ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/abolition-usa/archive/v01.n046

Internet Message Format | 1998-12-07 | 42KB

From: [e-mail] (abolition-usa-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: abolition-usa-digest V1 #46
Reply-To: abolition-usa-digest
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


abolition-usa-digest     Tuesday, December 8 1998     Volume 01 : Number 046




----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 6 Dec 1998 21:26:32 -0600 (CST)
From: [e-mail] (Robert Smirnow)
Subject: (abolition-usa) QUERY RE Y2K & DE-ALERTING, ACCIDENTAL NUCLEAR WAR, PLEASE RESPOND

    Friends,
            The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation received a suggestion that
Abolition 2000 should initiate an electronic petition concerning
de-alerting because of Y2K potentially DISASTROUS problems. I was asked
to write the petition up and circulate it but don't have enough
expertise to.I am not writing on behalf of The Nuclear Age Peace
Foundation although I think they'd be very interested in any well
thought out, drawn up draft/petition. Can someone that does have
extensive knoweldge re Y2K  and nuclear weapons help with a
draft/petition? I thank you ahead of time. I will forward any such
material to The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation.


    Also, can any of you pass along info re the potential of accidental
nuclear war both Y2K related and non Y2K related?



     Peace,
           Bill Smirnow



  PS   Let's all remember that the Pentagon is seriously concerned
about Y2K related accidental nuclear war scanarios. I don't know but
imagine all other nuclear weapons states, declared or not, as well as
all NNWS "Defense" departments would be very concerned re this
potential catastrophe.Fallout knows no boundaries & many Non-Nuclear
Weapons States[NNWS] are targeted by NWS.



- -
 To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 10:40:05 -0500
From: Stephen Young <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) QUERY RE Y2K & DE-ALERTING, ACCIDENTAL NUCLEAR WAR,  PLEASE RESPOND

Dear friends,

This issue is covered in great detail in a recent BASIC reports research paper,
"The Bug in the Bomb: The Y2K Problem and Nuclear Weapons", which is available
free on our website at:  http://www.basicint.org.

You can also get hard copies for $10 by replying to me.

Thanks

Stephen Young
Senior Analyst
BASIC

Robert Smirnow wrote:

>     Friends,
>             The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation received a suggestion that
> Abolition 2000 should initiate an electronic petition concerning
> de-alerting because of Y2K potentially DISASTROUS problems. I was asked
> to write the petition up and circulate it but don't have enough
> expertise to.I am not writing on behalf of The Nuclear Age Peace
> Foundation although I think they'd be very interested in any well
> thought out, drawn up draft/petition. Can someone that does have
> extensive knoweldge re Y2K  and nuclear weapons help with a
> draft/petition? I thank you ahead of time. I will forward any such
> material to The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation.
>
>     Also, can any of you pass along info re the potential of accidental
> nuclear war both Y2K related and non Y2K related?
>
>      Peace,
>            Bill Smirnow
>
>   PS   Let's all remember that the Pentagon is seriously concerned
> about Y2K related accidental nuclear war scanarios. I don't know but
> imagine all other nuclear weapons states, declared or not, as well as
> all NNWS "Defense" departments would be very concerned re this
> potential catastrophe.Fallout knows no boundaries & many Non-Nuclear
> Weapons States[NNWS] are targeted by NWS.
>
>
>
> -
>  To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "[e-mail]"
>  with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message.
>  For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
>  "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.


- -
 To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 11:32:50 -0500 (EST)
From: Hisham Zerriffi <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) QUERY RE Y2K & DE-ALERTING, ACCIDENTAL NUCLEAR WAR, PLEASE RESPOND

Dear Bill Smirnow,

        The latest issue of our newsletter, Science for Democratic Action,
has a 5 page article on de-alerting and its role in nuclear disarmament and
includes a brief discussion of Y2K issues.  You can download it from our
website (http://www.ieer.org) or I would be happy to send you a hardcopy.
Another resources I would check are "The Bug in the Bomb" which is a new
report by Michael Kraig of the British-American Information Security Council
(BASIC) in Washington DC.

Hope this helps.

