The Nuclear Issue 2 - Contents:
- Abolition 2000, plus statement,
-
Statement on Nuclear Weapons by International Generals and Admirals
-
Statement on Nuclear Weapons by International Civilian Leaders

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

The Nuclear Issue part 1: treaties texts ABM - NPT - START-II - CTBT
More treaties texts and other documents will follow.

For Dutch content (with Dutch addresses) go to this part

Sitemap



Top ABOLITION 2000, a global network to eliminate nuclear weapons, grew out of a caucus of citizen groups campaigning for abolition who monitored and lobbied the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Renewal and Extension Conference in New York in April 1995. Its central aim is to have in place by the new millennium a Nuclear Weapons Convention committing the nuclear weapon states to get rid of their nuclear arsenals within a fixed timetable.

Several Working Groups have been established, which focus on issues including:

Overcoming nuclear threats/legal issues;

Drafting a Model Nuclear Weapons Convention;

NATO;

Sustainable energy;

Radiation health effects;

Non-violent direct action;

Weapon-usable radioactive materials;

Depleted uranium;

Nuclearization of space.

Since then, Abolition 2000 has grown to over 1,500 endorsing groups, with national networks established in the US, Canada, New Zealand, Britain, Germany and also a European regional one.

An electronic newsletter called "The Sunflower" is published monthly by the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation in California. Abolition 2000 adopted the sunflower as its logo after the US, Russian and Ukrainian defence ministers planted sunflower seeds on the site of the last missile silo on 4 June 1996, the day Ukraine offcially celebrated sending the last former Soviet nuclear weapon back to Russia, and pronounced itself nuclear weapon-free. US Secretary of Defense Perry said that sunflowers instead of missiles in the soil would ensure peace for future generations.

Abolition 2000 works primarily through the Internet. There is an e-mail listserver called <abolition-caucus@igc.apc.org> which exchanges information of global interest. Others cover specific topics, like the expansion eastwards of NATO.

An Abolition 2000 international petition is being promoted; and city councils are being asked to adopt a resolution supporting Abolition 2000.

The network plans gatherings around major conferences on nuclear issues: in Geneva in April-May 1998, over 100 delegates came to monitor and lobby government representatives at the Second Preparatory Committee Conference before the Year 2000 Review of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. In May 1999, Abolition 2000 held its annual general meeting in the Hague following the Hague Appeal for Peace Citizens' Centennial Conference.

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

ABOLITION 2000 Statement

A secure and livable world for our children and grandchildren and all future generations requires that we achieve a world free of nuclear weapons and redress the environmental degradation and human suffering that is the legacy of fifty years of nuclear weapons testing and production.

Further, the inextricable link between the "peaceful" and warlike uses of nuclear technologies and the threat to future generations inherent in creation and use of long-lived radioactive materials must be recognized. We must move toward reliance on clean, safe, renewable forms of energy production that do not poison the environment for thousands of centuries. The true "inalienable" right is not to nuclear energy, but to life, Iiberty and security of person in a world free of nuclear weapons.

We recognize that a nuclear weapons free world must be achieved carefully and in a step by step manner.

We are convinced of its technological feasibility. Lack of political will, especially on the part of the nuclear weapons states, is the only true barrier. As chemical and biological weapons are prohibited, so must nuclear weapons be prohibited.

We call upon all states - particularly the nuclear weapons states, declared and de facto - to take the following steps to achieve nuclear weapons abolition. We further urge the states parties to the NPT (Non Proliferation Treaty) to demand binding commitments by the declared nuclear weapons states to implement these measures:

1. Initiate immediately and conclude by the year 2000 negotiations on a nuclear weapons abolition convention that requires the phased elimination of all nuclear weapons within a timebound framework, with provisions for effective verification and enforcement.*

2. Immediately make an unconditional pledge not to use or threaten to use nuclear weapons.

3. Rapidly complete a truly comprehensive test ban treaty with a zero threshold and with the stated purpose of precluding nuclear weapons development by all states.

4. Cease to produce and deploy new and additional nuclear weapons systems, and commence to withdraw and disable deployed nuclear weapons systems.

5. Prohibit the military and commercial production and reprocessing of all weapons-usable radioactive materials.

6. Subject all weapons-usable radioactive materials and nuclear facilities in all states to international accounting, monitoring, and safeguards, and establish a public international registry of all weapons-usable radioactive materials.

