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

U.S. Shield Plans Under Heavy Fire
Putin Assails National Effort As Zhu Raises Taiwan Issue

International Herald Tribune
Paris, Friday, July 7, 2000
By Sharon LaFraniere Washington Post Service
http://www.iht.com/IHT/TODAY/FRI/FPAGE/protest.2.html

MOSCOW - Chinese and Russian leaders are stepping up their criticism of U.S. proposals on missile defenses, with Beijing denouncing a theater missile defense project that would protect Taiwan and Russia criticizing Washington's tentative plans to build a national missile defense system to protect the entire United States.

In Rome, the Chinese prime minister, Zhu Rongji, said Thursday that China was ''categorically opposed'' to U.S. missile defense plans.

Mr. Zhu, speaking at a news conference, said that the Washington plan for ''theater defense'' would draw Taiwan into its sphere of protection, and that this ''would be a blatant interference in Chinese affairs.''

The Russian president, Vladimir Putin, in one of his strongest condemnations, said earlier that a U.S. decision in favor of the national missile defense system would ''signify an undermining'' of the global military balance.

President Jiang Zemin of China, who discussed the U.S. plan with President Putin at a regional security summit meeting in Central Asia on Wednesday, agreed that the 1972 treaty controlling missile defenses should not be altered to allow the United States to proceed, according to a Kremlin official.

Mr. Putin and Mr. Jiang talked for 50 minutes in Dushanbe, the capital of Tajikistan.

The summit meeting was also attended by the leaders of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, former Soviet republics near China.

The two leaders, who first met last year when Mr. Putin was the Russian prime minister, have previously warned that the United States could provoke a new arms race if it went ahead with its tentative plan to set up radar and 100 ''missile interceptors'' in Alaska.

President Bill Clinton has promised to decide in coming weeks whether to approve the $60 billion project, and the Pentagon has scheduled a crucial test of a ''missile killer'' on Friday over the Pacific.

Washington contends that it needs the missile interceptors to defend the United States not against Russia or China but instead against unpredictable smaller powers like North Korea, Iraq or Iran, some with missile capabilities.

But Beijing argues that the defensive missiles would cancel out China's small force of long-range missiles and compel it to build a stronger nuclear-strike force.

The United States contends that Russia has the firepower to overwhelm a limited national defense.

Russia agrees with that, but it argues that the American system, as visualized, would undercut the very foundation of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty of 1972.

The premise of that treaty was that both sides were equally vulnerable to missile attack by the other.

Mr. Putin said at a new conference that Russia would consider it highly significant if Washington proceeded with the project despite the Russian Parliament's recent ratification of the START-2 Treaty, and also his own suggestion that Russia and the United States could create a joint missile defense system.

In an interview published Wednesday, Colonel General Vladimir Yakovlev, head of Russia's strategic missile forces, said that Russia might respond to a U.S. missile shield by increasing the number of warheads on its long-range Topol-M missiles or by reviving a program to build medium-range ballistic missiles.

The presidents of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan joined Mr. Putin and Mr. Jiang in a declaration that the 1972 ABM Treaty must not be altered.

The issue of the missile defense system is expected to come up again on Friday when China and the United States resume arms control talks after a year's interruption.

-------- asia

ASEAN urged to protest Star Wars test

Friday, July 7, 2000
By United Press International
http://enn.com/news/wire-stories/2000/07/07072000/upi_starwars_14534.asp

The international environmental watchdog and anti-nuclear group Greenpeace today urged Southeast Asian governments to oppose a scheduled test of the U.S. Star Wars missile defense program.

The appeal came shortly before the U.S. military planned an attempt to shoot down a missile warhead in space fired from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California.

The Minuteman intercontinental missile with a dummy warhead was scheduled to be launched toward the Pacific Marshall Islands. A U.S. "hit-to-kill" weapon was then to be fired from Kwajalein Atoll to intercept the warhead about 120 miles above the Earth. The Pentagon's third and final preliminary test of the system was scheduled for between 0200 GMT and 0600 GMT Saturday.

The test is a key step toward deciding whether to quickly begin building a limited missile defense aimed at foiling attacks by states such as North Korea, Iran and Iraq.

"We reject this proposed Star Wars missile system because it will spark a new nuclear arms race and destroy the international arms control and disarmament regime," said Athena Ballesteros, regional campaigns coordinator for Greenpeace Southeast Asia. Ballesteros urged the ten-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), which supports a nuclear free zone treaty, to express their governments' concerns about the impact of the Star Wars testing on their nuclear non-proliferation efforts.

"We are calling on the Philippines and Thailand, in particular, to urge their ASEAN neighbors to come together and express their opposition to the continued expansion of nuclear weapons by the world's nuclear powers led by the U.S.," she said in a statement.

Greenpeace warned that if the Star Wars plan goes ahead, there will be a reversal of the deep reduction already made in nuclear arsenals around the world as a result of the end of the Cold War. It said one of the most serious consequences will be a collapse of existing arms control and nuclear disarmament treaties such as the U.S.-Russian 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, and the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty.

"Let us not forget that a crucial component of nuclear non-proliferation efforts is to develop non-nuclear energy sources instead," Ballesteros said. "Abandoning a reactor program that could have produced plutonium for nuclear weapons would mean more funds for energy alternatives."

-------- business

Nuclear Missile Defense: Corruption and Conflicts of Interest

July 7, 2000,
www.worldpolicy.org/projects/arms/reports.html.

Thanks,

Frida Berrigan, ATRC <BerrigaF@newschool.edu> Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 10:50:55 -0400

Nuclear Missile Deception: Corruption and Conflicts of Interest in the National Missile Defense (NMD) Test Program

I. Fraud and Incompetence in Missile Defense Programs

"It's not a defense of the United States . . . It's a conspiracy to allow them to milk the government. They are creating jobs for themselves for life." Former TRW Engineer Nira Schwartz, quoted by William Broad, New York Times, March 7, 2000

"We rigged the test," the scientist said. "We put a beacon with a certain frequency on the target vehicle. On the interceptor, we had a receiver." In effect the scientist said, the target was talking to the missile, saying, "Here I am, come get me . . . The hit looked beautiful, so Congress didn't ask any questions." Scientist involved in the Pentagon's June 1984 missile defense test, quoted by Tim Weiner, New York Times, August 18, 1993

The spectacular failure of the Pentagon's latest National Missile Defense (NMD) test on July 8th dramatically underscores the fact that this deeply flawed program is simply not up to the task of defending the United States from even a small number of ballistic missiles armed with nuclear warheads. The NMD project has now failed two of its first three "hit-to-kill" tests, in which an interceptor vehicle is supposed to destroy a mock nuclear warhead in mid-flight. And even in the one "successful" test, last October, it was later revealed that the interceptor vehicle had originally honed in on a large, brightly illuminated decoy balloon that in effect helped guide it to the mock warhead. Despite this dismal track record, the Clinton administration is still seriously considering moving towards deployment of an NMD system by preparing to award contracts for long lead-time procurement to begin construction on a key NMD radar system in Shemya, Alaska in the spring of 2001.

