ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/abolition-usa/archive/v01.n095

Internet Message Format | 1999-03-24 | 51KB

From: [e-mail] (abolition-usa-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: abolition-usa-digest V1 #95
Reply-To: abolition-usa-digest
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


abolition-usa-digest     Thursday, March 25 1999     Volume 01 : Number 095




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

Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 21:59:41 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: (abolition-usa) McReynolds, quick analysis of Kosovo

 Subj:    McReynolds, quick analysis of Kosovo
 Date:    3/23/99 9:56:46 PM Eastern Standard Time
 From:    DavidMcR
 To:    [e-mail], JDCoffin
 To:    [e-mail]
 To:    [e-mail], [e-mail]
 To:    [e-mail], Epank, [e-mail]
 To:    [e-mail], [e-mail]
 To:    [e-mail], Zefalcon, RBLepley
 To:    [e-mail], [e-mail]
 To:    VOBARON, [e-mail], Lthurston8
 To:    [e-mail], [e-mail]
 To:    [e-mail], [e-mail]
 To:    [e-mail], [e-mail]
 To:    [e-mail], [e-mail]
 To:    [e-mail], [e-mail]
 BCC:    DavidMcR

 Scott McClay of NACC in Seattle had written me for a couple of paragraphs for
a flyer - I hope, Scott, that you can extract something from this. I will sent
this on to other lists as well, and of course anyone can repost.

 Now that NATO has given authorization for the bombing of Yugoslavia, the
question is what response do socialists and pacifists have to this?

 The first problem is that we are not dealing with "good guys". I know parts
of the Left will try to explain away the NATO action as a steady effort to
eliminate the last bastion of socialism in Europe. I know that parts of the
peace movement will downplay what Milosevic has done.  And I also know -
perhaps most important at these times of crisis - that those of us ten
thousand miles from where the bombs are going to fall really don't know all
sides of the conflict. We deal with what the media gives us. Things always
look different when you are standing on the ground, either in Serbia or in
Kosovo. They are always more complex than they seem at this distance.

 Milosevic is not a "good guy", anymore than Saddam Hussein is. Yet in both
 cases we should oppose any assumption that because Milosevic and Hussein are
not nice, therefore NATO is. Or that because these men are not nice that we
have some reason to bomb hell out of their countries, impose sanctions on
their people, etc. After all, in the matter of "niceness" what kind of country
are we, that supported Saddam during his long and bloody war against Iran in
the 1980's? Or that supported the Shah in Iran when the secret police engaged
in torture at least as bad as anything in Kosovo? How selective in the anger
of our TV pundits and our President, how short their memories.

 NATO is taking exactly the position regarding Kosovo that it opposes when it
comes to Turkey, where the Turkish Kurds are asking for precisely the same
thing as the Albanians in Kosovo - self-determination. In Turkey we oppose the
Kurdish demand because Turkey is a NATO ally. In Kosovo we support the drive
for self-determination because the U.S. wants to weaken Milosevic - and he
isn't in NATO.

 Terrible tragedies have occured in both situations  -  but because Turkey is
a NATO ally we hear very little about Turkish atrocities against the Kurds.
Only on the Iraqi side has the U.S. established a "no fly zone" to help the
Kurds - because in Iraq, we want Saddam weakened.

 The U.S. policy is terribly cynical, as, historically, all nations' policies
are. Cynical or not, the Yugoslav army is engaged in actions which should be
opposed by all reasonable means short of engaging in bombing, which has no
sanction from the UN, and is applied to Yugoslavia only because it is weak in
relationship to NATO - NOT BECAUSE THE CAUSE IS MORE URGENT. All during the
Russian massacres in Cheneya there were no threats of Western bombing - but
I'm afraid the situation is the same in Kosovo, it is a part of Yugoslavia,
has been since close to the turn of this century, contains some of the
monuments most critical to the Yugoslavs as part of their history.

 Yugoslavia and Kosovo got themselves into this mess when (a) Milosevic
engaged in ruthless nationalism that rejected any reasonable arrangements for
moderate self-determination in Kosovo. And (b) when the powerful and
nonviolent mass movement in Kosovo, which had won much Western support and
created a virtual parallel government, was derailed by the violence of the
Kosovo Liberation Army. The KLA attacked Serbian police and Serbian civilians.
Yugoslavia counter-attacked brutally.

 The KLA took any peaceful accomdation off the table. Do I support the right
of the KLA to use violence? Sure, any people has that right, just as I
supported the right of the Vietnamese to use violence. But between supporting
the right and thinking that use of violence is reasonable there is a huge gap.
I should add that while I do support the right of self-determination, I don't
support nationalism, not in the U.S., and not in Kosovo. In the case of the
Vietnamese it was not simply self-determination, but also, as in India, an
effort to remove a foreign occupying force. The case for that is less clear in
Kosovo, where the present 90% Albanian population was not a "steady historic
fact".

 The NATO bombing may be painless (for NATO - not for the Serbs) but it may
also prove costly. It is believed that Yugoslav air defenses are moderately
efficient, which means there may be loss of U.S. jets. And then ground action
to rescue the pilots.
 If the bombing proves ineffective, will NATO troops be sent in? If they are
sent in (perhaps to arrest Milosevic) do we have any sense of how long they
will have to stay, how fierce the fighting is likely to be?

