The international legal regime of non-proliferation of nuclear weapons

Of all the threats posed by weapons of mass destruction of all types, the threats posed by nuclear weapons are the most devastating and far-reaching in their effects, because even limited use of such weapons anywhere in the world would have devastating economic, ecological and societal consequences in overall consequences. Addressing this danger requires a multifaceted approach. It was under this circumstance that the international Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) became global and approached universality in terms of the number of participating countries. Regarding the issue of balance between the consensus model of decision-making and the institutional hierarchical structure of decision­making within the framework of the nuclear non­proliferation system, opponents and supporters of the concept of multilateralism in international relations believe that the nature of the nuclear non-proliferation system should be considered from opposite positions. The first perspective is based on the theory and practice of the Westphalian system of interaction between sovereign states, each of which seeks to survive or maximize its power in a world in which interstate relations are anarchic. From this perspective, nuclear nonproliferation is a purely national policy with its own goals, including disarmament. Therefore, the NPT is nothing more than a combination of political will and government commitments aimed at preventing or hindering the possibility of obtaining nuclear weapons by other states. However, the global nature of the threat of nuclear proliferation forces opponents of the concept of multilateralism to recognize the need for limited cooperation between states, mainly within the framework of non-binding agreements that only partially define national policy and often do not contain any provisions for collective enforcement measures. Therefore, for opponents of the concept of multilateralism, the NPT is a tool for promoting national interests.