Nuclear Age Peace Foundation

Category: Nuclear Abolition

NAPF and SGI: Working Together for a Nuclear Weapon-Free World
On March 25, 2014, a delegation from Soka Gakkai International (SGI) visited the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation’s headquarters in Santa Barbara, California, for a discussion and strategy meeting. Many of the participants in the meeting were from the youth division of Soka Gakkai Japan.

One of the main things we discussed during the meeting was the SOKA Global Action plan, which has three objectives:
- Advance the culture of peace and the abolition of nuclear weapons;
- Strengthen ties of friendship within Asia through cultural exchanges;
- Further SGI’s reconstruction efforts following the Great East Japan earthquake.
The point that came across most strongly was a plan to hold a youth summit for nuclear weapons abolition in Hiroshima in 2015, around the 70th anniversary of the U.S. atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This idea was proposed in SGI President Daisaku Ikeda’s 2014 Peace Proposal, as well as in NAPF President David Krieger’s speech to the Student Movement for Nuclear Disarmament at Soka University of America in November 2013.

NAPF and SGI will continue to work together closely for a world free of nuclear weapons, including at the upcoming Non-Proliferation Treaty Preparatory Committee meetings in New York, starting on April 28.
April 4, 2014
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.

There is no defense against nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons are a technological spear against which there is no shield. Without defense, there is only nuclear deterrence, the threat of massive nuclear retaliation against innocent people. But such retaliation is not defense; it is retaliatory vengeance, pure and simple.

Nuclear deterrence requires rational leaders. A rational political leader would be unlikely to use nuclear weapons if he understood that the consequences might be a retaliatory nuclear strike on his country. But not all leaders behave rationally at all times and under all conditions. In fact, some leaders behave irrationally much of the time. Would you gamble on humanity’s future resting solely on the rational behavior of all political leaders of all nuclear-armed countries at all times?

Accidents happen. Human beings are fallible creatures, and their technological creations are not impervious to serious error. Powerful examples of mixing human fallibility with technological imperfection have occurred with accidents at nuclear power plants, including at Three Mile Island in the United States, Chernobyl in the former Soviet Union and Fukushima Dai-ichi in Japan. There have been many false alarms and near disasters with nuclear weapons as well, involving the weapons inadvertently falling from US bombers and being in plane crashes, coming very near to catastrophic nuclear detonations. The Department of Defense has put out a report listing 32 serious nuclear accidents from 1950 to 1980. It confirms that accidents with nuclear weapons do happen and that the world has been very fortunate that such accidents have not resulted in serious nuclear detonations.

Perfection is an impossible standard. The US intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) force tries to maintain perfection as its standard. As a result, a culture has developed in which young officers cheat on their examinations, take drugs and cover up for the lax standards of other officers. The head of the US ICBM force was recently fired from his post for drunkenness and cavorting with Russian women on an official trip to Moscow.

Possession encourages proliferation. When some countries maintain possession of nuclear weapons and base their military strategies on those weapons, surely that provides an incentive for the proliferation of nuclear weapons to other countries. There are few expert analysts who would argue that nuclear proliferation is a global good (even though some experts would argue for almost anything). The United States, United Kingdom and Soviet Union originally negotiated and promoted the Non-Proliferation Treaty to try to prevent other countries from developing or acquiring nuclear arsenals. In the treaty, though, these nuclear weapon states, and others who later became parties to the treaty (France and China), agreed to level the playing field by pursuing negotiations in good faith for a cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and for nuclear disarmament. Because “an early date” has long since passed and because these countries are continuing to modernize their nuclear arsenals and because there are no multilateral negotiations for nuclear disarmament taking place, many countries believe the five NPT nuclear weapon states are not acting in good faith. These conditions are ripe for nuclear proliferation.

Nuclear arsenals are extremely costly. The nine nuclear weapon states plan to spend more than $1 trillion in the next decade on maintaining and modernizing their nuclear arsenals. The United States alone plans to spend $1 trillion in the next 30 years on its nuclear arsenal. These extraordinarily large sums could be far better used for alleviating poverty in the countries possessing nuclear weapons and throughout the world. Nuclear weapons are Cold War relics that endanger all complex life on the planet and deserve to be dismantled and to rust in peace. Surely, we can put humanity’s resources and brain power to better use than perfecting the means of our own annihilation.

They are a coward’s weapon. Nuclear weapons are long-distance killing devices that make cowards of their possessors. There is nothing about them that is soldierly or brave. They can be used only to threaten annihilation or to cause it. This is a likely contributing factor, along with boredom and lack of career advancement opportunities, to the widely reported low morale among Air Force missile launch officers.

Their threat or use would be a crime against humanity. Under international humanitarian law, there are limitations to what force can be used in warfare. Weapons that kill indiscriminately, cause unnecessary suffering or are disproportionate to a prior attack are prohibited. Committing a crime against humanity is punishable criminally under international law. Just as the Nazi leaders were held to account for crimes against humanity at Nuremberg after World War II, those who threaten or use nuclear weapons should also be subject to criminal accountability.

