nuclear-news

A Serious Proposal: Russia and China Call for Global Strategic Stability.

By Alice Slater*https://indepthnews.net/a-serious-proposal-russia-and-china-call-for-global-strategic-stability/

NEW YORK | 1 October 2025 (IDN) — It’s ironic that the arms control community is protesting the idea of resuming nuclear test detonations. The nuclear test detonations have never stopped.

Although Bill Clinton signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) in 1996, he swiftly funded the “Stockpile Stewardship” program at the US nuclear weapons complex, allowing the Dr. Strangeloves in their labs to continue to perform laboratory tests as well as blowup plutonium with chemical explosives,1,000 feet below the desert floor at the Nevada Test Site on Western Shoshone holy land.

Since there was no chain reaction causing criticality, Clinton claimed these “sub-critical” tests were not nuclear tests and didn’t violate the new treaty. Of course, Russia and China swiftly followed the US lead; the Russians continued to test at Novaya Zemlya, and China at Lop Nor.

Indeed, it was the US’s refusal to promise that the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty would be truly “comprehensive” that caused India and Pakistan to test their nuclear arsenals after the US rejected their pleas to include prohibitions against “sub-critical” and laboratory tests in the CTBT. Although Clinton signed the CTBT, the US, unlike Russia and China, never ratified it. Sadly, Russia announced during the Ukraine war that it was leaving the CTBT.

People of goodwill who are alarmed at new reports of proliferating nuclear weapons and would like to put the nuclear genie back in the bottle, stop the endless wars and huge budgets for useless atomic weapons, would do well to take some advice from Russia and China. On May 8, they issued a “Joint Statement by the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China on Global Strategic Stability” in the context of the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II.

They note “the serious challenges facing the international community” and lay out several recommendations that would strengthen “global strategic security”, acknowledging that “the destinies of all countries are interrelated” and urging that states not “seek to ensure their own security at the expense and to the detriment of the security of other states.”

US “Golden Dome”

They proceed to explain a whole series of provocative actions that threaten the peace, including states deploying nuclear weapons and missiles outside their territories. They are particularly critical of the US “Golden Dome” program, which is expected to create a new battleground in space. Reiterating their pleas over many years to keep space for peace, they state the following:

The two sides oppose the attempts of individual countries to use outer space for armed confrontation. They will counter security policies and activities aimed at achieving military superiority, as well as at officially defining and using outer space as a ” warfighting domain”. The two Sides confirm the need to start negotiations on a legally binding instrument based on the Russian-Chinese draft of the treaty on the Prevention of the Placement of Weapons in Outer Space and of the Threat or Use of Force Against Outer Space Objects as soon as possible, that would provide fundamental and reliable guarantees for preventing an arms race in outer space, weaponization of outer space and the threat or use of force against outer space objects or with their help. To safeguard world peace, ensure equal and indivisible security for all, and improve the predictability and sustainability of the exploration and peaceful use of outer space by all States, the two Sides agree to promote on a global scale the international initiative/political commitment not to be the first to deploy weapons in outer space.

The US and its allies, sheltering under the US nuclear umbrella, would do well to take Russia and China up on their offers for making a more peaceful world! With Mother Earth sending cascading warnings about the need for nations to cooperate, we can ill afford business as usual. Time to change course!

*Alice Slater serves on the Boards of World BEYOND War and the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space. She is an NGO representative at the UN for the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation. [IDN-InDepthNews]

October 3, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics international | Leave a comment

Israel’s Netanyahu addresses Empty UN Chamber with Genocidal Claims after Mass Walkout

INFORMED COMMENT, Juan Cole, 09/27/2025

Ann Arbor (Informed Comment) – Even the tiniest detail is litigated in newspaper headlines when it comes to the Israeli government. Many news outlets reported that “some” or “dozens” of delegates walked out of the UN hall where the General Assembly had gathered as Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu prepared to address them.

