DOCSLIB.ORG

A Pledge to Fill the Legal Gap Vienna Conference 2014

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Pledge to Fill the Legal Gap Vienna Conference 2014 A PLEDGE TO FILL THE LEGAL GAP VIENNA CONFERENCE 2014 “Austria pledges to cooperate with all relevant stakeholders ... to stigmatize, prohibit and eliminate nuclear weapons.” – AUSTRIAN PLEDGE A commitment to act From fact-based discussions to the start of negotiations he landmark Vienna Conference on the Humanitarian Impact of Nuclear Weapons, hosted by Austria from 8 to 9 December 2014, concluded with an extraordinary Tpledge “to fill the legal gap” for the prohibition and elimination of nuclear weapons. Nations must now commence negotiations on a treaty banning these weapons completely. this process from a fact-based dialogue to the start SUMMARY of diplomatic negotiations for a ban. Outlawing nuclear weapons is not a radical proposition: it n Delegates from 158 governments attended the Vienna conference, up enjoys widespread support among governments from 146 in Nayarit and 128 in Oslo. and the public, and is the logical and responsible n Around 100 governments delivered course of action in light of the indiscriminate and national statements, with many calling unacceptable effects of any use of nuclear weapons. for negotiations on a ban. Although Austria presented the “Austrian Pledge” n The UN secretary-general and Pope Francis issued strong messages solely in its national capacity, and not as a consensus denouncing nuclear weapons. outcome of the Vienna conference, the Austrian n The perspectives of nuclear test foreign ministry has since invited all other interested survivors and the Red Cross states to endorse it. ICAN is confident that, over movement featured prominently. the coming months, many will do so – and signal n Austria concluded with a pledge to fill the legal gap for the prohibition and their intention to start negotiations in 2015 on a elimination of nuclear weapons. treaty banning nuclear weapons. As a global civil n All governments have since been invited society coalition working to achieve such a treaty, to join the Austrian Pledge to show ICAN stands firmly behind the Austrian Pledge and their support for abolition. will mobilize our campaigners around the world to promote it to governments and the public alike. The Vienna conference was the third and most Factual conclusions widely attended in a series of major diplomatic The Vienna conference built on the evidence-based conferences held over the past two years to examine findings of the Oslo and Nayarit conferences, Sponsors Article 36 the grave risks and catastrophic consequences of and added a new legal dimension to the debate. Austrian Federal Ministry for Europe, Integration & Foreign Affairs nuclear weapon detonations. Beginning in Oslo in Conclusions drawn from the panels, as reflected in Dick Smith Foods March 2013 and continuing in Nayarit, Mexico, in the Austrian chair’s summary, included: Friedrich Ebert Stiftung Heinrich Böll Stiftung February 2014, this humanitarian-centred process Janet Holmes à Court has shed new light on the dangers of living in n The impact of any nuclear weapon detonation, Holy See a world armed to the brink with thousands of irrespective of cause, would not be constrained ICAN Norway nuclear weapons, and underscored the necessity and by national borders, and could have regional Irish Department of Foreign Affairs & Trade Dr Alan McPhate Published by ICAN February 2015 paramount urgency of eliminating this intolerable and even global consequences. Allan Myers AO QC threat to humanity and the planet as a whole. n Nuclear weapon detonations cause destruction, Contact: [email protected] Norwegian People’s Aid Website: www.icanw.org The compelling and bold pledge delivered death and displacement, as well as profound Norwegian Royal Ministry of Foreign Affairs Text and layout: Tim Wright PAX by Austria at the conclusion of the conference and long-term damage to the environment, Religions for Peace Japan Cover: Austrian foreign minister Sebastian is a resounding call to action, a tool with which the climate and human health. Indeed, they Soka Gakkai International Kurz opens the Vienna conference. governments and civil society can now transform threaten the very survival of humankind. Svenska Läkare mot Kärnvapen This page: Michael Linhart, secretary- Vienna Convention Bureau general of the Austrian foreign ministry, Women’s International League for Peace & Freedom delivers the Austrian Pledge. 1 BOX 1 n The scope, scale and inter-relationship of the BOX 2 humanitarian consequences caused by nuclear CHAIR’S SUMMARY weapon detonations are catastrophic and more complex than commonly understood. Statement: Indiscriminate weapons get banned n “Many delegations stressed the need for n The use and testing of nuclear weapons have security for all and underscored that the only Nadja Schmidt Indiscriminate weapons get banned. way to guarantee this security is through demonstrated their devastating immediate We have done it before with other the total elimination of nuclear weapons and long-term effects. Nuclear testing e have heard alarming weapon systems, including bio- and their prohibition. They expressed around the world has left a legacy of serious Wevidence about the devastat- logical and chemical weapons. An support for the negotiation of a new legal ing effects of nuclear weapons. international prohibition is merely instrument prohibiting nuclear weapons, health and environmental harm. Radiation We have heard about the risks of the logical outcome of an examina- constituting an effective measure towards has contaminated the food chain and is still detonations, either accidental or tion of the risks and consequences nuclear disarmament, as required also by the measurable in the atmosphere to this day. intentional. We have heard that no of nuclear weapon detonations. A Non-Proliferation Treaty.” n