Home 
 Articles 
 Flashpoints 
 G7 HIROSHIMA MEETING SHOULD COMMITT TO ELIMINATION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS
         
			G7 HIROSHIMA MEETING SHOULD COMMITT TO ELIMINATION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS	
	
			
			Saturday, 09 April 2016 19:13		
	
			
			John Hallam		
	
		
		
	
	 
10 APRIL 2016
PEOPLE FOR NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT
G7 HIROSHIMA MEETING SHOULD COMMITT TO ELIMINATION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS
The  G7 meeting scheduled for 10 and 11th April in Hiroshima should commit  unequivocally to the total and complete elimination of nuclear weapons,  not at some distant future date but immediately. It must do so as a  security imperative of the highest importance.
One important,  though not the only, step toward elimination is of course a Ban Treaty.  Other elements include a framework of agreements, and a nuclear weapons  convention. We do not need to wait until nuclear weapons have been  eliminated, or for the support of the nuclear weapon states to bring any  of these elements into being: Every weapon that has actually been  eliminated has been banned before, not after, its final elimination. We  urge the Japanese government and all governments to support both a ban  treaty and other critical steps to the elimination of nuclear weapons. 
Without  such a commitment and a clear path to that elimination, there is no  point – and indeed it is downright insulting – to hold a G7 meeting in a  city that has become, through the untiring efforts of its residents and  successive mayors, synonymous with nuclear disarmament/abolition.
A controversy has erupted over the potential use of the word 'inhumane' with respect to nuclear weapons.
This  is ridiculous – especially as the compromise that has reportedly been  reached allows reference to the 'devastating consequences' of nuclear  weapons use. Surely this is a difference without a difference.
The  proposed G7 statement  thumbs its nose not only at the repeated use of  the word 'inhumane' to characterize nuclear weapons in a number of UN  General Assembly resolutions sponsored by Japan that have received  overwhelming support from governments worldwide,  but also at the fact  that both the International Court of Justice's 1996 judgment and the  ensuing consensus of Governments worldwide is that nuclear weapons are,  indeed, precisely, 'inhumane'.
At bottom however it matters not  a bit whether the G7 choose to call them 'inhumane' or merely refer to  their 'devastating consequences'.  
What truly matters is  that: 
--Even  'small-scale' use of nuclear weapons would kill up to millions and  would be a war crime of the highest order no matter what the  circumstances that led to it. 
--The use of a number of hundreds  of nuclear weapons (in say an India-Pakistan conflict) would cause tens  to hundreds of millions of immediate deaths and result in global  climatic impacts causing famine that would last for decades. 
--The  use of a number of thousands of warheads (such as in a Russia/NATO  conflict, a possibility that looks every day more likely) would cause  the immediate deaths of as many as a billion people, and end what we  call 'civilization'. It would put a question-mark over human survival  itself. 
The elimination of nuclear arsenals – all nuclear  arsenals – is a security, and indeed a  human survival imperative, of  the absolute highest priority. 
This, and not the sensitivities (or even the security) of some of the G7, is what is truly at stake.
John Hallam
People for Nuclear Disarmament
61-2-9810-2598 61-2-9319-4296 (do not leave message) 
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it