ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/abolition-usa/archive/v01.n144

Internet Message Format | 1999-07-01 | 49KB

From: [e-mail] (abolition-usa-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: abolition-usa-digest V1 #144
Reply-To: abolition-usa-digest
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


abolition-usa-digest       Friday, July 2 1999       Volume 01 : Number 144




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

Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 14:22:34 -0700
From: Jan Harwood <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) IN 191 DAYS RUSSIAN MISSILES ENTER Y2K; ANYONE WORRIED?

Here in Santa Cruz, CA, we've been getting signatures on the Abolition 2000
petition to abolish all nuclear weapons worldwide for over a year now,
every Saturday downtown, and have gathered nearly 10,000 of them.  Our
group, a committee of Women's International League for Peace and Freedom,
has also held public meetings, made talks at churches, and got as much as
we could into the local media. De-alerting may be our next big push.

Now we're doing radio spots, and your clear and eloquent letter is going to
be a take-off point for one of them.  Thanks for your efforts and your
energy.  Peace, Jan Harwood



- -
 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, 29 Jun 1999 17:57:04 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: (abolition-usa) Kosova Analysis / nuclear link

Friends,

War Resisters League has just release an analysis I did, titled "Death,
Bombs, and Videotape". It does have in it a reference to what I think is
substantial damage to any hopes for an early curb on nuclear weapons.

For anyone interested I can send this as an attachment and also if you want
the printed version, send your name and address.

Peace,
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.

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

Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1999 21:15:01 -0400
From: ASlater <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) Fwd: update on CD impasse

Dear Friends,
Here is the international take on US nuclear policy in a disheartening=
 report
from the Rebecca Johnson at the Acronym Institute.  Peace, Alice Slater=20

