May 1, 2005

May Day 2005
Fight for the Fraternal Unity of the Peoples! One Humanity, One Struggle!
— Statement of the U.S. Marxist-Leninist Organization

Salute to Anti-War Marchers: U.S. Must Disarm Now! Oppose War Plans Against Korea!
Mayors Worldwide Demand: Eliminate Nuclear Weapons
Condoleezza Rice Interviews: U.S. Continues Provocations Against Koreans

For Your Information
Nuclear Weapons States Required to Disarm
Key Provisions of the NPT
Facts About U.S. Nuclear Weapons

Sign the Non-aggression Pact
DPRK Stand on Nuclear Weapons and Six-Way Talks
True Colors of U.S. as Arch Nuclear Criminal Disclosed — Korean Central News Agency

Views on Disarmament
U.S. Nuclear Weapons Policy: Dangerous and Counterproductive — Union of Concerned Scientists
Bush Nuclear Policy Violates International Law, Again — Francis Boyle

30th Anniversary of Defeat of U.S. Imperialism
Hail the Heroic Vietnamese People and Their Great Victory of Liberation


May Day 2005

Fight for the Fraternal Unity of the Peoples! One Humanity, One Struggle!

— Statement of the U.S. Marxist-Leninist Organization —

On this May Day 2005, the U.S. Marxist-Leninist Organization sends a red salute to the workers and communists of all countries. As a contingent of the international working class, we pledge our efforts to contribute to the advance of humanity by organizing to defeat U.S. imperialism. We call on all the workers across the country to join this mighty battle against U.S. reaction and raise high the banner to Fight for the Fraternal Unity of the Peoples!Let all the workers here show their mettle by rejecting the chauvinism of U.S. imperialism and its U.S.-style democracy.

We know first-hand what a fraud this democracy is. It is a democracy that keeps the people out of power and refuses to submit to the will of the people to end U.S. wars of aggression, bring all U.S. troops home, and increase funding here and abroad for social programs. It is a democracy that is launching one assault after the other on the rights of the working class and people, here and abroad, and doing so with a brutality that knows no limits.

U.S. imperialism and its democracy are dragging the world down an ever darker and more reactionary path, threatening all the achievements of humanity. The ruling circles and their monopoly media are working particularly hard to convince American workers that our place is with the empire and against the peoples of the world. This can be seen in the efforts to whip up fear and antagonisms against the Arab peoples, the Koreans, the Mexicans. It can be seen in the efforts to use immigration and so-called "terrorist threats" to pit the workers inside the country against each other and justify repression against any who resist. It can be seen in the unending chauvinism of Bush about "spreading freedom and democracy," a chauvinism designed to convince Americans to support war and aggression abroad.

The government lies about the peoples of the world being the threat are no different than the lies about Iraq and weapons of mass destruction. They serve U.S. empire and threaten humanity. The war against Iraq, like those against Viet Nam and Korea show that it is not the peoples that are the threat but the U.S. government. It is not democracy but brutal war crimes, massacres, enslavement and robbery of the peoples and their resources that the U.S. spreads.

It is the government that is the source of insecurity at all levels and U.S.-empire building that threatens a third world war. It is the working class and people and their defense of their rights, their resistance to repression here and abroad, that are the source of security. This is what conditions today show clearly.

We are One Humanity with One Struggle. We American workers are part of the single international working class, standing as one to defend and advance humanity. The unity of our class depends on building our fraternal unity with the workers and peoples of all lands as this is a decisive weapon to defeat the chauvinism of U.S. imperialism and bring forward a new world that favors humanity.

[TOP]


Salute to Anti-War Marchers

U.S. Must Disarm Now! Oppose War Plans Against Korea!

The U.S. Marxist-Leninist Organization salutes all those coast to coast and worldwide taking their stand against U.S. imperialist war and aggression and its nuclear first-strike plans. We extend a special salute to the large delegation from Japan, taking their stand to abolish nuclear weapons and oppose war in the May 1 actions in New York City. It is fitting that Americans and Japanese are standing together, rejecting the terrorism of the U.S., rejecting its empire building, rejecting its chauvinism against the peoples of the world. Together we represent the united stand of the peoples that there will be no world ruled by U.S. imperialism. We will not permit the triumph of fascism and darkest reaction now being imposed by the U.S. We say, Another World Is Possible! and the organized work of many hundreds of millions resisting reaction is bringing it into being. Let us step up these efforts and build the fraternal unity of the peoples as a vital part of the bulwark against reaction!

As Americans we stand front and center in demanding that the U.S. be the first to disarm and disarm now. We demand that the U.S. contribute to peace by bringing all U.S. troops home now. We call on the U.S. to take the lead in nuclear disarmament and fully support the Mayors for Peace initiative demanding that negotiations to eliminate nuclear weapons start now.

The U.S. is currently targeting the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) for a first-strike nuclear attack, conducting "nuclear war drills" in the area. We call on all concerned about nuclear disarmament and peace to stand as one with the Korean people, north and south, in demanding that the U.S. remove all its nuclear weapons from the Korean peninsula and sign a non-aggression pact with the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. We vehemently oppose the U.S. war plans against the DPRK, and their efforts to promote Japanese militarism and use Japan as a military base for agression against all the peoples of the region. We reject the U.S. efforts to pit the peoples against each other and use our Japanese and Korean brothers and sisters as their soldiers in a U.S. imperilaist war.

