UNGA Condemns What Security Council Cannot

March 2022 Newsletter

Dear Friend,

Over the last two weeks, we all watched the threat of Russian invasion turn quickly into an illegal war of aggression against the sovereign state of Ukraine. Russia has persistently violated international law, making indiscriminate attacks, some with cluster munitions banned in much of the world, and threatening nuclear weapons use while increasing the readiness of its nuclear forces.

As a new parent—I returned to work last month from parental leave after bringing a wonderfully sweet baby boy into my family—the footage of NICU newborns sheltering in a makeshift bomb shelter while their heroic nurses work to keep them safe struck particularly close to home amidst all the horrifying reports of the affected Ukrainian people.

The unacceptable risk of a nuclear strike, whether intentional or accidental, has not been so stark in decades. This precariousness will persist so long as nuclear weapons continue to exist; it’s a risk we must eliminate for the security of humankind.

We stand in support and solidarity with the brave people of Ukraine, Russia, and around the world who are calling for an end to this unprovoked war and putting their bodies on the line to do so. Below you can find excerpts of LCNP’s February 25th statement plus commentary on subsequent developments.

The rest of this month's newsletter addresses two yet-again-delayed conferences: the Review Conference of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and the First Meeting of States Parties to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. With a small glimmer of hope and progress, the last item here celebrates the recent one-year anniversary of the entry into force of the TPNW. While the world continues to live under the shadow of "nuclear deterrence" polices and the threat of nuclear weapons, as is painfully evident this week, as the body of international law proscribing these weapons of mass destruction grows, so does the stigma against them.

Finally, it’s impossible not to highlight that there has never been a better time to support our work for nuclear abolition under the law than now. Please consider a gift to LCNP today—every dollar has a meaningful impact.

Ariana Smith

Executive Director

SUPPORT LCNP'S WORK HERE

LCNP Statement on Russia's Invasion of Ukraine

In a statement released on 25 February 2022, Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy strongly condemns Russia’s attack on Ukraine, stating:

“The Russian invasion is in clear violation of international law, and is causing the people of Ukraine to experience terror, suffering, and death. Given the increased risk of nuclear weapons use, whether intentionally or by miscalculation, it also exposes the peoples of the region and the world as a whole to harm on a vast scale.”

Key points of the statement include:

The invasion is a violation of the United Nations Charter, Article 2(4), which prohibits the “threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state;”

Putin’s thinly veiled references to resort to nuclear weapons should other states intervene militarily are unlawful threats of force under the UN Charter, Article 2(4), because they are an element of the unlawful invasion. They are also contrary to general international law because they threaten the commission of an illegal act—here the use of nuclear weapons. Further, they cannot be reconciled with the Reagan-Gorbachev principle, “a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought,” reaffirmed in the 5 January 2022 statement of the five nuclear-armed states party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty: Russia, US, China, UK, and France;

Several US and NATO actions in relation to Russia since the mid-1990s, in particular opening the door to Ukraine’s membership in NATO in 2008, were unwise and even reckless in their disregard of the security concerns of Russia. That in no way, legally or morally, serves to justify Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine.

In closing, the statement says: “Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy stands against Russia’s unlawful acts of war and threats of nuclear force. We call for both sides to comply with international humanitarian law, respect human rights, and provide access to humanitarian aid. We further call for an immediate cease-fire, dialogue and diplomacy, and fulfillment of the requirements of the UN Charter.”

On 27 February, Putin ordered an increase in the readiness of Russia’s “deterrent forces,” including nuclear forces. Putin’s continued invocation of possible resort to nuclear arms is deeply disturbing. It underlines the imperative of limiting the conflict and of halting it quickly. It also once again demonstrates the necessity of ending reliance on nuclear weapons by Russia, the United States, and other possessor states and eliminating the weapons globally. For comments by LCNP advisor Jacqueline Cabasso and others on Putin’s previous references to nuclear weapons, see this IDN story by Thalif Deen.

We welcome the holding of a UN General Assembly special session on the crisis in view of the paralysis of the Security Council due to the veto afforded Russia as a permanent member of the Council. On 23 February, a resolution was adopted by a vote of 141 to 5 with 31 abstentions. It deplores the Russian aggression in violation of Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, calls for immediate Russian withdrawal from Ukraine, urges immediate peaceful resolution of the conflict, and calls for all parties to strictly observe international humanitarian law.

For some observations on the causes and consequences of the crisis, and the terms on which it could be resolved, see this op-ed by LCNP Senior Analyst John Burroughs published a few days prior to the invasion.

