|
WHAT'S NEW IN INES? |
||||
|
No. 31/2002 |
Dateline: November 14, 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. 31/2002
MEMBERSHIP AND PROJECTS' NEWS
USA: Nuclear Age Peace Foundation (NAPF), The Sunflower, No. 66, November 2002
Back issues: http://www.wagingpeace.org/sf/backissues.html Events are listed at: http://www.wagingpeace.org/calendar/events_current.html
The November 2002 issue of The Sunflower covers the following:
To read "The Sunflower", please send an email to Carah Lynn Ong, Director of Research and Publications: < >
or goto: http://www.wagingpeace.org/sf/index.html (The newsletter is also available in pdf format online)
THE US POLICY ON IRAQ
(SPECIAL SECTION)
More than 13,000 US academics oppose a US invasion of Iraq (Source: Sydney Morning Herald, 2 November 02)
More than 13,000 United States academics have signed an open letter opposing a US invasion of Iraq, arguing that President George Bush has failed to make his case for war.
In the letter, on the internet at: http://www.noiraqattack.org, the scholars say Mr. Bush has failed to demonstrate a credible threat from Iraq's President Saddam Hussein, failed to mobilise an international coalition in support of its aims, and even failed to persuade some of its own supporters of the merit of such a step.
"The decision to go to war should have the clear support of the US Congress, the Secretary of State, and the commanding officers of the armed forces," they argue.
"The likelihood of a high cost in lives of both combatants and non-combatants is too great given the weak justifications that have been offered for an invasion."
The signatories went on to suggest that the mooted invasion risked increasing regional and global instability by raising tensions between Israel and the Palestinians, boosting the popular appeal of radical Islamist movements, and increasing anti-US sentiment, among other things.
"As educators and scholars we hope our message sparks informed discussion on- and off-campus that reaches to Washington DC," they conclude.
The letter was the idea of a geology lecturer at the University of Minnesota who passed it around to a few colleagues and got it published on September 17 in the university paper, the Minnesota Daily. The letter was later posted on the internet by someone at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and by the beginning of November contained nearly 30,000 signatures.
US, French and Russian Security Council Resolution drafts on Iraq
Colin Rowat of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq (CASI) has recently disseminated a brief comparative analysis of the US, French and Russian Security Council Resolution drafts on Iraq. This is available from the WNII Editor as an rtf-formatted email attachment.
NOTE in addition, that at CASI's homepage, you can find a list of links to Iraq-related UN Security Council Resolutions, including Resolution 1441 adopted on November 8, with associated documentation: http://www.casi.org.uk/info/scriraq.html
Abolition 2000 statement on Iraq
The Global Council of Abolition 2000 has issued a statement on the situation with Iraq: http://www.abolition2000.org/statementsandreleases/iraq_statement_en.html
This statement was faxed to the members of the UN Security Council, along with the text of the Abolition 2000 founding statement, the Moorea Declaration, and the Saffron Walden Declaration.
IPPNW report "Collateral Damage: The Health and Environmental Costs of War on Iraq"
On 12 November, IPPNW has released this report worldwide. It has been elaborated by the British IPPNW affiliate and is based on projections from the 1990-91 Gulf War, which led to an estimated 205,000 casualties. It analyses current U.S. combat scenarios and concludes that a new conflict will be much more intense and destructive than the first Gulf War.
The report forecasts a huge death toll, a massive humanitarian crisis and long term health and environmental damage from any war on Iraq. A US-led attack on Iraq is likely to result in between 48,000 and 260,000 deaths during the first three months of combat. If nuclear weapons were used, the death toll would rise into the millions. The aftermath of such a military attack could include civil war, famine, epidemics, millions of refugees and economic collapse. Post-war health effects could take an additional 200,000 lives, according to the report.
