The global discourse about nuclear weapons tends to focus on broad cross-regional groups: nuclear-weapon states, non-nuclear-weapon states, the non-aligned movement, U.S. allies. These groupings often obscure more than they reveal about the views and policies of the states that comprise them, particularly at a regional level. What security threats do states in different regions perceive to be most important? What implications do – and, as importantly, should – differences in security perception have for policy on disarmament and nonproliferation, including the proposed nuclear weapon ban and on extended nuclear deterrence? To what extent can risk reduction measures developed in one regional context, such as nuclear weapon free zones or conventional arms control arrangements, be applied to others?


Joan Rohlfing, Nuclear Threat Initiative


Rafael Grossi, ambassador of the Argentine Republic and permanent representative to international organizations in Vienna
Henk cor van der Kwast, ambassador of the Netherlands to the Conference on Disarmament
Richard Sadleir, first assistant secretary in the International Security Division, Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade

Due to technical issues, audio is not available for this panel. We apologize for the inconvenience. 

Polling Question

Did the failure to agree on a consensus final document at the 2015 Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty Review Conference have a material effect on the long-term sustainability of the nonproliferation regime?

Number of respondents: 158

This poll was taken during the conference but was not specifically linked to this session.