The 6th General Conference of Mayors for Peace
Commemorating the 60th Anniversary of the Atomic Bombings

Opening Ceremony
13:00-14:30, Thursday, August 4, 2005
Phoenix HallInternational Conference Center Hiroshima
Opening Speech
Tadatoshi Akiba
President of Mayors for Peace
Mayor, Hiroshima, Japan
Greetings
Kofi Annan
Secretary-General of United Nationsdelivered by Nobuyasu Abe, UN Under-Secretary-General for Disarmament Affairsof the United Nations

Yuzan Fujita
Governor of Hiroshima Prefecturedelivered by Tadaomi Saito, Chairman, Hiroshima Peace Culture Foundation

Commemorative Speech for the 60theAnniversary of the Atomic Bombing
Douglas Roche, O.C.
Chair of Middle Power Initiative
Former Canadian Senator and Ambassador for Disarmament to the UN

Tadatoshi Akiba, President of Mayors for Peace, Mayor, Hiroshima, Japan:
UN Deputy-Secretary-General Abe, Middle Powers Initiative Chairman Roche,International Christian University Professor Mogami, ambassadors, honored guests,
representatives from cities around the world, ladies and gentlemen, today at the
opening of the 6th General Conference of Mayors for Peace, I am filled with gratitude
to see that so many of you have come and honored us with your presence. I welcome
you all from the bottom of my heart. Before we get down to business, I’d like tointroduce to you some of the key Mayors for Peace and allies who have been so
important to our organization, and in particular, to our campaign during the past year.
First, it is a great honor to introduce UN Deputy-Secretary-General Nobuyasu Abe.
He has been a tremendous support, especially since the NPT Preparatory Committee
Meeting in 2004. In fact, it was through his good offices that we were able to holdtwo very important events at the UN this past May, one of which was honored by anaddress by Secretary-General Annan.
Next, I am extremely honored to present Honorable Gisela Kallenbach who is amember of the European Parliament and is here representing that body. The European
Parliament has adopted two resolutions endorsing our 2020 Vision which greatly
encouraged us in our belief that we represent a global majority and gave us atremendous boost in prestige among the European activists.
Mayor Daniel Fontaine, representing the French national chapter of Mayors for Peace– in French it is L'Association Française des Communes Départements et Régions
pour la Paix – is Mayor of Aubagne, France, a city that has long given Mayors for
Peace extremely valuable support. Aubagne has recently hosted an A-bomb
exhibition and has helped to make France a model for Mayors for Peace organizing.
Honorable George Regan is here representing the UK Association of Nuclear Free
Local Authorities. This association can rightly take pride in having launched the
Nuclear Free Local Authorities movement and their cooperation has long facilitated
Mayors for Peace activities, especially in Europe. More specifically, he was one of
the key people present in the Manchester Executive Committee where our 2020
Vision was born.
Mr. Alfred Marder is here representing the International Association of Peace
Messenger Cities. This association has been a strong ally, and Mr. Marder has
personally devoted considerable time and energy to the design and implementation of
our emergency campaign. He was present at this birth at our Executive Committee
Meeting in Manchester.
Let me also mention here that Mayor Beverly O’Neill of Long Beach, California, whois the current president of the US Conference of Mayors, will arrive at 8 p.m. tonight
and will be participating in the conference. I should mention in passing that the US
Conference of Mayors, consisting of 1,083 cities with populations larger than 30,000
in the United States, has endorsed the 2020 Vision in its general assembly in June lastyear.
Now let me now introduce our Vice-President City. Mayor Itoh of Nagasaki needs no
introduction , but some may not be aware of his great contributions to encouraging

1

NGO activities and youth involvement in peace activities, especially in Japan. He is
also the president of the National Council of Japan, Nuclear-Free Local Authorities,
which has more than 300 members.
Lord Mayor Schmalstieg of Hannover, Germany, is among our longest-serving andmost effective vice-presidents. Germany is a leader in the anti-nuclear movement andmuch of our success there can be traced in one way or another to Mayor Schmalstieg.
In France, we are extremely lucky to have a remarkably effective team that includes
Mayor Catherine Margate of Malakoff and her dynamic deputies Michel and Miho
Cibot . They have built a French national chapter of Mayors for Peace and havehelped Hiroshima in too many other ways to mention, though one of the mostspectacular is Miho’s animated film on the paper crane which you may have seen
already.
I am pleased also to welcome Mayor Afzal Khan who is now Lord Mayor ofManchester , our Executive City in the United Kingdom. He is new to ourorganization but Manchester has long been a leading player thanks to the commitment
and competence of Stewart Kemp, who is our contact and advisor there.
Mayor Evgeny Petrovich Ischenko and the City of Volgograd , and the City of
Volgograd have participated in the mayoral delegations in New York and haveconsistently supported Mayors for Peace projects. We expect him and the city to beleading our movement strongly, especially in Russia.
Councilor Raul Corro is representing Muntinlupa which has consistently attended
conferences and offered valuable support. I expect Muntinlupa’s role to grow as we
gradually turn the focus of our campaign from the US and Europe to Asia.
Last, but far from least, allow me to introduce Councilor Susanna Agostini of
Florence, Italy. Leonardo Dominici, the Mayor of Florence, is President of the
National Association of Italian Municipalities. He called me personally to assure us
that he intends to commit the entire association to supporting Mayors for Peace. Thus,
we may soon have what is essentially an enormous national chapter in Italy. This
would be wonderful.
Let me repeat that I’m filled with gratitude to all of these people and the cities andorganizations they represent. I am also grateful to all of you who are taking the time
to be with us today. I welcome you all from the bottom of my heart.
Mayors for Peace was formed in 1982, originally by the cities of Hiroshima andNagasaki, to foster solidarity among cities in the effort to raise consciousness andarouse international demand for the abolition of nuclear weapons. In August 1985,
we held our 1st General Conference. Four years ago, when we held our Fifth General
Conference, our membership stood at 508 cities. In the past four years, we haverecruited 572 cities, bringing our total membership to 1,083 cities in 112 countries
and regions. [applause] And this is the result of your efforts in each of yourcountries. Thus, we have become a truly global NGO representing literally hundredsof millions of people.

2

We have been surprised to learn that when peace activists in a given country are
determined to do so, they can recruit new Mayors for Peace extremely rapidly.
ITPNW in Germany and Norway, for Mother Earth in Belgium, and CND in Englandhave recruited literally hundreds of mayors. In fact, approximately half of the mayors
in Belgium are now members.
We have also found that when our member mayors are aware of and supportive ofpeace activities, the results far surpass expectations. We are more convinced thanever that the key to eliminating nuclear weapons is close cooperation between ourmayors and the peace activists in their cities.
The reason Mayors for Peace has grown so rapidly in the past four years is because
we are working from a sense of crisis. We have seen the United States move awayfrom disarmament and toward the development of nuclear weapons, even threatening
to put nuclear weapons in space. We have seen Russia respond by increasing its
reliance on nuclear weapons. We have seen India and Pakistan come to the brink of
war that could have easily escalated to a nuclear exchange. We have seen North
Korea abandon the NPT and turn to nuclear weapons for security. We have seen theterrorist attack on the World Trade Center in New York, followed by US attacks on
Afghanistan and Iraq. In the case of Iraq, the attack was based on what turned out tobe a non-existent threat from weapons of mass destruction.
Most frighteningly of all, we have seen the emergence of a so-called "war on terror"that is likely to perpetrate and escalate cycles of hatred, violence and retaliation that
could lead to nuclear terrorism or nuclear attack on terrorists.
To confront this crisis, the Mayors for Peace Executive Meeting in Manchester in2003 approved an emergency campaign to ban nuclear weapons. This campaign,
which was launched in Nagasaki in November that year, is promoting our 2020
Vision, a program for a nuclear weapons-free world by the year 2020, the 58th
Anniversary of the Atomic Bombings. However, the NPT Review Conference held at
UN headquarters this past May was quite disappointing. Resistance from nuclear
weapons states refusing to work seriously towards nuclear disarmament prevented any
meaningful progress. It is no exaggeration to say that the NPT, the only international
agreement for the control of nuclear weapons, is on the brink of collapse.
In this context, our meeting here in Hiroshima, just prior to the 60th Anniversary of
the Atomic Bombings, is extremely important. The fact that we have come from somany cities and countries reflects growing international public demand for genuine
world peace, and as a sponsor of this conference nothing could be more encouraging
than your presence.
Mayors for Peace is a gathering of mayors and cities. Mayors have a responsibility toprotect the lives of their citizens. However, if nuclear weapons are used, no amountof planning or training will allow us to protect the tremendous numbers of people whowill be killed and injured. To protect our people, our only option is to make surenuclear weapons are never used, and the only way to do that is to physically eliminate
them. The voices calling for an end to nuclear weapons represent the overwhelming
majority of the world’s population. Only a handful few actively seek to retain nuclear
weapons, and yet the people elect or polarize those few. In other words, all we have3

to do is to make nuclear weapons a salient issue in the election of our leaders. And
with our power as the majority, we can actually abolish nuclear weapons.
At this General Conference we will examine the results of the NPT Review
Conference and explore the next steps for Mayors for Peace from various perspectives.
We will refer to the international ban on anti-personnel landmines as an example oftranscending the normal frameworks of diplomacy to achieve popular results. That
campaign mobilized nations and NGOs around the world to generate an enormous
movement that led to a highly effective international treaty.
As I have said many times, the great majority of people on this planet want the humanrace to survive, and we need to make sure that the will of this majority is reflected ininternational decision-making. We need to find the most effective ways to bring thenuclear threat to the attention of the international public, then we need to offer the
public opportunities to express their demand in ways that will influence their leaders.
For three days, from August 4, that’s today, to the 6th, we will cross national andethnic barriers and overcome differences of religion and ideology to deliberate andadopt a plan to do exactly that. I hope you will all help us understand the mosteffective means of reaching and arousing the peace-loving public in your cities andnations.
Let me again thank our mayors and other representatives for traveling to Hiroshima
for the 60th anniversary. I do hope you will come to a deeper understanding of theatomic bombings and the Mayors for Peace campaign, and that you will help us bymobilizing the people of your respective cities to demand complete and permanent
liberation from the threat of nuclear annihilation. Thank you very much. [applause]
Now let us introduce at this point a message from Mr. Kofi Annan, Secretary-Generalof the United Nations. On behalf of Secretary-General Annan, his message will beread by Mr. Nobuyasu Abe, the Under-Secretary-General for Disarmament Affairs of
the United Nations. Mr. Abe.
Nobuyasu Abe, UN Under-Secretary-General for Disarmament Affairs of theUnited Nations: Mayors for Peace participating in this conference, distinguishedguests, let me read the statement by the Secretary-General of the United Nations:
Please accept my best wishes for this Conference of Mayors for Peacecommemorating the 60th Anniversary of the Atomic Bombings.
When the atom was split over Hiroshima and Nagasaki 60 years ago, adark shadow was cast over our human future. Untold destruction andhuman suffering were unleashed; more than 100,000 men, women andchildren were killed instantly, and more than 200,000 more werecondemned to horrific and lethal sickness. Global politics weretransformed forever. We entered a new and terrifying era in which theannihilation of humankind suddenly loomed as a real possibility. Our
mutual vulnerability became inescapable.
And yet, from that shadow a new hope emerged. Recognition of ourinterdependence ushered in the United Nations and the concept of our4collective security. The link between the horrors of Hiroshima andNagasaki and the founding aspirations of the United Nations was quickly
manifest: the UN General Assembly, in its very first resolution,
declared that our common goal must be the elimination of all weapons'adaptable to mass destruction.'
Six decades later, the world has been reawakened to nuclear dangers.
Nuclear proliferation remains one of the most pressing problems
confronting our world. Tens of thousands of nuclear weapons remain,
many of them on 'hair-trigger' alert. The emergence of a nuclear black
market and attempts by terrorists to acquire nuclear weapons andmaterials have compounded the nuclear threat.
Today, our challenge -- as it was for the founders of the United Nations - is to pass on to our children a brighter legacy than that bequeathed tous. We must build a future as envisioned in the UN Charter -- a future'in larger freedom.' That requires us to continue to work towards a world
free of nuclear dangers, and ultimately, free of nuclear weapons. All
States must do everything in their power to ensure that the horrors ofHiroshima and Nagasaki are not visited on any peoples, anywhere, every
again.
I am heartened, therefore, that you, Mayors for Peace, are promoting
your vision of a global ban on nuclear weapons by 2020. As
representatives of the aspirations of peoples and communities around theworld, as a link between the local and the global, you have a crucial roleto play.
I hope that in September, when Heads of State and Government conveneat the United Nations for one of the largest gatherings of the world
leaders ever, they will use the occasion to take bold steps towards
realizing your vision. For the sake of succeeding generations, for yourcommunities today, and to honour the memory of the victims of
Hiroshima and Nagasaki, they must do no less. Thank you.
Akiba: Thank you very much, Ambassador Abe. Now I would like to invite Mr.
Tadaomi Saitoh who is the Chairman of the Hiroshima Peace Culture Foundation toread the message we have received from the Governor of Hiroshima Prefecture,
Yuzan Fujita-san. Mr. Saitoh, please.
Tadaomi Saito, Chairman, Hiroshima Peace Culture Foundation, Hiroshima,
Japan:
I would like to extend my heartfelt congratulations to the 6th General
Conference of Mayors for Peace Commemorating the 60th Anniversaryof the Atomic Bombings. I deeply respect the distinguishedparticipants’ efforts toward the abolition of nuclear weapons. Since thefirst atomic bombing in human history on August 6, 1945, we, thecitizens of Hiroshima Prefecture, have strongly appealed for the5elimination of nuclear weapons and the realization of lasting world
peace.
Although this year marks the 60th anniversary since the end of theSecond World War, when we look at the situation in the international
community, the road to a nuclear-free world is still rough due to rise of
new countries wishing to hold nuclear arsenals and the fact that noconcrete measures were produced at the Review Conference of theParties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons heldin May of this year.
In addition, various problems arising from a combination of ethnic andreligious differences and poverty has made the international situation
more complicated and difficult with regional conflicts and rampant
terrorism.
To cope with this situation, aside from the efforts towards the abolitionof nuclear weapons, Hiroshima Prefecture is promoting peacecontribution activities based on “Hiroshima Peace Contribution Plan”
under the principle of creating peace, including reconstruction assistanceand development of human resources in post-conflict regions, utilizing
the knowledge, human resources and facilities accumulated in
Hiroshima.
We believe that local authorities can play an important role inestablishing peace and stability in the international community byworking together with international organizations, national government
and NGOs. We will continue to work more actively towards that end.
It is also significant for Hiroshima Prefecture that representatives ofcities and NGOs around the world gather here today to engage in wideranging discussions, strengthening their solidarity towards the realizationof nuclear-free world and lasting world peace. I believe this will be asignificant contribution for lasting world peace.
I close my congratulatory remarks with best wishes that this conference
will produce most fruitful results for all the participants, as well as thewhole global community.
Signed August 4, 2005, Yuzan Fujita, Governor of Hiroshima Prefecture.
We also received many other messages expressing wishes for the total elimination of
nuclear weapons and success of the 6th General Conference of Mayors for Peacecommemorating the 60th Anniversary of the Atomic Bombings from Mr. Ken
Livingstone, Mayor of London, and other mayors who could not attend the conference
today.
Akiba: Thank you, Mr. Saitoh. And now it is my pleasure to introduce the speakerof the 60th commemorative address.

6

The occasion of the 60th Anniversary of the Atomic Bombings is a solemn one for theCity of Hiroshima and on August 9 that of Nagasaki. And we are honored towelcome Senator Douglas Roche to look at the 60 years and outline for us the paths
we could take for the coming 60 years.
Douglas Roche or Senator Douglas Roche or Ambassador Douglas Roche, in manydifferent ways he’s called, he is now the Chair of the Middle Powers Initiative.
Senator Roche served as a member of the Canadian Parliament from 1972 to 1984.
He was appointed Canadian Ambassador for Disarmament from 1984 to 1989, andelected Chairman of the United Nations Political and Security, that deals withdisarmament, Committee in 1988. He was a Canadian senator from 1998 to 2004. He
has also served as Chairman of the Middle Powers Initiative from 1998 to the present.
So there is no wonder that many of us who have been associated with disarmamentissues consider Senator Roche, Ambassador Roche, as the leading figure in the areasof international disarmament and the elimination of nuclear weapons. In a sense,
some people call him "Godfather of Disarmament," and he certainly deserves it. And
today he will deliver a speech titled, “Overcoming the Obstacles to a Nuclear
Weapons-free World.”
Incidentally, let me mention something which I’d like to bring to your attention, thatis, we have planned to have three feature speakers during this conference: Senator
Roche, Prof. Inoguchi and Miss Walker. All these people actually have played a vital
important role in transforming the United Nations for a more effectively democratic
body from their own different perspectives, and that, I hope, will become clear as you
listen to the speeches of these people.
So with that, I’d like to invite Senator Roche up to the stage.Thank you very much.
Senator Douglas Roche, OC., Chair of Middle Power Initiative, Former
Canadian Senator and Ambassador for Disarmament to the UN: Thank you,
Mayor Akiba. Mr. Under-Secretary-General Abe, Prof. Mogami, Chairman of thisConference, distinguished mayors and representatives of cities, and dear friends in
Hiroshima, as we gather in this historic location to observe the 60th Anniversary of theAtomic Bombings of Hiroshima and then Nagasaki, my first thoughts turn to thehibakusha. I pay my respects to these brave people who have suffered so much andwho have taught the world. The stories of the hibakusha must never be lost. Future
generations must understand the reality of nuclear weapons. They must continue tolearn from these brave people who overcame Armageddon and chose the path of life.
The hibakusha rejected retaliation and embraced reconciliation as their guiding force.
That is a lesson for the ages.
I also wish to pay my respects, my deepest respects, to Mayor Akiba for his
worldwide leadership in building Mayors for Peace into a vibrant organization in the
campaign to rid the world of nuclear weapons. The 2020 Vision campaign,
articulated so brilliantly by Mayor Akiba, has provided new hope for all those who
desire to live in a nuclear weapons-free world. I congratulate the people of Hiroshima
for having selected such an outstanding world figure to represent their interests, and I
pledge today the continuing support of the Middle Powers Initiative for Mayor Akiba
and the Mayors for Peace campaign.

7

The framework for a nuclear weapons-free world is coming into view, even as thedaily news seems discouraging. It is perhaps paradoxical that a light can be seen, by
those with vision, even in the darkness of the moment.
My experience tells me that it is reasonable to hope for, and to work for, a world
beyond the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. As a parliamentarian, a diplomat
and an educator, I have worked on nuclear disarmament issues for the past 30 years. I
understand the obstinacy and the lassitude of governments all too well. But I havealso seen the developments taking place in civil society where increasing numbers ofhighly informed and deeply committed activists are cooperating with like-minded
governments to get things done to improve human security. The Anti-Personnel
Landmines Treaty, the International Criminal Court and the new surge of government
commitment to Official Development Assistance have come about because of civilsociety’s input into the government machinery.
We stand on the threshold of the construction of a viable plan for a nuclear weaponsfree world resulting from the active cooperation of knowledgeable leaders of civilsociety working with those politicians and officials of like-minded governments whotruly want to move forward.
The day will arrive when either nuclear weapons abolition takes effect or the world
will be devastated by a nuclear attack. One or the other will take place. And no
person, informed on the gravity of the situation, can deny this.
Dear friends, the eyes of the world are on Hiroshima today. It is our task to ensurethat political decision-makers stay focused on solving the problems at the epicenter ofHiroshima. We must have national policies that ban the production, deployment anduse of nuclear weapons by all countries in all circumstances for all time. There can be
no more equivocation. We must project our message for all to hear: nuclear weapons
are immoral, they are illegal and they are the ultimate evil. No civilized person can
any longer defend the possession of nuclear weapons. They must be banished fromthe face of the earth.
We who are assembled here today must gather new energy for our struggle. It is not
yet too late to prevent a nuclear catastrophe, which would be the third use of nuclear
weapons. But the hour is late. The nuclear weapons States refuse to negotiate theelimination of their nuclear arsenals. Proliferation of nuclear weapons is occurring.
Nuclear weapons have become part of war-fighting strategies. Terrorists seek nuclear
weapons. The Second Nuclear Age has already begun. This is a message that wemust get out to all those who think that the nuclear weapons problems went away withthe end of the Cold War.
Let us take heart as we renew our work today. We who stand for the abolition of
nuclear weapons are not some isolated minority. Unthinking politicians may try to
marginalize us. But we are a part of a growing majority. This is the majority justreferred to by Mayor Akiba. An international poll of citizens in 11 countries showedthat 86 per cent of people either strongly agree or agree to some extent that all nations
should sign a treaty to ban nuclear weapons. In Japan, the figure is 97 per cent ofpeople. The people of Japan want the abolition of nuclear weapons. We must tell the8government of Japan to work harder to obtain what the Japanese people so ardently
desire.
In the United States, 76 per cent of people favor a treaty to ban all nuclear weapons.
Yet the government of the United States stands today as the biggest obstacle tonuclear disarmament. I make that statement as a Canadian and next-door neighbor to
the United States, one who has lived among and loves the American people. Three ofmy children were born in the United States. But my parliamentary and diplomatic
experience has shown me how the present administration of the United States isundermining the rule of law. By refusing to accept today the commitments made in
1995 and 2000 to strengthen the Non-Proliferation Treaty, the government of the US
is weakening the non-proliferation regime. They have the ill-conceived idea that they
can reserve to themselves the right to continued possession of nuclear weapons while
proscribing their acquisition by other countries.
We must say clearly to the United States: you cannot have a two-class world. You
owe it to humanity to work with other countries in a constructive manner to negotiate
the complete elimination of all nuclear weapons. As Chairman of the Middle Powers
Initiative, I approach this work in a positive and a constructive spirit, not one ofrecrimination. I want to help the US, and the people of the US, understand thattogether the world community can build the architecture to provide security in a
nuclear weapons-free world.
I am announcing today that the Middle Powers Initiative will sponsor an "Article VI
Forum" – Article VI, the key article of the Non-Proliferation Treaty calling for
nuclear disarmament. We will sponsor this forum for like-minded States to startworking on identifying the legal, political and technical requirements for theelimination for nuclear weapons. We will invite the senior representatives of some 30
countries to a special meeting in early October at the United Nations in New York to
specify steps that could be taken unilaterally, bilaterally, regionally and multilaterally,
to enhance security without relying on nuclear weapons. This process may well
produce the outline of how negotiations, as called for in Article VI of the NPT andreinforced by the International Court of Justice, can proceed. A framework fornegotiations could be started. The Article VI Forum, with its ongoing work, will, ofcourse, pay attention to non-proliferation issues, but the focus will be principally on
nuclear disarmament issues, which are at the true center of the nuclear weapons crisis.
The Middle Powers Initiative cordially invites the government of Japan to join the
Article VI Forum. Membership in the Forum, in the opening stages, will be confined
to like-minded non-nuclear weapons States. They need to spend some time working
together to allow their creativity and commitment to surface in a non-confrontational
atmosphere. At some point in the new deliberations, those nuclear weapons Statesinterested in joining a new process to fulfill their Article VI commitments could be
invited to join in. I don’t know how long this process will take. I only know it must
begin.
My dear friends, it is much better to light a candle and show some hope for the world
than to curse the darkness. .

9All of this work is intended to strengthen the Non-Proliferation Treaty so thatnegotiations for the elimination of nuclear weapons will not only be pursued but
concluded. I see this work as a direct contribution to the Mayors for Peace campaign
for a Nuclear Weapons Convention to come fully into effect by the year 2020. The
immediate steps of Mayors for Peace to stimulate productive work at the United
Nations First Committee this fall and to get talks started by the year 2006, next year,
is highly commendable. I support it. Governments must begin to work together on
specific issues leading to nuclear disarmament, as Mayors for Peace has stated. It is
the duty of middle power states to lead the way and the Article VI Forum would help
them to fulfill this function.
The Middle Powers Initiative work in building some momentum through having likeminded States concentrate on preparing for a nuclear weapons-free world and theMayors for Peace work in driving the First Committee work forward this fall, go handin hand. Together, the Middle Powers Initiative and Mayors for Peace can contributeto progress. We can show all the nuclear weapons States that the world can work
together in addressing this greatest-of-all security problems. However, the Middle
Powers Initiative and Mayors for Peace cannot do this alone. Much will depend on
public backing and the political support needed for these new initiatives. A risingpublic demand for nations to get on with negotiating and implementing a Nuclear
Weapons Convention to ban the production and deployment of all nuclear weapons
must take hold in the future. The work of Mayors for Peace, with its growing andextensive network around the world, now more than 1,080 mayors, I’m sure that
number will double over the next year as a result of the immense energy that the
mayors here representing other cities today, along with the leadership here in Japanand Hiroshima and Nagasaki, I’m sure that that is going to be productive. There will
be a rolling effect across the world over the next year or two, and this conference
marking the 60th anniversary, for the next three days, can build that energy to roll out
from this auditorium and this place, to reach communities around the world. That is
our challenge, our mission, and that is what we must do in the next three days.
Now it can be expected that one or more of the nuclear weapons States will resist andcontinue to claim that it still needs nuclear weapons. But such claims will have lessand less credibility in a world where the architecture for security without nuclear
weapons becomes better understood and where the universal norm against thepossession of nuclear weapons is growing in stature.
Dear friends in Hiroshima, let us always remember: we have the historical momentum
for the abolition of nuclear weapons on our side. The Non-Proliferation Treaty, theInternational Court of Justice, the votes of the majority of nations are all calling for an"unequivocal undertaking" and systematic progress towards the elimination of nuclear
weapons. The proponents of nuclear weapons have been reduced to the mostridiculous arguments to justify nuclear retention. You know, not only are nuclear
weapons immoral and illegal, they are now devoid of any intellectual understanding.
Those who defend nuclear weapons should be laughed at, as one day they will bewhen humanity discovers it has the strength to overcome some merchants of evil.
Future generations will look back to our time and say without hesitation that nuclear
weapons were an anachronism, the obsession of old men trapped in the past. It will
be a source of wonder to future generations how humanity ever tolerated the means to
its own mass destruction. We can take power from that thought.

10

It’s our job to work toward this future of enlightenment. The people of the world
want us to succeed in building true human security. We must feel confident that we
can do the job. We must know that we can respond to our historical calling. We mustbe forever determined to build a nuclear weapons-free world. Hiroshima gives methat strength and hope.
Thank you.
Akiba: Thank you very much, Senator Roche, for the wonderful, inspiring andinvigorating speech, which outlined the path that we should take, the path that willlead us to a nuclear-free world. And I thank you for making it so concise,understandable, and also giving us confidence, and again, with deepest gratitude, witha place that will follow the path, I’d like to ask you to join me in applauding Senator
Roche again. Thank you very much. [applause]

11

The 6th General Conference of Mayors for Peace
Commemorating the 60th Anniversary of the Atomic Bombings

General Conference
14:30-15:30, Thursday, August 4, 2005
Phoenix HallInternational Conference Center Hiroshima
Chairperson: Tadatoshi Akiba
President of Mayors for Peace
Mayor, Hiroshima, Japan
Explanation of Agenda Items by:
Steve Leeper
U. S. Representative of Mayors for Peace Secretariat
Aaron Tovish
2020 Vision Campaign Manager
Speaker:

Johnanne Winchester
Director, Communications Coordination Committee for the United Nations, USA
Ellen Woodsworth
Councilor, Vancouver, Canada
John Hipkin
Mayor, Cambridge, U.K
Irene Michaud
Representing the Town of Leverett, U.S.A.
Frank Liu
Director of Japan region, Communications Coordination Committee for
the United Nations, USA
Gisela Kallenbach
Member of the European Parliament, Representative of Leipzig, Germany
Miho Cibot
AFCDRP French Mayors for Peace, Malakoff, France
Alan Ware
Global Coordinator, Parliamentary Network for Nuclear Disarmament
Fumio Ueda
Mayor, Sapporo, Japan

Chairperson, Tadatoshi Akiba, President of Mayors for Peace,Mayor,
Hiroshima, Japan: And now I would like to call the session to order, the session of
the General Conference of the Mayors of Peace. Based on the covenant of Mayorsof Peace, I will chair the General Conference today as the President of Mayors for
Peace. Before discussing the agenda items, I would like to introduce the chairpersonof each session and ask them to be recognized.
First of all, let's see, where are they seated? There. First of all, I would like tointroduce Prof. Toshiki Mogami of the International Christian University, who will
chair the whole program of the General Conference as well as the plenary sessions 1
and 2.
Next, I would like to introduce Mr. Alyn Ware, Consultant, International Associationof Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms, IALANA, who came all the way from New
Zealand. Mr. Ware will chair the Session Meeting 1.
Lastly, Prof. Nobuo Kazashi of Kobe University who will chair the exchange with
Hiroshima citizens. I guess he’s not here. I will recognized him again when he’s
here. Actually, it’s not limited to Hiroshima citizens, citizens of the world.
And Prof. Asai, President of the Hiroshima Peace Institute who will chair Session
Meeting 2. He is absent today on other business but he will join just shortly.
Now this session of the General Conference is where member cities of Mayors for
Peace discuss the agenda items. Today we have participants from non-member cities
of Mayors for Peace. Please understand that your participation will be as observers,
but that does not mean that you cannot speak. Please speak freely, but when it
comes to vote-taking, those who are not members will not be asked to vote. That is
the rule. And also, the representatives from national governments, NGOs and thegeneral public are asked to participate only as observers as well. So thank you foryour cooperation.
Now I would also like to ask representatives of non-member cities again to take thisopportunity to join Mayors for Peace, and I’m sure you will be convinced that it is agood idea after you have listened to the discussions which will start shortly.
Now we will take up the agenda item 1, Election of Executive Cities. I would like tocall on the Secretariat, which has been preparing for this conference for many months,
to give an explanation of the agenda item.
Secretariat, Steve Leeper, U. S. Representative of Mayors for Peace Secretariat:
Good afternoon. For those of you who have handouts, the handouts of the agenda
items, this item is on page 1 of that handout. I’m just going to give some briefbackground of these recommendations that we’re making now.
At the Fifth Executive Meeting in Hannover in September 2000, it was decided tofind and involve leading cities, especially in nuclear weapons States or suspectednuclear weapons States, that could help to strengthen our activities in those countries.
In addition, the by-laws of this conference stipulate that we are obligated to consider
regional balance in our selection of executive committee members. For these1reasons, and because all the individuals mayors I will now introduce have provided
invaluable support to Mayors for Peace, the Secretariat is recommending that thefollowing cities be elected to serve as Vice-President Cities.
Donald Plusquellic is Mayor of Akron, Ohio. Mayor Plusquellic, who was until
June this year the president of the US Conference of Mayors, was instrumental ingetting that conference to pass a resolution strongly supporting Mayors for Peace andour 2020 Vision. That resolution has proven to be a powerful tool for recruiting US
mayors and promoting the campaign.
Gary Moore is Mayor of Christchurch, New Zealand. We have never had an
Executive City from Oceania, and Mayor Moore has a strong personal commitment toour cause. In addition, New Zealand has for decades been at the forefront of the
struggle against nuclear weapons and it will be extremely beneficial to ourorganization to have Mayor Moore as our contact in his highly advanced anti-nuclear
nation.
Leonardo Dominici is Mayor of Florence, Italy. He is also President of the National
Association of Italian Municipalities and has personally assured Mayor Akiba that heintends to commit that organization representing most of Italy’s major cities, tosupporting our campaign.
Patrik Vankrunkelsven is Mayor of Laakdal, Belgium. He is also a member of theBelgium parliament and a devoted activist. He has been arrested for attempting a
citizen’s inspection looking for weapons of mass destruction at a NATO site in
Belgium, and he has been a central figure in the remarkable campaign that recruited
233 Mayors for Peace in Belgium. I believe that more than half of Belgium’s
mayors are now members of Mayors for Peace.
We are extremely lucky that these four outstanding mayors have agreed to join our
Executive Meeting, and they have been so appointed by Mayor Akiba under his
authority as President. At this point we have one President City, Hiroshima, seven
Vice-President Cities, and four new Executive Cities. According to Article IV,paragraph 2 of our by-laws, the new Executive Cities can be elected Vice-President
Cities only by a vote in the General Conference. If elected, according to Article V
they would serve for four years until the next General Conference. There is norestriction on the number of terms they can serve.
Prior to this 6th General Conference, the Secretariat approached all current
vice-presidents to inquire if they are willing to continue serving. In response, themayors of Nagasaki, Hannover, Malakoff, Manchester, Muntinlupa and Volgograd
agreed to continue as vice-presidents. Unfortunately, the Mayor of Como, Italy has
decided to resign his position.
Assuming that you elect all these candidates, we will have an executive committee often Vice-President Cities led by the President Mayor Akiba of Hiroshima. Thus, wewill have 11 officer cities. We do hope that you will approve these nominations.
Thank you.

2

Chairperson: Thank you very much. Now we have discussed this matter in the
Executive Committee, and based on the discussion the Secretariat would like to ask
you to approve this appointment of officers by a show of applause. May I have yourapplause of approval? [applause]Okay, thank you very much. I would like to ask the new vice-presidents to take aleading role until the 7th General Conference.
Next will be agenda item No. 2, The Future Role of Mayors for Peace. Again, I
would like to call on the Secretariat to give you an account of the plan for this coming
year, as well as a glimpse to the future years, so please.
Secretariat, Aaron Tovish, 2020 Vision Campaign Manager: Good afternoon.
We have had an extraordinary campaign up until this time over the lastyear-and-a-half or so. It has done wonders for getting the name of Mayors for Peaceout to a much wider public, and it has established a reputation, a good name for theorganization in circles of power and among the people.
Our challenge in the coming year, which is the main focus of the presentation that
I’ve been asked to make, is on building that reputation and exploiting it to the good of
the campaign and its objectives.
I want to first draw your attention to the draft pamphlet that describes the history of
the organization and will present the plans once they have been discussed, modified
and approved. The section that I’m dealing with begins on page 4 and continues
relentlessly for over four pages. I will not subject you to four pages of small type.
I will instead refer to the agenda item 2 of the conference work and I will movethrough it more or less reading it but also adding some commentary, and for that I
apologize to the interpreters.
Several of the speakers have already -- now I’m louder aren’t I -- have alreadyreferred to the kind of attitude that we need to take into this campaign as we move
forward, one of recognizing that nuclear weapons have had their day, that any attempt
to defend further prolongation of nuclear weapons is out of step with the great
majority of people and we represent that great majority. And so you’ll see that the
campaign plan tries to build on that attitude in a very concrete and we hope successfulway.
The campaign will consist of events and projects or ongoing activities. There will bethree major events in the course of what we can think of as the calendar, not thecalendar year, not the fiscal year, but the campaign year. In this campaign,
campaign years go from August commemoration to the next year’s Augustcommemoration. So we’d like you to think in terms of August to August when it
comes to the forward movement of the campaign.
So in the coming campaign year we have envisioned three main events. The firstwould be an effort to revise Disarmament Week which begins on UN Day, which isthe 24th October. We will call on cities around the world to mark these periods withlocal public events for education and outreach. The importance of this timing is that3

this is when the First Committee is meeting in New York, and I will get to that when
we go to projects.
The second major event is going to be in Vancouver in June 2006. We’re fortunate
to have here representatives from Vancouver who will give us much more detail on
this, but a particularly marvelous coincidence, which makes this irresistible, is that theWorld Urban Forum will take place just before and slightly overlapping with theWorld Peace Forum. And it doesn't take too much to add 1 and 1 and get 2.
Mayors, peace, Mayors for Peace. We’re going to be there, we’re going to urge ourmembership to be there, we will build ties to cities at the Urban Forum and we willbuild ties to our peace movement allies during the World Peace Forum.
And that in itself will be an excellent opportunity to promote the third major event in2006, in this first calendar year, and that is the 10th Anniversary of the International
Court of Justice. The unanimous opinion of the universal obligation to pursue andconclude measures leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects – Alan willcorrect me if I didn’t do that absolutely perfectly -- that advisory opinion will havebeen in force, you could say, for ten years, and we know that it has not been compliedwith. And so we will launch a month of action for compliance starting with theTenth Anniversary with a massive demonstration in the Hague with the help of all our
European colleagues hosting people from all over the world, and we will continue
activities on a local basis culminating here in Hiroshima and other Hiroshima andNagasaki Day commemorations around the world.
These events are opportunities for mayors to get involved who have not yet been
involved, and we are going to work throughout the year to ensure that we have broad
participation from our membership and from new mayors as well.
But these events are only successful if the long-ongoing activities, the projects of theorganization, are stirring up the determination and the public support that’s needed formayors to really throw themselves into this. And we have several important projects
under way.
The first is that we are already approaching governments, asking them to take into
account the lack of results from the NPT Conference, the lack of results from theConference on Disarmament, recognize that one of the main problems in both of thesebodies, as well as the Disarmament Commission, is that they have been hamstrung by
the consensus rule, which in effect gives a veto to any country. And as we know, asmall number of countries have been abusing that veto, and we are going to look to
the First Committee to establish a new, complimentary, supportive sub-committee thatis not hampered by this consensus veto and that can operate on the same basis as theFirst Committee and the General Assembly and that is by majority vote if necessary toadvance the work needed to plan for the achievement of a nuclear weapons-free worldby the year 2020. This will be an important new direction for the international
community, and we are already finding a great deal of interest in this, and we arehoping that we can push that through.
The activities on UN Day will coincide closely to when the First Committee will
actually be moving towards a vote on this and related resolutions and we are hopingthat it will give courage to countries to see this through. I could mean, while it is not4

at all certain, it could mean that negotiations could begin in Geneva as early as
January 2006.
The second project: Ask the People. We are going to try to promote in perhaps 50
countries, and hopefully we’ll succeed in maybe 35, to get national opinion polls
conducted by newspapers and other respectable and scientific polling operations, toreconfirm what has been found in a smattering and a disorganized and varied set ofpolls over the years, and which Ambassador Roche referred to, which is that huge
majorities of people want to see their governments get down to work and sort out thisthreat and eliminate it.
So this will be an opportunity over the course of a single year to get polls taken in a
broad spectrum of countries, nuclear weapons States, potential nuclear weapons States,
non-nuclear weapons States, demonstrating that no matter where the poll was taken,
people want to see this problem solved in their lifetime so their children can have abetter world.
Third project. You may recall, and I’m actually pleased to see so many of themayors who were in New York with us today, you may recall we had a presentationfrom the Rand Corporation. The Rand Corporation was commissioned by the
Department of Homeland Security to do a study on the impact of a nuclear detonationin the Port of Long Beach, which is right next to the Port of Los Angeles. A quarterof all exports and imports in and out of the United States go through that port. And
what the study found, and what he presented to us in New York, was that they still
could not fully track and fully comprehend the economic impact of such a disruptionof world trade. And it occurred to us that it would be very useful to do a similar
study in other major advanced technological centers of the world that have become sodependent on the just-on-time delivery of the world trade system.
So we’re looking to promote a similar study in East Asia and a similar study inEurope, and we’re hoping to bring those results to the attention of political leadersand people everywhere. It’s a wonderful coincidence, again, that the new presidentof the US Conference of Mayors is in fact the Mayor of Long Beach, California. So
we have a good friend and ally in this effort. In fact, it was Mayors for Peace thatbrought this study to her attention.
Participation in international, regional and local conferences. Mayors for Peace
obviously needs to find allies everywhere it can, and mayors operate in regional andinternational contexts, not just in Mayors for Peace but in all kinds of different
organizations. Mayors for Peace often gets invitations to participate in suchmeetings, not just meetings of mayors, but also peace movement meetings and soforth. We need the capacity to be represented at those meetings by mayors, if not bymayors then by staff members of the Secretariat or other people we want to empower
to take those roles.
We will be establishing an Advisory Committee to the campaign. Thus far, thecampaign has received on a very informal, but very useful basis, advice from experts,
peace activists, mayors, ex-mayors, and we want to formalize that a bit and regularize
it so that we have the benefit of their advice on a consistent basis.

5

We also need to strengthen the membership database. As the membership grows
rapidly we need to install new systems so that our communication with themembership improves, rather than deteriorating.
We also, as a major tool of communication, need to bring on board a web designer
who can make sure that our web is not irregularly up to date, is not only up to date but
extremely user friendly and valuable to those who visit it.
There are several education projects that will be discussed during the course of thismeeting, and you can get more information about them.
But then I must come to the question of fundraising. And I want now to draw yourattention to the dollar signs on this report, and you will see that the Secretariat and ouroffices outside of Japan have an annual bill of over $380,000. That bill, up until
now, has been consistently covered by the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and we
all hope and pray that they can continue to do that, but the activities of the campaign
create an extra financial need, and this burden should not fall on Hiroshima andNagasaki. They are just two of the thousand members of this organization.
If you look at the difference between what Hiroshima is covering in terms of theinfrastructure of the organization and the total cost of the campaign year that I’ve justdescribed, you will see that it’s about $160,000. So the Executive Committee has
decided, or is recommending, that the Mayors for Peace membership take an activerole in making up this difference of 160,000 and covering the costs of this campaign
as we have it planned, and hopefully we can even expand it as additional funds areraised.
If you just do pure mathematics on this, and this is not a specific proposal, but if you
take 1,000 members and divide it into the $160,000, you come up with the need of$160 from each city. That’s not a lot of money. But we’re also looking, in fact, toraise money from a number of other sources besides contributions gathered andcontributed voluntarily by cities. We’re going to be going to foundations. A
number of the projects I’ve described are likely candidates for grants fromfoundations. And we will be going to other NGOs, corporations and individuals andliterally directly soliciting their support for the work of Mayors For Peace.
Mayor Akiba has done work in this area himself here in Hiroshima and has found avery, very positive response, and we hope that other mayors will take on this task aswell and that other NGOs will pitch in as well, and we are more than happy tocooperate with NGOs in specific fundraising initiatives.
An example is given that the Global Peacemakers Association in the United States has
contracted with an organization called EPOP Productions to put on a concert, a major
concert, and it’s possible that this will generate significant revenues in the next
campaign year.
I have skipped a page, if you’re following me, I’ve skipped to page 5 to discuss
revenue. I’ll just quickly draw your attention to the fact that as the General
Conference here was responsible for a budget over a four-year period, because
conferences are held every four years, the budget does not claim to be at all detailed in6the following three years. There are activities, there are Secretariat expenses andthen you’ll see there’s an Executive Committee Meeting in August 2007 at the end ofthat campaign year, and then there’s the next General Conference. The expenses for
those meetings have been covered by Hiroshima in the past and so we’re again
focusing the attention of the membership on helping us raise the costs of what we
expect to be an increasingly powerful and therefore expensive campaign, although thecost is, we feel, quite moderately projected, and we’re hoping in fact that as thecampaign develops we’ll do far better than that. Thank you.
Chairperson: Thank you very much. And now we open the floor for discussion,
new ideas. If you have any comments, questions, whatever, I’d like to invite you to
speak up. Please raise your hand. And also for the sake of simultaneousinterpretation, you have to speak through a microphone. Does anyone want to speakat this point on this agenda item? Oh, yes, yes, please. Please identify which city
and what?
Johnanne Winchester, Director, Communications Coordination Committee for
the United Nations, USA: Yes, I’m Johnanne Winchester from theCommunications Coordination Committee of the United Nations. Two thoughts.
Does anyone know what the average nuclear weapon costs? And does anyone knowwhat the total nuclear weapons budget for building, maintaining stockpiles,
stewardship, et cetera, is globally, just to put our small budget in perspective. So
this is something –Chairperson: Is that a rhetorical question? So that you can actually give us ananswer? If that’s the case please give us the figure.
Winchester:

I don’t know the answer.

I wondered if someone here knows.

Chairperson: Okay. Does anyone have a figure? But yes, I’ll promise you that
the Secretariat will, and some of the expert friends who are present here, will come up
with the figure and make that available to you. That’s a very good point inproportion with the total amount of money utilized for creating nuclear weapons andmaintaining them and so forth, in comparison with the budget we have just proposed.
And I think that’ll make a very good point to the rest of the world, and I think in termsof the fundraising efforts that will drive home the importance of our work as well.
Winchester: And the second announcement is that my colleague, Mr. Liu Frankand I, who is the Asia-Pacific Coordinator for CCCUN and our other colleague who iscoordinating Japan have just come from a meeting in Tokyo with a major musicaltalent who also happens to be a senator in the Diet in Japan, and he and one of ourbusiness colleagues have offered to work with the Mayors for Peace campaign,self-funded, not asking for any money from the mayors, to create concerts in Asia,
hopefully working with EPOP.
Chairperson: Okay, thank you very much. There are other musicians andcelebrities that I personally came to know recently who have offered their services aswell. So I think the list of those people who will be cooperating with us will get
longer as time goes by. So if you have any suggestions or any leads to people who

7could help us, please get in touch with the Secretariat so that we can really strengthen
our network. Yes, please.
Ellen Woodsworth, Councillor, Vancouver, Canada: My name is Ellen
Woodsworth. I am the Acting Mayor of the City of Vancouver and I’m very pleased
to hear that you will join us in Vancouver at the World Peace Forum, and I hope that
all the delegates here will join us. It’s a crucial time. The theme of the conference
is “Cities and Communities Working Together to Build a Peaceful, Just, Sustainable
World,” and it draws upon the deep desire of young people to join the peace
movement with preceding generations of activists who fought against nuclear
weapons and for disarmament and tying the struggles for peace budgets as against thebudgets that are being used to build nuclear arms. So I just wanted to identify
myself and I’m happy to talk to anyone who’d like to know about this, and I hope wecan continue that discussion. Thank you very much.
Chairperson: Thank you very much. I’m sure many of us will be visiting
Vancouver next year. And in preparation for that, if you could tie what you’replanning in the conference in Vancouver next year with what we might be or we could
possibly do in conjunction with your efforts and discuss that during this conference, I
think that would be quite fruitful, so thank you for your intervention. Any others?
Yes, please.
John Hipkin, Mayor, Cambridge, U.K.: Mayor Akiba, thank you for thisopportunity to speak to the conference. I’m John Hipkin and I’m the Mayor ofCambridge in the United Kingdom. I simply want to stress, if I may, the importanceof local activity. Cambridge is a small city, it’s a renowned city, I know, but it’s acomparatively small city. Could I just give you the example of what happened inour community in the build-up to the war against Iraq?
Leading members of the City Council were not afraid to demean themselves byappearing in the marketplace very Saturday morning, asking people as they went
about their shopping, as they went about their ordinary business, to sign a petition.
That petition was directed in the first instance to the City Council. It asked the City
Council to formally oppose the intervention in Iraq. That resolution was passed.
Subsequently, a further resolution was presented to the Member of Parliament for
Cambridge who resigned her government position. In order to support the petition
she knew that it would make her unpopular with her own government, but she wasprepared to stand by the people of Cambridge. Subsequently, the member of theEuropean Parliament representing Cambridge endorsed the campaign.
I simply want to stress, although I support all the measures which have been outlined
this morning, there is no substitute for mayors getting down amongst the people,
working locally, putting pressure on the immediate politicians in their own
communities who are in the best position to affect policy. I wish you well Mayor
Akiba, and thank you for inviting me to Hiroshima.
Chairperson: Thank you very much for a wonderful report of courage in the Cityof Cambridge. And I would like to add to your comment as somebody who has
lived in Cambridge, USA, and as somebody who is in a position to report to you that8

Cambridge, Massachusetts is also quite active in the efforts. And I’m really pleased
to see that both Cambridges are exemplary in our efforts towards creating peace, and I
would like to thank you for your report and welcome to Hiroshima as well.
Any other comments or opinions?

Yes, in the back, please.

Irene Michaud, Representing the Town of Leverett, U.S.A.: Hello. My name is
Irene Michaud and I’m here from Massachusetts in the US, and I had the good news
just before I left to come here that one of our representatives in Massachusetts wrote a
resolution that he brought before the House of Representatives and it wasco-sponsored by 16 other representatives. And as a result of that, the Massachusetts
House of Representatives has endorsed the Mayors for Peace, which will be very
helpful in our continued work. So thank you very much for paying tribute to
Cambridge, Massachusetts and the House of Representatives. Thank you.
Chairperson: Thank you very much for the wonderful report from Massachusetts,
and I’m proud to say, as a former resident of the state of the commonwealth of
Massachusetts, excuse me, that this time I think you went ahead of the state ofVermont in passing resolutions of the nature. In the 80s, Vermont was thefrontrunner in the efforts. So I hope that that trend will spread all through the UnitedStates because we do respect American mayors taking the initiative through their US
Conference of Mayors and through their efforts and also the state legislature joining
the US Conference of Mayors, and we do need to work with Americans of conscience,
which I know is the majority. So any others? Yes, please.
Frank Liu, Director of Japan region, Communications Coordination Committee
for the United Nations, USA: My name is Frank Liu, I’m from New York,
Communications Coordination for the United Nations, originally I’m from China.
Here is a very short announcement. We are going to make a special event tocelebrate the UN 60th year anniversary to ring the harmony bell in New York in the
Waldorf and we are going to invite President Hu Jintao and some other senior officersof the UN. At that time when we ring the bell, this bell we ring for harmony, wering for peace, we ring for no war. So we hope that every city mayor, everybody
here who are willing, we invite you to join us: when we ring the bell, you can ring
the bell at the same time in your city. Thank you very much.
Chairperson:
please.

Okay, thank you very much for the information.

Any others?

Yes,

Gisela Kallenbach, Member of the European Parliament, Representative ofLeipzig, Germany: Thank you, Mr. Akiba. You introduced me kindly as amember of the European Parliament, but I want to tell you officially that I’m also here
bringing with me the very best wishes of a new member of Mayors for Peace, myhome City of Leipzig, Germany. And my Lord Mayor gave me in my luggage an
address which I would like to hand over to you later this night. Thank you.
Chairperson: Thank you very much. I should also mention that there’s going to bea concert of St. Matthew’s Passion composed by Bach on the evening of August 5,
and since Leipzig is related to Bach, your Lord Mayor has sent us a message tying
Bach’s masterpiece with our Mayors for Peace, and I would like to thank you

9personally and I ask you to convey our thanks to your Lord Mayor. Thank you verymuch. Any other comments, questions? Yes, please.
Unknown: I just wanted to inform everyone that the Massachusetts House ofRepresentatives, the Senate of the State of Connecticut voted 34 to 0 in favor of the
Mayors resolution. And there’s a proposal in Connecticut that our Senate marry the
Massachusetts House and so we’ll have both houses.
Chairperson: Thank you very much for an encouraging, good report. And so it
seems that the legislatures in the United States are beginning to move and are coming
in full force in cooperation with us to move ahead toward nuclear disarmament. It’s
wonderful. Any other comments or questions? Yes, please.
Miho Cibot, AFCDRP French Mayors for Peace, Malakoff, France: I am Miho
Cibot from the French Local Authorities Association. I am Japanese and I have
lived for 30 years in France. We are acting as the chapter for the Mayors for Peace
and we want to recruit as many local authorities as possible to expand the movementof the Mayors for Peace. For the French mayors, there are a lot of mayors who are
acting also as the head of councils and assemblies, therefore, not only the mayors but
the representatives of the provinces are representing each province and city. And wehave created a website of our activities where we introduce the various activities ofthe Mayors for Peace and Mayors for Peace can be linked from our website.
And also, because this is the 60th anniversary, and to the Hiroshima and Nagasaki
Peace Association, there are a lot of inquiries about this organization, and we havebeen engaged in the PR activities. There was a radio interview last night and I havevery actively engaged in communicating what we are doing in Mayors For Peace.
We would like to have the other mayors do the same so that we can have various
activities in many corners of the world.
Chairperson: There was the suggestion that we should work harder so that citizens
themselves know that the Mayors for Peace exists and are working very hard towards
our goal of eliminating all nuclear weapons by 2020. Thank you very much for yourproposal and report. Are there any others? Yes, please.
Alan Ware, Global Coordinator, Parliamentary Network for Nuclear
Disarmament: Thank you very much, Mayor Akiba. Alan Ware from theParliamentary Network for Nuclear Disarmament. Just a quick comment on one ofthe projects which was proposed here, which is the Jump-Start Disarmament Project
which is under consideration for support by Mayors for Peace. I’d like to say that
we, the Parliamentary Network for Nuclear Disarmament, has been in collaboration
with Mayors for Peace on preliminary work on this project, and in New York at the
NPT PrepCom we released a joint statement as parliamentarians and mayors callingfor such negotiations. So we’re looking forward to continuing that collaboration
with Mayors for Peace, so therefore we would look very closely at hoping that thisproject does get support. And we will have copies of that Appeal which iscontinuing for members during this conference. Thank you very much.
Chairperson: Thank you very much.
want to make a comment?

We have been receiving -.

10

Oh, do youSecretariat, Tovish: Just a point of information. In my description that went
through the items, there was one section that was called Advisory Group andDeveloping Ties. If you turn to page 5 of your more descriptive pamphlet, wefeature as the second major area for developing ties in outreach, national legislatures.
So that’s in this publication, this thing. So I kind of brushed over that in the original
presentation, but a great deal of thinking and planning and hopefully results will be
coming out of work in conjunction with national legislatures following up on the good
progress that we’ve been hearing about today. Obviously, the main point of outreachis to other mayors and mayors' organizations and that’s what I mentioned in mypresentation. But I short-shrifted parliamentarians.
Chairperson: Thank you very much. And so actually one encouraging piece I
would like to add to your comment is that we have been receiving signed statementsfrom mayors who support the Appeal that went out of the joint meeting we’ve had.
So it’s being spread and it is having good effects, so thank you very much. I thinkthat will continue to be quite effective in the future as well. Yes, please.
Fumio Ueda, Mayor, Sapporo, Japan: I am the Mayor of Sapporo City. The
anti-nuclear movement, the movement called Nuclear Abolition, we cannot justdepend on Hiroshima and Nagasaki cities alone. All the people in Japan share thesame aspiration. I am not still a member of the Mayors for Peace Association.
There are so many other cities in Japan who share the same viewpoint and perception.
We hope that we will be able to expand the scope of the movement because you aregathered here in Hiroshima, in this wonderful set-up and discussion set-up.
I congratulate this organization, and Mayor Akiba, I congratulate your efforts and I
am very much encouraged by your big voices for seeking the abolition of nuclear
weapons. We hope that we will do the same in Sapporo City. The day ofHiroshima should be brought to Hiroshima City on the 6th August. In front of the City
Hall of Sapporo City there was the Winter Olympics held in 1972 and there is thetower for the Olympic flame and we are going to put on the flame of thiscommemorative Olympic tower to commemorate our activities to put our hands
together with you in Sapporo. This is the report from Sapporo. Thank you verymuch.
Chairperson: Thank you very much for your efforts to spread our activities
throughout Japan as well. Are there any other people who would like to speak?
don’t see any hands. All right.

I

With that then I believe that the agenda item No. 2, that is, our future plans ofactivities of the Mayors for Peace, I believe that that means that you approve our
future plans. So I’d like to again ask you to show your approval by applause.
[applause].
Okay, thank you very much. We will proceed as the explanation from theSecretariat told you in this coming year.
Now what we are trying to accomplish is something which is unprecedented in history,
that is, cities trying to change something that has to do with the survival of the entire

11

human race. But at this point it seems that we are accomplishing anotherunprecedented thing and making a world record which is an international conferenceof this magnitude and scale actually is moving ahead of its schedule. This is unheardof actually, and therefore we have 30 minutes left, but perhaps because of the jetlag
and heat and humidity we may deserve a recess ten minutes longer, but that stillleaves us with 20 minutes.
So this is my proposal. Many of you have actually asked for a slot in workshops, inplenary sessions to make a report or to speak for five minutes or ten minutes. But
since we did not have much time, I’m sure there are some cities that did not get theslot either in the plenary session or the workshop to speak, and this is short notice, I
know, but if you would like to speak at this point, even though you were not given aslot in the plenary session or one of the workshops, please raise your hand. I think
we can give five minutes to each city now so that about three or four cities probably
could speak at this point. If you’d like to do that you’re welcome and this is a goodtime to do it. Is there anybody who’d like to make a presentation at this point?
Okay, I’m sorry that it’s unprepared, you certainly would not wish to make at thispoint, but we will make an effort to accommodate any city that would like to speak at
a later point.
So then I would like to call this session adjourned. Thank you very much for yourcooperation.

