|
|
|
CND in the News
CND in the News: 14-20 February 2006
…………………………………………….
1 Nuclear hypocrisy
13 February 2006, Morning Star
KATE HUDSON urges Britain to raise its voice against a new generation
of nuclear weapons.
AN actual piece of nuclear proliferation has slipped past almost unnoticed
while the press has been full of the dangers of Iran's supposed attempts
at nuclear proliferation.
Last week, it was reported that France has secretly modified its nuclear
arsenal to increase the accuracy and range of its weapons. France is one
of the five "declared" nuclear weapons states, signatory to
the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. In common, with the US, UK, Russia
and China, France is required under the treaty to disarm its own nuclear
weapons. No progress on disarmament has been made by France, any more
than it has by any of the other states, including the UK.
This development comes only weeks after Chirac's statement that states
which threatened France could face a nuclear strike. According to French
Defence Minister Michele Alliot-Marie, the changes are aimed at "better
taking into account the psychology of the enemy. "A potential enemy
may think that France, given its principles, might hesitate to use the
entire force of its nuclear arsenal against civilian populations."
This is pretty shocking stuff. Maybe Alliot-Marie isn't aware that it
is illegal to target civilian populations. Maybe, he doesn't know that
the use of weapons which cannot discriminate between combatants and civilians
is a war crime.
It is profoundly to be hoped that the French government would hesitate
to use its nuclear arsenal against civilians.
And one cannot help comparing this with France's role as part of the recent
EU3 negotiations with Iran.
France, together with Britain and Germany, played a major role in referring
Iran to the UN security council over suspicions about its nuclear power
programme. Whatever suspicions there may be, there is no evidence that
Iran has a covert nuclear weapons programme. There is no evidence that
it has in any way contravened the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
What we do know for certain, though, is that France has. Not only through
its failure for decades to comply with its treaty obligations to disarm
but now through its nuclear modifications to make its nukes more accurate
and, of course, more useable. But France isn't the only one. Britain is
at it too, with government plans to develop a replacement for the Trident
nuclear weapons system at a cost of up to £25 billion.
What is most sickening about this is the way that our government tries
to make out that nuclear weapons are a "deterrent" for our security,
that they would never be used. As is clearly the case in France, Britain's
nuclear weapons are also there to be used - let there be no mistake about
it. In the run-up to the war on Iraq, Geoff Hoon made it absolutely clear
that Britain would be prepared to use nuclear weapons even against a non-nuclear
weapons state.
The overwhelming majority of public opinion - over 80 per cent - would
be against such an act, but the government does not have a good record
on listening to the people.
We have to understand that our government is quite capable of using nuclear
weapons. Its number one ally, the US, has made it quite clear that its
nukes are part of a "useable arsenal." Our great and immediate
concern has to be that the US and Britain may not only attack Iran but
may use nuclear weapons in the process. This danger must be exposed and
opposed. So, too, must our government's drive to nuclear proliferation
through replacing Trident.
In the past, these decisions have been taken behind closed doors. That
is clearly what has happened in France.
But, unless a decision has already been taken and the government is duping
us with its gestures towards a public debate on the issue, we still have
the chance to prevent a Trident replacement. Much work is already taking
place in Parliament, trade unions, faith communities and local organisations,
but more must be done.
An immediate step that you can take is to write to your MP and get them
to sign early day motion 1197, which was put down by Michael Meacher and
demands not only a full debate on all the options including not replacing
Trident but, crucially, also that the final decision should be taken by
a vote in Parliament.
It is by no means a foregone conclusion that such a vote would be won,
but the opportunity would be there.
Public opinion is already in a majority against the costly replacement.
We must build on that and convert it into a political and moral victory.
• Kate Hudson is chairwoman of the Campaign for Nuclear
Disarmament.
..…………………………………………….
Back to Top
| |
