The European Union and the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons: Let’s Agree that we Disagree

Abstract

The European Union has traditionally been an efficient actor on nonproliferation and peaceful uses of nuclear energy, but a poor actor on disarmament, mainly due to internal decisions within the Union on this issue. However, due to the growing crisis in the global arms control architecture and the entry into force of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), increased pressure is being exerted on the EU not only to adopt concrete positions on this issue, but also to act. This, it is argued, will be complicated, if not impossible, due to the internal structure and decision-making process of the Union, which cannot be asked to do more than it can do.

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 The Humanitarian Initiative, stemming from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), emerged in response to stalled nuclear disarmament efforts. Since 2013, it has organized conferences examining the Humanitarian Impact of Nuclear Weapons, leading to the Humanitarian Pledge by Austria. This pledge aimed to address the gap in nuclear disarmament outlined in Article VI of the NPT. The Mexico conference in 2014 concluded that prohibiting a weapon type typically precedes and promotes its elimination, thus advocating for a treaty banning nuclear weapons to fulfill Article VI of the NPT.

2 A small clarification: the TPNW negotiating meeting is not officially associated with the Humanitarian Initiative. The latter precedes the former, but they are distinct and separate entities, albeit thematically close.

3 For a long time, France did not consider its nuclear arsenals to be part of NATO’s strategy and remains a non-member of the Nuclear Planning Group.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Manuel Herrera

Dr. Manuel Herrera is Research Fellow at the Italian International Affairs Institute (IAI). E-mail: [email protected]