News & Politics

Suppose They Created a Nuclear Treaty and No Nuclear Powers Signed It?

Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum/U.S. Army via AP

The left has an impulse-control problem and it’s getting worse.

The dream of putting the nuclear genie back in the bottle and forgetting how to build the bomb began in the 1950s when some of the same scientists who created the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs proposed the elimination of all nuclear weapons. At that time there were only three nuclear-armed nations: the U.S., the Soviet Union, and Great Britain. They proposed that the nuclear fuel cycle be placed under international control with the scientists themselves in charge.

By controlling the mining of uranium, the milling of the ore, and the enrichment to bomb-grade levels, the scientists would have enormous power. No one was crazy enough to give them that power, so we had an arms race where thousands of weapons were built.

Various pie-in-the-sky proposals for nuclear disarmament from left-wing groups have circulated since then, but none have been taken seriously. “Ban the bomb” became something of a joke on comedy shows in the ’70s and ’80s.

But if there’s one thing we’ve learned about the left in recent years it’s that they never give up. The latest nuclear nonsense is in the form of a treaty that makes nuclear weapons “illegal.” It was created by the UN, which is an expert at coming up with nonsensical solutions to potentially catastrophic problems.

Fifty nations have signed this treaty, so it went into effect this week. There’s only one small problem: no nuclear-armed nation bothered to sign it.


The ban prohibits countries from producing, testing, acquiring, possessing or stockpiling nuclear weapons. It also outlaws the transfer of the weapons and forbids signatories from allowing any nuclear explosive device to be stationed, installed or deployed in their territory.

The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons was adopted in the summer of 2017, in hopes of bringing new momentum to the push to curb the deadliest armament in the world. But even then, it was seen more as a moral statement than an enforceable ban.

The immoral UN making a “moral statement”? Begging your pardon, but isn’t that silly?

The treaty is a 96-page reminder to nuclear weapons states, Whyte said, that “they need to be moving forward” with disarmament.

“How did the international community deal with slavery, colonialism? Once you delegitimize that conduct, it completely has an impact on the policymaking process,” she said. 

One can imagine some unfortunate soul running toward ground zero waving the treaty in the air and declaring a nuclear attack is “illegal.” Yeah, that will work out great.

Of course, it wouldn’t be silly if some madman like Kim Jong-un or the mullahs in Iran believed it was the only way to stay in power and targeted an enemy. The illegality of using the bomb would make them hesitate about 1/8 of a second before pressing the button.

But the treaty wouldn’t be complete without a “disparate impact” statement.

Detonating a nuclear weapon, the signatories say, would “pose grave implications for human survival, the environment, socioeconomic development, the global economy, food security and the health of current and future generations, and have a disproportionate impact on women and girls, including as a result of ionizing radiation.”

New York Times future headline: “World Blows Up. Women and Girls Hardest Hit.”