|
|
Q&A
'Closer Now to a Nuke-Free World'
Ramesh Jaura interviews DAISAKU IKEDA, president of Soka Gakkai International
BERLIN, Sep 29, 2009 (IPS) - A world free of nuclear weapons is no longer utopia - it is a concrete possibility,
says Daisaku Ikeda, president of the Buddhist association Soka Gokkai
International (SGI).
"In recent years, we have seen important, groundbreaking examples of
humanitarian ideals surmounting military logic and narrowly defined national
interests to bring new disarmament accords into existence," says Ikeda.
"Rather than asking ourselves whether nuclear abolition is possible, we need
to ask ourselves what we can do to make this a reality in our time."
Ikeda formulated a five-point plan early September aimed at nuclear
abolition.
"Through my proposal, I want to encourage the leaders not only of the
nuclear-weapon states but also of those countries that rely on the nuclear
weapons of others for their security to consider the present and future danger
presented by nuclear weapons," the SGI president says in a joint interview
with IPS and IDN-InDepthNews.
Following are excerpts from the interview conducted by email after the UN
Security Council session on nuclear abolition Sep. 24 chaired by U.S.
President Barack Obama.
IPS: President Obama spelt out his vision of a world free of nuclear weapons
last April in Prague. However, the U.S. President expressed doubts in his
speech in Prague that a nuke-free world would be ushered in in "our
lifetime". Would you share that view? In your proposal you ask "the world's
people to clearly manifest their will for the outlawing of nuclear weapons and
to establish, by the year 2015, the international norm that will serve as the
foundation for a Nuclear Weapons Convention (NWC)."
DAISAKU IKEDA: We stand today at a critical juncture, one that will determine
whether or not humankind can make genuine progress towards a world free
of nuclear weapons. Rather than asking ourselves whether nuclear abolition is
possible, we need to ask ourselves what we can do to make this a reality in
our time.
Through my proposal, I want to encourage the leaders not only of the
nuclear-weapon states but also those countries that rely on the nuclear
weapons of others for their security to consider the present and future danger
presented by nuclear weapons. At the same time, I urge that we all
understand that the real "enemy" is not nuclear weapons, nor the states that
possess or would develop them.
The real enemy is the way of thinking that justifies nuclear weapons. It is our
readiness to see others eliminated when they stand in the way of the
fulfilment of our desires and ambitions. This was the underlying message of
the declaration, issued some 52 years ago by my predecessor and mentor,
second Soka Gakkai president Josei Toda, calling for the abolition of nuclear
weapons.
As you note, President Obama has expressed his determination to work for a
world without nuclear weapons. At the same time, he has questioned whether
this goal will be realised in our lifetime. If the leaders of the nuclear-weapon
states and of all countries take concrete action on the basis of a shared sense
of responsibility and - most importantly - if there is consistent pressure from
the world's people acting in solidarity, what might seem impossible now can
certainly be made possible.
The five-year period to 2015, and in particular the eight-month period to
next year's NPT (non-proliferation treaty) review conference, will be decisive.
To establish a solid beachhead for a world without nuclear weapons, we need
to expand global popular commitment towards this goal.
IPS: The document released Sep. 8 - 'Building Global Solidarity Toward Nuclear
Abolition' - points out that the path to the adoption of an NWC is likely to be
a difficult one, not least because the entrenched perceptions of military
security stand in the way. Do you see any realistic possibility of
"humanitarian" ideals taking an upper hand over military and money-making
ideologies?
DI: In recent years, we have seen important, groundbreaking examples of
humanitarian ideals surmounting military logic and narrowly defined national
interests to bring new disarmament accords into existence. I am referring of
course to the treaties banning landmines and cluster weapons. Both were
realised through international campaigns based on the collaborative efforts of
NGOs working together with governments seriously committed to
disarmament.
I am calling for the establishment of a clear international norm condemning
nuclear weapons. This will provide the basis for a Nuclear Weapons
Convention prohibiting these most inhumane of all weapons. It is clear that
the way forward to an NWC will not be easy. But there are signs of new
awareness among the world's political leaders that are cause for hope.
The first is that we now hear more voices calling for nuclear abolition from a
realistic assessment of the dangers they pose. These include former high-
level officials of the nuclear-weapon states. I think the confluence of this
"realist" approach with more traditional peace and humanitarian antinuclear
perspectives presents an important opportunity to make progress towards a
world free of nuclear weapons.
The second is the fact that, in the 64 years since the bombings of Hiroshima
and Nagasaki, nuclear weapons have never been used. This points to the
steadily solidifying awareness that nuclear weapons are essentially unusable
for military purposes, even if we include the implicit threat underlying
deterrence as a form of "use".
