We use Google Analytics to learn more about who is reading the resources on our website. Please read Google Analytics privacy policy for further information. Close

logo_reaching-critical-will

30 May 2008

Dear Reaching Critical Will friends and advisors:

May has been a busy month for disarmament: the next stage of the Oslo process to ban cluster munitions just concluded in Dublin, Ireland with the adoption of a convention; hunger strikes to protest US "missile defense" have been taking place around the world; and 24 May marked International Women's Day for Disarmament. June will also be busy, starting off with the Global Week of Action Against Gun Violence on 2 June. There is life outside of the Conference on Disarmament! Citizens and governments are working for a better a future; we need to channel this successful energy and organize for a weapons free world. See information about all these events and more below and use the tools Reaching Critical Will provides to learn about the issues and spread the word. RCW is your resource.

In peace,
Ray Acheson, Project Associate

1) A ban on cluster munitions
The Dublin Diplomatic Conference on Cluster Munitions finished today in Dublin, Ireland, having negotiated a new instrument of international humanitarian law banning cluster munitions that cause unacceptable harm to civilians. 111 nations adopted the landmark draft treaty, which will outlaw the use, production and sale of cluster munitions as well as require the destruction of stockpiles within 8 years. Participating nations are expected to sign the pact in Oslo in December.

See the text of the Convention at http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/legal/clustermunitions/Convention.pdf.

Katherine Harrison, a former WILPF disarmament intern, has been providing daily updates of the Conference, which can be found online athttp://www.wilpf.int.ch/disarmament/clustermunitions/Dublin%202008/Updatesindex.html.

In her report from Wednesday, 28 May, Katherine says:

Taking campaigners by surprise, delegates agreed to adopt a text of a new Convention on Cluster Munitions on Wednesday evening. The text is a stunning success. It completely bans and requires the destruction of stockpiles of cluster munitions as a category of weapons, including all existing cluster munitions used to date. It does not permit a transition period or any delay. Cluster munitions that have caused so much human suffering in countries around the world will never be used again by States Parties and the treaty will undoubtedly have a huge impact on the ground in improving the lives of victims.

At 10:00 in the morning, the President presented the Conference with a draft consolidated text. President O'Ceallaigh called the draft an "extremely ambitious Convention text" representing the best possible balance of interests and compromise consistent with the Oslo Declaration. The Committee of the Whole then adjourned and bilateral consultations and regional meetings began. As the hours ticked on, campaigners anxiously awaited news and brooded over the text and possible outcomes.

Just after five pm, the President reconvened the Committee of the Whole, announcing that the Convention text was ready for consideration by the Conference. While many participants were unhappy with some areas of the Convention and would have proposed amendments, all delegations felt that opening the text to consider changing any article would risk unraveling the entire Convention and the very delicate balance presented in the text.

Over 70 countries took the floor to declare that they would agree to formally adopt the Convention on Friday morning. The CMC, ICRC, and two observer states also spoke. Even States who called for broad exceptions or exceptions for their national stockpiles in the beginning of the negotiations agreed to adopt the treaty. The UK, one of the countries most strongly opposed to a complete prohibition, endorsed the Convention, following an unexpected announcement from Gordon Brown that the UK would accept a total ban and destroy its remaining two types of cluster munitions.

Note: The British government has also agreed to remove cluster weapons from its armed forces and will ask the US to withdraw stockpiles from its UK military bases.

To read the rest of this report, which includes an article by article summary of the convention, seehttp://www.wilpf.int.ch/disarmament/clustermunitions/Dublin%202008/Updatesindex.html.

For additional information, see the Cluster Munitions Coalition's press releases and newsletters athttp://www.stopclustermunitions.org/media/pres-releases/.

For more information and primary documents, see the offical website at http://clustermunitionsdublin.ie/.

