The Central Asian Nuclear Weapons Free Zone is indeed a big deal to the nations of the region. They've been working on an agreement since 1992 under the assumption that it's what the U.S. and other nuclear powers wanted to see. Now, it turns out that while Russia and China are supportive, Britain, France and the United States have notified the United Nations that they are opposed.
nCa News and Analysis
Ashgabat, 6 October 2005 (nCa) --- Robert Joseph, US Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, met Wednesday with President Niyazov. During the meeting Turkmenistan reiterated its full commitment to non-proliferation and stated that as per longstanding policy of Turkmenistan, there was complete prohibition on transportation of weapons of mass destruction, missiles and related materials and components through the air space of Turkmenistan. ------- While Turkmenistan and other Central Asian countries are doing their best to establish a nuclear-weapons-free zone, it is apparent that the United States should do more to prove its sincerity to the region.
[...]
Turkmenistan, right from the beginning, has been advocating nuclear-weapons-free regime for the region.
The initiative for the Central Asia Nuclear-Weapons-Free Zone (CANWFZ) took shape after Mongolia declared itself a nuclear free zone in 1992. The idea was pushed forward by Uzbekistan during the 48th session of the UN General Assembly in 1993 after consultation with the other CA states.
On 27 February 1997 the presidents of all the Central Asian countries endorsed unanimously the Almaty Declaration, which combined the objectives of salvaging the Aral Sea and protection of the common river system with the need to declare Central Asia nuclear-weapons-free zone.
The terms of the draft document that has changed very little since 1997 bind the CA states to a non-proliferation regime, accept enhanced IAEA safeguards, and require them to introduce international standards to safeguard the nuclear installations. The proposed terms also ask the member states to comply fully with CTBT.
The Tashkent Meeting of the Central Asian countries that took place 7-9 February 2005 approved the draft of the resolution. The final draft is said to be very close to the original version that was put forward during the Samarkand Meeting of the regional countries on 27 September 2002.
[...]
AP quotes from their letter: "You should be in no doubt, France, Britain and the US will not support the CANWFZ Treaty if the February 8, 2005 text is signed without further changes," said the letter, dated 3 October 2005, which used the acronym for the zone.
?The letter does not say what the objections are, but the text of the draft leaves untouched language that Britain, France and the United States have long opposed. In particular, they object to ambiguous language in a clause called Article 12 which could give previous security agreements precedence over the treaty,? reports AP.
This position is difficult to understand because it is totally opposite to what the United States was saying during the early stages of the negotiations.
[..]
If the United States resisted the CANWFZ earlier because it appeared to override ?existing security arrangements? and opposes it now because it ?gives previous security agreements precedence over the treaty,? what kind of message does it send to the region?
This is total reversal of the earlier position and no explanation has been offered for this. The reversal of the position also puts into question the sincerity of the United Sates on an issue crucial to the region.
[..]
If sincerity is at the core of things, the United States should do two things immediately to convince the region of its good intentions:
Turkmenistan had floated a proposal a while ago to establish a regional centre for preventive diplomacy to handle the conflict situations before they boil over. Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan have already agreed to the idea and Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan are not opposed to it. If the United States really wants the Central Asian region to be free of the weapons of mass destruction, it should lend full and unconditional support to the proposal. Establishment of the centre for preventive diplomacy ? Regional Peace Centre ? in Ashgabat would provide a solid base for all other peace initiatives in the region.
The United States must prove by its actions, and not words alone, that it is committed to nuclear free regime, stability and peace in the region. This can be done by dismantling all the American military bases in the regime. This would put tremendous moral pressure on all the other power players to refrain from making the Central Asia their playground.
So, the nations of Central Asia want the U.S. to dismantle its military bases in the region. No wonder both the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense have visited there recently. But where is the coverage in the American media? As noted in another diary, the New York Times simply reported on Rumsfeld's Mongolian horse.