IPPNW participates in Arms Trade Treaty talks
By Dr. Ogebe Onazi, IPPNW Nigeria
Members of the IPPNW delegation to the ATT PrepCom (left to right), Shannon Gearhart, Hakeem Ayinde, Chukwuemeka Okolo, Maria Valenti, and Omolade Oladejo.
As a Nigerian doctor active with IPPNW, I am pleased to participate for a second time in twelve months in the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) Preparatory Committee talks at the United Nations in New York. I am part of the IPPNW delegation that includes Drs. Robert Mtonga (IPPNW Co-President from Zambia), Vic Sidel, Donald Mellman, Cathey Falvo, Shannon Gearhart, and Hakeem Ayinde (IPPNW USA), Omolade Oladejo and Chukwuemeka “Emeka” Okolo (IPPNW Nigeria), and Maria Valenti (Aiming for Prevention Director).
We are joining with more than 100 civil society participants from all continents to attend the meeting as members of the Control Arms Coalition. IPPNW serves on the steering board of this organization, a major NGO alliance working for a “bulletproof” Arms Trade Treaty that was recently nominated for the 2012 Nobel Peace Prize. The delegation includes Nobel laureates, parliamentarians, armed violence survivors, lawyers, activists, policy experts, and we health professionals. Read more…
Conservative politicians often portray the United Nations as a powerful monster, poised to gobble up the United States and other countries and put them under alien rule.
The reality, of course, is quite different. When it comes to international peace and security, the United Nations is notably lacking in power. Its resolutions along these lines are often ignored or go unenforced. Frequently, they are not even adopted. This situation leaves nations free to pursue traditional practices of power politics and, occasionally, much worse. Read more…
No military action will prevent nuclear proliferation
[The following statement was issued today by IPPNW’s Executive Committee.]
International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) opposes all military action against Iran’s nuclear program. Attacking Iranian facilities will cause widespread devastation, increase the risk of nuclear proliferation, and halt the chances for peace in the region.
IPPNW urges all nations, and Israel and the United States in particular, to refrain from launching military strikes against Iran, and to work with the international community to resolve, through the many diplomatic and non-violent pathways that remain open, the legitimate concerns that Iran may be developing a nuclear weapons capability.
IPPNW also calls upon Iran to reestablish full and transparent relations with the IAEA, and to provide IAEA inspectors with the comprehensive access and information they need to assure the international community that Iran is in compliance with its obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty and is not engaged in weapons development activities.
An Israeli military strike against Iranian facilities, with or without the support of the US and its other allies, would almost certainly provoke violent retaliation and cause potentially significant releases of radioactivity. The human cost would be enormous and would threaten regional and international peace and security. Such a conflict could escalate into a regional war, and could ultimately lead to the use of nuclear weapons — the very thing the entire world most needs to prevent.
There is no military solution to the problem of nuclear weapons proliferation anywhere in the world, particularly in the Middle East.
IPPNW supports regional and international efforts to negotiate a nuclear-weapons-free Middle East, and urges all States in the region, including Israel and Iran, to participate in good faith in the United Nations-sponsored conference that will be hosted by Finland to prepare the foundations for such an agreement.
The only way to ensure that nuclear weapons will never be used again, however, is to negotiate and complete a Nuclear Weapons Convention that will eliminate all existing nuclear weapons and prevent all states from acquiring or reacquiring them in the future.
Changes in the air in DPRK, Part 2
Yes, the changes we felt in North Korea during our visit there in October are sensed by others. In a recent issue of Science (Vol. 334, Dec 23 2011, p 1624-1625) there is a report from the new Pyongyang University of Science and Technology, PUST, by the scientific journalist Richard Stone.
This institution is founded and supported by evangelical Christians in the USA! More than half the staff of 29 foreign faculty members are from the USA. The teaching is entirely in English. The students have access to the Internet, although they have to log the sites they visit. Twenty graduate students will visit universities in China at the end of their studies. Cooperation with the Erasmus university exchange program in Europe is expected.
At this university there are 267 students – all male – from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, DPRK. They study such traditional subjects within the area of technology as chemistry and computer programming but also international finance.
The leaders in DPRK do understand that there is a need for scientific exchange with other countries. Five hundred IT specialists from the country have been sent to Europe and hundreds to China in recent years.
The report in Science is really very encouraging. There is apparently backing from the government of DPRK, although with close supervision by a parallel faculty from the Kim Il Sung University. However, the future development of the institution is uncertain. The building of the university was supported from South Korea, but that support has dwindled as the present South Korean government has taken a harder line against North Korea. The founding president of the university now has to travel around the world to obtain economic support for the university. There is very little equipment in the university to be used for laboratory studies.
