74 NPT States issue humanitarian appeal for abolition

[bananas]

http://peaceandhealthblog.com/2013/04/24/74-npt-states-issue-humanitarian-appeal-for-abolition/

74 NPT States issue humanitarian appeal for abolition
April 24, 2013
by John Loretz

The number of countries demanding the elimination of nuclear weapons as a humanitarian imperative grew to 74 today, when South Africa read a joint statement on the humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons on behalf of that many delegations to the 2013 Non-Proliferation Treaty Preparatory Committee in Geneva.

Declaring that “our countries are deeply concerned about the catastrophic humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons,” the States criticized the NPT for ignoring is very reason for existence “for many years,” even though “the humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons has increasingly been recognised as a fundamental and global concern that must be at the core of all deliberations on nuclear disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation.”

Noting the importance of both the 2011 resolution of the Council of Delegates of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and the international Conference on the Humanitarian Impact of Nuclear Weapons held in Oslo last month, the joint statement concluded that “It is in the interest of the very survival of humanity that nuclear weapons are never used again, under any circumstances….The only way to guarantee that nuclear weapons will never be used again is through their total elimination.

<snip>

In today’s issue of the daily newsletter published by Reaching Critical Will during NPT meetings, Ray Acheson reports that the NPT nuclear-weapon states appear to be rattled by all this talk about humanitarian consequences. “They say that these consequences are so well known there is no longer any point in discussing them.” Unfortunately for them, according to Ray, “the majority of other delegations do want to talk about it” [emphasis hardly needs to be added].

<snip>

[bananas]

1. Rejecting the strategy of denial

http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/disarmament-fora/npt/2013/nir/7693-24-april-2013-no-11-no-3

24 April 2013, No. 11, No. 3

Rejecting the strategy of denial
Ray Acheson | Reaching Critical Will of WILPF

Outside of the Assembly Hall, delegates from the nuclear weapon possessing countries say that they recognize the humanitarian and environmental devastation caused by the use of nuclear weapons. They say that these consequences are so well known there is no longer any point in discussing them. In public, they say nothing. The interventions delivered by the five recognized NPT nuclear weapon states on Monday did not include any references to this topic. However, the majority of other delegations do want to talk about it, not least because it is the most realistic way to address nuclear weapons.

While possessors or those sheltering under nuclear alliances prefer to discuss their weapons in the abstract, as “deterrents” or as instruments of “national security,” the rest of us see these weapons for what they really are: instruments of death, destruction, manipulation, injustice. This is why 127 governments came to Oslo, Norway in early March. Following on from the discussion that began in Oslo, countless delegations at this PrepCom have expressed concern with the catastrophic humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons. A joint statement is being prepared on this subject as well. “We cannot approach nuclear weapons through a strategy of denial,” argued Norwegian Ambassador Kongstad. “As long as the probability of a nuclear weapons detonation exists… it must be a humanitarian concern.” Likewise, Ambassador Otachi of Kenya argued that the policy of nuclear “deterrence” is the equivalent of threatening mass extinction.

Yet this basic understanding of the risks of nuclear weapons seems to have evaporated from the consciousness of those possessing the weapons. This is despite the fact that, as Mexican Ambassador Camacho noted, the NPT preamble refers to a consciousness of the devastating consequences that would be unleashed by nuclear war. Some weapon possessors suggest that such a war is unlikely. In its opening address, the US delegation relayed US Secretary of State John Kerry’s comment that the NPT was “conceived in a different era when the hands of the Doomsday Clock pointed precariously towards disaster.” Yet the Doomsday Clock, which was set at 7 minutes to midnight in 1968 when the NPT was negotiated, now sits at 5 minutes to midnight.

The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, which maintains the clock, explained that one of the biggest reasons for moving the clock closer to midnight in 2012 was the lack of progress on nuclear disarmament. ...

<snip>