Standing against nuclear violence
‘‘I want you to feel the presence of not only the future generations who will benefit from your negotiations to ban nuclear weapons, but to feel a cloud of witnesses from Hiroshima and Nagasaki.’’
Setsuko Thurlow survived the atomic bomb on Hiroshima as a little girl. She spoke these words at the United Nations in New York last week at the first negotiations on nuclear disarmament to take place for 20 years. 130 countries gathered to ‘‘negotiate a legally binding instrument to prohibit nuclear weapons, leading towards their total elimination’’.
The historic gathering is testament to the work of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, a coalition of civil society organisations around the world. Mainstream media focused on who wasn’t participating, i.e. the US, UK, Australia and others. I saw the same thing first hand during my work to ban cluster bombs. The first question was: ‘‘What impact will this have without the US?’’ It’s understandable in a world where a small number of wealthy, militarised countries wield so much power.
To me, the real story is one of hope, equality among nations and a commitment to humanity as the basis for global rules. It’s 130 countries working together with civil society, challenging the most destructive weapons ever. It’s people standing up for a world without nuclear violence, rejecting the injustice, inhumanity and madness of these weapons of mass destruction. This reflects choices we all face in our turbulent world of Brexit, Trump, ‘‘post-truth’’ and demonising ‘‘the other’’. Will we be divided by fear or choose hope and together build a better world for all of us?
This choice for hope put a nuclear ban treaty on the table. Aotearoa has always been a strong supporter of nuclear disarmament. We set the agenda in 1987, by passing the New Zealand Nuclear Free Zone, Disarmament and Arms Control Act. Last week in New York, two-thirds of the world’s nations joined us in launching global talks to ban nuclear weapons. This process has focused on humanity and the effects of nuclear weapons. Setsuko recalls seeing people in Hiroshima stumbling around carrying their eyeballs in their own hands.
That’s the reality of nuclear weapons. Elizabeth Minor, of Article 36, told the conference that: ‘‘The testimony given by survivors of nuclear detonations… has emphasised why this treaty to categorically prohibit nuclear weapons must be negotiated. The horrific and devastating impacts of nuclear weapons on people and places renders the possession of these weapons fundamentally unacceptable.’’
The process has seen strong cooperation between states, civil society, UN actors and the Red Cross. Such co-operation brings a variety of perspectives – ‘‘cognitive diversity’’ to quote my fellow Kiwi disarmament thinker Dr John Borrie. It’s a model that’s delivered results on landmines, child soldiers, cluster bombs, international justice, the arms trade and climate change.
The driving force for this nuclear ban treaty is the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN). In February 2013, I co-authored a report, Banning Nuclear Weapons, that laid out the basics of the treaty now being negotiated. Over the past four years, the Uk-based organisation Article 36, which published that report, has worked with other ICAN members to make this ban treaty happen. In just a few years, it’s gone from a sideline idea to the subject of United Nations negotiations. This is a tribute to the vision, tenacity and belief of a remarkable group of campaigners and the courage of those who believed in us.
The talks continue in New York in June. Diplomats will discuss a draft treaty being compiled by ambassador Elayne Whyte Go´ mez, conference chairwoman. Opposition will only get stronger, but what looks certain now is that a treaty banning nuclear weapons is within reach.
Thomas Nash is the co-founder of the Uk-based disarmament organisation Article 36 and led the international campaign to ban cluster bombs. He is also the Green Party candidate for Palmerston North.