Nuclear Age Peace Foundation

Author: David Krieger

  • Violence: We Are All Ayotzinapa

    Violence, you are killing our children,
    in our streets, our schools, our homes.

    Violence, you are killing our children,
    in Mexico and Nigeria, in Iraq and Syria.

    Violence, you are killing our children,
    in our cities, our towns, everywhere.

    Violence, you are killing our children,
    with guns and knives, bombs and drones.

    Violence, you are killing our children,
    with starvation, disease and pollution.

    Violence, you are killing our children,
    east and west, north and south.

    Violence, you are killing the future,
    threatening children not yet even on the planet.

    Violence, is there no reasoning with you?
    Enough is enough.

    Violence, you are a monster that must be stopped.
    Who will stand up? Who will speak out?

     

    VIOLENCIA: TODOS SOMOS AYOTZINAPA

    Violencia, estás matando a nuestros hijos,
    en nuestras calles, nuestras escuelas, nuestros hogares.

    Violencia estás matando a nuestros hijos,
    en México y Nigeria, en Irak y Siria.

    Violencia, estás matando a nuestros hijos,
    en nuestras ciudades, nuestros pueblos, en todas partes.

    Violencia, estás matando a nuestros hijos,
    con pistolas y cuchillos, bombas y aviones no tripulados.

    Violencia, estás matando a nuestros hijos,
    con hambre, las enfermedades y la contaminación.

    Violencia, estás matando a nuestros hijos,
    en el este, el oeste, el norte y el sur.

    Violencia, estás matando el futuro,
    amenazando a los niños que todavía ni siquiera han arribado al planeta.

    Violencia, ¿no podemos racionalizar contigo?
    Esto ya es demasiado.

    Violencia, eres un monstruo que debe detenerse.
    ¿Quién será el defensor? ¿Quién será el que hable?

     Traducción/adaptación de Rubén Arvizu

  • 2014 Evening for Peace Introduction

    Good evening and thank you for being part of this Evening for Peace. It is a privilege to share this evening with all of you.

    Will all the students in the room please stand. The work of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation is for you and the generations to follow you. Peace matters, and we’d like to help you all to become Peace Leaders.

    David KriegerWe live in a time of war, and in a world that sacrifices its children at the altar of violence. There are children growing up today who have never known peace. Can you imagine what that must be like?

    Within the living nightmare of war, some of these children may dream of peace. While their dreams may be beautiful, peace must be more than a dream.

    There are many perspectives on peace. Here is mine. Peace is a dynamic balance in which human needs are met and human rights are upheld. Peace is not the absence of conflict, but the commitment to resolving conflict without resort to violence.

    At the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, we believe that peace is an imperative of the Nuclear Age. We believe it is beyond reason to threaten each other with nuclear weapons – weapons of indiscriminate mass slaughter. Civilization and complex life hang in the balance.

    We believe it is not reasonable to prepare for war and, at the same time, to expect peace. If we want peace, we must prepare for peace. And we must be willing to stand up for peace. We cannot sit back and expect that war and preparations for war will diminish. The world is too small and too dangerous for such complacency.

    We believe that the United States, rather than leading the world in the modernization of nuclear weapons and their delivery systems, should be engaged in negotiating the abolition of these weapons, as it is required to do under international law. That is why we are consulting with the Republic of the Marshall Islands, a courageous small Pacific Island country, in their lawsuits against the nine nuclear-armed countries.

    Rather than planning to spend $1 trillion over the next three decades on modernizing its nuclear arsenal, the US should be using those funds to meet human needs and uphold human dignity. That is the kind of peace leadership that is called for in our time.

    On this, the occasion of our 31st annual Evening for Peace, we come together to celebrate all that peace means to each of us and to honor a courageous Peace Leader. Among the many outstanding Peace Leaders we have honored over the years are the XIVth Dalai Lama, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Mairead Corrigan Maguire, Jody Williams, Jacques Cousteau, Daniel Ellsberg, Walter Cronkite and Helen Caldicott.