Hisham Zerriffi

At 09:26 PM 12/6/98 -0600, you wrote:
>
>    Friends,
>            The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation received a suggestion that
>Abolition 2000 should initiate an electronic petition concerning
>de-alerting because of Y2K potentially DISASTROUS problems. I was asked
>to write the petition up and circulate it but don't have enough
>expertise to.I am not writing on behalf of The Nuclear Age Peace
>Foundation although I think they'd be very interested in any well
>thought out, drawn up draft/petition. Can someone that does have
>extensive knoweldge re Y2K  and nuclear weapons help with a
>draft/petition? I thank you ahead of time. I will forward any such
>material to The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation.
>
>
>    Also, can any of you pass along info re the potential of accidental
>nuclear war both Y2K related and non Y2K related?
>
>
>
>     Peace,
>           Bill Smirnow
>
>
>
>  PS   Let's all remember that the Pentagon is seriously concerned
>about Y2K related accidental nuclear war scanarios. I don't know but
>imagine all other nuclear weapons states, declared or not, as well as
>all NNWS "Defense" departments would be very concerned re this
>potential catastrophe.Fallout knows no boundaries & many Non-Nuclear
>Weapons States[NNWS] are targeted by NWS.
>
>
>
>-
> To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "[e-mail]"
> with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message.
> For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
> "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.
>
>


************************************************************
* Hisham Zerriffi                                          *
* Project Scientist                Phone: [phone]   *
* Institute for Energy             Fax:   [phone]   *
* and Environmental Research       E-mail: [e-mail] *
* 6935 Laurel Ave. Suite 204       Web:    www.ieer.org    *
* Takoma Park, MD  20912                                   *
************************************************************


- -
 To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 16:51:52 -0600 (CST)
From: [e-mail] (Robert Smirnow)
Subject: (abolition-usa) SIGN ON TO OPPOSE RUSSIAN REACTORS, WESTERN FUNDING

- ---
Date: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 16:44:50 -0500
From: Michael Mariotte <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: NIRS

To: [e-mail]
Subject: r4/k2 sign-on

Sender: [e-mail]

Dear Friends,

On December 14, 1998, there will be an international day of protest
against the proposed K2/R4 reactors in Ukraine. These are new reactors
that would be paid for largely with western money. For the past few
months, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) has
been holding a "public consultation" process on K2/R4, including public
meetings in several cities in Ukraine and other countries. The results
have been an overwhelming consensus against construction of these
reactors.

This letter to President Clinton is the U.S. participation in this
international day of protest. We will deliver it to the White House on
December 14, and issue a news release about it and the issue. We hope
that you will be able to sign on to this letter. We must have your
sign-on by 5 pm, Friday, December 11. You can e-mail to [e-mail]
or fax to 202-462-2183. Please include your name, organization name,
city and state.

Thank you!

Michael Mariotte
NIRS

December 14, 1998

Hon. William Jefferson Clinton
President of the United States
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20000

Dear President Clinton:

The undersigned U.S. environmental and citizens' groups are writing to
you to urge you to oppose western funding, through the European Bank
for
Reconstruction and Development, for the proposed new K2/R4 reactors in
Ukraine. We strongly oppose the completion of these unnecessary new
reactors, and our opposition is shared by a vast majority of Ukrainians
and NGOs throughout Europe, as the EBRD public consultation process has
demonstrated. Although we fully agree with your goal of closing the
Chernobyl nuclear plant, we also strongly oppose the completion of
K2/R4, on the grounds that they are both extremely unsafe and
unnecessary.

As the end of the public consultation period for K2/R4 approaches and
the EBRD will be making a decision on funding the project, we ask you
to
oppose EBRD funding of this unsafe and financially unsound project.

Nuclear power continues to create environmental and safety threats
throughout Europe and the world.  In Eastern Europe especially, nuclear
power continues to be relied on heavily, in a region where safety
standards and quality of equipment are generally lower than they are in
Western Europe. We are very concerned that the expansion of nuclear
power in Eastern Europe will only compound these problems.  In
addition,
we would like to point out that the money for K2/R4 would be much more
wisely spent on energy efficiency and renewable energy projects, as
well
as upgrades of currently operating power plants, as originally
recommended by a distinguished international advisory panel, including
U.S. experts Peter Bradford and David Freeman.

