(8th meeting) Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT)

The ninth plenary meeting of the 2026 Review Conference of Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons is called to order. Excellencies, distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen, as decided by the conference, this plenary meeting is dedicated to the presentations from non-governmental organizations. I would like to welcome the representatives of the 154 accredited non-governmental organizations that have come from all over the world to follow the proceedings of the 2026 NPT Review Conference and to express their views. We all appreciate efforts by non-governmental organizations in strengthening the global non-proliferation regime and in promoting nuclear disarmament. We also appreciate their expertise and dedication that are crucial in our efforts towards the realization of our common objective of a world free of nuclear weapons. I would like to make special note of the presence of the Hibakusha. I wish to thank them for their long-standing and determined efforts to spread the message of peace and of the need for a world free of nuclear weapons. I am convinced that the joint voice of civil society will give further impetus for the conference to intensify our efforts aimed at strengthening the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Delegates will also have noted that on the General Assembly lobby, the first floor as well as the basement the first basement of this building, there are some educative exhibitions organized by States Parties, our partners in civil society, and the International Atomic Energy Agency. Before moving to the NGO segment, I would like to remind delegations that the list of speakers for the general exchange of views under Main Committee I has closed. But the list of speakers for Main Committee II and Main Committee III remain open. I invite delegations wishing to make statements during the general exchange of views under these two Main Committees to inscribe through the e-delegate portal. I have 32 organizations on the list for this session. Each organization has been invited to speak for three minutes. The first speaker on the list is Mr. Jiro Hamasumi of the Japan Confederation of A and H Bomb Survivors Organizations, the Nihon Hidankyo. You have the floor, sir.

Chairperson, distinguished delegates, thank you for the opportunity to speak on behalf of the hibakusha. I am Inuyutaro Hiroshima hibakusha. 15 on August 6, 1945, the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, when my mother was three months pregnant with me. My father had left home for work that day. My relatives in the city fled to my house located 4 km away from the hypocenter. From that day on, about 30 people stayed together at our house. But, only my father never came home. My mother and sisters went in search for him, but They recovered only the buck of his belt, a bundle of keys, and his purse. At my house, the evacuees died one after another. The town was full of those who fled from the city. Bodies were gathered in the playground of a primary school. Four or five were cremated together every day over next month and a half. The hibakusha could neither die nor live as human beings. Having been given life in exchange for my father's death, I have never spent a day without thinking of him. The war is not over yet as there are still as many as 12,000 nuclear weapons in the world. We can never feel at ease until that number reaches zero. The atomic bombings 80 years ago still continue to inflict damage on the surviving hibakusha physically, economically, and mentally. Atomic bombs are weapons of the devil that cannot coexist with humanity. However, we, the hibakusha, have consistently resisted against nuclear weapons. Please visit our A-bomb exhibition now held in the lobby of the U1 building. Nihon Ki Dan Kyog, founded on August 10, 1956, proclaimed in its founding declaration message to the world that, "We hibakusha have reassured our will to save humanity from its crisis through the lessons learned from our experiences, while at the same time saving ourselves. For the past seven years, we have upheld our vow and appealed domestically and internationally, 'No more hibakusha'." 56 years have passed since the NPT entered into force. We urge you to immediately implement the promise you have made at the 2000 Review Conference, which was reaffirmed in 2010, namely the unequivocal undertaking by the nuclear-weapon States to accomplish the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals. In 1982, during the second UN Special Session on Disarmament, standing at the rostrum of the General Assembly Hall here, Yamaguchi Senji, hibakusha of Nagasaki, appealed, "No more Hiroshima, no more Nagasaki, no more war, no more hibakusha." nuclear weapons were used because we went to a war. That's why we must not wage war. Let us work together to build a human society free from nuclear weapons and war. Thank you very much.

I thank the distinguished representative of Nihon Hidankyo. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of the Japan Council Against Atomic and Hydrogen Bombs, Gensuke. You have the floor.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. We of the Japan Council Against Atomic and Hydrogen Bombs, Genhishi Kyok, is working to achieve the prevention of nuclear war, ban and elimination of nuclear weapons, and support and solidarity with the hibakusha. This conference is taking place under the worst and most dangerous situation, with wars and killings rampant, and the danger of the use of nuclear weapons is increasing. On the one hand, the overwhelming majority of countries in the world are the non-nuclear weapons states under the NPT, abide by the obligation of non-proliferation of not to develop or acquire nuclear weapons. close to 100 countries have ratified and signed the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, TPNW, and many more countries are operating nuclear weapon-free zones in many regions. On the other hand, however, the nuclear weapons states have failed to implement the elimination of nuclear weapons, the commitment of the unequivocal undertaking, and keep promoting the expansion and modernization of their nuclear arsenals. Some are even launching and continuing armed attacks on non-nuclear weapons states, including attacking, occupying, or controlling nuclear facilities. This atrocity continues to this day, all in violation of the UN Charter. The NPT takes a stand on the UN Charter and is aimed to avert the danger of nuclear war and protect the security of all nations. The only guarantee for achieving this objective is the complete elimination of nuclear weapons. In the hope that the conference will be fruitful, toward that end, I want to propose the following three points. First, nuclear weapons states should immediately cease the use of force against non-nuclear weapons states, as well as attacks or seizure of their nuclear facilities. Issues on the implementation of nuclear non-proliferation safeguards should be resolved through negotiations. Second, the Conference should reaffirm all agreements reached by the previous Review Conferences. The nuclear weapons states should fulfill their obligation under Article VI and report on their progress. The TPNW should be recognized as complementary to the NPT, and its universalization encouraged. Third, The use of nuclear weapons is a crime against humanity. Nuclear deterrence, nuclear sharing, nuclear umbrella, all should be eliminated. Finally, I want to call on all the governments and civil society organizations to make opportunities to hear the hibakusha's testimonies and share their commitment to the abolition of nuclear weapons. Thank you for your attention.

I thank the distinguished representative of the Japan Council Against Atomic and Hydrogen Bombs. I now have the honor to invite Mr. Kazumi Matsui and Mr. Shiro Suzuki, mayors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, mayors of peace. You have the floor, sir.

Good morning, everyone. My name is Matsui Kazumi. mayor of Hiroshima, and the president of Mayors for Peace. It is a great honor to address you here. Today, armed conflicts continue to unfold, claiming the lives of innocent civilians and destroying vital infrastructure. We also worry that neglecting the rule of law, including the UN Charter, could trigger even more conflicts. Even if conflicts are fought with conventional weapons, the involvement of nuclear weapons states heightens the risk of nuclear weapon use, causing inhumane consequences up to extreme levels. As ordinary citizens, We are forced to live our daily lives with a profound sense of anxiety. In every age, it is innocent civilians who fall victim to war. I strongly urge policymakers around the world to address issues rationally, rather than labeling others as either good or evil.

And arguing over whether attacks are justified.

Now more than ever, we must be have the value of nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation framework. The NPT has underpinned the international order through its three pillars, nuclear disarmament, non-proliferation, and peaceful use of nuclear energy. In recent years, however, we have seen little tangible progress toward nuclear disarmament. Having reviewed the achievement to date, we call upon all policymakers to return with strong determination to face negotiation as required by Article VI of the Treaty. The Mayors for Peace initiative is being based on the ardent desire for peace for the Hibakusha, who rose from the ashes of devastation. Today, it has grown into a global network of approximately 8,600 cities. Even amid severe international conditions, we will never give up. By deepening dialogue and solidarity among citizens and strengthening grassroots-level efforts, we will support peace initiatives at the national level. Ladies and gentlemen, all participants, I believe that you can understand the importance to overcome the current reliance on fragile nuclear deterrence and wish for true peace. Once again, I urge all the policymakers to advance nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation through diplomatic effort based on dialogue. Thank you.

I am Suzuki Shiro, mayor of Nagasaki. In August 1945, atomic bomb were dropped on the city of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, instantly reducing these lively cities to ruins. By the end of that year, a total of approximately 210,000 precious lives had been lost. The sufferings of the past seem to be fading away. I fear this oblivion. I fear that such forgetfulness may lead to a new acceptance of the use of atomic bombs. These words were left to us by the late Taniguchi Sumiteru, who at the age of 16 was exposed to the atomic bombing in Nagasaki and suffered severe deep red burns across his entire back. Despite such immense suffering, he dedicated his life to lead the peace movement. I believe his warning has become increasingly relevant today as the nuclear taboo erodes and the reliance on nuclear deterrence deepens. I am also deeply concerned that the downward spiral of force against force may further escalate, ultimately leading to the outbreak of a nuclear war. Nuclear weapons against nuclear weapons. As a representative of a wartime atomic bomb city, I hereby appeal to you all with unwavering conviction. Nuclear weapons are absolute evil. Their total abolition is the only path for humanity to preserve life on Earth for further generations. Now, I strongly urge all state parties to reaffirm the commitments made at previous conferences I call upon you to fulfill your obligation to pursue negotiations on nuclear disarmament in good faith as mandated by Article VI of the NPT and to present a concrete path towards making tangible progress on nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation measures. Before closing, let me share with you all the following message. Nagasaki must remain the last wartime atomic bombing site. Thank you.

I thank the mayors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki for your statements. I now give the floor to Ms. Mika Yokota, Governor of Hiroshima Prefecture.

Mr. Chair, distinguished delegates, and members of civil society, I am Mika Yokota, Governor of Hiroshima Prefecture and President of HOPE. It is my great honor to address the NPT Review Conference.

Today, we face a real danger that the nuclear taboo is broken.

Nuclear weapons are extremely inhumane.

They burn.

Injure, and kill all people, including innocent children, destroy all living beings and infrastructure, and inflict massive long-term suffering through radiation. From both humanitarian and ethical standpoints, nuclear weapons must never be used. Yet, as long as they exist, the risk of their use, whether by intent or accident, will remain.

Any use of nuclear weapons would clearly go against the terms of international law and could trigger escalation that would reversely devastate our world.

Humanity and nuclear weapons cannot coexist.

There are still 12,241 nuclear weapons in the world, possessing more than 135,000 times the destructive power of the one dropped on Hiroshima. We must never grow accustomed to this abnormal situation. That is why it is the responsibility of all of us to reinforce the nuclear taboo, moving away from the risk of nuclear use. We need security policies that do not rely on nuclear deterrence. Hiroshima will work with SIPRI, ICAN, and other partners to advance research on practical approaches to such security. I call on all States Parties to pursue this path.

It is increasingly important for all the people.

To carry forward Hibakusha's message and to make every effort to realize a world without nuclear weapons through mutual trust.

And cooperation. I call on world political and military leaders, as well as the youth, to visit the atomic bombed sites. To secure a sustainable planet and the future of humankind, we urge that nuclear abolition should be included among the United Nations' next goal. To all NPT State Parties, please, at this conference, make every effort to reach a consensus outcome on nuclear disarmament. Thank you.

