------------
Digest 106, originally sent Fri Jun 4 04:40:24 1999 :
There are 9 messages in this issue.
Topics in today's digest:
1. Fw: NRC: Government in the Sunshine Act Regulations
2. NucNews-0 Brief 6/03/99
3. NucNews-5 6/03/99 - Activism; Secrets; Cox Report Questions; Sierra Club "Bubba" Antinuc Ads; Hackers
4. NucNews-3 6/03/99 - Chernobyl; Uzbek Poison Island/Anthrax
5. NucNews-6 6/03/99 - S.Africa Abolition Petition; X-Ray de-mining; UN/Iraq; Russia, China: Stop Bombing!; World Court Declines halt NATO bombing
6. NucNews-4 6/03/99 - US - Senate vote Nuc Arms; No New Licenses since TMI; Treaty in US Limbo; Nuc Waste Savannah River - Yucca Mountain; Nuc Contractors Deal
7. NucNews-2 6/03/99 - Y2K-Europe; India/Kashmir; UK Nuc Accident Dounreay; Dungeness; Sellafield
8. NucNews-7 6/03/99 - Kosovo UN report; Serbia ok peace plan; Gunmakers Lawsuit; Cuban lawsuit
9. NucNews-1 6/03/99 - DU-Puerto Rico (2); DU-BBC; China/Korea; Tiananmen
_______________________________________________________________________________
Message: 1 Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 13:00:36 -0400
Subject: Fw: NRC: Government in the Sunshine Act Regulations
From: Winston Weeks <wweeks@aros.net>:
Anyone interested in open government should send their comments in ASAP. Don't buy their excuses! Address below.
Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001
ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff
http://www.state.nv.us/nucwaste/news/nrc10cfr9.htm <http://www.state.nv.us/nucwaste/news/n rc10cfr9.htm nrc10cfr9sum.htm>Summary of Document <http://www.state.nv.us/nucwaste/news/n rc10cfr9.htm nrc10cfr9.pdf>These pages from the Federal Register are also available in Adobe Acrobat
----------
[Federal Register: May 10, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 89)] [Rules and Regulations] [Page 24936-24942] >From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr10my99-3]
======================================================================= -----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 9
RIN 3150-AB94
Government in the Sunshine Act Regulations
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Final rule: Notice of intent to implement currently effective rule and request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Commission) is announcing its intent to implement a final rule, published and made effective in 1985, that amended its regulations applying the Government in the Sunshine Act. The Commission is taking this action to provide an opportunity for public comment on its intent because of the time that has passed since the Commission last addressed this issue. This action is necessary to complete resolution of this issue.
DATES: The May 21, 1985, interim rule became effective May 21, 1985. Submit comments by June 9, 1999. Unless the Commission takes further action, non-Sunshine Act discussions may be held beginning June 1, 1999 <http://www.state.nv.us/nucwaste/news/n rc10cfr9.htm nrc10cfr9a.htm>July 1, 1999.
ADDRESSES: Submit written comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Trip Rothschild, Assistant General Counsel, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555, (301) 415-1607.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission, through this notice of the Commission's intent to implement a rule published and made effective in 1985, seeks to bring closure to a rulemaking that amended the NRC's regulations applying the Government in the Sunshine Act. Because of the years that have elapsed, the Commission is providing this notice of its intent to implement this rule and is providing an opportunity for additional public comment on the Commission's proposal to implement. The purpose of the rule is to bring the NRC's Sunshine Act regulations, and the way they are applied by NRC, into closer conformity with Congressional intent, as set forth in the legislative history of the Sunshine Act and as clarified in a unanimous Supreme Court decision, FCC v. ITT World
[[Page 24937]]
Communications, 466 U.S. 463 (1984). The NRC's original Sunshine Act regulations, adopted in 1977, treated every discussion of agency business by three or more Commissioners, no matter how informal or preliminary it might be, as a ``meeting'' for Sunshine Act purposes. As the 1984 Supreme Court decision made clear, however, ``meetings,'' to which the Act's procedural requirements apply, were never intended to include casual, general, informational, or preliminary discussions, so long as the discussions do not effectively predetermine final agency action. These kinds of ``non-Sunshine Act discussions,'' which can be an important part of the work of a multi-member agency, had been foreclosed at NRC since 1977 by the agency's unduly restrictive interpretation of the Sunshine Act. In response to the Supreme Court's clarification of the law, the Commission in 1985 issued an immediately effective rule that revised the definition of ``meeting'' in the NRC's Sunshine Act regulations. To ensure strict conformity with the law, the new NRC rule incorporated verbatim the Supreme Court's definition of ``meeting.'' The rule change drew criticism, however, much of it directed at the fact that it was made immediately effective, with an opportunity to comment only after the fact. To address some of the concerns raised, the NRC informed the Congress that it would not implement the rule until procedures were in place to monitor and keep minutes of all non-Sunshine Act discussions among three or more Commissioners. No such procedures were ever adopted, however, nor was the rule itself implemented, and the issue remained pending from 1985 on. The Commission believes that it is time to bring the issue of the NRC's Sunshine Act rules to a resolution. As noted, because of the many years that have passed since the Commission last addressed this issue, the NRC is providing this notice of its intent finally to implement and use the 1985 rule, and providing 30 days for public comment on the Commission's proposal to implement. The Commission will not modify its current practices, under which no non-Sunshine Act discussions take place, until it has had the opportunity to consider any comments received.
I. Background
On April 30, 1984, the United States Supreme Court issued its first decision interpreting the Government in the Sunshine Act, Federal Communications Commission v. ITT World Communications, 466 U.S. 463. Though the case could have been decided on narrow, fact-specific grounds, the Court used the opportunity to offer guidance on what leading commentators have described as ``one of the most troublesome problems in interpreting the Sunshine Act'': the definition of ``meeting'' as that term is used in the Act. R. Berg and S. Klitzman, An Interpretive Guide to the Government in the Sunshine Act (1978), at 3. The Court rejected the broad view of the term ``meeting'' that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit had taken. It declared that the statutory definition of a ``meeting'' contemplated ``discussions that `effectively predetermine official actions.' '' The Court went on:
Such discussions must be ``sufficiently focused on discrete proposals or issues as to cause or be likely to cause the individual participating members to form reasonably firm positions regarding matters pending or likely to arise before the agency.'' 466 U.S. at 471.
The Court reviewed the legislative history, demonstrating how in the process of revising the original bill, Congress had narrowed the Act's scope. In the Court's words, ``the intent of the revision clearly was to permit preliminary discussion among agency members.'' Id. at 471, n.7. The Court explained Congress's reasons for limiting the reach of the Sunshine Act:
Congress in drafting the Act's definition of ``meeting'' recognized that the administrative process cannot be conducted entirely in the public eye. ``[I]nformal background discussions [that] clarify issues and expose varying views'' are a necessary part of an agency's work. [Citation omitted.] The Act's procedural requirements effectively would prevent such discussions and thereby impair normal agency operations without achieving significant public benefit. Section 552b(a)(2) therefore limits the Act's application. * *
*Id. at 469-70. At the time the Supreme Court handed down the ITT decision, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission had for almost eight years applied the Government in the Sunshine Act as though it required every discussion of agency business to be conducted as a ``meeting.'' Recognizing that the Supreme Court's guidance indicated that the NRC's interpretation of ``meeting'' had been unduly broad, the NRC's Office of the General Counsel (OGC) advised the Commissioners in May 1984 that the decision seemed significant: the decision was unanimous and it was the first time that the Supreme Court had addressed the Act. OGC suggested that revisions in the NRC's regulations might be appropriate to bring the NRC into line with Congressional intent. Soon after that, in August 1984, the Administrative Conference of the United States (a body, since abolished, to which the Sunshine Act assigned a special role in the implementation of the Act by federal agencies) issued Recommendation 84-3, based upon an extensive study of the Sunshine Act. The Administrative Conference was troubled by what it saw as one harmful effect of the Act on the functioning of the multi- member agencies. Commenting that ``one of the clearest and most significant results of the Government in the Sunshine Act is to diminish the collegial character of the agency decision making process,'' the Administrative Conference recommended that Congress consider whether the Act should be revised. The Conference observed:
Although the legislative history indicates Congress believed that, after the initial period of adjustment, Sunshine would not have a significant inhibiting effect on collegial exchanges, unfortunately this has not been the case.
If Congress decided that revisions were in order, the Conference said, it recommended that agency members be permitted to discuss ``the broad outlines of agency policies and priorities'' in closed meetings. The Administrative Conference did not address the distinction between ``meetings'' and those discussions that are outside the scope of the Act.
II. The NRC's 1985 Rule
On May 21, 1985 (50 FR 20889), the Nuclear Regulatory Commission issued new regulations implementing the Government in the Sunshine Act. As a legal matter, the NRC could have continued to use the language of its existing regulations, and reinterpreted them in accordance with the Supreme Court's decision. However, the NRC decided that in the interest of openness, it should declare explicitly that its view of the Act's requirements had changed in light of the Court's ruling. The revised rule conforms the definition of ``meeting'' in the Commission's rules to the guidance provided by the Supreme Court by incorporating the very language of the Court's decision into its revised definition. Specifically, it provides, at 10 CFR 9.101(c):
Meeting means the deliberations of at least a quorum of Commissioners where such deliberations determine or result in the joint conduct or disposition of official Commission business, that is, where discussions are sufficiently focused on discrete proposals or issues as to cause or to
[[Page 24938]]
be likely to cause the individual participating members to form reasonably firm positions regarding matters pending or likely to arise before the agency. Deliberations required or permitted by Secs. 9.105. 9.106, or 9.108(c) do not constitute ``meetings'' within this definition.
Under the rule, which was adopted as an immediately effective ``interim'' rule (it was characterized as ``interim'' to reflect the fact that it was being made effective before any comments were received and addressed), with an opportunity for public comment, briefings were excluded from the category of ``meetings.'' In the NRC's pre-1985 regulations, by contrast, briefings were treated as meetings, as a matter of policy. The NRC's 1985 rule proved controversial. In response to Congressional criticism, much of it directed at the Commission's decision to make the rule immediately effective, the Commission assured the Congress that it would conduct no non-Sunshine Act discussions until procedures were in place to govern such discussions. In December 1985, the NRC's Office of the General Counsel forwarded a final rulemaking paper in which comments on the interim rule were analyzed and responded to. However, by the time that the Commission was briefed on the comments, the American Bar Association had announced its intention to address Sunshine Act issues, including matters directly related to the NRC's rulemaking. The Commission therefore decided to withhold action on the matter and to defer actual implementation and use of the 1985 rule pending receipt of the ABA's views.
III. The American Bar Association Acts
In the fall of 1985, William Murane, Chairman of the Administrative Law Section of the American Bar Association, announced that the Council of the Administrative Law Section had decided to involve itself in the controversy over the Sunshine Act and its effect on the collegial character of agency decision making. Administrative Law Review, Fall 1985, Vol. 37, No. 4, at p. v. The Task Force established by the Administrative Law Section ultimately focused on a single issue: the definition of ``meeting'' under the Sunshine Act. Its report and recommendations were accepted by the Administrative Law Section in April 1986 and by the full American Bar Association in February 1987. The ABA's recommendation and report confirmed that the Commission's reading of the Sunshine Act, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in the ITT decision, was legally correct. Moreover, the legal standard set forth in the ABA recommendation incorporated the identical language from the Supreme Court opinion which the NRC had included in its 1985 rule: i.e., the provision stating that for a discussion to be exempt from the definition of ``meeting,'' it must be ``[not] sufficiently focused on discrete proposals or issues as to cause or be likely to cause the individual participating [agency] members to form reasonably firm positions regarding matters pending or likely to arise before the agency.'' Subject to that qualification, the ABA guidelines provide that the definition of ``meeting'' does not include:
(a) Spontaneous casual discussions among agency members of a subject of common interest; (b) Briefings of agency members by staff or outsiders. A key element would be that the agency members be primarily receptors of information or views and only incidentally exchange views with one another; (c) General discussions of subjects which are relevant to an agency's responsibilities but which do not pose specific problems for agency resolution; and (d) Exploratory discussions, so long as they are preliminary in nature, there are no pending proposals for agency action, and the merits of any proposed agency action would be open to full consideration at a later time. <SUP>1</SUP>
\1\ A fuller description of the types of discussions fitting in these four categories may be found at pages 9 to 11 of the ABA report. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The ABA report disposed of the suggestion, advanced by some critics of the NRC's interim rule, ``that the Supreme Court's opinion should be limited to the facts before the Court.'' While it recognized that the case could have been decided on fact-specific grounds, the report observed that:
[I]t cannot be assumed that the Supreme Court got carried away or that it was unaware that the definition of ``meeting'' was controversial and ``one of the most troublesome problems in interpreting the Sunshine Act.'' [Interpretive Guide 3.] We concluded therefore, that the Supreme Court meant what it said in ITT World Communications, and that it intended to provide guidance to agencies and the courts in applying the definition of ``meeting.'' Report at 7.
The ABA report also rejected the argument that because of the ``difficulty of specifying in advance those characteristics of a particular discussion which will cause it to fall short of becoming a meeting,'' the Supreme Court's view of the Act should not become part of agency practice. [Emphasis in the original.] The logic of this argument, said the ABA report, would permit no discussion whatever of agency business except in ``meetings,'' a result which ``seems clearly to us not to have been intended by Congress.'' Report at 8. The report noted that this argument in essence was a claim that agencies should apply a different standard from the one specified by Congress for distinguishing ``meetings'' from discussions that are not ``meetings.'' The ABA explained:
* * * Congress can hardly have gone to such pains to articulate a narrower standard had it not expected the agencies to use the leeway such a standard provides, and if they are to do so, they must attempt to set out in advance, whether by regulation or internal guidelines, the elements or characteristics of a discussion which will cause it to fall short of being a meeting. Report at 8, fn. 9.
The ABA report's conclusion was a measured endorsement of the value of non-Sunshine Act discussions. After stressing that its purpose was not to urge agencies to close discussions now held in open session, the report made clear that its focus, rather, was on the discussions which, because of the Sunshine Act, are never initiated in the first place. It said:
But the fact is that the Sunshine Act has had an inhibiting effect on the initiation of discussions among agency members. This is the conclusion of the Welborn report [to the Administrative Conference], and it is confirmed by our meeting with agency general counsels * * * [T]he Act has made difficult if not impossible the maintenance of close day-to-day working relationships in [five- member and three-member] agencies. * * * We believe that a sensible and sensitive application of the principles announced in the ITT case can ease the somewhat stilted relationships that exist in some agencies. Report at 11-12. [Emphasis in the original.]
The ABA report made clear that it did not regard the opportunity for non-Sunshine Act discussions as a panacea for the Sunshine-caused loss of collegiality which the Administrative Conference had identified, and which the ABA's own inquiry had confirmed. The Report concluded that the impact of loosened restrictions was likely to be ``slight,'' though it saw ``some tendency to increase collegiality * * * to the extent that it would contribute to more normal interpersonal relationships among agency members.'' Report at 12. The Report also observed that collegiality is most important in group decision-making sessions, where the Act's ``meeting'' requirements clearly apply. The ABA report recommended that agencies follow procedures for the monitoring and memorialization of non-Sunshine Act discussions to give assurance to the public that they are staying within the law. The ABA made clear that this was a policy recommendation, not a matter of legal obligation. (The report noted at one
[[Page 24939]]
point that if a discussion ``is not a `meeting,' no announcement or procedures are required because the Act has no application.'' Report at 6.) The ABA recommended that General Counsels brief agency members in advance on the requirements of the law, to assure their familiarity with the restrictions on non-Sunshine Act discussions, and that non- Sunshine Act discussions (other than ``spontaneous casual discussions of a subject of common interest'') be monitored, either by the General Counsel or other agency representatives, and memorialized through notes, minutes, or recordings.
IV. Further Developments
On August 5, 1987, an amendment was offered to the NRC authorization bill to bar the Commission from using any funds in fiscal year 1988 or 1989 ``to hold any Nuclear Regulatory Commission meeting in accordance with the interim [Sunshine Act] rule [published in] the Federal Register on May 21, 1985.'' 133 Cong. Rec. H7178 (Aug. 5. 1987).<SUP>2</SUP> As Chairman Philip Sharp of the Subcommittee on Energy and Power of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce explained, the amendment ``simply neutralizes a rule change.'' The amendment, passed by a voice vote, was not passed by the Senate and thus was not enacted into law. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The text of the amendment and the colloquy surrounding its adoption by the House of Representatives are also reprinted in full in SECY-88-25. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission took no further action regarding the Sunshine Act after 1985, and the issue was allowed to become dormant. While the ``interim'' rule of 1985 has remained in effect and on the books, at 10 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 9, the Commission has continued to apply its pre-1985 rules. Accordingly, all discussions of business by three or more Commissioners have continued to be treated as ``meetings,'' whether formal or informal, deliberative or informational, decision-oriented or preliminary, planned or spontaneous. No non-Sunshine Act discussions of any kind have been held. In the meantime, some other agencies adopted and implemented rules that permit informal discussions that clarify issues and expose varying views but do not effectively predetermine official actions, discussions of the sort that the Court's ITT decision said are a ``necessary part of an agency's work.'' 466 U.S. at 469-70. See, for example, the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission's (OSHRC) and Defense Nuclear Facility Safety Board's (DNFSB) definitions of ``meeting'', at 29 CFR 2203.2(d) (50 FR 51679; 1985) and 10 CFR 1704.2(d)(5) (56 FR 9609; 1991), respectively. In February 1995, Commissioner Steven M.H. Wallman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, joined by twelve other Commissioners or former Commissioners of four independent regulatory agencies (the Securities and Exchange Commission, Federal Communications Commission, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Federal Trade Commission), wrote to the Administrative Conference of the United States to urge a reevaluation of the Sunshine Act. The group expressed strong support for the Act's objective of ensuring greater public access to agency decision-making, but questioned whether the Act, as currently structured and interpreted, was achieving those goals. The group said that the Act has a ``chilling effect on the willingness and ability of agency members to engage in an open and creative discussion of issues.'' It continued:
In almost all cases, agency members operating under the Act come to a conclusion about a matter * * * without the benefit of any collective deliberations. [Footnote omitted.] This is directly in conflict with the free exchange of views that we believe is necessary to enable an agency member to fulfill adequately his or her delegated duties, and to be held accountable for his or her actions. We are also of the view that the Act is at odds with the underlying principles of multi-headed agencies. These agencies were created to provide a number of benefits, including collegial decision making where the collective thought process of a number of tenured, independent appointees would be better than one. Unfortunately, the Act often turns that goal on its head, resulting in greater miscommunication and poorer decision making by precluding, as a matter of fact, the members from engaging in decision making in a collegial way. As a result, the Act inadvertently transforms multi-headed agencies into bodies headed by a number of individually acting members. [Footnote omitted.]
The group identified as one problem the issue confronted by the NRC's 1985 rulemaking: that ``many agencies'' avoided the problem of distinguishing between ``preliminary conversations, which are outside of the Act, and deliberations, which trigger the Act,'' by a blanket prohibition, as a matter of general policy, against any conversation among a quorum of agency members, except in ``meetings'' under the Sunshine Act. While such bright-line policies were easy to apply and effective, the letter said, they were often over-inclusive, barring discussion of even the most preliminary views and often impeding the process of agency decision-making. The Administrative Conference, then soon to be abolished, took up the group's challenge, assembled a special committee to study the Sunshine Act, and convened a meeting in September, 1995, to discuss the Act, its problems, and possible remedies. The Conference appeared to be looking for some compromise, acceptable both to the Federal agencies and to representatives of the media, that would acknowledge the Act's impairment of the collegial process and try to remedy that by giving greater flexibility to agencies in applying the Act. No consensus developed, however. The Administrative Conference, apparently recognizing that there would be no meeting of the minds between critics and defenders of the Sunshine Act, did not pursue its efforts to find common ground.
V. Conclusions
The Commission has taken into account information from a number of quarters, as well as its own experience in implementing the Sunshine Act. It has considered, among other things, the language of the statute and its legislative history; the Supreme Court's decision in the ITT case; Recommendation 84-3 of the Administrative Conference of the United States; the findings of the American Bar Association; actual practice at other federal agencies, including the DNFSB and OSHRC; and the advice letter from numerous Commissioners and former Commissioners of four other independent regulatory agencies. Based on all of these, the Commission believes that while the Sunshine Act's objectives, which include increasing agency openness and fostering public understanding of how the multi-member agencies do business, are laudable, it is important to recognize exactly what it was that Congress legislated. The legislative history, as the Supreme Court explained, shows that Congress carefully weighed the competing considerations involved: the public's right of access to significant information, on the one hand, and the agencies' need to be able to function in an efficient and collegial manner on the other. Congress struck a balance: it did not legislate openness to the maximum extent possible, nor did it provide unfettered discretion to agencies to offer only as much public access as they might choose. Rather, it crafted a system in which the Sunshine Act would apply only to ``meetings,'' a term carefully defined to exclude preliminary, informal, and informational discussions, and then provided a series of exemptions to permit closure of certain
[[Page 24940]]
categories of ``meetings.'' Unfortunately, in part because of advice from the Justice Department in 1977 that later proved to be erroneous, the Commission's original Sunshine Act regulations did not give due recognition to the balance contemplated by Congress. Rather, the regulations mistakenly took the approach that every discussion among three or more Commissioners, no matter how far removed from being ``discussions that effectively predetermine official actions,'' in the Supreme Court's words, should be considered a ``meeting.'' 466 U.S. at 471. At the time that the Commission changed its Sunshine Act rules in 1985, many of its critics appeared to believe that if the rule change were implemented, numerous discussions currently held in public session would instead be held behind closed doors. This was a misapprehension. Indeed, if there is one point that needs to be emphasized above any other, it is that the objective of the 1985 rule is not that discussions heretofore held in public session should become non- Sunshine Act discussions; rather, the focus of the 1985 rule is on the discussions that currently do not take place at all. This was also the focus of the American Bar Association and the authors of the 1995 letter to the Administrative Conference. The Commission believes that non-Sunshine Act discussions can benefit the agency and thereby benefit the public which the NRC serves. This view did not originate with the Commission by any means. On the contrary, as described above, the starting point of the Commission's analysis is Congress's recognition that `` `informal background discussions [that] clarify issues and expose varying views' are a necessary part of an agency's work,'' and that to apply the Act's requirements to them would, in the words of the Supreme Court, ``impair normal agency operations without achieving significant public benefit.'' 466 U.S. 463, 469. For convenience, the currently effective (but not implemented) 1985 rule is included in this notice and the Commission is providing 30 days for public comment on its stated intent to implement the 1985 rule. No non-Sunshine Act discussions will be held during the period for public comment and for a 21-day period following close of the comment period to allow the Commission to consider the public comments. Absent further action by the Commission, non-Sunshine Act discussions may be held commencing 21 days after the close of the comment period. From previous comments, the following are possible questions about the 1985 rule, and the Commission's responses to those questions. 1. What types of discussions does the Commission have in mind, and what does it seek to accomplish with this rule? Answer: First and foremost, the Commission would like to be able to get together as a body with no fixed agenda other than to ask such questions as: ``How is the Commission functioning as an agency? How has it performed over the past year? What have been its major successes and failures? What do we see coming in the next year? In the next five years, and ten years? How well are our components serving us? Are we getting our message to the industry we regulate and to the public? Are we working effectively with the Congress?'' This kind of ``big picture'' discussion can be invaluable. One of the regrettable effects of the Sunshine Act, as documented as long ago as 1984, in Administrative Conference Recommendation 84-3, has been the loss of collective responsibility at the agencies, and the shift of authority from Presidentially appointed and accountable agency members to the agencies' staffs. The Commission believes that ``big picture'' discussions served a valuable function in pre-Sunshine Act days at NRC and can do so again, helping to assure that the Commissioners serve the public with maximum effectiveness and accountability. The Commission believes that some kinds of general, exploratory discussions can be useful in generating ideas. Such ideas, if developed into more specific proposals, will become the subject of subsequent ``meetings.'' The Commission recognizes that it would be incumbent on the participants in such non-Sunshine Act discussions to assure that they remain preliminary and do not effectively predetermine final agency action. The Commission believes that the guidelines proposed by the American Bar Association are the most suitable criteria for assuring compliance with the Act's requirements. The Commission also believes that spontaneous casual discussions of matters of mutual interest--for example, a recent news story relating to nuclear regulation--can be beneficial, helping both to ensure that Commissioners are informed of matters relevant to their duties and to promote sound working relationships among Commissioners. 2. Is it really clear that the law permits non-Sunshine Act discussions? Answer: Yes, beyond any reasonable doubt. Congress so provided, a unanimous Supreme Court has so found, the American Bar Association Task Force on the Sunshine Act agreed, the Council of the Administrative Law Section of the American Bar Association adopted the Task Force's views, and the ABA's full House of Delegates accepted the Administrative Law Section's report and recommendation. 3. Didn't the ITT case involve a trip to Europe by less than a quorum of FCC members, and couldn't the case be viewed as relating to those specific facts? Answer: The case was resolved on two separate grounds. Although the Supreme Court did not have to reach the issue of what constitutes a ``meeting'' under the Sunshine Act, it did so, in order (so the ABA report concluded) to provide guidance to agencies and the courts on a difficult aspect of Sunshine Act law. In addressing the ambiguity in the definition of ``meeting'' and thus the uncertainty as to the Act's scope, the Supreme Court was acting to resolve a problem that had been apparent literally from the day of its enactment into law, as President Ford's statement in signing the bill, on September 13, 1976, makes clear. He wrote:
I wholeheartedly support the objective of government in the sunshine. I am concerned, however, that in a few instances unnecessarily ambiguous and perhaps harmful provisions were included in S.5. * * * The ambiguous definition of the meetings covered by this act, the unnecessary rigidity of the act's procedures, and the potentially burdensome requirement for the maintenance of transcripts are provisions which may require modification. Government in the Sunshine Act--S.5 (P.L. 94-409), Source Book: Legislative History, Text, and Other Documents (1976), at 832.
