Two Greenpeace activists walked free from Los Angeles court today.
Tom Knappe and Matthias Pendzailek, from Germany, were given one
year probation. No fines were imposed, and they are free to return
home.
Nine other activists received the same sentence in January. Both
read powerful statements to the court prior to sentence, outlining
their moral and legal objections to the programme.
Four other activists and two freelance journalists will be
sentenced on Monday April 15th, after the US Attorney's office
announced in January it may demand jail time for some or all of
those remaining.
Mike Townsley, Greenpeace disarmament campaigner said, "We are
pleased that both Tom and Matt are finally able to put this
needless prosecution behind them. But while they are now free to
get on with their lives, the US Star Wars programme continues to
cast a dangerous shadow across all of our futures by destabilising
the international arms control regime and threatening to ignite a
new nuclear arms race,"
Statement of Tom Knappe, Germany
Your Honour, Ladies and Gentlemen, Adversaries and Friends of
Greenpeace. Please allow me a few words about the reasons for my
involvement in the peaceful demonstration at Vandenberg Air Force
Base on July 14 2001.
First of all, allow me to make a few remarks about my origin and
upbringing which will explain some of the reasons for my
participation in the peaceful demonstration against the National
Missile Defence Program, or Star Wars test.
As you know I was born in East Germany, the former German
Democratic Republic and lived there until I was 22 years old. It
was a country without democracy and liberal civil rights. The
effects of the Cold War have influenced and affected my life
presumably more than any other persons here in this room. I shall
never forget the moment when I stood at the Wall in Berlin, shocked
by the idiocy and vanity of the political systems. A brutal and
deadly separation of people, made by the people themselves, in the
midst of a civilized world.
When I had to join the army of the German Democratic Republic
and objected to military service under arms, I faced two options:
1. go to prison for several years, or, 2. flee from the country. I
chose the latter, which was by no means easy to do, because I had
personally tried to convince many of friends to stay in the country
and to resist oppression.
My father was an acknowledged actor in the German Democratic
Republic. When he started to become bothersome in the eyes of the
political system on account of his liberal opinions, he was
officially banned from his occupation. Socially isolated, he
resorted to drinking which led to his early death at an age of 51
years. I was 27 at that time. A later friend of my mother, who,
because he had "painted pictures that criticized the system" and
was repeatedly detained in the prisons of State Security in the
days of the former East German Republic, committed suicide.
The State Security agents were also closely observing me. Among
other reasons, because I had protested, publicly but peacefully,
against the deployment of Russian "SS 20" and "SS 23" missiles.
When in 1988 I intended to visit Romania and Bulgaria, which
were still socialist countries at that time, I was refused
permission to travel, no reasons were stated.
I am not telling you this for you to pity me. These occurrences
were only a few of the direct and indirect effects of the Cold War
which many of my fellow men and myself experienced in our youth,
and I believe that such projects as Star Wars could blow the world
back into a state of Cold War. It was oftentimes the irony of
history, and also the "Policy of Power" demonstrated by the Western
World, that provided the totalitarian regimes of the Eastern bloc
with the arguments which induced them to build an
"anti-capitalistic protective wall" (The Wall) and lock up their
own population out of fear of the democratic and liberal world.
Your Honour, the reason why I came to the United States was not
to violate the law of this country, but to participate in a civil
protest, following the tradition of Greenpeace, which is strictly
non-violent. It was a protest against one of the greatest and
politically and technologically most hazardous military projects in
the history of mankind. The Star Wars test that day violated the
Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty which was still valid at the
time of our protest.
Not without reason has the Treaty been cancelled by President
Bush in the meantime.
The National Missile Defence Program gives the wrong signal to
the world community, ideologically and politically. It might urge
countries such as India, Pakistan, Russia and China to enter into a
new arms race, the dimensions and political long-term effects of
which no one can really know today. It is also wrong especially
because the chances of real détente and a true end to the Cold War
between the East and the West never have been so close as now. The
most recent history of the conflicts between India and Pakistan in
the region of Kashmir have shown how fast the use of nuclear
weapons can become an issue on the agenda of the military
forces.
Consequently, on the rocky road to a peaceful world, there can
only be but one solution, total nuclear disarmament.
The National Missile Defence Program is also controversial as
far as its feasibility is concerned. Even American experts do not
try to conceal the fact that the rate of success lies at a maximum
of 95 percent when it comes to eliminating hostile missiles. You do
not have to be a mathematical genius to be able to calculate that a
potential enemy will rearm correspondingly, which means increasing
its defences twenty-fold, just enough so that the remaining 5
percent of the missiles will fulfil their intended military purpose
of destruction.
Your Honour, ladies and gentlemen, recent occurrences have
demonstrated in the most painful way imaginable that belief in
absolute security as well as an exaggerated and uncritical reliance
on technology, leads people astray. But it is this alleged absolute
safety that the advocates of the National Missile Defence Program
try to communicate to us. The political and technological hazards
which also exist for the territory of the United States are mostly
not disclosed.
The four months in which we were not allowed to return to our
home countries have clearly left their traces in the lives of the
defendants.
My mother had to seek psychological assistance and undergo
therapy, my company nearly faced bankruptcy. Contrary to permanent
suspicions of the district attorney, we have behaved cooperatively
throughout the entire proceedings and have appeared at all hearing
dates.
Please allow me to repeat that none of the defendants has come
to the United States to violate law and order. I believe that just
attempting to demonstrate against rearmament in a peaceful protest
will be judged and valued differently in the history books 50 or
100 years from now. Certainly there will always be people who will
try to disparage us as idiots or as dreamers who think they can set
the
world to rights. The pioneers of international environmental
protection as well as the pioneers of the peace and human rights
movements were confronted with the same problem several decades
ago. To compare peaceful Greenpeace activists with terrorists, or
to consider the action at Vandenberg Air Force Base as a
conspiracy, is grotesque, hysterical and does not give evidence of
highly social competence. Perhaps it is an expression of the
permanent fear which the mighty have of the weak. If men like
Martin Luther King would have placed their fears of violating the
law above their ethical visions, the world today would not have
become a better place for all of us to live in.
I thank you for your attention and ask you to consider the
motivation of our behaviour in your judgement.
Statement of Matthias Pendzailek, Germany
Your Honour:
In order for you to understand my actions, I would like to say
some words.
My actions were based on civil disobedience. As a German I have
to carry the heritage of my predecessors, and therefore the
responsibility to stand up and, through peaceful protest, to say
No! when it is apparent that international law is being broken and
global provocation's take us closer to war and destruction.
Furthermore, I am convinced that we all have the responsibility
to carry through the painful but ultimately instructive and
valuable experiences from the past to our descendants. We must not
forget, in order to prevent the past from catching up with us in
the future.
Therefore, we all have the obligation to respect nature and our
fellow men. People need nature, but nature does not need people.
This must also be remembered.
Freedom of speech is one of the most important democratic
rights. If the masses don't realise deficiencies, individuals have
the responsibility to clearly point out what is wrong and speak out
even more loudly and more distinctly.
It would seem there are only a few people willing to awaken
their fellow men, who have been lulled into a stupor, and make them
aware of their global responsibility. We have only one Mother Earth
and we must share it with each other. Therefore, we also must take
care of her together.
I accept responsibility for my actions, but I hope my motivation
for civil disobedience, expressed through peaceful protest, might
now be understood more easily.
I thank you very much for your attention. Please consider my
statement in your judgement.