ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/abolition-usa/archive/v01.n237

Internet Message Format | 1999-12-19 | 46KB

From: [e-mail] (abolition-usa-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: abolition-usa-digest V1 #237
Reply-To: abolition-usa-digest
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


abolition-usa-digest     Monday, December 20 1999     Volume 01 : Number 237




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

Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 12:57:39 +1000
From: FoE Sydney - Nuclear Campaign <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) Lord Jenkins of Putney on the Apocalypse (this is really good)

(this was originally posted by Paul Swann. I am passing it on. John Hallam)

http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld199697/ldhansrd/pdvn/lds9
9/text/91118-04.htm

House of Lords, November 18, 1999

Column 48

Lord Jenkins of Putney:

The debate takes place on a gracious Speech that deliberately ignores
the basic position of the world as it is today. I sought to raise that
matter at Question Time on Wednesday of last week. Instead of repeating
what I said, perhaps I may quote the words of the noble Lord, Lord
Peyton of Yeovil. The subject was the existence of massive reasons for
fear. The following point has not been mentioned in the debate. In the
past few years mankind has, for the first time, been in a position where
it can destroy itself and civilisation. This is a new position. Can we
continue to ignore the possibility that we may exercise that new power?
If, as I venture to suggest, we are on the way to the end of our
civilisation, much of the debate today will have the relevance of the
saloon bar chat in the "Titanic" immediately before it hit the iceberg.
The noble Lord, Lord Peyton, asked my noble friend Lady Scotland whether
she agreed that it was,

"high time that one or more of those who aspire to be described as
'leaders of the world' should depart from their stupefying silence on
the question of nuclear warheads, 40,000 of which are stockpiled around
the world and threaten not merely the peace of the world but the
existence of the planet".--[Official Report, 10/11/99; col. 1344.]


That is the context in which this debate takes place. Neither in the
gracious Speech nor in the debate so far has anyone ventured to touch on
the fact that we are in that position. For that reason, I am
particularly glad to hear the noble Lord, Lord Chalfont, echo my belief
that NATO is wrong to try to take over the role of the United Nations
and decide what international law is because that is the general
position of NATO. We must ensure that we do not seek to take away that
responsibility from the United Nations and place it
upon an organisation which is basically within the power of the
developed world and which, for that reason, ignores the interests of the
third world.

Another question on which the Government have done an amount of work is
whether we are in peril from an accidental occurrence as a result of the
millennium bug. Again, why do we ignore the possibility of such a
nuclear accident? As the noble Lord, Lord Peyton, has agreed, it could
be completely disastrous. I am not sure about destroying the planet.
However, general opinion is that such a conflagration of nuclear and
other weapons could at least threaten the existence of life on earth and
certainly that of humanity. In those circumstances, it seems wrong that
we ignore the situation and refuse to attempt to deal with it. That is
not the only manifestation of that refusal.

This is the third or fourth year of the Geneva disarmament discussions.
This year there has been no effective discussion on the subject. Instead
there has been continual discussion on matters of procedure: how shall
the nations attack their work? One cannot avoid the conclusion that it
is a deliberate means of refusing to tackle the real problem by the
nations involving themselves in procedural matters about which they can
talk forever.

In replying to the Question, my noble friend said that we have done our
best to break through this barrier and discuss the question of
international peace. I believe that we could do so if our heart were in
it, and we were prepared to consider nuclear disarmament as an absolute
necessity. But at present we still involve ourselves and the other
nations in the procedural issue which prevents us discussing the
specific problem.

Although I have been critical of some of the things my Government have
done, I would not wish anyone to think that I believe that the
Government have done no good. Most of the programme in the gracious
Speech involves good policies and important proposals which need to be
carried out. However, they need to be carried out with due consciousness
of our situation. That is where the Opposition amendment breaks down
totally. If I am critical in any way of the Queen's Speech, I am far
more critical of the Opposition amendment to it. I sincerely hope that
the noble Lord the Leader of the Opposition will consider whether he
puts the matter to the vote. I hope that he will not do so. If he does
so, I hope that noble Lords, not only on this side of the House, will
tell him clearly that we do not need such an amendment at the conclusion
of a debate of this kind.



The Duke of Norfolk: My Lords, before the noble Lord sits down perhaps I
may ask him this question, with all the respect that I have for his
views on disarmament. Are we not in a wonderful position with NATO, and
in particular with the power of the nuclear weapons of the United States
underwriting decisions of the United Nations? Are we not lucky that we
have NATO with its nuclear weapons, and the United States in particular,
supporting the decisions of the United Nations?


