By Eleonora Neri, International Relations Specialist at the Vienna Institute for Global Studies (VIGS)

As the world marked the 80th anniversary of the Trinity nuclear test in 2025, the first nuclear explosion, and the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, we are reminded that the menace of these weapons of mass destruction endures for as long as nuclear arms exist.

The current state of nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament is fragile due to a more unstable global security landscape. We are witnessing rising global anxieties over nuclear threats, including the potential use of nuclear weapons, possible further nuclear tests, and risks of nuclear proliferation with increased stockpiles of enriched uranium. We are witnessing pressure on nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament architecture where nuclear weapons and nuclear testing are back in public consciousness.

The institutional crises and lack of progress on key treaties underscore a wider trend: states are pulling back from multilateral and bilateral agreements, reflecting the instability and mistrust that characterize today’s geopolitical landscape. We are witnessing one withdrawal from the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) and continued deadlock on the proposed Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT). The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is under growing strain from escalating geopolitical tensions, most notably Russia’s war in Ukraine, which was a key factor behind the 2022 NPT Review Conference’s failure to adopt an outcome document. Meanwhile, the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) has emerged as a response to the deepening divide between nuclear- weapon states and non-nuclear-weapon states, but it still lacks support from nuclear-armed states. Additionally, as of February 2026, the last remaining nuclear arms-control agreement – the New START between the United States and the Russian Federation – will no longer be in effect, further weakening global arms-control effort. Today, according to Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), global stockpiles remain high, with roughly 12,200 nuclear warheads in existence, nearly 90% of them held by the United States and the Russian Federation.

In this challenging environment, strengthening nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament regime requires renewed political commitment and practical steps. As we approach the 2026 NPT Review Conference, it is vital to rebuild trust among states through greater transparency, risk-reduction measures, and renewed dialogue between nuclear-armed states. Although the current geopolitical climate offers little hope for a consensus final document, it is important to define what success can realistically look like. After two consecutive NPT Review Conferences without agreement, a third failure would further undermine the Treaty’s credibility, making expectations achievable and visible recommitment to NPT objectives all the more essential. Even without a final outcome document, the NPT will endure: its obligations remain legally binding, and its role at the heart of the global non-proliferation architecture will continue. The Treaty does not exist in a vacuum and is inevitably shaped by broader geopolitical realities. In this context, success should focus on states reaffirming past commitments and agreeing on practical, forward-looking steps. Demonstrating unity of purpose, maintaining dialogue, and advancing measures that strengthen the regime would already constitute meaningful progress, even in the absence of consensus.

Additionally, revitalizing multilateral forums, advancing long-overdue negotiations on the FMCT, and preserving the norm against nuclear testing remains critical. Equally important is supporting efforts under the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to ensure the peaceful use of nuclear energy while addressing emerging proliferation risks. Given that the risk of nuclear weapons being used is now considered the highest since the darkest days of the Cold War, it is urgent to raise public awareness about the dangers and consequences of nuclear war. In this regard, the adoption of the First Committee of a new resolution to mandate a study on the effects of nuclear war is a welcome development.

Eighty years after the dawn of the nuclear age, our task remains unchanged: to ensure that these weapons are never used again. Ultimately, the only guarantee against the use of nuclear weapons is their complete elimination. In this complex and challenging moment, there is an opportunity for world leaders to step forward and work together toward a world free of nuclear weapons. History shows that times of crisis have often sparked major breakthroughs in nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament – and this moment must be no exception.