The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons

Abstract

The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (2017) sets out to challenge deterrence policies and military defence doctrines, taking a humanitarian approach intended to disrupt the nuclear status quo. States with nuclear weapons oppose its very existence, neither participating in its development nor adopting its final text. Civil society groups seem determined, however, to stigmatize and delegitimize nuclear weapons towards their abolition. This book analyzes how the Treaty influences the international security architecture, examining legal, institutional and diplomatic implications of the Treaty and exploring its real and potential impact for both states acceding to the Treaty and those opposing it. It concludes with practical recommendations for international lawyers and policymakers regarding non-proliferation and disarmament matters, ultimately noting that nuclear weapons threaten peace, and everyone should have the right to nuclear peace and freedom from nuclear fear.

The Ukraine crisis, the nuclear threat and the ICJ Opinion of 1996

“…36, CCPR/C/GC/36, para. 66), 15 could open up a whole toolbox of soft law instruments designed to lead to stricter value orientation in international relations (Black‐Branch, 2021, p. 297) 16 . ‘Stigmatizing’ nuclear weapons (Black‐Branch, 2021, p. 180) could generally increase the costs of this instrument rendering it less attractive and in the long run economically and politically perhaps unsustainable.…”

Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons: Towards Sustainable Human Security

“…Although there is insufficient evidence to suggest the prohibition of nuclear weapons under customary international law, the TPNW is a significant occasion for states that support the goal of eradicating nuclear weapons. The TPNW is undoubtedly a triumph for a humanitarian effort to ban nuclear weapons [31]. It precludes state parties from disregarding humanitarian and human rights laws.…”