GROUNDSWELL, from Peace Action West

Atomic Bomb Survivor: Remember What Happened in Nagasaki and Hiroshima

Last weekend, I attended “Looking Back: Remembering the Victims of Nuclear Weapons – Looking Forward: Towards a Nuclear Free Future,” an event Peace Action West cosponsored to commemorate the victims of nuclear weapons on the 63rd anniversary of the US atomic bombing of Nagasaki.

Retired Methodist minister Rev. Nobuaki Hanaoka, who survived the US atomic bombing of Nagasaki as a baby, gave a moving speech to the large crowd that attended the event. You can watch a short video of part of his speech as he talks about the indiscriminate suffering caused by the bombing and the tragedy that it caused within his own family.

He went on to talk about the ensuing arms race with Russia and Congress' recent refusal to fund a new generation of nuclear weapons, the Reliable Replacement Warhead. It was interesting hearing him bring up that specific program as we stood just a few feet away from the Livermore Lab, which actually won the contest to design the RRW. Rev. Hanaoka also reminded us that our work is not yet done, saying there are an estimated 26,000 nuclear warheads worldwide (with the US accounting for about 10,000 alone) and that we all need to continue to push for global nuclear disarmament.

A Fragile Ceasefire, McCain's New Cold War, and the Same Old Addiction to Oil

As French President Nicolas Sarkozy landed in Moscow to discuss Georgia, Russian President Medvedev accepted calls for a ceasefire. The Russian leader accepted a six-point set of principles for ending hostilities between Russia and Georgia. The plan includes a return to the countries' positions before this last weekend's flare up and free access for humanitarian assistance. More than 2000 people are reported dead in the fighting and it will take time and sustained effort for the peace agreement to take hold.

As we reported yesterday, there is a Cold War feel in the air. John McCain's foreign policy platform has for some time featured harsh language about Russia and a plan to kick Russia out of the G8. (Considering that the G8 works by consensus that means Russia would have to boot itself out!) McCain has also poked fun of Bush's statement that Bush looked into Putin's eyes and saw his soul saying instead: "I looked in his eyes and saw three things a K and a G and a B". Which I suppose may be kind of funny, but it's an unwise thing to say, with Russian nuclear weapons still trained onto American cities, still on hair trigger alert.

McCain's Cold War accent has grown more pronounced during the Georgia conflict. McCain called for a meeting of the G-7 excluding Russia to meet about the situation. He also wanted to “review measures NATO can take to contribute to stabilizing this very dangerous situation". And now McCain has decided that "Today We are All Georgians". Some of this may be retro Cold War bluster, some of it may come from McCain campaign ties to Georgia. As the Wall Street Journal reported:

In 2005, Mr. Scheunemann asked Sen. McCain to introduce a Senate resolution expressing support for peace in the Russian-influenced region of South Ossetia that wants to break away from Georgia, the records show.

Such resolutions of Senate support are symbolic but helpful to countries in their diplomatic relations. The Senate approved Sen. McCain's resolution in December 2005, and the Georgian Embassy posted the text on its Web site.

Sen. McCain has endorsed Georgia's goal of entering NATO, a matter for which the country hired Mr. Scheunemann to lobby. In 2006, Senator McCain gave a speech at the Munich Conference on Security in Germany in which he said, "Georgia has implemented far-reaching political, economic, and military reforms" and should enter NATO, a text of his speech on the conference Web site shows.

As if that is not enough Cold War intrigue, there is of course the resource war twist to the Georgia conflict. The South Caucasus region is a major conduit for oil and gas to the West. The U.S. is looking to this oil to reduce dependence on Russian and Middle East oil. Georgia itself is the site of three major pipelines. One analyst gives his perspective on the conflict: "The Russian invasion is not about South Ossetia. It is about regime change in Tbilisi, reimposing a 19th-century sphere of influence in the South Caucasus, limiting the autonomy of the countries there, and through all these devices maintaining control of energy transmission lines to the West."

So the Russian government could be motivated by it's tight connections with that country's energy industry. Sounds kinda familiar don't it?

The Georgia conflict reflects two of the most dangerous dynamics of last century's geopolitics: the Cold War and an addiction to oil. Let's hope the next president can create the high-octane blend of smart diplomacy and renewable energy that can avert lethal conflicts as we ride onward into the rest of the 21st century.