We also defend the right of the DPRK to defend itself. So long as the U.S. has nuclear weapons, all other countries have the right to have them. When the U.S. disarms, the rest of the world will do the same. Already, the DPRK has pledged not to use their nuclear weapons for offensive purposes. It is the U.S. that refuses to do so, it is the U.S. that has filled south Korea with nuclear weapons, it is the U.S. that refuses to sign a non-aggression pact, all while claiming it wants peace. So let the U.S. take a stand for peace and eliminate their nuclear weapons in south Korea!

This year marks the 60th anniversary of the brutal U.S. crime of dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan. In the sixty years since that day, the U.S. remains the biggest threat to the world and the main source for a third world war. It has adopted a nuclear first-strike policy and a policy of pre-emptive war. It has declared to the world that all must bow down to U.S. empire building, or face its military wrath. The peoples of the world are rejecting this dictate as these actions show.

The U.S. Conference of Mayors, along with the Mayors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and hundreds more worldwide are urging U.S. President George W. Bush to act in support of the elimination of nuclear weapons at the 2005 UN Review of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) starting May 2. These Mayors recognize their social responsibility to the people of their cities and the world and are organizing to eliminate nuclear weapons, with a focus on the U.S. Many of them are joining in the anti-war, anti-nuke actions taking place, recognizing that it is the people who are decisive in winning these changes.

The U.S. Must Disarm Now! No U.S. Troops Abroad!

[TOP]


Condoleezza Rice Interviews

U.S. Continues Provocations Against Koreans

In recent interviews by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and during her trip to Asia, the U.S. acted to step up its provocations against the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) and the Korean people as a whole. The U.S. is determined to block the powerful movement for reunification developing throughout Korea, south and north. It is threatening a nuclear first strike to achieve its aims.

In an interview with Fox News April 21, Rice reiterated the U.S. refusal to negotiate directly with the DPRK. Rice said the U.S. would only negotiate within the framework of the six-way talks, which includes the U.S., DPRK, China, Russia, Japan and the Republic of Korea.

The DPRK has repeatedly called on the U.S. to sign a non-aggression pact as a means to contribute to peace in the region. It has also pledged not to use its nuclear weapons first and has said they serve as a defensive deterrent to U.S. threats.

It has been a year since the last six-way talks. U.S. threats and provocations against the Koreans, including conducting numerous war games in the region, are the basis for this. The provocations also include the U.S. branding the DPRK as an "outpost of tyranny," a slander no self-respecting nation would accept. The U.S. has so far refused to apologize and indeed has stepped up its threats.

In the more recent interviews Rice threatened to abandon the six-way talks and go to the UN Security Council (UNSC). She said, "Our aim is, indeed, to get the North Koreans to abandon their nuclear weapons ambitions, but we're only going to do that in a context in which they face the entire international community, not just us. That context (the six-way talks) is now there.

"Now, we reserve the right and the possibility of going to the Security Council should it be necessary, of putting other measures in place should it be necessary. I think the North Koreans are not confused about the fact that the United States maintains a significant deterrent against North Korean nuclear weapons if, indeed, they have gotten to that state. I think they are not confused about the fact that we have a very strong military alliance on the Korean Peninsula that is actively deterring North Korean aggression."

The U.S. has an estimated 1000 nuclear weapons in and around south Korea, as well as its bases and thousands of troops. Rice is clearly threatening here to use them against the Koreans in a first-strike attack. The U.S. has also said it will seek sanctions against the DPRK and try to use the UN Security Council for this.

The DPRK has emphasized that along with negotiating a non-aggression pact directly with the U.S., it is prepared to return to the six-way talks. However, they have made clear that the U.S. must provide conditions for these talks. They have also made clear that if the U.S. acts to impose sanctions, it will be considered an act of war.

A spokesman for the DPRK's Foreign Ministry said, "We have declared time and time again that it is our consistent ultimate aim to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula and there is no change in our principled stand to attain this through negotiation. What matters is that there are still no conditions and justification for the DPRK to participate in the six-way talks." He again called on the U.S. to "withdraw its remarks about `an outpost of tyranny' at an early date" as a means to provide the necessary conditions for the talks. He added, "We can never return to the talks nor can we have any form of dealing with the U.S. unless the ill fame of an `outpost of tyranny' is shaken off."

He said, "The U.S. is threatening to refer the nuclear issue to the UNSC" and "take sanctions against the DPRK." He concluded, "The U.S. may bring the nuclear issue to the UNSC, if it wants that so much. But, we make one thing clear: The DPRK will regard the sanctions as a declaration of war. We are fully ready to cope with everything in a do-or-die spirit and have already prepared all countermeasures against the sanctions. We have built the nuclear deterrent force with so much effort despite enormous difficulties in order to effectively cope with the arrogant, outrageous and brigandish method of the U.S. Therefore, we remain undeterred by the reckless remarks of Rice. We know what we should do at the decisive moment and will react to the hardline action of the U.S. with the toughest action."

[TOP]


Mayors Worldwide Demand

Eliminate Nuclear Weapons

Below is a statement issued by the U.S. Mayors Conference in 2004 and now being circulated worldwide by Mayors for Peace, calling on the U.S. to immediately begin negotiations to eliminate nuclear weapons. The demands will be presented during the review of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) at the UN the week of May 2nd.