You can find the report at: http://www.mapw.org.au/iraq/iraq-index.html
NUCLEAR WEAPONS
Abolition 2000 homepage: http://www.abolition2000.org Grassroots News: http://www.napf.org/abolition2000/news/
Australian NGOs call for WMD disarmament (Source: Friends of the Earth Australia press release, 9 November 02)
In an immediate response to UN Security Council Resolution 1441 on Iraq, the Australian NGOs Friends of the Earth Australia (FoEA), the Australian Peace Committee, the Medical Association for the Prevention of War, and Ozpeace called for all United Nations countries to declare their weapons of mass destruction capability and to make a commitment to totally disarm such weapons in a show of leadership to Iraq.
"The Permanent Five (P5) members of the Security Council have between them somewhere in the vicinity of 35,000 nuclear weapons and unknown arsenals of chemical and biological weapons," said Dimity Hawkins, FoEA spokesperson. "We ask that the P5 lead by example and declare to the world in full, accurate and complete terms all programs existing within their nations which rely on weapons of mass destruction."
"We must seek worldwide disarmament of weapons of mass destruction through diplomacy and agreement. War against any one nation is not an answer to the problem of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons. If we are talking about weapons of mass destruction we should start with those whom we know for certain actually have vast WMD arsenals - The US, Russia, France, the UK, China, India Pakistan and Israel." (FoEA nuclear weapons spokesperson John Hallam)
Nanotechnology, fourth generation nuclear weapons, etc
INESAP coordinator Regina Hagen draws your attention to the following two publications by Prof. Andre Gsponer from the Swiss-based Independent Scientific Research Institute:
Support for INES member Dr. Guillermo Miguel Eguiazu
Dear colleagues, dear friends! Our member Dr. Guillermo Miguel Eguiazu, professor at the University of Rosario, Argentina, conducts scientific research in the field of agricultural production and the influence of pesticides and other chemical compounds used in the agricultural practice. For years Eguiazu and his collaborator Alberto Motta acted for public measures to protect the consumers and the farmers against health-damaging technologies (e.g. cancer causing substances). They have developed measuring techniques and worked out prevention methods. They demanded legal regulation for e.g. protection against Aflatoxin in groceries. In the course of their investigations they came into conflict with established economic interests and, consequently, became subject of criticism and an increasing harassment by their faculty and the authorities of the university. Both about their work and the harassment Eguiazu and Motta have reported at the INES Conference in Stockholm, 2000. They were hindered in their research. Their laboratory interior and equipment was destroyed by unknown people. As a consequence, they had to move into a former chickens slaughterhouse with minimal research facilities. The financial support of their institute and their salaries were reduced by the government. The installation of gas and an adequate electricity supply for the laboratory were forbidden, although they would be privately sponsored. All the time Eguiazu was threatened that his institute would be closed if he would not stop his unwanted research. Since our letter campaign last year his situation has even got worse. In August of this year the local authorities indeed started an action to stop his activities. They sent a lawyer claiming the keys of the institute. All furniture and equipment were put on a truck and taken into a depository, where they are stored without being used. Eguiazu was able to save his personal belongings. The authorities, who initiated these reprisals are driven by the head of the Department of Agriculture of the University of Rosario, who is strictly committed to introduce so-called "modern agriculture technologies" including large scale use of pesticides, chemical fertilizers and the release of genetically engineered food plants. Eguiazu, who points to the severe risks of carelessly applying some of these techniques, is therefore the antagonist and is to be eliminated. The harsh behaviour of the authorities may have been triggered by a peculiar development. The Ministry of Education Science and Technology in Buenos Aires has established a committee named "Comisión Nacional de Categorizaciones" that has to evaluate the quality of all university professors and their research (*). In accordance with the National Universities and the "Consejo Interuniversitario Nacional," the committee classified 19 professors in the highest, 254 in a second category. The results were communicated to the faculties who had to inform the concerned professors. With a delay of 13 months the Faculty of Agriculture in Rosario informed Eguiazu that he was classified in the highest category. After the confirmation by the Minister the judgement of the committee was published on the Internet (**). >From the official publication it may be deduced that the advice of the faculty "Ciencias de la Salud" (Health Sciences) was crucial for Eguiazu's nomination. Obviously there is disagreement within the scientific world of Argentina. The higher rank of class 1 results in an increase in salary of the professor. This is in strong contrast with the 35% reduction of Eguiazu's salary that resulted from the deletion of his incentive several years ago. It seems that the high evaluation of Eguiazu by the independent government committee only hardened the position of the Faculty of Agriculture. Eguiazu strongly needs our help! Please support us and send a letter to the Minister of Education, Science and Technology in Buenos Aires. An example of a letter is given below. Please send us a copy of your letter.
