Aktuell‎ > ‎

Atomwaffen

Aktuelle Mitteilungen

  • Communique ICAN Switzerland: Mutlose Haltung des Bundesrates: Die Schweiz verzichtet im Moment auf Beitritt zum Atomwaffenverbot http://www.icanswitzerland.ch/mutlose-haltung-des-bundesrates/Genf, 15. August 2018 – Nach langem Zögern hat der Bundesrat heute endlich öffentlich zum Vertrag über das Atomwaffenverbot Stellung bezogen. Mit Verweis ...
    Veröffentlicht um 16.08.2018, 01:01 von Claudia Bürgler
  • Weshalb Schweizer Ärzte Bundesparlamentariern schreiben Von Jean-Jacques Fasnacht, Dr. med., Präsident IPPNW Schweiz, SCHWEIZERISCHE ÄRZTEZEITUNG 2018;99(30–31):976
    Veröffentlicht um 31.07.2018, 00:36 von Claudia Bürgler
  • Physician Leaders Urge All States to Sign Nuclear Weapons Treaty Die WMA (World Medical Association) hat Ende April eine Resolution verabschiedet, die alle Regierungen auffordert, den  Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons zu unterzeichen. www.wma.netCouncil Resolution ...
    Veröffentlicht um 07.05.2018, 02:47 von Claudia Bürgler
  • Die Eskalation Ein neues globales Wettrüsten hat begonnen, in Worten wie in Taten. Werden wir einen Atomkrieg erleben? DIE ZEIT. von Jochen Bittner, Matthias Naß und Gero von Randow 14. Februar 2018, zum Artikel
    Veröffentlicht um 30.04.2018, 00:00 von Claudia Bürgler
  • Don't Bank on the Bomb ICAN partner organization PAX has published a new edition of the landmark report detailing global investments in companies that produce nuclear weapons. The 2018 update of Don’t Bank on ...
    Veröffentlicht um 26.03.2018, 01:23 von Claudia Bürgler
Beiträge 1 - 5 von 57 werden angezeigt. Weitere anzeigen »

Communique ICAN Switzerland: Mutlose Haltung des Bundesrates: Die Schweiz verzichtet im Moment auf Beitritt zum Atomwaffenverbot

veröffentlicht um 16.08.2018, 01:01 von Claudia Bürgler

http://www.icanswitzerland.ch/mutlose-haltung-des-bundesrates/

Genf, 15. August 2018 – Nach langem Zögern hat der Bundesrat heute endlich öffentlich zum Vertrag über das Atomwaffenverbot Stellung bezogen. Mit Verweis auf die Schlussfolgerungen einer interdepartementalen Arbeitsgruppe erklärte er, die Schweiz sieht vorerst der Unterzeichnung des Atomwaffenverbotsvertrag ab. ICAN Switzerland bedauert diese Haltung ausserordentlich. Sie ist weder mit der humanitären Tradition unseres Landes vereinbar, noch aus sicherheits- und friedenspolitischer Sicht nachvollziehbar.

Die Veröffentlichung der Analyse der interdepartementalen Arbeitsgruppe zum Vertrag und seinen möglichen Auswirkungen erfolgt nur eine Woche nachdem die Weltgemeinschaft den Opfern der grauenvollen Atombombenabwürfe von Hiroshima und Nagasaki vor 73 Jahren gedachte. Opferhilfe ist ein zentrales Element des Verbotsvertrags, der Atomwaffen vollumfänglich ächtet. Der Bundesrat legt zwar weiterhin ein Lippenbekenntnis für eine nuklearwaffenfreie Welt ab und gelobt “keine Gelegenheit ungenutzt lassen, in der nuklearen Abrüstung und Nichtverbreitung Fortschritte zu unterstützen”. Seines Erachtens “überwiegen die Gründe gegen einen Beitritt der Schweiz aber die potenziellen Chancen, die mit einer Unterzeichnung und Ratifizierung dieses Vertrags einhergehen würden”. Der Bericht erwägt offen die Möglichkeit, dass sich die Schweiz unter den atomaren Schirm der NATO begeben könnte.

 

„Wir sind bestürzt über diese Einstellung und bedauern, dass die Schweiz nicht bei der Unterzeichnungszeremonie am 26. September in New York dabei sein wird“, sagt Annette Willi, Präsidentin von ICAN Switzerland. „Der Bundesrat setzt die Glaubwürdigkeit der Schweiz aufs Spiel. Die Schweiz kann nicht eine humanitäre Politik predigen und für den Abrüstungsstandort Genf weibeln und handkehrum den Beitritt zu diesem historischen UNO-Abkommen auf die lange Bank schieben“, so Willi weiter.

