NUCLEAR WEAPONS BAN, END POVERTY & REVERSE CLIMATE CHANGE

Our world is acutely threatened by nuclear weapons, poverty and man climate change. A  comprehensive  Nuclear Weapons Ban is needed to avoid an accidental full-scale nuclear catastrophe and a consequent Nuclear Winter that will wipe out most of Humanity and the Biosphere.  Every person must stand up for Humanity and the Biosphere in the One Percenter War on Terra.

 August 2014 saw the 69th  anniversary of the war criminal American  nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on 6 August and 9 August, respectively,  in 1945. The previous week saw the death at 93 of the last crew member of the US bomber Enola Gay that dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima [1]. In America’s war criminal nuclear bombing of Japan up to 166,000 were killed in Hiroshima and up to 80,000 perished in Nagasaki. These utterly unjustified, war criminal attacks were militarily unnecessary, evidently simply “proof of principle”, and strategically a US warning to other nations (notably the USSR) of America’s ability, preparedness and resolve to repeatedly commit mass murder.

After their defeat in 1945 the Germans adopted a CAAAA (C4A) protocol of Cessation of killing, Acknowledgment of the crimes, Apology and Amends for the crimes, and Assertion ”never again to anyone”. However  in the US Alliance there is still considerable approval for this nuclear holocaust and mass murder of up to 250,000 people, mostly civilians in the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The CAAAA (C4A) protocol of Cessation of killing, Acknowledgment of the crimes, Apology and Amends for the crimes, and Assertion “never again to anyone” is unknown to Americans and the American killing continues, albeit non-nuclear killing, with no Acknowledgement, Amends, Apology or Assertion of “never again to anyone”.   

History ignored yields history repeated. Thus mostly civilian deaths from violence or violently-imposed deprivation total 40 million (post-1950 US Asian Wars), 4.6 million (the continuing Iraqi Genocide, 1990-), 5.5 million (the continuing Afghan Genocide, 2001-), 12 million (continuing US War on Muslims, 1990-) , 10 million (continuing US War on Terror, 2001-) and 2 million (continuing Palestine Genocide, 1936-) [2-4].  In August 2014 Australian-targeted  US drones are killing Muslims from Somalia to Pakistan . In US- , UK- and Australia-backed  Israel’s latest Gaza Massacre  2,000 Palestinians (80% civilians and including about 500 children) have been killed, 10,000 have been wounded, 450,000 have been driven from their homes, 250,000 have been made homeless and 1.8 million (half children) have been variously traumatized from shelling and bombing in reprisals for zero (0) Israeli deaths from Gaza rockets in the previous year and 28 in the previous 14 year i.e. 2 per year as compared to 134 Israelis being murdered by fellow Israelis each year [5]. In 2014 Nobel Peace Laureate Obama has sent nearly 1,000 US troops (advisers and security personnel) back to Iraq and has now promised an indefinite  US bombing campaign in Libya, Somalia, Yemen, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and Pakistan .  UN Population Division data indicate that 17 million people die avoidably each year from deprivation in Developing Countries (minus China ) on a Spaceship Earth with One Percenters in charge of the flight deck [4].

Back in 2007 when he was  President of the prestigious American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS),  the present senior advisor to President Barack Obama on science and technology issues, Professor John Holdren,  identified nuclear weapons, poverty and climate change as 3 key threats to humanity. As reported by AAAS: “Challenges such as poverty, climate change and nuclear proliferation pose global risks that require scientists and engineers to join with political and business leaders in a concerted search for solutions, AAAS President John P. Holdren said Thursday. In his Presidential Address at the AAAS Annual Meeting, Holdren described a world poised at an unprecedented moment of decision: Without swift and urgent action, he said, the problems could spiral toward disastrous, permanent changes for all of life on Earth” [6].

Unfortunately the “swift and urgent action” recommended by Professor John Holdren is simply not happening, leaving the world at risk as outlined below.  

1. Nuclear Weapons. A nuclear exchange would wipe out most of Humanity (current population about 7 billion) , successively through the initial instantaneous destruction of cities, subsequent deaths from burns and  radiation sickness from radioactive fallout, and  finally  through a “Nuclear Winter” decimating agriculture, photosynthesis and photosynthate-based life in general.  While imposing deadly Sanctions on Iran (that has zero nuclear weapons and  repeatedly states that it does not want nuclear weapons and wants a nuclear weapons-free Middle East), the US (7,315 nuclear weapons) is boosting its nuclear and conventional forces in Asia and Australia and continues to pour billions of dollars of military aid into the war criminal, genocidally racist, ethnic cleansing and nuclear terrorist rogue state of Apartheid Israel that reportedly has up to 400 nuclear weapons.  The upper  estimates of stored  nuclear weapons  are as follows: US (7,315), Russia (8,000), Apartheid Israel (400), France (300), UK (250), China (250), Pakistan (120), India (100), and North Korea (less than 10). India , Pakistan, Apartheid Israel and North Korea have not ratified the Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) [7]. Nuclear exchanges have almost occurred accidentally several times in the last half century [8] and in several instances have only  been averted by the sane actions of particular  courageous and humane individuals e.g. Commander Vasili Alexandrovich Arkhipov (1962) and Lieutenant Colonel Stanislav Yevgrafovich Petrov (1983) [9].

2. Poverty. UN Population Division data indicate that about 17 million people already die avoidably each year from deprivation in Developing Countries (minus China ) on a Spaceship Earth with One Percenters in charge of the flight deck. 9 years ago global avoidable deaths totaled 16 million per year [4]. In Iran alone about 100,000 Iranians die avoidably each year under cruel US-imposed Sanctions. The Sanctions applied to Iraq from 1990 to 2003 killed an estimated 1.7 million people, 1.1 million being under-5 year old infants [10].  1950-2005  avoidable deaths from deprivation have totalled 1.3 million for the world, 1.2 billion for the Developing Word and 0.6 billion for the Muslim world, these estimates being consonant with 1950-2005 under-5 infant deaths totalling 0.88 billion for the world, 0.85 billion for the Developing World and 0.4 billion for the Muslim World [4].

3. Climate Change.  In  2009 the WBGU, which advises the German Government  on climate change, estimated that for a 75% chance of avoiding a catastrophic 2C temperature rise, the world must emit no more than 600 billion tonnes carbon dioxide (CO2) before zero emissions in 2050. Unfortunately the global greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution is so high that the World will exceed this terminal budget in 4 years relative to 2014 [11]. The Global Warming Potential (GWP) of CH4 on a 20 year time frame and with aerosol impacts considered is 105 times that of CO2.  The 50 Gt (50 billion tonnes) of  CH4 predicted to be released from  the East Siberian Arctic Shelf in coming decades [12] is equivalent to 50 billion tonnes CH4 x 105 tonnes  CO2-equivalent/tonne CH4 = 5,250 tonnes CO2-e or about nine (9) times more than the world’s terminal greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution budget. The world faces catastrophe  unless global warming  and this Arctic CH4 release can be stopped [9]. Unaddressed man-made climate change is set to exacerbate an already worsening climate genocide and cause 10 billion avoidable deaths this century [13].

Scientists have solutions to  all of these 3 major threats facing humanity but politicians – notably those representing the One Percenters who own about half of the world’s wealth – are  preventing the required actions in all 3 areas that are summarized below.

1. Nuclear Weapons. Complete nuclear  disarmament in accordance with  a  Nuclear Weapons Ban is technically possible. About 117 countries now  support a complete Nuclear Weapons ban [8, 14] and this is also supported by the Red Cross, the Red Crescent, the World Council of Churches and the International Trade Union Confederation. However a Nuclear Weapons Ban  is opposed by nuclear-armed countries and their compliant lackeys. Thus, for example,   while Australia has no actual nuclear weapons of its own, it has hosted nuclear tests and testing of nuclear  weapons delivery systems, hosts nuclear armed war ships, plays a key role in US nuclear terrorism through its Pine Gap joint US-Australian communications facility, and under the present pro-war, pro-Zionist,  US lackey Coalition Government slavishly supports US and Israeli war policies and is doing its best to oppose a Nuclear Weapons  Ban. Thus the Sydney Morning Herald reported (2014): “ In October 2013, according to the documents released under freedom-of-information law, Australia refused a request by New Zealand to endorse a 125-nation joint statement at the United Nations highlighting the humanitarian consequences of any use of nuclear weapons.'' Australia objected to a sentence declaring that it is in the interest of humanity that nuclear weapons are never used again, ''under any circumstances''. A group of 16 nations, including Indonesia, Malaysia, Mexico, South Africa and New Zealand, have been working to highlight the humanitarian effects of nuclear weapons. That diplomatic campaign is intended to lay the ground for negotiation of a convention that would prohibit nuclear weapons - putting them in the same category as chemical and biological weapons, which are already prohibited under international law… declassified documents have revealed that the government's primary concern is that a nuclear weapons ban would ''cut across'' Australia's reliance on US nuclear deterrence” [15].

2. Poverty. Notwithstanding  the expansion of ostensible democracy and social welfare in the 20th century, the world's wealth is overwhelmingly  concentrated the hands of the rich. Thus, according to Oxfam “[Its] report, Working for the Few, shows that the wealth of the world is divided in two: almost half going to the richest one per cent; the other half to the remaining 99 per cent” . French economist Professor Thomas Piketty argues in his important book “Capital in the Twenty-First Century” that current wealth inequality endangers democracy and economic sustainability,  and he proposes a progressive annual wealth tax to address the danger. There is a  largely ignored Global Avoidable Mortality Holocaust in which currently 17 million people die avoidably each year from deprivation and deprivation-exacerbated disease in the Developing World (minus China).  This is happening on Spaceship Earth with the flight deck under the control of the 10% richest who have about 90% of the wealth of the World and who in turn are controlled by One Percenters who own about half the wealth of the World. An annual global wealth tax of about 4% would yield US$16 trillion annually and enable raising all countries to annual per capita incomes equivalent to the $6,000 per person per year of China and Cuba, countries for which annual avoidable mortality is zero (0) [4, 16, 17].  

3. Climate Change.  Basically we know what the problem is (man-made greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution )  and how to solve it (stop and reverse GHG pollution). Fundamentally, as enunciated by 300.org, we need to urgently reduce atmospheric CO2 concentration from the current dangerous and damaging 400 ppm CO2 to about 300 ppm for a safe planet for all peoples and all species. To achieve a safe atmosphere  we must achieve the following: (1) change of societal philosophy to one of scientific risk management and biological sustainability with complete cessation of species extinctions and zero tolerance for lying;  (2) urgent reduction of atmospheric CO2 to a safe level of about 300 ppm as recommended by leading climate and biological scientists; and  (3) a rapid switch to the best non-carbon and renewable energy (solar, wind, geothermal, wave, tide and hydro options that are currently roughly the same market price as coal burning-based power) and to energy efficiency, public transport, needs-based production, re-afforestation and return of carbon as biochar to soils or bicarbonate to oceans coupled with correspondingly rapid cessation of fossil fuel burning, deforestation, methanogenic livestock production and population growth [9].

Unfortunately,  the Western democracies have become  Murdochracies, Lobbyocracies and Corporatocracies in which the Big Money of the dominant One Percenters buys people, presstitutes, politicians, policies, parties, preferment, public perception of reality, votes and political power. The young must revolt (peacefully, of course) to secure their future and have 3 main avenues for  action on all these 3 major threats to Humanity, specifically (1) massive peaceful demonstration in the streets under the banner “Save our future”;  (2) at the ballot box where they must vote 1 Green and  consign  the corrupt lackeys of the One Percenters and Ten Percenters to the sewer of History; and (3) through Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) against the terracidal One Percenters and all those people, politicians, parties, presstitutes, companies, corporations and countries whose actions are threatening Humanity and the Biosphere.

No  doubt the One Percenters will move to take over any political mass movement of the more than 50% of Humanity who are under 30 and so the Young (and those who love and care for the Young) must act in ways that are independent  of such manipulation, The  Young should eschew the lying Mainstream media [18] and adopt the sound advice from the 1960s of “Don’t trust anyone over 30”.  The Young should adopt an ABC strategy  for individual action that has been extremely effective for political and  religious movements from Catholicism to Communism, namely:

(1) Accountability  (hold the One Percenters and their lackeys responsible by Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) and by vocal exposure);

(2) Badge (wear a badge summarizing the key goals e.g. “Nuclear Weapons Ban”, “4% wealth tax” ,  “300 ppm CO2”; I wear 2 badges everywhere I go saying  “Free Palestine” and “300 ppm CO2”); and

(3) Credo (have a snappy one sentence to quickly explain your badges(s) to someone in a lift or a check-out queue, e.g. re Nuclear weapons, “To save the world from inevitable nuclear annihilation  we need a  Nuclear Weapons Ban now”; re Poverty, “A 4%  annual global  wealth  tax  can give every country a Cuban-style minimal annual  per capita income and potentially halt the annual global avoidable mortality  holocaust that kills 17 million annually through First World-imposed deprivation”; and re Climate change, “For a safe and sustainable future for all peoples and all species we must urgently return atmospheric  CO2 concentration back to the pre-Industrial  Revolution 300 ppm CO2 from the present dangerous  and damaging 400 ppm CO2”.