The risks of accidental, mistaken, unauthorized effective response is possible. new legal instrument prohibiting We have also heard the stories of these weapons would constitute a or intentional use of nuclear weapons are people who have survived the use long-overdue implementation of the evident due to the vulnerability of nuclear or testing of nuclear weapons. Their Non-Proliferation Treaty. command-and-control networks to human stories illustrate that nuclear weap- This is a meaningful proposal. It ons are unacceptable and should would establish a comprehensive error and cyber-attacks, and the maintaining of therefore be clearly prohibited. set of prohibitions and provide a nuclear arsenals on high levels of alert. What stands out from the ses- framework under which the elimina- n Limiting the role of nuclear weapons to sion on legal frameworks is that we tion of nuclear weapons can be are currently lacking an instrument pursued. This is a feasible, achiev- deterrence does not preclude the possibility that explicitly characterizes nuclear able proposal. It can be negotiated of their use, nor does it address the risks weapons as unacceptable under now, and have normative and practi- stemming from accidental use. The only international law. Our next step as cal impacts. assurance against nuclear weapon detonations supporters of the humanitarian ini- We have heard some say that tiative should be to explore the best the calls for a new legal regime on is the total elimination of nuclear weapons. way to address this legal deficit. nuclear weapons fail to take into ac- ing majority of states will join this n No state or international body could address The chair of the Nayarit confer- count security interests. But whose process, and we look forward to ac- in an adequate manner the immediate ence concluded that, in light of the security are they talking about? companying you along the road to a devastating immediate and long- We believe that states should put treaty banning nuclear weapons. humanitarian emergency or long-term term effects of nuclear detona- a prohibition in place now. The 70th consequences caused by a nuclear weapon tions, the time has come to start a anniversary of the Hiroshima and Nadja Schmidt is director of ICAN detonation in a populated area, nor provide diplomatic process to negotiate a Nagasaki attacks is the appropriate Austria. This is a shortened version adequate assistance to those affected. legally binding instrument prohibit- milestone to launch such a process. of the statement she delivered on AUSTRIAN PLEDGE ing nuclear weapons. This will take courage. We have behalf of ICAN at the Vienna confer- n There is no comprehensive, universal legal This is not a radical proposal. confidence that the overwhelm- ence on 9 December. n “Austria calls on all states parties to the Non- norm prohibiting the possession, transfer, Proliferation Treaty to renew their commitment production or use of nuclear weapons. The to the urgent and full implementation of existing obligations under article VI, and to this mere existence of these weapons raises end, to identify and pursue effective measures profound ethical and moral questions on a to fill the legal gap for the prohibition and level transcending legal discussions. A legal deficit: time to fill the gap successful in banning the use of other weapons that, elimination of nuclear weapons, and Austria pledges to cooperate with all stakeholders to “It is an anomaly that nuclear weapons remain individually, can generate only a small percentage achieve this goal.” As noted also in the chair’s summary, many the only weapons of mass destruction that have of a nuclear weapon’s overall destructive force.” delegations argued that humanitarian concerns n “Austria pledges to cooperate
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Changing the Discourse on Nuclear Weapons: the Humanitarian Initiative Elizabeth Minor Elizabeth Minor Is a Researcher at UK Non-Governmental Organization Article 36
    International Review of the Red Cross (2015), 97 (899), 711–730. The human cost of nuclear weapons doi:10.1017/S181638311600014X Changing the discourse on nuclear weapons: The humanitarian initiative Elizabeth Minor Elizabeth Minor is a Researcher at UK non-governmental organization Article 36. She has previously worked for non- governmental organizations Every Casualty and Oxford Research Group. Abstract This article examines the progress of the humanitarian initiative to reframe the nuclear weapons discourse internationally. The initiative seeks to shift debate away from theories of strategic stability and towards a focus on the impact of nuclear weapons themselves. This effort has now gathered significant support at an international level, and its implications are increasingly recognized by both nuclear-armed and non-nuclear-armed States. The initiative has been underpinned by the deliberate logic of humanitarian disarmament. A treaty banning nuclear weapons, around which momentum is gathering, would be an achievable, legally coherent and logical next step developing from the initiative. Keywords: nuclear weapons, humanitarian initiative, disarmament, prohibition, ban treaty. Since 2010, the unacceptable humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons have been the subject of increased attention, analysis and discussion internationally. Looking at nuclear weapons from a humanitarian perspective challenges prevalent framings of the purpose and role of these weapons that have previously been focused on State security and strategic stability. A humanitarian perspective fundamentally questions the acceptability of nuclear weapons. Committed States, © icrc 2016 711 E. Minor civil society and international organizations have pursued this change in the discourse as a deliberate strategy to reframe the debate on nuclear weapons and establish foundations for their stigmatization, prohibition and elimination.
