Tag: Open Letter

  • Open Letter in Support of the 2017 Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons

    Open Letter in Support of the 2017 Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons

    This open letter was coordinated by the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, of which NAPF is a Partner Organization. Numerous articles were written about the open letter, including in The New York Times.


    The coronavirus pandemic has starkly demonstrated the urgent need for greater international cooperation to address all major threats to the health and welfare of humankind. Paramount among them is the threat of nuclear war. The risk of a nuclear weapon detonation today — whether by accident, miscalculation or design — appears to be increasing, with the recent deployment of new types of nuclear weapons, the abandonment of longstanding arms control agreements, and the very real danger of cyber-attacks on nuclear infrastructure. Let us heed the warnings of scientists, doctors and other experts. We must not sleepwalk into a crisis of even greater proportions than the one we have experienced this year.

    It is not difficult to foresee how the bellicose rhetoric and poor judgment of leaders in nuclear-armed nations might result in a calamity affecting all nations and peoples. As past leaders, foreign ministers and defence ministers of Albania, Belgium, Canada, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Japan, Latvia, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain and Turkey — all countries that claim protection from an ally’s nuclear weapons — we appeal to current leaders to advance disarmament before it is too late. An obvious starting point for the leaders of our own countries would be to declare without qualification that nuclear weapons serve no legitimate military or strategic purpose in light of the catastrophic human and environmental consequences of their use. In other words, our countries should reject any role for nuclear weapons in our defence.

    By claiming protection from nuclear weapons, we are promoting the dangerous and misguided belief that nuclear weapons enhance security. Rather than enabling progress towards a world free of nuclear weapons, we are impeding it and perpetuating nuclear dangers — all for fear of upsetting our allies who cling to these weapons of mass destruction. But friends can and must speak up when friends engage in reckless behavior that puts their lives and ours in peril.

    Without doubt, a new nuclear arms race is under way, and a race for disarmament is urgently needed. It is time to bring the era of reliance on nuclear weapons to a permanent end. In 2017, 122 countries took a courageous but long-overdue step in that direction by adopting the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons — a landmark global accord that places nuclear weapons on the same legal footing as chemical and biological weapons and establishes a framework to eliminate them verifiably and irreversibly. Soon it will become binding international law.

    To date, our countries have opted not to join the global majority in supporting this treaty. But our leaders should reconsider their positions. We cannot afford to dither in the face of this existential threat to humanity. We must show courage and boldness — and join the treaty. As states parties, we could remain in alliances with nuclear-armed states, as nothing in the treaty itself nor in our respective defence pacts precludes that. But we would be legally bound never under any circumstances to assist or encourage our allies to use, threaten to use or possess nuclear weapons. Given the very broad popular support in our countries for disarmament, this would be an uncontroversial and much-lauded move.

    The prohibition treaty is an important reinforcement to the half-century-old Non-Proliferation Treaty, which, though remarkably successful in curbing the spread of nuclear weapons to more countries, has failed to establish a universal taboo against the possession of nuclear weapons. The five nuclear-armed nations that had nuclear weapons at the time of the NPT’s negotiation — the United States, Russia, Britain, France and China — apparently view it as a licence to retain their nuclear forces in perpetuity. Instead of disarming, they are investing heavily in upgrades to their arsenals, with plans to retain them for many decades to come.

    This is patently unacceptable.

    The prohibition treaty adopted in 2017 can help end decades of paralysis in disarmament. It is a beacon of hope in a time of darkness. It enables countries to subscribe to the highest available multilateral norm against nuclear weapons and build international pressure for action. As its preamble recognizes, the effects of nuclear weapons “transcend national borders, pose grave implications for human survival, the environment, socioeconomic development, the global economy, food security and the health of current and future generations, and have a disproportionate impact on women and girls, including as a result of ionizing radiation”.

