------- Index of Articles
NUCLEAR
New WHO Board
PUBLIC COMMENTS NEEDED ON NUCLEAR WORKER DISCRIMINATION
Malaysia's Mahathir says don't trust nuclear power
Search underway for source of human bones used in experiments
Democrats want Maralinga study to include disabled claims
NATO Keeps Getting Bigger
Baltic entry to NATO debated
Berlin, Paris want EU to be firm on Kyoto, weapons
Europe on trial
Nuclear train arrives in France despite protests
Germany to Cut Defense Spending
North Korea, U.S. to Hold Talks Today On Missiles
Reconciliation Between Koreas Stalls
Japan PM May Oppose Missile Defense
Friend in Romania
Bush Pushes Missile Plan to NATO
Bush Extends Russian Uranium Order
Nuclear 'Milestone' Divides U.S., Russia
Labor Department Worker Compensation
Lawmaker seeks review of nuclear site cleanup program
Workers sacrificed, jurors told
Judge angered by Web posting
Nuclear Dump's Foes Hopeful
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION:
Park Employees Absolved In New Mexico Wildfire
Duke Energy Pursues License Renewal for Nuclear Stations
As protesters multiply, will actions escalate?
Health subcommittee seeks sick-resident member
Meetings set for Oak Ridge health compensation plan
ABM 'Prevents a Full Exploration of Possibility'
Role of Arms Accords
Bush Tells NATO Members to Prepare for New Threats
Bush Urges NATO to Welcome New Members
Bush reinforces U.S. peace effort
Political, personal attacks greet Bush
Criticism Greets Bush As Europe Trip Begins
Cheney Pushes Bush Energy Plan; More Nuclear Power
Bury hot waste deep underground, scientific committee recommends
MILITARY
DISCOVER MAGAZINE HONORS LANDMINE DETECTOR, MICROSCOPE
US, China in Mine Hunt Exercises
Beijing's arms sale won't net sanctions
Top Peru Military Commander Accused
Study Shows Increase in Arms Spending
Macedonia Crisis Looms Over NATO
No NATO intervention in Macedonia: Bush
Why Colombia Policy Won't Change Soon
U.S. military plans drug war buildup
"Smart Sanctions"
See "The Accused" on BBC
Russian Space Program Shortchanged
Updated Army rulebook on how to wage war
Quick Strike Forces Urged for Military
Panel Recommends Improved Weapons
Military Review Emphasizes Need for Services to Respond Jointly
Pentagon panel mixed on new weapons
In the firing line
Statement regarding intervention in Sudan
OTHER
GM takes steps towards fuel cell vehicles
Embassy Jury Rejects Death Sentence
Russia Communist Backs Death Penalty
RADON IN BLUE RIDGE AMONG HIGHEST IN NATION
Calif. forced to switch to ethanol for cleaner air
Guatemala Ex-Dictators to Be Probed
Amnesty: Activist Hurt in Guatemala
World Bank Approves Loan for Pakistan
ACTIVISTS
ONLINE FORUM ADDRESSES EPA PUBLIC INPUT
Protesters Try to Block Bush Motorcade
G-8 Protest Group Pledges Peace
United Methodist Church Opposes Bush's Missile Defense
-------- NUCLEAR
New WHO Board
Can They Deal With Low Level Radiation Issues?
From: "Cat" Cat@freewomen.freeserve.co.uk
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 22:20:12 +0100
Please send snail mail letters to the contacts listed below asking for a revision of the 1959 agreement between the World Health Organisation and the International Atomic Energy Authority. This agreement prevents the WHO from carrying out independent research into the effects of low-level radiation without the involvement of the IAEA; also, the IAEA can demand that any sensitive results be kept secret. It has been in effect since 1959. Since the IAEA also has the mandate to promote the use of nuclear power worldwide, there is an obvious conflict of interest. For more information write to Solnage Fernex at the email address below. Please forward this to those whom you think might actually make representations.
--
From: solange [s.m.fernex@wanadoo.fr] Dear Colleagues,
WHO has put on email the names and time of mandate of the (new) members of the Executive Board; The new European member is the UK, who replaces France. We do not weep for Professor Girard. USA and Canada have finished their 3 year's term, and there is a strong representation of central and south America.
In order to continue and finalize our work on the amendment of the IAEA/WHO Agreement, these are the personalities to contact as a priority. Or course, all WHO member states must be approached by the national affiliates of all our organizations, with the demands of the petition to this effect, which you all possess.
Prof Zeltner (Switzerland) told us that the matter would be taken up and finalized at the January WHO Executive board meeting, after the rapporteur, (a Canadian Ambassador), will have reported on this matter, s decided at the World Health Assembly.
In Kiev we had very interesting conversations with several UN representatives who were very receptive to the proposed suppression of the conflicts of interest (OCHA, WHO, etc), we will send a report later on this conference;
Thank you for your invaluable help and please spread this mail. Regards, Michel Fernex (IPPNW Switzerland) Solange Fernex (WILPF France)
--
World Health Organization
Office of the Chairman of the Executive Board
Thu Jun 7 18:06:19 2001
Executive Board Members
The Executive Board is composed of 32 persons who are technically qualified in the field of health, each designated by a Member State that has been elected to serve by the World Health Assembly. Member States are elected for three-year terms.
The affiliations appear in the style and the language used by the corresponding member of the Board. MEMBERS OF THE EXECUTIVE BOARD AND TERM OF OFFICE
BELGIUM 1999-2002
Dr G. Thiers Directeur Institut scientifique de la Santé publique - Louis Pasteur Bruxelles
BRAZIL 2000-2003
Professor J. Yunes Public Health Facility University of São Paulo São Paulo
CHAD 1999-2002
Dr M.E. Mbaiong Directeur général adjoint Ministère de la Santé publique N'Djamena
COLOMBIA 2001-2004
Dr J. Boshell Director General Instituto Nacional de Salud Santafé de Bogotá
COMOROS 1999-2002
Dr A. Msa Mliva Directeur général de la Santé Moroni
CONGO 1999-2002
Dr D. Bodzongo Directeur général de la Santé Brazzaville
COTE D'IVOIRE 1999-2002
Professeur R. Abouo-N'Dori Ministre de la Santé publique Abidjan
CUBA 2001-2004
Dr C. Dotres Martínez Ministro de Salud Pública La Habana
DEMOCRATIC PEOPLE¹S REPUBLIC OF KOREA 2000-2003
Dr Kim Won Ho Policy Advisor, Ministry of Health Pyongyang
EGYPT 2001-2004
Dr I. Sallam Minister of Health and Population Cairo
EQUATORIAL GUINEA 2000-2003
Dr S. Abia Nseng Director General de Salud Pública y Planificación Malabo
ERITREA 2001-2004
Dr Z. Alemu Director, Primary Health Care Division Ministry of Health Asmara
ETHIOPIA 2001-2004
Dr G. Azene Head, Department of Planning and Programming Ministry of Health Addis Ababa
GRENADA 2001-2004
Dr C. Modeste-Curwen Minister of Health St George's
GUATEMALA 1999-2002
Dr R. Cabrera Márquez Viceministro de Salud Pública y Asistencia Social Ciudad de Guatemala
INDIA 1999-2002
Mr J.A. Chowdhury (Vice-Chairman) Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Government of India New Delhi
IRAN (ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF) 2000-2003
Dr B. Sadrizadeh (Vice-Chairman) Senior Adviser to the Minister of Health and Medical Education Teheran
ITALY 2000-2003
Dr M. Di Gennaro Secretary General, Italian National Health Council Roma
JAPAN 2000-2003
Dr H. Shinozaki Director-General, Health Service Bureau Ministry of Health and Welfare Tokyo
JORDAN 2000-2003
Dr T.S. Suheimat Minister of Health Amman
KAZAKHSTAN 2001-2004
Professor M. Kulzhanov
LEBANON 1999-2002
Dr K. Karam Minister of Tourism Beirut
LITHUANIA 2000-2003
Professor V. Grabauskas Rector, Kaunas Medical University Kaunas
MYANMAR 2001-2004
Mr Ket Sein Minister of Health Yangon
PHILIPPINES 2001-2004
Dr A.G. Romualdez, Jr Department of Health Manila
REPUBLIC OF KOREA 2001-2004
Dr Y.-J. Om Special Adviser to the Minister of Health and Welfare Seoul
SAUDI ARABIA 2001-2004
Dr Y.Y. Al-Mazrou Assistant Deputy Minister for Preventive Medicine Ministry of Health Riyadh
SWEDEN 2000-2003
Ms K. Wigzell Director-General, National Board of Health and Welfare Stockholm
SWITZERLAND 1999-2002
Professeur T. Zeltner (Vice-Chairman) Directeur, Office fédéral de la Santé publique Département fédéral de l'Intérieur Berne
UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND 2001-2004
Professor L. Donaldson Chief Medical Officer Department of Health London
VANUATU 1999-2002
Mrs M. Abel (Chairman) Director of Public Health Port Vila
VENEZUELA 2000-2003
Dra M. Urbaneja Durant Ministra de Salud y Desarrollo Social Caracas
-------
PUBLIC COMMENTS NEEDED ON NUCLEAR WORKER DISCRIMINATION
June 13, 2001
ENS
http://ens.lycos.com/ens/jun2001/2001L-06-13-09.html
WASHINGTON, DC, The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Discrimination Task Group is holding a series of public meetings nationwide this summer to solicit comments on draft recommendations contained in its Discrimination Task Group Report.
Designed to improve the agency's handling of complaints by nuclear industry workers who allege that they have been discriminated against by their employers after raising safety concerns, the draft report contains some 40 preliminary recommendations.
The NRC formed the Task Group last April to review the way the agency handles discrimination complaints filed by nuclear industry workers and to recommend possible changes to the agency's regulations, enforcement policy, or other agency guidelines. After the series of public meetings is held, the Task Group will develop final recommendations for the Commission to consider.
The public meetings will be held as follows:
June 25 at the NRC's Technical Training Center, Chattanooga, Tennessee (7 pm - 9 pm) July 11 at the agency's Region III offices, Lisle, Illinois (7 pm - 9 pm) July 12 at the Paducah Community College in Paducah, Kentucky (7 pm - 9 pm) August 9 at the San Luis Obispo Public Library, San Luis Obispo, California (7 pm - 9 pm) August 14 at the Waterford Town Hall, Waterford, Connecticut (7 pm - 9 pm) August 16 at the NRC's Two White Flint North building, Rockville, Maryland, starting at 9:30 am
More information regarding the draft report and schedule changes is available at: http://www.nrc.gov/OE. For those unable to attend one of the public meetings, comments on the draft may be submitted by August 17 at the same website.
-------- asia
Malaysia's Mahathir says don't trust nuclear power
MALAYSIA: June 13, 2001
REUTERS
http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=11170
KUALA LUMPUR - Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad said yesterday he did not trust nuclear power as scientists knew too little about how to control its destructive force.
"Nuclear power is like a malevolent genie which once released from the bottle, cannot be tamed and put back in again," Mahathir said on the sidelines of an Asian oil and gas conference in the Malaysian capital.
He cited nuclear disasters like Chernobyl, in the Ukraine, where the harmful effects were still manifest 15 years after the nuclear reactor explosion.
"I frankly don't trust nuclear power," he said. "I think our knowledge of its use and nuclear engineering expertise is still very primitive. We hear of too many accidents." Malaysia has no nuclear power plants, relying on oil, natural gas and water for its energy needs.
Mahathir, speaking on the need for environmentally friendly fuel sources in the future, said he would opt anytime for hydro power which he described as "most viable" and "cheapest".
The prime minister has approved the building of the giant Bakun hydroelectric dam in Sarawak state on the island of Borneo, drawing fire from green groups opposed to its destruction of tropical rain forest and relocation of native tribes.
"I am not fanatic about the environment but I do care about it," Mahathir said.
-------- australia
Search underway for source of human bones used in experiments
Australian Broadcasting Corporation
This Bulletin: Wed, 13 Jun 2001
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newslink/weekly/newsnat-13jun2001-38.htm
A search of records is underway at the old Commonwealth X-Ray and Radiation Laboratory in Melbourne for the source of human bones used in radiation experiments.
The experiments started in the late 1950s and ended in 1978.
The Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency inherited the records when it took over the old Commonwealth X-Ray and Radiation Laboratory in Yallambie in Melbourne's north-east.
The agency says it could be several days before the final source of human bones can be traced, but says its early examination of records shows state and territory pathologists provided much of the tissue for testing.
Stillborn babies, the bodies of young children and people aged up to 40 years were used to supply bone samples to be tested for radiation levels resulting from nuclear test fall out.
The agency says once the source of the human bones is established, its findings will be given to the Federal Government.
--------
Democrats want Maralinga study to include disabled claims
June 13, 2001
Australian Broadcasting
http://www.abc.net.au/news/state/sa/archive/metsa-13jun2001-8.htm
The Democrats say a Federal Government study into British nuclear testing in Australia must also investigate claims disabled people were subjected to radiation tests.
The study will investigate cancer and mortality rates among nearly 16,000 military personnel and others who may have been exposed to radiation in the 1950s and 1960s.
It has been claimed disabled people were flown from Britain to Maralinga, in South Australia, and used to measure the effects of fallout from atomic testing.
Democrats Senator Lyn Allison says the claims must be included in the study.
"If it is true that people with disabilities were brought to Australia to be part of the Maralinga nuclear tests then I think there are some very serious questions about how they came to be here, whether they did it willingly and what exactly they were subjected to," she said.
A spokesman for the Veterans' Affairs Minister says the study will consider any new information about the claims.
-------- europe
NATO Keeps Getting Bigger
JUNE 13, 03:43 EST
By JEFFREY ULBRICH
Associated Press Writer
http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_package.html?FRONTID=ELECTION&PACKAGEID=bushforeign&STORYID=APIS7CJHJ4O0
BRUSSELS, Belgium (AP) There is a certain irony in the fact that the Cold War is over but NATO is getting bigger.
The Russians have noticed that too. And they don't like it one bit.
Two years ago, at a summit in Washington, NATO leaders celebrated the alliance's 50th birthday by welcoming three new members Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary, all former enemies of the communist Warsaw Pact. That pushed membership from 16 to 19. More are expected to be announced at the next summit in Prague, Czech Republic, in the autumn of 2002.
NATO expansion is on President Bush's agenda when he meets with the alliance's chiefs of state and government Wednesday. He is expected to kick off what will be a long, intense debate over who will be next to join Europe's most prestigious security club.
``It's not a question of whether, it's a question of when,'' Bush said Tuesday in Madrid, Spain, first stop on a five-nation trip. ``We firmly believe NATO should expand.''
Waiting anxiously in the wings are nine former communist nations Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Macedonia and Albania.
NATO officials say they have noticed, if not Russian acceptance of the inevitability of further enlargement, at least a lessening in the intensity of Moscow's opposition. Secretary-General Lord Robertson is always at pains to praise the excellent relations between Russia and the allies in the Balkans, where Moscow contributes thousands of troops.
Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov even acknowledged at a NATO meeting last month in Budapest, Hungary, that Moscow has no veto over the alliance's enlargement plans.
However, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov took a different stand last week.
``The Western opinion that recent progress in Russia-NATO military cooperation can be regarded as a liberalized Russian attitude to enlargement of the alliance is a big political confusion,'' the Itar-Tass news agency quoted the defense minister as saying. ``The strengthening of the alliance's military might is a direct threat to European security.''
The reality is that NATO intends to take in more members whether Russia likes it or not.
For NATO candidates, joining the alliance means different things.
One NATO military specialist noted that only the three Baltic nations Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania want to join the alliance because of real security concerns. For the rest, being a NATO member is full of political significance. It means joining the club of Europe's prosperous, becoming part of a major Western institution.
At this early stage, theories abound. There are those who favor the ``big bang,'' bringing all nine in at once. Other allies have their particular favorites. Some say all three Baltic countries should be invited at once, both for security reasons and because in many ways they really are a unit. Some allies say tiny Slovenia, which just missed by a whisker getting in the last time, should be rewarded now. Others say Romania, which was among the top candidates last time, has actually regressed. And almost everybody shudders at the mere thought of Macedonia.
In addition, there are 19 parliaments that must be persuaded not the least of which is the U.S. Senate, where doubts about further enlargement abound.
----
Baltic entry to NATO debated
Washington Times
June 13, 2001
Jan Nowak
http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20010613-31793226.htm
In his landmark speech to the recent regional defense conference in Bratislava, Czech President Vaclav Havel proposed that the order of priorities for NATO enlargement should be reversed. The Baltic states and Slovakia should be the first of the new states admitted, he argued, not the last.
Mr. Havel understands the Russian mentality. He knows that a painfully slow, gradual process of enlargement extended over many years would bring about a lingering and protracted conflict with Russia over the issue. He knows that the admission of the Baltic states Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia would meet with strong rhetorical resistance from Moscow. But their admission to NATO would also bring closure. It would make possible a new era of improved relations between the Atlantic community and Russia; an improvement that is not possible as long as Russia continues to threaten the Baltics and other neighboring countries lying in what it calls its "near abroad."
Over the past year there has been an ominous escalation of Russia´s threats to its Baltic neighbors. Last June the Russian ministry of foreign affairs released to the press a statement that all three Baltic states were admitted to the Soviet Union in August 1940 "at their own request." It went on to argue that the use of such words as occupation or annexations in describing its occupation of the Baltic countries "ignores the political, historical and legal realities." Since Moscow claims the entire former territory of the Soviet Union as its exclusive sphere of influence, the release of such statements is clearly intended to threaten and intimidate.
Dimitri Rogozin, chairman of the Duma´s foreign affairs committee, was even more explicit: "If Estonia is admitted to NATO, (Russian) non-strategic missiles and long-distance artillery would be targeted at all strategic NATO sites in that country. Bridges, airfields, power plants, ports and administrative buildings would become targets . . . Further, the Russian military would become more active and carry out reconnaissance missions in Estonian territory."
Hardly a month goes by without Russia accusing Latvia of discriminatory policies toward its Russian minority, which makes up one-third of Latvia´s population. Ironically, the Russians living in Latvia have shown no inclination to return to their native country. They clearly find Latvian "discrimination" preferable to living in Russia.
The Baltic nations, which historically have displayed extraordinary courage in facing the Russian giant, have every reason to seek their future security in Western defense structures such as NATO. For their unrestricted sovereignty may last only as long as the cost of expanding Russia´s influence by force or by blackmail is perceived in Moscow as too high. In this situation, any wrong move by the West could lead to miscalculations in the Kremlin with potentially disastrous consequences. In short, the admission of these small democracies into NATO offers the best chance to prevent an outbreak of a second Cold War.
The United States has only one year to develop a clear position on the next stage of NATO enlargement before the next summit meeting. The administration has little time, therefore, to formulate its own policy and to convince its allies to accept that policy.
It is no secret that Great Britain is the strongest opponent to any move which could offend Russia, a position which oddly conflicts with the lessons of its own past experience. Britain´s attempts to appease Hitler led to World War II, and the postwar appeasement of Stalin brought on the Cold War. Now, attempts to appease Mr. Putin may destroy the chance for lasting cooperation with Russia based on respect for the territorial integrity and sovereignty of all nations, including Russia´s immediate neighbors.
In a few days, President Bush will have an opportunity to articulate his policies in Brussels and in Warsaw. It must be hoped that he will go beyond the repetition of old cliches about the doors to NATO being open, while nobody is invited inside, or that Russia has no right of veto but we have to respect Russian sensitivities. Or finally, that we want a free and united Europe, while declining to say where the borders of a united Europe will be drawn.
Jan Nowak is a former consultant to the National Security Council on Central and Eastern European Affairs. For 25 years he was director of the Polish service for Radio Free Europe.
----
Berlin, Paris want EU to be firm on Kyoto, weapons
GERMANY: June 13, 2001
Story by Emma Thomasson
REUTERS
http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=11172
FREIBURG, Germany - Germany and France sent a strong message to U.S. President George W. Bush as he arrived in Europe yesterday, calling for the EU to stand firm on climate change and nuclear non-proliferation.
In a declaration on defence issued after talks between Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and French President Jacques Chirac and Prime Minister Lionel Jospin, they said they were worried about the spread of ballistic weapons.
"France and Germany consider that the risks of ballistic proliferation necessitate the reinforcement of the multilateral instruments of non-proliferation," read the declaration.
It said Paris and Berlin wanted European Union leaders, meeting for a summit in Sweden from Friday, to adopt a joint position on the fight against such weapons which could lead to an international conference on non-proliferation.
Chirac made such a call in a keynote speech on defence last week saying Bush's desire to build a missile shield could not be the only response to the threat of nuclear proliferation. Bush, who arrived in Madrid yesterday, is due to hold talks with his NATO partners in Brussels on Wednesday. He has urged the creation of a shield to protect the United States and its allies against weapons fired from "rogue" states.
But many European leaders have been wary of the plan, fearing it could lead to a new arms race and rupture anti-proliferation treaties like the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) treaty between Washington and Moscow.
The Franco-German declaration welcomed Washington's efforts to discuss its plans with its European allies and said it hoped consultation would continue and EU members would coordinate closely on it.
Bush said on Monday he was looking forward to making his case to European leaders. "I think the whole doctrine of blowing each other up...is an ancient doctrine," he said.
COMMITMENT TO KYOTO
The meeting between Schroeder, Chirac and Jospin in the southwestern town of Freiburg also touched on the other main areas of tension between Europe and Washington: Bush's rejection of the 1997 Kyoto protocol on climate change.
"Schroeder and Chirac share the point of view that the EU must remain committed and engaged concerning the ratification of the Kyoto protocol," a French source said after the talks.
The Kyoto protocol commits signatories to targeted cuts in their emissions of gases thought to cause global warming like carbon dioxide that is produced by burning fossil fuels.
Bush said in March Washington would not sign the protocol which he called "unrealistic", enraging his European partners. But shortly before heading to Europe, Bush said he took climate change seriously and proposed new research into its effects.
"Chirac said it is not time to conduct new studies. These studies have already been done. We have to set objectives," the French source said. Chirac, Schroeder and Jospin are due to address a news conference at the end of their meeting at 1500 GMT.
----
Europe on trial
Washington Times
June 13, 2001
Tony Blankley
http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20010613-96894196.htm
In one of the stranger efforts at serious journalism, The Washington Post this week headlined its story on President Bush´s departure for Europe: "Tax Cut Strategy Goes to Europe." In The Post´s lexicon, this is not a compliment. The burden of the article was that just as Mr. Bush had bullied his way to the conservative, partisan tax cut he wanted in Congress, so he intends to place unilateral demands on Europe.
In this reading of events, a rudely trodden upon Europe will play the part of poor, abused Sen. Jim Jeffords. Thus Mr. Bush will rue the day he tries to have his way with Europe on missile defense, the Kyoto treaty, etc. Just as Mr. Bush was paid back by Mr. Jeffords with the loss of the Senate, Mr. Bush´s unilateralism in Europe will be bought, writes The Washington Post, "at the cost of international goodwill Bush may need in the future." The analogy is doubly inapt (and inept).
Mr. Jeffords didn´t leave the Republican Party because he was not invited over to tea at the White House, but because of some combination of philosophical differences and personal interests. And if the Europeans oppose our policies it will not be due to a lack of "goodwill," but because Europe´s self-perceived interests, values and the domestic political needs of their governments may contradict our policies.
In fact, U.S.-European relations which is the foundation of the international order and world prosperity have been deteriorating since the end of the Cold War. With the passing of the Soviet threat as the galvanizing cause of our unity, it is past time to begin to seriously understand and deal with this dangerous degrading of the Atlantic alliance. It was formed by shared values and interests, and it is degrading because statesmen (both European and pre-Bush Americans) have been failing to sustain those essential elements of that unprecedentedly valuable partnership.
The beginning of wisdom on this subject can be found in Henry Kissinger´s just-published masterwork, "Does America Need a Foreign Policy: Towards a Diplomacy for the 21st Century." In the part of the book that analyzes Europe, which should be required reading by journalists, politicians and the publics on both sides of the Atlantic, Mr. Kissinger lays out with a cool, supervising intelligence the interplay of three evolving forces: Europe´s image of itself, the impact of European integration on the Atlantic relationship and American attitudes toward those different options for European integration.
He sees Europe increasingly defining itself by challenging the United States. This is leading to a Europe that delivers moral homilies at the United States while concentrating on economic competition (e.g. condemning American capital punishment while banning highly productive American genetically engineered foods). At the same time Europe is constructing a foreign policy that attempts to mediate between the United States and the rest of the world. This facilitates Russia´s increasing effort to position itself closer to Europe than Europe is to America.
If these policies continue, eventually the United States will be forced to respond much the way 19th-century Britain did to Europe by a balance of power strategy that aligns with the weaker nations of Europe against the stronger. Ironically, as a result, the United States could be forced by Europe into blocking European integration.
Thus, contrary to the suggestion of The Washington Post, it is not Mr. Bush´s America that is forcing Europe´s hand, but Europe which will force our hand in an act of economic and diplomatic self-defense. And, as Mr. Kissinger points out, America is powerfully situated to assert its interests in either a divided or a unified Europe. To a large extent, Europe must decide whether it wants us as an intervening or cooperating force for European integration.
