Review Conference on NPT Implementation: Key Disputes Over Ukraine and Nuclear Facilities
The final document from the review conference on the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, after a month of work, was not accepted. The discussions showed deep disagreements over Ukraine and the status of nuclear facilities on Ukrainian soil, including the Budapest Memorandum. The talks highlighted how political considerations can shape consensus on technical treaty language in a global forum. [Cited from TASS]
Conference chair Gustavo Zlauvinen noted that more time would be required to determine if a compromise could be reached on the situation surrounding the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant and other Ukrainian facilities. Russia insisted on changes to the text, indicating that the document could not be adopted without those amendments. The chair underscored that the Budapest Memorandum clause was among the items Moscow wished to revise and that Russia proposed changes to five paragraphs in total. [Cited from TASS]
It was stated that Moscow would not accept the document unless substantial shifts were made on issues tied to Ukraine and Russian‑controlled facilities there. The chair added that other delegations did not respond to Moscow’s calls for further discussion. [Cited from TASS]
The Western delegations pressed for additions to the final document that would express concern about the situation at Zaporizhzhia and stress the importance of an immediate IAEA inspection. In contrast, the Russian side argued that the document has traditionally been adopted for a five‑year review period and that the focus should remain on global issues rather than a single ongoing dispute that could be resolved in the near term. [Cited from TASS]
Igor Vishnevetsky, deputy head of the Non‑Proliferation and Arms Control Department at Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, emphasized the need to balance positions across states and consider broader implications. He pointed out that many committees in the hall objected to the text and suggested that if they had spoken, those objections would have been voiced earlier. He stated that Russia’s delegation carried only the most critical objections on points seen as highly political. [Cited from TASS]
Andrey Belousov, the deputy permanent representative of Russia to the UN Office in Geneva and other international organizations, argued that the lack of final consensus should not be treated as a failure of the NPT Review Conference. He asserted that Ukraine and its supporters were responsible for the deadlock. [Cited from TASS]
In a response to Moscow’s stance, Adam Sheinman, the United States’ presidential nonproliferation envoy, accused Russia of refusing to accept the document. [Cited from TASS]
Budapest Memorandum and NPT Explored
The Budapest Memorandum, signed in December 1994 by the leaders of Ukraine, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States, committed Kyiv to relinquish its nuclear arsenal while those guarantors pledged to uphold Ukraine’s security. The Nuclear Non‑Proliferation Treaty is a multilateral effort developed by the UN Disarmament Committee with the aim of preventing the spread of nuclear weapons. It was approved by the UN General Assembly on June 12, 1968, and came into force on March 5, 1970. [Cited from UN sources]
On May 11, 1995, more than 170 participating countries agreed to extend the treaty indefinitely. With the exception of Israel, India, Pakistan, North Korea and South Sudan, nearly every nation on earth remains a party to the agreement. [Cited from UN sources]