+++++++++++++++++++ WHAT'S NEW IN INES? +++++++++++++++++++

No. 9/1997 ---------------------------------------------------------

Dateline: 28 Sep 1997

--- what's new in INES? --- what's new in INES? --- what's new in INES?---


Editor: Tobias Damjanov, Kreutzkamp 33, D-21465 Reinbek, Germany


 Proofreading by Kate Maloney, SGR UK


--- what's new in INES? --- what's new in INES? --- what's new in INES?---




=== > 1997 INESAP CONFERENCE "Challenges and Opportunities

for a Nuclear-Weapon-Free World"

September 8-10, 1997, Fudan University, Shanghai


--- (I) ---

The following letter to President Bill Clinton was sent by 15 participants

of the INESAP 1997 Conference in Shanghai to protest against the announced

subcritical test in the USA.


September 10, 1997


President William Clinton

The White House

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue

Washington, DC USA


Dear President Clinton,

  We, the undersigned, write from Fudan University in Shanghai, China, where

for the last three days we have taken part in the Third International

Conference of International Network of Engineers and Scientists Against


  One year ago today, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the

Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), prohibiting "any nuclear weapon test

explosion or any other nuclear explosion." Since then the United States and

more than 150 other countries have signed the Treaty, and the U.S. has

pledged, in accordance with Article 18 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of

Treaties, to refrain from any action that would defeat its objects and

purpose. As stated in the Preamble, the objective of the CTBT is "to

contribute effectively to the prevention of the proliferation of nuclear

weapons in all its aspects [and] to the process of nuclear disarmament..."

  During our conference we learned that the United States is preparing to

conduct its second "subcritical" nuclear test, code-named Holog, later this

month, underground at the Nevada Test Site. According to a public statement

by a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) official, Holog will be "important for

understanding performance" of nuclear weapons. Subcritical tests involve

chemical explosive and weapons grade plutonium. In our view, they violate

the spirit if not the letter of the CTBT. This would especially apply if

complete weapons configurations were tested, a possibility DOE has explicitly

kept open. Further, subcritical tests signal an unrelenting U.S. commitment

to nuclear weapons. We believe that subcritical tests are acts of bad faith,

provocative to other States, that jeopardize prospects for its global entry

into force.

  We are deeply concerned that the subcritical tests and the huge "Stockpile

Stewardship" program of which they are part, are making it possible for the

U.S. to continue modernizing its nuclear arsenal, even under a CTBT. This is

also contrary to the Article VI Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty obligation to

eliminate nuclear weapons, an obligation affirmed unanimously by the

International Court of Justice in July 1996. U.S. failure to meet its Article

VI obligation threatens the long-term viability of the nonproliferation


  We call on you as the leader of the world's most advanced military power to

reverse the dangerous and destabilizing effects of a renewed nuclear

research, development and testing program. We urge you to cancel Holog and

any other subcritical tests. We appeal to you to begin negotiations on a

treaty to eliminate nuclear weapons. The world is watching, and waiting.

 For a nuclear weapon free world,



Reiner Braun, on behalf of INES --- Jacqueline Cabasso, Western States Legal

Foundation, USA --- Merav Datan, USA --- Surendra Gadekar, India --- Martin

Kalinowski, Germany --- George Lewis, USA --- Allison Macfarlane, USA ---

Luis Masperi, Argentine Physical Society, Argentina --- Vijai Nair, India ---

Abdul Nayyar, Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad, Pakistan --- Marco Martinez

Negrete, Mexico --- Goetz Neuneck, Germany --- Reuven Pedatzur, Israel ---

Juergen Scheffran, Germany --- Alice Slater, USA


--- (II) ---

At the 1997 INESAP Conference it was also agreed to send a collective message

of greetings to the International Conference on Central Asia Nuclear Weapon

Free Zone in Tashkent, Uzbekistan which we publish here as well:


To Abdulaziz Kamilov

Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Uzbekistan


Message to the International Conference "Central Asia - Nuclear Weapon Free



The participants of the 1997 Conference of the International Network of

Engineers and Scientists Against Proliferation (INESAP), meeting in Shanghai,

China, September 8-10, send our warmest greetings to the distinguished

delegates to the International Conference on "Central Asia - Nuclear Weapon

Free Zone", being held in Tashkent, September 14-16, 1997.

We fully support and endorse the efforts of the people and governments of

Kazakstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan to

create a nuclear weapons free zone in Central Asia.

At every stage of the nuclear weapon fuel cycle and testing, nuclear weapons

have contaminated the environment and harmed the lives of people throughout

the world for far too long. Central Asia has also suffered seriously from the

damage and consequences of nuclear testing. The bombings of Hiroshima and

Nagasaki have convinced us that these terrible weapons of mass destruction

and genocide must never be used again. Nuclear weapons do not contribute to

our security and they threaten our health, peace and survival.

Your efforts to add your beautiful Central Asian Region to those in the

Pacific, Central and South America, Africa and South-East Asia, which have

already been declared nuclear-weapon-free zones, well contribute to the

establishment of more nuclear weapon free zones in the world. We heartily

welcome your initiative, which will constitute a major contribution to the

growing movement to abolish nuclear weapons altogether, to promote the

international goal of a Nuclear Weapons Convention, and to make the whole

Earth nuclear-weapon free.


=== > World Forum for Alternatives: Manifesto

(from the August 1997 INES Newsletter)


It is time to reclaim the march of history

(The full text of the Manifesto is printed in the INES Newsletter)


At a meeting held in mid-March of this year, a group of about thirty people

from all corners of the globe - North America, Latin America, Europe, the

Middle East, Africa and Asia - seized the initiative to create a World Forum

of Alternatives whose Manifesto is attached.

We are writing to solicit your participation in and support for this

initiative, and likewise we would be grateful if you could supply us with

names of people in your country or region who could be invited to join the

list of Forum members.

Once enough signatures have been gathered, we will make the Manifesto widely

known. We will equally keep you informed of all progress made in this

direction through our Newsletter.


Please send your response to the Secretary of the Monitoring Committee:

Samir Amin, Forum du Tiers Monde, P.O. Box 3501, Dakar, Senegal; Tel / Fax:



The full text of the Manifesto is printed in the INES Newsletter.


=== > FIET Code of Ethics

(from the August 1997 INES Newsletter)


Gerhard Rohde, Secretary General of FIET, and a member of the INES Council

sends us the FIET Code of

Ethics, which is published in full in the INES Newsletter.


FIET is the 11 million strong International Federation of Commercial,

Clerical, Professional and Technical Employees. FIET was founded in 1904 in

Amsterdam and is now based in Geneva, Switzerland. FIET has around 420

affiliates in over 100 countries. Within FIET, there is a special department

for professional and managerial staff, which represents also engineers and

scientists. FIET cooperates with INES. Together with INES, FIET has organized

a major international congress for engineers and scientists in Amsterdam last

year on "Challenges of Sustainable Development." Recently P&MS, the Committee

for Professional and Managerial Staff has adopted its own code on

professional, social and ethical responsibility which is meant to be kind of

guideline for professionals organised in the member organizations.

The Code represents the standards, which it is reasonable to expect members

to comply with when carrying out their duties within their special fields.

FIET affiliates represent a very broad range of individuals who are employed

as professionals or managers by corporate bodies operating in many countries

of the world and who consequently find themselves working under different

cultural, economic and social conditions, and under diverse laws, statutes

and regulations which frequently interact or overlap.



=== > The Baltic University Programme

(from the August 1997 INES Newsletter)


Project Director of the Baltic University Programme is Lars Ryden, Associate

Professor at Uppsala University.

The Baltic University Programme is a network of universities in the Baltic

Sea region. Some 150 universities and other institutes of higher learning in

14 countries take part. All countries within or partly within the Baltic Sea

drainage area are included: Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Russia,

Belarus, Poland, Germany, Denmark and Sweden, and more marginally the

Ukraine, Slovakia, Norway and Czechia. Some 800 individuals take part in the

network, most of them being active within environmental science but also

within the humanities and the social sciences.


The programme has evolved into activities in four fields:


* Teaching. Making partly use of video presentations and TV broadcasting,

several courses have been developed:

The Baltic Sea Environment;

Peoples of the Baltic;

A sustainable Baltic Region.


* Cooperation with public and with educational TV companies for broadcasts to

the general public on the same

issues. Among others, the TV program Save the Sea on the environmental

situation of the European seas was produced by

the Swedish Educational TV.


* Research cooperation on a regional basis mostly on environmental issues.

Among others, a Baltic Region

environmental database was established (BUGIS project).


* A beginning cooperation with municipal and regional administrations and



=== > Open skies over Bosnia

(from the August 1997 INES Newsletter)


INES chairperson Hartwig Spitzer visited Bosnia in June as part of his

professional work on arms control research and image analysis. He writes:


"On June 17 and 18, 1997 I had the opportunity to participate in a joint

Hungarian-Romanian Open-Skies trial flight over Bosnia and Herzegovina. This

flight should support confidence building and reconciliation amidst a deeply

split population and high levels of tension. The actors behind such steps are

representatives of international organizations like OSCE as well as

courageous members of non-governmental organizations that are engaged in

Bosnia and Herzegovina. The addressees are both official representatives and

the threefold 'general' public."

The main action taken in this Open-Skies project, was a weapons verification

flight across Bosnia. Photographs taken during this flight were made

available to all parties concerned. Representatives of the three divided

Bosnian camps witnessed the flight.

Spitzer concludes his article with: "What is the outlook for lasting peace in

Bosnia? We cannot tell. Whenever I talked to representatives of the three

entities, I heard words of polarization, blaming the other sides. At the same

time, the outside world is being held responsible for solving the internal

problems. Everyone believes that an international force like SFOR has to stay

present for years in order to prevent the outbreak of new fighting. An

Open-Skies Agreement could be one of many measures (most importantly economic

reconstruction), which could support the parties in a true normalization of

their relations. This will take time, persistence, and dedication. The goal

is a transformation of hate, fear, and helplessness into an attitude of

taking care of oneself, and of accepting the others."


=== > Global Charter of Rights for Corporations

(This article was sent to us by Eric Fawcett, Canada <> and was already distributed to all INESnet

subscribers on 11 Sep 1997)


This issue is central to the mandate of INES--there will be no

sustainable deveopment if we lose control of all our economies to the

multinational corporations!


In Canada there has been NO public debate whatsoever, with a government

re-elected in June that won the 1993 election largely on opposition to

NAFTA, which it immediately signed! So much for democracy!

What about your country, where faceless bureaucrats are also presently

negotiating your future?


The Nation magazine: "M.I.A. Culpa"


In popular mythology, economic globalization is a natural phenomenon,

like continental drift: impossible to resist or control. In reality,

globalization is being shaped and advanced by carefully planned legal

and institutional changes embodied in a series of international

agreements. Pacts like the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)

and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) promote the

unregulated flow of money and goods across borders and strip elected

governments of their regulatory authority, shifting power to

unaccountable institutions like the World Trade Organization. Virtually

unreported, the latest and potentially most dangerous of these agreements

is now under negotiation.


The Multilateral Investment Agreement (M.I.A.), as the proposal is

known, is under consideration at the Organization for Economic

Cooperation and Development (O.E.C.D.). Its purpose is to grant

transnational investors the unrestricted "right" to buy, sell and move

businesses-and other assets-wherever they want, whenever they want. To

achieve this goal, the M.I.A. would ban a wide range of regulatory laws

now in force around the globe. It would also pre-empt future efforts to

hold trans-national corporations and investors accountable to the public.

The agreement's backers (the United States and the E.U.) intend to seek

assent from the twenty-seven industrial countries that make up the

O.E.C.D. and then pressure developing countries to sign.


Negotiations are already at an advanced stage. Yet few Americans have

even heard of the agreement. Trade officials are treating M.I.A.

information like nuclear secrets; the mainstream media are oblivious.

Whether the M.I.A. is adopted and, if so, just how far its deregulatory

tentacles will extend depend on whether opponents can force the proposal

from its present obscurity into the light of open debate. Although the

public has been denied access to actual drafts of the agreement, reviews

of O.E.C.D. working group reports and an official summary of the

M.I.A.'s main features provide a clear picture of its aims and



As proposed the M.l.A. would force countries to treat foreign investors

as favorably as domestic companies. Laws placing conditions on foreign

investment -- like requirements that transnational firms form

partnerships with local companies or employ local managers -- would be

prohibited. Under this new regime, corporations would find it easier and

more profitable to move investments, including production facilities, to

low-wage countries. At the same time, developing countries would be

denied the tools necessary to wrest benefits from foreign investment.

Efforts to promote local development by earmarking subsidies for

homegrown businesses and limiting foreign owner ship of local resources

would also be barred. If adopted, the M.I.A. will mean foreclosure of

Third World development strategies, increased job flight from industrial

nations and enormous new pressures on countries, rich and poor, to

compete for increasingly mobile investment capital by lowering

environmental and labor standards.


A key M.I.A. provision could also threaten corporate accountability laws

championed by progressives in the United States. The M.I.A. takes aim at

statutes in any nation that link the provision of subsidies, tax breaks

and other benefits to a corporation's behavior. This ban could be used

to challenge a host of local, state and federal measures, including:

laws requiring subsidized companies to meet job-creation goals; community

reinvestment rules that require banks to invest in underserved areas; and

"living wages' requirements for companies receiving public aid or



Perhaps most disturbing, the M.I.A. would pre-empt strategies for

restricting corporate flight to low-wage areas-a major cause of job loss

and income stagnation in the industrialized world. On top of the damage

done by plant closings and layoffs, corporations use the threat of flight

to undermine the bargaining power of unions and scare policy-makers away

from the regulation, taxation and public spending necessary to raise

living standards. Though remote from today's policy agenda, rules

limiting the capacity of corporations to flee are essential to restoring

the ability of government and labor to deal with corporations on a level

playing field. The M.I.A. would bar such rules as a violation of

investors' rights.


In its scope and enforcement mechanisms, the M.I.A. represents a

dangerous leap over past international agreements. It lets any

corporation that objects to a city, state or national law bring suit

before an international M.I.A. panel-which could then order the law

overturned as a violation of the pact. Governments would enjoy no

reciprocal right to sue corporations on the public's behalf The full

extent of the drafters' ambitions is reflected in W.T.O. director general

Renato Ruggiero's recent characterization of the M.I.A. negotiations:

"We are writing the constitution of a single global economy."


If the M.I.A. is a "constitution," its bill of rights is for investors

only. The agreement does nothing to protect workers or consumers or to

shield small businesses from anticompetitive practices by



The Clinton Administration backs the M.I.A. for the same reason it

supported NAFTA: the view that increased international commerce is

inherently beneficial and that whatever's good for corporations is good

for the nation. Negotiators plan to complete the agreement by June 1997,

and present it to O.E.C.D. countries for approval as a treaty. This could

mean a vote in the U.S. Senate by next fall.


Organizations like Citizens Trade Campaign, Public Citizen's Global Trade

Watch and the A.F.L.-C.I.O. have made major strides in educating Congress

and the public on trade and investment issues. If unions, consumer

groups, environmentalists, state and local officials and small businesses

build on this work and make their voices heard, it is not too late to

modify or even derail the agreement.


The outcome is critical-not just because of the destructive provisions of

the M.I.A. itself but because it is the next battleground in an

intensifying campaign to institutionalize corporate dominance. Francis

Fukuyama may be satisfied that the current winning streak of market

ideology heralds the end of history." The corporations, however, want to

put it in writing.




Scot Nova is director and Michelle Sforza-Roderick is research associate

at the Preamble Collaborative/Preamble Center for Public Policy in

Washington, D.C.


From: ccpa <

Subj: MAI Analysis from The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives


Press Release April 10, 1997


Few Canadians have even heard of the Multilateral Agreement on

Investments (MAI), even though, if adopted, it would greatly expand and

entrench the rights of transnational corporations and investors-at the

expense of everyone else.

"The MAI is designed to establish a whole new set of global rules for

investment that will give transnational corporations the unrestricted

right to buy, sell, and move their operations whenever and wherever they

want around the world, completely free of government intervention or

regulation," says Tony Clarke, president of the Ottawa-based Polaris


Spearheaded by the U.S. and Canada, the MAI is now being negotiated

behind closed doors at the headquarters of the Organization for Economic

Cooperation and Development (OECD) in Paris. It is intended to be ready

for ratification by the 29 OECD member states this fall.


Clarke, who recently obtained a draft copy of the full text of the MAI,

has done a preliminary analysis of the agreement's likely effects on

Canada, on its governments and citizens. His analysis, titled "The

Corporate Rule Treaty," was released today by the Canadian Centre for

Policy Alternatives (CCPA).

Calling the MAI "a charter of rights and freedoms for corporations only,"

Clarke says that a close study of the proposed agreement indicates that

its adoption by the OECD nations will greatly strengthen the power of the

TNCs, while correspondingly weakening the power of nation states.


