The _neu_-nuclear powers possess at most a few hundred warheads and lack true intercontinental delivery systems. They might kill a few million people but the da

The _neu_-nuclear powers possess at most a few hundred warheads and lack true intercontinental delivery systems. They might kill a few million people but the damage will be localised. All of the countries that could - and would (given the right kind of existential threat posed by another) kill a few _hundred million_ people in even a limited exchange are on the council. There are other, non-nuclear states that could cause similar (<10m) deathcounts if they had a conflict. What we don’t want to do is frame the security council as “the nuclear club” which allows them to dictate global security - that would give states like DPRK and Hussein’s Iraq even more motivation to pursue a nuclear weapons programme. To an extent it does come down to sincerity - I’m not concerned about India being a nuclear power despite it bordering Pakistan and PRC: I have faith in India’s democracy and stability to use their power responsibly (Kashmir is another discussion) - but I don’t extend that to DPRK who are clearly using it to avoid a Libya-type situation but who may end up using it anyway given the inherent instability of autocratic dynasties.