Dr. Günter Emde (Founder of the International Network of Engineers and Scientists to Protect and Promote Ethical Engagement - INESPE) < > Prof. Armin Tenner (Chair of INES)
(*) The installation of the committee is part of the Programa de Incentivos a los Docentes Investigadores (**) http://incentivos.spu.edu.ar/banco/r_042060.htm
Background: Dr. Guillermo Eguiazu, born in 1951, studied agriculture. In 1976 he found, together with Alberto Motta, Aflatoxin (a kind of micotoxin) in yellow corn in the area around Rosario and Santa Fe. He moved to Germany to find out more about this phenomenon. He received his doctorate in 1983 at the University in Stuttgart for his studies on causes, analysis techniques and different kinds of protection concerning fungal poisoning during the cultivation of grain. In 1984 he founded the institute INCABIE (Instituto de la calidad biologica y ecotoxicologia - Institute for Biological Quality and Ecotoxicology) together with Alberto Motta. Prof. Eguiazu is teaching at the University Rosario; he is member of the National Research Council in Argentina.
Example letter:
Ministerio de Educación, Ciencia y Tecnología Ministro Pizurno 935 1° Piso Of. 114 (1020) Capital Federal Buenos Aires Republic Argentina
Right Honourable Minister, I am writing on behalf of Dr. G. M. Eguiazu and Mr. A. Motta and their research activities at the Institute for Biological Quality and Ecotoxicology (INCABIE) at the University of Rosario. Last year we were informed that the financial support for the absolutely basic needs of materials and work equipment for this laboratory as well as the yearly benefits and financial incentives were withheld. We sent you a letter to protest against this situation. Unfortunately, the situation of Dr. Eguiazu and his staff and institute did not at all improve. On the contrary, he was threatened with the closure of his institute if he would not stop his unwanted research. Now, in August 2002, after a first attempt in March, this threat was put into effect. The local authorities finally succeeded to stop his activities. They closed the entry door of the institute, confiscated all equipment (except personal belongings) and took it to a depository, where it is stored without being used. We protest against these actions against a nationally and internationally reputable scientist who is trying to examine and analyze health risks of modern agricultural techniques. We cannot understand how in a democratic state it is possible to stop research activities conducted in the interest of the citizens. We could observe that the appreciation for Eguiazu and the indignation at his treatment can also be found inside Argentina. Eguiazu as a professor and researcher was classified at level 1 by the Comisión Nacional de Categorizaciones of your Ministry. In a letter to the President of the Rosario University, 172 students took the initiative to protest against the forced closure of the institute INCABIE. They stressed the importance of the institute for the scientific-technical establishment of Argentina and for the education of a critical academic society. We ask you to provide necessary room and support for Eguiazu, his institute and his staff, and to enable them to resume their work. INCABIE and its scientists must be protected and supported and should enjoy the necessary academic and scientific freedom to carry out their objectives in cooperation and dialog with the corresponding international scientific community. With this letter we expect to contribute to the continuity of INCABIE's valuable research and Prof. Eguiazu's dedicated engagement in the interest of the public. Yours sincerely,
CONFERENCES, MEETINGS, SEMINARS
Climate policy for the longer term: from here to where?
For more details, contact Georgina Wright: < > http://www.riia.org
International Conference on Energy and the Environment (ICEE)
For more details, contact Daoping Liu: < > http://www.gwu.edu/%7Eeem/ICEE/firstpagenew.htm
International Solar Energy Society (ISES) Solar World Congress 2003
For more details, contact: < > http://www.hvac.chalmers.se/seas/
World Conference on Climate Change
For more details, contact the Conference Secretariat: < > http://www.meteo.ru/wccc2003/econc.htm
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. 31/2002 what's new in ines < < < < <