Nuclear Weapons: Who Has What at a Glance | Arms Control Association Nuclear Weapons: Who Has What at a Glance Latest ACA Resources The P5+1 And Iran Nuclear Deal Alert, January 17 (January 17, 2017) Contact: Kelsey Davenport , Director for Nonproliferation Policy, (202) 463-8270 x102; Kingston Reif , Director for Disarmament and Threat Reduction Policy, (202) 463-8270 x104 Updated: October 2016 At the dawn of the nuclear age, the United States hoped to maintain a monopoly on its new weapon, but the secrets and the technology for making nuclear weapons soon spread. The United States conducted its first nuclear test explosion in July 1945 and dropped two atomic bombs on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945. Just four years later, the Soviet Union conducted its first nuclear test explosion. The United Kingdom (1952), France (1960), and China (1964) followed.

Seeking to prevent the nuclear weapon ranks from expanding further, the United States and other like-minded states negotiated the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1968 and the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) in 1996. India, Israel, and Pakistan never signed the NPT and possess nuclear arsenals. Iraq initiated a secret nuclear program under Saddam Hussein before the 1991 Persian Gulf War. North Korea announced its withdrawal from the NPT in January 2003 and has tested nuclear devices since that time. Iran and Libya have pursued secret nuclear activities in violation of the treaty’s terms, and Syria is suspected of having done the same. Still, nuclear nonproliferation successes outnumber failures and dire forecasts decades ago that the world would be home to dozens of states armed with nuclear weapons have not come to pass. At the time the NPT was concluded, the nuclear stockpiles of both the United States and the Soviet Union/Russia numbered in the tens of thousands. Beginning in the 1970s, U.S.

and Soviet/Russian leaders negotiated a series of bilateral arms control agreements and initiatives that limited, and later helped to reduce, the size of their nuclear arsenals. Today, the United States and Russia each deploy more than 1,500 strategic warheads on several hundred bombers and missiles, and are modernizing their nuclear delivery systems. China, India, and Pakistan are all pursuing new ballistic missile, cruise missile, and sea-based nuclear delivery systems. In addition, Pakistan has lowered the threshold for nuclear weapons use by developing tactical nuclear weapons capabilities to counter perceived Indian conventional military threats. North Korea continues its nuclear pursuits in violation of its earlier denuclearization pledges. Nuclear-Weapon States: The nuclear-weapon states (NWS) are the five states—China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, and the United States—officially recognized as possessing nuclear weapons by the NPT. The treaty legitimizes these states’ nuclear arsenals, but establishes they are not supposed to build and maintain such weapons in perpetuity.

In 2000, the NWS committed themselves to an “unequivocal undertaking…to accomplish the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals.” Because of the secretive nature with which most governments treat information about their nuclear arsenals, most of the figures below are best estimates of each nuclear-weapon state’s nuclear holdings, including both strategic warheads and lower-yield devices referred to as tactical weapons. September 2016 New START declaration : 1,367 strategic nuclear warheads deployed on 681 ICBMs, SLBMs, and strategic bombers. FAS estimates 2,570 non-deployed strategic warheads and roughly 500 deployed and non-deployed tactical warheads. In May 2016 the Defense Department announced that as of September 30, 2015, the United States possessed 4,571 active and inactive nuclear warheads ]. (Note: This number does not include warheads awaiting dismantlement.) The State Department announced in April 2015 that approximately 2,500 warheads are retired and await dismantlement.

Non-NPT Nuclear Weapons Possessors: India, Israel, and Pakistan never joined the NPT and are known to possess nuclear weapons. India first tested a nuclear explosive device in 1974. That test spurred Pakistan to ramp up work on its secret nuclear weapons program. India and Pakistan both publicly demonstrated their nuclear weapon capabilities with a round of tit-for-tat nuclear tests in May 1998. Israel has not publicly conducted a nuclear test, does not admit or deny having nuclear weapons, and states that it will not be the first to introduce nuclear weapons in the Middle East. Nevertheless, Israel is universally believed to possess nuclear arms, although it is unclear exactly how many. The following arsenal estimates are based on the amount of fissile material—highly enriched uranium and plutonium—that each of the states is estimated to have produced. Fissile material is the key element for making nuclear weapons. India and Israel are believed to use plutonium in their weapons, while Pakistan is thought to use highly enriched uranium. India : Between 100-120 nuclear warheads. Israel : An estimated 80 nuclear warheads, with fissile material for up to 200.

