campaign

THE MAGAZINE OF THE CAMPAIGN FOR NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT SPRING 2010

Campaign for Nuclear

Disarmament,
Mordechai Vanunu
House,162 Holloway
Rd, London N7 8DQ
Photo: Cynthia Cockburn

Tel: 020 7700 2393

Fax: 020 7700 2357
enquiries@cnduk.org
www.cnduk.org

Inside
9/11: A personal journey Nobel prize winner Jody Williams speaks out
Make Trident an election issue Michael Foot – an electoral lesson
CND Cancer links to nuclear power Latest on ‘missile defence’
 Editorial
A new START?
Kate Hudson, CND Chair
T’S A YEAR since President Obama
I made his famous Prague speech,
committing to a nuclear weapons-free
world. As President Medvedev of Russia
added his voice to the call, hopes were
high that real progress would be made
towards that goal. Those were truly
inspiring moments, and although there
have been times since then that I felt hope
was receding, finally words have been
turned into actions. Now a new Treaty is
to be signed, which will make significant
reductions to US and Russian deployed
nuclear weapons. It’s not everything we
want, but it is a step in the right direction.
But at times over the past few months it
has seemed as if the whole process could
be derailed. So what was going wrong?
After all, countless world leaders and
dignitaries have also spoken up. Thousands
will gather at the nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty (NPT) Review Conference in New
York in May, to urge states to agree steps
for a disarmament process. So why did the
Opinions expressed by authors in Campaign are their own, and do not necessarily reflect the policies of CND.
2
momentum slow? After all, President
Obama even received the Nobel Peace
Prize because of his intentions on nuclear
disarmament. And the main obstacle to
agreement – Bush’s planned ‘missile
defence’ system in the Czech Republic
and Poland – appeared to be abandoned.
Sadly, ‘missile defence’ reappeared in
the autumn as a spanner in the works.
The US administration has plans for a
new version of the system in eastern
Europe, this time in Romania, and
perhaps Bulgaria. It’s hard to see why US
leaders think this will be more acceptable
to Russia. While the US continues to
Sadly,
‘missile defence’
has reappeared
as a spanner
in the works
towards a nuclear
weapons-free world
claim that the system will defend the US
from potential missile strikes from Iran,
no one really believes that, particularly
not the Russians. They see quite clearly
that this system enables the US to
achieve nuclear primacy – the capacity to
launch a first strike against them and
mop up any retaliatory strike with the
system’s interceptor missiles.
It is this new version that was proving
to be an obstacle to the new START
Treaty. The Americans refused to include
it and the Russians refused to leave it out.
For the time being, a compromise has
been reached. The system has been
included in the preamble to the Treaty,
and either side can cease reductions if
they feel that ‘defensive’ systems are
putting them at risk. But is this enough to
ensure ratification of the Treaty by the
Russian parliament? And is it too much to
ensure ratification by the US Senate?
As if it’s not creating enough problems
already, missile defence is now being turned
on China. For some years the US has been
pursuing an Aegis sea-based interceptor
missile system with Japan, Australia and
South Korea. This is now centre stage
following the completion – after weeks of
protest by China – of a $6.5 billion
weapons transfer to Taiwan, including 200
advanced Patriot anti-ballistic missiles.
It is also providing Taiwan with eight
frigates which can be equipped with the
Aegis system to carry missile interceptors.
Adding Taiwan to the Aegis system is a
considerable provocation to China. Not
surprisingly, China Daily observed that the
weapons deal with Taiwan ‘is the key part
of a US strategic encirclement of China’.
Russia has been encircled by US and
NATO bases for decades, and China is
now getting the same treatment. There is
no doubt that the US sees China as a
strategic competitor, but provoking a new
nuclear arms race with China doesn’t
seem a sensible option by any yardstick.
We must continue to back President
Obama’s vision of a nuclear weapons-free
world. I, for one, believe that he is sincere
in that aim, but we must make it clear, to
our own government as well, that such
initiatives have to be viable.
If we want a disarmament process that
will work, there’s no point in provoking
Russia and China with ‘missile defence’.

