ICAN condemns surge in nuclear arms investments
Global nuclear tensions helped boost investments in atomic weapons production by around $81 billion in 2017, campaigners said on 7 March, urging investors to blacklist the companies that stock the world’s nuclear arsenals.
Beatrice Fihn, who heads the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), said: ‘If you have been wondering who benefits from [US President] Donald Trump’s threat of nuclear war, this report has the answer.’
ICAN won the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize.
In a report, ICAN and another anti-nuclear campaign group PAX detailed a ‘massive increase’ in investments in the top 20 companies involved in producing key components for the nuclear arsenals of Britain, France, India and the US.
The report, titled ‘Don’t Bank on the Bomb’, found that a total of $525 billion was made available last year to such companies – an increase of $81 billion from 2016.
Fihn said in a statement: ‘A new nuclear arms race has moved the Doomsday Clock closer to Armageddon, but it has also started a new nuclear gold rush for those wanting to cash in on mass destruction.’
The report authors said the selection of the top 20 companies that have benefitted from the boom, including Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Airbus and BAE Systems, was ‘not exhaustive’.
The list, they said, was ‘an attempt to identify the privately owned companies that are most heavily involved in the nuclear weapon industrial complex.’
They also explained that suppliers to the other five nuclear weapons states – Russia, China, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea – were not included because they mainly relied on government agencies.
With the current standoff between the US and North Korea creating the world’s most acute nuclear threat in decades, Fihn urged investors to divest from nuclear weapons producers.
Trump has also ratcheted up global tensions over Iran, by criticising a landmark 2015 agreement to restrict Tehran’s nuclear programme.
Vowing to ‘shame’ whoever tried to profit from nuclear weapons production, Fihn said: ‘Producing, possessing and modernising nuclear weapons is not something to be proud of.’
Other companies listed in the report included Honeywell International, Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics, Aecom, BWX Technologies, Huntington Ingalls Industries and Jacobs Engineering.
The report authors also listed the investment companies that pumped most money into nuclear weapons producers in 2017, with three – BlackRock, Vanguard and Capital Group – alone accounting for around $110 billion.
While the report criticised the ‘massive increase of investments in mass destruction’, it also hailed 63 financial institutions that are limiting or refusing to make such investments.
Among them was Norway’s massive pension fund, which is valued at nearly $1 trillion.
Sue Snyder of PAX said: ‘Investments are not neutral. These companies should be congratulated for standing on the side of humanity.’
More from Defence Notes
-
Eurosatory 2026: New public security needs drive personal protection equipment modernisation
European law enforcement and public security agencies are entering a new cycle of investment in personal protection equipment (PPE), driven by evolving threat profiles, officer welfare requirements and advances in materials technology.
-
Eurosatory 2026: Milrem Robotics puts forward multi-layered defence concept for NATO’s eastern flank
Autonomous systems developer Milrem has evolved a model for an interoperable robotised approach to the Eastern Flank Deterrence Initiative (EFDI), showing how uncrewed systems could provide a multi-layered defence architecture in the air and on land along NATO’s eastern borders.
-
Eurosatory 2026 to highlight changing defence and security priorities
Eurosatory 2026 will reflect a defence and security sector shaped by conflict, rising government spending, uncrewed systems, multidomain networks and growing demand for sovereign capabilities.
-
Delays, departures and drama cloud UK defence programmes ahead of absent DIP
The UK defence secretary’s departure suggests that the long-delayed Defence Investment Plan is unlikely to meet the funding demands of the armed forces, with consequences for procurement and the UK’s standing at a NATO summit weeks away.