    With close to 14,000 nuclear weapons located at dozens of sites across the globe and on submarines patrolling the oceans at all times, the capacity for destruction is beyond our imagination. All responsible leaders must act now to ensure that the horrors of 1945 are never repeated. Sooner or later, our luck will run out — unless we act. The nuclear weapon ban treaty provides the foundation for a more secure world, free from this ultimate menace. We must embrace it now and work to bring others on board. There is no cure for a nuclear war. Prevention is our only option.

    Signed by:

    Lloyd AXWORTHY
    Former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Canada

    BAN Ki-moon
    Former Secretary-General of the United Nations and Minister of Foreign Affairs of South Korea

    Jean-Jacques BLAIS
    Former Minister of National Defence of Canada

    Kjell Magne BONDEVIK
    Former Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs of Norway

    Ylli BUFI
    Former Prime Minister of Albania

    Jean CHRÉTIEN
    Former Prime Minister of Canada

    Willy CLAES
    Former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Belgium and Secretary General of NATO

    Erik DERYCKE
    Former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Belgium

    Joschka FISCHER
    Former Federal Minister of Foreign Affairs of Germany

    Franco FRATTINI
    Former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Italy and Vice-President of the European Commission

    Ingibjörg Sólrún GÍSLADÓTTIR
    Former Minister for Foreign Affairs of Iceland

    Bjørn Tore GODAL
    Former Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of Defence of Norway

    Bill GRAHAM
    Former Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of National Defence of Canada

    HATOYAMA Yukio
    Former Prime Minister of Japan

    Thorbjørn JAGLAND
    Former Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs of Norway

    Ljubica JELUŠIČ
    Former Minister of Defence of Slovenia

    Tālavs JUNDZIS
    Former Minister of Defence of Latvia

    Jan KAVAN
    Former Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic and President of the UN General Assembly

    Alojz KRAPEŽ
    Former Minister of Defence of Slovenia

    Ģirts Valdis KRISTOVSKIS
    Former Minister of Foreign Affairs, Minister of Defence, and Minister of the Interior of Latvia

    Aleksander KWAŚNIEWSKI
    Former President of Poland

    Yves LETERME
    Former Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs of Belgium

    Enrico LETTA
    Former Prime Minister of Italy

    Eldbjørg LØWER
    Former Minister of Defence of Norway

    Mogens LYKKETOFT
    Former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Denmark

    John McCALLUM
    Former Minister of National Defence of Canada

    John MANLEY
    Former Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs of Canada

    Rexhep MEIDANI
    Former President of Albania

    Zdravko MRŠIĆ
    Former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Croatia

    Linda MŪRNIECE
    Former Minister of Defence of Latvia

    Fatos NANO
    Former Prime Minister of Albania

    Holger K. NIELSEN
    Former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Denmark

    Andrzej OLECHOWSKI
    Former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Poland

    Kjeld OLESEN
    Former Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of Defence of Denmark

    Ana de PALACIO Y DEL VALLE-LERSUNDI
    Former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Spain

    Theodoros PANGALOS
    Former Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs of Greece

    Jan PRONK
    Former Minister of Defence (Ad Interim) and Minister for Development Cooperation of the Netherlands

    Vesna PUSIĆ
    Former Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign and European Affairs of Croatia

    Dariusz ROSATI
    Former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Poland

    Rudolf SCHARPING
    Former Federal Minister of Defence of Germany

    Juraj SCHENK
    Former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Slovakia

    Nuno SEVERIANO TEIXEIRA
    Former Minister of National Defense of Portugal

    Jóhanna SIGURÐARDÓTTIR
    Former Prime Minister of Iceland

    Össur SKARPHÉÐINSSON
    Former Minister for Foreign Affairs of Iceland

    Javier SOLANA
    Former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Spain and Secretary General of NATO

    Anne-Grete STRØM-ERICHSEN
    Former Minister of Defence of Norway

    Hanna SUCHOCKA
    Former Prime Minister of Poland

    SZEKERES Imre
    Former Minister of Defense of Hungary

    TANAKA Makiko
    Former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Japan

    TANAKA Naoki
    Former Minister of Defense of Japan

    Danilo TÜRK
    Former President of Slovenia

    Hikmet Sami TÜRK
    Former Minister of National Defense of Turkey

    John N. TURNER
    Former Prime Minister of Canada

    Guy VERHOFSTADT
    Former Prime Minister of Belgium

    Knut VOLLEBÆK
    Former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Norway

    Carlos WESTENDORP Y CABEZA
    Former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Spain

  • An Open Letter to Trump and Putin: The World Needs Nuclear Zero

    This Open Letter was originally published by The Hill. To add your name to the Open Letter, click here.

    putintrump

    This may be the most dangerous time in human history.

