13 Jul NATO Communique Response

On July 12,2018, the NATO communique was announced, and it includes language on nuclear weapons and criticism of the TPNW.

The communique showed [Messaging courtesy of ICAN] –

NATO member states showed again they concede to Trump’s nuclear policy rather than listen to their own people.     

• According to recent YouGov polling in Belgium, Italy, Germany, and the Netherlands, each of which hosts US nuclear weapons: at least twice as many people are in favour of removing the weapons than keeping them.
• Four times as many people are in favour of their country signing the TPNW than not signing it.
• Europeans don’t want to be the battlefield on which nuclear weapons would be used.

The NATO Communique is incoherent and inconsistent.

• NATO recognizes the inhumane and indiscriminate nature of biological and chemical weapons, but ignores the WMD that their own analysis admits would kill millions within days.
• NATO complains of “snap exercises” and nuclear war games of Russia, while claiming uncertainty is key to NATO deterrence.
• NATO says the security situation in Europe is “deteriorating” and worries about non-state actors and terrorism, but wants us to believe more nuclear weapons is the answer.
• NATO claims that their nuclear modernization is necessary for stability, but that nuclear modernization in other countries is why stability is eroding. You can’t have it both ways.
• NATO celebrates the success of the NPT over the last 50 years, and reiterates their commitment to nuclear disarmament under the NPT, while issuing policy declarations directly contradicting agreed action plans and next steps under the NPT to make disarmament a reality.

NATO advocates strong deterrence while claiming that the NATO nuclear posture of France and the UK will confuse adversaries.

• So we are supposed to believe that uncertainty and instability create stability!
• NATO admits that their policy aims to increase miscalculations by saying that the UK and France’s “separate centres of decision-making contribute to deterrence by complicating the calculations of potential adversaries.”
• NATO worries about terrorist groups gaining access to WMDs, including nuclear weapons, while claiming that more nuclear weapons will make us safer from this threat.

Unable to make a coherent case against the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, NATO continues to make false and incoherent statements about the TPNW’s relationship with the NPT. 

• The will of most nations to ban nuclear weapons is only a threat if you want to reserve the right to use nuclear weapons with impunity.
• The NPT is the ‘cornerstone’ of nuclear non-proliferation efforts and the TPNW supports and builds upon that foundation. But 50 years has only given us a cornerstone, so it’s time to build safe and solid nuclear disarmament: with the TPNW at its core.

NATO may continue living in the past, but the rest of the world is moving forward and taking responsible and concrete steps towards comprehensive nuclear disarmament.

• 122 states are not sitting on their hands waiting for NATO to act. They are moving forward with the TPNW.
• NATO can claim that the TPNW will have no impact in the Alliance members, but banks and pension funds in Belgium, Canada, Norway, the Netherlands, the UK, and even in the US disagree.
• More and more businesses are seeing that nuclear weapons are risky investments, breach the rule of law, and are contrary to the values of their shareholders.