Reprinted from The Common Good, no 5, Winter 1997
Nuclear Abolition: a possible dream?
By Katie Dewes
"When spiders unite, they can tie down a lion."
Ethiopian Proverb
When my eldest daughter Jessie was born 18 years ago, she was confronted by a nuclear stockpile capable of killing her 20 times over. Despite many attempts at nuclear disarmament by peace groups and governments worldwide, nuclear hegemony reigned supreme. There was little hope that she would live to see the nuclear stranglehold on her future eased, let alone eliminated. But, by the time she was a toddler, women had encircled Greenham, millions had marched all over Europe and North America, and small Pacific islands were declaring themselves nuclear free. Hope became contagious as little groups of people gathered strength from courageous actions of others. Many went to prison to uphold existing international law which they believed already banned the use of nuclear weapons. Greenham women used the Geneva Conventions, Nuremberg Principles and Hague Conventions in their defence and even took President Reagan to the US Supreme Court in an effort to prevent global nuclear omnicide.
As a young child Jessie participated in groups working for a nuclear free Aotearoa/New Zealand and South Pacific. By the time she was seven she saw these dreams fulfilled and her immediate future looked more secure. In 1986 retired magistrate and member of JessieÕs local Christchurch peace group Harold Evans, heard a US law professor talk of seeking an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to clarify the legal status of nuclear weapons. Evans took up the challenge of convincing governments to take this case to the Court.
Within six years he and others had built up an impressive list of citizen groups worldwide prepared to support the initiative, and in 1992 the World Court Project was launched by the International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms, the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War and the International Peace Bureau. This coalition succeeded in persuading governments to pass resolutions at both the World Health Assembly and the UN General Assembly requesting advisory opinions on the legality of the threat and use of nuclear weapons. Although the bulk of support came from the Non Aligned Movement, some states were prepared to break ranks with their former nuclear allies. These included the Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, South Africa and New Zealand. China chose not to vote. Nuclear capable India submitted that nuclear weapons were illegal.
On July 8 1996, after deliberating on submissions from 43 states and the WHO, 14 World Court judges found that Òa threat or use of nuclear weapons would generally be contrary to the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict, and in particular the principles and rules of humanitarian lawÓ. They also concluded that Òthere exists an obligation to pursue in good faith and bring to a conclusion negotiationsÓ leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective international control.
Jessie, now just seventeen, heard this historic news from the Hague as she sat with eighty year old Harold Evans at her home in Christchurch. She was exuberant. At last her future and that of her grandchildren seemed assured. Nuclear abolition was in sight. HaroldÕs gift to humanity was a tool which could help rein in nuclear proliferators by using the law. In the process of educating the public and decision makers, millions of people had used their collective power to influence global decision making. Nearly four million Declarations of Public Conscience were accepted by the World Court in support of the case, along with endorsements from over 500 groups. Gorbachev, Archbishop Tutu, Rigaberto Menchu and other Nobel Laureates joined the list of prominent supporters. Nations that had voted for nuclear disarmament for decades worked together to use their anti-nuclear majority in the UN and in 1996 passed a resolution calling for a Nuclear Weapon Convention similar to those banning chemical and biological weapons. Bolstered by the strength of international public opinion and the World Court decision, some nuclear allied states (eg Norway and Canada) began to review their nuclear weapon policies.
During the 1995 World Court Oral Hearings Australia announced the establishment of the Canberra Commission on the Elimination of Nuclear Weapons as a response to international outrage at the resumption of French nuclear testing. This prestigious 17 member committee included former military chiefs, politicians, diplomats, scientists and doctors. Their report, published in August 1996, a month after the World Court opinion, criticised current nuclear policy and provided a plan for abolition:
ÒThe first requirement for the five nuclear weapon states is to commit themselves unequivocally to the elimination of nuclear weapons and agree to start work immediately on the practical steps and negotiations required for its achievement.Ó
A few months later a member of the Commission, General Lee Butler (Former Head of US Strategic Air Command) and 60 other generals and admirals from 17 countries, issued a statement calling for an immediate reduction in nuclear stockpiles and taking all nuclear weapons off alert.
