United Nations Adopts Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons Treaty

December 10. 2017:
ICAN Honored: 2017 Nobel Peace Prize Ceremony

• 6.36 - Address of Nobel Committee leader Berit Reiss-Andersen on the choice of ICAN
             for the 2017 Peace Prize (view transcript)
• 35.12 - Presentation of the award to ICAN's Beatrice Fihn and Setsuko Thurlow
• 44.22 - ICAN Director Beatrice Fihn address (view transcript)
• 1.03.55 - Setsuko Thurlow address (view transcript)

For immediate release: October 6, 2017:
International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons Wins Nobel Peace Prize- NukeWatch Calls on New Mexico Politicians and Santa Fe Archbishop To Support Drive Toward Abolition

Beatrice Fihn, ICAN Executive Director, receiving an Alliance for Nuclear Accountability award in 2017, presented by Marylia Kelley of ANA member group Tri-Valley CAREs. (Jay Coghlan, Nuclear Watch Director, is currently the ANA board president.)

Santa Fe, NM. Nuclear Watch New Mexico strongly applauds the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (disclosure: NukeWatch is one of ICAN's ~400 member groups around the world). This award is especially apt because the peoples of the world are now living at the highest risk for nuclear war since the middle 1980's, when during President Reagan's military buildup the Soviet Union became convinced that the United States might launch a pre-emptive nuclear first strike. Today, we not only have Trump's threats to "totally destroy" North Korea and Kim Jong-un's counter threats, but also renewed Russian fears of a US preemptive nuclear attack... Generally unknown to the American taxpayer, our government has quietly tripled the lethality of the US nuclear weapons stockpile..."
(view/download complete press release)

October 6, 2017:
Nobel Peace Prize For International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons
"The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided to award the Nobel Peace Prize for 2017 to the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN). The organization is receiving the award for its work to draw attention to the catastrophic humanitarian consequences of any use of nuclear weapons and for its ground-breaking efforts to achieve a treaty-based prohibition of such weapons. We live in a world where the risk of nuclear weapons being used is greater than it has been for a long time. Some states are modernizing their nuclear arsenals, and there is a real danger that more countries will try to procure nuclear weapons, as exemplified by North Korea. Nuclear weapons pose a constant threat to humanity and all life on earth." (ref)
The award was the lead story this morning on Germany's Deutsche Welle with a video interview with Yanthe Hall of ICAN Germany.
Democracy Now, Oct. 6: Amy Goodman interviews Tim Wright, Asia-Pacific director of ICAN on the Nobel award and the ban treaty. (watch segment).

The Ban Treaty: What's Next?
Ray Acheson on Democracy Now July 12: "The next process is going to be signing on to the treaty. It'll open for signature at the U.N. in New York on the 20th of September. And after that, they'll have to go through a national ratification process in order for it to enter into force. But that should all happen within the next year or two, and then it will be international law that is binding on all of the countries that have adhered to it, which means, in some cases, they're going to have to change their practices and policies that may enable or facilitate the use or the possession of nuclear weapons.
"There could be economic divestment, for example, from nuclear weapon-producing companies. There could be changes of national law that currently permit transit of nuclear weapons through territorial waters. There could be different shifts in policies and practices around military training exercises that currently involve the preparation to use nuclear weapons. And it will also be an iterative process of building up the stigmatization and the norm against nuclear weapons through the public policy, through parliaments and through national discourse."
Ray Acheson is director of Reaching Critical Will, the disarmament program of the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom; she represents WILPF on the steering committee of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons.

July 11, 2017:
Interview with Rick Wayman and Ira Helfland on the Ban Treaty
Rick Wayman:
"I think one of the most exciting things about this treaty process is the very deep and meaningful involvement of civil society, of my group, the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, of the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War. Many of us were under the umbrella of an international campaign called the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons. This voice really was unstoppable, but I also want to mention, to the credit of the nations that participated in this UN process, they gave civil society a big voice. It was really unlike any other UN process that I have been a part of before. I think that this, in many ways, revolutionized the way that international diplomacy and international treaties are made, so I'm very excited about that and very hopeful for the future."

