ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/abolition-usa/archive/v01.n061

Internet Message Format | 1999-01-21 | 49KB

From: [e-mail] (abolition-usa-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: abolition-usa-digest V1 #61
Reply-To: abolition-usa-digest
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


abolition-usa-digest     Friday, January 22 1999     Volume 01 : Number 061




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

Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 11:19:29 -0800
From: Jan Harwood <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 17:34:46 -0500

I'm coming to Santa Barbara for the conference on Feb. 12-14, and I think
two or three others from my AB-2000 group are coming, although they haven't
yet committed themselves.  When you say there are 10 openings, does that
mean in addition to the five that each of us who went to Chicago may
utilize?




- -
 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: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 13:07:45 -0800
From: Nuclear Age Peace Foundation <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 17:34:46 -0500

Hi Jan,


    My name is Lori Beckwith and I am taking over Sue's position here at the Foundation for Abolition 2000.  One of my duties is to coordinate the upcoming meeting.

    It was my understanding that the invitations were sent out to those people who attended the Chicago meeting, New York meeting, and a diversity list.  Also, each person on the Interim Coordinating Committee had the option to invite five people.  The 10 additional spaces were for people who have a strong interest in attending the meeting but didn't receive an invitation.

    I wasn't aware that people who went to the Chicago meeting were also inviting additional people.  I'm in a difficult position because while I don't  want to alienate people, we only have a limited number of spaces at the facility we will be using.

    You will be receiving a letter from me shortly thanking you for all of the petitions you sent in, but I'll thank you now as well.

    I look forward to meeting you in February, and please get back to me soon to clarify the invitation process.



Thanks,


Lori


At 11:19 AM 1/20/99 -0800, you wrote:

>I'm coming to Santa Barbara for the conference on Feb. 12-14, and I think

>two or three others from my AB-2000 group are coming, although they haven't

>yet committed themselves.  When you say there are 10 openings, does that

>mean in addition to the five that each of us who went to Chicago may

>utilize?

>

>

>

>

>-

> 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.

>

>

<bigger>*********************************************************

NUCLEAR AGE PEACE FOUNDATION

International contact for Abolition 2000

a Global Network to Eliminate Nuclear Weapons

</bigger>**********************************************************

1187 Coast Village Road, Box 123

Santa Barbara, CA 93108-2794

Phone [phone] * Fax [phone]

e- mailto:[e-mail]

URL http://www.wagingpeace.org

URL http://www.napf.org/abolition2000/

**********************************************************



- -
 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: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 17:49:54 -0500
From: Mark Mebane <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 17:34:46 -0500

Jan Harwood wrote:
>
> I'm coming to Santa Barbara for the conference on Feb. 12-14, and I think
> two or three others from my AB-2000 group are coming, although they haven't
> yet committed themselves.  When you say there are 10 openings, does that
> mean in addition to the five that each of us who went to Chicago may
> utilize?
>
> -
>  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.
Dear Ms. Harwood,

As I understand it, no. These additional spots are for individuals who
did not receive the initial wave of invitation letters. Moreover, these
spots can not be acquired from someone other than the interested
person(s).  As of last count we have six spaces still available. Please
have your friends contact me if they are interested in holding a space.
Thank you and I look forward to seeing you in Santa Barbara!

- -
 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: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 19:49:37 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 17:34:46 -0500

Hi Lori,

You said in an earlier post that you mailed an invitation to me and to Sonya
Ostrom. I have not received mine, I don't know about Sonya.

What is the scoop?

Thanks, peace and health,

Colby


- -
 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: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 20:28:29 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 17:34:46 -0500

Hi,

I want to attend this meeting. Lori at napf has told me that she mailed an
invitation to me that I have not received at this moment.

Do you know anything about this?

Colby Lowe

- -
 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: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 11:05:13 -0500
From: Mark Mebane <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) INVITATION

THE ORGANIZING MEETING FOR A USA ABOLITION CAMPAIGN IS BEING HELD
FEBRUARY 12-14, 1999 IN SANTA BARBARA, CALIFORNIA.

A LIMITED 6 SPACES ARE STILL AVAILABLE AND ARE BASED ON A FIRST COME,
FIRST SERVE BASIS.

 IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO RESERVE A SPOT PLEASE CONTACT MARK MEBANE AT
[e-mail], or by phone: [phone].

- -
 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: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 15:14:35 -0800
From: Don Larkin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) INVITATION

I would like to attend the Santa Barbara meeting.  I am:

  Don Larkin
  189 Hollywood Avenue
  Santa Cruz, CA  95060
  [phone]
  [e-mail]

I work with the Santa Cruz Abolition 2000 group and am an occasional
volunteer for Western States Legal Foundation.

