Nuclear Age Peace Foundation

Tag: Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons

  • U.S. to Launch Minuteman III Missile Test Just Five Days After 50th Country Ratified Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons

    U.S. to Launch Minuteman III Missile Test Just Five Days After 50th Country Ratified Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons

    For Immediate Release

    Contact: Sandy Jones  (805) 965-3443; sjones@napf.org

    U.S. TO LAUNCH MINUTEMAN III MISSILE TEST JUST FIVE DAYS AFTER 50TH COUNTRY RATIFIED TREATY ON THE PROHIBITION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS

    SANTA BARBARA, CA– Early tomorrow morning, between 12:01 a.m. and 6:01 a.m., the United States will launch an unarmed Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile from Vandenberg Air Force Base. While the Air Force maintains that missile tests are planned many months in advance, the timing of this test is questionable, at best.

    This test will take place just five days after Honduras became the 50th country to ratify the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW). With the 50th ratification, the treaty will enter into force on January 22, 2021. The treaty prohibits the possession, testing, use, or threat of use of nuclear weapons.

    Rick Wayman, CEO of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, a non-profit based in Santa Barbara committed to the abolition of nuclear weapons and solving the most dangerous technological, social, and psychological issues of our time, commented on the timing of the missile test. He noted, “This past Saturday, the world took an important step toward the elimination of nuclear weapons with the 50th ratification of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. Now, in addition to its diplomatic undermining of the treaty through threatening letters, the U.S. government plans to demonstrate its active defiance of the treaty’s provisions by testing a nuclear-capable missile.”

    Wayman further commented, “While most of the world’s countries are evolving to a view that nuclear weapons are unacceptable under all circumstances, the U.S. is testing a nuclear missile built to fight the Cold War; one which is designed to cause the indiscriminate slaughter of hundreds of thousands of people.”

    The military will track the unarmed ICBM as it travels to a predetermined target, typically some 4,200 miles away near the Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands. Between 1946 and 1958, the United States detonated 67 nuclear bombs on, in and above the Marshall Islands — vaporizing islands, creating craters into its shallow lagoons and exiling hundreds of people from their homes and their land.

    #                                         #                                         #

    The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation’s mission is to educate and train people of all ages and backgrounds to solve the most dangerous technological, social, and psychological issues of our time, and to survive and thrive in the 21st century. The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation is a non-partisan, non-profit organization with consultative status to the United Nations. For more information, visit wagingpeace.org.

  • Celebrating the 50th Ratification of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons

    Celebrating the 50th Ratification of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons

    Setsuko Thurlow
    Setsuko Thurlow at the 2015 NAPF Evening for Peace.

    The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons has entered into force! This truly marks the beginning of the end of nuclear weapons! When I learned that we reached our 50th ratification, I was not able to stand. I remained in my chair and put my head in my hands and I cried tears of joy. I have committed my life to the abolition of nuclear weapons. I have nothing but gratitude for all who have worked for the success of our treaty. I have a powerful feeling of solidarity with tens of thousands of people across the world. We have made it to this point.

    As I sat in my chair, I found myself speaking with the spirits of hundreds of thousands of people who lost their lives in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I was immediately in conversation with these beloved souls — my sister, my nephew Eiji, other dear family members, my classmates, all the children and innocent people who perished. I was reporting to the dead, sharing this good news first with them, because they paid the ultimate price with their precious lives. Like many survivors, I made a vow that their deaths would not be in vain and to warn the world about the danger of nuclear weapons, to make sure that no one else suffers as we have suffered. I made a vow to work for nuclear disarmament until my last breath. And now we have reached a milestone in our decades’ long struggle — the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons will become international law!

    I have a tremendous sense of accomplishment and fulfillment, a sense of satisfaction and gratitude. I know other survivors share these emotions — whether we are survivors from Hiroshima and Nagasaki; or test survivors from South Pacific island nations, Kazakhstan, Australia and Algeria; or survivors from uranium mining in Canada, the United States or the Congo. All those who have been victimized by the barbaric behavior of nine nations who continue to develop more horrendous weapons, prepared to repeat nuclear massacres far more devastating than the atomic bomb that leveled my hometown, Hiroshima. For the victims and survivors, this initial success with the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons is tremendously uplifting. I celebrate this moment with my brothers and sisters across the world who have been victimized, and still raise their voices, and still survive.

    We also celebrate with those people across the world who recognize the ultimate evil of nuclear weapons, instruments of radioactive violence and omnicide that have kept the entire world hostage for all these 75 years. We celebrate with the global community of anti-nuclear activists who have come together and have worked for the success of this treaty. I am especially grateful to my dear colleagues in the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons. ICAN laid the groundwork to collaborate across the divide of diplomacy and activism, to achieve something of profound and lasting importance.

    I also want to acknowledge how moved I am that in the preamble to the treaty, hibakusha are identified by name. This is the first time in international law that we have been so recognized. We share this recognition with other hibakusha across the world, those who have suffered radioactive harm from nuclear testing, from uranium mining, from secret experimentation. And furthermore, the treaty recognizes that indigenous people have been disproportionately affected by the production of nuclear weapons. We in hibakusha and indigenous communities uniquely understand that not only the use of nuclear weapons in war but also the testing and production of nuclear weapons causes death and unspeakable suffering through invisible radioactive contamination. And here the treaty recognizes that women and girls are more susceptible to the effects of radiation — that there are gendered implications to radioactive violence.

    I am moved to acknowledge the positive obligations of the treaty as well — such as victims assistance and environmental remediation which will be a hallmark for taking responsibility for the inter-generational effects of radiation. It is vitally important that we all understand that the nuclear age will continue far beyond the nuclear weapon age. We will need to contain and care for radioactive materials into the far future.

