Nearly Three Dozen Nations Sign Hague Statement on Nuclear Security Framework

Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte hands over a symbolic stick to President Obama during the closing session of the Nuclear Security Summit in The Hague on Tuesday. Thirty-five countries committed to bolstering nuclear security, backing a global drive spearheaded by Obama to prevent dangerous materials falling into the hands of terrorists.
National Journal
Sebastian Sprenger
Add to Briefcase
Sebastian Sprenger
March 25, 2014, 10:09 a.m.

THE HAG­UE, NETH­ER­LANDS — Thirty-five na­tions par­ti­cip­at­ing in this week’s Nuc­le­ar Se­cur­ity Sum­mit here agreed to sign onto a de­clar­a­tion aimed at bring­ing the in­ter­na­tion­al com­munity closer to a uni­ver­sal and leg­ally bind­ing nuc­le­ar-se­cur­ity re­gime.

Spear­headed by the Neth­er­lands, the United States and South Korea, the ini­ti­at­ive by mid-morn­ing had garnered the sup­port of two-thirds of the 53 states par­ti­cip­at­ing in the bi­en­ni­al con­fab, when seni­or of­fi­cials from the three coun­tries un­veiled the joint state­ment.

The two-day sum­mit, which ended on Tues­day, in­cluded Pres­id­ent Obama in a lead­ing role and was at­ten­ded by many oth­er heads of state. All 53 na­tions sep­ar­ately is­sued a more broadly worded fi­nal com­mu­nique.

The pro­ject banks on vol­un­tary ac­tions by in­di­vidu­al coun­tries to strengthen the se­cur­ity of their nuc­le­ar ma­ter­i­als, a prac­tice widely seen as too weak around the globe. But some is­sue ex­perts say the new ef­fort could open the door to more-form­al ar­range­ments among the group of ini­tial par­ti­cipants in the years ahead.

Sign­ers com­prise a di­verse ar­ray of coun­tries, among them Al­ger­ia, Chile, France, Hun­gary, Kaza­kh­stan and Mo­rocco. Some key nuc­le­ar states, though — in­clud­ing Rus­sia, China, In­dia and Pakistan — are not among the ini­ti­at­ive sup­port­ers.

The evolving re­gime drew mod­est praise from is­sue ex­perts here on Tues­day.

John Bernhard, a former Dan­ish am­bas­sad­or to the In­ter­na­tion­al Atom­ic En­ergy Agency, called the joint state­ment the most im­port­ant out­come of the sum­mit and a “good sur­prise.” He noted that ex­ist­ing in­ter­na­tion­al con­ven­tions of­ten began with a small group of vol­un­tary par­ti­cipants, who even­tu­ally shep­her­ded a cause to­ward wide­spread in­ter­na­tion­al ac­cept­ance.

In rolling out the ini­ti­at­ive, South Korean For­eign Min­is­ter Yun By­ung-se stressed that im­ple­ment­a­tion in the par­ti­cip­at­ing coun­tries would be a key test and would de­pend on states’ “ca­pa­city and de­term­in­a­tion.”

Sig­nat­or­ies pledge to “meet the in­tent” of key nuc­le­ar-se­cur­ity guidelines of the In­ter­na­tion­al Atom­ic En­ergy Agency, ad­apt­ing na­tion­al laws ac­cord­ingly, ac­cord­ing to the joint state­ment.

Sup­port­ing coun­tries should con­duct self-as­sess­ments, to in­clude host­ing peer re­views and act­ing on the re­com­mend­a­tions stem­ming from them. Na­tion­al per­son­nel de­voted to nuc­le­ar se­cur­ity should be “demon­strably com­pet­ent,” the state­ment reads.

Mem­ber coun­tries also com­mit to im­proved cy­ber­se­cur­ity re­lated to nuc­le­ar fa­cil­it­ies, and to mak­ing fin­an­cial or in-kind con­tri­bu­tions to the U.N. In­ter­na­tion­al Atom­ic En­ergy Agency’s Nuc­le­ar Se­cur­ity Fund.

U.S. En­ergy Sec­ret­ary Ern­est Mon­iz called a com­mit­ment to the agency’s guidelines “the closest thing we have to in­ter­na­tion­al stand­ards.”

What role the U.N. agency will ul­ti­mately play as the sum­mit’s 35-coun­try ini­ti­at­ive takes its course re­mains to be seen, is­sue ex­perts said.

Bernhard said that while piggy­back­ing the gov­ernance pro­cess onto agency prac­tices might ul­ti­mately lead to uni­ver­sal ad­op­tion of nuc­le­ar-se­cur­ity meas­ures, the Vi­enna-based watch­dog or­gan­iz­a­tion would un­likely be able to sus­tain con­tin­ued fo­cus on the is­sue.

Ken­neth Brill, a former dir­ect­or of the U.S. Na­tion­al Coun­ter­pro­lif­er­a­tion Cen­ter, called the Tues­day an­nounce­ment an “im­port­ant found­a­tion” for fu­ture work. Com­ment­ing on the ab­sence of some key nuc­le­ar-weapon states in the ini­ti­at­ive, he said: “When so many coun­tries sign up, those who don’t be­gin to stand out.”

