FEATURES U.S. sets sights on Star Wars Pentagon moves into space Even as it pastes on its sweetest public-relations face for the U.S.- Soviet arms talks in Geneva this month, the Reagan administration is moving rapidly to ensconce the Pentagon above the atmosphere. The most critical choice of our times — will space be the final frontier, or the final battleground? — is being made, perhaps irrevocably, right now. For the past year and a half, the USSR has been urgently proposing a mutual moratorium on tests of anti- satellite systems, to be followed by hard-nosed negotiations for a ban on all space weapons. As a gesture of good faith, the Soviets have been unilaterally observing the-testing moratorium. Last November, Reagan gave his re- sponse to the idea. The U.S. Airforce began trials of the Miniature Homing Vehicle (MHV), a sophisticated anti- satellite missile which is deployed and launched from an F-15 fighter. Current Pentagon plans call for two squadrons of MHV-armed F-15s. That will give the U.S. the ability to ‘‘blind” and “deafen” the Soviet Union within min- utes — a development that threatens to abolish arms control by making it impossible to verify. Anti-satellite weapons bring the U.S. a big step closer to achieving a first-strike capabil- ity, a major objective of the Reagan administration. The tempo of space militarization is picking up, and the last chance to nego- tiate a halt to this new, destabilizing, ultra-expensive arms race is rapidly slipping away. This month will see the first exclu- sively military mission of the U.S. space shuttle. With it will go a new, high-tech spy satellite to be placed in geostationary orbit high above the USSR. With it will also go the first of a new breed of astronaut-soldier. A whole army of them will soon be serv- Analysis Fred Weir ing under the Pentagon’s new Unified Space Command. A juvenile Holly- wood fantasy, Buck Rogers, is being called into existence to play out another cinematic delusion — Star Wars. The U.S. Airforce’s huge $2.8-billion military spaceport at Vandenberg Air- force Base, California, is now nearing completion. By the end of the decade, a fleet of military space shuttles will be operating from there under Pentagon control, and in complete secrecy. The $26-billion Strategic Defense In- itiative, Reagan’s research program for an impenetrable anti-missile ‘‘shield”’ to cover the United States, has also been stepped up in recent months. Pen- tagon scientists are reportedly working on a variety of exotic technologies, in- cluding X-ray lasers, particle-beam weapons, and electro-magnetic rail- guns. It is conservatively estimated that to produce and deploy such a missile defense system — even though it is un- likely to work — will cost over $1-tril- lion. Carl Sagan, America’s most eminent astronomer, recently appeared on PBS’s Latenight America, and was asked what $1-trillion might accomplish if it were applied to peaceful space ex- ploration. The question floored him. With one trillion dollars, and current technology, he said, ‘“‘we could have a _manned mission to Mars, a permanent News human base on the Moon, we could send unmanned ships to investigate the Sun, robot probes to the moons of Jupi- ter and Saturn; we could have a perma- nent space laboratory in Earth orbit . . . all of this, with hundreds of billions left over to spend on social programs’’. So much for the dream. The reality is that almost every project for peaceful space exploration on the space agency NASA’s books has been slashed in re- cent years, and all resources focussed on the military endeavour. The pro- posed NASA probe .to investigate Hal- ley’s Comet — cancelled. The Grand Tour mission to the outer planets — planned to take advantage of a planet- ary alignment that won’t occur again until 2110 — cancelled. The Mariner probe to study the atmosphere of Jupi- ter — cancelled. The Solar Polar and Sun Blazer missions to examine the outer envelope of the Sun — cancelled. Ronald Reagan is even backing off his own pet project of amanned U.S. space station for the next decade, and has lately been trying to solicit private do- nations and NATO allies to help pay the cost. The same does not hold true for Soviet space projects. During 1984, Soviet cosmonauts kept the orbiting Salyut-7 space laboratory continuously occupied, breaking their own previous record of 211 days. The USSR is cur- CARL SAGAN: With one trillion dollars, instead of Reagan’s Star Wars, “we could have a manned mission to-Mars, a permanent human base on the Moon, we could send unmanned ships to in- vestigate the Sun, robot probes to the moons of Jupiter and Saturn; we could have a permanent space laboratory in Earth orbit. . . all of this with hundreds of billions left over to spend on social programs”. rently testing a space plane for trans- porting cosmonauts to orbiting plat- forms, and is expected,.in 1985, to begin trials with its own space shuttle. By the end of the decade, the Soviets say they will loft a permanent space station, which will weigh up to 100 tons and have room for 12 cosmonauts. Last month, the USSR launched two missions, Vega 1 and Vega 2, designed to rendezvous with Halley’s Comet when it sweeps around the Sun in 1986. Radar maps of the Northern Hemis- phere of Venus, taken by the Soviet Union’s Venera 15 and 16 robot probes, have recently been published in the — Planetary Report, delighting and amaz- ing space scientists around the world. There seems to be little hope, how- ever, for the future of peaceful ex- ploration and co-operation in space under the kind of military pressure that is now building on the ‘high frontier’. 