Call for the unilateral nuclear disarmament by France
Transcription
Call for the unilateral nuclear disarmament by France
Call for the unilateral nuclear disarmament by France As early as 1961, it has been clearly asserted by the UN that any use of nuclear weapons would be a crime: « Any state using nuclear and thermo-nuclear weapons is to be considered as violating the Charter of the United Nations, as acting contrary to the laws of humanity and as committing a crime against mankind and civilization. » (resolution of 24 November 1961). Too few states have drawn the logical conclusion of this resolution: if the use of nuclear weapons is a « crime against humanity », the threat of resorting to their use is already a criminal act. But it is precisely this threat which is the basis of so-called « nuclear deterrence » strategies. Admittedly, the moral argument will probably not sway political and military leaders. In this field as in so many others, purported realism will always claim to carry more weight than purported moralism. It is therefore necessary to convince decision-makers that nuclear weapons are strategically in-operative as well as im-moral: it is simply a matter of realism to recognize that nuclear weapons protect us from none of the potential threats to our security. They are in particular quite incapable of deterring terrorism in any form. On the other hand, the mere possession of nuclear weapons constitutes a threat not only for other peoples but for ourselves. In reality, the true motivation behind nuclear deterrence is not the defence of populations, but the wish to give the State a semblance of power, of a power consisting exclusively of the ability to destroy and to annihilate. By maintaining and modernizing its nuclear weapons systems, France can only encourage global proliferation: if it claims that nuclear weapons guarantee the security of the French nation, how can the French state ask nations not equipped with nuclear weapons to renounce any claim to possess them? It follows that nuclear disarmament would meet the demands both of the « ethics of conviction » and those of the « ethics of responsibility ». And both sets of demands are equally compelling. Nuclear deterrence, furthermore, requires citizens to abandon their destiny to the sole decision of the President of the Republic. Nuclear weapons accordingly imply, by an organic necessity, « the solitary exercise of power». The whole process of developing nuclear deterrence systems has always been and remains hermetically closed to any citizenbased control. Lastly, the state’s nuclear weapons equipment swallows up huge sums of money. The estimated cost of the French nuclear arsenal from 1945 to 2010 is 228.67 billion euros. Even as we are told that the country is in the throes of a serious crisis, the law on military spending (2009-2014) foresees an annual budget of 3.3 billion euros for nuclear deterrence: 2.3 billion to modernize the weapons themselves, and 1 billion euros to maintain and to deploy them. These investments, directly financed by taxation, are not socially useful. They are amongst the least jobcreating investments. So it is not demagogy to assert that these sums would be better used in other sectors of the economy, in particular in public services aimed at people’s needs, which are currently under threat. In conclusion, nuclear deterrence is immoral, unrealistic, dangerous and costly Many people are convinced of this and share a hope for a world without nuclear weapons. But this hope runs a serious risk of disappointment: it might seem necessary to wait for all nuclear powers to agree to general abolition. This is to forget our responsibility as citizens of a nuclear-armed country: we are not directly responsible for world disarmament, but we are fully responsible for the nuclear disarmament of our own country. It is incumbent on us to build peace and security within a France without nuclear weapons. That is why, without waiting for the general abolition of nuclear weapons under an international convention which remains hypothetical, we consider that for us, as French citizens, it is our responsibility to call right now for: unilateral nuclear disarmament by France. Unilateral disarmament by our country is possible if French people wish it. But up to now, they have never had the possibility of debating the issue to say whether they want nuclear disarmament or not; it is urgent to provoke that debate now. The French people must be able freely to express their will to renounce nuclear weapons. In order for French citizens genuinely to exercise this power of decision, it is necessary to consider holding a referendum based on popular initiative, since that is, in a democracy, the only way of giving the sovereign people the possibility to express themselves on a vital question. 16th January 2012 First signatories : - Olivier ABEL, philosopher - Jean MERCKAERT, chief editor of the Projet - Guy AURENCHE, honorary lawyer journal - Maria BIEDRAWA, president of the International - Edgar MORIN, philosopher and sociologist Fellowship of Reconciliation (IFOR) - Jacques MULLER, former senator - Paul BLANQUART, sociologist, writer - Jean-Marie MULLER, philosopher, writer, - Simone de BOLLARDIÈRE spokesperson of the Mouvement pour une Alternative - Bernard BOUDOURESQUE,priest of the Mission Non-violente (MAN) de France, former scientist at the Commissariat de - Antoine NOUIS, director of publication of the l’Énergie Atomique (CEA) Réforme journal - José de BROUCKER, journalist - Jean-Paul NUNEZ, pastor, vice-president of IFOR - Thierry CASTELBOU, director of publications at - Richard PÈTRIS, director of the École de la Paix, the Gardarem lo Larzac newspaper Grenoble - Bernard DANGEARD, responsible leader of the - Bernard QUELQUEJEU, Dominicain, philosopher French-speaking community of l’Arche de Lanza del - Pierre RABHI, French farmer, writer and Vasto philosopher of Algerian origin - Bernard DRÈANO, president of the Helsinki - Alain REFALO, teacher, founder of the Centre de Citizens’ Assembly (HCA, France) ressources sur la non-violence de Midi-Pyrénées - Hélène DUPONT, secretary of the association - Matthieu RICARD, Buddhist monk, writer Partenia 2000 - Alain RICHARD, Franciscan monk at Toulouse - Isabelle FILLIOZAT, psychologist, psychotherapist, - Jacques RICHARD, Medical doctor writer - Lama Denys RINPOCHÈ, Father superior of the - Dominique FONTAINE, vicar general of the Buddhist community Dachang Rimay Mission de France - Jean-Pierre SCHMITZ, President of the Réseaux du - Bernard GINISTY, philosopher Parvis federation - Étienne GODINOT, president, l’Institut de - Antoine SONDAG, priest Recherche sur la résolution Non-violente des Conflits - Bernard STÈPHAN, Managing Director of (IRNC) Témoignage Chrétien - Françoise HÈRITIER, anthropologist, honorary - Alain TOURAINE, Director of Studies at the École professor at the Collège de France des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales - Stéphane HESSEL, ambassadeur de France Marlène TUININGA, journalist, member of the - Albert JACQUARD, geneticist Ligue internationale des Femmes pour la Paix - Patrick JIMENA, initiator of the Festival Camino et la Liberté (WILPF) Agir pour la non-violence Didier VANHOUTTE, former president of the - Gustave MASSIAH, economist Réseaux du Parvis federation - Olivier MAUREL, writer François VAILLANT, Chief Editor of the Alternatives - Christian MELLON, jesuit, member of the Centre Non-Violentes journal de recherche et d’action sociales (CERAS) Paul VIRILIO, philosopher, writer - Philippe MEIRIEU, professor at Lyon II university Patrick VIVERET, philosopher, writer Mouvement pour une Alternative Non-violence (MAN) : [email protected] - www.nonviolence.fr The text of a citizens’ petition in favour of unilateral nuclear disarmament by France can be found on the site of the campaign led by the MAN : www.francesansarmesnucleaires.fr or fsan.fr