Mayoral Statement in Support for the Commencement of Negotiations on the Elimination of Nuclear Weapons

I,_____,Mayor of _____ concur with the following resolution adopted by acclamation on 28 June 2004 by the U.S. Conference of Mayors, which represents over one thousand of the largest cities in the United States:

Support for the Commencement of Negotiations on the Elimination of Nuclear Weapons

1. WHEREAS, as long as nuclear weapons exist, cities around the world will be vulnerable to instantaneous devastation on a scale exceeding even that experienced by Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945; and

2. WHEREAS, a nuclear war would devastate many cities, an accidental missile launch would devastate several cities, and use of a nuclear weapon by terrorists would devastate a city; and

3. WHEREAS, any nuclear attack would obliterate City Hall and all emergency response mechanisms rendering any city planning for such a disaster utterly futile; and

4. WHEREAS, the world's foremost line of defense against nuclear dangers is the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) which is currently in its seventh review cycle, with all parties to the treaty scheduled to meet next May to ensure that the treaty is being fully implemented; and

5. WHEREAS, all other weapons of mass destruction have been prohibited by international agreement and are being eliminated under international control, and the nuclear-weapon states party to the NPT have undertaken to pursue negotiations in good faith on nuclear disarmament; and

6. WHEREAS, the International Court of Justice unanimously found in 1996 that all states were obliged to bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective international control; and

7. WHEREAS, the World Conference of Mayors for Peace has launched an international campaign calling on the 2005 NPT Review Conference to launch negotiations on the elimination of nuclear weapons, to be concluded by 2010 and fully implemented by 2020, also known as the 2020 Vision; and

8. WHEREAS, weapons of mass destruction have no place in a civilized world,

9. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the U.S. Conference of Mayors calls upon the U.S. President to support a decision by the 2005 NPT Review Conference to commence negotiations on the prohibition and elimination of nuclear weapons and nuclear-weapon-related materials, and

10. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the U.S. Conference of Mayors shall remain engaged in this matter until our cities are no longer under the threat of nuclear devastation.

I, hereby, join in calling upon the U.S. President to support a decision by the 2005 NPT Review Conference to commence negotiations on the prohibition and elimination of nuclear weapons and nuclear-weapon-related materials; and personally resolve to remain engaged in this matter until my city is no longer under the threat of nuclear devastation. (the international version read: I, hereby, call upon the Head of Government of my country to support a decision by the 2005 NPT Review Conference to initiate negotiations on the achievement and maintenance of a nuclear-weapon-free world.)

(Signed)

[TOP]


For Your Information

Nuclear Weapons States Required to Disarm

The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), passed in 1968, calls on the five officially recognized nuclear-weapons states (the U.S., Russia, Britain, France, and China) to "pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament," (Article VI). In 2000, the five states committed themselves to an "unequivocal undertaking…to accomplish the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals."

It is well-known that the U.S. and Russia still have the largest arsenals by far, with the U.S. the main state continuing to build new nuclear weapons, such as the tactical "bunker-busters" and others. The U.S., while itself refusing to disarm, is demanding that no other state acquire nuclear weapons. The U.S. is currently estimated to have 5,968 strategic warheads, more than 1,000 operational tactical weapons, and approximately 3,000 reserve strategic and tactical warheads.

Russia is said to have 4,978 strategic warheads, approximately 3,500 operational tactical warheads, and more than 11,000 stockpiled strategic and tactical warheads.

China is estimated to have more than 100 warheads, France about 350 and Britain less than 200.

[TOP]


Key Provisions of the NPT

Under Article I, the nuclear weapon states [the U.S., Russia, Britain, France and China] undertake not to transfer to any recipient whatsoever nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, and not to assist encourage or induce any non-nuclear-weapon state to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.

Under Article II, each non-nuclear-weapon state pledges not to receive, manufacture, or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices; and not to seek or receive assistance in their manufacture.

Article III obliges each non-nuclear-weapon state to accept comprehensive international safeguards through agreements negotiated with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The intent of these safeguards is to deter and detect the diversion of nuclear material for nuclear explosive purposes.

Under Article IV, parties may engage in peaceful nuclear programs in a manner consistent with Articles I and II and are expected to assist the nuclear programs of other parties, with special attention to the needs of developing countries.

Article VI obligates all parties to pursue good-faith negotiations on effective measures relating to ending the nuclear arms race at an early date, to nuclear disarmament, and to achieving a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.

Article VII recognizes the right of any group of states to conclude regional treaties ensuring the total absence of nuclear weapons in their respective territories.

Article X allows each party, in exercising its national sovereignty, to have the right to withdraw from the Treaty if it decides that extraordinary events, related to the subject matter of this Treaty, have jeopardized the supreme interests of its country. It shall give notice of such withdrawal to all other Parties to the Treaty and to the United Nations Security Council three months in advance. Such notice shall include a statement of the extraordinary events it regards as having jeopardized its supreme interests.

[TOP]


Facts About U.S. Nuclear Weapons

1. Total number and types of nuclear warheads and bombs built, 1945-1990: more than 70,000/65 types

2. Number currently in the stockpile (2002): 10,600 (7,982 deployed, 2,700 contingency stockpile)

3. Estimated 1998 spending (most recent available) on all U.S. nuclear weapons and weapons-related programs: $35,100,000,000; cost of the initial Manhattan Project to build nuclear weapons, (through August 1945): $20,000,000,000

4. Ballistic missile defense spending in 1965 vs. 1995: $2,200,000,000 vs.$2,600,000,000

5. Number of attack (SSN) and ballistic missile (SSBN) submarines (2002): 53 SSNs and 18 SSBNs

6. Number of secret Presidential Emergency Facilities built for use during and after a nuclear war: more than 75

7. Total number of U.S. nuclear weapons tests, 1945-1992: 1,030 (1,125 nuclear devices detonated; 24 additional joint tests with Great Britain); includes 106 in the Pacific, elimination of an island in the Enewetak atoll and 911 tests in Nevada

