Questioning the U.S. Agenda for Peace

If there is any large cause with which women are profoundly identified, it is the cause of peace. Women’s organizations are noted for their activism for peace over the centuries, and rightly or wrongly, it is widely thought that women, by the nature of their sex, have a unique contribution to make toward avoiding war.

Thus it seems a bit odd that since Congress established the country’s first United States Institute of Peace in 1984--a federally funded think tank for scholarly peace research--the 13 board members who have been nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate so far have all been men.

An ‘Incomprehensible’ Omission

It seems odd to Barbara Levin--in fact, “incomprehensible,” as it was put in a letter of protest to the President on Dec. 16 from the Washington-based Center for Defense Information. Levin is director of the Women’s Agenda for the center, which is far from being a feminist group or a peace group per se. The center is a private nonprofit organization directed by retired senior military officers that, according to Levin, supports a strong national defense but opposes excessive military expenditures or policies that would lead to nuclear war.

The letter of protest to the President was signed by Levin and by the center director, Gene R. La Rocque, rear admiral, USN (ret).

This group has women on its board and is so committed to involving women in the issue that it put on a national women’s conference on the prevention of nuclear war in 1984, and from that established its ongoing Women’s Agenda, run by Levin with the purpose of assuring that women are involved in development of the center’s policies and programs and to involve and educate more women outside the organization on the prevention of nuclear war.

‘Not One Is a Woman’

“Dear Mr. President,” said the letter signed by Levin and La Rocque, “On Oct. 19, 1984, you signed into law a bill to establish a United States Institute of Peace. The act requires that you nominate a board of directors for the institute comprised of 15 members. To date you have submitted 13 names to the Senate . . . of those 13, not one is a woman. We are writing to urge you to redress this omission. . . .

“There is fertile ground for arguing that if more women held positions of power in the military and national security establishments, humanity might not be on the edge of extinction as we are today. How much more incomprehensible it is, therefore, to omit women from the only official peace establishment currently being created by the federal government.”

The letter also pointed out that adequately representing women on the board of the institute would “go far to alleviate the embarrassment caused your Administration by Mr. Regan’s unfortunate aspersion of women’s interest in military and national security issues at the summit in Geneva.” (In this incident last November, White House Chief of Staff Donald Regan created an international flap by saying that women were more interested in reading about “human interest stuff” like the First Ladies and would not understand the issues being discussed at the summit.)

Copies of the letter were sent to First Lady Nancy Reagan, the President’s daughter, Maureen Reagan, and Sens. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) and Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass). Hatch is chairman and Kennedy a member of the Senate Labor and Human Resources Committee, which held hearings and approved the nominations to the board. If the letter would have affected the confirmation process, it probably came too late. It was mailed Dec. 16. The Senate confirmed all of the President’s nominees to the institute on Dec. 18.

To date, the center has not received a reply from the White House or from any of those who received copies, Levin said, nor has the Administration made any statements on the issue of the all-male board. “We did send it just before the holidays,” Levin said, “which could lead to delay (in getting a response).”

A Distinguished Group

The 13 men named to the board, for two- or four-year terms, are a distinguished group. Four, by law, represent government departments as ex-officio members, among them Kenneth L. Adelman, director of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, and representatives of the Secretaries of State and Defense. Representing the Defense Department is Richard N. Perle, assistant secretary for international security policy. Max Kampelman, who headed the U.S. arms control negotiating team in Geneva, was named to represent Secretary of State George Shultz. The fourth is Army Gen. R. D. Lawrence, president of the National Defense University.

Most probably share the philosophy of the Administration on defense issues, Levin said. Only one member is on record as even favoring the creation of the peace institute--the new chairman of the board, John Norton Moore, a professor of law at the University of Virginia. Moore was recommended for the post by the National Peace Academy Campaign, the group that lobbied for the establishment of the Institute of Peace, which the Administration opposed in Congress for budgetary reasons.

Other members range from Sidney Lovett, senior member of the First Church of Christ Congregational in Hartford, Conn., to Dennis L. Bark, a professor at Stanford and deputy director of its Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace. Ironically, one of the new male members is the husband of a woman rather well known for her experience in matters of international relations--Evron M. Kirkpatrick, resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research and husband of former U.N. Ambassador Jeane J. Kirkpatrick.

Stating Their Position

The center’s position is that there are many women as well qualified as these men for the board of the Institute of Peace. While the letter to the President did not name any women who would be appropriate candidates--”We didn’t want to appear to be lobbying for any particular individual,” Levin said--she is willing to name a few informally:

--Ruth Adams, former editor of the Bulletin of Atomic Sciences.

--Coretta Scott King, president of the Martin Luther King Jr. Center for Nonviolent Social change.

--Condaleezza Rice, assistant professor of political science and assistant director of the Center for International Security and Arms Control at Stanford University.

--Vera Kistiakowsky, professor of physics at MIT who has worked extensively in nuclear arms issues.

--Anne Cahn, executive director of the Committee for National Security and former chief of the social impact staff for the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency.

--Antonia Chayes, former undersecretary of the Air Force.

--Collette Shulman, senior staff assistant, School for International Affairs, Columbia University.

--Catherine Kellerher, professor at the University of Maryland and former official with the National Defense University.

--Betty Bumpers, founder and president of Peace Links.

--Mary Dent Crisp, former Republican National Committee co-chair and senior adviser to Business Executives for National Security.

Those are a few of the women Levin could suggest. “There are certainly many women qualified for this board,” she said. There is still a chance for nomination of at least two women to the board as there are still two vacancies for which nominees have not been proposed.