[ Japanese version | Trident Ploughshares 2000 site | homepage of this site ]

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.