The 2025 session of the UNDC focuses on a comprehensive set of disarmament-related issues, guided by the principles outlined in the Final Document of the First Special Session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament (SSOD-I). The session will address the following key agenda:

• Cessation of the nuclear arms race and nuclear disarmament.
• Prevention of nuclear war, including all related matters.
• Prevention of an arms race in outer space.
• Adequate international arrangements to assure non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons.
• New types of weapons of mass destruction and new systems of such weapons, such as radiological weapons.
• The comprehensive program of disarmament.
• Transparency in armaments.
• Consideration and adoption of the annual report and any other report, as appropriate, to the General Assembly of the United Nations.

Pakistan’s statement at the 2025 United Nations Disarmament Commission reflects continuity and concern in its approach to global disarmament and emerging technologies. Pakistan invokes the legacy of the First Special Session on Disarmament (SSOD-I, 1978), emphasis on the time-bound elimination of nuclear weapons, impartial and undiminished security for all, and the call for balanced disarmament. Pakistan expresses concern for the continued disregard for disarmament obligations with rising defense spending, growing nuclear modernization programs, and the accelerating arms race, which is now further fueled by rapid technological advancements and geopolitical competition among the great powers, has further shrunk the space for arms control and disarmament.

Moreover, Pakistan also stressed that there should be legal assurances for non-nuclear weapon states and balanced reductions of conventional and nuclear arms. A direct causal relationship between conventional weapons and nuclear arsenals requires concrete measures to institute a balanced reduction of armed forces and conventional armaments, especially at the regional and sub-regional levels. While discussing emerging technologies, Pakistan warns against the destabilizing potential of cyber capabilities, artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and automation in the military domain. It also identifies the multifaceted risks these technologies pose, particularly the threat of new arms races, ethical and legal dilemmas, and challenges to compliance with International Law. The growing militarization of AI, primarily through autonomous weapons, demands global attention. Pakistan emphasizes the need for a multilateral response to address these issues. Pakistan’s stance reflects the constructive commitment to international disarmament and security.

Moreover, Australia reasserts its commitment to a nuclear weapons-free world. They accentuate the development of credible verification mechanisms that will build mutual trust and ensure state compliance. Their statement fails to address the global geopolitical competition and lack of interest of great powers in disarmament. While discussing the emerging technology, Australia proposes consensus-based principles rather than a specific policy framework. This approach seeks to consolidate commonalities across discussions on diverse technologies and avoid duplicating efforts underway in specialized forums. While this strategy may facilitate broad agreement and maintain institutional relevance, it also risks producing watered-down outcomes with limited practical utility. Australia emphasizes the lawful development of military technologies, especially under international humanitarian law; however, it fails to address the regulatory and accountability measures.

Furthermore, the United Kingdom maintained a balance while affirming its commitment to global disarmament norms and defending its national security interests within the volatile geopolitical landscape. The UK strongly supports multilateralism and international law while positioning itself as a responsible actor within the disarmament framework. It promotes a gradual, systematic approach to nuclear disarmament through established mechanisms and emphasizes practical initiatives such as transparency, verification, irreversibility, and risk reduction. The UK blames current geopolitical tensions, particularly Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and nuclear rhetoric, as significant hurdles to disarmament. The UK also blames Russia, Iran, the DPRK, and China for violating the NPT regime. This critique resonates with traditional selective moral policing, which undermines the agenda and consensus within the UNDC, especially among non-aligned and Global South countries. The UK also acknowledges the challenges posed by emerging technologies, highlighting both their transformative potential and associated risks. While it supports responsible development and regulation, the UK’s comments on emerging tech remain broad and lack concrete proposals. Despite this, the UK presents itself as a collaborative actor open to dialogue and concludes on a hopeful note, emphasizing cooperation and preserving global disarmament architecture.

In addition, Russia strongly emphasized geopolitical grievances and a defensive posture regarding its role in the international security architecture. Russia argued that the West abandoned the principle of equal and undiminished security, accusing it of pursuing unilateral dominance and rejecting genuine multilateralism. By blaming the deterioration of international security on Western actions, Russia positions itself as a reactive power forced to take compensatory steps to defend its sovereignty and strategic interests. Russia’s argument justifies its military build-up and strategic policies, including the rollback of arms control commitments, while portraying itself as a responsible actor upholding the true spirit of multilateralism.

Furthermore, Russia justifies its Withdrawal of ratification of the CTBT as an essential measure to achieve parity with the United States. Russia also reaffirms support for the NPT while continuing the establishment of Nuclear Weapon-Free Zones, particularly in the Middle East, emphasizing its ongoing involvement. Russia, while discussing lethal autonomous weapons, space arms control, and biotechnology, should be confined to forums like the GGE and BTWC frameworks. Russia promotes equitable access to new technology and international collaboration, a stance designed to gain support from Global South nations apprehensive about technological disparity. Russia portrays itself as a victim of Western dominance and an advocate of multilateralism. She also argued that polarization in the disarmament discourse and geopolitical divisions hinder substantial advancement in the UNDC.

Likewise, France demonstrates its commitment to the multilateral disarmament framework while safeguarding its strategic interests. They pledge pragmatic and progressive disarmament, highlighting measures already implemented by France, such as reductions in its arsenal, transparency regarding nuclear capabilities, and irreversible dismantling of nuclear testing and fissile material production facilities. This pragmatic approach enhances France’s credibility as a responsible nuclear-armed state within the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) context. France also emphasizes nuclear risk reduction and transparency as confidence-building measures. The statement strongly supports the NPT as the cornerstone of the non-proliferation regime, reiterating concern over Iran’s nuclear advancements and North Korea’s weapons program while expressing determination to seek diplomatic solutions. France acknowledges the growing complexity posed by developments such as AI, autonomous weapons, cyberspace threats, and the militarization of outer space. France is also willing to explore how the UNDC can contribute meaningfully to these ongoing discussions, which is welcome.

Author

Muhammad Shahzad Akram is a Research Officer at the Center for International Strategic Studies, AJK. He holds an MPhil in International Relations from Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad, and is an alumnus of the Near East South Asia (NESA) Center for Strategic Studies, National Defense University (NDU), and Washington, DC. His areas of expertise include cyber warfare and strategy, arms control, and disarmament.