[DRAFT: Hiroshima Report 2013] 1-(2) Commitment to Achieve a World without Nuclear Weapons (sections D)

(Following is a draft version, which is subject to be updated or revised. Your comments and feedbacks are welcome!)

Back to the Contents

D) Humanitarian Consequences of Nuclear Weapons

Since the joint statement delivered by 16 countries at the NPT PrepCom in 2012, debates on humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons have received remarkable attention from the international community.

[DRAFT: Hiroshima Report 2013] 1-(4) Diminishing the Role and Significance of Nuclear Weapons in the National Security Strategies and Policies

(Following is a draft version, which is subject to be updated or revised. Your comments and feedbacks are welcome!)

Back to the Contents

The Hiroshima Report 2012 attempted to analyze the role and significance of nuclear weapons in the national security strategies and policies, mainly based on the declaratory policies of the nuclear-weapon/armed states. In 2013, there have been few significant changes in their nuclear policies.

[DRAFT: Hiroshima Report 2013] 1-(3) Reduction of Nuclear Weapons

Following is a draft version, which is subject to be updated or revised. Your comments and feedbacks are welcome!

Back to the Contents

A) Reduction of nuclear weapons

Russia and the United States continue to undertake reductions of their strategic nuclear weapons under the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START). The status of their strategic (nuclear) delivery vehicles and warheads under the Treaty has been periodically updated in the U.S. State Department homepage (see table 1-2 below).

[DRAFT: Hiroshima Report 2013] 1-(2) Commitment to Achieve a World without Nuclear Weapons (sections C)

Following is a draft version, which is subject to be updated or revised. Your comments and feedbacks are welcome!

Back to the Contents

C) Announcement of significant policies and important activities

Obama’s Berlin Speech

The U.S. President Barack H. Obama addressed his second-term foreign and security policies, including nuclear disarmament, non-proliferation and nuclear security at the Brandenburg Gate, Berlin on June 19, 2013. With reaffirming that “[p]eace with justice means pursuing the security of a world without nuclear weapons -- no matter how distant that dream may be,” he announced:

“After a comprehensive review, I’ve determined that we can ensure the security of America and our allies, and maintain a strong and credible strategic deterrent, while reducing our deployed strategic nuclear weapons by up to one-third. And I intend to seek negotiated cuts with Russia to move beyond Cold War nuclear postures. At the same time, we’ll work with our NATO allies to seek bold reductions in U.S. and Russian tactical weapons in Europe.”[1]

[Op-Ed] Daryl G. Kimball, "The Humanitarian Obligation to Achieve Nuclear Disarmament"

Since the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the catastrophic effects of nuclear weapons have driven global leaders to pursue concrete steps to reduce the threat of nuclear weapons use. Yet the threat of the use of nuclear weapons by the world’s nine nuclear-armed states—in response to conventional attack, in response to a nuclear attack, or as the result of accidental exchange—remains. As global leaders and the public consider how to reduce the nuclear threat, the humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons underscore why they need to act with greater urgency.

Over time, our understanding of the scope of these effects has become more sophisticated.  Early studies found that the direct effects of a large-scale nuclear exchange would produce catastrophic regional and national damage that would kill tens of millions and likely several hundred million people within one month of the initial exchange.[1]

More comprehensive studies in mid-1980s found that the direct effects of such a nuclear large-scale nuclear war involving thousands of nuclear detonations could result in several hundred million human fatalities, the indirect effects could be far greater, leading to the loss of one to four billion lives.”[2]

[DRAFT: Hiroshima Report 2013] 1-(2) Commitment to Achieve a World without Nuclear Weapons (introduction, sections A and B)

Following is a draft version, which is subject to be updated or revised. Your comments and feedbacks are welcome!

Back to the Contents

In 2013, no new, remarkable commitment toward a “total elimination of nuclear weapons” or a “world without nuclear weapons” was set out by NWS, NNWS or nuclear-armed states. As mentioned in the Hiroshima Report 2012, no country, including the NWS, openly opposes the goal of the total elimination of nuclear weapons or the vision of a world without nuclear weapons.[1] The Chairman’s Factual Summary of the 2013 NPT PrepCom also noted that the NPT parties “recalled their resolve…to achieve the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons in accordance with the objectives of the Treaty.”[2] However, it does not seem that nuclear-weapon/armed states actually set a goal of an early achievement of a world without nuclear weapons, or even consider their total elimination as a feasible, realistic goal. They have kept their position that their nuclear weapons continue to play important roles for their security policies at least in the foreseeable future. Deeper nuclear cuts in the short-run cannot be expected.

[DRAFT: Hiroshima Report 2013] 1-(1) Status of Nuclear Forces (estimates)

Following is a draft version, which is subject to be updated or revised. Your comments and feedbacks are welcome!

Back to the Contents

As of December 2013, eight countries have declared that they have nuclear weapons. According to Article IX-3 of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), “a nuclear-weapon State is one which has manufactured and exploded a nuclear weapon or other nuclear explosive device prior to 1 January 1967.” China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States meet this requirement, and have acceded to the NPT as nuclear-weapon States (NWS) which are permitted to possess nuclear weapons under the treaty.