Nuclear Age Peace Foundation

Author: Michael Coffey

  • Another World is Possible: Report from the 2004 World Social Forum

    Introduction

    The third annual World Social Forum was held in Mumbai, India January 16-21, 2004. Previous Forums were held in Porto Alegre, Brasil. The move to Mumbai acknowledges the significant percentage of the world’s population that lives in Asia, seeking to increase their access to the event. As a gathering to strategize effective means toward transforming global society with an emphasis on human rights, the Forum drew an estimated 75,000 world citizens. A series of over 1,200 workshops explored the numerous perspectives through which to view globalization: war, imperialism, water, labor, discrimination, and many, many more. The larger panels and events with 4,000 people and more were organized by Forum coordinators while the remaining workshops were self-directed and given space by Forum coordinators. English and Hindi were the main languages spoken, while translation was available in French and Spanish. A tremendous energy was palpable from the smallest to the largest Forum event. Beyond the workshops, cultural performances, street theater, and political protests merged into a loud and colorful sea of humanity.

    Nuclear Weapons-Related Workshops

    The disarmament community was well-represented at the Forum. Our input was crucial given the recent developments in nuclear proliferation issues and increased visibility among the general public. Many experts view Asia as a “hot spot” with regard to nuclear weapons, given the number of nuclear powers within close proximity and their historical rivalries. Consequently, India proved an ideal location to strategize steps toward a world free of nuclear weapons.

    There were a series of workshops that explicitly addressed nuclear weapons as well as many others in which speakers linked the abolition of nuclear weapons with other social justice issues. Workshop themes included, but were not limited to, civilian weapons inspections, global hibakusha, uranium mining, US militarism, and campus organizing. For my part, I spoke on two panels, one in the International Youth Camp (IYC), titled “Youth Organizing in the Second Nuclear Age,” and another in the main venue, titled “The Threat of Nuclear Weapons: The Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons.” The IYC session was by far my favorite. Approximately, 35-40 young people, mostly from India and the US, joined in the dialogue. Two of my closest colleagues joined me on the facilitation team: Tara Dorabji, Outreach Coordinator with Tri-Valley CARES in Livermore, California, and Dr. Kathleen Sullivan, an independent education consultant specializing in disarmament issues. We divided the 3-hour session into an introduction to nuclear weapons issues, US nuclear weapons policy, small group discussions, and closing thoughts. The exchange was critical of both US foreign policy and the Indian nuclear establishment. Conversational topics ranged from nuclear weapons to racism to poverty. In closing, one participant shared that Kathleen’s encouragement was more of a factor in his participation than the workshop title. He went on to say that he had not thought much about nuclear weapons issues, but now was interested in learning more.

    The structure of the second workshop differed greatly. “The Threat of Nuclear Weapons: The Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons” featured 13 speakers from 7 countries: Belgium, Greece, India, Japan, New Zealand, USA, and Vietnam. The panel, convened by Abolition 2000 and the World Peace Council, drew an even more diverse audience of approximately 200 people. In greeting participants as they arrived, I soon realized that the audience held as much expertise and experience as the panel. Allotted ten minutes each, speakers concentrated on three topics: assessing the nuclear threat, the global campaign, and the local campaign. Time passed quickly as each presenter delivered a passionate and informative talk. As my time approached and being the last speaker, I grew disappointed in realizing that there would be little time for discussion. This sense of disappointment lasted only briefly though, for the World Social Forum is less of a finish line and more of a starting point. The conversations that I had with workshop participants immediately following the workshop confirmed this understanding as will our collaborative efforts in the months to come.

    Coalition-Building*

    The Forum was a tremendous networking opportunity, reconnecting with old friends and making new ones. It was comforting to stay in the same hotel as the Abolition 2000 group (an international network of anti-nuclear organizations), most of whom spent part of the journey to Mumbai aboard the Peace Boat. It was my pleasure to help United for Peace and Justice (a coalition of over 650 US peace groups that oppose the Iraqi war and empire-building) promote March 20th as a day of action by passing out promotional pins, stickers, and t-shirts. As an alum of the New Voices Fellowship Program, I was proud to know that the current fellows participated in the Forum with many leading workshops. As a representative of a new member organization in the National Youth and Student Peace Coalition, I encouraged the many youth group representatives and educators that I met to organize an activity on March 4th as a day of action opposing the militarization of schools. Similarly, I experienced two chance encounters with magazine publishers who are clear allies in the struggle to counter corporate media by providing accurate information to the masses: ColorLines & YES!. Lastly, philanthropists were in attendance at the Forum, particularly the Global Fund for Women and the New World Foundation. Their presence reminded me that successful social justice movements require various stakeholders, who must all challenge ourselves through relentless self-critique and education.

    *This is just a small sampling of the dynamic people and organizations that I came in contact with in Mumbai.

    Mumbai

    Formerly known as Bombay, the bustling Mumbai (population, 13 million) seemed unfazed by the tens of thousands of guests. The contradictions in wealth and poverty were extreme. The buildings expressed India’s rich past. The sights were many, unique, and often shocking. In being somewhat overwhelmed and after having missed many opportune picture-taking moments, I resorted to writing down the most memorable sights in my journal. Here’s a sampling: a cow walking in the middle of the highway, an elephant walking along the side of the road, a truck full of live chickens, the Arabian Sea, a man pulling a cart with a washer and dryer on it up a hill, every third car being a black and gold taxi, an ox drawn cart, the diversity of Indian people, a snake charmer with two cobras, organized groups of children begging, Nike Town, a cricket game, and the many billboards promoting movies (Mumbai has earned the nickname “Bollywood,” being the capital of India’s entertainment industry).

