Tensions around nuclear weapons and the risk of their use are at a peak. Yet, European leaders are in nuclear proliferation hysteria. Melissa Parke argues that the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) offers an alternative path to nuclear deterrence in a fracturing global landscape
Eighty years after Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the Doomsday Clock currently sits at 89 seconds to midnight — the closest it has ever been — reflecting the increasing risk of nuclear conflict. Nuclear-armed states are investing billions into modernising their arsenals, expanding capabilities, and embedding nuclear deterrence more deeply into security policies. French President Emmanuel Macron has proposed extending France's nuclear deterrence to protect European allies, while Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk has suggested that Poland should consider acquiring nuclear weapons of its own. These moves would deal a potentially fatal blow to the vital Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and usher in a new age of nuclear weapons proliferation.
The world has spent nearly a century living under the shadow of nuclear weapons. Every crisis — from the Cuban Missile Crisis to the current war in Ukraine — has served as a reminder that deterrence is not a guarantee against disaster. Nuclear weapons do not keep the peace; they are an ever-present threat to it, and exacerbate and create conflicts. Every day that nuclear weapons continue to exist is a day that an accident, miscalculation, or deliberate act could lead to catastrophe.
The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) — also known as the Nuclear Weapon Ban Treaty — is the only international treaty that categorically rejects nuclear weapons. It bans their use, possession, development, and transfer, making clear that these weapons are not legitimate tools of security but instruments of mass destruction.
The TPNW is still young, entering into force only on 22 January 2021. With the crumbling of arms control agreements and with the NPT under ever-increasing strain, it is perhaps the single sign of hope that we can reverse the proliferation trend. Support for the treaty is also growing — almost half the world’s states have now signed or ratified it, and backing at the UN General Assembly continues to increase.
As arms control agreements crumble, the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons may represent hope that we can reverse the proliferation trend
Despite opposition from nuclear-armed states and their allies, the recent Third Meeting of States Parties (3MSP) of the TPNW demonstrated that progress is not just possible, it is happening. The meeting produced a strong political declaration highlighting the progress that signatories have already made. The declaration also condemned the ongoing nuclear arms race and nuclear states' sabre-rattling rhetoric. Countries party to the treaty are not waiting for permission from nuclear-armed states to move forward — they are shaping a new international norm.
One of the most important outcomes of the 3MSP was its outright rejection of nuclear deterrence as a viable security strategy. A groundbreaking new report submitted to the conference catalogued the ways in which nuclear doctrine threatens States Parties' security. It also provided detailed recommendations on how TPNW states can challenge current nuclear doctrine, at the UN Security Council, in their dealings with the media, and bilaterally with nuclear-armed states.
Advocates for nuclear deterrence often present it as a stabilising force. Yet history shows that it has repeatedly led to crises that could have escalated into full-scale nuclear war. From miscommunications during the Cold War to recent threats by nuclear-armed leaders, deterrence has brought us closer to catastrophe rather than preventing it.
Though nuclear deterrence is often presented as a stabilising force, it has repeatedly led to crises that could have escalated into full-scale nuclear war
Deterrence is also an inherently exclusive and unjust system. It places the security of a handful of states above the well-being of the entire planet. Nuclear states tell those that do not possess nuclear weapons — many of whom have suffered from nuclear testing and its environmental consequences — that their security concerns are secondary. The TPNW flips this narrative, asserting that nuclear weapons are a legitimate security concern for all nations, not just those that wield them or claim protection from them.
The TPNW also addresses the consequences of past nuclear detonations. Many of the communities most affected by nuclear weapons — Indigenous populations, colonised peoples, residents of nuclear test sites, and hibakusha (atomic bomb survivors) — were present at the 3MSP, reminding the world that nuclear harm is not theoretical; it is lived experience.
The advocacy of communities affected by nuclear weapons, including survivors from the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, reminds us that nuclear harm is not theoretical; it is lived experience
The treaty’s provisions for victim assistance and environmental remediation are not just symbolic — they are tangible commitments to justice. As the 3MSP moved forward with discussions about a trust fund for survivors and plans for environmental cleanup, it reinforced that nuclear disarmament is not just about preventing future horrors but about addressing the ongoing consequences of past actions.
South Africa's forthcoming presidency of the TPNW Review Conference in 2026 is profoundly significant, as it remains the only nation to have had nuclear weapons and voluntarily disarmed. Its leadership is especially poignant given how certain states are doubling down on deterrence and revealing their overtures to the non-proliferation regime over the years to be mere lip service. The TPNW’s supporters — which include five of the ten largest countries in the world by population — reflects a growing group that have chosen to permanently close the door to nuclear weapons. Many belong to alliances that give them influence on nuclear-armed states beyond the US, the UK, and France.
The TPNW is more than just a treaty; it is a paradigm shift. At 3MSP, States Parties firmly rejected the flawed logic of nuclear deterrence that has kept nuclear weapons at the centre of global security policies for far too long. As Jiro Hamasumi, a hibakusha from Hiroshima and representative of the 2024 Nobel Peace Prize-winning group Nihon Hidankyo, said at the opening of the 3MSP, nuclear weapons are 'the devil’s weapons that rob the victims of their future and cause agony to their families'.
History will not judge us kindly if we continue to delay action. The TPNW offers a concrete path toward a safer world. We know which way the other path leads.
