Hang tight while we fetch the video data and transcripts. This only takes a moment.
Connecting to YouTube player…
Fetching transcript data…
We’ll display the transcript, summary, and all view options as soon as everything loads.
Next steps
Loading transcript tools…
2141 Lesson 6.4 Landmines and Cluster Bombs with Diplomat Turcotte | Erika Simpson | YouTubeToText
YouTube Transcript: 2141 Lesson 6.4 Landmines and Cluster Bombs with Diplomat Turcotte
Skip watching entire videos - get the full transcript, search for keywords, and copy with one click.
Share:
Video Transcript
Video Summary
Summary
Core Theme
This content is an interview discussing Earl Turcotte's extensive career in arms control and disarmament, focusing on landmines, cluster munitions, and nuclear weapons, and advocating for international action and treaties to abolish these weapons.
gonna record to the cloud um
um
just give it a minute um
okay welcome everyone I'm really pleased
to introduce to you uh Earl turcotte uh
he is in Ottawa and we will be talking
to him today about our theme which is
landmines conventional Warfare and
actually cluster bombs so I will
introduce you to him and then we'll have
a short and very I hope Illuminating uh
discussion so I would need to share the
screen for a second and here you are I
if you don't mind
um Earl I'm just going to explain to the
students that you have a ba from the
University of Windsor an MMA in
Philosophy from the University of Ottawa
and an M.A in international affairs from
Carleton University so that's a very
preeminent University in terms of
international relations
after short-term positions with wask
what we call the world University
Service of Canada which is still around
and as a UNICEF volunteer in India in
the mid-1970s Mr turkhart served as a
parliamentary assistant to a Canadian MP
which is short for Member of Parliament
in 1978 and 1987 9 79 I'm just doing
some reference letters for that same program
um after completing Graduate Studies in
1982 he joined Ceta that's short for the
Canadian International Development
agency serving in various capacities
over a 22-year period
including as country program manager
these are titles of positions within
suda planner country analyst
first Secretary posted in Ghana in
Africa and finally as chief of ceta's
mine Action Unit that's for mines which
we'll be talking about today for several years
years
in 2004 Mr turcott joined the United
Nations development program in New York
City as the senior development advisor
with the United Nations development
program undp mine action team
in mid 2005 he returned to Canada to
join the Canadian Department of Foreign
Affairs and international trade and as
we've talked about that's now called
Global Affairs Canada as the senior
coordinator for mine action and director
of the Mind action team
for the following seven years he led
diplomatic responsibility for Canada's
engagement on the anti-personnel
mine that anti-personal mind boundary
I don't know why I call it the landmine
boundary but I'm I'm wrong and we can
talk about that and the convention on
Conventional Weapons and was Chief
Canadian negotiator of the convention on
cluster munitions
for several years he also managed
Canada's engagement in the UN program of
action on small arms and light weapons
which is what we've been talking about
in the class
Mr turcotte left the Canadian Public
Service in 2011 from 2012 to 2014 he
served as the UN development program's
Chief technical advisor to the
government of Laos or Leos how you
pronounce it is up to you in the
unexploded ordinance sector and was
based in Vientiane can you pronounce
that Ben 10 yeah
since returning to Canada Mr turcotte
has focused largely on nuclear
disarmament he has served terms as
chairperson of the Canadian Network to
abolish nuclear weapons
cnanw which is how I met Earl as
Canadian coordinator of parliamentarians
for nuclear non-proliferation and
disarmament pnmd and as a member of the
peace and security working group of the g78
g78
he remains a member of the Canadian pug
wash group for Science and peace which
is also how we have met in many
conferences Mr turcott has published
numerous articles on mine action and on
nuclear disarmament so this works so
well with our theme today which is I'm
turning now back to you Earl a mine
action and then I'm hoping in a second
shorter interview to talk to this very
well-known diplomat who knows so much
about nuclear disarmament as well thank
you Earl for coming and if I had a big
audience we would clap thank you Erica
okay just a minute um
um
uh anyway thank you Earl I just wanted
to check the recording was working
because it's such a great interview I'm
hoping and do you want to tell us a
little bit more about how you decide to
become interested was it way back when
you were a parliamentary assistant or
did you become more interested in global
issues later on in your career
well actually uh uh Eric I became very
interested in global issues uh when I
was hitchhiking around Europe and North
Africa at 18 years of age after I had
dropped out of high school
oh no
back uh for about three years uh but uh
even though that was extremely limited
exposure it uh it certainly expanded my
horizons uh so uh it affected my choices
in terms of what I studied and after
doing Philosophy for many personal
reasons I decided to focus on
International Affairs at the Patterson
School of International Affairs in
Ottawa which led I was delighted it led
into into 22 years with the Canadian
International Development agency working
on Canadian foreign aid programs uh
before I I moved on briefly to the UN
and then to Canadian Foreign Affairs uh
while I was with Sita I had an
opportunity we we had a program
to clear anti-personal landmines and
cluster Munitions all the detritus of War
War
I had witnessed the impact of that
largely in Southeast Asia and parts of
Africa that I had traveled in so when