Ukraine and other countries in Central and Eastern Europe are at a
crossroads in terms of power generation. Part of the legacy from the
old
Soviet regime is heavy reliance on nuclear power and the use of
obsolete
and unsafe reactor design types. These reactors, including the VVER
1000
type used at K2 and R4, have been identified by the IAEA as having
serious and fundamental safety flaws that are not entirely correctable.
In important respects, these reactors cannot meet internationally
accepted safety standards and could not be licensed in the United
States.

Ukraine has suffered enough under government policies that aggressively
promote the use of nuclear power, without regard to international
safety
standards, or indeed to the human costs of nuclear accidents. The
Ukrainian people have spoken: They do not want
yet another unsafe and expensive nuclear project which continues to
risk
their health and environment.


Our understanding is that the Administration believes that permanently
closing Chernobyl is the most important issue here, and that if helping
Ukraine build new reactors is the price to close Chernobyl, we should
provide that assistance. We appreciate and agree with your insistence
on
closing Chernobyl. But building new unsafe reactors to replace old
unsafe reactors is not much of an improvement. Rather, the United
States
and the international community must do everything it can to assist
Ukraine in attaining a sound non-nuclear energy future. Ukraine has the
necessary energy resources to accomplish this goal, and the U.S. and
EBRD should concentrate its efforts on this.

Thank you very much for your attention to this matter and we look
forward to hearing from you soon regarding your position on this urgent
issue.

Sincerely,


Cc: Vice President Al Gore
Karen Shepherd, EBRD




- -
 To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 17:01:09 -0600 (CST)
From: [e-mail] (Robert Smirnow)
Subject: (abolition-usa) OPPOSE RUSSIAN REACTORS, WESTERN FUNDING

- ---
Date: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 16:44:50 -0500
From: Michael Mariotte <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: NIRS

To: [e-mail]
Subject: r4/k2 sign-on

Sender: [e-mail]


Dear Friends,

On December 14, 1998, there will be an international day of protest
against the proposed K2/R4 reactors in Ukraine. These are new reactors
that would be paid for largely with western money. For the past few
months, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) has
been holding a "public consultation" process on K2/R4, including public
meetings in several cities in Ukraine and other countries. The results
have been an overwhelming consensus against construction of these
reactors.

This letter to President Clinton is the U.S. participation in this
international day of protest. We will deliver it to the White House on
December 14, and issue a news release about it and the issue. We hope
that you will be able to sign on to this letter. We must have your
sign-on by 5 pm, Friday, December 11. You can e-mail to [e-mail]
or fax to 202-462-2183. Please include your name, organization name,
city and state.

Thank you!

Michael Mariotte
NIRS

December 14, 1998

Hon. William Jefferson Clinton
President of the United States
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20000

Dear President Clinton:

The undersigned U.S. environmental and citizens' groups are writing to
you to urge you to oppose western funding, through the European Bank
for
Reconstruction and Development, for the proposed new K2/R4 reactors in
Ukraine. We strongly oppose the completion of these unnecessary new
reactors, and our opposition is shared by a vast majority of Ukrainians
and NGOs throughout Europe, as the EBRD public consultation process has
demonstrated. Although we fully agree with your goal of closing the
Chernobyl nuclear plant, we also strongly oppose the completion of
K2/R4, on the grounds that they are both extremely unsafe and
unnecessary.

As the end of the public consultation period for K2/R4 approaches and
the EBRD will be making a decision on funding the project, we ask you
to
oppose EBRD funding of this unsafe and financially unsound project.

Nuclear power continues to create environmental and safety threats
throughout Europe and the world.  In Eastern Europe especially, nuclear
power continues to be relied on heavily, in a region where safety
standards and quality of equipment are generally lower than they are in
Western Europe. We are very concerned that the expansion of nuclear
power in Eastern Europe will only compound these problems.  In
addition,
we would like to point out that the money for K2/R4 would be much more
wisely spent on energy efficiency and renewable energy projects, as
well
as upgrades of currently operating power plants, as originally
recommended by a distinguished international advisory panel, including
U.S. experts Peter Bradford and David Freeman.

Ukraine and other countries in Central and Eastern Europe are at a
crossroads in terms of power generation. Part of the legacy from the
old
Soviet regime is heavy reliance on nuclear power and the use of
obsolete
and unsafe reactor design types. These reactors, including the VVER
1000
type used at K2 and R4, have been identified by the IAEA as having
serious and fundamental safety flaws that are not entirely correctable.
In important respects, these reactors cannot meet internationally
accepted safety standards and could not be licensed in the United
States.

