
Britain’s support for genocide? A UN view.

G-EWGZMLLNG0
Life Experience
Israel suffered a terrorist outrage. No country, no people deserve such suffering, so to express sympathy and say that Israel has a right to defend itself is right. HOWEVER after Rishi Sunak expressed sympathy and conditional support for Israel it very quickly became obvious that Israel’s idea of self-defence was to commit terrorist atrocities far far greater than anything Hamas did or could ever do.
Rishi Sunak, weeks ago, should have stated that the British people do not support Israeli atrocities, that we condemn them completely and that Israel should halt them immediately.
The lives of over two million people in Gaza are ruined, traumatized, put in doubt.
I find it offensive that a British Prime Minister is not able to speak out against the barbarism of Israel at the present time. And worse still has left the impression that we, the British, still stand shoulder to shoulder with the Israelis in their continuing destruction and carnage.
The concept of winning is impossible at the moment. I suspect that Israel sees winning as the complete destruction/ethnic cleansing of Gaza and its people. Israel will only win when it learns to live in peace with Palestinians. Then Israel will have security. It is clear that this is not what Israel is aiming for.
Rishi Sunak should also demand that Hamas hands over the hostages. Hamas has made offers to hand hostages over but these offers have been rejected by Netenyahu so far.
Condemnation of UK support for genocide
This is the judgment of a top international lawyer and UN official writing about the war in Gaza:
“This is a text-book case of genocide. The European, ethno-nationalist, settler colonial project in Palestine has entered its final phase, toward the expedited destruction of the last remnants of indigenous Palestinian life in Palestine. What’s more, the governments of the United States, the United Kingdom, and much of Europe, are wholly complicit in the horrific assault. Not only are these governments refusing to meet their treaty obligations “to ensure respect” for the Geneva Conventions, but they are in fact actively arming the assault, providing economic and intelligence support, and giving political and diplomatic cover for Israel’s atrocities.”
Volker Turk, High Commissioner for Human Rights, Palais Wilson, Geneva
From a letter to Director of the New York Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. 23 October 2023.
“Everyone who arrived at the hospital that night had been dismembered,” Maarouf said. “We buried six children together because their bodies were all cut into pieces. We gathered their remains and put them in one shroud.”
Maarouf said cutting off internet and communications allows Israel to “hide its atrocities”, and described its air raids and accompanying actions against Palestinians as a “brutal holocaust”.
A quick prayer was said over the bodies before they were loaded on the open beds of pick-up trucks to be buried in the emergency cemetery.
“History will judge those who have allowed this to happen to us and did nothing to help or stop this aggression,” Maarouf said.
Al Jazeera, 31 October 2023
Israel Palestine – What will happen?
Israel’s thinking
Israel is a country that believes that security is achieved by armed might/military spending. It is second in the world on the amount spent on arms and armies as an amount per head of population, ahead of the USA. (1) Yet its population lives in fear and has been shocked and enraged by the action of the military wing of Hamas. Previously Israel believed it had the Palestinians under control and could keep them subdued.
Israeli anger is understandable, but the failure of its policy hasn’t changed its thinking. It is acting as if it thinks that more violence will bring it peace. Israel does not understand that at least part of its insecurity is caused by its violence. It has demonstrated that security is not achieved through military might.
Israel defies international law.
I have learned that Hamas provides civilian administration in Gaza, running hospitals, schools waste disposal etc. Israel’s true enemy is the military wing of Gaza yet it is targetting the entire population, whilst maintaining that it is doing everything possible to protect civilians.
Israel does not know what victory on their terms would look like, unless the entire destruction of the people of Gaza is their aim. That appears to be their aim.
Hamas’s thinking
My minimal research today – references below – show an organisation that has conflicting factions and many conflicting ideas. However it is evident there is a desperation for freedom from Israeli control and a desire to live securely in freedom. Violence by the military wing of Hamas seems to be aimed at indicating that Palestinians will not continue to tolerate Israeli control. Militarily Hamas is insignificant. It is unimaginable that Hamas could “conquer Israel” or destroy Israel. No-one believes that is a possibility. In recent years Hamas has said it would accept various proposals for peaceful coexistence with Israel. (2)
What will happen?
From the Israeli point of view they are traumatising the population of an entire region and daily increase the suffering. They seem unaware that this creates anger, and hatred against them which may be long lasting and which provokes violence. Their daily massacres etc make prospects for peace recede and bring shame on the people of Israel and those who support them.
Condemnation of Israeli action is growing around the world.
Israelis, like the rest of the world, can only live in peace and security by living in cooperative friendship with other people. That is outside the thinking of the present leadership.
Will Hamas negotiate?
Of course they will. That is one reason they have taken hostages. They want change. They want independence, freedom, respect, dignity. They are desperate for change. The Israelis need change too.
Footnote
I can understand the extreme anger on both sides but I repeat that I am against the terrorist actions of both sides.
The British Government
The British government should state that it does not support Israel in its ongoing murderous assault on the people of Gaza. We should not be part of the escalating problem. We may have some influence, but at the moment it is in the wrong direction.
(1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_with_highest_military_expenditure_per_capita
(2) From Encyclopedia Britanicca – A Hamas negotiating position
“In the years after the Aqṣā intifada, Hamas began to moderate its views toward the peace process. After more than a decade of rejecting the foundational principles of the PA, Hamas ran in the 2006 Palestinian legislative elections and subsequently participated in the PA, with indications that it would accept agreements between Israel and the PA. Since then, senior Hamas leaders have stated their willingness to support a two-state solution based on pre-1967 borders. In A Document of General Principles and Policies issued in 2017, the organization acknowledged “the establishment of a fully sovereign and independent Palestinian state, with Jerusalem as its capital along the lines of the 4th of June 1967, with the return of the refugees and the displaced to their homes from which they were expelled” as a “formula of national consensus.” But Hamas continued to reject the legitimacy of Israel, and hard-liners within the organization remained strident in their rhetoric.”
“In May 2021 tensions in Jerusalem boiled over and led to the greatest escalation of violence since 2014. After clashes between Israeli police and Palestinian protesters left hundreds injured, Hamas launched rockets into Jerusalem and southern and central Israel, prompting air strikes from Israel in response. After 11 days of fighting, Hamas and Israel reached a cease-fire.
In 2022, as Israel conducted incursions in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip to target militants, Hamas refrained from escalating confrontations in and around the Gaza Strip.”
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Hamas
There is more of this article, telling the complex story, at https://www.britannica.com/topic/Hamas/Conflict-with-Israel
The road to peace and security – the European solution
We have had wars and deadly enemies and great suffering in the past. How do we defend ourselves against these enemies today? We have treated each other as human beings, become friends and trading partners and both sides feel safe. Think of our wars with Spain, the Netherlands, France, Germany.
Our conflict with Russia? We were heading in the right direction for a number of years, trading with Russia, buying Russian gas, but unfortunately the leaders of NATO have systematically eroded Russian confidence in our friendship and we are all paying for their incompetence.
30 October 2023
Israeli bombs seek terrorists in Gaza. When the war is over the displaced Palestinians will be able to return to their homes.
30 October 2023
Terrorism – dictionary definition “Systematic use of violence and intimidation to achieve some goal.” – Collins English Dictionary.
I condemn all terrorism – that means terrorist groups and terrorist states.
Tribe One
Brutally killed 1400 people
Holds 220 hostages captive.
Tribe Two
Brutally killed over 8000 people
Holds 2.2 million hostages captive, tormenting and killing large numbers daily. Very few of these hostages will ever be released
Holds 6000 Palestinians in Israeli prisons (1)
Since 7 October has arrested thousands of licensed workers from Gaza who were working in Israel (2)
Has cut off supplies of food, water and fuel to these people in the besieged territory
Has ordered a million people out of their homes.
Daily bombs homes and infrastructure.
International Committee of the Red Cross
‘Shocked by the intolerable level of human suffering’: ICRC
Mirjana Spoljaric, head of the International Committee of the Red Cross, says the “tragic loss of so many civilian lives is deplorable”.
“It is unacceptable that civilians have no safe place to go in Gaza amid the massive bombardments, and with a military siege in place there is also no adequate humanitarian response currently possible,” Spoljaric said in a statement.
“This is a catastrophic failing that the world must not tolerate.” – Al Jazeera.
My personal view – The British government should not support barbaric behaviour
I am shocked and amazed that the British government can’t even bring itself to call for a ceasefire. And more than that, I think it is disgraceful that the British government should state its full support for the perpetrators of inhuman behaviour which defies description. It should condemn the action and state that it cannot support such action, however it may be described.
Photo Al Jazeera.
(1) BBC Radio 4 Six O’clock news 30 October 2023
(2) From Al-Jazeera
Thousands of Gaza workers go ‘missing’ in Israel amid wartime mass arrests
Palestinians whose permits to work in Israel were revoked are believed to be held in detention camps, but Israel has so far refused to release information about them, human rights groups say.
Human rights groups are concerned about further arrests amid continuing raids in the occupied West Bank [File: Jaafar Ashtiyeh/AFP]
By Federica Marsi and Ylenia Gostoli
Published On 28 Oct 2023
Thousands of workers from Gaza, who were employed in Israel when the war started, have gone missing since then amid a campaign of mass arrests.