Given that nukes are nuts, steps should be undertaken urgently to assure that nuclear weapons are never used again – by accident, miscalculation or design. Article VI of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and customary international law require the pursuit of negotiations in good faith for nuclear disarmament in all its aspects. These negotiations should commence immediately and take the form of a new international treaty, similar to the Chemical Weapons Convention and the Biological Weapons Convention. It would be a Nuclear Weapons Convention, a treaty to achieve Nuclear Zero by means of the phased, verifiable, irreversible and transparent elimination of nuclear weapons. The sooner such a treaty is negotiated and implemented, the safer all humanity will be.

This article was originally published by Truthout. David Krieger is President of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation.

March 26, 2014
Lucky Dragon Crewmember Speaks in Marshall Islands

Mr. President, distinguished guests and ladies and gentlemen,

I am very happy to be here with the Marshallese victims in the 60th anniversary of the Bravo shot. I thank you very much for giving me this opportunity to speak before you.

My name is Matashichi Oishi, former crewmember of the Japanese fishing boat, Fifth Lucky Dragon. Sixty years ago, we were catching tuna at about 160 kilometers to the east of Bikini Atoll, Marshall Islands.

On the morning of March 1, 1954, the U.S. military conducted a hydrogen bomb test at Bikini Atoll. The destructive power of the bomb was enormous. It is said to be 1,000 times greater than the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima. Not only our boat but about 1,000 Japanese fishing boats were exposed to the deadly fallout from the bomb. After the explosion with brilliant flash, frightening sound and a red fire ball going up to the sky, massive white powder fell on us. Our heads and bodies were covered with it. The white powder was not hot. Nor it had any smell or taste, so we did not feel any danger at that time. But around the evening of that day, all crewmembers fell sick, having headache, dizziness, nausea or diarrhea. Some of them were ill in bed.

It was only after some time that we learned the white powder contained strong radiation. We had no knowledge about radiation at that time. The white powder stuck on our heads or got into our underwear. As it accumulated on the boat, footsteps were marked on the deck after we walked on it. After a couple of days, blisters developed on our skin. It was actually the burns caused by radiation. After a period of one week to 10 days, our hair began to come off. Such strange symptoms appeared one after another on our bodies. We talked each other on the boat, “Let us not talk about this even after going home. If it is known to the United States, something terrible will happen. We may be used as guinea pigs for scientific tests.”

Due to the exposure to the fallout, 16 out of 23 crewmembers have died in the prime of life in their 40s or 50s. My first child was deformed and stillborn. I have suffered from liver cancer and had an operation. At present, I am suffering from bronchitis, irregular heartbeat, diabetes, high blood pressure, atrial fibrillation and lung tumor. Two years ago, I had brain hemorrhage, which left paralysis on the right side of my body. Now I have lost the sense of smell and am barely surviving, taking more than 20 kinds of medicine. Many fishermen who encountered the H-bomb test have died without knowing that they were internally irradiated.

The government of Japan, rather than claiming compensation for the enormous damage suffered by the fishing communities or fishermen, received only a meager amount of consolation payment from the US. In return, behind the scenes, Japan made deals with the U.S. government to receive the provision of its nuclear technology and nuclear reactors. That was the start of nuclear power generation in Japan.

Since around 1985, I have spoken before junior and senior high school students more than 700 times to make them known about the danger of radiation and internal exposure.

Internal exposure, though invisible, is life-threatening and dangerous. This danger still persists in Rongelap and the Marshall Islands. A report of the US National Cancer Institute has estimated that more and more Marshallese people will develop cancers. In addition to fallout from nuclear testing which covered the earth, nuclear plant accidents took place in Three Mile Islands, Chernobyl and Fukushima, inflicting severe damage and contamination on local people and the world over. When I see an increase of cancer patients, I suspect that radiation effects may be one of the causes of this situation.

It was reported that the total amount of radiation released into the ocean since the accident of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant amounts to 27,000 trillion Bq as of September last year. I hear that even now, 400 tons of contaminated groundwater is flowing into the ocean. The Bikini test contaminated the ocean, and the same thing is happening now. As a former fisherman, I am concerned about radiation effects on the marine life near Japan and in the Pacific. Both the Marshall Islands and Japan are ocean nations. We must keep our ocean clean and safe.

Ten years ago, together with John Anjain, late Rongelap mayor, I visited his home island Rongelap. John told me a lot about the old days on the island. I especially remember the story about his son, Lekoj. I felt his deep sorrow as a father to lose a 19-year-old son, who used to be as strong and happy as anyone else. Sadly, his death was followed by many more deaths and sufferings. The United States should reveal all the facts on the damage and effects of nuclear testing and take responsibility for them. I will continue to call on the US to fulfill its responsibility to the end. Just one month and a half since that time, I was informed of his death. He died of cancer. My heart broke at the news.

Many of the people in the Marshall Islands greatly suffered from nuclear arms race, which was carried on for producing powerful weapons to fight. I call on the leaders of nuclear weapon states to reflect on their folly. Give justice to the victims. Those responsible for nuclear damage must make compensation to them. I firmly oppose both nuclear weapons and nuclear power.

March 1, 2014
Nuclear Victims Remembrance Day

Yasuyoshi Komizo, Chairperson of the Hiroshima Peace Culture Foundation, delivered this speech in the Marshall Islands on March 1, 2014, as part of Nuclear Victims Remembrance Day.

