by Jennifer Knox

Jennifer Knox, a sophomore at Cornell College, recently joined the Global Zero team as an intern through the Cornell Fellows program. Her work focuses on logistics planning for the 2012 Reaching Zero summit at Yale, tracking nuclear news, and researching policy objectives.

The new congressional Budget Control Act mandates cuts of $487 billion from the defense budget over the next 10 years, sending the Pentagon into a frenzy working on a response. Dr. Lawrence Korb, who will be speaking at Global Zero’s Student Summit at Yale in February, joined colleagues Spencer Ackerman and Heather Hurlburt on a panel to discuss recommendations for a leaner and more efficient military. I attended The Best Defense: Protecting America in an Age of Austerity panel at the Center for National Policy on January 10, 2012. While questions about the nuclear arsenal did not feature prominently in the conversation, I read between the lines to get a military perspective on the role nuclear weapons should play in America’s defense.

Spencer Ackerman, Scott Bates, Dr. Lawrence Korb and Heather Hurlburt

All three panelists addressed the general anxiety surrounding budget cuts. Dr. Korb, former Assistant Secretary of Defense under the Reagan administration, described rampant claims that the cut would leave the U.S. unacceptably vulnerable as “much ado about nothing.” He said that in pursuing these cuts we follow a long American tradition of scaling down defense spending after an extensive period of war. The defense budget is not and never has been a machine of perpetual growth, and this 487 billion dollar figure only reflects 8% of total planned spending. 

Dr. Korb went on to support the need for change and adaptability in the military’s mission in order to respond to contemporary developments in the world. The three panelists agree that our large nuclear arsenal is no longer a necessity. Nuclear weapons were mentioned when the panelists discussed areas where cuts should be made. The resounding message from the three experts was that the nuke budget should be cut. Still, the panelists devoted less time to the issues of the nuclear arsenal than to other defense strategy reforms.

Heather Hurlburt, former Special Assistant to the President and State Department Policy Planning Staff member under the Clinton administration, described a strange tension between political and military responses when it comes to the possibility of cutting nukes. She revealed that many authority figures within the military were actually in favor of re-evaluating the role of nuclear weapons in defense strategies; spending fewer resources on maintaining them; and emphasizing them less within operational planning. The responsibility for pushing funding to develop and test nuclear weapons lies with Congress. The Statement on Defense Strategic Guidance issued by Leon E. Panetta, Secretary of Defense, articulates the difficulties of this divergence between civilian and military leadership while planning these cuts. He insists that, “savings must be achieved in a balanced manner, with everything on the table, including politically sensitive areas that will likely provoke opposition from parts of the Congress, from industry and from advocacy groups.”

This panel conversation showed me just how easy it is to create controversy where none should exist. As Panetta said, there is no reason that we need to “choose between our national security and fiscal responsibility.” After attending the panel discussion, here’s my take: cutting our nuclear arsenal should be our first priority. It seems such wasteful spending distracts not only from civilian priorities but from defense objectives as well.

A heartfelt thank you to all of you who made 2011 a remarkable year for Global Zero. Thank you signatories, students, staff and supporters for your work and commitment to creating a world without nuclear weapons. And now, here’s the 2011 Global Zero highlight reel:

APRIL

The GZ|DC Convention at The George Washington University brought together hundreds of exceptional students and young professionals for three days on the anniversary of the 2010 signing of the START Treaty and President Obama’s 2009 Prague speech calling for a world without nuclear weapons. Attendees participated in intensive leadership trainings and strategized on building the Global Zero movement with eminent leaders and experts, including US Under Secretary of State Ellen Tauscher, Special Advisory to the President Gary Samore, CNN political analyst David Gergen, and many others.

JUNE

The Global Zero Cut Nukes Campaign kicked off in June with an endorsement from the Financial Times (registration required) and The Economist. The message was clear: while budgets for education, public safety and health care are slashed, politicians spend billions each year on nukes. Our Cut Nukes petition called on leaders to cut nukes, not the things that matter most.
 
