DESPAIRING? Most of us are when we look at the present state of our world and what is in prospect. We see the agonising siege of Gaza, the months of fire, flood and storm, so many trapped in poverty while the few have obscene levels of wealth.
Human history is not short of brutality and exploitation but there are two factors that make our current situation essentially different. We can now destroy life as we know it on this planet and it will be because of human choices.
The existing stock of nuclear weapons in the world could achieve this within hours and the rate of technological development is rapid.
The failure to act decisively on climate change may take a bit longer but once the process accelerates, we must expect the impact to be devastating. However, we can’t afford despair and Scotland, despite being small, can make a contribution of significance.
Early this year, Scottish CND discussed how we could both broaden and intensify action against these two existential risks, which are not in separate silos but interact.
READ MORE: Scottish Government's next indy paper to focus on migration
Military activity and arms manufacture have a significant carbon footprint. But even more important will be the major resource and territorial disruptions climate change will cause and which will lead to conflict.
We wanted to bring together old and young activists not just to analyse the problems but to focus on how we could all contribute to the solutions.
This coming together will take place on Saturday and we have called it a Festival for Survival. The words “survival” and “twin threats” were obvious but did the word festival sound too celebratory?
We decided we wanted to assert that we are not passive victims. We are activists and we believe change is possible.
Scotland has constantly been used by the British state irrespective of our choices. The first campaign in which I took part was in 1960 when it was announced that Scotland would become a major US nuclear base within three months.
Because of the UK’s failure to develop its own missile system, it had to go cap in hand to plead for the lease of a US system. Britain is still totally dependent on the lease of a US system, now Trident.
President Eisenhower reluctantly agreed but only on condition that they got the Holy Loch. Prime minister Macmillan did try to “sell” them Loch Linnhe instead because a few Highlanders would be easier to handle than Glaswegians but it was the Holy Loch or no missile lease.
Scotland is, of course, still the site of the greatest concentration of nuclear firepower in Europe. In the event of a nuclear exchange, we would be a top target. Half the Scottish population would instantly be toast while the others would take longer to die. But with independence, we could make a truly important international contribution.
The SNP, the Greens, Alba and some Labour MSPs support the United Nations Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. Some 122 states have voted in favour and to date 69 states have formally ratified it.
We would be in the special position of being a ratifying state with nuclear weapons on our territory which would be removed through a UN treaty. So it would be a strong message that change is possible and the nuclear spiral can go into reverse.
We must also challenge those in Scotland (including some independence supporters) who support new oil developments and dismiss the need for a radical change in economic priorities on the basis that Scotland is an insignificant contributor to global warming in comparison with China, US, India, so why should we don a hair shirt?
READ MORE: Angus MacNeil to work with Alba in Westminster
This is both immoral and shows a failure to understand how to develop behavioural change. From a moral perspective, we should be discussing per capita carbon emissions both within and among states.
We should also be very conscious of the fact we are exporting much of our emissions to other countries because we now depend on them to manufacture so much of what we consume.
Change happens when people see new ways of doing things that work. This may come from creative new technologies or from organising ourselves differently and using resources differently. The world needs new socio-economic models.
This can be easier for smaller states to do than large ones. Scotland has so much potential to be such a model.
These are the things we will engage with at the festival. How do we contribute to peacemaking? Are there other states which can show us alternatives?
Ireland, for example, has chosen not to be in a military alliance but to focus on contributing to UN peacekeeping initiatives. It played a significant role in the Cluster Bomb Treaty.
Austria and Switzerland have provided a home for international humanitarian agencies. New Zealand decades ago passed legislation prohibiting any involvement with nuclear weapons. Many European states have environmental housebuilding standards which put the UK to shame.
We did plan to discuss Ukraine. We did not expect to be in the midst of an even more horrific war. That will be in all of our minds.
Despite all the problems in the independence movement in Scotland, we can make the independence case in three words – Sunak, Starmer, Gaza. The British political establishment does not speak for Scotland.
Isobel Lindsay is co-vice-chair of Scottish CND
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel