list of states with nuclear weapons

{{Weapons of mass destruction}}

The following is a list of states that have acknowledged the possession of nuclear weapons or are presumed to possess them, the approximate number of warheads under their control, and the year they tested their first weapon and their force configuration. This list is informally known in global politics as the "Nuclear Club"."Nuclear club", Oxford English Dictionary: "nuclear club n. the nations that possess nuclear weapons." The term's first cited usage is from 1957.Jane Onyanga-Omara, [https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2016/01/06/nine-nations-possess-nuclear-weapns/78350588/ "The Nuclear Club: Who are the 9 members?"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170904111359/https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2016/01/06/nine-nations-possess-nuclear-weapns/78350588/|date=4 September 2017}}, USA TODAY, 6 January 2016 With the exception of Russia and the United States (which have subjected their nuclear forces to independent verification under various treaties) these figures are estimates, in some cases quite unreliable estimates. In particular, under the Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty thousands of Russian and US nuclear warheads are inactive in stockpiles awaiting processing. The fissile material contained in the warheads can then be recycled for use in nuclear reactors.

From a high of 70,300 active weapons in 1986, {{as of|2024|lc=on||df=US}} there are approximately 3,880 active nuclear warheads and 12,119 total nuclear warheads in the world. Many of the decommissioned weapons were simply stored or partially dismantled, not destroyed.Webster, Paul (July/August 2003). "[https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2009/sep/06/nuclear-weapons-world-us-north-korea-russia-iran Nuclear weapons: how many are there in 2009 and who has them?] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170108004154/https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2009/sep/06/nuclear-weapons-world-us-north-korea-russia-iran|date=2017-01-08}}" The Guardian, 6 September 2009.

Additionally, since the dawn of the Atomic Age, the delivery methods of most states with nuclear weapons have evolved—with four acquiring a nuclear triad, while others have consolidated away from land and air deterrents to submarine-based forces.

{{table alignment}}{{sort under}}

{{Pie chart

| value1 = 44.19

| value2 = 42.79

| value3 = 4.86

| value4 = 2.35

| value5 = 1.83

| value6 = 1.46

| value7 = 1.38

| value8 = 0.73

| value9 = 0.41

| label1 = Russia

| label2 = United States

| label3 = China

| label4 = France

| label5 = United Kingdom

| label6 = India

| label7 = Pakistan

| label8 = Israel

| label9 = North Korea

| caption = Percentage of global nuclear warheads by country

| color1 = Red

| color2 = Green

| color3 = Yellow

| color4 = Purple

| color5 = Orange

| color6 = Brown

| color7 = Magenta

| color8 = Blue

| color9 = Azure

}}

{{See also|History of nuclear weapons}}

These five states are known to have detonated a nuclear explosive before 1 January 1967 and are thus nuclear weapons states under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. They also happen to be the UN Security Council's (UNSC) permanent members with veto power on UNSC resolutions.

{{Main|Nuclear weapons of the United States|United States and weapons of mass destruction}}{{See also|Manhattan Project}}File:Trinity Test Fireball 16ms.jpg" fireball, the first man-made nuclear explosion, 1945]]

The United States developed the first nuclear weapons during World War II in cooperation with the United Kingdom and Canada as part of the Manhattan Project, out of the apprehension that Nazi Germany would develop them first. It tested the first nuclear weapon on 16 July 1945 ("Trinity") at 5:30 am, and remains the only country to have used nuclear weapons in war, having bombed the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in the closing stages of World War II. The project expenditure through 1 October 1945 was reportedly $1.845–$2{{nbs}}billion, in nominal terms,{{cite book| last = Nichols| first = Kenneth D.| author-link = Kenneth Nichols| title = The Road to Trinity| year = 1987| publisher = William Morrow and Company| location = New York| isbn = 0-688-06910-X| oclc = 15223648|pages=34–35}}{{cite news|date=7 August 1945|title=Atomic Bomb Seen as Cheap at Price|page=1|newspaper=Edmonton Journal|url=https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=yuVkAAAAIBAJ&pg=5621%2C2841878|access-date=1 January 2012}} roughly 0.8 percent of the US GDP in 1945 and equivalent to about ${{Inflation|US|1.9225|1945|r=1|disp=out}}{{nbs}}billion today.{{Inflation-fn|US}}

The United States was the first nation to develop the hydrogen bomb, testing an experimental prototype in 1952 ("Ivy Mike") and a deployable weapon in 1954 ("Castle Bravo"). Throughout the Cold War it continued to modernize and enlarge its nuclear arsenal, but from 1992 on has been involved primarily in a program of stockpile stewardship.{{cite book|first=Chuck|last=Hansen|title=U.S. nuclear weapons: The secret history|location=Arlington, TX|publisher=Aerofax|year=1988|isbn=978-0-517-56740-1}}{{cite book|first=Chuck|last=Hansen|title=The Swords of Armageddon: U.S. nuclear weapons development since 1945|location=Sunnyvale, CA|publisher=Chukelea Publications|year=1995|url=http://www.uscoldwar.com/|access-date=20 February 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161230020259/http://www.uscoldwar.com/|archive-date=30 December 2016|url-status=dead}}Stephen I. Schwartz, ed., Atomic Audit: The Costs and Consequences of U.S. Nuclear Weapons Since 1940 (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 1998).{{cite magazine|last1=Gross|first1=Daniel A.|title=An Aging Army|magazine=Distillations|date=2016|volume=2|issue=1|pages=26–36|url=https://www.sciencehistory.org/distillations/magazine/an-aging-army|access-date=22 March 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180320230842/https://www.sciencehistory.org/distillations/magazine/an-aging-army|archive-date=20 March 2018|url-status=live}} The US nuclear arsenal contained 31,175 warheads at its Cold War height (in 1966).{{cite web|title=Fact Sheet: Increasing Transparency in the U.S. Nuclear Weapons Stockpile|url=http://www.defense.gov/npr/docs/10-05-03_Fact_Sheet_US_Nuclear_Transparency__FINAL_w_Date.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150811174503/http://www.defense.gov/npr/docs/10-05-03_Fact_Sheet_US_Nuclear_Transparency__FINAL_w_Date.pdf|archive-date=11 August 2015|publisher=U.S. Department of Defense|access-date=31 August 2013|date=3 May 2010|url-status=dead}} During the Cold War, the United States built more nuclear weapons than all other nations at approximately 70,000 warheads.{{cite web|url=https://www.nrdc.org/policy-library|title=Policy Library|access-date=23 August 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160822130722/https://www.nrdc.org/policy-library|archive-date=22 August 2016|url-status=live}}Robert S. Norris and Hans M. Kristensen, "[https://web.archive.org/web/20081119090924/http://thebulletin.metapress.com/content/c4120650912x74k7/fulltext.pdf Global nuclear stockpiles, 1945–2006]," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 62, no. 4 (July/August 2006), 64–66...

{{Main|Russia and weapons of mass destruction|Strategic Rocket Forces}}

{{See also|Soviet atomic bomb project}}

File:US and USSR nuclear stockpiles.svg

The Soviet Union tested its first nuclear weapon ("RDS-1") in 1949. This crash project was developed partially with information obtained via the atomic spies at the United States' Manhattan Project during and after World War II. The Soviet Union was the second nation to have developed and tested a nuclear weapon. It tested its first megaton-range hydrogen bomb ("RDS-37") in 1955. The Soviet Union also tested the most powerful explosive ever detonated by humans, ("Tsar Bomba"), with a theoretical yield of 100 megatons, reduced to 50 when detonated. After its dissolution in 1991, the Soviet weapons entered officially into the possession of its successor state, the Russian Federation.{{cite book|first=David|last=Holloway|title=Stalin and the bomb: The Soviet Union and atomic energy, 1939–1956|location=New Haven, CT|publisher=Yale University Press|year=1994|isbn=978-0-300-06056-0}} The Soviet nuclear arsenal contained some 45,000 warheads at its peak (in 1986), more than any other nation had possessed at any point in history; the Soviet Union built about 55,000 nuclear warheads since 1949.

