Nuclear Age Peace Foundation

Author: Mike Ryan

  • Sunflower Newsletter February 2014

    Issue #199 – February 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
      • An Open Letter to College and University Presidents by David Krieger
      • The Fragility of Our Complex Civilization by John Scales Avery
      • Nukes Are Nuts: The Sequel by David Krieger
    • US Nuclear Weapons Policy
      • Enhanced Military Capabilities of U.S. Nuclear Bomb
    • Nuclear Proliferation
      • Temporary Nuclear Deal With Iran Takes Effect
    • Nuclear Insanity
      • Strategic Deterrent Coalition
      • Land-Based Nuclear Missile Officers in Multiple Scandals
      • North Korean Leader May Not Be Consistently Rational
    • Nuclear Testing
      • National Cancer Institute to Study Health Effects of First Nuclear Test
      • 60th Anniversary of Largest U.S. Nuclear Test
    • War and Peace
      • Latin American and Caribbean Nations Proclaim Zone of Peace
    • Resources
      • Eight Ways You’re Wrong About Iran’s Nuclear Program
      • New Nuclear Disarmament Community Online
      • Banning Nuclear Weapons: A Pacific Islands Perspective
    • Foundation Activities
      • Noam Chomsky to Deliver NAPF 2014 Kelly Lecture
      • Peace Leadership Training in San Diego
      • Mexico Conference on Humanitarian Impacts of Nuclear Weapons
      • Nukes Are Nuts Video Contest Announced
    • Quotes

     

    Perspectives

    An Open Letter to College and University Presidents

    by David Krieger

     

    You are in a unique position of leadership to influence today’s youth to achieve a better tomorrow for America and the world. I am writing to enlist your help in educating young people to understand the survival challenges that face humanity in the 21st century.

    Education is driven by values. Young people must learn to live with reverence for life, as did Albert Schweitzer, and to support equitable and nonviolent solutions to social problems, as did Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. Young people must be imbued with compassion, commitment and courage. They must learn to use their imaginations to find creative and cooperative solutions to the great issues of our time. And they must find joy in the process and take time to celebrate the miracle of living on the only planet we know of in the universe that supports life.

    To read more, click here.

    The Fragility of Our Complex Civilization

    by John Scales Avery

     

    Cultural evolution depends on the non-genetic storage, transmission, diffusion and utilization of information. The development of human speech, the invention of writing, the development of paper and printing, and finally, in modern times, mass media, computers and the Internet: all these have been crucial steps in society’s explosive accumulation of information and knowledge. Human cultural evolution proceeds at a constantly-accelerating speed, so great in fact that it threatens to shake society to pieces.

    The great and complex edifice of human civilization is far too precious to be risked in a thermonuclear war. It has been built by all humans, working together. By working together, we must now ensure that it is handed on intact to our children and grandchildren.

    To read more, click here.

    Nukes Are Nuts: The Sequel

    by David Krieger

     

    Nuclear weapons are monstrous and obscene explosive devices that have no function other than to threaten or cause mass annihilation. They kill indiscriminately and cause unimaginable suffering. The world knows well the death, destruction and lingering pain caused by these weapons at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Nuclear weapons could end civilization and have no place in a civilized society. Nukes are nuts!

    To read more, click here.

    US Nuclear Weapons Policy

    Enhanced Military Capabilities of U.S. Nuclear Bomb

     

    Over 2 1/2 years ago, the Federation of American Scientists claimed that the planned Life Extension Program for the B61 nuclear bomb would provide new military capabilities to attack targets with greater accuracy and less radioactive fallout. In January, former U.S. Air Force Chief of Staff, Gen. Norton Schwartz, confirmed that the B61-12 would indeed have new military capabilities.

    Critics claim that “the increased accuracy and lower yield options could make the B61-12 more attractive to use because of reduced collateral damage and radioactive fallout.” The development of the B61-12 contradicts the 2010 Nuclear Posture Review, which declared that Life Extension Programs for U.S. nuclear weapons would “not support new military missions or provide for new military capabilities.”

    Hans M. Kristensen, “General Confirms Enhanced Targeting Capabilities of B61-12 Nuclear Bomb,” FAS Strategic Security Blog, January 23, 2014.

    Nuclear Proliferation

    Temporary Nuclear Deal With Iran Takes Effect

     

    Under a short-term agreement that went into effect on January 20, the United States granted Iran “limited, targeted and reversible sanctions relief for a six-month period.” The deal, which will expire in July 2014, was the result of Tehran’s agreement to suspend its uranium fuel-enrichment and other parts of its nuclear program, and disable thousands of centrifuges.

    However, Western nations, particularly Israel, remain skeptical of Iran’s long-term intentions. Iran continues to be adamant that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only.

    Rick Gladstone and Thomas Erdbrink, “Temporary Nuclear Deal With Iran Takes Effect,” The New York Times, January 20, 2014.

    Nuclear Insanity

    Strategic Deterrent Coalition

     

    The newly formed Strategic Deterrent Coalition, led by Albuquerque business leader Sherman McCorkle, seeks to raise awareness of the U.S. nuclear weapons complex and protect the massive budgets of these facilities. The coalition’s primary goal is to defend the nuclear triad (intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine, and long-range bombers) against sensible proposals to eliminate one or more of its component parts in a post-Cold War world in which the U.S. and other nuclear-armed states are obligated to negotiate in good faith for Nuclear Zero.

    Michael Coleman, “New Coalition Defends U.S. Nuclear Complex,” Albuquerque Journal, January 9, 2014.

    Land-Based Nuclear Missile Officers in Multiple Scandals

     

    Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel has begun a campaign to define and remedy troubles that plague the U.S. nuclear force. A progressively worsening scandal was revealed in January that started with missile officers around the country being investigated for illegal drug use. That investigation quickly grew to include accusations of at least 92 out of the 500 missile officers cheating on proficiency tests. Hagel has summoned top officials to the Pentagon and said he will form an expert group of military outsiders to perform a broader review of the U.S. nuclear force.

    Secretary Hagel reported to top officials that “personnel failures within this force threaten to jeopardize the trust the American people have placed in us to keep our nuclear weapons safe and secure.” The problem, however, is not simply a personnel issue. It is the unnecessary and insane nuclear mission that is at the heart of the low morale of missile launch officers and their generals alike.

    Robert Burns, “Hagel Vows to Get to Bottom of Nuke Missile Ills,” Associated Press, January 23, 2014.

    North Korean Leader May Not Be Consistently Rational

     

    Navy Admiral Samuel Lacklear, head of U.S. military forces in the Pacific, has expressed concern about Kim Jong Un’s decision-making abilities, saying that the North Korean leader has made the Pacific region a “very dangerous place.”

    Admiral Lacklear’s comments come after a series of actions, including the execution of Kim’s uncle, Jang Song Thaek, and increased military and nuclear productivity that has antagonized the U.S., raising fears and anxieties among senior military officials.

