This is the weekly electronic information service of the International Network of Engineers and Scientists for Global Responsibility

Editor: Tobias Damjanov, e-mail:   
INES homepage: http://inesglobal.org
INES International Office   
INES Chair: Prof. Armin Tenner   

CONTENTS of WNII No. 9/2001

• Membership and Projects' News:
  • From the Editor
  • USA: Nuclear Age Peace Foundation (NAPF), The Sunflower, No. 46,
    March 2001
• Nuclear Weapons:
  • Tritium and the US nuclear weapons program
  • Web references re: recent Russian missile tests
  • Web references on the Russian Missile Defense Proposal
  • US Domestic Opinion on National Missile Defense
  • US Nuclear Forces and arms control prospects
• Sustainable Development:
  • CSD9: Fourth Bureau Meeting
  • First session of the UN Forum on Forests (UNFF)
• Conferences, Meetings, Seminars:
  • Consumption, Everyday life and Sustainability Summer School
• INES Web- and Email Service

MEMBERSHIP AND PROJECTS' NEWS

From the Editor

PLEASE NOTE: I might have problems to issue the next WNII edition in time because I have to undergo an operation during the forthcoming week.

Tobias Damjanov

USA: Nuclear Age Peace Foundation (NAPF), The Sunflower, No. 46, March 2001
Back issues: http://www.wagingpeace.org/sf/index.html
Events are listed at: http://www.wagingpeace.org/calendar/events_current.html

The March issue of The Sunflower covers the following:

• Ballistic Missile Defense Systems: Russia Presents Its Own Ballistic Missile Defense System to NATO
• Star Warriors (Space Patrol)
• Depleted Uranium: UK Fires DU Munitions off Coast of Scotland
• Nuclear Matters:
  • North Korea Threatens to Scrap Missile Test Deal
  • Kursk Tragedy Caused by Torpedo Misfire
  • German Intelligence Reports on Iraq Nuclear Weapons Capability
  • Concern Over British Nuclear Sub Deepens
• Nuclear Energy: Price Anderson Act Up for Renewal
• FAQ of the Month: What is MOX Fuel?
• Nuclear Insanity: Missile Defense is Bush's Idee Fixe
• NAPF Happenings: Nuclear Age Peace Foundation Kicks Off International Membership Campaign
• Actions You Can Take: Urge the US to Ratify the Anti-Personnel Landmine Treaty!
• Resources:
  • "State of the World 2001", a downloadable report from the World Watch Institute: http://secure.worldwatch.org/cgi-bin/wwinst/SOW01P
  • The Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League (BREDL) has released a three part report, "Plutonium: The Last Five Years," documenting plutonium hazards and inventories and revealing the US  Department of Energy's mismanagement of its plutonium storage responsibilities: http://www.bredl.org/press/2001/Pu_Report.htm
  • Using information from the Center for Responsive Politics, Project Abolition has put together a profile of the campaign contributions and lobbying expenses of the Big Four Star Wars contractors, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and TRW.  Project Abolition has also compiled a list of these contractors' plants and offices around the country: http://projectabolition.org/cprojects.html

NUCLEAR WEAPONS

Abolition 2000 homepage: http://www.abolition2000.org

Grassroots News: http://www.napf.org/abolition2000/news/

Tritium and the US nuclear weapons program [Source: Nuclear Policy Project Flash, Volume 3, Number 8, February 26,
2001]

Kenneth Bergeron writes in the current issue of the Bulletin of Concerned Atomic Scientists that since the last tritium-producing
nuclear reactor in the US was shut down in 1988, the US Department of Energy has debated where to renew its supply of tritium, which will be exhausted by 2016. Though it violated existing US policy against the use of commercial reactors for the US nuclear weapons program, then-Energy Secretary Bill Richardson decided that nuclear reactors used by the Tennessee Valley Authority to produce electricity would be modified at US government expense to produce Tritium. Bergeron argues that this will lower the barriers to obtaining tritium, either through theft or duplication of the new technology for tritium production in conventional reactors.  http://www.bullatomsci.org/issues/2001/ma01/ma01bergeron.html

