Nuclear Age Peace Foundation

Tag: youth

  • Where Are They Now? Lauren Lankenau

    Where Are They Now? Lauren Lankenau

    Interns have always played a vital role at NAPF and we love staying in touch with them after they leave us and begin their careers.

    Lauren Lankenau interned with us during the spring of 2018, shortly before leaving Santa Barbara to attend Vanderbilt University Law School. This summer, Lauren will work with Keller Rohrback, L.L.P., the law firm that represented the Marshall Islands in the lawsuits we strongly supported.

    We caught up with Lauren to find out how her time at NAPF has influenced her life thus far…

    NAPF: In what ways did your internship at NAPF impact your life?

    Lauren: My internship with NAPF allowed me to explore nuclear issues outside the classroom setting and ultimately gave me a type of solace knowing that I too can make a difference in this world.

    NAPF: The Nuclear Zero Lawsuits were filed in 2014, just about six years ago. What was it about these lawsuits that interested you?

    Lauren: The ability to give a voice to people harmed by government entities is what interested me about the Marshall Islands case. The tale of environmental exploitation without adequate recompense is far too common. I want to hold people accountable for their actions.

    NAPF: Would you say that your time at NAPF furthered your interest in becoming an activist and using your voice for justice?

    Lauren: I always had an interest in enacting change, but was unsure what mode would be most impactful. At the time of my internship, I was focusing primarily on science. Working at NAPF showed me that activism is actually a more effective way to prevent environmental harm. My internship coincided with my switch from science to activism.

  • 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.

  • Valeria Salamanca: In Her Own Words

    Valeria Salamanca: In Her Own Words

    Tell us a little about your journey to your current position at Tri-Valley Cares? What drove you to commit to nuclear issues?

    Well, to be honest, I stumbled upon nuclear issues. I knew that I was drawn to the world of nonprofits and activism, but I hadn’t chosen a specific issue.

    A family friend had been involved with Tri-Valley CAREs for a few years and knew they were looking for someone to help with outreach in the Latino community, which is very prevalent in the Central Valley. I had just graduated from college with a degree in marketing and had moved back home to Tracy. I was looking for part-time work so it turned out to be perfect timing!

    I didn’t know much about nuclear issues beforehand, but once I became a part of Tri-Valley CAREs, I couldn’t believe the amount of information kept from the public eye. I had lived in Tracy for over 15 years, yet my family didn’t know that we live less than 10 miles from an explosive testing facility conducting toxic bomb blasts used to support nuclear weapon development, a.k.a. Livermore Lab’s Site 300. My community deserves to know if they are subject to toxic air at the hands of DOE-Livermore Lab. The lack of information and resources to the subjected communities is why I will always support this issue.

    As a younger woman in the field of nuclear abolition, how have you seen gender impact your work? Have you had any female mentors along your professional journey thus far?

    The work we do at Tri-Valley CAREs is powered by the female anti-nuclear activist badass, Marylia Kelley. She is the backbone of our organization and I have had the honor to work directly with her on a regular basis. I don’t know how she does it, but she will use every last drop of energy until the job gets done. Being able to see someone like her with so much passion for nuclear issues has definitely made me raise my standards. She has the greatest attention to detail and knack for effectiveness and clarity. I even see myself implementing lessons I learned from working with her outside of the office. I’m proud to say that I’ve had the privilege to collaborate, create and execute projects that have and will result in victories for peace and justice.

    Also, I didn’t realize until just now that most of the community Ieaders in the Central Valley I have collaborated with have all been women. I guess that indicates positive leadership trends!

    As the ‘bilingual outreach specialist’, can you tell us how you view your role connecting the work of Tri-Valley Cares with youth and Latinx communities? Why is this role so important?

    According to 2016 census data, Tracy is 39.4% Latino/Hispanic descent, and that number is even higher in the surrounding communities. I’m sure in a couple of years it will be half of Tracy’s population. Livermore Lab does not translate a single document that is supposed to be available to the public. That is an environmental injustice. As the bilingual outreach specialist, I fill that role by translating material for the Spanish-speaking population. This eliminates the marginalization of these communities created by the Lab. These communities should not and will not be excluded.

    In regard to the youth outreach, I was able to continue our annual tradition of the Youth Video Contest. This was started by Tri-Valley CAREs to engage the youth by having them learn about local and national issues with the nuclear weapons complex and allowing them to win a cash prize!