9/11: a personal journey
Terry Rockefeller
N 11TH SEPTEMBER 2001 my sister
O Laura Rockefeller died in the North
Tower of the World Trade Center. Laura
was an actress and singer, but that morning
she had reported for a two-day, freelance
job helping to run a business conference.
The following days were filled with
devastating pain and a numbing dread that
the violence of 9/11 could spin out of
control. Now, more than eight years later,
while I still grieve for our family’s loss and
for the missed opportunities that life would
have brought Laura, I am profoundly
aware of how the 9/11 tragedy forged
powerful bonds of compassion and
common purpose among people
throughout the world.
In the months after 9/11, an
organisation called September 11th
Families for Peaceful Tomorrows
[www.peacefultomorrows.org] was
founded by relatives of 9/11 victims. They
believed that nonviolent responses to the
terrorist attacks not only were possible, but
would, in the long run, create a safer world
for people everywhere. The name of the
organisation comes from Dr. King’s
observation: ‘Wars are poor chisels for
carving out peaceful tomorrows.’ Four of
our members travelled to Afghanistan in
January 2002 to bear witness to the
suffering of civilians whose innocent family
members had become the ‘collateral
damage’ of the war that the US, UK, and
the international coalition are waging.
Their journey moved me to join
Peaceful Tomorrows and try to address the
difficult issues that were arising as the US
and the world responded to 9/11:
 Were we courageous enough to deplore
the 9/11 terrorists’ tactics, while
acknowledging the reasons they gave:
US military bases in the Muslim holy
lands, and failure to end the Israeli
occupation of Palestinian territory?
 Would US security measures and the
treatment of alleged perpetrators of the
attacks respect international law and the
US Constitution, or would they instead
threaten civil liberties and human rights?
 Were wars of retaliation that
overwhelmingly killed civilians going to
reduce terrorism?
Our members studied war and learned
a great deal about civilian casualties. The
trends were deeply disturbing. At the dawn
of the 20th century, 10% of those killed in
war were civilians; by the century’s end,
largely because of aerial warfare and ever
more powerful bombs, it had risen to
90%. The world decried the deaths of
innocent civilians on 9/11. As 9/11 family
members, we organised to oppose all war
in our loved ones’ names.
One of the most inspiring events of our
early days was the April 2002 visit to
Ground Zero in New York City by three
Hibakusha, survivors of the atomic
bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Accompanied by four 9/11 family
members, the Hibakusha stood at the site
of the terrorist attacks and called for an
end to ‘all violence.’ Their journey of 57
years from the Ground Zeros of Japan to
the World Trade Center site taught us a
profound lesson about the commitment
required to end war and abolish weapons
of mass destruction. Also profound was
our awareness that we were working to
Viewpoint
build an international community for peace
by standing in solidarity with people with
whom our nation had once been at war.
Over Peaceful Tomorrows’ eight years,
we have been honoured to collaborate
with many organisations throughout the
world whose members were also
personally affected by war and terrorism,
yet responded with a call for non-violence.
We have learned so much from these
courageous activists. Among them: The
Parents’ Circle/Family Forum; The
Afghan Women’s Network; La’Onf; The
Institute for Healing of Memories.
This year, Peaceful Tomorrows is
especially gratified to be part of the
international effort to move the world
toward a nuclear-free future. We join
CND and others calling upon the 2010
NPT Review Conference to make ‘an
unambiguous commitment to begin
negotiations on…elimination of all
nuclear weapons.’
I do this work because Laura’s death
taught me how interconnected we all are
on this planet. Peaceful Tomorrows’ work
honours the Hibakusha who travelled to
Ground Zero, because the abolition of
nuclear arms will be a profound step
forward in breaking the cycles of violence
engendered by war and terrorism.
Terry Rockefeller joined September 11th
Families for Peaceful Tomorrows in 2002.
3
 Campaigns
Abominable AWE
Photos: Dawn Rothwell
Dawn Rothwell,
CND Campaigns Officer
STRONG MESSAGE, picked up by
A national and international news, was
sent to the government on the 15th
February that the abolition of nuclear
weapons is vital to ensure peace and
security in the world. It is what most of the
world wants, including the majority of the
British population. On that bitingly cold
day around 800 campaigners converged on
AWE Aldermaston, with banners and
placards, with songs and with determin-
ation. Organised by Trident Ploughshares,
and supported by CND and other groups,
this blockade was the largest in many years.
And, often using all kinds of strange and
ingenious ways of attaching themselves to
each other, the demonstrators blocked
every one of the seven gates to the
abominable site for many hours.
Aldermaston is where the British
nuclear warheads are designed and
produced. In line with plans to replace the
whole Trident nuclear weapons system, the
government has said that a decision will be
made in the next parliament about whether
current warheads will be refurbished or
new ones developed. AWE says its role is
‘to maintain a capability to produce a
4
successor system should the government
require one in the future’. With major new
redevelopment and construction at the site
since 2002 and nearly 1,500 new staff
employed there, it is clear that AWE is
more than ready to produce new warheads.
All of this has meant that spending on new
facilities at AWE has increased 17-fold
over the past decade, from £24 million in
2000 to £420 million in 2009.
Despite much opposition, many key
facilities for the site have been given
planning permission. The Orion laser
facility, which simulates the conditions of
nuclear explosions, was approved in 2006
and has now become a silvery construction
the size of a football pitch close to the
boundary fence between Construction and
Home Office Gates. Planned to be fully
operational by 2012, the Helen laser it
replaces is slowly being dismantled. The
AWE scientists held an ‘emotional farewell’
ceremony to mark Helen’s closure in 2009;
meanwhile they continue their research at
US facilities. Most recently, planning
permission for AWE’s new ‘Project
Pegasus’ enriched uranium handling facility
was approved by West Berkshire Council
even though it received 1,400 objections,
many of them made thanks to CND
supporters. This facility, replacing older
facilities, will process military stocks of
already enriched uranium for nuclear
warhead components and nuclear
submarine reactor fuel.
At every step of the way we must
continue to oppose new developments at
Aldermaston. Next up for planning
permission is ‘Project Hydrus’, a
hydrodynamics facility which, in
combination with others including the
Orion Laser and new supercomputers, will
allow the UK to generate data particularly
advantageous to any new weapons
development. Underground nuclear
weapons testing can be avoided using these
facilities and the UK can claim to support
the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty
(CTBT) it has signed and ratified, even
though the CTBT’s core objective is the
pursuit of nuclear disarmament and
preventing proliferation. Most other
countries have also signed and ratified this
treaty, although some – such as the US,
China, Iran, Israel, Pakistan and North
Korea – have not, which means it cannot
enter into force and so nuclear weapons
testing cannot be legally outlawed. When
the UK, and other nuclear weapon states,
get round the CTBT with advanced
technology, this discourages other
countries from supporting the treaty
because it makes the notion of nuclear
haves and have-nots even stronger.
Until UK nuclear weapons are scrapped
we must persistent in condemning AWE
Aldermaston’s work in every way we can:
join blockades and protests, submit
objections to the planning inquiries for
each and every facility and support the
Aldermaston Women’s Peace Camp(aign)
(see the back page for details). See their website
at www.aldermaston.net and the Nuclear
Information Services website
http://nuclearinfo.org for detailed
information on AWE developments.
Keep an eye on the CND website for
details of how to object to Project
Hydrus (planning permission inquiry due
mid-2010).
 Viewpoint