In the lead up to the Global Zero Summit, student leaders met in London for the GZ Student Institute where they learned how to bring the Global Zero movement to their own university campuses:

The Global Zero Student Institute in London from Global Zero on Vimeo.

 World leaders, student activists and others gathered at the Global Zero Summit in London in June where the media shone a bright light on the growing international movement to eliminate nuclear weapons. Here, Her Majesty Queen Noor of Jordan discusses nuclear spending with CNN:

JULY

The GZ Institute in Washington, DC provided another venue for policy discussions with distinguished signatories and campaign training for enthusiastic students and interns.

The support people showed for Global Zero’s call to cut nukes at the Pitchfork Music Festival encouraged student leader, Ellie Cooper. “Clearly, cutting nuclear weapons spending appeals to a wide variety of ages, professions, and localities. I hope G-20 leaders are as motivated by peoples’ passion as we are!” Read her blog post.

AUGUST

In August we launched the Student Petition Challenge. Students around the world competed to collect the most Cut Nukes petition signatures. With great prizes on offer, we were delighted to see so many students get their game on.

OCTOBER

Global Zero moms spoke out in support of the Cut Nukes campaign. Oscar-nominated actress Naomi Watts and former CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson made this PSA asking our leaders to cut nukes first. Valerie and Naomi are both mothers and active supporters of Global Zero. They want to make sure that children across the nation have access to the best education – and that they live in the safest possible world.
  

Naomi Watts and Valerie Plame Wilson say, “Cut nukes!” from Global Zero on Vimeo.

The GZ Institute in Los Angeles set the scene for the Global Zero Summit at The Ronald Reagan Presidential Library on the 25th anniversary of the historic Reykjavik Summit, when Presidents Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev nearly agreed to eliminate all nuclear weapons.

A hundred eminent international leaders participated in the event, including former US Secretaries of State George Shultz and James Baker and business leaders Sir Richard Branson and Jeff Skoll, who spoke on a panel on the cost of nuclear weapons.

In late October, The New York Times endorsed Global Zero’s plan to reduce the US nuclear arsenal in the editorial, The Bloated Nuclear Weapons Budget.
 

 With a new year ahead of us, we take inspiration from your support in 2011. Thank you for being part of the movement to achieve a world without nuclear weapons.

As we begin a fresh new year, it seems fitting to ponder some past events that set the stage for nuclear weapons in today’s world. Here’s January, in atomic history:

January 1945

First plutonium reprocessing production run at the Hanford Site in Washington. The site was home to the B Reactor, the first full-scale plutonium production reactor in the world.

January 1950
Klaus Emil Julius Fuchs, a German-British theoretical physicist and atomic spy, confesses to giving atomic secrets to the USSR.

Photo credit: Truman Presidential Museum and Library

President Harry S. Truman (pictured above) gives the order to proceed with building the H-bomb. The directive is said to have come in response to evidence of an atomic explosion occurring within USSR in 1949.

January 1954

U.S.S. Nautilus is launched. She is the world’s first operational nuclear-powered submarine.

January 1966

U.S. B-52 bomber crashes near Palomares, Spain carrying four unarmed H-bombs. Of the four hydrogen bombs, three were found on land near a small fishing village. The non-nuclear explosives in two of the bombs detonated and contaminated a 2-square-kilometer area by radioactive plutonium. The fourth (pictured above) was recovered from the Mediterranean Sea intact after a 2½-month-long search.

January 1967
Outer Space Treaty is introduced to ban nuclear weapons being placed in orbit.

January 2003
North Korea announces it will withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Let’s put the past behind us and work for a future without nuclear weapons! You can support nuclear disarmament by signing the Cut Nukes petition.

Global Zero was saddened by the news that former Czech president and Nobel peace laureate Václav Havel passed away on Sunday, December 18 at the age of 75.

Widely known for his tireless dedication to peace, security and democracy, President Havel joined Global Zero in the fall of 2009.  We were honored by his support and participation.