 

Der Vertrag über das Verbot von Atomwaffen wurde am 7. Juli 2017 von 122 Staaten angenommen. Auch die Schweiz stimmte an der UNO für den Vertrag. Seither haben ihn 60 Länder unterzeichnet, darunter Liechtenstein und das neutrale Irland, und 14 haben ihn sogar schon ratifiziert, so etwa Österreich und Nato-Partner Neuseeland.

Das Ende unserer humanitären Tradition?

Die Haltung des Bundesrates steht im direkten Widerspruch zur humanitären Tradition der Schweiz. Das Internationale Komitee vom Roten Kreuz (IKRK) hat alle Staaten eindringlich zum Beitritt aufgefordert. In einer gemeinsamen Stellungnahme vom Mai 2018 erinnerten IKRK-Präsident Peter Maurer und die Präsidentin des Schweizerischen Roten Kreuzes, Annemarie Huber-Hotz, an die verheerenden Konsequenzen von Atomwaffen. Sie wiesen auf die zunehmende Gefahr einer Kernexplosion hin und riefen dazu auf, sich beim Entscheid über den Beitritt der Schweiz „von unserer humanitären Tradition leiten [zu] lassen“.

Daraufhin hatte der Nationalrat eine Motion (17.4241) angenommen, die den Bundesrat ersucht, den Vertrag unverzüglich zu unterzeichnen. Die Motion ist gegenwärtig in der Aussenpolitischen Kommission des Ständerats hängig, die sich hoffentlich noch vor der Herbstsession mit dieser wichtigen Angelegenheit befassen wird.

In einer Zeit in der das humanitäre Recht in zunehmend in Frage gestellt wird und der Multilateralismus unter Druck steht, sendet die Haltung des Bundesrates ein falsches Signal an die Weltgemeinschaft.

 

„Wir hoffen, dass der Ständerat das Ruder herumreisst. Die Position der Schweiz in dieser Sache ist von internationaler Bedeutung und die im Bericht der Bundesverwaltung erwähnten Einwände verlangen nach einer vertieften, öffentlichen Debatte“, sagt Willi. „Als Schweizer Bürger muss man sich fragen: erleben wir gerade das Ende der stolzen humanitären Tradition unseres Landes? Das dürfen wir nicht einfach so hinnehmen.“

 

Deswegen lanciert ICAN Switzerland heute eine Petition die den Bundesrat auffordert seine Haltung zu überdenken und den Atomwaffenverbotsvertrag jetzt zu unterzeichnen und diesen umgehend dem Parlament zur Genehmigung für die Ratifikation vorzulegen.

Kontakt

Annette Willi (français): 078 760 66 21, annette@icanswitzerland.ch
Maya Brehm (Deutsch): 079 747 12 11, maya@icanswitzerland.ch

Hintergrund

Der Vertrag über das Verbot von Atomwaffen von 2017 verbietet die Entwicklung, das Testen, die Produktion, die Herstellung, die Aneignung, den Besitz, die Lagerung, den Transfer, den Einsatz und die Androhung des Einsatzes von Atomwaffen.

60 Staaten haben den Vertrag unterzeichnet und 14 haben ihn ratifiziert (Stand 15. August 2018). Damit er in Kraft tritt sind 50 Ratifikationen nötig.

Der Vertrag ergänzt die Ziele bestehender Übereinkommen zur atomaren Abrüstung, einschliesslich des Vertrags über die Nichtverbreitung von Kernwaffen (NVV).

Über ICAN Switzerland

ICAN Switzerland ist der Schweizer Zweig der Internationalen Kampagne für die Abschaffung von Atomwaffen (ICAN), einer globalen Koalition von 468 Organisationen in 101 Ländern.

ICAN erhielt 2017 den Friedensnobelpreis für ihre Arbeit für den Atomwaffenverbotsvertrag.

Weshalb Schweizer Ärzte Bundesparlamentariern schreiben

veröffentlicht um 31.07.2018, 00:35 von Claudia Bürgler   [ aktualisiert: 31.07.2018, 00:36 ]

Von Jean-Jacques Fasnacht, Dr. med., Präsident IPPNW Schweiz,
SCHWEIZERISCHE ÄRZTEZEITUNG 2018;99(30–31):976

Physician Leaders Urge All States to Sign Nuclear Weapons Treaty

veröffentlicht um 07.05.2018, 02:47 von Claudia Bürgler

Die WMA (World Medical Association) hat Ende April eine Resolution verabschiedet, die alle Regierungen auffordert, den 
Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons zu unterzeichen. www.wma.net

Council Resolution: https://www.wma.net/policies-post/council-resolution-on-the-prohibition-of-nuclear-weapons/

Don't Bank on the Bomb

veröffentlicht um 26.03.2018, 01:23 von Claudia Bürgler

ICAN partner organization PAX has published a new edition of the landmark report detailing global investments in companies that produce nuclear weapons. The 2018 update of Don’t Bank on the Bomb shows that 329 financial institutions from around the world have invested US $525 billion into 20 companies involved in the production, maintenance and modernization of nuclear weapons in France, India, the United Kingdom, and the United States since January 2014. Fourteen country profiles provide details about nuclear-weapons-related work of identified producers and the financial institutions that support this work. On the positive side, Pax researchers found that the number of institutions that have financial relationships with nuclear weapon producers has decreased since the adoption of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. The complete 2018 Don’t Bank on the Bomb, as well as individual country profiles, are available online.

Protéger les générations futures des menaces nucléaires et climatiques

veröffentlicht um 26.03.2018, 01:04 von Claudia Bürgler

Le Temps: 23.3.2018. OPINION. A l’âge de l’anthropocène, une nouvelle justice doit voir le jour, estiment trois spécialistes ayant participé à l’élaboration d’une déclaration sur les crimes transgénérationnels https://www.letemps.ch/opinions/proteger-generations-futures-menaces-nucleaires-climatiques

We owe it to our children to end the nuclear age

veröffentlicht um 18.01.2018, 23:50 von Claudia Bürgler   [ aktualisiert: 18.01.2018, 23:53 ]

Emilie Gaillard, Congress, September 2017, Basel
The Hill. By Andreas Nidecker, Emilie Gaillard and Alyn Ware, opinion contributors The views expressed by contributors are their own and not the view of The Hill

Foto: Emilie Gailard. Congress "Human Rihts, Future Generations and Crimes in the Nuclear Age", September 2017, Basel.

As nuclear tensions increase, dangerous times have raised legally-loaded questions about nuclear weapons. Should the U.S. violate or undermine the Iran nuclear deal? Does the president have unfettered power to launch a preemptive nuclear strike on North Korea? What's the legal status of the Trump administration's intention, telegraphed in the newly leaked Nuclear Posture Review, to expand U.S. nuclear capabilities and arsenals when the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty supposedly commits us to cutting and eventually eliminating them?

But there’s an even broader legal dilemma looming over production, testing and threatened use of nuclear weapons: how they affect the human rights of future generations. Those threats to the future are also compounded by nuclear energy, which generates radioactive waste we’re manifestly unable to control, and by destabilizing the climate that has enabled and sustained human civilization.  

ADVERTISEMENT
Can such crimes against the future be legal? How can we respect the human rights of future generations in view of them? International symposia at the University of Basel (Switzerland), University of Caen (France) and Charles University in Prague (Czech Republic) recently grappled with those questions. The Basel conference produced a declaration on human rights and trans-generational crimes resulting from nuclear weapons and nuclear energy.

Protecting future generations from the threat of nuclear weapons was an important consideration in the International Court of Justice’s 1996 affirmation that threat or use of nuclear weapons is generally illegal, given their long-term and indiscriminate impact. But despite the Court’s decision, most nuclear-armed states retain (illegal) policies to use nuclear weapons, including in a first, pre-emptive strike.

In general, current law fails to safeguard the rights of future generations. But that doesn’t make failure defensible, sustainable or in accord with legal principles. Evolution of this area of law is necessary and inevitable.

Some 2000 nuclear weapons were detonated for “testing” since 1945, releasing millions of curies of radiation. This impacted human health globally, and will continue to do so for generations.  Most nuclear testing victims live in remote areas like the Pacific islands, the Kazakhstan steppe, or the North African Sahara. They have largely been forgotten; today’s younger generations are unaware of their sacrifice. Yet forgetting is perilous, because today’s youth will be tomorrow’s victims unless the cycle is broken.

There are some legal efforts to break it. For example, the 2017 Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons obligates signatories to provide environmental remediation and assistance for nuclear testing victims. But the provision is unenforceable, because none of the nine nuclear weapons states signed the treaty.

Like nuclear weapons, nuclear energy also poses enduring threats to human health. The Chernobyl explosion caused widespread contamination across the region and the whole European continent. High volumes of radiologically contaminated water from Fukushima continue to leak into the Pacific.

These, too, are crimes against the future. Some lethal isotopes in nuclear waste have half-lives of thousands of years. Waste repositories will need to be guarded for unimaginable time periods, with associated financial, logistical and security implications for future societies, an enormous burden we leave to our descendants.

Like the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) asserts a human right to health, applicable to nuclear contamination. But in practice that right isn’t respected.

