About bgautam1

Notre Dame: History/Peace Studies/Arabic.

Why Students Demand Zero

I am a senior undergraduate student at the University of Notre Dame. I take classes in History and Peace Studies, I attend lectures on campus, I tailgate on football weekends.

And every day, I fight for a world without nuclear weapons.

This fight matters not just to me, as a student and as an American, but to young people everywhere across the globe. We are all united as a single generation. A generation that was born into a world darkened by the shadow of nuclear weapons, by the persisting threat of nuclear annihilation, by the knowledge that our governments hold the power to destroy thousands of innocent lives at the push of a button.

We never lived through the Cold War, but we are left with its ghosts. Those ghosts remain, buried in American silos and locked up in Indian storage facilities. Out of sight, but still a present danger.

I think that many times, my generation is viewed as self-absorbed and apathetic. We are dubbed the “Me Generation” by the media, the selfish millenials, the selfie generation. But in my experience, I haven’t found that to be true. When I think of my friends and classmates, I immediately think of their passion, of their commitment to make the world a better place.

Students are passionate about so many causes: helping the homeless, preserving the environment, de-stigmatizing the mentally ill. But in the event of a nuclear holocaust, there won’t be homeless to fight for. There won’t be an environment to preserve; it will be desolated by nuclear winter. Everything and everyone will be annihilated. All of these issues that we care so deeply about will simply go up in smoke.

This is why young people everywhere must fight for a world free from nuclear weapons. Because this is our world, our future. It is the only world we have.

Nuclear weapons have the potential to destroy that world, and all that is good within it.

Nuclear weapons cannot distinguish between a terrorist and a toddler, between a militant and a mother. They are indiscriminate weapons. As university students, we are taught to view lives as precious and to respect human dignity. We are taught that science should be a force for good in the world. These values are irreconcilable with the inherently indiscriminate and destructive nature of nuclear weapons.

So what can we do? How do we, as students, fight something so vast and terrible, something negotiated between state leaders, something seemingly beyond our control?

The answer: we take control. We take an active role in the fight. We shift this paradigm of nuclear weapons as an issue reserved for politicians and military leaders, and make it an issue for young people everywhere.

We are young and passionate. As students, we are fortunate to have an extensive network of professors, clubs, and resources to tap into. These networks are not limited to our university campuses; they extend across schools, across states, across entire oceans. We have the technology and experience to use social media to connect with advocates around the world. We can use these networks to build and grow the Global Zero movement, to spread the word that disarmament is possible.

We can combine our many voices into one, and with that one voice we can demand change from our leaders.

Alone, we may feel helpless in the face of nuclear weapons, but together? Together we are an unstoppable force. Together, we can win this fight.

I really, truly believe that we –the students, the young people of the world– are the generation that will bring about Global Zero’s vision: a world without nuclear weapons.

Advertisements

Nuclear Weapons in Today’s World.

What is the significance of nuclear weapons in today’s world? What security challenges do they present, and what steps are being taken to combat these challenges? 

Kelsey Davenport, Nonproliferation Analyst at the Arms Control Association in Washington D.C., will offer observations on these questions, on current nuclear security issues, and on the broader field of nuclear nonproliferation based on her international and professional experiences in the field. Davenport‘s work focuses primarily on the nuclear programs of Iran and North Korea, as well as on other nonproliferation issues.

As a Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies alumni, Davenport represents the way in which the multidisciplinary nature of peace studies can lead to a wide variety of career paths. Additionally, she possesses unique insight into the world of nuclear policy, insight that will be extremely valuable to our own GZND chapter members.

The Davenport talk is scheduled for Wednesday, Nov. 5th at 7:00 pm in the Montgomery Auditorium of LaFortune.

Please join us in welcoming Davenport, and reflect on the way in which nuclear weapons both continue to present old threats and simultaneously embody new dangers in the year 2014. To learn more, visit our Facebook page or the Arms Control Association blog.

Should Iran abandon enrichment?

Q: Should the P5+1 insist that Iran abandon enrichment altogether as part of a final deal? A: No.

Q: Should the P5+1 insist that Iran abandon enrichment altogether as part of a final deal?
A: No.

As the P5+1 countries and Iran continue negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program, the issue of uranium enrichment remains a divisive topic. The P5+1 countries and Iran hold seemingly incompatible views on Iran’s right to enrich uranium; they disagree about whether or not this right is guaranteed under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). With both sides polarized, negotiators should seek a compromise that advances stability and trust between the involved parties rather than demanding the complete abandonment of Iran’s enrichment program.

The dispute over Iran’s enrichment program stems from both conflicting interpretations of NPT rhetoric and from the possible applications of enriched uranium. At low enrichment levels (20% and below), uranium can be used for nuclear power reactors and medical radioisotopes, examples of the peaceful purposes defended by Iran. At 90% enrichment, however, uranium can also be used to construct nuclear weapons for military purposes, a major security concern for the P5+1. Therefore, terms of the interim agreement reached at Geneva included the down-blending of Iran’s highly enriched stockpile and increased levels of IAEA access to Iranian nuclear facilities: measures created to ensure Iran’s nuclear program remain exclusively peaceful.

In past months, Iran has complied with terms negotiated at Geneva. According to recent IAEA reports, six of the measures agreed upon have already been fully implemented and others are in progress.[i] This, combined with Iran’s continued cooperation in multilateral talks, indicates that although the maintenance of a low-level enrichment program might remain a point of resistance in negotiations, Iran is nevertheless willing to sacrifice in certain areas and implement directives fairly. Now that this has been established, it is critical to find a point of compromise on the issue rather than assume extreme positions.

Aside from possible energy benefits, allowing Iran to maintain monitored, low-level enrichment programs would increase regional security. Neighboring countries such as Saudi Arabia and Kuwait have already praised the Geneva agreement for advancing the possibility of nuclear energy programs in the Middle East and for limiting the threat of Iranian acquisition of nuclear weapons. Allowing monitored enrichment would also set a new precedent for levels of IAEA inspection and involvement internationally, fostering greater transparency and trust between nuclear power countries. Smooth interactions in Iran would also bolster the IAEA’s reputation in the Middle East as a fair and unbiased agency. Finally, it would strengthen relationships between Iran and the P5+1 countries; continued implementation of safeguards would serve as confidence building measures, proving to Iran that its nuclear energy and research programs are not being threatened while proving to the international community that Iran is not pursuing nuclear weapons.

If, on the other hand, the P5+1 countries were to insist that Iran abandon all enrichment, the possibility of a complete breakdown in negotiations would be imminent. Pushing this issue too far might result in greater backlash from the same hard-liner groups that berated Iranian officials for “selling out” during the Geneva agreement, creating a less favorable environment towards any future progress.[ii] A termination of talks would do nothing to strengthen regional stability; additionally, it would only reinforce the perception of Western powers as hypocritical and bullying in their treatment of Iran.

Rather than eliminating enrichment completely, limiting Iran’s capacity and stockpile so that it does not exceed the supply needs of nuclear power and research programs is a mutually beneficial alternative. Complete elimination might ensure that Iran wouldn’t acquire nuclear weapons, but it would not foster long-term stability or security. Furthermore, limiting enrichment sets a precedent for restraint and transparency, as Iran sets caps, converts materials, and agrees to intrusive onsite checks and other security measures from the IAEA.

 

Together with South Asia.

"Because annihilation is never justified."

“Because annihilation is never justified.”

Since its conception, Global Zero Notre Dame has been interested in collaborating with chapters across the globe; we believe the movement’s strength comes in large part from its international support.

This month, we are showing our support for the latest GZ South Asian initiative: the “Why Do You Fight For a World Without Nukes?” photo campaign.

In this campaign, students from India, Pakistan (and Notre Dame!) will write the reason they support the fight for a world free of nuclear weapons on their hand or arm, and add the picture to a shared album that will be viewed from Islamabad to Bangalore.

"Because I want my brother safe."

“Because I want my brother safe.”                                       photo credit to Jodi Hilton 

Reasons provided have included:

  • Because annihilation is never justified,”
  • Because there are better ways to waste our money,”
  • Because I believe in the sanctity of life” and
  • Because I want my brother safe.

Interested in joining our campaign? Share a photo to our Facebook page or email entries to ND-GLOBAL-ZERO@listserv.nd.edu.