Peace in Space

ACDN FRANCE: SPACE PRESERVATION TREATY SIGNING CONFERENCE

2nd Rally for International Disarmament - Nuclear, Biological and Chemical
Saintes (France) 6-8 May 2005
SPACE PRESERVATION TREATY SIGNING CONFERENCE

-----------------------------------------------------------    The Space Preservation Treaty Signing Conference is the most reliable, timely, and effective method available that will bring world leaders together to permanently ban all space-based weapons in an enforceable verifiable manner that will lead to a "cap" on the war industry while it evolves into becoming a space industry.

This way the permanent war economy can be transformed into a sustainable, cooperative, peaceful Space Age society.

An international Treaty Signing Conference on the Space Preservation Treaty must be convened as soon as possible to facilitate Nation State leaders coming together for the signing and to bring into force an immediate and permanent ban on all space-based weapons. We must stop the arms race at the only moment in time, in all of history, when it can be stopped, before it begins in space (that is, before space-based weapons are deployed and/or before a momentum of funding and vested interests makes the weaponization of space impossible to stop).

An International Treaty Signing Conference for the Space Preservation Treaty can be convened at any time by any willing U.N. Member State(s) under the authority of Article 102 of the United Nations Charter.   

The current U.S. administration plan is to "seize the high ground" to "dominate and control space," and many say that he who controls and dominates space also controls and dominates all on earth. The momentum of funding, vested interests and technology being put into place could make it impossible to stop the weaponization of space if a ban is not turned into law in time.

Space-based weapons could be deployed under the guise of calling them "merely research" or "merely tests," or they could be deployed without even the conducting of tests.    Many experts say this is an emergency situation, as there is only one chance to ban space-based weapons. Many agree that time is of the essence to get the Space Preservation Treaty signed into law quickly.

Time is of the essence to get the Space Preservation Treaty signed into law.    The signing of the Space Preservation Treaty will help to put needed pressure on the U.S. congress and administration.   

The Treaty is the Key to preserving peace in space so we can achieve peace on earth: When the first five (5) countries sign on to the Space Preservation Treaty, an international outer space peacekeeping agency will be established and equipped to monitor outer space and enforce (conflict resolution style) this ban.

Since 1948, over 40,000 multi-lateral agreements or Treaties have been signed, ratified and deposited with the U.N. Secretary General by Member States under Article 102 of the U.N. Charter. Under Article 102 of the United Nations Charter, "every treaty and every international agreement entered into by any Member of the United Nations after the present Charter comes into force shall as soon as possible be registered with the Secretariat and published by it."

We seek two or more Nations ready to sign the Space Preservation Treaty and then take it to other like-minded Nations.

Please volunteer to help this endeavor. We need to build a world movement to send packages of educational information to all world leaders, to media, to the people about the Space Preservation Treaty and to help organize the Space Preservation Treaty Conference.

You can find information at www.peaceinspace.org and www.peaceinspace.com.

Email: [email protected]

Institute for Cooperation in Space
Dr. Carol Rosin
Alfred Lambremont Webre, JD, MEd

LA CONFÉRENCE de SIGNATURE de TRAITÉ de CONSERVATION de l'Espace est la méthode la plus fiable, la plus opportune, et efficace disponible qui réunira des chefs du monde interdire de manière permanente toutes les armes espace-basées d'une façon vérifiable exécutoire qui mènera à un "chapeau" sur l'industrie de guerre tandis qu'elle se transforme en devenir une industrie de l'espace. 

De cette façon l'économie permanente de guerre peut être transformée en société soutenable, coopérative, paisible d'âge de l'espace. 

Une conférence internationale de signature de Traité sur le Traité de conservation de l'espace doit être assemblée aussitôt que possible pour faciliter les chefs de pays venant ensemble pour la signature et pour introduire dans la force une interdiction immédiate et permanente de toutes les armes espace-basées. 

Nous devons arrêter la course aux armements au seul moment à temps, en tout d'histoire, quand elle peut être arrêtée, avant qu'elle commence dans l'espace (c'est-à-dire, avant que des armes espace-basées soient déployées et/ou avant un élan du placement et des droits acquis rend le weaponization de l'espace impossible pour s'arrêter). 

Une conférence internationale pour le Traité de conservation de l'espace peut être assemblée à tout moment par n'importe quel Member de l'ONU disposé sous l'autorité de l'article 102 de la charte des Nations Unies. 

Le plan courant d'administration des ETATS-UNIS est "saisissent la terre élevée" "dominent et commandent l'espace," et beaucoup dites qu'il qui commande et domine des commandes de l'espace également et domine tous sur terre. 

L'élan du placement, des droits acquis et de la technologie étant installée pourrait le rendre impossible d'arrêter les armes dans l'espace si une interdiction n'est pas transformée en loi à temps.  des armes Espace-basées pourraient être déployées sous l'apparence de les appeler "simplement recherche" ou "simplement des essais," ou eux pourraient être déployés sans même la conduite des essais. 

Beaucoup d'experts disent que c'est une situation de secours, car il y a seulement une chance d'interdire les armes espace-basées.  Beaucoup conviennent que le temps est de l'essence pour obtenir le Traité de conservation de l'espace signé dans la loi rapidement. 

Le temps est de l'essence pour obtenir le Traité de conservation de l'espace signé dans la loi.  La signature du Traité de conservation de l'espace aidera à faire pression nécessaire sur le congrès et l'administration des ETATS-UNIS. 