Of course moral and scientific authority should be quoted in the hope that it will be taken very seriously, although even such weighty authority can be readily minimized by powerful Mainstream media and politicians. Thus in relation to climate change there are 1 billion Catholics and Pope Francis in his important 2015  Encyclical  Letter "Laudato si" demands that in order to save “millions of premature deaths” a “fully borne” Carbon Price be emplaced on greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution and that “there is an urgent need to develop policies so that, in the next few years, the emission of carbon dioxide and other highly polluting gases can be drastically reduced” [19]. Armed with this weighty, science-informed and authoritative  moral advice, the billions of Humanity might hope to save themselves and the Biosphere by demanding that fossil fuel burning must rapidly cease and  the polluters must pay in full by a Wealth Tax (for historical GHG pollution) and a Carbon Tax (for ongoing GHG pollution) [20]. However, for example, in coal- and gas-rich Australia the leading Catholic prelate (Cardinal  George Pell) and like-minded leading conservative Catholic politicians and commentators (notably Prime Minister Tony Abbott and Leader of  the Opposition Bill Shorten) are opposed to  Pope Francis’ position of extremely rapid action on climate change, as is Catholic Republican candidate Jeb Bush in the US. However one hopes that despite massive Mainstream media power and malreportage in the Western democracies - democracies  that have become Plutocracies,  Murdochracies, Lobbyocracies, Corporatocracies and Dollarocracies - ordinary folk will be able to see through the climate change denialist  and effective climate change denialist untruth and spin and punish the climate change deniers and effective climate change deniers at the ballot box. Indeed Pope Francis in his important 2015  Encyclical  Letter "Laudato si" supports the use of "boycotts" [19].

Of course, many other strategies are possible. Thus  in relation to the horrifying threat of mass extinction from nuclear weapons one can be more specific about the targets of Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) that obviously should apply to all nuclear weapons-possessing countries and all those complicit in nuclear terrorism.

Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) should apply to the  US (4,800 warheads),  Russia (5,700) and also to:

1.  “Small” nuclear powers like France (290 warheads),  China (250), the UK (120), Pakistan (100-120), India (90-110), Apartheid Israel (80-100 with the material for 200 more) and North Korea (6-8) (see “Arms control Association”: http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/Nuclearweaponswhohaswhat  ) that are most likely to be pressured successfully by carrot or stick and should be particularly   subject to Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) as were successfully applied to  Apartheid South Africa (see “Nuclear weapons ban , end poverty & reverse climate change”: https://sites.google.com/site/300orgsite/nuclear-weapons-ban  ).

2. Numerous countries that (a) host US bases, (b) host US  nuclear weapons, (c) host  nuclear-armed warships, or (d) host nuclear terrorism-related communications facilities . Thus  when a US nuclear-armed warship is in an Australian port,  Australia is effectively hosting US nuclear weapons  and making Australia a nuclear target,  as well as hosting a US Marine base in Darwin, hosting nuclear-armed warships in general, and hosting  joint US-Australian  nuclear terrorism-related communications facilities such as that at Pine Gap in Central Australia.

3. All countries that refuse to join the present 127 nations (2016) who support the Nuclear Weapons Ban (Gideon Polya, "Nuclear Weapons Ban & Boycotts, Divestment & Sanctions (BDS) To Save World From  Nuclear, Poverty & Climate Threats", Countercurrents, 11 August 2014: http://www.countercurrents.org/polya110814.htm  ).

Decent people must vote out all politicians complicit in nuclear terrorism. Thus Australians who utterly abhor mass murder will utterly reject the US lackey, US nuclear terrorism-complicit  Lib-Labs (Coalition and Labor Right), vote 1 Green and put the Coalition last.

References.

[1]. “Theodore Van Kirk, last crew member of Enola Gay, dies in US aged 93”, The Guardian, 30 July 2014: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/29/enola-gay-atomic-bomb-crew-van-kirk-dies-93#comments .

[2]. “Muslim Holocaust Muslim Genocide”: https://sites.google.com/site/muslimholocaustmuslimgenocide/ .

[3]. “Palestinian Genocide””: https://sites.google.com/site/palestiniangenocide/

[4]. Gideon Polya, “Body Count. Global avoidable mortality since 1950”, that includes n avoidable mortality-related a history of every country since Neolithic times and is now available for free perusal on the web:  http://globalbodycount.blogspot.com/  .

[5]. Gideon Polya, “Mike Carlton, top Australian columnist, forced from job for criticizing Apartheid Israeli Gaza Massacre”, Countercurrents,  08 August, 2014: http://www.countercurrents.org/polya080814.htm .

[6]. AAAS quoted in Gideon Polya,    “New Year's Resolutions: speak out to save Democracy, Humanity & Biosphere from greedy One Percenter Corporatocracy”, Countercurrents, 03 January, 2013: http://www.countercurrents.org/polya030113.htm .

[7]. “List of states with nuclear weapons”, Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_nuclear_weapons  .

[8]. Fred Mendelsohn,  “Working to abolish nuclear weapons” , ABC Radio National Ockham’s Razor, 10 August 2014: http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/ockhamsrazor/working-to-abolish-nuclear-weapons/5650138 .

[9]. “Are we doomed?”: https://sites.google.com/site/300orgsite/are-we-doomed .

[10]. “Iraqi Holocaust, Iraqi Genocide”: https://sites.google.com/site/iraqiholocaustiraqigenocide/geneva-convention .

[11]. Gideon Polya,  “Doha climate change inaction. Only 5 years left to act”, MWC News, 9 December 2012: http://mwcnews.net/focus/analysis/23373-gideonpolya-climate-change.html  .

[12]. Gail Whiteman, Chris Hope and Peter Wadhams, “Vast costs of Arctic change”, Nature, 499, 25 July 2013: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v499/n7459/pdf/499401a.pdf .

[13]. “Climate Genocide”: https://sites.google.com/site/climategenocide/ .

[14]. “International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons: (ICAN): http://www.icanw.org/why-a-ban/positions/ .

[15]. Philip Dorling, “Australian diplomats frustrated nuclear weapons ban”, Sydney Morning Herald, 10 March 2014: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/australian-diplomats-frustrated-nuclear-weapons-ban-20140309-34fgg.html .

[16].  Gideon Polya, “4 % Annual Global Wealth Tax to stop the 17 million deaths annually”, Countercurrents, 27 June 2014: http://www.countercurrents.org/polya270614.htm .  

[17[. Gideon Polya, “Key Book Review: “Capital In The Twenty-First Century” By Thomas Piketty”,  Countercurrents,  01 July, 2014: http://www.countercurrents.org/polya010714.htm .

[18]. “Mainstream Media Lying”: https://sites.google.com/site/mainstreammedialying/ .

[19]. Pope Francis, Encyclical Letter “Laudato si”, 2015: http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html .

[20].  Gideon Polya, “Pope Francis Demands “Fully Borne” Cost of Pollution (Carbon Price) To Prevent “Millions Of Premature Deaths”,  Countercurrents, 29 July, 2015: http://www.countercurrents.org/polya290715.htm .

 

THE REMAINDER OF THIS SITE IS AN ALPHABETICALLY-ORGANIZED COMPENDIUM OF HUMANE AND EXPERT OPINION DEMANDING 

(A) NUCLEAR WEAPONS BAN

(B) END POVERTY

(C) REVERSE CLIMATE CHANGE

 


(A) NUCLEAR WEAPONS BAN

 

INDIVIDUALS

 


200 AUSTRALIAN  SCIENTISTS & SCHOLARS (2017):  “17 October 2017.  An open letter to the Right Hon. Malcolm Turnbull MP, Prime Minister of Australia

 

Dear Prime Minister

 

Last call on the climate and nuclear twin perils

 

On the 26 January, 2017, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists1 stated: “Over the course of 2016, the global security landscape darkened as the international community failed to come effectively to grips with humanity’s most pressing existential threats, nuclear weapons and climate change.” These twin perils are not unrelated. As the full horror of climate change unfolds, conflict among nations and peoples over diminishing liveable environments and disrupted food and water supplies will increase. Nuclear holocaust is a plausible component of a climate change endgame.

 

In this regard we refer to your statement of 12 August, 20102: “Now our response to climate change must be guided by science. The science tells us that we have already exceeded the safe upper limit for atmospheric carbon dioxide. We are as humans conducting a massive science experiment with this planet. It’s the only planet we’ve got.”

 

Dangerous global warming is taking place before our eyes. During the seven years since your statement was made the climate deteriorated further, with a recent spate of intensifying hurricanes, floods and wildfires3costing many lives and billions of dollars56.

 

These developments, corroborated by reports by leading climate research institutions around the world (WMO7, NOAA8, NSIDC9, Hadley-Met10, Potsdam Climate Impacts11, CSIRO12, BOM13 and others), include [details]…

 

Australia’s role in these developments is not minor. The combined total domestic use and export of coal and gas, constitutes a very high percent of the global CO2 emission of 36billion tonnes in 201525.

 

We wish to ask two questions:

 

First. Why is the government continuing to promote the mining, combustion and export of coal and other fossil fuels, despite the stern warning by science and the growing calamity of global warming, including the rise in hurricanes and wildfires around the world26?

 

Second. There exist some 14,900 nuclear weapons 27threatening to be triggered by accident or design, with the probability for such an event growing with time. Why has the government decided not to sign the nuclear weapons ban treaty28 despite the fatal

consequences of these weapons29?

 

Consistent with your statement of 12 August, 201030, the world is facing an existential risk posed by the twin global warming and nuclear threats. The history of the 20thand 21St centuries will recall those who attempted to save the planetary biosphere and the future of human life and nature as we know it.

 

We respectfully request you meet a delegation of scientists to discuss the issue.

 

Yours sincerely

The signatories*

17.10.2017

 

*200 Australian scientists, including in the medical, environmental and physical disciplines, as well as scholars in the humanities.”

 

(see “17 October 2017.  An open letter to the Right Hon. Malcolm Turnbull MP, Prime Minister of Australia” : https://johnmenadue.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/OPEN-LETTER-TO-THE-AUSTRALIAN-PM_17-10-2017_including-figures.pdf ).

AVERY. John Avery (Associate Professor,  Department of Chemistry, University of Copenhagen. Fellowships, Contact Person in Denmark for [Nobel Prize-awarded] Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs (2015): “The island republic [of the Marshall Islands; RMI] is suing [in U.S. Federal Court.] the five `established' nuclear weapons states recognized in the 1968 nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT), the US, Russia (which inherited the Soviet arsenal), China, France and the UK, as well as the three countries outside the NPT who have declared nuclear arsenals ¨C India, Pakistan and North Korea, and the one undeclared nuclear weapons state, Israel.” The Republic of the Marshall Islands is not seeking monetary compensation, but instead it seeks to make the nuclear weapon states comply with their legal obligations under Article VI of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and the 1996 ruling of the International Court of Justice… The RMI will appeal the U.S. attempt to reject its suit in the U.S, Federal Court, and it will continue to sue the 9 nuclear nations in the International Court of Justice. Whether or not the suits succeed in making the nuclear nations comply with international law, attention will be called to the fact the 9 countries are outlaws. In vote after vote in the United Nations General Assembly, the peoples of the world have shown how deeply they long to be free from the menace of nuclear weapons. Ultimately, the tiny group of power-hungry politicians must yield to the will of the citizens whom they are at present holding as hostages. It is a life-or-death question. We can see this most clearly when we look at far ahead. Suppose that each year there is a certain finite chance of a nuclear catastrophe, let us say 2 percent. Then in a century the chance of survival will be 13.5 percent, and in two centuries, 1.8 percent, in three centuries, 0.25 percent, in 4 centuries, there would only be a 0.034 percent chance of survival and so on. Over many centuries, the chance of survival would shrink almost to zero. Thus by looking at the long-term future, we can clearly see that if nuclear weapons are not entirely eliminated, civilization will not survive. Civil society must make its will felt. A thermonuclear war today would be not only genocidal but also omnicidal. It would kill people of all ages, babies, children, young people, mothers, fathers and grandparents, without any regard whatever for guilt or innocence. Such a war would be the ultimate ecological catastrophe, destroying not only human civilization but also much of the biosphere. Each of us has a duty to work with dedication to prevent it” (John Scales Avery, “Remember Your Humanity”, Countercurrents , 14 February, 2015: http://www.countercurrents.org/avery140215.htm ).

John Scales Avery (2015): “The non-nuclear-weapon states insisted that Article VI be included in the treaty [NPT] as a price for giving up their own ambitions. The full text of Article VI is as follows: “Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a Treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict international control.” Several nuclear weapon states, notably the United States, are grossly violating Article VI. The NPT has now been signed by 187 countries and has been in force as international law since 1970. However, Israel, India, Pakistan, and Cuba have refused to sign, and North Korea, after signing the treaty, withdrew from it in 1993. Israel began producing nuclear weapons in the late 1960’s (with the help of technology provided by France, and with the tacit approval of the United States) and the country is now believed to possess 100-150 of them, including neutron bombs. Israel’s policy is one of visibly possessing nuclear weapons while denying their existence” ( John Scales Avery, “Israel, Iran And The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty”, Countercurrents, 21 July, 2015: http://www.countercurrents.org/avery210715.htm ).

Dr John Avery (physicist, Lektor Emeritus, Associate Professor, at the Department of Chemistry, 13-Nobel-Laureate University of Copenhagen and since  1990 the Contact Person in Denmark for Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs that in  1995 received the Nobel Peace Prize) on Paris Climate Agreement (2015):WE NEED SYSTEM CHANGE, NOT CLIMATE CHANGE! Civil society, excluded from the COP21 conference by the French government, carried banners with this slogan on the streets of Paris. They did so in defiance of tear-gas-using black-clad police. System change has been the motto for climate marches throughout the world. Our entire system is leading us towards disaster, and this includes both economic and governmental establishments. To save human civilization, the biosphere and the future, the people of the world must take matters into their own hands and change the system…Our present situation is this: The future looks extremely dark because of human folly, especially the long-term future. The greatest threats are catastrophic climate change and thermonuclear war, but a large-scale global famine also has to be considered. All these threats are linked.

