CYIL vol. 14 (2023)

CYIL 14 (2023) THE VIENNA CONVENTION ON CIVIL LIABILITY FOR NUCLEAR DAMAGE … existing international regime. Due to the different technological scope of the conventions, both of them naturally attracted different states. The Brussels Convention was signed in particular by coastal nations, which either envisaged deploying their own nuclear fleet 37 , or expected to allow nuclear ships into their ports. 38 In this respect, it was natural that the Vienna Convention attracted both coastal 39 and landlocked states. 40 The difference in technological scope also caused the future fate of both the Vienna and the Brussels Conventions. Both were adopted at a stage when the nuclear industry was in its infancy and the course of future development was uncertain. 41 While the development of terrestrial nuclear installations was a successful project, nuclear propulsion has never attracted any considerable interest other than military. Consequently, while the Vienna Convention entered into force on 12 November, 1977, the Brussels Convention has never been ratified by a sufficient number of states and is recently considered a dead instrument of international law. 2.2 Relationship to the Paris Convention The Paris Convention was adopted on 29 July, 1960 with the intention to establish 42 a regime of nuclear liability for those states participating at the (then existing) Organisation for European Economic Co-operation (OEEC). 43 Thus, the ambition of the Paris Convention from its early beginning has been rather regional and focused on the densely populated industrial territory of Western Europe. 44 Therefore, the Signatories to the Paris Convention were exclusively states of this region. 45 In strict contrast to both the Vienna and Brussels Conventions, the Paris Conventions have never possessed any universal ambition. While the Organisation for European Economic Co-operation (OEEC) was replaced by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in 1961, which had a more worldwide aspiration, neither of the non-European states ever joined the liability regime of the Paris Convention. Turkey was the only exception, as it belonged to the original Signatories to the Paris Convention and, until 37 Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands and Portugal. 38 China, Democratic Republic of Congo, India, Indonesia, Korea, Lebanon, Liberia, Madagascar, Monaco, Panama, Philippines, Surinam, Syrian Arab Republic and the United Arab Emirates. 39 Argentina, Cuba and Egypt. 40 For example, landlocked Bolivia accessed the Vienna Convention in 1968 and another landlocked country, Niger, accessed the Convention in 1979. 41 The Vienna Convention has reflected this uncertainty concerning the future development of the nuclear industry in its Article XXVI.1., which provided that a diplomatic conference shall be convened by the Director General of the Agency at any time after the expiry of a period of five years from the date of the entry into force of this Convention in order to consider the revision thereof, if one-third of the Contracting Parties express a desire to that effect. 42 The Paris Convention, art. 21.a. 43 Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Greece, Ireland, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and the United Kingdom were member countries to the OEEC. Western Germany was originally represented by Bizonia and the French occupation zone. Trieste was also a member of the OEEC for a certain period. 44 See KAUFMANN, O. La Convention européenne sur la responsabilité civile dans le domaine de l’ energie nucléaire (1960) 13 Revue hellénique de droit international , at p. 27. Also see BERMAN, W. and HYDEMAN, L. A Convention on Third Party Liability for Damage from Nuclear Incidents (1961) 55 American Journal of International Law, pp. 966–69. 45 Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Switzerland, Sweden and the United Kingdom.

303