In this issue:

Danger:Triumphalists at Work
Security & Survival - New Book Launched
Hague Appeal for Peace
Chinese "Nuclear Thefts"
NATO Summit
Abolition 2000 Update
High Level Round Table in Costa Rica 
Middle Powers Initiative 
Austria Adopts Nuclear Free Law
Canada's Nuclear Policy
Vermont Legislature 
NPT PrepCom   
Citizen Weapons Inspections 
Direct Action Cases 
St. Petersburg Conferences 
UN Disarmament Commission
DOE Lawsuit Victory 
Ballistic Missile Defense 
Global Action To Prevent War
Landmine Ban Grows
Staff Update 
Notable Books   


Select one of the articles above to view
or scroll down the newsletter.


Vol. 12,  No. 3,  Fall 1999

BOMBS AWAY!  is the newsletter of the Lawyers' Committee
on Nuclear Policy (LCNP), a non-profit organization that engages
in legal and policy advocacy in support of nuclear disarmament
in national and international settings.

Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy
211 E. 43rd St., Suite 1204, New York, NY 10017
Tel: (212) 818-1861  fax: (212) 818-1857
e-mail:  website:


Officers: Peter Weiss (President)
Saul Mendlovitz (Vice-President)
Robert Boehm (Treasurer)

Staff:  John Burroughs (Executive Director)
Jim Wurst (Program Director)
Alyn Ware (Consultant-at-Large)
Olu Arowolo (Administrator)



   Home  |  World Court Project   |  Nuclear Weapons Convention  |  Abolition 2000  |  Global Action to Prevent War

Nuclear Disarmament & Non-Proliferation  |  Nuclear Energy  |   Middle Powers Initiative  |  About LCNP  |  Publications



Back to Top




Danger: Triumphalists at Work
by Peter Weiss


Recent weeks have seen an outpouring by media sages on "The Lessons of Kosovo." NATO, we are told, not only lives, but has a new raison d'etre. The world is no longer safe for human rights violators. Thanks to the miracle of precision-guided weapons, wars can now be fought without casualties. Washington does not want to be the world's policeman, but there is no one else to do the job.

What kind of response should this triumphalism evoke from those of us who are committed to human rights, to international law and to nuclear abolition? One appropriate answer was given by Federico Mayor, the outgoing head of UNESCO in his address at the opening plenary session of The Hague Appeal for Peace on May 12. Ethnic cleansing and other gross human rights violations, said Mr. Mayor, demand a response from the world community, but the response must also be correct. He did not expand on his statement, but those of us who are not hampered by diplomatic constraints are free to do so.

The response of the US and its NATO allies was fundamentally flawed in both of the areas of international law dealing with the use of force. With respect to jus ad bellum, the law which determines the legality of going to war, the NATO campaign was patently illegal. Under the UN Charter, only two circumstances can justify the use of force across national boundaries: either self-defense or specific UN authorization. Neither of these existed. Non-UN sanctioned humanitarian intervention, attractive though it may be on moral grounds, is no longer permissible on legal grounds since 1945, if it ever was. And those who advocate it solely on moral grounds - the "something had to be done" school of thought - bear at least the burden of demonstrating that a good faith effort was made to proceed within the bounds of the law. That burden, clearly, was not discharged, since Russia and China were deliberately sidelined from the very beginning and no attempt was made to take the matter to the Security Council.

As for jus in bello, or humanitarian law, the use of depleted uranium and cluster bombs and the gradual expansion of targeting policy from military to primarily and, in some cases, solely civilian targets, show a deplorable disregard of the laws of war on the part of the NATO command.

All of this bodes ill for the nuclear abolition movement, for a number of reasons:

    1. A series of "victories" over disproportionately smaller enemies - Grenada, Panama, Iraq and now Serbia - has enabled the American establishment, and a large part of American society, to overcome the Vietnam syndrome, which for a number of years acted as a brake on military adventurism. And a country which relies on a strong military to solve non-military problems will forever be loath to give up its most powerful weapons.
    2. International law has been dealt a body blow by the US' and NATO's blatant disregard for the mandates of the UN Charter. The mantra of a succession of US Presidents - "We will act multilaterally if we can and unilaterally if we must" - has now been expanded to read "We will act legally if we can and illegally if we must." In the last several instances of the use of military force by the United States, even in the case of Vietnam, some efforts, no matter how tortured, were made to provide a veil of international as well as constitutional legality. After Kosovo, it's back to "The cavalry to the rescue!" (and the devil take the hindmost).
    3. The glorification of precision bombing, despite the Chinese embassy fiasco and other instances of "unavoidable collateral damage", is reminiscent of one of the arguments presented to the World Court by the United States in the nuclear weapons case. There, the US argued that, since modern military technology made precise targeting possible, there was no reason to condemn the use of nuclear weapons in advance as necessarily causing indiscriminate damage to civilians. But then, if the hundreds of Kosovars and thousands of Serbs killed during the bombing campaign were not casualties, there is no need to worry about the fallout from a precisely targeted nuclear bomb, is there?

To end this glum analysis on an upbeat note: Secretary of Defense Cohen, asked by Charlie Rose on PBS on June 30 what threats were facing the United States, replied that the greatest threat, without doubt, was that of a nuclear exchange. If he really believes that, and there is no reason to doubt it, he and the President should welcome the gathering momentum of the nuclear abolition movement.



Back to Top






New Book Launched:

Security and Survival:
The Case for a Nuclear Weapons Convention


On May 13, 1999, the Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy (LCNP) and the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) released a new book, Security and Survival: The Case for a Nuclear Weapons Convention. To a capacity crowd at the Hague Peace Conference, Merav Datan (IPPNW),  Peter Weiss (LCNP), Jürgen Scheffran (INESAP) and Carlos Vargas (Consultant to the government of Costa Rica), outlined the rationale for, and the issues raised by, the project of achieving  a global treaty to eliminate nuclear forces.

Security and Survival covers the same ground, considering many of the critical questions which have arisen since the Model Nuclear Weapons Convention was circulated by the United Nations in 1997 at the request of the government of Costa Rica. It includes comments from a number of scientists and disarmament experts on enforcement, security, breakout, deterrence, terrorism, health & the environment, cleanup & disposition, nuclear energy, weapons knowledge, conversion, research, economic aspects, and steps to disarmament. Security and Survival provides a vision of the final goal of nuclear abolition, a conception of how a denuclearized global society could work, and a map of how to get there. It is an invaluable resource in the campaign for nuclear disarmament.