Le Traité est la clef à préserver la paix dans l'espace ainsi nous pouvons réaliser la paix sur terre:  Quand les cinq premiers (5) pays signent dessus au Traité de conservation de l'espace, une agence de la paix internationale d'espace extra-atmosphérique sera établie et équipée pour surveiller l'espace extra-atmosphérique et pour imposer (modèle de résolution de conflit) cette interdiction. 

Depuis 1948, plus de 40.000 accords ou Traités multilatéraux ont été signés, ratifiés et déposés avec le sécrétaire général d'cU.n. par des Etats membres en vertu de l'article 102 d'cU.n. Charter.  En vertu de l'article 102 de la charte des Nations Unies, "chaque traité et chaque accord international sont entrés dans par n'importe quel membre des Nations Unies après que la charte actuelle entre en vigueur soit inscrite aussitôt que possible au secrétariat et éditée par elle." 

Nous cherchons deux nations ou plus prêtes à signer le Traité de conservation de l'espace et puis à le prendre à d'autres nations semblables. 

Svp volontaire pour aider cet effort.  Nous devons établir un mouvement du monde pour envoyer des paquets d'information éducative à tous les chefs du monde, aux médias, aux personnes au sujet du Traité de conservation de l'espace et à l'aide organisons la conférence de Traité de conservation de l'espace. 

Vous pouvez trouver l'information à www.peaceinspace.org et à www.peaceinspace.com. 

Email:  [email protected]

Institut pour la coopération dans l’espace

Dr. Carol Rosin
Alfred Lambremont Webre, JD, MEd

TORONTO STAR: Missile defence: It's still a bad idea

TORONTO STAR: Missile defence: It's still a bad idea

This article was signed by 10 concerned Canadians, including former external affairs minister Lloyd Axworthy, vice-chancellor, University of Winnipeg; Dale Dewar, president, Physicians for Global Survival; Mel Hurtig, founder of the Council of Canadians; Peggy Mason, Canada's former U.N. ambassador for disarmament; John Polanyi, Nobel laureate and professor, University of Toronto; and Steven Staples, of the Polaris Institute.
The federal election has unexpectedly reopened the debate on Canada's participation in the U.S.'s Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD) system. The Canadian government, after a lengthy public debate, decided not to participate in the U.S. missile shield in February 2005. It was a popular decision because the majority of Canadians opposed participation and numerous events of the last year have borne out that it was the correct decision.
Conservative party leader Stephen Harper feels otherwise. He has promised that, if elected, his government will revisit the previous government's decision not to join the U.S. missile defence system.
In the past Parliament, all the political parties supported the government's decision not to participate in BMD with the exception of the Conservatives, who reserved judgment on the issue. Is it the Conservatives' assessment now that negotiating entry into the BMD program could be in Canada's best interests?
News and analysis from the United States shows Canada to be vindicated, as it appears that confidence in the viability of the ground-based, mid-course system is faltering.
A U.S. Senate defence subcommittee, led by missile defence advocate Republican Ted Stevens, recently warned supporters that the Missile Defence Agency had decided that the first generation of interceptor missiles in Alaska and California will also be the last.
The missiles are behind schedule, badly over budget and have yet to be fully tested or declared operational. In other words, as many prominent scientists and military experts have testified, the Pentagon is admitting BMD may never meet the challenge of achieving any acceptable reliability.
The Congressional Budget Office has also issued its own warning, predicting that the projected annual costs of the missile defence system could spiral upwards to $19 billion per year, more than twice its annual budget today.
In fact, after examining the key technologies and their likelihood of success, the budget office proposed halting missile defence deployment entirely. Had Ottawa joined and made a financial commitment, Canadians could have seen their expected contribution likewise skyrocket for a system that has little chance of functioning.
In any renewed discussion of Canada's participation in the ballistic missile defence program, the potential for the weaponization of space looms large. Like all other parties, the Conservative party shares an opposition to the weaponization of space, a chief international concern about the missile defence program.
But in the last year, President George W. Bush has shown no indication that he has renounced the Pentagon's and Air Force's declared and widely publicized plans to "dominate space" and to "deny others the use of space" through the use of space weapons.
On the contrary, doctrines for space warfare continue to be espoused in Washington.
Alarmingly, last fall the U.S. voted "no" for the first time on the annual United Nations resolution to prevent an arms race in outer space. Observers agree this is a clear indication that the decision to deploy space weapons may be imminent. Had Canada joined the ballistic missile defence program, we would have been unable to avoid responsibility for contributing to a new arms race in space.
The Canadian government approved detailed BMD talks with the Americans in May 2003 and rejected the idea in February 2005. Canadian questions about our potential participation apparently could not be answered satisfactorily. Would there eventually be U.S. weapons in space? Would Canada be stuck with a mounting tab as costs rapidly increased? Bush adamantly refused to give Prime Minister Paul Martin an undertaking that missile defence was not tied to the future weaponization of space.
What is more, the White House and proponents of BMD within the Canadian government were unable to convince Canadians that participating in the program is vital to their security.
Following the decision not to join, a Decima poll found that 57 per cent supported the decision, and 26 per cent opposed it. Virtually every constituency was opposed to BMD participation — from teenagers to senior citizens, men and women, urban and rural dwellers, and a majority in every single province. Simply put, strong links to the Bush administration make BMD an unpopular cause among many Canadians, who are clearly wary of Bush's aggressive military and foreign policy.
Canada was correct not to join missile defence in 2005, and nothing new has occurred that warrants reopening the debate.
Our country has long been a staunch advocate of diplomatic efforts to abolish nuclear weapons, and it has a strong interest in keeping Earth's orbit a demilitarized zone.
We believe that joining the "Star Wars" system being pushed by the Bush administration would undermine Canada's reputation as a peacekeeper and advocate for disarmament, and endanger the entire world.

Original Article