Posted on: May 25th, 2022 by Ernie Regehr
From the Globe and Mail, May 24, 2022
By Ernie Regehr
Russia’s recent threats to add nuclear attacks to its brutal assault on the people and infrastructure of Ukraine is a cruel reminder of the harsh, inescapable reality of nuclear deterrence – the very existence of nuclear weapons carries the ever-present danger that they will be used.
Every state with nuclear weapons threatens to use them. In the case of Russia, President Vladimir Putin recently promised his adversaries “consequences you have never experienced” if he decides to unleash these weapons. The more measured language of the 2021 Summit Communiqué of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, meanwhile, said that the organization would only use nuclear weapons in “extreme” circumstances to “impose costs on an adversary that would be unacceptable and far outweigh the benefits that any adversary could hope to achieve.” Russia’s threat of nuclear warfare is more immediate and therefore much more dangerous in this moment, but the point is that both statements clearly threaten the use of nuclear weapons as a possibility. These weapons, both warn, are always at hand and could, in desperate circumstances, be unleashed.
By the simple fact of their Damoclean presence, in both wartime and peacetime, nuclear weapons impose on humanity the relentless task of keeping them from being launched. It is an imperative dangerously dramatized by the Ukraine war, with United States Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin coming to the only credible conclusion – nuclear war is “where all sides lose.” That truth applies regardless of which side makes the first move.
The preamble to the international Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons states that any use of a nuclear weapon would be “abhorrent to the principles of humanity and the dictates of public conscience.” Unfortunately, that doesn’t change the tragic fact that neither Ukraine nor its NATO neighbours have the means to prevent a Russian nuclear attack. We can continue to discourage the use of nuclear weapons in our appeals to Russia’s leadership, but in the end we are left waiting to see what the dangerous vagaries of the Kremlin will bring next.
Humanity remains hostage to a global “security” system based on threats and counter-threats of nuclear attack. Russia’s stance is clear, while NATO’s official nuclear doctrine (outlined in its “strategic concept,” which was last revised in 2010) insists that nuclear weapons are the “supreme guarantee” of security for NATO allies. At the same time, NATO also promises to work toward “the conditions for a world without nuclear weapons.”
This inherent contradiction has never been in greater need of resolution and the opportunity to advance that effort will present itself at the NATO Summit scheduled for Madrid at the end of June. As a member of NATO’s Nuclear Planning Group, Canada has a key seat at the table.
The transition from claiming that nuclear weapons are the “supreme” guarantors of security to creating a world without them will hardly be managed in a single meeting, but the upcoming summit does offer a timely opportunity to challenge nuclear orthodoxy – and Canada, along with like-minded partners, has the opportunity and obligation to help drive change.
A modest but worthwhile effort would be to press for a shift in NATO’s nuclear rhetoric – to acknowledge nuclear weapons not as fundamental to security but as a problem to be overcome.
A more concrete and widely encouraged measure would be for NATO to pledge that it will never be the first to use nuclear weapons, and to adjust its war planning measures accordingly. A no-first-use commitment should really be a straightforward matter of heeding American security realist Henry Kissinger, who told the Munich Security Conference in 2009 that “any use of nuclear weapons is certain to involve a level of casualties and devastation out of proportion to foreseeable foreign policy objectives.”
NATO currently hosts U.S. tactical nuclear gravity bombs in five European countries, each with fighter aircraft tasked to deliver those B61 bombs to NATO-defined targets. It is an arrangement meant to signal NATO’s technical and political capacity to launch nuclear attacks in the event of a war – in other words, the capacity to start a war that all sides would lose.
Combined with a no-first-use pledge, returning those tactical nuclear weapons to the U.S. would be a prominent turn toward nuclear de-escalation. And removing these barbarous weapons that are, in the end, unusable by any state at all attuned to “the dictates of public conscience” can only enhance security.
Mr. Putin’s brazen threat to launch nuclear attacks presents us with the reality of the use of nuclear weapons – the mass killing of civilians and soldiers alike, as well as vast physical and environmental destruction. In Madrid, Canada will have the opportunity to challenge its NATO partners to take some modest but deliberate steps away from the abyss that nuclear weapons promise.