Back to Top







Hague Appeal for Peace


Hague Appeal for Peace
Resounding Success:
10,000 Call for the Abolition of War

"I hope that this gathering is only the beginning of a movement that will lead, finally, to a collective decision to give peace a chance at the beginning of what can be humanity's most promising millennium." - Jimmy Carter

From May 10-15, 1999, 10,000 people from over 100 countries came together in The Hague, Netherlands to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the first Hague Peace Conference and issue a call for the abolition of war and a fifty point agenda on how to achieve this goal.

The Hague Appeal for Peace conference hosted 400 workshops and  included notable peacemakers including Jody Williams, Desmond Tutu, José Ramos Horta, Joseph Rotblat and Rigoberta Menchu Tum. Among the many other guests who attended and addressed the conference were UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, the heads of UNESCO, UNIFEM and UNICEF, Queen Noor of Jordan, and Prime Ministers Wim Kok of the Netherlands and Sheikh Hasina of Bangladesh.

The conference launched a visionary but practically based final document, The Hague Agenda for Peace and Justice for the 21st Century, which will serve as a guide for groups and individuals working on the global campaign to abolish war. Prime Minister Hasina pledged to send the Agenda to all world leaders.

LCNP, represented by Peter Weiss, Saul Mendlovitz, John Burroughs, Alyn Ware, Anabel Dwyer and Jonathan Granoff, organized and participated in numerous workshops, panels, press conferences and other presentations on topics including nuclear disarmament, the right to peace, international law, conflict resolution, citizen inspections and Global Action to Prevent War. Two of  LCNP's events, the play A Clown, A Hammer, A Bomb and God , and the release of the book Security and Survival: The Case for a Nuclear Weapons Convention , were among the highlights of the conference.

The Hague conference was artistically and culturally spectacular as well as intellectually inspiring. Banners, posters, art and photo exhibitions, as well as musicians, dancers and other performance artists thronged the halls and workshop spaces, and the conference wound up with a dance party DJ'd by Alyn Ware. As Emma Goldman said (though not at this conference), "If I can't dance I don't want to be part of your revolution."

Ben Roberts in "A Clown, A Hammer, A Bomb and God",
performed at the Hague Peace Conference






See more about the play at:


Hague Agenda: UN Document!

On June 23, 1999, The Hague Agenda for Peace and Justice for the 21st Century (the action plan discussed and launched at the Hague Appeal for Peace Conference) was distributed as a UN document (document reference A/54/98). It is available in the six official United Nations languages: Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish. It can be viewed on the UN website, , or the Hague Appeal For Peace website,


Back to Top






Battening the Hatches:
Chinese "Nuclear Thefts" Provokes Wrong Response
by Alyn Ware


On March 6, 1999, the New York Times published a long front page article, "China Stole Nuclear Secrets for Bombs". The scandal was further fueled by the later release of the Cox Committee report. Results included the firing of Los Alamos scientist Wen Ho Lee, the restructuring of security in the Department of Energy (DOE), and a clamp down on information availability from the DOE.

However, according to The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (BAS) publisher Stephen Schwartz (60 Minutes, August 1, 1999), as well as Robert S. Vrooman, former head of counterintelligence at Los Alamos (New York Times, August 18, 1999), there is no evidence that Lee actually passed classified information to Chinese officials. Lee has not been charged with any crime. Further, there is considerable controversy as to the extent and significance of the alleged espionage, whatever its source or means.  Yet the scandal has had considerable impact on Congress and the Department of Energy.

On March 17 and 18, Congress voted overwhelmingly in favor of a bill on Ballistic Missile Defense, a program ostensibly to counter possible missile threats from China among others. This bill, which threatens the ABM Treaty, had failed in 1998.

The DOE, which came under intense congressional criticism for this supposed leak, has responded by battening down the hatches. The declassification of material which was begun in the Openness Initiative has ground to a halt. Public access to millions of pages of previously classified documents has been blocked. The DOE Office of Declassification has been renamed the Office of Nuclear and National Security Information.

This approach is misconceived and counterproductive. The idea that such a restriction of information availability could prevent China, or any other country, from either developing or modernizing nuclear forces is erroneous, because the necessary knowledge has already spread widely.  In commenting on a critical question concerning "Knowledge and Reversibility" in Security and Survival: The Case for a Nuclear Weapons Convention , Theodore Taylor, former weapons designer, states:  "I therefore tend not to be hopeful that control of information is likely to be very effective in curbing the proliferation of nuclear weapon concepts in countries with either rudimentary or advanced understanding of the relevant design principles."

On the contrary, Schwartz contends that overcontrol of information may "impede the detection of alleged nuclear espionage". He notes that "[b]ecause nuclear weapons information is so tightly held, U.S. intelligence analysts,according to Newsweek, apparently didn't know what to look for when reviewing intercepted communications and other raw intelligence." (BAS, May/June 1999)

While the US continues to research, design, test and maintain nuclear weapons, other countries will follow suit with their own programs. Weapons concepts and information will inevitably be discovered or leaked. The only rational approach is to negotiate for the elimination of nuclear weapons and to employ weapons research and information in a program for dismantling and destroying the weapons and controlling weapons usable materials and for monitoring and verifying their elimination and control.

China has at least rhetorically supported this approach, calling for negotiations on a nuclear weapons convention. BAS editor Mike Moore argues that the US should "call China's hand", stating: "If the United States can find a way to bring China and the other nuclear powers into negotiations on a nuclear disarmament treaty - admittedly not a likely prospect - that would set an engagement standard worthy of a new millennium." (BAS, July/August 1999)



Back to Top







NATO Summit
by Jim Wurst


While the war in Kosovo overshadowed NATO's 50th anniversary summit on April 23-25, the backroom debate over the role of nuclear weapons in the Alliance also strained consensus. Largely at the insistence of Canada and Germany, the US plan to keep NATO's nuclear policy in its Cold War mode was blocked. These two major non-nuclear allies had publicly stated that NATO's deterrence doctrine was outdated and that NATO's strategic doctrine should reflect that reality.

As a result of this split, the summit's two key documents - the Communiqué and the Strategic Concept -- send mixed signals about the role of nuclear weapons.

Most importantly, the Communiqué, in paragraph 32, says: "In the light of overall strategic developments and the reduced salience of nuclear weapons, the Alliance will consider options for confidence and security building measures, verification, non-proliferation and arms control and disarmament. The Council in Permanent Session will propose a process to Ministers in December for considering such options."  In other words, the Alliance has put off the day of reckoning. Canadian Foreign Minister Lloyd Axworthy said at a news conference during the Summit, "I think we have now gained an acknowledgment that such a review would be appropriate and that there would be directions to the NATO Council to start the mechanics of bringing that about." While the US probably hopes it will be able to work its will behind closed doors, it is also an opportunity for the allies that want to change NATO's doctrine and for NGOs to promote alternative strategies.