    [Show full text]
  • The Story So Far : the Humanitarian Initiative on the Impacts of Nuclear Weapons
    This is a repository copy of The Story so Far : The Humanitarian Initiative on the Impacts of Nuclear Weapons. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/82748/ Version: Published Version Other: Ritchie, Nick orcid.org/0000-0002-6397-7498 (2014) The Story so Far : The Humanitarian Initiative on the Impacts of Nuclear Weapons. International Law and Policy Institute (Norway) and United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR). Reuse Items deposited in White Rose Research Online are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved unless indicated otherwise. They may be downloaded and/or printed for private study, or other acts as permitted by national copyright laws. The publisher or other rights holders may allow further reproduction and re-use of the full text version. This is indicated by the licence information on the White Rose Research Online record for the item. Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ THE STORY SO FAR The humanitarian initiative on the impacts of nuclear weapons By Dr Nick Ritchie Paper No 1 of 6 ILPI-UNIDIR Vienna Conference Series #HINW14vienna • Decisive multilateral progress toward a nuclear-weapon-free world led by the nuclear-armed states has not been forthcoming since the end of the cold war, as many once expected. • Some non-nuclear-armed states have responded by reframing nuclear disarmament debate in terms of the unacceptable humanitarian consequences of the use of nuclear weapons, and this perspective has gathered broad political support and momentum.
    [Show full text]
  • NATO and the Frameworks of Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament
    NATO and the Frameworks of Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament: Challenges for the for 10th and Disarmament: Challenges Conference NPT Review Non-proliferation of Nuclear and the Frameworks NATO Research Paper Tim Caughley, with Yasmin Afina International Security Programme | May 2020 NATO and the Frameworks of Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament Challenges for the 10th NPT Review Conference Tim Caughley, with Yasmin Afina with Yasmin Caughley, Tim Chatham House Contents Summary 2 1 Introduction 3 2 Background 5 3 NATO and the NPT 8 4 NATO: the NPT and the TPNW 15 5 NATO and the TPNW: Legal Issues 20 6 Conclusions 24 About the Authors 28 Acknowledgments 29 1 | Chatham House NATO and the Frameworks of Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament Summary • The 10th five-yearly Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (the NPT) was due to take place in April–May 2020, but has been postponed because of the COVID-19 pandemic. • In force since 1970 and with 191 states parties, the NPT is hailed as the cornerstone of a rules-based international arms control and non-proliferation regime, and an essential basis for the pursuit of nuclear disarmament. But successive review conferences have been riven by disagreement between the five nuclear weapon states and many non-nuclear weapon states over the appropriate way to implement the treaty’s nuclear disarmament pillar. • Although the number of nuclear weapons committed to NATO defence has been reduced by over 90 per cent since the depths of the Cold War, NATO nuclear weapon states, and their allies that depend on the doctrine of extended nuclear deterrence for their own defence, favour continued retention of the remaining nuclear weapons until the international security situation is conducive to further progress on nuclear disarmament.