Human rights groups and trade unions believe some of the workers have been illegally detained in military facilities in the occupied West Bank, following the revocation of their permits to work in Israel. Authorities in Israel have so far refused to release the names of those they are holding.
end of list
When the Palestinian armed group, Hamas, launched an unprecedented assault on the south of Israel on October 7, about 18,500 residents of Gaza held permits to work outside the besieged strip. The exact number of workers present in Israel as hostilities began remains unknown, but thousands are thought to have been rounded up by the Israeli army and transferred to undisclosed locations.
It isn’t often I lie awake at night thinking about troubles in foreign countries but that is happening now.
Partly what’s disturbing me is the scale and absolute horror of the cruelty of what is being done and partly it is our country’s standing staunchly in support of the perpetrators of the horror.
I’d like to hear a politician speak the truth and call things what they are and recognise and condemn all terrorism. Dictionary definition “Systematic use of violence and intimidation to achieve some goal.” – Collins English Dictionary.
What sort of state holds over two million people hostage blockading them in a small territory, cuts off water, food and fuel to the territory, orders a million people to leave their homes and stay out of them indefinitely, bombs more of their homes every day – so far indiscriminately killing over 5000 people, seems intent on genocide, doesn’t recognise international law? If there is such a state surely it should be described as a terrorist state. I’d like to hear condemnation of such action. I’d like to hear that we do not regard such a state as a friend, and that we do not support such action. I’d like to hear the perpetrators called on to stop this horrendous behaviour. Extermination cannot be accepted as a legitimate policy of any state.
Defence against “an enemy” – the British solution. We have had wars and deadly enemies and great suffering in the past. How do we defend ourselves against these enemies today? We have treated each other as human beings, become friends and trading partners and both sides feel safe.
Today’s violence is delaying the time of security for both sides.
MY POEM
A Message from Tony Blair to the People of Iraq
(Written a few days after the start of the attacks by US and UK forces, March 2003. It has been claimed by Tony Blair and others that the problems caused by the invasion could not have been foreseen.)
Note, 2019. I wrote this bitter, sarcastic poem shortly after the first bombing of Iraq feeling extremely angry about the sanctimonious arrogance, dishonesty and criminality and cruelty of Tony Blair. I feel the same way today and regret that he has not been brought to trial as a war criminal. – DR.
A Message from Tony Blair to the People of Iraq
Poem by David Roberts
Look into my honest eyes.
Listen to my honest lies.
Look into my angel face.
Just hear the sincerity in my voice.
I want you all to understand
the better future we have planned.
We bomb with Christian love, not Christian hate.
We come,
not to conquer,
but to liberate.
It is essential, and I want to make this very clear,
that our first aim is to make the world a safer place.
And with precision bombing you need have no fear.
And though you’ve not actually uttered threatening words
to Britain and America, or indeed the world,
and though you haven’t acted yet,
we believe you pose a threat
a threat that cannot be ignored.
I tell you frankly that so great is the threat
that act we must, while there is still time,
or we may live to reap the bitter harvest
of regret.
I’m sure you will appreciate
that we have the right
to remove regimes
that we dislike.
We have the right to assassinate.
We have the right to decide your fate.
So the purpose of our mission,
now that war has started,
is also perfectly clear:
we come to bring you hope
and take away your fear.
Your army, as you know, is hopelessly outgunned.
Resistance by your soldiers is completely senseless.
We’ll simply massacre. We’ll wipe them out.
They cannot touch us. They’re defenceless.
We wreck your homes, your lives, your infrastructure.
You needed help.
Without it you would have had no future.
Our peace, justice and democracy
you will soon enjoy and celebrate.
Remember, we come,
not to conquer,
but to liberate.
Your cities shake and thunder with our bombs.
Tumbling buildings. Plumes of flames.
Roaring jets and shrieking men.
The crash of glass and children’s screams.
We see the mushroom clouds again.
Now you can appreciate the genius of our civilisation.
Remember, this isn’t war:
it’s liberation.
We destroyed your tv station. We cut your phones.
Your power and water supplies we cut.
We destroy public buildings and private homes.
You see billowing smoke and conflagration.
But it isn’t war:
it’s liberation.
Your hospitals overflow. They cannot cope.
We are killing you softly with our love.
Death and destruction are everywhere.
Your future fills with hope.
And if you cannot comprehend this desecration.
Just try to understand,
it isn’t war:
it’s liberation.
Cruise missiles, depleted uranium,
pulse, cluster and bunker buster bombs
may shock you.
And perhaps, you’re just a little awed.
But please understand we come to help
and this is your reward.
Regrettably we can treat nothing as sacred:
it is a fact of war.
No artefact of God or man,
no suffering, no pain, no law
can impede the progress of our plan.
One advantage of our attack
is that we will build for you
a new Iraq.
So don’t worry about the scale of the destruction.
Our companies will make it all as new
and your oil will pay for reconstruction.
Look to the future.
Your children will not easily forget
how we came to help.
Round the clock bombing
may have left them traumatised
and perhaps a little mad,
but soon we are sure they’ll realise
just what luck they’ve had.
Some ask if I’m untouched by human suffering.
I can tell you my sleep is undisturbed,
though I deeply mourn the thousands killed.
I am not shaken,
and I am not stirred.
So finally I say,
that for a brighter future
a little bombing is a small price to pay.
Ignore the carnage, terror and destruction.
Our purpose
is not
domination or exploitation.
This is not
a war of conquest.
It’s a war of liberation.
David Roberts
28 March-9 April 2003
Twenty years ago Britain and the US indulged in a ruthless and immense bombing campaign against Iraq, a country which did not threaten us. This act was therefore a blatant war crime and the people who initiated it were, by definition, war criminals – most notably Bush and Blair.
It was an outrage against humanity and a shameful blot on Britain’s reputation. Iraqi society was destroyed. With police and military removed terrible lawlessness erupted. Three million refugees fled Iraq, including Christians who had been protected under the rule of Saddam Hussein. Within Iraq six million people fled their homes. Terrorism was provoked. Out of this grew ISIS.
The bombing had been talked about for months and arguments for it were so obviously stupid that thinking people around the world were incensed and took to the streets in the biggest day of anti-war protests the world has ever seen. Tens of millions of people marched in 780 cities.
And yet, in what I think was the most shocking day in my lifetime, I saw hundreds of British politicians voting for war.
Energy costs so much more in the UK as compared with France
How Macron protected electricity consumers
“In France, President Emmanuel Macron’s government responded to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine by imposing a tariff “shield” for consumers, limiting energy companies to a 4% rise in 2022 followed by 15% in 2023, keeping inflation lower than in other European countries.” BBC report
In the face of underpayment of staff in UK caring professions, and the destruction of the NHS by not addressing staff shortages, I have been shocked by the way the government is hugely increasing spending on “defence”. The UK has the fourth largest military budget in the world. This century UK wars have been mainly wars of aggression causing untold misery. In my view this ministry needs holding back not given ever more money.
I have spent several days researching this article which I hope readers will find informative and useful. The media I feel should be giving proper prominence to this important issue.
Dear Readers, I’d be interested to hear your views on this topic. You can comment at the end of this article.
Ben Wallace, our Secretary of State for Defence, is making a bid for still more increases in defence spending citing “an historical low in defence spending,” “the Russian threat” and “The War in Ukraine.”
These arguments deserve examination.
Historical low
Since when has the spending of a government department been based on spending many decades earlier? Current and predicted need should be the only guide.
The Russian Threat
This is a problem. For most of the last sixty years we have lived with the Russian Threat. Diplomacy prevailed and violence against the western European countries never erupted. In fact Russia (actually the Soviet Union) withdrew from country after country, as a result no doubt feeling itself diminished. A sign, perhaps, that NATO, could also relax.
Tensions were reducing and this new relaxation began to be exploited with trade with Russia improving, and proving very valuable, even vital, to some western European states.
NATO’s inappropriate response
Thinking only with a military mindset NATO courted states formerly within the Soviet sphere of influence to join NATO so that “NATO countries” began to encircle the remains of the Soviet Empire (and become customers of western arms manufacturers). Surely something which would discomfort Russian leaders, even humiliate them in the eyes of their population – especially when NATO forces exercise along the borders of Russia. In these circumstances how could Russia “look strong”?
Fighting Russia today
It is unbelievable that the rhetoric remains aggressive towards Russia. Our only secure defence is friendly relations with other countries. This may seem impossible to some but a look at history shows that most of our former enemies whom we fought for years, decades or even centuries are now our trading partners and allies, not because they fear our armies and weapons, but because it is the only policy that makes sense. I’m thinking especially of Germany, Japan, France, Spain, the Netherlands.
A war with Russia
It would be suicidal lunacy to engage in actual fighting with Russia, and we seem to be on the edge of this at this moment (March 2023). We are so vulnerable it wouldn’t even take nuclear weapons to destroy Britain. We have sitting targets which, if struck with missiles, would make Britain uninhabitable. I’m referring to our nuclear power stations and especially our nuclear waste storage facility in Cumbria. This is the largest store in the world of the most toxic substances known to man, radio-active nuclear waste. At huge cost and for the next hundreds of years and more we will continue to struggle to keep this material safe. Its release into the environment would create devastation on a scale never previously experienced by mankind. Brief extracts from a Guardian article, a government report and facts about the toxicity of the waste material are printed below.
We therefore need better diplomacy not more weapons to handle “the Russian threat”. We are heading dangerously in the wrong direction
Does the war in Ukraine justify more spending?
Presumably part of our current vast defence budget is earmarked for war fighting so this is where the money should come from. We are no longer fighting in Afghanistan or Iraq.
We are not a protagonist in the war in Ukraine, just a supporter of the Ukrainian side. Are we contributing enough or should we contribute more?
In fact we are contributing far more than any other country in Europe – £2.3 billion in 2022 with £2.3 billion pledged for 2023 – roughly equal to the financial contribution of all other European countries put together. [Source:House of Commons research briefing 15 February 2023. See below.] Several countries will supply only non-lethal materials.
It would seem reasonable for us to contribute less and encourage other European/NATO countries to contribute more.
Britain’s Defence Record
British “defence” has been a disaster and a disgrace for the last 25 years. We have engaged in wars of aggression against Serbia, Afghanistan and Iraq. The social, economic and political fabric of Iraq and Serbia were deliberately destroyed and Afghanistan, already one of the poorest countries in the world, has been weakened significantly by our 20 year intervention alongside the Americans. The consequences of these wars has been death and destruction, millions fleeing from their homes, vast increases in human misery, in terrorist threats and millions of refugees. These wars have not been in defence of Britain. Our leaders have failed us. Twenty years in Afghanistan fighting the Taliban left the Taliban in control. Some of the facts of these conflicts are set out below.
The running of the ministry of defence has been incompetent, lacking strategy, proper planning and serious failings in administering its spending. More details below.
How well is our money being spent by the Ministry of Defence?
Unfortunately the Ministry of Defence is legendary for its delays in contract fulfilment, over-spends, and cancelled and failed projects. Currently it is short of shells and artillery and possibly manpower. This suggests that money has been misspent elsewhere. As an example, one suggestion is that the two new super aircraft carriers costing £7 billion (plus the cost of aircraft) and an astronomical sum to run were a mistake. They are targets not easy to hide and their anti-missile defences may be overwhelmed.
So far they have not proved reliable. The second of the two, “HMS Prince of Wales, which has a crew of 1,600, spent fewer than 90 days at sea during its first two years of service after suffering multiple leaks, according to The Guardian.” – Business Insider report.
Might they be sailed into the Baltic and the planes used to attack Russian forces? Of course not. Are we going to take on China? For practical modern day warfare they are useless unless used against some poor defenceless country, and we wouldn’t want to do that. Sell them.
Was enough being spent on defence in 2021?
It jolly well should have been enough. Britain is almost top of the table for big military spending in the world. It’s fourth in the world after the US, China and India. We spend more than Russia, or Germany or France. [Source Stockholm International Peace Research Institute report 2022, therefore 2021 figures.] We spend more of our GDP on defence that any other country in NATO except the US. Why are we trying to look like a super power and delude ourselves that we could ever survive another all-out war?
The answer is, I think, that spending is not related to our calculated needs but to spending targets set by America. It is as if we are incapable of thinking for ourselves as an independent country.
Present Day UK Defence Spending
● 2019 Conservative Manifesto commitment to increase defence spending every year by ½ percent ABOVE INFLATION.
● 19 November 2020: Government announced £16.5 billion increase in defence spending ABOVE MANIFESTO COMMITMENT – the biggest increase in defence spending for thirty years.
● Total increase in arms spending £24.1 billion over four years compared to 2019
● Further huge increase in defence spending promised in next 7 years.
Liz Truss planned to spend 3% of GDP on defence by 2030. To do this the government would need to increase defence spending by about 60% in real terms. This is equivalent to about £157 billion in additional spending. I believe this target is still in place.
Conclusion
We need to scrap the proposed increases in defence spending and spend our existing defence budget more appropriately in relation to actual needs. We need to pay more attention to developing friendly relations with all countries.
Appendix – Sources and Facts
Extract from a report of the WATSON INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS
December 2022
“The United States war in Afghanistan continues destroying lives due to the war-induced breakdown of the economy, public health, security, and infrastructure. Afghans have been massively impoverished by the conflict. 92% of the population faces some level of food insecurity and 3 million children are at risk of acute malnutrition. Some regions are currently facing famine. At least half the population is living on less than $1.90 per day.
[Death toll]
About 243,000 people have been killed in the Afghanistan/Pakistan war zone since 2001. More than 70,000 of those killed have been civilians.
Key Findings
• As of September 2021, more than 70,000 Afghan and Pakistani civilians are estimated to have died as a direct result of the war.
• The United States military in 2017 relaxed its rules of engagement for airstrikes in Afghanistan, which resulted in a massive increase in civilian casualties.
• The CIA has armed and funded Afghan militia groups who have been implicated in grave human rights abuses and killings of civilians.
• Afghan land is contaminated with unexploded ordnance, which kills and injures tens of thousands of Afghans, especially children, as they travel and go about their daily chores.
• The war has exacerbated the effects of poverty, malnutrition, poor sanitation, lack of access to health care, and environmental degradation on Afghans’ health.”
…
“The CIA armed Afghan militia groups to fight Islamist militants and these militias are responsible for serious human rights abuses, including extrajudicial killings of civilians.
Even in the absence of fighting, unexploded ordnance from this war and landmines from previous wars continue to kill, injure, and maim civilians. Fields, roads, and school buildings are contaminated by ordnance, which often harms children as they go about chores like gathering wood.
The war has also inflicted invisible wounds. In 2009, the Afghan Ministry of Public Health reported that fully two-thirds of Afghans suffer from mental health problems.
[Effects of the war]
Prior wars and civil conflict in the country have made Afghan society extremely vulnerable to the reverberating effects of the U.S. post-9/11 war. Those war effects include elevated rates of disease due to lack of clean drinking water, malnutrition, and reduced access to health care. Nearly every factor associated with premature death — poverty, malnutrition, poor sanitation, lack of access to health care, environmental degradation — is exacerbated by the current war.”
WATSON INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS
111 Thayer Street, Brown University, Box 1970 Providence, RI USA 02912-1970
P +1 401 863 2809
© 2023 Watson Institute
Afghanistan deaths
UK forces’ deaths in Afghanistan since 2001 – 456.
“As of September 2021, more than 70,000 Afghan and Pakistani civilians are estimated to have died as a direct result of the war.”
From WATSON INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS report
December 2022
“No one knows with certainty how many people have been killed and wounded in Iraq since the 2003 United States invasion. However, we know that between 275,000 and 306,000 civilians have died from direct war related violence caused by the U.S., its allies, the Iraqi military and police, and opposition forces from the time of the invasion through October 2019. The violent deaths of Iraqi civilians have occurred through aerial bombing, shelling, gunshots, suicide attacks, and fires started by bombing. Many civilians have also been injured.
Because not all war-related deaths have been recorded accurately by the Iraqi government and the U.S.-led coalition, the numbers are likely much higher. Several estimates based on randomly selected household surveys place the total death count among Iraqis in the hundreds of thousands.
Several times as many Iraqi civilians may have died as an indirect result of the war, due to damage to the systems that provide food, health care and clean drinking water, and as a result, illness, infectious diseases, and malnutrition that could otherwise have been avoided or treated. The war has compounded the ill effects of decades of harmful U.S. policy actions towards Iraq since the 1960s, including economic sanctions in the 1990s that were devastating for Iraqis.
Despite more than $100 billion committed to aiding and reconstructing Iraq, many parts of the country still suffer from lack of access to clean drinking water and housing.”
WATSON INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS
111 Thayer Street, Brown University, Box 1970 Providence, RI USA 02912-1970
P +1 401 863 2809
© 2023 Watson Institute
According to Iraq Body Count there have been approximately 200,000 civilian deaths and 88,000 military deaths. For details and their meticulous methodology see iraqbodycount.org
UK Service personnel deaths in Iraq
“Operation Telic was the codename for British operations in Iraq, which lasted from 19 March 2003 to 22 May 2011. During the campaign, 179 British service personnel died.” – Wikipedia.
War-related refugees in and from Iraq
“As of 2020, 9.2 million Iraqis are internally displaced or refugees abroad.”
https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/human/refugees/iraqi
The US is the largest provider of military assistance to Ukraine, having committed $30 billion since the start of the Biden administration. $29.3 billion of that assistance has been provided since February 2022.
As the second largest donor, the UK has committed £2.3 billion in military assistance to Ukraine so far and has pledged to match that assistance in 2023. The UK is also hosting a training programme (Operation Interflex), which is supported by several allies, with the aim of training 10,000 new and existing Ukrainian personnel within 120 days. The UK has recently committed to training Ukrainian fast jet pilots but has said that combat fighter aircraft will not be provided, at least in the short term.
NATO, as an alliance, has been clear in its political support of Ukraine and fully supports the provision of bilateral military assistance by individual allies. NATO is helping to coordinate requests for assistance from the Ukrainian government and is supporting the delivery of humanitarian and non-lethal aid. Ukraine is not a NATO member, however, and therefore isn’t party to NATO’s mutual defence clause under Article V of the North Atlantic Treaty. As such, NATO troops will not be deployed on the ground in Ukraine. Allies have also ruled out imposing a no-fly zone over Ukraine because it would bring Russia into direct conflict with NATO forces. At the Heads of State and Government summit in Madrid at the end of June 2022 NATO allies agreed a new package of assistance for Ukraine that will provide long term, sustained, support.
The European Union is also providing non-lethal and lethal arms through its European Peace Facility (EPF). This is the first time the bloc has, in its history, approved the supply of lethal weapons to a third country. To date, the EU has committed €3.6 billion. In October 2022, the EU also approved a new training mission for the Ukrainian armed forces.”
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9477/
The toxicity, enormous quantity, difficulty of containment even in peace time, the timescale of this risk are all on a scale that is difficult to comprehend. Most people can’t begin to try to grasp it and so the most dangerous and vulnerable feature of life in Britain isn’t thought about. The issue deserves our attention.
These are tiny extracts from an important article in The Guardian by Samanth Subramanian
“Nothing is produced at Sellafield anymore. But making safe what is left behind is an almost unimaginably expensive and complex task that requires us to think not on a human timescale, but a planetary one.
“I’d gone to Sellafield not to observe how it lived but to understand how it is preparing for its end. Sellafield’s waste – spent fuel rods, scraps of metal, radioactive liquids, a miscellany of other debris – is parked in concrete silos, artificial ponds and sealed buildings. Some of these structures are growing, in the industry’s parlance, “intolerable”, atrophied by the sea air, radiation and time itself. If they degrade too much, waste will seep out of them, poisoning the Cumbrian soil and water.
———-
“The best way to neutralise its threat is to move it into a subterranean vault, of the kind the UK plans to build later this century. Once interred, the waste will be left alone for tens of thousands of years, while its radioactivity cools. Dealing with all the radioactive waste left on site is a slow-motion race against time, which will last so long that even the grandchildren of those working on site will not see its end. The process will cost at least £121bn.
—————–
“ All of Sellafield is in a holding pattern, trying to keep waste safe until it can be consigned to the ultimate strongroom: the geological disposal facility (GDF), bored hundreds of metres into the Earth’s rock, a project that could cost another £53bn. Even if a GDF receives its first deposit in the 2040s, the waste has to be delivered and put away with such exacting caution that it can be filled and closed only by the middle of the 22nd century.
————
“High-level waste – the by-product of reprocessing – is so radioactive that its containers will give off heat for thousands of years. It, too, will become harmless over time, but the scale of that time is planetary, not human. The number of radioactive atoms in the kind of iodine found in nuclear waste by-products halves every 16m years.
——————–
“Somewhere on the premises, Sellafield has also stored the 140 tonnes of plutonium it has purified over the decades. It’s the largest such hoard of plutonium in the world, but it, too, is a kind of waste, simply because nobody wants it for weapons any more, or knows what else to do with it.
“Sellafield now requires £2bn a year to maintain.”
The Guardian, Samanth Subramanian
Read the full article at https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/dec/15/dismantling-sellafield-epic-task-shutting-down-decomissioned-nuclear-site
Extracts from the Report on the work of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) Session 2019–21
23 November 2020
[This report is primarily about the clearing up of radio-active materials and equipment from the British Magnox nuclear reactors which have so far been closed down, but it makes clear the worrying uncertainty about the unprecedented timescale to complete the task of decommissioning nuclear power stations and the unknowability of the escalating costs.]
“The uncertainty affecting the Magnox sites reflects a wider uncertainty about the costs and timetable of decommissioning the whole civil nuclear estate. According to the NDA’s [Nuclear Decommissioning Authority ] most recent estimates it will cost the UK taxpayer £132 billion to decommission the UK’s civil nuclear sites and the NDA estimates that the work will not be completed for another 120 years.”
“The cost of the long-term liability to decommission the UK’s civil nuclear sites now stands at £132 billion, though by its nature this estimate is inherently uncertain. When pushed to provide us with a full and final figure for the cost of decommissioning the Magnox sites, The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority’s management of the Magnox contract the NDA could not do so and stated that this will not be possible until the work has been completed.”
“Public accountability is hindered by a lack of transparency about the scale and nature of the challenge of decommissioning and the performance of the NDA. Nuclear decommissioning will cost current and future generations of taxpayers’ substantial sums of money “
Source https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/3703/documents/36067/default/See section 2 of Conclusions and Recommendations for this information.
====================
Nuclear waste is the most toxic mix of substances known to man. The biggest repository in the world of such material is in Cumbria, UK. Very large sums of money are being spent trying to contain this material until such time, in decades to come, that it can be buried in caverns bored deep into rock far below the earth’s surface to keep it “safe” for tens of thousands of years.
There are several kinds of radio-active substances with different degrees of danger to life. Just as an example look at plutonium-239. Its radio-activity reduces over time. It is calculated to have decayed to half strength after 24,110 years.
Hazards
“Plutonium-239 emits alpha particles to become uranium-235. As an alpha emitter, plutonium-239 is not particularly dangerous as an external radiation source, but if it is ingested or breathed in as dust it is very dangerous and carcinogenic. It has been estimated that a pound (454 grams) of plutonium inhaled as plutonium oxide dust could give cancer to two million people.“
from wikipedia
Sellafield stores 140 tonnes of plutonium. See The Guardian” article above.
Shouldn’t other European countries be giving more?
See this Government account of our spending: –
The US is the largest provider of military assistance to Ukraine, having committed $30 billion since the start of the Biden administration. $29.3 billion of that assistance has been provided since February 2022.
As the second largest donor, the UK has committed £2.3 billion in military assistance to Ukraine so far and has pledged to match that assistance in 2023. The UK is also hosting a training programme (Operation Interflex), which is supported by several allies, with the aim of training 10,000 new and existing Ukrainian personnel within 120 days. The UK has recently committed to training Ukrainian fast jet pilots but has said that combat fighter aircraft will not be provided, at least in the short term.
NATO, as an alliance, has been clear in its political support of Ukraine and fully supports the provision of bilateral military assistance by individual allies. NATO is helping to coordinate requests for assistance from the Ukrainian government and is supporting the delivery of humanitarian and non-lethal aid. Ukraine is not a NATO member, however, and therefore isn’t party to NATO’s mutual defence clause under Article V of the North Atlantic Treaty. As such, NATO troops will not be deployed on the ground in Ukraine. Allies have also ruled out imposing a no-fly zone over Ukraine because it would bring Russia into direct conflict with NATO forces. At the Heads of State and Government summit in Madrid at the end of June 2022 NATO allies agreed a new package of assistance for Ukraine that will provide long term, sustained, support.
The European Union is also providing non-lethal and lethal arms through its European Peace Facility (EPF). This is the first time the bloc has, in its history, approved the supply of lethal weapons to a third country. To date, the EU has committed €3.6 billion. In October 2022, the EU also approved a new training mission for the Ukrainian armed forces.”
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9477/
This briefing dated 15 February 2023.
Nuclear power stations go off line.
BBC report
“EDF’s nuclear output in France fell by 30% to its lowest since 1988 as more than half of its 56 ageing nuclear power stations went offline for repairs, which had been delayed because of the Covid-19 pandemic. “
How Macron protected electricity consumers
“In France, President Emmanuel Macron’s government responded to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine by imposing a tariff “shield” for consumers, limiting energy companies to a 4% rise in 2022 followed by 15% in 2023, keeping inflation lower than in other European countries.
But it meant that EDF had to sell power to French consumers at a loss, while UK consumers paid far more for their energy. EDF has around 80% of France’s electricity market.”
Read the full report: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-64674131
Last week saw the 20th anniversary of an extraordinary and unique day in world history, 15 February 2003. It was the day when tens of millions of people marched in 780 cities around the world in protest against the proposed war by Britain and America, against Iraq.
Julie and I travelled up to London in a coach from Burgess Hill. We marched in a crowd of hundreds of thousands, (it turned out to be between one and two million) united in a common feeling of opposition to war and with an expectation that such a huge expression of public opinion could not be ignored.
The millions of marchers were right. Yet on 18 March 2003 hundreds of British MPs voted for war.
The ruthless and immense bombing campaign was an outrage against humanity and a shameful blot on Britain’s reputation. Iraqi society was destroyed. With police and military removed terrible lawlessness erupted. Three million refugees fled Iraq, including Christians who had been protected under the rule of Saddam Hussein. Terrorism was provoked.
Part of the anti-Iraq-war contingent from Burgess Hill, 15 February 2003.
Ambulance drivers’, nurses, and other public service workers pay demands are described as “unaffordable”. Yet spending on arms has consistently gone above inflation and even this has been added to. Biggest increase in defence spending for 30 years, way above commitments in the rest of Europe.
● 2019 Conservative Manifesto commitment to increase defence spending every year by ½ percent ABOVE INFLATION.
● 19 November 2020: Government announced £16.5 billion increase in defence spending ABOVE MANIFESTO COMMITMENT.
● Total increase in arms spending £24.1 billion over four years compared to 2019
● Further huge increase in defence spending promised in next 7 years.
Liz Truss planned to spend 3% of GDP on defence by 2030. To do this the government would need to increase defence spending by about 60% in real terms. This is equivalent to about £157 billion in additional spending.
This spending target for arms spending by 2030 remains the government’s aim.
It’s easy to find half the money needed to plug the current government cash shortage. Cut that whopping increase in arms spending
November 2020 – what happened
On 19th of November 2020 the government announced the largest military spending budget for 30 years, giving the UK the biggest defence/arms spending budget in Europe.
This amounted to a £16.5 billion increase above the Conservative manifesto commitment over four years.
On existing forecasts, this is an overall cash increase of £24.1 billion over four years compared to the previous year’s budget (2019).
Liz Truss’s proposed escalation
This is quite separate from the proposed further huge increase in arms spending proposed by Liz Truss. Her proposal was unbelievable and would have caused outrage if it had been pursued.
Her commitment was to spend 3% of GDP on defence by 2030. To do this Liz Truss’s government would have needed to increase defence spending by about 60% in real terms. This is equivalent to about £157 billion in additional spending.
Cut what?
But the 2020 commitment remains in place and is an obvious place to save money.
Just a starter
We have two new super aircraft carriers run at enormous cost. Great for use in the Second World War, but how can they be deployed to defend Britain!? These should be mothballed or sold.
This would enable us to stop the manufacture all the aircraft needed to equip these currently emasculated weapons/super-ships.
I’m sure the government does not need to exceed its manifesto commitment on defence spending.
Today, 20 October 2022, Liz Truss, UK Prime Minister, has resigned and the British Government is in a feverish condition following a couple of weeks of disastrous policy decisions and U-turns. The newly appointed Chancellor of the Exchequer, Jeremy Hunt, has said that there will have to be painful cuts in the spending of government departments.
SO THERE WILL BE CUTS to public services – AND THE BRITISH PUBLIC WILL surely question why arms spending is continuing to increase rapidly. Surely the public will not accept that arms manufacture would take precedence of over key departments such as the health service, and education
The UK now has the biggest defence/arms spending budget in Europe. On 19th of November 2020 the government announced the largest military spending budget for 30 years.
This amounted to a £16.5 billion increase above the manifesto commitment over four years.
On existing forecasts, this is an overall cash increase of £24.1 billion over four years compared to the previous year’s budget.
The Royal United Services Institute said that the “additional cash represents a real-term increase of between 10 percent and 15 percent in the defence budget.”
HUGE FURTHER INCREASES IN SPENDING PLANNED
But now the government is planning astronomic further increases.
Professor Malcolm Chalmers of the Royal United Services Institute web 2 Sep 2022 commented on the latest UK arms spending target:
“To deliver on its commitment to spend 3% of GDP on defence by 2030, Liz Truss’s government will need to increase defence spending by about 60% in real terms. This is equivalent to about £157 billion in additional spending over the next eight years, compared with current planning assumptions. By comparison, the 2020 Spending Review, and the associated Integrated Review, allocated an extra £16.5 billion over four years. This would be the biggest increase since the early 1950s.”
Professor Malcolm Chalmers, Royal United Services Institute website, 2 Sep 2022. TO PUBLIC SERVICES
The costs of nuclear power that the UK government doesn’t consider or reveal to the public
Radio-active, toxic waste
Nuclear power generation creates vast quantities of cancer-causing radioactive waste which remains highly dangerous and radioactive for many generations to come, in fact for thousands of years. This nuclear waste presents environmental problems and costs which are so great that they cannot be paid for within the lifetimes of people currently alive. The waste from current and recent nuclear power stations has not been successfully stored and no-one has so far suggested a satisfactory way of doing this. See the extracts below from a recent government report on this problem
The decommissioning of nuclear power stations at the end of their useful life is part of this environmental problem.
Financial Costs
Building costs are enormous and have, so far, always gone well over budget. According to December 2017 estimates, Hinkley Point nuclear power station currently under construction was to be built for £20.3bn by 2025, to be paid for over a 35 year period. It is now estimated that it will cost between £21.5bn and £22.5bn (BBC)
The costs of decommissioning (cleaning up the radio-active defunct nuclear power stations and removing radio-active waste to yet-to-be-built safe storage facilities which need to remain safe for thousands of years) are beyond calculation (see the extracts from a UK Government’s Public Accounts Committee report below) – a financial burden which is omitted from cost calculations of nuclear energy. The energy companies will pass the waste disposal problem and costs onto succeeding governments and generations. We (and our children) will pay for this in our energy bills and taxation.
The UK government’s Public Accounts Committee report
The Public Accounts Committee report describes the cost of dismantling spent nuclear reactors and disposing of nuclear waste as “ inherently uncertain”. It has drawn attention to the incompetence with which waste disposal and decommissioning are handled in the UK, and the estimate that today’s waste could take up to 120 years to make safe. If these costs are added into the cost of nuclear “cheap energy” it will be seen as not only highly dangerous but also far more expensive than the day-to-day running costs would suggest.
Read the Public Accounts Committee report for yourself. It makes chilling reading.
Still feeling the hurt all these years after the end of the Vietnam War, 1975, over 45 years ago. PTSD doesn’t just go away. Veteran, Jack Murphy’s recent song on YouTube
58,000 Americans were killed in the war. The total death toll: 3 Million.
There are a number of powerful poems by Vietnam veterans on The War Poetry website.
Video received from Jack Murphy via my CONTACT form.
Thanks, Jack.
Crisis is not too strong a word to apply to care of the elderly in care homes and those living in their own homes with care assistance. Currently a million people are suffering with dementia in the UK and numbers are increasing.
Today’s move (11 November) by the government to require all care home staff to be double vaccinated against Covid will mean a further exodus of staff from a desperately struggling service.
In the first of two programmes Ed Balls, former government minister, goes to live and work for a fortnight as a carer in a care home in Scarborough. Beyond doubt the staff are dedicated, working in a physically and emotionally stressful situation and are close to exhaustion because of staffing shortages. They are paid a very low wage and feel undervalued. The finances of the care home in the programme are on a knife edge.
What can be done? If a care home closes where will the helpless and desperately needy patients go? The situation, replicated in thousands of care homes across the country, urgently needs answers.
You can see this first programme on BBC I-player and the second programme is next Monday, 15 November 2021 at 9 pm on BBC2.
She told me that ”the planet is screaming for help”. And “We are catastrophically far from the crucial goal of 1.5°C.” Words like screaming and catastrophe are not scientific or measured and do nothing to encourage sensible discussion or practical solutions to the genuine problems that are part of climate change.
This kind of talk is hysteria and unfortunately hysteria is infectious. It has already spread around the world to create a new kind of belief system, a new kind of religion (climate activism), which is not open to discussion or questioning and is only loosely related to facts.
Its approach is designed to generate fear and develop a following through a desire to be saved from a Terrible Fate. It leads to such bizarre behaviour as people gluing their hands to tarmac in order to draw attention to the fear they think we all should be experiencing. They believe they can offer us salvation and seek to convert the world to their beliefs by their show of passion, conviction, certainty that they have the answer.
If we follow them we can save millions of lives, stop the ice caps and glaciers melting, stop the desertification of farm lands, stop rising sea levels, stop extreme weather events, wildfires, hurricanes and floods.
Unfortunately, the world’s media thrive on stories of shock and horror and talk of imminent disasters and so are only too happy to spread the alarmist rhetoric. Every natural disaster is good news for the media who will not miss an opportunity to highlight it and explain its cause – climate change, of course.
Climate alarmists get a disproportionate share of the headlines as compared with people taking a rational approach to dealing with global warming.
Scientists tell us that global warming has been going on for the last 27,000 years. 27,000 years ago an ice sheet stretched down across Scotland and Northern England as far as the Midlands and took another 16,000 years to melt off the UK. Sea levels have been rising all this time.
Continued global warming is inevitable and is accelerating in some areas which is certainly a matter of grave concern.
We can expect more natural disasters and we know pretty well where they will occur. A French atlas I have, published in 2003, shows the areas of France where natural disasters are likely to occur and what they will be. Armed with this knowledge people can make preparations to cope. Similar knowledge exists in countries around the world.
The people of the Netherlands are not waiting for sea levels to rise. As far as they are concerned the sea level has already risen. The sea level is already higher than much of their land but by skilful water management and engineering they have saved themselves with flood defences and pumping stations.
Strengthening flood defences is a major task for many countries and may be more effective than trying to halt climate change. Quick and definite results can be guaranteed.
Hurricanes cannot be prevented but buildings can be built to withstand them.
Forest fires may be worse now partly because many occur in forests planted by humans and consisting of very resinous and highly flammable pine trees. Seriously wide fire-breaks might be incorporated in planting schemes, so, perhaps, re-thought forestry management systems may help.
Some effects of climate change may be impossible to mitigate and so we hope policies designed to “halt climate change” may have some effect.
I would like to highlight one proposed solution to the climate crises which is dangerously inappropriate as it carries huge, and very long-term environmental risks to be suffered by future generations. Please see my post on this issue. About the dangers of nuclear power.
Obviously there is more to the climate change issue than considered above.
This article doesn’t cover all my thoughts on climate change so I will write another article soon. This will be on climate science and the questions campaigners don’t address.
Please also see my memories of an extreme weather event, the Fenland Floods of 1947. It includes a remarkable video.
Do you believe that if we all drive electric cars, use heat pumps instead of gas boilers, insulate our houses to the maximum, never fly again – then floods, rising sea levels, forest fires and all the ills of climate change will end?
Young people who learn about natural disasters from the media may get an impression that things have never been so bad and are getting worse and worse all the time. It’s natural to be worried. There are always terrible things happening in the world but I think it is wrong to think the situation is worse than it’s ever been. We can blight our lives with fear if we get things out of proportion.
Many countries are experiencing more and worse problems than in previous history, but in some areas things are little changed or even much better. There have always been terrible natural disasters and extreme fluctuations in weather and everywhere is not consistently getting warmer and warmer.
And, most important, many places have learned to cope with the effects of ongoing climate change.
When I was 4 years old, in March 1947, huge areas of the Fens in Eastern England were flooded, hundreds of thousands of acres of prime farmland. The floods extended to within a mile or two of where I was born in Spalding, Lincolnshire, and and to within a few miles of where I lived in the village of Surfleet.
My father did some” disaster tourism” and took the family out in the car one Sunday afternoon in March to have a look at the floods. I remember being driven along the Cowbit Road in Spalding by the side of the river Welland.
To my surprise I found a picture on the internet of this scene in 1947 close to the railway bridge across the river. My infant school was further along this road, about a quarter of a mile further north.
I remember the sandbags and not understanding how they could help with the flood. I think that when we were there the river level wasn’t up to the brim. And along the same road. I remember fire engines and long pipes, attached to the fire engines, along the edge of the road. This was also something I couldn’t understand.
The river Welland is to the left of the picture behind the trees and can be seen with the level of the water up to the top of the sandbags. Normally the water level in this river is twenty or so feet lower than it is in this picture.
We drove on past the village of Cowbit and along the bank and looked out on an endless extent of water with a farmhouse standing like an island maybe 200 yards from the bank on which our car had paused. A sort of raised road or causeway extended from the farmhouse to the road on the raised bank.
The flooding was said to be “the worst since 1880”.
The winter of 1947 in the UK is remembered as one of the worst ever, but it didn’t begin this way. In fact, after the first cold week in January the weather was exceptionally warm. “During the night of 15-16 January, the temperature at Leeming in North Yorkshire didn’t fall below 11.7 °C.
The following day, maximum temperatures close to 14 °C were recorded in Norfolk, Herefordshire and Flintshire.” [Metlink article.]
The first night of frost was on 20th January. From then on matters got rapidly worse with snow everyday, blizzards, gales, and unrelenting low temperatures. The whole of the UK was gripped in freezing conditions and deep snow for almost two months. Life became very difficult.
A sudden change in the weather occurred on 8th March with the arrival of torrential rain which fell onto ground frozen solid and with drainage ditches blocked with ice.
There were burst river banks and floods all over the UK, but the low-lying Fens were particularly affected.
More information about the winter of 1947 can be found at
https://www.metlink.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/1947_1963winter.pdf
Following the flooding a long canal called the Coronation Channel was dug to direct excessive rising water out to sea. The drainage of the whole area is controlled by a system of channels, pumping stations and sluices (sliding barriers that can be raised or lowered to allow or prevent the flow of water)..
Colin Powell, Former US Secretary of State, died 18 October 2021, age 84.
On 5 February 2003 Colin Powell was the man who sold the “evidence” of the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to the gullible statesmen and politicians in the UN. Their response gave the go-ahead to the Iraq war and the destruction of Iraq, a shameful, murderous act which created hostility, distrust and hatred of western powers. The people of Iraq are still paying a terrible price and so are we.
At the time he would have known that the case he was advancing was absolutely valueless.
He would have known
Tens of millions of people around the world saw that the proposed bombing was an outrage against reason and humanity and took part in the world’s biggest ever anti-war demonstrations.
The US tells us frequently of its democratic values. Was it the democratic wish of the Iraqi people
In his autobiography Colin Powell tells how, as a soldier in Vietnam, he torched Vietnamese villages setting the straw huts ablaze with his own Zippo lighter.
That Powell played a key part in all this is not to his credit. We cannot honour such a man. Let’s not pretend the evil he has supported and facilitated has all been good for humanity.
David Roberts, 19 October 2021
This could be an interesting series about these brilliant and eloquent politicians.
People will never forget the audacity of Blair and his colleagues in ignoring the biggest and worldwide demonstrations of opposition to the war against Iraq, or the worldwide disbelief in the arguments presented.
But will the BBC gloss over the Iraq war and the unprovoked wars against Serbia, and Afghanistan which constitute war crimes under international law.
Will the BBC dodge the question of why these apparent war criminals have not yet been brought to trial?
Does the BBC know the first thing about international law against war?
Declaration of the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal, 1945. But, to see more of what international law says, please see my blog post, The Law Against Wars.
How often has the BBC ever challenged politicians on the legality of unprovoked attacks on other countries? Instead the BBC has given copious amounts of air time to those proposing war and the death, destruction and human misery it will cause. Criticism of such proposals has been minimal.
“To initiate a war of aggression is a crime that no political or economic situation can justify”.
“. . . if certain actions in violation of treaties are criminal actions, these are criminal actions whether committed by the USA or by Germany. . . We are not willing to endorse a law that may condemn the criminal behaviour of others unless we are prepared to have those laws invoked against ourselves as well”. – US Supreme Court, Justice Robert Jackson – Principal Attorney for the USA at the Nuremberg Tribunal, 1945.
“. . . the second aim of the trial was to establish the rules of international law for the future, so that not only the launching of wars of aggression would be illegal, but also, for the first time, to make the rulers who lead their countries into wars of aggression personally responsible for their actions” – Lord Shawcross – Principal British Prosecutor at Nuremberg, 1945
“Individuals have international duties which transcend the national obligations of obedience. Therefore [individual citizens] have the duty to violate domestic laws to prevent crimes against peace and humanity from occurring” — Declaration of the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal, 1945
Principle I. Any person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefore and liable to punishment.
Principle II. The fact that internal law does not impose a penalty for an act which constitutes a crime under international law does not relieve the person who committed the act from responsibility under international law.
Principle III. The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law acted as Head of State or responsible government official does not relieve him from responsibility under international law.
Principle IV. The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.
Principle V. Any person charged with a crime under international law has the right to a fair trial on the facts and law.
Principle VI. The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:
(a) Crimes against peace:
(i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;
(ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i).
(b) War Crimes:
Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation of slave-labour or for any other purpose of the civilian population of or in occupied territory, murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.
(c) Crimes against humanity:
Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhumane acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial, or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime.
Principle VII. Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity as set forth in Principle VI is a crime under international law.
“No State or group of States has the right to intervene, directly or indirectly, for any reason whatever, in the internal or external affairs of any other State. Consequently, armed intervention and all other forms of interference or attempted threats against the personality of the State or against its political, economic and cultural elements, are in violation of international law.
No State shall organize, assist, foment, finance, incite or tolerate subversive, terrorist or armed activities directed towards the violent overthrow of the regime of another State, or interfere in civil strife in another State.
The territory of a State shall not be the object of military occupation resulting from the use of force in contravention of the provisions of the Charter. The territory of a State shall not be the object of acquisition by another State resulting from the threat or use of force. No territorial acquisition resulting from the threat or use of force shall be recognized as legal.
Every State has the duty to refrain in its international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations. Such a threat or use of force constitutes a violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations and shall never be employed as a means of settling international issues.
A war of aggression constitutes a crime against the peace, for which there is responsibility under international law.
In accordance with the purposes and principles of the United Nations, States have the duty to refrain from propaganda for wars of aggression.”
Tony Blair and his colleagues, and British politicians who supported the war, should be held to account for the shame they have brought to this country, and the thousands killed and injured as a result of their decisions, crimes against humanity.
America, Britain, and the others presented the war against the Taliban as a war against terrorism. Terrorism may be defined as the use of violence for political ends. On this definition the terrorism delivered by Britain, America, and others far exceeds any terrorist suffering we may have endured before or since this war.
Much of our own suffering has come to us as a direct result of our own actions in Afghanistan. Over 450 British soldiers were killed in this war and approximately another thousand seriously injured. These facts alone show that this military fantasy operation has made things worse for ourselves even on that small measure of achievement.
Of course, the general picture is far worse than this. Although we are constantly told of the benefits brought to Afghanistan by Western involvement in the last 20-years certain facts are mostly quietly overlooked. For example, over 160,000 Afghans were killed during the last 20-years, many by direct US bombing, but others in the ongoing conflict which the Western presence promoted in the country, taking sides but never bringing peace, far from it. Our use of violence against Afghans must have brought about suffering on a wide scale, and anger against the west, a stimulus to retaliation. More details below.
This is what an Amnesty web report said on 20 June 2019:
“There are currently more than 2.6 million registered refugees in the world from Afghanistan.
There are more than 2 million people who have been internally displaced by the ongoing conflict. . .
In a report published in June 2019, the Institute for Peace and Economics said that Afghanistan is the world’s “least peaceful” country, replacing Syria.”
The cost of the UK taxpayer is in the region of £40 billion.
The figure put out by the government is about half this but its figures overlook a number of factors. For an analysis of the costs see the Fact Check web page by Channel 4..
https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/how-much-has-the-afghan-conflict-cost-britain
American service members killed in Afghanistan through April [2021]: 2,448.
U.S. Contractors: 3,846. [employed to do military tasks or support the US military operation]
Afghan national military and police: 66,000.
Other allied service members, including from other NATO member states: 1,144.
Afghan civilians: 47,245.
Taliban and other opposition fighters: 51,191.
Aid workers: 444.
Journalists: 72.
[Total number of Afghans killed: 164,436. The number of Americans killed was more than twice the number that died in the 9/11 twin towers atrocity]
“The cost of this 20-year military and security engagement has been astronomically high – in lives, in livelihoods and in money.
Over 2,300 US servicemen and women have been killed and more than 20,000 injured, along with more than 450 Britons and hundreds more from other nationalities.
But it is the Afghans themselves who have borne the brunt of the casualties, with over 60,000 members of the security forces killed and nearly twice that many civilians.
The estimated financial cost to the US taxpayer is close to a staggering US$1 trillion.”
Wars such as the one against Afghanistan are an affront to intelligence and affront to morality. They are unnecessary and counterproductive. Few countries in the world today involve themselves in such primitive military adventures and it is a matter of shame that the UK is one of the few countries that believes in violence as an acceptable mode of international relations.
David Roberts, 14 September 2021
Please share this post.
Friday 10th September is World Suicide Prevention Day – an annual awareness day that highlights the important work that people, organisations and charities are undertaking globally, to prevent suicide.
PAPYRUS is one of these organisations which offers advice and help in the UK, not only to those with suicidal feelings, but also to friends and relatives who may want advice about how to help someone they believe may be severely depressed or in danger of committing suicide.
Papyrus runs Hopeline UK.
Please share this post.
Cash shortage isn’t just because of covid. – Biggest arms spending budget for 30 years
The UK now has the biggest defence/arms spending budget in Europe. On 19th of November 2020 the government announced the largest military spending budget for 30 years.
This amounted to a £16.5 billion increase above the manifesto commitment over four years.
On existing forecasts, this is an overall cash increase of £24.1 billion over four years compared to last year’s budget.
The Royal United Services Institute said that the “additional cash represents a real-term increase of between 10 percent and 15 percent in the defence budget.”
This cannot be because we are suddenly under greatly increased threat of invasion.
Surely it is not a coincidence that the foreign aid budget has been drastically cut. Not enough money to meet increased demands in the health service. But the media don’t talk about this huge increase in government arms spending at a time of critical, immediate needs.
David Roberts
30 July 2021
It’s surprising to find censorship from facebook when facebook is dedicated to the free expression of opinions. I suspect there are people in facebook who don’t want certain views and facts to be widely presented.
ON THIS PAGE
Extract from The New York Times, 21 May 2021 describing some of what Israeli forces did to the people of Gaza
Facebook’s explanation of why they censored me
Too many people think there’s a struggle going on between equals because that’s the way our media present it most of the time. Really one side is one of the most heavily armed states in the world, helped by the US and UK and it’s pushing around (and stealing land from) almost totally unarmed civilians with house demolitions, demolition of apartment blocks, infrastructure demolitions and the killing of hundreds of civilians. There is no excuse for not taking sides. War criminals should be brought to justice. See posts on my blog www.davidrobertsblog.com for more information and emails to my MP.
This item tells us something about the behaviour of Israel in its attempt to live alongside and with Palestinians.
“With the approval of the Trump administration, an emboldened Israel has stepped up the pace of settlements, demolitions and evictions of Palestinians in both East Jerusalem and the West Bank.
A nation state law passed in 2018 eroding the rights of Israeli Palestinians, along with chronic underfunding, property discrimination and bad policing, stoked a sense of growing grievance among the Arabs that make up 20% of Israel’s population. The tensions that ultimately exploded with rocket fire from Gaza began in East Jerusalem over the proposed evictions of Palestinians in favour of Jewish settlers, spawning a social media campaign named #saveSheikhJarrah that brought together Israeli Palestinians with those in West Bank and Jerusalem.
Far from solving the conflict, the man known as Mr Security may have helped open up a new front which no military operation can resolve, especially with Iranian backed Hamas in the ascendancy. Resolution can only come from the inside out.”
My note: “settlements” is another word for land-theft, evicting Palestinian owners to make way for Israelis to live in Palestinian property.
NY Times online 21 May 2021
“In addition to killing more than 230 Palestinians in Gaza, including 65 children, the Israeli airstrikes have devastated civilian infrastructure, wrecked sewage systems and water pipes, damaged at least 17 hospitals and clinics, severely damaged or destroyed about 1,000 buildings and suspended operations at Gaza’s only coronavirus testing laboratory.”
“Your comment goes against our community standards so only you can see it. Facebook.
We have these standards to prevent things such as false advertising, fraud and security breaches.
We don’t allow people to get likes, follows, shares or video views in a way that’s misleading to others.
We define spam as things such as:
• Repeating the same comment
• Getting fake likes, follows, shares or video views
• Coordinating likes and shares to mislead others about the popularity of something
Your comment goes against our Community Standards on spam, so no one else can see it.”
I ticked a box to say I disagreed with their decision.
“You disagreed with the decision
We usually offer the chance to request a review, and follow up if we’ve gotten decisions wrong.
We have fewer reviewers available at the moment because of the coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak. We’re trying hard to prioritise reviewing content with the most potential for harm.
This means that we may not be able to follow up with you, though your feedback helps us do better in the future.
Thank you for understanding”
The goal of our Community Standards has always been to create a place for expression and give people a voice. This has not and will not change. Building community and bringing the world closer together depends on people’s ability to share diverse views, experiences, ideas and information. We want people to be able to talk openly about the issues that matter to them, even if some may disagree or find them objectionable.
Joe Biden repeatedly states that Israel has the right to self defence, a statement which is literally true but designed to be misleading and is therefore dishonest.
In fact the opposite is true. Biden suggests that the aggressor, Israel, is the victim in this Israel/Palestine dispute. Israel has overwhelming fire-power, an endless supply of sophisticated weapons, jet planes, tanks, drones, guided missiles, high explosives much of it supplied by and even funded by the United States and is using this fire-power against two million defenceless civilians in Gaza. America is on Israel’s side.
Israel’s bombardment is almost exclusively of civilians, their homes, their means of living. Today (17 May 2021) the BBC reported that Israeli attacks in Gaza had destroyed roads and power lines. Yesterday they destroyed an apartment block that housed, amongst families, international reporters. On 12 May Offices of Gaza’s Interior Ministry were hit and all police stations were destroyed.
The message is, “We will destroy you. We will make Gaza ungovernable. We will make your lives impossible and we are taking steps to stop the world from knowing what we are doing to you.” I think the word for this is “genocide”.
True that Hamas who govern Gaza continue with determination but not effectively to fire their simple rockets at Israel, and that 10 Israelis have been killed as a result of hundreds of rockets fired. The rockets land in civilian areas (the few that get through) and this is wrong.
They can expect more violence from Israel. BUT ALSO their cause may be kept before the attention of world leaders who are the only ones who can release Palestinians from their suffering. Their cause is their claim to have a right to freedom, respect, and life itself, free from Israeli control and abuses.
Blinken, speaking at a news conference in Copenhagen, Denmark, said he has not seen any Israeli evidence of Hamas operating in the Gaza building that housed residences, offices and media organisations – including Al Jazeera – that Israel hit on Saturday. Blinken says he has asked Israel for justification for the attack.
In the last week, at least 58 children in the enclave territory and two children in southern Israel have been killed.
“How many more families need to lose loved ones before the international community takes action? Where can children run to when air strikes rain down on their homes?” said Jason Lee, Save the Children’s Palestine country director.
“Families in Gaza, and our staff, are telling us that they are at breaking point – they are living in hell with nowhere to seek refuge and seemingly no end in sight,” said Lee.
It’s unlikely that UK mainstream media has reported protests from around the world against Israel’s bombing. Picture taken in Paris 16 May 2021.
Al Aqabah; Algiers; Amman; Ankara; Athens; Auckland; Baghdad; Basrah; Beirut; Benslimane; Bergen; Berlin; Birmingham; Boston; Bradford; Brighton; Bristol; Brooklyn; Brussels; Calgary; Cape Town; Casablanca; Chicago; Christchurch; Copenhagen; Cork; Daraa; Dearborn; Dhaka; Diwaniyah; Doha; Dublin; Dunedin; Edinburgh; Edmonton; Frankfort; Galway; Glasgow; Halifax; Hamburg; Hamilton; Irbid; Istanbul; Jacksonville; Johannesburg; Kampala; Karachi; Kashmir; Kensington; Khartoum; Krakow; Kuwait; Leipzig; London, Canada; London, UK; Los Angeles; Madrid; Mahdia; Manchester; Manhattan; Marrakesh; Melbourne; Michigan; Milan; Milwaukee; Mogadishu; Montreal; Nabatieh; Nairobi; Nelson; New York; Nicosia; Norwich; Oslo; Ottawa; Palmerston; Paris; Peshawar; Philadelphia; Pittsburgh; Pristina; Rabat; Raleigh; Rome; San Jose; Sandton; Saskatoon; Sao Paulo; Srinagar; Sydney; St. John’s; Stuttgart; Tehran; Tokyo; Toronto; Tripoli; Tunis; Vancouver; Vienna; Warsaw; Waterloo; Washington; Wellington; Whanganui.
Nearly 200 people, including 58 children, have been killed by Israeli bombing in the last week. 17 May 2021
11 May 2021
“Our Quaker testimonies to peace and equality compel us, once again, to speak out on this issue. At this time, (11 May) over 850 people (840 Palestinians and at least 21 Israeli police officers and 7 Israeli civilians) have been wounded. In Gaza, 24 Palestinians including 9 children, were killed overnight.
“The latest round of this 73-year cycle of violence has taken place amid provocative and discriminatory actions by the Israeli government. There are threats to forcibly remove more Palestinian families from their homes in East Jerusalem in favour of Israeli settlers, which the UN has warned may constitute a war crime, and tear gas and stun grenades have been fired by Israeli soldiers into the Al Aqsa Mosque as Muslims meet in worship for the end of Ramadan. We have seen violent crackdowns on peaceful protestors, retaliatory rockets fired indiscriminately from Gaza into Israel and airstrikes from Israel kill civilians in Gaza.
“All of these actions are grave violations of international law and must end immediately.