8. Estimated amount spent between October 1, 1992 and October 1, 1995 on nuclear testing activities: $1,200,000,000. Number of tests: 0

9. Total cost of the Aircraft Nuclear Propulsion (ANP) program, 1946-1961: $7,000,000,000. Total number nuclear-powered planes built: 0

10. Volume in cubic meters of radioactive waste resulting from weapons activities: 104,000,000

11. Number of high level radioactive waste tanks in Washington, Idaho and South Carolina: 239

12. Number of U.S. nuclear bombs lost in accidents and never recovered: 11

13. States with the largest number of nuclear weapons (in 1999): New Mexico (2,450), Georgia (2,000), Washington (1,685), Nevada (1,350), and North Dakota (1,140)

14. Total known land area occupied by U.S. nuclear weapons bases and facilities: 15,654 square miles (larger than Massachusetts, New Jersey and Washington, D.C. combined)

15. Minimum number of classified pages estimated to be in the Department of Energy's possession (1995): 280 million

(The data above was obtained from the "U.S. Nuclear Weapons Cost Study Project" at: http://www.brook.edu/fp/projects/nucwcost/weapons.htm

[TOP]


DPRK Stand on Nuclear Weapons and Six-Way Talks

The following text is the full statement released in February by the Democratic People's Republic of Korea's KCNA news agency. It elaborates on the many U.S. provocations against the DPRK, the DPRK's goal to eliminate nuclear weapons on the Korean peninsula, its right to have nuclear weapons as a defensive deterrent, and the necessity for the U.S. to stop its hostile stand as the next step toward resuming the six-way talks, held in China, between the U.S., DPRK, China, Russia, Japan and the Republic of Korea.

* * *

Pyongyang, February 10 (KCNA) — The Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) Ministry of Foreign Affairs released a statement Thursday to clarify its stand to cope with the grave situation created by the US hostile policy toward the DPRK.

The statement says: The second-term Bush administration's intention to antagonize the DPRK and isolate and stifle it at any cost has become quite clear.

As we have clarified more than once, we justly urged the US to renounce its hostile policy toward the DPRK whose aim was to seek the latter's "regime change" and switch its policy to that of peaceful co-existence between the two countries. We have closely followed with patience what policy the second-term Bush regime would shape after clarifying the stand that in that case it would be possible to solve the nuclear issue, too.

However, the administration turned down our just request and adopted it as its policy not to co-exist with the DPRK through the president's inaugural address and the state of the union address and the speech made by the secretary of State at the Congress hearing to get its approval, etc.

The remarks made by senior officials of the administration clarifying the official political stance of the US contained no word showing any willingness to co-exist with the DPRK or make a switchover in its policy toward it.

On the contrary, they have declared it as their final goal to terminate the tyranny, defined the DPRK, too, as an "outpost of tyranny" and blustered that they would not rule out the use of force when necessary.

And they pledged to build a world based on the US view on value through the "spread of American style liberty and democracy."

The true intention of the second-term Bush administration is not only to further its policy to isolate and stifle the DPRK pursued by the first-term office but to escalate it. As seen above, the US has declared a new ideological stand-off aimed at a "regime change" in the DPRK while talking much about "peaceful and diplomatic solution" to the nuclear issue and the "resumption of the six-party talks" in a bid to mislead the world public opinion.

This is nothing but a far-fetched logic of gangsters as it is a good example fully revealing the wicked nature and brazen-faced double-dealing tactics of the U.S. as a master hand at plot-breeding and deception.

The DPRK has clarified its stand that it would not pursue anti-Americanism and treat the US as a friendly nation if it neither slanders the political system in the DPRK nor interferes in its internal affairs. It has since made every possible effort to settle the nuclear issue and improve the bilateral relations.

However, the US interpreted this as a sign of weakness, defiled the dignified political system in the DPRK chosen by its people and wantonly interfered in its internal affairs. The US, turning down the DPRK's request to roll back its anti-DPRK hostile policy, a major stumbling block in the way of settling the nuclear issue, treated it as an enemy and, not content with this, totally rejected it, terming it "tyranny." This deprived the DPRK of any justification to negotiate with the U.S. and participate in the six-party talks.

Is it not self-contradictory and unreasonable for the US to urge the DPRK to come out to the talks while negating its dialogue partner? This is the height of impudence.

The US now foolishly claims to stand by the people in the DPRK while negating the government chosen by the people themselves. We advise the US to negotiate with dealers in peasant markets it claims they are to its liking or with representatives of "the organization of north Korean defectors" on its payroll if it wishes to hold talks.

Japan is now persistently pursuing its hostile policy toward the DPRK, toeing the US line.

Moreover, it fabricated the issue of false remains over the "abduction issue" that had already been settled in a bid to nullify the DPRK-Japan Pyongyang Declaration and stop any process to normalize diplomatic relations with the DPRK. How can we sit at the negotiating table with such a party?

It is the trend of the new century and wish of humankind to go in for peace, co-existence and prosperity irrespective of differing ideology, system and religious belief.

It is by no means fortuitous that the world people raise their voices cursing and censuring the Bush administration as a group pursuing tyranny prompted by its extreme misanthropy, swimming against such trend of the world.

We have shown utmost magnanimity and patience for the past four years since the first Bush administration swore in.

We can not spend another four years as we did in the past four years and there is no need for us to repeat what we did in those years.

