Author: Mike Ryan

  • Voices in Support of the Nuclear Zero Lawsuits

    Below is a selection of quotes in support of the Nuclear Zero Lawsuits, filed on April 24, 2014 by the Marshall Islands against all nine nuclear-armed nations. You can sign the petition supporting the Marshall Islands and learn more about the lawsuits at www.nuclearzero.org.

     

    David Krieger
    President
    Nuclear Age Peace Foundation

    David KriegerThe Republic of the Marshall Islands has acted boldly and courageously in standing up to the nine nuclear-armed nations, and through its lawsuits asserting that all nations are required to follow the dictates of international law.  Justice delayed is justice denied.  In the case of nuclear arsenals, justice delayed increases the threat that nuclear weapons will be used by accident or design.Marshall Islanders know the pain and suffering caused by nuclear weapons, and they have taken legal action to assure that no country or individual will suffer in the future as they have suffered in the past and continue to suffer in the present.  Before the law, all countries stand on even footing – the small and the large, the weak and the powerful.

    The Marshall Islands seeks no compensation through these lawsuits.  They have acted out of noble intentions.  All Marshall Islanders should be proud that their country stands on the side of reason, justice and sanity.  In these lawsuits, the Marshall Islands has taken a stand for all humanity.  May the Marshalls prevail for the sake of us all and for the future of humanity and the planet.

    Setsuko Thurlow
    Survivor of U.S. atomic bombing of Hiroshima

    Setsuko ThurlowI deeply admire the courage and conviction shown by the Marshall Islands, plaintiff in the case against known nuclear weapon states to “pursue in good faith and conclude negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament.”

    Although we hibakusha have spent our life energy to warn people about the hell that is nuclear war, in nearly 70 years there has been little progress. In fact it is progress for proliferation that wins out — with very nuclear possessor nation currently modernizing their arsenals.  We urgently need a new path, one that recognizes the utterly unacceptable humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons — weapons that in this moment threaten all life on earth.

    But David has once again mounted his offense against Goliath, and those states that do not want to get rid of nuclear weapons are running out of excuses.  Non nuclear weapons states and NGOs are working for a ban treaty that would establish new international norms and standards through a legally binding instrument to abolish nuclear weapons.  And now, the Marshall Islands are standing up and challenging the nuclear weapon states — countries that have been insincere for more than 44 years since the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty entered into force.

    It is our hope that this new movement to ban nuclear weapons together with the Marshall Islands case against nuclear weapon possessor nations will finally lead us to nuclear disarmament.  Congratulations to the Marshall Islands for taking up this call!

    Kate Hudson
    General Secretary

    Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament

    An Open Letter to President Loeak of the Marshall Islands

    Dear Mr. President,

    Kate HudsonI am writing on behalf of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament to express our great appreciation for your decision to institute legal proceedings against the nine nuclear weapons states. We sincerely welcome your decision to take them to the International Court of Justice for their failure to comply with Article VI of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty: to ‘pursue in good faith and bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective international control’.

    We feel a debt of gratitude to you, in particular, for instituting proceedings against our own country, the United Kingdom, the governments of which we have challenged since our foundation in 1958. Your principled and courageous stand will assist our current struggle to prevent the replacement of the Trident nuclear weapons system. It will expose the hypocrisy of our government as it claims to support the goals of the NPT yet plans to spend vast sums on building new nuclear weapons; it will reveal the obstructionism of our government as it boycotts and derails sincere initiatives towards global abolition; and it will lay bare our government’s contempt for the fundamental NPT bargain – that non-proliferation and disarmament are inseparable.

    As well as the undoubted legal weight of your case, we believe that the case you have put to the International Court of Justice also carries extraordinary moral weight. We are well aware of the terrible suffering and damage inflicted on your people. We recall with horror that between 1946 and 1958, the US tested 67 nuclear weapons in the Marshall Islands, earning your country the description ‘by far the most contaminated place in the world’, from the US Atomic Energy Agency.

    Together with our support for your legal proceedings and our recognition of the intense suffering from which this was born, I would like to say that we also feel a strong and long lasting bond with the people of the Marshall Islands. Our movement, the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, was founded in large part as a response to the H-bomb testing of the 1950s, so much of which was carried out in your islands. In our early years we campaigned strenuously for the abolition of nuclear weapons testing until the achievement of the Partial Test Ban Treaty in 1963.

    The test on Bikini Atoll, in your country, in March 1954, with its terrible radiation impact on the people of Rongelap, moved countless people around the world to action. The tragic consequences for the Lucky Dragon, caught in the impact, stirred a whole generation of activists to oppose nuclear weapons. The experience of your country and your people is at the very heart of our movement.

    We pledge our support to you and wish you every success in this most crucial of struggles.

    Archbishop Desmond Tutu
    Nobel Peace Laureate

    desmond_tutuThe failure of the United States to uphold important commitments and respect the law makes the world a more dangerous place. President Obama has said that ridding the world of these devastating weapons is a fundamental moral issue of our time. It is time for the United States to show true leadership by keeping the promises set forth in the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

    Bianca Jagger
    Social and Human Rights activist

    Bianca JaggerI wholeheartedly support the people of the Republic of the Marshall Islands, in their courageous decision to file The Nuclear Zero Lawsuit against the nine nuclear-armed nations in the International Court of Justice in The Hague, and against the U.S. in Federal District Court in San Francisco. The Marshall Islanders seek to hold these countries accountable for failing to fulfill their obligations as set out in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and customary international law, to pursue negotiations for the worldwide elimination of nuclear weapons.

    After 60 years of exposure to nuclear radiation, the Marshall Islanders know first-hand the disastrous consequences of living in a nuclear world; irresponsible nuclear detonations have caused death, prolonged suffering, damage to their health and irreparable environmental destruction. The plight of the Marshall Islanders reflects the experience of many people across the world, as corporations and military enterprises overstep the boundaries of their influence, committing grave human rights violations.

    I am a great believer that individuals can make a difference. By filing these lawsuits, the inspirational people of the Marshall Islands show us that we have both the right and the power to hold governments accountable for their actions.

    As the brave Marshall Islanders stand up against nine of the most powerful nuclear countries across the globe, this is not just about justice for the local people but also for all of humanity, and for generations to come. Marshall Islands is not looking for compensation, but injunctions to ensure that present and future generations will not have to experience this unconscionable atrocity. As Judge Weeramantry said in his Advisory Opinion, Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons Case, “At any level of discourse, it would be safe to pronounce that no one generation is entitled, for whatever purpose, to inflict such damage on succeeding generations.”

    We must work towards a world which is not organized around strategic military objectives, a world where we are not threatened by the possibility of nuclear disasters. I therefore add my voice to that of the Marshall Islanders and call upon the nuclear weapon nations to immediately fulfill their moral and legal obligation to begin serious negotiations for a nuclear-free world.

    Yasuaki Yamashita
    Survivor of the U.S. atomic bombing of Nagasaki

    Yasuaki YamashitaI had not known anything about nuclear testing in the Pacific.  I was in high school in Nagasaki, and it was still a very tough time.  Then in 1954, there was big news in Japan that the Bikini Islands were experiencing nuclear testing.  The Lucky Dragon crew came home sick and dying.  Hibakusha know about radiation.  My father died from radiation exposure. Many people thought that nuclear radiation was only a problem for atomic bomb survivors, but when we learned about Pacific Islanders, we realized they suffered the same way we suffered: by becoming sick without knowing what had happened.  We must work together, seeing the future to reach a peaceful world.  We must learn from the Pacific Islanders.  It is really important to support the Nuclear Zero campaign. We must work together to bring the nuclear weapon states to the International Court of Justice.

    Daniel Ellsberg
    Former US military analyst

    daniel_ellsbergThis suit is long overdue.  The U.S. has been in continuous violation of its Article VI obligations under the NPT since ratification nearly 45 years ago.

    Helen Caldicott
    Australian physician, author and anti-nuclear advocate

    Dr. Helen CaldicottThe people of the Marshall Islands have suffered from a grievous crime committed by the US military with their nuclear weapons. And these deeply traumatized people now demonstrate to the world immense courage by taking the mighty government of the United States and the other nuclear-armed nations to the International Court of Justice.May we pray that their immense suffering and courage will open the hearts of the international community to finally, once and for all, move toward rapid total nuclear disarmament.

    Ben Ferencz
    Prosecutor of Nazi war crimes

    Benjamin FerenczCurrent nuclear expenditures and policies are genocidal, suicidal and insane. The use of nuclear weapons, knowing that large numbers of civilians will be killed, is a crime against humanity for which responsible leaders would be held accountable, civilly and criminally, in a national or international criminal court.

    Kathleen Sullivan
    Program Director
    Hibakusha Stories

    Kathleen SullivanThe new legal challenge to nuclear-armed nations from the Marshall Islands is hugely inspiring. The Nuclear Zero campaign is another definitive step in the direction of nuclear abolition.

    Martin Sheen
    Actor and Social Justice Activist

    Martin SheenNuclear weapons are a clear reflection of fear and paranoia and project a false sense of security. I stand with the Marshall Islands in their pursuit of negotiations for Nuclear Zero, the only safe number of nuclear weapons on the planet.

    Steven Starr
    Senior Scientist
    Physicians for Social Responsibility

    Steven StarrThe people of the Marshall Islands, who – as a result of US nuclear weapons tests – watched their children die and saw their homeland turned into an uninhabitable radioactive exclusion zone, have full right to demand that the nuclear weapon states finally abolish their nuclear arsenals. Nuclear abolition is the central agreement of the 1970 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Within the NPT, the nuclear weapon states agreed to act in good faith to abolish their nuclear arsenals, in exchange for the promise of the non-nuclear weapon states not to build their own nuclear weapons.

    Today, forty-four years after the NPT went into effect, the nuclear weapon states continue to modernize their nuclear weapons – while they boycott the humanitarian conferences sponsored by the non-nuclear weapon states, which call attention to the existential threat posed by existing nuclear arsenals.  The demand of the Marshall Islands should be echoed by all nations and peoples, who will perish if the strategic nuclear arsenals of the nuclear weapon states are detonated in conflict.

    Robert J. Lifton
    American psychiatrist and author

    Robert J. LiftonThe work on the Nuclear Zero lawsuits has profound value in a number of ways.  It responds humanely to the pain of Marshall Islanders, which Kai Erikson and I became acutely aware of in working with them.  The lawsuits are combating nuclearism, a still dangerous spiritual disease, and military stance.  They are also helping to combat climate falsification, which has demonstrable links to nuclearism.  And they are demonstrating a determination to take action on behalf of continuing life, rather than giving up on our planet.

    Alice Slater
    Member of the Coordinating Committee
    Abolition 2000

    Alice SlaterCongratulations to the Marshall Islands in their bold initiative to sue the nine nuclear weapons states in the International Court of Justice, together with a separate case against the US in Federal Court. The Marshall Islanders are seeking a court order that the nuclear outlaws comply with customary international humanitarian law as well as honor the promises that were made in the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) to conclude negotiations to eliminate nuclear weapons on the planet. The announcement of this legal action was welcomed with applause and loud cheering in New York during the said proceedings of the NPT meeting at the UN. It is inspiring that this small island nation whose people bore the terrible catastrophic consequences of US nuclear testing in the Pacific, with genetic damage, cancer, leukemia and awful mutations caused by the radioactive fallout, has courageously challenged the unconscionable policies of the nuclear weapons states. Congratulations to the Marshall Islands for leading the way in this important new legal proceeding.

    Blase Bonpane
    Director
    Office of the Americas

    Blase BonpaneThe Marshall Islands.”The weak things of the earth shall confound the strong.”The poisoned and fractured Marshall Islands shout a “broken alleluia” to the planet. This nation of 68,000 people is a victim of “nuclearism,” a terminal pathology which endangers life on earth.Nuclear ovens have a potential of indiscriminate slaughter far greater than the madness of the Third Reich.

    Aside from atmospheric and underground testing there has been a plethora of serious nuclear accidents. Scientists are in awe that these events have not triggered a disaster.

