Page 161 - 《国际安全研究》2022年第2期

Vo1. 40, No. 2, March/April 2022
weapons, thereby completely delegitimizing nuclear weapons in the international
community. The author argues that although the Treaty embodies humanitarian
concerns and the vision of a nuclear-free world, it still has significant limitations in
the current international situation. From a theoretical point of view, the Treaty hopes
to strengthen norms against nuclear weapons use by all countries of the international
community. However, its logical basis is not secure in that norms are subject to
regression or even subversion, thus not being able to produce strong constraints on
states. On the practical level, the Treaty has been explicitly boycotted by some nuclear
weapon states and their allies on the grounds that it is incompatible with the policy of
nuclear deterrence. This rejection has also highlighted such defects of the Treaty as
ignoring security concerns of some countries, impairing states’ self-defense rights and
overlooking nuclear disarmament verification mechanisms. In view of many disputes
arising from the Treaty in the international community, the author proposes that the
Treaty should return to a progressive route to comprehensive nuclear disarmament. In
the future, the Treaty could be further improved in terms of providing security
guarantees, distinguishing different scenarios of nuclear bans, establishing
verification institutions and strengthening its compatibility with the existing nuclear
non-proliferation regimes so as to facilitate reforms on those regimes and contribute
to a possible breakthrough in the stalled nuclear disarmament process.
[Keywords] TPNW, dilemmas of prohibition of nuclear weapons, nuclear disarmament,
nuclear-free world
[Author] DING Yi, Assistant Research Fellow, Shanghai Institute for Global Security
and Governance, Shanghai University of Political Science and Law (Shanghai,
201701).

104 Complex Identity Politics: Three Dimensions of West Asian Powers’
Participation in the Afghan Security Affairs
SUN Degang and ZHANG Jieying
[Abstract] Since the outbreak of the “Arab Spring”, sectarian disputes have led to the
realignment of Islamic powers in Western Asia represented by Turkey, Iran and Saudi
Arabia. Meanwhile, in Afghanistan, the power structure featuring a weak central
government and strong local sects has resulted in the fragmentation of this country.
This paper puts forward the concept of “complex identity politics” and holds that
Turkey, Iran and Saudi Arabia get involved in Afghan security affairs with triple
identities. In terms of ethnic and sectarian identities, Turkey has formed a special
relationship with such Turkic ethnic groups as Uzbeks and Turkmen in northern
Afghanistan; Iran has established special relations with such Persian-speaking ethnic
groups as Hazara and Tajik people in central and northeast Afghanistan respectively;
Saudi Arabia has developed a special relationship with the Pashtuns in southern
Afghanistan. Viewed from regional identity, Turkey, Iran and Saudi Arabia have
incorporated Afghanistan into their own multilateral mechanism in the process of
“looking east” and thus formed an institutional balance with the aid of the
Organization of Turkic States, the Economic Cooperation Organization and the

· 159 ·