4. On the meaning of ``meeting'' as used in the Sunshine Act, aren't the views of Congressional sponsors of the legislation entitled to consideration? Answer: Yes, when they appear in the pre-enactment legislative history. In the present case, for example, the Supreme Court cited the remarks of the House sponsor of the Sunshine Act, Representative Dante Fascell, who introduced the report of the Conference Committee to the House. He explained to his colleagues that the conferees had narrowed the Senate's definition of ``meeting'' in order ``to permit casual discussions between agency members that might invoke the bill's requirements'' under the Senate's approach. 122 Cong. Rec. 28474 (1976), cited at 466 U.S. 463, 470 n.7. Likewise, Senator Chiles, the Senate sponsor of the bill, described the definition of ``meeting'' in the final bill as a ``compromise version.'' 122 Cong. Rec. S15043 (Aug. 31, 1976), reprinted in
[[Page 24941]]
Government in the Sunshine Act Source Book. In any case, however, once the Supreme Court has declared what the law requires, federal agencies are bound to follow its guidance. 5. Is there any basis in the legislative history for the notion that non-Sunshine Act discussions are not only permissible, but useful? Answer: Yes. The point was made forcefully by Professor Jerre Williams (subsequently a judge on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals), presenting the views of the American Bar Association. He testified, in Congressional hearings on the bill:
One of the most critical facets of the American Bar Association view has to do with the definition of ``meeting.'' The ABA firmly agrees that policy must not be determined by informal closed-door caucuses in advance of open meetings. On the other hand, however, the ABA believes it important that ``chance encounters and informational or exploratory discussions'' by agency members should not constitute meetings unless such discussions are ``relatively formal'' and ``predetermine'' agency action. It should be a matter of concern to all those interested in good government that agency members be allowed to engage in informal work sessions at which they may ``brainstorm'' and discuss various innovative proposals without public evaluation or censorship of their search for new and creative solutions in important policy areas. All persons who have engaged in policymaking have participated in such informal sessions. Sometimes outlandish suggestions are advanced, hopefully humorous suggestions abound. But out of all this may come a new, creative, important idea. There is time enough to expose that idea to public scrutiny once it has been adequately evaluated as a viable alternative which ought to be seriously considered. [Emphasis added.] Hearings Before a Subcommittee of the Committee on Government Operations, House of Representatives, 94th Cong., First Session (Nov. 6 and 12, 1975), at 114-15.
6. Why is the NRC paying so much attention to the ITT case and ignoring the Philadelphia Newspapers case which dealt specifically with NRC? Answer: First of all, the ITT case dealt with the issue of what is a ``meeting,'' whereas Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc. v. NRC, 727 F.2d 1195 (D.C. Cir. 1984). dealt with an unrelated issue: whether a particular ``meeting'' could be closed under the Sunshine Act. Secondly, the ITT case was decided by the Supreme Court, and as such would be entitled to greater weight than the decision of one panel of a Court of Appeals, even if they were on the same issue. Thirdly, the full D.C. Circuit, sitting en banc, has severely criticized the Philadelphia Newspapers decision for digressing from Congressional intent and thereby reaching an ``untoward result.'' Clark-Cowlitz Joint Operating Agency v. FERC, 798 F.2d 499, 503 n.5 (D.C. Cir. 1984). 7. If it is so clear that non-Sunshine Act discussions are permissible, why did the NRC interpret the Act differently for so many years? Answer: In part, the answer lies in the fact that the Justice Department, in the years 1977 to 1981, took an expansive view of the definition of ``meeting.'' (See the letter from Assistant Attorney General Barbara A. Babcock reprinted in the Interpretive Guide at p. 120.) In contrast, Berg and Klitzman, the authors of the Interpretive Guide, believed that Congress had consciously narrowed the definition. (See the Interpretive Guide at 6-7.) Because the Justice Department defends Sunshine Act suits in the courts, its view of the law's requirements carried considerable weight. The Supreme Court's decision in the ITT case resolved the issue definitively. 8. Didn't the NRC acknowledge in its 1977 rulemaking that it was going beyond the law's requirements in the interest of the Act's ``presumption in favor of opening agency business to public observation''? Why isn't that rationale still applicable today? Answer: There are at least three factors today that were not present in 1977: (1) the Supreme Court's ITT decision, which makes clear that Congress gave the agencies authority to hold such discussions because it thought they were an important part of doing the public's business; (2) the Administrative Conference recommendation stating that the Sunshine Act has had a much more deleterious effect on the collegial nature of agency decision making than had been foreseen; and (3) the American Bar Association report stating that Congress gave the agencies the latitude to hold non-Sunshine Act discussions in the expectation they would use it, and suggesting that the use of such discussions might help alleviate some of the problems caused by the Sunshine Act. Moreover, the Commission has had the benefit of its own and other agencies' experience under the Act. It should be emphasized that the Commission, by implementing this rule, is not implicitly or explicitly urging that the Sunshine Act be altered; rather, it is saying that the Sunshine Act should not be applied even more restrictively than Congress intended when it enacted the statute. 9. Why does the NRC put such reliance on the ABA report, when the ABA made a point of saying that it was not urging the closing of any meetings now open? Answer: The question misses the point of the ABA comment. In the context in which the comment appears in the ABA report, it is clear that the ABA was expressing its concern for the discussions that currently do not happen at all, either in open or in closed session, because the Sunshine Act inhibits the initiation of discussions. Its point was similar to that made by Professor Williams in the hearings on the bill in 1975, when he urged that agency members not be deprived of the opportunity to generate ideas in ``brainstorming sessions''--ideas which may subsequently be the subject of ``meetings'' if they turn out to warrant formal consideration. As we have emphasized above, the Commission is not proposing to close any meetings currently held as open public meetings. 10. How does the Commission intend to differentiate between ``meetings'' and ``non-Sunshine Act discussions'? Answer: The Commission intends to abide by the guidance provided by the Court in FCC v. ITT World Communications and contained in our regulations, in differentiating between ``meetings'' and non-Sunshine Act discussions. Applying this guidance, the Commission may consider conducting a non-Sunshine Act discussion when the discussion will be casual, general, informational, or preliminary, so long as the discussion will not effectively predetermine final agency action. Whenever the Commission anticipates that a discussion seems likely to be ``sufficiently focused on discreet proposals or issues as to cause the individual participating members to form reasonably firm positions regarding matters pending or likely to arise before the agency,'' the Commission will treat those discussions as ``meetings.'' See id. at 471. Further, to ensure that we appropriately implement the Supreme Court guidance in differentiating between non-Sunshine Act discussions and meetings, the Commission will consider the ABA's remarks on the seriousness of this task. For instance, the ABA cautioned that a non- Sunshine Act discussion ``does not pose specific problems for agency resolution'' and agency ``members are not deliberating in the sense of confronting and weighing choices.'' Report at 9-11. Some specific examples of the kinds of topics that might be the subject of non-Sunshine Act discussions would include generalized ``big picture'' discussions on such matters as the following: ``How well is the agency functioning, what are our successes and
[[Page 24942]]
failures, what do we see as major challenges in the next five and ten years, what is the state of our relations with the public, industry, Congress, the press?' Preliminary, exploratory discussions that generate ideas might include, for example, ``Is there more that we could be doing through the Internet to inform the public and receive public input? How does our use of the Internet compare with what other agencies are doing?'' Such ideas, if followed up with specific proposals, would become the subject of later ``meetings'' within the meaning of the Sunshine Act. Spontaneous, casual discussions of matters of mutual interest could include discussions of a recent news story relating to NRC-licensed activities, or a Commissioner's insights and personal impressions from a visit to a licensed facility or other travel. Under this heading, three Commissioners would be permitted to have a cup of coffee together and to talk informally about matters that include business-related topics. Under the Commission's pre-1985 rule, such informal get- togethers were precluded. Briefings in which Commissioners are provided information but do not themselves deliberate on any proposal for action could include routine status updates from the staff. Discussions of business-related matters not linked to any particular proposal for Commission action might include an upcoming Congressional oversight hearing or a planned all-hands meeting for employees. 11. Apart from the issue of the definition of ``meeting,'' are there other changes that the interested public should be aware of? Answer: Yes, one minor procedural point. The 1985 rule includes a provision stating that transcripts of closed Commission meetings will be reviewed for releasability only when there is a request from a member of the public for the transcript. Reviewing transcripts for releasability when no one is interested in reading them would be a waste of agency resources and thus of the public's money. 12. Will the Commission adopt any particular internal procedures for its non-Sunshine Act discussions? Answer: For an initial 6-month period of non-Sunshine Act discussions, the Commission will maintain a record of the date and subject of, and participants in, any scheduled non-Sunshine Act discussions that three or more Commissioners attend. After the six- month period, the Commission will revisit the usefulness of the record- keeping practice.
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 9
Criminal penalties, Freedom of information, Privacy, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sunshine Act.
The May 21, 1985 (50 FR 20863), rule is currently effective but has never been implemented. For the convenience of the reader, the Commission is republishing the text of that rule.
PART 9--PUBLIC RECORDS
1. The authority citation for part 9 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sec. 161, 68 Stat. 948, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2201); sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841). Subpart A is also issued 5 U.S.C. ; 31 U.S.C 9701; Pub. L. 99- 570. Subpart B is also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552a. Subpart C is also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552b.
2. In Sec. 9.101, paragraph (c) is republished for the convenience of the reader as follows:
Sec. 9.101 Definitions.
* * * * * (c) Meeting means the deliberations of at least a quorum of Commissioners where such deliberations determine or result in the joint conduct or disposition of official Commission business, that is, where discussions are sufficiently focused on discrete proposals or issues as to cause or to be likely to cause the individual participating members to form reasonably firm positions regarding matters pending or likely to arise before the agency. Deliberations required or permitted by Secs. 9.105, 9.106, or 9.108(c), do not constitute ``meetings'' within this definition. * * * * * 3. In Sec. 9.108, paragraph (c) is republished for the convenience of the reader as follows:
Sec. 9.108 Certification, transcripts, recordings and minutes
* * * * * (c) In the case of any meeting closed pursuant to Sec. 9.104, the Secretary of the Commission, upon the advice of the General Counsel and after consultation with the Commission, shall determine which, if any, portions of the electronic recording, transcript or minutes and which, if any, items of information withheld pursuant to Sec. 9.105(c) contain information which should be withheld pursuant to Sec. 9.104, in the event that a request for the recording, transcript, or minutes is received within the period during which the recording, transcript, or minutes must be retained, under paragraph (b) of this section. * * * * * Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day of May, 1999.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Annette Vietti-Cook, Secretary of the Commission. [FR Doc. 99-11669 Filed 5-7-99; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
____________________________________________________________
* Peace Through Reason - http://prop1.org -Convert the War Machines! * ____________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________
Message: 2 Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 21:27:48 -0400
Subject: NucNews-0 Brief 6/03/99
[Please address replies to articles to the original publisher (with a copy to prop1@prop1.org and NucNews@onelist.com (Archives)). Your help in refuting false information appreciated! ]
-------------
NucNews-1 6/03/99 - DU-Puerto Rico (2); DU-BBC; China/Korea; Tiananmen NucNews-2 6/03/99 - Y2K-Europe; India/Kashmir; UK Nuc Accident Dounreay; Dungeness; Sellafield NucNews-3 6/03/99 - Chernobyl; Uzbek Poison Island/Anthrax NucNews-4 6/03/99 - US - Senate vote Nuc Arms; No New Licenses since TMI; Treaty in US Limbo; Nuc Waste Savannah River - Yucca Mountain; Nuc Contractors Deal; NucNews-5 6/03/99 - Activism; Secrets; Cox Report Questions; Sierra Club "Bubba" Antinuc Ads; Hackers; NucNews-6 6/03/99 - S.Africa Abolition Petition; X-Ray de-mining; UN/Iraq; Russia, China: Stop Bombing!; World Court Declines halt NATO bombing; NucNews-7 6/03/99 - Kosovo UN report; Serbia ok peace plan; Gunmakers Lawsuit; Cuban lawsuit
--- (1)
1. Navy Admits Firing Uranium Shells By Michelle Faul, Associated Press, June 2, 1999 http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WAPO/19990602/V000509-060299-idx.html
2. Uranium bullets fired in error in Puerto Rico (Reuters) 06:21 p.m Jun 02, 1999 Eastern, By Patricia Zengerle http://senghor.dogpile.com/texis/search?q=nuclear+OR+plutonium+OR+uranium+OR +radioactiv%3F%3F%3F&fs=nws&to=thirty
3. 'Your Views' on the European elections Wednesday, June 2, 1999 BBC http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/events/euros%5F99/your%5Fviews/newsid %5F358000/358688.stm .. there should be a huge turnout against New Labour and its policy of warfare - we need to support the health and education of the ordinary population across Europe, and not spend £2m a day on the insanity of depleted uranium and cluster bombing of the Balkans. John, England -- High-tech war in Kosovo 08 May 99 | Sci/Tech
http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/special%5Freport/1998/kosovo/newsid%5 F337000/337679.stm -- Pentagon confirms depleted uranium use 08 May 99 | Sci/Tech http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_337000/337855.stm -- Nato bombs cut Serb power 03 May 99 | Europe http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/newsid_334000/334249.stm -- UN rights chief slams Nato bombings 30 Apr 99 | Europe http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/newsid_332000/332745.stm -- Analysis: Escalating the war 28 Apr 99 | Europe http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/newsid_330000/330456.stm -- World: Europe - Nato pounds Serbs ... Ecological disaster warning April 25, 1999 BBC http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/newsid%5F327000/327895.stm
4. China Opens Another Door to an Isolated North Korea By ERIK ECKHOLM, New York Times, June 3, 1999 http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/asia/060399nkorea-china.html BEIJING -- North Korea's No. 2 political leader arrived in Beijing on Wednesday for the first high-level meeting between the two Communist allies in eight years, talks that will be closely watched by the United States and China's Asian neighbors. -- North Korea Unresponsive in U.S. Talks, Envoy Reports (May 30, 1999) http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/asia/053099korea-us.html -- U.S. Aide Due in North Korea With Deal to Lift Sanctions (May 21, 1999) http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/asia/052199korea-sanctions.html
5. Remember Tiananmen Embassy Row By James Morrison THE WASHINGTON TIMES, June 3, 1999 http://www.washtimes.com/internatl/embassy.html Chinese Ambassador Li Zhaoxing might have hoped to distract attention from the 10th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre as he made the rounds of news shows, denouncing the accidental bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Yugoslavia. But he is unlikely to forget it when demonstrators converge on the Chinese Embassy today to commemorate the protest that ended when Chinese tanks broke up the pro-democracy movement in Beijing.... -- Beijing Uses Press, Police to Deter Tiananmen Memorials By Michael Laris, June 3, 1999 Washington Post http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1999-06/03/167l-060399-idx.html BEIJING, June 2--China's Communist government employed its police and propaganda machinery today in a double-barreled warning to the country's fractured dissident movement that it should not try to commemorate the 10th anniversary of the violent army crackdown on democracy demonstrators in Tiananmen Square.... -- China Allows No Echoes of Tiananmen June 3, 1999 Associated Press http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/i/AP-Tiananmen-Erased.html --- Chinese Police Detain Dissidents 8:47 a.m. EDT June 3, 1999, Associated Press http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/i/AP-China-Tiananmen.html --- Lying About Tiananmen Editorials, Washington Post, June 3, 1999 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1999-06/03/124l-060399-idx.html -- T-Day Plus 10 Years June 3, 1999 New York Times ESSAY / By WILLIAM SAFIRE http://www.nytimes.com/library/opinion/safire/060399safi.html -- Tiananmen Defense By Jim Hoagland, Thursday, June 3, 1999; Page A27 Washington Post http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1999-06/03/121l-060399-idx.html -- Party Paper in China Makes Rare Mention of '89 Protests New York Times, June 3, 1999, By ERIK ECKHOLM http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/world/china-tiananmen.html ... One popular Chinese-language Internet chatroom, at www.sohu.com, announced that it was shutting down for 10 days, ostensibly to "improve the system," but possibly under pressure to avoid discussions about the 1989 crackdown in which army troops killed hundreds of civilians....
---(2)
6. EU Worried About Y2K Hitting Nuclear Power Plants 05:36 a.m. Jun 03, 1999 Eastern, By Suzanne Perry (Reuters) http://senghor.dogpile.com/texis/search?q=nuclear+OR+plutonium+OR+uranium+OR +radioactiv%3F%3F%3F&fs=nws&to=thirty
7. India's Fernandes Sees No Nuclear Danger Mon 31 May 22:08 Reuters News Service http://senghor.dogpile.com/texis/search?q=nuclear+OR+plutonium+OR+uranium+OR +radioactiv%3F%3F%3F&fs=nws&to=thirty By Chaitanya Kalbag NEW DELHI - India's Defense Minister George Fernandes said Monday he was sure Pakistan's military chiefs would not resort to the use of nuclear weapons against India because they would ``liquidate'' their own country in the process.... --- Kashmir, the Imperiled Paradise By SALMAN RUSHDIE, June 3, 1999 New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/oped/03rush.html
8. UK - Nuclear workers monitored after fire Firefighters were called to a uranium fire at Dounreay http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid%5F354000/354543.stm Photo - http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/350000/images/_354543_dounreay300.jpg Five workers at the Dounreay nuclear plant are being monitored for possible radioactive contamination after a fire at the plant. The five had been handling a package of uranium waste when it ignited and firefighters were called in to extinguish the blaze... -- Photos: http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/350000/images/_354543_dounreay300.jpg http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/350000/images/_354543_dounreay150.gif -- Relevant Stories -- UK New nuclear scare at Dounreay 23 Dec 98 | http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_241000/241649.stm -- UK More scientists for Dounreay 30 Nov 98 | http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_224000/224520.stm -- UK Strategy for 'unsafe' Dounreay 30 Nov 98 | http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_224000/224520.stm -- UK Experts question safety at nuclear plant 01 Sep 98 | http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_162000/162330.stm -- Health Dounreay under the microscope 31 Aug 98 | http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/health/newsid_161000/161686.stm -- UK Politics MPs criticise Dounreay 'secrecy' 28 Jul 98 | http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk_politics/newsid_140000/140949.stm -- UK Politics Government urged to abandon reprocessing 22 Jul 98 | http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk_politics/newsid_137000/137275.stm -- UK Greenpeace outcry over Brent Spar waste 12 Jul 98 | http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_131000/131466.stm
9. Nuclear power station oil leak [Dungeness B] 31 Jul 98 | UK http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_143000/143031.stm -- Relevant Stories -- UK Politics Government condemned for energy policy "failure" 09 Jun 98 | http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk_politics/newsid_109000/109590.stm -- UK Dounreay 'lost enough uranium for 12 bombs' 02 Jun 98 | http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_105000/105298.stm -- UK Dounreay's £200m clean-up 31 Mar 98 | http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_72000/72030.stm -- UK Sellafield pigeons radioactive hazard - Greenpeace 12 Mar 98 | http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_64000/64833.stm
10. Health -- Study lifts nuclear industry cancer fears May 27, 1999 Published at 23:54 GMT 00:54 UK BBC http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/health/newsid%5F354000/354560.stm Children of workers at nuclear plants are no more likely to develop cancers, a study has concluded.... -- Photo Sellafield: http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/350000/images/_354560_300sellafield.jpg -- Relevant Stories [This one got to me - it couldn't be the plutonium from Sellafield, it must be the diesel fumes or paint....] -- Health Boats blamed for leukaemia 19 Apr 99 | http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/health/newsid_323000/323289.stm -- Cloned embryos 'could treat leukaemia' 31 Mar 99 | Health http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/health/newsid_308000/308341.stm -- Health Uranium blamed for Gulf War Syndrome 02 Feb 99 | http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/health/newsid_270000/270800.stm -- Internet Links -- Leukaemia information http://www.patient.org.uk/cancer.htm -- British Nuclear Fuels PLC http://www.bnfl.com/ns-home.html -- Health Effects of high-level radiation exposure http://radefx.bcm.tmc.edu/ionizing/subject/risk/acute.htm -- British Medical Journal http://www.bmj.com
--- (3)
11. Ukraine sees $120-$160 mln grant for Chernobyl cover 01:01 p.m Jun 02, 1999 Eastern (Reuters) http://senghor.dogpile.com/texis/search?q=nuclear+OR+plutonium+OR+uranium+OR +radioactiv%3F%3F%3F&fs=nws&to=thirty KIEV, June 2 - Ukraine hopes to get a grant of $120-$160 million by the end of July to continue urgent work on the sarcophagus covering a destroyed reactor at the Chernobyl nuclear plant, an official said on Wednesday.... -- Chernobyl - a disaster recalled May 24, 1999 Published at 09:59 GMT 10:59 UK BBC - Sci/Tech http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid%5F351000/351368.stm -- Chernobyl legacy mounts 24 May 99 | Sci/Tech By Alex Kirby, News Online BBC http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_351000/351286.stm A senior Ukrainian Government scientist, Dr Georgiy Lisichenco, says some of the effects of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster will not peak until the second half of the next century. -- Kiev: The grey reality 10 May 99 | Europe http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/newsid_340000/340009.stm -- Europe's next Chernobyl? 26 Apr 99 | Europe http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/newsid_328000/328631.stm -- Demonstrations in Ukraine and Belarus to mark anniversary of Chernobyl disaster 25 Apr 99 | Europe http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/newsid_328000/328276.stm -- Machine in the tomb 18 Nov 98 | Sci/Tech http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_216000/216764.stm -- Chernobyl children face immune system disease 04 Sep 98 | Health http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/health/newsid_164000/164740.stm -- 'Close Chernobyl before 2000' 23 Jul 98 | Europe http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/newsid_138000/138365.stm -- Chernobyl (OECD Nuclear Energy Agency) http://www.nea.fr/html/rp/chernobyl/chernobyl.html -- Chernobyl (Uranium Institute) http://www.uilondon.org/chernidx.htm -- Chernobyl Children's Project UK http://www.zoo.co.uk/~z0001991/
12. POISON ISLAND: A SPECIAL REPORT At Bleak Asian Site, Killer Germs Survive By JUDITH MILLER, June 2, 1999 New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/global/060299anthrax-island.html VOZROZHDENIYE ISLAND, Uzbekistan -- In the spring of 1988, germ scientists 850 miles east of Moscow ... in the city of Sverdlovsk ... hundreds of tons of anthrax bacteria -- enough to destroy the world many times over -- [were loaded] into giant stainless-steel canisters ... onto a train two dozen cars long ... almost a thousand miles across Russia and Kazakhstan.... Here Russian soldiers dug huge pits and poured the sludge into the ground, burying the germs and, Moscow hoped, a grave political threat.... -- Related Articles -- Tests With Anthrax Raise Fears That American Vaccine Can Be Defeated (March 26, 1998) http://www.nytimes.com/library/national/science/032698anthrax-vaccine.html -- Arrests Highlight Growing Threat of Bioweapons (Feb. 21, 1998) http://www.nytimes.com/library/national/science/022198anthrax-primer.html
--- (4)
13. For the Record: NUCLEAR ARMS Vote, Senate NUCLEAR ARMS - For: 56 / Against: 44 Thomas' Roll Call Report Syndicate, June 3, 1999; Page M06 http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1999-06/03/072l-060399-idx.html Here's how some major bills fared recently in Congress and how local members of Congress voted, as provided by Thomas' Roll Call Report Syndicate. NV means Not Voting...