    Brazil vs. India

    As a participant in the 2003 World Social Forum in Porto Alegre, I began comparing the two events almost upon arrival in Mumbai. The difference in global context was significant. Various phases of the US-led aggression against Iraq dominated the news headlines leading into both Forums. In January of 2003, claims that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction were used as grounds for the attack. By January of 2004, Hussein had been captured and these claims had been replaced by claims of bringing “freedom” to the Iraqi people and thoroughly refuted by high-level experts in the Bush administration. A harsh critique of US foreign policy and a strong anti-imperialist sentiment characterized both Forums.
    The evolution from participant to workshop facilitator was a major factor influencing my experience. Whereas in Brazil, I could pick and choose my daily schedule. In Mumbai, my schedule was set in large part given my responsibilities to prepare for and promote my workshops. Similarly, my network had expanded in the year since Brasil and it was important for me to support my friends’ workshops. In all, my time in India was more focused and productive in terms of representing the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation.
    Oppressed and marginalized peoples found a voice through both Forums. In Brazil, members of the landless people’s movement had a strong showing, speaking to the need for land reform and identifying allies through workshops, street theatre, and social receptions. In India, the Dalits (more commonly known as “untouchables”) used similar tactics to draw attention to their plight. It is interesting to note that even though the Forum is viewed as an alternative to the World Economic Forum, which is largely a meeting of economic powers and corporate leaders, a group of Indian and Filipino activists organized an alternative to the Forum. These activists claimed that Forum organizers accepted funding from the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations and in so doing became puppets of imperial powers. Even though I later learned that Forum organizers did not receive such funding, this alternative to the alternative raised interesting questions regarding philanthropy, grassroots organizing, and social change.

    Follow-Up

    There were numerous tactics that groups used to maximize their Forum experience and promote their cause. I will list a few here in the hope that the disarmament community builds on the success of the 2004 Forum by having an even stronger presence in 2005.

    • Unified promotion – Given that groups plan ahead and secure their workshop times and places, it would be an excellent showing of solidarity to have an email, flyer, poster, brochure, and/or booklet that lists all of the workshops with a disarmament theme. If a Forum participant is interested in a big picture “War, Militarism, and Peace” workshop, he or she may also be interested in a local action “How to Conduct a Civilian Weapons Inspection” workshop.
    • Interactive workshops – Disarmament issues are new to many even at a massive gathering of activists such as the World Social Forum. It would be ideal to strike a balance between relaying a lot of information and catering to individuals’ questions and concerns. Developing engaging, dynamic, and colorful presentations and workshops are key to expanding the global movement to abolish nuclear weapons.
    • Shared booth/tabling – The 2004 Forum featured large exhibition halls where organizations could distribute materials, sell goods, and maintain a consistent, accessible presence. The care and attention that went into the planning of these displays varied greatly. The best of these displays had friendly, knowledgeable people fluent in multiple languages; colorful posters and/or projected images; and free informational materials.
    • Coordinated media – Issuing press releases before, during, and after the Forum may peak interest among journalists (local, national, and international) and raise the visibility of disarmament issues as a whole.
    • Host a reception – Social events are great opportunities for Forum participants to engage in conversations initiated in workshops, to network, and to unwind. There is far less competition among social receptions than there is for workshops and, at times, a much better turnout.

    This is a brief summary of my trip to the 2004 World Social Forum in Mumbai, India. I sincerely thank those who made the trip possible and you for your interest in reading my thoughts! I welcome comments, questions, and all feedback with the hope of relaying the spirit of Mumbai through my work with the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation and beyond.

    Michael Coffey is the Youth Outreach Coordinator for the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation. Contact him at  youth@napf.org or (805) 965-3443.

  • 100 Letters, 100 Days: Suggested Talking Points, Requests, and Logistics

    Campaign Overview

    Initiated in the spring of 2001, the UC Nuclear Free Campaign stands on the shoulders of a long history of community mobilization toward the abolition of nuclear weapons. The campaign honors this legacy and provides opportunities for a younger generation to contemplate critical issues related to nuclear weapons, claim a voice, and create positive change. Specifically, the campaign highlights the University of California’s management of the nation’s primary nuclear weapons labs: Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore.

    To date, the campaign is driven by student groups on 5 key UC campuses (Santa Barbara, Los Angeles, Berkeley, Santa Cruz, and Davis) and community groups with an expertise in nuclear issues: Nuclear Age Peace Foundation in Santa Barbara, Tri-Valley Communities Against a Radioactive Environment (CAREs) in Livermore, California; Western States Legal Foundation in Oakland, California; Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety in Santa Fe, New Mexico; and the Los Alamos Study Group in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Toward advancing the UC Nuclear Free Campaign, these groups have formed the Coalition to Demilitarize the University of California.
    A Warm Welcome

    On October 2nd, 2003, UC President Designate Robert Dynesl began his term overseeing one of the largest public university systems in the world: $1 billion in annual donations, 1.2 million alumni, 190,000 students, and 2 nuclear weapons laboratories. During his term, the Regents will decide whether or not to bid to continue managing Los Alamos National Laboratory, one of the primary US nuclear weapons laboratories. We ask that members of the UC community, specifically students, faculty, staff, and alumni, seize each of the first 100 days of Dynes’ presidency as opportunities to voice our varied opposition to UC’s role in the development of nuclear weapons. We ask that these voices are joined by diverse stakeholders in the future of humanity, such as high school seniors applying to a UC school, former and current lab employees, parents of UC students, community residents, hibakusha (survivors of the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki), elected officials, religious leaders, and entertainers. Our aim is for Dynes to receive at least 1 letter per day for 100 days beginning with his first day in office and lasting through January 9th, 2004.
    Getting Started

    A series of talking points and questions are listed herein to help individuals craft their letters. We ask that each letter end by making the following requests: (1) sponsor a series of public forums and (2) hold a televised debate on the UC management of nuclear weapons. Advice from Congressional staff suggests that handwritten, personalized letters are highly effective. Similarly, crayon drawings may be a way to involve young children in discussions about peace, nonviolence, and the power of one person. Editorial assistance is available through contacting either Tara Dorabji (925) 443-7148 or Michael Coffey (805) 965-3443.
    Talking Points

    1. Every nuclear weapon in the US arsenal was created in part by a UC employee.
    2. The UC Regents have managed the nation’s primary nuclear weapons labs under a contract that has never been put up for competitive bid in over 50 years. Earlier this year, the Department of Energy announced that the Los Alamos contract will be put up for bid. UC has not decided whether or not to bid.
    3. The current administration is pushing for a possible return to full scale underground nuclear testing and develop new, “more usable” and “bunker busting” nuclear weapons.
    4. The development and production of new nuclear weapons are illegal under Article VI of the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, which became law in 1970 and requires that: “Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to the cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.”
    5. UC scientists conduct subcritical nuclear tests at the Nevada Test Site on Shoshone land that was seized by the U.S. government. The battle for land rights continues in courts to this day.
    6. Both the Livermore and Los Alamos sites are contaminated by large amounts of radioactive waste that has seeped off-site.
    7. US nuclear weapons policy is explicitly offensive and several documents name countries that the US has contingency plans for preemptive strikes. Some of these nations do not possess nuclear weapons.
    8. The US is the only country to have used nuclear weapons in war.
    9. As institutions within the University of California system, Los Alamos and
      Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories gain access to some of the “best and brightest” minds to recruit into nuclear weapons design.
    10. There are numerous historical examples of young people and students fighting on the frontlines of the movement for social justice. Continuing this legacy, many student groups were active during the 2002-2003 school year, speaking out and organizing around militarism, environmental, and racism issues.
    11. For decades, UC faculty members have been active, vocal opponents of UC’s continued and expanded role in nuclear weapons development. While this activism has taken the form of letters to newspaper editors, testimony at Regents meetings, and referendums, a series of reports serves as the greatest resource for gauging faculty sentiment on this issue: Academic Senate Report (November 1989), Galvin Report (February 1995), and University Committee on Research Policy Report (January 1996
      UC President Designate Robert Dynes has been a consultant with the Los Alamos National Laboratory for over 20 years.
    12. Nuclear weapons constitute one category of weapons of mass destruction. The other categories are chemical and biological weapons. UC Davis is being considered as a site for a Biosafety Level 4 Laboratory for biological weapons. Researchers at level 4 laboratories study the most dangerous germs known to humans, such as SARS, anthrax, and Ebola.

    Requests

    Sponsor a series of objective and inclusive forums on the issue, at least one on every campus. Such forums need to reach various constituencies, specifically students, faculty, and staff.

    Hold a televised debate on the UC management of the nuclear weapons labs.Stop the University of California from all collaborations that develop or enable the development of Weapons of Mass Destruction.

    Logistics

    Please pre-date your letter between October 2nd, 2003 and January 9, 2004. Contact Michael to find out which date we need you to cover. Address your letter to Robert Dynes and copy each UC Regent. It would help this effort a great deal if you would send us your letter as soon as possible. We will continue to accept letters throughout the duration of the campaign. This will enable us to maintain a persistent stream of letters. If you’re interested in a particular day, such as Dia de la Raza, Veterans’ Day, or Christmas, please contact Michael Coffey as soon as possible at (805) 965-3443 or youth@napf.org.
    Please address the letters as follows:

    Robert Dynes, President

    The Regents of the University of California

    Office of the Secretary

    1111Franklin Street, 12th Floor

    Oakland, CA 94607-5200
    Please “CC” each Regent:

    Richard Blum, Ward Connerly, John Davies, Judith Hopkinson, Odessa Johnson, Joanne Kozberg, Sherry Lansing, David Lee, Monica Lozano, George Marcus, Velma Montoya, John Moores, Gerald Parsky, Norman Pattiz, Peter Preuss, Haim Saban, Tom Sayles, Cruz Bustamante, Herb Wesson, Gray Davis, Jack O’Connell, Matt Murray, Jodi Anderson
    Please send letters to the following address:

    Michael Coffey, Youth Outreach Coordinator

    Nuclear Age Peace Foundation

    PMB 121, 1187 Coast Village Road, Suite 1

    Santa Barbara, CA 93108-2761

    Upon receipt of letters, we will make an electronic copy for documentation purposes, make additional hard copies to send to each Regent, and mail the letters on the appropriate date. In order to confirm that we received your letter, please provide us with your email address and/or phone number.

    During the campaign, select letters will be featured online, while at the end of the campaign a “best of” document will be created that includes selected letters, photographs, an introduction to the issues, and ideas for actions. The document will be a valuable organizing tool for future efforts.

    We would love to hear from if you know others who would be interested in writing a letter and/or contributing toward the success of the campaign in some other way. Thank you for your time and devotion!

    Draft Letter Outline

    Your name

    Full Address

    Your telephone, fax, and email information
    Date the letter
    Robert Dynes, President

    The Regents of the University of California

    Office of the Secretary

    1111Franklin Street, 12th Floor

    Oakland, CA 94607-5200
    Dear President Dynes,
    · Identify yourself (state your UC affiliation or connection to issue).

    · Share your personal thoughts on UC’s role in weapons development.

    · State requests.

    · Thank Dynes for his attention to your concerns.

    · Let Dynes know that you look forward to hearing from him.

     

    Sincerely,

     

    Sign your name

    Type or print your name

     

    CC: Richard Blum, Ward Connerly, John Davies, Judith Hopkinson, Odessa Johnson, Joanne Kozberg, Sherry Lansing, David Lee, Monica Lozano, George Marcus, Velma Montoya, John Moores, Gerald Parsky, Norman Pattiz, Peter Preuss, Haim Saban, Tom Sayles, Cruz Bustamante, Herb Wesson, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Jack O’Connell, Matt Murray, Jodi Anderson

    Please contact Michael Coffey, Youth Outreach Coordinator, for further information on campaign at 805. 965.3443 or youth@napf.org

  • Supporting Active Citizenship Among Youth: Discussion Notes

    On Thursday, September 25, 2003, the Foundation hosted a dialogue entitled “Supporting Active Citizenship among Youth.” Numerous local organizations with an interest in better serving youth were represented: Santa Barbara County Education Office, Endowment for Youth Committee, Future Leaders of America, Big Brothers/Big Sisters, La Casa de Maria, and PAX 2100. Similarly, a strong contingency of students and parents from Santa Barbara Middle School enriched the dialogue.

    Foundation Board Member, Marc Kielberger, shared pictures from his recent trip to Sierra Leone, reflecting on the experience while incorporating lessons learned as Executive Director of Free the Children (the largest network of children helping children in the world). Similarly, Marc referred to his efforts as founder of Leaders Today (an international youth development organization) and author of Take Action! A Guide to Active Citizenship (a text used annually by 17,000 school children in Toronto alone). The presentation began with startling statistics about Sierra Leone. At 147 infant deaths per 1,000 births, Sierra Leone has one of the highest infant mortality rates in the world. Life expectancy is 45 year of age for women and 40 years for men. While minerals are the Sierra Leone’s main export, Marc explained how many of the individuals he met during his travels view diamonds as one compounding factor fueling civil strife and extreme cases of human rights abuses. Still, Marc found hope on his trip. He visited a primary school built by Free the Children. He met and talked with numerous former child soldiers who had forgiven themselves and their former enemies, choosing to work for peace instead. He renewed his own passion for helping others in need.

    Prior to our general discussion, Lauren Peikert, a 7th grade student at Santa Barbara Middle School, made a special presentation of $2,500 to Free the Children’s School Building Campaign. Lauren was inspired to help others when Free the Children’s Embracing Cultures Tour visited her school last year. The tour featured three powerful young speakers and artists from different cultural backgrounds who invited Lauren and her classmates to be leaders in their school, community, and the world. Lauren sold drinks at sports events, spoke at her church, and organized numerous other creative ways toward building a school and hiring teachers for children in Sierra Leone.

    The discussion that followed contained numerous insightful comments and revelations, all focused on better identifying and meeting the needs of Santa Barbara youth so that they may have the will and skills to help others. A number of participants who were born and raised in Santa Barbara cited a sense of neighborhood as a key factor in coming of age, building self-confidence, and resolving conflict. Many participants agreed that this sense of neighborhood has been replaced with a certain degree of segregation, exclusion, and isolation. We asked ourselves, how can we restore this sense of community? How can we teach compassion in an extremely competitive culture? Marc commented that young girls often develop an interest in leadership and community service before their male counterparts. His trainings tend to focus and mobilizing this core group and challenging them to inspire and instruct their peers. Following these trainings, the school culture often shifts from one of competition to one where social consciousness is cool. Numerous parents agreed and added that parents must set a good example for their children to become compassionate leaders.

    Toward the end of the dialogue, three follow-up actions were proposed. Foundation President, David Krieger, challenged all of the Santa Barbara Middle School students present to raise enough money to build another school. When they achieve their goal, they will have the opportunity to present the check at the Foundation’s upcoming 20th Anniversary Evening for Peace, honoring Harry Belafonte and Jonathan Schell. In addition, the organizations present expressed an interest in collaborating toward creating a series of opportunities for young people to speak out and participate in informative, empowering events. This series would culminate in a summer leadership camp.

    If you are interested in contributing toward the successful completion of these actions or for more information about this event, please contact Michael Coffey, the Foundation’s Youth Outreach Coordinator, at youth@napf.org. 

  • WMD’s and UC?

    One critical sleeper issue in California’s gubernatorial dilemma involved weapons of mass destruction, specifically the continued development of nuclear weapons by the University of California. The UC system has been a partner in the US nuclear weapons industry since the Manhattan Project. While many of us may be very familiar with the Berkeley, UCLA, and UCSB campuses, the Lawrence Livermore and Los Alamos National Laboratories may not evoke any immediate images or emotions. While these labs conduct cutting-edge research in numerous fields, nuclear weapons development is their core mission. As governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger will nominate five new UC Regents’ by the end of his term, probably selecting from among wealthy campaign supporters. These Regents will influence whether or not UC will bid to continue managing nuclear weapons laboratories owned by the Department of Energy. The recent security lapses, employee fraud, and espionage allegations at Los Alamos do not help UC’s chances. Reports indicate that Lockheed Martin, Bechtel, and the University of Texas plan to bid. This issue is bigger than the UC Regents. As UC students, alumni, faculty and community members, we must have input on the decision. This issue is bigger than California. The question is not which research institution is best suited to manage the labs, but can we redefine national security emphasizing education, environmental sustainability, food security, and health care?

    *Michael Coffey, is the Youth Outreach Coordinator of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation

  • Notes From The Road

    Recently, I spent some time in northern California. The trip was both rewarding and productive. The main reasons for the visit were to speak at the Hands Around Livermore Lab Rally and March, strategize actions for the upcoming year with fellow members of the Coalition to Demilitarize the University of California, and co-facilitate a workshop introducing the UC Nuclear Free Campaign at the University of California Student Association (UCSA) Congress.

    Livermore

    On Sunday, August 10th, Hands Around the Lab: Rally and March drew over 1,000 people to a key facility in the US nuclear weapons complex, UC-managed Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) in Livermore, California. The day’s agenda included a gathering at William Payne Park adjacent to LLNL and culminated in participants joining of hands encircling the lab. The event was one of the many organized to commemorate the anniversaries of the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and mobilize citizens toward a nuclear weapons free world. KPFA’s Miguel Gavilan Molina served as master of ceremony, orchestrating a series of passionate of musicians and speakers. I used my allotted microphone time to emphasize the power of young people in the struggle to protect civil rights and work for peace. Moving from the theoretical to practical, I informed listeners of UC student efforts to get their university out of nuclear weapons business. Slightly revising the day’s schedule, I asked recent UC Santa Cruz grad, Darwin BondGraham, to share his thoughts on the subject. His comments framed the nuclear issue within the larger trend of the increasing militarization of colleges and universities. We ended by inviting people to visit our small information table and/or join us for our planning meeting the following day. There was an excellent line-up of speakers that followed. Unfortunately, I only heard bits and pieces of their comments as I talked with various people while walking through the crowd back to our information table.
    Berkeley

    The following day, members of the Coalition to Demilitarize the University of California met to brainstorm and reach consensus around actions to advance the UC Nuclear Free Campaign during the 2003-2004 school year. Undergraduate and graduate students from Berkeley, Davis, Los Angeles, and Santa Cruz contributed to the dialogue as well as representatives of Tri-Valley CAREs and Western States Legal Foundation. I spoke on behalf of the Foundation and committed myself to reporting back to UCSB students who could not attend due to prior commitments. Given its history of student and community activism, UC Berkeley was a great place to meet. If you are interested in the notes from this brainstorming session, please write me at youth@napf.org.
    Sacramento

    Prior to our workshop at the University of California Student Association (UCSA) Congress, three of us from the Coalition joined UCSA at their action opposing Proposition 54, otherwise known as The Racial Privacy Initiative. Introduced by UC Regent Ward Connerly, the misleading October ballot measure would effectively restrict efforts to resolve societal problems that have racial implications, such as hate crimes and discrimination, health care and disease treatment, and education access and achievement. The action was held at Connerly’s American Civil Rights Institute based in Sacramento. Connerly is the same Regent who the San Francisco Chronicle quoted as saying that UC will not bid to manage Los Alamos National Laboratory if the Department of Energy chose to implement an open competition, which was announced in April. Furthermore, common ground between anti-racism and anti-nuclear weapons movements is evident in that people of color suffer disproportionately from both the testing of nuclear weapons and storage of toxic waste from weapons development and nuclear energy production.
    Davis

    Later in the day, we began our workshop and dialogue, introducing about 20 undergraduate, graduate, and professional student leaders from UCLA, UCSB, UCI, UCSD, and UCR to the UC Nuclear Free Campaign. The Coalition had a strong showing of co-facilitators present, representing 3 campuses and 2 community organizations. There was a good diversity of viewpoints and experiences: one student had visited the Hiroshima Peace Museum as a high school student, another’s parents worked at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, another declared that nuclear weapons are going to be used in the near future, and another was a member of the Berkley Associated Students that passed a resolution calling for UC to get out of the nuclear weapons business. We provided participants with an overview of US nuclear weapons policy, a description of the history and future plans of our Coalition, a highly-interactive question and answer period, and hand-outs, particularly One Bomb, Two Bomb, Gold Bomb, Blue Bomb: The Scholastic Adventures of Robbie D. Bomb, written and designed by Emily Hell and Darwin BondGraham. Newcomer Coalition member, Brian Sparks came through with the question of the day: “So what are we going to do?” Ultimately, we had to bring our workshop to a close due to time constraints, and Michael Cox volunteered to explore answers to Brian’s question throughout the remaining 3 days of the Congress. We are grateful to have had the opportunity to contribute our piece to the UCSA Congress in part because UCSA is recognized by the UC Administration, UC Board of Regents, California Legislature, the California Governor’s Office and numerous state and federal agencies as the official voice of the over 180,000 UC Students, but more so as active citizens seeking alternatives and solutions to current conditions.
    However before we left UC Davis, we visited the UC Davis physics department for an impromptu weapons inspection. We were lucky to meet Professor Wendell Potter amidst the dust of summer construction and renovation. He spoke with the five of us for about 30 minutes about the integrity of university researchers, the often fine line between defense and civilian applications, and love of learning. He understood why we chose the physics department for our inspection, but cautioned us not to overlook the biology department. As you may know, UC Davis is the proposed site for a $200 million infectious disease research facility laboratory that would work with potentially lethal viruses and bacteria. The exchange with Professor Potter was an unexpected highlight of the trip.
    It was great solidifying established contacts and meeting new allies! I thank all of you whose curiosity and generosity made my week enjoyable.

  • The University of California & the Nuclear Weapons Labs: The Role of Academia in the Development of Nuclear Weapons

    Student Pugwash USA Educational Seminar
    “Nuclear Weapons: Science and Policy”
    July 13-17, 2003; American University; Washington, DC

    INTRODUCTION

    I am not a defense intellectual or degreed scientist. I am a young concerned citizen who recognizes patterns of aggression and violence done in may name and perpetrated by leaders of a country I call home. I imagine that many of you all fit a similar self-description simply based on your being here today. I thank you and commend you all for stepping outside of the matrix of corporate media, cold war theology, and public apathy. One of the mottos and mantras that I’m beginning to use with the young interns and volunteers at the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation is think for yourself, see for yourself, and help others. By being here today, you’re taking the crucial steps of gathering information toward thinking for yourself.

    Today’s theme, the role of academia and scientists in the development of nuclear weapons, is a large one. The increasing militarization of US colleges and universities is a national trend that influences the courses available to students, faculty hiring, the presence of military recruiters on campus, internship and fellowship opportunities, and potentially many aspects of your high school, undergraduate, graduate, professional, and adult lives. In the interest of time, I’ll focus my comments on the University of California system which along with such prestigious campuses as Berkeley, UCLA, and UCSB includes 2 pillars of the US nuclear weapons complex: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Los Alamos National Laboratory. These are massive institutions involved in cutting-edge, multi-disciplinary scientific research. Billions of dollars flow through them annually as do thousands of employees, including UC faculty and students. The individuals who make decisions regarding this contract are not faculty or students. UC has Regents which are essentially like a Board of Directors. For the most part, they are wealthy, influential people who have made significant financial contributions to political campaigns. The California governor appoints them; the state legislature approves them. They serve 12-year terms. It is easy to be overwhelmed and confused by the role these labs serve, but the key point to remember is that the lab’s historical and current core purpose involves the research and development of nuclear weapons.

    BASIC QUESTION & MYTHS

    So we have to ask ourselves is it appropriate for an institution of higher learning with the creed to nurture values and morals within its many students to be in the nuclear weapons business? To help you develop your own personal answer for that question, I want to share with you my list of 5 myths about the role of academia in nuclear weapons development. These are ideas that I’ve heard during UC Regents meetings, read in newspaper articles and lab reports, and heard expressed by lab representatives during panel discussions just like this one.

    #1 Public Service, Prestige, and National Security

    Many people believe that managing nuclear labs boosts UC’s status and prestige in comparison to other research institutions. This belief is based on the notion that nuclear weapons are vital to our national security. Also, the belief is based on the notion that UC performs a public or community service by managing nuclear labs. UCLA Chancellor Albert Carnesale who worked on the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty delivered a lecture in February of last year titled “Rethinking National Security.” Based on his over 20 years of experience in the international peace and security field, he lectured on how the US has been hypocritical in our efforts to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons while maintaining our own stockpile. I wonder what Carnesale has to say now that his university system is being considered as a site to develop new nuclear weapons? Whatever his answer, one way to refute the service and status myth is by drawing attention to the dangers and pitfalls of nuclear weapons development: the toxic waste by-products that we do not yet know how to store safely and that will be here for tens of thousands of years, the indiscriminate nature of nuclear weapons damaging all life in their path whether military target or civilian population, and the many victims of the nuclear age, not just those who perished from the Hiroshima and Nagasaki blasts and the hibakusha who survived the blasts and suffer from radiation exposure but also those who suffer from underfunded health care and public education systems and an overfunded military.

    Philip Rogaway is a professor in the department of computer science at UC Davis. This excerpt is from an article that appeared in the UC Davis student newspaper January 16, 2003:

    “…For years I have been troubled by the fact that the university I am a member of plays this unique role in the U.S. weaponry. I have always believed that the UC should terminate this role. Running weapons laboratories is at odds with the mission of an open institution of higher education, as the bulk of what the labs do is neither in the open nor education-related. Our stewardship of the labs is also inappropriate from the point of view that we are a community that spans a wide range of political orientations, ethical views and nations of citizenship. It violates UC Davis’ Principles of Community.

    A 1996 study by the University Committee on Research Policy concluded that our management of the weapons labs does not fulfill the conditions of appropriate public service. It advocated phasing out this role. The report was severely attacked by UC officials. Their objections generally ignored the central ethical question of whether it was appropriate for a university to manage U.S. weapons laboratories.

    The 1996 report was one of several that have been done over the years, consistently taking a dim view of our role in the labs. In 1990, 64 percent of faculty voted to phase out UC management of the weapons labs. In 1996, 39 percent of faculty voted to do so. Regardless, this is not a question in which UC faculty have any say, and the DOE contracts have always been renewed, regardless of faculty sentiment.

    Now Los Alamos and its UC management are again in the news. Amid FBI, DOE and Congressional investigations of widespread theft and fraud, UC President Richard Atkinson recently announced the resignation of Los Alamos’ Director John Browne and Deputy Director Joseph Salgado. Employees are accused of purchasing numerous personal items on government funds, and management is accused of dismissing those who had been investigating the incidents. The scandal is the third to hit Los Alamos in recent years… It has been reported that DOE Secretary Spencer Abraham is considering putting out for bid the UC’s contract to run Los Alamos, or even canceling it early. This would be a nice outcome, even if it should come to pass for the wrong reason…The question isn’t if we manage the labs poorly or well. We shouldn’t be managing weapons labs at all. It is unfit business for a university.”

    #2 Freedom of Academic Exploration

    When I think of universities, I think of places where ideas flourish, where you can explore concepts that may not seem to have immediate application and you’re free to be ahead of your time. Some people use this rationale to justify university-managed nuclear weapons research. Universities have an air of transparency, openness, and accountability which clash with the realities of classified, top-secret federally-funded weapons research.

    #3 Cash Cow

    There is the belief that the nuclear weapons labs bring in a lot of money. The figure is close to $3 billion, but these dollars stay at the labs. The university receives an administrative fee which pales in comparison to the total contract amount. The last I heard the figure for the administrative fee was close to $17 million. This point has a lot to do with concerns over rising student fees. The University of California is a public university system. The state and federal education budgets have a greater impact on student fees than whether or not UC manages nuclear weapons labs.

    #4 UC is better than a defense contractor

    Matthew Murray is the UC student Regent. His position allows for a student voice at the highest level of decision-making in the UC system. Last Friday, Matthew wrote an email on the nuclear topic to a group of students I work with:

    “…I should be fair and say right off that I detest nuclear weapons, I am despondent about our nation’s current attitude in engaging the international world, and I wish we could rid ourselves and the world of nuclear arms. That said, it doesn’t seem likely that that will happen any time soon, and I am currently inclined to think that I’d rather have UC managing the nation’s labs than another less qualified university, or even worse a private company, where notions of academic skepticism, peer reviewed research, and openness to the public are nowhere near as strong as in the university setting.

    That said, I do not think UC should compete for the labs no matter the circumstances. Our involvement with them has always been considered something we do as a public service and participating in a competition for their management would frame our relationship with the federal government in a different light, one that does not sit well with me.”

    I disagree with Murray on one simple point though – UC is not better than a defense contractor. As an institution that provides weapons developers with the smokescreen of academic integrity and the cheap labor of thousands of students, UC is a defense contractor. I understand where Murray is coming from in his statement about the abolition of nuclear weapons seeming far off; still, I find hope in his belief that UC should not bid to continue managing the development of nuclear weapons and that a nuclear weapons-free world is our ultimate goal.

    #5 Historical Momentum

    I have heard UC spokesman cite the reasoning of historical momentum to explain the UC-DoE contract. They are saying that because UC was there in the beginning, UC will always be there. This is by far the pro-lab supporters’ weakest argument, basically saying that people and institutions can’t change. Here is one example of an individual who changed his mind. His name is Joachim Piprek. He is a professor in UCSB’s Computer Engineering Department. This excerpt is from a letter dated March 20, 2003.

    “History has reached a turning point. The Bush administration has started an unprovoked and illegal war – against international law, against the outspoken will of the world community, and against the will of about half the American people, who openly opposed a war without UN mandate.

    Germany has started two terrible world wars which killed over 60 million people. Despite the fact that I was born ten years after the last one ended, I was never proud of being a German. My family lives in Dresden, a city that was almost completely destroyed in one night of allied bombing in 1945. More than 40,000 civilians were burned alive that night. I grew up with pictures of war and I was hoping that humankind will learn from history and that this will never happen again to anybody. War always kills innocent people, on both sides. Today, the memory of war is still alive in Europe and the vast majority of Europeans oppose this new war, no matter what their government says. As a German who came to the US ten years ago to live his dreams, I feel a strong moral obligation to stand up for peace, here and now.

    As many researchers in the US, I am involved in military research projects which pay for part of my current salary. These projects are financed by the Pentagon to ensure the superiority of US military technology. We now see very clearly that this technology will not be used to maintain peace but to wage unjustified and aggressive wars. I can no longer participate in such research in good conscience.

    I therefore declare that I will immediately stop my contributions to research reported to the Pentagon…I know that this decision will hurt my career, however, this is a small price to pay compared to the many lives of Iraqi citizens (50% children under 15) and US soldiers (100,000 body bags have been shipped by the Pentagon) as well as the lives of US citizens who will be killed in future terror attacks. All these lives and billions of our tax dollars are intentionally sacrificed by the Bush administration in order to gain access to Iraqi oil.

    Is this the American Dream?”

    CONCLUSION – THE URGENCY OF NOW

    As Nobel Laureate Joseph Rotblatt expressed last night, there have been significant changes and setbacks in nuclear weapons policy just within the last year. These setbacks involve efforts to resume nuclear testing and develop new low-yield tactical nuclear weapons, the stated intent to use nuclear weapons in an offensive capacity against named countries, and traditional nonproliferation language co-opted and used as justification to attack.

    In about 3 months, a new UC president, Richard Dynes, will begin his term. During Dynes term, UC will decide whether or not to compete to continue managing the Los Alamos National Laboratory. If UC chooses not to compete, they can send a clear message to the world that nuclear weapons development does not belong in a university setting. Living in California, I feel compelled to work on this UC-DoE issue. There may be a similar opportunity for you where you live. Let’s work together on this and honor the decades-long stand for peace by Pugwash!

