Sign by emailing FoE Sydney - Nuclear Campaign <nonukes at foesyd.org.au>

My apologies if you get this more than once, due to overlapping lists.
(If you wish to be removed from this list you MUST give me the same email
adress as is on this list, else I cannot locate you.)

Dear All,

On June 4/5, Presidents Clinton and Putin meet in Moscow. High on their
list of topics to talk about are START-III and the ABM treaty.  These talks
come in the wake of the nuclear nonproliferation treaty review conference
at which the nuclear nations pledged to the 'unequivocal and total'
elimination of nuclear weapons under immense pressure from the rest of the

This is a sign - on letter for organisations and parliamentarians,
organised mainly by myself and Commander Robert Green of the World Court
Project, with a great deal of input from Daryl Kimball and Steven Young.

Essentially it asks Clinton and Putin at the Moscow Summit on 4/5 June, to
go for the lowest possible START-III warhead numbers, and not to proceed
with the NMD system.

It reminds them forcefully of the final document from the NPT Revcon which
has just finished, esp where the NMD is concerned.

It's already got the signatures of CDI, WILPF, WCP, Abolition2000, TVC,
Proposition One, PSR, and a number of members of the European Parliament,
the Belgian Parliament and the Australian parliament.

You are urged to sign it as a matter of urgency, given the shortness of
time beween now and the Moscow summit.

+1-202-456-2461, +1-202-456-2883, +1-202-456-6218, 456-6201

+7-095-205-4330, +7-095-206-5173 7-095-205-4219

+7-095-244-3276, +7-095-244-2203

+1-202- 647-6047

+7-095-247-2722, +7-095-293-3323,


Dear Presidents Clinton and Putin,

We the undersigned,  are writing to you in the aftermath of the Review
Conference of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and in view of
your summit meeting in Moscow on June 4-5, with respect to the ratification
of the START-II arms control agreement, the negotiation of a START-III
agreement, and the possible deployment of a National Missile Defence (NMD)
system by the US, with the prospect of the modification of the
Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty.

Your two countries bear a unique responsibility for the security of the
world, as you possess by far the largest share of the world's nuclear

The overwhelming majority of the world's governments and peoples are not
content to see nuclear weapons retained indefinitely by your two nations
(or by the UK, France, China, Israel, India or Pakistan). This has been
shown repeatedly in UN  resolutions  calling for the elimination of nuclear
weapons, and opinion polls supporting the immediate start of negotiations
for a nuclear weapons convention. Support for a nuclear weapons convention
is widespread in many quarters and cannot be dismissed.

Measures discussed at the NPT Review Conference which should form a basis
for your Moscow discussions include:

(1) Unequivocal and Total Elimination

The five recognized nuclear weapon states (NWS) responded to global
concerns expressed at the NPT Review Conference  with a joint statement
pledging an 'unequivocal' commitment to 'ultimate' elimination of nuclear
weapons. Non-nuclear weapon states responded  that they consider the word
'ultimate' to be inadequate, and want an accelerated program of
negotiations toward the total elimination of nuclear weapons.

There are disturbing signs that 'ultimate' in the P5 statement  may  in
fact mean 'forever'.  Documents presented by the US to Russia (the ABM
Treaty 'Talking Points') indicate that the US essentially encouraged Russia
to maintain a large nuclear arsenal on permanent constant alert. This is
exactly the opposite of what needs to happen.

The NWS statement  fell far short of the much stronger commitment expressed
in the 1996 Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice, the
judiciary body of the United Nations, and the world's highest legal
authority. Reaffirming the need to eliminate nuclear weapons in its
interpretation of Article VI of the NPT,  it unanimously stated:

"There exists an obligation to pursue in good faith and bring to a
conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects
under strict and effective international control."

A significantly stronger position than the NWS statement has been adopted
in the final declaration of the NPT Review,  in which the NWS made an
'unequivocal undertaking' to 'accomplish the total elimination of their
nuclear arsenals'.  This position however, represents a bare minimum.

The reality is that the peoples and nations of the world want decisive
action to eliminate nuclear weapons, and they will expect your Moscow
discussions to reflect this new undertaking and to demonstrate evidence of
your compliance with it.

(2) Take US and Russian Nuclear Forces off 'Launch-on-Warning' Status.

The final declaration of the NPT Review Conference contains a commitment to
take 'concrete steps to reduce the operational status of nuclear weapons'.
We therefore urge that both the US and Russia agree immediately to take
nuclear weapons off 'launch-on-warning' status.

The idea of an entirely accidental nuclear war, which 'launch-on-warning'
makes possible, must be intolerable to you, yet it has nearly occurred on a
number of documented occasions. Evidently the US and Russian military were
sufficiently concerned about this last year to establish a joint 'Center
for Y2K Strategic Stability'. With such mutual verification of early
warning information achieved between them, it should be possible to extend
this to monitoring de-alerting of their nuclear forces. Removing nuclear
weapons systems from launch-on-warning status would be the single most
responsible and important step that you could both take in Moscow toward
the complete elimination of nuclear weapons.