{{Main|Nuclear weapons of the United Kingdom|United Kingdom and weapons of mass destruction}}

{{See also|Tube Alloys|British contribution to the Manhattan Project|High Explosive Research|British hydrogen bomb programme}}

File:Trident II missile image.jpg launched from a Royal Navy {{sclass|Vanguard|submarine|0}} ballistic missile submarine]]

The United Kingdom tested its first nuclear weapon ("Hurricane") in 1952. The UK had provided considerable impetus and initial research for the early conception of the atomic bomb, aided by Austrian, German and Polish physicists working at British universities who had either fled or decided not to return to Nazi Germany or Nazi-controlled territories. The UK collaborated closely with the United States and Canada during the Manhattan Project, but had to develop its own method for manufacturing and detonating a bomb as US secrecy grew after 1945. The United Kingdom was the third country in the world, after the United States and the Soviet Union, to develop and test a nuclear weapon. Its programme was motivated to have an independent deterrent against the Soviet Union, while also maintaining its status as a great power. It tested its first hydrogen bomb in 1957 (Operation Grapple), making it the third country to do so after the United States and Soviet Union.{{cite book|first=Margaret|last=Gowing|title=Independence and deterrence: Britain and atomic energy, 1945–1952 |location=London|publisher=Macmillan|year=1974|isbn=978-0-333-15781-7}}{{cite book|first=Lorna|last=Arnold|title=Britain and the H-bomb|location=Basingstoke|publisher=Palgrave|year=2001|isbn=978-0-312-23518-5}}

The British Armed Forces maintained a fleet of V bomber strategic bombers and ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) equipped with nuclear weapons during the Cold War. The Royal Navy currently maintains a fleet of four {{sclass|Vanguard|submarine|0}} ballistic missile submarines equipped with Trident II missiles. In 2016, the UK House of Commons voted to renew the British nuclear weapons system with the {{sclass|Dreadnought|submarine|1}}, without setting a date for the commencement of service of a replacement to the current system.

{{Main|France and weapons of mass destruction|Force de dissuasion}}

File:USS Enterprise FS Charles de Gaulle.jpg (left) and French nuclear-powered aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle (right), each of which carries nuclear-capable warplanes]]

France tested its first nuclear weapon in 1960 ("Gerboise Bleue"), based mostly on its own research. It was motivated by the Suez Crisis diplomatic tension in relation to both the Soviet Union and its allies, the United States and United Kingdom. It was also relevant to retain great power status, alongside the United Kingdom, during the post-colonial Cold War (see: Force de frappe). France tested its first hydrogen bomb in 1968 ("Opération Canopus"). After the Cold War, France has disarmed 175 warheads with the reduction and modernization of its arsenal that has now evolved to a dual system based on submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) and medium-range air-to-surface missiles (Rafale fighter-bombers). However, new nuclear weapons are in development and reformed nuclear squadrons were trained during Enduring Freedom operations in Afghanistan.{{Citation needed|date=November 2013}}

France acceded to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in 1992.[http://disarmament.un.org/treaties/t/npt?OpenView Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141217025852/http://disarmament.un.org/treaties/t/npt?OpenView|date=17 December 2014}}, United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs. In January 2006, President Jacques Chirac stated a terrorist act or the use of weapons of mass destruction against France would result in a nuclear counterattack.[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4627862.stm France 'would use nuclear arms'] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061219022622/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4627862.stm|date=19 December 2006}} (BBC, January 2006) In February 2015, President François Hollande stressed the need for a nuclear deterrent in "a dangerous world". He also detailed the French deterrent as "fewer than 300" nuclear warheads, three sets of 16 submarine-launched ballistic missiles and 54 medium-range air-to-surface missiles and urged other states to show similar transparency.{{cite web|url=http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Nuclear_deterrent_important_in_dangerous_world_says_Hollande_999.html|title=Nuclear deterrent important in 'dangerous world', says Hollande|work=spacedaily.com|access-date=20 February 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304194041/http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Nuclear_deterrent_important_in_dangerous_world_says_Hollande_999.html|archive-date=4 March 2016|url-status=live}}

{{Main|China and weapons of mass destruction|People's Liberation Army Rocket Force}}

File:1965-01 1964年 首次原子弹爆炸2.jpg]]

China tested its first nuclear weapon device ("596") in 1964 at the Lop Nur test site. The weapon was developed as a deterrent against both the United States and the Soviet Union. Two years later, China had a fission bomb capable of being put onto a nuclear missile. It tested its first hydrogen bomb ("Test No. 6") in 1967, 32 months after testing its first nuclear weapon (the shortest fission-to-fusion development known in history).John Wilson Lewis and Xue Litai, China Builds the Bomb (Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1988). {{ISBN|0-8047-1452-5}} China is the only NPT nuclear-weapon state to give an unqualified negative security assurance with its "no first use" policy.{{cite web|url=http://nuclearthreatinitiative.org/db/china/nfuorg.htm|title=No-First-Use (NFU)|work=Nuclear Threat Initiative|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100125101108/http://nuclearthreatinitiative.org/db/china/nfuorg.htm|archive-date=25 January 2010}}{{cite report|url=https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/atf/cf/%7B65BFCF9B-6D27-4E9C-8CD3-CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/Disarm%20S1995265.pdf|title=Statement on security assurances issued on 5 April 1995 by the People's Republic of China |publisher=United Nations|date=6 April 1995|id=S/1995/265|access-date=20 September 2012}} China acceded to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in 1992. As of 2016, China fielded SLBMs onboard its JL-2 submarines.{{cite journal|last1=Kristensen|first1=Hans M.|last2=Korda|first2=Matt|date=4 July 2019|title=Chinese nuclear forces, 2019|journal=Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists|language=en|volume=75|issue=4|pages=171–178|doi=10.1080/00963402.2019.1628511|bibcode=2019BuAtS..75d.171K|issn=0096-3402|doi-access=free}} As of February 2024, China had an estimated total inventory of approximately 500 warheads.[https://fas.org/publication/chinese-nuclear-forces-2024-a-significant-expansion/ Chinese Nuclear Forces, 2024: A “Significant Expansion”], Federation of American Scientists, January 16, 2024.