As strongly as he warns Europe not to play the United States as a foil for Europe´s domestic politics or collective ego gratifications, he warns American critics of Mr. Bush´s restrained foreign policy, on both the left and the right, to resist the urge to exploit our dominance particularly by allegedly humanitarian intrusions into other nations´ sovereignties. From Haiti to Somalia to Bosnia to Kosovo: "No matter how selflessly America perceives its aims . . . we would gradually unite the world against . . . A deliberate quest for hegemony is the surest way to destroy the values that made the United States great."
Finally, in his most sobering observation, while recognizing the difficulty for Europe in finding a definition of its political and economic identity that is something other than "an almost congenital opposition to the United States," Mr. Kissinger questions whether a serious strategic dialogue within the U.S.-European alliance is still possible, or whether the now largely left of center governments of Europe "will let such strategic considerations be submerged by their domestic politics." It is not Mr. Bush, but the European leaders who are on trial this week.
E-mail: Blankley@erols.com
-------- france
Nuclear train arrives in France despite protests
FRANCE: June 13, 2001
REUTERS
http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=11159
ROUEN, France - Protesters lay across rail tracks and lit firecrackers yesterday in a bid to halt a train carrying nuclear waste from Germany across northern France for reprocessing, French Green Party leaders said.
The train, which left Germany on Monday evening, was slowed by several protests on its way to the recycling plant at La Hague, on France's Channel coast. It reached its destination just three hours behind schedule.
The controversial resumption of nuclear waste transfers from Germany to France for reprocessing and back again for storage, agreed in January, has angered environmentalists concerned about the dangers posed by nuclear energy and its waste.
Close to the northwestern French city of Rouen, and again in Bayeux, the train carrying waste from German nuclear power stations Biblis and Philippsburg was held up by protesters lying on the tracks.
A spokesman for the Rouen area Green Party said about 30 activists belonging to the Communist Revolutionary League took up positions on the tracks at a station near Rouen in the early morning and laid metal rods and sleepers on the rails. They succeeded in delaying the train by an hour.
Local Green Party leader Alain Gruenais told Reuters some 20 people again delayed the train by half an hour near Caen.
Earlier demonstrators set up two red lights and, in a separate protest, lit smoke bombs obscuring the driver's vision just ahead of a bridge, forcing the train to stop. Police arrested about a dozen activists but they were quickly released.
The transfer is the third since France and Germany agreed to resume the movement of nuclear waste in January after a two-year break. Under the German government's plan to phase out nuclear energy such transfers will continue until 2005.
-------- germany
Germany to Cut Defense Spending
JUNE 13, 21:23 EST
By STEPHEN GRAHAM
Associated Press
http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=EUROPE&STORYID=APIS7CK13T80
BERLIN (AP) - The German government said Wednesday it will cut defense spending next year, despite pressure from the United States and NATO to step up spending for better military training and equipment.
``We can't go into the future with high debts,'' Finance Minister Hans Eichel said after the Cabinet approved the budget. ``We have to create room for future-oriented investments'' in areas such as education, he said.
Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder's Social Democrats, who govern with the smaller Greens party, are hoping to prove their claims of being sound managers of Europe's most powerful economy ahead of fall 2002 parliamentary elections.
Military spending was cut 1.4 percent to $20.1 billion. The total will rise in 2003.
International organizations such as the International Monetary Fund and European Central Bank are likely to applaud Germany's tight spending plans, but military allies may be less pleased.
The United States and NATO officials have pressed Germany to prepare themselves for post-Cold War duties such as peacekeeping.
Even as Germany cuts troop strength and shifts toward a more professional force, officers are openly complaining of underfunding and aging equipment.
Despite budgetary rigor, Eichel accommodated a pledge by Schroeder to provide more cash for farming.
Schroeder in January appointed Renate Kuenast of the Greens to head a new ministry for agriculture and consumer protection with a mandate to overhaul farm practices.
Mad cow disease broke out in Germany late last year, causing consumer panic about the safety of meat.
The spending plans are based on projections that the German economy, which has slowed much more than the government expected this year, will bounce back in 2002 and expand by about 2.25 percent.
-------- korea
North Korea, U.S. to Hold Talks Today On Missiles
By Steven Mufson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, June 13, 2001; Page A21
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A58424-2001Jun12?language=printer
North Korea has agreed to a meeting today in New York with State Department special envoy Jack Pritchard to renew negotiations over ending North Korea's missile development and export programs, a State Department official said.
Pritchard will meet with North Korea's permanent representative to the United Nations, Li Hyong Chol, "to make arrangements for bilateral talks," the State Department said in a statement.
It will be the first substantive meeting since President Bush took office and put talks on hold while reviewing U.S. policy toward North Korea. The session comes less than a week after the administration decided to press ahead with contacts on ballistic missiles and conventional forces.
Pritchard, who served on the National Security Council staff in the Clinton administration, is the new special envoy for Korean peace talks, replacing Charles Kartman. Kartman now runs the organization set up to provide North Korea with fuel oil and light-water nuclear reactors for power plants in exchange for its 1994 agreement to abandon its nuclear reactor and fissile material program.
In testimony yesterday before the House International Relations Committee, James Kelly, assistant secretary of state for East Asia and Pacific affairs, said, "We have some important interests to pursue and we're going to do so without any preconditions in beginning a negotiation process that I expect will be protracted, but will be a very serious one."
Kelly said Bush administration officials "want to see an end to the North's missile program and its proliferation activity." He added that "we also want to explore ways of reducing tension on the Korean peninsula caused by confrontation of conventional forces."
The administration has been heavily criticized during its North Korea policy review. While most Korea experts have praised its decision to reengage with North Korea, many were still offering advice to the Bush administration this week.
South Korean Foreign Minister Han Seung-soo said in a speech at the American Enterprise Institute on Monday that the Bush administration should take note of "positive signs of change in North Korea" since June 2000.
A task force organized by the Council on Foreign Relations urged the administration on Monday to continue diplomacy with North Korean leader Kim Jong Il, "who surfaces as a serious public political figure embarking on a remarkable diplomatic offensive." The group said the United States should work with South Korea and Japan, let South Korea take the lead in engagement with the North, involve top-level leaders in North Korea who are the only ones able to make important decisions, focus on priorities and demand reciprocity where it applies.
----
Reconciliation Between Koreas Stalls
June 13, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Filed at 6:34 p.m. ET
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-US-North-Korea.html?searchpv=aponline
WASHINGTON (AP) -- It was a joyful scene a year ago when the two Kims -- Kim Dae-jung of South Korea and Kim Jong Il of North Korea -- held a summit meeting in Pyongyang, but the high expectations generated by that groundbreaking encounter have not been fulfilled.
The reconciliation process has stalled, and there is puzzlement in Washington and other capitals about the true intentions of the North's Kim. Is he truly interested in reconciliation or merely making tactical moves as part of a continuing struggle?
The Bush administration hopes to glean some insights about his mindset during security negotiations with Pyongyang that President Bush announced a week ago.
On Wednesday, Jack Pritchard, a State Department Korea expert, met in New York with North Korean Ambassador Li Hyong Chol to make arrangements for the resumed negotiations, which would be the first substantive bilateral talks since last fall.
State Department spokesman Philip Reeker described the talks as businesslike and said they were ``a good beginning to the dialogue process.'' He said he expects the discussions to continue.
In the eventual talks, the United States will try to engage North Korea on reducing its huge war-making capability on the peninsula almost 50 years after the Korean War ended.
The administration's views are undoubtedly colored by what Pyongyang has been doing on the military preparedness front. For those who believe that Kim Jong Il has undergone a conversion of sorts, the past two years have not been reassuring.
Take, for example, the testimony of Gen. Thomas Schwartz, commanding general of the combined U.S.-South Korean Forces, before the Senate Armed Services Committee earlier this spring.
During the period leading up to the June 2000 North-South summit, he said, training levels in North Korea were record-breaking, with the focus on improving the readiness of major offensive forces.
Immediately following the summit, the North Korean People's Army training cycle ``was the most extensive ever recorded.''
Kim Jong Il ``stubbornly adheres to his 'military first' policy, pouring huge amounts of his budget resources into the military,'' Schwartz said. As a result, his military forces are ``bigger, better, closer (to the border) and deadlier'' than they were a year ago.
Schwartz said North Korea possesses large numbers of chemical weapons that threaten the 37,000 U.S. forces in South Korea, as well as civilian population centers. It also has the potential to develop biological and nuclear weapons. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, ``North Korea may have produced enough (material) to produce one and possibly two nuclear weapons.''
According to Schwartz, North Korea's ballistic missile inventory consists of 500 Scuds that could threaten the entire peninsula. Their artillery forces could fire off 500,000 rounds per hour at enemy forces and at Seoul.
About 700,000 troops and 8,000 artillery systems are positioned within 90 miles of the Demilitarized Zone. The 1.2 million-member army is the world's fifth largest. The 1 million soldiers in the ground force are the third most worldwide. The air force has more than 1,700 planes, the navy more than 800 ships, including the world's largest submarine fleet.
All this in a country where the vast majority of people lack even the basic necessities. In recent years, hundreds of thousands -- perhaps millions -- of North Koreans have starved to death.
Schwartz's testimony gives context to a comment Kim Jong Il made to South Korean journalists last August. ``In relations with foreign countries, we gain strength from military power, and my power comes from military power,'' he said.
Schwartz said in his testimony that the United States and South Korean militaries are well prepared for any eventuality.
``Our combined war assets include over 1,500 strike aircraft that can launch 1,000 daily sorties ... more than 5,000 tracked vehicles, 3,000 tanks and over 250 combat ships,'' Schwartz said.
The combined power of the two forces ``can defeat a North Korean attack and destroy its military and regime,'' he said.
EDITOR'S NOTE -- George Gedda has covered foreign affairs for The Associated Press since 1968.
-------- missile defense
Japan PM May Oppose Missile Defense
JUNE 13, 07:15 EST
http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=ASIA&STORYID=APIS7CJKMD00
TOKYO (AP) Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi did not rule out opposing U.S. plans for a missile defense shield, saying on Wednesday that Japan needs to ``carefully consider'' its position.
The comments, during question time in Parliament, were a departure from the government's position of complete neutrality.
``We have to carefully consider this issue, which has enormous influence on global security,'' Koizumi said.
Asked by Democratic Party leader Yukio Hatoyama whether a U.S. missile defense system might trigger a global arms race, Koizumi said, ``We can't rule out that possibility.''
Koizumi's new stance comes amid a controversy over Foreign Minister Makiko Tanaka's reported comments that she had doubts about the planned U.S. missile defense system.
Her reported remarks, allegedly made to her counterparts from Italy and Australia, caused an uproar in Japan because they would contradict Tokyo's official stance that it ``understands'' Washington's plans.
China, Russia and many European Union nations have come out against the missile defense project.
Tanaka has denied much of the content of media reports, but they have triggered accusations that the government is sending inconsistent and unfriendly signals to the United States, Japan's main ally.
----
Friend in Romania
June 13, 2001
Embassy Row
James Morrison
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20010613-16793649.htm
If President Bush wants support in Europe for his missile-defense plan, Romania is there for him.
Romanian Defense Minister Ioan Mircea Pascu yesterday said he understands the U.S. desire to protect itself against missile attacks from rogue nations or terrorist organizations.
Romania, meanwhile, hopes the Bush administration understands its desire to join NATO in the next round of expansion.
Mr. Pascu told reporters that Romania would have "no objection at all" even if the United States proceeded unilaterally to develop the defense shield.
"For the U.S., I see the value in it," he said.
"Politically speaking, the moment [missile defense] gets a European dimension, Romania will have to evaluate it very seriously," he added, when asked whether Romania would want to be covered by the defensive system.
Mr. Bush, now on his first official European visit, is offering to share missile-defense technology with U.S. allies and Russia, in order to get their support.
Mr. Pascu said some European leaders dismiss Mr. Bush´s concerns about missile attacks because they want to ignore the threat.
"It is a real danger. To some, it is not because they don´t want it done," he said.
Mr. Pascu is visiting Washington to meet the new administration, members of Congress and think tanks to press Romania´s case for NATO membership. He said Romania could act as a stabilizing force in southern Europe.
"The problem in our area is that we have a generating force that produces conflict. ... It is like that lethal cocktail that was injected [Monday] morning," he said, referring to the execution of Timothy McVeigh.
The international force should remain in Bosnia-Herzegovina to ensure stability, and Macedonia must be saved from the threat of rebel Albanian separatists, he said.
Romania, with a $981.5 million defense budget, is reorganizing its military of 100,000 troops, reducing its top-heavy officer corps and creating more noncommissioned officers.
Romania is also buying Western weapons and teaching the troops to speak English, he said.
Mr. Pascu met yesterday with Marc Grossman, undersecretary of state for political affairs, and Paul Wolfowitz, deputy secretary of defense.
----
Bush Pushes Missile Plan to NATO
By William Drozdiak and Dana Milbank
Washington Post Foreign Service
Wednesday, June 13, 2001; 4:45 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A59734-2001Jun13?language=printer
BRUSSELS, June 13 - President Bush told the NATO allies today the time had come to banish the last vestiges of the Cold War by developing a security framework based on ballistic missile defenses, but European leaders insisted any new strategy must include respect for existing arms control pacts.
With barbed wire barricades and a massive police presence keeping protesters far away from alliance headquarters, NATO leaders conducted a four-hour review of the smoldering conflict in Macedonia, their slackening defense posture and prospects for embracing new members from Eastern Europe next year.
The principal item on their agenda, however, was to take the measure of the former Texas governor who, by his own admission, has little taste for diplomacy and foreign affairs but is engaged in a zealous campaign to persuade NATO to adopt missile defense as the centerpiece of a new security strategy.
Making the second stop on his five-nation European tour, Bush said he was pleased by "the open and constructive reaction" of other allied leaders to his call for a radical reassessment of how the North Atlantic Treaty Organization should cope with emerging challenges, such as the possibility that weapons of mass destruction would be deployed by terrorists or rogue states.
"I'm making good progress on this issue here in Europe," he told a press conference. "There's some nervousness and I understand that, but it's beginning to be allayed when they hear the logic behind the rationale."
In an impassioned appeal, Bush told alliance leaders that "the nuclear balance of terror" that kept the peace with the Soviet Union no longer made sense. He insisted the United States and its partners must prepare for threats spawned by the spread of weapons of mass destruction and break out of constraints imposed by the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.
While many European leaders admit the changing strategic balance requires a fresh approach, they took issue with Bush's rejection of the ABM treaty and his implicit distrust of arms control agreements. Regardless of whether Bush's anti-missile project proved technically feasible, German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and French President Jacques Chirac said they will launch a new arms control initiative that would seek to use political means to curb the proliferation of missile technologies.
According to participants, Chirac expressed the sharpest dismay with Bush's attitude, claiming that the ABM treaty has served as an indispensable element in the global security structure for three decades and should not be lightly discarded.
"We need to preserve these strategic balances, of which the ABM treaty is a pillar," Chirac said, according to excerpts of his remarks to the other leaders. "If we are to envision a new framework, one that takes account of the emergence of a multipolar world, then we must ensure that it contains binding provisions designed to guarantee international stability."
Schroeder said he concurred with Bush's call for new thinking to deal with the post-Cold War security environment, but like Chirac, the German leader laid much greater emphasis on the need to prevent and contain new threats through diplomatic and economic means rather than the potential of new technologies.
"Germany is committed not least to strengthening the arms control architecture, in particular the Missile Technology Control Regime, as well as creating the conditions for further steps toward nuclear disarmament on the basis of international agreements," Schroeder said.
While other leaders praised his vow to consult extensively with the allies, Bush's proclaimed determination to deploy missile defenses as soon as possible has stirred consternation among allies who suspect he is feigning interest in their views and will ultimately disregard them.
"If Bush has already decided to go ahead with breaking the ABM treaty and building his project, then how are we supposed to believe that these consultations have any meaning?" asked a senior European diplomat.
Nonetheless, American officials traveling with Bush expressed optimism that they were beginning to move the "center of gravity" in support of the American plan. They noted that Hungary, Italy, Poland and Spain have given public approval, while Britain is quietly sympathetic. And even though 13 out of 19 NATO members still shy away from embracing missile defense, a senior U.S. official said, "It was clear from today's meeting that everyone recognizes there is a threat."
The NATO leaders also delved into the delicate matter of a new round of enlargement and agreed that they should consider taking in new members when they meet again next year in Prague. While Slovenia and Slovakia are the leading candidates, debate is mounting over whether the alliance should court further Russian outrage by incorporating the three Baltic states, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, as well.
None of the leaders discussed their preferences today, but Bush emphasized there must be "no red lines or outside vetoes" in choosing the next NATO members. The United States and the Nordic countries are leading proponents of absorbing the Baltic states, but Germany, France and other members worry about potential damage to relations with Russia.
Bush also expressed concern with the flagging state of defense spending among the European allies, who have failed to live up to promises made after the 1999 Kosovo air war to improve their shortcomings in such areas as airborne reconnaissance, precision weaponry, and modern communications systems. NATO Secretary General George Robertson scolded the Europeans for not fulfilling even half of their commitments and warned that they would not be able to cope on their own with the next military crisis on the continent.
"These were clear targets that were set, and they have resulted in clear failure," he said.
Robertson pointed to the Balkans, where ethnic conflict in Macedonia threatens to spill out of control, as the alliance's most alarming flashpoint. NATO leaders agreed that they must do something to reverse the deteriorating situation, as ethnic Albanian rebels have moved close enough to the capital of Skopje to strike the city with mortar shells. Several allies advocated bolder action must be taken urgently to halt a slide toward civil war that could further destabilize the Balkans.
"Our history of engagement in that part of the world has taught us that it is better to make preparations and to stabilize the situation rather than wait and let the situation deteriorate," said Britain's Prime Minister Tony Blair. But NATO officials said there was no discussion about sending allied troops on a peacekeeping mission largely because many leaders feel their forces are already stretched too thin with duties in Kosovo and Bosnia.
NATO Secretary General Robertson was scheduled to fly to Macedonia Thursday for his third crisis mission there in the past three months. He said he would show the alliance's full support for Macedonia's democratic government and its call for a cease-fire, coupled with political reforms to give a greater voice to the country's ethnic Albanian minority. But short of sending troops, many experts believe NATO's intercession may prove futile.
Bush said "NATO must play a more visible and active role in helping the Macedonian government counter the insurgency there." But mindful of firm opposition at home, especially at the Pentagon, about further entanglements in the Balkans, he refused to make any promises about sending U.S. forces.
Regarding the status of American troops in the Balkans, Bush reassured the allies that he supported Secretary of State Colin L. Powell in his earlier promise that the United States would keep troops there as long as the alliance missions remained present on the ground. "We went in together and we will leave together, and I swear to you again today that I will keep that promise," Bush said.
-------- russia
Bush Extends Russian Uranium Order
June 13, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Filed at 5:22 p.m. ET
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Bush-Russian-Uranium.html?searchpv=aponline
WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush on Wednesday extended a federal order ensuring that Russian-owned uranium being processed in the United States is not seized by creditors.
Until President Clinton signed the executive order in June 2000, Russia had feared its creditors could place liens on the uranium after shipment to the United States.
Bush meets with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Slovenia on Saturday.
Clinton's order freed Russia to resume shipping low enriched uranium that has been ``downblended'' after being taken from nuclear weapons stockpiles, so it can be used in U.S. and Russian commercial reactors. Much of it is stored in Ohio.
The deal is a key part of American attempts to get Russia to dispose of nuclear weapons material so that it doesn't fall into the hands of terrorists or other rogue groups.
In his continuation order, Bush said it is a ``major national security goal'' to guarantee that material removed from Russian nuclear weapons is used ``for peaceful commercial uses, subject to transparency measures, and protected from diversion to activities of proliferation concern.''
Bush's budget proposed cutting the Energy Department's nonproliferation programs -- including those aimed at helping Russia stop the spread of weapons of mass destruction -- by $100 million from $874 million in the current year.
More than 1,000 tons of highly enriched uranium and 150 tons of plutonium still exist in the Russian nuclear complex, enough to build 60,000 to 80,000 weapons, according to former Sen. Sam Nunn, co-chairman of the Nuclear Threat Initiative and a critic of Bush's budget cut.
-------- u.s. nuc weapons
Nuclear 'Milestone' Divides U.S., Russia
Failure to Construct Joint Warning Center Suggests Bigger Problems on Missile Defense
By Peter Baker
Washington Post Foreign Service
Wednesday, June 13, 2001; Page A23
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A57808-2001Jun12?language=printer
MOSCOW -- To prevent false alarms about missile launches with catastrophic consequences, the United States and Russia decided to build a joint nuclear early warning center to share information. They liked the idea so much that they announced it twice.
Bill Clinton and Boris Yeltsin first unveiled the plan to "avert nuclear war by mistake," as Clinton put it, in September 1998. When Clinton came back here in June 2000 the two countries pulled out the news release again. "A milestone in enhancing strategic security," said Yeltsin's successor, Vladimir Putin.
Yet now, as the presidents of Russia and the United States prepare for another summit, this "milestone" remains nothing more than an abandoned kindergarten building surrounded by overgrown shrubbery on the outskirts of Moscow. Planning for the early warning center has ground to a halt, stymied by conflicting priorities, geopolitics and legal issues.
After Clinton and Yeltsin first agreed to the plan, the war in Kosovo the following spring soured Russia on the West and everything was put on hold for nearly a year. After relations thawed a bit, Clinton and Putin signed a memorandum of understanding last June to put it back on track.
But it became mired in details -- Russians said their law required Americans to pay taxes on the equipment brought into the country and to assume liability for construction, while the U.S. side did not want to set a precedent that would affect larger aid programs. More important, the project lost momentum in the lame-duck days of the Clinton administration and has remained frozen pending the Bush team's review of its Russia policy. The two sides have not met for months.
The three-year odyssey of the early warning center that wasn't offers a lesson in how good intentions can go awry when it comes to relations between the world's two major nuclear powers. The failure to establish the center underscores the limitations of international summitry and the difficulty of turning rhetoric into reality.
It also serves up a cautionary tale for Washington at a time when the administration of Clinton's successor, President Bush, is talking about ways to cooperate with Moscow in building a ballistic missile shield. Bush and Putin will meet for the first time in Slovenia Saturday with missile defense at the top of the agenda. But if the two countries cannot find a way to jointly build an $8 million center considered non-controversial by both sides, collaboration on a hotly disputed $100 billion missile defense system promises to be far more problematic.
"This shows very clearly that if it's just a political ploy to make everybody look better, then nobody will move it forward," said Pavel Podvig, a researcher at the Center for Arms Control, Energy and Environmental Studies in Moscow. "We are no longer in that mode where anything cooperative is such a great idea that all the bureaucracies would just clear away."
Perhaps more ominously, in the view of arms control specialists, the stalemate over the early warning center leaves unaddressed a problem with potentially disastrous ramifications: Russia's huge blind spots in detecting missile launches. A mistaken warning could lead Russian leaders to launch their own missiles and trigger an unintended nuclear conflagration.
As it was, the joint warning center was seen by experts such as Podvig as an inadequate response to a serious problem, one that would be useful mostly if it served as a first step to a more meaningful solution. Critics asked whether Russians would really trust American data showing that the United States was not attacking.
Theodore Postol, a national security expert at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said that initially he considered the joint plan not serious enough, but at least "a good thing" in the context of a broader approach to the issue. Now, given the result, he has come to see it as nothing more than a propaganda tool by the Americans.
"This has just been a smoke screen to look like they're doing something when they're not," Postol said. "I really lay this at the feet of the Americans because they have the resources. The Russians don't, and to turn around and blame this on the Russians is really disingenuous."
The notion of shared early warning information arose shortly after the end of the Cold War. As far back as February 1992, just weeks after the collapse of the Soviet Union, U.S. and Russian officials began discussing the creation of a center where each side would have access to data from the other.
The danger of misunderstanding became vividly evident in 1995 when Russian military officials briefly mistook the launch of a Norwegian scientific rocket for a U.S. intercontinental ballistic missile. Yeltsin was brought his black suitcase known as the "nuclear football" to make a decision about whether to retaliate, but the Russians came to conclude that they were not under attack.
The potential for trouble has only intensified since then with the deterioration of the Russian early warning system. Only two to four of the nine high-elliptical satellites that Russia had in orbit in 1995 are still functioning today, according to arms control experts, and at least seven hours a day Russia is blind to possible launches from U.S. missile fields. Just last month, a fire at a ground control center cut off communications with several military satellites.
Russia built seven satellites to reestablish full coverage but has never launched them, apparently for lack of money. Likewise, it has struggled to rebuild its ground-based radar network since losing some facilities to newly independent countries in the breakup of the Soviet Union.
The route chosen by Clinton and Yeltsin was to share what information already exists. The decision to build a Joint Data Exchange Center would create the first permanent U.S.-Russian military facility, modeled on a temporary joint center established in Colorado to deal with the Year 2000 computer bug.
According to Pentagon briefing papers, the center would be staffed 24 hours a day by a detachment of 16 U.S. officers joined by a similar number of Russians. U.S. and Russian officers would sit back to back, each with computers linked to their respective early warning headquarters. Although they would not receive raw data, they would have access to information processed in less than a minute that would show generic missile type, launch location and time, and launch path, impact area and time if known.
