As Tooker brings in the New Year in a jail cell in the Netherlands for protesting an American nuclear weapons facility, let us reflect on what Peace on Earth really means. -a

NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT

"The nuclear bomb is the most anti-democratic, anti-national, anti-human, outright evil thing that man has ever made. If you are religious, then remember that this bomb is Man's challenge to god. It's worded quite simply: We have the power to destroy everything that You have created." Arundhati Roy

Throughout the latter half of the 20th century, the United States and the former Soviet Union engaged in a nuclear arms race that, at its height, saw the deployment of some 80,000 nuclear weapons, many of which were thousands of times more powerful than those that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki. At the present time, ten years after the end of the Cold War, eight countries have a total of some 36,000 nuclear weapons, more than 95% of which are in the arsenals of the United States and Russia.

Nuclear weapons have drained resources, including scientific ones, from productive uses. A recent study by the Brookings Institution found that, since the beginning of the Nuclear Age, the US alone has spent more than $5.5 trillion on nuclear weapons programs. The US continues to spend some $25-$35 billion annually on maintaining, testing, and developing its nuclear arsenal. All of these misspent resources represent lost opportunities for improving the health, education, and welfare of the people.

Furthermore, due to the conditions of social disintegration in the former Soviet Union, there is increased concern that nuclear weapons or weapons-grade nuclear material may fall into the possession of additional countries, criminals, or terrorists. The breakup of the former Soviet Union has also weakened Russia's early warning system, since many parts of this system were located outside of Russia. Hence, given the limited time available to make decisions about whether or not a state is under attack, the result could be a miscalculation or an accidental launch of nuclear weapons.

Moreover, the failure of the nuclear weapon states to eliminate their nuclear arsenal will likely result in the proliferation of nuclear weapons to other nations. If the nuclear weapon states continue to maintain the position that nuclear weapons preserve national security, it is only reasonable that other nations with less powerful military forces will also decide that a nuclear arsenal is necessary to maintain national security, as well.

Distinguished leaders throughout the world -- generals, admirals, scientists, Nobel Laureates, and heads of state and government -- warned of the dangers inherent in relying upon nuclear weapons for defense. The leaders of nuclear weapon states have not heeded these warnings. If nuclear weapons are relied upon for defense, sooner or later they will be used, by accident or by design. The fact that we have had these weapons in our midst for some fifty years provides no assurance that they will not be used in the future.

There is a way out of this dilemma. Man invented nuclear weapons. While it is not possible to "dis-invent" them, or as some say "to put the genie back in the bottle," it is possible to abolish them under strict and effective international control. Nuclear weapons threaten the future of humanity. Hence, it is a highly sensible goal for humanity to seek to abolish these weapons.

Take a stand for a better world! Promote global efforts for peace and non-violence! Provide energy and momentum to a worldwide effort to rid the planet of weapons of mass destruction! Support re-allocation of resources to ensure a sustainable global future! Sign the petitions to abolish nuclear weapons!

http://junior.apk.net/~halder/poll.html

A. Abolition 2000 (petition to abolish nuclear weapons)

B. No Star Wars/No BMD

C. Make Nuclear Weapons a Thing of the Past

D. De-alert Nuclear Weapons (Back from the Brink Campaign)

E. Abolish Nuclear Weapons Petition (by Proposition One Committee)

to top

The Netherlands, December 30, 2000
Gomberg Arrested in The Netherlands in Anti-Nuclear Weapons Protest

While much of the world celebrated Peace on Earth, on Wed. Dec 27 ten people entered through a hole in the fence the Volkel airforce base in southeastern Holland. Recent Toronto mayoral hopeful Tooker Gomberg was among the ten who were caught and charged with property damage. He is presently being held in jail in Oss, the Netherlands. Gomberg may be deported to Canada as early as Tuesday Jan. 2. Gomberg and Kelly Reinhardt burned their Canadian passports at the Climate Conference in The Hague in November and have remained in the Netherlands since that time.