12

The 6th General Conference of Mayors for Peace
Commemorating the 60th Anniversary of the Atomic Bombings

Keynote Speech
Evaluating the 2005 NPT Review Conference and Prospect
for Nuclear Abolition
15:45-17:00, Thursday, August 4, 2005
Phoenix HallInternational Conference Center Hiroshima
Keynote Speaker: Kuniko Inoguchi
Professor, Sophia University

Tadatoshi Akiba, Vice President of Mayors for Peace, Mayor, Hiroshima, Japan:
I would like to welcome all of you back to the conference hall and it is my pleasure to
start this session. The keynote speaker of the 6th General Conference of the Mayors
For Peace is Prof. Inoguchi. She is currently a Professor of Sophia University inTokyo but her illustrious career is quite long. I’d like to introduce part of that to you
briefly.
She received her Ph.D. in political science from Yale University, and from April 2002
to April 2004 she was appointed as Permanent Representative and Ambassador
Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Japan to the Conference on Disarmament in
Geneva, Switzerland. So this is the Japanese Ambassador of Disarmament in Geneva.
And her publications include War and Peace, this is not a novel but a scholarly
treatise, and also An Emerging Post-Hegemonic System: Choices for Japan, Invitation
to Political Science and academic articles published in various journals.
Previously, I mentioned her in connection with democratizing the United Nations andshe will, I’m sure, mention her work in the United Nations that while she was the
Ambassador to the United Nations she actually showed to the world what an excellent
academician could do in politics and in diplomacy by implementing measures which
restrict effectively the small arms trade within the world, among other things. So
without further adieu, I’d like to invite Prof. Kuniko Inoguchi of Sophia University.
Prof. Inoguchi, please.
Kuniko Inoguchi, Professor,Sophia University: Thank you very much indeed,
Mayor Akiba. You are very kind, too kind. Thank you very much. So Mayor Akiba,Your Excellencies, and distinguished mayors from all around the world, and ladies
and gentlemen, and also colleagues, it is indeed my very, very great pleasure to behere to participate in this very important and inspiring conference.
And first of all, I would like to congratulate the organizers of this conference and all
the Mayors for Peace and all of those who support those mayors in such a dynamic
and significant effort of a transnational nature.
I also would like to congratulate very strongly and personally Mayor Akiba and also
Mayor Itoh for their unfailing and untiring effort to uphold the profound message ofhibakusha and their children and grandchildren and the rest of the citizens of those
two cities. And the message is that, as was pointed out by Ambassador Roche, thesufferings they had gone through should never be repeated by anybody anywhere in
the world. Their continuous commitment, as represented by the energetic campaigns
and work of those two mayors is a kind of light or a ray of light or ray of hope in darkwaters of difficulties and political stalemates, about which we are all very muchfrustrated. So I would like to wholeheartedly congratulate the very successful effortof this campaign and wish you all the best, and of course you have all my support,
maximum of my support.
Now the task assigned to me this afternoon is to evaluate the 2005 NPT Conference
and discuss prospects for nuclear abolition, but in order to do that let us first of all try
to think and keep in mind the emerging features of the new multilateralism or new
internationalization, and it is my understanding that our effort towards the totalelimination of nuclear weapons needs to be placed within the new features of the new1internationalization, which together has reduced, and some signs of that are alreadywith us. So let us capitalize on those new trends and place disarmament efforts withinthat context.
So let us spend just a few minutes to see and think together, what are the new featuresof the new multilateralism as opposed to new conservatism? So here is the otherconceptual dimension, an alternative to the prevailing view of new conservatism, so a
new multilateralism, new international relations in the 21st century. What are thecomponents and how can we relate the nuclear disarmament area to those newfeatures?
First of all, I pointed out the past knowledge. So many of the global issues today havebecome increasingly more complex, that experts or a coalition of experts andpractitioners must create successful networks to deepen their knowledge and to show
in a knowledge-based effort the path to the future. Now in the past, if we think back,what were the components of international relations that forced other countries tothink which otherwise they wouldn’t have thought. In the 19th century, probably thecoercive labor power. In the 20th century, it could have been the economic power.
But in the 21st century, you cannot threaten other states to make them do things that
otherwise they would not do. You neither can persuade other countries witheconomic power. In the 21st century it is most likely that changes will come along
those that profess excessive knowledge and can show knowledge-based ways toachieve these goals.
Now the labor power rests with States. Economic power rests with States andbusiness enterprises, but the knowledge of power rests with each individual humanexistence, so in the end a State will have to look into the civil society and each expert,
each activist, each campaigner, and of course the mayors of local government who
possess very important pieces of local knowledge, as well as ways to relate them to auniversal message, full ideas as to how to overcome global bottlenecks. So the powerof knowledge is what I would consider to be one of the very important features of thecoming age, and here I think we should have, in the former part I said, a network ofscholars, scientists, professionals, NGOs, citizens, mayors, practitioners, policymakers, those who share knowledge and a problem-solving mindset. And it’s called
an epistemic community, it comes from the philosophy, the vocabulary of philosophyof epistemology. It’s the community of knowledge but not in the sense contained
within the knowledge community only, but with the problem-solving mindset toutilize knowledge to overcome the world’s problems. So the power of knowledge is
one of the major elements of the new multilateralism which we wish to have and inwhich future nuclear disarmament efforts should be placed.
The second important feature is the priority on human time and progress. Now ofcourse in the nuclear disarmament area, listening to hibakusha and what they have totell us is the single-most important driving force to force us to think, what are thehumanitarian goals of nuclear disarmament? I know in this issue we can learn a lot
from other areas of government, as was introduced by Mayor Akiba, from the kind of
objectives which were done in conventional weapons including anti-personnel
landmines, ICBLs. We have Dr. Susan Walker represented in this room. We canlearn from the efforts of humanitarian de-mining, on the importance of prioritizing

2

humanitarian progress, so that we will be able to make common ground to bring safe
together to pursue the kinds of legal arrangements that they are responsible for doing.
And as I said when I tried to make the point for the power of knowledge, the third, got
enhanced partnerships, is the key point. I called it a "new triad for making a
difference": States, international organizations and civil society must come together.
And it is very indicative that in this room we have representatives and the UnderSecretary-General Mr. Ambassador Abe, and also I hope some governments areinterested in our activities and we have this wide range of representation from civilsociety, NGOs, local governments and citizens and just the citizens. What we need isan enhanced partnership. And this is from NPT 2005, it will tell us what we need to
do to enhance that partnership so that States will not make similar failures in the
future.
Now the next feature is the implementation of norms and rules, and the norms andrules are there but those are not implemented. The 20th century was very much into
this, creating norms and rules, but was not very capable of implementing them. And
as we implement norms and rules, it is very important to do that in an integrated
manner at all different level: global, regional, national and local. At the global level
there is this United Nations effort for nuclear disarmament, also, as Ambassador
Akiba kindly pointed out, all kinds of efforts at the conventional weapons level aswell. In the nuclear disarmament area, we have adopted numerous General Assembly
resolutions and there are many resolutions, and tricky resolutions, associated withtreaties. At the regional level we could have more of a common denominator andtherefore we may be able to push the process even farther beyond what is acceptable
at the global level. At the global level, sometimes it tends to become a minimum
common denominator, whereas, at the regional level one could step forward further
due to common understanding about the common States in the same region. You
could have, you could carry on campaigns at the regional levels, in the Asia-Pacific,
in Europe, and of course nuclear-free zone activities and efforts belong to very
successful ways of consolidating regional commitments to that end.
And of course States, the primary bearer of responsibility in this regard, States must
put in place the necessary legislation according to the treaty commitments they havemade at the global level. Also, States are responsible for putting on the agenda, at the
global level, of the priorities for the human society. But then, the local government
level or the local citizens level is the key to the real implementation and real
understanding and deep support for what national governments should be doing at the
global level as they represent States.
So coordination of all these four levels is very important. And we can look at
examples from the conventional weapons area. In small arms, we have the United
Nations forces to the program of action, we even don’t have a treaty, so nuclear
disarmament is far ahead of us. But still the implementation efforts in small arms or
the anti-personnel landmines area is very vigorous and regional platforms also serve
as a very important implementation focal arena. And nation states’ governments are
asked to put in place administrative and legislative measures to make sure the treaty
commitments or political commitments will be carried out. And the real de-mining orcollection and destruction of small arms and the like takes place at the local level.
And also the real education and disarmament takes us to the local level. And the real3

voice of the affected, the local knowledge, is mobilized at the local level. All
knowledge starts with local knowledge. And among all local knowledge, what is
locally known by the affected population is something that everybody else must learn
from.
So this brings us to the next bullet point, mobilizing local knowledge for global
solutions. And here the hibakusha knowledge needs to be shared more systematicallyand widely. And I appreciate the kind of statement made earlier by Ambassador
Roche focusing on the importance of focusing on hibakusha. And we now have, as I
said, the second generation, third generation of people who lived through, survived,
and are trying to send an inter-generational message to us.
And the next bullet, the results-oriented mindset. We are here not only to extend
words but to make sure that something could happen, “make a difference” needs to be
the keyword. Since we've said, the second bullet, we are prioritizing humanitarian
progress, that means something that affects each human beings and human security,
results are very important. You need to even take more acute effort, understanding of
the need for the result-oriented mindset.
For the last point, inclusion, I call it the "philosophy of inclusion," under democracy
everybody is equal, but then even if you are equal you may not be included in the
network. In the United Nations, for example, this is a little bit different area, but
adjacent to disarmament in the development area these days, for example, poverty isconceptualized not only as a category of income but as exclusion. No matter how
much income you could increase under certain policy measures, if certain parts of the
population, such as women or such as minorities or in other criteria, are excluded, thepoverty is wisdom. So inclusion is the keyword. It doesn’t necessarily mean thatevery decision needs to be on a consensus basis, as was indicated earlier, but we haveto always be mindful of the fact that weapons affect every nation and every humancommunity, and therefore, in the end we have to make maximum effort to develop thesense of ownership to the process on the part of all States and all actors, including
NGOs, international organizations, citizens’ activities, local governments. So
everybody is the partner and owner of the process, and therefore they have to be
responsible and they have to make due contributions to push the process forward witha results-oriented mindset.
So against these new elements, how was the NPT Review Conference? And we reallyshould be very shameful of what really the main conference produced in the light ofsome of the new trends that are emerging in some other areas. Now let us, since thisis a task assigned to me, I hope you would not mind reading with me what I have to
say about the outcome of the Review Conference 2005.
Now it was attended by 153 countries. They failed to build on the past agreement,
and on any kind of decisions or recommendations for furthering progress on the vitalsecurity issues of nuclear non-proliferation, so some see it as a total failure. And theconference, as everybody knows, lasted for four weeks, and four weeks is a long, longtime. When I had to promote the small arms and light weapons processes at theUnited Nations I had one week, but then the lead-up to that was as important as one
week of conference. But the NPT had four weeks! And they had three years of leadup, and it failed. And instead of utilizing their four weeks and resources to tackle

4

vital challenges and debate practical ideas for implementing, because implementationis the key. Later I will be discussing the need for a new treaty beyond NPT, but
before getting there we have to implement NPT, and implementation, as I said, has
always been lacking during the 20th century. We were very good at writing downsomething, drafting, but not at implementation for the reasons that, as I’ve shown
earlier, the coordination between all four levels didn’t function.
So we could have, during the four weeks, or they could have, I was not in thegovernment any more, debated practical ideas for implementing the treaty’s
commitment more effectively. The government delegations tangled themselves withprocedures and lost a lot of time. It was a lot of time spent in procedural issues. On
the final day they agreed to a procedural document that numbers of participants inmeetings and indicated how they could cover the financial cost. So that is myevaluation of this NPT 2005 conference.
Now what could have been done? I am fully aware of the enormous difficulties andpolitical difficulties and circumstances, but despite that, it should still have beenpossible to use the conference to give a strong message at least, at least about theimportance of preventing the use, acquisition and spread of nuclear weapons. At least,
when I said at least I didn’t write down the ban of production. At least they could
have agreed on those messages, and nuclear weapons, and also nuclear materials, ofcourse, and possibly delivery means of nuclear weapons, and in failing to addressthese issues seriously or send any kind of principled message, you see? Those
conferences are to produce a principled message agreed among governments. The
governments have the trades’ aspirations and security interests of their citizens fromaround the world.
But many parties felt something, and most parties, I would assume, would agree on
those points. There are a few that may not agree, but during those four weeks, thosewere the points which most parties felt were important. All right? First now, we findit quite important, nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation are not two very
separate things. The States tends to be more interested in non-proliferation issues
because of this understanding of this perception of new threats, the terrorist threat, andin order to deal with terrorist threats you have to have very strong non-proliferation
policies, and that means a lot attention and also support, but what is important is,nuclear non-proliferation is unsustainable without significant progress in nuclear
disarmament.
Now this is because, among many other reasons, it’s very simple. Now, if you want
to minimize the probability of nuclear terrorism, how should we go about thinking on
non-proliferation and disarmament issues? Nuclear terrorism could occur by nuclear
weapons falling into the wrong hands. When do such circumstances arrive? Other
things being equal, if you have a larger quantity of anything, the probability ofslipping away from your stockpiles or arsenals is larger. So if you want to minimize
or reduce the risk of proliferation, you need to reduce the active quantity of the thing,of the good, weapon, that you don’t want to leak out.
So non-proliferation in fact is a first step towards anti-terrorist strategy. In order tostem terrorism, and in fact I did cite that, you have to understand the nature of theconflict and you have to go for reconciliation, but then you don’t have reconciliation

5

with the maximum amount of weapons in hand and also you don’t reduce the risk ofproliferation if you keep on increasing the upset quantity of the weapon. So the firstbullet, non-proliferation is unsustainable without significant progress in nuclear
disarmament. That was what most parties felt in my understanding.
Now the second point is about the disguise of proliferation under the cover ofpeaceful use. That needs to be discussed and addressed more intensively. So thesecond point goes, the nuclear fuel cycle is now a bigger security problem thanrecognized when the treaty entered into force in the 1970s and therefore will have tobe addressed. And it was a pity that the May conference failed to address this to thefull extent given the enormous amount of time which was available.
Later, I have made this slide for you, some of the ideas about how to go about thenuclear fuel cycle. These are the discussions that could have taken place if
delegations of State were serious enough to use the United Nations conference rooms
and the treaty body itself to discuss some important issues, new issues, that havefuture implications.
Now there are other points I probably have left. In importance, the third point could
be less important, but nevertheless I may have to point it out. We all know that NPTfunctions and also the Conference on Disarmament and many other bodies function
on a group system basis, and the group based on the Western group and others, NewYork and the Eastern European, oh, I didn’t mean to say, that’s all. I mean, many
East European countries are in New York, so other East European countries and the
non-aligned movement is outdated, so they have to revise the group system and thatwas felt strongly by many participants or parties to that conference.
Now the fourth bullet is relatively important or very important. In view of the failureof the 2005 Review Conference, the agreements obtained in the Review Conferencesof 1995 and 2000 still stand as legal and political benchmarks for measuring progress
and promoting compliance until the NPT can be fully implemented in all its nuclear
disarmament and non-proliferation aspects. So what was achieved in 1995 and 2000
in particular, when there was an unequivocal commitment by nuclear weapons States
to agree on certain important points, that stands still as the legal commitment andpolitical benchmarks.
So the problems of the 2005 conference neither invalidate nor undermine the relevant
obligations and undertakings previously agreed to, and therefore, since the conference
this year did not produce documents that would guide us to implementation, we haveto find the guidance in previous documents.
The next bullet is something very, very important. Now during the NPT conference,
the mayors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki led a movement, and during the conference,but also in the lead-up, so led the movement to the 2005 Review Conference, and now
that needs to be built on and that needs to be given the right coherent strategy. We
have to strategize what was achieved by those two mayors in the lead-up to the 2005
conference and during the 2005 conference. The world mayors and governors
together with parliamentarians must create a strategic partnership. Now this is what I
called "an enhanced partnership" as one of the characteristics of the new6multilateralism. We need a strategic partnership between government, civil society,government and civil society, including local government.
And then I have a rather important line. Local knowledge, as I’ve said, of survivors,
an affected population. And in the nuclear disarmament context this is hibakusha, andsecond generation hibakusha, and third generation hibakusha. They must be put to
use to create common bases for global solutions. We have to encourage them to raise
voices and in this campaign to raise a voice we can learn from ICBL, in antipersonnel landmines. And also we learned a lot as we enhance the United Nations
process on small arms and light weapons, learn from what was done with antipersonnel mines regarding the affected. Incidentally, I was the co-chair for the AntiMining Standing Committee for the Ottawa Treaty as well. What we tried to do isreally to encourage survivors to raise their voices, and when they raise their voice, thedelegates of States must listen carefully and with respect because those are the people
who have gone through and survived such a tremendous challenge.
So Mayor Akiba and Mayor Itoh were very effective and instrumental in pushing thiscampaign to make sure that voices from the two cities are heard on the global level.
Now the last point I have to make as a professor -- which is rather unfortunate
because we think that what we should hope is that our generation will be able totackle all the problems and therefore there is no need for disarmament education for
the future generation, but it doesn’t go that way -- outreach to generations to come is amust since nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation requires long-term commitment
and obligations and also implementation is far from complete. So the goal ofdisarmament education is to prioritize, to enhance inter-generational partnerships tocarry on the process.
So in my view, those are some of the few points which most States felt were
understood during the four weeks of deliberations. However, we have to thinkbeyond, we have to really think beyond. We need a treaty that takes us beyond NPT.
We have to keep the NPT, we have to implement it to the full extent, but what weneed to look into now is the next generation of nuclear disarmament treaty. And it isessentially a ban on the future production of fissile materials for nuclear weapons.
Now the future production of fissile materials, weapons grade fissile material, is, I
would say, is a kind of raw material for something you manufacture. So if you don’t
have the raw material, you will not be able to produce the final product. So FMCT, tosome material, a kind of treaty, is a kind of treaty that ultimately prohibits any
production of any nuclear weapons in any part of the world. The single mostimportant feature of this treaty is that it does not have a discriminative nature. As you
know, NPT distinguishes two categories of States, those that exploded a nuclear
device before January 1, 1967, and those who didn’t. Now this fissile material sort oftreaty prohibits the production of fissile material, weapons grade, for all States, so
there is one category of States and members, parties, if this treaty is adopted. And
therefore, nuclear weapons States under NPT will also agree not to produce any
further nuclear weapons.
If you allow me, this was one of the issues which absorbed most of my energy during
my ambassadorship in Geneva. Essentially my job was to convince each nuclear

7

weapons State to agree to entering into the negotiation of this treaty. And thedisarmament treaty, once it is put to a legal negotiation process, it usually comes out
with a product. So what States do is to deter the entry into the negotiation and nuclear
weapons States have very strong reasons not to let this negotiation process progress
forward. But some things do change, whereas many things don’t change.
What I found, with some limited encouragement, is that in the end, for example, theUnited States also said yes to this concept of treaty throughout the NPT in May, theNPT conference in May. It is my understanding because I was not there, but theUnited States insisted that FMCT is a must and it is necessary, and part of theargument which we said, which I’ve said with them, is that, as I said, as I discussed
anti-terrorist strategies, the most important anti-terrorist strategy is to make every
country agree, and every country will not agree unless the United States agrees that nocountry will produce any further nuclear weapons, because if you keep increasing theabsolute quantity then the probability of getting into the wrong hands is bigger, so if
you want to fight terrorism you have to have NPT. This will ban production of
nuclear weapons.
So under NPT, Article VI, as Ambassador Roche explained, we have to dismantle theexisting weapons, but then there is no treaty to prohibit future production of nuclear
weapons. So this is the next nuclear disarmament treaty after NPT, and after entering
into force of the CTBT, but we can do that on pallalel, there’s nothing that hinders us
from getting into negotiations of this FMCT and therefore effort in Geneva is
expected. And I would like to take this opportunity to ask the Mayors for Peace andall other associated NGOs and citizens to put all out pressure to governments to get
down with this FMCT negotiation because most nuclear weapons States, including theUnited States, have accepted the prospect for this treaty now.
Now I have written down the basis for legitimacy. First of all, in the NPT context, as
we had the 1995 extension conference, the review and extension conference, the callfor the FMT was included as immediate, it was included, not only included but it
called for the immediate commencement and early conclusion of the negotiation on
the FMCT. It was a part of a political bargain and it was never denied explicitly andtherefore there is full legitimate reasons for the need of going to this next generation
nuclear disarmament treaty.
Now if you’re interested in the elements of this treaty, I have a website in fact. It was
Sophia University's website, and I have drafted a lot of recommends and also theframework for negotiations. I have it on my website. I’m sure it’s with the website of
the Conference on Disarmament also, so please look at it and share with me theunderstanding that we need the next nuclear disarmament treaty; we need a legallybinding treaty that takes us beyond NPT to make sure that any further production of
nuclear weapons is banned in the entire global community.
The second bullet shows that in the 2000 NPT Review Conference, which was five
years ago, which was not all that unsuccessful, in fact it was quite successful giventhat the Review Conference this time was totally unsuccessful. In the 2000 NPT, theparties successfully drafted a final document, and in the final document it included
this call for the immediate commencement and negotiation of FMCT. This has to dowith CD and agree on the work, but that’s a technicality so you don't have to pay

8attention to that, but what was important is that in the 2000 NPT it was also again
included in the final document, so there is all legitimate legal basis to identify FMCT
as the next treaty in line. And also since 2000, the United Nations General Assembly
has adopted annually, by consensus, the resolution on FMCT. So those are the baseson which we insist that we have to look to treaties beyond NPT.
And of course NPT does not enjoy full universalization due to India, Pakistan and
Israel. So FMCT, since there’s no discriminative clause, there is no reason for any
country not to come into FMCT.
Now, those are rather technical notes so you really don’t have to look to the firstbullet point, but this Ambassador Shannon is a Canadian ambassador who in 1995
made a major effort forward to put this agenda under an international forum, and so
we owe a lot to the late Ambassador Shannon, and still today the Shannon Mandate
tells us what the FMCT is about. And it is on the Second Lagos Ban of the
Production of Fissile Materials for Nuclear Weapons or Other Nuclear Explosive
Devices.
And the last line, the second from the last line, is also very important. To negotiate a
non-discriminatory, multilateral and internationally effective and verifiable treaty. So
this is called the Shannon Mandate along which we understand how the FMCT would
look like. And of course there are many elements within this context that need to be
discussed.
Now the third bullet point is, let’s see, well I think we can go to the next one. The
technical deliberations. Now let me take this opportunity to share with you some of
the technical side of this FMCT to show what is to be expected beyond NPT and tostrengthen NPT.
Now the first goes, substantial technical deliberations will be required to achieve thisobjective without affecting the right to peaceful use of nuclear energy. So the right tothe fissile use of nuclear energy is guaranteed under the NPT, so this will not be
jeopardized and to make that sure the technical deliberations could be quite extensive
and rather difficult.
Now States need to define the scope of materials to be placed under monitoring andelaborate the verification schemes and to ensure the sufficient credibility to the treaty,
and the materials to be monitored. So those are very familiar to many of you, ofcourse the plutonium and hydrogen-enriched uranium and 235 isotopes, if it’senriched to 20 per cent can be used for weapons and this is the benchmark used by
IAEA to safeguard also. So those materials are within the scope of FMCT.
And for the plutonium, there are two different views, one is if the plutonium is
produced by irradiation in the reactive core, that plutonium needs to be subjected tomonitoring. The other idea is that if it is only separated from irradiated reactive fuel,then it needs to be monitored. But in any case, this is for the weapons grade and forthe weapons, so how to make it compatible to peaceful use is a kind of very difficult
technical issue, as I’ve said earlier, in relation to the proliferation under the disguiseof peaceful use.

9And of course there are what we call ANMs, alternative nuclear materials, and manyother isotopes that need to be covered within the FMCT. And once, as I’ve said,
those materials for weapons are totally banned from production, you will not be able
to make a nuclear weapon. And therefore, to think of that in Hiroshima, of the day
when no other nuclear weapon will be made anywhere in the world, is something that
we should look into and hope for.
So the verification is also a very technical but also a very contested part of thisargument so I might share some major points that they often discuss. The verification
regime needs to be composed of three elements: the declaration of fissile materials in
facilities by member states; the verification of declared material, and; the verificationof undeclared material and activities. This is very much in line with NPT. And then I
drew some generic parameters from the arms control verification regimes that alreadyexist today. So those are the things that we need to negotiate and put into the treaty
format, and in fact, when I say knowledge-based consultations or knowledge, thepower of knowledge, it is expected that civil society, the experts, scientists, scholars,
think tanks, activists, would come together to draw this kind of treaty together.
And I would very much hope that future activities of Hiroshima are, first of all, we
have to consolidate the raise voice campaign for hibakusha. But for the scholars it isvery important to draft treaties for the practitioners because they need models toproceed with to imagine how the ultimate end product would look. And such effort is
not all that coming at least from Japan. A few European NGOs have helped me a lot
with the drafting of the framework for FMCT, but in future we need the power ofknowledge to install new nuclear disarmament treaties, and for that we need many
alternative treaties, models, and that can come from citizens, from civil society.
Now some of the general parameters for the verification, because verification is a very
sensitive part of the entire framework of this new treaty, how to ensure the correctness
and completeness of the initial declaration. That sounds very much like IAEA. How
to guarantee, sufficient assurances from routine inspections, how to detect and declareactivities and issue effectiveness at least of the inspections. I mean, what if someother countries have clandestine activities to produce such weapons grade materials.
How to protect sensitive, confidential information, the framework of verification. So
in the transition, nuclear weapons States will have the nuclear weapons that alreadyexist. So they will have confidential information, but on the other hand they will becommitting to no further production, future production, so they need to be put undersome kind of verification, but the No. 4 point encompasses the difficulty associatedwith this, how to protect the sensitive and confidential information for those Statesthat need to be protected under NPT.
Now how to ensure cost effectiveness and cost efficiency. Verification is always very
costly, but of course, if you think of the cost of wars or WMD wars, we should not bescared away with the budget consideration.
Now the last, how to create a verification system that can respond flexibly totechnological progress. Now there are many non-intrusive verification technologies
these days, remote sensoring or monitoring, and while the FMCT entering into
negotiation is pending, technological progress could provide us with a lot of non-10

intrusive monitoring and verification technologies and that will make this FMCT
verification component a little easier to negotiate.
And of course the non-nuclear weapons States of NPT, like Japan, which haveaccepted both IAEA full scope safeguards and additional protocols are considered tomeet FMCT verification requirements. So it is expected that all countries or all nonnuclear weapons States who are pending the negotiation for FMCT will accept fullscope safeguards and additional protocols so that once we have FMCT, non-nuclear
weapons States will not have to worry about any further.
Now this is a kind of new issue which I sort of hinted earlier. Now there is this very
big problem that the world needs a lot of energy and there is this worldwide demand
for nuclear energy. Now why is that? Now why is that? Growing global demand forelectricity. Many countries are successfully growing, although the human community
as a whole hasn’t very successfully developed in a sustainable manner of development,
and therefore global demand for electricity is soaring and uncertainty of supply andprice of natural gas and soaring prices of oil, of course, concerns about air pollution
and the immense challenge of lowering the greenhouse gas emissions under the Kyoto
Protocol and so forth. So now these have come to justify the growing demand fornuclear energy.
Of course, as the technical and organization foundation for nuclear safety improves,
the prospect of new nuclear power stations on a large scale is a real one. So in future
we have to agree to the scenario whereby a lot of countries will resort to the peacefuluse of nuclear energy, but at the same time, how could we guarantee their right to use
nuclear energy but make sure that the process will not occur? So that’s a challenge
and there is no answer. So this is not an answer. This is just sitting out of the agendaof the problem, the new kind of problem which should have been discussed within the
NPT conference.
Now could we allow a great number of States to develop their own nuclear fuelcycles? And the answer is probably not, considering the non-proliferation advantage.
So there is this report which just came out, actually it came out right before the NPTMay conference from IAEA, there was an expert group for the Director-General of
IAEA, and they produced a concept paper entitled “Multilateral Nuclear Approach”
and the report number is 640 so you might be able to have access to it through the
IAEA website.
Now it suggests multiple options for avoiding unlimited development of sovereign
nuclear fuel cycles by developing some kind of international-regional mechanisms
whereby assurance in supplies and services in nuclear fuel will be provided to States,
provided to those governments, those States that had in turn agreed to forego building
its own nuclear fuel cycle capacity. In that case, assurances in supply of services
takes a form of fuel leasing and fuel take-back offers, and it would have to include
effective backup sources of supplies in the event that multilateral nuclear approved
suppliers are unable to provide the nuclear fuel material and services. A kind of intergovernmental fuel bank could be established to alleviate unexpected cases, such as
excessive shortage of supplies, denial of service for political reasons, and so forth.
And IAEA could function as an anchor, a guarantor of the agreement.

11

So those are the forefront of our discussions. It may not be the best idea. Of course if
we could abandon the need for the fissile use of nuclear energy, that is desirable formany societies, but for the reasons I have elaborated at the very first, the top of thepage, there is this demand for peaceful use, and how should we relate that problem
with this risk of polarization, and how should we deal with these issues under the NPT,
because NPT assures us of the peaceful use of nuclear energy. So those are theforefront of issues.
So we are faced with new facts, and all this proliferation concern comes from theterrorist threat or threats from non-actors which States are not used to dealing with.
So let us share a few minutes to think, what is the real challenge that we face? Of
course we have NPT, we need further nuclear disarmament treaties, but without thekind of points that I intend to make from here-on, all the efforts already said in thisstatement could be meaningless.
So now let us look into, what is the conflict in wars that we face in the current
international community? We have to analyze wars, conflict, the nature of conflict,because armaments are for wars, and unless we can change or understand the natureof wars, we may not be able to have some strong thrust to the future of disarmament.
So in my view the nature of conflict changed after the Cold War.
During the 19th century or 20th century and during the Cold War, most of the major
wars were fought for political reasons. So if the political leaders have a peace pact,
sign a peace pact, the war is finished, terminated, and you will not have killings any
more. But after the Cold War we face a kind of a new form of conflict, and I decided
to label it as "deep-rooted conflict." And in fact I have given you some of the citationof some most illuminating books that come from, and I take this opportunity toadvertise this Stockholm-based inter-governmental organization called theInternational Institute for Democracy and Elector Assistance, and Mayor Akiba waskind enough to mention that democratization is another major pursuit as a politicalscientist. Now this international IDEA, it is called, is an inter-governmental body thatstudies democracy and promotes democracy, and they have produced this concept andI am an executive board member of that inter-governmental organization. Now they
have produced these reconciliation, deep-rooted conflict concepts. So if anybody isinterested in these new concepts beyond disarmament, but they are very deeply
associated with disarmament.
Now what is deep-rooted conflict? It is the kind of conflict which goes beyond State,beyond political purposes, and is based on hatred. Now the first split goes, there is a
shift in the characteristics of violent conflicts from a traditional inter-State conflict todeep-rooted intra-State or even inter-State conflict, and therefore the reconciliation
process along with a peace pact is necessary to deter recurrence of similar conflicts.
So they said, if it is a political conflict you have to literally sign a peace pact and thewar is finished, but since the nature of the current conflicts around the world are deeprooted, there is this penetration of hatred in all social cohorts so you need to design areconciliation process that penetrates all cohorts of the society to finally terminate aconflict in a way that will not recur.
Now the second bullet I have cited from one of the books, deep-rooted conflict. Whatis it? It combines two powerful elements, important identity-based factors based on

12differences in race, religion, culture, language, sometimes it’s called a conflict ofcivilization, with a perceived imbalance in the distribution of economic, political andsocial resources and opportunities. So there comes the hatred. And traditional
approaches all too often fail to address the deep-rooted nature of conflicts and that’s
the conclusion of peace pacts. It does not necessarily bring human security. With thepeace pact you have a national security, but since the deep-rooted nature is not
resolved, because there is no process of reconciliation. The United Nations Security
Council resolutions will not talk about reconciliation or the process of reconciliation,
so it is beyond the scope of addressing the termination role, the need to design areconciliation process. So this is a vacancy that can be considered to be one of the
major reasons why wars recur in post-Cold War years and that they tend to persist,and even if the country is fit to have finished the war, still people suffer immenselyfrom lack of human security and lack of any protection.
So people continue to suffer and die from war-related effects long after the war itself
has come to an end, and national security is seemingly restored. And of course
terrorism grows on such a deep-rooted sense of hatred. And many people say thatpoverty is the basis of terrorism. But even more so, hatred is the basis. If you havedeep-rooted hate in the community, so they will live on that.
Now there is no clear solution for this, to overcome the conflicts that have this kind ofnature. But there is one common denominator, which is deep-rooted hatred in theminds of people. So the reconciliation at all political social levels is the key to ending
the violent conflict. And unless you have disarmament, along with the reconciliation
process, you will not in the end achieve the difference, which is, that was very
important. To make a difference we have to focus on the need for reconciliation.
Now this brings me to the last point which I really wanted to make. Hiroshima is a
global model for reconciliation as was pointed out by Ambassador Roche. The firstpoint, the reconciliation as the aftermath of violent conflict is a complex process. In
an inclusive process combining the search for truth, justice, forgiveness, healing,
reparation and cooperation is the design of the road to a peaceful future.
Reconciliation is both the goal and the process to find a way to coexist with former
adversaries by sharing a future. So this is the reconciliation process that has to be
designed, implemented, has to go into every resolution of the Security Council of theUnited Nations if it is serious to end the conflict permanently without recurrence.
Now the next bullet is cited from one of the books printed at the bottom. Now this ison the concept of reconciliation because it’s very difficult to conceptualize. The word
“reconciliation” is a very popular vocabulary, but if you’re asked how would you
define it, it’s very difficult, so to make the job easier for everybody I decided to put
this in the slide. Reconciliation is a concept and a pact to refrain the conflict so thatthe parties are no longer preoccupied with focusing on the issues in a direct cognitive
manner. Its primary goal and key contribution is to seek innovative ways to create atime and a place within various levels of the affected population to address, integrate,embrace the painful past, and the necessity for the shared future as a means of dealing
with the present. So that’s the definition of reconciliation.
And so this brings me to the last point. Hibakusha, the affected, the survivors of thebomb, of the nuclear bomb, is a global model. They have never sought retaliation and13they have embraced reconciliation. So this should be the message from Hiroshima,
Nagasaki. But from Japan, generally that in the 21st century, along with the legallybinding instrument to enhance nuclear disarmament, we need the process forreconciliation and hibakusha at the core of the nuclear disarmament as the global
model.
Even right after the bombing, hibakusha never asked Japan to possess weapons forretaliation, only the complete opposite; they asked that Japan should never haveaccess to it, and that nobody anywhere in the world should go through what they had
to go through, so they have embraced this concept of reconciliation. Now I have seenthat.
Well, I decided to put in this last page. This was me with Mr. Kofi Annan at theUnited Nations.
Now the diplomatic negotiations can never fail because if you fail in disarmament
negotiations there could be a lot of people killed, so you are facing the great fate ofmany individuals. So what are the future keys to the success in negotiations?
Remembering this page, these are the new elements of the international community.
And in order to achieve this, first of all, knowledge-based search for common ground.
We have to know, we have to be able to draft the future path and roadmaps, and those
who are in the position to accumulate knowledge and share, they have to accumulateknowledge and come out of their offices to share with activists.
The second bullet point is very important: putting survivors first, putting the affected
first. Raise your voice. Help them raise their voice. Bring the voice to theconference room so that people will never forget what they have never gone through.
And this will help create some common ground for those delegations that are notnecessarily convinced or interested in disarmament issues.
But in real negotiations, factoring in domestic context is very important. Many
countries, especially big powers such as, of course, the United States, China, big
powers, usually take a longer time to convince the domestic audiences and thedomestic audience and different government agencies they will spend a lot of time forinter-agency consultations. You have to let them do that. You have to factor that in.
And therefore, the roadmap or the process needs to be drawn up with a lot of cautions
and extensiveness. So I call it the "enhanced extended process."
Now I said at the outset, we need results-oriented mindset, and I came up with this
SOS, so save our ship. And in order to save our ship what we need is a "solutionoriented synergy." In the first place I thought SOA, "solution-oriented action," butthen I came to the conclusion that you alone will never be able to achieve anythingwhich could make a real difference. You always have to work in synergies, in a
network, in linkages with other organizations, with other interested groups, so you
have to develop this synergy, and it was very encouraging to see some synergy
developing between nuclear disarmament for, for example, the anti-personnel mines
area, and also possibly and hopefully in the small arms and light weapons area,
because Mr. Kofi Annan said, small arms are a de facto weapon of mass destruction,
500,000 killed every year, 500,000 people. That means 1,400 a day, and while we sitin this kind of air-conditioned conference room, it’s like one person per minute, so

14

already it’s 60 or 70 people have died of small and light weapons. So this is really,
really a slow motion weapons of mass destruction or de facto weapons of mass
destruction.
And I will add to this comment that the reason why we have never really looked into
those conventional weapons areas, and I ask, I plead for the support from the nuclear
disarmament community to extend your understanding and support for theconventional weapons disarmament area as well, because the reason why small arms,
anti-personnel mines and all that, are left to the sidelines is because, I found thereason why. When I arrived as ambassador I couldn’t understand why these
exceptionally important issues are not necessarily making progress. But then I
understood the reason. It discriminately affects women. Most of the victims arechildren and women. So the kind of weapons that kill simply women and children are
not the priority for disarmament in the current international community. Of the
500,000 victims of small arms and light weapons, 70 per cent are women and children.
And this is the picture when I am telling Mr. Kofi Annan that other areas ofdisarmament, including small arms, needs to be included because of this discriminate
nature of victims that arrive in the conventional area.
Now in the end, multi-faceted follow-ups. Well NPT failed but we can send out manyother follow-ups and make best use of the limited outcome. Of course the Mayors for
Peace activities come really to the forefront. The importance of putting Hiroshima,
Nagasaki first, upholding the message. If the States are not doing it, why not the
mayor? The Middle Power Initiative. Yes, of course, since the big powers are notdoing it, why not the middle powers? So we should go for multi-faceted follow-ups.
Please help the Japanese government push for FMCT because FMCT is the top
priority for the government, for my government.
Also in the Asia-Pacific we have, we face the threat of proliferation with the DPRK. I
was in the Republic of South Korea last month and I called to the East Asian
community that since NPT failed, nobody is really making consolidated pressure for
DPRK, so DPRK should make an independent non-pressured decision to return to thefamily of NPT.
So those are the kinds of tricky follow-ups that you could do, well, NPT didn’t
produce a very high-pressure document condemning the proliferation, condemning
DPRK to having non-compliance or to having abandoned the treaty commitment. But
since there is no pressure, it is an opportunity for DPRK to independently make its
own decisions in return, and I hope that is being done with the Six Party Talks which
are taking place even at this particular moment in Beijing.
So thank you very much for putting up with my long talk and I would like to put thison my website also, so if you are interested in looking into these issues, please visit
my site. I gave my email address so if you have questions, please contact me. Thankyou very much.
PRESIDENT AKIBA: Thank you very much, Prof. Inoguchi. I would like to thankyou for speaking for such a long time for all of us on the important issues of
diplomacy, especially in the areas of disarmament. It has especially been gratifyingthat you were able to place the message of hibakusha within the context of the rarefied15

work of diplomacy and academia and vice versa. I believe it is important for us toappreciate that because in order for us to mobilize, the majority of the people in theworld, it is very important for us to realize that we focus on the common threads thatunite, that tie together different groups. Those two groups may not coincide on every
point of issue, but we can always find a common thread that ties any two groups
together. And that thread will eventually create, piece by piece, a beautiful final
product, such as a quilt. If you can envision a quilt which consists of beautiful piecesof cloth and each cloth is independent, they are not completely overlapped, however,they are stitched along a common line and together they form a beautiful and warm
quilt. And your presentation this afternoon basically laid out in front of us how we
can make that beautiful quilt, which is what we are developing here. So I’d like tothank you again, and please join me with another applause to Prof. Inoguchi.
[applause]

16

The 6th General Conference of Mayors for Peace
Commemorating the 60th Anniversary of the Atomic Bombings

Plenary Session Ⅰ
Next Steps for Mayors for Peace-What mayors and citizens can do to abolish nuclear weapons10:00-14:00, Friday, August 5, 2005
HimawariInternational Conference Center Hiroshima
Chairperson: Toshiki Mogami
Professor, International Christian University
Keynote Speaker:
Susan Walker
Humanitarian Affairs and Disarmament Consultant
Former ICBL Intersessional Programme Officer
Speaker:Ellen Woodsworth
Councilor, Vancouver, Canada
Daniel Fontaine
Mayor, Aubagne, France
Alfred Marder
New Haven, Chairman of New Haven Peace Commission, U.S.A
André Hédiger
Mayor, Geneva, Switzerland
Gary Moore
Vice President of Mayors for Peace
Mayor, Christchurch, New Zealand
Beverly O’Neill
President of the US Conference of Mayors, Mayor, Long Beach, U.S.A
Herbert Schmalstieg
Vice President of Mayors for Peace
Mayor, Hannover, Germany
Mohamed Afzal Khan
Vice President of Mayors for Peace
Mayor, Manchester, U.K
Evgeny Petrovich Ischenko
Vice President of Mayors for Peace
Mayor, Volgograd, Russia
Alain Audoubert
Mayor, Vitry-sur-Seine, France
Hervé Brahmy
President, Seine St. Denis, FranceWalter Momper
President of House of Representatives, Berlin, Germany
Steve Freedkin
Chairperson of the Berkeley Peace Justice Commission, U.S.A
Brian Fitch
City Councilor, Brighton & Hove, U.K
Bob Harvey
Mayor, Waitakere, New Zealand
Mohamed Ismail Mohamed Ariff
Mayor, Galle, Sri Lanka
Jean-Pierre Brouhon
Official Delegation Representative, Ixelles, Belgium
Susanna AgostiniCouncilor, Florence, Italy
Bruno Vincenzo Scittarelli
Mayor, Cassino, Italy
Nimal Chandrasiri de Silva
Mayor, Kurunegala, Sri Lanka
Arlette Zielinski
Deputy Mayor, Villejiuf, FrancePeter Chan
Councilor, Waitakere, New ZealandTadatoshi Akiba, President of Mayors for Peace, Mayor, Hiroshima, Japan:
Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I’d like to call the plenary Session 1 to order.
This morning we are honored by the presence of Prof. Toshiki Mogami of theInternational Christian University located in Tokyo. He will chair this plenary
Session 1 and 2. Let me explain a little bit about Prof. Mogami’s contributions to thecause of peace and his academic career.
He graduated from the University of Tokyo and then received his Masters andDoctorate degree in international law with his specialty of international law andinternational organization. He assumed the professorship of the International
Christian University in 1990 and was appointed to chair many professionalorganizations. One of these organizations is the Japan Peace Studies Association. He
was a very active chairman of that organization from 1999 to 2001 and made peacestudies one of the recognized academic disciplines in Japan.
He has contributed to the Mayors for Peace as an excellent advisor and served as themoderator, chairman, chairman of the drafting committees, and so forth during the 4th
and the 5th General Conference, and we are lucky and honored and pleased to havehim as the advisor, as well as the chairperson for the plenary session. The City ofHiroshima owes him a great deal because he has been a consistent supporter of theCity of Hiroshima peace activities, as well as a leader in his own discipline. So now I
would like to introduce Prof. Mogami and take this podium.
Chairperson, Toshiki Mogami, Professor, International Christian University:
Thank you very much, Mayor Akiba, and good morning, everyone. I am happy tohear the over-generous introduction by Mayor Akiba. And I am deeply honored tochair this conference once again. Since this is the third time for me to chair thisconference, I see many faces among you which are familiar to me and I feel very
happy whenever I see them. Of course, I feel equally happy when I see faces which
are new to me. Welcome to this meaningful conference. But I feel unhappy when I
think about the failure of the recent NPT Review Conference and when I think about
the stalements in the nuclear disarmament and lack of enthusiasm on the part of somegovernments for nuclear disarmament.
But we are not here to share our disappointments or discouragement. Instead, we
have gathered here to get united once again in our endeavors for peace. We are here
despite the failure of the NPT Review Conference and despite the increasingly
looming prospects of nuclear proliferation, and even nuclear clashes. We are here toenliven our commitment to the unity and reconciliation of humankind. And we arehere to mutually enrich our approaches to these problems by hearing ideas which may
be new to us. And above all, we are here to reconfirm our conviction that what
happened here, 60 years ago, in Hiroshima must never happen again to anybody in theworld. And let’s be united with our commitments to all these purposes and ideals.
Now I would like to call the meeting to order. And today, at the beginning, we havethe pleasure of having Ms. Susan Walker as the very exciting keynote speaker and we
begin with her presentation. But before calling on her, I would like to give the floor
to the Councilor of the City of Vancouver, Ms. Ellen Woodsworth so that she canpresent to you some announcement about the World Peace Forum which will be held
June next year.

Ellen Woodsworth, Councilor, Vancouver, Canada: Thank you. It’s a pleasure to
be here on behalf of the Mayor of the City of Vancouver. We decided that it was time
to mobilize cities and communities together for peace, justice and to end poverty, andwe have decided to hold a World Peace Forum in June 2006 in the City of Vancouver,
Canada, dovetailed with the World Urban Forum, which is a time when mayors,
councilors, environmentalists, architects, planners, emerge to talk about ideal cities
and sustainable cities. We thought that this would be an ideal time in world history
when communities, who, like Hiroshima and Nagasaki, are being destroyed in wars
and have burst to stop wars and pro-peace movements could get together withcouncilors and mayors and to find a way forward.
So in June of next year in Vancouver we are meeting, and at the same time manyorganizations will be having their conferences there: International Peace Messenger
Cities will be meeting with Mayors for Peace, International Peace Research Center
will be coming there, Pugwash. The working groups, the youth, the women, the arts,
the anti-racist groups, groups from all over the world are planning now how to makeVancouver, which is renowned as a city of peace, a city that will leave a legacy andbuild towards a future of peace and sustainability.
Out theme which we’re asking everyone to use as they talk in their organizations ofplans to bring to the World Peace Forum is "Cities and Communities Working
Together to End War and Build a Peaceful, Just and Sustainable World." We haveinvitations that Dr. Price will be handing out to you, and you will probably have seen
our flyer that we have been handing out.
As we speak today, in Vancouver we will be honoring the victims of Hiroshima andNagasaki with a commemoration service, and our Vancouver Public Library is doinga special folding of cranes at all its neighborhood libraries that will be coming
together at its main library. So there are many, many activities that are happening in
Vancouver. And I wanted to give a poster to the Mayor of Hiroshima, Mayor Akiba,that is a picture taken of Hiroshima in the 50s with Kinoku Laskey who just passed
away, who was a resident of Vancouver. And I will present this to Mayor Akiba, andI hope that you will be able to bring your organizations to Vancouver to work withcivil society to advance peace and justice and to fight poverty in this world bybuilding a peace agenda as opposed to a military agenda. Thank you so much.
Chairperson: Thank you very much, Ms. Woodsworth. Now we begin the official
part. First, as I told you, we will ask Ms. Susan Walker to give her presentation, andsoon after that we will call on each of you to give your presentation. And the basic
rule is that you are requested to limit your presentation to five minutes maximum, theshorter, the better because we have so many requests to speak up on the stage, so
please abide by the time limit. So now we will have Ms. Susan Walker on stage, but
before that I’ll give you a brief introduction of Ms. Walker.
Ms. Walker is well known as a strong part of the ICBL, International Campaign to
Ban Landmines, but before doing that she worked in the American RefugeeCommittee, a medical program, and after that she worked strenuously for Handicap
International, and Handicap International, this NGO became one of the six cofounding NGOs to establish the ICBL, and it was in 1992. And from 1992 sheworked hard for the cause of the ICBL and then finally succeeded in getting the treaty
ratified by the world community.
Susan completed her contract with the ICBL in May 2005, but she continues to workon the implementation of the 1997 Mine Ban Convention, humanitarian affairs anddisarmament consultant in Geneva. She has been always active in giving the world ahumanitarian moment. So as this conference is willing to incorporate the ideas of theso-called Ottawa Process, which was adopted for the signing of the landmine ban
convention, I think we can turn to the rich experiences of hers. So she may have lotsof advice and suggestions to us, I believe. So will you please come up? Ms. Walker.
Susan Walker, Humanitarian Affairs and Disarmament Consultant,
Former ICBL Intersessional Programme Officer: Good morning, everyone.
Mayor Akiba-san, Mayor Itoh-san, Dr. Mogami-san, Senator Roche-san, mayors,
hibakusha-san, and other champions in the movement to ban nuclear weapons,
konnichiwa, and thank you very much to the Mayors for Peace for inviting me as along-term advocate in the International Campaign to Ban Landmines, or ICBL, toaddress this important and historic conference on the 60th Anniversary of the Atomic
Bombings and to share our experience. It is an honor and a privilege to be here.
Walking through the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum yesterday, it was the stories
of individual suffering and death which brought the horrors of nuclear war into clear
focus. Such as Sadako Sasaki, who was two years old on the 6th August, 1945, andwho died ten years later after contracting leukemia. The thousands of paper cranes
she folded with a child’s innocent hope of recovering from her illness has become aworldwide symbol of peace. Your work during the challenging years ahead must
succeed in realizing her hopes so that never again will a child have to say in agony,
and I quote, “Am I still alive? I am so thirsty,” as Hiroki Hori, a 13-year-old boy whodied on the 10th August, 1945, said as he was dying.
This week I learned that most of the footage and the photos of the Holocaust causedby the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were hidden away and declared
top secret by the United States government for decades before a few were released.
More will now be broadcast for the first time on television on this 60th anniversary
weekend. May they so horrify and shake the world citizens and governments that we,collectively, seize the opportunity to progress on banning nuclear weapons. There isan urgency to do so, particularly in this post 9/11 world of the war on terrorism.
We always need to try new things, and I’m going to try a new thing today. I’ve nevermade or done a PowerPoint, so the remainder, it’s not words, it is photos that
hopefully will bring the landmines issue to play, so I will try to see if this works.
It is indeed fitting to have a session on the civil society role in achieving the AP Mine
Ban Convention in order to learn from the extraordinary success to date in making
strides to rid the world of this indiscriminate and insidious weapon. The antipersonnel mine ban movement, or "Ottawa Process," as it is called, is very likely themost successful example to date of government and civil society partnership to
address a global humanitarian crisis. It is also the first time that a conventional
weapon in widespread use has been banned.

The photos that you’ll be seeing are taken the last two weeks in Thailand andCambodia. As Professor Mogami said, I continue to work on implementation of theconvention and was on mission in Thailand and Cambodia to implement the victim
assistance provisions of the convention.
As you know, the limited military utility of anti-personnel mines is far outweighed bytheir humanitarian consequences, as documented in the study done by a group of
retired generals for the International Committee of the Red Cross. It’s entitled, “Antipersonnel mines: Friend or Foe?” The world responded to the global humanitariancrisis caused by anti-personnel mines with a comprehensive and unequivocal ban.
This historic convention was negotiated, signed and entered into force faster than any
convention in modern times. There are many lessons that can be drawn from the APmine ban movement for you efforts to achieve a comprehensive ban on nuclear
weapons and I hope to share some of these with you.
The ICBL is a coalition of 1,400 organizations in over 90 countries, including a broad
range of relief and development, rehabilitation, humanitarian mine clearance, andhuman rights organizations. This is almost identical in numbers to the Mayors for
Peace network of 1,080 cities in 112 countries and territories. This is an advantage
which must be used to its fullest, having a network like this. In 1997, the Nobel Peace
Prize Committee spoke of our joint efforts saying, and I quote, “As a model for
similar processes in the future, it could prove of decisive importance to theinternational effort for disarmament and peace.”
I have been asked to speak about the role of the ICBL and civil society in achieving
the global ban on anti-personnel mines. I will focus on how the unprecedented
partnership between civil society and governments brought about the convention andthe success we have had to date.
The next five years are indeed a critical period as we continue to implement theconvention, and I will say the full name only once, Convention on the Prohibition of
the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines, and On Their
Destruction. The first review conference of the convention, also known as the"Nairobi Summit on a Mine-Free World," took place in Kenya from 29 November to3 December last year. It reviewed the first five years of progress since the convention
entered into force on 1st March 1999 and issued a high-level declaration signed by theheads of States that were there and the heads of delegation. Most importantly, theStates parties adopted the Nairobi Action Plan for 2005-2009 in order to reach ourlife-saving objective of a world without anti-personnel mines. This is probably themost detailed and comprehensive action plan ever to come out of a convention review
conference.
Anti-personnel mines are the cause of a global humanitarian crisis with severe health,human rights, environmental, rehabilitation and social and economic consequences inmany of the poorest, war-torn or post-conflict countries in the world. These are also
the countries that are least able to deal with the humanitarian consequences anddevastation on their infrastructure.
The disastrous effects of anti-personnel mines on anyone who steps on them, changes
lives forever, if one survives the blast. Children are more vulnerable, as they areusually ripped apart and killed by them due to their small size, rather than maimed, as
the designers of anti-personnel mines intended for strategic military reasons. Most of
the photos that you’ll be seeing here are, themselves, people that are landmine
survivors, some of them my old patients and workers.
At this time when there is a great deal of pessimism surrounding multilateral affairs
worldwide, the convention serves as a beacon of hope that citizens and theirgovernments, working in partnership, can and have made a difference. Antipersonnel mines continue to maim and kill for decades after wars have ended, as they
do not recognize peace accords, but the international community has made great
strides during the past seven years to address this crisis.
Speaking personally, I am involved in the mine ban movement because of 15 years ofworking in medical, rehabilitation and humanitarian mine clearance programs inSoutheast Asia with refugees, villagers and persons with disability, including literally
tens of thousands of landmine survivors. I have experienced the horror of a 34-yearold Cambodian man being killed by an anti-personnel mine 400 meters from where I
stood, leaving behind a wife and three small children, and have carried a 19-year-old
Cambodian boy to the hospital two hours after he was blown up by an anti-personnelmine.
I have also had the joy of talking with one of our patients happily working in his radio
repair shop, who thanked us for "giving him back his life." Why? Because Handicap
International’s Social and Economic Reintegration Programme had provided him withthe opportunity to establish a livelihood. He was able to marry and have two children,and he said it never would have happened if he was not able to support himself andhis family.
A letter I received in 1995 from my colleague following one of my trips to Cambodia
said, and I quote:We have information on the man who died of a mine explosion on June
8th, 1995, the day you and Steve were on site with the mines advisorygroup in Battamgbang. His was Pech Korb. He was 36 years old. He issurvived by his wife, Seang Chantorn, and three sons, ages 2, 4 and 6.
He had stopped being a soldier five months before he died. He resigned
from the military, as his salary was not enough to support his family. He
thought they would have more security if he farmed. He knew his land
was mined, but he worked on it every day anyway because he had noother choice. Like every other farmer, they needed the rice crop in orderto survive. His wife is still working on the same plot of land. She andher children are completely destitute. Enclosed are pictures of Mr. Pechand his family; unfortunately, we have none of him while he was still
alive.
It is because of experiences like this that many of us are involved in this process, for
the AP landmine convention was borne out of the utter and massive devastation
caused by anti-personnel mines and the more-than-compelling humanitarian
imperative to address this crisis. This is why ensuring that the convention is fullyimplemented must remain high on each of our agendas and indeed on that of theinternational community.
When the convention was negotiated in Oslo in September of ’97 and signed in
Ottawa in December ’97, millions of survivors and those living and working in minedcommunities worldwide felt the voice of the victims had finally been heard. As you
know, we were honored to receive the Nobel Peace Prize in ’97. In the words of theNobel Committee, and I’ll show you what it is, a copy of what you get when you
receive the Nobel Peace Prize, this was the announcement on October 10, ’97, andthen they present a diploma with an original work of art on the 10th December whenit’s issued each year. The committee said, and I quote:
The ICBL and Jody Williams started a process which in the space of afew years changed a ban on anti-personnel mines from a vision to afeasible reality. …With the governments of several small and mid-sizedcountries taking the issue up and taking steps to deal with it, this work
has grown into a convincing example of an effective policy for peace.
Indeed, since ’97 the ICBL and the Ottawa Process have been used as a model increating the Human Security Network, the International Criminal Court, the Child
Soldiers Campaign, the Small Arms and Light Weapons Campaign, the Cluster
Munitions Coalition, and even the Tobacco Convention to name a few. The real prize
for the ICBL will always remain the convention, which was courageously negotiatedand adopted in Oslo by small and mid-sized countries who joined together to address
this global humanitarian crisis, thereby defining a new way of conducting
international diplomacy. The convention was then signed in Ottawa on the 2nd and 3rdof December ’97. Throughout this historical process, the ICBL, in partnership with
key governments such as Norway, Canada, Austria, Belgium, Ireland, Mexico, South
Africa and Switzerland, the eight countries that came to the first meeting we convened
on a possible ban in January of ’96, these countries, as well as the International
Committee of the Red Cross and various UN agencies have played a crucial role inensuring that the world achieved and has now begun to consolidate and fully
implement this convention "without exceptions, without reservations, and withoutloopholes."The convention, indeed, provides a "Framework for a Mine-Free World" with acomprehensive ban on anti-personnel mine, an obligation for all States Parties todestroy their stockpiles of AP mines within four years and clear mined areas within
ten years. While no extension is allowed for the four-year stockpile destruction
deadline, for mine clearance, especially for countries like Cambodia, Afghanistan,Angola, that has millions and millions of mines, there is a possibility for extension of
the mine clearance deadline.
There is also an obligation for "Each State Party," and I’m quoting the convention,“Each State Party in a position to do so shall provide assistance for the care,rehabilitation and social and economic reintegration of mine victims and for mineawareness programs.” The ICBL believes that all countries, including mine-affected
countries, are in a position to help mine victims.

Yesterday someone said to me, oh, are there still many landmines in the world. A few
figures to update you. Eighty-two countries worldwide remain mine-affected with
15–20,000 new victims in 65 of these countries; 85 per cent of the victims arecivilians, as reported in the ICBL’s Landmine Monitor 2004 report. Forty-one of the
65 countries where there were new victims were "at peace," not war.
Significant global progress has been made since entry into force on the 1st March ’99
with a de facto export ban in place, reduced use, a decrease in production, an increasein humanitarian demining and victim assistance programs, and tens of millions ofstockpiled mines having been destroyed by States Parties. Most importantly, we are
beginning to see a decrease in the number of new victims. When we first started
reporting, we reported 26,000 new victims per year, and the last report’s estimatednumber is 15–20,000 new victims per year, but 15–20,000 new victims in 65
countries still remains totally unacceptable. That is one new landmine victim every
30 minutes or approximately 150 new landmine victims around the world during thedays we are here in Hiroshima.
Just a quick update on this progress. There are now 145 States Parties and 8
Signatory States, or 80 per cent of the world. On transfers, as I said, a de facto ban isin place, even for countries that have not joined the convention. More than 37 million
stockpiled mines have been destroyed by States Parties, and there has been a dramatic
drop in production. There used to be 55, 5-5 countries producing landmines. Now
there are only 15, 1-5, and out of those 15 some are not currently producing but wekeep them on the list because they have not banned landmines.
There has also been a significant decrease in new use of AP lines by States. Only four
governments since May 2003 compared to 15 governments using them in 1999. The
use by armed non-state actors has also decreased.
Mine clearance, victim assistance, resource mobilization have all increased.
Global mine action funding is estimated to be $2.3 billion over the past decade. It
sounds like a lot but it’s not enough to address the problem.
And most importantly, as I’ve said, the number of new victims is going down eachyear, but remember they are added to the 3 to 4 to 500,000 landmine survivors whowill need care for the rest of their lives.
Even with these significant achievements during the first seven years of theconvention, we must not be complacent because what the ICBL has always called "aweapon of terror" or a weapon of mass destruction in slow motion continues to havedevastating humanitarian, developmental and socio-economic consequences in 82
mine-affected countries. We will not rest on our laurels. The ICBL will not stop until
they have completed what they set out to accomplish: a mine-free world.
So what lessons can be drawn from the AP mine ban movement to contribute to the
Mayors for Peace effort to translate the vision and the dream of a world free of
nuclear weapons into reality by the year 2020? I will mention only nine points,
though there are many more.

First, identify a few key like-minded governments and work closely in cooperation
with them to galvanize the necessary political will and to develop a strategic action
plan for the coming years, one that is practical and visionary. Perhaps Aaron Tovish’s
presentation last night addressed this matter.
Number 2, if necessary, take the process out of the United Nations, as we did with the
Ottawa Process, unless the consensus rules and tyranny of the minority can be
circumvented.
Three. Raise the voices. Dr. Inoguchi mentioned the Raising the Voices program
which was a leadership training program for landmine survivors. You can raise thevoices of the hibakusha and subsequent generations of the people of Hiroshima andNagasaki so the citizens and governments of the world understand the horrors of a
nuclear holocaust.
But also raise the voices of like-minded governments. They need pressure from you
to be able to do this. We face this all the time in the landmine convention, even withthe most committed governments like Norway and Canada that have been very strong
since the beginning. They are constantly telling us, the people we work with, youmust put pressure, priorities are elsewhere now. We need to get the budget andcommitment from our government so please continue to push us to do this. So raisethe voices of like-minded governments and citizens of the world calling for a ban on
nuclear weapons. Another government, South Africa, said to me when I told him I
was coming here, he said, "We need more pressure from civil society, otherwise thiswill not happen." As Senator Roche said yesterday, we are the majority and ourcollective voice must be heard. International public opinion and many governments,
the majority of governments, are on our side.
Number five. Bring together all the organizations, mayors, parliamentarians andothers calling for a ban on nuclear weapons and deliver an unequivocal and united
message to the international community. Why not turn your 2020 Vision into a truly
international and united campaign to ban nuclear weapons?
Number six. Get the issue on the agendas of every relevant movement in national,
regional and international organizations and governments, not only for nice words on
paper, like resolutions, but for concrete action and implementation of suchdeclarations of intent.
Number seven. Become the experts. Yesterday someone asked statistics on the costsof nuclear weapons and stocking all of that. Become the experts, and issue briefing
papers on the facts, the dangers and the horrors of nuclear weapons.
Number eight. Again, when I was preparing to come to Hiroshima I met with Prof.
Jozef Goldblat of the Geneva International Peace Research Institute, who I’m suremany of you know. He has suggested that perhaps the first step should be aprohibition on the use of nuclear weapons, rather than seeking a ban, a total ban on
everything.
And finally, proceed with determination, commitment and plain hard work.

Now none of these nine points are rocket science. And I’m sure you’re doing manyof them already, but this is what has gotten us in the campaign to the success that wehave had to date. But again, implementation is the key, because we have a long way
to go to rid the world of AP mines.
As ICBL’s ambassador and co-laureate of the 1997 Nobel Peace Prize, Jody Williams,
said on 19th July at the first ever conference of the Global Partnership on thePrevention of Armed Conflict, or GPPAC, a new acronym to me, the conference wasentitled "From Reaction to Prevention: Civil society forging partnerships to prevent
violent conflict and build peace." And it was held at the UN headquarters in New
York. Jody said, and this was just two weeks ago:
This conference is a tremendous demonstration of civil society’s
commitment to creating a new agenda for conflict prevention. The
GPPAC Global Action Agenda that has emerged from three years ofwork by thousands of women and men around the world helps focus themind for continued work. But more importantly, it provides a basis forenhanced action by civil society to strengthen efforts to prevent violent
conflict and to build peace. It clearly demonstrates our commitment,
one that must be matched by governments and the international
institutions at all levels in order to forge a real partnership for change.
In conclusion, ICBL's goals have always been clear. Our message has not changed
from Day 1, from 1992. The total ban which we achieved, now to universalize theconvention, to monitor the implementation, and to ensure that victim assistance andhumanitarian mine clearance programs are adequately funded.
Your Mayors for Peace 2020 Vision emergency campaign to ban nuclear weapons
must strive forward with this same clear vision and the same sense of determinationand purpose. The AP Mine Ban Convention is one of the few multilateral processes,
which is working successfully today. The close partnerships between governments
and civil society has been key to our success. Continued success in the full
implementation of the convention will serve to resolve not only this global
humanitarian crisis but also to underline the importance of the Rule of Law andInternational Humanitarian Law.
Failure to do so will relegate our historic achievements to the dustbins of history. For
the sake of humanity we must not allow this to happen. Collectively, we have madehistory. Collectively, we will work to ensure that place in history by translating thepromise of the AP Land Mine Convention into life-saving reality on the ground.
For the sake of the millions living in mined communities and the tens of thousands of
new mine victims each year, we must and we will succeed in securing a world wherechildren and adults can "walk, play and live without fear" that their next step may betheir last.
Our work is far from over. This week when I was checking email, I got a notice fromthe campaign that the United States is considering very seriously to resume theproduction of anti-personnel mines. They haven’t used them since the Gulf War, theUnited States has not produced them since 1997, but earlier this year the Bush

Administration announced, following a two-and-a-half year review that in fact theUnited States would not join the convention. I believe it’s probably the only country
in the world that has said they will not join the mine ban convention. Others have said
we cannot join now, we believe in the humanitarian goals and we will eventually join.
So we have our work cut out for us. And so do you.
For the sake of the survival of humanity, you must and you will be successful. We
must and we will be successful in achieving a world without nuclear weapons. May
you be energized and inspired by the urgency of achieving this by 2020, if not before.
Thank you. Domo arigato gosaimashita.
Chairperson: Thank you very much, Ms. Walker, for your informative, insightful
and energizing speech. We are really encouraged by what she said. And her speechstrongly impressed us that this is really, truly a humanitarian age. As long as you
have strong and clear humanitarian objectives and determination, people always
gather together to achieve those purposes, and in essence of that it would be better if
we can have some like-minded countries, I would rather call them conscientiouslyminded countries, like the case of Canada and Norway and other countries in the caseof ICBL. So there is some strong hope which we can cling to. We have to thank Ms.
Susan Walker once again.
And just in passing, you heard many times over the name of Ms. Jody Williams, who
was also representing the ICBL together with Susan Walker. And there is acommonality between myself and Ms. Jody Williams. It is that her birthday and mineare exactly the same, Oct. 9, 1950, and this makes me feel an affinity to Ms. Williams.
And what is more, this is the same birthday as Snoopy. He was born on exactly thesame day, so we three have the same proud commonality.
Now I’d like to –Walker: Excuse me, Professor Mogami. In honor of your sharing the birthday withJody Williams, may I ask you and Mayor Itoh-san to come. I would like to present
you with this copy of the Nobel Peace Prize.
Chairperson: Something related to Snoopy?
Walker: Yes. Snoopy would, I’m sure Snoopy would be in favor of the Nobel Peace
Prize and the ban.
What this is are the key documents in the Ottawa Process, also the report from the
Nairobi Summit, our theme was "Wanted: A Mine-Free World." And a copy of theNobel Peace Prize.
Chairperson: Well, thank you very, very much again, Susan. And now we will
move on to the presentation of the representatives of each city. I will call on themaccording to the order as distributed to you. And I’ll call on one person, and at thesame time I’ll call on the person to be followed, who will follow the current speaker,
so I will ask the next speaker to be ready in time. And we will keep doing this forabout an hour, and after that we’ll take about a ten-minute break, and after that wewill resume the presentations until 1:00 in the afternoon. And in order to save time,and since you are the principal actors of this conference, I’ll try to give you as muchtime as possible, so I’ll refrain from making comments on the presentations of each ofyou, however important it may be. So I’ll be, basically, quiet. So please, this is mycooperation to you and I would like you to cooperate with me.
So the first speaker is the Mayor of Aubagne, France, Monsieur Daniel Fontaine.
And the second speaker is the Chairman of the New Haven Peace Commission, Mr.
Alfred Marder. Monsieur Fontaine?
Daniel Fontaine, Mayor, Aubagne, France: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
My name is Daniel Fontaine. I am the Mayor of Aubagne, France. I am also amember of AFCDRP, that’s the French Peace Authorities Association, I am the
Chairman of that AFCDRP.
First of all, I would like to start my presentation as to how we brought as many as 25
local authorities to this meeting. And to you Mayor Akiba, I would like to thank you
for organizing this wonderful setup for the Mayors for Peace. In France, AFCDRP
members, and also we do have the French Association of Mayors for Peace, and weare acting as the chapter of the Mayors for Peace.
In 1985, Hiroshima and Nagasaki took the initiative in creating this organization,
Mayors for Peace, but in those days there was not much participation by France. In
1985, there were only five or six local authorities who were participants. But after
founding AFCDRP, the number of French local authorities who are participants inthis organization exceeds 60. As the country France, which advocates itself for the
nuclear deterrence, this is a substantial number. French local authorities and the cities
throughout the membership of AFCDRP concur with Vision 2020 campaign because
we realize that it is necessary to think about seriously the world peace, and in theminds of the citizens for many, many years this was the high level of interest. In
reality, peace is a global but yet daily issue. And this is indeed the issue which has tobe tackled from all perspectives. Based on this notion, we hope that we will be able
to contribute a lot for the ideal of creating peace.
Peace impacts on various aspects such as East Asian culture and security. Throughthat dialogues we hope that we will be able to tackle the issue which might beconsidered far from the daily life of people, without creating apathy in the minds ofthe people. We hope that we will be able to tackle these various problems in order toestablish peace.
I would like to give you one good example I came across in the school children’s
education from four to five years old. There was a program for education. There wasan interview with the children and they were able to create or refuse violence. As forthe need for dialogue, assimilate the other’s culture and try to find the solidarity.
Through those educational programs, children are able to do the same as is seen in the
United Nations and UNESCO, and this kind of dialogue among children will give life
and the future to our world. If cities are able to do the same, then this kind of value
set can be strongly promoted. Peace values should not stay only at schools andconference rooms. This is not at all an abstract theme.

