-------- NUCLEAR (by country)

-------- russia

Putin To Cut Nuclear Spending

Associated Press August 13, 2000

MOSCOW (AP) - President Vladimir Putin has decided to reduce spending on nuclear forces and shift some of their responsibilities to the conventional forces, the air force commander said.

The decision came at a meeting Friday to debate the future of Russia's beleaguered military and defuse tensions over control of the country's nuclear arsenal. Putin, elected in March, has championed nuclear disarmament as a goal of his presidency.

The Interfax news agency said that at Friday's meeting, ``A decision was made on the redistribution of financial flows'' away from the nuclear forces toward the conventional forces. It gave no details.

Air force commander Anatoly Kornukov, who participated in the meeting, said on Russian television Saturday that the space missile defense troops, currently a branch of the Strategic Rocket Forces, would be put under air force command by 2002.

The head of the General Staff, Gen. Anatoly Kvashnin, wants to downgrade the Strategic Rocket Forces by folding them entirely into the air force, saying Russia must concentrate its meager money on conventional forces such as those fighting rebels in Chechnya.

His proposal prompted a rare public dispute with Defense Minister Gen. Igor Sergeyev, a former commander of the nuclear forces. He argues that Russia needs to improve its nuclear arsenal to deter possible attacks by other nations.

The Kommersant newspaper reported that Putin won backing from the Security Council for his proposal to reduce Russia's nuclear arsenal to 1,500 warheads.

Russia has promised to cut its stockpile - estimated now at 6,000 warheads - to 3,000 to 3,500 under the START-II arms reduction treaty with the United States. A planned START-III originally envisaged both sides cutting to 2,000 to 2,500 warheads.

But Putin, arguing that Russia cannot afford upkeep on so many weapons, has suggested dropping that to 1,500. Kvashnin wanted even deeper cuts, to 1,400 warheads.

Russia's 1.2 million-strong armed forces are broke and low on modern equipment and morale. The Russian Defense Ministry budget for 2000 is less than $5 billion - compared to about $268 billion in the United States.

----

Russia to Rebuild Conventional Forces
Putin Opts to Redirect Resources Away From Aging Nuclear Arsenal

International Herald Tribune
Paris, Monday, August 14, 2000
By Daniel Williams Washington Post Service
http://www.iht.com/IHT/TODAY/MON/FPAGE/arms.2.html

MOSCOW - President Vladimir Putin has decided to unilaterally reduce Russia's nuclear arsenal and shift scarce financial resources to rebuild conventional military forces, according to reports in the Russian news media.

Details emerging from a pivotal defense-policy meeting that lasted four hours Friday suggest that Mr. Putin sided with the chief of the general staff and against the defense minister in the bitter dispute.

''Great significance was attached to the development of conventional forces,'' the Interfax news agency said. ''A decision was made on the redistribution of financial flows'' away from nuclear arms.

Mr. Putin decided to let the number of Russia's nuclear warheads shrink to 1,500, less than half of the 3,500 permitted under the START-2 arms-reduction treaty, which Russia ratified only this year, the Russian media reported Saturday.

Russia wants the United States to agree to reduce its arsenal to 1,500 warheads under a proposed START-3 treaty.

Russia's nuclear arsenal has been shrinking because of obsolescence and the lack of money to build new missiles, airplanes and submarines to deliver the nuclear warheads.

The rate of the Russian strategic forces' decline in the years ahead has been a subject of debate.

By some estimates, Russia will inevitably fall below 1,000 warheads without a major buildup, depending in part on how quickly the military retires missiles that have reached the end of their official service life.

The chief of the general staff, General Anatoli Kvashnin, has lobbied for deep reductions in strategic nuclear weaponry, with the financial savings to be diverted to conventional land, air and sea forces.

The defense minister, Marshal Igor Sergeyev, a former commander of nuclear-missile troops, has strongly opposed the idea, which he recently called ''insane.''

Marshal Sergeyev has also insisted that the strategic rocket forces remain a separate branch of the military, but he appears to have suffered a setback on this point.

As the number of land-based missiles declines over the next five years, the status of the elite strategic rocket forces as a separate branch will be ''reconsidered'' and parts of the force will fall under air force command within two years, Interfax reported.

The decisions made Friday are part of Mr. Putin's efforts to fashion a 15-year plan for armed-forces development.

On one hand, Russia wants to maintain a strategic nuclear arsenal, a keystone in the country's claim to superpower status.

On the other hand, Russia has fought three land wars in the past 20 years or so, including the present conflict in Chechnya, in which major deficiencies in its conventional armed forces were exposed, including inadequately maintained and inappropriate equipment, inadequately trained troops and poor coordination among the branches of the armed services.

General Kvashnin has argued that heavy investment in nuclear weapons has sapped the conventional forces' strength.

Mr. Putin hinted Friday that he had taken General Kvashnin's side when he warned against ''unrestrained stockpiling of weapons'' and said Russia must build a military force it can afford.

All steps must be ''calculated and economically justified,'' Mr. Putin said. He authorized an $80 million increase in this year's $4.5 billion defense budget

But General Kvashnin did not get everything he wanted. He had asked for the nuclear arsenal to be cut to 1,400 warheads, 100 fewer than the number approved, the Kommersant Daily newspaper reported.

Marshal Sergeyev also convinced Mr. Putin that the service life of some older missiles could be prolonged, according to the newspaper.

One remaining wild card may be a U.S. proposal to build a limited missile defense system. If it goes ahead, Russia's nuclear-arms faction will press for a nuclear buildup, Kommersant predicted.

''This is the only thing that offers the rocket people a chance for revenge,'' the newspaper said.

President Bill Clinton's administration has tried, so far without success, to persuade the Russian government to amend the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.

The aim would be to allow U.S. construction of a limited national missile defense system capable of shooting down a few dozen missiles, presumably launched by smaller powers.

The United States has signaled that, in return for concessions on Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty constraints, it would consider reducing the number of U.S. strategic warheads to 2,000 or fewer.

---

Russia to Cut Its Nuclear Stockpile
Putin Decides to Shift Funds To Rebuild Conventional Forces

Washington Post
Sunday, August 13, 2000; Page A16

By Daniel Williams Washington Post Foreign Service
http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/2000-08/13/098l-081300-idx.html

MOSCOW, Aug. 12-Russia will unilaterally reduce its nuclear arsenal and shift scarce financial resources to rebuild its conventional forces, President Vladimir Putin decided at a pivotal defense policy meeting on Friday, Russian media reported today.

Details emerging from the four-hour meeting suggest that Putin sided with the chief of the general staff and against the defense minister in the bitter dispute among the military brass.

"Great significance was attached to the development of conventional forces," the Interfax news agency said. "A decision was made on the redistribution of financial flows" away from nuclear arms.

Putin decided to let the number of Russia's nuclear warheads shrink to 1,500, less than half the 3,500 permitted under the START II arms reduction treaty, which Russia ratified this year, Russian media reported. Russia wants the United States to agree to reduce its arsenal to 1,500 warheads under a proposed START III treaty.

The size of Russia's nuclear arsenal has been inexorably shrinking because of obsolescence and the lack of money to build new missiles, airplanes and submarines to carry nuclear warheads. The speed of the Russian strategic forces' decline in the years ahead has been a subject of debate; by some estimates Russia will inevitably fall below 1,000 warheads without a major buildup, depending in part on how quickly the military retires missiles that have reached the end of their official service life.

The chief of the general staff, Gen. Anatoly Kvashnin, has lobbied for deep cuts in strategic nuclear weaponry, with the financial savings to go to conventional land, air and sea forces. Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev, a former commander of nuclear missile troops, has strongly opposed the idea, which he recently called "insane."

Sergeyev has also insisted that the strategic rocket forces remain a separate branch of the military. However, he appears to have suffered a setback on this point. As the number of land-based missiles declines over the next five years, the status of the elite strategic rocket forces as a separate branch will be "reconsidered" and parts of the force will fall under air force command within two years, Interfax said.

The decisions made Friday are part of Putin's efforts to fashion a 15-year plan for armed forces development. On the one hand, Russia wants to maintain a strategic nuclear arsenal, a keystone in the country's claim to superpower status.

On the other hand, Russia has fought three land wars in the past 20 years, including the present conflict in Chechnya, in which deficiencies in its conventional forces were exposed, including inadequately maintained equipment, ill-trained troops and poor coordination. Kvashnin has argued that over-reliance on nuclear weapons has sapped the conventional forces' strength.

Putin hinted Friday that he had taken Kvashnin's side when he warned against "unrestrained stockpiling of weapons" and said that Russia must build an armed force it can afford. "All our steps must be . . . calculated and economically justified," said Putin, who authorized an $80 million increase in this year's $4.5 billion defense budget.

However, Kvashnin did not get everything he wanted. He had asked for the nuclear arsenal to be cut to 1,400 warheads, 100 less than the number approved, the Kommersant Daily newspaper said. Sergeyev also convinced Putin that the service life of some older missiles can be extended, Kommersant said.

One remaining wild card may be the U.S. proposal for a missile defense system. If it goes ahead, Russia's nuclear arms faction will press for a nuclear buildup, Kommersant predicted. "This is the only thing that offers the rocket people a chance for revenge," the newspaper said.

The Clinton administration has tried, so far without success, to persuade the Russian government to amend the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty to allow construction of a limited national missile defense system capable of shooting down a few dozen missiles.

The United States has signaled that in return for Russian concessions on the ABM Treaty, it would consider slashing the number of U.S. strategic warheads to 2,000 or fewer. But it is unclear whether Putin's decision to shrink Russia's nuclear arsenal will be accompanied by a new willingness to compromise on missile defense.

-------- us nuc politics

AL GORE'S JOURNEY
Mastering the Details In Congress, Gore Selected Issues Ready for Prime Time

Washington Post
August 13, 2000
By KEVIN SACK and ROBIN TONER
http://www.nytimes.com/library/politics/camp/081300wh-gore-record.html

WASHINGTON, Aug. 12 -- The Democratic freshman class that was elected to the House of Representatives in 1976 was a remarkable one, loaded with bright and ambitious young reformers who blended the idealism of their generation with the cynicism bred by Watergate and Vietnam. Many would go on to bigger things -- Richard A. Gephardt to the top of the House Democratic leadership, Leon E. Panetta to the White House as chief of staff, Barbara A. Mikulski to the Senate.

But even in this hotbed of ambition, Al Gore stood out. As former Representative Jim Cooper of Tennessee put it, "Al was never a backbencher." Almost as soon as they arrived on Capitol Hill, members of the class of '76 began looking for ways to break out of the pack. Some, like Mr. Gephardt, played the inside game, building the personal alliances essential for rising in Congressional leadership. Others, like Mr. Gore, a young Tennessean with a famous political name, preferred the outside game.

It was not his way to twist arms or trade favors. While he made friends, particularly on the basketball court in the House gym, backslapping was not his political strong suit. Instead, Mr. Gore, who was 28 when first elected, went methodically about the task of identifying issues -- many slightly obscure but all deadly serious -- that he could make his own.

Throughout his 16 years in Congress, 8 in the House and then 8 in the Senate before becoming Bill Clinton's running mate, Mr. Gore was strikingly effective at winning attention by championing just-over-the-horizon consumer-oriented causes. Toxic-waste dumping. Genetic testing. Global warming.

He reveled in the details, in mastering the arcana of arms control or computer technology, issues the average politician might find bloodless or simply too hard, then trying to popularize those issues with the voters at large.

So effective was his strategy, and so media-savvy his approach, that former Senator Alan K. Simpson of Wyoming, once the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, remembered: "We called him Prime Time Al. That's what he was known as in our cloakroom."

Today, as Mr. Gore moves toward Los Angeles to accept his party's presidential nomination at the Democratic National Convention next week, his record on Capitol Hill remains a vital part of his biography. And the debate over whether its hallmark was prescience or political expedience will rage over the next three months.

His campaign strategists say most Americans are unaware of how Mr. Gore spent the years 1977 to 1992 -- the pre-Clinton years -- and they plan to highlight that era in convention speeches and films. "Gore throughout his career has taken on important issues well before it was fashionable to take them on," said Mark Fabiani, Mr. Gore's deputy campaign manager for communications.

Mr. Gore himself, when asked in a recent interview aboard Air Force Two to summarize his Congressional career, said the message was simple: "I will not hesitate to take on any special interest that is operating to the disadvantage of the American people. And I'll never hesitate to take on any challenge, however complex or difficult."

But the Bush campaign will portray Mr. Gore as a man who carefully crafted his Congressional career to maintain his political viability, a man with little grounding other than his own ambition. "Al Gore's flip-flops on important issues, including guns and abortion, underscore why there's a leadership gap in this campaign," said Dan Bartlett, a Bush campaign spokesman.

Clearly, Mr. Gore was engaged in a balancing act for much of his Congressional career. He chose issues that pushed him to the national stage, but he was compulsive about tending his district back home. He studiously avoided the kind of polarizing debates that ultimately contributed to the defeat of his father, Senator Albert Gore Sr., in 1970. The issues the younger Gore selected had the advantage of being virtually nonideological. There was right and wrong in Mr. Gore's positioning, but rarely was there right and left.

On the most volatile controversies, like abortion and gun control, he took stands that put his conservative constituents at ease and then shifted positions as he moved from Tennessee politics to the national arena. To the extent he ever alienated the home folks, he usually managed to work his way back into their good graces by maintaining a relentless regimen of town hall meetings, sometimes five on a given Saturday.

It all left his political rivals with little room to maneuver. "He picked out issues that unless Adolf Hitler was your idol you couldn't disagree," said Victor H. Ashe, the mayor of Knoxville, Tenn., and Mr. Gore's Republican opponent in his first Senate campaign in 1984. "Organ transplant databases. More money for Alzheimer's research. Infant formula. I mean, who in their right mind is going to fight against those? He avoided any issue that could be divisive."

Mr. Gore's ideological ratings by groups that monitor Congressional voting records typically group him as a centrist Democrat, particularly on foreign policy, with positions that grew somewhat more liberal as he moved toward his failed 1988 presidential campaign. His approval rating by the liberal Americans for Democratic Action, for instance, grew from 45 percent in his first year to 78 percent in 1990.

The A.F.L.-C.I.O. gives him a lifetime voting-record score of 88 percent, the United States Chamber of Commerce 32 percent. His most high-profile shift probably was on abortion: he moved from a reliable vote against any federal financing for abortion, with an 84 percent rating by the National Right to Life Committee, to an outspoken, unqualified advocacy of abortion rights.

But much of Mr. Gore's Congressional career was not spent in the middle of the ideological wars; his interests, his political instincts and perhaps the memory of his father pushed him elsewhere.

An Invaluable Forum

The Democratic freshmen who entered the House in the post-Watergate classes of 1974 and 1976 expected to make a difference, fast, in contrast to their predecessors' long years of quiet back-bench servitude. Mr. Gore hoped to be on the Appropriations Committee, the seat of federal largess, but he lost out to his friend and fellow freshman Norm Dicks of Washington. He landed, fortunately enough, on the Commerce Committee. Mr. Dicks recalled saying that he had done Mr. Gore a favor: "I told him, 'Now you'll be on Commerce and on TV all the time.' "

Indeed, the Commerce Committee had purview over a wide array of consumer issues -- involving energy, the environment, health care -- and it gave Mr. Gore an invaluable forum. He got a seat on the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, and eventually became chairman of a similar subcommittee of the House Committee on Science and Technology.

From those perches, Mr. Gore quickly became known as a meticulously prepared, take-no-prisoners inquisitor, aided by his background in law and his five years as a newspaper reporter. The headlines from back home -- and some in Washington -- portrayed an aggressive young lawmaker standing up for consumers, whether he was charging monopoly practices among natural-gas pipeline companies or exposing an international uranium cartel: "Gore: Thousands of Babies Drinking Harmful Formula?" "Rep. Gore Breaks Up a Monopoly." "Gore Questions Contact Lens Solution Use." "Gore Introduces Nationwide Transplant Organ Bill."

It was a pattern that would continue over the years as he crusaded against the marketing of unhealthy baby formula, raised early ethical concerns about the use of genetic testing and engineering, promoted the benefits of midwifery and helped establish a national organ transplant network.

Barely past 30, Mr. Gore was in the thick of the struggle for the passage of the Superfund Act of 1980, which established a fund to clean up toxic wastes. He was also an important member of the Congressional Clearinghouse on the Future. "We'd bring in top scientists, top futurists who were looking at technological developments, their implications for society," Mr. Gephardt said.

Much later, Mr. Gore would become the butt of late-night talk show jokes for his claim of having helped to create the Internet. But Congressional colleagues say he really was ahead of the curve in seeing the implications of new technologies, like computer networks and genetic testing.

"He understood the link between technology and development; he could see the future very well," said David E. Bonior of Michigan, now the Democratic whip. Mike Kopp, one of Mr. Gore's early aides, remembered him subscribing to scientific journals, "obscure publications," at home, clipping out articles and bringing them in for his staff to review.

He certainly had his detractors, who saw his hunger for the media limelight as extraordinary, even by Washington standards. Former aides say he was skilled at cultivating reporters, studying their interests and then catering to them. Still, by most accounts Mr. Gore fit happily into the culture of the House. His father cast a formidable shadow, but as another famous son of a famous Congressman, Representative John D. Dingell put it, "It is not looked down upon in this place" to have a family legacy. Mr. Dingell, the Michigan Democrat who was the exceedingly powerful chairman of the Commerce Committee from 1981 to 1995, became something of a mentor to Mr. Gore.

Mr. Gore could be a demanding, micromanaging boss, traits that have extended to his campaign. In his early days, he sorted the office mail himself and insisted on reviewing and editing the most pedestrian constituent letters. Former aides said he did not take well to criticism and was not particularly solicitous of advice from underlings. Though he was accessible, he avoided both small talk and confrontation. "Typically," said Mr. Kopp, "his reaction when you criticized him was he'd either walk away or get busy doing something else."

But he also hung out with members of the House like Tom Downey of New York, most of them young men with young families, and was among the regulars in the freewheeling basketball games at the House gym. "I had closer friendships in the House," Mr. Gore said, comparing it with the Senate. "I just, I had more fun in the House."

Still, even in the House gym, his competitive instincts showed. Mr. Bonior recalls walking into the gym one night to find Mr. Gore on his back at midcourt, trying to make an implausible shot that others could not match. (When asked about this in an interview, Mr. Gore said without a pause, "Not trying.")

Addressing Arms Control

Midway through his tenure in the House, at the start of the 1980's, Mr. Gore began his move to a more national arena, obtaining a seat on the House Intelligence Committee and plunging into the most arcane field in Washington: arms control. It has become a highly burnished chapter in the official Gore story -- how he heard the persistent fears of nuclear war from the folks back home, how he embarked on a secretive yearlong tutorial on arms control with Leon Fuerth, today his national security adviser and then a top staffer with the Intelligence Committee.

"The levels of anxiety were high, and the liberal position was the freeze," said Peter Knight, a top aide at the time. "He was looking for a more complete answer."

By 1982, with a major speech and an article in The New Republic, one of his many essays and op-ed articles on the issue, Mr. Gore came forth with his answer: an arms control strategy that would move from big multiple-warhead missiles to smaller single-warhead missiles, which could be easily scattered and thus much harder to target, thereby reducing the advantage of a first strike.

"It was a high like you've never seen," Mr. Kopp recalled. "He proved to himself and to people who didn't know him that he could get up to speed on an issue that people thought was untouchable, and he went through that course in record time with flying colors. He also thought he might have really found the key to unlocking the Iron Curtain."

In 1983, when the Reagan administration was trying to win Congressional approval for the big multiple-warhead MX missile, Mr. Gore and like-minded colleagues sought a compromise: limited deployment of the MX, development of the smaller single-warhead Midgetman missile and a new push toward arms control. In the end, when the Midgetman went undeveloped but the MX pushed ahead, some Democrats thought Mr. Gore and his allies had been used; others praised their search for a new path.

"It's not a black and white thing," said Michael Krepon, president of the Henry L. Stimson Center, an international-security policy group. "If you take a longer-range view, the outcome that Gore was pushing -- take the warheads off these land-based missiles, that single-warhead missiles are the route to stability on land -- what Gore was pushing for became conventional wisdom 15 years later."

What was clear was that Mr. Gore was playing at a very high level of the game.

'A Raging Moderate'

Even as he became a more prominent national figure, doing the Sunday talk shows and finding his name in assessments of presidential timber, Mr. Gore was careful to return to Tennessee whenever possible.

His father's defeat by Bill Brock had provided the great political lesson of his life. As the Republicans gained a foothold in the South, the senior Mr. Gore became vulnerable because he had opposed the Vietnam War, supported civil rights (for the most part) and become a Washington fixture who did not go home much. The younger Gore would not make the same mistake.

He started as a freshman, making the trip every weekend, driving maniacally down country roads in a Dodge Omni, staying for an hour or so regardless of whether he was speaking to 50 people or to 5. "Whenever two or three people got together, Al would be there," said former Senator James R. Sasser of Tennessee, who served with Mr. Gore.

One minute Mr. Gore would be jotting down the name of an elderly woman who needed help with her Social Security check. The next he would be using coffee-cup missiles to explain his arms control proposals. Those who watched him then said he seemed far more natural than he does now.

The meetings served him well when he had to cast tough votes, as he did against Ronald Reagan's tax cuts. "People were standing up and saying you better vote for this, and Al would just talk about why he thought it was a bad idea," said Steve Owens, an early House aide. "It proved his theory that if you came back enough and made yourself accountable, people would understand even if you disagree with them."

To the extent that he could, Mr. Gore minimized opportunities for disagreement. In line with his district, he opposed both Medicaid financing of abortion and most forms of gun control, positions that he changed as he felt the lure of national politics. "There's no doubt that I changed my position," he said, but he noted that many Democrats had evolved on such issues.

Clearly, though, Mr. Gore had no interest in leading on divisive topics. "On the abortion stuff, he was never out front," said former Representative Peter H. Kostmayer, a Democratic member of the class of '76 from Pennsylvania. "I never noticed how he voted. He did it quietly. I was surprised to read that he had ever been antichoice."

Mr. Gore called himself "a raging moderate," and it worked. After a close first election, He ran unopposed in 1978, won with 79 percent in 1980 and was unopposed again in 1982.

It seemed almost preordained, when Howard H. Baker Jr. of Tennessee announced his intention to retire from the Senate, that Mr. Gore would take his seat. But Mr. Gore did not find the easy fit in the Senate that he had found in the House.

He was young for a senator, 36, and entering an institution where seniority mattered, deeply. He had been chairman of a subcommittee in the House, but now he was a junior member of his committees, including Commerce and, eventually, Armed Services.

"We went to dinner one night at a restaurant on the Hill, and he was talking about his frustrations, trying to figure out ways to get back involved in environmental issues," Mr. Owens recalled. "In the middle of it, he just looks at me and says, 'You know, sometimes I wonder if this was such a smart idea.' "

He did find a way to pursue his interests. He played a major role in probing NASA after the Challenger disaster in 1986. He was an early voice warning about the dangers of global warming. He worked on legislation that promoted high-performance computing and networking projects, and was an early champion of the Internet. (Mr. Gore steps carefully around that accomplishment today, after overstating his role last year.) He maintained a high profile in national security matters, serving as a member, for example, of a Senate observer group for arms control talks in Geneva in 1985. And he continued his tutorials on various issues.

But his tenure in the Senate was framed by two presidential campaigns -- the one he conducted in 1988 and the one many expected him to conduct in 1992. His opponents argued that as his national ambitions grew, his hunger for the spotlight was all-consuming.

"He didn't show up in legislating, like Kennedy or the people I dealt with," said former Senator Simpson. "He showed up in the news cycle." Critics saw political calculations everywhere in Mr. Gore's Senate years -- including his decision to break with his party and vote to authorize President Bush to wage war on Iraq.

Mr. Gore described his vote as one of 10 Democrats to authorize the Persian Gulf war as "excruciatingly difficult," indeed the toughest of his career. He dismissed those who viewed it as a political vote, saying that in fact it jeopardized his ability to win Democratic presidential primaries. "It was anything but a political vote," he said.

But Mr. Simpson asserts that Mr. Gore bargained with the Republicans over how much speaking time he would get -- and when -- before he made his decision, an assertion dismissed by the Gore campaign and other Democrats. George Mitchell, the majority leader at the time, scoffed: "They've been trying to peddle that for eight years."

The vote that seemed so politically dangerous at the time proved highly auspicious for Mr. Gore's political future, with the gulf war considered a resounding military success. But as the 1992 election approached, it seemed ever more apparent to Mr. Gore's aides that he would not run, at least not at the top of the ticket. He focused more and more on favorite issues -- notably global warming -- that had proven so hard to translate into a presidential campaign agenda in 1988.

"I was disappointed in myself in '88," Mr. Gore said, "by the extent to which I responded to the deafening silence on those issues by muting my own discussion of them and shifting into sort of cookie-cutter issues."

In the end, Congressional scholars say, Mr. Gore's time in Congress will be remembered for his persistence on those issues. "If you were to pick the master coalition builders in Congress, Al Gore wouldn't be on that list," said Norman J. Ornstein, an expert on Congress at the American Enterprise Institute. "But if you were to pick the master agenda setters, he definitely would."

This much was clear, though. By the time Bill Clinton called, Al Gore had broken from the pack.

-------- u.s. nuc weapons

U.S. Maginot Line - aka National Missile Defense System

fdpeace@earthlink.net -
Frank Dworak Pax Christi USA Representative to U.S. Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons
Sun, 13 Aug 2000 16:49:27 -0400

Items from this month's Harper's Index:

Year in which Mikhail Gorbachev told Ronald Reagan, "I think you're wasting your money" on Star Wars: 1987

Cost to produce Safeguard, the only U.S. ground-based long-range missile shield ever deployed: $23,500,000,000

Number of days in the 1970s that the system was operational before it was abandoned as inadequate: 135

Number of years of planning and construction devoted to France's Maginot Line fortifications in World War II: 15

Number of days it took the German army to maneuver around them and invade France: 3

----

Lost U.S. Nuclear Bomb Off Greenland Base Site?

Yahoo News
Sunday August 13 10:23 AM ET
By Peter Starck
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20000813/ts/greenland_nuclear_dc_2.html

COPENHAGEN (Reuters) - A U.S. nuclear bomb lost more than three decades ago probably lies on the seabed off Greenland's Thule airbase, which the United States aims to use for its controversial anti-missile shield, a Danish newspaper reported Sunday.

Classified documents obtained by a group of former workers at Thule, an Arctic air and radar base built by the United States in 1951-52, suggest that one of four hydrogen bombs on a B-52 bomber that crashed there in 1968 was never found, the daily Jyllands-Posten said.

``Detective work by a group of former Thule workers indicates that an unexploded nuclear bomb probably still lies on the seabed off Thule,'' the right-leaning mass-circulation daily said.

The crash on January 21, 1968 led to a crisis in relations between the United States and NATO ally Denmark, which is responsible for Greenland's foreign, security and defense policy and at the time prohibited nuclear weapons on its territory, including Greenland.

Denmark was never informed about the lost bomb, which has serial number 78252, the paper said.

Film Shows ``Bomb-Like Object''

Footage filmed at the site by a U.S. submarine searching for remains of the B-52 wreckage in April 1968 contained images of a bomb-like object, the Danish Ritzau news agency reported.

A U.S. state department document dated August 31, 1968 said all weapons onboard the crashed aircraft had been accounted for but did not spell out whether they had been recovered, Ritzau said.

The United States assured the Danish government in spring 1968 that clean-up work after the B-52 crash had been completed and gave up searching for the lost bomb in August that year, Jyllands-Posten said.

``We are not able to comment at this stage,'' Lawrence Butler, Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. embassy in Copenhagen, told Reuters by telephone. Danish government officials were not available for comment.

Niels-Joergen Nehring, head of the state-sponsored Danish Institute of International Affairs (DUPI), which published a report named ``Greenland During the Cold War'' in 1997, including a chapter on the B-52 crash, said Jyllands-Posten's claim that a lost bomb remained off Thule was not surprising.

``It is not new information that there might be some stuff left there,'' Nehring told Reuters, adding the crash had occurred ``some kilometers off the coast'' where the water depth beneath the ice was 250-300 meters.

The U.S. investigation of the crash site had ended once it had been confirmed that no radiation danger existed, he said.

Senior State Department officials are scheduled to visit Greenland on August 21 to 24 for talks with Danish and Greenland officials on Thule's role in the planned National Missile Defense (NMD) initiative.

According to Senate testimony by Defense Secretary William Cohen in July, Washington needs a decision on upgrading the Thule radar next year if the White House gives the political go-ahead to deploy NMD by 2005.

Home to a ballistic missile early-warning radar station, Thule sits at the midpoint of a chain of similar sites between Alaska and the British Isles -- a line along which the United States may build a shield against missiles from what it calls states of concern such as North Korea, Iraq, Iran and Libya.

Greenland Politicians Oppose Plan

Leading politicians in Greenland, which has enjoyed limited self-determination under the Danish crown since 1979, do not want Thule to play any role in the NMD.

Denmark has declined to speak out on the issue apart from saying that the NMD should not go ahead if it breaches the strategic missile treaty between the United States and Russia. Moscow opposes the U.S. missile shield plan, and says it does breach the treaty.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned Denmark and other U.S. NATO allies that their participation in the NMD could upset global strategic stability.

DUPI's Nehring said the fresh nuclear bomb report would probably raise an uproar in the domestic media but was unlikely to seriously affect Denmark's position on the NMD.

``It will of course give rise to questions and debates...but I don't think it will have any long-term impact,'' he said.

The Danish government has said it will make a decision if and when Washington submits a request to upgrade the Thule radar.

---

Lost U.S. Nuclear Bomb Near Planned NMD Radar?

Yahoo News
Sunday August 13 2:54 PM ET updated 4:52 PM ET Aug 15
By Peter Starck
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20000813/ts/greenland_nuclear_dc_3.html
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/world/DailyNews/greenland_nuclear000813.html

COPENHAGEN (Reuters) - A U.S. nuclear bomb lost more than three decades ago probably lies on the seabed off Greenland's Thule airbase, which the United States aims to use for its controversial anti-missile shield, a Danish newspaper reported Sunday.

Classified documents obtained by a group of former workers at Thule, an Arctic air and radar base built by the United States in 1951-52, suggest that one of four hydrogen bombs on a B-52 bomber that crashed there in 1968 was never found, the daily Jyllands-Posten said.

``Detective work by a group of former Thule workers indicates that an unexploded nuclear bomb probably still lies on the seabed off Thule,'' the right-leaning mass-circulation daily said.

The January 21, 1968 crash led to a crisis in relations between the United States and NATO ally Denmark, which is in charge of Greenland's foreign, security and defense policy and at the time prohibited nuclear weapons on its territory, including Greenland.

Denmark was never informed about the lost bomb, which has the serial number 78252, the paper said.

Film Shows ``Bomb-Like Object''

Footage filmed at the site by a U.S. submarine searching for remains of the B-52 wreckage in April 1968 contained images of a bomb-like object, the Danish Ritzau news agency reported.

A U.S. state department document dated August 31, 1968 said all weapons on board the crashed aircraft had been accounted for but did not spell out whether they had been recovered, Ritzau said.

The United States assured the Danish government in Spring 1968 that clean-up work after the B-52 crash had been completed and gave up searching for the lost bomb in August that year, Jyllands-Posten said.

``We are not able to comment at this stage,'' Lawrence Butler, Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. embassy in Copenhagen, told Reuters. Danish government officials were not available for comment.

Niels-Joergen Nehring, head of the state-sponsored Danish Institute of International Affairs (DUPI), which published a report named ``Greenland During the Cold War'' in 1997, including a chapter on the B-52 crash, said Jyllands-Posten's claim that a lost bomb remained off Thule was not surprising.

``It is not new information that there might be some stuff left there,'' Nehring told Reuters, adding that the crash had occurred ``some kilometers off the coast'' where the water depth beneath the ice was 250-300 meters.

The U.S. investigation of the crash site had ended once it had been confirmed that no radiation danger existed, he said.

Health Hazard May Cloud Nmd Talks

But a nuclear physicist who asked not to be identified told Reuters that a hydrogen bomb on the seabed, if it existed, would become a grave health hazard for people near the crash site.

Corrosion of the bomb's metal casing would sooner or later allow radioactive plutonium to seep into the sea, contaminating the shore as well as killing fish and algae, the physicist said, adding there was no risk of such a bomb exploding by itself.

Senior State Department officials are scheduled to visit Greenland on August 21 to 24 for talks with Danish and Greenland officials on Thule's role in the planned National Missile Defense (NMD) initiative.

According to Senate testimony by Defense Secretary William Cohen in July, Washington needs a decision on upgrading the Thule radar next year if the White House gives the political go-ahead to deploy NMD by 2005.

Home to a ballistic missile early-warning radar station, Thule sits at the midpoint of a chain of similar sites between Alaska and the British Isles -- a line along which the United States may build a shield against missiles from what it calls states of concern such as North Korea, Iraq, Iran and Libya.

Leading politicians in Greenland, which has enjoyed limited self-determination under the Danish crown since 1979, do not want Thule to play any role in the NMD.

---

Cold War Bomb May Lie in Greenland

New York Times
August 13, 2000 Filed at 10:47 a.m. EDT
By The Associated Press
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/i/AP-Greenland-Cold-War-Bomb.html
http://web.philly.com/content/inquirer/2000/08/14/national/NUKE14.htm

COPENHAGEN, Denmark (AP) -- Documents obtained by former workers at the U.S. Air Force base in Greenland offer new evidence that an unarmed hydrogen bomb that sank in 1968 may still lie on the seabed, a newspaper reported Sunday.

On Jan. 21, 1968, an American B-52 carrying four unarmed hydrogen bombs with plutonium cores was on a mission near the Soviet border when a fire broke out in its cabin. The plane crashed on the frozen Baffin Bay off the U.S. Air Force base in Thule in northern Greenland, a semiautonomous Danish territory.

Five of the six crew members survived. Three of the bombs broke on impact, while the fourth reportedly sank to the seabed.

About 1,200 Danish and Greenland workers cleaned up the wreckage and scooped tons of radioactive debris and ice into barrels that were shipped back to the United States. That spring, Washington assured NATO member Denmark that cleanup work had been completed, according to Sunday's report in the Jyllands-Posten newspaper.

However, classified documents obtained by a group of former civilian employees at the air base suggest that the United States continued to search for the lost bomb until August of 1968 without informing the Danes, according to the newspaper.

The documents from the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission reportedly show that the U.S. search teams recovered the debris from the other three bombs but that the fourth bomb -- with the serial number 78252 -- was never found.

U.S. Embassy officials in Copenhagen could not be reached for comment. The Danish government, which has said previously that it was investigating similar reports but considered them unlikely, had no immediate reaction.

The former workers -- some of whom have filed for compensation, saying they have cases of cancer and other diseases related to the crash cleanup -- said they obtained the documents while researching their longtime claim. More details were not immediately available.

Sunday's report offered new evidence of a possibility Danish officials have considered for years. In 1987, Denmark's foreign minister said the country was looking into a report that the bomb still lay off the coast of Greenland. In 1995, Greenland's premier accused the United States of withholding information about the B-52 crash.

---

Lost U.S. Nuclear Bomb to Affect Talks on Greenland

Reuters
August 13, 2000 Filed at 6:23 a.m. ET
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/international/international-greenla.html

COPENHAGEN (Reuters) - A long lost U.S. nuclear bomb probably lies on the seabed off Greenland near Thule airbase, which the United States wants to use for its controversial anti-missile shield, a Danish newspaper reported on Sunday.

Classified documents obtained by a group of former workers at Thule, an Arctic air and radar base built by the United States in 1951-52, suggest that one of four hydrogen bombs on a B-52 bomber that crashed there in 1968 was never found, the daily Jyllands-Posten said.

``Detective work by a group of former Thule workers indicates that an unexploded nuclear bomb probably still lies on the seabed off Thule,'' the right-leaning mass-circulation daily said.

The crash on January 21, 1968 led to a crisis in relations between the United States and NATO ally Denmark, which is responsible for Greenland's foreign, security and defense policy and at the time prohibited nuclear weapons on its territory, including Greenland.

Denmark was never informed about the lost bomb, which has serial number 78252, the paper said.

Footage filmed at the site by a U.S. submarine searching for remains of the B-52 wreckage in April 1968 contained images of a bomb-like object, the Danish Ritzau news agency reported.

A U.S. state department document dated August 31, 1968 said all weapons onboard the crashed aircraft had been accounted for but did not spell out whether they had been recovered, Ritzau said.

The United States assured the Danish government in spring 1968 that clean-up work after the B-52 crash had been completed and gave up searching for the lost bomb in August that year, Jyllands-Posten said.

``We are not able to comment at this stage,'' Lawrence Butler, Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. embassy in Copenhagen, told Reuters by telephone. Danish government officials were not immediately available for comment.

Senior State Department officials are scheduled to visit Greenland on August 21 to 24 for talks with Danish and Greenland officials on Thule's role in the planned National Missile Defense (NMD) initiative.

According to Senate testimony by Defense Secretary William Cohen in July, Washington needs a decision on upgrading the Thule radar next year if the White House makes the political go-ahead to deploy NMD by 2005.

Home to a ballistic missile early-warning radar station, Thule sits at the midpoint of a chain of similar sites between Alaska and the British Isles -- a line along which the United States may build a shield against missiles from what it calls states of concern such as North Korea, Iraq, Iran and Libya.

Leading politicians in Greenland, which has enjoyed limited self-determination under the Danish crown since 1979, do not want Thule to play any role in the NMD.

Denmark has declined to speak out on the issue apart from saying that the NMD should not go ahead if it breaches the strategic missile treaty between the United States and Russia. Moscow opposes the U.S. missile shield plan, and says it does breach the treaty.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned Denmark and other U.S. NATO allies that their participation in the NMD could upset global strategic stability.

---

Denver Rocky Mountain News
August 13, 2000

Clinton's successor to make missile defense decisions

Holger Jensen
Send E-mail to Holger Jensen
mailto:hjens@aol.com
Holger Jensen's Biography
http://insidedenver.com/news/columnists.shtml#jensen

It is now clear that President Clinton's successor will have to make the tough decisions on an American missile shield.

And the system - if one is built - will cost more and take longer to deploy than the original $60 billion envisioned for 20 interceptors in Alaska by 2005, growing to 100 interceptors in later years.

Although Clinton will decide whether to take the first step of building a radar station in the Aleutian Islands, probably in September, Defense Secretary William Cohen has already acknowledged that the next president will be able to stop it, modify the plan or take an altogether different approach.

Vice President Al Gore and Republican contender George W. Bush both are committed to missile defense. But Gore would like to win Russian agreement to amend the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, while Bush, promising a "foreign policy with a touch of iron," has said he will go ahead whether Moscow likes it or not.

Both candidates, however, will be governed by the same criteria that bedevil the Clinton administration: the urgency of the missile threat to the United States, the technical feasibility of building a reliable National Missile Defense system, its cost and the fallout for U.S. foreign policy.

There is little disagreement on threat. Intelligence assessments prepared last September and again last week both say we will face missile dangers from North Korea, probably Iran and possibly Iraq by 2015.

For this we have Russia and China to thank.

A CIA report presented to Congress last week said both countries continue to export missile technology and components to North Korea, Iran, Libya, Pakistan and India. North Korea in turn exports "significant" missile-related equipment and technical expertise to countries in the Middle East, South Asia and North Africa.

"The Chinese have taken a very narrow interpretation of their nonproliferation commitment," said the report, while Russia is not only helping Iran's missile program but also adding to its stockpile of chemical and biological weapons.

The technical feasibility of NMD is more questionable.

Two of three U.S. attempts to shoot down missiles over the Pacific have failed. And the Pentagon's lead contractor on missile defense, Boeing Co., is a year behind schedule in developing a new booster rocket for the "kill vehicle" that is supposed to destroy incoming warheads. Its first solo flight, scheduled for April, was postponed to November and now is not likely to take place until the spring of 2001.

Cohen still believes the technology can be developed but confessed to Congress recently that "major problems have called into question the realism of the timetable." Boeing's delays have already pushed up the cost, and delaying the target date to 2006 or 2007 would add to the expense.

Fifty Nobel laureates and the American Physical Society, which represents 42,000 physicists, have urged Clinton to delay deployment until the system has been successfully tested. Last month, 61 congressmen and 31 senators added their voices to the appeal, saying Clinton should leave the decision to his successor.

"We share the judgment of numerous physicists, security experts, military and government officials who have concluded that unresolved questions about the system's effectiveness and the decision's impact on the overall national security of the United States cannot be adequately answered this year," said a letter from the House.

Critics believe the backlash against missile defense would far outweigh its benefits. China and Russia, while engaging in wholesale missile proliferation, are bitterly opposed to NMD, contending that it will undercut the deterrent value of their own arsenals, violate the ABM treaty and launch a new arms race. Our European allies fear it will endanger all existing arms control agreements.

A National Intelligence Estimate prepared for the White House agrees that China will probably add to its nuclear arsenal if we deploy a missile shield, and Russia, while continuing to reduce the number of missiles it can no longer afford, would accelerate development of weapons to circumvent NMD.

The reaction of our friends would be equally negative. In the words of German President Johannes Rau, the Europeans are "extremely worried that arms control and disarmament will come to a halt. What is at stake is the fate of the entire world - not the supposed interests of a country, a party or a group within a party."

Holger Jensen is international editor. E-mail: hjens@aol.com

---

There's fighting over missile defense shield
Serious debate soon degenerates into name-calling

Pioneer Planet
Sunday, August 13, 2000
DAVID ABEL
BOSTON GLOBE
http://www.pioneerplanet.com/seven-days/4/news/docs/031361.htm

It's the most contentious national security debate since the Cold War: whether or not to build a $60 billion missile defense shield involving technologies so sophisticated that some haven't even been invented.

For two key players in the debate -- outspoken Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor Ted Postol and White House chief of staff John Podesta -- it's also an exercise that has degenerated into name-calling.

``I must say that the overall impression you leave from your correspondence,'' said Podesta in a handwritten response recently to Postol's drubbing of the administration's anti-missile plan, ``is that your brilliance is only exceeded by your arrogance.''

Insulted, Postol fired right back with sarcasm:

``I do not rule out that I could be wrong -- I am not so arrogant to deny that possibility -- and that there is some subtle point of basic science . . . known only to you and your advisers, but not to Nobel laureates.''

With that, what started as a dry, substantive scientific analysis completed its descent into shallow sniping.

The war of words has been brewing since May when Postol, a physicist who is one of the leading critics of pricey Pentagon programs, sent the White House a detailed critique explaining why its Reagan-era, Star Wars defense system won't work.

The 54-year-old professor was a scientific adviser to the chief of naval operations in the 1980s. He helped develop the Trident 2 missile and believes the anti-missile system's technology will be incapable of distinguishing between a potential enemy's decoys and real nuclear warheads. A few balloons, he says, might be sufficient to fool the anti-missile missile.

For nearly three months, Postol waited for a reply to his pointed criticism, only to receive what he considered to be a form letter from the White House: three paragraphs thanking him for his interest in the issue and reiterating the president's mantra on missile defense.

The lack of any appreciation of his critique rankled him, so the scientist fired off a missive to Podesta:

``The almost comically unresponsive letter you sent to me more than two months after being informed about these serious matters adds to my concern that you and others on the White House staff have not taken your responsibilities seriously.''

To date, neither the Pentagon nor the White House has provided Postol with a detailed response. The administration's reticence has also angered other scientists around the country, who have rallied behind Postol's criticism.

Those calling for a halt in the move to deploy an anti-ballistic missile force include major scientific groups such as the Federation of American Scientists, the Union of Concerned Scientists, the American Physical Society, and 50 Nobel Prize-winning scientists who have called the planned system ``premature, wasteful and dangerous.''

Before the White House responded with its ``form letter'' in July, Postol says the administration's only response had been to try to silence him. Shortly after the scientist's initial letter arrived at the White House, the Pentagon classified it as secret, making a public response impossible.

A few weeks later, the Pentagon dispatched agents from the Defense Security Service to admonish Postol to keep quiet about sensitive data.

But Ted Postol is not a man who treads lightly over billion-dollar programs that might not work.

Nearly a decade ago, the missile specialist gained acclaim in scientific circles and disdain in the Pentagon after debunking the ``success'' of Raytheon Corp.'s Patriot missile during the Persian Gulf War. His analysis prompted the Army and Raytheon to reduce Patriot's claimed success rate by half.

And the bearded, no-frills physicist doesn't take kindly to personal attacks. He calls Podesta's note ``out of line.''

According to Postol's analysis, the Pentagon has rigged missile tests to ensure success. After a 1997 test of the anti-missile revealed it couldn't effectively distinguish decoys from warheads, he says, the Pentagon stopped using decoys that would seriously challenge the defensive weapon.

The physicist also accuses the Pentagon of significantly reducing the difficulty of the next 14 tests planned before the anti-missile system would be deployed in 2005.

The Pentagon has so far only dismissed Postol's criticism as based on old data and plans still in the making.

Postol, however, has warned the Pentagon and the White House not to let science ``be perverted to serve a particular political point of view,'' and has urged the administration to form an independent scientific commission to study the missile plan.

Otherwise, Postol wrote to Podesta, ``Your single-minded loyalty to the departing president will have served the nation poorly.''

Those calling for a halt in the move to deploy an anti-ballistic missile force include major scientific groups such as the Federation of American Scientists, the Union of Concerned Scientists, and the American Physical Society.

---

The National Missile Mess

New York Times
Steven Lee Myers
August 13, 2000
http://www.nytimes.com/library/review/081300this-week-review.html

As President Clinton nears a decision on building a national missile defense, an intelligence report warned that the decision could prompt China to expand its nuclear arsenal tenfold, while Russia could take destabilizing steps like placing multiple warheads on its ballistic missiles.

The report could erode support for the administration's proposed missile shield, which is also facing technological hurdles. Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen postponed making his recommendation to Mr. Clinton by at least a month, citing "a number of difficult issues," including the need for more tests and delays in building a new booster rocket.

---

New York Times
August 13, 2000
http://www.nytimes.com/00/08/13/letters/l13wor.html

How Big a Role on a Global Stage?

To the Editor:

"America in the World" (editorial, Aug. 7), in urging debate on how the country assesses its national interests in today's changed international arena, accurately cites some of those interests: ensuring our defense, reducing nuclear weapons, keeping channels of commerce open, encouraging democracy and the rule of law, and protecting health and the environment.

The furtherance of those interests abroad rests on effective intelligence, a well-equipped and trained military force and patient but energetic diplomacy. Yet diplomacy is not mentioned in your editorial.

The national debate you rightly urge must include the role of diplomacy -- including the regrettable state of affairs where financing for foreign affairs has been cut by 30 percent in real terms since the mid-1980's, to the point where today only one penny of every dollar in the federal budget goes to the crucial, preventive role diplomacy can play before the use of force becomes relevant.

BRUCE LAINGEN Washington, Aug. 9, 2000
The writer is president of the American Academy of Diplomacy.

The Rule of Law
To the Editor:

"America in the World" (editorial, Aug. 7) proposes that encouraging the rule of law in Russia and China "should be among the primary goals of the next president." Fair enough. But should the rule of law also play a part in our foreign policy?

You say "the Pentagon can safely eliminate thousands of nuclear weapons . . . but must maintain enough to discourage attack." The first part of that statement is welcome, but the second invites the United States to set an example of lawbreaking.

The nonproliferation treaty obliges us to negotiate in good faith for nuclear disarmament. The International Court of Justice has interpreted this to mean complete nuclear disarmament.

And at the United Nations in May, the United States solemnly signed on to an "unequivocal undertaking" to eliminate its nuclear arsenal. The Pentagon's continuing reliance on nuclear deterrence flouts this legal obligation.

PETER WEISS New York, Aug. 7, 2000
The writer is president of the Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy.

To the Editor:

Your Aug. 7 editorial about foreign policy points to America's "wealth, military might and technological edge over any rivals."

This does not, however, give us special knowledge of the complexities of the politics and cultures of these "rivals." Such knowledge comes only from years of study and living in these countries.

Yet while military and intelligence agencies' budgets continue at cold-war levels, the State Department budget has been reduced, and in constant dollars is now less than it was in the 1970's.

As a result, we have few Foreign Service specialists in the crisis areas of the Balkans, West Africa, the former Soviet Union and China, among others.

An increase in the number of highly qualified area specialists will not guarantee the success of diplomacy everywhere, but in many cases it would obviate the need for military intervention and at a fraction of the cost.

ARTHUR L. LOWRIE Lutz, Fla., Aug. 8, 2000 The writer is a retired Foreign Service officer.

------- MILITARY (by country)

-------- chile

From Chile's Army, Little but the Sound of Fury

New York Times
August 13, 2000
By CLIFFORD KRAUSS
http://www.nytimes.com/library/review/081300pinochet-review.html

SANTIAGO, Chile -- Chilean soldiers still march to the tune of the stern martial music -- the Badenweiler, Nibelung and Ferbelin -- that the Prussians brought with them in 1885 when Chile invited them to modernize its army. The soldiers' medals, uniforms and goose-stepping also evoke that era, making the force appear profoundly anachronistic, even in a nation as traditionbound as this one.