I thank the Governor of Hiroshima Prefecture. I now give the floor to Ms. Yuko Baba, Vice Governor of Nagasaki Prefecture.

Chair, representatives of governments and members of civil society, I am Yuko Baba, Vice Governor of Nagasaki Prefecture. I'd like to express my sincere respect to all those who organized this NPT Review Conference. I'm deeply honored that Nagasaki Prefecture has the opportunity to address this issue for the first time. Eighty years after the atomic bombing, the people of Nagasaki have continued to call for a world without nuclear weapons. Harm from nuclear weapons does not end with the explosion. Radiation exposure continues over the long term, threatening human health and damaging both lives and societies. Recently, the UN established an independent scientific panel for assessing the effects of nuclear war, such as impacts on climate change and food insecurity. Dr. Masao Tomonaga from Nagasaki is also participating. The issue of nuclear weapons is no longer past tragedy of just Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It is a shared challenge that all humanity must confront. However, we are seeing accelerating trends that undo nuclear disarmament progress and undermine the nuclear nonproliferation regime. International cooperation frameworks, including the NPT itself, are facing serious challenges. I stand before you with a strong sense of urgency, carrying Nagasaki's desire to be the last place to suffer an atomic bombing. Today, emerging technologies such as AI are increasingly incorporated into nuclear weapon systems and frameworks. Misinterpretation of information and accelerated decision making may cause unintended escalation. What makes this moment especially urgent is that the divisions we face are not driven by AI, but by human beings. Without dialogues grounded in our shared fundamental human values, neither nuclear deterrence nor nuclear abolition can function. For decades, the hibakusha who experienced first-hand the devastating effects of nuclear weapons have conveyed these fundamental human values to the world. However, the time they have to share their testimonies is running out. For this reason, we must ensure that the realities of the atomic bombings are passed on, while also advancing dialogue across generations and different perspectives. For a nuclear weapon-free future, Nagasaki remains committed to broadening participation in peace efforts and fostering imaginative and empathetic people. I would like to pose a question to you all. Can humanity truly guarantee that Nagasaki will be the last place to suffer an atomic bombing? The answer depends on the choices we make today. Let me conclude with these words from Hibakusha. May a peaceful and beautiful earth, free of nuclear weapons and war, be inherited by our children. Thank you for your attention.

I thank the distinguished Vice Governor of Nagasaki Prefecture. I now invite the distinguished representative of the Korean Atomic Bomb Victims Association.

My name is Sim Jintae, head of the Hapcheon branch of the Korean Atomic Bomb Victims Association. My father was forcibly sent to Hiroshima in 1941, and my mother was also sent to Hiroshima. My father was forcibly conscripted to Hiroshima by the Japanese colonial authorities in 1941, and my mother also worked in a munitions factory in Hiroshima. I was born in Hiroshima and was exposed to the atomic bombing when I was three years old. More than 100,000 Koreans were massacred. A significant number of them, like my parents, were forced laborers. More than 50,000 Koreans lost their lives. More than 100,000 Koreans were exposed to the atomic bomb dropped by the United States.

A significant number of them, like my parents, were conscripted laborers living there under Japanese colonial rule.

Over 50,000 Koreans lost their lives. For those who survived, life was a living hell. Many perished at sea while attempting to return to Korea by boat. Even those who managed to make it back to their hometowns were forced to endure suffering amidst abject poverty, lingering health effects from the bombing, and neglect from the society. 일을 못하고 수입이 없으니 최소한의 치료조차 받지 못하는 악순환 속에서 눈물로 하루하루를 버텨야 했습니다. 저 역시 원인 모를 피부병에 시달리고 밥을 먹는 것보다 굶는 날이 더 많았습니다.

Too ill to work, and without income to afford even basic medical treatment, we had to struggle through each day.

With nothing but our tears.

I, too, suffer from an inexplicable skin disease, and there were far more days when I went.

Hungry than days when I had a meal.

I have been working as a branch manager of the Korean Wombop Association since 2001. During that time, the Wombop Association 고통 속에 신음하다 아무런 사과도 받지 못한 채 세상을 떠나는 모습을 수없이 지켜보았습니다. 그 후손들 역시 지금 이 순간에도 고통을 받고 있습니다. I have served as the head of the Hapcheon branch of Korean Atomic Bomb Victims Association since 2001. Over these years, I have witnessed countless victims of the atomic bombing pass away, groaning in agony, without ever.

Receiving a single apology.

Their descendants, too, continue to suffer to this very moment. I wish to ask Why must we die in this manner? Japan forcibly took the Korean people away from their land.

And the United States dropped the atomic bomb.

The Korean government turned its back on us.

They are victims, yet no perpetrators.

The Korean government turned its back on us. They are victims, but no perpetrators. What exactly are you doing? Are they simply waiting until all 1,500 surviving first-generation Korean victims pass away? Because no one has stepped forward to take responsibility, we, the Korean survivors of the atomic bombings, have fought this battle ourselves. It has been my lifelong conviction that the United.

States, the nation that dropped the atomic bombs, must offer a sincere apology and provide compensation. Therefore, we are currently.

Organizing an international people's tribunal in Seoul this coming November to hold the United States accountable for its actions. Our Korean atomic bomb victims and their descendants are suffering from the effects of the 모두 고철 덩어리가 될 때까지 끝까지 싸울 것입니다. 한국 원폭 피해자 문제에 많은 관심과 연대를 부탁드립니다. 감사합니다. Only when the United States offer an apology and provide compensation will no other nations dare to even contemplate the use of nuclear weapons.

All nations possessing nuclear arms must immediately dismantle their barbaric policies that threaten other countries and all of humanity with nuclear destruction.

We, the Korean survivors of the atomic bombs and our descendants, will continue to fight to the very end until these nuclear weapons, which are in essence illegal.

Instruments.

Of war and are reduced to nothing more than scrap metal.

We ask for your deep interest and solidarity with the cause of the Korean atomic bomb victims.

Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of the Korean Atomic Bomb Victims Association. I now invite the distinguished representative of the Affected Communities and Allies Working Group for a nuclear-free world.

Distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen, first, we would like to.

Extend our solidarity with diverse nuclear victims who have suffered nuclear and radioactive harm. We must recognize that the entire nuclear fuel chain, from uranium mining to waste disposal, undermines people's fundamental rights to life, health, and a clean environment. We urge member states to acknowledge that nuclear energy is neither peaceful nor a climate solution. To eliminate nuclear weapons globally, we must address the threat at its origin, the United States. The US decision to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki has never been deemed lawful by international authority. Furthermore, between 1946 and 1958, the US conducted nuclear tests on humans in the Marshall Islands, severely impacting the environment and altering the DNA of the Marshallese people, all without effective international oversight. We must acknowledge the dangers of nuclear technology, first felt in Africa. Uranium development in Dr. Congo provided the material for nuclear detonations in New Mexico, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki. Under Belgian occupation, the local population was exposed and their land and water remained contaminated to this day. Therefore, regarding Article IV of the NPT, we make the following proposal. We propose an NPT review to clarify Article IV's claim regarding the rights of industries, whether independent or dependent on the NPT, to use nuclear energy. Promoting nuclear technology can lead to more reactors and increased conflicts. We propose that NPT provide and disclose information to support this claim, including all impacts of uranium development. The NPT claim seems to prioritize state ambitions for colonization through the nuclear industrial complex over people's right to self-determination. We propose increased cooperation between NPT and the OACR to protect the UN system and its members from threats, as seen in the Democratic Republic of Congo and the Marshall Islands, from nuclear-armed states and their allies. It is crucial to oppose any nuclear testing or expansion of nuclear programs to prevent further health and environmental damage. We recommend that the Conference of the Parties evaluate each state's effective participation in the operation of the NPT every five years.

In closing, we urge NPT to oppose spiritual degradation and uphold the UN Charter.

By keeping the NPT as a vital instrument of international law. A world free of nuclear threats can only be achieved when the United States and countries that have developed nuclear weapons for defense against the US or others.

Have eliminated their nuclear arsenals. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of the Affected Communities and Allies Working Group for a Nuclear-Free World. I now invite the distinguished representative of the Manhattan Project for a Nuclear-Free World.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Last year, we co-organized the World Nuclear Victims Forum in Hiroshima and adopted the Declaration of the Rights of World Nuclear Victims. It acknowledges that we all have the right to not be exposed to ionizing radiation. It demands accountability of nuclear perpetrators, calls for the rights and reparations for nuclear victims, and offers guidelines to mitigate nuclear harm. This year marks the 15th anniversary of the ongoing Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster. More than 40,000 people are still displaced. The disaster changed the peaceful livelihood of local people who are now compelled to reside in areas where radioactive hotspots remain. One of the Fukushima evacuees who relocated from Fukushima with small children emphasized that, "Every person on Earth has the right to protect themselves from radiation exposure. Together with people all over the world, I hope we will reconsider the issues of nuclear energy as a matter of basic human rights related to life and health, and we demand not to give up those rights." Following the disaster, Japan conducted large-scale decontamination efforts to bring back residents to Fukushima, spending $40 billion. The contaminated soil generated was equivalent to 2 million 10-metric-ton truckloads. Instead of storing them as radioactive waste, Japan plans to recycle them in public projects nationwide. It is estimated that this will cost up to additional $30 billion. In 2023, Japan and TEPCO began dumping ALPS-treated contaminated water into the Pacific Ocean from the damaged nuclear site, despite prior release of a large amount of highly radioactive material following the disaster. This is not acceptable. Marine surveys after the March 1954 nuclear test at Bikini Atoll and recent studies revealed that radioactive material travels along ocean currents without being diluted in ocean water. Nuclear tests and disasters have spread contamination in the ocean, which is the source of all life, and it is our responsibility to protect the ocean for future generations. Mr. Chair, distinguished delegates, the true impact of radioactive contamination is often oppressed, while potentially devastating nuclear technology is deceptively promoted worldwide as sustainable or peaceful. Since we lack the technology to fully contain radioactive materials once released, prevention is the key to mitigate radioactive harm. Rather than investing billions of dollars to achieve nuclear ambitions, we ask NPT parties to focus our resources on protecting the inalienable rights to life and health of nuclear victims and affected communities. Let's create a nuclear-free future where no more nuclear victims are created. No nukes, no war. Thank you very much.

