purposes is to ensure that the international community is safe from the threat

of nuclear technology being used for military purposes, specifically nuclear weapons of mass

destruction (nuclear bombs).

If a country withdrawals from the NPT, that country is stating that they are no longer

bound to not using nuclear technology to procure nuclear weapons. This obviously has serious

repercussions on the global agreement that the international community should be working

towards the total disarmament of nuclear weapons, as the NPT states. The UN’s ultimate goal,

with the NPT as a pillar to this goal, is to see that nuclear weapon states actively seek to make

disarmament a reality. Unfortunately, these countries are not fully committed to this ideal

themselves for various reasons, one specific country being the United States.

With the conclusion of the Cold War, the United State and Russia have ceased to be such

intense global rivals, yet still retain thousands of nuclear war heads.18 The international

community, specifically the UN and its Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, have stated that

disarmament and the implementation of the NPT are of the utmost importance for the security of

mankind.19 However, the nuclear weapon states seem to take a different stance. There is a split

in the US between those who believe that nonproliferation requires progress toward nuclear

disarmament and those who believe that a strong nuclear deterrent is essential and that

17 http://www.un.org/disarmament/WMD/Nuclear/NPTtext.shtml18 Getting to Zero: The Path to Nuclear Disarmament, ch 5.19 UN DPI, Nuclear Disarmament ‘Not an Idealistic Dream’ But Urgent Necessity for Human Security, Says Secretary-General in International Day Message, 2014.

nonproliferation and disarmament are unrelated.20 There is a real fear in the US, and with good

reason, that if the US does not posses nuclear weapons that there is nothing stoping North Korea

or Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons for themselves. The US, over the years, has put

considerable pressure on Iran and North Korea to abandon their nuclear program.21

The fear of either North Korea or Iran having nuclear weapons programs is very real in

the US. The reason for this fear is due to the fact that in 2006 North Korea conducted nuclear

tests.22 Another great fear in the US is that terrorists will obtain nuclear weapons and seek to use

them to hurt the US. These fears, as well as the inability to agree on what works best as

deterrence amongst those in the US, is causing a divide in one of the most important, if not the

most important, nuclear weapon states. This divide and fear has meant that the US Senate has

not yet ratified the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT).23 Without such a powerful

nation on the CTBT, the treaty looses some credibility, and hurts the overall international effort

towards the total disarmament of nuclear weapons. While the US not ratifying the CTBT may be

cause for concern, so is the fact that North Korea is actively pursuing nuclear weapons.

While acceding to the NPT in 1985, Pyongyang has refused to sign a nuclear safeguards

treaty with the IAEA.24 Then in 1994, North Korea announced that it was exercising its right to

withdrawal from the NPT under article X.1 as well as continuing its non-compliance with the

IAEA Safeguards Agreement.25 As a result the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) issued

Resolution 825 which condemned the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea’s (DPRK or North

20 CRS Report for Congress. http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA480872 21 http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/publications/pointer/journals/2011/v37n1/feature3/_jcr_content/imindefPars/download/file.res/3.%2021-31%20Novelty%20of%20Warfare%20in%20the%20Contemporary%20Era.pdf22 Ibid. 5123 http://www.nti.org/media/pdfs/apmctbt_2.pdf?_=1328040541&_=132804054124 North Korea and the Bomb25 United Nations Security Council Resolution 2094 on nuclear Nonproliferation in North Korea, Introductory Note by Klara Tothova Jordan.

Korea) intention to withdraw from the NPT.26 North Korea ultimately agreed to remain a party

to the NPT and to end its nuclear program.

However, in 2003 problems arose again between the IAEA and North Korea, which will

ultimately be discussed under the third issue analysis. As for Iran’s nuclear program with the

dual purpose of providing nuclear energy with a military option was started under the late Shah

Ayatollah Khomeini. However, this program was eventually shut down under the same Shah

until it was revived when Iran was isolated in its struggle against its aggressing neighbor Iraq.27

North Korea’s actions in 1994 were the first and only instance of a country exercising Article X.1

of the NPT. This raises the question of wether or not Article X.1 should remain in the NPT. The

debate is ongoing.

Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula

The third topic to be discussed at the 2015 NPT RevCon is the denuclearization of the

Korean Peninsula. This issues is different than the other two issues in that it is not directly

related to one of the articles of the NPT. However, the issue shares equal importance, if not

more, as the other two and is directly related to the second issue of Article X and measures to

withdrawal from the NPT. The Korean nuclear crisis started back in the 1960s when the Soviet

Union provided North Korea with a research reactor and training for Korean engineers. Then

North Korean leader Kim Il Sung tried to build a nuclear weapon but was not granted assistance

from the Chinese or Russians. In 1989, an American satellite captured images of an advanced

weapons facility near the town of Yongbyon.28 To this point, the United States had placed tactical

nuclear weapons in South Korea. When it was discovered that North Korea was building a bomb

for themselves the United States had to appeal to China and Russia to pressure North Korea into

26 Ibid.27 The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and India.28 Proliferation on the Peninsula: Five North Korean Nuclear Crises.

