JAPAN Hiroshima: A visiter to the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum looks at photographs of some of the victims of the atomic bomb 'Little Boy' which was dropped on the city in August 6th 1945 by the United States of America.It was the first atomic bomb ever used as a weapon and was dropped three days before the "Fat Man" bomb was used against Nagasaki. The two bombs killed over 100,000 people.
Photographer © Toru Morimoto / Panos Picture

Japan Council against Atomic and Hydrogen Bombs (GENSUIKYO)
April 2008

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.
For this, we want to make two specific proposals.

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.

Japan Council against A & H Bombs (GENSUIKYO)
2-4-4 Yushima, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8464 JAPAN
phone: +81-3-5842-6034
fax: +81-3-5842-6033
Email: antiatom@topaz.plala.or.jp
URL: http://www10.plala.or.jp/antiatom

back to top

2008 World Conference against Atomic and Hydrogen Bombs

Here is a call for participation in and support for the 2008 World Conference against A and H Bombs, and attached its provisional program and pre-registration form, plus a call for joining the 2008 International Youth Rally "Let us get rid of nuclear weapons". Please make a plan to come to Hiroshima and Nagasaki on Aug. 2-9, 2008. We look forward to receiving your pre-registration forms!

For a Nuclear Weapon-Free, Peaceful and Just World:
Call for Participation in and Support for the
2008 World Conference against Atomic and Hydrogen Bombs

February 14, 2008

61st General Meeting, Organizing Committee of the World Conference against A & H Bombs

Aspiring to a nuclear weapon-free, peaceful and just world, we will hold the 2008 World Conference against Atomic and Hydrogen Bombs from August 2 to 9, 2008, in the A-bombed cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. We cordially invite people worldwide, both in and out of Japan, who share the common goal to take part in and support the World Conference.

This year’s world conference will serve as a springboard for developing a joint international campaign toward the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference in the spring of 2010. The implementation of the “unequivocal undertaking” to eliminate nuclear weapons, agreed to in the 2000 Review Conference by the nuclear weapons states was sought for in the last NPT Review Conference held in 2005. But the conference ended in failure, due to the attempt by the U.S. to focus only on “nuclear non-proliferation.”

However, the disastrous situation in Iraq caused by the US led-war using the proliferation as a pretext has not only shown the bankruptcy of “order imposed by power” but also the fact that the abolition of nuclear weapons is the only way to overcome threats from nuclear weapons. Under these circumstances, a determination to jointly endeavor to achieve the implementation of promise by the nuclear weapons states is growing among NGOs, national governments and local municipalities.

The U.N. General Assembly last December adopted resolutions to urge the implementation of the agreement to abolish nuclear weapons and to demand an early commencement of negotiations leading to the elimination of nuclear weapons with greater support than in previous years. We are also witnessing a new move in which former advisors to different U.S. Presidents, secretaries of state and defense, and the defense and foreign ministers of its allies are calling on the nuclear weapons states to take action toward a “nuclear weapon-free world.”

Now is the time for all the people of the world who wish to achieve a “nuclear weapon-free world” to work together and develop broader and greater actions.

At the same time, we are aware of the responsibility of the Japanese movements. Against the wish of the people for a nuclear-free and peaceful Japan, and in defiance of a worldwide trend, our government is deepening Japan’s dependence on the U.S. “nuclear umbrella” and promoting revision of the peace Constitution. We urge the government of the world’s only A-bombed nation to assume a leading role for nuclear weapons abolition and to contribute to world peace by strictly observing the Three Non-Nuclear Principles and Article 9 of the Constitution. To this end, we are determined to make progress in our grass-roots movements, working together with the Hibakusha.

The World Conference against A & H Bombs has helped develop international solidarity and joint efforts between anti-nuclear peace movements of the world and governments working for the elimination of nuclear weapons. Let us have active discussion and interactions, and expand our movements further to open a sure perspective for a future set free of threats from nuclear weapons. We also hope to develop our solidarity with the movements against war and for peace, and for protection of environment and people’s livelihoods.

