BAN!
BULLETIN FOR THE ABOLITION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS
World Court Project update
Statement of Joseph Rotblat
The following statement by Joseph Rotblat was submitted to
International Court of Justice on 14 November 1995 by Marshall
Islands: "From 1933-39 I was a Research Fellow at the
Radiological Laboratory of the Scientific Society of Warsaw and
from 1937-39 Assistant Director of the Atomic Physics Institute
of the Free University of Poland. In 1939 I left Poland for
England take up a scholarship under James Chadwick at the
University of Liverpool. My research in Liverpool, which, helped
to establish the feasibility of the atomic bomb, led to my
joining the British team on the Manhattan Project in Los Alamos.
After the War I was made Director of Research in nuclear physics
at Liverpool University, a position I held until 1949. In 1950 I
changed my field of research to the study the application of
physics ta medicine, specializing in radiation physics and
radiation biology. From 1950-76 I was Professor of Physics at the
University of London and Chief Physicist at St Bartholomew's
Hospital where I established a large team specialising in the
study of the effects of radiation on living organisms.
In 1981, while a visiting scholar at the Stockholm International
Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), I wrote Nuclear Radiation in
Warfare which examined the biological effects of radiation an
man; the radiations from nuclear explosions and the effects of
these radiations on human, animal and plant life; and the
protection from radiation that might be afforded by civil defence. I served as rapporteur for the 1983 WHO investigations into the Effects of Nuclear War on
Health and Health Services and the follow up report in 1987 which
had an expanded remit covering in addition environmental
consequences of nuclear warfare. I would like to summarise the
effects of nuclear radiation in warfare as follows. Of the three
main injurious agents of nuclear weapons - blast, heat and
ionizing radiations - one aspect of the last agent, fall-out, is
the least amenable to quantitative assessment, owing to its
dependence on a number of unpredictable factors. Yet, in any
nuclear war, local and/or global fall-out are likely to produce a
heavy casualty tall.
In a counterforce attack, with the underground ICBM silos as
targets, the great accuracy of modern missiles might make it
possible to avoid direct hits on large centres of population, but
millions of civilians are likely to be killed or suffer long-term
effects of radiation from exposure to fall-out. I have noted the
statement to the Court an October 20, 1995 by M. Vignes, Legal
Adviser to the World Health Organization, and I share his
conclusions on this point. In an all-out war, into which any
nuclear conflict is very likely to escalate, the largest
immediate casualty toll would be from the effects of blast, heat
and initial radiation in the cities hit by nuclear weapons.
But in this case too fall-out would add immensely to the number;
of dead and injured, as well as greatly diminishing the extent of
post-war recovery. Civil defence measures such as deep shelters,
which may provide some protection against blast, would be must
less effective against local fall-out, owing to problems arising
from the necessary long stay in such shelters. Huge areas of land, remote from the target zones, would remain uninhabitable for long periods, probably years if nuclear
reactors were targets of attack, and most of the livestock and
crops would be lost.
The effects of local fall-out would be felt just as badly in some
non-combatant countries, but global fall-out would result in
long-term damage to all countries, including the Antarctic; it
would be expressed in an increased incidence of cancers, and it
is to be expected that there would be an increase in genetic
defects in future generations. The property of fall-out to extend
the injurious action both in space and in time, is a novel and
unique characteristic of nuclear warfare. Not only the
inhabitants of the combatant countries, but virtually the whole
population of the world. and their descendants, would be victims
of a nuclear war therein lies the radical change which nuclear
weapons introduce into the whole concept of warfare.
I have read the written pleadings prepared by the United Kingdom
and United States. Their view of the legality of the use of
nuclear weapons is premised on three assumptions:
a) that they would not necessarily cause unnecessary suffering;
b) that they would not necessarily have indiscriminate effects on
civilians,
c) that they would not necessarily have effects on territories of
third states.
It is my professional opinion - set out above and in the WHO
reports referred to - that on any reasonable set of assumptions
their argument is unsustainable on all three points. Even in the
hypothetical case that at some time in the future nuclear weapons
are developed that have a negligible effect on the civilian
population, any use of such a weapon is likely to start a nuclear
conflict in which nuclear weapons are used that have all the
effects described above."
Meetings on the outcome of the ICJ ruling
"Judgement Day":
When the ICJ announces its ruling, an international meeting
has been tentatively scheduled for The Hague/Netherlands,
probably around April 1996
The International Peace Bureau (IPB) will hold a conference
on nuclear abolition in Brussels, tentatively scheduled for 13
May 1996. Organized under the auspices of the Parliament's
European Intergroup for Peace and Disarmament, the conference
aims to assess the Advisory Ruling on nuclear weapons due to be
issued by the International Court of Justice before the end of
April. Also, it is intended to launch publicly a new stage in the
international campaign for the elimination of nuclear weapons.
(Note that prior to the conference, there will be IPB's annual
Council meeting on May 11, and a Networking meeting on May 12)
Contact:
IPB
Rue de Zurich 41
C-1201 Geneva, Switzerland
Tel.
(41-22) 731 6429
Fax: (41-22) 738 9419
e-mail: ipb@gn.apc.org
Negotiations
Contents