- -Don


Mark Mebane wrote:
>
> THE ORGANIZING MEETING FOR A USA ABOLITION CAMPAIGN IS BEING HELD
> FEBRUARY 12-14, 1999 IN SANTA BARBARA, CALIFORNIA.
>
> A LIMITED 6 SPACES ARE STILL AVAILABLE AND ARE BASED ON A FIRST COME,
> FIRST SERVE BASIS.
>
>  IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO RESERVE A SPOT PLEASE CONTACT MARK MEBANE AT
> [e-mail], or by phone: [phone].
>
> -
>  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: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 20:30:16 -0500
From: Peter Weiss <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) INVITATION

So would I (like to attend the meeting). I sent a message two days ago
to mark mebane, but it didn't go through. Cora would also like to
attend.
                    Peter Weiss, President, LCNP
                    fx 718 432 0076


Don Larkin wrote:
>
> I would like to attend the Santa Barbara meeting.  I am:
>
>   Don Larkin
>   189 Hollywood Avenue
>   Santa Cruz, CA  95060
>   [phone]
>   [e-mail]
>
> I work with the Santa Cruz Abolition 2000 group and am an occasional
> volunteer for Western States Legal Foundation.
>
> -Don
>
> Mark Mebane wrote:
> >
> > THE ORGANIZING MEETING FOR A USA ABOLITION CAMPAIGN IS BEING HELD
> > FEBRUARY 12-14, 1999 IN SANTA BARBARA, CALIFORNIA.
> >
> > A LIMITED 6 SPACES ARE STILL AVAILABLE AND ARE BASED ON A FIRST COME,
> > FIRST SERVE BASIS.
> >
> >  IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO RESERVE A SPOT PLEASE CONTACT MARK MEBANE AT
> > [e-mail], or by phone: [phone].
> >
> > -
> >  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.



- -
 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: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 19:15:02 -0800
From: Jan Harwood <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 17:34:46 -0500

Dear Lori:  I've heard very good things about you from John Burroughs and
others, and I'm glad you've taken over from Sue, who was so effective and
personable.

Jackie Cabasso's take on the invitations, as she told it to the regional
meeting in Oakland a couple of weeks ago, was that each person who went to
Chicago had five invitations to distribute. I never received any invitation
in the mail, only the generalized ones, but I've encouraged several people
from my AB 2000 group to come, and I think they've contacted Mark Mebane.
I look forward to meeting you there; it should be a very exciting meeting.



- -
 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: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 20:33:35 -0800 (PST)
From: Timothy Bruening <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) Military Budget

What are the latest figures for military spending by the U.S. and other
nations? What military projects would you cut, and how much money would be
saved this year and over the next few years?  I would be interested in
receiving literature on cutting military spending at 1439 Brown Drive,
Davis, CA 95616.


- -
 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: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 02:54:23 -0600 (CST)
From: [e-mail]
Subject: (abolition-usa) Fwd: LEGISLATION RE CHARGING US FOR EVERY TIME WE ACCESS INTERNET, OBJECT! HR-45, Unilateral  Nuclear Reductions, Call Now

- ------Begin forward message-------------------------


X-Sender: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
From: carol rosin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: net


   Friends,
            Please call both your Senators & your Rep., all available through the Congressional Switchboard at: 202-224-
3121 to object to this. Also, Clinton at: 202-456-1111. Also, please remember to voice your objections to the brand new
Mobile Chernobyl Bill, HR-45. Check NIRS web site at: www.nirs.org  for more specifics re this & other great material,
too.Again, the proposal would have high level commercial nuke waste trucked over 43 states for at least 30 years. The waste
would come within 1/2 mile of where 50 MILLION Americans live- I don't have any data on the proximity the waste would
travel to Mexicans & Canadians residences & workplaces nor how many Mexicans & Canadians would be within a range of 1/2
mile or 10 miles. Can anyone pass along info re this?


   A reminder that Senator Bob Kerrey [D-Nebraska] recently made a speech before the Council on Foreign Relations calling
for U.S. unilateral nuclear disarmament. Let's call Kerrey's office [The same 202-224-3121 Congressonal switchboard to
access anyone in the House and/or Senate] and both thank him and ask him to:

1. Continue Raising the issue

2.Write a "Dear Colleague Letter" re this and circulate it

3.Introduce legislation to enact massive unilateral U.S. nuclear weapons reductions as soon as possible


     Let's do the same with our individual Representatives and Senators.



 This was forwarded to me this AM. I thought you would like to know
about it.  Please forward the information below for those who may want to
respond.
 Congress will be voting in less than two weeks. CNN stated that the
 Government would, in two weeks time, decide to allow or not allow a
 charge to your phone bill equal to a Long Distance Call EACH time you
access the
 Internet.
Send a message to your representative and tell him/her that you do not
think this is fair. When you go to the Web site, put in your zip code
and
the
 Web site will tell you who your representative is. It will also
provide a
 little form letter for you to write your concerns.
 The address is  http://www.house.gov/writerep/
If you choose, visit the address above and fill out the necessary
form!
 If EACH one of us, forward this message on to others in a hurry, we
may
 be
 able to prevent this injustice from happening!