But until recently, the misfit was only superficial. Even a decade ago, Chile's armed forces still had a powerful grip on the country, overseeing not only its defense, but also its economic and political affairs. A law unto themselves, they rousted dissidents from their beds and tortured and executed them at will.

Now, though, they are losing their commanding position in Chilean society. That became strikingly evident last week, as Gen. Augusto Pinochet, their former leader, was stripped of his senatorial immunity by the Supreme Court, clearing the way for his probable arrest and trial. In response, all the top military commanders could do was grumble, publicly and bitterly.

"The political role of the military is diminishing little by little," said Francisco Javier Cuadra, a lawyer who was General Pinochet's chief of staff between 1984 and 1987. "And as Pinochet leaves the stage, its profile will diminish even further."

Two major events created the slope the military is sliding down, which is all the more noteworthy because old authoritarian habits are returning in neighboring Peru and some other South American countries.

One, of course, was the arrest of General Pinochet in London two years ago on a Spanish warrant charging him with gross violations of human rights, including kidnapping, murder and torture. The arrest encouraged a rush of attention to human rights abuses in this usually closed society and emboldened prosecuting judges to investigate and charge scores of retired and acting police and military officers. When the prosecutions began, the general was not around to quash them. The military's accustomed impunity began to erode.

Then the Chilean government, pressing for General Pinochet's return, argued that he should face Chilean rather than Spanish justice as a matter of sovereignty, and the military -- which does not want him to face any trial at all -- went along. Since March, when the general returned to Chile after the British released him on humanitarian grounds, he has been too weak to block the prosecutions of fellow officers.

The other crucial event was Chile's election of Ricardo Lagos in January as the first Socialist president since 1973, when General Pinochet overthrew Salvador Allende with the help of the Nixon administration. In his first months in power, Mr. Lagos has pushed forward the economic deregulation policies first pioneered by General Pinochet and eliminated capital restrictions loathed by Wall Street.

With Marxism no longer a problem, the United States, which strongly supported the Pinochet coup, is now strongly backing civilian rule. Domestic fears of Communism have faded, too, removing the armed forces' chief argument for one of the largest per capita military budgets in Latin America. Chile's business community, while maintaining support for General Pinochet, has drawn back from pushing the military to intervene to protect him, because they know such turbulence would deter international credit, investment and trade as the country emerges from a recession.

A third factor is simply the passage of time. Commanders have rotated, and the most senior of the Pinochet era have retired. Younger officers remain devoted to General Pinochet, but most focus on relations with the politicians who hold the purse strings for the new frigates, fighter jets and tanks they say they desperately need.

Likewise, a new generation on the Supreme Court (only three of 20 justices remain from General Pinochet's time) has ruled that cases of missing people can be treated as kidnappings. Until a body is produced, a kidnapping case is considered open. The approach has opened a multitude of cases that had been shut by a 1978 amnesty for political crimes -- including killings -- decreed under General Pinochet.

That pushed the armed forces to the negotiating table with human rights lawyers and led to top officers' signing a document in June that promised their assistance in finding the bodies of the missing, in exchange for testifying in private and receiving immunity.

The agreement was the first time the military acknowledged that members of the security forces had played a role in the wrongful death of anybody and the first time it publicly retreated from old rebuttals that either the disappeared had been killed in civil conflicts or that they were not dead at all, but had merely left the country.

"It was a great advance," said Mario Fernandez Baeza, President Lagos's defense minister. "Only two years ago, a large sector of the society, including the armed forces in a quiet way, justified those abuses."

Now, with even its border disputes with Peru and Argentina settled over the last three years, the military is trying to learn to live without enemies. That may mean living with new masters.

Mr. Lagos has begun negotiations with conservative lawmakers to change the constitution written during the Pinochet era, which gives the military special powers, including wide-ranging autonomy and representation in the Senate. He has also been forthright about claiming his superiority over the armed forces, on several occasions publicly scolding military chiefs.

After Gen. Ricardo Izurieta, the army chief, defiantly told reporters he needed no one's permission to visit General Pinochet after last week's ruling, Mr. Lagos observed, sharply: "The command of our country rests on what I decide."

Until recently such a clash would have sent shudders through Chile. But General Izurieta has learned to balance his relations with two civilian presidents and hard-liners within the armed forces unhappy that he has not better defended General Pinochet. After his words of defiance, he immediately reiterated the military's promise to seek the whereabouts of the missing. Mr. Lagos, for his part, said he did not mind that General Izurieta and other commanders made a courtesy visit to their old leader.

"It's a completely regulated conflict," said Mr. Cuadra, the former Pinochet aide. "It's political theater with both Lagos and Izurieta each playing a role and each knowing the other's lines in the libretto."

-------- india/pakistan

Kashmir Violence Flares Ahead of Independence Day

Yahoo News
Sunday August 13 1:01 PM ET
By Sheikh Mushtaq
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20000813/ts/kashmir_blast_dc_9.html

SRINAGAR (Reuters) - Twelve people died and 52 were wounded in a string of land mine explosions and gun battles in troubled Jammu and Kashmir state Sunday, ahead of Indian independence day ceremonies next week.

At least five soldiers were killed and 45 injured in two blasts in southern Kashmir, after militants opposed to Indian rule threatened to disrupt Tuesday's independence celebrations.

The first land mine blast hit a Border Security Force (BSF) vehicle near Kud, 100 km (60 miles) east of Jammu, the state's winter capital. Three security men were killed on the spot and one died of his injuries on the way to hospital, police said.

The pro-Pakistan Hizbul Mujahideen guerrilla group, which ended a 15-day truce last week, claimed responsibility for the blast. The group's spokesman, Salim Hashmi, told Reuters by telephone from Rawalpindi the mine had killed eight policemen and wounded 35, 15 of them seriously.

The militant group later called on the people of the trouble-torn region to boycott independence day festivities.

``Why should we celebrate when our people are being massacred, our property is being destroyed, our womenfolk are being molested and raped,'' the guerrilla group said in a statement delivered to local newspaper offices in Srinagar.

India Pm Says Ready For Talks

Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee condemned the blasts, saying militants were disappointed and dejected over their failure to muster support from the international community, the Press Trust of India (PTI) said.

PTI quoted Vajpayee as saying there were differing factions among the militants and that the Indian government was hopeful that those who wanted peace would be able to convince the others to hold talks.

``We are ready for talks and we want to resolve the Kashmir issue. But the militants have to take a decision of their own,'' Vajpayee said.

Hours after the first blast, while senior border police were inspecting the site, a second explosive device went off nearby, killing one soldier and injuring seven.

Officials in Jammu said at least four of the wounded were in critical condition and 13 were seriously hurt.

Later in the day, four civilians were injured when a bomb exploded in a dustbin near Dal Gate in the heart of Srinagar, the state's summer capital, police said.

Violence Expected

Security patrols have been stepped up and house-to-house searches started in Srinagar.

Tension has risen in Kashmir since Hizbul Mujahideen called off its cease-fire, citing New Delhi's refusal to accept three-way talks that would include Pakistan to resolve the 53-year-old Kashmir dispute.

Guerrillas who have been fighting Indian rule for a decade in the Himalayan region have threatened more violence, including a ``bombardment'' in the Valley in the run-up to the independence day ceremonies.

Kashmir's main separatist alliance, the All Parties Hurriyat Conference, has called for a strike Tuesday to mark India's independence day as a 'black day'.

Elsewhere in the region, five people were killed in gun battles and three soldiers were wounded in explosions in Kokarnag and Anantnag, both in the disputed Kashmir Valley.

Police said two men trying to enter India's side of Kashmir from across the line of control with Pakistan were killed in the Poonch sector.

India, which accuses Pakistan of stoking the 10-year-revolt against Indian rule in Kashmir and Jammu, blamed its arch rival for the collapse of its most serious peace initiative to end the cycle of bloodshed that has killed an estimated 30,000 people.

Islamabad denies direct involvement, but says it offers diplomatic and moral support to the Kashmiri people in what it says is their struggle for self-determination.

---

From Despair, Some Hope Emerges
Failed Truce May Have Aided Outlook For Kashmir Peace

Washington Post
Sunday, August 13, 2000; Page A16
By Pamela Constable Washington Post Foreign Service
http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/2000-08/13/093l-081300-idx.html

NEW DELHI-A window of opportunity to make peace in Kashmir slammed shut in the past week when a major separatist guerrilla group canceled a brief cease-fire and exploded a powerful car bomb that killed at least 12 people and wounded 27 others in the city of Srinagar.

While Kashmiri guerrilla groups and the governments of India and Pakistan blamed one another for the failed peace initiative, there are signs that the truce--the first in 11 years of fighting--has improved long-term prospects for resolving a conflict in which more than 50,000 people have died.

"At least everyone caught the moment," a Western diplomat here said. Indian officials quickly accepted the guerrillas' surprise offer of a truce, he noted, and since the bombing Thursday, both India and Pakistan have reiterated their determination to seek peace. "Even in this sour atmosphere, everyone is looking for a way to keep [the peace process] going," he said.

The blast occurred outside a bank in the Kashmiri city of Srinagar and left bloodied bodies of journalists and policemen strewn in a crowded street. It also left no doubt that the Hizb ul-Mujaheddin guerrilla group is back at war after two weeks of peace efforts, a welcome lull during which its fighters even played a cricket match with Indian troops.

The Kashmiri conflict is seen by the United States and others as a nuclear "flash point" in the longtime rivalry between India and Pakistan. The two countries have fought two of their three wars over Kashmir, and in 1998 both exploded nuclear weapons in underground tests.

Indian officials blamed Pakistan, which backs the guerrillas, for sabotaging the first concrete breakthrough since Muslim separatists in Indian-ruled Kashmir began their insurgency in the Himalayan region in 1989. They said Pakistan had pressed Hizb ul-Mujaheddin to cancel the cease-fire and allowed other guerrilla groups based in Pakistan to launch attacks across Kashmir last week.

"There can be no doubt in anybody's mind that it is Pakistan which has sabotaged the prospects for peace," L.K. Advani, India's internal affairs minister, told Parliament on Wednesday. He noted that Hizb ul-Mujaheddin had directly echoed Pakistan's demand--long resisted by India--to be included in three-way negotiations on Kashmir.

However, Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee said India's "door is still open" to separate talks with Pakistan, Kashmiri leaders and the guerrilla groups.

Pakistan denied any connection with the latest guerrilla attacks and Foreign Minister Abdus Sattar said India had "not only squandered but sabotaged" the chance to talk peace with Hizb ul-Mujaheddin. He called the Srinagar blast a "criminal act," and added that "there must be a return to the peace process."

Hizb ul-Mujaheddin leaders also blamed India for scuttling the talks by making "impossible demands" and by refusing to include Pakistan in negotiations. But the guerrilla group also left open the possibility of returning to dialogue, saying the truce had "shown the Indians we can be peace-loving" while the bombing had "shown them we can also be strong fighters."

[As India stepped up security in New Delhi and Kashmir before Independence Day on Wednesday, guerrilla leaders in Pakistan threatened to launch more violent attacks in the coming days. Suspected Islamic guerrillas lobbed a grenade Saturday near the Hazratbal mosque, a deeply revered Muslim shrine in Srinagar, wounding four women, the Associated Press reported.]

President Clinton, who urged India and Pakistan to resume negotiations on Kashmir during a visit to the region in March, telephoned Vajpayee this week to express regret about the cease-fire cancellation and the guerrilla attacks. He also sent a letter to Pakistan's military ruler, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, expressing concern about the continued violence.

In the short run, the recent weeks' drama has cast India in a better light than Pakistan, as Vajpayee prepares for a high-profile visit to Washington and New York next month. Musharraf also will be in New York for a session of the U.N. General Assembly, but the two are not expected to meet.

Some analysts here speculated that Pakistan orchestrated the cease-fire--and its collapse--to show Washington that it was sincere about seeking peace but that India could not be trusted to reciprocate.

But the dominant view among officials and foreign affairs specialists in India is different. They argue that Hizb ul-Mujaheddin, which is composed largely of local Kashmiri youths and led by former Kashmiri politicians, is more independent of Pakistan than other guerrilla groups in Kashmir whose forces are motivated by Islamic fundamentalism. Thus, Hizb ul-Mujaheddin caught Pakistan by surprise with its July 24 cease-fire offer to India.

Pakistan's response appeared to reveal its government as weak and unable to oppose Islamic fundamentalists who support various insurgent groups in Kashmir and view their struggle as part of a jihad, or holy war, against Hindu-dominated India.

When Hizb ul-Mujaheddin announced its truce, the umbrella association of guerrilla factions, the Pakistan-based United Jihad Council, expelled it. And when masked Hizb ul-Mujaheddin leaders held unprecedented direct talks with Indian officials in Srinagar, other insurgent groups based in Pakistan reacted angrily, launching a series of attacks in Kashmir that left more than 100 people dead, including Hindu pilgrims and migrant bricklayers.

The cease-fire--which had been announced by Hizb ul-Mujaheddin's indigenous Kashmiri commanders in Srinagar--was finally called off Tuesday by the group's political leaders in Pakistan, apparently under pressure from the government and Pakistani Islamic parties, analysts said.

"The withdrawal of the cease-fire made it clear that [Hizb ul-Mujaheddin] . . . and Musharraf have failed to stand up to the orthodox jihadis," the Times of India said in an editorial Thursday. "As long as Pakistan is dominated by the army, the fundamentalists and the feudals, Kashmir will continue to be its obsession."

Despite its early collapse, the cease-fire offer generated new flexibility in New Delhi and a surge of hope among Kashmiris, including those who previously had dismissed talks as a sellout. For the first time, Vajpayee said India was willing to talk to the guerrillas without preconditions and to negotiate with Pakistan without waiting for it to return to democracy.

The short-lived truce also brought out divisions between Kashmiri factions that favor armed conflict and those that are willing to negotiate. Hard-line groups seemed sidelined by the momentum for dialogue, and Hizb ul-Mujaheddin and the main secessionist political group, the All Parties Hurriyet Conference, threatened to split internally over the issue.

"One cannot quite assert that . . . it's back to square one," the Indian Express said in an editorial Thursday. "A tenuous consensus for dialogue is growing," the paper noted, adding that India should now use "deft deployment of the carrot and the stick" with Kashmiri leaders.

-------- iraq

Mr. Chavez in Baghdad

Washington Post
Sunday, August 13, 2000; Page B06
http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/2000-08/13/214l-081300-idx.html

HANDED A fresh six-year mandate in a national election last month, President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela has just been to Baghdad to see Saddam Hussein, thus becoming the first head of state to so honor the sanctions-bound Iraqi dictator since the 1991 Persian Gulf War. Venezuelan diplomats spun this as a mere "elementary courtesy" to a fellow member of OPEC, the oil cartel whose leaders Mr. Chavez wants to gather at a summit in Caracas. The visit had no "political or ideological content," says Foreign Minister Jose Vicente Rangel. But it was plainly calculated as a thumb in the eye of the United States. If not, why did Mr. Chavez, in a speech to his own people prior to the trip, trumpet the Baghdad stop with special glee: "Imagine what the pharisees will say when they see me with Saddam Hussein!" he crowed. Prior to the Baghdad trip, Mr. Chavez had also spoken admiringly of the regimes in Cuba, Mao's China and Libya.

The volatile Venezuelan president is hardly the first Latin American leader, elected or unelected, to bolster his own standing at home by sounding an anti-Yankee note, even to the point of deliberately making common cause with American enemies. And it's true that Mr. Chavez's visit to Baghdad was part of a broader itinerary that included pro-Western Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, as well as Iran. Venezuela is pursuing closer relations with these OPEC members to shore up the price of oil, its chief export and the linchpin of Mr. Chavez's economic strategy, such as it is. The United States itself has hardly shied from friendly dealings with odious regimes, most recently nuclear-armed North Korea.

Still, the standard defense of Mr. Chavez's effusions about sundry despots--that the man doesn't really mean what he says--is an odd one. Saddam Hussein is a special case--a man whose very presence in power destabilizes a critical region of the world, and who is a sworn enemy of not only the United States but of his own people. Mr. Chavez seemed almost giddy in describing how Saddam Hussein had personally driven him around Baghdad, as if he either didn't know or, worse, didn't care that his chauffeur for the evening is a certified mass murderer. The piercing of the Iraqi leader's international isolation by the Venezuelan leader can only contribute, albeit modestly, to the legitimation and hence the prolongation of Iraq's dangerous government. So far, Mr. Chavez's dalliances with the world's anti-American dictators have not translated into either an imitation of their methods in his own country, or a major rupture with the United States. But after the spectacle in Baghdad, it's harder to find fault with those who worry that they eventually might.

---

The President of Indonesia Seeks to End Iraq Sanctions

New York Times
August 13, 2000
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/asia/081300indo-iraq.html

JAKARTA, Indonesia, Aug. 12 -- Indonesia's president called today for international sanctions against Iraq to be lifted as Venezuela's president visited here after a trip to Baghdad.

President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela, who has been visiting petroleum-producing countries in advance of an OPEC meeting in Venezuela, said the United Nations sanctions against Iraq that have been in place since the war in the Persian Gulf were an injustice and were causing intense misery to that nation's children.

Mr. Chávez's visit to Iraq was the first by a head of state since the 1991 gulf war.

President Abdurrahman Wahid of Indonesia said after meeting with Mr. Chávez at the presidential palace in Jakarta that he would visit Baghdad in the coming months and wanted sanctions against Iraq terminated.

"I share President Chávez's sentiments about the Iraqi people," he said. "Because of that, Indonesia would like to see the blockade on Iraq to be lifted soon."

Unicef says the number of infant and child deaths in Iraq has doubled in the decade since the sanctions began, but it said some of the suffering is attributable to Iraq's actions, not the sanctions.

Nevertheless, criticism has been growing of the strict trade sanctions that the United Nations says will be in place until Iraq is free of weapons of mass destruction. Iraq is permitted to sell some of its oil and use the proceeds for food, medicine and other civilian needs.

On Thursday, Mr. Chávez met with President Saddam Hussein during a brief visit to Baghdad. The trip raised the ire of the United States and Britain -- the primary backers of the sanctions -- which said they were concerned about giving the Iraqi president credibility.

Mr. Chavez plans a meeting of OPEC countries on Sept. 27 in Venezuela, the first such meeting since 1975.

He said he invited Mr. Hussein to attend the meeting but that the offer was declined "for reasons that are obvious to everyone." He said Mr. Wahid had also been invited and had accepted.

Mr. Chávez is also seeking backing for maintaining the current price of oil, which he says, contrary to the United States' view, is not too high.

-------- u.s.

U.S. MILITARY CIVIL DISTURBANCE PLANNING: THE WAR AT HOME

By Frank Morales

An edited version of this article currently appears in CovertAction Quarterly, #69 Spring/Summer 2000.
From: Charles Knause <cknause@sprintmail.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 09:31:39 -0700

Under the heading of "civil disturbance planning", the U.S. military is training troops and police to suppress democratic opposition in America. The master plan, Department of Defense Civil Disturbance Plan 55-2, is code-named, "Operation Garden Plot". Originated in 1968, the "operational plan" has been updated over the last three decades, most recently in 1991, and was activated during the Los Angeles "riots" of 1992, and more than likely during the recent anti-WTO "Battle in Seattle."

Current U.S. military preparations for suppressing domestic civil disturbance, including the training of National Guard troops and police, are actually part of a long history of American "internal security" measures dating back to the first American Revolution. Generally, these measures have sought to thwart the aims of social justice movements, embodying the concept that within the civilian body politic lurks an enemy that one day the military might have to fight, or at least be ordered to fight.

Equipped with flexible "military operations in urban terrain" and "operations other than war" doctrine, lethal and "less-than-lethal" high-tech weaponry, US "armed forces" and "elite" militarized police units are being trained to eradicate "disorder", "disturbance" and "civil disobedience" in America. Further, it may very well be that police/military "civil disturbance" planning is the animating force and the overarching logic behind the incredible nationwide growth of police paramilitary units, a growth which coincidentally mirrors rising levels of police violence directed at the American people, particularly "non-white" poor and working people.

Military spokespeople, "judge advocates" (lawyers) and their congressional supporters aggressively take the position that legal obstacles to military involvement in domestic law enforcement civil disturbance operations, such as the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act, have been nullified. Legislated "exceptions" and private commercialization of various aspects of U.S. military-law enforcement efforts have supposedly removed their activities from the legal reach of the "public domain". Possibly illegal, ostensible "training" scenarios like the recent "Operation Urban Warrior" no-notice "urban terrain" war games, which took place in dozens of American cities, are thinly disguised "civil disturbance suppression" exercises. In addition, President Clinton recently appointed a "domestic military czar", a sort of national chief of police. You can bet that he is well versed in Garden Plot requirements involved in "homeland defense".

Ominously, many assume that the training of military and police forces to suppress "outlawed" behavior of citizens, along with the creation of extensive and sophisticated "emergency" social response networks set to spring into action in the event of "civil unrest", is prudent and acceptable in a democracy. And yet, does not this assumption beg the question as to what civil unrest is? One could argue for example, that civil disturbance is nothing less than democracy in action, a message to the powers-that-be that the people want change. In this instance "disturbing behavior" may actually be the exercising of ones' right to resist oppression. Unfortunately, the American corporate/military directorship, which has the power to enforce its' definition of "disorder", sees democracy as a threat and permanent counter-revolution as a "national security" requirement.

The elite military/corporate sponsors of Garden Plot have their reasons for civil disturbance contingency planning. Lets' call it the paranoia of the thief. Their rationale is simple: self-preservation. Fostering severe and targeted "austerity", massive inequality and unbridled greed, while shifting more and more billions to the generals and the rich, the de-regulated "entities of force" and their interlocking corporate directors know quite well what their policies are engendering, namely, a growing resistance. Consequently, they are systematically organizing to protect their interests, their profits, and their criminal conspiracies. To this end, they are rapidly consolidating an infrastructure of repression designed to "suppress rebellion" against their "authority". Or more conveniently put, to suppress "rebellion against the authority of the United States." And so, as the Pentagon Incorporated increases its imperialist violence around the world, the chickens have indeed come home to roost here in America in the form of a national security doctrine obsessed with domestic "insurgency" and the need to pre-emptively neutralize it. Its' code-name: "Garden Plot".

Recently, Pentagon spokesman Kenneth H. Bacon "acknowledged that the Air Force wrongfully started and financed a highly classified, still-secret project, known as a black program without informing Congress last year." The costs and nature of these projects "are the most classified secrets in the Pentagon."(1) Could it be that the current United States Air Force Civil Disturbance Plan 55-2 Garden Plot is one such program financed from this secret budget? We have a right to know. And following Seattle, we have the need to know.

As this and numerous other documents reveal, U.S. military training in civil disturbance "suppression", which targets the American public, is in full operation today. The formulation of legitimizing doctrine, the training in the "tactics and techniques" of "civil disturbance suppression", and the use of "abusable", "non-lethal" weaponry, are ongoing, financed by tax dollars. According to the Pentagon, "US forces deployed to assist federal and local authorities during times if civil disturbance will follow use-of-force policy found in Department of Defense Civil Disturbance Plan-Garden Plot." (Joint Chiefs of Staff, Standing Rules of Engagement, Appendix A, 1 October 1994.)

ORIGINS OF OPERATION GARDEN PLOT: THE KERNER COMMISSION

"Knowledge makes a man unfit to be a slave." Frederick Douglass,

Rochester, New York is the former home of Frederick Douglass's, North Star newspaper. In 1964, it erupted in one of the first large-scale urban outbursts of the decade. Precipitated by white police violence against the black community, the July uprising lasted several days, subsiding only after the arrival of 1500 National Guardsmen. In "the fall of 1964, the FBI, at the direction of President Johnson, began to make riot control training available to local police departments, and by mid-1967 such training assistance had been extended to more than 70,000 officials and civilians."(2)

On July 29, 1967, President Johnson issued Executive Order 11365, establishing the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders. It is more commonly known as the Kerner Commission, named for it s chair, former Major General, and then Governor of Illinois, Otto Kerner. The creation of the commission came hot on the heels of the violence in Detroit, a conflict which left 43 dead, several hundred wounded and over 5,000 people homeless. Johnson sent troubleshooter Cyrus Vance, later Secretary of Defense, as his personal observer to Detroit. The commission issued its final report, completed in less than a year, on March 1, 1968.