    But for now, in this joyous present moment, we can rejoice in making our first move. I cannot truly express with words my feelings of overwhelming gratitude. How we have struggled in spite of being confronted by indifference and ignorance! How we have struggled in spite of being ridiculed by nuclear armed and nuclear dependent states! In spite of that and more, we have made it to this point — nuclear weapons are now illegal under international law!

    Nuclear abolitionists everywhere can be incredibly encouraged and empowered by this new legal status. Now, with greater intensity and purpose, we will push forward. While this is a time to celebrate, it is not a time for us to relax. The world is ever more dangerous. Yes, we have made it to this point, but we have a long path to cover until we reach our goal of the total elimination of nuclear weapons.

    It is unlikely that I will see that day. It is unlikely that any atomic bomb survivor with their own lived memories will bear witness on that day but with the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, we can be certain that that beautiful day will dawn. And on that day, we hibakusha, test survivors, indigenous people and others, victim to the inter-generational cruelty of radioactive poison, will be remembered and someone alive at present will report to us. Because of our work, our solidarity, our love for this world, we will be a part of a much greater celebration in spirit, when nuclear disarmament will be achieved as part of a greater movement that encompasses peace, justice, equality and compassion for all.

    The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons has opened a new door, wide. Passing through it we begin a new chapter in our struggle — with a mighty embrace of gratitude from those we have lost, and a heartfelt welcome from those who are yet to come. The beginning of the end of nuclear weapons has arrived! Let us step through the doorway now!

    Setsuko Thurlow is a survivor of the US atomic bombing of Hiroshima, and a member of the NAPF Advisory Council.

  • 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

  • Unlike the Pandemic, Nuclear War Can Be Stopped Before it Begins

    Unlike the Pandemic, Nuclear War Can Be Stopped Before it Begins

    This article was originally published by Waging Nonviolence, and is reproduced here under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license

    Nuclear weapons have been posing a threat to humanity for 75 years — ever since the U.S. bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945.

    These days, our focus is understandably on the COVID-19 virus and the threat it poses to human life. But as we commemorate the anniversary of these bombings, it is important to acknowledge that unlike the coronavirus, nuclear weapons can only be remediated with prevention. Millions of people could be killed if a single nuclear bomb were detonated over a large city, and the added threats of radiation and retaliation could endanger all life on Earth.

    As political and socioeconomic instabilities grow, the risk of nuclear conflicts and even a global nuclear war is growing by the day. In fact, the world’s nuclear-armed countries spent a record $73 billion on their arsenal of weapons of mass destruction last year, almost half of that sum represented by the United States, followed by China. Mobilizing global action for the abolition of nuclear weapons — to safeguard health, justice and peace — is more important now than ever.

    “When societies become more unstable, all forms of violence become more likely,” says Rick Wayman, CEO of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation. “We, as individuals and as humanity, must overcome the root causes that have led to the past 75 years of nuclear weapons [development]. Absent this, we will continue to have national leaders that cling to nuclear weapons.”

    The dangerous choice that is still being made by some government leaders of nuclear-armed nations has been threatening the world’s population for decades. But the global health threat presented by nuclear war can be stopped before it begins. And the way to do it is through the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, or TPNW, which has been the focal point of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons.

    The road to nuclear disarmament

    Today, nine countries possess nuclear weapons — the United States, China, the United Kingdom, Russia, France, India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea — and it is estimated that they possess almost 15,000 nuclear warheads in total. Yet another report shows that 22 countries currently have one kilogram or more of weapons-usable nuclear materials, compared to 32 nations six years ago.

    On July 7, 2017, the TPNW was adopted by the United Nations as a multilateral, legally-binding instrument for nuclear disarmament. However, the treaty will only enter into force and prohibit the development, testing and use of nuclear weapons worldwide once 50 nations have signed and ratified it. That’s what the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, or ICAN, is working hard to achieve.

    ICAN is a coalition of non-governmental organizations in over 100 countries that won a Nobel Peace Prize in 2017 for its efforts to achieve a global nuclear weapons ban treaty. They have been working to raise public awareness about the catastrophic consequences of weapons of mass destruction, while persuading decision-makers and mobilizing citizens to pressure their governments to sign and ratify the TPNW — a treaty that they have managed to bring forward after years of advocacy meetings at the United Nations and in national parliaments.

    Daniel Högsta, ICAN’s campaign coordinator, says the TPNW is “the most promising new vehicle for changing attitudes and the political status quo around nuclear weapons.” He adds that residents and leaders of cities and towns “have a special responsibility and obligation to speak out on this issue” for nuclear disarmament, given that these places are the main targets of nuclear attacks.

    ICAN developed a Cities Appeal initiative and a #ICANSave online campaign, to encourage local authorities to lead the way in supporting the treaty, building momentum for national governments to sign and ratify it. This is usually done through council resolutions, official statement or press releases from municipal authorities communicating their support for the global ban treaty, sometimes including nuclear weapons divestment commitments.

    “We have been very excited by the positive responses from cities all around the world,” Högsta said. “We have just surpassed 300 cities and towns that have joined [the ICAN appeal], which includes municipalities of all sizes, from huge metropolitan areas like Los Angeles, Berlin, Sydney, Paris and Toronto, to small but nevertheless committed towns.”

    These steps are not only fast tracking the success of the TPNW, explains Högsta, but it is also challenging the assumption that local politicians cannot influence foreign policy decisions. In the United States, for example, many city leaders have joined the ICAN appeal and committed to divest public pension funds from nuclear weapons companies, although President Trump has not yet shown the same interest.

