Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
The world experienced brutal consequences of nuclear weapons used for the first time in
1945. These weapons proved to be human annihilating weapons when the large scale
catastrophe was caused by it in cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Some states involved
in arms race to dominate each other for ideological, political and economic interests.
Thousands of nuclear weapons were manufactured and deployed during the cold war,
which decreased the sustainability of human beings on the planet. The nations of the
world felt to control and limit the nuclear weaponization. Different initiatives are taken in
controlling and disarmament of nuclear weapons. But the testing of nuclear weapons
were experienced during the whole cold war which had disastrous implications over the
whole ecosystem. CTBT is one of the effort to control and limit the nuclear weapons by
putting bans on testing of nuclear weapons. In this research paper The Comprehensive
Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) is critically analyzed. What are the prospects of its
enforcement and challenges to bring the treaty into force ? Is it a treaty based on ill
intentions of some powerful states or for the betterment of the mankind to avoid the sever
disarmament and nuclear arms control ? This paper also shed light on the perspectives of
the states important for the entry into force of the treaty, who have not signed and
ratified the treaty. Different books, articles, research papers, reports are consulted to form
The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty is the treaty which puts ban on nuclear testing by
anyone, anywhere. This treaty is considered to be an arms control treaty by imposing a ban
nuclear testing. The efforts to ban nuclear tests are as old as the first nuclear test which was
conducted in Alamogordo, New Mexico, United States, on July 1945. Jawaharlal Nehru the
premier of India advocated a “standstill agreement” on nuclear testing. “In 1963 PTBT ( Partial
Test Ban Treaty) was signed which banned nuclear testing in outer space, in atmosphere and
underwater, did not prohibit underground nuclear test”. But the treaty could not succeed in
diminishing the numbers of nuclear weapons1. U.S and Soviet Union increased nuclear weapons
In 1968 the nations of the world agreed upon a treaty known as NPT which laid the
Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty but could not reached upon the formation of the treaty. Then
the CTBT was formally negotiated in a ‘Conference on Disarmament’ in Geneva in 1994 and 1996,
which was offered for signatures in 19962. 158 states voted for the treaty and out these states
India, Bhutan, and Libya voted against the treaty. Since that time 183 nations of the world have
signed the treaty and 166 have ratified the treaty3. The treaty has to see the ratification of eight
1
History of CTBT: Summary, visit: https://www.ctbto.org/the-treaty/history-summary/
2
Ibid
3
Daryl Kimball, “ The Status of Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty: Signatories and Ratifiers” available at
https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/ctbtsig
Essentials of the CTBT
The Article 1 of the treaty states that, “ Each State Party undertakes not to carry out any
nuclear weapon test explosion or any other nuclear explosion, and to prohibit and prevent any such
nuclear explosion at any place under its jurisdiction or control”4. The treaty bans all kind of peaceful
nuclear explosions.
This treaty is considered to be the last hurdle in the way of developing nuclear weapons.
It attempts to be a barrier in the development of new nuclear weapons and in the improvement
of existing nuclear weapons. As soon as the treaty enters into force it will provide a legal binding
From 1945 till 1996 when the CTBT was negotiated, almost 2000 nuclear tests were
performed, in this “(1000+) by United States, (700+) by Soviet Union, (200+) by France, and (45)
by United Kingdom and China each”. India, Pakistan and DPRK have performed nuclear explosion
after 1996, the former two did in 1998 and the later in 2006 and 20096.
According to Article XIV of the treaty that the treaty will entry into force when the 44
states which are mentioned in the Annex 2 of the treaty sign and ratify the treaty7. These are
those states who had nuclear facilities before the negotiation of the treaty. The last state who
ratified the treaty was Indonesia who did so. There are eight states whose ratification is required
4
Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, visit at:
https://www.ctbto.org/fileadmin/content/treaty/treaty_text.pdf
5
What is CTBT? Available at: https://www.ctbto.org/the-treaty/article-xiv-conferences/2011/afc11-information-
for-media-and-press/what-is-the-ctbt/
6
Ibid
7
Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, visit at:
https://www.ctbto.org/fileadmin/content/treaty/treaty_text.pdf
that include US, China, Egypt, Israel, Iran, India, Pakistan, and North Korea. Out of these India,
Pakistan and North Korea have even not signed the treaty8.
Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization
(CTBTO) works for making the treaty into force. It has a verification regime which monitors
compliance to the treaty. The CTBT verification regime consist of “International Monitoring
System (IMS), International Data Center (IDC) and On Site Inspections (OSI)”. These systems work
for detecting nuclear explosions and members are from 183 states have signed the treaty. CTBT
verification regime detected the 2006 and 2009 nuclear test made by DPRK9.
The basic problem is there with definition given by the CTBT for nuclear tests. States
cannot be prevented by CTBT from building basic nuclear weapons because for such a basic
weapons, testing is not necessary10. States can build nuclear weapons which may be utilized
directly in a war which does not need to be tested in before using them against an adversary. For
8
CTBT: Annex 2 States, visit to: https://2009-2017.state.gov/t/avc/rls/159264.htm
9
What is the CTBT verification regime, visit: https://www.ctbto.org/the-treaty/article-xiv-conferences/2011/afc11-
information-for-media-and-press/what-is-the-ctbt/
10
Thomas Schober and others, “ Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty: Questions and Challenges”, Arms Control ( Nov 7,
2012) available at: https://www.heritage.org/arms-control/report/the-comprehensive-test-ban-treaty-questions-
and-challenges
Weapons that does not carry “thermonuclear boosting elements”, are capable of
providing yield in the range of 15 to 50 kilotons. These weapons can prove to be catastrophic and
CTBT ( Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty) has not provided with the framework that what
should be done with state if there is any non-compliance, it has only established with
CTBT has failed to prevent the countries like Russia and China form developing “ low yield,
clean, penetrating and electromagnetic-pulse (EMP) nuclear weapons” which has increased their
nuclear reliability. The credibility of the weapons of other nations has been dropped because
It is very difficult that treaty come into force because of the U.S who was a strong
supporter of the non-proliferations regime and mover of the treaty has not yet ratified the treaty
as senate of the U.S did not approve it. So how probable it is that other states sign and ratify the
treaty14?
Voting system is also a problem when thirty out of fifty one “members states of the
executive council” does not agree to authorize an “On Site Inspection” it will not be conducted15.
11
Ibid
12
Ibid
13
Ibid
14
Moonis Ahmar, “ The Introduction”, in Moonis Ahmar, The CTBT Controversy: Different Perceptions in South Asia,
( Department of International Relations University of Karachi, Karachi Pakistan 2000)
15
Thomas Schober and others, “ Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty: Questions and Challenges”
There can involve the politics of big powers to safeguard their interests and their allies interests.
And on site inspection can not be conducted until the treaty does not come into force.
Some states are also concerned about the time period of the treaty which is indefinite.
These states are not ready to ratify a treaty which is unlimited in nature that may have adverse
effects on their maintenance of deterrence of nuclear weapons which can challenge the security
of those states.
Capabilities of detections are not that much improved which can detect the “small low
yield test” which may be helpful in modernization of nuclear weapons. States can carry nuclear
tests in special type of container which makes it undetectable for the CTBT verification regime16.
The 183 members states that have signed and 157 that have ratified the treaty, in these
most of them are not relevant to matters about nuclear weapons. “The real concern lies with the
11 states”. The P5 states ( U.S, The U.K, France, Russia and China), Pakistan, India, Israel, North
Korea and the two states who are takes interests in development of nuclear weapons Syria and
Iran17.
The treaty does not prohibit “multiplying of nuclear weapons, improving nuclear
16
Kathleen C Bailey, “ The CTBT remains fatally flawed” visit at:
https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2016/02/24/the_ctbt_remains_fatally_flawed_109073.html
17
Thomas Schober and others, “ Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty: Questions and Challenges”
18
Moonis Ahmar, “ The Introduction"
Prospects of Enforcement of the treaty
The Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty is about to be an international norm that
prohibits nuclear testing. Even states like India who had voted against the treaty’s resolution is
abiding by it. U.S can play a big role in bringing the entry into force. After ratification of U.S China
is likely to follow suit as it expressed many a times. U.S can also put pressure on Israel and Egypt
which are close allies of the U.S19. And the world can see a nuclear free Middle East.
In the case of India and Pakistan, Indian officials have expressed that they do not want to
be from those last states who sign and ratify the treaty. Pakistan has officially made clear that
they are going to sign and ratify the treaty if India signs ratifies the treaty. And the case of North
Korea can be adjusted with when relationships between U.S and North Korea get normalized20.
States should be made sure that by signing and ratification of the treaty, it does not mean
that they are going to abandon their nuclear weapons or policy of deterrence which can pose
threats to their security. They are not going to functionalize like a non-nuclear states but has to
Those non-annex 2 states who are yet to ratify the treaty: making them part of the treaty
will strengthen the global norm against nuclear testing, which can be helpful in pressurizing the
19
Jeffrey Lewis, “ THE CTBT: PROSPECTS FOR ENTRY INTO FORCE” OCCASIONAL PAPER 4 ( 2010) visit at:
http://www.vertic.org/media/assets/Publications/CTBT%20OP4.pdf
20
Ibid
21
“ Achieving the Entry into Force of the Comprehensive-Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty”, Vienna Center for
Disarmament and Non-Proliferation; Workshop Report ( 10 May 2017) Web Link: https://www.vie-mission.emb-
japan.go.jp/CTBT%2010%20May%20Report%20Final%20(3).pdf
Educating and training common people in promoting non-proliferation and disarmament
specifically in the eight annex 2 states can help in bringing treaty into force. This general public
can play a role in promotion of the treaty’s entry into force by pressurizing the policies of the
By taking the issues into considerations that are hindering and preventing the states from
the treaty can be helpful. It is a difficult task to address all problems and challenges but is
Critical analysis
In the very first article of the treaty it is said that every state that become part of the
treaty “will not carry nuclear test explosion or any other nuclear explosion and prohibition and
prevention of any such explosion at any place under its jurisdiction or control”. It should be
clarified over here that the phrase “any other explosion” does not mean that the utilization of
nuclear weapons is also prevented. This only means prohibition of peaceful nuclear explosions23.
