UNITED NATIONS — A monthlong conference aimed at curtailing the spread of nuclear weapons ended in failure Friday after being scuttled by arguments among the United States, Iran and Egypt.
Representatives of more than 150 nations convened at U.N. headquarters to seek ways to stop more countries from developing nuclear weapons, prevent terrorists from acquiring them, and get a renewed commitment from atomic powers -- especially the United States -- to significantly reduce their stockpiles.
But strong disagreements over priorities prevented substantive efforts to address the gaps between the world's nuclear haves and have-nots.
The United States tried to keep the focus on alleged nuclear threats from Iran and North Korea instead of its pledges to whittle down its own arsenal.
Iran, which contends that its atomic program is strictly for generating electricity, refused to discuss proposals to restrict access to nuclear fuel and objected to being singled out as a "proliferation concern." And Egypt joined Iran in demanding that the conference address Israel's nuclear status and declare the Middle East "a nuclear-free zone."
"The conference after a full month ended up where we started, which is a system full of loopholes, ailing and not a road map to fix it," Mohamed ElBaradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, told reporters in Vienna as the conference fizzled to a close.
U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan launched the conference -- a review of the 1970 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty -- on May 2, telling delegates that "the consequences of failure are too great to aim for anything less" than new measures to curb the spread of nuclear weapons and reduce the number of existing arms.
Under the treaty, atomic powers pledged to dismantle their arsenals and transfer nuclear know-how for generating electricity to other nations, in exchange for vows from those countries not to develop nuclear weapons. Reviews of the treaty are held every five years.
But critics say that not only are the nuclear powers not living up to their side of the deal, they are now seeking to restrict sensitive technology that other countries have a right to. The U.S. and some other nuclear powers, however, contend that increasingly stringent rules on transferring technology are needed to keep weapons out of terrorists' hands.
