By Tariq Rauf*
VIENNA | 4 August 2025 (IDN) — This year, 2025, marks several historic events of the nuclear age which moved from theoretical calculations to physical reality at 3:25 PM local time on 2 December 1942, when the Italian nuclear physicist Enrico Fermi achieved the first controlled self-sustaining atomic fission chain reaction from the Chicago Pile (CPG-1) at the University of Chicago.
Three years later, at precisely 5:30 PM on 16 July 1945, the age of nuclear weapons began with the detonation of the “Trinity” nuclear explosive device over the New Mexico desert. Less than a month later, at approximately 8:15 AM local time on 6 August 1945, the US Air Force unleashed the “Little Boy”, a 9,700-pound uranium gun-type bomb, over Hiroshima. Three days later, on 9 August 1945, at 11:02 AM, the US Air Force detonated the plutonium device “Fat Man” over Nagasaki, with an estimated explosive yield of 21,000 tonnes (kilotons), about 40 per cent greater than that of the Hiroshima atomic bomb.
The detonation of the two atomic bombs, according to estimates, killed between 150,000 and 246,000 children, men and women, mostly civilians. Fortunately, in a bizarre way, to date, these remain the only uses of nuclear weapons, though the danger of nuclear war today is regarded as being the highest in decades.
Following the Trinity nuclear test detonation of 16 July 1945, the Hungarian nuclear scientist Leó Szilárdobserved that, “Almost without exception, all the creative physicists had misgivings about the use of the bomb” and further that “Truman did not understand at all what was involved regarding nuclear weapons”.
Russell-Einstein Manifesto
This year also marks the 70th anniversary of 9 July 1955, the Russell-Einstein Manifesto that delivered the stark ultimatum that humanity must renounce war or face the risk of “universal death”. This Manifesto, developed by the philosopher Bertrand Russell and nuclear scientist Albert Einstein, was co-signed by another eight of the world’s then most prominent scientists and Nobel laureates.
The Russell-Einstein Manifesto issued a clear warning that:
“No one knows how widely such lethal radioactive particles might be diffused, but the best authorities are unanimous in saying that a war with H-bombs might quite possibly put an end to the human race. It is feared that if many H-bombs are used there will be universal death – sudden only for a minority, but for the majority a slow torture of disease and disintegration”.
“In view of the fact that in any future world war nuclear weapons will certainly be employed, and that such weapons threaten the continued existence of mankind, we urge the governments of the world to realize, and to acknowledge publicly, that their purpose cannot be furthered by a world war, and we urge them, consequently, to find peaceful means for the settlement of all matters of dispute between them”.
It remains an uncomfortable truth that Leó Szilárd’s observation cited above still rings true when it comes to the leaders of today’s nine nuclear-weapon possessor States as well as of most of their diplomats and those of 30-plus countries in military defence arrangements underpinned by nuclear weapons — that they still do not fully understand and accept the existential threats of nuclear weapons!
Failing Nuclear Arms Control
Now, why do I say this? From 28 April to 9 May this year, I was an official delegate at the United Nations in New York, attending the meeting of States parties to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). After 10 days of debates, consultations and negotiations, the result was precisely — zero, nothing — no agreement on any measures, however small, to try to reduce the present and continuing anthropogenic existential risks of nuclear weapons.
This year’s session of the NPT Preparatory Committee took place in the 80th memorial year of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Regrettably, hardly any other delegation except mine noted this sad anniversary to reflect on the memory of all those affected by nuclear weapons over the past eight decades and the suffering of survivors and victims of nuclear weapons and the NPT’s obligation for nuclear disarmament — such is the disconnect now.
Also, regrettably, the award of the 2024 Nobel Peace Prize to Nihon Hidankyo largely went unmentioned. At the NPT PrepCom, on 28 April, Foreign Minister of Japan Iwaya Takeshi, aptly recalled that at the UN General Assembly Second Special Session devoted to Disarmament (UNSSOD II) in 1982, a hibakusha stood on the podium of the General Assembly and powerfully appealed to the international community, saying, “No More Hiroshima, No More Nagasaki!!” – to leverage the recognition of the suffering and struggles of the hibakushato redouble efforts for nuclear disarmament.
Today, nearly 12,250 nuclear warheads, each orders of magnitude more powerful than the ones detonated in 1945, are possessed by nine countries, deployed at more than 100 locations in 15 countries.
Nuclear weapon systems are being modernised and updated. New ones are in the pipeline. Only a very few Cold War nuclear arms control regimes remain in force, hanging by slender threads. The last remaining nuclear arms reduction treaty between Moscow and Washington, New START, will expire in early February next year, which, if not replaced with a new agreement or mutually agreed restraints, could spur a renewed nuclear weapons race this time utilising advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence, hypersonic and nuclear-powered missiles, and weapons in Space.
Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons
The nuclear-weapon possessor States remain loath to accept any benchmarks, targets or timelines for nuclear disarmament, and reject any prohibition of nuclear weapons. The new flavour of the day is the amorphous concept of nuclear risk reduction being peddled by three of the five nuclear-weapon States and most of their allies, and some “respectable” think tanks performing the role of echo chambers of their governments’ policies.