>From: [e-mail] ([e-mail])
>
>Update on the CD Impasse
>Rebecca Johnson
>
>The Conference on Disarmament (CD) in Geneva closed the second part of its
>1999 session on 25 June, still without any agreement on its work programme,
>despite the efforts of successive CD presidents.
>
>The ad hoc committee on a fissile materials ban is not overtly the problem,
>but notwithstanding the attempts from various western delegations, it is
>clear that it will not be agreed by itself. The US, Britain and France had
>earlier proposed that the fissban committee should be reconvened each year
>until it was concluded. Pakistan objected on grounds that creating
>permanent
>committees was contrary to the CD rules of procedure. India agreed that
>there was no provision in the rules of procedure to do this and complained
>that "this artificial separation of the elements of work and temmpts to
>give
>them automatic annual extensions is unprecedented in the CD..."=20
>
>Despite immense reluctance from the United States, which preferred less,
>and
>some non-aligned delegations and China, which wanted more, the principle of
>establishing ad hoc groups on nuclear disarmament and outer space seems to
>have been accepted, subject to getting consensus on mandates. Therein lies
>the rub. The former President, Ambassador Mohamed-Salah Dembri of Algeria,
>and his successor, Ambassador Guillermo Gonz=E1lez of Argentina, have been
>circulating draft mandates, but so far without agreement. In particular,
>the
>United States is understood to have serious difficulties obtaining
>agreement
>from Washington. Now a second problem has been raised: will there be any
>point in agreeing a work programme this year unless there is acceptance
>that
>the same committees, groups and coordinators should continue in 2000?
>
>In addition to opposing the automatic re-establishment of the fissban
>committee, India and Pakistan also appear loathe to go along with the
>growing view that if a work programme can be adopted this year, there
>should
>be some in-principle decision that the CD would work on that basis in 2000
>and not waste months trying to put together a new or different package for
>at least the next 12 months. Others fear that the alternative -- beginning
>again from scratch in January -- is making the CD look ridiculous. When the
>CD resumes on July 26, there will barely be time for any committees or
>groups to meet, let alone decide how to address the issues. The CD starts
>negotiating on its reports (if any) by mid August, and will then close on 8
>September. After months of bargaining and pressure politics to achieve a
>work programme, the Conference should try for a full year to make it work.
>That would get fissban negotiations started at least, as well as enabling
>the CD to begin to discuss how nuclear disarmament, outer space and the
>other issues might be addressed.=20
>
>The draft mandate being circulated at the end of the session proposed an ad
>hoc group on nuclear disarmament based on the NATO-5 proposal put forward
>by
>Belgium on February 2 (on behalf also of Germany, Italy, Netherlands and
>Norway): to "exchange information and views on endeavours towards nuclear
>disarmament and to explore further prospects that could help attain this
>objective".=20
>
>On outer space, the draft mandate would establish an ad hoc working group
>under agenda item 3 entitled =91Prevention of an arms race in outer space=
=92,
>"with a view to preventing the weaponisation of outer space, to examine and
>identify, through substantive and general consideration, specific topics or
>proposals that might be a basis for subsequent in-depth consideration,
>including aspects related to possible confidence-building or transparency
>measures, general principles or treaty commitments".   This carefully fuzzy
>language is much less than China proposed in March, but may be further than
>the United States is prepared to go, in view of its plans for missile
>defence and the intense politicisation of the issue in US Congressional
>politics. China had earlier proposed an ad hoc committee "negotiate and
>conclude an international legal instrument banning the test[ing],
>deployment
>and use of any weapons, weapon systems and their components in outer space,
>with a view to preventing the weaponisation of outer space"  but is willing
>to compromise on a lesser mechanism as a first step.=20
>
>Besides ad hoc groups on nuclear disarmament and outer space, the draft
>work
>programme would include the ad hoc committee under agenda item 1 to
>negotiate a ban on the production of fissile materials for weapons and
>other
>explosive purposes (fissban) and a committee to deliberate on negative
>security assurances. It is probable that special coordinators for the
>agenda, expansion, and the much-need =91improved functioning=92 of the CD,=
 as
>well as landmines would also be agreed. Though names are beginning to be
>floated it is too early to speculate on who would become the special
>coordinators or chairs of the committees and groups.
>
>Outer Space
>Following China=92s focus on outer space, Pakistan devoted significant time
>on
>June 3 to this issue. Referring to "updated [American] blueprints designed
>to achieve =91full spectrum dominance=92 in the twenty-first century,"
>Ambassador Munir Akram continued: "Together with other revolutionary
>military technologies, covering every aspect of modern-day armaments,
>recommendations have been made for a constellation of space-based lasers to
>provide global coverage for an array of space-orbiting vehicles which could
>unleash high-density kinetic energy weapons on ground targets. We believe
>that efforts towards militarisation of outer space, or deployment of other
>weapon systems relying on a space dimension, will create new and dangerous
>instabilities. They would deal a serious blow to efforts for nuclear
>disarmament and possibly lead to a new race for more lethal and denagerous
>weapons systems, including nuclear weapons."
>
>Russia=92s Ambassador, Vasily Siderov, also raised serious concerns,
>stressing
>that "outer space is a property common to all mankind". Noting that the
>1967
>Treaty on outer space did not establish a general prohibition for the use
>of
>outer space for military purposes, Siderov said that "progressive
>development of space equipment and state-of-the-art high technology weapon
>systems can provide a positive incentive for some states to use this legal
>loop-hole for purposes inconsistent with the peaceful activities in the
>space around the earth". He argued that one of the principal tasks of the
>international community should be to negotiate a "legal regime prohibiting
>deployment of offensive weapons in outer space". Echoing Pakistan=92s=
 remark
>that "prevention is better than cure", Russia considered it "better to
>consider today the means of preventing an arms race in outer space rather
>than waste tomorrow huge amounts of resources to disarm it".=20
>
>France=92s ambassador Hubert de la Fortelle characterised prevention of an
>arms race in outer space as its second priority for CD work. France
>considered that the importance of this issue were borne out by recent
>developments, such as the North Korean ballistic missile test and
>discussion
>of the possibility of adjusting the ABM Treaty, which France regarded as
>the
>cornerstone of stategic equilibrium. De la Fortelle made clear France=92s
>support for an ad hoc committee on outer space by endorsing both the 1998
>UNGA resolution and last year=92s special coordinator=92s report, and
>reasserted
>its 1993 proposal for notification of launches of ballistic missiles or
>space vehicles. =20
>
>Others also emphasised the urgency of addressing outer space issues in the
>CD, although Ukraine=92s Ambassador Mykola Maimeskoul also commented that
>"not
>only weaponisation, but also militarisation of outer space is perceived by
>many states as a threat to their security". Some countries who deploy or
>use
>military surveillance satellites in outer space, including China, have
>insisted on a distinction between the weaponisation and militarisation of
>outer space. They want the CD to address weaponisation but not
>militarisation. While many delegations accept this distinction, recognising
>that preventing the weaponisation of space would be a more manageable goal
>at this point than opposing the militarisation of space, some do not. In
>particular, a growing number of NGOs are drawing attention to the role of
>military satellites in espionage, intelligence gathering, targetting and
>weapons guidance. While supporting efforts to set up a CD mechanism to
>consider these issues, it is clear that much discussion will be needed to
>lay the groundwork for more substantive consideration.
>
>Fissban
>Several statements stressed the importance of convening the committee to
>negotiate a fissban, as agreed in August 1998. For France, the cut-off
>treaty was the major priority for CD work and de la Fortelle castigated the
>CD=92s inability to get started. He said that the treaty should be
>multilaterally negotiated, non-discriminatory and internationally and
>effectively verifiable. Siderov also called for speedy re-establishment of
>the fissban committee and said that Russia considered it wrong to "waste
>time searching any alternative issues in the field of nuclear disarmament
>topics...ignoring the repeatedly re-confirmed consensus on FMCT."
>Ambassador
>Savitri Kunadi recalled that the G-21=92s proposal for a work programme had
>included a committee to negotiate the fissban and therefore India "had no
>difficulty going along" with such a decision. She particularly emphasised
>various other aspects of the work programme, however. Referring again to
>the
>proposal from Britain, France and the United States to add to the fissban
>mandate that the committee be reconvened each year until negotiations are
>concluded, Akram, warned that "if the FMT consensus is to be reopened,
>Pakistan would also seek inclusion of the concerns reflected in the
>amendments we proposed to the Canadian resolution" to the 1998 UN General
>Assembly (such as reducing and controlling existing stocks).=20
>
>Nuclear Disarmament
>In his valedictory statement to the CD after eight years as Egypt=92s
>ambassador, Mounir Zahran called the CD "totally handicapped" in its
>failure
>to achieve nuclear disarmament. He recalled the gains in other fora, such
>as
>the Canberra Commission, the 1996 advisory opinion of the International
>Court of Justice, and the August 1996 G-21 programme of action for
>achieving
>the elimination of nuclear weapons in three stages. Like Zahran, Kunadi
>harked back to the priorities set at the first UN Special Session on
>Disarmament in 1978. India, which just two months earlier prevented
>agreement in the UN Disarmament Commission on holding a fourth special
>session on disarmament, said that although it wanted more, in the spirit of
>flexibility it would support a working group on nuclear disarmament, as
>proposed by the ambassador of Venezuela, when he was CD President
>(CD/1575).
>Akram, like the rest of the G-21 also said that Pakistan would accept an ad
>hoc group as "a first step" and the "least common denominator".=20
>
>While arguing against a role for the CD in nuclear disarmament, Siderov
>reminded delegations that "nuclear disarmament is a time-consuming and
>costly process, which requires solutions to a whole range of financial,
>technical and environmental problems" despite which, the "two major powers
>have already done a lot" during recent years. Russia was "in favour of
>other
>nuclear powers joining our efforts aimed at reducing nuclear arsenals".
>Siderov also recalled that President Yeltsin=92s 1994 proposal for a Treaty
>on
>nuclear security and strategic stability was "still on the negotiating
>table".
>
>Other issues
>There have been angry exchanges between North and South Korea over recent
>clashes in adjacent waters, further exchanges between India and Pakistan
>over Kashmir, and several comments on NATO=92s bombing in Yugoslavia,
>prompting a furious reply from the US ambassador, Robert Grey. In
>particular, Siderov argued that "the NATO aggression against the sovereign
>Yugoslavia has gravely complicated the international climate". Like Russia,
>several speakers raised concerns about the role of the one remaining
>superpower and attempts to dictate by force. Russia raised concerns about
>ecological damange and NATO=92s use of "indiscriminate inhumane weapons,=
 such
>as cluster bombs and depleted uranium, which bring sufffering mainly upon
>the civilian population".=20
>
>Ambassador Peter N=E1ray announced Hungary=92s ratification of the
>comprehensive
>test ban treaty, emphasising the importance of this accord, negotiated at
>the CD. Ambassador Ian Soutar spoke of Britain=92s efforts to increase
>transparency by providing more detailed information on its exports of arms
>and military equipment. Several, including Ecuador, called for decision on
>enlarging the CD by five additional countries to be taken forthwith. There
>were routine references to negative security assurances, landmines and
>other
>disarmament-related matters, but without any new ideas or sense of urgency.
>
>Conclusion
>While the CD=92s lack of a work programme is deplorable, the discussions
>about
>the priority issues are themselves diplomatic negotiations of political
>importance, reflecting changing political relations among some of the major
>states. Although the importance of the political difficulties should not be
>masked by attempts to reach procedural compromises, it would be absurd to
>get agreement on a work programme for a few weeks this year unless the
>Conference is also prepared to make a commitment to give that work
>programme
>at least a year=92s try. Even if it is not possible under the present rules
>to
>make such an undertaking binding on the next CD session, every effort
>should
>be made to get agreement in good faith, either through the CD report or a
>presidential declaration. For the four weeks interval, diplomatic attention
>has turned to attempts to negotiate a verification protocol for the
>Biological Weapons Convention (BWC).
>
>The CD will reconvene 26 July and run for barely 6 weeks, to 8 September.
>
>
>
>
>The Acronym Institute
>24, Colvestone Crescent, London E8 2LH, England.
>telephone (UK +44) (0) 171 503 8857
>fax                (0) 171 503 9153
>website http://www.acronym.org.uk
> =20
Alice Slater
Global Resource Action Center for the Environment (GRACE)
15 East 26th Street, Room 915
New York, NY 10010
tel:  [phone]
fax:  [phone]
email:  [e-mail]