Dear Friends,

First of all, on behalf of the citizens and city of Hiroshima, I would like to reiterate our profound gratitude to H.E. Mr. Christopher J. Loeak, President of the Republic of the Marshall Islands, for his recent visit to Hiroshima on 15 and 16 February 2014. President Loeak visited Hiroshima despite the heavy snow storm that forced commercial flights to be cancelled. We are deeply moved and profoundly grateful for the strong sense of commitment to peace and humanitarian solidarity expressed by President Loeak not only by his words but also by his deeds.

During his visit to Hiroshima, an invitation was made to our city to participate in this important event here in Majuro to mark the 60th anniversary of the Castle Bravo nuclear test. The City of Hiroshima accepted this kind invitation with honor and gratitude, because we share the memory of the indescribable horror of the inhumane consequences of nuclear weapons; we share the painful loss of loved ones; we share the deep pains of devastation and loss of our beloved homes and community we cherished so much. And above all, we share the unshakable will to reconstruct our society, culture, economy and environment. We have never lost our human dignity and strong bonds of humanity. We shall continue to work together with you toward building a peaceful world without nuclear weapons.

At 8:15 on August 6, 1945, the first atomic bomb in the history of mankind was dropped on human population in Hiroshima. In a moment, the entire city was reduced to ruins, and 140,000 precious lives were lost.

Even for survivors, lives were permanently altered. Under harsh, painful circumstances, the “hibakusha“, atomic bomb survivors, have struggled with anger, hatred, grief and other agonizing emotions. Suffering with aftereffects, over and over they cried, “I want to be healthy. Can’t I just lead a normal life?” The suffering of the hibakusha continues to this day almost 70 years later, while Hiroshima has become known as the city of water and greenery with a population of over 1,180,000. To the eyes of the hibakusha, the nuclear weapon is the ultimate inhumane weapon and an absolute evil.

Having lived through unimaginable sufferings, the hibakusha have arrived at their profound humanitarian conviction that “no one should ever again suffer as we have.” Based firmly on this conviction, they have earnestly been appealing for the realization of a peaceful world without nuclear weapons. They plead that every person, without distinction, has a right to live a good life. We shall all work together to create peace.

Even with the average age surpassing 78, the hibakusha have never ceased promoting this humanitarian appeal for peace. This is remarkable because it is not a message of revenge, but a very important unifying call of deeply humanitarian nature. This precious and powerful message should be solemnly shared by all of us who live in today’s world. And I believe that it has a special significance as a rich source of inspiration to the youth who are about to build the future world in their own vision and efforts.

In order to create a rising tide of humanitarian efforts toward building a peaceful world without nuclear weapons, the mayors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki took initiatives to establish Mayors for Peace in 1982. Current membership has expanded to over 5,900 cities with the total population of approximately 1 billion citizens in 158 countries and regions, including Majuro and Bikini Atoll. As a group of mayors with a strong sense of responsibility to guarantee the safety and welfare of citizens, Mayors for Peace has inscribed deep in their heart the spirit of Hiroshima and Nagasaki for peace and is aiming for nuclear abolition by 2020.

As Secretary General of Mayors for Peace, I welcome that the world community is finally focusing on the harshly inhumane reality of nuclear weapons, and discussion is proceeding also at the governmental level. As a concrete step towards the nuclear abolition, Mayors for Peace is campaigning for a nuclear weapons convention. We also acknowledge various other approaches and measures for nuclear disarmament as they are complementary. We also place high priority on raising awareness for peace across a wide range of civil society, because it creates a sound basis for world leaders to take bold steps for peace.

From the standpoint of humanity, we appeal to all our fellow human beings that we shall never again allow nuclear weapons to be used. The only secure way to prevent the use of nuclear weapons is to abolish them. The need to achieve a world without nuclear weapons that will be sustainable over the long term compels us to build a society in which mutual distrust and threats are replaced by a shared sense of community, rooted in an awareness that we all belong to the same human family. In such a society, diversity will be treasured and disputes will be resolved through peaceful means. The road to this goal may be long and difficult, but it is certainly achievable, and we must proceed with determination. This sense of global community can support a new type of reliable international security, doing away with the threat based “nuclear deterrence” and will ultimately become the basis for lasting world peace. In this process to be free from the danger of nuclear weapons use, we ask world leaders to put in place concrete policies, frameworks and confidence-building measures to promote international and regional peace and security.

On our part, we shall spare no effort to work together with you towards the realization of a peaceful world without nuclear weapons. Equally, whatever the source of radiation may be, we must do everything we can to prevent any more hibakusha anywhere.

Lastly, I sincerely pray for the citizens of this beautiful part of the world, who have experienced unthinkable hardship through the aftermath of nuclear weapons tests, to enjoy a peaceful life more than anyone and anywhere else – one of compassionate human spirit, robust health, dynamic culture, and filled with smiling faces of neighbors who live in harmony.

Thank you very much!

March 1, 2014
Wake Up!

The alarm is sounding.
Can you hear it?

Can you hear the bells
of Nagasaki
ringing out for peace?

Can you feel the heartbeat
of Hiroshima
pulsing out for life?

The survivors of Hiroshima
and Nagasaki
are growing older.

Their message is clear:
Never again!

