Vaya aquí
para la versión española
Nuclear Age Peace Foundation* Statement:
The Challenge of Nuclear Weapons in the
Twenty-First Century: A Path Forward
June 15, 2003
The peoples and governments of the world face an
urgent challenge relating to weaponry of mass destruction and
particularly to nuclear weaponry.
At the crossroads of technology, terrorism, geopolitical
ambition, and policies of preemption are new and potent dangers
for humanity. Despite ending the nuclear standoff of the Cold
War era, nuclear weaponry is again menacing the peoples of the
world with catastrophic possibilities.
We recognize the need for any government to pursue
its security interests in accordance with international law; and
further, we recognize that distinctive threats to these interests
now exist as a result of an active international terrorist network
having declared war on the United States and its allies. Nonetheless,
we reject the assessment of the current US administration that
upgrading a reliance on nuclear weapons is in any sense justified
as a response. We find it unacceptable to assign any security
role to nuclear weapons. More specifically, nuclear weapons are
totally irrelevant and ineffective in relation to the struggle
against terrorism.
Nuclear weapons, combined with policies that lower
barriers to their use, pose unprecedented dangers of massive destruction,
recalling to us the horrors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Any major
use of such weapons could doom humanity’s future and risk
the extinction of most life on the planet.
The international regime preventing proliferation
of nuclear weapons has badly eroded in recent years, and is in
danger of unraveling altogether. This is due in large part to
the refusal of the nuclear weapons states to fulfill their long-standing
obligations set forth in Article VI of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty to pursue nuclear disarmament in good faith. Other states,
taking note of this underlying refusal to renounce these weapons
over a period of more than five decades, have seen growing benefits
for themselves in acquiring nuclear weapons.
Back in 1998, India and Pakistan, responding at
least in part to the failure of the declared nuclear weapons states
to achieve nuclear disarmament, decided to cross the nuclear weapons
threshold. These two countries, both having always remained outside
the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, have a long history of conflict
and war with each other. They are a flashpoint for potential nuclear
war in South Asia.
Another flashpoint is Israel’s undeclared,
yet well-established, nuclear weapons arsenal, which introduces
the risk that nuclear weapons will be used in some future crisis
in the Middle East. Israel’s nuclear arsenal and the implicit
threat of its use has encouraged other Middle Eastern countries
to seek or acquire weapons of mass destruction, including the
establishment of nuclear weapons programs.
A third flashpoint exists on the Korean Peninsula
in Northeast Asia, where North Korea has withdrawn from the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty and other agreements restricting its
nuclear program. The North Korean government has announced that
it will expand its nuclear weapons program unless the US agrees
to negotiations to establish a mutual security pact.
US government policies are moving dangerously in
the direction of making nuclear weapons an integral component
of its normal force structure, and terrorists are becoming increasingly
unscrupulous in challenging the established order. Terrorist organizations
have been boldly seeking access to weaponry of mass destruction.
Beyond this, the recent Iraq War, supposedly undertaken to remove
a threat posed by Iraqi possession of these weapons, seems to
have sent the ironic message to North Korea and others that the
most effective way to deter the United States is by proceeding
covertly and with urgency to develop a national arsenal of nuclear
weapons.
US official policies to develop smaller and more
usable nuclear weapons, to research a nuclear earth-penetrating
weapon for use as a "bunker buster," and to lessen the
timeframe for returning to underground nuclear testing, along
with the doctrine and practice of preemptive war, have dramatically
increased the prospect of future nuclear wars. The nuclear policies
and actions of the US government have proved to be clearly provocative
to countries that have been named by the US president as members
of “the axis of evil” or that have been otherwise
designated by the present US administration to constitute potential
threats to the United States. Several of these countries now seem
strongly inclined to go all out to acquire a deterrent in the
face of American intimidation and threats.
There is no circumstance, even retaliation, in
which the use of nuclear weapons would be prudent, moral or legal
under international law. The only morally, legally and politically
acceptable policy with regard to nuclear weapons is to move rapidly
to achieve their universal and total elimination, as called for
by the world’s leading religious figures, the International
Court of Justice in its 1996 opinion, and many other governments
and respected representatives of civil society. Achieving such
goals would also dramatically reduce the possibilities of nuclear
weapons falling into the hands of terrorist organizations.
Given the existence of treaty regimes that already
ban chemical and biological weapons, the outlawing and disarmament
of nuclear weapons would complete the commitment of the governments
and peoples of the world to the prohibition and elimination of
all weaponry of mass destruction. Such a prohibition, and accompanying
regimes of verification and enforcement, could lead over time
to a greater confidence by world leaders in the rule of law, as
well as encourage an increased reliance on non-violent means of
resolving conflicts and satisfying grievances.
It is the US insistence on retaining a nuclear
weapons option that sets the tone for the world as a whole, reinforcing
the unwillingness of other nuclear weapons states to push for
nuclear disarmament and inducing threatened or ambitious states
to take whatever steps are necessary, even at the risk of confrontation
and war with the United States, to develop their own stockpile
of nuclear weaponry. In this post-September 11th climate, the
United States has suddenly become for other governments a country
to be deterred rather than, as in the Cold War, a country practicing
deterrence to discourage aggression by others.
For these reasons, we call upon the United States
government to:
• Abandon its dangerous and provocative nuclear
policies, in particular, researching, developing and making plans
to shorten the time needed to resume testing of new and more usable
nuclear weapons;
• Take its nuclear arsenal off the high alert
status of the Cold War;
• Meet its disarmament obligations under
Article VI of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and the Treaty’s
Review Conferences, including making arms reduction agreements
irreversible;
• Renounce first use of or threat to use
nuclear weapons under all circumstances;
• Enter into negotiations with North Korea
on a mutual security pact; and
• Assert global leadership toward convening
at the earliest possible date a Nuclear Disarmament Conference
in order to move rapidly toward the creation and bringing into
force of a verifiable Nuclear Weapons Convention to eliminate
all nuclear weapons and control all nuclear materials capable
of being converted to weapons.
We also call on other nuclear weapons states to
accept their responsibilities to work toward a world without weapons
of mass destruction as a matter of highest priority.
These steps leading to the negotiation and ratification
of a treaty to eliminate nuclear weapons should then be coordinated
with existing arrangements of prohibition associated with biological
and chemical weapons to establish an overall regime dedicated
to the elimination of all weaponry of mass destruction. It would
be beneficial at that stage to also create an international institution
with responsibility for safeguarding the world against such diabolical
weaponry, including additional concerns associated with frontier
technologies, such as space weaponization and surveillance technology,
radiological weapons, cyber warfare, advanced robotics, genetic
engineering and nanotechnology.
Finally, we recommend that an international commission
of experts and moral authority figures be appointed by the Secretary
General of the United Nations to issue a report on existing and
emerging weaponry of mass destruction and to propose international
arrangements and policy recommendations that would enhance the
prospects for global peace and security in the years ahead and,
above all, the avoidance of any use of weapons of mass destruction.
Humanity stands at a critical crossroads, and the
future depends upon our actions now.
* The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation is a non-profit,
non-partisan international organization dedicated to the elimination
of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, the
strengthening of international law and the education of a new
generation of peace leaders. Further information may be found
at the Foundation’s web site: www.wagingpeace.org.
|