    In a dramatic recent decision, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists has moved its iconic Doomsday Clock ahead from three minutes to only two-and-a-half minutes to midnight.

    Humankind faces two existential challenges of global and potentially apocalyptic scope: nuclear weapons and climate change. Our focus here is on nuclear dangers, but we strongly encourage you, Presidents Trump and Putin, to undertake in a spirit of urgency all necessary steps to avert further global warming.

    As the leaders of the United States and Russia, the two countries with the largest nuclear arsenals, you have the grave responsibility of assuring that nuclear weapons are not used — or their use overtly threatened — during your period of leadership.

    The most certain and reliable way to fulfill this responsibility is to negotiate with each other, and the other governments of nuclear-armed states, for their total elimination.

    The U.S. and Russia are both obligated under Article VI of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to engage in such negotiations in good faith for an end to the nuclear arms race and for complete nuclear disarmament. Your success in this endeavor would make you heroes of the Nuclear Age.

    Initiating a nuclear war, any nuclear war, would be an act of insanity. Between nuclear weapons states, it would lead to the destruction of the attacking nation as well as the nation attacked. Between the U.S. and Russia, it would also destroy civilization and threaten the survival of humanity.

    There are still nearly 15,000 nuclear weapons in the world, of which the United States and Russia each possess some 7,000. Approximately 1,000 of these weapons in each country remain on hair-trigger alert — a catastrophe waiting to happen that could be prevented with the stroke of a pen.

    If nuclear weapons are not used intentionally, they could be used inadvertently by accident or miscalculation. Nuclear weapons and human fallibility are an explosive combination, which could at any moment bring dire consequences to the U.S., Russia and the rest of humanity. The world would be far safer by negotiating an end to policies of nuclear first-use, hair-trigger alert and launch-on-warning. Further, negotiations need to be commenced on the phased, verifiable and irreversible elimination of nuclear weapons.

    Nuclear deterrence presupposes an unrealistic view of human behavior if projected over time. It depends on the willingness and ability of political leaders to act with total rationality in the most extreme circumstances of stress and provocation. It provides no guarantees of sustained security or physical protection. It could fail, spectacularly and tragically, at any moment.

    The further development and modernization of nuclear weapons by the U.S., Russia and others, and the proliferation of nuclear weapons to other countries, would make for an even more dangerous world. It is important for the sake of regional peace and the avoidance of future nuclear confrontations to uphold the international agreement that places appropriate limitations on Iran’s nuclear program, an agreement that has the support of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council plus Germany.

    Your nuclear arsenals give each of you the power to end civilization. You also have the historic opportunity, should you choose, to become the leaders of the most momentous international collaboration of all time, dedicated to ending the nuclear weapons era over the course of a decade or so. This great goal of Nuclear Zero can be achieved by negotiating, as a matter of priority, a treaty to ban and eliminate nuclear weapons.

    We, the undersigned, implore you to commence negotiations to reduce the dangers of a nuclear war, by mistake or malice, and immediately commit your respective governments to the realizable objective of a nuclear weapons-free world. It would be the greatest possible gift to the whole of humanity and to all future generations, as well as of enduring benefit to the national and human security of Russia and the United States.

    Initial Signers: David Krieger, Richard Falk, Noam Chomsky, Jody Williams, Daniel Ellsberg, Medea Benjamin, Mairead Maguire

    David Krieger is president of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation. Richard Falk is professor emeritus of international law at Princeton University. Noam Chomsky is professor emeritus at MIT. Jody Williams is the chair of the Nobel Women’s Initiative and is a Nobel Peace Laureate. Daniel Ellsberg is a former Pentagon consultant and a well respected author. Medea Benjamin is co-founder of social justice movement CODEPINK. Mairead Maguire is co-founder of Peace People in Northern Ireland and is a Nobel Peace Laureate.