Peace is the inevitable result of justice and sharing on a global scale. The use of
nuclear weapons and the use of weapons are creating a threat to human beings in the
future because we have not come up with a solution peacefully to eradicate the causeof tension. Mayor Akiba continues to give the warning to the authorities andorganizations in the world about the threat of such nuclear weapons. In May this year,
Mayor Akiba has clearly stated his opinions at the United Nations podium in New
York. We, the members of AFCDRP, would like to deliver our appreciation to Mayor
Akiba for his courageous delivery of the speech.
I wonder whether it is possible for us to rectify all those problems which lie in our
future to abolish nuclear weapons. Those weapons are in the accessible range of theStates and state actors and non-state actors. We can no longer sacrifice many
people’s lives with this threat. There are a lot of differences in income among theStates and individuals, but our lives, our environments are at stake. Based on such
purpose on those conceptions, in many conferences there is much deliberation seen,
the hope and aspirations of human beings are common. Because the threat of nuclear
weapons is so serious we have to give the global perspectives. Nuclear weapons are
not a single anomaly in our period. It is a horrifying omen for our future as humanbeings.
For the cities and local authorities in the world, there are a lot of roles to be played bythem in fighting against nuclear weapons. Every single citizen in the world has thehope to live in a peaceful society and world. We do have strong confidence in that
belief. The cities consist of people who are in different ages, and this is the mostappropriate place that we can enjoy the flowering of peaceful flowers. I belong to
AFCDRP France. We focus on the sustainability of actions. We have campaigns
concurring with Vision 2020. We hope that we will be able to continue suchcampaigns to encourage such movements. And at the same time, the membership ofFrance local authorities, 60 of them in Mayors for Peace, this is our commitment. I
would like you to understand. Thank you indeed very much, ladies and gentlemen.
Chairperson: Thank you very much, Mr. Fontaine. And the next speaker is Mr.
Marder from New Haven, USA.
Alfred Marder, New Haven, Chairman of New Haven Peace Commission,
U.S.A.: Mayor Akiba and honored guests, first, for the interpreters, I am going tomove away slightly from my prepared text.
The 60th anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is not only anoccasion of remembrance but more. It is a harsh reminder that a political weapon ofhorrible dimensions was ushered into the world 60 years ago aimed at cities and theirpeople, a weapon so frightening it was capable, and is capable, of holding all
humanity hostage. Faced with the reality of even a more critical time today, mayors
and officials of cities have the sworn duty not only to raise their voices for the total
abolition of these weapons, but must use the full resources of their cities to mobilize
their citizen in this campaign.
Just as we gather here, in my city we are mobilizing for vigils, bicycle rides,
demonstrations, exhibits for August 6. Proclamations have been issued, City

Councils have endorsed. All this is happening in perhaps thousands of US cities thiscoming week.
We must do more. And we can do more. We are proposing, in addition to the track ofenlisting governments to come together, to formulate a treaty calling for the total
abolition of nuclear weapons, two additional steps. Number one, there is a resolutionthat has been passed at the United Nations, calling for a Special Session on
Disarmament No. 4. This will provide an opportunity for those of us in the antinuclear weapons movement and the anti-war movement to mobilize throughout theworld. There is a working group that has been set up and I would urge that the
mayors and Mayors for Peace, my organization, the Peace Messenger Cities, andothers, begin to campaign to insist that our governments endorse the Special Session
in the year 2007.
But in addition to that, we are proposing a part of this campaign that I believe every
single mayor can endorse. We are calling for divestment of investments from doing
business with any company that is participating in the manufacture or deployment of
nuclear weapons.
A little touch of history. Those of use who were in the leadership of the antiapartheid movement in South Africa used the weapon of divestment to force
corporations, to force institutions, to force cities to divest their pensions from any
corporation doing business with apartheid South Africa. That proved to be a
fantastically successful campaign, less in terms of costing corporations dollars, but in
mobilizing the moral and spiritual sense of our countries that we could not tolerate
any longer a situation in one country maintaining the apartheid system.
We recognize that nuclear weapons are not apartheid. We also recognize that theUnited States is not South Africa. However, if the cities were to direct their pensions
from any corporation involved in nuclear weapons manufacture, it would have major
ramifications. And may I emphasize, this is cost-free. It is cost-free. There is nofinancial penalty for instructing the pension management from moving theinvestments from one corporation to another. If universities, trade unions, religious
bodies and individuals, as well as cities, regions and states were to join the campaign,
it would create that political atmosphere that would not be ignored and could not beignored, even in my country, the United States.
Again, I emphasize, this campaign costs nothing. And in most cases, it depends upon
you as the mayor if you were to instruct the pension investment folks that your city
would no longer tolerate financially backing corporations manufacturing nuclear
weapons. This campaign would not take focus or energy from any of the othersuggestions that have been made. We believe that this campaign must operate on any
number of tracks for us to succeed. This campaign that we are suggesting is a
grassroots campaign, a local campaign, a campaign in which mayors and cities canplay a leading role. It would enhance efforts to gather governments to fashion a treaty
calling for the total abolition of nuclear weapons.
Dear friends, it is now up to us.

Chairperson: Thank you very much, Mr. Marder, for your interesting proposals.
And the next speaker is the Mayor of Geneva, Switzerland, Mr. André Hédiger. And
the following speaker will be the Mayor of Christchurch, New Zealand, Mr. Gary
Moore.
André Hédiger, Mayor, Geneva, Switzerland: Mayor Tadatoshi Akiba, guests,
ladies and gentlemen, the first thing I would like to say is that I feel very honored tobe here with you here.
We are here to discuss the concrete actions that we can undertake to guarantee thesecurity of our children and that of generations to come. Above all, we are gathered
here in this symbolic City of Hiroshima to remember the past and celebrate thecourage of a people to rise above the ruins and smoke of destruction.
It is our task to remember and ensure that such suffering would never again be
inflicted on humankind – for there are no words that exist in any language that can
describe the horror and agony that the survivors of Hiroshima, the hibakusha, endure
to this day. The written archives of the Red Cross review the terrible impact.
For many years, the United States prohibited any information to be distributed on Abombs, and at the Red Cross, Dr. Marcel Junod’s report is kept in Geneva. He was adoctor sent to Hiroshima and the first foreign doctor who helped hibakusha. He
provided medical supplies and he prepared them to be airlifted to Hiroshima andNagasaki. "The Disaster of Hiroshima" is the title of his report. It was written in
September 1945. This report was also censored and was not published for many years.
In 1982, the International Red Cross for the first time announced the existence of thisreport in its journal.
In commemoration of the 60th anniversary, Geneva decided to republish this. "Theeffect of the bomb was mysteriously serious…" as he wrote, "many victims
apparently recovering suddenly suffer a fatal relapse due to the decomposition ofwhite blood cells and other internal injuries now dying in great numbers…" This iswhat Dr. Junod has confirmed.
A commemorative day is important in certain respects because it recalls the past andleads us to the future. In Hiroshima and Nagasaki, very extreme activities wererealized, that is, the horrible bomb was developed and then there was an effort of thepeople who tried to rescue the victims, sacrificing and risking their own lives. Therealso was strong protest and opposition. This is scientific knowledge, the strength of
opposition, and the self-sacrificing effort, these are the things that we need to treasure.
Even now, after 60 years, more than 17,000 A-bombs exist on this earth. Ninety-three
per cent belong to the US and Russia. All efforts to try to stop the production andabolish them were discouraged by the nuclear power States. As a guarantee for self
defense, they possess nuclear weapons. Now the United States is trying to develop
mini nukes; the United States does not exclude the possibility of their use because
they are more effective than conventional weapons. They can destroy the hideouts ofthe terrorists in the mountains. With this, much opposition was heard because no use
of nuclear weapons was to be supported, but that effort can be completely negated bythis kind of activity. But we need to have a talk, therefore, a campaign to eliminate

nuclear weapons. We need to provide information to the citizens and we need toappeal to the government. Security and peace can only be realized when there isdialogue and trust.
For international society it is important that you prioritize the interest of mankind as awhole and this has to be appealed to the government. Human beings are now facedwith many different threats. Children die every three seconds from poverty and otherimpacts, and very soon more than 2 million would lose their lives due to HIV, 14
million new patients of AIDS appear, and 1.7 million people died of tuberculosis in
2003, and in the same year 8.8 million people were said to be inflicted withtuberculosis. Appropriate medical service, food and the real right of development
should be given to the people all over the world. That means we need to provide
resources, we need to have knowledge. These should not be used for violence.
At the NPT review meeting in New York, the real issue was not discussed. We
should not, however, give up our efforts, as this failure should not discourage us fromour efforts to achieve the ultimate goal of a nuclear-free world. For the NPT and thenthe countries, we need to appeal to them to be in compliance with all the provisions of
the treaty. We also need to speak to the countries with active nuclear capabilities totake part in NPT as soon as possible.
Mayor Akiba, taking this opportunity I’d like to pay my respects to your ceaselessefforts. You protect peace, you promote nuclear disarmament, and your carry out
international campaigns for Mayors for Peace, which I understand is very difficult.
The City of Geneva supports his effort and we will continue to support the objectivesof Mayors for Peace in the future.
Taking this opportunity, in Geneva next year we intend to take part in the next World
Peace Forum in Vancouver, which will be held next year. In September, the City ofGeneva, the city of peace and humanity, will pay homage to Dr. Junod and hibakusha.
We are going to name the new plaza, the Junod Plaza. And we need to always remindourselves of the reason why we are here. We need to get rid of nuclear weapons andother weapons of mass destruction, and for that we need to reach a new stage of
discussion. Thank you very much.
Chairperson: Thank you very much, Mr. Hédiger. The next speaker is Mr. Gary
Moore from Christchurch, New Zealand.
Gary Moore, Vice President of Mayors for Peace, Mayor, Christchurch,
New Zealand: Mayor Akiba and Itoh, fellow mayors and elected representative andall attendees, konnichiwa.
Greetings to the global peace community - those of us here today - and the many
billions of people who are here with us in spirit.
Here in Hiroshima, and in Nagasaki, it is impossible to not feel that it is here where
humanity took a deadly wrong turn on the road of destiny. It was here that our
species first felt the fury and finality of what the foolish like to call "our mastery of
the atom." The only "mastery" shown here was that humans were capable of taking
the fatal step in giving us the potential for complete destruction of our species.

It is appropriate that we should also be here, where the horror that became reality, that
we should turn back from that deadly past. There can be no more fitting time toincrease our efforts for peace than when much of the world seems mesmerized by thepolitics of terror. The world has known, right here, the ultimate in terror. It is a formof terror that some think is acceptable because it is held in the hands of governmentsof major and powerful nations. It is still terror! Governments are made of people justas flawed and fallible of any of us here today, and many of them forget that we holdthis world in trust for our children’s children.
In a world beset with terror, massive economic and social change, and climate change,
the path to survival and peace is through embracing our common humanity. The
pursuit of peace as a quest specially suited to a global group such as Mayors for Peace.
We mayors are elected by our local residents to be the First Citizens in ourcommunities. We are the ideal medium with which to dilute the poison of terror andwar. As a fellow mayor said to me in New York earlier this year when we were at theUnited Nations, it is on cities that nuclear bombs will fall, not on governments. In
cities, live people.
I believe that in most people exist the common desire for peace and prosperity. As
First Citizens, we have a moral and ethical responsibility to reflect this desire of our
citizens. Mayor to mayor, city to city, and person to person, we can build bridges ofunderstanding and insight beyond the ability of our national leaders and corporate
hubs. We already have about 1,000 mayors involved with the Mayors for Peacemovement. A simple request here today is that this 1,000 will be joined by thousands
more over the years.
Our goal is to rid the world of nuclear weapons by the year 2020. We should say that
we desire to live on a planet which has no war. I remember a child once asking its
mother, “Mother, what is war?” We must make this a historical question.
Our worst enemies on our journey will be a sense of cynicism and defeat. We must
not give these enemies any power. They are illusions used to shackle much of themodern global community into a world of hollow, mindless consumerism. There is
no product more worthy of pursuit than peace and a civil society. Without thisproduct, the rest of life becomes indeed one of terror, futility and hopelessness.
In my own life journey, I have had the joy of overcoming the forces of cynicism anddefeat many times. Five years ago in New Zealand, at a time of very high youth
unemployment, a small group of mayors started an organization called Mayors
Taskforce for Jobs. At that time the prevailing view was that unemployment was nota concern for mayors.
Our goal was zero unemployment. We chose to start with youth unemployment. We
have set a goal in our country as mayors that no person under 25 would have nothing
to do. They will either be in training or in jobs. The cynics said it could not be done,that other cities would not join us, and that there would always be a number of
unemployed people in our communities. And they were wrong.

The majority of New Zealand mayors are now members of Mayors Taskforce for Jobs.
Our country has the second-lowest rate of unemployment in the developed world.
Our whole attitude towards unemployment has changed. And it changed becausesome of us said that unemployment was not acceptable and that we needed to be both
idealistic and pragmatic at the same time. We took an impossible vision and we’rewell on the way to achieving and making it a reality.
Let me illustrate with another story. Before I became mayor my job was to establish
work schemes with groups and communities hit by the massive economic changes in
New Zealand in the 1990s. Amongst the hardest-hit were the Maori people. Some ofthem were living in their coastal town of Kaikoura, two hours’ drive north ofChristchurch. Prosperity had left the town, as had hope and optimism. We talked to
the residents to see if we could find something that might be developed to uplift the
town. Some people said that tourists might be interested in taking boats out to sea towatch the migration of whales in the area. The cynics were dismissive, and thedefeated of spirit could not imagine it happening, particularly by the Maori people.
But a tiny group could imagine it, and when all other funding failed they mortgaged
their homes to turn this dream into a reality.
These days, Kaikoura Whalewatch is rated as one of the top eco-tourism destinationsin the world. And the journey took us many years. It is a booming business, about tobecome a $100 million New Zealand business. It has completely revived andrenewed its community. It plays an important role in attracting tourists to the South
Island of New Zealand and it exists because a few people rejected cynicism and defeat
and held on to a vision.
We can do the same with Mayors for Peace. We already have 1,000 members
representing 1,000 cities. Instead of promoting us as being just anti-nuclear, let us beespecially pro-peace. Let us make the step towards righting the immense wrong done
to our common humanity, and let us start today. That’s the challenge for Mayors for
Peace.
Remember, we as mayors, as cities, are not a threat to nation-states. Without abackdrop of peace, there can be no successful international trade. People stop trustingeach other. Imagine if as the mayors of the world we said: We will hold hands andwe will promote trade, peace city to peace city. We will promote culture, peace city
to peace city. We will promote our people to know each other, from peace city topeace city. We will promote the civil society in every peace city. We will exchange
artists from peace city to peace city. We should turn our minds, attendees, to how we
can assist cities right now in Zimbabwe and North Korea.
As nation-states play games with each other, let us form a whole new network acrossthe world, peace city to peace city, and say, We can rid the world of nuclear terror bya massive insistence on the path of peace! Tinakoto-tinakoto-tinakoto-katol.
Chairperson: Thank you very much, Mr. Moore. And the next speaker is the
President of the US Conference of Mayors, Ms. Beverly O’Neill.

Beverly O’Neill, President of the US Conference of Mayors,
Mayor, Long Beach, U.S.A.: Thank you very much, Prof. Mogami, and to Mayor
Akiba-san and distinguished guest speakers, ladies and gentlemen, good morning to
all of you. I am really honored to be here with you. I think that this room is full offriends because each one of you is making a difference. Throughout the world, youhave come from throughout the world, and you are making a difference for our world.
I thank you for that. We all should feel fortunate that we’re here because we are withpeople that have the same commitment we have, we are here with people that have thesame compassion and the same heart. And I thank you all for being here for thisimportant discussion, this important conference.
I want to thank Mayor Akiba for the warmth of his welcome and also for the work hehas done and the constant efforts that he has done putting this together and using thestrength of the membership throughout the world. I thank you very much, Mayor
Akiba-san.
I am Beverly O’Neill, I am President of the United States Conference of Mayors. I
am here today representing them, I’m also Mayor of the City of Long Beach,
California. Our organization is 75 years old and we represent over 1,000 of thelargest cities in the United States. We have had a strong bond with mayors fromthroughout the world. In Japan, for many years we’ve had exchanges of US andJapanese mayors and in all the exchanges that we have had with mayors coming toJapan they have visited Hiroshima.
We were honored that Mayor Akiba addressed our conference this last January inWashington, DC, it’s our annual conference we have each year, and also theconference was honored to participate with Mayor Akiba and the United Nations
Secretary Kofi Annan at the Mayors for Peace meeting in April at the United Nations,and I know quite a few of you were there at that time. And I’m pleased to be here toextend a short message to all of the participants. And I’m pleased to be here because I
feel this is a significant event.
Our organization has long strongly advocated a decrease and elimination of the threatof nuclear weapons. At our annual meeting each June we have policy resolutions thatprovide us the advocacy that we use in Congress and with the White Housethroughout the year. Dating back for several decades, the Conference of Mayors hasenacted strong policy calling for the reduction and elimination of nuclear weapons.
Last year in Boston, the mayors of the United States unanimously passed a resolution
entitled Support for the Commencement of Negotiations on the Elimination of
Nuclear Weapons. This resolution declares that weapons of mass destruction have noplace in a civilized world. And that calls for commencement of negotiations on theprohibition and elimination of nuclear weapons. It declared the US Conference ofMayors will remain engaged in this matter until our cities are no longer under the
threat of this destruction.
In the year of the 60th anniversary, the use of nuclear weapons at Hiroshima andNagasaki, it is interesting to review the Conference of Mayors' 1985 resolution thatspecifically pointed that reversing the nuclear arms race. That marked the 40th

anniversary for the use of nuclear weapons at Hiroshima and Nagasaki and endorsed
the declaration that 1985 is the year to reverse this arms race.
We stand here together today united in this cause. And I would like to especiallyrecognize our executive director. The presidents change each year in the mayors
organization. I am fortunate to be president this year, but we have the same executive
director that we’ve had for many years, and I want to recognize him, our executive
director who has played a key role in the growth and development of this organization,
our organization, and with his guidance and leadership we have been consistently astrong voice for mayors, and Tom Cochrane where are you? Sitting somewhere?
Right over there.
The Conference of Mayors believes in the strength of mayor-to-mayor cooperation.
We have supported several international mayoral summits and worked for cooperation
among mayors of the world, and that’s been said several times this morning, people
talking about mayors talking with each other. We are trying to do this. We have done
this for years, and I think more of this is going to be happening because mayors allover the world speak the same language. Every day they see their constituents, every
day they meet with their constituents, every day they are confronted with their needs
and their fears of the future. If the network of mayors in your own country has not yet
gone on record for the elimination of nuclear weapons, I would encourage you to
consider asking your mayors’ association to pass such a resolution because united weare a strong voice.
Today we are in an historic time. And we are in an historic city. It symbolizes both
the destruction that mankind can do, as well as mankind’s hope to achieve a betterworld, and we stand together in a united effort to achieve brilliance by wisdom andexperience and strength informed by conscience. Through all of our efforts together,
the mayors of the world, we can realize our goal of eliminating the threat of nuclear
war. And that can be our century’s claim to distinction and to progress. That kind ofworld is what all of us in this room seek. That’s why we’re here today and that’s why
I’m so proud to join with you on this occasion. Thank you very much.
Chairperson: The next speaker is Dr. Herbert Schmalstieg, the Lord Mayor of
Hannover, Germany.
Herbert Schmalstieg, Vice President of Mayors for Peace,Mayor, Hannover,Germany: Mr. Chairman, Prof. Mogami, Mayor Akiba, distinguished guests,
colleagues, friends, when one talks of the dangers to peace and the growing threats inthe world, in these days only a few people will call to mind Hiroshima and Nagasaki
or regard nuclear weapons as a primary danger. As dates that symbolize our fear of
war and violence, it is less likely that we will name the 6th August or the 9th August
1945, but rather the 11th September 2001, the 11th March 2004, or most recently, the10th July 2005.
In the face of this wave of extremist violence that could break almost anyway in theworld as we meet here, other dangers recede in our awareness. Understandable as thisis, it is important not only to resist terrorism but also, and especially, to fight theorigins of terrorism. These origins include, above all, the increasingly hopelessfutures of so many young people; they include unemployment, poverty, hunger andhardship. But it is just as important, and particularly this year, 60 years after thebombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, not to forget the nuclear threat, a threat which isjust as real today as it has always been. As long as there are all nuclear weapons in
the world the danger will persist that the number of countries that can acquire theseweapons will increase, and as long as the possibility cannot be excluded that criminalorganizations will get access to nuclear weapons, there will be, no peace in the world.
It is by no means simple to make progress along the road to complete nuclear
disarmament and to fulfil the 2020 Vision; we have to learn this lesson again this year.
The Seventh Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference in New York ended up
without producing any results, provoking increased skepticism about the chances ofsuccess for multilateral nuclear disarmament negotiations. The cities, and we as
mayors, therefore have an important responsibility: to express the anxieties of our
citizens and our politicians, to our governments, in the face of the continuing nuclear
threat, and to demand once and for all such steps towards complete nuclear
disarmament.
For this reason it is good to see how more and more cities, more and more mayors arerecognizing this responsibility in joining us in our concern. The significant increasein affiliated cities shows this clearly. The days in New York, the participation by somany mayors of cities all over the world in the NPT Review Conference was, to thisextent, also encouraging. We must persist in our commitment to our cause; we may
not slacken our efforts. For we can do much to ensure that the realization of thenecessity for comprehensive nuclear disarmament grows, so that it also one day will
become reality. On the question on what each of us in our cities can do to achievethis, I will give just a few examples.
First, and foremost, I believe, we must be committed to education, to taking thearguments for disarmament to children and young people and encouraging acommitment to peace - in kindergarten, in school and after school. This is where thefoundations of active work for peace are laid. The Mayors for Peace Conference
being held at the moment here in Hiroshima is truly a good example.
Secondly, the cities must always raise their voices in protest at threats to freedom andcommunity life, for these are the issues that affect us directly. In this we must seek towork with non-governmental organizations, citizens campaigns and groups. Since
June of this year, a "Peace Tram," for example, has been running on the Hannover
tramway network, decorated by striking graphics by young artists calling for peace 60
years after the A-bombs on Japan.
Thirdly, cities must also take their appeals and demands for nuclear disarmament to
the national governments. They must make it clear that it is not only the concerns ofpolitical representatives, but also the interests, the anxieties of local citizens that thecities are speaking for. We are only strong if we are united. This is true not only in
one's our own country, but also across national borders. In a world that isincreasingly growing closer and more open we must also, on issues that endanger our
coexistence and peace in the world, seek and strengthen international cooperation.

And therefore, fourthly, we may never slacken in our efforts to ensure that the circle
of cities that, together with us, are striving for a world without nuclear weapons
continues to grow.
As a contribution in this spirit I would now like to present our President, Mayor
Akiba, with new declarations of affiliation from six German cities and local
authorities whose mayors have committed their communities to Mayors for Peacewith their signatures. We have now in our country, in Germany, 236 members in ourorganization, and we are very proud that we can say this for you, Mr. Akiba, in thisconference. In this way we will grow stronger and can then, we hope, in the not-toodistant future, finally make it possible that the wish No more Hiroshimas! No more
Nagasakis! comes true. Thank you very much for your attention.
Chairperson: I guess we can have at least two more speakers before we take a break.
Mr. Mohammad Afzal Khan, Lord Mayor of Manchester, United Kingdom, and thenafter him will be Mr. Evgeny Petrovic Ischencho, Mayor of Volgograd, Russia.
Mohammed Afzal Khan, Vice President of Mayors for Peace, Mayor,
Manchester, U.K.: Mr. Chairman, Mayor Akiba, mayors, colleagues, distinguishedguests, ladies and gentlemen, konnichiwa. It is an enormous privilege to participate inthis important conference and I pay tribute to the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki for
their hard work and dedication that makes these meetings possible. I think it is uniqueand very important to provide this platform for people from all over the globe to cometogether to share and to learn from one another. It is also a great honor to be invited
once again to hold the position of Vice-President City in the Mayors for Peaceorganization, and I am pleased to accept this on behalf of the City of Manchester.
Many of you will know that Manchester is proud of its record in promoting peace andnuclear weapons abolition. Twenty-five years ago, it initiated an international
movement of nuclear weapons-free zone local authorities. The movement rapidly
spread in the 80s and many towns and cities worldwide continue to declarethemselves nuclear-free zones and pledge themselves to a nuclear-free future.
Since 1984 Manchester has also given its support to Mayors for Peace and we havebeen inspired by the energy that the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki have brought tothe campaign, particularly in the recent years and notably with the launch of the 2020
Vision in Nagasaki, November 2003. The goal of nuclear weapons abolition by 2020is achievable. We know it is the desire of the vast majority of people worldwide andlocal government has a vital part to play in articulating and representing these justdemands through national governments.
Through its nuclear-free policy, Manchester has worked closely with peace
campaigners in the city over two decades, and will continue to do so. The City
Council provides support for local groups and local groups provide support to theCouncil. Cooperative working is mutually beneficial and builds campaigning
capacity.
To reaffirm its commitment to nuclear weapons abolition and broaden the base of its
cooperative work for peace, Manchester adopted a new Peace Policy and declared2005 a Year of Peace, Remembrance and Reconciliation. The terms of the policy
demonstrate the value the city places on cooperative work at all levels of society.
Manchester, a city of peace: The council recognizes the contribution it can makethrough the provision and delivery of its services towards promoting social inclusion,social justice, good citizenship, and peace between the peoples, cultures and faithcommunities that it serves.
In a post 9/11 world the adverse consequences of conflict and international instability
radiate into my city's communities. The values that the city projects in response tointernational conflict impacts on our community life. In this context the city willassert more vigorously its commitment to peace. With the City Council Leader taking
the Presidency of the EuroCities network in July 2005, there is an additional
opportunity to signal the value that Manchester places on peace to other European
continental peers.
We are now setting about designing and preparing materials to communicate this newpolicy and we look to the city’s 25th nuclear-free zone anniversary in November tolaunch a communications campaign to raise the profile of the city’s peace work, andto encourage people to value the gift of peace more highly. Sometimes, resolving ourconflict peacefully and fairly is hard and can involve very difficult decisions andunpalatable compromises, but violence and war inflict more greater suffering. The
evidence is everywhere.
To support the 2020 Vision, Manchester has also sought to cooperation with other UK
Mayors for Peace towns and cities and national citizens’ groups. It has been able touse its position within the UK nuclear-free local authorities network to advance this.
Following the mayors’ lobby at the NPT preparatory conference in April 2004,
London and Manchester jointly set up a UK Mayors for Peace Working Group
bringing in advisors from leading peace groups and benefiting from their expertiseand energy. The group meets regularly to implement the campaign strategy of the
Mayors for Peace organization within the UK and to promote further support in the
UK. A detailed report of the first year of the UK Mayors for Peace Working Group's
achievements was delivered to the mayors conference in New York last May by the
Mayor of London's representative.
Locally elected councils, the first layer of government and the means by which somany services essential to creating a clean and healthy environment are delivered,carry great democratic legitimacy. Citizens' groups bring expertise, energy andcreativity. By combining the two, the whole can often be greater than the sum of theparts. I believe Mayors for Peace recognizes this truth and, without losing its
distinctive identity, we will look to combine with leading peace and nuclear abolition
campaigns in the future to deliver the just demand of a nuclear weapons-free world.
Thank you very much. Domo arigato gosaimashite. Thank you.
Chairperson: Thank you very much. The next and last speaker will be Mr. Ischenko.
Evgeny Petrovich Ischenko, Vice President of Mayors for Peace, Mayor,
Volgograd, Russia: Honorable Mayor Akiba, colleagues, distinguished guests,

ladies and gentlemen, Volgograd has the great honor to be one of the Vice-President
Cities of Mayors for Peace and I am privileged today to represent here the City of
Volgograd, formerly Stalingrad, and our 1 million of its citizens who are waiting for
us to come back and to report on the results of this conference.
In April–May this year with over 100 mayors drawn from different cities of the world,
the Volgograd delegation was honored to attend the Seventh NPT Review Conferencein New York. It has been an enormous privilege and a very moving experience toparticipate in this important conference. And I pay tribute to the cities of Hiroshima
and Nagasaki for all their hard work and dedication which has made it possible. They
brought us together in New York to discuss our priorities and to elaborate thecommon approach to the elimination of nuclear danger.
The NPT has become one of the most prominent events in the history of the state
relations. Each of us has great aspirations and hopes for the bettering of theinternational situation in post-conference time. Unfortunately, we have to admit andrecognize that as cities the means we can possibly employ to achieve our goal are
limited. Then the prerogative belongs to militaries and national governments.
The previous name of our organization implied that vital issue which actually explains
our approach to the problem, namely, inter-city solidarity. We represent the local
authorities which have much more direct contact with people than central government.
We have direct control and direct contact in matters affecting health and welfare, we
can ensure the sustainable development of our cities in a peaceful environment. All
the mayors in all countries face the similar problems. The number of members cities
has far exceeded 1,000 and we must work together to achieve our goals.
We believe that as a city we should provide a wide range of activities and events toenable our citizens to understand the horrors of nuclear war and in so doing enable
our citizens to be well informed to oppose nuclear weapons.
As a Mayor of Volgograd, I personally support the Peace Committee in our city. In
close cooperation with Hiroshima Peace Foundation, the City of Volgograd hosted thetraveling exhibition from the Peace Memorial Museum dealing with A-bombevidence. In the coming year we will host the Executive Committee of the Peace
Messenger Cities. On 6th August, Volgograd citizens will participate in the peace bell
ceremony to pray for the souls of the A-bomb victims.
As the same time, the International Youth Conference for Peace in the Future is being
held in Hiroshima. It has brought together young people from Europe and Asia andprovides them the brilliant opportunity to discuss vital issues of life and to destroy
some stereotypes.
We highly appreciate that initiative of Hiroshima and we are ready to receive inVolgograd young people of our twin cities and member cities of Mayors for Peace.
This will enable us to develop that inter-city solidarity we are talking about today.
Let me repeat here one very well-known thing which reflects the reality. "Pessimists
are only passive observers; it is the optimist who changes the world." Thank you.

Chairperson: Thank you very much, Mr. Ischenko. And this is the end of the firsthalf of the plenary session this morning. And we will take about a ten-minute breakfrom now on, and I would like to announce that we will keep some timeframe forquestions and answers at the end of this plenary, after all the speakers have finishedtheir presentations. So please prepare your questions and further discussion for that
timeframe. Thank you very much.
-BreakChairperson: Okay, I think the seats are half full so I think it’s time to resume
without waiting for the others to come back. And due to some unavoidable reasons
I’d like to propose to change the order of speakers at the outset. And I would like tocall on the Mayor of Vitry-sur-Seine ahead of the Councilor of Florence. So after thisrepresentative from Vitry-sur-Seine, we will call on the Councilor of Florence. So
Monsieur Alain Audoubert.
Alain Audoubert, Mayor, Vitry-sur-Seine, France: Ladies and gentlemen, ourglobe indeed is becoming smaller, and for future generations we have theresponsibility to control and manage our globe because of biological diversificationand there are a lot of problems related to the globe. And for this purpose we would
need to go into a different new stage of development, not confrontation but
sustainable development and cooperation need to be what we pursue. And we should
not only rely on peace education, but also, nevertheless, education is very important,and therefore that is why our city would like to give the cooperation with all of you
towards achieving the objectives outlined in the UNESCO Charter.
And we are conducting various cultural events throughout the year at Vitry-sur-Seine.
From August 6 to 9, we are holding a Peace Poster Exhibition in our park and we areshowing a movie titled A Bird of Happiness, and also, at the Children’s Recreation
Center, cultural activities are being carried out using the anthology of the 100 mostbeautiful peace poems, prefaced by the mayors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and we
also hope to open these events by releasing doves. And we are appealing to President
Chirac of France to appeal for nuclear abolition by collecting petitions.
And also, in New York we have just seen our active activities putting pressure on
conference participants and we had the speech by the Mayor of Hiroshima and also
we had the favorable response from Secretary-General Annan, and they were all
effective in some way or another, but the treaty is going back on its own objectives.
And more recently, the new nuclear weapons states, amounting to about 30, are also
trying to justify the development of nuclear weapons in order to destroy, which is
ridiculous indeed.
We have seen the position of the United States which led to the recent failure of the
NPT Review Conference, but we need to continue to exert pressure on thesegovernments by uniting the efforts of all the citizens of the world.
The next step for our city is to conduct events. On Sep. 21, which is the UN
International Day of Peace, we will have exhibits on A-bombs and we’ll invite
hibakusha to give us testimonies. And to the French government authorities we’ll besending our delegation carrying our petitions.

The French government has a special responsibility and the French government isquite active in preventing proliferation. For example, the criminal nuclear tests inMururoa Atoll has been given up on under the pressure of the French people, however,research is still ongoing at research institutes. The government has also dismantled
the missile launching base in Albion has reduced its nuclear subs. However, they
have also decided to build new submarines and are increasing the budget, therefore,
nuclear development-related programs. So we would need to continue to appeal to
our own governments as to the rest of the world as well.
There are nuclear weapons States and there are countries that are not signing the NPTtreaty yet. Depending on their stance, I think the situation in those countries may
differ, but we need to continue to exert pressure on all of these nations andgovernments and we need to expand our activities to the global scale.
There were 100 mayors going on a peace march, peace activists around the world in
New York, the picture of which was carried in the newspaper Victory. And at the endof October or beginning of November, I am suggesting that we may try to implement
model activities on a global and international scale. Then we would be able to exert
further pressure towards nuclear disarmament, and I think we may be able to position
those events as an extension to the International Day of Peace, Sep. 21.
We would need to cooperation with NGOs and other citizens around the world, and I
think that this will contribute greatly towards the materialization of Vision 2020 andopen new avenues for mankind in a new way.
I would like to conclude by this poem: All cities, all people should join hands torealize a peaceful world without nuclear weapons and violence.
Chairperson: Thank you very much, Mr. Audoubert. I’ll call on the President ofSeine St. Denis, France, Monsieur Mr. Hervé Brahmy.
Hervé Brahmy, President, Seine St. Denis, France: Mayor Akiba, mayors of thecities and colleagues, and ladies and gentlemen, abolition of nuclear weapons isnecessary for us to continue to have hopes for sustainable peace on the globe. I
wholeheartedly concur with the opinions advocated by Mayor Akiba. In April 2003,
he delivered the speech in Geneva. He says the direct objective is on the nuclear
weapons, but our long-term objective is to create the new civilization. Yes, indeed.
Objecting to nuclear weapons is fighting against the concept which legitimizes thatforce is the right way, not for the development of human beings. Weapons are
utilized for the exploitation and destruction of human beings, and we are fighting
against such a force, including money.
Whenever we hear the names Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it’s been already 60 years, but
still we feel mournful and sorrowful. In this very place we realize that for many,
many years the use of nuclear weapons have had a grave impact on human beings.
And originally, come to think of it, they are formidable about money which can beutilized for medicine and education on humane purposes, they are expended for
creating deadly weapons in the industries, nuclear weapons technologies which havecreated the worst barbaric actions gives horror and fear. Especially we hate theexistence of destructive weapons such as WMD and conventional weapons. The fact

that we are using those terms and words means that those weapons are taken for
granted in our world.
This illustrates how much role is to be played by science and research for thecivilization development of humans. And more than that, what we are wishing tocreate in the world, that world has to be equipped with solidarity, non-violence, basic
rights to be protected. Those value sets are necessary in order to eradicate poverty andviolence, which can find the causes in exclusivism, ignorance and exploitation we arefighting for the sake of peace. We need to build up immediately cooperation, justice
and an equal world.
More and more there is a proliferation of nuclear weapons seen in the world. Eachcountry is promoting their militarization. You find many terrorist attacks. Onceagain, we have to recognize and respect human beings, and for us and our future
generations and for our children we have to make a decision for the future of the
globe.
In Europe, we are celebrating the symbolic year commemorating the liberation of theconcentration camp of the Nazis. We once again have to recall what kind ofexperience we have had in the barbarian actions in the dark and bleak period. What
was the logic there in those days? There should be something we have to do. There
are so many millions of people who think that way, opposition to the Iraqi war in thevarious sustainable problem solutions seen in the Middle East. There are so many
people who have desperation in the hope for creating a peaceful world. By using
intelligent dialogue and negotiation we do have the capability to rectify those conflicts.
Based on such vision, we advocate strongly democracy and the rights of citizens. In
Seine St. Denis we have strong confidence in our future which can be built up by theactions of young people. Because of that we are here in Hiroshima and we brought 15
young Peace Messengers with us. By looking at the reality of the world, we need toopen our minds and we need to participate in this peace culture. I’m sure thisopportunity will give those young Peace Messengers to build up their personalities in
the future.
Many people still think the world without weapons is only a utopia, I know that. But
we did have a wonderful experience in Europe, the convention treaty which wasconsidered to be the complex European constitution. By using the ownership of thepeople are now in the hands of the Europeans. The convention, however, which has
admitted only the increase of the defense expense, was denied by the obsession of the
majority. Without the wonderful movement in Europe this kind of movement was notrealized.
Therefore, we believe that the spirit of wishing for a utopia will make us move further.
As many as 200 peace activists of France are here in Japan, including the young Peace
Messengers and parliamentarians. Human beings are the ones who created nuclear
weapons and it is our responsibility as humans to try to seek for other alternative ways.
A poet of France said, Paul Eluard says, those who are no longer afraid of themselves
will be born because they can have confidence in whole human beings. There are nofools with human faces any more. Together with the new Messengers, who areresponsible for building the new period, I am here with you. I would like to express
my appreciation for the sponsors. Thank you very much.
Chairperson: Thank you. The President of the House of Representatives of Berlin,
Mr. Walter Momper.
Walter Momper, President of House of Representatives, Berlin, Germany: Mr.
Chairman, Mayor Akiba, ladies and gentlemen, this conference is of great importanceto the entire world, and by taking part in this event the German capital City of Berlin
is expressing its deep bond and solidarity with the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
As a former Governing Mayor of Berlin and the current Speaker of the Berlin Houseof Representatives, I am deeply moved by the visit to the city that sufferedimmeasurable horrors during the Second World War and today has become a symbolof hope which brings us all to work for a strong and for a lasting peace.
We have not forgotten that the Second World War was planned and unleashed in
Berlin by the Nazis and that the atomic bombs that were dropped on Hiroshima andNagasaki were a part and a consequence of the same war. The untold suffering
endured by the people of Japan shocked and horrified us in Germany too.
Like Warsaw and Stalingrad, Berlin was among the cities in Europe hit hardest by
the war, and today it shares the deep concern about peace in the world. We, too, areaware of the great risk of nuclear terrorism, a tragic accident or a military
miscalculation. We are aware of the danger that international terrorism or emerging
nations will end up acquiring nuclear weapons or the knowledge needed to produce
them and could use them in regional conflicts. It is to be feared that these dangerous
developments are already further than we expect them to be.
The nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty will become even more important in the next
few years as one of the cornerstones of international politics. All peace-loving
nations, and fortunately these are the majority, must work together to find ways andmeans to stop the exchange of nuclear material and its misuse to make war. Nuclear
weapons must be outlawed and stockpiles must be reduced or destroyed.
Demands and declarations alone will probably be unable to accomplish this.
However, with solidarity, with determination and shared goals, the community ofnations has been able to achieve great things in the past. If we join hands to work forpeace and against the threat of nuclear weapons, we will help to make the world safer
for peace. That is why Berlin supports the work of Mayors for Peace, in memory of
the victims of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, in solidarity with the survivors and with oureyes on the future, and on peace in the world.
It will remain our responsibility and our obligation to work for the peaceful solutionof conflict everywhere in the world. Berlin will do its part to promote peace. With
this in mind, I wish us all continued luck and good success in our fight. Thank youvery much for your patience.
Chairperson: Thank you very much, Mr. Momper. The next speaker will be the
Chairperson of the Berkeley Peace Justice Commission, USA, Mr. Steve Freedkin.

Steve Freedkin, Chairperson of the Berkeley Peace Justice Commission, U.S.A.:
Konnichiwa. Members of Mayors for Peace and honored guests, my name is Steve
Freedkin, I am the Chairperson of the City of Berkeley’s Peace Justice Commission. I
am honored to be here representing Berkeley Mayor Tom Bates, and I wish to thankeach of you for your dedication and hard work towards creating a world in which theatomic bomb remains a terrible fact of history, but only of history and never to berepeated.
Berkeley stands with Mayors for Peace and the peace-loving people of Japan in many
ways. Our mayor, Tom Bates, joined the delegation attending the United Nations
Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference. On Aug. 6 at 8:15 a.m. and again on
Aug. 9 at 11:02 a.m., the city’s peace bell will be rung in remembrance of the two
atomic bombings. This is being done in response to a request from a hibakusha from
Hiroshima who visited our city in May. On the night of Aug. 6, Berkeley will hold its
fourth annual peace lantern ceremony modeled after Hiroshima’s event.
Mr. Marder of New Haven has already mentioned some of the ideas I wish to sharetoday. In fact, I told him he had stolen some of my ideas, but that I’m happy to be
robbed in this case. He mentioned the boycott of South Africa that helped bring down
the system of apartheid. I’m proud to live in Berkeley, the city where the boycott ofSouth Africa began.
The City of Berkeley has a process in which citizens can directly create laws. In 1986,
the voters of Berkeley adopted the Nuclear-Free Berkeley Act. This law declares thatthe citizens of Berkeley consider nuclear weapons to be illegal and the city is to avoid
conducting any business with any organization that is involved in nuclear weapons.
This goes beyond the idea of pension investments that Mr. Marder mentioned. It
affects all business relationships.
The University of California operates three nuclear research laboratories for the US
government. Therefore, the City of Berkeley is required to avoid conducting businesswith the university. In practice, of course, this is difficult because the university’s
Berkeley campus is by far the largest institution in the city. However, whenever it ispossible, the city will work with different organizations and not with the university.
The efforts of Mayors for Peace are crucial steps towards elimination of nuclear
weapons. Cities may also want to take direct action of their own to withdraw support
from the nuclear weapons industry, as Berkeley does under its Nuclear-Free Berkeley
Act.
For one example, the Hoya Glass Company in Japan makes lenses for laser equipmentthat is used in fashioning nuclear bombs. Perhaps the cities of Mayors for Peace may
wish to boycott any equipment or supplies containing Hoya Glass as just one example.
We in Berkeley have developed a lengthy list of companies that have connections to
the nuclear weapons industry that we avoid doing business with. We will be happy toassist any of your cities in developing procedures and lists of companies for a nuclear
weapons boycott.

Mayor Bates and the people of Berkeley will continue to work with Mayors for Peaceto achieve the vision of eliminating nuclear weapons by the year 2020. Domo arigato
gosaimashita.
Chairperson: Thank you very much, Mr. Freedkin. The next speaker is the city
councilor of Brighton & Hove, United Kingdom, Mr. Brian Fitch, please.
Brian Fitch, City Councilor, Brighton & Hove, U.K.: I thank the mayors ofHiroshima and Nagasaki, the city councils and those numerous bodies that havesponsored this event enabling all of us to come here to make this happen. Those of us
who are mayors or city politicians know how difficult it is to finance such events, andI would like to put on record a really big thank you for the tremendous effort andsacrifice that has been made so that we can all gather here for these few days on thisimportant subject.
I am standing here, this is not the tie of the City of Brighton. This is one that Gary
Moore gave me from Christchurch, so if you have the opportunity to be given one ofthese lovely presents make sure you lift your card up so that you can show theemblem. That’s really like house notes. Thank you very much, Gary, for thefriendship that you have shown to many of us here, and I think it really makes thisconference gel when we can share some of the lighthearted things with serious things.
The subject we are here for, what can mayors and citizens do to abolish nuclear
weapons? My city, which is on the south coast of England, is a Peace Messenger City
and a member of Mayors for Peace. I am an elected member for over 30 years of theCity Council and I’m Secretary-General of the International Association of Peace
Messenger Cities. So many of you are in Mayors for Peace and Peace Messenger
Cities. So if you want to join both, Mr. Marder and myself are here. I think that’s akind of little peace commercial. Thank you very much for that.
Our city is an active member and supports the 2020 Vision of a total abolition of
nuclear weapons. We want a nuclear ban treaty and we’re working towards it. Ourcity works with the World Court Project, which opposes nuclear weapons, and isorganizing a worldwide campaign. The city, which is a Peace Messenger, is working
internationally with 80 cities around the globe. We share objectives, aims, and we try
to, at all levels, have the interchange with politicians, citizens, universities, because
that’s really what makes us.
Many of us here are elected representatives and we’re only as strong as the weakest
link in the chain. We are elected by people, we’re accountable to people, and it’s
important that we never lose sight of that. The people make us, and hopefully, we cancarry through their inspirations and their ideals to the levels that bring peace in thisworld.
What do we do? On our seafront lawns each year we have a peace event, and if theweather is good, and sometimes the sun does shine in England, we can have 5,000
people at a peace event on the sunny south coast. We are involved on Hiroshima Day
back home in the UK when peace activists, the Sussex Alliance of Peace – Sussex is
our region, prefecture – and peace activists gather in a variety of places to have a
Hiroshima and Nagasaki Day service and they float lanterns on the ponds and lakes

throughout the county. We have had the Hiroshima Exhibition three times in our city.
Last year we were privileged to have a delegation from Hiroshima that toured, notonly the UK but parts of Europe, and it’s been a great joy to see some of you back
here, and tonight we’ll have the opportunity of renewing those acquaintances.
Important work is being done by the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and I think weall recognize this and want to work with them.
Following the failure of the NPT conference, we must support and use the New
Agenda Coalition. I think we’ve got to use the opportunity with the states of New
Zealand, Mexico, Switzerland, Ireland, South Africa, Brazil, Egypt, and of course
Canada. I believe those states have a vital role in the world today because we must
not lose sight of the international goal for banning nuclear weapons and creatingworldwide peace, and those nations have an important role.
What do we do? Well, we as a city, a lot of my Councilors, when Blair went to Iraq
we emailed Blair and we’ve sent a message that we did not want to go to war and wewere opposed to it. We are now, in New York, we had the opportunity of meeting the
British Ambassador to the UN, and the delegation from the UK gave a strong message
to the government of our views on the issue of nuclear weapons.
We believe that we must use all means, we must use citizens, the people in our cities,
the organizations, so that we can actually change government policy and change
worldwide policy because policies are made by people and we’ve got to have agreater influence on those policies, on our own governments, and work through theUnited Nations to ensure that we begin to get decisions that will achieve the banningof nuclear weapons.
Coming to Hiroshima in 1989 changed my life. I remember coming to Narita Airportand opening the door: I think I know what a turkey felt like on Thanksgiving Day.
The heat rushed in and I’ve never known a temperature like it. From that first visit toHiroshima and Nagasaki, I was the mayor of the city at the time and I became theMayor of Peace throughout that period of my office and I’ve continued with this workat every level. I believe that we as individuals must use the opportunities that are
given to us, that we must work with all the organizations that are in our localities andwe must take the peace message forward.
Now I’ve put some World Court leaflets outside. There’s one that I will ask you tolook at and sign. "I do not accept that nuclear weapons can defend me, my country or
the values I stand for." I would hope that as many of you will sign these so that they
can go back to the organization and we can show how we, as Mayors for Peace, arestanding and signing up to a contract. The World Court Project brochures areavailable there and there’s a lot of really good work being done.
Can I thank you once again for this opportunity, and I look forward to listening andworking with you in the next few days. And when we return to our homes I hope that
we can keep the contact, use the expertise, share the ideas, so that one day we will
come to this conference to announce that nuclear weapons have been banned. Thankyou.

Chairperson: Thank you very much indeed, Mr. Fitch. I’d like to call on the Mayorof Waitakere, New Zealand, Mr. Bob Harvey.
Bob Harvey, Mayor, Waitakere, New Zealand: Mr. Akiba-san, haere mai, haeremai, haere mai. Haere mai piki mai, haere mai kake mai. I’ve just greeted you in thelanguage of the Maori people of New Zealand, Aotearoa in the Pacific. And I stand
before you today, proudly, here on this platform on this great occasion.
I’d like to dedicate this speech, which will be brief, to a former prime minister of mycountry, Mr. David Lange, who lies gravely ill in hospital. It was David Lange's
concept that New Zealand would become nuclear-free 20 years ago, and from 20
years ago we have held his vision. He made New Zealand nuclear-free and many
mayors, there was another mayor, my good friend Mr. Moore of Christchurch, Mayor
Moore and I have made sure that the dedication of New Zealand as a nuclear-free cityand country stays. So I dedicate this speech to him.
I’d like to give you a background to Waitakere City because I think you should know
the context of New Zealand’s Aotearoa in the context of Waitakere where I havebeen the mayor for the last 13 years. Waitakere was born as a city in 1989 whenseveral small towns were merged. It enjoys a spectacular location in the western
sector of the Auckland area. It’s an urban area shaped by post-war expansion, formsof networks of small villages really, town centers and suburban sprawl.
But we have been proudly nuclear-free now for almost 30 years. We were one of thefirst cities to declare itself a nuclear-free city. That’s pre-dating the government
stance with David Lange. And every day since that time we have flown from theCouncil building a nuclear-free flag. Colleagues, it is a great symbol of what we cando to symbolize what we do.
The theme of this conference is of course peace, and while occasions like this are
grand, it’s the small things that we do every day that I believe continue to contributetowards the harmony of our communities. So let me give you some quick examples.
New Zealand, and indeed Waitakere, were always committed to the environment.
And so when I became the mayor in 1992, I declared the city an eco-city, a city not
only of the environment but also of peace. And that means that we have worked withthe people to communicate what their needs and vision could be, and believe me, it
has worked.
In our community we have built a strong, peaceful local community and we havefound that crime and other social ills have evaporated with wealth and relative
prosperity.
Being an eco-city has also meant that we are protecting and expanding our "green
network."
It’s also important that when we adopted Agenda 21 that the communities understoodthat Agenda 21 brought peace and solidarity through the community. And so it has acalming effect on our communities.

We are home to around 130 separate and different cultures. That is very, very
interesting, particularly in the complexity of this modern 21st century. And thus weare a melting pot of the Pacific. Our population is very small, considering most ofyou, 190,000, and 39 per cent of our population are under the age of 24, very young,very Polynesian. One-third of the population is under 20 years of age. So we are a
microcosm really of the whole country.
Waitakere has an absolute commitment to peace and sustainability. We believe thetwo are inseparable. Peace in Waitakere’s terms means consultation and involvementin the decision-making, and so we believe peace has many voices. This is evidenced
by the way Waitakere has brought Maori and Pacific Island people together. We havealso signed memorandums with our Pacific Island people and our ethnic community
board. Councilor Chan is our first Asian Councilor in, indeed, 40, 50 years. So I
believe we have tried, and I think succeeded, in creating a peaceful community, acommunity in which people feel safe, valued and comfortable.
And to Waitakere’s credit we have involved a number of peace initiatives and let mejust tell you quickly.
We have taken a holistic approach to sustainable development, in particular,
recognizing the inter-relationships between the environment and the economy and thepeople. And I would like to acknowledge here our relationship with our Japanesesister city of Kakogawa. Our main council building features a peace garden, which
was a gift from that city to ours, and it features peace roses. And our community
understands that the rose takes a lot of work to allow it to flourish, so the rose isnamed "peace," and in that garden peace flourishes.
I personally, like my colleague Gary, have been involved in peace initiatives all mylife, almost for 40 years. But when I became the mayor, I led a delegation of protests
against the testing of nuclear weapons in the Pacific, closest to our door. We often
saw our skies turn red in the night as the testing in Muraroa in Tahiti took place.
Enough was enough. We went in 1995 and testing soon stopped. We mobilized thewhole country.
In 1996 I was honored to received one of the United Nations Mayors for Peaceawards for the work we had done in Waitakere City.
And so I greet you all, but I acknowledge that in dark and in good times we must takeownership of issues of peace.
But today I bring you something special. Here are the letters of every city of New
Zealand, Aotearoa, not including Gary Moore and my colleague Alex Shaw from
Wellington who are here. This is a whole nation, every city in New Zealand has
given me a letter of support, and I present that to my friend, my dear friend, Mr.
Akiba, on this because it is so important. Thank you.
And so I follow and finish this speech with just a simple Maori greeting, a greetingthat says it all: He tangata, he tangata, he tangata – it is people, it is people, it ispeople. I also bring him a gift from New Zealand, the gift is a pottery bowl called"peace." Thank you. Kia ora rawa atu to you all.

Chairperson: Thank you very much, Mr. Harvey. I would like to call on the Mayorof Galle, Sri Lanka, Mr. Mohamed Ismail Mohamed Ariff.
Mohamed Ismail Mohamed Ariff, Mayor, Galle, Sri Lanka: Mr. Chairman, YourWorship the Mayor of Hiroshima, Mr. Akiba, distinguished mayors, distinguishedparticipants, ladies and gentlemen. We, the Mayors for Peace who have assembled
here today in this august assembly at Hiroshima, have a great responsibility thrust on
us for the maintenance for peace in the world. It is a very urgent necessity. The
subject that I need is towards a safer world has a great bearing on it today than it wasat any other time.
Today there is great unrest in the world. Why is it? There is an unrestricted
expansion of nuclear power, expansion and the threat of experiments of the world’s
major powers. They are in the process of experimenting with the further use of
nuclear power generation. This has caused a serious threat to all of us, to mankind.
Nuclear power can be used both for peaceful purposes, as well as destructive purposes.
At the same time, there is another threat too, and what is it? It is the threat ofterrorism. Frequently, we hear of bomb attacks by terrorist groups. Once America
was attacked and recently we have heard about bomb attacks in the UK, and in several
other countries. This has caused untold suffering and embarrassment to all of us andthis aspect needs our immediate attention.
When we think of the present day world, how the increasing use of nuclear power
generation has caused unrest among nations. Powerful world powers already possessthem and other nations, for example, India and Pakistan and North Korea, are also inthe process of developing and expanding their resources on nuclear energy. This has
led to controversial arguments about the safety of the world. As we have experienced
in the past, the expansion of nuclear power breeds fear and anxiety and unrest amongus. Its expansion is a great threat to world peace. Its uncontrolled use will be a great
danger, not only for the countries that experiment on it, but it will result in the total
destruction and even and annihilation of mankind from earth.
What is needed today is a need for the control of unrestricted expansion of nuclear
power. The future program of work needs control and abolition. At the same time, itis necessary to program for the use of nuclear power for peaceful purposes. It is aregrettable fact that so far the methods adopted to control the nuclear program havenot produced the desired result. Even after 60 years of the explosion of the atomic
bomb, the effects of it are still being experienced, the effects of radiation are still
being studied. It is our bound duty to adopt.
We hope and pray that the solution by this body to request the world powers to thinkagain and make use of their good offices to control the use of nuclear power. Thankyou.
Chairperson: Thank you very much. The next speaker is the Official Delegation
Representative of Ixelles, Belgium, Mr. Jean-Pierre Brouhon.

Jean-Pierre Brouhon, Official Delegation Representative, Ixelles, Belgium:
Mayor Akiba, Mr. Chairman, esteemed guests, mayors, there are places in the world
which, despite the passage of time, will forever evoke great emotion. Preserved in thespirit of human soul, the power of these emotions refuses to diminish with the passingof generations. These places lead us to a new level of understanding, one whereby we
can hope to grasp the real meaning of the term "compassion." Hiroshima andNagasaki are two such places. In Hiroshima, where the cities of the past still echoaround the shops and houses, life has very quickly found a path back to normality, anormality that others so much take for granted.
Today your great city is a symbol to the enduring human spirit, as well as an example
to us all of the ability in overcoming a great tragedy. We must all take time to reflect
on our duties as citizens of the world. Again, for the tsunami there were lots of efforts
seen for the reconstruction of cities. In the time scale of human history, thedestruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki represents but less than the fraction of asecond, though it is a moment that should be permanently etched into the memory ofeach and every one of us.
On Aug. 6 of 1945 science ceased to be solely a tool for the advancement of mankind,for it has now become also the instrument of Armageddon. Science, it could be said,
had become the harbinger of death forever more casting a shadow over the whole ofmankind. War had ceased to be just a conflict between two attacking armies, but had
grown to legitimize the use of weapons of unimaginable power.
The scientist Albert Jacquard said:
Of the previous advancements in history, not the taming of fire, not theadvent of writing, nor the discovery of a new continent, has been so
decisive. This time men have harnessed the power such that it exceeds
the capacity of the planet; they endanger everything that it contains.
Mr. Mayor, mayors of the cities, we applaud the lead you took in the United Nations
through the convention for peace, and also with the other cities of the world. And
starting from August 2004, there has been another action, emergency action for the
nuclear abolition. One thousand eighty are the number of the members in thisorganization, Mayors of Peace. We have to be very careful, otherwise, we might bedoomed to Armageddon. If you look at the newspaper, we have to face many threats,such as terrorism. No matter where the terrorists appear, we have to challenge against
terrorist attacks.
But no matter what kind of threats we face, we should never forget the need for theabolition of nuclear weapons because those are similar fighting as you can find thebomb in the subway, armaments and nuclearization will lead the way to thedestruction of the world, and we will lose the self-determination of people if we
continue to allow those terrorist attacks to happen.
At the present time, the world’s nuclear arsenals have a total explosive yield
equivalent to a ton of TNT for every man of the planet. No longer can we afford to
stick our heads in the sand ignoring the situation, hoping beyond hope that nobody
uses their nuclear arsenals.

The human race received s wakeup call on the issue of nuclear weapons and theirdestructive powers, but since that time nothing has made it possible to reverse theinfluence of nuclear weapons and their holders. Nuclear tests multiplied while thenuclear arms race gathered pace at an alarming rate. The nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty, NPT treaty, was disregarded. For the participants armament fighting, they
have disregarded the NPT treaty.
As French writer Albert Camus said:…in view of this terrifying prospect that has been placed at thedoor of mankind, we can see clearer than ever that peace is the
only fight worth fighting for. We cannot just leave it to hope, it
is imperative that people address their governments, in order thatthey might rightly choose between hell and reason.
This can be the only way forward. Let us never tire of saying that it is the duty of
every citizen never to forget. Under the names of Hiroshima and Nagasaki we have tocontinue to give the message to future generations. Hiroshima and Nagasaki
experiences and events will not be in vain. This provides the world with a tangiblereference point whereby countries can see the futility of a nuclear proliferation
strategy. The network of Mayors for Peace initiative like the countrywide Vision 2020
led many countries to express their position in this direction.
"Bourgmestre" is the name for the mayors. We have 235 mayors in Belgium, that’s
the percentage of 50 per cent who give the endorsement to the purpose and themission of the Mayors for Peace. This represents in my country an important step at
the local level towards the fight for disarmament. We, the inhabitants of the world,
are the only ones who have the power, the power to win the total and lasting peace.
To quote Camus again:
The only rational lesson we can learn is the urge/need to commit morevigorously to fight for a truly international society, one where larger
nations don’t have superior rights to small or medium nations and where
war isn’t motivated by the appetite or doctrine of one or more states.
Let us go back to our countries and testify to the memory of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Let’s not wait for our neighbors to act before we act, but rather to act without delay.
The change will come through both through our perseverance and our will to succeed.
This is the purpose of the visiting delegation from Belgium that I have the honor tolead. Thank you very much.
Chairperson: So may I call on the Councilor of Florence, Ms. Agostini, finally, andthen Mr. Scittarelli after her.
Susanna Agostini, Councillor, Florence, Italy: First of all we would like to thank
Mayor Akiba and all the other mayors who have made Mayors for Peace such animportant and respected association at the international level.

In the name of Mayor Leonardo Dominici, the Mayor of Florence, I am here today tobring the greetings and the solidarity of the City of Florence. It is an honor torepresent my city with emotion and respect in this international meeting, especiallybecause of the importance of the City of Hiroshima as a worldwide symbol. The
ceremonies reminding us about the events of our past history and that threw the wholeworld into chaos, can be the starting point for our new pact of civil and institutional
commitment to continue our duty. Florence and its mayor are here represented inorder to continue a commitment started in the 50s by an historical Mayor of Florence,
Mayor Giorgio La Pira, who already back then, just like Mayors for Peace today,
focused his intellectual and literary thoughts on the role of mayors as a bridge
between the institutional powers and the citizens’ needs.
The threat of a global apocalypse due to atomic weapons is a theme and a problem
that all nations and governments must face, although we know that the resistance tofind a real solution is still too strong; as proof of that, we can see how the results arefar from being satisfying if we evaluate the last modification of the Non-Nuclear
Proliferation Treaty signed in New York, which is unfortunately an evidence of thislack.
For these reasons, it is necessary to create a stronger intervention of the communities
in the name of the powers of humankind that were evoked by Martins in the famous
clause II of The Hague Conference on the limitations of weapons. What we aim is anintense pressure on governments in order to achieve new strong peace policies and therefusal of the atomic weapons.
To achieve this goal we need complicated and delicate actions to awake the citizens’
sensitivity of this theme which looks distant from an individual commitment and thatfor this reason is often psychologically "removed." In fact, in Italy recent studies
have proved how the nuclear threat is still a secondary cause of fear compared toother new causes like international terrorism, or traditional ones like criminality. The
general answer is: there is nothing we can do against the nuclear threat and we arecompletely defenseless.
On the contrary, we are here today because there are things we can do! Mayors canplay the most important role in this action together with their cabinets and the City
Councils. Being the closest institution to the citizens, mayors can achieve importantresults. Today and in the near future – what we are calling in this conference "Next
Steps" – mayors can convince their citizens of the importance of their commitment
and transform the natural instincts toward peace into a real need, based oncommitment and on the possibility of sustainable interventions. Mayors must become,first of all, the promoters of the diffusion of information about the dangers this threatbrings. We should go beyond the new important themes of peace education in theschools and generalize and enhance the education to all the citizens, using the proper
instruments of communication, which are immediate and easily understandable by all
cultural levels.
We must educate children and teenaged students, we must constantly train the
educators, we must give up detailed information to the citizens and to the media inparticular in order to spread the knowledge on the real threat of the atomic weaponsthat unfortunately still exist.

