ICAN around the world
Nuclear weapons around the world
The nuclear-weapon states
Today there are nine nuclear-armed states: the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, France, China, Israel, India, Pakistan and North Korea. The first five of these states were the declared nuclear-weapon states when the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty entered into force. Israel, India and Pakistan, which are not NPT parties, acquired their nuclear weapons subsequently, although Israel has never acknowledged the existence of its arsenal.
North Korea tested a nuclear device in 2006 and declared itself a nuclear-weapon state, and tested another in 2009. In addition to these nine states, US nuclear weapons are deployed in six European states: Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Turkey and the United Kingdom. However, recent reports suggest that the last remaining US nuclear weapons in the United Kingdom were removed from Lakenheath Air Force Base in 2008.
Nuclear weapons are also aboard warships on international water. In total there are approximately 23,300 nuclear weapons in the world’s arsenals. Of these almost 96 per cent are in the United States and Russia. Forty-four states in the world have the capacity to develop nuclear weapons through their nuclear power reactors and research reactors.
Nuclear forces in 2009
- United States — 9400
- Russia — 13,000
- United Kingdom — 160
- France — 300
- China — 186
- India — 60–70
- Pakistan — 60
- Israel — 80
- North Korea — 1–10
- Total — 23,330
Source: SIPRI
American nuclear forces
In January 2009, the US nuclear arsenal was estimated at 9400 nuclear warheads. Of these 2700 were operational. The US nuclear programme consists of three parts: intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-launched ballistic missiles and bombers. The United States also holds approximately 500 tactical nuclear weapons.
Russian nuclear forces
Russia has the largest nuclear weapons arsenal in the world. As of early 2009, Russia was estimated to have approximately 4834 nuclear warheads in its operational stockpile and 8166 in reserve or awaiting dismantlement, for a total of approximately 13,000 nuclear weapons. The Russian nuclear programme, like the US programme, consists of three parts: intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-launched ballistic missiles and bombers.
British nuclear forces
The UK arsenal consists of one nuclear weapon system: a fleet of nuclear-powered submarines equipped with ballistic missiles. Each submarine is equipped with 48 nuclear warheads, each of which can be fired in a separate direction. Each warhead has a firepower equivalent to 100 kilotons, which equals eight times the yield of the atom bomb dropped over Hiroshima in 1945. The British government announced in 2005 that it has fewer than 200 operationally available nuclear warheads.
French nuclear forces
The French nuclear arsenal is estimated at 300 nuclear warheads. The Federation of American Scientists notes that France, like other nuclear-weapon states, probably has inactive nuclear warheads in a reserve. The French arsenal consists of two nuclear weapon systems: submarine-launched ballistic missiles and air-launched, intermediate-distance missiles. Three of France’s nuclear submarines are equipped with 16 ballistic missiles each, and each missile has a capacity to launch six warheads. A fourth nuclear submarine, Le Terrible, was inaugurated in March 2008. France also has about 60 nuclear warheads for delivery from bombers.
Chinese nuclear forces
China has a total stockpile of about 240 nuclear warheads, of which 186 are operational. China’s nuclear arsenal consists of approximately 80 land-based missiles with the capacity to carry one nuclear warhead each. The state also has one nuclear submarine equipped with 12 single warhead missiles. A small number of nuclear warheads — approximately 40 — can be launched by bombers.
Indian nuclear forces
India tested a nuclear device in May 1998. The state is not party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and is considered a de-facto nuclear-weapon state. The number of warheads in the Indian nuclear arsenal has not been made public by the Indian government, making an estimate difficult. India has produced enough weapons-grade plutonium to produce some 100 nuclear warheads. It is estimated that India’s arsenal consists of 60 to 70 nuclear warheads, mainly air-borne.
Pakistani nuclear forces
In May 1998, after India’s nuclear-weapon tests, Pakistan tested a series of nuclear weapons over two days to show its nuclear capability. Like India, Pakistan is not a party to the NPT. The country is quickly developing and upgrading its nuclear arsenal. It is difficult to state the exact size and composition of the Pakistani arsenal, as the government has not made any information public. It is estimated that Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal holds 60 warheads, for delivery by bombers and land-based ballistic missiles.
Israeli nuclear forces
Israel’s nuclear weapons have been called “the world’s worst-kept secret”. It is generally accepted that Israel possesses nuclear weapons, although Israeli officials have never confirmed their existence. The nuclear doctrine of Israel is based on the concept of ambiguity. The exact size of the Israeli nuclear arsenal is unknown. It has been estimated that the Israeli arsenal holds approximately 80 warheads.
North Korean nuclear weapons
There is a great level of uncertainty surrounding the North Korean nuclear weapon program. The country has operated a reactor producing nuclear weapons-grade plutonium since 1986. Independent experts claim it has produced about 43kg of separated plutonium. Depending on technical knowledge and the desired yield, North Korea may have produced something between 5 and 10 nuclear warheads. It is uncertain if it has produced nuclear warheads that actually can be delivered by a missile.
North Korea conducted its first underground nuclear test on October 9, 2006. The expected blast was less than 1 kiloton, which can be compared to the bomb dropped on Hiroshima in 1945 with a blast effect of 19 kiloton. The test most likely did not achieve the expected effect, yet showed that North Korea has mastered the nuclear fuel cycle and has the capacity to produce at least more primitive nuclear weapons. It conducted a second nuclear test in 2009.
