Monday, April 28, 2014

Offener Brief an Bundespräsident Didier Burkhalter "Aufnahme der Krim in die Russische Föderation sei illegal"

Eidgenössisches Departement für auswärtige Angelegenheiten (EDA), 3. April 2014

Verein Impulswelle.ch, Postfach 3156, 5430 Wettingen, team@impulswelle.ch

Ihr Statement, die Aufnahme der Krim in die Russische Föderation sei illegal

(Burkhalter ist gleichzeitig Bundespräsident und Aussenminister der Schweiz sowie Präsident der OSZE)

Sehr geehrter Herr Bundespräsident,

Der nachstehende Offene Brief wird hier eindrucksvoll vorgelesen.

Wir sind erstaunt, dass Sie im Namen der Schweiz öffentlich erklärt haben, dass die politische Anbindung der Krim an die Russische Föderation „illegal“ sei. Sie haben damit nicht nur die Regierung der Russischen Föderation und 90 % der Menschen auf der Krim verärgert und beleidigt, sondern auch erhebliche Teile des Schweizervolkes, die mit dieser Sichtweise gar nicht einverstanden sind.
Die Volksabstimmung in der Region Krim am 16. März 2014 verlief absolut friedlich und entspannt, wie der EU-Parlamentsabgeordnete und OSZE-Wahlbeobachter Ewald Stadler (1) aus Österreich in einem online-Interview detailliert geschildert hat. Die vielen Ordnungskräfte waren nötig, um den grossen Andrang zu den Stimmlokalen in geordnete Bahnen zu lenken, um eine geregelte Stimmabgabe überhaupt zu ermöglichen.
Von Bedrohung, Erpressung oder Wahlfälschung kann also gar keine Rede sein. Herr Stadler konnte dies bei seinem persönlichen Besuch vieler Wahllokale leicht feststellen. Er betonte zudem, dass die meisten Wahlbüros von Frauen geleitet wurden, die ihm bereitwillig und ausführlich all seine Fragen beantworteten. Die gesamte Abstimmung verlief vollkommen rechtmässig – das heisst legal. Es gehört zur Tradition der direkten Demokratie in unserem Land, dass wir Schweizerinnen und Schweizer das Selbstbestimmungsrecht ALLER Völker sehr hoch halten, so wie es in der UNO-Charta festgeschrieben steht.
Grund für diese Abstimmung lieferte die faktische Ausserkraftsetzung der ukrainischen Verfassung durch einen Putsch rechtsgerichteter Faschisten. Nach monatelangen Demonstrationen auf dem Maidan - von den USA mit fünf Milliarden Dollar finanziert und durch deren „NGOs“ organisiert - wurde die vom Volk gewählte Regierung gestürzt. Unter Einschüchterung und der Aufsicht durch Kalaschnikow-Bewaffnete setzte das ukrainische Parlament mit 72 %iger Mehrheit eine „Übergangsregierung“ ein, die in ihrer Zusammensetzung genau den Wünschen der US-Regierung entspricht. Dies entnehmen wir dem veröffentlichten Telefonat von Victoria Nuland mit dem amerikanischen Botschafter Jeffrey Payette in Kiew (2).
Wir betrachten diese Vorgänge mit vollem Recht als illegalen Staatsstreich, im Anschluss an eine jahrelange Destabilisierung der ukranischen Gesellschaft mit Geldern der amerikanischen NED (National Endowment for Democracy) und der deutschen Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung (unter Aufsicht von Bundeskanzlerin Merkel) sowie Organisationen weiterer NATO-Staaten.
Fazit: Der Staatsstreich – d.h. die Absetzung Janukowitschs - war illegal, die Einsetzung der Übergangsregierung kam mit weniger als 75 % der Parlamentsstimmen zustande und ist deshalb ebenso illegal, wenn man sich auf die rechtsgültige Verfassung der Ukraine abstützt.