What's the rush? Why move full speed ahead on a system with no demonstrated capability for actually protecting the United States against ballistic missiles? The short answer is politics. In the short-term, the Clinton administration is seeking to inoculate Al Gore from Republican charges of being "soft on defense" by throwing money at the defense budget generally and missile defense projects in particular. But now Vice President Gore, who has tried to carve out a reputation for himself as a knowledgeable reformer of costly and inefficient government programs and practices, is in danger of being charged with being "soft on defense contractors" as he stands by in silence while billions of dollars of missile defense contracts are doled out to companies that have records of fraud, corruption, and mismanagement. Given their recent performance, it would be risky to buy a used car from these companies, much less trust them to build one of the most technically demanding and costly weapons programs ever undertaken by the Pentagon.

Fraud is nothing new in missile defense research. But the Clinton Administration's National Missile Defense initiative is permeated with fraud to a degree not seen since the heyday of Ronald Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) in the 1980s. Under persistent pressure from conservative true believers and cash hungry contractors, the Clinton/Gore NMD plan has been an ad hoc undertaking from the start, characterized by scientific fraud, exaggerated threat assessments and political manipulation. Hopefully, the mounting revelations of fraud and mismanagement in the NMD program will force Congress, the Executive Branch, and the defense industry to stop the mad rush to deploy this dangerous and ill-conceived system BEFORE U.S. taxpayers waste tens of billions of dollars pursuing what John Isaacs of the Council for a Livable World has aptly described as "a new Maginot Line."

On March 7th of this year, in a front page article entitled "Ex-Employee Says Contractor Faked Results of Missile Test," New York Times science writer William Broad revealed that Nira Schwartz, a senior research scientist at TRW, had filed suit against the company alleging that she had been fired for refusing to falsify basic research findings on the essential question of whether an NMD interceptor could tell the difference between a decoy and a nuclear warhead. On May 11th, after conducting the only independent scientific analysis to date on test data released pursuant to Dr. Schwartz's lawsuit, Dr. Theodore Postol of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology sent a letter to White House Chief of Staff John Podesta presenting evidence of "criminal fraud" in the NMD testing program.

More than two months later, after another failed NMD test, Dr. Postol's charges have yet to yield a serious, substantive response from the Clinton administration. Instead, the Pentagon and the White House have countered with political spin control, arguing that Dr. Postol would change his mind if only he knew of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization's (BMDO) full, classified plans for addressing the decoy problem. The Department of Defense has also engaged in a clumsy and counterproductive effort to chill public discussion by declaring Postol's May 11th letter itself to be classified.

At a May 25th press briefing in Washington, DC, Postol urged the White House to "stop playing politics with an important decision that directly effects the security of the nation," and called for the establishment of "a team of scientists who are truly independent in their fields and independent of the Pentagon . . . to look into this matter." Postol urged the Department of Defense's Inspector General to "investigate and determine whether the BMDO classified the May 11, 2000 letter to the White House in order to hide waste, fraud, and abuse in the BMDO." While the White House has failed to act on Postol's charges, they have resonated on Capitol Hill, where 53 House members led by Representatives Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) and John Conyers (D-MI) have called for an FBI investigation of potential fraud in the NMD program. Meanwhile, Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL) has put forward an amendment that would require the Pentagon to test the NMD system in realistic conditions against multiple decoys before making any decisions about deployment.

Durbin's amendment responds in part to further revelations by Postol regarding the Pentagon's "dumbing down" of the test series for the NMD interceptor from now through 2005. Postol persuasively demonstrates that the BMDO redesigned the test series to purposely exclude the numbers and types of decoys that the interceptor had been unable to tell from the mock warhead during preliminary tests. In fact, Postol noted, the large, balloon shaped decoy that had played a part in the only successful NMD intercept to date acted not as a decoy but as a "beacon" which assisted the kill vehicle in its efforts to locate the mock warhead.

The test of July 8th was no better -- it failed despite the Pentagon's best efforts to ensure a positive outcome. As Mark Thompson noted in the July 10th issue of Time magazine (released on July 3rd), the latest test of the system used a similar decoy to the one that served as a beacon in last fall's test (the decoy balloon failed to inflate during the test). In addition, the other parameters of the test were so carefully scripted that Thompson rightly suggested that the experiment is all but rigged:

There are virtually no unknowns in the procedure. The Pentagon knows the type of rocket launching the target as well as the nature of the target; it knows how powerful the rocket's engine is, where it is coming from, and when it is being launched. The crew launching the interceptor will even get to listen in on the countdown of the warhead's rocket as it takes place. All that is valuable intelligence -- and much, if not all of it, would be denied to the U.S. if a rogue state decided to strike. Such advantages "place significant limitations" on the value of the test, says Philip Coyle, the Pentagon's chief weapons tester.

If the NMD system can't even pass a test that is "all but rigged," how would it fare in a more realistic test environment involving multiple decoys? The extreme difficulties involved in discriminating decoys from warheads and the inadequacy of the Pentagon's current testing regime have been highlighted in a major joint study by scientists affiliated with MIT and the Union of Concerned Scientists, in a statement by the American Physical Society (the largest organization of physicists in the U.S.), and in a recent letter by 50 American Nobel Laureates organized by the Washington-based Federation of American Scientists which also underscores the strategic risks of proceeding with NMD. But, much like Richard Nixon's "secret plan" for peace in Vietnam, the BMDO's sole response to this avalanche of informed technical criticism has been to claim that it has classified plans for dealing effectively with decoys that cannot be revealed at this time for fear of tipping off potential adversaries.

The Pentagon's continued stonewalling in the face of valid technical critiques of NMD underscores the need for an independent assessment of the program by scientists and organizations that do not stand to profit by ignoring the system's glaring weaknesses. Unfortunately, the NMD testing program as currently structured does just the opposite: it maximizes the authority and influence of companies like Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and Raytheon which stand to make billions of dollars if a decision is made to go full speed ahead towards deployment.

II. Nonstop Money Dispenser: The Corporate Role in NMD Fraud

As the debate over whether or not to deploy the Clinton Administration's National Missile Defense (NMD) system heats up, it's worth taking a good, hard look at the companies responsible for building the Pentagon's most sophisticated and demanding weapon system yet. Since Ronald Reagan gave his March 1983 speech touting a new missile defense program that could render nuclear weapons "impotent and obsolete," the U.S. has spent over $70 billion researching and developing the various mutations of missile defense.

According to the Congressional Budget Office the first two phases of the Clinton administration's NMD system will cost taxpayers at least another $60 billion (counting the costs of dual use communications and tracking satellites). The Council for a Livable World has suggested that the multi-tiered approach favored by George W. Bush could cost $120 billion or more. Even by the standards of the Pentagon, that's a hell of a lot of money.

For the four "lumbering behemoths of the apocalypse" -- the military mega-firms Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon, and TRW, which despite splitting over $30 billion per year in Pentagon contracts are still struggling financially -- a lead role in the NMD program offers a glitzy new set of projects and a major stream of potential new revenues to lure back investors and skilled personnel who have been turned off by the companies recent track records of corruption, cost overruns, and mismanagement. These four companies dominate the missile defense program at this point, accounting for 60% of total missile defense contracts issued by the Pentagon during the last two fiscal years -- a total of over $2.2 billion during that time period. Since the results of the missile defense tests they are helping to carry out will determine whether they start reaping lucrative, multi-billion dollar NMD production contracts, these major corporate players in the NMD testing program have serious and direct conflicts of interest.