    Rachel Oswald, “U.S. Commander: North Korean Leader May Not Be Consistently ‘Rational’,” Global Security Newswire, January 23, 2014.

    Nuclear Testing

    National Cancer Institute to Study Health Effects of First Nuclear Test

     

    After nearly seven decades, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) is conducting a study to determine the health effects of the 1945 Trinity Site atomic test on New Mexico residents. The study is designed to determine the specific radiation doses to which the “Trinity downwinders” were subjected during the test. It was prompted by the conclusion of a 10-year study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that found radiation levels at homes near the Los Alamos National Laboratory were almost 10,000 times the accepted levels.

    NCI scientists will be focusing on the diets and lifestyles of New Mexico residents who were children at the time of the blast. The NCI study notes that diets are important in studying radiation levels because contaminated foods, including dairy products, can be a significant source of radiation.

    Dennis J. Carroll, “Downwinders Welcome Study of Trinity Blast’s Impacts,” Santa Fe New Mexican, January 25, 2014.

    60th Anniversary of Largest U.S. Nuclear Test

     

    March 1 will mark the 60th anniversary of Castle Bravo, an atmospheric nuclear weapon test conducted by the United States near Bikini Atoll in the Marshall Islands in 1954. The hydrogen bomb had a yield of 15 megatons, 1,000 times more powerful than the bomb that destroyed Hiroshima. It was the largest weapon ever tested by the United States.

    Radioactive fallout from the explosion heavily contaminated Rongelap and Utirik atolls, but the residents of these islands were not evacuated for three days. A Japanese fishing vessel, the Lucky Dragon, was in the radioactive fallout path, which created a strong reaction against atmospheric nuclear testing among the people of Japan.

    Rongelap Atoll continues to have high levels of radiation in many areas, and many Rongelap natives believe it is not yet safe to return to their homeland 60 years later.

    For more information on the Castle Bravo test and its consequences, visit the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organization’s page here.

    War and Peace

    Latin American and Caribbean Nations Proclaim Zone of Peace

     

    On January 28 and 29, the Heads of State and Government of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) gathered in Havana, Cuba, to sign a proclamation of their region as a zone of peace.

    The proclamation contains the nations’ “permanent commitment to solve disputes through peaceful means with the aim of uprooting forever threat or use of force in our region.” The proclamation also declares a “commitment of the States of the region to continue promoting nuclear disarmament as a priority objective and to contribute with general and complete disarmament, to foster the strengthening of confidence among nations.”

    To read the full CELAC proclamation, click here.

    Resources

    Eight Ways You’re Wrong About Iran’s Nuclear Program

     

    The National Interest has published a report by Yousaf Butt that debunks eight false assertions about Iran and its nuclear program.

    The report begins, “Oft repeated but false assertions about Iran’s nuclear program – and the recent deal to tamp it down – may end up being more dangerous than the program itself. These wrong statements reinforce each other, get amplified in the media, and are fueling a march to military action.”

    To read the full report, click here.

    New Nuclear Disarmament Community Online

     

    NAPF’s Geneva Representative, Christian N. Ciobanu, is developing a unique online nuclear disarmament community on Goodwall.org, “the social network to do good.” The social network will be officially launched on February 6, 2014, but the beta version is online now.

    Members of the community can write, comment, follow posts and stories, and share them on their Facebook and Twitter accounts.

    To join Goodwall.org, click here. For further information, please contact Christian N. Ciobanu at christian.ciobanu@graduateinstitute.ch.

    Banning Nuclear Weapons: A Pacific Islands Perspective

     

    The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), of which NAPF is a member, has published a new report entitled “Banning Nuclear Weapons: A Pacific Islands Perspective.” The report details the ongoing humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons testing in the Pacific. March 1 will mark the 60th anniversary of the infamous “Bravo” nuclear test at Bikini Atoll in the Marshall Islands, which spread radioactive fallout over inhabited islands. From 1946 to 1996, at least 315 nuclear test explosions were conducted across the Pacific region by France, the United Kingdom and the United States.

    The author of the report, Nic Maclellan, said, “Pacific island nations – which understand all too well the horrific effects of nuclear weapons – are perfectly placed to play a leadership role in the process to negotiate a ban on nuclear weapons, which will help ensure that no one else suffers as they have suffered.”

    To download a copy of the report, click here.

    Foundation Activities

    Noam Chomsky to Deliver NAPF 2014 Kelly Lecture

     

    Professor Noam Chomsky will deliver the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation’s 13th Annual Frank K. Kelly Lecture on Humanity’s Future on February 28 at 7:30 p.m. in Santa Barbara, California. Professor Chomsky will speak on “Security and State Policy.”

    Tickets are sold out, but the lecture will be live audio streamed courtesy of KCSB. To listen to the lecture live at 7:30 p.m. Pacific Time on February 28, go to kcsb.org. If you live in the Santa Barbara area, you can also tune in to KCSB on the radio at 91.9 FM.

    Video of the lecture will be available as soon as possible following the event.

    Peace Leadership Training in San Diego

     

    From January 6-10, NAPF Peace Leadership Director Paul K. Chappell presented his five-day Peace Leadership Training as a graduate course at the University of San Diego School of Leadership and Education Sciences. Attended primarily by a select group of Ph.D. students and community activists, the course covered the type of leadership that is needed today, the type of leadership taught by Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. The course focused on nonviolence and new ways to wage peace.

    To read testimonials from the course, click here.

    For more information on Peace Leadership lectures and trainings, click here.

    Mexico Conference on Humanitarian Impacts of Nuclear Weapons

     

    NAPF Director of Programs Rick Wayman, New York Representative Alice Slater and Geneva Representative Christian N. Ciobanu will attend the Second Conference on the Humanitarian Impacts of Nuclear Weapons, which is hosted by the Mexican Ministry of Foreign Affairs. They will attend the official government conference as observers, with many opportunities to speak with representatives of countries around the world who are concerned about this issue. They will also participate in strategy sessions with representatives of dozens of non-governmental organizations from around the world.

    In January, NAPF sent out an action alert encouraging President Obama to send a U.S. delegation to the conference in Mexico. Thus far, the U.S. has played a negative role, discouraging countries from examining the humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons and actively choosing not to participate in such international forums. Click here to take action.

    Nukes Are Nuts Video Contest Announced

     

    NAPF’s 2014 video contest has officially launched. The contest is open to people of all ages around the world. To enter, make a video of 30 seconds or less about why you think nuclear weapons are nuts (as in “crazy”). Top videos are eligible for cash prizes and Nukes Are Nuts gear.

    For more information and full contest rules, click here.

    Quotes

     

    “To modernize your nuclear weapons stockpile and assure that they continue to stay secure and safe, it takes money, it takes resources.”

    — U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel.

     

    “The pressure is on for the U.S. to rebuild a cold war nuclear arsenal over the next 30 years…[but] as the threat goes down, we plan to spend more. In an age of budget constraint, it is hard to see how an increase in nuclear weapons spending is needed or aids American security.”

