The role of nuclear weapons in modern global politics

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Karaganda State University named after E.A. Buketov

The role of nuclear weapons in modern global politics

Kuat Musin PhD in Law, Associate Professor

Almaz Zheksekin PhD in Law, Senior Lecturer

Karaganda

Abstract

The place of nuclear weapons in current world politics remains an important issue due to the threat of nuclear war, strategic relations between countries with nuclear capabilities, and the impact on international stability and security. However, this issue is becoming increasingly relevant in light of the growing confrontation between countries with significant nuclear capabilities, in particular between China and the United States. Thus, the purpose of this study is to examine the impact of nuclear weapons on international relations, the preservation of peace and security in the modern world, and the use of nuclear weapons as a deterrent and/or threat tool. The methodological basis of the study is the analysis of documents and legislation, historical analysis, structural and functional method, and system method. The results of the study highlight the history of the emergence and development of nuclear weapons, and attempts to regulate their volumes. The current state of nuclear arsenals of states, the location of nuclear weapons, their modernisation and role in modern international relations are investigated, and statistics on nuclear warheads of nuclear countries are provided. The role of diplomacy and international agreements in the management of nuclear weapons is also analysed. They recalled the current geopolitical conflicts and tensions between states, and manipulations by nuclear countries that can lead to an increase in the risks of nuclear escalation. As a result of the study, key factors and aspects that determine the role of nuclear weapons in international politics were identified, such as deterrence, threats, proliferation, and international agreements, their impact on international stability, international diplomacy, terrorism, and technological challenges related to nuclear issues. Research on this topic is of practical importance for shaping political strategies, ensuring world peace and security, and raising awareness of possible threats and challenges associated with nuclear weapons nuclear weapon international relations

Keywords: Russian war against Ukraine; maintenance of international peace and security; principles of international security; deterrence; manipulation

Анотація

Куат Саніядзанович Мусін Кандидат юридичних наук, доцент Карагандинський державний університет імені Є.А. Букетова м. Караганда, Казахстан

Алмаз Калкаманович Жексекін Кандидат юридичних наук, старший викладач Карагандинський державний університет імені Є.А. Букетова м. Караганда, Казахстан

Роль ядерної зброї у сучасній глобальній політиці

Місце ядерної зброї у поточній світовій політиці залишається важливим питанням через загрозу ядерної війни, стратегічні відносини між країнами з ядерним потенціалом та впливом на міжнародну стабільність і безпеку. Разом з цим, все більшої актуальності набуває дане питання у зв'язку з посиленням конфронтації між країнами, які володіють значним ядерним потенціалом, зокрема між Китаєм та Сполученими Штатами. Таким чином, мета цього дослідження полягає в розгляді впливу ядерних озброєнь на міжнародні відносини та на збереження миру та безпеки у сучасному світі, а також використання ядерної зброї як інструмент стримування та/або загрози. Методологічну основу дослідження становлять аналіз документів та законодавства, історичний аналіз, структурно-функціональний метод та системний метод. Результати дослідження висвітлюють історію виникнення та розвитку ядерного озброєння, а також намагання регулювати його обсяги. Вивчено поточний стан ядерних арсеналів держав, розташування ядерної зброї, її модернізацію і роль у сучасних міжнародних відносинах, надана статистика ядерних боєголовок ядерних країн. Також проаналізовано роль дипломатії та міжнародних домовленостей в управлінні ядерною зброєю. Пригадано про сучасні геополітичні конфлікти та напруженість відносин між державами, про маніпуляції з боку ядерних країн, що можуть призвести до підвищення ризиків ядерної ескалації. В результаті дослідження було визначено ключові фактори та аспекти, які визначають роль ядерного озброєння на міжнародну політику, такі як стримування, загрози, розповсюдження і міжнародні домовленості, їх вплив на міжнародну стабільність, міжнародну дипломатію, тероризм, та технологічні виклики, пов'язані з ядерною тематикою. Дослідження цієї теми має практичне значення для формування політичних стратегій, забезпечення світового миру та безпеки, а також підвищення обізнаності та усвідомлення можливих загроз і викликів, пов'язаних з ядерною зброєю

Ключові слова: російська війна проти України; підтримка міжнародного миру та безпеки; принципи міжнародної безпеки; стримування; маніпуляції

Introduction

The role of nuclear weapons in modern global politics is one of the most important topics that deserves deep scientific study and analysis. This problem reflects the complex aspects of the impact of the nuclear arsenal on international relations, security, and stability in the modern world. On the one hand, the appropriate arsenal poses a potential threat of large-scale destruction and human extinction, if used. It creates fear and risk for international stability, as states develop strategies for obtaining, deploying, and using radioactive weapons in accordance with their national interests, which in the 21^st century increasingly contradict each other. On the other hand, such weapons determine the geopolitical influence of the states that possess them, and play a key role in shaping international strategies and diplomatic relations. Countries with nuclear capabilities use it to protect their interests and provide strong arguments in international negotiations, but today there are many cases when countries with nuclear arsenals begin to manipulate their position, which poses a potential threat to other countries and global security. The importance of radioactive weapons in modern global politics is determined by the presence of a potential nuclear threat, the development of strategic relations between states possessing such weapons, and its impact on international stability and security.

