Det danske Fredsakademi
Kronologi over fredssagen og international politik 31. Oktober 1997 / Time Line October 31, 1997
Version 3.530. Oktober 1997, November 1997
10/31/1997
CIVIL SOCIETY AND GLOBAL RESPONSIBILITY:
THE ARMS TRADE AND EAST TIMOR.
By Angie Zelter 31/10/97.
An essay for inclusion in a book called 'Security, Community and
Emancipation. An Introduction to Critical Security Studies' edited
by Ken Booth.
contents
Background: Ploughshares Actions
The Context: British Arms Sales to Indonesia
The Action
The Trial and the Defence
Global Citizenship
References
"Not Guilty. Not Guilty on all counts!". Tears were streaming down
the faces of almost everyone sitting in Liverpool Crown Court on
July 30th 1996 when the 4 Ploughshares women were finally released.
They had faced upto ten years in prison for their act of damaging a
Hawk ground-attack aircraft bound for Indonesia. Ricarda, one of
the Ploughshares' women's main supporters, described the feelings
well, 'Not guilty - we had held it in our hearts and minds all
through the trial, all through the six months our friends were
locked up on remand for acting to prevent genocide. What a
wonderful day for justice and for East Timor! I ran out ..... of
the court.....and the whole square erupted in cheers, laughter,
tears. As we celebrated we knew that all over the world people were
celebrating with us, including in East Timor. This action really
did disarm for life and justice. Everybody was hugging everybody,
knowing that we were all part of this moment in history, of wheels
turning, of new hope born' [1].
I was one of those 4 Ploughshares women. I had decided to join with
three other women to do what my Government had failed to do - to
prevent the provision of weapons to the genocidal dictator, Suharto
- to prevent at least one Hawk fighter plane from being delivered
to an Indonesian regime which has one of the worst human rights
records in the world.
Before describing our actions, the trial and our defence, I will
give some background and context.
Background: Ploughshares Actions.
A deal had been signed for British Aerospace (BAe) to supply
Indonesia with 24 Hawk ground-attack aircraft [15]. Indonesia
already had a number of Hawks, sold in 1978, and eyewitnesses had
reported seeing these Hawks being used to attack villages in East
Timor [5]. Well before the second Hawk deal was finally signed in
June 1993, thousands of people in Britain had been working to try
to stop the deal. A large coalition of human rights, peace and
anti-arms trade groups had formed to oppose the sale and had
organised many protests ranging from letter writing, lobbying,
petitions, vigils and leafletting to organising peace camps and
demonstrations that included many acts of civil disobedience like
die-ins, blockades and trespasses at government buildings and BAe
sites [2]. Some of us determined that if none of these activities
had worked by the time the first batch of Hawks were due to leave
for Indonesia then we would personally prevent them going by
peacefully disarming as many as we could find. We formed a small
group and spent over a year planning our ploughshares action as a
last resort if all else failed.
The Ploughshares movement originated in the North American
faith-based peace movement that emerged during opposition to the
Vietnam war in the 1970's. The first Ploughshares action was
carried out in 1980 by the 'Ploughshares Eight' who entered a
General Electric plant in Pennyslyvania, US where the nose cones
for the Mark 12A nuclear warheads were manufactured. Enacting the
Biblical prophecies of Isaiah (2:4) and Micah (4:3) to "beat swords
into ploughshares", they hammered on two of the nose cones and
poured blood on documents. They used ordinary household hammers to
carry out their direct act of disarmament. As of August 1997 over
140 individuals had participated in over 60 Ploughshares actions in
Australia, Germany, Holland, Sweden, UK and US. The smallest group
of hammerers consisted of one person (who had only one support
person) 'Harmonic Disarmament for Life' and the largest group of
hammerers consisted of nine people and was called 'Trident
Nein'.
There have been very many different weapon systems that have been
disarmed including components of the US first-strike nuclear
weapons systems such as MX, Minuteman, B-52 bombers, P-3 Orion
anti-submarine aircraft, and the NAVSTAR. Combat aircraft used for
military intervention, such as helicopters, F-111 and F-15E fighter
bombers and Hawk aircraft have been disarmed, as have anti-aircraft
missile launchers, bazooka grenade throwers and AK-5 automatic
rifles [16]. Ploughshares actions are always peaceful and
accountable actions and are part of the non-violent and
civil-disobedience traditions. Although originally rooted in
Christianity they are now universal and gain their spiritual
strength from many different faiths and traditions. Our action was
the 56th such Ploughshares action carried out by ordinary people
across the world and we named it 'Seeds of Hope - East Timor
Ploughshares - Women Disarming for Life and Justice'. It was the
first all-women Ploughshares, the first where the defendants were
all acquitted and the one where the most damage was done to the
weapons system. The initial costs by BAe were in the region of ?2.5
million but this was later reduced in court by the defence to ?1.5
million.
The Context: British Arms Sales to Indonesia.
