nebraska reportnebraskansforpeace.org/uploaded/pdfs/np2009/2009fallreport.pdf____ credit card...

Nonprofit Org.U.S. Postage

PAIDPermit No. 310

Lincoln, NE

Nebraskans for Peace941 ‘O’ St., Ste. 1026Lincoln, NE 68508

Phone:402-475-4620/Fax:475-4624nfpstate@nebraskansforpeace.orgwww.nebraskansforpeace.org

ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED

What’s HOT inGlobal Warming p. 6

Decarbonizing War p. 7

Hyman Minsky and theEconomic Meltdown p. 8

Nebraskans for PeaceLegislative Wrap-Up p. 9

Speaking Our Peace p. 12

NFP Policy Statement onAfghanistan/Pakistan p. 3

StratCom…The NextGeneration in War-fighting p. 4

UNA-USA Adopts StratComResolution p. 5

inside:inside:inside:inside:inside:

2009 Annual Peace Conference

Phyllis Bennis

“What a Just U.S. Policyin the Muslim World

Would Look Like”with

Phyllis Bennis of the Institute forPolicy Studies in Washington, D.C.

Saturday, October 24 • 9:30 a.m. – 5:00 p.m.Trinity United Methodist Church • 5th & Elm Streets in Grand Island

(See article on page 3)

Send us an email at:[email protected]

with the wordsEMAIL NEBRASKA REPORT

in the subject line. And instead of havingyour Nebraska Report delivered by mail,you’ll receive an email when a new issueis available, with instructions for how toread the publication online. By reducingNFP’s printing and mailing costs, we’ll

leave a smaller carbon footprint.

Get the Nebraska Report in your ‘Inbox’… not your mail box.

Nebraskans for PeaceVOLUME 37, NUMBER 6

Nebraska ReportFALL 2009

There is no Peace without Justice

FALL 2009 NEBRASKA REPORT, P.2

Moving? Change of Email Address?

Nebraska ReportThe Nebraska Report is published nine times annually by Nebraskans for Peace. Opin-ions stated do not necessarily reflect the views of the directors or staff of Nebraskans forPeace.

Newspaper Committee: Tim Rinne, Editor; Mark Vasina, ChristyHargesheimer, Peter Salter, Marsha Fangmeyer, Paul Olson

Typesetting and Layout: Michelle Ashley; Printing: Fremont TribuneWebsite: Justin Kemerling

Letters, articles, photographs and graphics are welcomed. Deadline is the first of themonth for publication in the following month’s issue. Submit to: Nebraska Report, c/oNebraskans for Peace, 941 ‘O’ Street, Suite 1026, Lincoln, NE 68508.

Nebraskans for PeaceNFP is a statewide grassroots advocacy organization working nonviolently for peace withjustice through community-building, education and political action.

State Board of DirectorsKerry Beldin, Leola Bullock, Holly Burns, A’Jamal Byndon, Miguel Carranza, FrankCordaro, Josh Cramer, Henry D’Souza, Bob Epp, Marsha Fangmeyer (Secretary), JillFrancke, Caryl Guisinger, Christy Hargesheimer, Patrick Jones, Justin Kemerling, JohnKrejci, Bill Laird, Frank LaMere, Rich Maciejewski, Rev. Jack McCaslin, Michael McKenny,Patrick Murray, Paul Olson (President), Byron Peterson, Zola Petersen, Del Roper, DeirdreRoutt (Vice President), Linda Ruchala, Jay Schmidt, Lela Shanks, Eva Sohl, Alex Stamm,Nic Swiercek, Hank van den Berg, Mark Vasina (Treasurer), Terry Werner. Tim Rinne(State Coordinator), Brittany Crawford (Office & Fundraising Coordinator), Susan Alleman(Organizational Administrator), 941 ‘O’ Street, Suite 1026, Lincoln, NE 68508, Phone402-475-4620/Fax 402-475-4624, nfpstate@ nebraskansforpeace.org. Mark Welsch,(Omaha Coordinator) Omaha NFP Office, P.O. Box 6418, Omaha, NE 68106, Phone402-453-0776, nfpomaha@ nebraskansforpeace.org.

NFP Chapter & Affiliate Contact Information

NAME (print) ________________________________________________________

Old Address ________________________________________________________

City _______________________________ State _________ Zip _______________

NEW ADDRESS ______________________________________________________

City _______________________________ State _________ Zip _______________

New Phone # ________________________________________________________

NEW EMAIL __________________________________________________

Crete Chapter ................................................. Pat Wikel ................................ 402-826-4818

Lincoln Chapter .............................................. Jill Francke ............................. 402-770-1930

Omaha Chapter .............................................. Mark Welsch .......................... 402-453-0776

Scottsbluff Chapter ......................................... Byron Peterson ...................... 308-783-1412

Southwest Nebraska Chapter ........................ Dennis Demmel ..................... 308-352-4078

Central Nebraska Peace Workers .................. Charles Richardson ............... 402-462-4794

Contact the NFP State Office for information on the UNL, UNO, UNK, Creighton &Nebraska Wesleyan University and Hastings, Dana & Doane College Chapters

Join NFP Todayat the

Become a Member of the Oldest StatewidePeace & Justice Organization in the United States

Clip & Mail

Yes! Here’s my membership to NFP at the special introductory rate of $25.

____ Check (payable to ‘Nebraskans for Peace’)____ Credit Card (Master Card/Visa)

card #_______________________________ expires ____________ 3-digit ____

Name ____________________________________________________________

Address __________________________________________________________

City/State/Zip _____________________________________________________

Home Phone ______________________ Work/Cell _______________________

Email Address _____________________________________________________

Legislative District # (or name of your State Senator) _______________________

Clip and send this form to: Nebraskans for Peace, 941 ‘O’ Street, Suite 1026, Lincoln, NE 68508

Or become a member online, visit: nebraskansforpeace.org and click on “Donate.”

ISSUE INTERESTS (circle all that apply)

Anti-War & International Law StratCom & Anti-Nuclear Organizing

Turn Off the Violence Civil Rights & Economic Justice Environment

VOLUNTEER INTERESTS (check all that apply)

_____ Get involved with a local NFP Chapter.

_____ Lead discussions or participate in a speakers’ bureau

_____ Attend rallies, vigils or news conferences

_____ Staff a table at NFP-endorsed events

_____ Help out with office tasks at the Lincoln or Omaha offices

Membership payments to ‘Nebraskans for Peace’ are NOT tax-deductibledue to our political activity. Tax-deductible contributions can be madeto the ‘Nebraska Peace Foundation’ for our educational work.

New Member rate of just $25


lead any operations in that country requiring force—if for noother reason than that, from the outset, they would have hadthe sanction and support of the international community. Theleading role the U.S. continues to play militarily in Afghanistanonly enforces the image of the U.S. as an imperial power andcomplicates the effort of the Obama Administration to estab-lish a new relationship with the Muslim world.