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vitae
    April 2020 CURRICULUM VITAE NAME: Claude Bruderlein, LL.M., Esq. ADDRESS: Harvard Humanitarian Initiative (HHI) Program on Humanitarian Policy and Conflict Research (HPCR) Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health 14 Story Street, 2nd Floor Cambridge, MA 02140 [email protected] DATE OF BIRTH: January 11, 1962 Montréal, Québec, Canada CURRENT POSITIONS Since 2017 Director of the Centre of Competence on Humanitarian Negotiation (CCHN) Since 2012 Strategic Advisor to the President, International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) Since 2012 Senior Researcher, Program on Humanitarian Policy and Conflict Research (HPCR) Since 2010 Teaching faculty, International and Global Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School of Government Since 2000 Teaching faculty, Department of Global Health & Population, HSPH EDUCATION 1996 Harvard Law School, Cambridge, Massachusetts Degree: LL.M. 1990 Law School of the University of Geneva, Switzerland Degree: Licence en Droit in Civil Law 1984 McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada Degree: Bachelor of Arts in Economics/Political Science LICENSURE AND CERTIFICATION Since 1997 Attorney, New York Bar Association ACADEMIC APPOINTMENTS 2019 – ongoing Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM) Associate Professor at the Montreal Institute of International Studies 2012 - ongoing Harvard School of Public Health Adjunct Lecturer on Global Health, Department of Global Health and Population 2010 - ongoing Harvard Kennedy School of Government Faculty instructor, International and Global Affairs Concentration 2003 - 2012 Harvard
    [Show full text]
  • Alexander Kmentt
    Policy Brief No. 20 APLN/CNND 1 Policy Brief No. 104 February 2021 The Humanitarian Initiative and the TPNW 1 Alexander Kmentt Introduction At the 2010 NPT Review Conference state parties agreed by consensus to express their “deep concern at the catastrophic humanitarian consequences of any use of nuclear weapons” 2 . In the following years, non-nuclear-weapon states and civil society representatives focused increasingly on the humanitarian impact and the risks associated with nuclear weapons. This focus of activities—later referred to as the Humanitarian Initiative—was done primarily through several international conferences where new research on the humanitarian consequences and nuclear risks aspects was presented as well as joint cross-regional statements highlighting the concern about these aspects. The latest iteration of the initiative’s joint statement in 2015 has been subscribed to by 159 states. The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) builds on the Humanitarian Initiative. It was adopted by 122 states in 2017 and entered into legal force on 22 January 2021. This policy brief outlines the rationale of the Humanitarian Initiative 1 The points made in this policy brief are developed in a forthcoming publication “The treaty prohibiting nu- clear weapons – How it was achieved and why it matters” by Alexander Kmentt, to be published by Routledge. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of the Austrian Foreign Ministry. 2 Extracted from 2010 Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, Final Document, document NPT/CONF.2010/50 (Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • Implementing
    2012-2013 REPORT IMPLEMENTING IHL Participation of the American States in International Humanitarian Law Treaties and their National Implementation ICRC Regional Delegation for Mexico, Central America and Cuba Presidente Masaryk 29 Col. Chapultepec Morales Delegación Miguel Hidalgo This report, prepared by the Advisory Service on International C.P. 11570, México D.F. - México Humanitarian Law of the International Committee of the Tel.: (++ 52) 55 2581 2110 Red Cross (ICRC) for submission to the Member States of the [email protected] www.icrc.org Organization of American States (OAS), is not exhaustive. For © ICRC, December 2013 further information, please visit www.icrc.org. 2012-2013 REPORT IMPLEMENTING IHL Participation of the American States in International Humanitarian Law Treaties and their National Implementation LEGAL BASIS FOR ICRC ACTION The work of the International Committee of the Red Cross is based The international community – through the Geneva Conventions on the Geneva Conventions for the protection of war victims of and Additional Protocol I – gives the ICRC an important role to 1949 and their Additional Protocols of 1977, the Statutes of the play in the event of international armed conflict, which includes International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and the visiting prisoners of war and civilian internees. The ICRC is also resolutions of the International Conferences of the Red Cross granted a broad right of initiative. and Red Crescent. In non-international armed conflicts, the ICRC also enjoys The ICRC, with
    [Show full text]
  • INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW Answers to Your Questions 2
    INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW Answers to your Questions 2 THE INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE OF THE RED CROSS (ICRC) Founded by five Swiss citizens in 1863 (Henry Dunant, Basis for ICRC action Guillaume-Henri Dufour, Gustave Moynier, Louis Appia and Théodore Maunoir), the ICRC is the founding member of the During international armed conflicts, the ICRC bases its work on International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and Additional Protocol I of 1977 (see Q4). Those treaties lay down the ICRC’s right to • It is an impartial, neutral and independent humanitarian institution. carry out certain activities such as bringing relief to wounded, • It was born of war over 130 years ago. sick or shipwrecked military personnel, visiting prisoners of war, • It is an organization like no other. aiding civilians and, in general terms, ensuring that those • Its mandate was handed down by the international community. protected by humanitarian law are treated accordingly. • It acts as a neutral intermediary between belligerents. • As the promoter and guardian of international humanitarian law, During non-international armed conflicts, the ICRC bases its work it strives to protect and assist the victims of armed conflicts, on Article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions and internal disturbances and other situations of internal violence. Additional Protocol II (see Index). Article 3 also recognizes the ICRC’s right to offer its services to the warring parties with a view The ICRC is active in about 80 countries and has some 11,000 to engaging in relief action and visiting people detained in staff members (2003).
