A PRIORITY FOR PEACE Office of International Justice & Peace United States Catholic Conference Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2016 https://archive.org/details/humanrightspriorOOunse Celebration of Pope Paul Vi’s 9^ Annual Period of Peace IIMAN IGHTS - A PRIORITY FOR PEACE Office of International Justice & Peace United States Catholic Conference 2 DeadtSffecf CONTENTS Pages Introduction 5 Liturgy 7 Focus A Contrary Weapon—The Arms Race 9 A Positive Weapon— Human Rights 18 Process Study Plan 29 Quiz: How Much Is Too Much? 31 3 INTRODUCTION Pope Paul VI has selected 'The Real Weapons of Peace" as the theme for the 1976 World Day of Peace. His emphasis on real wea- pons suggests that there exist in our world today false conceptions of what truly leads to peace. These false conceptions can arise from three sources: idolatry, ideology and ignorance. The three sections of this booklet relate to these false conceptions and their sources. The first section, "Liturgy" emphasizes the need for prayerful preparation and reflection on the issue of war and peace. The parali- turgical material introduces the concept of idolatry into this prayerful reflection, putting idolatry in contemporary terms. The second section, "Focus," examines the tensions between the weapons of peace and the weapons of war, human rights and na- tional security. Two background pieces are offered for study and reflection on the ideology underlying American foreign policy. The first point of focus, "A Contrary Weapon," reviews the expressions of Latin American churchmen about arms sales in their countries, especially by U.S. arms sellers. The second piece, "A Positive Wea- pon," challenges the view of some U.S. foreign policymakers that military assistance and political stability in Latin American take pre- cedence over human rights. The final section, "Process," attempts to countermand ignor- ance as a threat to peace by engaging segments of the Christian community in serious study. The real weapons include a knowledge- able and politically astute public, willing to effect changes in national policies toward the genuine pursuit of justice and peace. James R. Jennings Patricia L. Rengel Editors 5 6 CYO/Joan Gress LITURGY Liturgical Readings The following biblical texts were suggested by the Pontifical Commission Justice and Peace as the core of a liturgical celebration on the papal theme, "The Real Weapons of Peace": Exodus: 2:11-15. Epistles: 2 Cor. 5:17-21. Eph. 2:12-19. Gospel: Matt. 5, especially vv. 21-26. A Paraliturgical Reading — "A Satire on Idolatry" The following material lends itself to use in a paraliturgical cele- bration. It is an adaptation of Isaiah, Chapter 44 (the Jerusalem Bible translation). Opening Reading: The makers of idols all amount to nothing. They neither see nor know anything, and they are more deaf than other people. Everyone who associates with those who form a god or cast an idol will be put to shame. They will be assembled in the court and reduced to fear and shame. Some idol makers work with iron or steel, plastic or aluminum. They shape it with hammers into guns and rockets and instruments of torture, and they work until they are exhausted. Other idol makers stretch out a line and draw their god with chalk or ink on wood or paper or magnetic tape. The image does not have a human form, but idol worshipers imagine that its face is human. The idol worshiper cuts down the trees, mines the ore and coal and driljs for oil which the Lord provided to serve the human need for fuel. With half of these he makes a fire, and on its embers he bakes 7 bread and roasts his meat and says, "I am warm, I feel the fire." But with the other half, he makes a god which he adores, an idol which he worships and he implores it, "Rescue me, for you are my god." The idols have no knowledge and they cannot reason. Their eyes are coated so they cannot see, and their hearts so that they can- not understand. But the idol worshiper does not reflect nor have the insight to see that he is chasing ashes: Will he ever say, "Is not this thing that I adore nothing but a fraud?" A Recitation: (L: Leader; P: People) L. Thus said the Lord our God: I am the first and the last; There is no other God besides me. P. We have other gods, our possessions, our weapons. L. Who is like me? Let him stand up and speak. Let him confront me and argue it out. P. We have other gods, who are silent, and subtle and sophisticated. L. Who, from the beginning foretold the future? Let him tell us what is yet to come. P. We have other gods, like "national security" and "private property." L. Have no fear, do not be afraid. You are my witnesses, is there any other god besides me? P. No! There is no other god. If we will only believe. 