PREVENTING NUCLEAR USE: THE
HUMANITARIAN IMPERATIVE FOR
NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT
Rebecca E. Johnson Ph.D
Co-Chair, ICAN
Director, Acronym Institute for Disarmament Diplomacy
Nuclear weapons could destroy us all.
To prevent nuclear use and war we must
understand their catastrophic health and
environmental consequences
and, in that knowledge, pursue their elimination
“We know from history that
deterrence can fail; and we know
from experience that some enemies
cannot be deterred.”
2002 US National Security Strategy
15 kT explosion over Mumbai
Firestorm zone 10 cal/cm2
Severe blast damage >10
psi
Lethal prompt radiation >4 Gy
Up to 860,000
prompt deaths,
2.1 million injured
Ramana MV. Bombing Bombay?
IPPNW Global Health Watch Report 3,
1999
If nuclear weapons are used, these
are the early effects:

Blast





direct
Indirect
Heat/flash


Initial
 Direct
 Induction of radioactivity
Fallout
 Local (mostly external)
 Intermediate (mostly
external)
 Global (mostly internal)
Electromagnetic pulse


Burns, blindness
fires
Radiation


Environmental effects



communication systems
break down
on Biota (living things)
on Climate
Complex synergistic
effects
> e.g. blast lethal area of 150 km2
would have fire conflagration
area 350 km2
> Radiation would weaken immune
systems
> Persistent high mortality years
later, genetic effects harming
future generations
Nuclear weapons – a very urgent
threat to health
In Hiroshima...

90% of physicians and
nurses killed or
injured

42 out of 45 hospitals
non-functional
• 70% of victims with
combined injuries
• 65% with burns
Hiroshima and Nagasaki

Ground
temperatures
reached about
7,000 degrees C

“Black rain”
containing
radioactive fallout
poured down for
hours after the
explosions
Ionising radiation
Capacity to damage
core genetic blueprint DNA
→ cancer
→ other health
effects
→ genetic
damage
Many different isotopes
Each behaves
Radioactivity of plutonium







1 millionth of a gram → fatal
cancer
Half-life (T1/2) 24,400 years
Decayed to 1/1024th of original
amount after 244,000y
Neanderthals died out 30,000 y
Last Ice Age glaciation 10,000 y
Settled agriculture 12,000 y
Writing invented 6,000 y
NUCLEAR USE – WHEN, not IF!
NOW over 19,000 weapons + 9 nuclear-armed
states PLUS proliferation incentives, drivers
+ risks of nuclear terrorism
and regional nuclear war
Current arsenals 2012
>19,000 weapons
>2,000 Mt
Down from peak arsenals
(1986)
 70,000 weapons
15,000 Mt
BUT NOWHERE NEAR ZERO!
Dangerous Dependency: 9 countries spend
over $100 billion p.a. on nuclear weapons
2011 in $ billions
US
61.3
Russia
14.9
UK
5.5
France
6.0
China
7.6
Israel
1.9
India
4.9
Pakistan
2.2
DPRK
0.7
TOTALS
104.9
This is $100 billion they
did NOT
spend on health, climate
security, education, food,
water, development....
Imagine... a Hiroshima-sized (15 kt)
nuclear bomb on Mumbai
 860,000
prompt deaths?
 pulverised infrastructure
 injuries from blast, heat,
fires, collapsed buildings,
radiation poisoning
 destruction of hospitals and
doctors, nurses, ambulances
 paralysed health services,
no blood supplies...
Early Effects of nuclear explosions

Blast





direct
Indirect
Heat/flash


Initial
 Direct
 Induction of radioactivity
Fallout
 Local (mostly external)
 Intermediate (mostly
external)
 Global (mostly internal)
Electromagnetic pulse


Burns, blindness
fires
Radiation


Environmental effects



communication systems
break down
on Biota (living things)
on Climate
Complex synergistic
effects
> e.g. blast lethal area of 150 km2
would have fire conflagration
area 350 km2
> Radiation would weaken immune
systems
> Persistent high mortality years
later, genetic effects harming
future generations
In Hiroshima, survivors
envied the dead
Current Nuclear Forces (SIPRI 2012)
Nuclear-armed States
Member of the 1968 NonProliferation Treaty?
United States of America
NPT
Warheads (approx)
TOTAL // of which,
deployed-active
8,500
// 2,150
Russia (formerly USSR)
NPT
10,000
// 1,800
United Kingdom
NPT
225
//
160
France
NPT
300
//
290
China
NPT
240
Israel
non- NPT
80-100 (?)
India
non- NPT
80-100
Pakistan
non- NPT
90-110
North Korea
withdrew from NPT (2003)
7 (?)
Warhead total (approx)
19,000
What if... 100 nuclear weapons are used in
a ‘limited’ nuclear war in South Asia?
India and Pakistan are both nuclear armed,
with estimated 80 – 110 nuclear bombs
each, and a history of conflict and terrorism.
Nuclear mistakes and war are possible and
could cause:
•20 million deaths in major cities in India and
Pakistan
•Radioactive contamination throughout the
region
•Global climate disruption from smoke and
soot
Nowhere to Hide
Regional war with a few nuclear
weapons would mean:
• Nuclear explosions ignite fires that burn
whole cities
• Soot lofted high into the atmosphere
absorbs incoming sunlight
• Dramatic decrease in sunlight and
warmth reaching the planet’s surface
• Abrupt dropping of temperature
• Extreme weather and disrupted rainfall
‘Little Boy’ on
6 August 1945
US detonated a
13-15 kiloton
uranium gun-type
bomb over
Hiroshima
 Deaths - 118,661
 Injuries - 78,000