Let me set the context. Indonesian armed forces have repressed and
denied human rights within Indonesia ever since Suharto seized
power in 1965. He has killed an estimated million of his own people
in order to ensure his own power base [17]. The Indonesian forces
continue to repress people in many parts of Indonesia and are
ignoring local indigenous peoples land and human rights by
re-settling people on their lands from the central islands through
the infamous trans-migration policies [18 & 19]. There is much
conflict in Aceh and in Kalimantan that have recently flared up
into full-scale riots and killings. The Indonesian armed forces
annexed West Papua in 1963 against the wishes of its people and
continue to exploit the natural resources there backed up by the
full repressive miltary system [3].
The human rights abuses are on an appalling scale. Amnesty
International summed up the situation as follows:- 'Hundreds of
thousands of civilians have been killed, their mutilated corpses
sometimes left in public places to rot; prisoners have been
routinely tortured and ill-treated, some so severely that they have
died or suffered permanent injury; thousands of people have been
imprisoned following show trials solely for their peaceful
political and religious views; scores of prisoners have been shot
by firing squad' [4].
The Indonesian armed forces violated East Timor's right to
self-determination by invading East Timor in 1975 [21] and have
continued to illegally occupy East Timor against the UN Security
Council and General Assembly resoulutions ever since. This illegal
occupation underlies all the other criminal acts it carries out of
resource exploitation, land theft, torture, bombings and shootings
[20]. A third of the population of East Timor have been killed -
that is one in every three people. Jose Ramos Horta, exiled East
Timorese Leader and Nobel Laureate, said, 'Entire villages have
been wiped out. Entire tribes of indigenous peoples have been
obliterated. This is genocide' [5].
And yet since 1978, the UK has been a major supplier of armaments,
military aircraft and naval vessels to Indonesia. The UK has a
special relationship with Indonesia based on trade which has
undermined its commitment to human rights [28]. The UK has also
supplied police and internal security equipment and trained both
the military and the para-military forces including the police, who
have been at the forefront of torture and human rights abuses. Two
of the Hawks from the first sale, armed with missiles, were used
daily for almost six months in 1983 and were responsible for the
death of hundreds of civilians and guerrilla fighters in three
areas of East Timor. A Hawk was seen destroying a village in East
Timor in September of 1994 [5]. In December of 1995 Hugh
O'Shaughnessy, a journalist with The Observer, saw Hawk aircraft
flying over Dili [6].
Indonesia, by any objective criteria, is a systematic and
persistent violator of international laws. And yet the UK says it
is concerned about human rights and respects international law.
Government officials tell us that they check all arms exports
against the UK guidelines, the EU criteria, the CSCE
(Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe) criteria and
the criteria of the five Permanent members of the UN Security
Council [7]. All these criteria stress the human rights record of
the recipient country and its respect for international law, the
internal situation, the preservation of regional peace and the need
for restraint in arms deals.
Of what use are all these criteria if weapons are still sent to
Indonesia? They are a total waste of time, effort and paper, and
much worse than that, they are, in effect, a huge lie. These arms
control agreements with their ennumerated criteria give the
impression that there are some controls upon the arms trade, when
in fact Britain sells arms for profit and strategic gain,
regardless of any humanitarian considerations. This view is not
based on jaded cynicism but on a thorough reading of letters,
statements and policy documents of government departments, arms
corporations and economic advisors.
To take just a few examples. The BAe Corporate Governance Manual
states, 'The company demands and will maintain the highest ethical
standards in its business activities. The company will respect the
traditions and cultures of each country with which it deals.
Performance against the ethical standards needs to be monitored
regularly' [8].
Dick Evans, then Chief Executive of BAe, wrote to me:- 'Regarding
the issue you raise on limiting exports. In 1994 export markets
accounted for 82% of our defence business and the FS Survey placed
BAe as the UK's top exporter of manufactured goods. The world
market for aerospace and defence products is highly competitive and
we cannot afford to limit our export opportunities or to become
reliant on the UK domestic market without risking extinction'
[9].
The Country Forecast for Indonesia, found in the Department of
Trade and Industry Library (this is the government department that
issues the export licences for military equipment), states:- 'In
seeking to achieve its foreign policy goals, the government will
continue to be hampered by external pressure over two issues:
Indonesia's controversial annexation of the former Portuguese
colony of East Timor and its human and workers rights record .....
these pressures will remain manageable, with many of Indonesia's
most important trading partners having implicitly accepted the
country's role in East Timor and few foreign governments willing to
sacrifice potentially lucrative trade relations with Indonesia on
the altar of human rights' [10].
Britain's duplicity is exemplified in the letters sent to
protesters. We are told that we defend ourselves and should not
deny others the right to do the same. We are then given a quote
from Article 51 of the UN Charter. This is a partial and distorted
irrelevance as this article only recognises the use of force in
response to an armed attack and it has to be a limited and
proportional response in compliance with international war laws.
Indonesia is not a country under attack fighting valiantly to
defend itself. Indonesia is itself the aggressor and needs weapons
to carry out offensive actions not defensive ones. And no mention
is ever made, by the British authorities, of the UN Charter's
Article 1(2) where it says that every people have a right of
self-determination.
Our institutions have been playing word games like this for years.
