States are currently meeting at the United Nations headquarters in New York to begin negotiations on a treaty prohibiting nuclear weapons. This meeting is the most important multilateral initiative in nuclear disarmament since the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) came into effect in 1970. Although it is party to NPT, Canada has announced that it will not participate in the ban-treaty talks, thus publicly standing with the few who support continued existence of nuclear weapons.
Canada has not had nuclear weapons on its territory since 1984, when US Genie air-to-air missiles were returned to the United States from Canadian airbases. The country has also renounced the acquisition and production of nuclear weapons, making it the first country with the capacity to produce nuclear weapons that chose not to do so.
Forty-six years ago, when the NPT came into force, nuclear disarmament was at the forefront of the public consciousness. Since then, global disarmament has been stalled, resulting in growing international frustration over the lack of progress.
When it comes to nuclear disarmament, Canada has adopted a step-by-step approach, which claims to encourage the pursuit of independent and progressive initiatives until, eventually, a world without nuclear weapons is reached. This approach is highly problematic because it gives these indiscriminate weapons undeserved legitimacy.
As of today, nuclear weapons are the only weapon of mass destruction not explicitly prohibited by international legal agreement. In addition, the step-by-step approach has failed, again and again, to achieve the real change that most non-nuclear-armed states seek.
Canada has a long history of supporting nuclear states to maintain their nuclear arsenal through military alliances like the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which has nuclear deterrence as part of its strategic concept. Former Minister of Foreign Affairs Stéphane Dion admitted that Canada will not support new efforts towards disarmament because of its obligations under NATO. But that would mean turning away from other international obligations like the NPT and the security concerns of the majority of the world.
Nuclear disarmament will not be achieved unless the collective responsibility to disarm is taken seriously by the international community as a whole. The major nuclear powers have failed to fulfill their existing obligations under the NPT to negotiate in good faith the elimination of their nuclear arsenals. Amid heightened tensions and increased instability between the West and Russia, the existence and modernization of nuclear arsenals could potentially result in their proliferation to other nations, and to terrorist groups.
NATO allegiance can no longer be used as an excuse to legitimize the existence of a weapon that can cause irreversible harm to the environment and endanger human survival. NATO members, Canada included, can—and should—challenge the validity of the organization’s rationale of advocating for arms control, disarmament and non-proliferation while simultaneously relying upon nuclear deterrence. They can do so without questioning their commitment to the alliance as a whole.
Almost 72 years after the first atomic bombs were dropped, no real global action has been taken to eliminate nuclear weapons—until now.
Public support for disarmament was crucial to Canada’s previous nuclear disarmament efforts. Today, we as the next generation of Canadian leaders need to push for Justin Trudeau to participate in the negotiations by calling our member of parliament and reminding them of the country’s commitment to sustainable peace. Such a peace can only be achieved in a nuclear-free world.
By joining actively in the new negotiations starting today, Canada would be taking a decisive first step into finding a legal path to nuclear disarmament—an end which was championed by former Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau. Such action would undoubtedly position the country favourably in its bid for a seat at the UN Security Council in 2021.
