|
WHAT'S NEW IN INES? |
||||
|
No. 25/2002 |
Dateline: September 25, 2002 |
|||
This is the weekly electronic information service of the International Network of Engineers and Scientists for Global Responsibility
Editor: Tobias Damjanov, e-mail:
WNII is archived at: http://inesglobal.org/archive.htm
INES homepages: http://inesglobal.org http://www.inesglobal.com/
INES International Office
INES Chair: Prof. Armin Tenner [Please note that the first "1" in q18 is the number one, while the last "l" is an "L"]
CONTENTS of WNII No. 25/2002
Re: "An Ethical Career in Science and Technology?" (from WNII 23/2002)
Kate Maloney, administrator of the UK Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR), informs that the booklet "An Ethical Career in Science and Technology?" is also available in pdf format and can be downloaded (free!) from: http://www.sgr.org.uk
THE US POLICY ON IRAQ
(SPECIAL SECTION)
David Krieger: Stop War Against Iraq: Speak Out and Act Now!
Dear Friends,
If you care about peace, now is the time to act.
The Bush administration is pushing ahead with plans for a preemptive war against Iraq, a war that would be immoral, illegal and would create a new cadre of terrorists bent on striking out at the US.
It is a war that will slaughter Iraqi civilians and kill young Americans.
It is a war that will drain our treasury and keep us from providing better education, shelter and health care for our people.
It is a war that is almost universally opposed by US allies and countries in the Middle East.
It is a war in which no one will win and everyone will lose.
It looks as though the Congress is prepared to go meekly along in supporting this mad rush to war. Congress is on a fast-track to consider war resolutions by next Friday (September 27th).
The only force that can stop Congress and the administration is the strong, clear voices of the American people speaking out for peace.
This is the time to make your voice heard and your presence felt if you care about a peaceful future.
I urge you to call or email your representatives in Congress now. If you oppose committing our nation to war, let them know.
David Krieger President, Nuclear Age Peace Foundation http://www.wagingpeace.org
Congressional Switchboard is
Senators: http://www.senate.gov/contacting/index.cfm
Representatives: http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.html
Press release by the Syndicat National de Chercheurs Scientifiques (SNCS)
The French INES member organisation Syndicat National de Chercheurs Scientifiques (SNCS: National Trade Union of Scientific Researchers) has issued the following press release:
The SNCS stands out against the unilateral will of the Bush administration to wage war against Iraq. To carry out such a plan would violate the UN Charter and the rules of the International Law. Moreover, there is no evidence today that the Iraqi government has succeeded since 1998 in disposing new weapons of mass destruction.
Considering and waging such a war shows irresponsibility. It is despising its disastrous consequences for the Iraqi people, consequences which would be also dangerous and destabilizing for the Middle West and for the whole world, particularly because it would considerably increase the risk of further and multiple acts of terrorism.
The SNCS supports the movements which oppose the war and organize demonstrations against it in the USA.
The SNCS requires the scientific community members to express their opposition to this war.
Paris, 17 September 2002
The French version of this statement is available on request from INES member Marc Ollivier: < >
The SNCS has also translated into French the statement of Richard Falk and David Krieger "No War Against Iraq" and published it in its journal.
Statement by Rep. Lynn Woolsey (Democrats-California), Press Conference Opposing Military Action in Iraq, 19 September 2002
Thank you, Rep. Kucinich for inviting me to speak today. I do not believe that our world, our children, the people of the Middle East or the citizens of Israel will be safer by going to war against Iraq. I believe that going to war against Iraq would be a mistake. The cost would be heavy in lives lost, dollars wasted and it would squander the goodwill of our allies.
The serious question is when will the human race work towards peace, rather than war. As citizens of the most educated and financially well-off country in history, when will we decide to put our strength and our energy and our creativity behind peace rather than destruction.
It is true that Saddam Hussein is a dictator he is a menace and the world would be better off without him. But, the world will also be better off if the United States works within the scope of international institutions instead of launching an unprovoked first-strike against Iraq. America’s greatest asset is our moral authority, not our military power. Attacking a sovereign country unprovoked forfeits that authority completely.
A war with Iraq will cost between $100-250 billion. Just think what we could do with that amount of money if we decided to invest in humanity rather than military hardware.