For example, Japan ratified the covenant, and the Japanese constitution even defends the trans-generational principle of human rights in articles 11 and 97. But despite those legal principles being articulated, the Japanese media is still prevented from reporting on current events in Fukushima, and medical research on the effects of the meltdown is still restricted. The Japanese government maintains that small amounts of radiation are harmless, so limits for public radiation exposure could be increased from 1 to 20 millisieverts per year, the same as for radiation workers.

That’s unconscionable and untenable, not to mention discriminatory against young women and children who are much more susceptible to radiation exposure than men, with higher risks of cancer and non-cancerous diseases. Radiation exposure may present mutations and diseases in their offspring decades later. That’s why Japan’s handling of the Fukushima fails to accord with its own constitution as well as the ICESCR.

Failing to combat climate change effectively is also a crime against the future. The chances of meeting the Paris goal of limiting global warming to 2°C are receding since the U.S. withdrew and financial contributions of many signatories remain out of scale with the problem. Greenhouse gas emissions have risen in the two years since the Paris accord. If we stay on this too-little, too-late trajectory, we’ll not only fail to protect human rights, but much of life on earth.

Can all this be considered legal? Not for long. The dawn of the nuclear age marked the acquisition of unprecedented human power over the earth and all forms of life, as the Caen symposium pointed out. Many legal experts believe that in this new anthropocene era, a new code of medical and legal ethics is necessary. Trans-generational impacts of nuclear war, nuclear catastrophes and climate change must now be seriously considered, and require a paradigm shift in our legal thinking about the future.

The District Court of Hague took a step in that direction in 2015 when it affirmed in Urgenda Foundation v. the Dutch State that the government had a responsibility to protect future generations by limiting greenhouse gas emissions. A similar case in the United States — People v Climate Change — was granted jurisdiction and is proceeding to consideration of its merits.

http://thehill.com/opinion/energy-environment/369535-we-owe-it-to-our-children-to-end-the-nuclear-age

 

Nobel Lecture given by the Nobel Peace Prize Laureate 2017, ICAN, delivered by Beatrice Fihn and Setsuko Thurlow, Oslo, 10 December 2017.

veröffentlicht um 13.12.2017, 00:18 von Claudia Bürgler


www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2017/ican-lecture_en.html

[Beatrice Fihn:]

Your Majesties,
Members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee,
Esteemed guests,

Today, it is a great honour to accept the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize on behalf of thousands of inspirational people who make up the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons.

Together we have brought democracy to disarmament and are reshaping international law.
__

We most humbly thank the Norwegian Nobel Committee for recognizing our work and giving momentum to our crucial cause.

We want to recognize those who have so generously donated their time and energy to this campaign.

We thank the courageous foreign ministers, diplomats, Red Cross and Red Crescent staff, UN officials, academics and experts with whom we have worked in partnership to advance our common goal.

And we thank all who are committed to ridding the world of this terrible threat.
__

At dozens of locations around the world - in missile silos buried in our earth, on submarines navigating through our oceans, and aboard planes flying high in our sky - lie 15,000 objects of humankind's destruction.

Perhaps it is the enormity of this fact, perhaps it is the unimaginable scale of the consequences, that leads many to simply accept this grim reality. To go about our daily lives with no thought to the instruments of insanity all around us.

For it is insanity to allow ourselves to be ruled by these weapons. Many critics of this movement suggest that we are the irrational ones, the idealists with no grounding in reality. That nuclear-armed states will never give up their weapons.

But we represent the only rational choice. We represent those who refuse to accept nuclear weapons as a fixture in our world, those who refuse to have their fates bound up in a few lines of launch code.

Ours is the only reality that is possible. The alternative is unthinkable.

The story of nuclear weapons will have an ending, and it is up to us what that ending will be.

Will it be the end of nuclear weapons, or will it be the end of us?

One of these things will happen.

The only rational course of action is to cease living under the conditions where our mutual destruction is only one impulsive tantrum away.
__

Today I want to talk of three things: fear, freedom, and the future.

By the very admission of those who possess them, the real utility of nuclear weapons is in their ability to provoke fear. When they refer to their "deterrent" effect, proponents of nuclear weapons are celebrating fear as a weapon of war.

They are puffing their chests by declaring their preparedness to exterminate, in a flash, countless thousands of human lives.

Nobel Laureate William Faulkner said when accepting his prize in 1950, that "There is only the question of 'when will I be blown up?'" But since then, this universal fear has given way to something even more dangerous: denial.

Gone is the fear of Armageddon in an instant, gone is the equilibrium between two blocs that was used as the justification for deterrence, gone are the fallout shelters.

But one thing remains: the thousands upon thousands of nuclear warheads that filled us up with that fear.

The risk for nuclear weapons use is even greater today than at the end of the Cold War. But unlike the Cold War, today we face many more nuclear armed states, terrorists, and cyber warfare. All of this makes us less safe.

Learning to live with these weapons in blind acceptance has been our next great mistake.

Fear is rational. The threat is real. We have avoided nuclear war not through prudent leadership but good fortune. Sooner or later, if we fail to act, our luck will run out.

A moment of panic or carelessness, a misconstrued comment or bruised ego, could easily lead us unavoidably to the destruction of entire cities. A calculated military escalation could lead to the indiscriminate mass murder of civilians.

If only a small fraction of today's nuclear weapons were used, soot and smoke from the firestorms would loft high into the atmosphere - cooling, darkening and drying the Earth's surface for more than a decade.

It would obliterate food crops, putting billions at risk of starvation.

Yet we continue to live in denial of this existential threat.

But Faulkner in his Nobel speech also issued a challenge to those who came after him. Only by being the voice of humanity, he said, can we defeat fear; can we help humanity endure.

ICAN's duty is to be that voice. The voice of humanity and humanitarian law; to speak up on behalf of civilians. Giving voice to that humanitarian perspective is how we will create the end of fear, the end of denial. And ultimately, the end of nuclear weapons.
__

That brings me to my second point: freedom.

As the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, the first ever anti-nuclear weapons organisation to win this prize, said on this stage in 1985:

"We physicians protest the outrage of holding the entire world hostage. We protest the moral obscenity that each of us is being continuously targeted for extinction."

Those words still ring true in 2017.

We must reclaim the freedom to not live our lives as hostages to imminent annihilation.

Man - not woman! - made nuclear weapons to control others, but instead we are controlled by them.

They made us false promises. That by making the consequences of using these weapons so unthinkable it would make any conflict unpalatable. That it would keep us free from war.

But far from preventing war, these weapons brought us to the brink multiple times throughout the Cold War. And in this century, these weapons continue to escalate us towards war and conflict.

In Iraq, in Iran, in Kashmir, in North Korea. Their existence propels others to join the nuclear race. They don't keep us safe, they cause conflict.

As fellow Nobel Peace Laureate, Martin Luther King Jr, called them from this very stage in 1964, these weapons are "both genocidal and suicidal".

They are the madman's gun held permanently to our temple. These weapons were supposed to keep us free, but they deny us our freedoms.

It's an affront to democracy to be ruled by these weapons. But they are just weapons. They are just tools. And just as they were created by geopolitical context, they can just as easily be destroyed by placing them in a humanitarian context.
__

That is the task ICAN has set itself - and my third point I wish to talk about, the future.

I have the honour of sharing this stage today with Setsuko Thurlow, who has made it her life's purpose to bear witness to the horror of nuclear war.

She and the hibakusha were at the beginning of the story, and it is our collective challenge to ensure they will also witness the end of it.

They relive the painful past, over and over again, so that we may create a better future.

There are hundreds of organisations that together as ICAN are making great strides towards that future.

There are thousands of tireless campaigners around the world who work each day to rise to that challenge.

There are millions of people across the globe who have stood shoulder to shoulder with those campaigners to show hundreds of millions more that a different future is truly possible.

Those who say that future is not possible need to get out of the way of those making it a reality.

As the culmination of this grassroots effort, through the action of ordinary people, this year the hypothetical marched forward towards the actual as 122 nations negotiated and concluded a UN treaty to outlaw these weapons of mass destruction.

The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons provides the pathway forward at a moment of great global crisis. It is a light in a dark time.

And more than that, it provides a choice.

A choice between the two endings: the end of nuclear weapons or the end of us.

It is not naive to believe in the first choice. It is not irrational to think nuclear states can disarm. It is not idealistic to believe in life over fear and destruction; it is a necessity.
__

All of us face that choice. And I call on every nation to join the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.

The United States, choose freedom over fear.
Russia, choose disarmament over destruction.
Britain, choose the rule of law over oppression.
France, choose human rights over terror.
China, choose reason over irrationality.
India, choose sense over senselessness.
Pakistan, choose logic over Armageddon.
Israel, choose common sense over obliteration.
North Korea, choose wisdom over ruin.

To the nations who believe they are sheltered under the umbrella of nuclear weapons, will you be complicit in your own destruction and the destruction of others in your name?

To all nations: choose the end of nuclear weapons over the end of us!

This is the choice that the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons represents. Join this Treaty.

We citizens are living under the umbrella of falsehoods. These weapons are not keeping us safe, they are contaminating our land and water, poisoning our bodies and holding hostage our right to life.

To all citizens of the world: Stand with us and demand your government side with humanity and sign this treaty. We will not rest until all States have joined, on the side of reason.
__

No nation today boasts of being a chemical weapon state.
No nation argues that it is acceptable, in extreme circumstances, to use sarin nerve agent.
No nation proclaims the right to unleash on its enemy the plague or polio.

