English
Français
Sent to many people who encouraged our representative at the UN to have Canada participate in the negotiation for a nuclear ban on nuclear weapons.
Dear “ Canadian Citizen “ :
Thank you for your email asking Canada to provide unconditional support for a UN legally-binding instrument to prohibit nuclear weapons.
First, let me assure you that advancing nuclear disarmament in a concrete and meaningful way remains a priority for the Government of Canada. We absolutely recognize the grave consequences of even an accidental nuclear detonation, which are clear and beyond dispute. We remain fully committed to pursuing pragmatic initiatives to help realize a world without nuclear weapons.
In this regard, the Government of Canada is pleased that in December 2016, the General Assembly adopted a Canadian‑led disarmament resolution. Passed with the support of 159 UN member states, the resolution moves us closer toward a fissile material cut‑off treaty (FMCT), which would end production of the material that provides nuclear weapons with their destructive power. An FMCT is widely seen as the next logical step toward nuclear disarmament and an integral part of the pragmatic incremental approach favoured by Canada. In addition to the FMCT, Canada is involved in multilateral initiatives to develop and strengthen measures to address the technical challenges of nuclear disarmament verification, and to further the implementation of the 2010 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Action Plan.
The Government of Canada has followed closely the discussions leading to the current negotiations on a treaty to ban nuclear weapons. While Canada supports a nuclear weapons convention or ban as a final step of nuclear disarmament, we fear that the current initiative is premature and does not take account of the concerns of states that believe such negotiations are not feasible in the current global security environment. In fact, no North Atlantic Treaty Organization ally is participating in these negotiations (except the Kingdom of the Netherlands, which is participating under Parliamentary mandate), nor is any nuclear weapon possessing state.
As a consequence, the negotiations will likely be ineffective and result in a declaratory ban that will not include any measures to eliminate even a single nuclear weapon nor ensure that future disarmament would be verifiable, irreversible and transparent. Our government remains concerned that this initiative also seriously risks deepening existing divisions between nuclear and non-nuclear states that will make future progress on nuclear disarmament even more difficult.
We recognize that the incremental approach favoured by Canada will take time and effort. However, we are confident that we can still move steadily toward our shared goal of a world free of nuclear weapons through our leadership on the FMCT and active participation in practical initiatives like the International Partnership for Nuclear Disarmament Verification. Once again, let us reaffirm that advancing nuclear disarmament to achieve a world free of nuclear weapons remains a priority for the Government of Canada.
Thank you for writing.
Permanent Mission of Canada to the United Nations
— Response to the Mission letter by Rolland Gaudette, from Canada
Thank you for your reply.
However, I totally disagree with your view on the ineffectiveness of these debates, which will undoubtedly lead to a global awareness of the risks that we all know and which you list in your answer. If countries that have nuclear weapons do not want to get rid of them, then why Canada, which has none, could not be a positive leader in this debate?
I fear the only reason is by fear of ruffling our neighboring country, the USA.nuclear detonation, which are clear and beyond dispute.We remain fully committed to pursuing pragmatic initiatives to help realize a world without nuclear weapons.In this regard, the Government of Canada is pleased that in December 2016,
No other reason could justify such a refusal to participate in this debate and to continue being under the yoke of the Trump administration.When a person decides to quit smoking because it is not good for health, it cannot be done by decreasing one cigarette a day, it has to be a complete stop with the related weaning effects.
Countries possessing atomic weapons, which by their numbers could destroy mankind dozens of times, are under the fatuous illusion of holding a balance of power while boosting their egos; and mainly, once again, our neighbors who pretend to be the policemen of the planet. Should it be necessary that all countries acquire nuclear weapons before they finally understand that it is a senseless escalation and then begin a real disarmament process with the risks this may entail?
This debate and vote will probably not achieve unanimity, but it will have the merit of highlighting the will to disarm the planet and isolate the recalcitrant, producers and sellers of weapons; an irreversible step towards a next stage, definitive this time, when other countries will follow suit and become solidary of this cause.
How can we pay taxes to have peace when they are used to sow terror and war? Will economic and supremacy interests triumph over the aspiration of all peoples (except a minority of rulers) who wish to live in peace and discover the difference in the other for a mutual enrichment?
I would like this message to reach the highest leaders of our government, including Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, the son of a former prime minister who was also calling for peace.
Rolland Gaudette, pacifist citizen like the 8 billion people of this humanity