To highlight the need to include women and gender in the treaty on cluster munitions, and to mark International Women's Day for Peace and Disarmament (24 May 2008), the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom issued the following statement:

Ensuring Women and Gender are reflected in the Cluster Munitions Treaty

As the world's oldest women's peace organization, WILPF brings over 90 years of work towards disarmament to the campaign to ban cluster munitions. WILPF welcomed the signing of the February 2007 Oslo Declaration and has since closely monitored efforts to develop an international convention.

Our members looks towards the May 2008 negotiations in Dublin with hope and expectation for a strong and clear Treaty that a) contains a total ban on cluster munitions, b) supports the clearance and reconstruction efforts in all affected communities, and c) provides comprehensive assistance to victims of these indiscriminate weapons.

WILPF strongly believes there is a need for greater awareness of the unique problems facing women in affected communities – in barriers to medical care and risk awareness programs, social stigmatization and psychological trauma, divorce and abandonment, providing for dependents with little access to employment, and risks of extreme poverty.

WILPF therefore calls for the inclusion of a specific reference to UN Security Council resolution 1325 on Women Peace and Security in the preamble of a treaty on cluster munitions, in addition to the reference to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, already included in the present draft. This will help ensure that gender mainstreaming and gender balance issues are duly considered in the formulation and implementation of cluster munitions policies and programs at all levels.

Men, women, girls, and boys are affected differently by the presence of cluster munitions in their communities, with women and girls often disproportionately affected. Experiences from the landmine process have shown that women are less likely to receive medical care, prostheses, and access to mine risk education. Women victims face divorce, abandonment, or stigmatization. Even when they are not victims themselves, the loss of a male relative or husband has severe economic consequences for women in many affected communities.

Gender influences the role an individual plays in their community, in their social and economic activities, and their likelihood of becoming a cluster munitions victim as well as their access to medical attention and risk education and awareness programmes. Data should be disaggregated by sex and age, in order to gain a more comprehensive and representative picture of the effects of cluster munitions on all individuals in affected countries. Women should have equal access to risk education programs.

WILPF calls for the definition of cluster munitions victims to include both direct and indirect victims; persons injured and maimed, as well as their families, and their local community. A broad definition will facilitate the development of programs that reach women, who all too often risk becoming "invisible" secondary victims. Implementing gender perspectives and considerations in the process will improve the effectiveness of a future instrument and its ability to protect civilians.

Prohibiting cluster munitions resonates deeply within communities of activists promoting women's rights and human rights as well as disarmament. Governments can depend on strong civil society support for their efforts to ban cluster munitions, a weapon that causes indiscriminate harm and leaves a legacy of mutilation and death long after conflicts are declared over.

More detailed information on the effects of cluster munitions and unexploded ordnance on women and girls can be found in WILPF's publication, "Cluster Munitions and Women," available at
http://www.wilpf.int.ch/PDF/DisarmamentPDF/ClusterMunitions/WILPF-Women-and-Cluster-Munitions.pdf

For more information about cluster munitions, please see:
http://www.wilpf.int.ch/disarmament/clustermunitions/
http://www.stopclustermunitions.org/

2) Hunger strikes against "missile defense"
As part of its expanding "missile defense" system, the United States wants to build a radar base in the Brdy military district in the Czech Republic, some 90 kilometers southwest of Prague, along with a base for 10 "defense missiles" in Poland. The Czech government has been negotiating with the United States over the radar base for about a year and plans to end the talks in late spring. The project is sharply criticized by Russia, several European Union states, and the majority of Czech citizens.

Since 13 May, Jan Tamáš and Jan Bednar of the nonviolent movement against US bases in the Czech Republic began a hunger strike against the proposed radar base, demanding an open discussion between citizens and the government about the base and the end to talks between the Czech government and the US. On 25 May, Jan Bednar has experienced liver trouble since beginning the hunger strike, which has forced him to be hospitalized, but has vowed to continue. On 29 May, Tamáš and Bednar were granted a meeting with Czech Foreign Affairs Minister Karel Schwarzenberg. Feedback from that meeting indicates, however, that the government is unwilling to accept any of their requests. Tamáš urged him to suspend talks with the Bush administration, to wait for the next US administration, and in the meantime begin a real and transparent debate on the issue, involving all social forces in the country.