    — Jon Wolfsthal, Deputy Director of the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies, in an essay on the Huffington Post.

     

    “One man in the right makes a majority.”

    — Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865), 16th U.S. President. This quote appears in the book Speaking of Peace: Quotations to Inspire Action, edited by NAPF President David Krieger.

    Editorial Team

     

    Scott Berzon

    Neil Fasching

    David Krieger

    Grant Stanton

    Carol Warner

    Rick Wayman

     

  • Sunflower Newsletter January 2014

    Issue #198 – January 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
      • Missile Launching in the Dark by David Krieger
      • The Doublespeak of Nuclear Disarmament by Kate Hudson
    • US Nuclear Weapons Policy
      • Nuclear Weapon Protestors Face Decades in Prison
      • Budget Soars for U.S. Nuclear Weapons Modernization
    • Nuclear Disarmament
      • South Africa, the Nation that Gave Up Its Nuclear Weapons
    • Nuclear Proliferation
      • Russia Plans to Revive Rail-Mobile Nuclear Missiles
    • Nuclear Insanity
      • Congressman Supports Use of Nuclear Weapons Against Iran
      • Israeli Nuclear Whistleblower Still Held in Israel
    • Resources
      • Nuclear Famine: Two Billion People at Risk
      • The Morning of August 6
    • Foundation Activities
      • NAPF to Welcome Noam Chomsky to Santa Barbara
      • Peace Leadership in Canada
    • Quotes

     

    Perspectives

    Missile Launching in the Dark

    by David Krieger

     

    In the early morning hours of December 17, under cover of darkness, the Air Force launched a Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile from Vandenberg Air Force Base. It was a test of a nuclear-capable missile. Despite the claims of the Air Force, such tests do not make us safer or more secure- only more terrifying to others, and when it comes to nuclear weapons we should be terrifying ourselves. These are weapons that could destroy civilization, and yet we have the hubris to play Russian roulette with them and continue to do so more than 20 years after the end of the Cold War.

    The Air Force seems excessively proud of its ability to have “successfully launched” the nuclear-capable Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile. Is it pride in their ability to obey orders and carry out a mission fully capable of ending civilization should they be called upon to launch nuclear-armed Minuteman III missiles? The Air Force views its test launches as providing “data to ensure a safe, secure and effective nuclear deterrent.” But neither the Air Force nor anyone in authority can assure that nuclear deterrence will be safe, secure or effective.

    To read more, click here.

    The Doublespeak of Nuclear Disarmament

    by Kate Hudson

     

    It’s easy to say you want a world without nuclear weapons. Nearly everyone does: even David Cameron. It’s like saying there should be no global poverty: the hard part is taking action to do something about it.

    Imagine if David Cameron returned from his recent trade-boosting visit to China and had to concede, shamefaced, that he hadn’t mentioned trade with the UK. Worse still: what if he returned and boasted of the fact that he hadn’t mentioned trade with the UK? Well this is precisely what the Foreign and Commonwealth Office has just done following a UN meeting on nuclear disarmament.

    To read more, click here.

    US Nuclear Weapons Policy

    Nuclear Weapon Protestors Face Decades in Prison

     

    On January 28, three nonviolent protesters against nuclear weapons, Sr. Megan Rice, 83, Michael Walli, 63, and Gregory Boertje-Obed, 57, are scheduled to be sentenced in U.S. District Court in Knoxville, Tennessee, for the supposed crime of sabotage. They face decades in prison for their moral and courageous acts of protest..

    Roots Action has launched a campaign to encourage the judge, Amul R. Thapar, to show leniency in the sentencing of the protestors. Roots Action’s message reads in part, “The action taken by Megan, Michael and Greg was done from a commitment to nonviolence and from an allegiance to the future for our children and our planet, trying to insure that life will not be terminated by a nuclear war.”

    To send a letter to Judge Thapar, click here.

    Budget Soars for U.S. Nuclear Weapons Modernization

     

    The Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports that just in the past year, the projected budget for modernizing existing nuclear programs has increased by roughly $19 billion. The GAO report compared National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) budgets from 2012 to the current projections to arrive at the $19 billion figure. This huge increase also leaves out several other areas of significant cost for which NNSA has not provided figures.

    Notably missing are the figures for the construction of the Uranium Processing Facility in Tennessee and the Chemistry and the Metallurgy Research Replacement-Nuclear Facility in New Mexico. It’s not clear how much additional funding will be needed for these projects, but there’s no question that the existing budgets are underestimated significantly.

    A report released December 20 by the Congressional Budget Office estimates the cost of the Obama administration’s plans for the U.S. nuclear arsenal from 2014 to 2023 to total $355 billion.

    Frank Munger, “GAO: NNSA’s Modernization Costs Jump $19B, but the Budget Numbers Don’t Mesh with Plans,” Atomic City Underground, December 13, 2013.

    Nuclear Disarmament

    South Africa, the Nation that Gave Up Its Nuclear Weapons

     

    Former South African President F.W. de Klerk wrote an op-ed published in the Los Angeles Times detailing his thinking behind the decision to get rid of South Africa’s nuclear weapons in 1989.

    De Klerk wrote, “Nuclear weapons had no value in the kind of border wars we were fighting, and the prospect of using them against neighboring countries was too appalling to be contemplated.”

    He continued, “The international community must take concrete steps to control, and finally eliminate, nuclear weapons as a thinkable option. This will require greater support for the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and more rapid movement by existing nuclear weapons states toward the reduction and dismantling of their stockpiles. The world should realize that real security does not lie in increasing our power to destroy others; it lies in our ability to live with others on the basis of peace and justice.”

    F.W. de Klerk, “South Africa, the Nation that Gave Up Its Nukes,” Los Angeles Times, December 22, 2013.

    Nuclear Proliferation

    Russia Plans to Revive Rail-Mobile Nuclear Missiles

     

    Gen. Sergei Karakayev, commander of Russian strategic rocket forces, has indicated that Russia intends to revive its rail-based Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) capability in response to U.S. plans to develop a conventional long-range strike capacity. Russia considers missiles that can be moved around by train to be easier to protect from elimination by an adversary than traditional silo-based missiles.

    Russia has not had a rail-based ICBM capability since retiring its final Soviet-era system eight years ago.

    “Russia May Revive Rail-Mobile ICBMs to Counter U.S. Prompt-Strike Arms,” Global Security Newswire, December 18, 2013.

    Nuclear Insanity

    Congressman Supports Use of Nuclear Weapons Against Iran

     

    In a statement on C-Span, Republican congressman Duncan Hunter of California said that if the U.S. had to hit Iran, “you don’t do it with boots on the ground, you do it with tactical nuclear devices.” This remark goes a step further than those made by GOP donor Sheldon Adelson in October, who said that a nuclear device should be detonated in the desert of Iran to send a warning. Hunter said that his opinion is formed by his own service spent in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    Hunter’s statement had no lack of opponents. Kingston Reif of the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation responded, “The first use of nuclear weapons against Iran would guarantee a mad Iranian dash to acquire nuclear weapons to deter future such US attacks.”

