TANZANIA – A four-week United Nations conference aimed at reviewing the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) concluded recently without reaching a consensus. This outcome highlights the growing tensions surrounding nuclear weapons, particularly between the United States and Iran.
Do Hung Viet, Vietnam’s U.N. Ambassador and chair of the conference, announced that the 191 parties to the NPT could not agree on even a minimal final document. He indicated that while “no one blocked consensus,” a significant factor in the inability to reach an agreement was a provision in a draft document asserting that Iran “can never seek, develop or acquire any nuclear weapons.”
This marks the third consecutive failure at a conference reviewing the NPT, which is considered a cornerstone of global nonproliferation and disarmament efforts. The previous review in August 2022 was similarly stalled when Russia blocked consensus over its invasion of Ukraine and related issues, particularly concerning the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant.
U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres expressed disappointment over the lack of agreement, emphasizing that the “elevated risk posed by nuclear weapons demands urgent action.” His spokesperson, Stephane Dujarric, reinforced the call for countries to engage in dialogue and diplomacy to mitigate nuclear risks.
The backdrop of the conference was fraught with escalating tensions over Iran’s nuclear program, particularly following military actions involving U.S. and Israeli airstrikes. President Donald Trump has characterized these military actions as necessary to prevent Iran from developing nuclear capabilities, despite Iran’s insistence that its nuclear endeavors are strictly civilian.
Throughout the conference, the U.S. accused Iran of showing “contempt” for its treaty obligations, while Iran countered that the U.S. and Israel’s actions against its nuclear facilities were violations of international law. As a signatory to the NPT, Iran is required to allow inspections of its nuclear sites, yet it has been criticized for denying access to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to certain sites that had been attacked.
Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association, noted that the U.S. insisted on naming Iran’s violations in the final document, which Iran vehemently opposed. Instead, Iran sought to highlight what it considered unlawful attacks on its facilities by the U.S. and Israel, but this request was not accommodated.
In their concluding remarks, the U.S. labeled Iran a “prolific treaty violator,” while Iran accused the U.S. and its allies of perpetuating a “relentless campaign” to justify their military actions against Iran. The discord was evident, with both sides entrenched in their positions.
Kimball further remarked that this conference reflected strong rhetorical support for the NPT, but pointed out that the treaty’s foundations are “cracking” due to inaction and the obstinacy of major powers. He argued for the necessity of enlightened, engaged, and pragmatic leadership to prevent the escalation of nuclear threats.
Rebecca Johnson, founding executive director of the Acronym Institute for Disarmament Diplomacy, criticized both the U.S. and Russia for their approaches, asserting that these nuclear powers tend to exacerbate tensions rather than work toward disarmament commitments outlined in the NPT.