The problems of the study include several complex aspects and problems, such as the constant threat of nuclear war and the non-proliferation of relevant weapons. Research on the role of nuclear weapons includes analysing the risk of nuclear conflicts and identifying strategies for their prevention. Nuclear threats remain relevant and potentially the most destructive for the entire world. One of the main challenges is trying to prevent the spread of radioactive weapons to new countries, especially if they are countries that are often involved in terrorist activities. This applies to the use of diplomacy, control and sanctions. The relevant topic is complex and dynamic due to constant changes in international relations and strategies of countries with nuclear potential. The study requires a comprehensive approach, considering ethical, political, strategic, and geopolitical aspects.

The study by O.M. Sokolovska (2023) explored the understanding of global nuclear security in the context of political accents and points out the importance of this issue in connection with a number of important processes unfolding in the modern world. One of the current factors is the military events in Ukraine, which pose a threat to global stability and security. In addition, the global nuclear order is undergoing changes that are driven by new challenges and threats, such as climate change, volatile oil prices, and energy security challenges. The global nuclear security situation requires intensive efforts to strengthen international organisations and the regulatory framework that underpins the global nuclear governance system. A significant contribution to this issue was made by D.O. Menshakova (2021), who investigated the nuclear status of France in terms of public positioning in the Euro-Atlantic security environment.

It is worth paying attention to the paper by V.O. Perminov & A.E. Valuev (2023), who examine the challenges and threats facing the modern global security architecture and the role of NATO in this context. Special attention is paid to the analysis of the Russian war against Ukraine. The study examines an issue related to the category of “international security”, which the authors understand as “maintaining international peace and security and using effective collective measures to prevent threats to peace and repression”. The researchers examine the following principles of international security, including, in particular, “peaceful coexistence” and “ensuring proportional security for each state”.

In addition, among the newer publications, it is worth noting the scientific contribution of V.V. Myronenko (2022), who studied the main periods of development of the nuclear missile programmes of the United States of America from their creation to the present, and the paper by A.V. Borodai (2022), which focuses on the processes of globalisation taking place in modern world politics and the impact that the threat of nuclear conflict plays in this context. During 2022-2023, significant changes in the political priorities of European countries became apparent. The reason for these changes was the Russian war against Ukraine.

However, several aspects remain little studied in the field of the impact of nuclear weapons on world politics, namely, the nuclear ambitions of states that do not yet have nuclear weapons and how this may affect international politics in the future.

The purpose of the study is to investigate the impact of the presence of nuclear arsenals on international relations, peace and security, the use of nuclear weapons as a means of deterrence or threat, and to predict the possible consequences of their uncontrolled spread and use.

Materials and Methods

The study used logical and legal method, historical analysis, structural, functional, and system methods. The texts of relevant official documents were studied in detail using the logical and legal method. Key terms, concepts, responsibilities of countries, and international norms related to nuclear weapons are identified. International treaties and agreements governing nuclear weapons were also examined, and how they affect their functioning and role in modern relations. The method of analysing documents and legislation allowed obtaining objective data and carefully investigating various aspects of the role of nuclear weapons in international relations.

Historical analysis has helped to understand how nuclear weapons have become an important element of modern international relations and geopolitical processes. Using this method, the issues of developing nuclear weapons and attempts to regulate their volumes were considered. The paper examined the current state of nuclear arsenals of countries, the deployment of nuclear weapons, modernisation and the role of nuclear weapons in modern international relations. Historical analysis helped to understand how the role of nuclear weapons has evolved and shaped global politics in the past and how this role may change in the future.

The structural and functional method helped to study the role of nuclear weapons in modern global politics, considering their functions and structure in the context of international relations and geopolitical processes. Using the appropriate method, the functions that nuclear weapons perform in modern international relations (deterrence, threat, defence, political influence and manipulation) were determined. The structure of nuclear arsenals in different countries was considered. The paper examined how the presence of nuclear weapons affects geopolitical relations between countries. The threats of misuse and manipulation of nuclear weapons for political purposes in such countries as the Russian Federation, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Pakistan, and India are considered. The application of the structural and functional method allowed for a deeper understanding of the functions and structure of nuclear weapons in modern global political relations.

