Skip to main content

The New UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons



Manlio Dinucci
Il Manifesto
19 July 2017

122 States have adopted a “Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons” which can be seen as supplementing and following on from the “Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty”. This new text clarifies how states are actually behaving: all the States who have signed the first Treaty are actually trashing it and have refused to sign the second.

The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (hereinafter, “The Treaty”), adopted by the vast majority of the United Nations, on 7 July, is a landmark event, clearing out of our minds any debris of denial that a nuclear war would have catastrophic consequences for the whole of humanity. On the basis of this knowledge, the 122 states that have voted for it, undertake to neither produce nor possess nuclear weapons, nor to use them nor threaten to use them nor to receive them directly or indirectly. This is the key selling point of the Treaty that aims to create “a legally binding instrument for prohibiting nuclear weapons, leading to their total elimination”.

The Treaty will enter into force on 20 September, once it has been signed and ratified by 50 states. While we fully back the urgent need for this treaty, we must not and cannot fail to acknowledge its limitations:
  • First: the Treaty, which is only legally binding on states party to it, will not prohibit them from being part of military alliances with states possessing nuclear weapons.
  • Second, each state party to the Treaty, “has the right to withdraw from this Treaty if it decides that extraordinary events related to the subject matter of the Treaty have jeopardized the supreme interests of its country ”. A vague formula that permits each state party at any time to tear up the agreement, shirk off the obligations imposed by it, and equip itself with nuclear weapons.
  • The third and biggest limitation is the fact that not one State possessing nuclear weapons is party to the Treaty: the United States and the other two Nato nuclear powers (France and Great Britain) that hold an aggregate of around 8,000 nuclear heads; Russia which has even more; China, Israel, India, Pakistan and North Korea, with minor arsenals but which are not for this reason alone, negligible.
  • Fourth: the non-nuclear members of Nato have not signed up to the Treaty. Note in particular, Italy, Germany, Belgium, Holland and Turkey all of which host US nuclear bombs. Holland, after participating in the negotiations, expressed a contrary position when the time to vote came. A total of 73 UN member states are not party to the treaty, including the US/Nato’s principal partners: Ukraine, Japan and Australia.

This means that the treaty is not capable, in its current form of slowing down the race to nuclear weapons; a race that is becoming even more dangerous especially from the qualitative angle. At the head is the United States that using revolutionary technology has launched the modernization of its nuclear force: this is what Hans Kristensen of the Federation of American Scientists reports; for this “triples the destructive power of the existing US ballistic missiles”, as if the US is planning to have “the capacity to fight and win a nuclear war by disarming the enemies with a surprise first strike”. A capacity that also includes the “anti-missile shield” to neutralize enemy reprisal, such as that lined up by the United States in Europe, against Russia and in South Korea against China. Russia and China are also undertaking the modernization of their own nuclear arsenals. In 2018, Russia will line up a new inter-continental ballistic missile, the Sarmat, with a range up to 18,000 km, capable of transporting 10-15 nuclear heads that, by entering the atmosphere at hypersonic speed (more than ten times the speed of sound), manoeuvre to dodge the interceptor missiles piercing the “shield”.



Among the countries that are not party to the Treaty is Italy, tripping over itself to follow the United States. The reason is clear. If Italy signed up to the Treaty, it would then have an obligation under international law to divest itself of US nuclear bombs lined up on its territory. The Gentiloni government, while defining the Treaty “as strongly divisive instrument”, concedes that it is committed to “apply every aspect of the Non Proliferation Treaty”, which is the cornerstone of disarmament”. This NPT is a treaty that Italy ratified in 1975 but is constantly violating. For the NPT binds every state that is militarily non-nuclear “not to receive from anyone nuclear weapons, nor to control such weapons, directly or indirectly”. Instead, Italy has made its territory available to the United States to install at least 50 B-61 nuclear bombs at Aviano and 20 such bombs at Ghedi-Torre; the US has also trained up Italian pilots to use them. From 2020, the B61-12 will be stored in Italy: a new US arm for a nuclear first strike. In this way, Italy, formally a non-nuclear country, will be transformed into the front line for an increasingly dangerous nuclear confrontation between USA/Nato and Russia.

So that the Treaty adopted by the United Nations (but ignored by Italy) is not limited to paper, we are forced into claiming that Italy will observe the NPT defined by the government as the “cornerstone for disarmament”. By this declaration, we are calling for the complete de-nuclearization of our national territory.

Translated from Italian to English by Anoosha Boralessa  for Voltairenet
Featured image is from the author.

Source: http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-new-un-treaty-on-the-prohibition-of-nuclear-weapons/5607622

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The French “Patriot Act”: Why is France Extending Its State of Emergency? From Pseudo-Democracy to Dictatorship

Guillaume Kress Global Research 19 February 2016 President Francois Hollande, whose legitimacy stems from nothing but a fraudulent multiparty electoral system , has repeatedly abused his authority  since taking office in 2012 by waging illegal wars in foreign countries (i.e., Mali, Syria) without consulting his electors. [1] He  recently failed to confer with them when his Socialist government responded to last year’s terrorist attacks in Paris by adopting Orwellian domestic policies – policies that have allowed the Hollande administration to spy on citizens , block websites containing “terrorist related content” , strip convicted “terrorists” of French citizenship , and criminalize activism against Israeli occupation .[2] These policies prevent the spread of information which may expose the government’s criminal activities. We should note, here, that the state of emergency greatly facilitates political corruption. [3] To put it briefly, the state of...

EDITORIAL: Be Careful Italy

Ne News 2 June 2018 As you may be aware, there was a constitutional crisis in Italy following the decision to make a Eurosceptic Italian Finance Minister, which resulted in the Italian President to dissolve the government. Just a couple of days ago, this was resolved. However, it is worth noting that one of the parties in this coalition is the far-right wing Northern League, as well as the Five Star Movement. However, the people of Italy must be careful, especially in regards to the Northern League, as they may be the party to destroy Italy’s sovereignty and hand it over to the unelected and unaccountable European Union, which is increasingly becoming a fascist police state. That’s right, despite denying it and claiming that they are Eurosceptics, the Northern League may actually be the most pro-European Union party in the Italian Government. Throughout the world (and in particular the Western World), we are seeing the rise of far-right wing parties who claim ...

Big Pharma: An Example of the Best ‘Democracy’ Money Can Buy

Monica Cruz Liberation News 23 May 2018 The U.S. government constantly vilifies Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea, and other governments it opposes, claiming that they are not democracies. Republicans and Democrats alike warn of “oppressive regimes” while telling us that the U.S. is a true democracy, and everyone here has a say through voting. But a closer look reveals that the deciding factor in U.S. “democracy” is not the vote at all, but the dollar bill. Policies are made and unmade not because of the number of votes they get, but because corporations spend hundreds of millions of dollars on ‘lobbying,’ and other ways of paying off law makers to pass the laws they want. Take the pharmaceutical industry. Virtually everyone takes medication at one time or another, and access to medicine can mean life or death. Many people cannot afford medication. In a recent poll, the Kaiser Family Foundation found that 80 percent of people in the U.S.  believe drug c...