On behalf of the Global Zero community, we extend our deepest condolences to President Havel’s family.

Lawrence Bender, Producer of Countdown to Zero and a Global Zero signatory, will receive the UN Correspondents Association Advocacy of the Year Award today! Here, he urges leaders to act with much greater urgency in setting a course for the elimination of all nuclear weapons. This piece was published in Huffington Post on December 14, 2011.

The Indispensable Choice: Eliminating Nuclear Weapons
by Lawrence Bender

Today, I will have the honor of receiving from United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon the UN Correspondents Association Advocacy of the Year Award for my work in the Global Zero movement to eliminate all nuclear weapons. Since I and one hundred international leaders from around the world launched the movement three years ago this month, we have made tremendous progress, but if we are to avert nuclear catastrophe, our leaders must act with much greater urgency to set our course to the elimination of all nuclear weapons.

When the lights went out on the Soviet Union on Mikhail Gorbachev’s watch twenty years ago this month, the fate of its thirty-five thousand nuclear weapons became a source of deep concern to the world. Russia had to round up its nuclear inheritance from most of the fourteen other republics that emerged from the Soviet break-up, in many cases prying them loose from countries like Ukraine that claimed ownership. Miraculously, Russia retrieved them without losing its grip on a single weapon, thanks in large part to the herculean effort of the Russian general in charge, Evgeny Maslin.

But the list of nuclear dangers has only expanded over the past two decades, and frankly there is little relief in sight. The world is beset with problems and preoccupied with economic challenges that have distracted attention from the even greater danger of nuclear catastrophe. We are pretending as though this peril will go away if we ignore it.

New threats are knocking on the door - the spreading of the bomb to additional countries, and potentially to terrorists. Since Gorbachev stepped down, Pakistan, India, and North Korea have acquired and tested the bomb. Iran is moving ever closer to that day. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey and others are waiting in the wings. As Iran goes, so go them. The world faces the specter of cascading proliferation that may not be stoppable if it gains further momentum. Terrorists will stand a better chance of getting their hands on them. The use of nuclear weapons would become inevitable.

And there remain serious risks stemming from the continuing Cold War habits of the United States and Russia to keep many hundreds of their nuclear-armed intercontinental rockets poised for launch within a few minutes. In the documentary film Countdown to Zero, which I produced, Gorbachev recalls how hair-trigger nuclear missiles allowed him only minutes to decide whether to unleash Soviet nuclear forces on apparent warning of an incoming strike. His counterpart in nuclear negotiations, former President Ronald Reagan, also was astonished at how little time for reflection was allowed by the standing nuclear war plans: In his memoirs, Reagan wrote: [pp. 36-7] “Russian submarines off our East Coast with nuclear missiles could turn the White House into a pile of radioactive rubble within six or eight minutes. Six minutes to decide how to respond to a blip on radar scope and decide whether to release Armageddon! How could anyone apply reason at a time like that?”

What is more astonishing is that virtually nothing has changed. Both Russia and the United States continue to prepare to fight a large-scale nuclear war with each other on a moment’s notice. If their launch-ready stances are adopted by the world’s other nuclear weapons countries, then the risks of the accidental or unauthorized use of nuclear weapons would grow exponentially. As Enrico Fermi said about the laws of physics, if an event is not prohibited absolutely, then it will happen eventually. If nuclear weapons are not stood down and eliminated, one day they will be used.

Rather than retreating from the precipice of an avoidable disaster, almost all of the nine nuclear weapons countries are upgrading their nuclear arms, at an estimated total cost of one trillion dollars over the next decade. The United States is constructing new uranium and plutonium factories to build bombs, and planning to build new nuclear-armed submarines and bombers. Russia is embarked on a 70-billion dollar binge to replace its aging nuclear forces. China is building its first fleet of nuclear missile submarines and truck-based nuclear forces. Great Britain is preparing to build four new Trident-class submarines. France just christened a new nuclear missile submarine. Pakistan is surging its production of nuclear materials and may take third place in nuclear-arsenal size within a few years, ahead of everyone but Russia and the U.S. India is playing catch-up deploying new land-based missiles and submarines. Even Israel is buying submarines (from Germany), equipping them with nuclear cruise missiles and deploying them in the Persian Gulf to pose a nuclear threat to Iran. The bête noire of nuclear countries, North Korea, is spending extravagantly on its nuclear factories and missiles while its people starve.