8 FOCUS A Contrary Weapon—The Arms Race Congressional Testimony The subject of this testimony is the issue of U.S. military aid and sales to other countries, particularly to the countries of the Third World. The purpose of this testimony is to convey to this Committee the attitudes of great numbers of people, and particularly of leaders within the churches both here and in Latin America, concerning the effects of our military assistance programs. Simply put, the United States Catholic Conference favors meas- ures that will both decrease the militarization of the world (and parti- cularly Latin America) and will free the United States from its unhappy role of arms salesman to the world. That statement, repre- sentative as I believe it is of church leaders both here and in Latin America, deserves to be fleshed out more fully. Particularly, it needs to be fleshed out to counter one of the prevailing justifications of- fered for continuing such programs, namely, that the people of the recipient countries not only want such assistance but even that they would be offended if it were decreased or terminated. Since the end of World War II, the peoples of this planet have been oppressed by one of the great plagues of all history, the ever- widening spiral of violence symbolized by the global arms race. This is not simply a question of The Bomb and who gets in or is kept out of the nuclear club. It is a question of armaments of every kind at every level, of militarization in terms both of hardware and of mental attitude, of war-making and preparing for war, of striving after an elusive and finally mythical “balance of terror." The Catholic Bishops of the United States have condemned the arms race in no uncertain terms. Speaking before the Roman Synod in 1971, and in the name of the episcopal conference of the United States, John Cardinal Krol termed the arms race “a plague to all humanity in both the developed and developing nations. The su- preme tragedy of the race is that it is irrational as well as unjust." It is unjust, he said, for three reasons: 1. It violates the rights of citizens of the nations that are in- volved in it because of the heavy burden of taxation they must bear. 2. It has adverse effects on the citizens of other nations who are thereby deprived of the aid and assistance required for so- cial progress. 3. It offends against the rights of all persons who may as a re- sult become the victims of some unforeseen disaster and who live always in the fearful shadow of the third world war. Testimony of the U.S. Catholic Conference presented by Thomas Quigley, Adviser for Latin* America, Office of International Justice and Peace, to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, May 1973. 9 Where Do Your Taxes Go? The Administration is asking Congress for $254.2 billion in Federal funds for Fiscal 1976. Of this amount: Military: 54%—37% is earmarked for current military expenditures and 17% for the cost of past wars—6% for veterans benefits (which the Administration includes in "human resources") and 11% for interest on the national debt (four-fifths of which can be conserva- tively estimated as war-incurred). Human Resources (education, manpower, social services, health, income security): 22% Physical Resources (agriculture, community and regional devel- opment, natural resources, commerce, transportation, environment, energy): 10% All Other (international affairs, justice, space, general government, revenue-sharing, and one fifth of the interest on the national debt): 14% The figures above have been compiled by the Library of Congress Legislative Reference Service as released by Rep. Les Aspin. Source: SANE 10 "Moreover," Cardinal Krol continued, "the armaments race vio- lates the world's poor in a way that is fruitless and intolerable." This point especially needs emphasis. As the Cardinal said: The tragedy of military expenditure is that the developing nations are suffering most from the arms race. While military spending during the past six years increased 50 percent in the world, the percentage of increase in developing nations was 145 percent. From 1964 to 1968, the percengage of military spending increased 36.6 percent in the world and 57 percent in the United States; but, in a number of developing countries, the increase ranged from 100 to as high as 300 percent . . . The rate of increase in military spending in developing countries since 1964 exceeds the advance in the gross national product at the expense of populations (73 percent of the world) whose average income per capita is still barely $200 a year. The arms race is indeed a plague to all humanity and, in the Third World at least, it is widely perceived to be just that. This is evident, for example, in the Latin American attitude toward the global arms race and the U.S. role in it. There is a critique of our Mili- tary Assistance Programs that is widely advanced in Latin America. It is held by large numbers of North Americans as well and it is applied not only to the Military Assistance Programs, to military missions and training, to sales and grants of arms and materiel, to covert opera- tions such as those of the Central Intelligence Agency and the Fed- eral Bureau of Investigation, but is sometimes extended almost to the entire official U.S. presence in Latin America. This critique is based upon an analysis of the social, historical, political and economic forces that have shaped our world. It is not an analysis most Americans share. But, because it does enjoy wide cur- rency in many parts of the world, it is important for us at least to ad- vert to it. It is often asserted, for example, that U.S. assistance pro- grams, including military aid, serve three broad purposes: to prop