A-bombs and the M-bomb

[Y2K Moderator <i-y2k-mod@phil.gn.apc.org>]

The Interdoc-Y2K list has received a number of messages on the danger
of nuclear weapons accidents as a result of the Millennium Bomb. We
have collected the messages into a single posting to avoid cluttering
the list, and to make it easy for those who are interested in this
issue:

* Appeal of the Missouri Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament
* Boston Globe article by Colum Lynch, "Y2K Bug Worries US, Russia"
* Comments by Alan Phillips of Science for Peace, Physicians for
     Global Survival
* Media Release by Science for Peace on Y2K and Nuclear Weapons

Interdoc-Y2K Moderator

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: G Parker Rossman <grossman@mail.coin.missouri.edu>
To: rverzola@phil.gn.apc.org, interdoc-y2k@jca.ax.apc.org
Subject: Missouri Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament Appeal (fwd)

Please pass on to anyone interested in action, comments or suggestions.

Parker Rossman               grossman@mail.coin.missouri.edu
3 Lemmon Drive           author, EMERGING WORLDWIDE ELECTRONIC             
Columbia MO 65201        UNIVERSITY (Praeger, 1993)
            home page: http://www.trib.net/~prossman         

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 11:22:16 -0600 (CST)
From: Uel Blank <ublank@mail.coin.missouri.edu>
To: G Parker Rossman <grossman@mail.coin.missouri.edu>
Subject: Missouri Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament Appeal

The Missouri Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament (MCND) solicits your
response and support for its call for a world-wide removal of all
nuclear launch-activating keys during the week before and after
January l, 2000; better still---from the end of Hanukkah 1999 to the
end of Ramadan 2000.

In this way humanity can guarantee that there will be no unintended
nuclear malfunctionings due to Y2K computer glitches.  The danger is
high. Recently the United States Department of Defense received a
grade of 'D' for its Y2K preparedness.  No one knows what problems may
emerge with managing the 13,000 U.S. nuclear warheads if even a few
related computers malfuntion on 1/2000 C.E.  And will Russia's
ramshackle, antiquated computer system fail to control its 25,000
nuclear warheads on the first day of the year 2000?

The need for dialogue and action to disconnect all nuclear weapons at
the turn of the millenium is indicated by discussions such as that on
CBS "60 Minutes" (Nov. 17, 1998) which revealed the serious
possibility of computer glitches at the begenning of the year 2000

Please respond with your thoughts.
-----------------------------
Uel Blank
3209 Crawford Street
Columbia MO 65203
ublank@mail.coin.missouri.edu

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael Gurstein <mgurst@ccen.uccb.ns.ca>
To: interdoc-y2k@jca.ax.apc.org
Subject: Y2K May be a REAL Bomb (fwd)


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 15:41:45 -0500
From: Doug Hunt <dhunt@CENTER1.COM>
To: TOES97@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Subject: Y2K May be a REAL Bomb

From the Boston Globe

Y2K bug worries US, Russia
By Colum Lynch, Globe Correspondent, 12/12/98

    UNITED NATIONS - Concerned that the year 2000 computer bug might
accidentally set off a nuclear war, the United States and Russia are
hammering out an agreement to station experts in each other's nuclear
command centers next year to prevent miscalculations that could kill
millions of people, according to senior US officials.

The Clinton administration is seeking to allay Russian concerns that a
potential breakdown of its computer system caused by the bug would be
misinterpreted by Moscow as an American attack on its computer defense
network. Russian military doctrine anticipates that a nuclear strike
against Moscow would be preceded by an attack on its military
information systems.

''If all the radar screens go blank, will they think we did it and
decide to launch a nuclear strike?'' asked Senator Robert F. Bennett,
a Utah Republican who heads the congressional task force that deals
with year 2000 problems.

US military officials met with their Russian counterparts in New York
yesterday to reach an agreement. William Curtis, the director of the
Pentagon's year 2000 compliance office, said in an interview yesterday
that America would probably have its experts in place in Moscow by the
middle of 1999. He added that the United States is also in discussions
with China, which expressed concerns like those of the Russians.

''We need to make sure there is no chance someone will be blindsided
if the radar screens of any country using nuclear weapons go blank,''
said Curtis. ''That is a cause for panic. You don't know whether it's
an attack on your system.''

Curtis said the Pentagon is also worried that the 2000 bug will wreak
havoc on the capacity of foreign governments to provide essential
services, threatening everything from urban power grids to water
purification and health care systems.

He said government officials are also concerned that such a scenario
would place enormous demands on the US military to conduct
humanitarian emergency response operations abroad. Curtis said the
Clinton administration sought to persuade other countries at a major
UN conference on year 2000 compliance yesterday to intensify efforts
to prepare their computer systems.

''We know there will be some nasty surprises,'' Curtis said. ''But we
have to walk a tightrope between provoking panic and keeping people
from going to sleep at the wheel.''

