Bureaucratic activism - Dr Elbaradei (IAEA)

IAEA Director-General, Dr Mohamed Elbaradei spoke at school today. It's sad that his criticism of the nuclear weapons state's unwillingness to disarm (as required under the 35 year old Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty) could be described as radical, but that's where the disarmament debate is at. Unusual (and welcome) to see an experienced international bureaucrat willing to stick his neck out to describe the shortcomings of the system, and a pleasant surprise to hear him talk passionately about development as a component of international security - "if we had more Mother Theresa's we'd have less suicide bombers." Here are some of his main points:

- The current security system is not sustainable because it is not equitable. States have legitimate security concerns that need to be met. For example Iran feels threatened by 140,000 US troops in Iraq, quasi-nuclear Israel, nuclear Russia, nuclear Pakistan and a history of regional conflict - these perceived vulnerabilities need to be offset somehow.

- Need an international security system that does not rely on nuclear weapons. So long as one state has them, proliferation will happen. Proliferation is not a technological issue, but a threat perception issue. Proliferants tend to be in unstable regions - the instability is a root cause of proliferation and must be addressed.

- Current peace and security architecture ignores the plight of those less strategically relevant (DRC, Rwanda, Sudan, etc). A new system needs to be based on human security. The individual right to security is entwined with the right to peace, dignity and freedom.

- There is a contradiction between nuclear weapons states modernising their arsenals (eg: UK Trident) while at the same time preaching to nuclear aspirants that nuclear weapons are not the path to their security. What possible use do nuclear weapons states have for 27,000 warheads "short of an alien invasion." Despite the legal obligations under the NPT, the issue needs political resolution.

- The unilateral approach to security is easier ("instant gratification"), but delivers less long-term benefits. Multilateralism is harder but the only way.

- On Iran, engagement is necessary. Sanctions are only one tool and need to be supplemented by direct engagement. "Isolation strengthens the hardliners, engagement empowers the moderates." Need also to deal with the longstanding bilateral grievances between the US and Iran.

- Elbaradei was particularly taken by Bill Clinton's view - Powerful states needs to build a world they would want to live in should they ever cease to be the big guys on the block.