the opportunity came up there was a
competition for the position of chief of
the mine Action Unit I I decided to go
after it and uh and that then became my
focus for the next almost 15 years I was
on arms control disarmament and largely
programming to clean up the the detritus
of war that continues to kill and maim
often for decades after conflict has ended
ended
yeah detergent is a very polite word for
the destruction that has been created by War
War
um and I think that's a very diplomatic
word as well and that that had a big
impact on you
combined with your education at the
Norman Patterson School of International
Affairs which is the has been for a long
time the top training at the Master's
level but if you want to do
international relations you don't know
you can hitchhike and learn a lot about
the world too that's another way of
learning about it so this is very I
think helpful for the students they're
all interested in pursuing a career
possibly as a global citizen
um as a global citizen can you tell us a
little bit more about land mines I will
I will be talking to the students using
PowerPoint slides showing the impact
and also Cambodia and you can imagine
you've seen all these kinds of pictures
and slides but tell us a little bit more
about how how you feel about land mines
um
rudimentary landmines were used as early
as the American Civil War uh cluster
Munitions uh earliest recorded events as
I understand it was during World War II
when they were used by Germany on on England
England
but they uh certainly expanded both
weapons became somewhat more
sophisticated and expanded uh across
many parts of the world
um anti-personal landlines have been
used in many many countries uh uh from
for decades uh until uh in the late
1990s uh most of the countries of the
world came together and decided to ban
them uh and
11 years later uh the same a similar
process was used to ban cluster
Munitions now the weapons have a lot in
common two things in particular one is
they are absolutely indiscriminate
weapons uh in the case of landmines they
are usually victim activated so when
someone comes near nearby or steps on
the landline especially anti-personal
landmines of course they go off uh they
can they they usually maim but they can
often kill
um in in many cases the intent of uh of
militaries that use them is to maim
because it it
exacts an ongoing cost if you like on
the the at their adversaries on the
perceived enemies
both of our weapons of Terror in that
the vast majority of victims have been
civilians the international Committee of
the Red Cross estimates that more than
95 percent of land mine and cluster
Nation uh victims have been civilians
and a large number of them have been
killed long after the war has ended long
after conflict has has ended so as a
weapon uh of use for the military
first of all they are absolutely
contrary to the laws of war or
International humanitarian law that
requires that a distinction be made
between civilians combatants and non-combatants
non-combatants
um these weapons simply cannot do that
so they cannot discriminate and you said
that they're they're non-discriminating
weapons in their impact so they do not
discriminate between the military and
civilians in fact you mentioned that not
the estimate is that 95 of victims are
civilians not military soldiers or
professional late trained soldiers yeah
95 Yes actually in some cases uh more
than 95 up to 97 depending on on the theater
theater
um anti-personal landmines once they're
set in the ground wherever they are set
of course then anybody who comes along
at any time uh can be victims cluster
bonds uh are are in many respects a more
horrific weapon they are designed as
what is called an area-wide weapon uh
they in effect saturate a wide area so
by Design they are indiscriminate the
whole point is to saturate a wide area
not not they are a polar opposite of a
Precision weapon the exact opposite of
that and uh they have been used again
indiscriminately not only over military
targets but often quite deliberately as
they are in Ukraine today in civilian
areas precisely as a weapon of Terror
and to try to exact a price on the
civilian population in addition to
whatever military targets uh they might
be uh uh they might be trying to access
now of course the the other side of both
weapons is that they have very high
failure rates in the case of cluster
bombs cluster Munitions a cluster bomb
uh think of it as a large Hollow casing
uh that can be either launched from
ground but usually dropped from the air
that then opens up and in it are
typically hundreds of small submunitions
and they too are designed to spread out
so that they cover a wide area
up to 40 percent in some cases even more
do not detonate on impact which means
that they can be lying around
moving around with weather systems uh
with rain snow with whatever uh and
burrowing into the ground in many cases
and Lasting for decades
um we have case of of the Vietnam War uh
in Southeast Asia where
um cluster bombs in particular the
bombings the sub emissions that are
often called bombies
um continue to kill people on a regular
basis so the Vietnam War ended for
America uh you know in in the 1970s but
it continues to kill Maine in Southeast
Asia so this kind of technology is
absolutely horrific and inhumane as well
as being contrary to International
humanitarian law and should never be used
used
exactly it should never have been
developed and it should never have been
used it is sad uh to be a tourist you
cannot go to Laos or Vietnam without
being walking in special areas that are
only for that have been demined at Great
cost and that is very very expensive we
talk in my other classes about land mine
clearing techniques and new technology
like robots but
um it doesn't seem very hopeful can you
tell us a little bit more about your
success as the Canadian under the