ÒWe have been presented with a challenge of the highest possible historic importance: the creation of a nuclear weapons-free world. The end of the Cold War makes it possible. The dangers of proliferation, terrorism, and a new nuclear arms race render it necessary. We must not fail to seize our opportunity. There is no alternative.Ó
In early 1997, the European Parliament noted the importance of the ICJ decision and called for negotiations to begin leading to the conclusion of a Nuclear Weapon Convention. A US public opinion poll at the time showed that 87% supported a nuclear weapons convention.
The tide was turning rapidly and the movement for abolition gained some powerful allies. The peace movement coalition which took the case to the World Court had metamorphosed into Abolition 2000, with a central aim Òto have by the year 2000 a signed global agreement that sets a firm timetable for the complete elimination of nuclear weaponsÓ. This network now has over 720 groups representing more than 14 million people from six continents working for this aim.
An abolition-caucus has been established on the Internet allowing participation by little peace groups and individuals from all over the world. As abolition became a possibility, activists and lawyers began to take their governments back to court in an effort to implement the World Court decision. In Belgium, Germany, France and the US people have broken into nuclear bases in order to force the issue into the courts and in some cases have been acquitted after using the World Court opinion in their defence. In another case, 13 people were absolved following an action in Scotland where protesters wearing judgesÕ robes and wigs stopped a convoy carrying Trident nuclear warheads.
On July 8 1997, on the first anniversary of the World Court decision, the NATO Foreign Ministers meeting in Brussels will be handed a summons from a coalition of peace activists and lawyers, supported by many international groups. The summons reminds the Ministers of the ICJ opinion, the UNGA call for a Nuclear Weapon Convention and points out how NATO is acting illegally by maintaining the policy of first-use, expanding NATO, issuing orders to its military personnel to prepare to use nuclear weapons and making conditional plans to use them. It ends with the warning:
ÒWe, as citizens of a planet under threat of irreparable damage from the illegal threat of nuclear weapons, and acting in accordance with our obligation under the Nuremberg Charter to uphold the law, hereby give you notice that unless you take immediate action to review NATOÕs illegal nuclear policy we shall use all non-violent means in our power to intervene against all preparations for nuclear war at all the places where they are carried out. As NATO, after one year, has given no indication of complying with the ICJ Advisory Opinion, such action will commence after the meeting of the NATO Heads of State in Madrid.Ó
This year, on the 52nd anniversary of the Hiroshima bombing, politicians and citizen groups will meet outside the NATO Headquarters in Brussels where speakers will denounce NATOÕs illegal nuclear policy and participants will walk to the nearest police station to file a complaint against NATO preparation of Ôwar crimesÕ. Three days later, on the anniversary of the Nagasaki bombing, groups are organising non-violent direct actions at different nuclear Ôsites of crimeÕ. To date actions are planned in Belgium, Fiji, France, Germany, Netherlands, Scotland and the US.
As the momentum towards abolition increases it is sobering to remember there are now less than 900 days before we welcome in a new millennium and Jessie turns 21. In her short lifetime she has already witnessed most of the Southern Hemisphere declared nuclear free, the end of the Cold War, a Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban concluded, a successful Chemical Weapon Convention, the indefinite extension of the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty and the World Court opinion. She is fortunate to have been part of making the dream of nuclear abolition a probability. As part of her commitment to see it become a reality she is now working with a disarmament research group in Britain, before going to the UN to be trained by a fellow New Zealander in how that system can be used by Ôwe the peoplesÕ.
She is one of the millions of spiders weaving their intricate webs which will eventually disarm the nuclear lion. Long may international law and strong public opinion continue to underpin this struggle! My hope is that we will achieve this in my lifetime and that one day I will hold a grandchild born into a nuclear-free world.