Although the Kerner Commission has over the years become associated with a somewhat benign, if not benevolent character, codifying the obvious, "we live in two increasingly separate America s" etc., the fact is that the commission itself was but one manifestation of a massive military/police counter-insurgency effort directed against US citizens, hatched in an era of emergent post-Vietnam "syndrome" coupled with elite fears of domestic insurrection.While the movement chanted for peace and revolution, rebellious, angry and destructive urban uprisings were occurring with alarming frequency, usually the result of the usual spark, police brutality, white on black crime. The so-called urban riots of 1967-1968 were the zenith, during this period, of social and class conflict. "More than 160 disorders occurred in some 128 American cities in the first nine months of 1967."(3)

The executive order establishing the commission called for an investigation of "the origins of the recent major civil disorders and the influence, if any, of organizations or individuals dedicated to the incitement or encouragement of violence."(4) The work of the commission was funded from President Johnson s "Emergency Fund." The executive order sought recommendations in three general areas: "short term measures to prevent riots, better measures to contain riots once they begin, and long term measures to eliminate riots in the future."(5) Their two immediate aims were "to control and repress black rioters using almost any available means", (6) and to assure white America that everything was in hand. Commission members included Charles B. Thorton, Chairman and CEO, Litton Industries, member of the Defense Industry Advisory Council to the DoD and the National Security Industrial Association, John L. Atwood, President and CEO, North American Rockwell Corporation ("Commission Advisor on Private Enterprise"), and Herbert Jenkins, Atlanta Chief of Police and President of the International Association of Chiefs of Police.

During the early stages of staff recruitment, commission Deputy Executive Director Victor H. Palmieri "described the process as a war strategy"(7) and so he might given the overwhelming presence within the commission and its consultants of military and police officials. One quarter of over 200 consultants listed were big-city police chiefs, like Daryl F. Gates, former chief LAPD. Numerous police organizations, including the heavily funded Law Enforcement Assistance Administration (financiers of SWAT), guided the commission s deliberations. No less than 30 police departments were represented on or before the commission by their chiefs or deputy chiefs.

A key player within the commission, "consultant" Anthony Downs, stated at the time that, "it would be far cheaper to repress future large-scale urban violence through police and military action than to pay for effective programs against remaining poverty." (8) As for the military, twelve generals, representing various branches of the armed services appeared before the commission or served as contractors. The commission s "Director of Investigations", Milan C. Miskovsky, was "on leave as assistant general counsel of the treasury, and formerly connected to the Central Intelligence Agency."(9)

The Kerner Commission s "study" of "civil disorder" lead directly to (civilian) recommendations regarding the role of the military in domestic affairs. The report dutifully "commends the Army for the advanced status of its training." Further, it states that "the Department of the Army should participate fully in efforts to develop nonlethal weapons and personal protective equipment appropriate for use in civil disorders." In addition, "the Army should investigate the possibility of utilizing psychological techniques to ventilate hostility and lessen tension in riot control, and incorporate feasible techniques in training the Army and National Guard units."

THE ARMY AND CIVIL DISORDER

Under the heading, "Army Response To Civil Disorders", the commission report states that "the commitment of federal troops to aid state and local forces in controlling a disorder is an extraordinary act An Army staff task group has recently examined and reviewed a wide range of topics relating to military operations to control urban disorders: command and control, logistics, training, planning, doctrine, personnel, public information, intelligence, and legal aspects." The results of the Army brass s study was subsequently, "made known to the National Guard and to top state and local civil and law enforcement officers in order to stimulate review at the state and local level."(10)

The Army Task Force which assisted the Kerner Commission issued its own report in early 1968. In it, the Pentagon took a multi-pronged approach to solving the civil disturbance problem. "Expanding the suggestion of Cyrus Vance, Military Intelligence working with the FBI, local, county and state police forces undertook a massive domestic intelligence gathering operation the Senior Officers Civil Disturbance Course was instituted at the Military Police Academy in Georgia Security forces ranging from Army troops to local police were trained to implement their contingency plans Contingency plans, called planning packets, were prepared for every city in the country that had a potential for student, minority or labor unrest."(11)

In addition, "the Army Task Force that had designed this program took on a new name, the Directorate of Civil Disturbance Planning and Operations. The Army Task Force transformation into the Directorate occurred during the massive rioting that broke out in black ghettos of 19 cities after the assassination of Martin Luther King in April 1968."(12) At that time "seven army infantry brigades, totaling 21,000 troops were available for riot duty. And a hugh, sophisticated computer center kept track of all public outbursts of political dissent, thereby furnishing the first of the Army Task Force s prescribed remedies: intelligence."(13)

By June of 1968, the Directorate had become the Directorate of Military Support, setting up shop in the basement of the Pentagon. "Better known as the domestic war room, the Directorate had 150 officials to carry out around-the-clock monitoring of civil disorders, as well as to oversee federal troop deployments when necessary. At the cost of $2.7 million, this massive directorate also developed policy advice for the secretary of the Army on all disturbances and maintained intelligence packets on all major U.S. cities."(14)

Even though the full extent of US military intelligence activities during this period is far from generally known, "by 1968, many Justice Department personnel knew that the military was preparing to move in massively if needed to quash urban riots, and some officials feared the development of a large national military riot force. It was well known among top officials that the Department of Defense was spending far more funds than the Justice Department on civil disorder preparations indicative of the growing trend at the federal level toward repression and control of the urban black rioters."(15)

By 1971, Senator Sam Ervin, later of Watergate reknown, had convened his Subcommittee on Constitutional Rights which "revealed that Military Intelligence had established an intricate surveillance system covering hundreds of thousands of American citizens. Committee staff members had seen a master plan - Garden Plot that gave an eagle eye view of the Army-National Guard-police strategy."(16) "At first, the Garden Plot exercises focused primarily on racial conflict. But beginning in 1970, the scenarios took a different twist. The joint teams, made up of cops, soldiers and spies, began practicing battle with large groups of protesters. California, under the leadership of Ronald Reagan, was among the most enthusiastic participants in Garden Plot war games."(17)

As time went on, "Garden Plot evolved into a series of annual training exercises based on contingency plans to undercut riots and demonstrations, ultimately developed for every major city in the United States. Participants in the exercises included key officials from all law enforcement agencies in the nation, as well as the National Guard, the military, and representatives of the intelligence community According to the plan, joint teams would react to a variety of scenarios based on information gathered through political espionage and informants. The object was to quell urban unrest "(18)

Unrest of a different sort took place on the evening of February 27th 1973. At that time, a group of Native Americans occupied a trading post in the village of Wounded Knee on the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota. By the 2nd of March the takeover had "triggered the army contingency plan for domestic disturbances. Emergency Plans White now coded as Garden Plot brought the Army into South Dakota Three army colonels, disguised as civilians, and reconnaissance planes assisted", while "the Justice Department used the army to conduct intelligence for civilian law enforcement around Wounded Knee."(19) Information on other instances in which Garden Plot was "triggered" over the intervening years is presently locked in Pentagon vaults.

In essence, the contemporary roots of militarized efforts to suppress domestic rebellion lie in the US Army s master plan, Department of Defense Civil Disturbance Plan 55-2, Garden Plot. Since at least 1968, the military has expended billions of dollars in this effort. The plan is operative right now, most recently during and after the Los Angeles uprising of 1992. A view into details of this plan is possible by way of an examination of United States Air Force Civil Disturbance Plan 55-2, Garden Plot which is the "implementing" and "supporting plan for the Department of the Army (DA) Civil Disturbance Plan - GARDEN PLOT dated 1 March 1984 (which) provides for the employment of USAF forces in civil disturbances." It is specifically drawn up "to support the Secretary of the Army, as DOD Executive Agent for civil disturbance control operations (nicknamed GARDEN PLOT), with airlift and logistical support, in assisting civil authorities in the restoration of law and order through appropriate military commanders in the 50 States, District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and US possessions and territories, or any political subdivision thereof." The plan "is effective for planning on receipt and for execution on order."(20)

U.S. AIR FORCE 55-2 - GARDEN PLOT

"The long title of the plan is United States Air Force Civil Disturbance Plan 55-2, Employment of USAF Forces in Civil Disturbances. The short title of this document is USAF Civil Disturbance Plan 55-2. The nickname assigned by Department of the Army is GARDEN PLOT." It's dated July 11, 1984.

The plan opens with some basic "assumptions", namely that "civil disturbances requiring intervention with military forces may occur simultaneously in any of the 50 States, District of Columbia, Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, US possessions and territories." And like the current situation in Vieques, Puerto Rico, "civil disturbances will normally develop over a period of time." In the event it evolves into a confrontational situation, under Garden Plot, it is a "presidential executive order" that "will authorize and direct the Secretary of Defense to use the Armed Forces of the United States to restore law and order."

According to the Air Force plan, the military will attempt "to suppress rebellion whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impractical to enforce the laws of the United States in any state or territory by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings (10 USC 332)". Applying its own version of equal protection under the law, the military can intervene "when insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combinations, or conspiracies in a state so hinder or obstruct the execution of the laws as to deprive individuals of their Constitutional rights, privileges, and immunities or when the insurrection impedes the due course of justice, and only when the constituted authorities of the state are unable, fail or refuse to protect that right, privilege, immunity, or to give that protection (10 USC 333)." In other words, the Army makes an offer of "protection" that the citizenry can t refuse.

T.Alden Williams, in a sympathetic 1969 treatment of the Army in civil disturbances, put it this way: "Where officials have not shown determination, or have invited violence by predicting it, violence has developed. Hence, it follows that with few exceptions, serious riots are evidence of police failure and that, implicitly, it is at the point of police failure that states and their cities redeem their national constitutional guarantees and the Regular Army may be asked to intervene."(21) Some redemption.

According to the Air Force plan's "Classification Guidance", the roughly 200 page document "is UNCLASSIFIED and does not come within the scope of direction governing the protection of information affecting national security. Although it is UNCLASSIFIED, it is FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY as directed by AFR 12-30. This plan contains information that is of internal use to DOD and, through disclosure, would tend to allow persons to violate the law or hinder enforcement of the law." Consequently, the plan s "operations orders and operating procedures must be designed to provide the highest degree of security possible." Therefore "the entire staff should identify known or suspected opposition awareness of previous operations and operations plans", while "procedures should be designed to eliminate the suspect sources to the degree possible." And "in the event of organized opposition some sort of advisory intelligence gathering capability should be assumed."

The Air Force document warns, under the heading of "Open Literature Threat", presaging current military discourse on "info-war", that "any information/document, though seemingly unclassified, which reveals information concerning this Plan is a threat to OPSEC (operational security)" This is especially true given the nature of the "Human Intelligence (HUMINT) Threat." Recognizing that, "prior to and during sustained military operations in Support of the Plan, the potential HUMINT threat could be considerable", the plan recommends that "every effort should be made to reduce vulnerability to this threat by adhering to OPSEC procedures and safeguarding Essential Elements of Friendly Information (EEFI)."

Under "Operations to be Conducted: Deployment", the Air Force plan states that "a civil disturbance condition (CIDCON) system which has been established to provide an orderly and timely increase in preparedness for designated forces to deploy for civil disturbances control operations, will be on an as required basis for USAF resources for such operations as aerial resupply, aerial reconnaisance, airborn psychological operations, command and control communications systems, aeromedical evacuation, helicopter and weather support." The Air Force does have some experience in this area. "In response to the US invasion of Cambodia, student unrest broke out. Under Operation Garden Plot, from 30 April through May 4, 1970, 9th Air Force airlift units transported civil disturbance control forces from Ft. Bragg to various locations throughout the eastern US."(22) In fact, two years earlier, "Air Force Reserve C-119 and C-124 units participated in Garden Plot operations set up to quell domestic strife that followed the assassination of Martin Luther King."(23)

Although the section on "Counterintelligence Targets and Requirements" is "omitted", the plan does specify its targets, namely, those "disruptive elements, extremists or dissidents perpetrating civil disorder." A "civil disturbance" is defined as a "riot, acts of violence, insurrections, unlawful obstructions or assemblages, or other disorders prejudicial to public law and order. The term civil disturbance includes all domestic conditions requiring the use of federal armed forces pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 15, Title 10, United States Code." Conditions precipitating Garden Plot activation are "those that threaten to reach or have reached such proportions that civil authorities cannot or will not maintain public order." As for legal authority, "the Constitution of the United States and numerous statutes provide the President with the authority to commit Federal military forces within the United States DOD Directive 3025.12 provides guidance in committing Federal armed forces."

FORCE STRUCTURE

The "application of forces should be in the following order: local and state police, Army and (in support role) Air National Guard under State control, Federal civil law enforcement officials, federal military forces to include Army and (in support role) Air National Guard." According to the plan, "State Adjutants General prepare civil disturbance plans for the employment of National Guard units under state control." Specifically, "as a general rule for planning purposes, the minimum forces to be supported in any single objective area is 5,000. The maximum to be supported is 12,000 for any objective area other than Washington, DC and 18,000 for Washington, DC." The "objective areas" are "those specified by the Presidential Proclamation and Executive Order in which the Secretary of Defense has been directed to restore law and order", and as "further defined by the Letter of Instruction issued to Task Force Commanders by the Chief of Staff, US Army."

In order to avoid the unseemly implications of "martial law", "requirements for the commitment of Federal military forces will not result in the declaration of a National Emergency". In this regard, the "Public Affairs Objectives" include the development of "procedures for the public release of appropriate information regarding civil disturbance control operations." Media and other queries "concerning employment of control forces may be locally answered by an interim statement that the: Department of Defense policy is not to comment on plans concerning the possible employment of military units and resources to carry out assigned missions."

Concerning "Force Requirements", the plan states that, "US Army and Marine Corps units designated for civil disturbance operations will be trained, equipped and maintained in readiness for rapid deployment, (with) ten brigades, prepared for rapid deployment anywhere in CONUS. A Quick Reaction Force (QRF) will be considered to be on a 24 hour alert status and capable of attaining a CIDCON 4 status in 12 hours " Upon receipt of orders, "the Task Force Commander assumes operational control of the military ground forces assigned for employment in the objective area", including "specials operations assets." In case the soldiers are unfamiliar with "urban terrain", the "Defense Mapping Agency Topographic Center provides map services in support of civil disturbance planning and operations."

The "Summary of the Counterintelligence and Security Situation" states that "spontaneous civil disturbances which involve large numbers of persons and/or which continue for a considerable period of time, may exceed the capacity of local civil law enforcement agencies to suppress. Although this type of activity can arise without warning as a result of sudden, unanticipated popular unrest (past riots in such cities as Miami, Detroit and Los Angeles serve as examples) it may also result from more prolonged dissidence." USAF Garden Plot advises that "if military forces are called upon to restore order, they must expect to have only limited information available regarding the perpetrators, their motives, capabilities, and intentions. On the other hand, such events which occur as part of a prolonged series of dissident acts will usually permit the advance collection of that type of information "

The United States Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC), "provides training programs and doctrine for civil disturbance operations to military services." The US Army Force Command (FORSCOM), "organizes, trains, and maintains in readiness Army forces for civil disturbance operations", while the Director of Military Support (DOMS), "conducts, on a no-notice basis, exercises which direct headquarters of uniformed services, appropriate CONUS command, and other DOD components, having GARDEN PLOT responsibilities to assume a simulated increased preparedness for specified forces." In addition, the DOMS, "maintains an around-the-clock civil disturbance command center to monitor incipient and on-going disturbances."

The document, the United States Air Force s "implementing plan" for the US Army s Civil Disturbance Plan 55-2, Garden Plot, goes on to detail every aspect of military "suppression" of "rebellion against the authority of the United States", including who pays, who bills and how to secure "loans" to cover the costs "attributable to GARDEN PLOT." Ominously, under "Resources Employed Without Presidential Directive", the document states that when the "immediate employment of military resources is required in cases of sudden and unexpected civil disturbances or other emergencies endangering life or federal property, or disrupting the normal processes of Government, expenses incurred will be financed as a mission responsibility of the DOD component employing the military resources."

PENTAGON DIRECTIVES

Department of Defense Directive 3025.12, Military Assistance for Civil Disturbances (MACDIS) became effective on February 4, 1994 when signed by then Defense Secretary William Perry. It states that, "the President is authorized by the Constitution and laws of the United States to suppress insurrections, rebellions, and domestic violence under various conditions and circumstances. Planning and preparedness by the Federal Government and the Department of Defense for civil disturbances are important, do to the potential severity of the consequences of such events for the Nation and the population." Further, "the Secretary of the Army, as DoD Executive Agent, shall provide guidance to the other DoD Components, through DoD 3025.12-R, the DoD Civil Disturbance Plan (GARDEN PLOT), or both, in accordance with this Directive".

DoDD 3025.12 makes it clear that "MACDIS operations are unprogrammed emergency requirements for the Department of Defense", and that in order to "ensure essential control and sound management of all military forces employed in MACDIS operations, centralized direction from the DoD Executive Agent (the Army) shall guide planning by the DoD component." Thus, "MACDIS missions shall be decentralized through the DoD Planning Agents or other Joint Task Force Commanders only when specifically directed by the DoD Executive Agent."

According to the directive, the "Army and Air National Guard forces have primary responsibility for providing military assistance to state and local governments in civil disturbances." Accordingly, "the Army National Guard State Area Commands (STARCs) shall plan for contingency use of non-Federalized National Guard forces for civil disturbance operations." The directive further outlines policy, guidelines, and legal justification for "military assistance for civil disturbances", including policy regarding domestic law enforcement, designating the Army as "the principle point of contact between the Department of Defense (DoD) and the Department of Justice (DoJ) for planning and executing MACDIS." (24)

The militarization of domestic "law enforcement" is founded, in part, upon Department of Defense Directive 5525.5, DoD Cooperation with Civilian Law Enforcement Officials, dated January 15, 1986, five years after Congressional "drug warriors" passed the Military Cooperation with Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies Act. Referencing the 1971 version of DODD 3025.12 (above), the directive states that, "it is DoD policy to cooperate with civilian law enforcement officials to the extent practical consistent with the needs of national security and military preparedness." In addition, "the Military Departments and Defense Agencies may provide training to Federal, State, and local civilian law enforcement officials."

Apparently, military Judge Advocates (lawyers) have no problem with the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act, (18 U.S.C.1385) which states that: "Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than two years or both." Nor is there much concern shown for "the historic tradition of limiting direct military involvement in civilian law enforcement activities." For even though the Act is cited within the directive as "the primary restriction on military participation in civilian law enforcement activities", it is rendered null and void in deference to "actions that are taken for the primary purpose of furthering a military or foreign affairs function." In fact, "under guidance established by the Secretaries of the Military Departments and the Directors of the Defense Agencies concerned, the planning and execution of compatible military training and operations may take into account the needs of civilian law enforcement officials for information when the collection of the information is an incidental aspect of training performed for a military purpose." (25)

ARMY FIELD MANUAL

United States Army Field Manual 19-15, Civil Disturbances, dated November 1985, is designed to provide hands-on "guidance for the commander and his staff in preparing for and providing assistance to civil authorities in civil disturbance control operations." The Army manual opens by noting that, "the DA Civil Disturbance Plan, known as Garden Plot, provides guidance to all DOD components in planning civil disturbance missions." Its' thirteen chapters cover, in depth, every aspect of military "tasks and techniques employed to control civil disturbances and neutralize special threats." Subjects include the nature of civil disturbances, participants ("the crowd"), federal intervention, information planning ("intelligence"), control force operations, crowd control operations, threat analysis ("criminal activists"), about which "law enforcement sources can provide useful information", riot control agents, extreme force options, apprehension, detention, and training.

According to the Army manual, "civil disturbances in any form are prejudicial to public law and order." They "arise from acts of civil disobedience", and "occur most often when participants in mass acts of civil disobedience become antagonistic toward authority, and authorities must struggle to wrest the initiative from an unruly crowd." They are caused by "political grievances" and "urban economic conflicts", or maybe even by "agents of foreign nations", but mostly, "urban conflicts and community unrest arise from highly emotional social and economic issues." And in a statement that resonates with the "benign neglect" of some years ago, the manual points out that disturbances may arise because "economically deprived inner-city residents may perceive themselves treated unjustly or ignored by the people in power."

Utilizing Garden Plot language, the manual states that "the president can employ armed federal troops to suppress insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful assemblies, and conspiracy if such acts deprive the people of their constitutional rights and a state s civil authorities cannot or will not provide adequate protection." Never mind the Congress or Constitution, "federal intervention in civil disturbances begins with the issuance of a presidential proclamation to the citizens engaged in the disturbance." In other words, the President reads "the riot act" and "a control force" is sent in to "isolate the disturbance area." The goal is to "isolate the people creating the disturbance from those who have not yet become actively involved."

According to FM 19-15, the Army can gather intelligence on civilians if their "activities can be linked directly to a distinct threat of a civil disturbance that may involve federal forces." This is especially important, given that "during civil disturbances many people engage in unlawful behavior." Therefore, "when at all possible, civil law enforcement agents are integrated with the military control force team making apprehensions", and "if police are not available, military personnel may search people incident to an apprehension." Useful measures for "isolating an area include barriers, patrols, pass and ID systems, and control of public utilities." Also, "imposing a curfew is a highly effective control measure in many civil disturbances." Army "saturation patrols", "integrated with civil police patrols", blanket the area, creating "the psychological impression of the control force being everywhere at once."

The Army field manual points out that when "control forces" resort to "forceful measures" they can turn to a host of weaponry, including "the M234, which is a nondeadly force measure, to the machine gun, which is the most deadly force measure." The manual states that "machine guns, 7.62 millimeter and below, may accompany units on civil disturbance missions." In addition, the "control forces" can utilize the M234 launcher, which is "a riot control weapon" mounted on an M16 rifle which "fires a projectile that causes pain on impact." In addition, "the riot shotgun is an extremely versatile weapon. Its appearance and capability have a strong psychological effect on rioters."

MARTIAL RULE

The concept of martial rule, as distinct from martial law, is not written, and therefore is an eminently more workable arrangement for "law enforcement forces". That s because, as FM 19-15 points out, "martial rule is based on public necessity. Public necessity in this sense means public safety." According to the manual, U.S. state authorities "may take such action within their own jurisdictions." And yet, "whether or not martial rule has been proclaimed, commanders must weigh each proposed action against the threat to public order and safety. If the need for martial rule arises, the military commander at the scene must so inform the Army Chief of Staff and await instructions. If martial rule is imposed, the civilian population must be informed of the restrictions and rules of conduct that the military can enforce." Realizing the power of free speech, the manual suggests that "during a civil disturbance, it may be advisable to prevent people from assembling. Civil law can make it unlawful for people to meet to plan an act of violence, rioting, or civil disturbance. Prohibitions on assembly may forbid gatherings at any place and time." And don t forget, "making hostile or inflammatory speeches advocating the overthrow of the lawful government and threats against public officials, if it endangered public safety, could violate such law."

During civil disturbance operations, "authorities must be prepared to detain large numbers of people", forcing them into existing, though expanded "detention facilities." Cautioning that "if there are more detainees than civil detention facilities can handle, civil authorities may ask the control forces to set up and operate temporary facilities." Pending the approval of the Army Chief of Staff, the military can detain and jail citizens en masse. "The temporary facilities are set up on the nearest military installation or on suitable property under federal control." These "temporary facilities" are "supervised and controlled by MP officers and NCOs trained and experienced in Army correctional operations. Guards and support personnel under direct supervision and control of MP officers and NCOs need not be trained or experienced in Army correctional operations. But they must be specifically instructed and closely supervised in the proper use of force."

According to the Army, the detention facilities are situated near to the "disturbance area", but far enough away "not to be endangered by riotous acts." Given the large numbers of potential detainees, the logistics (holding, searching, processing areas) of such an undertaking, new construction of such facilities "may be needed to provide the segregation for ensuring effective control and administration." It must be designed and "organized for a smooth flow of traffic", while a medical "treatment area" would be utilized as a "separate holding area for injured detainees." After a "detainee is logged in and searched", "a file is initiated", and a "case number" identifies the prisoner. In addition, "facility personnel also may use hospital ID tags. Using indelible ink, they write the case number and attach the tag to the detainees wrist. Different colors may be used to identify different offender classifications " Finally, if and when it should occur, "release procedures must be coordinated with civil authorities and appropriate legal counsel." If the "detainee" should produce a writ of habeas corpus issued by a state court, thereby demanding ones day in court, the Army will "respectfully reply that the prisoner is being held by authority of the United States."