The Strategic Concept, however, reaffirms NATO's reliance on nuclear weapons, stating: "Nuclear weapons make a unique contribution in rendering the risks of aggression against the Alliance incalculable and unacceptable. Thus, they remain essential to preserve peace." (Para 46). The Concept also affirms NATO's intention to maintain nuclear forces in Europe, stating: "Nuclear forces based in Europe and committed to NATO provide an essential political and military link between the European and North American members of the Alliance."

On the other hand, the Concept recognizes the changing security situation in Europe, and concludes that  "the circumstances in which any use of nuclear weapons might have to be contemplated... are therefore extremely remote."

The Concept also deals with threats from other weapons of mass destruction and announces the creation of a WMD Initiative, to "enhance existing Allied programs which increase military readiness to operate in a WMD environment and to counter WMD threats." Paragraph 22 of the Concept refers to WMD "on NATO's periphery." While these are statements of fact, given the context of the document and the Alliance's "out-of-area" operation in Kosovo, this is also the setting up of the justification for out-of-area actions.

The full texts of both documents can be found on the NATO website:



Back to Top



Abolition 2000 Update


Abolition 2000, an international network calling for the abolition of nuclear weapons, held its annual meeting in The Hague following the Hague Appeal for Peace Conference in May 1999. The main results of the meeting were:

  • March 1-8 are deemed Global Abolition Days, a week of action for the elimination of nuclear weapons;
  • An Abolition 2000 "Call for the New Millenium" was drafted. This bold, short and inspiring statement is an excellent tool for engaging people in nuclear abolition and Abolition 2000. (Contact LCNP or our website for a copy to give to friends, acquaintances, etc.);
  • A Coordinating Committee and a Global Council were established.  For LCNP, Alyn Ware is one of the nine members of the Coordinating Committee, and John Burroughs and board member Anabel Dwyer are on the Global Council;
  • A calendar of other disarmament days was produced.

1400 organizations have now endorsed the Abolition 2000 Statement. It is hoped that this number will rise to 2000 by the year 2000. For more information contact Abolition 2000, 1187 Coast Village Road #123, Santa Barbara, CA 93108.



Back to Top



High Level Roundtable in Costa Rica


On March 19, 1999, LCNP Board member Jonathan Granoff and Alyn Ware participated in a roundtable of experts in San José, Costa Rica to discuss the Model Nuclear Weapons Convention and prospects for progress on achieving an actual nuclear weapons convention. The roundtable was organized by Dr. Carlos Vargas, who represented Costa Rica in the World Court hearings on the legality of the threat or use of nuclear weapons, and included Sr. Rodrigo Carazo, former President of Costa Rica, and H.E. Melvin Saenz, former Alternate Ambassador to the United Nations. The roundtable formulated a statement to the Costa Rican government with a number of recommendations for promoting the MNWC at national, regional and international levels.



Back to Top

Middle Powers Initiative



The Middle Powers Initiative (MPI) marked its first anniversary this March. In line with its primary role of working with -- and attempting to influence - "middle-power" nations in the pursuit of nuclear disarmament, MPI's priority has become to help mobilize civil society and governments in support of the New Agenda Coalition (NAC), the seven-nation initiative working to promote a practical and effective nuclear disarmament agenda (see Bombs Away! (hardcopy), Fall 1998).
MPI is currently pursuing four priorities:

  1. Strengthening NAC's UN General Assembly Resolution: The NAC introduced a resolution in the 1998 General Assembly incorporating its agenda. The resolution was adopted 114 to 18 with 38 abstentions. Four of the five traditional nuclear weapon states voted no (China abstained), as did India, Israel and Pakistan; many US allies abstained. In other words, the usual North-South divisions did not appear, thus demonstrating the appeal and validity of the NAC's proposals. MPI sent delegations to capitals of key NATO and other US-allied to encourage nations under pressure from the NATO nuclear states to stand their ground. MPI continues to work to broaden and deepen support for the NAC resolution, which will be re-introduced in the 1999 General Assembly.
  2. Campaigning for changes in NATO nuclear strategy: The vote on the NAC resolution in the General Assembly showed a deepening split in the NATO alliance over the role of nuclear weapons. While the three nuclear weapon members of NATO voted against the resolution, all non-nuclear states except Turkey abstained. However, the illegal and immoral affirmation of first use and deterrence remains. MPI is working, especially in the non-nuclear NATO states, to bring NATO strategy in line with the states' obligations under Article VI of the NPT.
  3. Ensuring the survival of the Non-Proliferation Treaty: The May preparatory committee for the 2000 NPT Review Conference demonstrated once again the wide rift between most of the nuclear weapon states and the vast majority of non-nuclear countries over what needs to be done to fulfill the Treaty's obligations for non-proliferation and disarmament. MPI considers it vital that the NPT survives beyond the Conference as an instrument for genuine nuclear disarmament. It is therefore working with other NGOs to support NAC's efforts towards this objective.
  4. Facilitating Strategy Consultations: MPI is developing a role in organizing and facilitating consultations between citizen organizations and governments. In February, it co-convened with the Fourth  Freedom Forum a strategy consultation in New York that brought together officials from NAC countries plus several other governments and 37 NGO representatives to develop strategies to promote steps to strengthen the non-proliferation regime in the run-up to the 2000 NPT Conference.

MPI is a coalition of eight international NGOs, including IALANA, LCNP's parent. MPI is chaired by Senator Douglas Roche, the former Canadian ambassador for disarmament, and has offices in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and New York. A second, updated edition of its briefing book,
Fast Track to Zero Nuclear Weapons , will be published soon. For further information, see MPI's  website:



Back to Top



Austria Adopts NWFZ Law


The Austrian Parliament on July 11, 1999, passed a law of constitutional status, which prohibits not only the production of nuclear weapons in Austria (which is already forbidden by the NPT anyway) but also:

  • deployment of nuclear weapons;
  • transporting of nuclear weapons through the country (transit);
  • testing of  nuclear weapons; and
  • use of nuclear weapons.

This would prohibit Austria from joining NATO's nuclear sharing arrangements, should it ever become a member, or from joining similar arrangements in the European Union if they ever developed. Thus it becomes a major political and legal stumbling block against the possible future development of an independent European nuclear deterrent.