up unstable but friendly governments, to promote a favorable climate for private investment and to subsidize our own balance of payments deficits. That particular tri-partite formulation happens to come from a basically Leftist source, a newsletter of the North American Con- gress on Latin America. However, I would invite your comparison of it with the statement of former Assistant Secretary of State for Inter- American Affairs, Charles A. Meyer, specifically relating to the pro- gram covered by this bill: Our Foreign Military Sales Program helps countries, such as Brazil and Uruguay, meet their legitimate external and internal defense needs, contributes to a favorable climate for bilateral United States relations with the countries involved and gives support to our balance of payments position .... 11 One could quite legitimately infer that, despite the great differ- ences of rhetoric and especially of point of view, the two statements are remarkably similar. And, given especially what we know about the present government of the two countries cited by Secretary Meyer, the similarity could be called frightening. The point is not to assert that the radical critique of any of our foreign programs— whether advanced by the Left or by spokesmen for the Administration— is, in fact, correct. The point is that it is an incontestable fact that a large and increasing number of Latin Ameri- cans do accept that critique. It is among the people with whose struggle for social change the United States should be most sup- portive that this negative analysis of America's role is most prevalent. The attitudes within the Churches and Christian communities of Latin America constitute one of the more important barometers of popular attitudes within those societies. Historically, it is a church not especially disposed to anti-American feelings. The roots of Protest- ant communions lie here, and the relations of the Catholic com- munity with their co-religionists in the United States have been ex- tremely close and mutually beneficial, particularly over recent de- cades. Yet, criticism of American foreign policy and its effects upon the people of Latin America is, among churchmen and lay Christians throughout the hemisphere, virulent, widespread and growing every year. In the matter of military programs, including arms sales, one would be hard pressed to find a single statement among the literally hundreds of major Christian pronouncements of recent years that could be considered even remotely favorable to the continuance of such programs. 12 Indeed, ever since the historic Medellin Conference of 1968, opposition to the arms race and all that promotes it has taken on the character of official policy of the Catholic Church in Latin America. The Second Vatican Council in Gaudium et Spes declared: “The arms race is an utterly treacherous trap for humanity, and one which ensnares the poor to an intolerable degree." Echoing these words, the combined episcopates of all the Latin America countries, meet- ingjn Medellin, called for ... a halt and revision in many of our countries of the arms race that at times constitutes a burden excessively disproportionate to the legitimate demands of the common good, to the detriment of desperate social necessities. The struggle against misery is the true war that our nations should face. In another passage, the Latin American bishops criticized the arms race in their countries as "surpassing the limits of reason" and frequently stemming "from a fictitious need to respond to diverse interests rather than to a true need of the national community." They concluded by quoting from Pope Paul's encyclical of the previous year, On the Development of Peoples: "when so many communities are hungry, when so many homes suffer misery, when so many live submerged in ignorance . . . any arms race becomes an intolerable scandal." The intent could hardly be clearer. But the language, because these are papal and episcopal statements, tends to be somewhat carefully chosen. There are many more unvarnished restatements of the same point, for example, issued by groups of priests around the time of Medellin. In one text, a document signed by over 900 priests, the authors speak of the systemic violence within their societies and hold that this same system drains our yearly national budget by allocating enormous sums to wasteful military expenditures that are meant to protect the interests of the privileged few. At the same time our people are engulfed in hunger, ignorance and unemployment because "we do not have the means" to build industries, schools and roads. Shortly after the close of the Medellin Conference, a group of Colombian priests met to reflect on the conference and issued a declaration which included the following: We reject the enormous military budget. It is aimed at maintaining troops that are not meant to protect our national sovereignty, but to put down by violence popular uprisings on behalf of the rights of workers, peasants, or students. They are used to defend the structures which benefit the small minority who have economic and political power. 