Hundreds of international figures in the Global Zero movement, like Gorbachev and Maslin, have joined forces in a last-ditch effort to pull the world back from the brink. It may not be too late if we can convince world leaders and the public of the urgent need to take immediate steps to reduce the nuclear threat - like taking all nuclear weapons off of hair-trigger alert — and to begin multilateral negotiations to eliminate all nuclear arms in verifiable stages over a period of years. The Global Zero movement includes leaders who have served as national security advisors and in other positions with high-level responsibility for foreign policy, defense, and counter-terrorism that allows them to testify credibly about the growing dangers of nuclear war by intention or accident, by states or terrorists. Our agenda is to bring all the nuclear weapons countries into dialogue and negotiation to ensure that the use of nuclear weapons does not become inevitable. This is a catastrophe that can be prevented.

You can join Lawrence Bender in asking leaders to eliminate nuclear weapons by signing the Global Zero Cut Nukes petition today.

“Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.” -Nelson Mandela

More than 100 outstanding students from universities across the country will convene at Yale University on Feb. 18-19, 2012 to strategize and build the Global Zero movement. The Reaching Zero Student Summit will “arm” students with the tools and skills they’ll need to launch Global Zero campaigns on their campuses around the country and the world.

Here’s a sneak peek of what to expect:

* Intensive policy and campaign training.

* Unique opportunities to meet with eminent leaders and experts to discuss key steps for initiating multilateral nuclear arms negotiations, like Amb. Richard Burt, Amb. Steven Pifer and Amb. Seyed Hossein Mousavian, among others.

* Exploration of how nuclear weapons issues will affect upcoming presidential elections in the US, Russia and France.

* Strategies to organize and lead your own Global Zero campaigns, both on and offline.

Reaching Zero is a remarkable opportunity to connect with other students, like you, who believe in a world without nuclear weapons. Help us reach zero. Register for your summit seat today.

Note: We know that most students are on a tight budget. That’s why we’re offering a limited number of travel subsidies to students in need and who apply early on.

by Donna Horning, Global Zero Student Leader

My name is Donna Horning, and I’m a junior at Yale University originally from Seattle, WA majoring in Global Affairs and Political Science.

My interest in nuclear issues actually began in high school, when I completed National History Day projects on the Manhattan Project and the Space Race, and did nuclear physics research at the University of Washington. My interest in Global Zero started when I saw Joseph Cirincione (President of Ploughshares Fund) speak in my first international studies class about the dangers of nuclear proliferation. I have continued to focus on security issues in global politics ever since.

I was the director of Global Zero’s cut nukes campaign at Yale this semester, which ultimately collected more than 1200 signatures (about a fifth of everyone on campus!). How did we do it? With a highly committed team, coordinated to collect signatures outside dining halls and within our networks, yielding a large number of petition signatures and greater name recognition for Global Zero on campus.

I discovered that a small but highly committed team is much more effective than recruiting an army of marginally invested people. Canvassing for signatures isn’t too much fun (especially if you aren’t already a converted Global Zero zealot). So, you have to recruit people who are willing to be aggressive and know the issues well enough to debate occasionally. We had ~7 people (our executive board plus a few others) who were dedicated signature-getters over the six weeks of the campaign, and that was enough.

We used two main tactics to gather signatures. First, we positioned two people with petition sheets outside every dining hall over the course of several weeks according to a schedule created with Google Docs. We usually did this at dinner sometime between 5 and 7 pm. As people approached the entrance to the dining hall, we would ask some variation of: “Hey, would you be willing to sign a petition to cut nuclear weapons spending?” For those who actually stopped to listen, the signing rate was huge. Some “didn’t have time,” some outright said no, but the great majority were practically already signing before we finished our spiel.