Posted on: June 6th, 2021 by Ernie Regehr
An April 2021 Nanos Poll found 80 percent of Canadians agree that the world should work to eliminate nuclear weapons, and 74 percent agree that Canada should join the new Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons; 73 percent agree, even in the face of strong pressure from the US not to do so. As world crises worsen, the global goal of eliminating nuclear weapons is urgent and should be a national
priority. Canadians for a Nuclear Weapons Convention (a project of the Canadian Pugwash Group, endorsed by more than 1,000 distinguished Canadians, all of whom have been honoured by the Order of Canada) urges Canadian action.
May 26, 2021
The Right Honourable Justin Trudeau, P.C., M.P.
Prime Minister of Canada
Office of the Prime Minister
80 Wellington Street
Ottawa, ON
K1A 0A2
Dear Prime Minister,
Canadians for a Nuclear Weapons Convention (CNWC) has regularly written to you and the Minister of
Foreign Affairs in recent years, warning that strategic instability and regional crises are in danger of
escalating out of control, increasing the threat of nuclear attacks. We have urged that Canada move
beyond old approaches to one that builds global security, rejects the temptation to seek stability in
nuclear threats and counter threats, turns with renewed emphasis to dialogue and diplomatic responses
to conflict, and redoubles diplomatic efforts in support of nuclear arms control and disarmament.
We regret that we have not received substantive responses to our communications, yet we persist,
mindful of our responsibility as informed citizens to bring the nuclear peril and realistic responses to it to the attention of policymakers.
We appreciate your Government’s attention to the climate crisis and the current pandemic, and we
encourage you to persist and intensify those efforts and to devote increased resources to address the
needs and well-being of the world’s most vulnerable. Our focus in CNWC is the need to recognize the
reality of the dangerous and escalating threat of nuclear use, and thus we especially urge you to publicly
acknowledge this threat and to speak directly to Canadians about your Government’s response to it.
The threat of nuclear use – whether deliberately, by accident, or through miscalculation – has been
impressed anew upon us in recent weeks by incidents such as the intensifying confrontation in Ukraine,
President Putin’s threat that those who cross Russia’s “red lines” will “regret [their actions] in a way they
never have before,” President Biden’s recent statement that the United States will defend Japan using its
“full range of capabilities, including nuclear,” and a tweet from the U.S. Strategic Command that
contemporary conflicts could lead adversaries to resort to nuclear use as “their least bad option.” In the
context of full-bore nuclear “modernization” in all states with nuclear weapons, the nuclear danger is real and growing.
In four on-line webinar sessions held during the course of Winter 2020-21, CNWC, a project
of the Canadian Pugwash Group and supported by more than 1,000 distinguished Canadians, all of whom have been honoured by the Order of Canada, engaged an international group of arms
control/disarmament experts to address the growing threat of a nuclear catastrophe in the context of
disturbing strategic instability, the accelerating climate crisis, and the unnerving and persistent reality of
a global pandemic.
We were again reminded that the world’s nuclear arsenals, far from being the “supreme guarantee of
security,” as NATO officially puts it, represent instead a potent and existential threat to the planet while
at the same time being utterly impotent in the struggles to face the climate crisis, pandemic perils, and a
broad range of threats to the safety and well-being of vulnerable populations the world over.
Through expert analysis and dialogue, this series of events developed a set of concrete proposals for
Canadian action, set out in four sections below:
• NPT (the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons) and its forthcoming Review
Conference;
• TPNW (Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons) and its January 2021 entry into force;
• NATO and the need to challenge its continuing insistence that nuclear weapons and the threat
to use them are central to the collective security of its member states; and
• Public support for Nuclear Disarmament.
We look forward to your substantive response to the following analysis and recommendations.
NPT
When disarmament experts turn their minds to the forthcoming NPT review conference, they tend to
agree on three fundamental points:
1) It is critically important for the continuing credibility of the Treaty and for disarmament prospects
that the review produce a constructive final document;
2) At the 2000 and 2010 Review Conferences the NPT states agreed on a set of measures to advance
nuclear disarmament – what is now required is the political will to fulfill these commitments; and
3) The intransigent refusal of nuclear-weapon states to act to meet their Article VI obligations “to
pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures” for disarmament will continue unless
non-nuclear-weapon states, including those that, like Canada, are allied to one or more of the
nuclear powers, mount a collective challenge to the nuclear powers.