To investigate the role of nuclear weapons in contemporary global politics, the texts of international agreements and national legislation were used, namely the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (1967), the Treaty on the Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (1991), The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (1987), the Law of Ukraine “On the Non-Nuclear Status of Ukraine” (1991), and the Memorandum on Security Assurances in connection with Ukraine's accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (1994). Information on countries' nuclear arsenals, the number of nuclear warheads, the location of nuclear bases, and other statistics on nuclear weapons (ICAN, 2022; ICAN, 2023; SIPRI, 2022), the Nuclear Threat Index (NTI, n.d.) was used. These different sources provided a comprehensive view of the topic and allowed for a detailed analysis of the role of nuclear weapons in modern global politics.

Using the system method, the main elements that make up the system of “global nuclear policy” were identified, such as nuclear states, international treaties, political conflicts, geostrategic circumstances, etc. The study examined how these components interact with each other, how nuclear weapons affect international relations, political strategies of countries, and the structure and functioning of international organisations. The system method allowed comprehensively assessing the problem, understanding its connection with various aspects and considering the possible consequences of changes in the system.

Results

In modern conditions, it is impossible to deny the importance of investigating issues related to the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Recently, in particular, after the events of February 24, 2022, there has been an increase in the threat of using nuclear weapons. The problem of non-proliferation of nuclear weapons has been discussed since its introduction in the second half of the 1940s (Tomz et al., 2022). Although the number of nuclear weapons in the world has decreased compared to the Cold War period, countries with nuclear arsenals are in no hurry to completely abandon them. In addition to the five official members of the nuclear club - the United States, Russia, Great Britain, France, and China, new countries are emerging in the world that have nuclear weapons or are capable of creating them, in particular Israel, Pakistan, India, and North Korea. Some of these countries consider it an important guarantee of their national security and state sovereignty.

The development of nuclear weapons in history has been defined by a number of key events and stages. The first stage is the beginning of the nuclear era, which covers the years 1940-1950. The development of nuclear weapons was initially associated with the Manhattan and Manhattan-2 projects in the United States. As a result of these projects, the first atomic bomb was created, which was tested during the Manhattan test in 1945. In 1941, the United States created a commission to study the possibilities of creating nuclear weapons, called the Manhattan Project. This project was launched after the United States received information about German research in this area. On July 16, 1945, the historic Manhattan test took place, during which the first atomic bomb was tested in the desert in New Mexico. In August 1945, the United States dropped atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, resulting in several hundred thousand deaths and significant destruction. After World War 2, the development of nuclear weapons became an important branch of the defence industry. The United States was the first country to start producing nuclear and subsequent nuclear warheads (Montgomery & Carpenter, 2020). This situation has led to the creation of the “nuclear club” - a group of countries that develop and possess nuclear weapons.

The second stage in the history of nuclear weapons development is the arms race, which has a chronology of events from 1950 to 1960. The arms race that took place in the 1950s and 1960s was a period of intense increase in the number and development of nuclear weapons, and the means of their use. After the end of World War 2, the United States and the Soviet Union made attempts to increase the number of their nuclear warheads and missiles. Both sides developed and tested more powerful and efficient nuclear warheads, including hydrogen warheads. An important aspect of the arms race was the development of missiles and delivery systems for nuclear weapons, which led to the creation of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs).

The third stage of development was the need for nuclear weapons control and cooperation between the United States and the Soviet Union (Egel & Hines, 2021). The arms race has led to a significant increase in the number of nuclear weapons systems and created tensions in international relations. On June 12, 1968, the UN General Assembly adopted the text of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) (1968). On 11 May 1995, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons was extended indefinitely. The objectives of this international treaty are to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons and their manufacturing technologies, promote cooperation in the peaceful use of nuclear energy, end the nuclear arms race and achieve the ultimate goal of comprehensive and complete nuclear disarmament.

As of August 2022, 191 countries have become parties to the treaty (by ratification or accession), including 5 countries recognised as having nuclear weapons under the NPT. Israel, India, Pakistan, and North Korea are not parties to the Treaty. In 1993, North Korea announced its withdrawal from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Meanwhile, the UN secretariat continues to consider North Korea a party to the NPT. Under the NPT, each nuclear member state (the “nuclear state”) believed to have conducted a nuclear test before 1 January 1967 undertakes not to transfer nuclear weapons to any other state or other nuclear explosive devices. According to it, the nuclear state assumes the duty of strict control over such weapons, prevents or encourages any non-nuclear-weapon state not to produce them. In turn, each “nuclear-free state” undertakes not to accept the transfer, control, production or acquisition of nuclear weapons or nuclear explosive devices from any supplier of such weapons or explosive devices. The Treaty provides the legal basis for instruments of non-proliferation control, such as safeguards and oversight by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). In accordance with Article 3 of the Treaty, each state party must sign an agreement on guarantees for the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons with the International Atomic Energy Agency. Following this agreement, the International Atomic Energy Agency has the right to verify compliance by state parties with the provisions of the NPT. Later, after the discovery of Iraq's implementation of a secret military nuclear programme, the IAEA safeguards instrument was supplemented with an additional protocol. The implementation of this additional protocol has provided IAEA with more effective monitoring measures.