"Increasingly," he says, "the role of democratically elected governments

will be confined to developing and implementing policies that serve the

interests of transnational corporations, rather than the broader

interests of their own citizens."


Deploring the secrecy of the MAI negotiations, Clarke stresses the need

for a full public debate on this latest international treaty and suggests

that such a debate would be timely leading into the impending federal

election. He says that the MAI would tie the hands of any new government

in several key areas, including job creation, culture, health care, the

environment, and even the constitution.


"If any semblance of democracy is to be salvaged in Canada," he says,

"steps must be taken to forestall this surrender to corporate tyranny."


!INFO! For more information contact Tony Clarke at . Copies of

"The Corporate Rule Treaty" are available from the Canadian Centre for Policy

Alternatives, 804-251 Laurier Ave. W. Ottawa, ON K1P 5J6, Canada; Tel:

, Fax: , e-mail: ,


[The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives is an independent,

non-profit research institute funded primarily through organizational and

individual membership. It was founded in 1980 to promote research on

economic and social policy issues from a progressive point of view. The

Centre produces reports, books and other publications including a monthly

magazine. It also sponsors lectures and conferences.]


--- what's new in INES? --- what's new in INES? --- what's new in INES?---



++++++ NEW PUBLICATIONS ++++++


=== > Arkin, Bill: The U.S. Military Online: A Directory for Internet Access

to the Department of Defense

This book, writes "The Weekly Defense Monitor", "is a must have book for both

the merely casually interested and the serious researcher. Whatever your

fancy is--military budgets, weapons systems, contracts, U.S. military

presence overseas, speeches by Pentagon and military service officials,

military schools, major and minor bases, DoD field agencies,

military-published journals and magazines, and tons of other sites--you will

find sources here. And, in the future, those interested in receiving updates

to keep current will be able to do so online."


=== > Arnett, E. (ed.): Military Capacity and the Risk of War. China, India,

Pakistan and Iran

Oxford University Press, Oxford: 1997 [ISBN 0-19-829281]


=== > Gonchar, K.: Research and Development Conversion in Russia

Bonn International Centre for Conversion (BICC) Report 10, May 1997

!ADDRESS! BICC, An der Elisabethkirche 25, D-53113 Bonn, Germany; Tel.:

; http://www.bicc.uni-bonn.de


=== > Jarman, R.L. (ed.): Yugoslavia: Political Diaries 1918-1965 (4 volumes)

Archive Editions Limited, Slough: 1997 [ISBN 1-85207-950-9]


=== > Kempf, W.: Media Coverage of Third Party Peace Initiatives - A Case of

Peace Journalism?

Project Group Peace Research No. 37, Konstanz: 1997

!ADDRESS! Project Group Peace Research, Universitaet Konstanz, Prof. W.

Kempf, Postfach 5560, D-78457 Konstanz, Germany


=== > Peace Research Institute Frankfurt (PRIF): A Treaty on the Cutoff of

Fissile Material for Nuclear Weapons - What to Cover? How to Verify?

PRIF Reports No. 48, July 1997



--- what's new in INES? --- what's new in INES? --- what's new in INES?---




NOTE: Events listed here are being published only once due to limited space.

Changes, however, will be taken into account - they will be marked with

"!CHANGE [reference to the issue of "What's New In INES?" in which they were

mentioned first]!"


=== > International Congress "Conversion. Challenges for Enterprises and

Regions in East and West

Kiel, Germany, 27-29 March 1998

!INFO! Schleswig Holstein Institute for Peace Sciences (SHIP), c/o

Christian-Albrecht-Universitaet Kiel, Kaiserstr. 2/Geb. C, D-24243 Kiel,

; http://www.uni-kiel.de:8080/schiff/


=== > 1998 Asian Popular Culture Conference

University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada, 16-18 April 1998

The geographic focus of the conference will be East and Southeast Asia,

including Japan, Korea, China, and Taiwan, and the present and likely future

members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN): Brunei,

Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam, Cambodia,

Laos, and Myanmar.

Also, selected papers will be published in a book, designed for a general


!INFO! Centre for Asia-Pacific Initiatives (CAPI), University of Victoria BC,

Canada; e-mail Tim Craig ,




--- what's new in INES? --- what's new in INES? --- what's new in INES?---





Tobias Damjanov