And it doesn't seem to matter whether it is a Labour Government or
a Conservative Government in power. In 1978, in response to protest
letters about the sale of the first Hawk aircraft, Lord Goronwy
Roberts of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) said on June
19th, 'I hope you will be reassured to learn that the aircraft in
question are of the trainer version; equipment for their
ground-attack role has not been included in the sale, and therefore
they cannot be used in East Timor or against civilians.' On 8th
August 1996, Jeremy Hanley of the FCO, says, 'In the case of the
sale of Hawk aircraft, thorough assessments were made of the
likelihood of this equipment being used for internal repression in
Indonesia or East Timor. We concluded that it was not likely that
they would be so used.' Obviously neither protesters, like us, nor
East Timorese were or are reassured by these words. This is why
they are taking their own action - working directly for their own
security and in the interests of humanity as a whole.
After my release from prison and as a follow-up to our Hawk
disarmament action I worked with CAAT, TAPOL and the WDM to test
the Government statements about arms exports to repressive regimes
at the High Court. British Alvis tanks were used in April 1996
during an assault on students in Ujung Pandang, South Sulawesi and
British Glover Webb watercannons were used to break up peaceful
protests in Bandung, West Java in June 1996. TAPOL had acquired
photos of these events and witness statements. These 1996 incidents
formed the basis for the application for a Judicial Review at the
High Court [25]. The Judicial Review was to test the validity of
government assertions that decisions about arms sales are based on
careful consideration of the human rights record of the recipient
country in accordance with several international codes of practice
to which Britain had bound itself. It was the first ever legal
challenge to the export of arms and it failed, showing that
Government assertions about being bound by human rights criteria
are worthless. This has led to an understanding that the only thing
that can bind a Government to strict adherence of its own policy of
refusing to arm aggressive and repressive states is unambiguous
legislation [37].
Whilst reporting to the press on our Ploughshares action I had
said, 'Murder and genocide are not excusable, either morally or
legally, on the grounds that they provide jobs for British people.
Yet this is what is underlying the provision of arms to Suharto's
regime. The Genocide Act is part of British Law and it is time it
was used to prevent our Government and industry implicating
ordinary British workers in the horrific killings and repression
committed by the Indonesian state. British people need and want
jobs but only those that are socially and ethically justifiable.
Ploughshares activists are accountable for their acts of
disarmament - we want to see a government accountable for their
acts of armament and taking responsibility for their part in
genocide' [11].
The issue of jobs is of course a very emotive subject. Employment
is one of the most commonly used defences for maintaining unethical
business practices and apart from being used to defend the arms
industry is also used to defend many other contentious industries.
Society cannot duck the question - to what extent should moral
considerations and other values should be placed higher than
economic considerations? Is it right to earn our living at the
expense of other peoples around the world? These are ethical
questions and must be addressed as such [36]. I am of the opinion
that no country should organise it's economy around the suffering
of others. This said however, the arguments for the economy and for
jobs are often in any case very flawed. There are many studies
showing that more jobs could be saved by switching resources from
arms production [38]. There is also a need for a drastic
re-appraisal of jobs and employment in modern society. Much work
that is being done, it can be argued, does not really need to be
done - the arms industry, nuclear power, pornography, production of
hazardous products, clear-cutting of old-growth forests,
advertising, the glut of redundant and frivolous consumer goods (do
we really need 14 different brands of detergents or electric
toothbrushes?). And much work that needs doing is not getting done
- environmental protection, organic agriculture, community care,
restoration of public services, peaceful conflict resolution,
renewable and non-polluting energy production, repair of goods.
Many jobs that need doing are being done by volunteers and are
unpaid. The work ethic and the current norm of employment whereby
one sells one's time to an employer is only about 150 years old and
is already showing major flaws. Alternative ways of supporting
people and getting essential work done must beexplored. There are
plenty of ideas around including those of 'basic incomes' and
'ownwork' [39 & 40].
The Action.
Our Ploughshares group was all women (including the 6 supporters
who made up our full group of 10) and was consciously so - to
challenge the unbalanced, patriarchal basis of our society. We also
wished to work with women because we wanted to explore certain ways
of working that many men would not have been happy with. For
instance we wanted to explore our fears and emotions and look after
each other in order to properly prepare and support ourselves for
what might have been a very long time in prison. We also wanted to
counter the rather macho image that Ploughshares actions had
acquired by being dominated by men up to that point. We have been
successful in that since our action there have been several more
women-only Ploughshares actions. The arms industry, war and human
rights abuses are controlled by men with women and children as
major victims. In the last ten years 2 million children, far more
than the total number of soldiers, were killed in war [41]. It felt
good to confront this with an all-female team.
We made a Report [2] of around 50 pages that included the
background to the illegal and brutal invasion and twenty year
genocidal occupation of East Timor by Indonesia, a list of relevant
international laws and resolutions, information on British arms
deals to Indonesia, and our personal statements. We also produced a
20 minute video [26] that included many scenes from John Pilger's
film 'Death of a Nation' that had affected all four of us very
deeply. The video included personal testimony from East Timorese
who had seen Hawks attack and kill the people of their villages,
some telling statements from Government Ministers who admitted that
any reassurances from the Indonesian Government that they would not
use British weapons to kill their own people were not worth the
paper they were written on, as well as interviews with all four of
us explaining why we were ready to use our hammers to disarm a
Hawk. Both Report and Video were made to explain to both public and
court the background to our actions.
