Cesar Jaramillo

It is easy to defend norms in principle. Far harder to uphold them when they come at a cost — when they constrain not adversaries, but allies or ourselves. Liberal democracies have long positioned themselves as champions of international law, including international humanitarian law (IHL). As it turns out, they generally leave the field when they and not others are held to account.

The year promises to be turbulent, with resurgent geopolitical tensions, environmental degradation, and the rapid advancement of military technologies among the disruptions that threaten global peace and security. For Project Ploughshares, these disruptions underscore the importance of strengthening global norms and fostering responsible security policies. Canada can and should be a constructive player on the global stage, leveraging its unique position to foster diplomacy, strengthen international norms, and promote responsible security policies.

Donald Trump’s foreign policy, past and present, is built on a belief in peace through strength. From his administration’s emphasis on military dominance to his recent announcement of an “Iron Dome for America” missile defence system, Trump promotes the idea that U.S. security is best achieved through overwhelming military superiority. Trump’s first term as President saw the dismantling...

If Canada were to come forward now to champion a principled and rigorous defence of IHL, while also clarifying its connection to self-defence, it could set a new standard for accountability and constructive engagement. The opportunity exists.

I often say that being an optimist is in my job description. Not always an easy task in today’s world.

Having attended several Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Preparatory Committees and Review Conferences over the years, I have witnessed the persistent lack of progress on critical issues. The Second Session of the Preparatory Committee for the 2026 NPT Review Conference, held in Geneva, Switzerland from July 22 to August 2, ran true to form. Discussions seemed merely repetitive echoes from previous sessions, lacking any substantial resolution of key disputes. Such ongoing stagnation not only prevents needed change but undermines the credibility of the NPT process.

United Nations, Geneva July 23, 2024 Delivered by Cesar Jaramillo Project Ploughshares, Canadian Pugwash group, SEHLAC Network Chair, More than five decades after the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty entered into force, the world remains overshadowed by the threat of nuclear weapons. The ongoing conflict in Ukraine has laid bare the dark underbelly of nuclear deterrence and...

Don’t look now, but 69 states – the total membership of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) and all parties to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) – have just gone on record to declare that the United States, the Russian Federation, China, France, and the United Kingdom are in breach of their...

Almost 78 years after the first atomic bomb was deployed, the world was anticipating a sign that some of the world’s most powerful nations had resolved to craft a credible path to the complete elimination of nuclear weapons. The world was disappointed.

Project Ploughshares