|
|
|
WEB SPACE kindly donated by
|
May / June 2000Update on the Lucas Heights New Reactor Campaign (back to top)Successful rally at Menai, March 26 by Michael PricemanA crowd of over 1000 attended the rally at Menai Park which was organised by
People Against a Nuclear Reactor (PANR). Speakers included Senator Natasha
Stott-Despoja, who told the crowd that she would introduce a Private Members
Bill calling for a commission of inquiry into the proposal; Dr Helen
Caldicott, who swore that "a new reactor would be built over my dead
body"; and local resident Joanne Lentern who demanded a review of the
present emergency plans by the NSW State Government. Joanne said that the
advice to go inside, close the doors and windows, turn off the air conditioning
and wait for further direction was "dangerous fantasy". Alternative Methods of Producing Radioisotopes
In Peace Courier Nov/Dec 1999 page 5, I mentioned the Lockheed Martin, Idaho
research into a cheap, clean, non reactor method of making Technetium 99m, the
main medical radioisotope used around the world. The machines leave no
radioactive waste problems, neither can they be used for weapons research or
manufacture. So how has the news been received in the USA?
Predictably. In a message received from Dr Ralph Bennett, Director of
Nuclear and Energy Planning we learn that they have discontinued the work.
The reason, "Despite the price advantage, (and the other advantage) I
believe that there is considerable fear on the part of potential commercial
partners that the subsidised foreign (reactor based) supplies would act to cut
their prices to preserve jobs and national pride." ARPANSA Licensing
The Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) was
formed in February 1999. The first application it received for a licence
from ANSTO was for the suitability of the Lucas Heights site for a new nuclear
reactor. In spite of our protests that the existing plant, forty two years
old, should be licensed (or preferably denied a licence) first, ARPANSA
went ahead. This was on the basis that ANSTO had submitted the application
so it had to act on it. Public submissions were called for, their comments
"noted" but not acted on by the CEO and the licence granted, subject
to certain conditions. How Much Will a New Reactor Really Cost?
ANSTO and the Government have stressed the cost as being $286.4 million (in 1997
dollars). This in turn was based on estimates it got in 1992 for the
Research Reactor Review. And without any design or specification.
Can this figure be believed? In a well written article in the Bulletin May
16, by Fred Brenchley, comparison is made with the Collins submarine fiasco in
which 'a big ticket capital works project that leaps in price and then fails to
perform'. Where Is The Campaign Now?
The tenders from the final four possible suppliers are now being examined.
They are from AECL, Canada - INVAP, Argentina - Siemens,
Germany - Technicatome, France. When the final selection is
made negotiations for a contract will begin. It is planned that a contract
will be signed in the third quarter of this year. Then the specification
and design should at last appear. (Will it be available to the
public?) ARPANSA then comes into the picture. They say that the
specification will be gone through with a fine tooth comb and that process will
take from 12 to 18 months. At that stage ANSTO will apply for a licence to
construct. Defence White Paper (back to top)Federal Government will release a Defence White Paper later this year which will have a major impact on the economic, political and military role Australia plays in the new millennium. The alternatives before us are clear. Australia can maintain its current aggressive "defence" philosophy, involving power projection, using its military strength for economic leverage, pursuing the high technology path with reliance on the United States for advanced systems and logistics support, increasing the militarisation of our society, and pushing the arms trade with a consequent rise in poverty, insecurity and conflict. Alternatively, we can rethink what we mean by security, develop different relationships with regional states, reassess the weapons systems required to satisfy our security interests, develop conversion programs and increase aid to our regional neighbours. The belief that security can be enforced by ever greater numbers of more sophisticated weapons is being increasingly questioned. More and more people understand that real security comes with jobs, steady food supplies, homes, clean water, warmth, education and health care, democracy and human rights. Seventy per cent of the world's population lives in underdeveloped countries and face poverty and starvation. Over 500 million people have no job. The third world pays for first world extravagance with their lives and grinding poverty. No attempt to create a peaceful world can succeed unless these problems are confronted and resolved. For the world as a whole, allocating up to ten per cent of global output for military purposes is madness. We can either continue the arms race or move toward more stable and balanced social and economic development within a more sustainable international economic and political order. We cannot do both. Peace and community organisations have come together in the Blue Paper Project. We will release a series of fact sheets and discussion papers which are intended to educate, to encourage public discussion of these issues, and to develop understanding of and support for alternative views of our country's security and foreign policies. Did you know?Did you know that the Federal Government is spending over $11.5 billion on the military - about $30 million a day? Did you know that the