Boeing/TRW

As noted above, recent news reports indicate that TRW, a subcontractor for NMD, faked tests and evaluations of a key component in the NMD system, the "hit-to-kill" vehicle that is supposed to seek out and destroy incoming nuclear warheads against a backdrop of chaff and decoys. The whistle-blower, former TRW senior engineer Dr. Nira Schwartz, served on TRW's anti-missile team in 1995 and 1996. Schwartz contends that in test after test the interceptors failed to discriminate decoys from warheads, but management at TRW refused to report these failures to the Pentagon. After repeated appeals to her boss and colleagues to alert industrial partners and the military to her findings, Schwartz was fired.

Schwartz's allegations revolve around the interceptor being developed for the NMD system. In using computer programs to certify to the government that TRW's interceptor would pick out enemy warheads from decoys, Schwartz found that the proposed interceptor could do so only 5 to 15% of the time rather than 95% of the time, the performance goal established by the BMDO.

Pentagon spokesman Kenneth Bacon has tried to wave off charges of fraud involving the TRW "hit to kill" vehicle by arguing that a different vehicle, being developed by Raytheon, has been chosen for inclusion in the final NMD system. However, Bacon and his colleagues at the Pentagon have consistently failed to mention that Boeing, which is now the Lead Systems Integrator for the entire NMD project, designed the TRW interceptor vehicle that has been the subject of the fraud allegations. Indeed, Boeing proudly notes on its web site that the Boeing/TRW interceptor is still a "hot backup" in case the Raytheon version fails to perform adequately.

Furthermore, as Theodore Postol pointed out in his May 25th press briefing, "BMDO continues to make transparently false statements about the capabilities of the Raytheon Kill Vehicle relative to the Boeing Kill Vehicle. The Raytheon Kill Vehicle was NOT selected over the Boeing vehicle for technical reasons, as claimed by BMDO. It was selected because a Boeing employee illegally obtained sensitive Raytheon technical documentation on their Kill Vehicle." Postol's charge is particularly damning in the light of Boeing's central role in the biggest defense contracting scandal of the 1980s, Operation Ill Wind, in which the company and several of its key employees were at the center of a network of contractors and Pentagon employees trading in classified information in order to rig bids on major Pentagon weapons development programs.

Boeing's record of fraud and manipulation is especially troubling when one considers how dependent the Pentagon's Ballistic Missile Defense Organization has become on the company for carrying out even the most basic tasks relating to the testing program. As the Lead Systems Integrator for the NMD program, Boeing has unprecedented authority: the company is in charge of organizing and evaluating the entire BMD test series and supervising the work of key prime contractors and subcontractors involved in the research program. To cite one small recent example of the BMDO's dependence on Boeing, the New York Times reported on July 6th that journalists who want to view the July 7th NMD test via satellite would have to do so at Boeing's auditorium in the DC area because the Pentagon lacks the necessary equipment and facilities to provide simultaneous viewing of the test.

Whether Boeing colluded with TRW's manipulation of test results or merely overlooked them, it doesn't bode well for its role as the principal monitoring agent for subcontractors involved in NMD and the chief architect of the entire NMD testing program. Indeed, the most recent report on the NMD program by Philip Coyle, Director of the Pentagon's Independent Office of Testing and Evaluation, found that in its role as Lead Systems Integrator Boeing failed to establish a system for evaluating the testing program OR supervising the myriad subcontractors involved in NMD research and development.

For all practical purposes the fox is guarding the chicken coop: If Boeing is able to orchestrate a series of seemingly credible tests, it stands to make billions of dollars in production contracts for decades to come.

As the Project on Government Oversight (POGO) has demonstrated in a series of recent reports on waste and mismanagement in the defense sector, "until contractors improve their performance record and eliminate fraud, oversight remains crucial for protecting the public purse." POGO cites DOD Inspector General Eleanor Hill's similar concerns: "While we understand the many benefits of the new emphasis on Government/industry teamwork, the Department should not assume that procurement fraud no longer occurs. To the contrary, our criminal investigators report that their proactive undercover efforts regularly reveal significant fraudulent activity . . . Many advocates of drastic changes in Government acquisition practices are unaware of, or choose to ignore, the fact that procurement fraud remains a threat to the DOD and the U.S. taxpayer." For example, another POGO report notes that between 1994 and 1996, the defense industry returned more than $850 million to the government just to settle fraud cases under the False Claims Act.

Lockheed Martin

Lockheed has long been associated with the best and the worst of defense contracting, from successful programs like the F-16 fighter and the SR-71 reconnaissance plane to emblematic episodes of fraud and mismanagement like its bailout by the U.S. government in the early 1970s, its central role in the foreign bribery scandals in the mid-1970s, and its infamous role as the provider of the $600 toilet seat in the 1980s. Which Lockheed Martin will we see in the NMD program -- the world class weapons producer or the world class purveyor of cost overruns and contract manipulation? A few examples may help shed light on this conundrum.

· Lockheed Martin was in charge of the 1984 Homing Overlay Experiment (part of Reagan's Star Wars) that was later exposed as fraudulent (see source notes for further details).

· Lockheed Martin agreed to pay $13 million to settle government accusations that it violated arms export laws by sharing satellite technology with China. The violations date back to 1994 and cover 30 charges concerning dealings with Hong Kong-based Asia Satellite. Lockheed Martin provided Asia Satellite Telecommunications with technology that State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said could be used in missile development.

· An independent review of expensive and well-publicized launch failures of Lockheed Martin's rockets and satellites found that the company focused too heavily on cutting costs and not enough on supervising the quality of its work. More than $2 billion worth of military and private satellites were either destroyed or deployed into useless orbits after launch from Lockheed's Titan, Centaur and Athena rockets. Lockheed Martin provided the booster for the failed test of July 8th. The test was delayed for several hours due to a problem with a fuel cell in the Lockheed Martin booster rocket, and when it was finally launched the kill vehicle failed to separate from the booster, which in turn triggered the failure of the kill vehicle to destroy the mock warhead.

Lockheed Martin will pay the government $5 million to settle claims that two subsidiaries overcharged the Navy for anti-submarine devices. U.S. Attorney Paul Gagnon stated that the government paid between $1.8 million and $3.8 million too much for products from Nashua-based Sanders, a Lockheed Martin Company, and Marietta, Georgia-based Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. He also noted that the settlement would save the government the expense of a court battle over Lockheed's pricing practices.

· A rash of last-minute technical problems prevented Lockheed Martin's new rocket from lifting off in May of this year. It was the third delay in three days for the Atlas III, the first U.S. rocket to be equipped with a Russian engine. A broken radar thwarted the following try. In addition to the diplomatic and political issues raised by the professed willingness of the Clinton/Gore administration and the Bush campaign to share missile defense technology with Russia, the problems with the Atlas III raise an additional warning flag regarding such cooperative efforts.

· Lockheed Martin is the prime contractor for the PAC-3 theater missile defense system, which is running more than 30% over budget (or approximately $233 million). Lockheed Martin may have to pay about $70 million to cover its portion of the cost overrun.

· Lockheed Martin is the prime contractor for the Army's troubled Theater High Altitude Area Defense system (THAAD), which has succeeded in only 2 of 8 tests to date and was plagued by such serious problems that there was talk in late 1998 of taking the program away from Lockheed Martin and giving it to another contractor. A $15 million fine against Lockheed Martin for poor performance was lifted last year after THAAD scored two hits after six consecutive failures. Despite the history of problems in the program, Lockheed Martin recently received clearance to proceed to the Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) phase of the THAAD project, which could be worth up to $4 billion in contracts to the firm.

Raytheon

Raytheon, which just a few years ago seemed like the "most likely to succeed" among the new breed of military mega-firms, has been plagued by its own problems lately, ranging from an embarrassing "recall" of hundreds of Patriot missiles it had sold to U.S. allies after the 1991 Persian Gulf War to an admission that it had not engaged in proper testing of electronic components provided to the Pentagon.

The Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle (EKV) being developed for the NMD program has been the object of serious concern and criticism. The Welch panel stated, "The visit to the Raytheon facility in Tucson highlighted the impacts of the 'hardware-poor' nature of the EKV program. There were no spares, no development articles, and no articles available for parallel activities that could significantly reduce development and test risk. The first article built appears to be the one that will fly." The panel also pointed out that the EKV may not be able to withstand the shock loads once mounted on the actual Ground Based Interceptor booster, which will not be demonstrated until 2003 when the integrated GBI (operational version of the booster and EKV) will be tested.

· Other technical problems with the EKV have included fuel leaks, problems with the Inertial Measurement Unit (which independently guides the test kill vehicle in flight), and failure of components of the IR sensor system on the EKV. The failure of the July 7th NMD test was due in large part to the failure of the Raytheon kill vehicle to separate properly from the Lockheed Martin booster rocket. As a result, the sensors used to hone in on the mock warhead were never turned on, and the vehicle sailed wide of its target.

· The Army had to replace hundreds of PAC-2 missiles after problems with components of the missile. While the Army is working with Raytheon to find the root of the problem, so far they were able to pinpoint it to the missile's black box, or the radio frequency downlink, which sends signals back and forth to the ground station and the missile.

· As part of a settlement with the government, Raytheon will pay back $1.06 million to the federal government for cutting corners on tests of electronic weapons components.

· Raytheon Aerospace Co., a subsidiary of Raytheon Co., has agreed to settle allegations that it used a security firm to spy on a small competitor in Alabama three years ago. Raytheon agreed to pay $16 million to AGES Group, of Boca Raton, FL, to settle allegations that it had engaged in at least three days of industrial spying that included video and audio surveillance and thefts of documents.

· Raytheon agreed to pay the federal government more than $400,000 to settle a claim that its Beech Aerospace Services subsidiary overcharged the Pentagon on a 1991 aircraft maintenance contract. The government claimed that Raytheon double-billed for certain parts in maintenance work that was performed at various sites around the world.

The Bottom Line: Still Rushing to Failure

Given their inherent conflicts of interest and their recent histories of fraud and mismanagement, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, TRW and Raytheon must be closely monitored -- by both the Pentagon and by a panel of outside experts on ANY testing and research and development work they undertake on the NMD program. Until an effective monitoring system can be established, the Clinton Administration should suspend the NMD program and take it off what the first Welch panel rightly described as its "rush to failure."

Selected Sources (consult the authors for additional details):

These source notes include selected excerpts from key articles along with a list of some of the major sources consulted in the production of this report. For additional information, consult www.worldpolicy.org/projects/arms, as well as the web sites of the Coalition to Reduce Nuclear Dangers (www.crnd.org), the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (www.ceip.org, click on Nonproliferation Project), and the Federation of American Scientists (www.fas.org, click on Space Policy Project).

· New York Times by Tim Weiner, August 27, 1993 "Last year, the GAO audited seven 'Star Wars' tests between 1990 and 1992. The auditors found that three of the tests were accurately described to Congress. Those three tests were complete or partial failures. The missile defense program's officials told Congress the other four tests were successes. That was untrue, the auditors said.

The inaccurate claims included the success rate of experiments, the progress of the programs, the sophistication of the tests, the ability of interceptor missiles to distinguish between a target and a decoy and the missiles' achievement of accuracy and altitude goals, the GAO reported.

'They have lied about certain functions that their missiles are supposed to perform,' said a Federal investigator who agreed to speak only if he was not identified. 'They've used things to enhance the target. The fact is that you've got something up there solving your guidance problem. And you've got an incentive to deceive. That's how you keep your program going.'

A former Reagan administration official, a nuclear physicist who closely studied the missile defense program in the 1980s, said it was characterized by 'secrecy, greed, self-deception, deception of Congress and actually even of the President.' The former official, who remains a Pentagon consultant and who spoke on condition of anonymity, is not among the accusers in the debate."

-------- china

China answers critics with a book of nuke Web sites As arms talks with the US resume today, China says nuclear 'secrets' are easy to find.

Christian Science Monitor
FRIDAY, JULY 7, 2000
Kevin Platt (plattk@csps.com) Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
http://www.csmonitor.com/durable/2000/07/07/fp7s1-csm.shtml

BEIJING

As China renews talks with the US on weapons proliferation, it is deploying an unusual strategy to counter accusations it stole American nuclear secrets.

Still stinging from charges that Chinese spies acquired the designs for seven of Washington's most advanced nuclear warheads, the Beijing-based China Nuclear Information Center has released a cyber-directory to show how much information on thermonuclear weapons is freely available on the Internet.

"Foreign Nuclear Web Sites," which costs 30-yuan (about $3.75), is a treasure trove for would-be explorers of nuclear information stored in computers throughout the US and the world.

Within its 77 pages are Web addresses for the US Department of Energy's Office of Fusion Energy Sciences and all major American nuclear weapons labs, including one entry titled "Group T-2 (Nuclear Theory and Applications) of the Theoretical Division of the Los Alamos National Laboratory."

China's use of the "Internet defense" is rich in irony. Since the 1949 Communist revolution, Beijing has jailed thousands of Chinese on charges of leaking state secrets to foreigners by revealing information that was in fact printed in local newspapers. And the party is now trying to impose draconian controls on Internet users throughout China.

Talking points

During discussions between the US and China, which resume July 7-8, a range of proliferation issues is expected to be covered by John Holum, the State Department's top arms control expert, and his Chinese counterparts.

Beijing suspended weapons talks after US jetfighters bombed Beijing's Embassy in Belgrade in May 1999, killing three Chinese and wounding two dozen others.

The Beijing talks will cover China's effort to buy advanced radar systems from Israel and the US proposal to build a national missile shield to guard against a nuclear attack.

The discussions also will likely address "suspicions that China transferred nuclear weapons technology to North Korea and nuclear and missile technology to Pakistan," says Charles Ferguson, a nuclear weapons expert at the Federation of American Scientists in Washington.

China's harshest critics in Congress have charged that the world's last communist titan used myriad types of espionage to pilfer American weapons material, and that it might have sold that data to enemies of the US.

Congress is set to vote soon on a bill that would outline a series of sanctions against China if the proliferation charges are proven. That vote comes one year after a US Congressional panel headed by Rep. Chris Cox (R-Calif.) released a two-volume report that accused China of stealing a wide array of top-secret blueprints for thermonuclear bombs.

Li Tao, a technology division chief at China Nuclear, says that one reason the nuclear Web site directory was published was to refute the Cox Report.

Much of the information China was alleged to have stolen "is not secret - it's all published on the Internet," says Mr Li.

His comments echo an earlier statement issued by China's State Council, which stated that "the structure, size, weight, shape, power, and circular error probability ... of seven US nuclear warheads, including the W-88, listed in the Cox Report, in fact, can be found in many open documents and on the Internet."

