Published on 1st June 2025
Authored By: V Radha Priyanka
Amity University Rajasthan
Abstract
This paper discusses the complex legal frameworks which govern disarmament,non-proliferation, by also analyzing the evolution and development in contemporary international law. This paper offers a deep evaluation of the implications of major treaties, such as, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), and the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC), in overcoming the present security threats.
The research particularly underscores the legal complexities and intricacies arising from the swift progress of emerging new technologies, particularly autonomous weapons systems (AWS) and cyber warfare, along with their key consequences for the established principles of disarmament. Besides, it also examines the vital functions of international organisations, including the United Nations and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), in maintaining and enforcing disarmament and non-proliferation standards. By using a thorough assessment of relevant literature and international legal frameworks, this paper identifies the crucial legal deficiencies and also challenges which are hindering the execution of these regimes. It highlights the need for addressing the influence of global political rivalries on disarmament initiatives. To conclude, this paper puts forward practical suggestions and recommendations which intend to strengthen and transform the contemporary regime of disarmament and non-proliferation regime to manage the complexities of the legal landscape in the 21st century ensuring global security.
Keywords: Disarmament, Non-Proliferation, International Law, Nuclear Weapons, Autonomous Weapons, NPT, CWC, BWC
Introduction
The pursuit of disarmament and non-proliferation has always been a big matter of concern in the context of international law since the mid-20th century. The devastating impact of nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction have highlighted that an effective legal framework to prevent their use is the need of the hour.The international organisations such as the United Nations Organisation have made constant efforts in introducing treaties and conventions which aim to reduce the spread of Weapons of Mass Destruction and to promote disarmament in all states[1].However, due to the growth in the security landscape involving global political tensions, the rise of non-state actors and growth in technology pose key challenges to the legal frameworks.
The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT),acts as the milestone in the nuclear non-proliferation which has been vital in preventing the possession of nuclear weapons by limiting the signatories of the treaty. However, it is to be known that the treaty faces challenges related to verification and obligations related to disarmament of nuclear-weapon states. Similar to the treaty, the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) and the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) have made significant efforts and progress in curbing and limiting the chemical and biological weapons but they also face few challenges due to rapid growth of technology such as Autonomous Weapons Systems(AWS) and cyber warfare capabilities which make the legal landscape more complex.
This paper aims to examine the legal challenges and developments in disarmament and non-proliferation, focusing on the effectiveness of existing legal frameworks and the need for adaptation to address contemporary security threats.
Research Methodology
The paper is based on secondary sources for the deep analysis of Disarmament and Non-Proliferation to examine the legal challenges and developments pertaining to it. This paper used secondary sources of information like websites, newspapers and journals.
The major sources of data are specifically chosen so as to have a solid and strong foundation for the study. The NPT, CWC, and BWC, etc., are the backbone of the analysis as these provide the legal umbrella for disarmament and non-proliferation. United Nations resolutions and reports, as well as General Assembly and Security Council documents, provide information about the changing perception of security threats by the international community and how it has tried to deal with them. Reports from global institutions, like the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), provide key information and analyses on the enforcement of disarmament and non-proliferation standards. Last but not least, government documents and policy pronouncements shed light on the attitudes and policies of particular states.
Ultimately, the research methodology aims to produce a well-supported and insightful analysis of the legal challenges and developments in disarmament and non-proliferation.
Review of Literature
The non-proliferation and disarmament literature is extensive and wide-ranging. There is a broad variety of analysis of the technical, political, and legal aspects of Weapons of Mass Destruction control by scholars. The predominant themes in the literature are:
The vast literature on disarmament and non-proliferation captures the complex dimensions of the control of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), including legal, political, and technical dimensions. One of the major themes of the scholarly debate concerns the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and its overall effectiveness. Scholars have analyzed the success and failure of the NPT comprehensively, emphasizing key areas of compliance, verification, and nuclear-armed states disarmament commitments. Scholars such as Joseph Cirincione and Leonard Spector have made critical observations regarding the trends in nuclear proliferation, emphasizing the lingering challenges undermining the objectives of the treaty[2]. Their arguments tend to capture the contradiction between the objectives of the Non Proliferation Treaty in preventing proliferation and the incremental nature of disarmament, fueling the debate on the long-term sustainability of the treaty.
In addition to nuclear weapons, legal regimes governing chemical and biological weapons have also been subject to significant scholarly examination. Graham Pearson and Nicholas Sims’s research has illuminated the intricacies of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) and the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC), respectively[3]. Both recognize the challenge of determining compliance with these treaties, particularly considering the dual-use potential of the vast majority of chemical and biological agents. The development of the threat environment is also considered in the literature, such as the threat posed by non-state actors acquiring and using such weapons, and thus the necessity of a reconsideration of existing verification and enforcement methods.