Die vorsätzliche, gezielte Destabilisierung eines Landes durch ausländische Kräfte ist gemäss UNO-Charta genauso illegal.
Offensichtlich besteht in der „westlichen Wertegemeinschaft“, angeblich „verteidigt“ durch die USA und die NATO, ein erhebliches Interesse daran, einen dritten Weltkrieg zu provozieren.
Während 20 Jahren wurden in Westeuropa Fakten geschaffen, die Russland zwingen, seine Grenzen mit grösserer Wachsamkeit zu schützen. Wir erinnern nur an den Aufbau des NATO-Raketenschilds in den osteuropäischen Nachbarstaaten, nachdem Russland 1990 bereitwillig sein Versprechen ein und den Warschau-Pakt aufgelöst hatte.
Die „westliche Wertegemeinschaft“ tat genau das Gegenteil: Sie hielt ihr Versprechen nicht. Statt die NATO aufzulösen, wurde sie nach Osten erweitert um genau jene Staaten, die man Russland versprach, neutral zu lassen. Das ist Vertragsbruch pur und nach westlichem Verständnis illegal.
Eine der ersten Amtshandlungen der ukrainischen „Übergangsregierung“ war das Verbot von Russisch als Amtssprache. Sofort begann eine Jagd der faschistischen Anhänger Banderas auf ukrainische Politiker und Persönlichkeiten, die aufgrund ihrer politischen Ausrichtung oder wegen ihrer russischen Muttersprache getötet werden sollten.
An einer Pressekonferenz am 1. März 2014 in Frankfurt am Main haben wir Videos gesehen mit Leichen von Menschen, deren Kopf abgeschlagen worden war, daneben Banner mit Hakenkreuzen. Solch grausame Videos waren aus ethischen Gründen in keinem westlichen TV-Sender zu sehen, noch wurde über diese Geschehnisse berichtet.
An der erwähnten Pressekonferenz konnten wir aus erster Hand von Frau Dr. Natalia Vitrenko, Vorsitzende der Progressiven Sozialistischen Partei der Ukraine und Präsidentschaftskandidatin 2004, Vladimir Marchenko, Mitglied des Ukrainischen Parlamentes (1990-2002) und Valeri Sergashov, ehemaliges Mitglied des Regionalparlamentes von Odessa (3) erfahren, wie sehr sich viele Menschen in der Ukraine bedroht fühlen – entweder weil sie jüdisch sind oder Russisch sprechen oder andere politische Überzeugungen vertreten als jene des „Rechten Sektors“.
Sehr geehrter Herr Bundespräsident, wir haben nicht vernommen, dass Sie all diese Handlungen für „illegal“ erklärt hätten. Haben wir vielleicht etwas verpasst oder überhört?? Uns ist wichtig, dass unsere Regierung die Dinge beim wahren Namen nennt und so ihre Glaubwürdigkeit unter Beweis stellt.
Am 18. März 2014 hielt der Präsident der Russischen Föderation, Vladimir Vladimirovitsch Putin, eine feierliche Rede vor der versammelten Staatsduma, die in voller Länge gefilmt wurde. Im Internet konnten wir sie in deutscher und englischer Übersetzung verfolgen. Im Anschluss an seine Rede unterzeichnete Präsident Putin die Dokumente, mit denen dem Wunsch der Halbinsel Krim entsprochen wurde, in die Russische Föderation aufgenommen zu werden.
Daher kann keinesfalls von einer „Aggression“ oder feindlichen „Annexion“ gesprochen werden. Ebenso wenig stellt die Unterzeichnung dieses Vertrages eine Parallele zum Einmarsch Hitlers ins Sudetenland dar, wie dies westliche Medien wiederholt suggerieren in der unwürdigen Absicht, Herrn Putin zu dämonisieren und als Diktator im Stile Adolf Hitlers darzustellen. Dies halten wir für eine inakzeptable Beleidigung des Präsidenten eines befreundeten Staates, mit dem die Schweiz als neutrales Land seit 200 Jahren gute Beziehungen pflegt. Dies nicht nur weil Russland ein wichtiger Energie-Lieferant ist für uns, sondern auch eine Nation mit europäischer Kultur.
