Complete PDF of this edition.

On Wednesday, more than a dozen states and groups of states mentioned the need for a Nuclear Weapons Convention in their statements at the NPT Review Conference. This vocal display of government support for a global ban on nuclear weapons is unprecedented in this forum, and it is encouraging for the many civil society groups—and governments—intent on shifting the focus of the debate from the failed policy of arms control to the need for a roadmap to abolition.
During an informal Middle Powers Initiative (MPI) function last night, Douglas Roche, a former Canadian Senator and MPI chair, handed the Review Conference President, Ambassador Cabactulan, the signatures of more than 500 members of the Order of Canada—the nation’s highest public honour—making an urgent plea for work to begin now on a nuclear abolition treaty. Parliamentarians from various national legislatures presented Cabactulan with their own global petition for a convention.

Egypt was among the many governments to come out strongly in favour of a convention yesterday, which is important given its position as chair of both the Non-Aligned Movement and New Agenda Coalition, as well as a member of the Arab and African groups. The head of the Egyptian delegation said: “[C]ertain challenges must be decisively confronted through the outcome to emerge from the Conference … [including] the need to create a legal framework to eliminate nuclear weapons through the conclusion of an international legally binding convention to eliminate nuclear weapons in a specified timeframe.”
Among the other supporters of a convention yesterday were Liechtenstein, Costa Rica, Malaysia, Mongolia, Tunisia, Kenya and Colombia. ICAN will circulate a complete list of supportive statements later in the week. Liechtenstein also welcomed Switzerland’s determination to work to delegitimize nuclear weapons by focusing discussions on the humanitarian risks of these weapons.

Yesterday’s lunchtime seminar organized by the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War was a helpful reminder of the “human reality” of nuclear weapons. A fortnight ago, for the first time, the president of the International Committee of the Red Cross delivered a statement solely addressing the nuclear problem. He argued that, in order to prevent the use of nuclear weapons, states must fulfill their existing obligations to prohibit and completely eliminate such weapons through a legally binding international treaty.

He also said: “[T]he debate about nuclear weapons must be conducted not only on the basis of military doctrines and power politics … The currency of this debate must ultimately be about human beings, about the fundamental rules of international humanitarian law, and about the collective future of humanity.” He went on to warn that there would be no effective international medical response to the use of a nuclear weapon.

We have heard over the last three days the foreign ministers and ambassadors from numerous countries repeat the call for a “successful” Review Conference outcome. But what defines success? The Norwegian deputy foreign minister, Ms. Gry Larsen, said on Tuesday: “Our ambitions should be far higher than merely agreeing on a final document. We need an outcome document that makes a real difference.”

The Non-Aligned Movement has made it clear that movement towards a Nuclear Weapons Convention is “integral” to any agreed plan of action at the conference. Some European countries have also expressed support for an abolition-focused outcome. This Friday, Norway will co-sponsor an event with ICAN titled “Nuclear Weapons Convention: Now We Can”, which will explore the political and legal requirements of achieving zero.

China remains the only NPT nuclear weapon state to have expressed its support for an abolition treaty, although the United Kingdom has accepted that a convention will likely be necessary at some point in the future. The Chinese head of delegation, Mr. Li Baodong, argued on Tuesday that “[t]he international community should develop, at an appropriate time, a viable, long-term plan composed of phased actions, including a convention on the complete prohibition of nuclear weapons”. The United States yesterday expressed resistance to the idea.

The final government speaker on the second day of the conference was Mr. Nasser Bin Abdulaziz Al-Nasser of Qatar, who stressed that the Review Conference should adopt an action plan to eliminate nuclear weapons, and concluded on this optimistic note: “We hope that we will not wait long before we celebrate a universal treaty for disarmament and prohibition of nuclear weapons, for this has legal and political importance.”

With the new level of support for a convention displayed at this Review Conference, it may be sooner than many of the skeptics would have us think—although there is certainly much work to be done.
Tim Wright is NWC Project Coordinator for the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons.

777 UN Plaza - 6th Floor - New York, NY - 10017 - Ph: 212.682.1265 - Fax: 212.286.8211 - info@reachingcriticalwill.org
This site was created by Kache Productions ©2008