The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons provides the legal basis for the formulation of national measures for the accounting and control of nuclear materials, and national control over nuclear exports. With the support of many member states of the Treaty and the European Union, the International Atomic Energy Agency actively conducts information and educational work, conducts seminars, working meetings and other events in support of the implementation of the Additional Protocol to the Nuclear Protocol of the International Atomic Energy Agency. Along with this, an important treaty aimed at limiting and controlling nuclear weapons of “superpowers” was concluded in 1987: the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) (1987; Joseph & Nye, 2023). However, in 2019, the United States withdrew from the Treaty, accusing Russia of violating the agreement.

The fourth stage begins with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, which led to the creation of new independent nuclear powers, such as Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, and others. To reduce the risk of nuclear conflict and the proliferation of nuclear weapons, treaties and agreements were concluded between the former Soviet republics. For example, Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan decided to transfer their nuclear arsenals to Russia and became independent of nuclear weapons. Russia became the sole successor state to the Soviet nuclear arsenal. It continued to develop and modernise its nuclear forces (Smetana et al., 2022).

During this period, the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (1991) was concluded between the Soviet Union and the United States and later extended to Russia and other successor states of the Soviet Union. The SNL Treaty aims to limit and reduce strategic nuclear weapons, in particular, intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and heavy bombers. Its purpose is to reduce the number and limit the use of such means for conducting nuclear war. The SALT treaty provides for a complex system of checks, information exchange and other monitoring mechanisms that allow states parties to monitor compliance with the agreement, which includes inspections on the territory of other states and other trusted mechanisms.

The SALT treaty was an important step in the development of international law and nuclear weapons control. It has helped reduce the number of strategic nuclear assets and mitigate the threat of nuclear war. The treaty also played a role in building trust between the Soviet Union and the United States in the post-Cold War period. However, the implementation of the provisions of the SALT also faces challenges, such as the development of new types of strategic weapons, such as hypersonic missiles, which are not included in the restrictions of the agreement. In addition, there are questions about the future of the contract after the expiration of previous versions. In general, the SALT treaty is an important historical document that has contributed to the reduction of nuclear weapons and the reduction of the threat of nuclear war. It requires constant scientific analysis and updating to meet current challenges in the field of international security.

The question of Ukraine's attitude to nuclear weapons located on its territory appeared even before the official declaration of independence of the country, this position is reflected in the Declaration on State Sovereignty of Ukraine (1991) and in the statement of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine “On the nuclear-free status of Ukraine” (1991), which confirms Ukraine's intention to adhere to three non-nuclear principles: not to own, not to produce, and not to use nuclear weapons. The statement defined Ukraine's policy on nuclear weapons and established its status as a nuclear-free state. It reflected Ukraine's desire to give up nuclear weapons, which it inherited from the former Soviet Union, which was an important step to stabilise the situation in the region and ensure peace.

The result of Ukraine's adoption of nuclear-free status was a Memorandum signed in Budapest on December 5, 1994 (Memorandum on Security..., 1994), during the process of Ukraine's accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. The meaning of this Memorandum is that Ukraine, having abandoned the third most powerful nuclear arsenal at that time, and having made the greatest contribution to world peace and security after World War 2, received guarantees from the world's leading military states regarding the inviolability of its security and existing borders.

The signatories of the Memorandum not only reaffirmed their obligations not to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine, but also in Paragraph 2 of the Memorandum reaffirmed their obligations to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine; in Paragraph 3 of the memorandum, the states reaffirmed their obligations in accordance with the principles of the final act of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), to refrain from economic pressure on Ukraine aimed at subordinating it to their own interests. Based on these provisions of the convention, Ukraine has an obligation, together with its guarantors, the United States and the United Kingdom, to initiate the implementation of the Budapest Memorandum (Treaty between the United States..., 2010; Gustafsson & Krickel-Choi 2020; Kimball, 2022), but in fact, the consultations between the signatories provided for in the Treaty did not take place either after 2014 or after February 24, 2022.