    Tonight we honor a woman who stands solidly for peace, a woman who lives peace and breathes justice. Where peace needs an advocate, she is there, whether it be in the sweatshops of Asia, the streets of the Middle East or the halls of the US Congress. She has won victories from corporations on fair trade, human rights and human dignity. She has challenged Presidents, Secretaries of Defense and Secretaries of State. She has protested war-making on a bipartisan basis, protesting against leading figures in Republican and Democratic administrations, arguing that the US had no legitimate justification for invading Iraq or for continuing the war against Afghanistan.

    She holds two Master’s degrees, one in public health from Columbia University and one in economics from The New School. She has worked in Africa and Latin America for the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization and for the World Health Organization. She is the co-founder of two important civil society organizations, Global Exchange and CODEPINK. She is the author of eight books, the latest being, Drone Warfare: Killing by Remote Control.

    She has received many awards, including the Martin Luther King, Jr. Peace Prize from the Fellowship of Reconciliation and the Gandhi Peace Award from Promoting Enduring Peace.

    On May 23, 2013, she interrupted a foreign policy speech by President Obama. Her comments as she was forcibly led out of the room were recorded by Slate Magazine. She asked the President a series of questions:

    “Can you tell the Muslim people their lives are as precious as our lives?

    “Can you take the drones out of the hands of the CIA?

    “Can you stop the signature strikes that are killing people on the basis of suspicious activities?

    “Will you apologize to the thousands of Muslims that you have killed?

    “Will you compensate the innocent family victims?”

    She also shouted out: “I love my country.”

    When she had been removed from the room, President Obama said, “The voice of that woman is worth listening to.”

    That woman, Medea Benjamin, is our honoree this evening, and her voice is indeed worth listening to. I am very pleased, on behalf of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, to present her with the Foundation’s 2014 Distinguished Peace Leadership Award.

    David Krieger is President of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation (www.wagingpeace.org).

  • Peace Leadership

    We live in a time of war and in a world that sacrifices its children at the altar of violence.

    President Eisenhower warned against the “military-industrial complex.”  He might well have added, “military-industrial-academic-congressional complex.”  All are implicated in the obscene sums spent on war and its preparation.

    David KriegerThere are children growing up today who have never known peace.  Can you imagine what this must be like?

    Within the living nightmare of war, some of these children may dream of peace.  While their dreams may be beautiful, peace must be more than a dream.

    Peace is a dynamic balance in which human needs are met and human rights are upheld.  It is a way of resolving conflicts without resorting to violence.

    Peace is an imperative of the Nuclear Age.  It is beyond reason to threaten each other with nuclear weapons.  Civilization and complex life hang in the balance.

    To achieve peace, we must believe in peace and follow the path of peace.  A.J. Muste said, “There is no way to peace; peace is the way.”

    It is not reasonable to prepare for war and expect peace.  War is far too costly in terms of lives, resources and lost hopes and opportunities.  If we want peace, we must prepare for peace.

    To stand up for peace, one must believe that peace is worth standing for.  To fight for peace, one must believe that peace is worth fighting for.  Both require courage.

    The world needs peace, and peace requires courageous peace leaders.

    That is why the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation exists.  That is why its institutional stability and outreach are so important.  We cannot just sit back and relax, and expect that war and preparations for war will diminish.  The world is too small and too dangerous for such complacency.

    Our vision is a just and peaceful world, free of nuclear threat.  Our programs all aim toward these ends.  We work with courageous countries, organizations and individuals throughout the world to eliminate nuclear weapons and end the nuclear weapons threat to humanity and other forms of life.

    We train peace leaders throughout the world through our exceptional Peace Leadership Program.  We also honor courageous peace leaders with our annual Distinguished Peace Leadership Award.  Past honorees include Archbishop Desmond Tutu, the XIVth Dalai Lama, Mairead Corrigan Maguire, Jody Williams and Helen Caldicott.

