Countries Must Start Living under ‘Non-Nuclear Umbrellas’, Nagasaki Mayor Tells Review Conference amid Agreement ‘Token’ Disarmament Not Abolition
Fervent calls by survivors and activists for genuine and sustained efforts towards the abolition of nuclear weapons dominated the 2015 Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) today, as non-governmental organizations addressed delegates at Headquarters.
Representing 107 non-governmental organizations accredited to the Conference, speakers noted that the growing humanitarian focus since the last review had given a new impetus to the movement to eliminate nuclear weapons.
Youths around the world were more open to learning more about the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombings, said Setsuko Thurlow, a Hiroshima survivor, speaking as the first of four panellists. There was a sense of hopefulness and excitement now because of the growing humanitarian movement, which had reframed the debate from one of military deterrence to a strong imperative for banning such weapons.
Referring to an Austrian-led pledge to fill legal gaps on prohibiting nuclear weapons, Ms. Thurlow said the United States had “shamelessly” approached Japan and Norway not to sign that document. Such shady diplomacy was repugnant and blasphemous to the memory of those who perished in the atomic bombings seven decades ago. “You are part of the decision-making body of the fate of the humanity and your responsibility is great,” she said, urging States parties to produce tangible progress.
Kazumi Matsui, Mayor of Hiroshima, describing nuclear weapons as the “ultimate inhumane weapons” and “absolute evil”, stressed that complete disarmament was the only guarantee against their use. States should shift their security system from one of relying on nuclear deterrence to sustainable and peaceful endeavours rooted in the reality that the world consisted of a single human family. It was time for decisive leadership to abolish nuclear weapons, which was possible through the consolidated efforts by all segments of society.
Tomihisa Taue, Mayor of Nagasaki, said the Hibakusha were using the last of their strength to appeal for an end to nuclear weapons. As their average age was 80 years, they did not have much time left. “We have the responsibility to show the path towards nuclear abolition while they are still alive.” With a return to cold-war era tensions, nuclear war was ever more likely between the United States and the Russian Federation over Ukraine. Nuclear-weapon-free zones should be expanded across the world and countries must start living under “non-nuclear umbrellas”.
Daniela Verano, representing the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, said there had been a fundamental shift in the debate that had provided a new sense of empowerment to forces of reason and discomfort to nuclear-armed States. The growing humanitarian focus had raised new expectations of a legally binding instrument to ban nuclear weapons. Thus, in one way, there was a sense of satisfaction at the progress since the 2010 Review Conference. However, States possessing nuclear weapons maintained that the humanitarian focus was a distraction from the main work the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. That only suggested that the march towards a world free of nuclear weapons was gaining traction and poised to succeed.
When the floor was opened for discussion, participants highlighted both the growing awareness of the issue as well as the need for urgent action. A representative of Egypt attributed the positive change to growing awareness around the world of the humanitarian consequences of nuclear detonation.
A representative of Austria said his visits to Hiroshima and Nagasaki moved him towards greater action and urged other diplomats to do so as well. Progress on nuclear disarmament would require discussions across broader society, which the focus on humanitarian consequences had facilitated.
A participant from the Republic of Korea wanted to know whether Japan still maintained the position that the use of nuclear weapons was not illegal. Moreover, did the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki have the grounds to sue the United States for the atomic bombings?
Responding, the Mayor of Hiroshima said the Government had maintained that stance 20 years ago, but contemporary realities had shifted dramatically. In Nagasaki, the people’s wish was to work with the citizens of the world to abolish nuclear weapons rather than filing lawsuits.
The representative of New Zealand said the Humanitarian Consequences Group would do its utmost make the Review Conference produce tangible progress. A representative of Sweden stressed the role of civil society in pushing States parties to the Treaty, and called for greater interaction between the two.
During the statements segment, an atomic bombing survivor from the Republic of Korea said the Japanese Government had discriminated against Koreans when it came to medical care. He said the United States should have long ago apologized for its crime against humanity, as the bombings affected people from 33 countries. However, it had not shown any sign of its willingness to so. “Are they waiting for all of us to die?”
A representative of the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom said progress on nuclear disarmament had been most sluggish among the three pillars of the NPT. While the humanitarian focus had given new impetus, nuclear-weapon States must recognize that token disarmament, no matter how laudable, did not mean abolition.
A representative of the Arms Control Association said States were modernizing their nuclear weapons in a way that would continue to threaten the world well into the future. The Ukraine crisis had accelerated the tempo of nuclear confrontation, a situation that had the potential to spread across other parts of the world amid growing regional tensions.
A representative of People for Nuclear Disarmament said that despite recent cuts in the arsenals of the United States and the Russian Federation, they still possessed enormous stockpiles that far exceeded deterrence requirements. Amid the growing geopolitical tensions around the world, those arsenals posed a serious threat, he said, urging the Conference to hold serious deliberations. “Mere possession of nuclear weapons is a reminder of their potential use.”
A representative of the Egyptian Council for Foreign Relations said the NPT had not yielded expected results, including the failure to establish a zone free of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East. In view of the shortcomings of Treaty implementation and lack of respect of the Review Conference outcomes, States parties needed to revisit the indefinite extension of the Treaty in 1995 and replace it with a decision mandating five-year extensions.
A speaker for the Group of NGO Experts from New Agenda Coalition countries said the growing humanitarian focus had highlighted the vital need to abolish nuclear weapons. If the NPT was unable to deliver on its disarmament obligations, then perhaps another forum might be needed that would frame the debate within the context of the humanitarian consequences and produce tangible progress.
Two youth representatives from Ban All Nukes generation, reading from a joint statement, said the United Nations had been borne of idealism, but that some members had lost their way. The statements from States parties did not reflect the views of all the people living within their borders. It was often said that since there had been no nuclear war in 70 years, there would not be one, which was a flawed premise. “So far so good” was not a recipe for international peace and security. Either this conference could go down in history as just another conference, or the one that led to the ban on nuclear weapons. It was quite ironic that youths were acting more responsibly that the adults in charge of the Conference.
In her closing remarks, Review Conference President Taous Feroukhi said the presentations provided vibrant, moving and energetic contributions towards a successful outcome of the Review Conference as well as the implementation of the Treaty.
Also making statements were representatives of People for Nuclear Disarmament, International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms, Peace and Planet Mobilization, UNFOLD ZERO, World Council of Churches, Solidarity for Peace and Reunification of Korea, and People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy, as well as a survivor of the Nagasaki bombing.
The meeting opened with the screening of a video on the dangers posed by the existence of nuclear weapons and the urgency of a legally binding international instrument ensuring their abolition. Akira Kawaasaki, representing Peace Boat, moderated the panel.