    [Show full text]
  • 20210211 PP-Atomwaffen.Pdf
    Stiftung für die Rechte zukünftiger Generationen Mit dem Besitz von Atomwaffen hat die Menschheit erstmals in ihrer Geschichte selbst die Mittel in der Hand, um ihrem Fortbestehen ein Ende zu setzen. Nuklearwaffen bergen große Risiken für die Menschheit und bringen im Falle eines Einsatzes verheerende Folgen mit sich. Obwohl die Zahl der Atomsprengköpfe global seit den 1980er Jahren rückläufig ist, kann keinesfalls Entwarnung gegeben werden. Die neun Atomwaffenstaaten (USA, Russland, Großbritannien, Frankreich, China, Indien, Pakistan, Israel und Nordkorea) modernisieren ihre Arsenale. Eine destabilisierte Sicherheitslage, aufgekündigte Abrüstungsverträge und das Misstrauen zwischen den Atommächten sind nur einige der aktuellen Herausforderungen. Der Einsatz von Atomwaffen hat sofortige und langfristige Folgen für das Leben von Menschen, aber auch auf die Natur und das Klima. Die Menschheit kann es sich nicht leisten, auf nukleare Abschreckung zu setzen: Der derzeitige Umgang mit Atomwaffen ist nicht zukunftsfähig. Sicherheit vor Nuklearwaffen ist, das zeigt dieses Positionspapier, ein drängendes Thema, bei dem die Perspektive nachrückender Generationen unabdingbar ist. Durch die Existenz von Atomwaffen wird die Welt für heutige und zukünftige Generationen unsicherer. Eine (macht-)politische Entscheidung für oder gegen einen atomaren Erst- oder Zweitschlag mit all seinen langfristigen, irreversiblen Konsequenzen, ist eine Entscheidung über das Über- leben (großer Teile) der Menschheit. Selbst ohne den kriegerischen Einsatz und die damit verbundenen o.g. Gefahren und Folgen stellen die Atomwaffenarsenale ein Problem für die temporale und intertemporale Generationengerechtigkeit dar: Allein durch ihre Herstel- lung, Wartung und Modernisierung sind Atomwaffen ein relevanter Kostenpunkt und be- lasten die heute lebenden sowie zukünftige Steuerzahler*innen finanziell. Die SRzG fordert, dass Atomwaffen als Bedrohung für heutige und zukünftige Generationen wahrgenommen und diskutiert werden.
    [Show full text]
  • Banning the Bomb: the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons
    EXCERPTED FROM Banning the Bomb: The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons Jean Krasno and Elisabeth Szeli Copyright © 2021 ISBN: 978-1-62637-924-4 hc 1800 30th Street, Suite 314 Boulder, CO 80301 USA telephone 303.444.6684 fax 303.444.0824 This excerpt was downloaded from the Lynne Rienner Publishers website www.rienner.com Contents Preface ix 1 The Movement to Ban Nuclear Weapons 1 Constructivism: A Theoretical Framework 2 The Humanitarian Response: Its Achievements and Strategies 7 Why This Book? 9 The Structure of This Volume 10 2 Living on the Edge 15 Accidents and Incidents 18 Thinking the Unthinkable: Erosion of the Nuclear Taboo 25 The Business of Mutually Assured Destruction 28 The NPT Reaches a Midlife Crisis 32 3 The Evolution of the Humanitarian Initiative 41 The Humanitarian Conferences in Norway, Mexico, and Austria 43 The Open-Ended Working Group and the First Committee of the GA 46 Treaty or Convention: The Hard/Soft Law Debate 49 4 Reframing the Nuclear Disarmament Discourse 55 International Humanitarian Law as a Foundation 55 Countering Nuclear Deterrence Theory 58 Building on Experience from the Landmines and Cluster Munition Campaigns 64 vii viii Contents Discourse Strategies: Stigmatization and Delegitimization 66 5 State and Society in Action 77 The Central Role of Civil Society 77 State Supporters and the United Nations 81 States and Civil Society Join Hands: Collaboration as a Key to Success 86 Democratizing Nuclear Disarmament: Women Take a Stand 88 6 The Negotiating Conference 95 The March 2017 Negotiations
    [Show full text]
  • The European Union and Nuclear Disarmament – a Sensitive Question Published May 25, 2016 by Julia Berghofer
