Dr. Hina Pandey, Research Fellow at the Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (MP-IDSA) spoke on “The 11^th NPT Review Conference: An Assessment” at the Monday Morning Meeting held on 13 July 2026. Mr. Niranjan Oak, Research Analyst, MP-IDSA, moderated the discussion, attended by scholars from the Institute.

Executive Summary

The Speaker  in her  assessment of the 11^th Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference, which concluded on 22 May 2026, highlighted that the conclusion of the Review Conference  without a consensus outcome document was expected as it took  place  amidst geopolitical challenges such as  the Iranian nuclear crisis, suspension of cooperation between the US and Russia, withering away of nuclear norms of nuclear restraint and a growing deep divide between the nuclear weapon states (NWS) and the non-nuclear weapon states (NNWS) on the disarmament accountability on Article VI of the NPT. The estrangement in US-Russia relations as one of the factors contributing to the failure of the Conference was also highlighted in addition to the shifting of language in the drafts of the outcome documents. The discussion concluded with an assessment of future implications as well as key takeaways for India.

Detailed Report

The moderator, Mr. Niranjan Oak, set the context of the discussion by putting forward relevant   questions such as the significance of the NPT, in preventing nuclear proliferation vis-à-vis US extended deterrence nuclear guarantees and NPTs relevance for India, as it had rejected the NPT for creating nuclear haves and have nots.

Dr. Hina Pandey argued that while India remains outside of the Treaty and thus, cannot accept any obligations arising out of it, stocktaking of the issues within and surrounding the Treaty remains crucial from the standpoint of nuclear diplomacy. Further she noted, that NPT exists as a reality of the global nuclear order and has also often figured in India’s domestic debates and that while India rejects the Treaty, its non-proliferation record is consistent with the key provisions of the Treaty. Further, she noted that since India regularly holds disarmament dialogues and consultations with both NNWS and NWS State parties of the NPT such as Australia, Japan, UK, RoK, more recently New Zealand and Norway, stocktaking of the NPT Review Conference and the issues dominating it thus remains important. Furthermore, the assessment of the Review Conference in general remains important as it is the only formal multilateral platform where the NNWS and Civil societies assess the compliance of the NWS. Over the years, the NNWS have become more vocal in demanding accountability and reporting requirements. The 11^th NPT Review Conference too brought forward these concerns by the NNWS on slow pace of disarmament, nuclear modernisation programs by the NWS contradicting the spirit of the Treaty, lack of arms control and escalating nuclear rhetoric.

Dr. Pandey presented the assessment of the Rev Con on three parameters i.e. purpose of the Treaty, the status of the grand bargain vis-a-vis article VI and the expectations from the Rev Con versus the reality. Article VIII of the NPT requires a Conference every five years to examine the implementation and compliance of the Treaty obligations by the State Parties. This has often translated as reaffirmation of support, wherein the delivery of a consensus manifests as further actionable steps to advance the Treaty’s objective, making it theoretically action oriented.  Since the NPT is a contract Treaty designed to deliver on the grand bargain, a part of the grand bargain implies a quid pro quo wherein the NNWS have voluntary forgone the will to acquire nuclear weapons in exchange for peaceful nuclear energy benefits. The Speaker observed that while NNWS have held their part of the bargain, nuclear weapon states have avoided accountability. A point on successful outcomes of the previous Review Conferences, for example: “Thirteen Practical Steps” – a historic consensus document that identified practical steps in the sixth NPT Review Conference (2000) was also highlighted.  In addition, the Speaker also noted that the discussion on the 64-item action plan, put forward in the 2010- NPT Review Conference (as a landmark, comprehensive consensus framework) advancing specific actions on three pillars of the Grand Bargain repeatedly highlighted in this year’s Rev Con Agenda, too remain stalled.  The run-up to the final document was marred by a significant shifting and weakening of language on disarmament, removal of critique of nuclear arsenal modernisation, and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safety principles. North Korea, which found a mention in the previous (10^th NPT Review Conference) draft final document too was removed in the final most version in 2026. The Speaker also highlighted dichotomy between negotiating and achieving disarmament as a perpetual irritant to disarmament and also pointed out the weak link between non-proliferation and disarmament as structural inadequacy. She raised a question on newer geopolitical issues as diluting the Treaty’s foundational spirit and noted that towards the next Review cycle, that will resume in 2028 to 2031 much is left to be discussed in the absence of a final consensus outcome document.

Dr. Pandey also made a point on  a frequently overlooked reason for the failure of the Rev Con as the collapse of the US-Russia strategic stability dialogue and argued breakdown of bilateral talks by early 2022, and the subsequent  failure to renew the New START Treaty in February 2026, the suspended, withdrawn agreements/treaties between the US and Russia including the previously concluded Plutonium Management and Disposition Act,  Intermediate – Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, and Open Skies Treaty had ended traditional management of the global nuclear order by the two countries, also contributed to the failure of the NPT’s 11^th Review Conference. On Iran, the Speaker highlighted, that while considerable onus was also placed on the Iranian issue in derailing the consensus, however, it is not this straightforward as at the most fundamental level, the Iranian issue is tied to the unresolved ‘inalienable right to nuclear energy’ within the NPT-which the State Parties too failed to address in the recent Review Conference

In her concluding remarks Dr. Pandey suggested takeaways for India including – keeping a note on the continuation of the unresolved discussions of the NPT at various forums, as most likely the civil societies would take forward these conversations in alternative forums. Recommendations for India included the continued expansion of disarmament dialogues, consultations and conversations with other countries and to observe the P-5 discussions on multilateral arms control.

Q & A Session

The Q &A session included questions on NPT being a low-cost method devised during the Cold War by the P-5 to constrain NNWS and the possibility of change of the ‘grand bargain’. The discussion further highlighted the inherent structural inadequacies and limitations of the NPT- such as addressing of only horizontal proliferation, and limitation in addressing the supply side of proliferation. The speaker also cautioned about taking an extreme compartmentalised view of the NPT and stated that the global nuclear order heavily relies on a network of norms, treaties, transparency mechanisms, and confidence-building measures tied directly to the NPT.

On IAEA safeguards effectiveness, the Speaker explained inherent limits exist, including jurisdictional boundaries, financial constraints, and the absolute requirement for state cooperation, which can be sabotaged by political dynamics. On Artificial Intelligence (AI), the Speaker argued that the NPT may not be the appropriate forum to discuss as it leaves out countries outside of the Treaty. Addressing the comment on nuclear-sharing arrangements, the Speaker concurred that it remains in conflict with the spirit and core principles of the NPT.

The Report was prepared by Ms. Nisarga G R, Intern, Internal Security Centre, MP-IDSA.