Some open secrets

Stan Norris, co-author of "The Internet and the Bomb," says that "probably some of the information [China was charged with stealing] in the Cox Report is available on the Internet."

"If you have fissile material ... smart people and enough resources, you can build a bomb based on information available on the Internet," adds Mr. Norris, a senior analyst at the New York-based Natural Resources Defense Council.

China Nuclear's cyber-manual lists weapons research labs by four out of the world's five nuclear powers (interestingly, there is no weapons information about China - the fifth power), along with a Russian site called "A Primer on Fissile Materials and Nuclear Weapons Design."

"This is just incredible," says a Western diplomat. "We've seen people make nuclear devices based on publicly available information ... and the Chinese have certainly done a lot of research in this area," he adds. "But it's still astounding that they would sell this kind of directory on the open market."

China Nuclear's Li says he has no qualms about issuing the directory. "We're not worried about terrorists using this book. You could find even more information by doing a search for nuclear weapons on Yahoo." Li adds: "The nuclear directory we published is not exposing any secrets - countries don't put their military and state secrets on the Internet."

A Beijing-based diplomat says that while he's surprised by the publication of China Nuclear's weapons directory, he concedes that "the US would not put its most advanced weapons designs on open Web sites." He adds that the US "maintains a firewall between public Web sites and internal government computers, and continuously upgrades its defenses against the theft of secrets by hackers."

But the diplomat adds that the Internet could still be a valuable tool for spies or merchants of advanced weapons designs. "Before the Internet, spies had to worry about not only how to steal information, but also how to transfer that information to the end-user," he says. "But now, the transfer of any kind of information is just a click away."

---

Clinton Puts U.S. on Knees in China

NewsMax.com
Friday July 7, 2000
Dan Frisa
http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/7/7/142553

An advance U.S. diplomatic mission to China has arrived on bended-knees in preparation for a visit by Secretary of Defense William Cohen. The entire purpose of this effort is a major mistake, fraught with danger for our national security.

With the stated goals of seeking the assistance of China in dissuading North Korea from its aggressive military posture on the one hand, and reassuring China about our own plans for a missile defense shield on the other, the U.S. has no leverage, and no business, in conducting this trip.

Yet again the ineptitude of team Clinton in the field of foreign affairs is making itself obvious at a time that is rife with serious negative implications for U.S. interests. Exacerbating the problem is a poor track record over the past seven and a half years that has only made the current state of our international standing weaker than at any time in more than twenty years.

Recall that early in the first Clinton term Jimmy Carter was dispatched to North Korea in an attempt to defuse their nuclear saber-rattling. The "solution" was for the U.S. to agree to sanction the construction of nuclear power generation solely for "domestic energy needs" while we gave them millions of dollars, ostensibly for coal production.

As should have been expected, shortly thereafter the North Koreans did exactly what any thinking person should have known they would do: they proceeded with the development of nuclear warheads, which China has strongly and publicly supported, with financial and technological help.

Now Clinton naively expects China to exert its influence to stop North Korea from continuing on this belligerent course. Why should they and why would they? Their position can only be strengthened with the presence of another threat to America in the region, which is why they so encouraged and assisted their communist ally in the first place.

As to our own missile defense shield - which has yet to be finalized - why is it our concern what China thinks? I'll tell you right now they don't like it and they don't want it. Therefore, there is nothing to discuss.

Unless, of course, you're Bill Clinton and the election of your Vice Cheerleader is imperative to both your own legal self-preservation (by maintaining control at the Department of Justice) as well as the enhancement of your historical legacy.

These motivating factors, combined with a record of highly questionable - and likely illegal - dealings with China in the campaign finance scandal, the Los Alamos nuclear secrets giveaway, and the Loral warhead technology transfer, have all worked together to put the U.S. on its knees this week in Beijing.

The United States of America need never, ever, get on its knees before any nation, for any reason. A U.S. administration that would even contemplate such a posture - no less actually adopt it -- has abrogated its responsibility and trust, and should be replaced at the next appropriate opportunity.

That time will come this November and, hopefully, will be looked upon as a day that will live in glorious triumph over the sad follies of a sorry man who left an even sorrier legacy.

Dan Frisa represented New York In the United States Congress and served four terms in the New York State Assembly. E-mail: danfrisa@newsmax.com

---

U.S., China Open Arms Control Talks

Yahoo News
Friday July 7 9:07 AM ET
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/ap/20000707/ts/china_us_2.html

BEIJING (AP) - U.S. and Chinese officials opened their first arms-control talks in 19 months Friday, discussing China's assistance to Pakistan's missile program and arms proliferation in North Korea.

A team led by John Holum, the chief U.S. arms-control negotiator, also was expected to bring up American ambitions to build a missile defense system, something China opposes. China in turn was likely to talk about its No. 1 weapons proliferation issue: U.S. arms sales to rival Taiwan.

Washington and Beijing have tried for years to hold regular talks on arms control. Their last formal session was held in Nov. 1998. Nearly six months later, China broke off the dialogue after the U.S. bombed the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade.

``We are here to resume the dialogue on strategic and national security issues. It's very important to us,'' Holum told reporters before the meeting.

Holum will spend much of his time discussing China's alleged role in helping Pakistan build a missile threat to neighboring India, one U.S. official said on condition of anonymity. A U.S. intelligence report last year revived controversy over China's weapons exports, saying it sent Pakistan nuclear-capable M-11 missiles in the early 1990s.

The Clinton administration is trying to avoid imposing the sanctions that may be required under U.S. law after such a finding. But pressure is building in Congress for Chinese concessions. Proposed legislation in the Senate calls for monitoring of China's weapons proliferation and possible sanctions.

Holum hopes to gain Chinese commitments to strengthen missile and nuclear arms monitoring, said the U.S. official who spoke on condition of anonymity.

China has pledged not to export missiles and denies selling them to Pakistan. But it has declined to sign the international Missile Technology Control Regime or abide by its ban on sales of missile components.

The Chinese side is led by Vice Foreign Minister Wang Guangya. Holum also is to meet Lt. Gen. Xiong Guangkai, deputy chief of the general staff of China's military, and top foreign policy experts.

---

US arms control negotiator begins non-proliferation talks with China

Yahoo News
Friday, July 7 5:13 PM SGT
http://sg.dailynews.yahoo.com/headlines/asia/article.html?s=singapore/headlines/000707/asia/afp/US_arms_control_negotiator_begins_non-proliferation_talks_with_China.html

BEIJING, July 7 (AFP) - The top US arms control negotiator reopened non-proliferation talks with China Friday, signaling an end to a moratorium sparked by the NATO bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade more than a year ago.

John Holum, undersecretary of state for security and arms control, met with Chinese leaders early Friday after arriving Thursday evening, US Embassy spokesman John Berry said.

The talks are aimed at paving the way for a visit to China by US Defense Secretary William Cohen next week, which will be the first by a US defense secretary since the bombing.

Holum's visit and Cohen's scheduled trip are indications both countries are ready to resume normal, top-level arms control discussions.

Military talks and contact, along with human rights dialogue, were frozen following the May 7, 1999 bombing, which killed three Chinese nationals, injured more than 20 embassy staff and seriously damaged Sino-US relations.

