Especially in the lead-up to the 10th NPT Review Conference, it is more important than ever for NATO to take a proactive role in signalling its support for the goals that it shares with TPNW supporters.
The current state of the debate on the TPNW is highly polarized. Given the nature of Allies’ objections to the TPNW, it is unlikely that NATO will change its position as expressed in the 2017 and 2020 NAC statements. There is a strong feeling that TPNW supporters in civil society focus their energies on democratic countries and do not focus on other states that are exacerbating the current threat environment. TPNW supporters make good-faith arguments that often feature sophisticated legal interpretations aimed at addressing NATO’s concerns. However, these arguments are likely to remain unpersuasive in so far as they focus on legally available options and ignore political realities. It would be unfortunate if the current spirit of polarization around the TPNW were to have a negative impact on the overall propensity for cooperation – which is clearly needed by the international community. As was suggested by the representative of the Netherlands when the TPNW was adopted, there is a need for more dialogue about how the international community can overcome differences.
Now that NATO has made its position on the TPNW clear, it is important not to overemphasize the issue in its overall messaging on support for disarmament. On NATO’s side, more nuance would be helpful as the Alliance seeks to maintain a modern deterrence posture and demonstrate tangible support for nuclear disarmament. As regards TPNW supporters, more genuine engagement with the concerns expressed by NATO and other states – beyond merely issuing rebuttals – would also serve a long-term agenda in favour of disarmament.
In the spirit of refocused effort from all sides, it is more important than ever for NATO to take a proactive role in signalling its support for the ADN goals that it shares with TPNW supporters, especially in the lead-up to the 10th NPT Review Conference in 2021. Given its diverse membership and wide-ranging partnership networks, NATO can help bridge this gap. This paper has made specific suggestions on areas where more engagement beyond simply opposing the TPNW could be helpful. This includes possibilities for engagement with TPNW supporters. NATO’s partners can be a useful bridge in this regard.
Ultimately, however, the TPNW is – and should remain – only a relatively small component of NATO’s nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament posture. NATO should also continue to engage more broadly in the nuclear ADN realm, including in nuclear risk reduction, transparency measures among others. In March 2020, the NAC adopted a strong statement of support for the NPT on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the treaty’s establishment. The Council’s statement also called on NPT states parties to work together to make the Review Conference a success. This language was a first in NATO history. NATO should consider how to amplify the message behind its statement, which risks having become lost in the tumultuous events driven by the COVID-19 pandemic.
NATO has a long history of working with its partners on ADN issues. Further efforts and outreach can be useful. NATO’s positioning in the broader disarmament space in this way would show how the Alliance can play a constructive role and try to bridge gaps in what has become a divisive debate on the TPNW. At the same time, TPNW supporters should also support and see the value in such efforts.