In response, more than 100 States, parties to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) and non-aligned States counter that nuclear risk reduction is no substitute for nuclear disarmament, as does the UN Secretary-General, who said that: “The only way to eliminate the nuclear risk is to eliminate nuclear weapons … [he urged countries to work together to banish these … devices of destruction to the history books, once and for all”.
The Way Forward
I am glad that marking the International Day for the Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres had clearly stated that, “The only way to eliminate the nuclear risk is to eliminate nuclear weapons” and he urged countries to work together to banish these “devices of destruction to the history books, once and for all”.
Tellingly, United Nations Deputy Secretary General, Jan Elliason earlier had remarked, “There are no right hands for wrong weapons, and Weapons of Mass Destruction are simply wrong”.
A notable United Nations Study on the Climatic and Other Global Effects of Nuclear War concluded that “the circumstances arising from a nuclear war lie at the extreme end of the range of harmful actions that the human race might inflict on itself … [the report] confirmed that a nuclear war could not be won and must not be fought. It can also be seen as strong argument for the pursuit of sharp reductions in, and ultimate eradication of nuclear weapons”.
More recently, the Austrian Ambassador for Disarmament, Alexander Kmentt, has tellingly stated that the “most urgent task is to ensure that the so-called nuclear taboo is not broken. It is of existential importance for humanity and future generations that nuclear weapons are never used again, under any circumstances … The obvious gold standard of nuclear risk reduction is the elimination of nuclear weapons”.
In mid-July this year, I attended the Nobel Laureate Assembly, held at the University of Chicago — the place where the first self-sustaining atomic chain reaction was set off in December 1942. The Nobel Assembly “convene[d] the world’s foremost experts on nuclear weapons at a critical moment in global security … to produce actionable, pragmatic recommendations”. Accordingly, the experts negotiated and adopted “a set of guiding principles to shape nuclear diplomacy in the decade ahead”. 120 Nobel Laureates have signed the resulting Declaration for the Prevention of Nuclear War across all disciplines.
The Declaration calls on all nuclear-armed States, inter alia, that:
“There is no greater obligation than to prevent the catastrophe of nuclear war. These actionable and attainable steps will aid global leaders in this solemn task. We ask that they each be guided by the words of Nobel Laureates Bertrand Russell and Albert Einstein: ‘We appeal as human beings to human beings: remember your humanity, and forget the rest’ … Our survival and the survival of future generations are at stake”.
I have titled this commentary Ridding the Menace of Nuclear Weapons, taking my cues from a masterful book by Professor William Walker of St. Andrews University, to mark his retirement, entitled A Perpetual Menace: Nuclear Weapons and International Order. He took the book’s title from a famous quote of Danish nuclear scientist Niels Bohr’s July 1944 memorandum to Franklin Roosevelt in which Bohr advised that “any temporary advantage [of using nuclear weapons], however great, may be outweighed by a perpetual menace to human security”.
The cover design of Professor Walker’s book is based on the allegorical reference in (Book VI of) Plato’s Republic, about a “Ship of Fools”, in which society is depicted as a ship crewed by idiots and reprobates unaware of their dysfunctional plight on a choppy sea. Professor Walker notes that the allegory is stretched because the ship he is referring to today “carries the innocent and capable along with the deranged, and, far from being allowed to drift aimlessly, is being piloted in acute awareness of mortal danger” — that is, the willful minimization of the increasing existential risks of nuclear weapons including that of an inadvertent nuclear war.
In launching the Russell–Einstein Manifesto at Caxton Hall in London on 9 July 1955, Bertrand Russell aptly commented that, “The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people are so full of doubts”.
A “right to nuclear peace”
Though today, unfortunately, we are living in an increasingly lawless world internationally, nevertheless, an international order anchored in legal norms and treaties offers the best hopes for survival. In this regard, the NPT and the TPNW together, supplemented by the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), collectively establish a “right to nuclear peace” and stop nuclear weapons from becoming a “perpetual menace”. These are key objectives to strive for at the next NPT review conference in 2026, to be mindful of in this the 80th anniversary year of the twice use of nuclear weapons and the 70th commemorative year of the dire warning issued in the Russell-Einstein Manifesto, and by the hibakusha: “No More Hiroshima, No More Nagasaki!!”
*Tariq Rauf, is an independent advisor and consultant on nuclear governance matter and a Director of Atomic Reporters and of Canadian Pugwash, and is a member of the Executive Committee and Council of Pugwash Conferences; former: Vice Chair of Canadian Pugwash; former member of the Eminent Persons Group for Substantive Advancement of Nuclear Disarmament established by the Foreign Minister of Japan; former Head of Nuclear Verification and Security Policy at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna, Alternate Head of the IAEA Delegation to the nuclear non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conferences; Senior Advisor on nuclear disarmament to the Chairs (nuclear disarmament) at the 2015 NPT Review Conference and 2014 NPT PrepCom; long time Expert with Canada’s NPT delegation until 2000. Personal views are expressed here. [IDN-InDepthNews]
Image: Hiroshima Peace Memorial. © Yuko Baba, UNITAR Hiroshima (used with permission).