Pakistan : Between 110-130 nuclear warheads. States of Immediate Proliferation Concern: Prior to the implementation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, Iran pursued an uranium-enrichment program and other projects that provided it with the capability to produce bomb-grade fissile material and develop nuclear weapons, if it chose to do so. Iran’s uranium enrichment program continues, but it is restricted and monitored by the nuclear deal. In contrast, North Korea has the material to produce a small number of nuclear weapons, announced its withdrawal from the NPT, and tested nuclear devices. Uncertainty persists about how many additional nuclear devices North Korea has assembled beyond those it has tested. In September 2005, Pyongyang “committed to abandoning all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programs.” Nuclear arsenals | ICAN Nuclear arsenals > NEWSLETTER Nuclear arsenals Nine countries together possess around 15,000 nuclear weapons. The United States and Russia maintain roughly 1,800 of their nuclear weapons on high-alert status – ready to be launched within minutes of a warning. Most are many times more powerful than the atomic bombs dropped on Japan in 1945.

A single nuclear warhead, if detonated on a large city, could kill millions of people, with the effects persisting for decades. The failure of the nuclear powers to disarm has heightened the risk that other countries will acquire nuclear weapons. The only guarantee against the spread and use of nuclear weapons is to eliminate them without delay. Although the leaders of some nuclear-armed nations have expressed their vision for a nuclear-weapon-free world, they have failed to develop any detailed plans to eliminate their arsenals and are modernizing them. How many nuclear weapons are there in the world? COUNTRY SIZE OF ARSENAL United States The first country to develop nuclear weapons and the only country to have used them in war. It spends more on its nuclear arsenal than all other countries combined. 6,800 warheads Russia The second country to develop nuclear weapons. It has the largest arsenal of any country and is investing heavily in the modernization of its warheads and delivery systems. 7,000 warheads United Kingdom It maintains a fleet of four nuclear-armed submarines in Scotland, each carrying 16 Trident missiles. Its parliament voted in 2016 to overhaul its nuclear forces.

215 warheads France Most of its nuclear warheads are deployed on submarines equipped with M45 and M51 missiles. One boat is on patrol at all times. Some warheads are also deliverable by aircraft. 300 warheads China It has a much smaller arsenal than the US and Russia. Its warheads are deliverable by air, land and sea. It appears to be increasing the size of its arsenal at a slow pace. 260 warheads India It developed nuclear weapons in breach of non-proliferation commitments. It is increasing the size of its nuclear arsenal and enhancing its delivery capabilities. 110–120 warheads Pakistan It is making substantial improvements to its nuclear arsenal and associated infrastructure. It has increased the size of its nuclear arsenal in recent years. 120–130 warheads Israel It has a policy of ambiguity in relation to its nuclear arsenal, neither confirming nor denying its existence. As a result, there is little public information or debate about it. 80 warheads North Korea It has a fledgling nuclear weapons programme. Its arsenal probably comprises fewer than 10 warheads. It is not clear whether it has the capability to deliver them.

<10 warheads Hiroshima 70th Anniversary: What to Know About Nuclear Weapons in 2015 - NBC News Aug 6 2015, 7:24 am ET Hiroshima 70th Anniversary: What to Know About Nuclear Weapons in 2015 by Alexander Smith Hiroshima Marks 70th Anniversary of Atomic Bomb With Solemn Ceremony 0:48 autoplay autoplay Copy this code to your website or blog <iframe src="" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> Seventy years after the U.S. dropped the first wartime atomic bomb on Japan, nine nations are estimated to possess a total of around 16,000 nuclear weapons. This potentially world-ending technology was introduced at exactly 8:15 a.m. Japanese time on the morning of August 6, 1945 . A U.S. Air Force B-29 dubbed the Enola Gay flew over the Japanese city of Hiroshima and dropped the bomb code-named "Little Boy." The plume of smoke after the nuclear bomb detonated above Hiroshima. ASSOCIATED PRESS Three days later, the U.S.

dropped an even larger bomb, "Fat Man," over Nagasaki. At least 100,000 people were killed instantly across both cities; Japan's surrender in World War II came within one week. These events precipitated a seven-decade nuclear arms race. Here's where things stand today: How many nuclear weapons are there in the world today? Most analysts agree there are currently close to 16,000 nuclear weapons in existence, 90 percent of which are owned by the U.S. and Russia. This may seem like a lot, but it's far fewer than the peak Cold War stockpile in 1986, when the global arsenal exceeded 60,000, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (Sipri) . That's not to say the world is turning its back on nukes. President Barack Obama optimistically declared in April 2009 that he would lead the way toward "a world without nuclear weapons." But the government is projected to spend $348 billion on its nuclear arsenal over the next 10 years, according to a Congressional Budget Office estimate released in January.