Diplomatic sources said Friday that top items on the agenda for Holum and his counterparts included China's objections to US desires to build a missile defense shield to protect itself and a shield to protect its allies in Asia, including Taiwan.

China has voiced strong opposition to the US plans, saying they would lead to an arms race. Beijing has objected even more adamantly to Taiwan being included in the US defense system, saying that would be a blatant interference in China's internal affairs.

The island, ruled separately since the Nationalists fled there after losing a civil war with the Communists in 1949, is seen by Beijing as an inseparable part of China which must be returned to the mainland, by force if necessary.

The US side, sources said, would be seeking to encourage Beijing to bring about a peaceful resolution to the stalemate between Beijing and Taiwan's newly-elected president, Chen Shui-bian.

Chen has rejected China's demand that he accept a policy recognizing Taiwan as a part of China's sovereignty, and China has rejected Chen's offer to return to a compromise the two sides reached in 1992 in which neither would define the one-China principle.

US officials also may raise with Chinese leaders findings which allege China has resumed selling missile technology to Pakistan, sources said.

Though it remains to be seen how much can be achieved in the restart of arms controls talks between the two countries, China's neighbors in the region are applauding the start of discussions.

"This is a good sign. The dialogue will make a good atmosphere in the region," said Yang Changsoo, first secretary responsible for disarmament and non-proliferation matters in the South Korean Embassy in Beijing.

Yang said Asian countries are watching closely for results of the talks, but believe good will come out of the meetings even if nothing concrete is achieved.

"This time is just to exchange views. It's been a long gap since the two sides last held security dialogue in November 1998," Yang said.

Analysts said the resumption in dialogue was largely brought about by the recent US Congress decision to grant permanent normal trade relations status to China, which will negate the need for China to win approval for trade privileges with Washington every year.

Holum reportedly met with China's Assistant Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Guangya and Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs Yang Jiechi Friday.

He is also scheduled to meet with People's Liberation Army's deputy chief of general staff Lt. General Xiong Guangkai and the Chinese Communist Party's foreign affairs expert Liu Huaqiu before leaving Beijing Sunday for Singapore and Tokyo.

China refuses to accept the US explanation that the Belgrade embassy bombing was a mistake caused by human error and outdated maps, despite having accepted compensation for the loss of lives and property.

---

Anti-Missile Test Looms Over China-U.S. Arms Talks

Yahoo News
Friday July 7 6:18 AM ET
By Paul Eckert
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20000707/pl/china_usa_dc_5.html

BEIJING (Reuters) - Chinese and U.S. officials resumed long-frozen arms control talks on Friday as the United States prepared to test an anti-missile system that has united China, Russia and others in strident opposition.

The two sides reopened a dialogue on disarmament and non-proliferation China angrily broke off last May after NATO warplanes bombed the Chinese embassy in Yugoslavia.

But the two-day meeting in Beijing straddles a key $100 million test over the Pacific Ocean of a planned U.S. National Missile Defense (NMD) plan that China bitterly opposes.

On Saturday, the U.S. military will try to shoot down a missile warhead in space -- a key step toward President Clinton's decision whether to begin building a limited missile defense against states such as North Korea, Iran and Iraq.

Touring Europe, where the plan has sparked fears of a new arms race, Prime Minister Zhu Rongji fired a salvo at a closer-to-home version of NMD: the U.S.-proposed Theater Missile Defense (TMD) for its allies and troops in Asia.

``China is categorically opposed to the TMD,'' Zhu told a news conference in Rome on Thursday.

``The system would aim to put Taiwan in a sphere of protection. This would be blatant interference in Chinese affairs,'' he said. He and Italian premier Giuliano Amato had common positions on both NMD and TMD, Zhu said.

Normalisation With New Disputes

China fears the TMD, intended to defend U.S. troops and Asian allies against perceived missile threats from North Korea, will be used to shelter Taiwan and embolden resistance there against Beijing's determination to bring it back into its fold.

Zhu's criticism came after the Chinese Foreign Ministry said NMD would upset the global strategic balance and TMD would set off an arms race in Asia. Talks on Friday and Saturday between a U.S. delegation led by senior arms control adviser John Holum and Chinese officials headed by Vice Foreign Minister Wang Guangya aim to improve relations and deepen bilateral arms control and non-proliferation dialogue.

``Restarting the talks is in itself good and we hope to get as much into the nitty-gritty as time allows,'' a U.S. official said.

But China is fuming not only at NMD and TMD, opposition to which has helped bind its new-found friendship with Russia. Both fear that NMD could evolve to neutralize their nuclear missiles.

Beijing also resents U.S. arms sales to Taiwan, an island which it claims as a wayward province and has threatened to attack if it declares independence.

Pakistan, Israel Cast Shadows

China is also upset about U.S. legislation that would require the United States to impose sanctions against the Chinese government, companies and other groups if they help countries develop or acquire nuclear bombs or other weapons of mass destruction.

Senate support for the nonproliferation bill has increased in recent days amid new allegations that China sold missile technology to Pakistan. Beijing and Islamabad have denied the accusations.

Another arms spat is brewing over China's $250 million deal to buy Phalcon airborne early warning radar systems from Israel. The United States fears the technology could be used against Taiwan and has lobbied hard to scupper the deal.

China suspended the arms control and non-proliferation talks and dialogue on human rights, as well as military-to military contacts, after NATO's bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade in May 1999.

Military contacts were resumed in January with the visit of a top Chinese general to the United States and the return to normality will be completed next week when Defense Secretary William Cohen travels to Beijing.

---

U.S. Wants China to Curb North Korea

NewsMax.com
Friday, July 7, 2000
http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/7/7/75617

Declaring North Korea is a military threat to the United States, Defense Secretary William Cohen is asking Communist China to intervene with its communist neighbor.

A high-level U.S. delegation is already in Beijing, laying the groundwork for Cohen to put the request directly to President Jiang Zemin and Defense Minister Chi Haotian next week.

The Clinton-Gore administration wants them to try to persuade North Korea to dismantle its missile programs - that China has helped it create - in exchange for billions in U.S. financial aid to Pyongyang.

Paving his own way to Beijing, Cohen said in advance of his arrival Tuesday:

"North Korea historically has had one of the largest militaries in the world, forward deployed. It does still pose a threat to not only South Korea" but also has the "capability of posing a threat to the United States and others in the future.

"We have to look at not only their words today, but their capabilities. And so we have to continue to provide for our security issues, and we will take that into account as the situation unfolds."

This will be Cohen's first trip into the mainland since U.S.-China military relations went sour in the wake of the American-led air war in Yugoslavia in which the Chinese embassy in Belgrade was bombed - accidentally, the Pentagon insists.

The secretary's mission holds considerable significance:

• It takes advantage of the thawing of those icy relations.

• It follows on the Clinton-Gore administration's efforts to persuade both houses of Congress to approve permanent normal trade relations with China.

• It precedes the coming November election, in which one of the major issues will revolve around the Clinton-Gore administration's cozy relations with illegal Chinese campaign contributors, China's record of military espionage within the United States, and the extent to which the next president is willing to go to the military aid of Taiwan should Beijing make good on its threat to attack.

• It seizes the opportunity to influence North Korea's military posture on the heels of unprecedented face-to-face talks between the hostile leaders of North and South Korea.