With $150 billion we could help developing countries in Africa by forgiving half of the continent’s debt, $112 billion would repair or rebuild all the public schools in the United States, and for only $12 million we could de-mine and replant the breadbasket of Afghanistan to help that nation recover from more than 20 years of continuous war.
We owe it to our children to exercise the full range of diplomatic options in Iraq, so we can prevent a war that will cost thousands of lives, and give a boost to our real enemies the terrorists who planned September 11.
War represents a failure of national policy. It is a last resort. America’s strength is our commitment to moral action and a government based on the rule of law. That law must never be silent, and our moral sensibilities must never be intimidated by fear.
Congressional coalition to oppose a U.S. military attack on Iraq? (Source: The Washington Times, 20 September 02)
On 19 September, a group of 19 House Democrats pledged to build a congressional coalition to oppose a U.S. military attack on Iraq. "Unilateral military action by the United States against Iraq is unjustified, unwarranted and illegal," said Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich, who predicted "dozens" more Democrats would join their group in coming days to oppose the Bush administration's plan for an attack. "The administration has failed to make the case that Iraq poses an imminent or immediate threat to the United States."
Mr. Kucinich, Ohio Democrat, has been leading the anti-war effort. He said there is no credible evidence linking Iraq to the September 11 terrorist attacks or to the al Qaeda network. Mr. Kucinich also said there is no credible evidence that Iraq possesses weapons of mass destruction.
The anti-war Democrats said a pre-emptive strike against Iraq would make the United States an aggressor, would be too costly financially and in terms of human life, and could be open-ended.
New articles and references
Miriam Pemberton*: The Economic Costs of Going to War with Iraq: http://www.fpif.org/commentary/2002/0209warimpact.html
* Miriam Pemberton < > is peace and security editor for Foreign Policy In Focus (online at http://www.fpif.org ), and delivered this testimony before Congress on September 13, 2002. See also the new "Project Against the Present Danger" of Foreign Policy in Focus at: http://www.presentdanger.org and the Foreign Policy in Focus Iraq Page: http://www.fpif.org/iraq/index.html
Charles Knight: First Strike Guidelines: the case of Iraq (Project on Defense Alternatives* Briefing Memo #25, 16 September 2002): http://www.comw.org/pda/0209schneider.html Assesses how the case of Iraq measures up within a set of guidelines for preemptive counterproliferation developed by the director of the Air Force Counterproliferation Center. Includes extensive notes with links to material relevant for making an informed decision about war.
* The Project on Defense Alternatives is part of The Commonwealth Institute, a US-based INES member organisation
US Secretary of State Colin Powell, testimony (as delivered) before US House of Representatives’ Committee on International Relations, 19 September 2002: http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2002/13581.htm
"Further Resolution on Iraq" (Bush resolution, 19 September) and a transcript of the White House background briefing: http://usinfo.state.gov/regional/nea/iraq/text/0919bush.htm
NOTE that there is an alternative resolution introduced by Barbara Lee and others [unfortunately, I could not find yet a proper URL where to find this; so if you wish to read it in full: it is available from the WNII Editor as an rtf-formatted email attachment.
The key paragraph of this resolution certainly is the following:
"… be it Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That the United States should work through the United Nations to seek to resolve the matter of ensuring that Iraq is not developing weapons of mass destruction, through mechanisms such as the resumption of weapons inspections, negotiation, enquiry, mediation, regional arrangements, and other peaceful means."
See also the Labour Party Counter Dossier released by the Labour Party members who oppose Tony Blair on the war: Alan Simpson, MP UK, Chair of Labour Against the War, and Dr Glen Rangwala, Lecturer in politics at Cambridge University, UK: The dishonest case for war on Iraq: http://www.traprockpeace.org/counter-dossier.html
SPECIAL SECTION ON US MISSILE DEFENSE POLICY
International Days of Protest to Stop the Militarization of Space (see also WNII 16/2002)
On October 4-11 protests in over 14 countries will be held as part of Keep Space for Peace Week: International Days of Protest to Stop the Militarization of Space. The protest events, held in local communities worldwide, will also speak out against U.S. war plans in the Middle East and how space is being used by the Pentagon to coordinate all war on the Earth. The events are being organized by the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space (GN).