    The humanitarian appeal

    The cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were completely destroyed by the nuclear bombs dropped over Japan, which killed more than 200,000 people immediately and injured countless others. Those who survived suffered long-term health effects such as cancers and chronic diseases due to the exposure to radiation. Yet their story remains very much alive.

    Some hibakusha people — survivors of the atomic bombings from 75 years ago — have partnered with ICAN to share their testimonies and make sure the world does not forget about the catastrophic consequences of nuclear conflicts. Setsuko Thurlow, one of the survivors and an anti-nuclear activist, has been sending letters to government leaders worldwide to encourage them to join the TPNW. She sent a letter to Donald Trump last month.

    Doctors around the world have also been warning about the dreadful consequences of potential nuclear conflicts amid the coronavirus pandemic, given that health professionals and facilities are already overwhelmed. A recent study showed that a limited nuclear exchange between just two countries, like India and Pakistan, would be enough to cause a global disaster in food production and natural ecosystems. That’s why these weapons must not be used and countries should commit to banning them once and for all, before irreversible damage to humanity and the planet is done.

    Fortunately, this is close to being achieved. Chuck Johnson, director of nuclear programs at the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, ICAN’s founding organization, says that 82 nations have already signed the TPNW and 40 have ratified it. That means only 10 more ratifications are needed for the global ban treaty to enter into force.

    The world has never been so close to abolishing nuclear weapons and there’s hope this may be achieved by the end of this year. After all, the pandemic is teaching government leaders about the need to put humanity at the center of security plans.

    The role of peace education

    The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation is a partner organization of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons. Yet their focus has been on training people in peace literacy.

    Wayman says that to achieve a world free of nuclear weapons — and free of other serious problems such as wars, mass shootings, racism and sexism — we need to look at the root causes of why our society continues to embrace these forms of violence. And it all comes down to non-physical human needs, such as belonging, self-worth and transcendence. “If people can’t find healthy ways of fulfilling them, they will find unhealthy ways,” Wayman said.

    He believes that peace literacy can give people “the tools they need to recognize, address and heal the root causes of these serious problems plaguing societies around the world.” That is crucial because if people do not confront the root causes of violence and engage in healthy and peaceful relations with themselves and others, nuclear weapons may not be entirely abolished.

    Take slavery for example. Most countries in the world passed laws to abolish slavery in the 19th or 20th centuries, but slavery-like working conditions and forced labor are still reported nowadays. That’s because racism and other unhealthy, violent forms of human relations have not ceased to exist and oftentimes are not discouraged by individuals, organizations or politicians.

    Therefore, passing laws to ban nuclear weapons is an important step, but it is probably not enough to end this public health threat. Educating people, across all levels of society, about the importance of doing no harm and practicing nonviolence is fundamental for building a future where peace, not war, is the status quo.

    Given the immense challenges our global society is facing today, especially in terms of health, it is time to mobilize for nuclear disarmament. As Setsuko Thurlow, a hibakusha, said in her letter to President Trump: “Every second of every day, nuclear weapons endanger everyone we love and everything we hold dear. Is it not yet the time for soul searching, critical thinking and positive action about the choices we make for human survival?”

  • Youth Activism on the TPNW Program

    Youth Activism on the TPNW Program

    In mid-February of 2020, the Peace Action Fund of New York State, NuclearBan.US, Treaty Awareness Campaign, International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, and Nuclear Age Peace Foundation launched the Youth Activism on the TPNW (Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons) Program.  The coordinators were Emily Rubino of the Peace Action Fund of New York State; Eust Eustis of the Treaty Awareness Campaign; Molly McGinty of the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War; and Christian N. Ciobanu of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation.

    As part of this program, the coordinators brought 15 students (11 from New York and 4 from Boston) to the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN)’s Forum on How to Ban Bombs and Influence People. This forum was held at Salle Olympe de Gouges, 15 Rue Merlin, 75011 Paris, France.

    Upon arriving to Paris, the youth participated in an informal orientation, where they received the itinerary and met with one another. 5 Swiss students from the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies and 1 doctoral student from Sciences Po also attended the orientation.

    During the second and third days of the program, the youth attended the ICAN Forum. At the Forum, Setsuko Thurlow, a survivor of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, delivered the keynote address.

    Following her moving address, the forum convened a series of panels, which focused on activism 101; the risks and consequences of nuclear weapons; detoxing from deterrence; how activists can work with parliamentarians and members of the financial community; how art can be used as a social justice tool; and how activists have challenged established narratives from various actors in the world such as the military, climate change, nuclear weapons, patriarchy, big business, and colonial powers. The panelists included: Jean-Marie Collin of ICAN France; Beatrice Fihn of ICAN; Ray Acheson of Reaching Critical Will; Susi Snyder of PAX, Catherine Killough of Women Cross DMZ; and Leona Morgan of the Nuclear Issues Group, amongst others. A list of the speakers can be found here.

    During the final session of the Forum, participants heard from prominent actors of the climate movement, professional NGOs and single-issue coalitions about different pathways to achieving change.

    Throughout the Forum, Susan Chapas, an intern of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, interviewed students about their thoughts on nuclear disarmament. These video clips will be available soon.

    The participants felt empowered and are thinking about how they can shift the discourse on how nuclear weapons are discussed and engage in conversations with the public about the TPNW. Additionally, many young people shared that the Forum was the first time that they had heard about the intersectionality of climate change and nuclear weapons. Usually, they only hear about these issues in separate siloed discussions.

    The participants also appreciated the fact that many of the panelists and participants of this program were women. A young person shared that women’s empowerment is vital, but unfortunately lacking at many disarmament forums. Thus, it was important for her to hear from strong female activists and participate in a program composed of young women.