The DPRK Foreign Ministry clarifies as following to cope with the grave situation created by the US hostile policy toward the DPRK:

First. We have wanted the six-party talks but we are compelled to suspend our participation in the talks for an indefinite period till we have recognized that there is justification for us to attend the talks and there are ample conditions and atmosphere to expect positive results from the talks.

The present deadlock of the six-party talks is attributable to the US hostile policy toward the DPRK.

There is no justification for us to participate in the six-party talks again given that the Bush administration termed the DPRK, a dialogue partner, an "outpost of tyranny", putting into the shade the hostile policy, and totally negated it.

Second. The US disclosed its attempt to topple the political system in the DPRK at any cost, threatening it with a nuclear stick. This compels us to take a measure to bolster its nuclear weapons arsenal in order to protect the ideology, system, freedom and democracy chosen by its people.

It is the spirit of the Korean people true to the Songun politics to respond to good faith and the use of force in kind.

We had already taken the resolute action of pulling out of the NPT and have manufactured nukes for self-defense to cope with the Bush administration's evermore undisguised policy to isolate and stifle the DPRK.

Its nuclear weapons will remain nuclear deterrent for self-defense under any circumstances.

The present reality proves that only powerful strength can protect justice and truth.

The US evermore reckless moves and attempt to attack the DPRK only reinforce its pride of having already consolidated the single-minded unity of the army and people and increased the capability for self-defense under the uplifted banner of Songun. The DPRK's principled stand to solve the issue through dialogue and negotiations and its ultimate goal to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula remain unchanged.

[TOP]


True Colors of U.S. as Arch Nuclear Criminal Disclosed

— KCNA, April 21, 2005 —

Pyongyang, DPRK, April 21 (KCNA) — Rodong Sinmun Thursday carries a lengthy signed article laying bare the true colors of the U.S. imperialist aggressors as the arch nuclear criminal in the world. The article says: The real nature of the U.S. as the world's arch nuclear criminal found a vivid expression in the fact that it singled out a preemptive nuclear attack as its basic military strategy for world domination after the Sept. 11 incident and has since contemplated the use of nukes as conventional weapons, regarding all other countries of the world as targets of its nuclear attack.

The DPRK is the main target of the U.S. strategy of preemptive attack and its strategy of preemptive nuclear attack. As the U.S. imperialists suffered a shameful defeat in the last Korean war, they have worked hard to stifle the DPRK through the use of nukes. To this end, they have shipped at least 1,000 nuclear weapons of different types into south Korea, turning it into the biggest nuclear outpost in the Far East and incessantly increasing the nuclear threat to the DPRK. The U.S. is, therefore, chiefly to blame for having exacerbated the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula.

The U.S. imperialists have staged ceaseless nuclear war exercises targeted against the DPRK with huge nuclear strike means involved, openly threatening to use them in the event of an "emergency" on the Korean Peninsula. This has increased the danger of a nuclear war on the peninsula. The U.S.-south Korea joint military exercises, a combination of "RSOI" and "Foal Eagle," staged last March in south Korea, were reckless large-scale nuclear war exercises in preparation for a preemptive nuclear strike at the DPRK.

It is self-evident that the DPRK can not remain a mere onlooker given the fact that the U.S. is persistently pursuing its policy to stifle the DPRK with nukes. It was the U.S. that compelled the DPRK to have access to nuclear weapons and Washington is chiefly to blame for standing in the way of the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. The DPRK's possession of nuclear weapons is an exercise of its legitimate right to self-defense. It is a measure for just defense as it is aimed to avert a war and protect its ideology and system, freedom and democracy from the U.S. increasing nuclear threat and its attempt at preemptive nuclear attack. It is in full line with the principle of defending national sovereignty and the requirements of international law for preventing war and ensuring peace.

The nuclear issue between the DPRK and the U.S. can find a smooth solution if the U.S. stops uttering such empty words as "it has no intention of invading north Korea" devoid of any guarantee and takes such trustworthy measures in practice as rolling back its hostile policy to stifle the DPRK with nukes and making a switchover to a policy of peaceful coexistence with it. Whether the U.S. makes a switchover in its policy toward the DPRK or not is a touchstone showing whether it truly wants the settlement of the nuclear issue between them and the denuclearization of the peninsula or not.

If the peninsula is to be nuclear-free, it is necessary to clear south Korea and its vicinity of all the U.S. nuclear weapons and the U.S. threat of a nuclear war and eliminate all possibilities of south Korea going nuclear. This is a focal point and the master key to denuclearizing the peninsula. The U.S. is loudmouthed about "non-proliferation of nuclear weapons" but it is, in fact, chiefly accountable for fostering the nuclear proliferation. Proceeding from its biased stand, the U.S. has connived at, encouraged and cooperated with those forces toeing its line and its allies in the development and possession of nukes. But it has pulled up those countries that incurred its displeasure over their "nuclear issues" and kicked up a noisy racket of pressure in a bid to internationalize those issues.

If any alliance with the U.S. is used as standards by which to handle the nuclear issue, then the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty would be invalid. As a matter of fact, the double standards applied by the U.S. in handling the nuclear issue are turning the NPT into an irrelevant dead document.