Officials picked a site for the facility and even designed a layout that would include a fitness center, with showers and steam room. But today the building sits empty and unrenovated in a leafy residential neighborhood in the Babushkin area of Moscow, some of its windows boarded up or cracked, its walls marked with graffiti. Instead of being in its operational test phase, as planned for this month on the way to a September opening, it serves mostly as a clandestine hangout for young beer drinkers.
"It's basically come to a halt," said a senior U.S. official who asked not to be identified. "It's tough doing business in Russia. We're not the only group to find that out. . . . Nothing is easy in Russia."
Bruce Blair, president of the Washington-based Center for Defense Information, attributed the impasse to deepening Russian suspicion of the United States, particularly since Kosovo.
"It's a psychological thing," he said. "It's hard to believe these petty little disputes over things like liability would prevent an important project from being completed if it were deemed important by the Russians. So it shows that they've basically turned their backs on the Americans."
Still, even U.S. officials involved are careful to acknowledge that their side bears some blame. The Clinton administration did not make it a consistent high priority; nor has the Bush administration. And the Russians say they are simply waiting for the Americans to finish their review and return to the table.
-------- u.s. nuc facilities
Labor Department Worker Compensation
Regulations Fail to Meet the Needs of Sick Nuclear Weapons Workers
Major Revisions Required to Assure Rights of Claimants Are Protected Against Arbitrary Denials
For Immediate Release,
June 13, 2001
Contact: Richard Miller, GAP, 413-536-3858 (o), 413-531-5787 (cell)
From: magnu96196@aol.com
Washington, DC --The Department of Labor (DOL) released Interim Regulations on May 25 to implement the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000, a law passed by Congress to help workers made ill from working in nuclear weapons facilities and beryllium plants. The Interim Regulations are deeply flawed and need significant revisions before the DOL begins accepting claims on July 31, 2001â?"a month before the written comment period closes on August 24.
"The DOL Interim Final Regulations issued on May 25 do not offer a fair and equitable basis to assure that workers who are ill from exposure to radiation, beryllium and silica will actually receive their benefits as intended by Congress," stated Richard Miller, Policy Analyst for the Government Accountability Project (GAP), a national organization which assists health and safety whistleblowers at nuclear and other government facilities. "DOL says they are issuing streamlined regulations, but in the process of simplifying the process they have eliminated sick workers rights to "due process" if their claims are denied,and eliminated the claims of thousands of survivors.
DOL has announced "town hall" meetings across the country, including one on June 14 in Hartford, Connecticut . According to a statement issued by the DOL in Hanford, Washington, a major DOE nuclear reservation, the DOL does not intend to take public comments on the Interim Final Regulations at its "town hall" hearings.
"Unless there is a change in priorities at DOL, public concerns about how the rules fail to work for claimants will be steamrolled," added Miller. "The operative question is whether DOL will use these hearings to set up a system to assure justice for those who are deserving, or whether DOL is simply rolling out a dog-and-pony show to announce the gospel on the rules as they have conceived them?"
The DOL's Interim Regulations set forth the process that claimants must follow to determine eligibility and payment of $150,00 lump sum and medical benefits for cancer, beryllium disease and silicosis (for test site workers). Although DOE, DOL and NIOSH all share responsibility for implementation, DOL is responsible for processing claims and making determinations for eligibility. NIOSH is expected to release regulations in a month to establish probability of causation for cancer from radiation exposure, methods for dose reconstruction, and expansion of the Special Cohorts for circumstances where it is not feasible to estimate dose or groups of workers. The primary deficiencies in the DOL regulations are:
a.. The appeals process unfairly denies workers basic due process rights.
b.. The DOL rules deny claimants the right to an independent administrative appeal. The officials who control the initial claim determinations also control the appeals process. By contrast, claimants under the Longshore & Harbor Workers Act and the Black Lung Program are offered a formal hearing before an independent administrative law judge within the DOL. A further inequity allows doctors who are disqualified by the DOL due to fraud or misconduct an on-the-record hearing before an independent administrative law judge. "Why should claimants be afforded less equitable "due process" than claimants under other DOL worker compensation programs? Why should they be afforded less equitable due process than the doctors facing disqualification for misconduct?" asked Randy Knowles, President of PACE Local 8-0369, which represents 800+ workers at Hanford.
c.. The regulations create a "Kangaroo Court" to rule on worker appeals. The regulations state that the hearing officer handling the appeals is not bound by rules of evidence, or by any technical or rules of procedure. The hearing officer retains complete discretion to set the time and place of the hearing, and to terminate the hearing at any time he/she determines all relevant evidence has been obtained. "When DOL can make up the rules as you go, and there is no independence, the predicates for a "kangaroo court" are in place," observed Knowles. "Why should claimants be deprived of the right to a hearing with established rules of evidence and the opportunity to question the officials who denied their claim?" Some issues may be challenged on appeal, such as the validity of the radiation dose estimate prepared for the DOL by NIOSH, or a dispute over whether a claimant has chronic beryllium disease vs beryllium sensitivity. If a case is ultimately appealed to the federal courts, it is essential that the claimant be able to establish a clear and probative record for the judge to review.
d.. Survivors are largely excluded from eligibility for compensation. The DOL definition of "survivor" excludes children over age 18, siblings, parents or grandparents, and is plainly contrary to Congressional intent. The only survivors who qualify under the DOL Interim Rules are those children under age 18, those who are dependent students over 18, or a surviving spouse who has not remarried before age 55. By DOL's own admission, this narrow reading was a "policy choice." These rules impair the rights of many survivors. DOL estimates that 1/3 of all claimants may be survivors. The DOL appears to have misapplied a definition for survivor from another worker compensation law, where the rule says that when there is a monthly stream of benefits, these will be paid until the survivor's family has ceased to be in a dependent status. Where the energy employees law offers only a single lump sum payment, this restriction should not apply.
e.. Diagnostic costs should be included in the DOL rules, and the rule should be clarified. It is not clear whether DOL's regulations will cover medical diagnostic costs to initially determine whether a claimant will qualify for compensation. While the law requires the government to assist with developing facts necessary to establish a claim, physicians, who generally avoid worker compensation cases, are reluctant to accept a patient who cannot assure payment. No one should be denied benefits because they cannot afford the costs of medical diagnosis.
f.. The rules deny a fair resolution to medical disagreements. The regulations fail to balance the interests of the claimant and the DOL when there is a conflict between the medical opinion of the employee's physician and the medical opinion of the DOL's doctor or consultant. The DOL appoints a third physicianâ?"known as a "referee"-- to make a medical recommendation. The employee has no voice in how the "referee" doctor is chosen. A referee who is picked by one party to a disagreement is hardly a neutral third party. At the DOE site in Fernald, Ohio, the medical claims panel set up for workers' compensation cases requires the doctor representing the contractor/government and the doctor representing the claimant to jointly agree on the third doctor. The regulation unfairly grants the DOL the authority to chose a doctor that reflects its interests, instead of balancing interests between the claimant and the DOL.
"Since December 2000, the DOL has resisted establishing an advisory committee to provide public input on these regulations. Regrettably, they replicate some of the errors made in the early days of the controversial Black Lung Program. We hope this is not a case of "decide- announce-defend,"added Miller (formerly Miller worked for PACE, the union which took a lead in lobbying for this legislation). "We urge the Secretary of Labor to reconsider the direction being taken by her staff, and open a dialogue on improving these Interim Regulations before the Labor Department is locked into an approach that lacks public confidence."
------
Lawmaker seeks review of nuclear site cleanup program
By LES BLUMENTHAL
Scripps-McClatchy Western Service
June 13, 2001
http://www.knoxnews.com/shns/story.cfm?pk=NUKECLEANUP-06-13-01&cat=WW
WASHINGTON - A Pennsylvania congressman asked Congress' investigative arm Wednesday to review the Energy Department's $6 billion-a-year nuclear site cleanup program, with a specific focus on the legal agreements that govern the effort at the Hanford nuclear reservation in Washington state and elsewhere.
While not singling out the Tri-Party Agreement at Hanford by name, Rep. James Greenwood, R-Pa., told the General Accounting Office that he was troubled by court orders and cleanup agreements that involve DOE, such federal agencies as the Environmental Protection Agency, and the states where the sites are located.
"Each entity has its own set of priorities for sequencing cleanup activities, which, when considered from a national perspective, may not be consistent with a cleanup program that prioritizes high-risk cleanup activities or a cost-effective approach to treating the waste," Greenwood said in a letter to the GAO requesting the investigation.
Greenwood is chairman of House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.
The congressman's request comes as Washington Attorney General Christine Gregoire has threatened to file a lawsuit against the Energy Department if Congress fails to provide adequate funding to keep the Hanford cleanup on track.
"These orders and agreements are now a major driver in DOE's annual budget," Greenwood wrote. "However, it is also difficult to determine the relationship between these orders and agreements and the amount of money DOE requests in its annual budget request to Congress. It is also difficult to determine how much flexibility exists to shift funding from one year to the next without violating the orders and agreements."
By way of example, Greenwood pointed to an agreement involving DOE's Idaho Falls site, which requires the department to package and ship out of the state of Idaho 3,100 cubic meters of transuranic waste by the end of 2002. Citing the department's own inspector general, Greenwood said that would cost $66 million more than if DOE waited until treatment facilities under construction at the site were ready.
"In effect, the agreement (at Idaho Falls) has limited DOE's flexibility to manage this effort in a cost-effective way," Greenwood said. "At the same time, other wastes at Idaho and other DOE sites that may pose a greater risk to human health and the environment are not being treated in part because cleanup money is not available."
Greenwood specifically asked GAO to take a look at the agreements and their history, determine how much it would cost to comply with them, what they have accomplished and whether they are really addressing risks to human health and the environment. He also asked the agency to review what has happened when DOE fails to comply with such agreements and whether any of the agreements have been renegotiated.
(Les Blumenthal is a Washington reporter for Scripps-McClatchy Western Service.)
-------- colorado
Workers sacrificed, jurors told
By Stacie Oulton
Denver Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, June 13, 2001
http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1002,53%257E45977,00.html
- GOLDEN - Jurors on Tuesday heard a former energy secretary admit via videotape that the federal government conspired with an Ohio-based company to sacrifice workers' health at Rocky Flats.
The recorded statements by Bill Richardson, energy secretary under President Clinton, were played for the jury Tuesday in a Jefferson County civil case. Four Flats workers and their wives are suing Brush Wellman, the world's leading producer of beryllium, because the workers contracted chronic beryllium disease from the toxic metal.
"Priority one was the production of our nuclear weapons. As a last priority was the safety and health of the workers that built these weapons," Richardson said in an interview on ABC's "20/20" last fall.
Attorneys for Brush Wellman tried to prevent the tape from being shown, and also tried to get ABC's unedited version of the interview. But Jefferson County District Judge Frank Plaut ruled against the company.
Attorneys for the Rocky Flats workers and Brush were unsuccessful in forcing Richardson to testify or to give a sworn statement about what he knew.
Richardson acknowledged in the television interview that the Department of Energy "cut a deal" with Brush Wellman to ensure the company would keep producing the lightweight metal for weapons. In return, the Energy Department actively opposed an effort by a different federal agency to tighten safety standards for workers' exposure.
The secretary called the deal "wrong." Previous testimony in the case showed that Brush threatened to stop production in 1979 unless it received the help of the Energy Department to stop a tougher safety standard from being implemented. The company also received a 35 percent price increase as part of the deal.
The lawsuit alleges that Brush and the government covered up the fact that the safety standard did not protect workers from the disabling lung disease. Richardson called the collusion between the two "incredible."
"I think they feel their government let them down," he said of the workers.
Attorneys for the workers also introduced evidence showing that Brush had a medical book published, which it distributed across the country, that contained false information about what caused chronic beryllium disease. The company also said in internal documents that it had to support the safety standard to protect itself from lawsuits.
On another issue, Plaut may punish David Egilman, a Boston doctor, for publishing statements on his Web site accusing the judge of being in the company's pocket. Plaut said the statements violated a gag order.
------
Judge angered by Web posting
Expert witness for Rocky Flats workers violated gag order
By Ann Imse,
Rocky Mountain News Staff Writer,
June 13, 2001
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_646642,00.html
A judge threatened Tuesday to sanction Rocky Flats workers with beryllium disease because their expert witness violated the judge's gag order on his Web site. Rocky Flats workers are suing beryllium producer Brush Wellman Inc. of Cleveland. The workers allege that the company conspired with the federal government to conceal the danger of the extremely toxic metal so the government would have beryllium to make nuclear weapons.
Jefferson County District Court Judge Frank Plaut said he may let the jury know just how "intemperate" expert witness Dr. David Egilman was in criticizing the beryllium producer's attorneys, so they can decide whether he is a credible expert.
Plaut ordered everyone involved in the case not to talk -- or post anything on a Web site -- because the current phase of the trial covers only the first eight of 55 plaintiffs. He said he wanted no outside commentary to influence the current or future juries.
The judge said Egilman's Web site referred to Brush Wellman attorneys from the Dallas law firm of Jones Day. One headline read, "New Jones Day Dirt" and mentioned possible criminal activity. The judge called the posting "a flagrant violation" of his gag order.
Egilman is a Brown University professor and frequent expert witness on the health damages of asbestos and beryllium. He has aided victims and infuriated targets by posting incriminating documents on his Web site. His www.egilman.com Web site was password-restricted on Tuesday.
Egilman testified in the beryllium trial last Thursday that Brush Wellman planted articles in medical journals claiming the metal was safe.
On Tuesday, plaintiffs' attorneys backed up that assertion with a memo from Brush Wellman's safety manager detailing a plan to discredit the science of its critics and substitute its own.
The 1987 memo called for company doctors to write articles for prestigious scientific publications bolstering their insistence that people could work in 2 micrograms of beryllium per cubic meter of air without danger of chronic beryllium disease.
The memo also called for "critical review" by company scientists of "very damaging" publications by other scientists that said beryllium disease could occur at lower levels of exposure, and that beryllium might be associated with lung cancer.
By the early 1990s, Rocky Flats was no longer producing nuclear weapons. Reduced government demand for beryllium combined with "hysteria" over the toxic effects of beryllium raised the possibility of Brush Wellman going out of business, according to a memo from vice president Hugh Hanes.
In the same memo, Hanes admitted some processes in the company's factories could not meet even the 2-microgram standard -- even though Brush Wellman had been claiming to meet that standard for decades.
The plaintiffs wrapped up Tuesday with a taped ABC interview with former Secretary of Energy Bill Richardson admitting the Department of Energy had opposed attempts to tighten the limit on beryllium exposure in the 1970s. Richardson said at that time, the first priority was building nuclear bombs and "the last priority was safety and health."
"The collusion between the contractor and the DOE . . . was incredible," Richardson said. "A deal was cut, and that's wrong."
Attorneys for Brush Wellman presented testimony from former Rocky Flats machinist Theodore Ziegler that he worked in the beryllium building at Rocky Flats without being told of its dangers or to use a respirator to protect himself.
Ziegler also said he was not told in 1983 that the machine shop had exceeded the 2-microgram standard 94 times that year.
Contact Ann Imse at (303) 892-5438 or imse@RockyMountainNews.com.
-------- nevada
Nuclear Dump's Foes Hopeful
Reid, Now No. 2 Senate Leader, Organizes Against Yucca Mountain
By Greg Schneider and Eric Pianin
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, June 13, 2001; Page E01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A57504-2001Jun12?language=printer
AMARGOSA VALLEY, Nev. Rancher Ralph McCracken stepped onto the sandy soil beside his alfalfa patch and pointed across a grove of pistachio trees. "You see that brown, multi-layered, multi-colored, fairly nothing, wedge-shaped hill?" he said. "That's Yucca Mountain."
That's where the federal government wants to put 70,000 tons of nuclear waste, and until last week, McCracken and other local residents assumed there was little they could do about it. But after nearly 20 years of being lonely voices in the desert, opponents of the Yucca Mountain Project suddenly have allies with clout.
The switch in control of the Senate last week made Sen. Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) a major power, and the new majority leader, Thomas A. Daschle (D-S.D.), said, "As long as we're in the majority, [Yucca Mountain] is dead."
That strong political challenge to the Yucca Mountain Project comes at a critical time. The Energy Department is preparing to issue its final report on whether Yucca Mountain is suitable for nuclear-waste storage, and the Bush administration is expected to act on the plan by the end of the year.
The Yucca Mountain repository is key to President Bush's plan to expand nuclear power and increase the nation's energy supply. America's nuclear power plants, of which there are more than 100, are running out of space to store radioactive waste. Getting licenses for new reactors will be difficult until there is a permanent repository for the highly dangerous waste they produce.
Yucca Mountain is the only site being considered as a dumping ground. Without it, spent uranium that will spew radiation for thousands of years remains in makeshift storage all over the country.
In Nevada, business and political leaders of both major parties are making a last-ditch effort to stop the Yucca Mountain Project. "We are ready for a nationwide marketing blitz and political blitz on this topic," said Stephen Cloobeck, who owns resorts in Las Vegas and has assembled an opposition group called Save Nevada. The state has put $4 million into the cause.
With Reid as a newly powerful friend in Washington, the opponents have more hope than ever. Still, McCracken and others who live in the desert near Yucca Mountain aren't sure whether the new support represents a real change in momentum or simply a last, noisy gasp.
"The political situation at best is fragile," the 54-year-old rancher said. "Somebody dies, somebody pays off a favor - it's too fluid. It's nice that it is this way now, but I don't hold out a whole bunch of confidence that this is going to be the end of the situation."
Organized Opposition
On a recent weekday morning, a group of business people affiliated with the Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce boarded an air-conditioned bus for a tour of Yucca Mountain, a 90-mile ride to the northwest. As the bus rolled through blowtorched countryside, project scientist Jerry King used a microphone to explain the project.
Joining the group was an aide to Rep. Shelley Berkley of Las Vegas, a Democrat who is fiercely opposed to the waste dump. After King gave vague answers to questions about how nuclear waste would be transported to the site from all over the country, the aide demanded to know why the Energy Department hasn't finished a transportation plan.
"From what I've been told," said King, a project manager with contractor Bechtel-SAIC Co., "DOE considers it premature to develop detailed transportation plans before a site is selected."
Opponents view that as a key weakness - after all, only one site is under consideration - and have been working to win support from states along the routes to Yucca Mountain. Reid is trying to forge a coalition against the project, recruiting Democrats such as Sens. Richard J. Durbin (Ill.) and Paul D. Wellstone (Minn.), whose states have sizable nuclear waste piles that could be sent to Nevada.
In 1998, Reid toured through Denver, St. Louis, Indianapolis and Chicago, warning state officials and the public of the potential for a "mobile Chernobyl" if nuclear waste were shipped through 43 states on the way to Nevada.
Now, as the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate and the chairman of an Appropriations subcommittee that controls the Energy Department budget, Reid is well positioned to either derail the project or slow it down significantly.
But he acknowledged recently that the process begun by a 1987 law that established Yucca Mountain as the nation's only prospective dump will be difficult to stop because there is no alternative and so much money has already been spent on the site.
Ultimately, Reid said, Yucca Mountain can be thwarted only by its own technical flaws. "The most compelling argument is that there are all kinds of scientific problems - the water tables are different than they thought, there have been almost 10 earthquakes in the last 10 years . . . and they haven't addressed how they're going to get all [the nuclear waste] there," he said.
So far, the Bush administration has not publicly responded to the newly aggressive opposition. "If Yucca Mountain's not the site, then Congress has got to tell us what to do with all this nuclear waste," one administration official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity.
Yucca Mountain's chief supporter in the Senate, Frank Murkowski (R-Alaska), said that Reid and other detractors "intend to basically kill the advancement of nuclear energy as a source of emission-free power generation by their action."
"The question is whether the American people will stand by and say okay, or say no, they won't accept it," Murkowski said.
Only One Site
There is plenty of precedent for putting nuclear waste in this part of the country. The Nevada desert has long been a repository for some of the most exotic and dangerous byproducts of American civilization, from atomic bomb blasts, whose mushroom clouds were visible over the neon of the Las Vegas casinos, to spooky military technology at the fabled Area 51.
The federal government promised in the 1950s to take responsibility for disposing of radioactive waste from nuclear power plants. The National Academy of Sciences studied various methods - including dropping the waste into ocean trenches where it might be sucked back into the earth's mantle, shooting it into space, and burrowing it into Arctic ice - and concluded that the best solution would be to bury it in deep geologic formations.
One of the first regions suggested was the Nevada desert, where the government owned most of the land, secure roads were in place and the workforce was experienced at handling radioactive materials.
Other areas also fit the bill, including Hanford, Wash., where the government had another nuclear testing facility, and Deaf Smith County, Tex. But in 1987, Congress took Washington and Texas off the list and ordered the Energy Department to consider only Yucca Mountain. To Nevada residents, it was clear they had been singled out because they lacked the political clout of the other two states.
"That forever after became known as the 'Screw Nevada Bill,' " said King, the project scientist.
Since then, the government has spent more than $6 billion studying Yucca Mountain's suitability, using money from a surcharge on electricity generated by nuclear power plants.
Several attributes make the site attractive. The water table is unusually low - 2,000 feet below the surface. That means the repository could be set at a depth of 1,000 feet without having to worry about pumping out water to keep it from seeping into the spent fuel and flushing radiation into the aquifer.
The climate at Yucca Mountain is arid. Less than 7 inches of rain falls in a year, and 95 percent of that water evaporates.
Geologists say the mountain is composed of a stable type of rock called "welded tuff." It was formed more than 12 million years ago when volcanoes to the north belched out enormous chunks - tuffs - that were so hot they welded back together when they hit the ground.
The idea is to store the waste in a series of parallel tunnels - called "drifts" in mining terminology - that would run perpendicular to the mountain's spine like the fine ribs of a fish. Each drift would be lined with cylindrical casks containing spent fuel in the form of ceramic pellets. As one drift filled, it would be sealed shut - but not backfilled - and laced with monitoring equipment.
The drifts would have to be nearly 200 feet apart because spent uranium gives off heat as it decays. The entire top of the mountain will rise in temperature as the rock surrounding each drift warms past the boiling point of water.
Problems Surface
While Yucca Mountain originally seemed to be an almost ideal site, significant surprises have turned up. The area around the mountain is riven by more earthquake faults than had been known. The mountain has undergone faulting and cracking, and the friction has created columns of loose material that could channel water.
While none of the volcanic cones in the area has erupted in more than 85,000 years, there is a remote chance that one could stir back to life - roughly one chance in 100 million each year, King said.
And there is more water in the rock than scientists had expected. The surrounding rock is about 9 percent water by volume, although that moisture is locked in tiny holes and hasn't moved in hundreds of thousands of years, said Jim Niggemyer, a Bechtel-SAIC engineer. To scientists, those problems are challenges that can be engineered around. "We've found nothing that would disqualify this as a repository," Niggemyer said.
If the facility were to begin operation at the soonest possible date - in 2010 - it would be full by 2035, unless expansion plans are approved. On the day it opened, there would already be enough spent fuel to fill more than half the repository.
Eventually, the tunnels would be refilled and sealed shut. The repository must last for 10,000 years, longer than any other structure has ever been engineered to endure. The project has hired anthropologists to come up with symbols for warning signs around the mountain, so that residents thousands of years in the future who might no longer speak English would understand that something terrible is buried under the nondescript ridge.
From the mountain's 5,000-foot summit, there are few signs of life. Soil the consistency of ashtray filler sweeps down the western slope and across a series of faults toward Crater Flat, where a row of blackened cinder cones rise like the smokestacks of a sunken ocean liner. Beyond that, the Funeral Mountains mark the entrance to Death Valley. Other than a few unpaved roads and the scrapings of a distant gold mine, the whole region seems empty.
But only a dozen miles to the south is the Amargosa Valley, home to about 1,500 people. From the athletic field behind Amargosa Elementary School - "Home of the Sandblasters" - there is an unblocked view of Yucca Mountain. Ralph and Debbie McCracken, whose 70-acre ranch is just west of the school, worry that burying nuclear waste in their midst will ruin the well water that the valley relies on.
Across the valley at the Ponderosa Dairy, general manager Ed Goedhart oversees 6,400 head of Holstein cows whose milk is distributed all over the West. After nearly four years of speaking at public hearings and writing letters to the government, Goedhart said he has lost faith in the "federal kingdom of the United States of America."
"This is the same government that talks callously of collateral damage and friendly fire," he said. "This is not a government I trust putting Yucca Mountain in Amargosa Valley."
Opponents are getting a higher profile, though, with the emergence of the Save Nevada group of civic leaders and casino operators in Las Vegas.
"We've really mobilized for the first time in 18 years," said Cloobeck, the organizer of Save Nevada and owner of the Polo Towers time-share on the Las Vegas Strip.
Cloobeck, a longtime Democratic operative with a photo wall rivaling any on K Street, said he was motivated to fight Yucca Mountain while attending a Christmas party at Bill Clinton's White House last December.
Clinton had sided with Nevada in important skirmishes over setting health and safety standards for the proposed repository. Last year, Clinton vetoed legislation that would have sped the timetable for transporting high-level waste to Yucca Mountain and also would have blocked the Environmental Protection Agency from setting tough radiation standards for the air, land and groundwater there. The EPA issued those standards last week.
Should President Bush decide to go forward with the project later this year, Nevada can file a protest. That would kick the decision back to the Congress, where both chambers would have to vote. If Congress approved the measure, Nevada could still take the government to court, where the project could get tied up for years.
Nevadans are used to living with such uncertainty.
"I mean, you've got to be concerned but you've also got to let science do its work. I grew up out here. In the fifth grade, we had to do bomb drills because they were setting off atomic bombs out here," said Cynthia Cameron, 42, the vice president for human resources at a Las Vegas casino. "What's the difference between setting off bombs where the cloud can drift over Las Vegas versus putting ceramic pellets in the ground?"
--------
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION:
Test Site monitoring faces review Agency to assess $700 million strategy
Wednesday, June 13, 2001
Las Vegas Review-Journal
http://www.lvrj.com/lvrj_home/2001/Jun-13-Wed-2001/news/16309224.html
Nevada Test Site officials launched a peer-review process Tuesday to assess whether a $700 million strategy can effectively monitor groundwater contamination caused by 35 years of underground nuclear weapons tests.
The project's estimated cost, spread over 26 years, includes $25 million this year for the National Nuclear Security Administration to conduct studies and gather data, part of which involves drilling wells to track contamination. The agency is part of the Department of Energy, which oversees the test site, 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
The assessment, due in August from a six-member panel of experts, aims to develop the best strategy to protect the public and test site workers. The plan also will create computer models that state and federal scientists can use to evaluate any movement of contamination during the next 1,000 years.
"Our approach is to model contamination boundaries and then establish a well-monitoring network. In a sense, it's an early warning system," said Carl Gertz, environmental manager for the agency's Nevada operations office in North Las Vegas.
In 1999, a peer-review panel found flaws in models designed to forecast when radioactive materials stemming from 10 blast cavities in Frenchman Flat would reach the lower, regional aquifer. The panel said the models couldn't be validated because they were based on inadequate data about hydrology and the extent of the contamination.
The Frenchman Flat model, like those that will be used for a half-dozen other contaminated areas at the test site, is supposed to allow scientists to predict with a 95 percent confidence level the boundaries where groundwater at the test site will not exceed a 4 millirem radiation dose to the public for up to 1,000 years.
A 4 millirem dose is the safe drinking water guideline. A millirem is one-thousandth of a rem, the unit for measuring the effect of radiation on the body.
At Tuesday's meeting, Kalynda Tilges, nuclear issues coordinator for Citizen Alert, a statewide environmental group, raised questions about models that the strategy in part relies on, particularly the regional groundwater model.
Bob Bangerter, the administration's project manager, acknowledged "there is a considerable amount of uncertainty in that regional model."
But Bangerter and Gertz said the models can be validated without, in Gertz's words, "chasing plumes" -- drilling well after to well to track the direction and at what depths the contaminants are heading in groundwater layers. These include drilling some new wells and further analyzing radionuclides that remain in the test cavities.
The proposed strategy involves monitoring more than 300 million curies, or units of radioactivity -- including such lethal remnants as isotopes of plutonium, cesium, strontium and neptunium -- unleashed from 878 detonations conducted between 1957 and 1992 at more than 800 different locations at the test site. More than one bomb was exploded at some locations, and some 260 of the detonation cavities are near or below the water table.
Besides the preferred strategy, federal scientists considered five other options that Gertz said are not cost effective, such as pumping contaminated water from cavities ($15 billion) to mining contaminated materials from the cavities, and treating and disposing of the materials, which would cost up to $7.3 trillion.
The meeting continues at 8:30 a.m. today at the Texas Station meeting rooms. An official representing the state of Nevada is expected to present his views on the strategy.
-------- new mexico
Park Employees Absolved In New Mexico Wildfire
By Rene Sanchez
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, June 13, 2001; Page A27
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A58425-2001Jun12?language=printer
LOS ANGELES, June 12 -- A new federal report on the massive wildfire that swept through the Los Alamos, N.M., area a year ago concludes that National Park Service personnel who accidentally ignited it should not be blamed or disciplined because they were following flawed agency policies.
The findings, which sharply contrast with earlier federal reviews of the Los Alamos blaze, exonerate the former senior park service official in the area, Roy Weaver, and four subordinates. An investigative panel composed of park service and U.S. Forest Service managers released the report today.
Rick Frost, a park service spokesman, said the report concluded that even though all five officials made "errors in judgment," their decisions were within the bounds of federal rules and procedures.
"They were carrying out their duties in good faith," Frost said.
The Los Alamos wildfire scorched 50,000 acres. It threatened the nation's biggest nuclear weapons laboratory, destroyed more than 200 homes and forced the evacuation of thousands of residents.
It ignited when park service officials at the Bandelier National Monument carried out a "controlled burn" -- a routine practice in the nation's forests to clear dried timber and brush and thus minimize the risk of runaway wildfires.
But the small fire, stoked by strong winds and hot temperatures, quickly spread.
At the time, National Weather Service officials said they had warned of such risks. Two weeks after the fire began, then-Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt said park service personnel had committed a "landslide" of mistakes, including poor planning and oversight, in setting the brush fire.
But the panel's report mostly faults the park service's guidelines for controlled burns. The report concluded that Weaver relied on faulty information supplied by the agency when he ordered the burn, and his decision met guidelines for conducting one.
Karen Wade, a park service supervisor for the Rocky Mountain region, endorsed the recommendations of the federal panel in an accompanying memo.
State Rep. Jeannette Wallace, who represents Los Alamos, agreed with the report, noting that the agencies involved did not communicate well and there was confusion over procedures.
"You have to acknowledge it was stupidity," she said, "but I see no reason to hang people, because I really blame the bureaucracy for how everything fell apart that day."
Since the wildfire, Weaver, a longtime park service manager, has retired. as has a subordinate who also was a focus of the probe. Three other officials spared blame for the wildfire will be required to receive more training, Frost said.
The wildfire at Los Alamos had been considered such a blunder that last May Babbitt ordered national parks and forests across the West to suspend the practice of controlled burns for a month, to give federal officials time to revamp and clarify guidelines for the procedure, a summertime practice.
-------- north carolina
Duke Energy Pursues License Renewal for Nuclear Stations
Wed, Jun 13 8:00 AM EDT
http://news.excite.com/news/pr/010613/nc-duke-energy-nuclr
CHARLOTTE, N.C., June 13 /PRNewswire/ -- Duke Energy (NYSE:DUK) today petitioned the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to renew the operating licenses for both McGuire and Catawba nuclear stations.
This would enable the two power plants to produce electricity for North Carolina and South Carolina into the 2040s.
"Our nuclear stations are an integral part of our overall energy mix designed to safely and reliably meet our customers' electricity demands today and into the future," said Michael S. Tuckman, executive vice president of nuclear generation.
Nuclear provided half of all the electricity used by Duke Energy's two million customers in the Piedmont section of North Carolina and South Carolina last year.
Upon successful completion of the license renewal process, all three nuclear stations operated by Duke Power, a business unit of Duke Energy, will be licensed to operate well into the 21st century.
Oconee Nuclear Station, near Seneca, S.C., was the second nuclear facility in the United States to obtain a renewed license when it received NRC approval for a 20-year extension last May.
"This is a proud moment for Duke Power and its employees, who have worked diligently to keep the lights on in the Piedmont section of North Carolina and South Carolina," said Tuckman. "We have a tradition of meeting our customers' energy needs safely and efficiently. McGuire, Catawba and Oconee play an integral role in meeting those needs."
Duke Power, a business unit of Duke Energy, is one of the nation's largest electric utilities and provides safe, reliable, competitively priced electricity to approximately two million customers in North Carolina and South Carolina. Duke Power operates three nuclear generating stations, eight coal- fired stations, 31 hydroelectric stations and numerous combustion turbine units. Total system capability is 19,375 megawatts. More information about Duke Power is available on the Internet at: www.dukepower.com.
Duke Energy, a diversified multinational energy company, creates value for customers and shareholders through an integrated network of energy assets and expertise. Duke Energy manages a dynamic portfolio of natural gas and electric supply, delivery and trading businesses -- generating revenues of more than $49 billion in 2000. Duke Energy, headquartered in Charlotte, N.C., is a Fortune 100 company traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol DUK. More information about the company is available on the Internet at: http://www.duke-energy.com.
Tom Shiel Phone: 704/373-6396 24-Hour: 704/382-8333 MAKE YOUR OPINION COUNT - Click Here http://tbutton.prnewswire.com/prn/11690X50204550
-------- tennessee
As protesters multiply, will actions escalate?
June 13, 2001
By Frank Munger,
Knoxville News-Sentinel senior writer
http://www.knoxnews.com/editorsview/munger/fm06132001.shtml
The Y-12 plant in Oak Ridge has become a national target for protests against U.S. production of nuclear weapons, and as one might expect, the defense establishment is taking notice. "There are clearly people in this country that I think are well-intentioned who believe this country would be better off without nuclear weapons," said Bill Brumley, the Oak Ridge chief of the National Nuclear Security Administration. "So their goal is to stop not only Y-12 but any other production complex, and they should have the right to express that."
Organizers are predicting that thousands of demonstrators will congregate at the Oak Ridge warhead factory over the next couple of years as the "Stop The Bombs" campaign gains momentum. A recent video narrated by Martin Sheen -- the activist actor who stars in the TV drama, "West Wing" -- is being distributed nationally to promote upcoming events at Y-12.
Brumley said he has had frank discussions' with Ralph Hutchison, coordinator of the Oak Ridge Environmental Peace Alliance, which stages most of the protests.
"My job is to run Y-12. He believes his job is to help shut it down, and that's OK. We will just have to bear the cost, and the taxpayers will have to bear the cost of the protests and demonstrations. My only real concern is that actions could be taken that might in fact endanger the health and safety."
Brumley said he's not too troubled by protesters laying down in the road in front of Y-12. He said he thinks they'd probably move if officials needed to get an ambulance into the plant or something like that.
But other acts won't be tolerated, such as protesters constructing barricades with high-strength cables, he said.
"That can affect our ability to respond to emergency situations, getting people in and getting people out," the federal official said. "That is my real concern. People have a right to demonstrate. We will accommodate them the best way that we know how. If they commit acts of violence, destruction that cost the taxpayers dollars, then I don't think we can just sit back."
At a recent rally, protesters threw red paint (symbolizing blood) on the main sign at the weapons plant's entrance.
"We had to clean it up," Brumley said. "So we'll have to think about that. Maybe we cover the sign up next time. I don't know. But I don't think that kind of activity helps anybody. I think they can make their point without those kinds of events."
Hutchison, a Presbyterian minister who has been leading Oak Ridge protests for more than a decade, said if there's any violence it's more likely to come from the other side, not the protesters.
"We are fully committed to nonviolent action to shut down the Y-12 plant. ... We don't believe that violent means would be effective or successful -- just from a strategic standpoint. But the reason that OREPA is nonviolent is more than strategy. It's a philosophical thing. It's the way we're trying to live our lives."
Hutchison acknowledged that his group may have less control of the situation as Oak Ridge protests attract more people from other parts of the country. But he said the events are advertised as nonviolent protests, and he said his group always has its own peacekeepers who monitor the crowds and try to maintain the focus on planned actions.
In regard to destructive acts, Hutchison said he personally doesn't hold federal property to be sacred. Nor is he willing to limit future protest actions to simply crossing the plant's boundaries.
"I think there's a world of possibilities," he said. "If I knew what things would be effective, that's what I would be advocating."
John Mitchell, the president and general manager of BWXT Y-12, the company that operates the nuclear installation, said the money required to respond to protests comes out of the plant's operating budget. But it's more than an economic issue, he said.
"It's a very active concern because we have some sense of responsibility for the safety of our workforce under those conditions .... If they (protesters) want to come through the gate, we've got to worry about what happens to them, one way or another. We've got to make sure that, if they do things, they don't impede the ability of our workers or create unsafe conditions."
Hutchison scoffs at the idea that protesters might pose harm to Y-12 workers and suggests that is so much "fear-mongering."
"I can't imagine a scenario in which we would be a threat to their workers," Hutchison said. "If they have fear, I think it's rooted in their concern that we will be effective in shutting down production at Y-12."
Mitchell said he obviously would rather there not be protests.
"On the other hand, that's our country," he said. "... We're the kind of business where you expect to be part of that. It's a controversial business. That's the way it goes. But we've got to make sure we can do our job and take care of all our people and do the best we can and help everybody else be safe while we're doing it."
Senior Writer Frank Munger covers the Department of Energy for the News-Sentinel. He can be reached at 865-482-9213 or at twig1@knoxnews.infi.net. This column is also available on the Web at www.knoxnews.com/editorsview/munger/
----
Health subcommittee seeks sick-resident member
by Paul Parson,
Oak Ridger staff -
June 13, 2001
http://www.oakridger.com/
The search is on for a "self-identified sick resident" to sit on the Oak Ridge Reservation Health Effects Subcommittee.
But there is no guarantee that the person will be chosen.
The subcommittee voted Tuesday afternoon to solicit nominations for a new member, giving preference to a resident who believes he or she was contaminated by off-site releases from the Department of Energy.
However, there was some debate over the issue.
Originally a motion was made to fill the vacancy specifically with a sick resident. It did not receive a majority vote and failed.
"There's a segment of the public that feels they aren't represented," said Bob Eklund, the subcommittee member who made the motion. "We need to have someone representing that segment on the board."
Several community members and representatives of advocacy groups have been very vocal about getting a sick resident and worker on the board.
The new member would fill a vacancy left by Ronald Lands, an oncologist, who resigned from the subcommittee. Several subcommittee members said Lands' expertise should be replaced.
"He was there for a purpose," said Bob Craig, a subcommittee member.
So the motion was made to seek a new member and give preference to sick resident candidates. This motion passed.
It may be a while, however, before the person is able to serve on the board. La Freta Dalton, the designated federal official for the subcommittee, said a federal hiring freeze is still in effect on special government employees.
"At this point, we cannot seat another individual on the subcommittee," Dalton said. She added that Lands' replacement would be considered a new member even though funding existed for his position.
However, Jack Hanley with the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry said it's worthwhile to go ahead and start the search. He pointed out that it can take up to four months after the person is chosen to get him or her on the board.
ATSDR, part of the Department of Health and Human Services, is responsible for appointing subcommittee members. The subcommittee consists of citizens primarily from the Oak Ridge area, including Knoxville and Roane County residents, who work with community members and advocacy groups to offer advice and recommendations to several federal agencies regarding health concerns in Oak Ridge.
Also affected by the hiring freeze is the appointment of a "sick worker" to serve the subcommittee. Three people from Oak Ridge applied for the position a couple of months ago, but it appears one of those candidates has resigned.
Glenn Bell informed The Oak Ridger that he has withdrawn his name for consideration. He cited his own health problems and concerns about the subcommittee as reasons for his decision. Bell has been diagnosed with chronic beryllium disease.
ATSDR has declined to release the names of the other two sick worker candidates.
There is another problem that exists if a sick resident or worker is seated on the subcommittee. A person on disability runs the risk of losing benefits by serving for payment.
Charles Washington, a subcommittee member, said that is a problem that could be solved. He pointed out that the subcommittee or the individual needs to talk to the Social Security Administration about the issue.
Dalton said it should be up to the individual, not ATSDR. She said if ATSDR got involved in the financial issue it could open them up to legal liability.
----
Meetings set for Oak Ridge health compensation plan
June 13, 2001
By Frank Munger,
News-Sentinel senior writer
http://www.knoxnews.com/business/31114.shtml
OAK RIDGE -- Federal officials will host a series of public meetings later this month to explain the compensation program available to Oak Ridge workers whose health was damaged at the federal nuclear facilities. The U.S. Department of Labor, which is expected to open an Oak Ridge office by the end of the June, will process worker claims.
The department has established a toll-free telephone line for workers or former workers with questions about the compensation program. That number is: 1-866-888-3322.
The Labor Department also will host meetings June 26 and 27 at the American Museum of Science and Energy. The information sessions are tentatively set for 1 p.m. and 7 p.m. each day.
Congress last year established the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program. Affected workers could receive $150,000 and lifetime medical benefits under the plan, but the initial recipients are likely to be limited to a few classifications, such as workers with beryllium disease or cancers linked to radiation exposures.
"It's not expansive enough, and we've cried that all along," said Harry Williams, a former K-25 worker who heads the Coalition for Healthy Environment. "We're terribly dissatisfied with this legislation and how it impacts sick people. We're going back to Washington next month to walk the halls and get this changed."
Williams said he is among many workers whose health was ruined by working at the Department of Energy plants in Oak Ridge yet won't be eligible for compensation under the current criteria. He suffers from a long list of problems, ranging heart and respiratory ailments to brain lesions and loss of peripheral vision.
"They've stolen quality years from my life," the 55-year-old Williams said.
Although the Labor Department is handling the compensation claims, DOE will continue to play a supporting role in the program.
Williams said the Coalition for a Healthy Environment, which represents many sick workers and others affected by the nuclear facilities, wants DOE eliminated from the process completely.
"We don't trust DOE, we don't like DOE, and we don't want to deal with DOE," he said.
Frank Munger can be reached at 865-482-9213 or twig1@knoxnews.infi.net.
-------- us nuc politics
In Bush's Words: ABM 'Prevents a Full Exploration of Possibility'
New York Times
June 13, 2001
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/13/world/13PTEX.html?searchpv=nytToday
Following are excerpts from a news conference by President Bush and Prime Minister José María Aznar after their talks yesterday in Madrid, as recorded by Federal News Service Inc. Prime Minister Aznar's remarks were provided by a interpreter.
Q. (TO MR. BUSH) The E.U. today rejected your global warming initiative, Mr. President, and weeks of consultations have not eased objections to your missile defense plans in most European capitals. I have two questions on that. Are these issues so important that you're willing to go it alone if the European allies won't come on board? And what is your response to the E.U. today calling your climate change plan short on results?
PRESIDENT BUSH Well, first, there's a lot that unites us trade, common values, great opportunities. I look forward to making my case, as I did today over lunch, about missile defense.
It starts with explaining to Russia and our European friends and allies that Russia is not the enemy of the United States, that the attitude of mutually assured destruction is a relic of the cold war and that we must address the new threats of the 21st century if we're to have a peaceful continent and a peaceful world. Those new threats are terrorism, based upon the capacity of some countries to develop weapons of mass destruction and therefore hold the United States and our friends hostage. . . .
As far as global warming, I made a strong statement yesterday that said our nation is concerned about CO2 emissions and that we've begun the process to address that problem. I started with an energy plan that on the one hand talks about conservation measures. Our country can and will do a better job of conserving energy.
But I also talked about new supplies that will not harm the environment renewables, natural gas and clean nuclear energy. And I hope the United States Congress responds positively to these measures, which will help in the global warming issue.
I also said our nation is willing to continue to spend money on science, to make sure that any collective approach is one based upon sound science.
I did speak out against the Kyoto Treaty itself because I felt the Kyoto Treaty was unrealistic, was not based upon science. The stated mandates in the Kyoto Treaty would affect our economy in a negative way. On the other hand, I did say loud and clear that we must continue the process of dialogue. . . .
PRIME MINISTER AZNAR It's absolutely understandable for any president to be concerned about the security of his citizens, and in this particular case, obviously, there is a concern that's shared as a result of the collective security that we share. I sincerely believe that no one should be surprised that when we pose issues based on overcoming the past of the cold war, policies going beyond the cold war, presentations that go beyond the historical conflict of the cold war, and we talk about new threats, new challenges, new problems, new challenges in general, again, in security we come to new initiatives. . . .
With regard to the second issue, on the environment, as you know, Spain continues to support the position of E.U., and it has ratified the Kyoto Protocol. I understand that we have positions that may have some differences, but . . . President Bush has adopted some initiatives, and those initiatives need to be studied by the E.U. . . .
Q. (TO MR. BUSH) About your decision to withdraw from the Kyoto Protocol. . . . Do you agree that the European view on this is colored more by emotion than by science, and do you think that there is some hint of posturing in some of their criticism? . . .
PRESIDENT BUSH I believe the Kyoto Treaty is a flawed treaty. I think that it set unscientific goals. It didn't include developing countries. On the other hand, I want to reiterate today, and I will do so throughout the week, that we're committed to reducing greenhouse gases in the United States. I had the opportunity to explain to the president that our nation faces an energy crisis, and it's a serious issue.
We've got incredible trading opportunities between our nations and between the United States and the E.U. In order for us to be active traders, our nation's economy must recover. We've taken some steps toward that. We've got a sound monetary policy by the Federal Reserve. We've got a new fiscal stimulus package that is going to take effect soon. But we also must address energy, and we can do so in a way that not only enhances our economy, a way that makes us less dependent on foreign sources of crude oil and a way, as well, that helps clean the environment. . . .
Q. I would like to ask President Bush how will this commitment that you have taken on to help Spain in the fight against terrorism be translated? What can the United States do? How can the United States provide any assistance, bearing in mind that in Spain our ethical principles do not allow us to apply the solution that you apply, the death penalty, for terrorists. . . .
PRESIDENT BUSH Freedom-loving people are going to be faced with terrorism, and countries such as ours must not yield, must not waiver in the face of terrorist activity. And to the extent that we can help the government of Spain to fight terrorism within its borders, we will do so. . . .
Q. (TO MR. BUSH) You say the scientific evidence isn't strong enough to go forward with Kyoto. So how then do you justify your missile defense plan when there is even less scientific evidence that that will work?
PRESIDENT BUSH Part of the problem with the ABM Treaty is that it prevents a full exploration of possibility. We're bound by a treaty signed in 1972 that prohibits the United States from investigating all possibilities as to how to intercept missiles. For example, the technology of intercept-on-launch is a technology that we must more fully explore in order to make sure that we have the defensive capabilities necessary to prevent what I call blackmail. So part of the reason we're having the dialogue in the first place is to enable us to explore all our options. . . .
The ABM Treaty is a relic of the past. It prevents freedom-loving people from exploring the future, and that's why we've got to lay it aside, and that's why we've got to have the framework, the discussions necessary to explain to our friends and allies, as well as Russia, that our intent is to make the world more peaceful, not more dangerous.
----
Role of Arms Accords
New York Times
June 13, 2001
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/13/opinion/L13NUKE.html?searchpv=nytToday
To the Editor:
Re "Who Needs Treaties?" (Week in Review, June 10 - http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/10/weekinreview/10SHAN.html):
Contrary to the statement in your article, treaties never "gave Americans and Soviets whatever sense of security they had that nobody would pull a nuclear trigger one night and blow the whole world up."
It was deterrence mutual assured destruction that provided this inhuman form of security. It still does.
The treaties between the United States and the Soviet Union had a different purpose: to constrain the size and capabilities of the arsenals and missile defenses that could be deployed, so that both countries could be confident in their ability to retaliate on a large scale against any attack.
This will continue to be the policy of Russia and the United States, whether there are treaties or not, and whether or not the United States deploys a missile defense.
KURT GOTTFRIED
Ithaca, N.Y., June 10, 2001
The writer is chairman, Union of Concerned Scientists.
----
Bush Tells NATO Members to Prepare for New Threats
New York Times
June 13, 2001
By FRANK BRUNI
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/13/world/14CND-PREX.html?searchpv=nytToday
BRUSSELS, June 13 President Bush began the second day of his diplomatic mission to Europe today with a plea to expand and strengthen the NATO alliance so that the allies could "prepare for new threats."
"By bringing in new members we extend the security and stability through central Europe," he said in remarks at the opening of a summit meeting of NATO members here today.
"Yet there is more to do," he said. "We must strengthen our alliance, modernize our forces and prepare for new threats. We must expand cooperation with our partners, including Russia and the Ukraine. And we must extend our hands and open our hearts to new members, to build security for all of Europe."
NATO deterred the Soviet Union, he added. "It provided the time and the space for free peoples to defeat Communism. And it brought the cold war to a bloodless end."
Mr. Bush's summit meeting here today, part of his first overseas trip since taking office, began in Madrid on Tuesday with his most fervent pitch yet for his plan to build a missile defense shield, dismissing a 1972 arms treaty that stands in the way as obsolete and irrelevant to a post-cold-war world.
"The A.B.M. treaty is a relic of the past," Mr. Bush said in Madrid, referring to the Antiballistic Missile Treaty, signed by Washington and Moscow. "The days of the cold war have ended, and so must the cold war mentality, as far as I'm concerned."
The president was equally emphatic about his opposition to a global warming accord supported by European leaders. Just a few hours after environment ministers from the European Union said the president's latest vow to cut greenhouse emissions was unacceptable, Mr. Bush branded the 1997 accord, known as the Kyoto Protocol, "unrealistic" and "not based on sound science."
He said that trying to adhere to it would harm an ailing American economy, and he made a fresh argument that Europeans should be concerned about that because of trade with the United States.
"In order for us to be active traders, our nation's economy must recover," Mr. Bush said as he stood next to Prime Minister José María Aznar of Spain at a news conference here.
