Nuclear Proliferation in Modern Times: What Does This Mean for the World Today?

Nuclear proliferation is still one of the critical issues of international peace and security. The very rationale of nuclear deterrence, which was more or less specific to the Cold War, is again becoming a global issue. Every nation is revising its doctrines concerning nuclear weapons and in some cases indulging in updating the offensive and defensive forces and even expanding the frontiers of nuclear weapons.

Illustration by The Geostrata

This article investigates current changes in the factors involved in nuclear proliferation, offers particular examples, and lastly looks into the threats posed by this new age of nuclear weapons on international peace. It also discusses India’s current position with respect to proliferation and the potential path the nation must take moving forward.

Historic Context of Nuclear Proliferation

Nuclear explosion preceded nuclear proliferation when the atomic bomb was dropped in Hiroshima and started World War II and it advanced massively during the Cold War period. The world witnessed two nuclear superpowers the United States of America and the Soviet Union build massive stockpiles that risked annihilating each other. In light of the increasing danger, it was decided that it was necessary to introduce the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1968 which was to restrain the dissemination of nuclear weapons, promote nuclear disarmament and facilitate the use of nuclear power for peaceful purposes.

Other instruments like the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty and START were also established but focused on limitations of destructive arms and conducts. In the last decades, however, the undermining of important arms control regimes and increasing tensions have led to the reemergence of the expansionist nightmares.

Current Trends and Advances: Modernisation of Global Nuclear Arsenals

Today, nuclear proliferation is influenced by new geopolitical realities, technological advancements, and the breakdown of international agreements. The U.S. withdrawal from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty in 2019 and uncertainty surrounding the New START agreement have cast doubt on the effectiveness of arms-control frameworks. This uncertainty has fueled competition among nuclear and non-nuclear states alike, leading some to reconsider nuclear options. Additionally, advancements in cyber warfare, artificial intelligence, and missile technology have created new dimensions in nuclear strategy, prompting nations to enhance their arsenals to maintain an edge.

Iran’s nuclear program has become one of the most contentious proliferation issues. After the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) sought to limit Iran’s nuclear capabilities in exchange for lifting economic sanctions, the U.S. withdrawal from the deal in 2018 led to increased tensions. In recent years, Iran has resumed uranium enrichment and significantly increased its stockpile, raising alarm among international watchdogs and sparking fears of regional instability.

Iran’s leaders maintain that their nuclear activities are for peaceful purposes. Yet, the program’s rapid expansion has led to escalating sanctions from the U.S. and cautious diplomacy from the European Union. This standoff has fueled further instability in the Middle East, with regional rivals such as Israel warning that Iran’s nuclear ambitions pose a direct threat.

The Democratic People's Republic of North Korea has for decades wished for, and worked toward, the development of nuclear weapons to exercise control and to enhance its status in international relations. It is, however, noteworthy that despite all the sanctions and diplomacy, North Korea is still able to further its nuclear ambitions by carrying out missile tests that worry not just Asia but the entire world. For North Korea’s leaders, possessing nuclear weapons is a matter of regime security and balance of power politics with regional powers, especially the USA, and the world in general. The prospects of encumbering North Korea through diplomacy pursued by the U.S. and South Korea had very little resonation with the North Korean government, which conveyed that it would not cease its embrace of nuclear weapons.

While countries such as Iran or North Korea are often singled out due to their efforts to proliferate, even established nuclear states are found to be actively modernising their existing stockpiles.

The US, Russia, and China are all in the process of upgrading, and expanding their nuclear capabilities. For example, the US has been in the process of renovating and replacing with advanced technologies its nuclear force elements: land, sea, and air-delivered strike missiles, although Russia performed successful tests of state-of-the-art hypervelocity missiles.

On the other hand, China has been building more silos for its ICBMs, which shows the country is undergoing a paradigm shift aimed at enhancing its nuclear strength. All of the above-mentioned actions complicate the nuclear environment since the reaction of each state to the actions of other states is based on the concept of a security dilemma, which may result in an arms race.