Since 1996 the Municipality of Florence has created the Peace and Solidarity
Commission representing all the political parties sitting in the City Council, including
Councilor Agostini. The aim of the Commission is in particular to put online all thepeace operators associations, both institutional and volunteer, that operate in the
Florentine territory and to coordinate and guide their activities into the international
scene. Our fiscal mission can count on the volunteer and direct support of free groupsof citizens that have been committed for years in the field of peace promotion and that
represent a precious aid to our research of a new awareness of about nuclear weapons.
In 2002 Florence has hosted the Social Forum, an opportunity for an international
meeting for all the peace initiatives in the world. Florence has always been involvedin the promotion of peace.
Another duty of the Peace Commission is the promotion and support of any useful
initiative that can help the integration of different cultural traditions in order to create
a new global culture based on the acceptance of the others and in the recognition ofpeace as the most important value in the world.
Adding the results of our Florentine work to the results of all the other committed
cities in the world that operate on this theme can help us achieving our goals. We canonly count on cooperation and on the results achieved at a local level, but each one
added to the others and adjusted to the local realities can represent an actual success.
The results of these activities will create a culture of differences that altogether will
avoid the atrocities that occurred against the inhabitants of this beautiful city andwelcoming city on Aug. 5, 60 years ago, and we should be sure that this will never
happen again in the future. Thank you.
Chairperson: Thank you very much. And may I call on Mr. Scittarelli ?
Bruno Vincenzo Scittarelli, Mayor, Cassino, Italy: Amongst the most serious
problems that threaten the peaceful nation and the survival of the earth, the atomic
proliferation is surely the most severe, destined to condition the whole humanity of
the world.
Unfortunately, war has always been an element very close to the story of mankind, an
exceptional event but also recurrent: once resolving the nature of the conflict, theopposing parties have always been able to restart their reconstruction programs andreestablish new political, social and economic balance.
Up to now, therefore, war has always had losers and winners. Men, populations, havebeen able to restart their historical course. Today, it is no longer possible. The actual
war problem in the world is completely different in aspects and dimensions as fromthe past. A nuclear weapon conflict means the total annihilation of mankind,
therefore: no winners, no losers; no slavery, no liberty; no richness, no poverty; no
progress, no underdevelopment; but the end of everyone and of all the inhabitants of
the world.
Emptiness, death, silence forever.

Today, unless one wishes to choose the road leading to human sacrifice, thecontroversies of interests and conflicts of power must necessarily be reduced totolerable conditions, compatible with the necessary international balance.
Peace and the survival of mankind, thus, seem to be obscured by the balance of terror,
and not by a true desire to establish worldwide relations that will definitely eliminate
all dangers of the explosion of a world war.
The prologue of the tragedy, of the "final solution" we have already seen. Hiroshima
and Nagasaki, the Nazi extermination camps, are the first testimonies of a very
dangerous road that humanity risks to run up to the end.
Must we then give up and prepare ourselves for the worst? Do we have to remain
motionless to all this and wait for the tragedy to occur without doing anything to stopit?
We mayors, members of these communities that during the last world conflict havelearnt the horrors of the war, must direct our political actions in order to pursue theculture of peace. Every single man, every single citizen must have the desire of peaceand refuse the wicked logic of war. The City of Cassino has actuated and pursues aconstant and strong political action towards twinships.
Campaigns of sensitization amongst the citizens of the problems connected to nuclear
proliferation in order that the national and international public opinion may convince
the government to review their programs on the matter. In other words, it is necessary
to pursue a serious policy of disarming, stop the running towards terrible war arms,
and avoid the terrible reciprocal "chasing" along the road of never-ending military
power.
Only with these methods, only with the imposing of agreements on the disarming,
even if only partial and gradual, will we be able to avoid the destruction of mankind.
It is essential that our actions aim to inform everyone on the risks that atomic arms
threaten not only to one nation or to one continent but to the whole world and thewhole humanity.
The City of Cassino, ever since 1984, with an official council committee document,
has declared its territory nuclear-free. It has also included in its statute an importantand valid instrument such as the Forum for Peace that is intended to take place
periodically at an international level.
However, our actions must be forwarded to all the State members of the treaty on
non-atomic proliferation that must obey all the rules of the treaty. In particular, they
must: ensure over the illegal use of nuclear technology, that civil atomic programs do
not turn into military ones, that nuclear arms do not fall into the hands of groups ofterrorists and that the three components of the treaty must be obeyed. The nonproliferation of nuclear arms, the disarming of nuclear arms, the peaceful use of
nuclear energy.

Although the objective conditions of our times do not allow much space for hope andreason, openings where everlasting peace may enter exist and thus become an
exulting reality for all humankind.
Universal peace must not and can not be founded upon the basis of terror, on scaring abalance full of uncertainties and risks, on opposing armies; it must derive from
wisdom and from sensibility.
Chairperson: Thank you very much. And the next speaker will be the Mayor of
Kurunegala, Sri Lanka, Mr. Nimal Chandrasiri de Silva.
Nimal Chandrasiri de Silva, Mayor, Kurunegala, Sri Lanka: Honorable Mayor
Akiba and the members of councils, municipal councils, and all peace-loving
participants, ladies and gentlemen, first of all I must thank Honorable Mayor Akiba
for inviting the mayors and the members of councils and municipal councils in Sri
Lanka for the 6th General Conference of Mayors for Peace commemorating the 60th
Anniversary of the Atomic Bombings.
We Sri Lankans, we are subjected to both hand-made calamities and naturalcalamities. We in Sri Lanka have been suffering, Sri Lankans have been suffering
irreversible losses due to the monster of terrorism. Although we didn’t have a track of
nuclear weapons, we experience the dangers of bomb explosions due to terrorism andterrorist activities in Sri Lanka, so as a result, our daily living, happiness, mirth andfuture aspirations and all have been deprived. Sri Lankans are a peace-loving nation
so we convey our fullest assistance to protect the world from the disaster of nuclear
weapons and bomb explosions.
Ladies and gentlemen, very recently Sri Lanka had to face a natural calamity, thetsunami. That’s not a hand-made calamity; that’s a natural calamity, that’s a natural
disaster. Thousands and thousands and thousands of innocent people died
unexpectedly. Many still remain homeless and jobless due to this unexpectedcatastrophe. The Sri Lankan government finds it very difficult to rebuild Sri Lanka
within a short period of time. Many nations all over the world, especially Japan,
America, Germany, France and other countries, help us a lot. And they are still
helping us. So I take this opportunity to thank them all.
Ladies and gentlemen, as a peace-loving person, I have a kind, honest and humble
request to all of you. Let’s get together, hand in hand, to protect the world from thedisaster of nuclear weapons and terrorism. Sri Lanka is a paradise of the Indian
Ocean. It’s very beautiful. Kurunegala is the city, the central city in Sri Lanka. I
kindly invite everybody to visit our beloved motherland. Thank you very much.
Chairperson: Thank you for being short and keeping to time. And the last speaker
will be the Deputy Mayor of Villejiuf, France, Madame Arlette Zielinski.
Arlette Zielinski, Deputy Mayor, Villejiuf, France: Mr. Mayor of Hiroshima, I’dlike to thank Mayor Akiba for the kind invitation given to us.
From AFCDRP we would like to thank the previous speaker for explaining what weneed to do for peace and peace culture. The residents of the municipalities and thechildren of our city agree with the sense of friendship and peace. We have a long
history of fighting against violence. Paul Vaillant Couturier was a mayor between
1929 and 1937. He was a journalist and he was an author and he also has edited asong, and in 1917 together with Henri Barbusse he established l'Association
Républicaine des Anciens Combattants and it was a fight against the war.
And Villejiuf was a member since the inauguration of AFCDRP, from 2001 to 2010,
it took part in the United Nations decade for the culture of peace and for non-violence
for the children of the world. And we have 48,000 inhabitants in our city and we havemade some endeavors to realize peace. We need to get away from the culture of war,
but the culture of war is adjusting and coordinating different worlds.
And on the 21st April the City Council, with a unanimous vote, adopted a resolution
which was to be sent to NPT Review Conference in terms of full compliance andimmediate compliance of all provisions, in particular the provision of Article IV and
Article VI in request of early compliance.
And whenever people suffer from the injustice of wars, violence and difficulties, ourchildren and women and citizens fight against these. And the 21st September we hear
the poems and songs of peace-loving artists. The walls are also decorated with thepaintings of artists calling for peace. And this day-to-day civic activity is a kind of
education for the young people to enhance its awareness toward peace.
We have an inter-center effort. The republican government and our city officials
always are urged to work against nuclear weapons. Solidarity is not just a word but it
is a very familiar term which is put into practice on a day-to-day basis in every
household and in every family.
And on the 6th August the library shows the cinema that accuses the foolishness of
nuclear violence. On the 9th August we have a large picnic for peace. Children andcity officials and citizens get together in the park named after Pablo Neruda, a great
protector and advocate of peace and justice.
And we think about the children of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in order not to repeat
their mistakes of sacrificing children all over the world. Five hundred balloons areflown to the sky and at the same time all churches in the city toll their bells never torepeat their mistakes. Villejiuf is a Peace Messenger City for peace and peace culture
we believe is an important future of our society.
On Oct. 6, 1999, the declaration and action program for the culture of peace at theUnited States UN resolution was adopted. In line with that the city’s mayor andcouncilors focus on education for the promotion of a culture of peace. We have achildren’s live festival, we also have an event to eliminate racial discrimination.
Through these we promote our cause. We try to enhance the culture of peace. We try
to prevent conflicts. We try to have a consensus, and we also educate people with
non-violence cause.
We also promote international peace and security, the peaceful resolution of conflict.
And what we call for, we call for total disarmament and a comprehensive alternate

abolition of nuclear weapons, 50 per cent reduction of major expenses are what weare calling for.
France and other countries and with other local governments, we are working together
seeking a country and a nation and a world different from what we have now, where
we have no violence. We want to share wealth and knowledge. We want to have amutual benefit and fair allocation of wealth.
But it’s important that we need to find the root causes of war which are poverty andinjustice, the imbalance of development that causes confusion. The future of thepeaceful world can be realized through the solidarity of all races. But we can do morethan that. Our belief and our confidence should be built upon to realize peace on an
eternal basis. Let us keep Vision 2020. Thank you.
CHAIR MOGAMI: Thank you very much. Please allow me to announce to you that
we will finish this session at 2:00 flat, and I do not make my own comments and I willbasically accept your comments in tomorrow’s plenary, but in order to make the bestof the remaining three minutes, if you have any burning desire to make a comment
immediately, I can take one or two during this session. Is there any who wants tomake a comment on the spot? No? Yes, please.
Peter Chan, Councilor, Waitakere, New Zealand: To the Chair, I am Councilor
Chan from Waitakere City, New Zealand. Well, there are some comments.
War can never end war. The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki 60 years
ago was just one of the many consequences of the war. Sixty years after the war, theworld is not getting better. So many people in the world are still suffering frompoverty, injustice, starvation, social discrimination, international terrorism, racialconflicts, political and religious persecution. Yes, nuclear weapons must be outlawedand destroyed and this is a pitiful step towards world peace, but there are some otherissues that we need to address apart from the atomic weapons itself.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is an historic time and an historic place. We must learn
from history and respect history. Let us make our point. Let us have our voice
everywhere. Let us carry the message of peace from people to people, mayor to mayor,
cities to cities, and generation to generation. Together we can make a difference.
Thank you.
Chairperson: Thank you very much. Is there anyone else? If so, the meeting will
be adjourned now. Thank you very much for your patience and please accept myapologies for having extended this session for such a long, long time. Thank you verymuch.

The 6th General Conference of Mayors for Peace
Commemorating the 60th Anniversary of the Atomic Bombings

Section Meeting Ⅰ
International Cooperation for the Abolition of Nuclear Weapon-Partnership with NGOs and National Governments15:00-17:30, Friday, August 5, 2005
HimawariInternational Conference Center Hiroshima
Chairperson: Alyn Ware
Consultant for the International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms
Speaker:

Chantal Bourvic
Counselor, Val de Marne, France
Gisela Kallenbach
Member of the European Parliament, Representative of Leipzig, Germany
Alain Audoubert
Mayor, Vitry-sur-Seine, France
Ellen Woodsworth
Councilor, Vancouver, Canada
Ana Vicente
Mayor, Palmela, Portugal
Heinrich Niemann
District Councilor for Urban Development and elder Deputy Mayor,
Marzahn-Hellersdorf von Berlin, Germany
Pierre Villard
Co-Chair, Mouvement de la Paix, France
Yannik Hake
International Law Campaign, Germany
George Regan
National Chairman, Nuclear-Free Local Authorities U.K.
Asin Marika Abdul Karim
Councilor, Kandy, Sri Lanka
Mary Ellen McNish
Secretary General, American Friends Service Committee, U.S.A
Masayoshi Naito
Representative, Network for Nuclear Weapons Abolition, Japan
Keiko Nakamura
Acting Secretary General, Peace Depot, Japan
Johnanne Winchester
Director, Communications Coordination Committee for the United Nations, USA
Douglas Roche, O.C.
Chair of Middle Power Initiative
Former Canadian Senator and Ambassador for Disarmament to the UN

Teruo Takemoto, Director General, Citizens’ Affairs Bureau, Hiroshima, Japan:
Hello, ladies and gentlemen. I am Takemoto for Hiroshima City Hall, in charge ofcivic affairs. We would now like to begin the Section Meeting 1. Please allow me tointroduce our chairperson. This is Mr. Alyn Ware, consultant for the International
Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms and he was the Executive Director of
the Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy and UN Coordinator for the World Court
Project which led to the advisory opinion. He is currently a consultant at large for the
Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy, outreach educator for the Aotearoa New
Zealand Foundation for Peace Studies. Now, Mr. Ayn Ware, please.
Chairperson, Alyn Ware, Consultant for the International Association of
Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms: Thank you very much and welcome to theafternoon meeting, Section 1, on International Cooperation for the Abolition of
Nuclear Weapons: Partnership with Non-Governmental Organizations and National
Governments. Along with our mayors and other city representatives, we haveparticipating in the section government representatives, non-governmentalorganizations and other members of civil society. So this should assist in ourconsideration of this aspect of the Mayors for Peace campaign, the collaboration andcooperation with other members of civil society.
I propose to conduct the meeting in the following way. Firstly, I will make some
opening comments on the topic. Secondly, I have a list of participants who havealready requested the floor to speak. We have a list of I think 15, so we will thenallow them to take the floor for up to five minutes for initial remarks. Then we’ll takea break for coffee and refreshments, and then when we come back we’ll open up thefloor for questions, ideas, proposals, discussions, questions, et cetera.
So with regards to the focus of this section, it’s to discuss ways in which means forpeace can effectively cooperate and engage with key non-governmental organizations,
national governments and other sectors of civil society in the pursuit of nuclear
disarmament, and in particular, in the achievement of nuclear weapons abolition by
the year 2010, with the complete elimination of nuclear weapons by 2020, the Vision
2020.
One of the aspects of the Mayors for Peace campaign, which has led to its high profile
and its influence, is that it shapes its campaign activities very strategically, so
although the campaign is quite simple and idealistic, a nuclear weapons-free world,
the form and program is quite sophisticated, taking into consideration specific roles
that mayors and cities can play within the current international political environment.
There will be times when mayors for peace should work as mayors, by themselves, tomaximum the attention of the unique roles that mayors and cities have, and topromote and generate increased awareness of the responsibilities of cities and mayors.
However, there will be other times when Mayors for Peace should collaborate withspecific groups or with specific constituencies, building on existing or potential links
between mayors and that constituency. An example of this is the relationship that’s
been built between Mayors for Peace and The Parliamentary Network for Nuclear
Disarmament which highlights the mutually reinforcing roles of mayors andparliamentarians in promoting nuclear disarmament. And then there will be othertimes when Mayors for Peace should collaborate in a much wider and more general
sense with a cross-section of the abolition movement.

1

So in our discussions today, it will be useful to think about the strategic value of thesedifferent types of actions and collaborations. But also it would be valuable in our
discussions today to examine some of the examples of collaboration and cooperationthat have already occurred between Mayors for Peace and other sectors so that we canlearn from these and build upon them. I will just mention a few of those but I’m suremany of our speakers will mention others.
One example is the relationship between Mayors for Peace, the Abolition Now
Campaign, the International Peace Bureau and the wider abolition movement which
has helped to encourage mayors around the world to join the Mayors for Peaceemergency campaign.
Another is the strategic work which Middle Powers Initiative and Abolition Now
Campaign have helped in order to shape the nuclear abolition strategy which Mayors
for Peace is advancing. That includes, for example, looking at how best to engage
with international disarmament fora, like the Non-Proliferation Treaty Review
Conference and the United Nations General Assembly.
Another example, which I mentioned briefly before, the relationship between Mayors
for Peace and the Parliamentary Network for Nuclear Disarmament. A good exampleof this was the Joint Statement by mayors and parliamentarians which was released atthe 2005 NPT Review Conference, but which is still significant and politically useful
because it talks about the role that governments should take in the current politicalcontext, and there are copies of that Joint Statement available for those who have notendorsed it at the front door. Most of you probably have already picked one up, inJapanese and English.
Another example, and this is a collaboration between Mayors for Peace andgovernments. We’ve got a number of governments at the 2005 NPT Review
Conference that have collaborated with Mayors for Peace, including sponsoring press
conferences and fora. That included countries like Canada and New Zealand.
Another example of collaboration with government, again this is New Zealand, justrecently the New Zealand Minister for Disarmament contacted every mayor in New
Zealand to encourage those not already members of Mayors for Peace to join.
So those are just a few examples of collaboration that’s already happened and has had
some considerable success.
And finally, it would be useful in our discussions this afternoon to think aboutcollaborative strategies for Mayors for Peace, working with like-minded governments
in non-governmental organizations to advance nuclear abolition in light of thedisappointing 2005 NPT Review Conference. In this respect, it would be useful toconsider, for example, how we could collaborate on promoting such initiatives as the
Article VI Forum, which Senator Douglas Roche launched yesterday, and also the
proposal to encourage the United Nations General Assembly to establish a subcommittee to commence nuclear disarmament deliberations and negotiations, which
was in the Mayors for Peace program announced yesterday. So that’s a few thoughts
to start the discussion going.

2

It’s now my honor to introduce Ms. Chantal Bourvic, the County Councilor of Val deMarne, France, to give some comments. Following Ms. Chantal Bourvic, I’ll be
inviting Ms. Gisela Kallenbach to give comments. Thank you. Is Ms. Chantal
Bourvic available?
Chantal Bourvic, Counselor, Val de Marne, France: Ladies and gentlemen, dearfriends, dear colleagues, we feel that we would need to proceed with our actions in themost effective manner, and for the sake of the abolition of nuclear weapons we would
need to gather our forces and strengths and gather as many people as possible.
And the local governments are very close to the citizens and therefore they play a very
important role in serving our citizens. And therefore we should be cooperatingclosely with the NGOs and various associations and always the local governments aswell as national agencies.
The provincial assembly of Val de Marne and the regional local authorities arecooperating together to send the delegation here to Hiroshima, which is now
experiencing the 60th Anniversary of the Atomic Bombing. We have also brought
about 30 young people and they belong to different organizations as well. The third
encounter among international youth will be held and they will be participating in thisinternational conference, as well as participating in other events that are held during
this week. These young people are uniting to fight against various problems in theworld, including poverty and hunger, as well as peace.
Of course there are many citizens wishing to participate in activities, not only limited
to nuclear disarmament, and by disarmament we are not only focusing on nuclear
arms but this involves issues that are related to other inequalities in the world andincludes the issue of poverty as well.
So now that we are gathered here in Hiroshima, it shows us how important nuclear
abolition is for the sake of securing peace in the world. They are able to have a firsthand experience by coming to Hiroshima, and by doing so they would be able to learn
that their activities cannot be effective in reducing poverty unless there is peace in theworld and wars cannot be gotten rid of if there is no solution brought to inequality.
So we should gather our wisdom.
We have been looking at Vietnam, which has been going through many years of civil
strife, South Africa, El Salvador, have also gone through conflicts. And also Palestine,
which is occupied by a nuclear weapons State, we are partnering with these four
countries to fight for peace. Israel is receiving support from the United States in an
unconditional manner and it creates much discord in the Middle East because of this.
And therefore, we are fighting to bring about peace in the region. Niger is also one ofthe poorest of the countries in Africa. Since they have been fighting for many years,
Niger has not been able to come out of poverty so readily. The natural conditions arevery harsh. There is much hunger or damage from locusts and grasshoppers.
The nuclear weapons are now in the hands of human beings, which can annihilate thelives on earth in an instant. So we should also know that mankind also has thepossibility of turning this around, to utilize the technology in a more fruitful way, to3save the people from poverty and hunger instead. As I have mentioned, we have been
partnering with these four countries that I’ve mentioned before, and by doing so wehope to abolish nuclear weapons from the face of the earth. And based on this, thefunds that are made available could be utilized for the welfare of citizens and for thesake of building friendship among the people of different countries.
So as local governments or municipalities like us or in the provinces or in the regional
sense, different local authorities and NGOs are trying to work together to provide
peace. And the local government should play the important role of getting that peaceto their citizens and we should carry their message. There is a writer who has written
on peace, Bertolt Brecht. Well, nature is harsh, it brings wind and rain, but wars are
not nature-made, they are man-made, and in the spring, May Day, human beings
breathe. Peace cannot bloom flowers immediately. It is human beings that bringabout the flowers.
Chairperson: - France, for her comment. And now I’d like to invite Ms. Gisela
Kallenbach, a Member of the European Parliament. Thank you.
Gisela Kallenbach, Member of the European Parliament, Representative ofLeipzig, Germany: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Mayor Akiba, honorable
participants, ladies and gentlemen, the collapse of the NPT must have been a shocking
realization for the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki who are still suffering from theeffects of the dreadful events of 60 years ago. Manifestly, there is still no real
understanding of the principle of guilt and atonement. This makes our voice more
important than ever, and this is why I deliver to you today an appeal from theMembers of the European Parliament. You might find a copy at the table at the endof the room.
We, the Signatories, we, who have signed this, have resolved to speak up for nuclear
disarmament and call on the European Union to do everything in its power to ensurethat nuclear weapons are never deployed again. By means of this Statement, we wantto encourage mayors in our own cities to join the Mayors for Peace movement. I havesuccessfully achieved this in my home City of Leipzig,, and I’m happy to announce
again that our Lord Mayor Mr. Wolfgang Tiefensee has become a member of thisorganization with the agreement of the Council of Elders of Leipzig City Council.
Please allow me to pass on the personal greetings of Mr. Tiefensee and to you, to you
all at this point.
In his Message of Greeting, which I handed over yesterday evening to Mr. Akiba, heremembers the demand of the East German peace movement in times of worldwide
armament to turn words into plowshares. He calls on us to talk about antipathy anddepression as a consequence of violent conflict, and not to conceal the opportunities
that are lost in life when government expenditure is devoted to armaments instead ofeducation, youth or health care.
However, it is not enough to just collect signatures for the demands of Mayors for
Peace. I think all of us, we agree on this. There must be more. A true movement willbe created from this initiative should we succeed in convincing our citizens that
nuclear weapons must be banned worldwide and that a deep commitment to peace and4disarmament is ultimately the most important legacy that we can leave our children
and grandchildren.
This commitment also includes the reconditioning and reparation process. I notice
only too well from my own experience in Germany. I am listening very closely
throughout the conference to what mechanisms you use in your various cities toachieve this aim, and how we can ensure that the yesterday- announced one year
campaigning gains the full support of the civil society.
Also, this year’s Review Conference of NPT represents a common standpoint for EU
countries on fundamental questions, which is an enormous step forward. As a
Member of the European Parliament, it is not only important to me that the European
Union worked for nuclear disarmament and against the further proliferation of nuclear
technology, we Europeans must clarify whether and how Europe will become
involved in measures to counter the further proliferation of nuclear weapons as part of
the European Security and Defense Policy within NATO or under the guise of theEuropean Union.
As a member of the Green faction of the European Parliament, I am convinced thatmultilaterality and diplomacy must be given priority over bilateral agreements andmilitary intervention. The additional protocols to the NPT must form the basis formonitoring obligations. The treaty relating to the comprehensive ban on nuclear
weapons testing must ultimately be ratified by the remaining countries. In order for it
to come into force, nuclear countries themselves must take their obligation seriouslywith regards to nuclear disarmament pursuant to Article VI of the NPT.
Dear ladies and gentlemen, with today’s presentation of the call from the Members of
the European Parliament, we would like to show the people of Japan that they are notalone in their commemoration of the victims and political efforts to stop any
repetition of this tragedy. Let’s stand together and let’s take up the proposals
contained in Mr. Akiba’s letter to the Review Conference and support other activities,
like those proposed by the Middle Power Initiative or by yesterday’s keynote speaker,
Mrs. Prof. Inoguchi, in order to create a new negotiation platform for the ban of
nuclear weapons. Thank you for you attention.
Chairperson: I’d like to thank Ms. Gisela Kallenbach, a Member of the European
Parliament, for her comments. I’ll now take the opportunity to invite Mr. Alain
Audoubert, the Mayor of Vitry-sur-Seine, to make some comments. And thenfollowing Mr. Alain Audoubert will be Ms. Ellen Woodsworth, Councilor of
Vancouver. Thank you.
Alain Audoubert, Mayor, Vitry-sur-Seine, France: So now that globalization isproceeding, I think that there is a recognition that a solution to peace and global
environmental issues are of the same nature. Let me repeat. As we see the progressof globalization in the world, there is a widened recognition that the solution to peaceand global environmental issues are the same battle. And many NGOs of my town
are participating in the campaign Vision 2020, which I can report to you with greatsatisfaction. Thanks to the initiatives taken by our city, we have many events taking
place and various NGOs are expressing their own concerns as well as their own topics
of interest, and they are expressing various desires for disarmament.

5Currently 25 residents of Vitry-sur-Seine are in Hiroshima now and some have joined
the Mouvement de la Paix or they are staying under the planned program of our city,
So whether they be direct peace movements or humanitarian movements ormovements for the sake of assistance or cooperation or for cohabitation or codevelopment or for the sustainable development or for the environmental protection,
the local organizations and NGO activists have this strong awareness that they need todeal with the evil on the earth that is produced because of actions and behaviors
closely related to power relationships.
Now $875 billion of the world military expenses is immense, and it is three times theamount of the budget that is spent by the UN for hunger, literacy and medicine or
potable water and environment, and so such recognitions are leading people to standup for Vision 2020.
With more and more population being concentrated in large city centers, the local
governments are expected to play an international role together with the United
Nations. I believe we need three types of effort. First, we need a peace movement,such as Mouvement de la Paix, and also we need to deepen our exchanges withappropriate organizations to promote the participation of citizens.
Secondly, many NGO activists should exchange with other NGOs, for example, under
the World Social Forum. The World Social Forum for 2006 will be held in Caracas in
the Americas, Karachi in Asia, Bamako in Africa, and the European Social Forum
will be held in Athens. And therefore there will be events taking place in different
parts of the world. By respecting diversity of the World Social Forum, the Mayors for
Peace perhaps could try to incorporate the Vision 2020’s goals into the activities ofthese attempts that are being made to build another world.
And we should make further efforts to increase the number of participating cities in
the Mayors for Peace in order to enhance our activities on a worldwide scale. We
have two cities with which we have twinned with Vitry. And they are also
participating actively in our peace initiatives, and we are urging them to participate in
the Mayors for Peace meetings in 2006.
In France, we have 60 member cities but they are smaller-sized or middle-sized cities.
Under the cooperation of Hiroshima City, Paris has contributed by planning the Abomb Exhibition, but we need to involve such major cities like Lyons and Marseilles.
Under the same spirit, Mayors for Peace could perhaps deepen their relationship with
United Cities, which was an organization borne by the joint efforts of IULA, and theWorld Sister City Union. I think we would need to make such further efforts in orderto heighten the awareness on the part of the citizens for nuclear abolition. Thank youvery much for your attention.
Chairperson: I would like to thank Mr. Alain Audoubert, Mayor of Vitry-sur-Seine,for his comments. I would now like to invite Ms. Ellen Woodsworth, the Councilorof Vancouver, to make some comments. Thank you. Following Ms. Woodsworth, I
will be inviting Ms. Ana Vicente from the City of Palmela to make some comments.

6

Ellen Woodsworth, Councilor, Vancouver, Canada: Thank you very much. It’s apleasure and an honor to be at this conference, especially in Hiroshima at the 60th
anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Dear friends, 60 years ago the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were destroyed by
two atomic bombs that killed tens of thousands of civilians. It was a crime against
humanity. We pay tribute to the victims and to the survivors whose efforts for redress
and peace have played a foundational role in the peace movement in Japan and aroundthe world. We mourn their passing. In November last, we in Vancouver lost a
Hiroshima survivor and anti-nuclear activist, Kinoku Laskey. We must not forget thesurvivors or their message, Never Again.
We also pay tribute to the City of Hiroshima and their mayors past and present by
establishing the worldwide organization Mayors for Peace. You have set an exampleof how cities must take up their responsibility to assure that peace and nuclear
abolition are achieved. Vancouver is proud to be an active member of Mayors for
Peace and the International Peace Messenger Cities.
The invasion of Iraq has created new problems and challenges. The City of
Vancouver joins with millions of others around the world to say No to the invasion
and the Canadian government declined to join in the "coalition of the willing."
Inspired by the resurgence of the peace movement worldwide, we believe that wemust work to abolish nuclear weapons and put an end to militarism and war. Global
military expenditures are robbing cities of the funds necessary to assure healthy
communities, education, housing and basic infrastructures, and are denying the world
the resources to end poverty.
On March 31, 2005, the City of Vancouver Council voted unanimously to support, tohelp fund, and to actively participate in the World Peace Forum to be held from June
22 to June 28, 2006 in Vancouver immediately following the World Urban Forum,
also being held in Vancouver. The City of Vancouver also agreed to contribute$150,000, and then we had the endorsement of the Vancouver Parks Board, theVancouver School Board and the Vancouver Public Library.
The idea of holding a World Peace Forum surfaced in March 2003 at a Vancouver
conference, Preventing Crimes Against Humanity: Lessons from the Asia-PacificWar 1931 to 1945. This was a unique anti-war conference focused on issues ofredress from World War II, including Asian victims of biological warfare, forcedlabor, sexual slavery and other human rights abuses, victims of the atomic bombing ofHiroshima, Japanese-Canadians who were dispossessed and exiled by the Canadiangovernment, as well as First Nations people, long the victims or crimes against
humanity and genocide, most recently, the abuse they suffered in so-called residential
schools.
It was during this conference that the United States administration began its bombing
and invasion of Iraq. In the course of this conference, it became clear from many
participants that it was necessary to wage a worldwide campaign against the invasion
and war but that a campaign-based strategy alone was not sufficient. In order toachieve a balanced global perspective to guide us in the future, the peace movement
needed to develop a better understanding of challenges to peace in the various regions

7

of the world, from the Middle East, to Asia, the Americas, and Africa. Without such avision we may not have the capacity and flexibility to respond to future crises
appropriately, i.e., on the Korean Peninsula. This was a contribution that reflected themulticultural nature of the conference.
The proposal for a World Peace Forum also drew on a number of other currents
represented at the conference. Elders, who had participated in world peace meetingsfrom the 1940s and 1950s, reminded us that such a thing is possible. Furthermore, anumber of people had attended the anti-globalization meetings at the World Social
Forum. And I attended these meetings to discuss with the World Social Forum thepossibility and the necessity of holding such a forum, and was it appropriate to holdsuch a forum in North America, in Vancouver, at this time. There was overwhelming
support for this proposal.
Inspired by the survivors of the crimes against humanity, hoping to grow a regionallyinclusive peace movement, and drawing on the history of previous world peace
meetings and inspired by the World Social Forum, the proposal for a World Peace
Forum saw the light of day.
The World Peace Forum, as I said earlier today, not knowing that I would actually be
standing before you at this point, is growing at leaps and bounds as people arrange tohave their conferences in Vancouver and others during the World Peace Forum, andothers are planning to have their conferences during the World Urban Forum. We
have developed a structure with an international advisory body, with a Canadian
advisory body and with working groups, and these working groups, whether it’s the
youth working group, the women’s working group, the sustainability working group,
the anti-racism/anti-caste working group, are developing connections globally with
their counterparts, and we encourage you, if you have an active youth component, toemail us and let us connect our youth with your youth. And as I will be doing thisevening, meeting with the women who have come here to discuss the impact of wars
and nuclear war in particular on women and drawing those analogies.
We very much at this conference want to network with each other, we want tostrengthen our existing movements, our existing organizations, learn from bestpractices around the world, and we want to ensure that there is a legacy that comes outof this conference. We want to solicit constructive summaries, case studies, active
practices, which the youth have changed the name from "best practices" to "active
practices" because they say active practices means you’re doing it and best practices
may be just intellectual models, and the youth want to get down and get things
moving.
We want to make sure it’s a civic community partnership, so it’s neither the municipal
governments nor the communities but both working in partnership, and we’vedeveloped an organizational model which reflects that. You might want to make surethat it’s gender equal, that it reflects the diversity of people, and that First Nations
people around the world show us the way forward and give us their examples of theirresilience and their sustainability and their victories as they move forward.
We want, for example, case studies, such as we’ve heard this day, of the role, how
was it that half of Belgium’s mayors are members of the Mayors for Peace or how

8was it that New Zealand’s mayors were able to all support the initiatives that we’re
working on today? And what role have the NGOs or social movements played inachieving this high level of participation? There are lessons from these that we canlearn from each other? We will use these summaries as a basis for discussion both
before and during the World Peace Forum. Constructive summaries could mean
positive or negative experiences but which emphasize ways we can work together inthe future.
This project will involve three stages, one, soliciting examples from around the world,from individuals, as well as organizations civic and civil, using the central website as
the depository for these reports, and we hope you will take a look at our website,www.worldpeaceforum.ca.
Two, the international advisory body will attempt in early 2006 to distill a summaryof these experiences and present some proposals about future ways for local
governments and communities to work together. This discussion paper will becirculated to all participating organizations and posted on the web for discussion prior
to the conference. Feedback will be solicited and circulated by the web and othermedia.
And three, all sessions at the World Peace Forum will be expected to discuss andrespond to the discussion paper and related materials. The international advisoryboard will meet one or two days before the forum convenes to further discuss the
feedback and to make any recommendations they might consider appropriate. These
will be circulated to all delegates as part of the discussion package. A broad civic
civil group will convene and the workshop and forum will be expected to post theresults of their deliberations on the topic immediately after their sessions are over.
And a final summary will be prepared.
So this gives you a taste of how we are moving forward, how we have learned from
the Mayors for Peace, and we hope that we will see you all in June 2006 in Vancouver.
Thank you so much.
Chairperson: I’d like to thank Ms. Ellen Woodsworth, Councilor of Vancouver, forher comments. I would now like to invite Ms. Ana Vicente, Mayor of the City ofPalmela, to make some comments. Following Ms. Vicente, I’ll be inviting Mr.
Heinrich Niemann to make some comments. Thank you.
Ana Vicente, Mayor, Palmela, Portugal: First of all I would like to say that it’s anhonor to share this conference and these moments with you, especially at this time in
Hiroshima.
Ladies and gentlemen, dear friends, the great philosopher from Athens, Socrates, said
that he was not only from Athens, he was a citizen of the world. We, mayors of theentire world, feel citizens of the martyr City of Hiroshima. Such a fact increases our
responsibility facing people of Hiroshima and other cities.
Buildings are made from the bottom to the top. We mayors, know that our force
comes from the bottom, from the citizens we represent, those who elected us. Our
struggle for the abolition of nuclear weapons depends on our capacity to globalize our9unity. We are very near to the people because we are the local power, the last chainof the power. This proximity allows us to have a real perception of their aspirations,but on the other hand, to answer directly to them.
This explains why in my country so many tens of municipalities have signed thepetition to abolish the nuclear weapons. Different mayors with very different politicaland ideological orientations have signed the petition. The fact that we have local
elections next October may be an explanation for the fact that I’m the only Portuguese
mayor here in this conference.
Friends, the Hiroshima explosion became a hellfire for women, men, no matter theirphilosophy, and all the innocents, like children and old people. Nuclear weapons
when used destroy everybody and everything. Nowadays they can destroy the planet
and its life. The destructive power of the thermo-nuclear bomb is a thousand times
more powerful than those that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
We and our children and our towns, we are all enemies of those who try to support
their power in nuclear weapons. That’s the point we have to face and to make clear
for our citizens and for the public opinion in general. Everybody must fight for theabolition for such powerful weapons now, immediately. I think that we, mayors of
the world, we come here to claim our repulsion for crimes against Hiroshima andNagasaki, but we are conscious that it means a battle.
Unfortunately, the country which considers itself leader and powerful in the world,
insists in this strategy and insists that nuclear weapons are to be used. Their strategy
and the non-respect for the international treaty and the uninterrupted research anddevelopment of new experiences makes instability all over the world. And if we haveother nuclear powers that also follow the same way, spending financial resources, we
could feed millions of people, maybe stopping hunger.
Humankind cannot become a prisoner of the strategy of the bellicose countries nor are
the prisoner of a casual accident which could simply make a holocaust. The nuclear
weapons existing are enough to destroy life on our planet. What kind of dementia or
sickness can explain that countries still run to increase their nuclear capacity, trying tobe the first one. Nuclear weapons represent the instability factor in the world andavoid sustainable development. They must be banished now, also for the stability ofinternational order.
We are in Hiroshima and a market town that saw, in the first second of the atomic
explosion, to be killed tens of thousands of citizens and our fight gets more and moreactually in since years.
The citizens we represent feel easily that war in general is an horror, but nuclear war
is the worst one. They know that the enemy are all of us: politics, armies, simple
people from left to the right, religious or not religious, workers and intellectuals, inthe town or in the countryside.
In my municipality, an old small town called Palmela, there is a castle on a hill from
where we can look at the sky, the rivers and the neighborhood cities, including Lisbon
and its beautiful bridges. We all can see, and all we can see has been made by Mother10Nature or by the hard work of the people. I cannot imagine a nuclear mushroom
growing up in the sky and coming down and destroying life and burning all history
with centuries, menacing the future generations.
We realize the deep sorrow of Hiroshima and we don’t want any more Hiroshima andNagasaki. We want a world free from nuclear weapons. We want to be sure that it
will not happen again in Washington, Moscow, Beijing, Tel Aviv, Palmela or any
other town. There are no good or better nuclear weapons; all types make horror andpain.
In my municipality we get used to dedicating some of our energies to prove that peacemust be a fight for all of us, when we talk about Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but also
when we talk about Iraq or Timor. We get used to the idea that people must knoweach other, must respect their difference, must be tolerant and must develop friendshipand cooperation all over the planet. That’s why we, the local government, practicing
international cooperation can help the fight for peace in the world.
And in this spirit I think that we should globalize our cooperation and make contacts
maybe with, for example, a recently formed organization last year in Paris which put
together all the municipalities in the world. It’s an organization which is called
CGLU, Cité et Gouvernements Locaux Unis and which is close to the United Nations.
The political powers must listen to their citizens when millions have moved into thestreets against war and for peace. Local power can feel and hear better citizens’
claims. And citizens know that there are no developments without peace.
To finish, I want to share my feeling that Hiroshima is an example of suffering but
also an example of hope. I want to congratulate the citizens and the local government
for the beautiful town they have heartily rebuilt. Long live peace. Thank you verymuch.
Chairperson: I’d like to thank Ms. Ana Vicente, Mayor of the City of Palmela, forher comments. So now it’s my honor to invite Mr. Heinrich Niemann, who’s
representing Marzahn-Hellersdorf, which one of the 12 districts of Berlin. Mr.
Niemann. Is Mr. Niemann here? Ah, there, thank you, sir. Following Mr. Niemann,
I will be inviting M. Pierre Villard, Mouvement de la Paix, to be speaking.
Heinrich Niemann, District Councilor for Urban Development and elder Deputy
Mayor, Marzahn-Hellersdorf von Berlin, Germany: Mr. Chairman, distinguishedguests and colleagues, ladies and gentlemen, my town Hellersdorf, a part of Berlin, isfor the first time participating in a conference general of the Mayors for Peace. My
first task therefore is to listen to all your ideas and experiences.
In the plenary session today, the President of the Berlin Parliament Mr. Momper
spoke about general positions of the German capital. We think that in such a big city
as Berlin it may be useful that the parts of the city take care of their own very concrete
responsibility, not only in the usual aggressions of city administration, but in the
global things too, and therefore we became a member of your movement.

11

I represent one of the 12 districts of Berlin, the youngest among them, only foundednot 30 years ago because of the grading in this area, the large housing estates with
about 100,000 flats. Now about 240 inhabitants live in my town, Hellersdorf. Other
specialties of my city are, it is that part of Berlin where in 1945 the Soviet Army firstcrossed the border of Berlin to defeat the fascist Hitler state.
And two years ago, in my city a Japanese zen garden was opened called Garden of theJoining Water. It was created by the Japanese garden architect and priest, Shunmyo
Masuno, a symbol for peace and humanity for the richness of our planet. This garden
is part of the project Gardens of the World situated in our city. All that means, ouryoung populations, its historical roots and obligations and the cultural eyes to theworld are the challenges for our city, the authorities and the citizens, the young andthe old, to do more and more substantially to keep peace.
First, we have the duty to inform the sensibility to educate the young generation, thechildren, and lately our grandchildren. I feel that is not only necessary but possible,
and more than before. Young people are aware of the dangerous situation and they
have a lot of ideas to bring forward their demands. I am very glad to inform aboutsuch activities in my town Hellersdorf. Those 16 years old pupil, Gislinde Böhringer,joined the youth peace group, took part in the peace activities in New York at theUnited Nations NPT Review Conference in this May. She was an actor of theprotective wall for international law. Surely yesterday you have seen it around thedome. I gave up rather quickly my little stupid attempt to find out the line of Gislinde
on one of the little wooden stones. Thousands and thousands and thousands ofindividual signatures form a wall. What a powerful symbol.
Other young people formed in the 90s as a reaction to the NATO bombing of theformer Yugoslavia a big peace sign by stones and flowers in the public park and I
allowed it as the Councilor. The name of this park is now Jelena Santic Peace Park.
They organize their meetings, concerts and other events about themes of war andpeace.
Please allow me some personal remarks. As a medical student, as a charity the Berlin
Humboldt University, I heard lectures by a Professor, a renowned physician andbiologist. He was a member of an international physicians group in the early 50s of
the last century who researched the effects of atomic bombing in Hiroshima. He
taught us, more than 40 years ago, not to be neutral as a physician in the case of
nuclear weapons. This was and this is a heritage for my life. Later on, as a memberof the IPPNW, in the national physicians movement for the prevention of nuclear war,
I witnessed in 1988 during a scientific test of meeting near a Nevada test site, at thistime a shocking news about many hidden nuclear tests by the USA ignoring the
meanwhile accepted rules of international information.
In 1990, in Semipalantinsk there is a Soviet test site. The public got for the first time
an impression of the impacts of the nuclear test to the population and the nature of
Kazakhstan. And 16 years ago, in 1989, I participated here in Hiroshima and in
Nagasaki, in the 9th World Congress of IPPNW. From the historical side this was alast congress in the world of the two superpowers and the Cold War, but even then thearguments for nuclear weapons were already out. The end of the Cold War brings the12elimination of nuclear weapons. That was the hope and the eligible demand. Today
the reality is nuclear disarmament is not on the way as necessary.
Now, since more than a dozen years, I work as a councilor for the ecological andurban development in the very young city. Yesterday, I read in the museum a fatal
sentence, that there will be no cause here in Hiroshima for 75 years, a man, awoman’s lifetime. My city is only 26 years old. I declare here in Hiroshima on
behalf of Marzahn-Hellersdorf of Berlin that its authorities and its citizens will dotheir part in the movement of the Mayors for Peace.
In the year 2020 Marzahn-Hellersdorf will celebrate its 41st birthday as a grown up
and a blossoming city, part of Berlin, in a world free of nuclear weapons, in a peacefulcommunity with every other city in each part of our unique planet. Thank you verymuch.
Chairperson: I’d like to thank Mr. Heinrich Niemann from Marzahn-Hellersdorf forhis comments. And I’d now like to invite M. Pierre Villard from Mouvement de la
Paix to give some comments. Following M. Pierre Villard I’ll be inviting Mr. Yannik
Hake from the International Law Campaign. Thank you.
Pierre Villard, Co-Chair, Mouvement de la Paix, France: Thank you. Chairman,
ladies and gentlemen, and mayors gathered from around the world, NGO
representatives, I would like to express my appreciation first of all for inviting NGOs
to this conference, and as one NGO representative, our NGO is called the Peace
Movement which is one of the strongest movements for peace in France. The Abomb and H-bomb ban in congress has also been held here in Hiroshima and I had theopportunity to attend the congress.
In order to avoid nuclear weapons we would need to oppose nuclear weapons,violence in general, but we see proliferation eroding the peace. I believe we can have
many dreams for ourselves in this world but not all dreams would come true. At the
May NPT Review Conference, we did not end up with a decision to abolish nuclear
weapons after all. We had great expectations for this conference, but the nuclear
weapons States tried to maintain their own positions and therefore the conference
failed to bring about productive results. So we are seeing a negative trend in thecurrent world. The United States won the war against Saddam Hussein but the UnitedStates has not won the fight against terrorism yet.
How can we stand up to fight against terrorism? For this, we would first of all need todeal with issues poverty, underdevelopment, and a lack of democracy and respect forrights. We would need to focus our attention on these fundamental issues, otherwise,
we would not be able to fight an effective fight against terrorism. After 2001, theUnited States has been engaged in various forms of destruction and we have great
concerns about this. American people, there was much opposition against the war in
Iraq and this has isolated the United States in many ways. There was a division ofviews in the UN Security Council and there was no consensus even among the nuclear
weapons States.
So given this situation how the United States has acted was a concern for all of us.
Can we wait for the United States to take action? If we did so, we would have to wait

13

until the 22nd century perhaps to see nuclear disarmament, so we would need to start a
new process for nuclear disarmament.
The majority of countries are against nuclear weapons and it is only a handful ofcountries which have nuclear weapons or are either nuclear weapons States orsuspicious of having nuclear weapons. We should focus our attention more on
countries who have had courage enough to abolish nuclear weapons. The citizens
would have to engage in various activities and movements and such citizens
movements can change the world and make a difference. The citizens should ask
themselves what their roles are and what they can do. NGOs and local authorities
would have to play their due roles, and we have the legitimate right to do so as NGOs,
and NGOs’ roles cannot be replaced by organizations or agencies. We should unite
towards a single goal of nuclear abolition.
In order to achieve abolition, we need to have a power that replaces military power.
Peace culture, I’m sure, is a possible alternative for military power. Peace Movement
is engaged in such activities and for this we need a significant partnership. Regarding
the NPT Treaty, we have tried to join forces with the Mayor of Hiroshima and manymunicipalities have created a network to support the Mayors for Peace. And theFrench network of Mayors for Peace was established to go hand in hand with
Hiroshima City and the Mayors for Peace movement campaign, and this has borne
fruit so that on the day of the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki we are carryingout various activities of our own.
Mayor Akiba has also met our youth representatives. Hibakusha and nuclear weapons
should become something of the past and we should be liberated from nuclear
weapons by successfully abolishing and eliminating nuclear weapons from the surfaceof the earth. We must muster our courage towards this end.
Chairperson: I’d like to thank Pierre Villard for his comments. And I’d now like toinvite Mr. Yannik Hake from the International Law Campaign. Following Mr. Hake,
I will be inviting Mr. George Regan from the Nuclear-Free Local Authority. Thankyou.
Yannik Hake, International Law Campaign, Germany: Thank you, Mr.
Chairman. Dear Lord Mayor and mayors, ladies and gentlemen, dear guests, I’m very
happy and deeply honored to be granted the opportunity to address all of you onbehalf of those working for the International Law Campaign and as a representative ofmy generation.
We have come here today to let you know that you have inspired us with immense
hope. In his speech during the conference on the revision of the Non-Proliferation
Treaty, Kofi Annan pointed out what an indispensable influence a society has exerted
in the past. Had it not, there would be no ban on landmines and no Kyoto Protocol
today. This is why we would like to express our gratitude to you, the Mayors for
Peace, for your encouraging example which has triggered so much self-initiative withregard to political activities and civil societies.
It is a great honor for us to work side by side with you for our shared endeavor - theabolishment of all nuclear weapons. In doing so together with you, who has set an14example proving the political activities coming from within the civil society, to havetheir say. In other words, achieving that complete disarmament of nuclear weapons
will start an irreversibility will at the same time strengthen the self-awareness in civilsociety and heighten their inspiration to find a clear position on equally-pressing
issues similar to the one of nuclear weapons, in hand encourage them to substantively
influence political affairs at the global scale.
As pupils working for the International Law Campaign and together with all young
people from around the world with whom we have established contact, we havealready found our position. We are no longer willing to mute witness while in spite ofglobal implications and negative environmental, economic, humanitarian and social
consequences, politicians slowly focus on the pros of national wealth, national
security, national power and preserving that power when making decisions.
Politicians take it for granted and presume that it is its natural right to apply military
violence at any time and at any place on earth toward an existing or assumed threat tothe security of their national well-being.
So we are no longer willing to vote for politicians who still consider the use of nuclear
weapons as legitimate means of securing national interests. Also invisible, nuclear
weapons are a constant threat for all of the six billion people living on this planet.
This is why we call on everybody to assume their co-responsibility and their right tovote, to finally abolish this threat because nuclear weapons are a permanent threat tothe life and culture of billions of people, do not target military facilities but civilians,
require maintenance and further development, consume vast amounts of money,
resources which could be used instead to achieve the millennium goal, in other words,
the fight against poverty and global injustice with respect to living conditions forhuman beings. If used to this end, they would strengthen one of the most important
prerequisites for the peaceful coexistence of all people.
In our opinion, the direct root cause turning one of the most significant development
steps in human history, i.e. the illegitimacy of military force as enshrined in thecharter of the United Nations into an issue of the past soon. The reason for this is thatsome nations already consider the potential danger of being attacked by such weaponssufficient justification to claim their right on self defense. In doing so they ignore therenunciation of the use of violence and take military steps, even up to the usage of
nuclear weapons.
To avert the assumed threat, this means that weapons believed as existing to preserve
peace, produce the biggest threat to it.
The only way out of this vicious circle of nuclear violence is open by all nations
declaring the complete abolishment of the use of such weapons together with theglobal consensus of the illegitimacy of such weapons and the complete destruction of
all existing weapons. This goal seems to be almost unreachable and too far away yet,and it’s up to every single one of us that we keep it together. It is not enough thatmillions of us dream about it. We have to get up and do something to make thisdream become reality.
This is why we together with all signators from around the globe stand up andrequisite the politician decision-takers from all nations to do the following: Stand by

15

and fulfill the promise you gave unconditionally; Rid humankind from the scourge ofwar; Recognize the illegitimacy of military force as enshrined in the Charter of theUnited Nations already 50 years ago without any exceptions; To the benefit of all
human beings on this planet, finally fulfill your international law obligations and start
the irreversible disarmament of all nuclear weapons.
Rest assured that we will not just remain passive and full of confidence until you, as
the political decision-makers, will start this task. Rather, we will actively look for andtake those paths which will help to support this immensely important step of a normal
human development from civil society’s side. And we will call on you and every
single politician decision-taker individually to make a personal choice to practice hard
together with us.
As a concrete step on this path, we’d like to invite you, as a member of the Mayors for
Peace, to follow the example of Mayor Akiba, Mayor Itoh, Mayor Livingstone andMayor Schmalstieg to take a small part of this symbolic protection wall forinternational law to your cities to use it as a seed for your local part of the worldwide
growing people’s memorial. Thank you very much. If you want to see the wall, it’saround the atomic bomb dome. You can go there and watch it.
Chairperson: I want to thank Mr. Yannik Hake for talking about the International
Law Campaign and for a voice for youth. Just to let people here know that there has
been a large youth contingent engaged in the Hiroshima Day activities. In fact, there
was a rally of 300 yesterday. And so it’s very exciting to see youth engaged, andhopefully later on in our discussions one of the topics that people might like to talkmore about is how to engage youth in Mayors for Peace activities and in peace
activities in cities.
So now I invite Mr. George Regan from the Nuclear-Free Local Authorities UK tomake some comments, and then following Mr. Regan will be Mr. Marika Akma, a
Member of the Municipal Council of Kandy in Sri Lanka. Mr. Regan, thank you.
George Regan, National Chairman, Nuclear-Free Local Authorities U.K. :Thank you, Chairman. Lord Mayor, mayors, councilors and delegates, I chair the
Nuclear-Free Local Authorities in the United Kingdom, an organization with, at thistime, 75 definite local authorities are represented in our organization, and we are atpresent extending our efforts into Ireland to hopefully achieve a liaison with the wholeof Ireland group to become involved in the same thing. We work closely with Mayors
for Peace and report regularly to our constituent groups on the progress and theirenormously great work that the Mayors for Peace carry out.
It is an absolute honor to be here as an ordinary Councilor, just a person who works
day-to-day with people in my area and doing these things, but I couldn't let theoccasion pass without seeing the effect. Coming to Hiroshima is hard. I have neverfelt so saddened. I will never ever forget the sense of shame that I experienced after
visiting the museum and listening to the things there.
I really wonder whether national politicians, whether Mr. Blair, could leave President
Bush’s coattails for a while and possibly visit Hiroshima. If these people are going tocontinue to support the use of these weapons, surely they should be aware of the16effects and what they actually do to human beings. Anyway, I haven’t written aspeech; I have been really quite deeply affected by this experience. I hope to take itback.
One thing I also know, however, and the young gentlemen, the last speaker alluded toit, and clearly it’s true: if the world leaders could not be frightened of nuclear
weapons, one thing they are certainly frightened of and that is the people who electthem. And our job, as well as working with organizations and assisting Mayors for
Peace, is also to get back to the people who will go out, certainly, in the United
Kingdom every four years, and elect people. No person in their right mind wishes tohave nuclear weapons. Therefore, logically, you would say, no person in their rightmind should be electing an individual who has no difficulty encountering such a thing.
We will be challenging, as it has just been recently stated, that the United Kingdom
decided to the replace Trident. We, as an organization in the United Kingdom, will beusing all our political connections and we will challenge this. It’s actually anappalling thought at this time that we could go a stage further. I thought Iraq had justabout put the icing on the cake for me. But we move on. It’s a terrifying thought.
But again, I’ve had some hope coming to this conference. I have heard people speakof the way forward. I have heard people who have discussed the wide range ofactivities and beliefs and ways of keeping the momentum going, of increasing thepressure for the abolition of nuclear weapons. This is something, hopefully, we canget back again, as I say, to people, to people who live and work and eat and sleep, andpersuade them.
I honestly believe anyone who’s had a visit, as I’ve had in the last few days, have seen
and listened to what I’ve done, no one in their right mind, no person with a grain ofhumanity could possibly consider such a means of – I view this as, probably an
unusual idea, as political experience. You have to work far harder for peace than you
have not to. It’s far easier to show a big stick. It’s far easier to frighten someone than
it is to persuade them by peaceful means. And hopefully that’s something we cancontinue to work for. I won’t keep you all afternoon and I thank you very much,
Chairman, and everyone else for the opportunity to address this conference. Thankyou.
Chairperson: I’d like to thank Mr. Regan, Nuclear-Free Local Authorities, United
Kingdom Chairman, for the comments. Now I’d like to invite Mr. Asmin, Member ofthe Municipal Council of Kandy, Sri Lanka, to make some comments. After Mr.
Asmin, I’ll be inviting Mary Ellen McNish from the American Friends Service
Committee to make some comments. Thank you very much.
Asin Marika Abdul Karim, Councilor, Kandy, Sri Lanka: In the name of Allah,
the most beneficial and merciful. Let me first of all greet you in Islam saying, AsSalaam-Alaikum, peace be unto you.
Mr. Chairman and in our place we say, in our part of Sri Lanka we say Worship the
Mayors, that’s what we say. If I say Worship the Mayors, distinguished guests,
excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, and obviously my fellow brothers from Sri Lanka,
it is indeed a great privilege for me to have got this opportunity to stand amongst you

17and express my views of the 60th anniversary of commemorating the bombing ofHiroshima. Even though this is a privilege, I am sad and hurt when I look back to 60
years.
First of all, let me introduce myself. I am a Muslim living in Sri Lanka, an island
known as a paradise of the Indian Ocean. It’s a majority Buddhist country and mycity is situated in the center known as Kandy, which is a holy place for Buddhists
where the Temple of Tooth of Buddha, our host, is called Maligawa. Muslims,
Hindus and Christians have built their religious places very close to this vicinity. In
other words, within stones’ throwing distance. We live in harmony. We actually, it’sa beautiful place, a rare thing that is, because as I am a Muslim.
My personality, my name has been misunderstood by most of the people. So I havecome here with my colleagues, friends, because we also experience this type ofactivities with diversifying situations where people have taken use, have put bombson their bodies and exploded themselves in the city. So we fear these type of
happenings in the world.
We have traveled a long way to this city, Hiroshima, to be with you and to be part ofyou and share your and our thoughts and strengthen the cause of Mayors for Peace.
On a quiet day when people were getting about their work 60 years ago the atomic
bomb was dropped on this living city. The world was taken aback, and since then we
have been discussing and trying to do something to stop the world from such
destruction. I had not been born when this incident occurred, but it is in my memory.
It is alive for us even though it happened 60 years ago, I feel it in me.
This day the scientists enjoy the glory of nuclear technology and for nations who
possess it. But for us this day is not a day of glory but a day that we stand together
condemning nations and scientists who are engaged in developing this deadly bomb.
Hiroshima, where we stand, was 60 years ago the ground selected to test the nuclear
weapon. Hiroshima was indeed the testing ground for America, to bomb a living city.
We had been educated that this nuclear bomb was a clear message to stop the war.
Had this message been put forth? Have the nations taken this message and stopped
being aggressive?
In my books it is not the number of debts or the area of devastation. Even from asingle grenade, if an individual is killed, it is murder. We saw Sep. 11 where two
petrol bombs flew to New York and into the pride America’s Twin Towers. The
whole world witnesses this catastrophe and saw the mighty fire coming down. Onceagain the world was shocked. Innocent American people going about their usual daily
routine, who believe in freedom and choices and believed in living for a better day,fell victim to these petrol bombs. They were innocent.
What happens to us? The politicians take positions. The civilians, the citizens suffer
those issues. We have taken party policies to be a part of the religion or the politicalparty has become a part of religion as such. We do not go deep into the policies of theparty. We align to the political parties and these political parties, they have their own
agenda as such. When they come to power they take visions and we become victims.

18

After the bomb, we saw the petrol bombs going into the Twin Towers. Why did thishappen? We have been told by analysts that this was a message. Once again, amessage. Due to this aggression the world witnessed the bombing of Afghanistan.
Here again, it was a message they are sending by bombing nations. From there, we
saw the rain of bombs falling to Iraq. This was another message to the new worldorder. In recent times we experienced the incident in Madrid. Here again, thesepeople are sending a message. The British, living in London along with someproperty, took this message into their own hands to justify their doctrine.
So now people are believing in tying up bombs to their bodies or in a car and thenexploding to give a message. And we are not here for that. We want a peacefulnation. We want a peaceful world to live in.
We wonder why nuclear weapons have not been used since 60 years ago. Nations arebeing bombed as a message. Nations are now in a race to find faster and accurate
measures of destroying a country with a blink of an eyelid. This is what the world isheading for. It’s very sad.
The bombing of Hiroshima and the message sent by it has been taken from the wrong
side of the stick. What was the message at Hiroshima? It was to stop the war, andthis method is now taken into the hands of individuals. It’s very sad.
What one should dread is that individuals have taken the message sent by thebombing of Hiroshima into their own hands and advocate their beliefs. We stand here
in this hall of Mayor for Peace as a nation. We have understood the word of living,condemning all forms of bombs, bombing industries to stop right now. We must, allof us, address this issue and stop. Given we have to come to a decision, even a bomb,it can be a grenade, if they are manufactured it is a disaster.
We should send a strong message and mayors alone are not enough. We should get
our leaders to start condemning along with other nations who are involved in thisdeadly industry.
Last but not least, even though Japan was the land of nuclear experience, today it
stands as a land of gifts and technology. We see Japan since the attack has gracefully
gifted the world with presents and my country has almost everything made in Japan.
Japan has faced its challenge and by that has set examples of non-violence. The great
gift to the world by Japan is your advanced technology which every nation is today
sharing.
As such, we peace-loving people should join hands with Japan to condemn the nations
who have and are developing these nuclear bombs. Thank you.
Chairperson: I’d like to thank Mr. Asmin, Member of the Municipal Council ofKandy, Sri Lanka for his comments. Now I’d like to invite Ms. Mary Ellen McNish
from the American Friends Service Committee to address us.
Mary Ellen McNish, Secretary General, American Friends Service Committee,
U.S.A. : Thank you. It is truly an honor to be here today, even though it is humbling
for any American to be present at such an occasion that we will celebrate tomorrow.