  • Testimony to the New York City Council

    My name is Alice Slater and I’m on the Board of World Beyond War and a UN Representative of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation. I am so grateful to this Council for stepping up to the plate and taking historic action to finally ban the bomb! I was born in the Bronx and went to Queens College, when tuition was only five dollars a semester, in the 1950s during the terrible Red Scare of the McCarthy era. At the height of the Cold War we had 70,000 nuclear bombs on the planet. There are now 14,000 with about 13,000 bombs held by the US and Russia. The other seven nuclear-armed countries—have 1,000 bombs between them. So it’s really up to us and Russia to move first to negotiate for their abolition as outlined in the new Treaty. At this time, none of the nuclear weapons states and our US partners in NATO, Japan, Australia and South Korea are supporting it.

    It may surprise you to know, that Russia has generally been the eager proposer of treaties for verified nuclear and missile disarmament, and, sadly, it is our country, in the grip of the military-industrial complex, that Eisenhower warned against, that provokes the nuclear arms race with Russia, from the time Truman rejected Stalin’s request to put the bomb under UN control, to Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Obama rejecting Gorbachev and Putin proposals, documented in my submitted testimony, to Trump walking out of the INF Treaty.

    Walt Kelly, cartoonist of the Pogo comic strip during the 1950s Red Scare, has Pogo saying, “We met the enemy and he is us!”

    We now have a breakthrough opportunity for global grassroots actions in Cities and States to reverse course from plummeting our Earth into catastrophic nuclear disaster. At this moment, there are 2500 nuclear tipped missiles in the US and Russia targeting all of our major cities. As for New York City, as the song goes, “If we can make it here, we’ll make it anywhere!” and it’s wonderful and inspiring that a majority of this City Council is willing to add it’s voice for a nuclear free world! Thank you so much!

  • Discussions on the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons at the 2019 UNGA First Committee

    Discussions on the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons at the 2019 UNGA First Committee

    As we approach the 2020 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference, it is important to reflect upon the current situation with nuclear weapons and the sliver of hope that humanity now has in the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.

    Brief History

    As part of the grand bargain between the Nuclear Weapon Sates (NWS) and the Non-Nuclear Weapon States (NNWS), the NWS agreed that they would “pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament.” In exchange, the NNWS would not acquire nuclear weapons.

    For decades, the NWS have not lived up to their part of their bargain to completely eliminate their nuclear weapons. Because of their opposition, 14,000 nuclear weapons still exist today. Additionally, the NWS have continuously modernized their nuclear weapons arsenals. In the case of the United States (U.S.), it plans to spend $494 billion over the next decade, which is an average of around $50 billion per year. Furthermore, according to the Center for Arms Control and Nonproliferation, U.S. modernization plans could cost as much as $1 trillion over the next three decades. Consequently, the NWS have continued to dangle Damocles’ Sword over the heads of all states and humanity.

    At countless NPT Review meetings, the NWS claimed that the “conditions were not yet ripe” for them to disarm their nuclear weapons. They also praised themselves for agreeing upon on a glossary of terms as a “step” towards a world free of nuclear weapons.

    Emergence of the TPNW

    As it became increasingly clear that the NWS would not ban their nuclear weapons, the NNWS and Non-governmental Organizations (NGOs) said enough is enough and took matters into their own hands. These states recognized the missing legal gap in Article VI of the NPT in the form of a legal prohibition for the complete and total elimination of nuclear weapons as articulated in the Humanitarian Pledge.

    With this in mind, the vast majority of states, in partnership with the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), successfully negotiated a Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in July of 2017 and one hundred and twenty two states voted in favor of the adoption of the treaty. The treaty unequivocally bans nuclear weapons once and for all. It is compatible with the NPT and is a necessary element for its implementation.

    To date, eighty states have signed and thirty-four states have ratified it. Fifty states are required to ratify it before it enters into humanitarian law. Once it becomes part of international customary humanitarian law, it will create a legal norm against nuclear weapons and completely prohibit them.

    2019 First Committee: Civil Society Statements

    To highlight the importance of the TPNW, the ICAN and international youth underscored the necessity for states to support the TPNW. ICAN underscored that:

    14,000 nuclear weapons that exist in the world today pose an acute existential threat to all of us. No nation is immune to the radioactive fallout that would transcend national borders if these weapons were ever used again. No nation is immune to the climate disruption, agricultural and economic collapse, mass human displacement and famine that would inevitably follow even a limited nuclear war.

    Additionally, young people reiterated that nuclear weapons remain an immediate threat facing humanity; and therefore, they must be banned.

    2019 First Committee’s resolution

    Due to the fact that an overwhelming number of states have expressed their support for the TPNW and their opposition to the status quo, fifty states delivered statements in support of the treaty during First Committee.

    Austria introduced its resolution entitled “Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons” (L.12). Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Bangladesh, Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Botswana, Brazil, Cabo Verde, Chile, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Gambia, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Indonesia, Ireland, Jamaica, Kazakhstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lesotho, Libya, Liechtenstein, Malawi, Mexico, Namibia, Nepal, New Zealand, Nigeria, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, South Africa, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Uganda, Uruguay and Viet Nam co-sponsored the resolution.

    The resolution contains seven operative paragraphs, including:

    Op 5, which calls upon those States in a position to do so to promote adherence to the Treaty through bilateral, sub regional, regional and multilateral contacts, outreach and other means;

    Op. 6. Requests the Secretary-General, as depositary of the Treaty, to report to the General Assembly at its seventy-fifth session on the status of signature and ratification, acceptance, approval or accession of the Treaty;

    States requested votes on both operative paragraphs.

    On Op. 5, 128 states voted in favor, 40 states voted against it, and 13 abstained on it. Concerning Op. 6, 109 states voted in favor, 26 states voted against, and 23 states abstained. As a whole, 119 states voted in favor, 41 states voted against, and 15 states abstained.

