Citizens Watch Newsletter February 2004
Groups Victorious as Los Alamos Withdraws Biolab
Approval;
Vow to Continue Litigation Against Livermore
Bio-warfare Agent Lab
By Steven Volker, Marylia Kelley and Jay Coghlin
From the February, 2004 issue of the Tri-Valley CARE's
newsletter, Citizen's Watch
Amid growing controversy and federal litigation, the
U.S. Dept. of Energy (DOE) announced that it has
revoked approval for its newly-constructed bio-warfare
agent research facility at the Los Alamos National Lab
in New Mexico, which was slated to experiment with
dozens of deadly pathogens.
Specifically, DOE withdrew the Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) and Environmental
Assessment (EA) that it had issued prior to the start
of construction. The Los Alamos facility, styled a
"Biosafety Level-3" (BSL-3), would have been used for
experiments — including genetic modification — with
live anthrax, botulism, bubonic plague and other
agents.
A second proposed bio-warfare agent research facility
at the Lawrence Livermore National Lab in California
remains under construction. The Livermore BSL-3
facility is slated to use the same mix of deadly
pathogens and will also contain a special laboratory
to conduct aerosol (spray) "challenges" of up to 100
small animals at a time.
In withdrawing approval for Los Alamos, the DOE
acknowledged its "continuing obligation under the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to consider
new circumstances and information" regarding the
facility's risks.
DOE’s action withdrawing approval of the New Mexico
bio-facility is a second major victory for two
environmental organizations, Nuclear Watch of New
Mexico, located in Santa Fe and the Livermore,
CA-based Tri-Valley CAREs.
The two groups filed litigation on August 26, 2003 in
the federal district court in Northern California,
charging DOE with violating NEPA by approving advanced
research on bio-weapon agents at its two principal
nuclear weapon design laboratories without conducting
a thorough review of the resulting environmental risks
and impacts on international non-proliferation
agreements. The lawsuit asks the court to compel site
specific and programmatic Environmental Impact
Statements and public hearings before the DOE can
begin operation at either of the contested facilities.
Last month, in federal district court, Judge Saundra
Armstrong issued an Order prohibiting any shipment of
"select agents" those most capable of being
weaponized to these proposed bio-warfare agent
research facilities pending the trial for our lawsuit,
to be heard this April in Oakland, California.
The DOE press release admits that it will now need to
go back to square one, produce a new environmental
assessment and review anew whether the agency will
undertake a full Environmental Impact Statement a
key demand in the lawsuit.
"We are elated that our lawsuit has persuaded DOE to
abandon its inadequate environmental assessment," said
Nuclear Watch Director Jay Coghlan. "The ‘new
circumstances and information’ which DOE cites likely
includes the strength of our two groups’ litigation
and the weakness of their case," added Coghlan. "The
public can now have better assurance that a stringent
risk analysis will be completed before bio-weapon
agent research begins in New Mexico at a secret
nuclear lab with a shoddy environmental, safety and
security record," he concluded.
"Although we are pleased DOE has agreed to withdraw
its approval of the Los Alamos facility, we remain
concerned that construction continues on the extremely
dangerous Livermore biolab," stated Marylia Kelley,
the Executive Director of Tri-Valley CAREs. "The risks
to public health and safety posed by the deadly
pathogens DOE proposed to use in Los Alamos are even
greater here at Livermore. The Livermore site is
adjacent to the active Los Positas earthquake fault
and next to a large metropolitan area," explained
Kelley. "Surely, we deserve no less than an immediate
halt to the construction of the Livermore bio-warfare
agent facility and for DOE to withdraw its approval,"
she added.
"DOE’s inexplicable failure to halt construction of
the equally dangerous facility at Livermore is a huge
mistake," commented plaintiffs’ lead attorney Stephan
Volker of Oakland. "This bio-warfare agent lab could
become a magnet for terrorist attacks, exposing the
entire Bay Area to potential contamination," added
Volker. "Unless DOE promptly agrees to withdraw its
approval of the Livermore biolab, we will ask the
Court to bar its operation to protect the public’s
safety."
Biological containment levels range from BSL-1, which
handles agents not known to cause illness, to BSL-4,
which houses agents for which there are no known
cures. A BSL-3 permits work with potentially deadly
pathogens used in both defensive and offensive
biological warfare research.