GRACE is a member of Abolition 2000, a global network working for a treaty
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.

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

Date: Thu, 01 Jul 1999 14:34:36 -0400
From: Bob Tiller <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) DOE reorganization

One of the key issues pending in Congress is the reorganization of the
Department of Energy in the wake of the Cox and Rudman reports.   Sen.
John Kyl (R-AZ) is pushing a dangerous plan which has far-reaching
implications for those who are concerned about either nuclear
proliferation and nuclear facilities clean-up.

Kyl expects to offer his plan as an amendment to the Intelligence
Authorization bill, which will probably be on the Senate floor in
mid-July.  He expects broad support because many Senators who are
concerned about security lapses will not study the content of his
legislation carefully.  Though we have voiced many criticisms of DOE
over the years, PSR (with other organizations) is actively opposing
Kyl's proposal, because it provides for less oversight and
accountability of DOE's nuclear weapons activities, not more.  This
legislation would enhance, entrench and protect the nuclear weapons
establishment in this country.

A different version of DOE reorganization has already passed the House
as part of the Defense Authorization.  Some Republican committee chairs
(Commerce and Science) were miffed that their jurisdictional issues were
swept under the rug, and they may revisit the issue.

Below is a letter that was sent to all Senators by PSR, ANA, NRDC and a
dozen other groups.  Feel free to use it.  Your contacts with Senators
on this issue during the upcoming ten-day recess could be very helpful.

Shalom,
Bob Tiller, PSR
- ------------------------------------------------
June 30, 1999
Dear Senator:

  We strongly urge you to oppose the proposed Kyl-Domenici-Murkowski
measure calling for the establishment of a semi-autonomous "Agency for
Nuclear
Stewardship" at the Department of Energy (DOE). The sponsors intend to
offer this legislation as an amendment to the Intelligence Authorization

Bill. We believe that the proposed legislation will adversely affect
efforts to
achieve the safe, secure and environmentally sound management of the
Department of Energy.

  The recently released "Science At Its Best -Security At Its Worst"
report of a Special Investigative Panel of the President's Foreign
Intelligence
Advisory Board (PFIAB report) provides a cogent analysis of many
problems at the Department of Energy's weapons labs. The PFIAB report
highlights
the need to reform what Senator Warren Rudman characterized as a
"culture of
arrogance" at both DOE headquarters and the laboratories.

  Unfortunately, this proposed legislation does not address the serious
problems that lead lab and contractor personnel to disobey, avoid, and
deflect Presidential and Secretarial directives. Instead, this proposed
legislation elevates those same recalcitrant bureaucrats to new levels
of authority with less oversight. The proposed Agency for Nuclear
Stewardship would bury essential security, non-proliferation,
environment, safety,
and health operations within a new semi-autonomous agency reminiscent of
the
Cold War days of the Atomic Energy Commission. It is that era that gave
us a legacy of disasters ranging from secret radiation experiments on
human
guinea pigs to widespread nuclear contamination which continues to pose
a threat and burden to the public.

  We have many concerns about the proposed Senate legislation. These are

some of the most egregious problems:

          The same "culture of arrogance" at DOE that creates security
problems, also leads to compliance problems with fundamental
environment, health
and safety standards which are often cavalierly regarded as a hindrance
to
the weapons program work. This results in mishaps that injure and kill
workers, and contamination that is seeping into the ground and polluting
the air.
Rather than granting the labs more autonomy to regulate themselves, the
Office of Environment, Safety and Health, reporting directly to the
Secretary, should be given greater enforcement authority to ensure lab
compliance with fundamental health and safety safeguards.

         The proposed legislation places nuclear non-proliferation
programs
within the Agency for Nuclear Stewardship. This creates a dangerous
conflict of
interest by allowing the same programs generating the technologies and
materials that create proliferation concerns to monitor and control
their own activities.  In order for DOE's nuclear non-proliferation
programs
to provide effective advice and carry out essential non- proliferation
work
with other countries, these programs should have an independent and
unbiased mandate.

         The security and counter-intelligence programs report to the
Director of the Agency for Nuclear Stewardship under this proposed
legislative
scheme. This leaves in question how the security and counter-
intelligence
issues at the rest of the DOE complex, including sites and operations
not
reporting to the Agency for Nuclear Stewardship, will be addressed. For
example,
what about safeguarding plutonium at former production sites such as
Hanford
and Rocky Flats, or unregulated release of information about
reprocessing
technologies? The Senate should be concerned about preventing
proliferation of sensitive technologies,  information, and nuclear
materials from the
entire DOE complex; but this requires a new approach which ensures that
security and counter-intelligence programs provide oversight for the
entire DOE complex and report directly to the Secretary of Energy.

         The proposed legislation would provide the new Agency for
Nuclear
Stewardship unique authority to bypass the standard budget process. The
Agency for Nuclear Stewardship is directed to send its budget wish list,

along with supporting legislative comments to Congress, unedited by the
Secretary of Energy  or the President's Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). This will serve to ensure that the Agency for Nuclear Stewardship

never competes with other funding priorities at DOE such as cleanup.
Further, there will be less information and opportunity for lawmakers to

identify and challenge wasteful programs and policies. It is even
possible that policies in direct conflict with the views of the
Secretary or the
President would be sent to Congress. This provision reveals the true
intent of the sponsors of this legislation: giving as much unrestrained
power
and authority to the nuclear weapons programs as possible.

  The best way to address mismanagement and disarray at nuclear weapons
labs,  production facilities, and the entire DOE  is more oversight, not

less. All of DOE's programs need to be held accountable to the public,
and to Congress.  They should not be elevated and removed from most
oversight as a reward for their failures in management and lab
security.  Removing
the ability to exercise oversight, and shine public light on the labs
and
production facilities, would re-create the same set of problems that led

to the current state of affairs.  Indeed, the new isolated structure
could
lead to even greater abuses and errors of judgment. Therefore, we
strongly urge you to reject this measure calling for establishment of
the Agency for
Nuclear Stewardship at DOE.



