Introduction

The General Assembly of the United Nations voted by a large number of people to
unite in 2017 a United Nation conference to reconcile a ‘legally binding instrument
to prohibit nuclear weapons, directing towards their total elimination’. The
outcome of the vote was 113 in favor, 35 against and 13 abstentions. Furthermore,
Four of the five nuclear weapon counties, for instance, France, Russia, the United
Kingdom and the United States, voted against, along with the majority of North
Atlantic Treaty Organization states in addition to Australia, Israel, Japan and South
Korea, all of the state depend on US nuclear guarantees. Surprisingly, North Korea
voted in favor. Additionally, Those abstaining included China, India, the
Netherlands, Pakistan and Switzerland. Furthermore, 122 countries supported the
treaty. The new treaty will make it illegal under international law to develop, test,
produce, manufacture, acquire, possess, stockpile, transfer, use or threaten to use
nuclear weapons. It also makes it illegal to assist or encourage anyone to engage in
these activities.The UK government refused to participate in the treaty negotiations
and even issued a hostile statement, while maintaining that it shares CND’s goal of
a nuclear weapons-free world.CND is lobbying the British government to sign the
treaty and work towards the global elimination of nuclear weapons.
Organizational meeting of countries.
In the United nation, an organizational meeting was held on February 16, 2017, in
New York. Moreover, the meeting was attended by more than 100 countries. And
the president of this organizational meeting was Ellyn Whyte Gomez. Actually,
the meeting was directed in 27- 31 march and 15 June- 7 July under resolution. In
addition to this, the meeting also agreed on the conference program and its rules
and regulations. And it will require a two-thirds majority for matters. Ergo, no
copies will be able to block the decisions on banning nuclear weapons,
Proliferation of conferences
The three previous international conferences of states are given below.
1. Oslo in 2013
2. Nayarit in 2014
3. Vienna in 2015
These conferences brought attention over peril to humanity posed by the nuclear
weapons. These states also highlighted tgatb1968 treaty of Non proliferation of
Nuclear weapons.These countries also emphasized that the treaty on Non-
proliferation of Nuclear weapons I n q968 had obligated the weapons countries to
disarm. The majority of these states also pointed out that there was a valid gap
regarding the b and elimination of weapons.
The aim of New treaty
The aims of the new treaty are evident in both its preamble and in its key
provisions. Its Article 1 prohibits not only nuclear possession by any party but also
receiving transfer or control of nuclear weapons (directly or indirectly, from any
other country), allowing stationing of nuclear weapons by any other country, and
assisting or encouraging any other country in nuclear weapon activities. Its
provisions are aimed at universally applying international humanitarian law against
indiscriminate or disproportional attacks on populations as a consequence of
nuclear weapons; and seek to prevent horizontal and vertical nuclear proliferation
in the form of assistance to other countries to acquire nuclear weapons, or
deployment of nuclear weapons overseas by those countries currently in possession
of them (UNODA 2018). The Preamble notes how these aims are consistent with,
and help to implement, a number of other wider UN aims, including UN General
Assembly resolutions calling for nuclear weapon elimination and the need for
compliance with international humanitarian law.
Modus Operandi for the pursuit of a world without nuclear missiles
The methods for the pursuit of a world without nuclear weapons are given below.
1. a comprehensive nuclear weapon convention is a proposee of multilateral
treaty to abolish nuclear missiles.And this might comprise embargoes on the
holding, advancement, testing, creation, and warning of use of  nuclear
rocket ban treaty.
2. A framework treaty.
3. An advanced approach based upon ‘building blocks’ of legal and non-legal
estimates as well as confidence-building measures.
Towards a world without nuclear wweapons

An international Organization, United Nations accepted an internationals treaty

prohibiting nuclear weapons in July 2017. Additionally, The treaty began for
signature in September 2017 and will embark into force when it’s approved by 50
nations.The countries which were in the favors of the agreement were 22 states.
The modern pact will create it unlawful under global law to formulate, test,
produce, manufacture, attain, possess, hoard, transfer, use or jeopardize to use
nuclear rockets. It also makes it unjust to boost or motivate anyone to engage in
these actions.The United Kingdom government declined to join in in the agreement
negotiations and even granted an aggressive statement while sustaining that it
shares CND’s goal of a nuclear-weapons-free world. And the USA, France, Israel
and Russia also oppsed the treaty.