    The Opposition

    The NWS and their allies opposed the resolution. In a joint statement, France, the United Kingdom (UK), and the U.S. explained that “nuclear deterrence is essential to international security.” They further contended that the TPNW “denies this reality.” This assertion that nuclear deterrence is essential to international security completely contravenes the spirit and intent of the NPT.

    In its national statement, the U.S. articulated that the TPNW “will not move us any closer to the eliminating nuclear weapons and has increased political divisions that make future disarmament efforts more difficult.” It further claimed that methodical approaches, such as creating the environment/conditions, including verification and compliance, will be more effective than the TPNW at achieving a world free of nuclear weapons.

    Even though the U.S. claims that it supports the creation of an environment or conditions for nuclear disarmament, President Trump’s actions suggest otherwise. As described in the 2018 US Nuclear Posture Review, the Trump administration is interested in developing low-yield nuclear weapons. Further, the posture explicitly mentions the U.S. could employ nuclear weapons in response to “significant non-nuclear strategic attacks.” This includes but is not limited to “attacks on U.S., allied, or partner civilian population or infrastructure.” Furthermore, the document asserts that the U.S. “could employ nuclear weapons in response to “attacks on U.S. or allied nuclear forces, their command and control, or warning and attack assessment capabilities.” This new policy suggests that the U.S. would use nuclear weapons to respond to a cyber attack and categorically rejects a sole purpose policy. Considering the policies set forth in U.S. Nuclear Posture Review, it is hard to fathom that the U.S. cares about creating the environment or conditions for a world free of nuclear weapons.

    The UK presented a similar argument, contending that the TPNW risks undermining the NPT and fails to address technical and procedural challenges that must be overcome to achieve nuclear disarmament.

    Hope

    Despite the opposition from the NWS and their allied states, the TPNW will enter into force extremely soon. In fact, as illustrated in the  Nuclear Weapons Ban Treaty Monitor, the rate of ratification and adherence to the TPNW amongst states after 24 months has been higher than the majority of other WMD treaties as is shown in the graph below.

    The entry into force of the TPNW will mark a new era for the international community. It will strengthen the rule of law and the NPT. It will also send a clear signal that the vast majority of states will not remain hostage to a small group of states.

    We cannot continue to live on the precipice of annihilation. Thus, states and civil society groups must continue to collaborate to ensure that the TPNW- a robust complementary instrument to the NPT- enters into force.

    Top image of UN General Assembly Hall by Patrick Gruban, cropped and downsampled by Pine – originally posted to Flickr as UN General Assembly, CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=4806869

  • Santa Barbara City Council Passes Revised Legislative Platform Supporting the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons

    Santa Barbara City Council Passes Revised Legislative Platform Supporting the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons

    For Immediate Release

    Contact:   Sandy Jones  (805) 965-3443; sjones@napf.org

     

    Santa Barbara–On June 18, 2019, the Santa Barbara City Council voted 6 to 1 to include in the new, revised legislative platform for the city, language that supports the prohibition of nuclear weapons, subject to Congressional oversight.

    The city’s legislative platform serves to summarize the Council’s official position on a variety of state and federal policy issues and authorizes City representatives, most commonly the Mayor, to take action on pending legislation on behalf of the City. It also enables the City to act quickly when advocacy is needed.

    This particular revision to the legislative platform was introduced to the City Council by the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation (NAPF), a non-profit, non-partisan organization based in Santa Barbara whose mission is to educate, advocate and inspire action for a peaceful world, free of nuclear weapons.

    The platform language is based primarily on the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, which was adopted at the United Nations in 2017 and would outlaw the use, threat of use, production and possession of nuclear weapons. Including this language in the legislative platform puts Santa Barbara at the forefront of nuclear abolition, along with other cities that have adopted similar language including Ojai, Los Angeles, Washington, D.C and Baltimore.

    Rick Wayman, NAPF’s incoming CEO, spoke at the City Council meeting, stating, “This treaty is the direction in which the world is moving and it’s incumbent upon us as citizens–as human beings–to do everything within our power, both individually and collectively, to prevent nuclear weapons from being used.”

    He continued by explaining, “City and state governments do not set foreign policy. But this issue transcends foreign policy. As anyone who has experienced a nuclear explosion will tell you, the devastation is beyond imagination. And the ability of first responders to deal with this situation is non-existent. Cities are the targets of nuclear weapons.”

    “For far too long, the world has teetered on the brink of nuclear war and it continues to this very minute. It’s up to all of us to change that course. By adopting this language as part of its legislative platform, the city of Santa Barbara would be doing a great service to its citizens and to the world.”

    #             #             #

    If you would like to interview Rick Wayman, NAPF’s Deputy Director, please call the Foundation at (805) 965-3443 or (805) 696-5159; A photo of Wayman is below.

    The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation’s mission is to educate, advocate and inspire action for a peaceful world, free of nuclear weapons. Founded in 1982, the Foundation is comprised of individuals and organizations worldwide who realize the imperative for peace in the Nuclear Age. The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation is a non-partisan, non-profit organization with consultative status to the United Nations. For more information, visit wagingpeace.org.

  • Auckland Statement on the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons

    Auckland Statement on the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons

    5-7 December 2018 Auckland, New Zealand

    The TPNW and the Pacific

    1. Pacific countries (Cook Islands, Fiji, Kiribati, Nauru, New Zealand, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu) came together in Auckland from 5-7 December 2018 to discuss the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), to take stock of the Treaty from a regional perspective, to assess its prospects for advancing nuclear disarmament and global security, and to canvass progress toward its entry into force.

