As 2025 draws to a close, November and December saw significant activity across core humanitarian disarmament issues, particularly the use of explosive weapons in populated areas and antipersonnel landmines. The second international conference on the political declaration on explosive weapons focused on promoting implementation of the Declaration’s commitments to ensure it becomes an effective tool of civilian protection. The decline in compliance with and respect for international law created a shadow over the Mine Ban Treaty’s Meeting of States Parties, but the significant number of states that spoke against withdrawals and unlawful suspensions of the treaty reflected the determination to uphold long-standing humanitarian norms. Other topics addressed over the past two months include autonomous weapons systems, nuclear weapons, incendiary weapons, and the environmental impacts of militaries.
The opening panel of the Twenty-Second Meeting of the States Parties to the Mine Ban Treaty. Credit: ISU AP Mine Ban Convention, 2025.
In case you missed it:
The UN Climate Change Conference (COP30), which met in Belém, Brazil, from November 10-22, did not seize an opportunity to deal with a critical source of environmental contamination. The Conflict and Environment Observatory argues that COP30 “failed to address or even acknowledge militaries as a major polluter” despite calls from states and civil society to do so.
From November 18-20, Costa Rica hosted the second international conference to review the status and implementation of the Political Declaration on Strengthening the Protection of Civilians from the Use of Explosive Weapons in Populated Areas. A Protection Forum, organized by International Network on Explosive Weapons (INEW) in cooperation with FUNDAPEM and SEHLAC, opened the meeting by foregrounding the voices and needs of people with lived experiences. At the official conference, participants discussed how to implement the Declaration in order to maximize civilian protection, focusing in particular on data collection, military policies and practices, and humanitarian access. At the end of the conference, the “Trio” of Ireland, Norway, and Costa Rica issued an outcome document about the way forward that offered specific recommendations.
In November, hibakusha (atomic bomb survivors) and supporters held rallies in Tokyo and Hiroshima in November calling for Japan to enshrine the Three Non-Nuclear Principles into law and join the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW). A petition urging the Japanese government to embrace these advances collected almost 3.5 million signatures.
The high contracting parties to the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW) held their annual meeting on November 12 at the UN in Geneva. The meeting lasted less than an hour and only dealt with procedural matters. On a constructive note, 42 states submitted a working paper reiterating their position that they are “ready to move ahead towards negotiations [of an autonomous weapons systems protocol] within the CCW on the basis of the rolling text.” In addition, a group of 10 states resubmitted a working paper from last year expressing concern about the human cost of incendiary weapons and calling for discussions under the auspices of CCW. Next year, states parties will continue their Group of Governmental Experts on autonomous weapon systems and hold its Seventh Review Conference.
On November 29, five humanitarian disarmament coalitions and 77 civil society organizations across 39 countries signed a joint statement criticizing Ukraine’s unlawful suspension of the Mine Ban Treaty. The signatories expressed deep alarm about Ukraine’s decision, noting that the step “blatantly contradicts the treaty’s core humanitarian mission” and emphasizing that the treaty does not allow suspension of its obligations during armed conflict. Invoking “geopolitical challenges” to justify the suspension of international humanitarian law rules “weaken[s] the very system created to protect humanity and promote peace,” the statement said.
On November 30, Bonnie Docherty and Gerry Simpson of Human Rights Watch published an article highlighting the dangerous international law implications of Ukraine’s unlawful suspension and encouraging other states to oppose its action. While recognizing that Ukraine is facing existential threats in its war with Russia, the authors identified six compelling reasons why other states should not remain silent on this point: (1) other states may follow Ukraine lead and similarly suspend their international obligations; (2) accepting Ukraine’s suspension sets a dangerous precedent for ignoring unlawful acts; (3) suspensions undermine the stigma generated by a treaty; (4) failure to stand up to an unlawful suspension could deter states from negotiating future treaties; (5) states may reciprocate by suspending their own obligations; and (6) improper suspension undermines the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
On December 1, the International Campaign to Ban Landmines published its Landmine Monitor 2025 report. According to the report, 6,279 people were killed or injured by landmines and explosive remnants of war in 2024. The number of casualties and injuries has not been this high since 2020.
Also on December 1, the UN General Assembly overwhelmingly passed its third resolution on lethal autonomous weapons systems, 164 to 6, with 7 abstentions. While the resolution is not as ambitious as many proponents of a treaty wanted, it does urge ongoing discussions within the CCW “with a view to future negotiations,” indicating support for a legally binding instrument.
In early December, the Twenty-Second Meeting of States Parties to the Mine Ban Treaty was held in Geneva. A large number of states parties stated that Ukraine’s suspension of the treaty was unlawful, and the final report reflected their position. Dozens of states parties expressed concern at the withdrawals of five states—Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland—but the final report’s language on that point was weaker, simply acknowledging their views and the commitments of the withdrawing states to abide by international humanitarian law. In other business: the meeting granted 15 states parties clearance deadline extensions, leading to concerns that extensions are becoming normalized; Norway delivered a progress report on the proposed Voluntary Trust Fund; and several states indicated positive developments in approaches to victim assistance while noting that more resources are needed.
Next year will be a busy one for disarmament with review conferences scheduled for four key treaties: the CCW, the Convention on Cluster Munitions, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and the TPNW. Given the current humanitarian and legal challenges faced in our field, finding ways to bolster respect for and compliance with international law will also be high on the agenda. Despite the work to be done, 2026 should begin on a high note with celebrations on January 22 of the fifth anniversary of entry into force of the TPNW.
This post expresses the views of the Armed Conflict and Civilian Protection Initiative and does not purport to represent the views of Harvard Law School’s International Human Rights Clinic or Harvard University.
As 2025 draws to a close, November and December saw significant activity across core humanitarian disarmament issues, particularly the use of explosive weapons in populated areas and antipersonnel landmines. The second international conference on the political declaration on explosive weapons focused on promoting implementation of the Declaration’s commitments to ensure it becomes an effective tool of civilian protection. The decline in compliance with and respect for international law created a shadow over the Mine Ban Treaty’s Meeting of States Parties, but the significant number of states that spoke against withdrawals and unlawful suspensions of the treaty reflected the determination to uphold long-standing humanitarian norms. Other topics addressed over the past two months include autonomous weapons systems, nuclear weapons, incendiary weapons, and the environmental impacts of militaries.
In case you missed it:
Next year will be a busy one for disarmament with review conferences scheduled for four key treaties: the CCW, the Convention on Cluster Munitions, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and the TPNW. Given the current humanitarian and legal challenges faced in our field, finding ways to bolster respect for and compliance with international law will also be high on the agenda. Despite the work to be done, 2026 should begin on a high note with celebrations on January 22 of the fifth anniversary of entry into force of the TPNW.
This post expresses the views of the Armed Conflict and Civilian Protection Initiative and does not purport to represent the views of Harvard Law School’s International Human Rights Clinic or Harvard University.
Share this:
Like this: