Speak Up, Speak Out! Interview on Current Nuclear Weapons Issues

Ginny Wolff, of Speak Up, Speak Out! on KSVR - FM, interviewed me last week about the work of Ground Zero Center for Non-Violent Action since 1977 to protest the Trident submarines based at the Bangor Naval Base in Silverdale, Washington. We discussed the history of Ground Zero, the bigger picture of U.S. foreign policy regarding the use of nuclear weapons, ongoing international tension, and the agreement between Congress and the Obama administration to spend a trillion dollars over 30 years to rebuild the entire U.S. arsenal of nuclear weapons.

The interview ends with a simple message listeners can deliver to President Obama. After listening, you can click here to send your message to President Obama. You can find additional action alerts at the right hand column (top of the page).

Thanks to KSVR and Speak Up, Speak Out! for covering important issues you won't hear in the mainstream/corporate media.

Next president has a nuclear option: Scrap the program

NOTE: This Opinion was originally published in the Seattle Times on September 27, 2016.

The USS Ohio sailing in the Strait of Juan de Fuca. The Trident nuclear submarine
has been converted to a guided missile submarine. It was first launched in 1979,
and was the original nuclear submarine in the U.S. Pacific Fleet...
(Steve Ringman/The Seattle Times)

By David Hall and Leonard Eiger
Special to The Times

HAVE you seen the Seattle bus ads? They read: “20 miles west of Seattle is the largest concentration of deployed nuclear weapons in the U.S.”

In light of recent media attention on who should have their finger on the nuclear button, this statement seems to beg the question: With so many nuclear weapons, what would happen should the president order their use?

“Mutual-assured destruction” is still central to U.S. nuclear deterrence policy. U.S. and Russian nuclear-armed missiles remain on hair-trigger alert 24/7, threatening to end civilization.

One hydrogen bomb deployed from Naval Base Kitsap on Hood Canal could wipe out a large city like Seattle and make the land uninhabitable for centuries. Look up the presentation “One city, one bomb” to understand the devastating potential of modern nuclear weapons.

The United States is the only nation to have used nuclear weapons against another, and we have led the nuclear arms race from its beginning in 1945. Now Congress and the Obama administration have adopted a trillion-dollar plan to rebuild the entire nuclear-weapons complex, including replacement of the Trident submarine fleet on Hood Canal, over the next 30 years. Trident submarines are considered the deadliest weapon ever built.

When our leaders warn that “all options are on the table,” they are threatening to use nuclear weapons. This has happened dozens of times since WW II, including during the Korean and Vietnam wars.

King County Metro bus ad reading, “20 miles west of Seattle
is the largest concentration of deployed nuclear weapons
in the U.S. (Courtesy of Leonard Eiger)

Once the current international prohibition against using nuclear weapons is breached, the door is open for every nuclear-capable nation to use nuclear weapons. Climate scientists have modeled a “small” nuclear war between India and Pakistan assuming 50 Hiroshima-sized bombs from each side targeting cities. Smoke and soot would be lofted by superheated air into the upper atmosphere, lowering temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere enough to reduce agricultural production for a decade. That’s how 2 billion food-insecure people in South Asia and China could starve to death.

This is our policy: to threaten these consequences. But decision-makers are not calculating the scale of devastation built into a single nuclear warhead, much less the thousands they plan to maintain throughout this century. Because the U.S. is building up its nuclear capability, other nuclear nations are building up theirs.

Think the Cuban missile crisis to understand Russian fears of the proximity of U.S. nuclear weapons. The Cuban missile crisis, often described as the closest humankind has come to incinerating itself, was caused by nuclear weapons in proximity to U.S. shores. And the recent coup in Turkey could have put 50 nuclear warheads in potentially unstable hands.

Washington state sits at the center of U.S. nuclear policy for our deployed nuclear weapons at Naval Base Kitsapand for the largest Superfund site in our hemisphere at the Hanford nuclear reservation. Plutonium production for U.S. nuclear weapons left millions of gallons of highly corrosive and radiologically lethal sludge that we may never be able to safely dispose.

