中文摘要 |
伊朗以核能和平利用為訴求,主張自我建構核燃料製造的鈾濃縮技術,確保核燃料的供應安全。鈾濃縮乃發展核武的敏感技術,美歐國家憂心,一旦放任此種發展,則有核武擴散之處。隨著聯合全面行動計畫(Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action,JCPOA)的簽署與生效,核燃料供應保證的國際造法歷程,意外促成核不擴散建制既有規範的差序化。回顧不擴散核武器條約(Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons,NPT)建制重塑,伊朗核燃料供應保證談判的國際造法歷程,以及美國川普政府試圖重新剝奪伊朗核子能力的議程設定,可以發現,操作核不擴散建制的國際強權,不但可以透過外交談判等權力互動,置入核燃料供應保證的新概念,並且得以運用國際造法,添附NPT規範支柱的規範前提,透過規範變異限縮NPT非核國核能和平使用的權力;霸權更能恣意以單邊否決手段,去除不符其利的規範安排,為規範建制的再度重塑,添附更多的運作空間。
Iran has been advocating the peaceful use of nuclear energy allowing for the development and possession uranium enrichment technology, which is a core element for nuclear fuel manufacturing, while claiming that it is the right of a sovereign state to ensure its secure supply of nuclear fuel. However, as uranium enrichment is a key technology for the development of nuclear weapons, the U. S. and European countries are concerned that once such development has been granted to Iran, there is a potential risk for the proliferation of nuclear weapons. After the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) came into force, international law-making processes for the assurance of nuclear fuel supply had accidently constructed the normative hierarchy of the NPT principles. By recalling the regime reconstruction process of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), law-making for the nuclear fuel supply assurance during the JCPOA negotiations, as well as the agenda-setting initiated by Trump administration's attempt to comprehensively re-deprive Iran's nuclear capability, this article discovers that the great powers that manipulated the NPT regime could input new ideas. These ideas include the assurance of nuclear fuel supply through the interaction of powers during international negotiations, which add new preconditions for the implementation of the principle of the peaceful use of nuclear energy and constrain the rights under which non-nuclear states of the NPT regime can peacefully use nuclear energy. The hegemony can unilaterally veto the normative arrangement that are against its interests and create extra space for the normative reconstruction of international regimes. |