Greenham women challenge U.S. missiles

Scan page 4

"I'm not a feminist and I'm not a radici I'm just a woman who's fighting for he It's that simple for me. I have nothing Simone, Greenham Peace Camp The Women's Peace Camp at Greenham Common [England] stands as a symbol of ordinary women's determination to prevent nuclear war. Fifty-five percent of the British population lives within 100 miles of the U.S. Air Force base at Greenham Common, where 19 cruise missiles were deployed in December 1983. Each missile, only 20 feet long, has 16 times the power of the bomb AS WE GO TO PRESS: Hundreds of police officers forcibly evicted the Greenham Common women on April 4, tearing down the fences and ripping their plastic-sheeting homes. Over 30 protesters were arrested.

dropped on Hiroshima. The missile flies below the range that radar can detect. Therefore deployment of these missiles renders verification treaties obsolete.

According to a recent poll, 73 percent of the British population is opposed to deployment. But in 1979 the British prime minister-along with the heads of state from West Germany, Italy, France and the U.S.—agreed to accept nuclear weapons if no treaty banning them had been signed by 1983. Thatcher's Conservative government supports the stationing of the additional 96 cruise missiles at Greenham Common. Plans also include trucking the missiles on maneuvers around the English countryside in a 22car caravan.

On March 8, the evening of International Women's Day, women holding a vigil in front of the Greenham Common main gate were pushed aside so that a launcher could get out. Since their arrival last November the cruise missiles have been, according to a British defense base. Jane's Defence Weekly reported in its Jan. 14, 1984, issue that there had been consultations between U.S. Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger and his British counterpart, Michael Heseltine, over the political problem the women's peace camp posed. While not wanting to admit the influence of the peace camp, the U.S. Air Force has been unable to plan for deployment beyond the ninemile perimeter fence. Pentagon sources had maintained that the missiles would be deployed "when the British population gets used to them."

The women's camp began two and a half years ago. In the summer of 1981 women living in the area decided to march from Cardiff, the capital of Wales, to Greenham Common. They hoped that their action might spark a political debate over the deployment of the missiles. But the press did not cover the 110-mile march of the 80 women and children. By the time the group arrived at the U.S. Air Force base, they decided to camp and continue their attempt to block the stationing of first-strike nuclear weapons in their neighborhood.

Living in tents and "benders"_.. branches of trees covered with plastic— under harsh conditions, and facing harassment and eviction, the women have established a strong political presence at the eight military gates.

The women did succeed in launching a national and international political debate over deployment of the U.S. missiles. In asserting their right to life and to live without fear of nuclear annihilation, Socialist Action April 1984 the women have directly confronted both British and U.S. authorities:

With both determination and humor, the women have invaded the base; emphasizing that the land has been held in common for hundreds of years, and that they will not allow it to be used for purposes of waging a first-strike nuclear war. The women go under the fence, over the fence, or through the fence. The women have picnicked on the base, taken their children for walks there, and celebrated various holidays by invading the base in Santa Claus suits or Easter rabbit costumes. Many picnic baskets come equipped with wire cutters.

They have challenged the military by symbolic actions that represent life rather than destruction. They have danced on half-completed silos and put up Christmas crosses. On one occasion they invaded a control tower, where they read classified documents, wrote "Greenham Women Everywhere," and, after an hour and a half, switched the lights on and off so that they could be "discovered." No matter how much security is tightened and reinforced on the base, the women find their way inside.

In December 1982, on the third anniversary of the decision to station the cruise missiles, the women at the peace camp called on women throughout Britain to come to Greenham Common and decorate the nine-mile fence with symbols of life. Despite the cold and snowfall, 30,000 gathered. They placed banners, photographs of their children, art work, and balloons along the entire perimeter. This action was built through chain letters, and through the help and aid of trade unions and other peace groups.

Last December women were asked once again to come in massive numbers to Greenham Common. Some commentators thought that they could not muster a significant crowd now that the cruise missiles were stationed there. Obviously the women had lost, they suggested, and soon they would be forced to accept reality and go away.

Instead, 40,000 women came to "Reflect the Base." They brought handheld mirrors and musical instruments. Every hour, for a five-minute interval, the instruments played, followed by silence.

This time more than 100 U.S. women, who wanted to express their solidarity 1d Barner with the British women, demonstrated as well. They were especially concerned because British Minister of Defense Heseltine had announced in the House of Commons he could not guarantee that unarmed women taking direct action against deployment would not be shot. He announced piously, "We have to protect our nuclear weapons."

Despite the pretense of joint responsibility for the cruise missiles, the U.S. military is in complete control. Many American women felt that if unarmed women were going to be shot for doing things that the Greenham Common women had been doing weekly since the camp began, U.S, women should be at their side.

In November, just before the missiles landed at Greenham Common, 12 British women and two U.S. Congressmen (Ronald Dellums and Ted Weiss) filed a legal challenge in U.S. federal court. They charged that the deployment of the missiles is illegal under both the U.S. Constitution and international law. Since the cruise missiles are first-strike weapons, the lawsuit maintains that deployment is in itself a violation of the UN Charter, which proscribes the illegal use of force.

The women recognize that even while they have legal arguments on their side, a victory will be difficult. Whoever loses in the lower court will appeal to a higher court. Yet the women feel good about being able to bring a suit against those who are guilty of deploying the missiles.

