Skip to main content

Sign up for our newsletter.

Quality journalism. Progressive values. Direct to your inbox.

nuclearweapons_0_0

Members of the New York Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (NYCAN) gathered outside the David N. Dinkins Municipal Building in Manhattan on the 75th anniversary of the bombing of the city of Hiroshima. (Photo: Erik McGregor/LightRocket via Getty Images)

The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons and the World's Future

The most promising course of action for people interested in human survival might well lie in a popular mobilization to compel the nuclear nations to accept the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons and, more broadly, to accept a restrained role in a cooperatively-governed world.

Lawrence Wittner

Late January of this year will mark the first anniversary of the entry into force of the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.  This momentous international agreement, the result of a lengthy struggle by the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) and by many non-nuclear nations, bans developing, testing, producing, acquiring, possessing, stockpiling, and threatening to use nuclear weapons.  Adopted by an overwhelming vote of the official representatives of the world's nations at a UN conference in July 2017, the treaty was subsequently signed by 86 nations.  It received the required 50 national ratifications by late October 2020, and, on January 22, 2021, became international law.

Despite this impressive display of respect for the landmark agreement, the nine nuclear powers have not only continued to oppose it, but have accelerated their nuclear arms race. 

Right from the start, the world's nine nuclear powers—the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France, Israel, India, Pakistan, and North Korea—expressed their opposition to such a treaty.  They pressed other nations to boycott the crucial 2017 UN conference and refused to attend it when it occurred.  Indeed, three of them (the United States, Britain, and France) issued a statement declaring that they would never ratify the treaty.  Not surprisingly, then, none of the nuclear powers has signed the agreement or indicated any sympathy for it.

Even so, the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons has acquired considerable momentum over the past year.  During that time, an additional nine nations ratified it, thus becoming parties to the treaty.  And dozens more, having signed it, are expected to ratify it in the near future.  Furthermore, the governments of two NATO nations, Norway and Germany, have broken free from the U.S. government's oppositional stance to the treaty and agreed to attend the first meeting of the countries that are parties to it. 

In nations where public opinion on the treaty has been examined, the international agreement enjoys considerable support.  YouGov opinion polls in five NATO countries in Europe show overwhelming backing and very little opposition, with the same true in Iceland, another NATO participant.  Polling has also revealed large majorities in favor of the treaty in Japan, Canada, and Australia.

In the United States, where most of the mainstream communications media have not deigned to mention the treaty, it remains a well-kept secret.  Even so, although a 2019 YouGov poll about it drew a large "Don't Know" response, treaty support still outweighed opposition by 49 to 32 percent.  Moreover, when the U.S. Conference of  Mayors, representing 1,400 U.S. cities, met in August 2021, the gathering unanimously approved a resolution praising the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.

Meanwhile, a variety of institutions, recognizing that nuclear weapons are now illegal under international law, have begun to change their investment policies.  In September 2021, Lansforsakringar, a Swedish insurance company with assets of over $46 billion, cited the treaty as a major reason to avoid investing in companies producing nuclear weapons.  In December, the New York City Council adopted a resolution telling the city comptroller to remove investments from the city's $250 billion pension fund from companies producing or maintaining these weapons of mass destruction.  According to ICAN, 127 financial institutions stopped investing in nuclear weapons companies during 2021.

Despite this impressive display of respect for the landmark agreement, the nine nuclear powers have not only continued to oppose it, but have accelerated their nuclear arms race.  Having cast off the constraints of most nuclear arms control and disarmament agreements of the past, they are all busy either developing or deploying new nuclear weapons systems or have announced their intention to do so.  

In this process of nuclear "modernization," as it is politely termed, they are building newly-designed nuclear weapons of increasing accuracy and efficiency.  These include hypersonic missiles, which travel at five times the speed of sound and are better able than their predecessors to evade missile defenses.  Reportedly, hypersonic missiles have already been developed by Russia and China.  The United States is currently scrambling to build them, as well, with the usual corporate weapons contractors eager to oblige.

When it comes to "modernization" of its entire nuclear weapons complex, the U.S. government probably has the lead.  During the Obama administration, it embarked on a massive project designed to refurbish U.S. nuclear production facilities, enhance existing nuclear weapons, and build new ones.  This enormous nuclear venture accelerated during the Trump administration and continues today, with a total cost estimated to ultimately top $1.5 trillion

Although there remain some gestures toward nuclear arms control—such as the agreement between U.S. president Joe Biden and Russian president Vladimir Putin to extend the New Start Treaty—the nuclear powers are now giving a much higher priority to the nuclear arms race.

The current build-up of their nuclear arsenals is particularly dangerous at this time of rising conflict among them.  The U.S. and Russian governments almost certainly don't want a nuclear war over Ukraine, but they could easily slip into one.  The same is true in the case of the heightening confrontation between the Chinese and U.S. governments over Taiwan and the islands in the South China Sea.  And what will happen when nuclear-armed India and nuclear-armed Pakistan fight yet another war, or when nuclear-armed national leaders like Kim Jong-un and a possibly re-elected Donald Trump start trading insults again about their countries' nuclear might?

At present, this standoff between the nuclear nations, enamored with winning their global power struggles, and the non-nuclear nations, aghast at the terrible danger of nuclear war, seems likely to persist, resulting in the continuation of the world's long nuclear nightmare.  

In this context, the most promising course of action for people interested in human survival might well lie in a popular mobilization to compel the nuclear nations to accept the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons and, more broadly, to accept a restrained role in a cooperatively-governed world.


Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Lawrence Wittner

Lawrence Wittner

Dr. Lawrence S. Wittner is Professor of History Emeritus at SUNY/Albany who has written extensively on peace movements, foreign policy, and economic inequality. He is the author of "Confronting the Bomb: A Short History of the World Nuclear Disarmament Movement" (2009).

We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.

Press Freedom Champions Renew Call for DOJ to Drop Charges Against Assange

"It is time for the Biden administration to break from the Trump administration's decision to indict Assange—a move that was hostile to the media and democracy itself."

Jessica Corbett ·


Oral Arguments Boost Fears of SCOTUS Buying Theory That Would 'Sow Elections Chaos'

"This reckless case out of North Carolina could explode the unifying understanding that power ultimately rests with the people of this country," one campaigner said of Moore v. Harper.

Jessica Corbett ·


War Industry 'Celebrating Christmas Early' as House Passes $858 Billion NDAA

"There is no justification to throw... $858 billion at the Pentagon when we're told we can't afford child tax credit expansion, universal paid leave, or other basic human necessities," said the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen. "End of story."

Brett Wilkins ·


GOP Florida Lawmaker Behind 'Don't Say Gay' Law Charged with Covid Relief Fraud

"It does not surprise me that someone who exploits queer kids for political gain would be charged with exploiting taxpayers for personal gain," said one Democratic state lawmaker.

Julia Conley ·


'Historic Victory': House Passes Bill to Protect Same-Sex and Interracial Marriage

President Joe Biden is expected to promptly sign the Respect for Marriage Act, which Democratic Reps. Pramila Jayapal and Jerry Nadler described as "an essential step to guard against the increasingly extremist, right-wing Supreme Court."

Kenny Stancil ·

Common Dreams Logo