Minister of Foreign Affairs Lloyd
oxworthy and how he managed to obtain a
legal treaty by inviting countries to
Ottawa and then uh and another second
meeting as well and can you give us a
little bit of background on how Canada
was able to spearhead the landmines
treaty or the Ottawa process okay the uh
yes I'm happy to uh the the otherwise
treaty the the anti-personal Mind Ban
Treaty predates my time in foreign
affairs so so I didn't have first-hand
experience with that but okay I thought
you I apologized it yeah now basically
the situation is this uh there had been
discussions ongoing discussions and
attempted negotiations in the
traditional United Nations Forum uh for
conventional arms uh negotiations and
that is what is called a convention on
certain Conventional Weapons actually
has an even longer title but we call it
the problem with that forum is that it
operates on the basis of consensus
decision making which has been
interpreted or rather misinterpreted to
mean that there must be unanimous
agreement so that you can only succeed
at the pace of your slowest least
imaginative or most obstructionist uh
state which means it's painstakingly
slow there's a similar forum for uh
weapons of mass destruction the
conference on disarmament that also
operates on a consensus basis and that
has not been able to agree even on a
program of work for two decades you can
imagine how frustrating uh that was for
for countries around the world who
desperately wanted in this case and in
the case of Conventional Weapons to to
address first of all anti-personal
landmines and then a decade later
cluster Ministries uh there had been
some minor successes in the CCW they did
manage to ban uh incendiary weapons
blinding laser weapons dumb dumb bullets
uh and and and a few other weapons but
not the ones that were doing the most
damage an anti-personal landmines were
among them
so what happened is uh in light of of
basically hitting the brick wall
diplomatically in the CCW our then
Minister of Foreign Affairs Lloyd
ashworthy with strong support from our
then prime minister Jacques Ritchie and
his cabinet Collins
uh did something that uh that was quite
unique he simply invited the countries
of the world that were like-minded that
were interested in Banning anti-personal
landmines to gum together in another
Forum that was designed specifically uh
to ban these weapons so they knew before
they came into it that the intent was to
seek a total ban on this category of weapons
weapons
um so countries were able to self-select
and those who weren't interested didn't
participate and those who were
interested did
in the end uh there was uh the reverse
successful negotiations difficult
negotiations but very successful overall
and uh in 1997 the uh the Ottawa treaty
was opened for Signature and today just
over 25 years later
there are 164 State parties out of
roughly 193 94 countries in the world
this is remarkable it is one of the most
successful disarmament treaties ever in history
history
now the convention on clustered
Munitions uh uh first of all the the
prime movers on that in this case among
states Norway took the lead now this
happened during in in Canadian history
under the uh Stephen Harper
Administration in Ottawa uh that wasn't
in my personal view the same Progressive
courageous bold approach to Arms Control
and disarmament uh that had obtained uh
during what ashworthy's day but um
nonetheless Canada did participate
Norway took the lead in convening The
Forum the various Forum with six other
countries uh
uh in some core support
but in the end uh
108 countries I believe actually it
might have been a bit more than 108
countries came together
and negotiated the convention on cluster
Munitions which was open for Signature
in Oslo in December 2008 and today
already has 110 States parties and
another 13 signatories so uh it's also
well on its way to becoming an
incredibly successful uh disarmament
treaty the differences well is that
whereas anti-personal landmines banned
anti-personal landlines only not
anti-type mines and other other types of
Mines the convention on cluster
Munitions banned all known forms of
cluster Munitions anything that could be
defined and at the time there were more
than 200 different types so it has
far-reaching consequences and has
already had tremendous uh humanitarian benefit
benefit
um and uh and millions of stockpiles of
submunitions have uh have already taken
place uh uh uh uh pardon me the
destruction of stockpiles has taken
place so uh it's having real impact uh
in the world
and you've been really key to promoting
the concept and you've spoken up very
courageously in front of the media and
in parliamentary in Parliament and and
so on I thought your concept of
self-selection was interesting you said
that countries self-selected to to
accept the Canadian invitation to talk
about land personal land mines not tank
land mines and then you also alluded to
the fact that uh they self-selected to
talk about cluster bombs
which countries apart from the
well-known ones like United States and
the Democratic People's Republic of
Korea that North Korea are not coming to
these kinds of negotiations can you tell
us a little bit about the countries that
are not attending
gee Eric I I could have easily had my
list in front of me
well I know it's Russia
um well uh now in the case of the
anti-personal mindband treaty one
notable difference between that and the
cluster Munitions convention is that the
United States did participate in the
negotiations uh for anti-personal
language again this predates me but that
is my understanding in the end they
chose not to become party to the
convention despite tremendous efforts
including by Mr axworthy himself to try
to persuade them to come on board they
just weren't prepared to do so at the
time they are still not a state party uh
they say largely because of the uh the
the uh the demilitarized zone between