Please Pass This ON


- ------End forward 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: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 02:56:37 -0600 (CST)
From: [e-mail]
Subject: (abolition-usa) Fwd: Mobile Chernobyl is back! Fight it!

- ------Begin forward message-------------------------

Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 14:55:51 -0500
From: Michael Mariotte <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: NIRS
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Mobile Chernobyl is back!

MOBILE CHERNOBYL ALERT! ALERT! ALERT! ALERT!

Capital Switchboard 202-225-3121 Call now and often!

Mobile Chernobyl, the idea of shipping all of the nation's high-level
nuclear waste to a parking lot in Nevada is BACK! Although Congress has
been unable to enact such legislation the past four years, the nuclear
industry wasted no time this year: on the first day of the
106th Congress, House members Fred Upton (R-MI) and Edolphus Towns
(D-NY) introduced a new Mobile Chernobyl bill. This year, it is HR 45.

The new bill is nearly identical to the previous House version of Mobile
Chernobyl but has some new funding provisions and new dates--to reflect
the atomic industry's previous failures to pass the legislation. The new
date for the opening of a centralized storage site for irradiated fuel
from nuclear power reactors and the military is 2003, which would
trigger the largest nuclear waste shipping campaign in history.

Transport of high-level nuclear waste from reactor sites, =BE of which ar=
e
east of the Mississippi River, would impact 43 states, according to
studies conducted by the State of Nevada. The legislation would require
an ambitious 3,000 metric tons of irradiated fuel a year--or about the
total amount that has been moved in the last 30 years, each year for the
next 30 years or more. 50 million Americans live within a half mile on
either side of the likely train tracks and highways this waste would
pass by. This is because normal trade routes-major interstate highways
and
railroutes--would be used to move the waste. Urban areas should examine
whether there is a disproportionate impact on some sectors of the
community. For example, highways and railways often are placed in
poorer, predominately minority areas.

MOBILE CHERNOBYL IS MOVING FAST. The new Chair of the House Subcommittee
on Energy and Water is Joe Barton, R-TX, who has long been a "water boy"
for the nuclear industry. He was, for example, the chief sponsor of
"one-step" reactor licensing legislation. Barton would like to move the
bill out of his subcommittee THIS MONTH - with no hearings.

Barton and his nuclear industry allies are counting on us to fold. They
believe that we have fought this effort so long and hard, that we no
longer have it in us to fight again. Guess again, Mr. Barton!

National environmental and public interest groups are meeting weekly to
launch an all-out offensive on Capital Hill. We have stopped this bill
every year since it was first introduced in 1994. We can stop it now,
but it requires immediate action from you, your friends and colleagues,
your organizations.

First target: demand hearings on this legislation. Since the funding
mechanism has changed - and is really complicated - this is the perfect
thing to focus on. NO MORE NUCLEAR WELFARE! Even if your U.S.
Representative is not on the House Commerce Committee, call his/her
office and demand that he/she:

1) OPPOSE HR 45, the Mobile Chernobyl Act
2) Demand new hearings: the bill is not the same and there are new
members of Congress
3) Focus on the money issues, the transport issue, and the fact that
this is environmental plunder not environmental protection!!!

While hearings might show the fallacy of the nuclear industry's funding
schemes-which are intended to put the burden of radioactive waste
storage on the taxpayer instead of the industry that created the waste,
hearings are not enough.

In fact, in December, 219 environmental groups demanded a complete end
to the Yucca Mountain project, for temporary or permanent waste storage,
because the science is now clear: Yucca Mountain cannot legally be
licensed as a radioactive waste dump-unless the government changes its
public health and safety licensing regulations and abandoning any effort
to isolate this massive load of radioactivity from the environment.

Here are a couple of other points you might want to make to your elected
representatives and senators. The impeachment trial is certainly slowing
things down in the Senate, but behind the scenes, the atomic industry's
gophers, such as Sens. Frank Murkowski, Larry Craig and Pete Domenici,
are readying new legislation there as well.

HR 45, and any Mobile Chernobyl legislation, is one of the worst
environmental bills ever. It does not provide a solution for nuclear
waste, just a "fix" for the nuclear industry that gets to dump their
waste on Native Shoshone lands, while at the same time making it the
possession of the tax-payer in perpetuity.  The legislation authorizes
the Department of Energy to curtail or preempt ALL environmental laws.

HR 45 sets new deadlines that are more unrealistic than the current
law's missed deadline of 1998.

Yucca Mountain will not isolate nuclear waste from the environment. Data
in the DOE's own "viability assessment" of the proposed Yucca Mountain
Repository contradicts any assertion that Yucca Mountain will isolate
nuclear waste from the environment. The constant seismic activity in the
area has fractured the soft rock of Yucca Mountain, allowing rain to
travel through the proposed repository site. The same fractures will
allow radioactive gases to escape as the waste decays.

A recent study of the funding of the Yucca Mountain Project shows that
there will be about a 50% shortfall in total project funds. By law the
funding for this project comes from the customers of nuclear power, and
the original concept was that they should pay the full bill. A
proportional 10% to be paid by taxpayers via the military budgets would
cover the cost of military waste that would go to the same site (10% of
the total waste). The fund is paid for monthly with the electric bill of
those who get nuclear power, but at the current rate, this fund will
deliver $28.1 Billion. The total projected cost of the program with
centralized storage is  $53.9 Billion. This means that taxpayers would
end up more than $25 billion in liability if these conservative
projections are met-and every year the cost projections go higher=85.

Our job is clear. We must stop HR 45 and all related legislation, and we
must begin now.

First, call your Congressmember at 202-224-3121 and demand that he/she
actively oppose this bill. Point out the effect transportation of
high-level atomic waste could have on your state.

Second, write your Congressmember-even if you called. Surveys of
Congressmembers clearly indicate that handwritten (or typed) letters
from citizens of the district or state are the single most effective
means of reaching your Congressmember. Faxes, e-mails, phone calls are
all ok, but nothing is as effective as a letter in your own words.

Third, organize your community, encourage more letters, phone calls,
faxes, e-mails. The latest public opinion polls we have available show
that some 67% of the public opposes Mobile Chernobyl, but only about 1/3
of the public even knows about it. Moreover, the more people learn about
it, according to the polls, the more likely they are to oppose it. That
means we all have to get out and educate and organize, because if we can
educate just 1/3 more of the public the battle will be over-we will win
hands down. Let NIRS know what organizing and educational materials you
need, we'll get them to you. You can also continue to collect signatures
on the Don't Waste America petitions, although we hope you'll use those
primarily as an educational tool, and encourage people to write their
own letters. Try setting up tables at public locations with a few sample
letters to Congress, focusing on your local situation, and urge people
to use these samples to write their own letters. Op-eds, letters to the
editor, press releases-it's time to start them all up again.

It is not too late to get resolutions against the legislation passed at
municipal and county levels. A resolution against HR 45 on the basis of
the transport of nuclear waste or any other issue is a very LOUD letter
to your U.S. Rep. Contact us if you need help with that.

It's time to stop Mobile Chernobyl once and for all. It's time to stop
Yucca Mountain once and for all. Together, we WILL prevail.

Michael  Mariotte
Mary Olson
NIRS
202-328-0002
http://www.nirs.org


- ------End forward 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: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 14:40:52 -0800 (PST)
From: Jackie Cabasso <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) Re: US Conditions for the CTB