Inaction is not an option. We have to act with courage and dedication, even if the odds are against success, because the stakes are so high. The mass media could mobilize us to action, but they have failed in their duty. Our educational system could also wake us up and make us act, but it too has failed us. The battle to save the earth from human greed and folly has to be fought through non-violent action on the streets and in the alternative media.

We need a new economic system, a new society, a new social contract, a new way of life. Here are the great tasks that history has given to our generation: We must achieve a steady-state economic system. We must restore democracy. We must decrease economic inequality. We must break the power of corporate greed. We must leave fossil fuels in the ground. We must stabilize and ultimately reduce the global population. We must eliminate the institution of war. And finally, we must develop a more mature ethical system to match our new technology

the nearly 2 trillion dollars that the world now spends on armaments and war could be used instead to speed the urgently needed transition to 100% renewable energy, and to help less-developed countries to face the consequences of climate change. There are reasons for hope. Both solar energy and wind energy are growing at a phenomenal rate, and the transition to 100% renewable energy could be achieved within a very few decades if this growth is maintained. But a level playing field is needed. At present fossil fuel corporations receive half a trillion dollars each year in subsidies. Nuclear power generation is also highly subsidized (and also closely linked to the danger of nuclear war). If these subsidies were abolished, or better yet, used to encourage renewable energy development, the renewables could win simply by being cheaper… None of us asked to be born in a time of crisis, but history has given great tasks to our generation. We must rise to meet the crisis. We must not fail in our duty to save the gifts of life and civilization that past generations have bequeathed to us. We must not fail in our duty future generations.” (John Avery, “We Need System Change!”, Countercurrents, 14 December, 2015: http://www.countercurrents.org/avery141215.htm ).

 

BORN. Max Born (German physicist and mathematician who was instrumental in the development of quantum mechanics and won the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1954) co-signed the Russel-Einstein Manifesto (1955) with 10 other eminent  scientists (all but 1 were or became Nobel Laureates)   that called for “an agreement to renounce nuclear weapons” and concluded with the resolution: “In view of the fact that in any future world war nuclear weapons will certainly be employed, and that such weapons threaten the continued existence of mankind, we urge the governments of the world to realize, and to acknowledge publicly, that their purpose cannot be furthered by a world war, and we urge them, consequently, to find peaceful means for the settlement of all matters of dispute between them.” (The Russel-Einstein Manifesto (1955): http://pugwash.org/1955/07/09/statement-manifesto/ ).

 

BRIDGMAN. Percy W. Bridgman (American physicist who won the 1946 Nobel Prize in Physics for his work on the physics of high pressures)  co-signed the Russel-Einstein Manifesto (1955) with 10 other eminent  scientists (all but 1 were or became Nobel Laureates)   that called for “an agreement to renounce nuclear weapons” and concluded with the resolution: “In view of the fact that in any future world war nuclear weapons will certainly be employed, and that such weapons threaten the continued existence of mankind, we urge the governments of the world to realize, and to acknowledge publicly, that their purpose cannot be furthered by a world war, and we urge them, consequently, to find peaceful means for the settlement of all matters of dispute between them.” (The Russel-Einstein Manifesto (1955): http://pugwash.org/1955/07/09/statement-manifesto/ ).

 

EHRLICH. Dr Paul Ehrlich (Bing Professor of Population Studies, President of the Center for Conservation Biology, Department of Biology, Stanford University, and author with his wife Anne Ehrlich [uncredited] of “The Population Bomb” in 1968) (asked “It's predicted that by 2100 the world population will plateau at 11 billion. Do you still maintain that the world population will be a major problem?”): “I don't maintain it will be. It’s already is a major problem. For example, even though there are some people who would claim that - professional deniers of climate change and the danger in climate change and their pimps in the fossil fuel industry, if you think about it for a minute, every person you add to the planet releases more CO2. When they release more CO2, it is a bigger threat not just to sea level rise. Everybody thinks sea level rise is the big thing about climate change. Actually, no. Our agricultural system is utterly dependent on the distribution, quality, timing of rainfall. All that's changing. We’re already seeing changes in the productivity of the basic grains we depend on. So each person you add needs more food, contributes more greenhouse gases, which increases the assault on agriculture, which has to be spread, the agricultural system already supplies something on the order of 30% of the greenhouse gases. So there’s just one little example where things are synergising and we are setting our kids up for even worse problems”.

 

Dr Paul Ehrlich) (asked “You have actually maintained, I think, there is a 90% chance that our civilisation will collapse within 50 years. How do you get to that?”): “Well, that is a gut feeling and the reason it’s a gut feeling is you can't deal with the discontinuities. In other words, you can see the general trends but many people, me included, but people who look at it more closely than I do, think the chances of a nuclear war between US and the Russians is bigger now than it was during most of the Cold War. They think there is an even bigger chance of a nuclear war between India and Pakistan and there that war itself, using maybe 215 kilotonne bombs, would destroy Australia and the US as a civilisation. Who can guess what the odds are on those. You get scared. But on the general trend, I think we will be very, very fortunate to avoid a collapse and Anne and I estimated 10%. Jim Brown, who is an energy expert and the world's greatest biogeographer said, "You’re crazy. There’s only a 1% chance of avoiding a collapse when you look at things like energy return on investment and so on.” Nobody knows. Jim is willing to work to make it a 1.1% chance. Anne and I are willing to work to make it an 11% chance, but I must say, when I watch the Republican debates, I'm converging on Jim”.

 

Dr Paul Ehrlich (asked “Do you think we’re overpopulated?): “ Yeah, I mean there’s no question about it. Talk to your ecologists. Talk to Corey - Corey Bradshaw and I just wrote a book called Killing The Koala and Poisoning the Prairies, which is a comparison of the US and Australia’s very successful war on the environment. You’re destroying your life support systems here. You’re working at it really hard. You are also working to become a Third World country, because your specialisation, of course, is to take your raw materials, like your coal, which are going to destroy the world of your grandchildren and great grandchildren, and ship as much of it unprocessed as you possibly can out to the rest of the world. A pile of coal that Australia shifts annually would be about the size of that thing there [lecture hall] extending that way all the way around the world and back to here, that's how much coal you dig out of the ground even though every scientist in the world knows we should stop burning it as fast as we possibly can. If you want a sustainable society, you can look to Australia. The Aborigines have the longest term sustainable society on the planet, until we came along, of course, and kind of screwed it up. But they went through 40, 50,000 years of great changes and so on, managed to survive, kept their numbers reasonable. By the way, you’re quite correct. If you want to solve the population problem, give women equal rights everywhere in the world. Give them equal opportunities. Give them access to modern contraception. Give them access to safe backup abortion and the odds are that you will start to slow population...” (Paul Ehrlich interviewed on Australian TV Q&A, “GST, Gonski, Population and Diversity”, 2 November 2015: http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s4321172.htm ).

 

EINSTEIN. Albert Einstein (outstanding German Jewish mathematician, winner of the 1921 Nobel Prize for Physics for discovering the photoelectric effect and most famous for E=mc2 , his special theory of relativity and general theory of relativity): “The splitting of the atom has changed everything, save man’s mode of thinking; thus we drift towards unparallelled catastrophe” (Albert Einstein quoted in Fred Mendelsohn, “Working to abolish nuclear weapons”, ABC Radio National Ockham’s Razor, August 2014: http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/ockhamsrazor/working-to-abolish-nuclear-weapons/5650138#transcript  ). Albert Einstein co-signed the Russel-Einstein Manifesto (1955) with 10 other eminent  scientists (all but 1 were or became Nobel Laureates)   that called for “an agreement to renounce nuclear weapons” and  concluded with the resolution: “In view of the fact that in any future world war nuclear weapons will certainly be employed, and that such weapons threaten the continued existence of mankind, we urge the governments of the world to realize, and to acknowledge publicly, that their purpose cannot be furthered by a world war, and we urge them, consequently, to find peaceful means for the settlement of all matters of dispute between them.” (The Russel-Einstein Manifesto (1955): http://pugwash.org/1955/07/09/statement-manifesto/ ).

 

INFELD. Leopold Infeld (Polish physicist and mathematician who collaborated with Einstein on relativity and Born on quantum mechanics) co-signed the Russel-Einstein Manifesto (1955) with 10 other eminent  scientists (all but Infeld were or became Nobel Laureates)   that called for “an agreement to renounce nuclear weapons” and concluded with the resolution: “In view of the fact that in any future world war nuclear weapons will certainly be employed, and that such weapons threaten the continued existence of mankind, we urge the governments of the world to realize, and to acknowledge publicly, that their purpose cannot be furthered by a world war, and we urge them, consequently, to find peaceful means for the settlement of all matters of dispute between them.” (The Russel-Einstein Manifesto (1955): http://pugwash.org/1955/07/09/statement-manifesto/ ).

 

JOLIOT-CURIE. Frederic Joliot-Curie (French physicist, husband of Irène Joliot-Curie, daughter of Marie Curie,  and 1935 Nobel Laureate in Chemistry with Irène Joliot-Curie for discovery  of generation of radioactive nuclides) co-signed the Russel-Einstein Manifesto (1955) with 10 other eminent  scientists (all but Infeld were or became Nobel Laureates)   that called for “an agreement to renounce nuclear weapons” and concluded with the resolution: “In view of the fact that in any future world war nuclear weapons will certainly be employed, and that such weapons threaten the continued existence of mankind, we urge the governments of the world to realize, and to acknowledge publicly, that their purpose cannot be furthered by a world war, and we urge them, consequently, to find peaceful means for the settlement of all matters of dispute between them.” (The Russel-Einstein Manifesto (1955): http://pugwash.org/1955/07/09/statement-manifesto/ ).

 

KRIEGER, David Krieger (president of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, a consultant to the Republic of the Marshall Islands) (2014): “Atmospheric scientists inform us of what would happen in a relatively small regional nuclear war between India and Pakistan, in which each side used 50 Hiroshima-size nuclear weapons on the other side's cities. It would result in putting enough soot into the upper stratosphere to restrict warming sunlight, shorten growing seasons and cause crop failures leading to global nuclear famine and the deaths by starvation of some 2 billion people. Nukes are nuts! The possibility of nuclear famine is horrendous, but even more terrifying would be an all-out nuclear war, which could send the planet into another ice age and make precarious the continued existence of human life. Nuclear weapons threaten not the planet itself, for the planet can recover after hundreds of thousands of years. They threaten the human species and all other forms of complex life. The nuclear-armed countries are playing Russian roulette with the human future. Nukes are nuts!” (David Krieger, “Nukes are nuts: the sequel” , Truthout, 25 January 2014: http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/21393-nukes-are-nuts-the-sequel ).

 

MANDELA. Nelson Mandela (anti-Apartheid hero and Nobel Peace  Laureate) to the South African Institute of Civil Engineers (August 30, 1993) : "The ANC will abide by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty...We fully support the declaration by the Organization of African Unity calling for the establishment of the African continent as a nuclear-weapons-free zone." and addressing the UN General Assembly, announcing that South Africa, along with seven other countries, was putting forth a resolution titled, "Towards a Nuclear Weapons Free World: The Need for a New Agenda" (1998): "We must ask the question, which might sound naïve to those who have elaborated sophisticated arguments to justify their refusal to eliminate these terrible and terrifying weapons of mass destruction -- why do they need them anyway?" (Nelson Mandela quoted by Vincent Intondi, “Nelson Mandela and the Bomb”, The World Post, 9 December  2013: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/vincent-intondi/nelson-mandela-and-the-bo_b_4407788.html ).

 

MENDELSOHN. Fred Mendelsohn (Emeritus Professor,  the Florey Institute of Neuroscience & Mental Health at the University of Melbourne) (2014): “Despite the end of the Cold War, we still live under the dark shadow of some 16,300 nuclear weapons, 1,800 of them on high alert. Each is capable of levelling a city in a flash, killing hundreds of thousands – if not millions – of innocent people. Each is designed to destroy indiscriminately on a vast scale, leaving a toxic radioactive legacy for decades. Collectively, nuclear weapons pose the greatest immediate threat to the health and welfare of humankind and the future of the planet. Such was the conclusion of the world’s leading medical authority, the World Health Organization… Climate scientists now predict that even a so-called “limited” nuclear war would put up to two billion people at risk of famine from an unnatural prolonged winter. A war fought using 5 per cent of all nuclear weapons in the world today would render the planet completely and permanently uninhabitable… The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), which originated in Melbourne seven years ago, has been instrumental in putting a nuclear weapons ban firmly on the global political agenda” (Fred Mendelsohn, “Working to abolish nuclear weapons… Now, with a nuclear weapons ban on the horizon, there is a historic window of opportunity for all of us to amplify our call for a nuclear-weapons-free world – and to hold our governments to account to ensure that they deliver this to us.”, ABC Radio National Ockham’s Razor, 10 August 2014: http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/ockhamsrazor/working-to-abolish-nuclear-weapons/5650138#transcript  ).

 

MULLER. Herman J. Muller (American geneticist, educator, and 1946 Nobel Laureate in Physiology or Medicine  for  the physiological and genetic effects of radiation (X-ray mutagenesis)) co-signed the Russel-Einstein Manifesto (1955) with 10 other eminent  scientists (all but Infeld were or became Nobel Laureates)   that called for “an agreement to renounce nuclear weapons” and concluded with the resolution: “In view of the fact that in any future world war nuclear weapons will certainly be employed, and that such weapons threaten the continued existence of mankind, we urge the governments of the world to realize, and to acknowledge publicly, that their purpose cannot be furthered by a world war, and we urge them, consequently, to find peaceful means for the settlement of all matters of dispute between them.” (The Russel-Einstein Manifesto (1955): http://pugwash.org/1955/07/09/statement-manifesto/ ).