Tamáš and Bednar have been joined by other hunger strikers around in the world in solidarity: Dino Mancarella in Trieste since May 14, Federica Fratini, Isabel Torres, Eduardo Calizza in Rome since May 19, Josa Alvarez in Spain since May 22. They have been joined on May 24 by Bruce Gagnon, the Korean Sung-Hee Choi in the USA, Gareth Smith in Australia and Joaquin Valenzuela in Bologna (Italy), Ivan Ivan Marchetti and Andrea Casa in Turin since May 26, and Dr. Hassan Nayeb Hashem in Austria since May 29.

There is an online petition in support of the hunger strikers' goal, which has so far been signed by more than 103,000 people. To sign this petition, please go to www.nonviolence.cz.

To keep up with the hunger strikers, check out Bruce Gagnon's blog at http://space4peace.blogspot.com/. There is also an interesting article in Z Magazine providing some context for the situation: http://www.zcommunications.org/zmag/viewArticle/17496.

Reaching Critical Will is part of a working group on space weaponization that formed at the Global Network annual space organizing conference in April 2008, of which Jan Tamáš is also a member. We will be producing some backgrounders and other materials related to these issues soon - stay tuned to www.reachingcriticalwill.org for more information. We already lots of information available regarding outer space issues, the development of the US "missile defense" system, and the aerospace military-industrial complex:

Outer Space: http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/legal/paros/parosindex.html
Space Weapon Technology: http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/corporate/dd/spacetech.html
Aerospace Industry: http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/corporate/dd/aerospace.html

The Arms Control Reporter also has extensive information on "missile defense" and space weapon technology - see below for details!

3) Global action against gun violence
A Global Week of Action Against Gun Violence 2008 will be held from 2-8 June. Members of the International Action Network Against Small Arms (IANSA) in 70 countries will join UN agencies to raise awareness, campaign for better gun laws, and push for stronger regulation of the global arms trade.

Read more about events planned around the world at http://www.iansa.org/campaigns_events/WoA2008/index.htm.

The UN High Representative for Disarmament Affairs, Sergio Duarte, has endorsed the Week of Action and the importance of small arms control. Read his statement at http://www.iansa.org/campaigns_events/WoA2008/index.htm.

IANSA has secured agreement for a powerful 1-minute film against gun violence to be shown around the world during Week of Action events. Watch the film at http://www.iansa.org/campaigns_events/WoA2008/kill-the-gun.htm.

4) The IAEA released a new report on Iran
The IAEA Director General released a new report on the implementation of NPT safeguards and relevant provisions of Security Council resolutions 1737 (2006), 1747 (2007), and 1803 (2008) in Iran. The report provides an update on progress made in resolving outstanding questions related to Iran's past nuclear activities and alleged weaponization work, in addition to providing an overview of Iran's current enrichment, reprocessing, and heavy water-related activities. As in past reports, the IAEA continues to certify that there has been no diversion of nuclear materials to weapons. Iran, however, continues to operate its uranium enrichment and heavy water-related facilities, in contravention of UN Security Council resolutions, and continues to deploy and test two new types of centrifuges (dubbed IR-2 and IR-3) at its pilot-scale enrichment facility.

The IAEA reports that it has been unable to make much progress in resolving outstanding issues. In its report, it greatly elaborates on the information that other states have provided about Iran's nuclear programme. It also outlines the specific questions it feels Iran must answer for it to have a full understanding of Iran's past nuclear program, including: resolving questions related to the alleged studies; provide more information on the circumstances of the acquisition of the uranium metal document; clarify procurement and R&D activities of military related institutes and companies that could be nuclear related; and clarify the production of nuclear equipment and components by companies belonging to defence industries.