As part of their bringing suit in the U.S. federal court, the Greenham Common women have opened an office in New York City. They are organizing speaking tours, publicizing the case, and raising the money necessary to carry out a serious political and legal battle. The night before filing the case, they held an all-night candlelight vigil on the steps of the U.S. Courthouse in Foley Square. On the day the case was filed, peace camps were set up at all 102 U.S. bases in Britain, illustrating the presence of foreign military bases on their soil. on the case. The women and their lawyers have been able to organize expert testimony about first-strike nuclear weapons and what that means to people's lives. They maintain that people-and especially children-have the right to live without the fear of a nuclear holocaust. The Center for Constitutional Rights and the Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy are providing the legal help.

U.S. refuses visa to Helen John, a woman who marched on the 1981 march to Greenham Common, was scheduled to talk about Greenham Common and the lawsuit throughout the Western Pennsylvania and Ohio area in early March. But the U.S. Embassy in London denied her a visa because she faces a court charge in Britain stemming from an October 1983 demonstration at Greenham Common. The charge, possession of wire cutters with intent to commit damage to property, is being contested by John, who has elected to have a jury trial in mid-April. However, the embassy decision to deny her a visa appears to violate the U.S immigration law, which states that aliens are to be denied visas only if they have been convicted of "crimes of moral turpitude."

The decision to deny Helen John a visa appears to be an attempt to prevent an outspoken and popular opponent of nuclear weapons from meeting with American citizens. In a BBC radio poll taken last December, John was named as the seventh most popular woman. Her visit was particularly important because she has been active in helping to convince British trade unions to oppose first-strike nuclear weapons and U.S. military bases in Britain, and to support unilateral disarmament. In addition, she has spoken throughout Western Europe and Eastern Europe about disarmament.

Ironically, another Greenham Common peace camp member, Jean Hutchinson, has been prohibited from leaving the U.S. After she spoke at a peace meeting at a church in Pontiac, Mich., she was arrested on three counts of conspiracy. She is barred from leaving the country until atter her trial.

Today there are half a dozen peace camps in both the U.S. and Britain, publicizing the manufacture and deployment of nuclear weapons. Few are like Greenham Common, open to women and children only. But the women's peace camps do have an important role to play. As Greenham Common has shown, when women rise up as women and demand an end to militarism, the old argument that a war must be carried out to defend the women and children collapses.

For further information about the lawsuit and speaking tours, contact: Greenham Women Against Cruise Missiles, c/o Center for Constitutional Rights, 853 Broadway, 14th Floor, New York City, 10003. Call (212) 674-3304.

Iranian children are cannon fodder Terrance Smith, in the The New York Times Magazine, describes the report of an East European journalist who saw "tens of thousands" of Iranian children "roped together, in groups of 20 to prevent the fainthearted from deserting, hurl themselves onto barbed wire or march into the Iraqi minefields in the face of withering machine gun fire to clear the way for Iranian tanks." "We have so few tanks," an Iranian officer explained, without apology.

At the same time, the U.S. government, one of Iraq's principal backers, admits that Iraq has been using chemical weapons. A United Nations report issued March 24 states that an investigative team found traces of mustard gas during on-site inspections of the battle zone. L

Scan page 5

It has been over five years since the February 1979 revolution in Iran. Three and one-half years have been spent in a war with Iraq.

In September 1980 Saddam Hussein, president of Iraq, ordered the invasion of Iran. The stated goal of the Iraqi invasion was to prevent the Iranian revolution from penetrating into south Iraq where the Shi'ite peasants of Iraq live.

In response, Joumhouri Islamie, the Iranian Islamic Republican Party (IRP) daily, published an appeal from Khomeini to the people of Iraq. It stated, "It is your duty, as well as that of the army, to overthrow Ba'athism, the non-Islamic party."

The United States and its allies, such as Saudi Arabia, also feared the spread of the Iranian revolution. While the Iraq on the condition that their autonomy be recognized.

Within less than two years, the Iranian troops had managed to push back the Iraqi army behind its own borders. But in July 1982 a turning point occurred in the war, with Iran launching a largescale offensive directed against the Iraqi city of Basra. Internally this military offensive was accompanied by the unleashing of a wave of official repression aimed at dismantling the mass organizations of the revolution, and at silencing all opposition to the Islamic regime. Over 20,000 Iranians were summarily executed for their opposition to Khomeini.

At this point, Saddam Hussein began to call for a unilateral ceasefire and peace. The Khomeini regime, however, refused Hussein's offer, demanding instead war reparations and a change of regime in Iraq.

What has followed in the last two years has been a grim spectacle of death and destruction. Tens of thousands of "volunteers" are rounded up monthly in Iran and are then sent out to the front lines to be slaughtered. Rejection of the war is growing among the Iranian masses, particulary the youth. This is also increasingly the case among the soldiers and peasant masses of Iraq.

End the fighting now!

The mullahs in Iran have managed to deal a crushing blow to the Iranian revolution. Today they are pursuing a policy of normalizing relations with imperialism and returning to a more "normal" form of bourgeois rule. The demagogic but reactionary Baathist regime in Iraq is also shoring up its relations with the imperialist powers.

For their part, the imperialist countries continue to arm Iraq—while making sure that sufficient arms get to Iran as well. They hope that the ruling cliques in both countries will exhaust the masses in their respective countries. Nonetheless, if the war begins to threaten the stability in the region-or threatens vital oil supplies—the United States and its allies may intervene militarily.

This war has not resulted in the liberation of any nation or people in the Middle East. Rather it has resulted in over 250,000 deaths and over 500,000 permanent injuries. Almost every family in Iran has lost one or two relatives. This war has cost over $400 billion.

This is a war between two capitalist

----- pull-quotes -----

industry magazine, "locked" inside the to lose and everything to gain."

wive lived through two world wars wite here, determined there ll never be a Third!'