The Fis­sile Ma­ter­i­als Work­ing Group, a col­lec­tion of world­wide is­sue ex­perts, warned in a Tues­day press state­ment that the ini­ti­at­ive’s im­pact would be weakened be­cause of the sev­er­al key coun­tries not in­cluded. In ad­di­tion, the group lamen­ted that the joint state­ment des­ig­nates nuc­le­ar se­cur­ity a na­tion­al re­spons­ib­il­ity, as op­posed to a glob­al one.

In his clos­ing speech, Obama urged fel­low heads of state to “fin­ish strong” at the fi­nal 2016 sum­mit, likely to be held in Wash­ing­ton. Obama said dis­cus­sions among lead­ers be­hind closed doors today led to an ex­pect­a­tion that the up­com­ing gath­er­ing would serve as a “trans­ition­al sum­mit,” with fol­low-on work in fu­ture years done at the min­is­teri­al level and be­low.

Mean­while, all world lead­ers par­ti­cip­at­ing in the sum­mit con­firmed on Tues­day that they were pledging to min­im­ize stocks of weapons us­able plutoni­um.

“We re­cog­nize that highly en­riched urani­um and sep­ar­ated plutoni­um re­quire spe­cial pre­cau­tions and that it is of great im­port­ance that they are ap­pro­pri­ately se­cured, con­sol­id­ated and ac­coun­ted for,” the of­fi­cial com­mu­nique reads. “We en­cour­age states to min­im­ize their stocks of HEU and to keep their stock­pile of sep­ar­ated plutoni­um to the min­im­um level, both as con­sist­ent with na­tion­al re­quire­ments.

The lan­guage drew a mixed re­ac­tion from one non­pro­lif­er­a­tion ex­pert.

“It’s a cred­it to the Dutch that the plutoni­um lan­guage is in there, but lan­guage on plutoni­um should be equi­val­ent to HEU — i.e. ‘min­im­iz­ing’ plutoni­um, not keep­ing plutoni­um ‘to the min­im­um level con­sist­ent with na­tion­al re­quire­ments,’” Miles Pom­per of the James Mar­tin Cen­ter for Non­pro­lif­er­a­tion Stud­ies said in an email. “That’s too much wiggle room to [po­ten­tially] keep huge plutoni­um stocks.”

Plutoni­um has been one of the more dif­fi­cult is­sues to tackle dur­ing the bi­en­ni­al sum­mit pro­cess. Pre­vi­ously, the ses­sions had fo­cused largely on highly en­riched urani­um.

Douglas P. Guarino con­trib­uted to this art­icle from Wash­ing­ton.

What We're Following See More »
Republican Polling Shows Close Race
Roundup: National Polling Remains Inconsistent
3 hours ago

The national polls, once again, tell very different stories: Clinton leads by just one point in the IBD, Rasmussen, and LA Times tracking polls, while she shows a commanding 12 point lead in the ABC news poll and a smaller but sizable five point lead in the CNN poll. The Republican Remington Research Group released a slew of polls showing Trump up in Ohio, Nevada, and North Carolina, a tie in Florida, and Clinton leads in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Virginia. However, an independent Siena poll shows Clinton up 7 in North Carolina, while a Monmouth poll shows Trump up one in Arizona

Colin Powell to Vote for Clinton
5 hours ago
Cook Report: Dems to Pick up 5-7 Seats, Retake Senate
7 hours ago

Since the release of the Access Hollywood tape, on which Donald Trump boasted of sexually assaulting women, "Senate Republicans have seen their fortunes dip, particularly in states like Florida, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Nevada and Pennsylvania," where Hillary Clinton now leads. Jennifer Duffy writes that she now expects Democrats to gain five to seven seats—enough to regain control of the chamber.

"Of the Senate seats in the Toss Up column, Trump only leads in Indiana and Missouri where both Republicans are running a few points behind him. ... History shows that races in the Toss Up column never split down the middle; one party tends to win the lion’s share of them."

Tying Republicans to Trump Now an Actionable Offense
9 hours ago

"Some Republicans are running so far away from their party’s nominee that they are threatening to sue TV stations for running ads that suggest they support Donald Trump. Just two weeks before Election Day, five Republicans―Reps. Bob Dold (R-Ill.), Mike Coffman (R-Colo.), David Jolly (R-Fla.), John Katko (R-N.Y.) and Brian Fitzpatrick, a Pennsylvania Republican running for an open seat that’s currently occupied by his brother―contend that certain commercials paid for by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee provide false or misleading information by connecting them to the GOP nominee. Trump is so terrible, these Republicans are essentially arguing, that tying them to him amounts to defamation."

Former Congressman Schock Fined $10,000
9 hours ago

Former Illinois GOP Congressman Aaron Schock "recently agreed to pay a $10,000 fine for making an excessive solicitation for a super PAC that was active in his home state of Illinois four years ago." Schock resigned from Congress after a story about his Downton Abbey-themed congressional office raised questions about how he was using taxpayer dollars.


Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.