PEOPLE FOR NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT

Last May 2024, a number of us wrote to the two of you on No First Use and on nuclear risk reduction negotiations between China and the United States.(text below in Chinese and English).

We are most disappointed to hear that China has suspended/is suspending negotiations. While we appreciate that relationships between China and the US are not what one might hope for, and that each of you holds the other to be entirely and solely responsible for that, with itself blameless, this is a move that does nothing to improve that relationship. It will indeed, worsen it.

In addition (or more importantly), there are considerations at stake that are rather more important than whom is 'on top' globally, and more important than any short term geopolitical advantage. These considerations are also more important than who gets to rule Taiwan, and even more important than who gets to shape the 'rules-based order'.

A large-scale nuclear war between either China and the US, or Russia and the US, or (most likely and most catastrophically) between all three, would of course, mean the end of civilisation and would mean the deaths of most if not all, humans, either as a direct and immediate result of nuclear explosions and their associated firestorms or afterwards from the nuclear winter and twilight, from starvation.

China is signatory to a number of statements from the G7 and the G20 that state that the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons is inadmissible.

Indeed, the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons is ALWAYS inadmissible. There are no circumstances in which their use or the threat of their use, can be justified.

These are considerations that transcend all other considerations whatsoever as they directly affect the very survival of humans, of most land-based (and many sea-based) living beings, and of what we call 'civilisation'. Neither China, the US, or Russia will survive a large nuclear exchange as organised societies, and the smoke of burning cities (US or Chinese) will blot out the sun for those who live far away from the conflict.

Whatever deep-seated issues divide China and the US, neither of you has an interest in potentially catastrophic outcomes.

Abandonment of negotiations on risk reduction measures will lead to no good outcome. Rather it will inevitably lead to a deterioration in bilateral relations, to further strategic competition, to an accelerated and exacerbated arms race that no one will or can win, and possibly to potentially catastrophic conflict.

I/We suggest as a minimum:

--That China retain its commendable policy of No First Use.

--That the US take seriously that policy and consider adopting it or something similar itself rather than seeking to marginalise it.

--That the US and China continue with a low-profile and serious, mutually respectful negotiating process both on nuclear risk reduction and on nuclear arsenals. These negotiations must be conducted by arms control experts, not used as a forum for political posturing.

--That this process become, as per Chinas own suggestion made to the CD some time ago, a model for other governments to adopt risk reduction measures.

 

Instead of making the nuclear negotiations hostage to deteriorating bilateral relations, it would be better to make those negotiations a circuit-breaker for the wider relationship. Failing that, the nuclear weapons issue is of such importance that it must not become hostage to US-China strategic competition in other areas.

 

This negative development can be turned around. It is vital to do so.

 

Signed

 

Aaron Tovish, Special adviser, No First Use Group, former coordinator Mayors for Peace, co-convenor, Abolition 2000 Nuclear Risk Reduction Working Group

 

Carlo Trezza, former Italian Ambassador for Disarmament and Nonproliferation, No First Use Group, 

 

John Hallam

Nuclear Disarmament Campaigner people for Nuclear Disarmament, Co-Convenor, Abolition 2000 Nuclear Risk Reduction Working Group, No First Use Group

 

(Letter sent in May 2024 below in Chinese and English)

 

 

尊敬的习近平主席和约瑟夫·拜登总统（，以及其他各位领导）：

 

我们欢迎中美两国就安全问题恢复高层会谈。这些会谈涉及严肃的问题，需要领导力和智慧的外交手腕。

核武国家间不断升级的紧张局势和武装冲突，包括俄罗斯与乌克兰的战争，正在增加核战争的风险。因此，在核风险减少措施上的进展，包括不首先使用核武器的可能性，极为重要。中美之间共同商定的核风险减少措施具有最高的重要性。如果其他国家政府也能加入这些措施或共同声明减少核风险，那就更好了。

在你们的共同努力下，当前核安全谈判的状况可以从双输转变为双赢。

实际上，我们可以说从三输转变为三赢，因为在防止核战争的问题上，你们双边关系的状态关乎整个世界的安全。

防止核战争，以及减少核风险，是如此重要的议题，对中美两国及全世界的生存至关重要，寻求局部利益、国家自豪感或短期的军事优势都不应阻碍这一重要对话进程。我们最近发现两个令人鼓舞的发展：

• 关于核风险减少的对话已经开始；

• 已经提出了不首先使用核武器的讨论。

这两项发展与2022年1月《不扩散核武器条约》核武器国家领导人声明和巴厘岛与德里的G20领导人声明以及最近在卡普里的G7声明一致，特别是“使用或威胁使用核武器是不允许的。”这些进展需要继续和深化，而不是停止、拖延或逆转。