In mid-January 1996, after preparing and planning everything
together, we finally split into two groups, taking joint
responsibility for each others actions. In the early hours of 29th
January, Lotta Kronlid, Andrea Needham and Joanna Wilson snipped a
hole in the fence around BAe's weapons factory in Warton,
Lancashire, opened the hangar door with a crowbar and proceeded to
use their hammers to disarm the control panels in the cockpit, the
radar system and the wings, nose and fuselage of the Hawk warplane.
They did around one and a half million pounds worth of damage.
Photos of women and children shot at the Santa Cruz massacre at
Dili (the capital of East Timor) in 1991 when Indonesian troops
fired on a peaceful demonstration killing 528 people, were hung on
the plane along with a banner we had carefully and lovingly sewn
over the previous months. The video and report were left on the
pilot seat and seeds of hope (vegetable and flower seeds) were
poured all over and around the plane. They were able to make
several phone calls from the hangar and it was not until the press
informed BAe security that they had disarmed a plane that the
security finally arrived to arrest them and take them into
custody.
It was to be a week later, on February 6th, before I (Angie Zelter)
joined them in prison. We had known that my time would be limited
as in the video and the Report we had all four appeared and made it
quite clear that we were all responsible together for the action.
Our names and addresses were quite openly printed in the Report. We
did not want there to be any confusion about who had planned the
action or any suggestion that we were trying to hide. My role was
to try a second 'secret' attempt if they failed to enter the hangar
without being caught or, if they succeeded, to ensure that their
act of disarmament was reported, to widen the debate by trying to
get others to stop the export of the remaining Hawks and then to
encourage others to join in further disarmament actions by asking
them to join me in an 'open' Ploughshares action.
As expected, a week later I was arrested at a public meeting near
Warton at which the police knew I was to be speaking. But I was
prepared and had already completed several press interviews,
attempted to get the courts to get a warrant of arrest for the
President of the Board of Trade for conspiring to aid and abet
genocide by signing the export licences for the Hawks, and met with
sympathetic MPs to try to get an emergency debate in
Parliament.
During the six months we spent in prison, awaiting trial, the four
of us received thousands of letters of support from many different
countries. Althought the mainstream press hardly covered the actual
disarmament action or our arrests, writing it off as criminal
damage, vandalism and irresponsible sabotage, the alternative press
had covered it widely and it was soon on the internet. Public
support grew so strong that by the time of the trial the court was
crowded and people had to take it in turns to witness the
proceedings. There were also several hundred people processing down
the streets of Liverpool each day to the Court and praying and
demonstrating in the large public square outside the court
buildings. The supporters all recognised the moral legitimacy of
our actions and sent their love, prayers and support.
Our greatest pleasure came from the letters from East Timorese,
letters smuggled out of the Indonesian jails where the East
Timorese prisoners had heard of our action on their radios and
through the underground prison network, and who appreciated our act
of love and solidarity with their people's tragedy. We have a much
prized letter from Xanana Gusmao, himself. Perhaps the most
significant part of these letters was the recognition that we were
acting with them, as global citizens, in defence of international
justice, our own humanity, for equity, human rights and global
security.
The Trial and the Defence.
Our trial took place over 6 days and was the first time ordinary
British people, in the form of the jury of 12 randomly selected
people from Liverpool, were given the opportunity to hear the
evidence against BAe, the British Government and the Indonesian
regime. Of course, ostensibly this was the trial of us four women.
We faced very serious charges of criminal damage and conspiracy to
commit criminal damage and had been treated in prison as high
security risk prisoners. If found guilty we faced up to ten years
in prison. We had prepared for a long prison sentence, not daring
to hope too strongly for an acquittal.
However, we knew that the real criminals were the Indonesian
miltary, security and police forces, the British and other Western
governments, who traded with and provided the support and means for
the ongoing repression and the powerful corporations who actually
made and sold the equipment. We used every opportunity during our
defence to put these real criminals on trial. As I said in the
trial :- 'Companies, governments and powerful people are often
treated as if they are above the law - their crimes are frequently
ignored or not recognised at all' [12]. This was our opportunity to
get their crimes recognised. Although we all wanted to represent
ourselves we decided to use two top rate lawyers. Our solicitor was
Gareth Pierce and our barrister was Vera Baird - both women. They
officially represented Jo, on legal aid, but protected all of us
from abuses within the court system and to ensure that we got a
fair hearing. We were all well aware that to some extent this was a
'political' trial.
