For those of us who grew up as children of the Cold War; who can recall scrambling for cover beneath our school desks in air raid drills should we be attacked by nukes from Cuba... (Hey Mom.....Where’s Cuba?)

For those of us who thought those nightmares and daymares were but bad memories that we’d now advanced past into a new, more secure world-- more capable of protecting against such threats...

For those of us who allowed ourselves some kind of blanket of complacency after the Cold War had been “won”, and the subsequent build-down of nuclear weapons begun, after all varieties of promising acronymed treaties had been signed by nations previously deficient in promise...

It’s time to get back under the desk.

I know, crouching beneath plywood against nuclear bombs may seem ridiculously naive in retrospect, but then so does much of the realpolitik of the Cold War era in contrast with today’s America. Former Secretary of Defense William Perry was in the front room chewing the cud with the real Deciders of the day during the Cuban missile crisis, while we were busy desk-diving... and guess what? He too was engulfed with that same sinking feeling of powerlessness, of icy terror, as we were.

“Every day I thought it would be my last day on earth...” he soberly confessed on Tuesday at the UCLA / Burkle Center Nuclear Weapons in a New Century conference.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GENERAL WES CLARK – In the House

March 6th-- A gaggle of be-buttoned Clarkettes shuffled into the first two rows for prime viewing as General Clark wound his way towards the front of the room weaving in and out, greeting people along the way. And then, behind me...there it was again. That question --- that infernal question:

“So, do you think you’re going to run for President, General Clark?”

The Clarkettes exchange a knowing glance.

“Well I haven’t said I’m not running—“

“It’s still kinda early, I guess, heh...”

“Yes. It’s VERY early.”

The slightest hint of lassitude in his voice. How could you not be exasperated, being asked this day and night? I think Wes will be as relieved as the rest of us when he no longer has to answer ‘that question’...

Fresh from Saudi Arabia, sporting a glowing tan, a crisp white shirt, ocean blue tie and that famous smile—Wes was beaming Tuesday at UCLA. The campus really seems to suit the General, and the UCLA and Burkle officials treat him with exceptional respect. Wes has that extra spring in his step when in the academic milieu. One senses he breathes easier, is invigorated and brightened by the idea-charged atmosphere...he seems to relish the high level of debate and intellectual exchange offered on campus. Wes Clark wears the University mantle reverentially-- and it fits him like a glove.

Kal Raustiala, Director of Burkle Center for International Relations, informs us that the original concept for this conference arose last fall when Wes first joined the Burkle Center. I must say-- props to UCLA. Staff, media relations, event coordinators, all the way to the shuttle drivers and name tag hostesses—they have got it down. How rare to find an institution that understands the value of organization and efficiency these days. Everyone was accommodating and friendly. Signs were propped up all over campus-- so that even a blonde couldn’t get lost seeking the Nuclear Weapons Conference. All carried off without a hitch.

Well, maybe one minor hitch... in the sound department.

After Wes introduced the interviewer, NY Times White House correspondent David Sanger , it was clear there was no mike present for Dr. Perry, seated onstage. Thus began the Wes Clark microphone dance—as he struggled to get his podium mike to stretch over to Dr. Perry, only a few feet away.

Unraveling the cord from the mike stand – Wes gently yanked and pulled at it in an attempt to reach Perry‘s hands-- and wound up just a few inches shy of Perry. Clark goes back to the stand, and tugs at it further, twisting and untwisting cords with great resolve. Back and forth he goes. No engineer in sight. Nervous laughter from the audience interrupts the awkward silence, as we realize—We have been watching the former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO single-mindedly wrangling with an uncooperative cable, determined to master the problem. It was kind of zen...

At last, he’s able to deliver the mike into Dr. Perry’s hands. David Sanger breaks the ice;

“Well, all good Generals improvise”

I tell this little anecdote because it so illustrates Wes Clark – the problem solver. ‘General Fix-It’ hates to see any problem, big or small, go unsolved. If he sees a microphone not working, a war not working, or a foreign policy not working —he’s simply unable to sit on the sidelines waiting for the proper authorities to take note. Wes wants to be the first to jump in there and fix it. The genetics of leadership on display.

