The double standard idea that Judge Weeramantry refers to has, unfortunately, become entrenched as an axiom of Washington’s policy decisions. This idea extends past nuclear weapons into other arenas. For example, Washington and Israel launched cyber attacks against Iran’s nuclear reactors, a country with which the United States is not at war; the U.S. governments official stance is that cyber attacks constitute acts of war, and now, with Chinese agents hacking U.S. systems, Washington calls for international rules and regulations. Washington wants a bilateral agreement with Jordan to prevent the Jordanians from enriching uranium (their right under the NPT), yet boycotts an Arab League-sponsored conference on making the Middle East a WMD-free zone because Israel would be force to admit its nuclear arsenal. And it’s not just Washington’s foreign policies where the double standards shine through; many Muslim American citizens have been imprisoned for merely visiting pro-Islamist websites, while the prominent politicians who received money from the Mujahideen-e Khalq (an Iranian anti-regime group that, until recently, was on the United States’ official terrorist list), which, according to federal law, is a felony. These instances of double standards are not lost on the rest of the world.
What I fear is that the abolition of nuclear weapons cannot be achieved globally, in good faith, without a substantial repositioning of Washington’s moral compass. The idea that the U.S. and its allies are somehow immune from the standards and rules that apply to the rest of the world undermines any effort to drastically reduce the world’s supply of nuclear weapons.