    2. The Conference took place at a time of increasing concern in the Pacific region, and globally, regarding the slow pace of progress toward a nuclear weapon-free world and the serious implications of this (including for the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)) in view of the lack of progress in implementation of the nuclear disarmament obligation of Article VI.

    3. Rising tensions, the modernisation of nuclear arsenals, the continued reliance on nuclear weapons in military and security concepts as well as on high alert postures, and threats regarding the possible use of nuclear weapons are widely seen as increasing the risk of a deliberate or accidental nuclear detonation.

    4. For its part, the Pacific is only too well aware of the catastrophic consequences of any nuclear detonation as a result of its own experience with over 300 nuclear weapon tests carried out  over  many  years  and  which  has  resulted  in  long-term humanitarian  and environmental harm to parts of the region. Efforts by Pacific countries to stop this testing; to “promote the national security of each country in the region and the common security of all”; and, so far as lies within the region’s power, to retain “the bounty and beauty of [its] land and sea”; were key factors in the adoption of the Treaty of Rarotonga in 1985 and its establishment of the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone.

    5. Pacific countries continued after the end of testing in the region in 1996 to show leadership in efforts to advance nuclear This reflected their awareness that all regions and peoples have a stake in international security and an important part to play in efforts to advance International Humanitarian Law and the elimination of all weapons of mass destruction.

    6. Building on their full support for the NPT as the cornerstone of nuclear disarmament, and for other aspects of the global nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation regime including the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), many Pacific countries took an active part in the Humanitarian Initiative on Nuclear Weapons with Pacific voices bearing witness to the horrors of nuclear weapon testing. Many Pacific countries were active, too, in the subsequent negotiations which resulted in the adoption of the TPNW on 7 July In this, they were giving reality to the words of the Pacific Conference of Churches that nuclear weapons “are no good for the Pacific, and no good for the world”.

    7. Five Pacific countries had already ratified the TPNW (Cook Islands, New Zealand, Palau, Samoa, and Vanuatu), and three others had signed it (Fiji, Kiribati, and Tuvalu) by the time of the convening in Auckland of the Pacific Conference.

    The Pacific Conference

    8. The Pacific Conference on the TPNW was hosted by New Zealand with an opening reception and welcome remarks given by the New Zealand Minister for Disarmament and Arms Control, Deputy Prime Minister, Rt Hon Winston Noting the increasing risks which nuclear weapons entail, Minister Peters expressed his hope that the region would be as strong in its support for the TPNW as it had been for the Treaty of Rarotonga. He conveyed New Zealand’s willingness to partner with its Pacific neighbours in carrying forward priority topics identified for action in the UN Secretary-General’s recent “Agenda for Disarmament”.

    9. A “Global Youth Forum on Nuclear Disarmament and the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons” was held concurrently with the Conference attendees welcomed the opportunity to engage with youth participants from NZ and from the wider Pacific, as well as further afield.

    10. In a video message to the Conference at its outset, New Zealand’s Prime Minister, Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern, described the TPNW as a significant first step towards the elimination of nuclear weapons. She invited Pacific countries to join together in supporting it and taking the Treaty of Rarotonga global.

    11. A statement was also delivered on behalf of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Vanuatu, Hon Ralph Regenvanu, highlighting the two key issues for Pacific countries of nuclear disarmament and climate change. Pacific Island nations must “continue to work in unity against the use of nuclear weapons for our good and, most importantly, for the good of our future generations”.

    12. Keynote speaker, Beatrice Fihn – Executive Director of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize laureate – conveyed ICAN’s pride in standing with Pacific nations to advance the Noting that “voices from the Pacific continue to bear witness to the horrors of nuclear weapon testing”, she attributed the awarding of the Nobel Prize in part to ICAN’s work with Pacific survivors of testing. She stressed the lack of an effective response capacity to any use of nuclear weapons, and observed that “the only way to prevent nuclear weapons from harming us is by getting rid of them – no other solution is realistic.”

    13. The participation at the Conference of representatives from Austria, Brazil, Ireland and South Africa – members of the Core Group which led the adoption of the TPNW – was welcomed by all The Conference also benefitted from presentations by colleagues from Auckland and Princeton Universities and input from the New Zealand Red Cross on behalf also of the Red Cross Movement.

    14. Participants noted that the TPNW was fully consistent with the existing nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation regime including the NPT and Equally, they emphasised the consistency of the TPNW with regional instruments, most notably the Treaty of Rarotonga, but also the recent Boe Declaration on Regional Security which reaffirms the importance of the rules-based international order founded on the UN Charter, and adherence to international law, and which outlines an expanded concept of security inclusive of human security and humanitarian assistance. It was also highlighted that the TPNW, and efforts to advance nuclear disarmament, support progress in attainment of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, in particular SDG 16 with its focus on peace, justice and strong institutions.

    15. Conference participants accepted the clear moral and humanitarian rationale for joining the Recalling the words of a former UN Secretary-General that “there are no right hands for wrong weapons”, the advantage of the TPNW’s unambiguous prohibition of nuclear weapons was noted both in advancing disarmament and in reducing the incentive for proliferation. A number of those who had already ratified the TPNW conveyed their pride at their country’s leadership on this issue. Palau had led the way for the region, being the first to ratify the Treaty.

    16. Participants exchanged views on key provisions of the Discussion on Article 1 of the TPNW centred on the range of prohibitions which were included in that Article as well as those activities (such as military co-operation and transit) which were not prohibited. Discussion on Article 2 revealed that one country, with praise-worthy promptness, had already forwarded its declaration to the UN Secretary-General.