14. THE QUIZ Thursday, June 3, 1999; Page A25 http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1999-06/03/135l-060399-idx.html How many construction licenses for new nuclear power plants have been issued since the Three Mile Island nuclear accident in 1979? Answer: None, according to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. However, since the accident, 58 individual reactor units at various sites have been issued "operating permits," the last step in a nuclear plant's licensing....
15. Nuke Treaty Remains in Senate Limbo By Tom Raum, June 2, 1999; 2:22 a.m. EDT Associated Press http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WAPO/19990602/V000201-060299-idx.html http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/w/AP-Treaty-Games.html WASHINGTON (AP) -- Arms-control advocates suggest a nuclear test ban treaty languishing in the Senate could, if ratified, make it harder for China to take its acquired nuclear-weapons technology to the next level....
16. Radioactive Waste Disposal Fails [Savannah River] WASHINGTON IN BRIEF Compiled from reports by staff writer Michael A. Fletcher and the Associated Press. Thursday, June 3, 1999; Page A06 http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1999-06/03/154l-060399-idx.html After spending nearly $500 million, the Energy Department acknowledged yesterday that a crucial stage in the disposal of millions of gallons of highly radioactive waste is a failure and should have been abandoned years ago.... -- Failure in nuclear waste disposal cited USA Today June 3,1999 http://usatoday.com/news/washdc/ncswed05.htm
17. US to Skip Step in Nuclear Disposal By H. Josef Hebert Associated Press Writer Wednesday, June 2, 1999; 2:09 p.m. EDT http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WAPO/19990602/V000566-060299-idx.htmll WASHINGTON (AP) -- After 16 years of experiments, the Energy Department has abandoned a key step in its process to vitrify and store millions of gallons of highly radioactive nuclear waste at a nuclear weapons facility in South Carolina.... Energy Secretary Bill Richardson decided last week to seek a new private contractor to examine alternatives to the failed process that had been abandoned because it was found to produce explosive gases, the officials said.... -- U.S. Sees Flaw in Safe Storing of Atom Waste By MATTHEW L. WALD, June 2, 1999 New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/washpol/project-shutdown.html
[Opposing Views on Yucca Mountain]
18. Nuke Waste Site Safety Questioned June 2, 1999 Associated Press http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/a/AP-Yucca-Flooding.html BOSTON (AP) -- Signs of ancient groundwater flooding at the proposed Yucca Mountain site for nuclear waste in Nevada could put the project's safety in question, a Russian scientist says. ... -- Scientists: Potential Nev. Nuke Waste Site Stable 02:24 a.m. Jun 03, 1999 Eastern By Patrick Connole http://senghor.dogpile.com/texis/search?q=nuclear+OR+plutonium+OR+uranium+OR +radioactiv%3F%3F%3F&fs=nws&to=thirty WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Geological Survey scientists said Wednesday a proposed nuclear waste repository in Nevada is safe from flooding, furthering the case for making Yucca Mountain the nation's permanent waste site next decade....
19. Avondale Nearing Shipbuilder Deal By Alan Sayre AP Business Writer Tuesday, June 1, 1999; 6:36 p.m. EDT http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WAPO/19990601/V000011-060199-idx.html NEW ORLEANS (AP) -- Avondale Industries Inc., a major Navy shipbuilder, is prepared to accept a $500 million cash buyout offer from defense contractor Litton Industries Inc., but is giving a rival bidder two days to top it. Avondale, based in New Orleans, earlier agreed to merge with Newport News Shipbuilding in a $470 million stock swap deal....
--- (5)
20. Flash Campaigns: Online Activism at Warp Speed By REBECCA FAIRLEY RANEY June 3, 1999 New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/06/cyber/articles/03campaign.html Related Sites -- Benton Foundation - http://www.benton.org MoveOn - http://www.moveon.org Libertarian Party - http://www.lp.org Stop the War Now - http://www.stopthewarnow.com Issue Dynamics - http://www.idi.net E-rate Action - http://erateaction.policy.net
21. Spilling Our Nuclear Secrets New York Times, June 3, 1999 http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/letters/ldasch.html To the Editor: ... TOM DASCHLE Senate Democratic Leader Washington, May 28, 1999 ...CHU-YUAN CHENG Muncie, Ind., May 31, 1999 ... professor of economics at Ball State University. ...China has only about 20 intercontinental ballistic missiles. The United States has about 7,000 nuclear warheads; China has only 400.... -- Related Article -- Spying Isn't the Only Way to Learn About Nukes (May 30) http://www.nytimes.com/library/review/053099china-review.html -- On Unofficial Level, at Least, Chinese Value Ties to the U.S. (May 27) http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/asia/052799china-us.html
22. Follow Up the Cox Report New York Times, May 27, 1999, William Safire http://www.nytimes.com/library/opinion/safire/052799safi.html ... Here are a few questions for investigators in both houses of Congress to pose: ... to Samuel Berger ... Bill Richardson ... Louis Freeh ... Tom Daschle ... Dan Bennet ... George Tenet ... Richard Shelby and Bob Kerrey ... Robert Toricelli ... -- Nuke irony: Stronger China benefits U.S., experts say Eric Rosenberg, San Francisco EXAMINER WASHINGTON BUREAU, May 31, 1999 http://www.sfgate.com:80/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/examiner/archive/1999/05/ 31/NEWS859.dtl
23. 'Bubba' Anti-Nuke Ads Don't Bomb By Jenny Coyle, The Planet, June 1999 Volume 6, Number 5 http://www.sierraclub.org:80/planet/199905/beat.html A fictional character named "Bubba" grabbed the attention of South Carolina residents in April with a series of Sierra Club radio ads objecting to the state's hunger for other states' nuclear waste....
24. Hackers Spur Pentagon To Bolster Its Security By John Schwartz Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, June 2, 1999; Page A02 http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1999-06/02/141l-060299-idx.html -- White House Warns Hackers They Will Be Punished Updated 12:27 AM ET June 2, 1999 By Tim Loughran http://webcrawler-news.excite.com/news/r/990602/00/net-internet-hackers WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Annoyed by a recent wave of attacks against official U.S. government Web sites, the White House Tuesday warned hackers who targeted federal Internet sites they would be caught and punished.... -- Federal Cybercrime Unit Hunts for Hackers By MATT RICHTEL - June 2, 1999 New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/mo/biztech/articles/02hack.html
--- (6)
25. NUCLEAR-PETITION METROPOLITAN MAYOR SIGNS ANTI-NUCLEAR PETITION ANC, South Africa, CAPE TOWN 31 May 1999, Sapa http://www.anc.org.za:80/ancdocs/briefing/nw19990601/27.html Cape Metropolitan Council mayor William Bantom is to add his name to the State of the World Forum's mayors' list for the worldwide abolition of nuclear weapons.
26. Loch Harris' ChemTech Physicist to Address Nuclear Conference 02:23 p.m Jun 01, 1999 Eastern /PRNewswire/ http://senghor.dogpile.com/texis/search?q=nuclear+OR+plutonium+OR+uranium+OR +radioactiv%3F%3F%3F&fs=nws&to=thirty ... Croatian officials who were prominent participants insisted on inviting a paper from Dr. Henry Blair, noted physicist for Chemical Detection Technologies, Inc. (ChemTech), into the program. Blair's topic, "A Man Portable X-Ray Fluorescence Based Landmine Detection and Location System," will discuss the scientific basis behind ChemTech's ELF landmine detection system and hint at its use in other applications.... .http://www.wku.edu/API/crete99/, or http://www.lochharris.com. SOURCE Loch Harris, Inc.
27. Russia Says U.N. Inspectors Left Chemicals in Iraq By JUDITH MILLER, June 2, 1999, New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/world/iraq-un.html UNITED NATIONS -- Keeping pressure on an agency that Russia has criticized for months, Moscow's representative here on Tuesday accused the U.N. Special Commission responsible for disarming Iraq of endangering Iraqis by leaving behind dangerous chemicals in its Baghdad laboratory....
28. Stop Bombing, China and Russia Insist New York Times, June 3, 1999 http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/europe/060399kosovo-china.html BEIJING -- China and Russia repeated Wednesday their demand that NATO airstrikes be halted before political talks begin to resolve the crisis in Yugoslavia.... -- Diplomacy: Moscow and West Making Headway on a Kosovo Deal http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/europe/060399kosovo-diplomacy.html -- Issue in Depth: Conflict in Kosovo http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?13@@.efd553f
29. World Court Declines To Halt NATO Bombing Reuters, June 2, 1999, By Janet McBride http://webcrawler-news.excite.com/news/r/990602/07/news-yugoslavia-court THE HAGUE (Reuters) - The United Nations' top court Wednesday rejected Yugoslav requests to halt NATO air strikes on its territory, but expressed concern about the legal basis for the bombing.... -- Yugoslav Cease-Fire Request Denied June 2, 1999, 7:51 a.m. EDT, Associated Press http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/i/AP-World-Court-Kosovo.html -- THE COURT Judges at The Hague Refuse to Halt the NATO Bombing By MARLISE SIMONS, June 3, 1999 New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/europe/060399kosovo-world-court.html -- World: Europe Nato opens courtroom defence Yugoslav lawyer Rodoljub Etinski addresses the court May 10, 1999 Published at 18:11 GMT 19:11 UK - BBC http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/newsid%5F339000/339655.stm
--- (7)
30. 'Rampage' Of Terror Is Cited U.N. Team Reports On Visit to Kosovo Reuters Thursday, June 3, 1999; Page A21 Washington Post http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1999-06/03/146l-060399-idx.html UNITED NATIONS, June 2--The first U.N. humanitarian mission to Kosovo reported today that it found indisputable evidence in the rebellious Serbian province of "organized, well-planned violence against civilians aimed at displacing and permanently deporting them." -- THE EVIDENCE U.N. Finds Proof Evidence of 'Ethnic Cleansing' in Kosovo June 3, 1999 New York Times, By JUDITH MILLER http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/europe/060399kosovo-un.html UNITED NATIONS -- The leader of a U.N. mission to Kosovo has found what he called "indisputable evidence" of Serbian "ethnic cleansing" of Kosovars, as well as "ample evidence" of "serious" damage caused by NATO's airstrikes....
31. Serbian Assembly OKs Peace Plan--Deputies Updated 7:09 AM ET June 3, 1999 (Reuters) http://webcrawler-news.excite.com/news/r/990603/07/news-yugoslavia-plan-accept BELGRADE - Serbia's parliament Thursday accepted an international peace plan for Kosovo after a "big row," a deputy said.... -- Yugoslavia Accepts Peace Plan 10:02 a.m. EDT June 3, 1999, Associated Press http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/i/AP-Yugoslavia-Kosovo.html -- THE PENTAGON U.S. Military Chiefs Firm: No Ground Force for Kosovo June 3, 1999 New York Times, By STEVEN LEE MYERS http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/europe/060399kosovo-pentagon.html -- US Cautious on Belgrade Acceptance Top News Article at 10:50 a.m. June 3, 1999, Associated Press http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/i/AP-US-Kosovo.html - Developments in Kosovo Crisis 10:22 a.m. EDT Associated Press http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/i/AP-Kosovo-Developments.html -- NATO's Actions Likened to Hitler's Filed at 12:05 a.m. EDT June 3, 1999, Associated Press MOSCOW (AP) -- Alexander Solzhenitsyn, the Russian writer and Nobel Peace Prize laureate, said Wednesday that NATO's bombardment of Yugoslavia was morally no different than Hitler's actions...
32. Main Points of Kosovo Peace Plan 9:49 a.m. EDT June 3, 1999, Associated Press http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/i/AP-Yugoslavia-Peace-Text.html BELGRADE, Yugoslavia (AP) -- Key points of the Kosovo peace plan approved by the Serb government and parliament today. A copy of the plan was obtained by The Associated Press from parliamentary sources....
33. Lawsuit Filed Against Gunmakers June 3, 1999, Associated Press http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/a/AP-Gun-Lawsuit.html CAMDEN, N.J. (AP) -- Camden County has joined the list of governments suing the gun industry to recover costs stemming from handgun violence....
34. Cuban Lawsuit Seeks $181B From U.S. June 1, 1999 By The Associated Press http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/i/AP-Cuba-US-Demand.html HAVANA (AP) -- Cuban officials have filed a lawsuit demanding $181 billion from the U.S. government for damages that Cuba says it has suffered in U.S. attacks over the last four decades, the Communist Party daily Granma reported Tuesday.... _____________________________
A fast way to keep up to date: Subscribe to NucNews !! To subscribe: prop1@prop1.org Say "Subscribe NucNews"
NucNews Archive: http://prop1.org/nucnews/nucnews.htm The Conversion Project at http://prop1.org "A-Z Antinuclear Weblinks" at http://prop1.org/prop1/azantink.htm
_______________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________
Message: 3 Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 21:29:23 -0400
Subject: NucNews-5 6/03/99 - Activism; Secrets; Cox Report Questions; Sierra Club "Bubba" Antinuc Ads; Hackers
20. Flash Campaigns: Online Activism at Warp Speed
By REBECCA FAIRLEY RANEY June 3, 1999 New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/06/cyber/articles/03campaign.html
In the swell of online political activism these days, whether the issue is children with guns or Kosovo, cutting-edge campaigns are posting a directive as powerful as any slogan:
"This campaign is based solely on word of mouth. It's CRUCIAL that you tell others. To transmit a brief letter to your e-mail circle, just click here."
So-called "flash campaigns," focused on hot news topics and making use of e-mail chain letters and online petitions, are erupting on the Internet. Though crises have always boosted the visibility of advocacy groups, cheap online mobilization changes the equation. With the Internet, anyone can be an advocate.
The Internet is inspiring groups and individuals who have never run issue-oriented campaigns before. And with the arrival of the newcomers comes a slight fear that the role of traditional advocacy groups could fade if they fail to keep up.
"They could be marginalized by these independent innovators," said Jillaine Smith, a senior associate with the Benton Foundation who tracks online advocacy. "I would like to see the more established organizations follow the example of the innovators. The challenge is to break out of that box."
One of the most visible examples of a flash campaign is an effort called MoveOn.org. It was started last September by Joan Blades and Wes Boyd, a married couple from Berkeley, Calif., who had been largely uninvolved in politics. They set up an online petition calling for Congress to censure President Clinton and move on in the aftermath of the Monica Lewinsky affair.
The couple sent 100 e-mail messages to friends and family asking them to add their names to the petition and forward the message to others. In the course of a few months, they gathered more than 500,000 names. People also pledged to donate $13 million next year to candidates running against members of Congress who tried to impeach the President.
MoveOn received extensive media coverage, but even so, the couple says that fully 90 percent of the people who added their names to the petition heard about it through the e-mail campaign.
After the high-school shootings in Littleton, Colo., Blades and Boyd reactivated their list of supporters to back a gun-control campaign. Their latest petition now has 70,000 signatures, most of them added in the first week of the campaign. Visitors to the site can also fire off e-mail to their representatives in Congress. For Congressional offices that do not take e-mail, notes are sent by fax or postal mail.
During the impeachment turmoil, Blades had to start from scratch, but this time around, she had an instant list of 300,000 people to notify. The creation of that list cost practically nothing.
"It really was just $89.50 to put up a Web site," Blades said.
The Libertarian Party, which had earlier focused solely on backing candidates, has seen similar success with issue-based online campaigning.
As a result of the party's first online effort in March, 171,000 people sent e-mail to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, protesting a proposed rule that would allow banks to closely monitor customers' financial transactions. That represented about 83 percent of the e-mail that was sent to the agency on the issue. The FDIC dropped the proposal, citing the flood of e-mail.
Fresh from their first success, the Libertarians launched an anti-war site at stopthewarnow.org in late April.
Steve Dasbach, national director of the party, said that in the past, the Libertarians had issued press releases stating their positions, but they had no ability to do more until the Internet came along.
In addition to building support for the party, Dasbach said, "we're trying to provide opportunities for people who already oppose the war."
In the first week, 1,000 people a day were sending e-mail to their representatives in Congress through the site, and more than 15,000 messages have been sent since the campaign's start. For constituents whose representatives do not take e-mail, the site provides a phone number or fax number for the local Congressional office.
Although these newcomers have been quite successful, the traditional advocacy organizations could still use technology to keep their edge among the innovators. Some groups have started investing in sophisticated technology that allows precise targeting of online supporters.
Ken Deutsch, vice president of Internet strategic communications at Issue Dynamics Inc. in Washington, put his company's targeting software into action in a recent campaign. Sponsored by education groups, the campaign pushed for renewal of the e-rate program, a federal subsidy for Internet connections in schools and libraries.
Visitors to the site generated about 11,000 messages between the end of April and last week, when the Federal Communications Commission approved $2.25 billion in financing for the program. Traffic to the site peaked when news outlets covered the e-rate issue.
That interest generated a list of supporters who can be mobilized quickly in the future. Individuals on the list will receive alerts, including phone numbers for Congressional offices, when their representatives are taking action on related issues.
This potential for immediate mobilization could change the way established advocacy groups work.
"It changes what you can do grass-roots work on," Deutsch said. "Real decisions get made in [Congressional] committees, and the advocacy world never knows what's coming up until the last minute. There's no time to create a new Web site and mobilize supporters."
The advantage, he predicted, will lie with groups that reach a base of online supporters quickly.
Whether Internet campaigning ultimately strengthens or weakens the role of established advocacy groups, the publicity surrounding flash campaigns has definitely caught their attention.
"You used to mobilize people to march and demonstrate," said Smith of the Benton Foundation. "Now you mobilize them to send e-mail. It's certainly a lot easier to participate. Is it as effective? Big question mark."
To Blades, the trend is healthy. During the MoveOn campaign, she frequently received thank-you notes from single mothers who appreciated having an easy way to get involved.
"It's enabling the five-minute activist," she said.
Related Sites
Benton Foundation - http://www.benton.org MoveOn - http://www.moveon.org Libertarian Party - http://www.lp.org Stop the War Now - http://www.stopthewarnow.com Issue Dynamics - http://www.idi.net E-rate Action - http://erateaction.policy.net
----------------
21. Spilling Our Nuclear Secrets
New York Times, June 3, 1999 http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/letters/ldasch.html
To the Editor:
As a physicist, I find it hard to believe that the Administration's declassification of nuclear secrets was all that significant (Week in Review, May 30).
Many physicists outside the United States weapons establishment have done the work that made it possible for all the nuclear powers to conduct tests with few failures. Far more frightening is the possibility that the Administration thought it could buy off future expansion of nuclear weaponry with such a dopey scheme.
While claiming the comprehensive test ban treaty as a centerpiece of its policy, the Administration has pursued the development of new nuclear weapons through nonnuclear testing and modeling.
The Administration has also extinguished hope for nuclear nonproliferation.
The American-led attacks on Iraq and Yugoslavia have inspired serious re-evaluation of the need for nuclear weaponry in many countries.
DONALD H. MC NEILL Bradley Beach, N.J., May 31, 1999
To the Editor:
William Safire's May 27 column takes issue with my statement pointing out that Republican Congressional committee chairmen were briefed on Chinese nuclear espionage efforts in 1996 and chose not to take action in response to that information. As several press accounts have since confirmed, Senate and House briefings occurred shortly after Samuel R. Berger, then the deputy national security adviser, had received an identical briefing.
My intent was not to criticize any particular member of Congress but to expose the hypocrisy of those who have chosen to blame only the Clinton Administration for security lapses going back several administrations and involving both parties. In fact, the Clinton Administration was the first to address the Energy Department's security problems in a comprehensive manner.
The sooner we abandon the blame game, the faster we can do what is necessary to secure our nuclear weapons and safeguard our national security.
TOM DASCHLE Senate Democratic Leader Washington, May 28, 1999
To the Editor:
Re "On Unofficial Level, at Least, Chinese Value Ties to the U.S." (front page, May 27):
The Cox committee report on Chinese theft of American nuclear and missile secrets may serve as a timely warning for the United States to tighten military technology security. However, the real threat of espionage seems largely overblown.
China has only about 20 intercontinental ballistic missiles.
The United States has about 7,000 nuclear warheads; China has only 400. The real threat would be a disruption in commercial and cultural relations between China and the United States, which could destabilize China and send it into the hands of hardliners eager for a return to Communism.
CHU-YUAN CHENG Muncie, Ind., May 31, 1999
The writer is a professor of economics at Ball State University.
To the Editor:
Re "Spying Isn't the Only Way to Learn About Nukes" (Week in Review, May 30): Another example of disregard for the security of our nuclear-weapons information was the elimination of color-coded access-control badges at Energy Department nuclear laboratories, beginning in 1994.
Badge color, visible across a large room, displayed one's security status -- badges enabled personnel to readily discern whether there was anyone within hearing range who should be excluded from hearing classified information. The change to green badges stripped away that protection.
This administrative disaster needs correction.
HELEN M. HUNT Princeton, N.J., May 30, 1999
Related Article
Spying Isn't the Only Way to Learn About Nukes (May 30) http://www.nytimes.com/library/review/053099china-review.html
On Unofficial Level, at Least, Chinese Value Ties to the U.S. (May 27) http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/asia/052799china-us.html
----------------
22. Follow Up the Cox Report
New York Times, May 27, 1999 http://www.nytimes.com/library/opinion/safire/052799safi.html
In the CNN parking lot the other night, after a Larry King telecast about the hemorrhage of our secrets to China, Representative Chris Cox told the Senate Intelligence Committee chairman, Richard Shelby: "We're out of business. Now it's up to you."
Here are a few questions for investigators in both houses of Congress to pose:
To Samuel Berger, the Hogan & Hartson trade lobbyist turned national security adviser: Why can't Congress see your memo to President Clinton summarizing the devastating Cox report on espionage when it was submitted for security clearance in January? With the report now public, no claim of secrecy can properly be made.
Clinton pretended two months ago to have been uninformed of wholesale espionage. Did Berger's January cover memo truly reflect the Cox report's revelations, or did it lull the President into a false sense of national security?
To Bill Richardson, Energy Secretary since September 1998: You were briefed on espionage suspicions in November, and received the Cox report in January. Did you never have occasion to mention its serious implications on China policy to the President? You knew Secretary of State Albright was going to China in February; why did you withhold it from her? Did the White House suggest she be kept ignorant, or was it your own idea?
To F.B.I. Director Louis Freeh: Attorney General Janet Reno says "I was not apprised of the details of the case at the time the decision was made" to reject wiretap surveillance of Wen Ho Lee at Los Alamos. Didn't you think this was important enough to take to the top? She also says your 1997 request "did not contain a request to search any computer." If that is true, why not?
To the Senate Democratic leader, Tom Daschle: The bipartisan Cox report charges the White House with failing to inform Congress, but you say "Republican chairs of the Congress were warned about this as early as 1996 and also chose to do nothing." Did you read those "warnings" before accusing Senator Arlen Specter and Representative Porter Goss of failing in their intelligence oversight duties? Can the public now see if those staff briefings were complete?
To Dan Burton, chairman of the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee: With Reno Justice allowing all Clinton's illegal Asian fund-raisers to cop a plea and walk, you've subpoenaed Charlie Trie for June 10 and John Huang for June 17. Will you allow the ranking Democrat, Henry Waxman, to turn hearings into a partisan circus, or will you depose Trie and Huang extensively beforehand to discover links to Bruce Lindsey, the D.N.C.'s Don Fowler and Hillary's Harold Ickes?
To George Tenet, Director of Central Intelligence: You reported to Cox that information on China's theft of our W-88 nuclear warhead design came from a "walk-in" planted by Chinese intelligence. That's counterintuitive counterintelligence; does nobody in C.I.A. dispute the "dangle" theory? Where is he now, and is he (or she) singing?
To Richard Shelby and Bob Kerrey of Senate Intelligence: The Cox report ran 900 pages, but nearly 400 pages were cut out by the Clinton sanitizers. Was all of this really for security reasons, or do many redactions cover C.I.A., F.B.I. and White House embarrassments?
To Senator Robert Torricelli, Democrat of New Jersey: You told CBS's Bob Schieffer that Clinton should talk to Reno about "her ability to perform her duties." Are you worrying about her judgment under a physical affliction, or making a nonpartisan judgment on sustained misfeasance at Justice -- or helping the White House toss her off the sled to save Sandy Berger?