13 14 Nothing in the intervening years has altered these positions. Indeed, as the tempo of domestic repression has increased in one Latin American country after another, a repression facilitated in no small way by the arms and training provided by foreign govern- ments, Latin American bishops and others have repeatedly spoken out, often at great personal risk, to denounce such military and police excesses. In June 1972, for example, the bishops of Uruguay directly accused the Uruguayan armed forces of “killings, physical oppres- sion, torture and illegal imprisonment/ 7 In April 1973, the bishops of the Dominican Republic decried the "systematic violation of human rights" in a society that, as they say, has been victimized by "exploi- tation and foreign intervention, a toy in the hands of powerful inter- ests." These are some of the most authentic voices of Latin America. These are the people who are attempting to speak on behalf of the vast majority who have no voice, not for the tiny minorities in each country who seek to maintain their own privilege and power. When Secretary Meyer, echoing other Administration spokesmen, says that "our inability to respond to reasonable requests [for arms] is often interpreted by Latin American leaders, civilian as well as mili- tary, as evidence of United States disinterest in the area or of pater- nalistic judgments on our part concerning the defense requirements of the countries involved," he is certainly not reflecting the attitudes of any of these most authentic voices. 15 WORLD ARMS TRADE WORLD MILITARY EXPENDITURE Percentage distribution, billions of dollars, at constant (1970) prices and exchange rates. cn _ oo Af\ - 1954Q 19640 OU , i . i 1 — in - 1 1 i 1 1 1 Lwi ! 1 \X\ i f 1 U.S.A. U.S.S.R. U.K. France _ 0t^ er . Third Developed World Source: SIPRI 16 Organizations/Resources Arms Control Association, 11 Dupont Circle, N.W., Suite 503, Washington* D.C. 20036. Tel. (202) 797-6450. Publishes monthly newsletter, "Arms Control Today," $1 5/yr. October 1974 and September 1975 issues focus on the question of U.S. arms sales and include selected bibliographies. Center for Defense Information, 122 Maryland Avenue, N.E., Wash- ington, D.C. 20002. Tel. (202) 543-0400. Publishes the monthly newsletter, "The Defense Monitor," free or for contribution. The May 1974 and August 1975 issues focus specifically on U.S. military assistance. Coalition on National Priorities and Military Policy, 110 Maryland Avenue, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20002. Tel. (202) 546-7000. Publishes bimonthly "Legislative Memo," $7/yr. Focus is on foreign policy and military assistance in legislative context. Fellowship of Reconciliation, Box 271, Nyack, New York 10960. Tel. (914)358-4601. Publishes monthly magazine, "Fellowship," $5/yr. Friends Committee on National Legislation, 245 Second Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20002. Tel. (202) 547-4343. Publishes the monthly "FCNL Washington Newsletter," $1 0/yr. The March issue each year deals with how the federal tax dollar is spent. International Institute for Strategic Studies, 18 Adam Street, London WC2N 6AL, England. Publishes the monthly "Adelphi Papers," the yearly "Strategic Survey" and "Military Balance." Subscription to all: $1 5/yr. Pax Christi U.S.A., Manhattan College, Riverdale, New York 10471. Tel. (212) 548-1400, Ext. 305. Publishes a quarterly newsletter as well as occasional papers. Membership fee of $5 entitles one to both. SANE, 318 Massachusetts Avenue, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20002. Tel. (202) 546-4868. Publishes the monthly newsletter, "Sane World," $4/yr. Also published booklet, 'The Arms Pushers," August-September 1974, $1.25. Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), Sveavagen 166, S 113 46, Stockholm, Sweden. Published the SIPRI Yearbook 1975 on world armament and dis- armament, 610 pp., $25. Available from the MIT Press, 28 Carl- ton Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142. In 1971, pub- lished The Arms Trade With the Third World, 910 pp., $16.80. Available from the Humanities Press Inc., Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey 07716. U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, U.S. Department of State, Washington, D.C. 20451. Tel. (202) 632-3597. Published "World Military Expenditures and Arms Trade 1963- 1973," $2. Available from the U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. 17 A Positive Weapon— Human Rights Congressional Testimony The focus of this testimony is the Military Assistance Program provided for in the 1975 Foreign Assistance Act. Specifically, this testimony is in support of the amendments to the Foreign Assistance Act offered by Senator James Abourezk which would: —terminate programs and support for foreign police and prison training in the United States or abroad; and — prohibit military assistance for any country which did not agree to inspection of its prisons by selected international agencies. The Abourezk amendments raise the broader issue of the rela- tionship of human rights and U.S. foreign policy. Last November at their annual general meeting, the Catholic Bishops of the United States, in a resolution commemorating the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Universal Declaration ofHuman Rights, stated: Internationally, the pervasive