  • Political Responsibility in the Nuclear Age: An Open Letter to the American People

    This article was originally published by The Nation.

    Dear fellow citizens:

    By their purported test of a hydrogen bomb early in 2016, North Korea reminded the world that nuclear dangers are not an abstraction, but a continuing menace that the governments and peoples of the world ignore at their peril.  Even if the test were not of a hydrogen bomb but of a smaller atomic weapon, as many experts suggest, we are still reminded that we live in the Nuclear Age, an age in which accident, miscalculation, insanity or intention could lead to devastating nuclear catastrophe.

    What is most notable about the Nuclear Age is that we humans, by our scientific and technological ingenuity, have created the means of our own demise.  The world currently is confronted by many threats to human wellbeing, and even civilizational survival, but we focus here on the particular grave dangers posed by nuclear weapons and nuclear war.

    Even a relatively small nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan, with each country using 50 Hiroshima-size nuclear weapons on the other side’s cities, could result in a nuclear famine killing some two billion of the most vulnerable people on the planet. A nuclear war between the U.S. and Russia could destroy civilization in a single afternoon and send temperatures on Earth plummeting into a new ice age.  Such a war could destroy most complex life on the planet.  Despite the gravity of such threats, they are being ignored, which is morally reprehensible and politically irresponsible.

    The White HouseWe in the United States are in the midst of hotly contested campaigns to determine the candidates of both major political parties in the 2016 presidential faceoff, and yet none of the frontrunners for the nominations have even voiced concern about the nuclear war dangers we face.  This is an appalling oversight.  It reflects the underlying situation of denial and complacency that disconnects the American people as a whole from the risks of use of nuclear weapons in the years ahead.  This menacing disconnect is reinforced by the media, which has failed to challenge the candidates on their approach to this apocalyptic weaponry during the debates and has ignored the issue in their television and print coverage, even to the extent of excluding voices that express concern from their opinion pages.  We regard it as a matter of urgency to put these issues back on the radar screen of public awareness.

    We are appalled that none of the candidates running for the highest office in the land has yet put forward any plans or strategy to end current threats of nuclear annihilation, none has challenged the planned expenditure of $1 trillion to modernize the U.S. nuclear arsenal, and none has made a point of the U.S. being in breach of its nuclear disarmament obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.  In the presidential debates it has been a non-issue, which scandalizes the candidates for not raising the issue in their many public speeches and the media for not challenging them for failing to do so.  As a society, we are out of touch with the most frightening, yet after decades still dangerously mishandled, challenge to the future of humanity.

    There are nine countries that currently possess nuclear weapons.  Five of these nuclear-armed countries are parties to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (U.S., Russia, UK, France and China), and are obligated by that treaty to negotiate in good faith for a cessation of the nuclear arms race and for nuclear disarmament.  The other four nuclear-armed countries (Israel, India, Pakistan and North Korea) are subject to the same obligations under customary international law.  None of the nine nuclear-armed countries has engaged in such negotiations, a reality that should be met with anger and frustration, and not, as is now the case, with indifference.  It is not only the United States that is responsible for the current state of denial and indifference.  Throughout the world there is a false confidence that, because the Cold War is over and no nuclear weapons have been used since 1945, the nuclear dangers that once frightened and concerned people can now be ignored.

    Rather than fulfill their obligations for negotiated nuclear disarmament, the nine nuclear-armed countries all rely upon nuclear deterrence and are engaged in modernization programs that will keep their nuclear arsenals active through the 21st century and perhaps beyond.  Unfortunately, nuclear deterrence does not actually provide security to countries with nuclear arsenals.  Rather, it is a hypothesis about human behavior, which is unlikely to hold up over time.  Nuclear deterrence has come close to failing on numerous occasions and would clearly be totally ineffective, or worse, against a terrorist group in possession of one or more nuclear weapons, which has no fear of retaliation and may actually welcome it.  Further, as the world is now embarking on a renewed nuclear arms race, disturbingly reminiscent of the Cold War, rising risks of confrontations and crises between major states possessing nuclear weapons increase the possibility of use.

