The Erosion of Global Nuclear Order
The mounting tensions between Russia and Ukraine, coupled with the escalating conflict in the Middle East, have brought the world perilously close to contemplating the use of nuclear weapons.
BySyed Raza Abbas
December 25, 2024
MODERN DIPLOMACY
The mounting tensions between Russia and Ukraine, coupled with the escalating conflict in the Middle East sparked by the October 7 Hamas attack, have brought the world perilously close to contemplating the use of nuclear weapons. Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly warned the West against intervening in the Russo-Ukrainian war, hinting at nuclear retaliation if pushed to the brink. Meanwhile, in the Middle East, the specter of nuclear escalation looms ominously. Israeli cabinet minister Amichai Eliyahu has floated the grim possibility of deploying nuclear weapons against Hamas militants entrenched in the Gaza Strip. Simultaneously, the fragile state of Iran-Israel relations, exacerbated by the missile exchanges and the unraveling of the Iranian nuclear deal, threatens to ignite overt nuclearization in the region. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s candid assertion that the Kingdom would pursue nuclear weapons if Iran becomes a nuclear power further underscores the perilous trajectory of an emerging arms race. This relentless push toward nuclear proliferation risks unraveling the global nuclear order, possibly marking its terminal decline.
The global nuclear order, crafted by the victors of the Second World War and spearheaded by the United States and its Western allies, has long stood as a tenuous bulwark against the unrestrained spread of nuclear weapons. The global nuclear order is founded on four interrelated pillars: nuclear deterrence, arms control, non-proliferation, and disarmament. Nuclear deterrence seeks to prevent the use of nuclear weapons by maintaining their strategic value as tools for political and security purposes, based on the premise that the threat of retaliation discourages aggression. Arms control focuses on regulating the development, stockpiling, and deployment of specific weapons and technologies, aiming to limit their use and reduce the risks associated with their proliferation. Non-proliferation endeavors to curb the spread of nuclear weapons and related technologies, promoting international stability by preventing the emergence of new nuclear-armed states. Finally, disarmament advocates for the complete elimination of nuclear weapons and their associated technologies, aspiring toward a world free from the existential threats posed by these weapons. Together, these elements shape the framework for managing nuclear risks and pursuing global security.
Anchored by the landmark Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), signed in 1967 and ratified in 1970, this order delineated the world into nuclear “haves” and “have-nots.” The treaty formally recognized the United States, the United Kingdom, France, China, and Russia as the only legitimate nuclear powers—de jure nuclear states—while other nations with nuclear capabilities, such as India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea, assumed the status of de facto nuclear powers. The cornerstone objectives of the NPT were threefold: to curb the horizontal proliferation of nuclear weapons, to promote peaceful applications of nuclear technology, and to advance the ultimate goal of complete disarmament. Article VI of the treaty suggests all signatories pursue good-faith negotiations aimed at halting the nuclear arms race, achieving nuclear disarmament, and forging a comprehensive disarmament treaty under stringent international oversight.
The optimism that accompanied the NPT’s inception gave rise to a series of significant arms control and disarmament agreements, particularly during the 1969-1979 period, often described as the golden age of arms control. This era of détente between the United States and the Soviet Union saw a thawing of Cold War hostilities and an unprecedented commitment to curbing the nuclear threat. Key treaties from this period include the Outer Space Treaty (1967), which barred the placement of nuclear weapons in space; the Latin American Nuclear Weapon Free Zone Treaty (1967), establishing the world’s first nuclear-weapon-free zone; the Seabed Treaty (1971), prohibiting nuclear weapons on the ocean floor; and the landmark Biological Weapons Convention (1972). These were complemented by later agreements, such as the Chemical Weapons Convention (1993) and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (1996), as well as bilateral accords like the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT) and the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) between the U.S. and the Soviet Union.
Despite these strides, the global arms control architecture now lies in disarray. The proliferation of nuclear weapons continues unabated, with increasing stockpiles of operational warheads signaling a chilling reversal of past disarmament gains. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) estimates the global inventory of nuclear warheads at 12,121, of which 9,585 are in military stockpiles ready for deployment. Alarmingly, Russia and the United States alone account for approximately 90% of the world’s nuclear arsenal. According to SIPRI Director Dan Smith, “While the global total of nuclear warheads continues to fall as Cold War-era weapons are gradually dismantled, regrettably, we continue to see year-on-year increases in the number of operational nuclear warheads. This trend seems likely to continue and probably accelerate in the coming years, and it is extremely concerning.”
The confluence of geopolitical rivalries and eroding arms control agreements has created a precarious global landscape. In the Middle East, Iran’s nuclear ambitions and Israel’s vehement opposition, coupled with Saudi Arabia’s declared intent to pursue its own deterrent, hint at a region on the cusp of a nuclear arms race. Meanwhile, the stagnation of disarmament efforts—marked by the U.S.’s withdrawal from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty and the lack of progress in extending New START—further underscores the fragility of the global nuclear order.
The stakes have never been higher. A renewed commitment to arms control and disarmament is urgently needed to avert a catastrophic descent into widespread nuclear proliferation. Diplomatic engagement, confidence-building measures, and robust international oversight are essential to reinvigorate the faltering global nuclear framework. Failure to act decisively could spell the irreversible unraveling of decades of progress, ushering in an era defined by the specter of nuclear confrontation.
No comments:
Post a Comment