Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 10:11:10 -0400 From: Eric Fawcett Subject: sfp-72: NATO Bombing - Dire Warnings Two views from members of the Advisory Council of Science for Peace on Russian responses to the illegal NATO war against Yugoslavia: 1] "BOMBINGS REIGNITE NUCLEAR WAR FEARS", Times-Colonist p A15, 13 May 99 by Dr. Mary-Wynne Ashford, co-President of IPPNW, Nobel Peace Prize winners 2] "NATO Blitzkrieg & Russia", letter from David Morgan, President of VANA, to Eric Fawcett *************************************************************************** 1] "BOMBINGS REIGNITE NUCLEAR WAR FEARS" by Dr. Mary-Wynne Ashford (Times-Colonist 13 MAY 99 page A15) Dr. Mary-Wynne Ashford is co-president of the Nobel Peace Prize IPPNW] 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. **************************************************************************** 2. NATO Blitzkrieg & Russia by David Morgan, President of VANA Vancouver, May 11 VANA's prime concernn remains the threat of nuclear war. In our 1995 convention we voted by about 75% in favour of Canada's exit from NATO. This was based on NATO's highly belligerent and provocative actions during the Cold War, especially in 1983 when the Pershing II & Cruise missiles were deployed in Europe. These actions of NATO's were far more dangerous to human survival than the current blitzkrieg against Yugoslavia. So for VANA, NATO was a thoroughly discredited institution at the end of the Cold War. When NATO announced its expansion into Eastern Europe, it confirmed our worst suspicions about the essentially belligerent and militaristic policy of NATO. Lloyd Axworthy strongly supported this expansion and even favoured NATO's expansion into the Ukraine. Much Russian goodwill towards the west disappeared as this expansion took place. NATO's bombing attack on Yugoslavia has been the clincher. The bonds between Russia and Serbia are very strong. In 1941, the apparently "futile" Serb and Greek resistance to the German invasions delayed the start of Barbarossa from 15 May to 22 June - 38 fateful days which were critical in late November as the harsh Russian winter closed in on the ill-prepared German army. In 1942 when the Germans were attacking Russia with 200 divisions they had to keep 40 divisions in Serbia to try to control the partisans. This bombing attack violates the UN Charter, NATO's own North Atlantic Treaty of 4 April 1949 and its recent Founding Act on Mutual Cooperation & Security between NATO and the Russian Federation, of 27 May 1979. Russian public opinion has swung from suspicion to outrage. Trust and goodwill towards the west have been widely damaged. When the radar warning reports come to the White House or the Kremlin in the middle of the night, the fate of the human race can depend on trust and goodwill. Both of these priceless assets have been recklessly squandered by the US/NATO bombing of Serbia. The stage has been set for very dangerous future crises. Prime Minister Chretien and Foreign Affairs Minister Axworthy have played criminal roles in this disaster. VANA strongly supports the international group of lawyers led by professors from Osgoode Hall Law School of York University in Toronto, who have laid a formal complaint with the International Criminal Tribunal at The Hague against all of the individual leaders of the NATO countries (including Chretien, Axworthy & Eggleton) and officials of NATO itself. The Canadian peace movement should unite in calling for the resignations of these ministers.