7. Prohibit nuclear weapons research, design, development, and testing through laboratory experiments including but not limited to non-nuclear hydrodynamic explosions and computer simulations, subject all nuclear weapons laboratories to international monitoring, and close all nuclear test sites.

8. Create additional nuclear weapons free zones (NWFZ) such as those established by the treaties of Tlatelolco and Rarotonga.

9. Recognize and declare the illegality of threat or use of nuclear weapons, publicly and before the World Court

10. Establish an international energy agency to promote and support the development of sustainable and environmentally safe energy sources.

11. Create mechanisms to ensure the participation of citizens and NGOs in planning and monitoring the process of nuclear weapons abolition.

A world free of nuclear weapons is a shared aspiration of humanity. This goal cannot be achieved in a non-proliferation regime that authorizes the possession of nuclear weapons by a small group of states. Our common security requires the complete elimination of nuclear weapons. Our objecbve is definite and unconditional abolition of nuclear weapons.

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

* The convention should mandate irreversible disarmament measures, including but not limited to the following: withdraw and disable all deployed nuclear weapons systems; disable and dismantle warheads; place warheads and weapons-usable radioactive materials under international safeguards; destroy ballistic missiles and other delivery systems. The convention could also incorporate the measures listed above which should be implemented independently without delay.

When fully implemented, the convention would replace the Non Proliferation Treaty NPT.

Further information: http://www.napf.org ----> click on Abolition


As announced in the introductory lines, the following text is an urgent appeal to end the nuclear madness by most respectable and long-employed highest-ranked military persons (retired).

Embargoed for release Thursday, December 5, 1996

Top STATEMENT ON NUCLEAR WEAPONS BY INTERNATIONAL GENERALS AND ADMIRALS

We, military professionals, who have devoted our lives to the national security of our countries and our peoples, are convinced that the continuing existence of nuclear weapons in the armories of nuclear powers, and the ever present threat of acquisition of these weapons by others, constitutes a peril to global peace and security and to the safety and survival of the people we are dedicated to protect.

Through our variety of responsibilities and experiences with weapons and wars in the armed forces of many nations, we have acquired an intimate and perhaps unique knowledge of the present security and insecurity of our countries and peoples.

We know that nuclear weapons, though never used since Hiroshima and Nagasaki, represent a clear and present danger to the very existence of humanity. There was an immense risk of a superpower holocaust during the Cold War. At least once, civilization was on the very brink of catastrophic tragedy. That threat has now receded, but not forever -- unless nuclear weapons are eliminated.

The end of the Cold War created conditions favorable to nuclear disarmament. Termination of military confrontation between the Soviet Union and the United States made it possible to reduce strategic and tactical nuclear weapons, and to eliminate intermediate range missiles. It was a significant milestone on the path to nuclear disarmament when Belarus, Kazakhastan, and Ukraine relinquished their nuclear weapons.

Indefinite extension of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in 1995 and approval of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty by the UN General Assembly in 1996 are also important steps towards a nuclear-free world. We commend the work that has been done to achieve these results.

Unfortunately, in spite of these positive steps, true nuclear disarmament has not been achieved. Treaties provide that only delivery systems, not nuclear warheads, will be destroyed. This permits the United States and Russia to keep their warheads in reserve storage, thus creating a 'reversible nuclear potential'.

However, in the post-Cold War security environment, the most commonly postulated nuclear threats are not susceptible to deterrence or are simply not credible. We believe, therefore, that business as usual is not an acceptable way for the world to proceed in nuclear matters.

It is our deep conviction that the following is urgently needed and must be undertaken now:

First, present and planned stockpiles of nuclear weapons are exceedingly large and should now be greatly cut back;

Second, remaining nuclear weapons should be gradually and transparently taken off alert, and their readiness substantially reduced both in nuclear weapon states and in de facto nuclear weapon states;

Third, long-term international nuclear policy must be based on the declared principle of continuous, complete and irrevocable elimination of nuclear weapons.

The United States and Russia should -- without any reduction in their military security -- carry forward the reduction process already launched by START: they should cut down to 1000 to 1500 warheads each and possibly lower. The Other three nuclear states and the three threshold states should be drawn into the reduction process as still deeper reductions are negotiated down to the level of hundreds. There is nothing incompatible between defense by individual countries of their territorial integrity and progress toward nuclear abolition.