Ukraine has suffered enough under government policies that aggressively
promote the use of nuclear power, without regard to international
safety
standards, or indeed to the human costs of nuclear accidents. The
Ukrainian people have spoken: They do not want
yet another unsafe and expensive nuclear project which continues to
risk
their health and environment.


Our understanding is that the Administration believes that permanently
closing Chernobyl is the most important issue here, and that if helping
Ukraine build new reactors is the price to close Chernobyl, we should
provide that assistance. We appreciate and agree with your insistence
on
closing Chernobyl. But building new unsafe reactors to replace old
unsafe reactors is not much of an improvement. Rather, the United
States
and the international community must do everything it can to assist
Ukraine in attaining a sound non-nuclear energy future. Ukraine has the
necessary energy resources to accomplish this goal, and the U.S. and
EBRD should concentrate its efforts on this.

Thank you very much for your attention to this matter and we look
forward to hearing from you soon regarding your position on this urgent
issue.

Sincerely,


Cc: Vice President Al Gore
Karen Shepherd, EBRD




- -
 To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 02:34:56 -0600 (CST)
From: [e-mail] (Robert Smirnow)
Subject: (abolition-usa) Fwd: DoE Deadline Extended for Pu-238 Development for Future Space

- ----
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 09:00:40 -0500 (EST)
From: [e-mail]

Sender: [e-mail]
Subject: DoE Deadline Extended for Pu-238 Development for Future Space
  Missions
To: [e-mail], [e-mail]







 One piece of good news for us is that the DoE has extended the
deadline for comments on the Proposed Production of Plutonium-238 for
Use in
Advanced Radioisotope Power Systems for Future Space Missions. Russell
Hoffman of the "Stop Cassini Homepage" called Colette Brown, DoE, and
confirmed that the November 4 deadline was a misprint and that the
correct
deadline date is now stated as January 4, 1999.

        This is a good opportunity, like responding to the scheduled
8/18/99
Cassini Earth flyby, for us to respond before a possible destructive
event.
I hope many of us will reply to their plans for irresponsible and
dangerous
nuclear technologies..

thanks, take care..


Jonathan M. Haber
NoFlyby Website
http://www.nonviolence,org/noflyby


<<<< REPRINT OF ORIGINAL NOTICE >>>>

NOTICE OF INTENT:

To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Proposed
Production of Plutonium-238 for Use in Advanced Radioisotope Power
Systems
for Future Space Missions (DOE/EIS-299). DOE intends to prepare an EIS
to
assess the potential environmental impacts of establishing a domestic
capability to produce Pu-238 including the storage of neptunium-237
(Np-237), fabrication of Np-237 targets, irradiation of targets to
produce
Pu-238, and the processing of these targets to isolate the Pu-238 and
recycle the Np-237. The Pu-238 would be used in advanced radioisotope
power
systems for potential future space missions. Without a long-term supply
of
Pu-238, DOE would not be able to provide the radioisotope power systems
that
may be required for these potential future space missions, and the
Department would not fulfill the intended space nuclear power role
assigned
to the Department in the National Space Policy statement issued on 19
September 1996. This assigned role of maintaining the space nuclear
capability is also consistent with the Department's charter under the
Atomic
Energy Act of 1954, as amended. Alternatives to be analyzed for the
fabrication of Np-237 targets and for processing the irradiated targets
include the use of the Radiochemical Engineering Development Center in
Oak
Ridge, Tennessee, and the Fuels and Materials Examination Facility at
the
Hanford Site near Richland, Washington. Alternative facilities for the
irradiation of targets for Pu-238 production include the Advanced Test
Reactor near Idaho Falls, Idaho, the Fast Flux Test Facility at the
Hanford
Site, Washington, and the High Flux Isotope Reactor in Oak Ridge,
Tennessee.