We cordially call on you to take part in and give support to the 2008 World Conference. We also call for your cooperation with the Nationwide Peace March which marks its 50th anniversary this year, the signature campaign for the abolition of nuclear weapons, and holding of A-bomb exhibitions. (end)

Contact: Yayoi Tsuchida
In charge of International Relations
World Conference against A & H Bombs
Organizing Committee
2-4-4 Yushima, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8464 JAPAN
Phone: +81-3-5842-6034
Fax: +81-3-5842-6033
Email: intl@antiatom.org
URL: www.antiatom.org

back to top

First A-bomb Exhibition in Egypt

Message for nuclear weapon-free and peace shared
Hiroshi TAKA
Secretary General
Japan Council against A and H Bombs (Gensuikyo)

From the viewpoint of what happened under mushroom cloud

With a theme of “For a nuclear weapon-free world – Hiroshima & Nagasaki speak,” a 24-member delegation of the Japan Council against A and H Bombs (Gensuikyo) held an A-bomb exhibition in Cairo, capital of Egypt, for one week from Oct. 24, the first day of the UN Disarmament Week.  We exhibited 30 pieces of “Hiroshima-Nagasaki A-bomb photo posters”, and A-bombed roofing tiles and a blouse with splashed patters that the late mother of Ms. Chizuko Kado wore when she was caught by the bomb.

  The Mubarak Center, three-story public library where the exhibition was held, is located along the west bank of the Nail River.  During the period, about 500 people visited the library and saw the exhibition. A panorama view of the two devastated cities and other posters depicting the effects of heat rays, blast and radiation impressively showed what had happened to people under the mushroom cloud. 

After Rupture of 2005 NPT Review Conference
The planning of the exhibition was started in the 2005 World Conference against A and H Bombs. In May of the same year, the NPT Review Conference with the implementation of an “unequivocal undertaking” for the abolition of nuclear weapons being urged was broken down by the arrogant attitude of the Bush administration.  Drawing a lesson from the disappointing outcome, the world conference came to an agreement to arouse overwhelming public opinion in favor of the abolition of nuclear weapons, and to that end, it called for vigorously carrying out a new signature campaign, peace marches, holding the A-bomb exhibitions to disseminate the damage of atomic bombing in and out of Japan.

In order to implement the decision of the world conference, Gensuikyo decided to conduct the Hibakusha’s speaking tour and the A-bomb exhibition not only in nuclear weapons states but in Asian countries; further, it decided to try to get cooperation from governments of the New Agenda Coalition and the Non-aligned Movement in these activities.  It was Egypt, member state of NAC and next chair nation of the NAM that was the first to kindly accept our request to host these activities.

Serious effort of Egypt government and people on this issue
Along with the exhibition, we had a seminar with the participation of students at Cairo university on Nov. 23, a panel discussion under the same theme of the exhibition on Nov. 24, a lecture meeting with about 30 newly-appointed diplomats as audience at the Diplomatic Institute and a dialogue with junior and senior high school students on Nov. 28.  All the programs were attended by government officials of Egypt. They presided at and spoke to these programs.  They include Prof. Mona El Baradei and Prof. Sanaa Ahmed Esmail at the seminar of the Cairo University, Amb. Abdel Raouf El Reedy, the director of the Mubarak Public Library, and Amb. Hisham Badr, former ambassador to Japan in the panel discussion, and Amb. Soad M. Shalaby, Amb. Amk Aboulatta and Amb. Mohamed Ezzeldine Abdel-Moneim in the lecture meeting.

Active dialogue and Q & A sessions
From the Japanese side, Mikiso Iwasa, assistant secretary general of Hidankyo and I, became speakers on behalf of the delegation. The two other Hibakushas of Junko Kayashige and Masae Kanatani also spoke about their experiences of atomic bombing at some programs.

I spoke that the purpose of the exhibition and the visit was to make known to the world the message of the Hibakusha that humans cannot coexist with nuclear weapons, and I called for making the abolition of nuclear weapons common effort of all humankind. 

Immediately after the atomic bombing and ever since, a myth has been propagated throughout the world that “The A-bombing brought an early end to the war” or “It saved several hundred thousand lives of the youths”.  However, the tireless efforts of the Hibakusha to let the world know the reality of what happened under the mushroom cloud, and of the world peace movement in response to Hibakusha’s call, have finally achieved the “unequivocal undertaking to eliminate nuclear weapons” from the nuclear weapons states in the final year of the 20th century at the 2000 NPT Review Conference.  Along with this achievement, we emphasized that dependence on nuclear weapons still continued, and for securing the survival of human race, all people and governments, beyond all boundaries, should work together to abolish nuclear weapons.

People at these meetings raised many diverse questions as “Why were Hiroshima and Nagasaki made targets for the A-bombing?”, “How were the Hibakusha able to survive until today?”, “Don’t you hold a grudge against the U.S., which dropped the A-bombs?” or “How can we force the nuclear powers to abandon their nuclear arsenals?”.  People were engaged in such lively discussions and Q & A sessions that many of them lined up before the microphone to speak up.