We knew that we did have a defence in law, whatever the police and
prosecutor said. We used Section 3 of the Criminal Law Act - 'A
person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances in
the prevention of crime' - to good effect. Vera explained, after
our trial, that our acquittal was not 'a perverse verdict'. This
was often stated by the press who found it hard to come to terms
with our acquital [27, 29, 30, 31, 32, & 33] . Vera explained,
'It was not a perverse verdict ..... It was neither wrong in law
nor contrary to the weight of evidence .....the disarmed Hawk was
one of the first batch of four due to be delivered in January .....
the three that were not damaged were sent to the Bandung Squadron
of the Indonesian airforce. Evidence at the trial was that this is
the squadron most dedicated to counter-insurgency operations. Those
are operations to eliminate lightly armed or unarmed individuals
and the squadron is within operational range of East Timor. In
short, the new BAe built Hawks were being sent to the squadron
which spearheads airborne attacks against East Timor .... they were
able to show that nothing but physical intervention could stop the
imminent delivery of this plane .... the evidence in this case
showed that a crime under British and International law was
imminent and that crime was stopped' [13].
The other defendants mainly concentrated on the British Criminal
Law Act defence and gave a powerful moral defence. We did not
attempt to hide from the court that whilst having a good legal
defence our act was based on simple humanity and love, and whatever
the state of the law we would still have acted to prevent that
plane from going out to kill innocent people. However, I purposely
used an International law defence. This was because, viewing myself
as a global citizen, I wanted to use a global defence regardless of
what was open to me as a British citizen. My defence was based on
the following outline ;- 'International law is binding on all
individuals, all states and in this particular court right
now....Indonesia is a systematic and persistent violator of
international laws....Our British government and BAe are complicit
in these crimes and in breach of major international laws
themselves.....The export licence issued for these Hawks may be an
official British government licence but it is actually illegal
under international law....It is every citizen's right and duty to
try and uphold international law by trying to prevent such
horrendous crimes from being committed....We thus had a duty to
take affirmative action under international law, the reasonable
exercise of which made our Ploughshares action lawful [12].
One of the most interesting cases that I brought to the Liverpool
Court's attention, in connection with corporate crime, was that of
the Zyklon B case [14]. It dealt with the question of whether or
not two German businessmen were entitled to sell the poisonous gas,
Zyklon B, to the SS when there were good grounds to believe that it
would be used for the purpose of exterminating human beings. After
the war the owner and manager of the company selling the gas were
put on trial at Nuremberg. They argued that Zyklon B was just an
article that could be used for a lawful purpose and could be sold
just like any other article in the market. An attitude similar to
that of the Prosecutor and BAe about Hawks. The Nuremberg Tribunal,
however, ruled that that under international law it was a war crime
to sell Zyklon B and the two were found guilty. In my final address
to the Court I was able to explain:- 'We need to be aware that the
further we are from the physical and personal impact of our actions
or the human effects of our decisions, then the less moral
responsibility we feel. The longer and more complex the chain of
events, the more moral responsibility gets dispersed and reduced.
Then the point comes when the system may be guilty of an appalling
crime against humanity but no individual feels obliged to own the
consequences of their actions. The Indonesian regime denied their
responsibility, BAe denied theirs, the British government denied
theirs. Therefore we were obliged to take responsibility. We knew
of the crimes that would be committed by any one of these Hawk
aircraft if they ever reached Indonesia, we knew that any
Indonesian trying to disable the planes there would be tortured and
shot, we therefore took responsibility here, after trying all other
possible steps' [12].
Well, the jury, I am glad to say agreed with us and found us not
guilty. The Judge, prosecutor, BAe and various other officials were
shocked and angry but obviously not totally unprepared. As we
stepped out of the court we were immediately served with temporary
injunctions, later changed to permanent injunctions, to prevent us
from going anywhere near any of the many BAe sites in Britain. But
the struggle continues. A total of 13 people have permanent BAe
injunctions against them but continue to either defy them or find
other ways of campaigning. The campaign to stop the unethical arms
trade continues with very many more people taking part [24]. The
publicity from the trial encouraged lots of new people to join in
the protests against arms sales fairs, various arms manufacturers
AGMs [43], and to join in protests and demonstrations outside the
Department of Trade and Industry [34]. A large number of East
Timorese refugees from refugee communities in Ireland, Portugal and
Britain took part in this demonstration. This has been a powerful
new development in the campaign. More East Timorese refugees have
now moved to Britain and are taking part in nonviolent direct
action. Four East Timorese were arrested alongside 7 British
protesters (myself included) after breaking in to the Glover Webb
factory near Southampton and painting on the armoured vehicles and
water cannon, awaiting export to Indonesia, 'Not for Export' and
'Prevent Human Rights Abuses'. The police were ashamed at the true
life stories of torture that the East Timorese had suffered and the
company were perhaps similarly embarassed and did not want the
publicity that would come with a trial - the charges have been
quietly dropped [42].
Global Citizenship.
The idea of global responsibility and global citizenship, of seeing
ourselves as one family, is an ancient concept. Although many
people in power have a very materialistic, industrial, linear frame
of mind bounded by concepts of 'national security needs' and
'economic growth' many ordinary people have not forgotten our roots
in the interconnected life-web of which we are but one species. We
perceive that our life support systems around the world are
deteriorating and dying. Not only have most of our natural forests
been destroyed but also the life in the oceans. The basic security
of healthy and vibrant living eco-systems upon which we can base
our own human societies is no longer intact. We can see, feel,
hear, breathe and taste the death of the life-support systems all
around us. There are reports from ordinary people all over the
planet telling us of new diseases and decreased fertility in many
species including our own, of contaminated and dwindling
fresh-water supplies, soil-erosion, forest destruction, desert
encroachment, mass extinction of other species, climate change, and
mass social dysfunctions and we can see the evidence in our own
areas. We can see that practical solutions to these pressing
problems are not being put in place by our governments or by the
'leaders' and 'decision-makers' in our world.
