��������

Eight decades on, relatively few people recall the historical significance of Aug. 15, 1945. Yet, the surrender of Japan on that day, ending the Second World War, was a pivotal moment in 20th-century history.

Each year, Victory over Japan Day, known as VJ Day, commemorates that surrender. While Victory in Europe Day — May 8, 1945 — marked the end of the war in Europe, many thousands of armed forces personnel had continued to fight in Asia in what is sometimes seen as a forgotten conflict.

Eighty years later, the momentous events of 1945 might appear to be consigned to the history books, yet they have much relevance to the world of today.

This core point was highlighted by Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba on this month’s 80th anniversary of the dropping of the atomic bomb on Nagasaki, one of the key developments that led to the surrender of Japan. Ishiba vowed to uphold the commitment that his country would never possess, produce or permit the introduction of nuclear weapons. Moreover, he pledged to help bring about “a world without nuclear war and a world without nuclear weapons.”

These are widely seen as noble goals. But today the world faces at least two major threats in this realm, as the post-1945 so-called nuclear taboo preventing the further use of atomic weapons has begun to erode.

Firstly, there are still more than 12,000 such weapons stockpiled around the globe, each of which is more powerful than the two devices used eight decades ago by the US in Japan combined. This is a chilling fact, given that the bomb dropped on Nagasaki on Aug. 9, 1945, is estimated to have killed more than 70,000 people, while the one used three days earlier on Hiroshima is estimated to have killed more than 140,000.

The events of 1945 might appear to be consigned to history, yet they have much relevance to the world of today.

Andrew Hammond

Today, there are growing tensions between the US and Russia, each of which possesses more than 5,000 nuclear weapons, together representing about 90 percent of the global total. Just this month, US President Donald Trump engaged in a war of words with former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev over atomic weapons. Medvedev referred to “Dead Hand,” the Russian nuclear retaliation system, in an apparent threat to the US. In response, Trump claimed he had ordered two US nuclear submarines to move closer to Russia.

The reasons this behavior is so alarming are at least twofold. Firstly, there is the risk of miscalculation in the context of growing global investment in new nuclear weapons technology. The US government, for instance, is building a new generation of nuclear weapons and plans to resume nuclear testing. China, too, is rapidly increasing its nuclear arsenal, which is estimated to have approximately trebled in size to about 600 weapons. While still relatively small compared to the US and Russia, the direction of travel is clear.

These actions are slowing disarmament and nonproliferation initiatives, such as the efforts to advance the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, the first international accord designed to comprehensively ban nuclear arms. The treaty came into force in 2021 but has so far been ignored by nuclear-armed states and other key parties, including Japan.

The origins of the international nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation campaign dates back decades, to at least 1963, when the US, the former Soviet Union and the UK signed the Limited Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. Other landmarks have included the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which came into force in 1970.

With global momentum shifting toward rearmament rather than abolition, a growing list of nations, including South Korea, Ukraine and Turkiye, have expressed an interest in acquiring atomic weapons. Iran, too, is likely to further develop its nuclear capabilities, fueled by the recent attacks by Israel and the US on its development facilities.

While many fear the use of nuclear weapons as a conscious choice, as happened in 1945, a growing number are also alarmed about the possibility of deployment in error. This includes the possibility of cyberattacks, especially on systems in which artificial intelligence is utilized.

Beyond the state use of nuclear weapons, there also remains the threat of atomic terrorism.

Andrew Hammond

Beyond the state use of nuclear weapons, there also remains the threat of atomic terrorism. While some assert that the probability of a major nuclear terrorism event remains very low, Robert Gates, a former US defense secretary, noted while in office that “every senior leader, when you’re asked what keeps you awake at night, it’s the thought of a terrorist ending up with a weapon of mass destruction, especially nuclear.”

This nuclear terrorism agenda first appeared prominently on the international radar in the aftermath of the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s, amid concerns about safeguarding the former communist empire’s extensive nuclear arsenal.

More than two dozen states have had at least 1 kg of highly enriched uranium in civilian stocks. Since the 1990s, more than 4,000 confirmed incidents of illicit trafficking, unauthorized possession or loss of nuclear and radioactive material have been reported to the International Atomic Energy Agency.

It is the US, which dropped the nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, that has been at the forefront of international post-Cold War efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and materials. However, this agenda is no longer a top priority for Washington.

While the international ability to tackle nuclear terrorism might be eroding significantly, the threat could be growing. Yet, given the hurdles that exist to terror networks obtaining weapons-grade material, perhaps the more likely danger is the use of a small nuclear weapon or a radiological dispersal device (a so-called dirty bomb), which could still cause immense damage, especially in a major urban area.

The world is therefore facing a growing risk related to the possible use of nuclear weapons. The danger lies not only in the growing threat of the state use of such weapons, but also in nuclear terrorism — a major global effort is now needed to counteract these grim challenges.

• Andrew Hammond is an associate at LSE IDEAS at the London School of Economics.