(3)Implementation of START-II

The final declaration of the NPT Review Conference contains a commitment to
the implementation of START-II.  This is highly uncertain due to US Senate
opposition to the 1997 ABM (Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty) protocols.
Consequently, both sides should  should agree to  unilateral reciprocal
measures to reduce their deployed strategic nuclear arsenals below START-1
levels in accordance with START-1 verification procedures.


The NPT Review conference has urged both of you to conclude START-III as
soon as possible. We therefore further urge you to work together to  agree
to   irreversible, verifiable, reductions to 1000 warheads or below for
deployed strategic systems, and in addition to verifiable measures to
deactivate and dismantle all remaining tactical nuclear weapons.

If your two countries are to satisfy your obligations under Article VI of
the NPT, and the wishes of the rest of the world, it is clear that you must
join with the other nuclear weapon states in a process that will take your
nuclear arsenals down to zero.

(5)Preserve and Strengthen the ABM Treaty

The final declaration of the NPT Review conference refers to the
'preserving and strengthening' of the ABM treaty.  This and the NWS
statement at the recent NPT Review Conference on the 'maintenance and
strengthening' of the ABM treaty should not be interpreted to mean the
treaty's alteration to allow NMD deployment.

We strongly urge that the US does not deploy a National Missile Defence
(NMD) system,  and that it cease efforts to amend the ABM Treaty to allow
such a deployment.  As indicated by the 'Talking Points', such deployment
merely encourages retention of large nuclear arsenals.

The UN Secretary-General,  New Agenda Coalition,  Non-Aligned Movement,
European Union, the other NWS and others have all  strongly reaffirmed the
importance of retaining the ABM Treaty.  The deployment of a costly system
of unproven and dubious efficacy against a threat that does not yet and may
never exist, will serve only to derail the process of nuclear weapons
elimination to which both the US and Russia are bound as NPT signatories.

The recent NPT Review  shows that the whole world wants you to take
immediate steps toward the elimination of your nuclear arsenals.
Accordingly we urge you in Moscow to make the deepest cuts possible under
START-III, and to proceed swiftly from there to the complete elimination of
nuclear weapons under strict international control.


Bruna Nota, President, Women's International League for Peace and Freedom,

Caroline Lucas MEP, Green MEP for South East England,
Frank Cook MP, Vice-President, NATO Parliamentary Assembly,

Commander Robert D. Green, Royal Navy (Ret'd.), Chair, George Farebrother,
Secy., World Court Project UK,
Hailsham, Sussex, UK.,
Dr. Phyllis Starkey, MP Milton Keynes Southwest, UK.,

Ak Malten, Global Anti-Nuclear Alliance, The Hague, Netherlands,
Eloi Glorieux, MP  Flemish Regional Parliament, Belgium.,
Peter Vanhoutte, MP Greens Belgium, Belgian Defence Committee Member,
Brussels, Belgium.,

Galina Ragouzhina, WISE-Kaliningrad, Russia.,
Natalia Koniachkina, WISE-TOMSK, Russia.,
Alexandra Koroleva, Ecodefense Kaliningrad, Russia.,

Bill Blaikie MP, House Leader, New Democratic Party of Canada,
Neil Arya, President, Physicians for Global Survival, Canada,
David Morgan, President, Veterans Against Nuclear Arms, Vancouver, BC, Canada,
Joyce Lydiard, WILPF-British Columbia, Canada.,

Rear-Admiral Eugene J. Carroll, Jr., US Navy (Ret'd.), Centre for Defence
Information, Washington DC.,
Carah Ong, Coordinator, Abolition-2000, Santa Barbara, Calif.,
Ellen Thomas, Proposition One Committee, Washington DC., US.,
Marylia Kelly, Executive Director, Sally Light, Nuclear Weapons Program
Analyst, Tri-Valley CAREs, Calif.,
Martin Butcher, Director of Security Programs, Physicians for Social
Responsibility, Washington DC., US.,

Kate Dewes, Disarmament and Security Centre, Christchurch, NZ.,

Irene Gale, AM, Australian Peace Committee, Adelaide, SA.,
Tanya Plibersek MP, Federal Member for Sydney, Federal Parliament, Aust.,
John Hallam, Nuclear Campaigner, Friends of the Earth Australia Sydney, Aust.,

John Hallam
Friends of the Earth Sydney,
17 Lord Street, Newtown, NSW, Australia, 2042
Fax (61)(2)9517-3902  ph (61)(2)9517-3903
nonukes at foesyd.org.au