Michael Spies of the Arms Control Reporter outlines the report's updates on issues and evidence. He notes that past weaponization allegations continue to center around four issues:

a) Uranium metal document: In paragraph 24, the IAEA notes it has been shown an identical document in Pakistan, thus providing support for Iran's claim that it was supplied by the Khan network. The IAEA has previously noted there is no evidence Iran has pursued any of the steps provided in the document. Iran claimed the document was provided at the initiative of the Khan network.
b) Missile reentry vehicle modifications: The IAEA now states with more confidence that the studies relating to this issue involved modifying a Shahab-3 to fit a nuclear warhead. The annex lists 13 documents said to have originated in Iran regarding these studies. Iran continues to deny the authenticity of these reports. It should also be noted that the IAEA has not been able to provide Iran with all the documents it has seen regarding this, making it unclear how Iran is supposed to respond to information it cannot review.
c) Green salt project: Iran continues to deny the existence of this project, pointing to its operational full-scale uranium conversion facility.
d) High explosive testing: Iran claims that some of these documents relate to conventional military applications and that they do not have any connection to Iran (one of the three related documents provided by the IAEA to Iran is in English only).

Assessing the report, Spies argues that there are two different but interrelated axes that need to be understood in order to assess the meaning of the report. In its investigation, it can be argued that the IAEA is operating beyond both its legal mandate and technical competence. Given the highly political nature of the debate around Iran, these legal and technical points take on a special significance, especially in the context of maintaining international confidence in the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) regime.

1. Legal: The IAEA states the purpose of its investigation is to be able to provide assurances regarding Iran's nuclear program. However, as the IAEA continues to certify the lack of diversion of nuclear materials, these assurances seem unconnected to Iran's safeguards obligations or the Additional Protocol. Under the NPT, the IAEA is tasked with ensuring nuclear materials are not diverted to use in weapons. Problematic for cases of suspected compliance, however, the NPT does not provide for any international inspection of possible weaponization activities, some of which need not have any direct nuclear connection (e.g. modification of a missile reentry vehicle). While the satisfactory resolution of these issues may naturally lead to greater international confidence in Iran's nuclear activities, it has not been made clear what would be required of Iran for the IAEA to be able provide such assurances. This could entail conclusion of the investigation, or the full implementation of the UN Security Council resolutions, or something else altogether. Additionally, it is not clear what the legal significance or practical effect of these assurances would be, as Iran is presently in compliance with its NPT safeguards obligations and in light of the fact that the matter of sanctions and negotiations are primarily linked to issue of Iran's uranium enrichment program.

2. Competence: Following from the IAEA's mandate under the NPT and related to its ability to provide assurances, it is unclear to what extent the IAEA has technical expertise to assess weaponization issues. This is highly relevant in the present situation, because the IAEA must draw a very general conclusion on whether or not Iran has pursued nuclear weapons, based on fragments of information. While there seems to be a strong circumstantial case for past Iranian nuclear weapons-related activities—mostly limited to component design studies— as the IAEA notes in paragraph 24 of the report, it has not seen evidence of other activities that would be required for the design and construction of a nuclear weapon. Many of these activities may not involve any direct nexus nuclear materials, and thus fall outside the technical capacity of the Agency. As such, it is unlikely the IAEA would ever be able to provide a truly full picture on weaponization issues. This ultimately poses a problem, as any weight the IAEA gives to circumstantial evidence, without the technical ability to provide a balanced and comprehensive portrait, serves as a cause for heightening international escalation on the Iran issue.

According to most mainstream media coverage of the report, including from Agence France-Presse, the IAEA used "far stronger language than the past," expressing "'serious concern' that Iran is still hiding information about alleged studies into making nuclear warheads and defying UN demands to suspend uranium enrichment." The media also quoted several "non-proliferation experts," including Mark Fitzpatrick of the International Institute for Strategic Studies, who said there was no "'sugar-coated suggestion that Iran has been forthcoming' in addressing the outstanding issues. Instead, the report 'clearly refutes Iran's claims that it has done everything it needs to do with regard to the action plan.'"