Pound them with their own words

Jody Williams led the successful international campaign to outlaw land mines which resulted in the
1997 Mine Ban Treaty; she won a Nobel Peace Prize for her efforts. In February she joined the
Aldermaston blockade where she ‘locked on’ at the ‘Women’s Gate’. The following day she was key
speaker at CND’s public meeting ‘Banning nuclear weapons is easier than you think.’

Below are excerpts from her speech: It was a great moment when Bill Clinton,
another one of my favourite Presidents –
DON’T HAVE FAITH in Obama, not – was speaking before the United
‘I I have to say unfortunately. I noted
the other day that he has requested the
Nations … and he called for the eventual
elimination of landmines – the first
biggest increase in nuclear budget since President/Head of State in the world to
1944, so words are one thing actions are do that in the UN. Now we all knew that
another. I don’t care what they say. he was looking at ‘eventual’, we knew that
Unfortunately I am a cynic, I operate on was the part of the phrase he liked,
the premise that you never believe their ‘eventual’ elimination. The word we liked
words. The only thing that matters is was ‘elimination’ so that’s what we
what they actually do. focused on, and we kept using it to beat
We were fortunate in the land mine people over the head that Clinton had
campaign because there was no turf [to called for the elimination of landmines!
argue about] because nobody worked on are already illegal in terms of And so you’ve got Obama who has said in
it, nobody thought about it, nobody cared discrimination and proportionality. They Prague that America was committed [to
about it. So when we started the creation are already illegal! So, to get a grassroots nuclear disarmament]! So you’ve got to
of the campaign, we went out to natural campaign fired up, you don’t need to get keep pounding them on about how
allies and invited them to be part of a into the minutiae unless you’re really America is committed. And then you also
process of creating a political movement excited to get into the minutiae. Mostly go after them on the other side, if you are
to ban land mines. And nobody wanted to you just need the call that these things so freaking committed then why has your
take the lead so they were all thrilled that suck, we need to get rid of them, save the budget been the biggest since 1944? Those
somebody else could do it and they could planet, ban nukes. are little tools but they actually do work’.
join up. And we started with a staff of one, We were able to use every little thing  You can watch the whole of Jody
which was me, and two NGOs, one in … every little element that gave us room Williams speech on the CND website at
Germany and one in the US so we could to pound them with their own language. www.cnduk.org/jodywilliams
call it the International Campaign to Ban
Landmines. Ridiculous but it sounded
awesome. We did grow from that pathetic
beginning to about 1,300 non-
governmental organisations working
together in 90 countries around the world
under a simple call to ban landmines.
I think sometimes in trying to make
people understand that it’s doable to ban
nuclear weapons there is too much
emphasis on the NPT and the CTBT
and the LMNOP and ‘this that and the
other’. I don’t care, in a sense I don’t
need to be a nuclear physicist, I don’t
need to know how the damn things are
made or put together. What I know is
that under existing international law they