The public scoping period begins with the publication of this Notice of
Intent and will continue until 4 November 1998. [extended to January
4th,
1999 according to in conversation with Colette Brown and the editor of
this
newsletter].  Public scoping meetings will be announced as soon as
determined but at least 15 days prior to the date of
the meetings. Contact Colette Brown, Office of Nuclear Energy, Science
and
Technology (NE-50), U.S. Department of Energy, 19901 Germantown Road,
Germantown, Maryland 20874, tele. 301.903.6924, fax: [phone],
E-mail:
"Colette Brown" <[e-mail]>. Requests to speak at
scoping
hearings, scoping comments, and requests for documents should be
submitted
to the above contact. [For detailed information, see 63 FR 53398, 5
October
1998.]

Comment period begins Oct 5 and ends NOV 4 [extended to JAN 4, 1999]

DOE Contact:
 Colette Brown, Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology
(NE-50)
 USDOE,  19901 Germantown Road
 Germantown, MD 20874

Telephone [phone]
FAX  [phone]

EMAIL  [e-mail]

A toll free telephone number has been established to receive public
comments.
Interested parties may call [phone] and leave a detailed message
with
their comments.

<<<< END OF REPRINT <<<<

ps: [We have received feedback that there were problems getting through
using the above toll free number and a better one is: [phone],
expecially for questions.]





- -
 To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 08 Dec 1998 11:20:09 -0500
From: Kathy Crandall <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) START 2, Y2K

Dear Nuclear Abolitionists:

Stay tuned START II progress, and please check out the MSNBC story on
Y2K and Nukes. . .

Kathy

APO  12/08 0956  Russia Postpones Nuke Treaty Talks

   MOSCOW (AP) -- Russia's parliament again postponed discussions on the

START II treaty today after failing to meet a deadline for sending a
related measure on nuclear weapons to President Boris Yeltsin.
   The parliament's agenda-setting body, the Duma Council, had planned
today to review a bill outlining Russia's nuclear weapons program.
   But it delayed debate because no parliamentary factions except the
liberal Yabloko party submitted proposals or suggestions for the
measure, the Interfax news agency said.
   Russia's Communist-led parliament has repeatedly delayed action on
the START II treaty, signed by the United States and Russia in 1993.
   The lawmakers want an additional measure outlining the country's
nuclear weapons program before they act on the treaty.
   The START II treaty would halve the Russian and American nuclear
arsenals to about 3,000 to 3,500 warheads each.
   Yabloko leaders accused Communists in the parliament of once again
stalling on the treaty, which the U.S. Senate ratified in 1996.
   Yeltsin and other proponents of ratification say the missiles that
would be destroyed under START-II will soon be out of date anyway.
   One positive note was sounded today when Nikolai Kharitonov, a leader

of the Communist-allied Agrarian Party, said he had changed his mind
about the treaty after a meeting with Prime Minister Yevgeny Primakov,
and now supported it.
   "As things stand now, ratification is in Russia's interest,"
Kharitonov said, according to the Interfax news agency. He suggested
that Russia could enhance its prospects for Western financial aid by
ratifying the accord.
************************************************************

If you have web access, please check this MSNBC story. Not only can you
see the cool graphics, you can vote to rate the importance of  the story

and help to ensure broader coveraged by MSNBC:

http://www.msnbc.com/news/220749.asp#BODY

Also check out these sites for more on Y2K and Nukes:
British American Security Information Council Report at:
http://www.basicint.org/

and The Federation of American Scientists Site on Command and Control
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/c3i/index.html

... And don't forget to order your
De-Alerting Resource & Action Kits by contacting the Disarmament
Clearinghouse
or ordering from the Web at:
http://www.psr.org/Disarmhouse-dealert.htm
************************************************************
Fears mount over millennium bombs

 Will the Year 2000 problem make a dangerous situation explosive?

The multiple warheads from a US missile light up the sky during a live
exercise over the vast atoll of Kwajalein. The atoll is used by the US
military as a test site.


                                                                By Kari
Huus

MSNBC

 Dec 6 =97  Perhaps no entity on earth faces a more mammoth Year 2000
challenge than the U.S. Department of Defense, which has some 1.5
million computers, 28,000 systems and 10,000 networks. Within its
purview, no area has prompted more concern than the country's nuclear
weapons arsenal, and whether its control and command is safe from the
millennial bug.

THE CONCERN LIES with computer systems programmed to use two rather than

four digits to describe the year =97 for example "79" instead of "1979."
When the year 2000 arrives, experts predict that some computers may
mistake the date for 1900 and shut down or malfunction. They may also
feed bad information to other systems with which they are linked.

