URANIUM ENRICHMENT: PREVENTING PROLIFERATION RISKS WITHOUT UNDERMINING STATES' SOVEREIGNTY

1
URANIUM ENRICHMENT PREVENTING PROLIFERATION
RISKS WITHOUT UNDERMINING STATES' SOVEREIGNTY

• Milagros Álvarez Verdugo
• University of Barcelona

2
Preliminary remarks

• Uranium enrichment proliferation risks
  mistrusts.
• Proposals to limit the spread of enrichment
  capacities.
• Limitation should and can be achieve without
  undermining the States right to nuclear energy
  for peaceful purposes.

3
Speech sections

• Which is the current situation in economic,
  political and legal terms?
• Which are the tensions underlying the proposals
  already on the table?
• Which are the formulae that can prevent, in the
  long term and in the medium term, the
  proliferation risks associated with enrichment
  capacities?

4
1. CURRENT SITUATION

• Economic political perspective
• Narrow supply side (9 States - 5 companies)
• Doubts on capacity to satisfy future demand
• Legal perspective
• International control (NPT IAEA)
• Exports control (NSG)
• UNSC Res. 1540

5
2. MULTILATERALIZATION PROPOSALS

• Main options
• Guarantee of access to enriched uranium.
• Transformation of national facilities into
  international facilities.
• Construction of new joint facilities.
• Main underlying tensions
• Economic strengthening the oligopoly.
• Political avoiding the tertium genus of States.
• Legal apparent suspicion upon States.

6
3. Formulae to prevent proliferation risks

• In the long term multinational system of
  worldwide reach covering the entire nuclear
  energy cycle
• In the short term transitional formulae
• An independent, viable and effective nuclear fuel
  bank.
• Enrichment centers of a regional and
  supranational nature.