The P5 process is now five years old, but how much progress has been made since 2009? And what are the prospects for the forthcoming NPT Review Conference in 2015?
As the P5 Process aged, most non-nuclear-weapon states (NNWS) grew more sceptical that closed, multilateral discussions could end the disarmament standstill. The P5 have learned to talk, but after five years they are still crawling. Despite the advent of the P5 process in 2009, most assessments highlight the fact that little progress has been made against the disarmament-specific actions in the Action Plan.
This paper examines the P5’s work over the past year in order to anticipate the likely shape of the discussions at the 2015 Review Conference. To do so, it draws upon previous RUSI analysis on activity in the ‘P5 process’, public statements, and interviews with officials from both NWS and NNWS.
It argues that the challenge for NWS will be to convince their non-nuclear counterparts that the process’s value and significance in the long term is not merely a convenient cover for collective stagnation in the short and medium term. Outputs over the last year, as well as those expected in the coming year, could go some way to assure others that this is not the case. Alternatively, those outputs, depending upon their quality and the way they are presented, could be viewed as more symbolism than substance and could lead to heightened criticism.
Finally, this paper expresses concern at the likely sour atmosphere at the Review Conference, but argues that swift action by the P5 to improve their public messaging and develop a working plan can improve prospects for agreement at that meeting.
About the Author
Andrea Berger is a Research Fellow focusing on non-proliferation, arms control and Korean Peninsula security issues. She is also the Deputy Director for the UK Project on Nuclear Issues and a contributor for NK News. Andrea previously worked in non-proliferation research and analysis at the International Centre for Security Analysis. She has also worked for the Government of Canada in a number of analytical capacities, lastly in the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development.
WRITTEN BY
Andrea Berger
Associate Fellow