 The Pentagon stands by its Year 2000 (or Y2K) effort, which it says has

been under way since 1995 and budgeted at $2.5 billion over five years.
But defense officials don't offer guarantees. "None of us knows exactly
what is going to happen," says Pentagon spokesperson Susan Hansen.

"We feel cautiously optimistic that what will happen is some
nuisances rather than crises=85 We feel pretty confident that
we will be able to provide for the national security of the
United States."

Cautious optimism on the part of the DoD has done little to reassure
critics. A recently released report by the British American Security
Information Council (BASIC) in Washington says Department of Defense
efforts to address the Y2K issue have been riddled by "severe and
recurring problems." And, BASIC notes, there is even less information
available about Moscow's efforts, much less the rest of the world's
nuclear weapons infrastructure.

The combination of possible computer glitches and the hair-trigger
posture of U.S. and Russian nuclear forces raise the specter of a
missile launch based on compromised surveillance data, or a
communication breakdown in the event of a real attack, according to the
BASIC report. U.S. decision-makers must take steps now to preclude
disaster should the Pentagon fail," says the report's author,  Michael
Kraig, a Scoville fellow.

RISKS AND MYTHS

Analysts on both sides of the debate are quick to say that missiles are
highly unlikely to launch themselves at the stroke of midnight
on Jan.1, 2000. Rather, most concerns about military computer
glitchesare focused on the vast web of computerized communications
systems under STRATCOM =97 U.S. Strategic Command, which controls the
country's nuclear arsenal. Equally worrisome is U.S. Space Command (part
of NORAD, the North American Aerospace Defense Command), responsible for
early-warning radar and surveillance =97 the basis for
military decisions. (For a review, see the Federation of American
Scientists' Nuclear Forces Guide).

As in other sectors, no one is sure how the military's overall
procedures will work if one part of the system fails. What raises the
stakes is that both the United States and Russia maintain "launch on
warning" postures =97 calling for nuclear retaliation upon detection of
the other's launch of missiles.

If date-related problems produce inaccurate early-warning data, or if
communications within the military command are compromised, there will
be 10 minutes to half an hour to clarify the situation and make the
decision to launch or hold back.


Even in normal times misinterpretation of data frequently leads to
heightened alert. Signals are sometimes garbled by solar disturbances.
In 1979, personnel at NORAD saw the numbers indicating ballistic missile

launches suddenly jump from zero to 20. In preparation to retaliate,
nuclear bomber crews started their engines, and Minutemen missiles were
readied. Ultimately, the data was traced to a faulty embedded chip
design.

 Who's benefitting from the frenzy?
Given all the work required to make U.S. weapons systems Y2K safe, who's

getting the contracts =97 and subsequently earning big fees? Well, it's
not a windfall for defense giants who traditionally make most of their
money from government contracts. In fact, the amount budgeted =97 $2.54
billion spread over five years =97is companies like defens and aerospace
behemoth Lockheed Martin Corp. Lockheed says it has had piecemeal
contracts on the overall Y2K effort, but that most of its input came
under regular
government maintenance contracts. Compare the amount the company is
earning on Y2K upgrades to the $80 million the company is spending to
make itself internally compliant, and there's little or no benefit.
"It's a wash, or less than a wash, " says Jim Fetig, a spokesman for
Lockheed. "The outgo is bigger than the     input. " The same message
came from Northrop Grumman, which makes military surveillance systems,
military electronics and combat aircraft. Despite winning a handful of
small information technology contracts,  "we've noticed no big upsurge,
" a spokesman said.

=97 Kari Huus


In 1995, Moscow went into a state of high alert when its early warning
radar mistook a Norwegian scientific probe for a U.S. trident missile
launched from the Baltic.

The response decision was elevated all the way to President
Boris Yeltsin, his defense minister and the chief of staff, who
decided against action when they determined the "impact" would be
outside Russian borders.


There is also a danger that, in the event of data correctly interpreting

attack, communication systems used to coordinate a reaction may
malfunction. Indeed, the DoD's efforts to prevent this breakdown go only

so far, since the military has shifted from largely dedicated
communications systems to commercial networks. In testimony before a
House subcommittee in June, Deputy Secretary of Defense John Hamre
conceded, "If Ma Bell's or Bell Atlantic's system fails on Year 2000,
we're going to
have mission failure, and I don't have any control over that."

