Nagasaki Mayor Shiro Suzuki expressed "great disappointment" and "strong indignation" after the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) review conference collapsed [1, 2, 3].
As the leader of the only city in Japan to suffer an atomic bombing, Suzuki's reaction underscores the frustration of survivors and peace advocates who view the NPT as the primary global mechanism for disarmament. The failure to reach a consensus signals a deepening divide between nuclear-armed states and those pushing for total abolition.
Speaking at the United Nations headquarters in New York during an NGO session on May 1 [1, 3], Suzuki criticized the treaty's signatories. He said that the members failed to demonstrate a sincere posture toward achieving a world without nuclear weapons in a visible way [1, 2, 3].
Suzuki described nuclear weapons as an "absolute evil" and reiterated his goal to make Nagasaki the final city to ever experience the horrors of war [3]. The mayor's remarks followed the breakdown of the formal review process, where member states were unable to agree on a final document.
Despite the collapse, some survivors urged a continued effort to strengthen the treaty framework. Tsuyoshi Yamakawa, an atomic bomb survivor, said that the failure to adopt a document should not lead to feelings of hopelessness [1]. He said this moment could actually be an opportunity to consider how to maintain, and further strengthen, the NPT system [1].
While some reports indicate the formal review conference was scheduled to begin on May 27 [4], the NGO sessions and associated diplomatic failures were already being felt by delegates and advocates on May 1 [3].
“I feel great disappointment. I feel strong indignation that the contracting parties could not demonstrate in a visible way that they are truly and sincerely aiming for the realization of a world without nuclear weapons.”
The collapse of the NPT review conference reflects a growing geopolitical stalemate between nuclear-weapon states and non-nuclear-weapon states. For cities like Nagasaki, the inability to secure a formal agreement is seen as a regression in global security, suggesting that the diplomatic path toward disarmament is stalling while nuclear arsenals remain a central part of national defense strategies.
