India and the Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty: Policy Options
Abstract The international community inside and outside the Conference of Disarmament is underscoring the need for concluding a fissile material cut-off treaty (FMCT). The Indian government, for a long period, has been sponsoring the idea. Notwithstanding the international stagnation, the issue has been instigating periodic debate in India on the Indian approach. The periodic revival of the issue requires that India revisit its policy on fissile material production as well as its approach towards a possible FMCT. This article examines the question: should India's approach to conclude an FMCT be within the UN institutional framework? The new international reality is pushing for a new context, new realignments and a fresh outlook for an FMCT. India should take its own time to support conclusion of an FMCT so that its national interests and security are not adversely affected.
Perspectives on a Treaty Prohibiting the Production and Stockpiling of Weapon-Usable Nuclear Material
Negotiations on a treaty banning the production of fissile materials for nuclear weapons, and other nuclear explosive devices, has been on the international agenda for nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament for decades. A fissile material cut-off treaty (FMCT), later known as a fissile material treaty (FMT), was originally conceived as a measure to prevent additional States developing nuclear weapons and to limit the stocks of fissile material for States already possessing nuclear weapons. Over time, nuclear-weapon States pushed for a treaty that would only prohibit future production, while several non-nuclear-weapon States favoured two parallel objectives—nuclear non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament—and the inclusion of existing stocks and also their elimination. In 1993, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a Resolution calling for the negotiation of a FMCT in the Conference on Disarmament (CD). The CD took up the matter in 1994 and by March 1995, a compromise-negotiating mandate was cobbled together by Ambassador Gerald Shannon that envisaged negotiations on a treaty with the proviso that any delegation could raise any relevant matter during the negotiations. Until now States have not been able to coalesce around a common negotiating mandate. This chapter reviews the ups and downs of the efforts to discuss treaty related issues and provides a technical yet accessible discussion on issues of definitions of fissile and nuclear material; the scope of coverage of a treaty; verification models; institutional aspects; and negotiating approaches, and suggests a practical way for making progress on this overdue important non-proliferation and disarmament measure.
Women in Social Work Education: Progress or Promise?
Abstract The literature on the status of female social work educators has addressed the problems these educators face in the areas of salaries, academic rank and tenure, publication rates, and level of decision making. Given this attention to the status of these educators, one might expect positive resolutions to these problems. This article, which is based on a review of both the current literature and statistics on US social work faculty, evaluates the status of women faculty in social work academia to determine if progress has been made. Findings reveal that female educators are seeing slow improvment in some areas; however, inequalities continue. The authors suggest strategies for supporting the development and retention of women faculty.