Government is about to release a Defence White Paper which will set down the guidelines for the economic, political and military role Australia plays in the new millennium? Did you know that the Government has not held a public inquiry or organised community discussion about these matters although they will affect our jobs and our standard of living? Did you know that cutting the current military budget would not leave Australia undefended and insecure? It would provide millions of dollars for projects which are vital for Australians' security and quality of life. Did you know? $350 million would pay for free medicine for every Australian $170 million would fund ten community hospitals with 100 beds and 300 staff each $408 million would provide 3,000 public housing homes $5 million would fund 15 women's health centres $72 million would provide 8,000 extra university places $49 million would pay for 1 0,000 extra TAFE places $10 million would fund 30 Aboriginal Health Centres $280 million would double pre school childcare places. Armed Groups Asked to Commit to Landmine Ban (back to top)Press release from NSA Working Group per Sister Pak Poy.Representatives of armed opposition groups, government observers and landmine ban campaigners met in Geneva with experts in the field of international humanitarian law to begin a dialogue process seeking to engage non-state armed organisations in a landmine ban. The conference "Engaging Non-State Actors in a Landmine Ban" held on
24-25 March 2000 and convened by the Non-State Actors (NSA) Working Group
brought together in one room members of the Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA)
from North Africa; Kurdish Workers' Party (PKK) in West Asia; the Philippines
Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) and the Revolutionary Proletarian Army (RPA);
the Polisario of Western Sahara and others connected with internal conflicts in
Europe and Latin America to discuss steps to further universalise the ban on
landmines. For two days, representatives of these groups rubbed shoulders with
embassy officials of different countries in the pioneering conference. In today's wars many rebel groups are landmine users. At the same time, these groups are also victims of mines which are made, traded and planted by others or by themselves. The 1997 Ottawa Treaty commits state signatories to a ban on anti-personnel mines but provides no mechanism to draw other armed groups into a humanitarian solution to the landmine crisis. Conference organisers - six non-governmental organisations from Canada, Colombia, Philippines, Switzerland, UK and Zimbabwe - saw the need to engage all actors in armed-conflict, believing rebel groups have a stake in stopping the inhumane destruction caused by this indiscriminate weapon. Such groups are often victims and users themselves, may exercise de facto control over mined areas and their constituents may be seriously affected by landmines. Research on landmine use by ethnic rebel groups in Burma showed that the casualty rate during the manufacture of mines was a high 80% for one group and that about half the casualties caused by another group's mines were among their own people. Co-organiser Professor Miriam Coronel Ferrer of the Philippines Campaign to Ban Landmines opened the conference by noting "NSAs must be engaged because NSAs are part of the landmine equation. They are part of the problem, and they are part of the solution." Speakers noted that rebel participation in mine-clearing operations has been crucial, from identifying sites to actual removal. Operation Save Innocent Lives - Sudan, an indigenous demining organisation operating in Southern Sudan, credited its success in clearing and restoring 2.2 million square meters of safe land to the population to the minefield maps provided by the Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA). Reflecting on other experiences, ICBL [International Campaign to Ban Landmines] co-founder and deminer Rae McGrath affirmed the need for indigenous capacity in de-mining, the personnel for which often came from rebel ranks. During the conference, statements reflecting the current positions on landmines of groups like the Taliban, the Polisario, SPLA, MILF, the PKK and the RPP - a breakaway faction of the Communist Party of the Philippines - were presented. Former members of the now disbanded Kosovo Liberation Army encouraged all insurgent movements around the world to consider a total renunciation of mines. Legal experts explored the possibility of introducing innovations to the international humanitarian and human rights law as well as to the 1997 Ottawa Treaty that would allow non-state armed groups to obligate themselves through a unilateral declaration. Other mechanisms discussed to commit armed non-state groups include the development of codes of conduct, setting up landmine-free zones and the inclusion of anti-landmine clauses in ceasefire and peace agreements. Geneva Call, a Swiss-registered international non-governmental organisation, was put forward by several anti-landmine campaigns from different countries to receive ban commitments from non-state actors. The Geneva Call deed, with Geneva authorities acting as guardian, would serve as a basis for holding armed groups accountable. An SPLA commander noted in closing how the experience of meeting face to face with governments, civil society and other armed groups strengthened his feeling of common humanity. "The fear in us has been broken. This event was a very positive step forward in the worldwide movement to eliminate the suffering caused by this indiscriminate weapon," he said. The Non-State Actor Working Group consists of the following members of the International Campaign to Ban Landmines:
