ICAN calls Russia's suspension of START participation "extremely dangerous provocation"

Högsta laments that "the disarmament machinery" has been "eroded in recent years" and calls for a ban on nuclear weapons

MADRID, 22 Feb. (EUROPA PRESS) -

The interim executive director of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), Daniel Högsta, described Wednesday as an "extremely dangerous provocation" the announcement by Russian President Vladimir Putin to suspend Moscow's participation in the New Treaty. of Strategic Arms Reduction (START).

"It is an extremely worrying decision that we condemn with the utmost firmness," Högsta said in an interview with Europa Press, before stressing that for now it is not possible to know "what" the announcement means, since "the suspension is not something contemplated by the treaty". "It is clearly a provocation to announce this suspension and surely (Moscow) knows that it is not something that is contemplated," he said.

Likewise, it has stressed that the Russian decision "also demonstrates the use of arms control machinery as a tool to send signals, which is extremely worrying." "They are tools whose objective is to preserve peace and exercise some kind of control to avoid the unthinkable, so when they are used as Putin does (...), it is something extremely unacceptable, since it increases uncertainty around the use of nuclear weapons," he said.

Högsta lamented that "the disarmament machinery around nuclear weapons has been eroded in recent years" and explained that countries and civil organizations "clung to the New START like a retaining wall", although he has pointed out that the The decision "is a sign that (Russia) is holding this treaty hostage" in the context of the war in Ukraine.

Thus, he has spoken of "nuclear blackmail by Russia to cover up and avoid interference in its brutal invasion of Ukraine", in reference to the warnings from senior Russian officials about the possibility of resorting to these weapons and has explained that Moscow "sees this suspension (of the New START) as part of this increase in uncertainty, which he believes gives him some short-term advantage."

"We are in a situation where we hope Putin will not use nuclear weapons in this crisis. We do not know what his intentions are and we must not incite fear or panic, but this makes it clear that more needs to be done to restore the nuclear taboo", he said, while noting that the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons -adopted in July 2017 and in force since January 2021- "is the clearest condemnation of nuclear weapons".

Along these lines, he has argued that "what creates the most danger and uncertainty is the notion that nuclear weapons are somehow legitimate tools (...) of persuasion or blackmail, in the recent case of Russia." "What is very effective are the condemnations of the use of nuclear weapons and the threat about the use of nuclear weapons," she added.

Högsta has argued that while "many of the standing treaties that somehow maintained order have collapsed", Russia's condemnations of these threats "have proven effective". "This demonstrates the importance of international norms, represented in the disarmament machinery", he has abounded her.

In this way, he has specified that the "wrong lesson" that could be drawn "is that nuclear weapons are the solution", something that he has described as "insanity". "Russia is fueling the conflict by threatening to use nuclear weapons. Responding to that by saying that we need to strengthen our position on nuclear weapons is the opposite of what needs to be done," he said.

"There are no indications that this would be more successful than convictions," he said, while stressing that "the best solution is to continue denouncing Russia's irresponsible behavior and reduce dependence on nuclear weapons."

On the other hand, he has advocated "being realistic about the threat and risks" posed by Russia's actions and has asked to "take them seriously", although he has stressed that "it is not useful to foment panic". "The chilling thing is that nobody knows" what the risk is that Moscow decides to use these weapons. "The truth is that the only person who knows if Putin will use nuclear weapons is Putin himself," he stressed.

"In the context of this war, we are hoping that he does not use nuclear weapons, that he acts rationally, that he does not misinterpret some type of advice, make a miscalculation or make a technical error," he stressed, before recalling that "there are options to improve the situation" that go through "a greater political will on the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons".

"It is a chilling situation, but it is not that there is no hope," he assessed, before pointing to the "democratic will" and the "will of the peoples" in the face of this "unacceptable situation." "There are only nine states with nuclear weapons, but there are governments in NATO and other military organizations that somehow give credibility to nuclear weapons, which is the wrong lesson to be learned from this crisis," he asserted, before adding that "the fundamental problem" is that "there are more than 12,000, almost 13,000, nuclear weapons in the world." "Any one of them causes a humanitarian catastrophe from which it is impossible to recover," she warned.

Along these lines, he has assessed that the treaties "provide a structure for some type of control over the number of nuclear weapons and the type of nuclear weapons" and has said that "it was taken for granted for a long time that everything is fine because there is control of weapons and (...) deterrence operates normally".

"The lack of progress in disarmament created fundamental pressure on all these instruments, which were left subject to political events," he said, for which he pointed out that "the pillars on which these treaties were based individually were weaker than thought because nuclear disarmament has slowed and there is little political will in nuclear weapon states for such disarmament.

Thus, he lamented that "there is a lot of talk about a world free of nuclear weapons, but there are few actions underway", before asking to "support and reinforce" these treaties. However, he has stressed that "the situation is poisoned because deterrence is based on a myth, which is that nuclear weapons can be controlled."

"There are safeguards that are useful and every treaty that disappears takes us in the right direction, but deterrence is the main problem, believing that nuclear weapons serve some kind of target or security purpose," he said. "It is something fundamentally wrong", she has criticized her.

"If we look at it, gun control, while important, has been used as an excuse for inaction," he argued. "You often see governments that are part of nuclear alliances talk only about non-proliferation and arms control, as if that were enough and would give us security," she said.

In this way, he explained that "the problem is not with people like (former US President Donald) Trump and Putin, who are symptoms of the problem." "Over time, we will have leaders like that who cannot be trusted, but it is nuclear weapons that create fear and uncertainty," he said.

For this reason, he has pointed out that "non-proliferation cannot exist by itself, without disarmament" and has reiterated that "non-proliferation, demanded by states that have nuclear weapons, is a failed strategy." "Disarmament and, in fact, the prohibition through the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, is the only credible way to guarantee that non-proliferation takes place", he has concluded.