The mushroom cloud of the first test of a hydrogen bomb known as "Ivy Mike" as photographed from the Pacific Ocean atoll of Enewetak in 1952. U.S. Air Force via Reuters, file Although the raw numbers are decreasing, this continued investment has built bombs many times more powerful than those used in 1945. "It's generally believed that the warheads used on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were 15 kilotons," said Tariq Rauf, director of Sipri's Disarmament, Arms Control and Non-Proliferation Program. "The smallest weapon in the arsenal of the U.S. and Russia today is 100 kilotons." Rauf added: "The dangers of the Cold War are still with us. The total numbers have gone down, but the number of warheads that could reach their target in 20 minutes has not changed so much." Who else has nuclear weapons besides the U.S. and Russia? Nine nations are known or widely believed to possess nuclear weapons: the U.S., Russia, China, the U.K., France, India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea.

American allies Britain and France have decreased their stockpiles to just a few hundred each. And the U.K. is among a handful of nations — including Germany, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey — that allow the U.S. to keep atomic bombs at bases on their soil. Rivals India and Pakistan have been involved in four wars and countless border scuffles since their partition in 1947. They have around 100 nuclear weapons each, according to Sipri. One of Russia's largest Soviet-built nuclear submarines, the Typhoon (Akula) class, heaves ahead in the Barents Sea at Russia's Arctic Coast in September 2001. Dmitry Lovetsky / AP, file Christopher A. Bidwell, a senior fellow at the Federation of American Scientists , believes that far from escalating their conflict, the acquisition of nukes by these tense neighbors meant that they were no longer able to engage in full-blown warfare. Aware of what an actual war might risk, he said, India and Pakistan now seem reluctant to escalate hostilities beyond the low-level border fighting we see today. Israel has a policy of not commenting on its nukes.

However "it is generally accepted by friend and foe alike" that they have around 80 warheads, according to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists . Experts say North Korea has fewer than 10 warheads. But despite its regular stream of truculent rhetoric on the subject, the reclusive nation has so far failed to successfully develop a long-range method of delivery. Are world powers trying to get rid of their nuclear weapons? In principle, yes. Almost every country on the planet has now signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. This accord, known as the NPT, first came into force in 1970 with the aim of preventing the spread of nuclear weapons around the world. The treaty gave special status to the earliest nations to test nuclear weapons — the U.S., Russia, China, the U.K. and France — meaning they were allowed to keep their bombs while working toward getting rid of them. All the other signatories promised not to build or buy their own weapons. However, India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea have refused to sign the NPT. These countries were relative latecomers to the world of nuclear testing and as such would not enjoy the special status of their nuclear predecessors.

Signing the treaty would in theory mean giving up their stockpiles. Critics of the NPT point to these countries' apparent impunity, as well as the billions of dollars still being spent on existing nuclear programs. Russian RS-24 Yars/SS-27 Mod 2 intercontinental ballistic missiles drive during the Victory Day parade at Red Square in Moscow in May. RIA Novosti via Reuters Others, like Dr. Page Stoutland, at the the nonpartisan, non-profit Nuclear Threat Initiative , say the treaty is "very imperfect, yet its the best thing going." In the 1960s, many analysts believed that the number of states with nuclear weapons would increase to around two dozen. That prediction has fallen well short, owing largely to the treaty, according to Stoutland, who is vice president for scientific and technical affairs at the NTI. "It has created a barrier to many states who might be thinking about their own weapons program," he said. Are we safer than we were in the Cold War? Experts and campaigners are still divided on the safety and necessity of modern-day nuclear weapons. Some, like Bidwell, say that the technology is beneficial as it has stopped world powers entering into full-blown wars with each other.

Others, such as Rauf, say that instead we have merely fought proxy wars in places such as Vietnam and Afghanistan. Meanwhile, there are still believed to be around 4,300 nuclear weapons deployed at active bases worldwide. As many as half of America's deployed weapons are believed to be on a so-called "hair-trigger alert," meaning they can be launched within minutes if necessary. "This increases the risk of an accidental or mistaken launch with potentially catastrophic outcomes," according to the Union of Concerned Scientists , a Massachusetts-based nonprofit organization. A Malmstrom Air Force Base missile maintenance team removes the upper section of an ICBM at a Montana missile site. John Parie / U.S. Air Force via AP file Most agree, however, the threat of Washington and Moscow willfully engaging in mutually-assured destruction has dipped significantly since the early 1990s. "Despite the situation in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine , it's not really conceivable that U.S. and Russia would use nuclear weapons against each other in that scenario," said Stoutland at the NTI.

