کوئی جوہری ہتھیار نہیں

Those who, by chance, survived the nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki became known in Japanese as hibakusha, or “explosion-affected people”.

Many endured life-long pain and discomfort due to their injuries, along with psychological trauma. Some developed thick scar tissue over their bodies and faces or lived for decades with fragments of glass embedded deep in their flesh.

Women faced particular hardship and stigma because of fears that genetic damage caused by the bombs would be passed on to their children and grandchildren.

Within a few years of the attacks, survivors began developing cancers and other illnesses at unusually high rates as a result of the delayed effects of radiation. Leukaemia was especially common in the early years.

To alert the world to the danger of nuclear weapons, many survivors have publicly shared their personal testimonies of what happened in 1945. Some who were children at the time of the attacks are still alive today and continue this truth-telling work.

Their message has been clear and consistent over the decades: Nuclear weapons and humanity cannot coexist.

In 2024, Nihon Hidankyo – a Japanese confederation of organisations representing survivors – won the Nobel Peace Prize “for its efforts to achieve a world free of nuclear weapons and for demonstrating through witness testimony that nuclear weapons must never be used again”.

The courageous, unstinting advocacy of survivors has inspired many people around the world to join the movement for nuclear abolition.

Other aspects of the development of nuclear weapons – from the mining of uranium to the disposal of radioactive waste – have also had devastating impacts on human health and the environment.

At uranium mines – where the process of making nuclear weapons begins – radioactive and chemical pollution from waste tailings has seeped into the soil and waterways, harming workers and nearby communities. No mine anywhere in the world has been fully cleaned up after mining has finished.

Radioactive contamination has also occurred at nuclear reactors involved in the production of plutonium for nuclear weapons. At the Windscale nuclear power station in the United Kingdom, for example, a fire raged for three days in 1957, sending plumes of radiation across much of Europe. All milk from farms in the vicinity had to be destroyed.

Many communities globally also face ongoing challenges related to the safe, secure storage of vast quantities of nuclear waste amassed from the production of tens of thousands of nuclear weapons since 1945. It will remain dangerous for millennia.

While only nine nations possess nuclear weapons, more than 30 others support their retention and potential use, including by claiming protection from an ally’s so-called “nuclear umbrella”.

All members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), for example, have publicly endorsed nuclear weapons. Several even host US nuclear bombs on their territories – including Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Türkiye – and provide the aircraft and personnel needed to drop them. Belarus has a similar hosting arrangement in place with Russia.

Some nations share intelligence for the purpose of nuclear targeting, or allow nuclear-armed ships to transit through their waters and dock in their ports or nuclear-armed aircraft to enter their airspace and refuel at their airports.

All such acts of complicity perpetuate nuclear dangers and undermine disarmament efforts.

The failure of nuclear-armed nations to disarm has heightened the risk that more nations, or even non-state actors, will one day acquire nuclear weapons. Achieving progress in disarmament is essential to preventing their spread.

While important measures are in place to guard against proliferation, the effectiveness of these measures cannot be guaranteed. Any nation capable of enriching uranium or reprocessing spent nuclear fuel to produce plutonium could, in theory, develop a nuclear weapon in a matter of months.

South Africa, Israel, India, Pakistan and North Korea all acquired nuclear weapons using facilities and materials that were ostensibly for “peaceful purposes”, underscoring the proliferation risks inherent in nuclear power programmes.

Just a few kilograms of highly enriched uranium or separated plutonium would be enough to produce one nuclear bomb. Today, hundreds of tonnes of these materials exist in global stockpiles, with more being produced. For disarmament to succeed, this problem must be addressed.

There is not only a risk of the deliberate use of nuclear weapons; they could also be detonated as a result of human error, technical malfunction, cyber-attack, misinterpreted warnings or unauthorised access to command and control systems.

The numerous accidents involving nuclear weapons since 1945, as well as incidents where they were almost used due to errors, demonstrate the alarming potential for unintended disaster.