In the present uncertain situation in DPRK after the demise of the “Dear Leader” we do not know who or what group is going to be the strong force in the country. Now there may be a chance to open contacts with young people there and show what the rest of the world is like.
Here is a chance not to be missed. People of DPRK know next to nothing about democracy and about the open society. If a few thousand of the future leaders of the country could come abroad to study, that might be important in the future.
The PUST University is in a difficult economic situation and the future is uncertain. How unreasonable, that when we spend billions of dollars on military defence against the perceived threat from North Korea, we can not find a few millions for this investment in the future! There is plenty of money in EU coffers for such purposes, even today!
In IPPNW we have been able to bring a few doctors from North Korea to Europe for short-term medical training. Can we do more? Can we find EU money for a greater exchange? Do we have the contacts and the resources, and the will?
DPRK revisited: changes in the air?
[Editor’s note: Dr. Westberg was part of an IPPNW delegation that visited Pyongyang in October 2011. He wrote the piece that follows before the death of the DPRK leader, Kim Jong-Il, was announced.]
Already on the train from Beijing to Pyongyang do I feel a different atmosphere from that at my visit in 2005. The custom officials look briefly at our documents, register and seal our mobile phones as in previous years, but pay no attention to our computers, written material and CDs. The train is overflowing with packages and trunks, at least some of it apparently smuggled. At the first DPRK stop after the border an expensive new car picks up four big bags from the train. All houses along the track are newly painted, maybe for the benefit of the Dear Leader who passed through in his special train two years ago.
Mobile phones — yes they are here now! Statistics are not available but at least a large minority of the younger people in the streets of Pyongyang seem to have them. Our guide says that mobile phones are equally common in the rural areas. They can be used only for calls within the country. Considering that you need a permission to travel between the provinces and cities in the country, the mobile phones will be a strong factor in informing and uniting people.
Apparently, the middle class is growing and is becoming more prosperous. A few years ago there were few locals in the better restaurants, mostly foreigners. Today the locals are the majority. There are more bicycles, also in the biking-unfriendly Pyongyang. Bikers often disobey the rule that they should not cross the streets. They do not carry their bikes down and up the stairs at the underpasses as requested and sometimes bike on lanes marked “no bikes.” Pedestrians cross the street most anywhere. The beginning of civil disobedience? Read more…
Medical Alert for a Strong Arms Trade Treaty – Sign the Petition!
Calling All Health Professionals to Help Pass a Global Arms Trade Treaty to Save Lives, Protect Health
Hundreds of thousands of people are killed each year with firearms, with millions more maimed or traumatized. The cost of treating armed violence is a huge drain on health budgets and diverts monetary and human capital from other vital human needs.
Yet there are currently no legally binding, global rules regulating the trade in conventional arms.
The United Nations is negotiating a global Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) to prevent irresponsible arms trade. A strong and humanitarian-focused ATT would help save lives and promote health.
If you are a medical or public health professional we need you to add your health voice to our new Medical Alert on Armed Violence petition to the United Nations to call for passage of a strong global Arms Trade Treaty (ATT). Our goal is 25,000 health signatures, and you can help.
Add your name to the petition supporting a strong and humanitarian-based ATT. A delegation of IPPNW medical professionals will deliver the petition to the key negotiators at the UN during the ATT Review Conference in 2012.
After you sign the petition, send a message to your medical colleagues and ask them to sign, too.
IPPNW is launching this campaign as a sister initiative to the global Speak Out! campaign of the Control Arms Coalition. Health professionals and others can add their voices to this campaign at the Control Arms web site here.
Indian doctors consider alternatives to nuclear energy
Indian Doctors for Peace and Development (IDPD), IPPNW’s Indian affiliate, held an interactive session on nuclear energy on October 20 at the India International Centre in New Delhi. Professor Andreas Nidecker, President IPPNW Switzerland, and General Vinod Saighal were the featured speakers. The session was moderated by Dr. L.S. Chawla, President of IDPD.
Dr. Nidecker presented medical arguments against the civil use of nuclear power, explained in detail the reasons why nuclear energy is not a viable source for meeting the world’s energy needs, and reported that after the Fukushima nuclear reactor crisis the Swiss government decided to phase out nuclear energy. He described the harmful effects of radiation throughout the nuclear chain — from uranium mining to nuclear waste disposal. Fukushima, he said, has put a full stop to the false claims about the safety of nuclear energy.
Dr. Nidecker noted several specific drawbacks to nuclear energy, including rising costs, security issues, the absence of a solution to the waste problem, intense water usage, environmental contamination, the health effects of exposure to ionizing radiation, and the increasing risks for nuclear proliferation, and the diversion of investments away from better, safer, and more sustainable alternatives, such as wind and solar power technologies.