According to Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), China is in the middle of a significant modernization and expansion of its nuclear arsenal. Its nuclear stockpile is expected to continue growing over the coming decade and some projections suggest that it will deploy at least as many intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) as either Russia or the US in that period. However, China's overall nuclear warhead stockpile is still expected to remain smaller than that of either of those states.Kristensen, Hans M; Korda, Matt. (2023). "[https://www.sipri.org/yearbook/2023/07 World Nuclear Forces 2023]". In [https://www.sipri.org/yearbook/2023 SIPRI Yearbook 2023: Armaments, Disarmament and International Security].Oxford University Press. The Yearbook published by SIPRI in 2024 revealed that China's nuclear warheads stockpile increased by 90 in 2023, reaching 500 warheads.{{Cite web|title=Chinese Nuclear Arsenal Grows by Seventeen Percent in 2022, SIPRI Reports |url=https://www.gcatglance.com/2023/06/chinese-nuclear-arsenal-grows-by-17-percent-in-2022.html|access-date=2023-06-21}}

US Department of Defense officials estimate that the Chinese had more than 600 operational nuclear warheads as of December 2024, and it was on track to possess 1,000 nuclear weapons by the year 2030.{{Cite news |last=McLeary |first=Paul |date=December 18, 2024 |title=Pentagon report: China boosts nuclear stockpile |url=https://www.politico.eu/article/pentagon-report-china-boosts-nuclear-stockpile/ |access-date=December 18, 2024 |work=Politico}}

{{Main|India and weapons of mass destruction}}

File:Agni-V during its first test flight.jpg during its first test flight on 19 April 2012]]

India is not a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Indian officials rejected the NPT in the 1960s on the grounds that it created a world of nuclear "haves" and "have-nots", arguing that it unnecessarily restricted "peaceful activity" (including "peaceful nuclear explosives"), and that India would not accede to international control of their nuclear facilities unless all other countries engaged in unilateral disarmament of their own nuclear weapons. The Indian position has also asserted that the NPT is in many ways a neo-colonial regime designed to deny security to post-colonial powers.George Perkovich, India's Nuclear Bomb: The Impact on Global Proliferation (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999), 120–121, and 7.

The country tested what is called a "peaceful nuclear explosive" in 1974 (which became known as "Smiling Buddha"). The test was the first test developed after the creation of the NPT, and created new questions about how civilian nuclear technology could be diverted secretly to weapons purposes (dual-use technology). India's secret development caused great concern and anger particularly from nations that had supplied its nuclear reactors for peaceful and power generating needs, such as Canada.{{cite web|title = 18 MAY 1974 – SMILING BUDDAH |url = https://www.ctbto.org/specials/testing-times/18-may-1974-smiling-buddah|website=CTBTO|access-date=24 January 2018}} After its 1974 test, India maintained that its nuclear capability was primarily "peaceful", but between 1988 and 1990 it apparently weaponized two dozen nuclear weapons for delivery by air.George Perkovich, India's Nuclear Bomb: The Impact on Global Proliferation (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999), 293–297. In 1998 India tested weaponized nuclear warheads ("Operation Shakti"), including a thermonuclear device, and declared itself as a nuclear state.{{cite web|url=http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/India/IndiaShakti.html|title=India's Nuclear Weapons Program: Operation Shakti|year=1998|access-date=10 October 2006|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061003235010/http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/India/IndiaShakti.html|archive-date=3 October 2006|url-status=live}} India adopted a "no first use" policy in 1998.{{Cite news|date=2019-08-29|title=No first use nuclear policy: Explained|work=The Times of India|url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/no-first-use-nuclear-policy-explained/articleshow/70844818.cms|access-date=2023-04-19|issn=0971-8257}}

In July 2005, US President George W. Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh announced a civil nuclear cooperation initiative{{cite web|url = https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2005/07/20050718-6.html|title = Joint Statement Between President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh|access-date=15 May 2009|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20091227004630/http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2005/07/20050718-6.html|archive-date=27 December 2009|via = National Archives|work = whitehouse.gov|url-status=live}} that included plans to conclude an Indo-US civilian nuclear agreement. This initiative came to fruition through a series of steps that included India's announced plan to separate its civil and military nuclear programs in March 2006,{{cite web|url=http://www.indianembassy.org/newsite/press_release/2006/Mar/sepplan.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060903091254/http://www.indianembassy.org/newsite/press_release/2006/Mar/sepplan.pdf|title=Implementation of the India-United States Joint Statement of July 18, 2005: India's Separation Plan|url-status=dead|archive-date=3 September 2006|date=3 September 2006}} the passage of the India–United States Civil Nuclear Agreement by the US Congress in December 2006, the conclusion of a US–India nuclear cooperation agreement in July 2007,{{cite web|url=https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2007/89552.htm|title=U.S.- India Civil Nuclear Cooperation Initiative – Bilateral Agreement on Peaceful Nuclear Cooperation|date=27 July 2007|access-date=22 May 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171117140302/https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2007/89552.htm|archive-date=17 November 2017|url-status=live}} approval by the IAEA of an India-specific safeguards agreement,{{cite web|url=http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/News/2008/board010808.html|title=IAEA Board Approves India-Safeguards Agreement|website=Iaea.org|date=31 July 2008|access-date=15 May 2009|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090505234507/http://iaea.org/NewsCenter/News/2008/board010808.html|archive-date=5 May 2009|url-status=live}} agreement by the Nuclear Suppliers Group to a waiver of export restrictions for India,{{cite web|url=http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/Final_NSG_Statement_India_20080906.pdf|title=Statement on Civil Nuclear Cooperation with India|access-date=18 October 2008|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081019090645/https://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/Final_NSG_Statement_India_20080906.pdf|archive-date=19 October 2008|url-status=live}} approval by the US Congress{{cite web|url=https://2001-2009.state.gov/secretary/rm/2008/10/110554.htm|title=Congressional Approval of the U.S.-India Agreement for Cooperation Concerning Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy (123 Agreement)|date=2 October 2008|access-date=22 May 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171117032516/https://2001-2009.state.gov/secretary/rm/2008/10/110554.htm|archive-date=17 November 2017|url-status=live}} and culminating in the signature of US–India agreement for civil nuclear cooperation{{cite web|url=https://2001-2009.state.gov/secretary/rm/2008/10/110916.htm|title=Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Indian Minister of External Affairs Pranab Mukherjee At the Signing of the U.S.-India Civilian Nuclear Cooperation Agreement|date=10 October 2008|access-date=22 May 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171117032418/https://2001-2009.state.gov/secretary/rm/2008/10/110916.htm|archive-date=17 November 2017|url-status=live}} in October 2008. The US State Department said it made it "very clear that we will not recognize India as a nuclear-weapon state".[http://www.armscontrol.org/interviews/20060518_Joseph Interview With Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Robert Joseph] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081023081854/http://www.armscontrol.org/interviews/20060518_Joseph|date=23 October 2008}}, Arms Control Today, May 2006. The United States is bound by the Hyde Act with India and may cease all cooperation with India if India detonates a nuclear explosive device. The US had further said it is not its intention to assist India in the design, construction or operation of sensitive nuclear technologies through the transfer of dual-use items.[http://www.indianexpress.com/story/356926.html Was India misled by America on nuclear deal?] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080910011419/http://www.indianexpress.com/story/356926.html|date=10 September 2008}}, Indian Express. In establishing an exemption for India, the Nuclear Suppliers Group reserved the right to consult on any future issues which might trouble it.{{cite web|url=http://www.armscontrol.org/system/files/20080906_Final_NSG_Statement.pdf|title=ACA: Final NSG Statement|access-date=18 October 2008|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101120200023/http://www.armscontrol.org/system/files/20080906_Final_NSG_Statement.pdf|archive-date=20 November 2010|url-status=live}} As of June 2024, India was estimated to have a stockpile of 172 warheads.{{Cite web|title=India and Pakistan|url=https://armscontrolcenter.org/countries/india-and-pakistan/|access-date=2023-09-16|website=Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation|language=en-US}}

{{Main|Pakistan and weapons of mass destruction}}

File:Chagaiatomictests.jpg series of tests.]]