While the bomb was first used as a weapon of war in 1945, Bidwell said its main use is now as a "political weapon," shaping geopolitics while remaining safely in its launcher. "No one intends to use it until they absolutely have to," said Bidwell, who also served as a naval officer in the 1980s. What about a nuclear bomb being detonated by accident? It is well documented that the Cold War was pock-marked with several terrifying near-misses. A year before the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, the U.S. accidentally dropped two hydrogen bombs over North Carolina after a B-52 bomber broke up midair. A low-voltage switch was all that stopped the four-megaton devices detonating over the Eastern Seaboard, averting a likely cataclysm involving millions of Americans, according to documents released under the Freedom of Information Act. The Soviet Union had its own mishaps. In 1983, its newly developed early-warning system wrongly detected the launch of intercontinental ballistic missiles from America. It was only one Soviet air force officer who identified the error and was credited with preventing a possible retaliation.

The cloud from "Ivy Mike," an experimental thermonuclear device or H-bomb, that was tested on Elugelab Island in November 1952. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY file "We made it by the skin of our teeth though an intense arms race with the Soviet Union," according to Dr. Robert Standish Norris, a senior fellow at the Federation of American Scientists. Many analysts believe this threat has not diminished entirely. Creaking Cold War technology still underpins the nuclear arsenal of the U.S. and Russia, hence the eagerness to upgrade their infrastructure. "People do things they don't mean to do, and nuclear weapons systems are very complex," Stoutland added, spelling out the recipe for what he says is the minimal but existential threat of an accident. "It's difficult to have complete assurance that something cannot go wrong." What about terrorists and other non-state actors? After the post-Cold War entente, and particularly after 9/11, the global focus shifted to stopping militant organizations getting hold a nuclear bomb. The U.S. was especially keen to stamp out the potential nightmare scenario of someone detonating a small nuclear device in the center of one of its major cities.

Organizations such as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) have been central in "the global effort to lock up the materials that could be used to make a nuclear weapon," Stoutland said. "This still remains a concern but a lot of progress has been made in the past few decades," he added. Play Copy this code to your website or blog <iframe src="" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> However, as that threat has decreased, a new one has sprung up in its place: cyber security. "One of the key issues is that command and control systems are so complex that one cannot be 100 percent confident that the system is secure," Stoutland added. Cyber attacks could interrupt a nation's ability to communicate launch orders, trick a radar system into believing there was an imminent attack, or take direct control of a weapon. "This is certainly an emerging problem," Stoutland added. "But I'm confident there are plenty of people within the American and Russian governments who are focused on this exact issue." Alexander Smith Should every country have the right to possess nuclear weapons? | Debate.org Should every country have the right to possess nuclear weapons?

If the United States has them why the hell not? To me it's like owning a gun and then saying nobody else can have one. If the US and some of these other countries don't want Iran or North Korea getting nuclear weapons, then they should get rid of their nuclear programs too. It's hypocritical in my mind to have the nukes and then dictate to the rest of the world who can or can not get them. What fits the criteria of getting a nuke? I don't know about North Korea but the reason why a country like Iran is trying to get them is because their enemies the US and Israel have them. I've been stressing to my buddies that Israel is the strongest nation in the Middle East of course no to avail because of the alleged threat by the Iranian president( I can't spell his name) to blow Israel into the sea. I must remind everyone who has the nukes and who doesn't. Iran has to do this to protect themselves. But of course here in the West anyone that tries to defend themselves are the bad guys. In no way shape in form am I an Iran supporter, however if our country is going to sit up there and say that they shouldn't have nukes, shouldn't we get rid of ours.

After all Iran has no nuclear weapons as of yet. Submit No Nukes, or Nukes for everyone I do not like nuclear and hydrogen bombs at all, but let's face it. USA has nukes, Russia has nukes, India has nukes, China has nukes, Brazil has nukes, France and UK have nukes. And they want to prevent Iran from having nukes? Why on Earth? I don't see why one/a few country/-ies is better than the others, or how some countries could be certain to protect world peace but others are certain to cause nuclear war?! No. No nuclear weapons for anybody. If they don't want to get rid of them, than nukes for everybody. Submit Yes, everyone has the right to nuclear weapons. If we (The United States) have the right to own and create nuclear weapons why shouldn't anyone else be able to? Also since the creation of nuclear weapons, after using them once or twice and seeing the destruction they cause, every country that has them knows how powerful they are. Nuclear weapons cause people to realize they are safe. Also they cause a sense of peace throughout the world, because everyone knows that a country will not use them unintentionally.

