IMPUDENT DISTORTION ON THE NEW DEFENCE
MODEL
(Translation by Pamela Perussich)
Since 1989, from the fall of the Berlin Wall and the consequent
dissolution of the Treaty of Warsaw, that in NATO countries of wich Italy, there is talk
of a New Defence Model (NDM).
In 1990, in London, the NATO instead of breaking up like the ex-comunist nations had
already done, deceided to continue, giving themselves a new aim. A speaker on the news
expressed the above information in a concise and efficient manner; it also was expressed
that the defence minister at the time the Honourable Virginio Ragnoni, had visited one of
his colleagues at the Pentagon (USA) one month after the Gulf War, stating the following:
"Reformulation of the NATO; the NATO is no longer in charge of the east-west
(Russia-America) but of the north-south (signifying rich countries versus poor
countries)".
Also in 1991, an objective statement was confirmed by the Minister of Defence asking
Parliament to pass a law on the NDM with the following specifications: defence not only of
the boarders but that of "VITAL NATIVE LAND INTERESTS", in any CORNER of the
world; "VITAL NATIVE LAND INTERESTS meaning primary sources present in third world
countries wich are necessary for the economy of industrialized nations."; according
to this picture Europe and in particular ITALY should have a part in a political and
economical bridge between industrialized and third world countries.
On the other hand, the French parliament approved a law authorizing the government, the
use of the "FORCE DE DRAPPE" (THE FRENCH ATHOMIC BOMB), for the defence of
"VITAL NATIVE LAND INTERESTS" in any part of the world. It is not a wonder that
the French resumed nuclear experiments in Mururoa.
And to think that French bishops have a legitimate peace document that morally justifies
the "deterrence of the atomic bomb" because the Second Vatican Council had
convinced the use of nuclear weapons, but the deterrence is only a threat, not
means of usage, therefore usage is morally accepted. Now the French government is
authorized to "use" the atomic bomb without any kind of immoral declaration on
behalf of French bishops and even less French army chaplains.
The American bombings on Iraq because Saddam abuses the Kurdish people (it seems that the
US doesn't know that Turkey moves in the same way and even they bomb Kurdish refuge camps
in the north of Iraq) and now the bombings of the NATO on Serbia with the use of
impoverished uranium missiles (not to say the least…very radioactive!) has stirred up
a lot of American bishops, but not the European ones, not even the army Chaplains.
WELL…WHAT IS THEIR PURPOSE? Can't they see that there is a war instead of
humanitarian interference? That shamelessly it is just ridicolous to talk about
humanitarian bombs? That it has gone way passed the limite of deterrence, the situation
has entered in the moral madness of atomic radiation?
On the 25th of April, at the reunion of NATO countries, at
Washington this villanous logic reached its peak: the Constitution of the alliance was
riformed so that the so called international police action was included.
According to the ONU they were not able to hide the unlawfulness of the bombings (no
decision was made by the security council and threrfore they could not have become
legitimate), according to the NATO constitution (art. II) the thought of legitimizing
themselves including in their own constitution the aim of going to war wherever and to
intervene against whoever they retained suitable. The word "war" is used because
it's not enough by simply changing the name, that a police action will be formed.
Statements of a military general: "You can't send armies to do the duty of the
international police action" (gen. Bruno Loi). Statements of Italian bishops: "
From single states, the right to obtain justice alone with force should be taken away like
it was taken away from private citzens and intermediate communities, eliminating the
national armies. Equally the proposals that have a tendency to change the strcuture and
formation of the army merit support, so that it can assimulate into an international
police corps, directly dependent on the ONU, wich however remains an external body".
Moreover "It appears urgente to promote throughout public opinion, a risortion of a
NONVIOLENT form of defence" [LA VERITÀ VI FA LIBERI: Nuovo Catechismo Adulti della
CEI, Cap. XXVI, pp. 493-494).
This villanous pattern formed by the NATO must be stopped; better, the NATO needs to break
up and the ONU possess true authority so it can garantee peace for all nations, using a
police structure and not that of armies and war.
Certainly a stop needs to be put even on Milosevic, who is showing the worst sort of
nationalism, with the ethnic "clean up" absolutely out of every human civil
reasoning.
The Pope John Paul II, without any kind of ambiguity has declared the uselessness and
immorality of this war and of every war, like he already stated in his USA trip; LIFE IS
SACRE and INVIOLABLE, not only that of the innocent but even that of the guilty.
To be coherent with the catechism of the Universal church, there should be the total
abolishment of the death sentence, without anymore exceptions; in the same way there
should be the abolishment once and for for all the notorius "THE RIGHT WAR
DOCTRINE" currently still in use.
The Pope proposes as an alternative to war, dialogues and diplomatic agreements, but the
range of nonviolent actions and the general "Nonviolent popular defence method"
goes way beyond these elements.
Referring to the first point, as an answer to an alternative war solution the following
notes can be taken into consideration merit of Professor Antonio PAPISCA from the
University of Padua, Italy:
STOP the operations of the wars, Milosevic, UCK, NATO;