Nuclear Ban Treaty: Sand or Grease for the NPT?

  • Michal OndercoEmail author
Part of the Rethinking Peace and Conflict Studies book series (RCS)


This chapter analyses whether the Nuclear Ban Treaty provides sand or grease for the NPT review process. The chapter does so in three steps: firstly by looking at the membership of the Nuclear Ban Treaty and its potential to bridge existing divides within the NPT. Secondly, the chapter looks at how the Ban Treaty played out in the Preparatory Committees for the 2020 NPT Review Conference. Thirdly, the chapter will look at the likely short-term future scenarios for the Ban Treaty, and the likelihood and impact of its entry into force.


Treaty on prohibition of nuclear weapons Non-proliferation treaty Review process Network analysis Ratification 



This chapter draws on remarks delivered at the UCSIA workshop ‘Non-nuclear peace’ in Antwerp, and at the European Initiative on Security Studies conference in Paris (2018). Some of the thoughts that underpin this chapter were presented in a policy brief written for Peace Research Center Prague (Onderco 2018). I am thankful to the editors, as well as to Målfrid Braut-Hegghammer, Rebecca Davis Gibbons, Harald Müller, and Michal Smetana for their thoughtful comments. I thankfully acknowledge funding by the Charles University Research Centre programme UNCE/HUM/028 (Peace Research Center Prague/Faculty of Social Sciences). Ashley-Richard Longman proofread the chapter with much care. All data is accurate as of December 2018.