Greenham Common (back to top)The APC recently received a letter from Thabia Campbell. She tells us about the sculpture project in the UK to commemorate the Greenham Common Women's Peace Camp. Thabia says that sometime ago a few Australian peace groups and Trade Unions made donations towards the project and could the APC spread the news. She goes on to say that although the project was enthusiastically supported by individuals and campaigning groups, the art and political establishments still see it as controversial. Thabia is keen to learn of similar sculptures of women in Australia. She says Perth has the Pioneer Woman which is similar in idea to the Greenham Common Woman. About the statue:She is a woman 35 years old, carrying a baby on her hip, not
necessarily her biological child, which can be seen as one generation's work to
make the world safe for following generations. Other women are commemorating Greenham in other ways. This statue commemorates the spark that set the women's movement for peace alight in 1981. Undeclared War (back to top)Despite the progress made on many of the goals set at the 1990 World Summit for Children, this has been a decade of undeclared war on women, adolescents and children as poverty, conflict, chronic social instability and preventable diseases such as HIV/AIDS threaten their human rights and sabotage their development. Each of these obstacles is compounded for women and girls by the discrimination against them that infiltrates all sectors of society in every country. Gender discrimination, so entrenched in social norms as to escape notice, keeps young girls from school and women from active and equal involvement in their communities. This discrimination is at the base of many of the violations of women's rights, including the physical duress of domestic violence or the strategic use of rape and forced pregnancies as weapons of war. And where women's rights are at risk, children's rights are too. The poverty trapPoverty is a world of darkness, where every day is a struggle to survive. The poor are the majority in nearly one of every five nations in the world. In rich countries, they are increasingly concentrated in minority communities. They endure lives of hunger, malnutrition and illness and are denied their right to education, to receive good health care, to have access to safe water and sanitation and to be protected from harm. The number of people living in poverty continues to grow as globalisation - one of the 20th century's most powerful economic phenomena - proceeds along its inherently asymmetrical course: expanding markets across national boundaries and increasing the incomes of a relative few while further strangling the lives of those without the resources to be investors or the capabilities to benefit from the global culture. The majority are women and children, poor before, but even more so now, as the two-tiered world economy widens the gaps between rich and poor countries and between rich and poor people. To be a girl born into poverty is to endure discrimination many
times over in pervasive and insidious patterns. From the moment of girls'
conception, their rights are in peril. There may be as many as 60 million
"missing women" in the world who, except for the gender discrimination
that starts before they are born and continues throughout their lives, would be
alive today! These girls, children of poverty, often begin their lives passed over in favour of their brothers for food, medical attention and schooling. At the mercy of the men in their families and communities, they suffer the isolation of ignorance and illiteracy, the agony of beatings. For girls and women of the lowest caste, public humiliations are frequent. Caste poverty persists throughout the vast region, defying the laws that prohibit its practice and stripping well over 160 million people in India alone of their rights. A particularly cruel burden falls on the children, as parents take out meagre loans in exchange for consigning or selling a child to a factory or plantation owner. An estimated 20 million, and perhaps as many as 40 million, girls and boys in South Asia toil in this debt servitude, hunched over looms, making bricks, or rolling cigarettes by hand. Countless others spend their childhood and adolescence in domestic servitude, sweeping floors and scrubbing pots and pans. It is disturbing to imagine what awaits a child of six when his parents place him in debt bondage in exchange for a loan for seed or shelter. It is almost unfathomable to think of a girl from the Nepalese mountains who, sold by her impoverished parents to an agent offering employment in a carpet factory, instead finds herself in a windowless room in Calcutta or Mumbai with other girls, forced to have sex with as many as two dozen adult clients a day. Like the debt-trapped countries in which they live, the children rarely succeed in paying off their parents' debts, even after 10 or 12 years, and they perpetuate their families' servitude by handing it down to a younger sibling or to their own offspring. From "The state of world's children ". Out of "Asia?" (back to top)Donald Denoon, Australian National UniversityAddressing a forum in the East-West Center in Honolulu last year, Jose Ramos Horta claimed that East Timorese consider themselves to be Melanesian (rather than Indonesian). It followed that an independent East Timor would apply for membership of the South Pacific Forum and the South Pacific Commission. This proposal would remove East Timor from "Asia", and disturb one of the basic geopolitical guidelines of Australia's foreign policy. The distinction between Asia and the Pacific is mainly one of perception. Alfred Russel Wallace famously