 Only in the past few days has the New York Times carried a story about war
crimes committed by Croatia late in the Bosnian conflict. At that time the
Croatian Army drove tens and tens of thousands of Serbs from their ancestral
homes, killing many in the process. The Times noted that the role of the U.S.
in training and supplying the Croatians had never been fully probed and that
charges that two Croatian generals should be arrested for war crimes might
embarrass the U.S. At that time the Croatian offensive was reported in the
West, but with none of the anger and moral fury that had been felt when the
Serbs had carried out similar ethnic cleansing. Had the war already so changed
us that we had lost the ability to feel grief, sorrow, and anger when Serbian
families were murdered and driven out? We were right to feel this about the
Serbian attacks on Muslims and Croats - what happened to us? Will that happen
again if we find NATO forces in a door to door fight in Serbia?

 Any democratic opposition in Serbia (and it does exist) will be largely
destroyed by bombing. The same is true of any hope for nonviolent alternatives
in Kosovo.

 There are times when those of us who believe in peace cannot provide answers.
We can be as truthful as possible, see as clearly as possible, but we may not
have answers.

 The irony is that because the US (and NATO) is so heavily armed there is a
temptation to use the weapons to prove we need them and, more crucial, to fail
to make any of the concessions and compromises we might make if we didn't have
the weapons.  One reason for disarmament is that it would make it more
essential to pursue peaceful alternatives - which the US won't pursue as long
as it is armed.

 For the moment, beyond opposing the bombing, and opposing the Serbian attacks
on Kosovo, I think we are without effective solutions. The serious problem is
that I believe Clinton and NATO also are without effective solutions - but
they have the ability to expand an already disturbing level of violence.

 David McReynolds
 NYC / March 23, 1999
 (I'd also recommend asking War Resisters League for a recent issue of the
magazine, Nonviolent Action, which has a very good piece in it by Howard
Clark. Send $l and mention that article to: WRL, 339 Lafayette St., NYC 10012)
>>

- -
 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, 23 Mar 1999 20:47:00 -0800
From: "David Crockett Williams" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) 4.4.99 50th NATO "birthday", is it operating correctly?

NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION (NATO)

The North Atlantic Treaty, signed in Washington on 4 April
1949, created an Alliance for collective defence as defined in
Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. The Alliance links
fourteen European countries with the United States and Canada.
The treaty is an alliance of independent countries with a common
interest in maintaining peace and defending their freedom through
political solidarity and adequate military defence to deter
and, if necessary, repel all possible forms of aggression
against them. Created within the framework of Article 51 of
the United Nations Charter, which reaffirms the inherent right
of individual or collective defence, the Alliance is an
association of free states united in their determination to
preserve their security through mutual guarantees and stable
relations with other countries.

NATO is the Organisation which serves the Alliance. It is an
inter-governmental organisation in which member countries
retain their full sovereignty and independence. The
Organisation provides the forum in which they consult together
on any issues they may choose to raise and take decisions on
political and military matters affecting their security. It
provides the structures needed to facilitate consultation and
cooperation between them, not only in political fields but
also in many other areas where policies can be coordinated in
order to fulfil the goals of the North Atlantic Treaty.
NATO's essential purpose is thus to safeguard the freedom and
security of all its members by political and military means in
accordance with the principles of the United Nations Charter.
Based on common values of democracy, human rights and the rule
of law, the Alliance has worked since its inception for the
establishment of a just and lasting peaceful order in Europe.
This Alliance objective remains unchanged. NATO also embodies
the transatlantic link by which the security of North America
is permanently tied to the security of Europe. It is the
practical expression of effective collective effort among its
members in support of their common interests.

The fundamental operating principle of the Alliance is that of
common commitment and mutual cooperation among sovereign
states based on the indivisibility of the security of its
members. Solidarity within the Alliance, given substance and
effect by NATO's daily work in political, military and other
spheres, ensures that no member country is forced to rely upon
its own national efforts alone in dealing with basic security
challenges. Without depriving member states of their right and
duty to assume their sovereign responsibilities in the field
of defence, the Alliance enables them through collective
effort to enhance their ability to realise their essential
national security objectives.

Member Countries.
Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland,
Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain,
Turkey, United Kingdom and United States.


- -
 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, 23 Mar 1999 23:32:09 -0500
From: Peter Weiss <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) NYC / arrests for Police Brutality

Absolutely right. Cora is going with women tomorrow, I with CCR on
Thursday. We haven't been arrested since 1975; getting out of practice.