Increasingly alarmed by the prospects of so-called cyber- warfare
against its military defenses, Russia has proposed that the United
Nations create an international treaty controlling ''information
warfare.''

Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov wrote to UN Secretary General
Kofi Annan on Sept. 23 warning that dangers posed by information
warfare ''may be comparable to that of weapons of mass destruction.''

''We cannot permit the emergence of a fundamentally new area of
international confrontation, which may lead to an escalation of the
arms race based on the latest development of the scientific and
technological revolution,'' he added.

Russian fears have been fueled in part by an October report from the
Joint Chiefs of Staff stating that American forces will use
''information operations to support our national military strategy.''

''The Russians fear that their critical defense systems are vulnerable
to hacking by the United States and other countries,'' said Roger C.
Molander, a specialist on cyber-warfare at the Rand Corp.

American sources say Russia raised the issue of cyber-warfare with
Vice President Al Gore and President Clinton during their latest
visits to Moscow. The issue has also been raised in closed-door
congressional briefings by the CIA, Bennett said. On Nov. 2, the
Clinton administration agreed to begin debate in the UN General
Assembly next year on ''information security.''

Although Curtis insisted that there is no chance a glitch in the
computer network that controls the more than 2,000 US nuclear missiles
could accidentally launch a missile, analysts say there is
considerable uncertainty about what will happen on Jan. 1, 2000.

''The US system is supposed to be year 2000 compliant by the year
2000, but we've had people tell us it won't be compliant until the
year 2034,'' said Tanya Padberg, an analyst at the British and
American Information Center. ''If that is the case, what does that say
about the Russian system?''

This story ran on page A02 of the Boston Globe on 12/12/98. Copyright
1998 Globe Newspaper Company.

** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this
material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a
prior interest in receiving the included information for research and
educational purposes **

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Bob Olsen <bobolsen@tao.ca>
Subject: Y2K and Nuclear

Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 19:27:59 -0400
From: "Alan F. Phillips" <aphil@cujo2.icom.ca>
Reply-To: aphil@cujo2.icom.ca
Organization: Physicians for Global Survival
To: Eric Fawcett <fawcett@physics.utoronto.ca>
CC: Bob Olsen <bobolsen@tao.ca>
Subject: Re: Y2K and Nuclear Power Plants

to Eric and SfP recipients (and this may  interest Bob Olsen and his 
colleagues too),

[NOTE TO BOB OLSEN: I would be glad to put together what I have 
collected on Y2K and N_weapons, and send you by email.  What I have 
learned about Y2K and nuc.power has only come incidentally.  Alan.]

I don't doubt that the Y2K problem could dangerously affect nuclear 
power plants.  However, there are two separate and good reasons why it 
is less important for citizens to stir up their governments about the 
power plants than about nuclear weapons (whether held by their own 
governments or not).

1) An accidental major nuclear war, that could possibly be caused by a 
Y2K confusion in the military computer systems of Russia or U.S.A., 
would destroy all human civilization in a few hours, and could 
exterminate the human species.  Once started, it could not be stopped.  
No nuclear power plant disaster could do anywhere near such irrevocable 
damage.

2) Those responsible for the power plants (and the governments who know 
they are maintaining these plants against the wishes of the majority of 
their people) know that after a disaster they and their families may be 
injured, and in any case they *will* be held responsible for the huge 
damage to others.  They are trying their best to deal with their Y2K 
problem, and a screaming public will not help them.  But those 
responsible for nuclear weapons have a strong vested interest in not 
admitting the risk of accidental nuclear war, even though Y2K may 
increase it, because it has been present for 40 years and will continue 
as long as they keep their weapons on alert.  Also, they know that in 
the event of the greatest possible disaster, no-one will be held 
responsible in any public or effective way - survivors will be too much 
occupied in trying to find food and shelter.

A strong citizen voice may influence NWS governments to tell the 
military to separate the warheads from the rockets;  and if they do that 
for Y2K they will have a difficult job persuading people to accept the 
idea of re-connecting them, and thus restoring the ongoing risk of 
accidental war.

A strong citizen voice in non-N_weapon States may influence their 
governments to join the New Agenda Coalition and the Middle Powers 
Initiative, and press harder on the NWS governments to abandon nuclear 
deterrence altogether.  THEN we would have a safer world.

Alan Phillips  <aphil@icom.ca>
Science for Peace,
Physicians for Global Survival (Canada).


   .............................................
   Bob Olsen, Toronto            bobolsen@tao.ca
   .............................................

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[This posting was also sent in by Paul Swann and Bob Olsen. --Mod.]