                         FAULTY CHAIN
Few military analysts suggest that 2000 will bring the Armageddon. "The
most likely thing is that Y2K problems get lost in the noise of flaky
computer problems," says John Pike, security analyst for the Federation
of American Scientists, a privately funded, non-profit organization
in Washington, D.C.

           However, Pike believes the greatest risk lies with
events that follow component failure. "The thing you worry
about is people improvising," he says, causing a relatively
innocuous event to escalate, as happened in the Three Mile Island and
Chernobyl crises.

 Pike paints a scenario: "Most probably, the response is
not that a missile will jump out of its silo at midnight, but that the
door of the missile silo will get stuck." A technician
whose job it is to keep the missile ready for use drops his
wrench into the silo, tearing a hole in the fuel tank, causing
an explosion. The explosion severs communication with the
base, and it goes into a higher state of alert, which raises
concern at military bases in Russia.

 "If systems behave peculiarly, people will be nervous, overworked, and
stop trusting the system," says Pike."Consequently the man-machine
interface starts behaving in unpredictable ways."

                         HOW MUCH PROGRESS IS ENOUGH
 The Department of Defense says the situation is well under control. It
reports that it has identified 2,581 mission-critical systems, of which
53 percent are now fully Y2K ready. Another 1,014 are going through the
paces and a few hundred are to be retired or replaced before 2000. The
idea is to finish all the fixes by Jan. 1, 1999 =97 three months earlier
than previously announced, according to spokesperson Hansen. This will
leave ample time for testing, and including Y2K testing in military
exercises.But BASIC, which did extensive documentation of the DoD
process, contends that there are serious flaws in the Pentagon's
representation =97 including ad-hoc funding, lax management and inadequat=
e

standards for declaring a system "Y2K compliant." In short, the fixes
won't be finished and tested in time, says BASIC. "Initial research
findings=85 have resulted in no confidence that the Pentagon's present
program will meet the Year 2000 challenge," according to its report.

Those findings were based in part on the government's own conclusions,
which started to set off alarms last spring. The Office of Management
and Budget has expressed its concerns that DoD will not meet its goals.
The General Accounting Office for the Senate Committee on Governmental
Affairs warned in a report in April, "Time is running out to correct
Department of Defense systems that could malfunction=85 the impact of
these failures could be widespread, costly and potentially disruptive to

military operations worldwide."

An array of audit reports posted by the Inspector General for the DoD
suggest many military departments are lagging behind schedule on Y2K
efforts, and predict disruptions in command and control, testing and day

to day operations.

                         THE NUCLEAR CLUB

Assuming that the Pentagon meets its goals, however, it seems clear that

Russia will not, particularly in light of its severe economic
constraints. Moscow has insisted that the Russian system is different =97
not susceptible to Y2K glitches =97 but the argument has failed to
convince. Defense Deputy Secretary Hamre described Russia's early
warning system as "fragile" in Senate testimony. "Our concern is that
Russia and China have only a very rudimentary understanding of the Year
2000 problem, which is why we need to reach out to them to make sure
they have custodial   confidence in their own systems," he said.

     That was in June. As of October, Washington and Moscow were
discussing the possibility of exchanging personnel in military sites to
usher in the millennium, which spokesperson Hansen says will "=85 relay
information and relieve the anxiety in case of a glitch ... to ensure no

one misconstrues Y2K problem for an attack."

      Some critics of U.S. nuclear policy, however, say that the
fundamental flaw is in the posture of U.S. and Russian forces in the
post-Cold War era. BASIC, as well as members of Congress and other
non-governmental groups, urge the U.S. and Russia to "stand down or
de-alert" missiles that remain on a hair-trigger prior to 2000. Though
most agree it is too late to separate missiles from warheads, BASIC's
Kraig urges the two sides to otherwise disable   missiles.

       Others are calling for an independent audit by a non-governmental

agency and fuller public disclosure of the results. "We don't know squat

about testing at STRATCOM," says Pike of FAS. "We know a lot more about
Y2K compliance of parking garages at Washington headquarters than
computers that are planning thermonuclear war."

