Wednesday, March 20, 2002
Susan V. Thompson, ed.
Read online or subscribe at:
http://www.9-11peace.org/bulletin.php3
INTRODUCTION: THE MOST TERRIFYING WAR OF ALL
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Several weeks ago the conflict between India and Pakistan raised
the dangerous possibility that the "war on terrorism" could have
nuclear implications. Nuclear weapons have became an issue again
last week, but this time, controversy is raging over the nuclear
policies of the US itself.
The center of the controversy is a Pentagon document titled the
"Nuclear Policy Review" or NPR. The document was leaked to the LA
Times, which published the first report on it. The NPR advocates
building and testing smaller nuclear weapons and raises the
possibility of treating nuclear weapons as part of the regular
military arsenal of the US. This policy flies in the face of
ongoing international attempts to prevent another arms race, and
as a result many world leaders have reacted with shock and horror
to the document -- even some of those who are part of the Bush
administration's international coalition. Particularly worrisome
is the fact that the NPR lists several non-nuclear countries as
possible candidates for nuclear strikes; the traditional US
commitment to using nuclear weapons only in retaliation for a
nuclear attack appears to have been abandoned.
The US has the largest and most sophisticated arsenal of nuclear
weapons in the world. The policies that it sets truly have global
ramifications, and the NPR seems to be setting an extremely
negative precedent. The NPR also has big implications for the
current "war on terrorism", since Iraq is one of the countries
listed as a possible nuclear target and it is also one of the
most likely next targets of the current war.
The bad news is that despite President Bush's concern with the
"axis of evil," it seems amply evident that the most dangerous
nuclear rogue state at the moment may very well be America. The
good news is that America's nuclear policy is not set in stone,
and can still be revised. In this bulletin, we hope to explain
the major nuclear issues that currently face the world -- not
with the intent of causing fear and despair, but with the intent
of giving you the information that you will need to speak out
against the current threats. The best hope for our shared future
lies with all of the citizens of the world who are willing to
work for peace. And if the doomsday clock is at seven minutes to
midnight, that means we still have time left to change things.
On February 27, 2002, the Board of Directors of the Bulletin of
the Atomic Scientists moved the minute hand of the “Doomsday
Clock,” which symbolically measures the likelihood of nuclear
holocaust, from nine to seven minutes to midnight. This is the
same setting at which the clock debuted 55 years ago. Read their
thorough and important summary of the global nuclear threat to
learn why they believe that the threat of destruction is so
close, and what can be done about it. If you click on only one
link this week, make it this one.
http://www.bullatomsci.org/media/current_print.html
Meanwhile, Israel is one of America's closest allies, yet it may
have a far more threatening nuclear arsenal than any of the
countries in the "axis of evil." It is specifically stated in the
Nuclear Posture Review that if Iraq attacked Israel, the US would
consider attacking Iraq with nuclear weapons.
This chart summarizes nuclear testing from 1945 to 1998, showing
which countries have tested nuclear weapons and how many tests
have been run. The US tops the list.
http://www.armscontrol.org/act/1998_05/ffmy98.asp
In 1996, Greenpeace celebrated the signing of the Comprehensive
Test Ban Treaty, after 25 years of campaigning to end nuclear
weapons testing.
http://www.greenpeace.org/~comms/nukes/ctbt/sep24.html
Unfortunately, the testing that had already been done is still
affecting the global environment today.
The nuclear test in Alaska (the one that Greenpeace was
originally created to protest) may still be having effects on the
surrounding environment. It was the largest nuclear blast in
America, 400 times more powerful than the weapon that destroyed
Hiroshima, and as it turns out, the blast was set off next to the
Alaskan equivalent of the San Andreas fault.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/1217-03.htm
USA Today recently reported that an unpublished study by the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has determined that
radioactive fallout from Cold War nuclear testing exposed
virtually everyone in the United States, and has contributed to
about 15,000 cancer deaths. The article includes charts, maps and
other information on this important issue.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002/02/28/usat-nuke.htm
America is the country possessing the largest and most
sophisticated nuclear arsenal in the world. Unfortunately, the US
has been opting out of important international agreements that
help regulate and govern the use of such weapons, especially
under the current Bush administration. "When the parties to the
NPT meet again this April, the US is sure to come under heavy
criticism for its notice of withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic
Missile Treaty, its failure to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban
Treaty, its new strategy to make nuclear disarmament reversible,
and its recent announcement that it is rescinding its security
assurances to non-nuclear weapons states."
http://www.wagingpeace.org/articles/02.02/0226kriegernucter.htm
THE NUCLEAR POSTURE REVIEW (NPR)
-----------------------------------------------
The three most controversial elements of the Nuclear Posture
Review are:
1) it advocates building and testing smaller nuclear weapons
2) it advocates the use of nuclear weapons such as these
"mini-nukes" in a much broader range of situations (possibly
including a first strike)
3) it lists China, Iraq, Iran, Syria, North Korea, Russia and
Libya as possible targets, although only two of these countries
are defined as nuclear powers.