    For allegedly sane political leaders to continue plotting, planning and conspiring to commit a nuclear holocaust is an ongoing crime.

    We must stop the race to biocide either with the help of the courts or with the outrage of a gentle, angry people.

    Thanks to the scholars, laureates and truth seekers who support this venture!

    Rich Appelbaum
    MacArthur Chair in Global and International Studies and Sociology
    University of California at Santa Barbara

    Richard ApplebaumI add my voice to the chorus of cheerleaders for the Marshall Islands in taking this on – they continue to fight the good fight, an inspiration to all of us.

  • Briefing Paper for the 2014 Non-Proliferation Treaty Conference

    The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation has published a briefing paper for the Third Preparatory Committee for the 2015 Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT PrepCom).

    The briefing paper opens with a description of the Nuclear Zero Lawsuits filed by the Marshall Islands against all nine nuclear-armed nations on April 24, 2014. The paper also includes the exact text of the application filed against the United Kingdom at the International Court of Justice.

    To download a free copy of the briefing paper, click here or on the image below.

     

    2014 NPT PrepCom Briefing Paper

  • Sunflower Newsletter: Special Lawsuit Edition

    The May 2014 issue of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation’s Sunflower newsletter is dedicated to the Nuclear Zero Lawsuits, filed by the Marshall Islands against all nine nuclear-armed nations on April 24, 2014.

    The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation is a consultant to the Marshall Islands on these cases.

    Click here to read the special edition of the Sunflower.

  • Motion on Nuclear Zero Lawsuits in Scottish Parliament

    Bill Kidd MSP, who represents Glasgow Anniesland in the Scottish Parliament, introduced this motion on April 29, 2014. Bill Kidd is also Vice-President of Parliamentarians for Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament.

    Scottish flagThat the Parliament acknowledges the actions of the Republic of the Marshall Islands in filing lawsuits at the International Court of Justice against the nine nuclear powers, the UK, France, the USA, China, Russia, India, Pakistan, North Korea and Israel, for violations of international law under the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty; notes the details of the lawsuits, which include the continuing modernisation of these states’ nuclear arsenals and their failure to negotiate nuclear disarmament, in clear breach of the 1968 treaty and international law; echoes the sentiments of the Foreign Minister or the Republic of the Marshall Islands, Tony de Brum, in stating “our people have suffered the catastrophic and irreparable damage of these weapons, and we vow to fight so that no one else on Earth will ever again experience these atrocities” when referring to the 67 nuclear weapons tests conducted in the Marshall Islands from 1946 to 1958, including the 1954 Castle Bravo nuclear test, which was 1,000 times greater than the bomb that destroyed the city of Hiroshima, and calls on the nations possessing nuclear weapons to fulfil their nuclear disarmament obligations.

  • Comments from a Nuclear Zero Lawyer

    Phon van den Biesen delivered these comments during the NGO presentations at the 2014 Non-Proliferation Treaty PrepCom.

    Introduction

    Nuclear Zero LawsuitsIt is a great honor for me to address this distinguished meeting. I am an attorney in Amsterdam and Vice-President of the International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms.

    Last Thursday, in my capacity as Co-Agent of the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI), I submitted nine Applications to the International Court of Justice against each of the nine states possessing nuclear weapons.(1)  The legal team advised the RMI that this was an entirely responsible thing to do given the state of the law today.

    In litigation breach of contract is one of the common grounds to sue. This is not different in international litigation. If any one State is not getting what it is entitled to, based on a contract, a treaty or norms of customary international law, in spite of the clarity of the language in which the obligations are stated, there comes a day that such a State will stop requesting politely and will bring the State that is not delivering to Court. Since July 1996, some three quarters of the UN General Assembly have, indeed and over and over again, been asking politely for a beginning of negotiations leading to leading to an early conclusion of a convention prohibiting and eliminating nuclear weapons.(2)  However, most of the nuclear armed States wouldn’t have it and ignored the polite request. And so these cases are now in Court.

    Jurisdiction of the Court

    Three of the nuclear-armed States have accepted the general compulsory jurisdiction of the Court (UK, India and Pakistan). The other six have not done so and are, therefore, in accordance with the rules regulating the World Court, invited to accept the Court’s jurisdiction in the cases brought by the RMI. These six states maintain they are committed to the international rule of law and the at least eventual elimination of nuclear weapons. They should come before the Court and explain their positions, and give the Court a wider opportunity to resolve the deep divide of opinion concerning compliance with obligations of nuclear disarmament.

    The 1996 Advisory Opinion

    In its Advisory Opinion of July 1996 the World Court provided an extensive answer to the question posed by the General Assembly with respect to the legality or illegality of the use and threat of use of nuclear weapons. Besides that and in the context of the question posed by the UNGA, the Court provided additional analysis:

    “98. (…)In the long run, international law, and with it the stability of the international order which it is intended to govern, are bound to suffer from the continuing difference of views with regard to the legal status of weapons as deadly as nuclear weapons. It is consequently important to put an end to this state of affairs: the long-promised complete nuclear disarmament appears to be the most appropriate means of achieving that result.” (para. 98. of the Advisory Opinion)

    From that starting point the Court went ahead and stated that it “appreciates the full importance of the recognition by Article VI of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons of an obligation to negotiate in good faith a nuclear disarmament.”  (para. 99 of the Advisory Opinion) And then the Court went on to – unanimously  –conclude:

    “F. There exists an obligation to pursue in good faith and bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective international control.” (para. 105(2)F, concluding section of the Advisory Opinion)

    So, the Court provided this additional analysis; the existing obligation is formulated in no uncertain terms.

    Contents of the applications

    In each of the nine Applications – which serve as a mere introduction to the proceedings – the RMI provides the relevant facts with respect to the nuclear arsenals as well as the nuclear policy of the Respondent State and sets out the main points of our legal position.(3)   Among other things we argue that upgrading and modernizing a State’s nuclear arsenal is not particularly providing evidence of respect for the legal obligation to bring the nuclear arms race to an early cessation, but rather it demonstrates that the Respondent State is not performing its legal obligations in good faith. The RMI also argues that the continued refusal of most of the nuclear-armed States to permit the commencement of negotiations on complete nuclear disarmament or even to participate in an Open-Ended Working Group aimed at facilitating such negotiations is evidence of their breaching the central obligation “to pursue and bring to a conclusion”.

    What RMI asks from the Court

    The RMI requests the Court to adjudge and declare that the Respondent is, in performing its obligations, not acting in good faith, and also to adjudge and declare that the Respondent breaches its obligation to pursue and conclude negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament. Obligations that flow from Article VI of the NPT and also from the requirements developed under customary international law. Also, in each of these cases the RMI requests the Court to Order the Respondent to pursue, by initiation if necessary, negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament.

    David and Goliath

    The steps taken by the RMI have been characterized through the David and Goliath metaphor. That picture, certainly, is useful especially when one is aware that in the fight between these two men David prevailed. But we should not forget that in Court cases the respective actual powers of the two parties to “the fight” are not a relevant factor. All parties are equal before the law; all parties are equal before the World Court. Each State is entitled to demand that promises made are kept.

    All State Parties to the NPT are under the obligation to pursue these negotiations. A situation in which less than two hands full of States are frustrating the expectations, yes, the rights of the great majority of States is not sustainable and needs to be put to an end, not by the law of force, but rather by the force of law.

    Endnotes

    1. Three of the cases are on the Court’s General List: Proceedings instituted by the Republic of the Marshall Islands against the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland on 24 April 2014; Proceedings instituted by the Republic of the Marshall Islands against the Islamic Republic of Pakistan on 24 April 2014; Proceedings instituted by the Republic of the Marshall Islands against the Republic of India on 24 April 2014. http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?p1=3&p2=3

    2. Most recently, A/RES/68/42, adopted 5 December 2013

    3. UK: http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/160/18296.pdf; Pakistan: http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/159/18294.pdf; India: http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/158/18292.pdf. Applications filed against the other six nuclear-armed states are available at www.nuclearzero.org, which also has contact information for the International Legal Team.

  • Sunflower Newsletter: May 2014

    Sunflower Newsletter: Special Lawsuit Edition

    Issue #202 – May 2014

    Facebook Twitter More...

    On April 24, 2014, the Republic of the Marshall Islands filed lawsuits against all nine nuclear-armed nations for failure to negotiate nuclear disarmament. The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation has stood by the side of the Marshall Islands and played an important role as their consultant in the “Nuclear Zero Lawsuits.” This issue of The Sunflower is intended to give readers more in-depth information about the lawsuits and is dedicated to the courageous leaders of the Marshall Islands who filed these lawsuits.

    To learn more about the Nuclear Zero Lawsuits, click here.

    • Perspectives
      • The Nuclear Zero Lawsuits: Taking Nuclear Weapons to Court by David Krieger
      • Speech at the Non-Proliferation Treaty Preparatory Committee by Tony de Brum
      • Russia and the US Respond to Nuclear Zero Lawsuits by Rick Wayman
      • Comments from a Nuclear Zero Lawyer by Phon van den Biesen
    • Selected Media Coverage of the Nuclear Zero Lawsuits
      • Television: Fox News
      • Newspaper: Associated Press
      • Radio: Voice of Russia
      • Online: Slate
    • Resources
      • Be a Hero for Nuclear Zero – Sign the petition
      • A Guide for NGOs and Campaigners
      • Copies of All Ten Lawsuits
    • Quotes

     

    Perspectives

    The Nuclear Zero Lawsuits: Taking Nuclear Weapons to Court

    Given the extreme dangers of nuclear weapons, we might ask: why isn’t more being done to eliminate them?  There has been talk and promises, but little action by the nine nuclear-armed nations – United States, Russia, United Kingdom, France, China, Israel, India, Pakistan and North Korea.  All nine countries are modernizing their nuclear arsenals.

    One small Pacific nation, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, has decided to take legal action against the nine nuclear-armed countries, which are threatening our common future.  As Tony de Brum, Foreign Minister of the Marshall Islands, points out, “The continued existence of nuclear weapons and the terrible risk they pose to the world threatens us all.”

    The Marshall Islands is taking its case to the International Court of Justice in The Hague and, in addition, filing against the U.S. separately in U.S. Federal District Court in San Francisco.  The lawsuits argue that the nuclear disarmament obligations apply to all nine nuclear-armed states as a matter of customary international law.  The courts are being asked to declare that the nuclear weapon states are in breach of their obligations under international law and order them to begin negotiating in good faith to achieve a cessation of the nuclear arms race and a world with zero nuclear weapons.

    To read more, click here.

    Speech at the Non-Proliferation Treaty Preparatory Committee

    Tony de Brum, Foreign Minister of the Marshall Islands, delivered this speech at the opening session of the Non-Proliferation Treaty Preparatory Committee on April 28, 2014.

    Ministers and Disarmament Ambassadors and experts have gathered here from around the world with the serious responsibility to achieve ultimate disarmament under the NPT – but I must ask how many people in this room, here today, have personally witnessed nuclear detonations?

    I, for one, have – I am a nuclear witness and my memories from Likiep atoll in the northern Marshalls are strong. I lived there as a young boy for the entire 12 years of the nuclear testing program, and when I was 9 years old, I remember vividly the white flash of the Bravo detonation on Bikini atoll, 6 decades ago in 1954, and one thousand times more powerful than Hiroshima – and an event that truly shocked the international community into action.

    Disarmament is only possible with political will – we urge all nuclear weapons states to intensify efforts to address their responsibilities in moving towards an effective and secure disarmament. The Marshall Islands affirms important bilateral progress amongst nuclear powers – but further underscores that this still falls short of the NPT’s collective and universal purpose. International law – and legal obligations – are not hollow and empty words on a page, but instead the most serious form of duty and commitment between nations, and to our collective international purpose.

    It is for this reason why I have participated as a co-agent in recent filings at the International Court of Justice and elsewhere against the world’s major nuclear powers. Those that make binding obligations within international treaties, and those who are bound by customary international law, must and will be held accountable for the pursuit of those commitments and obligations.

    To read more, click here.

    You can also watch a video of Tony de Brum’s speech that he delivered later the same day during NAPF’s lunchtime event at the United Nations in New York. Click here to watch the video.

    Russia and the U.S. Respond to Nuclear Zero Lawsuits

    Very little has been said thus far about the Nuclear Zero Lawsuits by representatives of the offending nations. However, the Russian Foreign Ministry did issue a statement about the lawsuit. One excuse they made is: “Russia has reduced its strategic nuclear potential by more than 80 percent and its non-strategic nuclear weapons by three-quarters from their peak numbers.”

    Given what is widely known about the humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons, it is inexcusable for any nation to maintain an arsenal of any size. Perhaps Russia does not realize this because it actively chose to boycott the conferences on humanitarian impacts organized by Norway in 2013 and Mexico in 2014. Russia’s continued boycotting of multilateral initiatives for nuclear disarmament (including the Open-Ended Working Group) demonstrates a lack of good faith effort.

    The U.S. State Department also released a short statement about the lawsuits, saying, “The U.S. is dedicated to achieving the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons, consistent with our obligations under the [NPT].”

    This might be the first time the Obama administration has written the words “peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons” and not immediately followed it with some version of “not in my lifetime.” If the U.S. is dedicated to a world without nuclear weapons, why is it modernizing its nuclear arsenal and planning which nuclear weapons it will deploy in the 22nd century?

    To read more, click here.

    Comments from a Nuclear Zero Lawyer

    On April 24, in my capacity as Co-Agent of the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI), I submitted nine Applications to the International Court of Justice against each of the nine states possessing nuclear weapons.  The legal team advised the RMI that this was an entirely responsible thing to do given the state of the law today.

    In litigation, breach of contract is one of the common grounds to sue. This is not different in international litigation. If any one State is not getting what it is entitled to, based on a contract, a treaty or norms of customary international law, in spite of the clarity of the language in which the obligations are stated, there comes a day that such a State will stop requesting politely and will bring the State that is not delivering to Court. Since July 1996, some three quarters of the UN General Assembly have, indeed and over and over again, been asking politely for a beginning of negotiations leading to leading to an early conclusion of a convention prohibiting and eliminating nuclear weapons.  However, most of the nuclear armed States wouldn’t have it and ignored the polite request. And so these cases are now in Court.

    To read more, click here.

    Click here to watch a video of Phon van den Biesen’s comments at the NAPF lunchtime event at the United Nations on April 28, 2014.

    Selected Media Coverage of Lawsuits

    Television: Fox News

    On April 24, Laurie Ashton, Counsel to the Republic of the Marshall Islands on the Nuclear Zero Lawsuits, appeared on Fox News with Shepard Smith. Fox News has the largest viewing audience of any U.S. news station during the middle of the day when this report aired.

    Marshall Islands Launch Lawsuit Against Nuclear Nations,” Fox News, April 24, 2014.

    Newspaper: Associated Press

    The tiny Pacific nation of the Marshall Islands is taking on the United States and the world’s eight other nuclear-armed nations with an unprecedented lawsuit demanding that they meet their obligations toward disarmament and accusing them of “flagrant violations” of international law.

    The island group that was used for dozens of U.S. nuclear tests after World War II filed suit Thursday against each of the nine countries in the International Court of Justice in The Hague, Netherlands. It also filed a federal lawsuit against the United States in San Francisco, naming President Barack Obama, the departments and secretaries of defense and energy and the National Nuclear Security Administration.

    “I personally see it as kind of David and Goliath, except that there are no slingshots involved,” David Krieger, President of the California-based Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, told The Associated Press. He is acting as a consultant in the case.

    The country is seeking action, not compensation. It wants the courts to require that the nine nuclear-armed states meet their obligations.

    Cara Anna, “Tiny Pacific Nation Sues Nine Nuclear-Armed Powers,” The Associated Press, April 24, 2014.

    Radio: Voice of Russia

    Rick Wayman, NAPF Director of Programs, and Laurie Ashton, Counsel to the Marshall Islands, appeared on Voice of Russia radio to discuss the Nuclear Zero Lawsuits. Ashton explained that the premise of the Marshall Islands’ claims is that the nuclear-armed nations have failed to engage in negotiations to end the nuclear arms race at an early date and have not had negotiations about complete nuclear disarmament. She said, “In fact, in the 44-year history of the treaty such negotiations have never been convened.”

    Wayman said that the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation along with other prominent anti-nuclear weapons organizations had started an advocacy campaign to support the Marshall Islands called “Nuclear Zero.”

    Sean Nevins, “Marshall Islands Sue Nuclear States for Complete Disarmament,” Voice of Russia, April 25, 2014.

    Online: Slate

    In an intriguing case, the Marshall Islands – a Pacific Island nation of about 68,000 people – filed suit in the International Court of Justice at the Hague against the world’s nine nuclear-armed nations over their failure to work toward eliminating these weapons. A separate U.S. federal lawsuit was also filed in a court in San Francisco against President Barack Obama, the secretaries of defense and energy, and the National Nuclear Security Administration.

    “Our people have suffered the catastrophic and irreparable damage of these weapons, and we vow to fight so that no one else on earth will ever again experience these atrocities,” said Marshallese Foreign Minister Tony de Brum.

    Laurie Ashton, one of the American attorneys representing the country in the suit, said that measures such as the New START Treaty, under which the United States and Russia agreed to reductions of their nuclear arsenals, don’t pass muster.

    “Reducing certain categories of arms does not satisfy the obligation to cease the nuclear arms rate,” she said. “If you’re reducing certain categories of your arms while you are modernizing and creating weapons in other categories, you’re still arms racing. Secondly, the Non-Proliferation Treaty calls for good-faith negotiations on complete nuclear disarmament, and the United States as refused to even call for such negotiations.”

    Joshua Keating, “Why the Marshall Islands Is Suing the World’s Nuclear Powers,” Slate, April 25, 2014.

    Resources

    Be a Hero for Nuclear Zero: Sign the Petition

     

    Add your voice to support the courageous action by the Marshall Islands to hold the nine nuclear-armed nations accountable for nuclear disarmament. Go to www.nuclearzero.org, where you can sign the petition, learn more about the Marshall Islands and the lawsuits, and share the good news with your friends.

    Zero is the only safe number of nuclear weapons in the world. The leaders of many nations know this, but until now, no country has been willing to stand up to the “Nuclear Nine.” Let the Marshall Islands know that you think they made the right decision, and let the leaders of the Nuclear Nine know that you demand that they negotiate for nuclear disarmament.

    A Guide for NGOs and Campaigners

     

    The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation has published a 12-page guide as a resource for non-governmental organizations and campaigners around the world who support the Nuclear Zero Lawsuits. The guide contains a summary of the lawsuits, frequently asked questions, a sample article and press release, and suggested social media content.

    To download a copy of the guide, click here.

    Click here to watch a short video of NAPF President David Krieger explaining how individuals and organizations can help support the Marshall Islands in this campaign.

    Copies of All Ten Lawsuits

     

    The Marshall Islands filed nine separate applications in the International Court of Justice – one for each of the nine nuclear-armed nations. They filed an additional lawsuit against the United States in U.S. Federal District Court.

    Click here to download all of the filings.

    Quotes

     

    “The failure of these nuclear-armed countries to uphold important commitments and respect the law makes the world a more dangerous place. We must ask why these leaders continue to break their promises and put their citizens and the world at risk of horrific devastation. This is one of the most fundamental moral and legal questions of our time.”

    Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Nobel Peace Laureate and member of the NAPF Advisory Council, speaking about the Nuclear Zero Lawsuits.

     

    “The continuing recalcitrance displayed by the nine nuclear weapon states not to disarm as promised in the NPT places life on earth on the cusp of annihilation every second of every day. The world is in a perpetual state of psychic numbing edging unconsciously as lemmings towards the cliff of nuclear extinction.”

    Dr. Helen Caldicott, member of the NAPF Advisory Council, speaking about the Nuclear Zero Lawsuits.

     

    “These applications to the International Court of Justice constitute an action by one friend to remind another to abide by its legal obligations to secure a world of peace, free of nuclear weapons. It is the least we can do for our children and other living things on Earth.”

    Tony de Brum, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of the Marshall Islands, speaking about the Nuclear Zero Lawsuits.

     

    “Nuclear weapons – the antithesis of humankind’s yearning for peace – should have no place in a world community determined to achieve mutual security on a global scale.”

    H.E. Archbishop Francis Chullikatt, Permanent Observer of the Holy See to the United Nations, in a statement delivered at the 2014 Non-Proliferation Treaty PrepCom.

    Editorial Team

     

    David Krieger

    Carol Warner

    Rick Wayman

     

     

  • Open Letter to President Obama

    April 16, 2014

    Dear President Obama,

    During the closing session of the Nuclear Security Summit in The Hague on March 25, 2014, you cited a number of concrete measures to secure highly-enriched uranium and plutonium and strengthen the nuclear nonproliferation regime that have been implemented as a result of the three Nuclear Security Summits, concluding: “So what’s been valuable about this summit is that it has not just been talk, it’s been action.”

    Would that you would apply the same standard to nuclear disarmament! On April 5, 2009 in Prague, you gave millions of people around the world new hope when you declared: “So today, I state clearly and with conviction America’s commitment to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons.” Bolstered by that hope, over the past three years, there has been a new round of nuclear disarmament initiatives by governments not possessing nuclear weapons, both within and outside the United Nations. Yet the United States has been notably “missing in action” at best, and dismissive or obstructive at worst. This conflict may come to a head at the 2015 Review of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT).

    We write now, on the eve of the third Preparatory Committee (PrepCom) meeting for the 2015 Review Conference of the NPT, which will take place at UN headquarters in New York April 28 – May 9, 2014, to underscore our plea that your administration shed its negative attitude and participate constructively in deliberations and negotiations regarding the creation of a multilateral process to achieve a nuclear weapons free world.  This will require reversal of the dismal U.S. record.

     

    • The 2010 NPT Review Conference unanimously agreed to hold a conference in 2012, to be attended by all states in the region, on a Middle East Zone Free of Nuclear and other Weapons of Mass Destruction. The U.S. was a designated convener, and a date was set for December 2012 in Helsinki. The Finnish ambassador worked feverishly, meeting individually with all of the countries in the region to facilitate the conference. Suddenly, on November 23, 2012, the U.S. State Department announced that the Helsinki conference was postponed indefinitely.
    • In March 2013, Norway hosted an intergovernmental conference in Oslo on the Humanitarian Impacts of Nuclear Weapons, with 127 governments in attendance. Mexico hosted a follow-on conference in Nayarit, Mexico in February 2014, with 146 governments present. The U.S. boycotted Oslo and Nayarit. Austria has announced that it will host a third conference, in Vienna, late this year.
    • In November 2012, the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) established an “Open-Ended” working group open to all member states “to develop proposals to take forward multilateral nuclear disarmament negotiations for the achievement and maintenance of a world without nuclear weapons,” and scheduled for September 26, 2013, the first-ever High-Level meeting of the UNGA devoted to nuclear disarmament. The U.S. voted against both resolutions and refused to participate in the Open-Ended working group, declaring in advance that it would disregard any outcomes.
    • The U.S. did send a representative to the UN “High-Level” meeting, but it was the Deputy Secretary for Arms Control, Verification and Compliance, rather than the President, Vice-President or Secretary of State. Worse, the U.S. joined with France and the U.K. in a profoundly negative statement, delivered by a junior British diplomat: “While we are encouraged by the increased energy and enthusiasm around the nuclear disarmament debate, we regret that this energy is being directed toward initiatives such as this High-Level Meeting, the humanitarian consequences campaign, the Open-Ended Working Group and the push for a Nuclear Weapons Convention.”
    • In contrast, Dr. Hassan Rouhani, the new President of Iran, used the occasion of the High-Level Meeting to roll out a disarmament “roadmap” on behalf of the 120 member Non-Aligned Movement (NAM). The roadmap calls for: “early commencement of negotiations, in the Conference on Disarmament, on a comprehensive convention on nuclear weapons for the prohibition of their possession, development, production, acquisition, testing, stockpiling, transfer, use or threat of use, and for their destruction; designation of 26 September every year as an international day to renew our resolve to completely eliminate nuclear weapons;” and “convening a High-level International Conference on Nuclear Disarmament in five years to review progress in this regard.” The NAM roadmap was subsequently adopted by the UNGA with 129 votes in favor. The U.S voted no.

    Meanwhile, your Administration’s FY 2015 budget request seeks a 7% increase for nuclear weapons research and production programs under the Department of Energy’s semi-autonomous National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). NNSA’s “Total Weapons Activities” are slated to rise to $8.2 billion in FY 2015 and to $9.7 billion by 2019, 24% above fiscal year 2014. Your Administration is also proposing a $56 billion Opportunity Growth and Security Initiative (OGSI) to be funded through tax changes and spending reforms. OGSI is to be split evenly between defense and non-defense spending, out of which $504 million will go to NNSA nuclear weapons programs “to accelerate modernization and maintenance of nuclear facilities.” With that, your FY 2015 budget request for maintenance and modernization of nuclear bombs and warheads in constant dollars exceeds the amount spent in 1985 for comparable work at the height of President Reagan’s surge in nuclear weapons spending, which was also the highest point of Cold War spending.

    We are particularly alarmed that your FY 2015 budget request includes $634 million (up 20%) for the B61 Life Extension Program, which, in contravention of your 2010 Nuclear Posture Review, as confirmed by former U.S. Air Force Chief of Staff, General Norton Schwartz, will have improved military capabilities to attack targets with greater accuracy and less radioactive fallout.

    This enormous commitment to modernizing nuclear bombs and warheads and the laboratories and factories to support those activities does not include even larger amounts of funding for planned replacements of delivery systems – the bombers, missiles and submarines that form the strategic triad, which are funded through the Department of Defense.  In total, according to the General Accounting Office, the U.S. will spend more than $700 billion over the next 30 years to maintain and modernize nuclear weapons systems. The James Martin Center places the number at an astounding one trillion dollars. This money is desperately needed to address basic human needs – housing, food security, education, healthcare, public safety, education and environmental protection – here and abroad.

    The Good Faith Challenge

    This our third letter to you calling on the U.S. government to participate constructively and in good faith in all international disarmament forums. On June 6, 2013, we wrote: “The Nuclear Security Summit process you initiated has been a success. However, securing nuclear materials, while significant, falls well short of what civil society expected following your Prague speech.”  In that letter, we urged you to you speak at the September 26, 2013 High-Level Meeting on Nuclear Disarmament at the United Nations; to endorse UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s Five-Point Proposal on Nuclear Disarmament; to announce your convening of a series of Nuclear Disarmament Summits; to support extending the General Assembly’s Open-Ended Working Group to develop proposals to take forward multilateral nuclear disarmament negotiations for the achievement and maintenance of a world without nuclear weapons; and to announce that the U.S. would participate in the follow-on conference on the humanitarian impacts of nuclear weapons in Mexico in early 2014.

    In our second letter, dated January 29, 2014, we urged that you direct the State Department to send a delegation to the Mexico conference and to participate constructively; and that your administration shed its negative attitude and participate constructively in deliberations and negotiations regarding the creation of a multilateral process to achieve a nuclear weapons free world. And we called on the United States to engage in good faith in efforts to make the Conference on Disarmament productive in pursuing the objective for which it was established more than three decades ago: complete nuclear disarmament; and to work hard to convene soon the conference on a zone free of WMD in the Middle East promised by the 2010 NPT Review Conference.

    Since our last letter, the U.S. – Russian relationship has deteriorated precipitously, with the standoff over the Crimea opening the real possibility of a new era of confrontation between nuclear-armed powers. The current crisis will further complicate prospects for future arms reduction negotiations with Russia, already severely stressed by more than two decades of post-Cold War NATO expansion, deployment of U.S. missile defenses, U.S. nuclear weapons modernization and pursuit of prompt conventional global strike capability.

    Keeping Our Side of the NPT Bargain

    Article VI of the NPT, which entered into force in 1970, and is the supreme law of the land pursuant to Article VI of the U.S. Constitution, states: “Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.”

    In 1996, the International Court of Justice, the judicial branch of the United Nations and the highest and most authoritative court in the world on questions of international law, unanimously concluded: “There exists an obligation to pursue in good faith and bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective international control.”

    Forty-four years after the NPT entered into force, more than 17,000 nuclear weapons, most held by the U.S. and Russia, pose an intolerable threat to humanity. The International Red Cross has stated that “incalculable human suffering” will result from any use of nuclear weapons, and that there can be no adequate humanitarian response capacity.   Declaring that “our nation’s deep economic crisis can only be addressed by adopting new priorities to create a sustainable economy for the 21st century,” the bi-partisan U.S. Conference of Mayors has called on the President and Congress to slash nuclear weapons spending and to redirect those funds to meet the urgent needs of cities.

    We reiterate the thrust of the demands set forth in our letters of June 13, 2013 and January 29, 2014, and urge you to look to them for guidance in U.S. conduct at the 2014 NPT PrepCom. We stress the urgent need to press the “reset” button with Russia again. Important measures in this regard are an end to NATO expansion and a halt to anti-missile system deployments in Europe.

     

    • We urge you to work hard to fully implement all commitments you made in the Nuclear Disarmament action plan agreed by the 2010 NPT Review Conference and to convene the promised conference on a zone free of WMD in the Middle East at the earliest possible date.
    • We urge you again to take this opportunity to endorse UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s Five-Point Proposal on Nuclear Disarmament, to announce your convening of a series of Nuclear Disarmament Summits, and to engage in good faith in efforts to make the Conference on Disarmament productive in pursuing the objective for which it was established more than three decades ago: complete nuclear disarmament.
    • We call on you to declare that the U.S. will participate constructively and in good faith in the third intergovernmental conference on humanitarian impacts of nuclear weapons to be held in Vienna late this year.
    • As an immediate signal of good faith, we call on your Administration to halt all programs to modernize nuclear weapons systems, and to reduce nuclear weapons spending to the minimum necessary to assure the safety and security of the existing weapons as they await disablement and dismantlement.

    Mr. President: It’s time to move from talk to action on nuclear disarmament. There have never been more opportunities, and the need is as urgent as ever.

    We look forward to your positive response.

    Sincerely,

    Initiating organizations:

    Jacqueline Cabasso, Executive Director, Western States Legal Foundation
    [contact for this letter: wslf@earthlink.net; (510) 839-5877
    655 – 13th Street, Suite 201, Oakland, CA 94612]

    John Burroughs, Executive Director, Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy

    Kevin Martin, Executive Director, Peace Action

    David Krieger, President, Nuclear Age Peace Foundation

    Joseph Gerson, Disarmament Coordinator, American Friends Service Committee (for identification only)

    Alicia Godsberg, Executive Director, Peace Action New York

    Endorsing organizations (national):

    Robert Gould, MD, President, Physicians for Social Responsibility

    Tim Judson, Executive Director, Nuclear Information and Resource Service

    Michael Eisenscher, National Coordinator, U.S. Labor Against the War (USLAW)

    Michael McPhearson, Interim Executive Director, Veterans for Peace

    David Swanson, WarIsACrime.org

    Jill Stein, President, Green Shadow Cabinet

    Terry K. Rockefeller, National Co-Convener, United for Peace and Justice

    Hendrik Voss, National Organizer, School of the Americas Watch (SOA Watch)

    Alfred L. Marder, President, US Peace Council

    Robert Hanson, Treasurer, Democratic World Federalists

    Alli McCracken, National Coordinator, CODEPINK

    Margaret Flowers, MD and Kevin Zeese, JD, Popular Resistance

    Endorsing organizations (by state):

    Marylia Kelley, Executive Director, Tri-Valley CAREs (Communities Against a Radioactive Environment) Livermore, California

    Blase Bonpane, Ph.D., Director, Office of the Americas, California

    Linda Seeley, Spokesperson, San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace, California

    Susan Lamont, Center Coordinator, Peace and Justice Center of Sonoma County, California

    Chizu Hamada, No Nukes Action, California

    Lois Salo, Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom, Peninsula Branch, California

    Rev. Marilyn Chilcote, Beacon Presbyterian Fellowship, Oakland, California

    Margli Auclair, Executive Director, Mount Diablo Pleace and Justice Center. California

    Roger Eaton, Communications Chair, United Nations Association-USA, San Francisco Chapter, California

    Dr. Susan Zipp, Vice President, Association of World Citizens, San Francisco, California
    Michael Nagler, President, Metta Center for Nonviolence, California (for identification only)

    Rev. Marilyn Chilcote McKenzie, Parish Associate, St. John’s Presbyterian Church of Berkeley, California (for identification only)

    James E. Vann, Oakland Tenants Union, California (for identification only)

    Vic and Barby Ulmer, Our Developing World, California (for identification only)

    Judith Mohling, Rocky Mountain Peace and Justice Center, Colorado

    Bob Kinsey, Colorado Coalition for the Prevention of Nuclear War

    Medard Gabel, Executive Director, Pacem in Terris, Delaware

    Roger Mills, Coordinator, Georgia Peace & Justice Coalition, Henry County Chapter

    Bruce K. Gagnon, Coordinator, Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space, Maine

    Lisa Savage, CODEPINK, Maine

    Natasha Mayers, Whitefield, Maine Union of Maine Visual Artists

    Shirley “Lee” Davis, GlobalSolutions.org, Maine Chapter

    Lynn Harwood, the Greens of Anson, Maine

    Dagmar Fabian, Crabshell Alliance, Maryland

    Judi Poulson, Chair, Fairmont Peace Group, Minnesota

    Marcus Page-Collonge, Nevada Desert Experience, Nevada

    Gregor Gable, Shundahai Network, Nevada

    Jay Coghlan, Executive Director, Nuclear Watch New Mexico

    Joni Arends, Executive Director, Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety, New Mexico

    Lucy Law Webster, Executive Director, The CENTER FOR WAR/PEACE STUDIES, New York

    Alice Slater, Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, New York

    Sheila Croke, Pax Christi Long Island, chapter of the international Catholic peace movement, New York

    Richard Greve, Co Chair, Staten Island Peace Action, New York

    Rosemarie Pace, Director, Pax Christi Metro New York

    Carol De Angelo, Director of Peace, Justice and Integrity of Creation, Sisters of Charity of New York (for identification only)

    Gerson Lesser, M.D., Clinical Professor, New York University School of Medicine (for identification only)

    Ellen Thomas, Proposition One Campaign, North Carolina

    Vina Colley, Portsmouth/Piketon Residents for Environmental Safety and Security, Ohio

    Harvey Wasserman, Solartopia, Ohio

    Ray Jubitz, Jubitz Family Foundation, Oregon

    Cletus Stein, convenor, The Peace Farm, Texas

    Steven G. Gilbert, PhD, DABT, INND (Institute of Neurotoxicology & Neurological Disorders), Washington

    Allen Johnson, Coordinator, Christians For The Mountains, West Virginia

    cc:

    John Kerry, Secretary of State
    Rose Gottemoeller, Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security
    Thomas M. Countryman, Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and
    Nonproliferation
    Susan Rice, National Security Advisor
    Ben Rhodes, Deputy National Security Advisor
    Samantha Power, Permanent Representative to the United Nations
    Christopher Buck, Chargé d’Affaires, a.i., Conference on Disarmament
    Walter S. Reid, Deputy Permanent Representative to the Conference on Disarmament