5
GENERAL ELECTION 2010
Scrap Trident – a vote
Kate Hudson, CND Chair
S WE HEAD for the polls in
A May, nuclear weapons are a
more significant electoral issue
than they have been for many years.
The financial crisis, an increasing
understanding that nuclear weapons
serve no military purpose, and a global
trend towards nuclear abolition, all
serve to build popular opposition
to Trident and its replacement.
Polls have repeatedly shown
a majority against Trident, from
across the political spectrum. It is
our responsibility to make Trident
central to the election campaign and
to ensure that the new parliament and
government do not press ahead with
Trident replacement.
Already the ‘Initial Gate’ decision on
the replacement process has been
delayed until after the NPT Review
Conference– let’s make sure the new
government doesn’t think it can just roll
it through after that. Please help us
achieve this.
Lobbying the candidates
We are aiming to lobby as many
mainstream parliamentary candidates as
we can. We are doing this both by letter
and on-line. We are asking for
candidates’ views on Trident replace-
ment and a Nuclear Weapons
Convention. Responses are being
published on our website and you can
access any responses to help in your
local campaigning. We are also asking
6
you to encourage as many people as
possible to use our on-line lobbying
tool. Via our website it will take you just
moments to contact your candidates on
these issues. Go to
www.cnduk.org/election. If you can,
please encourage other organisations to
make the link to this tool to spread the
message far and wide.
Shaping policy
The forthcoming general election
offers you an opportunity to try and
use your vote to influence policy
debates in the next parliament. We
need to make sure that our MPs – new
or re-elected – and the incoming
government, take nuclear disarmament
seriously. A CND election pack, which
provides you with information about
party policies, sample questions, model
letters, press releases, ideas about
meetings and hustings, and much more,
is available on our website, or by post if
you call the office on 0207 700 2393.
Priority themes
Whilst there may be local issues that
you will wish to raise with your
candidates, we would recommend that
you focus particularly on the issues of
Trident replacement and a Nuclear
Weapons Convention. These have been
the main strands of our work over the
past year, in the run up to the NPT
Review Conference in May. Briefing
sheets on these two issues, as well as a
host of others, are available on the
CND website.
winner Michael Foot –
an electoral lesson
For over two decades, Michael Foot
was wrongly blamed for the defeat of
the Labour Party in 1983. As one of
CND’s founders and a longstanding
supporter, Michael Foot backed
unilateral nuclear disarmament. Under
his leadership, and at the time of the
massive protests against the siting of

Photo: Sue Longbottom

US cruise missiles in Britain, Labour
adopted a pro-disarmament policy.
At the June 1983 general election,
the Conservative Party was re-elected
and the vote for Labour was reduced
from 36.9% in 1979 to 28.3%.
Needless to say, the media and the
right wing of the Labour Party rushed
to blame Foot’s defence policy for the
defeat. This myth was then used to
justify pro-nuclear policies by the
Labour leadership – and is still used
today. In fact, when I have debated
Trident replacement in Constituency
Labour Party meetings over the past
few years, the small minority of pro-
Trident members present have
wheeled out this tired old argument
to justify wasting £76 billion of tax
payers’ money on a new generation
of nuclear weapons.
But this argument was wrong then
and it is wrong now. There were clear
majorities in public opinion polls
against cruise, Trident and nuclear
bases in Britain. The key factor in the
Labour defeat was the split of the
Social Democratic Party (SDP) from
Labour, which succeeded in massively
cutting the Labour vote and splitting
Michael Foot speaking to Jon Snow at
the No War on Iraq demo, Feb 2003
opposition to the Tories. Although
the Conservative vote fell, and they
were outpolled by Labour and the
SDP combined, they won the
election. This was clearly not an
endorsement of Margaret Thatcher’s
nuclear policy.
Today, polls show that a majority
opposes Trident, from across the
political spectrum. Senior military
figures describe Trident as militarily
useless. Money needs to be saved
and common sense says it shouldn’t
be spent on nuclear weapons which
only increase the danger of nuclear
proliferation and do nothing to meet
the security threats that we face. The
reality is, nuclear disarmament is a
vote winner, not a vote loser. To
Michael Foot – our respect and great
thanks to a man of principle.