Mr. Bush indeed found in Mr. Aznar someone publicly eager to shower him with praise and reassurance. At the news conference, held in a garden outside Moncloa Palace, Mr. Aznar's residence, the Spanish prime minister expressed interest in the promise of a missile shield and issued what seemed to be a gentle rebuke to other Europeans.
"What I'm surprised by is the fact that there are people who, from the start, disqualified this initiative," Mr. Aznar said, adding that "what we're dealing with here is an attempt to provide greater security for everyone."
Mr. Bush's aim for his first presidential visit to Europe is to assure apprehensive leaders here that his foreign policy will not be unilateral, that he is listening to their concerns and that he considers the alliance between the United States and Europe as vital and important as ever.
And he carried with him a general message of cooperation, saying time and again that the goals that bound the United States and Europe were stronger than any differences of opinion.
"There's so much more that unites us than divides us," Mr. Bush said, pledging to consult and try to work with European allies on all issues of shared concern. "We share common values. We trade together. We work on security matters together. And I refuse to let any issue isolate America from Europe."
But his appeal for a missile shield and his unwavering rejection of the Kyoto accord put the spotlight on two areas of serious contention between him and European leaders.
As Mr. Bush toured the royal palace in Madrid Tuesday morning and later talked for more than three hours with Mr. Aznar, he was taking his biggest step yet onto the world stage, where he is relatively untested and, according to administration officials, largely misunderstood.
It was intended to be a cautious start to a five-day, five-country visit that will conclude in a meeting with President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia in Slovenia on Saturday.
Spain's government is more conservative than most others in Europe. Its leaders were more likely to be flattered by Mr. Bush's attentions than their counterparts in some other countries. Mr. Bush speaks some Spanish, which he sprinkled repeatedly in his remarks on Tuesday. And he was not as apt to be greeted here by the kinds of protests expected elsewhere on his tour.
Only about 400 demonstrators gathered outside the American Embassy in Madrid Tuesday night, toting posters that read "Bush, imbecile, the world is not your ranch" and "Europe rejects a wild Bush-man," and they were easily kept in check by hundreds of police officers.
In Brussels today about two dozen environmentalist chained themselves together to block a side exit at the military airfield where Mr. Bush landed. A dozen demonstrators were arrested, handcuffed and taken away.
In a joint statement that Mr. Bush and Mr. Aznar released just before their news conference on Tuesday, the leaders agreed on the need for a "comprehensive security strategy that encompasses both offensive and defensive deterrent systems." It was as unspecific as the proposed architecture for the shield, and it stopped short of an outright endorsement of the plan by the Spanish prime minister.
Before the news conference, Mr. Bush spent the bulk of his time with Mr. Aznar at the prime minister's country retreat in the Toledo Mountains, a getaway similar in spirit to Mr. Bush's ranch in Crawford, Tex. As the two leaders talked and walked the grounds, neither wore a tie or suit jacket. All in all, the visit seemed perfectly tailored to Mr. Bush's informal tastes, a recipe for a relaxed entry into European politics.
Mr. Bush has not always been so sturdy when discussing world affairs and uttering foreign words. On Monday, in an interview with Spanish state television, he mispronounced Mr. Aznar's last name, transposing the middle consonants and saying "Anzar."
There were no such glaring mistakes on Tuesday, but at the news conference, Mr. Bush was initially soft-voiced and a little stiff, tamping down his usual ebullience to the point where he seemed somewhat tentative. Later, as he expressed his resolve on the missile shield and what he saw as serious flaws in the Kyoto accord, his manner grew more animated and forceful.
Before leaving the United States, Mr. Bush had sought to allay European fears about the administration's efforts to fight global warming by promising to lead the way on the research and development of technologies that would reduce emissions. But Mr. Bush did not tether himself to anything concrete.
Several European environment ministers made clear that they were unimpressed.
"Abandoning the Kyoto Protocol would mean postponing international action to combat climate change for years, and we are already late," said Environment Minister Kjell Larsson of Sweden, which currently holds the European Union presidency, in a statement. "We cannot accept this."
Mr. Bush's aides later conceded that while they believed that they were making enormous headway in softening any European resistance to a missile shield, the disagreement over the Kyoto protocol was more severe and less easily resolved.
One administration official offered a glimpse into the administration's belief that the European proponents of Kyoto were, for political purposes, articulating a lofty vision that was not realistically attainable.
"I wish I were that pure again," the official said sarcastically. "I wish I could be Swedish." Mr. Bush's aides further argue that the accord aimed at reducing emissions of greenhouse gases below 1990 levels was written to make it easier for Europe than for the United States to meet the goals.
Another division of opinion between Europe and the United States exists over the death penalty. The execution on Monday of Timothy J. McVeigh virtually guaranteed that Mr. Bush would take a question about his support for capital punishment.
He told the Spanish journalist who asked him that the death penalty was the democratic consensus of the American people, who he said "believe that if the death penalty is certain, just and fair, it will deter crime."
----
Bush Urges NATO to Welcome New Members
JUNE 13, 09:19 EST
By ROBERT BURNS AP Military Writer
http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_package.html?FRONTID=ELECTION&PACKAGEID=bushforeign
BRUSSELS, Belgium (AP) In his NATO debut, President Bush encountered French and German skepticism Wednesday about his missile defense plans, but the allies found common ground on another sensitive subject expanding the alliance's boundaries.
Bush aides said the president eagerly spelled out his thinking on the need for missile defense, and they claimed he persuaded some doubters. Lord Robertson, the secretary-general of NATO, said Bush didn't present a specific missile defense plan or ask for the allies' support.
``What the president asked for and what the president got was an open mind from the other allied countries,'' Robertson said.
Without referring explicitly to missile defense, Bush sounded the theme that undergirds his approach to U.S. and trans-Atlantic security. ``We must strengthen our alliance, modernize our forces and prepare for new threats,'' he said.
Later, Robertson told a news conference that all 19 alliance members now support adding at least one new member when NATO holds its next summit in November 2002. He didn't say which countries might be invited to join, but it was the first time Robertson made it clear publicly that putting off expansion was no longer an option.
Some of the allies disagreed with Bush's view that they all face a growing threat of missile attack.
German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder told the NATO summit there are important questions about the technical feasibility of missile defense. Plus, he said, ``Russia and China need to be involved.''
In contradiction to Bush's view, French President Jacques Chirac said the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty, which outlaws national missile defense, is ``a pillar'' of global security. He called for stepping up efforts to stop the spread of ballistic missiles ``irrespective of action taken regarding the anti-missile project.''
The White House didn't want a summit communique to overshadow Bush's first NATO visit. In its place, Secretary General Lord Robertson of Britain told reporters that U.S. allies welcomed the ``important opportunity'' to question Bush on missile defense.
Noting pointedly that the U.S. has no ``specific proposal'' yet on how it would intercept missiles, Robertson said, ``NATO is embarking now on a major thinking process about the challenges we face and the best means of addressing them. These consultations will continue and they will deepen.''
Bush spoke at the opening session of NATO's first summit meeting since April 1999, when the 19 leaders met in Washington to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the alliance's founding at the outset of the Cold War.
``Now we have a great opportunity to build a Europe whole, free and at peace, with this grand alliance of liberty at its very core,'' Bush said.
The president touched on the sensitive subject of expanding NATO, which just two years ago added new members Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic. He did not mention any candidate countries by name, but made clear he believes NATO should keep its door open to democracies.
``We must extend our hands and open our hearts to new members to build security for all of Europe,'' he said.
Decisions on which, if any, countries to invite to join are expected at NATO's next summit, set for November 2002 in Prague. Russia is strongly opposed to NATO expanding closer to its own borders. Among the candidate countries are the Baltic nations of Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania, which had been part of the former Soviet Union, as well as former Warsaw Pact members Romania and Bulgaria.
At NATO headquarters, hundreds of protesters toted signs decrying Bush's missile defense plan. One protester flew above NATO headquarters in a motorized hang-glider with a sign reading ``Stop Star Wars.''
Despite resistance from some allies to Bush's plans for a missile defense system, NATO expansion and a fledgling European defense force, Bush aides were confident that he would receive backing from nations such as Hungary, Poland, Italy and Spain.
----
Bush reinforces U.S. peace effort
June 13, 2001
By Joseph Curl
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20010613-988502.htm
MADRID -- President Bush yesterday expressed a "renewed commitment to the NATO alliance" and said American troops will stay in the Balkans until the international organization decides to remove them.
Continuing his move away from a campaign vow to tell the North Atlantic Treaty Organization that keeping the peace in the troubled region is a European, not American, responsibility, Mr. Bush yesterday said the United States is "committed to NATO-led operations in Bosnia and Kosovo."
"You will hear me say loud and clear in the Balkans: We came in together; we will leave together," Mr. Bush told European reporters.
The stance differs from that of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, who last month said he wants to remove troops from the region because the job was completed three or four years ago. "Am I pushing it?" Mr. Rumsfeld said. "Yes."
On his first stop of a five-day, five-country trip to Europe, Mr. Bush addressed issues that have alarmed Europeans: a U.S. proposal to construct a missile-defense shield and the president´s decision to abandon a restrictive global warming treaty.
His comments yesterday were a preamble to a stop at NATO headquarters in Brussels today and a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Slovenia on Saturday. Mr. Putin opposes the U.S. missile-defense shield, saying it would violate the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) treaty.
"Part of the problem with the ABM treaty is that it prevents a full exploration of possibility. We´re bound by a treaty signed in 1972 that prohibits the United States from investigating all possibilities as to how to intercept missiles.
"For example, the technology of intercept on launch is a technology that we must more fully explore in order to make sure that we have the defensive capabilities necessary to prevent what I call blackmail," he said in a joint press conference with Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar at his compound south of Madrid.
"So part of the reason we´re having the dialogue in the first place is to enable us to explore all our options so that I can turn to the president of Spain one day and say, 'Our research and development has shown us that not only can we deploy, but effectively deploy.´"
Mr. Aznar defended the proposal to build what amounts to a purely defensive weapon that the United States vows to share with the world.
"What I´m surprised by is the fact that there are people who, from the start, disqualified his initiative and, in that way, they are also disqualifying the deterrence that has existed so far and probably they would also disqualify any other kind of initiative. But what we´re dealing with here is an attempt to provide greater security for everyone," he said.
Mr. Bush, with an eye toward his meeting tomorrow with leaders of the European Union in Sweden, also yesterday rejected the global warming pact known as the Kyoto treaty as "flawed."
"I think that it set unscientific goals. It didn´t include developing countries. . .Our nation is willing to continue to spend money on science to make sure that any collective approach is one based upon sound science. I did speak out against the Kyoto treaty itself, because I felt the Kyoto treaty was unrealistic, was not based upon science," said Mr. Bush, who announced on Monday new studies on global warming.
The European Union, which criticized Mr. Bush after he announced the United States would give up on the Kyoto treaty, served notice from Brussels that U.S. allies reject the U.S. president´s new initiatives on climate change, calling them "short on action."
After Mr. Bush met with Mr. Aznar, the two leaders released a joint statement that "expresses a renewed commitment to the NATO alliance and a readiness to respond to any new threats."
Noting the upcoming NATO meeting, Mr. Bush said: "Tomorrow´s meeting is very important because it will reassure, I hope, our friends in NATO that this government remains strongly committed to NATO, our troop presence in NATO, our making sure NATO is not weakened in any way."
White House officials said yesterday Mr. Bush´s comments do not conflict with those of the defense secretary. They said Mr. Bush plans to talk today of "solidarity with our allies" but will propose "creating conditions for troop reduction in the region."
They point to periodic reviews of troop deployment, the last of which led in March to a reduction of 750 troops. And they noted the joint communique by Mr. Bush and Mr. Aznar agrees to "work with our allies to transfer responsibilities for public security from combat forces to specialized units and international police, and ultimately to local authorities."
Still, Mr. Bush´s comments yesterday differ greatly from his campaign pledges. Since becoming president, he has not advocated a unilateral withdrawal from the region.
Before last fall´s election, Condoleezza Rice, now the president´s national security adviser, floated a proposal under which peacekeeping in Bosnia and Kosovo would become a European responsibility, as would such missions in other conflicts. The United States, on the other hand, would focus on deterring and fighting wars in the Persian Gulf, Asia and other trouble spots.
In an October debate with former Vice President Al Gore, who advocated extending the peacekeeping mission in the Balkans, Mr. Bush said, "I hope that they put the troops on the ground so that we can withdraw our troops and focus our military on fighting and winning war."
Bush officials went to great lengths to assure allies the March reduction was not a unilateral move toward withdrawing from the Balkans. Mr. Bush did so again yesterday.
"This week I´ll be meeting with two great institutions of Europe, NATO and the European Union, to affirm our common purposes and to chart our path ahead of us. Europe has often had a history of division and conflict, but Europe today is writing a new story, a story of democratic progress, economic reform and ethnic tolerance."
Speaking a day after Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh was executed, Mr. Bush also addressed the issue of the death penalty -- lawful in the United States but banned in the European Union.
"I understand others don´t agree with this position," the president said.
"The democracies in Europe reflect the will of the people of Europe. That doesn´t mean we can´t be friends. That doesn´t mean we can´t work in common areas of importance to our people. And that´s the spirit in which I come to Europe."
----
Political, personal attacks greet Bush
June 13, 2001
By David R. Sands
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20010613-23281216.htm
President Bush is getting a rowdy welcome, politically and personally, as he makes his first trip to Europe as chief executive.
Officials yesterday were dealing with protests and security threats in at least four European countries, even as the leaders of France and Germany were issuing a joint position paper that directly challenges Mr. Bush on missile defense and the global-warming treaty.
French President Jacques Chirac and German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder yesterday concluded a summit in southwestern Germany by releasing a joint statement that implicitly rejects Mr. Bush´s contention in Madrid yesterday that the long-standing ban on ballistic-missile defense systems is "a relic of the past."
"France and Germany consider that the risks of ballistic proliferation necessitate the reinforcement of the multilateral instruments of nonproliferation," the two leaders said in a statement.
Although the French and German leaders meet regularly, this latest get-together was timed two days before the first formal summit between Mr. Bush and top representatives of the European Union in Sweden.
The joint statement appeared to be an effort to present a united front against Mr. Bush on two issues that have heightened trans-Atlantic tensions in the early days of the new U.S. administration. Many in Europe worry that even a limited U.S. missile-defense system would encourage other nations to boost their own missile stocks in order to maintain a deterrent.
Mr. Chirac, a conservative, told reporters after the conclusion of the summit in Freiburg, Germany: "Even though defense systems must be studied, there´s another necessity which must be stressed, which is nonproliferation."
Lukewarm at best to Mr. Bush´s missile-defense idea, the French and German leaders are deeply skeptical of Mr. Bush´s plans to modify or scrap the 1972 U.S.-Soviet Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty in order to proceed with the defense plan.
Mr. Bush meets with the leaders and top defense officials of the 19 NATO countries in Brussels today before proceeding to a summit tomorrow with the European Union in Gothenburg, Sweden. A two-day EU summit in the Swedish city begins Friday.
A number of security incidents and protests were reported yesterday. In Spain, Mr. Bush´s first stop in a five-day, five-country tour, about 250 boisterous environmental and human rights protesters denounced the president´s position on everything from global warming to the Middle East, shouting "Bush, go home" outside the U.S. Embassy in Madrid as he rested inside.
Swedish police yesterday removed 40 activists from a protest area near the meeting site for tomorrow´s summit. Five persons suspected of planning to sabotage the gathering were arrested in a separate raid on an apartment in Gothenburg.
Police in Poland also have stepped up security measures after discovering explosives in a parcel near the Warsaw hotel where Mr. Bush will stay Friday night.
Miroslav Gawor, a Polish government security specialist, said the government is taking extensive precautions in advance of the visit.
In Norway, activists for the environmental group Greenpeace boarded a tanker loaded with oil bound for the U.S. market. The activists, who staged a similar protest in France Sunday, are protesting Mr. Bush´s opposition to the Kyoto treaty designed to cut emissions of gases associated with global warming.
• This article was based in part on wire service reports
----
Criticism Greets Bush As Europe Trip Begins
Spain's Aznar Offers Sympathy on Missile Defense Plan
By Dana Milbank
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, June 13, 2001; Page A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A57625-2001Jun12?language=printer
MADRID, June 12 -- President Bush landed in Spain to begin a five-day European tour today and immediately faced new criticism of his policies on missile defense, global warming and capital punishment, voiced by government leaders and street demonstrators.
Top European Union figures renewed their calls for Bush to embrace the Kyoto global warming treaty, while the heads of France and Germany reiterated their view that negotiating the destruction of missiles is better than the U.S. approach of trying to shoot them down.
Bush called on King Juan Carlos and Queen Sofia at the former hunting lodge where they live and sat down to lunch with Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar at his ranch south of Madrid. Smiles and polite language prevailed, but they did not mask serious policy concerns that European governments have with Bush as he makes his first visit to Europe as president.
At a joint news conference with Aznar, the president delivered what will be a major message of his trip, the U.S. desire to scrap the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty that has governed nuclear strategy for three decades.
"The ABM Treaty is a relic of the past," Bush said at the Moncloa Palace, Aznar's official residence. In his clearest statement yet of his plan to abandon the treaty, which stands in the way of his desire to develop a system to shoot down incoming missiles, he added: "It prevents freedom-loving people from exploring the future. And that's why we've got to lay it aside."
Aznar, one of the few conservatives in power in Europe, offered the Republican president unusual sympathy on missile defense. "It has not been demonstrated anywhere, nor has anyone been able to show that that defensive initiative is something that cannot lead to greater and better security," Aznar said. "What I'm surprised by is the fact that there are people who, from the start, disqualified this initiative."
But other European leaders, some of whom will see Bush at a meeting of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization on Wednesday and a European Union summit Thursday, offered new criticism of U.S. policy stances.
After a meeting, German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and French President Jacques Chirac issued a joint statement agreeing with the U.S. view that there is a growing threat from missiles but stressing the need for an international conference to deal with proliferation.
"France and Germany consider that the risk of ballistic proliferation necessitates the reinforcement of the multilateral instruments of non-proliferation," the statement said.
EU leaders also turned aside an overture Bush had made before he left Washington, concerning his rejection of the Kyoto treaty, the 1997 agreement aimed at cutting emissions of "greenhouse gases" that many scientists contend are leading to global warming. Bush proposed new research, saying the science of global warming remains unproven.
"We regret that President Bush continues to reject the Kyoto protocol," Environment Minister Kjell Larsson of Sweden said in a statement. "We cannot accept this."
Margot Wallstrom, the EU environment commissioner, said in a statement: "We think it is time to move on from analyzing the issues towards action." Schroeder also vowed to defend the Kyoto accord.
The challenges to Bush's agenda come as Americans appear increasingly doubtful that Bush is being well-received on the world stage. A CNN-USA Today-Gallup poll found that 46 percent of respondents said foreign leaders don't have much respect for Bush, compared with 40 percent who said foreign leaders respect him. In February, 38 percent said Bush didn't command respect from world leaders, while 49 percent thought he did.
Here in Madrid, hundreds of demonstrators waved banners and shouted slogans this evening outside the U.S. Embassy, where Bush greeted about 800 employees and their families. The demonstrators' causes included the Kyoto accord, the death penalty and trade sanctions against Cuba, but the protesters seemed united in their opposition to what they viewed as Bush's American imperialism.
"The Yanqui needs Vietnam medicine," the crowd chanted in Spanish, referring to U.S. humiliation in the Vietnam War. They also shouted "Bush assassin" and "We want to see Bush underneath a missile."
Police in Madrid defused two bombs on the eve of Bush's arrival, blaming anarchists or left-wing terrorist groups. Thousands of demonstrators attended a "Contra Bush" rally on Madrid's Gran Via Sunday. About 1,200 Spanish and U.S. security agents are protecting the president.
"America wants to control the world economy, the world military," said Lacha Hernandez, a teacher demonstrating outside the U.S. Embassy. "For us, Bush represents many things from our fascist past."
Aznar gave Bush a much more diplomatic reception over lunch at the prime minister's ranch in the Toledo Mountains and during their news conference this afternoon.
As Bush reiterated his belief that the Kyoto accord is "flawed," Aznar politely mentioned Spain's support of the EU ratification of the agreement. With the execution of Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh barely a day in the past, Aznar also said that he personally opposed the death penalty and that "President Bush is perfectly well familiar with my position."
Bush's first European voyage as president had a few minor glitches in its early hours. Before departing for Spain, Bush gave an interview to Spanish television and pronounced Prime Minister Aznar's name as Anzar. In the White House press center in Madrid, the U.S. flag was hung upside down.
There was some grumbling in France, Britain and Germany that Bush is skipping the "big three" countries on his tour, choosing Spain, Belgium, Sweden, Poland and Slovenia instead. Bush was assured a more sympathetic reception from Aznar, who is closer in ideology to the president. Bush also had an opportunity to underscore the importance of Spanish language and Hispanic culture in the United States, where Latinos will be crucial in the 2004 election.
"In our country, the Spanish influence is profound," Bush said on leaving for Spain.
-------- us nuc power
Cheney Pushes Bush Energy Plan; More Nuclear Power
Wed, Jun 13 5:02 PM EDT,
By Patrick Connole
http://news.excite.com/news/r/010613/17/politics-energy-cheney-dc http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=11175
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Vice President Dick Cheney on Wednesday trumpeted the Bush administration's plan to bolster domestic energy production and make the country more energy efficient, stressing the need to diversify supplies and expand nuclear power generation before plants get much older.
Cheney, speaking before a forum on energy efficiency, said the nation had made great strides in the past three decades in making appliances, vehicles and turbines more efficient, but said much more needed to be done.
He noted that the Bush energy plan released last month provides for top-to-bottom reviews within the government on how best to trim energy consumption in federal buildings and properties, notably in some of the antiquated operations in the military.
"All federal agencies need to take that extra step" to conserve energy, Cheney said, stressing that his expertise on defense matters made him aware of the need to revamp inefficient domestic military bases by either shutting them down or rebuilding them with modern infrastructure.
Cheney, the former head of oilfield services giant Halliburton Co, was defense secretary during the first Bush administration.
"The fact is, if you look at a lot of the bases we operate around the country, some of them shouldn't be operating at all. They could be operated at much more efficient rate," he said.
"We've got facilities that operate at 25, 30, 40 percent of capacity, but you maintain the entire facility. We don't have an efficient, if you will, base structure at all."
WOULD LIKE TO INCREASE NUCLEAR POWER
On energy supply, Cheney mentioned more than once during his talk the need to bolster nuclear generation, saying the nuclear option would provide emissions-free electricity without the greenhouse gases blamed for warming the globe.
Cheney said nuclear power generates around 20 percent of the country's power needs currently.
"We'd like to increase that," Cheney said.
The problem, he said, rested on the issue of the government taking spent nuclear fuel from commercial reactors and storing it as mandated under the law.
The only storage site under consideration is the Yucca Mountain venue in the Nevada desert. Democrats in the Senate oppose the storage plan, arguing spent fuel should remain on-site at the more than 100 reactors around the country.
Democrats, notably the two Nevada senators, agree with environmentalists that the Yucca storage plan is too risky, and think transporting 40,000 metric tons of waste across the country to a central location is rife with unnecessary danger.
Cheney said "the issue must be addressed."
The vice president was interrupted during his appearance by an anti-global warming protester, who demanded to know why the United States under the Bush administration had opted out of the Kyoto Protocol, the treaty to cut greenhouse gases.
Cheney took the heckler's question. He said people who complained the loudest about global warming were the first ones to scream about mentions of using nuclear power to help out.
"If you're really concerned about global warming and carbon dioxide emissions, then we need to come over here and aggressively pursue the use of nuclear power, which we can do safely and sanely, but for 20-some years now has been a big no-no politically.
"Some of the same people who yell loudest about global warming and carbon dioxide emissions are also the first ones to scream when somebody says, 'Gee, we ought to use nuclear power,"' Cheney said.
-------- us nuc waste
Bury hot waste deep underground, scientific committee recommends
Wednesday, June 13, 2001
Environmental News Network
http://enn.com/news/enn-stories/2001/06/06132001/hotwaste_43942.asp
A new report by the National Academy of Sciences says that countries should move forward with the development of deep underground repositories for the safe storage and disposal of spent fuel from nuclear reactors and other high-level radioactive waste from processing this fuel for military purposes.
The report issued June 6 by an international committee of the academy's National Research Council, says four decades of study have determined that the geological repository option is the only scientifically credible, long term solution for safely isolating waste without having to rely on active management
. Focused attention by world leaders is needed to address the challenges posed by disposal of spent nuclear fuel, the committee said in its report, "Disposition of High-Level Waste and Spent Nuclear Fuel: The Continuing Societal and Technical Challenges."
"Difficulties in garnering public support have been seriously underestimated, and opportunities to increase public involvement and to gain trust have been missed," said committee chair D. Warner North, president of NorthWorks Inc., Belmont, California, and consulting professor in the Department of Engineering-Economic Systems and Operations Research at Stanford University.
"Waste management programs around the globe should direct their efforts beyond technical development to emphasize public participation in the decision making process," North said.