  1. Acheson, R., & Fihn, B. (2013). Preventing collapse: The NPT and a ban on nuclear weapons. Reaching critical will. Accessed 20 January 2017.
  2. Barlow, A. (2018, July 6). Personal recollections of the 1995 NPT review and extension conference. Paper presented at the Charterhouse Nuclear History Conference, Charterhouse, UK.Google Scholar
  3. Berger, A. (2015). Gangs of New York: The 2015 NPT RevCon. European Leadership Network. Accessed 5 June 2018.
  4. Berry, K., Lewis, P., Pelopidas, B., Sokov, N., & Wilson, W. (2010). Delegitimizing nuclear weapons: Examining the validity of nuclear deterrence. Monterey, CA: James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies.Google Scholar
  5. Bolton, M., & Nash, T. (2010). The role of middle power–NGO coalitions in global policy: The case of the cluster munitions ban. Global Policy, 1(2), 172–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Borrie, J. (2014). Humanitarian reframing of nuclear weapons and the logic of a ban. International Affairs, 90(3), 625–646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Borrie, J., Caughley, T., Graff Hugo, T., Lovold, M., Nystuen, G., & Waszink, C. (2016). A prohibition on nuclear weapons: A guide to the issues. ILPI/UNIDIR. Accessed 16 July 2018.
  8. Box-Steffensmeier, J. M., & Christenson, D. P. (2014). The evolution and formation of amicus curiae networks. Social Networks, 36, 82–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Box-Steffensmeier, J. M., Christenson, D. P., & Hitt, M. P. (2013). Quality over quantity: Amici influence and judicial decision making. American Political Science Review, 107(3), 446–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Caughley, T., & Mukhatzhanova, G. (2017). Negotiation of a nuclear weapons prohibition treaty: Nuts and bolts of the ban. UNIDIR. Accessed 20 June 2017.
  11. Davis Gibbons, R. (2018). The humanitarian turn in nuclear disarmament and the treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons. The Nonproliferation Review, 25(1–2), 11–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dhanapala, J., & Rydell, R. (2005). Multilateral diplomacy and the NPT: An insider’s account. Geneva, Switzerland: UNIDIR.Google Scholar
  13. Doyle, T. (2017). A moral argument for the mass defection of non-nuclear-weapon states from the nuclear nonproliferation treaty regime. Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations, 23(1), 15–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Einhorn, R. (2016). The NPT review process: The need for a more productive approach. Arms Control Today. Accessed 6 July 2018.
  15. Fihn, B. (2017). The logic of banning nuclear weapons. Survival, 59(1), 43–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fihn, B., & Thurlow, S. (2017). Nobel lecture given by the Nobel Peace Prize Laureate 2017, ICAN. Nobel Media AB 2014. Accessed 17 July 2018.
  17. Fowler, J. H. (2006). Connecting the congress: A study of cosponsorship networks. Political Analysis, 14(4), 456–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. France. (2017, May 12). Intervention de Madame Alice Guitton. United Nations. Accessed 18 July 2018.
  19. Fuhrmann, M., & Lupu, Y. (2016). Do arms control treaties work? Assessing the effectiveness of the nuclear nonproliferation treaty. International Studies Quarterly, 60(3), 530–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Graham, T. (2002). Disarmament sketches: Three decades of arms control and international law. Seattle, Institute for Global and Regional Security Studies: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
  21. Grand, C. (2010). The non-proliferation treaty in an era of proliferation crises. Paris: European Union Institute for Security Studies.Google Scholar
  22. Hafner-Burton, E. M., Kahler, M., & Montgomery, A. H. (2009). Network analysis for international relations. International Organization, 63(3), 559–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Harries, M. (2017). The real problem with a nuclear ban treaty. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Accessed 30 June 2017.
  24. Horovitz, L. (2015). Beyond pessimism: Why the treaty on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons will not collapse. Journal of Strategic Studies, 38(1–2), 126–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. ICAN. (2016). Support for a conference in 2017 to negotiate a treaty banning nuclear weapons. Accessed 17 July 2018.
  26. Joyner, D. (2016). U.N. general assembly decides to convene a nuclear weapons ban conference. Arms control law. Accessed 30 June 2017.
  27. Kirkland, J. H., & Gross, J. H. (2014). Measurement and theory in legislative networks: The evolving topology of congressional collaboration. Social Networks, 36, 97–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lupu, Y. (2013). The informative power of treaty commitment: Using the spatial model to address selection effects. American Journal of Political Science, 57(4), 912–925.Google Scholar
  29. Mérand, F., Hofmann, S. C., & Irondelle, B. (2011). Governance and state power: A network analysis of European security. Journal of Common Market Studies, 49(1), 121–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Meyer, P., & Sauer, T. (2018). The nuclear ban treaty: A sign of global impatience. Survival, 60(2), 61–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mills, K., & Bloomfield, A. (2018). African resistance to the International Criminal Court: Halting the advance of the anti-impunity norm. Review of International Studies, 44(1), 101–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Müller, H., Fischer, D., & Kötter, W. (1994). Nuclear non-proliferation and global order. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Nzo, A. (1995). The statement by the Foreign Minister of the Republic of South Africa, Mr. Alfred Nzo: The 1995 Review and Extension Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. 19 April 1995. Department of International Relations and Cooperation Archives (Pretoria).Google Scholar
  34. Onderco, M. (2017). Bureaucrats in non-proliferation policymaking. Sources and Methods. Accessed 27 February 2018.
  35. Onderco, M. (2018). Likely impact of the ban treaty on the NPT review process. PRCP Policy Brief No. 2. Accessed 18 July 2018.
  36. Potter, W. C., & Mukhatzhanova, G. (2012). Nuclear politics and the non-aligned movement: Principles vs. pragmatism. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  37. Price, R. (2004). Emerging customary norms and anti-personnel landmines. In C. Reus-Smit (Ed.), The politics of international law (pp. 106–130). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Pytlak, A. (2018). Editorial: minority view. NPT News in Review, 15(6). Accessed 4 June 2018.
  39. Rauf, T. (2017). 2017: The year in which nuclear weapons could be banned? SIPRI Commentary. Accessed 20 July 2018.
  40. Rauf, T., & Johnson, R. (1995). After the NPT’s indefinite extension: The future of the global nonproliferation regime. The Nonproliferation Review, 3(1), 28–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sauer, T. (2016). It’s time to outlaw nuclear weapons. The national interest. Accessed 7 January 2017.
  42. Shetty, S., & Raynova, D. (Eds.). (2017). Breakthrough or breakpoint? Global perspectives on the nuclear ban treaty. London: European Leadership Network.Google Scholar
  43. Smetana, M. (2016). Stuck on disarmament: The European Union and the 2015 NPT Review Conference. International Affairs, 92(1), 137–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. South Africa. (2017, May 12). South Africa’s statement on the draft chair’s summary at the NPT First PrepCom, Friday. United Nations. Accessed 12 May 2017.
  45. United Nations. (2015). 2015 Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Final Document, Part II: Documents issued at the Conference. Accessed 4 June 2018.
  46. United Nations. (2017). Chair’s factual summary (Working Paper) (NPT/CONF.2020/PC.I/WP.40). Preparatory Committee for the 2020 Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Accessed 4 June 2018.
  47. United Nations. (2018a). Chair’s factual summary (Working Paper) (NPT/CONF.2020/PC.II/WP.13). Preparatory Committee for the 2020 Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, Second Session. Accessed 4 June 2018.
  48. United Nations. (2018b). Treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons. Accessed 17 July 2018.
  49. Williams, H. (2018). A nuclear babel: Narratives around the treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons. The Nonproliferation Review, 25(1–2), 51–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wolfsthal, J. (2017). Second time is NOT a charm for the nuclear ban Ttreaty. Arms control wonk. Accessed 30 June 2017.

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Public Administration and SociologyErasmus University in RotterdamRotterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations