[NukeNet] Kissinger, Schultz, Nunn Call For Nuclear Abolition

[Bill Smirnow]

http://acdn.france.free.fr/spip/article.php3?id_article=261&lang=en
      A BIPARTISAN PLEA FOR NUCLEAR WEAPONS
ABOLITION
      A World Free of Nuclear Weapons
      By GEORGE P. SHULTZ, WILLIAM J. PERRY, HENRY
A. KISSINGER and SAM NUNN - With a Commentary By
David Krieger


      Publication date : 5 January 2007


      Below is an impassioned call for US
leadership to abolish nuclear weapons by a
bipartisan foursome of prominent former US Cold
Warriors.


      The Wall Stree Journal- January 4, 2007;
Page A15

      Nuclear weapons today present tremendous
dangers, but also an historic opportunity. U.S.
leadership will be required to take the world to
the next stage - to a solid consensus for
reversing reliance on nuclear weapons globally as
a vital contribution to preventing their
proliferation into potentially dangerous hands,
and ultimately ending them as a threat to the
world.

      Nuclear weapons were essential to
maintaining international security during the Cold
War because they were a means of deterrence. The
end of the Cold War made the doctrine of mutual
Soviet-American deterrence obsolete. Deterrence
continues to be a relevant consideration for many
states with regard to threats from other states.
But reliance on nuclear weapons for this purpose
is becoming increasingly hazardous and
decreasingly effective.

      North Korea's recent nuclear test and Iran's
refusal to stop its program to enrich uranium -
potentially to weapons grade - highlight the fact
that the world is now on the precipice of a new
and dangerous nuclear era. Most alarmingly, the
likelihood that non-state terrorists will get
their hands on nuclear weaponry is increasing. In
today's war waged on world order by terrorists,
nuclear weapons are the ultimate means of mass
devastation. And non-state terrorist groups with
nuclear weapons are conceptually outside the
bounds of a deterrent strategy and present
difficult new security challenges.

      Apart from the terrorist threat, unless
urgent new actions are taken, the U.S. soon will
be compelled to enter a new nuclear era that will
be more precarious, psychologically disorienting,
and economically even more costly than was Cold
War deterrence. It is far from certain that we can
successfully replicate the old Soviet-American
"mutually assured destruction" with an increasing
number of potential nuclear enemies world-wide
without dramatically increasing the risk that
nuclear weapons will be used. New nuclear states
do not have the benefit of years of step-by-step
safeguards put in effect during the Cold War to
prevent nuclear accidents, misjudgments or
unauthorized launches. The United States and the
Soviet Union learned from mistakes that were less
than fatal. Both countries were diligent to ensure
that no nuclear weapon was used during the Cold
War by design or by accident. Will new nuclear
nations and the world be as fortunate in the next
50 years as we were during the Cold War?

      * * * Leaders addressed this issue in
earlier times. In his "Atoms for Peace" address to
the United Nations in 1953, Dwight D. Eisenhower
pledged America's "determination to help solve the
fearful atomic dilemma - to devote its entire
heart and mind to find the way by which the
miraculous inventiveness of man shall not be
dedicated to his death, but consecrated to his
life." John F. Kennedy, seeking to break the
logjam on nuclear disarmament, said, "The world
was not meant to be a prison in which man awaits
his execution."

      Rajiv Gandhi, addressing the U.N. General
Assembly on June 9, 1988, appealed, "Nuclear war
will not mean the death of a hundred million
people. Or even a thousand million. It will mean
the extinction of four thousand million: the end
of life as we know it on our planet earth. We come
to the United Nations to seek your support. We
seek your support to put a stop to this madness."

      Ronald Reagan called for the abolishment of
"all nuclear weapons," which he considered to be
"totally irrational, totally inhumane, good for
nothing but killing, possibly destructive of life
on earth and civilization." Mikhail Gorbachev
shared this vision, which had also been expressed
by previous American presidents.

      Although Reagan and Mr. Gorbachev failed at
Reykjavik to achieve the goal of an agreement to
get rid of all nuclear weapons, they did succeed
in turning the arms race on its head. They
initiated steps leading to significant reductions
in deployed long- and intermediate-range nuclear
forces, including the elimination of an entire
class of threatening missiles.

      What will it take to rekindle the vision
shared by Reagan and Mr. Gorbachev? Can a
world-wide consensus be forged that defines a
series of practical steps leading to major
reductions in the nuclear danger? There is an
urgent need to address the challenge posed by
these two questions.

      The Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)
envisioned the end of all nuclear weapons. It
provides (a) that states that did not possess
nuclear weapons as of 1967 agree not to obtain
them, and (b) that states that do possess them
agree to divest themselves of these weapons over
time. Every president of both parties since
Richard Nixon has reaffirmed these treaty
obligations, but non-nuclear weapon states have
grown increasingly skeptical of the sincerity of
the nuclear powers.

