High-Level Expert Group Meeting
15-16 April 2010
Hiroshima, Japan
Chaired by Ingvar Carlsson and Jean Chrétien
It has been 65 years since atomic bombs were detonated
over Hiroshima and Nagasaki with devastating consequences.
The surviving victims of that disaster, the hibakusha,
have long called for nuclear disarmament saying、 ‘No one
else should ever suffer as we did’. It is therefore right
that the Interaction Council convened its High-Level
Expert Group Meeting in Hiroshima, Japan, on the 15th and
16th of April 2010, to further aid the cause of abolishing
nuclear arms and to ensure that no one else endures the
unbearable suffering of the hibakusha.
Indeed, this is no new topic to the Council. Since its
establishment in 1983, the InterAction Council has called
for the abolition of nuclear weapons in almost all annual
meetings. In recent years, it has repeatedly called for
the nuclear weapon states to conform to their obligations
under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and to
renounce these relics of the Cold War era.
The future of humanity is threatened from proliferation of
nuclear weapons. The NPT recognised five nuclear weapons
states but this asymmetry was accepted only on condition
that they would negotiate toward nuclear disarmament. The
Cold War proved an obstacle to such disarmament and a
doctrine of deterrence emerged. With the Cold War behind
us that doctrine is now rightly questioned and the world
expects its leaders to develop a new security framework
that is not dependent on these weapons.
The devastating consequences of accidental or intentional
use of nuclear weapons are well-known. One hundred and
fifty thousand people lost their lives in Hiroshima and
Nagasaki on August 6th and 9th 1945. The survivors still
continue to experience higher cancer rates. A Nuclear
Winter could result from less than 100 regional
Hiroshima-sized detonations in 50 cities, using only 0.07
% of the global arsenal of existing nuclear weapons. The
damage would be global and irreparable.
Despite these facts, the current arsenal of over 20.000
nuclear warheads is large enough to destroy the world six
times over. Some nuclear weapons have more destructive
power than all the weapons used in all wars throughout
human history. Yet, international law has not completely
prohibited the use of nuclear weapons. A treaty banning
the first use of nuclear weapons is therefore needed for
the disarmament process. Nine states currently have
nuclear weapons and others may possibly be seeking them.
Further proliferation has been facilitated by the AQ Khan
network, creating the risk that nuclear weapons could be
within reach of terrorist networks or other non-state
actors.
Nuclear disarmament is urgently needed and it is now
becoming increasingly feasible. The end of the Cold War
brought a period of détente and movement towards
disarmament. This resulted in the conclusion of several
important treaties, including the Treaty on Conventional
Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) in 1990, the Strategic Arms
Reduction Treaty (START I) in 1991, the Chemical Weapons
Convention (CWC) in 1993, the extension of the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1995 and the
Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) in 1996.
However, momentum was lost and these positive developments
came to a regrettable halt. The United States Senate
refused to ratify the CTBT, START II failed, the US
withdrew from the ABM, and the Review Conference of the
NPT in 2005 ended without agreement. Furthermore,
expansion of NATO and plans to place missile shields in
Europe antagonised Russia and undermined the détente.
Disarmament was dropped down on the agendas and was no
longer among the priorities of governments. As the
InterAction Council rightly declared last year, the world
seemed to have moved towards a New Cold War and terrible
relics of that era, nuclear weapons, have been
retained.
Presently, there has been a strong revival in disarmament,
forcefully advocated in 2007 by the ‘Gang of Four’
American statesmen - Henry Kissinger, William Perry, Sam
Nunn, and George Shultz. Their call for a global
elimination of nuclear weapons has been welcomed and
reiterated by the InterAction Council. Since then, other
former statesmen have followed suit and Gangs of Fours
have been formed among others in Germany, Sweden, Canada,
the UK, Japan, Australia and Italy. They have all
reiterated the urgent call to prohibit nuclear weapons and
recommended immediate action.
Meanwhile, changes in governments have allowed for
reassessment of policies in some nuclear weapon states. In
April 2009 in Prague, President Obama announced that he
would work toward a world without nuclear weapons. Earlier
that year in London, President Obama and President
Medvedev had confirmed their commitment to prevent nuclear
proliferation and nuclear terrorism and endorsed the
elimination of nuclear weapons. The Nuclear Security
Summit of April 2010 in Washington, DC brought a
determination at the highest level to reduce the risk that
nuclear materials can get into the hands of terrorists and
non-state actors.
Earlier this year, the United States and Russia, who
possess 95% of the world’s nuclear weapons completed the
New START agreement. It should be promptly ratified by the
legislative bodies in the United States and Russia.
Furthermore, it is necessary to bring all permanent
members of the UN Security Council as well as the three
states that have not signed the NPT into the dialogues and
multilateral talks. Any solution must be global, as well
as regional. Taking the necessary steps, be they
political, strategic, technical or legal, will be
challenging.
A number of initiatives and recommendations have already
been proposed. In 2006 the International Weapons of Mass
Destruction Committee chaired by Hans Blix recommended
thirty steps on how to tackle the problems of weapons of
mass destruction. The recent report by the International
Commission on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament
sponsored by Australia and Japan contains seventy-six
recommendations for the elimination of nuclear weapons. In
February 2010, the Global Zero Summit in Paris released an
action plan outlining a step by step strategy to eliminate
nuclear weapons. The upcoming Review Conference of the NPT
in May provides a vital platform for further action.
The deterrence doctrine governed relationships among the
nuclear powers for decades. Today, the challenges require
a change in perception, dialogue and philosophy. We fear
the acquisition of nuclear weapons by unstable states,
accidental launch, and the proliferation of nuclear
weapons to terrorist groups or non-state actors. These
threats cannot be met by an increased investment in new
nuclear weapons technology. States should not respond to
these threats with more explosive power and an out-dated
concept of security.
It is important that as the world calls for nuclear
disarmament, it also endeavours to strengthen détente and
calm regional conflicts. The existence of nuclear weapons
has not prevented regional or domestic wars. Disarmament
efforts should be in parallel with efforts to foster
regional stability. Transparency and security cooperation
should replace the doctrine of deterrence.
In 1995, as part of the NPT, it was agreed that states
should work towards a zone free of nuclear weapons in the
Middle East. Now, more than ever, it is important to
ensure that such a promised zone become a reality. Nuclear
weapon free zones could also be of great value in East
Asia or the Arctic.
The risks that may flow from a revival of nuclear power
must be avoided. For instance the creation of a nuclear
fuel bank could reduce the incentives to develop
indigenous enrichment facilities and securing nuclear fuel
throughout its life cycle and decommissioning aging
reactors would reduce the risk of diversion.
Even though global disarmament of nuclear weapons is a
great diplomatic challenge, there is no option not to
tackle it. There are 190 signatories to the NPT, more than
130 states have signed treaties on nuclear weapon free
zones and more than 170 states supported the Japanese UN
resolution calling for the abolition of nuclear weapons.
Grassroots movements have reactivated their efforts,
raised awareness and generated momentum for action. The
Mayors for Peace campaign initiated by the Mayors of
Hiroshima and Nagasaki currently represents over 600
million people worldwide. The whole world is in favour of
disarmament.
This generation of leaders, who still remember the
Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings, owe it to the victims and
to future generations to ensure that such bombing will
never occur again. Nuclear weapons must be banned to
honour the pledge on the Memorial Cenotaph in Hiroshima’s
Peace Park – ‘Let all the souls here rest in peace, for we
shall not repeat the evil’.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Therefore the Chairmen of the Expert Group Meeting urge
the Council to adopt as its recommendations the
following:
Immediate actions
1. Nuclear weapon states should confirm and implement
their obligations under article VI of the NPT, to
negotiate towards nuclear disarmament.
2. All states possessing nuclear weapons should reduce and
eventually eliminate their arsenals.
3. In particular, Russia and the United States, who have
the largest stocks, should sharply reduce the number of
warheads, including non-strategic weapons.
4. All non-strategic nuclear weapons should be removed to
national territory. Ultimately, they should be dismantled
and eliminated.
5. The US, China and other states should promptly ratify
the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty to help bring it into
force.
6. Negotiations should start without delay on a treaty to
prohibit further production of fissile material for
weapons and address the issue of existing stocks.
7. States party to the NPT should be urged to accept and
ratify the additional protocol of the IAEA safeguard
verification and nuclear weapons states should be
encouraged to place enrichment and reprocessing plants
under safeguards.
8. United States and Russia should take all their nuclear
weapons off alert status.
9. States possessing nuclear weapons should increase
transparency of their capabilities, postures, and
strategies.
10. Efforts to foster global détente and regional
stability should be pursued alongside disarmament.
11. Within national governments, units should be created
to deal with and support disarmament and to consider how
states can manage their defense without nuclear weapons.
Resources for the pursuit and implementation of
disarmament should be allocated.
12. States should actively consider the establishment of
nuclear weapon free zones as in the Middle-East, including
Israel and Iran, and the Arctic.
13. Through the Six Party talks, North Korea should be
induced to abandon its nuclear ambitions by economic
incentives and disincentives, and security
guarantees.
14. Nuclear Security should be universally strengthened in
accordance with conclusions of the Washington summit and
the G8 Global Partnership should be renewed before it
expires in 2012.
15. The fuel bank mechanism should be developed in the
IAEA to reduce the incentive of states to build new
facilities for enrichment and reprocessing.
16. Funding of the IAEA should be increased.
17. States selling uranium should consider doing so only
on condition that safeguards are applied.
18. World leaders should visit Hiroshima and help to
inform the public about the dangers of nuclear
weapons.
Long-term actions
19. States should replace the philosophy of deterrence
with the concept of common security.
20. The UN Security Council should consider universal
disarmament and security a central part of its
mission.
21. Steps should be taken toward the internationalization
of the nuclear fuel cycle.
22. Negotiations should begin to develop a new Post Cold
War security architecture for Europe.
23. States should commit to a non first use of nuclear
weapons.
24. A convention prohibiting nuclear weapons should be
concluded in the same manner as conventions prohibiting
biological and chemical weapons.