  • A Message to Soka University on its Second Anniversary

    Good afternoon and congratulations on Soka University’s second anniversary of Dedication Day!

    My mentor David Krieger, the founder and President of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation asked me to join the celebration here today and relay his best wishes for continued growth as an institution, family, and positive force in society.

    I am the Youth Outreach Coordinator with the Foundation. By your presence here today, I imagine that many of you share our vision for a world at peace, free from the threat of war and free of weapons of mass destruction. It is evident now more than ever that we must make this vision a reality.

    Soka models what is right in higher education. In emphasizing world citizenship, Soka stands in direct contrast to the so-called top institutions of this country which partner with defense contractors to develop missile guidance systems. These institutions seek Pentagon dollars to develop bombs, investing in mass destruction over mass education. The increasing militarization of America’s universities has a negative impact on the availability of faculty positions, selection of majors open to students, surrounding physical environments, and the core integrity of the learning experience. This increasing militarization has international repercussions.

    When you talk with the people involved in weapons research. They believe they are performing a community service. They’ll tell you that historical momentum justifies their work. They’ll say, “Many of these contracts date back to the 1940’s. How could time be wrong?” They believe their work is prestigious. Select students within these universities recognize what is at stake and do not accept such flawed logic. These students have organized in opposition to the militarization trend. They need our help.

    I ask that the Soka community stand side-by-side with these students at UC Irvine, UCLA, UC Santa Cruz, University of Arizona, University of Texas, and elsewhere. Stand with them and hold true to the values of world citizenship, nonviolence, and equality. Project the good energy we feel here today to the backward corners of the world where humanity hangs by a thread and freedom fighters are suppressed.

    At the Peace Foundation, our motto is waging peace. There are 3 steps to waging peace: educate yourself, take action, and educate others. Waging peace is maintaining an awareness of US foreign policy, joining an organization working for peace, and communicating with our elected officials toward holding them accountable for their actions. Those are 3 simple things we can all do today: educate yourself, take action, and educate others.

    Congratulations and thank you Soka for all you do!

  • Honoring the Legacy of Cesar E. Chavez

    Unveiled in September 2002, a commemorative stamp honoring the legacy of Cesar E. Chavez was made available for purchase recently. The stamp features rows of lush green farm land in the background and the smiling side-profile of the legendary labor organizer and nonviolence practitioner in the foreground. Cesar’s motto of “si se puede” (it can be done) speaks to all of us who face obstacles, set backs, and/or doubts. His deeds set a shining example of overcoming odds, helping others, and affirming life. It is fitting to remember him now with April 23rd, 2003 being the 10th anniversary of his passing.

    Paul Chavez, Chairman of the Cesar E. Chavez Foundation, shared these thoughts at the unveiling ceremony, “My father’s teachings of compassion, justice and dignity still ring true almost a decade after his passing. The Cesar E. Chavez commemorative stamp is a powerful vehicle to introduce a new generation of Americans to his vital legacy, teaching them that through determination and hard work they can improve their own lives and communities.”

    It is not enough to remember him though. We must continue his work. For example, the vision and mission of the Cesar E. Chavez Foundation is to maximize human potential to improve communities by preserving, promoting and applying the legacy and universal values of civil rights leader Cesar E. Chavez. Their youth outreach programs emphasize service-learning, which combines community service and academic coursework to address needs in your immediate community. Visit their website for resources to organize your own event honoring Cesar Chavez: http://www.cesarechavezfoundation.org/.

    Read an essay about Cesar Chavez written for our Peace Heroes Essay Contest: https://wagingpeace.davidmolinaojeda.com/articles/peaceheroes/cesar_chavez.htm. Do something!

  • One-on-One with Kristen Morrison

    Recently, Kristen Morrison, a senior at UCSB and Renewable Energy Coordinator with us here at the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, addressed the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors asking them to block any and all shipments of spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste traveling through Santa Barbara County on its way to Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Compressed within Kristen’s 20 minutes of comments to the county Board of Supervisors were 1 year of volunteering with the Foundation, a number of leadership trainings, coursework on environmental issues as well as the echoing encouragement and support from family and friends. Ultimately, the county Board of Supervisors agreed with Kristen and the other concerned citizens working on this important issue, voting unanimously to oppose the Department of Energy’s plans to ship toxic waste through the county. I spoke with Kristen about her project:

    Why do you feel this issue is important?

    Currently nuclear energy produces 20% of our nation’s power. When it was first established back in the 50’s it was thought to be clean, safe, and cheap. Today nuclear energy has proven to be the opposite. After billions of dollars in research, and an endless supply of lethal radioactive waste it is safe to say the nuclear energy has only proven to be expensive, dirty and dangerous. Therefore we feel it is important to educate the public about the reality of nuclear energy and instead work toward a future of renewable energy. Yucca Mountain is proposed to be the US’s first nuclear waste repository, which will inevitably perpetuate the nuclear power industry. 77,000 tons of radioactive waste is scheduled to be shipped from over one hundred reactors across the country. Therefore if we are able to block waste transportation the Yucca Mountain project will be shut down and ultimately lead to the halt of nuclear energy production.

    Why did you feel it was necessary to speak with the County Board of Supervisors about toxic waste transportation?

    There are many channels of communication that will get our message across. Legislation is an important part of progressive social change. The Board of Supervisors is the governing body in the county with the legal voice to speak to higher legislative bodies of our government. Addressing the Board of Supervisors represented a key stage in our escalation plan and general campaign efforts.

    How did you start your campaign called “Don’t Waste Santa Barbara”?

    I started this campaign last summer with another UCSB student named Marissa Zubia. At the time, she was the Renewable Energy Coordinator and I was a volunteer here at the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation. Frequently, the Foundation hosts speakers on peace and security issues and other pressing concerns of our time. Through this speaker series, Marissa and I met a local activist named Dave Fortson with the Santa Barbara County Action Network. Dave shared his thoughts on the importance of young people getting involved in the community for the betterment of society. Combined with all the positive energy that’s already here at the Foundation, Dave’s charisma and devotion sparked our interest and the next thing I knew Marissa and I were dreaming up all the ways we could make a difference. We both were interested in the same issues of environmental justice and ecological consciousness so we came up with the campaign idea “Don’t Waste Santa Barbara”, which serves to educate the people of Santa Barbara on dangers of high level radio active waste transportation through our city. We drafted a county resolution to oppose the transportation of high level radioactive waste through Santa Barbara County. It took us about 3 months to get on the Board of Supervisor’s agenda, but after many phone calls, research, and writing we were finally in.

