ON August 19 this year, ground-breaking UN talks on nuclear disarmament concluded by making a clear recommendation to start negotiations on a treaty banning nuclear weapons. Known as the “Open-Ended Working Group” (OEWG), the talks took place in February, May and August of this year and have outlined elements to be included in a new treaty outlawing nuclear weapons. The majority support for the treaty was clearly underlined by joint statements delivered by many countries.
This breakthrough is result of the new global discourse on nuclear weapons. Bringing together governments, academia and civil society, a series of three conferences have uncovered new evidence about the devastating humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons and the risks of their use, whether accidental or intentional. The momentum generated by the “humanitarian initiative” has now culminated with the international community on the verge of negotiating a nuclear weapons ban. Many prominent global figures - the Pope, the Dalai Lama, Ban Ki Moon, Henry Kissinger, George Shultz, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Martin Sheen et al support this initiative.
Naturally, the nine rogue nuclear states oppose any such treaty. They want to continue playing Russian roulette with the planet, as if they and they alone had a divine right to arm themselves with weapons forever forbidden to the rest of humanity.
In this impasse Scotland plays a crucial role. An independent Scotland with a constitution banning nuclear weapons from our land and waters will break the nuclear cabal. Since Trident cannot operate from anywhere else in the UK other than the Coulport/Faslane complex, a nuclear-free Scotland means no Trident in Britain.
Either we have a future without nuclear weapons, or we have no future at all. By showing that escape from the nuclear nightmare is possible, Scotland can offer hope to the rest of the world. This places enormous moral responsibility on us. Do we have the imagination and courage to make the right choice?
Brian M Quail,
2 Hyndland Avenue, Glasgow.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel