The International Partnership for Nuclear Disarmament Verification (IPNDV) is celebrating its tenth anniversary in Geneva this week. This milestone comes with some notable outcomes and achievements. Looking back on past IPNDV activities and looking ahead to its future ones, Dr Irmgard Niemeyer outlines 10 lessons learned over the years.
Most analyses of the effects of nuclear war focus on the impacts in terms of casualties and climate shocks. But there would be many second-order and third-order effects on political, social, and economic systems. Sir Adam Thomson and Paul Ingram write that it is imperative to avoid a nuclear war. If all such efforts fail, we need to understand what it would mean for global civilisation and what we could start to do to prepare.
Alexander Kmentt, Director for Disarmament, Arms Control, and Nonproliferation at the Austrian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and ELN Senior Network member, writes that opponents of the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) in nuclear-armed states should stop dismissing the treaty outright. Instead, they should begin addressing the legitimate security concerns surrounding deterrence that are raised by its supporters.
As debate around UK defence policy increases ahead of a general election, a new survey of defence and foreign affairs opinion makers explores how the UK can help get the world back on a path to nuclear disarmament and offers 50 proposals to the UK government.
In March 2024, ELN co-hosted a track 1.5 dialogue on Iran’s nuclear diplomacy. Key takeaways from the group of multinational experts included the acknowledgement that Iran remains open to talks but seeks to preserve nuclear gains, widening gaps with Western positions. Participants also noted that regional dialogue and European support may help, though risks of escalation remain high amid US-Iran tensions, Israeli concerns, and regional instability.
YGLN members Maren Vieluf and Ananya Agustin Malhotra argue that NPT states need to start talking about whether or not “defensive” and “offensive” nuclear threats can be distinguished. If NPT states can find agreement on this matter, it could bridge the gap between states condemning any and all nuclear threats under any circumstances and those states that stand firmly behind “defensive” nuclear threats and allow for further progress to be made in the 11th NPT Review Cycle.