Pakistan is also not a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Pakistan covertly developed nuclear weapons over decades, beginning in the late 1970s. Pakistan first delved into nuclear power after the establishment of its first nuclear power plant near Karachi with equipment and materials supplied mainly by western nations in the early 1970s. Pakistani Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto promised in 1971 that if India could build nuclear weapons then Pakistan would too, according to him: "We will develop Nuclear stockpiles, even if we have to eat grass."{{cite web| last =Sublettle| first =Carey| title =Historical Background: Zulfikar Ali Bhutto| work =Nuclear weapons archives| publisher =Federation of American Scientists (FAS)| date =15 October 1965| url =http://www.nuclearweaponarchive.org/Pakistan/PakOrigin.html| access-date =19 August 2018| archive-url =https://web.archive.org/web/20131216222126/http://www.nuclearweaponarchive.org/Pakistan/PakOrigin.html| archive-date =16 December 2013| url-status=live}}

It is believed that Pakistan has possessed nuclear weapons since the mid-1980s.[http://www.nti.org/country-profiles/pakistan/ NTI Pakistan Profile] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120416084022/http://www.nti.org/country-profiles/pakistan/|date=16 April 2012}}, retrieved 22 April 2012. The United States continued to certify that Pakistan did not possess such weapons until 1990, when sanctions were imposed under the Pressler Amendment, requiring a cutoff of US economic and military assistance to Pakistan.{{cite web|url=http://www.iie.com/research/topics/sanctions/pakistan.cfm|title=Case Studies in Sanctions and Terrorism: Pakistan|publisher=Iie.com|access-date=15 May 2009|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090512121259/http://www.iie.com/research/topics/sanctions/pakistan.cfm|archive-date=12 May 2009|url-status=live}} In 1998, Pakistan conducted its first six nuclear tests at the Ras Koh Hills in response to the five tests conducted by India a few weeks before.

In 2004, the Pakistani metallurgist Abdul Qadeer Khan, a key figure in Pakistan's nuclear weapons program, confessed to heading an international black market ring involved in selling nuclear weapons technology. In particular, Khan had been selling gas centrifuge technology to North Korea, Iran, and Libya. Khan denied complicity by the Pakistani government or Army, but this has been called into question by journalists and IAEA officials, and was later contradicted by statements from Khan himself.See A.Q. Khan: Investigation, dismissal, confession, pardon and aftermath, for citations and details.

As of early 2013, Pakistan was estimated to have had a stockpile of around 140 warheads,{{cite web|url=https://fas.org/issues/nuclear-weapons/status-world-nuclear-forces/|title=Status of World Nuclear Forces|website=Federation of American Scientists|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180124145358/https://fas.org/issues/nuclear-weapons/status-world-nuclear-forces/|archive-date=24 January 2018|access-date=24 January 2018}} and in November 2014 it was projected that by 2020 Pakistan would have enough fissile material for 200 warheads.{{cite news| url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/pakistan/Pakistan-to-have-200-nuclear-weapons-by-2020-US-think-tank/articleshow/45250170.cms| title=Pakistan to Have 200 Nuke Weapons by 2020: US Think Tank | newspaper=The Times of india| date=November 2014| access-date=28 November 2014| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141127141607/http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/pakistan/Pakistan-to-have-200-nuclear-weapons-by-2020-US-think-tank/articleshow/45250170.cms| archive-date=27 November 2014| url-status=live}} As of 2024, SIPRI estimated that Pakistan had a stockpile of around 170 warheads.

On 27 April 2025, in a fiery response to India's declared suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty in retaliation for the 2025 Pahalgam attack,{{cn|date=May 2025}} Hanif Abbasi, the Pakistani minister of railways warned that any attempt to cut off Pakistan's water supply could lead to full scale war and stated Pakistan's nuclear stockpile of 130 warheads was aimed towards India.{{Cite web |date=2025-04-27 |title=‘Our nukes and missiles aren’t for show, they’re for India,’ says Pakistan Minister |url=https://www.financialexpress.com/world-news/our-nukes-and-missiles-arent-for-show-theyre-for-india-says-pak-minister/3824125/ |access-date=2025-05-01 |website=Financialexpress |language=en}}{{Cite news |date=2025-04-28 |title=Pakistan minister's nuclear attack threat at India while his people panic over Pahalgam revenge |url=https://www.hindustantimes.com/videos/pakistan-ministers-nuclear-attack-threat-at-india-while-his-people-panic-over-pahalgam-revenge-101745828002417.html |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20250430042417/https://www.hindustantimes.com/videos/pakistan-ministers-nuclear-attack-threat-at-india-while-his-people-panic-over-pahalgam-revenge-101745828002417.html |archive-date=2025-04-30 |access-date=2025-05-01 |work=Hindustan Times |language=en-us}}{{Cite web |last=Nova |first=Redazione Agenzia |date=2025-04-27 |title=Pakistan Railway Minister Threatens India: 'We Have 130 Nuclear Warheads For You' |url=https://www.agenzianova.com/en/news/Pakistan-Railway-Minister-Threatens-India-We-Have-130-Nuclear-Warheads-For-You/ |access-date=2025-05-01 |website=Agenzia Nova |language=en}}

{{Main|North Korea and weapons of mass destruction}}

North Korea was a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, but announced a withdrawal on 10 January 2003, after the United States accused it of having a secret uranium enrichment program and cut off energy assistance under the 1994 Agreed Framework. In February 2005, North Korea claimed to possess functional nuclear weapons, though their lack of a test at the time led many experts to doubt the claim. In October 2006, North Korea stated that, in response to growing intimidation by the United States, it would conduct a nuclear test to confirm its nuclear status. North Korea reported a successful nuclear test on 9 October 2006 (see 2006 North Korean nuclear test). Most US intelligence officials believed that the test was probably only partially successful with a yield of less than a kiloton.{{cite news|first1=Rick|last1=Gladstone|first2=Rogene|last2=Jacquette|accessdate=18 April 2021|title=How the North Korean Nuclear Threat Has Grown|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/17/world/asia/north-korea-nuclear-threat.html|newspaper=The New York Times|date=18 February 2017|issn=0362-4331|via=NYTimes.com}}{{cite news|accessdate=18 April 2021|title=TIMELINE:North Korea: climbdowns and tests|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-korea-north-nuclear-timeline-sb-idUSTRE54O0K020090525|newspaper=Reuters|date=25 May 2009|via=www.reuters.com}} North Korea conducted a second, higher-yield test on 25 May 2009 (see 2009 North Korean nuclear test) and a third test with still-higher yield on 12 February 2013 (see 2013 North Korean nuclear test).