Web references re: recent Russian missile tests
[Source: Nuclear Policy Project Flash, Volume 3, Number 8, February 26, 2001]

Russia conducted test-launches of three nuclear-capable strategic missiles on February 16: a submarine fired towards the Kamchatka Peninsula, a land-based Topol intercontinental ballistic missile was launched from the Plesetsk base at the same Kamchatka target, and a Tu-95 "Bear" bomber also fired a strategic missile. The Russian military reported that all three hit their targets. A Tupolev Tu-22M "Backfire" swing-wing bomber also test-fired two tactical missiles. Statements by Colonel General Leonid Ivashov, the Defense Ministry's foreign relations chief, made it clear that while the tests may have been planned a while
ago, they took place in response to recent US statements which describe Russia as a threat as part of US justifications for its missile defense system. Russia denied US claims that it shared sensitive technology with countries such as Iran, Iraq and the DPRK. Dmitry Trenin, a military analyst with the Moscow Carnegie Center, said Russia launched the missiles to show US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and others in the Bush administration they could not ignore Russian concerns. The tests
occurred two days after unannounced air exercises by Russian nuclear-capable bombers near Norway and Japan prompted their air forces to scramble in response. Recent Russian statements and actions indicate a degree of inflexibility over global security issues, though analysts believe that Russia will in the end take a more pragmatic position.

• Military Flexes Its Nuclear Muscle: http://www.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2001/02/19/001.html
• Russia Tests Strategic Missiles: http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/world/exussr/A17654-2001Feb16.html
• Russia Fires Missiles From Air, Land and Sea: http://www.russiatoday.com/news.php3?id=291558&section=default
• Russian Missile Test Sends Message: http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/20010217/t000014391.html

Web references on the Russian Missile Defense Proposal
[Source: Nuclear Policy Project Flash, Volume 3, Number 8, February 26, 2001]

Recently, Russian Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev briefed NATO Secretary-General George Robertson on Russia's plan, which first calls for Russian and NATO experts to evaluate ballistic missile threats before deciding whether to design and deploy missile defense systems to cover specific areas in Europe that are most likely to be targeted in such attacks. The Russian system will be mobile and focus more on specific threats than meeting a general long-range missile threat. Russian officials argue that their plan would not violate the 1972 ABM Treaty, would be more effective by intercepting missiles in their boost phase, and would be cheaper than the US$60+ billion US plan. US Representative Curt Weldon was part of a US delegation that traveled to Russia last June regarding missile defense and he said the Russian S-400 missile defense system currently in development is "fantastically capable" and if the S-500 is even better then it would violate U.S.-Russian protocols on theater missile defense systems. Robertson agreed to have NATO review the plan, but he left little hope that the Russian maneuver would succeed in dividing NATO despite its member's doubts about the wisdom of the planned US system.

• Putin Touts Limited Shield to NATO: http://www.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2001/02/21/001.html
• Russia Offers Plan for European Missile Defense: http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/20010221/t000015647.html
• Russia Details Anti-Missile Alternative: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A30761-2001Feb20.html
• Russian Anti-Missile Plan Is Broad Outline - NATO: http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010222/wl/nato_russia_dc_1.html
• Russia Presses Missile Defense Plan:
  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/aponline/20010220/aponline165218_000.htm
• NATO Chief Promises Fair Hearing for Russian NMD Counter-offer:
  http://www.russiatoday.com/news.php3?id=294831&section=default

US Domestic Opinion on National Missile Defense
[Source: Nuclear Policy Project Flash, Volume 3, Number 8, February 26, 2001]

US-based ABC News conducted a poll which showed that while 80 percent of Americans backed the construction of missile defense system, only half of those polled would still support missile defense if there were doubts about its ability to "fully protect" the US, and only 45 percent were for deployment when informed that the system's price tag is estimated to be $60-100 billion dollars. Support fell to 37 percent when people were asked if a defense system should be deployed even if it would "break an existing arms control treaty with Russia."

See also: "Americans Against Breaking Treaties For NMD": http://www.ceip.org/files/nonprolif/templates/article.asp?NewsID=162

US Nuclear Forces and arms control prospects
[Source: Nuclear Policy Project Flash, Volume 3, Number 8, February 26, 2001]

• National Institute for Public Policy (NIPP): Rationale and Requirements for US Nuclear Forces and Arms Control
  NIPP released this report which examines the process needed to fully assess US nuclear force requirements and arms control positions. The reports, originally released on January 1, states that since the potential opponents the US may face are unknown, the US must preserve a high degree of adaptability for its offensive and defensive forces.   However, preserving adaptability does not preclude nuclear arms reductions or the need for a new approach to arms control.
  http://www.nipp.org/Adobe/volume%201%20complete.pdf
• Carnegie Endowment for International Peace: Prospects for Nuclear Reductions in the Bush Administration
  The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace published an analysis of the prospects for reductions in US nuclear forces under President George W. Bush. The analysis states that the administration may be willing and able to implement sweeping arms reductions and negotiate new agreements more effectively than the Clinton administration, but that apathy and antagonism to international non-proliferation agreements will likely result in their abrogation, deterioration of international norms against weapons of mass destruction and a net increase in new threats to the US. The CEIP states that the proposed US NMD system will be pursued despite the danger that Bush might abrogate the ABM Treaty before he realizes the limits and costs of the technology. http://www.ceip.org/files/nonprolif/templates/article.asp?NewsID=76

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

CSD9: Fourth Bureau Meeting

I can make available, as an rtf-formatted email attachment, the Note (summary report) on the fourth meeting of the Bureau of the ninth session of the Commission on Sustainable Development, held at New York, 21 February 2001.

The editor

First session of the UN Forum on Forests (UNFF)  http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/forests.htm

The first substantive session of the UNFF is to take place at New York on 11-22 June this year.

• Provisional agenda:
  
  (i) Adoption of the multi-year programme of work;
  
  (ii) Develop a plan of action for the implementation of
  Intergovernmental Panel on Forests/Intergovernmental Forum on Forests
  proposals for action, which will address financial provisions;
  
  (iii) Initiation of the United Nations Forum on Forests' work with the
  collaborative partnership on forests;
  
  (iv) Provisional agenda, date and venue for its second substantive
  session in 2002;
  
  (v) Propose venues of future United Nations Forum on Forests sessions;
  
• For more detailed information, documents, etc. visit: http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/unff_2001_fsm.htm or contact Elisabeth Barsk-Rundquist at the UNFF Secretariat:
• NOTE in addition the "Summary of Proposals for Action" by the Intergovernmental Panel on Forests and the Intergovernmental Forum of Forests which, over a period of five years, have examined a wide range of forest-related topics and produced 270 proposals for action to be adopted by the international community. You can find this document at: http://www.affa.gov.au/docs/forestry/sustainability/international/ipf-iff-coverpage.html or as an rtf-formatted email attachment from the WNII editor.
• A Calendar of major international forest-related events can be found at: http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/unffdocs/unff2001_ic_bn2.pdf

CONFERENCES, MEETINGS, SEMINARS

Consumption, Everyday life and Sustainability Summer School
http://www.comp.lancs.ac.uk/sociology/esf/summerschool2001.htm

• Date: 17-23 July 2001
• Venue: Lancaster, UK
• Organized by the European Science Foundation as part of its TERM programme (Tackling Environmental Resource Management)

For more details, mailto:   

INES WEB AND E-MAIL SERVICE

No new or changed addresses.
All INES e-mail addresses and homepages are available upon request from:  

< < < < <  end of No. 9/2001  what's new in ines < < < < <