7
 Campaigns
Disarmament or dominance?
Sarah Cartin, CND Vice-Chair
HE CONCLUSION of President
T Obama’s review into the role and
purpose of the US Missile Defence
programme in September 2009 brought
with it the positive news that the plans
to build a radar station in the Czech
Republic and locate interceptor missiles
in Poland were to be scrapped. Quite
rightly, this was a time of celebration
for campaigners in both countries who
had worked to draw international
attention to the programme and the
impact it would have on their security.
But new developments are afoot.
Alarmingly – with shades of Reagan’s ‘Star
Wars’ system – the recent, successful test
of a modified Boeing 747 equipped with a
laser to shoot down an ‘enemy’ missile will
bolster plans to expand the programme.
This is despite very real concern about the
impact of a space-based arms race and the
expansion of first-strike capabilities.
Moreover, decisions about Poland and
the Czech Republic do not indicate that
the missile defence programme is being
halted or significantly scaled back. On the
contrary, the move is part of a wider
strategic reconfiguration to secure an
established US military presence across
eastern Europe and the Gulf states, whilst
rapidly increasing the deployment of sea-
based missile defence hardware.
Significantly too, at the beginning of
March, the Polish President agreed to a
‘status of forces agreement’ with the US
(paving the way for US troops there), and
to host shorter range US Patriot Missiles as
part of a plan to be fully integrated in the
Missile Defence programme.
Coupled with the NATO Secretary
General’s recent efforts to build support
for an expanded NATO Missile Defence
system as part of a continued NATO
nuclear-armed strategy, the long-term
threats are already apparent.
The cloak of NATO is providing the
US with the framework it needs to build
8
The continued development of Missile Defence jeopardises progress on global nuclear
disarmament
support in countries targeted for inclusion
in the reviewed Missile Defence strategy.
The US claims that its proposals to
deploy missiles (the Standard Missile 3
system) on destroyers in European waters
are in response to a threat of possible short-
and medium-range missiles launched from
Iran. Few people really believe this,
interpreting the system as an anti-Russia –
and ultimately anti-China – device.
So Romania’s apparently rapid
agreement in February to host a land-
based version of these missiles by 2015 is
once again provoking tension and
increasing insecurity in the region.
Likewise, Bulgarian peace groups are
concerned about suspected talks with US
officials over their country’s future
involvement in the programme.
Whilst the revised positioning somewhat
reduces the immediate threat of missile
range capability identified by Moscow
under the original Polish deployment plans,
in the global context, the long-term security
implications are clear. The entrenchment of
US military capacity sends out a very clear
message about their intentions over regional
interference, proxy state control, resource
dominance and first-strike capabilities.
This positioning does little for US-
Photo: Dawn Rothwell
Russian relations, and will potentially
undermine the opportunities presented by
the re-negotiated START treaty, which has
been tentatively scheduled for completion
in April. Any attempts by Russia and the
US to work together to reduce their
nuclear arsenals should be welcomed, not
threatened by the creeping global shadow
of Missile Defence.
In April 2009 Obama pledged his
commitment to a world without nuclear
weapons. Just a year later he is overseeing
the rapid expansion of the Missile Defence
programme. But the two are incompatible.
The continued development of Missile
Defence – including at Fylingdales and
Menwith Hill in Britain – jeopardises the
long term global security required for
nuclear disarmament to be an achievable
and sustainable strategy.
To talk peace through disarmament
whilst doing deals to secure global military
dominance is not going to work. A
successful implementation of the START
treaty and real commitment to the NPT
conference provide crucial opportunities for
Obama to take control of the situation and
halt the escalation of military expansion.
Only then can his pledges be taken
seriously.

