VIENNA, July 10 — Against this backdrop of heightened nuclear rhetoric and crumbling diplomatic consensus, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons stands as one of the few remaining pillars of global arms control, yet its foundations are increasingly under strain. Opened for signature on July 1, 1968, and entering into force on March 5, 1970, the NPT has 191 state parties. These include the five nuclear-weapon states recognized by the treaty: the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, France, and China.
The treaty’s core bargain rests on three pillars: preventing the spread of nuclear weapons, promoting disarmament, and facilitating the peaceful use of nuclear energy. Article VI of the treaty commits all parties to pursue negotiations on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race and to nuclear disarmament.
It is this commitment that has been at the heart of repeated review conferences, where non-nuclear states press the five recognised nuclear powers to make tangible progress. In the corridors of disarmament diplomacy, the failure of the 2020 NPT Review Conference still casts a long shadow. Originally scheduled for April 2020, the conference was postponed multiple times due to the COVID-19 pandemic and was finally held in August 2022.
It failed to adopt a consensus final document, a blow to the treaty’s credibility and a reflection of the deep divisions among member states. What is at stake now is the integrity of a treaty that has served as the legal and political bedrock of non-proliferation efforts for more than half a century.
The wider picture, however, is troubling. Russia’s nuclear threats during the Ukraine war have been widely criticized as violating the spirit of the NPT. Such rhetoric, coming from one of the treaty’s five recognised nuclear-weapon states, has alarmed European capitals and raised questions about the durability of the existing arms control architecture.
The next NPT Review Conference is scheduled for 2026. That gathering will take place in an environment markedly different from the one in which the treaty was negotiated. The Cold War bipolar order has given way to a more fragmented and volatile landscape.
China is expanding its nuclear arsenal, and the United States and Russia remain locked in strategic competition even as they hold the vast majority of the world’s nuclear warheads. For European states, particularly those without nuclear weapons of their own, the NPT is not merely an abstract legal instrument.
It is the framework that has, for decades, limited the number of nuclear-armed states and provided a forum for disarmament discussions. The failure of the 2022 review conference to produce a consensus document was a warning sign that the treaty’s mechanisms are under severe pressure. In the run-up to 2026, the key questions will revolve around whether the five nuclear-weapon states can demonstrate genuine commitment to Article VI, and whether the broader membership can bridge the gaps that led to deadlock in 2022.
The treaty’s future may well depend on the answers.