The biggest question is this: Will we fall for the usual "it's old news" and "everybody did it" defenses? Or will we connect the dots from the (a) corrupt Asian and satellite-producer contributions to the (b) refusal to stop the theft of nuclear codes lest it offend Beijing to the (c) change of policy to sell China powerful computers capable of using those codes to simulate tests?
The House is being serious. What about the Senate?
---
Nuke irony: Stronger China benefits U.S., experts say Eric Rosenberg, San Francisco EXAMINER WASHINGTON BUREAU, May 31, 1999 http://www.sfgate.com:80/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/examiner/archive/1999/05/ 31/NEWS859.dtl
----------------
23. 'Bubba' Anti-Nuke Ads Don't Bomb
By Jenny Coyle, The Planet, June 1999 Volume 6, Number 5 http://www.sierraclub.org:80/planet/199905/beat.html
A fictional character named "Bubba" grabbed the attention of South Carolina residents in April with a series of Sierra Club radio ads objecting to the state's hunger for other states' nuclear waste.
South Carolina takes nuclear waste and plutonium from 41 other states, according to South Carolina Chapter Executive Director Dell Isham.
In one of three ads, Bubba - a Georgia convenience store clerk played by actor and teacher Kerry Maher - explains how the Department of Energy wants to use the plutonium to make fuel for reactors, like the one near Rock Hill, S.C. "It's a little experimental, but the Department of Energy doesn't think it will be too dangerous . . . and it's gonna make more deadly radioactive waste, but y'all already got so much down there, what's a little more gonna matter?" Bubba rocketed to celebrity status with a series of political ads that helped elect Jim Hodges as governor. Isham knew a good thing when he saw it, and recruited Maher for the anti-nuke campaign. "Many residents are unaware of the state's appetite for nuclear waste," says Isham. "They had no idea we're the pay toilet of the country."
That's probably how Bubba would put it, too.
We Couldn't Have Said It Better
It's gratifying to see the media push a Sierra Club position further than we believe is prudent for us to do ourselves.
Randy Cohen, who writes "The Ethicist" column for The New York Times Magazine, did that in May when a reader complained that his friends act like he's a criminal for buying a sport utility vehicle. (SUVs have become the poster child for the Club's Global Warming campaign.)
"It depends where you drive," Cohen began, suggesting that the "unforgiving lunar surface" is acceptable, but paved American roads are not.
After describing - quite eloquently - the safety and pollution issues with SUVs, Cohen concluded with this: "So if you're planning to drive that SUV in New York, pack a suitcase into your roomy cargo area, because you're driving straight to hell."
"It's refreshing to be reminded yet again by the Times just how moderate and restrained Sierra Club's global-warming advocacy campaign is," says campaign director Dan Becker.
Heavenly Staffers Get Their Wings
Four stellar Sierra Club employees were honored by their peers on April 21 - John Muir's birthday.
Debbie Sease, legislative director in Washington, D.C., received the Michael McCloskey Award. Named for the Club's chairman and former executive director, it's given to people whose work has reflected and strengthened the meaning, purpose and mission of the Sierra Club. In her 18 years with the Club, Sease has built the legislative program into a powerhouse in the nation's capitol, where Congress recently rated the Sierra Club the most effective environmental organization (See story in November 1998 Planet).
The Special Achievement Award, which acknowledges an employee's efforts to benefit or streamline the work of the Club or enhance its public image, went to Ozark (Missouri) Chapter Director Ken Midkiff. His dedication and effectiveness have helped to elevate the chapter to the most successful environmental organization in the state.
Receiving the Virginia Ferguson Award was Annette Henkin, office manager in the Washington, D.C., office. Named for the Club's first paid employee, the award honors a staff member who has demonstrated consistent and exemplary work. Henkin, with 11 years of service to the Club, is known as a problem solver in the D.C. office.
Dina Perez-Neira, who works in the office of Development and Major Gifts, received the Community Service Award for her commitment to helping others through a non-Sierra Club cause. Perez-Neira and her husband, Alfredo Neira, founded Helping Hands International, which provides medical supplies and other materials to needy people in 17 countries.
Honored for serving as a Sierra Club employee for more than 20 years was Ellen Byrne, assistant public information manager. Club volunteers will be honored at the annual banquet in September. To nominate someone, check out the Club Web site at http://www.sierraclub.org/history/awards or contact Sandy Scales at sandy.scales@sierraclub.org ; (415) 977-5500.
Four Decades Later, McCloskey Retires
When retiring Sierra Club Chairman Mike McCloskey first became active with the organization as a law student in Oregon, he had a feeling that "clean air, clean water and wildlands were worth protecting, and that fighting those battles was far more enjoyable than the prospect of practicing law," he says.
On April 30, after 38 years with the Club, McCloskey retired. He will be honored at the Club's annual banquet on Sept. 24 in San Francisco.
McCloskey was recruited as the Club's first paid field-staff member by David Brower, and later replaced Brower as executive director in 1969, until 1985, when he became the Club's chairman.
During his first decade with the Club, he worked alongside environmental pioneers like photographer Ansel Adams. He helped establish Washington's North Cascades National Park and headed the lobbying campaign to establish California's Redwood National Park. He also was a key force in passage of the Wilderness Act and the National Environmental Protection Act.
More recently he has been a leader on global environmental policy, writing the basic drafts that became the United Nation's Charter for Nature.
----------------
24. Hackers Spur Pentagon To Bolster Its Security By John Schwartz Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, June 2, 1999; Page A02 http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1999-06/02/141l-060299-idx.html
--
White House Warns Hackers They Will Be Punished Updated 12:27 AM ET June 2, 1999 By Tim Loughran http://webcrawler-news.excite.com/news/r/990602/00/net-internet-hackers WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Annoyed by a recent wave of attacks against official U.S. government Web sites, the White House Tuesday warned hackers who targeted federal Internet sites they would be caught and punished....
--
Federal Cybercrime Unit Hunts for Hackers By MATT RICHTEL - June 2, 1999 New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/mo/biztech/articles/02hack.html
______________________
- Fifth of seven messages - _____________________
_______________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________
Message: 4 Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 21:28:51 -0400
Subject: NucNews-3 6/03/99 - Chernobyl; Uzbek Poison Island/Anthrax
11. Ukraine sees $120-$160 mln grant for Chernobyl cover
01:01 p.m Jun 02, 1999 Eastern (Reuters) http://senghor.dogpile.com/texis/search?q=nuclear+OR+plutonium+OR+uranium+OR +radioactiv%3F%3F%3F&fs=nws&to=thirty
KIEV, June 2 - Ukraine hopes to get a grant of $120-$160 million by the end of July to continue urgent work on the sarcophagus covering a destroyed reactor at the Chernobyl nuclear plant, an official said on Wednesday.
``We expect a grant worth $120-$160 million in line with the Shelter Implementation Plan (SIP) and should submit details to the European Bank's meeting set for July 1,'' Valentin Kupny, head of the SIP working group, told reporters.
Chernobyl's fourth reactor exploded in 1986, sending a cloud of radioactive fall-out across Ukraine, Russia, Belarus and many European countries in the world's worst civil nuclear disaster.
Soldiers and volunteers, working in intensive radioactive fields, constructed the concrete shelter above the reactor in 1986, but nuclear experts say that parts of the sarcophagus are in unstable condition.
Concern over the deteriorating condition of the sarcophagus prompted the creation of SIP, which is charged with creating safer and more stable conditions by 2005 through international funds. Authorities say SIP projects are worth $758 million.
Representatives of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, which is charged with collecting money for SIP, have said Ukraine received $150 million last year, and the July grant would allow new stabilisation work.
``The new grant will focus on many important issues, such as upgrading control systems within the shelter and resolving the problem of water under the sarcophagus,'' said Olexander Slavis, who helps raise funding for the bank's Chernobyl projects.
Experts say about 11,000 cubic metres of highly radioactive water are under the sarcophogus.
Ukraine has pledged to close the troubled plant by 2000, but the ex-Soviet state also expects to get enough funds from the West to complete two nuclear reactors to replace Chernobyl, as well as money to reinforce the sarcophagus.
Chernobyl - a disaster recalled May 24, 1999 Published at 09:59 GMT 10:59 UK BBC - Sci/Tech http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid%5F351000/351368.stm
---
Chernobyl legacy mounts
24 May 99 | Sci/Tech By Alex Kirby, News Online BBC http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_351000/351286.stm
A senior Ukrainian Government scientist, Dr Georgiy Lisichenco, says some of the effects of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster will not peak until the second half of the next century.
Dr Lisichenco, of the State Centre for Environmental Radiochemistry in Kiev, says a study he has made of radioactivity in Ukraine's water courses shows that it will be at its highest in the river Dnieper in 60 to 90 years from now.
The Dnieper, Ukraine's principal river, supplies Kiev and much of the country with drinking water.
Dr Lisichenco said, in an interview for the BBC's Costing the Earth programme, that the contamination could be a particular problem for areas in the south of the country which rely on river water for irrigating crops.
Reactor number four at Chernobyl exploded early on 26 April 1986, killing 31 people in the immediate aftermath. The subsequent number of deaths the released radioactivity has caused are unknown.
Missed deadline
The level of thyroid cancers among children living nearby has risen substantially - a 20-fold increase in parts of Belarus, and smaller increases in Ukraine itself and in parts of south-western Russia.
Ukraine has agreed to close the one remaining working reactor at Chernobyl, unit 3, by the end of this year. But the head of the state-owned nuclear energy company Energoatom, Dr Mykola Dudchenko, told the programme he is certain the plant will not close by the deadline.
Nor does he think the West will honour its pledge to fund the completion of two new reactors at Khmelnitsky and Rovno in western Ukraine, to compensate for the closure of Chernobyl.
Dr Dudchenko says Ukraine will itself pay for the Soviet-designed reactors, which are 85% complete, to be finished.
Energy needs
The only way of bringing them near to Western safety standards would be a hugely expensive retro-fit, which is far beyond Ukraine's ability to fund.
An independent study for the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, which will decide in July whether to fund their completion, concluded that the reactors were not the least-cost option for meeting Ukraine's energy needs.
The study group chairman, Professor John Surrey of the University of Sussex, says it came under high-level political pressure to think again.
And the former chairman of the World Association of Nuclear Operators, Remy Carle of France, says the French nuclear industry has used its influence to try to make sure the two new reactors are built.
---
Relevant Stories
Kiev: The grey reality 10 May 99 | Europe http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/newsid_340000/340009.stm
Europe's next Chernobyl? 26 Apr 99 | Europe http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/newsid_328000/328631.stm
Demonstrations in Ukraine and Belarus to mark anniversary of Chernobyl disaster 25 Apr 99 | Europe http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/newsid_328000/328276.stm
Machine in the tomb 18 Nov 98 | Sci/Tech http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_216000/216764.stm
Chernobyl children face immune system disease 04 Sep 98 | Health http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/health/newsid_164000/164740.stm
'Close Chernobyl before 2000' 23 Jul 98 | Europe http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/newsid_138000/138365.stm
Internet Links
Chernobyl (OECD Nuclear Energy Agency) http://www.nea.fr/html/rp/chernobyl/chernobyl.html
Chernobyl (Uranium Institute) http://www.uilondon.org/chernidx.htm
Chernobyl Children's Project UK http://www.zoo.co.uk/~z0001991/
----------------
12. POISON ISLAND: A SPECIAL REPORT At Bleak Asian Site, Killer Germs Survive
By JUDITH MILLER, June 2, 1999 New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/global/060299anthrax-island.html
VOZROZHDENIYE ISLAND, Uzbekistan -- In the spring of 1988, germ scientists 850 miles east of Moscow were ordered to undertake their most critical mission.
Working in great haste and total secrecy, the scientists in the city of Sverdlovsk transferred hundreds of tons of anthrax bacteria -- enough to destroy the world many times over -- into giant stainless-steel canisters, poured bleach into them to decontaminate the deadly pink powder, packed the canisters onto a train two dozen cars long and sent the illicit cargo almost a thousand miles across Russia and Kazakhstan to this remote island in the heart of the inland Aral Sea, American and Central Asian officials say.
Here Russian soldiers dug huge pits and poured the sludge into the ground, burying the germs and, Moscow hoped, a grave political threat.
While Mikhail S. Gorbachev was pressing his glasnost and perestroika campaign and warming ties with the West, intelligence evidence was mounting in Washington that the Soviet Union, contrary to its treaty pledges, was producing tons of deadly germs for weapons that the world had banned. The stockpile had to be destroyed in case the United States and Britain demanded an inspection, Russian scientists close to the program said.
Vozrozhdeniye Island was a natural choice. Until the military left here for good in 1992, Renaissance Island, as it translates from the Russian, had been the Soviet Union's major open-air testing site. Today, Renaissance Island, which the former Soviet republics of Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan now share, is the world's largest anthrax burial ground.
For the United States, it is an intelligence gold mine. At the invitation of Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, American military scientists and intelligence experts have secretly been traveling here for the past four years -- most recently last October -- to survey the island and take samples of the buried bacteria, according to senior Uzbek and American officials.
What they have found is stunning, the experts say.
Tests of soil samples from six of 11 vast burial pits show that, although the anthrax was soaked in bleach at least twice, once inside the 66-gallon containers and again after it was dumped into the sandy pits and buried for a decade under 3-to-5 feet of sand, some of the spores are still alive -- and potentially deadly.
Tests on the samples performed by American military laboratories have shown that the anthrax vaccine now being given, in six shots and a yearly booster, to 2.4 million Americans in uniform is effective against the Russian strain of this ancient, deadly scourge -- at least the strain found on the island.
While this has reassured the Clinton administration, the discovery of live spores has alarmed Kazakhstan and especially worries Uzbekistan, which has been exploring for oil on the two-thirds of the island it controls.
Because the Aral Sea is shrinking -- the result of wrongheaded Soviet irrigation policies -- this now-deserted, isolated island has grown from 77 square miles to 770 and will soon be connected to the mainland.
Uzbek and Kazakh experts fear the buried anthrax spores could escape their sandy tomb, stirred up by carriers like gophers and other rodents, lizards and birds, and be brought to Uzbek and Kazakh territory. The disease is spread from animals to people by direct contact; it is treatable with antibiotics if detected immediately. As a weapon, it would be disbursed as an aerosol, for inhalation.
Central Asian and American officials fear that, as access to the island eases, the buried anthrax could be used by terrorists to make more of the deadly agent.
In addition, officials said, exposure to the spores could add a new threat to a population whose health is already considered abysmal. International medical experts are just starting to assess which of their many chronic ailments are attributable to poverty and environmental degradation and which might be linked to the region's biological and chemical legacy.
The Island: Breeding of Germs, Breeding of Fears
Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, which have both renounced weapons of mass destruction, have independently asked the United States for help in assessing, or cleaning up this terrible biological legacy of Soviet rule. In addition, Uzbekistan permitted this correspondent to visit Renaissance Island earlier this year -- the first visit by a journalist -- and to interview officials and scientists concerned about the biological hazards here.
The trip, coupled with interviews with about two dozen scientists, government officials and military experts in Central Asia, Russia and the United States, has shed light on one of the most closely guarded biological secrets of the Cold War. Although Russian President Boris Yeltsin issued an edict in 1992 closing the site and vowing that the laboratory would be dismantled and decontaminated within three years, the cash-strapped Moscow government never followed through. And Russia has never acknowledged responsibility for the anthrax cemetery here.
Military scientists at the U.S. Army Medical Research and Material Command and other laboratories where the samples are being studied refused comment on the island and the tests. But other officials said the labs were still deciphering the Russian anthrax's molecular structure and trying to determine why spores collected from some of the pits did not die.
"We have always known that anthrax is hard to kill," said one military expert, who would only discuss this highly classified activity if he were not identified. "But this strain has proven especially durable, and this wasn't even the most powerful strains the Soviets made."
Signs of life diminish as the Soviet-era MI-8 helicopter speeds toward this island, a 90-minute flight from Nukus, the nearest Uzbek military base. As the chopper approaches the island, fishermen in their wooden boats disappear as what was once a living sea becomes marshland. Scraggly trees give way to patches of sagebrush until, finally, there is nothing left to see below save salt-covered, cement-colored sand that the sea once covered, now as dry and cracked as an ancient face. Nothing seems to live here, not even birds.
Given its remote location and inhospitable climate, the island was long a favored Russian spot for secretive arrangements. A study soon to be published by the Monterey Institute of International Studies in California concludes that the island and the former port city of Aralsk, now about 60 miles from the sea and part of Kazakhstan, were first used by the KGB's predecessor as exile camps for kulaks, the private farmers whom Stalin repressed.
In 1936, wrote Gulbarshyn Bozheyeva, the study's principle author, Vozrozhdeniye and the city that administered the island were placed under the Ministry of Defense, which in 1954 built a biological weapons test site on the island, calling it Aralsk-7.
"The lack of vegetation," she wrote, "hot and dry climate, and sandy soil reaching 140 degrees Fahrenheit in summer" were perfect for germ testing in that they would "reduce the spread and survival of pathogenic organisms."
American officials said that although satellites recorded some unusual activity on the island in 1988, the United States did not learn that the Soviets had buried anthrax from Sverdlosk here until 1992, when Dr. Kanatjan Alibekov, or Ken Alibek, as he is now known, a high-ranking germ weapons official, defected. Alibek had been the director of the giant Soviet anthrax production plant at Stepnogorsk, which is now in Kazakhstan. Between 1988 and his defection, he was the deputy director of Biopreparat, the secret network of some 40 supposedly peaceful facilities, including Stepnogorsk, that provided civilian cover for bio-weapons work.
In his book, "Biohazard" (Random House, 1999), Alibek does not disclose either that anthrax was buried on the island or what he told American officials during his debriefing. But he does report that such germ weapons as tularemia, Q-fever, brucellosis, glanders and plague were tested on Vozrozhdeniye beginning in the 1970s. In 1986 and 1987, he added in an interview, a strain of plague that was resistant to standard antibiotics was tested. In 1987, the book states, Alibek's scientists tested the powerful anthrax that he had developed at Stepnogorsk.
The Monterey study and Alibek say that the Soviet military labs also tested typhus, botulinum toxin, Venezuelan equine encephalitis, smallpox and microbial strains with characteristics useful in warfare, such as high virulence, resistance to ultraviolet rays or heat, and genetically engineered strains developed in the late 1980s.
Today, evidence of the grim research abounds. Clearly visible as one approaches the vast laboratory complex and test range are the telephone poles one kilometer apart on which detectors to measure germ agents were mounted and to which animals were tied during open-air testing.
The abandoned laboratory and high-containment unit that once handled the deadliest of agents have been stripped of equipment, pipes and even their floor and wall-tiles -- shiny, light-green mosaics decorated with a fish motif. What the Soviets left behind, scavengers, apparently impervious to the potential danger of contamination, have stripped away for sale, intelligence experts say.
The enclosed vivaria that once housed thousands of smaller animals killed in the testing -- rabbits, guinea pigs, white mice and hamsters, as well as such larger animals as horses, sheep, donkeys, monkeys and baboons -- are empty, their windows smashed or missing, their roofs collapsed.
Hundreds of small cages are stacked together in a dilapidated storage room; in another stands a human-sized cage, apparently for what scientists call "non-human primates," or man-sized monkeys. Hundreds of them died hideous deaths, sometimes in a single experiment, say Russian and American scientists.
The stench of the laboratory is familiar to veterans of the gruesome world of germ warfare -- a mixture of bleach, dust, animal dung and death.
On the northern part of the site, less than a mile from the laboratory, are the three-story barracks, residential homes, kindergarten, and cafeteria used by the Russians scientists who worked here and their families, about a thousand people in all.
Russian scientists who worked here said that most of the children were not vaccinated against the agents that were tested only a few miles downwind.
"We didn't test unless the wind was blowing south, away from the living quarters," said Dr. Gennadi L. Lepyoshkin, the former Soviet colonel who was Stepnogorsk's director after Alibek and was vaccinated against many of the lethal pathogens he tested.
In a recent interview at Stepnogorsk, Lepyoshkin, who is now director of Kazakhstan's peaceful National Center for Biotechnology and a co-author of the Monterey study, spoke almost nostalgically of his weeks here in the mid-1980s.
"The island was smaller and beautiful then, and the lab much closer to the sea," Lepyoshkin, displaying the water colors he painted and landscapes he sketched when he wasn't working with deadly microbes, playing volleyball, drinking vodka, or engaging in other island pastimes.
The Residue: Seeking U.S. Aid to Clean Up Site
In interviews in Tashkent, Uzbek officials said that only after their country became independent in 1992 did they understand the implications of their biological legacy. "We were shocked when we first learned the real picture," said Isan M. Mustafoev, Uzbekistan's deputy foreign minister. Alarmed by the health and environmental impact of unconventional weapons, Islom Karimov, Uzbekistan's president, renounced them.
In 1995, after Moscow refused to tell Uzbekistan what chemical or biological facilities had been built on Uzbek territory or what had been tested or buried here, Tashkent asked Washington for help, Mustafoev explained. 1/8On May 25, the United States and Uzbekistan signed a bilateral agreement that provides up to $6 million in American aid to dismantle and decontaminate a former Soviet chemical weapons testing facility near the Aral Sea.)
Kazakhstan had quietly permitted Pentagon officials to visit Vozrozhdeniye in 1995. Two years later, Uzbekistan independently invited more American experts to take samples of the buried anthrax, Mustafoev said.
Because the Uzbek Ministry of Defense was responsible for the American mission, Mustafoev said that his ministry was not told precisely what the tests showed about the samples that American teams collected in 1995, 1997 and last October. The last mission's goal, American officials said, was to determine why the some of the anthrax had survived.
In their major forays, the experts added, the Americans wore white, space-suit-like protective clothing and gas masks with respirators. All team members were vaccinated. "It was like a moon landing," one official said. "Only scarier."
Scientists said much can be learned from the material.
Dr. William C. Patrick III, who made germ weapons for the United States before President Richard M. Nixon outlawed them nearly three decades ago, said the samples would enable scientists to determine not only the strength of the Soviet strain, or strains, but also whether the anthrax had been genetically engineered, or enhanced in other ways for virulence or other desirable qualities.
Neither Patrick nor any officials directly involved in the missions would discuss what the samples had shown. But several experts confirmed that the tests indicated that the anthrax vaccine now being given American soldiers was effective. Molecular testing on the strains was continuing, they added.
Mustafoev said Uzbek's national oil company, which is exploring for oil on its part of the island, was not drilling close to the buried anthrax. "No amount of oil is worth risking human lives," he said.
Though Uzbekistan is deeply concerned about the potential danger, decontaminating the island, given its size and the amount of anthrax buried here, would be prohibitively expensive, he and American officials agreed. But Kazakhstan has asked Washington's help in surveying the Renaissance area to assess contamination levels, which the Clinton administration is encouraging Uzbek and Kazakh officials to work jointly on with American experts. Meanwhile, all three capitals have been quietly pressing Moscow to provide more information about what happened here.
Milton Leitenberg, a professor and expert on Russia's unconventional weapons programs, said that Moscow in 1987 had listed the town of Aralsk, the island's staging area, but not the island itself, in its first declaration of germ weapons related-sites which is required by the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention banning germ warfare. In its 1992 declaration, Russia finally listed the island, but as a site where only defensive testing for vaccines and materials had been performed. "The Russians," he concludes, "have never come clean about these programs."
The Neighbors: The Poor and Sick Could Get Even Sicker
The people who live near the island know all too well how little Moscow cared for their safety and welfare. No region of Uzbekistan has been harder hit by the Soviet Union's economic policies or its relentless pursuit of unconventional weapons than Karakalpakstan, the Uzbek semi-autonomous republic inhabited by almost 5 million people with their own distinct ethnic traditions, language and culture. Karakalpakstan, the home of the Aral sea, has seen its once thriving fishing industry devastated, its arable land ruined by overuse of fertilizers and pesticides, and its ground water polluted.
Yusup S. Kamalov, an Uzbek scientist who heads the Union for the Defense of the Aral Sea, an independent environmental group, called the situation "next to hopeless." The sea's surface water has shrunk by half, its volume reduced by 75 percent. "The sea is dying," he said.
Karakalpaks, said Ian Small, the country manager of Medecins Sans Frontieres, the volunteer physicians group, are among the most "chronically sick people in the former Soviet Union." Ninety-eight percent of pregnant women are anemic. Infant mortality rates are comparable to that of sub-Saharan Africa. Two-thirds of the population suffer from some chronic illness, often tuberculosis.