- -
 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, 1 Jul 1999 15:07:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: [e-mail] (marylia)
Subject: (abolition-usa) DOE + Labs-Wrong Rx

Hi. One of the issues in the following article is a wrongheaded approach to
DOE reorganization. Please, please consider calling your Senators or Rep.
to oppose it. Read on....

Wrong Medicine Prescribed for What Ails Weapons Labs

by Marylia Kelley
from Tri-Valley CAREs' July 1999 newsletter, Citizen's Watch

Let no one say that politics does not offer up a bounty of irony.

The nation's nuclear weapons design labs at Livermore and Los Alamos are
embroiled in a scandal over U.S. nuclear secrets that have allegedly been
leaked to China. Yet the individual scientist at the center of this
particular maelstrom has not been charged with any crime let alone
convicted as of this writing.

It is well understood by weapons physicists and their critics alike that
the term "nuclear secrets" is a bit of an oxymoron. When any of the
nuclear-armed states makes a significant advance in its weaponry, the
how-to information becomes known to other interested nations within five
years. So says Edward Teller, co-inventor of the hydrogen bomb and
co-founder of Livermore Lab, to give but one example.

Weapons design data leaks out in numerous small dribbles: in the
publication of unclassified papers on nuclear phenomena relevant to weapons
advances, in the margins of discussions between scientists at international
seminars and conferences where one mistakenly believes the other already
knows a piece of information, and so on. Furthermore, once an interested
nation knows that a particular advance in a warhead design is possible, its
physicists can postulate pathways and conduct experiments to come up with
the same result independent of leaked information.

These facts have enormous implications when one considers the nuclear
proliferation risks of the U.S. "Stockpile Stewardship" program.

It is a central goal of "Stockpile Stewardship" to attract more University
and other researchers to weaponeering by providing facilities, like the
National Ignition Facility and supercomputers, along with the financial
means to conduct unclassified experiments that yield data of interest to
the nuclear weapons program. Weapons designers call this "spin back" as
non-military sources are used for military purposes, the opposite of
"spin-off." Common sense tells us that anything of use to the U.S. nuclear
weapons program is likely to be of some interest to other countries with a
technological base (e.g., a nuclear reactor) and nuclear aspirations.

Moreover, the U.S. government has been, and is now, officially sharing our
"nuclear secrets" selectively with other countries. Exactly with which
countries we share what information shifts over time as our geopolitical
goals and alliances change. "Stockpile Stewardship" will exacerbate the
situation. Our government has made promises, both formal and whispered,
regarding NIF and other "Stewardship" data to a number of countries. This
needs to be called by its real name - nuclear proliferation.

Practically the only thing that can be said for certain about the security
scandal at the labs is that current U.S. nuclear weapons policy will lead
to more nuclear proliferation, with or without espionage. Yet, "Stockpile
Stewardship" is just about the only angle not being covered by the
mainstream news media, the pundits or Congressional hearings.

 Cold Warriors and agendas

Witness the hearings going on now in the Senate and the House of
Representatives. Testifying in the Senate on the President's Foreign
Intelligence Advisory Board Report, the chair of the panel that produced
the report, former Republican Senator Warren Rudman characterized the
weapons labs as having a "culture of arrogance" that contributed to
security leaks and needed to be reformed. A chorus then went up from Rudman
and Senators Pete Domenici (R-NM) and John Kyl (R-AZ) to reward that
arrogance by giving Defense Programs and its weapons labs semi-autonomous
status and increased authority within DOE- making the scandal-ridden
bureaucracy even more self-regulating and less accountable than at present.

Later in that day, when Rudman appeared before the House with his same
autonomy message, Rep. Dingell (D-MI) brought a small measure of reality to
the discussion when he declared: "None of us wants to use these serious
security problems as an excuse to put the inmates in charge of the asylum."

Watchdog groups including Tri-Valley CAREs were quick to respond, charging
the Republican proposals to "reorganize" DOE were really an attempt to go
"back to the future," returning the agency to the bad old days when Defense
Programs was in charge of its own environment, safety and health programs -
and massive contamination in communities across the nation, including in
Livermore, was the result.

Then, almost as if scripted to underscore our objections, Domenici offered
a reporter the name of someone he thought might run the new,
semi-autonomous weapons agency, James Schlesinger. Schlesinger directed the
Atomic Energy Commission, the notorious predecessor agency to the DOE.
More recently, he has been writing editorials advocating a return to
full-scale nuclear testing.

The truth is that DOE's Defense Programs, which still generates huge
volumes of plutonium and other nuclear waste, as well as chemical waste,
has been unable and unwilling to protect the environment and the public.
Past scandals connected to nuclear weapons programs have included milk
supply contamination from above ground testing, radiation experiments on
humans and the dumping of nuclear wastes directly into streams, rivers and
the ocean floor.

The best way to address mismanagement at the nuclear weapons labs is more
oversight, not less. Weapons programs need to be held accountable to the
public. Unfortunately, that is not the tenor of discussion going on this
month in the hearing rooms and halls of Congress.