    As citizens of a nuclear-armed country, we are also targets of nuclear weapons.  John F. Kennedy saw clearly that “Every man, woman and child lives under a nuclear sword of Damocles, hanging by the slenderest of threads, capable of being cut at any moment by accident, or miscalculation, or by madness.  The weapons of war must be abolished before they abolish us.”  What President Kennedy vividly expressed more than 50 years ago remains true today, and even more so as the weapons proliferate and as political extremist groups come closer to acquiring these terrible weapons.

    hiroshimaThose with power and control over nuclear weapons could turn this planet, unique in all the universe in supporting life, into the charred remains of a Global Hiroshima.  Should any political leader or government hold so much power?  Should we be content to allow such power to rest in any hands at all?

    It is time to end the nuclear weapons era.  We are living on borrowed time.  The U.S., as the world’s most powerful country, must play a leadership role in convening negotiations.  For the U.S. to be effective in leading to achieve Nuclear Zero, U.S. citizens must awaken to the need to act and must press our government to act and encourage others elsewhere, especially in the other eight nuclear-armed countries, to press their governments to act as well.  It is not enough to be apathetic, conformist, ignorant or in denial.  We all must take action if we want to save humanity and other forms of life from nuclear catastrophe.  In this spirit, we are at a stage where we need a robust global solidarity movement that is dedicated to raising awareness of the growing nuclear menace, and the urgent need to act nationally, regionally and globally to reverse the strong militarist currents that are pushing the world ever closer to the nuclear precipice.

    Nuclear weapons are the most immediate threat to humanity, but they are not the only technology that could play and is playing havoc with the future of life.  The scale of our technological impact on the environment (primarily fossil fuel extraction and use) is also resulting in global warming and climate chaos, with predicted rises in ocean levels and many other threats – ocean acidification, extreme weather, climate refugees and strife from drought – that will cause massive death and displacement of human and animal populations.

    In addition to the technological threats to the human future, many people on the planet now suffer from hunger, disease, lack of shelter and lack of education.  Every person on the planet has a right to adequate nutrition, health care, housing and education.  It is deeply unjust to allow the rich to grow richer while the vast majority of humanity sinks into deeper poverty.  It is immoral to spend our resources on modernizing weapons of mass annihilation while large numbers of people continue to suffer from the ravages of poverty.

    Doing all we can to move the world to Nuclear Zero, while remaining responsive to other pressing dangers, is our best chance to ensure a benevolent future for our species and its natural surroundings.  We can start by changing apathy to empathy, conformity to critical thinking, ignorance to wisdom, denial to recognition, and thought to action in responding to the threats posed by nuclear weapons and the technologies associated with global warming, as well as to the need to address present human suffering arising from war and poverty.

    The richer countries are challenged by migrant flows of desperate people that number in the millions and by the realization that as many as a billion people on the planet are chronically hungry and another two billion are malnourished, resulting in widespread growth stunting among children and other maladies.  While ridding the world of nuclear weaponry is our primary goal, we are mindful that the institution of war is responsible for chaos and massive casualties, and that we must also challenge the militarist mentality if we are ever to enjoy enduring peace and security on our planet.

    The fate of our species is now being tested as never before.  The question before us is whether humankind has the foresight and discipline necessary to forego some superfluous desires, mainly curtailing propensities for material luxuries and for domination of our fellow beings, thereby enabling all of us and succeeding generations to live lives worth living.  Whether our species will rise to this challenge is uncertain, with current evidence not reassuring.

    The time is short and what is at risk is civilization and every small and great thing that each of us loves and treasures on our planet.

    The authors are affiliated with the Santa Barbara based Nuclear Age Peace Foundation.

    Vaya aquí para la versión española.

