D
i s a r m a m e n t f o r D e v e l o p m e n t
P r o g r a m
Nuclear Weapons
| Statement to the 2nd Session of the Preparatory Committee for the 2010 NPT Review Conference | ||
|
||
| The
next NPT Review Conference is only within two years. Now that almost 63
years will have passed since the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki,
we are deeply concerned that about 26,000 nuclear weapons are still stockpiled
or deployed, while we witness the danger of proliferation of nuclear weapons
in the world.
In May 2000, at the eve of the 21st century, facing the growing public demand for the abolition of nuclear weapons, the five nuclear weapon states conceded to the “unequivocal undertaking to accomplish the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals”, and the NPT Review Conference agreed on the 13 steps, including that undertaking. Nevertheless, the “undertaking” has not been implemented. Rather, some leaders of certain nuclear weapon states continue to express “determination” to retain their nuclear arsenals, and even repeat their remarks for a threatened use of nuclear weapons. They say that All options are on the table; We will deal an unbearable blow to those threatening our interest; As long as there is unforeseeable uncertainty, we have to maintain the policy of first use of nuclear weapons, etc. These remarks were all made quite recently by political and military leaders of the nuclear weapon states. They demonstrate beyond doubt the following two facts before the people of the world. One is that nuclear weapons exist to be used. Another is that the very doctrine of possessing nuclear weapons and using them for the sake of one’s own interest or security forms the driving force of nuclear proliferation. At the same time, as pointed out in the proposal made by former U.S. Presidential advisor Kissinger, former State Secretary Schultz, former Defense Secretary Perry and former Chairman of the Senate Military and Foreign Affairs Committee Nann, human beings are faced with the “historic opportunity”. An overwhelming world opinion is seeking the abolition of nuclear weapons. Of the 192 U.N. member states, 183 states have assumed the treaty obligation of foregoing the development and acquisition of nuclear weapons, and those having nuclear power facilities accept the IAEA inspections. Given such conditions, if the five Nuclear Weapons States with the “privilege of possessing nuclear weapons” decide to implement the “elimination of their nuclear arsenals” according to their pledge made in the 2000 NPT Review Conference, and move toward initiating negotiations for a convention totally banning nuclear weapons, achieving a nuclear weapon-free world should not be a distant goal. If these five countries actually move towards elimination, including the U.S. and Russia having 95% of world’s nuclear arsenals, most probably India, Pakistan and Israel, the non-signatories of the NPT, can be brought to the negotiation table in the process of discussion and consultation. The problem of proliferation can all the less legitimize the refusal or delay of nuclear abolition. In Iraq that was victimized by the illegal military actions, no nuclear, biological or chemical weapons were found. North Korea, which had resorted to nuclear development, agreed in principle to abandon its nuclear program in return for the “security assurance”. Iran, with alleged “nuclear suspicion”, declared that its nuclear facilities are for “peaceful purposes”, and the United States also confirmed the non-presence of a nuclear program there. These things attest to the need to establishing a convention to totally outlaw nuclear weapons, all the more to eradicate the danger of nuclear proliferation. We are also deeply concerned about the proliferation of such technology as uranium enrichment or plutonium extraction, which can lead to nuclear weapons production. However, while the NPT confirms the development of nuclear energy by the non-nuclear States Parties as the “inalienable right”, if the double-standard over nuclear weapons possession, included in the treaty itself, is expanded to the field of “peaceful use”, no agreement can possibly be achieved over the nuclear fuel cycle. If the point at issue is the proliferation of nuclear weapons, i.e., the conversion of nuclear energy to military use, we must first block the path to the conversion. Then, only by pressing for a broad agreement on a total ban and elimination of nuclear weapons, new approaches, including the proposed “international control”, can become possible in dealing with the problems of nuclear fuel cycle, such as uranium enrichment or reprocessing of nuclear waste. Over
the last 8 years since the turn of the century, many people of the world
have harbored hope for the realization of the “elimination of nuclear
weapons” as agreed in May 2000, and enormous efforts have been made
for this. We must not disappoint them again in 2010. First, we call on all the U.N. member states, both nuclear and non-nuclear and both in military alliances and non-aligned, to come together to set a total ban on nuclear weapons as their common agenda and pass a resolution to start negotiations unanimously at the 63rd Session of the U.N. General Assembly in September. The United Nations, which declared to save humanity from “scourge of war” as its founding mission, and adopted as its first resolution the “elimination from national armaments of atomic weapons”, naturally bears the responsibility to achieve consensus from peoples on a total ban on nuclear weapons and to achieve this goal as its priority task. Rallying the will of the governments at the U.N. in such a way will give hope to the peoples of the world wishing for a nuclear weapon-free world, and certainly help the NPT Review Conference of spring 2010 to create a groundswell for pressing the implementation of the past agreements and the 13 steps, including the “unequivocal undertaking to eliminate nuclear weapons”. Secondly, we call for renewed efforts to make peoples of the world know what happened in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. The success in achieving a nuclear weapon-free world rests largely on public opinion and actions of the people who desire the goal, as well as the efforts made by the governments. For over 62 years, supported by peace-loving people’s understanding, the survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki have borne witness to their harsh A-bomb experiences, and appealed that “Humans cannot coexist with nuclear weapons”. Looking to 2010, we are urging the aged and ailing Hibakusha to again speak out on their experiences of the nuclear disaster and stand up to convey their wishes for nuclear abolition beyond generations and boundaries. We cordially call on all governments and NGOs sharing the goal of establishing a world without nuclear weapons to join and support this enterprise and hold A-bomb photo exhibitions and “meetings to listen to the Hibakusha’s testimonies” in the lead-up to 2010. J
a p a n C o u n c i l a g a i n s t A
& H B o m b s ( G E N S U I K Y O ) Phone
: +81-3-5842-6034 |
||
BACK TO NUCLEAR WEAPONS |
 |
BACK
TO NUCLEAR WEAPONS
 |