Training under FM 19-15/Garden Plot must be "continuous" and must "develop personnel who are able to perform distasteful and dangerous duties with discipline and objectivity." Dangerous to the local citizenry given that "every member of the control force must be trained to use his weapon and special equipment (including) riot batons, riot control agent dispersers and CS grenades, grenade launchers, shotguns, sniper rifles, cameras, portable videotape recorders, portable public address systems, night illumination devices, firefighting apparatus, grappling hooks, ladders, ropes, bulldozers, Army aircraft, armored personnel carriers, and roadblock and barricade materials." Sounding a lot like recent Urban Warrior war-games, the manual makes note that although unit training must address "the sensitivity and high visibility of civil disturbance operations", the "unit training must be realistic." In this regard, "the unit commander should try to include local government officials in field training exercises. The officials can be either witnesses or participants. But care must be taken to prevent adverse psychological effects on the local populace, especially if tension is high."(26)

Sources:

1.New York Times, "Pentagon Misused Millions in Funds, House Panel Says", July 22, 1999, pg. A-1. See also, on the subject of "unacknowledged Special Access Programs" wherein "the USAF's $7.4 billion budget for classified procurement is more than a third of the service's total budget", Bill Sweetman, "In search of the Pentagon's billion dollar hidden budgets - how the US keeps its R&D spending under wraps", International Defense Review, Jane's Defense Weekly, January 2000 www.janes.com/defence/editors/pentagon.html

2.James W. Button, Black Violence, The Political Impact of the 1960 s Riots, Princeton University Press, 1078, pg. 116.

3.Button, pg.121. Also, see, Cyrus R.Vance, Final Report of Cyrus R.Vance, Special Assistant to the Secretary of Defense, Concerning the Detroit Riots, July 23 Through August 2, 1967.

4.Michael Lipsky and David J. Olson, Commission Politics: The Processing of Racial Crisis in America, Transaction Books, 1971, pg. 161. The Executive Order is reprinted in US Riot Commission Report, Bantam Books, 1968, pgs. 534-535.

5.Lipsky and Olson, pg. 163, citing pg. 198 of a transcription of Lyndon B. Johnson, "Statement by the President", July 29, 1967.

6.Button, pg. 107.

7.Lipsky and Olson, pg. 165.

8.Anthony Downs, Opening Up the Suburbs: An Urban Strategy for America, Yale University Press, 1973, pg. 176. Downs, a leading "housing expert", believed that the key to effective urban based counter-insurgency was the notion of "spatial deconcentration", or the "adequate outmigration of the poor" from the cities. Downs wrote Chapters 16 and 17 of the Kerner Report which deal with "housing". He is the leading exponent of "deliberate dispersal policies" designed to "disperse the urban poor more effectively". The origins of "homelessness" (state repression) lie here.

9.Lipsky and Olson, pg. 168.

10.Report of the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, Washington, DC, March 1, 1968, pgs. 279-281.

11.Ron Ridenhour and Arthur Lubow, "Bringing the War Home", New Times Magazine, 1975, pg. 20.

12.Ridenhour and Lubow, pg. 20.

13.Ridenhour and Lubow, pg. 20.

14.Button, pg. 133.

15.Button, pg. 133.

16.Ridenhour and Lubow, pg. 18.

17.Donald Goldberg and Indy Badhwar, "Blueprint for Tyranny", Penthouse Magazine, August 1985, pg.72.

18.Goldberg and Badhwar, pg.72.

19.Joan M. Jensen, Army Surveillance in America, 1775-1980, Yale University Press, 1991, pgs. 257-258. This excellent historical account actually does what it says, tracing American "internal security measures" right back to the "founders".

20.United States Air Force Civil Disturbance Plan 55-2, Garden Plot, Headquarters, United States Air Force, June 1, 1984. (roughly 200 pages, not paginated)

21.T. Alden Williams, "The Army in Civil Disturbance: A Profound Dilemma?", pg. 161, in ed. Robin Higham, Bayonets in the Streets, University of Kansas Press, 1969.

22.Federation of American Scientists, Military Analysis Network, "Garden Plot", Nov. 1998.

23.US Air Force News Service, Kelly Air Force Base, Texas, "Air Force 50th Anniversary: April History", March 25, 1997, pg. 2. In fact, Garden Plot may have been operative prior and during the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. William F. Pepper, attorney for the late James Earl Ray, as well as the King family in their current attempts to get to the bottom of the murder, claims (Orders To Kill, Carroll and Graf Publishers, 1995, pg. 424) that the orders to kill King, which were delivered to special forces operatives in Memphis were tied to Garden Plot. Pepper states that the orders to kill King "appeared to come from the office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and were issued under the umbrella of the anti-black terrorist operation Garden Plot which was a part of the overall U.S. Command antiriot operation CINCSTRIKE which was activated with the outbreak of any major riot."

24.Department of Defense Directive 3025.12, Military Assistance for Civil Disturbances (MACDIS), February 4, 1994. Note: DoDD 3025.12 is one quarter of 4 correlated directives that deal with civil disturbance. The others include DoDD 3025.1, Military Support to Civil Authorities (Jan. 93), DoDD 3025.15, Military Assistance for Civil Authorities (Feb.97), and DoDD 3025.1-M, Manual for Civil Emergencies (June 94).

25.Department of Defense Directive 5525.5, DoD Cooperation With Civilian Law Enforcement Officials, January 15, 1986.

26.United States Army Field Manual 19-15, Civil Disturbances, Headquarters, Department of the Army, Washington, DC, November 25, 1985.

----

Bush Focuses on Military

New York Times
August 13, 2000
http://www.nytimes.com/library/politics/camp/081300wh-bush.html

SEATTLE, Aug. 12 -- Having campaigned with Senator John McCain of Arizona to appeal to swing voters, Gov. George W. Bush enlisted him yesterday to try to reach out to veterans and other Americans concerned about the country's military might.

At a rally at the Water's Edge in Everett, Wash., Mr. Bush, the governor of Texas, reiterated his pledge to spend more on the armed services. "I wish I could turn to the soldiers on that ship," Mr. Bush said, erroneously referring to the sailors on an aircraft carrier in the backdrop, "and I wish they could hear me: stay in the military, there's a new commander in chief coming."

Mr. McCain, a former Navy fighter pilot and prisoner of war in Vietnam, vouched for Mr. Bush's credentials on the issue. "I have total and complete confidence in a man whose father served this nation honorably, who served honorably in our National Guard," Mr. McCain said, alluding to Mr. Bush's Vietnam years, which were also spent as a fighter pilot, albeit in Texas.

Then Mr. McCain, who often jokes that being shot down in Vietnam threw doubt on his aerial prowess, added, ambiguously, "He wasn't a much better pilot than I was, frankly."

-------- OTHER
-------- environment

ON THE TRAIL
Gore, Invoking Spirit of 'Silent Spring' Author, Talks of Defending Environment

New York Times
August 13. 2000
By DAVID BARSTOW
http://www.nytimes.com/library/politics/camp/081300wh-dems.html

SPRINGDALE, Pa., Aug. 12 -- If there is an issue in which Vice President Al Gore feels he has a decided edge over Gov. George W. Bush, it is the environment.

Mr. Gore has written a best-seller on the subject; he has the endorsements of the major environmental groups and, as he loves to note, Mr. Bush presides over a state that consistently ranks at or near the bottom for air and water quality.

Today, with some polls showing him gaining ground on Mr. Bush, Mr. Gore stood on a ridge overlooking the Allegheny River and claimed spiritual kinship with the late Rachel Carson, who in 1962 wrote "Silent Spring," widely regarded as a founding document in the environmental movement.

Ms. Carson was born here, an Allegheny Valley town 12 miles northeast of Pittsburgh, and Mr. Gore came here intent on drawing parallels between her life's work and his own passion for the environment. Like Ms. Carson, he said, he spent time in his youth wandering his family's farm in Carthage, Tenn., "looking for critters" and learning to love nature.

He recalled how, when he was a teenager, his mother bought a copy of "Silent Spring" and then spent the next few weeks over breakfast discussing with Mr. Gore and his sister, Nancy, the book's warning against pesticides and other chemicals.

Where Ms. Carson had started studying the environment as a teenager, publishing her first article at age 14, Mr. Gore recalled studying at Harvard University under Professor Roger Revelle, a pioneer in researching the atmospheric effects of carbon dioxide.

"A long time ago," Mr. Gore told several hundred people gathered on the lawn of Springdale High School, "I joined with the spirit of Rachel Carson in committing myself to a new springtime filled with the sounds of wild birds, with the sounds of children learning about and appreciating the environment."

Ms. Carson's work, which first drew attention to the dangers of DDT, has been criticized by chemical manufacturers and some scientists. She has been accused of overstating the case against pesticides, of abandoning objectivity for bitter polemics.

But her main findings about the dangers of pesticides and insecticides to the environment continue to have broad acceptance, and Mr. Gore again drew a parallel with his own 1992 book that warned against the dangers of global warning.

"When she published 'Silent Spring,' she was the target of a very well-orchestrated, well-financed attack from special interests that were profiting from pollution," he said. He mocked industry advertisements showing children walking through clouds of pesticides to demonstrate their harmlessness, and likewise, he said, he had been the target of similar corporate "propaganda"

"When I published 'Earth in the Balance,' " he said, "I became the subject of a lot of attacks, and I want you to know I wear those attacks as a badge of honor."

Although much of Mr. Gore's performance here today amounted to a routine stump speech on a favorite subject, it also demonstrated something about his overall campaign strategy. Mr. Gore, several of his aides said, is determined to blend the rhetoric of environmental awareness with his larger populist theme of "fighting for the people" and taking on big business.

It is a strategy aimed chiefly at Mr. Bush, whom the Gore campaign has accused of being a captive of big oil. "Follow the smoke to the campaign contributions," said Chris Lehane, Mr. Gore's campaign press secretary.

But the strategy is also aimed at Ralph Nader, the consumer advocate and Green Party candidate who, according to some polls, has been eating into Mr. Gore's voter base with appeals to environmental advocates and union members, particularly in the Midwest.


-------- activists

From arrests to acclaim --
How Ploughshares became the nation's favourite nuclear saboteurs

By Stephen Naysmith
Sunday Herald - Issue 80,
Aug. 13, 2000
http://www.sundayherald.com/news/newsi.hts?section=News&story_id=10540

For two weeks, a campsite full of retired teachers, ministers, housewives, monks and nuns has been causing havoc on the banks of the Clyde.

The Trident Ploughshares camp, near the Royal Navy's armaments depot at Coulport, allows anti-nuclear campaigners to launch assaults, almost at will, on both the Coulport depot and the Clyde Submarine base at Faslane - both cornerstones of Britain's Trident nuclear weapons system.

So far, activists have been subject to 149 arrests, with some clocking up four, five or six each, for attempting to obstruct access to the two facilities, cutting through fences or swimming up the loch in an effort to reach the submarines themselves.

But the hostile reception the campaigners have received from police stands in stark contrast to increasing official and unofficial acceptance. Their code of non-violence and complete openness about their activities, as well as a ban on drink and drugs, has helped win the group support, not only from celebrities such as author AL Kennedy, but also from West Dunbartonshire and Glasgow City Council.

At the end of July, a group of Trident Ploughshares peace walkers, including Japanese monks and nuns from Milton Keynes, passed through Clydebank on their way to the camp, having hiked from the Ministry of Defence's Aldermaston base at Reading, in Berkshire. The group was welcomed by West Dunbartonshire's Lord Provost Alistair MacDonald, and presented with a silver quaich.

Yet within days, after the opening day blockade of Faslane, the group had suffered its first 83 arrests. Those taken to the cells included all but one of the monks. Then, just a day later, the peace walkers were again being officially feted, this time at Glasgow's City Chambers, where deputy provost Jean Macey laid on food and tea for the activists, many of whom had only just been released.

At the same time, Trident Ploughshares' efforts are still sending shockwaves through the Scottish legal establishment after last October's ruling by Greenock Sheriff Court, which appeared to suggest that the Trident nuclear weapons system was illegal under international law. Sheriff Margaret Gimblett's decision to acquit three female campaigners of all charges after they dismantled (Plough shares prefer the term 'disarmed') much of a submarine research station aboard a tethered barge in Loch Goil in June last year will be subject to a Lord Advocate's reference in October. This will determine whether the verdict was valid.

Whatever the outcome, the group - which has no leaders and takes its name from the biblical injunction to "beat swords into ploughshares and spears into pruning hooks" - seems to have revived Britain's moribund nuclear disarmament movement.

Marcus Armstrong, from Milton Keynes, thinks he knows why the campaign is winning new converts. He is one of them. A community activist who works part time for a variety of causes in Milton Keynes, he was at first wary of getting involved in the campaign's deliberate law-breaking. But over the last fortnight, Armstrong has been arrested six times, twice for attempting to swim to a Trident submarine and sabotage it.

Armstrong, who is a counsellor for the charity Childline, works in a hospice and also works night shifts in a YMCA homeless shelter, says his commitment to Trident Ploughshares' goals has grown steadily. "As I learned more, I grew more confident in the organisation," he says. "It is well- organised and supportive. The non-violence pledge and the ban on alcohol and drugs were essential - it was important for me that the organisation was something with that sort of public image."

Unlike, for example, the anti-capitalism protests in London in June, Trident Ploughshares members have always been disciplined since their first actions in May 1998. This is almost certainly one reason for the unusual level of tolerance they appear to command. This was illustrated once more during Armstrong's third, unsuccessful swimming attempt to a Trident sub. MoD police had to help him out of the water because he was tired and gave him a lift back to shore.

Because he has been so persistent, Armstrong now faces being held on remand if he is arrested again. "I'm not planning to pay any fines I receive, so I expect to serve a few weeks each year for non-payment. I accept that, but I don't want to spend a long time on remand," he says. "Most of us treat this as our summer holidays."

Unlike some protest groups, Ploughshares are hard to stereotype. Many are at Coulport out of a religious commitment. Last week, Alan Wilkie, a retired company director and Church of Scotland elder, was among a group who staged a light- hearted "Harry Potter" protest at the depot's gates. "We are here to overcome the latest manifestation of the dark arts," he told his fellow campaigners. Condemning MoD workers as "muggles" and Trident submarines as "unclear weapons", he added: "They can't distinguish between soldiers and civilians, friends and the enemy. They can't tell the difference between wizards and muggles."

Although the stunt was deliberately daft, the point was fundamental to the legal argument the group's activists have used hundreds of times in tiny district courts in Helensburgh and Dumbarton. They claim nuclear weapons are illegal under international laws which state that weapons cannot be used if they don't distinguish between military and civilian targets and personnel. Wilkie said the Lord Advocate's Reference at the High Court in Edinburgh in October was keenly anticipated not just by group members, but by legal experts around the world. "This is the highest court in the country actually addressing the principles of the international court of justice. People from all over the world are interested to see how the Scottish justice system deals with it."

David Mackenzie, Ploughshares spokesman, said the courts were groaning under the strain of dealing with hundreds of minor offences over the past fortnight. "It has been an enormously encouraging two weeks. We are developing all the time in confidence and skills. We're also seeing a shift in the responses we are getting. Even the police are increasingly sympathetic. "Whatever the outcome of the Lord Advocate's Review, we will go on."

----

Los Angeles Protest Noisy But Peaceful

Yahoo News
Sunday August 13 9:17 PM ET
By Christopher Noxon
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20000813/ts/campaign_protests_dc_11.html

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - About 4,000 people marched noisily but peacefully through Los Angeles on Sunday, the eve of the Democratic National Convention, demanding a new trial for former Black Panther activist Mumia Abu-Jamal.

Officers on motorcycles escorted demonstrators on their mile-long route from the downtown area to the heavily fortified Staples Center convention site along streets lined by police guarding boarded-up stores, banks and business offices.

Police in riot gear stood on side streets to discourage protesters from straying off the approved route and helicopters monitored the marchers, who waved giant papier mache puppets of a pig and of Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore (news - web sites) and Republican nominee George W. Bush (news - web sites).

A small group of black-masked youths shouted taunts and obscenities at police, burned a U.S. flag and tried to rush a security fence barring access to the Staples Center. A bemused group of delegates and reporters watched but no arrests, injuries or serious incidents were reported.

The rally was the first of some 20 demonstrations planned for the week that have put police on full alert.

Abu-Jamal, who is on death row in Pennsylvania for the 1981 murder of a Philadelphia police officer, has become a cause celebre of death penalty opponents worldwide.

The rhetoric was stridently anti-establishment and the rally attracted groups ranging from gay rights to animal rights activists, as well as socialist workers and labor unions shouting ``Free Mumia.''

Addressing the crowd between African drummers and a Latino rap band, civil rights leader Jesse Jackson said, ``There are more police here than people. They should go catch the criminals and set the people free.''

Actor-activist Ed Asner said Abu-Jamal's case was ``as important as any in the history of this country.

``Until Mumia is granted a new trial, we will watch the Al Gores and George Bushes of the world as they march the retarded, the young and the innocent to their death,'' Asner told the rally.

Police spokesman John Pasquariello said the day had passed ''exactly as we hope the rest of the week will remain.''

Los Angeles police, mindful of the 1992 riots that followed the acquittal of four white officers for beating black motorist Rodney King and currently embroiled in a major police corruption scandal, are as anxious as the Democratic Party for the convention to go well.

Neither police nor protest organizers will say how many people are expected to descend on Los Angeles for a week of protests against a range of issues, from corporate globalization to forest logging and immigration.

Police say they believe the majority of protesters will be peaceful but have made clear they will clamp down hard on troublemakers.

They have declined to rule out using tear gas or pepper spray and activists on Sunday held teach-ins at their headquarters on how to treat any chemical attacks and how to quickly find lawyers.

In the beach and tourist city of Santa Monica, wire security fences were being readied on the pedestrian shopping and restaurant promenade where so-called ``Gaptivists'' plan evening demonstrations on Sunday outside Gap clothing stores against sweatshop labor.

A beach party near Santa Monica pier was planned in competition with a corporate-funded party for Democrat delegates and supporters taking place nearby.

---

Wary L.A. Police Escort Hundreds at First Rally

Yahoo News
Sunday August 13 6:20 PM ET
By Jill Serjeant
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20000813/ts/campaign_protests_dc_10.html

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Under the wary eyes of hundreds of police, some 2,000 people marched through Los Angeles on Sunday, the eve of the Democratic National Convention, demanding a new trial for former Black Panther and convicted murderer Mumia Abu-Jamal.

Protesters ranging from gay rights to animal rights activists joined a march toward the heavily fortified Staples Center where Democrats are gathering, along downtown streets lined by police guarding stores, banks and business offices.

Police in riot gear stood on side streets to discourage protesters from straying and two helicopters monitored the marchers, who waved giant papier mache puppets of Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore (news - web sites), Republican nominee George W. Bush (news - web sites), and a pig.

The rally was the first of some 20 demonstrations planned for the week, prompting a vast police presence on city streets, and many stores and banks to board up their windows.

All 9,000 Los Angeles police are working 12-hour shifts and some have been assigned to ride the city's buses to ensure that the protests do not get out of hand.

Organizers said the heat -- temperatures neared 90 degrees Fahrenheit (32.2 Celsius) on Sunday -- may have kept some people away from the Abu-Jamal rally. He is on death row in Pennsylvania for the 1981 murder of a Philadelphia police officer and has become a cause celebre of death penalty opponents worldwide.

``If we get 2,000 to 3,000 people, I would consider that a victory,'' said John Imani of the LA Black Radical Congress. ''We have planned a peaceful demonstration. If anyone gets out of line they will be doing it on their own.''

Actor-activist Ed Asner told the rally that Abu-Jamal's case was ``as important as any in the history of this country.

``Until Mumia is granted a new trial, we will watch the Al Gores and George Bushes of the world as they march the retarded, the young and the innocent to their death,'' he said.

Police Vow To Clamp Down

Neither police nor protest organizers will say how many people are expected to descend on Los Angeles for a week of protests against a range of issues, from corporate globalization to forest logging and immigration.

Police say they believe the majority of protesters will be peaceful but have made clear they will clamp down hard on troublemakers.

They have declined to rule out using tear gas or pepper spray and community activists on Sunday pasted scores of bright orange notices on lampposts downtown with advice on how to treat any chemical attacks.

Los Angeles police, mindful of the 1992 riots that followed the acquittal of four white officers for beating black motorist Rodney King and currently embroiled in a major police corruption scandal, are as anxious as the Democratic Party for the convention to go well.

Saturday saw hundreds of police on street corners and on hotel rooftops but only a smattering of protests.

In the beach and tourist city of Santa Monica, wire security fences were being readied on the pedestrian shopping and restaurant promenade where so-called ``Gaptivists'' plan evening demonstrations on Sunday outside Gap clothing stores against sweatshop labor.

A large Adidas store in Santa Monica had its windows boarded up. Gap and Nike stores in Beverly Hills were also being targeted. Activists planned an alternative beach party near Santa Monica pier on Sunday evening in competition with a corporate-funded party for Democrat delegates and supporters taking place nearby.

---

L.A. Police Step Up Security for First Protests

Yahoo News
Sunday August 13 2:51 PM ET
By Jill Serjeant
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20000813/ts/campaign_protests_dc_9.html

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Police braced for the first big protests at the Democratic National Convention on Sunday, stepping up already tight security on city streets, buses and outside stores at the start of their most testing week since savage urban riots in 1992.

All 9,000 Los Angeles police were put on 12-hour shifts, uniformed and plainclothes officers were assigned to ride the city's buses and long queues formed outside the Staples Center convention site as delegates and journalists passed through stringent security checks.

Thousands of people were expected to converge on a downtown square for an afternoon rally calling for a new trial for Black Panther activist Mumia Abu-Jamal, who is on death row for the 1981 shooting of a Philadelphia police officer.

Organizers said the rally, to be followed by a march to the Staples Center, would be the biggest yet in Los Angeles in support of Abu-Jamal who has become a cause celebre of death penalty opponents worldwide. Speakers will include actor Edward Asner and Democratic Rep. Maxine Waters, a leader of Los Angeles's African American community.

A bank and several jewelry stores in the downtown jewelry district boarded up their windows or shut down for fear the protest might get out of control.

First Indication Of Strength

Sunday's march will give the first indications of the strength of the protests and of police tactics in handling them. Neither police nor protest organizers have estimated how many people are expected to descend on Los Angeles for some 20 major marches and rallies during convention week.

Police say they believe the majority of protesters will be peaceful but have made clear they will clamp down hard on troublemakers.

They have declined to rule out using tear gas or pepper spray and community activists on Sunday pasted scores of bright orange notices on lampposts downtown with advice on how to treat any chemical attacks.

Los Angeles police, mindful of the 1992 riots that followed the acquittal of four white officers for beating black motorist Rodney King and currently embroiled in a major police corruption scandal, are as anxious as the Democratic Party for the convention to go well.

Saturday saw hundreds of police on street corners and on hotel rooftops but only a smattering of small protests.

In the beach and tourist city of Santa Monica, wire security fences were being readied on the pedestrian shopping and restaurant promenade where so-called ``Gaptivists'' plan evening demonstrations on Sunday against sweatshop labor outside Gap fashion stores.

A large Adidas store in Santa Monica had its windows boarded up. Gap and Nike stores in Beverly Hills were also being targeted. Activists planned an alternative beach party near Santa Monica pier on Sunday evening in competition with a corporate-funded party for Democrat delegates and supporters taking place nearby.

---

THE SCENE
Police and Protesters Ready; Politicians Hope for the Best

New York Times
August 13, 2000
By TODD S. PURDUM
http://www.nytimes.com/library/politics/camp/081300dem-convene.html

LOS ANGELES, Aug. 12 -- The police say they are ready. They've chopped down trees that could be set on fire, uprooted newspaper racks that could be used as battering rams and fenced off a good-size patch of downtown Los Angeles with tall, silver swaths of chain-link in an effort to keep any protests at the Democratic National Convention from getting out of hand.

The demonstrators say they are ready, too. They're building puppets to protest corporate greed, practicing passive resistance and media techniques, sharing organizing tips over the Internet and warily watching the police cars that circle their "convergence center" near MacArthur Park. They pledge, as one of their Web sites puts it, to "celebrate and renew our resistance to corporate globalization, militarism, poverty, starvation, campaign finance corruption, sexism, racism, homo/trans-phobia, criminalization of youth, environmental destruction, prison industrial complex, genocide," and that's just for starters.

The politicians? They're nervous, but hoping for the best: hoping that protests stay peaceful, that freeways stay open, that the Police Department that made "Just the facts, ma'am" famous keeps it cool.

"We have been assured by all the law enforcement entities that everything's in hand, and that they're prepared for all contingencies and that everything's going to work out fine," said Terry McAuliffe, the chairman of the Democratic National Convention Committee and the overall organizer.

"We're going to peacefully coexist with the demonstrators. They have every right to be heard and we have every right to be heard."

That does not mean there hasn't been wrangling, or that there won't be more. On Friday afternoon, a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order barring the city and the Los Angeles Police Department from seizing any puppets or written materials from the headquarters of an umbrella protest group, as the authorities did in Philadelphia. In addition, the judge, Dean Pregerson of United States District Court, barred officials from entering the demonstrators' offices on the basis of purported administrative and building code violations.