 

PAULING. Linus Pauling (American chemist, biochemist, peace activist, author, educator,  1954 Nobel Laureate  in Chemistry for quantum chemistry and protein chemistry and 1962 Nobel Laureate for Peace) co-signed the Russel-Einstein Manifesto (1955) with 10 other eminent  scientists (all but Infeld were or became Nobel Laureates)   that called for “an agreement to renounce nuclear weapons” and concluded with the resolution: “In view of the fact that in any future world war nuclear weapons will certainly be employed, and that such weapons threaten the continued existence of mankind, we urge the governments of the world to realize, and to acknowledge publicly, that their purpose cannot be furthered by a world war, and we urge them, consequently, to find peaceful means for the settlement of all matters of dispute between them.” (The Russel-Einstein Manifesto (1955): http://pugwash.org/1955/07/09/statement-manifesto/ ).

 

PILGER. John Pilger (outstanding expatriate Australian journalist)  (2016): “ The Obama administration has built more nuclear weapons, more nuclear warheads, more nuclear delivery systems, more nuclear factories. Nuclear warhead spending alone rose higher under Obama than under any American president. The cost over thirty years is more than $1 trillion. A mini nuclear bomb is planned. It is known as the B61 Model 12. There has never been anything like it. General James Cartwright, a former Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has said, “Going smaller [makes using this nuclear]weapon more thinkable” (John Pilger: why Hillary Clinton is more dangerous that Donald Trump”, New Matilda, 23 March 2016: https://newmatilda.com/2016/03/23/john-pilger-why-hillary-clinton-is-more-dangerous-than-donald-trump/ ).

 

POLYA. Dr Gideon Polya (Australian biological chemist, artist and humanitarian writer opposing war, nuclear weapons, poverty, climate change and human rights abuse) (2014): "In relation to the horrifying threat of mass extinction from nuclear weapons one can be more specific about the targets of Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) that obviously should apply to all nuclear weapons-possessing countries:

1.  “Small” nuclear powers like the UK, France, Apartheid Israel and North Korea are most likely to be pressured successfully by carrot or stick and should be particularly   subject to Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) as were successfully applied to  Apartheid South Africa. 

2. Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) should also be applied against the numerous countries that (a) host US bases, (b) host US  nuclear weapons, (c) host  nuclear-armed warships, or (d) host nuclear terrorism-related communications facilities . Thus  when a US nuclear-armed warship is in an Australian port,  Australia is effectively hosting US nuclear weapons  and making Australia a nuclear target,  as well as hosting a US Marine base in Darwin, hosting nuclear-armed warships in general, and hosting  joint US-Australian  nuclear terrorism-related communications facilities such as that at Pine Gap in Central Australia.

3. Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) should also be applied against all countries that refuse to join the present 50 nations who support the Nuclear Weapons Ban" (Gideon Polya, "Nuclear Weapons Ban & Boycotts, Divestment & Sanctions (BDS) To Save World From  Nuclear, Poverty & Climate Threats", Countercurrents, 11 August 2014: http://www.countercurrents.org/polya110814.htm ).

 

POPE FRANCIS. Pope Francis (2015): “The humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons are predictable and planetary. While the focus is often placed on nuclear weapons’ potential for mass-killing, more attention must be given to the “unnecessary suffering” brought on by their use. Military codes and international law, among others, have long banned peoples from inflicting unnecessary suffering. If such suffering is banned in the waging of conventional war, then it should all the more be banned in nuclear conflict... A world without nuclear weapons” is a goal shared by all nations and echoed by world leaders, as well as the aspiration of millions of men and women. The future and the survival of the human family hinges on moving beyond this ideal and ensuring that it becomes a reality. I am convinced that the desire for peace and fraternity planted deep in the human heart will bear fruit in concrete ways to ensure that nuclear weapons are banned once and for all, to the benefit of our common home. The security of our own future depends on guaranteeing the peaceful security of others, for if peace, security and stability are not established globally, they will not be enjoyed at all. Individually and collectively, we are responsible for the present and future well-being of our brothers and sisters. It is my great hope that this responsibility will inform our efforts in favour of nuclear disarmament, for a world without nuclear weapons is truly possible” (Pope Francis, “Message of His Holiness Pope Francis  on the occasion of the Vienna Conference on the Humanitarian Impact of Nuclear Weapons” , From the Vatican, 7 December 2014: https://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/messages/pont-messages/2014/documents/papa-francesco_20141207_messaggio-conferenza-vienna-nucleare.html ).

 

POWELL. Cecil F. Powell (British physicist,and 1950 Nobel Laureate in Physics for development of the photographic method of studying nuclear processes and for the resultant discovery of the pion (pi-meson)) co-signed the Russel-Einstein Manifesto (1955) with 10 other eminent  scientists (all but Infeld were or became Nobel Laureates)   that called for “an agreement to renounce nuclear weapons” and concluded with the resolution: “In view of the fact that in any future world war nuclear weapons will certainly be employed, and that such weapons threaten the continued existence of mankind, we urge the governments of the world to realize, and to acknowledge publicly, that their purpose cannot be furthered by a world war, and we urge them, consequently, to find peaceful means for the settlement of all matters of dispute between them.” (The Russel-Einstein Manifesto (1955): http://pugwash.org/1955/07/09/statement-manifesto/ ).

 

ROBERTS. Dr Paul Craig Roberts (economist, academic, former editor and columnist for the Wall Street Journal and Business Week, nationally syndicated columnist for Creators Syndicate, author of numerous books,  and served as an Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan Administration earning fame as the "Father of Reaganomics”) (2015): “I have been around for a long time and have experienced more than most. The current situation in my experience is the most dangerous time of all for humanity. Nuclear weapons are no longer restrained by the Cold War MAD doctrine. Washington has released them into pre-emptive first strike form. The targets of these pre-emptive strikes–Russia and China–know it, because Washington proudly proclaims its immorality in public documents describing its war doctrine. The result is to maximize the chance of nuclear war. If you were Russia and China, and you knew that Washington had a war doctrine that permits a surprise nuclear attack, would you sit there waiting while Washington cranks up its anti-Russian and anti-Chinese propaganda machine, demonizing both countries as a threat to “freedom and democracy”? The fools in Washington are playing with nuclear fire. Noam Chomsky points out that in a less dangerous time than currently exists, we came very close to nuclear war. https://philosophynow.org/issues/107/Noam_Chomsky_on_Institutional_Stupidity “ (Paul Craig Roberts, “A Middle East Holocaust”, Paul Craig Roberts, 30 March 2015: http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2015/03/30/middle-east-holocaust-paul-craig-roberts/ ).

 

ROTBLAT.  Joseph Rotblat (Polish physicist who notably left the Manhattan Project on the grounds of conscience and whose  work on nuclear fallout contributed to the ratification of the 1963 Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty; secretary-general of the Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs from their founding until 1973 and  shared, with the Pugwash Conferences, the 1995 Nobel Peace Prize for efforts toward nuclear disarmament) co-signed the Russel-Einstein Manifesto (1955) with 10 other eminent  scientists (all but Infeld were or became Nobel Laureates)   that called for “an agreement to renounce nuclear weapons” and concluded with the resolution: “In view of the fact that in any future world war nuclear weapons will certainly be employed, and that such weapons threaten the continued existence of mankind, we urge the governments of the world to realize, and to acknowledge publicly, that their purpose cannot be furthered by a world war, and we urge them, consequently, to find peaceful means for the settlement of all matters of dispute between them.” (The Russel-Einstein Manifesto (1955): http://pugwash.org/1955/07/09/statement-manifesto/ ).

 

RUSSELL. Bertrand Russell (British philosopher, logician, mathematician, historian, writer, social critic, political activist ad 1950 Nobel Laureate for  Literature for his humanitarian writing) co-signed the Russel-Einstein Manifesto (1955) with 10 other eminent  scientists (all but Infeld were or became Nobel Laureates)   that called for “an agreement to renounce nuclear weapons” and concluded with the resolution: “In view of the fact that in any future world war nuclear weapons will certainly be employed, and that such weapons threaten the continued existence of mankind, we urge the governments of the world to realize, and to acknowledge publicly, that their purpose cannot be furthered by a world war, and we urge them, consequently, to find peaceful means for the settlement of all matters of dispute between them.” (The Russel-Einstein Manifesto (1955): http://pugwash.org/1955/07/09/statement-manifesto/ ).

 

RUSSELL-EINSTEIN MANIFESTO. The Russel-Einstein Manifesto (1955) : “In the tragic situation which confronts humanity, we feel that scientists should assemble in conference to appraise the perils that have arisen as a result of the development of weapons of mass destruction, and to discuss a resolution in the spirit of the appended draft…

Although an agreement to renounce nuclear weapons as part of a general reduction of armaments3 would not afford an ultimate solution, it would serve certain important purposes. First, any agreement between East and West is to the good in so far as it tends to diminish tension. Second, the abolition of thermo-nuclear weapons, if each side believed that the other had carried it out sincerely, would lessen the fear of a sudden attack in the style of Pearl Harbour, which at present keeps both sides in a state of nervous apprehension. We should, therefore, welcome such an agreement though only as a first step. Most of us are not neutral in feeling, but, as human beings, we have to remember that, if the issues between East and West are to be decided in any manner that can give any possible satisfaction to anybody, whether Communist or anti-Communist, whether Asian or European or American, whether White or Black, then these issues must not be decided by war. We should wish this to be understood, both in the East and in the West. There lies before us, if we choose, continual progress in happiness, knowledge, and wisdom. Shall we, instead, choose death, because we cannot forget our quarrels? We appeal as human beings to human beings: Remember your humanity, and forget the rest. If you can do so, the way lies open to a new Paradise; if you cannot, there lies before you the risk of universal death.

Resolution: We invite this Congress, and through it the scientists of the world and the general public, to subscribe to the following resolution: “In view of the fact that in any future world war nuclear weapons will certainly be employed, and that such weapons threaten the continued existence of mankind, we urge the governments of the world to realize, and to acknowledge publicly, that their purpose cannot be furthered by a world war, and we urge them, consequently, to find peaceful means for the settlement of all matters of dispute between them.”

Signatories [all but Infeld were or became Nobel Laureates]: Max Born, Percy W. Bridgman, Albert Einstein, Leopold Infeld, Frederic Joliot-Curie, Herman J. Muller, Linus Pauling, Cecil F. Powell, Joseph Rotblat, Bertrand Russell, Hideki Yukawa” ( The Russel-Einstein Manifesto (1955): http://pugwash.org/1955/07/09/statement-manifesto/ ) .

 

SALMOND. Alex Salmond (Scottish First Minister and leader of the Scottish Independence Movement) pledging that  nuclear weapons would not be used as a bargaining chip in the battle over the pound (2014): “Our ­opposition to nuclear weapons is not a campaign tactic or a negotiating position – it is one of the reasons for Scotland being ­independent” (Alex Salmond quoted in David Clegg, “Scottish Independence: Alex Salmond insists nuclear weapons are not up for negotiations in battle over pound”, Daily Record, 31 March 2014: http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/scottish-independence-alex-salmond-insists-3303402 ).

 

STEIN. Dr Jill Stein is an anti-racist Jewish American  physician and  the US Green Party candidate for President of the United States (2012 & 2016). As reported by Wikipedia: “Stein has accused the Israeli government of "apartheid, assassination, illegal settlements, blockades, building of nuclear bombs, indefinite detention, collective punishment, and defiance of international law.” She supports the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign against Israel and regards Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as a "war criminal"” )( Jill Stein”, Wikpedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jill_Stein ).

 

TAUE.  Nagasaki Mayor Tomihisa Taue’s Nagasaki Peace Declaration 2014 (9 August 2014): “The nations which are focusing on the inhumanity of these weapons have begun to consider treaties, such as a nuclear weapons convention, which would have them banned. However, nuclear weapon states, and those that are under a nuclear umbrella, have been unable to relinquish the idea that they can protect their national security with nuclear weapons. They are attempting to postpone the ban. If we cannot overcome this opposition, then next year’s “Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT)”, which is held every 5 years, will come to nothing. I appeal to the nuclear weapon states, and to all states that are under a nuclear umbrella, to take the first step in overcoming this conflict. I ask that you create a forum for discussion with those countries which seek to legally ban nuclear weapons. Please discuss what has to be done, and by when, in order to realize a “world without nuclear weapons”. As the country that best understands the inhumanity of nuclear weapons, I ask that the government of Japan take the lead in these efforts. One regional method of protecting the future from nuclear war is the creation of “Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zones”. Currently, more than half of our Earth’s landmass is already covered by such a Zone. I suggest that along with enacting the Three Non-Nuclear Principles, Japan should investigate a “plan for a Northeast Asia Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone”. This would be one method for protecting the Republic of Korea, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and Japan from nuclear weapons. The leaders of more than 500 Japanese local governing bodies support this concept, and this circle of agreement will continue to grow”  (Tomihisa Taue, “Nagasaki Peace Declaration 2014: http://www.city.nagasaki.lg.jp/peace/english/appeal/ ) .

 

YUKAWA. Hideki Yukawa (Japanese physicist and 1949 Nobel Laureate in Physics for work on elementary particles) co-signed the Russel-Einstein Manifesto (1955) with 10 other eminent  scientists (all but Infeld were or became Nobel Laureates)   that called for “an agreement to renounce nuclear weapons” and concluded with the resolution: “In view of the fact that in any future world war nuclear weapons will certainly be employed, and that such weapons threaten the continued existence of mankind, we urge the governments of the world to realize, and to acknowledge publicly, that their purpose cannot be furthered by a world war, and we urge them, consequently, to find peaceful means for the settlement of all matters of dispute between them.” (The Russel-Einstein Manifesto (1955): http://pugwash.org/1955/07/09/statement-manifesto/ ).