North and South Korea which is heavily
mined and they believe
uh incorrectly in my view but they
believe that landmines are important for
the ongoing security of South Korea
um that said there are roughly 30
countries that are not party to the AP
landline convention but they still
largely respect the Norms that have been
established with respect to
anti-personal landmines the two
exceptions that I know to that are
Russia and Myanmar in the case of the
landlines it's a military dictatorship
you know that's an interesting point
that they still respect the global
regime although they are not State
parties they have not signed it and
ratified it they still respect it so
that gives us some hope too for other
treaties like the cgbt and so on yes and
this comes from the stigmatization uh of
the weapon uh as is beginning to happen
with nuclear weapons as well uh with the
treaty on the prohibition of nuclear
weapons the more these weapons are
stigmatized the the more pressure is
brought to bear on countries not to use
them so even if they aren't formally a
state party and are not bound by the
legal obligations they nonetheless uh
come under pressure not to use them
um in the case of the conventional
cluster Munitions the notable exceptions
for use recently most recently is the
Russian Federation has used cluster bonds
bonds
um according to to uh Human Rights Watch
and other ngos hundreds of times in
Ukraine and unfortunately uh Ukraine
itself has alleged to have used cluster
bombs in the in the ongoing fighting uh
three times uh that that that I have seen
seen
um there's a lot of pressure being
brought to bear on Ukraine not to
continue the use of cluster Munitions
um you may know that they have requested
uh cluster Munitions from the United
States and that option is not off the
table uh the last I heard I may be a bit
out of date on that but to my knowledge
that the United States has not provided
uh the Ukrainian military with cluster
bonds or cluster Munitions and I pray
that they do not for the reasons that we
we discussed earlier be doing any
short-term military gain word deed not
only nullify but far exceeded by the
impact on their own military and mostly
on their own civilian population from
their own territory uh so yeah
I mean we that the United States is
going through a debate about what type
of tanks and they're talking about
giving their
um their their most capable tanks Canada
has just offered as well not our most
capable tanks but some more Battlefield
tanks uh but nobody's really talking
about this whole issue of cluster bombs
in the United States that I'm seeing but
you raised the issue in the hill times
and wrote an article over the holidays
in December and so therefore I was
wondering did you get any feedback from
anyone saying oh I've read that and
that's making us think again about how
we should not export cluster Munitions
under any circumstances to any country
did you get any feedback or none
whatsoever uh from from anyone who might
be considering using them I got lots of
very positive feedback from like-minded colleagues
colleagues
in Civil Society and also a few of my my
former contacts in in other governments
uh but uh but no none whatsoever from
certainly from anyone
um in in the American Administration
um but actually nor did I expect to uh
there are people like uh uh you know the
ICD all the the international campaign
to ban landmines and cluster Ministries
uh that is uh far more current
professional and and bring all kinds of
pressure to bear and do all kinds of
writing uh to try to bring pressure to
bear on low countries uh that are still
not uh parties to the conventions
um and uh they run into brick walls
quite regularly as well but uh to their
credit they persist and will continue to persist
persist
yes and I think we'll end on with this
final question because it's been so
informative in a short time and that is
how would you recommend that people
students who are very interested in this
topic take action should they join an
international organization like mine
this action Canada I have a PowerPoint a
show that talks about all of the
organizations they can join including
the ones in Canada do you think they
should write letters to their members of
parliament MPS uh visit their members of
parliament what do you think is an
effective way of
affecting change of making people think
about this well Erica you have mentioned
uh several I would say all of the above
if I were to uh prioritize I would say
write the prime minister
and and and and the prime minister's
office will ensure that the relatives
are of that the relevant ministers
offices are copied into any
correspondence they receive but we have
put pressure on our political leadership
because that's ultimately where the
decisions are made so uh you know in the
case of Canada we're on the right side
of of both conventions uh what we have
to encourage them to do our government
is to bring pressure to bear on those
who are not yet party to these uh to
these two conventions now it's an
important Point both conventions have a
requirement on States parties to make
every reasonable effort uh to
universalize the treaty that is to bring
others on board and that is a legally
binding obligation among states parties
we can remind them of the legally
binding operation uh pardon me
obligations uh to to to to to press
other governments to follow suit uh but
in terms of affecting change in arms
Patrol and disarmament more generally
and I would strongly urge focus on
nuclear weapons as well you know which
which pulls an existential threat to all
of humanity again in the case of nukes
split the pressure on our government as
best you can
through the media if you're going right
to remember Parliament yes but write
letters to the editor get it out into
the media because that has a strong
multiplier effect hundreds if not