"We've seen an alarming increase in kidney disease and various cancers," he said. "But because there has been no census since 1989 and health statistics are either nonexistent or unreliable, it's impossible to know whether what we're seeing is the result of the region's general poverty and environmental degradation or the past chemical and biological testing."
While local and Uzbek officials try to provide decent health care, he said, they and his small group, the only international charity in the region, are overwhelmed. Medecins is beginning to conduct a base-line health survey that may shed some light not just on the incidence of diseases, but their causes.
Most germ weapons scientists familiar with Vozrozhdeniye said there was little immediate danger to the local population. But with the continued shrinking of the sea, the island is becoming more readily accessible. In some of the pits, anthrax sludge is beginning to leach up through the sand, said one recent visitor here.
Although Uzbek officials have kept Renaissance Island closed, local inhabitants will inevitably come in contact with the still deadly bacteria once it is linked to the mainland. "We're now totally in the dark," Small said. "It's scary not to know what we're dealing with."
Related Articles
Tests With Anthrax Raise Fears That American Vaccine Can Be Defeated (March 26, 1998) http://www.nytimes.com/library/national/science/032698anthrax-vaccine.html
Arrests Highlight Growing Threat of Bioweapons (Feb. 21, 1998) http://www.nytimes.com/library/national/science/022198anthrax-primer.html
______________________
- Third of seven messages - _____________________
_______________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________
Message: 5 Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 21:29:43 -0400
Subject: NucNews-6 6/03/99 - S.Africa Abolition Petition; X-Ray de-mining; UN/Iraq; Russia, China: Stop Bombing!; World Court Declines halt NATO bombing
25. NUCLEAR-PETITION METROPOLITAN MAYOR SIGNS ANTI-NUCLEAR PETITION
ANC, South Africa, CAPE TOWN 31 May 1999, Sapa http://www.anc.org.za:80/ancdocs/briefing/nw19990601/27.html
Cape Metropolitan Council mayor William Bantom is to add his name to the State of the World Forum's mayors' list for the worldwide abolition of nuclear weapons.
The council said in a statement on Monday that Bantom felt strongly about the support the CMC would "give this worthy cause." "The world has recognised that the Cape Metropolitan area is an integral link within international society, both in the diplomatic arena and in tourism," Bantom said.
"I am proud to be representing the people of the Cape metropole in this worthy cause and wish to invite other mayors around the globe to support the abolition of nuclear weapons." CMC executive committee chairman Pierre Uys said the CMC fully supported the campaign.
"The destruction caused by nuclear warheads must not be allowed to happen again," Uys said.
----------------
26. Loch Harris' ChemTech Physicist to Address Nuclear Conference
02:23 p.m Jun 01, 1999 Eastern /PRNewswire/ http://senghor.dogpile.com/texis/search?q=nuclear+OR+plutonium+OR+uranium+OR +radioactiv%3F%3F%3F&fs=nws&to=thirty
AUSTIN, Texas, June 1 -- In the aftermath of agreements forged with the Ruder Boskovic Institute and the Croatian Mine Action Centre (CROMAC) in Croatia last week, officials of Loch Harris, Inc. (OTC Bulletin Board: LOCH) have become last-minute insertions in a prestigious international nuclear conference, according to Loch Harris CEO Rodney A. Boone.
"The 6th International Conference on Applications of Nuclear Techniques, to be held on the island of Crete, Greece June 20-26, was closed," said Boone. "But Croatian officials who were prominent participants insisted on inviting a paper from Dr. Henry Blair, noted physicist for Chemical Detection Technologies, Inc. (ChemTech), into the program.
Blair's topic, "A Man Portable X-Ray Fluorescence Based Landmine Detection and Location System," will discuss the scientific basis behind ChemTech's ELF landmine detection system and hint at its use in other applications.
Boone has also been invited by Dr. Vlado Valkovic, professor of physics and head of Ruder Boskovic Institute's Applied Physics Laboratory, to be co- author of his opening overview, "Humanitarian Demining: A Global Problem."
ChemTech, a subsidiary of Loch Harris, is owner and developer of the ELF technology, an X-ray-based system for detection and location of landmines. ChemTech recently announced an agreement to collaborate with Croatia's Ruder Boskovic Institute in field testing the ELF system in what Boone termed the "real, live laboratory of one of the worst landmine-polluted nations on earth."
"Over ten percent of the land area of Croatia has been rendered useless by an estimated 1.2 million undocumented landmines," said Boone. "Our task is to help them clear the equivalent of a one-mile wide path from Washington, DC to the Pacific Ocean."
The 6th International Conference on Applications of Nuclear Techniques is under the auspices of The Office Of National Drug Control Policy -- The White House, NCSR Demokritos, and Western Kentucky University. Additional information about the program may be found on the Western Kentucky University Web site, http://www.wku.edu/API/crete99/, or on the Loch Harris Web site, http://www.lochharris.com. SOURCE Loch Harris, Inc.
----------------
27. Russia Says U.N. Inspectors Left Chemicals in Iraq
By JUDITH MILLER, June 2, 1999, New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/world/iraq-un.html
UNITED NATIONS -- Keeping pressure on an agency that Russia has criticized for months, Moscow's representative here on Tuesday accused the U.N. Special Commission responsible for disarming Iraq of endangering Iraqis by leaving behind dangerous chemicals in its Baghdad laboratory.
The accusations were made as Russia requested a special meeting of the Security Council, contending that there was a danger from the chemicals. Richard Butler, the chairman of the embattled inspection agency, assured Security Council members at the closed meeting that the minute quantities of toxic chemicals being stored in a laboratory in the Canal Hotel pose no danger to Iraqi citizens.
But Sergey Lavrov, Russia's representative, said afterward that Butler would present a written report on the matter to the council.
Several diplomats described the Russian accusations about the laboratory as part of a broader struggle over the fate of the Special Commission, known as UNSCOM, and what policy the United Nations should pursue toward Iraq and its intransigent leader, Saddam Hussein.
Russia, China and France want the commission replaced and economic sanctions against Iraq lifted.
The United States and Britain, by contrast, argue that the commission, or an equally tough successor, must return to Iraq to conduct inspections. And they say that sanctions imposed on Iraq by the United Nations after the Persian Gulf war should not be lifted until Iraq has fulfilled its commitments to the council to give up nuclear, biological, chemical and other weapons of mass destruction.
Diplomats said that Butler told council members that the inspectors' laboratory was equipped with sensitive machines to analyze chemical compounds, as well as a room for packaging biological agents to send them abroad for analysis.
He confirmed that minuscule samples of dangerous chemicals used to calibrate the machines -- including sarin, VX and tabun -- were stored in the laboratory, which was sealed when the inspectors left in December. In addition, diplomats said, the lab held about 750 milliliters of mustard agent, or the equivalent of a wine bottle, which the commission had retrieved from Iraqi shells and other munitions.
The equipment and chemical samples were left behind when Iraq's lack of cooperation with the commission led to American and British bombing raids, which, in turn, led Iraq to end all cooperation with the inspection teams.
With the onset of summer and prospective power shortages, Butler and senior officials had privately discussed the fate of the laboratory with senior aides to Secretary-General Kofi Annan and had asked their help in returning to the facility to retrieve the samples and equipment and to close it down.
----------------
28. Stop Bombing, China and Russia Insist
New York Times, June 3, 1999 http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/europe/060399kosovo-china.html
BEIJING -- China and Russia repeated Wednesday their demand that NATO airstrikes be halted before political talks begin to resolve the crisis in Yugoslavia.
Russia's foreign minister, Igor Ivanov, spent the day meeting with China's top leaders, discussing their shared opposition to the NATO bombing campaign and their mutual desire to foster a "strategic partnership" aimed at offsetting the global dominance of the United States.
A joint communique issued Wednesday afternoon by Ivanov and China's foreign minister, Tang Jiaxuan, said: "NATO's immediate halting of military operations is a precondition of a political settlement of the Kosovo issue."
Ivanov told reporters that plans are being laid for a state visit to China later this year by President Boris Yeltsin, following up the visit to Russia and an ailing Yeltsin last year by President Jiang Zemin.
Ivanov said that increased political, economic and military cooperation between Russia and China "will contribute to stability and the interests of the international community" by helping to create a more "multipolar world."
While Russia has advanced military hardware to sell to China, the scope for economic cooperation appears to be limited: total trade between the countries last year was only $5.5 billion, a small fraction of China's trade with Japan or the United States.
Related Articles
Diplomacy: Moscow and West Making Headway on a Kosovo Deal http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/europe/060399kosovo-diplomacy.html
Issue in Depth: Conflict in Kosovo http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?13@@.efd553f
----------------
29. World Court Declines To Halt NATO Bombing
Reuters, June 2, 1999, By Janet McBride http://webcrawler-news.excite.com/news/r/990602/07/news-yugoslavia-court
THE HAGUE (Reuters) - The United Nations' top court Wednesday rejected Yugoslav requests to halt NATO air strikes on its territory, but expressed concern about the legal basis for the bombing.
Judges at the International Court of Justice declined to impose an interim ruling to halt the air strikes, saying Yugoslavia's complaints against eight NATO members did not fall under the Genocide Convention.
The court completely threw out Yugoslav complaints against the other two NATO members, the United States and Spain, on a legal technicality.
But Presiding Judge Christopher Weeramantry said the court was troubled about the legal foundation for NATO's action.
"The court is profoundly concerned about the use of force in Yugoslavia. Under the present circumstances such use raises very serious issues of international law," he said.
Yugoslavia had argued that NATO air strikes were illegal, basing its arguments on the U.N. charter, the Geneva Conventions and the Genocide Convention.
The case before the World Court has confronted NATO countries with an aspect of their campaign they had tried to keep quiet -- the shaky legal grounds for military action.
"Arguably there is no international legal justification for the bombing," said Olivier Ribbelink of the Asser Institute for International Law, noting that no single U.N. Security Council resolution legitimized the air campaign.
A member of the Yugoslav delegation, who declined to be named, criticized the rulings.
"The whole thing is politicized," he told Reuters ahead of a news conference by Belgrade's delegation.
The court ruling also decried the human effect of the conflict, which has stemmed from Western allegations of ethnic cleansing in Yugoslavia's southern province of Kosovo.
"The court is deeply concerned with the human suffering and loss of life in Kosovo that forms the background of this case and with the continued loss of life and human suffering in all parts of Yugoslavia," Weeramantry said.
He urged the states to find a peaceful solution to the conflict.
Yugoslavia sued 10 NATO states, arguing the bombing was tantamount to genocide. Belgrade asked for interim rulings, known as "provisional measures," to stop the bombing while the court considered Yugoslavia's complaint.
Although the court refused to issue emergency measures in eight cases, deliberations will continue with a final ruling likely to take years.
The court threw out the cases against the United States and Spain because the two countries had opted out of a clause in the Genocide Convention stating that disputes are to be submitted to the World Court.
Judgements of the World Court are final and without appeal, but the court has no means to enforce them. Nations that fail to comply fall under the jurisdiction of the U.N. Security Council, where the United States, Britain, France, Russia and China have veto power.
---
Yugoslav Cease-Fire Request Denied
June 2, 1999, 7:51 a.m. EDT, Associated Press http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/i/AP-World-Court-Kosovo.html
THE HAGUE, Netherlands (AP) -- The World Court today rejected Yugoslavia's request for an immediate halt to NATO airstrikes, dismissing the contention the alliance was committing genocide with its campaign.
Even though it deplored the use of force, the U.N. court said there was no clear indication of an attempt ``to bring about (Yugoslavia's) physical destruction in whole or in part.''
Yugoslavia had asked the court to order an immediate cease-fire as a first step while it considered whether the airstrikes are illegal -- a process that could take years.
The World Court did agree to examine whether NATO's airstrikes against Yugoslavia violate international law, expressing its ``deep and profound'' concern over the bloodshed.
Yugoslavia appealed to the World Court on April 29, more than a month after the airstrikes began March 24. Yugoslavia filed individual complaints against Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, the United States and the United Kingdom, asserting the NATO airstrikes breach international agreements, including the U.N. charter and international conventions on genocide.
Lawyers for the NATO countries argued their case in the court's ornate Peace Palace last month. The United States urged justices to toss out the matter as a ``political smokescreen.''
The Western allies insist the air campaign is a legally justified intervention aimed at ending a humanitarian catastrophe in the Yugoslav province of Kosovo.
Yugoslavia accused the allies of genocide against its people, claiming NATO is endangering the entire population with pollution caused by attacks on oil refineries and chemical plants.
The 15-judge World Court, formally known as the International Court of Justice, has no enforcement powers.
Yugoslav representative Rodoljub Etinski had no immediate comment on today's ruling.
---
THE COURT Judges at The Hague Refuse to Halt the NATO Bombing
By MARLISE SIMONS, June 3, 1999 New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/europe/060399kosovo-world-court.html
PARIS -- Judges at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, Netherlands, refused Wednesday to order NATO countries to halt their bombing of Yugoslavia. The judges also declined to discuss Yugoslavia's demand to be paid for war damages.
Announcing the decisions, the presiding judge said a large majority had found that the court had no jurisdiction to consider the Yugoslav claims. Yugoslavia had asked the court to declare the bombing illegal and for an immediate injunction to end the strikes.
The judges at the court, the highest judicial body of the United Nations, used veiled language to say the bombing was breaking international law.
"The court is profoundly concerned about the use of force in Yugoslavia," the acting president, Judge Christopher Weeramantry, said. "Under the present circumstances this raises very serious issues of international law."
But the judges did not address the legality, saying they were addressing only whether they had jurisdiction.
The decision was based on separate complaints filed by Yugoslavia in April against each of the 10 countries involved in the air attacks. Yugoslavia could not sue NATO, because the court deals just with disputes between nations. In effect, Yugoslavia had little hope of obtaining a blanket order to stop the bombing when it sued, experts said. But because different NATO countries accept different degrees of jurisdiction by the court, Yugoslavia had hoped to divide NATO and embarrass at least a few member governments.
"Yugoslavia has gambled wrong and it made mistakes on technicalities," a legal scholar said.
The panel of 15 judges threw out Yugoslavia's request for "provisional measures," or injunctions, to stop the airstrikes on two counts.
On April 25, Yugoslavia recognized the court's jurisdiction in the dispute but it stipulated that it would not apply to prior disputes. Legal experts said that in that way Yugoslavia wanted to insure that the court could not consider charges of ethnic cleansing or genocide for incidents before April 25.
But that backfired. The court said it could not consider the dispute with the NATO countries because the bombing had started before April 25.
Second, the court rejected Yugoslavia's contention that NATO countries were committing genocide in Yugoslavia. Legal scholars said Yugoslavia was using that accusation mostly as a procedural ploy.
Although some countries do not recognize the court, they have signed the Genocide Convention, and that would broaden the court's jurisdiction. But the judges said there was no evidence that the airstrikes were intended to commit genocide.
Actions against a state are not actions against a group, the court said. In presenting its case on May 10 and 11, Yugoslavia gave a lengthy overview of damage caused to civilian installations and said that at the time, 1,200 people had been killed and more than 4,500 wounded. Yugoslavia included no damage caused to the military, nor did it mention its campaign in Kosovo.
The court deliberations have taken three weeks, and insiders said they produced fierce arguments among the 15 permanent and five ad hoc judges. The strongest dissents were by judges from China, Russia and Sri Lanka.
Disagreement was also reflected in the vague wording that the court used to call for an end to the violence. The court said it was deeply concerned with the "enormous suffering in Kosovo" and the "continuing loss of life and human suffering in all parts of Yugoslavia."
The court said that in eight of the 10 cases brought by Yugoslavia it would continue to examine its jurisdiction and the "legality of use of force." But it dropped the cases against the United States and Spain because they had not recognized the court's authority in this case.
The other eight countries are Belgium, Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Portugal. Future deliberations could take months or even years and will deprive Yugoslavia of any immediate result that it had sought.
---
World: Europe Nato opens courtroom defence Yugoslav lawyer Rodoljub Etinski addresses the court
May 10, 1999 Published at 18:11 GMT 19:11 UK - BBC http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/newsid%5F339000/339655.stm
Nato nations have begun responding to allegations that the military operation against Yugoslavia breaks international law and amounts to genocide.
Yugoslavia has appealed to the International Court of Justice in a bid to stop the bombing.
Belgrade's lawyers say Operation Allied Force is tantamount to genocide.
Belgrade is claiming compensation from 10 Nato countries involved for, what it alleges is, an unlawful campaign.
Lawyer Rodoljub Etinski told the court in The Hague: "The acts of bombing against Yugoslavia are not just illegal acts, they constitute a violation of human rights and the perpetration of the crime of genocide."
"By killing people, by murdering children ... by destroying a whole nation, they want to protect a part of that population, one of its numerous ethnic minorities."
But shortly before the hearing began, Nato spokesman Jamie Shea called the legal move "particularly cynical". He said Yugoslav President Milosevic was responsible for the worst violations of human rights for half a century.
Mr Etinski told the court in the Hague that Yugoslavia's crackdown in Kosovo was aimed at suppressing terrorism and that the allies had no right to intervene in an internal conflict.
He told the court that Nato was using internationally banned weapons - cluster bombs and bombs containing depleted uranium - and was arming and training the Kosovo Liberation Army, which he described as a terrorist group.
The Belgrade Government wants the court to tell the United States, the United Kingdom, and other leading Nato countries to stop the airstrikes and pay Yugoslavia compensation.
The Serbs say that actions taken by the 10 Nato members represent "a gross violation" of their obligation not to use force against another state.
Ian Brownlie, a British professor of public international law who is on the Yugoslav legal team, told the court: "There is no general humanitarian purpose to these acts.
"The pattern of targets indicate political purposes unrelated to humanitarian reasons."
Geneva Convention
Yugoslavia says Nato has broken the United Nations Charter by taking enforcement action without authorisation from the Security Council.
Belgrade also accuses the alliance of breaking the 1949 Geneva Convention on the protection of civilians in time of war. Finally, Yugoslavia accuses Nato of genocide.
BBC Legal Affairs Correspondent Joshua Rozenberg says that the genocide allegation against Nato is perhaps the most striking.
It argues that Nato countries are in breach of their obligation not to deliberately inflict on a national group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction, in whole or in part.
Defending Nato
Yugoslavia is asking the court to make a temporary ruling ordering the Nato countries to stop the campaign.
The 10 Nato nations named by Yugoslavia have each been given one hour to put their cases.
Belgium, Canada and France were the first to outline their cases, giving a vigorous defence of Nato action.
They said that a court order stopping the bombing would turn reality on its head.
Canada's representative Philippe Kirsch said siad: "Provisional measures [ordering a halt to strikes] would not avoid irreparable damage, it would cause irreparable damage.
Belgium's representative Rusen Ergec said: "I would defy the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia to submit any evidence of any such intention to bring about the destruction of an ethnic, religious or national group."
And Ronny Abraham, a French Foreign Ministry official, said: "Yugoslavia is using the court as a political forum."
Before the hearing the US, which is due to put its case on Tuesday, described the legal action as an "absurdity" and "an obvious attempt to divert attention from the atrocities" perpetrated by the Belgrade regime.
Yugoslav demands
The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia wants the court to declare that:
Nato countries have wrongly intervened in the affairs of another state by supporting the Kosovo Liberation Army.
Nato countries have unlawfully attacked civilians and their property.
Nato countries are in breach of their obligation not to commit any act of hostility against historical monuments, works of art or places of worship.
By using cluster bombs, the Nato countries have broken their duty not to use weapons calculated to cause unnecessary suffering.
By bombing oil refineries and chemical plants, the Nato countries have acted in breach of their obligation not to cause considerable environmental damage.
By using weapons containing depleted uranium, the Nato countries have acted in breach of their obligation not to use prohibited weapons and not to cause far-reaching health and environmental damage.
By killing civilians, and by destroying enterprises, communications, health and cultural institutions, the Nato countries failed to meet their obligations to respect basic human rights.
By destroying bridges on international rivers, the Nato countries have acted in breach of their obligation to respect freedom of navigation.
______________________
- Sixth of seven messages - _____________________
_______________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________
Message: 6 Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 21:29:08 -0400
Subject: NucNews-4 6/03/99 - US - Senate vote Nuc Arms; No New Licenses since TMI; Treaty in US Limbo; Nuc Waste Savannah River - Yucca Mountain; Nuc Contractors Deal
13. For the Record: NUCLEAR ARMS Vote, Senate NUCLEAR ARMS - For: 56 / Against: 44
Thomas' Roll Call Report Syndicate, June 3, 1999; Page M06 http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1999-06/03/072l-060399-idx.html
Here's how some major bills fared recently in Congress and how local members of Congress voted, as provided by Thomas' Roll Call Report Syndicate. NV means Not Voting...
The Senate tabled (killed) an amendment allowing the United States to reduce its nuclear weapons at a faster pace than is permitted in the 2000 defense bill (S 1059, above). Backers said quicker reduction would ease pressure on Russia. That, in turn, would make it less likely for Russian warheads to be unleashed accidentally or by a rogue state, they said. But opponents termed the amendment unilateral disarmament.
At issue was how quickly the United States should implement the START I and START II arms pacts. Both have been ratified by the Senate.
But the Duma has not acted on START II. The 2000 defense bill prohibits the United States from going beyond START I reductions until Russia implements START II. This amendment sought to remove that statutory floor.
A yes vote was to keep a floor under U.S. nuclear arms reduction.
MARYLAND
Mikulski (D) No Sarbanes (D) No
VIRGINIA
Robb (D) No Warner (R) Yes
----------------
14. THE QUIZ
Thursday, June 3, 1999; Page A25 http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1999-06/03/135l-060399-idx.html
How many construction licenses for new nuclear power plants have been issued since the Three Mile Island nuclear accident in 1979?
Answer: None, according to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. However, since the accident, 58 individual reactor units at various sites have been issued "operating permits," the last step in a nuclear plant's licensing. All had been under construction before the TMI accident. The last unit to get an operating permit was at the Watt Barr nuclear plant near Spring City, Tenn., in 1996.
----------------
15. Nuke Treaty Remains in Senate Limbo
By Tom Raum, June 2, 1999; 2:22 a.m. EDT Associated Press http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WAPO/19990602/V000201-060299-idx.html http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/w/AP-Treaty-Games.html
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Arms-control advocates suggest a nuclear test ban treaty languishing in the Senate could, if ratified, make it harder for China to take its acquired nuclear-weapons technology to the next level.
Yet some of the same Senate conservatives who have been the loudest in condemning Chinese espionage and lax Clinton administration security policies have been blocking a ratification vote.
The Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty was signed by the United States in 1996 and submitted to the Senate the following year. Its ratification has long been a major foreign policy objective for the administration.
It remains on hold before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, where Chairman Jesse Helms refuses to bring it up.
Helms first wants the administration to send the Senate modifications to an older treaty -- the 27-year old Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with Moscow.
The North Carolina Republican gave the administration until June 1 to submit the modifications or face a freeze on all treaties.
Helms reiterated the threat last week: ``I will do everything within my power to ensure that the ABM treaty is never resurrected or reconstituted.''
As of today, the administration still had not sent the Senate the ABM modifications agreed to by President Clinton and Russian President Boris Yeltsin. Nor did the White House appear ready to act any time soon.
A senior White House official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said late Tuesday that Clinton ``clearly intends to fulfill his commitment to the Senate. But it's strictly the president's prerogative as to the timing of that submission.''
``The situation has been thrown off course by the Kosovo operation,'' the official said. ``We intend to try to put the arms control track back in gear with the Russians.''
The administration is afraid the GOP-led Senate will vote to scuttle the whole ABM treaty if it is revisited. Helms admits as much, saying it belongs in the ``dustbin of history'' since it was negotiated with a country that no longer exists, the Soviet Union.
But the biggest reason most conservatives dislike the ABM treaty is that it restricts deployment of a national defense against ballistic missiles, long a GOP goal and more recently embraced by Democrats as well.
Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Coalition to Reduce Nuclear Dangers, an arms-control organization, said the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty ``is one of the few tools that is available to the United States to prevent China from conducting nuclear tests on its warhead designs.''
``How helpful is it to national security to delay consideration of a treaty that's been in the Senate for 20 months now?'' Kimball asked.
The Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty has been signed by 152 countries, including Russia and China. Only 29 have ratified it. And of those, only two are nuclear powers: Britain and France.
China held its last underground nuclear test in 1996, then declared a moratorium on nuclear testing.
Many treaty advocates claim the Senate delay is keeping other nations from ratifying the treaty, which obligates its signatories not to carry out any nuclear weapons test explosions.