Wes wastes no time getting to the opening introduction of former Secretary of Defense, William Perry. In the spring of 1994, when the General joined the Joint Staff, Dr. Perry was working as the 19th Secretary of Defense under President Clinton. Wes tell us, “He was one of the great visionaries of the post Cold War era in terms of identifying the challenges.”

General Clark spells out some of Perry’s extensive resume:

A BS and MS from Stanford, a PhD from Penn State... All in mathematics. Today, Perry is a current professor at Stanford, a Senior fellow at MSI, co director of Preventive Defense Project, was co-director CSAC from 1988-1993, former Deputy Secretary of Defense, before serving as Sec Def. Been in business, formed high-tech companies, sits on many companies’ boards. Began his career in national security as an enlisted man, in the US Army corps of engineers.

Wes“It’s one of the things that those of us in uniform most admired Dr. Perry and Mrs. Perry for. They started at the bottom of the organization that he rose to lead. He understood what it was like to be a soldier, he understood what it was like to be a junior officer (Lieutenant in Army) And he understood what it was like to work in every element of foreign policy, research, development, technology, arms control... you name it.”

----------------------------------------------------------------------

William Perry – Impressionistic Portrait

"Reducing the risk of annihilating humanity in a nuclear war must carry an absolute priority over all other considerations." ~ Andrei Sakharov,Russian physicist, father of the Russian hydrogen bomb

For me, the biggest surprise of the two day conference was Dr. William Perry. Soft-spoken, pensive, and almost ‘gentle’ in demeanor, he bore no resemblance to the steely “If I Only Had a Heart” Sec. Def. prototype we’d become accustomed to under Rumsfeld. Rather a portrait of an old soldier who, by default, evolved into a compassionate wager of peace, deeply humane and instinctually thoughtful. A strong philosophical bent, a razor sharp intellect, backed by an impressive academic background. (Sound familiar?) It was instantly clear how much esteem he held for General Clark, and how that admiration was returned in kind. What a team they must have been together, in a different America-- the 20th century version.

He clearly suffered scars of living so close to the nuclear realities of the Cold War and post Cold War era. Clark took bullets in a war, Perry sustained a different kind of wound. Both emerged as soldiers who recognized the urgency of preventing against future wars.

“I am a child of the Cold War. Nearly all of my adult life, I have lived with a dark, menacing nuclear cloud hanging over my head.”

Heck of an opening statement....

In those days, he tells us, Mutual Assured Deterrents (MAD) were the principle means used to reduce the risks of nuclear war. But even with the deterrents in place, two “existential dangers’ remained:

1) Danger of nuclear war started by miscalculation
2) Danger of nuclear war started by accident

On Miscalculation:

In 1962, William Perry was a consultant to the Department of Defense.

Perry: "In early October, I got a telephone call from Washington-- “Bud” Wheelon, the Deputy Director of the CIA—asking me to come back to see him.
I said, ‘Sure, Bud, I’ll change my plans and get back some time next week...’
‘No,’ he said, ‘I mean right away.’ "

Perry took the red eye to Washington where he was shuttled into a room and shown pictures of missiles being deployed in Cuba. They requested Perry stay for a few weeks to help to analyze the situation. He agreed.

"Every afternoon we would get the new pictures being taken by the planes that over flew Cuba. We would study them, analyze them, and prepare a report. By two or three in the morning we would give that report to ‘Bud’. At seven in the morning he would brief President Kennedy on what had been seen the day before in Cuba," Perry said.

"Every day that I went in to do that, I thought would be my last day on earth— I really believed that we were heading for a nuclear war. And that we missed that nuclear war, that we avoided nuclear war... to this day, I believe was due as much to good luck as it was to good management."

Good Management

On Accidents:

Flash forward to 1977. Perry is the Under Secretary of Defense for Research & Engineering in the Carter Administration. Again, the phone rings. This time it’s 3:00 AM and Perry is fast asleep. The watch officer at North American Air Defense Command (NORAD) is calling to say his computers had just reported 200 ICBM’s are on the way to the U.S. from the Soviet Union.

“I immediately woke up,” Perry deadpans.