Valid responsibility to demilitarize

From its founding meeting, CND has championed the global abolition of nuclear
weapons. Trident is a relatively small part of a massive global problem that needs
to be dealt with. For many years we have argued that nuclear weapons must be
banned in the same way that chemical and biological weapons have been banned –
or more recently cluster munitions and landmines have been outlawed. Of course,
this demand for global disarmament doesn’t just come from campaigns like ours –
it is made by the overwhelming majority of states globally, many of which have
already taken action by forming themselves into nuclear weapons-free zones. In
fact, over half the globe is covered by such agreements.
The Requirements for Nuclear Disarmament

The requirement for nuclear disarmament has also been enshrined in international
law since 1970, in the form of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). The
NPT commits its signatories – including the UK – to take steps to disarm if they
have nuclear weapons and not to acquire them if they don’t. While the non-nuclear
states have kept their side of the bargain, all the nuclear powers still have their
weapons and are even upgrading or modernising their arsenals. Whilst substantial
bilateral or unilateral reductions have taken place since the end of the Cold War,
these have largely been the result of stockpile consolidation or systems
modernization.

Disappointment leads to new drive

The 2010 NPT Review Conference’s final document officially expressed ‘deep
concern at the catastrophic humanitarian consequences of any use of nuclear
weapons’ for the first time. Following this, a group of countries began delivering
joint statements on the humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons. By 2013, over a
hundred governments had joined the initiative and a conference was arranged in
Oslo.

Humanitarian impact leads to pledge

The historical experience from the use and testing of nuclear weapons has
demonstrated their devastating immediate and long-term effects. No political
circumstances can justify their use. Studies have shown that nuclear war would
result in mass starvation due to the impact on agricultural production and profound
climate change. As Scientists for Global Responsibility pointed out in 2013, ‘the
firepower of just one Trident nuclear submarine could not only devastate 48 cities
and cause tens of millions of direct casualties, but also cause a global cooling
lasting several years and of a magnitude not seen since the last Ice Age.’

Developments at the UN
This resolution directed to the establishment of a particular UN laboring group
which published a last announcement in August 2016 approving that a meeting be
held in 2017 to reconcile a global ban on nuclear missiles. Furthermore, the
nuclear nations tried to halt this consequence but failed. And hundred nations
voted in favour of the last report. Moreover, In October 2016, governments voted
on a resolution along the same lines at the United Nations, General Assembly.

The Agreement is adopted

The Delegates from over 130 nations took part in the meeting. And the United
Kingdom started again to revolt the method and sat alongside the US Ambassador
in criticizing the conversations. Ergo, The final text was approved in July 2017,
with 122 countries voting in favors. Besides this, The treaty is a powerful text
which has the potential to attain a globe without nuclear rockets.

Articles in the treaty

 Article 1 is a detailed ban on nuclear weapons. And its prohibitions

comprise the use, stockpiling, testing, creation, manufacture, stationing and
installation. IN addition to this , it also prohibits helping with illegal acts,
such as the United States contracting Trident weapons to the UK to hold
nuclear warheads. It will also be unfair to enable nuclear weapons to travel
through territorial waters or airspace.
  Articles 3 and 4 is about how to the conference of responsibilities are
calculated, encompassing the confirmation of the irreversible devastation of
nuclear weapons and the programmes to improve them. There are conditions
to enhance the safeguards and an embargo on them being undermined.

 Articles 6, 7, and 8 need states to give employment to fatalities of nuclear

weapons, either through their aim or through testing. It is also a prerequisite
that action is taken in contaminated areas. There is also a requirement to
motivate other governments to join the treaty, and for regular meetings to
review the progress being made.

Available for signature

The treaty opened for signature in September 2017 and will enter into force 90
days after 50 governments sign and ratify. Once this happens, the treaty is legally
binding on those states that have signed and ratified it. It is not binding on states
that remain outside the treaty though.

Nobel Peace Prize

The treaty is a breakthrough in international disarmament efforts and will be of
enormous support in achieving the goal that most of the world shares: that there is
no place for these weapons of mass destruction. The importance of the treaty was
highlighted when the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to ICAN for its tireless
work in campaigning for this momentous achievement. The award of this
prestigious prize is an essential recognition of the global majority against nuclear
weapons – and the movement that has done so much to advance it.
The nuclear states
Although law, morality and mass popular will are already in favor of getting rid of
nuclear weapons, the nuclear states ignore all these factors. This leaves the big
question of what difference will the ban treaty make? The treaty is a significant
pointer towards changing international attitudes to nuclear weapons. Previous
treaties prohibiting chemical and biological weapons helped to stigmatize them in
the minds of the public. This is now taking place with nuclear weapons.