    This role’s importance became very clear to me last week when 80+ community members attended a Public Hearing in Tracy for Site 300’s Bigger Bomb Blasts. As people were filing in, I noticed several familiar faces that I met at previous meetings in the community and as a guest speaker at other club meetings. Until that event, I had always thought of our Executive Director, Marylia, as the face of Tri-Valley CAREs. It wasn’t until last week that I realized in the Central Valley, I was the face of Tri-Valley CAREs and issues against Site 300. These individuals care about the environment and their communities’ health regardless, but a personal relationship is what pushes them to do more. I can’t take credit for the work our staff and volunteers do, but I now have a deeper understanding of the value of this role.

    What barriers do you face in your work as you seek to engage new communities in the work of Tri-Valley Cares?

    Some of the main barriers I came across involve different perspectives on nuclear weapons development and testing. The stronger opinions that were in opposition to our presence came from those who worked at or knew someone who worked at Livermore Lab. Others believed the activities conducted by the lab were justified because it was established before the immense population growth in the Central Valley. Importantly, however, I found that I could reason with some of the folks who were initially supportive of nuclear weapons development. I was able to demonstrate that we could disagree on some levels but  could still agree on others. Having that dialog is the first step to overcoming differences.

    How does your identity as a younger Latinx woman impact your outreach work? Do you feel this helps or adds barriers to your work?

    This may sound weird, but I honestly forget that these are defining points of my identity. So I don’t always realize their impact. However, when I do reflect on it, I notice that I represent change to some communities. To the Latino community, I sense pride when they see a young woman that looks like them and can speak Spanish if needed. To the environmental community, I feel that I represent progress. I guess it just depends what group I’m talking to. Sometimes I feel that my age inhibits my credibility, but that’s when I’m able to refer to the Tri-Valley CAREs team. I can speak to the organization’s great range of experience and knowledge and that goes a long way to overcoming any possible barriers.

    What professional achievement are you most proud of thus far?

    I’ll refer back to a previous answer. I am most proud of the attendance and involvement from the public at the recent Public Hearing in Tracy. It was literally a reflection of all the work we’d done these past couple of months. Not only were there members of the Central Valley Community that I had recently spoken to, but I felt a personal connection to so many people. I almost couldn’t focus for a big part of the hearing because I would see someone I knew, and we’d wave or hug. It was such a great feeling!

    What are the top professional goals you have for yourself within the next 3, 5, or even 10 years?

    I do hope to be a part of Tri-Valley CAREs for the long-term, whether it be as a board member, volunteer or donor. This role has allowed me to learn so much, not only about environmental injustices, but also about the power of grassroots efforts.

    Valeria (Val) Salamanca served as the Bilingual Outreach Specialist at Tri-Valley Cares, an organization whose mission is to promote peace, justice and a healthy environment. Originally from Tracy, CA, Val grew up in a community located less than 10 miles from Livermore Lab Site 300, a testing facility linked to nuclear weapons manufacturing. As the organization’s Bilingual Outreach Specialist, Salamanca ensured that information about Livermore and other nuclear-related developments was readily available to all residents. As a member of the Latinx community, Val offers translation and outreach to the Spanish-speaking population within Tracy (currently nearly 40% of the city’s residents). She also focuses her attention on reaching, engaging and collaborating with other young people so that future generations are aware of the nuclear threat and feel empowered to take leadership roles on this issue.

  • 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.

  • Duck and Cover

    Once those articulate Florida high school students, God love them, are finished exposing the craven emptiness of politicians like Marco Rubio and others subverted by the NRA, they might want to turn to nuclear weapons as another sacred cow ripe for the “we call B.S.” treatment.

    The acute dangers of gun violence and nuclear weapons offer ominous parallels. Both are deadly serious issues that provoke absurd levels of avoidance and paralysis.

    For 22 years, pressure from the NRA upon the Center for Disease Control caused Congress to defund research into gun fatalities. Opportunists like Rubio duck and take cover from the obvious root cause of our endless mass shootings, the glut of unregulated guns, to any other explanation no matter how implausible, in order to avoid shutting off the spigot of blood-soaked NRA cash.

    The solutions to keeping children in schools safe from mass shootings have never been hidden. There is a slam-dunk correlation between the numbers of guns in any country and the number of mass shootings, and the United States wins the booby prize for having by far the most guns and the most shootings.

    Avoidance continues rampant on the nuclear issue as well. Last fall Senator Corker, acknowledging bipartisan concerns about the unstable temperament of the president, opened a meeting of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee examining some of the legal issues of nuclear command and control, by remarking that this was the first hearing on the subject since 1976! Senator Rubio was there, tut-tutting that even talking about whether military personnel had the option to refuse to carry out illegal orders (they do) might undermine our credibility with North Korea.

    While the president’s unhinged bellicosity may indeed keep us up at night, the overall structure of executive authority over nuclear weapons is an even greater cause for sweaty insomnia than any particular person in office. No human being, however well-trained in sober decision-making, should ever be put in the position of having five minutes to decide whether to launch a fleet of nuclear-winter-causing missiles because someone else’s nuclear-winter-causing missiles were already on their way—or not, as in the case of the Hawaiian false alarm.

    Those who call for arming teachers, who buy into deterrence theory on either the gun level or the nuclear level, must justify the improbable notion that the more we are armed, the more we can move into the future without errors, misinterpretations, and accidents. Nuclear deterrence, designed to ensure stability, is undercut by the inherently unstable momentum of “we build-they build.” In order to be certain that the weapons, whether a loaded pistol in the drawer or a ballistic missile in a silo, are never used, they must be kept ready for instant use—accidents waiting to happen.

    Fortunately, the insane levels of destructiveness built up during the Cold War were reduced by the hard work of skilled diplomats—reminding us that sensible further reductions in nuclear arms remain within the realm of possibility even if political will is presently lacking.

    Reductions in the equally grotesque numbers of guns in the possession of American citizens are equally possible with well-structured buyback programs and common-sense regulations based upon the model of licensing citizens to drive cars.

    Duck and cover stopgaps only fuel vain illusions of survivability—crouching in closets or hiding under desks as a viable protection from either a shooter with an AR-15 or the detonation of a nuclear weapon. Prevention is not nine-tenths but ten-tenths of the cure.

    The rhythmic repetition of shootings tempts us to assume that the probability of nuclear war is much less likely than further gun slaughter. The reality is that without a fundamental change of direction, both more mass shootings and more nuclear weapons used against people are tragically inevitable. Too many assault rifles in the hands of too many angry, alienated young men will yield more incidents. The authority to launch nuclear weapons from North Korea is itself in the hands of an alienated young man, leaving aside that our president is himself a far cry from being a grown-up.

    Powerful lobbying efforts thwart reasonable plans for reducing either guns or nuclear weapons. In the case of the latter, a vast program of renewal costing trillions is getting under way, in clear violation of the spirit of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to which the U.S. is a signatory.

    The argument that the more we are armed to the teeth the safer we will be simply does not hold up under statistical examination. Where gun regulations are stricter, violent incidents drop, and where they are looser, incidents rise. Period. There is no logical reason to assume matters are any different with nuclear weapons. The more there are, and the more people who are handling them, the greater the chance of their being used. Period.

    That is why 122 nations signed an agreement at the U.N. last year banning nuclear weapons. In a similar spirit the students at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School quickly sublimated their grief and rage into a growing political movement to change gun laws. When they become adults and begin to run for office, it’s hopeful to imagine they will also call B.S. on the notion that more nuclear weapons make us safer.

    Winslow Myers, the author of “Living Beyond War: A Citizen’s Guide,” serves on the Advisory Board of the War Prevention Initiative and writes for Peacevoice.

  • My Story: Aidan Powers-Riggs

    Getting involved with the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation has been an incredible opportunity, and one that has complimented my academic and career interests in so many ways. I am a third-year Political Science major (emphasis in international relations) and professional writing minor at UC Santa Barbara. After graduation, I hope to work in the field of international peace and security for an NGO, the UN, or the State Department. To this end, I was driven to search for an internship that would not only get me involved in an issue of global importance, but could also provide a chance to apply the at-times abstract theories of political science and international relations to the real world. This internship has done just that, and more.

    I have been working with NAPF for several months, but the impact it has had on me feels as if it’s been years. I am exposed to countless fascinating, accomplished, and influential people each day I come in to the office or attend one of the Foundation’s many special events and lectures. I have had the opportunity to work on such rewarding projects as filming and editing videos for social media; conducting research on hot-button issues in nuclear weapons/energy; and contributing to the Foundation’s monthly newsletter, among other things.

    Not only has my knowledge of critical topics of nuclear security been greatly expanded as a result of this work, but I have been able to hone my writing and communication skills as well. This has paid dividends both in the classroom and in preparing me for the expectations and demands of a future career in international affairs.

