> >Via NY Transfer News * All the News That Doesn't Fit > >Prensa Latina Weekend Feature Service >21 May, 2000 > > >UNITED STATES: >"BAN THE BOMB" AGAIN >BY FRANCISCO FORTEZA (PRENSA LATINA) > >Havana.- During the tense decades of the Cold War frequent mass >demonstrations were held all over the world to protest the armss race >demanding: "Ban the Bomb." > >After the United States announced that it would develop the costly system of >"global defense" against "surprise missile attacks" the demand could be >changed, perhaps, to: "Ban the Missiles." > >The project of William Clinton's administration will cost 60 billion >dollars, according to estimates and it is described as a "shield" against >massive nuclear attacks on the United States. > >Although smaller in scale, in its general format, the system is very much >like the one proposed by Republican President Ronald Reagan, which was >called the "Star War" by the press. > >Those were hard times for the pacifists when Reagan presented his project of >a "nuclear umbrella." No one, however, was surprised of such a program >because the former Hollywood star was a known conservative, a profile of his >personality that was clearly visible. > >Reagan placed himself in an international controversy when, unaware that the >audio of the microphone was still open, he said over a US radio station: >"It's time. We should begin to bomb the Soviet Union." > >The old evil times seem to be back, with the new shield proposed by Clinton. >As was to be expected, Russia - less powerful since the disappearance of the >Soviet Union (USSR) as a world power but with nuclear weapons - has let her >protest be known. > >According to recent declarations of Russian Foreign Minister, Igor Ivanov, >in a world weapons conference he stressed that the US project attacks the >ABM treaty of 1972 on the limitations of anti-air defense systems. Canada, >Sweden and Belgium were of the same opinion and informed Washington of their >concern. > >Ivanov requested that the ABM be respected and warned that the antiballistic >system was a violation of that agreement and, therefore, the setting up of >such a shield would endanger the treaty achieved in the midst of the cold >war. > >In April, the Russian foreign minister met several times with the US >Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, to explain Moscow's point of view; >specialists agree that he was heard but not listened to. To add strength to >his protests, Ivanov visited President Clinton in the White House and >although the details of the meeting were not revealed, it leaked that this >controversial shield was one of the topics discussed. > >It was reported that, during the meeting, Ivanov delivered a letter to >Clinton from the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, requesting a >"constructive" development of relations between the two countries, already >damaged after NATO's adventure in Yugoslavia. > >WEAK SHIELD? > >The experts are concerned about the influence the US missile system will >have on world stability, but are not sure that it will be truly effective. >If Reagan's futuristic "Star Wars" was defeated because of its cost as well >as its danger, Clinton's "little wars" could end up forgotten because of its >inefficiency. > >The Pentagon has carried out two tests already to investigate if such a >defense network is feasible. The military has not revealed if the answer is >yes or no. >But some speculate that the results were negative. > >As a first test, a "bait" missile was launched from an American island in >the Pacific; it was supposed to be intercepted in the air with a missile shot >from US >continental territory. > >The U.S. announced that "the target was destroyed," although it was later >learned that the target was hit only because an aerostatic globe guided the >blind intercepting missile like a seeing-eye dog. A second test was >necessary and again the "bait" missile was destroyed; this time the U.S. did >not reveal whether the globe-guide was necessary. > >Whatever the answer, perhaps the pacifists who were left without a reason to >protest after the end of the Cold War will have to oil their machines again >and prepare new posters. Perhaps a large rocket with a great cross above it. > >(c) 2000 Prensa Latina, S.A. (PL). All rights reserved. > >================================================================= > NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems > Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us > 339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 > http://www.blythe.org e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >================================================================= > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Best friends, most artistic, class clown Find 'em here: >http://click.egroups.com/1/4054/0/_/30563/_/959018165/ >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >Cuba SI - Imperialism NO! >Information and discussion about Cuba. >Socialism or death! Patria o muerte! Venceremos! >http://www.egroups.com/group/cubasi > >Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > __________________________________ KOMINFORM P.O. Box 66 00841 Helsinki - Finland +358-40-7177941, fax +358-9-7591081 e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.kominf.pp.fi ___________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe/unsubscribe messages mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___________________________________