 

ORGANIZATIONS, STATES

 

127 STATES BACK NUCLEAR WEAPONS BAN. The following 127 nations have formally endorsed the Pledge to outlaw nuclear weapons  ( 127 countries in 2016 see ICAN: http://www.icanw.org/pledge/ ):

 

The following 127 nations have formally endorsed the Pledge:

  1. Afghanistan
  2. Algeria
  3. Andorra
  4. Angola
  5. Antigua and Barbuda
  6. Argentina
  7. Austria
  8. Bahamas
  9. Bahrain
  10. Barbados
  11. Belize
  12. Benin
  13. Bolivia
  14. Botswana
  15. Brazil
  16. Brunei
  17. Burkina Faso
  18. Burundi
  19. Cabo Verde
  20. Cambodia
  21. Central African Republic
  22. Chad
  23. Chile
  24. Colombia
  25. Comoros
  26. Congo, Democratic Republic of
  27. Congo, Republic of
  28. Cook Islands
  29. Costa Rica
  30. Côte d’Ivoire
  31. Cuba
  32. Cyprus
  33. Djibouti
  34. Dominica
  35. Dominican Republic
  36. Ecuador
  37. Egypt
  38. El Salvador
  39. Eritrea
  40. Ethiopia
  41. Fiji
  42. Gambia
  43. Ghana
  44. Grenada
  45. Guatemala
  46. Guinea
  47. Guinea-Bissau
  48. Guyana
  49. Haiti
  50. Honduras
  51. Indonesia
  52. Iran
  53. Iraq
  54. Ireland
  55. Jamaica
  56. Jordan
  57. Kazakhstan
  58. Kenya
  59. Kiribati
  60. Kuwait
  61. Kyrgyzstan
  62. Lebanon
  63. Lesotho
  64. Liberia
  65. Libya
  66. Liechtenstein
  67. Macedonia
  68. Madagascar
  69. Malawi
  70. Malaysia
  71. Malta
  72. Mali
  73. Marshall Islands
  74. Mauritania
  75. Mauritius
  76. Mexico
  77. Mongolia
  78. Namibia
  79. Nauru
  80. Nicaragua
  81. Niger
  82. Nigeria
  83. Niue
  84. Oman
  85. Palau
  86. Palestine
  87. Panama
  88. Papua New Guinea
  89. Paraguay
  90. Peru
  91. Philippines
  92. Qatar
  93. St Kitts and Nevis
  94. St Lucia
  95. St Vincent and the Grenadines
  96. Samoa
  97. San Marino
  98. São Tomé and Príncipe
  99. Saudi Arabia
  100. Senegal
  101. Serbia
  102. Seychelles
  103. Sierra Leone
  104. Singapore
  105. Somalia
  106. South Africa
  107. Sri Lanka
  108. Sudan
  109. Suriname
  110. Swaziland
  111. Tajikistan
  112. Tanzania
  113. Thailand
  114. Timor-Leste
  115. Togo
  116. Trinidad and Tobago
  117. Tunisia
  118. Tuvalu
  119. Uganda
  120. United Arab Emirates
  121. Uruguay
  122. Vanuatu
  123. Venezuela
  124. Viet Nam
  125. Yemen
  126. Zambia
  127. Zimbabwe

 

In addition, the following 23 nations have voted in favour of the Pledge resolution:

  1. Armenia
  2. Azerbaijan
  3. Bangladesh
  4. Belarus
  5. Bhutan
  6. Cameroon
  7. Equatorial Guinea
  8. Gabon
  9. Laos
  10. Maldives
  11. Morocco
  12. Mozambique
  13. Myanmar
  14. Nepal
  15. New Zealand
  16. Rwanda
  17. Solomon Islands
  18. Sweden
  19. Switzerland
  20. Syria
  21. Tonga
  22. Turkmenistan
  23. Uzbekistan

 

 

AUSTRIAN PARLIAMENT.  2014 report: “On July 10th, the Austrian Parliament has unanimously adopted the resolution regarding the efforts of the Austrian Federal Government in the field of disarmament and non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, tasking the Austrian Government “to continue its engagement on the international and European level for disarmament and for the complete prohibition of the development, sale, acquisition, proliferation and possession of nuclear weapons under international law” (Nadja Schmidt, “Austrian parliament  calls for prohibition of nuclear weapons”, ICAN, 13 August 2014: http://www.icanw.org/campaign-news/austrian-parliament-calls-for-prohibition-of-nuclear-weapons/ ).

 

CAMPAIGN FOR NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT (CND).  Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND)  “campaigns to scrap nuclear weapons and create genuine security for future generations” (see Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND): http://www.cnduk.org/ )  .

 

INTERNATIONAL CAMPAIGN TO ABOLISH NUCLEAR WEAPONS (ICAN). The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) in its own words: “The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) is a global campaign coalition working to mobilize people in all countries to inspire, persuade and pressure their governments to initiate and support negotiations for a treaty banning nuclear weapons. We call on states, international organizations, civil society organizations and other actors to:

  • Acknowledge that any use of nuclear weapons would cause catastrophic humanitarian and environmental harm.
  • Acknowledge that there is a universal humanitarian imperative to ban nuclear weapons, even for states that do not possess them.
  • Acknowledge that the nuclear-armed states have an obligation to eliminate their nuclear weapons completely.
  • Take immediate action to support a multilateral process of negotiations for a treaty banning nuclear weapons” (ICAN: http://www.icanw.org/campaign/campaign-overview/ ).

 In 2017 ICAN was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.


MEDICAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE PREVENTION OF WAR (AUSTRALIA) (MAPW). MAPW: “ Education, advocacy and campaigning on nuclear weapons issues are core to the work of MAPW.

·  There are currently around 19,000 nuclear weapons in the world, owned by just nine nations. Russia and the USA possess over 94% of today’s nuclear weapons. more...

·  Nations that possess nuclear weapons are: the United States of America, Russia, United Kingdom, France, China, India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea. The Federation of American Scientists has made an estimate of the size of each country's nuclear arsenal using the best information available. more...

·  Nuclear weapons are bad for your health. If exploded they would create a nuclear wasteland in which no medical help is really possible. Even in their production they are dangerous, creating deadly nuclear waste and posing the risk of accidents. 

·  The production and maintenance of nuclear weapons takes vital resources away from healthcare and other essential services. In the USA alone, about US$40 billion is spent on nuclear weapons each year. 

·  Nuclear weapons are unique in their capacity to cause human suffering. The first nuclear weapons, used at Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people before the end of that year.

·  Nuclear weapons create international instability and insecurity, rather than act as a deterrent. 

·  Australia has around 40% of the worlds known uranium resources, making us a key supplier to nuclear nations, including a number of nuclear-armed nations. more...

·  While Australia does not have nuclear weapons, we have a clear responsibility to work towards abolishing these ultimate weapons of mass destruction” (MAPW (Australia), :Nuclear weapons”: http://www.mapw.org.au/nuclear-weapons ).


NOBEL PEACE PRIZE. The Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded to many anti-nuclear weapons activists, namely Linus Pauling, (1962; anti-nuclear testing), International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (1985), Joseph Rotblat and Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs (1995, for anti-nuclear weapons stance) ,the  International Atomic Energy Agency and Mohamed El Baradei (2005, anti-nuclear weapons),  and to the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear weapons (ICAN) (2017) (in similar vein it was  also awarded to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons in 2013).

 

NUCLEAR AGE PEACE FOUNDATION. The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation exists  “To educate and advocate for peace and a world free of nuclear weapons, and to empower peace leaders. The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation serves as a source of hope and inspiration, and promotes active engagement in the creation of a just and peaceful world in which:

  • Conflicts are settled equitably and without violence;
  • Security is based on meeting human needs, preserving the environment and ensuring the rights of future generations;
  • Human dignity is respected and human rights are universally upheld and advanced; and
  • International, national and local institutions and legal structures support these aims(Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, “Mission and Vision”: http://www.wagingpeace.org/about/visionmission/ ).


NUCLEAR WEAPON BAN TREATY (TREATY ON THE PROHIBITION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS). According to Wikipedia (2017):The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, or the Nuclear Weapon Ban Treaty, is the first legally binding international agreement to comprehensively prohibit nuclear weapons, with the goal of leading towards their total elimination. It was passed on 7 July 2017. In order to come into effect, signature and ratification by at least 50 countries is required. For those nations that are party to it, the treaty prohibits the development, testing, production, stockpiling, stationing, transfer, use and threat of use of nuclear weapons, as well as assistance and encouragement to the prohibited activities. For nuclear armed states joining the treaty, it provides for a time-bound framework for negotiations leading to the verified and irreversible elimination of its nuclear weapons programme. According to a mandate adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in December 2016, negotiations on the treaty began in the United Nations in March 2017 and continued from 15 June to 7 July 2017. In the vote on the treaty text, 122 were in favour, 1 voted against (Netherlands), and 1 abstained (Singapore). 69 nations did not vote, among them all of the nuclear weapon states and all NATO members except the Netherlands” (see “Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons”, Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Prohibition_of_Nuclear_Weapons .

As of 22 September 2017, 3 states have ratified the Nuclear Weapon Ban Treaty (Guyana, Thailand and Vatican City )  and 53 states have signed the Treaty: Algeria, Austria, Bangladesh, Brazil, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chile, Comoros, Congo (Democratic Republic of; Congo-Kinshasa, Zaire), Congo (Republic of; Congo-Brazzaville), Costa Rica, Cote D’Ivoire, Cuba, Ecuador, El Salvador, Fiji, Gambia (The), Ghana, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Indonesia, Ireland, Kiribati, Laos, Libya, Liechtenstein, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Mexico, Nepal, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Palau, Palestine, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Samoa, San Marino, Sao Tome and Principe, South Africa, Thailand,  Togo, Tuvalu, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Vatican City, Venuzuela, and Vietnam (see “Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons”, Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Prohibition_of_Nuclear_Weapons ).

In October 2017 the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) was awarded the Nobel Peace prize.


PUGWASH CONFERENCES ON SCIENCE AND WORLD AFFAIRS. The Nobel Peace Prize 1995 was awarded to Polish physicist Joseph Rotblat and  Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs. Nobel Prize.org: “The Pugwash Conferences take their name from the fishing village of Pugwash, Nova Scotia, site of the first meeting in 1957 which was attended by 22 eminent scientists (seven from the United States, three each from the Soviet Union and Japan, two each from the United Kingdom and Canada, and one each from Australia, Austria, China, France, and Poland). The stimulus for this first Pugwash meeting was the "Manifesto" issued in 1955 by Bertrand Russell and Albert Einstein, and also signed by Max Born, Percy Bridgman, Leopold Infeld, Frederic Joliot-Curie, Herman Muller, Linus Pauling, Cecil Powell, Joseph Rotblat, and Hideki Yukawa, which called upon scientists of all political persuasions to assemble to discuss the threat posed to civilization by the advent of thermonuclear weapons. …lines of communication provided by Pugwash played useful background roles in helping lay the groundwork for the Partial Test Ban Treaty of 1963, the Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1968, the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty of 1972 and SALT I accords, the Biological Weapons Convention of 1972, the Intermediate-range theater Nuclear Force (INF) Treaty, as well as the Chemical Weapons Convention of 1993. Despite subsequent trends of generally improving East-West relations and the emergence of a much wider array of unofficial channels of communication, Pugwash meetings have continued to play an important role in bringing together key scientists, analysts and policy advisers for sustained, in-depth discussions of the crucial arms-control issues of the day, particularly in the areas of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. The Pugwash Workshops on Nuclear Weapons have brought together government and military figures with scientists and policy analysts to keep open lines of communication on such sensitive issues as: initiatives to limit missile defenses that led to the 1972 ABM Treaty; the Euromissile and Star Wars controversies of the 1980s; the dangers posed by the breakup of the Soviet Union regarding fissile material and the decommissioning of nuclear systems; the emergence of India and Pakistan as nuclear powers and the threat of additional proliferation; and the ramifications of US plans for national missile defense (NMD) and the implications of NMD for nuclear stability and arms control” (see “Nobel Peace Prize 1995 Joseph Rotblat, Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs”, Nobel Prize.org: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1995/pugwash-history.html ).


TREATY ON THE PROHIBITION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS (NUCLEAR WEAPON BAN TREATY). According to Wikipedia (2017):The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, or the Nuclear Weapon Ban Treaty, is the first legally binding international agreement to comprehensively prohibit nuclear weapons, with the goal of leading towards their total elimination. It was passed on 7 July 2017. In order to come into effect, signature and ratification by at least 50 countries is required. For those nations that are party to it, the treaty prohibits the development, testing, production, stockpiling, stationing, transfer, use and threat of use of nuclear weapons, as well as assistance and encouragement to the prohibited activities. For nuclear armed states joining the treaty, it provides for a time-bound framework for negotiations leading to the verified and irreversible elimination of its nuclear weapons programme. According to a mandate adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in December 2016, negotiations on the treaty began in the United Nations in March 2017 and continued from 15 June to 7 July 2017. In the vote on the treaty text, 122 were in favour, 1 voted against (Netherlands), and 1 abstained (Singapore). 69 nations did not vote, among them all of the nuclear weapon states and all NATO members except the Netherlands” (see “Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons”, Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Prohibition_of_Nuclear_Weapons .

