Here’s the English NATO nuclear glossary:

An example:

May be old news, but this EU regulation contains descriptions of three entities involved in Syria’s chemical weapons program.

Mohammad Nazier Houranieh is the co-owner of MHD Nazier Houranieh & Sons Co company, which operates in the metals industry and supplies the Syrian Studies and Research Centre (SSRC) with materials used in the manufacture of chemical weapons delivery systems. Therefore, Mohammad Nazier Houranieh is responsible for providing material support for manufacturing chemical weapons and is engaged in preparations for the use of chemical weapons and thus contributes to the continued threat posed by the proliferation and use of chemical weapons.

Chadi Houranieh is the co-owner of MHD Nazier Houranieh & Sons Co company, which operates in the metals industry and supplies the Syrian Studies and Research Centre (SSRC) with materials used in the manufacture of chemical weapons delivery systems. Therefore, Chadi Houranieh is responsible for providing material support for manufacturing chemical weapons and is engaged in preparations for the use of chemical weapons and thus contributes to the continued threat posed by the proliferation and use of chemical weapons.

MHD Nazier Houranieh & Sons Co is a company operating in the metals industry and supplies the Syrian Studies and Research Centre (SSRC) with materials used in the manufacture of chemical weapons delivery systems. Therefore, MHD Nazier Houranieh & Sons Co provides material support for manufacturing chemical weapons and is engaged in preparations for the use of chemical weapons and thus contributes to the continued threat posed by the proliferation and use of chemical weapons.

A reader provided a useful comment to this post:

Almost certainly because the secretary of state for defence isn’t involved ex-officio; the prime minister selects the two nuclear deputies at her own discretion. One of them usually is the defence secretary but this is not a binding condition.

From this October speech to the First Committee:

As a responsible nuclear weapon State, India is committed as per its nuclear doctrine, to maintain credible minimum deterrence with the posture of no-first use and non-use against non-nuclear weapon States.

Without diminishing the priority we attach to nuclear disarmament, India supports the immediate commencement of negotiations in the CD of a Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty on the basis of CD/1299 and the mandate contained therein. We share the widely felt disappointment that these negotiations continue to remain blocked.

From this press release:

Shri Rajnath Singh reiterated India’s position on the need to pursue the path of dialogue and diplomacy for an early resolution of the conflict. He pointed out that the nuclear option should not be resorted to by any side as the prospect of the usage of nuclear or radiological weapons goes against the basic tenets of humanity.

In this interview the other day, IAEA DG Grossi had the below exchange with Lesley Stahl concerning Iran:

Lesley Stahl: How close is Iran to making a nuclear bomb?

Rafael Mariano Grossi: At the current level of production of this enriched uranium, Iran has accumulated already enough material to have more than one device, if they chose to do that. But we don’t have any information that would indicate that Iran has a nuclear weapon program at the moment.

Lesley Stahl: Really?

Rafael Mariano Grossi: Really.

During this recent Atlantic Council event, the FT’s Demetri Sevastopulo recounted this anecdote concerning authority to launch British nuclear weapons:

a former British defence secretary asked me during the Trump administration,would it be possible for President Trump to launch a nuclear weapon without anyone stopping him, and how did theprocess work. And I said, there are lots of theories; I don’t know the exact answer. How did it work in the U.K? He said, I don’t know. They never briefed me on what I would have to do.

In his last book, President Obama recounted his early exchange of letters with Iran’s Supreme Leader Khamenei:

For all these reasons, my team and I had spent much of the transition discussing how to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon—ideally through diplomacy rather than by starting another war. We settled on a two-step strategy. Because there had been almost no high-level contact between the United States and Iran since 1980, step one involved direct outreach. As I’d said in my inaugural address, we were ready to extend a hand to those willing to unclench their fists. Within weeks of taking office, I’d sent a secret letter to Ayatollah Khamenei through a channel we had with Iranian diplomats at the United Nations, suggesting that we open a dialogue between our two countries on a range of issues, including Iran’s nuclear program. Khamenei’s answer was blunt: Iran had no interest in direct talks. He did, however, take the opportunity to suggest ways the United States could stop being an imperialist bully.

“Guess he’s not unclenching his fist anytime soon,” Rahm said after reading a copy of Khamenei’s letter, which had been translated from Farsi.”

“Only enough to give me the middle finger,” I said.”

I noticed that the AEOI still has Iran’s Policy on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament on its website:

A- Statement of the Founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran

After the triumph of the Islamic Revolution, the Islamic Government carried out a review on all bilateral, multilateral contracts and treaties. The founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the late Imam Khomeini, on a number of various occasions condemned nuclear weapons. In 80s, during public visit, addressing the audience and the world public at large, he said: “… if they continue to make huge atomic weapons and so forth, the world may be pushed into destruction and the major loss will afflict the nations. Everybody, wherever he is, the writers, intellectuals and scholars and scientists throughout the world should enlighten the people of this danger, so that the masses of people will standup vis-à-vis these two powers themselves and prevent the proliferation of these arms.”

B- Statement of the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran

The Islamic Republic of Iran regards use of nuclear and chemical weapons as a cardinal and unforgivable sin. We raised the slogan “Middle East free from nuclear weapons”, and we remain committed to this slogan. This slogan does not mean giving up our right to peaceful uses of nuclear energy and production of nuclear fuel. Peaceful use of nuclear energy is the right of all nations in accordance with rules of international law. All nations should be able to use this clean energy for vital uses in the country and for the people. They need not be dependent on others in exercising this right. Certain western countries that unlawfully possess nuclear weapons want to keep the monopoly of nuclear fuel production for themselves. A surreptitious movement is evolving these days to create a permanent center with an international name and appearance, but in fact in the permanent hands of few western countries, for the monopoly of production and sale of nuclear fuel.

Islamic Republic of Iran has never sought nuclear weapons and will not surrender the right of its people to peaceful use of nuclear energy. Our motto is “Nuclear energy for all, nuclear weapons for none”. We will insist on this motto and know that breaking the monopoly of few western countries in production of nuclear energy in the framework of NPT is good for all sovereign nations, including member states of the Non-Aligned Movement.