19

It is humbling both because of the suffering caused 60 years ago by the United States
government's use of nuclear weapons and because today the US foreign and military
policy is once again leading the world into nuclear instability.
Two years ago, when the United States went to war on Iraq, the citizens of the UnitedStates and the people of the world were told that Saddam Hussein was a threat
because he was close to having nuclear weapons.
Sadly, it has become clear that it is in fact the United States that is becoming thegravest nuclear threat to our world.
We have turned our back on more than 30 years of progress in nuclear reductions
achieved under presidents of both political parties in the United States. We need only
to look at the collapse of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in May to see the effectthat current US policies are having on global security.
Too many nations around the world are taking their cues from the Bush
Administration’s nuclear policy. Inspiring nuclear escalation in other nations is not asound defense policy; weapons of mass destruction can never create peace. They can
only lead to fear, distrust and violence. Power is lethal without wisdom and restraint.
The people of the United States need others around the world to join with us to help
us reverse US policy. Too many present here today know all too well that no nuclear
weapon should ever be used again. The mere possession of nuclear weapons is
unacceptable for us, our children, our nations and the world’s future.
Let me assure that millions of people in the United States stand with you in opposition
to these policies, and we continue to count on your courageous, moral and ethicalvoice.
The American Friends Service Committee, the Quakers, have always abhorred
suffering and injustice of war. At the outbreak of World War II, in the United States
we spoke out against the internment of Japanese-Americans. For decades, we havehelped bring hibakusha to the United States to tell their stories. This year, in honor of
their lifelong commitment to the abolition of nuclear weapons, we have nominated the
hibakusha for the Nobel Peace Prize.
The United States peace movement is doing everything within its power to confront
our government and to show that peaceful policies are not only desirable, but practical.
But we cannot be successful alone. We need the moral pressure of the world to holdthe US accountable and to force it to change its course. I ask all of you to continue topressure your own governments to oppose the path of proliferation put before them by
the United States.
Together, voices from within the United States joined with voices from around theworld can pull us back from the brink of annihilation. Keep encouraging andchallenging those of us living in the United States, even as we draw strength andencouragement from the courageous example set by so many of you.

20

May God, the author of life and the Spirit of peace, bless us all in the task ahead.
Thank you.
Chairperson: I’d like to thank Ms. Mary Ellen McNish from the American Friends
Service Committee for her comments. We have three more speakers for the session
and then opening the floor to any comments or questions. I’d first like to invite Mr.
Masayoshi Naito who is a Representative of the Network for Nuclear WeaponsAbolition, and following Mr. Naito, I’ll be inviting Ms. Keiko Nakamura from thePeace Depot. Mr. Naito.
Masayoshi Naito, Representative, Network for Nuclear Weapons Abolition,
Japan: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. It seems like the coffee break isn’t
over but I’d like to begin. Thank you very much for everyone coming all the way toHiroshima from various parts of the world.
I’d like to talk about the historic significance of the A-bomb experience and the 2020
Vision and Japan. First I’d like to talk about the A-bomb significance. I’d like to talkabout the hibakusha experience and the role Japan is to play, and I’d like to talk about
the 2020 Vision.
The Network For Nuclear Weapons Abolition is centering its activity as a network in
Tokyo and its surrounding regions for nuclear weapon abolition. Hiroshima Mayor
Akiba and Nagasaki Mayor Ito in February attended our rally for nuclear weaponsabolition.
First, I’d like to once again confirm the historical significance of the A-bombing. The
A-bombing in Hiroshima and Nagasaki I believe changed human history. Many
atrocities took place in many different wars, but the cruelty of the A-bomb is clearly
different from other histories of war because it showed us the possibility of the selfdestruction of mankind. We never had such a possibility by any weapon in the past.
So in that sense the A-bombing is different. After the A-bombs they dropped in
Hiroshima and Nagasaki the crisis continues, or the crisis is even larger, and as many
people pointed out, many countries now are trying to be nuclear-capable nations.
If nuclear weapons are ever used in the future, then there will be a chain of hatred, achain of retaliation, and mankind could be destroyed. Einstein created nuclear energy
and he said that everything was changed because of that, other than human thought.
National interests and power politics should be set aside. We need to come up with a
new principle and political system for human beings to coexist. That’s point one that
I would like to share with you.
Secondly, hibakusha is important as a witness and the testimony as a symbol for the
possibility of the self-destruction of mankind. I’ve been listening to their testimonies
over and over, and one thing that I can say is that they are the witness of the last scene
on the globe. Sixty years ago, on the 6th August, in this direction that I point out, 500
to 600 meters above the sky, an A-bomb exploded. All people around here, I think,were killed.
One hibakusha has said as follows in the testimony, which is very strong in my mind
as I remember, what would not have happened if things like that could happen again?

21

But he said he was shocked because the Korean War took place in a few years’ time.
He said that he felt that as a result of anything like this, there will never be a war
again. This is an important testimony. We can really feel a sense of reality from thistestimony. And he is a witness of the last day of earth, I could say. And he suffered
for decades after that, and he also has anxiety about his future.
Nuclear weapons are an absolute evil. They should never be used under any
circumstances. We should share this view. It’s important that the Japanese
government takes an important role in communicating this message of hibakusha, butthere are many obstacles. One thing is the Japanese relations with Asia. When wetalk about our experience of the A-bomb, some people say that it is a campaign oftrying to deny Japanese responsibility for waging a war. When there was a survey inthe 1980s in Korea, 80 per cent of the people of Korea said it was right to have the Abomb dropped in Japan and this percentage is higher in Korea than in the USA.
One thing is that as long as the Japanese government is dependent on American
nuclear weapons, it’s hard for Japan to convince the need for nuclear elimination. So
first of all we need to rectify the relationship between Japan and Asia, although thecurrent situation is not favorable.
Another thing is the Japanese government doesn't say it was wrong to drop an Abomb.
We need to change our relations with Asia and the United States. As many people
mentioned, when the government policy is to be changed, it is important that public
opinion and the campaign of grassroots efforts need to be strengthened. For Japan,
the 2020 Vision is very important. Unfortunately, the Japanese peace campaign, theJapanese campaign for the abolition of the A-bomb and hydrogen bomb were notunited. And because of this separation of the campaign efforts, there was a lack ofpressure on the government.
One thing we can do is the Global Citizens Conference was held in Nagasaki. Mr.
Alyn Ware took part in this conference. This is a conference held together by the Cityof Nagasaki and NGOs aiming for the elimination of nuclear weapons. When NGOs
and local governments work together, then that would be a better venue for more
people to take part. People who are unable to take part in previous campaigns, theywould be able to take part in such undertakings.
We are at a very important point in history. Japan should play an important role atthis important point in time, and the Vision 2020 that Mayors for Peace have started
should be expanding to all over Japan and I’d like work together with you. Thankyou very much.
Chairperson: I’d like to thank Mr. Masayoshi Naito for his comments. Now I’d liketo ask Keiko Nakamura, the Acting Secretary General for Peace Depot.
Keiko Nakamura, Acting Secretary General, Peace Depot, Japan: Thank you,
Chairman, and good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. I think I’m going to switch toJapanese now. So, ladies and gentlemen, it is a great honor for me to be given thisopportunity to speak as one Japanese NGO. I was planning to make some comments

22based on what I heard in the discussion, but all of a sudden I was invited to speak here
and I’m a bit nervous speaking in front of you.
The Japanese NGOs, not only in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, they are active in thismovement. We are located in Tokyo, mostly carrying out activities in the Tokyo
metropolitan area. And we would like to create the heightening of our movement inJapan towards the achievement of the 2020 Vision.
At the General Conference yesterday, I think it was mentioned by the Mayor of
Sapporo City, which still remains in our minds, we should not only depend on
Hiroshima and Nagasaki alone, that we will need to spread the movement around
Japan more widely. That is exactly what we are thinking of. As Mr. Naito has justmentioned in his speech, Japan plays a very important role, and the NGOs and local
authorities in Japan should join hands to promote the 2020 Vision.
This morning I was attending and speaking at a different meeting. I do this regularlyas part of my work, but I try to give them, the audience, the outline of the 2020 Vision.
And there was an elderly hibakusha woman attending the meeting and when I talked
about the 2020 Vision and what is taking place in the world where NGOs and local
governments are joining hands to achieve the 2020 Vision together, she was very
happy indeed to hear my comments. And she said that she was very disappointed
with the failure of the NPT Review Conference and she hardly knew what to do about
the future. But now that she learned about the 2020 Vision she said that she could
look forward to a brighter future.
When I first heard the 2020 Vision term, I was told that 20/20 refers to perfecteyesight and that is the reason why 2020 was chosen. So that was at least what I was
told.
And what I keenly feel today is that there seems to be a sense of stifling in the current
movement in Japan. And so we need insight into the future by working under this2020 Vision so that we gain the foresight in to the future. But what I wanted to talkabout in this discussion today was when we try to spread this movement around inJapan, we need the involvement of the citizens, generally speaking, and the JapaneseNGOs are ready to support such initiatives taken by the individual citizens.
Apart from ourselves, there are organizations called Hidankyo, which is a group of the
A-bomb survivors, and in order to promote the 2020 Vision they are also taking up
the challenge to speak about the 2020 Vision as they travel around Japan. And in asimilar vein, we’ve been also lucky to carry our message to the Japanese citizens.
And in order to do this, I have a request to the members of the Mayors for Peace.
Namely, I hope that the Mayors for Peace could work more closely with NGOs andI’m hoping that we have a mechanism for consultation between the two parties. Thatis something that I would like to promote specifically in Japan. I hear that in the UN
First Committee in this autumn conference, I believe this sub-committee would beestablished, so I hope that we could remain in touch and to exchange views so that the
representative NGOs will be given the place to become more active. May I proposethat the Mayors for Peace have such a consultative body with the NGOs so that we are23

able to have meetings, if not regularly, on some occasions to exchange views between
the two parties.
And secondly, we heard from the example of Manchester, and there are also cities
which have declared themselves non-nuclear in Japan, and there is the Council of
Non-Nuclear Local Authorities in Japan headed by Mayor Iccho Ito of Nagasaki City,
and we would like to cooperate more strongly with such organizations in promoting
the 2020 Vision, not only simple cooperation but I think we should work together tocreate the future together. We support the mayors and their efforts as NGOs, so as
Japanese NGOs we are very much interested in how deliberations are going on inyour meetings. So perhaps we may have such an exchange session with the Mayors
for Peace.
We would like to support the 2020 Vision that you are promoting, and therefore let us
work together to step forward towards a nuclear-free world. Thank you very much foryour invitation today.
Chairperson: I would like to thank Ms. Keiko Nakamura from the Peace Depot forher comments and for the very specific suggestions for Mayors for Peace, which seemto be very consistent with the Plan of Action that was adopted yesterday, and so I
expect it would be considered quite favorably. I would now like to ask Ms. Johnanne
Winchester, Director of the Communications Coordination Committee for the United
Nations, to give some words. Thank you.
Johnanne Winchester, Director, Communications Coordination Committee for
the United Nations, U.S.A.: Distinguished ladies and gentlemen and global citizens,arigato gosaimasu, merci beaucoup, xie xie ni, thank you very much for your patience.
To the Hiroshima Peace Foundation and Mayor Akiba and Mayor Ito and the citizensof Hiroshima and Nagasaki and all the governmental and civil society participants andvolunteers, thank you all for creating this special gathering in support of peace andreconciliation and a nuclear weapons-free world.
I often feel that I sit in my wheelchair in solidarity with the many millions of victimsof violence in the world today. With apologies to our wonderful simultaneoustranslators, I would like to share with you some practical suggestions and strategies
for global solutions. If anyone would like more information delivered electronically,please give me your cards later.
This is a brief overview of communications at work. This entire conference could bemade available to the entire membership of the Mayors for Peace and theirconstituencies. Just a little something to think about, those of us who are still feeling
jet-lagged. Also, it would mean that we could have translation in many languages atonce.
So here are some questions, and I would like you to consider and provide someanswers. We, your communications technologies colleagues, would like to be able toprovide you platforms, and I believe we already have the funding available to do this.
So do you need a new sustainable communications platform, economically andefficiently built and managed? Maybe I should start asking for hands to be raised if

24

it’s a yes. Do you need a new opportunity to learn to use technology easily at yourown pace, where you want to learn, at your desk, from your wireless laptop,
wherever? Do you need a capability to have meetings on demand with live humaninteractivity without travel but face to face? Do you need the ability to be on yourown video network whereby you can communicate with any sized audience in any
geography? More questions. You provide the answers. We provide your platforms.
Do you need interactive communications capability where you can gain instantfeedback, even live, from your audiences? Do you need connectivity with others,
even when there is no wired ability to communicate? Do you need a capability to be
more productive with your time and that of others locally, regionally, nationally orinternationally? Do you need to create a new set of recurring revenue, that’s income,financing for your projects, opportunities that support your efforts continually? Do
you need to utilize communications capability that actually saves you expenses while
creating these revenue opportunities?
Three entities came together a few years ago with a combined 75 years ofcommunications, media, distribution and production expertise. Having served theUnited Nations, NGOs, NPOs, governments, education and numerous commercial
entities, the strategy credentials represent empowering principles. We want to help
get our story on the air, on television, on computer desktops, on the cell phones.
Global Solutions embodies vision and a mission of global cooperation throughpositive action encompassing effective and efficient communications, education andrecurring revenue systems of self-support. I would repeat, recurring revenue systemsof self support for all of us who are always looking for the budget to do our projects.
So at the heart of your strategy are what we call CORE competencies, in English it’s
C-O-R-E. So the "C" stands for core conduits: understand the totality and flexibilityof communications and distribution systems available and in need of, and what isrequired for the key audiences. "O" stands for operating audits: understand yourproblem in its entirety before a solution is suggested. Audits are an objective way inwhich to baseline all data from all key perspectives, including constituencies,
marketing, financial needs and revenue opportunities. "R" stands for recurring
revenue: understand the opportunities, educate the leadership and integrate selfsupporting best practices for continuous economic viability, including cost savingsand new recurring revenue, that word again. "E" stands for exchange of ideas:
understand from your constituencies what it takes to get them involved, committed
and continually questioning the validities of today’s actions. So interactivity,
democratic process, is key to all of this. Now is the time to get to the CORE, C-O-RE strategy.
I will just mention a couple of technology ideas for some of you who may be familiar
with some of these things. There’s something called I-C-U-II, ICUII, which is the LI-V-E, live systems of live interactive video, it’s a type of technology that’s very
inexpensive, available today. Totally software based, you don’t have to buy any new
equipment. Your solution to communicate from anywhere to anywhere. One on one,up to eight simultaneous locations can be brought in. You can see them all on yourscreen at once. Wired and wireless, live video communication.

25

We could be having live interactive video conferences once a week, town hallmeeting to town hall meeting. Mayors to their constituencies, mayors to the NGO
constituencies, any kind of combination of community that we wish to bring together.
Unlimited monthly use with 216K of bandwidth. You can conduct meetings,
collaborate on projects, speak to constituencies, seek instant feedback and present
plans. You can also do a certain amount of streaming on a dial-up line, which is what
we often find in developing communities.
There’s a tremendous training platform in real time which is a key part of what we’regoing to need, is how do we educate, train, finance for a nuclear weapons-free world
and for sustainable security and a world culture of peace. And you can use it
anywhere on any PC, any time. You can integrate it to large room gatherings like thisthat has a large screen and there’s free audio conferencing included.
So these are platforms that exist today. We would like to be able to bring them to themayors and to our other constituents. Hopefully, we’ll be working with the City of
Vancouver and other cities like Harbin in China, which I just visited which will bedoing a preparation conference in planning for Vancouver next June.
So thank you all very much.
Chairperson: I’d like to thank Johnanne Winchester for that very interesting
explanation of technology that’s making it more possible to communicate acrossdistances and more effectively.
Now I’d like to open up the floor for comments and questions. Many people who
would like to add any ideas, proposals, suggestions, on the topic of cooperation
between Mayors for Peace and other sectors of civil society, governments,
parliamentarians, et cetera. Do I see any people who would like to make any
comments? I see Senator Douglas Roche. We have a mobile microphone which – dowe have the mobile microphone for Senator Roche? Thank you. It’s on its way.
Senator Douglas Roche, OC., Chair of Middle Power Initiative, Former
Canadian Senator and Ambassador for Disarmament to the UN: Thank youvery much. Ladies and gentlemen, yesterday I had the privilege of speaking to you so
I will not repeat what I said or speak long now. I only wanted to congratulate theMayors for Peace on assembling this gathering and bringing so many ideas to theforefront.
It’s evident that Mayors for Peace is still in its early stages and that the organizing inorder to be a stronger network is now taking place. A goal of doubling themembership of Mayors for Peace over the next year could be attained. I think that
there is a gathering momentum for Mayors for Peace, and this conference is showingthat.
In addition to broadening the base for Mayors for Peace, the work of electronic
communication that has just been very effectively been described here ought to be
utilized and that would set the stage, so to speak, for a way in which a manifestationof the attractiveness of Mayors for Peace in mobilizing civil society and pushing26

governments, this attractiveness will grow and enable Mayors for Peace to speak toother organizations and to work with other organizations.
And this morning we heard from Susan Walker in her nine points, on point 5, to bring
together our organizations, to work with other organizations. You’ve already started
to work with parliamentarians, to the Parliamentary Network for Nuclear
Disarmament that Alyn Ware chairs, and the fusion of mayors and parliamentarians
can lead to even more cooperation with other groups.
And thus, I conclude by pointing to next year with the World Peace Forum in
Vancouver. That is a place where many, many organizations from around the world
will gather. It will be a major event, and for Mayors for Peace to play and plan now
to play a strong role in either holding workshops or having events, it’s up to you to
decide, but I think that the frustration that everyone has spoken about here so muchcoming out of the failed NPT Review is going to give way to a new kind of energy
and creativity, and that Mayors for Peace is now poised to play a significant role.
So I urge you to strengthen the base of Mayors for Peace, to work electronically, andto have a stronger international manifestation of the attractiveness of Mayors for
Peace, and to have as an immediate goal showing this to the world at the Vancouver
World Peace Forum, that will then itself enable Mayors for Peace to go on to evengreater things. Thank you.
Chairperson: I thank Senator Roche for his comments, and I wonder if there’s
anyone else who would like to make any comments or contributions. I don’t see any
hands. Since there’s no other people wanting to make contributions I guess we canlook at wrapping up the session.
I’d like to thank everyone who made comments and contributions this afternoon.
There were a large number, a wide variety of very positive, informing, interesting,inspiring examples and ideas. Many of those, of course, will be of use to use in ourown cities in developing our peace programs back home, but also many of these will
be fit into the Mayors for Peace international campaign, and also some into thedrafting of the Appeal or declaration which is going to be drafted tonight with theideas that come from the plenaries and the two sections and then will be presented tothe plenary tomorrow.
And I think that’s about it for this afternoon. Thank you again very much for yourparticipation, for the great contributions, and have a good evening, and I’m looking
forward to the conclusions tomorrow. Thank you very much.

27

The 6th General Conference of Mayors for Peace
Commemorating the 60th Anniversary of the Atomic Bombings

Section Meeting Ⅱ
Peaceful Resolution of Conflicts and the Atomic Bomb Survivor’s Message

15:10-17:15, Friday, August 5, 2005
DahliaInternational Conference Center Hiroshima
Chairperson: Motofumi Asai
President, Hiroshima Peace Institute, Hiroshima City University
Speaker:

Claire Pessin-GarricVice President, Seine St. Denis, France
Jean Prince
Mayor's Delegate, Chaville, France
Irene Michaud
Representing the Town of Leverett, U.S.A.
Batbold Tsevegmid
Mayor, Zuunmod, Mongolia
Mohamed Ismail Mohamed Ariff
Mayor, Galle, Sri Lanka
Michel Cibot
City Hall Administrator, Malakoff, France
Yahia Al-Shaibi
Mayor, Aden, Yemen
Daniel Fontaine
Mayor, Aubagne, France
Toshiki Mogami
Chairperson of Plenary Session Ⅰand Ⅱ,
Professor, International Christian University, Japan
Hervé Brahmy
Presidend, Seine St. Denis, France
Koichi Otani
Coordinator of Zuunmod, Japan

Tadaomi Saitoh, Chairman, Hiroshima Peace Culture Foundation, Hiroshima,
Japan: Ladies and gentlemen, I am Saitoh, Chairman of the Hiroshima Peace andCulture Foundation. Because of the lively discussion during the morning, we are now
starting this session with a 30-minute delay. May I now present the chairperson ofthis session, Hiroshima City University, Hiroshima Peace Institute, Prof. Asai.
Prof. Asai joined the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 1963 in Australia. At the China
Embassy he worked, and he worked as the head of the conventions and the treaties in
China and Asia, and he acted as a professor at Japan Nihon University and Meiji
Gakuin University. He was also the head of the Research Institute in Meiji Gakuin
University. His expertise is Japanese diplomacy and peace studies. And this year hebecame the professor and head of the Hiroshima Peace Institute. Professor Asai, you
can have the floor, please.
Chairperson, Motofumi Asai, President, Hiroshima Peace Institute, Hiroshima
City University: Thanks very much for your kind introduction. Very frankly, I feelvery strong pressure because this is my first time to preside over a multi-lingual
meeting, so allow me to speak in Japanese instead of in English. First of all, allow me
to talk about the uniqueness or the characteristics, as well as the purpose of thisconcurrent session.
About the characteristics attached to this concurrent session, I should give you thehistorical background. In 2001, there was the Fifth Mayors for Peace meeting. In theprevious meeting there were two concurrent sessions: one is To Make an A-bombExperience a Legacy Shared by All, and; the second concurrent session was Exploring
Paths Towards the Peaceful Resolution of Conflicts. But at this time, they havedecided to put them together in one concurrent session. That is the reason and thebackground that this concurrent session was founded.
Therefore, in this concurrent session, because they were separate concurrent sessions,
we are going to put those two themes together to be discussed in this concurrent
session. So our task is grave and very difficult.
Just for your information, in the concurrent Session 1, the theme is International
Cooperation for the Abolition of Nuclear Weapons, which is exactly the same theme
which was discussed in the earlier Mayors for Peace Conference. So after having
understood the characteristics of the concurrent session, may I now share with you the
purpose of having this concurrent session so that we will be able to have the common
ground and understanding for the participants who are in this gathering.
The theme is the Peaceful Resolution of Conflicts and the A-bomb Survivors’
Message. The peaceful resolution of conflicts, how can we link it with the A-bomb
survivors’ message? To be frank with you, as a chairperson, at the outset I was notable to understand exactly what the linkage was between the two. But I was briefedby the sponsoring Secretariat and I came to realize how we are able to link those twoissues together. As a chairperson, since there were some difficulties for me inunderstanding the purpose of this meeting, therefore, in order for you, the participants,
to fully understand the purpose of this concurrent session, probably it’s better for me
to share with you my understanding about the purpose of having this meeting.

1

To give you the exact theme of this conference is to ask ourselves, based on the Abomb hibakusha messages as a legacy of the human beings, how can we tackle thepeaceful resolution of conflicts? This is the question raised. If I say this you might
wonder, how come hibakushas' message can be considered as a legacy which iscommon to human beings? Your question is valid.
In the concurrent session, in the previous meeting, there was the discussion to makethe A-bomb experience a legacy shared by all. That was one of the themes. In otherwords, the discussion was centering on whether hibakushas' message is the legacy
which is common to all human beings. Therefore that kind of question is quite valid
if you have some questions of such.
Now whenever we talk about the hibakusha message which is common to every
human being, what specifically is it? You might wonder. And also, according to theschedule of the conference, all the participants are requested to listen to the testimony
by hibakusha sometime tomorrow. Therefore, before you listen to the testimony ofhibakusha, it will be almost impossible to understand the hibakusha message. Somemight think that way. Such questions are also reasonable and valid.
And on some personal note, I took this job as the head of the Hiroshima Peace
Institute, as was introduced by Mr. Saitoh, in just April this year. Therefore, I have to
say I am not fully confident to assert that I am fully understanding the meaning of the
hibakusha message as a legacy common to all the people.
Then you may wonder how we can make any meaningful discussion in this Session
Meeting No. 2. Because as a chairperson I found one solution. In other words, I’dlike to first of all share with you some statements made by Mayor Akiba of Hiroshima
City who has made extraordinary efforts to sustain hibakushas' message as a legacy
shared by all and propose them as a temporarily common recognition of what
hibakushas' message is for the purpose of discussion, and use them as a starting point
for starting up discussion in this meeting. Of course some of you may have a
different idea and understanding about what hibakushas' message is, and of course
your opinions are quite welcome, and I’d like you to express your ideas of what you
think as hibakushas' message in the subsequent discussion. And please request thefloor by raising your hands.
Now Mayor Akiba, in his Peace Declaration of 1999, stressed three important
contributions left by many hibakusha for the rest of the world.
At first they said that they were able to transcend the infernal pain anddespair that the bombings sowed and to opt for life…their families, theirschools, and their communities were destroyed in a flash. They hovered
between life and death in a corpse-strewn sea of rubble and ruincircumstances under which none who would have blamed them had theychosen death. Yet they chose life. We should never forget the will andcourage that made it possible for the hibakusha to continue to be human.
Their second accomplishment is that they effectively prevented a thirduse of nuclear weapons. Whenever conflict and war break out, there arethose who advocate nuclear weapon's use…Yet the hibakusha's will that2evil not be repeated has prevented the unleashing of this lunacy. Theirdetermination to tell their story to the world, to argue eloquently that touse nuclear weapons is to doom the human race, and to show the use of
nuclear weapons to be the ultimate evil has brought about this result.
We owe our future and our children’s future to them.
Their third achievement lies in their representing the new worldview asengraved on the Cenotaph for the A-bomb Victims and articulated in theJapanese Constitution. They have rejected a path of revenge andanimosity that leads to the extinction for all humankind. Instead, they
have taken upon themselves not only the evil that Japan as a nation has
perpetuated but also the evil of war itself. They have also chosen to put
their 'trust in the justice and faith' of all humankind in order to create afuture full of hope.
Those are the passages and excerpts from 1999 Peace Declaration by Mayor Akiba.
And I believe that the third point is especially important, it has a very important
bearing in our discussion in this room. So please allow me to quote some of the otherstatements by Mayor Akiba to delve into this point.
Now about this Cenotaph referred to by Mayor Akiba, it includes the following
inscription which says, “Let all their souls rest in peace. For we shall never repeat theevil,” According to Mayor Akiba, because the second sentence doesn’t specify who
shall not repeat the evil, it caused a great controversy in society and some people saidshould why citizens of Hiroshima or hibakusha apologize? Shouldn’t the UnitedStates be made to offer an apology? However, at the end of the day, many hibakusha
and citizens of Hiroshima chose to interpret the second sentence to mean that we, allhumankind, shall not repeat this mistake and evil, and therefore this inscription
remains unchanged.
After this story, Mayor Akiba also added as follows,This presents a very important world view. The world is seen not as aplace of hostilities and animosities. The relationship between the Stateand people to people are not considered as a fixed antagonistic
relationship. Rather, people who chose those sentences for the
inscription did so because they believed that the nuclear weapons are theproduct of human science and technology, and therefore it is the
responsibility of the entire humankind to abolish nuclear weapons andconstruct a peaceful world. This view thus never breeds an idea of
retaliation or revenge.
This is the understanding and the view presented by Mayor Akiba.
In a nutshell, this is captured very well in another passage of the 2000 Peace
Declaration by Mayor Akiba which says, “to break the chain of hatred and violence,
to set out bravely on the road to reconciliation,” and also the title of Mayor Akiba’sbook, Reconciliation Instead of Retaliation. Those can be understood as hibakusha’s
message which needs to be shared as a legacy for all humankind.

3

I hope you have understood my understanding and this explanation. I’m sorry that I
have taken such a long time. Now I would like to welcome the statements from all ofyou. Five persons have already requested the floor, and as the way to proceed withthe discussion in this room, first let those five people to make statements and thenwe’d like to have a ten-minute intermission and then we’d like to open up the floor for
further questions or statements or comments regarding your views about the theme ofthis Session Meeting No. 2 which is Peaceful Resolution of Conflicts or Hibakusha’s
Message as a Legacy Shared by All. So that is the way I propose that we proceedwith our discussion.
We don’t have many participants in this session meeting, so first I’d like to see, I’m
not really sure whether all those five people who have request the floor are here. First
is Ms. Claire Pessin-Garric from France. Are you here?
Claire Pessin-Garric, Vice President, Seine St. Denis, France: Good afternoon,
ladies and gentlemen, Mayor Akiba, I would like to express my appreciation for
inviting us all here to Hiroshima. Together with your colleagues in Hiroshima we aregathered here. Together with the citizens of Hiroshima we are gathering, which gives
us a great privilege.
The conflict which causes a lot of losses of death could have been avoided if we could
have used the money for other purposes, such as development. The formidable
amount of money which was invested in the military industry could have been utilized
for other purposes. A quarter of the defense budget can be spent to satisfy the needsof people, such as housing, health and education. Sustainable development is theselection of ours.
AFCDRP believes that this is the significance of having this association. These
political activities in our community, in Seine St. Denis, we believe the basic humanrights, education, housing, health, the rights to have those basic needs, the right tolisten to opinions, and rights to be listened to, and the assertion of the rights to be
involved in the decisions are something we need to accomplish. We believe the basic
rights related to culture are also important.
In such a framework, in order to eliminate regional and local conflicts, we are
involved in various activities, and I would like to elaborate some of those activities
we are engaged in . Especially among the local authorities overseas, we started theinternational cooperation movements. Gabon, Palestine, Portugal, Mozambique andthose are the partners, and soon Vietnam, Algeria and Israel will be members of ourcounterparts.
Needless to say, peace and sustainable development can be achieved with thosepartnerships, especially when there is the common interest and we try and understandthe identity of human beings in such movements. Together with the inhabitants ofSeine St. Denis, we would like to offer our assistance and help by creating solidarity
among the people who are suffering from poverty. For example, in Southeast Asia
the tsunami in December, and in London, Iran and African continents there was aseries of chaotic situations and terror.

4

In Seine St. Denis, for the past 30 years there has been a strong appeal for theprotection of human rights, especially the rights to culture. Culture is inevitable inorder for us to look at ourselves. Culture is the shortest distance to others. In thatsense, it is necessary to understand different cultures to eradicate conflicts, torecognize the other’s culture is necessary. If we do not do this, that will create terror
and that will create hatred and create terrorist attacks. The rights to culture arenecessary to be affirmative with its own culture and to assimilate with the other’sculture, and by assimilating the other’s culture we believe we will be able to get thegood result. Diversification culture has to be accepted. In a globe of 6 billion people,
I believe for the future this is a very good opportunity for us to understand others.
We now live in a world which is based on free trade. In such an institution, we are
not able to rectify the problems lying between South and North because this is theorganization which was created based on hegemony. Although Chagall says, if
somebody likes me I have to express my appreciation. These are the words I’d like toquote on this occasion. I think it’s time to create another road.
We have created the Cultural Agenda 21. This Agenda 21 was adopted in UNESCO
and World Forum. Preparation for Agenda 20 was a good example of our activities,
understanding the differences in culture. In spite of the differences in politicalregimes, we are able to be engaged in the common project, and this is one success.
Cultural Agenda 21 is very important, not only in Europe but also in the other regions.
This can create the energy for motivating people to be engaged in peace-making
activities.
This is an urgent task for us to develop our next generation. There were a series oftragedies. One such example was seen in one town. There was a gangster
gunshooting. An 11-year-old citizen, a boy, was killed in that gun accident which
was impermissible. New violence was also witnessed. Guns were witnessed in theschools. Pistols and guns are used in communities. But the citizens of Seine St.
Denis are very much diversified and we do have the sensitivity. And there are people
who are living in this community with 150 different nationalities. We respect eachother. That kind of respect has to be fully respected. Educational programs are also
necessary in order to think about sustainable peace and we are understanding thedifferent cultures. It is now a time to challenge those issues in the world.
Young people are the peace harbingers and we have brought these Peace Messengers
together with us. They are engaged in peace activities. And those are the young
generation who can become peace creators. Thank you very much.
Chairperson: Thank you very much. In order not to create hatred and hostility, theimportance of culture is something we should never ignore. I myself was confident
about the importance of culture. As I was listening to Ms. Garric, you have talked
about the importance of culture in our civilization. Thank you very much for yourexcellent comments. Thank you very much.
The next speaker who asked for an intervention is the mayor's delegate from ChavilleCity, Mr. Jean Prince.

5Jean Prince, Mayor's Delegate, Chaville, France: Good afternoon. I am from theCity of Chaville with a population of 18,000. The theme I’m going to talk about
today might not be directly related to our main theme of this conference, which is theabolition of nuclear weapons, but allow me to talk about this subject.
I am a member of AFCDRP. What we are seeking is a sustainable, peaceful culture.
Therefore, in that sense for the people living in our local authorities, abolition of
nuclear weapons is not the ultimate objective. This is one of the methodologies toreach the sustainable peace culture. In that sense, in the very small town of Chaville,
what can we do in this domain, in this area?
City Governors are very close to the citizens. The population is not very large.
Group activities and community activities are very much energized, but the funds arelimited. What can we do in the longer perspective? We have to make a plan foraction. We have to offer information and we have to act upon the plan. Because of
those reasons, the peace culture issue should be considered not only by adults but also
by the children so that we will be able to create the peace culture in our community.
And we have been starting that type of education.
Because the time given to me is very limited, I will just give you one action of ours.
In the extra-curricular activities, we are providing education for children by using thecity activity center. We have set an education program, sustainability in education,and for each change of scholastic year, we introduce the educational program, that’s
PAGARS, that’s art, sports, environmental, education center.
The purpose of this educational program is as follows: We have hired instructors whoare qualified and we motivate the children between 3 years and 16 years of age.
Through education, children are able to know each other. They try to rectify theirconflicts among themselves and try to understand differences with others and respect
each other. The education is equivalent to peace culture, in sports to try andunderstand the control of his own body, as well as the others’ bodies, as well as thehandicapped people’s situation. Sports leads us to peace culture. Art also leads us topeace culture. Other than that, I’m sure the other colleagues of mine will talk about
peace. Therefore, on my part, if I may continue, based on the testimony of hibakusha
of Hiroshima, I think it’s possible to expand the scope of network of peace-making.
When it comes to the danger of nuclear weapons, for the children, especially in theelderly children, we were able to make them involved by using the game. We havethe game which has the title of “The Road to Peace” in order live, to overcome theviolence there is the package of the educational materials related to Palestine andIsrael. I’m not going to talk about those educational programs more in detail, but,
simply speaking, this project is quite effective. As one of the national programs under
the auspices of AFCDRP, by giving thoughts to the different ages of children, under
the appropriate guidance of the instructors, we are now implementing sucheducational programs for establishing the peace culture. This is what we can do in
one small local authority in France. Thank you very much.
Chairperson: Thank you very much, M. Jean Prince. Well, personally, as Mr.
Prince said, nuclear weapons abolition itself is not the ultimate goal of the activities of
non-nuclear authorities in France, but one of the important methods to construct world6

peace. And this is truly an impressive idea for me. In Japan, nuclear weaponsabolition is viewed as one very basic ultimate objective. It is more or less taken as
such, so abolition of nuclear weapons is considered as one of the means to construct
an eternal peace and a peace culture is truly an enlightening comment and view. And
also, what he stated as the case with the statement by Ms. Garric seems to indicate theimportance of culture and education.
Now then, may I ask the US Representative from the Town of Leverett of the UnitedStates of America. The Town of Leverett, Ms. Irene Michaud. Are you here?
Irene Michaud, Representing the Town of Leverett, U.S.A.: Konnichiwa. My
name is Irene Michaud from Weston, Massachusetts, American Friends Service
Committee in the United States, here representing the Town for Peace, Leverett. This
presentation and prayers are a tribute to the hibakusha and the bomb survivors’
message. Western Mass, AFSC, Nipponzan Myohoji and Traprock Peace Center,
have been working with many hibakusha supporters to seek the Nobel Prize for Peace2005 for the hibakusha and Hidonkyo organization which represents them.
Supporters of this effort have written letters of nomination and support to the Nobel
Committee. We have received copies of some of these letters written to the Nobel
Committee. We’ve put them together in this booklet. I want to share with you someof the statements about the bomb survivors and about their messages.
One letter of support, nomination, says “Their commitment to promote international
peace and to campaign for the abolition of nuclear weapons, demonstrates a courage
and a zeal for humanity that is deeply humbling and is demanding of our support andrecognition from the international community,” end of quote. Another supporter
wrote to the Nobel Committee stating, “As individuals and collectively, the hibakusha
survivors of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, have reflected the spiritof peace in turning their personal tragedies into an enduring plea to rid the world of
these most terrible weapons of mass destruction.” Another statement says, “I canthink of no group that has done more for peace than the hibakusha through decades of
hard work and volunteer commitment to move the world away from war, particularly
nuclear war.”
A history professor states of the hibakusha, “They have refused to be simply victims,
but have dedicated themselves to the proposition that there shall be no more victims
anywhere in the world.” A law professor states, “The hibakusha, Hidonkyo
organization, can truly be said to be living examples of the true force that Gandhi
once represented in another more localized context.” Professors have written many
books about the use of atomic bombs. One professor and author states, “Hibakusha
was a source of support to American scholars who were critical of the US use of force
at the end of World War II, and they have carried the banner for the abolition of
nuclear weapons for many years now.”
The hibakusha’s message is appreciated by another nominator who states, “They areliving monuments to the necessity of never forgetting.” Also, the nominator says, “I
had drawn enormous strength and inspiration from the tireless efforts of members of
Nihon Hidonkyo.” Another nominator states of the hibakusha, “They have taken thehorrors that they have experienced and used them as a moral basis to work for peace7around the world.” As one nominator states, “They have challenged the horror thatwas visited upon them and rejected revenge and bitterness and have called for peaceand forgiveness and an end to the nuclear threat.”Also, the hibakusha have been at the forefront of humanities efforts to save the worldfrom nuclear annihilation. The Peace Abby writes, “Their inspiration as wounded
healers speaking out against the use of nuclear weapons, wherever and whenever,gives hope to the entire world.” A US Veteran for Peace states, “In this mad time ofpossible proliferation, their voice has been ringing throughout the world for peace.”
In summary, the bomb survivors’ messages are messages of courage, humanity andspirit of peace. The hibakusha's message is a tremendous demonstration of hard workon their part. The hibakusha are a living demonstration of Gandhi’s true force. The
hibakusha have educated the scholars and carried the banner. The hibakusha call forpeace and reject revenge.
In conclusion, the hibakusha gives hope to the entire world. Let us honor them fortheir contribution. Arigato gosaimashita.
Chairperson: Thank you very much. Thank you very much Ms. Irene Michaud.
She presented their campaign to award the Nobel Peace Prize to hibakusha and
Hidankyo association, the association of hibakusha A-bomb victims, and she quoted
passages from various nomination letters to the Nobel Committee. And she also
stated that those letters indicate that hibakusha’s efforts and contributions are theliving symbols of the true force activities raised by Gandhi. And I personally also pay
the highest tribute to the activities and efforts made by Hidankyo, the association of
A-bomb survivors. And what Ms. Irene Michaud just stated also echoes hibakusha’s
message interpreted by Mayor Akiba, which I quoted at the very beginning of this
discussion. Thank you very much.
So before we move on, I would like to ask a representative from the City of Zuunmodof Mongolia, the Mayor of Zuunmod of Mongolia, Mr. Batbold Tsevegmid.
Batbold Tsevegmid, Mayor, Zuunmod, Mongolia: Good afternoon, my name is
Batbold. I am the Mayor of Zuunmod of the Province of Tuv of Mongolia. On theoccasion of the Conference of Mayors for Peace, on behalf of the City of Zuunmod of
the Province of Tuv of Mongolia, I would like to offer some words of greetings. Firstand foremost, I would like to express our heartfelt gratitude to be given this precious
opportunity to take part on this important conference and visit this beautiful city.
We, the Delegation from the City of Zuunmod, are extremely honored to be able to bepart of such an historic conference. Today it is extremely meaningful that weparticipate in such a campaign together with cities from all over the world. Thisconference gives us another opportunity to deepen our friendly relationships between
cities. May friendship and peace prevail on you. Let us work together.
I would like to extend my sincere thanks to all the participants at this conference.
Thank you.

8

CHAIR ASAI: Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor of the City of Zuunmod. Now the
Mayor of Galle of Sri Lanka has rushed to this venue kindly, so may I have the Mayorat the podium, please.
Mohamed Ismail Mohamed Ariff, Mayor, Galle, Sri Lanka : Mr. Chairman,
distinguished participants, ladies and gentlemen, it is a great privilege to be here withyou today at the commemorating ceremony of the 60th Anniversary of the Atomic
Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan. As a Sri Lankan, I am very happy to
be here with a small presentation to you all from Galle Municipality, as the Mayor ofGalle, which was devastated by the tsunami last December 26. It is regarding thesafer world today.
Today there is great unrest in the world. Why is this? There is an unrestricted
expansion of nuclear power, expansion and the threat of experiments. The world’s
major powers, like America, China, who possess the nuclear power, they are in theprocess of experimenting in the further use of nuclear power generation. This hascaused a serious threat to all of us, mankind. Nuclear power can be used both forpeaceful purposes, as well as for destructive purposes.
At the same time, there is another threat too, and what it is, it is the threat of terrorism.
It is all over the world, and even in my country terrorism is there for the last 20 years.
Frequently, we hear of bomb attacks by terrorist groups to places like the USA, andrecently in the UK, and in most of the countries like in Sri Lanka. This has caused
untold suffering and embarrassment and this aspect needs our immediate attention.
When we think of the present day world, how the increasing use of nuclear power
generation has caused unrest among nations. Powerful world powers already possessthem and there are nations, for example, India, Pakistan and North Korea are also inthe process of developing and expanding their resources on nuclear energy. It has led
to controversial arguments about the safety of the world.
As we have experienced in the past, the expansion of nuclear power breeds fear andanxiety and unrest among us. Its expansion is a great threat to world peace if it isuncontrolled. Use will be a great danger, not only for the countries that experiment on
it, but it will result in the total destruction and even annihilation of mankind fromearth.
What is needed today is the need for a control of unrestricted expansion of nuclear
power. The future program of work needs control, at the same time it is necessary toprogram for the use of nuclear power for peaceful purposes. It is a great regrettable
fact that so far the methods adopted to control the nuclear program have not produced
the desired results. Even after 60 years of the explosion of the atomic bomb, the aftereffects of it are still being experienced; its effect of radiation is still being studied. It
is our bound duty to adopt a resolution.
We hope and pray that the resolution by this body to request the world powers tothink again and again before making use of their good offices, to make use of their
good offices to control the use of nuclear power a success. Thank you.

9

Chairperson: Thank you very much, Mayor Ariff. Today, if we look at the world,
the peaceful use of nuclear energy, it does not stay only with the peaceful use, butsometimes that nuclear energy can be utilized for destructive purposes. That is thepoint raised by the mayor. In India, Pakistan and DPRK, they advocate the peacefuluse of nuclear energy and they had aimed to utilize that nuclear energy for otherpurposes. As was pointed out by Mayor Ariff, I believe his comment is well taken.
Now then, is there anybody who would like to take the floor at this juncture. Since
there are not many people, I would like to urge you to be very enthusiastic in giving
your comments or asking the questions.
Michel Cibot, City Hall Administrator, Malakoff, France: My name is Michel
Cibot. I’m from France. I am from the peace local authorities association, AFCDRP,
of France, and I once worked in the Peace Institute of Hiroshima.
The message of hibakusha and the message of the victims should be delivered to thenext generation, which matches the theme of discussion. I have been involved in thistask for the past 25 years.
Although what I am going to talk about might be different from the main subject,unlike the Japanese people, the hibakusha’s message, the victims’ messages are notknown to French people. I believe the similar situation can be seen in many countries.
Hibakusha is not very known to many people in the world because it’s very difficult
to remember this term or the names. Perhaps more efforts are needed. Their
testimony has to be effectively utilized and we have to create such an environment tohear their voices. We have to rectify the problem of ignorance of many countries in
the world. Hibakusha’s message has to be informed through film or through the
publication of books, and books were published by hibakusha or the victims in ourcase, and in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the French chapter head, who used to be thePresident of Hidankyo, has published a book.
I always said, how come Hidankyo is not awarded with the Nobel Peace Prize? That
was a question I always had. In this year’s Mayors for Peace, I sincerely hope that
this organization would endorse the Hidankyo to be awarded with the Nobel Peace
Prize. Hidankyo is the association of hibakusha A-bomb victims. We should supportand endorse such a nomination. By so doing, we are able to deliver the message thathibakusha is still surviving and we can make our self-determination. In aninternational conference like this we have to have a very specific message to support
the nomination of Hidankyo for the Nobel Laureate. Thank you very much.
Chairperson: As Ms. Irene Michaud said, victims, hibakusha’s existence, has to be
known, and Hidankyo, who has been making their best efforts to let the message beknown to the world, has to be awarded with a Nobel Peace Prize.
Yes, personally, Japanese hibakusha information is not very well known to many
people in the world. I believe this creates a very grave issue and concern. In
Germany there was the Holocaust and this has now become the memory common to
all human beings. On the other hand, what had happened in Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
It’s not a memory, a recollection common to all the human beings. Indeed, that is agrave concern.

10Probably, I would say the United States, who was the actor of dropping the A-bomb,
did not admit that they committed a crime by dropping the A-bomb on Japan. If theUnited States does not admit its sin, we are not able to make this as a remembrance or
the recollection common to all human beings.
Now Hidankyo, to be offered the Nobel Peace Prize, if that decision is made, in orderto do that we have to overcome some of the impairments and obstacles we might facevis-à-vis the United States moves. Thank you.
Any other comments or any other people who would like to take the floor?
Jean-Pierre Brouhon, Official Delegation Representative, Ixelles, Belgium: I am
from Brussels, Jean Pierre Brouhon. Brussels is one of the European capitals, and thisyear Hiroshima and Nagasaki commemorate the 60th anniversary of the A-bombings.
In Europe, even today this atrocious tragedy committed on human beings is not wellknown among Europeans. This is very shocking. Sixty years have passed, but wehave not really done a thorough soul-searching on the causes and reasons. So I
suggest to the Chairman, and we have to make sure that we have the duty toremember what was done 60 years ago.
And in Europe, the true reason why these bombs were dropped is now being
scrutinized by some Europeans with a level of high interest. They are trying to grope
for the reasons but not enough people are making efforts to know the reasons why
those cities were afflicted with those A-bombings, because, as we see from theactivities of NATO or in the United States, we haven’t really made serious efforts tounderstand who are the ones who committed this serious crime and why they did it.
And coming over to Japan I want to know whether Japanese people are making
serious efforts to analyze the causes of why these A-bombs were dropped on thesetwo cities.
From the moral perspective, the Japanese demanded an apology and compensation.
However, I also hear that Japanese are trying to recommend hibakusha and the legacyof A-bombings to the world’s heritage.
But of course, it is wonderful that hibakusha’s message is not a message of retaliation.
Hibakusha A-bomb survivors, I believe, have the right that they demand and claim fora memory and compensation. I do not read Japanese newspapers, but as far as I hear,sometimes I understand that those movements and campaigns by hibakusha are moreor less isolated and limited to a certain extent. But I wonder if there are any
movements to provide moral compensation to hibakusha and A-bomb survivors.
For Europeans who are trying to push for the cause of peace, we believe thathibakusha A-bomb survivors are the speakers of testimonies, and my question is, what
are the Japanese and the Japanese government doing for the benefit of hibakusha?
Chairperson: Thank you very much for the intervention. So we have some Japaneseparticipants on this floor, and I think that question is a very important and serious

11question posed to us, the Japanese. We, the Japanese people, as regards the tragedy
which was suffered by A-bomb survivors, hibakusha, are we doing anything asJapanese fellow country people to assist hibakusha people so that they are able to getmoral compensation?
I have various personal observations regarding this point, but let me ask the Japaneseparticipants on the floor who would like to respond to this very important question.
Anyone? Any Japanese participant who would like to respond to this question? No
one? Well, I am serving as the Chairperson of this session so I don’t think it isappropriate for me to share with you my personal point of view, but as I believe this isindeed a very important question posed to us from a friend from Europe, please allow
me to make some modest attempts to respond to this curious question posed.
To be quite honest and candid with you, with respect to the moral responsibility for
A-bomb dropping, I don’t think Japanese people have done enough to demand amoral responsibility to be taken by the perpetrator, the Americans. Of course there
are Japanese people who are indignant and angry about what Americans did on
Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and this is clear from the opinion polls taken in Japan,
however, the word “reconciliation” is also considered very important, and hibakusha
A-bomb survivors deeply understand the importance of reconciliation. As a result,they are put in a position where they have difficulty demanding moral responsibility,
and there is such a social atmosphere which makes such a demand very difficult.
However, including the A-bomb dropping on those two cities, some Japanese tend tobelieve that that was done and there’s nothing we can do about those past events, as
we have been so guided. We were guided to believe in that manner by the Japanese
government policies. And I personally believe that those Japanese government
policies, which have guided us or have misled us to believe in such a manner, arequite wrong. Putting aside whether we demand any material compensation for such aholocaust or tragedy, putting this question aside, I believe that we have to seriously
demand and claim a moral responsibility to be fully taken by the United States.
Unless we push this cause towards the United States, as Japanese we will keep having
trouble in putting this atrocity in the right place in our history.
Now, so much for my intervention. I would now like to return to the floor. Any othercomment or request from the floor, please? Just a moment, please. Yemen, I believe
the Mayor of Aden is here to deliver his speech. Mayor Dr. Al-Shaibi, may I invite
you to the podium, please?
Yahia Al-Shaibi, Mayor, Aden, Yemen: Sorry, I was enjoying the other session. I
just found out I’ve been deficient. Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen, good
afternoon. It is my pleasure and privilege to bring to you greetings from the Republicof Yemen and from the port city of Aden that I have the honor to be its governor.
This General Conference of Mayors for Peace marks the 60th anniversary of theevents that changed the world and entered the name of Hiroshima into the world’s
history books. Whenever the name Hiroshima is mentioned, we recall the first use of
a nuclear weapon in war and remember the vast suffering of this city and its people.
The very name of the city urges to spare no effort to prevent such an event from ever
happening again. The ability of one nation to use nuclear weapons on other members

12

of the human race has been a nightmare that the world has lived with ever since
Hiroshima, and shortly afterwards Nagasaki, were devastated 60 years ago.
It is right that this event should only mark the 60th anniversary of the bombing ofHiroshima, but should also be a special venue for the work of governments and nongovernmental organizations that seek to eliminate nuclear weapons from the world as
one of its primary goals. Around the world today, the shadow of local, ethnic,
national and regional tensions is very evident, and the fact that growing numbers ofcountries are acquiring the ability to make nuclear weapons tells us that the
proliferation of such armaments is a present reality that we have to deal with as amatter of great urgency. The danger that these weapons could be used in a war, oreven in an attack by a group seeking to harm a society or a city elsewhere, would
affect the whole world, and would affect it in ways that we cannot forecast or imagine.
The danger cannot and must not be ignored.
This conference provides us with an opportunity to express our concern that the threatthat world faces is a very serious and real one. And therefore, we must express ourunited stance that weapons of mass destruction must be removed from the earth. At
this time, we are confirming the views of the many millions of our fellow citizens
around the world who wish only to live in peace and to show their mutual respect forother nations and peoples. We therefore see it as our duty to demand that research,development programs and other actions aimed at making nuclear armaments should
be banned.
Mr. Chairman, the Republic of Yemen will play its part by standing united with thedelegates to this conference to achieve the 2020 Vision in reminding the world and its
leaders of the interdependence between nations. The globalization that has become an
important factor in the world reminds us that we depend on each other for so many ofthe benefits that the world offerss, and it is therefore sad that the threat of nuclear
conflict is again something that we must regard as a clear and present danger.
Aden has been a strategically important port city for well over 2,000 years. It lies
directly on one of the world’s major east-west trading routes at the western end of the
Gulf of Aden across the southern entrance to the Red Sea. Because of its location,
ships from many parts of the world pass close to the harbor entrance, and increasing
numbers of them call at Aden to deliver and to load national cargoes or to drop off
containers for transshipment to other ports in the region.
In May this year, the government of Aden held a workshop for representatives ofother ports and the key organizations in our region. The focus of the workshop was,
how to trace the movement of weapons that might be carried in a container, forexample, and pass through a port on the way to the final destination. We invited
experts in a number of disciplines to share their knowledge and experience with thoseattending. This workshop helped people in key positions in our region to acquire abetter insight into the potential dangers in which goods and materials of all types areconstantly on the move from one container to another.
In closing, I would like to express my compliments to all of you who have invested
your time and effort in order to take part in this important event. The world haschanged in many ways during the ten years since the 50th anniversary of the bombing13

of Hiroshima, and some of the changes have unfortunately been negative. Let us
spare no effort to bring about positive changes over the coming ten years, so that wewill be able to look back and be satisfied that we did all within our spheres ofinfluence to achieve our goal of making the use of nuclear weapons in settlingconflicts a thing of the past and will not be a part of the world that we share. Thankyou very much.
Chairperson: Mayor Shaibi, thank you very much. Listening to your comments I
wonder whether I can invite more comments from the floor, including the comments
on Mayor Shaibi’s presentation. Please.
Unknown: Thank you very much for giving me the floor. Like other participants
who made a contribution, I believe that to share the message and to keep thecontinuity by sharing the message from hibakusha is very important. As time goes byin the future, those message may completely disappear. I believe that the involvementof young people is going to be more important.
Yesterday I had a chance to meet with young people where they were talking withhibakusha A-bomb survivors. Such an encounter of sharing time together is essential,
necessary indeed. In France, not just in France, but for us in France there was a very
important commemoration, that is, the 60th anniversary of the liberation of the Frenchfrom Occupation and their liberation from the concentration camps, especially
Auschwitz, the Auschwitz concentration camp.
The people who were detained in those concentration camps and researchers who had
researched such an important theme have visited the schools to transfer the messageof those people. They went to the outskirts of cities and those people themselves havetaken the initiative to transfer down their surgeon experience to young people. They
know that they have not so many years before they die and they feel the need andurgency to share what they experienced. And I believe that the same thing needs to bedone vis-à-vis hibakusha A-bomb survivors. And that should take place not only inJapan, not just in Japan but in the rest of the world, in many local communities aroundthe world.
We make it a rule to have an occasion to take our citizens to Nazi concentration
camps. And hibakusha and A-bomb survivors and those people who were detained inconcentration camps have been the victims of the deprivation of human dignity. I
wouldn’t say that all of them are heroes and heroines but they are going to be theheroes and heroines because they had such strong determination to continue to live.
And their will to transfer and share the testimonies of experience to others is not at alleasy, because when they tell their experience, they relive the suffering and tragedy
they once suffered.
Hibakusha A-bomb survivors are not well-known in Europe. For many Europeans,the end of the war was August 5, 1945. August 5 is the end of World War II for many
Europeans, but actually the war was drawn to an end in such a tragic manner when Abombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. We need to work together to assist
and help in such important campaigns and efforts by A-bomb survivors. That is why
we are all here.

14

The Nobel Peace Prize I’m sure is going to be a very important tool to let the people
around the world know the message of A-bomb survivors. They are the martyrs, andthe people will know through the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize.
Chairperson: Thank you very much for a very important intervention. Auschwitz
and the Holocaust, which took place in Europe, is now a shared memory for all
humankind. However, if you look at the position of hibakusha A-bomb survivors,
their experience has not become a shared memory of humankind, and that I believe isa very important and grave situation and a source of concern for all of us who areinterested. In order for their experience to become a universal memory around theworld, we have to take their experience as a very universal issue.
Daniel Fontaine, Mayor, Aubagne, France: I am the Mayor of Aubagne from
France, the City of Aubagne from France. I am the President of AFCDRP, a Frenchorganization of Mayors for Peace.
I believe that the issue we are dealing with today in this session is extremely
important. When we think about especially peaceful resolutions of conflicts, as alesson to the discussion so far, for a peaceful resolution of conflicts, in Europe we try
to bring this about through the work of memory and remembrance. The work ofmemory and remembrance of course has a lot to do with education. Some speakers
have emphasized the importance of educational activities and campaigns. For
instance, concentration camps, the work of memory and remembrance is emphasizedin the school setting, as was mentioned by a previous speaker.
Recently, the French government has done a very important job of furthering thiswork of memorizing and the work of not forgetting. We have this duty of not letting
experience fade away. This duty of remembering the past, of course, has an important
bearing upon the nuclear weapons abolition. What happened in August 1945, byrevisiting what happened in Hiroshima and Nagasaki we can execute our duty ofremembrance and not forgetting.
And also, the NPT Review Conference ended up in failure in New York, as we know.
Many of us went to New York on that occasion to support the cause pushed forward
by the mayors of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, but again, in New York the United Nations
was found to be under the total control of the United States. They let the UnitedStates control the whole discussion and debate, and on the final day the United States
imposed their opinions and agenda on the rest of the world.
Therefore, I would like to applaud the proposal and suggestion, that is to nominate
Hidankyo as a Nobel Peace Prize winner. We should not wait for any approval fromthe American government. We don’t need to do that. Education and the memory ofA-bomb survivors and to recognize what they all have gone through, if we recognize
their dedication and their experience in this 60th anniversary of the A-bombing and if
we recognize their dedication and their suffering, I think we need to pass a resolution
at this General Conference to appeal to the rest of the world the need and thelegitimacy of nominating hibakusha as a Nobel Peace Prize winner. And to have sucha concrete action will let us remember what we are going to achieve in this General
Conference. And this evening we are going to have a Drafting Committee Meeting towrite up an Appeal out of the General Conference.

15

I believe that it is very important that with strong resolve we appeal and propose to
the Drafting Committee that we insert a sentence that says that this General
Conference would like to recommend and nominate hibakusha to the Nobel Peace
Prize and I believe that that will allow the rest of the world to understand and sharethe experience. And I think we will be able to make a step further forward into the
future for the nuclear weapons abolition.
On behalf of my French friends of AFCDRP, which has 60 local authority members
in France, I would like to put forward this proposal.
Chairperson: Thank you very much. Hidankyo should be nominated as a Nobel
Laureate. That point should be included in the Appeal in the document of thisconference. That should be put forward on the table to the Drafting Committee. That
was the proposal raised.
Fortunately, the Chairperson of the plenary session, Prof. Mogami, is now attending
this session. This message I am sure was taken by Prof. Mogami and I’m sure to theDrafting Committee which will be held this evening, we will give the thoughts to this
proposal.
Unfortunately, I myself am not able to attend this Drafting Committee this evening
because of my personal commitment, therefore I will deliver the proposal to Prof.
Mogami because Prof. Mogami is with us. Is this acceptable, Prof. Mogami? Will
you take this to the Drafting Committee? Prof. Mogami said in Japanese, it was takennote of, he said.
Any other intervention from the floor? To be frank with you it looks like there are a
lot of interventions from people who are sitting in the front row, but no voices areheard from the people sitting in the back. I feel very lonely and I feel very
unfortunate. Are there any interventions from the people sitting at the back?
Toshiki Mogami, Chairperson of Plenary Session Ⅰand Ⅱ, Professor,
International Christian University, Japan: To the French delegates, I havereceived a lot of wonderful comments from the French delegates and I’m obliged tomake a comment, so allow me to make a few comments.
First of all, I forgot your name, sir. The A-bombing. The fact that we were Abombed, what is the perception of the Japanese? Is there any moral responsibility weare feeling? And are we determined to make a claim or to make a demand? Your
proposal is well taken. Unfortunately, few Japanese have taken this as a serious moral
issue. This is the general response. There are various reasons for this. For one thing,after the war the perpetrators of the A-bombing became the biggest alliance withJapan, therefore accusing the perpetuator means accusing the United States, so wewere no longer allowed to do that because of the alliance between the two countries.
And this was included in the nationwide censorship because of the US-Japan alliance.
The fact that we were A-bombed was not able to be demanded for compensation.
And we Japanese have discarded our rights to do so.