Our delegation also learned many things
The first meeting of the World Conference against A & H Bombs and the government of Egypt was when the late Amb. Mahmoud Mubarak, then Assistant Foreign Minister of Egypt took part in the 2002 World Conference.  He was playing an important role as the representative of Egypt in the New Agenda Coalition.  It was around the time when the Bush Administration had been aiming its sights on Iraq and sent State Secretary Powell to Arab countries, by which tension was rapidly running high.  Through his presentations in the world conference, Amb. Mubarak showed a very firm and clear stance on the abolition of nuclear weapons and the solution of Iraqi problems through peaceful means.  The leadership played by Egypt led to the unanimous demand from the Arab world for a peaceful solution, which moved the anti-war opinion of the world.  Amb. Mubarak contributed greatly to developing friendly relations between the world conference and the government of Egypt, which has been playing a pivotal role in bringing together the NAC, the NAM and the League of Arab States.

Our delegation wanted to know how much the people of Egypt were conscious about nuclear-free and peace issues.  As is well known, Egypt engaged in warfare with Israel 4 times after the Second World War.  And through the 1970s, it shifted its stance to solving through diplomatic means the problems of Palestine and occupied territories by Israel.  That policy shift generated various controversies, but Egypt has proven that its effort for peaceful solutions does not mean the accommodation to injustice or sacrificing other peoples.  In the face of Israel’s possession of nuclear weapons and continued refusal to join the NPT, in early 1990s, Egypt proposed that the Middle East region should be made a zone free of all weapons of mass destruction, and has promoted a non-nuclear and peace diplomacy.  How do the people of Egypt see their government seeking the initiative for peace and a nuclear weapon-free world in the region facing unparalleled and complicated problems in Palestine, Iraq and Israel’s possession of nuclear weapons?  Naturally, the number of people whom we were able to meet during our short stay was limited.  However, when it comes to the question of nuclear weapons and peace, people in Egypt were all very sincere and serious in discussing and tackling the problem.

back to top

Nuclear Weapons & Today's Stand-Off

Middle Powers Initiative Statement *

US/Iran Confrontation:
Intensified Diplomacy and Adherence to International Law
September 20, 2007

Absent a Security Council resolution authorizing use of force, there is presently no basis in international law for the United States or any other state to respond to Iran’s nuclear program with a military attack or to threaten such an attack.

Resolution of differences between the United States and Iran through diplomatic means has become imperative. The catastrophe of Iraq should inform us that the use of force under present circumstances will bring even greater tragedy to the war-torn Middle East. Any threat to unilaterally use overwhelming force is irresponsibly hazardous. There is no imminent threat posed by Iran. There is a practical, legal and moral obligation to obtain security through peaceful and law abiding means.

An attack on Iran would violate the UN Charter prohibition on threat or use of force against the territorial integrity and political independence of another state. Since there is no immediate exigent threat of attack by Iran leaving no alternative course of action, there is no basis for claiming the right to use force in self-defense.

Regarding alleged Iranian support for Iraqi insurgents, and alleged US support for attacks in Iran, restraint and diplomacy are the right tools. Too much is at stake – the ending of the Iraq war, regional peace, and the preservation of the non-proliferation regime – to act otherwise. The two countries should therefore not conduct, support or threaten any covert or overt military activities against each other.

Iran is obligated to comply with the Security Council resolutions requiring suspension of enrichment activities and heavy water-related projects. Doing so would facilitate negotiations and, by the terms of the resolutions, lift the application of sanctions. In accordance with IAEA Board requests, Iran should also implement the Additional Protocol to build confidence.

To avoid an unpredictable and extremely dangerous escalation arising both from the Iraq war and the nuclear dispute, the United States and Iran, bilaterally and with other concerned countries, must now negotiate on the range of issues dividing them. They include the US military presence in Iraq; Iran’s alleged involvement in supporting Iraqi insurgents; border control issues between Iran and Iraq; US support of regime change in Iran; and Iran’s nuclear program. There should be no preconditions for commencement of negotiations.