``These are not salad days for arms control,'' said Chris Madison, a spokesman for Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware. Biden, the senior Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, is leading the charge for the treaty but has been frustrated by Helms.
The attention may now be on China in light of last week's congressional report on espionage, but China has fewer than 20 ballistic missiles capable of reaching the United States. Russia has thousands.
``I suggest we may be losing touch with reality. We are keeping more weapons in our arsenal than we need, and forcing the Russians to keep more in theirs than they can control,'' said Sen. Bob Kerrey, D-Neb.
Kerrey has sought unsuccessfully Senate approval for allowing the United States to reduce unilaterally its nuclear arsenal below the 6,000-warhead level permitted for both nations under existing arms-control agreements.
Yet, in this game of musical treaty chairs, the Clinton administration is insisting that it will hold off on the ABM modifications until Russia ratifies yet another arms-control agreement, the so called START II pact.
But with US-Russian relations strained by NATO's bombing in Yugoslavia, the Russian Duma does not seem inclined to act any time soon.
Underscoring the danger, Viktor Chernomyrdin, Russia's special envoy for Kosovo, wrote last week in an essay in The Washington Post that ``the world has never in this decade been so close as now to the brink of nuclear war.''
Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-S.D., said he and other ban supporters will work in the coming days ``to speak with some aggressiveness on this issue on the floor of the Senate'' in hopes of prompting a vote.
But with Helms in control, no one is giving Dorgan very good odds.
----------------
16. Radioactive Waste Disposal Fails WASHINGTON IN BRIEF
Compiled from reports by staff writer Michael A. Fletcher and the Associated Press. Thursday, June 3, 1999; Page A06 http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1999-06/03/154l-060399-idx.html
After spending nearly $500 million, the Energy Department acknowledged yesterday that a crucial stage in the disposal of millions of gallons of highly radioactive waste is a failure and should have been abandoned years ago.
The failed process involves attempts by scientists to find a way to separate the most highly radioactive material from less radioactive liquids in 35 million gallons of waste being stored in drums at the Savannah nuclear weapons facility in South Carolina.
Scientists found that the process, when handling such large amounts of waste, produces large amounts of explosive benzene gas, making it too dangerous.
Last week, Energy Secretary Bill Richardson directed that the project's contractor, a Westinghouse Corp. subsidiary, be replaced and that outside scientists be enlisted to help select an alternative technology.
Failure in nuclear waste disposal cited USA Today June 3,1999 http://usatoday.com/news/washdc/ncswed05.htm
---------------------
17. US to Skip Step in Nuclear Disposal
By H. Josef Hebert Associated Press Writer Wednesday, June 2, 1999; 2:09 p.m. EDT http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WAPO/19990602/V000566-060299-idx.htmll
WASHINGTON (AP) -- After 16 years of experiments, the Energy Department has abandoned a key step in its process to vitrify and store millions of gallons of highly radioactive nuclear waste at a nuclear weapons facility in South Carolina, department officials said today.
Energy Secretary Bill Richardson decided last week to seek a new private contractor to examine alternatives to the failed process that had been abandoned because it was found to produce explosive gases, the officials said.
The process involves attempts to separate the most highly radioactive material from the less radioactive liquid, so that less of the material actually would have to be turned into glass logs for disposal.
The vitrification program calls for converting the waste into 6,000 glass logs, a process that is expected to cost more than $17 billion and take nearly 30 years.
The Energy Department has built a $2 billion high-tech glass factory at the Savannah River weapons complex in South Carolina to transform the liquid waste into molten glass logs that can be more easily stored. The waste, left over from nuclear weapons production, will remain radioactive for thousands of years.
A study released today by the General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, said the search for a substitute method for separating the liquid could take eight to 10 years and cost from $1 billion to as much as $3.5 billion.
The government since 1983 has spent about $490 million in trying to perfect the ``in-tank precipitation'' method of separation.
Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., who ordered the GAO investigation, said the Energy Department should have abandoned the flawed separation method much earlier.
``Mismanagement (of the program) ... led to an extraordinary and pathetic waste of taxpayer money,'' Dingell said in a statement. ``All we have to show for $500 million is a 20-year delay and the opportunity to risk another $1 billion to make a problematic process work.''
Energy Department spokeswoman Anne Elliott said it was decided early last year not to proceed with the full-scale in-tank precipitation. She said three options will now be considered for waste separation including a scaled-back version of in-tank precipitation.
She said the contractor for the separation project, Westinghouse Government Services, was being replaced and a decision on how to proceed is expected later this year. Despite the problems with the separation process, the 2028 target for removal of the 35 million gallons of waste has not changed, she said.
If a way can be developed to separate the liquid, the waste would be encased in 6,000 glass logs that will be put in drum-like canisters for long-term storage or burial.
---
U.S. Sees Flaw in Safe Storing of Atom Waste
By MATTHEW L. WALD, June 2, 1999 New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/washpol/project-shutdown.html
WASHINGTON -- After spending 16 years and $489 million on a crucial step in its plan for the safe storage of millions of gallons of highly radioactive waste, the Energy Department has abandoned the procedure because it produces explosive gases.
Department officials said on Tuesday that they would get rid of the contractor, a former subsidiary of Westinghouse, and had asked outside scientists to help find another method for sorting the waste so the most radioactive material can be handled separately.
Alternatives could take years to develop and cost billions.
Ernest Moniz, the Under Secretary of Energy, said Tuesday in an interview that experiments at a South Carolina storage site in the early 1980's showed the process of concentrating the waste was producing high levels of explosive benzene gas. But rather than trying to develop a new procedure, "some rather poor judgment was used," Dr. Moniz said, and instead, engineers tried to make the process safe.
In a report released today by Representative John D. Dingell, Democrat of Michigan, the General Accounting Office said part of the problem was "design and construction being done concurrently -- with an emphasis on pushing ahead in the belief that the problems could be solved later." That a test in 1983 produced more benzene than the instruments could measure "seemed to have been forgotten over time," said the report by the G.A.O., the investigative arm of Congress.
Dingell, in a statement, said "mismanagement by the Department of Energy and Westinghouse led to an extraordinary, and pathetic, waste of taxpayer money. All we have to show for $500 million is a 20-year delay and the opportunity to risk another $1 billion to make a problematic process work."
The South Carolina plant is one of two main sites at which the Government is storing wastes from nuclear weapons. About 34 million gallons of waste are being held in 51 aging underground tanks, judged to be vulnerable to earthquakes, at the Savannah River Site, near Aiken.
Because the chemical mixture of the waste there was considered simpler than that at the second plant, in the state of Washington, officials decided to deal with the problems there first.
The plan is to convert the waste, which could be dangerously radioactive for thousands of years, into molten glass. The Energy Department has built a $2 billion glass factory, which is being used now for the sludge in the bottom of the tanks.
But a highly radioactive waste product, cesium, is dissolved in the liquid in the tanks. The idea was to add a component to turn the ceisum into a chemical that would sink to the bottom and thus take most of the radioactivity out of the liquid. The liquid could then be easily treated, and the solid, which had most of the radioactivity, could be turned into glass.
That process, advocated by Westinghouse, created benzene, a chemical in gasoline that will burn or explode at certain concentrations.
The Energy Department decided in January 1998 not to proceed with the step Westinghouse favored. Dr. Moniz said the Energy Secretary, Bill Richardson, decided last week, in a step that is rare in Government, to ask for bids from other companies to replace the contractor.
Earlier this year, Westinghouse said that if its plan for concentrating the waste did not work, the Government could spend $1 billion to build a processing plant to handle the waste in smaller batches, to control benzene emissions. The Energy Department is considering several alternatives and hopes to choose by fall.
But the costs may run higher. The report by the General Accounting Office said that an alternative might take eight years to develop and could cost $2.3 billion to $3.5 billion. The report suggests that because the flow of radioactive material to the glass factory will be different than planned, the total number of glass logs will have to increase, and with it, costs. The initial plan was for 5,200 logs, in stainless steel canisters, at a cost of $13.6 billion to $17.4 billion, including storage, although the cost of such storage is uncertain.
Energy Department officials say, however, that they face delays already because of budget constraints and that the difficulties with the chemistry may not pose additional delays. The glass factory can run for several years on the sludge, but will eventually need the waste material that officials are trying to concentrate out of the liquid.
Dr. Moniz, in a telephone interview, acknowledged that "some significant amount of funds could have been saved by pulling the plug somewhat earlier." But he added that several billion dollars would be saved by perfecting a way to concentrate the wastes and thereby reducing the volume of material to be sent to the glass factory.
The Westinghouse subsidiary in charge of concentrating the wastes, Westinghouse Government Services, was sold in March to Morrison Knudsen. It will continue to run other operations at Savannah River. Tuesday officials for the contractor and at the Energy Department would not estimate the value of the contract that the company will lose.
The Energy Department has even more wastes in underground tanks at its Hanford nuclear reservation, near Richland, Wash., and these are leaking into the Columbia River. It is working with BNFL, formerly British Nuclear Fuels Limited, to devise a system for solidifying the wastes there.
The Savannah River Site was built by DuPont and operated by that company for 30 years beginning in the early 50's; Hanford was run by a variety of companies with far less chemistry experience.
When scientists at the Savannah River Site were trying to figure out how to concentrate the waste, they experimented with a plan to add a chemical called tetraphenylborate to the tanks, to make cesium and strontium, two of the most intensely radioactive waste products in the liquids, fall to the bottom. The liquids would then be reduced in volume in an evaporator, and the resulting solids, which were not highly radioactive, would be mixed with cement. The solids would go to the glass factory.
But they discovered that copper and palladium already in the tanks were aiding in another reaction, one that produces benzene.
The chemical problems at Hanford are different, but experts there are worried by the problems at Savannah River.
Jerry Pollet, executive director of Heart of America Northwest, an environmental group, said that "from a management point of view, it raises a huge concern here."
The Energy Department signed a contract under which it promises to provide the wastes to a glass factory to be built by BNFL, and if it fails to deliver, Pollet said, it could pay large penalties.
---------------
18. Nuke Waste Site Safety Questioned June 2, 1999 Associated Press http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/a/AP-Yucca-Flooding.html
BOSTON (AP) -- Signs of ancient groundwater flooding at the proposed Yucca Mountain site for nuclear waste in Nevada could put the project's safety in question, a Russian scientist says.
Geologist Yuri Dublyansky of the Russian Academy of Sciences said Tuesday the flooding problem he found may be a ``potential show-stopper.''
Designers of the long-delayed project hope to seal off the radioactive waste underground for 10,000 years or more, when it will have decayed to safer levels.
James Paces, who has studied the site with the U.S. Geological Survey, challenged Dublyansky's conclusions. He said evidence indicates a seepage of rainwater, not water welling up from below.
The scientists spoke at a conference of the American Geophysical Union, a group of astrophysicists, geologists and other scientists.
The U.S. Energy Department is studying whether to bury spent, highly radioactive fuel from the nation's nuclear plants and weapons programs at Yucca Mountain, about 90 miles from Las Vegas.
Nationwide, more than 42,000 tons of lethal commercial waste is being kept at nuclear plants, mostly in cooling pools not designed for permanent safekeeping.
Yucca Mountain is the only site under consideration for permanent storage. The waste would be sealed in metal containers within rock tunnels about 1,000 feet underground and 1,000 feet above the water table. The site would begin operating in 2010 at the earliest.
Community concerns, politics and fears of earthquakes and water seepage have slowed progress. Government officials have acknowledged they cannot be certain the site will keep waste totally sealed for thousands of years. But they have said the site appears workable.
Dublyansky studied the formation of calcite mineral crystals beneath the mountain and said only groundwater could be responsible.
But Paces said other research indicates the crystals were formed by rainwater seepage. ``There's pretty good evidence that the repository was never saturated,'' he said.
---
Scientists: Potential Nev. Nuke Waste Site Stable
02:24 a.m. Jun 03, 1999 Eastern By Patrick Connole http://senghor.dogpile.com/texis/search?q=nuclear+OR+plutonium+OR+uranium+OR +radioactiv%3F%3F%3F&fs=nws&to=thirty
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Geological Survey scientists said Wednesday a proposed nuclear waste repository in Nevada is safe from flooding, furthering the case for making Yucca Mountain the nation's permanent waste site next decade.
USGS said three of its scientists presented the finding at a meeting of the American Geophysical Union in Boston.
``There is no evidence at Yucca Mountain, based on the distribution of calcite and opal, that water has ever flooded the potential repository area,'' said James Paces, one of the trio of USGS researchers who authored the report.
Late last year, the Department of Energy called the mountain a ``promising'' site for eventually storing 70,000 metric tons of spent radioactive fuel rods from nuclear power plants, and waste from production of nuclear weapons.
A final decision on whether to confirm Yucca Mountain as the final resting home for the nuclear waste is not due until 2001, after more scientific studies are completed.
Environmentalists and Nevada officials are concerned about the safety of Yucca Mountain. They fear possible radioactive seepage, earthquakes, and the security of waste delivery routes for trucks and trains to a site only 90 miles from Las Vegas.
But USGS scientists said they found slow growth rates for calcite and opal minerals that coat fractures and cavities in Yucca Mountain, attesting to the hydrological stability of the mountain for the past several million years.
Paces described cavities in the volcanic mountain's interior as being relatively free of such mineral deposits.
``If water had filled the cavities, minerals would have been deposited on the walls and ceilings as well,'' Paces said.
``Instead, our data indicate that the minerals formed from thin films of water flowing downward into open spaces.''
The long-term hydrologic stability of Yucca Mountain is an important factor in evaluating it as a potential site for storing nuclear waste, USGS said.
Yucca Mountain is comprised of a thick accumulation of 11 to 13 million-year-old volcanic rocks, some 1,600 to 2,300 feet of which are above the present-day water table.
USGS is the nation's largest water, earth and biological science and civilian mapping agency, working with more than 2,000 organizations to provide scientific information.
----------------
19. Avondale Nearing Shipbuilder Deal
By Alan Sayre AP Business Writer Tuesday, June 1, 1999; 6:36 p.m. EDT http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WAPO/19990601/V000011-060199-idx.html
NEW ORLEANS (AP) -- Avondale Industries Inc., a major Navy shipbuilder, is prepared to accept a $500 million cash buyout offer from defense contractor Litton Industries Inc., but is giving a rival bidder two days to top it.
Avondale, based in New Orleans, earlier agreed to merge with Newport News Shipbuilding in a $470 million stock swap deal. In a statement Tuesday, Avondale chairman Albert L. Bossier Jr. said the Litton offer, which amounts to $39.50 per share, is a better deal.
Avondale said it has given the Virginia-based Newport News 48 hours notice of its intention to go with the Litton deal.
Newport News had no comment on the announcement, said company spokeswoman Jerri Fuller Dickseski.
Joe Agular, an analyst who follows Avondale for New Orleans-based Johnson Rice & Co., said he expects Litton to be the buyer.
``I don't think Newport News is going to come with a higher offer, though I could be surprised,'' he said.
He also doesn't expect many layoffs, even though the merger would join two major Gulf Coast shipyards.
``The amount of work these companies both have is always going to be determined by the number of workers in their yards,'' Agular said. ``In the overhead -- the corporate administrative side -- there may be some. But I think it will be minimal.''
The Newport News-Avondale merger was apparently doomed Friday when Defense Secretary William Cohen said the Pentagon would probably tell the Justice Department to reject the Woodland Hills, Calif.-based Litton's $1.3 billion bid for Newport News for anti-competitive reasons.
At the same time, Cohen said the Navy had determined it would not oppose Litton's offer for Avondale.
Litton owns Ingalls Shipbuilding in Pascagoula, Miss. Litton made its bids for Avondale and Newport News earlier in May after Cohen rejected an attempt by General Dynamics Corp. to acquire Newport News.
On Friday, Cohen said that the Navy had made a ``preliminary determination'' that Litton's bid for Newport News would excessively limit competition in naval shipbuilding.
The Litton-Newport News deal would have reduced the number of companies competing to build most classes of Navy warships from three to two.
Newport News is the Navy's only builder of nuclear-powered aircraft carriers. Ingalls makes destroyers and other surface ships; Avondale specializes in auxiliary and amphibious craft. Ingalls and Avondale have competed for some defense contracts, as well as for building cruise ships.
In trading Tuesday, shares of Newport News rose 56 1/4 cents to $28.06 1/4 on the New York Stock Exchange. Shares of Litton rose 18 3/4 cents to $65.37 1/2 on the NYSE, while shares of Avondale rose $1.65 5/8 to $38.15 5/8 on the Nasdaq Stock Market.
______________________
- Fourth of seven messages - _____________________
_______________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________
Message: 7 Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 21:28:35 -0400
Subject: NucNews-2 6/03/99 - Y2K-Europe; India/Kashmir; UK Nuc Accident Dounreay; Dungeness; Sellafield
6. EU Worried About Y2K Hitting Nuclear Power Plants
05:36 a.m. Jun 03, 1999 Eastern, By Suzanne Perry (Reuters) http://senghor.dogpile.com/texis/search?q=nuclear+OR+plutonium+OR+uranium+OR +radioactiv%3F%3F%3F&fs=nws&to=thirty
BRUSSELS - The European Commission expressed alarm Wednesday about potential ``millennium bug'' disruptions in public services, saying it was especially worried about nuclear power plants in the former Soviet bloc.
The European Union executive said there was a lack of confidence that plants in Eastern Europe and the ex-Soviet Union had properly addressed safety and other concerns related to the Year 2000 (Y2K) computer problem.
But its report, which will be presented to EU leaders at their summit in Cologne this week, also cited a host of possible threats to public infrastructure within EU borders -- including electricity blackouts, breakdowns of wastewater pumping stations and overloading of telecoms networks with Y2K-related calls.
``There is a clear political responsibility of the public institutions at all levels to intensify work on the Y2K issue... and to pay particular attention to trans-border effects and contingency planning,'' it said.
The Commission's report examined whether Europe's public service suppliers were prepared to cope with the looming millennium bug -- the inability of some computers to process dates after December 31, 1999.
The EU executive, which sponsored a meeting of EU infrastructure providers in April, said reliable information was hard to get, but that some sectors in some countries were apparently not fully prepared for the date changeover.
``Every sector consistently reports that, in particular, smaller organizations continue to lag significantly behind large companies,'' it said. It did not name the countries it believed were less prepared.
The report expressed the most concern about nuclear installations in eastern Europe and the ex-Soviet states -- 50 power plants as well as research and other facilities.
It said the two main concerns were that the Y2K problem could cause on-site systems at power plants to fail, endangering safety, or create disruptions on electricity grids due to shutdowns of power stations or major users.
``The general view is there is a lack of confidence that the two main sources of concern have been appropriately checked (including contingency plans),'' it said.
The report noted that the International Atomic Energy Agency had already asked the Commission to support inspection missions to nuclear power plants in Kozloduy, Bulgaria; Zaporizhya, Ukraine; and a not-yet named location in Russia.
The Commission urged Bulgaria last month to close four Soviet-made nuclear reactors at Kozluduy earlier than planned, saying they posed a safety risk. The report said Y2K preparations by Western Europe's airline sector were well advanced, but risks connected to interactions with the EU's neighbors needed to more fully assessed.
It said the EU's financial sector was also generally well prepared but may have underestimated risks not directly associated with information system failures -- such as credit risks or liquidity problems.
----------------
7. India's Fernandes Sees No Nuclear Danger
Mon 31 May 22:08 Reuters News Service http://senghor.dogpile.com/texis/search?q=nuclear+OR+plutonium+OR+uranium+OR +radioactiv%3F%3F%3F&fs=nws&to=thirty
By Chaitanya Kalbag NEW DELHI - India's Defense Minister George Fernandes said Monday he was sure Pakistan's military chiefs would not resort to the use of nuclear weapons against India because they would ``liquidate'' their own country in the process.
Asked if the Kashmir fighting, the worst between the bitter neighbors in nearly three decades, might worsen into the use of their newly acquired nuclear weapons, Fernandes told Reuters in an interview:
``I am sure Pakistani generals may have other ideas about themselves but I don't think they are also longing to liquidate their whole country,'' Fernandes said.
``I am sure (Pakistan's) military men may have their ambitions in terms of being partners in power, but I am sure they are also sensible people when it comes to nuclear weapons because a nuclear weapon is not just killing your enemy but also killing yourself.''
Fernandes, who toured Kashmir's frontier areas Sunday, drew a graphic picture of the fighting over the past three weeks to evict hundreds of heavily armed militants who have dug themselves into high ridges in India's Drass, Kargil and Batalik sectors.
He said Indian soldiers were taking out infiltrators' pockets ``hill by hill,'' sometimes in hand-to-hand combat, in difficult high-altitude terrain on India's side of a cease-fire line, the Line of Control, which divides Kashmir.
He said on May 6, as the snow began to melt in Kashmir's high passes, a shepherd tending his flock tipped off authorities he had sighted some ``foreign elements...(who) looked like people who are here for some mischief.''
Two Indian army patrols were sent to investigate on May 8 and 10. Both were ambushed by the militants, who had taken position behind ``sangars'' or walls built with boulders atop ridges. India began to pour men and materiel into the area on May 10.
Its air force began to strafe militant positions on May 26, and now that rebel targets have been ``softened'' the Indian army has launched a fierce ground campaign, Fernandes said.
``Even while this operation of going hill by hill and flushing them out is on, our troops have also moved to the rear and have established positions there in order to cut the exit points and also prevent any kind of supplies from coming in.
``It is the terrain which is the biggest problem. The terrain enabled these people to come and it is the terrain which will take some extra effort to see that these fellows are flushed out.''
Fernandes said neither India nor Pakistan had bothered to set up permanent sentry posts in the areas now swarming with infiltrators because of the inhospitable terrain.
``Because you are here in glaciated mountain terrain, heights ranging between 14,000 to 17,000 feet (4,270 and 5,180 meters), and therefore over the years both sides had chosen by tacit understanding...(to not) run into each other's territory here.''
But the infiltration by about 700 men from the Pakistan side was a ``very well-planned operation,'' Fernandes said. ``It is not something that has suddenly happened.''
He said India believed the intrusions took place in April after snow had melted from the points of ingress. ''In Chorbatla and Drass there has been hand-to-hand combat, because ... our soldiers have gone up by rope to reach the points where these fellows are dug in.
``As of this morning our army's total casualties were 43 killed and 173 wounded and 12 missing including three officers. The air force has lost five killed including three officers. About 320 militants along with 150 Pakistani regular soldiers have been killed in the operations,'' Fernandes said.
He said he would like to bring the air and ground offensive against the infiltrators to a quick end.
But Fernandes, who flew over the combat zones Sunday, said: ''One could see the magnitude of the task our soldiers face at the moment. I wouldn't fix any time frame.
``What we have seen in the past 15-20 days is the reality on the ground which is we are in very mountainous territory...and therefore the fight for each of these mountaintops calls for a lot of effort. There aren't even mule tracks in that area.''
He said the Pakistan-backed infiltrators had been pushed back in ``all sectors.''
``We have been using both air power and all our firepower and all said and done they are sitting on the top up there with no place to escape, to that extent they are easy targets too.''
He said the infiltrators were a mix of regular Pakistani soldiers, ``some of them in uniformDi; Kashmiri separatists based in Pakistan; tribesmen from Pakistan's Baltistan region; and Afghan mercenaries. ``This is the broad profile of the intruders.''
---
Kashmir, the Imperiled Paradise
By SALMAN RUSHDIE, June 3, 1999 New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/oped/03rush.html
LONDON -- For more than 50 years, India and Pakistan have been arguing and periodically coming to blows over one of the most beautiful places in the world, Kashmir, which the Mughal emperors thought of as Paradise on earth. As a result of this unending quarrel, Paradise has been partitioned, impoverished and made violent. Murder and terrorism now stalk the valleys and mountains of a land once so famous for its peacefulness that outsiders made jokes about the Kashmiris' supposed lack of fighting spirit.
I have a particular interest in the Kashmir issue because I am more than half Kashmiri myself, because I have loved the place all my life and because I have spent much of that life listening to successive Indian and Pakistani governments, all of them more or less venal and corrupt, mouthing the self-serving hypocrisies of power while ordinary Kashmiris suffered the consequences of their posturings.
Pity those ordinary, peaceable people, caught between the rock of India and the hard place that Pakistan has always been!
And, as the world's newest nuclear powers square off yet again, their new weapons making their dialogue of the deaf more dangerous than ever before, I say, A plague on both their houses. "Kashmir for the Kashmiris" is an old slogan, but the only one that expresses how the subjects of this dispute have always felt; how, I believe, the majority of them would still say they feel, if they were free to speak their minds without fear.