On the ground in Beijing, the U.S. advance delegation, led by John Holum, who is Clinton's arms-control adviser, is urging Beijing to ease off on its own assistance to missile programs in Iran, Syria and other Middle East countries known to be hostile to the United States.

Also on their agenda is the Clinton-Gore administration's plan for a limited missile defense, intended to ward off a nuclear attack from North Korea and other "rogue states."

In addition to Russia, China is opposed to that plan, on grounds it may be used against it in event of war between Beijing and Taipei.

There is, thus, a lot of asking on the part of Americans knocking on official doors in Beijing in the next week or so. How much giving they are prepared to do in response to the inevitable asking in return by the Chinese has not yet surfaced.

---

Pressure Builds on Senate to Vote on China Pact

Yahoo News
Friday July 7 4:55 PM ET
By Adam Entous
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20000707/pl/china_congress_dc_8.html

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - With time running out in the congressional session, the White House and big business will ratchet up pressure on Senate Republican Leader Trent Lott next week to schedule a July vote on a landmark China trade bill before it gets bogged down in election politics.

The Republican-led Senate returns on Monday from its weeklong Independence Day recess, and despite weeks of lobbying by business, Lott has yet to set a date for legislation granting permanent normal trade relations (PNTR) to China.

Instead, Lott said the Senate's first order of business would be a controversial sanctions measure aimed at curbing alleged Chinese weapon sales to Pakistan and other nations. Lott also wants the Senate to complete work on key spending bills to fund the federal government before turning to PNTR.

The delay has outraged business groups, the White House and pro-trade Senate Democrats, who fear Republicans will sideline the trade bill until just before the November election to maximize pressure on Democratic presidential hopeful Al Gore (news - web sites). Gore's support for PNTR has put him at odds with organized labor, a key Democratic constituency which fears closer ties with China will lead to massive U.S. job losses.

But lobbyists were increasingly confident Lott would back down, clearing the way for a final vote on the trade bill before the Senate recesses for the month of August and the presidential and congressional races heat up.

``We're picking up momentum on the issue of bringing it to a vote sooner rather than later,'' said Lonnie Taylor, chief lobbyist for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which has threatened to reassess its financial support for lawmakers, Republican or Democrat, who hold up the trade bill.

There is little doubt over the outcome of the Senate vote once one is scheduled.

Unlike the House, where two out of three Democrats voted against measure, the trade bill enjoys broad bipartisan support in the Senate. Sixty-three lawmakers in the 100-member Senate said in a recent Reuters poll that they would vote in favor of PNTR, enough to override a vote-blocking filibuster.

Once approved by the Senate and signed into law by President Clinton, PNTR would end the annual ritual of reviewing Beijing's trade status and guarantee Chinese goods the same low-tariff access to U.S. markets as products from nearly every other nation.

In exchange for the trade benefits, China would open a wide range of markets, from agriculture to telecommunications, to U.S. businesses under the terms of a landmark agreement signed in November 1999. That agreement was a major step in China's bid to join the World Trade Organization.

But hurdles remain.

Despite a White House veto threat, Lott of Mississippi is pressing for passage next week of legislation that would require the United States to impose sanctions on the Chinese government or private companies if they help nations develop or acquire nuclear, chemical and other weapons.

Senate Democrats, led by Max Baucus of Montana, have threatened to hold up the measure until Lott schedules a vote on the trade bill. But Lott's spokesman said the Majority Leader had no ``imminent'' plans to announce a date on PNTR.

Senate aides said the appropriations process could bog down, forcing Lott to put off a vote on the trade bill until September or later. China's critics in the Senate could also delay final passage for months by adding amendments to PNTR, which would force the House and the Senate to negotiate a final compromise and vote again.

---

U.S. Negotiators Start Arms Talks in Beijing

New York Times
July 7, 2000
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/00/07/07/late/07china-us-arms.html

BEIJING -- U.S. and Chinese officials opened their first arms-control talks in 19 months Friday, discussing China's assistance to Pakistan's missile program and arms proliferation in North Korea.

A team led by John Holum, the chief U.S. arms-control negotiator, also was expected to bring up American ambitions to build a missile defense system, something China opposes. China in turn was likely to talk about its No. 1 weapons proliferation issue: U.S. arms sales to rival Taiwan.

Washington and Beijing have tried for years to hold regular talks on arms control. Their last formal session was held in Nov. 1998. Nearly six months later, China broke off the dialogue after the U.S. bombed the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade.

"We are here to resume the dialogue on strategic and national security issues. It's very important to us," Holum told reporters before the meeting.

Holum will spend much of his time discussing China's alleged role in helping Pakistan build a missile threat to neighboring India, one U.S. official said on condition of anonymity. A U.S. intelligence report last year revived controversy over China's weapons exports, saying it sent Pakistan nuclear-capable M-11 missiles in the early 1990s.

The Clinton administration is trying to avoid imposing the sanctions that may be required under U.S. law after such a finding. But pressure is building in Congress for Chinese concessions. Proposed legislation in the Senate calls for monitoring of China's weapons proliferation and possible sanctions.

Holum hopes to gain Chinese commitments to strengthen missile and nuclear arms monitoring, said the U.S. official who spoke on condition of anonymity.

China has pledged not to export missiles and denies selling them to Pakistan. But it has declined to sign the international Missile Technology Control Regime or abide by its ban on sales of missile components.

The Chinese side is led by Vice Foreign Minister Wang Guangya. Holum also is to meet Lt. Gen. Xiong Guangkai, deputy chief of the general staff of China's military, and top foreign policy experts.

----

Anti-Missile Test Looms Over China-U.S. Arms Talks

Reuters
July 7, 2000 Filed at 1:59 a.m. ET
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/international/international-china-u.html

BEIJING (Reuters) - Chinese and U.S. officials resumed long-frozen arms control talks on Friday as the United States prepared to test an anti-missile system that has united China, Russia and others in strident opposition.

The two sides reopened a dialogue on disarmament and non-proliferation China angrily broke off last May after NATO warplanes bombed the Chinese embassy in Yugoslavia.

But the two-day meeting in Beijing straddles a key $100 million test over the Pacific Ocean of a planned U.S. National Missile Defense (NMD) plan that China bitterly opposes.

On Saturday, the U.S. military will try to shoot down a missile warhead in space -- a key step toward President Clinton's decision whether to begin building a limited missile defense against states such as North Korea, Iran and Iraq.

Touring Europe, where the plan has sparked fears of a new arms race, Prime Minister Zhu Rongji fired a salvo at a closer-to-home version of NMD: the U.S.-proposed Theater Missile Defense (TMD) for its allies and troops in Asia.

``China is categorically opposed to the TMD,'' Zhu told a news conference in Rome on Thursday.

``The system would aim to put Taiwan in a sphere of protection. This would be blatant interference in Chinese affairs,'' he said. He and Italian premier Giuliano Amato had common positions on both NMD and TMD, Zhu said.

NORMALISATION WITH NEW DISPUTES

China fears the TMD, intended to defend U.S. troops and Asian allies against perceived missile threats from North Korea, will be used to shelter Taiwan and embolden resistance there against Beijing's determination to bring it back into its fold.

Zhu's criticism came after the Chinese Foreign Ministry said NMD would upset the global strategic balance and TMD would set off an arms race in Asia.