Wir erinnern Sie daran, dass die Russische Föderation einen rechtsgültigen Vertrag mit der Ukraine geschlossen hatte, ihre Schwarzmeerflotte und bis zu 25'000 Marine-Soldaten in der Hafenstadt Sewastopol auf der Halbinsel Krim zu stationieren. Russland hat der Ukraine jedes Jahr dafür eine ansehnliche Summe bezahlt, die das Land gewiss gut gebrauchen konnte angesichts des Lebensstandards der Ukrainer, der 50 % desjenigen der Russischen Föderation entspricht. Die russischen Truppen waren also schon lange auf der Krim – sie sind nicht erst „einmarschiert“, wie die NATOMedien ständig wiederholen!
Dieses unsägliche Russland-Bashing in den Medien ist Kriegshetze pur! Wir erwarten von unserem Bundespräsidenten, dass er die Interessen unseres Landes und unserer Bevölkerung mit Nachdruck vertritt – nicht jene der NATO, der US-Regierung und ihren Kriegshetzern.
Da die Schweiz in diesem Jahr den Vorsitz hat in der OSZE, zu der auch die Russische Föderation gehört, erwarten wir von unserer Landesregierung eine besondere Sensibilität für Neutralität.
Wir fassen zusammen:
Nicht die vertragliche Aufnahme der Krim in die Russische Föderation auf Wunsch von 90% der Stimmberechtigten auf der Krim ist illegal, sondern die Destabilisierung der Ukraine durch die 2'200 so benannten „Nichtregierungs-Organisationen“ der NATO-Staaten, allen voran der USA, unter Aufwendung von mehr als 5 Milliarden Dollar, ebenso der anschliessende Staatsstreich in der Ukraine.
Nicht die Volksabstimmung in der Krim war illegal, sondern die Einsetzung der ukrainischen Übergangsregierung in Kiew unter der Kontrolle durch bewaffnete Kräfte und mit weniger als 75 % der erforderlichen Stimmen im Parlament.
Nicht der russische Präsident Vladimir V. Putin ist ein Kriegshetzer oder Diktator, sondern die NATO und deren Führung, gelenkt durch die Regierung der USA und deren Hintermänner in der Bankenwelt. Einmal mehr wird zur Zeit der Versuch gestartet, ein stolzes Land mit einer reichen Kultur in einen ungewollten Krieg zu drängen, um ihm nachher die gesamte Schuld in die Schuhe zu schieben. Das hatten wir bereits in den vergangenen zwei Weltkriegen, mit allen furchtbaren Folgen für Deutschland und ganz Europa. ES REICHT.
Sehr geehrter Herr Bundespräsident, wir bitten Sie mit Nachdruck und aus ganzem Herzen, die Weiterentwicklung dieses NATO-Schreckensszenarios – diesmal mit Russland als vorgeschobenem Schuldigen – mit allen Mitteln der Diplomatie, der Staatskunst und Weisheit zu stoppen. Als Vorsitzender der OSZE haben Sie besondere Mittel in der Hand, die versteckten Absichten der NATO-Staaten, die mehrheitlich pleite sind (USA, Frankreich, Italien, Spanien, England etc) offen zu legen. Da diese nur allzu durchsichtig versuchen, durch einen Krieg neue Verhältnisse zu schaffen, ist es notwendig, die Realisation dieser offensichtlichen Kriegspläne zu verhindern.
Wir wollen kein Afghanistan, keinen Irak und kein Lybien in Europa – denn überall wo die NATO aus angeblich humanitären Gründen eingegriffen hat, herrschen heute Chaos und Elend.
Sie wurden von unserem Parlament als Bundespräsident gewählt, um Gedanken der Wahrheit, Worten der Weisheit und Taten des Friedens zum Durchbruch zu verhelfen. Wir wünschen Ihnen dazu den notwendigen Mut, viel Kraft und die Unterstützung aller wahren Freunde des Friedens.

Mit vorzüglicher Hochachtung und freundlichen Grüssen
Vorstand des Vereins Impulswelle.ch
Doris Honegger-Z. Ruth Frei Werner Frey René Machu
________________
Quelle: www.impulswelle.ch Verein Impulswelle.ch Postfach 3156 5430 Wettingen, team@impulswelle.ch
Die Impulswelle hat noch weitere Videos produziert:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3RBe-9xaKE
Dies ist auch zur Ukraine - eine Fabel im Stil von Animal Farm: Die Mär vom Bär.
Zurück
Posted by at No comments:

Detained OSCE observer released in Ukraine's Slavyansk 28.04.2014 | 01:18


One of the eight European observers being detained by self-defense activists in the eastern Ukraine city of Slavyansk on Sunday evening was escorted to an Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe vehicle and driven away. The two negotiators and the Swedish military inspector boarded a white car with an OSCE logo on it and drove away without any comment to reporters.
The spokesperson for the self-defense activists in Slavyanks said that the observer was released on medical grounds. "He has a mild form of diabetes and so we decided to let him go," she told reporters.

Slavyansk self-defense presents detained OSCE team to media

Self-defense activists in Ukraine's eastern town of Slavyansk on Sunday presented the eight detained European members of an international OSCE military observer mission to a news conference. The eight men, all apparently unhurt, were led into the main room of Slavyansk's town hall occupied by the anti-Maidan movement, where around 60 journalists were assembled, AFP reports. 
At a news conference organized by the self-defense forces, a German member of the observer mission, Colonel Axel Schneider, told reporters he had "not been touched," and that there had been no physical mistreatment of the group.

"All the European officers are in good health and no one is sick," Reuters reports.

OSCE sending team to Slavyansk to seek release of military observers

The OSCE said Sunday that a team of negotiators is heading to Slavyansk in eastern Ukraine to try and secure the release of eight military monitors held by self-defense forces. "They are expected to be in the region Sunday," Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe spokesperson Tatyana Baeva said.
"We hope to be able to provide more information once they arrive and when they start talking, if they start talking," she said, AFP reports.
She was unable to say how many negotiators were heading to the flashpoint eastern town, where the four Germans, one Pole, one Czech, one Swede and one Dane were detained on Friday together with five Ukrainians.
The negotiators being sent form part of a separate, 100-strong special monitoring mission by the Vienna-based pan-European security body who are already on the ground in Ukraine.
Russia, a member of the OSCE, pledged Saturday to "take all possible" steps to secure their release.

OSCE observers report false purpose of visit – Slavyansk people's mayor

The European military observers detained by self-defense forces in the eastern Ukrainian city of Slavyansk were not who they claimed to be and reported a false purpose of the visit, Vyacheslav Ponomarev, the people’s mayor of Slavyansk, said on Saturday, April 26. The detainees said they "have come on a sightseeing tour" but had a map marking the militia’s positions, he said.

"When they asked about the purpose of their visit, they said they had come for a sightseeing tour. In other words, they gave false information from the very beginning," Ponomarev said, adding that they had a map indicating the militia’s positions.

 "Let me tell you that the map alone would be enough to speak about spying," he said.
"The military were on our territory without our permission and were detained of course," he said.
"What we should do with them we will know after we have determined who they are and what brought them here,” Ponomarev said, adding that the detainees were being held in "normal conditions". "One of the military officials has diabetes, but we have necessary medications and food (for him)."
Ponomarev said the supporters of federalisation were ready to exchange the detained military for their comrades being held by the Kiev authorities.
"The Kiev junta is holding our comrades. But we are ready for an exchange if there is such a chance," he said.
Yevgeny Gorbik, a spokesperson for the supporters of federalization, told reporters that the detained military observers had been engaged in intelligence activities, TASS reports.

"The humanitarian group of the (OSCE) mission has denied any relation to them… 

 They (observers) had intelligence agents, cryptograms, and notebooks with secret notes", Gorbik said. "A Bulgarian officer had a notebook with notes in Russian which confirm his intelligence activities and speak of a meeting with agents," he added.

"No charges have been brought against them so far. But they’ve ended up in a company that calls into question the legitimacy of their activities," Gorbik said, adding, "The investigation is underway to find out what they were doing and where."

Posted by at No comments:

OPEN LETTER On Nuclear Disarmament To PRESIDENT OBAMA FROM U.S. ORGANIZATIONS



Mr. President: It’s time to move from talk to action on nuclear disarmament.

April 28, 2014

Dear President Obama,

During the closing session of the Nuclear Security Summit in The Hague on March 25, 2014, you cited a number of concrete measures to secure highly-enriched uranium and plutonium and strengthen the nuclear nonproliferation regime that have been implemented as a result of the three Nuclear Security Summits, concluding: “So what’s been valuable about this summit is that it has not just been talk, it’s been action.”

Would that you would apply the same standard to nuclear disarmament! On April 5, 2009 in Prague, you gave millions of people around the world new hope when you declared: “So today, I state clearly and with conviction America’s commitment to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons.” Bolstered by that hope, over the past three years, there has been a new round of nuclear disarmament initiatives by governments not possessing nuclear weapons, both within and outside the United Nations. Yet the United States has been notably “missing in action” at best, and dismissive or obstructive at worst. This conflict may come to a head at the 2015 Review of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT).

