Leaders from over 50 countries and members from four international organisations flew into Washington D. C. to attend the fourth Nuclear Security Summit on 31 March. What was primarily framed as a meeting to draw attention to the security threat of nuclear proliferation became focused specifically on issues of country attendance to the Summit and the threat of IS.

The Nuclear Security Summit was an initiative set up by President Barack Obama in 2009 to push for higher attention to the threat of nuclear terrorism – the first Summit was held in Washington D.C. in 2010. It seeks to empower the existing multilateral frameworks already elevating the urgent need for nuclear security and past Summit’s have produced working plans which have worked to increase national security with respect to nuclear materials and facilities and working with the international community to absolve the threats posed by extremists and rogue states. They have successfully installed detection equipment at international border crossings, ensure the removal of hazardous plutonium and other vulnerable materials from 12 countries to date and have upgraded security at 32 facilities worldwide.

The Summit was centered on the possibility of nuclear weapons being used in terror attacks. This threat has become an increasingly ominous threat after it was revealed that IS was involved in video surveillance of a top Belgian nuclear scientist and had considered attacking a Belgian nuclear site too. Obama emphasized the need to reinforce security around nuclear facilities that hold some 2,000 tonnes of nuclear material, especially those whose security is shaky at best. Amendments were proposed and ratified by member states to tighten protections against nuclear theft and smuggling, as well as numerous promises from world leaders to strengthen security against cyber attacks and facilities.

Notable absences from the Summit included Iran, Russia and North Korea. Iran failed to obtain an invite to the Summit, which caused great surprise given the recent signing of a nuclear agreement between Iran and the P5+1 (all of whom have representatives at the Summit, except Russia). Iran’s nuclear program was recently affirmed to align with international norms and sanctions against Tehran relaxed a great deal with the signing of the historic deal last year. Arguably the failure to invite Iran was a missed opportunity, especially considering that Iran is working towards strengthening its own security and safety. For example Iran has ratified the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and is closer to the threat of ISIS than many other attending countries.

President Vladimir Putin was unwilling to attend given the recent tensions between Russia and the US over conflicts in Ukraine and Syria, or as a Kremlin spokesman called it, a ‘shortage of mutual cooperation’. Russia however did pledge to increase its cooperation with the premier body dealing with nuclear proliferation, the International Atomic Energy Agency. Obama wrote recently in the Washington Post that it was an imperative that talks between Russia and the US in reducing nuclear stockpiles continue unhindered, especially given that the two Cold War foes possess 90% of the world’s nuclear weapons.

The actions of North Korea in the recent months and their response to the Summit have caused grave concern also. Talks between the US, South Korea and Japan at the Summit prompted Pyongyang to refer to the situation as a ‘semi-state of war’. So Se Pyong, the reclusive state’s ambassador to the United Nations said, ‘If the United States continues [their training exercises with South Korea] then we have to take the counter-measures also. So we have to develop, and we have to make more deterrence, clear deterrence. He also denounced the talks as ‘propaganda’ and maintained that Pyongyang’s ‘simultaneous’ policy was still in place if hostility towards it continued.

Given that plutonium the size of an apple has the capacity to kill hundreds of thousands of people, it is integral that high-level attention on the issue of nuclear security is sustained and that international cooperation is continued for the sake of peace and stability.