Wake up!
Now, before the feathered arrow
is placed into the bow.

Now, before the string
of the bow is pulled taut,
the arrow poised for flight.

Now, before the arrow is let loose,
before it flies across oceans
and continents.

Now, before we are engulfed in flames,
while there is still time, while we still can,
Wake up!

December 31, 2013
Nuclear Zero: The Necessary Number

This article is the introduction to the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation’s Annual Report.

In 1945 the first nuclear weapon was tested and, within weeks, the next two nuclear weapons were used by the United States on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

By 1986 there were over 70,000 nuclear weapons in the world, nearly all in the arsenals of the US and USSR.

Today there are just over 17,000 nuclear weapons in the world,

which means that, since the mid-1980s, the world has shed some 50,000 nuclear weapons. That’s progress, but it’s far from sufficient.

There are still some 2,000 nuclear weapons on hair-trigger alert in the US and Russian arsenals. These weapons are accidents waiting to happen.

Atmospheric scientists tell us that, in a regional nuclear war between India and Pakistan in which 50 nuclear weapons from each side were exploded on the other side’s cities, enough soot would be put into the stratosphere to block warming sunlight, shorten growing seasons, and cause crop failures leading to a billion deaths by starvation globally. Nuclear famine is only part of the havoc that a “small” nuclear war would cause.

Zero is the only safe number of nuclear weapons on the planet. It is what the human future requires of us. For the sake of the seven billion inhabitants of our planet, for everyone who matters to each of us, for everything that matters to each of us, we must strive for and achieve Nuclear Zero.

Another necessary number is One, because each one of us has the power to make a difference with our voice, our actions and our support. When a dedicated portion of the seven billion Ones on the planet are joined together and motivated, they can achieve any great and necessary goal, including Nuclear Zero.

At the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, we are committed to providing Peace Leadership that emphasizes the Power of One in achieving Nuclear Zero.

December 12, 2013
Two Billion at Risk: The Threat of Limited Nuclear War

This article was originally published by Common Dreams.

As physicians we spend our professional lives applying scientific facts to the health and well being of our patients. When it comes to public health threats like TB, polio, cholera, AIDS and others where there is no cure, our aim is to prevent what we cannot cure. It is our professional, ethical and moral obligation to educate and speak out on these issues.

That said, the greatest imminent existential threat to human survival is potential of global nuclear war. We have long known that the consequences of large scale nuclear war could effectively end human existence on the planet. Yet there are more than 17,000 nuclear warheads in the world today with over 95% controlled by the U.S. and Russia. The international community is intent on preventing Iran from developing even a single nuclear weapon. And while appropriate to stop the spread of nuclear weapons, there is precious little effort being spent on the much larger and more critical problem of these arsenals.

Despite the Cold War mentality of the U.S. and Russia with their combined arsenals and a reliance on shear luck that a nuclear war is not started by accident, intent or cyber attack, we now know that the planet is threatened by a limited regional nuclear war which is a much more real possibility.

A report released Tuesday by the Nobel Laureate International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War and its US counterpart Physicians for Social Responsibility documents in fact the humanitarian consequences of such a limited nuclear war. Positing a conflict in South Asia between India and Pakistan, involving just 100 Hiroshima sized bombs— less than 0.5% of the world’s nuclear arsenal— would put two billion people’s health and well being at risk. The local effects would be devastating. More than 20 million people would be dead in a week from the explosions, firestorms and immediate radiation effects. But the global consequences would be far worse.

The firestorms caused by this war would loft 5 million tons of soot high into the atmosphere, blocking out sunlight and dropping temperatures across the planet. This climate disruption would cause a sharp, worldwide decline in food production. There would be a 12% decline in US corn production and a 15% decline in Chinese rice production, both lasting for a full decade. A staggering 31% decline in Chinese winter wheat production would also last for 10 years.

The resulting global famine would put at risk 870 million people in the developing world who are already malnourished today, and 300 million people living in countries dependent on food imports. In addition, the huge shortfalls in Chinese food production would threaten another 1.3 billion people within China. At the very least there would be a decade of social and economic chaos in the largest country in the world, home to the world’s second largest and most dynamic economy and a large nuclear arsenal of its own.

A nuclear war of comparable size anywhere in the world would produce the same global impact. By way of comparison, each US Trident submarine commonly carries 96 warheads each of which is ten to thirty times more powerful than the weapons used in the South Asia scenario. That means that a single submarine can cause the devastation of a nuclear famine many times over. The US has 14 of these submarines, plus land based missiles and a fleet of strategic bombers. The Russian arsenal has the same incredible overkill capacity. Two decades after the Cold War, nuclear weapons are ill suited to meet modern threats and cost hundreds of billions of dollars to maintain.

Fueled in part by a growing understanding of these humanitarian consequences of nuclear war, there is today a growing global movement to prevent such a catastrophe. In 2011, the International Red Cross and Red Crescent movement called for its national societies to educate the public about these humanitarian consequences and called for the abolition of nuclear weapons. Seventeen nations issued a Joint Statement in May 2012 on the Humanitarian Impact of Nuclear Weapons that called for their total elimination. By this fall the number rose to 125 nations.

The international community should continue to take practical steps to prevent additional countries from acquiring nuclear weapons. But, this effort to prevent proliferation must be matched by real progress to eliminate the far greater danger posed by the vast arsenals that already exist.