North Korea was a member of the Non-Proliferation Treaty but announced its withdrawal in early 2003. Only a few months later, North Korean officials revealed for the first time during a roundtable talk with the United States that the country had produced nuclear weapons. It also stated that it possessed and would consider exporting plutonium rods unless the United States would accept bilateral negotiations. Negotiations with North Korea, which have been ongoing for many years with long periods of standstills and cooperation problems, have been conducted under the so-called Six-Party Talks among North Korea, the United States, Japan, South Korea, China and Russia.
Nuclear-weapon programmes
In 2003 Libya revealed that it had a far-reaching nuclear-weapon programme and enough uranium centrifuges to produce enough highly enriched uranium for nuclear weapons within a few years. Libyan leader Muammar al-Gaddafi, however, made clear that his country would give up its nuclear weapons plans. With the assistance of the United States, the United Kingdom and the International Atomic Energy Agency, the Libyan nuclear-weapon programme was dismantled.
Iraq also had a clandestine nuclear-weapon programme during the 1990s, which was revealed by IAEA inspectors. The nuclear-weapon programme was dismantled and, in its final report of 1998, the IAEA announced that no material or technological prerequisites existed for Iraqi resumption of its nuclear-weapon programme.
After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, nuclear weapons were deployed in four newly independent states: Russia, Belarus, Ukraine and Kazakhstan. The latter three decided to surrender the nuclear weapons on their territories and joined the NPT as non-nuclear-weapon states. All former Soviet nuclear weapons were inherited by Russia.
South Africa is the only state ever to possess nuclear weapons and voluntarily give them up in order to join the NPT as a non-nuclear-weapon state. The country had a nuclear-weapon programme during the 1970s and 1980s. It produced six nuclear devices and had a seventh under development when it abandoned the nuclear option in the 1990s.
NATO nuclear sharing
Under the NATO nuclear-sharing programme, the United States today has about 350 nuclear weapons deployed in six European NATO Member States. One of these, the United Kingdom, is a nuclear-weapon state, while the other five — Belgium, Italy, the Netherlands, Germany and Turkey — are non-nuclear-weapon states. The NATO nuclear doctrine has hardly changed during the last decades, despite the changes in the security situation after the end of the Cold War. NATO conducted a review of its nuclear policy in 2003 and concluded that the nuclear weapons deployed in Europe were still necessary to protect European security.
NATO’s non-nuclear members are, to different extents, involved in the nuclear policy of the military alliance. Some states do not allow the placement of nuclear weapons on their territories in times of peace. Other states have US nuclear weapons deployed on their territories to be used if needed by the United States and/or its own air force. All NATO member states participate in the NATO Nuclear Planning Group, where implementation of the nuclear policy and organization of exercises are discussed. France is an exception, having pulled out of the NATO military structure in 1966.
NATO’s nuclear cooperation has been criticized for violating the NPT, or at least going against the spirit of the treaty. Article I of the NPT establishes that the five nuclear-weapon states parties — the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, France and China — are not allowed to transfer nuclear weapons to “any recipient whatsoever”. Under Article II, non-nuclear-weapon states are not allowed to produce or in any other way acquire nuclear weapons. Many states parties believe that NATO nuclear cooperation is a violation of these provisions of the NPT. The United States and NATO contest this conclusion. NATO states are also criticized for violating the NPT, as European non-nuclear-weapon states under the NATO nuclear sharing can be allowed access to and control over US nuclear weapons placed in Europe.
Nuclear-weapon-free zones
Nuclear-weapon-free zones at a minimum prohibit the stationing, testing, use and development of nuclear weapons inside a particular geographical region, whether that is a single state, a region or an area defined solely by international agreements. Such zones have been described in many fora, including the Non-Proliferation Treaty and the UN General Assembly, as positive steps towards nuclear disarmament.
Today there are nuclear-weapon-free zones in Latin America and the Caribbean, the southern Pacific, Southeast Asia, Central Asia and Africa. More than 50 per cent of the Earth’s surface today comprises such zones (including 99 per cent of all land in the Southern Hemisphere). One hundred and nineteen of the world’s approximately 195 states belong to a nuclear-weapon-free zone, and 1.9 billion people live in such zones. States that belong to a nuclear-weapon-free zone are prohibited from producing, testing, stockpiling or acquiring nuclear weapons, and they cannot have nuclear weapons deployed in their territories.
Nuclear weapons in space
There is a big difference between militarization and weaponization of outer space. Space has been militarized since the first communication satellite was launched, and today armed forces all over the world rely on satellites for surveillance, warning systems and navigation. While space is heavily militarized, so far it is not weaponized. The Outer Space Treaty of 1967 prohibits the placement of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction in orbit in outer space. Nuclear weapons testing in outer space is prohibited, and celestial bodies such as the moon and the planets may only be used for peaceful purposes.
Even if the existing legally binding agreements limit deployment of weapons, use of force and military activities in certain parts of outer space to some extent, these are seen by some states as too limited to prevent weaponization of outer space. Scientific development and technological progress call for strengthening existing instruments or negotiating new treaties. The Weapons of Mass Destruction Commission recommended a Review Conference of the Outer Space Treaty to strengthen it and extend its scope.
Some states argue for a new treaty on the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space (PAROS). The United States argues that an arms race in outer space does not yet exist, and it is therefore unnecessary to take action on the issue. Some delegations and experts have thus argued that PAROS is not the most relevant treaty to pursue. Discussion in the Conference on Disarmament has recently focused instead on prevention of the placement of weapons in outer space. Changing the language in this way circumvents the US argument against PAROS.