Analysis: How low can they go?

The nuclear powers have promised eventual disarmament

By Defence Correspondent Jonathan Marcus

The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty - known as the NPT regime - rests upon a simple bargain. In return for giving up any desire to develop nuclear weapons, countries are afforded access to civil nuclear technology.

Nuclear installations are inspected and the whole regime was intended to prevent any further countries from becoming nuclear weapons states.

Official nuclear powers

USA

Russia

China

France

UK

But the five countries who acceded to the treaty already with nuclear weapons - China, France, Britain, the United States and the then Soviet Union - also had responsibilities. They promised eventually to give up their nuclear arsenals.

And a constant theme in the ensuing discussions of the NPT regime has been the pace and commitment with which they have sought to reach this target.

This is what explains the joint declaration by the five nuclear weapons states, who reiterate their commitment to the ultimate goal of the complete elimination of nuclear weapons.

Start-II poses difficult questions

That is not going to impress many of the critics. But the renewed interest in nuclear arms control following the Russian parliament's recent ratification of the Start-II treaty is going to force some difficult questions onto the agenda.

Start-II will take the Russian and US nuclear arsenals down to some 3,000 to 3,500 warheads apiece.

So if there is to be a new strategic arms reduction treaty how low can the US and Russia go?

At what point would the other declared nuclear weapons states have to join in the negotiations?

And if arsenals are reduced to what some might see as a minimum, is there any chance of moving towards the complete elimination of this category of weapons?

That's not going to be likely with undeclared nuclear powers like India, Pakistan and Israel unwilling to join the treaty regime.

Nonetheless everyone has an interest in seeing the NPT's values strengthened at this review conference whatever disagreements there might be about the pace of change or the treaty's failure to be universally supported.