    Were there any unexpected setbacks or obstacles along the way?

    Absolutely! There were many challenges and hurdles that made us both second guess what we were doing, and more than once we had to remind one another how important even the smallest contribution is to making a difference. Even though our work is merely a drop in the bucket, it is that drop that will become part of a very large flow moving toward a better world. Another wonderful aspect which encouraged us the whole way through was having a good time. We laughed a lot and became good friends.

    How did you prepare?

    We hosted an educational forum with four expert speakers, discussing the dangers of nuclear waste storage and transportation. We met regularly with our mentors and project board members, strategizing ways to get our message across. We contacted Santa Barbara city council members who encouraged us to write a county resolution opposing nuclear waste. District Supervisor, Gail Marshall, endorsed our resolution and the next thing we knew we were on the agenda to present it to the entire county.

    Can others take what you did in Santa Barbara and do it where they live?

    Being proactive in the community is essential everywhere, whether rich or poor, small or large. I was surprised by the positive response that I received as a student standing up for what I believe in and speaking out. A lot of times, we as young people get the message that society doesn’t want to hear from us and won’t respect what we have to say, but it is hard for them not to respect you when you research your issue and develop a convincing, passionate argument.

    Can they really stop the shipments or is this more of a symbolic victory?

    The resolution serves as the county’s declaration to stop the waste. It is not law; however, if enough communities across the nation create the same resolution the government would be forced to recognize the people’s will and thus it could be turned into a law.

    What is next for you?

    We would like to expand our campaign to the state level. For example, we’re researching whether other counties in California, if any, are pushing on the same issues. We may then work with them to form a statewide alliance

    Congratulations and good luck, Kristen!

    Are you a young person organizing for change in your community? Do you have a success story that you would like to share? We want to hear from you! Send us your success story. Write me at youth@napf.org.

  • UC Nuclear Free Student Press Conference

    On Thursday, March 21, 2002, students from 5 University of California campuses spoke from in front of the UC Office of the President in downtown Oakland demanding that the Regents disarm and democratize the weapons labs. Members of the Coalition to De-Militarize the University of California asserted that the Regents are accountable if the U.S. launches a nuclear attack on Iraq.

    Speakers highlighted the UC Nuclear Free Statement of Unity calling for the Regents to get out of the nuclear weapons business, a statement that has been endorsed by over 25 student and community groups in California and New Mexico. A scheduled UC Regents meeting was cancelled early Wednesday, March 20th denying concerned students and community members the opportunity to directly address the Regents regarding their management of labs that research and develop weapons of mass destruction.

    One agenda item on the cancelled meeting involved the Regents reporting to the Department of Energy regarding recent security problems, employee fraud, and key resignations at the labs. Following students’ comments, representatives from local news agencies questioned students about their demands and community members shared their thoughts on the significant tax dollars allocated toward weapons research by academic institutions, the environmental impact of the labs on their surrounding communities, and the strikes against Iraq that had begun just the night before.

    As a final act, students delivered a letter and list of demands to the Regents’ secretary. In the letter, students requested that the Regents designate time for public comments on weapons research issues during the May 14-15, 2003 Regents meeting at UCLA.
    Student Comment Excerpts

    Darwin BondGraham
    …The Militarization of American Society – Why must America go to war? To answer this question we have to look at our institutions, our culture, and our society. We have to look at how our economy functions; War is necessary. We have to look at our culture; our popular films, and mass media; War is an obsession. We have to look at how our politicians deal with problems; War is their answer:

    Since 1991 the United States has intervened militarily in dozens of nations. Each time war has been the answer. The US currently sells more weapons than nearly all other nations combined. Our government spends more on its military than the next twenty largest foreign militaries combined. The percentage of US exports that are weapons are 5% of total exports.

    Crowning this obsession with violence, this profanity, is our nation’s commitment to nuclear weapons. We have spent over $5 trillion on nuclear weapons. This year we will spend $6.38 billion on nuclear weapons. Our nation has made a renewed commitment to the research, design, and production of weapons of mass destruction…

    Valerie Kao
    My name is Valerie Kao. I am a UC Berkeley student and I am against the war!! I am here to express student and faculty sentiments about UC management of the United States nuclear weapons facilities. I want to express that the University of California, my university, is an unfit manager for Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories. The most recent news with regards to Los Alamos has exposed credit card fraud and missing equipment, among other scandals. But mismanagement reaches far beyond these headlines. The real issues here are disarmament and nonproliferation of nuclear weapons development. How many of the Regents are aware that laboratory directors, usually people chosen by the Regents, have regularly served as spokespersons for the modernization of nuclear weapons? That some actively sought to obstruct US negotiations for a Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty? Time and again, since it became US law in 1970, the labs and the UC administration have been implicated in violations of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

    Jamil Pearson
    …Seeing that the University of California is funded in part by the students and taxpayers, it is unfair to have the blood of innocents on those students and faculty who did not make the decision to manage nuclear weapons labs…It is time for the Uc Regents to e held accountable for their actions. The students of the University of California demand our voices be heard. The UC system is world renowned as an institution of higher learning. The students do not want to indirectly support nuclear weapons development not do we want to procure the stigma as a weapons developer….

    Michael Cox
    …In regards to nuclear weapons, the Non-Proliferation Treaty, which became US law in 1970, is the legal keystone in the effort to avoid nuclear holocaust. It requires that all member states pursue in good faith the abolition of their nuclear arsenals….The United States and the University of California stand in clear violation of the NPT….We are waging a war supposedly to disarm Saddam of WMD, while simultaneously threatening to the use of nuclear weapons to accomplish this goal…In this past Monday’s war speech given by President Bush, he stated that: “When evil men plot chemical, biological, and nuclear terror, a policy of appeasement could rbring destruction of a kind never before seen on this Earth.” Mr. President, we cold not agree with you more, and we are working to change the US policy of proliferation in order that you do not go down in history as this “evil man” of whom you speak…
    * The full student comments are available on demand. Contact Tara Dorabji with Tri-Valley CAREs at (925) 443-7148 or Michael Coffey with the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation at (805) 965-3443.