Ira Helfland:
"The nuclear weapons states did not participate in this process and that's been the root of the problem. They have not wanted to honor their obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty to eliminate their nuclear arsenals. The rest of the world has finally lost patience. They're concerned by the overwhelming medical evidence that even a very limited nuclear war would be a worldwide catastrophe. The rest of the international community has issued a real challenge saying that they will no longer accept a situation in which nine countries hold the entire world, including their own people, hostage to these terribly dangerous nuclear arsenals."

Read the full interview at The RealNews.com
- Rick Wayman is the Director of Programs and Operations at the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation. He also serves on the Board of Directors of the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability, and is Co-Chair of the 'Amplify: Generation of Change' network for nuclear abolition.
- Ira Helfand is a co-Founder and Past President of Physicians for Social Responsibility and co-President of PSR's global federation the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War.

July 7, 2017:
UN Adopts Treaty To Prohibit Nuclear Weapons
- The treaty prohibits nations from developing, testing, producing, manufacturing, transferring, possessing, stockpiling, using or threatening to use nuclear weapons. It also prohibits them from assisting, encouraging or inducing anyone to engage in any of those activities. In addition, nations must not allow nuclear weapons to be stationed or deployed on their territory. (See FAQs on the treaty provisions at ICAN)
ICAN's executive director, Beatrice Fihn: "We hope that today marks the beginning of the end of the nuclear age. It is beyond question that nuclear weapons violate the laws of war and pose a clear danger to global security... No one believes that indiscriminately killing millions of civilians is acceptable- no matter the circumstance- yet that is what nuclear weapons are designed to do. Today the international community rejected nuclear weapons and made it clear they are unacceptable." (ref: ICAN)
 
Ray Acheson, director of the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom disarmament program, 'Reaching Critical Will': "This is a treaty made by people. By diplomats who got inspired by an idea and went home to change their government's positions. By activists writing, thinking, and convening, bringing together governments and civil society groups to figure out how to make things happen. By survivors who give their testimony despite the personal trauma of reliving their experiences... By campaigners who mobilize nationally to raise awareness and pressure their governments. By politicians who truly represent the will of their people and speak the truth in parliaments..." (Nuclear Ban Daily July 8)
- Perry Project statement: UN Adopts New Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons
- Arms Control Assoc: New Nuclear Weapons Prohibition Treaty Marks a Turning Point
- Union of Concerned Scientists: Historic Treaty Makes Nuclear Weapons Illegal
- Ploughshares Fund: A Stunning Rebuke To The Nuclear-Armed States
- US, UK, France joint statement: "We do not intend to sign, ratify or ever become party to it."

"Many citizens, scientists and laymen alike, view nuclear-weapons abolition as an essential milestone in the development of human civilization, a moral, ideological and practical campaign that could catalyze the transformation of international relations and improve the outlook for civilization at a critical time." -James Doyle

June 15, 2017:
Final Negotiations Begin on Nuclear Weapons Ban Treaty
- Live stream- UN Web TV
- Draft Nuclear Weapons Ban Treaty View/download PDF
- An Open Letter from Scientists in Support of the UN Nuclear Weapons Negotiations
- Selected Elements of a Treaty Prohibiting Nuclear Weapons
- Statements and working papers to the conference
- The International Association Of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms is calling for a a prohibition on "threat of use". (ref)
- Unfold Zero, the World Future Council, Parliamentarians for Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament and the Basel Peace Office are calling for a prohibition on the financing of nuclear weapons production. (ref)
- We have a dossier on the background and trajectory of this initiative, and we'll keep it up to date with news and developments: Ban Treaty dossier.
- For further in-depth coverage of these negotiations, see the Reaching Critical Will and ICAN websites. Also note the ban treaty blog at ICAN for daily news and developments.

May 22, 2017:
Draft Nuclear Weapons Ban Treaty Released Today
View/download PDF

"Many citizens, scientists and laymen alike, view nuclear-weapons abolition as an essential milestone in the development of human civilization, a moral, ideological and practical campaign that could catalyze the transformation of international relations and improve the outlook for civilization at a critical time." -James Doyle

Above, from left to right: Rick Wayman, Nuclear Age Peace Foundation; Marylia Kelley, Tri-Valley Cares (Lawrence Livermore); Ralph Hutchison, OREPA (Y-12); Jay Coghlan, Nuclear Watch NM (Los Alamos, Sandia), and Hans Kristensen, Federation of American Scientists.