In a related development, the head of Defense Programs, Vic Reis, was
rumored to be a supporter of the Republican proposals. This put him in
direct conflict with his boss, Energy Secretary Bill Richardson, who has
been testifying against the reorganization proposals - and in favor of his
own plan - at every opportunity. Reis resigned, effective July 30.

On June 25, the FBI put forward its own proposal to benefit from the spy
scandal. The plan calls for a separate FBI division for counterintelligence
to root out spies and protect our nation's nuclear secrets.

One wonders, what if the morning papers reported some fine day that the FBI
has arrested the entire U.S. weapons establishment for sharing sensitive
"Stockpile Stewardship" data? Naw, probably not.

(Copies the Rudman report, letters, press releases and more are available
on request.)

++ Please note that my email address has changed to <[e-mail]>
on 3/1/99 ++

Marylia Kelley
Tri-Valley CAREs
(Communities Against a Radioactive Environment)
2582 Old First Street
Livermore, CA USA 94550

<http://www.igc.org/tvc/> - is our web site, please visit us there!
Our web site will remain at this location. Only my email address has
changed on 3/1/99.

[phone] - is our phone
[phone] - is our fax

Working for peace, justice and a healthy environment since 1983, Tri-Valley
CAREs has been a member of the nation-wide Alliance for Nuclear
Accountability in the U.S. since 1989, and is a co-founding member of the
international Abolition 2000 network for the elimination of 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.

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

Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1999 15:16:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: [e-mail] (marylia)
Subject: (abolition-usa) Nuke waste facility/Lab/letters needed!

Hi. Can you write a short note to the Governor's office supporting our
request for an Environmental Impact Report on Livermore Lab's hazardous and
radioactive waste? We have about a 30 day window, and your letter could
make a huge difference. Please read on for details. The address and contact
person at the governor's office are at the end of the article. Thank you.
Peace, Marylia

Governor Fails Important First Test

by Marylia Kelley
from Tri-Valley CAREs' July 1999 newsletter, Citizen's Watch

Last month, newly-elected Governor Gray Davis made his first big decision
under our state's key environmental law, the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA). This law is California's equivalent of the federal
National Environmental Policy Act. CEQA governs decisions made by state
agencies, and was enacted expressly to protect public health and our
communities.

The Governor's decision?
Davis' senior staff reportedly pressed the state Dept. of Toxic Substances
Control (DTSC) to grant Livermore Lab a final permit to build and operate a
new $32 million hazardous and radioactive waste treatment facility.
Further, the governor's office and DTSC decided it was not necessary to
conduct an Environmental Impact Report before making the permit
determination, instead relying on information provided by the Lab that is
years old, inaccurate and/or incomplete.

The published rationale?
According to the permit decision, the state certifies that Livermore Lab's
hazardous and radioactive waste operations could not possibly have a
negative impact on workers, the surrounding community or the environment.
This, at a site that sits on the EPA's Superfund list as one of the most
heavily polluted places in the nation. This, at a major nuclear weapons
research & development center with 880 pounds of plutonium (enough to make
nearly 100 modern nuclear weapons), 440 pounds of highly-enriched uranium
and a multitude of other radioactive and toxic materials on hand. This, at
place with a long - and continuing - history of accidents, spills to the
environment, employee injuries and safety violations involving hazardous
and radioactive wastes.

Tri-Valley CAREs' response?
Our organization, with the assistance of a fine team of attorneys, will
file a petition appealing the permit decision before the July 2nd deadline.
The DTSC will consider our petition, and the Lab will be prohibited from
going  forward with construction during the process. The state usually
responds to appeals in a reasonably quick time frame, about 30 days. One
very important point: based on our appeal the state can, if it chooses,
reverse its current decision, revoke the Lab's permit and require an
Environmental Impact Report before any new decision is made to grant or
deny the Lab a permit. If the state rejects our appeal, we will have the
further option of filing  a lawsuit.

What do we urgently need?
Over the next 30 days we have an opportunity to convince the governor's
office and DTSC of the wisdom of reversing their decision. Write a letter
today to Governor Gray Davis, Attn: Lynn Schenk, Chief of Staff, State
Capitol Bldg., Sacramento, CA 95814. The fax for Ms. Schenk is (916)
445-4633. She may be reached by phone at [phone].


++ Please note that my email address has changed to <[e-mail]>
on 3/1/99 ++

Marylia Kelley
Tri-Valley CAREs
(Communities Against a Radioactive Environment)
2582 Old First Street
Livermore, CA USA 94550

<http://www.igc.org/tvc/> - is our web site, please visit us there!
Our web site will remain at this location. Only my email address has
changed on 3/1/99.

[phone] - is our phone
[phone] - is our fax

Working for peace, justice and a healthy environment since 1983, Tri-Valley
CAREs has been a member of the nation-wide Alliance for Nuclear
Accountability in the U.S. since 1989, and is a co-founding member of the
international Abolition 2000 network for the elimination of 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.

