On August 20, 2025, the G7 Non-Proliferation Directors Group gathered in Ottawa, Ontario, issuing a sweeping statement that underscored the world’s precarious nuclear balance. Their message, released by Global Affairs Canada and published on September 2, 2025, was clear: the international community stands at a crossroads, facing rising nuclear risks, technological challenges, and the urgent need for renewed dialogue and restraint.
The G7’s declaration, coming amid global uncertainty, called for “a safer, more prosperous world, with undiminished security for all.” The group committed to leading by example—fostering dialogue, transparency, and cooperation as essential tools in the struggle to prevent nuclear catastrophe. “We are convinced that, in an increasingly uncertain security environment, meaningful progress on disarmament, non-proliferation, and arms control will require sustained engagement and mutual understanding from all concerned parties,” the statement read.
With the demand for nuclear energy rising worldwide, the G7 pledged to ensure that civil nuclear programs adhere to the highest international safety, security, and safeguards standards. They reiterated their “principled opposition to the proliferation of nuclear weapons as detrimental to international peace and security,” voicing robust support for the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and initiatives like the Global Partnership Against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction.
One notable initiative announced was the creation of a Shadow Fleet Task Force, aimed at tackling maritime sanctions evasion networks tied to illicit weapons programs. This move builds on the G7 Charlevoix Foreign Ministers’ Declaration on Maritime Security and Prosperity, signaling a willingness to confront new forms of proliferation and smuggling that threaten global stability.
Iran’s nuclear ambitions featured prominently in the G7’s concerns. The group reaffirmed that “Iran can never have or acquire a nuclear weapon,” and called for the resumption of negotiations to achieve a “comprehensive, verifiable, and durable agreement” addressing Iran’s nuclear activities. They urged Iran to remain a party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and to fully implement its obligations, including cooperation with the IAEA. The G7 also condemned Iran’s proliferation of ballistic missiles and its support for proxies such as Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and aligned militias in Iraq.
North Korea (DPRK) was another flashpoint. The G7 demanded “complete, verifiable, and irreversible” abandonment of all nuclear weapons, weapons of mass destruction, and ballistic missiles by the DPRK, in line with United Nations Security Council resolutions. The group emphasized that “the DPRK cannot and will never have the status of a nuclear-weapon State in accordance with the NPT nor any special status of any kind.” They also committed to countering sanctions evasion and illicit practices that fund Pyongyang’s unlawful weapons programs—pointing to Russia and China as significant facilitators.
The ongoing war in Ukraine cast a long shadow over the discussions. The G7 condemned Russia’s “continued brutal war against Ukraine,” reaffirming support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. They also denounced the provision of military assistance to Russia by the DPRK, Iran, and China, vowing to take further action against those supporting Moscow’s war effort. The safety of Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant, under IAEA monitoring, remains a pressing concern as the conflict drags on.
Reflecting on the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki eighty years ago, the G7 statement recalled “the unprecedented devastation and immense human suffering” wrought by nuclear weapons. They highlighted the “importance of the 80-year record of non-use of nuclear weapons,” the decline in global nuclear arsenals since the Cold War, and efforts to limit the vast sums spent on nuclear arms. Yet, they also voiced alarm over China’s “significant nuclear weapons build-up, which lacks transparency,” and Russia’s non-compliance with the New START Treaty, which is set to expire in February 2026.
This sense of urgency about the nuclear status quo echoes the warnings of experts like Harvard law professor Roger Fisher, whose 1981 essay “Preventing Nuclear War” (as recounted by The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists) proposed a radical protocol: requiring the President to personally kill a volunteer carrying nuclear launch codes to drive home the human cost of nuclear war. The so-called Fisher Protocol was never adopted, and, as the U.S. Department of Defense spends $1.5 trillion to modernize its nuclear arsenal, the doctrine of deterrence remains dominant. “The presence of ‘multiple nuclear competitors’ is a reason to develop even more nuclear capabilities,” the D.O.D. maintains.
Recent years have seen China more than double its nuclear arsenal, while Russia has modernized its own and deployed an anti-satellite weapon with nuclear potential in space. In November 2024, President Vladimir Putin formally lowered Russia’s threshold for nuclear use—an ominous sign for arms control advocates. With the New START treaty’s future in doubt, non-nuclear states like South Korea, Germany, and Saudi Arabia are reportedly reconsidering their nuclear options, especially as U.S. alliances show signs of strain.
Some experts, as reported by The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, believe that recent bombings of Iran’s nuclear facilities may only strengthen Tehran’s resolve to pursue nuclear weapons. North Korea, notably, has not faced similar military action. The risk of new nuclear states emerging is compounded by the normalization of nuclear competition and a public increasingly desensitized to the existential stakes. “We’ve normalized nuclear competition,” said Herb Lin, a national security scholar at Stanford, reflecting on how the capacity to destroy civilization has faded from the public’s everyday worries.
In July 2025, the Bulletin marked the eightieth anniversary of the Trinity test by organizing the Nobel Laureate Assembly for the Prevention of Nuclear War at the University of Chicago. The assembly’s declaration urged nuclear nations to engage in dialogue, develop back channels, maintain human oversight over nuclear command, and reaffirm commitment to the Outer Space Treaty, which bans nuclear weapons in space. These pragmatic steps, advocates argue, are essential to reducing the risk of accidental or intentional nuclear conflict.
The G7’s statement also highlighted the importance of strengthening the international treaty architecture underpinning nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament. They called for a successful NPT Review Conference in 2026 and the full implementation of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) and Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC). Condemning chemical weapons use in Ukraine, the G7 welcomed the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons’ (OPCW) independent verification efforts and called for accountability for those responsible.
Outer space and emerging technologies received special attention. The G7 called for preventing an arms race in space, compliance with the Outer Space Treaty, and the establishment of norms for responsible space behaviors. The group recognized that artificial intelligence, drones, quantum computing, and biotechnology offer both opportunities and security risks. Their commitment: to promote responsible development and robust export controls, safeguarding peace and security in a rapidly changing technological landscape.
As the G7 concluded, their message was both cautionary and hopeful. “We recognize the complex challenges ahead and the need for multilateral cooperation and a forward-looking approach,” the statement declared. The stakes—security, trust, and the elimination of weapons of mass destruction—could hardly be higher. With the world once again on edge, the call for renewed dialogue, vigilance, and restraint rings louder than ever.
