IPPNW to share in 2010 Haas peace award
IPPNW, the International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms (IALANA) and the International Peace Bureau (IPB) will receive the John and Chara Haas Award for International Peace and Social Justice on November 8, 2010, at the Nuclear Futures Conference in Philadelphia.
The Haas award, sponsored by the Project for Nuclear Awareness, is being given to the three organizations for their work on the World Court Project and “for their joint efforts to establish global consensus on the illegality of nuclear weapons.”
The World Court Project was a worldwide campaign that resulted in an historic 1996 advisory opinion about the illegality of nuclear weapons from the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The ICJ concluded that the threat or use of nuclear weapons is generally illegal under International Humanitarian Law, and that states have an obligation to conclude negotiations on a global nuclear disarmament agreement to bring about their elimination.
According to PNA executive director Ed Aguilar, this year’s award is being given to the World Court Project “and those who participated as well in the drafting of the Model Nuclear Weapons Convention…to commemorate and honor the fact that the NWC and its basis in the ICJ Opinion of 1996 have been endorsed by the UN Secretary General and many nations since 2008, and in the NPT Review this May in New York.”
The previous recipients of the Haas Award, which honors those who have spent a lifetime in the cause of peace, safeguarding the environment, and in helping to reduce and end nuclear weapons, were author Jonathan Schell (2008) and Weapons of Mass Destruction Commission chair Hans Blix (2009).
No more ‘Little Boy’ and ‘Fat Man’
By Rebecca Johnson*
[originally posted at 50.50 Inclusive Democracy]
As a political instrument of power projection and status, nuclear weapons carry a peculiarly masculine symbolism. In the 1980s, Greenham women were at the forefront of challenging masculine ideologies of defence and security. We need to seize the initiative and again become the agents of security transformation.
October 31 was the tenth anniversary of the adoption of UN SCR 1325 [9] on Women Peace and Security. This was the first ever resolution to treat women not only as the victims of men’s aggression, wars and mistakes, but as agents for change. The resolution, the result of hard work and lobbying by women from a range of humanitarian and disarmament organisations, notably the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF), Amnesty International and Oxfam, was treated as a groundbreaking feminist success when it was adopted. Underlining the importance of incorporating “a gender perspective” into work on peace and security, it urges UN Member States “to ensure increased representation of women at all decision-making levels in national, regional and international institutions and mechanisms for the prevention, management, and resolution of conflict”.
Ten years later, the verdict [10] on how this resolution has affected women in conflict zones is “Must do better”. A common criticism, heard most recently at the Feminism in London conference [11] on October 23, was that in seeking to implement the letter but not the spirit of this resolution the UN system had spawned a layer of “femocrats” rather than empowering women living and working in the conflict zones. Read more…
Retire the Bomb! Int’l Peace Day in Melbourne
By Dimity Hawkins, ICAN Australia
ICAN in Melbourne marked the day at the State Library with a mock retirement party for the Bomb, which was also an opportunity for people to add their video messages to the One Million Pleas campaign.
For the International Day of Peace (September 21), ICAN Australia held a small action in the center of Melbourne to raise awareness of the 65th anniversary of the bomb by throwing a retirement party and collecting “pleas” for the MillionPleas campaign.
Photos from the action can be seen here.
Target X:50+ installations already
By Alex Rosen, IPPNW Germany
Dear friends all around the world,
During the IPPNW Biking Aganst Nuclear Weapons Tour (BAN) this summer, we organized a number of Target installations all along our tour. You can view photos and descriptions of these events, as well as the more than 50 Target installations to date on our website: ippnw-students.org/Target. Organized by our colleagues in Canada, the US, Ecuador, El Salvador, Brazil, Peru, Finland, Sweden, Norway, the UK, France, the Netherlands, Estonia, Russia, Georgia, Switzerland, Germany, Portugal, Italy, India, Iran and Australia, these Target installations have helped bring the issue of nuclear abolition to the people on the street and stir public debate about the subject.
We are certain that events such as NWIP, Nuclear Weapons – my cup of tea, Target X and bike tours are valuable and effective ways to use our moral authority as doctors and medical students in order to influence discussion on a local and national level. By documenting and showcasing these events, we even attempt to create some international leverage – similar to the Million Pleas Campaign. All of these activities neatly fit under the umbrella of ICAN – our wonderful international campaign, which we try to make more known through our activities.
