Nuclear Disarmament

Nuclear weapon test Romeo on Bikini Atoll, 1954. Photo courtesy of the US Dept. of Energy

The existence of nuclear weapons poses the single greatest threat to humanity today. The stockpiles held by the United States, Russia, France, the U.K., China, India, Pakistan and Israel have the capacity to destroy the Earth hundreds of times over. As well, approximately 40 member-state parties to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty have legally acquired nuclear technology for peaceful purposes and also therefore have the capability to develop nuclear weapons.

The proliferation of nuclear weapons and the threat of terrorists seeking to acquire them heightens the existing dangers.

The U.S., Russia, the U.K., France and China possessed nuclear weapons when the Treaty went into force, and committed to eliminate their arsenals.

Though the numbers have been reduced, much more must be done to achieve total prohibition and abolition of nuclear weapons. The pace is slow and some of these states are upgrading their stockpiles and asserting that nuclear weapons are essential to their security strategies.

There is no ban on nuclear weapons, though they are indiscriminate weapons and their use would constitute a violation of International Humanitarian Law. It is not currently illegal to manufacture them, stockpile them or target a city deemed of military interest. According to the Advisory Opinion on the Legality of Nuclear Weapons, if it is believed that the survival of the state is at risk, it is not illegal to threaten to use and to use nuclear weapons. However, any use would have catastrophic humanitarian consequences and would contravene International Humanitarian Law.

Despite the end of the Cold War and better relations between Russia and the United States, the two countries still have thousands of nuclear weapons, on continuous high-alert status, targeted on each other. Thus, the risk of accidents, accidental launch, terrorist acquisition and attacks remains.

Cities are at risk. The design and purpose for nuclear weapons is to target the most densely populated areas, to kill the maximum number of civilians and to destroy their habitats. Military installations do not require the massive destructive power of a nuclear weapon. 

 

Nuclear Disarmament Content

The Vancouver Institute presents The Simons Foundation lecture with Professor Frank von Hippel, Senior Research Physicist and Professor of Public and International Affairs, Woodrow Wilson School of Public & International Affairs, Princeton University, on Saturday, October 15, 2016. This event is free and open to the public.
See the following link for Paul Meyer's recent contribution to the Simons Papers in Security and Development published by the School for International Studies at Simon Fraser Universtiy.

Keynote address by Jayantha Dhanapala
International Conference: Building a Nuclear Weapon Free World
Astana, Kazakhstan

Amb. (Ret.) Jayantha Dhanapala, former Under-Secretary-General for Disarmament Affairs at the United Nations, is President of Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs and one of The Simons Foundation's Peace Shapers as a previous recipient of The Simons Foundation Award for Distinguished Global Leadership in the Service of Peace and Disarmament.

See The Simons Foundation's page on The Canadian Defence Policy Review for briefing papers by Ernie Regehr, Senior Fellow in Defence Policy and Arctic Security at The Simons Foundation.

August 23, 2016
The current Canadian Defence Policy Review is not focused on questions of disarmament and arms control; Global Affairs Canada is the lead agency on those issues, and it would do well, by the way, to undertake a thorough review of related policies and priorities. Defence policies and postures do nevertheless help to either strengthen or undermine disarmament prospects. A case in point is NATO’s nuclear posture. Canada is involved as a NATO member and as a participant in NATO’s Nuclear Planning Group and as a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) as well, Canada has a responsibility to pursue alliance defence policies and practices that are conducive to full implementation of the NPT and ending NATO’s reliance on nuclear deterrence. That would in turn also advance the individual and collective security interests of NATO member states, including Canada, and all the states of the Euro-Atlantic. 

Visit The New York Times for the opinion editorial by James E. Cartwright and Bruce G. Blair on the United States' policy allowing the first use of nuclear weapons and how abolishing it will save money and make the world safer.

Opinion by James E. Cartwright
and Bruce G. Blair
Published by The New York Times

Bruce G. Blair, Ph.D., is Co-Founder of Global Zero, Research Scholar with the Program on Science and Global Security at Princeton University, and one of The Simons Foundation's Peace Leaders.

Commentary by Paul Meyer
Senior Fellow 
The Simons Foundation
Published by OpenCanada.org
August 4, 2016
 

Commentary by Paul Meyer, Senior Fellow, The Simons Foundation
Published by OpenCanada.org
August 4, 2016