Although it turned out to be a false alarm, (somebody had mistakenly taken a practice tape and put it in the computer, so it looked like a real attack.) It was human error. Perry said the Officer had only around 15 minutes to determine that fact. He informs us that this was one of the three or four incidents where we almost went to nuclear war by accident. I find myself thinking ‘three or four’ suddenly sounds like a large number, when the subject is nuclear near misses...

Dr. Perry tells us that changes brought about by the end of the Cold War have reduced to nearly zero the dangers of a nuclear war as a result of miscalculation.

That’s good news. I can breathe easier..... Not so fast.

“There still exists however the danger of a nuclear war occurring by accident,” Perry cautions. Considering that both American and Russian missiles remain in launch-on-warning mode, and considering that the Russian warning system seems to be a bit rusty, in dire need of a makeover... Talk about a mood-spoiler. He goes further.

“But the greatest danger today is that a terror group would detonate a nuke in one of our cities— It would be the greatest catastrophe ever suffered by Americans.” A discernible hush falls on the crowd. “Even a relatively primitive nuclear bomb detonated in one of our cities could result in 100,000 deaths.”

Perry then tells us that Graham Allison, nuclear expert and former Assistant Secretary of Defense (in other words, someone whose opinion we can’t readily dismiss), in his book “Nuclear Terrorism” -- proclaims a 50% probability that such an event would occur before the decade is over. Perry says he himself can’t put a number on that probability, but he feels Allison was not being “alarmist” in his projection. Then he drops this bomb on us (pun intended):

“Indeed, I believe that we are racing towards an unprecedented catastrophe.”

This guy must not get invited to many parties.

Amidst all of this grim prognostication, there is some GOOD NEWS: Dr. Perry says Al Qaeda [and other terrorist groups] cannot make a nuke from scratch. They have to either buy it or steal it – or minimally buy or steal the fissile materials. And we can stop that from happening....

But are we?

Well, Perry explains that the Administration has two priority programs to defend the U.S. from nuclear weapons: National Missile Defense (NMD) program and Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI). And it turns out-- our defense... not so good.

NMD is being deployed now at a cost of billions, and will “soon” be operational, but even if it performs exactly as advertised Perry argues-- it’s “simply irrelevant” to the problem of a nuclear bomb being delivered by a terrorist, because a terrorist would not use a Ballistic Missile to deliver a bomb in the US. So, billions of dollars and pronounced ‘irrelevant’.

He prefers the PSI program, which is intended to prevent nuclear material or bombs from being transferred from one country to another. But then he goes on to qualify that it still isn’t strong enough to prevent a determined smuggler from smuggling nuclear material needed to make a bomb out of the country. The amount of nuclear material needed to make a bomb being, “about the size of a grapefruit”... (I think the crowd stopped breathing at this point) Believing that we could stop that, according to Perry, would take a “huge leap of faith”. Perry’s grade on PSI: “Possibly ineffective”.

So-- of the top two programs in place to protect us from the mushroom catastrophe... one is irrelevant, the other- ineffective. He does propose solutions: (1) To reduce and protect existing nuclear materials and bombs (2) To prevent new arsenals from being created.

As Sec Def, Perry made ‘Reduce & Protect’ his top priority; overseeing the removal of all the nuclear bombs from the Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Belarus (they had 4000 nuclear weapons amongst them) After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Ukraine inherited a one million man military force and the third largest nuclear weapon arsenal in the world. As signatories of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NNPT), they ratified in 1994, and were free of all nuclear weapons by 1996. Gee, it’s almost like diplomacy worked.

Seeds Of Peace

The town of Pervomaysk in the Ukraine was the premier ICBM site of former Soviet Union, home to 700 nuclear warheads- all aimed at targets within the United States. Dr. Perry oversaw the weapons dismantling during his term as SOD and relayed this unusually poetic anecdote about it.

In March of 1995, on his first oversight visit to post-NNPT Pervomaysk, a Ukraine General escorted Perry deep underground to the control center where two young officers took him through a practice countdown, right up until the last step of launch. During the countdown, Perry said he gazed at the maps on the walls, with American cities indicated as targets—and told us that the reality and the horror of the Cold War had never been clearer to him than at that very moment, in subterranean Pervomaysk.