      Strong non-proliferation efforts are under
way. The Cooperative Threat Reduction program, the
Global Threat Reduction Initiative, the
Proliferation Security Initiative and the
Additional Protocols are innovative approaches
that provide powerful new tools for detecting
activities that violate the NPT and endanger world
security. They deserve full implementation. The
negotiations on proliferation of nuclear weapons
by North Korea and Iran, involving all the
permanent members of the Security Council plus
Germany and Japan, are crucially important. They
must be energetically pursued.

      But by themselves, none of these steps are
adequate to the danger. Reagan and General
Secretary Gorbachev aspired to accomplish more at
their meeting in Reykjavik 20 years ago - the
elimination of nuclear weapons altogether. Their
vision shocked experts in the doctrine of nuclear
deterrence, but galvanized the hopes of people
around the world. The leaders of the two countries
with the largest arsenals of nuclear weapons
discussed the abolition of their most powerful
weapons.

      * * * What should be done? Can the promise
of the NPT and the possibilities envisioned at
Reykjavik be brought to fruition? We believe that
a major effort should be launched by the United
States to produce a positive answer through
concrete stages.

      First and foremost is intensive work with
leaders of the countries in possession of nuclear
weapons to turn the goal of a world without
nuclear weapons into a joint enterprise. Such a
joint enterprise, by involving changes in the
disposition of the states possessing nuclear
weapons, would lend additional weight to efforts
already under way to avoid the emergence of a
nuclear-armed North Korea and Iran.

      The program on which agreements should be
sought would constitute a series of agreed and
urgent steps that would lay the groundwork for a
world free of the nuclear threat. Steps would
include:

      . Changing the Cold War posture of deployed
nuclear weapons to increase warning time and
thereby reduce the danger of an accidental or
unauthorized use of a nuclear weapon.

      . Continuing to reduce substantially the
size of nuclear forces in all states that possess
them.

      . Eliminating short-range nuclear weapons
designed to be forward-deployed.

      . Initiating a bipartisan process with the
Senate, including understandings to increase
confidence and provide for periodic review, to
achieve ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban
Treaty, taking advantage of recent technical
advances, and working to secure ratification by
other key states.

      . Providing the highest possible standards
of security for all stocks of weapons,
weapons-usable plutonium, and highly enriched
uranium everywhere in the world.

      . Getting control of the uranium enrichment
process, combined with the guarantee that uranium
for nuclear power reactors could be obtained at a
reasonable price, first from the Nuclear Suppliers
Group and then from the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA) or other controlled
international reserves. It will also be necessary
to deal with proliferation issues presented by
spent fuel from reactors producing electricity.

      . Halting the production of fissile material
for weapons globally; phasing out the use of
highly enriched uranium in civil commerce and
removing weapons-usable uranium from research
facilities around the world and rendering the
materials safe.

      . Redoubling our efforts to resolve regional
confrontations and conflicts that give rise to new
nuclear powers.

      Achieving the goal of a world free of
nuclear weapons will also require effective
measures to impede or counter any nuclear-related
conduct that is potentially threatening to the
security of any state or peoples.

      Reassertion of the vision of a world free of
nuclear weapons and practical measures toward
achieving that goal would be, and would be
perceived as, a bold initiative consistent with
America's moral heritage. The effort could have a
profoundly positive impact on the security of
future generations. Without the bold vision, the
actions will not be perceived as fair or urgent.
Without the actions, the vision will not be
perceived as realistic or possible.

      We endorse setting the goal of a world free
of nuclear weapons and working energetically on
the actions required to achieve that goal,
beginning with the measures outlined above.

      Mr. Shultz, a distinguished fellow at the
Hoover Institution at Stanford, was secretary of
state from 1982 to 1989. Mr. Perry was secretary
of defense from 1994 to 1997. Mr. Kissinger,
chairman of Kissinger Associates, was secretary of
state from 1973 to 1977. Mr. Nunn is former
chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

      A conference organized by Mr. Shultz and
Sidney D. Drell was held at Hoover to reconsider
the vision that Reagan and Mr. Gorbachev brought
to Reykjavik. In addition to Messrs. Shultz and
Drell, the following participants also endorse the
view in this statement: Martin Anderson, Steve
Andreasen, Michael Armacost, William Crowe, James
Goodby, Thomas Graham Jr., Thomas Henriksen, David
Holloway, Max Kampelman, Jack Matlock, John
McLaughlin, Don Oberdorfer, Rozanne Ridgway, Henry
Rowen, Roald Sagdeev and Abraham Sofaer.