16Unlike Auschwitz, the Nagasaki and Hiroshima issue did not become universal. What
do I mean by, did not become universal? In other words, this kind of incident should
not occur on anybody, in any place. What was seen in Auschwitz should not occur,
not only on Jews, but also the Palestinians and also the other people in the world. So
this is what I call universal. Now what about the incident in Hiroshima andNagasaki? This should not happen in other places in the world, including the UnitedStates and France. But this kind of logic was not seen. In other words, Japanese
discarded or Japanese were deprived of the right to do so.
We are very much appreciative of the kind words raised by the Japanese delegates.
What was lacking was pointed out by the French delegates. After the war, many
Japanese tend to forget whatever is inconvenient to them in order to build up our
nation.
Who are the ones whom we forgot? People in Hiroshima, people in Nagasaki. And
also people in Okinawa. Those are the people whom the Japanese forgot, theirmiserable environment, their miserable situation. For Japanese to forget what theirexperiences are, they try to protect their interest in Japan. Therefore, the experiencesof Hiroshima and Nagasaki did not become as universal as Auschwitz. Many people,
all the people talk and know about Auschwitz, but other than Hiroshima and Nagasaki
people, few people talk about Hiroshima and Nagasaki, even in Japan. It was very
difficult to universalize this incident.
On the other hand, with a very small number of people, friends of France, you aretelling us this is the experience which should become universalized, this is theencouragement and we are very much appreciative. I believe this is theadmonishment we received from French delegates, from French friends.
With those limitations and restrictions, there are some people who tried their best to
universalize this incident. Hidankyo was one, as the Mayor of Aubagne said,
nominating Hidankyo to become a Nobel Laureate. This was the encouragement andthe further efforts for universalization. And we are very much appreciative for yourcredit.
To summarize my comments to the French colleagues, because this point was very
important for us there are so many things we have to reflect upon in Japan. And to
your encouragement I am very much appreciative and grateful. Thank you.
Chairperson: Prof. Mogami, thank you very much. Yes. I see the hand out. Onceagain, I would like to check the floor.
Brouhon: This discussion is becoming very interesting to me. The comment wasmade on the Japanese people’s attitude vis-à-vis Hiroshima and Nagasaki and to the
Holocaust. Belgium friends had to leave here, but he has prepared Mary Norton's
documents. Mary Norton has written a lot of things about Japan. Mary Norton is
known to many people. According to her book, she said no Japanese talk about
Hiroshima, but Hiroshima is seen in many places in the world. Artistic masterpieces,
artistic statement, Hiroshima is seen in many corners of the world, Mary Norton said.
I believe this argument is very interesting, I said, but still I have to admit this is a17

complex issue. Japanese culture and Japanese attributes, I have been studying what
they are in the past 30 years.
There is something which is existing although it is not heard. I have started thepsychiatric analysis of the human beings, how the human behavior is linked with thehuman psychology. What’s not heard, what’s not said, how the incident can have an
influence on human behavior. This is the question I continue to seek. Once the Abomb was used, but never after Nagasaki, but still the threat of nuclear weapons still
exists and is very grave.
We have to again deliberate on the threat of nuclear weapons. The reason why there
was no use of nuclear weapons after that is, German scholars said about the risk ofsociety, the fact that there was no incident after something means something to us. In
other words, although Hiroshima is not talked of a lot in Western society, unlike the
Auschwitz case, but in Japan, although it is not voiced out, although it is not talked
from mouth to mouth, people know Hiroshima. Once you hear the words Hiroshima
and Nagasaki, everybody knows what that is. As one of the tasks of historians,
Hiroshima is one instantaneous incident. The Napoleonic wars continued for several
months and Napoleon was subjected to many studies. What about Hiroshima? Few
publications were made on Hiroshima.
So the ways we try to understand things are so different. This subtle sensitive
memory issue is very important, but more efforts should be exerted with the courage
and bravery of all the local authorities. We continue to seek remembrance andmemories of Hiroshima.
Chairperson: Thank you very much for a very important comment and intervention.
I saw a hand again. A gentleman.
Hervé Brahmy, Presidend, Seine St. Denis, France: My name is Hervé Brahmy. I
am Prefectural Council President of Seine St. Denis. Now the work of remembrance,
about conflict as a whole, is part of my work and activities. Please allow me to say a
few words about other armed conflicts which took place in Europe and also conflicts
which have taken place in many other parts of the world.
Now the work to “remember.” The work of remembrance and memory needs to bedone in a continuous manner. City council members have a very important duty to
execute. They have to be the vectors of orientation of such a memory andremembrance. We are in an advantageous position, perhaps the best position, to do
this work because of the following reason. Like catalysts of energy, we can be
engaged in many works. We can work as a catalyst to solicit energy and activities on
the part of the citizens. This might be a discussion to be done in the other session, but
putting together organizations and the energy of citizens, we can form a public forumof space or public space through which we disseminate the message of peace to therest of the world. Then to disseminate the message for peace itself is extremely
essential.
As I came to Hiroshima, I came with young people, actually members of the youth
organizations, and young people in our city and province came to Hiroshima with me.
And we hope that they will become the Peace Messengers. Especially when they18

come to Hiroshima and meet with young people from other cities, I hope that they
will have a very good encounter and meetings with young people from other cities
around the world. I had a chance to attend a meeting nearby this conference hall. And
young people from France and Japan and other countries were assembling in a very
big room and they were having a very active discussion with each other.
So what we have to do, I believe, is as follows and that is to use the technology andtools of communication or information sharing. I say this because A-bomb survivors
or those who were put in Nazi concentration camps can share their experience andtestimonies with the rest of the world.
So we should ask engineers or mechanics to produce very good film or videotape as
educational materials which can be used to enlighten young people around the world.
And this is where we need to execute our duty. And that’s exactly what I would liketo do upon my return to Seine St. Denis. We would like to put a public place where
we install personal computers and we of course can use various media, for instance
videotape for computers. We would like to use such technologies and let young
people use such information technology.
Already there are very good educational materials, such as cartoons and comic books,
and of course they can be used as good educational materials effectively. By so doing,
we might be able to make step forward from just remembering what happened but toawareness-raising. And such educational materials will be a very effective tool toshift from remembering to concrete action. Then there are still people who havesurvived the Nazi Holocaust and concentration camps, and I hope that young people
will have little encounters and an opportunity to meet with those survivors. And I also
believe that a lot of people can come to our city from the rest of the world.
Actually, we have residents from about 100 different countries living in our city. And
those are people from different cultural backgrounds. Of course they can also use
such information and engineering technology to disseminate new experience andinformation. As a Councilor, I suggest that each local authority use information andnew technology to disseminate information and awareness about peace anddisarmament needs, especially to young people.
Chairperson: Thank you very much for an intervention. Not just Japanese young
people, but toward young people around the world, sharing experience of the A-bomb
survivors is emphasized as a very important task to be done and continued.
When it comes to Japanese young people, except for those who live in Hiroshima andNagasaki, those Japanese young people do not have many opportunities to know
about hibakusha survivors unless they come and visit Hiroshima or Nagasaki as theirschool trips. So it is extremely important task for us to consider what other ways we
can use to disseminate the experience among Japanese young people.
Now is there anyone who requests the floor now?
Koichi Otani, Coordinator of Zuunmod, Japan: About Mongolia, allow me tomake an additional explanation because the presentation was made in Mongolian. I
am a coordinator. My name is Otani. The document is translated into Japanese. We

19are very sorry we are not able to prepare the English version for the presentation.
From Zuunmod of Mongolia, we have the Mayor attending here. Three cities are themembers of this organization. Since 1993, two cities have joined as members. And
for this year, Zuunmod, one city, has become a participant in this conference, in this
6th Mayors for Peace General Conference.
And also, in the series of the conferences of Mayors for Peace, this is the very firsttime for a Mongolian delegate to take the floor. Usually, they use the Mongolian
language, and for the local authority of Mayors it is very difficult to speak in either
English or French. That’s why he has delivered in Mongolian.
An A-bomb in August 1945, Mongolia was the government which had given thequick assistance to orphans. Because the country is a socialist nation there was nointernational relationship with Japan, and when there was the A-bombing convention
in 1957 in August, Mongolian attended that meeting to communicate the A-bombmessage.
The size of the Mongolia is four times larger than that of Japan and the population is
2.5 million, and we have as many as 25 million heads of animals, such as cows andsheep. If there is any relation to weapons, not only human beings but also the animals
are not able to live.
From Russia in the northern part and China in the southern part, it is surrounded. If
there is the use of a nuclear weapon there is the threat of irradiation. And we haveappealed for the nuclear-free zone in Central Asia to the United Nations. It is very
important to secure the security in Northeast Asia in this Central Asia, so having thedelegates from Mongolia is quite important for this conference. Thank you verymuch for listening.
Chairperson: Thank you very much. Mongolia is situated in a very important
position and a nuclear weapons-free zone is very important to be created in this region.
Is there any other person who would like to take the floor at this juncture? If not,allow me to make some wrap-up for a few minutes.
This concurrent session was titled as Peaceful Resolution of Conflicts, and I thoughtthat the discussion might concentrate on peaceful resolutions of conflicts among theparticipants. Therefore, the latter part, A-bomb Survivors’ Message, I wasn’t quite
sure how much interest we would be able to draw from the participants.
But to give you the conclusion, most of the statements were focused on the A-bomb
activities and messages surrounding Hidankyo. And also, there was the proposal to
make the recommendation to nominate Hidankyo for the Nobel Laureate, because by
doing so, A-bombing facts can be shared as the memory common to all human beings.
And this can be accepted and received as the legacy of all humankind.
And those are some of the important points. I did not give thoughts during the past.
As one of the scholars who is engaged in peace studies, I will continue to be engaged
in the peace movement.

20About the proposal on the recommendation of Hidankyo to become the Nobel
Laureate, I will be announcing this publicly in Japan so that we will be able to do soin the future.
I don’t know whether my summation was sufficient. I sincerely hope that you haveenjoyed this conference. Thank you very much. The meeting is adjourned.

21

The 6th General Conference of Mayors for Peace
Commemorating the 60th Anniversary of the Atomic Bombings

Exchange with Hiroshima Residents
What We Can Do to Abolish Nuclear Weapons by 2020
18:30-21:00, Friday, August 5, 2005
HimawariInternational Conference Center Hiroshima
Chairperson: Nobuo Kazashi
Professor, Kobe University
Speaker:André Baraglioli
Deputy Mayor, Bagnolet, France
André Hédiger
Mayor, Geneva, Switzerland
Stewart Kemp
Principal Policy Officer, Manchester, U.K.
Steve Freedkin
Chairperson of the Berkeley Peace Justice Commission, U.S.A
Raul CorroCouncilor, Muntinlupa, Philippines
Delphine Brilland
Councilor, Bobigny, France
Pastor Pier Luigi
Representative, Balducci Support Center, Italy
Bozidar Stanisi
Refugee of Yugoslavia, Italy
Hitoshi Shinmoto
Representative, Hiroshima Branch of Asia Pacific Forum, Japan
Ritsunori Doi
COOP, Japan
Akiko Awa
World Friendship Center, Japan
Fujiwara
No-DU Project Hiroshima, Japan
Steve Leeper
U. S. Representative of Mayors for Peace Secretariat, U.S.A.
Susan Walker
Humanitarian Affairs and Disarmament Consultant
Former ICBL Intersessional Programme Officer, U.S.A.
Chantal Bourvic
Councilor, Val de Marne, France
Johnanne Winchester
Director, Communications Coordination Committee for the United Nations, USA
Shinichiro Tsukada
Peace Depo, Japan
Yoshimitsu, Arakawa
Marine Animal Institute, Japan
Osamu Kimura, Japan

Tadaomi Saitoh, Chairman, Hiroshima Peace Culture Foundation: Goodevening, everybody. My name is Saitoh from the Hiroshima Peace Culture
Foundation. The discussion was quite active and the previous meeting was delayed,
and therefore this meeting was also delayed from the scheduled time. This year,
Mayors for Peace is now trying to establish the nuclear weapons ban treaty throughthe emergency activities for nuclear weapons abolishment. However, this year’s May
NPT Review Conference failed to narrow the gap between the nuclear powers andnon-nuclear powers, and therefore, the NPT system is on the verge of collapse.
Therefore, the 6th Mayors for Peace General Conference is going to assess the resultof the NPT review meeting, and we want to discuss what kind of initiatives we should
do in order to enact the nuclear weapons ban treaty. So this exchange with Hiroshimaresidents is also designed to discuss with the citizens of Hiroshima in order to abolishthe nuclear weapons by 2020. And there are also participants for the General
Conference and the Hiroshima residents who are expected to exchange. I hope thatthe discussion will be very active today.
Now I would like to introduce the Chairperson, Prof. Kazashi, from Kobe University,
Department of Letters. Prof. Kazashi graduated from Tokyo University of Foreign
Studies, and he got a doctorate in philosophy from Yale University, and his specialty
is contemporary philosophy and modern Japanese thought. After serving as an
assistant professor in Hiroshima City University, he has been a professor in Kobe
University since 2001. He used to be a member of the Preparatory Committee toestablish the Hiroshima Peace Institute and an Executive Advisor to Hiroshima Peace
Culture Foundation. He is now a member of the Committee of the Hiroshima
Association for Nuclear Weapons Abolition and also a representative of NonDepleted Uranium Hiroshima Project. Now I would like to give the floor to Prof.
Kazashi.
Chairperson, Nobuo Kazashi, Professor, Kobe University: Good evening, ladies
and gentlemen. Thank you very much for your kind introduction, Mr. Saito. Since
this is in Hiroshima I thought maybe I should speak in Japanese, but since this is aninternational conference, I assume that speaking in English would be more suitable, so
I would like to switch into English.
This conference is very unique in several regards. And one of its reasons comes fromthe fact that this Mayors for Peace conference is an attempt from the side of the levelof municipalities to exert influence on the international politics in order to orient the
future of the earth which affects all of us. However, as you know and everybody
knows, there is a huge gap between most people’s wish around the world for nuclear
abolition on the one hand, and the reality of international politics on the other hand.
For example, Senator Roche quoted the number about the opinion poll, and that is tosay, worldwide about 87 per cent of people are for banning nuclear weapons, andeven in the United States the number is quite high; I think it was 76 per cent of theAmerican people are for banning nuclear weapons.
I felt this huge gap existing between the people’s wish and the reality of international
politics when I participated in the NPT Review Conference personally as a member of
HANWA, the Hiroshima Alliance for Nuclear Weapons Abolition, and also as amember of Non-DU, Non-Depleted Uranium Hiroshima Project. So in this sense, I
think that this Mayors for Peace Conference has an extremely important and urgent
role to play, that is to say, mediate between the people’s hope and wishes and what’s
going on in international politics. In this sense, needless to say, the meeting for1

exchange between the mayors coming from all over the world and the people here in
Hiroshima and Japan, has a very important meaning in the sense that this is a very
unique occasion between the municipalities’ leaders working for nuclear weaponsabolition and the people of Hiroshima and Japan, because in a word, I think that thisunique endeavor by Mayors for Peace would not be able to succeed without the
support coming from the citizens, needless to say.
So I think I’d like to, without further explanation, in order to have time for exchange
among us as much as possible, I’d like to immediately ask the representatives fromabroad to present each view. And the way we are going to proceed this evening is asfollows. First, we are going to listen to the presentations by the, I believe, eight
representatives of Mayors for Peace, from Bagnolet, France, and Geneva, Switzerland,and Manchester, England, and Varanasi, India, and Hambantota, Sri Lanka, and also
Berkeley, California, USA, and Muntinlupa, Philippines, and also Bobigny, France.
And actually, is there any other representative who is supposed to give a talk here but
I didn’t mention, because actually I have a rather different list of presenters inJapanese? I’m personally, I myself am confused a little bit, so please let me know if I
missed some representatives. And actually there is one representative from Italy andwe’d like to ask him after these presentations.
And hopefully, we can finish these initial presentations by the representatives from
the Mayors for Peace Conference within an hour, less than an hour, so that we canhave more than one hour for exchange among us. I hope that is the way we canproceed. And so may I ask first the Deputy Mayor of the City of Bagnolet, France,
Mr. André Baraglioli, to come over?
André Baraglioli, Deputy Mayor, Bagnolet, France: Bonjour. Merci. Thank youvery much. Mayor Akiba and the participants of this conference and participants ofthis meeting today, I think if we could get together, although the number may be few,
we will be able to really achieve true peace. It’s a part of the problem that I am
coaching from. The nuclear weapons abolition is a very large and high target for apart of the people and for a utopia for the safety of the world. This abolition of nuclear
weapons is very important and it is a very realistic target as well.
We have to develop this nuclear weapons-free world along with the development of
the world peace culture. Peace culture is being promoted by our city, Bagnolet City,
and we do this through establishing sister relationships with various cities throughout
the world. One is with Shatila in Lebanon and also Oranienburg in Germany. Old
and young and men and women were killed in these cities, and the reason why wehave a sister relationship with Shatila is because the citizens and the organization are
to have an exchange with our city’s organizations and also our ultimate goal is toestablish true peace.
The issue of peace is not just an issue in the Middle East but also an issue for our city
as well. This is because the Jews and the Islam people live in our city and there ismuch violence towards these people. In Lebanon, in Shatila, through the sister
relationship with Shatila we want to abolish this kind of violence.
With regard to Oranienburg, the Oranienburg sister relationship, we have conductedvarious things together and we have had a communiqué declared jointly in order tooppose jointly against war in Iraq. And also 100 people participated in our city inliberalizing the people.

2

In Hiroshima I understand that there are many survivors of the A-bomb that are
passing away. But also in other cities there are people who have experienced thelarge disaster passing away and there are less people who have had this kind ofexperience. And between Germany and the French we have had three wars in our
history, however, our countries have a very good relationship now and this has been
proven by the sister city relationship between the two cities.
The survivors of the war and the survivors of the A-bomb, the survivors of the Nazidisaster exist. As the third generation today, we should make an effort so that we will
never forget the tragedy of the past. The memory of the past makes present days
something that is humane. And in addition to that, there is discrimination which is
causing war and also this leads to the threat of nuclear weapons. So we want toconvey the target of peace and of the abolishment of nuclear war or nuclear weapons
to the citizens of our city. Thank you.
Chairperson: That’s very sad. I think Mr. André Baraglioli very kindly finished his
speech I think within five minutes, so I think I’d like to ask the following speakers tofollow his model. So now I’d like to ask the Mayor of Geneva, Switzerland, Mr.
André Hediger to come over to the podium.
André Hédiger, Mayor, Geneva, Switzerland: Ladies and Gentlemen, and then theresidents of Hiroshima. First of all, I would like to say that the City of Geneva isfighting now. Switzerland has 700 years of history, and during that time we havenever fought a war with a foreign country, with other wars overseas, we didn’t
participate in them, and there was a civil war in Switzerland when we were making
Switzerland, the republic of Switzerland a country, so in terms of wars, we have neverbeen really dynamic in the past. So Geneva is the place where the humanitarian spirit
is living.
You know that international organizations are in Switzerland. There is a United
Nations, there is the WHO, and various international institutes operate in Switzerland.
The Red Cross also exists in Switzerland. So these international institutes areimportant elements for residents of Hiroshima, of people of Hiroshima. The Red
Cross, Dr. Marcel’s city’s doctors are actually having sent the food aid and relief aid
to the people of Hiroshima right after the atomic bombs, and in September we areorganizing an event for Hiroshima and we are also going to publish a book about
Hiroshima.
Please pay a visit to Geneva. Geneva is a good place where people are well accepted,
and we are pursuing peace. Two years ago we had an opinion poll and we learnt that
there are 130 different nationalities or 130 different people with different backgrounds
who are living in Switzerland, so 130 different nationalities coexist and are living in
Switzerland. So of course all European people come to Switzerland and live there,
and because of the political reasons sometimes people come to Switzerland. So we
respect ethnic groups and differences. In some schools, the people from 40 or 50
different countries are learning together. Educational institutions are still having a
hard time. The children are coming from different 40, 50 cultures and countries andlanguages, so the diets are also different among the children. So multiculturalism iswhat we have in Geneva. And it’s been going on for several centuries. So from Westto East and from South to North, lots of people are coming to Geneva, even from
Albania.

3

And in Europe, various developments occurred and a some time in the past there was
fascism in Spain. For example, in Portugal, we had fascism even in Greece, and somepeople who were persecuted there and then have fled to Switzerland, and we haveaccepted them and then provided jobs to them. So in many sense, we didn’t build a
block or wall to send off these Spanish people.
So the people living in Geneva are living in harmony, so everybody living in Geneva
are the people of Geneva. So what I’m trying to say is actually the peace culture isalready existing in Geneva. This is what I wanted to say.
So the problem we have is the Hiroshima-Nagasaki Appeal. We agree to it, and that
Appeal was made in the keynote speech in the beginning, and we also respond to theUnited Nations Peace Appeal. And how can we make peace is the question. We havea peace culture and peace education in Geneva, so we are incorporating the peace
culture in education and we have a peace school in Geneva, so faculties are teachingpeace. They are giving the education for the sake of peace, the children. So they areteaching the teachers about how to teach peace to children. So a big amount of budget
is spent for education, and also a big amount of money is spent for cooperation.
And cooperation with other countries is a very important issue. So the developing
countries, for example, Africa, Latin America, and East European country people, tothem we provide support and cooperation and the women in Africa. And also we are
spending money to develop the firefighters. We also provide support to a lot of
people. So we have to help other people. We have this strong determination. Somepeople are starving. To them as well we are making a lot of initiatives. So thosepeople who are suffering, we are lending a hand.
And then, we have had the Peace Appeal so that the reconciliation between thePalestinians and Israelis will be made. So now we have to make an effort so that
Palestine and Israel will make peace, will reach an agreement, so that they will meeteach other so that they can sit at the discussion table, the negotiation table.
A couple of years ago, we made this kind of appeal in Salavie, and in Morocco there
are two ethnic groups, and against them, to them as well we have asked them to havea negotiation and discussion and we are cooperating with the UN so we are making
cooperation with all the other countries. That’s all I wanted to say. Thank you.
Chairperson: Thank you very much for a very unique history of Switzerland withmany ethnic groups, which is very encouraging for us too. And I’d like to listen to
more of it, but this exchange meeting is multicultural itself so I think we have to try to
make as much time as possible for the exchange too. So next I’d like the ask the
Principal Policy Officer from Manchester, England, Mr. Stewart Kemp.
Stewart Kemp, Principal Policy Officer, Manchester, U.K.: Thank you very
much, Chairman, and thank you for the invitation to speak at this session. An apology
first of all because I was hoping that our Lord Mayor Afzal Khan would be able tospeak at this session but he has another engagement and so I’ve undertaken to step
into his shoes. I’ll speak slowly because I haven’t pre-prepared text that I’ve passed
to the interpreters, to the translators, and so I don’t want to run ahead too quickly forthem. But I’m very conscious of time, Chairman, so I’ll be as concise as possible.
And I think the easiest way for me to be concise is perhaps to headline a few issues
that we can come back to and perhaps discuss in the question-answer session after
these presentations are completed.
4Manchester is a very diverse city. It has a very large Muslim community, as
represented by our present Lord Mayor Afzal Khan, a very large Jewish community,
as represented in fact by the Chief Officer of our local authority, a very large Chinese
community, and many Chinese people work within the local authority, and indeed
many other groups and nationalities represented in the city. A very large AfroCaribbean community, I should more correctly say of Afro-Caribbean origin, now aBlack-British community. And we try to reach the whole spectrum of the community
through the council’s peace policy and its anti-nuclear policy to promote thosepolicies for all the citizens.
This year, and now Mayor Afzal Khan referred to this at the presentation earlier today,
the city carried a new policy that I would just like to read to you just by way of
introduction:
The Council recognizes the contribution that it can make through theprovision and delivery of its services towards promoting social inclusion,social justice, good citizenship and peace between peoples, cultures, thefaith communities that it serves. The Council will cooperate with
community-based and faith-based organizations, with other local
authorities, with statutory agencies, government departments, andinternational bodies in the pursuance of the safety, security anddevelopment of its richly diverse communities and their extended
families.
And I lay emphasis on “their extended families” because when there is, for example,
tension in Kashmir between Pakistan and India, which has the potential to develop
into a nuclear weapons crisis, then the ripples from that tension radiate across theglobe, and radiate into the community in Manchester and it raises tensions within thecommunity.
When there is ongoing inter-community conflict between Israelis and Palestinians,
these are issues that are picked on the streets of Manchester, they are issues that affectthe citizens of Manchester. They have extended families in Israel. They haveextended families in Palestine, and they have extended families, as I say, in Pakistan
and on the Indian sub-continent. And so we’re conscious of the need to promote
policy not only in the city, but nationally and internationally.
As we speak, we are conscious of the anniversary of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the 60th
anniversary. In the city, one of our initiatives has been to, through one of the local
cinemas, promote a season of films around a nuclear theme and it’s under theumbrella title “Project and Survive.” For anyone from the UK, they may see theresonance there because back in the early 1980s the government led a civil defense
campaign to try and persuade the British people that they would survive a nuclear war
if that was to occur on the European continent, which back in the early 1980s it
seemed a very strong possibility. It certainly didn’t feel a remote possibility. As I say,that campaign of civil defense was called “Protect and Survive.”
We have a commemoration now called “Project and Survive.” And through a seriesof films it will hopefully bring citizens in and to get them to think about this issue,
because I think something that we all need to understand is that here in Hiroshima
there can not be any more important issue, and there is not a more important issue inany city in my view. But the issue simply does not have the same level of priority in5other countries. Britain is a nuclear weapons state. The press is very largely pro
Britain’s nuclear weapons stance, and that feeds through to the opinions of people inthe country, and so tackling those opinions is extremely difficult.
There are many other points that I was hoping I might have time to draw out but we’reunder a lot of pressure with time so I need to stop here, but I’ll certainly be happy totake any questions about Manchester’s policy. All the work we do nationally we havea local authority. Thank you, Chair.
Chairperson: Thank you very much for another very concrete, very encouraging
example, and we really hope that we have time to listen to more concrete examples
from Manchester.
Now I’d like to ask to come over, the Chairperson of the Berkeley Peace JusticeCommission, California, USA, Mr. Steve Freedkin.
Steve Freedkin, Chairperson of the Berkeley Peace Justice Commission, U.S.A.:
Konbanwa, honored Mayor of Hiroshima Akiba, distinguished members of Mayors
for Peace and guests. My name is Steve Freedkin, I am the Chairman of the Berkeley
City Peace Justice Commission. I thank you for your dedication to creating a world inwhich the destruction of the atomic bomb remains a terrible fact of history, but onlyof history, never to occur again.
Berkeley stands with the peace-loving people of Hiroshima in many ways. On Aug. 6
at 8:15 a.m. and again on Aug. 9 at 11:02 a.m. the city’s peace bell will be rung inremembrance of the two atomic bombings. This is in response to a request by ahibakusha from Hiroshima who visited our city in May. On the night of Aug. 6,
Berkeley will also hold its Fourth Annual Peace Lantern Ceremony modeled after
Hiroshima’s event.
The City of Berkeley has a process in which citizens can directly create laws. In 1986,
the voters of Berkeley adopted the Nuclear-Free Berkeley Act. This law declares
nuclear weapons to be illegal. It requires the city to avoid conducting business withany organization involved in nuclear weapons. The University of California operates
three nuclear research laboratories for the US government. Therefore, the City ofBerkeley is required to avoid doing business with the university. Now in practice, ofcourse, this is difficult as the university’s Berkeley campus is by far the largest
institution in our city. However, when it is possible, the city will work with otherorganizations and not with the university.
The Nuclear-Free Berkeley Act is an example of a community taking direct action towithdraw support from the nuclear weapons industry. If these efforts spread, perhaps
they will be as effective as the boycott of South Africa, which was started in Berkeley,and helped end the system of apartheid.
We must continue to push national leaders to adopt policies leading to the eliminationof nuclear weapons, and perhaps it’s also time for cities to take direct action. For
example, the Hoya Glass Company in Japan makes lenses for laser equipment that isused in manufacturing nuclear bombs. Does the City of Hiroshima purchase any
equipment or supplies that contain glass contained by Hoya? Perhaps cities like
Hiroshima may wish to draw up a list of companies to boycott to make sure that nocity resources support any organization involved in nuclear weapons. Our city has

6created that kind of a list under the Nuclear-Free Berkeley Act, and I’d be happy toshare our research.
My city can learn from the spirit of reconciliation exemplified by the hibakusha ofHiroshima and Nagasaki. Increasingly, I think about peace activism as an effort topromote healing. In Berkeley and other places, including, I know, people in
Hiroshima, people are working towards this kind of healing approach to social change.
When I was offered the chance to speak to this gathering, I was grateful for theopportunity, but in a way it didn’t quite make sense because I know I have very much
more to learn from you in Hiroshima than I ever could share with you. So I will justsay one more thing and then I’ll stop talking and be ready to listen to you, and that
one more thing is domo arigato gosaimashita.
Chairperson: Thank you very much. It was a rather challenging request for us too.
And now I’d like to ask the City Councilor of Muntinlupa in the Philippines, Mr. Raul
Corro.
Raul Corro, Councilor, Muntinlupa, Philippines: Thank you, Professor. Goodevening, ladies and gentlemen. Mayor Akiba, honorable mayors, representatives fromthe civil society and our residents of Hiroshima, I intentionally did not speak in thisafternoon’s session because I was waiting for the opportunity to be with the residentsof Hiroshima in the exchange program tonight. When I was asked to choose whether
I would like to speak in Session 1 or Session 2, I said I don’t like to speak because
there are already several speakers that we have as I wanted to meet with the residentsof Hiroshima because I have a special message for you.
As you know, the Philippines was one of the countries occupied by the JapaneseImperial Army in World War II, and the Philippines, as you know, was one of thecountries which suffered the scars of the Japanese occupation in World War II. My
father, who was a soldier of the United States Armed Forces in the Far East, or
USAFFE, was one of the Filipino and American soldiers who endured the infamous"death march," as we call it, where they were made to march for hundred ofkilometers by the Japanese Imperial Army, and my father miraculously survived.
But tonight I’d like to convey my message to the residents of Hiroshima and to thenation of Japan that I am here tonight, not because of retaliation, but because ofreconciliation. We cannot achieve peace if we have hatred in our hearts, so I am here
today to convey my message to the residents of Hiroshima that our message from thePhilippines is reconciliation, not retaliation, and we condemn, in the strongest terms
possible, the use of atomic bombs and the use of nuclear weapons against humanity.
Tonight we would like to express our support to the 2020 Vision of eliminating
nuclear weapons by the year 2020. We firmly believe that weapons of mass
destruction have no place in a civilized world. For our part, in the City of Muntinlupa,
we firmly believe that knowledge is power. This was made very clear in thepresentation yesterday by the lady professor. What we mean by “knowledge ispower” is that we have at the local level to create awareness of the horrors of the useof atomic bombs, and by creating awareness at the local level, we will be able toinform our respective constituencies about the horrors of the use of atomic bombs andbe able in the process to get their support to raise their voices and join us in the
Mayors for Peace to campaign for the abolition of nuclear weapons by the year 2020.

7

Tonight I am happy to be with you and I’d like to convey to the residents ofHiroshima and the people to Japan that the Philippines and Japan have seen some very
healthy and normal diplomatic relations. We must forget the past, but we must lookforward to the future, a future that is free from nuclear weapons. Thank you.
Malami-salama-to
Chairperson: Thank you very much indeed. And thank you very much in the firstplace to choose to participate in this exchange with the people of Hiroshima, and also
thank you very much for the very great history which we have to really take into
consideration and face seriously. Nevertheless, thank you very much for giving us avery hopeful future-oriented presentation. Thank you very much.
And now I’d like to ask the Councilor of the City of Bobigny France, Ms. Delphine
Brilland, to come over.
Delphine Brilland, Councilor, Bobigny, France: Hello everybody. I’m very
impressed to be here. I’m so happy to be able to meet the people of Hiroshima. I
would like to talk a lot with you. My name is Delphine Brilland. I am the council
member of the City of Bobigny.
In New York, the United Nations, there was an NPT Review Conference and it failed
to come up with progress, so the premiers of the nuclear powers now have a very
serious responsibility because they have rejected the possibility to abolish nuclear
weapons. However, the threat of collapse of the treaty was avoided. This was good
progress. Our fight is continuing and this nuclear weapons abolishment, toaccomplish that we have to make more effort, however, the nuclear powers, they
don’t choose to abolish the nuclear weapons in the near future. However, weshouldn’t just be waiting. A lot of countries are now taking action and France is very
proactive in this area.
The City of Bobigny is putting peace culture as a priority and the City of Bobigny istrying to listen to the voice of the citizens, and we are also trying to implement theparticipation with democracy so that we can come up with collective profits.
From a couple of years ago we are promoting peace education, and the Council of
Bobigny has adopted a motion in order to contribute to the NPT, and at every
opportunity we are announcing our standpoint and also announcing the purpose of ouractivities. And AFCDRP is the association that Bobigny is participating in and thenwe are making contributions to promote the NPT. And on Sep. 11, that is when it isPeace Day in UNESCO, and then they are going to show the movie called Sadako
and they are also making origami. The children are sent to this institution, so thosepeople involved are going to attend tomorrow’s ceremony and AFCDRP, I think you
know this organization, the France Peace Municipality Association, and Bobigny is amember of this group and they are now in Hiroshima, and then we are communicating
what kind of peace initiatives we are taking. And I think I couldn’t complete myspeech within the given time. Thank you very much.
Chairperson: That was very fit for this occasion and I think we can have much timefor exchange afterwards, so including the first speakers, I think we can have lots ofoccasions to talk more.
And now, actually we have come to the list of the presenters, but as I’ve said at the
beginning, actually yesterday I happened to encounter people from Italy and I came to8

know that they actually want to participate in this exchange meeting, but they weretold that they must have registered in advance, and I said, no, no, please come. And
it’s okay. So now I’d like to ask the Pastor Pier Luigi from the Balducci Support
Center. So first Pastor Pier Luigi is going to talk in Italian and Miss Yamada is going
to translate for us.
Pastor Pier Luigi, Representative, Balducci Support Center, Italy: Hello. I
would like to greet all of you. I came from Italy. I am a member of the peaceexchange association and I am a member of the delegation visiting Hiroshima. The
Balducci Support Center is the name of our organization for refugees. We support
refugees and also immigrants. Balducci is the name of the association. Balducci isactually the name of the priest who is engaged in peace activities and our organizationis also engaged in peace activities. We are from a place in the northeastern part of
Italy, it’s a province in the northeast part of Italy.
The peace issue is something that is essential for people to live. For long years, wehave always thought about Hiroshima and Nagasaki deep in our minds. In that sense,
several times we have talked with Ms. Numata and other survivors of the A-bomb,
and we have invited these people from Nagasaki and Hiroshima and talked with them.
This kind of activity, that is, exchange with the citizens, is very important, and also
through these exchanges the school students visit our support center to hear about
these stories and experience.
The visit to Hiroshima this time is very impressive to me and I am very touched andhit by this occasion of participating in this conference. The A-bomb is very powerfulin terms of its massacre power, and it is something that we shall not forget as part ofour history of mankind. It also expresses the craziness of violence and politics. It
totally changed the history of human history.
Today we exist because we need to advocate the voice of humankind. We never shallrepeat Hiroshima or Nagasaki. We shall not do war. We shall not hold weapons, andwar shall never occur in any part of the world. And injustice in the world shall not be
admitted. Racial discrimination shall be abolished. And environmental destruction
shall be discontinued. These things need to be understood by each individual with asense of responsibility.
And in the community, as a citizen, and within Europe as well, and in eachorganization of the world we should revise and improve the United Nations. The
political flow or stream needs to be changed or else world peace will never beachieved. With our power, politics, religion, in various fields there are many things
that we can do and we need to do. What is important is not just to say no. Every day
we have to say yes. We have to say yes to the life of humankind.
Priest Balducci’s tomb carves the following words: The people of the future need tobe the people of peace or else they are not people. When you say you are not people,
you are not human. Humans will be destroyed like in the case of Hiroshima.
Another meaning of not being a human is that you are not human to be respected as ahuman. This memorial of peace said, lie in peace and we will never repeat the
mistake. There is no subject to this sentence but we ourselves must be the subject, theactor of peace. We must seek peace for the global family, global peace. Thank you.

9

His name is Bozidar. He actually came to our center, Balducci Support Center, in1992 as a refugee of Yugoslavia. He has received support from our center and he isstill living in a city in Italy. He is a poet and he is also a novelist, he is also a teacher.
From the standpoint of a poet he would like to say a few words to you.
Bozidar Stanisi, Refugee of Yugoslavia, Italy: Good evening. I would like toextend my heartfelt greetings to you. I refuse the war and from my perspective I
would like to say a few things. I also write books and I can say that war is totallyuseless. Sixty years ago Hiroshima had a tragedy about that. I have been also talking
about Hiroshima, but I also would like to talk about depleted uranium bombs as well.
I’m wishing that nuclear weapons would be completely abolished, and with this I
would like to conclude my speech. Thank you.
Chairperson: Actually, if we had more time I wanted to ask Mr. Pastor and Mr.
Bozidar, to talk more but because of the time we have to really limit our wishes to that.
So thank you very much for the presenters.
Now we have, it is about 7:32 I think, so we’re just about on time, so we have about
one hour for exchange of views among us. So now I’d like to invite the people ofHiroshima, not only of Hiroshima but people from Japan, to express their opinions,questions, comments to the presentations just made or and some other personal
opinions. So could you raise your hand, those people who would like to speak?
Please.
Hitoshi Shinmoto, Representative, Hiroshima Branch of Asia Pacific Forum,
Japan: Thank you very much. I was born in Hiroshima in 1954 after the war. There
was a statement from Berkeley and I think what he said was very important and I wasvery impressed by his statement.
With regard to nuclear weapons, with regard to the abolishment of nuclear weapons, it
is often said that people agree to the abolishment of nuclear weapons in general, but inspecifics there are some vagueness. So in making nuclear weapons there are various
companies that are involved and there are profits made by different companies in the
manufacturing or in the making of nuclear weapons, and this must be clarified and wemust look at the balance sheets and the financial statements of these companies which
contribute to the manufacturing of nuclear weapons. So I think it is very importantthat these corporations and companies that are involved disclose their statements, theirfinancial statements. And I think we need to also look at that aspect. I think that is avery important thing.
And with regard to the matter of peace, the issue of peace, unfortunately, in Japan we
do not know very much about how World War II occurred and we do not reflect uponourselves very much. There’s this Constitution Article IX, which is very importantfor Japan, and we should, in Japan, and within Japan as well, we have to study more
about Article IX of our Constitution, and Japanese scholars, as well as the world
scholars, must study why Japan was involved in the Second World War and I would
like to ask the professors to study further with regard to this matter.
And Hiroshima is considered to be the City of Peace, but at the same time, actually it
is a city of militarism. For the past 100 years, Hiroshima was the basis of aggressionin Asian countries and Hiroshima was the center of militarism in Western Japan andTokyo, of Eastern Japan, and for three years the Emperor lived in Hiroshima and also

10the Diet was held in Hiroshima for three years. Therefore, Hiroshima is not really aCity of Peace. It was a military city prior to that and we have to be aware of that.
There were many facilities related to the military in Hiroshima, and I think that is why
the Americans decided to drop the atomic bomb to Hiroshima. Thank you.
Chairperson: There was not really a question included, but it was a very positive
reaction to what Mr. Freedkin, said so I wonder if Mr. Freedkin, would you like to
add something to his remark? Your presentation was rather short.
Freedkin: All I want to say is domo arigato gozaimashita. I was very honored by
Shinmoto-san’s comments and look forward to working with him and anyone else
who would like to work together on these kinds of approaches.
Chairperson: Thank you very much. Are there any other persons who would like torespond to what he said or some other new questions? Please? Your name andgroup?
Ritsunori Doi, COOP, Japan: My name is Doi from the coop. The coop provides asafe and comfortable life, and then we provide food products to the members of thecoop, so it’s a safe life. A precondition of the coop is a world without starvation andwars. So one of the problems with life is peace. That’s why we are involved in peace
activities. So according to Japanese law, coops cannot do business operations beyond
prefectural borderlines, however, we now have 330,000 members across the nation.
So I would like to talk a bit about our peace initiatives.
First, the Mayors for Peace are now promoting the emergency action for the nuclear
weapons abolition, and then actually the Mayor of Hiroshima, Mr. Akiba, has come toour meeting to make a speech. And Japan coop groups and the Hiroshima Prefecture
coops have got together and he has asked us to cooperate with him too to establish thenuclear ban treaty by 2020. And 1,200 people have gathered and have reached aconsensus on that. We cannot make any big action. The majority of the members are
actually women and they are mothers. And the mothers care about the children andgrandchildren. They don’t want them to experience the miserable experience which
took place 60 years ago, so there is a very limited amount of money. However, they
make some contribution, not only monetary contribution but their actions arecontributed.
And what we mainly do is as follows. Actually I have been listening to the commentsfrom the speakers and it’s been 60 years since the end of the war and the experienceof the A-bomb is now being forgotten. We have to make efforts to succeed and tohand down this experience, so in our coop organizations at every opportunity weinvite the A-bomb survivors so that we can share what they have to say about theirexperiences. And then we are also trying to disseminate that information across all
the children and this initiative will be able to prevent the nuclear weapons war.
And every year we are making an appeal to the Japanese government to make thenuclear weapons ban, a nuclear weapons convention, and then we actually gathered apetition. About 30,000 people’s petition was gathered and we submitted that to theDiet. It’s hard to have our voices be heard to the politicians. However, we aremaking efforts so that our voice will reach the Diet.

11

And within this Peace Park, there is the cenotaph for the A-bomb victims, so we visit
those commemorative cenotaph, war memorial monuments, we are visiting them andthen we also try to disseminate information about why these memorial monuments
were built. And then we also make some sub group which can disseminate suchinformation, which can serve as guides in this park.
And in May there was the NPT Review Conference and then we sent two
representatives to that in order to let our voices be heard in the United Nations andalso on the global basis. So I think each individual should work on their own
municipalities and each government so that the nuclear weapons convention will beenacted. Thank you very much.
Chairperson: Thank you very much. I think that kind of report the Mayor Akiba
and the staff for the Mayors for Peace campaign must be very glad to hear, I think. I
recognize the face of one of the staff for the Mayors for Peace conference. And if
those who have already made presentations and if you also have something you’d liketo say in response to Japanese people, please do not hesitate to raise your hands
because already there are some very concrete serious points that have come up. I
wonder if there is anyone who would like to respond to that report just made. Yes?
Akiko Awa, World Friendship Center, Japan: My name is Awa Akiko. I belong
to the World Friendship Center. It was said that the experience of the war is being
faded and I think that is true. And the war is occurring in Iraq and the children areforced to see these wars on the TV and Internet, and there are wars occurring all over
the world and they are being broadcasted on TVs and the Internet. I am skeptical as towhy the children should not learn about the war that is going on throughout the worldright now and only forced to learn about the war that was held 60 years ago.
Chairperson: Your qualification, please. Affiliation, please.
Fujiwara, No-DU Project Hiroshima, Japan: My name is Fujiwara. No-DU
Project Hiroshima, is what I belong to, we have a booth over there, so please drop by.
With regard to the present war I think we should also focus on it and right now we are
dealing with the depleted uranium weapons. And in Iraq a lot of depleted uranium
weapons are being used, and not only in Iraq but in Kosovo and Bosnia-Herzegovina
are other locations where these weapons are being used and there are a lot of disasters
occurring, but such victims are not being brought up on the media.
And I think there was someone from Bosnia who made a statement but I would like to
ask someone who knows about this victim of the depleted uranium weapons to speak
up on this occasion. So what shall I do?
Chairperson: Was your request a concrete request? Yes. Could you stand up?
Stanisi : In 1995, the Bosnian war was over. And I think the intervention to the
Kosovo civil war ended in 1999. In 1999, there was the intervention to the civil war in
Kosovo. At that time a great amount of depleted uranium bombs were used. The
outcome of that was quite miserable and quite disastrous. A lot of people are now
having cancers, especially leukemia is now the outcome of those bombs. Nature andhuman beings, whatever has life was damaged. By just staying in Bosnia for a day,you get the same amount of radiation you receive in over a year in the other part of
the world. We don’t have the complete statistics because the government has its
political reasons for not submitting such data.
12

So briefly, I would like to talk about it. In the north of Bosnia there is a little city.
The children from one year old to ten years old, they have very serious cancers, very
complicated cancers. In one city, which has a 5,000 population, in the past ten years
500 people died. Two-thirds were perfectly having cancers.
So these depleted uranium bombs can be abolished totally by activism. Concreteknowledge. Various wise knowledge is not the only thing we need. The philosopher
Pascal said the reasoned mind has to be heard now. Thank you.
Chairperson: Thank you very much. Personally, I’d like to listen more about it,
partly because I’ve been involved in the anti-DU campaign, but if I do I might beblamed for being partial later, so I think I’d like to go back to the Mayors for Peace
related, directly related to the topic, and I have Steve Leeper, who has been working
really hard for the Mayors for Peace conference. Would you like to say something?
And actually as a staff player on the list of speakers for this exchange program?
Steve Leeper, U. S. Representative of Mayors for Peace Secretariat, U.S.A: I
guess I have a very fundamental question that we are dealing with in the campaign,and that is that the world now seems to be moving very much the way it did before
World War I and World War II. The gap between rich and poor is getting very large
and the poorer people are getting very angry. And in the United States, we have theproblem of a government that uses that anger and directs that anger and is riding onthat anger. And that anger is coming into the peace movement so that the peace
people themselves are angry at each other, angry at President Bush. There’s a lot of
intense hatred expressed, even among the peace people.
And I am wondering if any of the mayors in their cities or anybody has found somegood way of addressing this anger and some way of sort of generating peace and kindof a more emotional, and he was talking, and the important thing is the heart and themind of the people. How do we touch the people who are getting angrier and angrier?
How do we change that anger and turn it toward love and peace and kind of
coexistence, tolerance, cooperation, all of the things of peace culture? I think in our
campaign we realize that this is an extremely important step and we do not have agood answer for it and I wish someone would help us with that.
Chairperson: Thank you very much for a very important, fundamental question, I
think which is addressed directly to all of us, but I think there were some mayors who
mentioned about their attempts to sort of gear up towards the peace culture, so if there
are some mayors who would like to add to what they have already said in more
concrete terms, please do not hesitate, especially those who are the first speakers
whom I’d like to ask to finish up quickly. Or, yes?
Unkown: I am not a mayor but I am an A-bomb survivor in Hiroshima and people
are mentioning about the fading of the memory of the war, but I have highexpectations of you.
In 1945, I was six years old and I was 1.3 kilometers away from ground zero. I waslooking at the airplane that was sparkling and shining, and we A-bomb survivors
don’t want anyone to experience the tragedy we had. Somebody mentioned that the
cenotaph at the Peace Park says that each one of us is the main player of making thepeace. And also, the city, the Mayor of Hiroshima says that we have to have thereconciliation, and now my sister has come from Osaka. She is now 70 years old and13then she says that she might not be alive next year. This summer we thought that I
might not be able to come here next year with the healthy body; that’s why she cameto visit me this year. That really touched my heart.
About ten years ago, I had the disorder in the thyroid gland and because of that thetalking and walking capability and the hair, this was all lost in me and then I couldn’t
even stand up like this. And this thyroid gland is not the unique symptom for only thewar A-bomb victims, but the health authority of Japan decided that it is the result of
the atomic bomb.
I think nuclear weapons should not be used in any part of the world because nobody
should experience the disaster we had. In order to make sure that will come true wehave to abolish the nuclear weapons, that includes the depleted uranium bombs in Iraq
and in Bosnia. Especially the small children and women are most damaged. Look at
the disaster in Iraq. They don’t have drugs and children are dying one after another.
When I look at what they’re going through my heart aches. Why in the world, why
can’t we help them? That’s very painful. Our pain is not fading away.
There is a sister who was lost and my aunt who was pregnant passed away 500 meters
away and the bones were her bones, and my sister who came back, her back was filledwith maggots and the maggots went into her nerves and it gave her great pain, and on
the 16th of the same month, August, she passed away. This sister, I was able to findher body, but there was another sister who has been lost. I was given life andtherefore I came to this place and I came to hear the words of the mayors of the world
and I came here to ask the mayors all over the world, including the Mayor of New
York, to abolish nuclear weapons while people are still living. And I think we need tocreate such a world. We have to inherit, we have to provide a good and nice andclean world to our descendents.
It’s not fading away. Our experience is never fading away. We have become old but
we are not fading away. We A-bomb survivors are willing to visit anywhere as longas our health is maintained, as well as we are invited to share our experience.
Although my thyroid gland disease is still prevalent, with medicine I am able to standand speak like this today and I am able to travel. So as long as I have my medicine
with me, I can visit anywhere and share my experience with the other people. So aslong as the experiences of A-bomb survivors are effective, I am willing to visit
anywhere.
And I certainly hope that nuclear weapons will be abolished from the world as soon as
possible. I am sorry that I became a little emotional but I would like to stop here.
Chairpersopn: Thank you very much. Your talk is the kind of talk which it is quitedifficult for us to respond to in words. I think we feel that we need to engage inconcrete actions in order to respond to what has been just said. And actually, thisMayors for Peace conference is being held exactly for that purpose.
As you all know, as the future activities proposed by the Mayors for Peace campaign,
as a final very concrete objective, I think this Mayors for Peace conference has
already been trying to set goals, a set of activities that will press for a nuclear weapons
convention treaty concluded by 2010 and the total elimination of nuclear weapons by
2020. And I think this is what we really need to achieve, but of course it will not beeasy, so I think we try to come up with a concrete suggestions, proposals or requests
directed to the Mayors for Peace campaign.
14And so in that sense, I’d like to ask you to try to respond to what has been just said
with that concrete objective in mind. And also I think I’d like to draw your attention
to the fact of the very important question raised by Steve Leeper. Actually, the talkjust given is a response to Steve Leeper’s question, but are there any other people
who’d like to continue in this line or respond to Steve Leeper’s question? Okay,
please go ahead.
Susan Walker, Humanitarian Affairs and Disarmament Consultant,
Former ICBL Intersessional Programme Officer, U.S.A.: Domo arigato
gosaimasu. I just want to thank the woman who just spoke. My name is Susan
Walker. I’ve been working in humanitarian work and the International Campaign to
Ban Landmines for 26 years now. And your story is what brings the horrors of
nuclear weapons to the world and they should be heard more.
I am very moved, very saddened, of course, the loss of your sister, your healthproblems, and your willingness to come here. I know, I work with landmine
survivors. It is not easy to tell your story, and never apologize for getting emotional.
This is a terrible situation that you have endured all your life, since 1945. And theworld needs to hear that. You said yourself, you are getting older, and this will be lostto the world, so your stories must not only be heard like you’ve come tonight, and I
thank you very, very much again for coming. I think I speak on behalf of all of us. I
know I and the gentleman councilor from the Philippines, I think many people came
here, ah, he is still there. Many people came here to speak with the people ofHiroshima, not to hear ourselves speak again, and also to hear from A-bomb survivors.
So it is very important, and as you've said, you’re willing to travel even though you’re
not in good health as long as your stories are useful. You must know from the bottomof your heart that these stories are not only useful but very, very important. And I
thank you for sharing that and for being willing to continue to discuss it. Thank you.
Domo arigato gosaimasu.
Chairperson: Thank you very much for the very, it’s hard to express, but very
heartfelt response to what she just said. So please. Could you stand up?
Chantal Bourvic, Councilor, Val de Marne, France: I am the member of theprovince council in Val de Marne in France. And after the statement of a very
moving A-bomb survivor, it is hard for me to speak, but in France, in our municipality,
we are beginning various actions and one of them is, one of these days all of the Abomb survivors may pass away in the future, but we feel it’s very important that we
maintain the experience, the voices of the experience and we must advocate "No More
Hiroshima! No More Nagasaki!" And the world view, also we have to change theworld view of people’s mind and also we have to change the consciousness of powerin people’s minds.
And with the abolishment of nuclear weapons, true peace will come. In order toadvance the human society forward, nuclear weapons are not the only way. Nuclear
weapons are never the only way is what we need people to understand, what we needto have the people understand. And also, abolishment of nuclear weapons is very
important but at the same time we must abolish poverty as well. Poverty is providing
much pain to the people as well.

15

Maybe this isn’t a specific proposal but our future depends upon this. The
municipalities in France, 30 young participants are participating from my province inthis conference, and I think it is very important that young people, the young
generation participate in this kind of assembly.
Chairperson:I see some hands raised, and so let me ask her and let me go, move
down this way. Pardon?
Johnanne Winchester, Director, Communications Coordination Committee for
the United Nations, U.S.A.: Konbanwa. My name is Johnanne Winchester, Directorof the Communications, Coordination Committee for the United Nations. We’re theoldest non-governmental organization founded when the UN was formed and we
specialize in doing communications-related projects. So I wanted to respond directly
to what Steve brought to the table and also to a few other points that have been raised.
It is my personal opinion that the way to build a world culture of peace, which is themission of the United Nations system, to establish a world culture of peace, is to startin the imagination of everyone. And perhaps the Mayors for Peace and the otherinitiatives that are represented here tonight and around the world can really focus onwhat that imagination process is and begin to find creative ways of engaging people indesigning what the future could look like if it weren’t about conflict and violence,violence as a way of resolving conflict.
So part of it is about withdrawing our support - our dollars as consumers, our dollars
with municipal funds - the economic approach from organizations, corporations that
contribute to violence in many forms. Environmental violence is the big time bomb
waiting to go off for all of us. So part of it is withdrawing funds.
The gentleman from the Philippines reminded me that knowledge is power and in our
research, when we’re looking at doing a divestment campaign, the way they did with
South Africa, we’re dealing with nuclear apartheid now, in South Africa when theworld began to decide to withdraw its financial support from the regime in South
Africa that was creating the violence of racial apartheid, it was very systematicallydone and big universities began to withdraw their funds and large pension funds
began to withdraw their funds and then private investors withdrew their funds. And it
brought that regime down. So I think that one approach is to look at what countries
are insisting on maintaining their nuclear weapons arsenals, starting with my own
country, and looking at how to withdraw funds from those Treasury Bonds and otherthings.
There are 13 major corporations, there are many corporations that contribute to theweapons cycle of just-in-time delivery in supply chains, but there are 13 major ones
and the No. 1 happens to be Japanese. It has $175 billion a year in gross income.
And then the usual ones that we all know about in America and so on.
And in New York, two representatives spoke about having municipalities, this is from
Belgium, decide to withdraw their funds from any bank that was invested in any way
in weapons productions, and the City of Tacoma Park, Maryland, spoke about having
a law on the book for 22 years that prohibited the local government from buying apaperclip or a piece of paper or anything from any company that was affiliated or
engaged in weapons manufacture. So there are many creative ways to just say no tocontinuing this madness.

16

On the other side, we have to take all of those resources and look at how to invest
them in building a positive future. And that’s where the imagination of everyone canbe engaged. So remember, you have a lot of power with your purchasing dollars andwith organizing yourself with other organizations, individuals, alliances. So thankyou.
Chairperson: Thank you very much for bringing in another new proposal in terms ofimagination. Yes, The lady in the back,Unknown: Hello. Welcome to Hiroshima. I am working in the Hiroshima Peace
Memorial Museum and I am trying to communicate peace to people. I’m trying tomeet people from all around the world, peace-loving people, and I am shaking handswith all of them in order to abolish nuclear weapons.
Many people from many different countries have made comments and it was very
encouraging for me, especially the comments from the City of Berkeley, and also the
French people said that they are incorporating Sadako in their education. When I
heard that I am very happy about that. And you have come to Hiroshima, We would
like to know a more concrete explanation about what kind of initiatives they are doing.
Chairperson: Well, okay. I’m going to let the other people who raised their hands
speak first and then try to have your question answered later. Thank you very much.
Shinichiro Tsukada, Peace Depo, Japan: Shinichiro Tsukada. I came from Tokyo.
I am working as a volunteer at an NGO peace level and in Tokyo at Meiji University I
am in the international department and I have actually many questions, but I actuallywanted to know the concrete initiatives undertaken by the youngsters in othercountries. As a student I wanted to know what the students in other countries are
doing. But it seems like we don’t have time for that. But I have a favor.
I actually attended the NPT Review Conference as an auditor or observer. And ingeneral, people say it was a failure, and I think the Mayors for Peace has the main
body which can inflict a very positive influence on the NPT like the abolition 2020.
Also people were there in New York so I think people have high hopes andexpectations for this body. And as Mr. Akiba says, the Hiroshima-Nagasaki process,we need to change to it and I was expecting maybe I will hear something quite
overwhelming. However, it’s been only three months since that meeting in New York,so unless you have a magic wand you cannot come up with a wonderful solution. So I
guess there is some action plan, but there is not much concrete substance in it. So I
think you are now mapping that out.
Now we have 15 years to accomplish the goal and I am now 22 years old, so in 15
years I will become 37 years old. So we will be the generation who are going toundertaken that initiative, so the students I think should take the class of HiroshimaNagasaki lectures and those activists' information gave me a very good influence.
That’s why I’m here today. The mayors from various countries are here today andlectures of Hiroshima-Nagasaki maybe should be shared in other parts of the world.
Please host them. Thank you.
Chairperson: Thank you very much for that request for future action. And the next
person?

17

The Marine Animal Institute is where I am from. More than half a century has
passed since the A-bomb, but when Mayor of Hiroshima joins any NPT assembly heis forced to speak in front of an audience who are very few in lunch break. And so I
feel that the A-bomb or nuclear A-bomb experience of Hiroshima is not well-accepted.
The common sense of Hiroshima citizens and the common sense of the world has avery large gap between the two, so I think this needs to be revised and improved orelse we will never be able to abolish nuclear weapons.
And Mayor Akiba, more than ten years ago, started the Akiba Project, and the local
newspapers and other newspapers like the New York Times, global media, took it up
and the press people of such influential media people were invited to Hiroshima to
appeal to them on the 6th August. And I think this kind of approach is very important.
And also, the A-bomb survivors are separated into five organizations actually,
depending on different political parties. And on the 6th August the socialist people
look towards the east, the communist party looks to the west, and so there are otherorganizations looking in different directions during the ceremony. But when people
from abroad come to Hiroshima, when they see the different organizations looking
towards different directions they would not really appreciate the realism of such
ceremonies. I think these organizations need to be unified. The A-bomb survivors
now are separated and divided into different organizations, but they need to be unified
in order to appeal more to the people from abroad and have their true understanding.
Chairperson: Thank you for your opinion, which I share personally very much. So,
the next person please.
Unknown: I am not a Hiroshima citizen nor a Japanese citizen. Sixty years ago, Aug.
6, 8:15, more than 100,000 Koreans became the victims of the A-bomb at thislocation. Why were these Koreans in Hiroshima on that day? When I am asked
where I belong , I only respond by saying that I am a poet. The reason is, with regard
to the victims of Koreans of A-bomb, in the past 60 years the Japanese government
has not clarified such victims, and South Korea and North Korea, which is developing
nuclear, actually there were people from North Korea who became victims of the Abomb in Hiroshima on that day. And the Korean victims were actually separated.
And only five dollars was paid as compensation by the Japanese government to these
Koreans. And for the 36 years Japan has colonized the Korean peninsula and there
the responsibility of this colonization has not been compensated; the Japanese
government is not taking any responsibility.
I bring a picture of Mr. Shin Yong who has already passed away. He was the victim of
the Hiroshima A-bomb and he went back to his homeland but his parents said, "Oh,you’re a ghost, you’re not my son." And they tried to put him away. And he went
through plastic surgery several times and he looked like this, but at that time he wasblind. He could not hear and his nose was deformed and his mouth was deformed, so
he did not look like any human being, therefore his parents said that he was a ghost or
a monster. And he said, "Well, I am your son, my name is Shin Yong", he wrote it
on a piece of paper, and reading that piece of paper his father for the first time
recognized that he was his loving son.
So Mitsubishi in Japan and other companies, when there was an escalation of
aggression towards the Chinese continent, this place became where the militaryindustry expanded by four-fold in this location. And in order to collect the labor force
they forced Korean people to come to this place and Toyo Kogyo and Mitsubishi were18

the companies that they were forced to work for. And there were several hundred
women students who also were supposed to come to this Western Japan. And theNagasaki Mitsubishi military plant was another place where 700 or more or less of the
Korean women were forced to come to Nagasaki.
However, they were prohibited to speak in their language, and also their names wereforced to be pronounced in the Japanese way and their nationality was forced to beignored and they were forced to pay the greatest respect and honor to the Japaneseemperor. So because of the colonization policy of Japan, the Koreans were denied interms of nationality, and Korean identity was fully denied because of the colonization
policy of Japan.
After the World War II, Japan has been called the only A-bomb victimized nation.
But with this they have become very silent to the fact that there has been a great
aggression and invasion from Japan to the Korean peninsula. I think we are still
under the colonization policy. Ninety per cent of the Koreans who returned to the
Korean peninsula have passed away. And they have received no support with regard
to treatment after being victimized by the A-bomb as well.
And these people, there are 44 people who were forced to come and work for
Mitsubishi and became victims of the A-bomb and made a lawsuit, and for the firsttime in history they required full compensation from the Japanese government. And
this court litigation is going on still for the past ten years. And to West Japan, theimperial headquarters of West Japan, towards them the Korean victims asked,
required the compensation that is provided to the A-bomb survivors of Japanese andthis also, the litigation started and we won the litigation, the Koreans won thelitigation. But still it is taking ten years for the compensation from the Japanese
government to pay compensation for the colonization policy.
So the Korean A-bomb victims, they are still colonized by the Japanese government.
Even now they haven’t been regarded as human beings. If Japan wants to walk on thepath of peace, truly, then they have to recognize what they did in colonization. They
have to do soul-searching and through that they can establish reconciliation with the
Korean A-bomb victims and then we can see the light in the coexistence together.
However, the Japanese government still has not clarified or identified the scope of thedamage to the Korean A-bomb victims.
I came here but I wasn’t allowed to speak out until the very last. I was very sad.
Even in the international conference, the Korean A-bomb survivors are not fullyrecognized and we are not restored, so those people from France and Germany and
Italy, please listen to me. There is another Hiroshima A-bomb story in Hiroshima.
Now I’m going to wrap up. So I actually have made a book compiling thetestimonials of the Korean A-bomb survivors and then we’ve also made a movie
about the Korean experiences, and I’ve brought the video. And then also there is thephoto exhibition about the Korean experience in the A-bomb. The venue is pretty
close from here, so please pay attention to that. Please understand another story of
the Hiroshima A-bomb and then please bring this story back to your country. Thankyou very much for sparing time for me.
Chairperson: Thank you. And I think I need to say the point just brought into focus
is the reality we have to face anew, especially at this occasion. And I guess

19everybody knows that because of this kind of problem, Japan has now, at this very
moment, difficult times in its relationship with China, Korea and North Korea.
So actually that is also in the United States, there is a huge gap between thegovernment and the American people.
And also, actually I would like to say only a few words, and being aware that it would
not be sufficient, but I guess you know that looking at only Hiroshima there are allsorts of activities and lots of people are involved in all sorts of peace activities, notonly anti-nuclear activities. Actually, my friends and some of the members in ourgroup are involved in the attempt to work exactly for that purpose mentioned together
with Korean people. And of course we are aware that this kind of attempt at the levelof people has been far from enough in the sense that the Japanese government has
been able to get away with its very pragmatic attitude towards its history.
But there is yet another point. I am really sorry that I did not give a chance to speakout in the beginning. Let me explain. Maybe you didn’t see because you are sittingin the front, but there are so many people raising their hands in the back, so many
people, so I didn’t avoid you by design. Please understand that. I think I would liketo first ask the very first person who raised his hand, yes, please.
Unknown: If possible the people in and outside of Hiroshima they should be
provided more time and opportunity to speak their minds. That’s all I wanted to say
and then I would like to stop talking here. Thank you very much.
Chairperson: Close. Then I would request to finish up. Yes?
Unknown: I am the mayor of a city in France. What we have heard is related to us.
We ourselves have something to do with it. I understand that people had a very
disastrous experience, but I hope that you keep talking about it. I hope that you keep
sharing what you have experienced.
And Mayors for Peace believe that peace is necessary, however, even among us wehave some differences, differences of opinion, and also what kind of actions weshould make. To this we also have some differences. But we are now making
arguments about abolishing nuclear weapons, but we can also solve other problems.
The world has various problems now, the inequality issue, the inequality and thenunequal development and the nuclear weapons problem is one of the problems as well.
We shouldn’t give up taking action. We have to take action in order to accomplish
the nuclear weapons disarmament.
Disarmament is the issue, not just non-proliferation, because some people say that,
actually yesterday, at the exit of the museum, there was a young lady who speaks
French and she noticed that I was French so she just came to me and started talking in
French trying to practice French. And then she said that Hiroshima’s atomic bomb
was dropped at 8:15 in the morning on the 6th August. And where are we in thehistory of human beings? I cannot imagine. I cannot imagine that we will ever haveanother atomic bomb or nuclear bomb blast, that’s what she said. But I said, inNagasaki and in Hiroshima the atomic bombs were dropped. And wherever you arein the world, there is the possibility and the risk of having the third atomic bomb blast,
so we cannot bear that, we have to start taking action, we have to abolish andeliminate all the nuclear weapons.

