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 —