It's a global presentation to curb nuclear terrorism around the world. The concrete results of the summit were presented in the Seoul Communiqué. The leaders present included British Prime Minister David Cameron, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, French President François Hollande, Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi, Argentine President Mauricio Macri, Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto, Chinese Paramount leader Xi Jinping, the President Nursultan Nazarbayev, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, South Korean President Park Geun-hye and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The communiqué will likely support the role of the IAEA, and perhaps the International Criminal Police (Interpol), in nuclear safety, and will encourage the development of a culture of nuclear safety, the protection of radioactive materials and the fight against nuclear smuggling through forensic science and border controls.
The second of its kind, the Seoul summit aims to reach a consensus on the protection of nuclear materials against use by militants. Between March 26 and 27 in Seoul, approximately 50 world leaders will meet for the second time in two years to discuss how to address the risk of nuclear terrorism. Perhaps most importantly, the summit is also unlikely to result in a commitment to creating common international standards for nuclear safety. The main reason behind this failure to introduce a regime of global standards is the lack of great concern on the part of many governments about the risk of a nuclear terrorist attack, when they can cite the lack of any incident of nuclear terrorism as proof that current efforts are sufficient.
Therefore, the gradual implementation of these commitments and recommendations would contribute to a gradual improvement of global Nuclear Safety standards, which would help to protect against any sustained efforts by terrorist groups to access nuclear materials. There is no discussion about the risks of the 15,850 nuclear weapons existing in the world, nor on issues of nuclear disarmament or non-proliferation. Under the NSS process, countries are working to improve their nuclear safety on the basis of the Washington Work Plan, which contains numerous measures and action points. It could also contain general commitments to excellence in nuclear safety, to protect the entire EMU and plutonium against design-based threats, and support for the latest revision of the IAEA recommendation on the physical protection of nuclear materials.
The Netherlands set several objectives for the summit, including: reducing stockpiles of nuclear materials, improving the safety of nuclear and radioactive sources, increasing coordination with the nuclear industry and improving international cooperation. We seek to maintain the international network of government officials and experts who have supported the Summit process and to incorporate the wider community of States, as well as to encourage the continued participation of relevant partners in the nuclear industry and civil society. There are other multilateral forums that also deal with nuclear safety, for example, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material (CPPNM) and the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism (GICNT). The GAO also complained that U.S.
agencies were vague in the criteria used to judge when foreign nuclear sites can ultimately be considered safe. The objective of the summit was to improve global nuclear security through increased cooperation and the conclusion of concrete agreements aimed at better securing nuclear materials and facilities. These promises, known as “gifts from home”, included actions such as repatriating materials usable in weapons, conducting training for nuclear security personnel, updating national laws and regulations, and taking measures to combat illicit trafficking. .
