Signatories of the historic nuclear non-proliferation treaty convened Monday at the United Nations as concerns about a renewed arms race grow, with nuclear powers once again at odds over safety measures.
In 2022, during the previous review of the treaty—considered the foundation of non-proliferation efforts—UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned that humanity was “one misunderstanding, one miscalculation away from nuclear annihilation.”
On Monday, he cautioned that “the factors driving” nuclear weapons proliferation are accelerating.
Guterres stated, “For too long, the treaty has been deteriorating. Commitments have gone unmet. Trust and credibility are weakening. The forces promoting proliferation are speeding up. We need to reinvigorate the treaty.”
Amid heightened global geopolitical tensions since the last meeting, it remains uncertain what this gathering at the UN headquarters can accomplish.
France’s Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot told delegates that “never before has the risk of nuclear proliferation been so high, and the threat posed by Iran’s and North Korea’s programs is unacceptable for every member of this treaty.”
Lowering expectations, Do Hung Viet, Vietnam’s UN ambassador and the conference president, said: “We shouldn’t anticipate that this conference will resolve the underlying strategic tensions of our era.”
“But a balanced outcome that reaffirms essential commitments and outlines practical steps forward could enhance the integrity of the NPT,” he added.
“The success or failure of this gathering will have impacts far beyond these walls,” Viet warned. “The threat of a new nuclear arms race looms over us.”
The nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT), signed by nearly every nation except Israel, India, and Pakistan, seeks to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, promote disarmament, and foster cooperation on civilian nuclear technology.
As of January 2025, the nine nuclear-armed states—Russia, the United States, France, the United Kingdom, China, India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea—held a combined total of 12,241 nuclear warheads, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).
The U.S. and Russia possession accounts for roughly 90% of the world’s nuclear arsenals, with both countries investing heavily in modernization efforts in recent years, SIPRI reports.
China has also rapidly expanded its nuclear stockpile, prompting G7 nations to voice alarm over Moscow and Beijing boosting their nuclear capacities.
President Donald Trump indicated plans for new nuclear tests, accusing others of secretly conducting theirs.
In March, French President Emmanuel Macron announced a significant shift in nuclear deterrence strategy, including an increase in France’s nuclear arsenal, which currently stands at 290 warheads.
An “affront” to the NPT, according to Seth Shelden of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons—a Nobel Peace Prize laureate—stated that “trust is eroding both inside and outside the treaty.”
He expressed doubts about the summit’s potential outcomes, noting that decisions require consensus, and previous conferences failed to pass final political statements.
Historically, deadlocks have resulted from disagreements over regional issues, such as Israel’s opposition to a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East and Russia’s objections related to Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant.
This year’s summit faces numerous potential obstacles, including the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, Iran’s nuclear program, proliferation fears, and North Korea’s advancing nuclear capability.
The U.S., along with Britain, the UAE, and Australia, criticized Iran’s appointment as a conference vice president, calling it an “affront” to nations that take the NPT seriously.
Additionally, artificial intelligence is emerging as a prominent issue, with some nations advocating for strict human control over nuclear weapons.
الوسم: treaty
-
UN Proliferation Meeting Opens Amid Rising Nuclear Arms Race Risks
-
UN Summit on Nuclear Proliferation Amid Global Conflicts
Signatories of the historic nuclear non-proliferation treaty will gather at the United Nations starting Monday, as optimism dims about reaching a consensus and tensions escalate among nuclear-armed nations. In 2022, during the previous review, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned that humanity was “just one misunderstanding, one miscalculation away from nuclear annihilation.” The situation has only deteriorated since then.
Izumi Nakamitsu, the UN High Representative for Disarmament Affairs, expressed concern, stating, “All member states seem to share a sense of crisis.” She highlighted that there are currently no bilateral arms control agreements between the world’s two largest nuclear powers, especially noting the expiration of the New START treaty between Moscow and Washington in February. She added, “We are also seeing an overall increase in nuclear capabilities across all nuclear-armed nations.”
Nakamitsu emphasized that rising geopolitical conflicts have halted the post-Cold War momentum toward disarmament. The nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT), ratified by nearly every country—except notable outliers like Israel, India, and Pakistan—aims to curb nuclear weapons proliferation, promote disarmament, and foster cooperation on civilian nuclear technology.
As of January 2025, the nine countries with nuclear arsenals—Russia, the United States, France, the UK, China, India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea—possessed a combined total of 12,241 nuclear warheads, according to SIPRI. The U.S. and Russia hold nearly 90% of these weapons and have recently invested heavily in modernizing them. China’s nuclear stockpile has also expanded rapidly, prompting G7 nations to warn about Moscow and Beijing’s growing nuclear capabilities.
Former President Donald Trump has hinted at the possibility of conducting new nuclear tests, citing other countries’ actions. In March, French President Emmanuel Macron announced a significant upgrade to France’s nuclear force, which now totals about 290 warheads.
Seth Sheldon from the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), a Nobel laureate organization, noted, “Trust is clearly eroding inside and outside the NPT framework.” He questioned the summit’s prospects, pointing out that decisions require consensus and previous conferences failed to produce formal political statements. In 2015, disagreements mainly stemmed from U.S. opposition to establishing a nuclear-free zone in the Middle East, while in 2022, disputes centered around Russia’s objections to references to Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, which Moscow occupies.
This year’s summit faces numerous hurdles, including ongoing conflicts in Ukraine, Iran’s nuclear ambitions, proliferation fears among non-nuclear states, and North Korea’s expanding nuclear arsenal. If the summit ends in failure for a third consecutive time, experts suggest the NPT could gradually disintegrate, even if it doesn’t collapse overnight.
Artificial intelligence is emerging as a key issue on the agenda, with some nations advocating for maintaining human control over nuclear weapons to prevent accidental or unauthorized use.
-

Russia proposes extending nuclear arms limits with the US
Russia has extended an offer to continue adhering to nuclear warhead limits agreed with the United States beyond the current treaty, but with specific conditions. The proposal suggests abiding by the limits for one year after the treaty’s expiration on February 5, 2026, provided the U.S. reciprocates.
The New START treaty, signed in 2010, caps the number of nuclear warheads both nations can deploy and stands as the last significant arms reduction agreement between the two nuclear superpowers. While Russia froze its participation in the treaty in 2023, it has still voluntarily observed the agreed-upon numerical restrictions, which limit both sides to 1,550 deployed strategic nuclear warheads—nearly 30% less than the previous 2002 limit.
Russian President Vladimir Putin emphasized that maintaining these limits for one year aims to prevent a new arms race with Washington. He stressed that this approach would only be effective if the United States takes similar steps and avoids actions that could upset the existing balance of nuclear deterrence.