Indeed local people protesting at the exploitation of their natural
resources that are ripped up and sent to markets thousands of miles
away, leaving them destitute are often harshly repressed and put
down with weapons supplied by the industrialised nations that are
importing their raw materials from these very places. Britain's Rio
Tinto Zinc (RTZ) is the world's largest mining company and has a
large share in the Grasberg mine in the highlands of West Papua
(the Indonesians call it Irian Jaya). This mine hold the world's
largest gold and third largest copper deposits and is controlled by
the US company Freeport-McMoRan Copper and Gold. The mine is
operating against the wishes of the local Amungme, Dani, Komoro and
Ekari peoples who consider the mountain to be the home of their
ancestral spirit. The area is under military occupation and the
protests by the local people have been met with severe repression.
The Indonesian authorities themselves have had to admit that locals
have been murdered and 'disappeared' [3].
Something is very wrong. There is an overall problem in the system
as a whole. Ordinary, local people have been disempowered, have
lost their autonomy and self-sufficient economies and cultures and
the global economy is being run for the 'profit' of global
corporations rather than the well-being of the global peoples. The
present system in Britain is a part of this global system that is
not working in the public interest on behalf of all the varying
groups and peoples, nor is it behaving sustainably in the world as
a whole. Our present system has been set up and is being used by
nation states and by corporations to act in their own interests -
in the interests of those with power and those with control over
resources. Small scale businesses and companies that used to work
for the benefit of local peoples and local markets have now been
swallowed into the global market. The World Trade Organisation has
been set up by these global corporations to ensure that local
communities and democratically controlled institutions and even
countries, can be brought to heel if they attempt to control their
own resource use for the benefits of their own people or if they
try to ensure sustainable and equitable trade restrictions by
trying to prevent the import of unsustainable or damaging products
[22 & 23]. For instance Austria had banned the import of
tropical timber from unsustainable industrial-style old-growth
logging but was taken to the World Trade Organisation and
threatened with severe trading penalties if she did not repeal the
national legislation and allow the timber in.
We have all the information that we need to make necessary changes
and yet no action is taken and instead more research is demanded.
We have more and more governments and corporations acknowledging
the problems, sometimes recognising the solutions, perhaps even
writing good policy statements but not implementing them. Many of
the documents, guidelines, charters, and laws express wonderful
ideas of service to and on behalf of the people in the interests of
global long-term sustainability but real on the ground actions and
implementation is often at complete variance
This state of affairs has led to more and more citizens groups
realizing that if they are to survive, if they are to have real
security, then they have to work for it themselves. They have to
reclaim their lives, their lands, their laws, their religions,
their cultures. They have to start the difficult process of
becoming free, autonomous and fully alive. They have to peacefully
hold their governments and corporations to account. This kind of
world view, that I share, sees an interconnectedness between the
problems of human rights abuses and indigenous peoples rights,
between environmental destruction and civil war and conflict,
between arms sales and corporate power abuses and increasing
numbers of refugees.
Our Ploughshares action was an example of a small citizens group
taking action to further global security because the conventional
structures were unwilling or unable to act in a globally
responsible manner.
The theme of responsibility and global citizenship comes up over
and over again and can be seen in all of our personal statements
contained in the Report [2]. For instance, Lotta stated, 'For
twenty years Western governments' dealings with Indonesia and East
Timor have been two-faced. In the UN they have passed numerous
resolutions condemning the brutal Indonesian occupation. and
calling on Indonesia to withdraw. At the same time Western
companies, with the consent of their governments, have provided the
very means to carry out the occupation, by arming and supporting
economically the Indonesian regime. We have a joint responsibility
to put an end to this trade in murder and oppression. Acting from
that responsibility I'm taking part in this Ploughshares action. By
hammering on the Hawks we put into practice our visions of a
society where human life is sacred. This is the most direct and
practical solidarity I can show my sisters and brothers in East
Timor, who are struggling for peace and justice in their country'.
She goes on to say, we human beings have a strong and rich ability
to love and care for one another. With our lives and our actions we
can make the world a just and beautiful place to live in.... With
our action I want to show that it is possible to join together with
others and overcome the fears that stop us from taking action
against injustice. We have the resources. We don't have to obey a
government that makes immoral and unjust decisions' [2].
Andrea stated that she had been trying to stop the Hawk sale for
over three years and that she believed the sale to be immoral and a
contravention of both British and International law as well as
being a real and imminent threat to the people of East Timor. She
says, 'I therefore feel that I have no option but to disarm these
planes myself in order to prevent them from leaving for
Indonesia....I believe that above all else in life, we are called
to love and to be human. I can therefore not stand aside and allow
the Hawks to be delivered without doing all that is in my power to
peacefully resist. I believe that to be silent in this situation is
to be complicit with injustice' [2].