Simply put, the only way to eliminate the threat of nuclear war or risk of an accidental launch or mishap is to eliminate nuclear weapons. This past year the majority of the world’s nations attended a two-day conference in Oslo on the humanitarian consequences of nuclear war. The United States and the other major nuclear powers boycotted this meeting. There will be an important follow up meeting in Mexico in February. It is time for us to lead the nuclear weapons states by example in attending this meeting and by embracing the call to eliminate nuclear weapons.

December 12, 2013
Some Thoughts on the 2013 Nagasaki Appeal

The Fifth Nagasaki Global Citizens’ Assembly for the Elimination of Nuclear Weapons was held November 2-4, 2013 in Nagasaki. Citizens of Nagasaki continued their tradition of convening such Global Citizens’ Assemblies, which they have held every few years since the year 2000. I have been privileged to have been a participant and speaker in all five meetings as an invited guest of the city of Nagasaki, and to have participated in the drafting of all the Nagasaki Appeals.

The 2013 Nagasaki Appeal is an extraordinary document. It reflects the spirit of Nagasaki, the second of two atomic bombed cities on the planet, and the desire of its atomic bomb survivors to assure that Nagasaki remains the last city ever to suffer such a tragedy. I believe the Appeal should be read by every citizen of Earth and studied by young people everywhere. I’d like to share with you some of its highlights.

The Appeal begins with good news and bad news. It points out that over 50,000 nuclear weapons have been eliminated in the past quarter century (good news), but that 17,000 remain, only a small number of which could end civilization and most life on Earth (bad news). It expresses concerns that repeated delays by the nuclear weapons states in fulfilling their commitment to nuclear disarmament under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) “has discredited the nonproliferation regime and may destroy it.” Such a consequence would indeed be very bad news.

The Appeal takes note of the nuclear power accident at Fukushima, Japan in March 2011: “The fear and suffering of Fukushima citizens for their health and life renewed our recognition of the danger of radioactivity, whether from nuclear weapons or nuclear energy. The experiences of Fukushima and the atomic bombings of Nagasaki and Hiroshima have shown us that the effects of nuclear disasters are uncontrollable in time and space.”

Despite “daunting challenges,” the Appeal finds there are reasons for hope, among which is the renewed international attention to the devastating humanitarian consequences of the use of nuclear weapons. It also found that reliance upon nuclear deterrence for national security is “delusional,” in a world in which human security and global security are threatened by nuclear weapons.

The Appeal calls for a series of concrete actions, including commencing negotiations on the prohibition and elimination of nuclear weapons; the US and Russia taking unilateral and bilateral nuclear disarmament measures; phasing out of reliance on nuclear weapons in the security policies of all countries; having greater citizen participation in nuclear abolition campaigns; establishing new nuclear weapon-free zones; aiding the victims of Fukushima; and learning the lesson that humanity cannot continue to rely upon nuclear energy any more than it can rely upon nuclear weapons.

The Appeal also offers some specific advice to the Japanese government based upon its special responsibilities as the world’s only country to be attacked with nuclear weapons. These responsibilities include: coming out from under the US nuclear umbrella; providing leadership to achieve a nuclear weapon-free zone in Northeast Asia; demonstrating leadership for nuclear weapons abolition; and seeking and welcoming international assistance in controlling the radiological crisis at Fukushima.

The participants in the Nagasaki Global Citizens’ Assembly pledge to continue “utmost efforts to achieve a world without nuclear weapons.” It is a necessary goal for humanity and for the future. It is the great challenge that confronts all of us living on the planet in the Nuclear Age. Nagasaki is doing its part to lead the way. They need our voices and our commitment to succeed.

November 20, 2013
Hope for a Nuclear Zero World

NAPF President David Krieger delivered this speech at Soka University of America on November 16, 2013.

I’m very pleased to be back at Soka University of America. I have high respect for educational institutions, such as yours, that promote world citizenship. I’ve also witnessed the outstanding efforts that have been made in the past by the youth of Soka Gakkai International.

A Journey of Hope

In 1997, I spoke in Tokyo to an international group of Soka Gakkai youth. In doing so, I told them about an Abolition 2000 International Petition to Abolish Nuclear Weapons. The petition called for ending the nuclear weapons threat by, for example, de-alerting nuclear arsenals; signing an international treaty by the year 2000 to eliminate nuclear weapons within a time-bound framework; and reallocating resources from military purposes to assuring a sustainable future.

A few days after my talk to the Soka Gakkai youth, I was told that, led by the youth of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, these young people and their friends were determined to gather one million signatures on the Abolition 2000 Petition. I thought this was a large and ambitious number and was very happy that they had made this commitment. By the time they were finished, though, they had vastly exceeded their initial goal, gathering over 13 million signatures in a matter of only a few months.

On that trip to Japan, I had the pleasure of meeting Soka Gakkai International President Daisaku Ikeda in Yokohama. It was a memorable meeting, as we watched together a most impressive cultural festival with performers from many countries. The next year I was invited back to Japan to symbolically accept the 13 million signatures for transmittal to the United Nations. On that trip, I visited Tokyo, Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Okinawa. I had the chance to personally thank the young people who had participated in the signature-gathering campaign. I called my trip through Japan a “Journey of Hope,” hope because of the diligent efforts and promising action of young people.