    As I continue my involvement with this special organization, I look forward to learning even more from my many mentors here about how to be an effective peace leader, and to continue to spread the urgent message of nuclear disarmament to students like myself. As a young person, it’s easy to become numb to the seemingly-chaotic state of world affairs, and feel helpless against the tides of far-away global events. My experience at NAPF has taught me that we are all interconnected in more significant ways than you might think, and even a 20-year-old college student in a California beach town can make a real difference in the world.

  • My Story: Kristian Rolland

    One year ago, I walked through the Foundation’s doors – uninvited, and uncertain of what I would find. I’d heard about the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation while doing research about policy-oriented organizations in Santa Barbara, and I wanted to learn more.

    My research evolved into a year-long internship in which I learned how to go beyond “regular activism” to become an effective agent of change. It was an experience that profoundly impacts the person I am today.

    Interning at NAPF demands competence in a diverse set of subjects: effectively engaging and informing the public; making a longstanding impact on government; and using advanced technological tools to bolster advocacy efforts. It requires a growth-oriented mindset, and an unwavering willingness to reach out to individuals who can help further your cause. Last, but not least, it requires dedication to approaching the world’s problems with intellectual rigor and empathy.

    I had the privilege of working in many different areas related to advocacy and I came away with a holistic idea of what it takes to run a nonprofit. I tackled projects from intensive, scholarly research, website development, video production, article analysis and the implementation of a public outreach campaign. I had the opportunity to travel to Washington, DC, where I attended an intensive lobbying workshop and met with congressional staffers to advocate on the Foundation’s behalf. I also ran the Foundation’s online Google Adwords campaign, receiving two professional certifications in the process.

    I reached out to those with knowledge and experience, spending time with professors, marketing experts, Google representatives, digital media experts, and hibakusha (survivors of the atomic bomb). These invaluable interactions will stay with me for a long time, no doubt. They furthered my advocacy efforts and also serve as a reminder to continue networking.

    Last week marked the end of my internship at the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation. It’s as though I’m facing the world with a new pair of eyes: I feel empowered. My time there has given me an extraordinary set of new skills, and the confidence to go out and make a difference. I cannot thank my mentors enough for this opportunity of a lifetime.

  • Obama Does Right By Meeting Hibakusha, Describing Atrocities, & Recognizing Victims in Hiroshima– Makes Epic Fail By Not Reducing Nuclear Arsenal

    A group of 30 young people from 23 countries met in Hiroshima in August 2015 to work together for the abolition of nuclear weapons.
    A group of 30 young people from 23 countries met in Hiroshima in August 2015 to work together for the abolition of nuclear weapons.

    In August, 2015, thirty youth leaders from twenty-three countries met in Hiroshima in the hopes of strengthening solidarity and making a breakthrough toward ridding the world of nuclear weapons. We held the International Youth Summit for Nuclear Abolition over three days which culminated in a Youth Pledge, and a year-long action plan to collaborate to abolish nukes. Since then, we’ve continued to collaborate under the banner of ‘Amplify: Generation of Change’, and have taken many actions globally, toward our cause.

    When we initially heard that President Obama would become the first sitting US President to visit Hiroshima, we hoped that it would signify a change or at least be a reflective experience. That it was. But the American President left out the most important part– he failed to offer any concrete plan to reduce the US nuclear arsenal, which is the largest in the world.

    Like President Obama, about 9 months ago, we visited the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park and like many before us, laid a wreath in remembrance. Like President Obama, we had the chance to meet with resilient Hibakusha (a-bomb survivors) who have dedicated the rest of their days to world peace.

    Unlike President Obama, we do not have the authority to announce a dramatic reduction in the nuclear weapons or a u-turn on the United States’ plan to invest over $1 trillion in “modernizing” its nuclear arsenal over the next three decades. If we could, we would, without a doubt, because we believe that actions speak louder than words on nuclear policy and securing a peaceful tomorrow.

    In the last year, we, youth activists from around the world, have witnessed first-hand the failure of international players, including the United States, to fulfill their existing nuclear disarmament obligations, despite existing mandates by international law. Many of us who were part of the International Youth Summit to Abolish Nuclear Weapons have participated directly in and around global efforts like the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference, the First Committee meetings on Disarmament and International Security, the Marshall Islands International Court of Justice cases, and the Open Ended Working Group on Nuclear Disarmament, where the U.S. leaders clearly and repeatedly demonstrated a lack of willingness to move forward in nuclear disarmament discussions.