Effective diplomacy is now urgent because the US-Iran confrontation has reached a critical stage. Iran is charging that US-supported Kurdish groups based in Iraq are carrying out attacks in Iran, and there are credible reports that Iran is indiscriminately shelling northeastern Iraq. Similarly, the United States has stepped up its claim that elements in Iran are supplying advanced roadside bombs, other munitions, and training to insurgents in Iraq. In an August 28, 2007 address, President Bush stated that to protect US troops, “I have authorized our military commanders in Iraq to confront Tehran’s murderous activities.” The US government is considering declaring all or part of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps or its Qods Force a terrorist organization. The United States maintains a major strike force in the Persian Gulf. Iran continues its ongoing bellicose narrative regarding US global aspirations.

Nuclear developments have also reached a crucial juncture. Iran continues to insist on enlarging its capability to enrich uranium and building a heavy water reactor, in defiance of UN Security Council resolutions requiring suspension of those activities in order to “build confidence in the exclusively peaceful nature of its nuclear program.” Iran is now operating nearly 2,000 centrifuges under IAEA monitoring and producing low-enriched uranium, albeit at a much slower pace than expected. The United States, France, and Britain favor adoption of a new resolution stiffening sanctions. While endorsing sanctions, in his recent speech President Bush also said: “We will confront this danger before it is too late.”

The diplomatic approach to reversing the DPRK’s breakout from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is yielding results and should now be used with Iran. Key elements were the direct involvement of the United States and a willingness to contemplate normalization of relations and security guarantees. Further, we now know that IAEA and UNSCOM/UNMOVIC inspections of Iraq were effective. The IAEA should be allowed to do its job with respect to Iran.

A maximum effort should be made to reach agreement over time with Iran on nuclear matters, taking into account the following factors, among others.

First, since 2003, when its history of safeguards reporting violations was revealed, Iran has met reporting requirements. As in past reports, in his August 30, 2007 report IAEA Director General ElBaradei stated that: “The Agency is able to verify the non-diversion of declared nuclear material in Iran.” While the IAEA cannot now confirm the absence of undeclared nuclear materials and activities, as experience with countries such as Japan shows, that is a challenging determination that takes considerable time and requires enhanced inspections under the Additional Protocol.

Second, the IAEA and Iran have reached agreement on a work plan to clear up outstanding questions about Iran’s past nuclear activities. If successful, all questions, including those regarding acquisition of centrifuge technology from the Khan network, will be closed by December 2007. Already, the IAEA has declared that certain issues have been resolved. To encourage this process, it would be wise for the Security Council to defer a decision on strengthening sanctions.

Third, Iran has repeatedly indicated its openness to operation of limited enrichment facilities in Iran under heightened IAEA monitoring and with foreign participation. The United States needs to compare that scenario to possible Iranian withdrawal from the NPT and operation of enrichment and possibly reprocessing facilities outside of IAEA monitoring. Iran’s leaders do not appear to have made the decision to acquire nuclear weapons (as opposed to the capacity to produce materials for reactors or weapons). A well-considered diplomatic strategy and close international involvement with Iran’s program can keep the balance tipped toward non-acquisition.

Finally, the United States and other nuclear weapon states can more credibly insist on Iranian compliance with its international obligations if they meet their own. To decry the Iranian potential of developing nuclear weapons while brandishing arsenals of unimaginable destructive capacity on launch-on-warning status is inconsistent. The nuclear weapons states have, pursuant to their duties under the NPT, committed to a diminishing role of nuclear weapons in security policies and, in order to gain the indefinite extension of the NPT, made commitments to non-use of nuclear weapons against NPT non-nuclear weapon states. Accordingly, the United States is required to renounce the use of nuclear weapons against Iran rather than to maintain that “all options are on the table.”

NPT parties, including Iran and the United States, have also vowed to support creation of a zone free of WMD in the Middle East. In that regard, a useful step would be a region-wide freeze in nuclear fuel production activities, applicable to Israel as well as Iran, as proposed by the WMD Commission. The International Court of Justice, interpreting the NPT, has unanimously ruled that negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament must be concluded. The nuclear weapon states will have more success in rallying the international community to prevent proliferation if they meet their NPT disarmament commitments, among them bringing the test ban treaty into force, negotiation of a verified fissile materials treaty, and verified and irreversible reduction and eventual elimination of nuclear arsenals.

(The Middle Powers Initiative is a coalition of seven international non-governmental organizations* working primarily with “middle power” governments to encourage and educate the nuclear weapons states to take immediate practical steps to reduce nuclear dangers and commence negotiations to eliminate nuclear weapons. MPI is guided by an International Steering Committee and chaired by Hon. Douglas Roche, O.C., former Canadian Disarmament Ambassador.)

Find out about the world's top nuclear forces here.