I thank the distinguished representative of the Manhattan Project for a Nuclear-Free World. I now invite the distinguished representative of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. The NPT was negotiated three years after the Cuban Missile Crisis, with nearly 40,000 nuclear warheads in US and Soviet arsenals, and US intelligence projecting that more than 20 nations could develop nuclear weapons within a decade. In that environment, the international community negotiated and adopted a legally binding instrument for nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament. The danger associated with nuclear weapons has always been the strongest argument for their non-proliferation and elimination. The drafters of the NPT used strong words: cessation, liquidation, elimination. They are in the preamble of the NPT and Article VI converts them into law. That obligation has not been suspended, it simply has not been met. What has been produced by nuclear-armed states instead is the performance of actions made to give the impression of compliance. Risk reduction is framed as the responsible alternative to disarmament when the treaty explicitly requires elimination. This conference must also address the barely veiled threats to use nuclear weapons during the review cycle. These threats are a violation of the UN Charter, of international humanitarian law, and of the most basic obligations that nuclear weapons states assumed when they signed this treaty. ICAN condemns these nuclear threats unconditionally, and this Review Conference should do the same. We also condemn the U.S. and Israeli attacks against Iran unequivocally on the grounds that these attacks are illegal, inflict unacceptable and indiscriminate human suffering, and threaten the nuclear non-proliferation regime. In addition to the failings of nuclear-armed states, we are witnessing the heads of government of non-nuclear weapons states parties to this treaty publicly embracing nuclear weapons, calling for increased salience of nuclear weapons in their security strategies. In 2017, states negotiated the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. In five years, the TPNW, since its entry into force, the TPNW has made meaningful progress towards implementation. The TPNW emerged, just as the NPT did, because of the growing danger of nuclear weapons and in recognition of the fact that the ongoing possession of nuclear weapons and reliance on them in security doctrines of some countries threatens the security of all countries. The TPNW complements the NPT. It is what Article VI looks like when you take it seriously. This November, the TPNW will convene its first review conference in New York. ICAN urges every state in this room to attend as a state party or, at a minimum, as an observer. The NPT's promise is the cessation, liquidation, and elimination of nuclear weapons. We stand with the majority of this conference membership in working to fulfill it. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of ICAN. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Reaching Critical Will, speaking on behalf of a joint civil society group on gender and intersectionality.

Thank you very much. Over the past two NPT review cycles, we've seen a resurgence of imperialist wars instigated by nuclear-armed states, with support of many of their allies. They have paid no regard to international law, becoming outlaws within the so-called rules-based order that they themselves constructed in the wake of World War II. In the NPT context, we are seeing this disregard of international law in the threats to use nuclear weapons and to resume explosive nuclear testing. New countries are talking about acquiring or sharing nuclear weapons. NPT states parties are sharing nuclear materials with non-states parties. Nuclear-armed states have bombed or are occupying nuclear power facilities. One nuclear-armed state is committing genocide, while another recently threatened to do the same. The nuclear-armed states are spending more than $100 billion a year on their arsenals, modernizing and expanding them, and building new bomb factories and delivery systems. And as these states are maintaining their capacity to commit massive nuclear violence, survivors and affected communities of past harm are not receiving the reparations or reciprocity they're owed. All of these actions are in violation of international law. All of these actions put the world more and more at risk every day, even as millions already suffer from poverty, war, climate chaos, displacement, and violence. And all of these actions are happening at the same time that the far right forces in many countries are mounting an attack against gender equality. We are seeing a denial of the freedom of gender diverse people to participate in public life. Violence against women, girls, trans, non-binary, and other gender non-conforming people is increasing, and more and more limits are being imposed on their freedom of movement and choice. Claims about meritocracy are being erroneously pitted against calls for diversity, as if the real problem is not lack of opportunity and equality. These trends of increasing nuclearism and gender repression are connected. Behind the mythology of nuclear weapons as purveyors of security and stability lies the pursuit and perception of power, and behind perceptions of power lies gender. For many people, their ideas about gender prescribes how they see the world and their role in it. Part of why gender diverse people and women are under attack is because certain people believe that their rightful dominance is being questioned. Similarly, countries are being invaded, occupied, and bombed, and political leaders are being assassinated or kidnapped because certain governments believe that they have the same right to assert their dominance over the world. We need to unpack this, these connections between power, security, control, nuclear weapons, gender and oppression. We need to unpack it here at the NPT Review Conference in our discussions and thinking about how to unstick the persistent obstacles to achieving any form of outcome at these meetings and in relation to achieving nuclear abolition. Diverse perspectives and participation, including gender and racial diversity, can help expose the insecurities that lie behind the pursuit of security through violence and bombs. It is precisely these insecurities, misperceptions, and hypocrisies that must be examined and overcome in order to achieve disarmament, peace, and justice. We might not be able to eliminate oppressive systems overnight, especially as those entrenched in as nuclearism and other forms of militarism. But we must allow ourselves the space to pursue security differently, to collectively envision and invent what we need to build a world that works for all, not just for a few. Because what is clear is that the current ways of working and ways of thinking about the world are leading only to more brutality and barbarism. We need nuclear abolition and freedom for now. Thank you very much.

I thank the distinguished representative of Reaching Critical Will. I now invite the distinguished representative of the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War.

Honorable chair, distinguished delegates, and civil society colleagues, we are in a crisis. You wouldn't know that walking into this room. In January, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists set the Doomsday Clock to 85 seconds to midnight, the closest we have been to nuclear war in human history. Every second, we stand on the precipice of annihilation. There's only one way to turn back this clock. NPT member states, especially the five recognized nuclear weapons states, must act on their Article VI obligations at this review conference. On behalf of tens of thousands of health professionals worldwide committed to protecting human and global health, I remind you there is no humanitarian response to any use of nuclear weapons. Even a single detonation would usher in a catastrophic new era, resulting in hundreds of thousands of deaths, severe injuries, and an unrecognizable radioactive wasteland. A nuclear war, no matter the scale, would threaten the lives of every person on this planet, immediately and forever after. Despite decades of evidence on their catastrophic impacts, the nuclear-armed states are brandishing warheads and threatening the planet, acting with impunity and disregard for international law, holding the rest of the world at their mercy as they test their limits. In the last year alone, the last remaining US-Russia arms control treaty expired, leaving no binding limits or structured arms control dialogue between the two largest nuclear-armed states, or indeed any of them. All nine nuclear-armed states have modernized or expanded their nuclear arsenals, investing an estimated $100 billion in 2025 alone. All while the majority of the nine nuclear-armed states have engaged in deadly, destabilizing armed conflict. The response to this manufactured chaos cannot be business as usual. This review conference faces a choice. Allow the P5 to keep their arsenals in perpetuity, making future use of nuclear weapons inevitable, or to act with the urgency this moment demands. Today, we call on each of you, especially nuclear weapon states, to turn statements into action, take responsibility for our collective future, and fulfill your Article VI obligations in good faith. Join the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons without delay. If we fail to act now, we may not have another chance. IPPNW's recommendations can be found in full online. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of the IPPNW. I now invite the distinguished representative of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation.

Honorable President, distinguished delegates, colleagues, and friends, our world is a time ticking bomb. There are more than 12,000 nuclear warheads in existence, each capable of killing hundreds of thousands, some even millions of people, and any one of which could trigger a chain reaction leading to full-scale nuclear war in less time than this session will last. Nothing short of human civilization and possibly life itself is at stake. The five nuclear weapons states recognized under the NPT, the United States, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom, France, and China, possess over 95% of the world's nuclear arsenal. With that power comes not only a moral responsibility, but a clear legal obligation under Article VI this treaty to pursue negotiations in good faith to achieve not only nuclear disarmament but also general and complete disarmament. Nuclear disarmament and nuclear nonproliferation are not separate tracks towards a safer world. They are intertwined and inseparable paths. As Joseph Rotblat warned in his 1995 Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech, and I quote, "If the militarily most powerful and least threatened states need nuclear weapons for their security, how can one deny such security to countries that are truly insecure? The present nuclear policy is a recipe for proliferation. It is a policy for disaster," end of quote. And we join the voices of Hibakusha and countless others who have come before us in urging all NPT States Parties to take immediate and meaningful action. Condemn and cease all military combat, including wars that risk escalation towards nuclear conflict, and reaffirm the primacy of international law and peaceful resolution of disputes. Number two, unequivocally renounce the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons under any circumstances and reject policies such as launch on warning and first use that heighten rather than reduce the risk of nuclear war. Number three, commit to a concrete, time-bound path toward the world free of nuclear weapons, including by joining the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. The first step in this journey must be clear to all. The United States and the Russian Federation, which together possess more than 85% of the world's nuclear arsenals, must urgently restart bilateral negotiations to reduce and ultimately eliminate their stockpiles. The remaining nuclear-armed states must pause all modernization and arsenal increase programs and commit to a transparent, verifiable, an irreversible process of disarmament. Number four, recognize and assist all victims of the nuclear age, including survivors of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, those impacted by more than 2,000 nuclear explosions during the so-called nuclear testing period, and uranium mining workers and others harmed by the development of nuclear weapons, ensuring justice, support, and environmental remediation. This call is not just an abstract moral appeal. It is a prerequisite for human survival. The credibility of the NPT and the future of humanity depend on the actions we take during this conference. Thank you, Honorable President.

I thank the distinguished representative of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation. I now invite the distinguished representative of the International Trade Union Confederation.

President, distinguished delegates, I speak on behalf of the International Trade Union Confederation, representing 200 million workers through national trade union centers in 169 countries. For workers and their unions, the threat of nuclear weapons is fundamentally incompatible with the right to live and work in peace. The continued existence of nuclear weapons endangers not only global security, but also the social and economic fabric upon which working people depend. The global labor movement is gravely concerned by the continued modernization and expansion of nuclear arsenals, rising geopolitical tensions, and the erosion of arms control agreements. Global annual spending on nuclear weapons surpassed a staggering 100 billion U.S. dollars in 2024. We recall that Article VI of the Non-Proliferation Treaty obliges all States Parties to pursue negotiations on effective measures relating to nuclear disarmament. Workers around the world are demanding a renewed sense of urgency and responsibility. Resources that are currently devoted to nuclear weapons must urgently be redirected towards addressing the pressing needs of working people, decent work for all, universal social protection, quality public services, and a just transition to a low carbon economy for all. Only social justice will provide the human security that workers want. In this regard, the labor movement emphasizes the importance of just conversion strategies. Industries and workers currently linked to nuclear weapons production must not be left behind. With forward-looking industrial policies, social dialogue, and public investment, we call on all governments to develop fair conversion plans that shift skills, technologies, and productive capacity toward peaceful, sustainable, and socially beneficial sectors. Trade unions stand ready to work with governments and employers in and between countries to design and implement such plans and call for the creation of a fair conversion institute under the auspices of the United Nations. This is not only about disarmament, it is about building resilient economies, creating decent jobs, and ensuring that the transition away from nuclear weapons contributes to shared prosperity. Social dialogue is essential to achieving sustainable peace, in line with the International Labour Organization Recommendation 205 on employment and decent work for peace and resilience. The global labour movement is committed to working with governments, employers and international institutions to advance common security approaches. By investing in diplomacy, negotiation, and cooperation, we can help build the trust and conditions necessary to eliminate the perceived need for nuclear deterrence. We urge this Review Conference to deliver concrete, time-bound, and verifiable steps toward nuclear disarmament. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of the International Trade Union Confederation. I now invite the distinguished representative of the International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms.