Lord Jenkin of Putney: My Lords, if that is what the noble Duke
believes, he is entitled to do so. But he would not feel that way if he
were a member of almost any other nation in the world. The noble Duke
would speak in vain if he sought to convince most of the peoples of the
world that, because the United States is powerful and Europe is
beginning to say, "We, too, want to be equally powerful", that resolves
any dispute, or is a cause for gladness.


[Upon which Lord Jenkins' noble colleagues promptly changed the subject]



- -
 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, 17 Dec 1999 20:32:43 +1000
From: FoE Sydney - Nuclear Campaign <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) Will We survive Y2K? The Most Important issue for the next 14 days: You can help!

Will We survive Y2K? The Most Important issue for the next 14 days: You can
help!

Many of you are already working on a variety of environmental,
wantinuclear, and weapons issues.
You may react to this by saying 'I'm already doing my bit for the panet'.

You may even be working on something that is much more important in the
long run.

This will only occupy your attention for the next 14(10 really) days. But
it is possibly the single most important short term issue we could possibly
face.

What you do over the next 10 days or so could possibly affect whether we
will around to campaign on anything else.

But if there turns out to have been no problem what you do will still be
very helpful.

At the end of the next 14 days, the largest, oldest, most complex, most
deeply interconnected, and previously least Y2K - compliant computer
command and control systems in the world will experience Y2K.

These are of course, the systems that perform command, control,
communications, and monitoring for nuclear weapons systems.

There are some 2,000 warheads in 500  land-based minuteman ICBMs in the US,
and some 3,600 warheads in land- based ICBMs in Russia, on permanent 24
hour hairtrigger alert, with gyros spinning ready for launch at a moments
notice. That doesn't count warheads in SLBMs or bombers.

The launch of all 5,600 warheads could end all human life,  would certainly
end civilisation, and would do irreperable and very profound damage to the
entire web of life on earth.

The Pentagon has spent over $4 billion and it says it is totally confident
its systems will cope.

The Russians say their control systems for their nuclear weapons do not
utilise the date and will cope.

Privately however, US officers worry about blank screens, false data, and
communications blackouts.

The Canberra Commission reccommended as far back as 1996 that as a first
step toward nuclear abolition, nuclear weapons be taken off hairtrigger
alert. The Tokyo Forum has also called for this to be done.

Two UN resolutions passed this year and another two passed this year have
called for de-alerting.

Two resolutions of the Australian Senate and a resolution passed
unanimously by the European Parliament have called for nuclear weapons to
be taken off alert over the Y2k rollover.

Presidents Clinton and Yeltsin and their Secretaries of Defence have been
the recipients of a very large number of letters from NGOs all round the
world calling for nuclear weapons to be taken off alert.

So far there is no indication that they will do this.

Instead, Yeltsin has threatened the US, saying they should remember that
Russia has a large nuclear arsenal and has deployed ten of the latest
Topol-M missiles on full alert.

Nontheless, there are indications that the campaign has at least been noticed.

And what will actually happen on the night of the rollover has implications
that are about as ultimate as they could be.

Hopefully nothing at all will happen.  If nothing happens we will still be
here.

However, what will determine the future of us all and of all life is
exactly how a possible false alert will be dealt with.

That is why it is essential for the Pentagon and the Kremlin to hear our
voices over the next 15 days.

*That is why I am asking everybody I can to place the Y2K de- alert
campaign at the top of their priority lists for the next 14 (or more
realistically the next 10) days.*

There are lots of campaigns that are important.

There are lots of campaigns that have much more profound long term
implications than this one.

But we have to get through the Dec31/Jan1 rollover at the very least. Its
all a bit pointless if we accidentally make the planet uninhabitable by a
simple and utterly mindless computer glitch.

And of course it has been pointed out to me that  there may be Y2K -
related glitches in command and control systems for months or even years
afterwards.

The danger from all of this would disappear almost completely of course if
the 5.600 weapons now on 24 hour hairtrigger alert in the US and Russia
(land - based ICBMs only) were taken off alert.

With luck all this will prove to have been without foundation.  But even
without Y2K, there have been a series of hair- raising near- misses.

What we are dealing with is a classic 'High-Consequence, low- probability'
event.

But there is nothing to lose. A massive manifestation of global concern,
focussed on the Kremlin and the Pentagon is the best shot we have at giving
the world the best chance of getting through the new year.
And whatever happens on 31/1, this campaign puts 'de- alerting' on the map
as an all- round good idea.

And with luck nothing whatsoever will happen, and we'll all be wrong - till
the next hairraising near miss.

I am asking everyone to consider whether the possible risk and the possible
stakes over the rollover, even if the risk turns out to be very small
indeed, don't warrant your concerted effort for at least the next week, so
that we are sure we will be around for those high- priority, long - term,
deeper implication, campaigns.