thousands of people might read a letter
uh to the editor whereas uh an official
in the prime minister's office might
read one letter that's sent to the piano
and make record of it uh you know maybe
a few officials uh I might read it but
work through the media as well as
directly on the leadership and do there
are many many non-governmental
organizations Civil Society
organizations that are dedicated to Arms
Control and disarmament uh you can
provide a list of many as you said
you've done and I would urge you to get
involved volunteer almost everybody is a
volunteer and do what you can and just
keep it in mind so when you get into an
official position someday you can also
be a hopefully an advocate whether it's
in the private sector or the public
sector uh you can continue your advocate
in any way that is is appropriate
well thank you very much Earl we're
going to take a pause here so that we
can switch to another different topic
nuclear weapons which you were already
talking about but I wanted to thank you
for your contribution to this class this
understanding about landmines and
cluster bombs and also international
relations and Global diplomacy thank you
so much
hello now that I've introduced Earl
turquot to you I want to just emphasize
how pleased I am because in addition to
his strong background in negotiations
regarding the cluster bombs and
landmines he also has considerable
experience working on nuclear weapons
and indeed in the last few minutes we
just spoke about how it's important to
write to your prime minister
this is what you were recommending Earl
in order to tell the prime minister to
take stronger action on nuclear
disarmament and on getting rid of
nuclear weapons so that's what we're
going to talk about now is the process
of Canada spearheading the movement to
abolish nuclear weapons remember Canada
has no nuclear weapons of its own we
talked about how Canada got rid of the
bone Mark missiles and after the Cuban
Missile Crisis Lester Pearson got his
own decided to acquire them and then
under Pierre Trudeau gradually Canada by
1984 became nuclear weapon free
so what are the lessons of Canada's
discernment for other countries to
follow so I was wondering Earl if you
wanted to comment maybe on the lessons
that you learned
as a young person uh in Sudbury or um in
in Ottawa at the Norman Patterson School
of International Affairs on Canada's
record as a nuclear-free nuclear
um Erica my I I I should preface my
opinion that my direct involvement uh uh
in with nuclear disarmament is only
after my public sector career was over
so I've been doing this as a volunteer
and there are many volunteers across the
country uh doing it in my
semi-retirement uh uh working with civil
society organizations something I would
urge everyone to do if they if they have
the time and are so inclined uh you know
Canada becoming nuclear weapons free was
a remarkable decision uh we had as
you've alluded to uh American uh nuclear
warheads deployed on Canadian territory
for years and then under the Pearson and
then and then pioto regimes uh they were
repatriated uh to the United States that
said Canada still falls under the
nuclear umbrella if you like of the
three NATO
nuclear-armed States the United States
first and foremost with the vast
majority of nuclear weapons and the
United Kingdom and France so we are in
effect uh our country is a supporter of
the nuclear security Doctrine as our old
uh 30 NATO States in addition to some
non-natal nuclear-armed states and their
allies of course um
um
that is a Doctrine uh that is uh has got
to be done away with in my view I think
that this is a view that we share I know
it's a view that we share uh precisely
because nuclear weapons pose an
existential threat to the planet as a
whole to all of humanity and that is not
overstaking the case
um you may have already explained to
your colleagues and students that uh
even with a reduced Global nuclear
arsenal of roughly 13
000 nuclear uh nuclear weapons many of
which have multiple Warheads
uh scientists a nuclear scientists have
said that even a one percent exchange
could plunge the planet into a nuclear
winter which would lead to uh to famine
Global famine and uh the loss of
billions of lives that is billions of
lives and that's in addition to the
millions upon million some would be
killed if there were a nuclear war in
the direct impact and from the effects
of of the including radiation uh which
again uh you know travels uh so Canada
becoming nuclear weapons free was good
uh but we've got to go further uh we
have not played an active role or as
active a role as we could in nuclear
disarmament and many in Civil Society
are urging the government of Canada to
be much more active in particular in
trying to push NATO states to engage
non-natal nuclear armed States as well
into discussions that hopefully
eventually lead to negotiations for a
complete and total nuclear disarmament
now if I could just say that in 2017 as
you may know uh there were negotiations
uh and and the outcome of the nuclear
disarmament negotiations was the treaty
on the prohibition of nuclear weapons
which is historic again a remarkable
treaty uh and there are more uh State
parties uh uh all the time I I can't
recall what the number is at the moment
um I don't remember the number either I
do check it um every now and then um so
but I wanted to thank you for bringing
up the the comment about the I limited
nuclear exchange with tactical weapons
would lead to a global famine and the
end of the civilization in the world as
we know it and this is something that
more and more people are talking about
so thank you Earl for for bringing that up
up
um I noticed that today the bulletin of
atomic scientists has changed the uh the
clock that when it gets to midnight
means the end of the world as we know it
for all animals and for humans and for
all all species and they changed it
