A positive view of the Nuclear Disarmament Commission
A real chance for a world free of nuclear weapons Sydney Morning Herald MARK DAVIS December 17, 2009 “…………………The original “grand bargain” of the NPT was that the nuclear-armed states signing up agreed to negotiate disarmament while the states without nukes agreed not to develop or obtain weapons. The NPT declares that all states have “an inalienable right” to peaceful nuclear energy. It commits signatories to facilitate the exchange of nuclear materials for civilian purposes as long as the countries involved have accepted International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards to ensure materials are not diverted for military use.
But lots of players in the NPT reckon the grand bargain has not been honoured. Three countries – India, Pakistan and Israel – refused to sign the treaty and went on to develop their own nuclear arsenals.Then the Bush administration negotiated a sub-standard safeguards deal with India and pressured countries with uranium, including Australia, to wave this deal through at the Nuclear Suppliers Group last year…………..
Gareth Evans and his colleagues on the commission – who include several former senior political, diplomatic and military figures from 15 countries – have devised a deft set of recommendations that amount to a practical and realistic agenda rather than an idealistic wishlist.
Kevin Rudd is often ridiculed by political opponents for his globe-trotting and his foreign policy predelictions.
Yet his initiative in establishing the commission 18 months ago, before Obama’s election changed the atmospherics around nuclear disarmament and with little domestic political fanfare or payoff, could prove to be one of the best decisions of his first term in office.
No comments yet.
1.This month.
Zoom webinar – “Nuclear Winter: The Environmental Consequences of a Nuclear Exchange.”
April 7th at 11:30 am PST / 2:30 pm EST
Nuclear Winter: The Environmental Consequences of a Nuclear Exchange”
Join us for an informative webinar with renowned atmospheric scientist, Professor Brian Toon, as he discusses the environmental risks and global impacts of a nuclear war. Despite the potential damage caused by the blast from even small nuclear weapons, many countries continue to invest in and expand nuclear arsenals. Professor Toon will provide a scientific assessment of civilian fatalities, agricultural failures, climate concerns, and complications with food supply that would follow any international nuclear conflict. We need to plan how to prevent nuclear conflict and avoid catastrophe. Politicians and military planners must be made aware of global climate and agricultural complications that would ensue. Don’t miss this opportunity to learn from, and engage in, this vital conversation
The Road to War brings a sharp focus to why it is not in Australia’s best interest to be dragged into a war with China which will almost inevitably go nuclear very quickly. The filmmaker has interviewed some of Australia’s senior foreign policy analysts who have vast experience behind them in analysing what really is going on here as the United States rattles its sabres with China. And sets us up to be its proxy, like the poor Ukranians have been fed into the Meatgrinder. So America can remain the Top Dog. The Road to War reveals how the United States through its spy base at Pine Gap and by stationing six nuclear capable B52 bombers in the Top End (without permission from the traditional owners) is making Australia a prime nuclear target if the current war of words suddenly melts down into full scale war.
The Road to War shows the implicit connection between Carbon emissions (the US military uses a whopping 70% of America’s annual petroleum to move its armies and vast War Machine around the globe to its 800+ military bases..but under a loophole wangled at Kyoto, the US military does not have to report its C02 annual emissions). The Road to War starts screening at selected cities and regional centres in March. See the trailer end for details.
Antinuclear 
Leave a Reply