What merits particularly serious attention is that the start of a global thermo-nuclear war by the U.S. is no longer an assumption but may become a reality. The internal and external situation of the U.S. is not good. The U.S. economy is in the grip of a crisis due to the increasing burden of military spending and the escalating "war on terrorism." Its financial and trade deficits are swelling faster than ever before and the bankruptcy of enterprises and the depression of production are going from bad to worse. The American society is threatened with the nightmare of terrorism and horror and pervaded with an atmosphere of internal division. The U.S. stands more isolated internationally for its high-handed practices and unilateralism. It is seeking a way out of this serious crisis by igniting a nuclear war. In the past the U.S. nuclear attack was targeted against one or two cities of a country but now the world has, in fact, become the target of the nuclear war to be provoked by the U.S. Herein lies the great danger of its strategy of preemptive nuclear attack.

[TOP]


U.S. Nuclear Weapons Policy: Dangerous and Counterproductive

— Union of Concerned Scientists, September, 2004 —

The United States administration is pursuing nuclear weapon policies that are dangerously out of step with the security needs of the United States and the world, and completely out of sync with U.S. public opinion.

While maintaining much of its Cold War nuclear arsenal and posture, the United States is also pursuing development of new nuclear capabilities, and holding open the possibility of resuming nuclear testing. At the same time, U.S. nuclear weapons policies are undermining the U.S. goal of constraining the global spread of nuclear weapons.

U.S. Cold War arsenal is alive and well. Currently the United States maintains some 6,000 nuclear weapons in its active arsenal, with an additional 4,000 in lower states of readiness. Russia has roughly 8,000 active nuclear weapons, and an additional 9,000 intact weapons. To put these numbers into context, fewer than 200 of these weapons could devastate either country.

In May 2002, President George W. Bush proudly announced that: "President Putin and I have signed a treaty that will substantially reduce our strategic nuclear warhead arsenals to the range of 1,700 to 2,200, the lowest level in decades. This treaty liquidates the Cold War legacy of nuclear hostility between our countries."

Unfortunately, Bush's announcement does not match the reality. Under this 2002 Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty (SORT), also known as the Moscow Treaty, both countries will reduce their deployed strategic nuclear weapons to roughly 2,000 by December 31, 2012, at which point the treaty will expire. Moreover, the treaty does not require the dismantlement of a single warhead or delivery system and there are no verification requirements. Each country is free to retain as many stored warheads for rapid redeployment as it wishes.

Nor does the treaty cover "tactical" nuclear weapons, which are deployed on short range missiles or would be delivered by airplanes, and are intended for use in Europe in the event of a conventional war. The United States continues to maintain tactical nuclear weapons in different European countries, and Russia has many thousands, some of which are poorly guarded. This is especially dangerous since these weapons are small and relatively portable, making them an attractive target for terrorists seeking to acquire nuclear weapons.

The Bush administration plans to maintain some 6,000 warheads indefinitely and will retain its 2,000 deployed warheads on alert, able to be launched within a matter of minutes. Many of Russia's warheads will also remain on alert, perpetuating the real risk of accidental and inadvertent launch. Such a launch would be devastating. Instead of "liquidating the Cold War legacy," this treaty has effectively locked in the most dangerous leftover Cold War threat.

Further, the Bush administration intends to expand the U.S. nuclear weapons production capacity. It is planning to build a Modern Pit Facility that could annually produce 125 to 450 plutonium "pits," which are the cores of modern nuclear weapons. According to the administration, a key purpose of this facility is to provide a more "agile" production capability if the United States decided to manufacture newly designed pits.

These policies are dramatically inconsistent with American public opinion. When asked how many nuclear weapons the United States needs to deter other countries from attacking, the median response was 100 — a far cry from the 6,000 the United States has and plans to maintain. Some 72% think nuclear weapons reduced under an agreement should be destroyed and not simply dismantled so they could be reassembled later. And 82% think the United States should work to reduce the number of nuclear weapons on high alert.[1]

New nuclear weapons capabilities and roles. Largely outside of public debate, the Bush administration has been promoting new roles for nuclear weapons. In December 2001, the administration issued a provocative Nuclear Posture Review calling for the development of new, more usable nuclear weapons and for maintaining an option to use nuclear weapons first even against non-nuclear weapon states. Since then, the Bush administration has further articulated its nuclear use doctrine, asserting in several documents that the United States has the right to use nuclear weapons preemptively — in peacetime and on its own authority — to stop states from acquiring nuclear, chemical or biological weapons.

In parallel, the administration has also sought congressional funding for development of new nuclear weapons capabilities. The Energy Department has begun work to develop a nuclear "bunker-buster"— the so-called Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator, a modification of a high-yield nuclear weapon that would be designed to penetrate the earth before detonating, with the purpose of destroying underground bunkers, including those containing chemical or biological agents. However, analysis by independent scientists, including a former director of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, shows that these weapons would be far more likely to disperse than destroy any chemical or biological agents, and would generate extensive nuclear fallout.

The Energy Department has also initiated an "Advanced Concepts" research program to explore a wide variety of new kinds of nuclear weapons or modifications. One possibility is development of a so-called "mini-nuke"—a weapon with a yield of less than 5 kilotons. Some have promoted this smaller weapon as more "useable." At the request of the administration, last year Congress repealed a 1994 law that prohibited development of any nuclear weapons below 5 kilotons. However, even such "low-yield" nuclear weapons are very powerful and destructive. (The weapon that destroyed Hiroshima had a yield of 10-15 kilotons.) Moreover, the use of any nuclear weapon would breech an important barrier between conventional and nuclear weapons.

Again, U.S. nuclear policy is contrary to U.S. public opinion. The vast majority of Americans reject the idea of using nuclear weapons preemptively: 81% either believe the United States should never use nuclear weapons or should do so only in response to a nuclear attack. And 65% think the United States should not develop new types of nuclear weapons.