Cease-Fire Needed in Georgia to Avert Humanitarian Crisis

It's hard to watch the war unfolding in Georgia without a mixture of sadness and déjà vu. The age-old pattern of escalation is being played out again: small skirmishes lead to wider battles as provocations and counter-provocations grow into full-blown war. After months of increased tension the current conflict escalated when Georgia mounted what appears to have been a military offensive in the disputed region of South Ossetia.  The conflict quickly inflamed further with a second front opening in Abkhazia where Russia had been deploying troops. The war has now widened with Russian attacks in other parts of Georgia including around the city of Gori.

This is a challenging and serious humanitarian situation with reports that both Georgia and Russia have caused civilian casualties and attacked civilian targets. There are also tens of thousands of displaced persons. Numbers of causalities are hard to confirm but could number in thousands.

"There were rockets in the sky and it was like lightning all the time," one 11 year old boy told staff of the humanitarian organization World Vision. "When we were going from Ergneti to Gori to visit my aunt, they dropped a bomb on the way and the building blocks started to shake. We got scared and we immediately came to Tbilisi," he continued.

As the conflict grew yet again, Russian bombing now includes targets around the Georgian capital of Tbilisi demonstrating that the South Ossetia conflict is widening to a regional war. 

Peace Action West supports calls on both sides to respect international law in foreswearing attacks on civilians. We agree with calls for an immediate ceasefire, humanitarian assistance for civilians harmed by this conflict, and the resumption of talks to cope with regional tensions.

Meanwhile the conflict found its way into the American presidential race while the Bush administration is responding with its usual escalatory rhetoric. A Cold War tone was in the air with the U.S. ambassador to the UN Zalmay Khalizad accused the Russians of conducting a “campaign of terror against the Georgian population” during a Security Council meeting. Needless to say the Russian ambassador fired back with his own in-your-face rhetoric:

"This statement, Ambassador, is absolutely unacceptable, particularly from the lips of the permanent representative of a country whose actions we are aware of, including with regard to civilian populations in Iraq, Afghanistan and Serbia."

Of course it is entirely appropriate for the U.S. to send a firm message to Russia about its actions. But in New York the Bush administration is once again engaging is clumsy diplomacy by using language like "campaign of terror" while seeking diplomatic leverage at very venue the U.S. thumbed its nose at in the run up to the Iraq war.

In fact, the situation in Georgia demonstrates the importance of repairing the moral standing of the Unites States damaged by 8 years of the administration's unilateralism, militarism and bluster. The next administration needs a new approach. We need a foreign policy based on a creative and robust use of diplomacy, conflict prevention tactics, and international cooperation.  Then the U.S. can play a leading role in preventing and stopping these kind of international tensions.

Help elect a peace candidate in Arizona

This election year, one of the most important things we can do to change our foreign policy is to change the people who make it. The Peace Action West Voter Fund will be updating you throughout the next few months about progressive candidates all over the west who will help bring a new direction in US foreign policy.

First stop is the first district of Arizona. Republican Rick Renzi is retiring in disgrace after facing a 35-count indictment covering everything from money laundering to fraud. The first district of Arizona is now wide open, giving us the opportunity to elect a candidate who will support a progressive foreign policy.

Howard Shanker is one of several candidates competing for the Democratic nomination in the primary on September 2nd. An attorney and adjunct professor, Shanker has represented groups such as the Sierra Club and the Navajo Nation in fighting for environmental justice. He is an endorser of A Responsible Plan to End the War in Iraq and wants to divert some military spending to research alternative energy. He supports diplomacy with Iran and the elimination of nuclear weapons.

Click here to contribute to Howard Shanker’s campaign.

I met with Howard in June when I was in Arizona, and I was impressed with how engaged he was on our issues and his interest in Peace Action West and our work.  The primary is only three weeks away; we urgently need to support this progressive candidate.  We learned in 2006 that we can’t just elect any Democrats; we must elect progressives who are willing to take a stand to bring about a major shift in our foreign policy. Howard Shanker urgently needs our support before the September 2nd primary to make that happen.

The victims of nuclear weapons

Peace lanterns commemorate Hiroshima Day

August 6th marks the 63rd anniversary of the US atomic bombing of Hiroshima. On Saturday, we’ll remember Nagasaki Day. In remembrance of all the victims of nuclear weapons, I wanted to share with you some of the personal stories of people directly effected by nuclear weapons. Mr. Isao Kita was 33 years old when the bomb fell on Hiroshima. He was working for the Hiroshima District Weather Bureau 3.7 km from the hypocenter. He kept observing the weather even after he was exposed.

…It was not really a big flash. But still it drew my attention. In a few seconds, the heat wave arrived. …Even though there was a window glass in front of me, I felt really hot. It was as if I was looking directly into a kitchen oven. I couldn’t bear the heat for a long time. …I realized that the bomb had been dropped. As I had been instructed, I pushed aside the chair and lay with my face on the floor….

You can finish reading his story and other excerpts from the Hibakusha (the Japanese word for atom bomb survivors) posted online here.

While no nuclear bombs have been used against another country since Hiroshima and Nagasaki, people continue to suffer because of them to this day. Many of those who work to produce nuclear weapons in the US or who live in communities nearby are put at risk of severe and deadly health problems. There’s a heart-wrenching series in the Rocky Mountain News by Laura Frank highlighting the difficulty American nuclear weapons workers face in receiving government compensation for their illnesses. Here's one story:

Janine Anderson spent seven years as a secretary at the Oak Ridge nuclear reservation, one of the nation's premier nuclear weapons development and production complexes.

But that safe-sounding office position didn't protect her from the toxic exposure that has ravaged her body. Her lungs are scarred with deadly beryllium, a key ingredient in atomic bombs. Her immune system is attacking her body, which harbors an array of heavy metals in toxic quantities. Her liver is so enlarged that it is threatening to burst through her abdominal wall.

Reading their stories reminded me just how important it is that we work together to create a world free of nuclear weapons. You can help prevent more people from suffering because of nuclear weapons by taking one of the actions below.

Attend a local event

Groups across the country are listing their events for Hiroshima and Nagasaki Day. Click here to find an event near you. Those of you living in the San Francisco Bay Area can join me this Saturday at the annual event in Livermore. For information on the Livermore event, click here.

Take action online

You can send an email to your representative encouraging them to support verifiable reductions to the US nuclear stockpile by cosponsoring H Res 1045.

Or, you can tell the presidential candidates that you want leadership for a nuclear weapons free world.

Image courtesy of /kallu on flickr.com

Playing Favorites: The India Nuclear Deal

Last week, the India Nuclear Deal inched forward when the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) adopted a plan for inspecting India’s nuclear reactors.

"The safeguards agreement with the U.N. nuclear watchdog was essential before India can finalize the pact with the United States that would end more than three decades of nuclear isolation. The deal will open India's civilian reactors to international inspections in exchange for the nuclear fuel and technology it has been denied by its refusal to sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and its testing of atomic weapons.

…Without IAEA safeguards, India cannot import nuclear technology from the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group, which includes the United States. India must now strike a separate agreement with the Nuclear Suppliers Group. The U.S. Congress will then need to approve the U.S.-India accord."

We’ve worked to oppose the deal because it undermines global nonproliferation efforts. While the deal is for civilian nuclear technology, it would allow India to free up uranium for its own nuclear weapons program and potentially ratchet up tensions with neighboring Pakistan. Last month, Pakistan warned of the potential effects of the deal:

"Pakistan warned the international community yesterday that a deal allowing India to import US atomic fuel and technology could accelerate a nuclear arms race between Delhi and Islamabad.

The warning was made in a letter addressed to more than 60 nations as the Indian Government, having survived a no-confidence vote on Tuesday, dispatched diplomats to clear the deal with international regulators.

Later, in a concession to Islamabad, the United States said that it planned to shift $230 million (£116 million) in aid to Pakistan away from counter-terrorism to upgrading its F16 fighter jets seen as crucial for maintaining military parity with India. That announcement came four days before Yousuf Raza Gilani, Pakistan’s new Prime Minister, is due to meet President Bush at the White House for talks on co-operation in combating Islamic extremists."

Also disturbing is the fact that the deal would require no halt in nuclear trade if India tested another nuclear bomb. The deal's silence on this is a serious discrepancy with a 2006 law passed by Congress.

There is little debate that strengthening ties with the world's largest democracy is a good idea. But there are far better ways of doing it that wouldn't include undermining US credibility in efforts to curb nuclear proliferation elsewhere. On the one hand, we’re rewarding India with nuclear technology, a country with nuclear weapons that has not signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. On the other hand, we’re imposing harsh sanctions on Iran and leaving the military option on the table because it continues to pursue nuclear technology. According to the 2007 National Intelligence Estimate, Iran froze its nuclear weapons program in 2003 and it is a signatory to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. The Bush administration’s push to seal the deal with India sends the wrong message to Iran and the international community.

The India Nuclear Deal still has several hurdles to clear. Even if the Nuclear Suppliers Group finishes its work quickly, it’s uncertain if Congress will have time to consider the deal given the fact that they plan to wrap up work in late September. The sense of many in Congress is that the Bush administration, conscious of its legacy, is eager to force the deal through in 2008. But Congress needs to take the time to think things through on this one. There are better ways to strengthen our relationship with India than a nuclear deal.

McCain is in SF! Join our welcome party tonight.

It's no wonder that Sen. McCain's campaign has been so cagey about their planned fundraiser in San Francisco. Now that word is out, look what's happened! No Soldier Left Behind will rally outside the fundraiser at the Fairmont Hotel in San Francisco tonight.

For the last week, there was no evidence of a planned fundraiser on the McCain website. Today, the news is reporting a whole range of times for the start of the event. But in spite of all their efforts, we will  gather at 6:30pm on Monday, July 28 at the Fairmont Hotel, 950 Mason Street, San Francisco, CA 94108. We'll have signs, petitions, stickers, etc. If you are in the area, join us! For questions, contact me here.

UPDATE: We are now planning on getting a group out there earlier, at 5:30. Join us if you can!

REPORT BACK: It was a great action! You can see for yourself on this segment from one of the local stations that covered it, featuring your favorite peace group! (that's us)

Bringing the grassroots to the Hill: Peace Action's national lobby day

Cara and I were in Washington, DC this week, joining people from Peace Action affiliates from around the country to bring our concerns directly to members of Congress and their staff. We spent two days trudging around in the sweltering heat in our suits, meeting with congressional staff from districts throughout the west.  Here are some of the overall themes that came out of our meetings:

•    2008 is nearly over as far as Congress is concerned.  Even though it is only July, Congress has about 25 working days left in the calendar.  They are taking most of August off, and are planning to adjourn September 26th for the elections.  Because they are working with a lame duck president who is impeding their agenda, the Democratic leadership doesn’t even want to have a lame duck session after the election.  What this means is they are trying to cram everything they want to do into a short calendar.  Iraq, Iran and nuclear weapons are not likely to be high priorities.  A lot of our discussions involved laying the groundwork for the foreign policy we want to see in 2009.  On the grassroots side, we are making sure we keep constant pressure on, so members of Congress remember that ending the war in Iraq is still a top priority for voters.

•    It’s all about the presidential election.  For much of this year, we have been pushing against the idea that we need to wait around for a new president before working to bring about major foreign policy changes.  This dynamic is even stronger now that the Democrats have chosen a nominee.  Many congressional staff brought up Senator Obama and the need to calibrate their agenda with his platform.  It’s important for us to keep the pressure on the presidential candidates as well as congressional ones, and be setting up a clear mandate for 2009.

•    The Iraqi government’s call for a withdrawal timeline is resonating on the Hill.  While congressional staff don’t see many opportunities left in the year to pass legislation on Iraq, it’s clear that the latest news is having an impact. There have been efforts to express solidarity, including a new piece of legislation calling for the US to withdraw troops if the Iraqi government requests a withdrawal.  The new assertiveness the Iraqi government is showing is likely to weigh in decisions Congress is making about how to move forward on Iraq.

•    Congress hasn’t done a thorough examination of the idea of leaving a residual force in Iraq.  Peace Action West has been working to highlight the fact that many plans passed through Congress, as well as Sen. Obama’s, call for leaving behind a residual force, so-called “non-combat” troops to carry out limited missions.  A residual force would not do anything to dispel the perception of the US as an occupying power, and would leave a smaller, weaker US force as targets for the insurgency.  Some congressional staff seemed genuinely surprised when we pointed out that Obama’s plan could leave as many as 50,000 troops on the ground.  We emphasized the need to debate the relative merits of this idea, and it seems like an issue we should keep pushing on.

•    The push back against the Iran naval blockade legislation is working. We have joined a number of groups in pushing back against H Con Res 362, a resolution that has language that could be interpreted as calling for a naval blockade against Iran, an act of war. The legislation was hugely popular, with 244 representatives signing on as cosponsors.  The response from the grassroots has been overwhelming, and some members are starting to backtrack, going as far as withdrawing their names as cosponsors. Many congressional staff brought up the bill before we even had a chance to mention it, and several expressed support for the idea of changing the language in the bill (which is not as good as opposing the entire bill, but still significant progress when most people were expecting rapid passage of the bill).  We are hoping now to run out the clock on the bill and not have it come to a vote.  Our pressure is working and we need to keep it up.

SMACKDOWN III: Despite the Wrestling, 2010 Withdrawal Deadline Gains Steam

The combustible mix of domestic political spin and diplomatic arm twisting has gotten even stranger in the last couple says. After Iraqi Prime Minister al-Maliki told the German magazine Der Spiegel that he supported a timeline for withdrawal similar to Senator Obama's (mentioning Obama by name) the White House spin machine went into overdrive, calling in international chits.

