Peaceworks
was founded in 1982 as a Nuclear Weapons Freeze Campaign and we remain deeply
concerned about the threat these weapons pose to the survival of humanity and
the biosphere as a whole. We support any legitimate effort to advance the
mutual, verifiable elimination of these horrific devices.
We,
of course, do not see the use of military force as an appropriate method of
addressing nuclear proliferation. To even threaten the use of such force, as
Israel and the United States have done repeatedly over the years, creates the
incentive to achieve nuclear weapons capabilities as a deterrent.
To
begin with, the P5, that is the U.S., UK, France, Russia and China are all
nuclear-armed states. So is Israel. All the P5 members are signatories to the
1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Most people are aware that this
treaty requires non-nuclear weapons states to refrain from the pursuit of
n-weapons, and obligates them to open their nuclear facilities to international
inspection.
What
many do not realize is that Article VI of the NPT commits the U.S. and the
other nuclear weapons states to “pursue negotiations in good faith on effective
measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to
nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under
strict and effective international control.”
This
agreement was signed in 1968 and went into effect in 1970. 45 years later, the
Pentagon still has an arsenal of many thousands of warheads, and approximately
$60 billion of our tax dollars are being spent each year to maintain and
upgrade this arsenal and its delivery systems.
In
fact, maintaining nuclear dominance in perpetuity is the official strategic
doctrine of our nation. Toward this end, the U.S. is investing hundreds of
billions in constructing new nuclear weapons facilities around the country and
has absolutely no intention of following either the letter or the spirit of the
NPT, which, as a ratified treaty, is supposed to be the highest law of the
land.
As
long as the U.S. and the other P5 nations refuse to move forward on their
commitment to mutually eliminate their nuclear arsenals, they have very little
credibility arguing that other nations should not seek nuclear arms. This “do
as I say, not as I do” approach is worse than patronizing. Our government is
essential acting as a bully, insisting that others follow their orders,
imposing harsh economic sanctions and threatening military action if their
demands are not met.
The
other hypocrisy in the U.S. approach to Iran involves our government’s failure
to acknowledge the inherent connection between civilian nuclear power and
nuclear weapons. To build a significant nuclear fission energy program requires
the means for enrichment of uranium. And, as the fissile isotope of uranium is
relatively rare, for fission power to be more than a short term undertaking
requires the separation of plutonium from spent fuel.
Enrichment
capabilities and plutonium separation through reprocessing are necessary
ingredients for both a full-blown civilian nuclear energy program and a nuclear
weapons program. There is no secret to the bomb, only limited access to
“special nuclear materials,” that is highly enriched uranium and plutonium.
Peaceworks
opposes the use of nuclear fission for energy, recognizing that it is too
dangerous, too dirty, too slow and far too expensive to be a viable source of
energy to address the climate crisis. Our government, on the other hand,
supports the expansion of nuclear power and maintains the fiction that this can
be done without spreading nuclear weapons capabilities. In fact, the
infrastructure and technical knowhow for a civilian nuclear energy program is
exactly what is needed for any nation that wishes to “go nuclear” on the
weapons side.
Only
if we move beyond nuclear power, at home and abroad, can we really root out
nuclear weapons proliferation. If the world was to eschew the nuclear option
for energy, then any effort to build enrichment or reprocessing facilities
would be unambiguously directed toward weapons production and immediate action
could be taken.
With
these concerns stated, in the short run, it is clearly preferable to pursue
negotiations rather than to harken to the neo-cons’ drumbeat for war. Thus, we
must offer qualified support to the negotiations process. If we are to have any
hope for a peaceful, nuclear-free future, however, we must focus on nuclear
weapons in general, rather than seeing Iran as the problem.
We
should pursue a Nuclear-Free Middle East as part of a broader settlement of
regional conflicts, but we should not stop there. Ultimately, we need to work
for a world free of the scourge of nuclear weapons. And, in tandem with this,
we need a world that gets serious about addressing the climate crisis by moving
rapidly to improve energy efficiency and expand the use of safe, clean renewable
energy options.