    The 2014 recipient of the NAPF Distinguished Peace Leadership Award is Medea Benjamin.  She is a cofounder of Global Exchange and CODEPINK.  She is the author of eight books about peace.  She is an American who stands at the front lines of peacemaking throughout the world.  Where peace is endangered, she is there.  When members of Congress or the administration shout out for war, she makes her presence known for peace.  She is courageous and committed.

    Join us on November 16, 2014 in honoring Medea Benjamin as our 2014 Distinguished Peace Leader.  For information, contact the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation at 805-965-3443, or visit us online at www.wagingpeace.org.

  • The Mouse that Roared: Stand With the Marshall Islands

    The Marshall Islands is “the mouse that roared.”  It is a small island country standing up to the nuclear-armed bullies of the world saying, “enough is enough.”  It is in effect saying to the nuclear-armed countries, “Friends don’t let friends drive drunk (on the false power and prestige of nuclear weapons).”  The Marshall Islands is acting with courage, compassion and commitment, taking risks for all humanity.  It is seeking to restore global sanity and end the overarching threat of nuclear omnicide.

    marshall_islands_flagThe Nuclear Zero Lawsuits filed by the Marshall Islands against the nine nuclear-armed “Goliaths” have the potential to awaken the public to the current status of nuclear weapons dangers.  For the most part, the public appears ignorant of or apathetic to these dangers.  Awakening the public may be an even more important function of the lawsuits than the legal rulings of the courts.

    The lawsuits raise the following issues:

    First, the nuclear-armed countries party to the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (the US, Russia, UK, France and China) are obligated “to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race and to nuclear disarmament . . . ”  The four nuclear-armed countries that are not parties to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (Israel, India, Pakistan and North Korea) have the same obligations under customary international law.

    Second, all nine nuclear-armed countries are in breach of their obligations to negotiate a cessation of the nuclear arms race.

    Third, all nine nuclear-armed countries are in breach of their obligations to negotiate for nuclear disarmament.

    Fourth, all nine nuclear-armed countries are in breach of their obligations to act in good faith.  They are not engaged in negotiations.  Rather, they are modernizing their nuclear arsenals.  The United States alone has plans to spend $1 trillion over the next three decades modernizing its nuclear arsenal.

    Fifth, these breaches undermine the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and international law itself.

    Sixth, continued reliance on nuclear weapons keeps the door open to nuclear proliferation by other countries and by terrorist organizations, and to nuclear weapons use, by accident or design.

    According to atmospheric scientists, even a small regional nuclear war between India and Pakistan, in which each side used 50 Hiroshima-size nuclear weapons on the other side’s cities, would result in putting enough soot into the upper stratosphere to block warming sunlight, shorten growing seasons and cause crop failures that could lead to a global nuclear famine resulting in the death by starvation of some two billion people.  It would be a heavy price to pay for the broken promises and breached obligations of the nine nuclear-armed countries.

    There are still over 16,000 nuclear weapons in the world, with some 94 percent of these in the arsenals of the United States and Russia.  A war between these two countries could trigger an ice age that would end civilization and potentially all complex life on Earth.

    In sum, the nuclear-armed countries have obligations under international law that they are breaching, and these breaches raise serious threats to the people of the world, now and in the future.  The Marshall Islands has brought lawsuits against the nine nuclear-armed countries in an attempt to compel them to do what the parties to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty promised to do long ago, and what all nine nuclear-armed countries are required to do under international law.

    The people of the world should follow the lead of the Marshall Islands, one of the smallest but most courageous countries in the world.  We should stand with the Marshall Islands and support them in their legal action.  The dream of ending the nuclear weapons threat to humanity should be not only the dream of the Marshall Islands, but our dream as well.  You can find out more about the Nuclear Zero lawsuits and sign a petition supporting the Marshall Islands at www.nuclearzero.org.

    This article was originally published by Truthout.

  • Open Letter Supports Marshall Islands’ Nuclear Zero Lawsuits

    Recently, 78 civil society leaders from around the world released an Open Letter in Support of the Marshall Islands’ Nuclear Zero Lawsuits.  I am proud to be among the signers of that letter supporting a courageous small Pacific Island country, one with only 70,000 inhabitants.  The Marshall Islanders are seeking to make the world a far more secure place, free of the nuclear threat that has hung over the collective head of humanity for some seven decades.