Think about it. But not for too long.  There are only 14 days and you need
to act as soon as possible.

Tell Cohen, Clinton, and the Kremlin that we do not need to have 5,600
warheads on 24 hour a day ready- to launch status.

Tell them we want to know every time there is a false alarm or a near miss.

Ask them to extend the operational period of the joint Y2K strategic
stability centre at least through May, and preferably indefinitely.

The fax number of US Defence Secy William Cohen is [phone]
Bill Clinton's fax is [phone]
The Kremlin fax is [phone]

The cost of a single page A4 fax to Russia, as counted on a telephone bill
from Australia is $1.00-$1.50, but public fax agencies charge an arm and a
leg just to dial the number.

You can fax for free on  http://www.fax4free.com

(But the best fax is HANDWRITTEN).

*If you are an organisation* and want to sign a large sign- on letter,
please sign the letter to Presidents Yeltsin and Clinton that is being
periodicaly faxed to them on
 http://homepages.tig.com.au/~foesyd/nuclear/bbletter.html

Sample letters to Cohen/Clinton and to Sergeyev are below. Do please
customise and abbreviate.

And have fun while saving the planet from (possibly) the apocalypse!

I wish us all luck,  and that nothing happens.



1)SAMPLE LETTER TO COHEN/CLINTON (Please customise and shorten)

TO:
WILLIAM COHEN, US SECRETARY OF DEFENCE, [phone],

PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON,  WHITE HOUSE, WASHINGTON, US,  [phone],
[phone].


Dear President Clinton and Secretary for Defence Cohen,

I am writing  to urge your administration to take US nuclear forces off
'hairtrigger alert' even if only during the Y2K rollover period,  to ask
that any false alarms or 'near misses' over the Y2K rollover and at any
other time be reported publicly,  and to ask that the Y2K strategic
stability centre's operations be extended preferably indefinitely but at
least till May.

There is little time to act, and an immediate decision to place nuclear
weapons in a status in which immediate launch is impossible is essential to
ensure global stability.

As you will be aware, the European Parliament recently voted to ask you and
President Yeltsin to do as the UK has already done, and de-alert nuclear
weapons.

De-alerting of nuclear forces was strongly recommended by the Canberra
Commission in 1996 and then by the Tokyo Forum,  as a way to develop
strategic stability and build trust between the US and Russia. It has also
been incorporated into last year's  and  this years text of the New Agenda
Resolution in the UN General Assembly. It has also been reccommended by a
resolution specifically on the subject passed by last years General
Assembly and by this years First Committee on Reduction of Nuclear Dangers.
In addition it has been the subject of two resolutions passed by the
Australian Senate on 12 August and 20September, and finally it has been
clearly requested by the European Parliament. It is also the subject of
congressional resolution H.Con Res177 put by Edward Markey, and most
recently, the City of Berkley has asked for it.

De-Alerting and the establishment of the Y2K strategic stability centre are
not in competition with each other.  Indeed, we urge strongly that the
strategic stability centres operations be extended indefinitely.

Reductions in the number of weapons, the establishment of shared early
warning centers and de-alerting are all  vital to the reduction of tension
and the establishment of strategic stability.

This is particularly the case in view of the uncertainties posed by the
millennium date change (Y2K).

As you are well aware, the largest and oldest computer system complexes in
the world are those that control nuclear weapons systems.

The very nature of the Y2K problem makes it impossible to be sure
everything has been fixed until well into the new year.

Russia has, until recently, made little effort to even  acknowledge the Y2K
problem, let alone fix it. It is therefore quite possible that Russian
computerized control systems are not Y2K compliant and that they will
experience widespread failures during the Y2K rollover period.

Even more disquieting is the fact that that the Russians have constructed
the system known as 'Perimeter', or the 'dead hand'. This system seems to
include additional ways in which Y2K failure might lead to an accidental
launch.

The establishment of a Y2K strategic stability center in Colorado is
certainly an advantageous move and an absolutely essential one, but  it
does not entirely remove the danger of an accidental launch of nuclear
weapons.

The fact that the Center is scheduled, as far as we the public are aware,
to come into operation only on December 27th, four days prior to the
rollover, is far from reassuring. A four day delay will render it useless.

Similarly, the center itself will depend on the availability of
ultra-reliable hotlines between it and Moscow. The  Y2K vulnerabilities
recently discovered in six of the seven hotlines  on which US/Russian
communications depends, are also cause for deep concern.

If nuclear weapons are removed from a status in which they can be launched
within minutes, and placed in one which would require at least days to
launch, the risk of an accidental missile launch induced by Y2K or other
errors in command and control systems will be virtually eliminated.

This  has already been done by the UK, which has moved the 'notice to fire'
for its missile forces from minutes to days.

The United States is making a serious error in failing to consider
de-alerting.  Failure to take nuclear forces off hairtrigger alert over the
Y2K 'rollover' period is an error that has the potential of causing
unthinkable consequences.

The probability of this may be low,  but it  will never be zero as long as
nuclear forces remain on hair-trigger alert.  This will continue to be so
after the immmediate y2k 'rollover' period.

In a previous administration, President Bush took strategic bomber forces
off alert. We urge you to do this with all US nuclear forces.

(SIGNED)
etc.

2)SAMPLE LETTER TO YELTSIN/DEFENCE MINISTER SERGEYEV  (Please customise and
shorten)


PRESIDENT BORIS YELTSIN,  IGOR SERGEYEV,  RUSSIAN DEFENCE MINISTER,
[phone],

Dear Defence Minister Sergeyev and President Yeltsin,

I am writing to convey my deep concern that Y2K-related computer failures
in the command and control systems for nuclear weapons may lead to an
accidental nuclear war.

I am aware that both Russia and the US have taken this problem seriously
enough to establish a joint strategic stability center in Colorado.
However, I am very much concerned that this facility will come into
operation only by 27th December 1999, so that a delay of just four days
will make it useless.

This facility is however, essential to the security of the world, and
should continue to operate indefinitely.

I am also very much concerned that Y2K problems have been found recently in
six out of seven of the 'hotlines' that would be used if a crisis of any
sort arose over the Y2K rollover period.

I am aware that there have been a number of occasions when either the US or
Russia have mistakenly believed that the other nation was in the process of
launching a nuclear attack.

With 3,600 Russian warheads on 700 missiles and 2,000 US warheads on 500
missiles, with each side capable to launch within roughly 20 minutes, this
must never be allowed to happen, either over the Y2K 'rollover', or at any
other time.

The use of 5,600 warheads would certainly mean the end of what we call
civilization, would likely mean the end of the human race and could
possibly mean the end of all life.

I therefore urge both you and the United States, to place all your nuclear
forces in a status in which at least days not minutes, would be required to
launch . The United Kingdom has, I understand, already done this.

The European Parliament has recently called on both the US and Russia to
de-alert nuclear weapons and to place them in a state similar to that in
which the UK has placed its weapons. De-alerting of nuclear forces was
strongly recommended by the Canberra Commission in 1996 and then by the
Tokyo Forum,  as a way to develop strategic stability and build trust
between the US and Russia. It has also been incorporated into last year's
and  this years text of the New Agenda Resolution in the UN General
Assembly. It has also been reccommended by a resolution specifically on the
subject passed by last years General Assembly and by this years First
Committee on Reduction of Nuclear Dangers. In addition it has been the
subject of two resolutions passed by the Australian Senate on 12 August and
20September, and finally it has been clearly requested by the European
Parliament. It is also the subject of congressional resolution H.Con Res177
put by Edward Markey, and most recently, the City of Berkley has asked for
it.

In this context I am particularly concerned that statements have been made
in which the threat of nuclear weapons has been raised, and that new
missiles have been deployed and placed on alert status.

As what is at stake is potentially the survival of the entire planet, no
considerations, even the highest considerations of national security, can
take priority.

The immediate stakes are so high and the potential for global catastrophe
is so great, that  de-alerting of nuclear forces in the face of the Y2K
computer problem and the long - term possibility of false alerts must take
precedence over all other considerations of political and national
security.'
(Signed)
etc.

John Hallam
Friends of the Earth Sydney,
17 Lord street, Newtown, NSW, Australia,
Fax[phone]  ph (61)(2)9517-3903
[e-mail]
http://homepages.tig.com.au/~foesyd
http://homepages.tig.com.au/~foesyd/nuclear/bbletter.html








- -
 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, 17 Dec 1999 20:32:43 +1000
From: FoE Sydney - Nuclear Campaign <[e-mail]>
Subject: (abolition-usa) Will We survive Y2K? The Most Important issue for the next 14 days: You can help!

Will We survive Y2K? The Most Important issue for the next 14 days: You can
help!

Many of you are already working on a variety of environmental,
wantinuclear, and weapons issues.
You may react to this by saying 'I'm already doing my bit for the panet'.

You may even be working on something that is much more important in the
long run.

This will only occupy your attention for the next 14(10 really) days. But
it is possibly the single most important short term issue we could possibly
face.

What you do over the next 10 days or so could possibly affect whether we
will around to campaign on anything else.

But if there turns out to have been no problem what you do will still be
very helpful.

At the end of the next 14 days, the largest, oldest, most complex, most
deeply interconnected, and previously least Y2K - compliant computer
command and control systems in the world will experience Y2K.

These are of course, the systems that perform command, control,
communications, and monitoring for nuclear weapons systems.

There are some 2,000 warheads in 500  land-based minuteman ICBMs in the US,
and some 3,600 warheads in land- based ICBMs in Russia, on permanent 24
hour hairtrigger alert, with gyros spinning ready for launch at a moments
notice. That doesn't count warheads in SLBMs or bombers.

The launch of all 5,600 warheads could end all human life,  would certainly
end civilisation, and would do irreperable and very profound damage to the
entire web of life on earth.

The Pentagon has spent over $4 billion and it says it is totally confident
its systems will cope.

The Russians say their control systems for their nuclear weapons do not
utilise the date and will cope.

Privately however, US officers worry about blank screens, false data, and
communications blackouts.

The Canberra Commission reccommended as far back as 1996 that as a first
step toward nuclear abolition, nuclear weapons be taken off hairtrigger
alert. The Tokyo Forum has also called for this to be done.

Two UN resolutions passed this year and another two passed this year have
called for de-alerting.

Two resolutions of the Australian Senate and a resolution passed
unanimously by the European Parliament have called for nuclear weapons to
be taken off alert over the Y2k rollover.

Presidents Clinton and Yeltsin and their Secretaries of Defence have been
the recipients of a very large number of letters from NGOs all round the
world calling for nuclear weapons to be taken off alert.

So far there is no indication that they will do this.

Instead, Yeltsin has threatened the US, saying they should remember that
Russia has a large nuclear arsenal and has deployed ten of the latest
Topol-M missiles on full alert.

Nontheless, there are indications that the campaign has at least been noticed.

And what will actually happen on the night of the rollover has implications
that are about as ultimate as they could be.

Hopefully nothing at all will happen.  If nothing happens we will still be
here.

However, what will determine the future of us all and of all life is
exactly how a possible false alert will be dealt with.

That is why it is essential for the Pentagon and the Kremlin to hear our
voices over the next 15 days.

*That is why I am asking everybody I can to place the Y2K de- alert
campaign at the top of their priority lists for the next 14 (or more
realistically the next 10) days.*

There are lots of campaigns that are important.

There are lots of campaigns that have much more profound long term
implications than this one.

But we have to get through the Dec31/Jan1 rollover at the very least. Its
all a bit pointless if we accidentally make the planet uninhabitable by a
simple and utterly mindless computer glitch.

And of course it has been pointed out to me that  there may be Y2K -
related glitches in command and control systems for months or even years
afterwards.

The danger from all of this would disappear almost completely of course if
the 5.600 weapons now on 24 hour hairtrigger alert in the US and Russia
(land - based ICBMs only) were taken off alert.

With luck all this will prove to have been without foundation.  But even
without Y2K, there have been a series of hair- raising near- misses.

What we are dealing with is a classic 'High-Consequence, low- probability'
event.

But there is nothing to lose. A massive manifestation of global concern,
focussed on the Kremlin and the Pentagon is the best shot we have at giving
the world the best chance of getting through the new year.
And whatever happens on 31/1, this campaign puts 'de- alerting' on the map
as an all- round good idea.

And with luck nothing whatsoever will happen, and we'll all be wrong - till
the next hairraising near miss.

I am asking everyone to consider whether the possible risk and the possible
stakes over the rollover, even if the risk turns out to be very small
indeed, don't warrant your concerted effort for at least the next week, so
that we are sure we will be around for those high- priority, long - term,
deeper implication, campaigns.

Think about it. But not for too long.  There are only 14 days and you need
to act as soon as possible.

Tell Cohen, Clinton, and the Kremlin that we do not need to have 5,600
warheads on 24 hour a day ready- to launch status.

Tell them we want to know every time there is a false alarm or a near miss.

Ask them to extend the operational period of the joint Y2K strategic
stability centre at least through May, and preferably indefinitely.

The fax number of US Defence Secy William Cohen is [phone]
Bill Clinton's fax is [phone]
The Kremlin fax is [phone]

The cost of a single page A4 fax to Russia, as counted on a telephone bill
from Australia is $1.00-$1.50, but public fax agencies charge an arm and a
leg just to dial the number.

You can fax for free on  http://www.fax4free.com

(But the best fax is HANDWRITTEN).

*If you are an organisation* and want to sign a large sign- on letter,
please sign the letter to Presidents Yeltsin and Clinton that is being
periodicaly faxed to them on
 http://homepages.tig.com.au/~foesyd/nuclear/bbletter.html

Sample letters to Cohen/Clinton and to Sergeyev are below. Do please
customise and abbreviate.

And have fun while saving the planet from (possibly) the apocalypse!

I wish us all luck,  and that nothing happens.



1)SAMPLE LETTER TO COHEN/CLINTON (Please customise and shorten)

TO:
WILLIAM COHEN, US SECRETARY OF DEFENCE, [phone],

PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON,  WHITE HOUSE, WASHINGTON, US,  [phone],
[phone].


Dear President Clinton and Secretary for Defence Cohen,

I am writing  to urge your administration to take US nuclear forces off
'hairtrigger alert' even if only during the Y2K rollover period,  to ask
that any false alarms or 'near misses' over the Y2K rollover and at any
other time be reported publicly,  and to ask that the Y2K strategic
stability centre's operations be extended preferably indefinitely but at
least till May.

There is little time to act, and an immediate decision to place nuclear
weapons in a status in which immediate launch is impossible is essential to
ensure global stability.

As you will be aware, the European Parliament recently voted to ask you and
President Yeltsin to do as the UK has already done, and de-alert nuclear
weapons.

De-alerting of nuclear forces was strongly recommended by the Canberra
Commission in 1996 and then by the Tokyo Forum,  as a way to develop
strategic stability and build trust between the US and Russia. It has also
been incorporated into last year's  and  this years text of the New Agenda
Resolution in the UN General Assembly. It has also been reccommended by a
resolution specifically on the subject passed by last years General
Assembly and by this years First Committee on Reduction of Nuclear Dangers.
In addition it has been the subject of two resolutions passed by the
Australian Senate on 12 August and 20September, and finally it has been
clearly requested by the European Parliament. It is also the subject of
congressional resolution H.Con Res177 put by Edward Markey, and most
recently, the City of Berkley has asked for it.

De-Alerting and the establishment of the Y2K strategic stability centre are
not in competition with each other.  Indeed, we urge strongly that the
strategic stability centres operations be extended indefinitely.

Reductions in the number of weapons, the establishment of shared early
warning centers and de-alerting are all  vital to the reduction of tension
and the establishment of strategic stability.

This is particularly the case in view of the uncertainties posed by the
millennium date change (Y2K).

As you are well aware, the largest and oldest computer system complexes in
the world are those that control nuclear weapons systems.

The very nature of the Y2K problem makes it impossible to be sure
everything has been fixed until well into the new year.

Russia has, until recently, made little effort to even  acknowledge the Y2K
problem, let alone fix it. It is therefore quite possible that Russian
computerized control systems are not Y2K compliant and that they will
experience widespread failures during the Y2K rollover period.

Even more disquieting is the fact that that the Russians have constructed
the system known as 'Perimeter', or the 'dead hand'. This system seems to
include additional ways in which Y2K failure might lead to an accidental
launch.

The establishment of a Y2K strategic stability center in Colorado is
certainly an advantageous move and an absolutely essential one, but  it
does not entirely remove the danger of an accidental launch of nuclear
weapons.

The fact that the Center is scheduled, as far as we the public are aware,
to come into operation only on December 27th, four days prior to the
rollover, is far from reassuring. A four day delay will render it useless.

Similarly, the center itself will depend on the availability of
ultra-reliable hotlines between it and Moscow. The  Y2K vulnerabilities
recently discovered in six of the seven hotlines  on which US/Russian
communications depends, are also cause for deep concern.

If nuclear weapons are removed from a status in which they can be launched
within minutes, and placed in one which would require at least days to
launch, the risk of an accidental missile launch induced by Y2K or other
errors in command and control systems will be virtually eliminated.

This  has already been done by the UK, which has moved the 'notice to fire'
for its missile forces from minutes to days.

The United States is making a serious error in failing to consider
de-alerting.  Failure to take nuclear forces off hairtrigger alert over the
Y2K 'rollover' period is an error that has the potential of causing
unthinkable consequences.

The probability of this may be low,  but it  will never be zero as long as
nuclear forces remain on hair-trigger alert.  This will continue to be so
after the immmediate y2k 'rollover' period.

In a previous administration, President Bush took strategic bomber forces
off alert. We urge you to do this with all US nuclear forces.

(SIGNED)
etc.

2)SAMPLE LETTER TO YELTSIN/DEFENCE MINISTER SERGEYEV  (Please customise and
shorten)


PRESIDENT BORIS YELTSIN,  IGOR SERGEYEV,  RUSSIAN DEFENCE MINISTER,
[phone],

Dear Defence Minister Sergeyev and President Yeltsin,

I am writing to convey my deep concern that Y2K-related computer failures
in the command and control systems for nuclear weapons may lead to an
accidental nuclear war.

