The 1985 Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference: Looking Ahead

The upcoming Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference is seen as a significant event to assess global nonproliferation sentiment and confidence in the NPT itself. Unlike the 1980 Review Conference, this year's conference is expected to be less marred by political tensions and the urgent need to reduce dependence on fossil fuels. The preparatory meetings leading up to the conference have been relatively free of political disagreements among NPT parties.

There are three possible outcomes for the conference. A clear reaffirmation of the NPT would strengthen its authority, attract more countries to join, and send a strong message against proliferation. A more ambiguous outcome that neither questions nor reaffirms the treaty would be less helpful but still acceptable for the United States. In such a case, the credibility of the NPT would remain intact, frustrating potential proliferators who seek signs of weakening international sentiment. The least favorable outcome would be if the conferees question the validity of the NPT or threaten to withdraw, which would undermine the treaty's authority and encourage potential proliferators.

Regardless of the final outcome, the debate during the conference is expected to be contentious. Arms control issues, particularly the failure of nuclear powers to meet their obligations for NPT-mandated arms reductions, will be a major point of contention. Many non-nuclear states argue that the growing number of warheads in the arsenals of superpowers poses a greater threat to global security than the spread of nuclear weapons to non-weapons states. Third World countries also criticize advanced nations for not doing enough to assist non-nuclear states in acquiring peaceful nuclear energy for development purposes.

The Soviets are believed to want the conference to succeed but also to use it for political advantage and to exert pressure on the United States regarding arms control. Their announcement of a unilateral weapons testing moratorium is seen as an attempt to position themselves favorably on arms control, deflect criticism from neutral and non-aligned countries toward the United States, and put the US delegation on the defensive regarding comprehensive test bans.