 So, I want to thank Code Pink and the other organizers for inviting me today. And since this session is called Assessing the Nuclear Threat and Targeting Nuclear Weapons Producers, I want to spend the first part of my talk, Assessing the Nuclear Threat. And then I want to spend some time talking about mayors for peace. And, of course, I could speak for much longer than a lot of time here. So, let me just jump right into it. Today, nearly 15,000 nuclear weapons, most in order of magnitude more powerful than the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs, 94 percent held by the U.S. and Russia, continue to pose an intolerable threat to humanity and the biosphere. Donald Trump entered office with the U.S. poise to spend at least $1 trillion over the next 30 years. To maintain and modernize its nuclear bombs, warheads and delivery systems, and the infrastructures who sustain the nuclear enterprise indefinitely. And, by the way, the U.S. is beginning plans now to build new submarine launch ballistic missiles and new intercontinental ballistic missiles that are slated to be in service until through the 2080s. And Russia, China, France, the United Kingdom, India, Israel, and Pakistan are all engaged in nuclear weapons modernization programs of their own. On December 22nd of last year, President-elect Trump tweeted, the United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes. Well, on July 7th, I was at the United Nations to witness the adoption by the majority of the world's countries of a historic treaty to prohibit the possession, development, testing use, and threat of use of nuclear weapons. The vote by 122 to 1 unambiguously demonstrates that most of the world has indeed come to its senses regarding nuclear weapons. However, we stand at a nuclear crossroads with a sharply divided world. While the Ban Treaty represents the total repudiation of nuclear weapons and nuclear deterrence by most of the states that don't possess or rely on nuclear weapons, in a joint declaration following the vote the U.S., France, and the United Kingdom declared, we do not intend to sign ratifier ever become parties to the treaty. Now, we're all very aware of the tensions on the Korean Peninsula that have risen to the highest levels in decades as the U.S. and North Korea posit threats and counter threats of preemptive military strikes. And even former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, a pretty hawkish guy, has warned, we have the potential for a nuclear war that would take millions of lives, so I think we have to exercise some care here, you think? But this isn't the only nuclear flashpoint. And I'm going to quote Derek Johnson of Global Zero, who has assessed today's nuclear threat as, quote, an unprecedented moment in human history. The world has never faced so many nuclear flashpoints simultaneously. From NATO Russia tensions to the Korean Peninsula to South Asia and the South China Sea and Taiwan, all of the nuclear armed states are tangled up in conflicts and crises that could catastrophically escalate at any moment. Tensions between the United States with NATO and Russia have risen to levels not seen since the Cold War with the two nuclear giants confronting each other in Ukraine, Eastern Europe and Syria, and an accelerated tempo of military exercises and war games, both conventional and nuclear on both sides. And risky close encounters between Russian and NATO forces have increased dramatically in the Baltic region over the past three years. Just to make this a little more real, at the end of January of this year, the United States engaged in the largest ever military exercises in Poland. And they said, it's about deterrence. This is what the general in charge said, an outright attack by Russia is unlikely, but the best way to keep it unlikely is to do what we're doing here today. Well, Russia saw this deployment as a serious threat. And at the time, former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev warned that, quote, it all looks as if the world is preparing for war. More troops, tanks and armored personnel carriers are being brought to Europe. NATO and Russian forces and weapons that used to be deployed at a distance are now placed closer to each other as if to shoot point blank. Then in September, Russia conducted the Zapad 2017 exercises, the biggest Russian war games in years. In Western Russia, Russia's enclave of Kaliningrad and Belarus, a Russian ally which borders Ukraine as well as NATO member states, Poland, Latvia and Lithuania. It was a huge deployment. And I think it's notable that President Vladimir Putin chose to observe the war games rather than attending the opening of the United Nations General Assembly. The Russians followed up this massive conventional demonstration with a show of nuclear force, including intercontinental ballistic missile tests by its strategic missile forces. One of these involving a weapon with a new warhead design that seems intended to defeat ballistic missile shields, such as the one NATO is now developing. And then just a few days ago, with little public notice, NATO began, quietly began its annual exercise to practice how it might launch a nuclear attack during a crisis. On October 16th, which was just last Monday, NATO personnel in Belgium and Russia kicked off this latest version of the alliance's main nuclear deterrence exercise, nicknamed Steadfast Noon. This year's exercise involves operations at the Klein-Brogel Air Force Base in Belgium and the Buchel Air Base in Germany, where the United States maintains B-61 nuclear bombs. So this is happening in real time right now. And any kind of an incident, a shooting down of a plane by accident or miscalculation, any number of things could quickly escalate to the unimaginable. So that is the nuclear threat that we face. It's very serious and it's very present. So let me now switch to what we might be able to do about it, and talk about mayors for peace and local organizing, city-based organizing. So in the 1980s, there was lots of city-based local organizing initiatives, including, of course, the anti-apartheid divestment campaigns. That was also the height of the Cold War when public concern and fear of nuclear war was the highest level of concern on the public's agenda. So many cities passed local nuclear free zones, more than 130 US cities. Now, mostly these were symbolic or declaratory, but some had financial implications. And there are some lessons to be learned because sometimes cities had to violate their own ordinances in order to purchase from or invest in companies and financial institutions that are part of the web of nuclear weapons makers in the military industrial complex. There was even a magazine called Municipal Diplomacy. And in the early 2000s, many cities passed resolutions in opposition to the US war in Iraq in the Cities for Peace campaign. Now, in the new context, there's an article by a guy named Kirkpatrick Sale called States and