In the last three months 13 states have ratified the Treaty, bringing the total number up to 87 states. This morning Libya signed the treaty, only five years ago the country spoke out strongly against it. Support for the treaty has made considerable progress in the last decade, yet it lacks the support it truly needs. The United States didn't even send a representative to the conference and waited until the first morning of the conference to alert anyone.

"There is a serious problem when a country as significant as the United States won't sign," said Rebecca Johnson, Executive Director of the Acronym Institute.

The CTBT prohibits all nuclear weapons, test explosions and all other nuclear explosions. The Treaty plays a dual role in combating nuclear proliferation, according to a report published by the Arms Control Association in Washington, D.C. According to the report, the CTBT "prevents existing nuclear weapons states from developing new and more sophisticated types of nuclear weapons, while very simultaneously hampering acquisition by potential proliferant states."

The Treaty was signed in the United States under the Clinton administration, however failed to be passed in the Senate. The Bush administration has repeatedly told the world it will not ask the Senate to even reconsider the ratification of the Treaty, leaving many advocates for the CTBC quite frustrated.

"The multilateral approach is not shared by the Bush administration which chooses a selective multilateralism," said Daryl Kimball, Executive Director of the Arms Control Association. Kimball feels it is highly unlikely that the United States will ratify the Treaty before 2004.

Kimball fears that the Bush administration's opposition for the treaty will only grow stronger. There are indications already pointing in that direction. For example, the United States was the only state to vote against a procedural vote to put the CTBT on the calendar for the United Nations General Assembly. This was seen by many delegates as an unexpected move, according to Kimball.

Why is the United States so reluctant to ratify the CTBT? Kimball believes that for the US, which prides itself on being the world's superpower, signing the treaty puts it in a vulnerable position. "Bush wants all of his military possibilities open to deal with future threats," he said.

"In an effort to maintain a strong US arsenal, US labs have achieved over an additional $5 billion per year. That's $2 billion more than during the Cold War Era," said Kimball. "Scientists at US labs continue to test because uncertainties have undermined the existing stockpile."

After the events of September 11, a main focus in Washington D.C. has been how to starve terrorists of their assets. Ambassador Thomas Graham, Jr. views non-proliferation as the key to achieving this. "The central objective of the world community has to be to strengthen the norm of non-proliferation," said Graham. "This will keep weapons out of the hands of terrorists."

While the Bush administration shows no intention of ratifying the CTBT in the near future, Kimball believes that one cannot assume ratification will never happen. "It's going to take a major event, maybe someone else testing," said Kimball. "It's also going to take persistent support on behalf on Western allies."

The CTBT may be gaining support through conferences such as the just one held at the United Nations, yet its effectiveness is likely only to take hold when the very radically opposed United States can ensure its entry into force.