The rapid development of new technologies has brought new challenges to the debate on disarmament and non-proliferation. Scholars like Heather Roff and Peter Asaro have critically analyzed the legal and ethical implications of autonomous weapons systems (AWS), and raised serious concerns regarding their compatibility with international humanitarian law. Their work takes into account the possibility of AWS being deployed and utilized without significant human control4, thus challenging traditional concepts of accountability and responsibility in war. Their work highlights the need for international legal regimes that attempt to control the development and deployment of AWS, with the twin goals of limiting their proliferation and imposing ethical restraint.
In the same vein, application of international law in the context of cyber war has become a significant focus of academic scholarship. Academic research by Michael Schmitt and Gary Brown has explored the complexities entailed in applying classic legal concepts, including sovereignty and the use of force, to the specifics of cyberspace. Their research discusses the challenges of attribution in the case of cyberattacks, the risk of escalation, and the necessity of certain norms of responsible state action in the cyber world. This literature emphasizes the need for clarifying the legal context in the context of cyber war to prevent misperceptions and stability in the virtual world.
International organizations contribution towards imposing disarmament and non-proliferation norms has been discussed at length in academic literature. Lawrence Scheinman has examined significant contributions of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) towards nuclear safeguards and verification measures. They focus on the primary role played by the IAEA in nuclear proliferation detection and prevention while appreciating the limitations faced by the IAEA in making effective verification. This literature highlights the requirement of increasing mandates and budgets given to international organizations in a manner such that it is able to cater to the evolving security situation.
Finally, geopolitical tensions’ impact on disarmament and non-proliferation regimes is an ongoing topic in scholarly discussion. Scholars, such as Ramesh Thakur, have analyzed how competitions, conflicts, and international insecurity hamper arms control and disarmament progress. Their research usually supports that nations can prioritize national security interests above multilateralism, and thereby undermining current legal regimes[4]. The literature emphasizes that the root causes of geopolitical tensions must be rectified to improve the environment in favor of disarmament and non-proliferation.
The Efficacy of Existing Treaties
The efficacy of existing disarmament and non-proliferation treaties, such as the NPT, CWC, and BWC, is a subject of ongoing debate, with case laws and state practices revealing both successes and limitations. The NPT, while largely successful in preventing widespread nuclear proliferation, faces challenges exemplified by the Nuclear Tests cases (Australia v. France; New Zealand v. France), where the International Court of Justice (ICJ) addressed the legal obligations of states regarding nuclear testing, highlighting the tension between nuclear-weapon states’ disarmament obligations and their continued possession of arsenals[5]. The Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons advisory opinion by the ICJ further emphasized the obligation to pursue negotiations in good faith for nuclear disarmament, revealing a gap between legal obligations and state practice. Similarly, the Chemical Weapons Convention(CWC) and Biological Weapons Convention(BWC), while prohibiting chemical and biological weapons, struggle with verification and enforcement, as seen in the alleged use of chemical weapons in Syria, where attribution and accountability remain contentious issues[6]. These instances, combined with state withdrawals and non-compliance concerns, such as Iran’s past nuclear program, demonstrate the ongoing need to strengthen treaty regimes and address gaps in implementation, highlighting the disparity between the aspirational goals of these treaties and the realities of state behavior.
Legal Challenges of Emerging Technologies
The legal hurdles presented by emerging technology to disarmament and non-proliferation are significant, especially with regard to autonomous weapons systems (AWS) and cyber warfare[7].The principal challenge is how to subject existing legal norms to technologies which erode classical distinctions between combatants and civilians, and which can function with less human control[8].In the case of AWS, there is growing controversy on their consistency with international humanitarian law (IHL), especially the principles of distinction and proportionality[9]. Uncertainty is created by lack of clear-cut legal precedents, although controversy in the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW) remains. In cyber warfare, issues related to attribution, the determination of an “armed attack” in cyberspace, and the application of IHL to cyber warfare[10]. There are no clear-cut “case laws” in the classical sense due to the newness of these technologies, but the International Court of
Justice’s (ICJ) advisory opinion on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (1996) shows the relevance of IHL principles, which are currently being translated by analysts to the new technology realm. Development of norms through state practice and expert opinion, as exemplified by the Tallinn Manual on the International Law Applicable to Cyber Warfare, is key in managing these legal challenges.