    David KriegerThe Open Letter was addressed to Christopher Loeak, President of the Marshall Islands; Tony de Brum, Foreign Minister of the Marshall Islands; and the People and Parliament of the Marshall Islands.  They all deserve credit for their courage.  They are much like David in “David vs. Goliath,” but they carry court papers rather than a slingshot.

    The Open Letter salutes the initiative of the Marshall Islanders in seeking enforcement of international law by bringing lawsuits against the nine nuclear-armed “Goliaths” for their failure to fulfill their obligations to negotiate in good faith to end the nuclear arms race and to achieve complete nuclear disarmament.  These obligations derive from Article VI of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and from customary international law.

    The Open Letter praises the Marshall Islands for acting on behalf of all humanity and generations yet unborn in bringing the issue of the broken promises and breached obligations of the nuclear-armed countries to the International Court of Justice and to the U.S. Federal District Court.  In their lawsuits the Marshall Islands seeks no compensation.  Rather, it seeks an injunction by the Court requiring the fulfillment of legal obligations to negotiate for nuclear disarmament by the nuclear-armed countries.

    The letter concludes, “All people and all governments that have the welfare and survival of humanity and the planet at heart must support you wholeheartedly in your courageous legal action.”

    The Open Letter was coordinated by John Hallam, an Australian civil society leader working with People for Nuclear Disarmament and the Human Survival Project.  Other signers of the letter include Nobel Peace Laureates Archbishop Desmond Tutu and Mairead Maguire; and former Mayor of Hiroshima Tadatoshi Akiba.

    To read the Open Letter, click here.  To find out more about the Nuclear Zero Lawsuits and add your support, go to www.nuclearzero.org.

  • U.S. Nuclear Policy: Taking the Wrong Road

    David KriegerOn September 21, 2014, the International Day of Peace, The New York Times published an article by William Broad and David Sanger, “U.S. Ramping Up Major Renewal in Nuclear Arms.”  The authors reported that a recent federal study put the price tag for modernizing the U.S. nuclear arsenal at “up to a trillion dollars” over the next three decades.  It appears that Washington’s military and nuclear hawks have beaten down a president who, early in his first term of office, announced with conviction, “America’s commitment to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons.”

    Many U.S. military leaders, rather than analyzing and questioning the effectiveness of nuclear deterrence to provide security, are acting as cheerleaders for it.  Rear Admiral Joe Tofalo, director of the Navy’s Undersea Warfare Division, recently pontificated, “For the foreseeable future, certainly for our and our children’s and our grandchildren’s lifetimes, the United States will require a safe, secure and effective strategic nuclear deterrent.  The ballistic nuclear submarine forces are and will continue to be a critical part of that deterrent….”  He went on to argue that all legs of the nuclear triad – bombers, intercontinental ballistic missiles and submarine launched ballistic missiles – would be needed to “provide a strong deterrent against different classes of adversary threat.”

    Admiral Tofalo was backed up by Admiral Cecil Haney, commander of the U.S. Strategic Command, who argued, “In a world where our traditional adversaries are modernizing, emerging adversaries are maturing and non-state actors remain elusive and dangerous, we must get 21st century deterrence right…the reality is that an effective modernized nuclear deterrent force is needed now more than ever.”

    All this emphasis on modernizing the nuclear deterrent force may be good for business, but ignores two important facts.  First, nuclear deterrence is only a hypothesis about human behavior that has not been and cannot be proven to work.  Second, it ignores the obligations of the U.S. and other nuclear-armed states to pursue negotiations in good faith for an end to the nuclear arms race and for nuclear disarmament.

    The U.S. and other nuclear-armed countries are gambling that nuclear deterrence will be foolproof rather than a game of chance, like nuclear roulette.  Rather than providing security for the American people, nuclear deterrence is a calculated risk, similar to loading a large metaphorical six-chamber gun with a nuclear bullet and pointing the gun at humanity’s head.