  • Open Letter in Support of the Marshall Islands’ Nuclear Zero Lawsuits

    Dear President Christopher Loeak,

    Dear Foreign Minister Tony de Brum,

    Dear People and Parliament of the Marshall Islands,

    The world salutes your initiative in taking legal action for negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under Article VI of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and customary international law against the nine nuclear-armed “Goliaths” (the United States, Russia, UK, France, China, Israel, India, Pakistan, and North Korea).

    We hope that you will be joined in these lawsuits by as many governments as possible, and we will urge them to do so.

    In taking this action, you, and any governments that choose to join you, are acting on behalf of all the seven billion people who now live on Earth and on behalf of the generations yet unborn who could never be born if nuclear weapons are ever used in large numbers.

    You are also acting on behalf of all our ancestors throughout tens of millennia who will have their intellectual, cultural and scientific achievements cancelled should humanity terminate itself through the inadvertent or deliberate use of nuclear weapons.

    In addition, you are acting on behalf of untold thousands of other species who will surely perish in the catastrophic global climatic effects of a nuclear conflict.

    Win or lose in the coming legal arguments, what you, and any who join you, will do has the deepest moral significance, going far beyond the specific interests of any country or government and beyond the usual calculations of national self-interest.

    The unprecedented outburst of resounding applause that Foreign Minister Tony de Brum received in the plenary of the Non-Proliferation Treaty Preparatory Committee meeting on 28 April 2014 shows that, for the world, you are all heroes.

    If you stay the course, alone or with a host of others, then what you will be doing is – to recycle a phrase already well-used – “not so much making history, as making history possible.”

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

    (For further information see www.nuclearzero.org)

    Signed:

    Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Nobel Peace Laureate, South Africa

    Mairead Maguire, Nobel Peace Laureate, Northern Ireland

    Oscar Arias, Nobel Peace Laureate, Costa Rica

    Jody Williams, Nobel Peace Laureate, United States

    Shirin Ebadi, Nobel Peace Laureate, Iran

    Adolfo Pérez Esquivel, Nobel Peace Laureate, Argentina

    John Hallam (Letter coordinator), People for Nuclear Disarmament/Human Survival Project, Australia

    Prof. Peter King, Human Survival Project, Australia

    David Krieger, President, Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, United States

    Kumi Naidoo, Executive Director, Greenpeace International, Netherlands

    Aaron Tovish, Mayors For Peace 2020 Vision Campaign, Austria

    Colin Archer, Secretary-General, International Peace Bureau, Switzerland

    Ingeborg Brienes, Co-President, International Peace Bureau, Switzerland

    Jayantha Dhanapala, former UN Under-Secretary-General for Disarmament Affairs (Personal Capacity)

    Helen Caldicott, M.D., Founder, Physicians for Social Responsibility, Australia

    Jonathan Granoff, President, Global Security Institute, United States

    Senator Scott Ludlam, Australia

    Jill Hall MP, Australia

    Judy Blyth, People for Nuclear Disarmament, Australia

    Jenny Grounds, President, Medical Association for the Prevention of War, Australia

    Chris Hamer, World Citizens Association / Scientists for Global Responsibility, Australia

    Nick Deane, Marrickville Peace Group, Australia

    Father Claude Mostowyk, MSC, Missionaries of the Sacred Hearth Justice and Peace Centre, Australia

    Ruth Russell, Convenor, Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom, Australia

    Dennis Doherty, Australian Anti-Bases Campaign Coalition, Australia

    Hanna Middleton, Australian Anti-Bases Campaign Coalition, Australia

    Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, Sydney University, Australia

    Barney Richards, President, New Zealand Peace Council, New Zealand

    Bob Rigg, former Chair, National Consultative Committee on Peace and Disarmament, New Zealand

    John Hinchcliffe, President, NZ Peace Foundation, New Zealand

    Dr. Kate Dewes,Disarmament and Security Centre, New Zealand

    Commander Robert Green (Royal Navy, Ret.), Disarmament and Security Centre, New Zealand