Honorable President, Excellencies, distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen, my name is Dr. Deepshikha Kumari, and on behalf of the International Association of Nuclear Arms, I thank you for this opportunity. 30 years ago, in 1996, A global civil society movement and a General Assembly resolution advanced the following question to the International Court of Justice. The question was, is the threat or use of nuclear weapons in any circumstance permitted under international law? In its opinion, The Court raised concerns on whether any threat or use of nuclear weapons can ever be compatible with the principles of distinction, proportionality, necessity and the prohibition of unnecessary suffering. The Court concluded that the use of nuclear weapons is scarcely reconcilable with laws governing armed conflict. The Court also referred to the Martens Clause, which affirms that even where treaty law does not expressly regulate every circumstance, civilians and combatants remain protected by the principles of humanity and the dictates of public conscience. The Court also unanimously concluded that there exists an obligation to pursue in good faith and bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects. This unanimous conclusion gives an authoritative expression to Article VI of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. At a moment marked by geopolitical confrontation, nuclear modernization, emerging technologies, and renewed rhetoric of testing, the imperative to implement Article VI becomes even more acute. Honorable President, today, research on nuclear winter demonstrates that even a limited nuclear exchange could trigger global climatic disruption on a planetary scale. The heat, radiation and long-term consequences of nuclear weapons cannot be confined in time and space, and implicate intergenerational harm and possible collapse of conditions necessary for life itself. The legal case for disarmament is therefore reinforced not only by Article VI and international humanitarian law, but increasingly by broader principles governing catastrophic harm. With the 2025 advisory opinion on climate change, the International Court of Justice has reaffirmed prevention of serious transboundary harm and obligations owed to present and future generations. Honorable President, the indefinite retention of nuclear weapons cannot be reconciled with an obligation to conclude negotiations for their elimination. Nor can doctrines premised on perpetual readiness to inflict mass destruction be squared with the principles of humanity or the imperative to safeguard future generations. We therefore humbly submit that the survival of humanity and the survival of the treaty demands movement from rhetoric to meaningful negotiations, from negotiations to implementation, and from implementation to abolition. Thank you for your time and attention.

I thank the distinguished representative of the International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms. I now invite the distinguished representative of the Arms Control Association.

Thank you, Mr. President. Delegates, I'm honored to deliver the statement on realizing Article VI-related goals and objectives on behalf of more than 50 organizations, including my own, the Arms Control Association. To be successful, this review conference must reaffirm REVCON decisions from 1995, 2000, and 2010, and deliver tangible commitments for action that help put us back on the path to the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons. As this meeting convenes, none of the nuclear-armed five can credibly claim they are today meeting their key Article VI commitments. For the first time in decades, there's no legally binding treaty limiting the size and composition of the largest strategic nuclear arsenals. Independent researchers confirm that China continues to expand its arsenal. France just announced it will begin to increase the size of its arsenal. There are no active negotiations on disarmament. The United States has threatened to resume nuclear testing, quote, "on an equal basis," and has accused another, China, of conducting a prohibited nuclear test. The wars against Ukraine and Iran further highlight the failure to make progress on legally binding negative security assurances. Worse yet, with China's nuclear buildup in mind, many members of the U.S. nuclear weapons establishment are lobbying for a buildup of U.S. nuclear forces. Delegates, ladies and gentlemen, more nuclear weapons will not make us safer. Halting the spiral of nuclear tensions is in every nation's interest. This requires more than vague pronouncements and promises. It requires action on disarmament diplomacy. It is tragic that the U.S. and Russian leaders have failed for 20 years to engage in meaningful, sustained negotiations on a successor to New START. It is also notable that following the expiration of New START, the United States has proposed multilateral talks on nuclear arms control. Such an approach may sound appealing. After all, all five nuclear-armed states have Article VI commitments to engage in such talks. But without a serious strategy for success, this could be a formula for further inaction, especially given the complexities of a five-sided negotiation. And any new multilateral initiative should not be allowed to substitute for the immediate commencement of serious bilateral talks between the United States and Russia, and the United States and China, that could yield concrete outcomes, and perhaps more quickly. To improve the chance of success in future arms reduction talks, and to prevent unconstrained nuclear competition, we call on all five NPT nuclear states to agree to a freeze on the number of their strategic launchers at current levels. The final conference outcome, in our view, should call upon the nuclear weapons states to engage no later than the end of 2026 in negotiations, bilaterally and/or multilaterally, to end the nuclear arms race and on nuclear disarmament, and to refrain from increasing the size of their nuclear arsenals. It should reaffirm support for the global moratorium on nuclear explosive tests. It should call for prompt action by Annex 2 states on ratification before 2030. It should call upon the five nuclear-armed states to engage in technical discussions on new confidence-building measures to ensure that ongoing activities at former test sites are consistent with the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty. It should call upon the United States specifically to ratify the protocols to three key nuclear-weapons-free zone treaties by 2027, which will bring into force legally binding negative security assurances for the zonal states. Delegates, this is no ordinary NPT meeting. The stakes are high. We must close the disarmament deficit. We wish you success and offer our help and support. And the full version of this statement is online. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of the Arms Control Association. I now invite the distinguished representatives of the International Peace Bureau and the Middle East Treaty Organization.

Honorable chair, distinguished delegates, excellencies, and colleagues.

God says in the Quran, "We made you people and tribes to meet together." Therefore, we stand today on behalf of humanity to reaffirm that living in peace and security is one human right that is indivisible.

...Middle East Treaty Organization and the International Peace Bureau. Today, we face a declining security environment, renewed geopolitical competition, modernization and expansion of nuclear arsenals, erosion of arms control frameworks, and declining transparency. Recent military actions involving two states possessing nuclear weapons against a threshold state during ongoing negotiations highlight the growing risks of escalation and the erosion of diplomatic processes. This undermines predictability, weakens cooperation, and puts the NPT itself at risk. A weakened NPT risks opening a Pandora's box. As global and regional tension rise, it is essential not to allow them to overshadow our commitments and obligations. Complete nuclear disarmament, bringing peace that does not depend on fear. Nuclear risks are particularly acute in the Middle East, and the region has a pressing need for nuclear diplomacy. This need already being addressed through the ongoing UN conference on a Middle East weapons of free mass destruction free zone. This conference, established by General Assembly resolution 73/546, has convened annually since 2019, providing an exclusive space for dialogue based on consensus among regional states, thereby preserving the possibility of Israel's future participation. We remind states that disarmament begins with conversations and advances through commitments and action. This process shows that disarmament in the Middle East has already begun. It is fragile, but real, and must be protected.

We urge all States parties of the NPT to support the UN Conference on the Zone and call the United States and Israel to join the process in good faith, particularly at this time of heightened tensions, in order to help ensure that the Conference continues its work and fulfills its mandate in the aftermath of recent regional developments. We call on all States of the NPT to reaffirm the visibility of treaties obligations, recognizing nonproliferation, disarmament, and peaceful uses as mutually reinforcing, demonstrate measurable progress on nuclear disarmament, support and actively engage with fresh initiatives, particularly the process in the Middle East.

We know the dangers.

Nuclear weapons pose, and we have the means to eliminate them and prevent their spread without firing a single shot. We are not facing a lack of knowledge or tools, but a lack of political will. The path forward is clear. The frameworks exist. The obligations are agreed. What remains is the choice to act and the responsibility to do so. Thank you.

Thank you.

I thank the representatives of International Peace Bureau and the Middle East Treaty Organization. And now I have the honor to invite Ms. Gil Kim of Solidarity for Peace and Reunification of Korea, Spock.

Thank you. The collapse of the U.S.-Russia nuclear disarmament system and the unlawful military threats from nuclear-armed states toward non-nuclear states, particularly the U.S. aggression against Iran during nuclear negotiations, are weakening the NPT regime and expanding military confrontation while intensifying the global nuclear crisis. In this context, the past, present, and future nuclear issues on the Korean Peninsula go beyond being merely regional concerns. They serve as a microcosm of the global structure of nuclear confrontation and crisis today, as well as the prospects for the resolution. Of the approximately 700,000 victims of the US atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, 1/10, or around 70,000 people, were Koreans. Present-day nuclear confrontation on the Korean Peninsula lies within the broader historical continuum of Japan's unlawful colonial rule and the US atomic bombings. The US use of nuclear weapons as part of its strategy to contain the Soviet Union marked the beginning of US-Soviet nuclear confrontation. as well as the starting point for the division of the Korean Peninsula, the Korean War, and the subsequent nuclear standoff. Under the ROK-U.S. alliance, the United States deployed tactical nuclear weapons in South Korea, using South Korea as a forward base against the Soviet Union and China, and subsequently provided a nuclear umbrella and extended deterrence. Confronted with this, North Korea in turn entered into alliances with the Soviet Union and China and pursued nuclear development and acquisition. This dynamic has driven the military confrontation between the two sides into a full-fledged nuclear standoff. In other words, U.S. extended deterrence is the cause of North Korea's nuclear weapons development and possession. The Korean Peninsula is the only region in the world where opposing sides confront each other with preemptive nuclear strike doctrines. The ROK-US combined military exercises, the largest in the world, serve as a trigger that could escalate this acute nuclear confrontation on the Korean Peninsula into nuclear war. To reduce the likelihood of nuclear war, the US preemptive nuclear strike doctrine and the DPRK nuclear forces policy law must be abolished as a top priority. Extended deterrence is a violation of Article 2, paragraph 4 of the UN Charter, which prohibits the threat of force, and Article 1 of the TPNW. The way out of the Korean Peninsula's never-ending mutual threats, deterrence, and confrontation inherent in a security dilemma lies in the conclusion of a peace agreement on the Korean Peninsula and a DPRK-U.S. non-aggression treaty. This will be the only way to achieve denuclearization and peace on the Korean Peninsula. It will also set a precedent for a nuclear-armed state moving toward disarmament and open the way to a nuclear-free world and lasting peace. We will hold the International People's Tribunal in Seoul to examine the illegality of the U.S. nuclear bombings in 1945 and to demand that the U.S. make an official apology and provide compensation. Through this, we aim to hold the U.S. responsible for its past nuclear use and the current nuclear confrontation on the Korean Peninsula, and to present a path toward future denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and the world. Thank you.

I thank the representative of Solidarity for Peace and Reunification of Korea. I now have the honor to invite Mr. Daniel Gudbrandsson, who is delivering a civil society Nordic statement.

