Nuclear Suppliers Group Discusses Export Controls, JCPOA in First Plenary Since 2019

Member countries said they are focused on implementing the regime’s control lists and proposed “several” updates and clarifications to the restrictions but did not provide specifics, according to a June 25 joint statement. They also underscored the importance of updating NSG guidelines to keep pace with the “fast-paced nuclear and nuclear-related industry” and shared information on licensing and enforcement best practices.

Although the U.S. was represented at the meeting, the Commerce Department couldn't participate because of "limitations on attendance" due to the pandemic, a Bureau of Industry and Security spokesperson said June 28. The spokesperson said the agency was involved in the U.S.'s "preparation for the meeting and will continue to work with the interagency on action resulting from the meeting."

Some participating countries said they support work by the U.S., China, the European Union and others for the U.S. to rejoin the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, which would lift some sanctions against Iran (see 2106240044). The group also expressed strong opposition to North Korea’s nuclear weapons programs and said the country should “immediately cease all related activities.”

Members “reiterated their firm support for the full, complete and effective implementation of the [Nonproliferation Treaty] as the cornerstone of the international non-proliferation architecture,” the group said. “They underscored the importance of effective export controls and looked forward to promoting their agreed updated guidelines and understandings as a concrete contribution to the rescheduled NPT Review Conference.”

The group reappointed Mirjam Kochendorfer of Germany to chair the Consultative Group and appointed Brent Heilman, a nonproliferation program lead at the U.S. Argonne National Laboratory, to chair the Technical Experts Group.

Although members of the NSG met in person, it remains unclear whether the multilateral Wassenaar Arrangement will meet virtually or in person this year after last year’s meetings and plenary were canceled. Although BIS officials have said they expect some virtual meetings (see 2106080055), the spokesperson said the U.S. is working with other member countries on the possibility of in-person meetings this fall. "Future activities will be decided by the WA Secretariat," the spokesperson said.

In an interview Wassenaar posted to its website this month, regime officials told the WorldECR publication that member states continue to have “strong” shared interests over controlling a range of emerging exports, including cyber, space and quantum science technologies. “Export controls continue to be seen as an essential tool,” said New Zealand Ambassador Philip Griffiths, who heads the Vienna-based Wassenaar Secretariat.

Griffiths also said the Wassenaar knows it “must adapt” to evolving challenges to “remain relevant, including as new technologies -- such as additive manufacturing, drones, space technologies, artificial intelligence and quantum computing -- become more widespread. Experts have said Wassenaar and other multilateral export control regimes need to be modernized (see 2009290042). “Crafting export controls that balance the security and trade concerns of its participating states requires intensive collaboration,” he said. ‘I think it is fair to say that in some of these technical areas the WA has shown the way in finding a common language and basis for multilateral action.”

Despite criticism that Wassenaar practices are growing outdated, Griffiths said he expects the regime to remain relevant decades from now. “Unless the risks being addressed by export controls have been resolved in 25 years (which seems a rather tall order), I fully expect that the WA will have further consolidated its role as an international standard-setter and ‘leader by example’ in this area,” he said, “complementing the other multilateral export control regimes as well as instruments such as the Arms Trade Treaty.”