    The only foolproof way to assure that nuclear weapons won’t be used, by accident or design, is to abolish them.  This is what the generals and admirals should be pressing to achieve.  Negotiations in good faith for abolishing nuclear weapons are required by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and by customary international law.  Since these obligations have not been fulfilled in 44 years, one courageous country, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, has brought lawsuits against the nine nuclear-armed countries, seeking the International Court of Justice to order their compliance.  They have also brought a lawsuit specifically against the U.S. in U.S. Federal Court.

    Rather than showing leadership by fulfilling its obligations for ending the nuclear arms race and for nuclear disarmament, the U.S. conducted a Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile test on September 23, just days after the International Day of Peace and days before the International Day for the Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons on September 26.  Such displays of arrogance, together with U.S. plans to spend some $1 trillion on modernizing its nuclear arsenal over the next three decades, suggest that if the people don’t demand it, we may have nuclear weapons forever, with tragic consequences.

    You can find out more about the Nuclear Zero Lawsuits and support the Marshall Islands at www.nuclearzero.org.

  • Looking Back on September 11th

    Each rising of the sun begins a day of awe, destined
    to bring shock to those who can be shocked.

    This day began in sunlight and, like other days,
    soon fell beneath death’s shadow.

    The darkness crossed Manhattan and the globe,
    the crashing planes, tall towers bursting into flame.

    The hurtling steel into steel and glass endlessly played
    on the nightly news until imprinted on our brains

    People lurching from the burning towers, plunging
    like shot geese to the startled earth beneath.

    But such death is not extraordinary in our world of grief,
    born anew each brief and sunlit day.

    White flowers grow from bloodstained streets
    and rain falls gently, gently in defiance, not defeat.

  • The Need for a Global Survival Curriculum Element

    The university in the latter 20th century and early 21st century has been primarily a place where young people are trained to play managerial or professional roles in society.  Too often these roles have been shaped by corporate rather than societal needs.  Universities must have far higher aspirations than to train middle managers for the corporate world.  We live in a time when there are serious dangers threatening humanity, often dangers of our own collective making and cleverness.  We need new socially-concerned models of leadership, not based upon the corporate or military hierarchical models.  The university has a great responsibility to generate such new models of leadership.

    David KriegerHumankind has lived uneasily with nuclear weapons for nearly 70 years.  These weapons do not make us safer.  In fact, they threaten the very survival of humanity, including even that of their possessors.  The survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki have long been warning humanity that we must abolish these obscenely powerful weapons before they abolish us.  Yet, despite promises and legal obligations of the nuclear weapons states to pursue negotiations in good faith for a cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, more than 16,000 of these weapons still exist on the planet and some 1,800 of these remain on high alert ready to be fired in moments.  One nuclear weapon could destroy a city, a few nuclear weapons could destroy a country, a hundred nuclear weapons could bring on a nuclear famine, a few hundred nuclear weapons could end civilization, and a larger nuclear war could lead to the extinction of most or all complex life on the planet.

    In the Nuclear Age, our technologies have become powerful enough to destroy humanity.  This applies not only to nuclear technologies, but to other powerful technologies as well, such as the burning of fossil fuels for energy, which is impacting the Earth’s climate with predictably dangerous consequences for planetary life.  Other great global issues, in addition to nuclear war and climate change, include population growth, pollution of the oceans and atmosphere, food and water shortages and mal-distribution, nuclear wastes, inequality of resources, poverty, terrorism and war as a means of resolving conflicts.

    All great dangers in our time are global or potentially so, and consequently their solutions must also be global.  No country, no matter how powerful, can solve global problems alone.  We are all dependent upon one another for survival.

    One critical missing element in the university curriculum is a focused awareness of the great global dangers of our time, dangers that threaten civilization and the future of the human species.  To fill this vacuum, I have suggested a universally required course, “Global Survival 101.”  Such a course would provide an introduction to the great issues of global survival in the 21st century.  It would raise awareness of these dangers and educate students on key elements of world citizenship – including knowledge, responsibility, stewardship and participation – needed to safely navigate through and end these threats.