  • Sunflower Newsletter: July 2014

    Issue #204 – July 2014

    Facebook Twitter More... The Nuclear Zero Lawsuits are proceeding at the International Court of Justice and U.S. Federal District Court. Sign the petition supporting the Marshall Islands’ courageous stand, and stay up to date on progress at www.nuclearzero.org.
    • Perspectives
      • Accountability for the War in Iraq by David Krieger
      • The Emotional and Psychological Trauma to Our People Can’t Be Measured In Real Terms by Lia Petridis Maiello
      • Stop Calling the Iraq War a Mistake by Dennis Kucinich
    • Nuclear Zero Lawsuits
      • U.S. Conference of Mayors Pass Sweeping Resolution on Nuclear Disarmament
      • NuclearZero.org Now in Japanese
    • U.S. Nuclear Weapons Policy
      • Air Force Lobbies for New Nuclear Bombers
      • Empowering Nuclear Missile Officers
    • Nuclear Insanity
      • U.S. and UK to Renew Nuclear Weapon Partnership
      • U.S. Jets Intercept Russian Nuclear Bombers
    • Nuclear Proliferation
      • China Complains About Japanese Plutonium
      • New Method for Detecting Nuclear Warheads
    • War and Peace
      • U.S. Rejects Draft Treaty Banning Space Weapons
      • Article 9 Protest in Japan
    • Resources
      • This Month in Nuclear Threat History
      • Plan Your Action for Nuclear Abolition Day
      • Against the Tide
    • Foundation Activities
      • Paul Chappell Gives Keynote Address at Model UN Conference in Germany
      • Remembering the U.S. Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
      • Youth Video Contest Announced
    • Quotes

     

    Perspectives

    Accountability for the War in Iraq

    The current level of violence in Iraq has a single root: the destabilizing act in 2003 of illegally invading and then occupying Iraq ordered by the George W. Bush administration, with their arrogant claims that US troops would be greeted as liberators. Rather than liberating Iraq, however, our country lost yet another war there, one which left thousands of American soldiers dead, tens of thousands wounded and still more traumatized. We also destabilized the region; slaughtered and displaced Iraqis; left Iraq in a mess; created the conditions for a civil war there; strengthened Iran; created many new advocates of al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations; and demonstrated disdain for international law.

    The Bush administration led and lied the US into an aggressive war, the kind of war held to be a crime against peace at Nuremberg.  The lying was despicable, an impeachable offense, but it is too late for the impeachment of a president and vice-president who are now out of office.  The initiation of an aggressive war was an act, however, for which there should always be accountability, as there was at Nuremberg.  This, of course, would require having the courage and principle as a country to create policies to hold our own leaders to the same standards that we held those leaders whom we defeated in combat.

    To read more, click here.

    The Emotional and Psychological Trauma to Our People Can’t Be Measured In Real Terms

    The Republic of the Marshall Islands in the northern Pacific Ocean is not only a breathtakingly beautiful island state, but has recently moved into the public eye by starting a bold initiative that is widely interpreted as a “David against Goliath” undertaking.

    The Marshall islands were subjected to dozens of nuclear tests, carried out by the U.S. after 1945. According to the Associated Press, the island group filed suit in late April against each of the nine nuclear-armed powers in the International Court of Justice in The Hague, Netherlands. It also filed a federal lawsuit against the United States in San Francisco.

    The Foreign Minister of the Marshall Islands, Tony de Brum, explains in an interview the impact the nuclear tests had and still have for the citizens of the Marshall Islands and what he hopes these lawsuits can achieve for the island state and the world community.

    To read more, click here.

    Stop Calling the Iraq War a Mistake

    As Iraq descends into chaos again, more than a decade after “Mission Accomplished,” media commentators and politicians have mostly agreed upon calling the war a “mistake.” But the “mistake” rhetoric is the language of denial, not contrition: it minimizes the Iraq War’s disastrous consequences, removes blame, and deprives Americans of any chance to learn from our generation’s foreign policy disaster. The Iraq War was not a “mistake” – it resulted from calculated deception. The painful, unvarnished fact is that we were lied to. Now is the time to have the willingness to say that.

    In fact, the truth about Iraq was widely available, but it was ignored. There were no WMD. Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11. The war wasn’t about liberating the Iraqi people. I said this in Congress in 2002. Millions of people who marched in America in protest of the war knew the truth, but were maligned by members of both parties for opposing the president in a time of war – and even leveled with the spurious charge of “not supporting the troops.”

    I’ve written and spoken widely about this topic, so today I offer two ways we can begin to address our role.

    To read more, click here.

    Nuclear Zero Lawsuits

    U.S. Conference of Mayors Pass Sweeping Resolution on Nuclear Disarmament

    On June 23, 2014, the U.S Conference of Mayors (USCM) unanimously adopted a sweeping new resolution “Calling for Constructive Good Faith U.S. Participation in International Nuclear Disarmament Forums” at its 82nd annual meeting in Dallas.

    The resolution also expresses support for the Nuclear Zero Lawsuits filed by the Marshall Islands. It says, “[USCM] commends the Republic of the Marshall Islands for calling to the world’s attention the failure of the nine nuclear-armed states to comply with their international obligations to pursue negotiations for the worldwide elimination of nuclear weapons, and calls on the U.S. to respond constructively and in good faith to the lawsuits brought by the RMI.”

    Responding to the adoption of the resolution, Marshall Islands Foreign Minister Tony de Brum said, “This endorsement is acknowledged with deep gratitude on behalf of the Government and the People of the Marshall Islands, and most especially those who have lost loved ones in the mad race for nuclear superiority, and those who continue to suffer the scourge of nuclear weapons testing in our homeland.”

    U.S. Conference of Mayors Adopts Bold Resolution on Nuclear Disarmament,” Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, June 26, 2014.

    NuclearZero.org Now in Japanese

    NuclearZero.org, the campaign website for the Nuclear Zero Lawsuits, is now available in Japanese. Our friends in the youth division of Soka Gakkai International (SGI) will be launching a Nuclear Zero petition drive in Japan during the first week of July, and the Nuclear Zero website makes a perfect companion for this effort.

    The Japanese version of the website is at www.nuclearzero.org/jp. For those of you who do not read Japanese, you can check out the English-language version of the website and sign the petition in support of the Marshall Islands at www.nuclearzero.org.

    U.S. Nuclear Weapons Policy

    Air Force Lobbies for New Nuclear Bombers

    Maj. Gen. Garrett Harencak, the Air Force assistant chief of staff for strategic deterrence and nuclear integration, defended plans to update the U.S. long-range bomber fleet. According to Harencak, the new long-range bombers would have “persistent, long-range strike capabilities that provide practical alternatives for global security.” The Air Force hopes to deploy 100 of the new bombers by 2025.

    Amid questions about the necessity of the project and the relevancy of the nation’s bombers, Harencak argued that bombers are still needed to protect American interests and that the current fleet, which includes the 50 year-old B-52, is inadequate.

    Air Force General Presses Case for Future Nuclear Bomber,” Global Security Newswire, June 19, 2014.

    Empowering Nuclear Missile Officers

    Maj. Gen. Jack Weinstein, commander of the U.S. intercontinental ballistic missile force, said that nuclear missile officers have been suffering from low morale in part because they were being “micromanaged.”

    “The best way to produce leaders of the future is to make sure that when they are junior you properly educate and train them and you let them make decisions,” he said.

    However, Col. Robert Vercher, who stepped down in June as commander of the 91st Missile Wing at Minot Air Force Base, disagreed. Vercher said, “You might call it micromanagement, but I would call it oversight – proper oversight. When I hear the word ‘micromanagement,’ I go, ‘It depends.’ How much do you want your tax return micromanaged by your accountant? Exquisitely or just kind of haphazardly?”

    Robert Burns, “AP Interview: AF Should Empower Young Nuke Leaders,” Associated Press, June 25, 2014.

    Nuclear Insanity

    U.S. and UK to Renew Nuclear Weapon Partnership

    Britain is increasing its partnership with the United States to design new nuclear warheads, according to documents released in the UK under the freedom of information act. The Mutual Defense Agreement (MDA) was originally signed by the two countries in 1958. It is expected to be renewed within the next few weeks.

    One document describes the MDA as an agreement that enables Britain and the U.S. “nuclear warhead communities to collaborate on all aspects of nuclear deterrence including nuclear warhead design and manufacture.”

    Peter Burt of Nuclear Information Service, who obtained the papers, said, “The UK and U.S. are setting a dreadful example to the rest of the world by renewing the MDA, and are seriously undermining the credibility of international efforts to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons.”

    He added: “If Iran and North Korea had signed a similar agreement for the transfer of nuclear weapons technology, the UK and U.S. would be branding them pariah nations and screaming for the toughest of international sanctions to be imposed.”

    Richard Norton-Taylor, “Exclusive: UK to Step Up Collaboration with US Over Nuclear Warheads,” The Guardian, June 12, 2014.

    U.S. Jets Intercept Russian Nuclear Bombers

    On June 9, U.S. military jets intercepted four Russian bombers as they flew close to the Aleutian Islands in Alaska as well as the coast of Northern California. The Russian Tu-95 Bear H bombers, which can be equipped with nuclear-armed cruise missiles, appear to have been participating in a training exercise.

    While it is not unusual for such long-range practice runs to occur, the timing of the training exercise came during a particularly contentious time as Russia and the U.S. square off over the crisis in Ukraine. The U.S. has deployed nuclear-capable bombers to Europe to participate in training exercises with NATO.

    U.S. Jets Intercept Russian Bombers Near Alaska,” Global Security Newswire, June 12, 2014.

    Nuclear Proliferation

    China Complains About Japanese Plutonium

    China has complained that Japan failed to disclose 640 kilograms of plutonium in its possession to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Hua Chunying, a spokeswoman for the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, stated that Japan has a duty to report its plutonium to the IAEA and questioned whether this failure to report was “an unintentional omission or a deliberate concealment.” The Japan Atomic Energy Commission acknowledged that the plutonium, stored in an offline reactor at Genkai nuclear plant in Saga Prefecture, was omitted from its report out of a belief that the material was “exempt from IAEA reporting requirements.”

    Japan’s storage of nuclear material has often raised concerns in China, including the worry that Japan may eventually break away from its policy of refraining from nuclear weapon development. With a plutonium supply of more than 44 tons, Japan maintains the largest plutonium stockpile of any country without nuclear weapons. It takes approximately 4 kilograms of plutonium to make a nuclear weapon.

    Austin Ramzy, “China Complains About Plutonium in Japan,” The New York Times, June 10, 2014.

    New Method for Detecting Nuclear Warheads

    Scientists from Princeton University and the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory have invented a new method for inspectors to detect nuclear warheads without access to classified information. Inspectors would beam high-energy neutrons though a warhead and use a detector on the other side to measure the number of neutrons that pass through. They would then compare this result to the number that typically pass through a non-nuclear target.

    Physicist Andrew Glaser, first author of the study, said that the method would allow inspectors to determine “true nuclear warheads” while “learning nothing about the materials and design of the warhead itself.” If this “zero-knowledge protocol” proves effective, it could help advance the inspections process as part of the New START treaty between the U.S. and Russia. Both countries have agreed to reduce their deployed strategic nuclear arsenals to 1,550 weapons each by 2018.

    Mary-Ann Russon, “Scientists Invent New Way to Spot Nuclear Warheads Using Physics,” International Business Times, June 25, 2014.

    War and Peace

    U.S. Rejects Draft Treaty Banning Space Weapons

    A new draft treaty designed to limit the weaponization of space was introduced by China and Russia into the United Nations and met with opposition from the United States. The proposal, an update of the 2008 draft, would place “legally binding curbs on weapons in space.” The U.S., citing the lack of an effective verification system to monitor compliance in the UN draft, instead favors a less formal “code of conduct” being pushed by the European Union.

    Bill Gertz, “U.S. Opposes New Draft Treaty from China and Russia Banning Space Weapons,” The Washington Free Beacon, June 19, 2014.

    Article 9 Protest in Japan

    A man set himself on fire in protest of the Japanese government’s attempts to reinterpret Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution to allow the military to be used against other nations. Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe believes that Article 9 unfairly restricts Japan from exercising its right to self-defense. Article 9 currently outlaws war as a means to settle international disputes.

    The Article 9 decision is extremely controversial in Japan, with proponents of the pacifist constitution saying that reinterpreting the Constitution will more easily allow wars to take place. Japan is currently embroiled in a serious territorial dispute with China over the islands known to the Japanese as the Senkakus and to the Chinese as the Diaoyus.

    Japanese Man Self-Immolates in Pro-Pacifist Constitution Protest,” RT, June 29, 2014.

    Resources

    This Month in Nuclear Threat History

    History chronicles many instances when humans have been threatened by nuclear weapons. In this article, Jeffrey Mason outlines some of the most serious threats that have taken place in the month of July, including the first U.S. atmospheric nuclear weapon test in the Marshall Islands (July 1, 1946) and U.S. Strategic Command’s “Waging [Nuclear] Deterrence in the 21st Century” conference (July 29-30, 2009).

    To read Mason’s full article, click here.

    For more information on the history of the Nuclear Age, visit NAPF’s Nuclear Files website.

    Plan Your Action for Nuclear Abolition Day

    The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) is coordinating a worldwide day of action against nuclear weapons on September 26, 2014. The United Nations General Assembly has declared September 26 the “International Day for the Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons.”

    ICAN is asking people around the world to organize actions in their own countries to highlight the catastrophic humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons and to call for a treaty banning nuclear weapons. For ideas and resources to help you plan your activity, visit the ICAN website.

    Against the Tide

    The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) has published a new report entitled “Against the Tide: Why the Trident Commission’s Views Are Outdated and Out of Touch.” In the report, CND argues that the Trident Commission should have listened to the majority of the British people who oppose Trident replacement and the overwhelming majority internationally who want to see a world free of these monstrous and outdated weapons. Instead the Commission has produced a rehash of Cold War thinking that fails to acknowledge that the world has moved on.

    CND argues that cancelling the program to replace the Trident nuclear weapons system is a pragmatic and realistic alternative.

    To download a copy of CND’s report, click here.

    Foundation Activities

    Paul Chappell Gives Keynote Address at Model UN in Germany

    With the conference title “World Peace, Our Present Task, Our Future Aim,” the Oldenburg Model United Nations/OLMUN 2014 took place June 24-27, 2014 in Oldenburg, Germany. NAPF Peace Leadership Director Paul K. Chappell was keynote speaker on the opening night of the conference. Chappell spoke to over 700 high school students from Germany and other European countries on “Why World Peace Is Possible.”

    Paul argued that politicians manipulate soldiers by dehumanizing opponents in order to make them fight in war. He concludes that human beings are naturally peaceful and afraid of war and physical and psychological violence. This leads to his opinion that we can all have realistic hope for a peaceful future.

    For more information on this event, click here.

    Remembering the U.S. Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

    On August 6, 2014, the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation will participate in three events commemorating the U.S. atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on August 6 and 9, 1945, respectively.

    NAPF’s 21st Annual Sadako Peace Day will be held at La Casa de Maria in Montecito, California, at 6:00 p.m. This year’s featured speaker is NAPF Board member Robert Laney. The event is free and open to the public.

    NAPF Director of Programs Rick Wayman will attend a commemoration event at the gates of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), where many U.S. nuclear weapons have been designed and developed. A whopping 89% of LLNL’s budget request for 2015 is for nuclear weapon activities.  The theme of this year’s Bay Area commemoration event is “Failure to Disarm.” Rick has been invited to speak about the Nuclear Zero Lawsuits, which directly address the failure of all nine nuclear-armed nations to disarm. For more information on the Bay Area event, click here.

    Rick will also participate in a webinar hosted by Women’s Action for New Directions (WAND) on August 6 at 3:00 p.m. Eastern Time. He will be discussing the Nuclear Zero Lawsuits, and will be joined by a woman from the Marshall Islands who has suffered the effects of the U.S. nuclear weapons tests. The webinar is free and open to the public. More information and a registration link will be provided in the August issue of The Sunflower.

    Youth Video Contest Announced

    The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation is working with Tri-Valley CAREs, a non-profit organization based in Livermore, California, on a new youth video contest. Contestants will address the topic: “Six Decades of Nuclear Bombs at Livermore Lab: Tell Us Why a Clean Environment Is Important to You.”

    Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory is one of the two main nuclear weapons design and research laboratories in the United States. Every nuclear weapon in the U.S. arsenal was designed at either Livermore or Los Alamos National Lab in New Mexico. Operating this lab in Livermore, California for six decades has taken a serious toll on the local environment. In fact, the lab has released over 1 million curies of radiation into the local environment.

    The contest is open to people around the world. The deadline for submissions is October 31, 2014.

    For more information about the contest, click here.

    Quotes

     

    “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”

    The Russell-Einstein Manifesto, which was issued on July 9, 1955. This quote is featured in the NAPF book Speaking of Peace: Quotations to Inspire Action.

     

    “This isn’t about your job. It’s about materials with the power to taint land, air and water — to poison and kill living things — for tens of thousands of years. PR baby-talk can’t alter that deadly serious fact.”

    Sasha Pyle and Joni Arends, in an op-ed opposing the proposed rushed re-opening of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in Carlsbad, New Mexico. A serious radiation leak at WIPP in February 2014 has shut down the facility. Investigators are still unsure as to the exact cause of the radiation leak, which exposed at least 21 workers to elevated radiation levels.

     

    “Once again this year, the nuclear weapon-possessing states took little action to indicate a genuine willingness to work toward complete dismantlement of their nuclear arsenals.”

    Shannon Kile and Phillip Patton Schell, referencing the new annual nuclear forces data report by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).

    Editorial Team

    David Krieger
    Rose Mertens
    Elliot Serbin
    Carol Warner
    Rick Wayman

     

  • Sunflower Newsletter April 2014

    Issue #201 – April 2014

    Facebook Twitter More...

    In the next several weeks, we’ll be taking an exciting action that has never been seen before in the nuclear abolition movement. We need you to join us and spread the word! Please connect with us on Facebook and Twitter so you can have all the latest news and tools to join the courageous fight for a world free of nuclear weapons.

    • Perspectives
      • Ten Reasons Why Nukes Are Nuts by David Krieger
      • Ukraine and the Danger of Nuclear War by John Scales Avery
      • Jonathan Schell (1943-2014) by David Krieger
    • US Nuclear Weapons Policy
      • Nuclear Weapons Budget Rises in Age of Austerity
    • Nuclear Disarmament
      • NATO Using Crimea Crisis to Justify Continued Deployment of Nuclear Weapons
    • Nuclear Insanity
      • ICBM Scandal Intensifies
      • Activists Break Into Nuclear Weapons Base Before Nuclear Security Summit
    • Nuclear Proliferation
      • Japan Defends Decision to Stockpile Tons of Weapons-Usable Plutonium
    • Nuclear Testing
      • Israel Likely to Ratify Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty
    • Resources
      • This Month in Nuclear Threat History
      • NPT Action Plan Monitoring Report
      • Join Us at DC Days in May
      • Help Restore the Golden Rule
    • Foundation Activities
      • Check Out the Re-designed WagingPeace.org
      • Humanity Needs You to Join the Other One Percent
      • Peace Leadership Around the Globe
      • NAPF at the Non-Proliferation Treaty PrepCom
      • NAPF Peace Poetry Contest – Deadline July 1
    • Quotes

     

    Perspectives

    Ten Reasons Why Nukes Are Nuts

    There are many reasons why nukes are nuts. Here are my top ten:

    They are insanely powerful. A single nuclear weapon can destroy a city. A few nuclear weapons can destroy a country. A relatively small regional nuclear war can cause a nuclear famine, taking 2 billion lives globally. An all-out nuclear war could end civilization and cause the extinction of most complex life on the planet.

    Nuclear weapons kill indiscriminately. Their effects cannot be contained in time or space. They are an equal-opportunity destroyer, killing and maiming men, women and children. The radioactive materials in nuclear weapons keep killing long after the blast, heat and fire of the explosive force have taken their toll. They are capable of causing genetic mutations and killing or injuring new generations of innocent victims, as was the case with the repeated US atmospheric nuclear testing in the Marshall Islands.

    To read more, click here.

    Ukraine and the Danger of Nuclear War

    The current situation in Ukraine and the Crimean Peninsula is an extremely dangerous one. Unless restraint and a willingness to compromise are shown by all of the the parties involved, the crisis might escalate uncontrollably into a full-scale war, perhaps involving nuclear weapons. What is urgently required is for all the stakeholders to understand each other’s positions and feelings. Public understanding of the points of view of all sides is also very much needed.

    We in the West already know the point of view of our own governments from the mainstream media, because they tell us of nothing else. For the sake of balance, it would be good for us to look closely at the way in which the citizens of Russia and the Crimean Peninsula view recent events.

    To read more, click here.

    Jonathan Schell (1943-2014)

    I was saddened to learn of the recent death of Jonathan Schell, a distinguished writer and journalist and a long-time member of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation’s Advisory Council.  Jonathan was one of the most talented, thoughtful and moral writers of our time.  His first book, The Village of Ben Suc, published in 1967, reported on U.S. atrocities in Vietnam.  He went on to write many more important books, including The Fate of the Earth, in which he described in elegant prose the threat posed to humanity by nuclear weapons.  This 1982 book became a classic and in 1999 was selected by a panel of experts convened by New York University as one of the 20th century’s 100 best works of journalism.

    To read more, click here.

    US Nuclear Weapons Policy

    Nuclear Weapons Budget Rises in Age of Austerity

     

    Despite increasing austerity, the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) received a 7% increase in the Obama Administration’s FY2015 budget request. The NNSA is the semi-autonomous agency that builds and maintains U.S. nuclear weapons. While a 7% overall increase may not seem like much, consider this: the NNSA’s budget request for non-proliferation programs is down by 21%, and funding to dismantle nuclear weapons that have been taken out of service is down by 45%. Those “savings” — and then some — have been applied to programs to modernize many current U.S. nuclear weapons and facilities.

    Last month, companion bills were introduced in the House and Senate that would save $100 billion in the next ten years by reducing the number of nuclear weapons and cutting nuclear weapons spending. In the Senate, Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) introduced the Smarter Approach to Nuclear Expenditures (SANE) Act (S.2070). In the House of Representatives, Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) introduced the Reduce Expenditures in the Nuclear Infrastructure Now (REIN-IN) Act (H.R. 4107).

    The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation recently issued an action alert encouraging members of Congress to co-sponsor these bills. To take action, click here.

    Nuclear Disarmament

    NATO Using Crimea Crisis to Justify Continued Deployment of Nuclear Weapons

     

    Anders Fogh Rasmussen, General Secretary of NATO, has said that Russia’s annexation of Crimea may affect NATO tactical nuclear weapon reductions in Europe. NATO currently deploys approximately 180 U.S. nuclear weapons in Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey. Russia is thought to possess approximately 2,000 tactical nuclear weapons within its borders.

    The U.S. has also announced suspension of bilateral talks with Russia regarding improving understanding and cooperation around missile defense. U.S. and NATO missile defense deployment in Eastern Europe has been viewed by Russia as a serious threat for many years.

    Rachel Oswald, “NATO Chief Says Ukraine Events May Affect European Tactical Nuclear Reductions,” Global Security Newswire, March 20, 2014.

    Nuclear Insanity

    ICBM Scandal Intensifies

     

    The ongoing scandal relating to drug use and cheating by U.S. nuclear missile launch officers continues to get bigger. In late March, nine commanders, representing nearly the entire operational chain of command in the 341st Missile Wing at Malmstrom Air Force Base, were fired and the wing commander, Col. Robert Stanley, was allowed to resign.

    One missile crew member was quoted as telling investigators, “Cheating has been going on for years; however, leadership pretends that cheating is not happening.” Another said, “Our squadron leadership was just another generation of cheaters.”

    Robert Burns, “Nuke Test Cheating Linked to Flawed Leadership,” Associated Press, March 28, 2014.