presence of American power creates a responsibility of using that power in the service of human rights. The link between our economic assistance and regimes which utilize torture, deny legal protection to citizens and detain political prisoners without due process clearly is a question of conscience for our government and for each of us as citizens in a democracy. Seeking to assist Catholics in fulfilling this responsibility of conscience, the U.S. Catholic Conference has tried during the course of the last year to identify and actively support specific legislative measures which relate to the impact of U.S. foreign policy on human rights in other countries. The Abourezk amendments provide a means of relating specific human rights criteria to our military assistance policies. The relation- ship of human rights and foreign policy is a complex and delicate issue. The fragmented nature of the international system creates a substantial gap between the ideals proclaimed in the Universal De- claration of Human Rights and the actual practice the United States observes, tolerates and, at times, abets in and through its foreign policy. Since there exists no effective mechanism to guarantee the enforcement of human rights in the international system, the burden of enforcement falls upon individual states in their mutual relations. This is a fragile instrument of control; it can be strengthened only if states, especially the leading actors in the system, take seri- ously the consequences of their policies regarding human rights. This is not to ignore the practical difficulty of according a priority to Testimony of the U.S. Catholic Conference presented by Rev. J. Bryan Hehir, Associate Secretary for International Justice and Peace, to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, July 1974. 18 human rights criteria. These criteria constitute only one objective in the complex policy of a state. The essence of policy formulation in- volves making choices among competing, indeed at times conflict- ing, objectives. Too often, however, it is the human rights criteria which are suppressed in this process of choice. Frequently, they are subordinated to other objectives which appear more tangible or de- fensible to the general public, but which are not tested for validity with sufficient care or discrimination. An example of how human rights criteria can be subordinated to other objectives is provided in testimony already submitted to this committee by Secretary of Defense Schlesinger in support of the FY 1975 Military Assistance Program. In discussing the Military Assist- ance Program for Latin America, Secretary Schlesinger justified sup- port of such programs principally in terms of the need for global deterrence and regional stability. No serious analyst today questions the need for a stable deterrent in the present strategic configuration of the international system. In the U.S.-U.S.S.R. relationship, a stable deterrent may be a tragic necessity of the nuclear age, but it is a necessrty. 19 The applicability of the general notions of deterrence and stability to areas beyond the relationship of major tension between the superpowers, however, requires careful scrutiny. If the term stability is not confined to its proper context, it can, like the term security, be used to rationalize and justify not only superfluous poli- cies but, indeed, counterproductive policies. The stability which is maintained in much of the developing world, including areas of Latin America, is a condition which benefits only a fraction of the popula- tion in the midst of socio-economic systems which wreak havoc in the lives of millions. Stability in these conditions often means pre- serving the status quo when minimal standards of justice cry out for change and reform. Although Secretary Schlesinger explicitly noted that objections have been raised in the Congress and elsewhere against the Military Assistance Program in Latin America, he failed to deal with one of the most persistent criticisms: the opposition within the United States and in Latin America to the training of police and military per- sonnel at the International Police Academy and in American-spon- sored schools in the Canal Zone. To say, as the Secretary did, that these training programs serve the interest of both Latin Americans and the United States leaves several pertinent questions unan- swered. Whose interests in Latin America are served by such pro- grams, the interests of the majority of the population or the interests of a minority military elite? Moreover, how does the United States determine its own long-term interest in a region like Latin America? Is it really in its interest to be the source of training and techniques which are often later used to violate human dignity and suppress human rights? 