August 2021 Newsletter
Dear Friend,

This summer marked the 25th anniversary of the International Court of Justice's Nuclear Weapons Advisory Opinion, which found "the threat or use of nuclear weapons would generally be contrary to the rules of international law." In the first item below, you can view the webinar the International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms (IALANA) held both to reflect on the opinion's historical significance and to consider its place as international law continues to develop.

Moreover, this month marks the 76th anniversary of the United States' atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. As we take time to reflect on the horrific legacy of nuclear weapons and continue to advocate for their abolition (see "Nuclear Weapons & Climate Change," below), it is essential to center our discourse on lived experiences of survivors.

We must continue to consider in tandem the twin existential threats of climate change and nuclear weapons in our work. The recent IPCC report not only highlights the dangers of our all-but-guaranteed hotter climate but also recognizes the catastrophic impact of potential nuclear war on the climate.

Finally, LCNP celebrates its 40th anniversary this year. Keep an eye out in the coming months for our historical reflections on LCNP's activities and successes since 1981. Be sure to follow us on your social channels (click the icons just below this note!) for upcoming insight into our past, peace-building work, and join us as we persevere in using the law to build a safer future, one where nuclear weapons are no more.

In gratitude,
Ariana Smith
Executive Director
‌
Looking Back and Looking Ahead: IALANA
On July 8th, IALANA hosted a webinar entitled "Looking Back and Looking Ahead: The 25th Anniversary of the 1966 ICJ Advisory Opinion on the Legality of Threat of Use of Nuclear Weapons." This webinar marked the ICJ Advisory Opinion anniversary by discussing the history of the Opinion, its importance, and how it can and should be used today on the path towards nuclear disarmament.

Speakers included Christine Chinkin, Emeritus Professor of International Law, London School of Economics (LSE); Paolo Palchetti, Professor of International Law, Université de Paris (Sorbonne 1); Amela Skiljan, Vice-chair of IALANA Germany, PhD candidate; Phon van den Biesen, Attorney at Law in Amsterdam, Co-President IALANA; John Burroughs, Senior Analyst, Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy, and Vice President IALANA; Daniel Rietiker, International Law Lecturer, Lausanne University, Co-President IALANA; and Peter Weiss, President Emeritus IALANA and LCNP.

This event reaffirmed the importance of the ICJ Advisory Opinion, while also offering new perspectives on how to incorporate the opinion into discussions surrounding the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons and General Comment No. 36 on the right to life of the UN Human Rights Committee.

LCNP President Emeritus Peter Weiss shared the following remarks during the first half of the program:

Perhaps the most striking thing about the
effect of the ICJ Opinion on the anti-nuclear 
weapons movement was the energy that it
infused into the movement. Non-lawyers
 started lecturing on international law,
 lawyers began working on the next case, and
 the ICJ turned into something akin to the holy grail. 

But this infatuation with the law did not last.
Nevertheless, there has always been a hard core of  
believers in the role of law as the mover of
social progress. See, for instance, Jackie 
Cabasso's just released excellent article 
and she isn't even a lawyer. But for every 
believer there are several doubters and our
 challenge is to reverse that order. How can
 that be done? Here are some suggestions:

1) Whenever something about nuclear weapons 
is written or spoken, it should begin, not
end, with abolition. Too often one sees a good
paper about risk reduction, which ends with a by-
the-way mention that the real objective is
abolition. 

2) The mostly Catholic protesters who have 
been willing to serve jail sentences for their non-violent,
anti-nuke protests deserve our admiration. But not everyone
needs to share their heroism. What would you think,
for instance, of a protest staged by one or
more protesters equipped with replicas
of the "nuclear football," containing the nuclear
launch codes, which accompanies the president 
at all times wherever he or she is?

3) Beware of compartmentalism.
The manufacture and storage
 of nuclear weapons creates many 
other issues, including in the
 environment and racism. We
need to work with organizations
concerned with these issues.

4) Encourage the formation of extra-
curricular school activities dealing with 
subjects such as diplomacy, peace-making, and
 nuclear weapons. And let the students
 of today become IALANA's leaders of
tomorrow.

Thank you.