    I would envision such a course to be solutions-oriented, and to provide hope that, with cooperative efforts, global solutions are possible.  Present generations must be a voice for and must act for future generations that are not yet here to speak and act for themselves.  Based upon such a curriculum element, the leaders of tomorrow must step up and become the leaders of today.  The World University Consortium could pioneer in establishing such a course or a broader set of interrelated and interdisciplinary courses.

  • Letter: Nuclear Weapons Do Not Make Us Safer

    This letter to the editor of the Washington Post was published on August 22, 2014.

    Are NATO-based nuclear weapons really an advantage in a dangerous world, as Brent Scowcroft, Stephen J. Hadley and Franklin Miller suggested in their Aug. 18 op-ed, “A dangerous proposition”? They are not. They make the world a far more dangerous place.

    Nuclear deterrence is not a guarantee of security. Rather, it is a hypothesis about human behavior, a hypothesis that has come close to failing on many occasions. Additionally, nuclear weapons are not “political weapons,” as the writers asserted. They are weapons of mass extermination.

    The United States and the other nuclear-armed countries are obligated under the terms of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and/or customary international law to pursue negotiations in good faith for an end to the nuclear arms race and complete nuclear disarmament. This is the substance of the Nuclear Zero lawsuits brought by the Marshall Islands against the nine nuclear-armed countries at the International Court of Justice and in U.S. federal court. The United States continues to evade its obligations.

    Rather than continuing to posture with its nuclear weapons in Europe, the United States should be leading the way in convening negotiations to eliminate all nuclear weapons for its own security and that of all the world’s inhabitants.

    David Krieger, Santa Barbara, Calif.

    The writer is president of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation.

  • Message on the 69th Anniversaries of the Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

    Sadako Sasaki was a two-year-old child when the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima.  She died of radiation exposure from the bomb ten years later, when she was twelve years old. In her hospital bed she folded paper cranes in the hope of regaining her health. Japanese legend says it is good fortune to fold 1,000 paper cranes.  On one of the paper cranes she folded, Sadako wrote, “I will write peace on your wings, and you will fly all over the world.”

    Sadako Statue in HiroshimaSadako died with 644 cranes folded.  Her classmates finished the job.  Today there is a statue of Sadako in Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park.  Children from all over the world send colorful paper cranes to adorn this statue and other monuments in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and Sadako’s story has inspired young (and older) people all over the world to work for peace and a world free of nuclear weapons.

    Sadako’s paper cranes have flown to Santa Barbara, where we have created a Sadako Peace Garden, and hold an annual ceremony to remember the innocent victims of war.  Surely Sadako’s cranes have flown all over the world and are present wherever people gather to remember the innocent victims of war, including those who died as a result of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

    We remember the past to learn from it so as to not repeat its mistakes.  The only way we can be sure we will not destroy ourselves with nuclear weapons is to eliminate them all.  It is what the nine nuclear-armed countries are obligated to do, and what they must begin now by means of negotiations in good faith for the phased, verifiable, irreversible and transparent elimination of these weapons.  Sixty-nine years of the Nuclear Age is long enough.  It must be ended.

    Let us honor Sadako, as well as the survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the victims of nuclear testing, by demanding an end to the modernization and possession of nuclear arms.  Humanity is endangered.  The human future is at risk.  Enough is enough.  We must demand of our leaders that they undertake negotiations in good faith to abolish nuclear weapons if we are to assure that these steel-hearted annihilators will not abolish us.

    I urge you all to stand with the Marshall Islands in their courageous lawsuits against the nine nuclear-armed countries.  You can learn more and support the Marshall Islanders at www.nuclearzero.org.

    When we have achieved the goal of a world free of nuclear weapons, let us set our sights on a world without war and violence and one that is equitable for all and in which human dignity is universally respected and upheld.