Nuclear Weapons make everyone in the world have to work out their problems peacefully because no one wants the destruction of the world. Nukes are nothing but trouble Nuclear weapons are a serious threat to the entire world. They are the worst guns that have ever been created by humans and no country should be allowed to possess them. Nuclear Proliferation Treaty demands for all states to renounce their nuclear ambitions and for the states that have nukes to get rid of them. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US was essentially a world referee that would call out the states that didn't comply with the rules of NPT. We condemned India, Pakistan, North Korea and Libya, when they were pursuing nuclear weapons. Most recently, we have been demonizing Iran for their enrichment uranium program. However, in order to retain credibility as a referee, the United States must stay loyal to the principles of NPT that it helped to establish.While we condemn Iran for developing nukes, we never said anything to Israel. Israel never announced that they have nukes, however, everyone knows that they do. Israel denied any access to its nuclear facilities and refused to cooperate with IAEA on its nuclear sites. The Iranians and others see that and take notice.

While in theory NPT applies to everyone, there seems to be a double standard, which, of course, diminishes our credibility in the world. Everyone must obey the same rules without exceptions. US can't allow Israel to be exempts from international rules, just because Israel is "our buddy." Let me put it into context. If you are a referee and you allow one of your friends to ignore rules of the game, how do you call that? Cheating... Who holds the world's nuclear warheads? Get the full list by country What a silly debate with silly opinions. The only countries that can ban nuclear weapons and enforce the ban are the USA, Russia, and China. Thankfully, we have the United Nations to impose sanctions. If push comes to shove, it will be the USA that enforces the rules. Russia and China actually want most of the countries that are against the USA to have nukes because those countries will try to kill Americans and Jews. ============================================================================= Allowing everyone to have nukes is insane and can only hasten them being used, especially by radical Islam countries in the Middle East. Jihad is about destroying all non-Muslims, and if these folks get nukes they will definitively use them.

Iran needs to be taken out now! Korea needs to be taken out on the same day! ============================================================================= “The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.” ==================================================================== For some idiot to say, it is like owning a gun. If I can own a gun, you should be allowed to own a gun. The ignorance of many folks at this site does not cease to amaze me. All wars and weapons should never have happened! Amazing! Man is an aggressive animal; our first weapons were stones and clubs. Whoever had the biggest rocks and clubs won until the bow and arrow or sword were invented; then came gun powder and guns. Now we are at nuke stage. =========================================================================== Despite the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons treaty (NPT), which was not signed by India, Israel and Pakistan, and the efforts of the United Nations, nukes will be used again.

I just hope the USA has the most advance technology. ================================================================================ Data on the number of nuclear weapons is notoriously difficult to find. Almost 2,000 of the roughly 4,400 deployable warheads are in a state of high operation alert (2,150 USA, 1,800 Russia, 290 France, and 160 UK). Other nuclear warheads, 2012 – Russia has 8,200; USA has 5,850; China 200; Pakistan 100; India 90; Israel 80; UK 65; and France 10. Russia has approximately 7,350 warheads in reserve or awaiting dismantlement. ================================================================ The nukes will be used again. I hope America and its allies survive. Nobody knows what will happen to the earth if hundreds or thousands of nukes are exploded over a few days. I am not optimistic that human life on earth will survive. America needs to continue spending hundreds of billions on weapon advancement and defense annually; but, we should pull most of our troops out of the Middle East; but, we should maintain all are air and Naval bases.

Submit We barely survived the Cold War - don't start an Ice Age war! The Cuban Missile Crisis nearly caused a nuclear weapon exchange and possibly the death of millions. There are now more nations with nuclear weapons, including Pakistan, India, France and possibly Israel. There are also more rogue states that may use such weapons, including Iran to eliminate "the Zionist threat" they see in Israel for merely existing and Al Qaeda against the infidels. If every nation had a right to nuclear weapons, all the minor conflicts in the world could erupt into nuclear war. We should seek to disarm all nuclear weapons, not give a universal right to possess them. Posted by: Pir4And Nine Nations Have Nukes — Here's How Many Each Country Has - Business Insider Nine Nations Have Nukes — Here's How Many Each Country Has Jun. 17, 2014, 12:08 PM 778,952 print A deactivated Soviet-era SS-4 medium range nuclear capable ballistic missile is displayed at La Cabana fortress in Havana October 13, 2012.