But while CND welcomes the adoption of the treaty, it is important to be realistic.
Given that the UK parliament has voted to give the £205 billion project to replace
Trident the green light, it is unlikely that the Prime Minister will be signing the
treaty any time soon. However, we must do all we can to put this treaty right at the
top of the political agenda.

Nuclear Ban Communities

But the power doesn’t all lie in the government’s hands. Towns and cities around
the world are becoming Nuclear Ban Communities as they sign up to support the
treaty.Large cities including Washington D.C., Paris, Berlin and Manchester have
all adopted motions declaring their support. Other towns and cities in the UK to
join the campaign include Edinburgh, Norwich and Renfrewshire. This is an
important statement in support of this new treaty, showing that citizens across the
world want their governments to sign.

The response of NATO states

Some NATO states responded that there was no such legal gap and that the NPT
provided an essential foundation for the pursuit of nuclear disarmament. They
stressed that the international security environment, current geopolitical situation
and role of nuclear weapons in existing security doctrines should be taken into
account in the pursuit of any effective measures for nuclear disarmament, and as
such, a nuclear weapon ban treaty was not in their national security interests. These
states also maintained that a nuclear weapon ban treaty would create confusion
regarding the implementation of the NPT and complicate fulfilment of the NPT’s
nuclear disarmament obligations.

Statements for the Treaty from Proponent States

Supporters of the nuclear prohibition treaty argue that it will close a "legal gap"
that exists regarding nuclear weapons, which are not expressly outlawed by the
NPT even though their use would be contrary to the rules of international law
applicable in armed conflict. They argue that the prohibition treaty initiative
reinforces the NPT and its Article VI requirement for nuclear disarmament and that
it can reduce the salience of nuclear weapons and help prompt more urgent action
to reduce nuclear risk and promote disarmament.

Timeline

 2010
May 3-28: The final document of the 2010 Review Conference for the
nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) acknowledges the humanitarian
consequences of nuclear weapons use. 

 2013
March 4-5: The first conference on the humanitarian impact of nuclear
weapons use takes place in Oslo, Norway. 

 2014
February 13-14: The second conference on the humanitarian consequences
of nuclear weapons use takes place in Nayarit, Mexico.  
December 8-9: The final conferenceon the humanitarian consequences of
nuclear weapons use takes place in Vienna, Austria.  
December 9: 127 states endorse the Humanitarian Pledge, calling on all NPT
states parties to renew their commitment to Article VI of the NPT and to
take interim steps to reduce the risk of nuclear use.
  2015
October 29: The UN General Assembly First Committee votes135-12 with
33 abstentions on a resolution to create an Open Ended Working Group to
take forward multilateral nuclear disarmament negotiations. 

 2016
February 22-26: The first working group to advance multilateral nuclear
disarmament negotiations meets in Geneva, Switzerland. 
May 2-4 and 9-13: The second working group to advance multilateral
nuclear disarmament negotiations meets in Geneva, Switzerland.  
August 16-19: The third working group to advance multilateral nuclear
disarmament negotiations meets in Geneva, Switzerland, approving a final
report by a vote of 68-22 with 13 abstentions.  
October 27: The First Committee adopts a resolution to begin negotiations in
2017 on a nuclear prohibition treaty by a vote of 123-38 with 16 abstentions.

December 23: The General Assembly approves the resolution to begin

negotiations on a nuclear prohibition treaty adopted by the First Committee
by a vote of 113-35 and 13 abstentions.

 2017 
March 27-31: The first round of negotiations on a treaty prohibiting nuclear
weapons takes place at the United Nations in New York.  
May 22: President Elayne Whyte Gómez presents the first draft textof the
treaty at the United Nations in Geneva.
June 15-July 7: The second round of negotiations on a treaty to prohibit
nuclear weapons takes place at the United Nations in New York. 
July 7: The treaty prohibiting nuclear weapons is adopted by a vote of 122-
1-1. The Netherlands voted against the treaty, and Singapore abstained.
September 20: The TPNW opens for signature in New York. Fifty
statessigned the treaty, and three additional states both signed and ratified it
by the day's end.

Conclusion

In short, The UK government continues to state its commitment to multilateral

nuclear disarmament and should sign the treaty which aims to achieve that goal. In
this spirit, Trident should be scrapped and plans for its replacement cancelled in
what would be a significant step towards a nuclear weapons-free world