alll Se boll blll 11S Hs SO ee || Orbiting mirrors Laser beam be mf Mirror Laser beam aa SELLING STAR WARS: How the ultra-right developed secret plans to capture | and capitalize on massive U.S. peace sentiment, using ‘appropriate political and economic packaging,” to t keep the space weapons program alive. By EMILY DE NITTO A secret document prepared by the ultra-right that outlines how to manipu- late U.S. peace forces into supporting the development of space weapons was recently disclosed by the Council on Economic Priorities. Like the infamous CIA instruction book for the contras fighting against Nicaragua, it provides a horrifying look at current U.S. military policy without the “make-up.” In fact, it explains just how that “make-up” should be applied. The document is a blueprint of how to sell Star Wars to the U.S. public and NATO allies, including suggested “tech- niques for converting, or otherwise neu- tralizing, peace groups or arms control- lers.” Written in early 1984, some excerpts were printed in the June issue of Harpers magazine. Outside of this, it has received little media attention. The document’s cover, bearing the words “Not for Release,” is printed on Heritage Foundation stationery, although the foundation denies association with the report. Small print on the bottom reads “NSR 46: High Frontier: A New Option in Space.” High Frontier is a pri- vate study group organized by members of the Heritage Foundation to produce reports on Star Wars. The Heritage Foundation, an ultra- right think tank, has laid the ideological basis for much of the Reagan administra- tion’s policies and approaches in nearly every area of life, such as social spending and foreign policy. It is backed by some of the nation’s wealthiest businessmen, including many defence contractors. The Council on Economic Priorities says the document was written by John Bosma, a consultant retained by High Frontier who is now editor of Military Space magazine. The document’s stated objective is to offer a plan aimed at “keeping the BMD (Ballistic Missile Defence, another name for Star Wars — Ed.) program alive in 1984 and make it impossible to turn off by 1989.” Written before the presidential elec- tions, the document emphasized that supporters of Star Wars must ensure “sufficient political visibility and/or organizational and programmatic mo- mentum that it could not be turned off by a replacement or successor Demo- cratic administration.” Just as President Reagan demagogi- cally calls the first-strike MX missile the “Peacekeeper,” the insidious strategy proposed by the document is to “stress nuclear disarmament” and “play freely on high-road ethical themes” in a way that will win support for the creation of a whole space weapons arsenal. “The project,” the report says, “should unambiguously seek to recapture the term ‘arms control’ and all of the idealis- tic images and language attached to this term.” It calls for slogans like “arms con- trol through BMD — nuclear disarma- ment,” and proposes a strategy for convincing the mass nuclear weapons freeze campaign that Star Wars devel- opment will bring us closer to that movement’s goal. For example, in arguing for one of three tactical alternatives, the document says that “with appropriate political and emotional packaging, this approach may be able to tap the freeze constituency . but only if an unorthodox and radical approach to selling BMD to peace groups is undertaken by someone or some peace group.” ’ The report says that Star Wars propo- nents can “capture and capitalize on” the U.S. people’s peace sentiment by arguing against the concept of mutual assured destruction (MAD) that now exists between the U.S. and the Soviet Union. The report seeks to convince people that U.S. military superiority over the Soviet Union is the way to avoid nuclear war, rather than the present approach based on U.S.-Soviet arms parity. As Defence Secretary Caspar Wein- berger said of Star Wars, “If we can get a system which is effective and which we know can render their weapons impo- tent, we can be back in a sitution we were in, for example, when we were the only that the 6 © PACIFIC TRIBUNE, AUGUST 28, 1985 Political contributions by leading Star Wars contractors _ Ascorporations in the U.S. military-industrial complex work through think tanks _ like the Heritage Foundation and the High Frontier study group to influence public _ Opinion in favor of Star Wars, they are also working more directly to guarantee _ : super profitable space weapons program will continue and expand. In Sei al a Ubdhaes iden. wines Shier Wri cnicactons contin total of $747,425 in political action committee (PAC) funds to U.S. Senate b Meets UPR Gaeatte Slatenca Apgropsietions commitne wore ce tor ‘re-election, and they received 57 per cent of the total, or $423,242. (Source: Sattinon Budget Prosiieg = — Jan. 16, 1985.) | Amount | $123,250 — $108,902 | a .: ‘73,798. - - 5. 