Peace Committee delegates return from Hiroshima

By Carla Gorton
"It is now 50 years since the most devastating crime against humanity was committed, yet the leaders of the nuclear weapon states continue to sophisticate their weapons." This was the opening comment by peace activist Don Jarrett upon his return to Adelaide from the Annual World Conference Against A and H Bombs held in Hiroshima and attended by 350 people from 23 countries. Jarrett and fellow peace activist Hilde Varney represented the Australian Peace Committee (South Australia Branch) at the 50th anniversary conference. They outlined their experiences at a meeting of the Australian Peace Committee in Adelaide on August 22.
Jarrett and Varney both felt that to be in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and to meet the victims of nuclear warfare, was a very humbling experience. However, they emphasised that the victims of radiation fallout are all over the world.
Varney explained that she took up the issue of British bomb tests conducted in Australia. Very little was known internationally about the Maralinga tests and their effect on the indigenous people. A newspaper in Nagasaki picked up on Varney's speech and ran an article on the issue.

50th anniversary

US delegates at the conference played an important role in debunking the myths that their government has generated. According to Jarrett, US delegate Joseph Gershwin reminded participants that an understanding of the past moulds both the present and parameters for the future.
"In the United States, under the pressure of the new McCarthyism, the Smithsonian Institute World War II exhibition legitimised the use of atomic bombs. It transformed into idolatry the Enola Gay and the military unit that savaged the people of those two cities with nuclear weapons", said Jarrett.
"As Gershwin stated, this celebration of war crimes is not simply an insensitive assault against the Japanese and the people of the United States; its gravest threat lies in its unstated mission of building political support for continued United States nuclear war preparations."

Jarrett explained that while the Japanese government was criticised for its weak expression of regret and lack of apology for the aggression and crimes of the 15 years' war, elites in both Japan and the US have learned little over the last 50 years and are potentially more dangerous to human survival than they were 50 years ago.
He explained two particularly dangerous myths — that the primary purpose of the United States nuclear arsenal during the Cold War was deterrence; and that with the end of the Cold War the dangers of nuclear war have substantially receded.
Jarrett drew on a range of research to demonstrate that the use of the bomb was not needed to hasten the end of World War II
.
"It was clear that alternatives to the bomb existed, and Truman and his advisers knew it. Following the massive destruction, American scientists and some Japanese scientists moved in, restricted access to the area and carried out tests on people and buildings, without ever attempting to provide medical assistance to those who were injured."
Among the lessons that Truman and his successors took from Hiroshima and Nagasaki was that atomic diplomacy can work. Two essential elements of United States nuclear war doctrine have remained constant over the past 50 years: the commitment to escalation dominance and the refusal to rule out first strike nuclear warfare. It is not hard to see this as institutionalised nuclear terrorism.
On more than 20 occasions between 1946 and 1993, only three relating to crises in Europe, US presidents actively considered, prepared for or threatened nuclear attack.
Three times they threatened nuclear war in Korea. Three times they prepared for nuclear war against Vietnam. At least eight times, US presidents practised nuclear extortion in the Middle East, most recently during the Gulf War. There the US surrounded Iraq with between 700 and 1000 nuclear warheads. President Bush, Vice-President Quayle and defence secretary Cheney all articulated nuclear threats.

Non-Proliferation Treaty

The Clinton administration's nuclear doctrine has been clearly demonstrated in its foreign and military policy. The US national security adviser has warned that if US interests are threatened, they must be prepared to strike decisively and unilaterally.
According to Jarrett, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) caused some irritation at the conference. Some delegates felt that the outcome of the NPT discussions, though not perfect, was a step forward. This was strongly objected to by the US delegation, among others, which pointed out that the cornerstone of Clinton's foreign and military policy has been the unconditional and indefinite extension of the treaty.
Since the adoption of the NPT in 1968, the nuclear arms race has surged. The nuclear powers won time and political space to refine their nuclear arsenals and consolidate their power.
"The terms of these arms control treaties implicitly acknowledge that the continued possession of such weapons is not prohibited", Jarrett said. "For example, the limited test ban treaty permits underground nuclear weapons testing. This is a clear acknowledgment that the possession of such weapons by the nuclear states is lawful and implies that use in at least some circumstances would be lawful.
"Likewise, the NPT accepts the lawfulness of the development and possession of nuclear weapons by the nuclear states, which would make no sense at all if the use of such weapons was unlawful. This entire structure of obligation would make no sense if the use of nuclear weapons was considered to be unlawful under all circumstances."

Australia's role

Jarrett pointed out that despite huge changes across the world in the last decade, there have been no changes in Australian defence policy. The annual cost of the military is $9.6 billion. The government continues to rob Australia of resources, jobs and security and contributes to the international arms race, thereby increasing regional instability.
Australia's defence policy is an offensive strategy which relies on the alliance with the US, combined with military cooperation with our regional neighbours, called "strategic partnerships". Jarrett said politicians contribute to the expansion of military capabilities of regional states by stressing military relations, arms exports, and the supply of technology and military training. He cited the Kangaroo 95 "war games" with Indonesia as an example of such policies.

International concern

For Varney and Jarrett the international conference showed that there are people around the world who are actively involved in influencing people and governments to resist the big powers' attempts to maintain nuclear weapons policies.
The Nuclear Free Philippines Coalition condemned attempts by the US to re-establish a military role in the Philippines. Filipino activists said the US is lobbying persistently to have an "acquisition and cross servicing" agreement with the Philippines signed by the end of this year; later the US can again use Philippines territory for military interventions.
An encouraging sign for the two Australian delegates was the strength of the international response to French tests.
"In Finland the peace movement organised 12,000 people who were at an international soccer game against the French national team to hold up placards simply stating 'No bomb'", remarked Jarrett.
"The 140 foreign delegates showed tremendous solidarity and unity in opposition to nuclear weapons. By being in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, they showed the world there is a big movement against nuclear weapons."