However, Iran's ambassador to the IAEA, Ali-Asghar Soltanieh, said the report was an acknowledgement of the peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear programme. According to the Tehran Times, he argued that the report emphasized that the remaining issues have been investigated and solved and that the alleged studies are not among the remaining issues, adding "that documents related to the subject were not put at Iran's disposal on time." He went on to explain, "The documents on which the Americans spoke were not offered to the IAEA in the right manner and the director general too has for the first time expressed regret over the failure." The report does note, in paragraph 16, that much of the information related to the alleged studies on the green salt project, high explosives testing, and the missile re-entry vehicle project provided to the IAEA "by several Member States" was sent to the Agency "only in electronic form" and that the IAEA "was not authorized to provide copies to Iran."

Other news on Iran
On 2 May, the EU3+3 (United Kingdom, France, Germany, China, Russia, and the United States) met in London to offer an updated "package of incentives" to Iran. The package reportedly contains "promises of trade, technology, and even peaceful nuclear cooperation." Iran rejected the 2006 version of the package Reportedly, the United States opted not to send a delegate along with other delegates of the five nations to Tehran to hand deliver the package, and refused to include firm security guarantees as part of the package.

On 14 May, Iran submitted its own package of proposals, which covers "broad suggestions ... to settle security, political and economic concerns in the world as well as Iran's nuclear issue" to the UN Secretary General and EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana. It will also be submitted to several foreign ministries. An Iranian official told Reuters the aim of Iran's proposal was to kick start negotiations with world powers rather than offering a specific solution to the nuclear dispute. One Iranian official said the Iranian package could potentially be mixed with the EU3+3 package, as long as the EU3+3 drop their precondition of Iran halting uranium enrichment. On 19 May, Iran's Foreign Ministry Spokesman Hosseini emphasized that Iran did not raise the issue of security guarantees in its package.

US State Department Spokesman McCormack said Washington expects little from Iran's proposals, arguing that the Iranians "know what the requirements are". In response, Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad-Ali Hosseini said the United States has "jumped to conclusions" about its proposals, and "advised the United States not to consider the Iranian proposal only on its own merits, stressing that the proposals were prepared after consultation with different countries."

For regular updates on the Iran nuclear dilemma, please see http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/legal/iran.html.

5) International Women's Day for Disarmament
As the Aotearoa/New Zealand section of WILPF published in Scoop News this month, "Since 1982, International Women's Day for Disarmament has been marked on 24 May by women around the world calling for the peaceful resolution of conflict, and an end to the horror and devastation of armed conflict; the destruction of the physical environment by peacetime military training and weapons testing; the diversion of financial, human and other resources into military institutions; and to government support for corporations that profit from death and destruction."

In honour of this day, WILPF International released a statement on gender and cluster munitions (see above). In addition,Parliamentarians for Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament, of which the five co-presidents are women, released a statement:

The priority of peace and disarmament for the global community

On the occasion of International Women's Day for Disarmament, we appeal to world leaders and all citizens to re-dedicate themselves to implementing the goals of the United Nations for a world of peace and security through disarmament, the non-violent resolution of conflicts, and the reallocation of resources from military budgets to meet social and development goals.

We should immediately abandon the production, deployment and use of weapons such as landmines and cluster munitions which indiscriminately kill civilians, destroy communities, threaten future generations and tear apart the fabric of international law. We thus call for universal support for the international treaties to ban landmines and cluster munitions.

