How many countries have nuclear weapons and how many are there? How destructive are today’s nuclear weapons? What about “nuclear deterrence” theory? Do nuclear weapons help keep the peace? What is the New START Agreement and why has Russia suspended its implementation? What is the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons? Why does this treaty matter if none of the countries with nuclear weapons have joined? Why should one country give up its nuclear weapons if other countries still have them? Why should countries that don’t have nuclear weapons care about this treaty? Can a NATO state join the TPNW? Did Ukraine give up nuclear weapons? What are "tactical" nuclear weapons? What are 'dirty bombs'? What is the nuclear test ban treaty and why has Russia revoked its ratification? What are space nuclear weapons?

Will nuclear-armed states give up their arsenals if a ban on nuclear weapons is negotiated?

Answer

Banning nuclear weapons is not the same as eliminating them. A ban will be a necessary starting point for disarmament to happen. While the dismantlement of all nuclear arsenals might be a long process, a clear international rejection of these weapons is going to be an essential component of future disarmament efforts.

 

The world did not wait for Syria to eliminate their chemical weapons before the prohibition of chemical weapons was negotiated and brought into force. It did not make the chemical weapons convention any less important, rather it helped the international community to swiftly respond and put an end to the use of chemical weapons in Syria.

 

A ban on nuclear weapons will make the maintenance and development of nuclear weapons less attractive and more difficult, both for existing nuclear weapons possessors and potential new ones. It will create better conditions for effective disarmament measures.