Emily Defina, The Guardian
A global treaty prohibiting nuclear weapons becomes international law today. But the fight to rid the world of these dismal weapons continues.
Anti-nuclear protesters march in Pape’ete, the capital of Tahiti in French Polynesia, in 1995, denouncing French nuclear testing on Mururoa atoll. Photograph: Romeo Gacad/AFPSupported by
Thu 21 Jan 2021 19.00 GMT
In 1995, thousands of people marched peacefully hand-in-hand through the Tahitian capital of Pape’ete. The palm-lined streets were awash with songs of protest.
On a nearby shorefront, Cook Islanders had just arrived by traditional voyaging canoe: a vaka. They were there to deliver a message of solidarity with their island neighbours, en route to the nuclear test site of Moruroa.
These warriors, sailing at the forefront of the Pacific’s fight against nuclear weapons, delivered their message of peaceful resistance with prayers, songs and hakas.
The voyage represented one call in a chorus echoing across the Pacific, of people speaking out against the catastrophic humanitarian consequences of the use of nuclear weapons.
The men and women of Palau, who fought for the world’s first nuclear-free constitution, understood that the effects of nuclear weapons, like pandemics, do not respect human-drawn borders.
Twenty-five years on from the historic voyage of the Cook Islands’ vaka, the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons enters into force today.
This is the first legally binding international agreement to comprehensively prohibit nuclear weapons. Its ultimate goal is their total elimination.
The treaty was adopted and opened for signature in 2017 but required the commitment of 50 countries to become legally binding. Unsurprisingly, 10 of those national commitments came from the Pacific*, with the third-smallest nation in the world, Nauru, helping push the treaty over the line.
By joining the treaty, a quarter of the world’s nations are now legally bound to not develop, test, produce, acquire, possess, stockpile, use or threaten to use nuclear weapons.
But what use is such a treaty when powerful states who possess these weapons are not on board? We hear, often, of when international humanitarian law – the law of war – fails. We are confronted with the use of child soldiers, indiscriminate attacks on civilians, and the cruel treatment of detainees.
One ray of hope in this desolate picture is that these violations achieve their potency by the very fact that we all see them for what they are: violations of the law.
Law is an imperfect tool, slower and less effective than we would like, but as we have seen in the past, it does have the power to change behaviour. Violations of humanitarian law are far from eliminated. But they are certainly stigmatised and there is a trove of everyday successes that point to compliance with the law.
This makes all the difference to the lives of people affected: wounded fighters allowed through enemy checkpoints; humanitarian relief permitted across frontlines, messages conveyed from detainees to their families.
These events may not make headlines. But they do represent saved lives, reunited families and communities protected from the worst of war. These moments serve as reminders: we would be worse off without the law.
And treaties that prohibit and limit the use of weapons do have an impact.
The Ottawa mine ban treaty led to a reduction in casualties from landmines, the destruction of over 50m stockpiled mines and the clearance of mine-contaminated land. The use of anti-personnel mines is now widely stigmatised and many militaries have removed these indiscriminate weapons from their arsenals.
The development or use of chemical and biological weapons is now so universally condemned that no country in the world would proudly stand by a chemical weapons program on the international stage.
A quarter of a century since the people of the Cook Islands sailed out, the international community has listened, responded, and said ‘no’ to nuclear weapons.
The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons is not the end of the journey, it is only the start of a hard road of diplomatic engagement.
Although countries with nuclear weapons are not likely to join the treaty soon, with every country that joins, the momentum builds, paving the way for the eventual elimination of these weapons.
The international framework we already have in place to regulate nuclear weapons – such as the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and our own regional nuclear-free zone treaty, the Treaty of Rarotonga – remains critical.
This latest, overarching ban of nuclear weapons only complements efforts and treaties that have come before.‘Will to fight together’: Fiji has taken another bold step in the battle against nuclear weaponsRead more
And the key role the Pacific has played in making this treaty a reality underscores the collective might of small and dedicated, peaceful communities.
There is work ahead but today we must celebrate what we have achieved so far.
Today, a region whose very name means peace has led the world in committing to a safer future for humanity and our environment. Amid everything else, today is a welcome start to 2021.
- Emily Defina is a legal adviser with the International Committee of the Red Cross.
* Ten Pacific states have ratified the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons: Cook Islands, Fiji, Kiribati, Nauru, New Zealand, Niue, Palau, Samoa, Tuvalu and Vanuatu.