submitting to IAEA inspections. No progress was made however, until the United States pulled

these missiles out of South Korea in 1991.29

Part of the reason for no progress being made before the withdrawal of the US’s missiles

was due to China, while wishing to see a nuclear-free zone in the peninsula, wished to do so

through dialogue rather than pressures.30 While China had made it clear it would not help North

Korea’s nuclear program, it also would not force the DPRK to stop the program.31 Months after

this withdrawal of tactical missiles, the governments of North and South Korea agreed to keep

the Korean peninsula nuclear weapons free. As a result of these talks, the DPKR also submitted

to IAEA inspections, but not before North Korea reprocessed a small amount of spent fuel from

its reactor. When the IAEA discovered the the DPRK produced more plutonium than it had

declared North Korea refused the IAEA access to the spent fuel storage area for a more detailed

examination.32

The issue heated up yet again in 1994 when the Yongbyon reactor completed its fuel

cycle and the DPRK announced its withdrawal from the NPT and order the international

inspectors to leave North Korea.33 This caused a flurry of international activity, including a plan

between the US, Japan, and South Korea to impose heavy sanctions on the DPRK. As a result,

the DPRK declared that sanctions would be considered an act of war. Both sides prepared for

war until Kim Il Sung agreed to freeze Yongbyon nuclear activities and began serious

negotiations, leading to what was known as the Agreed Framework.34 Under this Agreed

Framework the DPRK indefinitely froze activity at Yongbyon, South Korea and Japan agreed to

build new commercial light water reactors for the DPRK, and America agreed to supply fuel oil

29 Ibid.30 China’s Policy Toward the Korean Peninsula31 China’s Policy Toward the Korean Peninsula32 Proliferation on the Peninsula: Five North Korean Nuclear Crises.33 Ibid.34 Proliferation on the Peninsula: Five North Korean Nuclear Crises.

to North Korea until the completion of the reactors.35 Fortunately, the 1994 Agreed Framework

successfully froze North Korea’s plutonium-based nuclear program for a time, but was unable to

resolve the issue of past nuclear activities or removing known fuel from the country.36

Failure to completely end the DPRK’s nuclear program lead to yet another set back on

August 31, 1998, when a three-stage projectile was launched from Musoodan-ni, North Korea.37

This lead to the immediate halting of all agreed activities between the countries. The Japanese

government, after looking into the missile and determining no satellite was launched into orbit as

the DPRK had claimed, postponed its signature of a contract specifying Tokyo’s burden-sharing

budget in the $4.6 billion light-water reactor project proposed under the Agreed Framework of

1994.38 However, on March 16, 1999, the US, Japan, and South Korea were able to reach an

agreement with the DPRK allowing the US access to the suspected underground nuclear site at

Kumchang-ni, North Korea, in exchange for 600,000 tons of food aid for the DPRK.39 Relations

between the US, Japan, South Korea, and North Korea were improving, and even closing in on a

desired agreement for North Korea’s nuclear program until the Bush Administration took office.

Bush broke off dialogue with North Korea in 2000 and for the next year and a half no dialogue

took place between the US and the DPRK.40

The failure to effectively end North Korea’s nuclear aspirations lead to the October 2002

charges that the DPRK was undertaking a uranium-based nuclear program, the collapse of the

Agreed Framework, and eventually North Korea’s withdrawal from the NPT.41 It was discovered

that North Korea was yet again conducting a secret nuclear program separate from the Yongbyon

35 Ibid.36 Rebels Without a Cause: North Korea, Iran, and the NPT.37 Proliferation on the Peninsula: Five North Korean Nuclear Crises.38 South Korea’s Missile Dilemmas.39 Ibid.40 Proliferation on the Peninsula: Five North Korean Nuclear Crises.41 Rebels Without a Cause: North Korea, Iran, and the NPT.

facility using highly enriched uranium (HER) in the place of plutonium. As a result the US,

Japan, and South Korea ceased their operations promised under the Agreed Framework and

dialogue between these parties ceased until China intervened. China pressured the DPRK into

multilateral meetings, leading to what is known as the Six Party Talks (SPT) between the US,

North Korea, China, Russia, Japan, and South Korea.42 The first three talks taking place in

Beijing during the Bush administration’s first term were unsuccessful and yet again no progress

was made in ending North Korea’s nuclear program. Things went from bad to worse in February

of 2005 when New York Times writer James Brooke reported

In a surprising admission, North Korea’s hard-line Communist government declared that it has nuclear weapons. It also said that it will boycott United States-sponsored regional talks designed to end its nuclear program, according to a North Korean Foreign Ministry statement transmitted today by the nation’s wire service.43

The situation worsened still in 2006 when North Korea conducted its first underground nuclear

test.44 This resulted in heavy sanctions by the US, causing increased economic hardship within

the DPRK.

In February 2007, the SPT members were able to reach an agreement on a

denuclearization plan, and in the second half of 2007 Pyongyang began disabling the Yongbyon

plant yet again.45 Furthermore, in mid-2008 Pyongyang made even more concessions by

providing the US with extensive details of its nuclear program and further dismantling the

Yongbyon reactor, which resulted in the further easing of US sanctions.46 However, the DPRK

failed to agree to a verification protocol for its nuclear program by the end of the Bush

administration and restarted its nuclear program, barring nuclear inspections in order to pressure

US negations. In May 2009, the DPRK conducted another nuclear test, which lead the US to

42 Proliferation on the Peninsula: Five North Korean Nuclear Crises.43 http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/10/international/asia/10cnd-korea.html?_r=044 The Six-Party Process, Regional Security Mechanisms, and China-U.S. Cooperation45 The Six Party Talks on North Korea’s Nuclear Program46 The Six Party Talks on North Korea’s Nuclear Program

push for tougher sanctions at the UNSC.47 Talks between the US and the DPRK did not resume

in 2009.

The situation was aggravated further with the North Korean sinking of a South Korean

naval vessel in March 2010.48 In July and October of 2011, Washington and Pyongyang held

bilateral discussions on the possibility of resuming the SPT, but no real progress was made until

February 2012. Under new leadership, Pyongyang agreed to suspend nuclear tests and allow the

IAEA back in for inspections. Yet once again the DPRK did not stand by what it said it would do

when North Korea launched a long-range rocket test.49 Not only did the DPRK carry out long-

range rocket tests, but also conducted its third underground nuclear test on 13 February, 2013.50

In response, led by China and the US, the UNSC adopted Resolution 2094 in March of

2013. Resolution 2094 condemned the DPRK’s nuclear activities, reaffirmed the DPRK’s

obligation to abandon all existing weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missile projects, and

further expanded financial and economic sanctions that might contribute to the DPRK’s illicit

programs.51 Since 2013, China and Russia have both expressed interests in resuming the SPT

negotiations. Both Russia and China have sought, since 2014, to use their influence in

Pyongyang to bring the DPRK back to the negotiating table. While no progress has been made

yet, it appears that tensions are once again easing, and there is hope in the international

community that talks will resume soon.

Policy Positions

Advancing Technical Cooperation in the Peaceful Use of Nuclear Energy

47 Ibid.48 Understanding China’s Response to North Korea’s Provocations49 The Six Party Talks on North Korea’s Nuclear Program50 North Korea in 2013: Economy, Executions, and Nuclear Brinkmanship51 United Nations Security Council Resolution 2094 on Nuclear Nonproliferation in North Korea, Introductory note by Klara Tothova Jordan

As an island country, Singapore is extremely concerned by the effects of climate change.

On top of the fact that Singapore is an island state, Singapore is very limited for space and

environmental resources. As a result, environmental sustainability has been a key part of

Singapore domestic and foreign policy. Singapore is so concerned with its long term survival

from an environmental standpoint that in 2010, in response to the recommendations of the

Economic Strategies Committee, conducted a comprehensive study to determine if nuclear

energy was a good fit for Singapore. The study focused on energy security, environmental

sustainability, and economic competitiveness. The study covered nuclear safety, security, risk

assessments, human resource development, and nuclear energy systems and demand. As a result

of this study, the government of Singapore concluded that

Nuclear energy technologies presently available are not yet suitable for development in Singapore. The latest designs of nuclear power plants are much safer than older designs which remain in use in any countries. However, the risk to Singapore, given that we are a small and dense city, still outweigh the benefits at this point... Singapore needs to continue to monitor the progress of nuclear energy technologies to keep our options open for the future.52

In reference to this study and Singapore’s concern for nuclear safety, delegate Leonard Lin

addressed the First Committee of the UN on 10 October 2011 signifying the Fukushima accident

as a wake up call for the urgent need to address issues of nuclear safety.53 The study also stated

that Singapore should focus on strengthening capabilities to understanding nuclear technology

and science in order to enable Singapore to access the implications of evolving nuclear energy

technologies and regional nuclear energy developments. Singapore also pledged in this

document on the findings of the study to support research in relevant areas of nuclear science and

52 http://www.mti.gov.sg/NewsRoom/Documents/Pre-FS%20factsheet.pdf53 http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/images/documents/Disarmament-fora/1com/1com11/statements/10Oct_Singapore.pdf

engineering, and train a pool of scientists and experts through education programs in local and

overseas universities.54

As a result of this study, Singapore revamped its efforts to contribute to the spread of

peaceful uses in nuclear technology. Through working with the IAEA in providing technical

assistance to developing Member States in order to ensure the safe and peaceful application of

nuclear technologies since 2000, on 26 January 2015, the IAEA and Singapore singed a

Memorandum of Understanding on the Singapore-IAEA Third Country Training Programme

(TCTP).55 This new Memorandum not only formalized and strengthened the already fruitful

relationship between the IAEA and Singapore, but also laid the framework for future technical

assistance across areas such as nuclear medicine, safety, public education, industry, and

environment. Under this new Memorandum, IAEA member states will nominate and send

candidates to training events hosted by Singapore. The Third Party Training Programme

includes English-language seminars, workshops, and scientific visits.56 All these efforts are

making an impression on the IAEA and the international community. As Ambassador Foo

Kok Jwee stated

To date, we have organized 23 scientific visits, 93 fellowship attachments, and 29 regional training events in subjects including nuclear medicine, radiotherapy, and radiation protections.57

Singapore, under this new Memorandum will continue to seek new ways to provide technical

assistance through professional training for the benefit of developing IAEA Member States, but

only if these member states pledge to safely and securely use nuclear technology peacefully.