    Ben Armbruster, “Congressman Says U.S. Should Use Nuclear Weapons if it Attacks Iran,” ThinkProgress, December 4, 2013.

    Israeli Nuclear Whistleblower Still Held in Israel

     

    Mordechai Vanunu, an ex-technician at Israel’s Dimona nuclear plant who leaked information about Israel’s nuclear weapons program in 1986, continues to have significant restrictions placed on his life after having served 18 years in prison. Vanunu is still restricted from talking to the media and foreigners, and is not allowed to leave Israel.

    Vanunu recently asked the Israeli High Court to allow him to leave Israel. However, the Israeli government claims that expert reports and secret information, presented to the court in a closed-door hearing, prove that Vanunu’s information is still relevant and its revelation would endanger state security. The court is not expected to rule on the matter in the near future.

    Yonah Jeremy Bob, “Vanunu Pleads with High Court to Allow Him to Leave Israel,” Jerusalem Post, December 25, 2013.

    Resources

    Nuclear Famine: Two Billion People at Risk

     

    International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) and its U.S. affiliate, Physicians for Social Responsibility, have released a new report concluding that more than two billion people – a quarter of the world’s population – would be at risk of starvation in the event of a limited nuclear exchange, such as one that could occur between India and Pakistan, or by the use of even a small number of the nuclear weapons held by the U.S. and Russia.

    “A nuclear war using only a fraction of existing arsenals would produce massive casualties on a global scale – far more than we had previously believed,” said the report’s author, IPPNW co-president Ira Helfand.

    To download a free copy of the report, click here.

    The Morning of August 6

     

    Tadashi Hasegawa was a Hiroshima atomic bomb survivor who spent his life speaking out against nuclear weapons. He recently wrote a book about his experiences and had it published in Japan. Before he died last year, his family promised him to translate his book into English. The book is entitled “The Morning of August 6, I Was 14 Years Old.”

    Click here for a free download of the book and to see video of an interview with Tadashi.

    Foundation Activities

    NAPF to Welcome Noam Chomsky to Santa Barbara

     

    The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation will welcome Professor Noam Chomsky to Santa Barbara to deliver the 13th Annual Frank K. Kelly Lecture on Humanity’s Future on February 28, 2014.

    Professor Chomsky, a long-time critic of nuclear weapons and U.S. nuclear policy, will speak at 7:30 p.m. at the Lobero Theatre in downtown Santa Barbara.

    For more information and to purchase tickets, click here.

    Peace Leadership in Canada

     

    NAPF Peace Leadership Director Paul Chappell spoke in December 2013 in New Brunswick, Canada on the principles of nonviolence at the workshop on Building Non-Violent Indigenous Rights Movements. Held at the Wabanaki Resource Center at St. Thomas University and sponsored by the Wabanaki Confederacy and The Land Peace Foundation, the first part of this workshop focused on how nonviolence training could be applied to the current struggle against fracking as Indigenous tribes resist the Government of New Brunswick’s appropriation of tribal lands for shale gas exploration.

    Chappell discussed both the philosophy of nonviolence and the actions of Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. He also explored the history of different kinds of nonviolent protests.

    “I was inspired to learn how Gandhi stood up for himself, with strength and nonviolence and was able to move so many people to action,” said Juisen Bartibogue, Mi’kmaq Nation, 19, of Burnt Church, New Brunswick. “I saw how nonviolence is the only way for us to be able to achieve our goals and to make a lasting peace.”

    Attorney Sherri Mitchell, a graduate of the summer 2013 NAPF Peace Leadership training, spoke during the second half of the workshop on strategy building for unified movements. A member of the Penobscot Tribe and executive director of the Land Peace Foundation, Mitchell has been an advocate for indigenous rights for over two decades, working to protect the rights of her own tribe and those of Indigenous people across the Americas.

    Mitchell said, “The battle over dwindling resources has caused aggressive attacks on Indigenous rights and these workshops will provide the practical skills to create strong and effective opposition to these attacks.”

    To see a picture from this event, click here.

    Quotes

     

    “We must ask the question, which might sound naïve to those who have elaborated sophisticated arguments to justify their refusal to eliminate these terrible and terrifying weapons of mass destruction — why do they need them anyway?”

    — Nelson Mandela speaking at the United Nations General Assembly in 1998.

     

    “We are obliged by our consciences to act when we know, and we are free to do so. … As long as one nuclear bomb or energy facility exists, all of life remains its potential victim.”

    — Sister Megan Rice, in an email interview from prison with Global Security Newswire.

     

    “Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.”

    — Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. This quote appears in the book Speaking of Peace: Quotations to Inspire Action, edited by NAPF President David Krieger.

    Editorial Team

    Scott Berzon David Krieger Carol Warner Rick Wayman

     

  • Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty

    Below is a link to the full text of the working draft of the Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty.

    http://fissilematerials.org/library/fmct-ipfm-sep2009.pdf

  • New START Treaty

    Below is a link to the full text of the New START Treaty:

    http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/140035.pdf

  • Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty

    Below is the link for the full text of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty:

    http://www.ctbto.org/fileadmin/content/treaty/treaty_text.pdf

  • Non-Proliferation Treaty

    The States concluding this Treaty, hereinafter referred to as the Parties to the Treaty,

    Considering the devastation that would be visited upon all mankind by a nuclear war and the consequent need to make every effort to avert the danger of such a war and to take measures to safeguard the security of peoples,

    Believing that the proliferation of nuclear weapons would seriously enhance the danger of nuclear war,

    In conformity with resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly calling for the conclusion of an agreement on the prevention of wider dissemination of nuclear weapons,

    Undertaking to co-operate in facilitating the application of International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards on peaceful nuclear activities,

    Expressing their support for research, development and other efforts to further the application, within the framework of the International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards system, of the principle of safeguarding effectively the flow of source and special fissionable materials by use of instruments and other techniques at certain strategic points,

    Affirming the principle that the benefits of peaceful applications of nuclear technology, including any technological by-products which may be derived by nuclear-weapon States from the development of nuclear explosive devices, should be available for peaceful purposes to all Parties to the Treaty, whether nuclear-weapon or non-nuclear-weapon States,

    Convinced that, in furtherance of this principle, all Parties to the Treaty are entitled to participate in the fullest possible exchange of scientific information for, and to contribute alone or in co-operation with other States to, the further development of the applications of atomic energy for peaceful purposes,

    Declaring their intention to achieve at the earliest possible date the cessation of the nuclear arms race and to undertake effective measures in the direction of nuclear disarmament,

    Urging the co-operation of all States in the attainment of this objective,

    Recalling the determination expressed by the Parties to the 1963 Treaty banning nuclear weapons tests in the atmosphere, in outer space and under water in its Preamble to seek to achieve the discontinuance of all test explosions of nuclear weapons for all time and to continue negotiations to this end,

    Desiring to further the easing of international tension and the strengthening of trust between States in order to facilitate the cessation of the manufacture of nuclear weapons, the liquidation of all their existing stockpiles, and the elimination from national arsenals of nuclear weapons and the means of their delivery pursuant to a Treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control,

    Recalling that, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, States must refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations, and that the establishment and maintenance of international peace and security are to be promoted with the least diversion for armaments of the world’s human and economic resources,

    Have agreed as follows:

    Article I

    Each nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty undertakes not to transfer to any recipient whatsoever nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices or control over such weapons or explosive devices directly, or indirectly; and not in any way to assist, encourage, or induce any non-nuclear-weapon State to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, or control over such weapons or explosive devices.