Both recorded sessions of the webinar can be found here.
Nuclear Weapons & Climate Change: Virtual Rally for Hiroshima & Nagasaki Days
On August 9th, Tri-Valley CAREs, Western States Legal Foundation, and Physicians for Social Responsibility, alongside many co-sponsoring organizations, hosted a virtual rally commemorating both Hiroshima Day (August 6) and Nagasaki Day (August 9), featuring Nagasaki survivor Nobuaki Hanaoka. The program opened with “live” August 6th footage at the gates of Livermore Lab and continued with prerecorded speakers and musicians.

During this event, LCNP Senior Analyst John Burroughs spoke about international law, nuclear weapons, and climate change. Burroughs argued that it is "imperative to create an effective process for global nuclear disarmament paralleling that for climate protection." The full text of these remarks can be found here.

To watch the virtual rally in its entirety, click here.
LCNP on the Nuclear Posture Review
LCNP recently sent a letter to President Biden and the Department of Defense regarding the US Nuclear Posture Review. In the letter, we note that the United States should take the lead in pressing for good faith multilateral disarmament negotiations, in compliance with Article VI of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

The letter starts as follows:

Dear Mr. President,

We strongly support your stated intention to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in national security policy. Diminishing the role of these weapons should be a guiding directive in the pending revision of the Nuclear Posture Review. The Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy since 1981 has advocated for non-use and global elimination of nuclear weapons in accordance with international law. We write to urge you to ensure that the NPR reflect both wise policy, particularly in the view of increased risks arising from technological change, and legal obligations. We applaud the extension of New START and your initiative to hold the June 16 Summit with Vladimir Putin, and we were encouraged that you and President Putin agreed to create a Strategic Security Dialogue and to reaffirm the principle that a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought.

The previous NPR during the Trump administration, like other recent policy statements by the governments of nuclear powers, reflected a disturbing trend toward normalizing nuclear weapons, treating them as just another weapons system to be integrated into general military planning. That trend threatens to weaken the taboo against actual use—a taboo that has held since 1945—and to increase severely the risk of nuclear war by accident, miscalculation, or unintended escalation

Read the letter in its entirety here.
No First Use - Or No Nuclear Weapons?
LCNP President Emeritus Peter Weiss analyzes the policy of No First Use and its newfound popularity among politicians and activists in this recent article.

An excerpt:

The opposition to nuclear weapons has a new name — “No First Use,” or NFU. The idea, promoted by some anti-nuclear and peace activists, is to push for an official government policy not to initiate a nuclear conflict.

This is a welcome development, inasmuch as it continues the activism aroused by TPNW, the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, after a long period in which such activism was largely dormant. However, it may be a bit early to celebrate what is sometimes referred to as the end of the nuclear age.

If NFU is supposed to be a first step toward abolishing nuclear weapons, it’s a very dangerous first step.

Find the full article here.
Recommended reading:
  • This article published by Outrider and in collaboration with the British American Security Information Council provides a feminist critique of minimum deterrence, assessing the UK's nuclear policy, particularly in light of the UK's recent decision to increase the upper limit on its nuclear stockpile

  • After the US bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki 76 years ago, the country denied that lingering radiation was causing further death and persistent illness. Black war correspondent Charles Loeb questioned this narrative and ultimately proved it wrong despite receiving no credit for doing so at the time.

  • An op-ed written by Jacqueline Cabasso, Executive Director of Western States Legal Foundation, discusses the 25th anniversary of the ICJ Advisory Opinion and the long-held illegality of nuclear weapons in her advocacy for abolition.

  • The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace analyzed China's nuclear buildup and the drive behind it. Senior Fellow Tong Zhao considers China's current modernization program, new data showing that China appears to be constructing over 200 new missile silos, and explains why this expansion is moving at an unprecedented scale.

  • A Foreign Affairs article outlines how nuclear energy is not the solution to climate change. Rising sea levels, droughts, fires, and extreme weather events cannot be stopped by innovative nuclear energy. Author Allison Macfarlane argues that the newfound interest in nuclear energy as a way to combat climate change comes "too little, too late."

  • IALANA Board member Andrew Lichterman wrote this op-ed arguing that 25 years after the ICJ Nuclear Weapons Advisory Opinion there has been very little progress towards nuclear disarmament, warning about "the erosion of international law."

  • Finally, Associate Professor of Government Nicholas Miller reflects in a Twitter thread on the rare success the JCPOA achieved in 2015, despite criticism and stalled re-negotiations today.