Reactions to N5 Statement on

the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty

A recent statement released by the Abolition 2000 Global Council responds to the statement of the five nuclear-armed states parties to the NPT, the US, UK, France, Russia, and China, in connection with the postponed NPT Review Conference.

Abolition 2000 welcomes the N5's affirmation "that a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought." But Abolition 2000 expresses dismay over the following sentence affirming "that nuclear weapons—for as long as they continue to exist—should serve defensive purposes, deter aggression, and prevent war.” Abolition 2000 comments: "The inconvenient truth is that nuclear weapons will continue to exist as long as nuclear-armed states continue to cling to the dangerous doctrine of 'nuclear deterrence' – the threatened use of nuclear weapons."

The Abolition 2000 statement describes the dismal current environment, and observes:

"In 2010, the NPT States Parties agreed by consensus to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in security strategies. Twelve years later the opposite is true; that role has been expanded. The scale and tempo of war games by nuclear-armed states and their allies, including nuclear drills, is increasing. Ongoing missile tests, and frequent close encounters between military forces of nuclear-armed states exacerbate nuclear dangers. With potential flashpoints over Ukraine and Taiwan, the risk of another use of nuclear weapons is as high as it has ever been. The nuclear disarmament process is stalled, and the five NPT Nuclear-Weapon States cannot credibly claim they are meeting their NPT Article VI obligations.... It is well past time for the five NPT Nuclear-Weapon States to stop issuing Orwellian “nuke-speak” statements and commence negotiations in good faith on elimination of their nuclear arsenals."

Other reactions to the N5 statement were reported in an IDN story by Thalif Deen. One of the commenters was Dr. M.V. Ramana of the University of British Columbia. Asked about the four nuclear-armed states not party to the NPT—India, Israel, North Korea, and Pakistan, he said that the N5 statement "implicitly extends to them in the sense that a nuclear war among them, say between India and Pakistan, cannot be won either and should not be fought." Further, "the obligation to disarm applies not just to the nuclear-weapon states under the NPT but also the other four countries. In 1996, the International Court of Justice unanimously stated that 'There exists an obligation to pursue in good faith and bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective international control'." That obligation applies to all states, he noted.

Joint Civil Society Statement to the States Parties to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty

On January 22, Reaching Critical Will delivered a statement endorsed by 90 civil society organizations to states parties to the Nuclear-Non-Proliferation Treaty. It was prepared for the 10th NPT Review Conference, which had been scheduled for January but was postponed again due to the pandemic, probably until August. LCNP Senior Analyst John Burroughs was one of several contributors.

Review conferences are normally held every five years. The 2010 Review Conference produced the last agreed outcome document. The joint statement observes:

"The 2010 NPT Review Conference affirmed 'that all States need to make special efforts to establish the necessary framework to achieve and maintain a world without nuclear weapons.' Non-nuclear-armed states assumed that responsibility by negotiating the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. The nuclear-armed states must now make their own 'special efforts' for disarmament."

The joint statement offers an extensive assessment of the current state of nuclear and global affairs. Among the observations:

"The world cannot wait until the environment is “right” for disarmament. It is true that success in conflict prevention and resolution, control of non-nuclear military capabilities, protection of human rights, climate and environmental protection, and other important endeavors would help to facilitate nuclear disarmament. But taking action for disarmament by negotiating agreements or through unilateral steps helps create an environment for the achievement of a world free of nuclear weapons while building a climate of mutual trust that will positively contribute to solving the world’s other pressing problems."

A video reading of the statement is here, and an excerpt read by John Burroughs is here.

Celebrating the One Year Anniversary of the TPNW

On January 21st, Reverse the Trend hosted an event to celebrate the anniversary of the entry into force of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) and the one year anniversary of Reverse the Trend. LCNP Research Officer Danielle Samler is a project coordinator of Reverse the Trend and LCNP is a partner organization.

This event included remarks from Ambassador Teburoro Tito of Kiribati to the UN and the US, Jim Anderson of Peace Action New York State, followed by spotlights on each of the RTT chapters. Rooj Ali and Sarah Rohleder spoke about RTT Canada, Akemi Terukina and Emma Pike talked about RTT Japan, and Marisha Jones talked about RTT Pacific. The event was an inspiring and joyful celebration reflecting on the hard work done to move the needle on nuclear disarmament and climate change and looked ahead towards the work to come.

The first meeting of TPNW states parties, originally scheduled for March, has been delayed in view of the pandemic, probably to July.