In 1968, for example, a US aircraft carrying four nuclear bombs caught fire and crashed near Greenland, contaminating the surrounding area with plutonium. Luckily, though explosions did occur, no nuclear chain reaction was triggered.

In 1995, Russian officials mistook the launch of a Norwegian scientific rocket for a US submarine-launched ballistic missile. The Russian president retrieved the launch codes for a retaliatory strike but ultimately determined that it was a false alarm.

Other deeply troubling incidents have involved the loss of nuclear weapons at sea, nuclear-armed submarines colliding, flying swans and light reflected off clouds being mistaken for nuclear-tipped missiles, and the inadvertent insertion of training tapes into an operational computer, which simulated an incoming nuclear attack.

Each year, nuclear-armed nations spend many billions of dollars enhancing and expanding their nuclear forces – money that could be invested in health care, education, poverty alleviation and action to address the climate crisis.

In some nations, corporations reap large profits from supporting the development and production of nuclear weapons. Think-tanks and universities are also involved and benefit financially.

Ending this life-endangering work would free up resources for other purposes and allow some of the brightest scientific minds to contribute to a more peaceful world – rather than perfecting their militaries’ ability to kill and destroy on a massive scale.

Any nation may join the TPNW at any time. Those that are currently reluctant to do so might reassess their positions as the treaty’s membership grows larger and the demands of their citizens grow louder.

This has been the case in the past for other treaties. France and China, for example, opposed the Non-Proliferation Treaty when it was negotiated but felt compelled to join it decades later.

The world is rapidly changing, and today’s leaders will not remain in power forever. Future governments might accept the merits of the treaty where current governments do not.

Nations that have joined the TPNW are required to encourage others to come on board, with the ultimate goal of “universal adherence”.

Joining the treaty sends a clear message that nuclear weapons are unacceptable and must be abolished. At a time of increasing nuclear dangers, it offers the best hope for eliminating the worst weapons.

“Let us seize now the unique opportunities brought to us by this treaty and bring the era of nuclear weapons to an end.”

– International Committee of the Red Cross, 2020

Write to, phone or meet with decision-makers in your country to seek their support for the total abolition of nuclear weapons.

Since 2017, thousands of parliamentarians across the political spectrum have responded to the demands of concerned citizens and signed an ICAN pledge to promote adherence to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (pledge.icanw.org).

Hundreds of cities, from Washington DC to Paris to Sydney, have also formally supported the treaty, signing onto an ICAN appeal (cities.icanw.org).

You need not be an expert to make your voice heard. What matters is that you recognise the gravity of the threat and the urgency of action.

Non-violent protest is an important way for people to convey their rejection of nuclear weapons. It can take many forms, including rallies, marches, blockades and vigils.

For decades, members of the global peace and disarmament movement have held protests, large and small, to draw attention to the cause. Countless actions have occurred at sites where nuclear weapons are built and deployed, at universities involved in their development, and outside national parliaments.

Undoubtedly, mass protests have helped bring an end to nuclear testing, halt the expansion of nuclear arsenals, prevent any use of nuclear weapons in war since 1945, and build pressure for disarmament.

More direct action is needed today.

In some nuclear-armed nations, companies are involved in the production of nuclear weapons and their components, and financial institutions provide capital to make this work possible.

Divesting from the nuclear weapons industry is a tangible contribution that financial institutions can make to disarmament. Hundreds have already done so, committing to nuclear-weapon-free finance, in line with the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (divest.icanw.org).

Individuals can contact their banks and pension funds and insist that nuclear weapons companies be excluded from their investments.

As the former UN secretary-general Ban Ki-moon once remarked: “The world is over-armed and peace is under-funded.” By donating to the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), you can help change that (icanw.org/donate).

ICAN is the leading civil society voice on nuclear disarmament globally, with a proven track record of effective advocacy, recognised in 2017 with the Nobel Peace Prize. With your support, we can take the campaign its full distance: all the way to zero nuclear weapons.