Trump and Iran nuclear deal

The Iran nuclear agreement agreed some verifiable limits on Iranian nuclear development in return for lifting some economic sanctions. That’s exactly how deals between parties who don’t trust each other are negotiated. Hasn’t Trump’s withdrawal just proved Iran right to be suspicious of the US?
– Carol Turner, Vice Chair

“We need to avoid a nuclear apocalypse” – Corbyn statement on Nobel peace prize

This is the full statement published by Jeremy Corbyn on LabourList after the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, a coalition of hundreds of NGOs based in Geneva.

Congratulations to the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) on its well-deserved award of the Nobel Peace Prize.

I’m proud to have worked with ICAN for the goal of a nuclear free world for many years and the Nobel Committee’s call for serious global nuclear disarmament talks demands an urgent response.

The need to avoid a nuclear apocalypse, killing millions upon millions of innocents and wrecking our planet. is becoming ever more pressing. Sadly, Theresa May and the Conservatives have tried to turn the issue into a party political game.

They are deeply irresponsible. Acting to prevent war, especially nuclear war, should be the starting point of any serious and sensible defence and foreign policy.

The tensions on the Korean Peninsula underline the urgency of the nuclear powers’ obligation under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to bring about nuclear disarmament.

We have to wind down the rhetoric now. As a member of the [United Nations] Security Council, Britain has an important responsibility and role to play. The next Labour government will ensure Britain takes a lead in strengthening global peace and security.

Reproduced from LabourList

Is the US-Korean conflict leading us into nuclear war?

As the war of words between Trump and North Korea entered its second week, newly elected South Korean President Moon Jae-in emerged onto the diplomatic stage on 16 August, declaring there’d be no second war on the Korean Peninsula. But is he right? In this video clip from China Global Television Network, Brian Becker, executive director of the US anti-war ANSWER Coalition explains some background to the conflict.

No Need For Nuclear

Labour CND recently participated in the conference No Need For Nuclear: The Renewables Are Here, which took place at Conway Hall, London, on 17th June 2017. Below are two short videos, which include presentations by Dr Carl Clowes, Public Health Wales, and Kelvin Hopkins, Labour MP for Luton North. 

Welcome Session
Dr Ian Fairlie, Dr Carl Clowes, Caroline Lucas, Kate Hudson.

Can Labour change its policy on nuclear new build?
Kelvin Hopkins MP

Corbyn: bringing end to conflict and war almost always involves talking to people you profoundly disagree with

In a speech on Friday 26 May 2017, Jeremy Corbyn reiterated his condolences to the families and friends of the victims, paid tribute to the emergency services and Manchester’s mood of unwavering defiance.  ‘The man who unleashed carnage on Manchester,’ he emphasised, ‘was not representative of Muslims.’

The war on terror was not working, Corbyn said. Whoever led the next government must do better.  Labour’s approach means change at home and abroad:

  • Labour would reverse cuts to emergency services and police. The UK cannot be protected on the cheap.
  • Labour would be tough on terror and on the causes of terror. The causes of attacks like Manchester can’t be reduced to foreign policy decisions alone.
  • An informed understanding of the causes of terrorism is indispensable for effective response. Many professionals acknowledge connections between wars the UK has fought and terrorism in Britain. This connection in no way reduces guilt of those who carry out attacks like Manchester.
  • Bringing end to conflict will almost always involve talking to people we profoundly disagree with. But the responsibility of government is never surrender the freedoms we have won. Carrying on as normal is an act of defiance of those who do reject our commitment to democratic freedoms.

Continue reading “Corbyn: bringing end to conflict and war almost always involves talking to people you profoundly disagree with”

Labour’s peace and disarmament policy misrepresented

And they actually think that nuclear weapons keep the peace?The attacks on Jeremy Corbyn support for nuclear disarmament began on day one of the election campaign.

In the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show (23/04/2017) interview at the start of the general election campaign, Corbyn said that an incoming Labour government would carry out a defence review, including the Trident nuclear weapons system. A couple of days later, the Guardian carried an article claiming this statement meant he was in breach of Labour’s manifesto commitments.

Continue reading “Labour’s peace and disarmament policy misrepresented”

Daily Telegraph letter – Leadership election

Labour CND Vice-Chair Walter Wolfgang had the following letter on the Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership bid published in the Daily Telegraph on Monday 17 August 2015.

SIR – Polls show that most voters in the United Kingdom reject Trident, not just those in Scotland. Jeremy Corbyn is the only leadership candidate to represent this majority view.

As Labour leader, Mr Corbyn’s firm anti-Trident stance would win support in Scotland – and in the rest of the country too.

He can promise to scrap Trident and spend the £100 billion on reversing some of the cuts. He’d be backed by the TUC, Unison and many other unions who oppose Trident.

Mr Corbyn represents the public’s view on Trident, just as he stood with the public on Iraq. He has the policies and qualities to win a general election.

Walter Wolfgang
Vice-Chair, Labour CND
Richmond upon Thames, Surrey

Morning Star letter – Leadership election

Labour CND Executive Member Rae Street had the following letter on the recent article by Polly Toynbee on Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership bid published in the Morning Star on Tuesday 31 June.

Dear Editor,

‘With Friends Like These’….

This week  a broadsheet newspaper ran an article by a well known journalist, supposedly Labour Party supporter, on the Labour Leadership, Polly Toynbee.

She wrote that Jeremy was a ‘1983 man, a relic of the election that brought him to parliament when Labour was destroyed by its out-of NATO, anti EU, renationalise-everything suicide note’. 

According to this article he is a ‘romantic’  and voting for him would be ‘ignoring the electorate’.  Which electorate I ask myself?

She claimed his stand on opposing Trident among other issues made Labour imagine they were ‘unelectably reckless.’  But this commentator seems to be unaware of what happened in Scotland.  Voters knew full well the SNP were against Triident and austerity and voted in unprecedented numbers for those policies.  They didn’t vote for the Labour Party led by Jim Murphy which was supporting Trident replacement.

Jeremy is not a ‘relic’ ; he represents for thousands of people what the Labour Party should stand for:  He is living in the real world where thousands across the UK and the world agree with him.

In solidarity,

Rae Street

Morning Star letter – Deputy Leadership

Labour CND Executive Member Rae Street had the following letter on the Deputy Leadership contest published in the Morning Star on Saturday 27 June. Labour CND has written to the five candidates asking for their views on Trident replacement and also on what they believe Labour Party policy should be.

Dear Editor,

All five of the candidates for Deputy Leader of the Labour Party are for Trident replacement. Do they really realise what they are signing up for ? Firstly the UK because of its “obligations to NATO” is still committed to first use of nuclear weapons,. The killing power of just one warhead, of which there are multiple, on a Trident missile (each sub. can carry up to 16 missiles) is nearly 8 times that of the one dropped on Hiroshima.

Trident offers no security against the threats to the UK, or citizens anywhere, identified by the government such as ‘terrorism’ and ‘cyber’ warfare. There are also the dangers recently identified by the whistle blower of accidents. If the UK continues to say it requires nuclear weapons for defence it will encourage other states to do so, thus the world gets nuclear proliferation. Last, but by no means least, there are the questions of the mind boggling cost. Upwards of £100 billion pounds to be spent on Trident replacement when the government claims there is no money for hospitals, schools, social services….. The only people who profit will be the US military manufacturers – Lockheed Martin and the rest.

Not one of these five has the humanity, the principles and the clear headedness of Jeremy Corbyn. Where do we go?

Yours sincerely,

Rae Street