At an online event hosted by the New York State Bar Association on 30 January 2025, legal experts discussed the topic of “Nuclear Weapons and International Law 2025: Nuclear Risks through a Legal Lens,” and highlighted the critical intersection of nuclear armament and international law amidst rising global tensions.
The event was co-chaired by Jonathan Granoff, President, Global Security Institute; Senior Advisor, Permanent Secretariat of the World Summits of Nobel Peace Laureates; Charles J. Moxley, Jr., Professor (Adj.), Fordham Law School; Principal, Moxley ADR LLC; Jeffrey Biller, Director, Law, Technology and Warfare Research Cell, United States Air Force Academy and Dr. John Burroughs, Senior Analyst, Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy
The panel highlighted the urgent need for re-evaluation of nuclear deterrence policies, emphasizing the divide between proponents and critics of the current strategies, and advocating for alignment with international law to enhance global safety. The conversation encompassed various perspectives, addressing inconsistencies in U.S. national security strategies over different administrations, the significance of inclusive dialogue among legal and political spheres, and the necessity of a coordinated global response to nuclear challenges posed by states such as Russia and China. The panelists also underscored the historical context and legal implications of nuclear weapons, citing geopolitical tensions and emerging technologies as factors necessitating a renewed commitment to the rule of law in mitigating nuclear risks and promoting peace.
The intricate dynamics of nuclear deterrence amidst rising geopolitical tensions was hihjlighted, notably following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Acknowledging varying nuclear policies across nations, particularly the doubts surrounding China’s no-first-use doctrine, the discussion pointed out the absence of recent diplomatic efforts for nuclear risk reduction, exacerbated by the impending expiration of the New START treaty. The speakers focused on the escalating military posturing from Russia and North Korea, which raises concerns about potential regional arms races and the risk of conventional conflicts transitioning to nuclear threats.
Emphasizing the need for a strategic reassessment of arms control frameworks, the conversation also delved into the complexities introduced by emerging technologies and artificial intelligence, calling for renewed engagement and the establishment of confidence-building measures to mitigate nuclear risks and prevent potential catastrophic outcomes. The discourse ultimately underscores the delicate balance required for effective deterrence, while cautioning against a simplistic reliance on numbers in evaluating nuclear capabilities.
The speakers also emphasized the significance of effective diplomacy to mitigate nuclear risks and promote arms control agreements, especially in light of deteriorating international relations.
The complexities of military necessity and proportionality in armed conflict was raised, emphasizing the need for a rigorous approach to legal standards given the catastrophic potential of nuclear warfare. They critiqued the ambiguous legal interpretations surrounding civilian protection during military operations, particularly in the context of reprisals, and call for the prohibition of such actions under customary international law.
The discussion highlighted the evolving risks of nuclear weapons in contemporary geopolitical tensions, revealing a shift toward viewing these weapons as tools of compellence, which raises the likelihood of catastrophic miscalculations among leaders. There was a call for practical, iterative approaches to negotiations and reestablishing channels of communication between nuclear powers, particularly the U.S. and Russia, to mitigate misunderstandings and reinforce the importance of maintaining existing treaties like the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
In conclusion, the panelists advocated for stronger international legal frameworks to maintain legitimacy and foster global trust, recognizing that while legal systems influence state behavior, their effectiveness diminishes under imminent threat. Overall, the conversation stressed the necessity for ongoing dialogue and innovative approaches to nuclear risk management within legal contexts.
The Global Security Institute is dedicated to strengthening international peace and security based on co-operation, diplomacy, shared interests, the rule of law and universal values. Our efforts are guided by the skills and commitment of our team of former heads of state, distinguished diplomats and politicians, celebrities, religious leaders, Nobel Peace Laureates, disarmament and legal experts, and concerned informed citizens. Our focus is on controlling and eliminating humanity’s greatest threat – nuclear weapons.