There is an important lesson to be learned from this ex-perience that should have immediate application to U.S.’s mili-tary policy toward Pakistan. Without the endorsement of theUnited Nations, any unilateral military intervention in Pakistanby the United States is liable to produce the same sort of cul-tural backlash and unsatisfactory outcome as our record inAfghanistan. International sanction and support is even all themore critical in Pakistan, as Pakistan is a nuclear power withits own sizable arsenal of weapons. Given the instability of the

That the United Nations—not the United States—should bethe agent leading any police or military actions in Afghani-stan has been the position of Nebraskans for Peace virtuallysince the terrorist attacks of 9/11. In choosing to launch itsown unilateral military attack (“Operation Enduring Freedom”)on the Taliban government October 7, 2001, the Bush/CheneyAdministration, however, deliberately chose to bypass theUN. UN sanction for military intervention in Afghanistan didnot come until the following December, after the Taliban gov-ernment had formally fallen. Through its “International Secu-rity Assistance Force,” the UN to this day maintains a militarypresence of 50,000 troops from approximately 40 differentnations in Afghanistan.

Considering the political and military quagmire that hasunfolded in Afghanistan under the U.S.’s leadership, there’slittle doubt that the UN would have been a superior agent to

Pakistani political situation, the last thing to be desired is forthese weapons to fall into the hands of either the Taliban oral-Qaida. And that is not outside the realm of possibility. Untilthe Pakistani government’s recent military offensive, theTaliban had moved to within one hundred miles of the na-tional capital, Lahore.

As an avowed advocate for peaceful negotiation andresolution of conflict, Nebraskans for Peace naturally deploresthe violence of this military offensive in Pakistan, the civiliancasualties and the displacement it represents to over twomillion Pakistanis. While the U.S. has no known troops onthe ground in Pakistan, it is actively aiding and abetting thePakistani government in this offensive, providing military sup-port and serving as an active combatant through its deadlyuse of drone aircraft.

NFP Policy Statement on Afghanistan/Pakistan

conclusion on page 11


2009 Annual Peace ConferenceAfghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan…

The nations with which the U.S. isbecoming politically and militarilyentangled seem to be growing by theyear. In the last decade alone, the U.S.government’s ‘War on Terror’ in theMiddle East and Central Asia has costover a trillion dollars in taxpayer money,a fortune in international ‘good will’ andhundreds of thousands of lives.

But the U.S.’s policy problems inthis region aren’t limited to thesebattlefields. Other oil-rich, strategic andMuslim countries as diverse as Somaliaand Nigeria in Africa, Lebanon, Turkey,Syria and Palestine in the Mideast, areall simmering ‘hot spots’ that coulderupt if the U.S. doesn’t change itspolicies in these vast areas of the globe.

Author and analyst Phyllis Bennis,who directs the New InternationalismProject for the Institute for Policy Studiesin Washington, D.C. and serves as afellow of the Transnational Institute inAmsterdam, is uniquely positioned tohelp chart a new course for the U.S. inthe Mideast and Central Asia.

While working as a journalist at the

U.N. during the run-up to the 1990-91Gulf War, she witnessed first-hand theU.S.’s efforts to dictate terms at theUnited Nations. That experience in turndrew her into the struggle over the use of‘economic sanctions’ to punish Iraq for

its alleged weapons of mass destruction.In 1999, Bennis accompanied a group ofcongressional aides to Iraq to examinethe impact of U.S.-led sanctions onhumanitarian conditions there, and laterjoined former U.N. Assistant SecretaryGeneral Denis Halliday, who resignedhis position as Humanitarian Coordina-tor in Iraq to protest the impact ofsanctions, in a speaking tour.

In 2001 she helped found (and stillserves on the steering committee of) boththe U.S. Campaign to End IsraeliOccupation and the national anti-warcoalition United for Peace and Justice.

She also co-chairs the U.N.-basedInternational Coordinating Network onPalestine and acts as an informal adviserto several United Nations officials onMiddle East issues.

Bennis is the author of numerous

books, including Ending the Iraq War:A Primer (Olive Branch Press, 2008),Understanding the U.S.-Iran Crisis:A Primer (Olive Branch Press, 2008),Understanding the Palestinian-IsraeliConflict: A Primer (Interlink, 2009),Challenging Empire: How People,Governments and the U.N. Defy U.S.Power (Interlink, 2005) and Before &After: U.S Foreign Policy and theSeptember 11 Crisis (Interlink, 2002).

This year’s Annual Peace Confer-ence, which is co-sponsored by theUniversity of Nebraska-Omaha School ofSocial Work, will be held on Saturday,

October 24 at Trinity United MethodistChurch, 5th & Elm Streets in GrandIsland, starting at 9:30 a.m. In additionto the keynote speech by Bennis, therewill be a second presentation from arepresentative of Amnesty International,outlining the need for a more justnational immigration policy. Theluncheon program will continue thecelebration of the 40th anniversary ofNFP’s founding, confirming our statusas ‘the oldest statewide Peace & Justiceorganization in the country.’ And theafternoon session will feature a selectionof Peace & Justice Workshops covering agamut of timely topics. Registration forthe entire day, which includes lunch, is$25 if you register by October 20. (Afterthe deadline, the cost rises to $30.) Four-and-one-half CEUs are available forSocial Workers and Licensed MentalHealth Practitioners.

Visit the NFP website atwww.nebraskansforpeace.org forinformation on how to register, orcontact the NFP State Office directly byemail at [email protected] or by phone at 402-475-4620.

Author and analyst Phyllis Bennis is uniquelypositioned to help chart a new course for the

U.S. in the Mideast and Central Asia.


StratCom…The Next Generation in War-fighting

International Week of Protest

Opposing Space Militarization

October 3–10, 2009Modern warfare, such as the U.S. occupation ofAfghanistan and attacks on Pakistan, uses UnmannedAerial Vehicles (UAVs) and GPS-guided bombs. Directedby space satellites, and remotely controlled far from thebattlefield, these weapons are responsible for massivecivilian casualties.

In the 2003 “Shock and Awe” bombing campaign on Iraq,70 percent of the weapons used by the Pentagon weredirected to their targets by space technology. Our childrenare being trained through video games today to be theremote killers of tomorrow. Death at a distance is still bloodon our hands.

We in the Global Network Against Weapons and NuclearPower in Space say it’s time to open our eyes and STOPthe military’s use of space for war on Earth.It is time to preserve space for peace and to end war.

by Tim RinneNFP State Coordinator

The following article wasprepared for distribution at theUnited Nations Association-USA National Convention, June12-14 in Washington, D.C.

The consolidation of eightmilitary missions in U.S.Strategic Command (nucleardeterrence; space; cyberspace;full-spectrum global strike;missile defense; intelligence/surveillance/reconnaissance;information operations; andcombating weapons of massdestruction) constitutes morethan a simple expansion ofStratCom’s power and reach.

It represents an evolution-ary leap—a paradigm shift—inthe way war is made.

Just as the invention ofgunpowder and the splitting ofthe atom ushered in a new ageof war-fighting, the creation ofthis global, integrated, space-reliant command has trans-formed the face of warfare.

Under “CONPLAN 8022”(the Pentagon contingency plandeveloped in the aftermath of 9/11), U.S. Strategic Commandoutside Omaha experiencedwhat StratCom Commanderformer astronaut General KevinChilton described as not simply“a sea-state change, but atsunami of change” in itsmission and organization. In thespace of five years, this Cold

War icon shed its ‘defensive’role as the headquarters of theU.S.’s nuclear deterrent tobecome the command center foroffensively waging the Bush/Cheney Administration’sinternational “War on Terror.”StratCom went from being the‘unthinkable’ weapon that, itwas hoped, would ‘never beused’ to ‘being used for every-thing.’

