OneWorld.net (U.S.)

© Network for New Energy ChoicesIn the early 1990s, the world breathed a sigh of relief when the constant threat of a nuclear world war, instigated by the brinksmanship of the U.S. and Russian superpowers, diminished. It took almost a decade after the Cold War, however, for public sentiment to realize that the threat of a bipolar nuclear conflagration was giving way to a murkier, scarier future with an increasing number of states either seeking or developing their own nuclear weapons programs. Additionally, failed states seem willing and capable of unleashing weapons of mass destruction.

As a good barometer of changes in public attitudes, a March 2005 poll by the Associated Press found that 52 percent of Americans now think that a nuclear attack by one country against another is somewhat or very likely in the next five years. A similar 53 percent think a nuclear attack by terrorists is likely over the same period. The same poll found that two-thirds of Americans say that no nation should have nuclear weapons.

Despite public sentiment opposing the development and/or use of nuclear weapons, global nonproliferation cannot succeed when countries like the U.S. use the threat of proliferation to manipulate public fear, while modernizing its own nuclear arsenal and asserting the right to use nuclear weapons preemptively. For example, in a March 15, 2005 memo titled “Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations,” the U.S. Joint Chiefs provided guidelines for allowing regional commanders to request approval for preemptive nuclear strikes against perceived threats of weapons of mass destruction against the U.S. or its allies. With such threats being made, it would be no surprise for other countries to follow suit.

During May 2005, world leaders have been meeting at the United Nations to discuss the future of the ailing Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Should this conference end in stalemate, a broad coalition of non-governmental organizations is expected to promote an international gathering to settle on an abolition process outside of the NPT framework. A similar process initiated by the Canadian government at an international conference in Ottawa (the so-called “Ottawa process”) resulted in a global treaty banning landmines that has since been signed by 122 nations. There are promising developments that such an “extra-NPT” process may bear fruit with respect to nuclear weapons.

In India, a new Congress government is revising the Rajiv Gandhi plan for nuclear disarmament. If India were to take the lead on a “Delhi process,” there are indications that Pakistan would be willing to explore ways out of a nuclear arms race. Both countries have agreed in principle to a nuclear weapons free zone in South Asia.

While a future free of nuclear weapons may seem a distant goal, it is achievable with the dedication of thoughtful citizens. On May 1st, in a massive demonstration of popular sentiment, thousands of people from around the world joined the Mayors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki to demand that negotiations begin on a treaty to phase-out all nuclear weapons by the year 2020. If popular will could be brought to bear on international political agendas, complete nuclear abolition could be achieved in our lifetime.

Chris Cooper, Public Relations Director GRACE (Global Resource Action Center for the Environment)