    Today, in Hiroshima, the President said: “[A]mong those nations like my own that hold nuclear stockpiles, we must have the courage to escape the logic of fear and pursue a world without them… We can chart a course that leads to the destruction of these stockpiles.”

    But among the many important points and references he made, President Obama did not lay out any plan or proposal for disarmament. Why not?

    If one thing isn’t obvious in today’s global climate, let us be perfectly blunt: young people are beyond tired of empty promises and nice words without the action or political will to back them up. If President Obama wants to make his final months meaningful, he must immediately and unilaterally take steps to reduce the US’s nuclear arsenal, which threatens all life on earth, while encouraging other nuclear powers to do the same. Without concrete signs of progress on nuclear abolition, the President’s trip to Hiroshima seems like mere political theater, like we have seen many times before, by many different world leaders. We simply don’t have the patience for lip service or macabre legacy tour.

    We are glad that President Obama took our call to attend Peace Memorial Park, to meet with Hibakusha, and to recognize the atrocities of the past and the suffering of victims. Unfortunately, he failed to take action on what should have been the most important part of his visit and speech; to declare concrete and measurable steps that would guarantee a future where impending nuclear winter is no longer a threat. Calling for nuclear disarmament while planning to spend $1TRILLION on “upgrading” the US nuclear arsenal over the next thirty years is hypocritical and extends the danger that nuclear warheads already pose, to future generations.

    Today, the President acknowledged the horrors caused by the US-Atomic-bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the learning that has come from it. But that is not enough. We will not take his calls seriously until we see that the US is working earnestly to ensure that these tragedies can never happen again. Younger and future generations are the biggest stakeholders in nuclear abolition will not stand by and allow President Obama’s visit to Hiroshima to be another missed opportunity, where lofty language casts a tall shadow of cynicism over the truth on the ground.

  • Message to the International Youth Summit for Nuclear Abolition

    Greetings to all participants in the International Youth Summit for Nuclear Abolition.

    You are engaged in the most critical task of our time, seeking a way out of the Nuclear Age, a very brief period in human history, but an incredibly dangerous one. Human civilization, so painstakingly created over thousands of years, could be destroyed in an afternoon of nuclear exchange, which could occur by accident, miscalculation or design. There would be no winners of that exchange, only losers, and the greatest losers would be the people of the future, including the youth of today. It is clear that nuclear weapons threaten all we love and treasure.

    International Youth Summit for Nuclear AbolitionNuclear weapons should never have been created, but they were. They should never have been used on cities, but they were. There should never have been widespread nuclear testing, but there was. Nor, should there ever have been an insane arms race, but there was. Today, we have far fewer nuclear weapons than at the height of the nuclear arms race in the mid-1980s, but those that remain still endanger us all.

    There is only one power strong enough to abolish nuclear weapons, and that is the power of the people acting with engaged hearts. Nuclear weapons are powerful devices. They can kill, maim, and cause massive destruction. But they are no match for the human heart, which has the power of love, compassion, understanding, empathy and cooperation. The human heart is an instrument even more powerful than nuclear bombs, warheads, and intercontinental ballistic missiles.

    To the power of the human heart can be added the power of the human mind to have a vision and strategies and tactics to reach agreed upon goals. Your task is to awaken your generation to the challenges posed by nuclear weapons and to engage their hearts, as well as their minds, in ending the nuclear weapons threat to humanity and all life.

    I have great faith in you, and I wish you all success in your important gathering. You are leaders for the common good on this most important of all issues. I encourage you to do your utmost and to never give up.

    David Krieger
    President
    Nuclear Age Peace Foundation

    This message was sent to the participants in the International Youth Summit for Nuclear Abolition, which took place on August 30, 2015.

  • Youth Statement at the 2015 NPT Review Conference

    This statement was delivered by former NAPF intern Josie Parkhouse along with Sampson Oppedisano, who attended the 2015 Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference as representatives of Ban All Nukes generation (BANg).

    Madam President and Delegates,

    Josie Parkhouse and Sampson OppedisanoToday, we stand before you as idealistic youth. We are not ashamed of this fact. We stand here because we believe the statements of the Nuclear Weapon States do not represent the majority of young people within their borders. We’re here to speak on behalf of these young people and we believe that a better world can be created: a world without nuclear weapons. I’m sure everyone in this room today can remember being young and having dreams of making the world a better place. The United Nations is built on this ideal. But some, who are present, have forgotten this idealism; you’ve lost your way along the path.