A Resumption of Nuclear Weapons Testing? The United States has signed but not ratified the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), which prohibits all nuclear explosive tests. Since 1992, the United States has also observed a moratorium on nuclear testing. President Bush has said he will not ask the Senate to ratify the treaty and that the United States may even seek to resume nuclear testing.

The administration's Nuclear Posture Review calls for reducing the time required for the United States to resume nuclear weapons testing. Accordingly, Congress has approved funds to reduce this time from 2-3 years (currently the maximum required for a diagnostically meaningful test) to 18 months. Moreover, if the United States decides to deploy newly designed nuclear weapons, these weapons would likely first undergo nuclear explosive testing.

Consistent with the polling results above, a large majority of Americans—87%—think the United States should participate in the CTBT.

A rejection of arms control as a policy tool. After signing the Moscow Treaty, President Bush made clear that this was the last nuclear arms control agreement the United States would take part in. Instead the United States would decide unilaterally, based on its own security needs, the level of its nuclear forces. The administration's policy on the CTBT also indicates its disdain for agreements that constrain U.S. behavior.

More recently, the Bush Administration undercut another treaty—the fissile material cutoff treaty (FMCT), which would halt the further production of fissile materials for nuclear weapons purposes. This treaty would have no practical effect on the United States and Russia, which retain enormous stockpiles of excess material from dismantled weapons. Instead, it would prevent countries like India and Pakistan from further expanding their arsenals. Such a treaty has been under consideration at the conference on disarmament for over ten years, with the United States as a strong supporter and at the May 2000 Review Conference of the NPT, and the United States has been a strong supporter. The Bush administration has now departed from previous U.S. policy and asserts that an FMCT cannot be "effectively verifiable." This new position throws a monkey wrench into international FMCT efforts and puts the United States at odds with many of its key allies, including Australia, Canada, and Japan.

U.S. policy undermines U.S. nonproliferation goals. There are several ways in which these nuclear weapon policies undermine the U.S. goals of preventing other countries from acquiring nuclear weapons, and of encouraging the new weapon states of India and Pakistan to freeze and roll back their weapon programs.

NPT obligations unfulfilled. These policies run completely counter to U.S. obligations under the 1970 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT)—the linchpin international treaty that maintains an important political barrier to a decision by other countries to "go nuclear." The underlying premise of the NPT, as spelled out in its Article VI, is that in exchange for other countries forgoing the development of nuclear weapons, the nuclear weapon states—including the United States—will pursue nuclear disarmament. Instead, the United States is maintaining an enormous arsenal and developing new nuclear weapons capabilities and roles for its nuclear weapons.

Moreover, in 1995 the 182 non-nuclear weapon states agreed to extend the NPT for an indefinite duration based on the promise made by the United States and other nuclear weapon states that a CTBT would soon be finalized. The U.S. failure to ratify the CTBT has both political and practical ramifications. Because the United States lobbied hard for an indefinite extension, its failure to support the CTBT is particularly a slap in the face of the world community. And without U.S. ratification, the treaty cannot enter into force. All U.S. NATO allies and Russia have ratified this treaty and are working for its entry into force.

The failure of the United States to take seriously its obligations under the NPT undermines whatever authority and political persuasion it might otherwise have.

New incentives to go nuclear. To add incentives for countries to join the NPT, the five nuclear weapon states have issued "negative security assurances" that they will not use their nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapon states that are NPT members, unless first attacked. A U.S. policy that asserts the right to preemptively use nuclear weapons removes this incentive for countries to remain non-nuclear. Even worse, it conveys a clear message to present and potential future adversaries of the United States: spare no effort to acquire nuclear weapons, since this is the only way to deter the preemptive use of U.S. nuclear weapons.

Resumed U.S. nuclear testing would set off new round of tests. If the United States were to shatter the current worldwide moratorium by conducting a test, undoubtedly other countries would follow suit — including Russia and China. For countries such as India and Pakistan, further testing would allow them to augment their current capabilities and could inspire a regional arms race.

Any U.S. nuclear test would be greeted by resounding political condemnation from the international community. This could make necessary cooperative efforts on priorities such as preventing and combating terrorism more difficult.

An Alternative U.S. Nuclear Posture. It is important for Congress and U.S. citizens to demand that the United States move away from its outdated and dangerous Cold-war nuclear posture, and instead comply with its treaty obligations and work cooperatively with other nations to strengthen the nonproliferation regime.

UCS has urged an alternative U.S. nuclear posture for this decade, one that would both reduce existing nuclear threats and enhance the nonproliferation regime, as detailed in the report Toward True Security. Its recommendations include:

U.S. adoption of a nuclear no-first-use policy that the sole purpose of U.S. nuclear weapons is to deter and, if necessary, respond to the use of nuclear weapons by another country;

U.S. rejection of rapid-launch options, and a change in deployment practices to provide for the launch of US nuclear forces in hours or days rather than minutes;

The elimination of all U.S. "tactical" nuclear weapons, intended for use on the battlefield;

Verified unilateral U.S. reductions to a total of 1,000 strategic warheads (including deployed and stored), accompanied by verified warhead dismantlement;

A U.S. commitment to further reductions in the number of nuclear weapons, on a negotiated and verified multilateral basis;

The prompt ratification of the nuclear Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.

[1] Poll numbers throughout this article are from "Americans on WMD Proliferation," Program on International Policy Attitudes, University of Maryland and Knowledge Networks, April 15, 2004.