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

Date: Fri,  2 Jul 1999 11:38:18 -0700 (PDT)
From: Nuclear Age Peace Foundation <[e-mail]>
Subject: [none]

G R A S S R O O T S    N E W S L E T T E R    J U N E     1 9 9 9



*** NEW ABOLITION 2000 ORGANIZATIONS

Welcome to the following organizations, and thanks to all who have joined
in the effort to reach 2000 organizations...

People with Disabilities Uganda/Africa
Pujehun Youths for Development/Africa
WCPA/GREN Youth/Canada
Toronto Raging Grannies/Canada
Jubillenium/Canada
Peace Movement of Esbjerg/Denmark
Nuclear-Free Future Award/Germany
SEEDS/India
Milli Parliament/India
International Council for Adult Education/India
Chernobyl Relief Group of Kansai/Japan
Global Peacemakers Association/Japan
WISE Amsterdam/Netherlands
Tibet Group (in Exile)/Nepal
Thosey Youth Club/Nepal
Service Civil International/Nepal
South Asian Forum/Netherlands
Rainbow Valley Community/New Zealand
Tui Community/New Zealand
All Pakistan Federation of United Trade Unions
Citizens Peace Committee/Pakistan
UPCH Universidad Pervano Cayetano Heredia/Peru
Sociedad Cientifica de Estudiantes de Medicina/Peru
St. Petersburg Peace Council/Russia
U.S. Military Base Return Committee/South Korea
Bicommunal Citizens Group for Peace in Cyprus/Turkey
Eirene Community/UK
Nation 1/UK
Burlington Association for Nuclear Disarmament, VT/USA
Canadian Campaign to Free Vanunu, VT/USA
Citizens Opposing a Polluted Environment, CA/USA
Cleveland Peace Action, OH/USA
Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, MN/USA
Little Friends for Peace, MD/USA
Peabody Watch Arizona/USA
Peace Links, Washington DC/USA
Public Citizen/Washington DC/USA
Resource Center for Nonviolence, CA/USA
Sing Sing Quaker Worship Group, NY/USA
Women for Peace, East Bay Chapter, CA/USA
Villa Montessori School, AZ/USA
Washington DC Area War Tax Resistance/USA
World Citizen Diplomats, NJ/USA

*** NEWS

*HAP-Exciting News! The Hague Agenda for Peace and Justice - now a UN
Document!
     As of Wednesday, June 23, the "Hague Agenda for Peace and Justice
for the 21st Century" (the action plan discussed and launched at the
Hague Appeal Conference) will be available in all of the United Nations
languages: Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish.
     The UN reference for the Hague Agenda is A/54/98.  Because this is now
an official UN document, it will be delivered to all UN delegates and
Secretariat staff upon its release.

*    Mr. Tom Rauch, the president of the Colorado Coalition for the
Prevention of Nuclear War, announced that as of November 17th, 1998, the
mayor of Denver, Wellington E. Webb declared, "DENVER IS A NUCLEAR FREE
ZONE".  Mr. Rauch also will bring a resolution similar to the one signed by
the mayor before the Denver City Council this fall to seek their support.
In the past, the resolution was turned down by the City Council because it
did not have the mayor's support.  Mr. Rauch is optimistic that the
resolution will pass in the Denver City Council now that the mayor has
signed a similar proclamation.

*    Ottawans in Nanoose Bay have united to oppose renegotiating a lease
extension on a seabed owned by the province  The seabed has been used as a
torpedo testing range by U.S. and Canadian Forces since 1965.  However, the
Federal lease on the seabed expires on September 4th of this year.  To
date, more than 150 official objections have been filed by peace activists,
community groups, church affiliated organizations, native bands, labor
unions, environmental groups and other concerned citizens.
     Since B.C. legislative approval in 1992, the province has been a
Nuclear Free Zone.  This recent attempt to expropriate provincial lands has
sparked a new peace movement in B.C. that highlights the need to ban
nuclear weapons and the desire of activists and citizens alike to achieve
it.  For more information related to this issue or to obtain a copy of the
petition, please refer to the Nanoose Conversion Campaign Website for a
Nuclear Free Georgia Strait at:
http://www.user.dccnet.com/lagasse/Nuclear_Free_Georgia_Strait/nanoose.html


*** PETITION UPDATE

ABOLITION 2000 PETITION COUNT
June 1999


Argentina        162

Austria            12,000 (Soka Gakkai)

Australia        9000

Belgium        1175

Canada            845

Costa Rica        30

Czech Republic    10

France            34,375 (Mouvement de la Paix)
            17,000 (Soka Gakkai)
              5,388    (Stop Essais)

Germany        1220

Greece            17

India            260

Italy            55,819 (Soka Gakkai)
                 968 (in house)

Japan            13,016,568 (Soka Gakkai)
                     3,800 (in house)

Malaysia        80

Netherlands        10

New Zealand        70,000 (Soka Gakkai)

Phillipines        10

Puerto Rico        134

Russia            10

Singapore        15

South Africa        70

Sweden        67

Switzerland        230

Ukraine        40

U.K.            940

U.S.             37,000 (in house)
            10,000 (Maine)

Miscellaneous (on-line + conferences)    3,475


Total: 260,350

Total including Japan: 13,280,718





*** ACTION YOU CAN TAKE

*      Peace Action's Nuclear Abolition Petition can now be signed on-line at
http://www.peace-action.org/abolitionpetition.html.  Please circulate this
message widely. We are collecting as many signatures as possible to present
to presidential candidates in the 2000 election.

