Thirty years ago, on 11 May 1995, the period of validity of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) was extended indefinitely without conditions. The NPT remains a cornerstone of international security. Almost all the states in the world are parties. In the early sixties there were American analysts who estimated that nuclear weapons proliferation would be inevitable. That had happened with all other weapons. The projection was that there would be twenty to thirty nuclear-weapon states in another twenty years or so. One of them would be Finland’s neighbour Sweden.
In the mid-sixties there were five declared nuclear-weapon states: the United States, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, France and the latest entrant, China in October 1964. It was suspected that Israel had acquired nuclear weapons with the assistance of France but Israel has not admitted – or denied – that it has nuclear weapons to this day.
The proliferation of nuclear weapons was not in their interests even in the days of the Cold War but the nuclear-weapon states were not willing to give up their own nuclear weapons to prevent proliferation. However, that was what many non-nuclear-weapon states demanded in exchange for not acquiring nuclear weapons themselves. At the joint initiative of the United States and the Soviet Union the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva commenced negotiations on a non-proliferation treaty in 1965, soon after China’s first nuclear weapons test. The negotiations were successful in the end. The square was indeed circled. The NPT was ready by 1968 and it entered into force in 1970. Its period of validity was extended indefinitely by the NPT review and extension conference in New York in 1995. There are 191 states parties to the NPT as of now.
The nightmare visions of the early sixties about nuclear proliferation have not been realized. The NPT can claim significant credit for this achievement. For its prime mover, the United States, extended nuclear deterrence, instead of possible nuclear sharing, became the primary tool to reassure its allies and friends. After the NPT´s entry into force in 1970 only three states have acquired nuclear weapons: India, Pakistan and North Korea. South Africa did acquire nuclear weapons under the apartheid regime but gave them up after power changed hands in the country in the early 1990s. Iraq had a nuclear weapons programme at one time and Iran continues to be a strong suspect in this regard. The dissolution of the Soviet Union left nuclear weapons stranded in newly-independent Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan but those nuclear weapons were transferred to Russia with massive economic and technical assistance by the West, mostly by the United States. The three denuclearized states joined the NPT in exchange. In addition, Ukraine received security assurances from the United States, the United Kingdom and Russia in the so-called Budapest memorandum. Ukraine has solid grounds to regret that particular decision today. Ukraine´s fate as a victim of aggression by a nuclear-weapon state party to the NPT and doubts about the overall reliability of US extended deterrence under the Trump administration raise fears about a new round of nuclear proliferation. The threshold to go nuclear for any non-nuclear-weapon state party to the NPT, even for the technologically most advanced ones, is still very high, though.
The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is undoubtedly an arrangement that violates the principle of sovereign equality between states. The NPT divides the world into haves and have-nots: nuclear- weapon states and non-nuclear-weapon states. This glaring imbalance between the rights and the duties enshrined in the NPT has grated on many non-nuclear-weapon states from the start and still does. Finland, however, adhered to the NPT among the first states to do so. For us, the NPT has always been a whole of three different but equally important parts: the commitment by the non-nuclear-weapon states not to acquire nuclear weapons, the commitment by the nuclear- weapon states not to transfer nuclear weapons to non-nuclear-weapon states and to negotiate in good faith about reducing their own nuclear weapons, and the commitment by both to promote the peaceful use of nuclear energy under the safeguards applied by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The nuclear-weapon states have always appreciated the moderate and constructive policy Finland has pursued in the implementation of the NPT.
The period of validity of the NPT was originally twenty-five years. At the review and extension conference in 1995 the more than a hundred non-nuclear weapon states members of the Non-aligned movement wanted make the extension conditional on progress in nuclear disarmament. On the other hand, the five nuclear-weapon states parties and the West in general, including Finland and Sweden, wanted indefinite extension without conditions. The clear majority of states parties were in the end persuaded to support indefinite extension. South Africa played a major role in securing this outcome. The opponents knew that they would be in the minority in any eventual vote. The extension decision was taken by consensus. The minority has sought redress ever since.
The 1995 decision to extend the validity of the NPT indefinitely is legally binding on all states parties. Politically, this decision was made easier for many non-nuclear-weapon states to accept by the agreement, at the same time, on a programme of principles and objectives on advancing nuclear disarmament. Unfortunately, there has been little progress in this regard since. The decision to extend the NPT indefinitely stands on its own feet, however. In fact, it is the permanence of the NPT that remains a condition for all future progress in nuclear disarmament.
Those states parties which advocated making the extension of the NPT conditional in 1995 have sought redress in all the five-yearly review conferences held since. After the 2015 review conference members of the Non-aligned movement were joined by Western disarmament activists, non-governmental organizations as well as Austria, Ireland and New Zealand. Together they initiated a process within the United Nations to negotiate a completely new treaty. The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) was accepted by a majority vote in the UN General Assembly and came into force in 2021. As of now, the TPNW has 73 states parties, none of which possess nuclear weapons. Finland did not even bother to join negotiations on such an unrealistic treaty. No NATO member state has acceded to the TPNW. Of the EU member states only Austria, Ireland and Malta are parties.
If and when negotiations on the reduction of nuclear weapons by the nuclear-weapon states again begin in one form or another some day, the permanent existence of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty will serve the objective of reducing nuclear weapons better than all the virtue signaling that a treaty banning nuclear weapons but negotiated by non-nuclear-weapon states amongst themselves represents.