The exact circumstances and conditions that will make it possible to proceed, finally, to abolition cannot now be foreseen or prescribed. One obvious prerequisite would be a worldwide program of surveillance and inspection, including measures to account for and control inventories of nuclear weapon materials. This will ensure that no rogues or terrorists could undertake a surreptitious effort to acquire nuclear capacities without detection at an early stage. An agreed procedure for forcible international intervention and interruption of covert efforts in a certain and timely fashion is essential.

The creation of nuclear-free zones in different parts of the world, confidence-building and transparency measures in the general field of defense, strict implementation of all treaties in the area of disarmament and arms control, and mutual assistance in the process of disarmament are also important in helping to bring about a nuclear-free world. The development of regional systems of collective security, including practical measures for cooperation, partnership, interaction and communication are essential for local stability and security.

The extent to which the existence of nuclear weapons and fear of their use may have deterred war -- in a world that in this year alone has seen 30 military conflicts raging -- cannot be determined. It is clear, however, that nations now possessing nuclear weapons will not relinguish them until they are convinced that more reliable and less dangerous means of providing for their security are in place. It is also clear, as a consequence, that the nuclear powers will not now agree to a fixed timetable for the achievement of abolition.

It is similarly clear that, among the nations not now possessing nuclear weapons, there are some that will not forever forswear their acquisition and deployment unless they, too, are provided means of security. Nor will they forgo acquisition if the present nuclear powers seek to retain everlastingly their nuclear monopoly.

Movement toward abolition must be a responsibility shared primarily by the declared nuclear weapons states -- China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States; by the de facto nuclear states, India, Israel and Pakistan; and by major non-nuclear powers such as Germany and Japan. All nations should move in concert toward the same goal.

We 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.

Signed,

........

INTERNATIONAL GENERALS AND ADMIRALS
WHO HAVE SIGNED STATEMENT ON NUCLEAR WEAPONS

CANADA - Johnson, Major General Leonard V. (Ret.) Commandant, National Defense College

DENMARK - Kristensen, Lt. General Gunnar (Ret.) former Chief of Defense Staff

FRANCE - Sanguinetti, Admiral Antoine (Ret.) former Chief of Staff, French Fleet

GHANA - Erskine, General Emmanuel (Ret.) former Commander in Chief and former Chief of Staff UNTSO (Middle East), Commander UMFII (Lebanon)

GREECE - Capellos, Lt. General Richard (Ret.) former Corps Commander
Konstantinides Major General Kostas (Ret.), former Chief of Staff, Army Signals
Koumanakos, Lt. General Georgios (Ret.) former Chief of Operations

INDIA - Rikhye, Major General Indar Jit (Ret.), former military advisor to UN Secretary General Dag Hammerskjold and U Thant Surt, Air Marshall N. C. (Ret.)

JAPAN - Sakonjo, Vice Admiral Naotoshi (Ret.) Sr. Advisor, Research Institute for Peace and Security
Shikata, Lt. General Toshiyuki (Ret.) Sr. Advisor, Research Institute for Peace and Security

JORDAN - Ajeilat, Major General Shafiq (Ret.) Vice President Military Affairs Muta University
Shiyyab, Major General Mohammed K. (Ret.) former Deputy Commander, Royal Jordanian Air Force

NETHERLANDS - van der Graaf, Henry J. (Ret.) Brigadier General RNA Director Centre Arms Control & Verification, Member, United National Advisory Board for Disarmament Matters

NORWAY - Breivik, Roy, Vice Admiral Roy (Ret.) former Representative to NATO, Supreme Allied Commander, Atlantic

PAKISTAN - Malik Major General Ihsun ul Haq (Ret.) Commandant, Joint Services Committee

PORTUGAL - Gomes, Marshal Francisco da Costa (Ret.) former Commander in Chief, Army; former President of Portugal