We must also end the out-dated doctrine where-by a few States erroneously believe that their security can be achieved by threatening to destroy other countries with nuclear weapons. The continuing possession of nuclear weapons stimulates proliferation and makes possible the acquisition and use by a terrorist group – something much more devastating than the destruction of the World Trade Centre in 2001. Even more frightening would be the use of multiple nuclear weapons between States - whether by accident, miscalculation or intent. Such use would dwarf the horrors of previous world wars and would generate environmental destruction far worse than the Chernobyl accident and the climate change from carbon emissions. We thus call for negotiations on a global treaty to ban nuclear weapons and ensure universal compliance with such a ban.

The threats to our planet – of climate change, poverty and war – can only be overcome by nations and the global community working in cooperation – something not possible while nations maintain large and expensive militaries and threaten to destroy each other. When one year of global military spending equals six hundred (600) years of the United Nations operating budget- are we truly committing ourselves to a world with increased cooperation and reduced conflicts?

On the other hand, globalization in the 21st Century has made comprehensive disarmament, the abolition of war and the achievement of cooperative security, realistic goals. We now have international mechanisms that can address security concerns, resolve international conflicts and respond to potential aggression in non-violent ways. And we have a growing global awareness and sense of responsibility to each other that can ensure that leaders in our communities and nations turn more to such mechanisms rather than resorting to the threat or use of force. This is enhanced by the involvement of women at all levels of conflict resolution and peacemaking, as promoted by UN Security Council Resolution 1325.

This new reality allows us to drastically reduce the one trillion dollars spent annually on the military and redirect these human and financial resources towards meeting the UN Millennium Development goals and preventing Climate Change. 

As women representatives we are all proud of our home countries and our national identities. But we also reach across our national borders to recognize our common human identity and to collaborate on building a peaceful, secure and just world. We invite you to join us.

Senator Abacca Anjain Maddison (Marshal Islands)
Hon Marian Hobbs MP (New Zealand)
Mikyung Lee (South Korea)
Alexa McDonough MP (Canada)
Uta Zapf MdB (Germany)

6) New resource: Arms Control Reporter
Now Available! Volume 25 • 596 pages • soft cover • perfect bound

Originally published by the Institute for Defense and Disarmament Studies from 1982–2005, the Arms Control Reporter is a research and reference tool for the arms control professional, working as a diplomat, researcher, journalist, or advocate. It seeks to make accessible detailed and up-to-date information and analysis related to the full range of international arms control efforts in a more comprehensive and multidisciplinary manner than topical and episodic arms control journals.

Each edition of the Reporter provides a snapshot of the current state of international arms control issues. For each treaty or negotiating area covered, the Reporter describes and assesses the current status, summarizing key issues and the negotiating positions of governments on those issues. The Reporter also chronicles day-to-day developments, reporting on meetings of states, statements by key leaders, and related events. In addition, it chronicles and summarizes the development of weapon systems and related programs.

The Reporter, now co-convened by the Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy, Reaching Critical Will of WILPF, and Global Action to Prevent War, has undergone substantial revision. While the content of the Reporter remains the same in scope and depth, it is now produced in a bound, soft cover format and has been expanded in its coverage and its analysis. The Reporter, while remaining a vital information resource, is also transforming into a vehicle for producing pioneering cross-cutting analytical perspectives on arms control and for affecting policy outcomes at all levels.

Volume 25: 2006, which covers the period between 1 January and 31 December 2006, is now available for purchase! In addition, Volume 26: 2007 is available for preorder at a discounted rate. The anticipated availability of this edition is October 2008.

Online access to all published Arms Control Reporter materials, 2006 onward, will be available for one-year, renewable subscriptions, via password-protected website. Materials pre-2006 may become accessible at a later date. We anticipate restoring online access by October 2008. In addition, full coverage of each topic for the preceding month will be posted online during the first week of the current month, as part of our Month in Review feature. We hope to resume monthly updates of all topics by October 2008.

More information, including the table of contents and comprehensive overview of changes for Volume 25, a downloadable order form, and information about our project to revitalize the Arms Control Reporter, can be found at www.armscontrolreporter.org. Please do not hesitate to contact us for additional details and information: email [email protected].