identified sharp distinctions between the placental animals of Southeast Asia, and the marsupials of Australia and the Pacific Islands. He divided these domains at Wallace's Line, between Lombok and Bali. But he also imagined a definitive cultural distinction between Southeast Asia and Melanesia. Although social scientists deny the sharpness of this separation, it has formed one of the bases of Australia's foreign relations. Australians' sense of identity depends on separating this country from its neighbours, both physically and conceptually. With Federation, the Commonwealth adopted "White Australia" as a strategic goal. Officials therefore repatriated most Pacific Islanders, and barred the entry of most "non-Europeans", transforming the country's ethnic composition. As late as 1959, Prime Minister Robert Menzies could explain blandly that "It is our national desire to develop in Australia a homogeneous population in order that we may avert social difficulties which have arisen in many other countries. But we are ... a friendly people not given to making distinctions among people on grounds of race or religion." Australian governments did not lump all "non-Europeans" together. Like Wallace, they separated "Asia" from the Pacific Islands. Even before Japan's rout of Russia in 1905, Asia was often a stereotyped region of teeming millions, weird religions, and military menace. By contrast, the Islands presented a comforting image of sparse (perhaps doomed) populations, whose lands could be turned to plantations, and whose lives should be shaped by colonial officials and Christian missionaries. Since their independence, the Islands have become even more dependent on Australia, but the converse is not true: Australian policy attaches much more importance to the "near North". Australians feel comfortable with their Pacific neighbours, and can usually afford to ignore them. In dealing with Island governments therefore, Australian officials tend to expect Westminster institutions and Christian values. To come to grips with "Asia", however, scholars and officials have long debated the significance of "Asian values". Described most lucidly by Lee Kwan Yew, Asian values are said to buttress family life and subordinate individual to national needs. Whether this was merely a mask for repression, or up-to-date Confucianism, the perception of different moral standards ensured that relations with "Asian" governments have needed constant care. Even then, conflict is not rare. For example, links with our most populous neighbour began well when Australia swiftly recognised the fledgling Indonesian Republic, and later endorsed its incorporation of West Papua. Relations were soured by konfrontasi, but sweetened under General Suharto's New Order. From then on, all Australian ministers described a special relationship between Canberra and Jakarta and (for example) acquiesced in the absorption of East Timor. Alas, the relationship was more special to us than to them. John Ingleson reports that in 1978 a senior Indonesian official likened Australia to the appendix of South-East Asia - its function was not properly understood, it was only taken notice of when it hurt, and nobody would miss it if it was removed. That is an enduring imbalance. In 1995, the Australian government's enthusiasm for APEC provoked polished insults between Prime Ministers Keating and Mahathir Mohamad. The exchange showed that Mahathir could afford to offend Keating much more than Keating could afford to annoy Mahathir. In contrast, Island leaders must be cautious in criticising Canberra. Australia is an indispensable member of the South Pacific Commission and the South Pacific Forum: we are marginal to the Association of South East Asian Nations. So the Indonesian border with Papua New Guinea marked a regional and cultural as well as an inter-state boundary - until 1999. East Timor had the misfortune to be on the Asian side of the divide. Australian ex-servicemen and Catholics alike argued that Australia had a special obligation towards East Timorese, but this was anathema to the architects of Australian foreign policy. In an unconvincing compromise, the government expressed only ritual concern for East Timorese autonomy, confident that Suharto would never budge. The decision to hold a referendum amazed Australians just as much as Indonesians. The violent anarchy which followed, the United Nations' unreadiness, and Australia's leadership of the multinational military force to East Timor (INTERFET) are too well known to repeat. Indonesian military, and even civilian authorities were annoyed by the rest of the world's negative reactions, but they felt completely betrayed by Australia. The contentious security treaty had not shaped Australian policy, and Australia's public protests contrasted with the "quiet diplomacy" of ASEAN. A generation of diplomatic conciliation had not averted the burning of flags on each side of the Timor Sea. Today Australian soldiers in blue berets are armed and empowered to enforce peace in East Timor. At the same time unarmed Australian civilians and soldiers monitor peace in Bougainville. They represent radically different ways of projecting Australian power into our radically different neighbourhoods; and it is disconcerting that all our political leaders seek photo-opportunities only with armed professionals and never with unarmed volunteers. So what are the implications of East Timor choosing to be affiliated with the South Pacific? Jose Ramos Horta may simply wish to diversify his country's international linkages, but a South Pacific affiliation does imply financial dependency and political instability. We must hope that he was unaware of the implications of his words.
