Sign the Pax Chrisiti Declaration Urging the UK and France to Honour Disarmament Treaty

This month, UK and France Pax Christie organisations have come together to encourage signing a declaration on the anniversary of the Lancaster House Treaties.

Made in November 2010, between the UK and France, these Treaties call for a “mutually beneficial long-term partnership in defence and security matters,”

Known as the Lancaster House Treaties, they recognise that “the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery is one of the most serious threats to international peace and security.” They state that both countries will work “to strengthen the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, one of the cornerstones of the international security architecture’ and will ‘support ongoing efforts in its three pillars: non-proliferation, the peaceful use of nuclear energy, and disarmament.”

Yet, fourteen years on, there is little, if any evidence that the two countries have taken any steps in this direction, despite the responsibility they bear as nuclear weapons states at a time when the threat of nuclear war is once more on the rise.

The Joint Declaration takes the opportunity provided by the anniversary of the Treaties to urge the leaders and governments of the UK and France to take meaningful and verifiable steps to honour their commitment to nuclear disarmament in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). It encourages them to take a more constructive approach to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW).

The Declaration also emphasises that the need for nuclear disarmament is a part of the teaching of the Catholic Church, reaffirmed this year by the Bishops in the International Affairs Department of the England and Wales Bishop’s Conference in ‘Called to be Peacemakers: A Catholic approach to arms control and disarmament’. That document calls on the British government to fulfil its obligations under the NPT and ‘ultimately forsake its nuclear arsenal’ to help create ‘a world without nuclear weapons’.   It challenges the British Government to engage meaningfully with the processes of the TPNW and ultimately to sign and ratify the treaty itself. 

Read the treaty here:

British and French Joint Declaration on the anniversary of the Lancaster House Treaties

It is not too late for organisations and individuals to add their signature which you can do here: 

Sign the Declaration

The Declaration will be kept open until Monday 9th December when we will send a copy to the UK Government.    

Don't miss it! Nuclear Blood Scandal Documentary

Documentary: BBC’s Britain's Nuclear Bomb Scandal: Our Story

This Wednesday, the BBC aired Britain’s Nuclear Bomb Scandal: Our Story, a deeply moving and revealing documentary that sheds light on the devastating human cost of the UK’s nuclear bomb tests. Through the voices of veterans like John Morris, who witnessed the tests on Christmas Island in the 1950s, the film uncovers harrowing stories of health conditions, genetic damage, and loss that have haunted these men and their families for decades. The program also examined allegations of cover-ups, including the destruction of medical records and secret radiation tests, sparking renewed calls for justice. 

This documentary is essential viewing, offering not only a window into a troubling chapter of British history but also a powerful case for transparency and accountability. As the veterans fight for recognition and answers, the film poignantly explores the enduring impact of these tests, including their toll on Indigenous communities in Australia. Catch up on iPlayer here.

If you’ve already watched the documentary and would like to learn more about the contributors to the piece, please find the link here.

A Chinese Perspective on the Path to Nuclear Disarmament

Alison Williams, Wimbledon CND Disarmament Coalition, reports on a Pugwash webinar featuring Zhou Bo, on 8 October 2024.

Pugwash-UK had a speaker well qualified to report on this topic: Zhou Bo had been a Colonel in the Army, in charge of Arms Control in the Civil Service and he is now an academic; a Senior Fellow at the Centre for International Strategy and Security in Beijing. 

In the wider context of the Chinese approach to Nuclear Disarmament he spoke most about their commitment to a No First Use policy.  He accepts that a nuclear ban is not going to be globally effective short-term and that amid growing competition and modernisation Nuclear Weapon States will not reduce their arsenals. That being so, China argues that a “No First Use” policy would be the most realistic way to reduce nuclear threats. 

He said there are two myths about China’s nuclear policy: first that they don’t want to talk about it and second that the US needs to be prepared for a nuclear conflict against the combined forces of China, Russia and North Korea.  That American “Nuclear Employment Guidance” he regarded as “completely ridiculous”. 

He thinks strategic stability would be achieved by a “trust and verify” policy for Cyber, AI and Outer Space as well as nuclear weapons. A No First Use pledge would allow a state to take the moral high ground without limiting its capacity for retaliation   And the policies of America, France and Britain are not far from China’s as things stand: America would only consider using nuclear weapons “in extreme circumstances to defend the vital interests of the United States or its allies and partners”; the UK “in extreme circumstances of self-defence, including the defence of NATO allies”  and France would adhere to a policy of “strict sufficiency”. 

Among the UN’s P5 countries he sees Russia posing the greatest challenge because deterrence seemed to be working: faced with Putin’s nuclear-use threats the US imposed strict limits on Ukraine’s use of American weapons. But it would be suicidal for North Korea to attack US partners (South Korea, the Philippines and Japan) given the fallout that would impact the region including itself. 

Zhou Bo suggests a two-track approach.  In Europe NATO could make a unilateral No First Use pledge against Russia as a gesture of goodwill.  And in exchange for Russia adopting a No First Use policy they could pledge no further expansion of their alliance. At present only Bosnia-Herzegovina, Georgia and Ukraine are on the waiting list and their entry into NATO would bring more trouble than benefit anyway. In Asia Russia and China already have a mutual No First Use agreement. The US and China could have the same arrangement and thereby de-escalate potential conflicts with US allies in the region.

History suggests that mutual diplomatic agreements can work – for example Non-targeting, a symbolic sign of goodwill.  In 2000 all the P5 countries agreed not to target weapons on one another.  Non-targeting is not verifiable but he thinks that it could be the next step beyond a No First Use commitment.

To those who object that China’s No First Use promotion is a diplomatic ploy he responds why can’t everyone adopt that ploy?  It would be morally binding because it is clearly verifiable. And if we are all agreed that a nuclear war cannot be won why can’t we all pledge No First Use?

Listen to Pugwash Zhou Bo’s Pugwash webinar here