Human Rights Law Can Solve a Key Non-Proliferation Loophole – Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation

Report on Strengthening Nuclear Non-Proliferation through Human Rights Law and the Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction: Nuclear Proliferation as an Obstacle to Sustainable Development

The proliferation of nuclear weapons presents a significant threat to international peace and security, directly undermining the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions. While the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) is a foundational element of global security, existing legal loopholes challenge its efficacy. This report examines how a recent development in international human rights law offers a pathway to strengthen non-proliferation efforts, thereby reinforcing the global commitment to sustainable development. However, the success of this approach is contingent upon robust international cooperation and adherence to the rule of law, key tenets of SDG 16 and SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals.

Analysis of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Framework

The NPT has been instrumental in curbing the spread of nuclear weapons. However, its framework contains a critical ambiguity that hinders progress towards comprehensive disarmament and threatens global stability.

• The “Manufacturing” Loophole: The NPT’s language prohibits non-nuclear states from acquiring or manufacturing nuclear weapons, but the term “manufacture” is interpreted narrowly. This allows states to develop all necessary components and technologies for a nuclear weapon up to the point of final assembly, effectively becoming nuclear-threshold states.
• Civilian Nuclear Programs: The treaty protects the right to develop civilian nuclear energy. This provision has been exploited by states to develop sensitive technologies, such as uranium enrichment, that have dual-use capabilities, creating a pathway to weaponization under a civilian guise.
• Impact on SDG 16: These loopholes weaken the international legal architecture designed to maintain peace and security. They undermine the effectiveness of global institutions and contravene the objective of creating a peaceful and inclusive society as envisioned in SDG 16.

Integrating Human Rights Law to Reinforce Disarmament Efforts

A significant development in international human rights law provides a new legal basis for challenging nuclear proliferation, aligning disarmament efforts with fundamental human rights and the protection of life, a principle that underpins SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being.

General Comment No. 36 (GC-36)

The United Nations Human Rights Committee’s General Comment No. 36 offers an authoritative interpretation of Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) – the right to life.

• A Broader Prohibition: Paragraph 66 of GC-36 explicitly states that the threat or use of weapons of mass destruction is incompatible with the right to life. Crucially, it obligates states to “refrain from developing, producing, testing, [and] acquiring” such weapons.
• Closing the NPT Gap: This interpretation extends the prohibition beyond assembly and use to the entire development cycle of nuclear weapons. It establishes a precedent under international human rights law that activities such as high-level uranium enrichment, even if permissible under a narrow reading of the NPT, violate the right to life.
• Strengthening SDG 16: By linking disarmament directly to a core human right, GC-36 strengthens the rule of law at the international level. It provides a powerful tool for holding states accountable and advances the goal of building effective and just institutions.

Challenges to Implementation: National Sovereignty and International Law

The primary obstacle to leveraging this human rights framework is the inconsistent adherence to international law by key global actors. The United States’ tendency toward exceptionalism, particularly its disregard for certain international legal norms, weakens the global governance structures essential for achieving the SDGs.

• Undermining Global Partnerships (SDG 17): When a major power selectively adheres to international law, it erodes the trust and cooperation necessary for effective multilateral action on global challenges like nuclear proliferation.
• Impeding Progress on SDG 16: Such actions undermine the legitimacy and authority of international legal bodies and treaties, hindering the development of peaceful and just societies governed by the rule of law. For the potential of GC-36 to be realized, a renewed commitment to multilateralism is essential.

Recommendations for Action

To integrate this human rights-based approach into non-proliferation advocacy and advance the Sustainable Development Goals, the following actions are recommended:

1. Normalize the Human Rights-Disarmament Link: The United Nations and member states should actively promote the legal principles outlined in GC-36 to establish a clear international norm that the development and production of nuclear weapons are a violation of the right to life, thereby strengthening the foundation for SDG 16.
2. Enhance Domestic Advocacy and Policy Coherence: Civil society organizations and advocates within nations, including the United States, should urge governments to formally recognize the connection between human rights law and non-proliferation. This includes pushing for legislative hearings and policy reviews to align national security strategies with international human rights obligations and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
3. Strengthen Multilateral Cooperation (SDG 17): Advocates must challenge actions that weaken the international legal order and call for a consistent application of international law. Fostering global partnerships committed to the rule of law is critical for creating an environment where legal instruments like GC-36 can be effectively utilized to achieve a world free of nuclear weapons.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