President, distinguished delegates, I thank you for taking the time to listen to civil society statements. I take the floor on behalf of 20 civil society organizations from Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, and Iceland. We urge all state parties to observe, to take in our observers, to take in our message. We will start by reminding everyone in this room that everything that happens here during this conference will impact human lives. President, with the heightened risk, we cannot wait. The world knows only too well the dangers that nuclear weapons represent. This alone should be enough for this review conference to take concrete action to strengthen the NPT. Lately, we have spent countless hours debunking arguments in support of Nordic nuclear weapons and European nuclear umbrellas. Distrust in security guarantees and lack of diplomatic relations create tensions and insecurity among us. In such conditions, hate and polarity spreads. This corrupts our societies and creates the false illusion that nuclear weapons create security. In fact, it only makes our world more dangerous. Moreover, the current debate surrounding European nuclear weapons reveal a reoccurring pattern of Eurocentrism. As is well known, the majority of states worldwide support the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, reflecting a broad global consensus against nuclear armament. However, this fact is completely disregarded when a few European countries contemplating expanding or hosting nuclear weapons, thereby endangering global security. All European countries have legally binding commitments under the NPT not to receive the transfer of or accept control over nuclear weapons. Further nuclear proliferation in Europe would undermine the treaty at a time when its legitimacy and effectiveness are already under significant strain. The voice for European and Nordic nuclear weapons do not represent the majority of the European and Nordic population. On the contrary, it is a slippery slope towards nuclear proliferation. The attention of the NPT was and still is to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons. President, over the time, the Nordic countries have actively worked towards nuclear weapons abolition and non-proliferation, reflecting a long-term regional commitment to reducing nuclear threats. It is therefore with great concern that we now witness the governments of the Nordic countries now weakening that historical work and defending the nuclear sharing concept. An argument has been made that the sharing of nuclear weapons in Europe was never prohibited by the NPT and has had a positive effect on preventing proliferation. Given the current discussion worldwide, such argument seems like a tiny band-aid on a very large leak. President, it is our point of view that nuclear weapons sharing programs go against the very principle and the intention of this treaty. In the process of this review conference, We therefore urge the Nordic countries and all distinguished delegates to create a framework that seeks to reduce the reliance on nuclear weapons sharing concept. At a time marked by an escalating nuclear threat and increasing reliance on nuclear weapons in a national security strategies, it is of the utmost importance that the Nordic countries strengthen their traditional policies of detente. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative for the Civil Society Nordic Statement. I now have the honor to call Mr. Jean-Marie Colin and Ms. Janina Ruther, European Partner Organizations of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, ICAN.

Mr. Chair, Excellencies and Friends, We, the European Partner Organization of ICAN, wish to raise concern about current deviation in the interpretation and implementation of the NPT. Nuclear-weapon States have committed under Article VI to pursue negotiations in good faith. This obligation was reaffirmed by the ICG in 1996, which confirmed the existence of a legal obligation not only to negotiate, but to achieve a precise result, nuclear disarmament in all its aspects. In January 2022, the same nuclear weapons states also declared the intentions to prevent an arms race that would benefit none and endanger all. However, all nuclear states, whether democratic or authoritarian, have been and are right now acting in contradiction with these commitments and are contributing to the destabilization of NPT. Recently, non-nuclear weapon European states have also been contributing to this weakening of the non-proliferation regime. States like Belgium, Denmark, Greece, Germany, the Netherlands, Poland, and Sweden are reaffirming the fallacious security logic based on the threat of the use of weapons of mass destruction by engaging in forms of nuclear arms cooperation proposed by France. After NATO's nuclear alliance and that between Russia and Belarus, the French initiative contributes to establishing nuclear alliance as a norm. In this context, one question arises: how can these states claim to defend the NPT with supporting policies that go against its spirit and may even violate it in the future?

Security on fear amounts to encouraging proliferation. If every state believes it must be feared in order to be free, as the French President Macron recently stated, then all states will be driven to acquire nuclear weapons. At a time when three nuclear-armed states are involved in armed conflict, we must ask ourselves, is this a reasonable path? As civil society organizations and as citizens of European states, we call on our governments to finally ensure security through the abolition of nuclear weapons. Have you already forgotten a not so distant past shaped by nuclear fear? From Hiroshima and Nagasaki to the Cold War, history has shown that civilian populations lived through constant crisis under the permanent threat of escalation with states ready to use weapons whose humanitarian and environmental consequences are catastrophic. We cannot accept that this is the vision of the future that our governments offer to the younger generations already confronted with climate disruption. This would be a major political failure. The States mentioned would bear particular responsibility. As democracies, they repeatedly invoke their democratic values, which we cannot hold in high enough regard. And that is precisely what they must uphold: the rule of law, not undermine it. Let us be clear. Nuclear weapons pose an existential threat to the very survival of humanity. We know that the vast majority of States reject nuclear weapons, as demonstrated by their commitments to the NPT, the TPNW, and nuclear-weapon-free zones. This majority must now make its voice heard firmly in all international forums, against the minority of States that is pursuing human security at risk. We want to support them in this, and we call on those States that are undermining the NPT to finally take seriously the demands and security needs of the majority of States and the civilian populations. Thank you.

I thank the representatives of European partner organizations of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons. I have the honor to call upon Mr. Rino Gianni of Pathways to Peace.

Thank you.

Good morning, everyone.

We convene together at a moment of heightened insecurity in Eastern Europe,

where geopolitical tensions, armed conflict, and renewed reliance on nuclear deterrence have increased nuclear escalation more than at any time in recent decades.

The war in Ukraine has sparked regional discussions around nuclear sharing arrangements, modernization of arsenals, nuclear threats, and creating nuclear weapon programs.

This rhetoric is extremely alarming. these only increase the risk of miscalculation and intentional use that can create catastrophic humanitarian and

ecological consequences that would extend far beyond national borders. Civil society stands with a clear message: nuclear weapons do not provide security. The legacy of Hiroshima and Nagasaki remind us that nuclear weapons do not discriminate between civilians and military combatants. Their use would violate international humanitarian law, damage ecosystems, disrupt global food systems, and affect new generations. No emergency response system is prepared to handle the impact of a nuclear detonation. Today, we are witnessing deeply concerning incidents. Estonia has signaled openness to hosting U.S. nuclear weapons under NATO nuclear sharing.

Poland has also expressed interest in hosting nuclear weapons or even pursuing its own nuclear capabilities. These actions risk escalating tensions with Russia, destabilizing regional security, and can prolong the war in Ukraine.

In this context, nuclear risk reduction and disarmament must be treated as an urgent, shared responsibility.

We call on all states in Eastern Europe and beyond to take immediate, practical steps to reduce nuclear dangers, such as rejecting or discontinuing nuclear sharing programs, adopting policies of no first use, increasing diplomatic cooperation to establish regional security, and positively engaging with other disarmament instruments such as the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, TPNW. The only guarantee against the use of nuclear weapons is their total elimination. We therefore urge all states under extended nuclear deterrence arrangements to positively engage with the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. The TPNW represents a historic and necessary step toward delegitimizing nuclear weapons and advancing a rules-based framework for their elimination.

Eastern European states have a critical role to play,

and they must work towards nuclear disarmament and risk reduction as a way to defuse regional tensions. Creating and participating in nuclear sharing programs will only escalate the war in Ukraine.

Countries in the region can either become a frontline of renewed nuclear confrontation or a leader

and advancing multilateral dialogue for disarmament.

We call on regional governments to listen to their citizens, to prioritize human security

over military posturing, and to invest in diplomacy instead of destruction.

Let us choose wisely and let us act urgently to ensure that Eastern Europe and the world moves towards

a future free of nuclear weapons.

Thank you.

I thank the representative of Pathways to Peace. I now have the honor to invite Ms. Jana Baltes. European Leadership Network and Arms Control Association.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I deliver a statement coordinated by the Arms Control Association and my own organization, the European Leadership Network, and endorsed by over 40 non-governmental organizations, civil society representatives, and experts. For decades, a global ban on nuclear explosions has been a central goal and is now a central element of the nuclear nonproliferation and disarmament regime. Three decades after the conclusion of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, the treaty has near universal support and has established a global norm against nuclear test explosions. The nuclear testing taboo contributes to both nuclear nonproliferation and disarmament. It impedes the development of new and more advanced nuclear warhead designs, which helps prevent dangerous nuclear competition and strengthens international security. The push to end all nuclear test explosion has also been driven by the widespread human suffering and environmental contamination produced by more than 2,000 atmospheric and underground nuclear test explosions since 1945. The effect of these detonations are still taking their toll on impacted communities across the globe. Universal compliance with the zero yield prohibition on nuclear explosions established by the CTBT is essential for the future of the NPT and global peace and security. But the CTBT and the de facto global nuclear test moratorium cannot be taken for granted. It is well known that the treaty's entry into force has been delayed due to the failure of eight states, including the United States and China, to ratify, and Russia's cynical decision to de-ratify in 2023. Even though all of the 187 signatories are legally bound to respect the object and purpose of the treaty, the full benefits of the treaty, including the option to order short-notice on-site inspections to investigate potential violations, cannot be realized until it enters into force. Additionally, the CTBT and the global nuclear test moratorium are now facing unprecedented new challenges related to concerns about ongoing activities at former Russian, Chinese, and US nuclear test sites, US accusations of noncompliance against China and Russia, and threats by the United States to conduct technically unnecessary, retaliatory nuclear test explosions, quote unquote, on an equal basis. Against this background, it is in the interest of all States not only to maintain the global moratorium on nuclear testing and advance towards CTBT entry into force, but also to develop and deploy additional tools to verify compliance prior to entry into force. Any resumption of nuclear explosive testing by China, Russia, and the United States, or others, would violate the zero-yield prohibition on nuclear test explosions established by the CTBT. It would set off a chain reaction of nuclear testing worldwide that could blow apart the global non-proliferation system. This conference represents a critical opportunity for responsible states to rejuvenate efforts to achieve entry into force of the CTBT and actively resist any move to resume nuclear testing at any yield, for any reason, by any state. We call on all NPT State Parties at this conference to reaffirm their support for the global nuclear test moratorium established by the CTBT and reiterate their collective commitment to the cessation of all nuclear weapons test explosions or any other nuclear explosions. We call on the Conference to urge the five nuclear-armed NPT States to immediately commence technical consultations on joint mechanisms to develop new confidence-building measures that strengthen capabilities to detect and deter prohibited nuclear testing prior to entry into force of the CTBT. We call upon the remaining Annex 2 States to immediately commence work to achieve their ratification of the Treaty. And we also call on all NPT States Parties to acknowledge the humanitarian and environmental consequences of nuclear weapons testing and the vital importance of assisting communities affected by nuclear weapons use and testing. Thank you for your attention.

I thank the distinguished representative of European Leadership Network and Arms Control Association. And now I have the honor to invite Sister Carol Gilbert of Civil Society Interfaith Statement.

