SANCTIONS HAVE BEEN EFFECTIVE AT STOPPING THE SPREAD OF WMD
ECONOMIC SANCTIONS HAVE EMPIRICALLY STOPPED WEAPONS DEVELOPMENT
Jonathan Dean, Union of Concerned Scientists, 9-13-99 (DOWNLOAD) updated from "The Last 15 Minutes," May 1996 Briefing Book on Ballistic Missile Defensehttp://www.clw.org/ef/bmdbook/contents.html // ACS
Economic sanctions are another form of insurance against weapon development. They can influence the actions of other states and block weapons development. Hard hit by sanctions, President Milosevic of Serbia reined in the Bosnian Serbs in the Dayton talks. Continuing sanctions have caused the Iraqi government to accept a stringent regime of outside inspections. The threat of UN economic sanctions was one factor in causing the North Korean government to drop its insistence on building new plutonium-producing reactors.
ECONOMIC SANCTIONS ARE AN IMPORTANT PART OF AN INTERLINKED SYSTEM THE USA HAS TO STOP NUCLEAR THRESHOLD STATES FROM ACQUIRING NUCLEAR WEAPONS
Peter Grier, Staff writer, The Christian Science Monitor, October 19, 1999, SECTION: USA; Pg. 1 HEADLINE: New rules for the nuclear age // ln-10-29-99-acs
Thus the US has little direct leverage over the actions of many of the "nuclear threshold" states. It relies instead on a net of interlinked measures - from multilateral weapons pacts to economic sanctions - to control the spread of atomic weaponry.
SANCTIONS AND ECONOMIC INCENTIVES ARE CRITICAL PARTS OF NON-PROLIFERATION EFFORTS
JANE PERLEZ, The New York Times, October 15, 1999, SECTION: Section A; Page 12; HEADLINE: DEFEAT OF A TREATY: THE ARMS EXPERTS; A Nuclear Safety Valve Is Shut Off, but U.S. Maintains Other Safeguards // ln-10-29-99-acs
For years, Washington has marshaled a variety of carrots and sticks in its efforts to combat proliferation and curb nuclear arsenals. These include arms control accords with the old Soviet Union; economic and political incentives to persuade non-nuclear nations not to build the bomb, and the threat of political and economic isolation against those who do.
PAKISTAN'S SANCTIONS EXPERIENCE HAS CAUSED IT TO WITHDRAW NUCLEAR WEAPONS COOPERATION WITH TURKEY AS IT IS ANXIOUS TO PLEASE THE USA
Juan Romero, Jane's Intelligence Review March 1, 1999; Pg. 32 HEADLINE: Charting reactions to the Islamic bomb //lnu-acs
The reported offer by Pakistan's Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to Turkish President Suleyman Demirel to co-operate on the development of nuclear weapons was made before Islamabad's own nuclear tests and the imposition of US sanctions on Pakistan, according to the Turkish daily Radical. This fact makes the possibility that it will be reiterated rather remote (now that Islamabad is aware of how disastrous sanctions can be to the Pakistani economy) unless there is a clear nuclear threat to Pakistan's national security from New Delhi and Tehran, in which case Islamabad might be willing to disregard the economic and political costs that a transfer of nuclear weapons capability to Ankara would bring. Essentially, whatever move Pakistan decides upon, it will have to take into account first what repercussions this will have on relations with the USA. Islamabad is dependent on US investments and loans and also on sophisticated US military hardware, which it cannot purchase from Russia as India is a very important market for Moscow. Pakistan has placed itself in a precarious position with the nuclear tests and is desperately looking for a way out.
REDUCED SANCTIONS HAVE BEEN USED TO PERSUADE INDIA TO SIGN THE CTBT
DEXTER FILKINS The Gazette (Montreal) April 12, 1999 p. A1 HEADLINE: India stages missile test: Pakistan hints at fast response //lnu-acs
Canada, the United States and other Western nations imposed limited sanctions on India when it conducted its underground nuclear tests last year, but has significantly relaxed them in the expectation that the Indian government will sign the global Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.