For the future, we hope for may more successful Target installations – especially in the nuclear weapon states, but also in places that people would not normally associate with nuclear abolition. We’ve had a number of very successful events at universities in Latin America – showing that students there share the rest of the world’s concerns about nuclear proliferation and the immense weapon stockholds of Russia and the US. We should demonstrate IPPNW’s global aspect by trying to organize Target installations in countries like Nigeria, Kenya, Zambia, Mexico, Mongolia, Indonesia, etc., etc. In most of these countries we now have vibrant IPPNW student groups who could take on this subject. Although it may not be their primary concern or the main reason for being active within IPPNW, it would show solidarity and support for our global campaign and be a great project for local groups to organize.
So:
- if you’ve already held a Target installation and it’s not on the website ippnw-students.org/Target, please contact me and I’ll upload the photos and reports.
- if you’re interested in organizing a Target installation in your city and the information on the website is not sufficient for you, please contact me.
- if you have good ideas for future Target installations or the website, please contact me
- if you’re interested to become more involved in the coordination of Target installations around the world, please contact me
I truly look forward to hearing from you…
All the best from Germany,
Alex Rosen
Swiss nuclear bomb
The Swiss nuclear bomb.
Little did we know. Not even Tom Lehrer (“Who’s next? Alabama’s got the bomb!”) dreamt that Switzerland planned to build atomic bombs. At one time an Air Force general proposed that Switzerland might build 400 nuclear weapons, to be carried by 100 Mirage air planes, with a capacity to reach Moscow!
At the recent IPPNW World Congress at Basel we visited the historical museum of the town. The guide told us that only two weeks after the bombing of Hiroshima did a group from the Swiss government decide to begin a study of the possibilities of Switzerland to build nuclear weapons.
The work seems to have proceeded very slowly, but when the Soviet invasion of Hungary in 1956 took place the Swiss planning for nuclear deterrence became more serious (ref 1, 2).
These plans were not only developed in meetings and in offices. Uranium was purchased and stored and reactors ordered. The USA offered reactors to a highly reduced price to avoid that Switzerland bought them from the Soviet Union. However, the Swiss government seems to have been unwilling to go any further if other countries than the original four nuclear weapon states did not get the bomb. It would be of interest to read more about these discussions.
The history of the Swiss nuclear weapons program is long and many pages are still missing from the history (1, 2). It appears that the rapidly increasing costs for the weapon carriers, that means the Mirage airplanes, was a problem for the military. The cost of a uranium enrichment plant was too high for the federal budget. The Air Force did however discuss the possible building of 400 charges and to test nuclear weapons in an uninhabited area of the country (1)!
A serious accident in a research reactor causing a partial meltdown occurred in 1969 (1). The reactor was located underground which contained the radioactivity. This accident strengthened the opinion against the nuclear weapons program. Switzerland signed the Non-proliferation treaty, NPT, in 1969 but it the country did not declare its uranium stores until five years later. That facility had been known by very few people.
The nuclear weapons program had some similarities to that of another neutral and nonaligned country, Sweden. The cost of the program was a major obstacle in both countries. The strategic discussion seems to have been rather superficial in both. That the nuclear weapons would not increase the security during the Cold War was not realized. It was taken as a matter of course that military strength gave security. It was not commonly understood that nuclear weapons require a new way of thinking.
It seems that the public opinion against the nuclear weapons program was less active in Switzerland than in Sweden. One reason could be that the women in Switzerland were much less involved in politics. The anti-nuclear campaign in Sweden was to a large extent a women’s movement.
When the NPT entered into power both countries had to give up the nuclear option. However, it was as late as in 1988 that the commission on nuclear weapons questions was terminated in Switzerland, officially ending the program (3)
It is important to study the reasons why certain countries gave up their nuclear weapons program while other persisted. The Nuclear weapons archive (3) summarizes the decisions but gives little information about the driving forces, especially in the society. Has the public opinion regarding nuclear weapons been important in these countries, in the same way it was in the USA (4), in Kazakhstan or the Ukraine? These questions have been the subject of several studies in recent years. The book by E.C. Hymans ((5) is the best known. The dissertation by Ulrika Möller (6) evaluates the situation of four different countries, making her studies quite valuable. The time has come to review these various studies, trying to understand the importance of reason and sentiment as forces in the nuclear arms race, and nuclear disarmament.
