Nuclear Abolition Is the Only Civilised Option: Here the essential arguments you are not supposed to know

Jan Oberg

TFF director

June 9, 2026

Global nuclear weapons spending reached an unprecedented 119 billion USD in 2025, according to the latest analysis by the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN). This represents a 19 per cent increase over the previous year and continues a five‑year trend of accelerating investment in nuclear arsenals. In total, nuclear‑armed states have spent 471 billion USD on these weapons since 2021.

The United States alone accounted for 69.2 billion USD, more than all other nuclear‑armed states combined. China (13.5 billion USD) and the United Kingdom (12.6 billion USD) followed as the next largest spenders. All nine nuclear‑armed states increased their budgets, many by double‑digit percentages.

These investments are not short‑term. Current modernisation programmes will keep nuclear weapons operational for decades. Several systems now under development or deployment are expected to remain in service into the 2060s, 2090s, or even beyond 2100. These include the US Sentinel ICBM, the UK’s Dreadnought‑class submarines, France’s next‑generation ballistic missile submarines, and China’s JL‑3 submarine‑launched ballistic missile.

Nuclearism – the thinking and tbe weapons – is not fading; it is being entrenched for the next century.

The nuclear weapons industry is a major beneficiary. At least 25 private companies earned 38 billion USD from nuclear weapons–related contracts in 2025 and collectively hold 401 billion USD in outstanding contracts. Lobbying is extensive: 138 million USD in the United States and France, and 226 documented meetings between contractors and senior UK officials. Nuclear weapons are not only political instruments; they are commercial products with powerful institutional defenders.

The opportunity costs are staggering.

The 2025 nuclear total equals 32 years of the UN regular budget. It exceeds the cost of ending world hunger for multiple years. One day of nuclear spending could fund 17,000 solar‑powered home transitions or plant two billion trees. Nuclear weapons do not merely threaten humanity; they drain resources from the very things that could secure its future.

Anti-democracy, Terrorism, Illegality, Deterrence, Accidents and Unethical: The Pillars of the Nuclear Delusion

Nuclear weapons remain humanity’s most destructive and undemocratic curse. No population has ever been asked whether it wants these weapons in its name. Decisions about devices capable of killing millions of civilians are made without public consent, democratic debate, or moral accountability. No opinion polls show that any nation’s majority wants them or would accept their use on their own territory.

The defining feature of nuclear weapons is that they are designed to kill innocent people who are not participants in any conflict. That principle — the deliberate targeting of civilians — is universally condemned in international humanitarian law. It is incompatible with any claim to civilisation, ethics, or responsible statehood.

The core definition of terrorism is the threat or use of violence against civilians to achieve political ends. Nuclear weapons embody this principle completely. Their destructive power is aimed not at military targets but at cities, populations, and the fabric of human life itself. The strategic value of nuclear weapons lies precisely in their ability to inflict mass civilian casualties. This is not a side effect; it is the doctrine. Nuclear deterrence depends on making entire societies fear annihilation. If non‑state actors used this logic, we would call it terrorism. When states use it, we call it security policy. The moral distinction is nonexistent.

Nuclear weapons are also illegal under international law. The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), adopted by the UN General Assembly in 2017, prohibits the development, possession, threat of use, and use of nuclear weapons. It entered into force in January 2021 and is now supported by 93 signatory states and 70 states parties. The treaty expresses the will of the global majority: most of humanity lives in countries that reject nuclear weapons outright. Nuclear‑armed states stand outside this legal and moral framework, isolated from the norms they claim to defend.

Supporters of nuclear weapons often claim that deterrence prevents war because nuclear weapons will never be used. But this argument collapses instantly. If both sides know the weapons will never be used, there is no deterrence. Deterrence only functions if leaders are willing to carry out the threat — that is, to commit mass murder when the strategy fails. The credibility of deterrence rests on the declared readiness to slaughter civilians on a scale that violates every principle of international humanitarian law. A doctrine that requires the willingness to commit a crime against humanity cannot be defended as a peace strategy.

Nukes are also unethical and illogic. There can be no political goal that legitimises their use and the automatic killing of millions of people, huge cities, and causes irreparable environmental damage. No human being or government anywhere can or should have the power to decide about humanity’s future. No government would use them on their own territory, they are by definition non-defensive is more than one sense. And who could conquer and use a territory after it has been nuked – a nuclear desert for what?

Even if one were to accept this perverse-grotesque logic, deterrence still fails on practical grounds. Too many accidents – that you have probably never heard of.

