Transcripts For LINKTV Inside Story 20240712

Hello again. The uks Health Secretary says the government is preparing for a mass rollout of the Coronavirus Vaccine in the first half of next year. There are reports that some hospitals are preparing to receive their first batches as early as next week. President trump is being accused of giving up the fight against covid19 after his chief of staff conceded that the u. S. Is not going to control the pandemic. Our White House Correspondent has more. This is something that has been seized on by the arrival of the u. S. President , the democratic president ial nominee, joe biden, who has accused this administration of waving the white flag, if you will, essentially throwing up its hands in terms of trying to contain this. Its a stark contrast to what the biden what biden says he would do as president , that he would make it mandatory for people to wear masks. He himself has been wearing a mask and has been social distancing in advance he has been holding in events he has been holding, in contrast the president s rallies. President erdogan has on saturday, he questioned president emmanuel macrons mental health, following his latest controversial comments on islam. That prompted friends to recall its ambassador from turkey. That prompted france to recall its ambassador from turkey. Armenia and azerbaijan have accused each other of violating a third humanitarian ceasefire. All three fell apart within just an hour of being announced. The two have been fighting over a disputed territory. Those are the headlines on al jazeera. I will be back with the newshour in under 30 minutes. Coming up next, inside story. Do stay with us. A global treaty outlawing Nuclear Weapons has reached its ratification goal and is set to come into force in january, but no Nuclear Power has signed it. Is the treaty a sign that the world is changing, or just an empty gesture . This is inside story. Hello. Welcome to the program. It has been hailed as a new chapter for Nuclear Disarmament, but opposed by the worlds major powers. The treaty has been ratified by 50 countries and will come into force next january, but none of the countries that have approved it actually have a Nuclear Arsenal and no country that has one has approved the treaty. This raises doubts about how much it can achieve. The u. N. Secretary general has called ratification the culmination of a Worldwide Movement to draw attention to the catastrophic humanitarian consequences of any use of Nuclear Weapons. It represents a meaningful commitment towards the total elimination of Nuclear Weapons, which remains the highest disarmament priority of the united nations. It is formerly called the treaty on the prohibition of Nuclear Weapons formally called the treaty on the prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. Countries signing up promise to never develop, possess, or stockpile Nuclear Weapons or other Nuclear Explosive devices. The commitment is legally binding, but, critics say, there is no real way to enforce it. None of the worlds acknowledged Nuclear Powers have signed it the worlds acknowledged Nuclear Powers have signed it. Lets bring in our guest in london. The group was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2017. In monterey, california, an associate professor of nonproliferation and terrorism studies. A warm welcome. Beatrice, how historic a milestone is this treaty . We would say that its extremely significant and a historic achievement, much in line with other huge legal developments over the past century, the u. N. Charter, the geneva conventions, the ban on biological weapons, the ban on chemical weapons, the ban on landmines, and now the ban on Nuclear Weapons. This treaty follows on all these legal instruments that constrain states behavior in warfare and protect the world and protect people. How many Nuclear Bombs are there in the world . How quickly can they be launched . I mean, there are estimates of thousands of warheads that are available to the countries that are both Nuclear Weapon states, under the nonproliferation treaty, as well as those countries which are outside the nonproliferation treaty and possess nuclear warheads. I think in total it comes to several 1000 warheads. Several thousand warheads. They can be launched in the matter of minutes, depending on which arsenal you are talking about. The risk certainly is pretty high. Is disarmament actually possible now, or is this treaty just the 21st century version of the Kellogg Briand pact signed in 1928 . Its signatories promised not to use war to resolve disputes or conflicts. That certainly didnt prevent world war ii from happening. I think all of us would like to think global discernment is possible, given the immense risks attached global disarmament is possible, given the immense risks attached to Nuclear Weapons. The environment is not conducive for disarmament to occur. The tp nw tpnw will change the discourse on Nuclear Weapons and change how we think about them and speak about them and who thinks and speaks about Nuclear Weapons. The countries that reject it have vested interests in the military status quo. They have interest in being able to prove project power and benefit