                        Peter

[e-mail] wrote:
>
> While not directly related to Abolition 2000 and not on the usual agenda of
> the Mennonite discussions, the continuing arrests in New York City in protest
> against police brutality are a very good demonstration of nonviolence. It is
> important that people from the white community take part, underlining the fact
> that the Hispanic and African American communities are not alone. For that
> reason I post this on to these two lists.
>
> David McReynolds
>
> Subj:   NYC / arrests for Police Brutality
>  Date:  3/23/99 12:20:55 AM Eastern Standard Time
>  From:  DavidMcR
>  To:    [e-mail], [e-mail]
>  To:    [e-mail]
>  To:    [e-mail]
>  To:    [e-mail]
>  To:    [e-mail], [e-mail]
>  To:    [e-mail] (Julia), BRUGGED
>  To:    [e-mail], [e-mail]
>  To:    StevenAult, [e-mail]
>  To:    SteBendich, SKentC, [e-mail]
>  To:    AriseFilms, [e-mail]
>  To:    [e-mail]
>  To:    [e-mail]
>  To:    [e-mail], [e-mail]
>  To:    Andyhumm, [e-mail], [e-mail]
>  To:    [e-mail], Joel Landy
>  To:    [e-mail], [e-mail]
>  To:    JMahoneyP, [e-mail], [e-mail]
>  To:    LCNP, [e-mail] (Ethan)
>  To:    [e-mail], Sjfive
>  To:    [e-mail], [e-mail]
>  To:    [e-mail], [e-mail]
>  To:    Chango shk, [e-mail], NAda802074
>  BCC:   DavidMcR
>
>  I would call attention to the daily arrests at Police Plaza here in New York
> City.
>
>  As those of you know who have been following the press, a growing number of
> quite prominent people have been taking part in these actions, sparked by the
> shooting of Diallo. I will be among those taking part on Friday (and expecting
> to get out in time for the Socialist Party Local meeting).
>
>  If you want to join in the arrests and don't have a contact, let me know. I
> don't have a phone number at hand, but I'll do my best to find one.
>
>  It is important that as many whites as possible take part. I am glad to see
> that this week Jews for Racial and Economic Justice are taking part.
>
>  Fraternally,
>  David McReynolds >>
>
> -
>  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: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 22:30:50 -0500
From: Peter Weiss <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) McReynolds, quick analysis of Kosovo

David: I agree with much of your analysis. It may even be too soft on
CLinton: I wouldn't be surprised if Milosevic reacted by killing a
hundred or a thousand Kosovars for every bomb dropped on Serbia. In my
view the only solution for this type of problem, other than long-range
conflict prevention and short range effective conflict resolution is to
interpose an effective force between the aggressor state and the victim
population. Ideally, that should be a UN-sponsored and UN-authorized
peacekeeping force made up of volunteers from many countries. Unideally,
it may have to be a NATO force sanctioned by the UN (but it probably
won't be, unless the Serbs agree, which they won't).
                            Peter

