Jim Springer Page 10 RAIN Oct./Nov. 1982 simple deterrence. Great accuracy is not needed to hold a retaliatory threat against cities. It, and its land-based fellow, the MX, is apparently designed to destroy Soviet military targets and might be used in a first-strike against the Soviet Union. The improvements in missile guidance have given the U.S. an offensive capability that allows for a new, more aggressive approach to "defense." An American president might see fit to launch a pre-emptive nuclear strike in the name of defense and of protecting the "free world." The Defense Department has yet to publicize a rationale for the new-generation missiles that explains why we need them for anything besides a first- stnke capability. The "deterrence" rationale has lost credence now, when invoked to defend the new missiles. The peace activists who attempted to stop the Ohio Restaurant in Poulsbo, Washington have views that receive less exposure than the military's. A tenet espoused by the pacifistic element of the movement is that the cause of arms creation and war is rooted inside each of us rather than in our supposed enemies. Jeanne Clark, a member of Ground Zero, which helped organize the peace blockade, says we need to overcome the "Tridents within ourselves." The Trident exists outside of us becausefirst it exists within us... the violence within us is hidden, hidden so deep that even we do not recognize its existence within us. It exists in our inability to accept differences which leads us to a desire to control. Differences seem to us unmanageable. People are too unpredictable when they are not like me. For many of us there are only two choices: I will make you like I am, or I will destroy you . . . Just as desirefor power over another is a Trident within us, so is the giving of power, cooperating with those who would believe that they have power over us — giving in, giving up. being without hope. It is this hopelessness and helplessness, this giving up of power and submitting to domination which keeps all of us enslaved to nuclear weapons. Pacifist Shelley Douglass, a Ground Zero Center founder who has been often jailed for civil disobedience, also stresses the importance of looking inward. She believes that one's attitude must be correct if actions are to be successful. We cannot say no to Trident out offear, though it may end the world. We cannot say no to Trident out of anger, though it impinges, upon our most basic rights. We can only say no to Trident out of a commitment to life and to love, and a willingness to change, because such commitment is the only alternative to the Trident fleet. To say no to Trident in a spirit of hatred or fear is to perpetuate Trident. To say no to Trident in a spirit of compassion is to begin to end nuclear weapons. These statements express a more direct approach to peace; we will get peace by being peaceful ourselves. If in seeking peace we adopt violence, we will never gain peace. The intuitiveness and simplicity of this argument make it compelling. Clearly it is impossible to attain a goal by promoting its antithesis. But given that the path to take is so obvious, why didn't the killing end centuries ago? Are we destined to war until we can war no more? Is the violence within us unconquerable? Perhaps it is, but we have no choice except to assume that self-control is possible and to set about trying it. For a true and lasting peace to take hold, we must surmount the barriers to peace that exist on many levels, from our shrouded psyches to our armament industries. While pacifism will not be soon embraced by mainstream America, it is a perspective that ought to receive serious consideration in the search for security and peace. Whatever it does embrace, mainstream America is very anxious to get out from under the shadow of nuclear war. Public opinion analyst Louis Harris, in a recent interview with The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (see access below), said he can recall nothing quite like the "urgent hunger for peace" disclosed by his recent polls. He found that 86 percent of the American people would like to see a negotiated nuclear arms reduction agreement between the United States and the Soviet Union. This indicates sentiment against the indirect bombs-for-peace approach in favor of the obvious, direct approach. Such overwhelming support for a reduction agreement makes the present an opportune time for our government to propose innovative and serious solutions to this momentous problem. The Trident submarine threatens any attempt to reach agreement with the Soviets. It, and other new weapons suggest that the military is readying a first-strike strategy against the Soviet Union and make the Soviets, and concerned Americans, extremely wary of our intentions. These weapons should have to be fully justified' to American citizens. If super-accurate missiles are truly necessary for national defense, let the military argue the case and convince Americans. The doubts and fears that first-strike weapons arouse in many Americans are warranted in the absence of any reasonable explanation for their existence. Until the military adequately explains them or ceases deploying them, it can only expect increasing resistance from Americans who abhor the thought of this country initiating the use of nuclear bomte a second time. □□
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTc4NTAz