27 July 2025, Berlin, Germany
The International Peace Bureau (IPB), in cooperation with the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), Greenpeace, the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, Oxfam, and 350.org, has released a global call to action for nuclear and conventional disarmament, common security, and a prioritization of sustainable development over militarism.
Continue reading “IPB Press Release: For Democracy that Delivers Peace and Prosperity for All”25 July 2025
The International Peace Bureau (IPB) expresses deep concern over the rising military clashes and political tensions between Thailand and Cambodia, which have resulted in the death of at least 15 civilians and the mass displacement of civilians from border areas. The escalation of long-standing tensions over the border risks further exacerbating civilian suffering and displacement.
The IPB calls for an immediate ceasefire and a return to diplomatic negotiations and conflict resolution as the only tools that can solve the crisis. Nationalist and militaristic rhetoric must be replaced by dialogue and common security. Moreover, IPB calls on ASEAN, particularly neighbour states, in the region and those with military ties to either party to encourage de-escalation and peaceful resolution.
Click on the button to load the content from docs.google.com.
Loading…
The Global Military Spending Crisis
In 2024, the world spent an unprecedented 2.718 trillion USD on military budgets—equivalent to the entire budgets of South Africa, Canada, Brazil, and India combined. This massive expenditure represents the highest military spending ever recorded, a 9.4% increase from 2023, surpassing even Cold War levels. Meanwhile, multiple, simultaneous global crises persist: hunger continues to claim millions of lives, the climate crisis intensifies, and human security remains fragile. The world also grapples with escalating refugee crises, the rise of authoritarianism, and deepening global inequalities, all of which threaten the stability and well-being of societies worldwide.
Continue reading “10% for All: A global campaign to cut military spending, reframe security, and invest in humanity”Drafted by Nordic Peace Alliance’s working group on Helsinki+50
Preamble
Inspired by the Helsinki Final Act signed on the 1 st of August 1975, we, civil society organizations and individuals from Europe and beyond, call for the reinvention and revitalization of cooperation for common security and human rights in Europe. The conference in Helsinki paved the way for several positive achievements, serving as the closest thing to a peace agreement for post-World War II Europe during the continued Cold War period. The allied victory in WWII led to the formation of the UN and the adoption of indivisible human rights and the UN Charter which is the basis of international law. The Helsinki Final Act built on these achievements and promoted economic, social, cultural, environmental, scientific, and humanitarian cooperation. Thus, the Helsinki Final Act created the necessary environment for détente, arms reduction, and a dynamic peace and human rights movement of global importance.
Berlin, June 22, 2025
The International Peace Bureau (IPB) strongly condemns the United States’ recent military strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. Carried out in coordination with Israel, these attacks are a dangerous escalation that violates both international law and the U.S. Constitution—and brings the region closer to a devastating war.
Under international humanitarian law, nuclear facilities are protected due to the catastrophic risks they pose to civilians and the environment. Targeting them is inhuman and illegal. There is no credible evidence that Iran is currently pursuing nuclear weapons—U.S. intelligence has confirmed this repeatedly. Military action under these circumstances has no legal justification.
Domestically, the strikes also violate the U.S. Constitution, which grants Congress—not the President—the authority to declare war. Launching attacks without Congressional approval contradicts both the War Powers Resolution and the principles of democratic oversight.
This is more than a legal issue—it is a matter of global security. Attacking nuclear infrastructure risks the release of radioactive materials, retaliatory strikes, and rapid regional escalation. The consequences could be catastrophic—not just for Iran and the Middle East, but for the world. The USA and Iran should cease hostilities and return to serious, long-term negotiations.
NATO members must not follow a U.S. president who acts unlawfully, even within his own constitutional system. They have a responsibility to uphold international law and prevent escalation—not enable it. Silence or complicity only deepens the crisis.
There is no military solution to this crisis. IPB calls for an immediate end to all military operations, respect for international law, and return to diplomacy. Peace and common security can only be achieved through cooperation, not weapons.
Statements are available in English, French, and Russian. Check it below:
Statement in English
Statement in French
Statement in Russian
13 June | Statement by the International Peace Bureau (IPB)
The International Peace Bureau strongly condemns today’s large-scale Israeli military assault on Iranian territory. This operation, which reportedly struck nuclear enrichment sites—including Natanz—ballistic missile facilities, and military leadership compounds, marks a dangerous escalation in an already volatile region.
Civilian infrastructure has also been impacted, with casualties reported in residential areas. Iran has responded by launching a wave of drone strikes and has withdrawn from planned diplomatic talks on its nuclear programme. These events mark a critical deterioration of regional stability and significantly heighten the risk of a broader war.
This attack comes at a time when Iran is not currently assessed by international watchdogs, including the IAEA, to be pursuing nuclear weapons, though recent IAEA findings highlight a growth in Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile However, actions like these dangerously empower voices that argue nuclear deterrence is necessary for national survival. In that way, the strike may perversely encourage proliferation rather than prevent it.
Israel, widely believed to possess approximately 90 nuclear warheads, remains the only nuclear-armed state in the region. Its continued refusal to acknowledge its arsenal or engage in nuclear disarmament efforts stands in stark contrast to global non-proliferation goals.
IPB warns that targeting nuclear facilities—regardless of intent—carries catastrophic risks, both from direct damage and from the precedent it sets. Attacks on nuclear infrastructure undermine international norms and endanger the very safeguards designed to prevent nuclear catastrophe.