    Article II

    Each non-nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty undertakes not to receive the transfer from any transferor whatsoever of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices or of control over such weapons or explosive devices directly, or indirectly; not to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices; and not to seek or receive any assistance in the manufacture of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.

    Article III

    1. Each non-nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty undertakes to accept safeguards, as set forth in an agreement to be negotiated and concluded with the International Atomic Energy Agency in accordance with the Statute of the International Atomic Energy Agency and the Agency’s safeguards system, for the exclusive purpose of verification of the fulfilment of its obligations assumed under this Treaty with a view to preventing diversion of nuclear energy from peaceful uses to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. Procedures for the safeguards required by this Article shall be followed with respect to source or special fissionable material whether it is being produced, processed or used in any principal nuclear facility or is outside any such facility. The safeguards required by this Article shall be applied on all source or special fissionable material in all peaceful nuclear activities within the territory of such State, under its jurisdiction, or carried out under its control anywhere.

    2. Each State Party to the Treaty undertakes not to provide: (a) source or special fissionable material, or (b) equipment or material especially designed or prepared for the processing, use or production of special fissionable material, to any non-nuclear-weapon State for peaceful purposes, unless the source or special fissionable material shall be subject to the safeguards required by this Article.

    3. The safeguards required by this Article shall be implemented in a manner designed to comply with Article IV of this Treaty, and to avoid hampering the economic or technological development of the Parties or international co-operation in the field of peaceful nuclear activities, including the international exchange of nuclear material and equipment for the processing, use or production of nuclear material for peaceful purposes in accordance with the provisions of this Article and the principle of safeguarding set forth in the Preamble of the Treaty.

    4. Non-nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty shall conclude agreements with the International Atomic Energy Agency to meet the requirements of this Article either individually or together with other States in accordance with the Statute of the International Atomic Energy Agency. Negotiation of such agreements shall commence within 180 days from the original entry into force of this Treaty. For States depositing their instruments of ratification or accession after the 180-day period, negotiation of such agreements shall commence not later than the date of such deposit. Such agreements shall enter into force not later than eighteen months after the date of initiation of negotiations.

    Article IV

    1. Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty.

    2. All the Parties to the Treaty undertake to facilitate, and have the right to participate in, the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials and scientific and technological information for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Parties to the Treaty in a position to do so shall also co-operate in contributing alone or together with other States or international organizations to the further development of the applications of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, especially in the territories of non-nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty, with due consideration for the needs of the developing areas of the world.

    Article V

    Each Party to the Treaty undertakes to take appropriate measures to ensure that, in accordance with this Treaty, under appropriate international observation and through appropriate international procedures, potential benefits from any peaceful applications of nuclear explosions will be made available to non-nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty on a non-discriminatory basis and that the charge to such Parties for the explosive devices used will be as low as possible and exclude any charge for research and development. Non-nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty shall be able to obtain such benefits, pursuant to a special international agreement or agreements, through an appropriate international body with adequate representation of non-nuclear-weapon States. Negotiations on this subject shall commence as soon as possible after the Treaty enters into force. Non-nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty so desiring may also obtain such benefits pursuant to bilateral agreements.

    Article VI

    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 VII

    Nothing in this Treaty affects the right of any group of States to conclude regional treaties in order to assure the total absence of nuclear weapons in their respective territories.

    Article VIII

    1. Any Party to the Treaty may propose amendments to this Treaty. The text of any proposed amendment shall be submitted to the Depositary Governments which shall circulate it to all Parties to the Treaty. Thereupon, if requested to do so by one-third or more of the Parties to the Treaty, the Depositary Governments shall convene a conference, to which they shall invite all the Parties to the Treaty, to consider such an amendment.

    2. Any amendment to this Treaty must be approved by a majority of the votes of all the Parties to the Treaty, including the votes of all nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty and all other Parties which, on the date the amendment is circulated, are members of the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency. The amendment shall enter into force for each Party that deposits its instrument of ratification of the amendment upon the deposit of such instruments of ratification by a majority of all the Parties, including the instruments of ratification of all nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty and all other Parties which, on the date the amendment is circulated, are members of the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency. Thereafter, it shall enter into force for any other Party upon the deposit of its instrument of ratification of the amendment.

    3. Five years after the entry into force of this Treaty, a conference of Parties to the Treaty shall be held in Geneva, Switzerland, in order to review the operation of this Treaty with a view to assuring that the purposes of the Preamble and the provisions of the Treaty are being realised. At intervals of five years thereafter, a majority of the Parties to the Treaty may obtain, by submitting a proposal to this effect to the Depositary Governments, the convening of further conferences with the same objective of reviewing the operation of the Treaty.

    Article IX

    1. This Treaty shall be open to all States for signature. Any State which does not sign the Treaty before its entry into force in accordance with paragraph 3 of this Article may accede to it at any time.

    2. This Treaty shall be subject to ratification by signatory States. Instruments of ratification and instruments of accession shall be deposited with the Governments of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the United States of America, which are hereby designated the Depositary Governments.

    3. This Treaty shall enter into force after its ratification by the States, the Governments of which are designated Depositaries of the Treaty, and forty other States signatory to this Treaty and the deposit of their instruments of ratification. For the purposes of this Treaty, a nuclear-weapon State is one which has manufactured and exploded a nuclear weapon or other nuclear explosive device prior to 1 January 1967.

    4. For States whose instruments of ratification or accession are deposited subsequent to the entry into force of this Treaty, it shall enter into force on the date of the deposit of their instruments of ratification or accession.

    5. The Depositary Governments shall promptly inform all signatory and acceding States of the date of each signature, the date of deposit of each instrument of ratification or of accession, the date of the entry into force of this Treaty, and the date of receipt of any requests for convening a conference or other notices.

    6. This Treaty shall be registered by the Depositary Governments pursuant to Article 102 of the Charter of the United Nations.

    Article X

    1. Each Party shall in exercising its national sovereignty have the right to withdraw from the Treaty if it decides that extraordinary events, related to the subject matter of this Treaty, have jeopardized the supreme interests of its country. It shall give notice of such withdrawal to all other Parties to the Treaty and to the United Nations Security Council three months in advance. Such notice shall include a statement of the extraordinary events it regards as having jeopardized its supreme interests.