After the show & tell, his hosts took him out to see one of the silos from which the SS-19 missile had just been removed, as part of the early steps of dismantling.

SS-19 silo at Pervomaysk after the silo headworks had been removed. Through the Cooperative Threat Reduction program 130 such silos were eliminated at three locations in Ukraine.

By the time of William Perry’s final visit to Pervomaysk, in 1996, all the bombs and missiles had been removed, and all the silos had been demolished. The visit was ceremonial. The three supervisory Defense Ministers (Russian, Ukraine & U.S.) who had overseen this historic weapons reduction were each given shovels and told to start digging. They were to plant sunflowers on the site of the former SS-19 nuclear silo. You can watch the CNN newsreel of it in Quicktime here:

Six months later, Perry receives a letter from the U.S. Ambassador to the Ukraine, who’d recently returned from a visit to Pervomaysk where they had just harvested the sunflowers. He sent Perry a little package of sunflower seeds. Perry continues--

"--And I took those seeds and I gave them to my grandson to plant at his school-- as a symbol that he and his grandchildren would not have to live with the same dark nuclear cloud that’s been hanging over my head for all these years..."

“Pervomaysk” translates to “The first of May”. Maybe this is “Where Have All the Flowers Gone?”-- to this Northern Ukraine mining town on the river.

Again, I see shades of General Clark in him. Two former warriors who served, who saw things both horrifying and unforgettable, whose spirits then arched towards calling the world to pursue peace.

We are also failing on the issue of keeping new arsenals from being built— Perry stresses that our current buildup of nuclear arsenal (bunker busters, etc) only serves to undermine the position of the United States when arguing for nuclear restraint of other nations. The mark of a statesman, Perry is quick to admit mistakes. He tells us that during his reign, despite valiant efforts, they regretfully failed to prevent India and Pakistan from going nuclear, but did succeed at holding N. Korea and Iran “at bay”. He feels the Bush administration has failed badly with N. Korea and Iran— because they’ve been “hobbled by the theory of not talking to bad guys”, as he puts it. The results of this policy haven’t been difficult to assess. During the past 6 years, N. Korea has built from 6 to 10 nuclear bombs, has tested one of them, and has tested at least seven Ballistic Missiles.

Now, however a change of policy seems to be on the books-- with direct talks with N. Korea and the regional conference scheduled with Iran and Syria. Lessons learned?

Perry wraps by quoting author, holocaust survivor, and all around sage for all seasons--
Elie Wiesel:

“Mankind must remember that peace is not God’s gift to his creatures. It is our gift to each other.”

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The David Sanger interview

Wes tells us that Sanger is- “One of the sharpest questioners today”- He has an aura of Brooks Brothers conservative, something in the side part of his hair gives it away. His questioning of Perry turned mildly aggressive as the interview proceeds. In fact, his second question chided that Perry’s critics might argue that his proposal to reduce American stockpiles would be viewed around the world as a form of (here it comes- the buzzword) –as a sign of “weakness”. (Ding!)

Perry: " --We have levels today that are probably 10 times the level needed to provide deterrents for N. Korea or for Iran. < snip > There is such a thing as leadership in this area of the world, and the United States providing the leadership of moving towards the elimination of nuclear weapons could be a very powerful force. "

Sanger went on to point out President Kennedy’s miscalculations that by 1975 we would have around 15 or 20 nuclear powers in the world, when in fact today we have only 9. Sanger asks if the fears were overblown. Perry responds that because he called out attention to the threat, the problem was mitigated. A success story.

Sanger launches right into a question about how Perry had referred to his “success during the Clinton administration” in keeping N. Korea and Iran from expanding their arsenal— Oh boy, here it comes, Sanger’s snide is starting to show

Sanger: " It won’t come as a shock to you that when I do my reporting around the Bush administration, they have a slightly different interpretation of the events... "

(Snark Alert, take cover! Snark Alert!)

Sanger says the Bushie’s take is that the Clinton administration had evidence as early as the 1990’s of N. Korea cheating on the 1994 framework accord and also of the likelihood of them having a highly enriched uranium program. When Perry was the N. Korean envoy, he’s quick to point out... And surprise, surprise!!—Their version is that Clinton ignored it and allowed them to continue.... I see where this is going now.