At 05:19 PM 1/19/99 -0500, War Resisters League wrote:
>Jackie,
>
>I'd like to see a copy of your article.  It sounds interesting and useful.
>
>Chris
>
>
At 12:02 PM 1/19/99 +0530, Vijai K Nair wrote:
>Vijai Nair wrote:
>
>Dear Jackie,
>
>Please send me the updated article. Also let me know if I have your permission
>to run it in a News Paper or Journal in India?
>
>Fond regards
>
>Magoo
>
>Jackie Cabasso wrote:
>
>> Dear Abolitionists.  Regarding US conditions for the CTBT: If you're looking
>> for a medium length (5 pages), up-to-date, fact-filled summary of current US
>> nuclear weapons programs and policies, I've recently updated my November
>> INESAP Bulletin article, NUCLEAR HYPOCRISY: NEW WEAPONS DEVELOPMENT AND
>> ANTI-DISARMAMENT POLICIES IN THE US.  If you'd like a copy I can e-mail it
>> in an enclosed file (WordPerfect or MSWord) or plain text, or I can fax
>> it or send it by snail mail.  As the convenor of the "virtual" Beyond the
>> CTBT working group, I'm pleased to provide this service.  Please let me
>> know if and how you would like a copy sent.  Peace, -- Jackie Cabasso
>>    ********************************************
>>        WESTERN STATES LEGAL FOUNDATION
>>            1440 Broadway, Suite 500
>>              Oakland, CA USA 94612
>>               Tel: [phone]
>>               Fax: [phone]
>>                [e-mail]
>>    ********** Part of ABOLITION 2000 **********
>>    Global Network to Eliminate Nuclear Weapons
>
>
>Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="vcard.vcf"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Content-Description: Card for Vijai K Nair
>Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="vcard.vcf"
>
>Attachment Converted: C:\INTER2\data\download\vcard7.vcf
>At 12:34 AM 1/19/99 -0800, Timothy Bruening wrote:
>At 09:11 PM 1/18/99 -0800, you wrote:
>>Dear Abolitionists.  Regarding US conditions for the CTBT: If you're looking
>>for a medium length (5 pages), up-to-date, fact-filled summary of current US
>>nuclear weapons programs and policies, I've recently updated my November
>>INESAP Bulletin article, NUCLEAR HYPOCRISY: NEW WEAPONS DEVELOPMENT AND
>>ANTI-DISARMAMENT POLICIES IN THE US.  If you'd like a copy I can e-mail it
>>in an enclosed file (WordPerfect or MSWord) or plain text, or I can fax
>>it or send it by snail mail.  As the convenor of the "virtual" Beyond the
>>CTBT working group, I'm pleased to provide this service.  Please let me
>>know if and how you would like a copy sent.  Peace, -- Jackie Cabasso
>
>Please e-mail it to me as plain text.
>
>At 07:25 PM 1/19/99 -0800, SCN User wrote:
>hey Jackie--Scott McClay here (you may remember me from LAG et seq days).
>Been in Seattle since 91, working w/ NACC, affliate of WRL. Would you
>send me your CTBT update, plain text, please? (or if easier, you can fax
>to 206.547.2631). I look forward to using it.
>
>I occassionally see bay area stuff w/ your name, glad to see you still
>plugging away relentlessly! Keep it up. Take care.
>
>
>--
>Scott McClay
>Seattle WA
>(206)-323-5695
>
At 10:48 PM 1/19/99 -0500, Peter Weiss wrote:
>Hi Jackie,
>
>    Please forward update. I've been having trouble opening attachments
>lately. I have both Word Perfect and MSWord; would plain text be best?
>                    Thanks and regards, Peter
>
>Jackie Cabasso wrote:
>>
>> Dear Abolitionists.  Regarding US conditions for the CTBT: If you're looking
>> for a medium length (5 pages), up-to-date, fact-filled summary of current US
>> nuclear weapons programs and policies, I've recently updated my November
>> INESAP Bulletin article, NUCLEAR HYPOCRISY: NEW WEAPONS DEVELOPMENT AND
>> ANTI-DISARMAMENT POLICIES IN THE US.  If you'd like a copy I can e-mail it
>> in an enclosed file (WordPerfect or MSWord) or plain text, or I can fax
>> it or send it by snail mail.  As the convenor of the "virtual" Beyond the
>> CTBT working group, I'm pleased to provide this service.  Please let me
>> know if and how you would like a copy sent.  Peace, -- Jackie Cabasso
>>    ********************************************
>>        WESTERN STATES LEGAL FOUNDATION
>>            1440 Broadway, Suite 500
>>              Oakland, CA USA 94612
>>               Tel: [phone]
>>               Fax: [phone]
>>                [e-mail]
>>    ********** Part of ABOLITION 2000 **********
>>    Global Network to Eliminate Nuclear Weapons
>>
>> -
>>  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.
>
>
>At 09:42 AM 1/19/99 -0800, Nuclear Age Peace Foundation wrote:
>Hi Jackie:
>I would apprecitate it if you would email me (WordPerfect version) your paper.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Lori
>
>At 09:11 PM 1/18/99 -0800, you wrote:
>>Dear Abolitionists.  Regarding US conditions for the CTBT: If you're looking
>>for a medium length (5 pages), up-to-date, fact-filled summary of current US
>>nuclear weapons programs and policies, I've recently updated my November
>>INESAP Bulletin article, NUCLEAR HYPOCRISY: NEW WEAPONS DEVELOPMENT AND
>>ANTI-DISARMAMENT POLICIES IN THE US.  If you'd like a copy I can e-mail it
>>in an enclosed file (WordPerfect or MSWord) or plain text, or I can fax
>>it or send it by snail mail.  As the convenor of the "virtual" Beyond the
>>CTBT working group, I'm pleased to provide this service.  Please let me
>>know if and how you would like a copy sent.  Peace, -- Jackie Cabasso
>>   ********************************************
>>       WESTERN STATES LEGAL FOUNDATION
>>           1440 Broadway, Suite 500
>>             Oakland, CA USA 94612
>>              Tel: [phone]
>>              Fax: [phone]
>>               [e-mail]
>>   ********** Part of ABOLITION 2000 **********
>>   Global Network to Eliminate Nuclear Weapons
>>
>>
>*********************************************************
>NUCLEAR AGE PEACE FOUNDATION
>International contact for Abolition 2000
>a Global Network to Eliminate Nuclear Weapons
>**********************************************************
>1187 Coast Village Road, Box 123
>Santa Barbara, CA 93108-2794
>Phone [phone] * Fax [phone]
>e- mailto:[e-mail]
>URL http://www.wagingpeace.org
>URL http://www.napf.org/abolition2000/
>**********************************************************
>
>At 12:13 PM 1/19/99 -0500, lizzy wrote:
>Jackie, great job and great offer. Please send me Nuclear Hypocrisy
>5-page in plain text if it's not too much trouble.
>
>Lizzy Poole
>[e-mail]
>
>NUCLEAR HYPOCRISY: NEW WEAPONS DEVELOPMENT
AND ANTI-DISARMAMENT POLICIES IN THE US