The Role of International Organizations
International Organizations, most notably the United Nations and its specialized agencies such as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), are at the center of the implementation of disarmament and non-proliferation norms, although their efficacy is generally undermined by political interests[11][12]The IAEA, through its safeguards agreements, such as the Additional Protocol, has been at the center of ensuring states’ compliance with the Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT), as in instances such as the inspections in Iran and North Korea, where the agency’s reports have had a significant impact on international action. Nevertheless, the efficacy of the IAEA is undermined by state cooperation and the willingness of the UN Security Council to act on its reports. The OPCW, through its verification regime and fact-finding missions, has also been at the center of the implementation of the CWC, as in the investigation into the use of chemical weapons in Syria[13][14]The Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) encapsulates the UN’s role in disarmament, indirectly, by emphasizing the duty to negotiate in good faith. The efficacy of these organizations is generally subject to the political will of member states, as evidenced by the constraints imposed on the UN Security Council through veto powers, and the general absence of enforcement mechanisms beyond diplomatic pressure and sanctions.
The Impact of Geopolitical Tension
Geopolitical tensions greatly weaken the efficacy of disarmament and non-proliferation regimes, as evident by the withdrawal of states from landmark treaties and the increasing use of nuclear deterrence. The collapse of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty following accusations of Russian non-compliance and US withdrawal, for example, illustrates how deteriorating relations can collapse existing arms control treaties[15]. Similarly, the ongoing nuclear confrontation between North Korea and the world, marked by Pyongyang’s repeated nuclear tests and ballistic missile launches, illustrates the destabilizing influence of regional conflict on non-proliferation. The geopolitical tensions between Iran and the West regarding the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and the eventual US withdrawal also illustrate the vulnerability of multilateral agreements to the vicissitudes of geopolitical currents[16]. In law, although the Nuclear Tests (Australia v. France) case established the binding nature of unilateral declarations on nuclear disarmament, the fact of geopolitical tensions more often than not overrides such legal norms to the extent that arms races escalate and the commitment to multilateral disarmament erodes.
Suggestions
Strengthening the NPT’s Disarmament Commitments:
Nuclear-weapon states should visibly meet their Article VI commitments by entering into meaningful disarmament talks. This involves establishing well-defined timelines and milestones for diminishing and eliminating nuclear stockpiles. A gradual process, accompanied by verifiable cuts, is necessary to ensure trust and reveal sincere intent. In addition, the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) must be ratified to establish the norm against nuclear testing, which is an essential step towards disarmament.
Supporting the Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Verification Regime:
The International Atomic Energy Agency’s safeguards system would need to be enhanced to counter changing proliferation threats. This would involve increased access to International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA) Inspectors, enhanced detection capabilities, and increased transparency about nuclear activities. The Additional
Protocol would need to be adopted universally to grant the International Atomic Energy Agency increased access and data. Clarifying ambiguities in the existing safeguards architecture would be essential, especially on dual-use technologies.
Strengthening National Implementation of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), and the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC):
States parties are obliged to adopt strong national legislation to criminalize prohibited activities and provide for effective enforcement. This involves the creation of national authorities with the facilities and expertise to execute the conventions. Periodic review and revision of national implementation measures to face emerging dangers and technological developments is necessary.
Strengthening International Cooperation on Chemical and Biological Threats:
Enhanced international cooperation is vital to address the threat of chemical and biological weapons use by non-state actors. This includes information sharing, capacity building, and joint investigations. Mechanisms for rapid response to alleged uses of these weapons should be established, and the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons(OPCW) and Biological Weapons Convention (BWC)
Implementation Support Unit should be empowered to coordinate these efforts.
Creating a Legally Binding Instrument on Autonomous Weapons Systems (AWS):
The global community must accelerate negotiations for a legally binding instrument to control AWS. The instrument must have clear prohibitions on the development, deployment, and use of AWS that do not have meaningful human control. It must also have provisions for pre-deployment review, accountability, and measures to avoid unintended effects.
Empowering International Organizations:
The UN Security Council has to play a more active role in solving disarmament and non-proliferation issues, invoking its power to sanction and enforce compliance. The International Atomic Energy Agency and Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons must be adequately funded and politically backed to fulfill their mandates effectively. The UN Disarmament machinery must also be revitalized.
Conclusion
In summary, it can be stated that disarmament and non-proliferation are essential cornerstones of global peace and security. Whilst the current legal regime, including treaties such as the Non Proliferation Treaty, Chemical Weapons Convention, and Biological Weapons Convention, has undoubtedly helped to contain the proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction, the same is faced with serious challenges in the modern security environment. The sudden multiplication of sophisticated technologies, the shifting strategies of non-state actors, and the constant undercurrent of geopolitics combined demand an across-the-board review and strengthening of the existing legal regime. The necessity is not simply one of upholding the status quo but one of proactively adjusting to the changing face of global security threats.
