In-depth News Features | NHK WORLD-JAPAN News

It's been a year since dozens of countries got together to enforce a landmark ban on nuclear weapons, yet the goal of eradication seems as distant as ever. For the states that refused to sign the treaty—countries with nuclear arms and others under their protection—discussions to prevent further spread of nuclear arms are not progressing. That stalemate has prompted some to ask: If the world's most powerful countries can't even agree to slim their nuclear arsenal, what hope is there of abolishing the weapons altogether?

It's been a year since dozens of countries got together to enforce a landmark ban on nuclear weapons, yet the goal of eradication seems as distant as ever. For the states that refused to sign the treaty—countries with nuclear arms and others under their protection—discussions to prevent further spread of nuclear arms are not progressing. That stalemate has prompted some to ask: If the world's most powerful countries can't even agree to slim their nuclear arsenal, what hope is there of abolishing the weapons altogether?

It's been a year since dozens of countries got together to enforce a landmark ban on nuclear weapons, yet the goal of eradication seems as distant as ever. For the states that refused to sign the treaty—countries with nuclear arms and others under their protection—discussions to prevent further spread of nuclear arms are not progressing. That stalemate has prompted some to ask: If the world's most powerful countries can't even agree to slim their nuclear arsenal, what hope is there of abolishing the weapons altogether?

It's been a year since dozens of countries got together to enforce a landmark ban on nuclear weapons, yet the goal of eradication seems as distant as ever. For the states that refused to sign the treaty—countries with nuclear arms and others under their protection—discussions to prevent further spread of nuclear arms are not progressing. That stalemate has prompted some to ask: If the world's most powerful countries can't even agree to slim their nuclear arsenal, what hope is there of abolishing the weapons altogether?

It's been a year since dozens of countries got together to enforce a landmark ban on nuclear weapons, yet the goal of eradication seems as distant as ever. For the states that refused to sign the treaty—countries with nuclear arms and others under their protection—discussions to prevent further spread of nuclear arms are not progressing. That stalemate has prompted some to ask: If the world's most powerful countries can't even agree to slim their nuclear arsenal, what hope is there of abolishing the weapons altogether?

Young people in Thailand have grown up against a backdrop of political chaos and drama. They will have their say in shaping their country's future on February 8 at the House of Representatives election ― but as NHK World discovers, many are torn between security issues and hopes for reform.

It's been a year since dozens of countries got together to enforce a landmark ban on nuclear weapons, yet the goal of eradication seems as distant as ever. For the states that refused to sign the treaty—countries with nuclear arms and others under their protection—discussions to prevent further spread of nuclear arms are not progressing. That stalemate has prompted some to ask: If the world's most powerful countries can't even agree to slim their nuclear arsenal, what hope is there of abolishing the weapons altogether?

It's been a year since dozens of countries got together to enforce a landmark ban on nuclear weapons, yet the goal of eradication seems as distant as ever. For the states that refused to sign the treaty—countries with nuclear arms and others under their protection—discussions to prevent further spread of nuclear arms are not progressing. That stalemate has prompted some to ask: If the world's most powerful countries can't even agree to slim their nuclear arsenal, what hope is there of abolishing the weapons altogether?

It's been a year since dozens of countries got together to enforce a landmark ban on nuclear weapons, yet the goal of eradication seems as distant as ever. For the states that refused to sign the treaty—countries with nuclear arms and others under their protection—discussions to prevent further spread of nuclear arms are not progressing. That stalemate has prompted some to ask: If the world's most powerful countries can't even agree to slim their nuclear arsenal, what hope is there of abolishing the weapons altogether?

It's been a year since dozens of countries got together to enforce a landmark ban on nuclear weapons, yet the goal of eradication seems as distant as ever. For the states that refused to sign the treaty—countries with nuclear arms and others under their protection—discussions to prevent further spread of nuclear arms are not progressing. That stalemate has prompted some to ask: If the world's most powerful countries can't even agree to slim their nuclear arsenal, what hope is there of abolishing the weapons altogether?