Meeting
the Russell-Einstein
Challenge to Humanity
By
David
Krieger
President, Nuclear Age Peace
Foundation
TFF
associate
October 30, 2004
"Hope
is not prognostication. It is an orientation
of the spirit, an orientation of the
heart."
Vaclav Havel
On July 9, 1955, the
Russell-Einstein Manifesto was issued in London. Its
concern was with the new, powerful H-bombs, which the
signers of the Manifesto believed placed the human race
in jeopardy of annihilation. "Here, then, is the
problem," the Manifesto stated, "which we present to you,
stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end
to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war? People
will not face this alternative because it is so difficult
to abolish war."
Bertrand Russell and Albert
Einstein were two of the leading intellectual figures of
the 20th century. Russell was a philosopher,
mathematician and Nobel Laureate in Literature. Einstein
was a theoretical physicist, considered the greatest
scientist of his time, and a Nobel Laureate in Physics.
Both men were tireless advocates for peace throughout
their lives.
Russell was primarily responsible
for drafting the Manifesto, but it contained ideas that
Einstein often discussed. Einstein signed the document
just days before his death. It was his last major act for
peace.
In addition to Russell and
Einstein, the Manifesto was signed by nine other
scientists: Max Born, Perry W. Bridgman, Leopold Infeld,
Frederic Joliot-Curie, Herman J. Muller, Linus Pauling,
Cecil F. Powell, Joseph Rotblat and Hideki Yukawa. All of
these men either already had received or would receive
the Nobel Prize. Linus Pauling, the great American
chemist, would receive two Nobel Prizes, one for
Chemistry and one for Peace.
Sir Joseph Rotblat is the only
signer of the Manifesto still living, and he is now 96
years old. He is an extraordinary man, who has been a
tireless advocate of the Manifesto throughout his long
life. He was the only scientist in the Manhattan Project
to leave his position when he realized that the Germans
would not succeed in developing an atomic weapon. He was
the founder of the Pugwash Conferences on Science and
World Affairs, and served as president of that
organization until in recent years his advanced age
caused him to step back. In 1995, Professor Rotblat and
the Pugwash Conferences jointly received the Nobel Peace
Prize. When Professor Rotblat turned 90, he announced
that he had two remaining goals in life: first, the
short-term goal of abolishing nuclear weapons; and,
second, the long-term goal of abolishing war.
The Russell-Einstein Manifesto
makes the following points:
1. Scientists have special
responsibilities to awaken the public to the
technological threats, particularly nuclear threats,
confronting humanity.
2. Those scientists with the
greatest knowledge of the situation appear to be the
most concerned.
3. Nuclear weapons endanger our
largest cities and threaten the future of
humanity.
4. In the circumstance of
prevailing nuclear threat, humankind must put aside
its differences and confront this overriding
problem.
5. The prohibition of modern
weapons is not a sufficient solution to the threat;
war as an institution must be abolished.
6. Nonetheless, as a first step
the nuclear weapons states should renounce these
weapons.
7. The choice before humanity is
to find peaceful means of settling conflicts or to
face "universal death."
In the end, the signers of the
Manifesto believed, that humanity had a choice: "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."
It has now been nearly 50 years
since this Manifesto was made public. On the 40th
anniversary of issuing the Manifesto in 1995, Joseph
Rotblat concluded his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech
by echoing the call: "Remember your humanity, and forget
the rest."
In 2005, when the Russell-Einstein
Manifesto has its 50th anniversary, we will be 60 years
into the Nuclear Age and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty (NPT) will commemorate the 35th anniversary of its
entry into force. In April 2005, the 189 parties to the
NPT will meet at the United Nations in New York for their
7th Review Conference. The meeting promises to be
contentious and disappointing.
In 1995, the parties to the NPT
agreed to extend the NPT indefinitely. At the time, the
nuclear weapons states had reaffirmed their obligation in
Article VI of the Treaty to pursue good faith efforts to
achieve nuclear disarmament. Five years later, at the
year 2000 NPT Review Conference, the parties to the
Treaty agreed to 13 Practical Steps for Nuclear
Disarmament. These included early entry into force of the
Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, a verifiable treaty
banning the production of fissile materials, application
of the principle of irreversibility to nuclear
disarmament, and an "unequivocal undertaking by the
nuclear-weapon States to accomplish the total elimination
of their nuclear arsenals…."
The nuclear weapons states have
made virtually no progress on the 13 Practical Steps and
little seems likely. The United States has been the worst
offender. It has failed to ratify the Comprehensive Test
Ban Treaty, opposed creating a Fissile Material Cut-Off
Treaty that is verifiable, treated nuclear disarmament as
completely reversible and, in general, shown no good
faith toward its obligations under the Treaty.