We are looking for leaders who understand that nuclear weapons are immoral and must never be used. Nuclear weapons threaten genocide on a scale that decision-makers refuse to talk about. The use of nuclear weapons are illegal under the laws of war and humanitarian law — unusable because there is no secure way to limit escalation, exorbitantly expensive and are a massive diversion of human talent and resources away from diplomacy, foreign assistance, innovation and public health.

U.S. priorities in the world are clearly written into our national budget.For the sake of future generations, we ask, “What will be the priorities of the next administration?”

David Hall, of Lopez Island, and Leonard Eiger, of North Bend, are active members of Ground Zero Center for Nonviolent Action and Physicians for Social Responsibility.

URL for original publication: http://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/next-president-has-a-nuclear-option-scrap-the-program/

Calling on Obama to Take Concrete Action in Hiroshima

Editor's Note: President Obama will visit Hiroshima this Friday after the Group of Seven economic summit in Japan. This will be the first time a U.S. president has visited the city that was devastated in the atomic bombing of August 6, 1945.

At a time when the US is modernizing its nuclear forces at an estimated cost of a trillion dollars over thirty years, the President's visit to Hiroshima is an opportunity that will likely not come again. Yet many, such as American University Professor Peter Kuznick, are concerned that Obama will "use it as a cover for his militarization of the conflict with China and his trillion dollar nuclear modernization program to make nuclear weapons more usable."

Joseph Gerson, of the American Friends Service Committee, said, “President Obama should cancel this spending, revitalize disarmament diplomacy by announcing a reduction of the U.S. nuclear arsenal, and challenge Russian President Putin to join in beginning negotiations to create the nuclear weapons-free world promised in Prague and required by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.”

Over seventy prominent scholars and activists signed the following letter urging President Obama to visit with Hibakusha, atomic bomb survivors, and to announce concrete steps toward nuclear disarmament during his visit to Hiroshima.

Whatever the President does and says in Hiroshima, his actions going forward toward the end of his term are what will count. He can take concrete steps to either end the new, rapidly escalating arms race or continue on the current path, one that will certainly come to no good end.

*************************

May 23, 2016

President Barack Obama
The White House
Washington, DC

Dear Mr. President,

We were happy to learn of your plans to be the first sitting president of the United States to visit Hiroshima later this week, after the G-7 economic summit in Japan. Many of us have been to Hiroshima and Nagasaki and found it a profound, life-changing experience, as did Secretary of State John Kerry on his recent visit.

In particular, meeting and hearing the personal stories of A-bomb survivors, Hibakusha, has made a unique impact on our work for global peace and disarmament. Learning of the suffering of the Hibakusha, but also their wisdom, their awe-inspiring sense of humanity, and steadfast advocacy of nuclear abolition so the horror they experienced can never happen again to other human beings, is a precious gift that cannot help but strengthen anyone’s resolve to dispose of the nuclear menace.

Your 2009 Prague speech calling for a world free of nuclear weapons inspired hope around the world, and the New START pact with Russia, historic nuclear agreement with Iran and securing and reducing stocks of nuclear weapons-grade material globally have been significant achievements.

Yet, with more than 15,000 nuclear weapons (93% held by the U.S. and Russia) still threatening all the peoples of the planet, much more needs to be done. We believe you can still offer crucial leadership in your remaining time in office to move more boldly toward a world without nuclear weapons.

In this light, we strongly urge you to honor your promise in Prague to work for a nuclear weapons-free world by:

• Meeting with all Hibakusha who are able to attend;

• Announcing the end of U.S. plans to spend $1 trillion for the new generation of nuclear weapons and their delivery systems;

• Reinvigorating nuclear disarmament negotiations to go beyond New START by announcing the unilateral reduction of the deployed U.S. arsenal to 1,000 nuclear weapons or fewer;

• Calling on Russia to join with the United States in convening the “good faith negotiations” required by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty for the complete elimination of the world’s nuclear arsenals;

• Reconsidering your refusal to apologize or discuss the history surrounding the A-bombings, which even President Eisenhower, Generals MacArthur, Arnold, and LeMay and Admirals Leahy , King, and Nimitz stated were not necessary to end the war.

Sincerely,

Gar Alperovitz, Co-Chair of The Next System Project, former Lionel R. Bauman Professor of Political-Economy at the University of Maryland,

Christian Appy, Professor of History at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst

Colin Archer, Secretary-General, International Peace Bureau

Charles K. Armstrong, Professor of History, Columbia University

Medea Benjamin, Co-founder, CODE PINK, Women for Peace and Global Exchange

Phyllis Bennis, Fellow of the Institute for Policy Studies

Herbert Bix, Professor of History, State University of New York, Binghamton

Norman Birnbaum, University Professor Emeritus, Georgetown University Law Center

Reiner Braun, Co-President, International Peace Bureau

Philip Brenner, Professor of International Relations and Director of the Graduate Program in US Foreign Policy and National Security, American University

Jacqueline Cabasso, Executive Director, Western States Legal Foundation; National Co-convener, United for Peace and Justice

James Carroll, Author of An American Requiem

Noam Chomsky, Professor Emeritus, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

David Cortright, Director of Policy Studies, Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies, University of Notre Dame and former Executive Director, SANE

Frank Costigliola, Board of Trustees Distinguished Professor, University of Connecticut

Bruce Cumings, Professor of History, University of Chicago

Alexis Dudden, Professor of History, University of Connecticut

Daniel Ellsberg, Former State and Defense Department official

John Feffer, Director, Foreign Policy In Focus, Institute for Policy Studies

Gordon Fellman, Professor of Sociology and Peace Studies, Brandeis University.

Bill Fletcher, Jr., Talk Show Host, Writer & Activist.

Norma Field, Professor Emerita, University of Chicago

Carolyn Forché, University Professor, Georgetown University

Max Paul Friedman, Professor of History, American University.

Bruce Gagnon, Coordinator Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space.

Lloyd Gardner, Professor of History Emeritus, Rutgers University.

Irene Gendzier Professor Emeritus, Department of of History, Boston University

Joseph Gerson, Director, American Friends Service Committee Peace & Economic Security Program,

Todd Gitlin, Professor of Sociology, Columbia University

Andrew Gordon, Professor of History, Harvard University

John Hallam, Human Survival Project, People for Nuclear Disarmament, Australia

Melvin Hardy, Heiwa Peace Committee, Washington, DC

Laura Hein, Professor of History, Northwestern University

Martin Hellman, Member, US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine Professor Emeritus of Electrical Engineering, Stanford University

Kate Hudson, General Secretary, Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (UK)

Paul Joseph, Professor of Sociology, Tufts University

Louis Kampf, Professor of Humanities Emeritus MIT

Michael Kazin, Professor of History, Georgetown University

Asaf Kfoury, Professor of Mathematics and Computer Science, Boston University.

G. Peter King, Honorary Associate, Government & International Relations School of Social and Political Sciences, The University of Sydney, NSW

David Krieger, President Nuclear Age Peace Foundation

Peter Kuznick, Professor of History and Director of the Nuclear Studies Institute, American University

John W. Lamperti, Professor of Mathematics Emeritus, Dartmouth College

Steven Leeper, Co-founder PEACE Institute, Former Chairman, Hiroshima Peace Culture Foundation

Robert Jay Lifton, MD, Lecturer in Psychiatry Columbia University, Distinguished Professor Emeritus, The City University of New York

Elaine Tyler May, Regents Professor, University of Minnesota

Kevin Martin, President, Peace Action and Peace Action Education Fund

Ray McGovern, Veterans For Peace, Former Head of CIA Soviet Desk and Presidential Daily Briefer

David McReynolds, Former Chair, War Resister International

Zia Mian, Professor, Program on Science and Global Security, Princeton University

Tetsuo Najita, Professor of Japanese History, Emeritus, University of Chicago, former President of Association of Asian Studies

Sophie Quinn-Judge, Retired Professor, Center for Vietnamese Philosophy, Culture and Society, Temple University

Steve Rabson, Professor Emeritus of East Asian Studies, Brown University, Veteran, United States Army

Betty Reardon, Founding Director Emeritus of the International Institute on Peace Education, Teachers College, Columbia University

Terry Rockefeller, Founding Member, September 11 Families for Peaceful Tomorrows,

David Rothauser Filmmaker, Memory Productions, Producer of "Hibakusha, Our Life to Live" and "Article 9 Comes to America

James C. Scott, Professor of Political Science and Anthropology, Yale University, ex-President of the Association of Asian Studies

Peter Dale Scott, Professor of English Emeritus, University of California, Berkleley

Mark Selden, Senior Research Associate Cornell University, editor, Asia-Pacific Journal,

Martin Sherwin, Professor of History, George Mason University

Tim Shorrock, Journalist, Washington DC.

John Steinbach, Hiroshima Nagasaki Committee

Oliver Stone, Academy Award-winning writer and director

David Swanson, director of World Beyond War

Max Tegmark, Professor of Physics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Founder, Future of Life Institute

Ellen Thomas, Proposition One Campaign Executive Director, Co-Chair, Women's International League for Peace and Freedom (US) Disarm/End Wars Issue Committee

Michael True, Emeritus Professor, Assumption College, is co-founder of the Center for Nonviolent Solutions

David Vine, Professor, Department of Sociology, American University

Alyn Ware, Global Coordinator, Parliamentarians for Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament 2009 Laureate, Right Livelihood Award

Jon Weiner, Professor Emeritus of Histry, University of California Irvine

Lawrence Wittner, Professor of History Emeritus, SUNY/Albany

Col. Ann Wright, US Army Reserved (Ret.), former US diplomat

Marilyn Young, Professor of History, New York University

Stephen Zunes, Professor of Politics; Coordinator of Middle Eastern Studies, University of San Francisco

King & Obama: A Tale of Two Legacies

Friends,

On January 26th the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists will announce whether the minute hand of the historic “Doomsday Clock” will be adjusted. . The Doomsday Clock is that icon of the nuclear age that, since 1947, has conveyed “how close we are to destroying our civilization with dangerous technologies of our own making.” The hands of the clock are currently at 3 Minutes to Midnight, and one can only hope they will not be set closer to that fateful hour.

Much of the world knows Dr. King as one of the great peacemakers of all time. What many people are not aware of is just how deep was King's opposition not only to war, but also to nuclear weapons.

Dr. King warned us, in his famous “World House” essay that:

When scientific power outruns spiritual power, we end up with guided missiles and misguided men.

As we consider the current and pending position of the minute hand on the Doomsday Clock in the context of Dr. King's recent birthday it is hard not to consider the stark contrast between his legacy and the legacy being created by U.S. President Barack Obama. Two Nobel Peace Prize recipients - two radically different paths.

Dr. King was an extraordinary orator. His words flowed deep from within his spiritual consciousness that was rooted in the struggles of human beings for their basic rights. They inspired people to come together in the spirit of nonviolence to build a better world. He most certainly lived out the words he spoke.

On the other hand President Obama, a prisoner of the National Security State and Military-Industrial Complex, is quite the orator, although his rhetoric has fallen far short. In his famous 2009 Prague speech Obama stated, “America's commitment to see the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons,” and specified that the United States would “reduce the role of nuclear weapons in our national security strategy, and urge others to do the same.” Nearly seven years later these words are nothing but empty promises.

Rebuilding the infrastructure that develops, builds and maintains nuclear weapons is not "progress." Rebuilding nuclear warheads and bombs is not “progress.” Moving ahead with plans to build a new generation of ballistic missile submarines, bombers, and land based missiles is most certainly not “progress.”

As the President begins his last year in office, and with the greatest nuclear weapons modernization effort (since the end of the Cold War) underway, we must ask what legacy will he leave?

What would Dr. King say to President Obama as he approaches final year in office? I imagine him speaking of the President's two daughters and asking,"Mr. President, what legacy do you want to leave for your children Malia and Sasha, and indeed what legacy do you want to leave for all the children of the world? Mr. President, just when is our nation going to truly lead the world to peace? When will we learn to live together in this great big World House that we all share? You and I know, Mr. President, that the alternative to disarmament is the dark abyss of annihilation? So Mr. President, what legacy will it be?"

Getting back on track toward Obama's vision in his Prague speech will require extraordinary vision, engagement and decisive action. Engagement and action already face strong opposition on many levels in both the civilian and military sectors of the government and on Wall Street. The President will not be moved to lead the world toward disarmament without significant prodding from civil society.

Certainly, since the end of the Cold War, a malaise set in as people assumed the peace dividend had eradicated the nuclear menace, and so they went about business as usual. Yet, the few in control of humanity's destiny have continued to make preparations for the unspeakable.

It is time for all citizens, and not just a small percentage, to be informed about the issues surrounding nuclear weapons and how they affect all of us. It is time for citizens to step forward and become engaged in decisions that were never in their hands in the first place, but should have been. It is time to bring nuclear weapons into the center of a public dialogue and debate, and for the citizenry to make its voice heard loud and clear in the halls of The White House, Congress and the Pentagon (and beyond).

If this United States in which we live is to be a true democracy, then it is up to us as citizens to make it so. And there is no greater issue, in terms of the survival of humanity, in which we can (and must) become engaged than the abolition of nuclear weapons.

Dr. King once said that "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice." King understood that change (at least lasting change) does not occur overnight. It is a long, hard struggle, as evidenced by every struggle for human rights throughout history.

Therein lies one major difference between Dr. King and President Obama. In his Prague speech, Obama recognized that, "This goal will not be reached quickly –- perhaps not in my lifetime." The difference is that Dr. King didn't stop working toward his goals even though he knew they may not be realized in his lifetime.

We, as citizens, must remind President Obama that he needs to change course and be in this for the long haul - for the sake of his children and all the children of the world. And – We must do it now!

So - Happy Birthday Martin. May our gift to you be our commitment to a nonviolent world free of the scourges of war and nuclear weapons.

Peace,

Leonard

King's Legacy!!! Obama's Legacy???

Friends,

Today is the birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr. - just one day after The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists announced that the Doomsday Clock will stay at five minutes to midnight (at least for now).

Much of the world knows Dr. King as one of the great peacemakers of all time.  What many people are not aware of is just how deep was King's opposition not only to war, but also to nuclear weapons.

I wrote about this earlier in January in a tribute to Dr. King's legacy.  I will not say more about that here except to say that the following quote speaks volumes to the depth of King's understanding of the taproot of violence so deep in the tortured soul of the national security state.

When scientific power outruns spiritual power, we end up with guided missiles and misguided men.

As we consider the position of the minute hand on the Doomsday Clock in the context of Dr. King's birthday it is hard not to consider the contrast between the legacy he left and the one being created by U.S. President Barack Obama.  Two Nobel Peace Prize recipients - two radically different paths.

Dr. King was an extraordinary orator.  His words flowed deep from within his spiritual consciousness that was rooted in the struggles of human beings for their basic rights.  He lived out the words he spoke.

On the other hand President Obama, a prisoner of the National Security State and Military-Industrial Complex, is quite the orator, although his rhetoric falls far short.  As yesterday's open letter from The Bulletin reminds the President, "In 2009 you stood in Hradcany Square and boldly stated: 'America's commitment to see the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons,' and you specified that the United States will 'reduce the role of nuclear weapons in our national security strategy, and urge others to do the same.'"  Four years later these words seem like empty promises.

The authors of the letter to Obama were correct to state that "we see progress," a few positive steps need to be viewed in a total context.  Rebuilding the infrastructure that develops, builds and maintains nuclear weapons is not "progress."  Rebuilding nuclear warheads and bombs is not progress.  Moving ahead with plans to build a new generation of ballistic missile submarines is not progress.

As the letter stated, "2012 was a year of unrealized opportunity..."  And now the President is about to embark on another four years in office.  What path will he take?  What legacy will he leave?

