As an answer to this question, I am pleased to introduce
the Year 2000 Campaign to Redirect World Military Spending to
Human Development. The Year 2000 initiative to reduce global
military spending requires a fundamental redefinition of security
in today's world, a concept of security that emphasizes
demilitarization, conflict resolution and sustainable human
development. This new definition of security will focus on the
international community's capacity to engage successfully in
peacekeeping operations, threat reduction, and conflict
prevention through dialogue and demilitarization. As part of the
Year 2000 campaign, we propose a practical set of guidelines that
the UN can implement, and that citizens in all countries can
encourage their governments to adopt.
The Year 2000 Campaign proposes that:
1. The Security Council and General Assembly of the United
Nations should call on all nations to commit to meetings with
their neighbors. These nations would agree to identify and
implement confidence-building measures and mutual reductions in
military threats, thus increasing the likelihood of substantial
reductions in military forces and expenditures by the year 2000.
2. Special envoys should be appointed by the U.N. Secretary
General to organize these demilitarization talks in all regions
of the world. These meetings would build confidence among nations
and reduce the likelihood of future conflicts.
3. Every nation should meet with its regional envoy to present
plans for regional security at reduced force levels. These
nations would also participate in negotiations guided by the
envoy, in order to identify military capacities and implement
mutual force reductions. Such negotiations would reduce the
threat that nations pose to each other due to the size,
proximity, and technological sophistication of their armed
forces.
4. With savings from reduced military spending, all nations
should implement economic reforms related to demilitarization,
such as the conversion of military to non-military production,
landmine clearance, community reconstruction, and the
reintegration of demobilized soldiers.
5. In support of the steps taken toward demilitarization by
developing countries, industrialized nations should condition
their aid to promote demilitarization. They could exchange debt
forgiveness for military conversion efforts, as well as provide
special funding for programs to assist the demobilization
process, promote transparency in military affairs, and bring
about the end of military involvement in the civil economy.
6. All arms-exporting nations should agree to a Code of Conduct
on arms transfers that would bar arms exports to non-democratic
governments, countries engaged in armed aggression in violation
of international law, countries that do not fully participate in
the U.N. Register of Conventional Arms, and governments
permitting gross violations of internationally recognized human
rights.
An initiative for such a Code has already been presented in
various legislatures around the world. I wholeheartedly support
the legislation introduced by Senator Mark Hatfield and
Representative Cynthia McKinney in the United States Congress. In
addition to supporting current efforts, I recently announced my
intention to convene Nobel Peace laureates to draft an
international Code of Conduct on arms transfers. We plan to
present this Code of Conduct to the United Nations General
Assembly in the fall of 1996.
I am also pleased to be joined by the other members of
Congress who are also initial endorsers of this campaign.
Congressman Dellums and Congresswoman Morella and Congresswoman
Furse have long been the leaders to redirect U.S. military
spending to human development. Congressman Miller worked with us
Central Americans to resolve the conflicts that raged in our
region in the 1980s. The Central American people will always
remember your efforts to silence our guns. And I applaud
Congressman Kennedy for efforts to condition lending from the
Bretton Woods institutions on recipient countries' progress on
demilitarization.
The Year 2000 campaign provides an opportunity for the world
to reclaim a substantial peace dividend each and every year. As
we approach the next millennium, is it not finally time to
harvest the dividends of peace?
Friends:
The United States is a military and economic superpower. We
would like to see this country use its potential to be a moral
superpower. By selling arms to developing nations, this country
is not a moral superpower. By coddling the arms merchants, this
country is not a moral superpower. By putting profits in front
of principles, this country is not a moral superpower. Instead
of doing what is profitable, the United States should strive to
do what is right. Because in the words of Abraham Lincoln,
struggling against the fate of a nation on the brink of its most
devastating war, only right makes might. We are, my friends, at
the brink of another war. We can let it consume us, and succumb
to our greed, or we can defy it and pursue a higher purpose for
all humanity.
The millennium that awaits us will demand strength,
dedication and sacrifice from our leaders. We must do more than
voice disagreement or dissatisfaction; we must actively challenge
the status quo. There will be powerful interests threatened by
the eradication of poverty, the preservation of the environment,
and the construction of a true culture of peace and democracy. To
confront these interests, we need leaders of vision and courage
to steer us toward a hopeful future with their creativity,
sincerity and resourcefUlness. We need leaders concerned with a
greater good -- who can look beyond personal good, national good,
and regional good - we need leaders who can guide us toward a
shared responsibility for our collective well-being.
We as a global community have not yet reached consensus on
how to address our challenges together. At such an important time
in human history, when the world wavers between democracy and
dictatorship, prosperity and poverty, we lack direction at both
the national and international levels. in order to confront the
many challenges we face, we must foster and build stronger
partnership among nations.
In order to achieve the goals of the Year 2000 campaign, we
must fight against many powerful interests. Among the most
powerful of those are ignorance and indifference. We must change
our way of thinking about security, prosperity, and military
prowess. No nation should be secure but in liberty, rich but in
compassion, nor strong but in the sense that other nations share
equal fortitude. If we make these ideas our guiding principles,
they will ultimately be our saving grace.
I am encouraged by the warm reception that the Year 2000
Campaign has received from the United Nations, where I met
yesterday with Rosario Green, the Assistant Secretary General. I
ask those of you present here -- and other individuals and groups
that advocate international peace and security -- to endorse the
Year 2000 plan and join us as we encourage the United Nations,
its agencies and member governments to implement the proposal.
In these last five years of this century, let us all join
together to reduce military spending, redirect resources to
sustainable human development, establish United
Nations-administered security talks, and approve an international
code of conduct on arms transfers. It is only through tackling
war, militarism and weapons of destruction on all levels and from
all sides that we will be able to realize our vision of a world
in which extreme poverty and senseless violence are nothing but
sad memories of the past.
* PROJECTS * RESOURCE LIBRARY * FORUM *