Diplomats from nearly every nation will convene in New York this week for a four-week review of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), the most comprehensive nuclear arms agreement globally. The stakes are exceptionally high as nuclear-armed states face growing tensions and challenges.
Escalating Nuclear Risks
Russia, Israel, and the United States—all nuclear-armed—are conducting wars of aggression against non-nuclear states. India and Pakistan, also nuclear-armed, engaged in conflict last year along their disputed border, raising fears of nuclear escalation. In February, the last remaining agreement limiting Russian and US nuclear weapons expired without replacement. These two nations hold nearly 90% of the world's nuclear arsenal, and all nine nuclear-armed states are modernizing their weapons, increasing deployed warheads and those on high alert.
The Doomsday Clock, which gauges the risk of global catastrophe, is now closer to midnight than at any point since 1947.
What Is the NPT?
The NPT is a cornerstone of international nuclear law, with 190 member states. It includes five nuclear-weapon states (China, France, Russia, the UK, and the US) that developed weapons before 1967, while all other members forgo nuclear arms. North Korea is the only state to leave the treaty; India, Israel, Pakistan, and South Sudan have never joined.
The treaty is a bargain: nuclear states pledged to disarm, while non-nuclear states agreed not to acquire weapons in exchange for peaceful nuclear technology assistance. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) monitors compliance, but the treaty lacks timelines, verification, or enforcement for disarmament. Extended indefinitely in 1995, the NPT is reviewed every five years.
Rare Consensus
Review conferences have been fraught. In 2015, Canada, the UK, and US blocked a negotiated text at Israel's behest. In 2022, Russia blocked the final text over references to Ukraine's Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant. Only two conferences (2000 and 2010) produced agreed outcomes, but implementation of disarmament steps has been weak. The NPT has moderately curbed proliferation—countries like Canada, Germany, and Australia abandoned nuclear ambitions—but disarmament has failed.
Conference head Do Hung Viet warned that failing to reach consensus again could hollow out the NPT and undermine its credibility.
Two Main Challenges
Expectations are low amid a dysfunctional international environment. Nuclear-armed states are expanding and modernizing arsenals, accelerating the arms race. Two recent developments cast shadows over the debate.
Russia's Weaponization of Nuclear Facilities
Russia has weaponized nuclear facilities in Ukraine, including operating plants with large radioactive inventories. Russian forces attacked and damaged facilities, interfered with operations, terrorized staff, and used plants as military bases, jeopardizing cooling systems and risking a radiological disaster beyond Ukraine. The 2022 review failed to pass measures protecting nuclear facilities from attack.
US-Israeli Attacks on Iran
The US and Israel attacked Iran's nuclear facilities, citing Iran's imminent nuclear weapons acquisition despite IAEA and US intelligence contradicting this. These attacks raise questions for non-nuclear states about the value of NPT compliance when nuclear-armed states use illegal force. Non-proliferation cannot be secured by war; the attacks may reinforce the lesson that nuclear weapons deter aggression. The risk of states leaving the NPT, like North Korea, is now higher.
In the nuclear age, security is shared or non-existent. Eliminating nuclear weapons through cooperation, negotiation, and international law is the only safe future.
