BI: Has the NPT been a success in the Middle East?
Einhorn: Yes. Not withstanding violations of the treaty by three Middle East countries, Iraq, Iran, and Libya, it has been a success. Iraq, Iran, and Libya adhered to the treaty cynically. But those who made a genuine commitment find that renouncing it is not so easy. Why? Because it has put in place political commitments that create a kind of non-nuclear inertia for countries that genuinely renounced a nuclear capability. It puts in place a norm that is the basis for pressuring them to comply with their obligations.
If not for the NPT, UNSCR 687 ending the first Gulf war would not have been possible. It put in place verification measures that we now see impeded Iraq's capability. Nor could the IAEA have conducted its rigorous investigation of Iran's clandestine program and pressured Iran to suspend its program. Without the NPT the US and UK could not have demanded that [Libyan leader Muammar] Qadhafi come clean and give up his program. And impediments to Israel-Arab peace negotiations would have been worse without the NPT.
BI: Is renouncing it so difficult for a member like, say, Iran?
Einhorn: Iran joined the NPT cynically and has been cynical about its obligations for 25 years. But take Egypt. Many Egyptians I have spoken to regret adhering to the NPT. They would like Egypt to have a better option today to go down the nuclear path if the situation in the region warranted it. They haven't entirely burned their bridges in Egypt, but there's a lot of nuclear inertia there now. Saudi Arabia would also find it hard to develop an indigenous capability. Even where there has been non-compliance, in two of the three cases I mentioned the NPT has been instrumental in getting them back into compliance.
BI: What can the NPT Review Conference currently taking place in New York do to improve the NPT regime in the Middle East?
Einhorn: At this stage, prospects for a successful conference are very small. The NPT of course will survive a conference without a final communique and will only be damaged a little bit. Only three or four of the previous six conferences have had a final communique, meaning a successful outcome. The real world will govern the health of the NPT, not what happens at this conference. But there will be missed opportunities, for example for putting greater pressure on Iran and developing ground rules for fuel cycle capabilities.
BI: Do you see a parallel or equivalency between NPT signatories that violate the treaty, as Iran is currently alleged to be doing, and non-signatories like Israel, India and Pakistan that develop a military nuclear capability.
Einhorn: I always draw a distinction between those that never joined and those that joined and cheated. Israel, Pakistan, and India never misled the international community; they made it clear they insist on keeping their options open. That's qualitatively different from a country joining and cheating, like Iran, Iraq and Libya. On the other hand, when India and Pakistan tested weapons, that had a negative impact by demonstrating they could defy non-proliferation norms, be mildly punished internationally and quickly be rehabilitated. Countries like Iran and North Korea gained the impression from this that they too could demonstrate a capability, weather a few years of sanctions, and eventually be rehabilitated too. I hope they are wrong and the world reacts very differently.
BI: Has Israel's avoidance of testing had fewer negative ramifications for the non-proliferation regime?
Einhorn: Israel's strategic ambiguity or opacity has been positive in terms of promoting peace in the region. The NPT has made Israel's posture possible. If the NPT had not served as a constraint on some of Israel's neighbors and they had felt compelled to go down the nuclear track, such an opaque posture would have been untenable.
BI: The NPT survived North Korea's developing of nuclear weapons. If Iran now also develops them, will the NPT still be viable?
Einhorn: Returns are not yet in on North Korea. We have to see whether they insist on retaining this capability, and how countries in the region like Japan and South Korea react. If North Korea retains its capability and Iran continues down this path, it could do irreparable damage to the NPT.
- Published 19/5/2005 (c) bitterlemons-international.org 
All Rights Reserved