Choosing Hope

At the end of that trip, when meeting with President Ikeda in Okinawa, we decided to do a dialogue on choosing hope. The dialogue took over a year to complete. It was published in Japanese in the year 2000, and two years later in English with the title, Choose Hope, Your Role in Waging Peace in the Nuclear Age. In that dialogue, President Ikeda and I exchanged ideas about peace, nuclear weapons and hope. Among the areas of our agreement are the following:

Peace is an imperative of the Nuclear Age. The creation, possession, modernization, testing, proliferation, threat and possible use of nuclear weapons make peace essential. Nuclear weapons have the potential to destroy civilization and end complex life on Earth, including human life.
Nuclear weapons are an absolute evil and must be abolished. This conclusion builds on the 1957 Declaration of Josei Toda, the second president of Soka Gakkai. Nuclear weapons kill indiscriminately. They are illegal and immoral. Their effects cannot be contained in time or space. They threaten the human future.

Peace must be pursued actively. It must be waged with a similar intensity, commitment and courage as the waging of war. The nonviolence of peace does not imply passivity.

To achieve peace and abolish nuclear weapons, young people must lead the way. Today’s youth are the future of humanity. If they desire peace and a future free of nuclear threat, they must stand up, speak out and demand peaceful solutions to conflict and the abolition of nuclear weapons.

Choosing hope is critical to any great goal, including the abolition of nuclear weapons. We all have a choice. We can choose hope or allow ourselves to fall into despair. Hope gives rise to action, and action reinforces hope. The opposite of hope is despair, which gives rise to inaction. Thus, we encourage all people, and particularly young people, to choose hope and act upon it.

There are three important C’s: compassion, commitment and courage. Meaningful change in our world requires individuals who live lives of compassion, commitment and courage.

One must never give up. All difficult goals require perseverance. Giving up on peace, nuclear weapons abolition, or any difficult goal is not an option if we want to create a more decent and loving world.

To achieve the goal of a nuclear weapons-free world will require all of the above and more. It will also require: understanding what nuclear weapons really are and the danger they pose to humanity; delegitimizing nuclear weapons for all countries of the world with no exceptions; recognizing the important role of the survivors of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the hibakusha; and developing a new universal ethic for the 21st century.

Understanding What Nuclear Weapons Really Are: Nukes Are Nuts

They are not ordinary weapons of war. They are insanely powerful devices of mass annihilation. They cannot distinguish between civilians and combatants, making them both immoral and illegal. Further, they do not protect their possessors; they only make possible mass murder of innocent people. Nuclear weapons are the ultimate suicide note to the planet. They are uncivilized tools of vengeance that have no place in a civilized world. Nukes are nuts.

Delegitimizing Nuclear Weapons

Political and military leaders of some countries believe that nuclear weapons have legitimate military purposes. They are short-sighted and mistaken. Weapons of mass annihilation can have no legitimacy. A simple test is this: If nuclear weapons are legitimate for one country, why shouldn’t they be considered legitimate for all countries? The same leaders who advocate legitimacy of these weapons for their own countries would be horrified at the prospect of doing the same for all countries.

Importance of Hibakusha

No group of people can reach the hearts of their fellow humans and make clearer what these weapons really are than the hibakusha, the survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. That is why their words and their pleas are so important. They have lived with the pain of those fateful and deadly bombings. They have sounded the warning. Because hibakusha are growing older and becoming fewer, their message to the world, and particularly to young people, is even more precious and comes with a greater sense of urgency. I urge young people to reach out to hibakusha, learn from them, and help in conveying their message to the world; make their understanding about the need to abolish nuclear weapons also your own message to the world.

Nuclear weapons endanger all of us. In the crisis of shared danger, comes the opportunity for shared action to overcome that danger. The hibakusha and civil society organizations are helping to lead the way out of the Nuclear Age. They are leading, but the leaders of the nuclear weapons states are not yet demonstrating the political will to follow or to lead themselves.

New Universal Ethic

Nuclear weapons could render the planet uninhabitable for humans and other complex forms of life, but the planet itself would survive the worst we could do. It is not the planet that is endangered; it is we humans.

I believe we humans need a new ethic to see us safely through and out of the Nuclear Age. For me, this new universal ethic would have the following elements:

Reverence for life. This is the central philosophy of Albert Schweitzer. It requires us to care for our fellow humans and for all creatures. We must be kind and good stewards of the planet.

Earth citizenship. We owe our allegiance to the Earth and to people everywhere. Our problems are global and our solutions must be global as well.

Universal human rights, including the sacred right to peace. All humans are entitled by virtue of being human to the basic rights set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. As the United Nations has declared, there is also a sacred right to peace.

Universal human responsibilities. With rights come responsibilities, including each generation’s responsibility to pass the planet on intact to new generations.

Nuclear weapons are incompatible with these ethical foundations. As the ultimate mass killing device, they are the antithesis of reverence for life. They divide countries and their inhabitants into nuclear haves and have-nots. They are an assault on human rights and life itself, and their possession and threat of use are a violation of our responsibilities to humankind as a whole and to future generations.