Back to Top


Canada Announces New Nuclear Weapons Policy


The Government of Canada on April 19, 1999 issued a new nuclear weapons policy in response to a report  released by the Parliamentary Committee on Foreign Affairs' in December 1998.

The new policy:

  • Requests NATO to review the Alliance's nuclear policy and its relationship to proliferation, arms control and disarmament developments;
  • Calls on both Russia and the U.S. to negotiate to de-alert and de-mate their nuclear arsenals to increase the margin of safety against unauthorized or accidental use of nuclear weapons;
  • Pledges to work with the New Agenda Coalition in pursuing shared nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation objectives;
  • Stresses the necessity to devalue the political significance of nuclear weapons;
  • Calls for a new Statement of Principles and Objectives at the 2000 Review Conference of the Non-Proliferation Treaty;
  • Repeats its calls for an Ad Hoc Committee of the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva to undertake substantive discussions on nuclear disarmament issues;
  • Agrees to hold an annual meeting with Canadian non- governmental organizations.

At the same time, however, the Government did not accept certain recommendations made by the Committee. The Government did not, for example, support  negotiations on a nuclear weapons disarmament convention or reject the use of surplus weapons plutonium from the U.S. and Russia in Canadian nuclear reactors.

For the Government's new policy visit .




Back to Top

Vermont Legislature Calls for Nuclear Abolition


On April 28, the Vermont House of Representatives approved a resolution calling on the President to negotiate a treaty that is mutual, verifiable and results in the elimination of all nuclear weapons. Earlier, the Vermont Senate voted unanimously for the same resolution. The vote followed intense campaigning by the Vermont Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, which in August 1998 organized the 93 mile long Vermont Walk to Abolish Nuclear Weapons. The coalition also organized town meetings throughout Vermont resulting in 33 towns adopting  resolutions calling on the US government to enter into negotiations for an abolition treaty.

Contact: Joseph Gainza, American Friends Service
Committee, 73 Main St., Box 19, Montpelier, VT 05602.
Tel: 802 229-2340. Email:



Back to Top


NPT PrepCom
by Jim Wurst


The most notable achievement of the third and final preparatory committee meeting (PrepCom) for the 2000 Review of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), held in New York from May 10 to 21, is that it did not fail.
The final report gives the veneer of agreement, but all the agreements are on procedural, not substantive, issues. Still, this was something of a victory since the 1998 session of the PrepCom ended in deadlock. But no one now believes that this papering-over of differences will prevent -- short of significant progress in nuclear disarmament -- a bitter battle next year over the viability of the NPT.
With broad acceptance that the 1998 Chair's paper was unusable because it was merely a massive list of everyone's ideas, the Chair of this PrepCom, Ambassador Camilo Reyes of Colombia, made two attempts to draft a document to go to the 2000 NPT Review. His second paper calls for "a number of practical steps that the nuclear-weapon states can and should take immediately before the actual elimination of nuclear arsenals." These steps include progress on START II and III, a "seamless process" of bringing the other nuclear weapon states into negotiations with the US and Russia, the "need for the nuclear-weapon states to reduce further their reliance on nonategic nuclear weapons" and to work for their elimination, and an ad-hoc committee at the Conference on Disarmament "with a negotiating mandate to address nuclear disarmament."

The session appeared heading for the same kind of deadlock that marred the 1998 session, but finally agreement was reached to send to the Review Conference the Chair's paper along with all the papers submitted by states and Reyes' two drafts with the notation: "The Preparatory Committee was unable to reach agreement on any substantive recommendations to the 2000 Review Conference." This means all the PrepCom materials will go to the Review Conference -- as will the disagreements between the nuclear weapon states and the vast majority of non-nuclear states.                         

The New Agenda Coalition (NAC) presented a working paper with 44 co-sponsors calling for "interim measures" including de-alerting, the "reduction of reliance on nonategic nuclear weapons," and an instrument against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons.                   
The Non-Aligned Movement submitted a paper which, among other things, called for nuclear disarmament negotiations in the Conference on Disarmament to culminate in a nuclear weapons convention. NGOs presented their positions to the delegates on May 11. Thirteen NGOs, including LCNP Executive Director John Burroughs, spoke to a half-filled conference room on issues ranging from US-Russian relations to indigenous perspectives on the nuclear age. LCNP additionally distributed an analysis of NATO-related issues of nuclear sharing and qualified assurances of non-use made to non-nuclear weapon states. All of the LCNP contributions and a more detailed report of the PrepCom can be found at All NGO presentations are at



Back to Top


Citizens Weapons Inspections
by Alyn Ware and Giovanni Nifosì

Following the 1996 advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice that the threat or use of nuclear weapons is generally illegal and that there is an obligation to eliminate them through negotiations, teams of citizens have been attempting to inspect nuclear weapons facilities in order to ascertain whether states are making any progress in adhering to these requirements (see Bombs Away! (hardcopy), Fall 1998). Below is a sample of these. Note: An annotated bibliography of cases involving inspections and other direct actions has been developed by Giovanni Nifosì and will be available at soon.

Kleine Brogel

On February 21, 1999, a group of Belgian Members of Parliament, artists, leaders of social groups and activists attempted a citizen weapons inspection of a NATO base at Kleine Brogel. It is believed that B-61 nuclear weapons are deployed on the base and operated by the US Munition Support Squadron. Following a refusal by Base Commander Buyse to allow the inspectors inside the base, activists cut a hole in the fence and over one hundred citizen inspectors entered. A number were attacked by dogs, including MPs Patrick van Krunkelsven (President of the Flemish Regionalist Party) and Johan Malcorps, who required hospital treatment. 120 people were arrested and released.

Volkel Air Force Base

Citizen weapons inspections were attempted or conducted at a number of nuclear weapons sites in Europe on Saturday,  April 24, 1999, the 50th anniversary of the founding of NATO. The inspections developed additional significance in light of NATO's bombing of Serbia and its negative impact on nuclear disarmament. Alyn Ware participated in an inspection at Volkel Airforce base in the Netherlands. It is believed that the US deploys between 10 and 30  B-61 free fall bombs with W-80 warheads at the base and that these are available to the Dutch Air Force during time of war under nuclear sharing arrangements between the US and Netherlands. The Non-Proliferation Treaty prohibits the transfer of nuclear weapons between states parties. As the inspectors were not permitted to enter the base,  four  proceeded to dig under the fence to gain access. They were arrested, charged and  released for trial at a future date.