India has badly mishandled the Kashmir case from the beginning. Back in 1947 the state's Hindu maharaja "opted" for India, and in spite of United Nations resolutions supporting the largely Muslim population's right to a plebiscite, India's leaders have always rejected the idea, repeating over and over that Kashmir is "an integral part" of India. (The Nehru-Gandhi dynasty is itself of Kashmiri origin.)
India has maintained a large standing military presence in Kashmir for decades, both in the Vale of Kashmir where most of the population is based and in mountain fastnesses like the site of the present flashpoint. This force feels to most Kashmiris like an occupying army and is greatly resented.
Yet until recently the generality of Indians, even the liberal intelligentsia, refused to face up to the reality of Kashmiris' growing animosity toward them. As a result, the problem has grown steadily worse, greatly exacerbated by laws that threatened long jail sentences for any Kashmiri making anti-Indian statements in public.
Pakistan, for its part, has from its earliest times been a heavily militarized state, dominated by the army even when under notionally civilian rule and spending a huge part of its budget -- at its peak, around half the total budgetary expenditure -- on its armed forces. Such spending, and the consequent might of the generals, depends on having a dangerous enemy to defend against and a "hot" cause to pursue.
It has therefore always been in the interest of Pakistan's top brass to frustrate peacemaking initiatives toward India and to keep the Kashmir dispute alive. This, and not the alleged interests of Kashmiris, is what lies behind Pakistan's policy on the issue.
These days, in addition, the Pakistani authorities are under pressure from their country's mullahs and radical Islamists, who characterize the struggle to "liberate" (that is, to seize) Kashmir as a holy war. But Kashmiri Islam has always been of the mild, Sufistic variety, in which local pirs, holy men, are revered as saints. This open-hearted, tolerant Islam is anathema to the firebrands of Pakistan and might well, under Pakistani rule, be at risk.
Thus, the present-day growth of terrorism in Kashmir has roots in India's treatment of Kashmiris, but it has equally deep roots in Pakistan's interest in subversion. Yes, Kashmiris feel strongly about the Indian "occupation" of their land; but it is also almost certainly true that Pakistan's army and intelligence service have been training, aiding and abetting the men of violence.
The fact that India and Pakistan possess nuclear weapons makes urgent the need to move beyond the deadlock and the moribund 50-year-old language of the crisis. What Kashmiris want, and what India and Pakistan must be persuaded to offer them, is a reunited land, an end to Lines of Control and warfare on high Himalayan glaciers. What they want is to be given a large degree of autonomy; to be allowed to run their own lives.
The Kashmir dispute has already exposed the frailty of the cold war theory of nuclear deterrence, according to which the extreme danger of nuclear arsenals should deter those who possess them from embarking even on a conventional war. That thesis now seems untenable. It was probably not deterrence that prevented the cold war from turning hot, but luck.
So here we are in a newly dangerous world, in which nuclear powers actually are going to war. In such a time, it is essential that the special-case status of Kashmir be recognized and used as the basis of the way forward. The Kashmir problem must be defused once and for all, or else, in the unthinkable worst-case scenario, it may end in the nuclear destruction of Paradise itself, and of much else besides.
Salman Rushdie is the author of "The Satanic Verses," "The Moor's Last Sigh" and, most recently, "The Ground Beneath Her Feet."
----------------
8. UK - Nuclear workers monitored after fire Firefighters were called to a uranium fire at Dounreay May 28, 1999 BBC http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid%5F354000/354543.stm
Five workers at the Dounreay nuclear plant are being monitored for possible radioactive contamination after a fire at the plant.
The five had been handling a package of uranium waste when it ignited and firefighters were called in to extinguish the blaze.
A spokesman for the north of Scotland plant said the five workers were in a waste handling area of the plant when the fire broke out in a small package containing what was described as "low level waste".
"The area was immediately evacuated but has now been re-entered to confirm that the fire is extinguished and the situation is now under control," he said.
However, he added: "Although there is no evidence of contamination, as a precaution the five staff involved will be checked to confirm that there was no intake of radioactivity."
And checks may be extended to other people at the plant "as necessary".
The Government last year announced plans to wind down the plant, which has been dogged by a string of controversial incidents over the past 18 months.
In May 1998, the Government's environmental watchdog in Scotland announced it was to curb radioactive pollution levels at Dounreay.
The Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (Sepa) acted after Dounreay officials admitted miscalculating radiation levels.
They revealed that levels of radioactivity at Dounreay over the previous six months had been up to 10 times higher than those reported. But they stressed they were still well below authorised limits.
Safety review
In May 1998, the Health and Safety Executive revealed a sweeping safety review of the Dounreay plant.
The inquiry followed an incident when a digger cut through electrical cables, paralysing the plant after the emergency supply also failed, prompting concerns about the control of the plant. And in June 1998, the UK Atomic Energy Authority admitted that 170kg of weapons-grade enriched uranium had disappeared from Dounreay - enough to make a dozen atomic bombs. The loss of the uranium was discovered a few months after the Government announced that a contaminated waste shaft would need cleaning up in a 25-year operation costing up to £355 million.
Anti-Dounreay campaigner Lorraine Mann said the only explanation for the incident was "incompetence" and said it reinforced the case for ending all nuclear activity at the plant.
Photos: http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/350000/images/_354543_dounreay300.jpg http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/350000/images/_354543_dounreay150.gif
Relevant Stories
UK New nuclear scare at Dounreay 23 Dec 98 | http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_241000/241649.stm
UK More scientists for Dounreay 30 Nov 98 | http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_224000/224520.stm
UK Strategy for 'unsafe' Dounreay 30 Nov 98 | http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_224000/224520.stm
UK Experts question safety at nuclear plant 01 Sep 98 | http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_162000/162330.stm
Health Dounreay under the microscope 31 Aug 98 | http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/health/newsid_161000/161686.stm
UK Politics MPs criticise Dounreay 'secrecy' 28 Jul 98 | http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk_politics/newsid_140000/140949.stm
UK Politics Government urged to abandon reprocessing 22 Jul 98 | http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk_politics/newsid_137000/137275.stm
UK Greenpeace outcry over Brent Spar waste 12 Jul 98 | http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_131000/131466.stm
---
9. Nuclear power station oil leak [Dungeness B]
31 Jul 98 | UK http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_143000/143031.stm
Dungeness B nuclear power station is investigating a suspect diesel fuel leak just months after losing 190,000 litres of oil into the ground from a cracked pipe.
News of the latest scare came as the Environment Agency announced it was taking legal action against the power station for polluting the environment.
Many of the fuel pipes at the Kent station are around 20 years old.
Experts believe a pipe at an auxiliary boiler is leaking but do not know the extent of the damage.
They came across a fracture while checking hundreds of miles of piping following the January disaster.
A clean-up operation to remove that oil from the ground is still continuing and two drinking water boreholes in the area remain closed as a precaution.
Environment Agency spokesman Ray Kemp said there was no reason to believe either incident had contaminated water supplies in the area.
But he added: ''We're extremely concerned bearing in mind the enormous potential for damage from the earlier incident.''
Bob Fenton spokesman for British Energy which runs Dungeness B said: ''It's obviously worrying to have any kind of leak of oil.
''We're checking hundreds of miles of piping and we're fairly certain there are no further leaks. There will be a lot of lessons to be learnt.''
Oil experts are cleaning up the first spillage at the rate of about 1,000 litres a day. They have so far recovered 58,000 litres.
Mr Fenton said the fuel had been trapped underground so it had not gone to sea or damaged plant life.
The Environment Agency is preparing to prosecute the station under the Environment Protection Act. The maximum fine at a Magistrate's Court is £20,000.
Dungeness B, built in 1983, has two reactors producing 1,100 megawatts of electricity a day.
It has just passed its safety review allowing it to continue operating for another ten years.
Relevant Stories
UK Politics Government condemned for energy policy "failure" 09 Jun 98 | http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk_politics/newsid_109000/109590.stm
UK Dounreay 'lost enough uranium for 12 bombs' 02 Jun 98 | http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_105000/105298.stm
UK Dounreay's £200m clean-up 31 Mar 98 | http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_72000/72030.stm
UK Sellafield pigeons radioactive hazard - Greenpeace 12 Mar 98 | http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_64000/64833.stm
----------------
10. Health -- Study lifts nuclear industry cancer fears
May 27, 1999 Published at 23:54 GMT 00:54 UK http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/health/newsid%5F354000/354560.stm
People living around Sellafield are suspicious about health risks
Children of workers at nuclear plants are no more likely to develop cancers, a study has concluded.
Researchers examined the medical histories of 46,107 children, one of whose parents was working at either the Sellafield nuclear plant, or those at Aldermaston in Berkshire, or Dounreay in Scotland.
Overall, they found the proportion of these children who developed leukaemia, or Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma, was the same as in society at large.
Writing in the British Medical Journal, they say they discovered some evidence that children whose parent had been exposed to relatively high doses of radiation before their conception had a higher risk of developing cancer.
However, this involved just three cases out of 111, and was dismissed as "statistically insignificant" by the report's author, Dr Eve Roman, from the Leukaemia Research Fund.
'Reassuring findings'
She said: "These are very reassuring findings. No unusual cancer patterns were evident."
But Janine Alliss-Smith, from pressure group Cumbria Opposed to a Radiactive Environment (CORE), said that the new research changed nothing, and if anything, supported the orginal study which linked cancer to radioactivity.
She said: "We have always been talking about very small numbers of cases and British Nuclear Fuels should now order more research on the issue."
Cluster of cases near plant
The link between radiation and childhood cancer was first suggested after a "cluster" of leukaemia cases in the village of Seascale, which is only a few miles from the Sellafield plant, which reprocesses spent nuclear fuel.
A report by Professor Martin Gardner hypothesised that as many of the families involved were connected with the plant, radiation exposure before conception was the cause.
British Nuclear Fuels have always staunchly denied the link, and a spokesman said that the comprehensive new research simply confirmed the findings of more than one piece of research published since Prof Gardner's work.
He said: "People were saying: 'The leukaemia cluster must have something to do with Sellafield, mustn't it?'."
"But now three studies since then have said there is no support for Gardner's theories."
He added that the majority of workers living in Seascale were white-collar office staff who were unlikely to have been exposed to doses of radiation.
Similar allegations about cancer "clusters" had been made about the Weapons Research Establishment at Aldermaston and the atomic reactor at Dounreay in Northern Scotland.
Photo Sellafield: http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/350000/images/_354560_300sellafield.jpg
Relevant Stories
[This one got to me - it couldn't be the plutonium from Sellafield, it must be the diesel fumes or paint....]
Health Boats blamed for leukaemia 19 Apr 99 | http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/health/newsid_323000/323289.stm
Cloned embryos 'could treat leukaemia' 31 Mar 99 | Health http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/health/newsid_308000/308341.stm
Health Uranium blamed for Gulf War Syndrome 02 Feb 99 | http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/health/newsid_270000/270800.stm
Internet Links
Leukaemia information http://www.patient.org.uk/cancer.htm
British Nuclear Fuels PLC http://www.bnfl.com/ns-home.html
Health Effects of high-level radiation exposure http://radefx.bcm.tmc.edu/ionizing/subject/risk/acute.htm
British Medical Journal http://www.bmj.com
______________________
- Second of seven messages - _____________________
_______________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________
Message: 8 Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 21:29:55 -0400
Subject: NucNews-7 6/03/99 - Kosovo UN report; Serbia ok peace plan; Gunmakers Lawsuit; Cuban lawsuit
30. 'Rampage' Of Terror Is Cited U.N. Team Reports On Visit to Kosovo
Reuters Thursday, June 3, 1999; Page A21 Washington Post http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1999-06/03/146l-060399-idx.html
UNITED NATIONS, June 2--The first U.N. humanitarian mission to Kosovo reported today that it found indisputable evidence in the rebellious Serbian province of "organized, well-planned violence against civilians aimed at displacing and permanently deporting them."
The leader of the team, Undersecretary General Sergio Vieira de Mello, said in an oral report to the Security Council that this calls for "urgent independent investigation" of what has happened since Yugoslav troops moved beginning in March to crush a secessionist revolt and drive out the ethnic Albanians who formed a population base for the rebel Kosovo Liberation Army.
Vieira de Mello dismissed the Yugoslav government's explanations for violence in Kosovo, saying all the arguments "cannot account for, explain or justify the extent and magnitude of the brutal treatment of civilian populations." Yugoslav authorities have said much of the brutality came from out-of-control militia groups.
"Even allowing for spontaneous uncontrolled brutality, the team collected indisputable evidence of organized, well-planned violence against civilians, aimed at displacing and permanently deporting them," he said, according to his speaking notes. He said the accounts of witnesses are consistent that the period from March 24 -- when NATO air attacks on Yugoslavia began -- to April 10 "saw a rampage of killing, burning, looting, forced expulsions, violence, vendetta and terror."
Vieira de Mello, whose team recently returned from visiting several areas of Yugoslavia, said the mission's freedom of movement in Kosovo was "more than expected but less than requested." He said the mission, which included representatives from a dozen U.N. humanitarian agencies, was able to make random stops and unscheduled spot checks.
---
THE EVIDENCE U.N. Finds Proof Evidence of 'Ethnic Cleansing' in Kosovo
June 3, 1999 New York Times, By JUDITH MILLER http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/europe/060399kosovo-un.html
UNITED NATIONS -- The leader of a U.N. mission to Kosovo has found what he called "indisputable evidence" of Serbian "ethnic cleansing" of Kosovars, as well as "ample evidence" of "serious" damage caused by NATO's airstrikes.
In a report to the Security Council, Sergio Vierira de Mello, the U.N. undersecretary-general and the emergency relief coordinator, warned Wednesday that the problems of the people inside Kosovo and Yugoslavia would "dramatically deteriorate unless the conflict is soon brought to an end."
"Even the most basic rehabilitation of shelter and essential services will require colossal efforts and resources" and needs to begin soon, de Mello concluded in a written summary of his oral report to the Council, which was released here Wednesday.
"Even allowing for spontaneous, uncontrolled brutality, the team collected indisputable evidence of organized, well-planned violence against civilians," he wrote in the summary.
De Mello and the representatives of 12 U.N. relief organizations and private relief groups traveled more than 1500 miles in an 11-day trip to gather information. He reported that his team found "a depressing panorama of empty villages, burned houses, looted shops, wandering livestock and unattended farms." Signs that the inhabitants had "fled on very short notice, probably in terror, was the most disturbing finding," he wrote.
He also singled out the plight of 500,000 Serb refugees from Croatia and Bosnia, who, he said in remarks to reporters after the Council meeting, were living in what he called "subhuman conditions."
The Russian and American representatives praised de Mello's report.
------------------
31. Serbian Assembly OKs Peace Plan--Deputies
Updated 7:09 AM ET June 3, 1999 (Reuters) http://webcrawler-news.excite.com/news/r/990603/07/news-yugoslavia-plan-accept
BELGRADE - Serbia's parliament Thursday accepted an international peace plan for Kosovo after a "big row," a deputy said.
"The Serb assembly accepted the agreement proposed by NATO and the EU in total, no excuse, no exception," Dragan Veselinov, a leader of the small Vojvodina coalition, told Reuters. Another deputy said the ultra-nationalist Radical Party had virulently opposed the plan. "There was a big row. The majority voted in favor of the peace plan, the Radicals voted against," he said.
"The Radicals voted against it but they are in a minority so peace will come," Veselinov said.
The Radical Party, led by Serbian Deputy Prime Minister Vojslav Seselj, holds 82 seats in the 250-seat parliament.
"The Radicals were very noisy and they even threatened to beat up some members of the Serbian Renewal Movement," said the other deputy.
"We were told that this vote today represented an initial step for further procedures to agree on details," a deputy from Milosevic's ruling Socialist Party told Reuters.
---
Yugoslavia Accepts Peace Plan 10:02 a.m. EDT June 3, 1999, Associated Press http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/i/AP-Yugoslavia-Kosovo.html
BELGRADE, Yugoslavia -- After more than 2 1/2 months of NATO airstrikes, Slobodan Milosevic's government today accepted an international peace plan, capitulating on Western demands to end the Kosovo conflict.
---
THE PENTAGON U.S. Military Chiefs Firm: No Ground Force for Kosovo
June 3, 1999 New York Times, By STEVEN LEE MYERS http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/europe/060399kosovo-pentagon.html
WASHINGTON -- On the eve of their first meeting with President Clinton since NATO's air war against Yugoslavia began, the Pentagon's senior commanders remain strongly opposed to mounting a ground invasion to drive Yugoslav forces from Kosovo, defense officials said Wednesday.
Even though 10 weeks of air and missile strikes have not forced President Slobodan Milosevic to bend to NATO's demands, the senior commanders, including the chairman and vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, believe there is insufficient domestic and international political support for sending ground troops into Kosovo, the officials said. Among Pentagon strategists there are strong reservations about an invasion that could quickly become mired in the Balkans with no clear exit in sight.
The chairman, Gen. Henry Shelton, and the vice chairman, Gen. Joseph Ralston, along with the chiefs of the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps, are to meet Clinton at the White House on Thursday afternoon. Although the meeting was previously scheduled as one of the president's periodic sessions with the nation's senior officers, the war in the Balkans is expected to dominate the discussions.
Secretary of Defense William Cohen, who will also attend, said Wednesday that he expected the discussion to cover "a full range" of issues facing the American military and NATO, including "questions about whether or not there would be any kind of ground option for a nonpermissive environment."
But he emphasized that there was no plan "under any active consideration" for anything beyond the peacekeeping force of 48,000 that NATO has said it would send into Kosovo once a settlement was reached.
"There is a consensus for a strong air operation in the NATO countries," Cohen said Wednesday after a ceremony welcoming Kuwait's defense minister to the Pentagon. "There is not a consensus for a ground operation in a nonpermissive environment. So we intend to focus on the positive."
NATO's commander, Gen. Wesley Clark, has urged the Pentagon and NATO to at least begin planning for a ground invasion because of a timetable that would require deployment in the summer if such a huge force is to return the refugees before winter sets in.
But the prospect of ground troops is so remote to the Pentagon's senior military officers that it was not specifically listed on their agenda for the meeting. Administration officials said, however, that they did expect a preliminary discussion on the option of a ground war.
The discussion on Kosovo is expected to focus on the progress of the air campaign and the larger impact the war has had on the four military services and their budgets.
The chiefs of the Army, Navy and Air Force and the commandant of the Marine Corps oversee the administration of their services, including their budgets, personnel and weapons, but they do not command any forces. That responsibility, along with drawing up war plans, rests with the nation's regional military commanders, overseen by the staff of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs.
From the start, the chiefs have expressed reservations about NATO's strategy and ever deeper misgivings about the prospects of an invasion, which would require thousands of troops and would risk significant casualties. On the 71st day of the air campaign, those views have not changed, the officials said.
"I don't think there's anybody among the chiefs saying, 'By God, if we don't invade Kosovo, it will be a travesty,"' one official said.
Although Clinton ruled out the use of ground troops when the air war began on March 24, he has since modified the administration's public position to leave open all military options.
For the first time Wednesday, the administration tried to play down the idea that winter's approach was creating a timetable that would force a decision on ground troops relatively soon, as Clark and Pentagon and NATO commanders have said.
"There is no deadline for any of these plans," the Pentagon's spokesman, Kenneth Bacon, said Wednesday. "We know how to deploy troops in the winter. We've proven that in Bosnia before. We certainly know how to operate in the winter."
Even though NATO's secretary-general, Javier Solana, said the alliance's goal was to return the hundreds of thousands of refugees from Kosovo to their homes before winter, the United States and its allies have already begun preparing to make the camps in Albania and Macedonia habitable through the cold months.
On the Joint Staff and among the chiefs, there is agreement, officials said, that if diplomacy fails to produce a settlement, the alliance will simply continue bombing. "Winterization of the camps will enable this to go right on into the winter if that is required," Shelton said last week.
Although some senior commanders have doubts, others believe the air war might still force Milosevic to accept NATO's conditions and withdraw the Yugoslav forces from Kosovo.
NATO aircraft flew 197 strike missions in Yugoslavia overnight Tuesday, including 150 in the area around Mount Pastrik on the Kosovo-Albanian border, where Kosovo Liberation Army guerrillas are engaged in fierce fighting with Yugoslav forces. The attacks continued Wednesday, according to the command.
"If we continue to pound away throughout the summer at the rate we are going now," a senior diplomat said, "we'll eliminate a lot more Serbian ground forces. Milosevic has to decide whether to cash in his chips now, or go on and risk losing a lot more."
---
US Cautious on Belgrade Acceptance Top News Article at 10:50 a.m. June 3, 1999, Associated Press http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/i/AP-US-Kosovo.html
WASHINGTON -- The Clinton administration reacted cautiously today to Yugoslavia's reported acceptance of a peace plan for Kosovo. ``It's a hopeful sign, but we need to see more'' details, said Pentagon spokesman Kenneth Bacon.
---
Developments in Kosovo Crisis 10:22 a.m. EDT Associated Press http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/i/AP-Kosovo-Developments.html
Latest developments in the Kosovo crisis today:
-- Yugoslav government accepts a Western-backed peace plan to resolve the Kosovo crisis and allow the return of more than 850,000 ethnic Albanians to the province in southern Serbia. Earlier, Serb lawmakers in Belgrade overwhelmingly approve the peace plan.
-- A text of the plan given to Serb lawmakers indicates Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic was forced to accept several NATO terms -- including a quick withdrawal of army and Serb troops from Kosovo and the deployment of an international security force.
-- Russian Premier Viktor Chernomyrdin and Finnish President Martti Ahtisaari meet with Milosevic before and after the Serbian parliament vote. Milosevic's acceptance of the plan is announced after the second meeting.
-- The United States and NATO reserve immediate comment, saying they will wait to hear from Ahtisaari, expected to brief U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott in Bonn, Germany.
--------
NATO's Actions Likened to Hitler's
Filed at 12:05 a.m. EDT June 3, 1999, Associated Press
MOSCOW (AP) -- Alexander Solzhenitsyn, the Russian writer and Nobel Peace Prize laureate, said Wednesday that NATO's bombardment of Yugoslavia was morally no different than Hitler's actions.
``I don't see any difference in the behavior of NATO and of Hitler,'' he was quoted as saying by the Interfax news agency.
``NATO wants to erect its own order in the world, and it needs Yugoslavia simply as an example: `We'll punish Yugoslavia, and the whole rest of the planet will tremble,''' he told reporters.
Solzhenitsyn spoke after being presented with the Lomonosov gold medal for his contribution to literature and history at Russia's Academy of Sciences. The academy had announced that it would give the medal to Solzhenitsyn in December, on the writer's 80th birthday.
Solzhenitsyn was held in Soviet prison camps for eight years, and he turned his experiences into his life's work: books including ``One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich'' and the three-volume ``Gulag Archipelago,'' which chronicled the atrocities in the Soviet Union's prison camps.
He was exiled from the Soviet Union in 1974 and returned to Russia only 20 years later. ---
32. Main Points of Kosovo Peace Plan
9:49 a.m. EDT June 3, 1999, Associated Press http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/i/AP-Yugoslavia-Peace-Text.html
BELGRADE, Yugoslavia (AP) -- Key points of the Kosovo peace plan approved by the Serb government and parliament today. A copy of the plan was obtained by The Associated Press from parliamentary sources.
The text was in Serbian and translated by the AP:
``In order to move forward toward solving the Kosovo crisis, an agreement should be reached on the following principles:
``1: Imminent and verifiable end to violence and repression of Kosovo.
``2. Verifiable withdrawal from Kosovo of military, police and paramilitary forces according to a quick timetable.
``3. Deployment in Kosovo, under U.N. auspicies, of efficient international civilian and security presences which would act as can be decided according to Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter and be capable of guaranteeing fulfillment of joint goals.
``4. International security presence, with an essential NATO participation, must be deployed under a unified control and command and authorized to secure safe environment for all the residents in Kosovo and enable the safe return of the displaced persons and refugees to their homes.
``5. Establishment of an interim administration for Kosovo ... which the U.N. Security Council will decide and under which the people of Kosovo will enjoy substantial autonomy within the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia . The interim administration (will) secure transitional authority during the time (for the) interim democratic and self-governing institutions, (establish) conditions for peaceful and normal life of all citizens of Kosovo.