I think this understanding is shared to a greater or lesser degree by the
political leaders of the nuclear-weapon states. In order to outlaw nuclear
weapons, we will need to raise the visibility of the issue internationally to a
far higher degree than was the case even for the movements to ban
landmines and cluster weapons. Civil society needs to come together to
create a popular groundswell for nuclear abolition.
IPS: The document calls upon the five declared nuclear-weapon states to
announce their commitment to "a shared vision of a world without nuclear
weapons." What would you expect such a shared vision to look like? And what
distinct outcome would you expect from the NPT review conference next
May?
DI: Vision gives birth to action. This is why it is epoch-making that the United
States has offered a vision of nuclear abolition. What is important now is for
all the nuclear-weapon states to earnestly debate the significance of this
vision and to find ways of sharing it. A shared vision provides the common
foundation for taking the next concrete steps forward.
In this regard, there are signs of progress. A few days ago, on Sep.24, the UN
Security Council meeting on non-proliferation and disarmament adopted a
resolution expressing the resolve to realise a world without nuclear weapons.
In light of the fact that all five of the nuclear-weapon states participated as
permanent members of the Security Council and that Security Council
resolutions are legally binding, this is extremely important.
If this resolution can serve as an impetus to the nuclear-weapon states to
start taking concrete and concerted action, they will be taking the lead
towards the goal of a world without nuclear weapons. Exercising this kind of
leadership is their solemn obligation under the NPT. At the same time, it is
clearly the only way to encourage the countries presently outside the NPT
regime to move towards nuclear arms reduction and elimination. The
solidarity that arises from this kind of responsible action will also accelerate
efforts to respond to such global challenges as poverty and climate change.
Perhaps the greatest single reason to expect the nuclear-weapon states to
play this kind of role is the emergence in recent years of the realistic
possibility of terrorism using nuclear weapons. Needless to say, deterrence is
not possible - meaningless in fact - against this type of threat. The greatest
and indeed only defence against the threat of nuclear terror is the strictly
verified abolition of nuclear weapons. Only this will obviate the danger that
nuclear weapons will be stolen or nuclear weapons technologies leaked.
In my proposal, I urge the five nuclear-weapon states to undertake the
following three commitments at next year's NPT review conference: 1) a
nuclear weapons moratorium; 2) substantively enhanced transparency
regarding their nuclear capabilities; and 3) deliberations on the absolute
minimum number of nuclear weapons on the path to abolition. Of course,
there is no need to wait until next year to commit to this path.
A moratorium on further development or modernisation of their nuclear
arsenals in particular would be a critical step towards nuclear abolition. From
the perspective of the world's citizens, there is no possible justification for
maintaining the capacity to destroy the world dozens of times over, much
less for further refining of this capability through technological development.
Agreement to this would certainly have an important positive impact on the
discourse surrounding the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) and a
Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT).
IPS: The document also calls upon the UN to establish a panel of experts on
nuclear abolition, strengthening collaborative relations with civil society in
the disarmament process. How would you evaluate UN's present relations
with the civil society in the field of nuclear disarmament? What role do you
envisage for SGI in particular and the civil society in general in achieving a
world free of nuclear weapons?
DI: The world has changed greatly since the United Nations was established in
1945. In recent years, there has been an increased appreciation of the need
to heed the voices of the world's citizens. Disarmament involves issues that
are of central concern to states. If the specialised knowledge and
communicative capacities of civil society can be fully utilised in this field, it
would greatly advance the cause of disarmament. I think the fact that the
annual conference of NGOs affiliated with the UN's Department of Public
Information, convened earlier this month in Mexico City, for the first time
ever took up disarmament as its theme symbolises this trend.
Nor can we overlook the increasing importance that has been accorded to the
concept of "human security" in recent years. As civil society has been clearly
pointing out, there are critical gaps in traditional conceptualisations of
national security - namely, adequate consideration of the impact of political
decisions in the lives of people. There are signs that governments are starting
to look to civil society as partners in developing and implementing new
modalities of security. The same can be said for the United Nations.
In my proposal, I stressed the importance of establishing a clear international
norm for nuclear abolition, and bringing together the power of ordinary
citizens to this end. I think civil society has a special role to play in resolving
issues that involve the complex interplay of national interests and are
therefore not amenable to solution solely through state or government
initiatives. It is crucial that civil society provide opportunities for people to
become more aware and awakened to their capacity to be agents of change.
People who share the common aspiration for a world free of nuclear weapons
need to come together and coordinate their efforts based on a deepened
sense of solidarity.
Drawing from a tradition of antinuclear activism reaching back more than five
decades, the SGI will continue to work to promote this kind of empowerment
within and through civil society. We will collaborate with other NGOs to
facilitate the development of a broad-based network for nuclear abolition.
(*This interview jointly with IDN-InDepthNews is part of an IPS-Soka Gakkai
International (SGI) project on nuclear abolition.)
(END)
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is RSS?
