Nuclear-Free Zones
| Author | Bertel Heurlin |
| Date | 01 March 1966 |
| DOI | 10.1177/001083676600100302 |
| Published date | 01 March 1966 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
Bertel Heurlin Nuclear-free Zones
An Attempt to Place Suggested and Established
Nuclear-free
Zones
within the Framework
of International Politics
I.
Introduction
The
aim
of
this article is to
treat
the
concept of nuclear-free zones in a critical
manner,
both
within
the
sphere of gener-
al international politics and
within
the
narrower sphere
of
disarmament poli-
tics, and finally to conclude
with
abrief
treatment
of
the
military and technical
aspects of this concept.
As a result of this discussion it should
become evident
that
the
proposals
for
nuclear-free zones, on a
par
with
a
series of
other
political phenomena, may
under
certain conditions be regarded by
states as being an appropriate instrument
of
foreign policy, while in
other
cases
and
under
different conditions such pro-
posals will be discarded in favour
of
other methods.
Furthermore,
the
article will show
that
the
first proposals concerning nuclear-
free zones were initially
the
expression
of
Soviet-American controversy in Cen-
tral
Europe.
The
next series
of
proposals
must
be seen as a diversion manoeuvre
by
the
"new
countries", which
put
for-
ward
the
proposals primarily in order to
avoid nuclear tests by foreign powers
upon their
own
territory,
but
also re-
flecting their aversion to
the
presence
of
nuclear weapons in any shape or form.
Added
to this was
the
desire
for
a long-
term freeze
of
the
non-nuclear status,
and
the
wish
for
amore or less out-
spoken dissociation
from
direct engage-
ment
in
the
East-West
conflict. As re-
gards the third stage of development,
the
states
now
appear to manifest asteadily
diminishing interest towards using
the
concept
of
nuclear-free zones.
The
in-
terest is more pronouncedly directed
towards an agreement concerning world-
wide non-proliferation; and
the
previ-
ously accentuated interest of
the
neutral
countries in a unilateral (i. e.
without
compensation
from
the
present nuclear
powers) renunciation
of
all claim to
nuclear weapons is steadily decreasing.
The
question
of
nuclear-free zones
has been selected as a topic
of
study
partly because
the
matter
now
seems
clear enough to be
the
object
of
an
analysis, and partly because
there
exist
no exhaustive expositions of
the
subject,
evaluating
the
political aspects
of
the
problem.'
It is interesting to note
that
the
prob-
lem has been made
the
object
of
amore
comprehensive treatment in
the
Eastern
countries,
with
Poland and
the
Soviet
Union at
the
fore." This literature, how-
ever, is characterized by
the
desire to
demonstrate
the
beneficial effect
the
realization
of
nulear-free zones may have
upon developments in international poli-
tics.
It
is in
fact
more aquestion of rec-
ommendations
than
efforts
of
scientific
analyses. A very detailed account has
been
written
by
the
Polish Professor
Skowronski,
but
even here
the
emphasis
is on rejecting
the
United
States' argu-
ments
for
not
accepting
the
nuclear-free
zones. Characteristically
the
conclusion
12
BERTEL HEURLIN
states:
"In
view
of
the
wide
support
given to
the
idea of nuclear-free zones,
and
the
sufficiency
of
practical ex-
perience,
there
are grounds today
for
instituting zones on a
permanent
basis
as one of
the
guarantees of collective
security.':"
In this present examination an
attempt
has
been made
partly to present
the
case
as a whole and partly to analyze national
motives underlying
the
question
of
nu-
clear-free zones. No
attempt
towards a
solution
of
the
problem has
been
made,
since
the
concept
of
nuclear-free zones
is in my opinion
not
an isolated
and
independent phenomenon,
but
ameans
of national policy of
the
moment
rather
than
an end in itself.
2.
What
the Concept Entails
Ever since
the
Soviet Union, in a dis-
armament
proposal in March 1956, in-
troduced the proposal to set up a
nu-
clear-free zone in
Central
Europe,
the
term
"nuclear-free zones" has
been
a
concept in international politics.' Al-
though
the
definition
of
the
concept,
nuclear-free zones, was originally an
expression
of
aparticular interest in
foreign politics on
the
part
of
the
Soviet
Union
and
a
number
of
East European
states,
the
Western
powers
were
forced
to accept it as a concept in international
negotiations.
Drawing aparallel
with
the
problems
connected
with
the
disarmament negotia-
tions,
the
introduction of
the
concept
of
general and complete disarmament in
September 1959 manifests certain simi-
larities
with
the
introduction of
the
concept of nuclear-free zones. In
both
cases
there
was
talk
of
new
definitions
within
the
field of disarmament politics,
with
the
purpose of establishing aquite
definite conception
of
the
disarmament
problem.
It
was apparent,
that
in
both
cases
the
Western
powers saw it to
their
advantage to
adopt
these concepts with
aslightly altered meaning, though sub-
ject to conditions differing widely
from
those of
the
Soviet Union.
The
idea
of
the
concept "nuclear-free
zones" varies
not
only
from
country to
country, however,
but
is also modified
according to
the
times. If it was previ-
ously accepted
that
the
conception
of
the
term
"zone" was
tantamount
to an
area covering several countries, we notice
that
in 1964
the
Soviet
Union
insisted
that
anuclear-free zone could also con-
sist of a single country.
It
must
be clear
that
so long as
the
states consider it in
their
interests to maintain
the
concept,
which is
neither
unequivocal
nor
of a
constant size, as an instrument of
their
foreign policy, it will exist as a disputed
element
of
some significance in inter-
national politics.
What
meaning have the states chosen
to place
upon
the
concept
of
nuclear-
free
zones?
The
word
zone in inter-
national politics is primarily understood
to be an area regarded as being a
part
of
awhole.
The
whole in this case is
the
whole world.
The
starting-point
for
nuclear-free zones is a single state or
larger groups of states,
with
the
state as
the
smallest unit, since
the
concept has
never been applied to areas comprising
apart of a state.
The
simplest explana-
tion
of
the
term
"nuclear-free" in con-
nection
with
the concept, "zone", is:
that
the
area concerned is free of nuclear
weapons, or more specifically,
that
there
is no storage, production or testing
of
nuclear weapons taking place. It depends
upon
the
immediate situation and inter-
ests of
the
particular state as to
whether
amore differentiated definition has to
be employed.
It
is possible,
for
example,
to call an area comprising one or several
countries which in actual fact, though
without
any international agreement to
support it, is
without
nuclear weapons at
any given time, a nuclear-free zone. Ac-
cording to this definition one might
rightly call all countries "nuclear-free
To continue reading
Request your trial