As of 22 September 2017, 3 states have ratified the Nuclear Weapon Ban Treaty (Guyana, Thailand and Vatican City )  and 53 states have signed the Treaty: Algeria, Austria, Bangladesh, Brazil, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chile, Comoros, Congo (Democratic Republic of; Congo-Kinshasa, Zaire), Congo (Republic of; Congo-Brazzaville), Costa Rica, Cote D’Ivoire, Cuba, Ecuador, El Salvador, Fiji, Gambia (The), Ghana, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Indonesia, Ireland, Kiribati, Laos, Libya, Liechtenstein, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Mexico, Nepal, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Palau, Palestine, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Samoa, San Marino, Sao Tome and Principe, South Africa, Thailand,  Togo, Tuvalu, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Vatican City, Venuzuela, and Vietnam (see “Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons”, Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Prohibition_of_Nuclear_Weapons ).

In October 2017 the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) was awarded the Nobel Peace prize.


UNITED NATIONS DISARMAMENT AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY COMMITTEE.

UN Disarmament and International Security Committee.

Wikipedia (2016): “Nuclear weapons — unlike chemical weapons, biological weapons, anti-personnel landmines and cluster munitions — have not yet been prohibited in a comprehensive and universal manner.[9] The Non-Proliferation Treaty(NPT) of 1968 contains only partial prohibitions, and nuclear-weapon-free zone treaties prohibit nuclear weapons only within certain geographical regions… In 2015 the UN General Assembly established a working group with a mandate to address "concrete effective legal measures, legal provisions and norms" for attaining and maintaining a nuclear-weapon-free world.[14] In August 2016, it adopted a report recommending negotiations in 2017 on a "legally binding instrument to prohibit nuclear weapons, leading towards their total elimination".[15] In October 2016, the First Committee of the UN General Assembly acted upon this recommendation by adopting a resolution that establishes a mandate for nuclear-weapon-ban treaty negotiations in 2017 (with 123 states voting in favour and 38 against, and 16 abstaining).[16] A second, confirmatory vote will take place in a plenary session of the General Assembly in December 2016” (“Nuclear-Weapon-Ban Treaty”, Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear-Weapon-Ban_treaty ).

Guardian report (October 2016): “United Nations member states have voted overwhelmingly to start negotiations on a treaty to ban nuclear weapons, despite strong opposition from nuclear-armed nations and their allies. In the vote in the UN disarmament and international security committee on Thursday, 123 nations were in favour of the resolution, 38 opposed and 16 abstained. Nuclear powers the United States, Russia, Israel, France and the United Kingdom were among those that opposed the measure. Australia, as forecast last week, and as a long-time dependant on the US’s extended nuclear deterrence, also voted no . The resolution now goes to a full general assembly vote some time in December. The resolution aims to hold a conference in March 2017 to negotiate a “legally binding instrument to prohibit nuclear weapons, leading towards their total elimination” ( Ben Doherty, “UN votes to start negotiating treaty to ban nuclear weapons”, Guardian, 28 October 2016: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/28/un-votes-to-start-negotiating-treaty-to-ban-nuclear-weapons ).

ICAN (27 October 2016): “On 27 October 2016, the First Committee of the UN General Assembly adopted resolution L.41 to convene negotiations in 2017 on a “legally binding instrument to prohibit nuclear weapons, leading towards their total elimination”. The voting result was 123 nations in favour and 38 against, with 16 abstentions [details provided]”  (ICAN (International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons), “Full voting result on UN Resolution L.41”: http://www.icanw.org/campaign-news/results/ ).

UN General Assembly draft resolution from UN Disarmament and International Security Committee (October 2016): “General and complete disarmament: taking forward multilateral nuclear disarmament negotiations. Austria, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Indonesia, Ireland, Jamaica, Kenya, Liechtenstein, Malawi, Malta, Mexico, Namibia, Nauru, New Zealand, Nigeria, Palau, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Samoa, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Swaziland, Thailand, Uruguay, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) and Zambia: draft resolution:  Taking forward multilateral nuclear disarmament negotiations. The General Assembly… 8 Decides to convene in 2017 a United Nations conference to negotiate a legally binding instrument to prohibit nuclear weapons, leading towards their total elimination…” (UNGA, 71st session, “General and complete disarmament: taking forward multilateral nuclear disarmament negotiations”: http://reachingcriticalwill.org/images/documents/Disarmament-fora/1com/1com16/resolutions/L41.pdf ).

Voting result (Matt Payton, “UN votes for global nuclear weapons ban negotiation in 2017”, Independent, 3 November 2016: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/un-nuclear-weapon-ban-united-nations-negotiations-2017-general-assembly-a7393501.html ;  ICAN (International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons), “Full voting result on UN Resolution L.41”: http://www.icanw.org/campaign-news/results/ ).

For (123) (7 being “White” European countries, namely Austria, Cyprus, Ireland, Liechtenstein, Malta, New Zealand, Sweden)

Voting result (Matt Payton, “UN votes for global nuclear weapons ban negotiation in 2017”, Independent, 3 November 2016: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/un-nuclear-weapon-ban-united-nations-negotiations-2017-general-assembly-a7393501.html ;  ICAN (International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons), “Full voting result on UN Resolution L.41”: http://www.icanw.org/campaign-news/results/ ).

For (123) (7 being “White” European countries, namely Austria, Cyprus, Ireland, Liechtenstein, Malta, New Zealand, Sweden):

  1. Algeria
  2. Angola
  3. Antigua and Barbuda
  4. Argentina
  5. Austria
  6. Azerbaijan
  7. Bahamas
  8. Bahrain
  9. Bangladesh
  10. Barbados
  11. Belize
  12. Bhutan
  13. Bolivia
  14. Botswana
  15. Brazil
  16. Brunei
  17. Burkina Faso
  18. Burundi
  19. Cabo Verde
  20. Cambodia
  21. Cameroon
  22. Central African Republic
  23. Chad
  24. Chile
  25. Colombia
  26. Comoros
  27. Congo, Republic of
  28. Costa Rica
  29. Côte d’Ivoire
  30. Cuba
  31. Cyprus
  32. Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (North Korea)
  33. Democratic Republic of the Congo (Zaire)
  34. Dominica
  35. Dominican Republic
  36. Ecuador
  37. Egypt
  38. El Salvador
  39. Equatorial Guinea
  40. Eritrea
  41. Ethiopia
  42. Fiji
  43. Gabon
  44. Gambia
  45. Ghana
  46. Grenada
  47. Guatemala
  48. Guinea
  49. Guinea-Bissau
  50. Indonesia
  51. Iran
  52. Iraq
  53. Ireland
  54. Jamaica
  55. Jordan
  56. Kazakhstan
  57. Kenya
  58. Kiribati
  59. Kuwait
  60. Lao Peoples Republic
  61. Lebanon
  62. Lesotho
  63. Libya
  64. Liechtenstein
  65. Madagascar
  66. Malawi
  67. Malaysia
  68. Malta
  69. Mali
  70. Marshall Islands
  71. Mauritania
  72. Mauritius
  73. Mexico
  74. Mozambique
  75. Myanmar
  76. Namibia
  77. Nauru
  78. Nepal
  79. New Zealand
  80. Niger
  81. Nigeria
  82. Oman
  83. Palau
  84. Panama
  85. Papua New Guinea
  86. Paraguay
  87. Peru
  88. Philippines
  89. Qatar
  90. Rwanda
  91. St Kitts and Nevis
  92. St Lucia
  93. St Vincent and the Grenadines
  94. Samoa
  95. San Marino
  96. Saudi Arabia
  97. Sierra Leone
  98. Singapore
  99. Solomon Islands
  100. Somalia
  101. South Africa
  102. Sri Lanka
  103. Suriname
  104. Swaziland
  105. Sweden
  106. Thailand
  107. The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
  108. Timor-Leste
  109. Togo
  110. Tonga
  111. Trinidad and Tobago
  112. Tunisia
  113. Turkmenistan
  114. Tuvalu
  115. Uganda
  116. United Arab Emirates
  117. United Republic of Tanzania
  118. Uruguay
  119. Venezuela
  120. Viet Nam
  121. Yemen
  122. Zambia
  123. Zimbabwe

Voting no (38) (all but Turkey, US-established South Korea and US lackey Micronesia are “White” European countries): Albania (Nato member), Andorra, Australia,  Belgium (Nato member), Bosnia & Herzegovina, Bulgaria (Nato member), Canada (Nato member), Croatia (Nato member), Czech Republic (Nato member), Denmark (Nato member), Estonia,  (Nato member), France (nuclear power) (Nato member), Germany (Nato member), Greece (Nato member), Hungary (Nato member), Iceland (Nato member), Israel (undeclared nuclear power), Italy (Nato member), Japan,  Latvia (Nato member), Lithuania (Nato member), Luxembourg, Micronesia,  Monaco, Montenegro, Norway (Nato member), Poland (Nato member), Portugal (Nato member), Romania (Nato member), Russia (nuclear power), South Korea, Serbia, Slovakia (Nato member), Slovenia (Nato member), Spain (Nato member), Turkey (Nato member), United Kingdom (nuclear power) (Nato member), United States (nuclear power) (Nato member)

 Abstain (16): Armenia, Belarus (former nuclear power), China (nuclear power), Finland, Guyana, India (nuclear power), Kyrgyzstan, Mali, Morocco, Netherlands (Nato member), Nicaragua, Pakistan (nuclear power), Sudan, Switzerland, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu

Did not vote or abstain (15): Afghanistan, Benin, Djibouti, Haiti, Honduras, Liberia, Republic of Moldova, Sao Tome & Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, South Sudan, Syria, Tajikistan, Ukraine

 

(B) END POVERTY

 

POLYA. Dr Gideon Polya (2014): “here is a largely ignored Global Avoidable Mortality Holocaust in which currently 17 million people die avoidably each year from deprivation and deprivation-exacerbated disease in the Developing World (minus China) [1]. This is happening on Spaceship Earth with the flight deck under the control of the 10% richest who have about 90% of the wealth of the World and who in turn are controlled by One Percenters who own about half the wealth of the World. An annual global wealth tax of about 4% would yield US$16 trillion annually and enable raising all countries to annual per capita incomes equivalent to the $6,000 per person per year of China and Cuba, countries for which annual avoidable mortality is zero (0) [1].  This is a feasible option for stopping the Global Avoidable Mortality Holocaust. Indeed a progressive annual wealth tax ranging up to 10% for the richest has been proposed for democracy and economic sustainability  reasons by French economist Professor Thomas Piketty in his important book “Capital in the Twenty-First Century”  [2]  Avoidable mortality (avoidable death, excess mortality, excess death, deaths that do not have to happen) can be defined as the difference between actual deaths in a country and deaths expected for a peaceful, decently-run country with the same demographics (i.e. similar birth rate and age distribution). For relatively high birth rate Developing World countries the baseline death rate is about 0.4% or  4 persons per 1,000 of population each year, However for the Developing World (minus China) (2015 population 4,632 million)  the death rate is 7.7 deaths per 1,000 of population per year (2010-2015) , this yielding an avoidable death rate of 7.7 - 4.0 = 3.7 avoidable deaths per 1,000 of population per year and 3.7 avoidable deaths per 1,000 of population per year x 4,632 million persons = 17.1 million avoidable deaths annually [3] (Gideon Polya, “4 % Annual Global Wealth Tax To Stop The 17 Million Deaths Annually”, Countercurrents, 27 June, 2014: http://www.countercurrents.org/polya270614.htm ).

Dr Gideon Polya (2007): “The 1950-2005 avoidable mortality (excess mortality) has been 1.3 billion for the World, 1.2 billion for the non-European World and about 0.6 billion for the Muslim World - a Muslim Holocaust about 100 times greater than the World War 2 Jewish Holocaust (6 million victims) and the “forgotten” World War 2 Bengal Famine in British-ruled India (4 million Hindu and Muslim victims). By way of corroboration, using UN data it is possible to calculate the under-5 infant mortality for every country in the World since 1950. The under-5 infant mortality has been 0.88 billion for the World, 0.85 billion for the non-European World and about 0.4 billion for the Muslim World. Whether a person dies violently or dies non-violently from deprivation or malnourishment-exacerbated disease, the end result is the same and the culpability the same. Further, the Ruler is responsible for the Ruled and (as clearly specified by the Geneva Conventions) an Occupying Power is clearly responsible for avoidable mortality in a conquered country. However avoidable mortality consequent on callous foreign control does not typically cease when foreign soldiers depart. Thus "occupation" can include economic and political hegemony by a foreign power… The continuing, horrendous global avoidable mortality is fundamentally due to violence, deprivation, disease and lying. We are one species confined to one planet and we revel in the richness of nature and human cultural diversity. The peace and cooperative community we commonly experience at the level of village, town, city and nation should apply internationally throughout Spaceship Earth. Intolerance of dishonesty, bigotry and violence, respect for human rights, international law and our common environment and commitment to truth, reason and a modestly decent life for everyone will end the global avoidable mortality holocaust and ensure that it will never be repeated”  (Gideon Polya, “Body Count. Global avoidable mortality since 1950” that includes a n avoidable mortality-related history of every country since Neolithic times and is now available for free perusal on the web: http://globalbodycount.blogspot.com/  ).