Rather than fulfilling its own
obligations, the US has pointed the finger at some
potential nuclear proliferators. It initiated an illegal
war against Iraq, alleging it possessed or was developing
weapons of mass destruction programs, including nuclear
programs, which turned out not to exist. It has stated
that Iran will not be allowed to obtain nuclear weapons,
implicitly threatening to attack Iran as well. After
North Korea withdrew from the NPT, the US entered into
six party talks with North Korea, but has been only
half-hearted in its attempts to meet their concerns by
offering security guarantees and development assistance.
At the same time, the US has never
expressed concern that Israel's nuclear weapons pose a
threat to Middle Eastern or global stability. When India
and Pakistan tested nuclear devices in 1998 the US
initially expressed concern. But after the terrorist
attacks of September 11, 2001, the US tightened its
relations with both of these countries and lifted its
sanctions on military materials. Even after the discovery
that Pakistani nuclear scientist A.Q. Khan was conducting
a global nuclear arms bazaar, the US has maintained its
close ties to Pakistan, despite the fact that Pakistani
President Musharraf moved quickly to grant Khan a pardon.
The US has yet to question Khan with regard to the extent
of his nuclear proliferation.
Mohamed ElBaradei, the head of the
International Atomic Energy Agency, recently reiterated
that forty countries have the potential to become nuclear
weapons states. Increased nuclear proliferation could be
the ultimate result of the failure of the nuclear weapons
states to fulfill their obligations for nuclear
disarmament. One of these proliferating countries could
be Japan, which remains a virtual nuclear weapons power
with the technology and nuclear materials to become a
nuclear weapons state in a matter of days.
As we approach this important
anniversary year of 2005, there is a failure of
governmental leadership toward nuclear disarmament and
little cause for hope. The United States, under the Bush
administration, has turned the terrorist attacks of
September 11, 2001 into an ongoing war, first in
Afghanistan and then Iraq. Neither of these wars is going
well. The Bush administration speaks of creating
democracy in these two countries, but in fact both
countries are now presided over by US-selected former CIA
assets.
If Mr. Bush should be elected to a
second term, the American people will have ratified his
policies of preventive war, deployment of missile
defenses, creation of new nuclear weapons, the
undermining of international law and the ravaging of the
global environment for the benefit of US global hegemony
and corporate profit. This would be a tragedy for the
United States and for the rest of the world. This
decision will be made on November 2, 2004 in the most
important election in our lifetimes. Until this decision
is made, we cannot predict the prospects for success at
the 2005 Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference. We
can project, though, that if Bush is elected, the
prospects for the success of the Treaty conference and
the future of the NPT will be exceedingly dim.
The vision of the Russell-Einstein
Manifesto, and of the two great men who put their names
on it, stands in stark contrast to the vision of the
leaders of today's nuclear weapons states and,
particularly, the present leadership in the United
States. The Russell-Einstein Manifesto calls upon us to
remember our humanity, ban nuclear weapons and cease war.
Mr. Bush, in contrast, seems incapable of embracing a
broader humanity, has shown no leadership toward banning
nuclear weapons and has demonstrated his willingness to
engage in preventive war on false pretenses.
The Russell-Einstein Manifesto
calls upon humanity to choose between dramatically
different futures. Since humanity is made up of all of
us, we all must choose. And the choice of each of us
matters. This great city of Hiroshima, a city that has
experienced so much devastation and rebirth, led by its
hibakusha, has chosen the path of a nuclear weapons-free
future. I am always inspired by the spirit of Hiroshima
and its courageous hibakusha, and I stand in solidarity
with you on this path.
One truly hopeful action at this
time is the Mayors for Peace Emergency Campaign to Ban
Nuclear Weapons. This campaign, led by the Mayors of
Hiroshima and Nagasaki, calls for the initiation of
negotiations in 2005 and the completion of negotiations
in 2010 for the elimination of all nuclear weapons in the
world by the year 2020. This is a great and necessary
challenge, one which deserves our collective support.
Just a few days ago, on behalf of the Nuclear Age Peace
Foundation, I presented our 2004 World Citizenship Award
to the Mayors for Peace for their critical effort on
behalf of humanity.
Our cause is right and it is noble.
It seeks, in the spirit of the Russell-Einstein
Manifesto, to preserve humanity's future. It calls upon
us to raise our voices, to stand our ground, and to never
give up. The year 2005 is a critical year, but it is not
the only year. Our efforts must be sustained over a long
period of time, perhaps longer than our lifetimes. This
means we must inspire new generations to act for
humanity.
There will be times when we may be
tired and discouraged, but we are not allowed to cease
our efforts to rid the world of nuclear weapons. No
matter what obstacles we face in the form of political
intransigence or public apathy, we are not allowed to
give up hope. This is the price of being fully human in
the Nuclear Age. The future demands of us that we keep
our hearts strong, our voices firm, and our hope
alive.
David Krieger is a founder and the
president of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation. He is a
leader in the global movement to abolish nuclear
weapons.
©
TFF & the author 2004
Tell a friend about this article
Send to:
From:
Message and your name
|