1985 is the year of decision. If the arms race in space can’t be stopped now, space war may well become a reality. My duty is done, my conscience is clear Following are excerpts of a statement by U.S. District Judge Miles Lord, made as he sentenced two nuclear arms in Minnesota to six months’ probation for caus- ing an estimated $33,000 in damages to military computer components at Sperry Corp.’s Eagan, Minnesota plant. They are reprinted here from the U.S. People’s World. As I ponder over the punishment to be meted out to these two people who are attempting to unbuild weapons of mass destruction, we must ask ourselves: Can it be that those of us who build weapons to kill are engaged in a more sanctified endeavor than those who would by their acts attempt to counsel moderation and mediation as an alternative method of settling inter- - national disputes? Why are we so fascinated by a power so great that we - cannot comprehend its magnitude? What is so sacred about a bomb, so romantic about a missile? Why do we condemn and hang individual killers, while extolling the virtues of warmongers? There are those in high places who believe Armaged-. don is soon upon us, that Christ will soon come back to earth and take us — believers and unbelievers alike —toa better place in Heaven. It would appear that much of our national effort is being devoted to helping in that process. The anomaly of this situation here — and I must say that this is a very difficult job for a federal judge to do — is that I am here called upon to punish two individuals who are charged with having caused damage to the pro- perty of a corporation in the amount of $33,000. It is’ this self-same corporation which only a few months ago was before me, accused of having wrong- fully embezzled from. the U.S. government the sum of $3.6 million. 410 e PACIFIC TRIBUNE, JANUARY 9, 1985 The employees of this company succeeded in boosting corporate profits by wrongfully and feloniously juggling the books. Since these individuals were all employees of a cor- poration, it appears that it did not occur to anyone in the office of the Attorney General of the United States that the actions of these men constituted a criminal conspi- racy for which they might be punished and imprisoned. The government demanded only that Sperry pay back amere 10 percent of the amount of which the corporation had been unlawfully enriched. Could it be that these men — who are working to build weapons of mass destruction — received special treat- ment because of the nature of their work? Is there some- thing sanctified about this effort to commit national suicide? The inexorable pressure which generates from those who are engaged in making a living and a profit from building military equipment, and the pork barreling that goes on in the halls of Congress to obtain more such contracts — each for his individual state — will in the ultimate; I believe, consume itself in an atomic holo- caust. - These same factors exert a powerful pressure on a judge in my position to go along with the theory that there is something sacred about a bomb, and that those who raise their voices and their hands against it should be struck down as enemies of the people — no matter. that in their hearts they feel and know that they are friends of the people. Now it is very difficult to condone acts such as this under the guise of free speech. Neither should it be totally condemned as being sub- versive, traitorous, treacherous or treasonous, in the — category of espionage or some other bad things. I would here in this instance attempt in my own small — way to take the sting out of the bomb, attempt in some — way to force the government — though I know it will be © futile — to remove the halo which it seems to hold over any device which can kill and, instead, to place thereon a — shroud, the shroud of death, destruction, mutilation, — disease and debilitation. If there be an adverse reaction to this sentence, I will © anxiously await the protestations of those who complain | of my attempts to correct the imbalance that now exists — in a system which operates in such a manner as to_ provide one type of justice for the rich and a lesser type — ‘for the poor, one standard for the mighty and another for — the meek, and a system which finds its humaness and — objectivity is sublimated to military madness and the — worship of a bomb. — (Here, Judge Lord gave each defendant a six-month ~ suspended sentence and placed each on probation for six months.) I am aware of the thrust of the argument which would — say this sentence would encourage others to do likewise. _ If others do likewise, they must be dealt with at that _ time. : I really wonder about the constitutionality of senten- cing one person for a crime which may be committed by another person at another time and place. It is also difficult for me to equate the sentence I here give you — for destroying $33,000 worth of property, because you have been charged — with those who stole $3.6 million worth of property but were not charged, demoted or in any way punished. ne My duty is done, my conscience is clear.