March 28, 2017, UN, NYC:
Ban Treaty Conference: Alliance for Nuclear Accountability Panel Discussion
See video clips of some of the speakers:

• Introduction: Rick Wayman, Nuclear Age Peace Foundation
• Marylia Kelley, Tri-Valley CAREs, Lawrence Livermore
• Ralph Hutchison, OREPA, Y-12
• Jay Coghlan NukeWatch NM. Los Alamos, Sandia
• Hans Kristensen and Matthew McKinzie, F.A.S., N.R.D.C.

March 28, 2017:
An Open Letter from Scientists
in Support of the UN Nuclear Weapons Ban Negotiations
As of 3/28: 3,447 signers
Some excerpts: "Nuclear arms are the only weapons of mass destruction not yet prohibited by an international convention, even though they are the most destructive and indiscriminate weapons ever created.
"We scientists bear a special responsibility for nuclear weapons, since it was scientists who invented them and discovered that their effects are even more horrific than first thought.
"[Nuclear war] is more likely than one may hope, because it can start by mistake, miscalculation or terrorist provocation. There is a steady stream of accidents and false alarms that could trigger all-out war, and relying on never-ending luck is not a sustainable strategy.
"Many nuclear powers have larger nuclear arsenals than needed for deterrence, yet prioritize making them more lethal over reducing them and the risk that they get used.
"But there is also cause for optimism. On March 27 2017, an unprecedented process begins at the United Nations: most of the world's nations convene to negotiate a ban on nuclear arms, to stigmatize them like biological and chemical weapons, with the ultimate goal of a world free of these weapons of mass destruction. We support this, and urge our national governments to do the same, because nuclear weapons threaten not merely those who have them, but all people on Earth."
- See the full Open Letter, signers to date, and sign-on form (please sign if you have, or are working toward, a PhD in a STEM field!): Future of Humanity.

March, 2017:
Negotiations on a Nuclear Weapons Ban Treaty Begin This Month at the UN
This past week began the most important effort to get rid of nuclear weapons since the Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1968. The NPT didn't stop North Korea, India, and Pakistan from going nuclear. And the nuclear weapons states did not proceed toward full elimination of nuclear weapons, having stalled out the process at a count of roughly 15,000.
Nuclear weapons states are all opposed to a ban treaty, along with those non-nuclear states 'benefitting' from the US nuclear umbrella. But a large majority of nations will likely approve the ban, in order to stigmatize possession of nuclear weapons by any power as a key step toward effective de-nuclearization.
A ban treaty is also the last best chance to put the brakes on a "2nd nuclear age". There is growing pressure to build and deploy nuclear weapons that can be used in regional conflicts, under the guise of modernization and justified by the meme of a 'second nuclear age'. And in this so-called 'second nuclear age', nuclear weapons will not just be maintained to prevent anyone from using them (deterrence), but will be designed and deployed for more effective war-fighting (counterforce). Of course, breaking the nuclear taboo strikes most of us as extremely unwise and dangerous. But a wholesale transition to '2nd nuclear age' weaponry and posture might be less likely if the majority of nations have declared nuclear weapons to be illegal and prohibited.
Negotiations are to be held in two sessions at the UN in New York. The first session began on March 27, and will last through March 31. The second, longer, session will be June 15 through July 7.
For further in-depth coverage of these negotiations, see the Reaching Critical Will and ICAN websites. Also note the ban treaty blog at ICAN for daily news and developments.

The Historic UN Vote On Banning Nuclear Weapons
The very first resolution passed by the newly formed United Nations on January 24, 1946, established a commission of the UN Security Council to ensure: 1) that atomic energy is only used for peaceful purposes, and 2) the elimination of atomic weapons from the arsenals of nations.
That was 70+ years ago. Then there was the appalling Cold War nuclear arms race. Now, a quarter century after the end of that frozen conflict, the nations of the UN General Assembly have moved again to deal with the catastrophic danger of nuclear weapons, and have passed an historic resolution "to convene in 2017 a United Nations conference to negotiate a legally binding instrument to prohibit nuclear weapons, leading towards their total elimination."
All nuclear weapons states, with the single exception of North Korea, voted against or abstained. The final vote was 123 for the resolution, 38 against, and 16 abstaining. (see country by country vote)
"There comes a time when choices have to be made and this is one of those times," said Helena Nolan, Ireland's director of Disarmament and Non-Proliferation, "Given the clear risks associated with the continued existence of nuclear weapons, this is now a choice between responsibility and irresponsibility. Governance requires accountability and governance requires leadership."
The Obama Administration was in fierce opposition. It lobbied all nations, particularly its allies, to vote no. "How can a state that relies on nuclear weapons for its security possibly join a negotiation meant to stigmatize and eliminate them?" said Ambassador Robert Wood, the U.S. special representative to the UN Conference on Disarmament in Geneva.
An interesting argument considering that the President himself had declared in Prague in 2009, "To put an end to Cold War thinking, we will reduce the role of nuclear weapons in our national security strategy, and urge others to do the same." (ref) [Removed by Trump administration]

