Who, after all, can possibly predict the next series of disastrous coincidences such as those that brought us the First World War or Fukushima? In an age of increasing automation, underscored by the horrifically huge arsenals of weapons of mass destruction, the consequences of such rapid escalation are too acute, and we cannot entrust our current institutions and international relationships with preventing them. We must do better. Make no mistake: cooperation in the twenty-first century is no longer a choice. It is an imperative. The nation that takes the reigns in this new endeavor will be at the forefront of the new era. Those that cling onto archaic paradigms based on zero-sum theories of security will lag, to the detriment–and very survival–of all.

Follow Jonathan Granoff on Twitter: www.twitter.com/GSInstitute

Why is this discussion imperative now? March 5 was the 45th anniversary of the coming into force of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Unfortunately, some nations  do not comply with all the terms of the NPT.  This year is also the 70th anniversary of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki – horrific events seared into our collective conscience and consciousness. The moment is ripe to signal that the era of nuclear weapons is coming to an end and to remove the threat of these weapons forever from the Earth.

The following excerpts are from a speech given by Peter Maurer, president of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), to the diplomatic community in Geneva on February 18, 2015.

(image)

I was in Hiroshima last week. I visited the Peace Memorial Museums and spoke to hibakusha – survivors. 70 years after the nuclear bombs were dropped on these cities, the lives of the survivors, the lives of countless people in Japan, are still overshadowed by these two watershed events in the history of modern warfare.

This year’s 70th anniversary is a forceful reminder of the catastrophic and lasting human cost of nuclear weapons. It is a stark reminder of the incineration of two cities and their inhabitants. For the survivors, it is a reminder of the burns, blindness and blast injuries that went untreated because the medical infrastructure had been destroyed; of the slow and painful deaths; of the suffering endured by those who were exposed to radiation and 70 years later are still being treated for cancers and other diseases.

…Yet today, 70 years after Hiroshima and Nagasaki – names that recall humanitarian disasters like no other – clear progress towards the prohibition and elimination of nuclear weapons is lacking. Nuclear weapons are the one weapon of mass destruction on which we are still confronted with a legal gap.

We recognize the efforts that have been made and the fundamental importance of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and all the commitments it contains, as well as other efforts to advance nuclear disarmament. But in light of the potential humanitarian consequences, progress in the field of disarmament is, as of now, insufficient.

…In three months’ time the commitment to move towards a world without nuclear weapons will again be addressed in the framework of the NPT Review Conference. This is a pivotal moment for the Treaty and for efforts to ensure that nuclear weapons are never again used. Much has happened since the last Review Conference. There are new developments and perspectives that the ICRC believes States must take into account as they prepare for the Conference and for any future work to address the dangers of nuclear weapons.

The Review Conference will have before it extensive and, in some areas, new information on the humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons. Thanks to the conferences held in Oslo, Nayarit and Vienna, the international community now has a much clearer grasp of the risk that nuclear weapons might be used or accidentally detonated and the effects that such an event would have on people and societies around the globe, as well as on the environment.

These conferences have confirmed and expanded what the ICRC learned from its experience in Hiroshima. Here are some of the key points that we take away from these meetings:

• Nuclear weapons are unique in their destructive power and in the scale of human suffering they cause. Their use, even on a limited scale, would have catastrophic and long-lasting consequences for human health, the environment, the climate, food production and socioeconomic development.
• The health impacts of these weapons can last for decades and impact the children of survivors through genetic damage to their parents. This has been evident where nuclear weapons have been both used and tested. We could not have imagined that Japanese Red Cross hospitals would still be treating victims of cancer and leukaemia attributable to radiation from the atomic blasts – today, 70 years on.
• Seventy years after the dawn of the “nuclear age,” there is no effective or feasible means of assisting a substantial portion of survivors in the immediate aftermath of a nuclear detonation, while adequately protecting those delivering assistance, in most countries or at the international level.
• The humanitarian consequences of a nuclear-weapon detonation would not be limited to the country where it occurs but would impact other countries and their populations. Thus, the continued existence of nuclear weapons and the risk of their intentional or accidental use is and must be a global concern.

…We know now more than ever before that the risks are too high, the dangers too real. It is time for States, and all those of us in a position to influence them, to act with urgency and determination to bring the era of nuclear weapons to an end.