We note that the 2021–22 Departmental Plan for Global Affairs Canada includes a reference to
“strengthening the foundations of international arms control and disarmament, notably to reinforce the NPT.” In this moment, an important way to strengthen the NPT is to challenge nuclear-weapon states to take advantage of the forthcoming review conference to demonstrate a commitment to action on the Treaty’s Article VI disarmament obligations by, at a minimum, taking the following steps:
• Collectively renew their commitment to the “unequivocal undertaking [to]…accomplish the total
elimination of their nuclear arsenals,” and “to undertake further efforts to reduce and ultimately
eliminate all types of nuclear weapons, deployed and non-deployed, including through
unilateral, bilateral, regional and multilateral measures.”
• Reiterate the 1985 statement by U.S. President Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail
Gorbachev that “a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought.”
• Agree to take concrete steps, like de-alerting, to reduce the risks of accidental use of nuclear
weapons.
• Acknowledge the need for significantly increased transparency regarding their nuclear arsenals
and doctrines, and recognize that nuclear-weapon states are accountable to all States Parties to
In time of online name registration, you have to careful to your credit card that it very essential to viagra sale http://davidfraymusic.com/buy-1139 be kept in security. Hone “safe sex, for example, utilizing levitra 10 mg http://davidfraymusic.com/events/beethovenhaus-bonn-beyond-sonatas/ latex condoms. A study also shows that even a 30-minute walk a order tadalafil day lowers your chance of having Erectile Dysfunction. There are many different forms of arthritis as well as treatment methods used that depend on the specific type of antioxidant called “anthocyanins” cheapest levitra pills which are known to improve vision. the NPT for the irrevocable implementation of the disarmament requirement in Article VI.
Canada, as a supporter, along with 15 other countries, of the Stockholm Initiative, is well placed to work
collaboratively to ensure that the initiative’s 22 “stepping stones” are adequately reflected in the review
conference outcome document. We appreciate that Canada has joined with Sweden and Germany in
writing to President Biden to urge serious consideration of the proposals.
TPNW
We again express our disappointment at the Government’s failure to welcome the TPNW as a positive
contribution to global efforts to overcome the long-term and dangerous failure of nuclear-weapon states
to meet their NPT disarmament obligations. It is broadly recognized that implementation of the NPT’s
Article VI requirement for “effective measures” toward eliminating nuclear arsenals requires additional
political, administrative, and legal instruments that are external to the NPT. The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and the proposed treaty on fissile material controls are examples of critically important legal
instruments to support implementation of Article VI. The TPNW is another such instrument.
As a new legal instrument, the TPNW adds nuclear weapons to the list of weapons of mass destruction,
along with chemical and biological weapons, subject to legally binding prohibitions. It reflects the urgency with which the majority in the international community view the need for nuclear disarmament action, and it constitutes a formal declaration by a significant portion of the planet (by population and territory) that nuclear weapons are unacceptable on the grounds that their extraordinary humanitarian and environmental consequences put them in violation of International Humanitarian Law and “the principles of humanity and the dictates of public conscience.” The TPNW sets out the legal prohibitions that are mandated by that conclusion and challenges all states with nuclear weapons to bring their national security policies into line with fundamental humanitarian and human rights principles.
Daryl G. Kimball, executive director of Washington’s Arms Control Association, refers to the TPNW as “a
powerful reminder that for the majority of the world’s states, nuclear weapons — and policies that
threaten their use for any reason — are immoral, dangerous, and unsustainable.” And as former Canadian Ambassador for Disarmament Paul Meyer has noted, “the purpose of the treaty over the longer term is to stigmatize nuclear weapons as immoral and illegal weapons of mass destruction.”
The irreversible presence of the TPNW on the arms control/disarmament landscape makes it impossible
to credibly ignore the growing legal/moral consensus that any actual use of such weapons would be a
crime against humanity and a violation of International Humanitarian Law. The challenge for Canada (and for other “nuclear umbrella” states) is thus to recognize that fundamental changes to their security
policies are required to bring them into conformity with the principles of humanity. We encourage Canada to participate as an observer in the forthcoming first meeting of the States Parties to the TPNW.
NATO
The requirement to bring security policies into strict conformity with International Humanitarian Law has serious implications for NATO. The alliance’s current Strategic Concept insists that nuclear forces are “the supreme guarantee of the security of the Allies,” but it also commits NATO “to the goal of creating the conditions for a world without nuclear weapons.” Canada has sought, as it explained last year in a statement to the UN First Committee, to reconcile its support for nuclear weapons as essential to its security with its support for “policies and practices to eliminate nuclear weapons.” Indeed, nuclear-weapon states have long asserted the same dual commitments – to nuclear weapons and to a world
without nuclear weapons – but the credibility of their disarmament commitments is belied by the fervour with which they pursue nuclear modernization and the stolid determination with which they ignore disarmament.
