Read on Twitter
Short thread: 1/ @NATO comes out swinging against #TPNW ahead of entry into force on January 22. Much familiar language but some new elements. https://twitter.com/Cox_NukePol/status/1338817657773182976
2/ This is new? "A world where the states that challenge the international rules-based order have nuclear weapons, but NATO does not, is not a safer world." Somewhat bold statement, after 4 yrs of @realDonaldTrump, who challenged nuclear order in significant ways. More importntly
3/ Statement is at odds with familiar @NATO chorus line "As long as nukes exist, NATO will remain nuclear alliance." Do nuclear challenger/s justify Alliance nuclear deterrent or mere existence of nukes? Clarity needed if NATO wants to "enable progress on nuclear disarmament."
4/ Also new: "Allies ... reject any attempt to delegitimise nuclear deterrence." This policy of "do as I say but not as I do" is not in line with NPT obligations to reduce role of nuclear weapons. It is also not sustainable.
5/ Familiar oddity: @NATO argues #TPNW will not result in nuclear reduction because it lacks "clear mechanisms for verification" and no nuclear weapon possessor has signed. But NPT also lacks disarmament verification provisions. 44% of nuclear possessors outside of NPT. 
6/6 Bottom-line: rather than accuse TPNW supporters of acting irresponsibly, @NATO should get on with it, relax on #TPNW EIF and clarify its own arms control and disarmament proposals - not just measures to "enable" reductions. NPT needs common ground. https://is.gd/UH7N61