Gomberg and Reinhardt spent Christmas at the Vredes Aktie Kamp, otherwise known as the Peace Action Camp, protesting the illegality (and immorality) of nuclear weapons. Visitors to this peace camp have been bearing witness in the forest alongside the American weapons base since April 1999. Although the Dutch government will not confirm or deny the existence of nuclear weapons on the site, civilian inspections indicate conclusively that the Volkel military base harbours 11 nuclear weapons and 3 squadrons each with eighteen F16 fighter jets.

In 1996 the UN International Court of Justice declared the use of nuclear weapons illegal, and it is based on this international law that the peace activists, including Gomberg, will be fighting the charges against them.

to top

The Hague, Netherlands - November 27, 2000
by Tooker Gomberg and Kelly Reinhardt

On Friday we burned our Canadian passports. We did it in outrage at our country's deplorable performance at addressing the climate catastrophe, a.k.a. climate change. The Canadian government has been woefully lacklustre on the home front, but what set us off was Canada's negotiating position at the World Conference on Climate Change in The Hague, Netherlands.

Of 180 nations attending, the position of the Canadian government was the worst of them all. Bottom of the list, according to the International Non-governmental agencies that awarded "Fossils of the Day."

Day after day the Canadian delegation proposed loopholes to ensure the continued growth of their beloved petroleum industry, until finally the talks ended in failure. Coming to an agreement at the Hague was the first ecological test of the millennium for the governments of the world. Thanks to the intransigence of Canada, the United States, Japan and Australia the global community of nations failed the earth.

As Canadians, we hung our heads in shame amongst the global delegation at the conference. Just as in the 1960's US draft dodgers came to Canada as conscientious objectors, so too have our consciences pushed us to action.

There is a profound feeling of sadness knowing we may not be returning to our native land any time soon. We hope that our families and other Canadians understand that our commitment to the planet transcends borders, just as the environmental problems do.

An emission from a coal-fired power plant doesn't stay in the country it was produced, but travels freely in the atmosphere, creating smog, and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Extracting and burning the oil from Alberta tarsands leads to islands disappearing in the Pacific. And the meltdown of the Arctic is well underway, as documented in a new film prepared by Canada's International Institute for Sustainable Development entitled: Sila Alongotok: Inuit Observations on Climate Change (http://www.iisd.org/casl/projects/inuit_video.htm).

While the conference in The Hague was underway last week, Epcor, Edmonton's city owned electric utility had the temerity to announce the building of another massive 400 megawatt (million watt) coal fired power plant. Exactly the wrong thing to be doing if you care about the climate.

But the Canadian government has ensured a loophole, a scheme of trading so industry can continue abusing our mother -- just buy her flowers and trees once in a while and everything will be all right.

Alberta, remember, is the province that gave birth to the ultimate "carbon trade". TransAlta Utilities invested in cow farts in Uganda. By funding a switch to a diet that resulted in less methane being emitted by cow flatulence they earn a credit to pump carbon into our atmosphere by burning coal with abandon. Obscene, but true.

The scientific community is telling us clearly that we need to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases by 60-80%. That means phasing out the use of fossil fuels, as Greenpeace urges, over the next three decades. The Kyoto agreement set a target of 5% reduction by 2012. Too small a step. Timidity won't get us where we need to go.

There is a most beautiful book entitled The Home Planet. It is an oversize collection of photographs of the earth from space. The photos and the words of people who have travelled off our home planet are transcendent. We are one people, dependent on one planet. There are no borders.

The photographs of the atmosphere show it as a thin layer, like the skin of an apple that blankets our planet and keeps the temperature just right. As we pump the exhaust from 500 million cars, and an exploding number of power plants, the thermostat is being cranked straight up, and the temperature is rising to dangerous levels.

So we must choose. Continue with business as usual, or get down to the work at hand. What's stopping our country from leading the transition to dramatic reductions in our need for energy, and massive investments in renewables like wind and solar? Only political will.