Nuclear Zero

In 1945 the first nuclear weapon was tested by the United States. Within a few weeks the US then used two nuclear weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, destroying those cities and killing and injuring their inhabitants. This was followed by a nuclear arms race, which reached its peak by 1986 with 70,000 nuclear weapons on the planet. Since then, the numbers have declined significantly, and today there are just over 17,000 nuclear weapons in the world, mostly in the arsenals of the US and Russia. This is still far too many, since one nuclear weapon can destroy a city and only 100 nuclear weapons used in a regional war between India and Pakistan could cause a Nuclear Famine leading to two billion deaths worldwide. The only number of nuclear weapons on the planet that makes sense is Zero. Our urgent goal must be a safe passage from where we are to Nuclear Zero.

On the path to Nuclear Zero, I would encourage bold actions to engage the nuclear-addicted states (those with nuclear weapons) and the nuclear-dependent states (those that rely upon the nuclear umbrella of nuclear-addicted states). The concerned citizens of these states, along with the citizens of the nuclear-free states, must form a bond to push for change. The status quo is no longer acceptable. The sense of urgency and the speed of change toward Nuclear Zero must intensify for the common good.

A Summit of Youth

I believe it must be young people, following in the moral footsteps of the hibakusha, who must lead the way. How are you to do it? I can only point you in the direction that you need to travel. You must forge a new path, one not yet cleared in the Nuclear Age. The path must be forged in the belief that nuclear weapons are an absolute evil and in the spirit of waging peace. It must be traveled boldly and with the confidence that the future belongs to those who follow their dreams for a better tomorrow.

I strongly support Daisaku Ikeda’s proposal for a Nuclear Abolition Summit in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 2015. It is a bold and hopeful proposal. If the nuclear weapon states (the nuclear-addicted states) and the nuclear-dependent states won’t participate, though, I suggest making it a Summit of Youth from around the world to come together to join forces for a world free of nuclear weapons. Invite the non-nuclear weapons states (the nuclear-free states) to come to the Summit to initiate negotiations for a Nuclear Weapons Convention for the phased, verifiable, irreversible and transparent elimination of nuclear weapons.

Let’s get to work banning nuclear weapons, with or without the nuclear weapon states. They cannot hold out indefinitely when confronted with the energy and passion of the youth of the world. One thing that seems certain to me is that the youth of the world are a more powerful force than even the most powerful nuclear warheads. Let the young people of Nagasaki and Hiroshima lead the way, starting with a Youth Nuclear Abolition Summit in 2015.

Our Best Hope

Our best hope for the human future is to unite in our support of the abolition of nuclear weapons. National security must give way to planetary security through the acts of individuals joining together with compassion, commitment and courage. To these we can add two more C’s – creativity and cooperation. We need to awaken from our slumber and be the noble people we are capable of being. We need leadership from the survivors of the atomic bombings and from the youth of Nagasaki and Hiroshima who support them. We actually need leadership from all youth of all countries. When nuclear weapons are abolished, it will be time for a new “C” – celebration. We can celebrate our gift to ourselves and to the future of humankind.

Why Work to Abolish Nuclear Weapons

I will conclude with 12 reasons for working to abolish nuclear weapons.

We can change the world in important and necessary ways.

We can take a giant step forward for humankind.

We can join with others in demonstrating good stewardship of the planet.

We can take control of our most dangerous technology.

We can help shape a more decent common future.

We can end the threat of omnicide posed by nuclear weapons.

We can uphold international law for the common benefit.

We can lead the way toward ending war as a human institution.

We can meet the greatest challenge confronting our species.

We can put compassion into action and action into compassion.

We can help to protect everything in life that we love and treasure.

We can pass on a more secure world to our children and grandchildren and all future generations.

David Krieger is President of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation.

November 16, 2013
Delegitimziing Nuclear Weapons: The Role of Citizens and Hibakusha

To understand how to delegitimize nuclear weapons, it is necessary to understand and deconstruct their legitimization.   Let us explore some of the beliefs by which these weapons have been legitimized.

1.   Nuclear weapons ended World War II.
2.   Nuclear weapons prevent war.
3.   No rational leader would use nuclear weapons.
4.   Nuclear weapons make countries more secure.
5.   Nuclear weapons are needed to protect against a nuclear attack.

Let’s examine these beliefs, and check their basis in fact.

Nuclear weapons ended World War II. At the end of World War II Japan was trying to surrender. Nearly all of its major cities had already been destroyed by conventional bombing. With the Soviet entry into the war in the Pacific on August 9, 1945, Japanese leaders knew they had no chance to prevail. It wasn’t nuclear weapons that ended World War II. It was the Soviet entry into the war in the Pacific. Nuclear weapons caused massive suffering and death in a country that was already defeated and trying to surrender.

Nuclear weapons prevent war. It is said that the threat to use nuclear weapons has prevented war, but actually many wars have occurred during the Nuclear Age. Nuclear weapons have not caused wars, but they also have not prevented wars. Countries with nuclear weapons have thankfully been reluctant to use them, even when losing a war. Examples include the US in Vietnam, the UK in the Falkland Islands, and the Soviet Union in Afghanistan.