US position "indefensible"
Ploughshares' Joe Cirincione wrote in a commentary for the Huffington Post: "The U.S. opposition is a profound mistake. Ambassador Wood is a career foreign service officer and a good man who has worked hard for our country. But this position is indefensible."
Cirincione: "The idea of a treaty to ban nuclear weapons is inspired by similar, successful treaties to ban biological weapons, chemical weapons, and landmines. All started with grave doubts. Many in the United States opposed these treaties. But when President Richard Nixon began the process to ban biological weapons and President George H.W. Bush began talks to ban chemical weapons, other nations rallied to their leadership. These agreements have not yet entirely eliminated these deadly arsenals (indeed, the United States is still not a party to the landmine treaty) but they stigmatized them, hugely increased the taboo against their use or possession, and convinced the majority of countries to destroy their stockpiles.
"The ban treaty idea did not originate in the United States, nor was it championed by many U.S. groups, nor is it within U.S. power to control the process. Indeed, this last seems to be one of the major reasons the administration opposes the talks.
"The movement reflects widespread fears that the world is moving closer to a nuclear catastrophe - and that the nuclear-armed powers are not serious about reducing these risks or their arsenals. If anything, these states are increasing the danger by pouring hundreds of billions of dollars into new Cold War nuclear weapons programs.
"There is still time for the United States to shift gears. We should not squander the opportunity to join a process already in motion and to help guide it to a productive outcome. It is a Washington trope that you cannot defeat something with nothing. Right now, the US has nothing positive to offer. The disarmament process is dead and this lack of progress undermines global support for the Non-Proliferation Treaty and broader efforts to stop the spread of nuclear weapons.
"The new presidential administration must make a determined effort to mount new initiatives that reduce these weapons, reduce these risks. It should also support the ban treaty process as a powerful way to build global support for a long-standing American national security goal. We must, as President John F. Kennedy said, eliminate these weapons before they eliminate us." See full post at HuffPo / See also Cirincione's updated and expanded post at The Bulletin:
  The UN makes history on a nuclear weapons ban. Does the US care?

"The rest of the world is finally standing up to this threat to their survival and that of the planet. They are taking matters into their own hands and refusing to be held hostage by the nuclear nations. They will no longer be bullied into sitting back and waiting for the nuclear states to make good on empty promises."
- Robert Dodge, Nuclear Weapons- The Time for Abolition is Now
The Vatican's ambassador to the UN, Archbishop Bernardito Auza declared, "Nuclear arms offer a false sense of security, and the uneasy peace promised by nuclear deterrence is a tragic illusion. Nuclear weapons cannot create a stable and secure world. Peace and international stability cannot be established on mutually assured destruction or on the threat of total annihilation. Lasting peace cannot be guaranteed by the maintenance of a balance of terror... The indefinite possession of nuclear weapons is morally wrong, an affront to the 'entire framework of the United Nations' and a contradiction to its vocation of service to humanity and the global common good." (ref)
And the Dalai Lama has stated: "By far the greatest single danger facing humankind- in fact, all living beings on our planet- is the threat of nuclear destruction. I need not elaborate on this danger, but I would like to appeal to all the leaders of the nuclear powers who literally hold the future of the world in their hands, to the scientists and technicians who continue to create these awesome weapons of destruction, and to all the people at large who are in a position to influence their leaders: I appeal to them to exercise their sanity and begin to work at dismantling and destroying all nuclear weapons." (ref)
And yet in spite of the clear opposition and condemnation of the vast majority of nations and of the people of the world, even of our "faith leaders", the nuclear weapons states, most particularly the US and Russia, are embarked on a "modernizing" production binge of new doomsday machines. This indeed can only be described as indefensible. Which of our 'leaders' will have the courage to lead the way in stopping this insanity?