The resolution in itself is significant as a general answer to the problem of how to stop the deadly arms spiral. But what is most important is that this is not just a bill in congress. It is a demand that in the past ten months has drawn tens of thousands of people into a rapidly growing American peace movement
Last June in New York, a half million people demonstrated against the arms race, and these mobilizations have conwith a variegated assembling around the "freeze" demand.
Together with the European mobilizations against the new intermediate-range missiles, the peace movement has become a political factor. In this connection, offering the perspective of assuring peace through the development weapons takes on the character of a political maneuver. It is a way of propagating the idea that military armament can achieve security, precisely the idea that in the postwar period has been used to justify the arms race and which is the cornerstone of the perverted logic that the peace movement has begun to combat.
The energy weapons are aimed first and foremost against the influence of the peace movement. But at the same time, this idea is a further development of the U.S.'s new nuclear strategy, which invol ves the notion that nuclear war is not unthinkable and that therefore the U.S. should assure its ability to fight and win
It is also in this connection that the Star Wars project has to be seen.
For the first time, the achievement of missiles would make it possible for the to use its nuclear-strike force, or possibly just threaten to use it, without fear of Soviet retaliation.
we have seen, such a possibility, Reagan wanted to conceal the fact that the Pentagon is planis already central in nuclear armament, not as a base for new weapons but as a base for the worldwide communications, aiming and warning system that is to direct and coordinate missiles and bombers in an atomic war.
Among the great number of hightechnology weapons that go into the striking force, the communications systems are decisive. And one of the Pentagon's leading specialists has said that improvement of these systems, called C31 network, is the U.S.'s most important strategic program. fense Department's five-year program has allotted at least 20 billion dollars for this
With his fantasy-filled speech about the blessings of a space war, trying to divert attention away from the fact that beefing up the C31 system represents preparation for war. is a fact that should arouse a big outery, including here in Denmark, where we are making our contribution to this project by letting the U.S. keep its base in The 'Greens' go to opening of parliament (DR)
Iceland and wing. It seems to me that everything indicates that the rightist women in it are there precisely to defend the interests of NATO. They think that NATO is a peace movement and operate on this basis. I think that it is clear that this the peace movement in the North Atlantic The U.S. base in Iceland is a major link in the chain of American air and radar bases in the North Atlantic. Traditionally, there has been strong opposition to it among Icelanders.
Before the annual spring action of the Association of Opponents of the Military Base (Samtaka herstoedhvaandstaedhinga, SHA) on April 19, a reporter from Neisti, the publication of the Icelandic section of the Fourth International, interviewed Arna Hjartarson, chairperson of the SHA. The following is a somewhat shortened version of the interview, which was published in the March 27
Question. What has happened in the SHA since its last national conference?
The association has operated in its customary way. After the national work groups were set up for culture, education, and agitation....
Then we managed to get our position in the mass media by writing articles and
Just now we are preparing spring actions, such as the Consultative Assembly of Scandinavian Peace Movements (Samradhsfundur Norraeanna Fridharhreyfinga), which will be held here in April.
A lot of financial difficulties hindered our work, a lot of debts have accumulated, many of them stemming from the Miklatun assembly last summer.
This assembly has been subjected to some criticism becase...a number people thought that the SHA's slogan "Iceland Out of NATO" was pushed aside and sacrificed for the sake of getting broader political support. But obviously it is always possible that the association may at times take the lead in actions that are not entirely committed to such central objectives of the military base oppon-
This goes for all sorts of actions that are linked to these objectives.
The mistake at the Miklatun assembly was that various parties and groups were allowed to take a free ride on the peace
The SHA bore the burden of organizing the meeting and, therefore,
In our last national meeting, it was resolved that there should be a march to
For a similar action this year. We did not decide anything more definite
Q. What's the relationship of the SHA to other peace movements?
A. It is the aim of the SHA this year years to develop common work with the peace movements in the Scandinavian countries. In the framework of this collaboration, we have basically worked out the demand for a nuclear-free Scandinavia, that is, to determine how big an area should be included and what rules should apply to it.
We have attended three meetings with the peace movements and a final consultative meeting is to be held in the Scandinavian House at the end of April.
meeting, documents will be sent out presenting the call for a nuclear-free Scandinavia as the common demand of the peace movements in the area.
Q. What countries do the peace movements want to include in this area?
All the Scandinavian countries. However, it has not yet been decided whether Greenland should be included in the area or not. argued very strongly that it should be.
We point out that in many respects we are in the same position as the Greenlanders and that we have more in common with them than the continental Scandinavian countries, since Greenland is tied into the Nuclear Early Warning System in a way similar to Iceland. Moreover, its geographical position is rather similar to that of Iceland.
What are the main difficulties in including Greenland?
In the original conception of a nuclear-free Scandinavia, no consideration was given to including Iceland, the Faroes, and Greenland.
The continental Scandinavians were opposed to this, because they thought it would make the demand utopian. was because of the importance of the U.S. base on Iceland. Finally, they, as well as others, changed their minds, and now there is agreement about Iceland. But there is still some reluctance about
What do you think about the "Women's Peace Movement.?"
Obviously, the opponents of the base welcome everyone who says there
But at the same time we think that they should oppose military armament in this country. called Women's Peace Movement has not
So, I think that it will not live up to the basis on which it was formed, that is, be a broad women's movement going from ultra-right women to the left movement is either going to be paralyzed or split.
Q. In the draft for the new constitution, consideration is being given to a great role for referenda. What's the SHA's position on that?
One of the SHA's aims is to get a referendum on the military and NATO. That has been true for some years. But there has never been any real discussion
As the constitution is written now, it is not possible to get money appropriated without the approval of the Althing (parliament). But none of the parties in parliament has given a lead on this. is not the custom in Iceland to hold referenda on other sorts of questions than the liquor laws and dogs.
But with the provision in the new constitution, the association will be able to reconsider this question....
Q. Is the workers movement split on the peace question?
It seems that the Icelandic union movement is very much attached to traditions of struggle that relate exclusively to wages and working conditions. takes up public issues only on very rare
It seems that there is not much consciousness of big public questions in the union movement. The military bases question has gotten only small attention in the union movement, at least
When such questions are raised, there is a chorus in response that the union movement is politically very diverse so that these issues would only split it. For this reason, the ASI (Althydhusamband Islands - Icelandic National Federation of Labor) has not taken up the bases question for ages and the May Day speeches have avoided it.
The ASI has been invited twice to take part in discussions and conferences on broad questions of peace and disarmament. But it has refused on the grounds that this is not the province of the workers movement. This is quite unlike what has happened elsewhere in Scandinavia where the union movements have been bastions of the fight for peace...
It is only the church that has tried to take up the banner of the fight for peace, without such restrictions, because it looks at the question from the standpoint of religious values.
It is clear to most people that it is hard to take a political position for peace and disarmament without coming out against the military and NATO. The result of this is that it has been mainly the opponents of the base who have taken up the issues of peace and disarmament and internationally the SHA is seen as the political arm of the Icelandic peace movement.
The reconstruction of the neocolonial
Lebanese state has in fact begun.
What is more, the new regime of President Amin
Gemayel was set up with the benefit of an almost universal consensus.