Regarding Russia's annexation of Crimea, the occupation of Donetsk and Luhansk regions in 2014, and the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, in accordance with the provisions of Article 48 of UN General Assembly resolution 56/83 on “Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts” (2002), Ukraine, the United States, Great Britain, France and China, as countries guaranteeing Ukraine's independence, had to take various measures at the international level at the beginning of the occupation of Crimea. In particular: stop Russia's membership in the UN, similar to the exclusion of the former USSR from the League of Nations; freeze the financial accounts of Russia and its individual citizens in the jurisdictions of the United States, Great Britain, and other countries; apply sanctions on oil and gas exported from Russia; impose sanctions on certain sectors of the Russian economy that finance the Russian military budget; send troops of guarantor countries to the territory of Ukraine to restore sovereignty and fulfil obligations under the Budapest Memorandum; file demands to Russia for compensation for damage caused to Ukraine as a result of Russian aggression and occupation. In the first ten days since the crisis began in February 2014, these guarantor countries had to adopt a series of international sanctions to show Russia a proportional price for its aggressive actions.

Analysis of the Budapest Memorandum on Security..., 1994) shows that security guarantees for Ukraine were violated long before 2014. For example, the border confrontation that took place in 2003 around the island of Tuzla, which almost led to a violation of the territorial integrity of Ukraine, is one such example. It is also important to note the 2006 gas wars, which represented deliberate economic pressure to subordinate Ukraine to Moscow's interests. The international community did not respond to such violations of obligations on the part of one of the signatories of the Memorandum, and the corresponding non-compliance increased over time and led to open military aggression. Ignoring the obligations to Ukraine by the signatories of the memorandum casts doubt on the significance of the signed agreements and promises made by representatives of the guarantor states in the framework of nuclear-free status treaties for any other state in the world. After unsuccessful attempts to capture Ukraine through direct military aggression, Russia has developed and applied new hybrid approaches with higher rates and threats of using tactical nuclear weapons (TNW). In particular, since March 4, when Zaporizhia NPP was seized, Europe and the United States have not seriously considered Russia's actions against nuclear facilities in Ukraine for a long time (Arceneaux, 2023). The activity of the Russian army around the Zaporizhia NPP suggests that they may try to lead to an accident at the plant with radiation release in order to stop hostilities and start negotiations.

The world has nine nuclear powers: the United States, Russia, Great Britain, France, China, India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea (Table 1). Of these countries, Israel does not officially recognise the presence of nuclear weapons, but some researchers emphasise their existence (Kristensen & Korda, 2022). Below are some countries with significant nuclear capabilities and the possible consequences of this fact: the United States has one of the largest nuclear arsenals of any country and was the first to develop and use nuclear weapons during World War 2. Their nuclear potential means that the United States can influence world politics and can use its nuclear weapons for strategic purposes (SIPRI, 2022).

Table 1

Comparative table on the state of the world's nuclear arsenals in 2021 and 2022

Source: SIPRI (2022)

Russia, as the successor to the Soviet Union, has the greatest nuclear potential. Its arsenal includes a qualitative and quantitative variety of nuclear weapons. Russia plays an important role in international relations and can use its nuclear arsenal to influence the geopolitical situation, especially in its full-scale war against Ukraine. Since Russia's total invasion in February 2022, the Kremlin has systematically used nuclear threats to deter other countries from providing military assistance to Ukraine (Brusylovska, 2023). This extreme tactic proved quite effective against risky Western leaders who, fearing a nuclear reaction, deliberately slowed down the supply of weapons to Ukraine. Such a cautious approach could have serious implications for international security in the future. If Western countries do not confront Vladimir Putin's nuclear blackmail, there is a real threat that he will continue such tactics. This, in turn, may encourage other countries to try to emulate it, which could lead to a new era of international instability, where countries will create their own nuclear deterrents (Yanchik, 2023; Gressel, 2022). Thus, the more time passes without a strong response from Ukraine's partners, the more likely it is that Russia's aggressive use of nuclear blackmail will become a common element of international relations. Countries around the world can change their own nuclear policies to achieve their expansionist goals or to defend themselves against their neighbours. If Putin is allowed to normalise nuclear blackmail as a foreign policy tool, the existence of long-standing nuclear non-proliferation initiatives could fail, and the world could enter a dangerous new era of nuclear instability.

China has a limited but growing nuclear arsenal. Its nuclear potential means that China can have an impact on stability and security in Southeast Asia and the world at large. India and Pakistan have limited but stable nuclear arsenals. Their nuclear weapons programmes pose geostrategic challenges in South Asia and affect regional stability. As for Israel and North Korea, these countries have an arsenal of nuclear weapons which is not recognised by the entire international community. Their nuclear programmes pose additional challenges to international security, as they have not officially confirmed the presence of such weapons.