The credibility of the Canadian and NATO commitment to a world without nuclear weapons is
commensurate with the extent of their willingness to muster diplomatic energy and tangible resources
toward that end. As a NATO partner, Canada has both the obligation and the opportunity to press for
alternatives to security policies based on threats of nuclear devastation. At a minimum, the Government
should thus act on the still relevant 2018 recommendation of the House of Commons Standing Committee on National Defence “that the Government of Canada take a leadership role within NATO in beginning the work necessary for achieving the NATO goal of creating the conditions for a world free of nuclear weapons.” We urge your Government to work with like-minded partners in NATO to revise the Alliance’s Strategic Concept and defence posture to end reliance on nuclear weapons.
One concrete measure of NATO’s commitment to ending its reliance on a nuclearized security posture
would be for the European non-nuclear-weapon state members of NATO that now host U.S. nuclear
weapons on their territories to end such arrangements and for all U.S. nuclear weapons to be returned to
home territory.
Canadian diplomatic engagement should also promote dialogue toward a new kind of relationship
between NATO and Russia. The point is not to ignore the latter’s violations of international law or serious human rights abuses, but to recognize that nuclear weapons have no role to play in addressing those violations. Indeed, Canada should encourage NATO and the United States to undertake ongoing talks with both Russia and China on the conditions and requirements for strategic stability and nuclear disarmament. The Stockholm Initiative “stepping stones” endorsed by Canada call for just such intensified dialogue on strategic stability and to “foster mutual understanding and trust and setting the frame for future arms control and disarmament.”
Public support for Nuclear Disarmament
Vigorous Canadian engagement on nuclear disarmament would win overwhelming public support. An
April 2021 Nanos Poll found 80 percent of Canadians agree that the world should work to eliminate
nuclear weapons, and that 74 percent agree that Canada should join the TPNW, with that support level
remaining at 73 percent, even in the face of strong pressure from the United States not to do so. That
unambiguous support can embolden your Government to recast nuclear disarmament efforts as a
national priority.
We are aware that Canada is not in a position, on its own, to bring major influence to bear on the global
nuclear crisis. That is true for Canada in any global endeavour, but Canada does have a seat at key tables,
including NORAD and NATO, at which nuclear deterrence issues are addressed. Canada has the company of like-minded states at the NATO table and thus the opportunity to seriously explore new directions. We can assure you from our engagement with international arms control and disarmament experts, and our engagement with the Canadian public, that a more assertive, principled, and humanitarian approach to the nuclear crisis would be widely welcomed.
As always, we acknowledge the work of the skilled diplomats and officials in Global Affairs Canada who
carry out Canada’s disarmament diplomacy. It is our sense that the Department’s work on disarmament
would benefit from explicit and public endorsement by the Prime Minister, and from an ambitious set of
instructions and policy directives. In that regard, we are disappointed that the 2019 and 2021 mandate
letters to the Minister of Foreign Affairs make no reference to nuclear weapons or to arms control and
disarmament. In a context of mounting nuclear dangers, that omission is unacceptable.
In looking forward to your substantive response to the ideas and proposals set out above, we convey to
you our good wishes and hopes for the Canadian government’s creative and responsible response to the
truly extraordinary set of global challenges we now face.
Sincerely,
Canadians for a Nuclear Weapons Convention (CNWC):
Ernie Regehr, O.C. (Chair)
Dr. Adele Buckley
Bev Tollefson Delong
Cesar Jaramillo
The Hon. Douglas Roche, O.C.
Dr. Jennifer Allen Simons, C.M.
cc: The Hon. Marc Garneau, P.C, C.C., C.D., M.P., Minister of Foreign Affairs
The Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan, P.C., O.M.M., M.S.M., C.D., M.P., Minister of National Defence
The Hon. Erin O’Toole, P.C., C.D., M.P., Leader of the Opposition
Jagmeet Singh, M.P., Leader of the New Democratic Party
Yves-François Blanchet, M.P., Leader of the Bloc Québécois
Annamie Paul, Leader of the Green Party of Canada