Jacqueline Cabasso, Western States Legal Foundation

    In 1991, as the Soviet Union was disintegrating, US General Colin Powell
stated: "You've got to step aside from the context we've been using for the
past 40 years, that you base military planning against a specific threat. We
no longer have the luxury of having a threat to plan for. What we plan for
is that we're a super power. We are the major player on the world stage with
responsibilities and interests around the world."  More than seven years
later, despite massive geopolitical transformations, the US continues its
quest for nuclear superiority and global military dominance. Since the end
of World War II, the US has fostered the myth of nuclear "deterrence," while
relying on the threatened first use of nuclear weapons to back up a foreign
policy based on intimidation and intervention.

    The nuclear tests by India and Pakistan briefly put the fear of nuclear war
back on the front page, and demonstrated the fragility of the
nonproliferation regime. But a deeper look reveals the global weakness of a
hypocritical "do as we say, not as we do" US nuclear posture, and calls into
question the basic premises of official US nonproliferation policy.

    In his May 16, 1998  weekly radio address, President Clinton told the
American people: "India has pursued this course at a time when most nations
are working hard to leave the terror of the nuclear age behind." This
statement is completely at odds with current US policy. Contrary to its
public pronouncements, the US is modernizing and upgrading its nuclear
forces and renewing its commitment to reliance on nuclear weapons, a reality
which threatens the long-term viability of both the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTB).

    Presidential Decision Directive 60 (PDD), signed in December 1997,
reaffirms the fundamental elements of US nuclear doctrine since World War
II.  According to newspaper accounts, the PDD re-commits the US to policies
of threatened first use and threatened massive retaliation, and affirms that
the US will continue to rely on nuclear arms as a cornerstone of its
national security for the "indefinite future." In addition, the PDD
reportedly contemplates nuclear retaliation against the use of chemical and
biological arms -- a policy called "counterproliferation."

    The PDD is backed by a major new program to upgrade the US nuclear weapons
infrastructure. The so-called "Stockpile Stewardship" program is intended to
retain "all historical capabilities of the weapons laboratories, industrial
plants and the Nevada Test Site," without underground testing. Stockpile
Stewardship will provide design capabilities potentially greater than those
available during the Cold War. It encompasses a test site ready to rapidly
resume full scale underground testing and a substantial nuclear warhead
production capacity, computer-integrated with new, high-tech, experimental
laboratory facilities.  In addition to ensuring the "safety and reliability"
of the "enduring" arsenal, Stockpile Stewardship is officially and
explicitly intended to maintain the capability to design and develop new
weapons, and to train a new generation of nuclear weapons designers. Over
the next decade, the US plans to invest $45 billion in this program -- an
amount, in inflation-adjusted dollars, well above the Cold War annual
spending average for nuclear weapons research, development, testing, and
production.

    Stockpile Stewardship will allow nuclear weapons development to continue
without full-scale underground tests.  Instead, scientists will simulate
nuclear tests using the world's fastest supercomputers and data collected
from more than 1000 past tests, coupled with new diagnostic information.
This information will be obtained from inertial confinement fusion
facilities,  pulsed power fusion experiments, above-ground hydrodynamic
explosions, and subcritical "zero yield" tests conducted deep underground at
the Nevada Test Site. These tests involve hundreds of pounds of high
explosive material and up to several pounds of weapon-grade plutonium.  They
are called "subcritical" because they do not generate self-sustaining
nuclear chain reactions with measurable nuclear yields. The US claims that
subcritical tests don't violate the CTB, which does not define a nuclear
test. But the CTB obligates the US "not to carry out any nuclear weapon test
explosion or any other nuclear explosion."  In view of US condemnation of
India's and Pakistan's nuclear tests, the subcritical tests, which clearly
violate the spirit of the CTB, should be called "hypocritical" tests. Since
signing the CTB in September 1996, the US has conducted five subcritical
tests. The next one, code-named "Clarinet," is expected in February 1999.