That is because international norms have been set, perceptions have been changed.

And now, at last, we have an unequivocal norm against nuclear weapons.

Monumental strides forward never begin with universal agreement.

With every new signatory and every passing year, this new reality will take hold.

This is the way forward. There is only one way to prevent the use of nuclear weapons: prohibit and eliminate them.
__

Nuclear weapons, like chemical weapons, biological weapons, cluster munitions and land mines before them, are now illegal. Their existence is immoral. Their abolishment is in our hands.

The end is inevitable. But will that end be the end of nuclear weapons or the end of us? We must choose one.

We are a movement for rationality. For democracy. For freedom from fear.

We are campaigners from 468 organisations who are working to safeguard the future, and we are representative of the moral majority: the billions of people who choose life over death, who together will see the end of nuclear weapons.

Thank you.

 

[Setsuko Thurlow :]

Your Majesties,
Distinguished members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee,
My fellow campaigners, here and throughout the world,
Ladies and gentlemen,

It is a great privilege to accept this award, together with Beatrice, on behalf of all the remarkable human beings who form the ICAN movement. You each give me such tremendous hope that we can - and will - bring the era of nuclear weapons to an end.

I speak as a member of the family of hibakusha - those of us who, by some miraculous chance, survived the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. For more than seven decades, we have worked for the total abolition of nuclear weapons.

We have stood in solidarity with those harmed by the production and testing of these horrific weapons around the world. People from places with long-forgotten names, like Moruroa, Ekker, Semipalatinsk, Maralinga, Bikini. People whose lands and seas were irradiated, whose bodies were experimented upon, whose cultures were forever disrupted.

We were not content to be victims. We refused to wait for an immediate fiery end or the slow poisoning of our world. We refused to sit idly in terror as the so-called great powers took us past nuclear dusk and brought us recklessly close to nuclear midnight. We rose up. We shared our stories of survival. We said: humanity and nuclear weapons cannot coexist.

Today, I want you to feel in this hall the presence of all those who perished in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I want you to feel, above and around us, a great cloud of a quarter million souls. Each person had a name. Each person was loved by someone. Let us ensure that their deaths were not in vain.

I was just 13 years old when the United States dropped the first atomic bomb, on my city Hiroshima. I still vividly remember that morning. At 8:15, I saw a blinding bluish-white flash from the window. I remember having the sensation of floating in the air.

As I regained consciousness in the silence and darkness, I found myself pinned by the collapsed building. I began to hear my classmates' faint cries: "Mother, help me. God, help me."

Then, suddenly, I felt hands touching my left shoulder, and heard a man saying: "Don't give up! Keep pushing! I am trying to free you. See the light coming through that opening? Crawl towards it as quickly as you can." As I crawled out, the ruins were on fire. Most of my classmates in that building were burned to death alive. I saw all around me utter, unimaginable devastation.

Processions of ghostly figures shuffled by. Grotesquely wounded people, they were bleeding, burnt, blackened and swollen. Parts of their bodies were missing. Flesh and skin hung from their bones. Some with their eyeballs hanging in their hands. Some with their bellies burst open, their intestines hanging out. The foul stench of burnt human flesh filled the air.

Thus, with one bomb my beloved city was obliterated. Most of its residents were civilians who were incinerated, vaporized, carbonized - among them, members of my own family and 351 of my schoolmates.

In the weeks, months and years that followed, many thousands more would die, often in random and mysterious ways, from the delayed effects of radiation. Still to this day, radiation is killing survivors.

Whenever I remember Hiroshima, the first image that comes to mind is of my four-year-old nephew, Eiji - his little body transformed into an unrecognizable melted chunk of flesh. He kept begging for water in a faint voice until his death released him from agony.

To me, he came to represent all the innocent children of the world, threatened as they are at this very moment by nuclear weapons. Every second of every day, nuclear weapons endanger everyone we love and everything we hold dear. We must not tolerate this insanity any longer.

Through our agony and the sheer struggle to survive - and to rebuild our lives from the ashes - we hibakusha became convinced that we must warn the world about these apocalyptic weapons. Time and again, we shared our testimonies.

But still some refused to see Hiroshima and Nagasaki as atrocities - as war crimes. They accepted the propaganda that these were "good bombs" that had ended a "just war". It was this myth that led to the disastrous nuclear arms race - a race that continues to this day.

Nine nations still threaten to incinerate entire cities, to destroy life on earth, to make our beautiful world uninhabitable for future generations. The development of nuclear weapons signifies not a country's elevation to greatness, but its descent to the darkest depths of depravity. These weapons are not a necessary evil; they are the ultimate evil.