Thank you, Mr. President. I am delivering this joint interfaith statement on behalf of 109 organizations. We as people of faith join in solidarity with our voices to call upon the leaders of the world to rescue the Non-Proliferation Treaty from crisis and to honor its deepest commitment, creating a world free from nuclear weapons. 56 years after the entry into force of the NPT, the treaty's most fundamental commitment remains unfulfilled. We see the NPT unraveling and a proliferation crisis brewing. All nuclear-armed states are modernizing their arsenals with new delivery systems and doctrines that lower the threshold for use. The moral authority of the treaty depends upon the credibility of the disarmament community. That credibility is now in crisis. Underlying all of this is a spiritual crisis. rooted in the normalization of violence and war as instruments for resolving conflict between peoples and nations. When armed force is treated as a first resort, when military spending eclipses investment in human development, when entire populations are taught to accept the threat of nuclear annihilation as a condition of their security, our moral imagination has failed. We affirm that genuine security is built on justice, on mutual care, on the recognition that no nation's safety can rest on another nation's annihilation. We call on our leaders to reaffirm the spirit of the NPT as an urgent and binding commitment. We recognize the depth of the divisions among NPT member states. But we refuse to accept paralysis. We call for states to engage in real dialogue, moving beyond entrenched positions to find the common ground of our shared survival. We call on our leaders to honor two commitments above all. First, recommit to Article 6, not in rhetoric, but in action. with verifiable reductions, with a moratorium on new warhead development, with a return to negotiations that includes all nuclear-armed states. Second, center human security in nuclear policy. Decisions about nuclear weapons must be grounded not in the security of states alone, but in the shared security of all people. Faith, conscience and commitment to truly inclusive peace compel us to carry with us the voices of the hibakusha, the downwinders, and all global communities who have experienced and borne witness to the suffering that nuclear weapons inflict. We hold you in the light, and we pray for you to be a beacon to your children and our children, showing the path toward a better future. You have the power to begin creating a world free from nuclear weapons. We are asking you to use it. Thank you.

I thank the representative of civil society interfaith statement. And now I have the honor to invite Reverend Masamichi Kamiya of Religions for Peace.

President, Excellencies, Distinguished Delegates, On behalf of Religions for Peace, I wish to express our appreciation for the opportunity to address this Review Conference. Religions for Peace is a global interfaith movement bringing together representatives of the world's major religious traditions united in the shared commitment to peace, justice, and flourishing of all humans in the Earth and its web of life. Despite our greatest efforts for the last 80 years, we are still living in the world where the basic right is at risk. Nuclear weapons remain silent, powerful, and ever-present a danger to human survival. The suffering witnessed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki remains a stark and enduring warning of the catastrophic humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons. In today's context, the consequences would likely be far more widespread and severe in the event of accident, miscalculation, or deliberate use. Across all different faiths and traditions, We affirm that a society founded on the principles of might and destruction cannot be just and inclusive. The possession of nuclear weapons and the policies that sustain them are, in fact, in direct contradiction to the moral foundation of human dignity. At the same time, we recognize that the path to the total elimination of nuclear weapons is complex and requires sustained steps with the trust at its center. In this regard, we underscore that the nuclear risks reduction is not an alternative to disarmament, but an ethical and political imperative in its own right. States must take steps to end their reliance on nuclear weapons as a security doctrine enhance transparency and communication to avoid accident, and pursue policies that would result in the reduction of nuclear risks. Excellencies, the road ahead of us is clear. We must double our efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons. The consequences of any use of nuclear weapons would extend far beyond the present generation. We are gravely concerned by the effort to undermine multilateralism, globally based rule of law, and international humanitarian law. With the advent of AI and the risk in global conflicts it creates, it is critical that we strengthen the frameworks for create more resilience to the multilateral processes. We believe that the international community has the capacity and responsibility to reverse the current trend and to build a future grounded in peace, justice, and shared security. Humanity must end the arms race before the arms race ends humanity. Religious communities around the world continue to support efforts to remove the threat of nuclear weapons now and in the future. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Religions for Peace. I now invite Mr. John Hallam of Abolition 2000 Nuclear Risk Reduction Working Group.

thank you with the doomsday clock currently at 85 seconds to metaphorical midnight the topic of nuclear risks and risk reduction is or should be at the very top of every diplomats list of priorities what is at stake is nothing less than the survival of what we call civilization The recent comments of Nobel Prize winning nuclear physicist, David Gross, to the effect that humanity may not survive the next 50 years, adds point to the Doomsday Clock's grim diagnosis. The International Court of Justice held that the destructive impact of nuclear weapons cannot be contained in space or time, and that the threat or use of nuclear weapons is generally contrary to international law. Yet nuclear-armed states continue to threaten the use of nuclear weapons, including in a wide and opaque range of scenarios, and to prepare for such use, including by placing weapon systems on high readiness to use, and by maintaining policies providing for the first use of nuclear weapons in a conflict. Nuclear-armed and allied states have agreed on paper that preventing nuclear war is a priority, for example, in the Pact for the Future and some recent G20 statements. But such words have not led to any action or to change policies or practices that keep the world on the brink of nuclear war by accident, miscalculation, misjudgment, escalation, or threat. Civil society joined with the non-nuclear states to urge real action on nuclear risk reduction. In 2023, No First Use Global presented Nuclear Taboo from Norm to Law to the NPT PrepCom, endorsed by over 1,100 notables. former prime ministers, foreign ministers, defense ministers, legislators, academics, scientists, religious leaders, youth and representatives of civil society organizations. The appeal called specifically on the NPT to enshrine the norm of non-use of nuclear weapons as a dictate of international law and to require all member states to comply fully in order to ensure their security policies and practices rule out the initiation of nuclear war, including first use of nuclear weapons. On September 26th last year, A similar Nuclear Abolition Day appeal with even wider endorsement was presented to the UN High-Level Meeting, commemorating the International Day for the Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons. This appeal is being again presented to the NPT Review Conference this afternoon, in a couple of minutes, by our colleague Rebecca Shute from the Nuclear Abolition Day Coalition. The Nuclear Abolition Day appeal is of core relevance to nuclear risk reduction, calling amongst other things for states to: a) affirm that the threat or use of nuclear weapons is inadmissible; b) advance tangible measures to implement this obligation, including standing down nuclear forces and adopting policies never to initiate a nuclear war. Each time an NGO representative has stood or sat here and talked about nuclear risks and nuclear risk reduction, that person, which has normally been me, has had to say, "This year is the most dangerous year so far." And then next year has been even more dangerous. However, it has now been several weeks since representatives of a certain government made explicit threats to destroy either the UK or Germany or Poland or all of Europe. It is some time since this representative became numb to the many such threats recycled, sometimes multiple times a week. Are they bluff? Should we believe them? Is nuclear doomsday around the corner or will we still be here 10 years down the track asking the same question? Hopefully we will. No time is better than now, the 81st anniversary of the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the establishment of the United Nations, to undertake these actions to achieve a nuclear-weapon-free world and to protect current and future generations. Three minutes is not enough time to do justice to the terrifying topic of nuclear risk and risk reduction. Three to seven minutes is, however, of the order of time that senior decision makers will have in an actual nuclear emergency. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Abolition 2000 Nuclear Risk Reduction Working Group. I now have the honour to invite Mr. Bill Kidd of Parliamentarians for Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament.

I thank you for your kind chairing of this review conference. Thank you very much. Your Excellencies, we are meeting at the United Nations in New York at a time of devastating armed conflicts. an erosion of multilateralism and the rule of law, a renewed nuclear arms race, increased risks and specific threats to use nuclear weapons, increasingly severe climate change-induced disasters and a looming existential threat to humanity from high levels of greenhouse gas emissions. I am addressing this review conference in my role as co-president of Parliamentarians for Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament, a network of parliamentarians representing citizens of nations around the world with their concerns over the dangers presented by nuclear weapons. I have spent 19 years as a member of the Scottish Parliament working for the removal of Trident nuclear weapons from the land and waters of Scotland. where the entire nuclear arsenal of the United Kingdom is based just 30 miles from the homes of half the Scottish population. Parliamentarians are active in their national assemblies and through organisations such as the Inter-Parliamentary Union and the Pan-African Nationalist Movement to address those issues. We appeal to you, as representatives of Governments, to do likewise. Together, we need to elevate diplomacy, cooperative leadership, common security and the rule of law in order to prevent nuclear war, resolve international conflicts peacefully, protect the climate for current and future generations and set in motion concrete processes to achieve the peace and security of a nuclear-weapon-free world. We need to strengthen the roles of the UN General Assembly, International Court of Justice and International Criminal Court to prevent and build accountability for acts of aggression. And we need to support the establishment of additional nuclear weapon free zones, especially as it stands in the Middle East. In these ways, we can replace the reliance on nuclear deterrence with the reliance on common security. In 2024, 70 parliamentarians from 34 legislatures endorsed the appeal to turn back the doomsday clock, which was presented to the NPT prepcom in Geneva. It includes nine concrete recommendations for achieving the peace and security of a nuclear-weapon-free world, a world that is based on the common security of the UN charter and not on the threat or use of force. You can view those recommendations in the written version of our statement. One immediate step that is not included is our 2024 appeal to end the war by the US and Israel against Iran through common security. Newsweek recently shared an article by PNND council member Jonathan Granoff, titled War Will Not Stop Iran's Nuclear Threat. That advocates making comprehensive inspection categories, much like the JCPOA and the chemical weapons convention, to apply to all non-nuclear weapons States parties to the NPT, not just Iran. That would make the world safe, stop the next North Korea and allow both the USA and Iran to rightfully claim a victory for the world. It would also strengthen the legitimacy of the NPT regime by reinforcing its non-proliferation pillar. Would it persevere? Advanced disarmament? No. But stopping a war and saving the legal instrument that obliges the P5 to achieve nuclear disarmament is worth our efforts. We cordially invite you to a side event on 6 May, which is organised by the PNND and the Inter-Parliamentary Union and is entitled A Nobel Effort: The Roles and Actions of Parliamentarians to Support Diplomacy, Disarmament and International Humanitarian Law. We will discuss those ideas in more depth. I thank you very much indeed.

I thank the distinguished representative of parliamentarians of nuclear nonproliferation and disarmament. I now have the honor to invite Ms. Rebecca Shute of NuclearAbolitionDay.org.