20

So mayors are now gathering in Hiroshima. But what are we going to do? Right.
The NPT Review Conference was a failure, however, the treaty is still living. And
based on that, the signatory countries have to fulfill their tasks and nuclear powers are
not fulfilling their tasks in the context of NPT. So we have to of course stop theproliferation of nuclear weapons. That’s necessary. And the US is now trying to start
the new nuclear arms race. We have to stop that as well. But I would like to say one
thing.
We are gathering here as the mayors. If we don’t have the citizens we cannot makeany use, so wherever you are, in whichever cities you are, we have to work together
with the citizens. And the government of the US, France, UK, Russia and othernuclear power governments, India, Pakistan and Israel as well, those nuclear
weapons-owning countries like North Korea, so to those nuclear power governments
we have to give pressure from the people, from citizens, and we have to force thegovernment to stop nuclear development, have to put the pressure on the government
to reduce the number of nuclear weapons. That’s the goal of 2020, and we have to betrue to this target. Sorry for speaking so long. Thank you.
Chairperson: Thank you for the very determined and powerful talk which was a
response to the question made by the young Japanese man. I think I’d like to ask theother foreign participants to respond to his question, but I think we are really out oftime.Yes, and may I ask the last speaker to give his talk?
Unknown: I am an A-bomb survivor in Hiroshima. I came here with great
expectations, and what I want say is, in Japan the greatest concern is the nuclear issueof North Korea. And I have no time to go into details, but I am, however, wondering
how much of the participants of the conference Mayors for Peace know about thisnuclear weapon in North Korea. They agree to the abolishment of nuclear weapons
but they still want to continue to use nuclear in a peaceful way. That is theinformation that I know from the newspapers.
And there is this abduction issue as well. And the six-nation talk. Japan is not very
being taken much into serious consideration. And also I must mention the fact thatJapan objects to the utilization of nuclear in a peaceful manner in North Korea. In
Japan we have many, many nuclear power plants, and if we wanted to, we do have thetechnology and the capability of making nuclear weapons. And also in the Diet there
are some Diet members who are for making nuclear weapons in Japan. So we mustbe also aware of that. I feel that this kind of issue is a very important issue whichshould be brought up in this conference of Mayors for Peace.
And so it is not true that Japan is really a peaceful nation, and there is this kind of
danger within Japan as well. Thank you very much.
Chairperson: Thank you very much for your very important point. Actually I’ve
been feeling the same problem and people talk a lot about the so-called American
double-standard. I think there is a Japanese double-standard in terms of nuclear
policy.
Also, concerning the very fact that Japan is sending, has sent the so-called Self
Defense armies to Iraq, just following America, the USA. So I think we are, in many
regards, in a very dangerous situation and we have to focus on the Japanese
government’s problems if we would like to appeal to the international community for21the nuclear disarmament and a peaceful world. And I think we have to conclude.
Very short?
Walker: Just two very short, the microphone again, but I just wanted to say to thegentleman in the back. I agree, I wish there had been more time and I know, I speak
only for myself, but I know there is free time tomorrow morning after the ceremony
and before the session starts, and I know I would be happy to meet with people, eventhough I’m not directly involved in the nuclear movement. And my guess is there
would be a number of people from the Mayors for Peace conference that would beinterested, because I think the point, it’s really too bad that people have come andreally not had time to talk. So thank you for your comments.
Chairperson: Thank you very much. Of course I do not have something to round up
this exchange meeting with. But just a very short thing. I have personallyparticipated in lots of conferences, international conferences, not only in my specialty,
which is philosophy, but also in the peace activities conferences, and I think every
time I participate in this kind of conference meeting I feel again that this kind of
meeting is not an end, it’s just a starting point, and there will be lots of expecting
developments coming out of this exchange. I think hoping for that, the kind ofdevelopment which even we ourselves might not be able to foresee.
I think I’d like to conclude, but I’d like to ask for your pardon. I’m aware there musthave been lots of points to be desired but I did my best to come up with the exchange
between people as freely as possible.
Osamu Kimura, Japan: Sorry, a very short comment. I came from Osaka, myname is Kimura. I have a comment to Mr. Freedkin. I am a friend to Mr. Freedkin.
Peace and the abolishment of nuclear weapons issue is an issue that is directly related
to democratism. And Berkeley was opposed to the Iraqi war, and also they haveadopted the convention to abolish any nuclear-related flying objects and also they are
discussing with regard to the issue of dispatching soldiers from California. So all ofthese things are related to the citizens’ movement.
There are more than 40 committees in the Council and all of the citizens participate inthese commissions and I was very shocked for such participation of the citizens andthe democratism that we see in Berkeley. Compared to this, the democracy in Japan
is very much limited. So what I want to ask the people in Hiroshima is that we haveto establish a process in which the citizens can participate more in the government, thepolitics, and we have to really study that and we have to develop this process of
citizens participating in democracy.
Chairperson: There must be a lot of things which we wish, in a different way, but I
think I would like to say, as you may know, there was a plenary session this morningand this plenary session had to end with no discussion time left. So when we think ofthat, I think, if I may say so, I think we did have almost one-and-a-half hours forexchange of opinions, and I’m aware that it is not enough, far from enough, but I
think, please believe that I did my best to bring up the free exchange of time. And I’dlike to thank every participant for coming and staying late to the end. And thank youvery much. And let’s work together, for the future together. [applause]

22

The 6th General Conference of Mayors for Peace
Commemorating the 60th Anniversary of the Atomic Bombings

A-bomb Survivor Testimony
13:00-14:00, Saturday, August 6, 2005
HimawarilInternational Conference Center Hiroshima
A-bomb Survivor: Akihiro Takahashi
Former Director of Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum

Minoru Hataguchi, Director, Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum, Hiroshima,
Japan: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to Hiroshima. I appreciate
your being with us. I am Director of the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum. My
name is Minoru Hataguchi. Sixty years ago, on this day of August 6, Hiroshima was
the first citizens and the city to be bombed by the A-bomb. And sixty years ago thecity was totally on fire and was totally destroyed. Sixty years ago, my father was also
killed by the atomic bombing.
The A-bomb survivors that survived the bombing have been living up until today withgreat suffering. Mr. Akihiro Takahashi, who will be speaking to you as a testifier, isalso one such A-bomb survivor.
Mr. Takahashi experienced the atomic bombing when he was 14 years old, in the
courtyard of his junior high school. And from 1954, he has been testifying as an Abomb survivor, speaking to children visiting Hiroshima, also speaking to many people
both in and out of Japan of his experience. In 1979, he became Director of theHiroshima Peace Memorial Museum. He has also received visitors from overseas andhas talked about his experience. And in 1991, he received the broadcasters award ofNHK. And also, in 2003 he had a dialogue with a pilot of Enola Gay, and this has
been also awarded by the Japanese Association of Literature, an essay.
So I hope that you will listen attentively to the testimony by Mr. Akihiro Takahashi
now.
Akihiro Takahashi, Former Director of Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum:First of all, I'd like to extend a heartfelt welcome to all of you, mayors from all over
the world who are participating in the 6th General Conference of Mayors for Peace
Commemorating the 60th Anniversary of the Atomic Bombings. My name is Akihiro
Takahashi. It is my honor to be introduced to you.
Now, it is only 60 years since the end of World War II, therefore, I would like tovigorously appeal to you for the abolition of nuclear weapons at the earliest possible
date. Though 60 years have already passed since the end of World War II, I still feelthe need to petition to you to achieve lasting world peace without further delay.
No matter how fast time has passed, no matter how many other important things haveoccurred, the devastation wrought by the Atomic bombing has remained on my mind.
Even to this day, the gravity of the day of Atomic bombing remains deep in mymemories.
On August 6th, 1945 at 8.15 am, the world's first atomic bomb exploded over
Hiroshima.
I was 14 years old then and a second year student in junior high school. I was in aplayground about 1.4 kilometers away from the hypocenter when the bomb exploded.
At the instant of the explosion, a fireball with a temperature of several million degrees
Celsius rose into the sky. The center of the explosion - around the A-bomb dome was filled with extremely high heat of 3,000 to 4,000 degrees Celsius.

1And a shock wave with the pressure of several hundred thousand atmospheres spreadin all directions. Following the shockwave was an extremely strong wind. Its
maximum instantaneous wind velocity peaked at 440 meters per second.
It is said that those who were 100 to 200 meters from the hypocenter were exposed toradiation of 17 Sieverts, which is 17,000 times as high as the level harmless to thehuman body.
The compound effects of heat rays, blast and radiation caused A-bomb damage
beyond our imagination. Almost the entire city was burnt down to scorched earth andmost people within were massacred. I can only say that such an indiscriminate
bombing was nothing but a diabolical atrocity, unethical and immoral.
According to those that dropped the A-bomb, to win the war, the complete destructionof cities and the massacre of innocent unarmed civilians was justified.
About 350,000 people, including Korean workers brought in forcibly from the Korean
Peninsula, U.S. POWs, and students from China and Southeast Asia, encountered theHiroshima bombing. About 140,000 were dead by the end of 1945. The death toll
increased to about 200,000 by the year1950. As of the end of March 2004, a total of273,918 atomic bomb survivors still live in Japan. Of these, 83,732 live in Hiroshima
City, and 48,749 live in Nagasaki City. In lesser numbers, A-bomb survivors dwell inevery prefecture from Hokkaido in the north to Okinawa in the south. I am one ofthese survivors.
Here I would like to show you some slides. There are 44 slides containing picturesand photographs.
Japan was at war for 15 years. On September
18th, 1931, the Manchurian Incident occurred.
This incident is also known as the preliminary
skirmish of the Japanese-Chinese war as it led
to the Japanese-Chinese War on July 7th, 1937.
This series of wars expanded to the PacificWar, which began with Pearl Harbor on
December 8th, 1941.
Japan went ahead with a war of aggression
against Asian nations such as China, and colonized the Korean Peninsula for 36 years.
Japan made a big mistake.
'Go, go, go soldiers!' This is a passage used in a textbook when I was an elementary
school child. We received militaristic education using such a textbook during the war.

2

Most junior high school boys then thought thatthey would become servicemen when they
grew up. I myself really wanted to enlist in the
boys' naval air force headquartered in
Kasumigaura in Ibaraki Prefecture.
At the center of this slide is the summer
uniform consisting of white cap, white jacket
with seven buttons, and white trousers. On theleft is a uniform for piloting an airplane. They looked very sharp to us at the time.
Our school teachers told us that becoming admirable airmen of the naval air force andmarching into the enemy's territory to kill as many enemy soldiers as possible wereright and necessary things for Japan to win the war - and we believed so, as well.
However, Japan lost the war, and we realized the faults of militarism. Moreover, welearned that Japan caused our Asian neighbors great distress and sorrow. I therefore
believe that the basic responsibility of war lies with the Japanese government.
Because the Japanese Government started the war…At the same time, however, I,
myself, should deeply repent the war fought by Japan as a Japanese who lived throughthe war, even though I was only a boy at the time. I was taught that killing people
was the right thing to do and I believed it. I think having such an idea was totallywrong even though I was taught so, and I now deeply repent this.
During the war, junior high school students andgirls in girls' schools were mobilized - rather
than studying - to perform demolition work ofhouses of ordinary citizens by order of thegovernment. This demolition work wascontinued to prepare vacant lots as evacuation
areas in anticipation of air raids by the UnitedStates. Residents of the demolished houses had
no choice but to give up their houses andevacuate to the countryside where relatives or acquaintances lived. They were
forcibly evicted by government orders.
Just before the A-bomb was dropped on
August 6th, an air raid warning and a
precautionary warning had been cleared earlier.
Feeling safe, we went out onto the playgroundand waited for the morning assembly to begin.
There were about 150 students on theplayground, including about 60 classmates of
my own. We then saw the US model B-29
airplane approaching, even though thewarnings had been already cleared. We never dreamt that this airplane was carrying
the A-bomb.

3

In Hiroshima, the sky was clear in thatmorning. The B-29 airplane approached justabove us leaving a beautiful vapor trail.
Believing we were secure and safe, we looked
up at the flying airplane while pointing at thesky. Then our teacher came out of the staff
room and our class president called out, 'Gather
around! Fall in!' At that particular instant, thetragedy happened.
With an incredible noise, complete darkness
covered my eyes for a second. Without being
able to see an inch ahead of me, I had no idea
what had happened. They say there was aflash but I do not remember it. From what I
have heard, it was a pale blue light burstingout in all directions, followed by a powerfulbooming blast.
We were blown away without the least
resistance

After a while, I recovered consciousness
when the smoke that had covered theplayground disappeared and it became light.
I had been blown about 10 meters away from
where I had been before the explosion, andhad fallen hard on the ground. The blast had
thrown me there.

I then found that some 150 other students had
also been blown in all directions and lay
everywhere in the playground.
The schoolhouse was flattened to the groundas it was built of wood. Every house andbuilding that had once stood around theschool had collapsed because of the blast.

4

I gazed into the distance but saw no houses all had disappeared except for a few buildings.
Oh, Hiroshima has disappeared, I thought for a
moment. Then I looked at my own body. My
school uniform had been burned and torn totatters by the heat rays. At the moment of the
A-bomb flash in the sky, my uniform had
spontaneously caught fire and burnt down totatters. That blast peeled the skin right off theback of my head and down to my back, arms, hands, and legs. I could see my own red
flesh exposed between tatters of skin burned by the heat ray. Recognizing that I must
be in a state similar to the many other students lying around me, I was seized
momentarily by panic.
Fleeing to a river at the time of an air raid waswhat I remember being told during evacuation
drills by the teacher. I promptly left theplayground to flee to the river.

On my way to the river I heard somebody
calling my name from behind.
'Hey, Takahashi, Takahashi, wait for me,
wait for me.' I turned around and saw myfriend. Tatsuya Yamamoto, calling me -he
was my classmate. I used to go to with him
every day.

He was just crying, 'Mom, help me, help'.
He just kept crying. I told him, 'Don't cry
anymore -crying is no use. Get moving
instead of crying or we may be in great
trouble. We must leave here now.' I scolded
him some times and encouraged him at othertimes. I stayed with him and pulled him
along. During the war we wore a cap called
a 'combat cap'. My hair remained in the part
covered by the cap but heat waves burnt away the hair that was not covered by the cap.
Bald spots were left on these spots. The cap was, of course, blown off.

5

A great number of bombed people werefleeing in procession. Everyone held out
their arms with tattered skin dangling fromthe fingertips. Their clothes were all tattered.
Some were almost naked - their skin had
peeled off and red flesh was exposed.
Everyone was fleeing and they were
dragging their feet and staggering barefootthe sight looked as if it were ghosts walking
in procession.
I saw many people in the procession who
had been hideously damaged. One wascovered with broken glass pieces from thewaist up - these glass pieces were window
glass, for instance, that had been broken intofragments and scattered by the blast, piercing
human bodies. I could see such glassfragments had struck my own body inseveral places such as my waist and botharms.
One woman was covered in blood with oneof her eyeballs hanging out. This had beencaused by the blast. A man on the left had
been so badly burned above the waist that hisskin was peeling from his entire back andburned red flesh was exposed.

There were several dead bodies. Amongthem I saw a hideously damaged woman's
dead body. Her ruptured internal organs
were bulging out onto the ground - this had
also been caused by the blast.

6

I also saw a baby lying beside a woman who
was apparently the baby's mother. Both wereseriously burned - almost their entire skin
had peeled off with red flesh exposed. The
baby was shrieking. He was still alive.
However, we couldn't do anything for thebaby as we were just boys.

A horse was dead with its neck in a troughand its skin peeled from its entire body,
exposing red flesh. This entire scene washorrible. Words can never describe such ahorrible sight.

With such a dreadful sight in front of us, we
ran for our lives towards the river.
The wreckage of houses destroyed by theblast, however, blocked every lane from themain street to the riverbank.
It was impossible to walk there.
We therefore desperately climbed over the
wreckage of the houses - down on all fours and finally, reached the riverside.
As soon as we reached the riverside, a firesuddenly broke out all at once in thewreckage of the houses. The fire was
spreading rapidly and a tall column of firerose to the sky with a loud sound and force just like a volcano erupting. Even now, I canclearly remember how frightened I was.
It was very fortunate that we were able toescape the fire. The fire was caused by the
wreckage of houses destroyed by the bomb blast spontaneously catching fire due tothe heat rays that flashed for a second up in the sky. Fire being used for cooking
breakfasts also combined with this fire. That fire is called a 'super high temperature
fire.' Many were trapped beneath destroyed houses with no hope of help reachingthem. Since only one or two people could not do anything to save those people.
Shortly, the spreading fire quickly reached them and many people had no choice but
to leave beloved family members beneath the wreckage to flee the fire. Within two

7

kilometers from the hypocenter, the fire burned everything combustible including
wooden houses.
When crawling down to the riverside, we
saw a small bridge that had miraculously
remained intact after the blast. That bridge
saved our lives.

I crossed the bridge to the other side andfound that my friend Yamamoto was nolonger with me. Later, after I recovered, I
heard from his mother that he had been taken
to his home by a kind stranger, but died six
weeks later on September 16 from acuteradiation poisoning. So I crossed the bridgeand got to the other side alone.

The opposite bank was 3 kilometers away fromthe hypocenter, so luckily there was no fireover there. "Oh, I am alive," I thought tomyself. And then, I let go. Tears welled up in
my eyes for the first time and I couldn't holdthem back. At the same time, I felt that mybody was getting hot - unbearably hot - so I
entered the river and soaked in the water. The
cold water felt so good on my burning hot
body that it was like a treasure. In reality, however, dead bodies were floating in theriver and it looked as if it was hell on earth.
Thousands of people were soaking their bodies in the water like I was, and many ofthem drank river water, then, were carried away to their deaths.
Shortly after, I came out of the river andwent to a makeshift relief station made ofbamboo taken from the mountains.
I received simple treatment and rested there.
A number of bombed people were waiting inline for treatment. Suddenly, large black
drops of rain began falling. This is what iscalled 'black rain'.

8

Black rain is formed when the dust sent tothe sky by the blast mixes with the rain.
This black rain contains radiation. Somepeople who were directly exposed to that rainlater suffered from radiation sickness.
Luckily, I was in a tent at that time so I was
not exposed to the rain. Looking at the black
rain for the first time in my life, I felt so
strange. I gazed at the rain for a moment andwondered if black rain had ever existed on this earth.
I waited until it had stopped raining and thenstarted walking back home by myself.
I was anxious, however, whether I could
walk more than 6 kilometers to my house by
myself after suffering such severe burns.

After walking for a while, I heard somebody
calling my name again. 'Takahashi,
Takahashi, take me home with you'. It was
the moan asking for help. I looked in the
direction of the moan and found myclassmate, Tokujiro Hatta, crouching at theroadside. We were from the same town andwent to the same school together everyday. I
looked at his body. The skin had peeled offfrom the soles of both his feet and the red flesh inside was burned and exposed. It
was impossible for Hatta to walk. I said, 'how did you come here?' He said that a kindstranger had carried him on a bicycle and left him there. After a while, I had come by.
I was worried about whether I could find a way to help him. He was my classmate
from the same town, so I did not want to go home by myself and leave him behind. I
wanted to help him some way or another but couldn't find any means. In the midst of
misfortune, fortunately he had suffered no severe gashes or burns except for the solesof his feet, so I finally thought of two ideas to help him.
One was for him to crawl on his hands andknees like a cat or dog. This way his feet did
not touch the ground.

9The other idea was for him to walk on his
heels with me supporting his body.
By traveling in these two ways alternatively,
we traveled towards home very slowly much slower than a snail's pace while helping
each other. It now came as a surprise that I
could think of such ideas.

Walking in such a unique manner made us
exhausted, so we rested by the roadside.
When I happened to turn around, I saw mygranduncle and grandaunt approaching. I
was overjoyed to see them and called tothem at the top of my voice. They were very
surprised. They never had the slightest ideathat they would meet us in such a place.
They were on their way home from the country where they had been attending amemorial service for their relatives. It was very fortunate that I saw them there bychance.
My granduncle carried me on his back, mygrandaunt carried my friend Hatta, and that is
how we were finally able to get home. Without
their help both of us would have died along theway and I would have had no chance of talking
like I am now, before all of you, mayors fromdifferent countries.

My friend and I finally reached home on astretcher that my grandfather brought.

10After I got home, my mother cut off my clothes
with scissors in order to undress me without
the pain I would have experienced if myclothes had brushed against my hands and legs
where red flesh was exposed. She dressed mein a new yukata - or summer cotton kimono.
I later heard that my friend Hatta had died fromacute radiation disorder on August 8th - twodays after the bombing.
For one and a half years after that, I received
treatment for my burns. Fortunately, one of
our acquaintances was a doctor and hevisited my house twice a day - in themorning and evening. This doctor, however,
was an 'ENT' doctor - an ear, nose and throat
doctor. Such doctors could not treat burns –that should be, of course, a surgeon ordermatologist. However, we couldn't ask formuch because, with the city area virtuallydestroyed, we had neither doctors, nurses, medicines nor food available to us. It isestimated that there were about 300 doctors and about 1,800 nurses in Hiroshima City
before the atomic bombing, of whom more than 70 percent were killed by thebombing. I was very lucky to receive treatment from a doctor, regardless of his
specialty, because a great number of victims never got any treatment. In this way, I
managed to survive - I was really fortunate.
However, treatment was a painful ordeal. The burned area was covered with gauze
bandages smeared with medicine. The following day, the doctor came to remove thebandages. Since the summer heat completely dried the gauze, it stuck to the wound.
I couldn’t stand the extreme pain I felt when it was pulled off. Blood and pus spouted
from the affected area. I clearly remember wailing, “Ow! Ow! It hurts! Stop!”
My grandfather washed the blood and pus from the gauze just removed, sterilized itby boiling, dried it, and used it the next day. No better treatment was available inpostwar Japan due to the scarcity of goods.
Although I have survived, since 1971 I havesuffered from chronic hepatitis thought tohave been caused by radiation. I have been
hospitalized 14 times, and currently I receive
shots - injections -three or four times a week.
I also suffer from many other diseases.
I now receive every kind of treatment except
those related to obstetrics, gynecology,
pediatrics, and psychiatry. Every day I'm
anxious and painfully aware of my difficulties and the pains involved with living. In
despair, I sometimes wonder why I have to continue to live while suffering this much.

11

Whenever I yield to despair, however, I encourage myself by saying that I havemanaged to survive so I should continue to live. And so I have lived thus far.
Scars from burns received at the time remain
on many parts of my body. Among them,burns on my right hand and arm were sosevere from the right elbow to the fingertips
that the skin peeled off and the red flesh
inside was exposed and burned. My rightelbow has been locked at an angle of 120
degrees since then and I can't move it. My
fingers - except for the thumb - remain bent
and I cannot move them either.
I have a very hard life because of this. I havekeloids on my wrist. Usually a burn heals
within a month at the earliest. After this,large lumps of flesh swell on the healed part.
That slide shows the state after the keloids
were removed from my wrist by a surgicaloperation.

I have a peculiar black-brown fingernail on
my right index finger. A glass fragment
propelled by the blast pierced the root of thisnail. According to a dermatologist, the glassfragment destroyed the cells that produce thenail. He correctly predicted that this rightfingernail would never heal and become anormal fingernail.

The fingernail grows naturally, and it grows
so thick and hard that it can't be cut withordinary nail clippers. I leave it for 2 to 3
years to grow.

12

Then a crack appears at the root of the nail andit falls off naturally. I have donated those nails
to the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum,
where two of my nails are exhibited in a
showcase in the bomb blast section.

This slide shows only one of my ears, butboth of my ears were crushed. Blood andpus accumulated in both ears and theyswelled large with a purple color. The
doctor squeezed the blood and pus out of myears. The blood and pus had rotted the
cartilage or soft bones forming the ears. The
rotted cartilage was crushed when the bloodand pus was squeezed out, so that my ears
were damaged in this way.
These clothes were worn by my friend,
Yamamoto, with whom I fled immediately
after the bombing. His mother always
treasured them as his “remains.” His siblings
donated them to the A-bomb museum in June
2003.

The chest of the jacket is burned out, and thefront of his pants is burned to shreds. You can
see the cloth in of the back. I encountered myfriend’s clothes again on August 2, 2004,
after 59 years. I was unable to look at themwithout tears. Why did the US have tomercilessly kill 7,200 innocent mobilized
students? Again, I felt a twinge of hatred for
the US. However, hatred never destroys
hatred. Where there is hatred, we cannot have peace. However painful, we mustovercome our hatred.
This ends the slide presentation.
Out of about 60 classmates of mine at the time, only 14 are still alive. I am one of the
few survivors. Nearly 50 of my classmates including Yamamoto and Hatta werecruelly killed by the atomic bomb.

13

Ever since the war, I have lived thus far pledging that I should never waste their
deaths.
I have lived with the conviction that it is the duty and responsibility of those who
survived to convey the unheard voices and will of the tremendous number of dead. I
live and work on behalf of my dead friends.
Even under the harshest of circumstances, we must never forget to open our hearts toothers. We survivors have discussed this among ourselves and have lived since thewar with this lesson etched in our minds.
I believe it is clear that the atomic bomb was dropped for experimental purposes.
There are three reasons that support my view. First, the United States manufactured
two different types of atomic bombs and wanted to compare them in terms ofdestructive capability. One was the 'little boy' - the uranium type which was dropped
on Hiroshima. The other one is the 'fat man' or plutonium type which was dropped on
Nagasaki. These two atomic bombs are different models and have different nuclear
substances. Secondly, the industrial area and the center of the city where the houses
were clustered were targeted by the bomb. In order to overthrow militarism, thekilling of a great number of Japanese citizens was necessary. Thirdly, they selected
cities that had been hardly damaged by incendiary bombs from air raids. Since thenair raids on such cities were banned. These are the three reasons to prove that theatomic bomb was used to experiment with its power and destructive energy.
The US takes the view that dropping the atomic bomb was the right thing because it
saved 1 million US officers and men and the Japanese citizens. But I'd like to call to
the United States to stop and think. This 1 million lives is only an assumption. The
atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki killed well over 300,000 people.
How does the US regard this number of lost lives? Don't we always say that the lifeof a single person weighs more than the earth?
Nuclear weapons are an absolute evil - we victims of A-bombs object to all war andappeal to the world for the prompt and total abolition of nuclear weapons while
overcoming all the grief and hatred we feel as A-bombs victims. Currently, it is said
that there are as many as 16,000 nuclear warheads on earth. Of those, 90% are in the
US or Russia. It is only the US and Russia that maintain huge arsenals of nuclear
weapons. The five nuclear-weapon states, the U.S., Russia, the U.K., France andChina, are protected by the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT). This
contradiction has been allowed by the international community. We, the A-bomb
survivors, cannot help but feel strong resentment to such an obviously irrational andunjust situation.
As I expected, the NPT Review Conference in May closed without any concrete result
due to the egoism of the five nuclear powers setting priority to national interests, andamong others, the unilateralism of the United States.

14

Nevertheless, no matter how many times we are knocked down, we, the A-bomb
survivors, rise again. We will tenaciously continue to appeal and act against wars andwork towards the abolition of nuclear weapons up until our last breath.
I urge the five official nuclear-weapon states, especially the United States, not to cling
to their national interests, and rather to think seriously about the interests ofhumankind and to lose no time in meeting their responsibility to international society.
The world is still dominated by a power-oriented philosophy and balance of terror – itendangers the earth towards self-destruction. At this critical moment, I would like toappeal strongly to every city and every citizen in the world to overcome the interstate
confrontation and the differences in thoughts and beliefs, and in solidarity with eachother, turn showdown to conversation, change distrust to friendship, and strengthen
the bond of unity among us, encircle the nuclear-weapon states and press them,“Immediately eliminate nuclear weapons!”
Dear leaders of nuclear-weapon states! If you still insist on maintaining nuclear
weapons, you should experience the same suffering we, the A-bomb survivors, wereforced to suffer through. Perhaps only after you have experienced first-hand theatrociousness of heat rays and blast, only after you become familiar with the horror ofradiation aftereffects, will you understand our honest and desperate plea. Yet, it is ourprimary desire to prevent another single human being from experiencing such horrors
as we did, firsthand. Perhaps it would be enough if you were to merely walk a mile inour shoes, so they say, and honestly attempt to understand the unacceptability of
nuclear weapons.
Dear leaders of nuclear-weapon states! Please be aware that if you hesitate today, it
could lead to a catastrophe tomorrow. If the leaders of nuclear-weapon states decided
to, nuclear weapons could be eliminated in a flash.
Unless we all have respect for international law and order, the world will never know
peace. As we have seen in the war in Iraq, no true victory, and certainly no peace, cancome from power controlling power. We must value the frameworks built so
painstakingly by the nations of the world and be determined to live in peacefulcoexistence with other peoples, other religions, and other cultures. I firmly believethat only on that foundation can we build a world of security and prosperity.
The human family is struggling with the negative legacy of the 20th century,
including wars, nuclear weapons, terrorism, global warming, famine, refugees,
violence, and violations of human rights. If people living in the 21st century fail todeal properly with this negative legacy, the present century may become the last withhumans on this Earth. I, myself, now strengthen my determination to live myremaining days in full awareness of my responsibility as a crew member on'Spaceship Earth.' I would like you to convey my view and wishes to all citizens in allparts of the world.

15

Thank you very much for your very kind attention. Thank you.
Tadatoshi Akiba, President of Mayors for Peace, Mayor, Hiroshima, Japan: On
this occasion, actually in this morning’s Peace Declaration, I declared the year
beginning today until August 9 next year, the Year of Inheritance, Awakening andCommitment. And to express that in a form that’s more understandable, I would liketo ask Mr. Takahashi to do one more favor for all of us. Actually, it’s by sheer luckthat Mrs. Takahashi is extremely good at folding paper cranes, beautiful ones, and she
has prepared leis consisting of paper cranes for this conference.
So I’d like to invite the Vice-President Cities representing all of us to accept Mr. andMrs. Takahashi’s gift to this conference. The colors of the lei represent the national
colors of your country. So I’d like to call on some of the Vice-President Cities tocome up to the podium and receive the lei.
First of all, Mayor Herbert Schmalstieg from Hannover, please. Would you come up
the podium? And Mr. Takahashi will place a lei for you.
Let me explain that when Mr. Takahashi visited Hannover, the City of Hannover andMayor Schmalstieg made a beautiful booklet, this booklet, consisting of the speech
you have just heard.
Next, I’d like to invite Mayor Catherine Margate from Malakoff, please. France.
Is Mayor Khan from Manchester here? Oh, you’ve just come back. Wonderful.
And Councilor Corro from Muntinlupa.
I understand that Mayor Ischenko from Volgograd had to leave, so I would like tomove on to the next.
Mayor Gary Moore from Christchurch, please.
And Councilor Agostini from Firenze.
And also to thank those people who gave us inspiring speeches, I’d like to invite
Senator Douglas Roche from Canada.
And Ms. Susan Walker. For the speakers we have the simple colors of red and white.
Well, thank you. Thank you very much, everybody. And before Mr. Takahashi leaves
us, may I ask you to again thank him for his courage, for his inspiration. Thank youvery much.
Takahashi: Thank you very much. Arigato gosaimashita. Thank you very much.

16

The 6th General Conference of Mayors for Peace
Commemorating the 60th Anniversary of the Atomic Bombings

Plenary Session Ⅱ
The Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapon by the Year 2020
14:15-15:30, Saturday, August 6, 2005
HimawariInternational Conference Center Hiroshima
Chairperson: Toshiki Mogami
Professor, International Christian University
Reporter of Session Meeting:
Alyn Ware
Chairperson of Session Meeting Ⅰ
Consultant for the International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms
Motofumi Asai
Chairperson of Session Meeting Ⅱ
President, Hiroshima Peace Institute, Hiroshima City University
Speaker:Michel Cibot
City Hall Administrator, Malakoff, France
Alick Shaw
Deputy Mayor, Wellington City, New Zealand
John Hipkin
Mayor, Cambridge, U.K
Gisela Kallenbach
Member of the European Parliament, Representative of Leipzig, Germany
Miho Cibot
AFCDRP French Mayors for Peace, Malakoff, France
Alfred Marder
New Haven, Chairman of New Haven Peace Commission, U.S.A
Daniel Fontaine
Mayor, Aubagne, France
Susan Walker
Humanitarian Affairs and Disarmament Consultant
Former ICBL Intersessional Programme Officer

Chairperson, Toshiki Mogami, Professor, International Christian University:
Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. The time has come so we’d like to open
Plenary 2 session. And this session will be composed of four parts, one is the reportfrom Plenary 1 and the second is the report from the Session Meeting 1 and the third
is the report from Session Meeting 2. And then after that I’ll give you a short wrap-up
report.
So it is my task to give you a report on Plenary 1 which was titled The Next Step for
Mayors for Peace. And each of us will spend about 15 minutes or so, I would say lessthan 15 minutes, because time is limited so I’ll try to abide by the time limit.
Plenary 1, which took place yesterday, started with Miss Susan Walker’s vigorous
keynote speech. She told us a lot about her rich experiences when she was actively
involved in the work of the ICBL, which won the Nobel Peace Prize. She gave us
many meaningful suggestions if this Mayors for Peace are to emulate the ICBL typeof activity. For example, she told about the importance of raising voices, for us toraise voices, as the pressure from civil society. And she also said that you have to be
explicit in your aims and you have to proceed with determination so that you cansucceed some day.
She said many other interesting things, but one point which struck me strongly was
when she said that you have to be ready to act out of the UN. People like myself, I
am an international lawyer, and I have the tendency to think of turning to the UN fromthe beginning, but she suggested that sometimes it is necessary to step out of themindset of the UN in order to succeed. And rather, you may have to rally with civic
society more than the UN itself. So there must be a good combination of both.
So after this vigorous keynote speech, we had the presentations of 21 cities. As amatter of fact, there were many more applications for presentations than we had
imagined. This was a very happy situation and we were very happy about this, but I
have to apologize to you once again. Because of this large number, we werecompelled to extend the session in an extraordinary way. But the presentations wererich enough that we never felt that we wasted time in any way.
The presentations were too rich to summarize in a few words or sentences, but I’d liketo take up only five major points. One is that there was strong support for the causeof the Mayors for Peace, like non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament and the 2020
Vision, everything. The presenters were almost unanimous in their support for thosecauses, and they were almost unanimous equally in their denunciation of the nuclear
doctrine, I felt.
And the second was that people were almost equally unanimous in their conviction in
the positive roles the mayors can play. Many people stressed their closeness tocitizens which would enable them to sense something different and to act in adifferent way from the central government, national government. And they are also
conscious of the power of the civil society of which they regard themselves as part.
And third, probably in connection with this sense of closeness with the citizens, manyemphasized the importance of peace education. There seems to be a commonality

1growing among the city representatives that children and other future generations are
the most important assets of society in our endeavor for peace.
And fourth, in relation to this, several indications manifested themselves that thepromotion of a culture of peace is also indispensable. This has to do with the love of
nature, environment and all living things. It has also to do with the notion ofreconciliation, which is the focus of the Mayors for Peace. In short, this puts forth theattitudinal change which will enable us to find an alternative to killing and violence.
And fifth and finally, there were also indications of the importance of memorizing.
Memories of the past tend to wither away, so if we are to build a better future on thebasis of past mistakes, we have to construct a mechanism through which our memory
is sharpened and stabilized. The important thing is that all this will not be a memory
for retaliation but a memory for reconciliation.
So these are the five points which I think were important in yesterday’s presentations
and discussions. And it was a long, long session but I do believe that despite its
length it was a very meaningful and fruitful and rich session. Thank you very much.
So next I’ll call on Mr. Alyn Ware of IALANA to report on Session Meeting Ⅰ.
Alyn Ware, Chairperson of Session Meeting Ⅰ, Consultant for theInternational Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms: Thank you, Mr.
Chair. I have the honor to give the report on Session Meeting Ⅰ, which is on
International Cooperation for the Abolition of Nuclear Weapons: Partnership with
Non-Governmental Organizations and National Governments. The meeting included
mayors and other city representatives, government representatives, non-governmentalorganizations and other members of civil society.
Sixteen representatives took the floor to make comments and this report willsummarize some of the main themes, actually ten of them.
One, on strategy. It was noted that Mayors for Peace should think strategically about
the nature of collaborations with other sectors, and that indeed it has been doing this.
And there will be times when Mayors for Peace should act within its own
constituencies of mayors and cities, highlighting the unique contribution that thisorganization can make and focusing on the specific roles of mayors and cities inpromoting nuclear disarmament.
There will be other times when Mayors for Peace should collaborate with a specificgroup or constituency building on the existing or potential links between mayors andthat constituency. An example of this is the relationship between Mayors for Peace
and the Parliamentary Network for Nuclear Disarmament, which highlights themutually reinforcing roles of mayors and parliamentarians in promoting nuclear
disarmament.
And there will be other times when Mayors for Peace should collaborate in a muchwider sense and more generally with a cross-section of the abolition movement.

2

Two, on partnership with governments. Collaboration with governments was noted as
especially important, particularly in building government support for a nuclear
weapons abolition treaty. Mayors for Peace has gained credibility throughcollaboration with like-minded governments, for example, at the 2005 NPT Review
Conference. And there was encouragement for deeper collaboration with new agenda
countries and with countries that become part of the Article 6 Forum, which was
proposed by Senator Douglas Roche and the Middle Powers Initiative.
Three, partnership with non-governmental organizations. There was considerable
discussion on such collaboration. This included collaboration with groups like
Abolition 2000, the International Peace Bureau, International Physicians for thePrevention of Nuclear War, and many others. These have helped Mayors for Peace tobuild membership, to assist Mayors for Peace in developing its abolition strategy, andits participation in international disarmament fora like the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
And these groups have also helped to engage cities in local disarmament and peaceactions. The plan of Mayors for Peace to establish an advisory group of NGO
representatives and disarmament experts was welcomed.
Four, partnership with other local authority organizations. There was discussion
about strengthening relationships with other local authority organizations andnetworks, such as local government commissions and associations of nuclear-free
local authorities.
Five, partnership with parliamentarians. The report on the positive relationshipbetween the Parliamentary Network for Nuclear Disarmament and the Mayors for
Peace, including the release at the 2005 NPT Review Conference of a joint mayors
and parliamentarian Statement on Nuclear Disarmament. And it was hoped that more
mayors and parliamentarians would endorse the Statement in order to support the
mayors for peace Jump-Start Disarmament Project, which is the one specificallycalling on the United Nations to establish a committee at its General Assembly in
October to kick-start preparations and negotiations to achieve a nuclear weapons-freeworld.
Six, youth. Considerable importance was placed on engaging youth as actors, equal
participants in the Mayors for Peace campaign and activities, and also in disarmament
peace actions and events in cities. The International Law Campaign, Peace Wall,which many of you have seen around the Dome, is one example of such a positive
youth action, and this was initiated by a German youth. It was hoped that there would
be increased representation by youth in future Mayors for Peace meetings, including
possibly on delegations from member cities.
Seven, promotion at the United Nations. It was noted that collaboration withgovernments and NGOs should focus on the Mayors for Peace programs adopted at
this General Assembly, and in particular, the Jump-Start Disarmament Project on
nuclear abolition negotiations, and also the educational projects on informing children
and the public on the effects of nuclear weapons.
Eight, events. A number of forthcoming events were noted as possibilities forengagement with other sectors by Mayors for Peace and also by member cities. These
included, for example, the forthcoming United Nations General Assembly, the World

3

Social Forum, the World Peace Forum in Vancouver in June, the World Urban Forum,
also in Vancouver in June, and the 10th Anniversary of the International Court ofJustice Case on Nuclear Weapons in July of 2006.
Nine, outreach across religious and ethnic groups. It was noted that Mayors for Peaceis engaging members from a variety of communities reflecting the breadth of religions
and ethnicities. In that respect, Mayors for Peace has an opportunity to transcend andtransform ethnic and religious barriers and to promote understanding in the pursuit ofworld peace.
And finally, on communications. There was some very useful information offered on
how Mayors for Peace could generate a more powerful media presence and develop
affordable, live audio-visual communication links and virtual meetings between its
members and also with key partners through new software such as ICUII and otherdeveloping technologies.
And in conclusion, the meeting concluded with a rousing tribute from Senator Rocheto Mayors for Peace for its vibrancy, its creativity, and its potential to make anhistorical contribution in cooperation with like-minded states and NGOs to achieving
the abolition of nuclear weapons. Thank you.
Chairperson: Thank you very much, Mr. Alyn Ware. And then I’ll call on Director
Motofumi Asai of Hiroshima Peace Institute on Session Meeting Ⅱ.
Motofumi Asai, Chairperson of Session Meeting Ⅱ, President, Hiroshima Peace
Institute, Hiroshima City University: Thank you very much. I would like to makethe presentation on the results of the concurrent Session Ⅱ. The number ofparticipants in the concurrent Session Ⅱ was very small in number. At the starting
point I was very much afraid whether we were able to start the meeting, but with thepositive and enthusiastic involvement by the participants, we did have very goodresults.
The advanced notification for the intervention were six in number, but two wereattending the concurrent Session 1. Therefore, in the concurrent session, after
finishing their statement they went back to concurrent Session 1. Therefore the total
number of the advanced interveners were four in substance. In the first round ofpresentations there were two points which were raised.
One, when we think about the peaceful resolution of conflict as a precondition, twopresenters emphasized the importance of education. One speaker said explicitly thatas a preventive measure of conflicts and for sustainable development of society, weneed to put more importance on education for peace. Another speaker said, for us in
French local authorities, abolition of nuclear weapons is not the ultimate goal, but it is
one of the important but basic means to promote a culture of peace. This delegate
also said, in order to let children, especially older children, know the danger ofnuclear weapons, it is possible to teach them by using very specific examples and also
games under the name of the game, “Path for Peace.”4

As a Chairperson, with those comments, I wanted to have a thorough discussion in thefollowing discussion time, but because of the following reasons, there was no further
discussion on this subject.
The second point, there was a call for hibakusha and the hibakusha organization to beawarded the 2005 Nobel Peace Prize and there was a very positive intervention.
Hibakusha refused to be treated as victims, as an individual, as a group they areappealing the spirit of peace. It is indeed the living proof of Gandhi’s spirit, she said.
She also proposed specifically Hidankyo to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize which
set the pace for further discussion to follow.
After we moved into the discussion session, most of the statements focused on
hibakusha and Hidankyo, hibakusha organization issues. From France and Belgium,
there was the comment that hibakusha is not know much in Europe, and also there
was a very hard question by them whether Japanese people are serious about letting
other people know about hibakusha. Not retaliation, but they have asked us, theJapanese, whether we have asked the United States to apologize and demand moral
compensation of the United States as the perpetrator of the A-bombing and theHolocaust. And to make Hiroshima and Nagasaki as the legacy common to all people,
in order to give legitimacy to Hidankyo, it is advisable to offer the Nobel Peace Prize
to Hidankyo.
Therefore, in this concurrent Session Ⅱ, in the Appeal of this Mayors for Peace there
should be sentence which says Hidankyo should be offered the Nobel Peace Prize.
There was a specific proposal. Therefore this comment was delivered to Prof.
Mogami, who happened to be attending in this conference session.
I personally think Mayors for Peace should be actively engaged in the activities tohave Hidankyo offered the Nobel Peace Prize in order to heighten international voices
and reinvigorate Japanese nuclear weapon abolition. That is considered to be fadingover Hiroshima memory. I sincerely hope that the plenary session will take this up
seriously.
So this is so much from the report from the concurrent session, but allow me tofurther make my perception about the concurrent Session Ⅱ. As I expected in the
beginning, there were so many people attending in concurrent Session Ⅰ, but not
many in concurrent Session. I believe this resulted from how two themes wereselected to begin with.
The theme of concurrent Session Ⅰ was International Cooperation for the Abolitionof Nuclear Weapons; it’s very easy to understand that theme. On the other hand, in
Session Ⅱ, the theme was Peaceful Resolution of Conflicts and the A-bomb
Survivors Message. This theme was separated in the earlier conference, in the year
2002: the Peaceful Resolution of Conflicts and Making the A-bomb Experience a
Legacy Shared by All. And in this 2005 meeting this was put together.
To be candid with you, ladies and gentlemen, as a Chairperson of this session, in the
beginning I did not understand exactly what the purpose of this concurrent session
was. I believe one of the reasons why we did not have many participants in this5

Session Ⅱ is that compared with the concurrent Session Ⅰ, which did have theexplicit purpose stated, the points to be discussed in Session Ⅱ were unclear.
This is my humble proposal, Chairman, to the Mayors for Peace. I sincerely hope
whenever you select the themes for the concurrent session you will select an attractive
enough theme which can make every participant feel difficult to decide which one hewants to attend. This is my request. Thank you very much.
Chairperson: Thank you very much, Prof. Asai, including your very goodsuggestions for the future of this conference.
Now it’s time for you to take the floor. I know that some of you want to take the floor
and say something additional based on the three reports, or, as I promised you
yesterday, you can add something to the topic of Plenary 1 yesterday because we ran
out of time. So those who are willing to say something, please feel free to raise yourhand. Yes, please. Yes, Mr. Cibot.
Michel Cibot, City Hall Administrator, Malakoff, France: I am Michel Cibot. I
am a Representative for the City of Malakoff and AFCDRP. In terms of cooperation
with NGOs and parliamentarians, I am all for that, but as a representative of the local
government, I think that this all relates to peace culture or the culture of peace andnuclear abolition. I think local governments should take ownership of these issues
and activities, daily activities, so that the local governments are able to talk closelywith the citizens to take ownership of these issues in order to motivate the citizens.
And I think this may not have been emphasized as much in the past.
One other point, the September 21 International Day of Peace, let me talk about this.
September 21 is declared as the UN International Day of Peace, so we should takeadvantage of this day to work on this day as the day to promote peace. The culture ofpeace, this is a notion that is defined by the United Nations. Once again, there is thisconcept of the culture of peace that could be furthered. It is a concept that isinternationally and legally supported. So let us promote this. And also to nominate
the Hidankyo as a candidate for the Nobel Laureate, I am for this.
Chairperson: So I think it was mentioned that we should focus the point onownership, and also to link this with activities at the UN. Thank you very much forthe comment.
Alick Shaw, Deputy Mayor, Wellington City, New Zealand: I'm Alick Shaw. I’m
Deputy Mayor of Wellington City, New Zealand. It seems to me that the key
contribution that we can make as leaders of local government is, in fact, to applypressure to our national governments. And if we look at the policy that New Zealandhas adopted on a national basis, the origins of that policy in many respects arose ofmunicipalities from one end of my country to the other declaring themselves nuclearfree, but not simply making the gesture, but making the gesture in order to ensure thatour government took an active position on that issue in the United Nations
particularly, but also in all the multilateral organizations of which we are a member.

6

It does seem to me, ladies and gentlemen. that that aspect of applying pressure andrecognizing the position of our nations is not altogether present or is not as clearlypresent in the documents we have before us as I think it ought to be.
Mr. Chairman, I really believe that this is the key to our action. Certainlyinternational conferences are important in terms of strategizing, sharing experiences
and so on, but unless we direct our attention to the positions of individual
governments, we will make no progress at all because it is they in the end who aregoing to make the decisions.
Let me close by reading to you one verse of a poem written by Hone Tuwhare, a great
New Zealand poet, who wrote this piece in tribute to Hiroshima. It’s poem called “No
Ordinary Sun”:
Tree let not your naked arms fall
nor extend in vain entreaties to the radiant ballThis is no gallant monsoon's flash
no dashing trade wind's blast
The fading green of your magic
emanations shall not make pure again
these polluted skies…for thisis no ordinary sun.
Chairperson: Thank you very much. There may be insufficiency in the documents.
I believe your suggestion is well-taken and so we would like to take note of what you
have suggested and try to work out something together. Thank you.
Excuse myself for the moment and ask Mr. Alyn Ware to take the Chair in themeantime, and I would like to ask others to take the floor and also make remarks.
John Hipkin, Mayor, Cambridge, U.K.: I would like to make one very minor
suggestion in response to what we previously heard as the report from Group 1 and amore general comment on peace education. The suggestion I’d specifically like tomake about the involvement of youth would be to explore an idea that we’ve alreadyadopted in Cambridge, which is that the mayor should have a Youth Ambassador. If
every Mayor for Peace nominated a student, a school student, a senior school student
or a young university student who would act as the mayor’s Ambassador, who would
accompany the mayor on important occasions when the discussion of issues of thiskind were raised, I think that would work. It certainly worked in the case of my own
Ambassador who is a keen young man from a peace organization and I think theexperience of being allied with the mayor has meant a great deal to him.
On the general question of peace education, my plea is simply, let it be education and
not indoctrination. I believe that children distrust their teachers when their teachers
oversimplify the complexity of the issues that face mankind. The issue of war andpeace is a complex one. There are difficult arguments to work your way through, andI have seen many, many instances in my long life as a teacher where teachers havedefrauded their pupils by giving them an over simplistic notion of how the world isand might be. So let us respect them by dealing with these issues in all their realcomplexity.

7Chairperson: I’d like to thank you for your comments, and in general it seems that it
will be possible to include some of these points in the reports of the working groups.
They are not finalized and set in stone, so ideas will be able to be reflected.
Just with regards to peace education, to let people know that there may still be somebrochures on peace education out at the front desk. If not, feel free to up to me
afterwards. These are ones put out by the New Zealand Ministry of Education, which
has gone out to every school in the country and reflects exactly the sentiments thatyou are talking about, what is peace education, education and not indoctrination.
Excuse me for putting in my own comments there. Thank you.
Are there other comments on the reports from the plenary and the two sessions? Oh
yes, over here, thank you.
Unknown: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I have heard from the report, it isvery important that we, the local leaders, put much pressure on our governments, andI would like to start with the Japanese government because I don’t see theGovernment of Japan putting in much effort in this activity, because when you readthe report you can find out that even this conference has been almost totally sponsoredby the City of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and we want to see that the Government ofJapan has come in strongly.
And as you know, this conference, we hold it every four years. So we need tostrengthen the national chapters of Mayors for Peace so that we encourage theSecretariat to see to it that the national chapters of Mayors for Peace are very, very
active so that we get these frequent meetings and reviews so that there is a momentum.
Because it seems that we are almost the remaining strong pressure group to see to itthat the nuclear weapons are abolished. Thank you very much.
Chairperson: Thank you very much. In each country, Mayors for Peace chaptersshould be strengthened. I believe the momentum has already been seen and there area lot of our cities which have already embarked upon such activities in the local areas,
and we would like to encourage such activities further. Any other interventions?
Gisela Kallenbach, Member of the European Parliament, Representative ofLeipzig, Germany: A very short remark. I just want to reassure that the existingclose cooperation with European institutions should be reinforced and strengthened
because I really, I am personally convinced that the difficult but successful unification
process in Europe could be a good example to other parts of the world. Thank you.
Chairperson: Thank you very much. Yes, please.
Unknown: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would just like to emphasize the very
important matter brought about by the lady professor in her presentation, the power ofknowledge.
As you know, despite the fact that we are in this modern age, where we haveadvanced communications technology, many more, especially the children, are not yetaware of what happened in Hiroshima, and so my plan at the local level is for me to8

bring home information materials, like film showings, like if we have a live
presentation of the Peace Ceremony of the victims of the A-bomb, like what we justheard this afternoon, conduct seminars and symposiums. So we need more
information materials so that we can start at the two general chains, the process foreducation for peace.
And therefore I suggest that we have to make use of the present modern information
technology to spread the word around, to spread the horrors of the atomic bomb. So I
emphasize that we have to remember the power of knowledge. And if our purpose ison the children, our asset for peace for future generations, then we have to educate
them as to what happened in Hiroshima in 1945 and to make them effective peace
advocates for the future. That’s my point, thank you.
Chairperson: Thank you very much.
It was a very constructive opinion. I concur with you. If everybody is very serious
about this kind of peace education, the Hiroshima Peace Culture Foundation does
have a lot of teaching materials. They are able to rent those materials out and it’s
possible for them to second people, of course it all depends on the budget of theirs,
but in some way or another they are always ready to provide you with those materials.
And we would like to do this in a Hiroshima and Nagasaki educational course, more
systematically at the university level as you can see in our proposal. If we are goingto do this, or if you are going to do this in the universities, Hiroshima City andHiroshima Peace Culture Foundation is prepared to provide you with materials.
Please utilize them.Thank you very much. Any other intervention, please?
Unknown: My question, I have a question, I also notice the State, the government,
there was none at the beginning of the conference. There was no government cabinet
representation in this event. Now my gentleman behind me was stating that the State,especially the Japanese government, should get involved in an international thing like
this, this international event. So when he said not a single cent has come from theState, that is something that we have to take to note, because at the end of the day it’s
the State that takes the position, even in my part of the world. So the State also
should get involved in some form or another.
So I think, I felt it when there was no top-listed - I call it a cabinet minister or somekind of representative of the State, especially commemorating the 60th Anniversary of
the Atomic Bombing, this conference, their attendance is very important.
Chairperson: Are you referring to the Japanese cabinet members or some other –Unkown: Yes, from the State, from the government of this country. Theirrepresentation from the top rank because that is important. I feel, I don’t know, that is
how I feel and their presence is felt from State to nation to nation, the word can gofrom the top rank.
Chairperson: President Akiba might want to say something about this proposal
because it has to do with the basic policy of this organization. Well, is this related tothis? No. Does anybody want to say something about this proposal? No? Related tothis? No, no the gentleman behind you.

9

Unknow: Thank you very much. It’s not that I am able to respond to the earlier
question, especially no presence by the heads of States in this conference, I’m not in aposition of responding to that question, but allow me to talk about a different issue.
As several delegates have already pointed out, I am 45 years old today. When I was
10, at school I was taught about the Hiroshima and Nagasaki A-bombings, and the
day before yesterday, I went to the museum where I learnt of the serious atrocity andhorror of the A-bombing. With my own eyes I was able to experience the A-bomb.
September 21 was designated by the United Nations as Peace Day. But specifically,
there have not been any specific events prepared. This is only the verbatim
commitment. Probably UNESCO or the other international organizations should be
mobilized.
Fall is going to be the start of the new educational term in Europe. In the curriculumof the new courses, we hope that peace should be educated and taught to the children
by using video and films. I think it’s possible to mobilize UNESCO if September 21
is set as the peace day, this can also be called as the day for the education of peace.
I was very much stunned by seeing the pictures of the A-bombings. Seeing isbelieving. You have to see the actual terror, the atrocity. I have seen those picturesand I felt so depressed yesterday. And our local authority, whenever there is anelection, we elect the local councilors. And there have been a lot of election
campaigns in the local authorities. But for the citizens to elect the right local
councilors, they have to also give thought to the terms of the local councilors.
Now going back to peace, peace does have diversity, without peace we cannot doanything. Peace is the concept which is very much diversified and it is multi-faceted.
Physical peace, mental peace, there are different peaces, but the A-bomb
instantaneously could destroy all peace. There are different types of peace in theworld. But all those peaces will be destroyed to ashes in a split second. In order toavoid that situation from happening we have to take the initiative on our own, on thelocal authorities. This is a long time-consuming movement.
CHAIR MOGAMI: Yes, we have to take more specific movements and activities
and give the thoughts to the features of the local authorities. Thank you.
Miho Cibot, AFCDRP French Mayors for Peace, Malakoff, France: My name is
Miho Cibot. In 1985, when the first Mayors for Peace was held, ever since then I
have been attending the conferences. In 1985, in the first meeting, that was indeed thevery beginning meeting. We did not know how long we would be able to continue
the Mayors for Peace meetings. And in the General Assembly we did discuss whether
we are going to continue this meeting. In those days, this Mayors for Peace, this idea
came about by the initiative of then Mayor Araki.
His idea was this. In 1982, as far as I know, he thought we should never depend on
government-to-government initiatives for the abolition of nuclear weapons. But
mayors, when there is a war, they are in the position of protecting the citizens in theirproximity. Therefore, we cannot depend on the central government when it comes to10

rectifying wars. Local authorities have to cooperate together with the citizens toprevent wars from happening. This is the proposal of this meeting. Mayors and the
local authorities in the world, cross-borders, should put their hands together. That
was the idea which was envisaged by then Mayor Araki.
Therefore, in this meeting, the comment was earlier raised about the non-presence ofthe head or the ministers of State and asking for such persons. But I do not consider
this is the floor, this is the de facto point of this meeting because there is no presence,
there is no initiative of the government. We started to take initiatives on the local
authorities. In France, for the past 30 years I have been involved in the peace
movement and the activities.
Whenever I was asked by the French people, what do you do, I explain my job and I
explain what I do, then those French doctors who have asked questions say, that is notyour job, that’s what the central government is supposed to do. And there are somany people who share the same view. Those are the types of things which should betackled by the central government, but because the issue cannot be solved by thecentral government initiative, we have decided to take initiatives on the local
authorities, on the cities, which are very close to the citizens. This is the very
important feature of this conference.
And in concurrent Session Ⅰ, the report was given saying that Japanese movements
are not adequate enough to communicate the message of hibakusha to the world. But
we have to admit it is very difficult to communicate such a message, but there are a
lot of efforts exerted so far. But it is very difficult to find the receiving end, thehosting countries.
In France, come to think of it, about 25 years ago, I think there are an increasing
number of French people who can collaborate with us. Although not all the membersof AFCDRP are present here, those cities who are not present in this meeting fromAFCDRP have been engaged in various peace activities by having the Sadako
Exhibition, and also some events for peace.
And in 1983, I created "On the Crane," that’s the title of the animation. And this year,
on NHK, an international radio broadcasting program, it was translated into 24
languages and this will be broadcast soon this year.
With long-enduring efforts and untiring efforts, we have culminated our efforts to thisevent. So there are a lot of efforts, and I sincerely hope each one of us is able to put
more efforts to create more receiving ends in each one of the countries. Thank youvery much.
Chairperson: Thank you very much. When it comes to representatives from theState government, as has just been mentioned, there is a history why we don’t have astate representative. I hope you would understand.
And the second point she mentioned, is also a wonderful point. It’s not that we are
not making efforts to communicate, it’s just that there’s not enough receiving ends
prepared. If we have more receivers as our counterparts there will be better
communication.
11

I think we are running out of time, but I think there are few hands up. The threepeople, or two people, these will be the last comments. The person in the back row,please.
Alfred Marder, New Haven, Chairman of New Haven Peace Commission,
U.S.A.: Thank you. In order to take advantage of the opportunity of a number ofgroups here, we convened a meeting this morning of those organizations that plan to
be involved in the Vancouver Peace Forum, and began the process of trying to unite
efforts, especially efforts around the abolition of nuclear weapons.
There will be any number of organizations in Vancouver whose main issue, main
focus is the abolition of nuclear weapons, and so the Mayors for Peace, theInternational Association of Peace Messenger Cities, Abolition 2000, which is theglobal council of organizations devoted to the abolition of nuclear weapons, 2000
members, hopefully the International Association of Physicians, parliamentarians andothers are initiating efforts to come together to use each other and their expertise.
And I would urge that we consider the World Peace Forum as the next major stop on
the highway to abolish nuclear weapons. I think it provides us an historic opportunity.
Chairperson: Thank you. The next person, please.
Daniel Fontaine, Mayor, Aubagne, France: What we are discussing is about what
we do, who is going to do what. My name is Daniel Fontaine. I am the Mayor of
Aubagne. I am the head of the AFCDRP.
Four years ago when we had the conference we discussed the same matter. and wechanged the name of the organization and we now call ourselves the Mayors for Peacebecause we wanted to emphasize the role that mayors can play. In that sense we needto keep our direction.
It is the mayors who are the central core of our organization. National governments
may take part in our efforts. That’s good, but the important thing is, we, as mayors,
get together and discuss things and make proposals and we should be the central pillarof this group.
The second point I wanted to say is in May 2005, what happened at the United
Nations was considered by the majority as a failure. It’s true that we were unable to
make progress. Some countries, because of political, economic and military-related
hegemony issues, they tried to hide the risk, they tried to hide the threat and risk of
nuclear weapons. And they tried to develop nuclear weapons. I’m not going to namethe country, you know which countries I’m referring to, and I’m sure you know who
is at the height of that effort.
The half-failed attempt should be remembered by us, and in our Mayors for Peace
conference we have to go beyond the Appeal that we are going to adopt very soon and
we need to have strong resolve and determination. We need to have a strong voice ofcondemnation for the proliferation. We also need to appeal to the people that we keep
the memories.