The great nuclear potential of these countries means that they have the ability to use nuclear weapons to protect their national interests and influence the international scene. However, it also puts a lot of pressure on international treaties and agreements on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, and on managing nuclear threats and ensuring the security of nuclear arsenals. Scientific analysis of such situations is important for understanding their impact on international security and for developing strategies for international control and disarmament.

At the beginning of 2022, approximately 12,705 nuclear warheads were recorded worldwide, of which 9,440 were in military warehouses and were intended for potential use (Table 1). Of this number, 3,732 warheads were deployed for use in mines and aerospace-based missile systems, and about 2,000 were put on high alert (SIPRI, 2022). It is worth noting that almost all of these nuclear warheads were the possession of the United States and Russia, which together controlled more than 90% of the world's total arsenal of nuclear weapons.

However, experts from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) point out that all other nuclear powers are also actively developing their nuclear capabilities. In particular, China is seeing the construction of at least 300 new missile silos, which indicate an increase in the number of nuclear facilities. In 2021, the UK officially announced its intention to increase the maximum threshold for its total stockpile of nuclear warheads, reversing a decade-long policy of gradual disarmament. Many other countries, such as India, Pakistan, France, Israel, North Korea and others, are also upgrading their nuclear arsenals.

In the event of a nuclear strike on Ukraine, each of these states theoretically has the ability to respond with a nuclear strike against Russia. However, it is important to note that the situation is very complex, and most of these states are pursuing foreign policies aimed at preserving peace and avoiding nuclear escalation. The UK has determined that it reserves the right to respond with a nuclear strike to aggression against Ukraine even without the consent of other NATO members (Rathbun & Stein, 2020). It is worth noting that total spending on the nuclear industry may also vary depending on the country's political priorities and geopolitical circumstances. Spending on nuclear programmes is the subject of regular monitoring and discussion at the international level to ensure global stability and reduce the nuclear threat.

In 2022, Russia spent USD 9.6 billion on upgrading its nuclear arsenal, an increase of 5.74% compared to the previous year (Figure 1). According to a report by the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN, 2023), Russia remains among the top three countries that spend the most on developing their nuclear forces in 2022. The first place remains in the United States, which spent USD 43.7 billion on nuclear weapons last year, slightly less than in 2021. China, which is in second place, increased its spending on nuclear weapons by 6%, to USD 11.7 billion. The largest increase in spending on the development of nuclear capabilities was recorded in India, where the figure increased by 21.8% to USD 2.7 million (Fig. 1). These data indicate the continued high global spending on nuclear weapons and confirm the importance of controlling these spending for stability and security.

Figure 1 Financial investments in the development of nuclear potential Source: reports of International Campaign for the Abolition of Nuclear Weapons (ICAN, 2022; ICAN, 2023)

Russia is not the only state in the world that manipulates nuclear weapons. North Korea has officially used its nuclear programme for political purposes since the 1950s (Dorsey, 2022). North Korea (DPRK) considers nuclear weapons as a means to strengthen its regime and ensure security. North Korean leaders believe that the presence of nuclear weapons prevents external aggression and increases their position in international relations. Conducting nuclear tests and launching missiles mainly serves to demonstrate the technical capabilities and military strength of the DPRK, which allows them to prove themselves as a serious player in the region and in international relations. North Korea uses its nuclear programme to extort agreements, political legitimacy, and humanitarian aid from other countries.

The DPRK has been making threats to use its nuclear weapons against the United States of America (USA) since the development of its nuclear programme, the corresponding threats are included in the general context of geopolitical relations between the two countries and are accompanied by diplomatic tensions. In particular, by resorting to nuclear blackmail, North Korea opposes joint military exercises between the United States and South Korea and other measures that it considers threats to its security (Chengjun, 2020). The United States of America (USA) responds to North Korea's (DPRK) threats against its nuclear weapons in various ways. The United States is applying economic sanctions against the DPRK in order to restrict financial resources and access to foreign goods, which is aimed at depriving the DPRK of funds for the further development of its nuclear programme. In addition, the United States maintains military readiness and conducts joint military exercises with its allies in the region to demonstrate its ability to protect its interests and those of its allies in the event of such aggression (Yavorska, 2013).