Abolition Walk from
World Court to NATO HQ

On May 27, 1999, approximately 500 peace activists arrived at NATO headquarters in Brussels, Belgium, most of them having walked from the International Court of Justice in The Hague,  on the 2000 Walk for Nuclear Abolition organized by For Mother Earth. A letter challenging  NATO's illegal nuclear policies and practices and seeking specific information on the numbers, locations, yields and targets of NATO nuclear weapons had previously been sent to NATO Secretary-General Javier Solana. 

A delegation of five activists, including Alyn Ware, was allowed into the headquarters to meet with press officer Nick Fiorenza and legal adviser Baldwin De Vidts, but the meeting did not produce the information sought. The NATO representatives were then informed that the activists would exercise their rights and responsibilities under the Nuremberg principles to take further non-violent action in order to prevent commission of war crimes and crimes against peace by NATO and that such actions would include attempts to enter the site to gather additional information. Once the activists started, they were beaten by the security police and fired upon with water cannons. Many were arrested. For Mother Earth activists continued actions at the base over the next two days. Over 260 arrests resulted. See


Hibakusha at Los Alamos

On August 6, 1999, about a dozen activists from France, Japan, Canada, the United Kingdom, California, Texas, and New Mexico gathered near a building where components of the first US nuclear device were assembled, at Los Alamos National Laboratory.  Hibakusha Seiko Ikeda and Sueko Motoyam of Nagasaki, in the first such visit of survivors of the US atomic bombings to the lab, described the horror of the blasts they experienced as children and spread thousands of sunflower seeds as homage to the victims and as symbols of  the developing abolition movement.  Led by LCNP's John  Burroughs, others read portions of the ICJ advisory opinion and provisions of international law under which the US bombings and subsequent development and deployment of the US arsenal were and are illegal. (The source for the reading, "Legal and Policy Bases for Citizen Verification of the Elimination of Nuclear, Chemical, and Biological Weapons", is available at or from LCNP.) On August 9, 1999, about 75 people were arrested in a "cross-the-line" protest at the lab organized by Peace Action. They were quickly released, and no prosecution is planned.

Davis-Monthan Air Force Base

On December 10, 1998, six members of a Citizen Weapons Inspection Team in Tucson, Arizona, were convicted of trespass following their attempted inspection of Davis-Monthan AFB for weapons of mass or indiscriminate destruction, namely depleted uranium ammunition. Following testimony from Base Commander Corley that the ammunition could be deployed at a moment's notice, Judge Eisenberg conceded that the defendants' action was in response to an imminent threat and was done in order to prevent harm, but said there were other reasonable alternatives to the action. The judge praised the defendants' depth of commitment and sentenced them to six months unsupervised probation and 10 hours of community service.

Lockheed Martin

Thousands of people have signed petitions demanding a Citizens Disarmament Inspection of Lockheed Martin to determine if its Valley Forge, Pennsylvania, facilities are in compliance with the World Court opinion. Lockheed Martin is the largest war contractor in the world, and the US government's chief nuclear weapons contractor. On January 18, 1999, Martin Luther King Day,  the Brandywine Peace Community attempted the inspection of three facilities during a walk through the complex. Fifteen people were  cited for criminal trespass and released. Contact: Brandywine Peace Community, POB 81, Swarthmore, PA 19081. Tel:  (610) 544-1818. Email:



Back to Top



Direct Action Cases
by Alyn Ware and Giovanni Nifosì


International Law Wins
Trident Acquittal

On June 10, 1999, a Kitsap County, Washington jury found eight activists who blocked traffic into Bangor Nuclear Submarine Base on August 9, 1998, not guilty.  In an unusual instruction which may have influenced the jury members, District Court Judge James Riehl informed them that international treaties supersede local law.  During the trial, defendant Brian Watson, relying in part on a declaration prepared by LCNP's John Burroughs, presented excerpts from the Hague Convention of 1907, the Nuremberg Principles and the 1996 International Court of Justice opinion on the legality of the threat or use of nuclear weapons. The jury foreperson was visibly moved after the verdict was delivered, stating that  she was "proud to sit with these people."

Contact: Ground Zero Center for Non-Violent Action, 16159 Clear Creek Road NW, Poulsbo, WA 98370.

Anti-Nuclear Speech Prohibited

On July 29, 1999, Judge Rebecca Beach Smith sentenced anti-nuclear activist Michele Naar Obed to one year in prison for violating probation conditions which included a ban on visiting Jonah House, a Catholic Worker house in Baltimore. Smith had previously detained Naar Obed to prevent her appearing on talk shows and participating in anti-nuclear protests. Naar Obed was on probation following her release from prison in November 1997 after serving time for a Plowshares action against a fast-attack submarine at Newport News Shipbuilding in August 1995. The judge found her to be a danger to the community based upon flaunting the conditions of probation, for going on talk shows, and associating with people who committed criminal acts (i.e., other Plowshares activists).

Contact: Jonah House, 1301 Moreland Avenue, Baltimore, MD 21216 Ph: 410-233-6238 or


Gods of Metal
Plowshares Sentenced

On January 4, 1999, five Gods of Metal Plowshares activists were sentenced to prison for terms ranging from four to ten months following their conviction for willful damage to government property stemming from their disarmament action against a B-52 bomber at Andrews Air Force Base outside of Washington. Federal Judge Alexander Williams gave each defendant the lowest sentence under the sentencing guidelines, stating: "It's clear to me that you're sincere in your beliefs…"  Defendant Kathy Boylan equated the B-52 to a Nazi gas chamber and to the chains placed on slaves. Defendant Carol Gilbert said "By our actions we intended to disarm these gods of metal. They are illegal and they must be disarmed." Prosecutor Patrick DeConcini, a Catholic and son of former senator Dennis DeConcini, when asked if it was difficult for him to be prosecuting two nuns, two priests and a grandmother, replied "I think that's fair to say."

Contact: Liz Walters, 1664 Church Street, Detroit, MI 48216.

Hung Jury in Ploughshares
Conspiracy Trial

On May 14, 1999, the eight day trial in Preston Crown Court, England, of three Swedish Ploughshares activists ended when the jury, after seven hours of deliberation, could not reach a verdict. Annika Spalde, Stellan Vinthagen and Ann-Britt Sternfeldt, of the Bread Not Bombs Ploughshares group, had been accused of conspiring to cause criminal damage to the new Trident nuclear weapons submarine, HMS Vengeance, after they entered the Barrow shipyards in September 1998 and began symbolic "disarmament" of Trident related equipment. Vinthagen commented, "We are really impressed that a jury of ordinary citizens from a town so dependent on weapons production refused to find us guilty, in spite of them being told by the Judge that that was their only option." A retrial has been set for October 11, 1999.  The judge has said that he will seek the view of the Attorney General on the application of the 1996 ruling by the International Court of Justice to Britain's nuclear weapons.

