Global Nuclear Order (GNO)

Syllabus
GS Paper 2 – Bilateral, Regional and Global Groupings and Agreements involving India and/or affecting India’s interests.

Context
Formed during the tense period of the Cold War, the GNO has managed to maintain its stability. However, it is now experiencing challenges due to shifts in global politics.

Table of Contents

Historical Context: The GNO was established in the tense atmosphere of the Cold War, under the leadership of the U.S. and the U.S.S.R., who headed the western and socialist blocs respectively.
Post-Cuban Missile Crisis Realizations: Following the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, both the US and USSR recognized two political realities that led to the formation of the GNO. They understood the necessity for bilateral mechanisms to prevent tensions from escalating to a nuclear level, and acknowledged the inherent danger of nuclear weapons, advocating for their proliferation to be restricted.
Efforts to Control Proliferation: In 1965, the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. began multilateral negotiations in Geneva to formulate a treaty aimed at curbing the spread of nuclear weapons.
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT): The NPT was initiated in 1968 with fewer than 60 parties. Today, it is widely regarded as the cornerstone of the global nuclear order, boasting 191 adherents.
India’s Position: India opted not to sign the NPT and shocked the world in 1974 by conducting an underground peaceful nuclear explosive (PNE).
The London Club: Seven countries (the U.S., U.S.S.R, U.K., Canada, France, Japan, and West Germany) proposed ad hoc export controls to ensure that nuclear technology transferred for peaceful purposes would not be used for PNEs.
Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG): The London Club eventually evolved into the NSG, which consists of 48 countries that adhere to common guidelines for exporting nuclear and related dual-use materials, equipment, and technologies.

Despite the close relationship between the Soviet Union and India, marked by the Indo-Soviet Friendship Treaty in 1971, the USSR remained dedicated to maintaining the GNO. Additionally, it was a founding member of the London Club.

Performance of GNO

Nuclear Taboo: Since 1945, humanity has managed to survive 75 years of the nuclear age without self-destruction.
Successful Non-Proliferation: Despite predictions that over 20 countries would possess nuclear weapons by the 1970s, only four countries (India, Israel, North Korea, and Pakistan) have gone nuclear since 1968. At that time, only five countries (the U.S., U.S.S.R., U.K., France, and China) had nuclear weapons.
Strategic Stability: This is based on the assurance of a second-strike capability, which is guaranteed by the massive arsenals built up by both the US and Russia. This assurance eliminates any incentive for a first strike, ensuring deterrence stability. Arms control negotiations have led to parity in strategic capacities, creating a sense of arms race stability. Additionally, fail-safe communication links provide crisis management stability.
Denuclearisation: Belarus, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan, which hosted Soviet nuclear weapons and had some capabilities, were denuclearised.
Extension of NPT: In 1995, the NPT, which was originally concluded for 25 years, was extended indefinitely.
Active Role of the USA: Between 1977 and 1988, the U.S. actively undermined Taiwan’s nuclear weapons program as it began normalising ties with China. During the 1970s, South Korea considered a nuclear weapons program, but France withdrew its offer to supply a reprocessing plant to South Korea under U.S. pressure.
Limitations: Arms control did not end the nuclear arms race between the US and the USSR. In fact, their arsenals grew from 28,000 bombs in 1962 to over 65,000 bombs in the early 1980s.

From the late 1980s onwards, the nuclear arsenals of the U.S. and the Soviet Union have significantly reduced to less than 12,000 bombs today. This substantial decrease is primarily attributed to the cessation of the Cold War competition and the dissolution of the U.S.S.R.

Impact of Changing Geopolitics on the Global Nuclear Order (GNO)

Multipolar World: The nuclear world today is no longer bipolar. The U.S. now faces a more assertive China, which is determined to regain its influence both regionally and globally.
Emergence of China: As China’s nuclear arsenal continues to grow, it may soon join the ranks of the United States and Russia as the third nuclear superpower.
Withdrawal from Treaties:
- USA: The U.S. withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty in 2002 and from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty in 2019.
- Russia: Russia de-ratified the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) in 2023. The only remaining agreement, New START, will lapse in 2026.
Erosion of Strategic Stability: The collapse of the 2021 Geneva meeting due to the Ukraine war, along with Russia’s nuclear warning to NATO and the U.S. against escalation in Ukraine, has revived nuclear concerns.
US Bias Over Non-Proliferation: The U.S. overlooked Israel’s development of nuclear weapons in the 1960s-70s and China’s assistance to Pakistan with its nuclear program in the 1980s. Recently, the U.S. was involved in the nuclear submarine AUKUS deal (Australia, U.S., and U.K.), reducing the influence of the NPT.
Change in Countries’ Stance: Domestic pressures are causing the U.S. to turn inwards, leading its allies, especially in East Asia, to question its ‘extended deterrence’ guarantees. A shift in this direction is evident in Japan’s decision to double its defense spending over the next five years.

