------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
Date sent: Wed, 19 May 1999 08:47:32 -0700
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Sid Shniad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: BOMBINGS REIGNITE NUCLEAR WAR FEARS
The Victoria Times-Colonist 13 MAY 1999 page A15
BOMBINGS REIGNITE NUCLEAR WAR FEARS
by Dr. Mary-Wynne Ashford
I am writing with an enormous sense of urgency and dread. I
have just been at a seminar in Moscow, followed by one at the Olof
Palme Institue in Stockholm. The meetings have convinced me we
are on the brink of nuclear war by the unintentional escalation of
the war against Yugoslavia.
Only western press and television coverage does not portray the
significance of the change in Russian policy regarding nuclear
weapons. The media imply that Russian warnings of a looming
world war, and their refusal to ratify START II, are the usual
political threats to gain concessions from the U.S.A. and loans from
the International Monetary Fund.
This analysis does not reflect the profound change in public
opinion expressed even by Moscow members of International
Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War. One of our long-term
IPPNW doctors, Dr. Davidenko, has changed from advocating
nuclear disarmament to advocating nuclear deterrence for Russia.
Our meeting with Aleksander Arbatov, deputy chairman of the
Defence Committee of the Russian State Duma, left us deeply
concerned.
Arbatov stated that U.S.-Russian relations, in the wake of
NATO's bombing campaign in Yugoslavia, are at the "worst, most
acute, most dangerous juncture since the U.S.-Soviet Berlin and
Cuban missile crises." He states that START II is dead, co-
operation with NATO is frozen, co-operation on missile defence is
out of the question, and Moscow's willingness to co-operate on
non-proliferation issues is at an all-time low.
Moreover, anti-U.S. sentiment in Russia is real, deep and more
wide-spread than ever, and the slogan describing NATO action -
"today Serbia, tomorrow Russia," is "deeply planted in Russian's
minds." Arbatov was bitter about 10 years of wasted opportunities
on both sides, with disarmament talks completely stalled even
before this crisis.
Scientist, politicians, doctors and generals all told us the same
thing, that NATO bombings of Serbia have set back disarmament
20 years. Some said that India and Pakistan are safe now they have
nuclear weapons and that other states like North Korea will step up
their nuclear weapons programs. Officials from Minatom, the
Russian atomic energy agency, have indicated their great concern
about some 22 nuclear reactors in the region of conflict. A bomb
hitting a reactor by accident would cause a catastrophe worse than
Chernobyl. Government spokesmen told us repeatedly that Russia
will not allow the bombings to continue for another month, and that
because their conventional forces are in tatters, Russia must rely on
its nuclear weapons. I must ask, "if these are idle threats, what
distinguishes them from real threats?" The credibility of the people
we spoke with has convinced me that the threats are serious.
Opinion is divided in most countries, even in peace
organizations, about whether the NATO bombings were a
humanitarian effort to stop a genocide or an act of aggression by
NATO, but their impact on nuclear weapons policy is an extremely
serious development. Most worrisome to us was the consistency of
the statements from speakers at the Moscow seminar and those we
met later in ministries of foreign affairs and health.
The single exception was Dr. Evgenie Chazov. He said we must
renew our efforts for nuclear disarmament in this very dangerous
situation. Dr. Chazov said we are back where we were in 1981
when he and American cardiologist Dr. Bernard Lown founded
IPPNW, but our work will be more difficult now.
The Russian speakers deplored ethnic cleansing and did not
support Milosovic, but Dr. Serguei Kapitsa, a scientist famous for
his weekly television show, stated that Russians feel a sense of
betrayal by the West and a profound loss of confidence in treaties
and in the United Nations because NATO took this action outside
the UN. Previously confident that Russia was moving toward
integration with Europe, they focused their security concerns only
on their southern and eastern boundaries. Now they perceive their
primary threat from the West.
Officials in Foreign Affairs (Arms Control and Disarmament)
told us that Russia has no option but to rely on nuclear weapons for
its defence because its conventional forces are inadequate. When I
said that if Russia used even a single nuclear weapon the U.S.A.
would respond with hundreds or thousands of missiles, they nodded
and said "Yes, it would be suicidal, but how else can we defend
ourselves?"
As I left Moscow, I felt the same dread I experienced in the
Reagan years, with a similar sense of unreality. While the Russians
are comparing this situation to the Cuban missile crisis, journalists
in the West tell me that the war is almost over now that
negotiations including the Russians are under way. Why are they
reassured when Milosevic has not agreed to anything, and the
bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade has added even
greater tensions to this war?
Even if the bombings stop now, they changes in Russia's
attitude toward the West, its renewed reliance on nuclear weapons
with thousands on high alert, and its loss of confidence in
international law leave us vulnerable to catastrophe.
Those of us who live in NATO countries must convince our
governments to stop the bombings until negotiations can bring
about a settlement. This crisis makes de-alerting nuclear weapons
more urgent than ever. To those who say the Russian threat is all
rhetoric, I reply that rhetoric is what starts wars.
The global situation is the most urgent crisis of our time. We
must mobilize all or networks to stop this bombing before we slide
into the final world war.
Dr. Mary-Wynne Ashford is co-president of the Nobel Peace Prize
winning IPPNW.
[PEN-L:7058] (Fwd) BOMBINGS REIGNITE NUCLEAR WAR FEARS
ts99u-1.cc.umanitoba.ca [130.179.154.224] Wed, 19 May 1999 18:35:55 -0500
