The UN General Assembly First Committee (GA1) is one of the primary platforms for deliberations on nuclear nonproliferation and disarmament issues. It considers all disarmament and international security matters within the scope of the UN Charter or relating to the powers and functions of any other organ of the United Nations. From 4 October to 4 November 2021, the 76^th Session of the UN GA First Committee on Disarmament and International Security took place. By observing the results of the Committee’s work, we can have more insight into the activeness of states in nonproliferation field, the distribution of power and influence among different states, and general support of UN Member States to different nonproliferation issues.

France has taken essential steps towards the process of disarmament and is resolutely committed to endorse its special role as a nuclear-weapon state. However, some experts have highlighted a level of ambiguity in the French rhetoric, for instance, in the light of the INF Treaty. In fact, by working on different fronts, France has been trying to find the right balance between deterrence and non-proliferation as well as between national interests and international commitments. As a result of the changing strategic context and the growing threats, has France been able to consolidate its political discourse? This blog gives an overview of the French stance on the NPT, TPNW, and the INF Treaty to evaluate the ongoing trends in the field of non-proliferation.

Sixty-third session of the UN Secretary General’s Advisory Board on Disarmament Matters concluded its work in Geneva. I took part in the work of the session, together with experts from Argentina, Australia, China, France, Ghana, Hungary, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Pakistan, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Spain, Switzerland, and the USA.

Following usual rhetoric, the end of the Cold War replaced the global competition for supremacy of the two great powers and fears of a large-scale nuclear conflict between them with a new era of cooperation and consolidating efforts for enhancing international security. Even so, the acute dialogue of Russia with outside (especially Western) world on too many security issues remains troubled. As it appears now, a permanent source of disaccord constitute the differences of views on local conflicts (whether a militarized crisis like the 2008 Georgia war or a diplomatic one like the 2011 question about what action to take toward Libya and the 2012 row over Syria), as well as sharp tensions over the US/NATO missile defense plans in Europe.