*     July 16th marks the 54th anniversary of the first nuclear test in New
Mexico. This July 16th you are encouraged to call your U.S. Senator and ask
them to do everything in their power to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban
Treaty (CTBT).  Make sure to speak directly with your Senator's Aide who
manages issues relating to CTBT and leave your name and address with them.
Aide's names are listed at http://www.psr.org/ctbtaction.html.  For more
information, contact:
Joan L. Wade
Disarmament Clearinghouse Coordinator
202-898-0150 (phone) or via email: [e-mail]

*     Sign an International Appeal opposing US and French Explosive Nuclear
Fusion Programs.  For more information and to obtain  a petition is
available at the Tri-Valley CARE (Communities Against a Radioactive
Environment) web site at http://www.igc.org/tvc or call Tri-Valley CAREs at
925-443-7148.

*     Fax Interior Secretary, Bruce Babbitt at 202-208-5048 and ask him to
instruct the US Delegation to the World Heritage Committee to actively
support an "In Danger" listing for Kakadu National Park in Australia.

*** EVENTS
July

 23-25th-The 4th Tokyo forum on nuclear non proliferation and disarmament
takes place.
 26th -The third session of the Conference on Disarmament (CD) begins.

August

3rd-8th-Tromp Trident Trek III is a 52 mile peace walk commemorating the
bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.  It begins in Ashland and ends at
Project ELF.  For more information, contact Nukewatch at 715-472-4185 or
email at [e-mail].

6th-Hiroshima Commemoration at Livermore Lab. It begins at
2:30 PM at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, where nuclear
weapons are designed and a new weapons facility is currently under
construction that is intended to create thermonuclear blasts in a reactor
vessel, called the National Ignition
Facility. The gathering will be at the corner of East Avenue and Vasco
Road. After a program of speakers and music, there will be a procession to
the gates of the Laboratory. This annual commemoration is sponsored by many
San Francisco Bay Area peace and
environmental organizations, including the Livermore-based Tri-Valley
CAREs. For more information, call  925-443-7148.

6th-9th-Peace Action and Peace Action Education Fund National Congress are
calling for students, activists and concerned citizens form across the
nation and from around the world to join them in Albuquerque, New Mexico to
commemorate the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.  For more information,
please contact:
Peace Action  www.peace-action.org 202-862-9740 ext. 3038
1819 H St. NW Suite 420 Washington, DC 20006

September

24th-Anniversary of the signing of the CTBT.
27th-Clinton to address the UN General Assembly in New York.
29th-1st-CTBT Ratification States to hold first conference.

October

25th-NGO Committee on Disarmament to hold a symposium throughout the week
in New York.


December

Millennium 2000:  Walking the Ways of Peace-December 29,1999 to January 2, 2000
Join a midnight candlelit procession onto the Nevada Test site on December
31st.  For more information, contact:
Nevada Desert Experience
[e-mail]     [phone]
P.O. Box 4487 Las Vegas, NV  89127


***SPECIAL

*    Special thanks to Jan Harwood and the committee of Women's
International League for Peace and Freedom for their continued efforts in
Santa Cruz, CA to educate and bring to the forefront the Abolition 2000
petition to abolish nuclear weapons.

*    A special thank you to Lori Beckwith for all her hard work as the
Abolition 2000 coordinator located at the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation and
a welcome to Carah Ong who will be her replacement.

***RESOURCES

*     The 47th edition of Houseman's Peace Diary 2000 will be published in
September.  The Peace Diary is a complete directory of 2000 organizations
in 170 countries.  It includes calendars, a forward planner and notes.  To
request a copy, please write:
HOUSMANS, 5 Caledonian Road, London NI 9DX,  England, UK

*     Esther Farnsworth has recently completed a book about the Vermont
Walk to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, which took place last August. The book is
entitled Grass Routes and contains speeches given by speakers along the
way.  Some of the speakers include: Jonathan Schell; Dr. Victor Sidel, from
the International Physicians to Prevent Nuclear War; The Rev. William Sloan
Coffin; Ambassador Thomas Graham, former negotiator for the U.S.; Stephen
Dycus, a law professor from Vt Law School and David Montgomery, a physicist
from Dartmouth.  The book is available at $10.00 US per copy.  To obtain a
copy, please contact Esther Farnsworth at [e-mail].



Carah Lynn Ong
Coordinator, Abolition 2000
Nuclear Age Peace Foundation
1187 Coast Village Road PMB 121, Suite 1
Santa Barbara CA 93108

Phone [phone]  FAX[phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Website http://www.abolition2000.org

To subscribe to the abolition-usa listerve, send a message (no subject) to
[e-mail]
To post to the list, mail to: [e-mail]

To subscribe to the international abolition-caucus, send a message (no
subject) to [e-mail]
To post to the list, mail to: [e-mail]



- -
 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 #144
***********************************

-
 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.