financially. At the end of the day, the idea that maintaining stability and Nuclear Weapons go hand in hand is just based off of sophisticated political, academic, and military theories. Even though some countries have turned them into doctrines, at the end of the day, they are just theories. The tpnw flips those theories on their heads and it memorializes all those that were affected by the production, testing, and use of Nuclear Weapons. It calls everybody to be accountable for what theyve done to the planet and to those populations and continue to put us all at risk. X all the countries that have ratified the treaty are bound by its requirements all the countries that have ratified the treaty are bound by its requirements. How will it be enforced . Theres no world police that can come and put you in prison if you violate it. That gives International Law a reputation of not being meaningful. We see these treaties do constrain governments, shift behaviors, and they work, not flawlessly, of course. But they do work. We see that based on the conventions that have banned other weapons, like the bioweapons, chemical weapons, landmines. For many of those, it has impacted countries that have not joined the treaty or didnt participate in the negotiations. Weve seen the u. S. , china, russia shift their behavior when it comes to landmines. They did not join that treaty. Weve seen them shift behavior when it comes to i think we can see that this treaty, whether or not these countries will join, and we do think eventually more countries, nuclear allied states, states with nuclear arms, will join this treaty. In the meantime, it will also hopefully shift their behavior, leads to more pressure on reduction. I think wed also give much more political pressure on these countries. It took china and france almost 20 years to sign up to the treaty stopping proliferation, the Nuclear Nonproliferation treaty. We believe it will go faster with this one. There are those who make the argument that Nuclear Weapons, as terrible as they are, actually have been a key element in preserving global peace for the last 75 years. What do you say to that . Thats a debate between the proliferation optimists versus the proliferation pessimists. Theres been a lot of research which has shown that even during the cold war, there were near misses. There were near accidents. The risk was fairly high throughout the cold war period. Its now that we are getting access to declassified documents or testimonies from people who are involved in those cases we realize that it wasnt as stable as it was earlier made out to be. Let me ask you to expand on a point. He talked about the middle east. Theres been concern growing for a while now about the threat of Nuclear Proliferation in the middle east. The only signatories to the treaty from the immediate region are sudan, algeria, and palestine. Thats not going to alleviate worry about what could happen in the middle east going forward, is it . No, but what it will do is, for a very long time, there is been a discussion on the middle east weapons of mass destruction freezone. This has been an issue that has been in gridlock for many decades. What the tpnw will do is help generate a conversation that could help positively contribute towards that effort, as well as just socializing these issues more to populations in the middle east and the wider global south who dont necessarily hear about it on a daytoday basis like we do in the United States and eure and russia, where our president s are currently in the middle of trying to quickly come to an agreement on whether or not to extend the only remaining arms control agreement that limits the Nuclear Arsenals of two of these major countries. These two countries hold over 90 of the worlds Nuclear Weapons. We are yet to see how many countries from the middle east and north africa join the tpnw. The point is and who is part of it now. These treaties dont do their job the moment they are adopted. They do it over time. All of them play an important role, but they dont ever solve the problem on its own. I dont think that all of thousands of supporters across the world who have generated the energy needed to get the tpnw to the finish line argue that they are doing it on their own. Its part of a constellation of efforts. If we truly want to see the middle east, wmdiii zone, come to fruition, i hope the tpnw will positively contribute to that end. Which is more concerning, the fact that the u. S. Has threatened countries that have signed on to this treaty, have asked them to rescind their commitments, or the fact that none of the acknowledged Nuclear Powers have signed up to begin with . The immediate step, we are very concerned that the United States is asking countries to withdraw from a multilateral agreement regulating Nuclear Weapons. We havent seen a withdrawal since north korea. Thats certainly nothing that anyone should support or want to see again. Thats extremely concerning. The real threat, of course, is the continued conversation, the new Nuclear Arms Race with all the Nuclear Armed states that are continuing to invest trillions of dollars into this weapon, even during a full dome a fullblown pandemic. We need to use this treaty to