NATO sharply criticized Russian and Chinese nuclear policies on Tuesday, urging both nations to cooperate with the United States for greater global stability. The alliance’s 32 members reaffirmed their commitment to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty ahead of next week’s UN review conference in New York.
Moreover, NATO’s statement directly challenged Moscow’s “irresponsibly threatening nuclear rhetoric” and Beijing’s opaque arsenal expansion. “Russia has violated crucial arms control commitments,” declared the North Atlantic Council. Meanwhile, China continues rapidly diversifying its nuclear weapons without transparency, the alliance added clearly.
NATO Assistant Secretary General Boris Ruge highlighted Russia’s recent Oreshnik missile deployments in Ukraine as dangerous nuclear signaling. “Today, we face a Russia that has dropped out of all important arms control agreements,” Ruge told Reuters. Consequently, he emphasized NATO’s defensive posture and rejection of aggressive nuclear posturing worldwide.
Diplomatic Hopes Amid Deadlock
Furthermore, Ruge defended France’s planned nuclear modernization as a “measured, reasonable, and transparent response” to current threats. However, Russia labeled the move “highly destabilizing” and potentially threatening to Moscow’s security interests. China similarly dismissed Western transparency concerns, stating its nuclear strength remains “at the minimum level required by national security.”
The Federation of American Scientists estimates Russia holds 4,400 nuclear warheads, followed by the United States with 3,700. China possesses approximately 620 warheads, while France and Britain maintain 290 and 225 respectively. Additionally, India, Pakistan, and North Korea possess nuclear weapons, while Israel’s arsenal remains unconfirmed publicly.
Ultimately, NATO hopes the upcoming conference produces a unified document emphasizing transparency and risk reduction. Nevertheless, the two previous review conferences in 2015 and 2022 failed to reach consensus on final statements. “Even if we were unable to agree on the document, that would not call into question the importance and validity of the NPT itself,” Ruge concluded firmly.