Cities Saying No to the Feds, in which he describes a growing trend towards nullification, as he calls it, of federal laws and policies by cities and states. It seems that in a time when the federal government and Congress are increasingly dysfunctional and unresponsive to the needs of people, there's a tremendous opportunity, as well as a need, to organize and build grassroots power at the local level. Now, the Paris, the Trump's withdrawal, announced withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accord provides a very striking example. A statement by climate mayors was made in response. June 1st, they said, quote, as 362 US mayors representing 66 million Americans, we will adopt, honor, and uphold the commitments to the goals enshrined in the Paris Agreement. We will identify efforts to meet each of our city's urgent climate goals, push for new action to meet the 1.5 degrees Celsius target, and work together to create a 21st century clean energy economy. And cities have also stepped up in many other areas. Sanctuary cities, minimum wage laws, marijuana laws, gun control laws, and healthcare. So why not? Why shouldn't they take on federal spending priorities and nuclear disarmament advocacy? So just the way the mayors responded to the current administration pulling out of the Paris Climate Accord, we need to respond to other, they need to respond to the other existential threat, nuclear weapons, as well as bloated military spending. Of course, it's easier for cities to engage in direct action to mitigate climate change. So we need to be creative, we need to be aware of local economic impacts of domestic military bases, which were mentioned earlier, there are 6,000 of them, and military contractors, and we need to think about a just transition for workers. This year, resolutions have been adopted by cities, including New Haven, Connecticut, Charlottesville, Virginia, Evanston, Illinois, New London, New Hampshire, and West Hollywood, California, urging Congress to cut military spending and redirect funding to meet human and environmental needs. Let me talk a little bit about Mayors for Peace. Mayors for Peace was founded in 1982, oh no, at the conclusion of the United Nations special session on disarmament by the mayors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. From its covenant through close cooperation among the cities, Mayors for Peace strives to raise international public awareness regarding the need to abolish nuclear weapons and contribute to the realization of genuine and lasting world peace by working to eliminate starvation and poverty, assist refugees fleeing local conflict, support human rights, protect the environment, and solve the other problems that threaten peaceful coexistence. As of October 1st, Mayors for Peace has grown to include 7,433 cities in 162 countries, representing more than 1 billion people. There are 211 US members. And Mayor Frank County of Des Moines, Iowa, is the newest vice president and lead US mayor. So I may beg you to give me another minute or two because I'm just getting to the tools that I can hand you. So the US Conference of Mayors, as opposed to Mayors for Peace, is the nonpartisan association of America's cities with populations over 30,000. There are 1,408 such cities and resolutions adopted at their annual June meetings become official US Conference of Mayors policy. Increasingly strong resolutions supported by Mayors for Peace members have been adopted by the US Conference of Mayors for 12 consecutive years. And I just wanna point out the two most recent ones which are directly relevant to the subject of our conference today. The 2016 resolution calling on the next US president, whoever it was, to pursue diplomacy with other nuclear armed states, participate in negotiations for the elimination of nuclear weapons, cut nuclear weapons spending, and redirect funds to meet the needs of cities. And it specifically commends the US Conference of Mayors, commends Mayor Denise Simmons and the Cambridge City Council for demonstrating bold leadership at the municipal level by unanimously deciding on April 2nd, 2016 to divest their $1 billion city pension fund from all companies involved in production of nuclear weapons systems and in entities investing in such companies. And then in the 2017 resolution, calling on President Trump to lower nuclear tensions, prioritize diplomacy and redirect nuclear weapons spending to meet human needs and address environmental challenges. They specifically, the US Conference of Mayors welcomes the restricting first use of Nuclear Weapons Act of 2017, introduced in both houses of Congress that would prohibit the president from launching a nuclear first strike with a declaration of war by Congress and calls on the president and Congress to reverse federal spending priorities and to redirect funds currently allocated to nuclear weapons and unwarranted military spending, to restore full funding for community block development grants and the Environmental Protection Agency to create jobs by rebuilding our nation's crumbling infrastructure and to ensure basic human services for all, including education, environmental protection, food assistance, housing, and healthcare. Okay, and I have copies of these resolutions over here. So let me tell you how you can use these resolutions because the US Conference of Mayors is considered to be like Main Street America. It has some cloud, and if they're not actively using lobbying on these resolutions, we can. So first of all, the resolution is designed to be used as an educational tool, so please use it. Give it to your mayor, your congressional representatives and your local media. Publish it on your websites. Ask your mayor to use it as a basis for town hall meeting. Find out if your mayor is a member of mayor's peace, if not sign her up or him up. Our goal is to reach 10,000 member cities by 2020, the 75th anniversary of the US atomic bombings. Work with your city council to adopt resolutions modeled on the recent local city resolutions or draft one commending and affirming the US Conference of Mayors, and also there will be a draft divestment resolution, which will be, I guess, discussed probably later today or tomorrow. Another thing mayors can do is raise public awareness about how military spending is diverting resources badly needed to address the needs of cities and the growing dangers of nuclear weapons. One way to do this is to post an art exhibit. The mayor's peace has a poster exhibit available. There are some brochures over there. And then of course we talked about divestment and I just wanna point out that we worked with the Future of Life Institute to drop a city's guide to nuclear weapons divestment, which is a toolkit. This version needs to be revised before it can be widely circulated, but it already exists. So I'll be happy to talk to folks about that afterwards. Like I said, I did bring some material here which you can pick up. Thank you.