General Saighal urged the development of a strong antinuclear movement. Dr. Chawla pointed out that nuclear energy is fraught with dangers to the health of the people, particularly those living around nuclear facilities. He said these problems had been confirmed by the IDPD study on the health effects of people living around Jadugoda uranium mines.
Dr. Arun Mitra, General Secretary of IDPD, said that the Indian people have to build a strong resistance against the nuclear policy of the government “against all the odds posed by the government and the pro-nuclear lobby in our country.”
A detailed report from the meeting is available here.
Ankara conferees: “Resolve Middle East conflicts without military force”
Ankara Declaration on IPPNW Middle East Core Group Meeting:
Strategies for Peace and Health in the Nuclear Free Middle East
International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) representatives from Israel, Iran, Egypt, United States, UK, France, Germany, Netherlands, Hungary and Turkey met in Ankara, Turkey, on December 8th to 10th 2011 to address the issues of peace, health and weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East.
The Middle East (ME) region is experiencing a turbulent period. There are political instability, ethnic and religious conflicts, economic difficulties and external military interventions causing detrimental effects on the health and well-being of the citizens of the Middle East.
We as health professionals have responsibilities to respond to these unacceptable conditions which have caused large scale suffering and loss of human life, and we are concerned that the existing conflicts could escalate into the use of weapons of mass destruction.
We call for:
- Sincere commitment of governments for peaceful resolution of conflicts without use of military force; and using diplomacy and the rule of international law.
- We demand that all signatories to NPT to ratify and observe their responsibilities immediately.
- Noting the published reports that there are nuclear weapons in Israel and tactical NATO nuclear weapons in Turkey, and there concerns that Iran is developing nuclear weapons; and there are possible chemical and biological weapons in the ME countries, governments should immediately start negotiations to establish a Weapons of Mass Destruction Free Zone -Middle East (WMDFZ-ME) including nuclear, chemical and biological weapons; and take measures to strengthen the implementation of chemical weapons convention (CWC) and biological weapons convention (BWC). We demand that all governments immediately start negotiations for to establish a Nuclear Weapons Convention (NWC). We call for the development of regional International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) activities.
- We oppose the plans for deploying Missile Defense Systems including those recently positioned in Turkey. They must be removed at once as the system escalates the danger of nuclear proliferation.
- We demand the strict observation of the landmines convention.
- Cease the supply of small arms, conventional weapons and weapons of mass destruction (or the components of such) in the region.
- The construction of nuclear power plants is a threat to the health of people and the environment of the ME as well as a stimulus to nuclear weapons proliferation. The ME is a primary earthquake region. Considering the bitter lessons of the Fukushima Catastrophe and past accidents such as Chernobyl, we call for an immediate abandoning of nuclear plant construction programs. The establishment of the renewable energy alternatives to nuclear power should be promoted.
- There are immense public health problems in the communities of the ME and primary health care programs have suffered from financial restriction and ongoing conflicts. We demand the immediate reallocation of military funding to health budgets.
- All efforts should be exerted by all governments and institutions to immediately end Israeli-Palestine/ Jewish-Arab conflict through peace negotiations and initiatives including the Arab Peace Initiative.
List of Signatories (in alphabetical order):
Abraham Behar, IPPNW-France, Mediterranean Commission Former President
Ahmed Saada, IPPNW-Egypt, Middle East Vice-President
Arielle Denis, ICAN Europe Coordinator – Geneva
Ernesto Kahan, IPPNW-Israel
Herman Spanjaard, IPPNW-Netherlands, Speaker of the International Council
Lars Pohlmeier, IPPNW-Germany, European Vice-President
Leila Moein, IPPNW-Iran, Medical Student Representative
Liz Waterston, IPPNW-United Kingdom
Patrice Sutton, IPPNW-USA
Raánan Friedmann, IPPNW-Israel
Robert Gould, IPPNW-USA
Sharon Dolev, ICAN Middle East
Zita Makoi, IPPNW-Hungary
Ahmet Saltik, IPPNW-Turkey
Bayazit Ilhan, IPPNW-Turkey, President of Ankara Medical Chamber
Berker Ozbek, IPPNW-Turkey, Medical Student
Burcak Aydin, IPPNW-Turkey, Medical Student Representative
Celalettin Guner, IPPNW-Turkey
Cem Coteli, IPPNW-Turkey, Medical Student Representative
Derman Boztok, IPPNW-Turkey
Guldali Aybas, IPPNW-Turkey
Ozen Asut, IPPNW-Turkey
Ozlem Tur, Ankara Middle East Technical University International Relations Department
Selcuk Atalay, General Secretary of Ankara Medical Chamber
Selenge Beduk, IPPNW-Turkey, Medical Student
Simge Uzman, IPPNW-Turkey, Medical Student
Aren’t nuclear weapons harmful, too?