On the mere perception of athreat to America’s nationalsecurity, StratCom (on wordfrom the president) is nowauthorized to preemptivelyattack any place on the face ofthe earth within one hour—using either conventional ornuclear weapons. It’s not fornothing that CommanderChilton testified to Congressthat he thought StrategicCommand should be re-named“Global Command” to betterreflect its new role and mission.

The agility and speed withwhich the command nowoperates effectively bypass anyconstitutional checks by theU.S. government’s legislative orjudicial branches (not tomention international bodieslike the UN Security Council).As the personal preserve of theexecutive branch, 60 minutesfrom now, StratCom could havestarted the next war andCongress and the Courtswouldn’t even know till theyheard about it on CNN.

At a “National DefenseIndustrial Association” confer-ence in March 2007, formerStratCom Commander (andcurrent Vice Chair of the JointChiefs of Staff) Marine GeneralJames Cartwright described thechanged face of warfare thatStratCom now sees itselfconfronting in the 21st century:

“Anything that comes offthe face of the earth” [be it anexplosive detonation, a rocketlaunch or a missile armed witheither a conventional or nuclearwarhead]…

…you have about 100seconds to type it, figure outwhat it is, and act. I can’t evenget a phone call through thatfast.

But the national system isset up to have a phone confer-ence about that.

You try to do that in themiddle of the night. You try todo that in the middle of theday—get people out of meet-ings. It’s not possible.

In that 100 seconds, whatdo we do when we get people onthe phone? We describe what’sgoing on so we spend most ofthe time in discovery ratherthan in options and activity andexecution. We can’t do businessthat way.

And that, he said, was “thesimple one” compared to thepotential threat of a cyberattack:

…Virus launched out ofBaghdad towards the UnitedStates, out to geosynchronous


UNA-USA AdoptsStratCom Resolution

The United Nations Association-USA unanimously adopted the following resolution on the “PeacefulUses of Outer Space” at its 2009 National Convention in Washington, D.C. June 12-14.

Submitted by the Nebraska Division of UNA-USA with the support of seven co-sponsors, theresolution not only addresses the need for a new space treaty, but also the role of U.S. StrategicCommand (StratCom) in “sustaining the U.S.’s technological advantage and freedom of action inouter space.”

Nebraska Division President Anita Fussell and John Krejci, chair of the group’s ‘Advocacy Com-mittee,’ served as delegates to the convention and—together with Nebraskans for Peace State Coor-dinator Tim Rinne—led the debate over the resolution. Although the original resolution underwent anumber of revisions before final adoption, the Nebraska Division couldn’t help but be pleased by theoutcome. Both the issues of StratCom and the United Nations’ annual “Prevention of an Arms Race inOuter Space” (PAROS) resolution are now on the UNA-USA’s national agenda, and the adoptedresolution itself is being shared with every member on Congress and the executive branch.

Nebraskans for Peace wishes to express its thanks to the Nebraska Division of the UNA-USA forits leadership in working to alert the national and international community about the threat StratComnow poses to the peacemaking goals of the United Nations.

S. 10 Peaceful Uses of Outer SpaceSubmitted by Nebraska DivisionCo-sponsored by: Montana Chapter; Monterey Bay Chapter; Albuquerque Chapter; Pike’s Peak

Chapter; Northern Colorado Chapter; Seattle Chapter; and Iowa Division.

Peace, Security and Disarmament GroupThe National Convention of the United Nations Association of the United States of America,

Recalling that Americans helped write into the U.N. Charter a mandate for the “maintenance ofinternational peace and security with the least diversion for armaments of the world’s human andeconomic resources,” and mindful of the mammoth expenditures on weaponry in concurrent armsraces since 1950;

Mindful that for decades the United States has joined with other technologically capable nationsin insisting on the peaceful uses of outer space;

Recognizing that the UN General Assembly annually reaffirms its desire to preserve space forpeaceful purposes by a near-unanimous vote for the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space(PAROS) resolution;

Applauds creation by the UN Conference on Disarmament, with U.S. support, of a working groupon weapons in space; and

Noting, however, that in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 2001 the executivebranch of the government of the United States assigned to the U.S. Strategic Command (StratCom)the task of sustaining the U.S.’s technological advantage and freedom of action in outer space;

Therefore,Asks the U.S. Administration and Congress to re-evaluate U.S. military policy regarding the

transformed role of U.S. Strategic Command;Urges the U.S. Administration to support the annual UN General Assembly resolution for the

Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space (PAROS); andCalls on the U.S. Administration to promptly undertake negotiations—under the auspices of the

United Nations—to negotiate a new treaty respecting the peaceful uses of outer space.

orbit, 23,000 miles out, and backdown to Seattle for the attack—300 milliseconds…

I can’t afford to do businessthe way we’re doing business, sowe have to build the organiza-tional construct to work in thesetimelines. We have to change thecultural approach to doingbusiness, [from] having peopleget involved and discuss andreview and then decide and thenexecute… to ‘intervention byexception’—machine to machine,intervention by exception. Buildthe business rules. Missile defensewon’t work without it. Space doesnot work without that. We’re at ahuge disadvantage if we think of itotherwise.

But what happens to all thepeople who think they have avote?

They’re disenfranchised.Business has discovered this.What do you do with middlemanagement in those kind oftimelines? It’s a huge problem.

Count Congress, the courts,the United Nations SecurityCouncil among the “middlemanagement” that’s being“disenfranchised” underStratCom’s new operating format.The compressed time-frame—ofnecessity, StratCom wouldargue—limits democratic input.Decisions have to be made—”machine to machine.” The‘checks and balances’ provided forunder the Constitution to preventthe executive branch fromoverreaching have been eclipsedby technology. Under theseconditions, the safeguard of‘separation of powers’ has becomea rickety thing of the past,unsuited to the threats of the 21st

century.This fixation on speed,

however, comes dangerously closeto a policy of ‘shoot first, askquestions later.’

What about computer error or‘flawed intelligence’? What ifStratCom launches and coordi-nates an attack (as it did with the

“Shock and Awe” bombingcampaign in Iraq) but there are noWeapons of Mass Destruction?What if, as was the case with Iraq,the information was wrong?

Even if it acts in good faith,with the best of intentions,StratCom—by its very mode ofoperation—runs the risk offlouting international rule of law.It risks a repetition of the same“illegal” act under the UN Charterthat Secretary General Kofi Annanspoke of when rendering judgmenton that preemptive attack againstIraq.

This ‘New StratCom’ how-ever, is not just a ‘good soldier’dutifully and obediently followingorders it’s handed.

It proposes. It promotes.It’s walking the halls of

Congress, lobbying electedofficials, hobnobbing with militarycontractors and the scientificcommunity, and spinning itspublic relations message as itmakes its views and wantsknown—on everything from whywe need to develop a new genera-tion of nuclear weapons to havingdirect control over the newlycommissioned “Cyber Command.”

With its comprehensivemission array, centralized author-ity and emphasis on speed andagility, StratCom will not onlyplan, direct and execute the nextmilitary conflict the White Housegets the U.S. into—it will collectand interpret the intelligence uponwhich the decision to attack will bemade. The same entity that (underits “Intelligence, Surveillance andReconnaissance” mission) isframing the alleged threat is alsothe entity that (under its “GlobalStrike” and “Combating Weaponsof Mass Destruction” missions)will execute the strike. A ‘firewall’no longer separates the ‘accuser’from the ‘executor.’ It’s a ‘closedloop’ with lots of room for humanerror—if not outright mischief.