With little effort Canada could move from the end of the line to front place. Replacing all the windows in Canada with super efficient ones, and turning all our cities' organic waste into biogas, would get us to double our Kyoto target in ten years. So why all the kicking and screaming? According to the David Suzuki Foundation Canada, Canada could cut emissions by 50% and improve the economy to boot (http://www.davidsuzuki.org/energy/index.htm).

For now, we are remaining in the Hague, home of the World Court of Justice, seeking climate justice. Ecological justice. We are talking with lawyers and exploring our options.

When it comes right down to it, if you had to choose allegiance between your country of citizenship, and the Earth that gives and sustains life, which would you choose?

to top

... a Statement by Kelly Reinhardt and Tooker Gomberg, Den Haag, the Netherlands Saturday, Nov. 25, 2000

Yesterday we burned our Canadian passports in outrage at the behaviour of the Canadian Government at the World Conference on Climate Change in Den Haag, Netherlands. We are investigating renouncing our Canadian citizenship.

Canada emerged from the UN Climate Conference in Den Haag as the WORST country on planet earth, according to a world-wide coalition of environmental Non-Governmental Organizations (www.fossil-of-the-day.org). We are ashamed of Canada's position as presented by Member of Parliament Lloyd Axworthy, Privy Councillor. While planet Earth sinks deeper into a climate crisis, Canada pushes for bigger loopholes to avoid taking desperately needed action. Canada has proven its allegiance to the petroleum industry to the detriment of the Canadian people and the world. Canada has held the planet back from achieving a global agreement to limit greenhouse gas emissions, and for this we are deeply distressed.

Canada is already feeling extreme impacts of climate change, and should be at the head of the pack, not at the back. The arctic is in the midst of a massive meltdown. Northern people are reporting climate unknown in their oral history. The Inuit have no word for sunburn, for thunderstorms, or for robins because they have never had these experiences before in their history. The Canadian government's own scientists confirm that northern Canada has already warmed by 2-3 degrees and that in the next 50 years it will warm by 10-15 degrees. That rate of warming would mean the end of the Arctic, and the meltdown of the planet.

The efforts by the United Nations to build a framework for reaching the Kyoto Protocol have failed due to the non-cooperation and greed of the most polluting nations: Canada, the US, Japan and Australia.

We believe the Government of Canada is behaving in a criminal fashion, and is complicit in massive crimes against humanity and the planet, by failing to act with due haste when faced with the threat of profound ecological damage which is already resulting in unprecedented human suffering and death.

We ask that the people of Canada, and the people of the earth, immediately begin working towards a 60 - 80% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, and demand action from their governments, based on the science of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The phase out of fossil fuels is imperative, along with the transition to sustainable energy. Our survival depends on it! Until the government of Canada moves in this direction, we cannot be co-conspirators in their lack of action that would destroy human lives and eco-systems.

This is a very serious matter; at no time in our history have we faced such imminent danger. Desperate times call for bold initiative.

to top

At 12 noon today in Den Haag, the Netherlands, where the UN Climate Change Conference (CoP6) is taking place, Tooker Gomberg and Kelly Reinhardt burned their Canadian passports to protest Canada's abominable position at the conference.

"Right now we're ashamed to be Canadians. Canada's postion at this conference has been the most dismal of every country on the planet. Instead of taking some leadership, Canada has embarrassed all Canadians and doomed the arctic (arctic ice has melted by 40% in recent decades). Axworthy should hop on a plane and go home in shame rather than holding the planet randsom."

Every day a worldwide coalition of environmental groups gives out awards for the most obstructive country (http://www.fossil-of-the-day.org) to the climate negotiations. Canada has gotten more awards than any country in the world!