What would Dr. King say to President Obama as he approaches the eve of another four years?  I imagine him speaking of the President's two daughters and asking,"Mr. President, what legacy do you want to leave for your children Malia and Sasha, and indeed what legacy do you want to leave for all the children of the world?  Mr. President, just when is our nation going to truly lead the world to peace?  When will we learn to live together in this great big World House that we all share?  You and I know, Mr. President, that the alternative to disarmament is the abyss of annihilation?  So Mr. President, what legacy will it be?"

The letter from The Bulletin is a positive model for moving forward, and its authors stated that "we see 2013 as a year for vision and engagement."  They further stated that "decisive action can make the world safer."

Indeed, to get back on track toward Obama's vision in his Prague speech it will require both vision, engagement AND decisive action.  Beyond vision, engagement and action already face strong opposition on many levels in both the civilian and military sectors of the government and on Wall Street.  The President will NOT be moved to lead the world toward disarmament without significant prodding beyond the letter from The Bulletin.

As the letter stated in the first sentence, "2012 was a year in which the problems of the world pressed forward, but too many of its citizens stood back."  Indeed, the vast majority of the nation (and the rest of the world) stood back while the few in control of humanity's destiny continued to make preparations for the unspeakable.

It is time for all citizens, and not just a small percentage, to be informed about the issues surrounding nuclear weapons and how they affect all of us.  It is time for citizens to step forward and become engaged in decisions that were never in their hands in the first place, but should have been.  It is time to bring nuclear weapons into the center of a public dialogue and debate, and for the citizenry to make its voice heard loud and clear in the halls of The White House, Congress and the Pentagon.

If this United States in which we live is to be a democracy, then it is up to us as citizens to make it so.  And there is no greater issue, in terms of the survival of humanity, in which we can (and must) become engaged.

Dr. King once said that "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice."  King understood that change (at least lasting change) does not occur overnight.  It is a long, hard struggle, as evidenced by every struggle for human rights throughout history.

Therein lies one major difference between Dr. King and President Obama.  Obama, in his Prague speech, recognized that "This goal will not be reached quickly –- perhaps not in my lifetime."  The difference is that Dr. King didn't stop working toward a goal even though he knew it may not be realized in his lifetime.  We, as citizens, must remind President Obama that he needs to be in this for the long haul - for the sake of his children and all the children of the world.

Happy Birthday Martin.  May our gift to you on this day be our commitment to a nonviolent world free of the scourges of war and nuclear weapons.

In Peace,

Leonard

U.S. Desecrating the very idea of Peace

Update (9/16/2011): The US Air Force has just announced that this test [referred to in this post] will not take place on the International Day of Peace. They have not yet announced a new date for the test. In the meantime, please consider sending a message opposing continued reliance on the theory of nuclear deterrence.

Friends,

In an incredibly blatant act of hubris the US Air Force (NOT IN MY NAME) is planning to test-launch a Minuteman III Intercontinental Ballistic Missile on September 21, the International Day of Peace.

That day is officially recognized each year by the United Nations General Assembly as a day for “commemorating and strengthening the ideals of peace both within and among all nations and peoples.”  In 2005, United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan called for the worldwide observance of a 24-hour cease-fire and day of nonviolence to mark the Day. 

It is hard to imagine that scheduling a missile test launch - the armed Minutemen in their silos carry 170 kiloton nuclear warheads and can be launched within one minute of receipt of the launch order - on September 21st is by pure chance.

Should that be the case (or in any case for that matter) President Obama should order the launch  cancelled!  Scheduling a test launch of weapon that is expressly designed to incinerate tens of thousands or even millions of people and cause massive long-term suffering of survivors, and if ever used would very likely result in an omnicidal nuclear exchange, is unconscionable and sends a dangerous message to the rest of the world.

We must send a clear message to President Obama and urge him to cancel the launch and (I would add) call on the President to re-dedicate himself to his original call for nuclear abolition stated in his now famous Prague speech on April 5, 2009.

Please visit the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation's action page and send your own personalized message to the President today!

And please - Spread the word! 

Peace,

Leonard