Comments for

Comment on IPPNW, ICAN bring abolition message to NPT PrepCom by John Loretz

John Loretz — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 16:08:37 +0000

The Model Nuclear Weapons Convention simulation was organized by German students who participate in something called the International Law Project. They got much-needed support from Regina Hagen of INESAP and from IALANA. On the day of the simulation game in Geneva, Tilman Ruff and Xanthe Hall of IPPNW were recruited to serve as the co-chairs of the “negotiation,” to fill in for a diplomat who had taken ill. This is a project well worth replicating, but I think in practice we need to defer to the international lawyers, who have the expertise and training to organize such events properly.

The issue of nuclear energy is a difficult one. The industry and its government supporters are aggressively making the case for global expansion of nuclear energy as an answer to global warming. But a compelling argument has been made against taking the nuclear path on both environmental and economic grounds. While today there is certainly a legal right to develop nuclear energy — NPT Article IV calls it an “inalienable right” without explaining why — that does not necessarily make it the right thing to do. IPPNW’s International Council passed a resolution in 1999 opposing nuclear energy not only because of its unavoidable links to nuclear weapons development, but also because of the inherent health and environmental dangers made manifest by Chernobyl. At both the 2007 and the 2008 NPT PrepComs, IPPNW joined other NGOs in calling for an International Sustainable Energy Agency that would channel global investments into clean, safe, renewable forms of energy that can meet the real need for economic development in the global south while ending our reliance on both fossil fuels and nuclear energy.

Comment on A Treaty to Abolish Nuclear Weapons by Gunnar Westberg

Gunnar Westberg — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 05:31:49 +0000

Maybe the problem is less that the public opinion in the US is not informed, more that it is wrongly informed. How come the US public believes what the gov’t says, what the news channels broadcast, when all the times since the Vietnam war we know that they are lying? Many Americans believed there were nuclear weapons in Iraq, altough that was so clearly a lie. Does noone remember the Tonkin Gulf incident? All the lies from the gov’t to justify interventions in Latin America?

This is a problem in democracies. We believe the “Free Press” is by nature and by definition reliable, credible, independent, while in many cases the journalists are as “Embedded” in the gov’t as they are in the US Forces in Iraq.

It is an interesting paradox that the Public Media in e.g. Canada and Britain are more independent of the gov’t , more critical, better informed, than the privately owned media in the US.

Comment on Late Night Thoughts on NPT Prep Com by Gunnar Westberg

Gunnar Westberg — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 05:03:45 +0000

Agreed. “Gang of Four” sounds derogatory. “Four Horseman” is no better. Maybe Four Senior Statesmen?

Gunnar

Comment on Late Night Thoughts on NPT Prep Com by michele di paolantonio

michele di paolantonio — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 10:49:13 +0000

Dear Gunnar, I knew last december, during the last VIII Summit, that my speech to the VII Summit inspired in some ways an american action towards “the four” to write their article published on the Wall Street Journal on january, 4th, 2007. Therefore, as IPPNW, we should consider urgently the necessity to find an expression not diplomatically offensive towards “the four”. Even if american security is the main reason of that article, we can stress that, for the first time, the american security’s reasons are the same of the mankind’s security. Therefore I suggest to change the expression “Gang of Four” in “Four Americans”, to leave to all of us the possibility to develop towards the goal of global nuclear disarmament their points of view starting again, after 20 years, by Gorbaciov’s and Reagan’s personal opinions. Michele

Comment on IPPNW, ICAN bring abolition message to NPT PrepCom by michele di paolantonio

michele di paolantonio — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 10:36:05 +0000

Dear John, in my opinion IPPNW should develop a realistic strategy to make more effective our activities in the PrepComs. Because the use of nuclear energy for civil purposes in the world is bad but energetically necessary, we could help every diplomatic subjects to develop international rules to separate scientifically, diplomatically and even in terms of military international actions of global police, the civil and the military use of nuclear energy. Also, IPPNW should recognaisse clearly the right of every country to reach and develop the tecnics to make energy from nuclear power plants. This, even if we, personally, consider much more safe to make energy in other naturalistic ways. I hope that you understand deeply my point of view and my considerations. Best greetings from Italy Michele

Comment on IPPNW, ICAN bring abolition message to NPT PrepCom by Tad Daley, JD, PhD, IPPNW Writing Fellow

Tad Daley, JD, PhD, IPPNW Writing Fellow — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 01:07:08 +0000

Nice report John. I really like the idea of a “simulation game to negotiate an Nuclear Weapons Convention.” I’ve been quite involved in the past in Model UN activities, and also in pushing for conceptual rethinking and substantive revisions of the United Nations Charter. And some of the very few characters who work on those issues have, a few times, convened a “Model UN Charter Review Conference” — where students simulate not participating in the UN of today, but designing the UN of tomorrow. Each time, it has served as a powerful tool for engaging the interest of the young. A group of some 300 Latin American college students just did this a few weeks back in April at the University of Guadalajara in Mexico.

So we should think about staging similiar “Model Nuclear Weapons Convention Negotiations.” These, too, could serve as a powerful tool for engaging the young — not just in the goal of abolition, but in strategies and tactics for making abolition happen.

Comment on A Treaty to Abolish Nuclear Weapons by Lawrence Wittner

Lawrence Wittner — Thu, 29 May 2008 18:23:09 +0000

I agree with the writers that Americans need to be educated to the fact that their nation is not always “in the right” and that consumerism interferes with that education, as well as with clear thinking. Nevertheless, it is striking that, despite these impediments, so many Americans have turned against nuclear weapons and have joined organizations promoting nuclear disarmament. Indeed, polls have shown repeatedly that overwhelming majorities of Americans favor the creation of a nuclear-free world. This might well account for the fact that John McCain, although a longtime hawk and opponent of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, has suddenly (now that he is campaigning for President) started to call for cuts in nuclear arsenals and reconsideration of that treaty.

Comment on A Treaty to Abolish Nuclear Weapons by ippnweupdate

ippnweupdate — Wed, 28 May 2008 23:07:31 +0000

Good Comment Robert!

Harks back to the early work of Robert Lifton, Jerome Frank and J. Bryan Hehir. Ever read “The Long Darkness”?

Comment on A Treaty to Abolish Nuclear Weapons by Jack

Jack — Wed, 28 May 2008 22:45:49 +0000

How can any education campaign (especially one about nuclear abolition) compete with the trappings of consumerism in today’s world? Nobody is scared about nuclear annihilation. Nobody cares about global health. How can we expect them to look our way for even a second when their vision is endlessly blurred by useless consumer messages.

Comment on IPPNW, ICAN bring abolition message to NPT PrepCom by Late Night Thoughts on NPT Prep Com «

Late Night Thoughts on NPT Prep Com « — Wed, 28 May 2008 22:26:11 +0000

[...] I will not summarize the conference; this has been done very well by John Loretz. [...]