Desmond Boylan/Reuters According to a new report from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), nine nations — the United States, Russia, United Kingdom, France, China, India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea — possess approximately 16,300 nuclear weapons. in total. Under the Treaty on Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (New START) , Russia and the United States have reduced their inventories but still account for more than 93% of all operational nuclear warheads. SIPRI notes that " all five legally recognized nuclear weapon states — China, France, Russia, the UK and the USA— are either deploying new nuclear weapon delivery systems or have announced programs to do so." BBC NEWS | Asia-Pacific | Nuclear weapons: Who has what? Nuclear weapons: Who has what? Pakistan, like India and Israel, is not party to the NPT Five nations are officially recognised as possessing nuclear weapons by the 1968 nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

These are the US, the first to acquire nuclear capability in 1945, Russia (1949), the UK (1952), France (1960) and China (1964). As information about nuclear arsenals is secret, there are only estimates about their nuclear weapons. The Arms Control Association (ACA), a US weapons research organisation, estimates the number of strategic warheads held by these states to be about 6,000 for the US, 5,000 for Russia, 300 for China, 350 for France and under 200 for the UK. Click here for estimates on global arsenals The NPT, which has 187 signatories, was created to prevent other countries from acquiring nuclear capability, to promote co-operation in the peaceful use of nuclear energy and to work towards nuclear disarmament. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) was set up to verify compliance to the treaty through inspections, making sure that nuclear material or activities were not being used for military purposes. Three states - India, Israel and Pakistan - never joined the treaty and are known to possess nuclear weapons.

Claiming its nuclear programme was for peaceful purposes, India first tested a nuclear explosive device in 1974. India and Pakistan both demonstrated their nuclear weapons muscle with a round of tit-for-tat tests in May 1998. While Israel has not publicly conducted a nuclear test and does not admit or deny having nuclear weapons, it is widely believed to possess nuclear arms. The ACA estimates India to have between 45 and 95 nuclear warheads, Pakistan 30 to 50, and Israel 75 to 200. Iran is generally perceived to be secretly pursuing a nuclear arms programme although it maintains its nuclear work is for peaceful purposes. Nuclear muscle The EU is engaged in negotiations with Tehran to urge it to suspend its nuclear activities while the US has stated that it will not allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons. North Korea, which this week announced it was pulling out of multilateral talks on its nuclear activities, is believed by the CIA to have one or two nuclear weapons. The ACA says Pyongyang also has sufficient spent nuclear fuel that could be reprocessed into fissile material for as many as six nuclear bombs.

The CIA has raised concerns that Syria, which is an NPT member, could be trying to covertly acquire nuclear bombs given the availability of foreign expertise. One of the most recent successes in non-proliferation was in 2003 when Libya renounced its then secret efforts to acquire nuclear capability. ESTIMATED NUCLEAR WARHEADS, STRATEGIC AND TACTICAL *The US is also said to have some 3,000 warheads in reserve, while Russia has about 11,000 in non-operational stockpiles Israel declines to confirm it has nuclear weapons North Korea claims it has nuclear arms but no details are available Iran is accused by the US of ambitions to build nuclear arms The Nuclear Weapons States - Who Has Them And How Many The Nuclear Weapons States - Who Has Them And How Many {{article.article.images.featured.caption}} Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own. Full Bio The author is a Forbes contributor. The opinions expressed are those of the writer. Loading ... Loading ... This story appears in the {{article.article.magazine.pretty_date}} issue of {{article.article.magazine.pubName}}. Subscribe Nuclear energy is growing around the world.

About 70 new reactors are under construction worldwide ( NEI ), with more than 600 others planned by mid-century. Five reactors are under construction in the United States. On the other hand, nuclear weapon states have declined slightly in the last twenty-five years (see figure below). Several old players have dropped their nuclear weapons programs or given their weapons back to Russia, including South Africa, Kazakhstan, Belarus and the Ukraine. The latter now regrets that decision very much. But since 1990, only two new players have succeeded in developing nuclear weapons, Pakistan and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (the DPRK , formerly known as North Korea). And only because a very clever Pakistani scientist named Abdul Qadeer Khan who developed Pakistan’s weapons program and sold stolen nuclear secrets to Iran, the DPRK and Libya. While the number of countries that have commercial nuclear power has increased to 31, the number of countries that developed nuclear weapons has not increased very much, contrary to early fears. Presently, there are nine nuclear weapons states with about 10,000 weapons, but there are about 430 commercial nuclear reactors in 31 countries, depending upon what finally shakes out in Japan and Germany.