"It sends a loud and clear message that the Constitution will not be suspended while the convention is in town," said Dan Tokaji, a lawyer for the local chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, which had earlier successfully sued the city to force creation of a designated protest site in clear view and hearing of the delegates entering the Staples Center, where the convention will be held. The city's initial plan was to fence off protesters in a parking lot well across the street and out of direct view. "We believe this order will be more than adequate to protector protesters' speech rights," Mr. Tokaji said.

At the same time, Mr. Tokaji said: "We remain very fearful. This department has a long history of violating people's civil rights, and we're very concerned about the us vs. them mentality that the L.A.P.D. brass has adopted. We believe that's actually harmful to the cooperation that will be necessary for things to go smoothly."

In fact, Los Angeles does not have a public culture of robust political activism or a tradition of large street demonstrations, and the department here is seldom called on to handle the kinds of raucous gatherings that are par for the course in New York, for example. The videotaped image of Los Angeles officers beating the black motorist Rodney King remains indelible, and nearly a decade after the adoption of measures intended to improve police training and discipline, the city is facing the threat of a federal civil rights lawsuit from the Justice Department, which alleges a pattern of widespread police misconduct.

But top officials here insist that the police are prepared for a firm but measured response, one that could very well involve a variety of nonlethal weapons from teargas to rubber bullets, pepper spray or paint-ball guns.

"You're going to see the most professional police enforcement ever," Mayor Richard J. Riordan said in an interview this week. "It's not just the L.A.P.D. It's also the F.B.I., the Secret Service, the county sheriffs, the highway patrol. Everybody's working well together."

Elise Hogue, a spokeswoman for the umbrella protest groups, D2KLA and DAN (which stands for Direct Action Network), said that it was difficult to estimate how many protesters, from a disparate range of loosely connected groups, might actually converge on the city. But she said the estimate of 50,000 offered by some city officials in the past was wildly overstated.

"We're going for somewhere between 5,000 and 10,000," she said.

"We're cautiously optimistic," Ms. Hogue added in an interview from the group's base near downtown. "Everything is going as planned. We're making some beautiful puppets and hoping they survive. But you can't really walk outside our door without seeing a policeman or an individual patrol vehicle cruising around."

The police planning has been under way for more than a year, and one of its principal goals has been to foster better cooperation than in some past crises, like the 1992 riots that followed the acquittal of the officers in the King beating. In that violence, interagency cooperation faltered, but now officials say there are clear plans. Sheriffs' deputies, for example, will be on hand to process demonstrators if mass arrests are necessary, leaving patrol officers available to stay on the streets, while highway patrol officers will provide security on delegates' buses.

City and Democratic officials acknowledge that their biggest concern is not the area around the Staples Center itself, which is compact and can be sealed off, but the possibility that a relative handful of demonstrators could create disruptions in widely spread out areas of this widely spread out city and seriously disrupt traffic on freeways or buses at hotels. Protesters have hinted that their prime targets might include corporate office towers that have nothing to do with the convention.

In the case of traffic disruptions or blocked buildings, top Democratic organizers say they are prepared to wait out demonstrators rather than provoke violence too quickly.

"We have told the L.A.P.D. that we can start the convention sessions late if we have to," one senior planner said.

Because delegates are so dispersed (the longest round trip from delegate hotels to the Staples Center is close to 50 miles), Los Angeles poses special challenges. Event Transportation Associates, the private concern organizing the transportation planning for the Democrats, says the longest one-way travel time has been clocked at 1 hour and 40 minutes. Nearly 300 buses will shuttle nearly 10,000 delegates, donors and friends of the party to and from 76 hotels in seven cities.

---

5 Years and Millions Later, Bombing Plagues Philadelphia

New York Times
August 13, 2000
By FRANCIS X. CLINES
http://www.nytimes.com/library/national/081300philadelphia-police.html

PHILADELPHIA, Aug. 12 -- Gerald Wayne Renfrow thought the nightmare hit its climax 15 years ago on a gruesome day when -- he still barely believes it -- he and his neighbors watched the city police bomb and burn down his solid working-class neighborhood, killing 11 people in a confrontation that became a firestorm.

"Now they're bombing us again," said Mr. Renfrow, more furious than sad as he girds against the city's latest attempt at what officials are calling closure for Osage Avenue.

That is the decision last month to send buyout condemnation notices to the owners of 60 replacement houses the city built as compensation for the victims of the police blunder in May 1985, when the city routed the MOVE group of armed radicals who had turned their house at 6221 Osage Avenue into a fortress.

Hovering in a helicopter with the authority of City Hall, the police dropped explosives on the MOVE row house, setting a fire that consumed the block-and-a-half neighborhood in West Philadelphia. Six adults and five children died inside the MOVE quarters.

There has been a scandalous epilogue to the disaster. The gleaming brick replacement houses for the 60 innocent homeowners on Osage Avenue and Pine Street turned out to have been built with construction flaws by a corrupt developer. The houses have cost the city a small fortune -- more than $570,000 for each row house, including an endless wave of faulty repairs. Support walls cracked for lack of basic expansion joints.

Cheap plumbing and wiring failed. Roofs leaked.

And now the city has suddenly discovered, after 13 years, that heating systems present "imminent danger" to residents through leaks of carbon monoxide.

The new administration of Mayor John F. Street, trying to cut the city's losses, this month offered Mr. Renfrow and his neighbors a painful ultimatum with a Sept. 6 deadline: Each must either quickly accept a $150,000 buyout or the house will be condemned at market value for less than half that amount as the city plans to raze the neighborhood one more time.

"Mistake had piled upon mistake across the years," said the city controller, Jonathan A. Saidel, who drew the line when he refused to pay a bill from city housing officials for another $9 million in proposed repairs on top of the $35 million total spent so far on the neighborhood.

"I went over to the site and couldn't believe what I saw," Mr. Saidel said of piles of fresh brick and window materials waiting for what has been a nonstop parade of repair workers. "I wondered how city inspectors signed off on this project in the first place," the controller said, echoing the long-running complaint of the residents.

The initial disaster occurred under Mayor W. Wilson Goode, with repairs going on through the incumbency of Mayor Edward G. Rendell. Mayor Street, who took office this year, is accused by residents of trying to wash his hands of the debacle at the expense of the victims.

"Oh, our new mayor wants 'closure,' " said Mr. Renfrow, the leader of the Osage/Pine Community Association, who has been trying to rally his neighbors. "He wants a feather in his cap as the man who finally ended the MOVE saga because we stand as a reflection of the city's incompetence. So they want to eliminate us, to decimate us once more."

Mr. Renfrow spoke on the way downtown to fight the ultimatum with a civil lawsuit.

He and 26 other resisters obtained a temporary restraining order to back up their demand that the city do what it promised -- provide proper replacement housing in the same neighborhood the police devastated. The area has the charm and sociability that residents say they revere and find irreplaceable, particularly as they begin looking for comparable value in housing in other areas.

"We're fighting," said Sandra Lee at 6254 Osage, one of those who watched the police attack. She looks back on the MOVE members as folly-ridden, but at least worth remembering for their resistance to City Hall.

"We were the victims and now they're telling us we got to go," she said, angry at what she said were "scare tactics" by the city. "If the heating was dangerous, how come no one died across these years?"

City officials say that was very likely because the windows were improperly installed, too, and were so leaky that deadly gases were able to vent through the cracks. Critics say this is precisely the Catch-22 mindset that has guaranteed there can be no closure over the MOVE episode until the neighborhood is made whole.

"If they're going to tear them down and sell the land to a developer, why not build the houses back up for us the right way?" asked Ernestine Grice, a widow who has lived on Pine Street for 43 years, except for the 18 months when she awaited reconstruction of her destroyed home.

"Absolutely nothing good has come of this," said City Solicitor Kenneth Trujillo, who is directing the proposed settlement.

"It's terrible. As a legal matter this administration could walk away from it, but as a moral matter we could not." He described the settlement as "double fair value" and the only way to end what evolved into a perpetual burden on taxpayers.

Initially, many of the homeowners accepted the buyout ultimatum. But Mr. Renfrow said they did so under duress and the city had a far greater responsibility remaining.

One of those who accepted, John DeVere, owns two houses on Pine Street and he considers the offer a windfall, since the resale possibilities had been nil for years. "But I'm an exception to most of the other people," Mr. DeVere said, "old people with bills and mortgages and nowhere to go."

Outside 6219 Osage, Lucretia Wilson told of the unbearable years when MOVE members right next door, protesting the conviction of nine members for the killing of a police officer, turned their house into a noisome clan commune crowded with scores of animals and raucous with amplified lectures through the night. The helicopter raid came after the police said they had tried to serve an arrest warrant on a MOVE member and met fierce resistance.

"They rendered my house uninhabitable," Ms. Wilson said. "But I was happy to come home to the new one," she said, describing the restored block filled with children.

"But the city isn't working with us," Ms. Wilson said. "They're giving us ultimatums. This situation is no different from the MOVE situation."

For what it is worth, Ms. Wilson has the sympathy of one of her former next-door pests, Ramona Africa, a member of the MOVE group, dispersed to other parts of the city.

"I was in that house when they bombed it and I'm the only adult survivor, and the only one who went to prison," said Ms. Africa, who served seven years for rioting. "What we can see is the city created a bad situation for itself that day. Bombing babies was wrong, and when the foundation is wrong nothing good can from it."

-------

OneList subscribers:

1. CHILDREN OF THE "MANHATTAN PROJECT"
From: df7332@aol.com

2. RUSSIA TO UNILATERALLY CUT NUCLEAR ARSENAL, Fossil Fuels May Be On What Out -Iceland Leads Way
From: "Bill Smirnow" <smirnowb@ix.netcom.com>

3. Some Reasonably Significant NMD/Nuke Weapons Stories
From: FoE Sydney - Nuclear Campaign <nonukes@foesyd.org.au>

----------

Message: 1
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 17:15:26 EDT
From: df7332@aol.com Subject: CHILDREN OF THE "MANHATTAN PROJECT"

To All:
Following is information that you may find of use.

CHILDREN OF THE "MANHATTAN PROJECT"
<http://home.att.net/~cotmp/>

EXCERPTS:

This Web Site serves three distinct purposes:

1. To form an organization comprised of surviving participants, relatives of participants, educators, historians, and anyone else sharing an interest in The Manhattan Project.

2. To provide a forum for discussion about all issues relating to The Manhattan Project.

3. To provide a unique source of historical information, photos and documents pertaining to The Manhattan Project.

We are attempting to locate as many participants of the Manhattan Project and/or their descendents as possible. We are also interested in hearing from anyone who has an interest in the Manhattan Project. You can be a big help by "recommending" our site to others who you feel may be interested.

OUR MISSION: The ultimate mission of this web-site is to preserve the dedicated efforts of countless individuals who came together from a wide-variety of ethnic, cultural, and educational backgrounds to work on a "super-secret" project that was destined to bring about an early conclusion to World War II: The Manhattan Project.

As we enter the new millennium and we look back on the major achievements of the past century, the development of the atomic bomb ranks at the top or near the top on most everyone's list. However, because of the ongoing controversy as to whether the "weapon" should have been used as it was, many people have chosen to ignore one of the most resounding examples of American perseverance in the face of seemingly impossible odds.

In fact, at a time where being "politically correct" and taking elaborate steps not to "offend" anyone has become a symbol of morality in America, many public schools have chosen to ignore the The Manhattan Project altogether. Furthermore, some government agencies and public service organizations have chosen not to participate in or sponsor events targeted toward remembering this astounding achievement.

Having grown up in a family that endured the hardships of Los Alamos, I have a keen awareness of the sacrifices made by the many hundreds of individuals associated with The Manhattan Project. Therefore, I have undertaken this project to prevent the memories of so many Americans from being "buried" in a hole with a posted sign reading "It's really best if we forget this ever happened".

----------

Message: 2
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 00:26:05 -0400
From: "Bill Smirnow" <smirnowb@ix.netcom.com>

RUSSIA TO UNILATERALLY CUT NUCLEAR ARSENAL,
Fossil Fuels May Be On Way Out -Iceland Leads Way

http://www.washingtonpost.com/up-dyn/articles/A12982-2000Aug11.html

National Security
Russia to Cut Its Nuclear Stockpile
Russian President Vladimir Putin addresses his Security Council in Moscow on Friday.


By Daniel Williams
Washington Post Foreign Service
Reuters
Sunday, August 13, 2000; Page A16

MOSCOW, Aug. 12 -- Russia will unilaterally reduce its nuclear arsenal and shift scarce financial resources to rebuild its conventional forces, President Vladimir Putin decided at a pivotal defense policy meeting on Friday, Russian media reported today.

Details emerging from the four-hour meeting suggest that Putin sided with the chief of the general staff and against the defense minister in the bitter dispute among the military brass.

"Great significance was attached to the development of conventional forces," the Interfax news agency said. "A decision was made on the redistribution of financial flows" away from nuclear arms.

Putin decided to let the number of Russia's nuclear warheads shrink to 1,500, less than half the 3,500 permitted under the START II arms reduction treaty, which Russia ratified this year, Russian media reported. Russia wants the United States to agree to reduce its arsenal to 1,500 warheads under a proposed START III treaty.

The size of Russia's nuclear arsenal has been inexorably shrinking because of obsolescence and the lack of money to build new missiles, airplanes and submarines to carry nuclear warheads. The speed of the Russian strategic forces' decline in the years ahead has been a subject of debate; by some estimates Russia will inevitably fall below 1,000 warheads without a major buildup, depending in part on how quickly the military retires missiles that have reached the end of their official service life.

The chief of the general staff, Gen. Anatoly Kvashnin, has lobbied for deep cuts in strategic nuclear weaponry, with the financial savings to go to conventional land, air and sea forces. Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev, a former commander of nuclear missile troops, has strongly opposed the idea, which he recently called "insane."

Sergeyev has also insisted that the strategic rocket forces remain a separate branch of the military. However, he appears to have suffered a setback on this point. As the number of land-based missiles declines over the next five years, the status of the elite strategic rocket forces as a separate branch will be "reconsidered" and parts of the force will fall under air force command within two years, Interfax said.

The decisions made Friday are part of Putin's efforts to fashion a 15-year plan for armed forces development. On the one hand, Russia wants to maintain a strategic nuclear arsenal, a keystone in the country's claim to superpower status.

On the other hand, Russia has fought three land wars in the past 20 years, including the present conflict in Chechnya, in which deficiencies in its conventional forces were exposed, including inadequately maintained equipment, ill-trained troops and poor coordination. Kvashnin has argued that over-reliance on nuclear weapons has sapped the conventional forces' strength.

Putin hinted Friday that he had taken Kvashnin's side when he warned against "unrestrained stockpiling of weapons" and said that Russia must build an armed force it can afford. "All our steps must be . . . calculated and economically justified," said Putin, who authorized an $80 million increase in this year's $4.5 billion defense budget.

However, Kvashnin did not get everything he wanted. He had asked for the nuclear arsenal to be cut to 1,400 warheads, 100 less than the number approved, the Kommersant Daily newspaper said. Sergeyev also convinced Putin >that the service life of some older missiles can be extended, Kommersant said.

One remaining wild card may be the U.S. proposal for a missile defense system. If it goes ahead, Russia's nuclear arms faction will press for a nuclear buildup, Kommersant predicted. "This is the only thing that offers the rocket people a chance for revenge," the newspaper said.

The Clinton administration has tried, so far without success, to persuade the Russian government to amend the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty to allow construction of a limited national missile defense system capable of shooting down a few dozen missiles.

The United States has signaled that in return for Russian concessions on the ABM Treaty, it would consider slashing the number of U.S. strategic warheads to 2,000 or fewer. But it is unclear whether Putin's decision to shrink Russia's nuclear arsenal will be accompanied by a new willingness to compromise on missile defense.

-------

Playing nuclear chicken
Kashmir crisis must be addressed before whole world suffers

By ERIC MARGOLIS
Toronto Sun
August 13, 2000
http://www.canoe.ca/CalgaryNews/908n1.html

Last week, as peace talks in embattled Kashmir collapsed and the killing resumed, the New York Times ran a front-page story revealing U.S. intelligence concluded "the likelihood of a war between India and Pakistan that could erupt into a nuclear conflict had increased significantly."

This alarming National Intelligence Estimate -- the combined product of all U.S. intelligence agencies -- was made last summer, soon after Pakistani regulars and Kashmiri rebels occupied the heights above Kargil in the Indian portion of the Himalayan mountain state of Kashmir, which is divided between India, Pakistan and China.

Readers may recall I reported last July that Pakistan and India were heading toward a possible nuclear war -- the same finding as U.S. intelligence.

Military sources on the subcontinent had told me India was three days away from a full-scale offensive against Pakistan.

Given India's 2-1 superiority in manpower and 3-1 in artillery, armour and warplanes, Pakistan would very likely need tactical nuclear weapons to stop such an onslaught.

My book on Kashmir and the Indo-Pakistani conflict, War at the Top of the World, which appeared last fall, detailed the dangers of nuclear war betweenIndia and Pakistan, a conflict that could kill millions and pollute the globe with radioactive dust.

At the time, few people seemed aware of the explosive, 53-year old struggle for "far-away" Kashmir.

Three weeks ago, Hezbul Mujahedin, the largest group of Islamic insurgents fighting for independence in the Indian-ruled portion of Kashmir, called a ceasefire in the conflict that's killed up to 70,000 people since 1989, and asked for talks with India. Other Kashmiri rebel groups bitterly opposed talks.

The surprise offer clearly wrong-footed Indian PM Atal Bihari Vajpayee, who first spoke of "unconditional" talks, but then rejected Hezbul's demands that Pakistan be included, and backtracked to his usual position: Kashmir is an integral, non-negotiable part of India -- an entirely domestic matter.

Other Islamic insurgent groups eagerly joined India's rejection of genuine peace talks, in one case by attacking Hindu pilgrims. Over 100 civilians died in this attack.

Rebel attacks against Indian security forces surged, with at least 10 more people dying in a bombing last Thursday.

Hezbul resumed combat. India claims Kashmiri insurgents are "Islamic terrorists" and "Afghan mercenaries," agents of Pakistan.

Delhi's simplistic view has been adopted by the Clinton administration, which has tilted strongly toward India under urging from American partisans of Israel.

India and Israel are forging a "strategic and nuclear alliance" and Israeli military advisers are aiding Indian counter-insurgency forces in Kashmir.

Russia, which is waging its own war against Islamic freedom-fighters in Chechnya, recently joined India and China in a new alliance to oppose Islamic independence movements in Kashmir, Afghanistan, western China and Central Asia.

The White House and Kremlin are co-operating to fight religious and democratic Islamic plans to overthrow Central Asia's Moscow-backed, post-Soviet dictatorships.

Contrary to Indian claims, the insurgents are mostly Kashmiri Muslims, not outsiders, as I have found on my visits to the region.

Contrary to Pakistan's denials, its crack intelligence service, ISI, does discreetly aid some rebel groups with arms and bases. Pakistanis regard Kashmiri guerrillas as freedom-fighters. India's intelligence agency, RAW, abets bombings inside Pakistan to destabilize that shaky nation.

What is clear amidst all this intrigue is a majority of Indian-ruled Kashmir's people, who are over 80% Muslim, want rid of their brutal, corrupt Indian overlords and seek either independence or union with Pakistan.

India's 600,000 troops in Kashmir have failed to crush the intifada in spite of wide-scale use of torture and gang rapes.

Numerous human rights organizations have condemned Delhi for its brutality.

The collapse of peace talks means India and Pakistan are again locked in their exceptionally dangerous confrontation over Kashmir, along whose ceasefire line their forces battle almost daily. This is the first time two nuclear powers have directly clashed since the 1962 Cuban missile crisis.

Pakistan and India are playing a dangerous game of nuclear chicken that would lead to war through design or accident.

It is up to the outside world to press India and Pakistan -- and China -- into settling the explosive Kashmir issue.

In 1947-49, the UN resolved that Kashmiris be allowed to vote on their future.

This has never been done. India, Pakistan and China annexed strategic parts of Kashmir without ever consulting the inhabitants of this once-independent state.

Tragically, Kashmir has become the Jerusalem of South Asia, a focus of competing religious, nationalist and historical passions that arouses fierce emotions, thwarts compromise and poisons relations between brother nations India and Pakistan.

-------

Kashmir may also become the trigger that detonates a nuclear war.
Lost U.S. Nuclear Bomb to Affect Talks on Greenland

Sunday August 13 6:23 AM ET
By Peter Starck
http://www.dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20000813/wl/greenland_nuclear_dc_1.html

COPENHAGEN (Reuters) - A long lost U.S. nuclear bomb probably lies on the seabed off Greenland near Thule airbase, which the United States wants to use for its controversial anti-missile shield, a Danish newspaper reported on Sunday.

Classified documents obtained by a group of former workers at Thule, an Arctic air and radar base built by the United States in 1951-52, suggest that one of four hydrogen bombs on a B-52 bomber that crashed there in 1968 was never found, the daily Jyllands-Posten said. ``Detective work by a group of former Thule workers indicates that an unexploded nuclear bomb probably still lies on the seabed off Thule,' right-leaning mass-circulation daily said.

The crash on January 21, 1968 led to a crisis in relations between the United States and NATO ally Denmark, which is responsible for Greenland's foreign, security and defense policy and at the time prohibited nuclear weapons on its territory, including Greenland.

Denmark was never informed about the lost bomb, which has serial number 78252, the paper said.

Footage filmed at the site by a U.S. submarine searching for remains of the B-52 wreckage in April 1968 contained images of a bomb-like object, the Danish Ritzau news agency reported.

A U.S. state department document dated August 31, 1968 said all weapons onboard the crashed aircraft had been accounted for but did not spell out whether they had been recovered, Ritzau said.

The United States assured the Danish government in spring 1968 that clean-up work after the B-52 crash had been completed and gave up searching for the lost bomb in August that year, Jyllands-Posten said.

``We are not able to comment at this stage,'' Lawrence Butler, Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. embassy in Copenhagen, told Reuters by telephone. Danish government officials were not immediately available for comment.

Senior State Department officials are scheduled to visit Greenland on August 21 to 24 for talks with Danish and Greenland officials on Thule's role in the planned National Missile Defense (NMD) initiative.

According to Senate testimony by Defense Secretary William Cohen in July, Washington needs a decision on upgrading the Thule radar next year if the White House makes the political go-ahead to deploy NMD by 2005. Home to a ballistic missile early-warning radar station, Thule sits at the midpoint of a chain of similar sites between Alaska and the British Isles -- a line along which the United States may build a shield against missiles from what it calls states of concern such as North Korea, Iraq, Iran and Libya.

Leading politicians in Greenland, which has enjoyed limited self-determination under the Danish crown since 1979, do not want Thule to play any role in the NMD.

Denmark has declined to speak out on the issue apart from saying that the NMD should not go ahead if it breaches the strategic missile treaty between the United States and Russia. Moscow opposes the U.S. missile shield plan, and says it does breach the treaty.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned Denmark and other U.S. NATO allies that their participation in the NMD could upset global strategic stability.

-------

Can Iceland run on hydrogen?
Why everyone is watching the world's first major effort to replace fossil fuels with fuel cells.

By Niall McKay
From the July 2000 issue
http://www.herring.com/mag/issue80/mag-hydrogen-80.html

They called him "Professor Hydrogen" -- and it wasn't supposed to be a compliment. For two decades, Bragi Árnason, a University of Iceland chemistry professor, clung to a vision of his country's future that sounded like something out of an Isaac Asimov novel. He was convinced his tiny North Atlantic nation could become the world's first hydrogen-powered economy. Suddenly, his dream is becoming a reality and he's a national hero. And he's got the whole world watching.

Mr. Árnason's plan to replace fossil fuels with hydrogen-powered fuel cells has received backing not only from the Icelandic government but from automotive and oil giants, including Shell and DaimlerChrysler (NYSE: DCX), who have ponied up millions to see if Professor Hydrogen just might be right. They want to use Iceland as a test bed for a new generation of cars and buses powered by hydrogen. If the project succeeds, what was once dismissed as a crazy fantasy may become the foundation for the world's transition from the dirty and inefficient process of burning fossil fuels, to the cleaner, more efficient power of hydrogen fuel cells. "We believe that we can eliminate most of our dependence on oil by 2030," says Hjalmar Árnason, chairman of the Icelandic government's committee for alternative fuel, and no relation to the professor.

The reason all eyes are now on Iceland is that a host of countries are looking to replace fossil fuels with hydrogen -- a quest motivated in equal measure by economic, political, and environmental concerns. Within the next 15 years, the demand for oil is projected to outstrip production, and the shortage will make gasoline prohibitively expensive. And there is the environmental factor. Burning fossil fuels causes pollution, and, as scientists are increasingly concerned, global warming. And if that isn't enough, more than two-thirds of the world's remaining oil reserves are in politically unstable regions, such as the Middle East.