It assumes perfect rationality, perfect information, perfect technology, and perfect political stability — conditions that have never existed in human history. The record of nuclear near‑misses exposes the fragility of the system: false alarms at NORAD, malfunctioning early‑warning satellites, misinterpreted radar signals, lost bombs, accidental arming events, and human errors that brought the world within minutes of catastrophe. The Petrov incident alone — in which a single Soviet officer chose not to report what appeared to be a US nuclear launch — demonstrates that deterrence has survived not because it works, but because individuals have disobeyed it.

A security system that depends on luck, secrecy, and the hope that no one ever makes a mistake is not a security system at all. It is a permanent hostage situation in which the lives of billions depend on the flawless functioning of machines and the flawless judgment of leaders.

No other policy area would tolerate such risk. No society would accept a transportation system, an energy system, or a medical system that fails even once in a century with civilisation‑ending consequences. Yet this is exactly what nuclear deterrence demands.

Nuclear weapons are not stabilising. They are not civilised. They are not compatible with democracy, law, human dignity, not to mention military efficiency.

Nukes are the last great superstition of the modern world — a belief that terror can produce safety. The world has abolished slavery, child labour, rape as a means of war, and absolute monarchy. It can abolish nuclear weapons too.

There is a convention against genocide. Were nuclear weapons to be used, it would not only lead to a genocide, it would be omni- and eco-cide.

The ICAN report shows that nuclear‑armed states are choosing long‑term nuclear rearmament over global public goods. The political argument shows that nuclearism is indistinguishable from the logic of terrorism. The historical record shows that deterrence is a myth sustained by luck and delusion.

Together, these realities point to a single conclusion: nuclear weapons have no place in a civilised world.

Nuclear abolition is not an idealistic dream. It is the only rational, ethical, and human response to a system built on the – unacceptable – threat of mass murder.

We need only one critical mass – explosion: Humanity’s mobilisation for the most important issue:

NUCLEAR ABOLITION NOW!

Peace & future researcher + ‌Art Photographer

Related Posts

It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...
How Oxford University Press allowed a personality‑driven narrative to masquerade as scholarship. Jan Oberg, dr hc, TFF director This article has also been published on TFF Substack where more readers react and withdraw their interviews from the project. A Special Issue in a scholarly journal is not an ordinary publication. It is a collective, curated […]

Recent Articles

Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...

TFF on Substack

Discover and subscribe to more peace materials on TFF Substack

Most Popular

Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...
Read More
Living-Peace-Sign-Budapest-copy
Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
b54a1f10-8c65-4f0b-9dd5-4abc0a7d04cc_2659x2659
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
010
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...
Screenshot 2026-10-02 011738
Jan ObergPhD, director, The Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research, TFFLund, Sweden October 2, 2026 This is my full original manuscript. The Chinese Academy of Social Science, CASS, makes two publications out if it. 1. China’s Five-year plan emphasized the capabilities of basic research and original innovation. It is regarded as the goal of the future social development, which, as required, should be significantly enhanced. Can you comment on the importance of original innovation in research and academic study? I believe it is easier to define “original innovation” in the natural sciences than in social sciences. The breaking points of what constitutes something new, or innovative, are not quite as sharp in the latter. But in both fields it is about opening up something that was closed, unseen, unexplored before – making manifest what was earlier latent. Innovations come in many forms and shapes – naming something that was not...
arctic-circle-map
The agreement is catastrophic both because of what it says and what it doesn’t mention. It reduces further the major asset of security policies: Freedom of action. Jan Oberg TFF director September 25, 2026 A couple of hours before the agreement was signed on September 22, 2026, I published the following 13 hypotheses about what it would most likely contain on TFF Substack (in English). I was wrong on only the first point. Contrary to what Trump had written on his Truth Social platform, it does not appear to come into force immediately. In fact, it turned out to be worse than even I had anticipated. After these hypotheses now come a number of reflections in light of what the agreement actually contains, and does not contain, as well as the way in which it has generally been presented by major media outlets and by the public-service broadcaster DR. My...
girl-5894831_1280
Below are TFF-related media mentions, comments, videos and social media posts published elsewhere but not on this homepage. We happen to catch and list only a fraction. Regarding video comments and debates, we recommend that you go to the TFF Video Channel on Substack where many of them are reproduced. Jan Oberg is a contributor to China Daily – 52 million daily clicks – and Global Times, CGTN and CCTV (the national television), China Investment, Xinhua News Agency and several others. Articles and videos on these media very often multiply into countless Chinese (and Western media) that re-post them from these main media. Thanks to The China Academy, his analyses, interviews and comments are frequently posted on YouTube channels such as Thinkers Forum and Wave Media. These videos are often re-posted on Bilibili (China’s YouTube), the China Content Center on TikTok, and on the Chinese edition of TikTok, Douyin.com. This means reaching hundreds of millions of viewers worldwide over a year. While there are too many to catch on all these...