reed writes

First draft of a speech for Prime Minister Harper   (disclaimer follows) .

Ladies and Gentleman,

First let me congratulate the President-Elect of the United States on his forthcoming inauguration.

Let me also say that Canada is ready and willing to work with you Mr. President, to address in a positive way, some of the most urgent problems facing our planet today.

In particular, I wish to address the issue of Iran's nuclear policy.

Let me say that my government has held discussions with Iranian officials and also with officials of the International Atomic Energy Agency; both have assured us that the government of Iran has no plans to produce a nuclear weapon. For that we are grateful. I wish to add that Iran has offered additional assurances that ought to go some way to alleviate the fears of all those who are concerned about the future peace of our world, including Israel, a state, which has expressed concern for its own security.

Mr. President, the time for belligerent and bellicose rhetoric – as we have both agreed – has passed. The time for angry and provocative slogans has passed.

Indeed, the time has come for a new approach. One that will offer all of us a way out of what seems to so many – an impasse – with no peaceful exit.

Let me be blunt Mr. President.

America has a long and particularly difficult history with Iran. It's a painful history that goes back to the combined British and American action of 1953, to overthrow the democratically elected government of Mohammed Mossadegh. That historical mistake was then compounded by the installation of the dictator, Shah Reza Pahlavi. His autocratic approach to government divided the Iranian people and contributed to the poisoning of relations with America and indeed with the West.

That is simply the stark reality, which we cannot ignore.

We find ourselves today in the deepest and most dangerous of dilemmas.

Mr. President, I repeat, Canada stands ready to do its part.

My government is calling today for the establishment of a world-wide consortium of uranium-producing nations. This consortium, under the legal authority of the United Nations, would undertake to assist the government of Iran and other governments in the development of full-scale nuclear enrichment programmes, dedicated to the production of nuclear power for peaceful purposes. Such a programme would, of course, be subject to strict inspection rules laid down by the IAEA under the direction of its Chairman, the highly respected Dr. Mohammed elBaradei.

Further we call on the community of nations – collectively – to renounce once and for all – any further development of weapons of mass destruction.

Further – we call on all nations, which have not yet signed the nuclear non-proliferation treaty to do so without delay.

And finally, we call on all nations, now in possession of nuclear weapons or nuclear facilities of any kind, to open all of their facilities to unfettered international inspection. 

In order to reach these goals, Canada calls upon all members of the international community to support the convening of a bona fide international working group. This group would include your country, Mr. President, as well as Iran, all other members of the Security Council and delegates from IAEA.

Only by taking decisive and meaningful action immediately, will we be able to move forward along the path of peace, which all of us wish to follow.

Thank you.

(Disclaimer: There is no doubt that such a proposal by Mr. Harper followed to its logical conclusion would win him the Nobel Peace prize. It would ensure his legacy as a peacemaker in the ranks of Lester B. Pearson and Nelson Mandela. However it is unlikely that Mr. Harper will ever deliver this speech or indeed anything like it, because he would be calling on India, Pakistan and Israel to support and obey international law.)

[I hope I'm wrong].

Bush’s nuclear hypocrisy exposed.

For almost eight years, the Bush administration has condemned other nations for pursuing a nuclear weapons arsenal, while at the same time maintaining its own storehouse of WMD. Moreover, Bush has – like other American leaderts – turned a blind eye to the actions of the most powerful nuclear-armed nation in the Middle East, Israel.

Now we see a strong argument being made that is diametrically opposed to the  Bush administration’s views…and a radical departure from American political and miltary policy.

According to Today’s Nrw York Times

"A who’s who of the (American) national security establishment — George Shultz, Henry Kissinger, William Perry and Sam Nunn — is calling on the United States to lead a global campaign to devalue and eventually rid the world of nuclear weapons.

None of these men (two former secretaries of state, a former secretary of defense and a former chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee) is given to casual utopianism — or anything casual. They are trying to shock sensibilities"

The fact that this cadre of dyed-in-the-wool warmongering conservative establishment elite is calling for a global ban on nuclear weapons is a good sign.

The question is this: will the leaders of the world listen…or is it already too late?

Read more here in the New York Times.

…and get real

For some time now it has been apparent that the nuclear industry, whether in the first, second, or third world, has been living in denial. Its denial has been enabled by short-sighted governments, which appear to have little or no understanding of the extent to which they are mortgaging the future – not just of individual citizens and nations – but of the planet..

The primary issue is not the enormous combined public cost of constructing, commissioning and operating these facilities. We need the power and we need nuclear power as a part of the portfolio. Moreover we already have nuclear and we have learned to live with it.

The issue is research and development. Far too little is being done on the research front and that needs to change. Both government and private industry must accelerate investment in the research end of things.

For example, the American waste repository at Yucca Mountain is more than a decade behind schedule and Canada has not even begun work on one. Even when Yucca Mountain is completed (assuming that day will come), it will be too small.

Unless significant dollars 40-50 billion of them in today’s money, are invested immediately in finding ways to make nuclear more efficient in every aspect, our heirs and assigns could find themselves in a blind alley with no way out.

Public and private lethargy in terms of advanced nuclear research, means that 15 years from now, conservation will no longer be voluntary, because we’ll be living in a time when both household and corporate electricity will be rationed.

And then of course there is the even greater issue of careless, negligent and lackadaisical behaviour by those who are charged with maintaining security.

Read More about the astounding allegations against Canada. And you may rest assured that if it is happening in Canada, it is happening globally.

It’s important to remember that the current information explosion around the issue of nuclear power coincides with a growing public awareness of the rising demand for- and cost of- energy in general – electricity in particular. When that awareness is combined with the drumbeat of warnings about climate change, the result is fertile ground for the marketing of "clean, efficient and safe" electricity production. It’s perfectly normal for the nuclear industry to take full advantage of a window of opportunity to promote a rapid expansion of its generating base; part of effort involves, naturally enough, convincing the public that all the ducks are in a perfect row, with no downside.

(I do believe that the chat in industry back rooms is a bit different from the over-the-counter variety, by the way).

Opponents of nuclear power are often ignorant of the facts and mouth off half-cocked with opinions that are based on little more than hearsay and/or conjecture. The arguments of such people are easily refuted by knowledgeable businessmen with straight-forward factual, common sense arguments.

The NEI has implied that I take the position that somehow or other research sponsored by the industry itself is invalid…ut talis…and nothing could be further from the truth. As I say at the top of this blog, the search for truth is where I draw the bottom line, although ignorance is sometimes a factor in reaching the wrong conclusion. (We’ve seen ample evidence of that with respect to certain foreign policy initiatives).

I’ve looked at the links and info you provided and certainly find no problem at all. My concern is not with what the industry, government and public know now…or even with the industry’s track record of safety and responsibility, which is virtually above reproach…certainly when compared with certain other energy and industrial sectors.

My questions revolve mainly around the issue of what the industry, governments and the public at large do not know or are not sharing. It’s my fear that the industry does not sharing fully either its knowledge or concerns about the possible downside of forging ahead rapidly with nuclear power expansion. That fear, which is not uncommon amongst members of the public is not going to be assuaged by a mere public relations campaign.

I didn’t undertake Nuclear Notebook as a means of beating up on the nuclear industry…or of attempting to engage in a tit-for-tat exchange of statements and/or allegations. I started it in order to educate myself.

If it eventually ends up as a means of clarifying issues for myself – and improving communication on this subject, I’ll be happy.

NUCLEAR POWER (3)

We know now, beyond any shadow of any doubt, that the waste product from the world’s  nuclear industries is one of the most important challenges facing us and our children.

I am cautiously optimistic that Canadians will find better ways of dealing with our high level nuclear waste.

However, in order to do that, Canadian authorities – both provincial and federal have one heckuva a lot of work to do.

Instead of just burying our high level nuclear waste in a granite hole in the Canadian Shield- that’s the current plan- Canada needs a more comprehensive strategy. Our leadership in both government and industry can take the opportunity to join hands and build an international coalition to deal with all the issues including education and advanced research. We can assist the world in making it safer to produce electricity using nuclear energy. It should be a Canadian-led initiative under the auspices of the United Nations. I repeat here, what I have said many times before…the safest place for nuclear waste is on-site in secure storage facilities. We need to figure out how to do that on a permanent basis. Only education and research will provide the answers we need.

But let’s face it, the really hard reality is that electricity-producing nuclear plants are the least of our worries. What is of greater consequence is the past and indeed, present production of nuclear weapons and their worldwide proliferation by The United States, Russia, Britain, France, China, Israel and now Pakistan and India. North Korea and Iran are bit players on this stage.   

Until now, the rich countries, plus India and Pakistan have gotten away with the equivalent of planetary murder. It’s imperative that the political leaders of the world get together and begin a genuine global nuclear awareness and disarmament process.

Canada can lead in this effort and help set the agenda. The Canadian Prime Minister could, if he wished to show some decency, speak out clearly, exposing the cavalier attitudes of irresponsible nuclear nations.

We have learned how to exploit the "God-given" atom for peaceful benefits…electricity and medical and other applications that save lives and enhance our quality of life.

But we have also permitted this "God-given" knowledge to be used for satanic purposes.  We have sold our technology to others, who have built bombs. And what have they done with the deadly leftovers? And did we care? DO we care?

•    Fact: thousands of tons of the waste from nuclear weapons production have been dumped into the world’s oceans.
•    Fact: tons of nuclear weapons waste are stored in insecure containers…accidents have happened and many have gone unreported.

Our political leaders have for decades, turned a blind eye to this madness. Instead of stepping up to the plate and speaking out, they have ignored the truly terrible dangers of nuclear weaponization. All of them, including our present Prime Minister Stephen Harper, have ignored the threat and instead, have taken the road of silence. Pierre Trudeau made a feeble effort to reprimand India but Indira Ghandi laughed in his face.

But we have a chance still, to lead an international campaign against weapons of mass destruction; we can expose and condemn those who build and maintain them. But do the people we elect have the courage? So far, they have not shown it. The so-called “Cold War” may be over…but the dangers persist.

Nearly two decades after the Berlin Wall came down the United States and Russia together still have nearly 25,000 nuclear weapons — including 6,000 long-range missiles deployed and ready to launch. By 2012, the two sides are supposed to cut their number of deployed weapons to around 2,000. But under the Moscow Treaty, there are no restrictions on how many weapons they can keep in reserve. The American Presidents never wanted a binding agreement…an attitude that does little to inspire public confidence or enhance public security.

So it may be fashionable to be skeptical of nuclear power, but those who oversee Canada’s nuclear power programmes so fare- have showed themselves to be responsible and accountable. That statement is especially true in light of the insane policies of the nuclear-weapons-nations and their leaders.

There is no doubt that we must come to grips with the rational and efficient treatment/disposal of nuclear waste produced by power plants and medical applications. But at the same time we have a duty to take a strong stand in condemning the weapons-makers.

Caring about one is pointless without caring about the other.