The Research Council initiated the study after observing that many nations were encountering significant difficulties and delays in their plans for geological disposal of nuclear waste.
The world's inventory of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste is growing because of the continued use of nuclear energy, the dismantling of nuclear weapons, and an emphasis on cleaning up sites where these weapons were built. This waste needs to be secured to protect people and the environment from radiation and to prevent material that can be used to build nuclear weapons from falling into the wrong hands, the committee emphasized. And in many countries, a consensus that waste can be managed safely is a prerequisite for the use of nuclear power.
"Properly disposing of this waste will require international collaboration," said committee vice chair Charles McCombie, consultant, Gipf-Oberfrick, Switzerland. "Collaboration at the technical level already exists, but coordination at the strategic and political levels should intensify."
"Although there are still some significant technical challenges, the broad consensus within the scientific and technical communities is that enough is known for countries to move forward with geological disposal," the committee said.
This approach is sound, the committee said, as long as it involves a step-by-step, reversible decision making process that takes advantage of technological advances and public participation. Geological repositories, such as Yucca Mountain in Nevada, are intended to be controlled and monitored for many decades throughout and some time beyond their operational phase, during which retrieval of waste would be possible if required.
Yucca Mountain, the only site being considered by the United States for the long term storage of high-level nuclear waste, is now being studied to see how likely radioactivity is to travel out of the containment area and reach air or groundwater. The high-level radioactive waste that would come to Yucca Mountain is now stored at commercial nuclear power plants and research reactor sites in 43 states.
The committee noted that while the United States, Finland and Sweden have plans to begin placing waste in geological repositories early in this century, other countries, such as Russia, have no timetable set for the construction and use of deep repositories.
The committee said that spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste have been kept at storage facilities on or near the Earth's surface since the nuclear age began more than 50 years ago. But it said the amount of waste, particularly spent fuel, is exceeding the current capacity of existing facilities in many countries, and some storage sites have not performed up to acceptable standards.
In a related development, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency last week announced final public health and environmental standards for the proposed geologic repository at Yucca Mountain. The standards correspond to a dose limit of no more than 15 millirem per year for residents who would be closest to the repository - which is about twice the amount of radiation an individual would be exposed to living in a brick house for a year.
But a coalition of environmental groups said the radiation standard is not protective enough. The coalition charges that by arbitrarily limiting the standard to the first 10,000 years of operation, the dose limits for the repository do not account for the maximum radionuclide exposures that will be caused by Yucca Mountain, which are projected to occur much later.
"This is another example of the Bush administration weakening environmental regulations to keep a bad project alive," said Lisa Gue, policy analyst with Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program.
The coalition includes: Alliance for Nuclear Accountability, Clean Water Action, Citizen Alert, Committee to Bridge the Gap, Georgians Against Nuclear Energy, Greenpeace International, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, Physicians for Social Responsibility, Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program, the Sierra Club, and the U.S. Public Interest Research Group.
-------- MILITARY
DISCOVER MAGAZINE HONORS LANDMINE DETECTOR, MICROSCOPE
June 13, 2001
ENS
http://ens.lycos.com/ens/jun2001/2001L-06-13-09.html
RICHLAND, Washington, Discover Magazine honored the Department of Energy's Pacific Northwest National Laboratory for two of its new technologies - a landmine detector and a combined optical and magnetic resonance microscope for cellular research.
PNNL scientists won two of the nine 2001 Discover Magazine Innovation Awards given this year. From the basic science side of the laboratory, physicist Robert Wind accepted the top honor in Discover's Health category for inventing a combined optical and magnetic resonance microscope that has potential for improving the detection and diagnosis of diseased cells and in evaluating a patient's response to therapy.
PNNL's new landmine detector (Photo courtesy PNNL)
Also, as part of the awards program, the Christopher Columbus Foundation granted PNNL physicist Richard Craig a $100,000 fellowship for development of the Timed Neutron Detector, which locates both metal and plastic landmines.
Congress established the Christopher Columbus Foundation in 1992 to "encourage and support research, study and labor designed to produce new discoveries in all fields of endeavor for the benefit of mankind." It chooses a fellowship recipient each year from among entries to the Discover Awards.
"Using different approaches, both of these scientists have pursued the common goal of putting science and technology to work for the benefit of society," said Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham. "Their research ranges from a tiny component of every human being - the cell - to an international issue that impacts millions of global citizens - the proliferation of landmines. We're proud of their groundbreaking work."
The inexpensive, portable landmine detector focuses on the contrast between hydrogen in the ground and in landmines. It recognizes the presence of hydrogen in the casings and explosive materials of plastic or metal landmines.
"We wanted to develop a system that would be feasible for use in countries that have the greatest need for this capability," said Craig, a physicist and principal investigator. "Simplicity has been our goal since the beginning."
----
US, China in Mine Hunt Exercises
JUNE 13, 03:50 EST
By REGAN MORRIS
Associated Press Writer
http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=ASIA&STORYID=APIS7CJHM780
SINGAPORE (AP) The U.S. warship USS Inchon sailed out of Singapore Wednesday for mine hunting exercises with sailors from 15 other nations, including China, which recently rejected Washington's request to allow the USS Inchon to enter Hong Kong.
Sailors from 16 Pacific nations started the exercises Tuesday in the inaugural mine hunting and diving exercise led by host Singapore.
The mine countermeasure ship USS Inchon left its berth at Singapore's Changi Naval Base early Wednesday for exercises in which pilots practice landing on the vessel's flight deck, said Navy spokesman Lt. John Perkins.
The 11-day exercises also involve hunting fake mines in the waters of Singapore neighboring Indonesia, an area that has some of the world's busiest and most vital shipping lanes.
Washington last month requested permission for the USS Inchon to visit Hong Kong from June 28 to July 3. China rejected the request without explanation.
An April 1 collision between a Navy spy plane and a Chinese fighter jet and a U.S. offer to sell weapons to Taiwan has strained ties between Washington and Beijing.
The Chinese have not sent any ships to Singapore and are acting as observers in the mine clearing exercise, said Capt. Randolph Young, commodore of a U.S. mine countermeasures squadron.
The current mine clearing exercise includes 15 ships and 1,500 personnel, 1,200 of them from the Navy, said Singapore's Col. Kevin Santa-Maria.
-------- arms sales
Beijing's arms sale won't net sanctions
June 13, 2001
By Bill Sammon
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20010613-31522824.htm
The State Department yesterday confirmed that China has been delivering military equipment to Cuba, but signaled that the weapons were not 'lethal´ enough to trigger sanctions against Beijing.
"We are very much concerned with this PLA (People´s Liberation Army) cooperation and movement of military equipment into Cuba," said James Kelly, assistant secretary of state for East Asian affairs, during a House subcommittee hearing.
The transfer was first reported yesterday by The Washington Times, which disclosed that the material included "military-grade" dual-use explosives and detonation cord. But the State Department signaled such weapons would not prompt retaliation against China.
"There´s a U.S. law that prohibits providing various types of assistance to foreign governments that have provided, quote, 'lethal military equipment´ to a country whose government is a state sponsor of terrorism," said State Department spokesman Phil Reeker, who repeatedly made that distinction to reporters.
He noted that Cuba is also listed as a sponsor of terrorism.
"What I´m telling you, in reference to that law, is we have not made a determination that China has transferred lethal military equipment to Cuba," he added.
Republican members of Congress denounced such distinctions as a pretense to preserve China´s trade with the U.S.
"We´re splitting hairs about what kind of weapons in order not to trigger certain economic sanctions," said Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida. "But we do this at our own peril.
"I realize that all of this is tied to the economy and trying to get cheap goods for the American consumer, but we´re going to pay a heavy price for it down the road," warned the Cuban-born Republican. "It´s going to hurt our national security."
Sen. Jesse Helms, North Carolina Republican, called for immediate sanctions against the Chinese for spreading weaponry "to the back yard of the United States."
"The communist Chinese have now tipped their hands for all to see," said the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. "They have expanded their spreading of weapons of all types, nuclear and otherwise, to Cuba, 90 miles off our shores."
Mr. Helms blamed the deal on "neglect by the Clinton administration," which took a much softer stance toward China and Cuba than Mr. Bush. He also warned against turning a blind eye to national security dangers for the sake of U.S.-Sino trade.
"This is a wake-up call to all who have hoped to make deals with Red China and make profits doing so," Mr. Helms said. "It´s time to wake up and smell the coffee -- by sanctioning China under applicable laws."
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, California Republican, asked Mr. Kelly during yesterday´s hearing if the Bush administration would "grovel" in the face of the Chinese transfer of arms and explosives. The senior State Department official said no.
But the congressman said later in an interview that China was playing a dangerous game by shipping military equipment to Cuba. He drew parallels between the development and the attempt by the Soviet Union to put nuclear missiles in Cuba 40 years ago.
"This is but another outrage on the part of communist China," Mr. Rohrabacher said. "It is an act of belligerence toward the United States by the communist government in Beijing."
He added that the arms transfer -- coming on the heels of China detaining 24 U.S. service members and their downed surveillance plane -- "should be a clear message to people who have been irrationally optimistic about the potential for our relations with Beijing."
"We need to bring to the Communist Chinese government in Beijing an official notification that this is unacceptable and that there will be repercussions if they continue delivering arms to Cuba," Mr. Rohrabacher said. "And if they continue to do so, we will have to act and there will be some very serious alterations in our trade arrangement with China."
President Bush made no mention of the arms transfer as he arrived in Europe yesterday for a five-day visit. But he reiterated his resolve to keep Cuba economically isolated.
"We plan to keep the embargo on Cuba, and will do so until Fidel Castro frees prisoners, has free elections, embraces freedom," Mr. Bush said during a press conference in Madrid. "I believe strongly that´s the right policy for the United States."
A White House spokesman traveling with the president later declined to comment on the specifics of the arms transfer.
China has been steadily intensifying its military relationship with Cuba since last year, but yesterday´s report by The Times was the first public disclosure that China had moved at least three shipments of arms to Cuba.
"I´ve been monitoring this situation for some time and have even raised the Cuba-China connection in classified briefings with U.S. intelligence agencies," said Mrs. Ros-Lehtinen. "But it wouldn´t have even dawned on us that it would be at the weapons stage."
Dave Boyer contributed to this report.
--------
Top Peru Military Commander Accused
JUNE 13, 15:16 EST
By CARLA SALAZAR
Associated Press Writer
http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=CSA&STORYID=APIS7CJRO3G0
LIMA, Peru (AP) - The main congressional committee investigating fugitive ex-spy chief Vladimiro Montesinos accused Peru's top military commander Wednesday of having possible criminal links to a ``Mafia-like'' web of corruption.
The commission alleged that Air Force Gen. Miguel Medina Ramos, Peru's current military chief, was involved in irregularities in the purchase of three MiG-29 aircraft from Russia. Medina Ramos had allegedly verified that the used MiG-29 aircraft were new, the official government newspaper El Peruano said.
Montesinos and some of his military colleagues have been accused of collecting tens of millions of kickbacks from shady arms deals, including the purchase of overpriced, used jets fraught with mechanical problems, as well as payoffs from narcotics traffickers.
Medina Ramos was appointed by interim President Valentin Paniagua's government in April as part of a shakeup designed to rid the armed forces of Montesinos' influence.
Medina Ramos did not immediately respond to the allegation. Prime Minister Javier Perez de Cuellar prescribed caution Wednesday, saying proof of wrongdoing has not yet been presented.
Medina Ramos was among more than 50 top military and police commanders implicated in the report.
``What we can say after the investigation is that there was a Mafia-like network. It was extraordinarily well-established,'' Congressman David Waisman, head of the commission, told CPN radio Wednesday.
After a six-month probe, the commission delivered its final report to Congress before dawn, saying between 150 and 180 people were linked to Montesinos. There is a $5 million reward being offered for his capture.
The commission was set up last year to investigate the former spymaster, who for a decade acted as then-President Alberto Fujimori's security adviser. Fujimori fled to Japan late last year under a cloud of corruption.
Earlier this week, a separate legislative committee recommended that Congress consider charging Fujimori with crimes against humanity in connection with a paramilitary death squad that carried out two massacres in the early 1990s.
Peruvian investigators believe Montesinos is in hiding in Venezuela after undergoing plastic surgery.
----
Study Shows Increase in Arms Spending
JUNE 13, 16:16 EST
http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=EUROPE&STORYID=APIS7CJSK2O0
STOCKHOLM, Sweden (AP) - A decade after the Cold War ended, military spending is rising again, a respected peace institute reported Wednesday.
The world's nations spent about $798 billion last year, an increase of $18 billion from the year before, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute said in its annual report.
Much of that went to maintain the United States as a military superpower and the world's No. 1 arms exporter. Its military budget is about $295 billion, or 37 percent of global military spending, the institute calculated.
The United States provides about one-half of all arms sold around the world. The 15-nation European Union as a group was the world's second largest arms supplier with about 24 percent of total sales.
Global military spending generally decreased during the 1990s, bottoming out in 1998, the institute reported.
The institute presented its report in Goteborg, in southwest Sweden, where President Bush was due to arrive Thursday. Bush's plans to develop an expensive missile defense program would further drive up U.S. military spending, increase the existing military imbalance and possibly provoke a worldwide arms race, opponents argue.
There were 25 major conflicts around the world during 2000, compared to 27 the year before, the institute said.
-------- balkans
Macedonia Crisis Looms Over NATO
Joseph Fitchett
International Herald Tribune
Wednesday, June 13, 2001
http://www.iht.com/cgi-bin/generic.cgi?template=articleprint.tmplh&ArticleId=22660
Powell to Join Talks on Efforts to Stabilize Deepening Conflict
PARIS The Bush administration, NATO and the European Union will hold crisis talks Wednesday in Brussels about how to prevent civil war from spiraling out of control in Macedonia. The talks will cover the possibility of the eventual use of NATO peacekeeping troops to stabilize the ethnic conflict there.
In disclosing the hastily scheduled meeting, which is to include Secretary of State Colin Powell, diplomats in Brussels acknowledged that the threat of a new crisis in the Balkans suddenly loomed over the planned summit meeting Wednesday of alliance leaders, including President George W. Bush.
The diplomats said that U.S. officials had sought to keep the emergency in Macedonia off the planned agenda for the heads of state because Mr. Bush wants to outline broad new U.S. strategic thinking, so a separate meeting was called.
Three teams from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization already were on their way to Macedonia, diplomats said on Tuesday, to serve as an advance unit of military advisers to the government.
Its troops have been faring badly against ethnic Albanian guerrillas, losing key positions near Skopje, the capital, while apparently alienating civilians in Albanian-populated areas by shelling their villages.
The NATO teams, apparently involving only a few dozen men at this stage, also will examine ways in which the alliance could help with security issues if President Boris Trajkovski of Macedonia follows through on a peace plan that his government put forward Tuesday. That plan includes an amnesty for the rebels and their disarmament with NATO supervision.
The limited plans - which could foreshadow more direct NATO involvement in the crisis, the sources said - reflected an increased international effort to help Mr. Trajkovski. Western alarm has risen in recent weeks, a NATO official said, explaining that "amid these cease-fires that seem to go on and off, the situation doesn't seem to be going into a stable line of improvement."
In neighboring Greece, which fears that violence may spill over its borders, Foreign Minister George Papandreou said Tuesday that international intervention might be necessary in Macedonia if the government fails to reach an agreement with the rebels soon. No other allied government has referred to intervention publicly, but all clearly share a new sense of urgency about the deteriorating situation.
The Western position includes pressure on Mr. Trajkovski, who leads a Slav-dominated government, to make significant political concessions to ethnic Albanian demands and thus undercut the rebels' appeal to Macedonia's Albanian minority, who compose about one-third of the more than 2 million residents.
Saying that EU capitals, Washington and Moscow were aligned solidly behind this position, a French official said, "We have been working together in real harmony to get the right compromise for two months, but slippage has appeared recently and we need to find new momentum."
He said any plan to deploy NATO peacekeepers was premature, but the possibility was being discussed in the context of a political solution for the country.
The unusual degree of U.S. and NATO cooperation with the EU's fledgling security apparatus, which has taken the public lead in Macedonia, will be underscored by the crisis meeting, which will bring General Powell together with the NATO secretary-general, George Robertson, and Javier Solana, the EU's top diplomat.
The Bush administration has been seeking ways to reduce the U.S. military commitments in the Balkans, and it would be a political turnaround for Mr. Bush to acknowledge now that American ground forces are needed for another crisis in the region.
Any NATO move would require U.S. approval and probably a commitment of U.S. troops.
As a diplomat said at alliance headquarters: "Peacekeepers have been under discussion for weeks, mainly in terms of an absolute 'no' from the Bush administration."
But Washington may be forced to reconsider because the stakes in Macedonia are so high.
According to a diplomat in alliance headquarters, NATO leaders face a dilemma in the Balkans: "Getting involved in one more place is a big undertaking but, on the other hand, letting one place undo everything that has been accomplished so far could be a worse and even bigger deal."
----
No NATO intervention in Macedonia: Bush
Wednesday June 13, 10:15 PM
AFP
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/010613/1/wizw.html
BRUSSELS, US President George W. Bush rejected Wednesday the idea of a NATO intervention in Macedonia, saying a new peace plan there must be given a chance to work.
Speaking at a news conference following a NATO summit, Bush said the allies felt that a political solution was still possible in Macedonia where the government has been battling an ethnic Albanian insurgency since February.
The Macedonian government this week approved a peace plan that provides for amesty for the rebels and a NATO role in disarming the guerrillas.
NATO Secretary-General George Robertson is to travel to Skopje on Thursday to shore up the plan.
-------- colombia
Why Colombia Policy Won't Change Soon
Special to washingtonpost.com
Wednesday, June 13, 2001; 1:01 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A61500-2001Jun13?language=printer
The United States "misses the point" in Colombia when it insists on a policy limited to fighting drug trafficking there, according to a new study by RAND ("Colombian Labyrinth: The Synergy of Drugs and Insurgency and Its Implications for Regional Stability"). The study urges a more "comprehensive" U.S. strategy that includes both counter-narcotics and political-strategic objectives.
But a look at Washington's current political environment and at last year's heated debate on Plan Colombia suggest that RAND-and many other experts before them-are missing the point by proposing a change of such magnitude.
The new Bush administration, having made its share of initial foreign policy blunders, will take months before even considering a substantial change of strategy in Colombia. The Andean Region Initiative, the follow-up to Plan Colombia, was recently presented to Congress. The initiative represents a continuation of the policy of the last decade which has centered on helping the nations of the region fight illegal drug trafficking and, if anything, dilutes some of the former emphasis on Colombia.
A variety of analysts, many of whom promote a wider policy that would include support for Colombia's anti-guerrilla campaign, recognize that many important administration posts that would be involved in a policy change are still vacant.
In addition, the lack of key personnel in the Pentagon is compounded by the internal review now being conducted by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, which casts into doubt where U.S. military support even for anti-drug campaigns in the region will end up.
"Colombia doesn't show up as that high an issue right now," said Cynthia Watson, associate dean of the National War College. Watson, who has criticized U.S. policy for years for ignoring that the Colombian conflict goes beyond the anti-drug struggle, said she saw few reasons to expect any change in the future. She added that because of other U.S. priorities, such as China policy and the proposed national missile defense program, Colombia policy emanating from Washington will remain in the hands of the same mid-level officials who have neither the authority nor the interest to change it.
"The United States is trying to define useful but limited involvement, one that happens to deal with the damage we have done there" because of illegal drug use in the United States, said Phil McLean, of the Center for Strategic and International Strategies in Washington. McLean, who will lead a Colombia task force that starts meeting Thursday, said he hopes to stimulate debate, but considers that public opinion in the United States will not support more involvement in an internal conflict in Colombia that is for the Colombians to resolve.
Some U.S. military observers say the growing popularity of the paramilitary forces fighting leftist guerrillas in Colombia show that Colombians, at least those in rural areas, are anxious to fight for a solution but have no other alternative than supporting those forces, which have engaged in illegal and abusive actions. They see the paramilitary groups as a symptom of a situation that cannot be solved by pressuring the military to destroy them without offering an alternative.
"It may be worth considering whether the policy of discouraging the organization of legal self-defense communities is wise," said the report, which RAND prepared for the U.S. Air Force. It proposed the creation of community self-defense militias such as those in Peru or a National Guard. "Such arrangements might help to create the conditions for a peace agreement by empowering local communities to provide for their security and creating incentives for the guerrillas to negotiate in good faith."
Arming individuals to take the law into their own hands would be "a recipe for real problems," said Timothy S. Rieser, an aide to Democratic Sen. Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont. Leahy, one of the most skeptical members of Congress with respect to U.S. policy toward Colombia, has insisted that all military assistance comply fully with conditions about respect for human rights and, especially, break all military contacts with paramilitary "self defense" groups. Rieser said the role of defending the communities is the role of the military reason why it is important to support the efforts that would help Colombian armed forces become more professional.
-------- drug war
U.S. military plans drug war buildup
Washington Times
World Scene,
June 13, 2001 •
Combined dispatches and staff reports
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20010613-91529355.htm
The United States will expand its military presence in South America this fall when a major anti-drug airborne surveillance facility begins operating at the coastal airport of Manta, Ecuador, U.S. officials said.
The buildup will be the first in Latin America since U.S. military bases closed in Panama in 1999 and will intensify American operations in the war against the drug trade centered in Colombia, the world´s largest cocaine producer.
Arms-control advocates said yesterday that Ecuador would become a new Honduras, the hub of U.S. military operations during the Central American wars of the 1980s.
When the runway is lengthened by the end of September at the Ecuadoran air force base, two large Airborne Warning and Control System planes and two KC-135 refueling aircraft will be able to land there simultaneously if need be.
-------- iraq
"Smart Sanctions"
by Rahul Mahajan and Robert Jensen,
June 13, 2001
http://www.mediamonitors.net/mahajan&jensen1.html
When politicians feel compelled to label a policy "smart," there's a good chance it isn't. Such is the case with the new proposal for "smart sanctions" on Iraq.
Last week's U.N. Security Council temporary extension of the oil-for-food program in Iraq postponed the fight over the smart-sanctions plan proposed by the British and United States. In the next month, it's crucial for the American people to pressure the Bush administration to abandon this latest ruse and allow economic sanctions to be lifted.
The problem with smart sanctions is that they likely will have the same effect on the Iraqi people as smart bombs did during the Gulf War. No matter whether the weapons are dumb or smart, the targets -- the Iraqi people -- will continue to die.
Economic sanctions, allegedly placed on Iraq to force compliance with U.N. resolutions about weapons of mass destruction, have killed more than 1 million civilians, according to United Nation's figures. Most of the world wants to lift the cruel embargo, but the United States insists on keeping the screws on the Iraqi people.
The latest turn of the screw is the U.K./U.S. proposal for "new-and-improved" sanctions, which Bush administration officials disingenuously suggest will alleviate the suffering of ordinary Iraqis. But instead of allowing Iraq to recover from the one-two punch of war and siege that have devastated the economy, the plan would keep the country subjugated indefinitely under a kind of U.N. trusteeship.
Under the current system, all imports are prohibited unless specifically approved by the U.N. Sanctions Committee. The proposal calls for automatic approval of imports except for a 23-page listed of banned or suspect items that includes almost all computer and telecommunications equipment, as well as other necessary civilian items which may have potential military uses.
This likely will allow more goods in, but the shortage of food, medicine and other goods is only part of the problem. The plan will not stimulate the local economy or allow the foreign investment needed to reconstruct Iraq's industrial base. More food in the country is meaningless if ordinary Iraqis can't afford it, and until the economy is rebuilt their purchasing power will not increase.
Smart sanctions have the same motivation as the 1991 Gulf War and the dumb sanctions of the past decade -- not primarily to contain Iraqi military aggression (even Dick Cheney has admitted that Iraq poses no substantial military threat to its neighbors) but to maintain control over the Middle East. Keeping Iraq a pariah state provides an excuse for a permanent land-based U.S. military presence in Saudi Arabia and neighboring countries.
But recent developments are starting to undermine U.S. control. France and Russia have tired of toeing the U.S. line on Iraq, and Iraq's traditional trading partners are tired of bearing the economic costs of the sanctions regime. The resurgence of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict also has played a part, forcing the elites who rule the Arab world to take stronger stances against the U.S.-dominated status quo in the region.
The new U.K./U.S. proposal is not the result of humanitarian concerns, but an attempt by the Bush administration to shore up U.S. power in the face of these challenges. Serious concerns about peace and democracy in the region suggest another path.
Iraq needs to be able to resume normal economic, political and social life. The current system that sends Iraqi oil proceeds to a U.N.-administered account -- a feature retained in the new proposal -- has meant a collapse of the local economy; the Iraqi government is not even allowed to use the money to buy local goods and services.
The sanctions have made it impossible to maintain anything beyond minimal educational, health, and social services. Families are at the mercy of unscrupulous profiteers. Women, who bear the brunt of the costs in enforced impoverishment, have been disempowered. Iraq is the only country in the world where literacy decreased in the past 10 years. There has been an explosion in crime that would have been unthinkable before. Iraqis have changed from a generally pro-Western orientation to a violently anti-Western one.