Ten years ago, with thePentagon’s more decentralized



NASA Scientist Jim Hansen Takes on ‘Big Coal’

What’s HOT in Global Warming?What’s HOT in Global Warming?by Professor Bruce E. Johansen

Jim Hansen, director of NASA’sGoddard Institute for Space Stud-ies, always has been a scientistwho operates with an uncommondose of conscience. Lately,Hansen has been stepping up hisbattle against coal-generatedpower. He personally went to thebarricades and was hauled off tojail with 30 activists in a protestof ‘mountain-top’ removal min-ing in West Virginia on June 23.Charged with obstructing officersand impeding traffic, Hansensoon was citing Mahatma Gandhion the difference between civildisobedience and civil resistance.

Hansen says that shuttingdown coal-fired power until emis-sions can be removed will providea major impediment to globalwarming—perhaps the most cru-cial solution of all. As a side-ben-efit, reducing use of coal will re-duce coal mining, including thenew style of strip mining thatblasts the tops off mountains andsifts the debris for fuel. Coal-min-ing and power interests stand inthe way, however. “If govern-ments continue to abdicate theirresponsibility to citizens in favorof special interests,” Hansen says,“It [civil resistance] seems essen-tial. Strength comes from realiza-tion of rightness of course.”

In addition, Hansen haspointedly criticized the Waxman-Markey ‘cap-and-trade’ carbonreduction bill being debated on

Capitol Hill because it allows con-struction of new coal-fired powerplants. As for the support manymajor environmental groups havegiven to the bill, Hansen said.“This is just stupidity on the partof environmental organizations inWashington. The fact that someof these organizations have be-come part of the Washington ‘goalong, get along’ establishment isvery unfortunate.” He points outthat the bill still allows new coal-fired power as well as strip-min-ing of mountain peaks, whichHansen calls “blasphemy”—nota scientific term, but it gets thepoint across.

Fee and DividendEqually adamantly, Hansen

believes that cap-and-trade will beuseless in the long-run battleagainst global warming. “Thefundamental reason that we donot switch to cleaner energies isthat fossil fuels remain the cheap-est energy source, as long as theydo not have to pay for their coststo society,” Hansen wrote re-cently. “We already should havebeen making fossil fuels pay forthe damage they cause to humanhealth and the environment. Butnow that we understand the cli-mate implications of fossil fueluse, and recognizing that it isnecessary to move beyond fossilfuels at some point anyhow, it isessential that we put a price oncarbon emissions to make that

transition occur sooner, in an eco-nomically efficient way.”

Hansen favors a direct “car-bon fee” applied uniformly to alloil, gas and coal at the source, atthe first sale at the mine or portof entry. His plan would then re-turn a share of that fee to peopleon a monthly basis in the form ofelectronic deposits in bank ac-counts or on debit cards. The feeshould increase gradually to ex-ert downward pressure on produc-tion of greenhouse gases, and belarge enough to affect purchasingdecisions.

Measured by 2007 fossil-fueluse in the United States, such afee, Hansen calculates, wouldgenerate $670 billion—a divi-dend for each adult resident ofalmost $3,000 per year. Allowing$1,500 per child (two per family),a likely family rebate would total$9,000 to offset rising prices thatwould be levied by companiespaying the tax. The idea is to re-ward production that reducesgreenhouse-gas production.

“The carbon fee would pro-vide a strong incentive to replaceinefficient infrastructure. It wouldspur the economy,” Hansen states.Financial incentives would spurnew building, appliance and ve-hicle efficiency standards. It alsocould provide an incentive tomove to ever-higher energy effi-ciencies and carbon-free energysources. Furthermore, Hansensaid, “It would spur innovation.In this fee and rebate approach, a

tipping point would be reached asenergy efficiency and carbon-freeenergies become cheaper thanfossil fuels. We would then tran-sition rapidly to the era beyondfossil fuels.” Such an approachalso would retain money insidethe country as transportation be-comes more energy-efficient.

Cap-and-Trade: A TaxCap-and-trade, is also a tax,

says Hansen, but one more likelyto direct profits to “millionaireson Wall Street and other tradingfloors at public expense,” as theymanipulate the new market, pro-viding “an invitation to blackmailby utilities that threaten ‘black-out coming’ to gain increasedemission permits.”

“The truth,” said Hansen “is[that] the climate course set byWaxman-Markey is a disastercourse.” Most importantly,Hansen believes that cap-and-trade, a product of special inter-ests, will be subject to delay, so itwill not solve the problem. It mayslow emissions, but because of thelong lifetime of carbon dioxide inthe atmosphere, merely reducingthe rate of increase does littlegood. The proportion of carbondioxide in the air must fall fromthe present level (about 387 partsper million) to 350 p.p.m. orlower.

Hansen acknowledges thatsome environmental leaders sug-gest that he is naïve to think thatan alternative exists to cap-and-

trade. “They suggest that I shouldstick to climate modeling,”Hansen said. However, he contin-ued, “Their contention is that itis better to pass any bill now andimprove it later. Their belief thatthey, as opposed to the fossil in-terests, have more effect on thebill’s eventual shape seems to bethe pinnacle of naïveté.”

Hansen has his eye on thefuture of the Earth, not on expe-diency. “The proper course of ac-tion is clear, from the science andcommon sense. The geophysicalboundary conditions dictate acourse that causes coal emissionsto be phased out expeditiously—although not necessarily coal use.There should be an immediatehalt to construction of coal-firedpower plants that do not captureall emissions, including carbondioxide. Mountaintop removal,with its blasphemous environ-mental damage, should bebanned… We should move rap-idly to terminate coal use exceptwhere all emissions are captured.The truth is that the climate prob-lem cannot be solved without tak-ing on special interests, specifi-cally the coal industry.”

Bruce E. Johansen is a professor ofCommunication at the University ofNebraska-Omaha and author, in2009, of Hot Air and Hard Science:Dissecting the Global Warming De-bate and the two-volume Encyclope-dia of Global Warming Science andTechnology.


Decarbonizing WarPolitical ContactsPolitical ContactsPolitical ContactsPolitical ContactsPolitical ContactsThe White HouseWashington, DC 20500Comment Line: 202-456-1111202-456-1414; Fax 202-456-2993www.whitehouse.gov/contact/

Sen. Ben Nelson720 Hart Senate Office Bldg.Washington, D.C. 20510202-224-6551; Fax 202-228-0012402-391-3411 (Omaha)402-441-4600 (Lincoln)bennelson.senate.gov/contact/email.cfm

Sen. Mike Johanns1 Russell CourtyardWashington, D.C. 20510202-224-4224402-477-2008 (Lincoln)402-434-4799 (Fax)[email protected]

Rep. Jeff Fortenberry, District 11517 Longworth House Office Bldg.Washington, D.C. 20515202-225-4806402-438-1598 (Lincoln)http://fortenberry.house.gov/

Rep. Lee Terry, District 21524 Longworth HOBWashington, DC 20515202-225-4155; Fax 202-226-5452402-397-9944 (Omaha)http://leeterry.house.gov/

Rep. Adrian Smith, District 3503 Cannon House Office Bldg.Washington, DC 20515202-225-6435; Fax 202-225-0207888-ADRIAN7 (Toll Free)http://www.adriansmith.house.gov/

Capitol Hill 202-224-3121State Capitol 402-471-2311State Senator, District #State Capitol; PO Box 94604Lincoln, NE 68509-4604

Governor Dave HeinemanPO Box 94848Lincoln, NE 68509-4848402-471-2244; Fax 402-471-6031gov.state.ne.us conclusion on page 11

Modern war is hugely

greenhouse gas-

intensive and

monstrously harmful

to human health

and safety.

by Bruce Johansen

Now that the United States Environmental Pro-tection Agency finally has defined human-gen-erated greenhouse gases as pollutants harm-ful to health and safety and deserving of regu-lation, President Barack Obama should orderall departments of the federal government (mostnotably the Pentagon) to calculate their carbonfootprints. Such an audit should include the first-ever report of greenhouse-gas emissions formodern, mechanized warfare (in this instance,in Iraq and Afghanistan). Eventually, a world-wide ban on the use of fossil fuels in warfarewill make armed conflict beyond a given nation’sboundaries all but impossible.

Modern war is hugely greenhouse gas-in-tensive (an irony when it is waged to ‘protect’oil supplies) and (as war always has been)monstrously harmful to human health andsafety. War has never been a wise tool of di-plomacy, and never a friend of the Earth. To-day, in addition, it is helping push us towardenvironmental apocalypse.

United States armed forces, which main-tain as many as 1,000 bases in other countries,consume about 2 million gallons of oil per day—half of it in jet fuel. Fuel economy has not beena priority in modern fossil-fueled warfare.Humvees average 4 miles per gallon, while an

Apache helicopter gets half a mile per gallon.Consumption of fossil fuels has increased overtime, with waste apace. The Air Force aloneuses half the oil consumed by the Departmentof Defense, burning through 2.6 billion gallonsof fuel in six months during 2006 while pros-ecuting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. This wasas much oil as the United States consumedduring all of World War II, between 1941 and1945 in a global conflict.

Blasting to supersonic speed on its after-burners, an F-15 Fighter burns four gallons offuel per second, or 14,400 gallons per hour. TheB-52 Stratocruiser, with eight jet engines, con-sumes 500 gallons of jet fuel per minute, or30,000 per hour. In ten minutes, a B-52 con-sumes what an average automobile driver usesin a year.

Worldwide RegulationThe greenhouse-gas emissions of war

should be regulated on a worldwide basis, andthe United States (as the world’s premier mili-tary power) should take the lead in de-carbon-izing international relations. Ecologically, waris a crime. In an environmentally sane world,the use of fossil fuels in war would be illegal.We must wage—and reward—peace.

Fossil fuels have been used to amplify theviolence of war since the beginning of the In-dustrial Revolution, just as ever-more-powerfulfirearms have amplified interpersonal violence.Without the use of fossil fuels in warfare, forexample, there would be no aerial bombing. De-carbonizing war also would step down violence,and emphasize diplomacy to solve internationaldisagreements.

A worldwide, accelerating crisis in whichall peoples in all nations face the same threatwill be necessary to make this kind of ‘swords-to-plowshares’ transition mutually acceptable.Within 50 years, global warming will be a threatof that magnitude, overwhelming differencesover ideology and property that provoke armedconflict.

A Fundamental Change inOur Thinking

A fundamental change in our ways of think-ing is going to be required to deal with globalwarming. While we debate politics, apoliticalgreenhouse gases merely retain heat. ‘Ther-mal inertia’ delivers the chemical changes inthe atmosphere roughly a half-century after ourburning of fossil fuels originally initiates them.The weather today is reacting to greenhouse-

gas emissions from about 1960. Since then,the world’s emissions have risen roughly 400percent, indicating dramatic temperature risesa half-century from now.

With global warming, the human race isbeing asked to acknowledge and address a fu-ture threat with a legal and diplomatic systemthat reacts in the past tense—only after we haveseen evidence. Political inertia plus thermal in-ertia presents humanity with the challenge offashioning a new energy future (such as regu-lating the use of fossil fuels in warfare) beforeraw necessity (in the form of the hot wind in ourfaces) compels action of a dramatic nature. TheEarth system also presents us with accelerat-ing feedback cycles involving melting perma-frost (injecting carbon dioxide and methane intothe air) and changes in albedo (reflectivity) frommelting snow and ice that compound them-selves.

FALL 2009 NEBRASKA REPORT, P.8 conclusion on page 10

Hyman Minsky andthe Economic Meltdown

by Hendrik Van den BergUNL Professor of Economics

One of the surprising things about the 2008financial collapse was that mainstreameconomists and financial experts com-pletely failed to anticipate it. But, what elsecould we expect from people who basedtheir worldview on ‘neo-liberal’ economicmodels that assume people behave ratio-nally, that market prices always reflect thetrue value of everything, and that the fi-nancial industry efficiently spreads risk tothose who can best bear it.

Still, some economists should haveforeseen the pending financial disaster. In-terestingly, there was one economist whopredicted the financial collapse right herein the Midwest: the late Hyman Minsky ofWashington University in St. Louis.

Minsky’s Financial InstabilityHypothesis

Hyman Minsky expanded the ideas ofthe notable British economist JohnMaynard Keynes to develop his “Finan-cial Instability Hypothesis.” This hypoth-esis not only explains the recent ‘housingbubble’ that was financed by the globalsales of securities backed by subprimemortgages, but it also explains why theworld was so surprised by the subsequentfinancial crisis.

Like Keynes, Minsky understood thatinvestment was the source of economicinstability. Also like Keynes, he understoodthat in a modern economy investment isfinanced through an intermediary finan-cial system with a life of its own. He thenextended Keynes’ reasoning by detailinghow the stability of the financial systemdepends on the types of financing the fi-

nancial industry provides. Specifically, fi-nancial stability depends on the relativedominance of ‘hedge finance,’ ‘speculativefinance’ and ‘Ponzi finance.’

‘Hedge’ financing means a project’scash flow covers not only all the requiredinterest or dividend payments, but the cashflow also suffices to pay off all debt by thescheduled due dates. ‘Speculative’ projectsare a bit more precarious in that they meettheir interest, dividend, or expected profitpayments, but everyone recognizes that itwill be necessary to ‘roll over’ some of thedebt when it comes due. Many newprojects, newly formed businesses and in-novative activities are speculative in na-

ture. While such projects individually arenot a concern for the health of the finan-cial system, if a large proportion of aneconomy’s investment projects are fi-nanced this way, the financial system couldbecome unstable should credit suddenlybecome less plentiful or financial marketsfreeze.

Changes in economic conditions,however, can cause viable speculative busi-nesses to suddenly become ventures whosecash flows from operations are not suffi-cient to meet even interest or dividend pay-ments—much less cut into the outstand-ing debt. Minsky called these “Ponzi ven-tures” because (in the tradition of truePonzi schemes) new borrowing is neededjust to cover the project’s day-to-day pay-ments.

The precise mix of hedge, speculativeand Ponzi financing depends on economicconditions and the regulatory structure thatgoverns the activities of the financial in-dustry. Fundamentally, it is the responsi-bility of the financial sector, its auditorsand regulators, and macroeconomicpolicymakers to prevent the growth ofspeculative and Ponzi financing. The 2008financial crash revealed the gross failureof the financial industry, its regulators andmacroconomic policymakers to police in-vestment practices. Had he been alive,Minsky would not have been surprised bythese failures.