POPE FRANCIS. Pope Francis (2015): “4. In 1971, eight years after Pacem in Terris, Blessed Pope Paul VI referred to the ecological concern as “a tragic consequence” of unchecked human activity: “Due to an ill-considered exploitation of nature, humanity runs the risk of destroying it and becoming in turn a victim of this degradation”… 20. Some forms of pollution are part of people’s daily experience. Exposure to atmospheric pollutants produces a broad spectrum of health hazards, especially for the poor, and causes millions of premature deaths… 26. Many of those who possess more resources and economic or political power seem mostly to be concerned with masking the problems or concealing their symptoms, simply making efforts to reduce some of the negative impacts of climate change. However, many of these symptoms indicate that such effects will continue to worsen if we continue with current models of production and consumption. There is an urgent need to develop policies so that, in the next few years, the emission of carbon dioxide and other highly polluting gases can be drastically reduced, for example, substituting for fossil fuels and developing sources of renewable energy…  48. The human environment and the natural environment deteriorate together; we cannot adequately combat environmental degradation unless we attend to causes related to human and social degradation…  The impact of present imbalances is also seen in the premature death of many of the poor, in conflicts sparked by the shortage of resources, and in any number of other problems which are insufficiently represented on global agendas… 165. We know that technology based on the use of highly polluting fossil fuels – especially coal, but also oil and, to a lesser degree, gas – needs to be progressively replaced without delay… 195. The principle of the maximization of profits, frequently isolated from other considerations, reflects a misunderstanding of the very concept of the economy. As long as production is increased, little concern is given to whether it is at the cost of future resources or the health of the environment; as long as the clearing of a forest increases production, no one calculates the losses entailed in the desertification of the land, the harm done to biodiversity or the increased pollution. In a word, businesses profit by calculating and paying only a fraction of the costs involved. Yet only when “the economic and social costs of using up shared environmental resources are recognized with transparency and fully borne by those who incur them, not by other peoples or future generations”, can those actions be considered ethical” (Pope Francis , Encyclical Letter “Laudato si”, 2015: http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html ).


(C) REVERSE CLIMATE CHANGE

 

 

AUSTRALIAN SCIENTISTS. . Part of a  statement prepared by Dr Barrie Pittock PSM (former leader, Climate Impact Group, CSIRO, IPCC Lead Author, and author of Climate Change: Turning Up the Heat), and Dr Andrew Glikson (Earth and paleoclimate research scientist, former Principal Research Scientist, AGSO; Visiting Fellow, Australian National University), and endorsed by 40 leading Australian environment scientists: “Australia to make every effort through its own and international actions to prevent CO2 -- equivalent levels from rising above 450 ppm and global warming from rising above 2 degrees C relative to pre-industrial temperatures, as is the European target. Further reduction of CO2 levels to 300-350 ppm may be required to have a reasonable probability of restoring a safe climate” (350.org, “40 Australian scientists sign on to 350 target, call for urgency oin the fight against climate change”, 22 October 2008: http://www.350.org/en/about/blogs/40-australian-scientists-sign-350-target-call-urgency-fight-against-climate-change ).

BROOK.  Professor Barry Brook (Sir Hubert Wilkins chair of climate change and director of climate science at the University of Adelaide's Environment Institute ): “If the planet is like an oven, it's still possible to turn down the temperature. The number is 300 and the methods will be extraordinary. In 2007, a climate awareness campaign was launched by well-known environmental author Bill McKibben. It was coined 350.org, with the slogan "350 is the most important number on the planet". The figure refers to a target concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the Earth's atmosphere, in parts per million (ppm). This number was drawn from a recent study by a team of climate scientists, led by NASA's Dr James Hansen ... But there is another, more surprising, problem with 350. It's the wrong number. While 350 ppm should give us a reasonable shot at avoiding more than two degrees of warming, that's hardly a safe future to be aiming for. We need only to look at the impacts at less than one degree to know we're already committed to some tough adaptation problems … A target of 300 to 325 ppm CO2 - the levels of the 1950s - is necessary if we wish to cut additional warming and start to roll back the already damaging impacts. As such, 350 is not a target, it's a signpost to a goal. So we're aiming at 350 but the real goal is 300 and we're already at 385”( Professor Barry Brook, “Six degrees of separation”, Sydney Morning Herald, 23 March 2009: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/earth-hour/six-degrees--of-separation-for-the-planet-20090324-984c.html ; Professor Barry Brook, “BraveNewClimate.com: http://bravenewclimate.com/ ).

 

GLIKSON. Andrew Glikson (Australian Earth and Paleoclimate scientist) on looming climate catastrophe, climate genocide and “existential calamity for civilization and nature”(2016): “Little mention is made of the existential threats posed by the climate and nuclear issues in the context of the current elections in the US and Australia. According to the world’s climate research institutions and the bulk of the peer reviewed scientific literature, the Earth has now entered a critical stage at which amplifying feedback effects to global warming transcend points of no return. Manifestations of a shift in state of the climate include; current rise in CO2 at 3.3 parts per million per year, the fastest recorded for the last 65 million years; extreme rises in Arctic temperatures; a plethora of extreme weather events such as cyclones, floods and fires; demise of habitats such as the Great Barrier Reef where corals die due to high water temperatures and coral bleaching; and other developments. The extreme rise of atmospheric carbon dioxide since the onset of the industrial age, and the corresponding rise in mean global temperatures as a direct result of the rise in carbon gases, pose an existential risk to the future of nature and civilization. The consequences of further burning of the vast carbon reserves buried in sediments and in permafrost and bogs can only result in a mass extinction of species  which rivals that of the five great mass extinctions in Earth history… It follows that, where and when the majority of authoritative scientific institutions (NASA, NOAA, NSIDC, Hadley-Met, Tyndale, Potsdam, CSIRO, World Academy of Science, IPCC and so on), based on the bulk of the evidence, indicate beyond reasonable doubt that open-ended emissions of greenhouse gases inevitably lead to a major shift in the terrestrial climate, and thereby the demise of humans and of species, a toleration and/or condoning of continuing emissions by governments contravenes at the very least the spirit of international laws… 1. Since the mid-1980s an abrupt rise in the temperature levels of the atmosphere, driven by an increase in concentration of greenhouse gases arising from release of >600billion ton of carbon (GtC) to the atmosphere is leading to an extreme shift in state of the atmosphere-ocean system, such has no precedence in the recorded geological history, with the exception of events which resulted in the mass extinction of species, including massive volcanism, extra-terrestrial impacts and large-scale release of methane. 2. As a direct consequence of the above, as well as reduction of the transient protection by industrial sulphur dioxide since mid-1980s, mean global temperatures have risen since about 1970 by more than 0.6o Currently, had it not been for the aerosols, mean global temperature would have been higher by an additional near to 1oC. 3. Allowing for the masking effect of sulphur aerosols, the total rise in temperature since the onset of the industrial age ~1750 is reaching levels similar to those of the Pliocene period (~2.6 – 5.3 million years ago). The shift is occurring at the fastest rate recorded by paleoclimate studies. Whereas many species can adapt to gradual environmental changes, the current temperature rise rate resulting from ~2-3 parts per million (ppm) CO2/year may not be sustained. 4. The current change is manifested by an increase in the rate of melting of the major ice sheets, accelerating sea level rise and a rise in the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, reflecting elevated energy level of the atmosphere-ocean system. 5.The consequences of continuing carbon emissions and consequent rise of mean global temperatures would render large parts of the Earth’s land surfaces uninhabitable due to temperature rise, droughts, storms and flooding of coastal, deltas and lower river regions by sea level rise – estimated as about 25+/-12 meters under Pliocene conditions, constituting an existential calamity for civilization and nature. 6. Excepting injection of transient short residence-time sulphur aerosols, the arrest of current climate trend would require (A) a meaningful reduction in current rate of carbon emission(~9 GtC/year) and (B) development of new methodologies for draw-down of atmospheric CO2, by at least 50 ppm, requiring research efforts on a global scale” (Andrew Glikson, “The climate Titanic and the melting icebergs”, Countercurrents, 30 June 2016: http://www.countercurrents.org/2016/06/30/the-climate-titanic-and-the-melting-icebergs/ ).

Dr Andrew Glikson (earth scientist and paleoclimatologist, ANU) (2016): “The Paris agreement, being non-binding, is in danger of not being fulfilled by many of the signatories… [need action to] transition from carbon-emitting technologies to alternative clean energy as fast as possible, and focus technology on draw-down (sequestration) of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere” (Dr Andrew Glikson quoted in James Whitmore, “Letter signed  by 154 Australian experts demands climate policy match the science”, Guardian Australia, 25 August 2016: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/aug/25/letter-signed-by-154-australian-experts-demands-climate-policy-match-the-science ).

HANSEN.  Dr James Hansen (a top US climate scientist; former Director, NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies; member of the prestigious  US National Academy of Sciences; 2007 Award for Scientific Freedom and Responsibility of the prestigious American Association for the Advancement of Science; and Adjunct Professor, Columbia University, New York, USA) et al. (2008): “Stabilization of Arctic sea ice cover requires, to first approximation, restoration of planetary energy balance. Climate models driven by known forcings yield a present planetary energy imbalance of +0.5-1 W/m2. Observed heat increase in the upper 700 m of the ocean confirms the planetary energy imbalance, but observations of the entire ocean are needed for quantification. CO2 amount must be reduced to 325-355 ppm to increase outgoing flux 0.5-1 W/m2, if other forcings are unchanged. A further imbalance reduction, and thus CO2 ~300-325 ppm, may be needed to restore sea ice to its area of 25 years ago”  (Hansen, J., Mki. Sato, P. Kharecha, D. Beerling, R. Berner, V. Masson-Delmotte, M. Pagani, M. Raymo, D.L. Royer, and J.C. Zachos, 2008: Target atmospheric CO2: Where should humanity aim? Open Atmos. Sci. J., 2, 217-231:  http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abstracts/2008/Hansen_etal.html  (abstract) and http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2008/2008_Hansen_etal.pdf ).

HEINBERG. Richard Heinberg (climate change activist and author of 13 books, most recently “ Our Renewable Future: Laying the Path for One Hundred Percent Clean Energy”, co-authored with David Fridley , 2016) on the worsening Biosphere disaster effectively largely ignored by Business As Usual (BAU) Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton in the  US Presidential race (2016):  “But here’s the real deal: a few generations ago we started using fossil fuels for energy; the result was an explosion of production and consumption, which (as a byproduct) enabled enormous and rapid increase in human population. Burning all that coal, oil, and natural gas made a few people very rich and enabled a lot more people to enjoy middle-class lifestyles. But it also polluted air, water, and soil, and released so much carbon dioxide that the planet’s climate is now going haywire. Due to large-scale industrial agriculture, topsoil is disappearing at a rate of 25 billion tons a year; at the same time, expanded population and land use is driving thousands, maybe millions of species of plants and animals to extinction… Could “we the people” handle a bit more of the truth? One would certainly like to think so. As it is, the US and the rest of the world appear to be sleepwalking into history’s greatest shitstorm (a somewhat more geeky and less scatological way to describe it would be as the mother of all Dragon Kings ). Regardless how we address the challenges of climate change, resource depletion, overpopulation, debt deflation, species extinctions, ocean death, and on and on, we’re in for one hell of a century. It’s simply too late for a soft landing (Richard Heinberg, “You can’t handle the truth”, Countercurrents, 2 August 2016: http://www.countercurrents.org/2016/08/02/you-cant-handle-the-truth/ ).

POLYA. Dr Gideon Polya: “To return to a safe planet for all peoples and all species we must achieve the following:

1. Change of societal philosophy to one of scientific risk management and biological sustainability with complete cessation of species extinctions and zero tolerance for lying.

2. Urgent reduction of atmospheric CO2 to a safe level of about 300 ppm as recommended by leading climate and biological scientists.

3. Rapid switch to the best non-carbon and renewable energy (solar, wind, geothermal, wave, tide and hydro options that are currently roughly the same market price as coal burning-based power) and to energy efficiency, public transport, needs-based production, re-afforestation and return of carbon as biochar to soils coupled with correspondingly rapid cessation of fossil fuel burning, deforestation, methanogenic livestock production and population growth.

We understand the problem and have the technological solutions – the impending catastrophe simply does not have to happen. Are we going to be able to overcome the current political stasis and act before it is too late for Humanity and the Biosphere? Is it too late? Are we all doomed?” (see Gideon Polya, “Are we doomed?”, 300.org: https://sites.google.com/site/300orgsite/are-we-doomed ).

POPE FRANCIS. Pope Francis (2015): “4. In 1971, eight years after Pacem in Terris, Blessed Pope Paul VI referred to the ecological concern as “a tragic consequence” of unchecked human activity: “Due to an ill-considered exploitation of nature, humanity runs the risk of destroying it and becoming in turn a victim of this degradation”… 20. Some forms of pollution are part of people’s daily experience. Exposure to atmospheric pollutants produces a broad spectrum of health hazards, especially for the poor, and causes millions of premature deaths… 26. Many of those who possess more resources and economic or political power seem mostly to be concerned with masking the problems or concealing their symptoms, simply making efforts to reduce some of the negative impacts of climate change. However, many of these symptoms indicate that such effects will continue to worsen if we continue with current models of production and consumption. There is an urgent need to develop policies so that, in the next few years, the emission of carbon dioxide and other highly polluting gases can be drastically reduced, for example, substituting for fossil fuels and developing sources of renewable energy…  48. The human environment and the natural environment deteriorate together; we cannot adequately combat environmental degradation unless we attend to causes related to human and social degradation…  The impact of present imbalances is also seen in the premature death of many of the poor, in conflicts sparked by the shortage of resources, and in any number of other problems which are insufficiently represented on global agendas… 165. We know that technology based on the use of highly polluting fossil fuels – especially coal, but also oil and, to a lesser degree, gas – needs to be progressively replaced without delay… 195. The principle of the maximization of profits, frequently isolated from other considerations, reflects a misunderstanding of the very concept of the economy. As long as production is increased, little concern is given to whether it is at the cost of future resources or the health of the environment; as long as the clearing of a forest increases production, no one calculates the losses entailed in the desertification of the land, the harm done to biodiversity or the increased pollution. In a word, businesses profit by calculating and paying only a fraction of the costs involved. Yet only when “the economic and social costs of using up shared environmental resources are recognized with transparency and fully borne by those who incur them, not by other peoples or future generations”, can those actions be considered ethical” (Pope Francis , Encyclical Letter “Laudato si”, 2015: http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html ).