today to 90 seconds to midnight so that
is a signal around the world that we are
getting too close to the abyss and to to uh
uh
to the end of the world as we know it
and so we need to take stronger action
as you're saying Earl Canada could
spearhead that because we'd have a
history in the past
but we are under the nuclear umbrella as
you pointed out and so we are part of
the NATO alliance with three nuclear
Powers the United States with the most
weapons as you pointed out and the
United Kingdom
with uh approx we you know we don't know
exactly but on the try in 250 and then
France with approximately 300 to 350. uh
and actually uh the the uh between the
United States and the Russian Federation
the Russian Federation has slightly more uh
uh
weapons but between the U.S and Russia
they possess more than 90 percent of all
nuclear weapons on the planet there are
nine nuclear-armed states at the moment
and several states with nuclear weapons
deployed on their territory in
particular in in Europe
um we actually do talk about all this in
my class so it's like a little mini
review you're giving us but it shows the students
students
students how important it is to know
these facts and to go forward with a
framework with this kind of a framework
and that helps you to take action even
in in Earl's semi retirement I didn't
even think of it semi retirement it's
like you're working full-time never
never see thing on so many things that
you're working on including the CNA and
W which is short for the Canadian
Network to abolish nuclear weapons which
is 17 organizations across Canada that
are working together to try to raise
awareness and then also you were part of
pnmd parliamentarians for nuclear
non-proliferation and disarmament and
also part of the Canadian pug watch
Group which I'm very strongly involved
in for the last 20 years
as well so these are organizations
students can get involved in but are
there other ways that you think that
students can gain more expertise for
example do you recommend a master's in
philosophy like you did or a masters in
international Affairs do you recommend
maybe taking an interruption in your
studies and then coming back once you've
traveled and you've worked and and
you've learned more what what can you give
give
essentially many many students some
personal advice from your heart about
how to undertake
so I I'm not sure I'm the best person to
give life advice but but in terms of of
disarmament uh you know there's a wealth
of information available and uh you know
uh you you if you want to do it if you
don't want to do it uh in in a formal
way I mean you can of course pursue your
studies uh in international Affairs uh
you can focus on arms control and
disarmament in some programs I um you
you alluded to my studies Erica I I did
do a master's in philosophy and I
focused on applied philosophy political
social moral and legal and it was there
that I was first introduced to the law
the law of War International
humanitarian law uh in addition to much
broader international law um
um
you know you can do that but you can
also Focus or you can also pursue I I
did another ma in international Affairs
at the Patterson School of International
Affairs in Ottawa uh I focused on
development studies at the time uh but
there are uh now that goes back quite a
few years that's my understanding that
the program today has has elements of
arms control and disarmament in various
programs that's something that can be
checked out there are other programs
across Canada many excellent universities
universities
informally there's a wealth of
information up there you you spoke about
the Canadian Network to abolish nuclear
weapons with uh 17 member organizations
there are literally hundreds of ngos
across Canada that endorse nuclear
disarmament and are working collectively
to bring pressure to bear on our
government and working with colleagues
in other countries on their governments
so there are ways to get involved with
ngos if you want to do it through Civil
Society in terms of just general
information in addition to a plethora of
books that are available YouTube videos
there are hundreds of YouTube videos uh
good ones uh you know
people who are expert in the field who
have produced go to YouTube and look for
closed calls on Newton nuclear uh
detonation or close I was watching that
the other day I I was trying to decide
if I wanted to select that age more
reading and I was riveted I had no idea
they did a very good job that one they
also you know the near you know the
airplane that had nuclear weapons on and
on and on it goes it scares you
willy-nilly well there are also
simulations uh simulations on what the
impact would be of of a nuclear bomb
dropping on the city or that City so you
can understand that modern thermal and
nuclear weapons are far I mean
exponentially uh more deadly than the
horrific Atomic weapons that were
dropped like in rushland and and
Nagasaki uh in in Japan
um you know there was just no comparison
in terms of the
capacity to kill and maim or and and
just destroy uh large swaths of humanity
and uh potentially if enough of them
were used the planet as a whole so this
is no you know you've probably had many
discussions about nuclear deterrence and
uh you you've I'm sure discussed the
principle of mutual assured destruction which
which
keeps things in a stalemate you know
you've got uh deliberate intelligent
um predictable systems in place such
that if if one country were to make a
preemptive strike on another that they
would be assured of having a retaliatory
strike therefore that maintains in
effect a kind of security
well that goes only so far
there have been and you've made
reference to this so many close calls
through human miscalculation uh accident
in some cases uh faulty information and
of course there's the increasing uh
incidence of cyber warfare cyber attacks
and whatnot there is probably a greater
