Countries with nuclear weapons, especially the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council – the United States, Russia, China, France, and the United Kingdom, play a crucial role in the maintenance of global peace. Recently, these nations have pledged to prevent the spread of atomic weapons and discourage nuclear conflict. This significant move was revealed in a joint statement released ahead of a review meeting of the 1970 Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
Current Tensions and the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)
The pledge comes at a time when tensions between the US and Russia are running high over the latter’s troop build-up near the Ukrainian border, a situation reminiscent of the Cold War era. Furthermore, efforts are underway to revive the JCPOA, a previously abandoned agreement with Iran over its controversial nuclear ambitions.
Key Points from the Joint Pledge
At the heart of the joint pledge is the commitment to deter further spread of nuclear weapons and enforce defense measures to dissuade aggression and prevention of wars. These nations also expressed intent to enhance their national measures to mitigate unauthorized or unintended use of nuclear weapons.
Individual Stances: China and Russia
Despite the joint pledge, individual nations voiced specific concerns. China voiced worries about possible conflict with the U.S., particularly over Taiwan, which China considers as part of its territory. On the other hand, Russia expressed optimism over the joint declaration by nuclear powers, hoping it would help reduce global tensions.
About the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)
The NPT is a pivotal international agreement aimed at preventing the spread of nuclear weapons and nuclear technology, promoting the peaceful use of nuclear energy, and advancing the goal of disarmament. Despite currently having 190 member states, key nations like India are not part of this treaty due to disagreements over its provisions and perceived discriminatory nature.
India’s Stand on NPT
India is among the few countries that did not sign or later withdrew from the NPT, viewing it as discriminatory. India has argued that such treaties selectively enforce non-proliferation on non-nuclear powers, thereby legitimising the monopoly of nuclear weapons among the five main powers.
Criticisms and Challenges Relating to the NPT
The current format of the NPT has faced various criticisms. Among these include its perceived failure in fostering a credible disarmament process, the absence of a tangible disarmament roadmap, and the omission of provisions for reductions and elimination of nuclear arsenals. Furthermore, critics argue that it fostered a system of nuclear ‘Haves’ and ‘Have-Nots’, whereby non-nuclear weapon states were limited in their abilities while nuclear-weapon states continued expanding their arsenals. This issue has resulted in several inconclusive sessions of the periodic Review Conference (RevCon).
Post-Cold War challenges also emerged when certain state parties attempted to gain nuclear latency led to instances of non-compliance, violations, defiance, highlighting the limitations of the treaty to address such new strategic challenges.
A Look Towards the Future: Energy Needs and Non-Proliferation
With rising energy demands worldwide, more countries have been exploring nuclear energy. The international community needs to reconcile the need for energy independence with reducing the risk of proliferation. Concrete actions such as reducing the role of nuclear weapons in national security doctrines, lowering alert levels, improving transparency, and establishing more nuclear-weapon-free zones would be welcomed moves. The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons is construed as a step in the right direction towards nuclear disarmament.