    17. The discussion under Article 3 highlighted the region’s commitment to meeting its International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards In this regard, it was noted that almost all Pacific countries (and all attendees at the Pacific Conference) do have a Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement in place and a considerable number have also adopted the Additional Protocol. Under the TPNW, if a State has the Additional Protocol in place at the time of entry into force of the Treaty, it must retain this as its minimum standard.

    18. Discussion on Article 7 served to emphasise the region’s strong interest in its provisions for victim assistance and environmental remediation of contaminated Access to such assistance was recognised as being of importance in the region in view of the legacy of nuclear testing.

    19. Emphasis was given to the obligation in Article 12 to promote universal adherence of all states to the Treaty.

    Next Steps on the TPNW

    20. It was recognised that the Pacific region has a role to play in adding its voice to the global effort to strengthen the norm against these inhumane weapons and to increase their In the Pacific, “we are small, but we can have a big impact.”

    21. Participants acknowledged the need to expedite the Treaty’s entry into force and lend weight to efforts to advance its A range of options were discussed for taking the TPNW forward in the region, as well as the potential to work with other regions around the world. Wider ratification in the Pacific region would be assisted by greater awareness-raising and by ensuring capacity for its implementation.

    22. In this regard, the range of offers of assistance to regional countries in moving forward with the Treaty – including from New Zealand, Core Group countries, the New Zealand Red Cross and International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), as well as by Auckland and Princeton Universities, and by ICAN – were welcomed by participants.

    23. Participants were also encouraged to make use of the existing assistance tools including the Signature and Ratification Kit for the Treaty published by the ICRC as well as the Information Kit on Signature and Ratification published by the UN Office of Disarmament Affairs (ODA). Use could also be made of the recent publication entitled “The TPNW: Setting the Record Straight” produced by the Norwegian Academy of International Law, and a range of other resources.

    24. Many participants agreed to work toward signature and ratification (as applicable) of the Participants agreed to stay in close touch in the lead-up to entry into force of the TPNW and to continue to engage actively, including in all appropriate regional contexts.

  • 2018 Evening for Peace Acceptance Speech

    2018 Evening for Peace Acceptance Speech

    I’m really humbled by this award and grateful for the opportunity to celebrate this evening with you. I want to start first by thanking David Krieger, President of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, and of course the board and the staff of the foundation for their long-term commitment to the abolition of nuclear weapons and their work as one of the original organizations to join ICAN. I also want to give a special thanks to Jill Dexter and Diane Meyer Simon, the co-chairs of the honorary committee that put together this wonderful event tonight. It has really been a remarkable evening and it’s not over yet. I also would like to take a moment to recognize Kikuko Otake, a survivor of Hiroshima (hibakusha), for being here. It is the survivors of nuclear weapons who remind us why we’re doing this. Their human stories make us understand why this is an imperative issue. I would also like to thank California State Assemblymember Monique Limón for being here. She was responsible for the great resolution that shows that California, is supporting the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. Yay!

    Asm. Monique Limón with ICAN Executive Director Beatrice Fihn.

    So working in nuclear disarmament for the last few years, means constantly finding yourself in a state of either complete terror or inspiring hope. In that sense too it’s a little bit like being a parent. But instead of young children like the two ones that I have in my home giving us near nervous breakdowns constantly it’s the two most powerful men in the world acting like children. Threats to wipe out an entire nation on Twitter: terror. A majority of states in the world, over 120, agreeing to prohibit nuclear weapons rooted in humanitarian reality and law: hope. North Korea testing a missile that could reach us in this room: terror. The treaty opening for signature a year ago and already been signed by 69 states, ratified by 19, at a record pace: hope. Over one million Americans waking up one morning to a text message saying “ballistic threat inbound to Hawaii, seek immediate shelter. This is not a drill”: absolute sheer terror. And people are beginning to wake up to the reality that we are still living under the threat of these weapons every single day.

    They are starting to experience the terror of the Cold War, and it’s our job to give them hope. Following the end of the Cold War, we were promised a world where reasonable men and democratic states would slowly reduce their nuclear arsenals in an orderly fashion, until there were none left: from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty under California’s own Ronald Reagan; to START under George Bush; to the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty under Bill Clinton; to the Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty under George W. Bush, when he said, “This treaty liquidates the Cold War legacy of nuclear hostility between our countries”; and Obama’s soaring Prague speech calling for the end of nuclear weapons era and his support of New START as the latest treaty. But the weapons weren’t liquidated. The threat remains. The Nuclear Test Ban Treaty was never ratified by the Senate, and just yesterday Donald Trump confirmed plans of the United States pulling out of the INF Treaty. You know, in honesty, it would be all too easy to just blame Donald Trump as a rogue, but the truth is that a system that one impulsive or unpredictable person can uproot is not an appropriate security system in the first place. Maybe the problem is not the man, maybe it is the weapon.

    Since the end of the Cold War, India, Pakistan, North Korea have become nuclear-armed states. You know, we might see Iran join them, and Saudi Arabia has said that if Iran can develop nuclear capability, they will too. The old plan has not been working. So what went wrong? Why are all these weapons still here threatening us all almost three decades on from the fall of the Berlin Wall?

    It’s not the treaties. Each one has value and must be fought for, including the INF right now, but it is a fact that we forgot to actually outright reject nuclear weapons – to ban them.

    Thanks to the leadership of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, one of the first organizations to join ICAN, we are seeing monumental progress in a time of great danger – hope and opportunity in this time of terror and fear. The past approach was centered around abstract concepts of security, realism about geopolitics, but they really ignore the reality that keeping these weapons around forever means that they will eventually be used again. They ignore the reality that if you say nuclear weapons are instruments of power, and they keep you safe, other nations will want to follow you. Then they ignore the reality that nuclear weapons cause humanitarian catastrophes and violate the laws of war. The mission of ICAN and our many partner organizations, including the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, was to bring those realities into the conversation about nuclear weapons.