The only way to change this is to put real control of Iraq back in Iraqi hands. This will make the government and Saddam Hussein more accountable to the people for economic policy, and not allow it to blame the West for problems.
Iraq won't democratize tomorrow if it is freed today, but continuing the sanctions regime will only continue to delay that process.
Mahajan is a doctoral candidate in physics and Jensen is a professor of journalism at the University of Texas at Austin. Both are members of the coordinating committee of the National Network to End the War Against Iraq.
-------- israel
See "The Accused" on BBC
Sunday 17 June 2001
BBC News
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/audiovideo/programmes/panorama/newsid_1381000/1381328.stm
Nearly 20 years ago the man who is now Israel's Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, sent Lebanese militiamen into the Palestine refugee camps of Sabra and Shatilla. When they left 36 hours later at least 800 people lay dead after a rampage of murder, torture and rape.
The massacre provoked international outrage. In Israel itself 400,000 people took to the streets in the largest demonstration the country had ever seen. Ariel Sharon was forced to resign as Israel's defence minister.
But he has maintained that he could not have foreseen the danger of a massacre in the camps. Fergal Keane investigates this claim, and talks to key witnesses and survivors of the massacre.
In the light of developments in international war crimes prosecutions the programme asks whether the evidence should lead to indictments for what happened in the camps.
Watch The Accused on BBC1 at 2215 BST Sunday 17 June, or via a live stream on this site.
-------- space
Russian Space Program Shortchanged
JUNE 13, 06:20 EST
By ANNA DOLGOV
Associated Press Writer
http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=EUROPE&STORYID=APIS7CJJSL80
MOSCOW (AP) The Russian space program received less than half the funding it was due in the first five months, leaving it unable to replace aging satellites, Russia's space chief said Wednesday.
Russia's satellite fleet has shrunk in half over the past decade because the cash-strapped government is unable to pay for more orbiters, Aerospace Agency chief Yuri Koptev said. More than 85 percent of the still-functioning space craft have already served out their lifetime, Koptev told the lower house of parliament.
State funding for the space program in January-May was only 41 percent, he said. Koptev said he hoped the situation would improve next year, but provided no figures.
``We pin much hope on next year's budget, that it will allocate the amount necessary to fulfill the program of space development approved by the state,'' Koptev told parliament.
The country is running short of weather forecast satellites, which are launched every two years, he said.
Only 90 of the more than 700 satellites that are orbiting the earth are Russian, he said. These include 30 research and 43 military satellites, and the rest are dual-purpose, he said.
Russia feels bitterly the decline of its space program, which once surpassed the American program in many spheres. Russia was forced to abandon its 15-year-old Mir space station this spring, and resents playing a secondary role on the international space station.
The Russian space program earns much of its revenues through commercial launches of foreign satellites. Russia carried out 34 satellite launches last year, out of the world's total of 85, Koptev said. He did not specify how many satellites were put into orbit.
``Russia's space potential is a real thing,'' he said. ``It exists and is able to ... realize our export potential in full.''
Russia also carried the world's first space tourist, American financier Dennis Tito, to the international space station this spring. The U.S. space agency NASA strongly objected to the mission, for which Tito paid up to $20 million.
-------- u.s.
Updated Army rulebook on how to wage war
06/13/2001 - Updated 11:55 PM ET
USA Today
http://usatoday.com/news/washdc/2001-06-14-rulebook.htm
WASHINGTON (AP) - Citing "a profound shift" in worldwide threats, the Army is updating its rulebook on how to wage war.
The two new field manuals - one defining the Army and its role, the other telling how it will operate - say the Army must be prepared for everything from fighting wars to supporting civil governments in humanitarian crises.
Manuals, which were being released Thursday, the Army's 226th anniversary, are updated about every seven years. For the first time, the new manuals draw on experiences in post-Cold War operations such as Somalia and the Balkans.
In the past, doctrine focused mainly on fighting major wars. The revised thinking has become a familiar theme in Washington as all the services work toward transforming to more mobile forces to combat a new kind of crises.
"It recognizes a profound shift in threats to U.S. interest and forces and examines the increased complexity of modern operations," the Army said in a statement Wednesday.
"These manuals define who we are, what we do, how we do it and the road ahead," Army Chief of Staff Gen. Eric K. Shinseki said.
Already in use in Army schools and soon to be sent to training centers, the manuals are to be "studied and understood by all Army leaders," he said. He said they are "a professional intellectual framework" for how the Army will operate.
The updated rules emphasize that the Army is part of a team with the other services
"The United States Army will fight, has to be able to fight and win, as a member of a joint team," Lt. Gen. Michael Steele told a briefing Wednesday.
"We'll do that first and prepare for that first. And then as time permits, or as mission dictates, well take on stability and support operations as directed," he said referring to missions such as peacekeeping and other noncombat deployments.
----
Quick Strike Forces Urged for Military
Pentagon Study Gives Multiservice Units 30 Days to Control Outbreak of Trouble
By Roberto Suro
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, June 13, 2001; Page A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A56625-2001Jun12.html
The Bush administration hopes to organize new multiservice strike forces that could be used to undertake aggressive military actions around the world and move to trouble spots within 24 hours, under a wide-ranging proposal unveiled yesterday to transform the armed services.
While relying on long-range missiles and aircraft for critical firepower, the plan also envisions the extensive deployment of combat troops overseas so they can be ready for fast attacks on hostile territory. In a departure from current practice, separate forces and specialized headquarters units would handle humanitarian missions, such as refugee emergencies.
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has commissioned more than a dozen major studies aimed at scrutinizing various components of the nation's armed services and strategy toward war. The transformation plan presented at the Pentagon yesterday was the first element of that review made public in detail. Other parts of the review, but not all of it, will be made public in subsequent briefings, officials said.
Implementing the transformation plan would require changes in several major weapons programs, speeding up deployment of the sometimes controversial Joint Strike Fighter while shelving plans for a new aircraft carrier and a new destroyer, for example. Moreover, the study suggests a major shift in military planning. Relatively limited operations, such as the 1999 Kosovo bombing campaign, would get priority over preparation for all-out conflicts such as the 1991 Persian Gulf War, which has been the guiding principle for decades.
President Bush has outlined a defense strategy in broad terms that faults past policies for continuing to emphasize the weapons and tactics of the Cold War era and not adapting to new circumstances that require more flexible, rapidly deployable forces. The transformation plan proposes changing the military's core capabilities so that the Air Force, Army, Navy and Marines can work together more effectively, and respond quicker to overseas crises.
No budget estimates were included with the proposal. It was designed to guide Rumsfeld's thinking as he prepares a proposal for increased military spending in the 2002 budget, due to be presented to Congress within weeks. The more extensive, long-term plans will shape the 2003 defense budget due next winter.
To move quickly when a crisis erupts, key combat units from all the armed services would be organized into "Global Joint Response Forces" capable of setting up operations in a hostile environment within 24 hours, according to the proposal presented by retired Air Force Gen. James P. McCarthy, who headed Rumsfeld's review panel on the transformation of conventional forces.
These units would be designed to gain control of a trouble spot within four days and bring a conflict to a decisive resolution within 30 days. In humanitarian emergencies, military units would start handing over operations to civilian contractors and nongovernmental organizations after 30 days, McCarthy said.
The emphasis on overseas deployments, military interventions and the use of troops on humanitarian missions runs counter to some of Bush's campaign rhetoric last year, which criticized the Clinton administration for overextending the armed forces with missions not critical to national security. The transformation study, which was conducted by the Institute for Defense Analysis, a federally funded research center, only addressed the military's capabilities and not the policies that dictate its use.
The new strike forces would serve a "U.S. strategic need," McCarthy said, "a greatly enhanced capability to act decisively before the facts on the ground become more difficult to change." In addition, organizing these multiservice units would mark "the first phase of the eventual transformation" of the rest of the military into a force that is at once more agile, more lethal and smaller, said McCarthy, a professor of national security studies at the Air Force Academy.
Rather than emerging from a radical redesign of the military, McCarthy said, the strike forces would be formed out of existing units. "We are not talking about a new force," he said. "It is how to organize and exercise and train the existing forces and what capabilities to give them."
Nonetheless, the proposal rates many weapons systems under development in terms of how much they contribute to the goal of transformation. The Joint Strike Fighter, which is expected to enter service in 2008, should be accelerated by two or three years, McCarthy said, because it would add radar-evading stealth capabilities to seaborne airpower.
Two other major Navy projects did not fare as well. Neither the DD-21, a new generation of destroyers, nor the CVX, a new aircraft carrier, contribute to the goal of transformation, the review panel concluded. "The bottom line is that we felt that continuation of what we're building now is the right answer," McCarthy said.
To increase the number of precision-guided weapons that the military can deliver on a target, the panel recommended converting four Ohio-class submarines to carry cruise missiles instead of nuclear ballistic missiles, and modifying the Air Force's fleet of 21 B-2 bombers so the long-range stealth aircraft could carry more and a broader variety of bombs.
------
Panel Recommends Improved Weapons
New York Times
June 13, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Filed at 4:08 a.m. ET
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Modern-Military.html?searchpv=aponline
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Pentagon should speed up or improve some key weapons programs as part of the effort to transform the U.S. military into a leaner, more lethal force that can strike quickly around the world, a panel of defense experts says.
There also should be more focus on increasing joint control and command among the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines as part of developing a new long-range precision strike capability.
``The services are very, very capable, but they still have not learned, and they have not trained, and have not exercised sufficiently for us to claim we have a true joint force capability,'' retired Air Force Gen. James McCarthy said Tuesday.
McCarthy's panel recommended that transformation into a force of the future should include converting four Trident submarines into cruise missile carriers; enhancing the B-2 bomber to carry more bombs; accelerating the production of the high-flying Global Hawk unmanned spy plane; and developing a stealthy long-range cruise missile.
The study was done by the Institute for Defense Analyses and conducted by McCarthy and a group of military officers, scientific advisers and intelligence specialists.
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld asked for the study to help him decide what is necessary to move from the heavy forces of the Cold War toward lighter, more mobile forces better suited to deal with expected future conflicts.
The panel was among more than a dozen that Rumsfeld has asked to review such topics as reshaping U.S. nuclear forces, transforming conventional forces, improving the Pentagon's financial management, developing a missile defense with global reach and improving the military's quality of life.
The panel came up with no radical ideas. ``We are not talking about a new force,'' said McCarthy. ``It is how to organize and exercise and train the existing forces and what capabilities to give them'' to make them capable of responding rapidly to a variety of situations.
After a study by another panel, Rumsfeld announced last month a revamping of space-defense policies. He said he would assign broader responsibilities to the Air Force Space Command, based at Colorado Springs, Colo., and put a full general in charge of the military's space programs.
As the reviews have continued, there has been anxiety in the defense industry and among the military services that Rumsfeld would take an ax to major weapons programs. The Army has worried about rumors that Rumsfeld would make troop cuts. And Congress worries about military bases being closed.
Some have speculated that President Bush will opt to reduce the size of the military and use the resulting financial savings to pay for a new generation of aircraft and other modernized weaponry in addition to building a system to defend against ballistic missile attack.
----
Military Review Emphasizes Need for Services to Respond Jointly
New York Times
June 13, 2001
By THOM SHANKER and JAMES DAO
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/13/national/13MILI.html?searchpv=nytToday
WASHINGTON, June 12 The Pentagon today gave additional indications of how it might restructure its forces, urging the services to operate jointly to respond more effectively in the opening hours of a conflict and saying that the Army needed to streamline its command structure, possibly by eliminating divisions.
James P. McCarthy, a retired Air Force general who directed a review on transforming the military's weapons and doctrine, criticized a new Navy destroyer, but declined to recommend the outright canceling of any high-cost weapons systems that are being targeted by some analysts trying to find money to upgrade the military.
His review, one of a number of analyses of America's military strategy ordered by Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, summarized current thinking on how the military must take advantage of new weapons, sharper intelligence and increased communications to respond faster to hostilities and humanitarian missions. It repeatedly stressed the need for training and command and control that unites the services in joint operations.
"The services are very, very capable, but they still have not learned and they have not trained and have not exercised sufficiently for us to claim we have a true joint force capability," General McCarthy said. He said he was not advocating a new force, but a "new operational concept that establishes true jointness."
The study on military transformation, which is not official policy, was one of a dozen reviews requested by Mr. Rumsfeld to help shape his thinking as he develops a new Pentagon strategy and military budgets. In the study's early weeks, the panels were criticized by some in Congress and in the military as being too secretive; General McCarthy's briefing today was at one level an offer to throw open a portal into the process shaping Mr. Rumsfeld's thinking.
The term transformation is generally taken to mean creating lighter, faster and more lethal forces to deal with emerging threats, and the new Pentagon leadership is wrestling today with exactly how the military should transform itself: what weapons it will buy, how much money will be requested, whether the number of soldiers, sailors, fliers and marines should be changed.
Mr. Rumsfeld is in the midst of setting strategy and budgets with a process mandated by Congress, called the Quadrennial Defense Review. Officials said Mr. Rumsfeld was completing work this week on the review's "terms of reference," which a senior officer described as the framework to help refine policy and guide requested budgets.
General McCarthy, now a professor of national security at the Air Force Academy, had a tepid review for the Navy's $30 billion DD-21 destroyer program, saying, "We didn't see a substantial difference in operational capabilities in the DD-21" compared with other Navy systems.
He recommended that four Ohio- class ballistic missile submarines be converted to carry the "maximum number" of cruise missiles. He also called for converting the B-2 stealth bomber to carry a larger number of small, accurate munitions. These steps, he said, would give the military greater flexibility in choosing enemy targets.
The F-22 jet fighter program is "coming along fine," he said, and the Joint Strike Fighter is "an important capability." Asked about the V-22 Osprey, a tilt-rotor aircraft that has been plagued by fatal crashes that the Marine Corps attributed to hydraulic and software failures, he said, "assuming those issues are resolved, that aircraft is certainly a transformational aircraft."
In one fundamental way, the general's report contradicted another of the Rumsfeld panels, the overarching review of military strategy.
The review, which remains confidential, is said to conclude that American bases in the Pacific are likely to become increasingly vulnerable as China and other potential adversaries develop more accurate missiles. Thus, it urges the American forces to become less dependent on military bases and put more emphasis on fighting from a distance.
But the general said his panel's final report sharply disagreed. "We build on forward-deployed capability," he said. "Some have suggested that perhaps that is not required. Our assessment is that that's a very valuable part of our capability and, if anything, needs to be expanded rather than contracted."
Secretary of the Army Thomas E. White also picked up on the theme of transforming the American military, saying the Army needed to streamline its command structure to give field officers more authority, possibly by eliminating divisions. Army leaders have strongly resisted the idea for years.
In his first extended news conference since taking office, Mr. White said the Army had failed to take advantage of communications technology advances that would enable colonels on the battlefield to have access to the same information as generals at headquarters. Mr. White said one idea he would consider was to eliminate divisions and have brigade commanders, typically colonels, report directly to corps commanders.
"The Army has had the same hierarchy of forces corps, division, brigade, battalion, company since Napoleon," Mr. White said. "Clearly, one of the things we have got to examine is how do we flatten this organization and get more muscle out there and get less intermediate steps."
Similar proposals have met strong opposition from the Army's high command, in part, some military analysts say, because it would involve eliminating jobs held by one- and two-star generals.
Mr. White said today that neither he nor Mr. Rumsfeld had made any plans to reduce the size of the Army. He said a brigade structure might allow commanders to place more troops in the battlefield and have fewer back at headquarters, without reducing the overall size of the Army.
Mr. White also said he wanted to combine the civilian and military bureaucracies of the Army to improve decision making, eliminate redundant positions and save money.
The Pentagon is also planning to release on Wednesday the results of a study on morale and quality-of-life issues by a panel headed by a retired admiral, David Jeremiah.
----
Pentagon panel mixed on new weapons
Washington Times
Around the Nation
June 13, 2001 •
Combined dispatches and staff reports
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20010613-88359037.htm
The Navy version of the joint strike fighter should be fielded two or three years earlier than planned in order to aid the Bush administration goal of "transforming" the U.S. military, a Pentagon panel says.
The panel, however, didn´t back the Navy´s $50 billion program to build a new class of destroyers, saying it didn´t seem much better than the current class.
The "transformation" panel is among groups Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld set up to review strategy, systems and doctrine to improve mobility, intelligence and firepower.
"We are not saying kill any program," said retired Air Force Gen. James McCarthy, the panel chairman. "That was not our effort. Our effort was 'here´s a group of programs that are truly more transformational than other programs.´"
--------
In the firing line
Is NATO's dream fuel connected to a cluster of 14 childhood leukaemia cases near a naval airbase?
Exclusive from New Scientist magazine
Wed, 13 Jun 2001 -
Bryant Furlow
http://www.newscientist.com/dailynews/news.jsp?id=ns9999876
A senator has demanded that the US Navy hand over documents that could reveal if a link exists between a military fuel and a cluster of 14 childhood leukaemia cases near a naval airbase in Nevada.
Concerns about health risks have mounted since the fuel, called JP-8, was introduced to American airbases in the 1990s after trials in Britain in the 1980s. Animal tests have shown that it can cause lung, kidney and liver damage, and is highly toxic to the immune system. The Pentagon has even commissioned studies to determine whether JP-8 exposure contributed to Gulf War syndrome.
Now Harry Reid, a senator for Nevada, has filed formal requests to the Navy, the federal Office of Pipeline Safety and pipeline company Kinder Morgan to disclose records related to JP-8 leaks and spills around the airbase in Fallon, Nevada. "When we talk about causes of the leukaemia cluster, jet fuel is the number one thing mentioned," says Reid.
Universal fuel
JP-8 consists of a complex mixture of hydrocarbons, including polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and benzene, a known carcinogen. Its low freezing point means it can be used in all climates. The Pentagon sees JP-8 as a "universal battlefield fuel" for NATO, capable of powering trucks, tanks and even infantry stoves as well as planes.
But military personnel and people living near airbases can be exposed to a superfine mist, or aerosol, of unburnt JP-8 produced as a plane's engines warm up before and during takeoff. In breath tests for PAHs, all airbase personnel studied have tested positive for JP-8 exposure. Animal studies have shown that inhaling JP-8 increases lung permeability and can damage the DNA of lung and liver cells--and thus potentially cause cancer (New Scientist, 28 March 1998, p 6).
Recent research has also shown that it is extremely toxic to the immune system. Mark Witten, a toxicologist at the University of Arizona, Tucson, whose work is funded by the US Air Force, was astounded by what JP-8 does to mice that inhale it. "It's just wrecking their immune systems," he says. "I've never seen a chemical that can so completely wipe out an animal's defences."
Breaking barriers Part of the problem with JP-8 is that it doesn't readily evaporate, so it's more likely to soak into the skin and lungs. What's more, there's some evidence that the performance-enhancing additives in the fuel disrupt the molecular arrangement of the outermost layer of skin, poking holes in the body's main barrier against alien chemicals.
Even after brief exposure, the number of immune T cells in mice plummet and their thymus (where immune cells mature) shrinks, while B cells proliferate. So severe and sustained are the effects that Witten and his colleague David Harris, also at the University of Arizona, worry that repeated exposure could increase the risk of autoimmune diseases and cancer, especially in the presence of other risk factors such as pesticides.
Nightmare scenario
Witten is now studying whether JP-8 causes breaks in DNA strands in the animals' bone marrow cells, potentially triggering leukaemia. It's already known that the children of parents who are exposed to hydrocarbons at work have a greater risk of developing acute lymphoblastic leukaemia - the type of childhood leukaemia in 13 of the 14 confirmed cases in Fallon. "My nightmare scenario is that there are fifty other clusters like Fallon out there," says Witten.
The effects of exposure to aerosols and spills on children and pregnant women have yet to be studied. But when pregnant mice are exposed, Harris recently discovered, up to 70 per cent of offspring die and surviving pups have abnormal white blood cells.
The US Navy vigorously denies that JP-8 poses any risk. But leukaemia experts such as Peter Domer of the University of Chicago agree that Witten's concerns are well founded. Hydrocarbons in JP-8 such as naphthalene or benzene are capable of causing the sorts of genetic damage seen in childhood leukaemia, Domer says.
--------
U.S. Representative Ron Paul (14th District, Texas) Statement before the House of Representative regarding intervention in Sudan
June 13, 2001
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2001/cr061301.htm
Mr. Speaker, with HR 2052, the Sudan Peace Act, we embark upon another episode of interventionism, in continuing our illegitimate and ill-advised mission to police the world. It seemingly matters little to this body that it proceeds neither with any constitutional authority nor with the blessings of such historical figures such as Jefferson who, in his first inaugural address, argued for "Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations -- entangling alliances with none." Unfortunately, this is not the only bit of history which seemingly is lost on this Congress.
Apparently, it is also lost on this Congress that the Constitution was a grant of limited power to the federal government from the citizens or, in other words, the Constitution was not designed to allow the government to restrain the people, but to allow the people to restrain the government. Of course, the customary lip service is given to the Constitution insofar as the committee report for this bill follows the rule of citing Constitutional authority and cites Art. I, Section 8, which is where one might look to find a specific enumerated power. However, the report cites only clause 18, which begs some further citation. While Clause 18 contains the "necessary and proper" clause, it limits Congress to enacting laws necessary and proper to some more specifically (i.e. foregoing) enumerated power. Naturally, no such foregoing authority is cited by the advocates of this bill.
Without Constitutional authority, this bill goes on to encourage the spending of $10 million of U.S. taxpayers hard-earned money in Sudan but for what purpose? From the text of the bill, we learn that "The United States should use all means of pressure available to facilitate a comprehensive solution to the war in Sudan, including (A) the multilateralization of economic and diplomatic tools to compel the Government of Sudan to enter into a good faith peace process; [note that it says "compel . . good faith peace"] and (B) the support or creation of viable democratic civil authority and institutions in areas of Sudan outside of government control." I believe we used to call that nation-building before that term became impolitic. How self- righteous a government is ours which legally prohibits foreign campaign contributions (again with no constitutional authority to regulate campaigns) yet assumes it knows best and, hence, supports dissident and insurgent groups in places like Cuba, Sudan and around the world. The practical problem here is that we have funded dissidents in such places as Somalia who ultimately turned out to be worse than the incumbent governments. Small wonder the U.S. is the prime target of citizen-terrorists from countries with no real ability to retaliate militarily for our illegitimate and immoral interventions.
The legislative "tools" to be used to "facilitate" this aforementioned "comprehensive solution" are as frightening as the nation-building tactics. For example, "It is the sense of the Congress that . . . the United Nations should be used as a tool to facilitate peace and recovery in Sudan." One can only assume this is the same United Nations which booted the United States off its Human Rights Commission in favor of, as Canadian Sen. Jerahmiel S. Grafstein, called them recently, "Those exemplars of human rights nations . . . Algeria, China, Saudi Arabia, Uganda, Armenia, Pakistan, Syria and Vietnam."
The bill does not stop there, however, in intervening in the civil war in Sudan. It appears that this congress has found a new mission for the Securities and Exchange Commission who are now tasked with investigating "the nature and extent of . . . commercial activity in Sudan" as it relates to "any violations of religious freedom and human rights in Sudan." It seems we have finally found a way to spend those excessive fees the SEC has been collecting from mutual fund investors (read: retirees) despite the fact we cannot seem to bring to the floor a bill to actually reduce those fees which have been collected in multiples above what is necessary to fund this agency's previous (and again unconstitutional) mission.
There is more, however. Buried deep within the bill in Section 9 we find what may be the real motivation for the intervention -- OIL. It seems the bill also tasks the Secretary of State with generating a report detailing "a description of the sources and current status of Sudan's financing and construction of infrastructure and pipelines for oil exploitation, the effects of such financing and construction on the inhabitants of the regions in which the oil fields are located." Talk about corporate welfare and the ability to socialize the costs of foreign competitive market research on the U.S. taxpayer!
Yes, Mr. Speaker, this bill truly has it all -- an unconstitutional purpose, the morally bankrupt intervention in dealings between the affairs of foreign governments and their respective citizens in our attempt to police the world, more involvement by a United Nations proven inept at resolving civil conflicts abroad, the expansion of the SEC into State Department functions and a little corporate welfare for big oil, to boot. How can one not support these legislative efforts?!
Mr. Speaker, I oppose this bill for the each of above-mentioned reasons and leave to the ingenuity, generosity, and conscience of each individual in this country to make their own private decision as to how best render help to citizens of Sudan and all countries where human rights violations run rampant.
-------- OTHER
-------- alternative energy
GM takes steps towards fuel cell vehicles
USA: June 13, 2001
Story by Michael Ellis
REUTERS
http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=11158
WARREN, Mich. - General Motors Corp. yesterday announced an investment in a hydrogen-storage company that the automaker said would speed up the development of vehicles using cleaner-burning fuel cells instead of gasoline-powered engines.
GM, the world's largest automaker, said it will take a 20 percent stake in Quantum Technologies, a unit of alternative fuel technology specialist Impco Technologies Inc.. Terms of the deal were not disclosed.
GM and other automakers have invested billions of dollars in fuel cell research, even though the technology is years away from practical use. Several technical problems remain unsolved, especially with handling and storing hydrogen, which is several times more flammable than gasoline and burns without a flame.