This paper has carefully analyzed the legal issues and trends in the field of disarmament and non-proliferation. By highlighting the effectiveness of current treaties, the legal nuance emerging from new technologies like autonomous weapons systems and cyber warfare, and the central role of international institutions, the research identifies key gaps and areas of enhancement. The report categorically emphasizes the need for increased commitment to disarmament commitments, the establishment of effective verification and enforcement measures, and the creation of new legal tools to adequately confront the new challenges that define the 21st century.
The suggestions made here are carefully crafted to strengthen the disarmament and non-proliferation regime so that the world becomes safer and more stable. The core of this mission is to enhance multilateralism, diplomacy, and global cooperation. These are the cornerstones on which the complex problem of Weapons of Mass Destruction(s) can be solved. Through continuous dialogue, collaborative work, and collective commitment to the security of the world, the global community can resolve the complexities of disarmament and non-proliferation.
Finally, the successful application of these proposals depends on the combined determination of states to put global security ahead of limited national interests. The quest for disarmament and non-proliferation is not a matter of law or technique; it is a question of morality and requires unrelenting commitment and collective action. Through an active and responsive strategy, the global community can protect coming generations from the disastrous effects of Weapons of Mass Destruction and create a more peaceful and secure world for everyone.
References
[1] Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) – UNODA, https://disarmament.unoda.org/wmd/nuclear/npt/.
[2] Jane, (Mar. 30, 2017), https://www.stimson.org/wp-content/files/file-attachments/National%20Perspectives%20on%20Nuclear%20Dis armament.pdf.
[3] Microsoft Word – REPORT_FROM_GENEVA_42C, (June 8, 2015), http://hsp.sussex.ac.uk/new/_uploads/geneva_report/HSP_Reports_from_Geneva_No.42.pdf. 4 A Comparative Analysis of the Definitions of Autonomous Weapons Systems, PMC https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9399191/.
[4] Ramesh Thakur(June 18, 2004), https://www.ipinst.org/wp-content/uploads/publications/weapons_of_mass_dest.pdf.
[5] Nuclear Tests (Australia v. France), (Mar. 20, 2025), https://www.icj-cij.org/case/58.
[6] A Modular-Incremental Approach to Improving Compliance Verification With the Biological Weapons Convention, PMC https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10541916/.
[7] Dilemmas in the policy debate on autonomous weapon systems, SIPRI (Feb. 6, 2025), https://www.sipri.org/commentary/topical-backgrounder/2025/dilemmas-policy-debate-autonomous-weapon-sys tems.
[8] The Challenges of Emerging Technologies, Arms Control Association https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2018-12/features/challenges-emerging-technologies.
[9] Autonomous Weapon Systems and International Humanitarian Law: Identifying Limits and the Required Type and Degree of Human–Machine Interaction, SIPRI
https://www.sipri.org/publications/2021/policy-reports/autonomous-weapon-systems-and-international-humanita rian-law-identifying-limits-and-required-type.
[10] Humna Sohail, Fault Lines In The Application Of International Humanitarian Law To Cyberwarfare, (Mar. 24, 2022), https://commons.erau.edu/jdfsl/vol17/iss1/8/.
[11] UNODA, OPCW, IAEA and CTBTO organize First Committee side event on “Weapons of Mass Destruction
Disarmament and Non-Proliferation Instruments in an Age of Accelerated Technological Change”, (May 20,
[12] https://disarmament.unoda.org/update/unoda-opcw-iaea-and-ctbto-organize-first-committee-side-event-on-weapons-of-massdestruction-disarmament-and-non-proliferation-instruments-in-an-age-of-accelerated-technological-change/.
[13] OPCW urges Syria to fulfil Chemical Weapons Convention obligations, OPCW (Dec. 12,
[14] ),https://www.opcw.org/media-centre/news/2024/12/opcw-urges-syria-fulfil-chemical-weapons-convention -obligations.
[15] Arms Control and World Order-Journal for Peace and Nuclear Disarmament, Voskopoulos (Jan. 20, 2023), https://gvoskop.wordpress.com/2023/01/20/arms-control-and-world-order-journal-for-peace-and-nuclear-disarm ament/.
[16] Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action on Iran Nuclear Issue at Crossroads 3 Years Later,
Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs Tells Security Council, Meetings Coverage and Press Releases (June 27, 2018), https://press.un.org/en/2018/sc13398.doc.htm.