The Defense Department says it's just not a practical solution to bring
in outsiders unfamiliar with the multitude of rules and regulations to
which they are subject. And as with many of the ideas being bandied
about at the cusp of 1999, there's just not enough time. Says Hansen:
"By the time [outside auditors] got up to speed it would probably be
past the year 2000."
- --
DISARMAMENT CLEARINGHOUSE
Nuclear Disarmament Information, Resources & Action Tools
Kathy Crandall, Coordinator
1101 14th Street NW #700, Washington DC 20005
TEL: [phone] ext. 232 FAX: [phone] ext. 232
E-MAIL: [e-mail]
http://www.psr.org/Disarmhouse.htm
http://www.psr.org/ctbtaction.htm

A project of: Peace Action, Physicians for Social Responsibility
and Women's Action for New Directions




- --
DISARMAMENT CLEARINGHOUSE
Nuclear Disarmament Information, Resources & Action Tools
Kathy Crandall, Coordinator
1101 14th Street NW #700, Washington DC 20005
TEL: [phone] ext. 232 FAX: [phone] ext. 232
E-MAIL: [e-mail]
http://www.psr.org/Disarmhouse.htm
http://www.psr.org/ctbtaction.htm

A project of: Peace Action, Physicians for Social Responsibility
and Women's Action for New Directions



- -
 To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 13:31:59 -0500
From: "David Culp" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) START-II DEBATE DELAYED AGAIN

START-II DEBATE DELAYED AGAIN
Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty Newsline
Tuesday, December 8, 1998

The Duma has postponed discussion of the START-II treaty until 15
December, ITAR-TASS reported on 8 December. Duma Deputy Speaker and
member of the Yabloko faction Vladimir Ryzhkov told reporters that the
Duma is set to ratify the treaty on that date or send the draft law to
President Yeltsin with an explanation of its stance. Duma Foreign
Affairs Committee Chairman Vladimir Lukin (Yabloko) told reporters
that the debate was delayed because no faction beside Yabloko had
submitted its proposals on the bill and that leftist parties are
deliberately delaying discussion. Duma Security Committee Chairman
Viktor Ilyukhin (Communist Party) said the treaty cannot be discussed
until the government submits a budget for decommissioning part of its
nuclear arsenal. Earlier, Liberal Democratic Party leader Zhirinovsky
declared that he is "even more convinced [than ever] that the Duma
should not ratify START-II."

- ----------

RUSSIA POSTPONES NUKE TREATY TALKS=20
Tuesday, December 8, 1998; 9:56 a.m. EST

MOSCOW (AP) -- Russia's parliament again postponed discussions on the
START II treaty today after failing to meet a deadline for sending a
related measure on nuclear weapons to President Boris Yeltsin.=20

The parliament's agenda-setting body, the Duma Council, had planned
today to review a bill outlining Russia's nuclear weapons program.=20

But it delayed debate because no parliamentary factions except the
liberal Yabloko party submitted proposals or suggestions for the
measure, the Interfax news agency said.=20

Russia's Communist-led parliament has repeatedly delayed action on the
START II treaty, signed by the United States and Russia in 1993.=20

The lawmakers want an additional measure outlining the country's
nuclear weapons program before they act on the treaty.=20

The START II treaty would halve the Russian and American nuclear
arsenals to about 3,000 to 3,500 warheads each.=20

Yabloko leaders accused Communists in the parliament of once again
stalling on the treaty, which the U.S. Senate ratified in 1996.=20

Yeltsin and other proponents of ratification say the missiles that
would be destroyed under START-II will soon be out of date anyway.=20

One positive note was sounded today when Nikolai Kharitonov, a leader
of the Communist-allied Agrarian Party, said he had changed his mind
about the treaty after a meeting with Prime Minister Yevgeny Primakov,
and now supported it.=20

``As things stand now, ratification is in Russia's interest,''
Kharitonov said, according to the Interfax news agency. He suggested
that Russia could enhance its prospects for Western financial aid by
ratifying the accord.=20

=A9 Copyright 1998 The Associated Press






- -
 To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

------------------------------

End of abolition-usa-digest V1 #46
**********************************

-
 To unsubscribe to $LIST, send an email to "[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe $LIST" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.