This moment must not become a tipping point.
IPB calls for:
We urge the international community to reject further militarization, uphold international law, and invest in a diplomatic path that promotes disarmament, human security, and enduring peace.
A concerning development has emerged from Finland: a government proposal to withdraw from the Ottawa Treaty, which bans the use of anti-personnel (AP) landmines, has received support from numerous Members of Parliament during discussions on Tuesday, June 3rd.
This move has sparked alarm among peace and humanitarian organizations across Finland and internationally. The Ottawa Treaty, also known as the Mine Ban Treaty, is a vital international agreement that prohibits the use, stockpiling, production, and transfer of anti-personnel landmines — weapons that are inherently indiscriminate and continue to harm civilians long after conflicts end.
Continue reading “Finland Considers Withdrawal from the Ottawa Treaty”(Brief statement by Dr. Enkhsaikhan of Blue Banner at Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TNPW) side event, New York, March 6, 2025)
Role of non-nuclear-weapon states (NNWSs) is increasing as a result of the studies undertaken on the effects of nuclear weapons which had lead to the conclusion of the TPNW. The commitments by the NNWSs undertaken by the NPT, NWFZ treaties and the TPNW in principle coincide, enrich and support each other.
Blue Banner, Mongolian NGO, which Dr. Enkhsaikhan‘ represent at this side event, had undertaken a study on the strengths and weaknesses of the NWFZ regime and had concluded that there are at least two dozen non-committed NNWSs (i.e. land-locked, neutral states, NNWSs that are not parties to nuclear military alliances or parties to the current NWFZs that due to current definition and concept of NWFZs cannot be part of the NWFZ regime since they would not be established “based on the arrangements arrived at among the states of the region concerned”. The reasons given by the P5 for their reluctance to accept single-State zones was that doing so might detract from establishing group-state zones, set unfavorable for them precedents and that as a principle the P5 do not provide security assurances to individual states. These are not valid reasons to exclude these non-committed NNWSs from the NWFZ regime and allow for blind spots and grey areas and knowingly establish the Achilles’ heels in the NWFZ regime. Fifty years have passed since the first NWFZ was established. In the meantime space, time and technology have become critical geopolitical factor affecting international security and stability. In the meantime nuclear arms race has intensified while the number of nuclear weapon states has increased to nine.
Check the full statement here:
The International Peace Bureau (IPB) expresses deep concern over the recent escalation of violence in Syria’s coastal regions, particularly affecting the Alawite community. This surge in conflict threatens the region’s fragile stability and underscores the urgent need for concerted international efforts to protect vulnerable populations and promote lasting peace.
On March 6, 2025, coordinated attacks were initiated by loyalists of the ousted President Bashar al-Assad against government security forces in the coastal town of Jableh. This ambush resulted in the deaths of several security personnel and marked a significant escalation in the region. In the aftermath, insurgent groups disseminated misinformation, alleging that the new government was targeting coastal communities, thereby inflaming sectarian tensions.
The government deployed reinforcements to the affected areas in response to the initial attacks. Clashes ensued, leading to severe casualties among the Alawite community, including children, the elderly, and civilians unaffiliated with the Assad regime. Between March 6 and March 8, Syria’s coastal regions, particularly the Latakia and Tartus provinces, experienced severe violence resulting in significant casualties among the Alawite community: initial estimations indicate the death of more than 1000 people, including hundreds of civilians, by extremists, foreign fighters, and Islamist groups.
Entire families—doctors, pharmacists, teachers, and innocent infants who had yet to experience life—have been mercilessly slaughtered. These tragic events have led to mass displacement, with thousands of Alawite civilians fleeing their homes. Many sought refuge at the Russian Khmeimim Air Base in Latakia province, seeking protection from the escalating violence.
International Response
The international community has expressed deep concern over these incidents, emphasizing the need for restraint and the protection of civilians to prevent further escalation and ensure regional stability.
The International Peace Bureau urgently calls upon the international community to:
The international community must not stand idle in the face of such barbarity. Immediate action is imperative to protect the remaining Alawite population and to hold those responsible for these crimes accountable. The sanctity of human life and the principles of justice demand nothing less.
The IPB remains committed to supporting peace initiatives in Syria and stands in solidarity with all communities affected by this tragic conflict.
Ireland is a neutral country. A central component of that neutrality is the Triple Lock. It stipulates that Irish troops can only be deployed on overseas missions if there is approval from:
A three-tiered approval mechanism to authorise the deployment of troops to highly complex and volatile environments, including conflict zones, makes good sense. Yet in recent days the Irish government announced plans to bring legislation before the cabinet to undo it. This is a fundamental policy shift that will seriously weaken Irish neutrality. It could see Irish troops being deployed, not to keep the peace within a UN mandated mission, but to wage war as part of a military alliance.
We firmly believe in neutrality as a means to actively prevent the outbreak of war and recognise that the Triple Lock is vital for preserving Ireland’s neutrality, particularly amid escalating global instability and conflict. We wrote to the Irish Taoiseach (Prime Minister) to convey our alarm at the erosion of a core component of Irish neutrality.
You can read the full letter below.
Continue reading “Alarm at Irish Government Plans to Dismantle Ireland’s Triple Lock”
Reload document 
Open in new tab 