far greater probability that there will
be an unintentional uh nuclear
detonation than there would be a
deliberate conscious act by some mad
fool uh who would thrust us into into a
nuclear exchange we also know that
non-state actors terrorist organizations
some have openly declared that they are
trying to get their hands on nuclear
technology they don't have to develop it
they don't need the expertise they can
steal it and there there are there have
been documented cases of nuclear
warheads going missing um
um
all of this could lead to again the only
sure way uh
of preventing another nuclear incident
is to destroy all nuclear weapons and to
ensure that all uh fissile material that
is a weapons grade facile material is
brought under strict International
control and depleted to the point where
it does not pose it can't be used easily
to create another nuclear weapon and to
put in place uh adequate systems of
monitoring to ensure uh that that
compliance is maintained but first you
have to have the political will and a
small number of countries in the world
simply don't have it they cling to their
nuclear weapons and our hope is that
they don't claim to them so long that it
becomes too late uh for for all of us
yeah compliance is an important goal
more than 50 of the world lives in a
nuclear weapon-free Zone and so on and
so technically we have to persuade about
50 of the world's population but
unfortunately uh many of those countries
have way too many nuclear weapons even
for minimal deterrence just to deter
they seem to think they need to have
thousands and thousands of tactical
nuclear weapons and and huge arsenals
and that raises as you pointed out the
chance of accident this calculation
misperception and and maybe it is more
likely we don't know that there would be
a nuclear war just through sheer
accident which is something that most of
the time the people in favor of
deterrence don't accept they they do
think that the safety mechanisms are
strong enough that it is unlikely
between the US and Russia but maybe
there might be a limited exchange
accidentally between the newer nine the
the the the other powers that have
nuclear weapons too so you know it could
be between us and Russia I'm not trying
to dollarize them but it could also
between be amongst the other seven
nuclear Powers well uh case in point
Erica is uh India and Pakistan I mean
they have an ongoing conflict over
Kashmir largely uh uh for for decades
and um they are both nuclear armed
States and both have uh actually
um threatened the deployment of tactical
nuclear weapons uh and
and uh we have heard the possible
delegation of launch authority to field
commanders now imagine that a field
commander on the border uh between India
and Pakistan in the midst of ongoing
conflicts some of it heated some of it
armed conflict at a low level
um having the authority to launch a
tactical nuclear weapon I mean this is a
recipe for absolute disaster and of
course once one is launched word ends
nobody knows Nobody Knows the world
could spiral down
into a larger exchange uh yeah I don't
want to focus just on India and Pakistan
as a problem
um but but I agree with you there's a
lack of knowledge in India and Pakistan
amongst the general population about the
impact of a nuclear war and so we need
to educate them
um and also we need to educate the
people I taught at the Canadian Forces
college and we had a visiting General
from India who had fought of actually uh
in six fours one in to protect the
nuclear weapons that cargo he told me
but he also was in favor of nuclear
deterrence and that Doctrine so it's a
very uh it's a very attractive Doctrine
it makes you feel safe but it might not
work and so that's something that I'm
glad that we had a chance to talk about
with you as an experienced Diplomat who
knows that they some sometimes
deterrence we can't test it but it might
fail uh that is true absolutely it might
fail I I that is not to suggest that
nuclear deterrence might not have some
short-term utility but I'll tell you
what makes us far safer is for there to
be concurrent disarmament that is
closely monitored and closely controlled
such that we don't destabilize the
situation you know I'm nobody is
suggesting that NATO unilaterally get
rid of its nuclear weapons what we are
suggesting what what what many uh other
countries and Civil Society are
suggesting is that all nuclear armed
States be engaged in disarmament
negotiations disarm concurrently and put
adequate monitoring systems in place to
make sure that nobody has a decided
military Advantage we don't want to
destabilize the status quo but there are
ways it can be done it's been done with
chemical and biological weapons of mass
destruction it's been done with
Conventional Weapons things we've
discussed it can be done with nuclear
weapons the last wmd that is something
yes
and I think what we'll end on then is to
talk about the travesty of Canada not
sending observers to the new treaty on
the prohibition nuclear weapons to even
to the negotiations we don't have to
sign the treaty but we should have
diplomats there who are observing and
explaining the Canadian perspective
rather than just not going so it's like
saying okay well I'm not going to go to
the meeting and therefore I'm not
responsible for it no no so I I with you
Earl I'm very much in favor of sending
observers to the tpnw and also for Inlet
Canada to to sign it and so it do you
want to end this um talking a little bit
about the pros and cons of the tpnw
there are some demerits there are some
negative parts of it and there's some
positive Parts on it did you want to
address that or uh sure I'd be happy to
do that first of all I think that the
tpnw again is a historic uh treaty it's
only failed is that others chose not to
participate and did not appreciate uh
the urgency of it and the value of it I
think the treaty of the convention
itself the the Treaty of the prohibition