    We ask you all to take a moment today to remember why you went into world affairs, remember the idealism of your youth and return to your former aspirational path. Unless we preserve the daring energy to look beyond the reality of today to a vision of a better tomorrow, we will continue to face the walls of apathy and defeatism. To stay on our current path is to give into fear and accept a less than safe world.

    Madam President

    A nuclear attack would be devastating and as Secretary General Ban-Ki-Moon reminded us, we only have to listen to the accounts of the victims of nuclear weapon use and testing to understand how no country could adequately respond. Unfortunately, keeping our heads in the sand is to continue to trust those that tell us that nuclear weapons keep us safe, that they will never be used again, and that they are a deterrent for other countries. Perhaps these convenient, unreflective and uncritical arguments veered you off the path of peace in the first place. After all, we are often told that because there has been no nuclear war for the last 70 years, we can assume that this will continue for the rest of history.

    This illogical attitude can be summed up well by an analogy of a man falling from a skyscraper. Those half-way up the building heard him shout as he passed their window, ‘So far so good.’ We’re often told as NGOs we are unrealistic in fighting for a nuclear weapon free world, but in fact basing world security on the ‘so far, so good’ recipe, we see that it is the nuclear weapon states that are being unrealistic. Clearly, ‘so far so good’ is not a recipe for world security. The worst is possible.

    Madam President

    We live in a highly interdependent world where the actions of one can affect us all. Even if we choose only to seek our own national interest, in today’s globalized world, this cannot be achieved without cooperating beyond our borders. All of our actions have an effect and this conference can either go down in history as just another review conference, or it can down in history as the review conference which led to a ban on nuclear weapons. However to achieve this requires real action, not just empty words and promises. Action based on the shared trust and respect for our world, for each other, for the environment and for humanity.

    Just as this conference can affect the whole of humanity, nuclear weapons used by anyone will have an immediate effect on everyone. Let’s take a long term view and by doing so, realize the importance of acting in this moment, at this conference.

    Madam President

    Today we find ourselves defending our peace and security more frequently from unpredictable threats. Be it the outbreak of Ebola or the rise of terrorist groups such as ISIS, our commitment to achieving lasting peace and security is increasingly tested.

    And yet, despite constantly reaffirming this commitment to pursuing a more safe and peaceful world, many leaders continue to ignore a threat that is within our power to end.

    To the nuclear weapons states we ask, what contributions to global peace and security are your nuclear stock piles making? Your continued investment and modernization of such useless weapons is not only a threat to all, but divests valuable resources away from services in education, healthcare, and development; prerequisites for the secure world you all claim to strive for.

    Quite frankly it’s ironic that we’ve reached a point where the youth at this conference are acting more responsibly in regards to disarmament than many of the adults changed with handling the task in the first place.

    Your inability to take action is appalling and resembles that of a child who procrastinates their homework until the last minute. The big difference here is that waiting until the last minute won’t lead to a bad report card, but rather to the potential destruction of humanity.

    You see it’s simple; A world where nuclear weapons exist is not a secure world. It is not a world where peace and trust between nations can begin to grow, and it is not a world that, we the youth, plan to inherit.

    Madam President

    Today, we find ourselves at a crossroad, and the path we choose will decide our future.

    The first path leads us to a future where continued empty promises only prevent progress from being made. To continue down this path is to give into fear; a groundless fear that nuclear deterrence is the only means to a secure and peaceful world.

    However, the second path is one many of you have fallen off of. This path leads us back to the idealism and pragmatic energy needed for a better tomorrow. Here we confront our fears through diplomacy and understanding and once again pursue the future we all deserve.

    In closing, Madam President and Delegates

    During a time where tensions amongst nations are on the rise, we understand that the task before us is not an easy one. But know this; A star shines brightest when surrounded by darkness. It is during our most trying times that we’ve proven that we can rise to the occasion.

    We the youth are ready to do our part, the question is, are you all? Will you all continue down the path of fear, Or, will you all remember why you’ve dedicated your lives to making the world a better place, and return to the path of idealism.

    A wise person is one who plants a tree whose shade they will never sit beneath. You can either continue to sit back and hope that we don’t destroy ourselves, or you can finally do your jobs and begin building a future that is peaceful and secure for all.

    So, what will it be? Thank you.