The truth is, almost everyone left, so that Netanyahu addressed mostly empty chairs. I don’t know why the editors who write these silly headlines think they can pull the wool over peoples’ eyes. We have video:

He was heckled in the chamber, and then heckled by New Yorkers outside. If Zohran Mamdani wins the mayoral contest in New York, Netanyahu won’t be able to come to the UN because he will be arrested as a war criminal by NYPD.

Moreover, although the press reports what Netanyahu says, no one on the diplomatic circuit seems to take it seriously. He full-throatedly rejected any attempt at a two-state solution, saying that establishing a Palestinian state would be “suicide” for Israel.

The implication for Netanyahu, whose family is from Poland, is that a recognized Palestinian state would somehow destroy Israel.

But how? Not by military action, surely. The Israelis have made short work of their military rivals in the region. With extensive American help they forced countries much larger than themselves, such as Egypt, to conclude a peace treaty. They are constantly bombing Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, and have hit Iraq and Iran and Qatar in the past year. They bomb whomever they wish whenever they wish. Why would a Palestinian state be more formidable than Egypt or Iran?

I cannot know for sure, but I think what Netanyahu means by the phrase is that a recognized Palestinian state would rob Israel of its legitimacy.

Again, I can’t see how that would work. International legitimacy is bestowed by the United Nations and the great powers. The establishment of a Palestinian state would not cause Israel to be kicked out of the UN. Actually, what might cause such an expulsion to happen is Netanyahu’s course of genocide against the Palestinians. Legitimacy is at least somewhat a matter of public opinion, and the vast walk-out of delegates at the UN General Assembly demonstrates that it is Netanyahu’s atrocities, not a Palestinian state, that has robbed Israel of legitimacy in the eyes of many.

But if we granted Netanyahu’s premise, then what? It implies that 14 million Palestinians must remain stateless. US Supreme Court justice Earl Warren defined citizenship as the “right to have rights.” Without citizenship in a state, people have no real human rights, as we easily can see in Gaza for the past two years, and in the West Bank if we look. If you’re stateless, you don’t really own your house. Other people can kick you out of it and move in. Or it can be arbitrarily bombed………………………………………………………………………………………….

If the only way Israel can exist is to make the Palestinians stateless forever, to wipe out a people, then it raises questions about whether Israel in this form, as a militant Jewish ethno-state, is worth it. Is Netanyahu saying the quiet part out loud and admitting that Israel’s existence requires a genocide of the Palestinians? https://www.juancole.com/2025/09/netanyahu-addresses-genocidal.html

September 30, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics international | Leave a comment

UN sanctions reimposed on Iran over alleged nuclear deal violation

The United Nations has reinstated sanctions on Iran on Saturday, following
a process triggered by the United Kingdom and key European powers that
Tehran has warned will be met with a harsh response.

Britain, France and
Germany triggered the return of sanctions on Iran at the UN Security
Council over accusations the country has violated a 2015 deal that aimed to
stop it developing a nuclear bomb. Iran denies seeking nuclear weapons. The
move prompted Iran to recall its ambassadors to all three countries.

iNews 28th Sept 2025, https://inews.co.uk/news/world/un-sanctions-reimposed-on-iran-over-alleged-nuclear-deal-violation-3943152

September 30, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics international | Leave a comment

Global majority of countries now signed onto the UN nuclear ban treaty

Kyrgyzstan has signed, and Ghana has ratified the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), bringing the numbers of those who signed, ratified or acceded into the global majority. Kyrgyzstan’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Zheenbek Kulubaev signed the treaty at the United Nations earlier today while Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa, Foreign Minister of Ghana, deposited his country’s ratification, bringing the total to 99 out of 197 eligible states that have taken legal action under the treaty.

