If biological and chemical weapons are banned why not nuclear ones?

WPS Sidhu, from New York University's Center on International Cooperation writes about the devious behavior of some nations regarding nuclear weapons. Nine states are recognized as nuclear weapons states, of which 5 are members of the UN Security Council, Israel has refused to confirm or deny its possession of nuclear weapons and North Korea withdrew from the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty, or NPT, in 2003. Then there are the nuclear umbrella states, such as Japan, South Korea and Australia, which have agreed to the protection offered by US nuclear weapons. In addition the US stations nuclear weapons in 5 members of NATO, Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey. 190 countries have signed the NPT but it is deceitful to proclaim non proliferation and then agree to an 'umbrella' of nuclear weapons. The whole of Africa and South America are nuclear weapons free zones, as is Australia, but if it has an umbrella of US weapons then its claim is suspect. Thus, it was Australia that tried to disrupt a resolution for complete nuclear disarmament at the UN General Assembly. A resolution sponsored by Austria proposed an Open-ended Working Group, or OEWG, to take forward multilateral negotiations towards nuclear disarmament. " Although this resolution was overwhelmingly supported by 138 countries, the five permanent nuclear weapon states of the UN Security Council plus Israel voted against it. While India and Pakistan abstained, North Korea, curiously, supported the resolution. Significantly, 34 states - mostly members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (Nato) and those protected by the US nuclear umbrella - also abstained," writes Sidhu. An OEWG meeting in Geneva came to a consensus to start negotiations in 2017 to ban nuclear weapons, like biological and chemical weapons have been banned. The nuclear weapons states and their clients do not want such a treaty. " In the OEWG, Australia became a proxy of nuclear weapons states and a disarmament spoiler: it called for a vote on the group's final report....," writes Sidhu. " Australia's objective was two-fold: first, to break the emerging consensus and, second, to close ranks among the umbrella states." In the event, although 19 NATO members, Australia and South Korea voted against the report, several NATO members and Japan abstained. The US and Russia have the largest arsenals. The US is designing a super-nuke, equivalent to 50,000 tons of TNT, while also making smaller bombs, which will minimise collateral damage. At the same time countries are furiously creating software for cyber warfare. Will it be possible to takeover the control of the nuclear arsenal of a country and use that for attack? Scary.