26 to 27 of March 2012 will witness the second nuclear security summit in the South Korean capital of Seoul. The location of venue of the summit in the geo-strategic important region, which is also embroiled in conflict, has certainly added to the significance of the summit to be attended by about 53 countries including India, Russia, US, China and UK. Delivering his bi-weekly radio address, the South Korean President, Lee Myung-bak stated that the main theme of the deliberation in the summit will be the issue proliferation of nuclear technology and its falling into hands of non-state actors such as terrorists. To quote him, “Currently, radioactive materials that can be utilized to make as many as some 130,000 nuclear weapons are scattered around the globe. The objective of the Nuclear Security Summit is to prevent such nuclear materials from falling into the hands of terrorist groups.” He further added, “Moreover, it is aiming at ultimately making a world without nuclear weapons by reducing the amount of nuclear materials around the world to a minimum level and tightening control of them.” However, another issue which will likely be focused, if not in main discussions, is the North Korean issue. It has become more significant in view of its declaration of launching rocket in the second week of April 2012, which the South Korean leadership has termed ‘grave provocation.’ Besides the two major issues, reports suggest that many individual countries will come forth with draft plans to augment international nuclear security.

The concept of nuclear security, or the moorings about a safe nuclear regime in the world, is not a nascent one. It has been in circulation since the bombs dropped in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. Nuclear disarmament has been a regular theme in international political discourse since the onset of the cold war. International bodies like the United Nations Organization and International Atomic Energy Agency, and various treaties like Partial Test Ban Treaty, Non-Proliferation Treaty, Fissile Material (Cut-off) Treaty, and Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty geared towards evolution of a global nuclear disarmament regime. But such measures have failed primarily as they lacked enforcement mechanism, as well as they become instruments in hands of some powers to target their rivals. It may not be appropriate to say that all treaties are lop sided or are aimed at perpetuating the world into two camps of ‘nuclear haves’ and ‘nuclear have-nots,’ but the proliferation of nuclear technologies in past few decades indicate that the treaties have been misused or their violations have been overlooked deliberately. It is the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1540 that provided further ballast to the concept of nuclear security. The resolution passed in 2004, with increasing fears of falling of nuclear technology into the hands of non-state actors including terrorist organizations, mandated “under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, obliging States, inter alia, to refrain from supporting by any means non-State actors from developing, acquiring, manufacturing, possessing, transporting, transferring or using nuclear, chemical or biological weapons and their delivery systems.”

Reportedly, there are 18 cases of nuclear material theft or loss, which can be used for nuclear-weapon making purposes. The Moldovan police busted in 2011 a smuggling ring, which attempted to sell highly enriched uranium. A report suggests that one member of the ring still remains at large with one kilogram of this material. It is possible that while states, howsoever combative, may bring certain measure of responsibility while thinking of pushing nuclear button, the non-state actors without much obligations may go blood-thirsty once they acquire these material, which they can further improvise and develop weapons of far devastating nature. The extremist organizations like Al Qaeda are known for their penchant to acquire nuclear weapons. Former Secretary General of the United Nations, Kofi Annan rightly emphasized that such a strike by a terrorist organization would “thrust tens of millions of people into dire poverty and create a second death toll throughout the developing world.”

The issue of North Korea will likely figure in the nuclear summit. Though North Korea, under the leadership of young Kim Jong-un, had agreed last month to suspend nuclear tests, missile launches and uranium enrichment and to allow nuclear inspectors into the country in exchange of aid, the announcement that the country will launch rocket in April 2012 has made the neighbours jittery and revived the prospects of intense rivalry in the Korean peninsula. Park Jung-ha, the spokesperson of President Lee has declared that Seoul will work with six-parties including Russia, US, China and Japan towards resolving the issue, and has expressed concern that such a move may further jeopardize the peace prospects in the region. North Korea supported the planned launch of rocket and declared, “The peaceful development and use of space is a universally recognized legitimate right of a sovereign state.” These developments may likely factor in deliberations in Seoul summit. Japan, which is recovering from its tsunami disaster last year which also devastated its Fukushima nuclear plant, has declared to take necessary steps to counter the emerging situation. Its Defence Minister, Naoki Tanaka said, “Depending on the situation, we would consider deploying PAC3 missile interceptors and Aegis ships.” The 2009 missile test by North Korea had propelled the region to the vortex of instability. Hence, it will be dependent on the six parties particularly Russia, China and the US, and how they collaborate to tackle the crisis that may engulf the region.

Though President Lee has stated that the focus of the summit will be to checkmate fall of nuclear technology into the hands of non-state actors, it is likely that participating countries will put forward plans for the summit. The UK will work for a joint statement, to be voluntarily signed by participating countries towards non- proliferation of nuclear material. France will put forward a proposal which, if implemented, will empower international bodies to inspect nuclear facilities in certain countries without permission. Such proposals may come up in the summit, but they are not likely to be passed as the participants may not agree to such mechanisms. More importantly, the issue of nuclear disarmament is so much driven by geopolitical and national interests; it is very difficult to achieve universal disarmament without compromising domestic policies. 

The Seoul summit may contribute richly to deliberations on nuclear disbarment and nuclear security in the globe. However, its usefulness to achieve the objectives as articulated by the South Korean leader can only be gauged from the summit pronouncements and their effectiveness. And also, on whether the participants evolve consensus on contentious issues, or differ as usual will depend the real worthiness of the Seoul Summit.