leverage pressure on the Nuclear Armed states. The letter asking countries to withdraw is a clear sign that the United States government fully recognizes the impact of this treaty. They have recognized in other documents that this threatens the legitimacy of nuclear deterrence. It is able to have an impact on them even if they dont join it, and thats why they are trying to stop it. Luckily, these countries have moved forward. It doesnt stop at these 50 countries. We are putting a lot of effort into bringing more countries into the middle east onto the treaty. We hope to increase that number. But also, the nuclear allied states, countries in europe with Nuclear Weapons on their territory and of course the Nuclear Arsenals. I saw you nodding. If you want to add to the point she was making . I dont want to be to add, but i would be keen to hear more about the efforts to get europe on board. Europeans host american Nuclear Weapons and are caught in the middle between the u. S. And russias nuclear risk paradigm. Right now, we dont know what the fate of the new strategic arms reduction or new start treaty is going to be when it potentially may expire in early next year. It would be interesting to hear these what europeans are thinking and saying about the tpnw, especially now that its going to enter into force. Would you like to respond to that question . Absolutely. I think thats a key group of countries that are going to be very important in the coming years. One of the real benefits with the treaty of prohibition is that it has kind of exposed some of the countries that have been hiding behind the Nuclear Arms Race. You have the problem countries, the nine Nuclear Armed states, the Key Countries with the weapons that we want to change. But around them, theres a whole circle of around 30 to 40 other countries that protects them and protects and upholds this structural problem of Nuclear Weapons. That is the nato countries, the nuclear allied countries, south korea, japan, australia, for example, that are participating in exercises, hosting Nuclear Weapons, and their military would be part of using weapons of mass destruction on civilian populations. They are very committed to human rights, the u. N. , peaceloving countries, but this is an extreme double standard when it comes to Nuclear Weapons and this treaty puts a lot of pressure on them. In order to get to the nuclear arms, we have to get through this these countries that protect the legitimacy of Nuclear Weapons. We are seeing positive things. The new belgian government, for example. It hosts u. S. Weapons on its territory. The new declaration has a positive reference to the tpnw in its form. We are going to work with that. We see action coming in germany later next year, which could change the Political Landscape there. How worried are you that the proliferation of Nuclear Weapons could spin out of control or that the situation is already spinning out of control . You have both vertical and horizontal proliferation going on. You have existing Nuclear Weapons states which are expanding their Nuclear Arsenal, so thats one. Thats one dynamic we are seeing. We see other countries, like iran, for instance, which is moving ahead in acquiring Nuclear Weapons capability, working towards that. On both these levels, we see an expansion taking place, rather than some kind of cap or slowing down. Whether we see the expansion of Delivery Systems or fewer Delivery Systems by different countries, longer range missiles, cruise missiles you have an expansion taking place in most of the Nuclear Weapon states. Thats moving away from the ideas of this particular treaty. At least amongst the countries that do possess Nuclear Weapons. From the perspective of this treaty, thats a worrying sign. Beatrice, the new start arms control treaty between the u. S. And russia is one of the most important Nuclear Arms Agreements in the postcold war era. Its been close to collapse, but it now looks like both countries might extend it, possibly for another year. Do you believe that we will see an extension. Extension . If theres not a breakthrough, how much more dangerous does the situation become . I certainly hope that there will be an extension. As we said earlier, this is the last barrier to a fullscale Nuclear Arms Race between russia and the United States, where they can control their arsenals massively can expand their arsenals massively. Theres a lot of uncertainty in the motivation of these administrations, what they actually are if they are actually interested or if they are just pretending to be interested. But i do think its very important to remember that this is not extending new start is not actually a step forward. It prevents a huge setback, which is very important to do, but i think we have to remember that sometimes when you governments going in a completely wrong direction, we cant be thinking the same level is good enough and that thats a huge success. We also have to remember that the aim of what they all have joined, the Nuclear Nonproliferation treaty, which is a legally binding commitment to get the disarmament, they have to move towards lower levels of Nuclear Weapons. They have to continue the process of new reductions, not