    2. Twenty-five years after the entry into force of the Treaty, a conference shall be convened to decide whether the Treaty shall continue in force indefinitely, or shall be extended for an additional fixed period or periods. This decision shall be taken by a majority of the Parties to the Treaty.1

    Article XI

    This Treaty, the English, Russian, French, Spanish and Chinese texts of which are equally authentic, shall be deposited in the archives of the Depositary Governments. Duly certified copies of this Treaty shall be transmitted by the Depositary Governments to the Governments of the signatory and acceding States.

    IN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned, duly authorized, have signed this Treaty.

    DONE in triplicate, at the cities of London, Moscow and Washington, the first day of July, one thousand nine hundred and sixty-eight.

  • Nelson Mandela: The United States of America is a Threat to World Peace

    Originally Published in Newsweek

    In a rare interview, the South African demands that George W. Bush win United Nations support before attacking Iraq

    Nelson Mandela, 84, may be the world’s most respected statesman. Sentenced to life in prison on desolate Robben Island in 1964 for advocating armed resistance to apartheid in South Africa, the African National Congress leader emerged in 1990 to lead his country in a transition to non-racial elections. As president, his priority was racial reconciliation; today South Africans of all races refer to him by his Xhosa clan honorific, Madiba. Mandela stepped down in 1999 after a single five-year term. He now heads two foundations focused on children. He met with NEWSWEEK’S Tom Masland early Monday morning in his office in Houghton, a Johannesburg suburb, before flying to Limpopo Province to address traditional leaders on the country’s AIDS crisis.

    Excerpts:

    NEWSWEEK: Why are you speaking out on Iraq? Do you want to mediate, as you tried to on the Mideast a couple of years ago? It seems you are reentering the fray now.

    NELSON MANDELA: If I am asked, by credible organizations, to mediate, I will consider that very seriously. But a situation of this nature does not need an individual, it needs an organization like the United Nations to mediate.

    We must understand the seriousness of this situation. The United States has made serious mistakes in the conduct of its foreign affairs, which have had unfortunate repercussions long after the decisions were taken. Unqualified support of the Shah of Iran led directly to the Islamic revolution of 1979.

    Then the United States chose to arm and finance the [Islamic] mujahedin in Afghanistan instead of supporting and encouraging the moderate wing of the government of Afghanistan. That is what led to the Taliban in Afghanistan.

    But the most catastrophic action of the United States was to sabotage the decision that was painstakingly stitched together by the United Nations regarding the withdrawal of the Soviet Union from Afghanistan. If you look at those matters, you will come to the conclusion that the attitude of the United States of America is a threat to world peace. Because what [America]is saying is that if you are afraid of a veto in the Security Council, you can go outside and take action and violate the sovereignty of other countries. That is the message they are sending to the world. That must be condemned in the strongest terms. And you will notice that France, Germany Russia, China are against this decision. It is clearly a decision that is motivated by George W. Bush’s desire to please the arms and oil industries in the United tates of America. If you look at those factors, you’ll see that an individual like myself, a man who has lost power and influence, can never be a suitable mediator.

    NEWSWEEK: What about the argument that’s being made about the threat of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and Saddam’s efforts to build a nuclear weapons. After all, he has invaded other countries, he has fired missiles at Israel. On Thursday, President Bush is going to stand up in front of the United Nations and point to what he says is evidence of…

    NELSON MANDELA: SScott Ritter, a former United Nations arms inspector who is in Baghdad, has said that there is no evidence whatsoever of [development of weapons of] mass destruction. Neither Bush nor [British Prime Minister] Tony Blair has provided any evidence that such weapons exist. But what we know is that Israel has weapons of mass destruction. Nobody talks about that. Why should there be one standard for one country, especially because it is black, and another one for another country, Israel, that is white.

    NEWSWEEK: So you see this as a racial question?

    NELSON MANDELA: Well, that element is there. In fact, many people say quietly, but they don’t have the courage to stand up and say publicly, that when there were white secretary generals you didn’t find this question of the United States and Britain going out of the United Nations. But now that you’ve had black secretary generals like Boutros Boutros Ghali, like Kofi Annan, they do not respect the United Nations. They have contempt for it. This is not my view, but that is what is being said by many people.

    NEWSWEEK: What kind of compromise can you see that might avoid the coming confrontation?

    NELSON MANDELA: There is one compromise and one only, and that is the United Nations. If the United States and Britain go to the United Nations and the United Nations says we have concrete evidence of the existence of these weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and we feel that we must do something about it, we would all support it.

    NEWSWEEK: Do you think that the Bush administration’s U.N. diplomatic effort now is genuine, or is the President just looking for political cover by speaking to the U.N. even as he remains intent on forging ahead unilaterally?

    NELSON MANDELA: Well, there is no doubt that the United States now feels that they are the only superpower in the world and they can do what they like. And of course we must consider the men and the women around the president. Gen. Colin Powell commanded the United States army in peacetime and in wartime during the Gulf war. He knows the disastrous effect of international tension and war, when innocent people are going to die, young men are going to die. He knows and he showed this after September 11 last year. He went around briefing the allies of the United States of America and asking for their support for the war in Afghanistan. But people like Dick Cheney’s I see yesterday there was an article that said he is the real president of the United States of America, I don’t know how true that is. Dick Cheney, [Defense secretary Donald] Rumsfeld, they are people who are unfortunately misleading the president. Because my impression of the president is that this is a man with whom you can do business. But it is the men who around him who are dinosaurs, who do not want him to belong to the modern age. The only man, the only person who wants to help Bush move to the modern era is Gen. Colin Powell, the secretary of State.

    NEWSWEEK: I gather you are particularly concerned about Vice President Cheney?

    NELSON MANDELA: Well, there is no doubt. He opposed the decision to release me from prison (laughs). The majority of the U.S. Congress was in favor of my release, and he opposed it. But it’s not because of that. Quite clearly we are dealing with an arch-conservative in Dick Cheney.

    NEWSWEEK: I’m interested in your decision to speak out now about Iraq. When you left office, you said, “I’m going to go down to Transkei, and have a rest.” Now maybe that was a joke at the time. But you’ve been very active.

    NELSON MANDELA: I really wanted to retire and rest and spend more time with my children, my grandchildren and of course with my wife. But the problems are such that for anybody with a conscience who can use whatever influence he may have to try to bring about peace, it’s difficult to say no.