From: Carolyn Langdon <forumpub@stlc.com>
To: "'owner-interdoc-y2k@jca.ax.apc.org'"
	 <owner-interdoc-y2k@jca.ax.apc.org>
Subject: Y2K and Nuclear Weapons Command

Science for Peace
Media Release
For immediate release - December 1998

Y2K and Nuclear Weapons Command and Control Systems

Toronto - There are over 35,000 nuclear weapons remaining in the world
today.  These arsenals contain the destructive power of 650,000
Hiroshima bombs. Thousands of these weapons, mostly land-based
ballistic missiles and submarine launched missiles are in a state of
ready deployment.  That is their warheads, which contain the nuclear
fissile material, are attached to their delivery systems.

Computers have become increasingly central to nuclear operations but
they have not been without their glitches and serious flaws. During
the Cold War computer malfunctions produced several serious false
alarms of missile attacks, and during the Gulf War computer
malfunctions contributed to the failings of the Patriot anti-missile
system.

"Both Russia and the U.S. are believed to have a "launch on warning"
policy, so that a retaliatory launch is made after an adversary's
missile is detected, and before the warhead impacts.  Thus a single
accidental or unauthorized launch could result in wholesale nuclear
war." says Dr. Alan Phillips of Science for Peace.

"When you factor in the Y2K computer problem an already dangerous
situation becomes untenable", says Calvin Gotlieb from Science for
Peace.  "A Y2K meltdown in the nuclear systems of any one of the
nuclear countries - the U.S., Russia, China, France, Britain, India,
Pakistan and Israel (an undeclared nuclear state) would spell
disaster."

Dr. Barbara Simons, President of the Association for Computing
Machinery states, "I am not going to worry about whether or not my VCR
might become confused on 1/1/00.  The worst case scenario is not
especially bad.  I am, however, going to worry about whether or not a
computer that controls a major weapons system becomes confused on
1/1/00."

Research findings by a number of different agencies and experts, both
inside and outside the U.S. Dept. of Defense (DOD), show "no
confidence" in the Pentagon's present program to meet the Year 2000
challenge.  The DOD weapons systems utilize millions of 'embedded
systems' in the form of microchips and microprocessors.  U.S. Deputy
Secretary of Defense John Hamre has admitted that, "everything is so
interconnected, it's very hard to know with any precision that we've
got it fixed."  This was the U.S. state of affairs after 2 billion
dollars had been spent trying to fix it. There is little information
coming out of Russia about their progress with Y2K problems, but we
can safely surmise that all can't be well given their diminished
resources.

David Parnas, the NSERC/Bell Industrial Research Chair in Software
Engineering at McMaster University is concerned about the risks posed
by the Y2K computer problem and nuclear systems. He says that, "The US
military establishment is heavily dependent on computers for
communication, intelligence and for control of weapons.  Computer
programs are very complex constructions.  When a problem is discovered
it often takes weeks to fix.  Often the "fixed" program is still not
right and requires further repair after the revised program is put
into service.  Sometimes, programs that are not date sensitive
exchange dates with programs that are and will fail when those
'partner' programs fail."

The Fail Safe Solution:

All nuclear weapons states need to disconnect their nuclear warheads
from their delivery systems to eliminate the risk of nuclear war by
miscalculation, accident, or the Y2K problem. With proper planning and
sufficient lead-time, it is technically feasible.  In 1991, in the
wake of the coup attempt in the Soviet Union, Presidents Bush and
Gorbachev took thousands of nuclear weapons off deployment in a short
period of time.  The most difficult problem will be providing safe
storage for the thousands of warheads from land-based missiles.  In
view of the risks involved in leaving weapons on ready alert, this
difficulty can be easily overcome if governments start planning now.

We need to hear from NATO, the U.N. and Congress that a multilateral
approach to the Y2K problem is being coordinated.  To date there has
been near silence.  Time is running out for a coordinated approach.

Similar views to those of Science for Peace are held by individual
computer scientists and nuclear physicists, organizations like the
Institute for Energy and Environmental Research and the British
American Security Information Council, both based in the U.S., and
Physicians for Global Responsibility among others.

                                 - 30 -

For more information please contact:

Science for Peace Board members:

Dr. Alan Phillips, Science for Peace & Physicians for Global Survival, 
905-385-0353
Calvin Gotlieb, Professor Emeritus, Dept of Computer Science, U of T
T. 416-978-2986 or 416-482-4509
David Parnas, P.Eng., NSERC/Bell Industrial Research Chair in Software 
Engineering, Dept. of Computing and Software, Faculty of Engineering at 
McMaster University 905-525-9140x27353 or 905-648-5772

Other:
Barbara Simons, President of the Association for Computing Machinery 
(simons@acm.org)
Arjun Makhijani, Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (U.S.) 
301-270-5500

For further information on the Y2K issue and other related nuclear issues 
see the Science for Peace website at:   www.math.yorku.ca/sfp/

Science for Peace is located at University College, 15 King's College 
Circle,
University of Toronto M5S 3H7 Canada.  Tel. 416-978-3606.