    The European Union and Nuclear Disarmament – a Sensitive Question Published May 25, 2016 by Julia Berghofer Nuclear disarmament is one of the most sensitive issues in the European Union. The Member States disagree in this matter, which is why most EU officials and politicians prefer not to talk about it. The UK and France categorically refuse to participate in talks about the total elimination of their arsenals. Four EU countries host NATO‟s nuclear weapons on their soil and desperately try more or less to conceal their mere existence. In the meantime, some of Europe‟s traditional disarmament advocates like Austria, Sweden, Denmark and Ireland, joined the „Humanitarian Initiative‟, a group of states that aims at a swift reduction of nuclear weapons. Especially the Austrians would prefer to prohibit them without further delay and the overwhelming majority of states outside Europe agree with them. They do not share the nuclear weapon states‟ concern that such a step would put the whole disarmament architecture at risk. A consensus or common strategy regarding nuclear disarmament seems to be hardly possible in today‟s Europe. Some EU officials even wonder whether a common standpoint is necessary at all. Yet in the long-term the EU could face a situation in which it can no longer afford to remain silent on this issue. For instance, in case of serious negotiations about a ban treaty, or in case the international humanitarian community raises concern about the legal status of NATO‟s nuclear sharing in Europe. Or, in a best-case scenario, in case the EU decides to establish a collective defence structure.
    [Show full text]
  • ICAN Nobel Lecture (English)
    ICAN Nobel Lecture (English) © THE NOBEL FOUNDATION, STOCKHOLM, 2017 Nobel Lecture given by the Nobel Peace Prize Laureate 2017, ICAN, delivered by Beatrice Fihn and Setsuko Thurlow, Oslo, 10 December 2017. B eatrice Fihn (​go to Setsuko Thurlow​) Your Majesties, Members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, Esteemed guests, Today, it is a great honour to accept the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize on behalf of thousands of inspirational people who make up the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons. Together we have brought democracy to disarmament and are reshaping international law. __ We most humbly thank the Norwegian Nobel Committee for recognizing our work and giving momentum to our crucial cause. We want to recognize those who have so generously donated their time and energy to this campaign. We thank the courageous foreign ministers, diplomats, ​Red Cross​ and Red Crescent staff, UN​officials, academics and experts with whom we have worked in partnership to advance our common goal. And we thank all who are committed to ridding the world of this terrible threat. __ At dozens of locations around the world – in missile silos buried in our earth, on submarines navigating through our oceans, and aboard planes flying high in our sky – lie 15,000 objects of humankind’s destruction. Perhaps it is the enormity of this fact, perhaps it is the unimaginable scale of the consequences, that leads many to simply accept this grim reality. To go about our daily lives with no thought to the instruments of insanity all around us. For it is insanity to allow ourselves to be ruled by these weapons.
    [Show full text]
  • Setsuko-Thurlow-Ngo-Presentation
    Ms. Setsuko Thurlow Nuclear Non-Proliferation Review Conference NGO Presentation to the Delegates United Nations, New York —1 May 2015 Check Against Delivery Madame President, Distinguished Delegates, Ladies and Gentleman On the cenotaph in the Peace Park in Hiroshima is an inscription that reads, "Rest in peace, the error will not be repeated." Instead of pointing an accusing finger at the United States the statement treats the issue reverently and philosophically as a crime against all of humanity. This has become the prayer and vow of many survivors who are determined to make sure that the deaths of their loved ones have not been in vain, and that no other human being will ever have to suffer the inhumane, immoral, cruel and indiscriminate effects of nuclear bombs. Over the years, I have travelled the world to share my testimony as a Hiroshima survivor to help raise people’s awareness of the danger of nuclear weapons. People’s attitudes toward nuclear weapons have varied from indifference, justification and denial to fear and outrage. I find youth today more open and ready to learn the almost forgotten history of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Never before in my work for nuclear disarmament have I felt such a sense of hopefulness and excitement as I do now. Why do I feel so hopeful? It's because of the birth of a rapidly growing global movement with humanitarian initiatives in the recent years. This movement has been reframing the problem of nuclear weapons from deterrence credibility and techno-military issues to the issue of the humanitarian consequences.
    [Show full text]