Cancer links to nuclear power
Living close to nuclear power stations raises infant leukaemia risks
Dr Ian Fairlie
MONG the many concerns over
A nuclear power plants, one especially
provokes public anxiety: the fear that
infants living near them suffer increased
cancer risks. Though a link has long been
suspected, it has never been accepted by
nuclear scientists. Now that may change.
Studies in the 1980s revealed increased
incidences of childhood leukaemia near
UK nuclear installations at Windscale
(now Sellafield), Burghfield and Dounreay.
The official response was that the
radiation doses from the nearby plants
were too low to explain the increased
incidences of leukaemia. The Committee
on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the
Environment (COMARE), responsible
for advising the government, concluded
that the explanation remained unknown
but was not likely to be radiation.
But a recent flurry of epidemiological
studies has reopened the debate. In 2007,
researchers in South Carolina carried out a
meta-analysis of 17 epidemiological
studies covering 136 nuclear sites in the
UK, Canada, France, the US, Germany,
Japan and Spain. Incidences of leukaemia
close to the sites increased from 14 to
21%, depending on proximity.
Following this, a German study found
14 cases of leukaemia, compared to an
expected four cases, between 1990 and
2005 in children living close to the
Krümmel nuclear plant near Hamburg,
making it the largest leukaemia cluster
anywhere in the world.
This was upstaged by the yet more
surprising KiKK study (a German
acronym for Childhood Cancer near
Nuclear Power Plants) published in 2008.
This impressive four-year study
commissioned by the German
government found higher cancer
incidences near all German nuclear
facilities. In more detail, it found a 1.6 fold
increase in embryonal cancer risk and a
2.2 fold increase in leukaemia risk among
children under five living within five km
of nuclear power stations between 1980
and 2003. Most striking was the strong
association with proximity to nuclear
power stations. The German government
accepted these findings and there was a
public outcry and media debate in
Germany, but not elsewhere.
The most obvious explanation –
radioactive releases from nearby nuclear
power stations – conflicts with the official
estimates of their radiation doses, which are
extremely low. Readers who followed the
UK leukaemia clusters in the 1980-90s will
have a sense of déjà vu. The problem is that
the models used to estimate radiation doses
from the radioactive emissions from
nuclear facilities are riddled with
uncertainty. This was the main conclusion
of a 2004 report by the Committee
Examining Radiation Risks of Internal
Emitters set up by the UK government.
So radiation could indeed be the cause
of the cancers. If so, how might local
residents have been exposed? Most
nuclear reactors have very high emissions
of tritium. The UK government’s 2007
report on tritium concluded that its
hazards should be doubled.
Scientists in many countries continue
to discuss the likely causes of the KiKK
cancer increases; in the UK there are three
on-going studies into cancers near UK
nuclear facilities. Unfortunately, the
government (strongly committed to
building more nuclear
power stations) is
playing a clever
game ignoring
p o w e r
these findings
and new studies. uc lea r
N – not worth the risk!
In November it
was forced to
News
initiate a Consultation on its proposals to
‘justify’ radiation exposures from proposed
new nuclear power stations (justification is
a legal obligation under a little-known EC
Directive requiring those who propose
nuclear power stations to balance their
health risks versus their putative economic
benefits). Clearly, evidence of infant
cancers near UK nuclear power stations
would be extremely relevant. But the
results of the three new UK studies are
available only after the closing date of the
Consultation, and the government refused
point blank to extend the deadline.
The overall conclusion is that the
government seems to be ‘massaging’ the
scientific evidence to fit existing policies.
New evidence of an association
between increased cancers and proximity
to nuclear facilities raises difficult
questions. Should pregnant women and
young children be advised to move away
from nuclear facilities? Should nearby
residents eat vegetables from their
gardens? But, crucially, the most important
question remains whether the UK
government should now rethink its
nuclear policies.
 Dr Ian Fairlie is an independent
consultant on radioactivity in the
environment. Between 2000 and 2004 he
was Scientific Secretary to the
government’s Committee Examining
Radiation Risks of Internal Emitters
(CERRIE). He has also written an
excellent CND briefing Infant leukaemias
near nuclear power stations with further
information – download from the
Briefings page of the CND website.
9
 Trade union update In the news
Toxic legacy of British nuclear
Get your union to say: No to Trident tests
Already being sued for compensation by
British test veterans, the MoD is now
going to be sued by Aborigines and