The Bread Not Bombs group works in association with Trident Ploughshares 2000, whose member Jane Tallents said: "It is an enormous encouragement that at least some members of a jury have appreciated the moral and legal arguments we are bringing to bear. We will continue to argue for the validity of direct disarmament."

Preston Crown Court is set to host yet another trial of disarmers when the Aldermaston Trash Trident activists appear on charges of damage to radar testing equipment on board the same submarine on the February 1, 1999.

Websites: and 

Loch Goil Disarmers Face
Theft and Damage Charge

On June 8, 1999, peace activists Ellen Moxley, from Dollar, Scotland, Ulla Roder from Denmark and Angie Zelter, from Norfolk, England, boarded "Maytime", a floating laboratory in Loch Goil which checks the "sonar invisibility" of Trident nuclear submarines, and cleared out the lab, throwing the equipment into the loch. The women were charged with  malicious mischief  and theft  and told that they would be released on the condition that they not  "reoffend" before the trial date, which has yet to be set.  When the women told the court that they would continue disarmament actions to uphold international law, they were returned to Corton Vale prison. For a report from prison by Ellen Moxley and video and photos see

Minuteman III Plowshares
Sentence Reduced

On February 18, 1999, Daniel Sicken was sentenced to 41 months and Sachio Ko-Yin to 30 months in federal prison for sabotage, conspiracy and destruction of government property in their Plowshares action against  a Minuteman III nuclear missile in August 1998 (see Bombs Away! Fall 1998). The defendants originally faced between 63 and 97 months for the convictions, but the sentences were reduced by Judge Walker Miller on the basis of arguments, some provided by LCNP President Peter Weiss, that the principle of "gradations of offense" applied and that there were reasonable motives for the offense including moral grounds and the International Court of Justice nuclear weapons opinion.



Back to Top



The View From Russia: Two Conferences in St. Petersburg


As the Yugoslavia war was winding down, LCNP Executive Director John Burroughs participated in two conferences in St. Petersburg, Russia. At a June 18-20 Abolition 2000 conference sponsored among others by the German and Russian branches of the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War and the St. Petersburg Peace Council, no one could miss the pervasive sense of betrayal and outrage of Russians arising from the NATO bombing without UN authority, the expansion of NATO, and other post-Cold War developments. Several Russian speakers expressed the conviction that progress in nuclear disarmament will require a renewal of respect for international law and institutions.

Burroughs was one of the drafters of the St. Petersburg Declaration issued by the conference. In addition to hitting now familiar abolition themes, the document speaks to the Kosovo war. It states that "future European security arrangements must comply with international law" and called for "new emphasis on regional security organizations," such as the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. OSCE is a pan-European security organization, involving 54 countries including Russia, the United States, and Canada, which promotes non-military solutions to conflict.

On June 22-25, Burroughs joined a Hague Appeal for Peace delegation participating in the second phase of the governmental Centennial Conference held to mark the 100th anniversary of the Hague Peace Conference of 1899. Forceful presentations on nuclear and comprehensive disarmament issues were made by Burroughs and others. Some of the points raised by HAP delegates and other civil society organizations will be reflected as positions of participants in the final report of the governmental process, to be circulated at the United Nations this fall.



Back to Top


UN Disarmament Commission


The UN Disarmament Commission's 1999 session ended without agreement on the convening of a fourth special session on disarmament. In previous years, the United States blocked the necessary consensus for holding an SSOD IV. This time it was India.

While the US said it could live with the paper prepared by the Chair of the working group, India objected to language that appeared to downgrade the Final Document of SSOD I (and thus its statement that nuclear  disarmament is the priority issue). India, and other developing nations, wanted language along the lines of "reaffirming the principles and priorities of SSOD I"; but the paper says "bearing in mind" the principles and priorities of the Final Document. India also objected to NATO's reaffirmation of nuclear deterrence, as spelled out in the Alliance's Strategic Concept issued a few days before, saying nuclear disarmament was impossible as long as deterrence was an accepted strategy.

Like last year's working paper, the Chair's paper listed objectives and possible agenda items, but not a proposed date. This failure does not mean the end of SSOD IV. It will probably be on the agenda of the First Committee this autumn where another attempt at a consensus decision will be made.


Back to Top

Landmark Victory in Lawsuit Against DOE

To settle a lawsuit brought by 39 environmental and peace groups, including the Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy, the US Department of Energy (DOE) has signed a landmark agreement that will bolster public oversight of  its efforts to address severe contamination problems in the nuclear weapons complex. Approved on December 14, 1998 by US District Court Judge Stanley Sporkin in Washington, DC, the settlement of NRDC v. Peña, No. 970936, ends nine years of on-and-off litigation handled by the Natural Resources Defense Council, with the DC firm Meyer & Glitzenstein serving as litigation counsel in the recent phase.

The innovative settlement reflects the plaintiffs' determination to promote transparency and public participation in the management of radioactive wastes, as well as the openness of some elements within DOE to such an approach - coupled with the fact that DOE faced an imminent contempt of court hearing for not complying with a previous agreement in the case! (See "Motion Seeks Imprisonment of DOE Secretary", Bombs Away! (hardcopy), Spring 1998.) In depositions taken by plaintiffs, former Energy Secretary James Watkins and other former senior DOE officials strongly backed plaintiffs' claims. The settlement mandates:

  • Creation of a publicly accessible, interactive computer database including details about waste and contaminated facilities, with public participation in the creation of the database
  • Establishment of a $6.25 million Citizens' Monitoring and Technical Assessment Fund for non-profit groups and tribes to obtain technical assistance in monitoring DOE's environmental activities and impacts
  • Completion of an environmental analysis, with public input, of plans for "long-term stewardship" at contaminated DOE sites

The computer database is expected to be available through the Internet by early 2000. Details regarding plans for the database, including the results of a "stakeholder" forum held in June 1999 pursuant to the settlement, visit

RESOLVE, Inc., a DC-based non-profit dispute resolution organization, has been selected as the administrator of the monitoring fund. An advisory board is now being established which will support an approach to granting money based on commitments to ecological values, a community-based approach to science, and environmental justice. It is expected that the application process will be opened this fall, with the first awards to be made in early 2000. For more information, see above-noted website, or contact Bruce Stedman at RESOLVE, 202-965-217,

Back to Top

Ballistic Missile Defense


In March 1999, the US Congress approved legislation mandating the deployment of a Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) system as soon as technologically possible. The House approved the measure 317 to 102; the Senate vote was 90 to 3.