SCHELLNHUBER. Professor Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research., Germany  (2008): “"It is a compromise between ambition and feasibility. A rise of 2oC could avoid some of the big environmental disasters, but it is still only a compromise…It is a very sweeping argument, but nobody can say for sure that 330ppm is safe. Perhaps it will not matter whether we have 270ppm or 320ppm, but operating well outside the [historic] realm of carbon dioxide concentrations is risky as long as we have not fully understood the relevant feedback mechanisms" [280 ppm is the pre-Industrial Revolution atmospheric CO2 concentration maximum for the last 1 million years ] (Professor Hans Joachim Schellnhuber quoted by David Adam, “Roll back time t safeguard climate, expert warns”, Guardian, 15 September 2008 : http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/sep/15/climatechange.carbonemissions ).

VERON. J.E.N. Veron, O. Hoegh-Guldberg, T.M. Lenton, J.M. Lough, D.O. Obura, P. Pearce-Kelly, C.R.C. Sheppard, M. Spalding, M.G. Stafford-Smith and A.D. Rogers (top coral scientists), “The coral reef crisis: the critical importance of <350 ppm CO2”, Marine Pollution Bulletin, October 2009: “Temperature-induced mass coral bleaching causing mortality on a wide geographic scale started when atmospheric CO2 levels exceeded 320 ppm. When CO2 levels reached 340 ppm, sporadic but highly destructive mass bleaching occurred in most reefs world-wide, often associated with El Niño events. Recovery was dependent on the vulnerability of individual reef areas and on the reef’s previous history and resilience. At today’s level of 387 ppm, allowing a lag-time of 10 years for sea temperatures to respond, most reefs world-wide are committed to an irreversible decline. Mass bleaching will in future become annual, departing from the 4 to 7 years return-time of El Niño events. Bleaching will be exacerbated by the effects of degraded water-quality and increased severe weather events. In addition, the progressive onset of ocean acidification will cause reduction of coral growth and retardation of the growth of high magnesium calcite-secreting coralline algae” (. J.E.N. Veron, O. Hoegh-Guldberg, T.M. Lenton, J.M. Lough, D.O. Obura, P. Pearce-Kelly, C.R.C. Sheppard, M. Spalding, M.G. Stafford-Smith and A.D. Rogers, “The coral reef crisis: the critical importance of <350 ppm CO2”, Marine Pollution Bulletin, vol. 58, (10), October 2009, 1428-1436: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V6N-4X9NKG7-3&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1072337698&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=6858c5ff7172f9355068393496a5b35d ).

WINTERSON. UK writer Jeanette Winterson’s novel  “The Gap of Time” (Penguin, London , 2015, page 162) is a modern version of William Shakespeare’s play “The Winter’s Tale” and includes the following conversation between the lovers Zel (WS’s Florizel, son of King Polixenes of Bohemia) and Perdita (WS’s Perdita, daughter of Sicilia’s Queen Hermione and King Leontes who in mad jealousy believes  that Polixenes has fathered both his son Mamillius and the girl subsequently called Perdita). With the passage of time (16 years), the young lovers Zel and Perdita sort out the mess bequeathed them (would that this were  to be true of the worsening Climate Genocide but a catastrophic plus 2 degree Centigrade temperature rise is now unavoidable):

“Zel: “Benjamin Franklin said that if you have to choose between liberty and security, choose liberty.

Perdita: I guess they didn’t have world terrorism back then.

Zel: That’s just a way of scaring us.

Perdita: I don’t agree. People get killed.

Zel: Yes they do, but some guy with a bomb in a backpack – how often does that happen, and to how many people? But no work, no, home, no healthcare, no hope – that’s the everyday life of millions, billions of people. To me, that the threat. And climate change is the threat. And war, and drought and famine…

Perdita: OK – so we need security. A secure future.

Zel: No!. We need to be free from corporate control that runs the world for the few and ruins it for the rest of us”.

 

APPENDIX

 

Some useful compendia about climate change information, requisite actions & expert opinions:

 

 

“1% ON 1%: one percent annual wealth tax on One Percenters”: https://sites.google.com/site/300orgsite/1-on-1 .

 “2011 climate change course”: https://sites.google.com/site/300orgsite/2011-climate-change-course .

300.org: . https://sites.google.com/site/300orgsite/300-org .

“300.org – return atmosphere CO2 to 300 ppm CO2”: https://sites.google.com/site/300orgsite/300-org---return-atmosphere-co2-to-300-ppm .

“Carbon Debt Carbon Credit”: https://sites.google.com/site/carbondebtcarboncredit/ .

"Climate Revolution Now": https://sites.google.com/site/300orgsite/climate-revolution .

“Cut carbon emissions 80% by 2020”: https://sites.google.com/site/cutcarbonemissions80by2020/ .

“100% renewable energy by 2020”: https://sites.google.com/site/100renewableenergyby2020/ .

“Climate Genocide”: https://sites.google.com/site/climategenocide/ .

“Gas is not clean energy”: https://sites.google.com/site/gasisnotcleanenergy/ .

 “Biofuel Genocide”: https://sites.google.com/site/biofuelgenocide/ .

“Divest from fossil fuels”: https://sites.google.com/site/300orgsite/divest-from-fossil-fuels .

“Climate Justice & Intergenerational Equity”: https://sites.google.com/site/300orgsite/climate-justice .

“Science & economics experts: Carbon Tax needed NOT Carbon Trading”: https://sites.google.com/site/300orgsite/sciennce-economics-experts-carbon-tax-needed-not-carbon-trading/ .

“Stop climate crime”: https://sites.google.com/site/300orgsite/stop-climate-crime .

“Stop air pollution deaths”: https://sites.google.com/site/300orgsite/stop-air-pollution-deaths

“Are we doomed?”: https://sites.google.com/site/300orgsite/are-we-doomed .

“Methane Bomb Threat”: https://sites.google.com/site/methanebombthreat/ .

“Nuclear weapons ban , end poverty & reverse climate change”: https://sites.google.com/site/300orgsite/nuclear-weapons-ban .

"Too late to avoid global warming catastrophe": https://sites.google.com/site/300orgsite/too-late-to-avoid-global-warming .

“Stop state terrorism” : https://sites.google.com/site/stopstateterrorism/  [state and corporate complicity in worsening climate genocide and 7 million annual air pollution deaths from carbon fuel burning].

"State crime and non-state terrorism": https://sites.google.com/site/statecrimeandnonstateterrorism/  [state and corporate complicity in worsening climate genocide and 7 million annual air pollution deaths from carbon fuel burning].

“Climate terrorism: 400,000 climate change-related deaths globally annually versus an average of 4 US deaths from political terrorism annually since 9-11”: https://sites.google.com/site/statecrimeandnonstateterrorism/climate-terrorism .

“Carbon terrorism: 3 million US air pollution deaths versus 53 US political terrorism deaths since 9-11 (2001-2015)”: https://sites.google.com/site/statecrimeandnonstateterrorism/carbon-terrorism .

 

 

Some key analyses by Dr Gideon Polya (Melbourne scientist):

 

Gideon Polya, “Expert Witness Testimony To Stop Gas-Fired Power Plant Installation”, Countercurrents,  14 June, 2013: http://www.countercurrents.org/polya140613.htm .

Gideon Polya,  " Doha climate change inaction. Only 5 years left to act", MWC News, 9 December 2012: http://mwcnews.net/focus/analysis/23373-gideonpolya-climate-change.html .

Gideon Polya, “Australia 's Huge Coal, Gas & Iron Ore Exports Threaten Planet”, Countercurrents, 15 May 2012: http://www.countercurrents.org/polya150512.htm .

Gideon Polya, “Country By Country Analysis Of Years Left Until Science-demanded Zero Greenhouse Gas Emissions”, Countercurrents, 11 June 2011: http://www.countercurrents.org/polya110611.htm

Gideon Polya , “2015 A-to-Z  Alphabetical List Of Actions And Advocacies For Climate Change Activists”,  Countercurrents,  14 January, 2015: http://www.countercurrents.org/polya140115.htm

Gideon Polya, “100 Ideas For Climate Change Activists Trying To Save The Biosphere And Humanity”,  Countercurrents, 10 August, 2013: http://www.countercurrents.org/polya100813.htm .

Gideon Polya, “Biochemical  Targets Of Plant Bioactive Compounds”: moral & utilitarian reasons to stop ecocide, speciescide, omnicide & terracide”, Countercurrents, 22 February, 2015: http://www.countercurrents.org/polya220215.htm .

Gideon Polya. “Polya's 3 Laws Of Economics Expose Deadly, Dishonest  And Terminal Neoliberal Capitalism”, Countercurrents, 17 October, 2015: http://www.countercurrents.org/polya171015.htm . Polya's 3 Laws of Economics mirror the 3 Laws of Therrnodynamics of science and are (1) Price minus COP (Cost of Production) equals profit; (2) Deception about COP strives to a maximum; and (3) No work, price or profit on a dead planet. These fundamental laws help  expose the failure of neoliberal capitalism in relation to wealth inequality, massive tax evasion by multinational corporations, and  horrendous avoidable deaths from poverty and pollution culminating in general ecocide, speciescide, climate genocide, omnicide and terracide.

“Climate change articles by Dr Gideon Polya”: https://sites.google.com/site/drgideonpolya/climate-change-articles .

“Climate change websites created by Dr Gideon Polya”: https://sites.google.com/site/drgideonpolya/climate-change-websites .

“Gideon Polya”: https://sites.google.com/site/drgideonpolya/home .

 “Gideon Polya Writing”: https://sites.google.com/site/gideonpolyawriting/ .

Gideon Polya, “Revised Annual Per Capita Greenhouse Gas Pollution For All Countries – What Is Your Country Doing?”, Countercurrents, 6 January, 2016: http://www.countercurrents.org/polya060116.htm

Open Letter to Australian Federal MPs: young betrayed & climate revolution now: https://sites.google.com/site/gideonpolyawriting/2015-9-6 .

“Free university education”: https://sites.google.com/site/freeuniversityeducation/ .

Carbon Debt:

Carbon Debt reflects the inescapable future cost in today's dollars of fixing the remorselessly increasing climate damage. Carbon Debt  is the historical contribution of countries  to the carbon pollution of the atmosphere and can be variously expressed as Gt CO2-e (gigatonnes or billions of tonnes of CO2-equivalent) or in dollar terms by applying a Carbon Price. Thus leading climate economist Dr Chris Hope from 90-Nobel-Laureate Cambridge  University has estimated a damage-related Carbon Price in US dollars of $150 per tonne CO2-e (see Dr Chris Hope, “How high should climate change taxes be?”, Working Paper Series, Judge Business School, University of Cambridge, 9.2011: http://www.jbs.cam.ac.uk/fileadmin/user_upload/research/workingpapers/wp1109.pdf  ).

The World added 350 Gt C (1285 Gt CO2) to the atmosphere in 1751-2006 (see James Hansen, “Letter to PM Kevin Rudd by Dr James Hansen”, 2008: http://www.aussmc.org.au/documents/Hansen2008LetterToKevinRudd_000.pdf ) and currently adds a further 64 Gt CO2-e annually (see Robert Goodland and Jeff Anfang, “Livestock and climate change. What if the key actors in climate change are … cows, pigs and chickens?”, World Watch, November/December 2009: http://www.worldwatch.org/files/pdf/Livestock%20and%20Climate%20Change.pdf ).

The World  has a 1751-2006 Carbon Debt of     350 Gt C x (3.67 Gt CO2/Gt C) x $150 per tonne CO2-e = $193 trillion plus a 2007-2015 Carbon Debt of (64 Gt CO2-e /year) x  ($150 /t CO2-e) x 8 years  = $76.8 trillion or a total 1751-2015 Carbon Debt of $270 trillion (about 3 times the annual world GDP of $85 trillion)  that is increasing by about 64 Gt CO2-e/year  x ($150 /t CO2-e)  = $9.6 trillion/year or about $10 trillion each year.

By way of a national example, Australia is a world-leading annual per capita  GHG polluter with a 1751-2006 Carbon Debt of 5.9 Gt C x (3.67 Gt CO2-e/Gt C) x ($150 /t CO2-e) = $3.2 trillion plus a 2007-2015 Carbon Debt of  2 Gt CO2-e/year  x ($150 /t CO2-e) x 8 years  = $2.4 trillion i.e. a total 1751-2015 Carbon Debt of $5.6 trillion (A$7.2 trillion) that is increasing at 2 Gt CO2-e /year x ($150 /t CO2-e) = $300 billion (A$385 billion) per year. Thus Australia (population 24 million) with 0.34% of the world's population has 2.1% of the world's Carbon Debt. The Australian Carbon Debt will have to be paid by the young and future generations and for under-30 year old Australians is increasing at about $30,000 (A$38,500) per person per year, noting that the annual Australian per capita income is about $65,000 (A$83,000) (see Gideon Polya, “2015 A-to-Z  alphabetical list of actions and advocacies for climate change activists”,  Countercurrents, 14 January, 2015: http://www.countercurrents.org/polya140115.htm ).

Comments