Det danske Fredsakademi
Kronologi over fredssagen og international politik 1 september 1984 / Timeline September 1, 1984
Version 3.5August 1984, 2. September 1984
09/01/1984
Fagbevægelsens internationale fredsdag / Den internationale
faglige fredsdag.
Internationalt Øst-Vest møde i Folkets Hus i
København.
09/01/1984
Hooligans for Peace
Første nummer af tidsskriftet "Return Address Moscow:
International News Bulletin on Independent Peace Activity in USSR".
Bladet publiceres af the Group for Establishing Trust Between
the USSR and the
USA.
I en leder på side 2 dateret June 4, 1982, appellerer
organisationen:
“The USSR and the USA have the means to kill in such
proportions that would end the history of mankind.
A balance of terror cannot be a reliable guarantee of safety in the
world. Only trust between peoples can create a firm assurance of
the future.
Today, when elementary trust between the two nations has been
completely lost, the problem of trust has ceased to be simply a
question of bilateral relations. This is the question: Will mankind
be wiped out by its own destructive capabilities or will it
survive?
This problem demands immediate action today. It is, however, very
obvious that political leaders of both sides are incapable of
coming to any sort of agreement about significant arms limitations
in the | near future ... to say nothing of genuine disarmament.
Due to their political interests and circumstances, ^politicians
find it difficult to be objective on disarmament issues.
Recognizing this, we do not wish to accuse one side or the other of
not wishing to promote the peace process, nor certainly of any
aggressive designs for the future. We are convinced of their
genuine desire for peace and curtailment of the nuclear threat.
However, the search for the-path to disarmament has become
difficult.
We all share an equal responsibility for the future. The active
peace movement among citizens of many countries proves that this is
understood by millions of people.
But our common desire for peace must not be blind. It must be
perceived and expressed in concrete terms. -It must be presented in
the context of actual conditions.
The world is concerned about its future. Everyone understands that
there must be dialogue if the threat is to be removed.
The prevailing principles of conducting bilateral dialogue must be
changed immediately.
We are convinced that the time has come for the public not only to
confront decision makers with the issue of disarmament, but also to
participate in the decision-making process with the
politicians.
We are in favor of a four-sided dialogue — for dialogue in
which average Soviet and American citizens are included on an equal
footing with political figures.
We favor consistent and ultimately complete destruction of
stockpiles of nuclear weapons and ether forms of mass destruction,
and for limitations of conventional weapons.
We view the present program for the search for peace as the
following:
1. As a first step to abolish the nuclear threat, we appeal to
everyone who does not desire the death of his neighbor to submit
his own specific proposals on bilateral limitations and cutbacks of
weaponry, and, most of all, for the establishment of trust.
W£ call for each such proposal to be forwarded simultaneously
to the governments of both countries and to representatives of
independent public peace groups.
We hope especially that our call will be heeded by the peoples of
the Soviet Union and the United States, whose governments bear the
main responsibility for maintaining the safety of the world.
2. We call upon the citizens of both countries to create combined
international public groups, based on the principles of
independence. Their functions would include: the receipt and
analysis of individual proposals on disarmament and promoting trust
between nations; the selection of the most interesting and
realistic proposals; bringing these proposals to the attention of
the respective populations about the possible consequences of the
use of nuclear arms, and about all issues concerning
disarmament.
3. We appeal to the scientific community, particularly to
independent international scientific organizations involved in the
campaign for peace, to work on scientific problems directly
connected with the preservation of peace. For instance, at the
present stage, it is extremely important to develop a unified
mathematical method for evaluating the weaponry of the opposing
sices. We call upon scientists to create independent research
groups to scientifically analyze citizen proposals.
4. We call upon political leaders and the media of both countries
to refrain from mutual accusations about intentions to use nuclear
weapons for aggressive purposes. We are convinced that such
accusations only inflame distrust between the sides and thus make
any constructive dialogue impossible.
5. We view as necessary guarantees of the establishment of trust
that the USSR and the USA must create conditions for the open
exchange of opinions and to inform the publics of both nations on
all issues on the process of disarmament. We appeal to the
governments of the USSR and the USA to create a special
international bulletin (with a governmental guarantee of
distribution in both countries) in which both sides would conduct a
dialogue, hold discussions, and would make public reports on the
following issues, among others:
a. An analysis of disarmament negotiations and the documents of
negotiations
b. An exchange of opinions and proposals on possible ways to limit
arms, and on disarmament
c. An exchange of proposals on the establishment of trust
d. An exchange of information on the possible consequences of using
nuclear arms.
Such a .bulletin would provide an opportunity for independent
citizens' peace groups to participate in general discussions,
publish uncensored materials, especially proposals on disarmament
and trust and information on (various) peace movements and the
steps they have taken.
We appeal to the governments and public opinion of the USSR and the
USA since we are convinced that everyone who understands that, the
future needs to be defended must have a genuine opportunity to
defend it.”
 |
 |