Jo stated, 'At least 200,000 East Timorese people have died as a
direct result of the Indonesian invasion and occupation of their
country. Many children, women and men have been killed by British
weapons - supplied by British companies, with the approval and
support of the British government. I am angry, ashamed and
distressed at Britains's complicity in these brutal mass
killings.....As a human being, I believe I must use all peaceful
means available to me to prevent my government from committing this
crime against humanity and against international law. Therefore,
together with my friends, I have decided to take personal
responsibility for the disarmament of Hawk aircraft destined for
Indonesia by hammering on parts of the plane essential to their
ground attack role - so rendering them harmless........instead of
fear, pain, grief and death, I want to offer hope, peace, justice
and freedom to my sisters and brothers in East Timor' [2].
I stated, 'Hawks from a previous arms sale have been seen bombing
villages in East Timor. I believe that the British Government and
BAe are aiding and abetting genocide in East Timor by sending Hawk
aircraft to Indonesia and that it is clear that they have no
intention of taking responsibility for the deaths that have and
will result from their arms deals. Mnay people in this country and
abroad have exposed the acts of the Indonesians and asked that an
arms embargo be imposed on them....But the Suharto regime continues
to get support from the
USA, Australia and Britain who are more interested in the
resources of gold, timber and oil that Indonesia is ripping from
the lands of its peoples than with the brutal disregard of human
rights'. I went on to say, 'I am not willing for innocent civilians
to be killed in my name and for this to be 'justified' as providing
jobs for British people. I wish to act as a responsible member of
the world community. I believe my act of personal disarmament is a
way to uphold international laws ....which set out rules for the
protection of innocent civilians. I believe that it is the
responsibility of every individual to do all in their power to
physically and peacefully stop any evil that they see taking place'
[2].
A new Labour Government that has said it will put ethics into
foreign policy may or may not actually implement these fine words
[44]. But regardless of the actions of governments and corporations
we, global citizens, will be peacefully experimenting with
alternatives, trying to reclaim our humanity, build up our
communities, reclaim our land back, rebuild the commons, reclaim
morality and the law, empowering ourselves and others in the
process [35]. We will join our struggles, to learn from and with
each other - not allowing ourselves to be imprisoned and
domesticated by our governments and corporations. We must all live
locally but take our global responsibilities seriously and
humanely.
References.
[1] 'Seeds of Hope - East Timor Ploughshares - Women Disarming for
Life and Justice. Final Newsletter No. 4 - August/September 1996',
available from The Greenhouse, 42-46 Bethel St, Norwich, Norfolk,
NR2 1NR, UK. Fax- 01603-666879.
[2] 'Seeds of Hope - East Timor Ploughshares - Women Disarming for
Life and Justice'. First edition, 29/1/96. Lotta Kronlid, Andrea
Needham, Joanna Wilson and Angie Zelter, available from The
Greenhouse, 42-46 Bethel St, Norwich, Norfolk, NR2 1NR, UK. Fax-
01603-666879.
[3] 'RTZ Finances Mine Expansion in West Papua' - The Ecologist,
Nov/Dec 1995.
[4] 'Human Rights in Indonesia and East Timor - Power and
Impunity', the Amnesty International Report of 1994, available from
Amnesty International, British Section, 99-119 Rosebery Ave, London
EC1R. Fax- 0171-833-1510.
[5] 'British Foreign Office and Defence Establishment are guilty of
the Crime of Genocide against the People of East Timor'. Jose Ramos
Horta, Lisbon, 16/11/94, available from The Greenhouse, 42-46
Bethel St, Norwich, Norfolk, NR2 1NR, UK. Fax- 01603-666879.
[6] Witness Statement of Hugh O'Shaughnessy produced for the Laying
of Information at Norwich Magistrates Court on 30/1/96, available
from The Greenhouse, 42-46 Bethel St, Norwich, Norfolk, NR2 1NR,
UK. Fax- 01603-666879.
[7] 'Export Licence and Arms Working Party 9MOD Form 680)
Applications: Guidance for Desk Officers', Non-Proliferation
Department, July 1995, Department of Trade and Industry, UK
Government document.
[8]' BAe Corporate Governance Manual', para 3.3., not available
from BAe unless you have connections, but activists copied parts of
it whilst doing a BAe office occupation.
[9] Personal letter to Angie Zelter from Dick Evans dated
20/7/95,available from The Greenhouse, 42-46 Bethel St, Norwich,
Norfolk, NR2 1NR, UK. Fax- 01603-666879.
[10] The Economist Intelligence Unit, 1st Quarter 1995, Country
Forecast Indonesia, found in the Department of Trade and Industry,
UK, library.
[11] 'Protesters to Hammer on Doors of Arms Dealers and Courts',
Seeds of Hope Press Release of 30/1/96, available from The
Greenhouse, 42-46 Bethel St, Norwich, Norfolk, NR2 1NR, UK. Fax-
01603-666879.