Dubbed "Star Wars Lite" by critics, the new plan is a scaled down version of the Reagan Administration's 1983 plan for a space-based system that would protect the United States from a massive Soviet missile attack, a system that never worked after 15 years and $50 billion of research. The new plan is said to be for defense against limited attack by nations such as North Korea or Iraq or accidental launch by Russia or China.

The US has allocated $10.5 billion over the next five years for research and tests and will make a decision by June 2000 whether to deploy the BMD system by 2005. Any BMD deployment would violate the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty and talk of sharing a system with Japan, South Korea and especially Taiwan, has infuriated the Chinese. Russia, seeing its own nuclear forces deteriorating and increasingly vulnerable, warns bilateral nuclear arms reductions would suffer.

For more information, see the Federation of American Scientists website,



Back to Top



Global Action to Prevent War - A Progress Report


Global Action to Prevent War (GAP), a major project of LCNP and its parent body, the International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms, is becoming a global coalition, with a newly formed international coordinating committee and a strong boost from the Hague Appeal for Peace.

GAP is a comprehensive program combining conflict prevention, peacekeeping, and disarmament measures in an integrated approach to reduce the scale and frequency of violent conflict, including genocide and other internal strife.  It seeks to create a war prevention regime in four phases over the first three to four decades of the 21st century, as more fully described in Bombs Away!, Fall 1998. The GAP document, now in its tenth revision, can be found at, or contact LCNP for a hard copy.

As an integrated program, GAP promotes a wide range of political and legal projects. For example: compulsory jurisdiction of states before the International Court of Justice, compulsory jurisdiction of individuals before the International Criminal Court; humanitarian intervention by appropriate UN standing forces; establishing a non-provocative or defensive security system; and training in non-violent conflict resolution in educational environments throughout the globe. Among other things, GAP aims to create a global security environment more conducive to the elimination of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons.  The importance of controlling and reducing "conventional" arms in this regard was most recently illustrated by the Russian military staff's announcement that during exercises held in July, Russia was required to use nuclear weapons to meet an overwhelming conventional force.

A coordinating committee has been organized involving prominent policy and political activists from the developing world such as Vandana Shiva, ecologist/feminist; Alejandro Bendana, Director, Center for International Studies, Managua; Jacklyn Cock, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg; and Walden Bello, Focus on the Global South, Bangkok and Manila. Mary Kaldor of the London School of Economics, Joseph Rotblat of Pugwash, John Burroughs of LCNP, Merav Datan of IPPNW, and Jonathan Schell of The Nation Institute are among the participants from the developed world.

At the Hague Appeal for Peace, GAP held two major sessions featuring Bendana, Cock, and Bello. Five other sessions included GAP founders Randall Forsberg, Director of the Institute of Defense & Disarmament Studies, Jonathan Dean, former US ambassador to Mutual Balanced Force Reduction negotiations and Senior Consultant to the Union of Concerned Scientists, and Saul Mendlovitz, LCNP Vice-President and Co-Director of World Order Model Projects. Four open meetings were held, where lively discussions ensued. GAP was adopted as a fundamental program of the continuing HAP process.

In the coming year, GAP has been asked to make presentations at the State of the World Forum; the Nobel Conference, the Future of Arms Control; the Seoul Conference on the New Millennium; and the Montreal Conference on World Civil Society. GAP will also assist in the organization of the citizens' millennium conference at the UN, spring 2000. GAP is actively seeking to find a number of states at the UN to submit the draft in an appropriate forum so that it will be discussed and acted upon in the next two or three years. Your comments are invited on the GAP document, whose next revision is scheduled for December 1999.



Back to Top


Landmine Ban Grows


At the First Meeting of the States Parties to the Ottawa Mine Ban Treaty, held in Maputo, Mozambique, May 3-7, 1999, it was reported that 135 states have signed the treaty, and 81 have ratified it. The treaty entered into force on March 1. The International Campaign to Ban Landmines presented the 1,100 page Landmine Monitor Report 1999, which provides a detailed country-by-country report on all aspects of compliance with the treaty. A surprise finding was that world-wide stocks of landmines are much greater than previously estimated - 250 million rather than 100 million. However, progress in demining and mine destruction is being made, with 12 million destroyed from the stockpiles of 30 nations. Most important is the cut in production of mines, with eight of the twelve largest producers of landmines now parties to the treaty and exports from producers virtually halted.

The US continues to refuse to join the landmines ban. A statement to the conference from President Clinton said merely that the US will "sign by 2006 if we have replacement weapons."

Contact: International Campaign to Ban Landmines,
2001 S Street N.W., Suite 740, Washington DC 20009,



Back to Top



Staff Update



Alyn Ware, formerly the Executive Director of LCNP, has returned to his home country, Aotearoa-New Zealand, following the expiration of his US work permit. Alyn has been appointed LCNP Consultant at Large and will continue part-time work on LCNP projects and issues including the nuclear weapons convention, Abolition 2000, and the Middle Powers Initiative. He plans to return to NY for key disarmament events. In addition, he will be assisting Peace Brigades International establish a peace team in East Timor, leading peace education in New Zealand schools, spending time with his daughter, and learning the Maori language (indigenous language of Aotearoa).


John Burroughs, formerly an attorney for Western States Legal Foundation, has joined LCNP as Executive Director. John was the NGO legal coordinator for IALANA, LCNP's parent body, during the November 1995 hearings before the International Court of Justice on the legality of nuclear weapons, and subsequently wrote a book for IALANA on the advisory opinion. His 1991 Ph.D. dissertation at the University of California at Berkeley examines the international law framework for nuclear weapon policy and protest. When time permits, John plays tennis and  hikes.

John Burroughs at Smolny Institute, St. Petersburg, addressing Centennial Conference, June 24, 1999
Photo by Jackie Cabasso


Jim Wurst, formerly the editor of Disarmament Times, has joined LCNP in the halftime position of Program Director. Jim combines this with his other halftime position as United Nations coordinator for the Middle Powers Initiative. Jim has considerable experience monitoring disarmament initiatives in the United Nations and with the international campaign to limit small arms. Jim and his wife Rosa are currently adopting a child.

