Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Groups keyboard shortcuts have been updated
Dismiss
See shortcuts

Arms-Discussion Digest V13 #2

3 views
Skip to first unread message

Rob Gross

unread,
Mar 17, 1995, 1:54:00 PM3/17/95
to
Subject: Arms Discussion Digest V13 #2


From: Rob Gross (moderator)
<GR...@BCVMS.BITNET/GR...@BCVMS.BC.EDU>
Friday, March 17, 1995, 14:28 EST
Arms Discussion Digest
Volume 13 : Issue 2

All submissions to ARM...@BUACCA.BU.EDU (ARM...@BUACCA.BITNET)
Please do not post articles, as they have a high probability
of being lost.

Today's topics:

Hovercraft (Jack M. Fox)
Photo Radar Good? or Bad? (Inde Au)
Probable countries with Nukes? (Dana Rachlin)
liberia (Bill Thurman)
Nuclear Proliferation Treaty... (Rajeev Upadhye)
Re: Arms-Discussion Digest V13 #1 (Larry Engelmann)
Harvard Model UN Simulation in Geneva (Aram Schvey)
Call For Papers (Taylor Vinson Ruggles)
New Mossad home page on WWW (ostrovsky victor)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Jan 1995 13:39:00 -0800 (PST)
From: Jack...@eworld.com (Jack M. Fox)
Subject: Hovercraft

I am looking for information concerning military hovercraft.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 16:22:51 -0500
From: tw...@ice.LakeheadU.Ca (Inde Au)
Subject: Photo Radar Good? or Bad?

I am doing some research in the area of photo radar use in
Canada, particularly Ontario. I would really appreciated some
information on the subject.

Any form of input is welcome. Related materials are most
welcomed.

Thanks in advance.

Inde Au
Lakehead University

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 15:35:30 -0500
From: csd...@panix.com (Dana Rachlin)
Subject: Probable countries with Nukes?

I was not sure where to post this so please excuse cross-posting.
We are trying to get a good grasp of which countries in the world
"unofficially" possess nuclear weapons, meaning that they are NOT
in the Congress of nations than publicly acknowledge that they
possess them (the countries that have joined the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty) but are generally know to PROBABLY have
them.

If anyone knows of a good listing of these or is pretty sure of
most of them, could you kindly send a message to
csd...@panix.com ?

Thank you kindly in advance!

Dana Rachlin
--
Dana Rachlin "She-Ra: Warrior Goddess of the Internet"
csd...@panix.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 01 Feb 1995 11:44:23 +0000 (GMT)
From: BTHU...@UNCAVX.unca.edu (Bill Thurman)
Subject: liberia

would it be appropriate on this group to seek info about what
kinds of weapons are available or are in use by 'rebels' in
monrovia?

bthu...@unca.edu

p.s. who's 'right or wrong' in the conflict?

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 Mar 1995 07:45:03 +0000 (GMT)
From: fv...@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Rajeev Upadhye)
Subject: Nuclear Proliferation Treaty...


FUTURE OF NON PROLIFERATION TREATY: NEED FOR A PRAGMATIC
AND RADICAL RETHINK.

Anil A Athale
Department of Defense and Strategic Studies
University of Poona
Ganesh Khind, Pune,
Maharashtra, INDIA, 411 007


INTRODUCTION.

No issue of contemporary international politics is so surrounded
by myths and half truths as the attempt at control of spread of
nuclear weapons to countries other than the five permanent
members of the UN security council or the big five. The Nuclear
non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is scheduled for a major review
this year and the nearly 150 signatories will decide whether to
extend it indefinitely or for a fixed period.

The world appears to be clearly divided into two distinct camps,
the five nuclear weapon powers supporting an indefinite extension
while the rest either opposed to it or simply undecided. The US
is firmly of the opinion that the treaty needs to be extended
indefinitely in its ' present form.'

NPT MYTHS.

World escaped nuclear holocaust due to a simple accident, the
first country to possess these weapons namely the US was at that
time a STATUS QUO power. If a revolutionary power like Hitlers
Germany or later Communist USSR were to be the first to possess
these weapons and hold a monopoly, howsoever temporary, the
world, or what would have been left of it, would have been a very
different place. The central concept of 'deterrence' or
essentially war preventing role that the nuclear weapons came to
acquire thus has this central political fact at the roots. USSR
as the follow up nuclear power could only match the US but could
never 'use' the nuclear threat to achieve political or
territorial objective. As time went by and mankind learnt more
about the side effects of nuclear explosives, lasting for decades
and affecting the entire world, non use of nuclear weapons became
a major tenet of security doctrines. The only possible use of
these was as a last ditch weapon of self defence against 'overt
threat. For all other purposes nuclear weapons were as good as
useless. The US lost in Vietnam despite her nuclear weapons so
did USSR in Afghanistan. Finally when an internal collapse
engulfed the erstwhile USSR, her nuclear arsenal was of no use in
stemming the rot. Yet unlike either chemical or biological
weapons, the nuclear weapons have been used, nearly 50 years ago
and proved to be decisive in winning the war. Also despite the
constraints, nuclear threats, against non nuclear nations have
been successfully employed as a 'cost effective' strategy. A non
nuclear nation, even the so called 'crazy state' like Iraq, has
been cowed down by it.