Financial Instability IsInevitable

Way back in 1982, in a volume en-titled, Can ‘It’ Happen Again?, Minskyargued that every prolonged period of eco-nomic growth, if left to run its course, willalways end in a financial collapse: “Sta-bility—or tranquility—in a world with...

capitalist financial institutions is destabi-lizing.” Minsky drew on Keynes’ 1936General Theory of Employment, Interestand Money, whose Chapter 12 so brilliantlydescribed the precarious nature of long-term investment. According to Keynes, in-vestors and innovators must reach a deci-sion on whether to invest, and lenders mustdecide whether to lend, even though their“knowledge of the factors which will gov-

ern the yield of an investment some yearshence is usually very slight and often neg-ligible.” Without exact knowledge of thefuture, investors and lenders rely on “con-fidence” and “convention,” which Keynesalso referred to as “animal spirits.” “Con-vention” refers to our understanding ofhow things will pan out. You might thinkof convention as a popular economicmodel. Keynes argued that people remainconfident and willing to engage in invest-

We Should Have Seen It Coming…

Living nearby in St. Louis, HymanMinsky often visited UNL in the 1970s

and ’80s to give talks or visit withfriends in the Economics Department.


The Nebraskans for Peace scorecard on the 2009 Uni-cameral Session tallied a number of victories—and oneparticularly heartbreaking loss.

On the positive side, the Legislature overwhelminglypassed a measure mandating education in our publicschools about the dangers of dating violence. Buildingon the passage of last year’s ‘anti-bullying’ bill, Sen. GwenHoward spearheaded a move this session to adopt the“Lindsay Ann Burke Act” (named after a victim of dat-ing violence). For two consecutive years now (at the in-stigation of Nebraskans for Peace and others), the Uni-cameral has passed legislation that requires school dis-tricts to establish policies to curb school violence. Thistype of nonviolence education among our youth is ex-actly what’s required if we are ever to create a societywhere everyone can feel secure and respected. Our thanksto all the senators who supported this important initia-tive.

Just as he promised during his 2008 election cam-paign, rookie senator and Nebraska Sierra Club leaderKen Haar made renewable energy development his legis-lative priority, and racked up several landmark accom-plishments. For the first time ever, a ‘net-metering bill’(LB 436) that will encourage local, small-scale wind en-ergy generation in the state made it through the Legisla-ture. The bill will permit private citizens to generate theirown wind energy and then sell what they don’t use totheir local power district. A second Haar-sponsored mea-sure (LR 83) creates a “Wind Energy Development ZoneTask Force” that, between now and the 2010 Session,will examine how best to develop major wind energy en-terprises in the state. On the basis of this study, state gov-ernment will finally have the state-of-the-art information

it needs on prime generation sites, transmission require-ments and environmental impact assessments to developNebraska’s largely untapped wind potential. In Sen. KenHaar, environmental advocates have a champion that wecan turn to for legislative leadership.

The immigration issue, unfortunately, continues tobe a highly charged political topic in the state, and NFPhad its hands full during the 2009 Session trying to stopeven more punitive legislation from being adopted. NFPofficially testified on four bills, and succeeded to helpingto kill one that would have required employers who are

seeking a public contract to verify the legal residency oftheir employees. Two others, mandating backgroundchecks and proof of identity, and collaboration betweenstate law enforcement and the U.S. Department of Home-land Security, were stranded in committee. The Legisla-ture did approve the fourth bill that demands verificationof lawful presence in the state to receive public benefits.More than ever, this mix of bills at the state level demon-strates the need for immigration reform at the federal levelto establish a uniform policy nationwide (and to avoidpersecuting individual workers and their families).

Although no specific legislation was introduced thissession on the subject of alcohol sales in Whiteclay, theLegislature did vote to authorize an interim study on thealcohol-associated problems in this border town just 200feet from the dry Pine Ridge Reservation. In an almostunheard of turn of events, the Legislature’s General Af-fairs Committee (which handles liquor control legisla-tion) and the Judiciary Committee jointly decided to con-duct the study. So far, hearings are scheduled to be heldboth in Lincoln and Rushville. The statewide screeningsof Mark Vasina’s documentary film, “The Battle forWhiteclay,” can be largely credited with sparking the re-newed interest in this long-standing blemish on our state’spublic image.

And finally, the major disappointment of the sessionwas of course the passage of a lethal injection bill (LB36), which once again gives Nebraska a constitutionalmethod of execution. While the measure passed handily(34 for, 12 against, with 3 abstentions), we can take someconsolation in the fact that an ‘Abolition bill’ was ad-vanced out of committee to the floor of the Legislature.LB 306, introduced by Sen. Brenda Council, was placedon General File and will be considered when the 2010Legislature convenes next January. The bill replaces thedeath penalty with life imprisonment without the possi-bility of parole.

The 2009 Session was the ‘long’ 90-day session ofthe 101st Legislature. Next year’s ‘short’ 60-day sessioncompresses the time frame in which we can do business.With so much legislation already on the docket, Peace &Justice activists will have to be ready to hit the groundrunning when the Unicameral reconvenes January 6, 2010.

Nebraskans for Peace Legislative Wrap-Up

Sen. Gwen Howard Sen. Ken Haar Sen. Brenda Council

On the positive side, theLegislature overwhelminglypassed a measure mandating

education in our publicschools about the dangers

of dating violence.


ment and innovative activities with uncer-tain outcomes as long as outcomes fromrecent investments were what they cameto view as ‘normal.’

Critical to Minsky’s hypothesis isKeynes’ observation that investors andlenders tend to focus on the near past ratherthan the distant past when they shapingtheir expectations of the future. Keyneswrote: “It is reasonable... to be guided to aconsiderable degree by the facts aboutwhich we feel somewhat confident, eventhough they may be less decisively relevantto the issue than other facts about whichour knowledge is vague and scanty.”Keynes’ observation about people’s reli-ance on the recent past was quite accurateand has been validated by recent psycho-logical research. Psychologists have foundthat people discount the past, just as theytend to discount the future, relative to to-day. Minsky thus concluded that the longereconomic growth continues, the more weexpect it to continue, because the last re-cession or financial collapse fades fartherinto the past. Expectations accordinglybecome increasingly optimistic, and thelonger the good times last, investors con-vince themselves that the world is now insome way different from what they viewas a progressively remote and irrelevantpast.

The recent financial crisis clearly vali-dates Keynes’ and Minsky’s observationsthat the recent past disproportionately de-termines investor and lender expectations.In fact, many of the risk models used inthe financial industry (such as those thatled Joseph Cassano of A.I.G.’s London Fi-nancial Products Division to claim that hedid not “see a scenario within any kind ofrealm of reason that would see us losingone dollar”) were estimated using datagoing back as few as five years. The fi-nancial models would have predicted moreaccurately if their parameters had beenestimated taking into consideration theGreat Depression from 70 years ago. Butthat is not how even those really smart

people who were paid very high salariesactually set their expectations or, appar-ently, how the financial geeks estimatetheir sophisticated financial models.

The process of rising expectations maycontinue for some time, but as expectationsrise above long-run sustainable trends,those projects investors and lenders believeto be ‘hedge’ projects become increasingly‘speculative,’ and those that are believedto be speculative are really ‘Ponzi’ financ-ing when true long-term trends are takeninto consideration. Sooner or later, thelong-term trends manifest themselves,speculative financing cannot be rolled over,and the financial sector finds itself with alot of Ponzi financing arrangements. A fi-nancial collapse causes investment toplummet, and an economic recession re-sults.