A S THE TRADE UNION conference season looms, union

positions on Trident are vitally important. In 2006, a strong RMT
resolution against Trident replacement from the floor of the TUC
Australian former service personnel who
also have suffered cancer and illness
caused by the British nuclear weapons
Conference was of the greatest significance in our campaigning in testing on their land. The Daily Telegraph
reported how some of those seeking
the run up to the parliamentary vote in March 2007. At this time of compensation were members of the
spending cuts, many trade unionists are acutely aware that spending families from the town of Woomera which
on Trident means loss of jobs and services in other sectors. lost 60 infants, some without an apparent
cause, during the decade of testing.
So please help us get this message out loud and clear, through the
movement and beyond. Below please find a model resolution that Iran sanctions
A fourth round of sanctions has been
you can take to your union branch, to win support for scrapping
proposed against Iran, in response to
Trident and its replacement. You can change it to suit your own continuing fears that it is developing a
union’s requirements and you can add in a commitment to affiliate to nuclear weapons programme. But China,
CND, if you think that is appropriate. Turkey and Brazil argue that further
diplomacy is needed rather than
sanctions. Israeli newspaper Haaretz
reported in December that Obama had
With Britain facing its biggest economic crisis since the Second World War
warned China’s President that the US
the country can ill-afford to spend billions of pounds every year on the could not hold back Israeli strikes against
Trident nuclear weapons system and in excess of £76bn on replacing it Iran for much longer if further sanctions
with a new generation of nuclear weapons. The Trident system comprises were not supported.
four nuclear-armed submarines, each of which can carry up to 48 nuclear
India’s growing military might
warheads. Each warhead has eight times the power of the atomic bomb
In February, in response to concerns about
that was dropped on Hiroshima in 1945, killing an estimated 140,000 the growth and modernisation of India’s
people. conventional forces, Pakistan stated that it
will not give up its nuclear weapons. It
The current Trident submarines will start to reach the end of their service
also will not sign the NPT as a non-nuclear
life in 2024. The present government is pressing ahead with building a weapon state, as it might have done in
replacement so that Britain can continue to be armed with nuclear the past had India been prepared to do
weapons into the 2050s and beyond. Yet opinion polls consistently show likewise. India is continuing to develop its
a majority against Britain’s possession of nuclear weapons and senior nuclear might with new submarines
armed with short-range nuclear tipped
military figures have said they are ‘militarily useless’ and should be
ballistic missiles.
scrapped. Such a replacement would:
1. be extremely expensive, over £76 billion including the lifetime running North Korea to build up nuclear
force
costs of a new system;
At the start of March, North Korea’s
2. mean that Britain was continuing to flout its undertaking under the Foreign Ministry said it would advance its
nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) to ‘negotiate in good faith’ nuclear weapons capability in response to
towards nuclear disarmament Obama’s ‘threats and provocations’
3. help provoke proliferation, because if we say we need nuclear weapons (reported by Reuters news agency).
for our security, other countries will come to the same conclusion
A-bomb survivors’ increased risk
4. undermine current international initiatives towards global abolition of of stroke and heart disease
nuclear weapons, backed by Presidents Obama and Medvedev, and New research findings reported in the
other world leaders British Medical Journal, show that those
Japanese who survived the Hiroshima and
Therefore this Conference calls on the government to: Nagasaki bombings have had a much
1. cancel plans for Trident replacement and spend the money saved on higher chance of suffering from heart
public services such as health, education and social services disease or stroke because of the moderate
2. abide by its undertakings under the NPT by scrapping the current levels of radiation they received. The study
Trident nuclear weapon system at an early date suggests further research into the risks
posed by lower doses.
3. support international initiatives for the global abolition of nuclear
weapons.

10
 Muriel’s Grapevine

COTTISH voices resounded loudly

S against nuclear weapons in March
with around two thousand people
joining the Cut Trident Not Jobs
demonstration organised by Scotland’s
for Peace. Headed by Alex Salmond,
First Minister of Scotland, the demo
wound its way from the Scottish
Parliament through the city to finish
with a big rally at Grassmarket.

More good news is that Tower

Display of artwork by children from primary schools, along the main beach of Punta

Hamlets CND reported that, with a lot

Umbria, Southern Spain, as part of a special day for peace and non-violence. The dove

of tireless campaigning, they have finally

with the paper feathers is made out of notes from all of the children in one class. The

managed to win over their local

paper-chain is made of links with the name and a message on it from each child.

Councillors who have now voted
unanimously for a Tower Hamlets
Mayor for Peace. Other groups take
heed, with lots of patience it can be
done!
Chesterfield CND’s Secretary was
moved to tears in January by a
wonderful display of artwork along the
main beach of Punta Umbria, a small
Phone, broadband & mobile
fishing and industrial town in Southern
Spain (see photo above). On a special
day for peace and non-violence in the
town, all of the children from the
primary schools had taken part in a
project to show what peace and
happiness meant to them.
Greater Manchester and District
CND has created a new regional map
which they are using as
an important
campaigning tool in the
Finally, Bristol CND has launched
an exciting, new, short film competition
for young people focused around what
nuclear weapons mean to them.
Creativity and originality are the aims
and special equipment or technology is
not necessary – participants can even
use their mobile phones to make their
films. Films can be live action or
animation and must be between 30
seconds and one minute long. There are
two age categories 12-16 and 17-25, and

