TOKYO - The four-week review conference of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty at U.N. headquarters in New York ended without adopting a final document, marking a third consecutive failure after 2015 and 2022. I went there during the final week.
With wars ongoing in Ukraine and Iran, and with the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty known as New START -- the only remaining nuclear arms treaty between the United States and Russia -- having expired, the international environment has become more hostile and member states, especially nuclear-weapon states, clung to national interests. This has raised concerns that the NPT will become increasingly hollow.
Vietnamese Ambassador to the United Nations Do Hung Viet, who served as conference president, tried to run proceedings in ways that broke with convention. Normally, discussions in three committees -- nuclear disarmament, nonproliferation and the peaceful use of nuclear energy -- coalesce and a draft outcome document is presented around the start of the final week, but this time an initial draft was circulated in the second week.
In revising the draft, adamant efforts were seen to secure an agreement by deleting many contentious provisions and nearly halving the number of items. But divisions persisted to the end, including over language related to Iran's nuclear development.
What stood out throughout the conference was the posture of nuclear-weapon states: disregarding the common interests the members affirmed when the NPT entered into force, pursuing only their own interests and seeking to water down language calling for nuclear disarmament.
The NPT is inherently unequal, recognizing only five nuclear-weapon states -- the United States, Russia, Britain, France and China -- while designating all others as non-nuclear weapon states. Even so, it entered into force because both sides shared the understanding that preventing any increase in the number of nuclear-armed states was indispensable to the stability of the international order.
During the bipolar confrontation of the Cold War, when the United States and Russia were able to reach an understanding, nuclear disarmament progressed and non-nuclear weapon states cooperated on nonproliferation. Today, in an era of multipolarity, balancing the interests of nuclear-weapon states has become more complex: arms-control treaties between the United States and Russia have lapsed, and Britain, France, and China are moving toward nuclear buildup.
If the stronger parties to the NPT become more self-centered, it will be difficult to generate momentum for cooperation. Meanwhile, divisions are deepening among non-nuclear weapon states, particularly between countries such as Japan, which rely on a "nuclear umbrella" for security, and those that do not.
Precisely when international relations are highly strained, parties should present new operational guidelines for the treaty and pursue effective measures, but regrettably that function is being lost from the review conference process.
The behavior of powerful states has weakened not only the NPT, but also other rules. For example, the World Trade Organization has become dysfunctional due to the United States' refusal to approve appointments to its Appellate Body. As a result, China's export controls on rare minerals and unilateral U.S. tariff measures have become routine.
The World Health Organization also saw the withdrawal of the United States by the administration of President Donald Trump due to dissatisfaction with the organization's response over investigations into the origins of COVID-19.
Moreover, the spectacle of permanent members of the U.N. Security Council resorting to the use of force symbolizes the grave reality of an international community unable to properly operate even the U.N. Charter.
Against that backdrop, how should Japan respond? Japan has styled itself a "guardian of the NPT" and has consistently stressed the importance of the "rule of law" at international gatherings, yet at this review conference some countries and overseas nongovernmental organizations said, "Japan's presence was faint."
Should Japan try to persuade the major powers, or should it follow the advice of Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and seek a breakthrough through coordination among the middle powers? In any case, actions that translate words into concrete steps are required to revive international law.
(Yuki Kobayashi was born in Kobe in 1972. After graduating from Kwansei Gakuin University and working as a reporter for Kahoku Shimpo, he earned a doctorate at Mines Paris and has been with the Sasakawa Peace Foundation since 2019, specializing in nuclear and atomic energy policy.)