For more information, including our legal filings and
DOE's latest press release, visit us at
www.trivalleycares.org
Contractors to Write Nuclear Safety Rules
By Marylia Kelley
from the February, 2004 issue of the
Tri-Valley CARE's newsletter, Citizen's Watch
The Dept. of Energy (DOE) is proposing to replace
safety requirements at its nuclear weapons sites with
new standards — written by the contractors. The move
follows a congressional directive to begin fining
those same contractors for violating existing
regulations.
At present, DOE facilities are not fully subject to
outside regulation by the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration. Instead, DOE regulations
"mirror" OSHA. Now, under the DOE plan, the current
safety standards for nuclear weapons facilities would
be reduced to unenforceable "guidelines."
KY Senator Jim Bunning, who authored the 2002
legislation ordering the contractor fines, said the
DOE proposal will "likely decrease worker protection."
OH Rep. Ted Strickland termed it "the fox guarding the
hen house." DOE defended the plan, saying "the
proposed rule seeks to fully protect our workers,"
while simultaneously assuring critics that the agency
has not made a final decision yet.
Cheating on Security
By Marylia Kelley
from the February, 2004 issue of the
Tri-Valley CARE's newsletter, Citizen's Watch
Security guards at DOE’s Oak Ridge facility were
tipped off prior to undergoing drills to test their
readiness to repel an attack, according to an internal
study. The DOE's Inspector General said that two
guards were allowed to view the attack simulation in
advance of the test. The guards were told which
buildings would be attacked, the number of mock
attackers and even where a diversion would be staged.
The Inspector General called the four exercises
"tainted and unreliable." Further, a broader
investigation is underway and has reportedly uncovered
widespread cheating at DOE sites.
At Livermore Lab, workers tell us they have watched
the Lab conduct "daily exercises" to get ready for a
DOE security drill scheduled the first week in Feb.
Whether security forces or Lab management have also
previewed details of the pending mock attack is not
known.
The New American Century
An essay by Arundhati Roy
reprinted in the February,
2004 issue of the Tri-Valley CARE's newsletter,
Citizen's Watch
The following is excerpted from the upcoming Feb. 9,
2004 issue of The Nation magazine. To read Roy's essay
in its entirety, go to www.thenation.com. We offer
these excerpts in preparation for the report back by
Tara Dorabji and Loulena Miles on the 2004 World
Social Forum on Feb. 19 (see enclosed flier).
In January 2003 thousands of us from across the world
gathered in Porto Alegre in Brazil and declared --
reiterated -- that "Another World Is Possible." A few
thousand miles north, in Washington, George W. Bush
and his aides were thinking the same thing.
Our project was the World Social Forum. Theirs -- to
further what many call the Project for the New
American Century.
In the great cities of Europe and America, where a few
years ago these things would only have been whispered,
now people are openly talking about the good side of
imperialism and the need for a strong empire to police
an unruly world. The new missionaries want order at
the cost of justice. Discipline at the cost of
dignity. And ascendancy at any price. Occasionally
some of us are invited to "debate" the issue on
"neutral" platforms provided by the corporate media.
Debating imperialism is a bit like debating the pros
and cons of rape. What can we say? That we really miss
it?
In any case, New Imperialism is already upon us. It’s
a remodeled, streamlined version of what we once knew.
For the first time in history, a single empire with an
arsenal of weapons that could obliterate the world in
an afternoon has complete, unipolar, economic and
military hegemony. It uses different weapons to break
open different markets. There isn’t a country on God’s
earth that is not caught in the cross-hairs of the
American cruise missile and the IMF checkbook.
Argentina’s the model if you want to be the poster boy
of neoliberal capitalism, Iraq if you’re the black
sheep. Poor countries that are geopolitically of
strategic value to Empire, or have a "market" of any
size, or infrastructure that can be privatized, or,
God forbid, natural resources of value -- oil, gold,
diamonds, cobalt, coal -- must do as they’re told or
become military targets. Those with the greatest
reserves of natural wealth are most at risk...
In this new age of empire, when nothing is as it
appears to be, executives of concerned companies are
allowed to influence foreign policy decisions. The
Center for Public Integrity in Washington found that
at least nine out of the thirty members of the Bush
Administration’s Defense Policy Board were connected
to companies that were awarded military contracts for
$76 billion between 2001 and 2002. George Shultz,
former Secretary of State, was chairman of the
Committee for the Liberation of Iraq. He is also on
the board of directors of the Bechtel Group. When
asked about a conflict of interest in the case of war
in Iraq he said, "I don’t know that Bechtel would
particularly benefit from it. But if there’s work to
be done, Bechtel is the type of company that could do
it. But nobody looks at it as something you benefit
from." In April 2003, Bechtel signed a $680 million
contract for reconstruction.