The global treaty prohibiting cluster munitions, which entered into force last August, was pursued on the basis that such weapons cause “unacceptable harm.” Similarly, the treaty outlawing anti-personnel landmines, negotiated a decade earlier, was borne from widespread public concern for the overwhelmingly civilian victims of those conventional arms.
The two treaties were achieved as a result of civil society and “likeminded nations” working in partnership to resolve an obvious and urgent humanitarian problem. Now many of the same governments and campaigners involved in those initiatives are turning their attention to an equally pressing task: banning nuclear arms.
In recent years, a growing number of nations have expressed dissatisfaction at the slow rate of progress towards nuclear disarmament. The arms control approach, which focuses on “managing” the threat rather than eliminating it, is floundering. With some nations pursuing nuclear arms in defiance of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and the already-armed investing billions in the modernization of their arsenals, a new approach is clearly needed.
At last year’s review conference of the four-decade-old NPT, in New York, a record number of states called for work to begin on a nuclear weapons convention – a treaty which, if successful, would make the aspiration of abolition a reality. By consensus, the conference acknowledged, first the first time, the “catastrophic humanitarian consequences” of any use of nuclear weapons, and the need to comply, at all times, with applicable international law.
The movement for a nuclear weapons ban received a further boost last week when national Red Cross and Red Crescent societies from around the globe adopted a historic resolution appealing to all states to “pursue in good faith and conclude with urgency and determination negotiations to prohibit the use of and completely eliminate nuclear weapons through a legally binding international agreement.”
Initiated by Australia, Norway and Japan, the resolution expressed deep concern about “the destructive power of nuclear weapons,” “the unspeakable human suffering they cause,” and “the threat they pose to the environment and to future generations.” It noted the impossibility of providing adequate relief in the event of a nuclear confrontation, and the fundamental incompatibility of nuclear weapons with international law.
This is not the first time the Red Cross has involved itself in this field – its doctors were among the first on the scene in Hiroshima, and the movement adopted several pro-disarmament resolutions during the Cold War, condemning the massive build-up of nuclear arms. But last week’s resolution signifies an important new commitment to the cause at a crucial moment. It could be a game-changer in the quest for a global ban.
The resolution follows a landmark speech last April by Jakob Kellenberger, the president of the International Committee of the Red Cross, in which he declared that the existence of nuclear weapons “poses some of the most profound questions about the point at which the rights of states must yield to the interests of humanity, the capacity of our species to master the technology it creates, and the reach of international humanitarian law.”
Other major international organizations would do well to follow the Red Cross’ lead. Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, for example, could raise public awareness about this enormous, immediate threat to our most fundamental of all human rights – the right to life. Greenpeace could re-engage in the field, which it all but abandoned a few years ago (with the exception of a few chapters).
Pursuing the elimination of nuclear weapons would also fit well with Oxfam International’s new campaign focus: food security for the world’s poor. Recent research by climate scientists shows that the use of even a small number of nuclear weapons would lead to devastating agricultural collapse across the globe (in addition to inflicting millions of immediate deaths).
All of these groups have a role to play in reshaping the debate – from one focused on Cold War notions of deterrence and military dominance to one concerned about the potential for these weapons to inflict grave humanitarian and environmental harm. Unless we radically alter our trajectory now and move expeditiously towards a nuclear weapons ban, the use one day of these ultimate instruments of terror seems all but inevitable.
Is nuclear war with China possible?
While nuclear weapons exist, there remains a danger that they will be used. After all, for centuries national conflicts have led to wars, with nations employing their deadliest weapons. The current deterioration of U.S. relations with China might end up providing us with yet another example of this phenomenon.
The gathering tension between the United States and China is clear enough. Disturbed by China’s growing economic and military strength, the U.S. government recently challenged China’s claims in the South China Sea, increased the U.S. military presence in Australia, and deepened U.S. military ties with other nations in the Pacific region. According to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the United States was “asserting our own position as a Pacific power.”
But need this lead to nuclear war? Read more…
Bimal Khadka
Bjorn Hilt
Charles K. Johnson
Gunnar Westberg
IPPNW
John Loretz
Lawrence Wittner
Maria Valenti
mollymcgint
Sue Wareham
Tilman Ruff
Tim Wright
Xanthe Hall
IPPNW peace and health blog 