Deregulation and Long-RunMemory Loss

Minsky’s financial instability hypoth-esis applies not only to actual investors andlenders, but also to the policymakers andeconomists who shape financial regulationand macroeconomic policies. The recentderegulation of the financial industry inmost countries around the world is a clearmanifestation of the focus on recent eventsand the fading of the distant past. When,in the late 1990s, the Clinton Administra-tion, advised by economists and financialindustry lobbyists, pushed to repeal the1933 “Glass-Steagall Act” and thus per-mit banks and insurance companies toagain engage in the risky investment ac-tivities that helped cause the Great Depres-sion, it clearly did not consult HymanMinsky.

Unfortunately, Hyman Minsky is nolonger with us today. But we can still heedhis insights that explain the 2008 finan-cial collapse so very well. Clearly, we needmuch tighter regulations to limit the riskslenders take with other people’s money andthe unrealistic “confidence” of investorswho seek to profit from stock market andreal estate bubbles.

But, the U.S. financial industry has,so far, lobbied very hard to limit regula-tory changes. Less than a month afterJPMorgan, Chase, Goldman Sachs,Citigroup and Bank of America acceptedbillions in government assistance, theycreated a lobbying group (the CDS Deal-ers Consortium) to fight against any in-creased regulation of some of the recentfinancial innovations that caused the 2008financial crisis. Also disturbing are thedirect links between policymakers and fi-nancial industry management, as evi-denced by the number of former investmentbankers in the Obama Administration.

As of this writing, no major regula-tory changes have yet been put in place inthe U.S. or the United Kingdom. The Brit-ish historian/writer John Lanchester re-cently explained this inaction in a LondonReview of Books article under the title, “It’sFinished”:

The Anglo-Saxon economies [Britain andthe U.S.] have had decades of boommixed with what now seem, in retro-

spect, smallish periods of downturn.During that they/we have shamelesslylectured the rest of the world on howthey should be running their economies.We’ve gloated at the French fear of debt,laughed at the Germans’ 19th-centuryemphasis on manufacturing, told theJapanese that they can’t expect to getover their ‘lost decade’ until they killtheir zombie banks, and so on. It’s em-barrassing to be in worse condition thanall of them.

Lanchester suggests that institutingnew regulations on British and Americanbanks or breaking up large financial con-glomerates “would mean that the Anglo-Saxon model of capitalism had failed.”That is, we have, so far, replaced our ig-norance of the distant past and dispropor-tionate focus on the recent past with anobstinate refusal to look back at all. Thefinancial industry, no doubt, hopes that thisobstinate blindness will last long enoughfor the massive taxpayer-funded bailoutsand fiscal stimuli to start the next economicbubble.

Minsky & Meltdown,conclusion

SPECIAL EVENTS

THE RESCUE PARTY TOUR:TOM MCPHEE'S AN AMERICANOPERAThursday, September 3 - 7:00 p.m.

MATINEE PRICED EVENINGSTuesdays & Wednesdays

COMING SOON

Fri, Aug 14 - Thu, Aug 20O'HORTENBent Hamer

Fri, Aug 14 - Thu, Aug 20AFGHAN STARHavana Marking

Fri, Aug 21 - Thu, Sep 3EVERY LITTLE STEPJames D. Stern & Adam Del Deo

Fri, Aug 21 - Thu, Sep 3FOOD, INCRobert KennerWith: ALTERNATIVE WAYS TOGROW WHAT YOU LOVE

Fri, Sep 11 - Thu, Sep 24ADAMMax Mayer


Paul Olson,Paul Olson,Paul Olson,Paul Olson,Paul Olson, conclusion conclusion conclusion conclusion conclusion

These Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs),armed with satellite-guided Hellfire missiles, areremotely operated with the direct assistance ofU.S. Strategic Command’s space and intelli-gence-gathering assets. Portrayed in the me-dia as flawlessly accurate weapons performingsurgical strikes against confirmed terrorist tar-gets, the robotic killing machines are in fact theabsolute height of impersonal imperial war-making. And the latest reports on the growingnumber of civilian deaths attributed to them in-dicate they are not nearly as precise as claimed.

The increasingly lethal military campaignsin the Swat Valley and South Waziristan—andthe concurrent refugee crisis—cry out for theimmediate and active involvement of the UnitedNations. If the Obama Administration intendsto chart a new course with the Muslim world(as opposed to the belligerent one pursued byBush and Cheney) it needs to actively courtthe involvement of the UN. Otherwise, historystands to repeat itself, and the U.S.-createdquagmire in Afghanistan could well spread toengulf a nuclear-armed Pakistan.

NFP Policy Statement, conclusion

Decarbonizing War, conclusion

bal reach.At a macro level, NFP opposes the

violence against our environment that isnow creating global warming and will soonbegin displacing people everywhere (untilsome military locks them in or out). Weare working closely with state legislatorslike Sen. Ken Haar to promote renewableenergy solutions—and already (as the ar-ticle on p. 9 indicates) can point to signifi-cant legislative gains on wind develop-ment.

In summary: to paraphrase Othello,“We have done the state some service andthey know it.”

We do seek publicity because we seekpeace and the diminution of violence.

We have a strategy and a substance.As Gandhi said, “It is not only generalswho can plan campaigns.” Our offensivesare under way. We have mounted them withabout 1700 members (about 1 in every

1000 citizens of Nebraska), and all with abudget that in most years paid our staff onlya little over the minimum wage.

But we could falter in these hard times.If you ever sense that Nebraskans for

Peace is becoming Nebraskans for Public-ity or Nebraskans for Socialism or Nebras-kans for Silliness, you can empower us bytelling us what you sense. If you sense thatwe are getting things done, please ask yourneighbors and friends to become membersand local chapter activists. (We need morethan one in one thousand.) Ask ten like-minded people this month. Send us $25,$50, $100, $1000 to enable us to completewhat we have started. Tell us what youwant us to spend it on. Your voices (andthose of the members you recruit), yourpocketbooks (and those of the contributorsyou snare for us), will mean the differencebetween shadow and act.

We want act.

Rises in carbon dioxide emissions alsoplay other roles in the Earth system besidesincreasing temperatures. For example, a risingcarbon dioxide level already is making theoceans more acid, imperiling anything with ashell, including the plankton that forms the ba-sis of the oceanic food chain. As temperaturesrise lineally, some research now indicates thatthe hydrological cycle changes exponentially—thus the remarkable number of severe droughtsand deluges around the world. Warmth alsochanges atmospheric circulation (and, thus,precipitation patterns), contributing to droughtin Australia, and the United States Southwest.

A ‘green’ military isn’t one with high-mile-age tanks, or bombers flying on bio-fuel, but aworldwide re-fit of the military’s mission thatrequires more than a change of technology. Itrequires a re-definition of nationalism to con-form to the needs of the Earth system in ourtime, in which the military becomes a serviceorganization that reacts to environmentalthreats in a future where war as we know ittoday is illegal on environmental grounds. Inecological terms, war waged in a self-justifying

gale of hatred-fueled nationalistic rage that dis-regards all ‘collateral damage’ as nasty butnecessary is a thing of the past.