On the seventh of July this year, I was overwhelmed with joy when a great majority of the world's nations voted to adopt the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. Having witnessed humanity at its worst, I witnessed, that day, humanity at its best. We hibakusha had been waiting for the ban for seventy-two years. Let this be the beginning of the end of nuclear weapons.

All responsible leaders will sign this treaty. And history will judge harshly those who reject it. No longer shall their abstract theories mask the genocidal reality of their practices. No longer shall "deterrence" be viewed as anything but a deterrent to disarmament. No longer shall we live under a mushroom cloud of fear.

To the officials of nuclear-armed nations - and to their accomplices under the so-called "nuclear umbrella" - I say this: Listen to our testimony. Heed our warning. And know that your actions are consequential. You are each an integral part of a system of violence that is endangering humankind. Let us all be alert to the banality of evil.

To every president and prime minister of every nation of the world, I beseech you: Join this treaty; forever eradicate the threat of nuclear annihilation.

When I was a 13-year-old girl, trapped in the smouldering rubble, I kept pushing. I kept moving toward the light. And I survived. Our light now is the ban treaty. To all in this hall and all listening around the world, I repeat those words that I heard called to me in the ruins of Hiroshima: "Don't give up! Keep pushing! See the light? Crawl towards it."

Tonight, as we march through the streets of Oslo with torches aflame, let us follow each other out of the dark night of nuclear terror. No matter what obstacles we face, we will keep moving and keep pushing and keep sharing this light with others. This is our passion and commitment for our one precious world to survive.

ICAN erhält den Friedensnobelpreis

veröffentlicht um 16.10.2017, 01:18 von Claudia Bürgler

PSR/IPPNW Schweiz gratuliert ICAN herzlich zum Friedensnobelpreis. Möge der Preis, den Weg zu einer Atomwaffenfreien Welt beschleunigen und viele zusätzliche Länder, auch die Schweiz, dazu bewegen, den Vertrag über das Verbot von Atomwaffen jetzt zu unterschreiben. (IPPNW International ist eine der Gründerorganisationen der ICAN Kampagne, PSR/IPPNW Schweiz ist Partner-Organisation der ICAN-Schweiz).


Mitteilung der ICAN, 6.10.2017

Es ist eine grosse Ehre den Friedensnobelpreis 2017 als Anerkennung für unsere Rolle im Prozess, der im Vertrag über das Verbot von Atomwaffen gipfelte, zu erhalten. Dieses historische Übereinkommen, das am 7. Juli mit der Unterstützung von 122 Staaten verabschiedet wurde, ist ein starkes und dringend nötiges Zeichen dafür, dass es eine Alternative gibt zu einer Welt, in der man sich mit dem Einsatz von Atomwaffen bedroht.

Die Internationale Kampagne für die Abschaffung von Atomwaffen (ICAN) ist eine Koalition von Nichtregierungsorganisationen aus 100 Ländern. Wir haben auf die Kraft der Zivilgesellschaft gesetzt und es ist uns gelungen, der destruktivsten aller Waffen, die je erfunden wurden, einen Riegel vorzuschieben – die einzige Waffe von der eine existentielle Bedrohung für die Menschheit ausgeht.

Der Friedensnobelpreis ehrt die unermüdlichen Anstrengungen von Millionen von Aktivistinnen und betroffenen Bürgern, die seit Anbruch der nuklearen Ära, gegen Atomwaffen protestiert haben. Sie haben darauf beharrt, dass Atomwaffen keine legitime Funktion erfüllen können und für immer vom Antlitz der Erde verbannt werden müssen.

Er ehrt auch die Überlebenden der Atomwaffenabwürfe über Hiroshima und Nagasaki – die hibakusha – und die Opfer von Atomwaffentests, deren ergreifende Erlebnisberichte und unermüdlicher Einsatz eine wesentliche Rolle in der Erarbeitung dieses historischen Übereinkommens spielten.

Der Vertrag verbietet die schlimmste aller Massenvernichtungswaffen vollumfänglich und gibt die Marschrichtung für ihre Abschaffung vor. Er ist die Antwort auf die immer tiefere Besorgnis der internationalen Gemeinschaft über die katastrophalen Auswirkungen, die weit verbreiteten und langanhaltenden Schäden für Mensch und Umwelt, die von einem Atomwaffeneinsatz verursacht würden.

Wir sind stolz auf die zentrale Rolle, die wir durch unser Engagement und die Teilnahme an Regierungskonferenzen in seiner Entstehung hatten, und wir werden uns in den kommenden Jahren gewissenhaft für seine vollständige Umsetzung einsetzen. Jedes Land, das nach einer friedlicheren Welt strebt, frei von nuklearer Bedrohung, wird diesem entscheidenden Vertrag ohne Verzug beitreten.

Die Schweiz, ein Land mit einer langen humanitären Tradition, hat an den Verhandlungen teilgenommen und für den Schlusstext gestimmt. Jetzt muss sie dem Vertrag so bald wie möglich beitreten.

Die unter gewissen Regierungen verbreitete Ansicht, Atomwaffen leisteten einen legitimen und unverzichtbaren Sicherheitsbeitrag, ist nicht nur fehlgeleitet, sondern auch gefährlich, weil sie zur Weiterverbreitung von Atomwaffen anstiftet und Abrüstungsbestreben unterwandert. Alle Länder sollten diesen Waffen entschieden den Rücken kehren – bevor sie je wieder eingesetzt werden.

Wir leben in einer Zeit grosser globaler Spannungen, in der feurige Rhetorik allzu einfach und erbarmungslos zu unsäglichem Grauen führen kann. Das Schreckgespenst eines nuklearen Krieges schwebt einmal mehr über uns. Nie war es so wichtig wie heute, sich unmissverständlich gegen Atomwaffen auszusprechen.

Wir zollen allen Staaten, die den Vertrag über das Verbot von Atomwaffen bereits unterzeichnet oder ratifiziert haben Beifall, und fordern alle anderen dazu auf, ihrem Beispiel Folge zu leisten. Der Vertrag bietet einen Ausweg in einer Zeit von beängstigenden Krisen. Abrüstung ist kein Wunschtraum, sondern eine dringende humanitäre Notwendigkeit.

Wir bedanken uns aufrichtig beim Norwegischen Nobelkomitee. Dieser Preis beleuchtet den vom Verbotsvertrag gewiesene Weg zu einer nuklearwaffenfreien Welt. Wir müssen diesen Weg beschreiten, bevor es zu spät ist.

Menschenrechte, künftige Generationen und Verbrechen im Atomzeitalter

veröffentlicht um 18.09.2017, 01:33 von Claudia Bürgler   [ aktualisiert: 18.09.2017, 03:54 ]

PSR / IPPNW (Internationale ÄrztInnen für die Verhütung eines Atomkrieges) Schweiz, SAFNA (Schweizer Anwälte für Nukleare Abrüstung), Basel Peace Office, U-Network Deutschland und CIDCE (Centre International de Droit Comparé de l’Environnement) Frankreich haben vom 14. – 17. September an der Universität Basel einen Kongress zum Thema „Menschenrechte, künftige Generationen und Verbrechen im Atomzeitalter“ durchgeführt. Es wurde festgestellt, dass die Anwendung von Atomwaffen schwerste Auswirkungen vor allem für die Zivilgesellschaft hätte. Die Folgen müssten als massive Menschenrechtsverletzungen, Kriegsverbrechen und Verbrechen gegen die Menschlichkeit gemäss dem Römer Statut des Internationalen Strafgerichtshofs angesehen werden. Zudem

wurde der vielen hunderttausend Opfer der beiden Atombomben in Hiroshima und Nagasaki und der mehreren tausend Atomtests in allen Kontinenten gedacht. Diese Menschen, aber auch die Geschädigten von Atomkatastrophen wie in Mayak 1957, Sellafield 1957, Tschernobyl 1986 und Fukushima 2011 wurden teilweise nie über die wahren Ursachen der Katastrophen und deren gesundheitlichen Auswirkungen informiert. Moderne wissenschaftliche Recherchen zeigen, dass Dokumente von Regierungen oft vernichtet wurden. Auch werden Nachforschungen zur laufenden Atomkatastrophe in Japan gesetzlich verboten. So erreichen betroffene Länder, dass epidemiologische Studien behindert oder verunmöglicht werden und die Entschädigung von Opfern erschwert wird. Es besteht somit ein grosser Bedarf einer gesetzlichen Verankerung der Menschenrechte auf Information und gerechter Kompensation der Opfer.

Im gleichen Kontext wurden auch Fragen der Verletzung von Menschenrechten künftiger Generationen diskutiert: Diese tragen die Risiken eines Atomkriegs, verbunden mit den gesundheitlichen Risiken der fortschreitenden globalen Verseuchung durch radioaktive Substanzen der Umwelt. Ebenso werden unsere Nachkommen massgeblich die finanziellen Lasten des Rückbaus von Atomkraftwerken und der sicheren Lagerung radioaktiver Abfälle schultern. Deshalb müssen nicht nur unsere, sondern auch die Rechte künftiger Generationen anerkannt und gesetzlich abgesichert werden.

photo: Mark Niedermann Photography Basel / Switzerland



Mehr Infos: /https://www.events-swiss-ippnw.org/


1-10 of 57