The G7 fails to meet commitment for nuclear weapons abolition

by Arun Mitra

Much was expected from the recently concluded summit of the group of seven countries—the G7—which included the USA, the UK, France, Canada, Italy, Germany, and Japan. Since the world is faced with the serious threat of use of nuclear weapons during the on-going Russia-Ukraine war, there was a feeling that the G7 should come out with a clear-cut commitment and time-bound strategy for nuclear disarmament. The summit had special importance as it was held in Hiroshima, a city which faced the catastrophic impact of the first ever use of the atomic bomb on a human population. The final communiqué released after the summit—the ‘Leaders’ Declaration,’ as it is called—does not, however, cite their explicit commitment to take steps to abolish nuclear weapons as a matter of urgency.

The summit declaration says “Together with the G7 Leaders’ Hiroshima Vision on Nuclear Disarmament, we express our commitment to achieving a world without nuclear weapons with undiminished security for all, through taking a realistic, pragmatic, and responsible approach. We reaffirm the importance of disarmament and non-proliferation efforts to create a more stable and safer world. The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) is the cornerstone of the global nuclear non-proliferation regime and the foundation for the pursuit of nuclear disarmament and peaceful uses of nuclear energy.” 

The declaration thus talks about achieving a world without nuclear weapons through taking a “realistic, pragmatic, and responsible approach.” This is no serious commitment and amounts to an evasion of any commitment at a time when we already have the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), which was passed by the United Nations General Assembly with an overwhelming vote on 7 July 2017. The TPNW is a multilateral treaty that represents the desire and voice of the people of the world. The G7 summit was an appropriate occasion to advance discussion on joining the TPNW.

It is pertinent to point out here that the NPT has been hanging in fire since the time it entered into force in 1970. The countries who have signed the treaty have not kept their commitment “to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date.” The failure of the 2022 NPT Review Conference was a big setback.

The declaration rightly condemns Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which constitutes a serious violation of international law, including the UN Charter. The declaration however has not a single mention of NATO’s designs to expand its area of influence. This gave an excuse to Russia to invade Ukraine as it says it does not like NATO to be right at its doorsteps. The declaration does not in clear terms stress the need to end the war through diplomatic efforts. On the other hand the voice to continue to supply modern weapons including missiles to Ukraine is loud and clear. Such an approach will not end the war. No wonder the Military Industrial Complex is making huge profits at the cost of human suffering.

The Declaration’s demand that Iran “must never develop a nuclear weapon” is hypocritical. Out of the G7, three are major nuclear-armed countries. They have to take the lead in abolishing nuclear weapons if they are to ask others not to develop them. 

On the question of dumping nuclear waste released by the Daiichi nuclear power plant at Fukushima, the declaration “welcomes the steady progress of decommissioning work at Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings (TEPCO)’s Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station, and Japan’s transparent efforts with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) based on scientific evidence.”

However, the most authoritative independent scientific assessment of the planned discharge has been conducted by a five-member independent international scientific panel appointed by the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF).  Based on their recommendations, IPPNW, at its World Congress held at Mombasa, has appealed to the Japanese government to abandon the planned release of over 1.3 million tons of radioactively contaminated water from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant disaster into the Pacific Ocean. The IPPNW resolution says“As physicians with professional responsibility to promote and protect long-term human and planetary health, we urge the Government of Japan to stop the planned release of large amounts of radioactively contaminated water from the damaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant into the Pacific Ocean…. Instead we urge full, evidence-based and transparent consideration of several viable alternative approaches, including storage in purpose-built seismically safe tanks, possibly after initial purification, subsequent use in concrete for structural applications with little or no potential for contact with humans and other organisms, and bioremediation for some important isotopes such as strontium-90. All the proposed alternatives would have orders of magnitude less impact and avoid trans-boundary impacts.”

The G20 meeting is not too far. The G7 would carry a powerful impact on decision making at the G20. Therefore, under the circumstances, we have to view with scepticism the outcome of the G20 on the issue of nuclear disarmament and global peace.  India, as President of the G20, has a lot of responsibility. At one time, when the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) was founded by statesmen such as Jawahar Lal Nehru—the first Prime Minister of India—Josip Broz Tito of Yugoslavia, and Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt, it represented  the voice of developing nations of the world with nuclear disarmament at its focus. Later, Rajiv Gandhi, during his tenure as Prime Minister of India in his speech in June 1988 at the UN General Assembly, proposed a world free of nuclear weapons, an end to be achieved through an “Action Plan for Ushering in a Nuclear-Weapon Free and Non-Violent World Order.”

But now the things are different. The G20 is not NAM. It is more a representation of the corporate world. With the present Indian regime out to export weapons, it is to be seen with concern what stand India takes on nuclear weapons abolition. India has several options to offer to the world, including joining the TPNW by all the nuclear weapons possessing countries, and declaring South Asia and other regions nuclear-weapon-free zones.

[Dr. Mitra is senior vice president of Indian Doctors for Peace and Development (IDPD) and co-president of IPPNW.]