    Dave Webb, Chair, Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, United Kingdom

    Bill Kidd MSP, United Kingdom

    Jenny Maxwell, Hereford Peace Council, United Kingdom

    Rae Street, Greater Manchester Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, United Kingdom

    Godrick Ernest Scott Bader, Life-President, Scott Bader Ltd, United Kingdom

    Arthur West, Chair, Scottish Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, United Kingdom

    Tony Simpson, Bertrand Russell Peace Foundation, United Kingdom

    Prof. Emeritus Kirsten Osen, International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, Norway

    Prof. John Gunnar Maeland, International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, Norway

    John Scales Avery, Ph.D., Chairman, Danish National Group, Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs, Denmark

    Ingrid Schittich, Chairperson, Association of World Citizens, Germany

    Xanthe Hall, Disarmament Campaigner, International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, Germany

    Herman Spanjaard, M.D., Chair, International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, Netherlands

    Dr. Peter van den Dungen, General Coordinator, International Network of Museums for Peace, Netherlands

    Dominique Lalanne, Co-chair, Armes nucléaires STOP, France

    Jean-Marie Matagne, President, Action des Citoyens pour le desarmement nucleaire, France

    Pep Puig, Ph.D., Group of Scientists and Technicians for a Non-Nuclear Future, Spain

    Josep Puig, President, Eurosolar, Spain

    Santiago Vilanova, Journalist, Green Alternative, Spain

    Maria Arvaniti Sotiropoulou, President, Greek Medical Association for the Protection of the Environment and against Nuclear and Biochemical Threat, Greece

    Dr. Mubashir Hasan, President Punjab, Pakistan People’s Party, Pakistan

    Sharon Dolev, Director, Israeli Disarmament Movement, Israel

    Sukla Sen, EKTA, India

    J. Narayana Rao, Secretary, Centre For Cultural, Educational, Economics and Social Studies, India

    Wilfred D’Costa, Indian Social Action Forum, India

    Dr. Ranjith S. Jayasekhara, Vice-President, Sri Lankan Doctors for Peace and Development, Sri Lanka

    Ronald McCoy, Malaysian Physicians for Social Responsibility, Malaysia

    Dr. Syed Husain Ali, Senator, Malaysia

    Hiro Umebayashi, Special Adviser, Peace Depot, Japan

    Hiroshi Taka, Representative Director, Japan Council against A & H Bombs (Gensuikyo), Japan

    Steve Leeper, Research Centre for Nuclear Weapons Abolition, Nagasaki University, Japan

    Hideyuki Ban, Citizens Nuclear Information Centre, Japan

    Tadatoshi Akiba, Former Mayor of Hiroshima, Japan

    Joan Russow, Global Compliance Research Project, Canada

    Gordon Edwards Ph.D., President, Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, Canada

    Martha Goodings, No2 Nuclear Weapons, Canada

    Vivian Davidson, President, World Federalist Movement – Vancouver Branch, Canada

    Patti Willis, Pacific Peace Working Group, Canada

    Phyllis Creighton, Veterans Against Nuclear Arms, Canada

    Larry Kazdan, CGA, Vancouver, Canada

    Saul Arbess, Director, Canadian Peace Initiative, Canada

    Global Alliance of Ministries for Peace

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

    Kathy Wanpovi Sanchez, Tewa Women United, United States

    Alfred L. Marder, President, US Peace Council, United States

    Kevin Martin, Executive Director, Peace Action, United States

    Stephen Vincent Kobasa, Coordinator, Trident Resistance Network, United States

    Lawrence Wittner, Professor Emeritus of History, SUNY/Albany, United States

    Ralph Hutchison, Oak Ridge Environmental Peace Alliance, United States

    Blase Bonpane, Co-Director, Office of the Americas, United States

    Theresa Bonpane, Co-Director, Office of the Americas, United States

    Prof. Martin Hellman, Electrical Engineering, Stanford University, United States

    Alice Slater, New York Director, Nuclear Age Peace Foundation

    Dr. Ruby Anne Chirino, Program Coordinator, International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, Mexico