Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Banning the Bomb: Inconsequential Posturing or Meaningful Stigmatization?

Banning the Bomb: Inconsequential Posturing or Meaningful Stigmatization? Global Governance 24 (2018), 11–20 THE GLOBAL FORUM Banning the Bomb: Inconsequential Posturing or Meaningful Stigmatization? Kjølv Egeland ON 7 JULY 2017, 122 STATES ADOPTED A TREATY DECLARING NUCLEAR weapons illegal under international law: the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (NWPT). On 20 September, the treaty was formally opened for signature. In contrast to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) of 1968, which permits five major powers to possess and use nuclear weapons, the new and more comprehensive prohibition enshrines the atti- tude that there are “no right hands for wrong weapons.” Given that none of the states that actually possess nuclear weapons are likely to sign the treaty anytime soon, some have dismissed the process as an exercise in inconse- quential posturing by insignificant actors. But the adoption of the ban treaty is momentous. Not only does the prohibition constitute a plausible means of delegitimizing nuclear weapons and thus facilitating their eventual elim- ination, but the treaty has deep historical significance: the adoption of the ban signifies that most of the world’s states are no longer prepared to accord certain states special entitlements under international law, at any rate not to possess nuclear weapons. The hierarchical http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations Brill

Banning the Bomb: Inconsequential Posturing or Meaningful Stigmatization?

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/banning-the-bomb-inconsequential-posturing-or-meaningful-8z230XncMT
Publisher
Brill
Copyright
Copyright © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
1075-2846
eISSN
1942-6720
DOI
10.1163/19426720-02401002
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Global Governance 24 (2018), 11–20 THE GLOBAL FORUM Banning the Bomb: Inconsequential Posturing or Meaningful Stigmatization? Kjølv Egeland ON 7 JULY 2017, 122 STATES ADOPTED A TREATY DECLARING NUCLEAR weapons illegal under international law: the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (NWPT). On 20 September, the treaty was formally opened for signature. In contrast to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) of 1968, which permits five major powers to possess and use nuclear weapons, the new and more comprehensive prohibition enshrines the atti- tude that there are “no right hands for wrong weapons.” Given that none of the states that actually possess nuclear weapons are likely to sign the treaty anytime soon, some have dismissed the process as an exercise in inconse- quential posturing by insignificant actors. But the adoption of the ban treaty is momentous. Not only does the prohibition constitute a plausible means of delegitimizing nuclear weapons and thus facilitating their eventual elim- ination, but the treaty has deep historical significance: the adoption of the ban signifies that most of the world’s states are no longer prepared to accord certain states special entitlements under international law, at any rate not to possess nuclear weapons. The hierarchical

Journal

Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International OrganizationsBrill

Published: Aug 19, 2018

There are no references for this article.