CANADA MoRE AC!Dp RAIN- FEWER ARMA MENTS Star Wars message sent to local MPs TORONTO — Peace groups across the country sent state- ments to their local members of Parliament on the fourth anniver- sary of U.S. President Reagan’s announcement of the Strategic Defence Initiative, commonly known as Star Wars. The action, facilitated by Canadian Peace Alliance, a na- tional network of 350 peace or- ganizations, was part of a Na- tional Awareness Day on Star Wars. This day is part of a plan to make peace a major issue in the next federal election. Canada Player *“Many Canadians think we are not becoming involved in Star Wars, because Mulroney turned down official government in- volvement. But Canada could still become a key player in the SDI program’’, said David Kraft of the Toronto Disarmament Network. Citing the recently announced fighter bases in the Canadian north as just one example of Can- ada becoming involved in SDI, Kraft explained the bases could be the beginning of extensive air defences in the North. Air de- fences are a necessary adjunct to the planned Star Wars program. ‘*Talk of early deployment, vio- lating the ABM treaty, and the types of systems the U.S. is work- ing on for SDI, all have significant implications for Canada. They threaten to undermine Canadian support for existing international treaties and current disarmament initiatives. In light of recently an- nounced plans to move more rap- idly to the deployment phase, Canadians could find themselves deeply involved in SDI without any chance to voice their opposi- tion’’. The statement calls on MPs to speak out in favor of the ABM Treaty and work for a compre- hensive nuclear test ban; to com- mit Canada to a ‘‘No Star Wars”’ status, and to work for disarma- ment and the peaceful use of space. Secret arms buildup uncovered by study Ottawa is being asked what role it played in agreeing to a recently unveiled NATO plan to escalate the arms race. Ina telegram to Prime Minister Mulroney the Toronto Disarma- ment Network asked what stand Canada took at the 1983 Mon- tebello, Quebec meeting when NATO defence ministers repor- tedly agreed to a unilateral reduc- tion of 1.400 “short range”’ or “battlefield” nuclear weapons. The question arises out of a British American Security Infor- mation Council. study which found that at the same meeting, NATO approved plans to moder- nize its arsenal with 2,000 new weapons, most of them destined for British troops. The study alleges there was a deliberate coverup of the plans, to avoid mass protests, similar to those which greeted the Cruise and Pershing missile decisions. NATO has about 6,000 short range missiles which are integral to its first strike policy. The British study is corrobo- rated in a report by U.S. Defence Secretary Caspar Weinberger, obtained through the Freedom of Information Act. It says that “specific’’ proposals for new battlefield weapons by NATO’s high-level groups were approved at Montebello. 6 e PACIFIC TRIBUNE, APRIL 1, 1987 ttainers, which would hold six International Atomic Agency By KERRY McCUAIG An unprecedented agreement which would allow the long distant air shipment of weapons-grade nuclear fuel over Canadian terri- tory, poses an “enviromental hazard of the first magnitude,” says a report by the Washington- based Nuclear Control Institute. The draft 30-year U.S.-Japanese treaty would permit shipments of up to 226 kilograms of plutonium, twice a month, between nuclear plants in Japan and processing fac- tories in Europe. The route, which includes a refuelling stop in Anchorage, Alaska, involves con- siderable airtime over northern Canada. Canada was not consulted about the agreement. External Affairs Minister Joe Clark told reporters that Canada has the right to disallow the flights but did not say if Ottawa would exercise this option. Inside the House, Transport Minister John Crosbie said Can- ada could request prior notifica- tion and approval of the flights but indicated Ottawa would not do this if it was demonstrated that proper safety beotedurcs were being followed. There appears to be some differ- ence of opinion, however, both on the legal requirements and safety measures. According to a March 23 article in the Globe and Mail, Transport Department law- yers say it would take a change in federal regulation to prohibit the plutonium flights. Under the Transport of Dan- gerous Goods Act, Canada will not allow radioactive material to be loaded or shipped in Canada without prior government appro- val; this does not apply to overflights, the lawyer said. Safety is also a major concern Plutonium flights seen) as hazard of firstorder environmental assessment can be done’’, said Kuperman. The spokesperson, who co- authored the report on plutonium shipments, suggested this be an item at the upcoming summit be- tween Prime Minister Mulroney and President Reagan in early Ap- ril. “In particular Canada could press to ensure that the canisters conform to the stricter NRC stan- dards’’. U.S. law requires that any spent fuel or byproducts from U.S. supplied uranium or reac- tors remain under U.S. control. (Plutonium is a byproduct of the Contrary to the Globe report the U.S. has not yet signed the treaty. Canada still has a chance to influence the president not to sign it, at least until a safety and environmental assessment can be done — Alan Kuperman of the Nuclear Control Centre - since the canisters developed to transport the plutonium, have failed high speed crash tests. U.S. National Regulatory Commission requirements demand the con- pounds of plutonium, remain in- tact at crash speeds of 141 metres per second. If a container of this strength can’t be developed the Nuclear Control Institute fears the U.S. will accept the lower guidelines of 14 metres per sec- ond. Canada has adopted the lower standards. Contrary to. the Globe report the U.S. has not yet signed the treaty, Alan Kuperman, a re- search associate with the Institute told the Tribune. “The agreement has not yet been signed by the president, so Canada still has a chance to in- fluence the president not to sign it, at least until a safety and uranium fuel used in nuclear power plants.) Ninety per cent of Japan’s nuclear fuel falls into this category. In the past the U.S. = cratic process. ‘We want to know what role, ay io caas _ government has had in this decision,”’ said V ordinator for the TDN. ‘‘These issues should be of prime would approve of Japan’s usage of its spent fuel on a case by casé basis. ““The new agreement gives a 30 year carte blanche to Japan. It is quite a watershed, unprece- dented in either commercial oF military situations’, said Kuper man. For the Institute, which is dedi- cated to halting the spread of nu- clear weapons, the agreement contains other hazards. “Certainly no one expects Japan to start a nuclear weapons program, but this is a 30 year agreement, and no one can se that far down the road’’, says Ku- perman. He also has concerns that the shipments could become targets for terrorists. ‘‘Only 15 pounds of plutonium is needed to produce 4 Nagasaki size bomb, yet undef this agreement 45 thousand tons will be shipped by the year 2000, it is not inconceivable that some thing like this could happen. “Even the International Atom ic Commission admits that you just can’t account for bulk ship- ments of plutonium. To give this carte blanche is a dangerous pre cedent.”’ ; Wendy Wright, ¢ 2 haa to the Prime —