    Some of the key Stockpile Stewardship technologies have been developed as
"dual-use" scientific facilities that can be used for both high energy
physics research and bomb science.  The prime example is the multi-billion
dollar, stadium-sized National Ignition Facility (NIF), presently under
construction at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California.
The NIF is designed to focus 192 powerful laser beams onto a pea-sized
capsule containing deuterium and tritium, forcing the two heavy isotopes of
hydrogen to combine through compression, and causing a brief thermonuclear
explosion that will create extremely high temperatures approaching those
found in full scale underground nuclear tests. If it works, "ignition" will
be achieved, producing a self-sustaining fusion reaction.  NIF will generate
sizeable explosions, central to Stockpile Stewardship. This raises serious
questions about whether NIF -- and the virtually identical "Projet
Megajoule," under construction in France, -- violates the letter of the CTB.

    The dangerous development and spread of these technologies is not limited
to the declared nuclear weapon states, each of which has its own version of
Stockpile Stewardship. Any country with an advanced inertial confinement
fusion program has the capability to rapidly develop a sophisticated
hydrogen bomb. Since the 1970's, India's weapons labs have constructed their
own "stockpile stewardship" program, complete with inertial confinement
fusion, thus allowing their designers to develop sophisticated weapons prior
to "proof" testing.  Much like the final French tests in the Pacific, the
Indian government announced that its tests served the purpose of generating
sufficient data to allow scientists to design and deploy weapons in
confidence, using lab experiments and supercomputers, without the need for
underground explosions.  Not surprisingly, this capability was obtained with
US assistance.  Between 1994 and 1996, over 800 Indian scientists visited
the US nuclear weapons laboratories.  And, it was reported shortly after the
May tests that IBM had sold an advanced supercomputer capable of running
simulations necessary to develop nuclear weapons "codes" to a suspected
Indian nuclear weapons research facility.

    The South Asian tests warn of a frightening trend, in which developing
nuclear powers can utilize sophisticated laboratory research and "dual-use"
technologies to design and deploy nuclear weapons with a minimum number of
explosions.

    The US Stockpile Stewardship program is the result of a "devil's bargain."
It is the price exacted by the nuclear weapons laboratories in exchange for
their acceptance of a ban on full scale underground tests. It is being
widely promoted as an essential condition for Senate ratification of the
CTB, a stated objective of official US nonproliferation policy. However,
this "deal" may actually weaken prospects for stemming the spread of nuclear
weapons.

    When the NPT was originally negotiated, a two-part bargain was struck to
induce the non-nuclear weapon states to forswear nuclear weapons.  First,
the nuclear weapon states promised in Article IV to assist the non-nuclear
weapon states with the development of nuclear power, an unfortunate
commitment that promoted the very proliferation the NPT was intended to
prevent. Second, the nuclear weapon states promised in Article VI to
negotiate the cessation of the nuclear arms race and the elimination of
their nuclear arsenals. This bargain was reaffirmed in the 1995 decision to
indefinitely extend the Treaty.  Pursuant to Article VI, the nuclear weapon
states agreed to conclude a CTB by 1996 and to pursue "systematic and
progressive efforts to reduce nuclear weapons globally, with the ultimate
goal of eliminating those weapons."

    These commitments were reinforced and expanded by the historic 1996
advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice. In what is now the
authoritative interpretation of Article VI, the Court held unanimously that
"there exists an obligation to pursue in good faith and bring to a
conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects
under strict and effective international control."

    During the Cold War, the NPT was largely ignored by the nuclear weapon
states. Now, in the logic of  "counterproliferation," the US military
establishment has turned the Treaty's original logic upside down. Possible
proliferation of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction has
become a principal rationale for the US to maintain and upgrade its own
nuclear forces.  This represents an expansion, rather than a reduction, of
the role of nuclear weapons and directly contradicts the Article VI
disarmament obligation.

    When President Clinton submitted the CTB to the Senate for ratification
over a year ago, his transmittal letter made clear that his endorsement of
the Treaty was conditioned on Senate support for the Stockpile Stewardship
program as a central requirement of "national security strategy" premised on
maintenance of a robust nuclear "deterrent."

    The CTB has been long-sought in the belief that it would constitute an
effective disarmament measure. However, conditioning adoption of the Treaty
on the establishment of the Stockpile Stewardship program in order to
compensate for the loss of underground testing demonstrates a profound US
disregard for global and historical expectations of the CTB. This may serve
in the long term to stimulate the spread of nuclear weapons, directly,
through the development and spread of technology and information, and
indirectly, by legitimizing continued possession and threatened use of
nuclear weapons.

    Today, US Trident submarines patrol the world's oceans at Cold War levels.
Armed with hundreds of unimaginably powerful nuclear weapons, they remain
ready to strike targets around the globe in a matter of minutes. The US
weapons laboratories are currently working on upgrades to the Trident
warheads and missiles. These upgrades may allow improvement in accuracy for
large portions of the submarine-launched ballistic missile force.  During
the Cold War, this kind of "upgrading" raised fears of  a disabling "first
strike" and was a driving force in the arms race.  Russia, France, the UK
and China are upgrading their strategic and tactical nuclear forces as well.