This brutal blueprint has been used over and over
again across Latin America, in Africa and in Central
and Southeast Asia. It has cost millions of lives. It
goes without saying that every war Empire wages
becomes a Just War... Like Old Imperialism, New
Imperialism relies for its success on a network of
agents -- corrupt local elites who service Empire. We
all know the sordid story of Enron in India. The
then-Maharashtra government signed a power purchase
agreement that gave Enron profits that amounted to 60
percent of India’s entire rural development budget. A
single American company was guaranteed a profit
equivalent to funds for infrastructural development
for about 500 million people!
Unlike in the old days, the New Imperialist doesn’t
need to trudge around the tropics risking malaria or
diarrhea or early death. New Imperialism can be
conducted on e-mail. The cornerstone of New
Imperialism is New Racism... As part of the project of
New Racism we also have New Genocide. New Genocide in
this new era of economic interdependence can be
facilitated by economic sanctions. New Genocide means
creating conditions that lead to mass death without
actually going out and killing people...
At the World Social Forum some of the best minds in
the world come together to exchange ideas about what
is happening around us. These conversations refine our
vision of the kind of world we’re fighting for. It is
a vital process that must not be undermined. However,
if all our energies are diverted into this process at
the cost of real political action, then the WSF, which
has played such a crucial role in the movement for
global justice, runs the risk of becoming an asset to
our enemies. What we need to discuss urgently is
strategies of resistance. We need to aim at real
targets, wage real battles and inflict real damage.
Gandhi’s salt march was not just political theater...
This movement of ours needs a major, global victory.
It’s not good enough to be right... If all of us are
indeed against imperialism and against the project of
neoliberalism, then let’s turn our gaze on Iraq... To
applaud the US Army’s capture of Saddam Hussein, and
therefore in retrospect justify its invasion and
occupation of Iraq, is like deifying Jack the Ripper
for disemboweling the Boston Strangler. And that after
a quarter-century partnership in which the Ripping and
Strangling was a joint enterprise. It’s an in-house
quarrel. They’re business partners who fell out over a
dirty deal. Jack’s the CEO...
How do we begin to mount our resistance? Let’s start
with something really small. The issue is not about
supporting the resistance in Iraq against the
occupation or discussing who exactly constitutes the
resistance. (Are they old killer Baathists, are they
Islamic fundamentalists?) We have to become the global
resistance to the occupation...
Opposition Causes DOE to Delay Plans for New Bomb
Plant
By Marylia Kelley
from the February, 2004 issue of the
Tri-Valley CARE's newsletter, Citizen's Watch
Congratulations are due to all of our members and
friends who protested, wrote letters and made phone
calls to oppose it. Kudos, too, to CA Senator Dianne
Feinstein for playing a lead role in cutting its
budget by more than fifty percent.
"It" is a new plutonium bomb factory capable of mass
producing 250 to 900 new bomb cores, called pits, each
year. Bowing to congressional pressure, the Dept. of
Energy announced on Jan. 28 that it would delay plans
indefinitely for the new manufacturing plant, called
the Modern Pit Facility or MPF.
The decision places a hold on the plant’s final
Environmental Impact Statement, which had been
scheduled for release this spring. Without a final
EIS, the DOE cannot move forward and choose a "winner"
among its five candidate sites to house the new bomb
plant.
The DOE hit the pause button "in order to address
congressional concerns that it is premature to pursue
further decisions on a MPF at this time," according to
the agency’s carefully worded press release. "I
believe we need to pause to respond to concerns that
some committees have raised about its scope and
timing," said Linton Brooks, head of DOE’s National
Nuclear Security Administration.
The Alliance for Nuclear Accountability heralded the
delay, citing "the inevitable health and environmental
risks of plutonium manufacturing" and the "simple lack
of need" as well as the negative international
implications of the facility. The MPF "is one project
America can live without," declared the national
alliance of groups, including Tri-Valley CAREs,
representing communities downwind and downstream of
DOE nuclear weapons facilities.
Senator Feinstein said she "welcomed the delay," and
pointed out that if the new bomb factory were to
operate at only half of its capacity, it could equal
or exceed China’s entire nuclear arsenal in a single
year. "I believe the development of new nuclear
weapons will hurt our relations with other nations
around the globe, our non-proliferation efforts, and
the environment," Feinstein concluded.
DOE's draft EIS made it clear that the MPF would
include the capability to make "new design pits,"
meaning that it could facilitate production of
entirely new types of nuclear weapons.