NPT is widely credited with having slowed down the spread of
nuclear weapons. This is only partially true. Technologically
advanced nations like Japan and Germany did not take this path as
they became part of larger security network and over time their
and other nuclear powers economies got so entwined that except
for formal symbols, the Western allies to day for a federation,
as far as security is concerned. Some other 'revolutionary
'powers like Iraq, Libya, Iran or Gulf Sheikhdoms, all desired
nuclear weapons but were so technologically backward that the
restrictive regime made sure that they could not go nuclear. But
for a vast majority of nations, technologically competent,
nuclear weapons were un-necessary as the then prevailing balance
of terror afforded security from nuclear threats. Larger
countries like India, despite the Nuclear Suppliers Group imposed
restrictions, still acquired nuclear weapon capability so did
Israel, South Africa and Pakistan. Iraq and N. Korea came very
near it. NPT can thus said to have played a very little role in
the non spread of nuclear weapons.

Another enduring myth has been that the nuclear weapon powers
have indeed been moving toward nuclear dis-armament. Attention
is drawn to the fact that the two major powers, USA and USSR from
their peak arsenals of 53 000 Megatons in 1963 have brought down
the destructive power to 19 000 Megatons by 1990s and are
prepared for a further 50% cut. This is both a lie and an eye
wash. All that happened during this period was that instead of
'wasteful' and over kill 20 Megaton city busters (the ability to
gassify whole cities), both the nuclear weapon powers went to
improve, miniaturize their weapons and while the megatonnage was
brought down the numbers went up. It will not be an exaggeration
to say that while the explosive power went down the ability to
totally destroy targets went up several fold. This is the reality
of 'nuclear arms cut'. In addition the miniaturized nuclear
weapons are much more usable as they cause minimum collateral
damage. With the balance of terror extinct with the ending of
cold war, use of mini-nukes is again a real possibility.

NPT is often compared with other dis-armament measures like the
convention banning chemical and biological weapons. This is
untrue as these treaties not only ban the use of these weapons
but also make no distinction between nations and permit some to
posses them and others no to. NPT is no dis-armament measure. At
best it is a selective arms control measure whose goal is
'stability' in the existing world power balance. Permitting some
nations to keep nuclear weapons, indirectly, legitimizes their
use. It is significant that except for China, no other nuclear
weapon power has given a 'no first use ' assurance.

NPT is also billed as a step towards nuclear disarmament. This
is a thorny issue as it is impossible to think of nuclear
disarmament in isolation from general and total disarmament. But
that in turn will need putting in place a world government first.
Mankind is still too far from this goal. Thus in effect NPT or
freeze in the nuclear balance is not only an intermediate but the
ultimate object, de facto, though not de jure.

DANGER IN EXTENSION OF NPT INDEFINITELY.

During the cold war the entire attention was focused on preparing
for the least likely possibility, an all out nuclear war. The
bush fire wars that were fought more frequently were realized to
be important when it was too late. Similarly as the attention is
today focused on the spread of nuclear weapons to more nations,
the real danger, of terrorist groups getting hold of these and
making use of them has received scant attention. A nation state
at least can be deterred by a counter threat. But a terrorist
group with no fixed territorial base is immune to deterrence.
Even against revolutionary or rouge states the current NPT has no
real answer unless the rouge states target one of the nuclear
weapon power itself.

President Kennedy's prediction that few years hence the next US
President will have to deal with several nuclear powers, unlike
him when he had to concern only with the USSR has not come true
so far. But the information revolution now sweeping the world and
various technological barriers crumbling, the next decade will
see many more nuclear capable countries emerging. Some of them
may well be convinced that they must spread their ideology at all
costs and through all means including nuclear terrorism.

The current NPT does not address any of these issues. To save
mankind, including even the nuclear powers, from the threat of
nuclear terrorism needs a universal and compulsory control regime
with an international guarantee of punishment for infringement.
But to achieve this goal the NPT has to give up its approach that
legitimizes "NUCLEAR MAFIA".

WAY OUT.

The opportunity to review the NPT should be seized now to put the
nuclear weapons and nuclear capable powers on notice to think
through a regime that can take care of emerging threats. The NPT
needs to be extended by 5 years only till the end of this
century. In the meanwhile all the countries of the world need to
sit down together and hammer out a universal and compulsory
regime that enforces accountability on ALL in terms of fissile
material and puts in place an international nuclear force, on the
lines of a Multilateral Nuclear Force thought in the 60s by
NATO.It is time to give a second look to the Baruch Plan of the
1950s as well. The current unseemly hurry in extending a
defective NPT appears to be mainly driven by the domestic agenda
of a US President who wants to peg his re-election campaign on
this apparent 'success', a success neither in the long term
interest of the US nor world that wants to control the nuclear
menace. Nuclear weapons are weapons that can enforce a sentence
of death on nations. In the realm of nuclear threats at least, the
world needs to usher in an equitable regime that does not
distinguish between nuclear threat to a tiny nation or Super
Power. It is the only basis on which a universal and compulsory
regime can be constructed.