[TOP]


Bush Nuclear Policy Violates International Law, Again

— Francis Boyle, March 14, 2002 —

Writing in the March 10, 2002 edition of the Los Angeles Times, defense analyst William Arkin revealed the leaked contents of the Bush Jr. administration's Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) that it had just transmitted to Congress on January 8.

The Bush Jr. administration has ordered the Pentagon to draw up war plans for the first-use of nuclear weapons against seven states: the so-called "axis of evil": Iran, Iraq, and North Korea; Libya and Syria; Russia and China, which are nuclear armed.

This component of the Bush Jr. NPR incorporates the Clinton administration's 1997 nuclear war-fighting plans against so-called "rogue states" set forth in Presidential Decision Directive 60.

These warmed-over nuclear war plans targeting these five non-nuclear states expressly violate the so-called "negative security assurances" given by the United States as an express condition for the renewal and indefinite extension of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) by all of its non-nuclear weapons states parties in 1995. Yet this new NPR has delivered yet another serious blow to the integrity of the entire NPT Regime.

Equally reprehensible from a legal perspective is the NPR's call for the Pentagon to draft nuclear war-fighting plans for first nuclear strikes:

• against alleged nuclear/chemical/biological "materials" or "facilities";
• "against targets able to withstand non-nuclear attack";
• and "in the event of surprising military developments," whatever that means.

According to the NPR, the Pentagon must also draw up nuclear war-fighting plans to intervene with nuclear weapons in wars:

• between China and Taiwan;
• between Israel and the Arab states;
• between Israel and Iraq;
• and between North Korea and South Korea.

It is obvious upon whose side the United States will actually plan to intervene with the first-use nuclear weapons. Quite ominously, today the Bush Jr. administration accelerates its plans for launching an apocalyptic military aggression against Iraq, deliberately raising the spectre of a U.S. first-strike nuclear attack.

The Bush Jr. administration is making it crystal clear to all its chosen adversaries around the world that it is fully prepared to cross the threshold of actually using nuclear weapons that has prevailed since the U.S. criminal bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.

Yet more proof of the fact that the United States government has abandoned "deterrence" for "compellance" in order to rule the future world of the Third Millennium.

The Bush Jr. administration has obviously become a "threat to the peace" within the meaning of U.N. Charter article 39. It must be countermanded by the U.N. Security Council acting under Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter. In the event of a U.S. veto of such "enforcement action" by the Security Council, then the U.N. General Assembly must deal with the Bush Jr. administration by invoking its Uniting for Peace Resolution of 1950.

There very well could be some itty-bitty "rogue states" lurking out there somewhere in the Third World. But today the United States government has become the sole "rogue elephant" of international law and politics. For the good of all humanity America must be restrained. Time is of the essence!

Francis Boyle is human rights lawyer and a professor of law at the University of Illinois. He is the author of The Criminality of Nuclear Deterrence, published by Clarity Press. He can be reached at: fboyle@law.utcu.edu

[TOP]


30th Anniversary of Defeat of U.S. Imperialism

Hail the Heroic Vietnamese People and Their Great Victory of Liberation

On April 30, 1975, the courageous Vietnamese people defeated U.S. imperialism and sent it fleeing from Viet Nam. The U.S. puppet regime in Saigon collapsed and the brutal U.S. armed aggression was brought to an end with the great victory of the whole Vietnamese people. Despite the armed might of U.S. imperialism and one of the most brutal wars in history, the Vietnamese people showed that a people who are confident in themselves and who use their human and natural resources to open a path for progress can stand up to whatever imperialism throws at them.

Buffalo Forum hails the historic victory of the Vietnamese people and their example of standing undaunted against U.S. imperialism, showing the world that a people fighting for their rights and firmly defending their just cause can win victory. We applaud their achievements since liberation and wish them every success in their on-going struggle for peace, independence and prosperity. We salute the path taken to defend the country's sovereignty and self-reliance, and the continuing spirit of courage and determination shown in tackling with the problems of the present. Celebrated each year on April 30th as Liberation Day, this great victory of the Vietnamese was hailed by all peace and justice-loving people and to this day inspires the peoples of the world with its heroism and determination.

The Vietnamese struggle for liberation stands as yet another model for humanity during this period of dark reaction being imposed on the world by U.S. imperialism. Like those now fighting to liberate Iraq, like the Cubans and Koreans, the Vietnamese fought without flinching for their national liberation, reunification and independence, and won victory on the battlefield. Like the U.S. war against Iraq and other sovereign countries, the Viet Nam war was a crime, a war of intervention and aggression by U.S. imperialism. More than three million Vietnamese were killed and millions more wounded by the U.S. The war was characterized by massacres of civilians, the razing of whole villages and widespread use of chemical and biological weapons. The war left the entire economy and country in ruins.

The U.S. must take responsibility to pay full reparations for the death and destruction inflicted on the people and land of Viet Nam, for the continuing impact of the war today and for punishing all those responsible for these crimes.

The criminal nature of U.S. imperialism is now being completely revealed as crimes are now openly committed and the most basic principles of democratic and international law are shunned, as is the case with Iraq, Cuba, Korea and elsewhere. This shows U.S. imperialism's only answer to crimes like those it committed in Viet Nam is to commit yet more crimes! But neither then nor now can the U.S. hide the fact that it had no business in Viet Nam, has no business in Iraq, nor anywhere else. Like in Viet Nam, the U.S. will fail to defeat the spirit and drive of humanity to end wars of aggression and liberate all of humanity.

[TOP]



Voice of Revolution
Publication of the U.S. Marxist-Leninist Organization
www.usmlo.org
office@usmlo.org