by Olivia Bouscaud
During the week of March 3rd, representatives of states and civil society organizations gathered at the United Nations Headquarters in New York for the Third Meeting of State Parties (3MSP) to the Treaty on Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW). Massachusetts participants included Susan Mirsky, Chair of the Nuclear Disarmament Working Group at MAPA, Christopher Spicer Hankle from Pax Christi, Frances Jeffries from Rotary, Joseph Gerson from the Campaign for Peace, Disarmament and Common Security, Timmon Wallis of NuclearBan.us, and Ira Helfand of Physicians for Social Responsibility.
The first meeting opened with an impactful statement from Izumi Nakamitsu, High Representative for Disarmament Affairs. She stated “in such volatile times, I believe ambitious outcomes are not only preferable but necessary for maintaining momentum. The alternative is the inertia that is born of cynicism.” Expanding the momentum for nuclear disarmament is essential, given that the planet and our humanity are at stake, and a strong basis for that momentum could be seen in the variety of esteemed individuals who came together with hope for a nuclear-free world. Delegates, activists, and even young people were able to participate in the discussions emphasizing the fact that nuclear disarmament is not simply a matter for governments, but an undertaking for people and communities everywhere.
Of particular importance to me were the voices of high school students from Japan, who continue to advocate for the movement against nuclear weapons in their country. Their words reminded us that the legacy of Hiroshima and Nagaski is still alive and will continue to live on as younger generations are motivated to seek and be part of a nuclear free future.
The conference also addressed the widening definition of “victims” of nuclear weapons. Although people around the world recognize Hibakusha (survivors of the atomic bombings) as nuclear sufferers, some speakers suggested expanding this definition to include all those impacted by uranium mining and other parts of the nuclear supply chain. The affected communities include Africa, Mexico, and Kazakhstan, which are still conducting uranium mining activities, and the nuclear reactor workers, who are exposed to the same radioactive hazards and health effects. These affected individuals also, therefore, need reparations and recognition of the suffering that they have endured.
Leena Morgan, an advocate from New Mexico, also strongly advocated for the need to act regarding nuclear weapons. She stated that, “Nuclear kills at every stage.” Her words revealed the truth – nuclear power and weapons are deadly in their production and application. She also pointed out how the development of nuclear weapons hinders development of other vital sectors like health, education and construction.
The 3MSP also focused on the nuclear states’ continued refusal to sign the TPNW. This decision is not just a political choice, but also a direct statement about their security posture. Nuclear-armed states have worked actively to prevent other countries from joining the treaty and have used their power to preserve the current system. Their persistence is a clear indication of the continued predominance of the controversial nuclear deterrence paradigm so strongly promoted by the nuclear states. The discussants made it clear that change is not only possible but necessary, and that there are concrete, tangible processes that can be adopted to reduce nuclear risks.
A related discussion focused on the responsibility of the states that are enablers of the nuclear weapons cycle, arguing that all states possessing nuclear weapons or supporting their proliferation must be held accountable for their horrific outcomes. As we continue to work toward disarmament, there is a growing understanding that reparations for the victims of nuclear weapons cannot be overlooked.
During the 3rd plenary meeting, there was also a call to change the vocabulary surrounding nuclear weapons. This proposition came from a woman from Tahiti who stated that the term “test,” which is often used to describe nuclear detonations, downplays the effects of these bombs. What has been called a ‘test’ is in fact a nuclear explosion with effects that are permanent in the lives of people, the environment and ecosystems. The language we use helps define the way we view and think about these weapons and their impact, and it is time to acknowledge that nuclear explosions are not simply tests, they are acts against humanity.
During this year’s conference, the meetings and discussions were a powerful reminder that change is never easy, but is always possible. We need to face the hard truths, stand up for what is right, and take bold, courageous action. The fight for a nuclear-free world is not a distant dream; it is a cause that requires our immediate attention and unwavering commitment. As we keep on moving forward, we must cling to the vision of the future where nuclear weapons are just a dark chapter in our history. It is our duty to ourselves, to future generations, and to the planet.
—
Olivia Bouscaud is a student at Northeastern University and an intern at Massachusetts Peace Action