of nuclear weapons is uh is actually
quite comprehensive and would not
require much uh by way of of technical
agenda to be used as the basis for a
complete uh nuclear disarmament uh
regiment that said I think that the nine
nuclear states that chose not to
participate in this and have chosen to
retain their nuclear weapons will
probably be disinclined to become party
to any treaty that they did not
personally get involved in negotiating
so uh our uh the view of many is that
there are many many roads lead to raw
and if you want to negotiate a
complimentary legally binding Treaty of
your own
go ahead uh but it will be complementary
there are many states party to the tpnw
and it is extremely valuable unto itself
that for no other reason than to prevent
the proliferation of nuclear weapons
that is to say all states that are party
to it have a legal obligation not to
develop nuclear weapons that in itself
is incredibly valuable but also they
have a legal obligation to universalize
the treaty and its Norms so they will
continue to bring pressure to bear on
the decreasing number of states that
support the existence of nuclear weapons
um I think Canada should have attended
the first meeting of States parties of
the tpnw as an observer irrespective of
the fact that we have chosen our
government has chosen not to become
party to it Canada has a strong history
of positive engaged diplomacy the UN is
strongly supportive of the tpnw we are
strong supporters of the United Nations
there's no reason Canada should not have
been there the only reason that we were
not there is because some of our NATO
colleagues brought tremendous diplomatic
pressure to bear on all NATO States not
to participate and I believe there were
two or three exceptions to that uh who
did participate later on later later
yeah later on but uh but not at the
beginning I know because I was at NATO
headquarters interviewing people and boy
it was it was a lot of fun they were
adamantly against the tpnw and and
against even sending anyone there and
against having the negotiations but
just to interrupt if we have time could
I just see something in in favor of uh
action that our government has taken I
mentioned the Stockholm initiative okay
I've already explained that to them so
you don't have to go to you don't have
to go into too much depth but I I've
explained it in um but but do it again
because that's great simply to say that
this it's called the Stockholm in
history it's led by Sweden uh and uh but
Canada is one of I believe 16 member
states uh that that are
um making overtures uh to do nuclear
armed States and through the Stockholm
initiative trying to in their own
independent way bring pressure to bear
in support of nuclear disarmament so it
is not that Canada has been inactive
Canada has been active to a point uh and
from what I understand from colleagues
working behind the scenes uh as best
they can and I mean I saw it as a bit of
a red herring and I said to the students
I feel like this is a way for Canada to
say it's doing something when it's
really not doing anything and uh yeah it
sounds great and everything but but what
are they actually doing I looked at The
Minister's speeches and the other
ministers and I wasn't convinced you
know so but that's my more cynical
nature uh that you're you're more noble
and and positive nature
um so I was fairly critical of it and
and just said hey we can't really hope
that much will come out of that but that
was just me so it just shows you that
there's some differences even amongst
people who are in agreement on nuclear
abolition on the need to have more
international law and the legal
obligations you keep emphasizing that
the legal obligations of State parties
like country like Canada
very important to understand and there's
so many students that want to go into
international law it's unbelievable good
it's just great for them to hear you
speak with respect about international
law and about its implications for
policy so we can't you know with the
Ukraine war we're sort of thinking might
makes right but no that's not true I do
need to mention one thing all roads lead
to Rome is an older analogy referring to
Rome as the head of the Imperial uh of
an Empire and so all roads were built in
Roman fashion I don't even know why we
say this but then we also can say things
like all past lead up the mountain or it
takes different paths to lead to your up
the mountain I just wanted to say that
because I know I'll get some students
out and say I'm ready to be Professor
Simpson what does that mean all Road
sleep Tyrone all roads lead through anyway
anyway
um I think we will have to stop here
Earl I really appreciate your commentary
and I know that generations of students
that will remember your commentary and
we don't know how it will influence them
but I want to thank you for my heart for
taking the time today to talk to us and
I I really appreciate this so thank you
thank you so much and and thank thank
you Erica for your ongoing heroic
efforts in support of arms control and
disarmament which I've been a great
admirer of your work for years and I
know how how busy you are and how
productive you are it's just incredible
well thank you thank you next time we
see each other in Ottawa hopefully we'll
be skating or something fun but but I
don't know anyway thank you and I'm
going to uh just say thank you again okay
Click on any text or timestamp to jump to that moment in the video
Share:
Most transcripts ready in under 5 seconds
One-Click Copy125+ LanguagesSearch ContentJump to Timestamps
Paste YouTube URL
Enter any YouTube video link to get the full transcript
Transcript Extraction Form
Most transcripts ready in under 5 seconds
Get Our Chrome Extension
Get transcripts instantly without leaving YouTube. Install our Chrome extension for one-click access to any video's transcript directly on the watch page.