Today Switzerland is one of the countries which take a strong stand for a nuclear weapons free world. The talk given by the Federal Foreign Minister of Switzerland, Micheline Calmy-Rey (7) at the IPPNW Congress was an inspired and serious call for nuclear abolition. Switzerland has together with Norway taken a place in the disarmament policy which Sweden left vacant.
- Stussi-Lauterberg J: Historical outline on the question of Swiss nuclear armament. Swiss government report, April 1966.
- Edwards B: Swiss planned a nuclear bomb. New Scientist 1966.
- Nuclear weapons archive. 7.4 States Formerly Possessing or Pursuing Nuclear Weapons.
- Wittner Lawrence S: The struggle against the bomb. Vol. I-III. Stanford Univ. Press 1997-2003
- Hymans J E C: The psychology of nuclear proliferation. Identity, emotions and foreign policy. Cambridge Univ. Press 2006
- Möller U: The prospects of security cooperation. A matter of relative gains or recognition. Göteborg 2007 Dept. Political Science Göteborg University
- Calmy-Rey M: The future of nuclear disarmament: A Swiss perspective. IPPNW World Congress Basel Schweiz 2010. ippnw.2010.org, then Plenary Documents
Gunnar Westberg
Aliens, Cyberwar and other curiosities
At last I feel mitigated in my avid viewing of „The Next Generation“ and „Doctor Who“, for it seems that I am psychologically equipped for the reports of aliens tampering with the nuclear deterrent. I am not in the least phased by this, in fact I welcome our green friends to join “Global Zero” along with Henry Kissinger and President Obama. If they have found a way of turning the damn things off, then I don’t have to spend any more time on de-alerting, I can concentrate on organising a Nuclear Weapons Convention for Trekkies. And I quite agree with UFO researcher Robert Hastings, that all the secrets on extra-terrestrial activities for peace should be declassified. We have a right to know about this new peace movement from beyond.
But wait, there’s more: someone of unidentifiable origin is trying to turn off all the nuclear installations built by Siemens. Using a virus called “Stuxnet”, installations all over the world (well, okay, not in any of the recognised nuclear weapons’ states) began having problems, including Iran. The cyber war we have all been waiting for has begun and reporters are suspecting state sponsorship rather than terrorism. But what state could possibly want Iran’s nuclear installations to go offline? I wonder. On the other hand, it could be the beginning of a nuclear industry war between Siemens and Westinghouse.
I had only just finished laughing at that excellent film “The Men Who Stare at Goats” with George Clooney and Kevin Spacey, when I discovered that in fact it is all true. A glance at this article by Gary S. Bekkum in the American Chronicle confirmed that the US is still using “psychic spies”, now against Iran. So perhaps the Iranians should lock up their goats.
Bekkum asks the question that I know is on all your lips: is there a connection between cyber invasion and alien nuclear intrusion? Or worse still: will we soon be confronting a 9/11 scale “surprise attack against the human mind”? Apparently Stephen Hawking is convinced there will be an extraterrestrial invasion. I myself don’t mind, so long as they get rid of the nukes and then we can live in peace with each other. Hell, I’m not prejudiced against aliens. I was one myself for long enough.
Anyone remember that Edwin Corley science fiction book back in the 1970s called “The Jesus Factor”? I think I was about 14 when I read that and I have secretly believed that the conspiracy theory is true. Apparently the whole nuclear arms race was a bluff, the darn things just don’t work. Even so, I think we should get rid of them because they cost so much money.
While we’re on the topic of money, I was shocked to hear that just one new “Next Generation” nuclear-armed submarine is going to cost the United States 100 million dollars. Captain Picard would be very cross indeed. This news coincided with reports that people on state benefit (Hartz IV) in Germany are going to get a total of 5 Euros extra a month, so they have a grand total of 364 Euros (489 US dollars) a month to live on. I suppose people in other parts of the world would think they were lucky.
Moral of this story: in the next life, come back as a nuclear submarine. You get more money spent on you, go on world cruises and never actually see any military action. Besides, the missiles on board don’t work anyway. But you might get a visit now and again by an alien, a computer virus or even a psychic spy.
New affiliates-in-formation from the former Yugoslavia
by Prof. Ulrich Gottstein, Co-founder and honorary board members of IPPNW-Germany
Left to right: Prof. Ulrich Gottstein, Germany, Dr. Dragan Veljkovic, Serbia, Dr. Emilija Jovanovska-Trajkovska, Macedonia, Dr. Ilirjana Bajraktari, Kosovo and Prof. Mazlu Belegu, Kosovo.
