Story highlights "Is there anyone that believes that North Korea would agree to a ban on nuclear weapons?" Haley asked 
 
 President Barack Obama's administration also opposed the talks 
 
 United Nations, New York (CNN) US Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley announced Monday that the United States and almost 40 other nations would not participate in the first-ever talks on an international treaty to ban nuclear weapons. 
 
 Flanked by ambassadors from about 20 nations, including nuclear powers United Kingdom and France, Haley couched the decision not to attend the talks, which began Monday, in personal terms. 
 
 As a mom and daughter, "there is nothing I want more for my family than a world with no nuclear weapons," the former South Carolina governor said. "But we have to be realistic." 
 
 JUST WATCHED North Korea continues with nuclear program Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH North Korea continues with nuclear program 02:39 
 
 "Is there anyone that believes that North Korea would agree to a ban on nuclear weapons?" Haley asked. 
 
 President Barack Obama's administration also opposed the talks, which the General Assembly voted to approve in December, and nuclear powers Russia and China also are not taking part. United Kingdom Ambassador Matthew Rycroft said his country also would not attend the talks because "we do not believe that those negotiations will lead to effective progress on global nuclear disarmament." 
 
 Read More ||||| Surrounded by other supporting countries, United States Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley, center, speaks to reporters outside the General Assembly at U.N. headquarters, Monday, March 27, 2017.... (Associated Press) 
 
 Surrounded by other supporting countries, United States Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley, center, speaks to reporters outside the General Assembly at U.N. headquarters, Monday, March 27, 2017. Haley and the other representatives were not participating in a meeting about prohibiting nuclear... (Associated Press) 
 
 UNITED NATIONS (AP) — U.N. talks aimed at banning nuclear weapons began Monday, but the United States, Russia, China and other nuclear-armed nations are sitting out a discussion they see as impractical. 
 
 Supporters of the potential pact say it's time to push harder toward eliminating atomic weapons than nations have been doing through the nearly 50-year-old Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. 
 
 With international tensions rising while public awareness of the nuclear threat has waned, "the need for progress on nuclear disarmament has rarely been as urgent as it is today," U.N. Under Secretary-General for disarmament Kim Won-soo said as the talks opened. 
 
 More than 100 countries voted for a U.N. General Assembly resolution last year to start discussions, with nations including Austria, Brazil and Ireland leading the effort. 
 
 But the U.S. and several other nuclear powers say a ban won't work and the world should instead stick with a more gradual approach. 
 
 "As a mom, as a daughter, there is nothing I want more for my family than a world with no nuclear weapons. But we have to be realistic," U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley said as she and colleagues from Britain, France and about 20 other nations, not all of them nuclear states, gathered Monday outside the General Assembly hall to show opposition to the talks starting inside. 
 
 Haley argued that a treaty would end up disarming nations "trying to keep peace and safety," while "bad actors" wouldn't sign on or comply. 
 
 "North Korea would be the one cheering, and all of us and the people we represent would be the ones at risk," she said. 
 
 North Korea carried out two nuclear tests last year and has continued to test ballistic missiles as recently as this month, in violation of U.N. resolutions. The North has said its nuclear efforts are meant as a deterrent against what it sees as U.S. hostility. North Korea's U.N. Mission didn't immediately respond to an inquiry Monday about the disarmament talks. 
 
 Opponents of the ban plan say gradual disarmament has made a difference. The U.S. has reduced its nuclear arsenal by 85 percent under the Non-Proliferation Treaty, Haley said; Britain has cut its nuclear forces by over 50 percent since the height of the Cold War, according to Ambassador Matthew Rycroft. 
 
 Still, "our countries continue to rely on nuclear deterrence for security and stability," French Deputy Ambassador Alexis Lamek said. 
 
 Chinese and Russian representatives didn't join the boycotters' news conference, but the two countries had said previously that they wouldn't participate in the talks. 
 
 Japan, which during World War II experienced the only atomic bomb strikes in history, did take part in opening remarks Monday. Saying that North Korea's actions challenge the non-proliferation approach, Japanese representative Nobushige Takamizawa said it was "crucial to have a realistic perspective as to how nuclear disarmament measures can contribute effectively to addressing actual security concerns." 
 
 The negotiations aim to create "a legally binding instrument to prohibit nuclear weapons, leading towards their total elimination." Backers hope a document will be inked by July. 
 
 Any treaty would bind only nations that ratified it. But despite the opposition from key nuclear players, supporters of the proposed ban feel it could help create a new international norm of rejecting atomic arms. 
 
 "It's very difficult to eliminate a weapon that you haven't prohibited first," said Beatrice Fihn, the executive director of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, an advocacy group. ||||| This article is over 1 year old 
 
 At least 113 countries meet at UN to discuss ban, but US ambassador says the world is too unsafe for the US not to have nuclear weapons 
 
 Negotiations on a treaty to outlaw nuclear weapons have begun in New York, but have been publicly condemned by the United States, which is leading a coalition of more than 40 countries – including Australia – boycotting the talks. 
 
 At least 113 countries are part of the negotiations which have begun at UN headquarters in New York this week, aiming to negotiate a “legally binding instrument to prohibit nuclear weapons, leading towards their total elimination”. 
 
 But, Nikki Haley, appointed as the United States’ ambassador to the UN by Donald Trump in January, spoke outside the meeting saying the world was too unsafe for the US not to have nuclear weapons. 
 
 “I’m a mum. I’m a wife. I’m a daughter. I always think of my family first. Our job is to protect our people and our country. To keep them safe. To keep the peace.” 
 
 Protect and Survive: Armageddon advice guide to be republished Read more 
 
 “We would love to have a ban on nuclear weapons but in this day and time we cannot honestly say that we can protect our people by allowing the bad actors to have them and those of us who are good trying to keep the peace and safety not to have them.” 
 
 France and the UK, fellow nuclear weapons states, also spoke against the ban treaty negotiations, saying they would not assist in disarming nuclear states. 
 
 Support for a ban treaty has been growing steadily over years, with frustration at the ineffectiveness of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty in reducing nuclear arsenals. More than 123 nations - the majority of nations at the UN - voted in favour of negotiations to outlaw nuclear weapons. 
 
 But a ban treaty has no support from the states that actually have nuclear weapons. The nine known nuclear states – the US, China, France, Britain, Russia, India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea – all oppose a ban treaty. 
 
 Facebook Twitter Pinterest US ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley: ‘Our job is to protect our people and our country. To keep them safe. To keep the peace.’ Photograph: Richard Drew/AP 
 
 Of the non-nuclear states opposing the ban treaty, Australia has been one of the most outspoken. 
 
 During months of negotiations, Australia has lobbied other countries, pressing the case for what it describes as a “building blocks” approach of engaging with nuclear powers to reduce the global stockpile of 15,000 weapons. 
 
 Australia has consistently maintained that as long as nuclear weapons exist, it must rely on the American nuclear umbrella, the protection of the deterrent effect of the US’s nuclear arsenal, the second largest in the world. 
 
 But political sentiment in Australia appears to support the ban treaty negotiations. 
 
 The Australian Senate passed a motion Monday urging the government to participate in the talks, and polling shows nearly three-quarters of Australians want Australia to be part of negotiations on a nuclear weapons ban treaty. 
 
 The Senate on Monday passed a motion urging the Australian government to “participate constructively” in the ban treaty talks. 
 
 The motion, moved by Labor Senator Lisa Singh, argued Australia had a moral and legal obligation to participate in efforts to ban nuclear weapons, the only weapon of mass destruction not outlawed under international law. 
 
 “There are close to 15,000 nuclear weapons in the world today, posing a grave threat to all humanity,” Singh’s motion said. 
 
 “Australia as a party to the non-proliferation treaty, is legally required to pursue negotiations in good faith for nuclear disarmament.” 
 
 In response, assistant minister to the prime minister, Senator James McGrath, told the Senate “Australia shares with the international community the goal of a peaceful and secure world free on nuclear weapons”, but that it would not be participating in the UN talks. 
 
 “This approach is consistent with Australia’s clear and long-standing position on the proposed nuclear weapons ban treaty. 
 
 “The proposed ban treaty would not advance nuclear disarmament. It will be ineffective in eliminating, or even reducing, nuclear weapons arsenals. It will not advance security… and it risks undermining the nuclear non-proliferation treaty by creating ambiguity and confusion through parallel obligations and by deepening divisions between nuclear and non-nuclear weapons states.” 
 
 Stockpiles of nuclear weapons around the world – in data Read more 
 
 An Ipsos poll conducted this month of 1050 Australians asked: “The UN will begin negotiations this month on a new treaty to prohibit nuclear weapons. Should the Australian Government support these negotiations?” 
 
 In all, 73% of respondents answered yes, 10.6% no, and 15.5% maybe. 
 
 The outreach coordinator for the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, Gem Romuld, said existing treaties – such as the nuclear non-proliferation treaty – had failed to reduce nuclear arsenals, and that Australia should embrace the new plan of action to rid the world of the weapons. 
 
 “The ban negotiations are modelled on comparable bans on chemical and biological weapons and landmines. This is a timely and historic opportunity to make nuclear weapons illegal along with the other weapons of mass destruction”. 
 
 “Boycotting the ban talks flies in the face of Australia’s international obligations and casts doubt on our commitment to the UN. Australia must choose the right side of history and join the ban negotiations without delay”. 
 
 The efficacy of a ban treaty is a matter of fierce debate. 
 
 Without the participation of the states that actually possess nuclear weapons, critics argue it cannot succeed. But proponents say a nuclear weapons ban will create moral suasion – in the vein of the cluster and landmine conventions – for nuclear weapons states to disarm, and establish an international norm prohibiting nuclear weapons’ development, possession and use. 
 
 Finger on the button: should Trump's nuclear weapons access be restricted? Read more 
 
 Non-nuclear states have expressed increasing frustration with the current nuclear regime and the sclerotic movement towards disarmament. 
 
 With nuclear weapons states modernising and in some cases increasing their arsenals, instead of discarding them, more states are becoming disenchanted with the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and lending their support for an outright ban.
– Monday saw the start of UN talks focused on a noble goal: banning nuclear weapons across our planet. It was the result of a 2016 vote that saw more than 100 countries in favor of a UN General Assembly resolution to kick off such talks, which are aimed at ultimately establishing an international treaty that would prohibit the development and possession of such weapons, CNN reports. By extension, using them would also be banned. The AP reports Austria, Brazil, and Ireland were at the forefront of the effort. Wondering where the US is? Boycotting. US Ambassador Nikki Haley was present Monday—but remained outside the General Assembly hall with other boycotting nations in a sign of opposition. One big quote: "As a mom, as a daughter, there is nothing I want more for my family than a world with no nuclear weapons. But we have to be realistic." Her view is that the nearly 50-year-old Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is doing its job, with the US slashing its nuclear arsenal by 85% under it, and that North Korea is too big a loose cannon for this to be a responsible or feasible endeavor. "North Korea would be the one cheering, and all of us and the people we represent would be the ones at risk," she said. By the Guardian's count, 113 countries are participating, but 40 are boycotting, and that list includes the US, China, France, Britain, Russia, India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea, which the paper points out are the nine states known to have nuclear weapons.