Burmese monks say – Enough is Enough (back to top)To all monks and people of BurmaMore than 4 months ago, a plea was made by reverend monks of Burma, Pegu Khat Wine Saydaw, Amarapura Sayadaw and Shwe Hintha Sayadaw to the country's ruling military leaders (State Peace and Development Council, SPDC) as well as opposition led by Noble Peace Prize Laureate Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. In the plea the monks stated "Enough is enough, please talk, give away your anger, anxiety to monks and save the country from ruin as Burma is becoming shameful in the eyes of the world in lack of chances to have an education for young generations (as military closed down all universities for more than 6 years as if fears for another uprising like 1988. It reopened recently but many analysts say it is substandard in educational values and more to do with averting the international pressure against the military). So far the monks' plea has been acknowledged but [there have been] no initiatives by the military rulers. Instead the military is accusing National Leagues for Democracy,
NLD, the winner of 1990 election of playing the religious card against the
military. This is the matters that seriously concerned to our monks. Therefore on behalf [of] 300,000 monks of Burma, the Central Executive Council of Union of Monks, Mandalay demands SPDC from today, Buddhist Calendar - Year of 1361, Month of Tabotwe Lasan 13 to 1362, Kasone Lasote 8 (17/2/2000) within 99 days period to hold dialogue with 1990 election winners including Daw Aung San Suu Kyi to save the country in desperation. If nothing has been done until due date expires, all the monks
of Burma will carry out as follows: * Towards lasting peace for Burma! Year of 1361, Month of Tabotwe Lasan 13 (17 February 2000) Central Executive Committee Congress of Monks of Burma Mandalay. "We'll get rid of nuclear weapons - eventually" (back to top)In a statement delivered to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty Review Conference at United Nations Headquarters in New York, the five "official" nuclear weapon states have promised to give up nuclear weapons "eventually". The P5 statement, delivered by the United States (US), China, the United Kingdom (UK), France and Russia, states that: "We reiterate our unequivocal commitment to the ultimate goals of a complete elimination of nuclear weapons and a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international safeguards." However, Article VI of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT)
reads: According to Irene Gale of the South Australian Peace Committee and John Hallam, nuclear campaigner with Friends of the Earth, "It is highly significant that the nuclear weapons states refer to nuclear disarmament as an 'ultimate' goal, while the language of the treaty, Article VI of which has been in force for thirty years, refers to cessation of the nuclear arms race and nuclear disarmament at an early date. The most optimistic spin that can be put on this statement, given that similar ones have been made by the P5 before, is that we would be in very deep trouble indeed if it had not been made. "It is also highly significant that within the last few days the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, a journal founded by colleagues of Albert Einstein, featuring the famous 'Atomic Clock', has obtained copies of a negotiating position on the Anti Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM) and START-11 from the US directed at Russia, in which the Russians were actually being discouraged from their favored position of very low missile and warhead numbers, to one in which larger numbers (up to 2,000) of warheads were to be kept on permanent hairtrigger alert, so as to provide a credible deterrent even with a US ABM system. "The P5 statement, like the Australian statement, contains no credible roadmap and no timetable for the elimination of nuclear weapons as per the terms of the NPT. It does contain a statement asking everyone to sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) - in spite of the fact that the US Senate has refused to sign it. It contains a call for the implementation of START-11, which is currently hostage to the US Senate ratifying a series of 1997 agreements it has made clear it will not ratify, and it contains a call for the negotiation of a fissile material cutoff treaty, when no progress whatsoever has actually been made on this goal. It contains - surprisingly, in view of US desires for an ABM system - a statement that the ABM Treaty must be preserved. "We call on the nuclear weapons states to take on board the sensible recommendations of the New Agenda Coalition of nations led by New Zealand, Ireland, Sweden, South Africa, Brazil, Mexico, and Egypt, and supported by the overwhelming majority of governments and Non-Government 0rganisations on the planet, for a step by step program to eliminate nuclear weapons." |
Site updated
|
|
Opinions expressed on this website do not necessarily reflect those of the APC
This site Copyright of the Australian Peace Committee , contact
APC-SA |