RUSSIA - Belous, General Vladimir (Ret.) Department Chief, Dzerzhmsky Military Academy
Gareev, Army General Makhmut (Ret.) former Deputy Chief, USSR Armed Forces General Staff
Gromov, General Boris, (Ret.) Vice Chair, Duma international Affairs Committee; former Commander of 40m Soviet Arms in Afghanistan: former Deputy Minister, Foreign Ministry, Russia
Xoltounov, Major General Victor (Ret.) former Deputy Chief, Department of General Staff, USSR Armed Forces
Larionov, Major General Valentin (Ret.) Professor, General Staff Academy
Lebed, Major General Alexander (Ret.) former Secretary of the Security Council
Lebedev, Major General Youri V. (Ret.) former Deputy Chief, Department of General Staff, USSR Armed Forces
Makarevsky, Major General Vadim (Ret.) Deputy Chief, Kouibyshev Military Engineering Academy
Medvedev, Lt. General Vladimir (Ret.) Chief, Center of Nuclear Threat Reduction
Mikhailov, Colonel General Georgy (Ret.) former Deputy Chief, Department of General Staff, USSR Armed Forces
Nozhin Hajor General Eugeny (Ret.) former Deputy Chief Department of General Staff, USSR Armed Forces
Rokhlin Lt. General Lev (Ret.) Chair, Duma Defense Committee; former Commander, Russian 4th Army Corps
Sleport, Lt. General Ivan (Ret.) former Chief, Department of General Staff, USSR Armed Forces
Simonyan, Major General Rair (Ret.) Head of Chair, General Staff Academy
Surikov, General Boris T., {Ret.) former Chief Specialist, Defense Ministry
Tehervov, Colonel General Nikolay (Ret.) former Chief, Department of General Staff USSR Armed Forces
Vinogradov, Lt. General Michael S. (Ret.) former Deputy Chief, Operational Strategic Center, USSR General Staff
Zoubkov, Rear Admiral Radiy (Ret.) Chief, Navigation, USSR Navy

SRI LANKA - Karunaratne, Major General Upali A. (Ret.)
Silva, Major General C.A.M.N., {Ret.) USF, U.S.A. WC (Sri Lanka)

TANZANIA - Lupogo, Major General H. C. (Ret.) former Chief Inspector General, Tanzania Armed Forces

UNITED KINGDOM - Beach, General Sir Hugh (Ret.) Hember, U. K. Security Commission
Carver, Field Marshal Lord Michael (Ret.) Commander in Chief for East British Army (1967-1969), Chief of General Staff (1971-73).Chief of Defence Staff (1973-76)
Harbottle, Brigadier Hichael (Ret.) former Chief of Staff, UN Peacekeeping Force, Cyprus
Mackie, Air Commodore Alistair (Ret.) former Director Air Staff Briefing

UNITED STATES - Becton, Lt. General Julius (USA) (Ret.)
Bums, Maj. General William F. (USA) (Ret.) JCS Representative, INF Negotiations (1981-88) Special Envoy to Russia for Nuclear Weapon Dismantlement (1992-93)
Carroll, Jr., Rear Admiral Eugene J. (USN) (Ret.) Deputy Director, Center for Defense Information
Cushman, Lt. General John H. (USA) (Ret.) Commander, I. Corps (ROK/US) Group Korea (1976-78)
Galvin, General John R., Supreme Allied Commander, Europe (1987-92)
Gavler, Admiral Noel (USN) (Ret.) former Commander, Pacific
Homer, General Charles A. (USAF) (Ret.) Commander, Coalition Air Forces, Desert Storm (1991); former Commander U. S. Space Command
James, Rear Admiral Robert G. (USNR) (Ret.)
Kingston, General Robert C. (USA) (Ret.) former Commander U.S. Central Command
Lee, vice Admiral John M. (USN) (Ret.)
Odom, Gen. William E. (USA)(Ret.) Director, National Security Studies, Hudson Institute; Deputy Assistant and Assistant Chief of Staff for intelligence (1981-85); Director, National Security Agency (1985-88)
O'Meara, General Andrew (USA) (Ret.) former Commander U.S. Army, Europe
Pursley, Lt. General Robert E., USAF (Ret.)
Read, Vice Admiral William L. (USN) (Ret.) , former Commander, U.S. Navy Surface Force, Atlantic Command
Rogers, General Bernard W. (USA) (Ret.), former Chief of Staff, U.S, Army, former NATO Supreme Allied Commander (1979-87)
Seignious, II, Lt. General George H. (USA) (Ret.), former Director Arms Control and Disarmament Agency (1978-1980)
Shanahan, Vice Admiral John J. (USN) (Ret.) Director, Center for Defense Information
Smith, General William Y., (USAF) (Ret.) former Deputy Commander, U.S. Command Europe
Wilson, Vice Admiral James B. (CSN) (Ret.), former Polaris Submarine Captain


Embargoed for Release February 2, 1998

Top STATEMENT ON NUCLEAR WEAPONS BY
INTERNATIONAL
CIVILIAN LEADERS

 

The end of the Cold War has wrought a profound transformation of the international political and security arena. Ideological confrontation has been supplanted by burgeoning global relations across every field of human endeavor. There is intense alienation but also civilized discourse. There is acute hostility but also significant effort for peaceful resolution in place of violence and bloodshed.