Risks: Potential for Escalation among Regions

The renewed focus on nuclear capabilities by both emerging and established powers heightens the risk of regional conflicts escalating into nuclear crises. In the Middle East, Iran’s nuclear pursuits have already strained relations and could prompt neighbouring countries to seek their nuclear deterrents. In East Asia, North Korea’s actions contribute to heightened tensions with South Korea, Japan, and the United States, risking miscalculations that could lead to broader conflict. The modernization of arsenals by the U.S., Russia, and China raises concerns about a new era of nuclear rivalry, where technological advancements and shifts in doctrine may undermine decades of arms control achievements.

India’s Nuclear Doctrine and Current Capabilities

India demonstrates unwavering commitment to the goal of total and comprehensive nuclear disarmament without any discrimination based on nuclear weapons. It also decided not to ratify the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons because the treaty is not legally binding and does not create customary law. In line with its ‘Working Paper on Nuclear Disarmament’, India insists that disarmament should be achieved by way of an evolutionary process rather than holding coercive and strict deadlines. India has also proposed that the issue of a consolidated Nuclear Weapons Convention be addressed during discussions at the UN Conference on Disarmament.

As India undertook the development of the nuclear weapons program outside the NPT treaty, the country exercised the principle of credible minimum deterrence and the no-first-use posture.

By 2023, some estimates suggest that the size of the Indian nuclear weapons inventory consists of approximately 164 nuclear warheads, which are part of a developing triad of land, sea, and air-based systems. These warheads, which contain a plutonium core system, are predominantly kept apart from the delivery vehicles thus increasing the time of readiness for any attack.

The Agni series provides the mainstay of the land-based Ballistic Missile systems that are operated by the Strategic Forces Command of India. This includes the short-range, medium-range, and intermediate range missiles developed as part of India's Integrated Guided Missile Development Programme. More sophisticated systems such as the Agni-P and Agni-V which are now stored in weather-controlled cylinders for quicker launch have however taken precedence in recent years over systems that are fueled with liquid propellants.

The current air power arsenal of India incorporates nuclear capable Mirage 2000H and Jaguar IS strike aircraft. However, the French-made Rafale jets are likely to serve future political objectives in terms of nuclear delivery. The third leg of India’s triad focuses on nuclear submarines and nuclear-capable submarines are considered to be extremely important for improving the second strike ability of the country.

India also increased its options of carrying weapons with nuclear warheads thanks to the surface-to-air missiles BrahMos and Nirbhay which are nuclear-capable cruise missiles. The BrahMos missile (derived from the Brahmaputra River in India and Moskva River in Russia), developed jointly by India's Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) and Russia's NPO Mashinostroyenia (NPOM) under a partnership called BrahMos Aerospace, is a versatile supersonic cruise missile.

It is designed for various platforms, including Surface-Launched, Land-Based, Aerial, and Submarine-Integrated Systems. The missile has undergone several iterations, including a lightweight version, with extended ranges exceeding 600 kilometers and enhancements for precision strike capabilities. At the same time, the Nirbhay cruise missile in an advanced stage of development in India is expected to have an operational range of 800-1,000 km and is undergoing testing before full fledged induction.

India’s nuclear setup encompasses the production of fissile materials. Indian nuclear weapons are based on plutonium and the country has adequate weapon grade plutonium reserves to create over one hundred extra warheads.

India manufactures reactor grade plutonium and HEU – highly enriched uranium which is used to power her nuclear submarines which HEU is around 30-45% enriched in uranium-235. These processes are carried out in the Rare Materials Plant (RMP) and it is anticipated that the growth of another enrichment capability in Challakere in the state of Karnataka will serve to support these processes.

The Way Ahead

Considering the significance of India’s nuclear doctrine in transition, it presents an opportunity to adopt policies that could strengthen both regional and global stability. For instance, pursuing strategic arms control talks with intra-regional players could resolve some of the security dilemmas in South Asia. Participating in initiatives such as the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) or strengthening cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) perhaps denotes India’s intention for responsible nuclear management.

As an example, further engagement in non-proliferation regimes, like the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), may benefit India’s external image and legitimacy. By adopting a position of a responsible nuclear power and strengthening its devotion to nonproliferation, India could enhance its utility in the contemporary world order which can be labeled as chaotic.

---

BY NAVYA SRIRAM

TEAM GEOSTRATA

info@geostrata.com