  • Draft of U.N. Security Council Resolution on Nuclear Nonproliferation and Nuclear Disarmament

    United States Draft
    UNSC Resolution on Nuclear Nonproliferation and Nuclear Disarmament
    The Security Council,
    PP1. Resolving to seek a safer world for all and to create the conditions for a world without nuclear weapons, in accordance with the goals of the Treaty on the Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), in a way that promotes international stability, and based on the principle of undiminished security for all,
    PP2. Reaffirming the Statement of its President adopted at the Council’s meeting at the level of Heads of State and Government on 31 January 1992 (S/23500), including the need for all Member States to fulfill their obligations in relation to arms control and disarmament and to prevent proliferation in all its aspects of all weapons of mass destruction,
    PP3. Recalling also that the above Statement (S/23500) underlined the need for all Member States to resolve peacefully in accordance with the Charter any problems in that context threatening or disrupting the maintenance of regional and global stability,
    PP4. Bearing in mind the responsibilities of other organs of the United Nations in the field of disarmament, arms control and nonproliferation, and supporting them to continue to play their due roles,
    PP5. Underlining that the NPT remains the cornerstone of the nuclear non-proliferation regime and the essential foundation for the pursuit of nuclear disarmament and for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, and calling upon all States Parties to the NPT to cooperate so that the 2010 NPT Review Conference can successfully strengthen the Treaty and set realistic and achievable goals in all the Treaty’s three pillars: non-proliferation, the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, and disarmament,
    PP6. Reaffirming its firm commitment to the NPT and its conviction that the international nuclear non-proliferation regime should be maintained and strengthened to ensure its effective implementation,
    PP7. Calling for further progress on all aspects of disarmament to enhance global security,
    PP8. Welcoming the decisions of those non-nuclear-weapon States that have dismantled their nuclear weapons programs or renounced the possession of nuclear weapons,
    PP9. Welcoming the nuclear arms reduction and disarmament efforts undertaken and accomplished by nuclear-weapon States, and underlining the need to pursue further efforts in the sphere of nuclear disarmament, in accordance with Article VI of the NPT,
    PP10. Welcoming in this connection the decision of the Russian Federation and the United States of America to conduct negotiations to conclude a new comprehensive legally binding agreement to replace the Treaty on the Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms, which expires in December 2009,
    PP11. Welcoming and supporting the steps taken to conclude nuclear-weapon-free zone treaties and reaffirming the conviction that the establishment of internationally recognized nuclear-weapon-free zones on the basis of arrangements freely arrived at among the States of the region concerned, and in accordance with the 1999 UN Disarmament Commission guidelines, enhances global and regional peace and security, strengthens the nuclear nonproliferation regime, and contributes toward realizing the objectives of nuclear disarmament,
    PP12. Recalling the statements by each of the five nuclear-weapon States, noted by resolution 984 (1995), in which they give security assurances against the use of nuclear weapons to non-nuclear-weapon State Parties to the NPT, and reaffirming that such security assurances strengthen the nuclear nonproliferation regime,

    PP13. Reaffirming its resolutions 825 (1993), 1695 (2006), 1718 (2006), 1874 (2009),
    PP14. Reaffirming its resolutions 1696 (2006), 1737 (2006), 1747 (2007), 1803 (2008), 1835 (2008),
    PP15. Reaffirming all other relevant non-proliferation resolutions adopted by the Security Council,
    PP16. Gravely concerned about the threat of nuclear terrorism, including the provision of nuclear material or technical assistance for the purposes of terrorism,
    PP17. Mindful in this context of the risk that irresponsible or unlawful provision of nuclear material or technical assistance could enable terrorism,
    PP18. Expressing its support for the 2010 Global Summit on Nuclear Security,
    PP19. Affirming its support for the Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism,
    PP20. Recognizing the progress made by the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism, and the G-8 Global Partnership,
    PP21. Reaffirming UNSC Resolution 1540 (2004) and the necessity for all States to implement fully the measures contained therein, and calling upon all UN Member States and international and regional organizations to cooperate actively with the Committee established pursuant to that resolution, including in the course of the comprehensive review as called for in resolution 1810 (2008),

    1. Emphasizes that a situation of noncompliance with nonproliferation obligations shall be brought to the attention of the Security Council, which will determine if that situation constitutes a threat to international peace and security, and emphasizes the Security Council’s primary responsibility in addressing such threats;
    2. Calls upon States Parties to the NPT to comply fully with all their obligations under the Treaty, and in this regard notes that enjoyment of the benefits of the NPT by a State Party can be assured only by its compliance with the obligations thereunder;
    3. Calls upon all States that are not Parties to the Treaty on the Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) to join the Treaty so as to achieve its universality at an early date, and in any case to adhere to its terms;
    4 Calls upon the Parties to the NPT, pursuant to Article VI of the Treaty, to undertake to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to nuclear arms reduction and disarmament, and on a Treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control, and calls on all other States to join in this endeavor;
    5. Calls upon all States to refrain from conducting a nuclear test explosion and to join the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), thereby bringing the treaty into force;
    6. Calls upon the Conference on Disarmament to negotiate a Treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices as soon as possible, and welcomesthe Conference on Disarmament’s adoption by consensus of its Program of Work in 2009;

    7. Deplores in particular the current major challenges to the nonproliferation regime that the Security Council has determined to be threats to international peace and security, and demands that the parties concerned comply fully with their obligations under the relevant Security Council resolutions,

    8. Encourages efforts to advance development of peaceful uses of nuclear energy in a framework that reduces proliferation risk and adheres to the highest international standards for safeguards, security, and safety;

    9. Underlines that the NPT recognizes in Article IV the right of the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I , II and III of the Treaty;

    10. Calls upon States to adopt stricter national controls for the export of sensitive goods and technologies of the nuclear fuel cycle;

