A more secure world?
‘If some nations – including the most powerful militarily – say that they need nuclear weapons for their security, then such security cannot be denied to other countries which really feel insecure. Proliferation of nuclear weapons is the logical conclusion of this nuclear policy’ (Professor Joseph Rotblat – nuclear physicist and Nobel Peace Prize winner).
The indefinite combination of nuclear
weapons and human fallibility will lead to a nuclear exchange. (Robert
McNamara - former
I find these statements by two people who well understood the effects of nuclear weapons very convincing and worth emphasising to people who see such weapons as essential to our security. The very first UN Resolution in January 1946, unanimously adopted by the General Assembly, set up an Atomic Energy Commission which was given the job of eliminating from national arsenals nuclear weapons as well as other weapons of mass destruction.
My personal view is that as campaigners we
need to work for non proliferation as well as campaigning to get rid of
An independent deterrent?
Our wonderful secretary Noel Hamel sent me the following piece by Dan Plesch. Many of you may have seen it but I find it helpful to remind myself of these facts occasionally:
One could argue that far from making us
independent our nuclear dependence on the
These are some of the issues which took us
to Aldermaston on 10 April to join Block the Builders and other protesters
outside the Atomic Weapons Establishment. Our government has only just voted to
sanction the replacement of the Trident system but none the less building
started quite a while ago and large new structures can be seen behind the
fences. Good people locked together stopped the traffic and the rest of us held
banners and placards. I do think it’s worth reminding those who work at