Honorable President, Excellencies, distinguished delegates. I speak on behalf of NuclearAbolitionDay.org, an open coalition of civil society organizations launched to the United Nations last July to build cooperation for and elevate the global impact of the UN International Day for the Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons. I have the honor to submit to the NPT the Nuclear Abolition Day Appeal, endorsed by approximately 670 organizations and 1,380 individuals from 101 countries. The appeal was initially presented to the high-level plenary on September 26, 2025, the International Day for the Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons. This appeal is not abstract. It is a collective warning. and a collective demand for action equal to the risk we face. Across regions, sectors, and generations, signatories are united by a simple truth: the current trajectory is unsustainable. The risk of nuclear use by accident, miscalculation, escalation, or intent remains unacceptably high. The consequences would be catastrophic, immediate, and irreversible. Maintaining the current regime cannot become a substitute for fulfilling its ultimate purpose. The appeal therefore sets up five clear, actionable calls. First, affirm unambiguously that the threat or use of nuclear weapons is inadmissible. Second, advance tangible risk reduction measures by nuclear-armed and allied states, including standing down nuclear forces and adopting policies to never initiate a nuclear war. Third, commit to the global elimination of nuclear weapons no later than 2045, the centenary of the United Nations, and begin immediate good-faith steps to achieve this goal. Fourth, cut nuclear weapons budgets and end public and private investments in the nuclear weapons industries. And fifth, redirect those resources to what actually sustains human security, strengthening the United Nations, advancing peace and conflict resolution, addressing the climate crisis, and meeting urgent human needs. Progress will not come from governments alone. The legitimacy, urgency, and durability of disarmament efforts depend on the full inclusion of civil society across disciplines, geographies, and lived experiences. This means meaningfully engaging youth, women, scientists, faith leaders, and affected communities. It means centering the voices of victims and survivors of nuclear weapons use and testing. It means empowering parliamentarians and local leaders who translate global commitments into national law and local action. There is no more fitting moment than this year to act. 2026 marks the 30th anniversary of the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the legality of the threat or use of nuclear weapons, an opinion that underscored both the profound legal constraints on these weapons and the obligation to pursue and conclude negotiations leading to complete nuclear disarmament. It is also the 80th anniversary of that court itself, an institution created to uphold the rule of law at the international level, even in the most consequential matters. These anniversaries are not symbolic. They are reminders of unfinished commitments and of promises deferred for far too long. At a time of rising risk and eroding trust, the choice before us is stark. Allow instability to dictate outcomes or summon the political courage to reinforce law, rebuild cooperation, and advance disarmament with seriousness of purpose. Honorable President, the appeal we present today reflects a broad and growing global constituency that expects the latter and that will continue to demand it. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of NuclearAbolitionDay.org. I now have the honor to invite Ms. Kekeshan Basu of World Federalist Movement Institute for Global Policy.

Thank you, honorable chair. Your excellencies, distinguished delegates, and colleagues, my name is Gehakisha Basu, and I speak as the co-president of the World Federalist Movement Institute for Global Policy on common security as a credible alternative to nuclear deterrence. On September 22, 2025, UN member states adopted the Pact for the Future by consensus, reaffirming that nuclear war would devastate all humankind, can never be won, and must never be fought, while committing to advancing disarmament and nonproliferation, including a nuclear-weapon-free world. As a young woman who spent more than a decade advancing disarmament education to lift the veil of secrecy surrounding nuclear weapons and raising awareness of the risks they pose, I now see a growing sense of urgency for security approaches that are rooted in cooperation, accountability, and shared responsibility. The pursuit of a nuclear-weapon-free world is grounded in international law as affirmed by the International Court of Justice in 1996. We call on NPT state parties to begin a phased transition away from nuclear deterrence and to initiate negotiations on a mutual, verifiable framework for global abolition by 2045. Nuclear deterrence is still seen as a source of security, yet it sustains risk rather than removing it. Advancing credible alternatives is therefore essential. Common security offers a practical framework addressing the concerns of all states, including adversaries, through diplomacy, negotiation, mediation, and international law. And there's already a strong foundation to build on as a result of civil society and policy initiatives to reduce reliance on nuclear deterrence, including strengthening nuclear weapon-free zones, advancing arms control agreements, and making more effective use of institutions such as the United Nations and the International Court of Justice. Recent global developments underscore the urgency of the shift. Across multiple regions, senseless wars and escalating conflicts continue to take lives and deepen insecurity, while diplomatic and legal mechanisms remain underutilized. Strengthening these tools, including broader acceptance of the International Court of Justice, is key to reinforcing a rules-based international order. We will explore these approaches further at a side event, Can Common Security Replace Nuclear Deterrence, on May 5th, and extend the invitation to all delegations to join the discussion. At a time when conflicts continue to unfold across the world, the responsibility to act with foresight and restraint carries profound consequences, for the decisions taken today will shape global security and the world that future generations inherit. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of World Federalist Movement Institute for Global Policy. I now have the honor to invite Mr. Desanta Rocamaga of Bagmati UNESCO Club.

Thank you, honorables here, distinguished delegates. and fellow representatives of civil society. My name is Desanta Rokamagar. I'm speaking on behalf of Bagmati UNESCO Club, a youth-led non-profit organization located in Hetauda, Nepal, affiliated with the Nepal National Commission for UNESCO under the Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology, Government of Nepal. More than five decades, that is how long this assembly has been negotiating with the end of the world. Five decades of review conferences, five decades of preparatory committee, five decades of language carefully crafted, carefully adapted, yet systematically not implemented. The doomsday clock stands at 85 seconds to midnight, and we are here again in this hall with our statements and our brackets and our agreed conclusions, while the clock does not wait for consensus. The Bagmati UNESCO Club has traveled from The ancient city of Kathmandu, where the sacred Bagmati River has carried prayers to the heaven for 3,000 years, not to add another statement to the archive. Instead, we believe this assembly is capable of something it has not yet fully chosen to be decisive. Today, the 1st of May 2026, Nepal and the Buddhist world celebrate Buddha Jayanti, the birth, enlightenment, and Mahaparinirvana of Gautama Buddha, born in Lumbini on Nepali soil 2,570 years ago. Nepal has lived Panchasheel, rooted in Gautam Buddha's own Panchashila, his five moral precepts of non-harm, peaceful coexistence, mutual respect for sovereignty, mutual non-aggression, mutual non-interference, equality, and mutual benefit, and peaceful coexistence. Situated between two of the world's most consequential civilization, Nepal has upheld these principles without exception, without compromise, and without a single nuclear weapon for generations. So, when this assembly asks how a world without nuclear weapon is possible, Nepal is the answer. We formally invite the world's nuclear leaders to Lumbini, not for a summit, not for a communique, but for a Vipassana retreat. Ten days, silence, on third-rishti, looking honestly inward. The cost is substantially lower than that of a single nuclear warhead, and since this Assembly has been deliberating for more than five decades, we feel it is only responsible to try a complementary approach. But the urgency for us today will not wait for stillness. Artificial intelligence is already operating inside nuclear command systems, not in a policy paper and not in a future scenario. Today, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists and the Future of Life Institute have each said the same thing with increasing alarm. AI integration raises the risk of miscalculation, unintended escalation, and a machine making the final, irreversible decision without a human concise in the room. An algorithm has no corona. Buddha taught that right action must flow from Samma Sankappa and Samma Diti, right intention and right understanding. No automated system possesses either. No system understands Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam, that the world is one family and that what destroys one diminishes all. The Bagmati UNESCO Club calls for meaningful human control over every nuclear related AI system, enshrined not as a guidance or aspiration, but as binding international law. We align fully with the ethics of artificial intelligence. We call for Article 6 commitments with real timelines, not declarations that expire with the conference. We speak for the global south, for Asia, Africa, the Pacific Islands, Latin America, and the Caribbean, where people bear the heaviest burden of nuclear risk while receiving the smallest share of benefits. Dharma, the duty of powerful toward the vulnerable, demands no less, because you do not claim to be one family and then decide that some of its members do not get medicine. Somewhere in Kathmandu this morning, a child is flying a kite above the valley. They have never heard the word megaton. They don't know what a launch code is. Instead, they know the wind. They know the pull of the string in their hand. And they know the way every children know before the world teases them otherwise that the sky belongs to everyone. We are here today because we intend to keep it that way. That child is depending on this room, every child born into whatever world this assembly leaves behind, they all are. They have no delegate here. They have no vote. They cannot speak. So we speak for them. Honorable Chair, we'll return to Kathmandu after this session. We'll walk beside the Bagmati River. We'll look up at the mountains that have stood for 60 million years, unmoved by empire, unimpressed by arsenals, indifferent to the calculations of deterrence, and we will report back to our people on what this assembly chose to be today. Gautam Buddha sat at a tree and refused to move until clarity arrived, we respectfully ask this assembly to do the same. The doomsday clock is at 85 seconds. The meditation hall in Lumbini has no clock. Namah Buddhaya. Shanti, shanti, shanti. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Paghmachi UNESCO Club. And now I have the honor to invite Ms. Aline Begna of Open Nuclear Network.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen, I'm speaking on behalf of the Countering WD Disinformation Initiative of the 31-member Global Partnership against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction. This initiative is funded by Canada and Germany, and is implemented by the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, King's College London, and Open Nuclear Network. As State Parties meet over the next month to review the implementation of the NPT, we must address a growing challenge affecting multilateral discussions in the nuclear and radiological realm. the amplification and circulation of false or unverified allegations regarding safeguards, compliance, or nuclear intent. Radiological and nuclear issues are technically complex and rely on specialized verification methodologies, established evidentiary standards, and clearly defined institutional mandates. When such matters are discussed or claims are made without the full context, misunderstandings and opportunities for confusion can arise and positions may harden before clarification or key details are made available. Unverified, unfounded and false allegations related to compliance, safety or intent can shape diplomatic positions before technical clarification is available. Technical findings may be selectively presented, reframed, or simplified, reducing complex issues to binary narratives. This risks distorting discussions and placing delegations, particularly those without specialized technical capacity, in difficult positions, including pressure on neutral or middle ground states to signal alignment prematurely, narrowing space for balanced engagement and increasing polarization. The introduction of serious allegations in multilateral settings carries particular weight. Such claims should be carefully substantiated and, where appropriate, grounded in established reporting mechanisms. Creating space for technical clarification before drawing conclusions can support stability in deliberations. This challenge cuts across all three pillars of the Treaty. In the context of non-proliferation, unverified claims regarding safeguards, compliance, or intent can undermine confidence in verification processes and distort assessment of risk. In the context of disarmament, inaccurate or misleading characterizations of capabilities, doctrines, or commitments can deepen mistrust and complicate dialogue. In the context of peaceful uses, misleading narratives about safety, security, or intent can undermine cooperation and erode confidence in the benefits of nuclear applications. To support the integrity of the treaty discussions, key standards should be implemented, including: All allegations should be grounded in well-documented and verified information. Technical assessments should be referenced in the full context. and established clarification mechanisms should be used where uncertainties arise. Where these standards are not met, caution should be exercised in engaging with or amplifying such claims. Verification through competent international bodies and trusted expert networks, requests for clarification through established treaty mechanisms, and internal coordination before responding should be prioritised. Where appropriate, timely and evidence-based communication should be used to clarify the record and mitigate the spread of misleading narratives. These principles are not intended to constrain debate. They are intended to protect it. Technical assessment and political deliberation serve complementary roles within the treaty framework. The NPT depends on informed engagement, mutual respect, and good faith deliberation. By exercising care in how nuclear and radiological information is presented and interpreted, State Parties can reduce the risk of avoidable polarization and preserve the integrity of this Review Conference. We thank you for your attention.

I thank the representative of Open Nuclear Network. And now I have the honor to invite Mr. Jarek Browner, and Ms. Ruj Ali, who are delivering a civil society youth statement.