No rational leader would use nuclear weapons. Actually, a presumably rational leader, Harry Truman, did use nuclear weapons on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. There is no guarantee that another rational leader in possession of nuclear weapons will not decide that the use of these weapons is in his or her country’s best interests. In addition, not all national leaders are rational at all times and particularly in times of stress. Some national leaders are simply not rational, even under normal circumstances.

Nuclear weapons make countries more secure. They actually do not. If a country has nuclear weapons, it is certain that it will also be targeted by nuclear weapons. The ability to retaliate with nuclear weapons does not assure that another country will not attack you by accident or design; it only assures that you can retaliate. This would be small compensation after a nuclear attack.
Nuclear weapons are needed to protect against a nuclear attack. Not so. The best protection against a nuclear attack is the global elimination of nuclear weapons. If there are no nuclear weapons on the planet, no country can be attacked.

What Nuclear Weapons Really Are

To delegitimize nuclear weapons, people need to understand what nuclear weapons really are and really do. They need to understand that nuclear weapons undermine their security rather than enhance it. They need to call these weapons by their true names: devices of mass annihilation and instruments of omnicide (the death of all).

When we speak of nuclear weapons, we refer to the most deadly and dangerous weapons ever created. This is how retired US Air Force General George Lee Butler, once in charge of all US strategic nuclear weapons, describes nuclear weapons:

“Nuclear weapons give no quarter. Their effects transcend time and space, poisoning the Earth and deforming its inhabitants for generation upon generation. They leave us wholly without defense, expunge all hope for survival. They hold in their sway not just the fate of nations but of civilization.”

Religious leader and Nobel Peace Laureate Archbishop Desmond Tutu has an equally strong view of the nature of nuclear weapons:

“Nuclear weapons are an obscenity. They are the very antithesis of humanity, of goodness in this world. What security do they help establish? What kind of world community are we actually seeking to build when nations possess and threaten to use arms that can wipe all of humankind off the globe in an instant?”

Importance of Hibakusha

No group of people can reach the hearts of their fellow humans and make clearer what these weapons really are than the hibakusha, the survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. That is why their words and their pleas are so important. They have lived with the pain and sounded the warning. Because the hibakusha are growing older and becoming fewer, their message to the world is even more precious and comes with a greater sense of urgency. I urge young people to reach out to hibakusha, learn from them, and help in conveying their message to the world; make their conclusions about the need to abolish nuclear weapons also your own message to the world.

Nuclear weapons endanger all of us. In the crisis of shared danger, comes the possibility of shared action to overcome that danger. The hibakusha and civil society organizations are helping to lead the way out of the Nuclear Age. They are leading, but the nuclear weapons states are not yet demonstrating the political will to follow.

New Ethic

Nuclear weapons are an absolute evil. They are the ultimate suicide note to the planet. They could render the planet uninhabitable for humans and other complex forms of life, but the planet itself would survive the worst we could do. It is not the planet that is endangered; it is we humans.
I believe we humans need a new ethic to see us safely through and out of the Nuclear Age. For me, this new universal ethic would have the following elements:

•   Reverence for life. This is the central philosophy of Albert Schweitzer. It requires us to care for our fellow humans and for all creatures. We must be kind and good stewards of the planet.

•   Earth citizenship. We owe our allegiance to the Earth and to people everywhere. Our problems are global and our solutions must be global as well.

•   Universal human rights, including the sacred right to peace. All humans are entitled by virtue of being human to the basic rights set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. As the United Nations has declared, there is also a sacred right to peace.

•   Universal human responsibilities. With rights come responsibilities, including each generation’s responsibility to pass the planet on intact to new generations.

Nuclear weapons are incompatible with these ethical foundations. As the ultimate mass killing device, they are the antithesis to reverence for life. They divide countries and their inhabitants into nuclear haves and have-nots. They are an assault on human rights and life itself, and their possession and threat of use are a violation of our responsibilities to humankind as a whole and to future generations.

Immediate Goals

Immediate goals include:

•   either a treaty or individual pledges by all nuclear weapons states of No First Use of nuclear weapons;

•   de-alerting of nuclear arsenals; and

•   commencement of negotiations for a Nuclear Weapons Convention for the phased, verifiable, irreversible and transparent elimination of nuclear weapons.

Our best hope for the human future is to unite in support of the abolition of nuclear weapons. National security must give way to planetary security through the acts of individuals joining together with compassion, commitment, creativity and cooperation, and acting with courage. We need to awaken from our slumber and be the noble people we are capable of being. When nuclear weapons are abolished, it will be time for a new “C”: celebration. We can celebrate our gift to ourselves and to the future.

Why Work to Abolish Nuclear Weapons

I will conclude with 12 reasons to work to abolish nuclear weapons.

We can change the world in important and necessary ways.
We can take a giant step forward for humankind.
We can join with others in demonstrating good stewardship of the planet.
We can take control of our most dangerous technology.
We can help shape a more decent common future.
We can end the threat of omnicide posed by nuclear weapons.
We can uphold international law for the common benefit.
We can lead the way toward ending war as a human institution.
We can meet the greatest challenge confronting our species.
We can put compassion into action and action into compassion.
We can help to protect everything in life that we love and treasure.
We can pass on a more secure world to our children and grandchildren and all future generations.

This article was originally published by Truthout.

November 4, 2013