[12] 'The International Law Defence' as given by Angie Zelter at
Liverpool Crown Court on 29th July 1996, available from The
Greenhouse, 42-46 Bethel St, Norwich, Norfolk, NR2 1NR, UK. Fax-
01603-666879.
[13] Personal letter from Vera Baird to Angie Zelter, dated 6/10/96
including a copy of an article Vera had had published in The Law
magazine, available from The Greenhouse, 42-46 Bethel St, Norwich,
Norfolk, NR2 1NR, UK. Fax- 01603-666879.
[14] 'Zyklon B Case', Law Reports of Trials of War Criminals, Vols
I-V, selected and prepared by the United Nations War Crimes
Commission, 1947. [15] 'Hawk Deal Provokes Human Rights Row' The
Guardian, 11/6/93.
[16] 'Swords Into Ploughshares' Art Laffin.
[17] 'Surviving Indonesia's Gulag' Carmel Budiadjo, Cassel, 1996,
ISBN 0-304-33561-4.
[18] 'Distant Voices' John Pilger, Vintage, 1992, ISBN
0-09914391-7.
[19] 'Generations of Resistance - East Timor' Cox and Carey.
[20] 'International Law and the Question of East Timor' CIIR/IPJET,
1995, ISBN 1-85287131-8.
[21] 'Timor - A People Betrayed' James Dunn, ABC, 1996, ISBN
0-73330537-7.
[22] 'When Corporations Rule the World' David C. Korten, Earthscan,
1995, ISBN 1-85383-313-4.
[23] 'Is Timber a Sustainable Resource/ - Talk to the London
Softwood Club' Angie Zelter, Reforest the Earth 1997, 42 Bethel St,
Norwich, Norfolk, UK.
[24] CAAT and TAPOL newsletters cover all these. Campaign Against
Arms Trade, 11 Goodwin St, London N4 3HQ. Fax- 0171-281-4369. TAPOL
- Indonesia Human Rights Capaign, 111 Northwood Rd, Thornton Heath,
Surrey, London N6. Fax - 0181-653-0322.
[25] 'In the matter of an application for a Judicial Review by
TAPOL, CAAT and WDM and in the matter of the Customs Powers
(Defence) Act 1939 and the Export of Goods (Control) Order 1994',
25/3/97, High Court, London. Information and documentation from any
of the three organisations involved.
[26] 'Seeds of Hope Video', available from The Greenhouse, 42-46
Bethel St, Norwich, Norfolk, NR2 1NR, UK. Fax- 01603-666879.
[27] 'Anger as Hawk Four are Freed', Evening Gazette, 31/7/96.
[28] 'A special relationship: Britain and Indonesia', Mark Curtis,
Talk at the House of Commons, 4/12/96, available from The
Greenhouse, 42-46 Bethel St, Norwich, Norfolk, NR2 1NR, UK. Fax-
01603-666879. Also, 'The Ambiguities of Power. British Foreign
Policy since 1945', Mark Curtis, Zed Books, London, 1995.
[29] 'Jet case verdict is hard to understand, says Minister', Kate
Alderson, The Times, 1/8/96.
[30] 'Crimes of Conscience - sincere ideals are no grounds for
acquital' - The Times Editorial, 1/8/96.
[31] 'Dunblane, Dili and Double Standards', Roy Greenslade, The
Observer, 4/8/96.
[32] 'Ploughing a Deep Furough', Michael Randle, The Guardian,
7/8/96.
[33] '?1.5 m Hawk Attack Women Freed', Hugh O'Shaughnessy, The
Independent, 31/7/96.
[34] 'Week of Protest in London', Maubere, Newletter of the East
Timor Ireland Solidarity Campaign, Room 13, 24-26 Dame St, Dublin
2. Fax-671-9207.
[35] 'Wild, wild wimmin' - Focus, The Sunday Times, 4/8/96.
[36] 'Industry terrified at Outbreak of ethics', John Vidal, The
Guardian, 7/5/97.
[37] 'Statement on the Judicial Review Initiative' - TAPOL, London,
10 April, 1997. TAPOL - Indonesia Human Rights Capaign, 111
Northwood Rd, Thornton Heath, Surrey, London N6. Fax -
0181-653-0322.
[38] 'Killing Jobs' - CAAT, Campaign Against Arms Trade, 11 Goodwin
St, London N4 3HQ. Fax- 0171-281-4369
[39] 'Future Work', James Robertson, Gower, 1985.
[40] 'Working Future - Jobs and the Environment, Friends of the
Earth, November, 1994.
[41] Peace Matters, No. 19, Autumn 1997. PPU. 41b Brecknock Rd,
London, N7 0BT. Fax-0171-482-6390.
[42] Eleven Protesters Held by Police after Factory Break-in', The
Independent, 6/5/97.
[43] 'Protesters Shout Down Chairman and Effectively Halt Business
over Continuing Sales of Hawk Fighters to Indonesia', Bernard Gray,
Financial Times, 1/5/97.
[44] 'Should Britain be selling weapons to a Government that acts
like this? - Labour's Moral Issue', Finance Guardian, 7/5/97.
 |
 |