North Korea claimed to have conducted its first hydrogen-bomb test on 5 January 2016, though measurements of seismic disturbances indicate that the detonation was not consistent with a hydrogen bomb.{{cite news|title=North Korea Test Shows Technical Advance|newspaper=The Wall Street Journal|date=7 January 2016|volume=CCLXVII|issue=5|page=A6}} On 3 September 2017, North Korea detonated a device, which caused a magnitude 6.1 tremor, consistent with a low-powered thermonuclear detonation; NORSAR estimates the yield at 250 kilotons{{cite web|url = https://www.norsar.no/press/latest-press-release/archive/the-nuclear-explosion-in-north-korea-on-3-september-2017-a-revised-magnitude-assessment-article1548-984.html|title=The nuclear explosion in North Korea on 3 September 2017: A revised magnitude assessment |website=NORSAR.no|access-date=15 September 2017|archive-url = https://archive.today/20170913180851/https://www.norsar.no/press/latest-press-release/archive/the-nuclear-explosion-in-north-korea-on-3-september-2017-a-revised-magnitude-assessment-article1548-984.html|archive-date=13 September 2017|url-status=live}} of TNT. In 2018, North Korea announced a halt in nuclear weapons tests and made a conditional commitment to denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula;{{cite news|title=North Korea has Begun Dismantlement of the Punggye-ri Nuclear Test Site'|url= https://www.38north.org/2018/05/punggye051418/|work=38north.org|access-date=3 August 2018|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20180803213550/https://www.38north.org/2018/05/punggye051418/|archive-date=3 August 2018|url-status=live}}{{cite news|title='Destruction at North Korea's Nuclear Test Site: A Review in Photos'|url = https://www.38north.org/2018/05/punggye052518/|website=38north.org|access-date=3 August 2018|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20180814103301/https://www.38north.org/2018/05/punggye052518/|archive-date=14 August 2018|url-status=live}} however, in December 2019, it indicated it no longer considered itself bound by the moratorium.{{Cite news|last=Sang-Hun|first=Choe|date=31 December 2019|title=North Korea Is No Longer Bound by Nuclear Test Moratorium, Kim Says|language=en-US|work=The New York Times|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/31/world/asia/north-korea-kim-speech.html|access-date=18 June 2020|issn=0362-4331}}

Kim Jong Un officially declared North Korea a nuclear weapons state during a speech on 9 September 2022, the country's foundation day.{{Cite web|date=9 September 2022|title=North Korea declares itself a nuclear weapons state, in 'irreversible' move|url=https://edition.cnn.com/2022/09/09/asia/north-korea-kim-nuclear-weapons-state-law-intl-hnk/index.html|access-date=9 September 2022|website=CNN}}

According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), North Korea's military nuclear programme remains central to its national security strategy and it may have assembled up to 30 nuclear weapons and could produce more. North Korea conducted more than 90 ballistic missile tests during 2022, the highest number it has ever undertaken in a single year.

{{Main|Nuclear weapons and Israel|Israel and weapons of mass destruction|Samson Option}}

Israel is generally understood to have been the sixth country to develop nuclear weapons, but does not acknowledge it. It had "rudimentary, but deliverable," nuclear weapons available as early as 1966.{{Citation| title = Israel and the Bomb| place = New York| publisher = Columbia University Press| last = Cohen| first = Avner| year = 1998| isbn = 978-0-231-10482-1| url = https://archive.org/details/israelbomb00cohe|page=1}}{{cite web| first = Mohamed| last = ElBaradei| url = http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Transcripts/2004/alahram27072004.html| title = Transcript of the Director General's Interview with Al-Ahram News| author-link = Mohamed ElBaradei| publisher = International Atomic Energy Agency| date = 27 July 2004| access-date = 3 June 2007| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20120418221656/http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/transcripts/2004/alahram27072004.html| archive-date = 18 April 2012| url-status=live}}{{cite web| access-date = 23 June 2009| work = Israel| title = Nuclear Overview| format = profile| publisher = NTI| url = http://www.nti.org/e_research/profiles/Israel/Nuclear/| url-status=dead| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20090102210432/http://www.nti.org/e_research/profiles/Israel/Nuclear/| archive-date = 2 January 2009}}My Promised Land, by Ari Shavit, (London 2014), page 188{{cite web|title=Israel's Quest for Yellowcake: The Secret Argentina-Israel Connection, 1963–1966|author=Nuclear Proliferation International History Project|url=http://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/israels-quest-for-yellowcake-the-secret-argentina-israel-connection-1963-1966|publisher=Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars|date=28 June 2013|access-date=22 November 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170814114619/https://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/israels-quest-for-yellowcake-the-secret-argentina-israel-connection-1963-1966|archive-date=14 August 2017|url-status=live}}{{cite web|url=https://fas.org/nuke/guide/israel/nuke/index.html|title=Nuclear Weapons|website=fas.org|access-date=7 November 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101207122117/http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/israel/nuke/index.html|archive-date=7 December 2010|url-status=live}}[http://www.nti.org/e_research/profiles/Israel/Nuclear/index.html NTI Israel Profile] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110728090642/http://www.nti.org/e_research/profiles/Israel/Nuclear/index.html|date=28 July 2011}} Retrieved 12 July 2007.{{excessive citations inline|date=August 2024}} Israel is not a party to the NPT. Israel engages in strategic ambiguity, saying it would not be the first country to "introduce" nuclear weapons to the Middle East without confirming or denying that it has a nuclear weapons program or arsenal. This policy of "nuclear opacity" has been interpreted as an attempt to get the benefits of deterrence with a minimal political cost. As of 2006, some analysts believe that, due to a US ban on funding countries that proliferate weapons of mass destruction, Israel could lose around $2 billion a year in military and other aid from the US if it admitted to possessing nuclear weapons.

According to the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Federation of American Scientists, Israel likely possesses around 80–400 nuclear weapons.There are a wide range of estimates as to the size of the Israeli nuclear arsenal. For a compiled list of estimates, see Avner Cohen, The Worst-Kept Secret: Israel's bargain with the Bomb (Columbia University Press, 2010), Table 1, page xxvii and page 82. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates that Israel has approximately 90 intact nuclear weapons, of which 50 are thought to be assigned for delivery by land-based Jericho ballistic missiles and 30 are gravity bombs for delivery by F-16I or F-15 aircraft. SIPRI also reports that Israel operates five German-built Dolphin-class (Dolphin-I and Dolphin-II) diesel–electric submarines. The submarines are based at Haifa on the Mediterranean coast. There are unconfirmed reports that all or some of the submarines have been equipped to launch an indigenously produced nuclear-armed sea-launched variant of the Popeye cruise missile, giving Israel a sea-based nuclear strike capability.{{cite book |last1=Kristensen |first1=Hans M. |last2=Korda |first2=Matt |title=SIPRI Yearbook 2024 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=9780198930570}}

On 7 November 2023, during the Gaza war, Heritage Minister Amihai Eliyahu said during a radio interview that a nuclear strike would be "one way" to deal with Gaza, which commentators and diplomats interpreted as a tacit admission that Israel possesses such a capability. His remarks were criticized by the United States and Russia, and Eliyahu was subsequently suspended from the Israeli cabinet.{{cite web|title=Israel's nuclear option remark raises 'huge number of questions': Russia's foreign ministry says Israel appeared to have admitted that it has nuclear weapons and is willing to use them.|url=https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/11/7/israels-nuclear-option-remark-raises-huge-number-of-questions-russia#:~:text=Moscow's%20reaction%20came%20on%20Tuesday,is%20also%20willing%20to%20use|website=Al Jazeera|publisher=Al Jazeera America|access-date=17 Nov 2023}}

The decision to use nuclear weapons is always restricted to a single person or small group of people. The United States and France require their respective presidents to approve the use of nuclear weapons. In the US, the Presidential Emergency Satchel is always handled by a nearby aide unless the President is near a command center. The decision rests with the Prime Minister in the United Kingdom. Information from China is unclear, but "the launch of nuclear weapons is commonly believed to rest with the Central Military Commission of the Chinese Communist Party."{{Citation needed|date=October 2024|reason=Where is this quote from? This seems like original research}} Russia grants such power to the President but may also require approval from the Minister of Defence and the Chief of the General Staff. The Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces has authority in North Korea. India, Pakistan and Israel have committees for such a decision.{{cite web|publisher=Union of Concerned Scientists|url=https://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/attach/2017/11/Launch-Authority.pdf|title=Whose Finger Is On the Button?|date=December 2017|access-date=21 February 2021}}