Madam President and distinguished excellencies, this review conference convenes at a time of significant risk, marked in recent weeks by alarming, inflammatory rhetoric of escalation. The global nuclear nonproliferation regime is strained, and the promise of a world without nuclear weapons remains further from realization than ever. As a generation that will live the longest with the consequences of today's decisions, we can no longer accept continued delays in actions. Madam President and distinguished excellencies, at a time when the transatlantic slave trade has been officially recognized by the UN General Assembly as the gravest crime against humanity, we find ourselves at a crossroads equipped with an actionable framework through which reparations and education around the mistakes of the past lay the foundation for justice tomorrow. Historically, black and brown communities bear the brunt of uranium mining, displacement, and nuclear testing. We, the youth, stand here today to continue the intergenerational effort to eliminate the persistent threat of nuclear weapons. From the lost uranium miners of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, to the poisoned communities along the Savannah River.

Site, to the hibakusha survivors of Japan and Korea, and the survivors of nuclear tests spanning the Marshall.

Islands, Kiribati, New Mexico, and Kazakhstan.

Distinguished delegates, we offer you the following recommendations. First, we urge all States Parties to reaffirm and fully implement their commitments under the Treaty across its three pillars. Second, we urge States Parties to engage substantively with the framework of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons to advance measurable progress on nuclear disarmament. As a complement to the NPT, the TPNW operationalizes Article VI by providing a concrete pathway from commitment to implementation. Third, we encourage serious consideration of forward-looking approaches to contemporary nuclear proliferation challenges, particularly those that address regional needs and promote cooperative security frameworks such as nuclear-weapon-free zones. While five zones have been successfully established since the inception of the NPT, progress toward a Middle East nuclear-weapon-free zone remains stalled and contested. More than ever, we emphasize the importance of working towards this arrangement, which provides tangible security benefits. Fourth, we urge States Parties to support the establishment of the International Trust Fund for Victim Assistance and Environmental Remediation, which is being spearheaded by Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan. We find it to be the most concrete and logical mechanism yet proposed to address the living humanitarian legacy of nuclear weapon testing. Lastly, we encourage increased and sustained resources to advance nuclear nonproliferation and disarmament education and awareness raising initiatives, ensuring that the story of who has borne the cost of those nuclear detonations is taught and that young people in affected communities can access with informed understanding the processes where decisions about their lives are made.

In closing, allow us to remind you that the NPT remains a living document, carrying the yet unfulfilled promise of a world without nuclear weapons. As James Baldwin wrote, "The obligation of anyone who thinks of himself as responsible.

Is to examine society and to fight to change it, no matter what the risk.

This is the only way societies change." Thank you for your time and attention.

I thank the representatives for delivering a civil society youth statement. I now have the honor to invite Mr. Daiki Katsukawa of Hiroshima and Nagasaki Peace Messengers.

Thank you so much. Madam President, distinguished delegates, fellow members of civil society. My name is Daiki Katsukawa, an undergraduate student from Soka University of America. I speak on behalf of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki Peace Messengers. I am honored to be here alongside three high school students. They asked me to share something personal with you, not a policy position or a list of demands, but a reflection on choosing to believe that what happens in this room still matters. Every year, the Hiroshima and Nagasaki Peace Messengers, high school students stand at local train station in their communities and call out to passersby asking a simple question. Will you sign your name in support of nuclear disarmament? Most walk by, but some pose, some sign. Over 29 years, the amount of signatures the high school students have collected have reached 2.8 million and have delivered to the United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs. There is something I want you to remember. Every year, when those students return home from UN offices abroad, they write reflection. Do you know what they write about? They do not write about the long journey or the building or the formality of it all. They write about you. They write about the UN officers and delegates they meet, those working each day to advance the very cause they're willing to fight for. They write about how hearing someone inside the system say, "Yes, disarmament matters," and how it gives them courage. I want to be honest. Some may look at 2.8 million signatures and see a great achievement. Others may ask a harder question. Has it made any difference? The students struggle with both truths. They see the same headlines you do, and yet they're still choosing to act for disarmament. As last two NPT Review Conference have failed to produce a consensus outcome, and after years of deep division and sharply contested negotiations, it would be entirely understandable to lose faith. But every single one of you, at some point in your career, made a choice. You choose public service. You choose diplomacy. You choose to believe that dialogue between nations could make the world safer. Something brought you here, your prime reason. The high school students still live with that prime reason, and they're here to remind you that the reason still exists. This tradition continues, not because results are guaranteed, but because choosing hope is not passive, it is a decision that requires courage. These students have made that decision. We are asking you to move the needle toward a world free from nuclear weapons, by acting based on your prime reason, one that your younger self would be proud of. Thank you so much.

I thank the distinguished representative of Hiroshima and Nagasaki Peace Messengers. I now have the honor to call upon Mr. Gabriel McGuire of Youth Fusion.

Distinguished delegates, My name is Gabriel McGuire. I am 20 years old, and I have the honor of speaking on behalf of YouthFusion. We stand before you in a moment characterized by destabilizing nuclear behaviors, the erosion of arms control frameworks, and growing global instability. Despite the difficulty of being a youth-led network operating in such an unpromising environment, we continue pursuing awareness-raising, educational, and advocacy initiatives guided by the conviction that moments of crisis have often created both the urgency and the opportunity to reduce nuclear danger, and that it's precisely in such moments that new perspectives must be brought into the room. At YouthFusion, we have worked to ensure that youth voices are not peripheral, but present, informed, and constructive. Through a recent survey conducted across our network, we identified both a strong desire among young people to engage in nuclear issues and a persistent gap in access, awareness, and trust in existing decision-making processes. Young people are not disengaged, but rather we are often excluded. And against this backdrop, we launched the youth hotline campaign, Negotiating Nuclear Risk, an initiative aimed at equipping aspiring nuclear experts with a practical toolkit to engage in nuclear diplomacy and shape risk reduction solutions. This project proved something essential, that young people refuse to be spectators of the events currently unfolding in world politics. Rather, they want to understand, take responsibility, and contribute meaningfully. Therefore, we call on States Parties to move beyond symbolic seats and institutionalize sustained youth participation as a source of policy innovation and problem solving within national delegations and multilateral processes, as well as meaningful influence on outcomes. Young people bring fresh perspectives less constrained by entrenched strategic assumptions and can help identify new pathways for nonproliferation, disarmament, and sustainable peace. As Youth Fusion demonstrated through the Youth Hotline campaign, when young people are given the tools and the access, they contribute with concrete, realistic, and forward-looking approaches. In a season characterized by compounding nuclear risk, these measures will strengthen both the effectiveness and the long-term credibility of the non-proliferation regime.

We believe that empowering.

Youth and integrating their contributions in key nuclear decision-making processes represents not only an investment in the future, but also an immediate asset for addressing today's nuclear challenges. Thank you.

I thank the representative of Youth Fusion, and thank you very much. That was the last speaker for this session.

Algeria wishes to take the floor.

Algeria would like to take the floor.

Okay. Algeria. I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Algeria. We give the floor to the representative of Algeria.

Thank you, Madam President. Good afternoon to you and to everyone in the hall. Thanks to all the NGOs for their very, very touching statements, and I really appreciate those, especially the testimonies. I have one question, there was one NGO that was interrupted. the mic was off without prior notice. And other organizations were... They went beyond the time limit, so I don't know what's the reason why that organization was interrupted. If it was technical, then perhaps that organization should be allowed to continue the statement.

So thanks for your clarification.

If the distinguished representative from Algeria can help us with the organization that he is talking about.

Thank you.

I believe it was ICANN Europe, and I think it was a joint statement, if I'm not mistaken.

Thanks.

The distinguished representatives of ICANN, if they wish, they may continue with the statement.

Thank you very much, Presidency. Distinguished Chair, Excellencies and Esteemed Colleagues, We, the European Partner Organizations of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, wish to raise concern about current deviation in the interpretations and implementation of the NPT. Nuclear-weapon States have committed under Article VI of the NPT to pursue negotiations in good faith. This obligation was reaffirmed by the ICJ in 1996, which confirmed the existence of a legal obligation not only to negotiate but to achieve a precise result, nuclear disarmament in all its aspects. In January 2022, the same nuclear weapons states also declared the intention to prevent an arm race that would benefit none and endanger all. However, all nuclear states, whether democratic or authoritarian, have been on our right now acting in contradiction with this commitment and are contributing to the destabilization of the non-proliferation regime. Recently, non-nuclear weapon European states have also been contributing to this weakening of the non-proliferation regime. States like Belgium, Denmark, Greece, Germany, the Netherlands, Poland, and Sweden are reinforcing the fallacious security logic based on the threat of the use of weapons of mass destruction by engaging in form of nuclear-armed cooperation proposed by France. After NATO nuclear alliance and that between Russia and Belarus, the French initiative contribute to establishing nuclear alliance as a norm. In this context, one question arise, how can these states claim to defend the NPT with supporting policies that go against its spirits and may even violate it in the future?

Basic security on fear amounts to encouraging proliferation. If every state believes it must be feared in order to be free, as the French President Macron recently stated, then all states will be driven to acquire nuclear weapons. At a time when three nuclear-armed states are involved in armed conflicts, we must ask ourselves, is this a reasonable path? As civil society organizations and as citizens of European states, we call on our governments to finally ensure security through the abolition of nuclear weapons. Have you already forgotten a not-so-distant past shaped by nuclear fear? From Hiroshima and Nagasaki to the Cold War, history has shown that civilian populations lived through constant crisis under the permanent threat of escalation, with states ready to use weapons whose humanitarian and environmental consequences are catastrophic. We cannot accept that this is the vision of the future that our governments offer to the younger generations, already confronted with climate disruption. This would be a major political failure. The states mentioned would bear particular responsibility. As democracies, they repeatedly invoke their democratic values, which we cannot hold in high enough regard. And that is precisely why they must uphold the rule of law, not undermine it. Let us be clear. Nuclear weapons pose an existential threat to the very survival of humanity. We know that the vast majority of States reject nuclear weapons, as demonstrated by the commitments to the NPT, the TPNW and nuclear-weapon-free zones. This majority must now make its voice heard firmly, in all international forums, against the minority of States that is putting human security at risk. We want to support them in this, and we call on those states that are undermining the NPT to finally take seriously the demands and security needs of the majority of states and the civilian population. Thank you.

I thank the representatives of ICAN for taking that up again. Thank you. That was the last speaker for this session. This concludes the list of speakers for this meeting. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the speakers and to express our appreciation to the non-governmental organization representatives gathered here today for their continued efforts to achieve a successful outcome of this review conference as well as their ongoing efforts to promote the implementation of the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Before closing, I would like to remind the delegations that the second meeting of the Main Committee I will be held today at 3 p.m. in the General Assembly Hall. I'll now give the floor to the Secretariat to make an announcement.

Thank you very much, Madam Vice-President.

The European Union would like to inform delegations that it is organizing, jointly with the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, the side event "Taking concrete steps to enhance transparency and accountability in the NPT review process".

15 in Conference Room C. A light lunch will be available.

Thank you very much, Madam President.

Thank you. The meeting now stands adjourned.