因此，我们对以下情况深感忧虑：

• 中国中止参与核风险减少对话；

• 美国尚未接受不首先使用核武器的提议。

我们敦促美国认真对待并有意义地参与中国于二月在日内瓦首次提出的不首先使用核武器的提议。

我们敦促中国继续并有意义地参与任何方面提出的核风险减少的建议。

鉴于上述情况，我们建议，与其采取“如果不是我的，那么也不是你的”的态度，不如采取“兼而有之”的方法，即：

• 风险减少措施可以显著加强不首先使用核武器协议；

• 不首先使用核武器协议将促进重大风险减少措施的实现。

我们还想补充一点，进入2026年《不扩散核武器条约》审议大会的第二次筹备委员会会议时，这样的双边合作将使本来阴郁的前景变得更加光明。这也将对其他核武国家施加必要的压力，使其言行与巴厘岛和德里的立场一致。

我们能否指望你们为了你们的人民和全世界人民的更大利益，放下那些从宏观角度来看相对次要的分歧？

不作为或瘫痪是最大的敌人。请不要让它得逞。抓住这个机会吧。

 

 

Dear Presidents Xi Jin Ping and Joseph Biden, [and others]:

 

We welcome the resumption of high level talks between China and the United States on security issues. These talks involve serious issues that require leadership and smart diplomacy.

Escalating tensions and armed conflict involving nuclear-armed States, including the Russian-Ukraine War, are increasing the risk of a nuclear war. This makes progress on nuclear risk reduction measures, including possibilities of no-first-use arrangements, of extreme importance. Mutually agreed nuclear risk reduction measures between China and the US are of the highest importance. It would be even better if other governments could also sign on to them or onto a mutually agreed statement on nuclear risk reduction.

 

It is within your mutual power to turn the current status of  nuclear security talks from lose-lose to win-win. 

 

Indeed, we might say from lose-lose-lose to win-win-win since the security of the entire world hinges on the state of your bilateral affairs when preventing nuclear war is at stake.

 

The prevention of nuclear war, and hence, nuclear risk reduction, is so important an issue and so critical to the very survival of both China and the US and the rest of the world, that more parochial considerations  and considerations of national pride or immediate-term military advantage  must not be allowed to derail a process of meaningful dialogue on that subject.

We have recently found two developments encouraging:

 - a dialogue had begun on nuclear risk reduction; and

 - talks on no first use of nuclear weapons had been proposed.

Both these developments were in line with the January 2022 statement of the NPT NWS leaders and the statement of the G20 leaders in Bali and Delhi, and the more recent G7 in Capri,  most notably that, "The use or threat of us of nuclear weapons is inadmissible."

These developments need to be continued and built on not halted, stalled,  or reversed.

 We are, thus, deeply concerned that:

- China has suspended participant in the risk reduction dialogue; and

- the US has still not taken up the NFU proposal.

We urge the US to take seriously, and to engage meaningfully, with the Chinese NFU proposal first enunciated in Geneva in February.

 We urge China to continue with and to engage meaningfully with, proposals from whichever quarter on nuclear risk reduction. 

 In view of the above, we would like to suggest that, rather than this "if not mine, then not yours" approach, an "all the above" approach should be pursued, that is:

- Risk reduction measures could significantly strengthen a NFU agreement; and

- A NFU agreement would facilitate the achievement of major risk reduction measures.

We might add that heading into the second Preparatory Committee meeting for the 2026 NPT Review Conference, such a bilateral convergence would brighten an otherwise gloomy outlook.  It would also put needed pressure on other nuclear armed states to bring their rhetoric into line with the Bali/Delhi stance.

Can we count on you to lay aside what are, in the grand perspective, minor differences for the greater good of your peoples and those of the whole world?

Inaction or paralysis is the greatest enemy here. Please, do not let it triumph.   Seize the opportunity.

Signed 

 

Aaron Tovish, Senior Adviser, No First use Global (Fmr campaign director, Mayors for Peace)

 

Alyn Ware, World Future Council, Abolition 2000

 

Marc Finaud, Vice-President, Initiatives for Nuclear Disarmament (France)

 

Uta Zapf, fmr chair, Bundestag Committee on Nuclear Weapons, 

 

Carlo Trezza, Former Italian Ambassador for Disarmament and Non Proliferation

 

Prof. Frank Hutchinson, Human Survival Project, Sydney Australia,

 

Jonathan Granoff, Global Security Institute, NY 

 

John Hallam,

Nuclear Disarmament Campaigner,

People for Nuclear Disarmament

Human Survival Project

Co-Convenor, Abolition 2000 Nuclear Risk Reduction Working Group