Pakistan has approximately 165-175 nuclear warheads, making it one of the countries with the largest nuclear arsenals in the world. Pakistan has developed nuclear warheads for various types of carriers, including short-, medium-, and long-range ballistic missiles (Rumelili, 2020). India also has a significant nuclear arsenal, which includes approximately 150-160 nuclear warheads. India has developed nuclear warheads for its ballistic missiles and submarines. The nuclear conflict between Pakistan and India is one of the most dangerous geopolitical situations in the world. The conflict between Pakistan and India is rooted in historical, religious, and territorial disputes, in particular, the problem of Kashmir, a region claimed by both countries. Pakistan and India conducted nuclear tests in 1998, declaring their nuclear status. This has led to an increase in the threat of nuclear escalation in the region. Both countries have large nuclear arsenals and are developing nuclear delivery systems. India and Pakistan have ballistic missiles, bombers, and other nuclear warhead carriers (Riqiang, 2022). The conflict in Kashmir and regular terrorist attacks in the region have raised serious concerns about the possibility of access to nuclear materials and weapons by terrorists. International attempts to resolve the conflict, in particular, through the UN and international mediation groups, have not always led to positive results, which only increases the level of nuclear threat. According to the calculations of the Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI) and Economist Impact (EI), the level of nuclear security, due to the fall in the rating of Russia, the United States and France, in 2023 decreased by 4 points compared to 2020. This is the first decrease in the overall index since the beginning of observations (Fig. 2).

Figure 2 Nuclear Security Index in nuclear-weapon states Source: developed by the author based on NTI data (n.d.)

Thus, the manipulation of nuclear weapons for political purposes threatens stability and security in the world. In 2014, Russia annexed Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk regions. In 2022, it launched a full-scale war against Ukraine and used its nuclear weapons as a means of blackmail and military support for its actions. This situation has created a threat of possible nuclear escalation in the region. North Korea regularly uses nuclear threats to defend its political demands, which has led to strained relations with neighbouring countries and international NGOs (Mrovlje, 2018). The nuclear conflict between Pakistan and India mentioned earlier is a very relevant example of how political conflicts can have a nuclear aspect and how this affects global stability.

On the other hand, international agreements on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons and agreements on the reduction of strategic weapons regularly become the subject of negotiations that affect the geopolitical landscape. These examples highlight the importance of diplomacy and international efforts on nuclear security issues. The world must have a strict system of control and settlement to prevent unwanted nuclear conflicts and manipulation. Due to the increasing use of nuclear blackmail as a political tool, it seems rational to develop international legislation and a system of sanctions against countries and political actors who use nuclear weapons intimidation. International bodies responsible for nuclear security should record all cases of such manipulations. Since manipulations often manifest themselves in the form of verbal threats, the development of an assessment methodology and direct assessment of the statements of political leaders should take place with the participation of linguists and specialists in international law. Such a body should be accountable to the UN. A ban on such rhetoric should also be established at the level of national legislation of the countries possessing nuclear weapons. Such measures will be a logical step for humanity to abandon the use of nuclear weapons. Along with the abandonment of its actual use, it is necessary to abandon its use for the purpose of conducting politics from a position of strength.

Discussion

In the modern world, the role of nuclear weapons in world politics remains a very important and complex topic. Nuclear weapons create psychological and military stability between states. The ability of each nuclear power to cause extremely great damage to another creates a psychological barrier to direct military conflict. The perception of a threat can carefully influence the resolution of international conflicts. Nuclear weapons affect geostrategic relations between states. Countries with nuclear weapons have a stronger voice in the international arena and can defend their national interests with greater efficiency. However, geostrategic competition can lead to increased tensions. The issue of nuclear proliferation remains an important topic in modern global politics.

O. Buryachenko (2023) raises the issue of security in a world where the number of nuclear powers is increasing, which requires an immediate solution, namely, the creation of a new configuration of the global security architecture aimed at controlling and reducing the risk of proliferation of nuclear weapons (including nuclear weapons and nuclear energy) in the international community. In addition, the researcher emphasises that it is necessary to take into account that Ukraine, which found itself in a unique geopolitical position after the aggression of the Russian Federation, has a unique experience and the right to offer a new approach to creating a global security system. This approach should include the creation of new mechanisms and structures to reliably control nuclear weapons and other threats of mass destruction. Awareness of the need to change the security paradigm in the world reflects the importance of solving the problem of proliferation and control of the nuclear component, and Ukraine has the potential and right to initiate this process at the international level. It is worth agreeing with the researcher's opinion, since the relevant studies proved that treaties and agreements on the control of nuclear weapons cease to work, and are an ineffective way to contain the nuclear policies of states that now very often manipulate their nuclear situation. It is also very important to investigate and develop new conceptual models that could answer the key question of creating a new, effective global security system and help countries get closer to its implementation.