Most importantly, the long sought prospect of a world free of the apocalyptic threat of nuclear weapons is suddenly within reach. This is an extraordinary moment in the course of human affairs, a near miraculous opportunity to realize that noble goal. But, it is also perishable: the specter of nuclear proliferation cannot be indefinitely contained. The urgent attention and best efforts of scholars and statesmen must be brought to bear.

Leaders of the nuclear weapon states, and of the de facto nuclear nations, must keep the promise of nuclear disarmament enshrined in the Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1970 and clarified and reaffirmed in 1995 in the language codifying its indefinite extension. They must do so by commencing the systematic and progressive reduction and marginalization of nuclear weapons, and by declaring unambiguously that their goal is ultimate abolition. Many military leaders of many nations have warned that all nations would be more secure in a world free of nuclear weapons. Immediate and practical steps toward this objective have been arrayed in a host of compelling studies, most notably in the Report of the Canberra Commission on the Elimination of Nuclear Weapons. Among these proposals, we, the undersigned, fully subscribe to the following measures:


1.
Remove nuclear weapons from alert status, separate them from their delivery vehicles, and place them in secure national storage.
2.
Halt production of fissile materials for nuclear weapons.
3.
End nuclear testing, pending entry into force of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.
4.
Launch immediate U.S./Russian negotiations toward further, deep reductions of their nuclear arsenals, irrespective of START II ratification.
5.
Unequivocal commitment by the other declared and undeclared nuclear weapon states to join the reduction process on a proportional basis as the U.S. and Russia approach their arsenal levels, within an international system of inspection, verification, and safeguards.
6.
Develop a plan for eventual implementation, achievement and enforcement of the distant but final goal of elimination.

The foregoing six steps should be undertaken immediately:

The following additional steps should be carefully considered, to determine whether they are presently appropriate and feasible:

Repatriate nuclear weapons deployed outside of sovereign territory.
Commit to No First Use of nuclear weapons.
Ban production and possession of large, long-range ballistic missiles.
Account for all materials needed to produce nuclear weapons,
and
place them under international safeguards.

The world is not condemned to live forever with threats of nuclear conflict, or the anxious fragile peace imposed by nuclear deterrence. Such threats are intolerable and such a peace unworthy. The sheer destructiveness of nuclear weapons invokes a moral imperative for their elimination. That is our mandate. Let us begin.

(long international list follows, containing:)
LIST OF DUTCH POLITICIANS WHO SUPPORT THE CRANSTON STATEMENT of 5 February 1998:

Andries van Agt, Former Prime Minister Chair, Interaction Council
E. Korthals Altes, Former Ambassador to Spain
A.L. ter Beek, Former Minister of Defence
J. van Houwelingen, Former Deputy Minister of Defence
J.G. Kraaijeveld-Wouters, Former Deputy Minister of Culture
Dr. D.J.H. Kruisinga, Former Minister of Defence
Ruud Lubbers, Minister of State, Former Prime Minister
Mr. J. de Ruiter, Former Minister of Defence
Prof. Dr. J.C. Terlouw, Former Deputy Prime Minister, Minister for Economic Affairs



Top
The Nuclear Issue - Contents in part one:
- ABM (Anti-Ballistic Missile)Treaty
-
NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty)
-
START-II (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty)
- CTBT Comrehensive Test Ban Treaty (full original text)

More Treaties texts and articles will be added successively.

See also website: http://www.cornnet.nl/~akmalten/ndocs.html

An English article on the Dutch and international situation, and possible new developments towards a nuclear-free world is posted at: http://www.antenna.nl/ikv/docs/broch/nuclear.html


Index - Consequences - Without 1 - Without 2 - Recent -
-
PLA - NET 1 - NET 2 - WORK 1 - WORK 2 - Shopping Benefits
-
Year Zero - @ - 15 August 1997 - Secret Story - Links - Sitemap -

(Dutch) -
Geheim verhaal - Eurowood - Haagse Vredesconferentie -
(German) -
Geheime Geschichte -
(italiano)
Una storia segreta
(français)
Une histoire sacrée sécrète