At the First Committee on International Peace and Security of the UN General Assembly, delegates voted to study the impacts of nuclear war, for the first time since 1989.
With the risk of nuclear weapons use as high – or even higher – as it has ever been amidst wars in Europe and the Middle East involving nuclear-armed states, scientists from around the world have been calling for a better understanding of the effects of nuclear war. Heeding this call, delegates at the UN General Assembly’s First Committee voted in favour of establishing a group of 21 scientific experts to study these effects and bring our knowledge of this risk up to date.
The UN-mandated panel will be tasked with “examining the physical effects and societal consequences of a nuclear war on a local, regional and planetary scale, including, inter alia, the climatic, environmental and radiological effects, and their impacts on public health, global socioeconomic systems, agriculture and ecosystems, in the days, weeks and decades following a nuclear war”and publish a comprehensive report.
While there is already a wealth of robust research on the effects of nuclear weapons, this has not been comprehensively brought together in 35 years. In this time, there has been major progress in climate and scientific modelling tools and this new study will allow scientists to review the improvements in our understanding of the effects of nuclear war. There have also been major societal and planetary changes, and the resolution recognises “today’s level of interconnectedness and the likelihood of global events having complex, cascading impacts on global systems and societies,” as well as “the fragility of those systems and our planetary boundaries.”
Melissa Parke, Executive Director for ICAN welcomed the study: “This new study is an opportunity to bring our understanding of the impact of nuclear war out of the 1980s and into the 21st century. As the world becomes increasingly more interconnected, we need to make sure that policy decisions are based on science- not dogma and scaremongering. This study is a chance to bring that science together and guide us towards the future we want.”
The vote on the resolution was not unanimous. Some of the nuclear-armed states and their allies actively lobbied against this study, possibly out of concern that more knowledge on what these weapons of mass destruction do would further erode any citizens’ support for having nuclear weapons. Only France, the Russian Federation and the United Kingdom voted against the resolution. However, the vast majority of states (144) – ranging from those that lead on disarmament and have been impacted by nuclear weapons testing in previous decades to those whose policies support the use of nuclear weapons – chose to commission this critical study.
Next steps
The 21 panel members will be appointed by UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres, and have been tasked to “engage and receive inputs from the widest possible range of stakeholders, including civil society, affected communities, and peoples from around the world” to truly understand the effects of a nuclear war at different scales (global, regional, individual). It will receive the support and expertise of all UN agencies and international organisations.
Having passed the First Committee, the resolution will pass to the Fifth Committee for a review of its budgetary implications and be submitted again to the full UN General Assembly in December. Once the panel is appointed, work will be carried out during 2025 and 2026 with a final report expected in 2027.
Such a comprehensive study on the physical effects and societal consequences of a nuclear war will be central to raising public awareness and mobilising public opinion in efforts to eliminate nuclear weapons.
Voting Result Details
In favour (144):
Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua-Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belize, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cabo Verde, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Cot D’Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Eswatini, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kiribati, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao PDR, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Federated States of Micronesia, Mongolia, Morocco, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Tuvalu, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Viet nam, Yemen, Zimbabwe
Against (3):
France, Russian Federation, United Kingdom
Abstention (30):
Albania, Belarus, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czechia, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Georgia, Hungary, India, Israel, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Pakistan, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, Turkiyë, Ukraine, United States, Zambia
Source: https://www.icanw.org/un_approves_new_study_on_effects_of_nuclear_war