Some countries are known to have delegated launch authority to military personnel in the event that the usual launch authority is incapacitated; whether or not the 'pre-delegated' authority exists at any particular time is kept secret.{{Cite web|last1=Feaver|first1=Peter|last2=Geers|first2=Kenneth|date=October 16, 2017|title="When the Urgency of Time and Circumstances Clearly Does Not Permit . . .": Pre-delegation in Nuclear and Cyber Scenarios|url=https://carnegieendowment.org/2017/10/16/when-urgency-of-time-and-circumstances-clearly-does-not-permit-.-.-.-pre-delegation-in-nuclear-and-cyber-scenarios-pub-73417|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171027063146/http://carnegieendowment.org/2017/10/16/when-urgency-of-time-and-circumstances-clearly-does-not-permit-.-.-.-pre-delegation-in-nuclear-and-cyber-scenarios-pub-73417|url-status=dead|archive-date=27 October 2017|website=Carnegie Endowment}} In the United States, some military commanders have been delegated authority to launch nuclear weapons "when the urgency of time and circumstances clearly does not permit a specific decision by the President."{{Cite news |date=2024-01-08 |title=MILITARY GOT AUTHORITY TO USE NUCLEAR ARMS IN 1957 |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1998/03/21/military-got-authority-to-use-nuclear-arms-in-1957/a71f519b-616a-4e75-86d3-424b2d882a4b/ |access-date=2024-10-03 |newspaper=Washington Post |language=en-US |issn=0190-8286}} Russia has a semi automated Dead Hand system which may allow military commanders to act based on certain pre-defined criteria. British nuclear-armed submarine commanders are issued with "letters of last resort" written by the Prime Minister containing secret instructions which may or may not give them delegated launch authority.{{Cite news|last=Taylor|first=Adam|date=July 13, 2016|title=Every new British prime minister pens a handwritten 'letter of last resort' outlining nuclear retaliation|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/07/13/every-new-british-prime-minister-pens-a-hand-written-letter-of-last-resort-outlining-nuclear-retaliaton/|newspaper=Washington Post}}

{{Main|Nuclear sharing}}

{{see also|Germany and weapons of mass destruction|Italian nuclear weapons program|Netherlands and weapons of mass destruction}}

Under NATO nuclear weapons sharing, the United States has provided nuclear weapons for Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Turkey to deploy and store.{{cite web|url=http://www.bits.de/public/researchnote/rn97-3.htm|title=Berlin Information-center for Transatlantic Security: NATO Nuclear Sharing and the N.PT – Questions to be Answered|publisher=Bits.de|access-date=15 May 2009|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090519054302/http://www.bits.de/public/researchnote/rn97-3.htm|archive-date=19 May 2009|url-status=live}} This involves pilots and other staff of the "non-nuclear" NATO states practicing, handling, and delivering the US nuclear bombs, and adapting non-US warplanes to deliver US nuclear bombs. However, since all US nuclear weapons are protected with Permissive Action Links, the host states cannot easily arm the bombs without authorization codes from the US Department of Defense.{{cite book|chapter-url=http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/Papers/SE-11.pdf|title=Security Engineering: A Guide to Building Dependable Distributed Systems|chapter=Nuclear Command and Control|publisher=Ross Anderson, University of Cambridge Computing Laboratory|access-date=29 April 2010}} Former Italian President Francesco Cossiga acknowledged the presence of US nuclear weapons in Italy.{{cite web|url=http://notizie.tiscali.it/articoli/politica/08/22/cossiga_atomica_in_italia_123.html|title=Cossiga: "In Italia ci sono bombe atomiche Usa"|access-date=16 September 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150928225725/http://notizie.tiscali.it/articoli/politica/08/22/cossiga_atomica_in_italia_123.html|archive-date=28 September 2015|url-status=live}} US nuclear weapons were also deployed in Canada as well as Greece from 1963. However, the United States withdrew three of the four nuclear-capable weapons systems from Canada by 1972, the fourth by 1984, and all nuclear-capable weapons systems from Greece by 2001.[https://www.institutmontaigne.org/en/expressions/weapons-mass-debate-greece-key-security-player-both-europe-and-nato Weapons of Mass Debate - Greece: a Key Security Player for both Europe and NATO], Institut Montaigne, 7 December 2001]{{Cite report|title=U.S. Nuclear Weapons in Europe|url=http://www.nrdc.org/nuclear/euro/euro.pdf|author=Hans M. Kristensen|date=February 2005|publisher=Natural Resources Defense Council|access-date=23 May 2006|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140723003003/http://www.nrdc.org/nuclear/euro/euro.pdf|archive-date=23 July 2014|url-status=live}} {{As of|April 2019}}, the United States maintained around 100 nuclear weapons in Europe, as reflected in the accompanying table.

{{As of|since=y|June 2023}},{{cite web|last1=Kristensen|first1=Hans|last2=Korda|first2=Matt|title=Russian Nuclear Weapons Deployment Plans in Belarus: Is There Visual Confirmation?|url=https://fas.org/publication/russian-nuclear-weapons-deployment-plans-in-belarus-is-there-visual-confirmation/|website=Federation of American Scientists|access-date=17 July 2023|date=30 June 2023}} the leaders of Russia and Belarus have claimed that a "number of"{{cite web|last1=Faulconbridge|first1=Guy|title=Lukashenko: I have veto over use of Russian nuclear weapons in Belarus|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/lukashenko-i-have-veto-over-use-russian-nuclear-weapons-belarus-2023-07-06/|website=Reuters|access-date=17 July 2023|date=6 July 2023}} nuclear weapons are located on Belarusian territory while remaining in Russian possession. Sources hostile to these countries have confirmed that nuclear warheads have been delivered to Belarus, but claim that the first transfers were instead made in August 2023.{{cite web|last1=Borysenko|first1=Ivan|title=Russia delivers first nuclear warheads to Belarus - Budanov|url=https://english.nv.ua/nation/russia-delivers-first-nuclear-warheads-to-belarus-ukraine-war-news-50350466.html|website=The New Voice of Ukraine|publisher=NV|access-date=10 September 2023}} Russia's stated intention is to provide Belarus with two delivery systems: dual-capable Iskander-M missile systems and necessary training and modifications for Belarusian Su-25 aircraft to carry nuclear weapons.{{cite web|title=Russian Foreign Ministry Announces Conversion of Belarusian Su-25 Aircraft to Carry Nuclear Weapons|url=https://www.eurointegration.com.ua/eng/news/2022/10/15/7148746/|website=eurointegration.com|publisher=European Pravada|access-date=17 October 2022}}

The deployment of Russian weapons to Belarus was framed by Russian President Vladimir Putin as being equivalent to the deployments of American nuclear weapons to NATO Allies in Europe under international law.