I am aware that both Russia and the US have taken this problem seriously
enough to establish a joint strategic stability center in Colorado.
However, I am very much concerned that this facility will come into
operation only by 27th December 1999, so that a delay of just four days
will make it useless.

This facility is however, essential to the security of the world, and
should continue to operate indefinitely.

I am also very much concerned that Y2K problems have been found recently in
six out of seven of the 'hotlines' that would be used if a crisis of any
sort arose over the Y2K rollover period.

I am aware that there have been a number of occasions when either the US or
Russia have mistakenly believed that the other nation was in the process of
launching a nuclear attack.

With 3,600 Russian warheads on 700 missiles and 2,000 US warheads on 500
missiles, with each side capable to launch within roughly 20 minutes, this
must never be allowed to happen, either over the Y2K 'rollover', or at any
other time.

The use of 5,600 warheads would certainly mean the end of what we call
civilization, would likely mean the end of the human race and could
possibly mean the end of all life.

I therefore urge both you and the United States, to place all your nuclear
forces in a status in which at least days not minutes, would be required to
launch . The United Kingdom has, I understand, already done this.

The European Parliament has recently called on both the US and Russia to
de-alert nuclear weapons and to place them in a state similar to that in
which the UK has placed its weapons. De-alerting of nuclear forces was
strongly recommended by the Canberra Commission in 1996 and then by the
Tokyo Forum,  as a way to develop strategic stability and build trust
between the US and Russia. It has also been incorporated into last year's
and  this years text of the New Agenda Resolution in the UN General
Assembly. It has also been reccommended by a resolution specifically on the
subject passed by last years General Assembly and by this years First
Committee on Reduction of Nuclear Dangers. In addition it has been the
subject of two resolutions passed by the Australian Senate on 12 August and
20September, and finally it has been clearly requested by the European
Parliament. It is also the subject of congressional resolution H.Con Res177
put by Edward Markey, and most recently, the City of Berkley has asked for
it.

In this context I am particularly concerned that statements have been made
in which the threat of nuclear weapons has been raised, and that new
missiles have been deployed and placed on alert status.

As what is at stake is potentially the survival of the entire planet, no
considerations, even the highest considerations of national security, can
take priority.

The immediate stakes are so high and the potential for global catastrophe
is so great, that  de-alerting of nuclear forces in the face of the Y2K
computer problem and the long - term possibility of false alerts must take
precedence over all other considerations of political and national
security.'
(Signed)
etc.

John Hallam
Friends of the Earth Sydney,
17 Lord street, Newtown, NSW, Australia,
Fax[phone]  ph (61)(2)9517-3903
[e-mail]
http://homepages.tig.com.au/~foesyd
http://homepages.tig.com.au/~foesyd/nuclear/bbletter.html







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

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

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 09:51:49 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: (abolition-usa) A2000 submission to Millennium Forum

Dear friends,

Below is a submission made on behalf of the Abolition 2000 network by the
coordinating committee in an early stage of the development of the
Millennium Forum's positions and also in an attempt to influence Kofi
Annan's March 2000 report concerning the agenda for the next century.

The Millennium Forum is a civil society process culminating in a meeting to
be held in New York at the United Nations, hosted by UN Department of Public
Information and NGOs, 22-26 May 2000. This in turn is intended to influence
the Millennium Summit of heads of state to be held in New York September
6-9, 2000, as well as the Millennium session of the General Assembly in
autumn 2000. Those interested in participating should look at
www.millenniumforum.org and also www.un.org/millennium. Note that the number
of civil society groups participating will be limited by the space available
to 1400 persons from around the world. There's an at least
tentative 1 February 2000 deadline for applying. See separate message for
more info re registering/applying.

The below document reflects, we believe, already established Abolition 2000
positions and views. It is not intended to be comparable to the 1995
statement, the Moorea Declaration, and other declarations and resolutions
adopted at Abolition 2000 meetings. But, it may be helpful in thinking about
what analysis, rhetoric, and programmatic positions Abolition 2000 should
present at the NPT Review Conference, and in developing any documents that
we wish to release next year in connection with the Conference or other
events. We were not seeking to set forth a comprehensive set of demands,
only a select few of high priority.