20 Robert McNamara, President of the World Bank, commented on the social conditions existing in much of the developing world: When the distribution of land, income and opportunity be- comes distorted to the point of desperation, what political leaders must often weigh is the risk of unpopular but necessary social reform —against the risk of social rebellion. Is it really in the long-term interest of the United States to provide the means of suppressing those voices calling for "neces- sary social reform" in inequitable structures and systems? A recent study by the Center for Defense Information in Wash- ington points out that, in the proposed FY 1975 budget, the Adminis- tration is requesting $2.5 billion in military assistance for 27 countries which forbid political opposition. Closer examination of this list re- veals that in some of these receiving countries, such as Brazil, Chile, Bolivia, South Vietnam and the Philippines, there have been continu- ing allegations made by church and international organizations that torture and other similar tactics are employed as a means of political control. It is not at all in the U.S. interest to be even marginally asso- ciated with financing governing elites or training their members who employ these forms of coercion. The U.S. Catholic Conference rec- ommends that the Committee vote to terminate such programs in the name of human rights. Because of its transnational presence and system of communi- cation, the Church has been one voice identifying the forms of re- pression which exist in several countries presently receiving U.S. military assistance. A particularly striking passage from a statement of the Brazilian Bishops of the Southern region of Brazil in March 1973, offers the following dialogue with Brazilian military authorities: It is not lawful for you to arrest people the way you do, without identification of agents, without communication to judges, without sentencing. Many of the arrests are kidnappings. It is not lawful for you to submit people to physical, psychological or moral torture in order to obtain confessions even more so when this leads to permanent damage to the health, psychol- ogical breakdowns, mutilations and even death. This passage is used only to illustrate the kinds of human rights violations which are alleged in a country destined to receive over sixty million dollars in military assistance this year, and from which over seven thousand members of the military have been trained in the Military Assistance Training Program. In the face of repeated assertions of human rights violations, the Administrative Board of the U.S. Catholic Conference, in February 1974, issued statements of solidarity with the Churches of Chile and Brazil. The intent of these statements was not to speak to foreign governments, but rather to addressable U.S. government, as well as the private sector, asking them to assess their policies of assistance to and involvement with 21 both Chile and Brazil in light of how human rights are being observed in those countries. Although the statements mentioned economic assistance, this testimony is concerned with the military assistance program. The decision to deny another country economic aid is always a very difficult choice because of the positive purpose economic as- sistance is designed to fulfill. The decision to withhold or terminate military assistance in the face of human rights violations perpetrated by military regimes presently in power can be made with greater clarity and assurance. The balancing factors in the decision on mili- tary aid are much less compelling. The Abourezk amendments provide a means to make this deci- sion and to make it with precision. They force the United States to end the business of offering training which can later be used to impli- cate it in fundamental crimes against the dignity, rights and freedom of others. They enable the United States to announce a standard of performance required of any who would seek U.S. aid for military purposes. These amendments are not undue interference in the in- ternal affairs of others. Rather, they are minimally necessary safe- guards lest American power be used for objectives outside U.S. borders which U.S. citizens would never tolerate here at home. The link between the standards the United States seeks to achieve within this country and the uses of U.S. power and wealth tolerated abroad touches the moral basis of the argument being made in this testimony. Although often failing in practice here at home, there is a constitutional commitment to a system of govern- ment based on the dignity of the person and the protection of the basic rights which assure human dignity. Implied in the U.S. consti- 22 £L 3 tutional system is the moral premise that where human rights are abused with impunity anywhere they are threatened everywhere. Any human community, including political society, is held together by bonds of trust and respect which are made visible and effective in the exercise of responsibility for one another. To refuse to accept responsibility for the life and dignity of others is to open the road for rule by terrorism, torture and brute force. The exercise of responsibility is especially needed in the interna- tional community. Since individual states are still the primary agents of authority and action in international politics, the responsibility for assuring the protection of human rights rests principally with them. If the United States cannot maintain a certain consistency between its national ideals of government and its international behavior, the very claim to universal validity upon which the rights of U.S. citizens are founded is