26 Sept 25 https://www.icanw.org/global_majority_now_signed_onto_nuclear_ban_treaty?utm_campaign=tpnw_reaches_majority&utm_medium=email&utm_source=ican

This is a key milestone for what is still a young treaty which was adopted by the UN just over just 8 years ago and only came into force under 5 years ago.

The TPNW outlaws nuclear weapons and all activities associated with them, including production, possession, testing, threats or use.

The TPNW was inspired by efforts to build the legal bulwark against the catastrophic humanitarian harm that nuclear weapons are known to cause. As we know from the evidence from the United States’ nuclear attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki 80 years ago, the effects of nuclear weapons are uniquely cruel and inhumane because of the indiscriminate, lasting, intergenerational harm they cause.

The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2017 for its work that led to the adoption of the TPNW. ICAN’s Executive Director, Melissa Parke, welcomed today’s news: “I warmly congratulate Kyrgyzstan and Ghana on their actions today. The TPNW is the best way to ensure real security from the existential threat nuclear weapons pose to the future of humanity, because as long as they exist, nuclear weapons are bound to be used, intentionally or by accident. The treaty is the sane alternative to the misguided and dangerous doctrine of nuclear deterrence and a new nuclear arms race that don’t provide security, but instead threaten it.”

Ms Parke continued: “The nuclear-armed countries and their allies that endorse the use of nuclear weapons are a distinct minority and they have no right to continue to threaten the future of the rest of the world. The TPNW is the pathway under international law to the fair and verifiable elimination of nuclear weapons so these nine countries have no excuse to continue to defy the majority here at the UN”.

The expanding influence of the TPNW has broken the hold nuclear-armed states and their flawed and dangerous doctrine of nuclear deterrence had on the public debate around nuclear weapons. The TPNW states are directly challenging deterrence doctrine as both a threat to all countries and an obstacle to nuclear disarmament – an objective the nuclear-armed states themselves say they share.

Theodora Williams Anti, from ICAN partner Foundation for Security and Development in Africa (FOSDA) said “Ghana’s ratification of the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons is a proud moment for our nation and a powerful statement to Africa and the world. By joining the majority of states in rejecting these weapons of mass destruction, Ghana affirms its unwavering commitment to peace, human security, and the protection of future generations. This milestone reminds us that true strength lies not in the threat of annihilation, but in the courage to choose dialogue, cooperation, and a safer world for all.”

95 states have signed the treaty, which has 74 states parties. Four countries acceded to the treaty without signing beforehand as permitted under its Article 14.

The fact that the global majority of states are now on board the treaty sends a strong signal to the nuclear-armed states and their allies which support the use of nuclear weapons in their defence strategies that they are the minority and increasingly regarded by the international community as irresponsible actors threatening global security.

The TPNW has made nuclear weapons as unacceptable as chemical and biological weapons. The more countries that join the treaty, the more the diplomatic pressure builds on the pro-nuclear states and the more isolated they will become with all the diplomatic and reputational costs involved.

September 28, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics international | Leave a comment

UN at 80: Civil Society Must Have a Say in the Struggle for Renewal

 Andrew Firmin, https://www.ipsnews.net/2025/09/un-at-80-civil-society-must-have-a-say-in-the-struggle-for-renewal/?utm_source=email_marketing&utm_admin=146128&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=UN_at_a_Mixed_Legacy_of_Highs_and_Lows_An_Overdose_of_Renewables_New_Energy_Risk_in_Brazil_and_more

LONDON, Sep 26 2025 (IPS) – As the high-level opening week of the UN General Assembly unfolds, with heads of states delivering often self-serving speeches from the UN’s podium, the organisation is undergoing one of its worst set of crises since its founding 80 years ago. This year’s General Assembly – ostensibly focused on development, human rights and peace – comes as wars are raging across multiple continents, climate targets are dangerously being missed and the institution designed to address these global challenges is being hollowed out by funding cuts and political withdrawals.