Issues and Concerns

Transition from Bipolarity to Multipolarity: The emergence of China as a global power introduces a new dynamic in nuclear relations, marking a shift from the previous bipolar order dominated by the U.S. and the U.S.S.R.
Alterations in U.S.-Russia Treaties: The U.S. and Russia have withdrawn from key treaties such as the ABM and INF, creating uncertainties surrounding the future of the New START Treaty.
Emergence of New Nuclear Peer Rivals: The U.S. now faces two nuclear peer rivals, Russia and China. This dynamic is further complicated by uncertainties stemming from the conflict in Ukraine.
Technological Shifts: The evolution of nuclear technology and instances of biased dealings, such as the AUKUS deal with Australia, have raised concerns within the NPT community.
Changing National Perspectives: Nations like South Korea and Japan are experiencing shifts in their nuclear perspectives, with considerations being given to national nuclear deterrents.
Challenges in Arms Control: There are challenges in implementing existing agreements like the NPT, and progress in disarmament efforts has been slow.
Modernization and Technological Advancements: The ongoing modernization of nuclear arsenals, including the development of advanced and potentially destabilizing technologies, is a significant concern.
Emerging Threats and Actors: There are risks associated with non-state actors or rogue states acquiring nuclear materials or technology, posing a threat to global security.

India’s Stand on Global Nuclear Order

Support for Nuclear Disarmament: India is in favor of complete nuclear disarmament within a specified timeframe.
Doctrine of ‘No First Use’ (NFU): Adopted in January 2003, this doctrine states that India will only use nuclear weapons in retaliation against a nuclear attack on Indian territory or Indian forces. However, the Indian Defence Minister indicated last year that this policy might change in the future.
Advocacy for Global Disarmament: India promotes global nuclear disarmament while seeking recognition as a responsible nuclear power.
Non-Signatory to NPT and CTBT: India has not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), viewing them as discriminatory.
Complexities due to Non-Signatory Status: India’s decision not to sign the NPT, coupled with the independent development of its nuclear program, complicates its relationship with the global nuclear order.
Expansion of Nuclear Arsenal: India’s ongoing efforts to expand and modernize its nuclear arsenal raise concerns about regional stability, particularly in light of tensions with Pakistan and strategic rivalry with China.
Relations with Pakistan: The nuclear dynamics between India and Pakistan present significant challenges.
Influence of China: India’s nuclear policy is shaped by its relations with China. As China modernizes its nuclear capabilities, India may feel the need to strengthen its own arsenal.

Path to Legitimacy and Stability in the Global Nuclear Order

Conditions for Legitimacy: There are two prerequisites to gain legitimacy:
- A convergence among the major powers.
- The successful portrayal of the outcome as a global public good to the rest of the world.
Reviving Consensus: It is crucial to revive consensus among nations to ensure stability in the global nuclear order.
Upholding Promises: The bargains promised must be upheld to maintain trust and cooperation among nations.
Accommodating Rising Powers: The demands and aspirations of rising powers should be accommodated to ensure a balanced and inclusive global nuclear order.
Promoting Disarmament: Encourage disarmament by advocating for significant and verifiable reductions in nuclear arsenals.
Enhancing Non-Proliferation Efforts: Strengthen efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons.
Inclusive Dialogue: Foster an inclusive dialogue that involves all stakeholders in the discussion.
Monitoring Technological Developments: Keep an eye on emerging technologies to identify potential risks early.
Support for New Treaties: Support new treaties like the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) and engage nuclear-armed states in discussions aimed at achieving a nuclear-free world.
India’s Role: India should concentrate on maintaining regional stability, engaging in dialogue with Pakistan and China, and ensuring the safe and responsible management of its nuclear arsenal.

Source: The Hindu

Practice Question

Analyse the transformation of the Global Nuclear Order (GNO) from the Cold War period to the present? How are the shifting geopolitical landscape and the national interests of major powers influencing the stability and future prospects of the GNO? [250 words]

Global Nuclear Order (GNO)