12

There was a very impressive comment I heard earlier and I strongly feel the same
sensation whenever I come to Hiroshima. This is my fourth visit to Hiroshima, andwhen I first came to Hiroshima I had the strongest impression. At that time I couldn’t
even sleep at night when I visited the museum. The duty of remembering is a duty foreveryone. But those who have a direct experience, those who suffered the A-bomb,
they should not be the only ones to remember, and that’s why we had a discussion at
Session Meeting 2 yesterday.
The Hidankyo, there is a proposal to nominate the group for the Nobel Prize for Peace.
I think this is a wonderful scheme. By doing so we can express ourselves. At thesame time, the world would be able to have no choice but to think about the reality ofHiroshima and Nagasaki.
Hidankyo’s nomination to the Nobel Peace award was not included in the Appeal, but
I think in line together with the Appeal we can also think about writing in ourstatement about what we’d like to do as Mayors for Peace. For the memory it should
be not faded, we should think about what we are going to do in the future, and there
are many, many people in the city this morning who are still fighting. So that thetragedy of Hiroshima and Nagasaki will be well remembered, we need to support
these people in various ways.
Chairperson: Thank you very much. Mayor Fontaine’s view that has just beenshared with us focused upon the fact that the people of Hiroshima wanted to hear the
most. I will briefly talk about Hidankyo later. Now the last comment, please. This
will be the last comment. From Susan.
Susan Walker, Humanitarian Affairs and Disarmament Consultant,
Former ICBL Intersessional Programme Officer: : Arigato gosaimasu, Mogamisan. I’m sorry to take the floor when I’ve had the microphone for a long timeyesterday, but I have seven points actually.
The first is, and I strongly feel this, the Mayors for Peace have the potential to be an
extremely powerful and effective agent for change. That being said, I think it needs tobecome much more focused, and I’m speaking very frankly because this is an
opportunity that all of you have.
Jody Williams, the '97 Nobel Peace Prize Laureate, often quotes a fellow peace prize
laureate of ours, Betty White from Ireland. And Betty constantly says, "emotion
without action is useless." It is important to raise voices but it is very, very important
to be focused and to take practical action. I couldn’t agree more with my colleague
from Wellington who said one thing the mayors can do is to apply pressure on yourlocal governments.
Our Japanese colleague said that Mayor Araki, when he founded the Mayors for
Peace, founded it to try and get rid of nuclear weapons. Of course, all of you as
mayors are dealing with every issue in your town, from unemployment to reduction ofpoverty to peace education, and that is fine and that is all part of your agendas. But I
think the Mayors for Peace, if you want to truly achieve getting rid of nuclear
weapons by 2020, need to have a very strategic plan of action just like we in thelandmine ban convention. I’m working on implementation now. We want to get

13mines out of the ground and to help victims. I have been going and talking withindividual governments in the field. It can’t only be done in Geneva and it can’t only
be done in New York or at the capital level. That’s where raising the voices comes invery importantly.
And I think individual and collective advocacy on the local, national, sometimes
regional - we talk about the European Parliament - has to be done, not onlyinternational.
The list of the events in the action plan is very good. The First Committee, the World
Peace Day, the world forums, these are all important international events. But work
has to be done in between. Just three ideas that came to mind was, the mayors,
individually, each of you, sending letters to the nuclear powers and also to, frankly, all
the governments of the world, asking for support. This could be, maybe a draft letter
could be prepared that you could use as a template.
But also, get your government representatives to visit Hiroshima and Nagasaki. That
has been suggested. I don’t think anyone hearing Takahashi-san’s presentation justearlier could not be moved. As Senator Roche said to me, there is no conceivablereason to have nuclear weapons. But that needs to get out.
The third could be countries like New Zealand, a nuclear-free country, speaking toother countries. And I plead ignorance on nuclear issues. I could not, for instance,tell you what country besides New Zealand, I was asking my colleagues, what country
besides New Zealand has declared themselves nuclear-free. That is where, as ourcolleague from the Philippines said, power is knowledge. Some of those essential
facts could be included in very simple briefing papers. I was surprised not to findmore, or frankly any, here that people could, the mayors, all of the network could takeback with them.
And the Middle Powers Initiative Conference that Senator Roche is talking about. I
think that will be an example of practical action. They plan to meet in October todiscuss the legal, political and technical requirements to eliminate nuclear weapons.
We did this in the campaign. We took each country saying, what are the blocking
points? Why are they not joining? Who are the influences that can influence? Everycountry is different. That analysis and work needs to be done, and it cannot only be
Hiroshima doing it or Aaron Tovish and his staff of zero? It needs to be, either you
need to contract people, but get some of that information.
The hibakusha, I think a lot has been said about that, raising the voices. But for
instance, was Takahashi-san’s presentation, which was one of the most moving that
I’ve seen, was that videotaped? I didn’t think of it before, but that is something thatcan be used again and again.
The power of media. I won’t say any more than that but the media should be engaged
on this.
Also the web, which is in your plan, the website being upgraded. We have found in
the International Campaign to Ban Landmines the importance of communications andnow you have a network of 1,000 mayors, right? One thousand. Yes, I’m finishing.

14You could set up electronic groups where Aaron could instantly send a message toevery single person that is a member and information can be sent out instantly and I
think the UN colleague spoke about that.
So sorry to go on for so long. Just one last clarification on the Nobel Peace Prize. It
seems there is some confusion, but you should know that the Nobel Peace Prize, eachyear the nominations close in January, the end of January, and AFSC has alreadynominated, they are already nominated, so what needs to be done now is letters of
support to be sent to the Nobel Committee. It would be powerful if every mayor inthis conference sent a letter of support. But that needs to be done urgently because thedecision will be made very soon.
So thank you, and thank you for the wonderful organization of this conference. Sorry
to go for so long.
Chairperson: Thank you very much for many useful suggestions and proposals
which are quite important items that we can make use of in our future activities. Now
I’d like to ask the two reporters of the session meetings to speak for one minute.
Ware: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Just to say I have been very heartened by
the comments of this session. They have been both very practical and also verysignificant in terms of not only ideas for Mayors for Peace but also looking at strategy.
And I’m sure we can build some of those into the reports which will be part of the
final report for the conference.
I had one comment on the strategy question, because it seems as though there may bewhat appears to be two opposing views on Mayors for Peace strategy with regards torelationships with governments. On the one hand, there is a view that Mayors for
Peace should be concentrating on influencing governments. On the other hand, there
is a view, I think, that was put that governments aren’t really to be influenced andMayors for Peace should instead look at building up the authority of cities on thisissue.
I’d just like to say that I don’t think that these are opposing strategies. They are
actually mutually-reinforcing strategies. It may be that in some situations mayors andcities will be able to have an incredible influence on national governments, and in thatcase, they should focus. An example was given on New Zealand where the cities
actually changed a policy of a country which was supportive of nuclear weapons to
one which now has legislated against nuclear weapons. That’s a positive example that
could be emulated possibly in some other countries but not others.
On the other hand, there may be countries where the States are totally not ready for
influence from the mayors and it’s very important to be able to build up the strength,
not only with mayors in other countries but also with like-minded States. We’regoing beyond borders here. So the mayor of a country in France, for example, there’s
nothing to stop mayors from there to build relationships with the government
members of New Zealand, for example. In fact, New Zealand and Canada and anumber of other like-minded States were very positive about working with Mayors for
Peace at the 2005 NPT Review Conference. They helped sponsor events there,
including press conferences.

15

So we need to look beyond just our nationalistic framework when we’re looking at the
influence of Mayors for Peace and really look at building a strategy for what
ultimately we will need government to support the treaty on the elimination of nuclear
weapons, which is what we’re working for of course with civil society support, but wecan’t leave out governments on that. Thank you.
Chairperson: Thank you very much.
Asai: In the case of the anti-personnel landmines campaign, civil societies, civilorganizations and NGOs, and in some cases national governments, these parties
collaborated to make the campaign a success to enter into a treaty. That was a very
impressive comment I heard yesterday.
But when it comes to the nuclear elimination campaign that we are working on, whenit comes to the circumstance in Japan, we have to frankly accept the fact that theJapanese government is most negative or inactive, not positive about nuclear
elimination. When we want to campaign for nuclear elimination, in Japan what weneed to do is, for the moment it’s not really realistic to involve the national
government, rather, Hiroshima, Nagasaki and other local governments who declarepeace should work together, join hands to give pressure to the national government sothat the government has no choice but to face the campaign. That is our real challenge.
In that sense, on a global basis, you have New Zealand and other countries who are
declared nuclear-free, and together with Mayors for Peace, if these national
governments work with us, it is very useful and beneficial. And these efforts in theend would lead to change national government's or cabinet government’s attitude of
not following always the American policy. Thank you.
Chairperson: Thank you very much. You may have the wish to speak up but wecannot extend our session as we did yesterday. I won’t be able to safely go back toTokyo if I do this, so I’d like to refrain from doing that.
In the report for Session 1, we had a very good discussion. What actors we have, how
we should collaborate with different sectors and different actors to be effective on thepart of Mayors for Peace, we heard very constructive views. And in Session Meeting
2, the importance of education for peace was mentioned, and Hidankyo wasmentioned. I happened to be in the discussion. It was a very good discussion I heard.
In the next session, when I explain about the Appeal, I will mention about Hidankyo.
So I’m not going to speak about that any more at this point.
But in any case, in the last session today we talked about how we should operate,
what methodologies we should cooperate. These ideas and suggestions, proposals are
all useful and there are different suggestions and different views mentioned. That, I
think, is one of the good things about this meeting. We are in a learning stage. We
have our own views. When you listen to other people’s views, that opens up yourmind and you would be able to learn more and know more after having heard theviews from other people taking part in the meeting. The fact that we have a variety ofviews is one of the good features of this conference, and I do hope that we cancontinue on with this kind of proceedings.

16

So with this we’d like to conclude Plenary Ⅱ.

17

The 6th General Conference of Mayors for Peace
Commemorating the 60th Anniversary of the Atomic Bombings

Closing Ceremony
15:40-17:20, Saturday, August 6, 2005
HimawariInternational Conference Center Hiroshima
Greeting

Tadatoshi Akiba
President of Mayors for Peace
Mayor, Hiroshima, Japan

Discussion of Hiroshima Appeal Draft
Chairperson: Toshiki Mogami
Chairperson of Plenary SessionsⅠ,Ⅱ and Appeal Drafting Committee
Professor, International Christian University
Speaker:
Gary Moore
Vice President of Mayors for Peace
Mayor, Christchurch, New Zealand
Stewart Kemp
Stewart Kemp, Principal Policy Officer, Manchester, U.K
Hervé Brahmy
President, Seine St. Denis, France
Aaron Tovish
2020 Vision Campaign Manager
Gordon Matheson
Councilor, Glasgow, U.K.
Alyn Ware
Chairperson of Section MeetingⅠ
Consultant for the International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms
Announcement of Hiroshima Appeal
Mohammed Afzal Khan
Vice President of Mayors for Peace
Mayor, Manchester, U.K
Closing Speech
Herbert Schmalstieg
Vice President of Mayors for Peace
Mayor, Hannover, Germany
Catherine Margate
Vice President of Mayors for Peace
Mayor, Malakoff, FranceTadatoshi Akiba, President of Mayors for Peace, Mayor, Hiroshima, Japan:
Well, may I start the meeting? Okay, now I’d like to start the closing session of the
6th Mayors for Peace General Assembly. Thank you very much for yourcooperation.
First of all, I’d like to report that this conference has been quite successful. In total,in the Secretariat count, we have had the participation of 243 people. Now let me
break that down. From within Japan we have 61 people from 38 cities, and fromabroad we have 144 people from 54 cities and three organizations, and that represents
19 countries in total. And we also have 18 governmental representations, including
the European Parliament. There was some reference to the lack of participation bynational government, but we do have 18. And I am pleased to summarize or at least
express my appreciation for the participation of many of you, and I only regret that alack of time prevented more ample participation or more frequent contributions byeach delegation.
But I found that many of the presentations and contributions were based on the actual
experiences of activities in each city, in each organization and so forth, and many
people supplied new ideas as to where we should be going and also new ideas thatwould help us pursue our goal of abolishing nuclear weapons by the year 2020. And
also some others raised questions that we need to deal with seriously in order for us toovercome some difficulties.
But all of these comments and contributions, presentations were inspiring and theygathered some new energy and insight. And also, they have helped us strengthen our
resolve to continue our efforts. And I believe there are many reasons for this, but letme point out just two reasons that all of your participation, your contributions here
have helped all of us in such a positive way.
One is that as mayors, as council members or as leaders of different organizations,
your daily job has been and is to inspire your citizens, to move them to action, to givethem energy so that you can tackle your local problems with creativity, and that’s
your daily job, and you have done a splendid job of showing what you do in yourcities very well in this General Conference, and I really would like to thank you all forshowing your talent in that way.
And I believe that the second reason is that you represented the voices of your citizens,the voices of the members of your organizations very well. Not only the voices, but
you represented the actions that have been taken by the citizens in your community.
And I believe that gave us the feeling that this is real; we are not talking about abstract
nonsense but rather concrete problems that each citizen faces each day. And we are
dealing with the problem of the peace of the world on that level, and that is why weare persuasive in the eyes of government officials and international organizations as
well. I believe that is our strength and we’d like to utilize that strength, takeadvantage of that strength, to make sure that we accomplish the goal.
That said, we need to work even more diligently in the coming years, until the next
General Assembly, which will be four years from now, but yearly we will produce
new actions plans, new names for the campaign year, starting from August 6 through1August 9 of the following year. Well, that’s the terminology which was born during
this General Conference, instead of fiscal year, instead of school year, we have thecampaign year or action year or we could even use the word Hiroshima Year or
Nagasaki Year or Hiroshima-Nagasaki Year, or whatever. But that is the one-year
cycle that we are going to use, 369 days, from August 6 through August 9 of thefollowing year we call maybe the Hiroshima-Nagasaki Year. But we will have a
new agenda and new action plan for each year.
But for this General Conference we’d like to summarize what we’ve accomplished in
the form of an Appeal, which you are calling the Hiroshima Appeal. And believethat you have in front of you the draft of this Appeal and I’d like to invite Prof.
Mogami, who is the Chairman of the Drafting Committee to propose this Hiroshima
Appeal draft to you and explain some of the careful considerations that went into thedraft. So Prof. Mogami, please.
Toshiki Mogami, Chairperson of Plenary SessionsⅠ,Ⅱand Appeal Drafting
Committee, Professor, International Christian University: Sorry to have kept you
waiting. I’ll start explaining about the Appeal. The Drafting Committee held its
meeting last night until well into midnight and we spent so much energy in making
this Appeal as acceptable as possible to everybody. And I will explain to you briefly
what the Appeal contains.
In the preambular paragraph, from paragraph 1 to 6, we have looked back upon thepast four years and we regretted, this Appeal regrets the slow process of nuclear
disarmament, almost stalemate of a nuclear process, and the aggravation of the world
situation. And at the same time, in these paragraphs, we express our resolution toconfront this deteriorating situation and make our determination to make things better.
This is what these preambular paragraphs say, and as to these paragraphs, there is one
serious problem, which I would like to propose an amendment from this page. It isparagraph 4, which begins with the terms, "The human family now faces…" and so on
and so on. And there was a heated discussion yesterday too about this paragraphSome of us were concerned to name the specific names of the countries and some ofus expressed the opinion that we have to specify the situation as clearly as possible.
So in the second sentence we say, "due to the doctrines of the US and other nuclear
weapons States…" Although we say "other nuclear weapons States," the name ofthe of the United States is singled out. And there was a kind rejection from Mr.
Cochrane, the President of the US Mayors Conference, which has been very
contributive to this organization, and he is embarrassed to see his country’s namesingled out and it’s quite understandable. There was serious discussion, and after theserious discussion the compromise was this, that we understand his situation, so Mr.
Cochrane and President Akiba and myself talked a few moment ago and we decided
that in view of the great contribution of the US Conference of Mayors, we should notcomplicate the organization’s work back in the US further, and we should
accommodate his concern.
And the compromise was to name all the countries which Mayor Akiba named in thismorning’s Declaration of Peace. Now if this is accepted, I’d like to propose it as it is,so we will say, "the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Russia, China, India
2and Pakistan," we limit to these countries, This is in accord with the Peace
Declaration today. If there is serious objection we will have to listen to that, and ifthat objection is not too serious I would like to propose it that way. Will you kindly
accept this amendment? [applause] Okay, so I take the majority as supporting this.
Thank you very much. So we will revise sentence that way. So this was the mostserious point.
And the discussion itself was a sincere and serious one and very productive I think.
So after that, the examination went so smoothly and after the preambular paragraphs,
we, the Appeal, takes up six points as the demands from this General Conference toStates and governments and some international organizations. As you can see, thecontent is very clear.
Number one, we demand the conclusion of the abolition of nuclear weapons and tourge the negotiation for that.
And the second point is that the nuclear weapons States would promptly cease theirdeployment.
And the third point is to invite governments to visit Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
And the fourth point is that governments will tackle other problems, like famine orpoverty and all other social problems, other than the nuclear disarmament issue.
And the fifth point is that governments will implement important environmental
treaties and other documents, including the Kyoto Protocol.
And the sixth point is, let’s make the best use of the funds which we will gain fromdisarmament and so on.
So these are the six main points which this Appeal demands from governments andother organizations.
And following that, this Appeal takes up six other points which we will set as ourgoals, this organization's goals, not demands. These are the demands for ourselves.
One is that we will strengthen our activities to urge governments to conclude thenuclear weapons ban treaty before the NPT Review Conference, once again in 2010,
before that.
And the second point is to strengthen the network of this Mayor’s conference.
The third point is to cooperate with other actors, including governments and NGOs
and other citizens for nuclear abolition.
And the fourth point is to urge the First Committee of the United Nations General
Assembly to start to set up a special committee for nuclear abolition and anuclear-free world.

3

And the fifth point is to transmit the message of hibakusha as humankind’s common
legacy to the world, and for that purpose to establish as many Hiroshima-Nagasaki
courses as possible.
And the sixth point is to promote the culture of peace throughout the world and forthat purpose to strengthen peace education.
So these are the substantive points of the Appeal. And one thing that has to be
explained at the beginning is the proposal to recommend Hidankyo for the Nobel
Peace Prize. And as far as I know, many people welcomed this proposal. In fact,
this was a very good proposal and this is being considered around here seriously.
But the reason why it was not included in this Appeal is that we had to spend so muchtime on many other points so we did not have enough time to consider seriously aboutthat good proposal. Personally, I myself think it was a very good proposal and I
personally want to thank the people who proposed that. But for technical reasons it
was not possible. But there was once again another request to consider that proposal
once again this morning. So once again I talked with Mayor Akiba and he is alsoquite thankful for that proposal, yet, we decided to postpone, not to include that
proposal this time. It is because it may incur some political difficulties where you
have to consider other points as well.
There are many points to be considered, but if I explain to you in the easiest way, forexample, this conference is being run by the close cooperation between Hiroshima
and Nagasaki, so it is a good idea to recommend an organization from Hiroshima to
the Nobel Committee. On the other hand, you have to think about Nagasaki equally.
So it will be best if both cities, the organizations of both cities, receive a Nobel
Peace Prize. For the moment, we don’t have enough time to consider all thosecomplicated points.
So in any event it is difficult to include that proposal in today’s Appeal. But there
are positive signs that Hiroshima City and Nagasaki City will be very active infulfilling that proposal, so it’s not neglected in any way, but please understand that
because we were unable to include the proposal this time.
So this is the rough explanation of the Appeal as outlined, and I will take questions if
there are any.
Gary Moore, Vice President of Mayors for Peace, Mayor, Christchurch, New
Zealand: Hello, I’m Gary Moore from Christchurch, New Zealand. One of thethings that I would like to see added here is I think we need to acknowledge that we
can make all the proposals we want, but without a Secretariat there will be nothing,that without the good will of Hiroshima and Nagasaki we wouldn’t be here. And so I
think we must share the burden, all of us, by making an international contribution,
by putting in place a format of some form or another.
Most of us in this room have been parties to movements, and a movement does not
happen without organization. So I would like to propose, and I have given this toMayor Akiba, that we promote a movement by forming an International Secretariat
which will share the burden of promoting and expanding Mayors for Peace. And I

4believe that the Executive, those of us here, would have the task of making that
happen.
Mogami: As the seventh point? That’s what you intend? Okay, this is a very
well-intentioned amendment and I would take opinions from you about this. The
proposal is, if I may repeat, to insert one more paragraph for the Roman numeral I, as
Roman numeral 1, the new sentence will be, "To promote a movement by forming an
International Secretariat which will share the burden of promoting and expanding theMayors for Peace." This might take some discussion or is it easy? [applause]Okay, this involves some technical questions. So in order to be precise withprocedure we have to reconvene the Drafting Committee once again, but we cannot
do that because you are waiting, and this contains some technical problems. We’d
like to propose that this will be, this kind proposal will be discussed after this. We will
have to establish a committee to discuss this or other things, in spite of your clapping
or applause. Yes?
Stewart Kemp, Stewart Kemp, Principal Policy Officer, Manchester, U.K.:
Chairman, I think at the very opening, at the Executive Meeting that the matter of the
future financing for the organization was raised, and it was agreed at that opening
Executive Meeting that in the period between now, I think Mayor Akiba mentioned
over the next couple of years, we ought to take soundings amongst the membership as
to how to proceed on that matter.
And it would seem to be appropriate in that same context to move forward and discuss
any of these organizational matters at the same time. So I would certainly proposethat we agree the statement as it stands, but take on board this point as something thatcan be discussed and views can be taken from the whole of the membership as to how
they may wish to move forward.
Mogami: Thank you very much Mr. Kemp for indicating that. You left it up to me,
so I did not know what happened at, but with this indication I think the problem has
been solved. So please accept the Appeal as it stands as far as this part is concerned.
Okay, thank you. And so let’s discuss about this later.
So any other serious proposals based on this? Please raise any suggestions based on
this draft and the Drafting Committee. Yes, please.
Hervé Brahmy, President, Seine St. Denis, France: From Seine St. Denis, myname is Brahmy. About the responsibility by the States, there was the paragraphwhich mentions about the responsibility assumed by the governments or the States. I
believe the part is also signed on the Millennium Declaration, and there is a Chapter
in the Millennium Declaration which says, "for peace, for disarmament, for security."
And after that Chapter 2, there are a series, I think there were ten proposals in theMillennium Declaration.
I believe the parties to this declaration are, for example, saying that we have to
respond to WMD. This is the Millennium Declaration, WMD I’m talking about. I
believe the governments are going to start the negotiations, that’s what’s suggested
there. So I would like you to include, based on the commitment which was declared5

in the Millennium Declaration in accordance with or following the commitments wemade in the Millennium Declaration, this is what we’d like you to do.
Mogami: There is something called the Millennium Declaration issued by theUnited Nations General Assembly, and the proposal is that he wants to add that term
specifically to this paragraph. The Arabic 1, is it absolutely necessary? Is theamendment necessarily indispensable? I hear some saying no.
Brahmy: To me, for peace, because this is the mayor’s assembly for peace,paragraph 1, that’s Arabic number 1, all governments or most of the governments area signatory to the Millennium Declaration, and the abolition of nuclear weapons is
mentioned in that Millennium Declaration. WMD, in order to avoid the risk of
weapons of mass destruction, the commitment is made in the Millennium Declaration.
The abolition of WMD, the abolition of nuclear weapons, that has to be considered as
an objective and we have to put our efforts as a commitment. So there is thematching in the objectives of our Appeal and the Millennium Declaration, and mywish is to include the Millennium Declaration term, the knowledge wording inparagraph 1.
Aaron Tovish, 2020 Vision Campaign Manager: There are several texts in which
the nuclear weapons States have made such commitments, including Article VI of the
Non-Proliferation Treaty, which is legally binding and which the International Courtof Justice reinforced in its findings. We could cite many sources for this. I don’t
think that that particular citation is particularly strong because it talks about
eliminating the nuclear dangers and not the weapons themselves in terms ofcommitment to negotiations. We’re talking here about abolition. So I think it
would complicate matters to bring that particular citation into this paragraph.
Mogami: Yes, please.
Michel Cibot, City Hall Administrator, Malakoff, France: What I was referring
to was a very small provision, specifically speaking. Those who are awarded by theNobel Peace Award, we would like to invite those Nobel Laureates and we would liketo designate them as Peace Ambassadors, so this another amendment, suggestion,
those Nobel Peace Laureates are the citizens.
Mogami: Excuse me, we are still in the midst of the discussion of one subject, so
would you please wait another moment, at a later stage? We are now discussing
whether the suggested wording should be included, “Millennium Declaration,” should
be included in paragraph 1. As long as we listen to the opinions of the Executive
Members, it is not necessary to include this. So we should go back to this point first.
Please wait for the other intervention.
Going back to you, are there any other comments? If we are going to the source ofthe text for the abolition of the nuclear weapons, because there are a lot of sources ofsuch texts, probably it is not convenient, it is not advisable to include one specificsource, which is the Declaration, here in this paragraph. That is the opinion I heard.
Any other opinions?

6

Well, I take it, if it is not necessary to make an amendment to the original appeal, ourwish is to retain the field as much as possible in the original format, so it is not an
indispensable amendment or proposal. We would like to decline such a request.
Now ladies and gentlemen, is there any burning new suggestion for an amendment.
Of course, there are so many hopes so there are a lot of ideals we want to put on thetable, but once you start to say what’s on your mind on this table, that’s going to takeanother four or five hours. We have spent four hours last night. I hope you will
respect what we have learnt last night, at midnight last night. We worked hard, we
have to go back to the table again if we start to say whatever we want to say. We
should never treat ourselves inhumanely. That is the principle.
Tovish: Extremely constructive suggestion. This morning we heard Mayor Akiba
declaring this a Year of Inheritance, Awakening and Commitment.
In the name of Mayors for Peace, and I think it would be slightly strange if in our
Appeal we make no reference whatsoever to this Year of Inheritance, Awakening andCommitment, and there is, I think, a logical place for this to appear. It could appear
after the first comma in the section that introduces the last six commitments on thepart of our organization. So it would read, “To achieve total abolition of nuclear
weapons,” it would say, “To advance total abolition of nuclear weapons and lasting
peace during this Year of Inheritance, Awakening and Commitment, we will
cooperate…” et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. So it would reflect the public statementthat Mayor Akiba made that this organization was in fact declaring such a year,
otherwise that will be absent from this Appeal. [applause]
Mogami: Oh, I hear you. I heard the same proposal from several other people andI hear lots of applause once again, so may I include that amendment into this draft?
[applause] Okay, let’s do it that way.
Okay, is there any other suggestion? The last one? The short paragraph preceding
the paragraph with Roman I, which starts “To achieve total abolition of nuclear
weapons.”
Could you really announce that to the floor?

Yes, the sentence.

Tovish: The verb at the beginning of that paragraph, for it to make sense, would
have to read, “to advance” rather than “to achieve” the goal. “To advance the goal.”
Mogami: No, no, no.
Tovish:“During this year.”Mogami: No additional amendments.

Just insert your sentence, please.

Tovish: I’m just clarifying that. Instead of “to achieve,” it would read “toadvance,” and then that beginning phrase would continue “during this Year of
Inheritance, Awakening and Commitment.”

7

Mogami: Is that clear? The wording will be different from the language, so I do
not repeat that in other languages, what Mr. Tovish says, so will you take note of what
he says and the Secretariat will once again streamline the revised text. So please
accept it as recommended.
Cibot: Mr. Chairman, I’m sure in the interests of time we have to be very brief.
It’s not that every member was a participant in the Drafting Committee. There are a
lot of members who have come here all the way from their respective city. Only
because there is limited time allocated to this session, you cannot decline someconstructive offer or proposal.
I have one proposal, one point to be added. Nobel Peace Laureates should be invited
to come to Hiroshima and Nagasaki. That is a small proposal, so that they can be theAmbassador of the Mayors for Peace, because they are also the citizens of the local
authorities. And Nobel Peace Laureates do have influential power. They arecompetent in delivery strong messages. In our fight, I am sure they can give us a lotof power and contribution.
Just one sentence, that is my hope.
Mogami: I tried not to automatically decline the new proposal. I sincerely hopethat you will understand the new proposal, the Nobel Peace Laureates should be
invited to Hiroshima, what do you think about this new proposal, ladies andgentlemen?
I heard some acclamations, probably half of the members seem to be agreeing to thisamendment proposal. Any other opinions?
Gordon Matheson, Councilor, Glasgow, U.K.: I suggest that that specificproposal be remitted to the Executive. That’s why they have an executive to deal
with these kinds of issues. It need not be a critical statement, which is the purpose ofthis document here. I’m not saying that I disagree with the suggestion, I’m justsaying I don’t think it is germane to this statement, and therefore I would suggest thatthe idea be remitted back to the Executive.
Mogami: The proposal was to discuss this in the Executive Session, executive
sitting session.
Alyn Ware, Chairperson of Section MeetingⅠ, Consultant for the International
Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms: Mr. Chairman, may I make asuggestion and it relates to proposals like this and possibly many other wonderfulideas that people have. On the first day, at the plenary, we were given a programplan which included a number of very, very good ideas, and this I think goes alongwith those thoughts and ideas that don’t need to be in this Declaration, but can be
added to the types of activities that can be conducted by Mayors for Peace.
And I would suggest that we don’t ask for any more of those sorts of ideas for thisparticular Declaration, but really if there are any problems that people have with the
Declaration, and if there aren’t then we should move towards accepting it. Thankyou, Mr. Chair.

8Mogami: Thank you very much. As for the ideas, there is a high possibility thatthose can be included in the action plans, and there are a lot of excellent plans alreadyincluded in the action plan. So as the policy, in the Executive Session this idea orsome of the action programs will be discussed. Is this acceptable? I’m sure you
must have a lot of ideas. You must have a lot of plans. But if we are going to takethis one by one at this moment, there will be a lot of things which were not given
thought to, those points which were not discussed before, so it is very difficult toinclude them in this Appeal. I understand your feelings and I understand how you
feel about some of the brilliant ideas you have, but I respect the mechanism or thepolicy so may I suggest, may I ask you to concur with this Appeal? [applause]
Thank you very much. Now, once again may I ask you, is there any burning,
indispensable suggestion where you might think that if we are going to leave this, thiswill create the fatal flaw or problem? Are there any?
And there will be a further small amendment to what Mr. Tovish says. He said that
he only mentioned this year , but this document will have to be valid for another four
years, so we will thoroughly, simply modify the sentence in order to incorporate thatpossible change. Okay so please recognize that.
So if so, I think as a whole this Appeal is ready to be accepted by this Conference, andif you accept will you please accept this by a show of hands? Okay. Okay, thankyou very much. I think the majority now has shown their hands and this Appeal has
been accepted. Thank you very much for your cooperation. Thank you. Thank youvery much, and actually I think we went ahead of ourselves, but at this point in orderto formally adopt the Appeal, I’d like to invite Mayor Khan of Manchester to read it
in full so that we understand what we are adopting clearly.
Afzal Khan, Vice President of Mayors for Peace, Mayor, Manchester, U.K.:
Lord Mayor, respective mayors, honored and distinguished guests, the Hiroshima
Appeal:We, representatives from 92 cities and local authorities and 4 organizations from 20 countries,
met at the 6th General Conference of Mayors for Peace Commemorating the 60th Anniversaryof the Atomic Bombings held in Hiroshima City and discussed in great detail the keynote
theme: Toward the total abolition of nuclear weapons by 2020: roles and initiatives for cities.
Following after the May 2005 NPT Review Conference which failed to achieve concrete
results, we actively discussed other strategies through which to pursue the complete abolitionof nuclear weapons.
At the 5th General Conference, held four years ago, we confirmed our commitment to strive
to make the 21st century a ‘Century of Humanity,’ in which all life is respected.
Unfortunately, major political developments, including continued terrorist attacks, havechanged the global situation dramatically, and the world continues to walk the path ofretaliation and war.
The human family now faces the risk of nuclear proliferation and a third use of nuclear
weapons due to doctrines of the U.S., Russia, U.K., France, China, India, and Pakistan, North
Korea’s declaration that it possesses nuclear weapons, the possibility that other States may be
developing nuclear weapons, and the possibility that terrorists might obtain and use nuclear
weapons.

9

Threats to civilians are not limited to nuclear weapons. In this world, an incredibly large
number of people are exposed in their daily lives to such threats as hunger, poverty, infectious
diseases, discrimination, violence, conflicts and environmental destruction.
Though national leaders worldwide are well aware of these challenges, their attention is
focused on pursuing national and economic interests rather than on implementing effective
measures to deal with these challenges. It is always citizens who are the victims of wars,
violence and environmental destruction. We mayors are responsible for the protection of thehuman rights and security of our citizens. To deal with these challenges, the Mayors for Peace
have confirmed once again our resolve to cooperate in strengthening our solidarity and makethe 21st century a ‘Century of Humanity’. We reaffirm Vision 2020, the emergency
campaign for the elimination of nuclear weapons.
We, the participants in this General Conference of Mayors for Peace:
1.

Call upon all governments to immediately start negotiations toward the conclusion of aninternational treaty banning nuclear weapons leading to total abolition of nuclear
weapons by 2020.

2.

Demand that countries possessing nuclear weapons promptly cease their operational
deployment.

3.

Invite government leaders, in particular those of countries possessing nuclear weapons,
to visit the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and see with their own eyes what nuclear
weapons have in store for humankind.

4.

Demand that governments actively deal with the entire range of global challenges,
including hunger, poverty, discrimination, violence and environmental destruction.

5.

Demand that governments throughout the world promote efforts by the whole ofinternational society to deal with environmental problems including full implementationof the Kyoto Protocol.

6.

Demand reductions in military expenditures and the use of funds generated by those
reductions to address problems in such areas as peace, hunger, refugees, and theenvironment, while actively promoting the conversion of industrial capacity frommilitary to civilian use.

To advance total abolition of nuclear weapons and lasting world peace commencing with this“Year of Inheritance, Awakening, and Commitment,” we will cooperate and strengthensolidarity across nation, ethnicity, ideology, belief and religion, giving particular emphasis tothe following:I.

In collaboration with all governments and with NGOs, promote activities that lead to aninternational treaty banning nuclear weapons by the time of the NPT Review Conference
due to be held in 2010, leading to the total abolition of nuclear weapons by 2020.

II. Create a network of Mayors for Peace member cities in each country and engage actively
in various initiatives for the total abolition of nuclear weapons.
III. Launch a great diversity of campaigns for nuclear weapons abolition in numerous cities
throughout the world working with nations, NGOs and the vast majority of the world’s
people.

10

IV. Urge the First Committee on Disarmament and International Security of the United
Nations General Assembly to establish a special committee to deliberate and plan for theachievement and maintenance of a nuclear-weapon-free world.
V. Propose that schools, colleges and universities across the world organize ‘Hiroshima andNagasaki Courses’ to communicate the message of the hibakusha to people across theworld as a common legacy for humankind.
VI. Promote peace education at all levels to develop a culture of peace.
We resolve the above and vow to work in close cooperation with the public to achieve thetotal abolition of nuclear weapons by 2020.
August 6, 2005
The 6th General Conference of Mayors for Peace
Commemorating the 60th Anniversary of the Atomic Bombings

Is this acceptable?

[applause]

Thank you very much.
Akiba: Thank you very much, Mayor Khan. And we intend to send this Appeal to
all the member cities, to all the national governments in the world, and many
international organizations, including the United Nations and affiliated organizations.
Now we are finally coming toward the end of this meeting and I would like to invite acouple of people from outside of Japan to address you at the final stage of theconference, and I’d like to invite one of the longstanding members of the Mayors for
Peace, as well as one of the dearest friends of Hiroshima for a long time, Lord Mayor
Schmalstieg of Hannover, please.
Herbert Schmalstieg, Vice President of Mayors for Peace, Mayor, Mayor,
Hannover, Germany:
Mr. President, Mayor Akiba, distinguished guests,
colleagues, dear friends, shall we put an end to the human race or shall mankind
renounce war? This is the temporary question of the manifesto by Einstein, Bertrand
Russell and eight other internationally-renowned scientists addressed to thegovernments of the world fifty years ago.
Today, 60 years after the end of the Second World War, 60 years after the horrificdestruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by A-bombs, this question still has not beenanswered. But we will not abandon our cause.
The 21st century must be the Century of Humanity. Events of terrorism in New York,
Madrid, London and in other places have upset the world situation. Nevertheless,among all the efforts to pursue and combat terrorism and to improve the safety of our
citizens, we may not slacken in our striving to reduce confrontation and to promote
peaceful coexistence among people of the world’s origins, color and cultures.
A life without peace, a life without these meetings between peoples and dialogues
between their cultures, is no life at all. People, dear friends, live in the city. This is
why we, mayors and councilors, have a right to raise our voices when peace is the11issue. Our commitment to equality, understanding and peace, is required each andevery day, among this day, in this place, on the 6th of August in Hiroshima more thanever.
I have more than 260 cities of Mayors for Peace in Germany declaring the following:
We are opposed to terrorism in any shape or form.
We are opposed to war and to violence.
We are opposed to the persistent and increasing threats posed by nuclear
weapons.
We demand a moratorium on all nuclear weapons testing and a stop to
all further development of nuclear weapons.
We demand the complete dismantling of all nuclear weapons.
This is the address to the United States. President Bush, make a start now on ending
the nuclear threat. Please do the first step, present an address to Russia. President
Putin, please show that your country is prepared to renounce all nuclear weapons.
And this is the address to the United Kingdom, to France, to India and Pakistan. We
want no nuclear weapons in North Korea or Iran, not in Israel or in any other country.
Ladies and gentlemen, we live in one world for whose world being we all share theresponsibility because we have only borrowed it from our children and grandchildren.
For this reason, we may not tolerate the way that more and more money is spent onarmaments and rearmaments, the instruments of death and destruction. We need thismoney to combat hunger, poverty and disease all over this one world of ours. We
need this money to declare war on AIDS, to eliminate discrimination, to stop thedestruction of our national environment, to prevent violence and the displacement ofpeople from their homes.
It will not be simple to achieve all this. Hiroshima, this 6th General Assembly of theWorld Conference of Mayors for Peace urges us to do everything in our power tomake it happen.
And also, as the events of the last two days have shown, give us courage for the future.
Let us work on ways to resolve and determination to make our vision a reality. No
more Hiroshima! No more Nagasaki! Thank you for your attention.
Akiba: Thank you very much, Lord Mayor Schmalstieg for your eloquent andpassionate closing remark. Now I would like to invite a good friend, also a
longstanding supporter of the Mayors for Peace, Mayor Catherine Margate of the Cityof Malakoff. I’m sorry, this is written in Japanese and I couldn’t find the proper
name, but Mayor, please. [applause]
Catherine Margate, Vice President of Mayors for Peace, Mayor, Mayor,
Malakoff, France: Mayor Akiba, distinguished mayors, ladies and gentlemen, 60
years ago Hiroshima and Nagasaki were destroyed by this atrocious event. After
that, victims suffered for many, many years. The A-bomb brought about thedestruction of human civilization.

12

This morning I listened to the testimony of the hibakusha. I saw at the museum an
exhibition and I took part in that very impressive, moving ceremony. I heard many
voices on how we should proceed with the campaign for nuclear elimination. There
are many appeals. We should never forget Hiroshima. We should never forget themen, women and children who gathered together to voice out their strong
commitment not to repeat Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And this afternoon, again, Mr.
Takahashi has moved us deeply through his testimony.
The future of mankind, how we can sustain our civilization, how we can reduce
tension, how we can resolve conflicts, how we can get rid of injustice and inequality.
As local governments there are many, many challenges and many commitments that
we need to make. We need to stop armaments from proceeding and we need toestablish a mechanism for peace.
The conference here in Hiroshima should continue to contribute to mobilizing people
on the local level to appeal for peace. You should not just voice opposition. Thatwould not be enough, but we need to tackle establishing a new civilization. The
culture for peace, as Mayor Akiba says, is the way we can stop the threat of nuclear
weapons to continue to make us fearful. We have to continue remembering throughthis Mayors for Peace conference. We should also identify what kind of education
programs we need. With other local governments interested in peace here in France,
I am committed to making various initiatives.
How we can promote disarmament, how we can go with development andsustainability go hand in hand. In many parts of the world, huge amounts of militaryspending are made. How we can rectify the situation is a challenge. How cancitizens take a central role in promoting a new initiative for peace?
What we can do to realize that the countries make steps forward for peace, how we
can make countries abide by the rules and provisions of the treaties. We need tomake sure that we realize the society that is just and equality. Thank you.
Akiba: Thank you Mayor Margate. And that concludes our 6th General Conferenceof Mayors for Peace, except I have the honor and pleasure of thanking everybody atthe end. It’s the privilege of the president of any organization to do so.
And first of all, I would like to thank the Drafting Committee and committee members.
I would like to thank the keynote speaker, the speaker of the commemorative lecture,
and also the speaker of the plenary session, chairpersons who coordinated theworkshops, and the panelists and all those who spoke.
And of course, I really would like to thank each one of you who participated in this
General Conference, and also I’d like to thank the government representatives who
have spent your busy time in attending and listening and interacting with the cityrepresentatives and city leaders.
Also, the NGOs who have been working with us tirelessly all these years, I would liketo thank you again.

13And all of you who have actually come from outside of Hiroshima, I’d like to thankyou, especially for overcoming the jetlag and also some of the inconveniences that
trips actually involved, such as your suitcase not arriving at the same time you do.
So I’d like to thank all of you who have had such trouble.
And also I’d like to thank the volunteers and the NGOs, and of course the interpreters
who have put up with many of the technical difficulties and so forth. And if I
haven’t mentioned, well, there are many other people who made this conference
possible. And of course the city employees who have always put in extra hours forthe success of this conference.
So with that I would like to declare that this conference is formally adjourned, andtonight there will be a farewell party and that will give you another chance to interact
with each other so that for the coming four years we’ll go again full steam toward thegoal of the abolition of nuclear weapons by the year 2020. So thank you very muchfor all of your efforts. Thank you very much. [applause]

14

The 6th General Conference of Mayors for Peace
Commemorating the 60th Anniversary of the Atomic Bombings

Press Conference
17:30-18:15, Saturday, August 6, 2005
Ran
International Conference Center Hiroshima
Toshiki Mogami
Chairperson of Plenary SessionsⅠ,Ⅱand Appeal Drafting Committee
Professor, International Christian University
Tadatoshi Akiba
President of Mayors for Peace
Mayor, Hiroshima, Japan
Herbert Schmalstieg
Vice President of Mayors for Peace
Mayor, Hannover, Germany
Catherine Margate
Vice President of Mayors for Peace
Mayor, Malakoff, France
Afzal Kahn
Vice President of Mayors for Peace
Mayor, Manchester, U.K
Raul CorroCouncilor, Muntinlupa, Philippines
Evgeny Petrovich Ischenko
Vice President of Mayors for Peace
Mayor, Volgograd, Russia
Gary Moore
Vice President of Mayors for Peace
Mayor, Christchurch, New ZealandSusanna AgostiniCouncilor, Florence, Italy
Beverly O’Neill
President of the US Conference of Mayors
Mayor, Long Beach, U.S.A.

MC, Zenpei Kunimoto, Director, Public Relations Division, Hiroshima, Japan:
Ladies and gentlemen of the press, thank you very much for waiting. We would now
like to begin the press conference for the 6th General Conference of Mayors for Peace.
I’m Kunimoto, Director of Public Relations Division of Hiroshima City. I will serve
as your MC. Please have your simultaneous interpretation receivers ready for thispress conference.
Here we have the attendance of the general Chairperson of the General Conference,Prof. Mogami of the International Christian University, and the President and VicePresident City mayors of the Mayors for Peace, and the President of the US
Conference of Mayors. We were scheduled to hold the press conference for a longer
time period, but we would like to end the press conference by 6:00. I would like tosolicit your cooperation.
First of all, I would like to ask each of the participants to give us a very short and briefcomments, after which we would like to entertain your questions. So first of all, may
I invite the President of Mayors for Peace, Mayor Akiba, to speak.
Tadatoshi Akiba, President of Mayors for Peace, Mayor, Hiroshima, Japan :Thank you very much, Mr. Kunimoto. I’m very sorry that we have kept you waiting
and also for shortening the press conference.
In this 6th General Conference of Mayors for Peace, we have had very meaningful
discussions, and ultimately, we have adopted the Hiroshima Appeal today. And one
other important point that I would like to mention is that two years ago we adopted
the 2020 Vision, which is the emergency vision to ban nuclear weapons, and this has
been revised, which we hope to adopt for this conference. From August 6 to August 9of next year, we would like to look at this 369 days as the campaign year. So in thisyear’s campaign year, specific actions to be taken in this year we have been able tocome up with specific actions to undertake in the following year. The details will beworked out in the subsequent year.
But regarding the operation and management of the Mayors for Peace conferences in
the past, compared with those in the past we have a greater membership and we needgreater funds to support these activities. And therefore, we have decided to raise
funds for our activities, and in this sense this was quite an epic-making General
Conference. Based on this, we will be working in the following year to come up withconcrete actions.
I am very appreciative of the positive contributions made by each city and thepresentations that we had that the speakers shared with us, specific practices that are
in place in each of the cities, and we have gained much energy and inspiration frommany of our member cities participating in this General Conference. So I’m very
thankful for this. Thank you very much.
MC: Then, may I ask Prof. Mogami to say a few words?
Toshiki Mogami, Chairperson of Plenary SessionsⅠ,Ⅱand Appeal Drafting
Committee, Professor, International Christian University: Good afternoon. I’m
not a mayor but I do have some special knowledge regarding this field, and therefore I1have been asked to help and I have served as the general coordinator or Chairpersonof this General Conference.
I wanted to help the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki as much as I can, that was theoriginal intent, but actually I have learned that many cities who are members of the
Mayors for Peace are actively working on peace issues in reality, and so I was very
happy to learn of these specific actions that are being undertaken by each individual
city. Overall, I have the impression that it was a very good conference. Thank youvery much.
MC: Then I would like to call upon the eight cities to speak to you. They are very
eloquent people, each individually, but since we are very short of time may I ask you
to be eloquent in being brief. So Vice-President City, Dr. Schmalstieg, City of
Hannover, please.
Herbert Schmalstieg, Vice President of Mayors for Peace,Mayor, Hannover,Germany: I have the opportunity to visit all the six conferences of Mayors for Peacein Hiroshima and I feel that we have had this year a very good start because we havealso a program for the next year. And we all agree that we don’t need nuclear
weapons in the world, not in Russia, not in the United States, in France, in Israel, in
Korea, in North Korea and all the other places. And we need this money withdifferent governments, for armaments and rearmaments, we need this money tocombat hunger, poverty and all other things in the world. And we will work and wehave the great opportunity and a chance that in 2020, our Vision 2020, no nuclear
weapons in our life.
MC: Next, the Mayor Margate, the City of Malakoff, please.
Catherine Margate, Vice President of Mayors for Peace, Mayor, Malakoff,
France: Yes, thank you. What I would like to emphasize here, this is the first visit toHiroshima. I am very much impressed in attending the Peace Memorial Ceremony. I
visited the Peace Museum in Hiroshima. I have listened to the testimony byhibakusha. I attended the conference with a high level of interest. Throughexchanges of the experiences of the mayors, we discussed thoroughly the path for theabolition of nuclear weapons.
And also the point was raised that an unprecedented defense budget is allocated insome of the countries, and that defense budget should be allocated to other purposes
for the prevention of disasters. In that area, there are a lot of roles to be played bymayors.
And what are the roles to be played by mayors? How can we mobilize the citizens ofeach city? Depending on the situation and conditions of each city, we would like tocreate specific initiatives. Through the education for children, through the education
for youth, we hope that we will be able to contribute to the nuclear abolition.
MC: Thank you very much. Lord Kahn, Mayor of Manchester, please.
Mohammed Afzal Kahn, Vice President of Mayors for Peace, Mayor,
Manchester, U.K.: Of course I’m sitting here next to the Lord Mayor from Germany,2

who has not missed any of the General Conferences. But this is my first conference
that I have attended and also the first time that I have had the opportunity andprivilege and to visit Japan.
After going through this whole conference, I think Manchester has a pure record.
Back in the 80s, we were the first city to declare ourselves a nuclear-free zone andthen since ’84 we’ve been part of this movement. And after all that we have seen inthis conference, and particularly this very special day of the 60th anniversary, one
thing is very clear to me, that this conference has given us the opportunity to learn, tonetwork, to see what is happening in the world, but ultimately, the goals which wehave set, I believe they are realistic and are achievable in this 2020.
And this whole conference has spurned us all on and I hope that we will be moving
forward. We have the world opinion with us. What we need to make sure is that allof us take responsibility because all of us have a role to play, and if we can do that
there is no reason why we cannot achieve the goals which have been set by 2020.
Thank you.
MC: Thank you very much. Corro, Mr. Corro, the Councilor of Muntinlupa, please.
Raul Corro, Councilor, Muntinlupa, Philippines: Muntinlupa is the only Asian
country which is a member of Executive Committee, aside from Hiroshima in Japan.
And my presence here in the 6th Conference is to me significant because, as you
know, the Philippines was once occupied by the Japanese Imperial Army in WorldWar II. We were a victim of war. Yet, despite our experience, we are now
advocating reconciliation and not retaliation because we believe that freedom from
nuclear weapons can stand our differences in the past.
My father was a soldier, a Filipino soldier, and was a prisoner of the JapaneseImperial Army. However, we would like to look forward and forget what has
happened in the past because nuclear weapons have no place in a civilized society.
We have to work very hard. That’s the reason why, I believe, that when I go back to
the Philippines we have to educate our young children, our school children, about thehorrors of the atomic bombings. That’s the reason why I believe that power isknowledge. We have to inform the public. We have to create awareness about thehorrors of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings so that this should not be repeatedagain.
And the Philippines has the policy in our Constitution of freedom from nuclear
weapons, and we believe we are one with Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the rest of themembers of the Executive Committee and the majority of the people of the world incalling for the abolition of nuclear weapons. And I’d like to bring this message home
to our people by bringing some materials, informative materials, film showings,
especially about the testimony of hibakusha. This has to be shown, this has to beshown to our children because the children are the direct beneficiaries of our actions
today.
The abolition of nuclear weapons in this world will benefit future generations. That is
the reason why Muntinlupa is fully supportive of this conference. In fact, I was herein 1995 during the 50th anniversary of the Hiroshima bombings and we will continue

3to support this Mayors for Peace and the abolition of nuclear weapons. Thank youvery much.
MC: Next, Mr. Petrovich, Mayor of Volgograd, please.
Evgeny Petrovich Ischenko, Vice President of Mayors for Peace, Mayor,
Volgograd, Russia: I’m sorry I speak Russian because my English is not so goodand my assistant, Elena, will translate. This conference provided us with a brilliant
opportunity to better understand each other, better learn about each other. And though
we had different wording during the Draft Meeting, for example, you had anabsolutely similar approach to the problems and similar visions on how to create thenuclear-free zones and how to learn to solve problems without warfare involved.
Thank you.
MC: Next is Mr. Moore, Mayor of Christchurch, please.
Gary Moore, Mayor, Vice President of Mayor for Peace, Christchurch, New
Zealand: Greetings and welcome from Christchurch, New Zealand. The first thing
I’d like to say to the Japanese people is that Mayor Akiba of Hiroshima is
acknowledged as a world leader in the cause of peace. And I want to tell you a simple
little story about how we have addressed this issue in New Zealand.
We declared our homes nuclear-free. We then declared our streets nuclear-free. We
then declared our suburbs nuclear-free. People declared their churches nuclear-free.
And then the pressure went on each of the towns and cities of New Zealand, and one
by one, led by my city, we all became nuclear-free cities. And in 1984, ourgovernment declared the whole country nuclear-free. And what started off as
something simple in the minds and the hearts of peoples in their homes, spreadthroughout the country to where it became national policy. And it isn’t easy to keepthat policy.
Our government is under constant pressure to actually get away from being a nuclearfree country, but the interesting thing is that we’re about to engage in a generalelection, and the leader of the Opposition toyed with dropping part of the nuclear-freelegislation, and he received a very clear message from the people of New Zealand: it
was totally unacceptable to move down that path, and he backed away.
So our challenge as mayors of the world is to spread this message, heart by heart,street by street, city by city, so that country by country the politicians feel courageousenough to pick this up and say, our country is nuclear-free. That’s what this is about.
Thank you. [applause]
MC: Thank you very much. The next speaker is Ms. Agostini, Mayor of Florence.
Susanna Agostini, Councilor, Florence, Italy: I'm the Councilor in the Peace andInternational Solidarity Commission of the City of Florence, and I’m here
representing my mayor. It is also for Florence the first time we participate to the MFP,
and we definitely have a great experience to report once we go back.

4

We are very happy with the results. We learnt a lot from this conference, and we aresure that our work will be the base for future steps towards a free nuclear world withthe help of all the mayors and the role they play in spreading this word to all theircitizen, and spreading new instruments and new commitments by every single one.
The Hiroshima Appeal is going to be the starting point for a new instrument for theeducation and information about all the consequences of war, in particular, because of
the victims of the last Hiroshima-Nagasaki atomic bombs.
We heard the poetry from these young students and we saw the ceremony thismorning with all the pain of these people, those who died and the relatives of those
who died, and we also saw those wounded bodies of men and women. And so wedefinitely know that people want peace and we cannot let them down.
For this reason we are all committing to this association. Let’s keep on working
together, both mayors and organizations from the civil society. Let’s try to make it a
dream come true and this is to abolish the nuclear weapons and to guarantee thehuman rights all over the world. Thank you.
MC: Thank you very much. Last but not least I’d like to invite Ms. Beverly O'Neill,
Mayor of Long Beach and President of the US Conference of Mayors.
Beverly O’Neill, President of the US Conference of Mayors,
Mayor, Long Beach, U.S.A.: Thank you very much. I am Beverly O’Neill. I am
Mayor of the City of Long Beach in Southern California and also the President of the
US Conference of Mayors. I am here representing the US Conference of Mayors andI first want to say how much we admire and are appreciative of Mayor Akiba. He
actually has been the leader in knowing that if you have the mayors involved, youhave the people involved. The mayors I have met at this conference and the people
that have been involved in this conference have been committed and have beenpassionate about the future.
We, as mayors, speak the same language. We understand what our people need. We
understand what they need, what they’re fearing for the future, and nuclear weapons iscertainly the most prominent problem we face.
The US Conference of Mayors meets annually, twice. We have resolutions that are
passed by our membership. The resolutions have been on nuclear weapons, theelimination or reduction of, for over 25 years. The Boston meeting that we had two
years ago, it was unanimous to begin the discussion in the United States on theelimination or the reduction of nuclear weapons.
So I’m very pleased to be here. I think the conference was very productive, very
insightful, very passionate about the future. I think that having the mayors involved
with this was very visionary on the part of Mayor Akiba because there are mayors thatare joining every day on this future that we need for our world.
MC: Thank you very much. We’d now like to open the floor for questions. If you
have a question could you please identify yourself by your affiliation and your nameand to whom your question is addressed.

5Asahi Newspaper: Ogawa from Asahi Newspaper. I have a question for Mayor
Akiba. In the opening remarks you mentioned the NPT Review Conference.
Following that, you mentioned that you seemed to see disappointment among thecitizens who are calling for nuclear elimination. You mentioned that this conference
might have given great hope to people who are depressed because of the failure. Is
that what you wanted to say?
Akiba: Yes, that’s how you should understand this conference. The problem is, we
had repeatedly pointed out in our conference, and also it is mentioned in otherconferences, that the Russell-Einstein Manifesto says that - this is I think the truth unless we renounce nuclear weapons, mankind will be completely destroyed. That
sense of crisis is what we feel.
If we feel that sense of crisis, just because you cannot realize what you hope for, you
shouldn’t just give up on your campaign against nuclear elimination because that
leads to total annihilation of mankind and prevention of such an event is what westarted with. Of course, you cannot have your way in everything you want. But wehave to set up our goal and we have to come up with concrete steps and measures andactivities to reach the goal. And here want to reinforce, expand such activities andactions in the campaign with more like-minded people to get together. And we wereable to confirm that commitment through this conference. In that sense, we believethat we have received many good ideas and suggestions and proposals. And we wereable to come up with good plans and actions.
The pace of our progress may not be as fast as everyone wants to see. But we aremaking a steady step forward.
MC: Thank you. Question, please.
Chugoku Newspaper: Morita from Chugoku Newspaper. A question to Mayor
Akiba. You said that in this 6th General Conference, many concrete measures andproposals I would assume have been made. And I think you have also reached certain
decisions in your agenda. What would be the most recent activities that you would
initiate in the very near future?
Akiba: Yes, we have Vice-President Cities. The mayors are going to exchange email
addresses so that we will be able to read emails without any failure. That would be
our first step.
MC: Ms. Morita, is that okay? Anything else? Yes, please.
Asahi Newspaper: Sorry, once again to Mayor Akiba. You mentioned about the
proposal to establish a sub-committee at the United Nations General Assembly. Could
you be more specific? What steps or what means are you going to employ to realize
this initiative?
Akiba: First of all, we need to speak to as many national governments as possible.
Already we need to have more concrete measures to speak to some government
representatives who would collaborate with us. We have a Mayors for Peace

6

International Campaign Manager, so if you’d like more specifics, perhaps he canrespond to you. Maybe you can speak to him directly after this press conference forthe interests of time.
MC: Ms. Morita again?
Chugoku Newspaper: Thank you once again. A question to Mayor Akiba. It seems
you had a very heated discussion in the closing ceremony. You had to extend thesession and you also had to extend the session in the plenary conferences. And I think
there were a shorter number of days held for the conference. Is that one reason why
you had extended sessions? Are you going to make some changes for future
conferences about the number of days you spend?
So you have the conference once every four years. It used to be that you have a
conference both in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but now you only have a conference here
in Hiroshima this time.
Akiba: Well, yes. As you said, the nature of the conference where we have so many
people and we decide to speak for three days and it’s rather difficult to reach any
conclusions with this many people. Just because we can extend two days wouldn’t
make everyone satisfied that they have said everything they wanted. That, I think, isthe kind of nature of any international conference.
What we did during the past is, we had so many different programs and actions that
we were engaged in. For the past one year we’ve had many good results andconsequences. But the problem was, we didn’t have enough system in the Secretariat
to take care of these activities in terms of money and people.
We also need more people and more time to prepare reports to each member city. But
we haven’t been able to do that. We don’t have enough human resources andfinancial resources. And things are changing very rapidly on a daily basis. Whenchanges are made we need to promptly communicate those changes to our member
cities, but we don’t have enough Secretariat function. And that’s one problem weface.
In order to have closer communication amongst our member cities, one challenge andone item that we discussed at the Executive Meeting and at the plenary session is that
we are to have an international secretariat office to have better communication. So in
the future, we will be able to have more thorough discussion. We will have a better
foundation for building consensus in the future. Thank you.
MC: The time has come. Just let me limit the question to one or two more questions.
Chugoku Newspaper: Okada of Chukoku Newspaper. I have a question to Prof.
Mogami. In the Appeal, in the final part you talk about poverty and hunger in the
middle part of the Appeal.
On the other hand, Ms. Susan Walker mentioned that the activities need to be more
focused to be effective. I think it is similar to Pugwash as well.

7

When you discuss peace and nuclear disarmament, the kind of participants’ focus
may be diverged in a sense when you do not have the focus, and therefore, in thediscussions at your conference, wasn’t there a case that participants may have been
looking towards different directions? So how do you intend to focus more on nuclear
disarmament in the future?
Mogami: Of course, I take note of your question. What Ms. Walker had mentioned I
think was very important for our meeting. On the other hand, poverty and hunger
needed to be included in this conference as well, and such issues have started to betaken up from the previous conference as well.
Even if we try to coordinate and cooperate among the cities in nuclear disarmament,
some cities may focus more importance on poverty and hunger, and yet they werelooking for a reason to participate in a conference like ours, and so they would havemore exposure to other cities, and therefore we did not want to focus only on nuclear
disarmament, and that has increased membership greatly.
But when we actually go to promote a certain movement, sometimes it becomes lesseffective. And therefore, in terms of promoting a movement, as Ms. Walker has
suggested, we may have to focus on a single issue. But having said that, however, I
don’t think we can say that peace is related only to the arms race or nuclear arms, andtherefore we are trying to think together on the mutual cooperation, to think mutuallyon these important issues that concern specific individual cities.
MC: Just one more question then.
Chugoku Broadcasting: Okamoto of Chugoku Broadcasting. I have a question to
the President of the US Conference of Mayors . As you mentioned, the mayors arealways working closely with citizens, and although the Mayors for Peace have been
appealing for many years, the top leaders of the United States and other countries
seem to be relying more and more on nuclear weapons. So trying to hear the voice ofthe citizens, do you have any particular strategy to appeal to the national government?
O’Nell: Let me just say that the United States Conference of Mayors is a group of
mayors from every party. It’s mayors that run a partisan, mayors that run without any
indication of party, so it represents all the cities of the United States, 30,000 or more.
That means that all of the large cities are a part of this organization.
The resolutions that I mentioned earlier are resolutions that go through a process andfinally get to the floor of the Conference for Mayors for a business meeting. Whenthe resolutions are passed they become part of our advocacy for the next year. These
are the things that we voted on, these are the things that we agreed on, these are thedirections we want to take. It could be resolutions on education, it could be
resolutions on transportation, it could be resolutions on land use. In this case, theresolutions I was discussing are the resolutions on nuclear disarmament. This gives
us a direction for all of our mayors, for all of our members.
We are the local government; we are not the federal government. The
recommendations that we make do not become part of the federal government policy
just because we say so, but it does give us direction in what we do and how we feel
about the policies for mayors.

8So when you ask if this is going to be part of the federal policy because of theresolutions on a local level, that’s not correct. We will make sure that we let theauthorities, the White House, the Congress know, what the US Conference of Mayors
feels about the direction in many, many issues. And as I’ve said earlier, we have beenworking on, 25 years ago, about the nuclear arms race, to stop that. And it takes along time before some of our policies really become part of the federal government.
But that’s the type of system that we live in, and it’s a system that gives our local
people the feeling that they can be part of the policies that we make sure that thefederal government knows is part of the mayors policy.
MC: Thank you very much. In view of the program to follow I would like to end thepress conference here. So with this we conclude.
Akiba: Regarding the question posed to President O’Neill, let me add. The questionthat was posed I think was not only posed to the United States only. I think it also
applies to other nuclear weapons States as well, including, we have the French cities,
British cities with us as well. And therefore, it concerns all the local governments.
There is a case, many cases, where the state policy may differ, the national policy may
differ from that of local authorities, but we are asserting ourselves as local
governments. I think we can all go back to Greece even, but in the case of theeconomy, I think it is the cities that have led the development.
And we speak of the 21st century as being the Century of the City, and in terms ofenvironment, for example, the US federal government has not signed the Kyoto
Protocol, but each city has set its limits in terms of emissions of the greenhouse gases.
If the cities are willing to set the limits individually as to the emissions of greenhousegases, ultimately, as a nation the United States may be able to meet the requirements
under the Kyoto Protocol. I think the cities, therefore, have that power. And so the
21st century can be said to be the Century of the City, and at the Japan-US City
Summit held in November of last year in Hiroshima, we made that point very clearly.
So if we are talking about the issues for which we speak for the citizens, we can doour part in trying to take actions on behalf of the will of the citizens. That is basicallythe intent of holding the Mayors for Peace, and also that is the approach taken byother similar organizations as well. So your question does not only address theUnited States but other countries as well.
MC: So we have the final version of the Hiroshima Appeal which will be distributed
to you. This is the official Hiroshima Appeal, the final version. So with this, ladies
and gentlemen, we would like to conclude the press conference. Thank you verymuch for your cooperation.

9