ooo


------------------------------

Date: Sun, 12 Mar 1995 09:05:08 -0800 (PST)
From: Larry Engelmann <ENGE...@SJSUVM1.sjsu.edu>
Subject: Re: Arms-Discussion Digest V13 #1

How the atomic bomb was used as "an article of persuasion" at the
Potsdam Conference. Surely, you jest. President Truman's diary
entries are available as is testament of his advisors and as is
Churchill's memoirs. Truman mentioned to Stalin that the US had
a superbomb. Stalin responded, reflexively, that he hoped they
would use it. End of conversation. I am not sure what
conclusions might be drawn from that. Certainly the word
persuasion would not enter into it, would it? On the way home,
on board ship, Truman received word that the bomb had been
dropped. Bombs. I suppose you could look at the recent popular
biography of Truman entitled "Truman" by David McCulloch, to get
the most recent discussions over this.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 21 Feb 1995 01:25:03 +0000 (GMT)
From: asc...@husc.harvard.edu (Aram Schvey)
Subject: Harvard Model UN Simulation in Geneva

I am posting this message to bring to your attention a United
Nations simulation that will be held in Geneva, on March 26-29.
The conference is perfect for anyone who has a passion for either
international politics or foreign affairs.

The simulation will bring together over two hundred university
students and young professionals from more than forty different
countries. Last year we had delegates from the continents of
Europe, Africa, Australia, Asia, and North America. There are
nine committees at this year's conference including the Security
Council, the International Monetary Fund (Executive Board), the
Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, the United
Nations Development Programme, the International Court of
Justice, the United Nations Environment Program, the Social,
Humanitarian and Cultural Committee, the Special Political
Committee, and the Commission on Human Rights. Each committee
will discuss two challenging problems that face the real United
Nations -- for example, the International Court of Justice will be
examining the legality of the embargo against the former
Yugoslavia. The advantage of an international conference of this
sort is that most countries are represented by one of their
citizens; this adds a degree of realism not found at other
conferences.

Aside from the opportunity to discuss international politics and
foreign affairs, the conference allows you to meet a diverse
group of people from around the globe. The interplay of
different cultures and the learning that takes place outside of
the conference halls are truly amazing. If this conference
interests you and you would like more information please forward
e-mail to the following address: wm...@fas.harvard.edu or call/fax
the following number: (617)-493-4300; please add (011) if you are
calling from outside the United States. I apologize to anyone
whose time I have wasted. I look forward to hearing from anyone
who is interested; past experience is not necessary.

Sincerely,
Aram Schvey

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 23:40:34 -0500 (EST)
From: Taylor Vinson Ruggles <trug...@osf1.gmu.edu>
Subject: Call For Papers

CALL FOR PAPERS

The Journal of International Legal Studies is accepting articles
for publication in its inaugural issue to be published in April
1995. The Journal is pleased to announce that Professor Anthony
D'Amato of Northwestern University will author an introductory
article entitled "The Path of International Law."

The Journal promises to be a unique legal resource of great
utility to both academics and practitioners. The Journal will
contain three main sections: "International Legal Theory,"
"Multinational Transactions," and "Practical Problems and Current
Developments." The Journal welcomes submissions representing a
variety of perspectives with particular attention given to those
that address the diverse challenges facing the international
legal community today.

In addition to articles, the Journal will also consider for
publication case studies, analyses of proposed legislation or
international agreements, literature surveys, book reviews and
notes. Occasional special issues will be dedicated to important
developments in international law and practice.

Editorial Policy
The Journal of International Legal Studies is a unique
student-edited publication which will enjoy the active support of
an advisory board of academics and practitioners from around the
world. The Editorial Board and Advisory Board will evaluate the
analytical rigor, practical impact and originality of the works
considered for publication.

Submissions
Manuscripts should be sent in English and on a 3.5" HD diskette,
along with a copy of the author's curriculum vitae to:

Taylor V. Ruggles
Lead Articles Editor
Journal of International Legal Studies
George Mason University School of Law
3401 North Fairfax Drive
Arlington, VA 22201-4498

Tel. (703) 993-8067
Fax. (703) 993-8088
email trug...@osf1.gmu.edu

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 06 Mar 1995 15:45:43 +0000 (GMT)
From: ostr...@hookup.net (ostrovsky victor)
Subject: New Mossad home page on WWW

The MOSSAD, Israel's secret intelligence agency.
By Victor Ostrovsky.
A new home page on the WWW
Look into the dark corners of the Mossad.
Read about it's recruitment methods, organization, liaison and more.
Faq is soon to come as is the new info' and Mossad sightings.
Fined out how you can become a member of the Mossad oversight committee.
See you at The Mossad.
The place to look is
http://www.phoenix.ca/mossad
Victor

--------------------------

End of Arms-Discussion Digest
**************************

0 new messages