According to GN Coordinator Bruce Gagnon, "Space wars have already begun. The Pentagon is now using NASA environmental satellite imagery to aid strike planning and weapons selection for Afghanistan and Iraq. Military satellites direct new high-tech weapons like the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) to hit targets on the ground. The so-called civilian space program has been taken over by the military. If that isn't bad enough, next the military wants to deploy weapons in space giving the U.S. Space Command full 'control and domination' of the planet for the benefit of the multi-national corporations."
In Australia, a national protest will be held 2,000 miles inside the center of the continent, at the U.S. Pine Gap space spy base that will also be used to help direct Star Wars. Other key actions will be held in places like England, Japan, Germany and throughout the U.S.
For a complete list of planned actions check the GN website at: http://www.space4peace.org
Abolition 2000 homepage: http://www.abolition2000.org Grassroots News: http://www.napf.org/abolition2000/news/
Cuba joins the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty http://www0.un.org/webcast/ga/57/statements/020914cubaE.htm
At the UN General Assembly, the Cuban representative, on 14 September, stated the following, among other things:
"Until today, and despite the fact that it has not developed and has no intention to develop nuclear weapons ever, Cuba has not been a State party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, for it is an insufficient and discriminatory instrument allowing the establishment of a club of nuclear powers without any concrete disarmament-oriented commitments. However, as a signal of the clear political will of the Cuban Government and its commitment to an effective disarmament process that ensures world peace, our country has decided to adhere to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. In doing so, we reaffirm our hope that all nuclear weapons will be totally eliminated under strict international verification."
2002 WORLD SUMMIT ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT NEWS
Trade Unions and the WSSD outcome
The Trade Union Advisory Committee to the OECD (TUAC) has provided an evaluation of the overall outcomes of the WSSD. This paper is available from the WNII Editor as an rtf-formatted email attachment.
For more information contact Lucien Royer, ICFTU/TUAC: < >
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
E-Conference on Communication for Environmentally Sustainable Development
EnvCom, a unit within the World Bank EXT vice-presidency, would like to invite you to participate in the E-Conference on Communication for Environmentally Sustainable Development, October 7-November 1, 2002.
This e-conference is intended to bring together the perspectives and experiences of environmental practitioners and communications specialists from various national environmental agencies, international organizations, academia, civil society and the media to establish a dialogue on how best to use strategic communication to support environment projects.
The conference will be organized around four main topics:
A new topic for discussion will be introduced each week. Each topic will be moderated by experts from leading academic centers, practitioners and/or experts from development agencies.
The conference proceedings will be presented to a broader audience in the World Bank so they apply ideas or test concrete experiences in Bank projects.
For more information visit the e-conference's webpage: http://www.worldbank.org/developmentcommunications
"The National Security Strategy of the United States" (Source: New York Times, 20 September 2002)
The document, titled "The National Security Strategy of the United States," is the first comprehensive explanation of the administration's foreign policy, from defense strategy to global warming. It is one that every president is required to submit to Congress.
The document is seen as the first comprehensive rationale for shifting American military strategy toward pre-emptive action against hostile states and terrorist groups developing weapons of mass destruction. The strategy document also states, for the first time, that the United States will never allow its military supremacy to be challenged the way it was during the cold war.
In the 33-page document, Mr. Bush also seeks to answer the critics of growing American muscle-flexing by insisting that the United States will exploit its military and economic power to encourage "free and open societies," rather than seek "unilateral advantage." It calls this union of values and national interests "a distinctly American internationalism."
One of the most striking elements of the new strategy document is its insistence "that the president has no intention of allowing any foreign power to catch up with the huge lead the United States has opened since the fall of the Soviet Union more than a decade ago." "Our forces will be strong enough," Mr. Bush's document states, "to dissuade potential adversaries from pursuing a military buildup in hopes of surpassing, or equaling, the power of the United States." The document argues that while the United States will seek allies in the battle against terrorism, "we will not hesitate to act alone, if necessary, to exercise our right of self-defense by acting pre-emptively." That includes "convincing or compelling states to accept their sovereign responsibilities" not to aid terrorists.
NOTE that the official PDF formatted is available from the White House website at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss.pdf
No new or changed email or web addresses in this issue. All INES e-mail addresses and homepages are available upon request from:
< < < < < end of No. 25/2002 what's new in ines < < < < <