Italy is the only country to completely halt its commercial nuclear energy program, although Germany will probably be the second. But new nuclear energy programs are emerging in many other states including countries like the United Arab Emirates, Vietnam, Saudi Arabia and Jordan. The only new nuclear weapons states in the last 25 years are Pakistan and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (the DPRK, formerly known as North Korea). South Africa, Kazakhstan, Belarus and the Ukraine dropped their nuclear weapons programs when the Soviet Union dissolved, and the old Soviet satellites gave all their nuclear weapons back to Russia. Most nuclear energy states have the knowledge and some of the infrastructure to develop a weapons program if they decide to, and the time required for them to do so is termed the latency period. Iran’s latency period is about 6 months but they are not expected to pursue the final steps to a weapon. After Scott Sagan. Iran was threatening to enter the weapons club, but they are now unlikely to complete the final steps . Libya abandoned its weapons program under pressure from the U.S. after failing to make real progress, and has since become a failed state.

Syria tried to secretly build a weapons reactor at al-Kibar with DPRK’s help several years ago, cleverly disguised as a 10th century Byzantine fortress (see figure below), but the Israelis bombed it before it got started, a fortunate move given the subsequent civil war in that country. Therefore, the focus on weapons proliferation by the United States and the International Atomic Energy Agency has been diligent and pretty effective. This simple discussion cannot cover the total complexity of this issue, and more can be found at Stanford’s Nuclear Risk Group , especially the work by Dr. Hecker . Presently, there are nine nuclear weapons states with about 10,000 weapons, down dramatically from the 100,000 at the height of the Cold War: Russia - 5,000 ; U.S. - 4,400 ; France - 290 ; China - 240 ; U.K.

- 195 ; Israel - 80 ; Pakistan - 200 ; India - 150 ; DPRK ~ 6 In contrast, there are 430 commercial nuclear reactors in 31 countries, assuming 10 or so in Japan are closed permanently and Germany permanently ends its nuclear program (see figure above). The Syrians attempted to build a weapons reactor in secret at al-Kibar with North Korea’s help several years ago. They cleverly disguised the reactor (on left) as a 10th century Byzantine fortress (on right). Fortunately, the Israelis caught wind of it and bombed it before it got started. Source: Los Alamos National Laboratory No nuclear weapons program ever came out of a nuclear energy program. It is theoretically possible, but not practical. Nations have tried, but even Argentina and Pakistan realized that if you want weapons, you develop a weapons program and pick one of the two traditional paths to the bomb. And no one is fooled by an energy front. In fact, those countries that have the bomb developed weapons programs for that very purpose, regardless of whether they had a nuclear energy program or not.

The connection between energy and weapons is that nuclear energy states have some of the basic knowledge and some of the infrastructure to start a weapons program, but only if they decide to obtain or develop the rest of the infrastructure and knowledge (see top figure). The time required for them to produce a bomb, after they make this momentous decision, and then successfully test it, is termed the latency period ( Sagan 2010 ). As examples, Peru has no nuclear energy or nuclear infrastructure of any kind and so doesn’t have a latency period. Sweden has nuclear energy but insufficient infrastructure to make a weapon in less than about five years, so its latency period is about five years. Iran’s latency period is about 6 months. Through political negotiation and economic pressure, they are now not expected to pursue the final steps to a weapon. But their latency period will likely always be less than a year. Pu and U An atomic bomb is a containerized uncontrolled nuclear chain reaction that can be made from either U-235 and Pu-239, or both, the two elements that can be easily split apart to release a lot of energy.

Since a reliable and effective bomb requires each element to be pretty pure (over 90% of either U-235 or Pu-239), one needs to choose the specific path for each. There are two basic approaches to building an atomic bomb. The first is enriching natural uranium until it is over 90% U-235, followed by emplacing it in a gun-type weapon (top). The second is to produce Pu in a weapons reactor, separate it from all the other elements and purify it to over 90% Pu-239, followed by emplacing it in an implosion-type weapon (bottom). The United States made both during World War II. Lately, Iran chose the U-bomb route, but has chosen not to build one. The DPRK chose the Pu-bomb, built and successfully tested two, and has enough Pu for several more. Note that Pu cannot be used in a gun-type bomb while U can be used in an implosion bomb although it's more difficult and unnecessary.