severely weakened. An unsupervised military assistance program can be the instru- ment of moral bankruptcy, a means of corrupting in the world those ideals the U.S. government is pledged to maintain at home. The Abourezk amendments provide a means of testing U.S. military as- sistance programs against its most deeply held moral and political beliefs. Those beliefs can be a vital force in shaping an international system founded on the dignity of the person, and committed to building a community of nations in which the political, social and economic rights of the person are acknowledged, protected and fostered. To fail to test all programs against these moral and political beliefs is not only to sacrifice the rights of others, it is to deny the best instincts of U.S. citizens and to deprive the international com- munity of the fruits of the political heritage of the United States. 23 24 What Are the Trade-Offs? Cut $ Amount (Approx.) Increase National Heart Lung Institute research $25 million Minutemen Missile silo fortifications Dept, of Agriculture water purification/ waste disposal grants $30 million development of ballistic reentry systems Dept, of HEW health services programs $31 million ICBM tech- nology summer youth employment and other youth programs $35 million B52D bomber modifi- cations education programs for handicapped children $48 million continued development of B-1 bomber economic development assistance for local communities $56 million M88 Tank Recovery Vehicle research and treatment for alcoholism, drug abuse and mental health $111 million development of strategic cruise missiles agricultural conservation programs $175 million procurement of DLGN nuclear- powered frigates vocational education, manpower training and employment $426 million acquisition of Patrol Frigates Source: SANE 25 Organizations/Resources Amnesty International of the U.S.A., 200 W. 72nd Street, New York, New York, 10023. Tel. (212) 724-9907. Publishes newsletter "Amnesty Action" and "Matchbox," $15 yr. (membership fee). In 1975, published worldwide survey, Report on Torture, 282 pp., $3.45. Available from Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 19 Union Square West, New York, New York 10003. Also available from AIUSA is "A Chronicle of Current Events," a journal of the human rights movement in the USSR, $2. 50/issue, plus 15% handling charge. Catholic Institute for International Relations, 41 Holland Park, London W1 1 3RP, England. Publishes a regular news brief on current affairs, "Comment," $9/yr. A recent issue deals with "Arms and the Third World." Also published the 1975 report of the Rhodesian Catholic Com- mission for Justice and Peace, "The Man in the Middle," $1.30. Internews, Box 4400, Berkeley, California 94704. Publishes the monthly "International Bulletin," $8/yr. Focus is on human rights in global context. Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Organization of American States, 19th and Constitution, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20006. Tel. (202) 331-1010. Publishes reports on the work accomplished by the Commission at its semi-annual sessions, $1 each. Also has published reports on the situation of human rights in Chile, Honduras and Cuba, (free). Two pamphlets, "Who It Is and How It Functions" and the "Handbook of Existing Rules Pertaining to Human Rights" are also free. Publications are in English and Spanish. Office of International Justice and Peace, U.S. Catholic Conference, 1312 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005. Tel. (202)659-6812. In 1974, published the booklet, "Human Rights: A Question of Conscience," 50*, which includes case studies of Rhodesia, Chile and the Philippines. Also published the U.S. Catholic Bishops statement "Human Rights in Chile and Brazil," 10*; USCC Congressional testimony on the "U.N. Declaration on Human Rights," 10*; and an English edition of "The Universal Declaration of Human Rights," an ecumenical commentary first issued in Brazil and Chile, 50*. Pontifical Commission Justice and Peace, 16 Palazzo San Calisto, Vatican City. Published booklet, "The Church and Human Rights," $1.70. Available from the USCC Publications Office, 1312 Massachu- setts Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005. 26 Research Center for Religion and Human Rights in Closed Societies, Ltd., 475 Riverside Drive, New York 10027. Tel. (212) 870-2481 or 2440. Publishes monthly, "RCDA-Religion in Communist Dominated Areas," $15/yr. Focus is on violation of religious freedom and other human rights in all closed societies. U.N. Commission on Human Rights, United Nations, New York, New York 10017. Tel. (212) 754-1234. The U.N. Office of Public Information (same address) has avail- able several publications on human rights resulting from acti- vities of the Commission. World Federalist Association, 1424 Sixteenth Street, N.W., Washing- ton, D.C. 20036. Tel. (202) 483-0550. Publishes the monthly magazine, "Transnational Perspectives," $3/yr., focusing on research and education in global inter- dependence, and the biweekly, "Legislation ... in the world interest," $2/yr. 27 28 PROCESS This process can be undertaken by any group, such as a class, an adult education study group, an ad hoc group, a