just maintain the current levels that exist. In a situation where russia and the u. S. And all the investment continues, its something we have to get. Its very important. It is important for the public to demand more of the governments. Its also important to remember that we are talking about can Nuclear Disarmament happen, of course it can. People make daily choices to keep Nuclear Weapons all the time. Governments, military leaders, parliamentarians that authorize the budgets. We can make different decisions. Its completely in our ability and our power as populations to demand that our governments take different decisions. Lets talk about the iran nuclear deal. When you see the u. S. Pull out of a Historic Deal like that, how much does that setback set back nonproliferation efforts in other countries . How negative is the impact . I think the impact can be quite severe. You can think about cascading effects emerging from any movement that iran takes towards acquiring Nuclear Weapons capability. Ever since the United States walked out of the jcpoa, the agreement with iran, weve seen more and more work that the iranian government has been putting in towards its Nuclear Weapons program. That naturally causes concern amongst other powers in the region, especially saudi arabia, the united arab emirates. How would they respond to this . There are reports in recent years about saudi interest in very will various weapons alliances with different countries, including pakistan. There is this worry that the expansion of irans Nuclear Weapons research, capability, would lead to these countervailing effects from a countervailing policy. There will be some concern within pakistan. They share a border. And so, it would be difficult to control a lot of these effects of the Iranian Nuclear expansion. Its certainly a worrying sign. The application of this treaty or rather the u. S. The abrogation of this treaty or rather the u. S. Walking out it will have an impact. The fact that u. S. President trump has repeatedly cast out on whether the u. S. Would honor its security commitments, the fact that there has been a loss of confidence by u. S. Allies in American Security agreements does not have the potential to lead more countries to pursue Nuclear Weapons . Does that have the potential to lead more countries to pursue Nuclear Weapons . When it comes to new start, europeans are trying to desperately, publicly, and privately lobby the United States to not just go for a oneyear extension, but to fully extend the treaty for the five years that it is allowed to be extended, so that they can actually work with the russians and come up with a verifiable way to get some of these additional legal instruments, such as a warhead freeze, on the table, and signed. But until we have new start extended, there is no basis or steppingstone to get those additional confidence Building Measures secure. I think that the United States and russia both are hearing from europeans who are caught in the middle on why the treaty should not just be extended for one year, but for five years, and why this should be the basis from which further discussions happen, not just between the u. S. And russia, but also the wider p5, which includes the u. K. , france, and china. While the u. K. , france, and china have far less Nuclear Weapons, the five of them do need to continue forward in a united way and come up with some proposals that all five of them can contribute towards, ahead of the conference that will happen next year. On the iran front, this is a giant wakeup call to europeans. The u. S. Withdrawal from the jcpoa can be seen as a sacrificial lamb of something much bigger. This withdrawal has generated conversations in europe about the need for europeans european strategic autonomy, i need to move away from the dollar and increase the salience of the euro. Its also led europeans to think hard about whether they can trust the United States in dealings on further arms control measures with other countries. Both new start being in limbo and the jcpoa barely clinging on to life at the moment are the United States is playing games and europeans are not happy because theres an understanding between the United States and europe that they will Work Together on these issues, especially because they have a more proximate threat to europe. Iran is closer to europe. Its missiles are closer to europe. Russian missiles are closer to europe. In terms of how devastating these things are, it does have an effect and it does wake people up and make them think. I wouldnt be surprised if, as a result, europeans are more willing and open to hearing about the frustrations that underlie the tpnw, and trying to find ways to complement that effort, if not disjointed and support it fully. We are out of time. Thanks to all of our guests. Thank you for watching. You can see the program again any time by visiting our website. For further discussion, go to our facebook page. You can also join the conversation on twitter. For me, the entire team, bye for now. Grafton is tamana crime traditional. Country town. We now have forever probably. The distinction of having given the world a man is turned out to be as strong as worst mass murder at this. Ten