140,000 deaths by
end 1945
‘Fat Man,
9 August 1945

US detonated a 21
kiloton plutonium
implosion bomb
over Nagasaki
Deaths - 73,884
 Injuries - 74,909
 Deaths by end of
1945 - 90,000
 6.7 square km
levelled

“Reliance on nuclear weapons for
[deterrence] is becoming increasingly
hazardous and decreasingly effective.”
Kissinger, Schultz, Nunn and Perry, WSJ Jan 2007
Trident submarine near Faslane, Scotland
In 1988, Rajiv Gandhi said that
nuclear deterrence is the
“...ultimate expression of the
philosophy of terrorism” that
“...will take us like lemmings to
”
our own suicide...”
Preventing nuclear use: recasting
the nuclear weapons problem
=> NW cause unacceptable harm and
humanitarian disaster with catastrophic regional
and global consequences.
=> Nuclear weapons use needs to be
recognized and treated as a crime against
humanity and war crime, as is the use of
chemical and biological weapons. This would
create strong disincentives, have impact on
doctrines and ambitions, and pave the way for
A GLOBAL LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE BAN
New and recent research on
environmental and climate effects of
nuclear explosions
Evaluated effects of 100 ‘small’ nuclear
explosions (15 kt, Hiroshima size) on
urban centres:
Less
than 0.5% of today’s nuclear arsenals
Up to 20 million immediate deaths
5 m tonnes radioactive soot and debris into
upper atmosphere
Lofting, circulation and persistence of smoke/dust
clouds for ~ 10 years
Global temperatures drop 1.25-1.5 deg
Substantial + long lasting climatic effects would
cause widespread global famine
The resarch scenario of a limited nuclear war
in South Asia showed:
Even if you live in a
NWFZ like Africa...
If others use nuclear
weapons it will have
terrible consequences
for innocent people 
1 billion dead
from starvation alone?
International Physicians
for the Prevention of Nuclear War
Starvation and
lowered immune
systems
 Epidemic
Diseases
 Cholera, other
diarrhoeal disease
 Plague
 Malaria
 Typhus
International Physicians
for the Prevention of Nuclear War
Desperation, Conflict and
Further wars
 Food riots
 Disruption of trade
 Hoarding
 Intra-state ‘civil’ wars
 Wars between nations
 and further nuclear
weapons detonated?
International Physicians
for the Prevention of Nuclear War
Bunker Mentality won’t keep us safe!
Time to ban nuclear weapons
“Weapons of mass destruction cannot be
uninvented. But they can be outlawed,
as biological and chemical weapons
have been, and their use made
unthinkable. Compliance, verification
and enforcement rules can, with the
requisite will, be effectively applied. And
with that will, even the eventual
elimination of nuclear weapons is not
beyond the world’s reach.”
Weapons of Terror, Report of the WMD Commission,
chaired by Dr Hans Blix, June 2006
Red Cross gets active –
2011
Resolution pledges:
In Nov 2011 the Red Cross
passed a new resolution on NW
– first since 1982
to ensure that nuclear
weapons are never again
used...
- to pursue in good faith and
conclude with urgency and
determination negotiations
to prohibit the use of and
completely eliminate nuclear
weapons through a legally
binding international
agreement, based on
existing commitments and
international obligations....
www.icrc.org
Nuclear-free countries in the driving seat
16 nation statement at May2012 NPT
PrepCom:
Austria, Chile, Costa Rica, Denmark, Holy See, Indonesia,
Egypt, Ireland, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Nigeria,
Norway, Philippines, South Africa, Switzerland
became 35 nation statement at UN in Oct 2012,
addiing:
Algeria, Argentina, Bangladesh, Belarus, Brazil, Colombia,
Ecuador, Iceland, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Liechtenstein,
Malta, Marshall Islands, Peru, Samoa, Sierra Leone,
Swaziland, Thailand, Uruguay, Zambia,
New thinking to inspire and coordinate
civil society and
government
initiatives to reframe
NW and pave the
way for banning
them on
humanitarian terms,
creating conditions
for total elimination
By themselves, the current arms
control and NPT regimes fail to stem
proliferation. They perpetuate nuclear
value and reward possessors
>A Nuclear Ban Treaty would erode
this and contribute towards crucial task
to discredit and delegitimize nuclear
weapons and their justifications,
including deterrence, status economic
investment and other drivers
WE MUST FRAME a new security
mindset that puts people before weapons
Human security must take precedence
over military notions of security
 Prioritise real and global security above
national state ‘defences’
 Nuclear weapons make us INSECURE
and VULNERABLE
 They waste and divert resources from
tackling real domestic and security
problems e.g. environmental/climate
desecration, health/pandemics, cuts,
economic chaos, water, food, shelter

Banning nuclear weapons: the
next step, not the last step
Examples from other weapons:

asphyxiating chemicals


biological and toxin weapons


1925 Geneva Protocol (use)1972 BTWC
antipersonnel landmines


1925 Geneva Protocol (use)1993 CWC (all aspects)
1997 Mine Ban Convention (use, stockpiling, production
and transfer...)
cluster munitions

2008 Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM prohibits
use, production, stockpiling and transfer...)
How can we change the debate on nuclear
weapons in India?
Educate, mobilise and
strategise!
Link, network, build campaign
WHAT WILL IT TAKE?
www.icanw.org
Prevention is better than cure!
We cannot cure nuclear addiction and we won’t be
able to protect ourselves if nuclear weapons are used
• So, what can we do?
• What do YOU want to
achieve?
• AND HOW??
• And how can ICAN help?
It’s necessary, possible and achievable – if we
mobilise and ACT!
www.icanw.org