Second, we used our networks (family, friends, and others) to gather more signatures directly, raise awareness, and send out mass emails (we considered an email response with the person’s full name typed in all caps a signature). We gathered the majority of signatures in the dining halls, but we definitely relied on the email and networking method to make it all the way to 1200. We were even able to get permission from a few residential college masters to send an email to the entire college (~500 students), which in some cases produced a very high yield.

Moral of the story – there’s no harm in asking! A lot of residential college masters and organizations said “no” to letting us send an email or attend an event, but enough said “yes” to make the whole effort worthwhile. Most exciting, due to the awareness we raised, some of our Global Zero members were actually approached by people around campus wanting to discuss nuclear issues. Here is Yale chapter member Jason Parisi’s story, in his own words:

There were two noteworthy questions, the first involving me being stopped on the sidewalk by someone who I had never seen before. She asked me about the extent to which people opposed our view of a nuclear weapons-free world. She told me that her roommates had previously all been pro-nuclear weapons but she (the girl who asked me) had been against. She said that she had managed to convince her roommates to look at what Global Zero was doing and the actual cost behind nuclear weapons and had managed to persuade all 5 of them to sign the petition for the cut nukes campaign. These were people who had actually been fervently pro-nuclear without fully considering the full implications of it. So that was an interesting correspondence; perhaps this highlights the extent to which many people who are pro-nuclear weapons don’t give the issue full consideration.

Another memorable situation was when I was in commons eating lunch. They were studying game theory, and the logic of nuclear weapons. These two juniors (I believe) approached me with what they had been studying in class and said that they believed what they were studying was incorrect - they believed that the game theory models overestimated the extent to which nuclear weapons benefitted both sides as post-Cold War strategic deterrence. They did raise an interesting question: even if we manage to achieve global nuclear disarmament, will many of the costs saved simply be transferred to conventional weapons investment instead of investment in education, energy, infrastructure, etc? I informed them that I hoped not, as public pressure is so high to create more desirable societies in many nuclear weapons states, and investment in military spending may be deemed hugely wasteful. It is a good question, and one for which there are probably few guarantees.

So most of all, the act of gathering signatures on campus has vastly expanded Global Zero’s name recognition at Yale and provided a solid public awareness platform from which to launch our other initiatives this year, including a master’s tea with Bruce Blair, a lecture with Joe Cirincione (in the same class I learned about Global Zero from my freshman year), and eventually our conference at Yale in February.

In summary: petition drives can seem tedious and low-impact, but there is no better substitute for building name recognition and awareness in a contained environment, like a college campus. Let’s harness the skills we’ve all learned from the cut nukes campaign for one final push this month!

by Kim Erdmann, Global Zero Student Leader and participant at the recent Student Institute and Global Zero Summit in LA.

Arriving in Los Angeles for the first time I felt empowered, destined to save the people I quickly passed in the airport. Could they see that I was part of a group of students who would protect them from potential nuclear fallout? Hmm… probably not. Truth is, few are aware of the threat nuclear weapons pose to humanity. It was the colossal job of Global Zero to teach us students how to change that.

Things really took off when students from all kinds of backgrounds sat behind their name tags and… named their favorite animal. Okay, we needed few icebreakers, but in no time we resembled a modern version of The Breakfast Club. Instead of sitting in detention, we conquered the application of Global Zero on our college campuses. The anthem of the Institute was easily “Don’t You Forget About Me”, possibly remixed with something from the Mission Impossible soundtrack.

Then, we got the opportunity to be formal observers at the Global Zero Summit at the Reagan Library. We greeted signatories including George Shultz, Richard Burt, Jack Matlock and many more. The powerful words of these world leaders taught us to persevere, and to strive to teach others about the mounting threat of nuclear weapons.