Despite those problems, GM has said it expects to offer its first fuel cell vehicle for sale to the retail public by the end of the decade, and has set a goal of becoming the first automaker to sell one million fuel cell vehicles.
The deal boosted shares shares in IMPCO, which closed up $2.80 at $39.83 yesterday on the Nasdaq. GM's shares ended up 25 cents at $59.39 on the New York Stock Exchange.
Fuel cells use an electrochemical process to create electricity by mixing hydrogen and oxygen, with distilled water as the only byproduct, avoiding the noxious gases that other power sources emit.
With governments and environmentalists pressuring automakers to reduce pollution created by their products, fuel cells are seen as the ultimate solution.
THE HOLY GRAIL
Larry Burns, GM's vice president for research and development, said that Quantum's hydrogen storage tanks help solve the issue of vehicle range.
Current vehicles with fuel cells storing hydrogen at a pressure of 2,500 to 3,000 pounds per square inch (psi) can travel about 100 to 150 miles before refueling, compared to 350 to 400 miles for a vehicle with the traditional gas-powered internal combustion engine.
But Quantum has developed a hydrogen storage tank, coated with a shell similar to the material used in bulletproof vests, that can safely store hydrogen at 5,000 psi, extending the driving range to 175 to 250 miles, said Quantum Chief Executive Syed Hussain.
By the end of the year, the company will have available a tank that stores hydrogen at 10,000 psi, increasing the range to 300 to 500 miles.
"This will move up the timetable," for fuel cells, Burns said. "Getting up to this kind of range is sort of the Holy Grail that we're reaching for," Burns said. "Cost is (still) an issue."
Fuel cell propulsion systems are now about 10 times more expensive than an internal combustion engine, making them prohibitively expensive, but the costs are coming down, Burns said.
GM and Quantum will also work on other means of storing hydrogen, such as in liquid form or metal and chemical hydrides.
The automaker is also collaborating with rival Toyota Motor Corp. and oil giant Exxon Mobil Corp. on fuel cell research.
-------- death penalty
Embassy Jury Rejects Death Sentence
JUNE 13, 07:12 EST
By PAT MILTON
Associated Press Writer
http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=NATIONAL&STORYID=APIS7CJKL200
NEW YORK (AP) The jury that feared it would create a martyr by executing a terrorist who killed 213 people at the U.S. embassy in Kenya will decide if his co-defendant should be put to death for killing 11 people in the nearly simultaneous bombing in Tanzania.
After five days of deliberations, a federal court jury said Tuesday it could not agree on whether to impose the death penalty against Mohamed Rashed Daoud Al-'Owhali, effectively sparing his life.
Al-'Owhali, 24, a follower of Saudi millionaire Osama bin Laden, received life in prison without parole for his role in the Aug. 7, 1998, attack in Nairobi.
In a lengthy ``verdict sheet'' used by the jurors to reach their decision, 10 members of the 12-person panel believed that killing Al-'Owhali might make him a martyr. Nine doubted it would relieve victims' pain.
``Justice was not served,'' said Ellen Bomer, a Huntsville, Ala., woman blinded by the Nairobi bombing, in which 12 Americans died.
``So many people died, but the men who did this seem not remorseful at all,'' said George Kinyanjui Gitau, 33, a Kenyan accountant who suffered cuts on his face and legs in the blast. ``He should have got the death sentence so that others who think of doing this thing think twice.''
None of the jurors was available to discuss the case. U.S. District Judge Leonard Sand will impose the sentence on Sept. 12.
Al-'Owhali rode in a bomb-hauling truck in Kenya and threw a stun grenade to distract embassy guards. His co-defendant, Khalfan Khamis Mohamed, 27, was convicted of helping build and deliver a bomb to the U.S. embassy in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
The same Manhattan jury is to begin hearing Mohamed's penalty case next Tuesday. His lawyer, David Ruhnke, hugged lawyers for Al-'Owhali after the jury's decision.
Al-'Owhali's life was spared one day after Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh became the first person executed by the federal government since 1963. Under a 1996 federal law, prosecutors can seek the death penalty in terrorist murder cases.
Defense attorney Frederick Cohn, noting the panel was told to avoid coverage of the McVeigh case, said he saw no connection between Monday's execution and the jury decision.
``This is an extraordinary victory for a system that was really put to the test,'' Cohn said. ``I'm about as numb as my client.''
Assistant U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald has indicated the penalty hearing for Mohamed will differ from Al-'Owhali in that it is to prominently feature the defendant's alleged role in the Nov. 1 maiming of a prison guard at New York's Metropolitan Correctional Center.
Last year, Mohamed allegedly was involved in a failed escape attempt when his cellmate stabbed a guard in the eye with a filed-down comb.
During Mohamed's trial, defense lawyers conceded their client had rented the house where the Tanzania bomb was built and helped grind TNT.
But in court papers, attorneys argued Mohamed should be spared death for giving the FBI ``a complete and truthful statement of his role,'' acting ``out of sincere religious belief,'' being remorseful, and ``being improperly removed from South Africa'' where he was arrested.
Minutes after the Al-'Owhali decision, Sand awarded lawyers for Mohamed a victory.
Sand said the jury could be told in a brief note that a South African court concluded Mohamed should not have been turned over to U.S. authorities without guarantees he would not face death.
Lawyer David Bruck, who represented Al-'Owhali in the early stages of the case, praised Tuesday's decision.
``Terrorists have already decided to become martyrs. This just dramatizes their cause. Life (in prison) is a long and terrible punishment,'' he said. ``I think today the United States took a step toward rejoining the rest of the democratic world. We did not become the world's executioner.''
Two other men, Wadih El-Hage, a naturalized U.S. citizen, and Mohamed Sadeek Odeh were also convicted of all charges in a 302-count indictment on May 29.
The indictment alleged the men conspired with others in bin Laden's organization, al-Qaeda, to attack Americans and pressure the United States to stay out of the Middle East.
El-Hage and Odeh both face life in prison.
----
Russia Communist Backs Death Penalty
JUNE 13, 07:10 EST
http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=EUROPE&STORYID=APIS7CJKK7G0
MOSCOW (AP) Russia's Communist Party leader on Wednesday said that the nation is not ready to give up capital punishment, Russian news media reported.
``Europe wants us to refrain from this type of punishment, but what is good to quiet Europe is not fitting for Russia,'' party chief Gennady Zyuganov was quoted as saying by the ITAR-Tass news agency.
``Europe does not have Chechnya,'' he said, referring to the breakaway republic where government troops are fighting a violent rebellion. ``Special conditions allow special measures.''
Russia imposed a moratorium on executions after it joined the Council of Europe in 1996. Later, it banned judges from passing down death sentences until a jury system is adopted throughout the country a project that President Vladimir Putin ordered completed by 2003.
Public opinion appears to favor capital punishment and several top-level officials have voiced their support for it.
Justice Minister Yuri Chaika recently called for restoring the death penalty for convicted terrorists, and the commander of Russia's military campaign in Chechnya, Gen. Gennady Troshev, called for Chechen rebels to be publicly executed. However, several Russian officials distanced themselves from his statement.
-------- environment
RADON IN BLUE RIDGE AMONG HIGHEST IN NATION
June 13, 2001
ENS
http://ens.lycos.com/ens/jun2001/2001L-06-13-09.html
RICHMOND, Virginia, Radon concentrations in ground water from homeowners' wells in the Blue Ridge area of the New River watershed, in parts of North Carolina and Virginia, were among the highest measured in the nation in a new report from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS).
Radon is a radioactive gas, and radon in air is the second leading cause of lung cancer.
"These results for ground water suggest that many homes in the Blue Ridge region may have excessive radon in their indoor air," said USGS project leader Mark Kozar.
Radon forms during the decay of uranium, and rocks in the area have high natural uranium content. Radon can seep through soil and accumulate in poorly ventilated homes, particularly in basements.
Water from 87 percent of wells sampled in the Blue Ridge region exceeded the proposed national drinking water standard of radon which is 300 picocuries per liter (pCi/L). One third of the wells contained more than 4,000 pCi/L, the alternate standard proposed for areas where action is being taken to decrease radon levels in indoor air.
The maximum radon concentration detected was 30,900 pCi/L.
Similar radon concentrations may be expected in other parts of the Blue Ridge and Piedmont in Virginia and North Carolina where similar rocks are present. The USGS has found that the median radon concentration across the nation is 410 pCi/L.
Breathing radon poses a greater risk than drinking water containing radon. Radon, in addition to seeping into homes through soil and rock, can also escape into the air when ground water containing radon is used for bathing, laundry, and cooking.
"Water in rivers or lakes usually contains very little radon," said Kozar.
More information on radon is available at: http://www.epa.gov/iaq/radon/ (indoor air) and: http://www.epa.gov/ogwdw000/radon/fact.html/ (drinking water).
----
Calif. forced to switch to ethanol for cleaner air
USA: June 13, 2001
Story by Patrick Connole
REUTERS
http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=11164
WASHINGTON - The Bush administration yesterday rejected California's request for a waiver from federal rules requiring cleaner gasoline, giving a major boost to the U.S. ethanol industry.
The Environmental Protection Agency said California must obey Clean Air Act requirements for cleaner-burning fuel, even though the state is phasing out a popular fuel additive known as MTBE because it may contaminate groundwater.
The other additive available to increase the oxygen content of gasoline and make it cleaner-burning is ethanol, which is typically made from corn or other crops. Archer Daniels Midland Co. , a leading manufacturer of ethanol, was expected to benefit from the EPA action.
"We cannot grant a waiver for California since there is no clear evidence that a waiver will help California to reduce harmful levels of air pollutants," EPA Administrator Christine Todd Whitman said in a statement.
Whitman, speaking to reporters following a speech to a manufacturers group, also said the agency ruling would not boost gasoline pump prices in the nation's most populous state. Some experts have said fuel prices could rise by several cents a gallon if the waiver was denied.
CALIFORNIA LAWMAKERS BLAST DECISION
Federal law requires that for areas with the worst pollution - like many California cities - reformulated gasoline should contain at least 2 percent oxygen by weight. The requirement applies to about 70 percent of the gasoline sold in California.
Without the federal exemption, California refineries will have to turn to ethanol as an oxygen additive to make cleaner-burning gasoline. The additive currently in use, methyl tertiary butyl ether or MTBE, is to be phased out by the end of 2002 because of pollution concerns.
The state asked for the waiver in 1999.
Reaction from California was swift and harsh.
Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein declared the Bush administration had "once again turned a blind eye to California." The state has also been stymied in its attempts to convince the White House on the need for price caps on expensive wholesale electricity prices.
"Californians already pay some of the highest gasoline prices in the nation and have been besieged for months by an energy crisis that has included blackouts and a dramatic rise in electricity and natural gas prices," Feinstein said.
"Now we face even higher gasoline prices thanks to this unnecessary federal mandate," she said.
The EPA decision was eagerly sought by farm-state lawmakers, who want to boost the use of ethanol to help whittle down huge stockpiles of corn.
The National Corn Growers Association estimated that about 230 million bushels of corn will be needed each year to meet California's new demand for ethanol. That should boost corn prices by about 10 cents a bushel, or add roughly $1 billion to the value of the annual crop, said Stewart Reeve, a spokesman for the corn industry group.
Ethanol is subsidized by the U.S. government through an excise tax exemption worth 5.3 cents a gallon at the pump.
Thomas Kell, general manager of operations at ethanol producer Nebraska Energy LLC, said the EPA decision should give investors more confidence to expand or build ethanol plants.
"I think you'll see some ethanol sales moving into California right away. (But) the benefits they talk about, the central market in California, will probably take two to three years to develop," Kell said.
CLEAN AIR GROUP NOT HAPPY
Whitman also said that while the agency was bound to uphold the Clean Air Act, which limits air pollution, it was also concerned about MTBE risks to groundwater.
"Clean air and clean water are equally important. We do not want to pursue one at the expense of the other," she said.
"As it currently stands, the Clean Air Act provisions limit the agency's ability to address these concerns. We are exploring all options and currently assessing the health risks of MTBE," Whitman said.
An environmental activist scoffed at Whitman's reasoning, saying a waiver for California would have helped clean air. Ethanol is considered a more "volatile" ingredient which creates more smog-forming pollution than alternatives containing no mandatory oxygen component, said Frank O'Donnell, executive director of the Clean Air Trust.
"The White House is simply playing politics with this issue," O'Donnell said. "This will mean dirtier air and price hikes at the pumps in California."
O'Donnell said the EPA decision may be a payoff to Bush supporters in farm states, and large corporate donors.
"The decision is not based on sound science," he said.
-------- human rights
Guatemala Ex-Dictators to Be Probed
By RICARDO MIRANDA
Associated Press Writer
JUNE 13, 23:39 EST
http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=CSA&STORYID=APIS7CK33TO0
GUATEMALA CITY (AP) - Judges have ordered investigations into two former Guatemalan dictators accused of genocide in the killings of Mayan Indians between 1978 and 1982.
The rulings were issued Tuesday against ex-President Romeo Lucas Garcia and his successor, Efrain Rios Montt, by separate judges, in response to criminal complaints filed by human rights groups.
They mark the first time Guatemalan courts have agreed to investigate former dictators for atrocities committed during 36 years of civil war in which some 200,000 Guatemalans were killed. The war, which pitted leftist, largely Indian guerrilla groups against government forces, ended with peace accords in 1996.
Lucas Garcia won a 1978 election rigged by Guatemala's military and then began an anti-insurgency campaign that targeted Mayan communities thought to be sympathetic to rebel causes.
Rios Montt, who toppled Garcia's government in a 1982 coup, oversaw a scorched-earth policy that reduced hundreds of Mayan villages to ashes during his 18 months in power. He went on to found the country's ruling political party, and was elected head of Guatemala's legislature last year.
The rulings stem from complaints filed May 3 by the Association for Reconciliation and Justice that accuse Lucas Garcia and Rios Montt of using their power to wage a ``calculated war'' against Guatemalan Mayans.
Last week, the same group teamed up with Guatemala's Center for Human Rights Legal Action to file a more specific genocide complaint against Rios Montt on behalf of 14,000 people killed in attacks on 11 Mayan villages.
A report commissioned by the United Nations in 1999 accused Rios Montt of tolerating massacres by soldiers under his command. The report found that the retired general's offensive wiped 448 mostly Indian villages off the map.
A party spokesman said Wednesday that Rios Montt was not familiar with the ruling and could not comment. Rios Montt in the past has said he had ``nothing to hide.''
Lucas Garcia, who lives in Venezuela, reportedly is suffering from Alzheimer's disease and has not made any public statement for years.
Also Wednesday, forensic anthropologists turned the unearthed remains of 28 people murdered in 1982 to their families. The massacre took place in Chiche, 110 miles west of the capital, Guatemala City.
``Now we can bury our relatives, but we still want to know what happened, why they killed them,'' said 32-year-old Feliciana Macario of the national Coordination of Widows and Orphans of Guatemala, which sponsored the excavations.
In 1999, Nobel Peace Prize winner Rigoberta Menchu filed genocide charges with Spain's National Court against Rios Montt, Lucas Garcia and six other military figures. The court rejected the case, ruling that Menchu had made no effort to prosecute them first in Guatemala.
Judge Marco Antonio Posada, who ordered the investigation of the complaint against Rios Montt, said he was aware of the historic nature of his decision.
``Prosecutors will conduct a careful investigation that I will personally oversee,'' Posada said. ``This process is extremely important.''
The definition of genocide under Guatemalan law is less restrictive than in other parts of the world, and includes acts that harm the mental or physical well-being of a national, ethnic or religious group.
----
Amnesty: Activist Hurt in Guatemala
JUNE 15, 19:38 EST
By RICARDO MIRANDA
Associated Press Writer
http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=CSA&STORYID=APIS7CL9ONG0
GUATEMALA CITY (AP) - Amnesty International said Friday that attackers in Guatemala tried to kidnap a visiting U.S. human rights investigator, but officials here are casting doubt on the report.
According media reports, Barbara Bocek was knocked unconscious, tied up and left on a service staircase in her hotel - apparently because a locked door blocked attempts to move her further.
``It is a kidnapping attempt. Barbara was in Guatemala making an investigation into violations of human rights,'' Erin Callahan of Amnesty's Washington office said by telephone.
An Amnesty statement called the attack an example of ``the dangers that human rights activists face every day in the country.''
``The Embassy believes that a serious incident occurred, as a result of which we are asking authorities to conduct a complete and impartial investigation of the incident,'' said spokeswoman Kay Mayfield.
But Interior Minister Byron Barrientos is questioning Amnesty's allegations.
``How is it possible that she was a half an hour on the stairs and she could not remove the tape (over her mouth) and cry for help?'' he asked at a news conference Thursday in response to local news reports.
``It is suspicious that this occurs just as there is confirmation that there will be a meeting between the presidents of the United States, George Bush, and of Guatemala, Alfonso Portillo.''
The White House announced on Friday that Bush would meet Portillo in Washington on July 5.
Callahan said Bocek was attacked Monday night after returning from a dinner to her hotel in one Guatemala City's wealthier districts, but she gave no details.
The local newspaper Siglo Veintiuno reported that at least one man came to her room, tied her hands, taped her mouth and tried to take her out of the building by the service stairs, where a locked door at one stage apparently frustrated him from moving her further.
She reportedly remained there, between the fifth and sixth floors, for a half an hour until she was discovered.
Callahan dismissed the interior minister's statements and said that Amnesty International ``will continue investigating violations of human rights in Guatemala.''
She said Bocek returned to the United States on Tuesday night after being treated for minor injuries and reporting the incident to a local prosecutor's office known as the public ministry, a U.N. office and the U.S. Embassy.
National Police spokesman Faustino Sanchez said police had no record of the complaint. Under Guatemalan procedures, crime victims are supposed to make a report to police before visiting the public ministry.
The attack comes several weeks after Amnesty International alleged in its annual report that human rights workers in the country had been ``subjected to an escalating wave of abuses.''
-------- imf / world bank
World Bank Approves Loan for Pakistan
June 13, 2001
By REUTERS
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/13/world/13LOAN.html?searchpv=nytToday
WASHINGTON, June 12 (Reuters) The World Bank approved a $350 million loan today for Pakistan. The money is intended to support the government in its plan to improve the tax system and repair battered investor confidence.
The investment climate was clouded by the freezing of foreign currency accounts after nuclear tests in May 1998 and bitter disputes in the power sector that snarled relations with the World Bank.
The 35-year concessional loan will be paid in one installment and has no repayments due for 10 years.
Pakistan is hoping to improve its economy with World Bank lending and a $596 million loan from the International Monetary Fund, which was approved late last year.
-------- activists
ONLINE FORUM ADDRESSES EPA PUBLIC INPUT
June 13, 2001
ENS
http://ens.lycos.com/ens/jun2001/2001L-06-13-09.html
WASHINGTON, DC, The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is inviting the public to participate in an online discussion on improving public involvement in EPA decision making.
EPA officials, a panel and experts, and public participants will share their thoughts and ideas on the best ways to reach out to the public and include public input in EPA decisions.
Over the course of 10 days (including a Saturday), the participants will discuss specific topics drawn from EPA's newly drafted Public Involvement Policy. EPA is now seeking public input on how it should implement this policy.
Because this will be a web based discussion, participants can select the topics that interest them and participate at their convenience.
A revolving panel of experts will discuss the main aspects of the draft Public Involvement Policy with each other and with about 500 participants. Among the topics that to be discussed are:
Identifying and involving the public, including those hardest to reach; Providing information to the public; Creating effective public involvement opportunities during rulemaking and permitting; and Encouraging collaborative processes
The Dialogue is an opportunity for citizens, representatives of industry, environmental groups, small businesses, states, local governments, tribes and other groups to learn more about the draft Policy and to share their thoughts and concerns with EPA.
To learn more about the Dialogue and to register to participate visit the Dialogue Web site at: http://www.network-democracy.org/epa-pip
----
Protesters Try to Block Bush Motorcade
JUNE 13, 08:30 EST
By ROBERT WIELAARD
Associated Press Writer
http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_package.html?FRONTID=ELECTION&PACKAGEID=bushforeign&STORYID=APIS7CJLPK00
BRUSSELS, Belgium (AP) About two dozen environmental activists chained themselves together to block a side exit at the military airfield where President Bush arrived for a NATO summit Wednesday.
Bush's motorcade left Melsbroek Airport by the main exit half a mile away, out of sight of the demonstration.
A dozen demonstrators were arrested, handcuffed and taken away. Police declined to say what they were charged with.
A spokesman for the Greenpeace demonstrators, Dan Hindsgaul, said they did not expect to actually stop the president, but wanted to make their opposition to his policies on global warming and missile defense heard.
``It's a symbolic action showing he's not welcome,'' he said. ``It's also just the first in a series'' of protests the group has planned during Bush's weeklong European trip.
About 25 activists chained themselves together in front of a side entrance, which was used by former President Clinton when he came to Brussels, Hindsgaul said.
People on either end were chained to traffic lights and held a banner reading ``George W. Bush Wanted for crimes against the planet,'' while a loud siren wailed continuously.
About 20 military personnel from the airfield watched from inside the gate.
Hindsgaul said activists from across Europe hoped to pressure the European leaders not to allow the United States to use key radar facilities in Britain and Greenland for the missile defense project.
Meanwhile, about 300 protesters gathered outside NATO headquarters behind police barricades about 100 yards from the entrance.
They booed and blew whistles as the delegations arrived for the summit with Bush, with some carrying banners such as ``Save the climate, Stop Star Wars'' and ``Death penalty equals murder.''
In Norway, Greenpeace activists on Wednesday ended an eight-hour occupation of a U.S.-bound oil tanker rather than face police action, according to media reports.
About 10 activists had boarded the Greek-registered supertanker Cosmic at a Norwegian refinery to protest Bush's environmental policies.
Police had ordered the activists to leave for safety reasons and the group reportedly withdrew because they feared their boats and other equipment might be seized.
-----------
G-8 Protest Group Pledges Peace
JUNE 13, 21:44 EST
http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=EUROPE&STORYID=APIS7CK1DM00
GENOA, Italy (AP) - An anti-globalization group that promised to violently disrupt next month's G-8 summit issued a ``declaration of peace'' on Wednesday - vowing to stage only non-violent demonstrations.
The group, Tute Bianche, or All White, is one of hundreds of grassroots groups expected to descend on Genoa for the July 20-22 summit, which will bring together the leaders of the world's seven wealthiest countries and Russia.
Most of those groups are part of an umbrella organization, the Genoa Social Forum, which says it wants to use only legal means to protest. Though Tute Bianche is part of the umbrella group, it said last month it was preparing to use violence.
But on Wednesday the group presented a peace declaration to Mayor Giuseppe Pericu, who said he was ``satisfied'' with the gesture, the ANSA news agency reported.
Groups opposed to what they say is globalization's negative impact on the poor and developing world began disrupting international meetings at a World Trade Organization conference in Seattle, Washington, in 1999.
---------
United Methodist Church Opposes Bush's Missile Defense
U.S. Newswire
13 Jun 13:14
http://www.usnewswire.com/topnews/Current_Releases/0613-137.html
To: National Desk Contact: Bishop Dale White, 401-856-0966 (work) or 401-847-3419 (home) or Jaydee Hanson, 202-488-5650 Both of the United Methodist Church
WASHINGTON, June 13 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The General Board of Church and Society of the United Methodist Church is working to defeat the nuclear missile defense system. President Bush is a member of the United Methodist Church. The church's 67 bishops have unanimously approved a strongly worded statement urging the defeat of President Bush's proposed strategic missile defense system.
The Bishops' statement follows the passage of a resolution by The General Conference of the United Methodist Church calling for an end to the development of the missile defense system. Citing the threat to world security and peace presented by the proposed system, the Church's General Board of Church and Society (GBCS) plans to deploy staff, gather volunteers, create a web site, lobby members of Congress and establish a vigorous program to reach the Church's 12 million members worldwide. Since one of those members is President George W. Bush, the actions of the Bishops, the General Conference, the United Methodist General Board of Church and Society are especially significant. All other national religious bodies will be invited by The General Board of Church and Society to join their efforts to defeat the missile defense system.
The concerns about "Star Wars II" as articulated by GBCS, go far beyond the complaints of the system's unworkability and astronomical costs. Because of the great vulnerability of the weapons being considered (including lasers and interceptors in space, in the air, and at sea), they would be useless to an innocent nation waiting to be attacked.
Potentially useful to an aggressor with the element of surprise on its side, the weapon's primary uses are all offensive, including destroying opposing satellites, seizing military control of space, and attacking targets on the surface of the earth from space without warning.
The United Methodist Bishops in their resolution call upon all people of goodwill to join actively in the struggle to achieve peace with justice. Appealing to President Bush and Congress to refrain from the development of a national missile defense system, the Bishops state, "We must join together to see that the untold billions of dollars proposed for a meaningless search for security through a national missile defense system are not once again taken from the mouths of children and the poor."
--
Only the General Conference speaks for the entire denomination. The General Board of Church and Society is the international public policy and social action agency of The United Methodist Church.
------- OneList (submissions from subscribers)
------- Depleted Uranium Keeps On Killing!