Nuclear weapons are back in focus. Donald Trump Jr. and RFK Jr. recently penned a joint article, warning that “the world is at greater risk of nuclear conflagration than at any time since the Cuban missile crisis.” North Korea shows no signs of scaling back its nuclear ambitions, while Iran blames the U.S. for walking away from its deal with world powers, pushing it to explore nuclear development. Meanwhile, Russian President Vladimir Putin hints at resuming nuclear tests, breaking a 30-year taboo. Donald Trump, whose administration abandoned the nuclear agreement with Iran, has even claimed—perhaps bizarrely—that nuclear war poses the biggest threat to American autoworkers.
Agree with Trump or not, one thing is clear: the nuclear threat is once again front and center. Experts, including the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, say the risk of nuclear Armageddon is higher today than ever before. With nuclear-armed states locked in hot and cold wars, disarmament seems like a distant dream. But history has shown that it’s often in moments of heightened danger that diplomacy can produce breakthroughs.
Some say nuclear weapons are an even bigger threat than climate chaos — and they certainly make it worse. A nuclear war could end humanity, but even without one, the costs are staggering. Last year, nuclear-armed nations spent $91.4 billion on their arsenals — a 34% increase from the year before. That’s $3,000 every second, or $173,000 a minute, wasted on weapons that threaten life instead of saving it. Imagine the impact if that money went towards clean energy — enough to power 12 million homes with wind or plant 1 million trees every minute.
There’s still hope for progress. History shows that breakthroughs in nuclear disarmament often come during times of heightened tension. The Cuban Missile Crisis led to the Partial Test Ban Treaty, and the nuclear missile buildup in Europe resulted in the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. Today, with conflicts like Ukraine and Gaza threatening to escalate, leaders must find “off-ramps” that not only prevent disaster but also advance nuclear disarmament.
The truth is, nuclear weapons are one of the most solvable global problems. We built them; we can dismantle them. What we need is the political will to act. Eliminating nuclear weapons wouldn’t just prevent Armageddon — it would help tackle other crises too. As author Timmon Wallis explains in Warheads to Windmills, global cooperation on climate change becomes much harder when the biggest carbon emitters are armed with nuclear weapons. By disarming, we could reduce carbon emissions, free up thousands of scientists to focus on sustainability, and unlock billions of dollars to combat environmental challenges and achieve the UN’s Sustainable Development Times. It’s time to act — for our planet and our future.
Next week, as world leaders convene in New York for the UN General Assembly, they’ll adopt a “Pact for the Future” — a set of commitments on sustainable development, security, and governance. However, this broad pact, which requires consensus from all nations, is likely to fall short in holding accountable those most responsible for stalling progress on nuclear disarmament.
A more promising path lies in the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), which entered into force in 2021. Though nuclear-armed states oppose it, this treaty is the first global agreement to ban nuclear weapons and provide a legal roadmap for dismantling them. It also addresses the human and environmental devastation caused by their use and testing. Supported by most of the world’s nations, the TPNW is a beacon of hope.
The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons helped push the treaty through the UN and won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2017 for raising awareness of the catastrophic impact of nuclear weapons. Taking inspiration from the 2017 Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, the 1997 Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention, and the 2008 Convention on Cluster Munitions, ICAN’s strategy deliberately involves constructing treaties without the involvement of every single powerful nation. By generating ample momentum, these treaties not only secured passage through the UN General Assembly but also established new diplomatic norms, making defiance challenging even for nations that refused to ratify them. For example, the US never joined the 1997 Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention but did eventually agree to their phasedown. Now, ICAN’s efforts are inspiring a new campaign — one focused on a Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty. We must pressure our political leaders to join these vital treaties and show the same policy entrepreneurship and innovation that grassroots and community leaders are already demonstrating.
They say we live in a world of despair, and things certainly feel dire. The UN Security Council has seen unprecedented division since 1989, and if Donald Trump returns to office, the U.S. could resume nuclear testing — as his former national security adviser, Robert O’Brien, suggested in Foreign Affairs this summer. But despite the bleak outlook, there’s still reason for hope.
The 2024 Global Solidarity Report reveals that despite rising anxiety among young people, there remains a deep — even remarkable — well of support for global solidarity. If we can harness this energy for positive, collective action, we can still build a better future. As Jonathan Glennie and Hassan Damluji, two of the report’s authors, put it:
“While the reality of today’s world rightly concerns us, we want to imagine the possibilities for what we can achieve. Humans make progress when they are hopeful.”
It’s not too late to pull back from the brink. In a world where despair often dominates, it’s crucial to keep imagining alternative futures and that hope is a verb – it requires doing and continued use to keep it strong. That’s why, as the 2024 Global Solidarity Report emphasizes, we urgently need to replace fear of disaster with an intentional, well-funded, fact-based campaign that inspires hope and fosters global solidarity. Only then will solutions like disarmament be within reach.