Ladies and Gentlemen, it’s time to play your favorite republican parlor game—
“It’s Clinton’s Fault!”

Sanger throws Perry a What Say You?-- which is greeted by the most protracted silence of the afternoon. Perry rubs his fingers along the wooden chair arms with intent, carefully deliberating just how he wants to answer this not-so-veiled criticism.

The wind appeared knocked out of his sails by this question. He responded in a lowered voice, drained and cheerless. He explained that they had successfully demonstrated the stop of all plutonium material and weapons production at the main facility at Yongpyong. That while they were always concerned of possible cheating, they had checked into it when alerted, and insisted on inspecting suspicious areas, which turned out not to be nuclear facilities. We had stopped them from building nuclear bombs, he demurred, but we understood we had not stopped their aspirations to build them..

Sanger turns the spotlight on to Iran. Saying that Israelis talk about a “point of no return” – where Iran will have gained enough knowledge that they could build a nuclear weapon at any time. And Israel has “suggested” they’d have to take unilateral action at that time. Sanger poses the question to the now demoralized former Secretary, “Is there a point of no return?”

Perry replies that he feels that constructive and robust diplomatic actions are the method to avoid that point — by actively engaging in direct talks with Iran... not from the sidelines.

Perry: “I do believe that stopping Iran’s nuclear program will be more difficult than stopping N. Korea’s and the consequences of an Iranian nuclear program could be more serious... “

Sanger "--Do you think the Iranian ‘problem’ will be easier for us to address if the American presence in Iraq is smaller? Or do you believe that beginning to pull out of Iraq over the next year, year and a half, would embolden the Iranians, because it would appear to be a from of American “weakness”--?

Imaginary GOP prizewinning buzzers go off at talking point keywords Embolden & Weakness. Ding! Ding! Perry doesn’t miss a beat on this one, and calls him on it.

Perry: "I’ve heard many people suggest that this action or that action would “embolden the terrorists” or “would embolden the insurgents” or “would embolden Iran”... It seems to me that they’re emboldened already. I can’t imagine doing anything could embolden them any more than they already are." (then he snaps back) "I don’t buy that." (audience laughter)

Sanger: (beat) "Well.. Uh.... We thought that we would give all of you a chance to, uh, ask Secretary Perry what’s on your mind..."

Perry: "I’m happy to have a change of questioning.... After David, I’m demanding hazardous duty pay! " (the crowd laughs loudly- Wes too is cracking up at this one!)

I’ll just offer these comments from the Q & A period that seemed most relevant:

Perry: "--If we cannot stop Iran and N. Korea....I think the dam has burst on nuclear proliferation. I can see South Korea and Japan going nuclear. Five years ago it would have been unthinkable for Japan to even be talking about it. Taiwan will be tempted. --- To me the dam started to break with India and Pakistan. --- I happen to feel that’s the last line of defense, if we cannot stop Iran and N. Korea, I think ... the game is over."

A question on Israel and a possible preemptive strike on Iran:

Perry: " It’s very likely I think that Israel is now considering launching a preemptive strike against an Iranian nuclear facility. Even if they could successfully conduct it, it could lead to a whole host of unintended consequences—many of which would be disastrous. I shudder to think about the possibility of all the consequences that would flow from an Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear facilities. "

When I finally got a chance to speak with William Perry afterwards, I noted that he’s even more avuncular and approachable up close. I handed him a Stop Iran War button which he promptly took to his duffle bag to safely stow away! Afterwards, Wes remarked how evident it was by his answers that Dr. Perry was a mathematician. And it’s true. Every word, every thought was carefully measured and doled out, like some exact tablespoon of SALT. (Pun intended)

I left the conference-- head abuzz with data, reams of scrawled notes tucked under my arm, the throb of carpal tunnel syndrome shooting up my right wrist—as I climbed aboard the shuttle to go back to the parking lot—suddenly I was nine years old again.

And ready to crawl back under my desk.

Just sign it. www.StopIranWar.com