ABOLITION 2000 CONTRIBUTION to PEACE, SECURITY, AND DISARMAMENT
SUBCOMMITTEE OF MILLENNIUM FORUM

14 December 1999
Our vision is a world free of nuclear weapons and the intolerable threat that
they pose to humankind, the environment and all living creatures. It is a
vision the United Nations General Assembly recognized in its very first
resolution, which sought to address "the elimination from national
armaments of atomic weapons and all other major weapons adaptable to mass
destruction." It is a vision reaffirmed in numerous resolutions of the
General Assembly throughout the past five decades.

Our vision is a world in which the obligations of Article VI of the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty are adhered to by all states.

Our vision is a world in which the obligation to achieve nuclear disarmament
"in all its aspects" set forth in the 1996 opinion of the International Court
of Justice is acted upon by all states.

Our vision is a world in which no nation's security rests upon threatening
the "ultimate evil" of murdering tens of millions of innocent people by
means of nuclear annihilation.

The obstacles to achieving this vision have been created by the nuclear
weapons states, which have continued to rely upon nuclear deterrence as the
cornerstone of their defense policies and have actively resisted all pleas
to meet their obligations under international law as well as their moral
obligations to humanity and the earth.

A decade after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the danger of intentional or
accidental use of nuclear weapons remains very real. Nuclear tests in South
Asia, wars in the Balkans and Chechnya, and plans for theater and national
missile defense systems have introduced new nuclear tensions.

In 1995, citizens' organizations at the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
(NPT) Review and Extension Conference released a statement calling for the
implementation of NPT disarmament obligations through the commencement of
negotiations leading to the conclusion by the year 2000 of a nuclear weapons
abolition convention setting out a binding schedule for the elimination of
nuclear arsenals. Over 1400 organizations have endorsed this statement, and
comprise the Abolition 2000 Global Network. In 1999, the abolition of nuclear
weapons was adopted as a core program of the Hague Appeal for Peace, a
multi-issue, international civil society initiative. Public opinion polls
show over 80% support for a nuclear weapons convention in most NATO
countries and nuclear weapon states, including the United States and United
Kingdom. The General Assembly and the European Parliament have both adopted
resolutions calling for a nuclear weapons convention. A Model Nuclear
Weapons Convention, demonstrating the feasibility of nuclear abolition, has
been circulated within the United Nations.

Nonetheless, the states possessing nuclear weapons show few signs of
willingness to relinquish their nuclear arsenals. Instead, they are
continuing with deployment of nuclear weapons and deterrence policies
including massive retaliation and, for most, an option of first-use. They
also spend vast amounts on infrastructure to enable the indefinite
maintenance of their arsenals, and continue to research and develop new
nuclear weapons and to test them through a variety of means. Most refuse the
commencement of multilateral negotiations on nuclear disarmament.

To end reliance on nuclear weapons, the doctrine of deterrence must be
squarely rejected as a viable basis for international security. It instead
must be recognized as illegal, immoral, and irresponsible. True security can
only be found in abolition of nuclear weapons, global demilitarization, and
strengthening of the war prevention and dispute resolution capabilities of
the United Nations and other international institutions.

At the dawn of the new millennium, the world's governments must move
rapidly to fulfill the promise of complete nuclear disarmament expressed by
the first General Assembly resolution. Urgent actions include:

1. Immediate commencement of multilateral negotiations leading towards the
early conclusion of a nuclear weapons convention that requires the phased
elimination of all nuclear weapons within a timebound framework, with
provisions for effective verification and enforcement. Such negotiations
could take place in the Conference on Disarmament, or in a special conference
convened by NPT parties, the General Assembly, or interested states.

2. Achievement of global zero alert through the withdrawal of all nuclear
weapons from foreign soil and international waters and de-alerting,
de-mating, and disabling of nuclear forces.

3. Cessation of further design, development and testing of nuclear weapons by
any means, closure of all nuclear test sites, and cessation of the further
nuclearization and militarization of space.

4. Commitments to non-use of nuclear weapons and declarations recognizing the
illegality, immorality, and irresponsibility of doctrines of nuclear
deterrence.

5. Reallocation of resources to ensure a sustainable global future and to
redress the environmental devastation and human suffering caused by nuclear
weapons production and testing, which have been disproportionately borne by
the worldÆs indigenous peoples.

- - Submitted by the Coordinating Committee on behalf of
the Abolition 2000 Global Network to Eliminate Nuclear Weapons
(Janet Bloomfield,* UK, Jacqueline Cabasso,* USA, Pol D'Huyvetter, Belgium,
David Krieger,* USA, Richard Salvador, Belau, Alice Slater,* USA, Hiro
Umebayashi, Japan, Alyn Ware,* New Zealand (alternate, John Burroughs,* New
York), Ross Wilcock, Canada) * = drafter

John Burroughs
Executive Director
Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy
New York

- -
 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 #237
***********************************

-
 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.