The Global Zero adventure was amazing. From Institute to Summit, all of us “Global Zero-ers” became friends and learned infinitely from one another. We shared differing approaches, from Tom Cruise-esque plans to those of a modern Molly Ringwald. Fundamentally we now know that Global Zero is a primary issue and needs attention from our friends and classmates. Going home to our own college campuses, we are equipped with know-how and with teammates who will make Global Zero an unstoppable movement.

Want to support the work Kim and other students are doing for Global Zero? Add your voice to the movement by signing the Cut Nukes petition.

This op-ed was published today in France’s La Croix. It is written by General Hugh Beach, Margaret Beckett, General Bernard Norlain, Paul Quilès, Michel Rocard and General David Ramsbotham on the 22nd anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall.

It is now 22 years since the fall of the Berlin Wall. This major event, followed by the dismantling of the Soviet bloc, brought an abrupt end to a bipolar world and marked a new era in international affairs.

And yet, since that time no new security doctrine has emerged as a consequence of this profound geopolitical change. Nuclear deterrence – exposing one’s opponent to a risk of mass destruction – remains a pillar of the defence policies of our two countries, France and Great Britain. Yet many people, especially among the younger generation, understand this doctrine is a relic of a bygone age, not relevant to the threats we face in the 21st century.

In the past, reducing the number of nuclear weapons was in effect a matter of maintaining a precarious balance between the Eastern and Western blocs. For their part, the British and French arsenals existed to protect Europe from the threat of large-scale aggression. Historically speaking, nuclear weapons were thought to have this strategic purpose.

Today, nothing could be further from the truth. The types of threats we once faced have been consigned to the history books. Nuclear deterrence is ill-suited to our rapidly changing 21st century world. In fact, the existence of nuclear weapons and its attendant risks of proliferation and nuclear terrorism are the greatest threats we now face. The instability we see around the world today argues strongly for the elimination of nuclear weapons – Global Zero – to be central to the development of a new international security doctrine.

Despite the above, the validity of maintaining nuclear arsenals is rarely questioned. This irrational and unhesitating attachment to nuclear weapons relies on an outdated orthodoxy. While portraying these arsenals as the ultimate guarantors of security, nuclear weapons countries continue to rely on them as symbols of their national prestige. Possessing such weapons provides these governments with the sense that they are Great Powers. Is there no better path for nations to exercise influence than to cling to these relics, trapped and imprisoned by the past?

Thousands of young Global Zero movement leaders understand that there is indeed another way. They believe in a world in which efforts to eliminate nuclear weapons will confer greater political prestige than the possession of outsized, expensive and dangerous arsenals. Today’s youth are not afraid of those who dwell on the other side of a Wall that no longer exists. It is precisely because this new generation can put the old fears behind them that they are able to adopt a fresh approach.

This rising generation of young people does not accept the illusion of stability nuclear weapons are presumed to confer. It understands that the nuclear weapons it has inherited cannot address the serious issues facing the 21st century world, such as terrorism, economic and financial crisis, climate change, poverty and epidemics. And it is outraged that more than $1 trillion will be spent globally over the next ten years to maintain nuclear arsenals against the backdrop of budget cuts that are undermining our social welfare system.

Changing prevailing attitudes is a shared moral and strategic duty. For the first time in decades, this idea is resonating among young people. We do not want them to fight alone. Like them and for them, we back Global Zero’s call for the first in history multilateral negotiations for the phased, verified elimination of all nuclear weapons worldwide. We urge our leaders to commit to participate in these negotiations so that we can leave the Cold War behind and build a new legacy of a world without nuclear weapons.

Signed by:
- Hugh Beach, General, former Deputy Commander-in-Chief of the land forces, United Kingdom
- Margaret Beckett, Foreign Secretary, United Kingdom
- Bernard Norlain, General, former Air Defense Commander and Air Combat Commander, France
- Paul Quilès, Former Minister of Defense, France
- Michel Rocard, Former Prime Minister, France
- David Ramsbotham, General, United Kingdom

Photo credit: gavinandrewstewart