• Startseite

Détente now!

Entspannungspolitik jetzt! - Политика разрядки, немедленно!

  • Support the international Appeal!
  • Topics
  • News Briefs
  • About Us
  • Sitemap
You are here: Home / Uncategorized / Nobel Peace Prize 2017: Ian Sinclair interviews Rebecca Starkey, ICAN

16. November 2017   WoBi

Nobel Peace Prize 2017: Ian Sinclair interviews Rebecca Starkey, ICAN

  • share 
  • share 
  • share 
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

This year’s Nobel prize winners are changing the culture on nuclear weapons –

Changing the culture around nuclear weapons to seeing them as just another dangerous weapon of mass destruction, won ICAN (the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons) a pivotal UN treaty and the Nobel Peace Prize last month. Ian Sinclair interviews Rebecca Starkey, ICAN’s UK Coordinator from 2012-2017 on the background, the future – and the UK’s role in it. (Rebecca is also co-initiator of the transatlantic appeal “Détente NOW!”.

Ian Sinclair: As the Nobel Peace Prize highlights, the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons was an incredible achievement. How did it come about? What was the most difficult hurdle ICAN had to overcome to make it happen?

Rebecca Starkey: Nuclear weapons were born in WWII, one of the darkest chapters in human history. The fear of nuclear weapons hung like a silent and terrifying cloud over the lives of millions of people during the decades following Hiroshima. … At the heart of ICAN’s campaign is a wake-up call to the world about this existential threat, and an urgent call to action to prevent catastrophic humanitarian harm.

One of the myths instilled in those of us brought up in nuclear armed countries is that nuclear weapons provide security. It is this unsubstantiated claim that underlines the theory of ‘nuclear deterrence’ and is an article of faith for so many decision makers in countries like ours. …

… Instead of answering the question ‘how can my country be safe without nuclear weapons’ we turned the tables and asked ‘how can the world be safe while nuclear weapons continue to pose a threat to everyone?’

In practical terms, this involved building a global coalition of organisations and individuals all committed to campaigning for the prohibition of nuclear weapons under international law, as the other weapons of mass destruction are. In 100 countries, ICAN campaigners lobbied decision makers, circulated petitions, organised creative stunts, wrote articles and pitched to journalists, held public meetings, protested in the street, made a splash on social media….

.. we gave speaking platforms to the survivors of the atomic bombs in Nagasaki and Hiroshima, as well as to the victims of nuclear testing, such as members of the British Nuclear Test Veterans Association; we showed hard-hitting films to diplomats to shake them out of their complacency; we brought in experts to explain in alarming detail the impact of nuclear weapons on the human body, on the environment, on the climate, on the global economy. We built strong partnerships between civil society and the states championing the treaty, without whose brave leadership the treaty – and ICAN’s Nobel Peace Prize – would not have been possible.

The three conferences on the humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons, hosted by Norway in 2013 and Mexico and Austria in 2014, shed new light on the perils of living in a world armed to the brink with nuclear weapons. They clarified the urgent need to prohibit these weapons under international law.

Campaigners for a nuclear-free world have traditionally been dismissed by the establishment as being idealistic peaceniks. ICAN turned this unfair characterisation on its head by focusing on facts, and by ‘owning’ realism; we showed up the theory of ‘nuclear deterrence’ for what it is: a theory…

When the risks and consequences around nuclear weapons are looked at face on, it becomes an idealistic position to suggest that the status quo can continue indefinitely. By focusing on humanitarian and climatic impact, on risks and consequences, the terms of debate are moved from the theoretical (and therefore unprovable) realm of ‘deterrence’ to a pragmatic discussion of International Humanitarian Law (IHL), human rights and environmental protection. Within such a framework, it is impossible to argue for the continued existence of nuclear weapons. It is the disarmers who become the realists, the proponents of nuclear weapons the idealists. ….

Source: This year’s Nobel prize winners are changing the culture on nuclear weapons – interview

  • share 
  • share 
  • share 

Related Posts:

  • June 1, 2019 - Peace Groups Call for INF Day of Action
  • Latest News on UN Nucelar Weapons Ban Consultations by ICAN
  • Hiroshima mayor calls on U.N. to adopt nuclear…
  • Kazakhstan signed Treaty on the Prohibition of…

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Search

News Briefs

  • June 1, 2019 – Peace Groups Call for INF Day of Action
  • Arms control: SPD European politicians demand new Ostpolitik
  • Swedish Foreign Minister Margot Wallström hands over Olof Palme Prize 2019 to Daniel Ellsberg
  • Hans Blix: The most important lesson in diplomacy is not to humiliate

Tags

Arms Control Cooperative Security Daniel Ellsberg Disarmament Détente Entspannungspolitik foreign policy debate G20 2017 Hans Blix INF Treaty Kasakhstan Katrin vanden Heuvel Kommando über Atomwaffeneinsatz Krisenmanagement heute Mikhail Gorbachev new détente New START Nort Korea Nuclear Weapons Nuclear Weapons Ban Olof Palme Ostpolitik Policy of Détente Pope Francis Preserve the INF Treaty Qatar Risk of Nuclear War SIPRI U.S. Nuclear Strategy United Nations US-Friedensbewegung US-Nuklearstrategie US Democrats US Foreign Policy Wettrüsten why détente NOW

Aktuelles

  • Stimmen aus dem Ausland
  • Verträge
  • Internationale Politik
  • Aus deutschen Medien
  • Aus Zivilgesellschaft und Kirchen
  • Aus Parteien und Parlamenten
  • Infobriefe
  • Recommended Articles

Support the international Appeal!

"Stop the Spiral of Violence –for a New Policy of Peace and Détente now!" In recent years both NATO and Russia have increasingly engaged in deterrence through rearmament and threats against each other rather than working for common security allover Europe through confidence and security building … ---->

Support us!

  • Help spreading this Page!
  • Promote Renewal of Peace Policies!
  • Contact us!
  • Donate!

Copyright © 2025 · JP Education Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

  • Deutsch
  • English
  • Русский
Diese Website benutzt Cookies. Wenn du die Website weiter nutzt, gehen wir von deinem Einverständnis aus.OKNeinMehr Informationen