Some of the loathsome positions Canada has taken at this conference include:

- trying to hijack the CDM and use it as a subsidy for its failed nuclear reactor export program
- accounting tricks rather than real action
- proposing additional addiditives to claim carbon credits
- wanting to remove references to existing international environment agreements : using sinks so that rather than making cuts, they could actually increase domestic emissions and still keep their Kyoto commitment
- including nuclear energy in CDM projects
- opposing limits on hot air.

From 1 p.m. (EST) onward Tooker Gomberg is on live webcast at http://www.abips.org.br/haia/haia.cfm (click on the tv screen)

For background info on Gomberg check out:
www.gombergformayor.org and www.greenspiration.org

to top

ALANNA MITCHELL
EARTH SCIENCES REPORTER
Saturday, November 25, 2000

There is high anxiety in The Hague that international talks on climate change are paralyzed and may fail. The core of the problem rests on disagreements between the European Union on one side and Canada and the United States on the other. Canada in particular is being heavily criticized for its refusal to budge on some of the most critical issues. International environmental groups have designated Canada as the most obstructive of the 180 countries at these talks.

The negotiations, considered a do-or-die effort to set rules for implementing the 1997 Kyoto Protocol on reducing greenhouse gas emissions, were to have ended at midnight last night, but they've now been extended to later this afternoon. During yesterday's negotiations, activists chanted slogans and U.S. and Canadian protesters -- including Tooker Gomberg, a former Edmonton city councillor and failed Toronto mayoral candidate -- burned their passports in opposition to their countries' bargaining positions.

Even with the extension of the talks, some countries have begun whispering about yet another summit in the spring to nail down a deal. "If we don't leave this meeting with concrete agreements for all of us to move forward, we'll have lost another decade in the fight against climate change," said Robert Hornung, director of the climate-change program at Ottawa's Pembina Institute for Appropriate Development.

Scientists believe greenhouse gases, and the need to prevent more damage to weather systems, are among the most pressing of the Earth's problems. Grave effects, including the phenomenon of environmental refugees -- those forced to flee from their homelands as they become uninhabitable -- are predicted within the lifetime of today's generation of children.

Mr. Hornung said if the international community fails to act on reducing the virulent concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere for another decade, the world will be fated to try to adapt to climate damage rather than prevent it. The effects of climate damage are already apparent. In Canada's High Arctic, the Inuit are cataloguing the destruction of the ecosystem, which includes the melting of ice and permafrost.

A recent study of the world's coral reefs shows that in some regions, a quarter have died as the oceans begin to heat up. As well, a projection from the International Energy Agency, published yesterday, says that world emissions of carbon dioxide are set to rise 60 per cent from 1997 to 2010 despite climate policies introduced in the past three years. The agency called for more decisive action. One of the main three sticking points at the talks involves something called carbon sinks.

They are activities or natural Earth processes that soak up greenhouse gases from the atmosphere and store them. Forests and agricultural lands, for example, are capable of being carbon sinks, although they can also emit greenhouse gases.

A sink is the opposite of a carbon source, or an activity that puts carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, such as burning fossil fuels. Canada and the United States argue carbon absorption from their forests and vast landscapes ought to be counted against the carbon dioxide they send into the air. The European Union disagrees.

It thinks the Canada-U.S. proposal is just a way to elude commitments to reduce emissions. In essence, the EU says the Kyoto Protocol ought to result in less carbon dioxide emitted into the air. Canada and the United States argue that as long as greenhouse gas concentrations fall, or remain stable, emissions can continue as they were.

The issues became even more painful for negotiators when Dutch Environment Minister Jan Pronk tried to break the impasse by issuing a position paper designed as a compromise. The EU called it unacceptable.

"Mr. Pronk's paper gives us the elements for the final phase of the negotiations but what is proposed does not respect our bottom line, which is to ensure that the environmental integrity and credibility of the Kyoto Protocol is safeguarded," said EU environment commissioner Margot Wallstroem.

The EU is also pushing for industrialized countries to reduce emissions at home rather than get credit for emissions it prevents in developing countries.

to top