We write now, on the eve of the third Preparatory Committee (PrepCom) meeting for the 2015 Review Conference of the NPT, which will take place at UN headquarters in New York April 28 – May 9, 2014, to underscore our plea that your administration shed its negative attitude and participate constructively in deliberations and negotiations regarding the creation of a multilateral process to achieve a nuclear weapons free world. This will require reversal of the dismal U.S. record.

  • The 2010 NPT Review Conference unanimously agreed to hold a conference in 2012, to be attended by all states in the region, on a Middle East Zone Free of Nuclear and other Weapons of Mass Destruction. The U.S. was a designated convener, and a date was set for December 2012 in Helsinki. The Finnish ambassador worked feverishly, meeting individually with all of the countries in the region to facilitate the conference. Suddenly, on November 23, 2012, the U.S. State Department announced that the Helsinki conference was postponed indefinitely.

  • In March 2013, Norway hosted an intergovernmental conference in Oslo on the Humanitarian Impacts of Nuclear Weapons, with 127 governments in attendance. Mexico hosted a follow-on conference in Nayarit, Mexico in February 2014, with 146 governments present. The U.S. boycotted Oslo and Nayarit. Austria has announced that it will host a third conference, in Vienna, late this year.

  • In November 2012, the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) established an “Open-Ended” working group open to all member states “to develop proposals to take forward multilateral nuclear disarmament negotiations for the achievement and maintenance of a world without nuclear weapons,” and scheduled for September 26, 2013, the first-ever High-Level meeting of the UNGA devoted to nuclear disarmament. The U.S. voted against both resolutions and refused to participate in the Open-Ended working group, declaring in advance that it would disregard any outcomes.

  • The U.S. did send a representative to the UN “High-Level” meeting, but it was the Deputy Secretary for Arms Control, Verification and Compliance, rather than the President, Vice-President or Secretary of State. Worse, the U.S. joined with France and the U.K. in a profoundly negative statement, delivered by a junior British diplomat: “While we are encouraged by the increased energy and enthusiasm around the nuclear disarmament debate, we regret that this energy is being directed toward initiatives such as this High-Level Meeting, the humanitarian consequences campaign, the Open-Ended Working Group and the push for a Nuclear Weapons Convention.”

  • In contrast, Dr. Hassan Rouhani, the new President of Iran, used the occasion of the High-Level Meeting to roll out a disarmament “roadmap” on behalf of the 120 member Non-Aligned Movement (NAM). The roadmap calls for: “early commencement of negotiations, in the Conference on Disarmament, on a comprehensive convention on nuclear weapons for the prohibition of their possession, development, production, acquisition, testing, stockpiling, transfer, use or threat of use, and for their destruction; designation of 26 September every year as an international day to renew our resolve to completely eliminate nuclear weapons;” and “convening a High-level International Conference on Nuclear Disarmament in five years to review progress in this regard.” The NAM roadmap was subsequently adopted by the UNGA with 129 votes in favor. The U.S voted no.

Meanwhile, your Administration’s FY 2015 budget request seeks a 7% increase for nuclear weapons research and production programs under the Department of Energy’s semi-autonomous National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). NNSA’s “Total Weapons Activities” are slated to rise to $8.2 billion in FY 2015 and to $9.7 billion by 2019, 24% above fiscal year 2014. Your Administration is also proposing a $56 billion Opportunity Growth and Security Initiative (OGSI) to be funded through tax changes and spending reforms. OGSI is to be split evenly between defense and non-defense spending, out of which $504 million will go to NNSA nuclear weapons programs “to accelerate modernization and maintenance of nuclear facilities.” With that, your FY 2015 budget request for maintenance and modernization of nuclear bombs and warheads in constant dollars exceeds the amount spent in 1985 for comparable work at the height of President Reagan’s surge in nuclear weapons spending, which was also the highest point of Cold War spending.

We are particularly alarmed that your FY 2015 budget request includes $634 million (up 20%) for the B61 Life Extension Program, which, in contravention of your 2010 Nuclear Posture Review, as confirmed by former U.S. Air Force Chief of Staff, General Norton Schwartz, will have improved military capabilities to attack targets with greater accuracy and less radioactive fallout.1

This enormous commitment to modernizing nuclear bombs and warheads and the laboratories and factories to support those activities does not include even larger amounts of funding for planned replacements of delivery systems – the bombers, missiles and submarines that form the strategic triad, which are funded through the Department of Defense. In total, according to the General Accounting Office, the U.S. will spend more than $700 billion over the next 30 years to maintain and modernize nuclear weapons systems. The James Martin Center places the number at an astounding one trillion dollars. This money is desperately needed to address basic human needs – housing, food security, education, healthcare, public safety, education and environmental protection – here and abroad.

The Good Faith Challenge

This our third letter to you calling on the U.S. government to participate constructively and in good faith in all international disarmament forums. On June 6, 2013, we wrote: “The Nuclear Security Summit process you initiated has been a success. However, securing nuclear materials, while significant, falls well short of what civil society expected following your Prague speech.”2 In that letter, we urged you to you speak at the September 26, 2013 High-Level Meeting on Nuclear Disarmament at the United Nations; to endorse UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s Five-Point Proposal on Nuclear Disarmament; to announce your convening of a series of Nuclear Disarmament Summits; to support extending the General Assembly’s Open-Ended Working Group to develop proposals to take forward multilateral nuclear disarmament negotiations for the achievement and maintenance of a world without nuclear weapons; and to announce that the U.S. would participate in the follow-on conference on the humanitarian impacts of nuclear weapons in Mexico in early 2014.

In our second letter, dated January 29, 2014, we urged that you direct the State Department to send a delegation to the Mexico conference and to participate constructively; and that your administration shed its negative attitude and participate constructively in deliberations and negotiations regarding the creation of a multilateral process to achieve a nuclear weapons free world. And we called on the United States to engage in good faith in efforts to make the Conference on Disarmament productive in pursuing the objective for which it was established more than three decades ago: complete nuclear disarmament; and to work hard to convene soon the conference on a zone free of WMD in the Middle East promised by the 2010 NPT Review Conference.3

Since our last letter, the U.S. - Russian relationship has deteriorated precipitously, with the standoff over the Crimea opening the real possibility of a new era of confrontation between nuclear-armed powers. The current crisis will further complicate prospects for future arms reduction negotiations with Russia, already severely stressed by more than two decades of post-Cold War NATO expansion, deployment of U.S. missile defenses, U.S. nuclear weapons modernization and pursuit of prompt conventional global strike capability.

Keeping Our Side of the NPT Bargain

Article VI of the NPT, which entered into force in 1970, and is the supreme law of the land pursuant to Article VI of the U.S. Constitution, states: “Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes 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, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.”

In 1996, the International Court of Justice, the judicial branch of the United Nations and the highest and most authoritative court in the world on questions of international law, unanimously concluded: “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.”

Forty-four years after the NPT entered into force, more than 17,000 nuclear weapons, most held by the U.S. and Russia, pose an intolerable threat to humanity. The International Red Cross has stated that “incalculable human suffering” will result from any use of nuclear weapons, and that there can be no adequate humanitarian response capacity.4 Declaring that “our nation’s deep economic crisis can only be addressed by adopting new priorities to create a sustainable economy for the 21st century,” the bi-partisan U.S. Conference of Mayors has called on the President and Congress to slash nuclear weapons spending and to redirect those funds to meet the urgent needs of cities.5
We reiterate the thrust of the demands set forth in our letters of June 13, 2013 and January 29, 2014, and urge you to look to them for guidance in U.S. conduct at the 2014 NPT PrepCom. We stress the urgent need to press the “reset” button with Russia again. Important measures in this regard are an end to NATO expansion and a halt to anti-missile system deployments in Europe.

  • We urge you to work hard to fully implement all commitments you made in the Nuclear Disarmament action plan agreed by the 2010 NPT Review Conference and to convene the promised conference on a zone free of WMD in the Middle East at the earliest possible date.

  • We urge you again to take this opportunity to endorse UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s Five-Point Proposal on Nuclear Disarmament, to announce your convening of a series of Nuclear Disarmament Summits, and to engage in good faith in efforts to make the Conference on Disarmament productive in pursuing the objective for which it was established more than three decades ago: complete nuclear disarmament.

  • We call on you to declare that the U.S. will participate constructively and in good faith in the third intergovernmental conference on humanitarian impacts of nuclear weapons to be held in Vienna late this year.

  • As an immediate signal of good faith, we call on your Administration to halt all programs to modernize nuclear weapons systems, and to reduce nuclear weapons spending to the minimum necessary to assure the safety and security of the existing weapons as they await disablement and dismantlement.

Mr. President: It’s time to move from talk to action on nuclear disarmament. There have never been more opportunities, and the need is as urgent as ever.

