Hurtig leads charge against weaponizing of space

Mel Hurtig is on fire again. The longtime crusader for Canadian sovereignty and author of several best-selling books (the last being Pay the Rent or Feed the Kids: The Tragedy and Disgrace of Poverty in Canada, McClelland and Stewart, 1999) spoke to a large crowd in the auditorium of Innis College, University of Toronto on March 9. The lengthy address was a virtual precis of his upcoming book Rushing to Armageddon: Paul Martin and George W. Bush's Star Wars.

In an interview earlier that day with CNT, Hurtig was insistent on the seriousness of the nuclear issue. "It is absolutely essential that we make this a priority issue in the next federal election. I'm quite convinced that what Paul Martin, Bill Graham and David Pratt are planning could be catastrophic for our country and perhaps all of the civilized world."

Hurtig seemed perplexed at the disappearance of the Canadian bishops in the past 20 years. "At one time the bishops were extraordinarily progressive, so socially conscious, so compassionate.

"We need them. My message is that we really are closer now to an apocalyptic event. And this isn't me. I quote Mohammed el Baradi at the beginning of my speech, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, who maintains that the chances of nuclear war are greater today than at any time in his lifetime. And then I quote Kofi Annan who says the same thing."

In the evening, Hurtig first directed people to vivelecanada.com, a new site on issues of Canadian sovereignty, which is getting 4,000 hits per day, then launched into his 90-minute speech, which began with this quote from Reuters:

"President George W. Bush is planning to put the first weapons in space. Despite large international opposition, budget papers sent to Congress on Monday showed that it is the first to set aside funds to start developing the kind of weapons President Ronald Reagan had in mind when he called for 'a space-based defense initiative.' Critics decried Reagan's vision as Star Wars.

Does Bill Graham actually believe this?

"Seventeen days later here is Bill Graham, our Rosedale-based Minister of Foreign Affairs: 'We are entering into negotiations and discussions with the United States about ballistic missile defence. We are not in any way engaged in nor will we permit ourselves to engage in anything like the weaponizing of space. It is a defence system.' There is no reason to suggest this will result in the weaponizing of space. This is to a very large degree about deceit, it's about how Paul Martin and his Liberal government have been blatantly dishonest with Canadians about one of the most vitally important decisions in the 137-year-history of our country, a decision with the most profound implications."

Hurtig went on to maintain that millions were concerned over the increased dangers of nuclear proliferation, military escalation and global destabilization, "most due to the American plan to weaponize and to dominate space and to completely deny others the use of space." The aforementioned el Baradi and Annan were just two prominent observers who had expressed grave concerns.

"Last April, the mayor of Hiroshima stated that 'We stand on the brink of hyper proliferation, perhaps the third actual use of nuclear weapons ... we're now forced to conclude that the United States, the prime mover in all things nuclear, relentlessly and blatantly intends to develop and maybe even use these horrible, illegal weapons.'"

In a Freedom of Information request, Hurtig received 200 blank pages (of 300) briefing notes for former defense secretary John McCallum and present minister David Pratt (one of the few Liberals who voted to go to war in Iraq). Though much info was deleted, Hurtig maintained that, "it's absolutely clear, Without a shadow of doubt that the Department of Defence is leaning heavily toward Canadian participation in Bush's missile defence scheme."

Yet, Bill Graham continues to insist that this program has nothing to do with the weaponizing of space. This appeared too much for Hurtig.

"In the face of all enormous amounts of official scientific evidence to the contrary, one can only regard Bill Graham's comment with the utmost dismay and contempt. There are only three conclusions to draw: either Graham is incompetent and well over his head in his portfolio, or he is very poorly briefed by his officials or he is intentionally lying to the Canadian public. I do not believe the first two explanations."

Hurtig directed the audience to log onto the United States Space Command's web site at www. gsinstitute.org. He advised everybody to note its posted document, Vision for 2020, every time they hear Paul Martin, Bill Graham or David Pratt say the U.S. National Missile Defence plans have nothing to do with placing weapons in space."

Church leaders reject space wars

On March 15, Canadian church leaders warmed Hurtig's heart when they released a statement entitled, Nuclear Disarmament and Ballistic Missiles. The signatories, including Archbishop Brendan O'Brien, the president of the CCCB, urged Prime Minister Paul Martin "to guide Canada toward an intensified commitment to nuclear disarmament and binding controls over nuclear missiles." In a poetic flourish, the letter commented, "Tragically and ironically, having committed the folly of building these weapons in the name of security, humankind now scours technology and science for ways to avoid the devastating insecurity that splitting the atom promises. "This minimal system lacks operationally tested capability ... The Pentagon itself lacks confidence that the ground-based, mid-course interception system that Canada is considering supporting can ever be made to work." Not only that, but "it violates an overwhelming global consensus against the weaponizing of space. The conclusion: Unequivocally reject the expensive futility of BMD."

On March 16, a former Pentagon official, Philip Coyle, testifying in Washington, poured scorn on President Bush's plan, which is set to begin deployment by the end of this year. Coyle said that the plan was untested, over budget and likely to fuel the arms race. Under heavy questioning, the Pentagon's chief weapons evaluator, Thomas Christie, admitted that the system was insufficiently developed to be effective.

Hurtig's book will be released in August. The debate undoubtedly will be continued.

When asked if he had anything further to comment on Hurtig commented, "What is most worrying now is the Russian and Chinese response to the American National Missile Defense plans, with new and more nuclear weapons, better intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), new submarines and in general an escalation and proliferation and destabilization scenario that is quite ominous."

COPYRIGHT 2004 Catholic New Times, Inc.
COPYRIGHT 2004 Gale Group