A UN Commission has just determined that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza, while the Israeli state recently escalated its campaign of violence by bombing Qatar. Meanwhile, Russia’s war on Ukraine threatens to spill over with its recent launch of drones against Poland and incursion into Estonia’s airspace. Conflicts continue in Myanmar, Sudan and many other countries, despite the UN’s foundational hopes of ensuring peace, security and respect for human rights.

The Trump administration has abandoned multilateralism in favour of transactional bilateral dealmaking while spearheading a donor funding withdrawal that is hitting both the UN and civil society hard. The US government has also repudiated the Sustainable Development Goals, the ambitious and progressive targets all states agreed in 2015, but which are now badly off track.

Today’s multiple and growing crises demand an effective and powerful UN – but at the same time they make this less likely to happen.

Cutbacks loom large

As state leaders meet, one of the items on the agenda is the UN80 initiative. Launched in March, this is presented as a reform process to mark the UN’s 80th anniversary. But reflecting the impacts of the funding crisis, it’s first and foremost a cost-cutting drive. The slashing of donor aid – not only by the USA, but also by other established donor states such as France, Germany and the UK, often in favour of military spending – is having a global impact. The UN is being hit both by states failing to pay their mandatory assessed contributions, or delaying them for long spells, and by underfunding of initiatives that rely on additional voluntary support.

When it comes to mandatory contributions, the most powerful states are those that owe the most, with the USA in the lead with a circa US$1.5 billion debt, followed by China on close to US$600 million. Meanwhile voluntary funding shortfalls are particularly hitting human rights work, always the most underfunded part of the UN’s work. In June, UN human rights chief Volker Türk announced that 18 activities mandated by Human Rights Council resolutions wouldn’t be implemented because of resource constraints. In a world riven by sickening conflicts, human rights investigations on Palestine, Sudan and Ukraine aren’t able to operate at anywhere near full capacity.

Funding shortfalls, intensified by the Trump administration pulling out of key UN bodies and agreements, have forced the UN to plan for a 20 per cent budget cut in 2026. That may involve shedding some 7,000 jobs from its 35,000-person workforce, merging some agencies, shutting offices and relocating functions to cheaper locations.

The UN is undoubtedly an unwieldy and over-bureaucratic set of institutions, and it would be surprising if there weren’t some efficiency savings to be made. If staff are relocated from expensive global north hubs to cheaper global south locations, it could help UN bodies and staff better understand global south realities and improve access for civil society groups that struggle to travel to the key locations of Geneva and New York, particularly given the Trump administration’s new travel restrictions – although that wouldn’t be the rationale behind relocation.

But the proposed cuts mean the UN is effectively planning to do less than it has done before, at a time when the problems are bigger than they’ve been in decades. Given this, decisions about UN priorities mustn’t be left to its officials or states alone. Civil society must be enabled to have a say.

Civil society already has far too little access to UN processes. At the high-level week, even civil society organisations normally accredited for UN access are locked out of events. Reform processes such as last year’s Summit of the Future have also fallen far short of the access needed. Civil society’s proposals to improve the situation – starting with the creation of a civil society envoy, a low-cost innovation to help coordinate civil society participation across the UN – haven’t been taken up.

Now even civil society’s limited access could be further curtailed. Already the Human Rights Council is shortening sessions, reducing the opportunities available for civil society. The proposed cuts would impact disproportionately on the UN’s human rights work. In the name of efficiency, the UN could end up becoming less effective, if it grows even more state-centric and less prepared to uphold international human rights law. States that systematically violate human rights can only benefit from the ensuing lower levels of scrutiny.

Civil society is an essential voice in any conversation about what kind of UN the world needs and how to make it fit for purpose. It urgently must be included if the UN is to have any hope of fulfilling its founding promise to serve ‘we the peoples’.

Andrew Firmin is CIVICUS Editor-in-Chief, co-director and writer for CIVICUS Lens and co-author of the State of Civil Society Report.

September 28, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics international | Leave a comment