In a general statement by the delegation of Singapore at the first preparatory committee

of the 2015 NPT RevCon in May 2012, Singapore stated its position on the Peaceful Uses of

54 http://www.mti.gov.sg/NewsRoom/Documents/Pre-FS%20factsheet.pdf55 http://www.iaea.org/technicalcooperation/Regions/Asia-and-the-Pacific/News/02032015-TCTP.html56 http://www.iaea.org/technicalcooperation/Regions/Asia-and-the-Pacific/News/02032015-TCTP.html57 Ibid.

Nuclear Technology (PUNE). Singapore stated that while it strongly supports the rights of

sovereign states to pursue PUNE under Article IV, this right does not come without

responsibilities.58 Singapore pointed out the fact that the development of certain nuclear

technologies leads to the capabilities and knowledge that could be used to pursue nuclear

weapons programs through uranium enrichment or plutonium reprocessing. To lessen this risk,

the delegation from Singapore proposed that to help build international confidence all countries

should promote transparency by establishing genuine dialogue and cooperation with the IAEA

and its established safeguards.59 At the third preparatory committee for the 2015 NPT RevCon

between 28 April to 9 May 2014, Ambassador Karen Tan made a statement to the committee

about the peaceful use of nuclear science and technology. In her statement, Ambassador Tan

point out that while Singapore supports the rights of sovereign states to peacefully use nuclear

science and technology, this use does not come without the responsibility to ensure that this

science and technology is carried out in a safe, secure, and safeguarded manner.60 Tan stressed

that as more countries consider the use of nuclear energy for the first time that the international

community can assist in sharing knowledge and expertise. Tan also stressed that the IAEA

should assist with training and other capacity building programs to help countries establish the

necessary regulatory and legal infrastructures to promote the highest standards of nuclear safety

and security.61 This was not a challenge to the IAEA, but rather a call to other Member States to

the NPT to use the IAEA rather than trying to do thing on their own.

58 http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/images/documents/Disarmament-fora/npt/prepcom12/statements/3May_Singapore.pdf59 http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/images/documents/Disarmament-fora/npt/prepcom12/statements/3May_Singapore.pdf60 http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/images/documents/Disarmament-fora/npt/prepcom14/statements/30April_Singapore.pdf61 Ibid.

In conclusion, at the upcoming 2015 NPT RevCon, Singapore will seek to promote

PUNE, based off of Singapore’s past actions and statements at the preparatory committees

leading up to 2015’s RevCon. However, while Singapore is committed to the spread of PRUNE,

Singapore will not support PUNE without Member States wishing to do so following IAEA

safeguards and procedures.

Article X and Measures to Withdrawal From the NPT

As has been stated before, Singapore is strongly committed to the NPT and what the NPT

stands for, nuclear disarmament. The issue of states being able to withdraw form the NPT under

Article X is that states that choose to do this are no longer bound under the treaty to commit to

the peaceful use of nuclear technology. This is a serious threat to not just Singapore, but the rest

of the world as well. Focusing on the specific example of North Korea helps to highlight the

flaws present in Article X. Since North Korea has withdrawn from the NPT, the DPRK’s nuclear

program is no longer regularly inspected by the IAEA to ensure that all nuclear activity is in a

peaceful manner. This means the the DPRK could be developing nuclear weapons at

unmonitored facilities. This is a huge threat to not just Singapore, but the entire international

community. North Korea is has not been known to make rational decisions, and if they do gain

nuclear weapons on a large scale the results could be absolutely devastating. Article X actually

undermines the NPT in that it allows countries to import or develop nuclear technology and then

walk away from the treaty to make bombs.62

Singapore does not fully support the ability of Member States to withdrawal from the

Non-Proliferation Treaty under Article X. As a nation, Singapore has been actively committed to

the peaceful use of nuclear technology, nuclear disarmament, global and regional non-

62 http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/PUB987.pdf

proliferation initiatives, and confidence building measures to promote peace and security.

Singapore has demonstrated this commitment to Member States through its support for UN

Security Council Resolution 1540 regarding the non-proliferation of weapons of mass

destruction, as well as Singapore’s participation in international disarmament and non-

proliferation treaties such as the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty, the Treaty on the Non-

Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, and the Treaty on the Southeast Asia Nuclear-Weapon-Free

Zone.63 The ability for Member States to withdrawal from the Treaty on the Non-proliferation of

Nuclear Weapons not only Jeopardizes Singapore’s security, but it jeopardizes the security of the

entire world. As a nation committed to the peaceful use of nuclear technology Singapore

strongly urges the Member States to reconsider Article X and its application.

Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula

In regards to the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, Singapore strongly supports

the idea that the Peninsula should be disarmed. Singapore is generally committed to the overall

disarmament of all nuclear weapon states, in order to help ensure the safety of non-nuclear

weapon states. Of all the issues at the conference, I believe this is the most important issue for

not just Singapore but the entire world. North Korea’s possession of a nuclear bomb is

extremely dangerous to the world. Being that North Korea is in relatively close proximity to

Singapore, the denuclearization of the peninsula is of upmost importance.

Singapore has shown its dedication to the complete nuclear disarmament of the world,

especially in 1997. In 1995, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia,

Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam proposed a Southeast Asian Nuclear-

Weapon-Free-Zone (SEANWFZ). Under this treaty, Singapore and its fellow Southeast Asian

63 http://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/gaiko/naruhodo/data/pdf/data2-3.pdf

countries stated that while they were dedicated to the peaceful use of nuclear technology, no

country that is a member to this treaty will develop nuclear weapons in the area, nor allow other

countries to develop, stockpile, or test nuclear weapons in the region.64 SEANWFZ is proposed

to last indefinitely. SEANWFZ is just one of the proponents of Singapore’s commitment to a

nuclear free world. Singapore is also a member to the CTBT. Singapore is also a firm supporter

of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) and the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC).65

All this shows that Singapore is committed to a global peace and security, because global

peace and security is best for Singapore. This is true because Singapore is one of the world

largest international shipping hubs, and since 2003, Singapore has been improving its export

control system to regulate the transfer of strategic goods and technology that could have potential

WMD applications.66 As a result of Singapore’s commitment to global peace, Singapore would

urge North Korea to return to the negation table in regards to shutting down its nuclear program.

Singapore would like to see the Six Party Talks (SPT) to resume post haste. Singapore, in a

speech at the third session of the preparatory committee for the 2015 NPT RevCon, urged the

DPRK to also comply with all relevant UNSC Resolutions, and to cooperate with the IAEA in

the full and effective implementation of its comprehensive safeguard agreement.67 In August of

2014, the DPRK Minister of Foreign Affairs Ri Su Yong met with Singapore Minster for Foreign

Affairs K Shanmugam to discuss the stability of the Korean Peninsula.68 This has not been the

only meeting between the two countries, and every time the two sides meet, the topic is peace on

64 http://cns.miis.edu/inventory/pdfs/aptbang.pdf65 http://www.mfa.gov.sg/content/mfa/overseasmission/newyork/nyemb_statements/first_committee/2012/201210/press_20121101.html66 http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/nr/2009/oct/27oct09_nr/27oct09_speech.print.noimg.html67 http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/images/documents/Disarmament-fora/npt/prepcom14/statements/30April_Singapore.pdf68 http://www.mfa.gov.sg/content/mfa/media_centre/press_room/pr/2014/201408/press_20140814.printable.html?status=1

the peninsula. This is a very important issue for both sides, because a stable Korean Peninsula

would benefit the whole region, that region being ASEAN.

In conclusion, Singapore is fully committed to a nuclear weapons free world. Singapore

would like to see Nuclear Weapons States further reduce their nuclear stockpiles. Singapore,

being a major trading hub, is concerned with the possibility of nuclear weapons passing through

their ports, and has actively taken measures to reduce this risk. Singapore has held multiple

meeting with various DPRK officials in order to try and strengthen relations both between the

countries and in the region. If the Korean Peninsula can be denuclearized and generally

stabilized the entire region (ASEAN) would benefit.

Bloc Positions

Advancing Technical Cooperation in the Peaceful Use of Nuclear Energy

In regards to a bloc position for Singapore and advancing technical cooperation in the

peaceful use of nuclear energy, Singapore is only willing to work with countries that have signed

and ratified the NPT as well as IAEA safeguards. These countries will include members of

ASEAN.69 Singapore has also worked with countries such as Australia, Canada, France,

Germany, Japan, Luxembourg, United States of America, New Zealand, and Norway. Singapore

also works closely with the IAEA to help advance the peaceful use of nuclear technology.

Additionally, according to a working paper submitted at the third preparatory meeting in New

York in 2014, the group of Non-Aligned States (also known as NAM) is committed to the

inalienable right of all the parties to the Treaty to develop research, produce, and use nuclear

energy for peaceful purposes.70 Singapore, being a member of NAM, will work with fellow

NAM countries on all the issues presented at the conference.

69 ASEAN and the Management of Regional Security70 http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=NPT/CONF.2015/PC.III/WP.4

Article X and Measures to Withdrawal From the NPT

In the case of Article X and measures to withdraw from the NPT Singapore will work

with many of the same countries it would work with for the above topic, especially NAM

members.

Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula

For the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, Singapore is will to work with both

sides of the argument to help reach a solution. The sides would be considered the DPRK and

countries such as China and Russia on one side, and the United States, Japan, and South Korea

on the other. The Six Party Talks have not happened for too long, and tensions on the peninsula

are growing. Singapore is likely to work with all of the above mentioned countries, as well as

ASEAN, and Non Alignment Movement (NAM) states to help advance negotiations.71 In 2010,

Singapore submitted a working paper at 2010 NPT RevCon on the topic of Non-proliferation of

nuclear weapons and on strengthening the IAEA safeguards. The working paper was submitted

by Japan, Australia, Belgium, Finland, France, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, New Zealand, Norway,

Peru, the Republic of Korea, Singapore, and Uruguay.72

Strategy

I believe that for the conferences, it will be important to take into consideration what the

US has to say on the issues presented. Singapore has very close ties with the US, and often

partakes in joint operations with the US. So for the topic of peaceful use of nuclear technology

Singapore would work closely with the US, and as such I will seek to do the same. However,

71 http://www.nti.org/treaties-and-regimes/non-aligned-movement-nam/72 http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=NPT/CONF.2010/WP.5/Rev.1

when it comes to the topic of the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, Singapore would

likely exchange dialogue between China and the US. I believe that as a representative of

Singapore, I will be able to provide a bridge between the two sides of the argument. As

previously stated, China and Russia are working with, and urging, North Korea to return to the

negotiation table. I believe that if I can be a bridge between the two sides that there is a chance

for progress toward resuming the talks. I also believe that it will be important to talk to North

Korea myself.

Singapore and the DPRK have held meetings between high ranking officials over the past

few years, improving the relationship between the two countries. A stable Korean Peninsula is

good for not just Singapore, but for the world. However, a stable Korean Peninsula is also good

for ASEAN. If the DPRK accepts the IAEA safeguard system and rejoins the NPT, Singapore

and the region of East Asia would benefit. Singapore has worked closely with the IAEA, and if

the IAEA is present at the conference I will work closely with their representative to advance

nonproliferation. In regards to strategy for addressing Article X, it will be important to speak

with countries who have not yet acceded to the NPT. A nuclear free world is very important, and

it starts with everyone signing on to the NPT. I believe I will work closely with the US in order

to try and get both Iran and North Korea back in the NPT.

Resolutions

Code: Draft Report Segment 1Committee: Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference (NPT RevCon)Topic: Advancing Technical Cooperation in the Peaceful Use of Nuclear EnergyI. Introduction

A. Advancing Technical Cooperation in the Peaceful Use of Nuclear Energy

1. Considering the devastation that would be visited upon all mankind by a nuclear war and the consequent need to make every effort to avert the danger of such a war and to take measures to

safeguard the security of peoples, the international community opened up the Treaty for the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons for signature in 1968.

2. As of March 2015 a total of 190 parties have joined the NPT, including the five nuclear-weapon States. More countries have ratified the NPT than any other arms limitation and disarmament agreement to date.

3. According to Article III section 2 of the NPT each State Party to the Treaty, the Treaty Parties are not allowed to share equipment or fissionable materials with other countries unless both are members of the NPT and are both willing to submit to the safeguards required by this article.

4. In accordance with Article IV all Parties to the Treaty have the right to develop research, production, and the use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes so long as they submit to IAEA safeguards and inspections. It is also understood in this article, specifically section 2, that State Parties should, either individually or together with other States, help further the development of peaceful nuclear technology in the developing world.

II. Mandate

This section will be provided by NMUN.

III. Conclusions and Recommendations

A. Advancing Technical Cooperation in the Peaceful Use of Nuclear Energy

5. The State Parties would recommend increasing the IAEA nuclear safeguard protocols to make them more strict in order to not only prevent the chance of proliferation, but to also ensure that all nuclear operation are safely conducted.

6. The State Parties recommend opening up negotiations with Member States of the UN who have not acceded to the NPT to do so. This would further ensure that the international community as a whole is dedicated to doing everything in its power to prevent nuclear war, as well as help these nations begin the process of benefitting from the peaceful uses of nuclear energy.

7. The NPT encourages State Parties to aid the developing countries in the procurement of peaceful nuclear technology so long as they submit to IAEA safeguards. The state parties would encourage the developed countries, especially the nuclear-weapon states, to aid the developing world in wither financial or technological ways.

Resolution 2

Code: Draft Report Segment 1Committee: Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference (NPT RevCon)

Topic: The Denuclearization of the Korean PeninsulaI. Introduction

A. The Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula

1. In the 1960’s, the Soviet Union provided the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (DPRK) with a research reactor and training for Korean engineers in the field of nuclear technology. The DPRK sought to obtain nuclear technology in the hopes of eventually developing a bomb, however, Russia and China refused to assistant in the proliferation of nuclear weapons.

2. In 1985, North Korea acceded to the Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), but Pyongyang refused to sign a nuclear safeguard treaty with the IAEA. Then in 1989, American satellites captured images of advanced weapons facilities near the DPRK’s town of Yongbyon. Prior to this discover, under the pretense that the DPRK had or was close to developing a nuclear weapon, the United States placed strategic nuclear missiles in South Korea. As a result, the DPRK continued to progress with its nuclear program. The United States appealed to China and Russia to pressure North Korea into submitting to IAEA inspection, but there was no progress on the issue until the US pulled its missiles out of South Korea in 1991.

3. In 1994, North Korea announced that it was withdrawing from the NPT under Article X.1. Also, the reactor at Yongbyon completed its fuel cycle, meaning that North Korea possessed the ability to reprocess this fuel and turn it into nuclear weapons. As a result, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) issued Resolution 825, condemning the DPRK’s actions. Kim Il Sung agreed to freeze the activities at Yongbyon and established the Agreed Framework. The Agreed Framework was designed to end North Korea’s nuclear program and ultimately denuclearize the peninsula.

4. However, in 1998, the DPRK launched a three-stage projectile from Musoodan-ni, which lead to the ceasing of the terms established under the Agreed Framework. The DPRK claimed it was launching a satellite into space, but the government of Japan determined that no satellite was launched. In March of 1999, the US, Japan, and South Korea were able to reach an agreement with the DPRK allowing the US access to North Korea’s suspected underground nuclear site at Kumchang-ni.