    We highlighted the humanitarian reality of these weapons. Relief organizations would not be able to send help into nuclear blast zones. As the International Committee of the Red Cross stated, “There will be no effective means to provide aid to the dying and wounded.” People will essentially be on their own. Our recent climate modeling shows a relatively limited nuclear exchange involving about a hundred nuclear weapons between India and Pakistan could result in a nuclear winter lasting two to three years. Beyond the unacceptable immediate deaths from the blast and fires, billions more around the world would die from the resulting famine. Our food system would collapse and our societies would likely follow.

    We told these stories where they needed to be heard. And most importantly we brought democracy to disarmament. For decades, the non-nuclear armed states have been told that they have no say in this issue. They were told that they have no right to speak up and create laws even though many bore the burden of these weapons when they were tested, and they will all bear the burden if they’re used again. Through working with those states and negotiating the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, we help those nations exercise their rights on the international stage and fulfill their obligation to protect their citizens.

    The treaty was adopted by 122 states at the UN last year, bringing credible pressure to the nuclear-armed states and countries living under the nuclear umbrella. It will create even more pressure once it legally enters into force when fifty states have ratified it.

    NAPF Deputy Director Rick Wayman spoke at the negotiations for the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in June 2017.

    But it’s not just nation states. Local communities and individuals play a really important role.

    So do we have any University of California graduates here? Gauchos? Banana Slugs? Bruins? Bears? I really have to admit I had no idea what those things meant before, but all of you UC alumni and in fact every single taxpaying California resident has a unique opportunity to effect change.

    The atomic weapons dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were designed at a lab run by University of California. Every U.S. nuclear weapon ever tested was designed by a UC lab. Every American warhead currently deployed around the world was designed in one of those labs now co-managed by the University of California. These labs are now developing Trump’s new generation of nuclear weapons. And their current task? Make nuclear weapons that are more likely to be used, what they call more usable.

    Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in the East Bay will receive nearly $1.5 billion in 2019 from the U.S. government. Eighty-eight percent of that will be going to nuclear weapons. While they have their grants, we have our plans.

    We’re targeting cities and states, businesses like right here in Santa Barbara, banks like Wells Fargo, universities, like the University of California, and we will succeed. And how do I know that?

    Well, first, we have the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. We aren’t just guessing this, we know this approach works because we’ve seen it happen with other weapons: biological weapons, chemical weapons, landmines and cluster munitions. Treaties, prohibition treaties, they have an impact. We know that shifting norms and changing law have a concrete impact.

    We can look at examples like Textron, for example, a U.S. company that actually stopped producing cluster bombs in 2016, even though the U.S. did not participate in the negotiations for the ban of cluster bombs or have any intention of signing or ratifying it. But because the rest of the world had banned them, it suddenly became bad business.

    Second, because we have partners like the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, working in this state and across the country, and have allies like all of you here. The ICAN movement has grown to over 500 organizations in over 100 countries working across generations to finally end the threat of nuclear weapons.

    And third, because we’re already having historic success even without the nuclear-armed states’ administrations on board. Take California for example. In a true expression of representative democracy, the California state legislature has said that it is their role to tell their federal counterparts how to represent California on the world stage, and we are telling them to embrace the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. They passed Assembly Joint Resolution 33 to do just that and to make nuclear disarmament the centerpiece of our national security policy and spearhead a global effort to prevent nuclear war. And even more local, the L.A. City Council recently passed a similar resolution, and a Santa Barbara resolution to make Santa Barbara a nuclear free city is in the works, and the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation has been working to make that happen.

    The California State Legislature adopted a resolution in August 2018 calling on the U.S. government to embrace the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.

    This state and those cities will join a host of major cities around the world who are speaking up on the rational side of nuclear disarmament through the treaty. ICAN will soon be launching a new campaign for a groundswell of local action: cities, regions, businesses, all joining our cause. What happens in these communities, in these cities, in California, matters around the world. I know this because I’ve heard it directly from global decision makers.

    Just a few weeks ago during the leader’s week at the United Nations in New York, people from as far away as Africa were talking about California embracing the treaty. It has motivated and inspired diplomats and leaders everywhere else in the world and your work is changing attitudes about what is possible and having a direct impact on building a nuclear weapons free world. This is really what momentum looks like, and this is democracy, and this is the impact that partner organizations of ICAN like the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation are having right now.

    I know many of you here have long cared about this issue and to you I say, never sink to the unimaginable level of those who tell you that nuclear disarmament is a pipe dream, that the U.S. will never give up their nuclear weapons.Prove them wrong. And some of you, many young people and students in the crowd, never knew the duck and cover drills of the Cold War and the constant fear of nuclear attack, and to you I say we need a new generation of leaders to take up the mantle of peace so that you will never have to know those fears. You inherited a problem not of your own making. But by the same token, you can better imagine a new international security not based on the risk of nuclear weapons, because many others can’t. Don’t buy into their terror, and join us on the side of hope.

    We’ve had a lot of very powerful opponents in this work, and they told us that we would never be taken seriously; we were. They told us that we would never ban nuclear weapons; we have. They told us the people would never feel secure without nuclear weapons, but the opposite is true.

    Now when they tell you it is not worth trying, that the U.S. will never give up its nuclear weapons, what will you choose? To continue to live in terror, or to join us on the side of hope? You are here tonight and you are part of this Evening for Peace and you support the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, so I know your answers pretty much already. And my question for you all is then, who will you bring with you on this journey and what will you do tonight, and tomorrow, and the next day, to assure that hope will win the day? This movement really needs your passion, your talent, and your commitment.

    And with that, and with partners like the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, we will end nuclear weapons before they end us.

    Thank you.