                   Jim Wurst



Olubukola (Olu) Arowolo
has joined LCNP as the administrator, a part-time position. She also works part-time for World Order Models Project, a partner with LCNP in a number of projects including the World Court Project and Global Action to Prevent War. Olu is a graduate of Long Island University.


         Olubukola Arowolo

Giovanni Nifosì, LCNP's Legal Researcher for the past year, left at the end of August to return to Italy to work with IALANA lawyer Joachim Lau. He has developed  databases of court cases and articles which refer to the ICJ advisory opinion on nuclear weapons. We thank Giovanni for his work and wish him the best of luck


           Giovanni Nifosì

Nya Gregor Fleron,
formerly the LCNP administrator, has returned to her home country of Denmark following the expiration of her US work permit. Nya completed her first book, Above the Underground, a novel about life in New York in the mid 21st Century, and has now started work on her next one.



Back to Top



Notable Books

Aotearoa/New Zealand at the World Court
Kate Dewes and Rob Green 
48 pp., $5
The Raven Press, May 1999, Christchurch, New Zealand
Available from LCNP

"This publication is a record of the passion felt by peaceful people who trusted in the rule of law and the eventual triumph of reason. It is a tale of commitment by ordinary people who persuaded governments of both major political parties to pursue the cause before the World Court."
David Lange, former Prime Minister of New Zealand

This book describes how New Zealanders, while strongly allied to both France and the US throughout the 20th century,  became passionately anti-nuclear as a result of the health effects of French and US nuclear testing in the Pacific and led campaigns to take first the nuclear testing issue and then the issue of the legality of nuclear weapons threat and use to the International Court of Justice.

The 1974 nuclear testing case was instrumental in forcing France to abandon atmospheric testing despite their apoplexy at the case being taken and their distaste for legal restraint against them. France later bombed an anti-nuclear boat in Auckland, New Zealand to prevent it from taking further action against French underground testing, but was eventually forced to abandon such testing as well.

The authors are optimistic that, in the same vein, the 1996 International Court of Justice opinion on the legality of threat or use of nuclear weapons will be instrumental in moving the nuclear weapon states to eventually abandon nuclear deterrence policies and move towards complete nuclear disarmament under a nuclear weapons convention.

Pacific Women Speak Out:
For Independence and Denuclearisation
Edited by Zohl de Ishtar 
78 pp.,  $10 plus $2 shipping
The Raven Press, 1998, Christchurch, New Zealand
Available from LCNP

Since 1945, over two thousand nuclear weapons have been detonated, causing devastation and suffering worldwide. Pacific Women Speak Out, a book containing the testimonies of 11 Pacific women, was launched at the United Nations on March 1, 1999, the 45th anniversary of the Bravo nuclear test in the Marshall Islands. The book, relates the devastating effects of nuclear testing, uranium mining, war, genocide and colonialism which is still being perpetuated against Pacific peoples by powerful countries including Indonesia, France, the US and Australia.

"The story of the Marshallese people since the nuclear weapons tests has been sad and painful. Allow our experience, now, to save others such sadness and pain."  Darlene Keju-Johnson, Pacific Women Speak Out

This Is My Homeland
Stories of the effects of nuclear industries
by the people of Serpent River First
and the north shore of Lake Huron
Edited by Lorraine Rekmans, Keith Lewis, and Anabel Dwyer
Serpent River First Nation, 1999, $15 US, $20 CA
"A lot of the people that worked at the mines, that are my age, are dying of cancer."     Junior

The North American Great Lakes Basin contains thousands of sites contaminated with radiation. In the Serpent River watershed, 250 million tons of tailings from 12 uranium and thorium mines and mills and a uranium refinery continue to inflict grave harm. The Rio Algom and Denison Mining Companies mines and mills produced yellowcake for U.S. nuclear weapons and Canadian nuclear power plants. The land for the mines and mills was seized in 1954 from the Serpent River First Nation in violation of the 1850 Robinson Huron Treaty.

In This Is My Homeland, the people of Serpent River talk about the health and environmental effects of the mining, the deception of the mining companies and governments, and their campaigns to regain justice against such tremendous odds.

"Many of us have been silent for a long time. We have been told to be quiet because we do not know all the details of the scientific information possessed by the experts. What has happened? Why are we listening to lunatics? What good is a nuclear bomb? What country and what people are we hoping to defend? The poisons that seep into our water system and the tailings dust in the air around us will kill us slowly and silently. Who will be left to defend if we all die of  radiation poisoning." -
Lorraine Rekmans,  This Is  My Homeland

Order from Chief Earl Commanda and Council, Serpent River First Nation, P.O. Box 14, Cutler, Ontario POP 1BO, Canada.



Back to Top





Nuclear Awakenings

In "Awakenings", Oliver Sacks tells the remarkable story of a group of patients suffering from encephalitis lethargica, the mysterious disease which reduces humans to a near vegetable state. After many experiments, Dr. Sacks comes up with a drug which brings these lost souls back to life: They read, they talk, they play music, they reason. A few months pass and, to their horror and that of those who have read the book or seen the movie, they revert to their previous state. "Awakenings" is a paradigm for the campaign to rid the world of nuclear weapons…

The half century during which the campaign has been waged by millions of people throughout the world is punctuated by events which temporarily open a window of reason on the insanity of nuclear deterrence… Each time, however, the policy makers and some of the citizens slipped back into their lethargic groove, as if driven by some irresistible force to desist from doing what had to be done. . . .  At some point, hopefully before that feared nuclear exchange takes place, the small group of civilian and military policy wonks who hold the fate of the earth in their hands, are bound to awaken long enough to do something about it.

Excerpted from "Holocaust by Inertia and How to Prevent It" by Peter Weiss

The full article can be viewed at Nuclear Watch, a new cybermagazine.


Back to Top


   Home  |  World Court Project   |  Nuclear Weapons Convention  |  Abolition 2000  |  Global Action to Prevent War

Nuclear Disarmament & Non-Proliferation  |  Nuclear Energy  |   Middle Powers Initiative  |  About LCNP  |  Publications
Why work at home jobs Best work from home jobs Whith legitimate work at home jobs More information on legitimate work from home jobs More information on free work at home jobs All about home job legitimate top work What online jobs work from home You search here work from home data entry jobs In a work at home job scams Buy work at home medical coding jobs I need work at home data entry jobs Where free legitimate work at home jobs So scam free work at home jobs The free legitimate work from home jobs In the no fee work at home jobs How legit work from home jobs In a business opportunity work at home jobs This was work at home jobs for moms This website about genuine work at home jobs This is legit work at home jobs Where bbb home job work