Civil society advocates and researchers are calling for a fundamental shift in the design of Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zones, urging policymakers to look beyond state-centric military calculations and prioritise humanitarian impacts.

Martina Schubert, the deputy director of the Vienna School of International Studies, speaking at a post-Non-Nuclear Proliferation Treaty review conference’s symposium on Wednesday, organised by Open Nuclear Network and Global Neighbours, in partnership with the Vienna School of International Studies, pointed out that Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zones must be more than lines drawn on a military map to manage state relations. The event took place in Vienna, Austria, to mark the 20th anniversary of the Treaty of Semipalatinsk, which established the Central Asian NWFZ.

At th event, speakers highlighted that historic regional treaties have frequently overlooked the long-term harms of nuclear testing and uranium mining, which have disproportionately devastated indigenous populations across the South Pacific, Central Asia, and Africa.

“Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zones must be more than lines drawn on a military map to manage state relations,” stated Martina Schubert, the deputy director of the Vienna School of International Studies.

Ms Schubert added, “They must become active instruments of humanitarian justice by incorporating explicit mandates for environmental remediation and victim assistance, directly addressing the multi-generational trauma left behind by nuclear explosions.”

Panellists also mentioned that strengthening existing zones and establishing new ones in places like the Middle East represents the most viable path forward to prevent accidental or intentional nuclear escalation while global consensus remains out of reach.

Analysts pointed out that without legally binding, unconditional protocols ratified by all recognised nuclear-weapon states, NWFZs remain structurally exposed. Security policymakers are advocating for the formal institutionalisation of cooperation among the world’s NWF zones to build a unified global front against nuclear modernisation.

The discussion centred on transforming the current ad hoc communication among regional secretariats into a permanent, structured network. Proponents argue that an institutionalised coalition of NWFZs would allow non-nuclear states to exert greater collective diplomatic pressure on nuclear-armed states.

Panellists stated that even structural progress toward a zone framework could serve as a valuable crisis-management and confidence-building mechanism in the region.

The current communication between regional secretariats (such as the Agency for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean) remains largely ad hoc. Proponents at the Vienna high-level dialogue argued that formalising this inter-zone relationship would amplify the diplomatic leverage of non-nuclear states, allowing them to collectively counter the actions of nuclear-weapon possessors.

“A fragmented approach limits our power. By institutionalising cooperation across these independent zones, non-nuclear states can combine their political capital, share structural best practices, and operate as a unified diplomatic bloc capable of forcing compliance on the global stage,” said Vladimir Norov, CEO of Silk Road Advisory and former Uzbekistani foreign affairs minister.