The treaty does not intend to prohibit the real explosions means explosions or bombing the
The CTBT ( Comprehension test ban treaty) is not only the treaty of putting ban on nuclear
explosions but symptomatic of the mindset of the West. It is necessary to understand the
mindset of the West before attempting to know the nature and scope of the comprehension test
22
Ibid
23
Ahmer Bilal Soofi, “Dimensions of CTBT” in Moonis Ahmar (ed.), THE CTBT CONTROVERSY: DIFFERENT
PERCEPTIONS IN SOUTH ASIA, (Karachi; Department of International Relations University of Karachi, Karachi
Pakistan, 2000).
ban treaty24. The West has always tried to maintain their status quo over the less developed and
third world nations. The treaties and steps of non-proliferation have always benefitted the
nations that have developed the nuclear weapons before the 1968 means Nuclear Weapon State
(NWS).
The betrayal of these Nuclear Weapon States can be observed in the form of Nuclear Non-
Proliferation Treaty (NPT) that after 19 years of its implementation in 1987 according to an
estimate that the five NPT states’ arsenal of nuclear weapons at 68,000: United States 24,000;
Russian Federation 43,000; United Kingdom 300; France 420; and China 42025.
In terms of dollars, 320 billion dollars were spent on defense in a year and total of about
13 trillion dollars to win the cold war. The point is that nearly 4 trillion dollars were spent on
developing and maintaining nuclear arsenal. It shows that how sincere United States is in
denuclearizing itself26.
Article six of the NPT says, “each of the parties of the Treaty undertakes to pursue
negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at
an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament
under strict and effective international control”27. Instead of having controlling the arms race and
going for complete disarmament which the treaty oblige over them, these states increased the
24
Tarik Jan, “ CTBT: A TOOL FOR AMERICAN DOMINATION” in Moonis Ahmar (ed.), THE CTBT CONTROVERSY:
DIFFERENT PERCEPTIONS IN SOUTH ASIA.
25
Ibid
26
Ibid
27
Ibid
In signing and ratifying treaties of nuclear non-proliferation United States has always
heeded to it’s own interests rather than thinking for the protection of the world in terms of non-
proliferation. This can be judged how U.S has tried to maintain its status quo in the beginning of
the formation of nuclear non-proliferation regime undermining the safety and security of the
The U.S is not sincere in saving the world from the hazard of nuclear as it always professes
to be. E.g. the Partial Test Ban Treaty (PTBT) of 1963 came to an end as an compromise draft,
because the U.S did not want a comprehensive test ban and wanted to have open the option of
underground testing28. The U.S have always left an option for its supremacy and hegemonic
The states who consider themselves as the custodians of the world security have not
ratified the treaty, considering it a threat to their nuclear arsenal that they might lag behind in
nuclear technology from rest of the countries. So, how possible it is that the state like U.S has not
ratified the treaty yet, India and Pakistan who are much backward in terms of nuclear technology
On the other hand states who ratified the treaty are performing nuclear tests which are
increasing the lethality and sophistication of their nuclear weapons. These tests are performed
in closed containers which are undetectable by the CTBTO. When there is a process of
sophistication of nuclear weapons by the technological advanced states why should the states
28
Ibid
who are not able to match those technologically advanced states in maintaining the deterrence
Treaties like PTBT, NPT and CTBT are actually the traits of P5 states to legitimize their
nuclear weapons, to maintain status quo of nuclear weapons in the form forcing the rest of the
world toward non-proliferation. These weapons provide them with an edge by which they can
Conclusion
After analyzing the treaty one can conclude that it is very difficult that the treaty may
enter into force. As it was seeming at the tenure of Barak Obama that U.S is likely to ratify the
treaty but with the arrival of Trump at the White House has reduced the possibility of ratification
as he is intended to withdraw U.S from some other important treaties like INF . U.S ratification
might help in bringing the treaty into force because China has many time expressed that they are
The states have to take proper steps for securing the world from the hazards of nuclear
weapons. No state should be complacent with its nuclear weapons safety and security. Serious
initiatives should be taken for safety and security of the existing stockpiles of nuclear weapons.
Treaties should be adopted which are not devised to serve the interests of specific powerful
countries. If these nations (P5) are really sincere in denuclearization efforts, they should start
implementing the article six of the NPT where these states accept that they would go eventually