``6. After the withdrawal, an agreed number of Serb personnel will be allowed to return to perform the following duties: liaison with the international civilian mission and international security presence, marking mine fields, maintaining a presence at places of Serb heritage, maintaining a presence at key border crossings.
``7. Safe and free return of all refugees and the displaced under the supervision of UNHCR and undisturbed access for humanitarian organizations to Kosovo.
``8. Political process directed at reaching interim political agreement which would secure essential autonomy for Kosovo, with full taking into consideration of the Rambouillet agreement, the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and other states in the region as well as demilitarization of the Kosovo Liberation Army. The talks between the sides about the solution should not delay or disrupt establishment of the democratic self-governning institutions.
``9. General approach to the economic development of the crisis region. That would include carrying out a pact of stability for southeastern Europe, wide international participation in order to advance democracy and economic prosperity, and stability and regional cooperation.
``10. The end of military activities will depend on acceptance of the listed principles and simultaneous agreement with other previously identified elements which are identified in the footnote below. Then a military-technical agreement will be agreed which will among other things specify additional modalities, including the role and function of the Yugoslav, i.e. Serb, personnel in Kosovo.
``11. The process of withdrawal includes a phased, detailed timetable and the marking of a buffer zone in Serbia behind which the troops will withdraw.
``12. The returning personnel: The equipment of the returning personnel, the range of their functional responsibilities, the timetable for their return, determination of the geographic zones of their activity, the rules guiding their relations with the international security presence and the international civilian mission.
``Footnote. Other required elements: Fast and precise timetable for the withdrawal which means for instance: seven days to end the withdrawal; pulling out of weapons of air defense from the zone of the mutual security of 25 kilometers within 48 hours; return of the personnel to fullfill the four duties will be carried out under the supervision of the international security presence and will be limited to a small agreed number -- hundreds, not thousands.
``Suspension of military actions will happen after the beginning of the withdrawal which can be verified. Discussion about the military-technical agreement and its reaching will not prolong the agreed period for the withdrawal.''
-----------
33. Lawsuit Filed Against Gunmakers
June 3, 1999, Associated Press http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/a/AP-Gun-Lawsuit.html
CAMDEN, N.J. (AP) -- Camden County has joined the list of governments suing the gun industry to recover costs stemming from handgun violence.
The lawsuit does not specify a damage amount, but officials said Wednesday that the county has spent millions cleaning up the damage wrought by firearms.
The county, the first local government to file such a suit in the state, wants to recoup part of the cost of running offices for the prosecutor, sheriff and medical examiner, and the juvenile detention center and county jail, officials said.
The lawsuit, filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court, also seeks to compel the gun industry to use so-called ``smart gun'' technology, rendering guns inoperable by anyone except the registered owner.
Last year, 30 people were killed by handguns in Camden County, across the Delaware River from Philadelphia.
The lawsuit names 21 gun manufacturers, and also includes 20 ``John Doe'' manufacturers, distributors and dealers whose names are not yet known.
Nearly a dozen municipal or county governments have sued, including New Orleans, Chicago, Miami and Dade County, Fla.; Bridgeport, Conn.; Atlanta; Cleveland; Detroit and Wayne County, Mich.; and Cincinnati.
-----------
34. Cuban Lawsuit Seeks $181B From U.S.
June 1, 1999 By The Associated Press http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/i/AP-Cuba-US-Demand.html
HAVANA (AP) -- Cuban officials have filed a lawsuit demanding $181 billion from the U.S. government for damages that Cuba says it has suffered in U.S. attacks over the last four decades, the Communist Party daily Granma reported Tuesday.
The lawsuit filed Monday on behalf of women's, small farmers and other groups was in response to a U.S. federal court judge's demand that the Cuban government pay the families of three of four civilian pilots killed in a shootdown off the island's coast in 1996.
The tribunal said that the U.S. government had caused far more death and damage with incursions into Cuban territory and attacks on diplomatic missions and aircraft in the last 40 years.
The tribunal said the $181 billion was the total cost of damages suffered by the families of 3,478 Cubans killed and another 2,099 left disabled.
Many of the attacks date back to the 1960s, including the ill-fated assault on the Bay of Pigs in 1961 by a group of Cuban exiles. The most recent attacks mentioned were the bombing of several Havana hotels in 1997 by a pair of Salvadorans, who the Cuban government claims were recruited by U.S. exiles.
In December 1997, U.S. District Court Judge Lawrence King in Miami demanded that the Cuban government pay a bit more than $187 million to the relatives of pilots Armando Alejandre, Carlos Alberto Costa and Mario de la Pena.
The three men died on Feb. 24, 1996, when their two planes were shot down by Cuban MiGs while on a flight whose stated aim was to search for rafters leaving Cuba. The island's government maintains that the planes violated Cuban airspace and even flew over land to scatter political pamphlets.
Miami-based Brothers to the Rescue, the organization the men belonged to, has denied that Cuban airspace was violated. The dead men's families sought damages under a new U.S. law that allows survivors to sue countries labeled by the American government as terrorist states.
A fourth man, Pablo Morales, wasn't a U.S. citizen, and his relatives weren't eligible to sue under the terrorism law.
The families want to be paid from Cuban assets frozen by the U.S. government. But it has proved difficult for the families to collect damages from the Cuban government.
The Cuban tribunal's demand, published as a separate supplement in Granma, said Cuba assigned the value of about $40 million to each person killed, whereas the U.S. judge used an average value of more than $62 million for each of the three lives lost in the shootdown.
______________________
- Seventh of seven messages - _____________________
_______________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________
Message: 9 Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 21:28:15 -0400
Subject: NucNews-1 6/03/99 - DU-Puerto Rico (2); DU-BBC; China/Korea; Tiananmen
1. Navy Admits Firing Uranium Shells
By Michelle Faul, Associated Press, June 2, 1999 http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WAPO/19990602/V000509-060299-idx.html
SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico (AP) -- The U.S. Navy headquarters in Puerto Rico says it has belatedly discovered that uranium-tipped shells were illegally fired at its range on an outlying island.
The Feb. 19 firing of 267 shells -- of which only 57 were recovered -- has raised new public health concerns and bolstered calls for the Navy to stop its exercises on Vieques island.
Vieques already has more than twice the average cancer rate of Puerto Rico, and politicians have long blamed the Navy's activities there.
Navy spokesman Roberto Nelson said Tuesday the Roosevelt Roads Naval Station was notified of the mishap March 5 and could not explain the two-week delay.
``Those are the same questions we are asking, too, and that is part of the investigation,'' he told the Associated Press.
Puerto Rican officials have claimed they were not notified about the firings at all. The Navy insists Puerto Rico was told.
It is against federal and local laws as well as Navy regulations to fire depleted uranium at the firing range at Vieques, an island the Navy has used to practice war games since the 1940s. NATO allies also practice on the 22-mile-long island, home to 9,300 residents.
Nelson said the shells were mistakenly loaded into a Marine Harrier jet from the Norfolk, Va.-based USS Kearsarge, which is currently participating in the NATO bombardment of Yugoslavia.
Last week, when news of the firings was reported by the Puerto Rico Independence Party, Nelson said it had occurred in early March and that the Navy had called in experts for a cleanup within two days.
But the Nuclear Regulatory Commission told the AP that the shells were fired Feb. 19 -- a date the Navy confirmed Tuesday.
A spokesman for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Roger Hannah, said the commission agreed there was ``virtually no risk to health and safety'' because the firing range was a restricted military zone and depleted uranium has low radiation levels.
But opponents said explosions of the shells throw particles of depleted uranium into the air that can travel for miles.
Ingested particles can cause up to 1,000 times the damage of an X-ray, said Mary Olson, a nuclear waste specialist and biologist at the Nuclear Information and Resource Service in Washington D.C.
Sen. Eudaldo Baez Galib of the opposition Popular Democratic Party said Tuesday that all residents of eastern Puerto Rico should be medically tested because of prevailing winds.
He added that a wind shift could carry the particles to the nearby U.S. Virgin Islands.
---
Uranium bullets fired in error in Puerto Rico (Reuters)
06:21 p.m Jun 02, 1999 Eastern, By Patricia Zengerle http://senghor.dogpile.com/texis/search?q=nuclear+OR+plutonium+OR+uranium+OR +radioactiv%3F%3F%3F&fs=nws&to=thirty
MIAMI, June 2 - U.S. Marines mistakenly fired uranium bullets at a Navy facility in Puerto Rico that has been the subject of protests over manoeuvres that killed a civilian and wounded four other people, U.S. officials said on Wednesday.
The Puerto Rican Independence Party, which has been leading protests against the U.S. Navy on the island of Vieques off Puerto Rico's east coast, alleged last week that the U.S. military had fired the prohibited radioactive rounds.
Officials with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the Navy confirmed the incident on Wednesday.
A Navy spokesman in Puerto Rico said the Navy had learned on March 5 and immediately informed the NRC that two Marine Corps Harrier jets expended 263 rounds of bullets made of depleted uranium during a training exercise at Vieques on Feb. 19.
Unlike typical lead bullets, rounds made of depleted uranium can penetrate armoured vehicles.
``They normally don't use this during weapons firing practice,'' Roger Hannah, an NRC spokesman in Atlanta, said.
Depleted uranium contains a small amount of radioactive material. But Hannah said the material expended at Vieques would not pose a threat to public health because it was in an isolated area and because it was fired into the ground.
``There is very little danger to public health and safety,'' he said.
The Navy said the use of depleted uranium is strictly prohibited on the Vieques range and the incident was being investigated.
The Puerto Rican Independence Party, which advocates the Caribbean island territory's independence from the United States, has staged several protests at Vieques in recent weeks.
The protests began after April 19 when an errant bomb killed civilian security guard David Sanes Rodriguez and wounded four other men, including three civilians and a military observer.
Residents have long opposed the Navy's presence on the 33,000-acre (13,200-hectare) island of Vieques, where the Navy runs the North Atlantic Fleet Weapons Training Facility, one of the largest live weapons training grounds in the world.
Vieques' 9,300 residents say the bombing harms the environment, destroys marine life, stunts economic development and may be linked to an above-normal cancer rate. They also worry about the danger presented by the bombs.
----------------
'Your Views' on the European elections
Wednesday, June 2, 1999 BBC http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/events/euros%5F99/your%5Fviews/newsid %5F358000/358688.stm
... there should be a huge turnout against New Labour and its policy of warfare - we need to support the health and education of the ordinary population across Europe, and not spend £2m a day on the insanity of depleted uranium and cluster bombing of the Balkans. John, England
Relevant Stories
High-tech war in Kosovo 08 May 99 | Sci/Tech http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/special%5Freport/1998/kosovo/newsid%5 F337000/337679.stm
Pentagon confirms depleted uranium use 08 May 99 | Sci/Tech http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_337000/337855.stm
Nato bombs cut Serb power 03 May 99 | Europe http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/newsid_334000/334249.stm
30 Apr 99 | Europe UN rights chief slams Nato bombings http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/newsid_332000/332745.stm
28 Apr 99 | Europe Analysis: Escalating the war http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/newsid_330000/330456.stm
---
World: Europe Nato pounds Serbs ... Ecological disaster warning
April 25, 1999 BBC http://news2.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/newsid%5F327000/327895.stm
----------------
China Opens Another Door to an Isolated North Korea
By ERIK ECKHOLM, New York Times, June 3, 1999 http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/asia/060399nkorea-china.html
BEIJING -- North Korea's No. 2 political leader arrived in Beijing on Wednesday for the first high-level meeting between the two Communist allies in eight years, talks that will be closely watched by the United States and China's Asian neighbors.
The official, Kim Yong Nam, president of the Presidium of the Supreme People's Assembly, brought a large entourage of political, trade and military officials and may also visit Shanghai and Hangzhou.
Months in the planning, the talks are intended to demonstrate that the alliance between North Korea and China remains strong. They come just as the United States has made its own offers of cooperation in an effort to moderate North Korea's military and economic policies.
During the Korean War, in the early 1950's, China sent troops to help North Korea beat back the advancing Americans, and China has remained determined ever since to preserve the Communist Government there as a buffer on the Korean peninsula.
But the alliance has been a tortured one. Even though Kim Il Sung, the North Korean leader at the time, visited Beijing in 1991, the relationship was deeply strained the next year when China bowed to practical reality and recognized North Korea's archenemy, South Korea, with its dynamic economy.
More recently, China has been concerned by North Korea's disastrous economic policies, which have forced China to provide large amounts of aid and could cause a social collapse, and by the North's missile tests, which have undermined China's regional security goals.
"North Korea is a troublesome ally," said Bates Gill, a military expert at the Brookings Institution in Washington. "But the Chinese see propping up the regime is their only real option."
In the talks this week, North Korea is expected to ask for renewed commitments of the food, energy and other aid that has helped the Government of Kim Jong Il (the son of Kim Il Sung) survive a famine and severe slowdown of its industries. The country's rigidly controlled, closed economy has never recovered from the demise of the Soviet Union and the subsidies and barter arrangements that Moscow provided.
China, in turn, is expected to press its secretive ally to moderate its behavior in areas that have threatened China's own strategic interests, appealing to North Korea not to repeat its tests of a new long-range missile. The surprise launching over Japan last fall set off alarm bells throughout East Asia and strengthened Japan's support for developing antimissile defenses with the United States -- a development seen by China as a threat.
China is also expected to urge North Korea not to develop nuclear weapons, according to a Western diplomat, who said China wants to avoid any increase of tension on the Korean peninsula.
China has long maintained scientific and technical exchanges with North Korea, but many Western experts say there is no evidence that advanced weapon technology have been handed over directly in recent years. North Korean sales of missiles to countries like Iran have been a major concern of the United States, and the extent of Chinese influence over such sales is disputed.
Chinese officials say they will urge North Korea to begin opening up its economy so it can resume development and reduce its desperate need for outside aid. But China is unlikely to pose any ultimatums that could lead to a serious break in relations or endanger the Communist Government, diplomats say.
China publicly endorses cooperation between the two Koreas and the "four party" international talks -- including Japan and the United States -- on a long-term peace settlement. At the same time, China wants to avoid a total collapse in North Korea, or other scenarios in which South Korea essentially absorbs the North: that would bring an American ally, and possibly American troops, right to China's border.
"China doesn't want U.S. forces north of the 38th parallel," said Douglas Paal, an Asia expert in Washington who served on the National Security Council during the Reagan and Bush Administrations.
Last week a former United States Secretary of Defense, William J. Perry, visited North Korea, offering economic and diplomatic benefits if the country would agree to abandon its missile and nuclear-weapons programs. There has been no official reply.
The two Koreas have also discussed resuming talks on the reunification of families and economic aid, officials in South Korea say.
---
Related Articles
North Korea Unresponsive in U.S. Talks, Envoy Reports (May 30, 1999) http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/asia/053099korea-us.html
U.S. Aide Due in North Korea With Deal to Lift Sanctions (May 21, 1999) http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/asia/052199korea-sanctions.html
----------------
Stop Bombing, China and Russia Insist
New York Times, June 3, 1999 http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/europe/060399kosovo-china.html
BEIJING -- China and Russia repeated Wednesday their demand that NATO airstrikes be halted before political talks begin to resolve the crisis in Yugoslavia.
Russia's foreign minister, Igor Ivanov, spent the day meeting with China's top leaders, discussing their shared opposition to the NATO bombing campaign and their mutual desire to foster a "strategic partnership" aimed at offsetting the global dominance of the United States.
A joint communique issued Wednesday afternoon by Ivanov and China's foreign minister, Tang Jiaxuan, said: "NATO's immediate halting of military operations is a precondition of a political settlement of the Kosovo issue."
Ivanov told reporters that plans are being laid for a state visit to China later this year by President Boris Yeltsin, following up the visit to Russia and an ailing Yeltsin last year by President Jiang Zemin.
Ivanov said that increased political, economic and military cooperation between Russia and China "will contribute to stability and the interests of the international community" by helping to create a more "multipolar world."
While Russia has advanced military hardware to sell to China, the scope for economic cooperation appears to be limited: total trade between the countries last year was only $5.5 billion, a small fraction of China's trade with Japan or the United States.
Related Articles
Diplomacy: Moscow and West Making Headway on a Kosovo Deal http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/europe/060399kosovo-diplomacy.html
Issue in Depth: Conflict in Kosovo http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?13@@.efd553f
----------------
Remember Tiananmen
Embassy Row By James Morrison THE WASHINGTON TIMES, June 3, 1999 http://www.washtimes.com/internatl/embassy.html
Chinese Ambassador Li Zhaoxing might have hoped to distract attention from the 10th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre as he made the rounds of news shows, denouncing the accidental bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Yugoslavia.
But he is unlikely to forget it when demonstrators converge on the Chinese Embassy today to commemorate the protest that ended when Chinese tanks broke up the pro-democracy movement in Beijing.
"Ten long years have passed since pro-democracy students were cut down in Tiananmen Square, while calling for the simplest of rights and freedoms, and the Beijing government refuses to admit its violent and tragic error," said Timothy Cooper, international director of the Free China Movement, which is organizing today's events.
The demonstration at the embassy at 2300 Connecticut Ave. NW begins at noon. Protesters will read the names of hundreds of student demonstrators who were killed by Chinese troops in Tiananmen Square.
At 7 p.m. the demonstrators plan to return to the embassy for a candlelight memorial service.
"We will challenge the Beijing government to release all student leaders from Tiananmen Square still in prison . . . honor its international human rights commitments . . . and redeem itself before the eyes of the world," Mr. Cooper said.
---
Beijing Uses Press, Police to Deter Tiananmen Memorials
By Michael Laris, June 3, 1999 Washington Post http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1999-06/03/167l-060399-idx.html
BEIJING, June 2China's Communist government employed its police and propaganda machinery today in a double-barreled warning to the country's fractured dissident movement that it should not try to commemorate the 10th anniversary of the violent army crackdown on democracy demonstrators in Tiananmen Square....
---
China Allows No Echoes of Tiananmen June 3, 1999 Associated Press http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/i/AP-Tiananmen-Erased.html
---
Chinese Police Detain Dissidents 8:47 a.m. EDT June 3, 1999, Associated Press http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/i/AP-China-Tiananmen.html
---
Lying About Tiananmen Editorials, Washington Post, June 3, 1999 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1999-06/03/124l-060399-idx.html
---
T-Day Plus 10 Years
June 3, 1999 New York Times ESSAY / By WILLIAM SAFIRE http://www.nytimes.com/library/opinion/safire/060399safi.html
WASHINGTON -- "The press in China was freer then," recalls Wei Jingsheng, the dissident forced into exile in the U.S., of the day exactly a decade ago when Beijing's rulers massacred Chinese students and workers demonstrating for democracy.
Wei was in prison at the time for advocating freedom on "Democracy Wall" years before. He was allowed to watch the official television news, and saw a man standing in front of a tank, arresting its progress.
But this was not the same picture that was front-paged all over the world. The other confrontation, the one Wei was watching, took place in front of the Military Museum, three miles from Tiananmen Square, where much of the bloody work was done.
"There were many other examples of courage," says Wei. "Chinese people will never forget what happened that day."
I wanted to have dinner with Wei this week because I admire anti-Communist dissidents. When names like Jiang and Clinton and Brezhnev are forgotten, memories of this century's heroic dissidents -- Andrei Sakharov, Anatoly Shcharansky and Wei Jingsheng -- will endure.
That's because they have done what no politician or Kremlinologist or China-watcher dreamed of doing. By publicly daring the most despotic systems to do their worst to silence them, the dissidents of our time -- like the biblical Job -- awoke the world's conscience to human rights.
Wei is a stocky, intelligent man with a shock of black hair, a quick smile and an uncompromising attitude who has some other dissidents here wishing he had stayed in jail another 18 years. Of their disunity, he says: "If you can find an American leader who unifies the people, I will go and study with him."
Are most Chinese angry at the U.S.? "The Communist leaders are trying to channel dissatisfaction against Westerners, and against pro-Western Chinese. But people are not sheep to be so easily manipulated."
The average Chinese reaction to being caught lifting our nuclear technology? "It may not be good for the democracy movement for me to say this, but you cannot fault the Chinese Government for stealing secrets. Many people always thought the U.S. was leaking the secrets to Beijing on purpose, along with the technology being sold, and are confused about why you now take offense."
The top leaders? "Jiang Zemin, whose son is a billionaire, blows with the wind. Li Peng is a hard-liner with limited intelligence. Zhu Rongji tries to save the ship from sinking, but to what end -- to prolong the life of the Communist Party? Befuddling."
The People's Liberation Army? "The P.L.A. is not a seamless entity. There is a faction of high officers who benefit from corruption, and another of lower rank who dissent from corruption. In that situation, accidents and coups can happen."
What's with the demonstration by 15,000 Falun Gong followers outside the leaders' compound? "When regimes weaken," said Wei, "popular religious movements and superstitions become significant. There are a hundred sects like Falun Gong, which means that people long for faith in some ideology, a new source of guidance. The Government recognizes the danger and is anxious for ways to control their growth."
Is China playing the Russian card against America? He smiled at the allusion to a reverse Nixonian strategy: "The Deputy Prime Minister, Qian Qichen, wants to draw in Russia to bolster China against the U.S. But Primakov was more concerned about dealing with NATO. Now Primakov's gone, and we'll have to see."
Today, T-Day plus 10 years, President Clinton will issue a statement challenging Congress to extend "most favored nation" trade privileges to China for another year. (Spinmeisters in the pro-China lobby are trying to change that historic phrase to "normal trade relations" to make it more palatable, and many in the media will meekly obey.)
I think Congress should vote to suspend trade privileges for China. Clinton will veto the bill and the Senate will sustain his veto, giving China its annual reprieve. That minuet is a good way of reminding Beijing how dependent it is on the American market -- just as patriots like Wei Jingsheng remind us how the spark of democratic spirit is alive among Chinese.
---
Tiananmen Defense By Jim Hoagland, Thursday, June 3, 1999; Page A27 Washington Post http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1999-06/03/121l-060399-idx.html
---
Party Paper in China Makes Rare Mention of '89 Protests
New York Times, June 3, 1999, By ERIK ECKHOLM http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/world/china-tiananmen.html
BEIJING -- The Communist Party's flagship newspaper made a rare reference Wednesday to the 1989 democracy movement in Tiananmen Square, calling the violent crushing of those demonstrations essential to the protection of national stability and economic progress.
The editorial in People's Daily, "Unswervingly Maintaining Social Stability," cited the NATO attack on the Chinese embassy in Belgrade last month as evidence that "hostile forces in the West have never abandoned their scheme to ruin China."
History has demonstrated, the editorial added, that the "firm and resolute suppression of the political turmoil in Beijing" in 1989 protected "national independence, dignity, security and stability and ensured the sustained, healthy development of economic reforms and opening to the outside world."
"China must steadfastly avoid letting a disturbance created by outside forces spark internal chaos," said the editorial, the latest installment in a campaign mounted after the embassy bombing, to paint Western human rights concerns as a plot to undermine China's progress.
Oddly, the English-language version of the editorial distributed by the official New China News Agency omitted the direct references to the demonstrations in 1989.
On the surface, life goes on as normal here and elsewhere in China. But there are many signs of official nervousness as the June 4 anniversary of the crackdown on the student-led demonstrations approaches.
Some 80 democracy advocates around the country have been detained, at least temporarily, by the police in the last month, and 28 remained in custody Wednesday, according to the Information Center of Human Rights and Democratic Movement in China, a small watchdog group in Hong Kong. The detainees included seven people in the southern city of Hangzhou who had planned to commemorate the 1989 demonstrations and were held Wednesday, the information center said.
In Beijing, in luxury hotels and some private compounds housing foreigners, CNN service on cable television has been temporarily cut off, apparently because the channel is transmitting numerous programs on the legacy of the demonstrations and their suppression. But almost no Chinese have access to CNN, anyway.
In another action that largely affects foreign visitors, Hong Kong and foreign newspapers delivered to hotels here and in Shanghai have been arriving with articles about China cut out by government censors. But journalists and diplomats with subscriptions received complete nonexcised copies, as usual.
One popular Chinese-language Internet chatroom, at www.sohu.com, announced that it was shutting down for 10 days, ostensibly to "improve the system," but possibly under pressure to avoid discussions about the 1989 crackdown in which army troops killed hundreds of civilians.
Tiananmen Square itself, where hundreds of thousands of students and others chanted and camped, has been closed at least through the month, officially for renovations in preparation for the 50th-anniversary celebrations in October of the Communist victory.
But extra police officers are in the streets, and hundreds of people involved with the 1989 movement have in recent weeks received visits or calls to warn them not to speak with foreign journalists or to engage in disruptive activities.