For a U-bomb you can depend on, you just need to enrich the U-235 up to about 90%, way more then the 3% to 5% for a commercial reactor. However, in addition to needing many highly sophisticated centrifuges and associated technologies, it takes a lot of energy to enrich U-235 to weapons grade, a lot of electricity to spin that many centrifuges that fast. To weaponize U, it's easiest to make a big gun assembly (see figure above), put two separate globs of U-235 not large enough to go critical alone, something like 40 lbs each but when combined is more than enough, pack propellant or explosives behind one of them, and at the right moment propel it into the other so it goes critical. This is the easiest way to make an atomic bomb. It was so easy, we didn’t even have to test it in 1945 before we used it. For a Pu-bomb, you need a weapons reactor to produce enough Pu-239, which needs to be separated from the other elements.

To weaponize it, you need to make an implosion assembly (see figure above), put a smaller glob of Pu-239, only 15 to 20 lbs since Pu-239 fissions better than U-235, but that is not dense enough to go critical. Then pack high explosives around it so that when they explode, the Pu is compressed to super high density and goes critical. An implosion-type Pu-bomb is a lot more difficult to make than a gun-type U-bomb and we were uncertain enough about it working that we decided to make two Pu-bombs so we could test one at the Trinity Site in New Mexico on July 16, 1945 before we used the other one on August 9th. So a U-bomb is easier to make, but a Pu-bomb is better to have tactically. This choice between U and Pu is reflected in the weapons programs of Iran and the DPRK. Iran decided to build a U-bomb to threaten its regional neighbors and to counter Israeli’s atomic weapons. They were never wanting to threaten the world. they also have significant uranium deposits.

Iran was using centrifuges to highly-enrich U, and got up to about 20% U-235. They did not require a weapons reactor. In fact, Iran recently completed and fired up a commercial power reactor, started with Russian fuel, and no one gave it a second thought since that is not a path to a weapon. However, Iran is now blending down its highly-enriched U-235 stocks, and is not expected to complete the steps needed to make a bomb. They will continue to enrich to fuel levels, depending upon the final agreements reached, and hopefully will take this opportunity to turn their enrichment capabilities to commercial use in producing low-enriched fuel for the region’s growing commercial nuclear programs. On the other hand, the DPRK went for the Pu-bomb because they don’t have a lot of electricity generation, and a Pu-bomb is lighter and easier to put on missiles since they actually want to threaten the world. They built a weapons reactor, that couldn’t make energy even if they wanted it to, but that was designed specifically to produce Pu-239. They reprocessed the fuel (see reprocessing figure in the previous post ), and built an implosion-type Pu-bomb.

They successfully built and tested two devices, and have enough Pu to build several more. Note - Iran may be also be pursuing the Pu route. They are completing a 40 MW heavy-water moderated reactor at Arak, ostensibly for research and isotope production, but that could be used for Pu production to pursue this other path to a weapon, particularly one that can go on a missile. It would not surprise me if Israel is watching this heavy water reactor closely with an eye to bomb it before it gets going, just like they did in Syria. But what about the large amount of U and Pu that has been produced by the United States, Russia and other nations over the last 70 years? A fair amount of weapon grade U and Pu around the world is not in bombs, something like 2,000 tons, enough to make thousands of bombs ( DoD Readiness Through Awareness ). It is a little frightening to know that some of it may not be well-secured, but the United States and the United Nations are working to secure them and seem to be making good progress. Finally, there are fusion bombs, or thermonuclear devices.

These nuclear weapons, made from fusing hydrogen into helium, are much larger and hundreds of times more powerful than atomic bombs made from fissioning heavy elements into pieces as we’ve been discussing. Fusion bombs do require a small fission-bomb trigger, however, to initiate the second stage fusion reactions. Fusion bombs are so difficult to make, require such large sophisticated facilities, huge nuclear workforces and enormous amounts of money, that only the most advanced nations have developed them, such as the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, France and China. India tried but failed , although they claim to have succeeded. We aren't worried about anyone new like the DPRK making fusion bombs. We’re worried about them making atomic bombs which are more than enough to get respect from one’s neighbors and strike fear into everyone else. After all, blowing up the world ten times over was a fusion fantasy of the Cold War. Dr. James Conca is a geochemist, an energy expert, an authority on dirty bombs, a planetary geologist and professional speaker. Follow him on Twitter @jimconca and see his book at Amazon.com

Question: What is the smallest country that is believed to possess nuclear weapons?
Answer: Israel