    Activists Break Into Nuclear Weapons Base Before Nuclear Security Summit

     

    Just days before the Nuclear Security Summit began in the Netherlands, four activists were arrested after breaking into Volkel Airbase, where U.S. nuclear weapons are kept under the guise of the NATO nuclear sharing agreement.  The activists entered a “secure” part of the base and took a photo of one of the bunkers in which U.S. B61 nuclear bombs are kept.

    The activists, part of a group called “Disarm,” explained in a statement that they wanted to raise awareness that the Netherlands continues to store nuclear weapons and that these weapons should have been given back to President Obama when he came to the country for the Nuclear Security Summit.

    Susi Snyder, “Four Dutch Activists Arrested at Volkel Airbase, Home to American Nuclear Bombs,” The Nuclear Resister, March 21, 2014.

    Nuclear Proliferation

    Japan Defends Decision to Stockpile Tons of Weapons-Usable Plutonium

     

    As part of its “gift-basket” pledge at the 2014 Nuclear Security Summit, Japan announced it would send hundreds of pounds of weapons-grade enriched uranium and plutonium back to the United States to be converted into a more proliferation-resistant form. Specifically, roughly 1,210 pounds of bomb-ready uranium and 730 pounds of separated plutonium will be sent to the U.S. While nonproliferation supporters applaud this action, they also note that this quantity of plutonium represents less than one percent of Japan’s worldwide stockpile and just 3.5 percent of the total domestic stockpile.

    Japan has long been criticized for its possession of what many have called “a bomb in the basement,” meaning that they could develop nuclear weapons within a matter of months should they decide to do so.

    Abe Defends Japan’s Management of Weapons-Grade Plutonium,” Kyodo News International, March 25, 2014.

    Nuclear Testing

    Israel Likely to Ratify Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty

     

    In 1996, Israel signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), which would ban all nuclear test explosions. Of the 183 countries that have signed the treaty, 162 have ratified it already.

    There remain eight countries that must ratify before the treaty can enter into force: Israel, Iran, Egypt, China, United States, India, North Korea and Pakistan. Lassina Zerbo, executive secretary of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization, said that all eight of the holdout countries “are concerned about their own national security,” but argued that “the treaty can enhance the national security of all those countries.”

    David Horovitz, “Israel ‘Probably’ Next to Ratify Nuke Test Ban Treaty – Top Official,” The Times of Israel, March 19, 2014.

    Resources

    This Month in Nuclear Threat History

     

    History chronicles many instances when humans have been threatened by nuclear weapons. In this article, Jeffrey Mason outlines some of the most serious threats that have taken place in the month of April, including the failed launch of a NASA satellite, which dispersed plutonium into the upper atmosphere (April 21, 1964) and the massive radioactive release at Chernobyl (April 26, 1986).

    To read Mason’s full article, click here.

    For more information on the history of the Nuclear Age, visit NAPF’s Nuclear Files website.

    NPT Action Plan Monitoring Report

     

    Reaching Critical Will recently published the 2014 edition of its NPT Action Plan Monitoring Report. The report provides factual and clear information on the status of implementation of the three pillars of the NPT Action Plan agreed to in 2010. The report covers actions related to nuclear disarmament, nuclear non-proliferation, the Middle East WMD-Free Zone, the humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons, and more.

    To read the report, click here.

    Join Us at DC Days in May

     

    The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation will be participating in the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability’s DC Days for four days of training, advocacy and networking. Please join us and activists from all over the U.S. from May 18-21 to meet with members of Congress and the Obama administration and voice your concerns about nuclear weapons, power, and waste. This event offers a unique opportunity to develop advocacy skills and practice political activism.

    To learn more about ANA’s DC Days and to register, click here.

    Help Restore the Golden Rule

     

    Our friends at Veterans For Peace need your help to restore the Golden Rule, the world’s first anti-nuclear peace boat. In 1958, her brave crew of Quakers and pacifists risked their lives and freedom to nonviolently confront nuclear testing on the high seas. With your help, they will be able to honor their legacy and continue the mission.

    Horrified by ongoing open-air nuclear bomb tests and the threat of nuclear war, the four-man crew sailed the Golden Rule from California toward the Marshall Islands. They were arrested by the U.S. Coast Guard and prevented from reaching the nuclear testing area. The publicity surrounding their trial and imprisonment helped ignite public outrage against nuclear weapons testing and alerted the world to the health hazards of nuclear fallout.

    To learn more about the Golden Rule and how you can support its restoration, click here.

    Foundation Activities

    Check Out the Re-designed WagingPeace.org

     

    The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation is pleased to launch its re-designed website www.wagingpeace.org. The new site contains the hundreds of articles that we have published over the years, along with engaging content on nuclear weapons and peace. From the text of historic international treaties to a new Peace Store featuring a wide range of merchandise, the new WagingPeace.org has something for everyone.

    We encourage you to check our website often, as new content is added regularly.

    Humanity Needs You to Join the Other One Percent

     

    For the third consecutive year, NAPF will sponsor a Summer Peace Leadership training at La Casa de Maria Retreat Center in Santa Barbara from July 20-26, 2014. This year’s theme is: Humanity Needs You to Join the Other 1 Percent!

    NAPF Peace Leadership Director Paul K. Chappell explains that less than 1% of the American population was actively involved in the women’s and civil rights movements, and less than 1% of the global population was actively involved in the movement to abolish state-sanctioned slavery.

    “It is only a tiny group of people who make positive change happen. This 1% must be well-trained, strategic, and creative. Just as soldiers are given excellent training in waging war, citizens must be given even better training in waging peace.”

    Positive change does not happen by itself. “We must make it happen.” Paul emphasizes the need to focus on Peace Leadership, to learn the form of leadership practiced by Gandhi and Marin Luther King Jr.

    “This will give us the strategic nonviolent and practical life skills that we need to wage peace in our personal lives, our communities, and throughout the world.”

    As a West Point graduate, Iraq war veteran, and former army captain, Paul brings the best of his West Point world-class leadership training and applies it to waging peace.

    Click here for more information and to apply for the summer course.

    Peace Leadership Around the Globe

     

    In March 2014, NAPF Peace Leadership Director Paul K. Chappell delivered a series of lectures and trainings in the New York City area and in Northern Uganda. Paul met with, among others, high school students in New York City, religious groups, and people from South Sudan and Uganda traumatized by decades of continuous war.

    To read a summary of three key Peace Leadership events in March, click here.

    NAPF at the Non-Proliferation Treaty PrepCom

     

    The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation will send a number of representatives to New York for the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Preparatory Committee (PrepCom) from April 28 – May 9 at the United Nations headquarters. Planned activities include a side event at the United Nations for countries and civil society entitled “Holding Nuclear Weapon States Accountable for Article VI of the NPT.” Article VI requires nuclear weapon states to negotiate in good faith for an end to the arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament.

    NAPF is also partnering with Soka Gakkai International to bring a group of young people to the PrepCom to meet with delegations and develop advocacy and diplomacy skills.

    Follow us on Twitter and Facebook for regular updates from inside the United Nations.

    Poetry in April and Throughout the Year

     

    April is National Poetry Month in the United States. To mark this occasion, the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation is offering all of its peace poetry books at 20% off during April. This includes our newest book, Summer Grasses: An Anthology of War Poetry, published in March 2014. You can also read all of NAPF’s peace poetry archives on our re-designed website.

    The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation’s annual poetry contest is now accepting entries. The Barbara Mandigo Kelly Peace Poetry Awards are an annual series of awards to encourage poets to explore and illuminate positive visions of peace and the human spirit. The Poetry Awards include three age categories: Adult, Youth 13-18, and Youth 12 & Under.

    For more information about the contest, including a full list of rules and instructions on how to enter, click here. The deadline for entries is July 1.

    Quotes

     

    “The moral cost of nuclear armament is that it makes of all of us underwriters of the slaughter of hundreds of millions of people and of the cancellation of future generations.”

    Jonathan Schell, member of the NAPF Advisory Council, who passed away in March 2014. Schell’s quote is featured in the book Speaking of Peace: Quotations to Inspire Action.

     

    “All I would want on my gravestone would be: ‘Here lies Tony Benn. He encouraged us.’”

    Tony Benn, former U.K. Member of Parliament and leader of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, who passed away in March 2014. He always encouraged us at NAPF to keep working for a nuclear weapon-free world.

    Editorial Team

     

    Scott Berzon

    Neil Fasching

    David Krieger

    Carol Warner

    Rick Wayman

     

     

  • Sunflower Newsletter March 2014

    Issue #200 – March 2014

    Facebook Twitter More...

    The Sunflower is a monthly e-newsletter providing educational information on nuclear weapons abolition and other issues relating to global security. Help us spread the word and forward this to a friend.

    Please donate to help sustain this valuable resource.

    Subscribe to the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation’s Sunflower newsletter and Action Alert Network.

    • Perspectives
      • Building the Morale of Missileers by David Krieger
      • Bravo: 60 Years of Suffering, Cover-Ups, Injustice by Beverly Deepe Keever
    • US Nuclear Weapons Policy
      • U.S. Begins Study on New Nuclear Cruise Missile
      • Members of Congress Introduce Legislation to Cut Nuclear Expenditures
    • Nuclear Disarmament
      • Ukraine Gave up Its Soviet Nuclear Weapons in 1990s
      • Conference on Humanitarian Impacts of Nuclear Weapons Marks Progress
    • Nuclear Insanity
      • ICBM Caucus Opposes Land-Based Missile Cuts
      • Peace Protestors Sentenced to Prison for Sabotage
      • Russia Tests Nuclear Missile Amidst Ukraine Crisis
    • Nuclear Waste
      • U.S. Nuclear Waste Workers Receive Internal Radiation Dose in Leak
    • Resources
      • This Month in Nuclear Threat History
      • Nuremberg Prosecutor on Creating a Humane, Peaceful World
      • A Ban on Nuclear Weapons: What’s in it for NATO?
    • Foundation Activities
      • Help Us Expose the Truth About Nuclear Weapons
      • Native Ideals to Spark a New Peaceful Revolution
      • Noam Chomsky Delivers NAPF Lecture
      • Nukes Are Nuts Video Contest – Deadline April 1
    • Quotes

     

    Perspectives

    Building the Morale of Missileers

     

    A recent news story in the Global Security Newswire stated, “Top U.S. military leaders are personally reaching out to missileers at the Montana base that has become ground zero for an Air Force probe into exam cheating.” It went on, “Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel on Saturday called six launch officers during their shifts at underground launch control centers, according to a Pentagon press story. Speaking on the phone calls for roughly an hour, the defense chief voiced his assurance that the launch officers were up to the task of carrying out the U.S. nuclear mission, said Pentagon officials.” (Hagel, Air Force Brass Reach Out to Montana Missile Officers, GSN, February 4, 2014)

    One can only imagine what was said in those morale building talks.

    Hagel: Howdy, missileer, this is Chuck. How’s everything down in your bunker?

    Missile Launch Officer: Just fine, sir, lit up like a shopping mall. Chuck who?

    To read more, click here.

    Bravo: 60 Years of Suffering, Cover-Ups, Injustice

     

    Sixty years ago on March 1 in the heart of the Pacific Ocean, the United States detonated the most powerful nuclear weapon in its history.

    For these islanders, Bravo also ushered in 60 years of sufferings and a chain reaction of U.S. cover-ups and injustices, as detailed below. Over the decades, their pleas for just and adequate compensation and U.S. constitutional rights they had been promised were rejected by the U.S. courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, by Congress and by executive-branch administrations headed by presidents of either party.

    To read more, click here.

    US Nuclear Weapons Policy

    U.S. Begins Study on New Nuclear Cruise Missile

     

    This July, the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) will begin its formal study of the two potential warheads to be paired with new nuclear cruise missiles. The Air Force is currently working alongside the NNSA to determine if the W80 warhead, which is currently used in Air-Launched Cruise Missiles, or the W84 warhead, which was formerly used in Ground-Launched Cruise Missiles, is the best warhead for the new Long-Range Standoff Missile (LRSO). Either warhead would require a life-extension and improvement program to achieve the design and capability sought by the Pentagon.