[e-mail] wrote:
>
>  Subj:  McReynolds, quick analysis of Kosovo
>  Date:  3/23/99 9:56:46 PM Eastern Standard Time
>  From:  DavidMcR
>  To:    [e-mail], JDCoffin
>  To:    [e-mail]
>  To:    [e-mail], [e-mail]
>  To:    [e-mail], Epank, [e-mail]
>  To:    [e-mail], [e-mail]
>  To:    [e-mail], Zefalcon, RBLepley
>  To:    [e-mail], [e-mail]
>  To:    VOBARON, [e-mail], Lthurston8
>  To:    [e-mail], [e-mail]
>  To:    [e-mail], [e-mail]
>  To:    [e-mail], [e-mail]
>  To:    [e-mail], [e-mail]
>  To:    [e-mail], [e-mail]
>  BCC:   DavidMcR
>
>  Scott McClay of NACC in Seattle had written me for a couple of paragraphs for
> a flyer - I hope, Scott, that you can extract something from this. I will sent
> this on to other lists as well, and of course anyone can repost.
>
>  Now that NATO has given authorization for the bombing of Yugoslavia, the
> question is what response do socialists and pacifists have to this?
>
>  The first problem is that we are not dealing with "good guys". I know parts
> of the Left will try to explain away the NATO action as a steady effort to
> eliminate the last bastion of socialism in Europe. I know that parts of the
> peace movement will downplay what Milosevic has done.  And I also know -
> perhaps most important at these times of crisis - that those of us ten
> thousand miles from where the bombs are going to fall really don't know all
> sides of the conflict. We deal with what the media gives us. Things always
> look different when you are standing on the ground, either in Serbia or in
> Kosovo. They are always more complex than they seem at this distance.
>
>  Milosevic is not a "good guy", anymore than Saddam Hussein is. Yet in both
>  cases we should oppose any assumption that because Milosevic and Hussein are
> not nice, therefore NATO is. Or that because these men are not nice that we
> have some reason to bomb hell out of their countries, impose sanctions on
> their people, etc. After all, in the matter of "niceness" what kind of country
> are we, that supported Saddam during his long and bloody war against Iran in
> the 1980's? Or that supported the Shah in Iran when the secret police engaged
> in torture at least as bad as anything in Kosovo? How selective in the anger
> of our TV pundits and our President, how short their memories.
>
>  NATO is taking exactly the position regarding Kosovo that it opposes when it
> comes to Turkey, where the Turkish Kurds are asking for precisely the same
> thing as the Albanians in Kosovo - self-determination. In Turkey we oppose the
> Kurdish demand because Turkey is a NATO ally. In Kosovo we support the drive
> for self-determination because the U.S. wants to weaken Milosevic - and he
> isn't in NATO.
>
>  Terrible tragedies have occured in both situations  -  but because Turkey is
> a NATO ally we hear very little about Turkish atrocities against the Kurds.
> Only on the Iraqi side has the U.S. established a "no fly zone" to help the
> Kurds - because in Iraq, we want Saddam weakened.
>
>  The U.S. policy is terribly cynical, as, historically, all nations' policies
> are. Cynical or not, the Yugoslav army is engaged in actions which should be
> opposed by all reasonable means short of engaging in bombing, which has no
> sanction from the UN, and is applied to Yugoslavia only because it is weak in
> relationship to NATO - NOT BECAUSE THE CAUSE IS MORE URGENT. All during the
> Russian massacres in Cheneya there were no threats of Western bombing - but
> I'm afraid the situation is the same in Kosovo, it is a part of Yugoslavia,
> has been since close to the turn of this century, contains some of the
> monuments most critical to the Yugoslavs as part of their history.
>
>  Yugoslavia and Kosovo got themselves into this mess when (a) Milosevic
> engaged in ruthless nationalism that rejected any reasonable arrangements for
> moderate self-determination in Kosovo. And (b) when the powerful and
> nonviolent mass movement in Kosovo, which had won much Western support and
> created a virtual parallel government, was derailed by the violence of the
> Kosovo Liberation Army. The KLA attacked Serbian police and Serbian civilians.
> Yugoslavia counter-attacked brutally.
>
>  The KLA took any peaceful accomdation off the table. Do I support the right
> of the KLA to use violence? Sure, any people has that right, just as I
> supported the right of the Vietnamese to use violence. But between supporting
> the right and thinking that use of violence is reasonable there is a huge gap.
> I should add that while I do support the right of self-determination, I don't
> support nationalism, not in the U.S., and not in Kosovo. In the case of the
> Vietnamese it was not simply self-determination, but also, as in India, an
> effort to remove a foreign occupying force. The case for that is less clear in
> Kosovo, where the present 90% Albanian population was not a "steady historic
> fact".
>
>  The NATO bombing may be painless (for NATO - not for the Serbs) but it may
> also prove costly. It is believed that Yugoslav air defenses are moderately
> efficient, which means there may be loss of U.S. jets. And then ground action
> to rescue the pilots.
>  If the bombing proves ineffective, will NATO troops be sent in? If they are
> sent in (perhaps to arrest Milosevic) do we have any sense of how long they
> will have to stay, how fierce the fighting is likely to be?
>
>  Only in the past few days has the New York Times carried a story about war
> crimes committed by Croatia late in the Bosnian conflict. At that time the
> Croatian Army drove tens and tens of thousands of Serbs from their ancestral
> homes, killing many in the process. The Times noted that the role of the U.S.
> in training and supplying the Croatians had never been fully probed and that
> charges that two Croatian generals should be arrested for war crimes might
> embarrass the U.S. At that time the Croatian offensive was reported in the
> West, but with none of the anger and moral fury that had been felt when the
> Serbs had carried out similar ethnic cleansing. Had the war already so changed
> us that we had lost the ability to feel grief, sorrow, and anger when Serbian
> families were murdered and driven out? We were right to feel this about the
> Serbian attacks on Muslims and Croats - what happened to us? Will that happen
> again if we find NATO forces in a door to door fight in Serbia?
>
>  Any democratic opposition in Serbia (and it does exist) will be largely
> destroyed by bombing. The same is true of any hope for nonviolent alternatives
> in Kosovo.
>
>  There are times when those of us who believe in peace cannot provide answers.
> We can be as truthful as possible, see as clearly as possible, but we may not
> have answers.
>
>  The irony is that because the US (and NATO) is so heavily armed there is a
> temptation to use the weapons to prove we need them and, more crucial, to fail
> to make any of the concessions and compromises we might make if we didn't have
> the weapons.  One reason for disarmament is that it would make it more
> essential to pursue peaceful alternatives - which the US won't pursue as long
> as it is armed.
>
>  For the moment, beyond opposing the bombing, and opposing the Serbian attacks
> on Kosovo, I think we are without effective solutions. The serious problem is
> that I believe Clinton and NATO also are without effective solutions - but
> they have the ability to expand an already disturbing level of violence.
>
>  David McReynolds
>  NYC / March 23, 1999
>  (I'd also recommend asking War Resisters League for a recent issue of the
> magazine, Nonviolent Action, which has a very good piece in it by Howard
> Clark. Send $l and mention that article to: WRL, 339 Lafayette St., NYC 10012)
> >>
>
> -
>  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: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 00:34:52 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) NYC / arrests for Police Brutality

In a message dated 3/24/99 12:02:08 AM Eastern Standard Time, [e-mail]
writes:

<< Subj:     Re: (abolition-usa) NYC / arrests for Police Brutality
 Date:    3/24/99 12:02:08 AM Eastern Standard Time
 From:    [e-mail] (Peter Weiss)
 Sender:    [e-mail]
 Reply-to:    [e-mail]
 To:    [e-mail]

 Absolutely right. Cora is going with women tomorrow, I with CCR on
 Thursday. We haven't been arrested since 1975; getting out of practice.

                         Peter

So am I, Peter - it may have been ten years since my last arrest, having
failed at the Pentagon, despite my best efforts (this past October).

At this rate the whole city may have to be arrested before Giuliani realizes
there is a problem.

David
(Thanks for the comments on the Kosovo problem  - I wish I saw an easy answer)


- -
 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, 24 Mar 1999 08:52:07 -0800
From: "David Crockett Williams" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) 50th NATO anniversary, April 4, 1999

No, it was not intended as a rah, rah, NATO piece and it was not one that I
wrote.  It was forwarded from another list with no author attributed but
rather indications that it was lifted from official NATO descriptions of
that organization.

The point of submitting it to concerned lists is to suggest focusing on the
date of the 50th anniversary of NATO (April 4, 1999) in letters to editor,
demonstrations, etc., to do a "line by line" discussion of how (not) well
has NATO fulfilled its expressed objectives.  In doing this one would need
to start with something more authoritative than that piece which indicated
no author attribution, but my suggestion is that because of this 50th
anniversary focus, more media attention might be offered to such messages on
that occasion.


- -
 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, 24 Mar 1999 15:51:00 -0800
From: Cindy A Pile <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) Millennium 2000

Dear Friends:


    Greetings and Peace! The Nevada Desert Experience (NDE), a
faith-based organization working for an end to nuclear weapons testing,
is
planning a very special gathering for the Third Millennium:
Millennium 2000: Walking the Ways of Peace! Religious Action for
Disarmament. The Nobel Peace Laureates are asking all people to begin
this next phase of humanityÆs history with a renewed commitment to
nonviolence and peace. Ten years ago while visiting the Nevada Test Site
Archbishop Dom Helder Camara said: ôThis is the scene of the greatest
violence on Earth. It should be the place of the greatest acts of
nonviolence
on the Earth.ö Millennium 2000 is the Nevada Desert ExperienceÆs
response to these challenges.

    Knowing that our young people are the ones who will carry the
torch of hope into this new age, this gathering will begin with a Youth
Day
on December 29, 1999, followed by a Bishops' Dialogue for Disarmament.
The main program, which the Fellowship of Reconciliation, Pax Christi
USA, Healing Global Wounds and the Los Angeles Catholic Worker are
cosponsoring, will run from Thursday, December 30, 1999-Sunday, January
2, 2000 in Las Vegas. It will bring
together people from all faith traditions and many organizations working
for justice and peace. It will include time to listen to inspiring
speakers, to sing, pray and dance, to reflect on our personal journeys
toward nonviolence and to strategize where we as a movement go from here,
with a particular emphasis on how to better mobilize the faith-based
community.

    The highlight of this event will occur on December 31, 1999. While
places like Las Vegas, Nevada usher in the New Year with parties which
anaesthetize the spirit, at this crucial point in our global history we
will bring our prayers to the desert. United by our common longing for a
world filled with peace, we will process onto the Test Site at midnight
carrying candles which represent the dawning of a nuclear-free world.

    The Nevada Desert Experience invites you to join us in this celebration!
Two of our board members were at the meeting in Santa Barbara, but since
they were representing their own organizations, they forgot to mention
this major event. So, if you and your organization are interested in
endorsing/cosponsoring Millennium 2000, publicizing it and mobilizing
people to attend and/or offering a workshop, please contact our Las Vegas
office at [e-mail], [phone], POB 4487, LV, NV 89127.

Thanks!

Cindy Pile
Education Director



___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

- -
 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, 24 Mar 1999 23:38:38 -0800
From: "David Crockett Williams" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) Russia, China, Korea, Iraq, Serbia:  WWIII?

>From NewsMax.CoM

NewsMax Home =B7 Archives =B7 Inside Cover =B7 TalkMax =B7 Liners =B7 Com=
ment Max =B7
News Links =B7 Contact Us!

Russia and China: A Pattern of Belligerence =96 Part 1
J.R. NyquistMarch 23, 1999

War Preparations Continue in Russia

All around the globe, a pattern of belligerence toward the United States
and her allies is emerging: from the Korean peninsula down through the
Spratly Islands near the Philippines, enveloping Taiwan, then reappearing
in Central Asia, the Middle East, and the Balkans.

The rhetoric from Beijing, Moscow, Belgrade, Pyongyang, and Baghdad
suggests possible coordination. Forward military deployments by China,
Iraq, Serbia, and Russia, together with sinister construction projects an=
d
major troop movements, have been noted in East Asia, the Pacific, and the
Middle East.

In the past month, numerous developments have taken place in Russia that
suggest war preparations:

RUSSIA CREATES UNIFIED COMMAND OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS

In January, the Russian General Staff announced that all of the country=92=
s
nuclear forces -- Strategic Rocket Forces, submarine-based weaponry, and
nukes on their strategic bombers -- would now be placed under one command.

ANALYSIS: This development was widely reported in Russia and by the
Associated Press. The AP story indicated bafflement that Russia, in the
middle of economic problems, would be reorganizing its armed forces,
especially the nuclear forces. But this development fits the thesis that
Russia is, in fact, preparing for war.

In war, the principle of "unity of command=94 is considered crucial. By
moving to unify nuclear command, the Russian armed forces can now better
coordinate a nuclear surprise attack involving all nuclear service
branches, obviating the friction of interservice rivalry. In a strictly
defensive situation, centralization of the nuclear forces is unnecessary,
even counterproductive. Decentralization is better for defense.

However, this is not true for attack. Coordinating an effective, disarmin=
g
first strike requires a high degree of control and coordination, which a
unified nuclear command facilitates. This move, coupled with the fact
Russia has been moving its strategic warheads onto submarines in the past
six months, should be viewed with alarm.

TOP GENERALS RESIGN FROM STRATEGIC ROCKET FORCES

In the second half of January, the commander of Russia=92s Strategic Rock=
et
Forces, Col.-Gen. Vladimir Yakovlev, resigned his post together with his
three chief deputies, allegedly throwing Russia=92s nuclear forces into
disarray.

After taking this unprecedented action, Yakovlev stated that the reason f=
or
his resignation was a personality conflict with Gen. Sokolov, the command=
er
of Russia=92s early-warning service.

ANALYSIS: According to Col. Stanislav Lunev, ranking defector from the Ma=
in
Intelligence Directorate of the Russian General Staff, Yakovlev=92s
retirement was planned some time ago.

"They already have civilian jobs waiting for them,=94 Lunev said. "There =
will
be no disruption of the rocket forces.=94

Lunev believes the resignations stem from the reorganization of Russia=92=
s
nuclear forces under a single chief, but he nonetheless admits that
Yakovlev and his deputies are hard-liners and careerists. After closer
analysis, it is difficult to argue that they would resign in protest over=
 a
measure they themselves long advocated, as they were supporters and
proteges of Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev, the man most responsible for
the reorganization of the nuclear forces.

There are serious inconsistencies here that must not be passed over. Why
did Yakovlev and his deputies resign? Has a secret nuclear command center
been established? A centralized nuclear command would have to create
alternate command posts in several bunkers, with many capable general
officers at the ready.

Were these resignations made in protest over the reorganization of Russia=
=92s
nuclear forces, or were they part of the reorganization itself?

RUSSIA=92S NORTHERN FLEET PUT ON ALERT

When President Clinton bombed Iraq in December, Moscow put its Northern
Fleet on alert. This curious move, which makes no sense in terms of
reacting to a Middle East crisis, and coming at a supposed time of reduce=
d
superpower tensions, has serious implications that ought to be explored.

ANALYSIS: Prior to a surprise nuclear attack on the United States, it is
believed the Russians would attempt to put most of their nuclear missile
submarines to sea. Therefore, the question that must be asked is whether
the Russians used the alert to deploy their missile submarine forces.
Despite what some analysts might say, any large-scale deployment to sea i=
s
a red flag.

The Northern Fleet contains the lion=92s share of Russia=92s naval strike
capability, and any alerting of that fleet needs to be carefully
scrutinized. In fact, any Russian fleet alert should be answered by a
comparable U.S. fleet alert. It is alarming in and of itself that the
United States did not respond in kind.

RUSSIANS CONTINUE NUKE TESTING

The Russians have abandoned the agreement to forgo underground nuclear
tests. They have admitted to testing three tactical nuclear warheads in
recent weeks. These are part of a new generation of tactical nuclear
weapons that the Russian armed forces have developed.

In addition, during the period of the agreed suspension of underground
tests, there have been suspicious earthquakes in Russia with signatures
characteristic of strategic nuclear tests.

ANALYSIS: Nuclear readiness requires the occasional testing of nuclear
warheads. New, more efficient weapons must be tested before they are
deployed to the armed forces. The United States has not tested its nuclea=
r
stockpile in several years, while the Russians have been testing their
weapons.

The importance of tactical nuclear weapons to the Russians lies in the fa=
ct
that these cannot be kept track of by arms control specialists. The START
agreements require Russia to destroy the bulk of its strategic nuclear
stockpiles, which cannot be hidden.

But tactical nuclear weapons have a number of advantages over strategic
ones. First and foremost, they are more efficient in terms of their use o=
f
nuclear fuel. Also, tactical nuclear weapons can be packed into ICBMs,
bombers, fighter-bombers, or artillery units, making them the most
versatile type of nuclear weapon.

Last, but not least, tactical nuclear weapons can be delivered as a
cluster, which is a more effective means for destroying large urban areas=
,
and obviates the terms of the START treaties, which call for the
elimination of multiple independently targeted re-entry vehicles (MIRVs).

THE RUSSIANS LIE ABOUT THEIR READINESS

The chief of the Russian General Staff, Anatoly Kvashin, a hardened
professional known for his stony silence, now claims that Russia has halv=
ed
its western military deployments, reducing its strike capability near
Finland. On Jan. 11, Kvashin stated: "We have extremely low defense
readiness.=94

ANALYSIS: These are curious words from an ordinarily obsessive, secretive=
,
and paranoid functionary. Such a pronouncement is uncharacteristic and
probably deceptive. Throughout history, when Russian forces have been wea=
k
or unready, no Russian general officer would dare to acknowledge the fact.
Such acknowledgment, under normal conditions, would lead to immediate
dismissal.

Russian military doctrine pays close attention to the dictum of Sun Tzu,
the ancient Chinese strategist, who said: "All warfare is based on
deception. Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable; when using ou=
r
forces, we must seem inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy
believe we are away. ... Hold out baits to entice the enemy. Feign
disorder, and crush him.=94

If Russia is really moving troops off its border with Europe, as well as
troops away from its Chinese border, where are the troops being relocated=
?

UNPRECEDENTED SLAUGHTER OF RUSSIAN FUR ANIMALS

Russia and Belarus have large collective farms dedicated to the breeding =
of
polar foxes and minks. Russia is the world=92s largest fur consumer, annu=
ally
buying 40 percent of the furs produced worldwide. But now, Russian
officials claim that demand has stalled, and they are slaughtering their
fox and mink herds because they cannot afford to feed them.

Slaughter is normal at the onset of winter, of course, but this slaughter
is of unprecedented numbers of animals. At the same time, Russia is
importing fur from China, as well as coats, jackets, and boots. If Russia=
n
demand has stalled and the market for furs is flooded, why the imports?

ANALYSIS: Wherever we see an inconsistency in Russia=92s economy, we have=
 to
think twice. In World War II, Russian spies infiltrated all of the sheep
ranches in Europe. Their mission: to watch and see if sheep were being
sheared for 5 million sheepskin coats. Soviet military intelligence
reasoned that if Hitler intended to invade Russia, he would need heavy
winter clothing for his troops. The shearing of the sheep would be a dead
giveaway.

Unfortunately for Hitler, he did not make the 5 million coats. And though
he caught Soviet military intelligence off guard, his troops in Russia
suffered frostbite and amputations once winter began. In fact, one of the
medals struck for German soldiers during 1941-42 was called "The Order of
the Frozen Meat.=94

Logistical preparations are a necessary part of war. National leaders
ignore such preparations at great peril. In this context, what are we to
make of this huge increase in the production and importation of furs and
uniform clothing in Russia?

While this activity could indicate Russian economic miscalculation, one h=
as
to wonder why the fur herds were increased to such a size to begin with.
Since these fur farms are state-controlled, an increase in production
suggests an increase in projected consumption. But as civilian consumptio=
n
has remained steady, the obvious conclusion is that somebody in Moscow wa=
s
anticipating a huge increase in the military=92s demand for winter clothi=
ng.
With the aforesaid cover story of a collapsed market, Moscow might well
mask a planned troop mobilization of very large dimensions. If Russia
called up her reserves either before or after a nuclear exchange, she wou=
ld
need winter coats, boots, and headgear (even if the attack took place in
warm weather).

Russia=92s soldiers may have to confront winter weather conditions in Nor=
th
America if Russian military doctrine is followed. This doctrine calls for
an invasion of America. Always cognizant of history, the Russian General
Staff is well aware of Hitler=92s mistake in World War II and would never
repeat that mistake in World War III.

As Russia openly makes moves for war, its new partner, China, has been
taking equally dramatic steps. Coming Wednesday: Part 2 -- Chinese Premie=
r
Calls For Nuclear War Preparations

Russia and China: A Pattern of Belligerence =96 Part 2
J.R. NyquistMarch 23, 1999

China=92s Clenched Fist

As Russia openly makes moves for war, its new partner, China, has been
taking equally dramatic steps.

CHINESE PREMIER CALLS FOR NUCLEAR WAR PREPARATIONS

On Jan. 8, as if to prepare his people for war, Chinese President Jiang
Zemin laid out the mission of the People=92s Liberation Army in a speech:=
 "We
must resolutely safeguard the unity of the motherland and the nation=92s
territorial integrity.=94

Unity, of course, is the war cry of the Communists against Taiwan. Jiang
also warned that the Chinese People=92s Liberation Army must prepare itse=
lf
for nuclear war.

Soon thereafter, China conducted military exercises in which Chinese
nuclear forces practiced targeting American troops in the Far East.

At the same time, the People=92s Republic announced radical changes in
military policy. The Chinese air force was placed on "offensive mode=94 a=
s
opposed to "defensive mode,=94 and China=92s army doctrine was altered to=
 one
of global warfighting.

China has also begun centralizing the distribution of supplies for all
branches of the military in what the official media calls the biggest
streamlining effort in 50 years. In this context, China=92s new "strategi=
c
partnership=94 with the Russian Federation takes on sinister ramification=
s.
China is also backing North Korea in its dispute with the U.S. alliance.

ANALYSIS: China is making serious war preparations. This enhances China=92=
s
options against Taiwan, South Korea, the Philippines, and Japan. There is
every reason to believe, from these moves, that China will support North
Korea if war should break out in the Far East. In the context of a renewe=
d
war, Taiwan would almost certainly be subject to blockade, possibly
sparking a naval action between China and the U.S. This is a dangerous
situation that China seems ready to welcome. (Also, China now supports
Saddam Hussein in the U.N.)

CHINA SEIZES SPRATLY ISLANDS

In the Far East, China has invaded the Spratly Islands, more than 800 mil=
es
from China yet 140 miles from the Philippines. Manila has expressed alarm
that the People=92s Liberation Army is erecting gun and anti-aircraft
emplacements on Mischief Reef.

The Chinese ambassador to the Philippines, Guan Dengming, insisted that
China was merely constructing "shelters for fishermen.=94 But a leading
Philippine official countered this, saying: "We strongly believe a fortre=
ss
is being built.=94

Philippine Defense Secretary Orlando Mercado stated that concrete buildin=
gs
in the Spratlys "are beginning to look more like military structures rath=
er
than the so-called fishermen=92s refuge the Chinese claimed it to be.=94
Mercado further accused China of bullying the Philippines, referring to
recent Chinese moves as "a creeping invasion.=94

ANALYSIS: China=92s invasion of the Spratlys may not be aimed at the
Philippines. The Spratlys lie across a key waterway that is essential to
Taiwan. The concrete structures, aside from the anti-aircraft emplacement=
s,
may be useful to mine-laying operations. The Mischief Reef operation may =
be
the first step toward an eventual blockade of Taiwan, which is heavily
fortified and would probably repel a direct Chinese assault.

Taiwan President Lee Teng-hui, taking note of Beijing=92s attempts to
encircle his small island country, called on his citizens "to raise their
vigilance against the military threat from China.=94

It=92s important to note the Clinton administration has been silent over =
this
audacious move by Beijing. In previous administrations, America would hav=
e
moved with military force to prevent China=92s expansionist plans. The
failure of the United States to confront China in the Spratlys bodes ill
for Taiwan.

Russia and Chinese war preparations are not isolated and involve communis=
t
client states around the world.

SADDAM HAS RENEWED HIS WAR MACHINE

The Iraqi government has stepped up military activity in southern Iraq. T=
he
military governor of the Basra region, a Russian-trained Iraqi general, h=
as
confirmed the arrival of new air-defense weapons, fully acknowledging tha=
t
his orders are to shoot down American planes. On Jan. 26, American
warplanes pounded Iraqi artillery and anti-aircraft positions.

Throughout the second half of January, Iraq deployed troops toward the
Kuwait border. In response, Kuwait has mobilized its army, claiming that
Saddam is about to do something "dramatic.=94 The Iraqi dictator, aside f=
rom
asserting his territorial ambitions against Kuwait, denounced Saudi and
Egyptian leaders as "lackeys and stooges of the U.S.=94

ANALYSIS: Iraq is an old Soviet client state. The country=92s secret poli=
ce
was trained by Yuri Andropov=92s KGB. Its officer corps was trained by th=
e
Russian army. Nearly all of Iraq=92s military equipment is Russian. Russi=
an
Prime Minister Yevgeny Primakov, a fluent Arabic speaker and longtime
supporter of Saddam Hussein, has intensified Moscow=92s diplomatic and
military support for Saddam.

As Kosovo renews its civil war, as China tightens its noose around Taiwan=
,
as North Korea girds for war, Saddam=92s threat to Kuwait keeps U.S. forc=
es
diverted and occupied. Saddam=92s provocations may be coordinated through
Moscow with the provocations by China, North Korea, and Serbia.

NORTH KOREA=92S EXTREME BEHAVIOR

The North Koreans, close allies of Moscow and Beijing, have recently
declared that "the United States will [soon] be reduced to ashes and will
no longer exist.=94 North Korean headlines from the first week of 1999
proclaimed that "U.S. Imperialist Aggressors Will Be Unable to Avoid
Annihilating Strikes.=94

Another North Korean source stated that the Americans would be wiped "fro=
m
this planet for good.=94 In the New Year=92s message of the North Korean
government, the communists called on their citizens to "love rifles,
earnestly learn military affairs, and turn the whole country into an
impregnable fortress.=94

Kim Myong, an influential North Korean writer and editor who lives in
Tokyo, was quoted as saying: "Maybe there will be a new war. Maybe everyo=
ne
in Tokyo will die.=94

Kongdon On, a North Korean specialist at the Institute for Defense Analys=
is
in Washington, says: "There is...strong frustration among a lot of people
that North Korea is acting very strangely.=94 Han Park, a political scien=
tist
specializing in North Korea at the University of Georgia, also stated: "T=
he
situation will be very, very dangerous in the next few months.=94 South
Korean President Kim Dae-jung, fearing the communist threat, warned his
people to be ready for a surprise attack from the North.

ANALYSIS: North Korea has broken its agreement to desist from developing
nuclear weapons. It is now suspected that North Korea has nuclear
capability, and also has the missiles to deliver nuclear weapons. Able to
threaten Tokyo as well as other Japanese cities with nuclear destruction,
North Korea is now emboldened and may renew its struggle to conquer the
South.

With Chinese and perhaps Russian support, Pyongyang has mobilized its arm=
ed
forces and is now ready to strike. Defectors from the North Korean milita=
ry
have stated that Pyongyang has a plan to conquer South Korea in seven day=
s.
Such a plan, if it exists, probably emphasizes the use of nuclear,
biological, or chemical weapons of mass destruction, since the convention=
al
firepower of the North Korean army (as it now stands) could not readily
defeat the South in such a short time.

CIVIL WAR LOOMS IN KOSOVO

Violence has again erupted between Albanian separatists and Serbian force=
s
in Kosovo, and, despite NATO warnings, the violence shows every sign of
continuing. Russia has openly supported the Serbs, giving out subtle
warnings about a "widened war in Europe.=94

ANALYSIS: More American troops and air units, including a carrier group,
are pinned down. This crisis further stretches American military resource=
s,
and with no end in sight. American ground forces are said to trace their
lines of supply through Hungary, a former Russian satellite with a dubiou=
s
political leadership. This is an awkward position to be in, and with
Russia=92s new belligerent stance we are in no position to challenge the
Serbian communists.

Taking the above items as a whole, a pattern of war preparations and
belligerence is clear. Nations of the old communist bloc are making
provocative moves across the board. With America=92s armed forces at an
all-time postwar low in readiness and strength, it is doubtful we can mee=
t
the challenges that lie ahead.

North Korea and China seem to sense our weakness. And add to this that al=
l
these provocative moves have come during the impeachment trial of Preside=
nt
Clinton.


- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Read Part 1 Russia and China: A Pattern of Belligerence War Preparations
Continue in Russia.



- -
 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 #95
**********************************

-
 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.