Someone will complain that decarboniz-ing warfare would be unrealistic. The sameassumptions have given us an economic andaccounting system that places the carbon priceof everything we do (including war) at zero.Given the price future generations will pay forour emissions, business as usual is what isimpractical. Peacemakers in our time are oftenassumed to be naïve dreamers. With the envi-ronmental dangers we now face, however, atimely end to war is not naïve, but necessary.Armies of the future will study the best ways tosolve international conflicts without armed con-flict—and the monumental pollution that accom-panies their death and destruction.

War has always been a costly enterprisein terms of what we’ve paid for it in blood andtreasure. Calculating in its carbon footprintshould convince us once and for all that in fos-sil-fueled war there will be no victors left stand-ing on the Earth… only losers.

Carlton B. Paine, Ph.D. • Clinical Psychologist

5625 ‘O’ Street, Suite 7 • Phone: 402-489-8484 • Lincoln, NE 68510

command and control structure—andwithout the advantages of space technol-ogy—it would have been organization-ally and technologically impossible tocreate a weapon with StratCom’sprowess. In the whole of recordedhistory, there’s never been a weapon thatcould offensively attack any place on theface of the earth (with nuclear weapons,no less) in such a compressed timeframe.

It constitutes nothing less than anevolution in war-making—one thathourly places the security of the entireworld at risk.

Operating as it does with suchfreedom of action and so little oversight,StratCom is on the verge of becoming alaw unto itself: a kind of 21st centurypresidential “Praetorian Guard,”

StratCom, conclusionexercising vigilante justice.

And before things get any furtherout of control, the Congress and thecourts of the U.S.—and the GeneralAssembly of the UN—need to starttalking about how best to rein in thisnew war-making menace with a systemof international protocols.

Because (a less belligerent ObamaAdministration notwithstanding), there’sno putting this genie of StratCom backin the bottle any more than in 1945 wecould undo the new danger that wasunleashed by the atomic bombings ofHiroshima and Nagasaki.

Back then, the world had to learnhow to live with ‘The Bomb.’

Now, we must learn how to live withStratCom.

YYYYYour Four Four Four Four Foundaoundaoundaoundaoundation Speakstion Speakstion Speakstion Speakstion Speaks by Loyal Park, Nebraska Peace Foundation President

Do you put peace work at the top of your priorities?If so, please consider including Nebraskans forPeace or Nebraska Peace Foundation in your will.Plan for tomorrow by preparing your will today.

Shadow and Actby Paul Olson, NFP President

BULLETIN BOARDSept. 21 International Day of Peace

Oct. 24 2009 Annual Peace Conference in Grand Island (see page 3)

Oct. 24 United Nations Day / UNA-USA Nebraska Division Annual Dinner inLincoln

Nov. 2-4 Protest at the ‘Strategic Space Symposium’ in Omaha

SpeakingOur Peace

NFP State Office Hours in Lincoln, 10:00 – 2:00 weekdays941 ‘O’ Street, #1026, Lincoln, NE 68508


I do get discouraged. I became blue whenNebraska’s junior senator (then our gov-ernor) described Nebraskans for Peaceas “Nebraskans for Publicity” (at aboutthe same time he was speaking up for therights of Whiteclay beer dealers).

But Senator—then Governor—Johanns is not alone in dismissing NFP.Recent radio call-ins when I spoke out indefense of academic freedom addressedme as president of “Nebraskans for So-cialism.” We were either treasonous orfluff. The vehemence of the epithets grewagain when we called for an end to U.S.aid to Israel to limit the massive attackson Gaza and Israel’s neighbors. (We also,incidentally, called for an internationalembargo on weapons sales to the nationsbordering Israel.) To seriously speak ofseeking the path of peace is to invitemarginalization through epithet. Thecurrent political climate calls for blood.

But was the governor right? Are weonly publicity hounds?

If we are, we certainly fail miserablyat our putative essential mission.

Nebraska newspapers generally donot rush to publish our op eds or newsreleases unless we take rather conven-tional positions. When we take noncon-formist Peace & Justice positions, to get

our voice heard, we usually have to com-municate by email, website, the NebraskaReport or public gatherings—eventhough the positions we espouse laterbecome the centrist position of politicaldiscussion and action…

(See, for example, our early supportfor Senator Ernie Chambers’ legislativeresolution on divestment in South Africa,our early response to the wars in Afghani-stan and Iraq, our work on Whiteclay, andour leadership role in promoting ‘anti-bullying’ legislation.)

We are often alone—at least at first—in espousing new directions for society.When we went after LB 775 and itsunexamined tax breaks for Big Business,except for a union or two, we had almostno allies. The cause was worth discuss-ing, but no one had the guts to tangle withthe business lobby head on. When NFPwent after Whiteclay, we were prettymuch ridiculed—until Mark Vasina pro-duced his film showing Nebraska’s rankindifference to law enforcement for PineRidge Indians.

When we proposed anti-bullyingrules to the Nebraska Board of Educa-tion and the Legislature, we were deridedas sissy-makers. When we challengedStratCom’s new offensive mandate and

its slender threads of presidential control—circumventing Congress’s authority to de-clare war, we were ignored. (StratCom isthe state’s third-largest employer and, ac-cording to the Bellevue and Greater OmahaChamber of Commerce, annually pumps$2.4 billion into the Nebraska economy.Politically and economically beholden tosuch largesse, we of course have grown shyabout even dreaming of biting the handthat’s so generously nurturing us—even ifthe future of the human race is at stake.)

So are we really Nebraskans forPeace?

I hope so, both in our organizationaland our personal lives. At every level ofhuman interaction, we should believe thatfaith in violence as a tool (whether inter-personal or international) is a poor substi-tute for decency, negotiation, care for oth-ers, empathy and self-sacrifice.

We believe faith in violence needscountering on the whole continuum ofhuman experience. NFP begins with vio-lence at the individual and family level.Hence, we have worked on (and contrib-uted to the passage of) the Legislature’santi-bullying and the anti-dating violencebills, and throughout our history havemounted many other informal efforts todiminish violence in Nebraska society.

Moving up the continuum, we haveacted against the state-supported vio-lence-and-addiction mechanisms thatghettoize African Americans, destroyNative Americans, and imprison His-panics in unsafe work environmentsand jeopardize their home lives, as evi-denced by our human rights, Whiteclayand immigration work. Our Whiteclayactivities now have the attention of thestate attorney general, some liquor com-missioners and some legislators. We—and others with us—stopped the worstof the anti-immigrant legislation andpreserved the “Dream Act” promisingeducational opportunity for Hispanicstudents.

We early on challenged the myththat Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruc-tion and we supported Nebraska Sena-tor Chuck Hagel’s similarly bold chal-lenge. Today, the substance of thesechallenges is the conventional wisdom.

As you can see from this and re-cent issues the Nebraska Report, we arelaboring to place the StratCom issuebefore Congress and the United Nationsand are strengthening the resolve ofthose in South Korea and the CzechRepublic who oppose StratCom’s glo-

Send written requests to:Whiteclay DVD, c/o Nebraskans for Peace941 ‘O’ Street, Suite 1026, Lincoln, NE 68508

DVD copies of

The Battlefor

Whiteclayare available from NFPfor a suggesteddonation of $15.Paypal and credit cardpayments accepted.

Call 402-475-4620.

nebraska reportnebraskansforpeace.org/uploaded/pdfs/np2009/2009fallreport.pdf____ credit card...

Documents