      URL for this article:


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB116787515251566636.html


--------------------------------------------------
------------------------

      A BIPARTISAN PLEA FOR NUCLEAR WEAPONS
ABOLITION

      By David Krieger

      An amazing and important commentary appeared
in the January 4, 2007 issue of the Wall Street
Journal, co-authored by four high-level architects
of the Cold War: George Shultz, William Perry,
Henry Kissinger and Sam Nunn. The article,
entitled "A World Free of Nuclear Weapons," was
amazing not so much for what it proposed, but for
who was making the proposal. The four prominent
former US officials reviewed current nuclear
dangers and called for US leadership to achieve
the abolition of nuclear weapons. Their argument
was as follows:

      1. Reliance on nuclear weapons for
deterrence is becoming increasingly hazardous and
decreasingly effective.

      2. Terrorist groups are outside the bounds
of deterrence strategy.

      3. We are entering a new nuclear era that
will be more precarious, disorienting and costly
than was Cold War deterrence.

      4. New nuclear weapons states lack the
safeguarding and control experiences learned by
the US and USSR during the Cold War.

      5. The nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
envisioned the elimination of all nuclear weapons.

      6. Non-nuclear weapons states have grown
increasingly skeptical of the sincerity of the
nuclear weapons states to fulfill their
Non-Proliferation Treaty obligations to eliminate
their nuclear arsenals.

      7. There exists an historic opportunity to
eliminate nuclear weapons in the world.

      8. To realize this opportunity, bold vision
and action are needed.

      9. The US must take the lead and must
convince the leaders of the other nuclear weapons
states to turn the goal of nuclear weapons
abolition into a joint effort.

      10. A number of steps need to be taken to
lay the groundwork for a world free of nuclear
threat, including de-alerting nuclear arsenals;
reducing the size of nuclear arsenals; eliminating
tactical nuclear weapons; achieving Senate
ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty
and encouraging other key states to also do so;
securing nuclear weapons and weapons-usable
materials everywhere in the world; and halting
production of fissile materials for weapons,
ceasing to use enriched uranium in civil commerce
and removing weapons-usable uranium from research
reactors.

      For many of us committed to the global
effort to abolish nuclear weapons, there is
nothing new in their arguments. They are arguments
that many civil society groups have been making
since the end of the Cold War. Other former
officials, such as Robert McNamara and General
George Lee Butler, former head of the US Strategic
Command, have also made such arguments. What is
new is that these former Cold Warriors have joined
together in a bipartisan spirit to publicly make
these arguments to the American people. This means
that the perspectives of the Nuclear Age Peace
Foundation, the Global Security Institute, the
Nuclear Policy Research Institute and other
dedicated civil society groups are finally being
embraced by key former officials who once presided
over Cold War nuclear strategy.

      The bipartisan advice of Shultz, Perry,
Kissinger and Nunn to abolish nuclear weapons will
require a full reversal of the current Bush
administration nuclear policies. The Bush
administration has thumbed its nose at the other
parties to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty,
behaving as though the US had no obligations to
fulfill its commitments for nuclear disarmament
under the treaty. The administration has largely
opposed the 13 Practical Steps for Nuclear
Disarmament agreed to by consensus at the 2000
Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference.

      If the administration wants to demonstrate
leadership toward nuclear weapons abolition, it
could immediately submit the Comprehensive Test
Ban Treaty to the Senate for ratification; call
for negotiations at the Conference on Disarmament
of a Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty; reach an
agreement with Russia to begin implementing deeper
cuts in the nuclear arsenals of the two countries,
which Russia supports; and call for a summit of
leaders of all nuclear weapons states to negotiate
a new treaty for the elimination of nuclear
weapons.

      If the United States becomes serious about
leading the way to a world free of nuclear
weapons, as called for by the former US officials,
it can assume a high moral and legal ground, while
improving its own security and global security.
Each day that goes by without US leadership for
achieving a nuclear weapons-free world undermines
the prospects for the future of humanity. There is
no issue on which US leadership is more needed,
and there is no issue on which the US has more to
gain by asserting such leadership.

      The 19th century philosopher Arthur
Schopenhauer said, "All truth passes through three
stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is
violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being
self-evident." The truth that if we are to have a
human future the US must lead the way in
abolishing nuclear weapons has been frequently
ridiculed and violently opposed. The commentary by
Shultz, Perry, Kissinger and Nunn suggests that
this truth may now be entering the stage of being
self-evident.

      David Krieger is president of the Nuclear
Age Peace Foundation (www.wagingpeace.org). He has
lectured and written widely on the need to abolish
nuclear weapons.






        Article other(s) version(s) :
           Printable version


      In the same section






      Keywords navigation

      Nuclear disarmament




      USA











      Hits :  50636


Home page | Contact us | Site Map | Admin |

     Site created with SPIP
      Design anf functionality modified from the
template Easter-Eggs