The U.S. currently has about 10,000 nuclear weapons in
the arsenal. The Bush administration is overdue with a
report to congress outlining the future of the
nation's nuclear stockpile.
The Moscow Treaty, concluded in 2002, does not require
the actual dismantlement of any nuclear weapons.
However, many in congress have been pressing for
modest reductions. Thus, the tardiness of the Bush
report most likely caused some of the questions
regarding the "scope and timing" of the MPF.
The DOE press release states that the agency is not
abandoning the idea of a new bomb factory to replace
its Cold War-era Rocky Flats plant, shut down in 1989
due to severe environmental contamination. The new MPF
is "an essential element of America’s nuclear defense
policy," Brooks declared.
We expect we will need to confront this issue again in
one to three years. We pledge to remain vigilant and
ready to act anew when DOE's plutonium bomb factory
rears its ugly head once again. We invite you to
continue to promote nuclear disarmament and oppose
new nukes with us. Stay tuned!
Toward a Global People's Movement:
Tri-Valley CAREs sends delegates to the World Social Forum in India
By Loulena Miles
From Tri-Valley CAREs' February 2004 newsletter, Citizen's Watch
On Jan 16-21 in Mumbai (Bombay), India, over 80,000 people attended the
World Social Forum from 2,660 organizations representing every continent on
earth! Imagine a grand staging ground where activists from all different
walks of life come together, meet each other, and talk about how to
communicate and coordinate for international action. Tri-Valley CAREs
mission in attending the forum was to illuminate the social, environmental
and moral costs of continued reliance on nuclear weapons.
The main themes of the conference this year were imperialist globalization,
patriarchy, militarism, peace, fundamentalism, and racism. Some 800
workshops were offered, each in 3 hour increments, scattered across the
expansive grounds. Choices had to be made, sacrificing one anti-militarism
workshop might be worth the trade-off for an anti-Bush workshop given by
activists from Korea. It was challenging and fun to think broadly about how
nuclear weapons connect to many people's struggles and to forge new
relationships with peace advocates across the globe.
Opening speeches were given by luminaries such as Indian author and
anti-nuclear activist Arundati Roy, and Iranian Nobel Laureate Shirin
Ebadi. Roy appealed to those gathered to target two corporations profiting
from the reconstruction of Iraq and shut them down. "Iraq is the
culmination of imperialism and neoliberalism", declared Roy.
A call went out to mobilize on March 20, the first anniversary of the US
attack on Iraq. Ebadhi called for reform in international institutions to
make them serve the will of the majority of the people on the earth and to
make human beings the center of globalization rather than international
capital. In effect, she called for a movement to make the economy serve the
people instead of the people to serve, and live only, for the economy.
Tri-Valley CAREs hosted and participated in panel discussions on citizen
weapons inspections, the nuclear cycle from mining to designing, nuclear
weapons and the youth forum. We also met activists from anti-nuclear groups
in many countries including India, South Africa, Australia, France, Italy,
Japan, Korea and New Zealand. As a result of this meeting, many groups are
forming a network to organize broadly against all aspects of the nuclear
cycle from production of the weapons to disposal of the waste. We also
publicized the May 1st international day of action against nuclear weapons
that coincides with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty preparatory
conference in New York and the August 7th day of remembrance of the
bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
What This New Movement is About
There is an unprecedented movement afoot within the activist community to
improve ways for citizens to organize for social change on an international
scale. After the massive anti-WTO protests in Seattle in 1999, a group of
people decided to link up all the organizations that network in the mass
protests and to arrange another kind of meeting on a world scale - the
World Social Forum - directed at social concerns. The World Social Forum
was originally convened in 2000 in Puerto Allegro, Brazil, as a
non-governmental, citizen led alternative to the World Economic Forum,
which is an annual meeting of elite political and business leaders to
create global partnerships and coordinate business decisions on global
issues in Davos, Switzerland.
In contrast, the World Social Forum in India was the 4th in a series of
annual "world-wide" meetings to discuss problems that span the globe and to
envision collective solutions. Regions are beginning to host their own
forums as well including the European Social Forum, the Pan-Amazon Social
Forum, and the Mediterranean Social Forum. It is a forum for vigorous
debate on an international level, an opportunity to realize connections
between movements and issues, and it is a place for activists to discard
their assumptions about "foreign" countries and "foreign" peoples and
evolve toward a more complex understanding of our common challenges.
Next year's forum will again be in Brazil. Tri-Valley CAREs members
interested in attending next year should please step forward!
Citizen's Alerts
Please see our Calendar Section!
|