International Day of Disarmament and Non-proliferation

Group of Governmental Experts on Emerging Technologies in the Area of Lethal Autonomous Weapons System Geneva, 2-6 March 2026 - Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects, Watch the 9h Meeting - 1st Session Group of Governmental Experts on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems 2026 Meetings & Events

                        Our dream of peace is in peril. The threat of nuclear weapons use is the highest in decades. Global tensions are pushing military spending to stratospheric levels. Small arms and light weapons are proliferating. And emerging technologies are making conflicts even deadlier. We must lower the temperature. On this International Day for Disarmament and Non-Proliferation Awareness, I urge leaders to step back from the brink. Stop rattling the nuclear saber. Halt the arms races. It’s time to invest in the architecture of peace, not the tools of war. That means living up to disarmament obligations. Rebuilding trust. And strengthening the systems and tools that prevent the proliferation, testing and use of deadly weapons. Together, we can prevent catastrophes and ensure a safe and peaceful world for all. António Guterres, United Nations Secretary-General.

Multilateral disarmament negotiations under United Nations auspices have traditionally sought consensual outcomes, regardless of the specific formal decision-making rules governing particular bodies. The preference for consensus is rooted in the legitimacy it is perceived to confer in matters of security — the fundamental concern of States. Because disarmament is directly linked to international security and, by extension, national security, many States have considered consensual decisionmaking essential to producing outcomes that are both credible and implementable. Reflecting this approach, consensus decision-making was seen as essential to negotiations and deliberations in two of the three main disarmament bodies recognized in 1978 by the General Assembly at its first special session devoted to disarmament. The outcome document affirmed the central role of consensus — particularly in the realm of nuclear disarmament negotiations — and the priority States attached to it. The United ...

Consensus is generally understood as a decision-making procedure characterized by the absence of objection. In multilateral disarmament negotiations , however, “consensus” carries a particular nuance that distinguishes it from “unanimity”. In practical terms, consensus is reached when no State formally objects to a decision, including by requesting a vote. Importantly, “joining consensus” does not necessarily mean that a State agrees with every element of the text or outcome. It is entirely possible — and often the case — that a State joins consensus to adopt the text while maintaining specific reservations or substantive concerns. In this context, “ explanations of vote ” are an important tool for making consensus work in practice, allowing States to place reservations on the record without rejecting the outcome as a whole (see box 4). Explanations of vote may also be used to clarify why a State voted against a decision or chose to abstain. In some instances, States explicitly note ...

   Group of Governmental Experts on Emerging Technologiesin the Area of Lethal Autonomous Weapons SystemGeneva, 2-6 March 2026 - Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on theUse of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injuriousor to Have Indiscriminate Effects. Watch the 8th Meeting - 1st Session Group of Governmental Experts on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems 2026! Meetings & Events

Consensus decision-making is a well established practice in nuclear disarmament negotiations , the General Assembly having enshrined its centrality in the final document of the first special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament. Consensus has long been viewed as essential to producing effective and implementable agreements in the nuclear field, given the unique responsibility of nuclear-weapon States to disarm . At the same time, profound and persistent divergences of views — especially the entrenched division between nuclear “haves” and “have-nots ” — create unique obstacles to consensus, notably on matters directly related to the elimination of nuclear weapons and the Middle East . These challenges are perhaps most visible in the long-standing paralysis in the Conference on Disarmament, which has not carried out substantive negotiations for more than 25 years. Although some substantive discussions have taken place in subsidiary bodies and thematic meetings conven...