5. In October 2002, the US charged the DPRK with accusations that the DPRK was developing a uranium-based nuclear program. As a result, negotiations between the involved parties ceased until 2005 when the Six Party Talks (SPT) between China, Russia, the DPRK, South Korea, Japan, and the US. By 2008 the SPT lead to an agreement between the parties that the DPRK would dismantle the reactor at Yongbyon and provide the US with extensive details in regards to the DPRK’s nuclear program. However, there was a failure to reach an agreed verification protocol for the end of the DPRK’s nuclear program and in 2009 the DPRK conducted another nuclear test. SPT talks were permanently suspended, and have yet to resume. The UNSC passed resolution 2094, led by the US and China, in March of 2013. Since this resolution in 2013, China and Russia have expressed interest in resuming SPT negotiations.

II. Mandate

This section will be provided by NMUN.

III. Conclusion and Recommendations

A. Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula

6. The State Parties to the treaty strongly urge North Korea to resume its commitment to nuclear nonproliferation by ending its weapons program and rejoin the NPT.

7. The State Parties are deeply concerned that SPT negotiations have not yet resumed and urges both sides to consider the devastation that would be visited upon the world in the event of a nuclear war.

8. The State Parties call on the UNSC to take the matter seriously, and urges the UNSC to do everything within its power to help see negotiations are resumed post haste.

References

Bajoria, Jayshree, and Beina Xu. "The Six Party Talks on North Korea's Nuclear Program." September 30, 2013. Accessed March 15, 2015. http://www.cfr.org/proliferation/six-party-talks-north-koreas-nuclear-program/p13593.

Brooke, James. "North Korea Says It Has Nuclear Weapons and Rejects Talks." The New York Times, February 10, 2005. Accessed February 13, 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/10/international/asia/10cnd-korea.html?_r=0.

Comby, Bruno. "The Benefits of Nuclear Energy." July 7, 2005. Accessed February 13, 2015. http://ecolo.org/documents/documents_in_english/BENEFITS-of-NUCLEAR.pdf

"Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty & Partial Test Ban Treaty." January 17, 2012. Accessed March 2, 2015. http://www.nti.org/media/pdfs/apmctbt_2.pdf?_=1328040541&_=1328040541.

"Efficient Industry, Cleaner Environment: Making a Difference with Nuclear Technology." February 1, 2015. Accessed March 8, 2015. http://www-naweb.iaea.org/na/resources-na/factsheets/Industry/Efficient Industry, Cleaner Environment.pdf.

"Fact Sheet Nuclear Energy Pre-Feasibility Study." October 15, 2012. Accessed March 19, 2015. http://www.mti.gov.sg/NewsRoom/Documents/Pre-FS factsheet.pdf.

"First Preparatory Committee of 2015NPT Review Confrence 30April- 11May2012 Vienna Statement by Singapore." May 4, 2012. Accessed March 9, 2015. http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/images/documents/Disarmament-fora/npt/prepcom12/statements/3May_Singapore.pdf.

"Fukushima Accident." Fukushima Accident. February 1, 2015. Accessed March 8, 2015. http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Safety-and-Security/Safety-of-Plants/Fukushima-Accident/.

Hao, Jia, and Zhuang Qubing. "China's Policy toward the Korean Peninsula." Asian Survey 32, no. 12 (1992): 1137-156. Accessed March 11, 2015. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.lib.ilstu.edu/stable/pdf/2645043.pdf.

Hong, Adeline. “Statement by Miss Adeline Hong, Delegate to the 67th Session of The United Nations General Assembly Thematic Debate on Other Disarmament Measures and International Security, First Committee, 1 November 2012.” November 1, 2012. Accessed March 10, 2015.

Huntley, Wade L. "Rebels Without A Cause: North Korea, Iran And The NPT." International Affairs 82, no. 4 (2006): 723-42. Accessed March 13, 2015. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.lib.ilstu.edu/stable/pdf/3874155.pdf?acceptTC=true.

"International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)IAEA Home." Our Work: Passing the Torch: IAEA and Singapore Commit to Third Country Training. February 3, 2015. Accessed March 3, 2015. http://www.iaea.org/technicalcooperation/Regions/Asia-and-the-Pacific/News/02032015-TCTP.html.

Kim, Taewoo. "South Korea's Missile Dilemmas." Asian Survey 39, no. 3 (1999): 486-503. Accessed March 17, 2015. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.lib.ilstu.edu/stable/pdf/3021210.pdf.

Kelleher, Catherine McArdle. Getting to Zero the Path to Nuclear Disarmament. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 2011.

Lin, Leonard. "Statement by Leonard Lin, Delegate to the 66th Session of The United Nations General Assembly at the General Debate of the First Committee." October 10, 2011. Accessed March 16, 2015. http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/images/documents/Disarmament-fora/1com/1com11/statements/10Oct_Singapore.pdf.

Mack, Andrew. "North Korea and the Bomb." Foreign Policy 83, no. 1 (1991): 87-104. Accessed March 8, 2015. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.lib.ilstu.edu/stable/pdf/1148719.pdf?acceptTC=true.

Medalia, Jonathan. "Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Issues and Arguments." March 12, 2008. Accessed March 8, 2015. http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA480872.

"MFA Press Statement: Bilateral Meeting Between DPRK Minister for Foreign Affairs Ri Su Yong and Minister for Foreign Affairs K Shanmugam, 14 August 2014." August 14, 2014. Accessed March 15, 2015.

Narine, Shaun. "ASEAN and the Management of Regional Security." Pacific Affairs 71, no. 2 (1998): 195. Accessed March 15, 2015. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.lib.ilstu.edu/stable/pdf/2760976.pdf.

Nayan, Rajiv. The Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty and India. London: Routledge, 2012."Non-Alignment Movement (NAM)." February 1, 2015. Accessed March 18, 2015. http://www.nti.org/treaties-and-regimes/non-aligned-movement-nam/.

"Nuclear Medicine: Improving Health Around the World." February 1, 2015. Accessed March 1, 2015. http://www-naweb.iaea.org/na/resources-na/factsheets/Human Health/Nuclear Medicine Improving Health Around the World.pdf.

"Nuclear Technology for a Sustainable Future." June 1, 2012. Accessed February 16, 2015. http://www-naweb.iaea.org/na/resources-na/factsheets/Nuclear Applications Overview/Rio brochure.pdf.

"Number of Nuclear Reactors Operable and Under Construction." Number of Nuclear Reactors. August 1, 2015. Accessed February 15, 2015. http://www.world-nuclear.org/Nuclear-Basics/Global-number-of-nuclear-reactors/.

Pang, Zhongying. The Six-party Process, Regional Security Mechanisms, and China-U.S. Cooperation toward a Regional Security Mechanism for a New Northeast Asia? Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Center for Northeast Asian Policy Studies, 2009.

Perry, W. J. "Proliferation On The Peninsula: Five North Korean Nuclear Crises." The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 607 (2006): 78-86. Accessed March 17, 2015. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.lib.ilstu.edu/stable/pdf/25097840.pdf.

"Print - Opening Address by Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Defence Mr Teo Chee Hean at the Opening Ceremony of Exercise Deep Sabre II." Print - Opening Address by Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Defence Mr Teo Chee Hean at the Opening Ceremony of Exercise Deep Sabre II. October 27, 2009. Accessed March 14, 2015.

"Resolution 1540 (2004)." April 28, 2004. Accessed March 19, 2015. http://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/gaiko/naruhodo/data/pdf/data2-3.pdf.

Schlissel, David, and Bruce Biewald. "Nuclear Power Plant Construction Costs." July 1, 2008. Accessed March 9, 2015. http://www.psr.org/nuclear-bailout/resources/nuclear-power-plant.pdf.

"Securing a Better Future for All: Nuclear Techniques for Global Development and Environmental Protection." February 1, 2015. Accessed March 9, 2015. http://www-naweb.iaea.org/na/resources-na/factsheets/Food and Agriculture/NA-Factsheets_Food and Agriculture.pdf.

Sim Vee Ming, Jeffery. "Novelty of Warfare – in the Contemporary Era." Pointer 37, no. 1 (2011): 21-31. Accessed February 16, 2015. http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/publications/pointer/journals/2011/v37n1/feature3/_jcr_content/imindefPars/download/file.res/3. 21-31 Novelty of Warfare in the Contemporary Era.pdf.

Sokolski, Henry D. Reviewing the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Carlisle, PA: Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College, 2010.

Song, Jooyoung. "Understanding China's Response to North Korea's Provocations." Asian Survey 51, no. 6 (2011): 1134-155. Accessed March 15, 2015. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.lib.ilstu.edu/stable/pdf/10.1525/as.2011.51.6.1134.pdf.

Tan, Karen. "Statement by Ambassador Karen Tan Permanent Representative of Singapore to the United Nations in New York, at the Third Session of the Preparatory Committee For The 2015 NPT Review Conference, New York, 28 April – 9 May 2014." May 5, 2014. Accessed March 7, 2015. http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/images/documents/Disarmament-fora/npt/prepcom14/statements/30April_Singapore.pdf.

Tothova Jordan, Klara. "United Nations Security Council Resolution 2094 on Nuclear Nonproliferation in North Korea, Introductory Note by Klara Tothova Jordan." International Legal Materials 52, no. 5 (2013): 1196-208. Accessed March 5, 2015. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.lib.ilstu.edu/stable/pdf/10.5305/intelegamate.52.5.1196.pdf.

"Treaty on the Southeast Asia Nuclear-Weapon-Free-Zone (Bangkok Treaty)." March 27, 1997. Accessed March 15, 2015. http://cns.miis.edu/inventory/pdfs/aptbang.pdf.

"United Nations Official Document." UN News Center. March 12, 2014. Accessed February 12, 2015. http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=NPT/CONF.2015/PC.III/WP.4.

"United Nations Official Document." UN News Center. May 12, 2010. Accessed March 16, 2015. http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=NPT/CONF.2010/WP.5/Rev.1.

"UNODA - Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT)." UN News Center. January 1, 1968. Accessed February 12, 2015. http://www.un.org/disarmament/WMD/Nuclear/NPTtext.shtml.

Yung Lee, Hong. "North Korea in 2013: Economy, Executions, and Nuclear Brinksmanship." Asian Survey 54, no. 1 (2014): 89-100. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.lib.ilstu.edu/stable/pdf/10.1525/as.2014.54.1.89.pdf.