I. Pogorelova (2022) highlights the situation on the Korean Peninsula, which poses a significant challenge to the security interests and strategies of key regional states in Northeast Asia, such as the United States, China, Russia, and Japan. The main problem is the settlement of North Korea's nuclear missile programme, which has an important impact on the level of security at the regional, international, and global levels. The researcher concludes that solving the problem of nuclear weapons in North Korea would lead to an end to the long-standing conflict and an improvement in the situation both in the Asia-Pacific region and in the world as a whole. In the current geopolitical environment, when there is a sharp confrontation between the United States and Russia, and strained relations between the United States and China, it is difficult to achieve a unified position on the issue of nuclear weapons. The lack of consensus and trust between the participating countries makes it difficult to solve this problem. In addition, states are focusing on ensuring their own security and strengthening their influence in the world, which puts the issue of priorities for solving the nuclear problem in the second place. At the moment, North Korea's denuclearisation is unattainable. Therefore, the key challenge in this context is efforts to reduce the threat, reduce tensions, impose a nuclear moratorium and arms control, and prevent further expansion and strengthening of North Korea's nuclear missile capabilities through a combination of pressure, diplomacy, and positive incentives at the appropriate time. This study also analysed the DPRK's attitude to nuclear weapons and how they use them for political purposes, and concluded that it is important to solve this problem, given its impact on geopolitical stability and security in the region and in the world as a whole. The confrontation between the US, Russia, and China really complicates the issue of North Korea's nuclear denuclearisation, and the unattainability of this goal poses a security threat. Therefore, the proposal to focus efforts on threat reduction, arms control, and preventing further growth of North Korea's nuclear potential is appropriate.

G.D. Arceneaux (2023) investigated the manipulation of nuclear weapons by the Russian authorities in their war against Ukraine. The researcher comes to the conclusion that the conflict between Russia and Ukraine violates the usual concepts regarding the role of nuclear policy in modern conflicts and competition. The “nuclear revolution” theory cannot explain that Russia is using the nuclear threat to limit military assistance to Ukraine, nor can it explain the rapid development of Russia's nuclear doctrine and capabilities that support risky behaviour. Instead of deterring conflict and competition, nuclear weapons have contributed to Russian aggression and have been used to deter Western intervention. The researcher notes that analysts need to carefully analyse changes in Russia's risky behaviour. Many of the threats from Russia were only verbal, but Russian leaders have opportunities to demonstrate their determination more openly. The risk of uncontrolled escalation remains constant, and policymakers should actively analyse the situation throughout the conflict to reduce the likelihood of a nuclear escalation. It is also worth noting that according to the results of the study, the Russian-Ukrainian war presents a serious challenge for politicians, especially given the long-term consequences of this conflict for the future role of nuclear weapons in international conflicts and competition. Russia's use of the nuclear threat to secure control over the occupied territory is a prime example of the difficulties that arise in attempts to resolve conflicts, where the state uses conventional military forces to annex territory, and then uses nuclear weapons to hold that territory. When assessing the potential costs and benefits of responding to Russia's nuclear threat, policymakers must carefully consider the long-term value of curbing Russian ambitions for global security.

T. Zhao (2022) analysed the nuclear potential and manipulation of China's use of nuclear weapons. The researcher noted that China is the only country in the world that adheres to the unconditional no first use (NFU) policy. This Chinese practice and its impact on international security have significant implications for the global NFU debate and inform other countries about possible consideration of such policies. The question of whether NFU policies can achieve the expected benefits of reducing the role of nuclear weapons, curbing competition in this area, and reducing the risk of nuclear proliferation largely depends on other countries' confidence in these policies. The researcher examines a number of internal issues that may affect the level of trust in Chinese NFU policies. Among them, it is necessary to highlight the interest of Chinese military strategists in the possibility of using nuclear weapons in ordinary conflicts under certain conditions, through the so-called “lowering the threshold of nuclear coercion”. Other factors include the lack of institutional constraints in China's system to enforce NFU compliance and growing ambiguity about the possibility of applying NFU policies in specific scenarios due to the development of new technologies. Notably, NFU policies can have a significant impact on the international dynamics of nuclear weapons. On the one hand, it can contribute to the containment of conflicts and the risk of the use of nuclear weapons. On the other hand, in the context of growing competition between states, it is important to understand how China will adhere to its NFU policy in the face of growing tensions and threats, and the question arises whether China's policy will serve as an example for someone, for example, for the Russian Federation.

Freilich (2022) investigates the situation between Israel and Iran. Israel's national security strategy has made significant strides in its historical context. In the past, Israel has been in a vulnerable state, constantly ready for military intervention when its existence was a significant threat. The main potential threat as of 2023 remains Iran, which has nuclear ambitions, while the Hezbollah organisation poses a serious direct threat to Israel's security.