On March 2, two days after Israel and the U.S. attacked Iran, triggering a war in West Asia, French President Emmanuel Macron announced the expansion of France’s nuclear arsenal. While the two events are not directly related, the two are part of the same phenomenon: in today’s world, marked by conflicts and weakening of international law, nuclear weapons look more attractive than ever as a means of deterrence. Yet, there is an underlying double standard in how different countries are treated under the global nuclear order.
In June 2025, Israel launched massive attacks on the heart of Iran’s nuclear and military structure, killing key officers and scientists, claiming it to be a necessary step before its adversary got any closer to building an atomic weapon. Iran has always maintained that its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes.
Several of Iran’s top political, spiritual, military leaders and scientists were targeted by Israel, both in the June 2025 conflict and the ongoing war. Yet, Israel, which possesses nuclear weapons, faces no inspections, sanctions or international pressure. While countries like Iran, which are considered to be adversaries of the West, face sanctions and attacks despite signing nuclear treaties, allies such as Israel are well protected despite not being a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and not accepting IAEA safeguards on its principle nuclear activities.
While the stated objective of these strikes was to prevent Iran from creating nuclear weapons, it raises a bigger question about how the global nuclear order functions, and whether its rules apply evenly to all the countries.
COMMENT | The third nuclear age
Global nuclear order
The modern global nuclear order is governed by the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), which came into being in 1970. The main aim of this treaty was to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons while promoting the peaceful usage of nuclear energy. This created a system under which five countries are recognised as nuclear-weapon states, while the other signatories agree not to pursue nuclear weapon technology, in exchange for access to peaceful nuclear technology, and a commitment by nuclear countries to work towards complete nuclear disarmament. The five countries are the U.S., Russia, China, Britain and France, and including these, a total of 191 countries are signatories. Among the 191 countries is Iran, while Israel has not signed the NPT and is not a party to this treaty, maintaining its long-standing policy of nuclear ambiguity.
As per the treaty, Iran is allowed to pursue civilian nuclear technology under the monitoring of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The Vienna-based IAEA conducts inspections, analysing samples and monitoring cameras at over 900 sites worldwide to detect diversion. However, the system is known for its long standing inconsistencies. Over the years, many countries have developed nuclear weapons outside the treaty framework.
EDITORIAL | Reckless wreckers: On threats to nuclear facilities
Iran’s journey
Iran’s nuclear programme is what experts have called a “threshold” nuclear strategy. Officially, Iran’s government has maintained that they are not seeking to acquire a nuclear weapon and that its former Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has issued a fatwa, or religious edict, against acquiring one. Yet, Iran has developed a stockpile of highly enriched uranium. According to several analysts, Iran was seeking to use its status as a “threshold” state to its advantage in negotiations without incurring the diplomatic costs of actually making nuclear weapons.
Over the years, Iran’s nuclear programme has led to various sanctions, and this, coupled with the government’s mismanagement, has led to dire economic crises in the country. And now, in this recent crisis in Iran, two nuclear powers, the U.S. and Israel, are overwhelming the defences of a country that clearly had a nuclear enrichment programme but never actually had a nuclear weapon.
Also Read | India increased its nuclear warhead count to 180 in 2024: SIPRI report
Israel’s ambiguity
Over the years, Israel has always remained ambiguous about the possession of nuclear weapons, having neither accepted nor denied it. However, experts believe they have a significant nuclear arsenals. The American based Centre for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation states that Israel possesses about 90 plutonium-based nuclear warheads and has produced enough plutonium for 100-200 weapons. Despite this, unlike Iran, Israel is not subject to international inspections of its nuclear programme, nor is it a signatory of the 1970 treaty.
The talks around nuclear weapons are not limited to west Asia alone. Europe is dealing with its own nuclear discussions. French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz have already talked about a “European nuclear deterrent” during the Munich Security Conference in late February. This marks a clear pivot from post-Cold War denuclearisation dreams of the last few decades.
He also stated that for the first time ever, France would permit its nuclear-armed aircraft to be stationed in other European countries; however, it would retain complete control over the use of its nuclear arsenal. Although several countries host American weapons on their soil, France is the only state in the EU with its own nuclear weapons.
Most of the European countries are part of NATO; therefore, in theory, they are protected under the U.S. nuclear “umbrella”. However, the very fact that Germany is considering an alliance under France’s nuclear umbrella speaks volumes about the lack of trust in the “Umbrella” provided by the U.S., which has already been compromised under Mr. Trump’s ‘America First’ foreign policy.
Especially now, the crisis in West Asia has probably not helped to ease the concerns of Europeans about America’s reliability as a partner in terms of security. France may not be the only European country making renewed nuclear plans. Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk indicated last week that Poland, at the epicentre of tensions between Russia and Europe, may eventually follow suit in developing nuclear weapons.
Also Read | Nuclear spectre: On the risk of an era of nuclear brinkmanship
New global nuclear era
These developments are coming at a time when the international architecture of arms control is in a state of disarray. Several of the treaties that were signed during the Cold War between Russia and the U.S. have ceased to be in force in recent years, removing important limits on nuclear arsenals. The expiration of the last agreement between the U.S. and Russia, New START, last month is just the latest sign of the world entering a new nuclear age, in which the numbers of these weapons are rising, as are the threats of their use.
At the same time, China is expanding its nuclear arsenal at a rapid pace, and Russia is raising the spectre of nuclear war in Ukraine. In the past, the United States often worked towards preventing other countries from creating nuclear weapons. However, the country’s recent foreign policy might make the acquisition of nuclear weapons more attractive than ever.
The ongoing conflict in West Asia is likely to influence the approach taken by other countries towards nuclear deterrence. Moreover, the perception of double standards in the global approach to nuclear weapons is also likely to add more problems to the efforts aimed at controlling the proliferation of these weapons.
From the battlefields of West Asia to the strategic think tanks of Europe and East Asia, nuclear weapons are again at the core of global security calculations. The challenge for the global community will be whether, or not, it can recover the credibility of the global non-proliferation regime before the next wave of proliferation sets in.