"There is no doubt in our minds that hydrogen is the future," says Don Huberts, CEO of Shell Hydrogen. "The only real question is when." Hydrogen fuel cells are clean, emitting steam instead of exhaust fumes. They are more efficient, because they use a chemical reaction rather than squirting oil into a cylinder and setting it alight (see "Fuel Cells Explained"). And hydrogen is as plentiful as tap water. The eco-friendly William Clay Ford, chairman of Ford (NYSE: F), who drives an electric pickup truck to work, has predicted that hybrids -- cars fueled by both hydrogen and gasoline -- could account for 20 percent of all vehicle sales by 2010. Likewise, predictions for stationary applications are optimistic, topping 2.2 million kilowatts by 2010, according to the American Hydrogen Association, a trade association.

But the technology does have limitations. Hydrogen is usually found bound to other elements, such as oxygen and carbon, which means it must be extracted using electricity. And where does much of the world's electricity come from? You got it -- oil. If the predictions by automakers are correct, hydrogen-powered fuel-cell vehicles will begin to appear in delivery and public fleets in the next ten years. And it will probably take another 20 years before they become pervasive. But with gas prices rising to two dollars a gallon in the United States, the economics may change soon. While the gallon equivalent of hydrogen now costs $3 to produce, it is nearly twice as efficient as gasoline.

If hydrogen power is to become a practical alternative to oil in the long run, then it needs to be created using electricity from renewable sources such as hydroelectric, geothermal, and wind power. That's where Iceland comes in, with its abundant supply of low-cost geothermal and hydroelectric power. Exactly how much? That's the question Bragi Árnason set out to answer in his doctoral research in 1970.

"I discovered that we have enough geothermal energy to provide the equivalent of 100 nuclear power stations and enough hydroelectric power to provide the equivalent of 15 nuclear power stations," says the professor, who is now 65. "So I began to think about ways in which we could use the surplus."

THERMALS UNDERTHERE

Beneath Iceland's capital, Reykjavík (which means smoky bay), magma from volcanic activity far beneath the earth's surface heats fresh water to boiling point. The water turns to steam, which works its way to the earth's surface, collecting debris along the way, and billows out as black smoke. When the Vikings arrived in 800 A.D., they settled here because of the plentiful hot water. They used natural hot springs for bathing.

The only black smoke that can be seen in Reykjavík today comes from the buses and cars that zip around the city. But just 20 miles away at the Sudurnes geothermal power plant, steel vents release the pressure built up under the earth's surface. The excess water, which contains sulfur and silica, is run off into a ravine. Like their Viking forebears, Icelanders today relish natural baths. Many come to bathe in the waste product of the power plant, where a resort called Blue Lagoon has sprung up. Across the lagoon, the plant uses the steam pressure from below the ground to drive steam turbines and generate electricity. That steam then heats fresh water that is piped back to Reykjavík and used to heat the city.

In 1950, when the rest of the world thought that nuclear energy was the wave of the future, Iceland moved all of its heating and electricity production from oil- and coal-fired power plants to geothermal and hydroelectric power plants. This gave the nation of 280,000 inhabitants some of the lowest-cost electricity and heating in the world ($0.02 per kilowatt). Cheaper heating was no small matter given Iceland's frigid climate. Low-cost electricity was a boon to the fish-processing industry. Despite their remote location, local plants managed to compete successfully in the international market. The result of all these changes was striking. Before World War II, Iceland was considered a third world country. Today it is ranked seventh in quality of life by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).

Two-thirds of Iceland's oil consumption goes to fishing and industry; the rest is used for ground transportation. Fishing accounts for 65 percent of Iceland's exports, so the nation relies on low oil prices to supply fish to the world market at a competitive price. The price of oil is therefore the single biggest factor to the success of Iceland. If oil prices go up, fish prices go up and exports drop.

But if Iceland can cut this fuel bill, it can lower import and export costs. This would assure even greater economic progress in the next 50 years than Iceland has achieved in the last 50. In many ways, Iceland has as much to gain from the implementation of a hydrogen economy as it did from the introduction of geothermal and hydroelectric power production. Of course, the same can be said for the rest of the world. Greater efficiencies in energy production make for greater economic progress.

Mr. Árnason was thinking along these lines when he began considering how Iceland might use its geothermal surplus to produce low-cost electricity, not only for fish-processing plants, but also to power the fishing fleet and local transportation. This would allow the nation to make another leap in prosperity.

But how? Standard battery technology was not powerful enough to propel cars or fishing vessels. So Mr. Árnason decided that hydrogen was the most workable solution because it could be produced by applying low-cost electricity to water. But low-cost fuel cells didn't exist. Without them, Mr. Árnason's idea was simple science fiction. "I had a problem," he says. "I knew that hydrogen was the solution but I also knew that people would think I was crazy."

Mr. Árnason sought advice from a mentor, University of Iceland physics professor Thorbjörn Sigurgeirsson. "He told me that if I really believed that hydrogen was the solution then I should start talking about it immediately because any new technology takes about 30 years to mature." Thirty years later, DaimlerChrysler, Ford, Toyota (NYSE: TM), and Nissan Motor (Nasdaq: NSANY) are working on hydrogen-powered cars, which they plan to release in 2004.

If the hydrogen plan is carried out, Iceland could reduce its annual oil bill of $150 million to almost zero. This may be small by U.S. standards, but it would have a significant impact on the tiny Icelandic economy.

"Moving our economy from oil to hydrogen will enable us to reduce the trade deficit, which is important," says the Icelandic government's Hjalmar Árnason. "But much more important is that it will create a center for hydrogen expertise in Iceland."

As a small, advanced nation, Iceland would like to position itself as a testing ground for new technologies well beyond energy. The government is hoping that the hydrogen experiment will distinguish the country as an ideal, innovative lab. "It's best to introduce a new technology in a small society because if it goes wrong it's easier to fix," Hjalmar Árnason says. "Then you take the lessons you've learned in a small society and apply them to larger societies."

SHEIK UP

Two other motives lie just beneath the surface. First, if hydrogen becomes the fuel of choice, then Iceland could produce it by the megaton and ship it to mainland Europe. This could transform the already wealthy Icelanders into hydrogen sheiks. Second, and far more urgent, is the need to reduce pollution. Despite Iceland's low consumption of fossil fuels, its carbon dioxide emissions are extremely high -- more than 2.6 million metric tons a year -- because of two large aluminum plants and one large ferrosilicon plant. "We already use renewable sources of power so how do we lower emissions?" Hjalmar Árnason asks. The only practical solution was to reduce oil consumption.

The nation's high level of pollution made Iceland unqualified to sign the Kyoto Accord of 1997, the international climate agreement that dictated emission levels for participant countries. It was this accord that sparked broad interest in Bragi Árnason's dormant hydrogen plan. The government commissioned a report from the University of Iceland. What may have seemed like a crazy idea in 1970 now seemed sound, and even economically practical, in the late '90s. Moreover, if the country could reduce transportation and fishing emissions, then it could build more aluminum and ferrosilicon plants.

When the Icelandic government publicly announced plans to move to a hydrogen economy, officials began receiving calls from around the world. Mr. Árnason's papers were getting the attention of energy and automotive companies. Shell and DaimlerChrysler were particularly intrigued, and agreed to back the project to use Iceland as a testing ground for hydrogen-based technology. And Mr. Árnason became a public figure.

FUEL FOSSILS

What changed? Certainly, automobile and energy companies knew the economic, environmental, and political problems with oil better than anyone. Then in the '90s DaimlerChrysler and Ford put their money into developing alternatives, investing more than a billion dollars in one of the most promising fuel-cell companies, Canada's Ballard Power Systems (Nasdaq: BLDP). General Motors (NYSE: GM), Volkswagen (OTC: VLKAY), BMW (OTC: BAMXF), Honda (NYSE: HMC), Toyota, and Nissan all followed suit and began to develop fuel-cell vehicles. Most are due to hit car showrooms in the next three to five years. "Fuel cells will end the 100-year reign of the internal combustion engine," predicted Mr. Ford of Ford Motor at the Detroit Auto Show in January.

Wary of losing their grip on the energy supply market, the oil companies are also getting in on the hydrogen act. Two years ago, Shell Chairman Mark Moody-Stuart created Shell Hydrogen to explore how the company could use its more than 20,000 gas stations to supply a new generation of vehicles. Texaco (NYSE: TX) and BP Amoco (NYSE: BPA) have also set up hydrogen research projects.

The oil and energy companies have a lot at stake. First, it is projected that current oil reserves will begin to run low in the next 50 years. Long before that happens, the world will begin using oil faster than it can be extracted from the ground, according to the International Energy Agency, energy advisors to the OECD. Of course, there are other alternatives, such as natural gas and even the extraction of gasoline from coal. But fossil fuels will get increasingly expensive because it will require a change to the current delivery infrastructure.

Also, there's the discomfort of having so much oil produced in the politically unstable Middle East. And there's the environment: if global warming continues to be an important concern and the rate of climate change increases over the next several decades, the automotive and oil companies could someday find themselves vulnerable, like tobacco companies today.

According to a recent study by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, mean global surface temperature will increase by 1 to 3.5 degrees Celsius by 2100 -- a faster rate of warming than that seen in the past 10,000 years.

For these reasons, DaimlerChrysler started the ball rolling in the early '90s, when it commissioned a study to determine how much life was left in the internal combustion engine. "We realized that we would have to start looking for alternative fuel sources very quickly," says Wolfgang Scheunemann, DaimlerChrysler's manager for technology communications. "After some research we decided that hydrogen or a fuel from which we could extract hydrogen was the most viable alternative to oil."

It seems fitting that a descendant of Daimler-Benz, the company that first commercialized the internal combustion engine at the beginning of the 1900s, would also be the first automotive company to decide it was time to move on at the end of the century. In 1993, when the company said that it was going to have production-ready hydrogen-powered electric vehicles by 2004, the rest of the automobile industry scoffed. Such an idea seemed ridiculous because the technology was not commercially viable. Now, an automotive or energy company without a hydrogen strategy is like a retailer without an Internet strategy.

Last year, the Icelandic government signed its deal with Shell, DaimlerChrysler, and Norwegian hydrogen producer Norsk Hydro (NYSE: NHY) to test hydrogen fuel-cell buses and cars. Two months later, Toyota arrived on the island with a planeload of scientists. One official, who asked not to be identified, says Toyota tried to snag the project by offering to foot the full cost and supply as many engineers as were needed. Toyota officials refused to comment.

To implement the plan, the Icelandic government, Shell, and DaimlerChrysler created a consortium called Vistorka (meaning eco-energy), with $1 million in seed capital. The consortium has three objectives: replace Iceland's public buses with fuel-cell buses, persuade the population to buy fuel-cell cars, and develop fuel-cell technology to power fishing trawlers.

"Originally, we believed that phase two should be to import fuel-cell cars into Iceland," says Jon Bjorn Skulason, general manager of Vistorka. "This seems impractical so now we have decided to investigate converting our fishing fleet to hydrogen-powered vessels." Vistorka is about to begin the first phase of its ambitious plan -- a $50 million project to replace the Reykjavík Municipal Bus Service's 100 buses with hydrogen fuel-cell buses. In May, it raised $3.5 million from the European Community for the project. Now, Vistorka is looking for partners to launch a startup to develop hydrogen fuel-cell fishing vessels.

ALTERNATIVE REALITIES

Iceland is hardly the only place with hydrogen power on its mind. Chicago; Vancouver, British Columbia; Dusseldorf, Germany; and Sacramento, California all have hydrogen bus projects in the works. In October, a consortium called the California Fuel Cell Partnership will begin testing hydrogen fuel-cell cars in California, with the goal of exploring their commercial potential. "We will explore the fueling issues, road test the vehicles, and also gauge the public's reaction to hydrogen power," says Joe Irvin, spokesman for the partnership.

The partnership chose California for the trial because the state has mandated that by 2004, 10 percent of cars sold within its borders must be zero-emission vehicles, meaning they must not belch polluting fumes. That's not to say that we are all going to be humming around in hydrogen-powered vehicles anytime soon. Even the most enthusiastic fuel-cell proponents estimate that the transition will take from 20 to 40 years.

"My guess is that hydrogen will not reach the same level of acceptance in the transportation industry as oil until 2050," says Karl Jessen, director of energy and Internet strategies at the Yankee Group consulting firm. "Unless of course we have a major ecological or energy crisis in the next few years."

It's difficult to store hydrogen in small spaces and there is no infrastructure to deliver it to a mass market. This has compelled the automakers to look at alternative fuels from which they can extract hydrogen. The contenders are propane, methanol, and gasoline. These are stored in a vehicle in much the same way as gasoline and a specialized apparatus called a reformer is used to strip out the hydrogen. The drawback with propane is that while it would significantly reduce pollution it won't eliminate it completely. One carbon atom will have to be released to free every four hydrogen atoms. The same goes for methanol. And reforming hydrogen from gasoline does almost nothing to help the environment, as one carbon atom is released to produce every one and one-half hydrogen atoms. Furthermore, adding a reformer raises the cost and substantially increases the weight of the vehicle, which goes a long way to making fuel-cell cars less competitive than their gasoline counterparts.

"Unfortunately, we won't see pure hydrogen-based fuel-cell vehicles for some time," says Jason Mark, senior transportation analyst with the Union of Concerned Scientists. "The automakers will first introduce natural gas- and methanol-based vehicles. Gas stations are just not equipped to deliver hydrogen and we estimate that it will cost about $200 billion to upgrade them."

WARM FRONT

Although moving to hydrogen will ease the energy supply problem, slowing down the effects of global warming may be more difficult. The catch-22 is that, environmentally speaking, the best way to obtain hydrogen is to extract it from water, and the electricity used to do so must come from somewhere.

While Reykjavík is a rarity, with its access to massive amounts of low-cost, environmentally friendly power, the rest of the world relies on oil for a great deal of its electricity. If the process is to be completely pollution-free, then renewable sources such as hydroelectric, geothermal, or solar power must be used. "You have to measure the process from well to wheel," says Steven Taub, associate director of energy consultancy Cambridge Energy Research Associates. "It's no use saying that our cars are emission-free if oil is used to create the hydrogen."

But hydrogen seems to have enough greenbacks behind it. Although the auto industry is the most aggressive promoter of the technology, it is certainly not the only industry looking to harness fuel cells. The market for fuel-cell technology for stationary applications is perhaps more advanced. International Fuel Cells (formally ONSI and a subsidiary of United Technologies (NYSE: UTX)) has sold more than two hundred 200-kilowatt fuel cells for stationary applications. The company started out the technology for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration but now sells fuel cells for use as back-up power generators. Each cell costs about $800,000, runs on natural gas, and provides digitally perfect electricity. The customer list is impressive, and diverse: First National Bank of Omaha, Staten Island University Hospital, and 4 Times Square, the New York home of the Conde Nast publishing empire. "Fuel cells are more reliable than generators since there's no maintenance, no moving parts, no servicing needed," says Mike London, communications manager for International Fuel Cells. "Just natural gas in one end and pure, digitally perfect power out the other."

Meanwhile, companies from Ballard Power Systems to Motorola (NYSE: MOT) are working on fuel-cell technology for the electronics industry. The advantage is that users could instantly recharge their cell phone or laptop by adding a cartridge containing methanol (the hydrogen would be extracted from the methanol and used to power the fuel cell). And SRI International has been working on fuel-cell technology for the portable-devices market for the past decade, and this year expects to spin out a company called Polyfuel to produce fuel cells. "We have developed a portable-devices fuel cell that will give users five times the run time and the ability to instantly recharge their device," says Subhash Narang, SRI's director of product development. Mr. Narang believes that Polyfuel can have a product to market in the next three years.

By that time, Iceland's Professor Hydrogen may be traveling on Reykjavík's hydrogen-fueled buses, watching his nation's hydrogen-fueled economy prosper, and enjoying the fact that it isn't all part of a sci-fi novel.

Write to niall.mckay@redherring.com.

----------

Message: 3
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 17:50:40 +1000
From: FoE Sydney - Nuclear Campaign <nonukes@foesyd.org.au>

Some Reasonably Significant NMD/Nuke Weapons Stories

John Hallam Friends of the Earth Sydney,
17 Lord Street,
Newtown, NSW, Australia, 2042
Fax (61)(2)9517-3902 ph (61)(2)9517-3903
nonukes@foesyd.org.au
http://homepages.tig.com.au/~foesyd

Dear All, My apologies if you have already had some of these stories.

I think they are of enough significance to warrant uploading again in case you have not got them.

Based on these, there is even some ground for a bit of optimism.

However, the danger, as always, is that the issue will go 'off the boil', the world will go back to sleep, and the weaponeers will flourish.

With stories like these there is less justification than ever for the stand of the US right.

Let us hope that the US knows how to reciprocate, and understands that if it proceeds with NMD all this hopeful development could be negated.

John Hallam

---

1) Russia to Cut Nuclear Missiles, Merge Forces-Source

Reuters
Thursday August 10
By Martin Nesirky

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia's Security Council will advise President Vladimir Putin to cut land-based nuclear missiles and merge the rest of the Strategic Rocket Forces with the air force, a Defense Ministry source said on Thursday.

The source told Reuters the move was part of a restructuring of Russia's armed forces that would start in 2001 and result in three branches of the military -- land, sea and air -- rather than four, including the Strategic Rocket Forces.

Putin's advisory but influential Security Council meets on Friday to discuss military reforms including the nuclear missile cuts and merger.

The move, if Putin agrees with it, would represent a lop-sided compromise in an internal row and a major change in Russian strategic policy. It would lead to much greater emphasis on the hitherto neglected submarine-based deterrent.

``The Strategic Rocket Forces will be merged with the air force and silo-based missiles which become obsolete in 2003 will be scrapped,'' the source said.

Defense experts say Russia has about 750 intercontinental ballistic missiles, most of them in silos or on mobile launchers. A few dozen are railway-based. All but 20 were deployed more than a decade ago.

The overall number of warheads is about 3,500. A similar number are loaded in submarine missiles and air-launched cruise missiles or bombs.

The land-based warheads could be cut as low as 1,500, the source said. That would be in line with Russian proposals for START-3 arms treaty talks with the United States.

No Reshuffle Expected

The source said there would be no reshuffles in the upper echelons of the armed forces. There has been speculation Putin might use the meeting to sack Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev and the chief of General Staff, General Anatoly Kvashnin, who have both been at daggers drawn over the plans for nuclear forces.

There will also be structural changes in the Strategic Rocket Forces -- which are responsible only for land-based missiles -- and savings will be used to fund conventional ground forces which have been found wanting in the Chechnya war.

``We are not talking about liquidating the Strategic Rocket Forces or denting Russia's nuclear shield, including its land-based component,'' the first deputy chief of General Staff, Valery Manilov, told reporters.

Few would disagree the 1.2-million-strong armed forces are in poor shape -- low on cash, short of modern equipment and demoralized despite fighting phrases from their military-minded president and continued domestic support for the Chechnya war.

The differences arise when deciding how to improve things.

Compromise Found

Kvashnin has made clear he favored deep cuts in the Strategic Rocket Forces and a merger with or even absorption into the air force. He wants more money for ground forces.

Sergeyev, a former missile commander, sees the rocket forces as a vital deterrent umbrella and a guarantee that Russia retains a seat at the top table of international powers.

He does not rule out some cuts but favors putting all legs of the formidable if aging triad of nuclear weapons based on land, in submarines and aboard planes under one separate command -- but not under the air force.

So the changes outlined by the source have a distinct whiff of compromise, although Sergeyev has come off worse.

Further changes to the Security Council plans outlined by the source cannot be excluded altogether.

``The range of views is impressive -- from threatening words about everyone being sacked to more neutral talk about a compromise with everyone getting less,'' wrote the newspaper Vremya Novostei, referring to speculation about the plans.

With only so much money around, something has to give.

To get a feel for the problem, consider the defense budget.

On Wednesday, President Clinton signed a $287.5 billion defense spending bill for the fiscal year starting October 1 -- that is some $30 billion bigger than Russia's entire gross domestic product. The Russian defense budget is $4.5 billion on paper but far less in practice.

Putin is expected to agree to honor an earlier pledge to dedicate 3.5 percent of GDP to defense spending.

Russia has been struggling to reform its armed forces since the mid-1990s but economic and political crises as well as two wars in Chechnya have made the process at best intermittent.

(Additional reporting by Robert Eksuzyan)

-----

2) Russia to Cut Its Nuclear Stockpile

By Daniel Williams
Washington Post Foreign Service
Sunday, August 13, 2000 ; A16

MOSCOW, Aug. 12 ÐÐ Russia will unilaterally reduce its nuclear arsenal and shift scarce financial resources to rebuild its conventional forces, President Vladimir Putin decided at a pivotal defense policy meeting on Friday, Russian media reported today.

Details emerging from the four-hour meeting suggest that Putin sided with the chief of the general staff and against the defense minister in the bitter dispute among the military brass.

"Great significance was attached to the development of conventional forces," the Interfax news agency said. "A decision was made on the redistribution of financial flows" away from nuclear arms.

Putin decided to let the number of Russia's nuclear warheads shrink to 1,500, less than half the 3,500 permitted under the START II arms reduction treaty, which Russia ratified this year, Russian media reported. Russia wants the United States to agree to reduce its arsenal to 1,500 warheads under a proposed START III treaty.

The size of Russia's nuclear arsenal has been inexorably shrinking because of obsolescence and the lack of money to build new missiles, airplanes and submarines to carry nuclear warheads. The speed of the Russian strategic forces' decline in the years ahead has been a subject of debate; by some estimates Russia will inevitably fall below 1,000 warheads without a major buildup, depending in part on how quickly the military retires missiles that have reached the end of their official service life.

The chief of the general staff, Gen. Anatoly Kvashnin, has lobbied for deep cuts in strategic nuclear weaponry, with the financial savings to go to conventional land, air and sea forces. Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev, a former commander of nuclear missile troops, has strongly opposed the idea, which he recently called "insane."

Sergeyev has also insisted that the strategic rocket forces remain a separate branch of the military. However, he appears to have suffered a setback on this point. As the number of land-based missiles declines over the next five years, the status of the elite strategic rocket forces as a separate branch will be "reconsidered" and parts of the force will fall under air force command within two years, Interfax said.

The decisions made Friday are part of Putin's efforts to fashion a 15-year plan for armed forces development. On the one hand, Russia wants to maintain a strategic nuclear arsenal, a keystone in the country's claim to superpower status.

On the other hand, Russia has fought three land wars in the past 20 years, including the present conflict in Chechnya, in which deficiencies in its conventional forces were exposed, including inadequately maintained equipment, ill-trained troops and poor coordination. Kvashnin has argued that over-reliance on nuclear weapons has sapped the conventional forces' strength.

Putin hinted Friday that he had taken Kvashnin's side when he warned against "unrestrained stockpiling of weapons" and said that Russia must build an armed force it can afford. "All our steps must be . . . calculated and economically justified," said Putin, who authorized an $80 million increase in this year's $4.5 billion defense budget.

However, Kvashnin did not get everything he wanted. He had asked for the nuclear arsenal to be cut to 1,400 warheads, 100 less than the number approved, the Kommersant Daily newspaper said. Sergeyev also convinced Putin that the service life of some older missiles can be extended, Kommersant said.

One remaining wild card may be the U.S. proposal for a missile defense system. If it goes ahead, Russia's nuclear arms faction will press for a nuclear buildup, Kommersant predicted. "This is the only thing that offers the rocket people a chance for revenge," the newspaper said.

The Clinton administration has tried, so far without success, to persuade the Russian government to amend the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty to allow construction of a limited national missile defense system capable of shooting down a few dozen missiles.

The United States has signaled that in return for Russian concessions on the ABM Treaty, it would consider slashing the number of U.S. strategic warheads to 2,000 or fewer. But it is unclear whether Putin's decision to shrink Russia's nuclear arsenal will be accompanied by a new willingness to compromise on missile defense.

---

3) Putin Urges a Start III Arms Pact

Thursday August 3

MOSCOW (AP) - President Vladimir Putin on Thursday reiterated promises to fulfill the START II arms reduction treaty and pushed for a START III treaty that would further cut Russian and U.S. nuclear weapons stockpiles.

``The Russian leadership has consistently supported the strengthening of the regime of nonproliferation of nuclear weapons, and is taking steps to continue the process of nuclear disarmament,'' Putin said in a letter of greeting to Britain's Pugwash Conference on Science and World Affairs.

``Having ratified START II, Russia intends to work on ensuring its implementation and full observation, as well as the speediest conclusion of START III treaty,'' Putin's message said.