We look forward to your positive response.

Sincerely,

Initiating organizations:

Jacqueline Cabasso, Executive Director, Western States Legal Foundation

[contact for this letter: wslf@earthlink.net; (510) 839-5877
655 – 13th Street, Suite 201, Oakland, CA 94612]

John Burroughs, Executive Director, Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy

Kevin Martin, Executive Director, Peace Action

David Krieger, President, Nuclear Age Peace Foundation

Joseph Gerson, Director, Peace and Economic Security Program, American Friends Service Committee (for identification only)

Alicia Godsberg, Executive Director, Peace Action New York

Endorsing organizations (national):

Robert Gould, MD, President, Physicians for Social Responsibility

Tim Judson, Executive Director, Nuclear Information and Resource Service

Michael Eisenscher, National Coordinator, U.S. Labor Against the War (USLAW)

Michael McPhearson, Interim Executive Director, Veterans for Peace

David Swanson, WarIsACrime.org

Jill Stein, President, Green Shadow Cabinet

Terry K. Rockefeller, National Co-Convener, United for Peace and Justice

Hendrik Voss, National Organizer, School of the Americas Watch (SOA Watch)

Alfred L. Marder, President, US Peace Council

Robert Hanson, Treasurer, Democratic World Federalists

Alli McCracken, National Coordinator, CODEPINK

Margaret Flowers, MD and Kevin Zeese, JD, Popular Resistance

Bruce K. Gagnon, Coordinator, Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space

David Culp, Legislative Representative, Friends Committee on National Legislation

Rev. Kristin Stoneking, Executive Director, Fellowship of Reconciliation

Kimber J. Heinz, Organizing Coordinator, War Resisters League

Lois Barber, Executive Director, Earth Action

Mary Hanson Harrison, President, Womens International League for Peace and Freedom, US Section

Sister Patricia Chappell, Executive Director, Pax Christi USA

Raphael Sperry, President, Architects/Designers/Planners for Social Responsibility

Lois Barber, Co-founder, 2020 Action

Jack and Felice Cohen-Joppa, Coordinators, The Nuclear Resister

Mary Beth Brangan, James Heddle, Co-Directors, EON, The Ecological Options Network

Lynne Elizabeth, Director, New Village Press

Bruce Stedman, Development Director, Alliance for Nuclear Accountability (for identification only)


Endorsing organizations (by state):

Liz Hourican, CODEPINK Peace Ladies, Arizona

Marylia Kelley, Executive Director, Tri-Valley CAREs (Communities Against a Radioactive Environment) Livermore, California

Blase Bonpane, Ph.D., Director, Office of the Americas, California

Linda Seeley, Spokesperson, San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace, California

Susan Lamont, Center Coordinator, Peace and Justice Center of Sonoma County, California

Chizu Hamada, No Nukes Action, California

Lois Salo, Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom, Peninsula Branch, California

Rev. Marilyn Chilcote, Beacon Presbyterian Fellowship, Oakland, California

Margli Auclair, Executive Director, Mount Diablo Peace and Justice Center. California

Roger Eaton, Communications Chair, United Nations Association-USA, San Francisco Chapter, California

Dr. Susan Zipp, Vice President, Association of World Citizens, San Francisco, California

Phoebe Sorgen, Fukushima Response Bay Area, California

David Hartshough, Executive Director, Peace Workers, California

Carolyn S. Scarr, Program Coordinator, Ecumenical Peace Institute/Clergy and Laity Concerned, California

Lee Siu Hin, National Coordinator, National Immigrant Solidarity Network, California

Lee Siu Hin, Action LA Network, California

Sherry Larsen-Beville, Livermore Conversion Project, California

Mary Harper, Director, Center for Changing Systems, California

Marjorie Lasky, Grandmothers Against War, SF/Bay Area, California

Roberta Medford, Vigil Coordinator, Montrose Peace Vigil, California

Ellen Rosser, President, World Peace Now, California

Bart Ziegler, PhD, President, The Samuel Lawrence Foundation, California

Michael Nagler, President, Metta Center for Nonviolence, California (for identification only)

Rev. Marilyn Chilcote McKenzie, Parish Associate, St. John's Presbyterian Church of Berkeley, California (for identification only)

James E. Vann, Oakland Tenants Union, California (for identification only)

Vic and Barby Ulmer, Our Developing World, California (for identification only)

Judith Mohling, Rocky Mountain Peace and Justice Center, Colorado

Bob Kinsey, Colorado Coalition for the Prevention of Nuclear War, Colorado

Medard Gabel, Executive Director, Pacem in Terris, Delaware

Susan Berkowitz-Schwartz, Founder/President, All People's Day, Inc., Florida

Roger Mills, Coordinator, Georgia Peace & Justice Coalition, Henry County Chapter, Georgia

David Borris, President of the Board, Chicago Area Peace Action, Illinois

Lisa Savage, CODEPINK, Maine

Natasha Mayers, Whitefield, Maine Union of Maine Visual Artists

Shirley “Lee” Davis, GlobalSolutions.org, Maine Chapter

Lynn Harwood, the Greens of Anson, Maine

Dagmar Fabian, Crabshell Alliance, Maryland

Judi Poulson, Chair, Fairmont Peace Group, Minnesota

Darlene Coffman, SE MN Alliance of Peacemakers, Minnesota

S. Gladys Schmitz, Mankato Peace Vigil, Minnesota

Ann Suellentrop MSRN, Physicians for Social Responsibility,Kansas City, Missouri

Marcus Page-Collonge, Nevada Desert Experience, Nevada

Gregor Gable, Shundahai Network, Nevada

Jay Coghlan, Executive Director, Nuclear Watch New Mexico

Joni Arends, Executive Director, Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety, New Mexico

Lucy Law Webster, Executive Director, The CENTER FOR WAR/PEACE STUDIES, New York

Alice Slater, Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, New York

Sheila Croke, Pax Christi Long Island, chapter of the international Catholic peace movement, New York

Richard Greve, Co Chair, Staten Island Peace Action, New York

Rosemarie Pace, Director, Pax Christi Metro New York

Barbara Harris, Granny Peace Brigade, New York

Margaret Melkonian, Executive Director. Long Island Alliance for Peaceful Alternatives, New York

Charlotte Koons, Co-founder, CODEPINK Long Island, Women for Peace, New York

Jim McCabe, NY Metro Progessives, New York

Charlotte Phillips, M.D., Chairperson, Brooklyn For Peace, New York

Carol De Angelo, Director of Peace, Justice and Integrity of Creation, Sisters of Charity of New York (for identification only)

Gerson Lesser, M.D., Clinical Professor, New York University School of Medicine (for identification only)

Elizabeth Hegeman, John Jay College of Criminal Justice – CUNY, New York (for identification only)

Ellen Thomas, Proposition One Campaign, North Carolina

John Heuer, Eisenhower Chapter 157, Veterans For Peace, North Carolina

John Heuer, Peace Action, North Carolina

Terry Clark, Chairperson,Physicians for Social Responsibility, Western North Carolina Chapter, North Carolina

Vina Colley, Portsmouth/Piketon Residents for Environmental Safety and Security, Ohio

Harvey Wasserman, Solartopia, Ohio

Nina McLellan, Co-president Cleveland Peace Action, Ohio

Ray Jubitz, Jubitz Family Foundation, Oregon

Patrick Hiller, Executive Director, War Prevention Initiative, Oregon

Peter Bergel, Board of Directors, Oregon PeaceWorks

Nancy Tate, Lehigh-Pocono Committee of Concern (LEPOCO Peace Center), Pennsylvania

Edith Bell, Remembering Hiroshima/Imagining Peace, Pennsylvania

Ralph Hutchison, Coordinator, Oak Ridge Environmental Peace Alliance, Tennesse

Cletus Stein, convenor, The Peace Farm, Texas

Rusty Tomlinson, High Plains Circle of Non-violence, Texas

Steven G. Gilbert, PhD, DABT, INND (Institute of Neurotoxicology & Neurological Disorders), Washington

Allen Johnson, Coordinator, Christians For The Mountains, West Virginia

John LaForge, Co-director, Nukewatch, Wisconsin

cc:
John Kerry, Secretary of State
Rose Gottemoeller, Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security
Thomas M. Countryman, Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and
Nonproliferation
Susan Rice, National Security Advisor
Ben Rhodes, Deputy National Security Advisor
Samantha Power, Permanent Representative to the United Nations
Christopher Buck, Chargé d’Affaires, a.i., Conference on Disarmament
Walter S. Reid, Deputy Permanent Representative to the Conference on Disarmament

Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)