parish council .... The time schedule is flexible. Study Plan Meeting!. Group convenes and opens meeting with paraliturgical celebration, "A Satire on Idolatry" (p. 7 ). The group takes the quiz, "How Much Is Too Much?" (p. 31 ), suffi- cient copies having been reproduced for this purpose. After quizzes have been scored and summarized, discussion follows on: a) What is the significance of the data? b) What is the relationship between the pattern of the group's (.or individual's) responses and the correct answers? (Was the tendency to overesti- mate or underestimate the problem?) c) What are the idols the group can identify? Discussion is taped for use in Meeting II. Over a period of time (one week to one month), as preparation for Meeting II, the group studies "A Contrary Weapon" (p. 9 ) and "A Positive Weapon" (p.18 ) and materials selected from the re- sources given following those pieces. Meeting II. Group reconvenes and discusses again the signifi- cance of the data in the quiz and the pattern of the group's original responses in light of their study. As the discussion develops, selected portions from the taped discussion of Meeting I are played. Group reflects together on the change of attitudes that has or has not taken place. In preparation for Meeting III, the group explores the involve- ment of their members of Congress (House and Senate) in the pro- motion of human rights legislation: a) How did the members of Congress in your district and state vote on the Abourezk amendments dis- cussed in "A Positive Weapon"? b) Several members of Congress have offered human rights amendments to the current foreign economic assistance legislation. Have yours? Does he/she support or oppose those proposed? Why? Meeting III. Group discusses the involvement of their members of Congress in the promotion of human rights legislation. Group together reflects on the question: Does the present U.S. foreign policy promote human rights? 29 Meeting IV. Group considers in what specific ways, in their indi- vidual and group situation, they can have an impact on what the U.S. government is involved in abroad. Attention should focus on drawing up short-term action plans and plans for continuing involvement over the long run in studying and monitoring Congres- sional activity on this issue. Meeting V. Group appraises: a) the learning process of Meetings I through IV and b) the utility of the plans adopted, making adjust- ments as necessary. Optional. Group communicates its appraisal and its plans to the Office of International Justice and Peace of the U.S. Catholic Con- ference. 30 Quiz: How Much Is Too Much? 1. Between 1973 and 1974 arms sales to less developed countries increased by a. 10% b. 20% c. 30% d.40% 2. Presently, how many nations can produce nuclear explosives? a. 5 b. 10 c. 15 d. 20 3. The United States has some type of military commitment with how many nations? a. 70 b. 90 c. 110 d. 130 4. In 1975, the direct cost of U.S. foreign commitments will come to a. $5 billion b. $10 billion c. $15 billion d. $20 billion 5. Adding the indirect costs, the total cost of U.S. foreign com- mitments is about a. $30 billion b. $40 billion c. $50 billion d. $60 billion 6. Of all U.S. tactical nuclear weapons, about what percentage is located outside the United States? a. 20 b. 30 c. 40 d. 50 7. A 100-megaton nuclear attack on the United States would instantly kill what percent of the U.S. population? a. 10 b. 15 c. 20 d. 25 8. A 1000-megaton nuclear attack on the United States, within the first few seconds, would kill how many million people? a. 80 b. 90 c. 100 d. 110 9. Which country is the largest arms seller in the world? a. USSR b. USA c. France d. Britain 10. From 1961 to 1971, the USSR supplied arms to 37 countries, and the United States to a. 15 b. 25 c. 50 d. 75 11. Since World War II, the United States has trained foreign military leaders numbering over a. 50,000 b. 100,000 c. 250,000 d. 500,000 12. Presently, the United States has military personnel stationed in how many countries abroad? a. 15 b. 25 c. 40 d. 50 13 Presently, the United States has military personnel stationed abroad numbering a. 50,000 b. 100,000 c. 250,000 d. 500,000 14. To how many authoritarian governments does the United States give aid? a. 21 b. 36 c. 54 d.72 15. Of the authoritarian governments the United States aids, how many are military dictatorships? a. 0 b. 6 c. 12 d. 18 16. Torture has become a state institution in how many countries? a. 5 b. 10 c. 20 d. 30 17. How many American companies are legally engaged in either producing or exporting weapons? a. 100 b. 500 c. 750 d. 1,000 18. Jn 1965, the United Nations called upon member states to ratify nine human rights conventions. How many has the United States ratified? a. 1 b. 3 c. 5 d..7 31 Answers: 1. d; 2. d; 3. b; 4. d; 5. d; 6. d; 7. c; 8. c; 9. b; 10. d; 1 1. d; 12. c; 13. d; 14. c; 15. d; 16. d; 17. d; 18. a. Sources: Amnesty International Center for Defense Information Stockholm International Peace Research Institute United Nations Association of the USA U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency 32 Office of International Justice and Peace United States Catholic Conference 1312 Massachusetts Avenue. N.W. Washington. D C. 20005 50C