    The Air Force and NNSA are expected to conclude the study by the summer of 2015, after which the LRSO program would award one or several technology development contracts to a prominent defense company, such as Lockheed Martin or Boeing. The goal of the formal study is to determine which warhead would undergo a life-extension program to modify and maintain the warheads for the new LRSO. This is to fulfill the desire that the new LRSOs are operational by the mid 2020s.

    “Air Force and NNSA To Select Nuclear Cruise Missile Warhead in Mid-2015,” Inside the Air Force, February 28, 2014.

    Members of Congress Introduce Legislation to Cut Nuclear Expenditures

     

    Senators Edward J. Markey (D-MA) and Jeff Merkley (D-OR) introduced a bill that would cut $100 billion from the current nuclear weapons budget over the next decade. The Smarter Approach to Nuclear Expenditures (SANE) Act would decrease the number of deployed strategic submarines from 14 to 8, reduce the purchase of replacement submarines from 12 to 8, cut warhead life extension programs, remove the nuclear mission from F-35s, and cancel nuclear weapon making facilities and missile defense programs. The authors of the bill believe that the U.S. must stop wasting money on outdated nuclear programs and prioritize the nation’s future by investing in things like education.

    While the SANE Act was proposed in the Senate, Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) proposed the Reduce Expenditures in Nuclear Investments Now (REIN-IN) Act in the House of Representatives. Rep. Blumenauer argues that the bill is necessary because the United States cannot afford, nor does it need, such expensive weapons systems.

    Markey and Merkley Introduce Legislation to Cut Bloated Nuclear Weapons Budget,” Office of Sen. Ed Markey, February 28, 2014.

    Nuclear Disarmament

    Ukraine Gave up Its Soviet Nuclear Weapons in 1990s

     

    This year marks the 20th anniversary of the signing of the Trilateral Statement, the agreement that set the terms for eliminating the strategic nuclear weapons left on the territory of Ukraine when the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. In return for giving up the world’s third largest nuclear arsenal (1,900 nuclear weapons) to Russia for dismantlement, Ukraine received:

    Security assurances. The United States, Russia and Britain would afford security assurances to Ukraine (i.e.: respect its independence and to abstain from economic intimidation).

    Compensation for highly-enriched uranium (HEU). “Russia agreed to provide fuel rods for Ukrainian nuclear reactors containing low enriched uranium equivalent to the HEU removed from the nuclear warheads transferred from Ukraine to Russia for dismantlement.”

    Elimination assistance. The United States would make accessible Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction assistance to cover the costs of eliminating the ICBMs and other nuclear infrastructure in Ukraine.

    Steven Pifer, “Getting Rid of Nukes: The Trilateral Statement at 20 Years,” The Brookings Institution, January 13, 2014.

    Conference on Humanitarian Impacts of Nuclear Weapons Marks Progress

     

    The Second Conference on the Humanitarian Impact of Nuclear Weapons, hosted by the Foreign Ministry of Mexico, concluded on February 14 with a plea for action to outlaw nuclear weapons ahead of the 70th anniversary in 2015 of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

    Representatives of over 140 countries attended the conference, as well as many civil society groups, including three representatives from the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation. Issues discussed at the conference included the mounting danger of nuclear weapons use globally because of their “proliferation and vulnerability to cyberattacks, human error and potential access to nuclear arsenals by terrorist groups.” The conference reiterated that a nuclear weapon detonation would have effects not constrained by national borders, most severely affecting the poor and vulnerable. Atomic bomb survivors also attended to share their stories and speak against the continued existence of nuclear weapons.

    Confab Calls for Action to Outlaw Nukes before 70th Anniversary of Bombings,” Japan Times, February 16, 2014.

    Nuclear Insanity

    ICBM Caucus Opposes Land-Based Missile Cuts

     

    A group of lawmakers from states that host land-based strategic nuclear missiles (Montana, North Dakota and Wyoming) are concerned the Pentagon could be studying closing down some of the weapon silos. Multiple letters from both chambers of Congress have been directed to U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, demanding to know whether his department is conducting environmental studies relating to Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs).

    Opponents of the possible reduction of the ICBM silos claim that the missiles are “vital to promoting peace and keeping our country and allies safe from current and emerging threats.” They included in their letter to the Pentagon that, “We are also concerned that beginning an ICBM environmental assessment could significantly damage the morale of airmen working on this crucial mission.”

    This defense of land-based nuclear missiles comes at a time when at least 92 out of 500 missile officers are being investigated in a cheating scandal, and many officers report feeling “burned out.”

    Rachel Oswald, “Lawmakers from Missile States Worry Pentagon Is Studying Closing Silos,” Global Security Newswire, February 21, 2014.

    Peace Protestors Sentenced to Prison for Sabotage

     

    Sister Megan Rice, an 84-year-old nun, has been sentenced to nearly three years in prison for breaking into the Y-12 National Security Complex in Oak Ridge, previously known as the “Fort Knox of uranium.” The ability of Rice and two other activists, Greg Boertje-Obed and Michael Walli, to break into the plant raised serious questions about security, as the facility holds the nation’s primary supply of bomb-grade uranium. Greg Boertje-Obed and Michael Walli were each sentenced to 62 months in prison for their nonviolent action.

    In her closing statement, Rice told the judge, “Please have no leniency with me. To remain in prison for the rest of my life would be the greatest gift you could give me.” For Rice, prison was preferable to living in a country where the government spends too much on the military and weapons.

    Commenting on the sentencing, NAPF President David Krieger said, “Rather than receiving jail sentences, Sister Megan and her colleagues should be honored not only for their exceptional courage, but for exposing the inadequate state of the security of the U.S. nuclear weapons complex. The government has to stop acting as though it is all right to threaten the mass murder of innocent people as a means of bolstering U.S. security. It doesn’t work and makes all humanity, and the future of complex life, less secure.”

    84 Year Old Nun Gets Prison in Nuclear Weapons Break-In,” Fayetteville Observer, February 18, 2014.

    Russia Tests Nuclear Missile Amidst Ukraine Crisis

     

    The Russian military reportedly test fired a Topol RS-12M Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) on March 4, as the crisis in Ukraine continues to grow. The Topol RS-12M missile is a delivery vehicle for Russia’s nuclear warheads. The U.S. said that it was notified of the ICBM test beforehand, as required by arms control treaties.

    This provocative test is reminiscent of a U.S. test of a Minuteman III ICBM at the height of the U.S.-North Korea crisis in 2013.

    Russia Reports Ballistic Missile Test Amid Crimea Tension,” BBC News, March 4, 2014.

    Nuclear Waste

    U.S. Nuclear Waste Workers Receive Internal Radiation Dose in Leak

     

    The U.S. Department of Energy reported that 13 workers in New Mexico were exposed to radiation from a leak at the Waste Isolation Pilot Project (WIPP), the only deep underground nuclear waste dump facility in the U.S. WIPP is the only facility in the U.S. that can store plutonium-contaminated clothing and tools from nuclear building and testing sites. After the leak occurred on February 14, employees were checked for external contamination and had biological samples taken to check for possible exposure from inhaling radioactive participles. The 13 workers who tested positive have been notified and will undergo additional testing to determine the magnitude of the exposure.

    This is the first reported release of radiation from the plant in the 15 years that it has been storing plutonium-contaminated waste from nuclear bomb building sites. From the analysis of air samples around the plant, officials are able to tell that a container of waste leaked, but haven’t been able to get underground to find out what caused it. While elevated radiation levels have been detected around the plant, officials report the readings are too low to constitute a public health threat.

    Jeri Clausing, “13 Workers Exposed to Radiation at New Mexico Nuclear Dump,” Associated Press, February 26, 2014.

    Resources

    This Month in Nuclear Threat History

     

    History chronicles many instances when humans have been threatened by nuclear weapons. In this article, Jeffrey Mason outlines some of the most serious threats that have taken place in the month of March, including the Castle Bravo nuclear test (March 1, 1954) and President Reagan’s announcement of his “Star Wars” plan (March 23, 1983).

    To read Mason’s full article, click here.

    For more information on the history of the Nuclear Age, visit NAPF’s Nuclear Files website.

    Nuremberg Prosecutor on Creating a Humane, Peaceful World

     

    Ben Ferencz, the only living prosecutor from the Nuremberg Trials, has issued a 3-minute video statement about how he thinks we can go about creating a humane and peaceful world under international law.

    To watch the video, click here.

    A Ban on Nuclear Weapons: What’s in it for NATO?

     

    The International Law and Policy Institute has published a new paper entitled “A Ban on Nuclear Weapons: What’s in it for NATO?”

    The proposal that nuclear weapons should be banned through the early adoption of a legally binding instrument is gaining traction. A topic of increasingly serious discussion, it is making its way up the international agenda – from being an idea with no real prospect of successful adoption, to a proposal to be reckoned with. Arguing that a process to ban nuclear weapons could become a political reality in the foreseeable future, this paper considers the implications of such an instrument for NATO member states. The paper finds that as a matter of international law, there is no barrier to member states’ adherence to such a treaty. Likewise, concerns about the political implications for NATO ignore historical variations in member state military policy and underestimate the value of a ban on nuclear weapons for promoting NATO’s ultimate aim: the security of its member states.

    To read the full paper, click here.

    Foundation Activities

    Help Us Expose the Truth About Nuclear Weapons

     

    73% of Americans think that nukes are nuts. Isn’t it time to wage all-out peace?

    Help NAPF launch a movement that exposes the truth about nuclear weapons. Click here for more information.

    Native Ideals to Spark a New Peaceful Revolution

     

    NAPF Peace Leadership Director Paul Chappell spoke on the principles of nonviolence at the second workshop on Building Nonviolent Indigenous Rights Movements on February 15, 2014 in Nova Scotia, Canada. Held at the Tatamagouche Retreat Center outside Halifax, and sponsored by the Wabanaki Confederacy and the Land Peace Foundation, this workshop also included special interactions from the Native community.

    “The inclusion of more traditional and ceremonial elements into the Nova Scotia workshop, such as talking circles that were facilitated by prayer and ceremony, enabled us to deepen our dialogue with participants. By including more traditional elements, we were able to connect with each other in a more meaningful way,” said co-trainer Sherri Mitchell, Indigenous lawyer and Executive Director of the Land Peace Foundation.

    To read more about the training in Nova Scotia, click here.

    To learn more about the Peace Leadership Program, including our 2014 Peace Leadership Summer Course, click here.

    Noam Chomsky Delivers NAPF Lecture

     

    Professor Noam Chomsky delivered the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation’s 13th Annual Frank K. Kelly Lecture on Humanity’s Future on February 28 in Santa Barbara, California. Speaking to a sold-out theater of over 600 people, Professor Chomsky discussed “Security and State Policy.” He ended his lecture stating that continuing with a world that contains nuclear weapons amounts to collective suicide; we must not allow this situation to go on any longer.

    A transcript of Prof. Chomsky’s speech is available now on the NAPF website. Photos, video and the audio podcast will be posted on wagingpeace.org as soon as they are available.

    Nukes Are Nuts Video Contest – Deadline April 1

     

    The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation’s annual Swackhamer Disarmament Video Contest is now underway. The theme of this year’s contest is “Nukes Are Nuts.” Contestants will make videos of 30 seconds or less describing why they think nuclear weapons are crazy and must be eliminated.

    We have already received some excellent entries, which can be viewed on the contest’s Facebook page.

    For more information about the contest, including a full list of rules and instructions on how to enter, click here. The deadline for entries is April 1.

    Quotes

     

    “Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.”

    Article VI of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which entered into force on March 5, 1970. Emphasis is ours.

     

    “Sunflowers instead of missiles in the soil would ensure peace for future generations.”

    — U.S. Defense Secretary William Perry, speaking at a ceremony in Ukraine in 1996 marking their new status as a nuclear weapon-free nation. This quote is featured in the book Speaking of Peace: Quotations to Inspire Action, edited by NAPF President David Krieger.

    Editorial Team

     

    Neil Fasching

    David Krieger

    Rose Mertens

    Carol Warner

    Rick Wayman