Members of the Non-Aligned Movement have called on all countries to "refrain from nuclear sharing for military purposes under any kind of security arrangements."[https://web.archive.org/web/20050508053154/http://www.un.org/events/npt2005/statements/npt02malaysia.pdf Statement on behalf of the non-aligned state parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons], 2 May 2005 The Institute of Strategic Studies Islamabad (ISSI) has criticized the arrangement for allegedly violating Articles I and II of the NPT, arguing that "these Articles do not permit the NWS to delegate the control of their nuclear weapons directly or indirectly to others."[http://www.issi.org.pk/journal/2000_files/no_4/article/6a.htm ISSI – NPT in 2000: Challenges ahead], Zafar Nawaz Jaspal, The Institute of Strategic Studies, Islamabad {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090109082520/http://www.issi.org.pk/journal/2000_files/no_4/article/6a.htm|date=9 January 2009}} NATO has argued that the weapons' sharing is compliant with the NPT because "the US nuclear weapons based in Europe are in the sole possession and under constant and complete custody and control of the United States."{{cite web|url=http://www.nato.int/nato_static/assets/pdf/pdf_topics/20091022_NATO_Position_on_nuclear_nonproliferation-eng.pdf|title=NATO's Positions Regarding Nuclear Non-Proliferation, Arms Control and Disarmament and Related Issues|publisher=NATO|access-date=8 September 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130911033954/http://www.nato.int/nato_static/assets/pdf/pdf_topics/20091022_NATO_Position_on_nuclear_nonproliferation-eng.pdf|archive-date=11 September 2013|url-status=live}}

Nuclear weapons have been present in many nations, often as staging grounds under control of other powers. However, in only one instance has a nation given up nuclear weapons after being in full control of them. The fall of the Soviet Union left several former Soviet republics in physical possession of nuclear weapons, although not operational control which was dependent on Russian-controlled electronic Permissive Action Links and the Russian command and control system.{{cite book|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=MNanc3lYUsQC|chapter=Why Ukraine gave up nuclear weapons : nonproliferation incentives and disincentives|author=William C. Martel|pages=88–104|title=Pulling Back from the Nuclear Brink: Reducing and Countering Nuclear Threats|editor=Barry R. Schneider, William L. Dowdy|publisher=Psychology Press|year=1998|isbn=9780714648569|access-date=6 August 2014}}{{cite journal|url=http://cns.miis.edu/npr/pdfs/pikaye13.pdf|title=Post-Soviet Russia and Ukraine: Who can push the Button?|author=Alexander A. Pikayev|journal=The Nonproliferation Review|volume=1|issue=3|pages=31–46|date=Spring–Summer 1994|doi=10.1080/10736709408436550|access-date=6 August 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140521083227/http://cns.miis.edu/npr/pdfs/pikaye13.pdf|archive-date=21 May 2014|url-status=live | issn=1073-6700 }} Of these, Kazakhstan and Ukraine continue to have neither their own nuclear weapons nor another state's nuclear weapons stationed in their territory whereas Belarus does again claim to have Russian-owned nuclear weapons stationed on its territory since 2023.

{{Main|South Africa and weapons of mass destruction|Nuclear programme of South Africa}}

File:South African nuclear bomb casings.jpg

South Africa produced six nuclear weapons in the 1980s, but dismantled them in the early 1990s.

In 1979, there was a detection of a putative covert nuclear test in the Indian Ocean, called the Vela incident. It has long been speculated that it was a test by Israel, in collaboration with and with the support of South Africa, though this has never been confirmed. South Africa could not have constructed such a nuclear bomb by itself until November 1979, two months after the "double flash" incident.{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/may/23/israel-south-africa-nuclear-weapons|title=Revealed: how Israel offered to sell South Africa nuclear weapons|last=McGreal|first=Chris|location=Washington, D.C.|date=24 May 2010|work=The Guardian|access-date=6 February 2022}}

South Africa acceded to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in 1991.[https://fas.org/nuke/guide/rsa/nuke/index.html Nuclear Weapons Program (South Africa)] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151016020250/https://fas.org/nuke/guide/rsa/nuke/index.html|date=16 October 2015}}, Federation of American Scientists (29 May 2000).Von Wielligh, N. & von Wielligh-Steyn, L. (2015). The Bomb – South Africa's Nuclear Weapons Programme. Pretoria: Litera.

{{See also|Kazakhstan and weapons of mass destruction}}

{{See also|Ukraine and weapons of mass destruction}}

• Kazakhstan had 1,400 Soviet-era nuclear weapons on its territory and transferred them all to Russia by 1995, after Kazakhstan acceded to the NPT.{{cite web|url=https://fas.org/nuke/guide/kazakhstan/index.html|title=Kazakhstan Special Weapons|publisher=Federation of American Scientists|access-date=7 November 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151117015936/https://fas.org/nuke/guide/kazakhstan/index.html|archive-date=17 November 2015|url-status=live}}
• Ukraine had an estimated 1,700 nuclear weapons deployed on its territory when it became independent from the Soviet Union in 1991, equivalent to the third-largest nuclear arsenal in the world.{{cite news|last=Chiu|first=Leo|date=2023-12-10|title=Day in History: Ukraine Gave Up Its Soviet Nuclear Arsenal for Unfulfilled Guarantees|url=https://www.kyivpost.com/post/25148|newspaper=Kyiv Post|access-date=March 27, 2025}} At the time Ukraine acceded to the NPT in December 1994, Ukraine had agreed to dispose of all nuclear weapons within its territory. The warheads were removed from Ukraine by 1996 and disassembled in Russia.{{cite web|url=https://fas.org/nuke/guide/ukraine/|title=Ukraine Special Weapons|publisher=Federation of American Scientists|access-date=7 November 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151016045730/https://fas.org/nuke/guide/ukraine/|archive-date=16 October 2015|url-status=live}} Despite Russia's subsequent and internationally disputed annexation of Crimea in 2014, Ukraine reaffirmed its 1994 decision to accede to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty as a non-nuclear-weapon state.[https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2014/03/25/joint-statement-united-states-and-ukraine Joint Statement by the United States and Ukraine] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170216154310/https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2014/03/25/joint-statement-united-states-and-ukraine|date=16 February 2017}}, 25 March 2014.
• Belarus, which since 2023 has resumed hosting Russian nuclear weapons, also had single warhead missiles stationed on its territory into the 1990s while a constituent of the Soviet Union. When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, 81 single warhead missiles were stationed on newly Belarusian territory, but were all transferred to Russia by 1996. Belarus was a member of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) from May 1992{{cite web|url=https://fas.org/nuke/guide/belarus/index.html|title=Belarus Special Weapons|publisher=Federation of American Scientists|access-date=7 November 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151117022903/https://fas.org/nuke/guide/belarus/index.html|archive-date=17 November 2015|url-status=live}} through February 2022, when it held a constitutional referendum resulting in the cessation of its non-nuclear status.{{Cite web|title=Belarus votes to give up non-nuclear status|url=https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/2/27/belarus-holds-referendum-to-renounce-non-nuclear-status|access-date=2022-03-01|website=www.aljazeera.com|language=en}}

In connection with their accession to the NPT, all three countries received assurances that their sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity would be respected, as stated in the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances. These assurances have been flouted by Russia since the Russo-Ukrainian War began in 2014, during which Russia claimed to annex Crimea, occupied Eastern Ukraine, and in 2022, launched a full-scale invasion, with limited responses by the other signatories.{{Cite web|last=Borda|first=Aldo Zammit|title=Ukraine war: what is the Budapest Memorandum and why has Russia's invasion torn it up?|url=http://theconversation.com/ukraine-war-what-is-the-budapest-memorandum-and-why-has-russias-invasion-torn-it-up-178184|access-date=2022-05-05|website=The Conversation|date=2 March 2022|language=en}}{{Cite web|last=Pifer|first=Steven|date=2014-04-12|title=The Budapest Memorandum and U.S. Obligations|url=https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2014/12/04/the-budapest-memorandum-and-u-s-obligations/|access-date=2022-05-05|publisher=Brookings Institution|language=en-US}}{{Cite web|title=Ukraine's forgotten security guarantee: The Budapest Memorandum|url=https://www.dw.com/en/ukraines-forgotten-security-guarantee-the-budapest-memorandum/a-18111097|access-date=2022-05-05|publisher=Deutsche Welle|date=12 May 2014|language=en-GB}}