    11. Encourages the work of the IAEA on multilateral approaches to the nuclear fuel cycle, including assurances of nuclear fuel supply and related measures, as effective means of addressing the expanding need for nuclear fuel and nuclear fuel services and minimizing the risk of proliferation, and urges the IAEA Board of Governors to agree upon measures to this end as soon as possible;
    12. Affirms that effective IAEA safeguards are essential to prevent nuclear proliferation and to facilitate cooperation in the field of peaceful uses of nuclear energy, and in that regard:
    a. Calls upon all non-nuclear-weapon States party to the NPT that have yet to bring into force a comprehensive safeguards agreement or a modified small quantities protocol to do so immediately,
    b. Calls upon all States to adopt and implement an Additional Protocol, which together with comprehensive safeguards agreements constitute essential elements of the IAEA safeguards system,
    c. Stresses the importance for all Member States to ensure that the IAEA continue to have all the necessary resources and authority to verify the declared use of nuclear materials and facilities and the absence of undeclared activities, and for the IAEA to report to the Council accordingly as appropriate;
    13. Encourages States to provide the IAEA with the cooperation necessary for it to verify whether a state is in compliance with its safeguards obligations, and affirms the Security Council’s resolve to support the IAEA’s efforts to that end, consistent with its authorities under the Charter;
    14. Undertakes to address without delay any State’s notice of withdrawal from the NPT, including the events described in the statement provided by the State pursuant to Article X of the Treaty, while recognizing ongoing discussions in the course of the NPT review on identifying modalities under which NPT States Parties could collectively respond to notification of withdrawal, and affirmsthat a State remains responsible under international law for violations of the NPT committed prior to its withdrawal;
    15. Encourages States to require as a condition of nuclear exports that the recipient State agree that, in the event that it should terminate, withdraw from, or be found by the IAEA Board of Governors to be in noncompliance with its IAEA safeguards agreement or withdraw from the NPT, the supplier state would have a right to require the return of nuclear material and equipment provided prior to such termination, noncompliance or withdrawal, as well as any special nuclear material produced through the use of such material or equipment;
    16. Encourages States to consider whether a recipient State has in place an Additional Protocol in making nuclear export decisions;
    17. Urges States to require as a condition of nuclear exports that the recipient State agree that, in the event that it should terminate its IAEA safeguards agreement, safeguards shall continue with respect to any nuclear material and equipment provided prior to such withdrawal, as well as any special nuclear material produced through the use of such material or equipment;
    18. Calls for universal adherence to the Convention on Physical Protection of Nuclear Materials and its 2005 Amendment;
    19. Welcomes the March 2009 recommendations of the Security Council Committee established pursuant to resolution 1540 (2004) to make more effective use of existing funding mechanisms, including the consideration of the establishment of a voluntary fund, and affirms its commitment to promote full implementation of UNSCR 1540 by Member States by ensuring effective and sustainable support for the activities of the 1540 Committee;
    20. Reaffirms the need for full implementation of UNSCR 1540 (2004) by Member States and, with an aim of preventing access to, or assistance and financing for, weapons of mass destruction, related materials and their means of delivery by non-State actors, as defined in the resolution, and calls upon Member States to cooperate actively with the Committee established pursuant to that resolution and the IAEA, including rendering assistance, at their request, for their implementation of UNSCR 1540 provisions, and in this context welcomes the forthcoming comprehensive review of the status of implementation of UNSCR 1540 with a view to increasing its effectiveness, and calls upon all States to participate actively in this review;
    21. Calls upon Member States to share best practices with a view to improved safety standards and nuclear security practices and raise standards of nuclear security to reduce the risk of nuclear terrorism, with the aim of securing all vulnerable nuclear material from such risks within four years;
    22. Calls upon all States to manage responsibly and minimize to the greatest extent that is technically and economically feasible the use of highly enriched uranium for civilian purposes, including by working to convert research reactors and radioisotope production processes to the use of low enriched uranium fuels and targets;
    23. Calls upon all States to improve their national technical capabilities to detect, deter, and disrupt illicit trafficking in nuclear materials throughout their territories, and to work to enhance international partnerships and capacity building in this regard;
    24. Urges all States to take all appropriate national measures in accordance with their national authorities and legislation, and consistent with international law, to prevent proliferation financing, shipments, or illicit trafficking, to strengthen export controls, to secure sensitive materials, and to control access to intangible transfers of technology;
    25. Declares its resolve to monitor closely any situations involving the proliferation of nuclear weapons, their means of delivery or related material, including to or by non-State actors as they are defined in resolution 1540 (2004), and, as appropriate, to take such measures as may be necessary to ensure the maintenance of international peace and security;
    26. Decides to remain seized of the matter.

    US President Barack Obama will chair a special meeting of the UN Security Council on September 24 to discuss nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation.
  • Dr. Helen Caldicott: Implications of Fukushima

    Dr. Helen Caldicott: Implications of Fukushima

    Dr. Helen Caldicott spoke at an event in Santa Barbara, California, sponsored by the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation on the medical implications of nuclear weapons and Fukushima. The video of this event is below.

     

  • Todos tenemos un papel que desempeñar

    David Krieger


    Click here for the English version.


    Las armas nucleares son dispositivos que cambian el juego. Son más que armas. Son artefactos aniquiladores, capaces de causar daños catastróficos a ciudades y países. Ellas tienen el poder destructivo de llevar la civilización al borde del desastre.  Podrían causar la extinción de la mayor parte o toda la vida compleja en el planeta.


    Uno de los grandes líderes morales de nuestro tiempo, el arzobispo Desmond Tutu, escribió: “Las armas nucleares son una obscenidad. Son la antítesis misma de la humanidad, de la bondad en este mundo. ¿Cuál es la seguridad que ayudan a establecer? ¿Qué tipo de comunidad mundial estamos realmente tratando de construir cuando hay naciones que poseen y amenazan con usar armas que pueden aniquilar a toda la humanidad en un instante? “


    Las armas nucleares amagan el futuro mismo de la humanidad. Ellas son inmorales e ilegales. Causan daño indiscriminado y sufrimiento innecesario. Sus efectos no pueden contenerse ni en el tiempo ni el espacio. Su existencia exige una inmediata respuesta de nuestra parte. Tenemos que unirnos, como nunca antes, para protegernos contra esta amenaza tecnológica de nuestra propia fabricación o enfrentar las terribles consecuencias.


    Sin embargo, usted puede preguntar, ¿qué puedo hacer?


    En primer lugar,  tomar en serio la amenaza y reconocer que su propia participación puede hacer la diferencia. Esto no es un tema que se puede dejar sólo a los líderes políticos. Después de lidiar con ello durante más de dos tercios de siglo, el peligro sigue latente.


    En segundo lugar, unirse con otros en el trabajo por un mundo más pacífico y libre de armas nucleares.  Las voces de los ciudadanos pueden hacer la diferencia, y agregarse a esas voces significa una diferencia aún mayor. Los ciudadanos tienen que ponerse de pie y hablar como si el futuro dependiera de lo que dicen y hacen, porque así es.


    La Nuclear Age Peace Foundation ofrece muchas formas de amplificar las voces de los ciudadanos. Creemos que el camino hacia un mundo libre de armas nucleares se encuentra a través del liderazgo de Estados Unidos y el camino hacia ese liderazgo es a través de una ciudadanía activa y participativa. Usted puede estar al día con nuestro boletín electrónico mensual Sunflower y puede participar haciendo presión para el cambio a través de nuestra Red de Alerta de Acción.


    En tercer lugar, convirtiéndose en un líder de paz, en alguien que tiene esperanza y cree en la paz. Nunca perder la esperanza, y trabajar activamente para construir un mundo más pacífico. Vivir con compasión, compromiso, valor y creatividad. Haciendo su parte para construir un mundo que podamos estar orgullosos de heredar a nuestros hijos y nietos y a todos los niños del futuro, un hermoso planeta libre de la amenaza de la aniquilación nuclear.


    Si usted es un pintor, pinte. Si es un escritor, escriba Si usted es un cantante, cante. Si usted es un simple ciudadano, participe. Encuentre una manera de dar sus talentos para edificar un mundo mejor en el que la amenaza de la guerra y la devastación nuclear no penda sobre nuestro futuro común – un mundo en el que se alivien la pobreza y el hambre, los niños sean educados, los derechos humanos  respetados, y el medioambiente esté protegido. Estos son los grandes desafíos de nuestro tiempo y cada uno de nosotros tiene un papel importante que desempeñar.