run up to the election. winners will share £1,000 of cash prizes

The map simply gives the which will be presented at the 2010
ice s cost of replacing Trident Encounters Film Festival in Bristol.
for each of the towns in  See the competition website at
serv
nd mobile
ro adband a ith a difference
their area. The group www.thechanceofalifetime.org
ho ne , b r w
Get p coms sup
plie
from a tele
calculates the cost for
e tim e
C N D at the sam
each town by firstly
p o rt
...and sup
dividing the overall
estimated cost of
10 credit
give you a £
replacing Trident by how
w e w ill o
supporter, of your sp
end will g
As a CND 6 % rk
many people there are in
t bill AN D n t w o
on your firs ir excelle
e m co ntinue the

the UK. Then, by

help th
to CND to

Call: 0845 458 9040 knowing the population

of each town, the cost
per person can be
Visit: www.thephone.coop/CND

multiplied by this figure.

QUOTE: ‘CND’ and AF0267

11
 What’s on
Diary
16-17TH APRIL
Peace History Conference. This
fourth conference, organised by the
Movement for the Abolition of War
with the International Peace Bureau
is back by popular demand at the
Imperial War Museum.
To book places, see
www.abolishwar.org.uk or call
01908 511 948.
23-26TH APRIL
Join the camp against nuclear new
build at Sizewell Nuclear Power Station
in Suffolk to say ‘Nuclear Power is not
the answer to climate chaos’.
Organised by Nuclear Power People.
 Contact: mellcndeast@cnduk.org
or nuclearpeoplepower-
owner@lists.riseup.net
30TH APRIL – 1ST MAY
Disarm Now! International NGO
Conference for a Nuclear Free,
Peaceful, Just and Sustainable World
at Riverside Church, New York City
in advance of the NPT Review
Conference.
For more details see:
http://peaceandjusticenow.org
2ND MAY
International Day of Action for a
Nuclear-Free World. Rally and March
in New York.
For more details see:
http://peaceandjusticenow.org
3-28TH MAY
NPT Review Conference
We are sending a delegation to New
York to join thousands of peace
activists to press for action on
nuclear disarmament. This is a very
important opportunity so join our
delegation, or organise an event or
a media angle locally.
12 Campaign is printed on 100% recycled paper
Last call to action!
1. Petition
Please send all signed No to Trident
Replacement, Yes to a Nuclear
Weapons Convention petitions to the
CND national office as soon as you
can. The deadline has passed but we
can still accept petitions until mid-
April as we need as many signatures
as possible to hand in with a global
petition at the NPT Review
Conference in New York in May.
2. Postcard
rd – don’t waste
Times are hanuc
our money on lear weapons!
or
N O TRIDENT REPLACEMENT
Campaign for Nuclear Disarmam
ent
Send the enclosed Times are Hard
postcard to the Foreign Office to put
as much pressure on as you can
before the NPT Review Conference.
If you’ve already sent one, thank
you and please pass this oni to a
friend or relative.
3. Advert
Add your name to the No Trident
Replacement advert being printed in
the national press in the run-up to the
General Election. Use the mailsheet
this magazine came with or go to
www.cnduk.org/advertdonate
8TH MAY 2010
MANA Concert for Peace: the
Chilingirian String Quartet at the
Hinde Street Methodist Church,
Thayer Street, London W1
Book tickets at www.mana.org.uk
or call 020 8455 1030.
5TH JUNE
A global day of action has been
called to highlight the outcome of
the NPT review conference. Put this
date in your diary as actions in the
UK are being planned.
Watch our website for more
information www.cnduk.org
9TH -10TH OCTOBER
? Britain is
in the middle of the Making Disarmament Happen, CND
worst economic crisis
in decades. But the
government is
planning to spend
National Conference and AGM will
as much as
£76 billion on
incorporate an International meeting
replacing Britain's
Trident
nuclear weapons
system. on the theme of making nuclear
• 020 7700 2393 • www.c
nduk.org
disarmament happen. Details to follow.
Regular events
and Peace Camps
ALDERMASTON WOMEN'S PEACE CAMP
2nd weekend of each month.
Contact 07904 450 307 or email
info@aldermaston.net or see
www.aldermaston.net
MENWITH HILL PEACE CAMP
Contact Yorkshire CND for details.
FASLANE PEACE CAMP
Permanent. 81 Shandon, near
Helensburgh, G84 8NT Scotland
Contact 01436 820901 or email
faslanepeacecamp@conscious.every1.net
Lobby your
parliamentary candidates
This only takes a few moments. Type your postcode into CND's
new online tool at www.cnduk.org to ask them where they
stand on Trident replacement and a Nuclear Weapons
Convention. Your vote means a lot to the candidates – lobby
them now. See the centre pages more information.