“As Quakers we place equal value on every human life and believe the structural violence of occupation damages all people of the region. We have said before that the conflict between the Palestinians and Israelis will only be resolved when Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory is ended, and the inherent equality, dignity and worth of all is realised. We still believe this to be so. We urge our faith and political leaders to speak out with us. For as long as we remain silent, and choose to step back from uncomfortable words and actions, we are all complicit in the ongoing violence.”
We urge our faith and political leaders to speak out with us.
– Paul Parker, Recording Clerk [Quakers in Britain]
Today, as Palestinians continue to experience exile, blockade, relentless spikes in violence and huge increases in land dispossession, we work with Palestinian and Israeli partners to protect human rights and promote resilience for Palestinian communities and civil society.
All our work aims to support the foundations for a just, lasting peace for all. We work on protecting human rights. Our partners work to challenge discriminatory laws, practices and decisions affecting Palestinians living under occupation in the West Bank and Gaza, and Palestinian citizens of Israel.
Best wishes
David Roberts www.davidrobertsblog.
Protests in cities around the world condemn Israeli action as the outrages escalate. The demonstration in New York is shown here.
Israel appears to be trying to destroy social control in Gaza. Hamas today, 12 May 2021, claimed that Israeli airstrikes had destroyed all police stations in Gaza. Israel’s message is clear, We will destroy you.
I hope that governments around the world will condemn the Israeli action and not fudge the issues by “calling on both sides” to stop the violence as if there is an equality in what each side is doing. Please see my quote from the Christian Aid website in my blog post, “Palestinians suffer once again”.
David Roberts
Tuesday 11 May 2021
I have written to my MP today and urge readers to write to their MPs. See my separate post to read what I said to him.
Air strikes by Israeli jets on Gaza last night are reported to have killed 24 people including at least 9 children. The air strikes follow several days of attacks by Israeli police and settlers on Palestinians in Jerusalem, injuring over 300 people. Israeli forces stormed the Al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem.
Regrettably Palestinians have retaliated with a barrage of their primitive rockets fired into Israel, killing 5 people.
Today, as Palestinians continue to experience exile, blockade, relentless spikes in violence and huge increases in land dispossession, we work with Palestinian and Israeli partners to protect human rights and promote resilience for Palestinian communities and civil society.
All our work aims to support the foundations for a just, lasting peace for all. We work on protecting human rights. Our partners work to challenge discriminatory laws, practices and decisions affecting Palestinians living under occupation in the West Bank and Gaza, and Palestinian citizens of Israel.
Arab League chief, Ahmed Aboul Gheit condemned deadly Israeli air strikes on the Gaza Strip as “indiscriminate and irresponsible” and said Israel had provoked an earlier increase in violence by its actions in Jerusalem.
The violence began after Israeli forces stormed the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound on Monday for a third consecutive day, firing rubber-coated steel bullets, stun grenades and tear gas at Palestinian worshippers inside Islam’s third holiest site in the final days of the holy month of Ramadan.
David Roberts
Please share this post.
Dear David,
Thank you for contacting me about the UK’s nuclear stockpile.
The fundamental purpose of our nuclear weapons is to preserve peace, prevent coercion and deter aggression. A minimum, credible, independent nuclear deterrent assigned to the defence of NATO, remains essential in order to guarantee our security and that of our Allies. I would argue that it has worked in that none have ever been fired in anger by any side. Given this, advances in anti-missile technology require a larger volume of warheads in order for the threat to remain credible and thus peace to be preserved.
Kind regards,
Andrew
Andrew Griffith MP, Member of Parliament for Arundel & South Downs 7 April 2021
Dear Andrew Griffith
I very much appreciate that you are working your socks off and doing a great job for the constituency.
Thank you for replying to my email re our defence spending, especially our proposed increase in nuclear warheads.
Believing in nuclear weapons is an act of faith and I think you have made your choice, but I still hope that you will be prepared to look at reasoned argument and perhaps agree with some of the points below.
The majority of people in this country and almost every country and person in the rest of the world take a different view from you.
These are some of the reasons
Preventing coercion and deterring aggression would be good outcomes if they work. But several thoughts occur to me on this topic.
Honouring treaties is something Britain has been proud of, but increasing the number of our nuclear warheads is an extraordinary reversal of an agreement we have kept for over half a century. The government’s website proclaims our commitment to the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty. Claiming that others have improved their defences cannot justify what we propose doing.
The UK is a signatory and ratifier for The Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty. The NPT remains the most widely subscribed to nuclear arms control treaty in history. 190 states have signed the treaty.
The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is an essential pillar of international peace and security, and the heart of the nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation regime. Its unique status is based on its near universal membership, legally-binding obligations on disarmament, verifiable non-proliferation safeguards regime, and commitment to the peaceful use of nuclear energy”
UN Secretary-General António Guterres on the Fiftieth Anniversary of the NPT’s opening for signature, 24 May 2018, Geneva
“The UK remains committed to the collective long-term goal of a world without nuclear weapons, and supports the full implementation of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation on Nuclear Weapons (NPT) in all its aspects. There is no credible alternative route to disarmament.”
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-nuclear-deterrence-factsheet/uk-nuclear-deterrence-what-you-need-to-know
[More about international treaties and conferences was included here. See other articles about nuclear weapons and the treaty on my blog.]
Russians have reduced nuclear weapons stockpile
At the height of the Cold War Russia/USSR had about 40 thousand nuclear warheads. Today it has about four thousand warheads.
Source: Federation of American Scientists. https://fas.org/issues/nuclear-weapons/status-world-nuclear-forces/
I think the people of Britain and the world will not understand or welcome what Britain is doing by its partial reliance and increased spending on a larger nuclear arsenal.
David Roberts
www.davidrobertsblog.com
PS May I have permission to quote your letter on my blog?
Andrew Griffith gave permission for me to quote his email.
David Roberts
Please share this post and feel free to comment.
“Instead of a stockpile of no more than 180 warheads by the mid-2020s, the UK will now increase its overall stockpile to no more than 260 warheads.”
Statement found in Integrated Review 2021, House of Commons Library Summary, 17 March 2021.
Setting aside the morality of preparing to carry out the mass annihilation of millions of people, why are we breaking an international treaty agreement which we have honoured for over 50 years? How will other countries regard this action?
The government has responded to criticism by explaining that the increase is not really an increase but it won’t appear like this to other nations. What do you think?
The UK is a signatory and ratifier for The Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty.The NPT remains the most widely subscribed to nuclear arms control treaty in history. 190 states have signed the treaty.
“The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is an essential pillar of international peace and security, and the heart of the nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation regime. Its unique status is based on its near universal membership, legally-binding obligations on disarmament, verifiable non-proliferation safeguards regime, and commitment to the peaceful use of nuclear energy”
UN Secretary-General António Guterres on the Fiftieth Anniversary of the NPT’s opening for signature, 24 May 2018, Geneva
“The UK remains committed to the collective long-term goal of a world without nuclear weapons, and supports the full implementation of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation on Nuclear Weapons (NPT) in all its aspects. There is no credible alternative route to disarmament.”
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-nuclear-deterrence-factsheet/uk-nuclear-deterrence-what-you-need-to-know
Under the treaty, the five Nuclear Weapons States commit to pursue general and complete disarmament, while the Non Nuclear Weapons States agree to forgo developing or acquiring nuclear weapons.
Article VI commits states-parties to “pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.” Acknowledging the necessity of intermediate steps in the process of nuclear disarmament, Article VII allows for the establishment of regional nuclear-weapon-free-zones.
May 22, 2000: The NPT states-parties agree to a final document at the sixth review conference that outlines the so-called 13 steps for progress toward nuclear disarmament, including an “unequivocal undertaking by the nuclear-weapon States to accomplish the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals.”
June 2011: The United Kingdom announces voluntary planned reductions in its deployed nuclear forces set to be accomplished by early 2015. When complete, the United Kingdom will have no more than 120 deployed strategic warheads, with 60 warheads in reserve to support the maintenance and management of the operational force. All excess warheads will be dismantled by the mid-2020s.
May 6, 2014: All five nuclear-weapon states sign the protocol for the Central Asian Nuclear-Weapons-Free-Zone (CANFWZ) treaty. The CANFWZ applies to Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan.
(CANFWZ – Central Asian Nuclear-Weapons-Free-Zone)
November 17, 2014: France ratifies the CANFWZ
December 8-9, 2014: pledge to cooperate to “stigmatize, prohibit, and eliminate” nuclear weapons.
A third conference on the Humanitarian Impact of Nuclear Weapons is held in Vienna. The United States and the United Kingdom decide to attend, and China choses to send an observer. Over 150 countries and several international and civil society organizations participate. Over 60 countries sign a pledge to cooperate to “stigmatize, prohibit, and eliminate” nuclear weapons.
January 30, 2015: The United Kingdom ratifies the CANFWZ.
Above quotes from Arms Control Association https://www.armscontrol.org
At the height of the Cold War Russia/USSR had about 40 thousand nuclear warheads. Today it has about four thousand warheads.
Source: Federation of American Scientists. https://fas.org/issues/nuclear-weapons/status-world-nuclear-forces/
David Roberts, www.davidrobertsblog.com 4 May 2021
My books (books I have edited) are primarily books of war poetry (mainly the First World War) and remembrance poems.
I also run a very popular war poetry website www.warpoetry.uk