Treaty of Shanbally
This article is incomplete because it is pending further input from participants, or it is a work-in-progress by one author.
Please comment on this article's talk page to share your input, comments and questions.
Note: To contribute to this article, you may need to seek help from the author(s) of this page.
|Treaty for the End of Nuclear Armament Proliferation in the World|
|Signed||1 August 1965|
|Effective||1 January 1968|
|Condition||Ratification by Chervolesia, Estmere, Nuxica, Narozalica, Senria, Swetania, Werania, and at least 25 other nations.|
|Depositaries||Government of Caldia|
|Languages||Estmerish, Floren, Gaullican, Narodyn, Senrian, Weranic, Xiaodongese, and Yavorstri|
The Treaty for the End of Nuclear Armament Proliferation in the World, conventionally known as the Treaty of Shanbally, is a treaty drafted in the eponymous city with the aim of reducing, and where possible eliminating, the proliferation and growth of existing nuclear stockpiles in the world. It aims to prevent the further spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology and instead promote cooperation between nations in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and technology. Negotiations first began in 1961 after worlds emerging nuclear powers conducted a series of successful tests. It was negotiated by temporary Community of Nations Special Committee on Disarmament based in Garrafrauns, Caldia.
The treaty opened for signature in 1965 after almost three years of negotiations. It entered into force in 1968. More governments have adhered to the Treaty of Shanbally than any other agreement regarding arms limitation and disarmament. The only nation that has never accepted the treaty is Xiaodong, which possess nuclear weapons that are not legally sanctioned.
The treaty defines nuclear states as those that have built, tested, and stockpiled nuclear devices before 30 September 1964. Nuclear weapons states are officially recognized by the Community of Nations and are considered to be the only states to posses nuclear weapons in accordance with international law. These states are Chervolesia, Estmere, Narozalica, Nuxica, Senria, Swetania, and Werania. Negotiations almost collapsed following Senria's successful nuclear test on 21 September 1964. The Senrian government was criticized of trying to legally gain status as a nuclear state despite actively working to help draft a treaty with the aim of disarmament. While at the time the treaty was proposed there were predictions that there would be 15-20 states with nuclear weapons within 20 years, only Xiaodong is confirmed posses nuclear weapons without lawful status. Zorasan has been accused of working to develop nuclear weapons technology, but these allegations have not yet been proven.
The Treaty of Shanbally has been criticized for allowing so many states to maintain a nuclear arsenal in line with international law. Under the terms of the treaty, the six nations who developed, tested, and stockpiled nuclear weapons prior to 30 September 1964 were permitted to continue their weapons programs and maintain their arsenal. Proponents of nuclear disarmament have argued allowing so many nations to maintain internationally sanctioned stockpiles.
The decision to recognize Senria as a nuclear state also caused controversy. Senria successfully conducted a nuclear test on 24 September 1964, three years after negotiations began; the country was accused of acting deceptively or hypocritically by pursuing a nuclear weaponry program while simultaneously negotiating a treaty intended to aim nuclear proliferation. Senria has by and large rejected this criticism, noting that its actions were entirely legal under international law at the time. Takesi Takahata, Prime Minister of Senria at the time of the treaty's signing, claimed that Senria was being subjected to unfair scrutiny because it was the only non-white nation to have nuclear weapons at the time, and stated that "the perpetual security threat posed by the aggressor nation both justifies and necessitates Senria pursuing all avenues of self-defense, including nuclear devices".
While the treaty is considered to be successful in deterring other states from pursing a nuclear capacity, it has been criticized for not having provisions to sufficiently address the development of nuclear devices by non-signatories. Sydney Allen, a prominent Estmerish anti-nuclear activist, has argued the treaty should have outlined steps all signatories would take in the event that a non-signatory successfully tested or stockpiled nuclear weapons. In the case of Xiaodong, Allen has stated all signatory states should have been required by the treaty to place sanctions on Xiaodong.
Xiaodong, the only state who has refused to sign the Treaty, argues that the Treaty was written with the intention to "freeze" the international system so that the most powerful states of 1965 would be able to indefinitely continue military and political dominance through exclusive access to nuclear weapons and thereby have the ability to threaten other states. Xiaodong has stated it would only sign the treaty if the currently recognised nuclear states commit and make concrete steps towards multilateral disarmament, stating that it would be pointless for Xiaodong to unilaterally disarm if the vast majority of nuclear warheads remained in operation. However this stance has been criticised as the estimated nuclear warheads Xiaodong possesses are believed to be one of the largest stockpiles on the planet.
Despite Swetania being one of the recognised nuclear states by the treaty, the country's political establishment has repeatedly criticised it for its failure to provide "functional intergovernmental mechanisms for the promotion and establishment of multilateral and universal disarmament" as said by General Commissar for Foreign Affairs Visvaldis Lācis in 1991, accentuated by Swetania's concrete efforts at unilaterally reducing the size its arsenal, nominally to set an example for other nuclear states. Furthermore, some political figures often associated with pro-Southern positions (mostly through the Policy Centre for Coian Diplomacies) have condemned the treaty for its perceived failures to adapt to "evolving geopolitical realities" and "excessive dogmatism" they believe frustrate collaboration and compliance on nuclear-related matters with southern and developing countries (widely understood as referring to Xiaodong, and more recently to Zorasan too), and as such hindering the enforcement of the treaty's aims.