67.600 | S : nation with nuclear weapons.” But he fails to point out that that was the only time nuclear weapons were ever used, in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan. The report cleverly argues against allowing Star Wars to become identified with the ultra-right, even as it admits that “BMD is primarily a ‘right wing’ cause because assent to a pro-BMD position generally means subscribing to a whole array of other ‘conservative’ pro-defence arguments or programs.” In a section calling for a sales approach “that seeks to disarm BMD opponents by stealing their language and cause — arms control,” the report noted that while HF (Heritage Foundation or High Frontier — Ed.) can play a formative role in any one of the proposed routes (for promoting Star Wars) it is best that such activism be done elsewhere for pol- itical reasons.” The report emphasizes that “it_would be dangerous to the cause of BMD for this effort to be initiated by New Right alignments. A centrist group is abso- lutely ‘essential, it says, one that has no image problems.” It adds, “‘An important ‘initial target audience’ should be Commentary maga- zine readers, who are politically influen- tial and active on behalf of Israel and for sizable U.S. defence budgets. Special efforts should be made to attract neolib- erals and moderates, particularly Demo- crats.” Since this report was written, two pro-Star Wars articles have appeared in Commentary. The report’s outline and suggested methods have clearly been adopted by the Reagan administration. The report reflects the right-wing’s fear of the powerful peace sentiment in the U.S. as well as among the other NATO countries. It devotes significant space to ways of convincing NATO member states to support the administra- tion’s space weapons plans, but the administration has not succeeded in winning unconditional support for Star Wars from any of the NATO allies. The report expresses concern that “conditions may not be right (to) con- sider a BMD program serious,” but argues that “irrespective of (Star Wars’) present technical or political merits,” a campaign for space weapons is impor- tant to “conclusively demolish the main- Stream arms control argument (that producing more weapons) automatically destroys arms control.” The report ends with a “sample list” of groups and individuals who are pro-Star Wars, neutral and “declared enemies.” Among the Heritage Foundation’s “enemies” are Catholic bishops, “main- stream Protestant publishing houses” and the New York Times. Opposition to Star Wars is broad and deep throughout the U.S. and the world. The aim of both the report and the administration — to manipulate the U.S. people into believing that building more weapons is the way to achieve disarma- ment — is not an easy one to achieve, and they have failed to win decisive vic- tories. But the administration has maintained its objective of “ensuring (Star Wars’) initial startup. ” Late in June, Congress voted for just under $3 billion to con- tinue Star Wars research, and Vice Pres- ‘defeat of Star Wars. ident George Bush travelled to Europe t pressure NATO for its support. If the peace movement is to defeat Staf__ Wars — the most dangerous threat to humanity since the development of th atom bomb — then it must know th tactics of Star Wars supporters. The Her itage Foundation report, with all its crass cynicism and manipulative designs ex posed, can actually contribute to the Emily De Nitto is a staff reporter for the Daily World. : Sci-fiauthor assails SDI Reagan’s Strategic Defence Initiative was quickly dubbed Star Wars by the media to cap- ture its science fiction flavor — the idea of an “impenetra- ble” shield of laser weapons zapping at nuclear missiles. But people with more expe- rience in the field than Reagan, are skeptical about the system’s capabilities. Isaac Asimov, the guru of Western science fiction writers, with over 300 titles to his credit, has emerged as a severe critic of the project. Asimov’s profession may count him among the experts but he prefers to base his criticisms on the fact that he is “a sane human being.” “If we’re in real danger of nuclear war now, trying to set up something for the middle of the 21st century isn’t going to do us any good,” he charges. “In fact by filling us full of false con- fidence, we're not going to make a strong enough effort to pre- vent war now.” Asimov believes that there is more to Reagan wanting Star Wars than just a misguided notion of national defence. The motivation lies in wanting a weapons system which bring will the Soviet Union to its knees: “If you don’t do what we demand, we’re going to smash you with our entire nuclear armory and you won’t be able to respond with a single bomb.” Ironically the author says nuclear weapons contain their own built-in deterrent. “If the Soviet Union can’t penetrate Star Wars, all they have to say is ‘Go ahead. Bomb the hell out of us. You'll get destroyed by the nuclear winter that follows.’ ” Only a small amount of the world’s nuclear arsenal would be needed to bring on nuclear winter: dust, soot and fallout from the explosions would blot out the sun and eventually plunge the world into freezing darkness. “T’m convinced nuclear win- ‘ter is actually sométhing that will happen,” says Asimov. “Unless we’re completely insane, we don’t dare take the chance.”