START II, which would slash both countries' nuclear arsenals to between 3,000 and 3,500 warheads each, was ratified by the Russian parliament this spring after years of stalling by the Communist opposition. Moscow and Washington are now considering START III, which would set ceilings of 2,000 to 2,500 warheads each.

Still, Russia has threatened to scrap all arms agreements if the United States proceeds with proposals to deploy a new missile defense system. Such a system would likely require Washington to back out of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, which Moscow considers a cornerstone of global stability.

--

4) N. Korea Reassures Putin It Will End Missile Program

By David Hoffman
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, August 4, 2000 ; A01

MOSCOW, Aug. 3 ÐÐ In a confidential exchange of letters, North Korea has reaffirmed to Russia that it will drop its intercontinental ballistic missile program if other countries will launch two or three satellites a year for Pyongyang at their expense, well-informed sources said today.

The letters were exchanged between President Vladimir Putin and North Korean leader Kim Jong Il in the wake of Putin's July 19 visit to Pyongyang, where he first received the missile offer. Putin passed along what he had been told then, but questions immediately arose in the West about the exact meaning of what the North Koreans were proposing.

The threat of North Korean missile launches is one of the major reasons the United States is considering a limited national missile defense system. A decision on whether to begin construction is to be made later this year by President Clinton or next year by his successor. If the North Korean threat is diminished--or could be abated with a relatively small investment in satellite launches--this could have a significant impact on the debate in Washington on the issue.

Putin first described the North Korean proposal to leaders of the major industrial democracies at the Okinawa summit July 21-23. But U.S. and other officials said then there were many uncertainties, such as whether North Korea wanted to import the rocket technology or would be satisfied with launches outside its borders.

Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov explained at the summit that North Korea is open to suggestions on that issue, but his statement attracted little attention, and doubts persisted. The letters described today, with their demand that the launches be paid for by countries with concerns over the missiles, strongly suggest Pyongyang envisages that the launches indeed would be outside North Korea.

A State Department spokesman in Washington said tonight the United States has not been notified of the letters and therefore has no comment. After meeting North Korean Foreign Minister Paek Nam Sun at a regional security conference in Bangkok Friday, Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright said that she was unable to get from him any clarification of Pyongyang's plans.

Russia has repeatedly argued that the United States has overstated the threat from North Korea and that it would be cheaper to use diplomacy than to build the missile shield. Alexandre Mansourov, a visiting fellow at the Center for Northeast Asian Policy Studies at the Brookings Institution, said the offer, and now the clarifications, were an important diplomatic breakthrough for Russia, improving its chances of playing an intermediary role as the traditionally secretive government in Pyongyang begins to look outward.

The request to have other countries pay for satellite launches was not directed at Russia, Mansourov said, adding: "It is an idea for the United States to consider."

Well-informed sources here said the letter to Putin reiterates that North Korea would abandon its intercontinental ballistic missile program in exchange for the help with satellite launches, which Pyongyang says are for peaceful purposes. Going a step further than what was earlier disclosed, the North Koreans also asked that the "concerned countries"--those that have criticized its missile program--pay for the two or three satellite launches a year Pyongyang is requesting, the sources said.

The suggestion seems to be patterned on an earlier agreement in which North Korea agreed to shut down a graphite-moderated nuclear reactor, which the West feared could produce nuclear weapons materials, in exchange for two 1,000-megawatt light-water reactors from a consortium of the United States, Japan and South Korea.

Asked today about the exchange of letters with North Korea, a spokesman for the Russian Foreign Ministry, Alexander Yakovenko, had no comment.

Mansourov said Pyongyang essentially seems to be proposing to repeat the pattern of the nuclear reactor deal with the missile program. He noted that North Korea is not offering to curtail shorter-range missiles, only the continent-spanning ones.

Concern over North Korea's missile program escalated in August 1998, when it launched a three-stage missile over Japan. A declassified National Intelligence Estimate prepared for the Clinton administration has predicted that a North Korean Taepodong II missile will be capable of hitting the United States by 2005.

Mansourov said the North Korean offer to curtail the missile program came as a surprise last month to the visiting Russian delegation. At first, Putin inquired about Pyongyang's intentions only in general terms. When the offer was made, Putin suggested to Kim that they make a joint statement but was told he could make the announcement on his own, Mansourov said. Putin then told Russian journalists about it.

Mansourov said the chief outcome of the Pyongyang summit was the setting of a "new personal relationship" between Putin and the North Korean leader. "Even though very little substance was discussed . . . the fact that a personal relationship was established bodes well."

Russia had improved ties with South Korea under former president Boris Yeltsin, while all but abandoning North Korea, a closed, Stalinist state. Recently, a new bilateral treaty between Russia and North Korea was ratified by parliament, and Kim has agreed to make a precedent-breaking visit to Moscow. This week, continuing the effort to strengthen Russia's role in the region, Putin telephoned South Korean President Kim Dae Jung, pledging support for peace on the Korean Peninsula.

===========================================================

DOEWatch List ----A Magnum-Opus Project Subscribe online: http://www.onelist.com DOEWatch page: http://members.aol.com/doewatch

1. K-25 water test phase completed
From: magnu96196@aol.com

2. CHILDREN OF THE "MANHATTAN PROJECT"
From: df7332@aol.com

3. Weapons plant yanks beryllium-tainted gear
From: magnu96196@aol.com

4. Healing Our World: Weekly Comment By Jackie Alan Giuliano, Ph.D.
From: magnu96196@aol.com

5. Nuclear bomb 'lost near Greenland'
From: magnu96196@aol.com

6. Scientists Find Zirconate Material Promises Improved Safety for Storage of Plutonium
From: magnu96196@aol.com

----------

Message: 1
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 10:21:38 EDT
From: magnu96196@aol.com

K-25 water test phase completed
Some results are expected this week

August 13, 2000
By Frank Munger,
News-Sentinel Oak Ridge bureau
http://www.knoxnews.com/news/13170.shtml

OAK RIDGE -- The U.S. Department of Energy and its Oak Ridge contractors have completed the initial phase of water sampling at the K-25 Site, and some results may be available early this week. No matter the results, the concern and controversy appear likely to continue.

A group of ill workers on Friday reiterated their dissatisfaction with DOE's sampling plan and questioned whether the federal agency would admit K-25's water system is contaminated, even if the lab results prove it.

". . . The department would literally be hanging itself and its contractors if it were to publicly confirm the presence of radioactive and/or chemical contaminants in its sanitary water system resulting from its own sampling endeavors," the group of current and former workers at K-25 said in a statement released to the news media.

The group is proposing an independent team of experts to evaluate water concerns at the DOE plant, including the possibility that interconnecting water lines may have allowed "cross-contamination" of the drinking water from impure sources.

Representatives plan to meet with DOE's Oak Ridge officials on Monday.

Meanwhile, the concerned employees accused a DOE contractor of flushing the water lines at K-25 prior to last week's sampling.

DOE spokesman Steven Wyatt strongly denied the allegation.

"We heard this same claim earlier ... and checked it out. It just isn't true."

Wyatt said Monday's meeting will involve planning for the second phase of the project, focusing on past operations of the K-25 water system.

He said many groups would be represented at the meeting, including concerned employees and Dr. Richard Bird, a Boston physician who evaluated some of the sick workers and proposed additional studies.

In addition to samples taken last week by DOE and its contractors, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency took "replicate" samples and plans to have those evaluated, said John Blevins of EPA's Region 4 office in Atlanta.

Wyatt said DOE expects to have test results on bacteriological contamination in the water system by early this week.

Results on chemicals in the water should come next, followed by the analysis of any radiological elements, he said.

All of the sampling results should be available within two weeks, Wyatt said.

Regarding the upcoming review of past operations of the K-25 water system, Wyatt said DOE probably will seek "outside assistance."

He also said DOE plans to address the concerns raised by sick workers and others.

Frank Munger may be reached at 865-482-9213 or twig1@knoxnews.infi.net.

----------

Message: 2
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 16:01:50 EDT
From: df7332@aol.com

Subject: CHILDREN OF THE "MANHATTAN PROJECT"

To All:
Following is information that you may find of use.

CHILDREN OF THE "MANHATTAN PROJECT" <http://home.att.net/~cotmp/>

EXCERPTS:
This Web Site serves three distinct purposes:

1. To form an organization comprised of surviving participants, relatives of participants, educators, historians, and anyone else sharing an interest in The Manhattan Project.

2. To provide a forum for discussion about all issues relating to The Manhattan Project.

3. To provide a unique source of historical information, photos and documents pertaining to The Manhattan Project.

We are attempting to locate as many participants of the Manhattan Project and/or their descendents as possible. We are also interested in hearing from anyone who has an interest in the Manhattan Project. You can be a big help by "recommending" our site to others who you feel may be interested.

OUR MISSION: The ultimate mission of this web-site is to preserve the dedicated efforts of countless individuals who came together from a wide-variety of ethnic, cultural, and educational backgrounds to work on a "super-secret" project that was destined to bring about an early conclusion to World War II: The Manhattan Project.

As we enter the new millennium and we look back on the major achievements of the past century, the development of the atomic bomb ranks at the top or near the top on most everyone's list. However, because of the ongoing controversy as to whether the "weapon" should have been used as it was, many people have chosen to ignore one of the most resounding examples of American perseverance in the face of seemingly impossible odds.

In fact, at a time where being "politically correct" and taking elaborate steps not to "offend" anyone has become a symbol of morality in America, many public schools have chosen to ignore the The Manhattan Project altogether. Furthermore, some government agencies and public service organizations have chosen not to participate in or sponsor events targeted toward remembering this astounding achievement.

Having grown up in a family that endured the hardships of Los Alamos, I have a keen awareness of the sacrifices made by the many hundreds of individuals associated with The Manhattan Project. Therefore, I have undertaken this project to prevent the memories of so many Americans from being "buried" in a hole with a posted sign reading "It's really best if we forget this ever happened".

---------

Message: 3
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 21:03:01 EDT
From: magnu96196@aol.com

Weapons plant yanks beryllium-tainted gear

8/11/2000
Scripps Howard News Service
http://www.tennessean.com/sii/00/08/11/oaker11.shtml

OAK RIDGE -- With increased concern about the risk of worker exposures to beryllium, even at low levels, authorities at the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant recently removed tainted grinding wheels from several machine shops and are scouring the plant for other equipment that may contain small amounts of the metal.

Bill Wilburn, a plant spokesman, said some operations in the Alpha-1 facility were temporarily suspended last month after it was learned some grinding wheels might contain low levels -- less than 2% -- of a beryllium alloy. Nine of the suspect wheels were ultimately removed, although Wilburn said it appeared that only two of the wheels had actually been used in grinding operations.

A check of machining equipment elsewhere in the plant is to be completed this week, Wilburn said.

Even though the beryllium content was "very low" in the grinding wheels, Wilburn said Y-12 took precautionary steps "because of the current health concerns."

Thirty-five current or former Y-12 employees have been diagnosed with chronic beryllium disease, an incurable respiratory illness that can be debilitating or even fatal in some instances. Another 60 Y-12 workers have had positive blood tests indicating their bodies are sensitized to the metal, meaning they likely will develop the disease.

Legislation is pending in Congress that would provide financial compensation to beryllium victims at the Department of Energy facilities.

Although DOE has lowered the acceptable limits for beryllium exposure in the workplace, some researchers have suggested there may be no safe level of exposure to beryllium for people genetically predisposed to the disease.

Beryllium, a lightweight metal, is used in the manufacture of nuclear warhead parts at Y-12, and those shops where it is processed are tightly monitored, with special protection afforded workers.

However, finding the metal in grinding wheels was a surprise and a concern, because the equipment was being used in non-beryllium areas where some employees with CBD or beryllium sensitization are assigned.

In response to questions, the Y-12 spokesman said the problem was discovered July 19 by a plant employee who was reviewing "material safety data sheets" in preparation for a training course.

The information showed that the grinding wheels used in Alpha 1 contained some beryllium.

Glenn Bell, an Oak Ridge machinist with chronic beryllium disease, said the information should have been red-flagged years ago when the equipment arrived at Y-12 from the manufacturer.

Some of the wheels apparently have been at the warhead factory since 1992.

"Why weren't these sheets reviewed then?" Bell asked. "I'm just concerned that it took so long to catch it."

Bell said he thought plant officials did a good job after being alerted to the new issue.

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

Message: 4
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 21:03:57 EDT
From: magnu96196@aol.com

Fluoride - Poison in the Water?

Healing Our World:
Weekly Comment By Jackie Alan Giuliano, Ph.D.
Environment News Service

Would you intentionally ingest a material that is used as a pesticide and has been suspected of causing cancer, hip fractures, intellectual impairment, fertility problems, deformed fish and dental deformities? Well, two-thirds of the population of the United States, and soon the entire population of the city of Los Angeles and its surrounding communities, take this material into their bodies every day if they use tap water in any way.

Listed as one of the top 25 censored stories of 1998, the use of fluoride in our drinking water may have originated over 50 years ago as a way to cover-up the dangers of fluoride first discovered during the project to create the first atomic bomb.

While going over hundreds of declassified documents about the U.S. atomic bomb development program, the Manhattan Project, reporters Joel Griffiths and Chris Bryson found that fluoride was the key chemical in atomic bomb production. Millions of tons were subsequently used during the Cold War period to manufacture the high-grade uranium and plutonium for nuclear weapons.

Fluoride was the top chemical hazard of the U.S. nuclear weapons program, not only for workers, but for those living in nearby communities as well.

The documents show that the first U.S. lawsuits levied against the atomic weapons program were over fluoride poisoning, not radiation damage. The documents reveal that the U.S. government secretly ordered atomic bomb scientists to create "evidence useful in litigation" against defense contractors who were being accused of injuring citizens with fluoride.

In order to gather information, the government experimented with the residents of Newburgh, New York between 1945 and 1955. In a highly classified operation, the government secretly gathered blood and tissue samples from people of that town with the help of the New York Department of Health. Some of the results were published, but the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (now the Nuclear Regulatory Commission) censored the report for reasons of "national security" by removing the evidence of the adverse health effects from fluoride.

The evidence is compelling that the entire U.S. - and now international - program of water fluoridation began as a massive effort to coverup one of the most toxic materials to come out of the nuclear weapons program. If fluoride was presented to the country as beneficial, then no one could sue the government for being harmed by it.

Have you seen children and young adults among your family and friends with those whitish spots or flecks on their teeth or, in more extreme cases, dark streaks that look like decay? This is the effect of dental fluorosis, the first visible sign of overexposure to fluoride. In some communities, the incidence of dental fluorosis is 30 to 60 percent or more.

National brand of toothpaste for children

In the last 50 years, fluoride has shown up in toothpastes, in byproducts from the chemical industry and even in tablets for children, increasing our exposure to the chemical greatly. Unprecedented levels of fluoride are accumulating in our bodies, particularly the bodies of children. Fluoride accumulates in the bones and has been linked to an increase in the occurrence of stress fractures in young people in the United States.

The U.S. government's efforts to keep fluoride toxicity secret has had effects to this day. Very few studies have been done investigating the harmful effects of fluoride. Dr. Phyllis Mullenix, former head of toxicology at Forsyth Dental Center in Boston and now a critic of fluoridation, conducted animal studies in the early 1990s. She found that fluoride is a powerful central nervous system toxin and that the human brain could be adversely affected even at low doses.

In fact today, research from China has shown a correlation between exposure to low doses of fluoride and diminished IQ in children. But when Dr. Mullenix applied for a grant from the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) to continue her central nervous system research, she was turned town. An NIH panel flatly told her that "fluoride does not have central nervous system effects."

Yet a declassified atomic bomb program memo dated April 29, 1944 states clearly that "clinical evidence suggests that uranium hexafluoride may have a rather marked central nervous system effect..." The memo goes on to ask for a series of animal tests to be done on central nervous system effects and says, "this is important not only to protect a given individual, but also to prevent a confused workman from injuring others by improperly performing his duties."

The first air pollution disaster in the United States involved fluoride. You won't find it in most history books. On October 31, 1948, an inversion layer caused the fumes from the U.S. Steel plant in Donora, Pennsylvania to sink to the ground, killing 20 people and sickening 2/3 of the town's 14,000 inhabitants. If the weather pattern had lasted another day, thousands would have been killed.

An official report at the time of the disaster said that no single chemical was the cause, but Philip Stadtler, the nation's leading fluoride expert at the time, said the fluoride levels in the blood of dead and dying people that night were 12 to 25 times above normal. The official report not only helped U.S. Steel avoid compensating the people, but it saved other fluoride-producing industries from worry. Today, steel and aluminum manufactures release huge amounts of fluoride into the atmosphere.

So is our nation's water fluoridation program the product of an effort to keep secret the toxic effects of fluoride? Unbelievably, this seems to be the case.

Many studies also show that the incidence of cavities in children in fluoridated communities is virtually the same as non-fluoridated communities, yet the mythology of fluoride continues.

The Resources section below will help you choose what you can do. But once again, the larger issue is about the assumptions we make in our society and where we have been taught to place our trust. Evidence is mounting that all assumptions must be challenged. We must ask "why" every step of the way and then find ways to say "no!"

"In point of fact, fluorine causes more human cancer death, and causes it faster, than any other chemical." -- Dean Burk, chief chemist emeritus at the U.S. National Cancer Institute.

RESOURCES

1. An excellent summary of the key points against fluoride is at http://www.nofluoride.com/summary.htm

2. Visit the following websites for details about the controversy of fluoride:

Fluoride and the A-bomb program: http://www.icom.net/~nexus/fluoridebomb.html

Disaster at Donora: http://www.cadvision.com/Home_Pages/accounts/babiuk/donora.htm

an excellent site at http://www.cadvision.com/fluoride/index.htm

the findings of a study done by a Massachusetts town considering fluoridation: http://www.cadvision.com/Home_Pages/accounts/babiuk/natick.htm

risks and benefits: http://www.cadvision.com/fluoride/calgaryh.htm

Fluoride Information Index at http://www.rvi.net/~fluoride/

a very thorough article: http://www.icnr.com/FluoridePres/FluoridationOverdose.html

3. Read about all the sources of fluoride we encounter in a day in this referenced fictional piece at http://www.rvi.net/~fluoride/brou.htm

4. What you can do to decrease your own personal exposure and that of your family:

Find out if your community's water supply is fluoridated. If so, use bottled water for drinking and cooking. Boiling will not remove fluoride - it will only concentrate it. Don't give it to your pets either. Don't use it for baby formula. You should probably do this anyway whether or not fluoride is present.

Use non-fluoride toothpastes. There are many on the market. Try a health food store rather than the supermarket.

DO NOT swallow your toothpaste if you are using a brand with fluoride.

5. If you are experiencing tooth sensitivities and you have found the fluoride gels your dentist has prescribed helpful, you can still get relief in a number of other ways. Visit the following sites for help: http://www.saveyoursmile.com/healtharticles/sensitiveteeth.html http://www.betterwebbuilders.com/sensitiveteeth.html Visit the Preventative Dental Health Association at http://emporium.turnpike.net/P/PDHA/health.htm

6. Find out how to organize your community from http://www.nofluoride.com/

7. Find out who your Congressional representatives are and e-mail them. Demand federal intervention to stop fluoridation. If you know your Zip code, you can find them at http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/ziptoit.html or you can search by state at http://www.webslingerz.com/jhoffman/congress-email.html. You can also find your representatives at http://congress.nw.dc.us/innovate/index.html

8. Learn about the issues. A great alternative bookstore is Powellâ€(tm)s Bookstore in Portland, Oregon at http://www.powells.com/cgi-bin/associate?assoc_id=212 where you will find a wonderful alternative to the massive chain bookstores taking over the market.

Visit the Healing Our World Archive and check out the many resource links in past articles.

{Jackie Giuliano, a writer and a Professor of Environmental Studies, can be found in Venice, California, planning to use bottled water to boil pasta when fluoridation starts in L.A. Please send your thoughts, comments, and visions to him at jackie@healingourworld.com and visit his web site at www.healingourworld.com}

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

Message: 5
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 21:13:54 EDT
From: magnu96196@aol.com

Nuclear bomb 'lost near Greenland'

13 August, 2000
By Jon Leyne
http://news6.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/americas/newsid%5F87800 0/878907.stm

An American nuclear bomb - lost in an air crash - may still lie in the sea off Greenland, according to a report published in a Danish newspaper.

The newspaper, Jyllands-Posten, says the bomb was on board an American B-52 bomber which crashed in 1968 close to the American airbase at Thule - in the north-west of the Danish arctic island.

The huge planes, which are still in service, were designed to deliver the nuclear deterrent deep inside the Soviet Union.

According to the newspaper report, after a clean up operation, the US assured Denmark that all weapons on board the crashed aircraft had been accounted for.

But the paper says that only three out of four nuclear weapons carried by the plane were actually recovered.

Serial number

It says that detective work by former employees at the airbase indicates that one bomb is probably still on the seabed.

It even quotes the serial number - which it says is 78252.

The remote airbase at Thule plays an important role in America's nuclear defences.

It is the site of a radar station designed to give early warning of incoming ballistic missiles.

Missile plan

If Washington goes ahead with its plan to deploy a national missile defence system, the radar at Thule will need to be upgraded.

The plan is already facing heavy opposition in Greenland and among the rest of America's trans-Atlantic allies.

If this latest revelation proves true it can only be a further cause of friction.

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

Message: 6
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 21:18:48 EDT
From: magnu96196@aol.com

Scientists Find Zirconate Material Promises Improved Safety for Storage of Plutonium From Dismantled Nuclear Weapons

Aug. 11, 2000
ATTENTION: Science, National editors
http://www.stlnet.com/postnet/News/wires.nsf/StateRegion/A0FE50AF092913CB8625693800692492?OpenDocument

ANN ARBOR, Mich., Aug. 11 (AScribe News) -- An international research team, led by University of Michigan scientists, has found that gadolinium zirconate is much more resistant to radiation than the ceramic currently being considered for disposal of plutonium from dismantled nuclear weapons in the United States. This highly durable material -- a zirconate pyrochlore -- is calculated to resist radiation damage for up to 30 million years.

The research team performed a systematic study of the radiation resistance of gadolinium titanate, the ceramic currently proposed for plutonium immobilization, and zirconate compositions. Results indicate that the titanate will be damaged by radiation in less than 1,000 years. The zirconate will not sustain damage for periods up to 30 million years. Considering that plutonium is an environmental contaminant with a radioactive half-life of 24,500 years, the multi-million-year calculation of the zirconate's durability makes it a leading candidate for the immobilization of plutonium.

``This is a significant scientific discovery with major environmental impact for future generations,'' said Dr. Yok Chen, Program Manager in the Office of Basic Energy Sciences at the U.S. Department of Energy, which funded this research at the University of Michigan and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL).

Rodney Ewing, professor of nuclear engineering and radiological sciences at the U-M College of Engineering, and William Weber, a senior staff scientist at PNNL, led the team of researchers that included scientists at the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organization and the Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research in India.

The team's findings were first published in the December 1999 Journal of Materials Research (JMR). This past week, another international team of researchers at Los Alamos National Laboratory, working independently from the U-M team, announced similar results with an erbium zirconate ceramic.

The safe disposal of plutonium is a relatively new environmental problem. Both the United States and the former Soviet Union have agreed to dismantle nuclear weapons, resulting in 100 metric tons of plutonium, approximately 50 from each side. This plutonium is only a small part of a growing global inventory of plutonium that is already greater than 1,300 metric tons.

``What to do with this plutonium is a science and policy issue of great national and international importance,'' said Ewing. ``Two independent research teams have shown that zirconate-based materials offer an excellent solution to the serious problem of this ever-increasing amount of plutonium. Taken together, these startling results confirm that there are radiation-resistant and chemically durable materials that can safely contain plutonium.''

This new material is capable of incorporating a large variety of chemical elements in its structure, including plutonium. The zirconate withstands the radiation that results from the decay of plutonium. The ability to sustain high levels of damage without a disruption of the atomic structure accounts for the radiation stability of this material.

``The currently considered titanate became completely disordered at relatively low exposures to radiation,'' said Shixin Wang, a U-M postdoctoral fellow and lead author on the JMR article. Wang presented these findings at the Plutonium Futures 2000 conference on July 10 in Sante Fe, N.M.

``The disordered titanate material leads to an increase in the loss of plutonium when the material is in contact with water,'' added Weber at PNNL.

The team will continue to investigate the chemical durability of gadolinium zirconate by leaching tests. The radiation behavior of the zirconates with high concentrations of impurities will be studied to ensure a complete knowledge of the long-term performance of this material.

Media Contact: Janet C. Harvey-Clark, University of Michigan News Service, 734-647-7087; janethc(at)engin.umich.edu

Professor Rodney Ewing, 734-647-8529; rodewing(at)umich.edu

Staci Maloof, PNNL, 509-372-6313; staci.maloof(at)pnl.gov