Page 4 RAIN Summer 1986 Introduction by F. Lansing Scott "The trouble with disarmament," writes Salvador de Madariaga, veteran of many early disarmament negotiations, · "was (and still is) that the problem of war is tackled upside down and at the wrong end. Nations don't distrust each other because they are armed; they are armed because they distrust each other. And therefore to want disarmament before a minimum of common agreement on fundamentals is as absurd as to want people to go undressed in the.winter. Let the weather be warm, and people will discard their clothes readily and without committees to tell them how td undress." Is there a way to promote a "warming of the weather'' in international relations through personal and local action? Can we enhance our own security without .thieatening the security of others and without undermining the very things we are seeking to protect by diverting resources to military production? From · Protest to Proposal In spite of many dire warnings about the unprecedented dangers of nuclear war, in spite of what once appeared to be a - promising Nuclear Freeze movement in America, in spite of all the insightful research and intensive activities on the part of many dedicated individuals and organizations in the American peace movement, the arms race continues unabated. How can this be? One reason may be the heavy ·emphasis of the peace movement on what it is against. It is against nuclear weapons, it is against foreign intervention, it is against the arms race. But in a country that equates nuclear weapons, a · strong military presence abroad, and "being ahead" in the arms race with national security, the peace movement runs the risk of appearing to be against national security. . However, some voices are emerging that take a different approach to the problem~ Instead of simply taking sides in the debate between more weapons and fewer weapons, they are seeking to change the basic terms of the debate. Instead of beginning in opposition to the status 'quo, they _are taking ,a strong stand infa vor of national security, while redefining what constitutes true security in today's world.· Sever~ of these perspectives are represented in the following pages. Although many of these approaches are just beginning to take shape, and by no means ·could be said to consitute a single coherent school of thought, it is possible to·see some general themes.emerging. Here are some of the important ones: •We must broaden .our definition of security, if we are to have anything worth protecting from foreign-threats. Many of today's most serious threats come from within. -Real security means enabling all people to meet their basic needs. That increased levels of military spending is diminishing our ability to meet social needs is well-known and well-documented. . .:.-Real security depends on ecological sustainability. 0Ur national preoccupation with military defense diverts attention and resources from coping with ecological dangers. The fact that military production is demanding ever-increasing amounts of limited resour~es presents an ecological problem in itself. · · . -Real security·means protecting democratic principles and free access to information. Increased militarization demands withholding access to important governmental information in order to "protect national security/' , ·• Instead of relying solely on our ability to win (or even "deter") a ·military conflict, we can minimize the conditions that lead to conflict. -Decrease dependence on far-flung resources. The need to protect oilr access to "strategic,, resources all over the globe is one of the central driving forces of current U.S. military policy. -Decrease America's sha.re ofworld resource consumption. Should we use.military might to protect a level of consumption unattainable by most of the rest of the world? -Shift military arsenals to a strictly defensive posture. Reducing threats to potential adversaries eliminates much of the fuel for the arms race. -Improve international relations through better comm.uni- ~ cations. "Citizen diplomacy,, efforts, international networking, and new communications technologies help break down political and cultural barriers and continue to bring us closer to a "global village." • Make America more defensible through nonmil~tary alternatives. -Minimize vulnerability by decentralizing life support systems. Our present highly centralized systems for the provision of vital needs, such as energy, water, food, data processing, and telecommunications, are very vulnerable to terrorist and other kinds of military attack. -Develop a policy ofnonviolent civilian-based defense. A strategy of widespread citizen noncooperation can deter and defeat invasions without resorting to viol~nce. O o
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTc4NTAz