One of the smaller highlights of the IPPNW World Congress in Basel, Switzerland was the participation of “founders in progress” of new affiliates from former Yugoslavia. They were very impressed and felt enormously stimulated to start and to continue peace work in their countries which had been enemies for such a long time.
—
Note from the editor: the affiliates-in-formation from Macedonia and Kosovo are going through the affiliation process which will be voted on at the next Board of Directors meeting and then ratified by the IC at the 2010 Congress. It has been wonderful to witness the warm welcome and ongoing support, guidance and encouragement from the leaders of other established affiliates such as IPPNW Germany.
Public Mobilization for a Nuclear-Free World
[Historian Lawrence Wittner, a professor at the State University of New York in Albany, was a featured speaker at IPPNW’s World Congress in Basel, Switzerland in August. He is the author of Confronting the Bomb: A Short History of the World Nuclear Disarmament Movement (Stanford University Press) The following article, available in full by following the link below, was published on the website of Foreign Policy in Focus.]
One of the ironies of the current international situation is that, although some government leaders now talk of building a nuclear weapons-free world, there has been limited public mobilization around that goal — at least compared to the action-packed 1980s.
However, global public opinion is strikingly antinuclear. In December 2008, an opinion poll conducted of more than 19,000 respondents in 21 nations found that, in 20 countries, large majorities — ranging from 62 to 93 percent — favored an international agreement for the elimination of all nuclear weapons. Even in Pakistan, the one holdout nation, 46 percent (a plurality) would support such an agreement. Among respondents in the nuclear powers, there was strong support for nuclear abolition. This included 62 percent of the respondents in India, 67 percent in Israel, 69 percent in Russia, 77 percent in the United States, 81 percent in Britain, 83 percent in China and 87 percent in France.
But public resistance to the bomb is not as strong as these poll figures seem to suggest.
The same old concept from NATO?
by Bjorn Hilt
The tremendous efforts from IPPNW Germany and many others against the so-called nuclear sharing in Europe must be highly appreciated from all of us.
Personally I am very disappointed and frustrated about what we have seen so far in regard to nuclear issues in the drafts of the so called NATO new strategic concept and I have no illusions of the final one apart from perhaps some cosmetic changes in wording. With a few exceptions, the most important being indications of willingness to commit to a negative security assurance, the language remains that of the cold war with deterrence and all of that rubbish. It is unbelievable that the NATO states intend to have that as their nuclear strategic concept for the next ten years or so (the last one was from 1990).
I have also been disappointed and frustrated with the so called broad engagement of civil society in the process to develop the new strategic concept. They might have asked some of their toadies, but as we from IPPNW and many others tried repeatedly to participate on different occasions we were either turned down or silenced completely. So that was barely a play to the gallery from Madam Albright and her company.
Having said that, I am not that displeased with my own Norwegian MFA that I believe play a serious and honest part trying to move nuclear questions in the right direction both within and without NATO. But, we should not expect too much from old NATO. As we don’t ask the smokers if they want bans on smoking, we don’t ask the NWS whether they find it right or wrong to keep nuclear weapons around. Along with our intermediate work to free Europe from all nuclear weapons, we must therefore also work independently to build a broad public front for a Nuclear Weapons Convention, which will eventually outlaw all nuclear weapons and states that still believe in the necessity to cling to their own or shared nuclear weapons.
Iran and nuclear weapons. A personal reflection.
In the nineteen sixties there were many who believed that there was a military threat from China against Europe. “Optimists learn Russian, pessimists learn Chinese” was a common joke. “Whatever you say, China is hell on earth” I heard a respected politician say in 1965. So I went there to see for myself, together with about thirty other young persons, travelling the transsiberian railway. When after five weeks of travel in China I left Beijing, I cried. I cried because I thought I would never see this marvelous city again. I would be destroyed by a nuclear attack.
When recently I stood on the great square in Isfahan in Iran, one of the most beautiful places in any city anywhere in the world, I felt a similar sorrow. If USA or Israel attacks the uranium enrichment plant at Natanz, not far from Isfahan, also this square, this masterpiece, this wonderful old city, would be destroyed.
What happened to me during these travels was that I saw the world from the perspective of The Other. Man has an ability to feel what another human being feels. Travels can have this outcome. 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 