THE eleventh Review Conference of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty ended without consensus on May 23, 2026. Nevertheless, participants underscored the escalating dangers of nuclear proliferation and the heightened probability of nuclear weapons use. The protracted Ukrainian war, Israel’s and the United States’ invasion of Iran and the breakdown of bilateral arms control treaties between Russia and the US have all severely undermined the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Regime. The NPT was introduced at the height of the Cold War and signed on 1 July 1968. It entered into force in March 1970. It went into effect with almost 100 states as original signatories and today counts 191 state parties. Its scope included disarmament, arms control and proliferation of nuclear technology for the civilian application or “peaceful” use of the atom for nuclear power generation, medical treatment and improving agricultural yield. The NPT Review Conference is held every five years.
The NPT has created a discriminatory nuclear order by dividing the world into nuclear “haves” (countries that tested nuclear weapons before 1967) and “have-nots” (everyone else). Therefore, the Treaty recognizes only five states as legitimate nuclear-weapon states: the United States, Russia, China, France and the United Kingdom. This discriminatory structure undermines the moral and legal legitimacy of the Treaty. Pakistan participated in the NPT draft negotiations but has refrained from joining the Treaty. It tested nuclear weapons on May 28, 1998 and has systematically advanced its nuclear arsenal. India, Israel, South Sudan and North Korea are not members of the Treaty.
North Korea is the only state to have joined the NPT and withdrawn from it in 2003. The withdrawal of Pyongyang from the Treaty has strengthened pro-nuclear lobbies in South Korea and Japan. They viewed that nuclear weapon as a “currency” of power, able to deter the nuclear-armed adversary—North Korea. However, Japan and South Korea refrained from leaving NPT because both states have the US “nuclear umbrella” – the system through which they receive nuclear protection from the United States. The recent security debates in Japan and South Korea reveal that many strategic pundits are questioning the credibility of the nuclear umbrella. Would the United States really risk New York or Washington to defend Japan and South Korea?
The NPT’s commitment to a world free of nuclear weapons and the peaceful use of nuclear technology is under intense threat. Its credibility has been steadily eroding. For instance, the participants of the 11th Review Conference led by Vietnam’s Ambassador to the UN, Do Hung Viet, debated the nuclear proliferation challenges for four weeks at United Nations headquarters in New York, but failed to reach consensus on a modest outcome document that reaffirms consensus-based commitments made at the 1995, 2000 and 2010 Review Conferences. The last two NPT Review Conferences held in 2015 and 2022 also failed to produce a consensus outcome document. On April 27, 2026, UN Secretary-General António Guterres alarmed participants at the 11th review conference about the weakening NPT and the surging risks of nuclear proliferation. He declared, “For too long, the treaty has been eroding. Commitments remain unfulfilled. Trust and credibility are wearing thin. The drivers of proliferation are accelerating. We need to breathe life into the treaty once more.”
The Nuclear Weapon States rhetorically support Article VI of the NPT, which demands: “Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.” Instead of capping and rolling back their nuclear weapons programs, they are modernizing their nuclear arsenals and keeping nuclear weapons a central part of their defense strategies due to increasing strategic tensions in global politics. As a result of these actions, the latent nuclear weapon states are contemplating acquiring nuclear weapons.
The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), reported that nine nuclear-armed states—Russia, the United States, France, the United Kingdom, China, India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea—collectively possessed approximately 12,241 nuclear warheads as of January 2026. Nearly 90 percent of those warheads remain under the control of the United States and Russia. The nuclear arsenal modernization of all nine nuclear-armed states could instigate these states to resume nuclear weapon tests. Another disturbing development is the attacks on nuclear infrastructure, which are under the International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards. To conclude, ideally, NPT members should outline a consensual strategy to achieve the three main objectives of the Treaty—nuclear disarmament, nonproliferation and the peaceful uses of nuclear energy under effective safeguards against military diversion. However, the Treaty’s discriminatory character impedes nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation.
—The writer is Vice Chancellor of the Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad.