"In short, the Pentagon wants to make nuclear war fighting more
thinkable, dramatically lowering the bar. It wants to reclassify
nuclear weapons as offensive tools, not defensive ones. It wants
to build more weapons, when the U.S. and Russia seek cuts. And it
is reneging on a 1978 pledge: That the U.S. won't launch nuclear
strikes against non-nuclear foes, provided that they don't team
up with a nuclear ally to attack the U.S."
Read the rest of this Canadian article to get a succinct and
easily understandable overview of the Nuclear Posture Review and
what its implications are.
http://9-11peace.org/r.php3?redir=131
The Nuclear Posture Review proposes violating the Comprehensive
Test Ban Treaty. The US has yet to ratify this treaty, and the
likelihood that the US will begin testing nuclear weapons again
now seems almost inevitable.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4371815,00.html
Robert W. Nelson, a theoretical physicist who is on the research
staff of Princeton University, debunks the ideas of Bush's
advisors. He reports that it is simply not possible for a kinetic
energy weapon to penetrate deep enough to prevent widespread and
intense local radioactive fallout from the nuclear explosion.
Therefore the proposed bunker busters will increase rather than
decrease civilian deaths.
http://www.clw.org/pub/clw/coalition/briefv5n7.htm
"This is a very dangerous policy," said Joseph Cirincione, a
nuclear proliferation expert at the Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace. "The test is: How would we feel if other
countries adopted the same policy? I'm not talking about rogue
states. What if India developed nuclear weapons to go after
terrorists in the Himalayas? Would we feel safer then?"
http://9-11peace.org/r.php3?redir=132
In response to the controversy, Colin Powell has said that the US
will continue to follow its policy of using nuclear weapons only
as a response to a nuclear attack initiated by another country.
Powell has also attempted to address the strain that the NPR has
put on relations between Russia and the US, and has stated that
there are no missiles currently targeted at Russia (although he
added that they could easily be redirected.)
http://9-11peace.org/r.php3?redir=133
Would the US really consider a first strike? The answers have
ranged from "not likely" to "no comment."
http://www.iht.com/articles/51688.html
REACTIONS TO THE NUCLEAR POSTURE REVIEW
------------------------------------------------------------
This article basically provides a summary of the initial
reactions to the report from around the world; China was "deeply
shocked."
http://www.nandotimes.com/world/story/296816p-2611312c.html
In a fairly obvious spin attempt, the Washington Post asserted
that the European allies of the states were "unperturbed" by the
NPR: "Reports that the United States is reexamining where to
target its nuclear arsenal drew a subdued response this weekend,
with some European leaders dismissing the project as routine
military planning." However, the article does point out that both
Iran and Russia reacted very strongly to the NPR, accusing the US
of intimidation tactics.
http://9-11peace.org/r.php3?redir=134
Various experts contend that the NPR undermines the 1970
Non-Proliferation Treaty, and could very well lead to a new arms
race.
http://atimes.com/front/DC13Aa01.html
British Labour MP Alice Mahon has since said: "The lunatics have
taken over the White House. This report must be ringing alarms
throughout NATO." This article reports that the international
reaction to the NPR has been one of "horror".
http://9-11peace.org/r.php3?redir=135
UN Undersecretary General for Disarmament Affairs expressed
"alarm and consternation" at the report.
http://www.unfoundation.org/unwire/2002/03/13/current.asp#24627
North Korea reacted strongly to the NPR, and has threatened that:
"The DPRK will not remain a passive onlooker to the Bush
administration's inclusion of the DPRK in the seven countries,
targets of U.S. nuclear attack, but take a strong countermeasure
against it." The article notes that North Korea's nuclear weapons
program was "frozen" in 1994 in exchange for oil supplies and
Western nuclear reactors.
http://9-11peace.org/r.php3?redir=136
North Korea has since more explicitly threatened to revive its
nuclear program in response to the NPR.
http://9-11peace.org/r.php3?redir=137
China has accused the US of "nuclear blackmail."
http://9-11peace.org/r.php3?redir=138
Russia is listed in the Nuclear Posture Review as a potential
target, a fact that is threatening talks between the two
countries.
http://9-11peace.org/r.php3?redir=139
Canada's former ambassador for disarmament calls for Canada to
oppose the State's nuclear plan immediately, stating, "friends
don't let friends drive drunk."
http://www.wagingpeace.org/articles/02.03/0313rocherethink.htm
Even conservative extraordinaire Pat Buchanan asks: "Is it for
the United States to threaten atomic strikes against non-nuclear
rogue states? Will that threat intimidate them –- or cause them
to accelerate their efforts to acquire the bomb?"
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=26794
ABOUT THE BULLETIN
---------------------------
The 9-11Peace.org bulletin is a weekly newsletter providing
resources, news, and action ideas to over 27,500 people around
the world. The full text of the bulletin is online at
http://www.9-11peace.org/bulletin.php3; users can subscribe to
and unsubscribe from the bulletin at that address also. The
bulletin is a project of 9-11Peace.org. Contact
bulletin@9-11peace.org for more information.