Up until the 1990s the US had stationed nuclear weapons outside of its territories and sharing countries.{{cite web|author=Hans M. Kristensen| title=The Withdrawal of U.S. Nuclear Weapons From South Korea|date=September 28, 2005|publisher=Federation of American Scientists|url=http://www.nukestrat.com/korea/withdrawal.htm|accessdate=2017-09-24| author-link=Hans M. Kristensen}}

{{Main|South Korea and weapons of mass destruction}}

{{Main|Philippines and weapons of mass destruction}}

During the Cold War, specifically during the presidency of Ferdinand Marcos from 1965 to 1986, American nuclear warheads were secretly stockpiled in the Philippines.{{Citation |title=US stored nukes in Philippines under Marcos–Bayan |date=2024-04-15 |url=https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/58985/us-stored-nukes-in-philippines-under-marcos%E2%80%93bayan#:~:text=Citing%20a%20declassified%20%E2%80%9CTop%20Secret,%E2%80%94as%20early%20as%201966.%E2%80%9D }}{{cite web|url=https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB197/nd-17c.pdf|title=Presidential Decision on Categories of Information for Symington Subcommittee to be protected by executive privilege|access-date=2024-04-15}}

{{Main|Taiwan and weapons of mass destruction|Timeline of the Republic of China's nuclear program}}

Taiwan was developing capacities to construct nuclear weapons up until 1988.{{cite book |isbn=978-1-72733-733-4 |publication-place=Washington, D.C. |publisher=Institute for Science and International Security |lccn=2018910946 |first1=David |last1=Albright |first2=Andrea |last2=Stricker |title=Taiwans's Former Nuclear Weapons Program: Nuclear Weapons On-Demand |year=2018 |access-date=13 August 2024 |url=https://isis-online.org/uploads/isis-reports/documents/TaiwansFormerNuclearWeaponsProgram_POD_color_withCover.pdf |archive-date=16 January 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220116043944/https://isis-online.org/uploads/isis-reports/documents/TaiwansFormerNuclearWeaponsProgram_POD_color_withCover.pdf }}"ROC Chief of the General Staff, General Hau Pei-tsun, met the director of American Institute in Taiwan, David Dean in his office after Colonel Chang's defection in 1988. Dean questioned him with the US satellite imagery detecting a minimized nuclear explosion at the Jioupeng military test field in Pingtung in 1986. Hao answered that, after nearly 20 years of research, ROC had successfully produced a controlled nuclear reaction. Hau recorded the statement in his diary and published on the Issue 1 (2000), but was removed from the later re-issues." {{cite book|last=Hau|first=Pei-tsun|title=Ba nian can mou zong zhang ri ji|trans-title=8-year Diary of the Chief of the General Staff (1981–1989) |url=https://openlibrary.org/books/OL13062852M/Ba_nian_can_mou_zong_zhang_ri_ji_(She_hui_ren_wen)#about/about |publisher=Commonwealth Publishing |date=1 January 2000 |issue=1|isbn=9576216389 |language=zh-TW |location=Taipei|ol=13062852M }} Before 1974, the United States stationed some of its arsenal in Taiwan.{{cite news |work=National Security Archive |series=National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book |issue=20 |first1=Robert S. |last1=Norris |first2=William M. |last2=Arkin |first3=William |last3=Burr |title=United States Secretly Deployed Nuclear Bombs In 27 Countries and Territories During Cold War |date=20 October 1999 |publication-place=Washington, D.C. |url=https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/news/19991020 |archive-date=7 February 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210207142738/https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/news/19991020 }}

{{Main|United States nuclear weapons in Japan}}

After World War II the US had nuclear weapons stationed in Japan until the 1970s.

{{main|Canada and weapons of mass destruction}}

The US stationed nuclear weapons at CFB Goose Bay in Labrador between 1964 and 1984.{{cite encyclopedia|url=https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/canada-and-nuclear-weapons#:~:text=Canada%20helped%20develop%20nuclear%20weapons,nor%20tested%20a%20nuclear%20weapon|title=Canada and Nuclear Weapons|encyclopedia=The Canadian Encyclopedia|last=Noakes|first=Taylor C.|access-date=17 January 2024}}

The US stationed nuclear weapons in Greece until they were removed in 2001.{{Cite web|title=Greece|url=https://www.icanw.org/greece|access-date=2024-06-10|website=ICAN|language=en}}

{{cols|colwidth=21em}}

• Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty
• Doomsday Clock
• Historical nuclear weapons stockpiles and nuclear tests by country
• International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons
• No first use
• Nuclear disarmament
• Nuclear latency
• Nuclear power
• Nuclear program of Iran
• Nuclear proliferation
• Nuclear terrorism
• Nuclear warfare
• Nuclear-weapon-free zone

{{colend}}

{{notelist}}

{{reflist}}

{{Refbegin}}

• {{cite book| title=The Military Balance 2012| author=International Institute for Strategic Studies|author-link=International Institute for Strategic Studies| editor-last=Hackett|editor-first = James| date=7 March 2012| publisher=Routledge|location= London, England| isbn=978-1857436426| ref=IISS2012}}
• {{Citation| title = The Third Temple's holy of holies: Israel's nuclear weapons| first = Warner D.| last = Farr| series = The Counterproliferation Papers, Future Warfare Series| volume = 2| publisher = USAF Counterproliferation Center, Air War College, Air University, Maxwell Air Force Base| url = https://fas.org/nuke/guide/israel/nuke/farr.htm|date=September 1999| access-date = 2 July 2006}}.
• [https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/when-did-and-didnt-states-proliferate Philipp C. Bleek, “When Did (and Didn’t) States Proliferate? Chronicling the Spread of Nuclear Weapons,” Discussion Paper (Cambridge, MA: Project on Managing the Atom, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, June 2017).]

{{Refend}}

• [http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/ The Nuclear Weapon Archive]
• [https://web.archive.org/web/20080920020429/http://thebulletin.metapress.com/content/0096-3402/?sortorder=asc&Article%20Category=Nuclear%20Notebook Nuclear Notebook] from Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
• [http://www.nrdc.org/nuclear/euro/contents.asp U.S. Nuclear Weapons in Europe: A review of post-Cold War policy, force levels, and war planning] NRDC, February 2005
• [https://web.archive.org/web/20071208135127/http://www.pbs.org/newshour/indepth_coverage/military/proliferation/ Tracking Nuclear Proliferation] Online NewsHour with Jim Lehrer
• Stockholm International Peace Research Institute's data on world nuclear forces
• [https://www.wilsoncenter.org/nuclear-history-documents Nuclear Proliferation International History Project] For more on the history of nuclear proliferation see the Woodrow Wilson Center's Nuclear Proliferation International History Project website.
• [https://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/proliferation-watch-us-intelligence-assessments-potential-nuclear-powers-1977-2001 Proliferation Watch: US Intelligence Assessments of Potential Nuclear Powers, 1977–2001]

{{Clear}}

{{Military country lists}}

{{Nuclear Technology}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:States With Nuclear Weapons}}

*

Category:Cold War

Nuclear weapons

Category:Nuclear weapons policy

Category:Nuclear proliferation

Category:Nuclear technology-related lists