   The primary Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) addressed in the article is:

   • SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

     This goal is central to the article’s theme, which focuses on promoting peaceful and inclusive societies by strengthening international law and institutions to prevent violence. The article discusses the role of international treaties like the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and human rights law (ICCPR) in preventing the spread of nuclear weapons. The entire argument for using human rights law to close loopholes in non-proliferation treaties is an effort to build stronger global institutions and legal frameworks to ensure peace and security.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

   Based on the focus on international law and the prevention of violence through arms control, the following specific targets under SDG 16 can be identified:

   • Target 16.1: Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere.

     The article directly addresses this target by focusing on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. The text argues that the “development, production, and testing” of such weapons is a threat, and preventing their spread is a critical measure to avert the catastrophic violence and death that their use would cause. The effort to stop proliferation is a direct action towards reducing the potential for the most extreme form of violence.

   • Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.

     This target is at the core of the article’s argument. The text analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of international laws like the NPT and the ICCPR. It highlights how the United States’ “disregard [for] international law” undermines global legal principles. The proposal to use the UN Human Rights Committee’s General Comment No. 36 to strengthen non-proliferation efforts is a clear attempt to “promote the rule of law at the… international level.”

   • Target 16.4: By 2030, significantly reduce illicit financial and arms flows, strengthen the recovery and return of stolen assets and combat all forms of organized crime.

     While the article discusses state-level proliferation rather than illicit arms flows by non-state actors, the principle of controlling the movement and creation of dangerous weapons is directly relevant. The article’s concern with the NPT loophole that allows states to “develop nearly everything required to build a nuclear weapon” is fundamentally about stopping the flow and spread of weapons of mass destruction technology and materials.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

   The article implies several indicators that could be used to measure progress towards the identified targets:

   • Indicator for Target 16.1: Number of states developing, producing, testing, or acquiring nuclear weapons.

     The article implies this indicator by mentioning that states like “Iran and North Korea have exploited” loopholes in the NPT. Progress would be measured by a reduction in such activities and the strengthening of legal frameworks to prevent states from reaching the threshold of nuclear capability. The call to “stop the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction” points to this as a key measure of success.

   • Indicator for Target 16.3: Level of state compliance with international law and authoritative legal interpretations.

     The article provides a negative example of this indicator by citing the Trump administration’s actions, which “disregard international law.” A positive measure of progress would be the degree to which states, particularly major powers like the United States, adhere to and officially recognize international legal principles, such as those laid out in General Comment No. 36. The call for a “Congressional hearing” to document the connection between human rights law and non-proliferation is a step toward creating such an indicator.

   • Indicator for Target 16.4: Monitoring and restriction of activities related to nuclear weapons development, such as uranium enrichment.

     The article explicitly suggests that the new understanding of human rights law “may provide the opportunity to outlaw high level uranium enrichment.” This implies that tracking and regulating the production of fissile materials is a tangible indicator for measuring progress in halting the proliferation of nuclear weapons technology, thereby reducing the “flow” of materials essential for these arms.

4. Create a table with three columns titled ‘SDGs, Targets and Indicators” to present the findings from analyzing the article. In this table, list the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), their corresponding targets, and the specific indicators identified in the article.

   SDGs	Targets	Indicators
   SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions	16.1: Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere.	Number of states pursuing or acquiring nuclear weapons capabilities (implied by the focus on stopping proliferation and the mention of Iran and North Korea).
   SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions	16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels.	Degree of state compliance with international treaties (NPT, ICCPR) and legal interpretations (GC-36), contrasted by the article’s example of the U.S. disregarding international law.
   SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions	16.4: Significantly reduce illicit financial and arms flows.	Level of monitoring and legal restriction on activities related to nuclear weapon development, such as “high level uranium enrichment.”

Source: armscontrolcenter.org