Somehow the White House got the Iraqis to claim that they were mistranslated:

"US presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes."
Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki says he agrees with US presidential candidate Barack Obama's plans for withdrawing US troops from Iraq. Maliki was careful to back away from outright support for Obama. "Of course, this is by no means an election endorsement. Who they choose as their president is the Americans' business," he said. But then, apparently referring to Republican candidate John McCain's more open-ended Iraq policy, Maliki said: "Those who operate on the premise of short time periods in Iraq today are being more realistic. Artificially prolonging the tenure of US troops in Iraq would cause problems."

The Iraqi response to Der Spiegel intriguingly came in a press release from the US military (direct from CentCom) and quoted Iraqi government spokesperson Dr. Ali al-Dabbagh as saying that Maliki's statement was "misunderstood and mistranslated".  (Daily Kos points out that Dr. al-Dabbagh has worked closely with White House communications operations having given press conferences "from the freaking White House Conference Center Briefing Room standing next to Dana freakin' Perino. Repeatedly." )

There's only one problem with the White House/Iraqi damage control efforts. Both the New York Times and the Washington Post did their own translations and al-Maliki was translated correctly.

Underlining the seriousness of growing Iraqi support for a withdrawal in 2010, the  Iraqi government continued to make statements about timetables and goals for 2010. For example:

"Obama is closer to Iraqi opinion on the issue of withdrawal of U.S. forces," said Ali al-Adeeb, a top official in Maliki's Dawa party. "We don't know him personally, but we like his opinion and his calls to set a timetable to withdraw forces."

The aforementioned Dr. al-Dabbagh -- perhaps pulled between various factions -- yesterday said no to timetables while continuing to reinforce the 2010 deadline:

“We cannot give any timetables or dates but the Iraqi government believes the end of 2010 is the appropriate time for the withdrawal.”  ... “We are hoping that in 2010 that combat troops will withdraw from Iraq.”

Finally, Maliki is not the only Prime Minister that Obama is meeting on his trip that seems to think that 2010 is a good deadline for the withdrawal of troops. The British press is reporting that PM Gordon Brown is "expected to pave the way for the withdrawal of British troops from Iraq by 2010."

The plot thickens and more and more the "time horizon" of 2010 seems like a politically viable deadline for the endgame of the occupation of Iraq. Voters who hope for a comprehensive plan to end the occupation, to bring all the soldiers home to their families, and at the same time rebuild Iraq can support Peace Action West's efforts through our No Soldier Left Behind campaign.

Candidate meetings and more in Minnesota

Stephan, me and Ann at Espresso Royale in Minneapolis

I continued my western states tour this week with a visit to Minneapolis, Minnesota.  In addition to some great meetings that are helping to build our electoral work and the No Soldier Left Behind campaign, I also got to enjoy a summer thunderstorm, something I grew up with in New England but is a rarity in the Bay Area.

Minnesota is yet another location for some hot races in the congressional elections this year.  I started out my trip meeting with Democratic congressional candidate Ashwin Madia.  Madia is running against Erik Paulsen to fill the open seat vacated by Republican Jim Ramstad.  Madia and I had a good discussion about some of the major foreign policy challenges the new Congress will face, including promoting diplomacy and peace in Iraq and Iran, and stopping the proliferation of nuclear weapons.  Both candidates reported this week that they each raised more than $600,000 last quarter, so this is going to be a highly competitive and closely watched race.

I also enjoyed some kamikaze cakes (pancakes with blueberries, bananas and walnuts in them) with Matt Fuehrmeyer, Research Director for Democratic Senate candidate Al Franken.  I shared information and resources on our issues and talked about the kind of action our supporters would like to see from the next Congress.  Franken will also have a tough race against incumbent Senator Norm Coleman (R), though things will be a little smoother for him now that Jesse “The Body” Ventura has decided not to launch and independent bid for the seat.

One of the highlights of my trip was meeting with Peace Action West supporters Ann and her husband Stephan in Minneapolis.  It was a great opportunity to share more about Peace Action West and political organizing on a one on one basis.  I was inspired by Ann’s enthusiasm and willingness to hit the streets and organize in her community.  Ann will be organizing congressional lobby meetings for our upcoming week of action and gathering signatures on our open letter to the next president, so Minneapolis folks stay tuned for more activity in your community.

And now, a day of rest before I hop on a plane again to go to Washington, DC for Peace Action’s National Lobby Day to put some pressure on the members of Congress we already have to do their part.