    The US plans to maintain indefinitely a nuclear arsenal of more than 10,000
intact warheads in various states of readiness, with thousands of additional
plutonium "pits" in reserve.  The size of this arsenal is not affected by
the START process, which deals only with deployed "strategic," or long-range
weapons. Even if START II is ratified by the Russian Duma --  in doubt due
to NATO expansion, US development of a Ballistic Missile Defense system, and
political instabilities in Russia -- in 2007 each side will retain some
3,500 deployed strategic weapons.  The START III framework agreement would
allow each side to maintain 2,000 or more deployed strategic nuclear
weapons.  At present, there are no formal arms reduction negotiations underway.

    While US officials publicly proclaim that the CTB will severely constrain
the further development of nuclear weapons, it appears that the Pentagon has
sufficient confidence in near-term Stockpile Stewardship capabilities to
seriously consider developing and deploying modified weapons designs without
underground testing. In fact, it has already done so. Existing facilities
have been used to produce and deploy the first US nuclear weapon with
improved military capabilities since 1989. The B61-11 is an earth
penetrating gravity bomb with a variable yield ranging from 300 tons to over
300 kilotons TNT. The US claims that the B61-11 is not a "new" weapon
because the physics package has not been changed. But in fact, it is a
weapon with new military capabilities.  And its use has already been
threatened against Libya and Iraq in connection with alleged chemical and
biological weapons-capabilities.

    The world reeled when India and Pakistan conducted their nuclear tests.
But just two months earlier, the US flight-tested the B61-11 in Alaska,
using a depleted uranium warhead.  Attempts by local tribes and
environmental groups to focus national attention on this US nuclear test
fell on deaf ears. Other nuclear weapons projects reportedly underway
include upgrades to MX warheads and strategic bombs, nuclear glide bombs,
and -- possibly -- a nuclear warhead for theater defense missiles designed
to intercept and incinerate biological and chemical warheads.

    In addition, contingency plans are underway to allow US nuclear weapons
production to quickly increase to "cold war levels of building." Modernized
plutonium pit manufacturing capability will add to the 12,000 unused pits
currently in storage and the 12,000 in the current weapon arsenal. In
addition, the US is preparing to resume production of  tritium, halted in
1988 for safety reasons. (Tritium is radioactive hydrogen -- the "H" in
H-bomb.  It is used to boost the explosive power of  nuclear weapons.) Yet
the current store of tritium could supply a stockpile of 1,000 nuclear
warheads for the next 50 years.

    Such programs represent the antithesis of the NPT Article VI obligation to
"pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to
cessation of the nuclear arms race and an early date and to nuclear
disarmament," which was unambiguously reaffirmed by the US in conjunction
with the 1995 NPT extension decision. The reality is that Stockpile
Stewardship is intended to ensure that nuclear disarmament does not occur as
a consequence of the CTB.  Moreover, new nuclear weapons designs and
improvements directly contravene the "cessation of the nuclear arms
race"Article VI requirement.

    The US National Academy of Sciences, in its 1997 report, The Future of
Nuclear Weapons, warned: "The absence of change in US nuclear posture and
practice to reflect the dramatically altered post-Cold War conditions
weakens the credibility of US leadership in nonproliferation efforts."

    The most appropriate and effective response to the nuclear crisis in South
Asia is for the US, the world's first and leading nuclear power, to
commence, without further delay, negotiations on the global elimination of
nuclear weapons -- its legal obligation under the NPT.  This should be
coupled with immediate measures to reduce the very real danger of an
intentional or accidental nuclear launch.  Nuclear forces should be taken
off  "hair trigger" alert and withdrawn from deployment.  Warheads should be
separated from delivery vehicles.  And Senate ratification of the CTB should
be linked to nuclear disarmament instead of being conditioned on the
Stockpile Stewardship program.  Maybe then the US would be in a position to
convince India and Pakistan not to alert and deploy their own nuclear
forces, and to join the CTB and NPT.

- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- ------------------------------------------
Jacqueline Cabasso is the Executive Director of the Western States Legal
Foundation in Oakland, California, a founding member of the Abolition 2000
Global Network to Eliminate Nuclear Weapons.  An earlier version of this
article appeared in the INESAP Bulletin, November 1998.  Revised 1/99>
   ********************************************
       WESTERN STATES LEGAL FOUNDATION
           1440 Broadway, Suite 500
             Oakland, CA USA 94612
              Tel: [phone]
              Fax: [phone]
               [e-mail]
   ********** Part of ABOLITION 2000 **********
   Global Network to Eliminate Nuclear Weapons


- -
 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 #61
**********************************

-
 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.