Talks on Friday and Saturday between a U.S. delegation led by senior arms control adviser John Holum and Chinese officials headed by Vice Foreign Minister Wang Guangya aim to improve relations and deepen bilateral arms control and non-proliferation dialogue.

``Restarting the talks is in itself good and we hope to get as much into the nitty-gritty as time allows,'' a U.S. official said.

But China is fuming not only at NMD and TMD, opposition to which has helped bind its new-found friendship with Russia. Both fear that NMD could evolve to neutralize their nuclear missiles.

Beijing also resents U.S. arms sales to Taiwan, an island which it claims as a wayward province and has threatened to attack if it declares independence.

PAKISTAN, ISRAEL CAST SHADOWS

China is also upset about U.S. legislation that would require the United States to impose sanctions against the Chinese government, companies and other groups if they help countries develop or acquire nuclear bombs or other weapons of mass destruction.

Senate support for the nonproliferation bill has increased in recent days amid new allegations that China sold missile technology to Pakistan. Beijing and Islamabad have denied the accusations.

Another arms spat is brewing over China's $250 million deal to buy Phalcon airborne early warning radar systems from Israel. The United States fears the technology could be used against Taiwan and has lobbied hard to scupper the deal.

China suspended the arms control and non-proliferation talks and dialogue on human rights, as well as military-to military contacts, after NATO's bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade in May 1999.

Military contacts were resumed in January with the visit of a top Chinese general to the United States and the return to normality will be completed next week when Defense Secretary William Cohen travels to Beijing.

----

Anti-Missile Test Looms Over China-U.S. Arms Talks

Yahoo News
Friday July 7 1:59 AM ET
By Paul Eckert
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20000707/wl/china_usa_dc_1.html

BEIJING (Reuters) - Chinese and U.S. officials resumed long-frozen arms control talks on Friday as the United States prepared to test an anti-missile system that has united China, Russia and others in strident opposition.

The two sides reopened a dialogue on disarmament and non-proliferation China angrily broke off last May after NATO warplanes bombed the Chinese embassy in Yugoslavia.

But the two-day meeting in Beijing straddles a key $100 million test over the Pacific Ocean of a planned U.S. National Missile Defense (NMD) plan that China bitterly opposes.

On Saturday, the U.S. military will try to shoot down a missile warhead in space -- a key step toward President Clinton's decision whether to begin building a limited missile defense against states such as North Korea, Iran and Iraq.

Touring Europe, where the plan has sparked fears of a new arms race, Prime Minister Zhu Rongji fired a salvo at a closer-to-home version of NMD: the U.S.-proposed Theater Missile Defense (TMD) for its allies and troops in Asia.

``China is categorically opposed to the TMD,'' Zhu told a news conference in Rome on Thursday.

``The system would aim to put Taiwan in a sphere of protection. This would be blatant interference in Chinese affairs,'' he said. He and Italian premier Giuliano Amato had common positions on both NMD and TMD, Zhu said.

Normalisation With New Disputes

China fears the TMD, intended to defend U.S. troops and Asian allies against perceived missile threats from North Korea, will be used to shelter Taiwan and embolden resistance there against Beijing's determination to bring it back into its fold.

Zhu's criticism came after the Chinese Foreign Ministry said NMD would upset the global strategic balance and TMD would set off an arms race in Asia.

Talks on Friday and Saturday between a U.S. delegation led by senior arms control adviser John Holum and Chinese officials headed by Vice Foreign Minister Wang Guangya aim to improve relations and deepen bilateral arms control and non-proliferation dialogue.

``Restarting the talks is in itself good and we hope to get as much into the nitty-gritty as time allows,'' a U.S. official said.

But China is fuming not only at NMD and TMD, opposition to which has helped bind its new-found friendship with Russia. Both fear that NMD could evolve to neutralize their nuclear missiles.

Beijing also resents U.S. arms sales to Taiwan, an island which it claims as a wayward province and has threatened to attack if it declares independence.

Pakistan, Israel Cast Shadows

China is also upset about U.S. legislation that would require the United States to impose sanctions against the Chinese government, companies and other groups if they help countries develop or acquire nuclear bombs or other weapons of mass destruction.

Senate support for the nonproliferation bill has increased in recent days amid new allegations that China sold missile technology to Pakistan. Beijing and Islamabad have denied the accusations.

Another arms spat is brewing over China's $250 million deal to buy Phalcon airborne early warning radar systems from Israel. The United States fears the technology could be used against Taiwan and has lobbied hard to scupper the deal.

China suspended the arms control and non-proliferation talks and dialogue on human rights, as well as military-to military contacts, after NATO's bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade in May 1999.

Military contacts were resumed in January with the visit of a top Chinese general to the United States and the return to normality will be completed next week when Defense Secretary William Cohen travels to Beijing.

---

Battle Brews Over Chinese Weapon Sales

Yahoo News
Thursday July 6 7:02 PM ET
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20000706/pl/china_congress_dc_7.html

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Senate Republican leaders are pressing for passage next week of legislation that would combat weapon sales by China, despite objections from the White House and business leaders who see it as a threat to commercial ties with Beijing.

Introduced by Republican Sen. Fred Thompson of Tennessee and co-sponsored by Senate Republican Leader Trent Lott of Mississippi, the legislation would require the United States to impose sanctions against the Chinese government, companies and other groups if they help nations develop or acquire nuclear bombs and other weapons of mass destruction.

Senate support for the nonproliferation bill has increased in recent days amid new allegations that China sold missile technology to Pakistan. Beijing has called the allegations groundless.

``The protections (the nonproliferation bill) affords American national security are more important now than ever,'' said John Czwartacki, Lott's spokesman.

Czwartacki said he expected the nonproliferation bill to pass as early as Tuesday, even though it is opposed by most Senate Democrats and faces a White House veto. Opponents argue that the bill was too provocative and could backfire on U.S. business.

Thompson had initially threatened to add the nonproliferation initiative to legislation granting permanent normal trade relations (PNTR) to China. Instead, Lott and Thompson agreed to bring it up as a ``free-standing'' bill, rather than as an amendment to PNTR.

But Senate Democrats, led by Max Baucus of Montana, have threatened to hold up Thompson's measure until Lott schedules a final vote on the trade bill.

Senate aides said the standoff had created a new hurdle to passage of PNTR, but doubted it would derail the trade bill. Czwartacki said Lott still intended to call up PNTR before the end of July.

Once approved by the Senate and signed into law by President Clinton, PNTR would end the annual ritual of reviewing Beijing's trade status and guarantee Chinese goods the same low-tariff access to U.S. markets as products from nearly every other nation.

In exchange for the trade benefits, China would open a wide range of markets, from agriculture to telecommunications, to U.S. businesses under the terms of a landmark agreement signed in November 1999. That agreement was a major step in China's bid to join the World Trade Organization.

-------- korea

Engagement Is Not Appeasement

By Michael O'Hanlon
Friday, July 7, 2000; Page A27
http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/2000-07/07/046l-070700-idx.html

In his recent op-ed article ["Evil Without End?"], Fred C. Ikle provides just the latest example of a line of criticism directed at the Clinton administration's policies toward Stalinist North Korea in recent years. The charge, in essence, is that these policies amount to appeasement.

The critics are wrong. It is now clear that a carrot-and-stick policy toward North Korea has been the right approach, and has produced a significant foreign policy success for the Clinton administration.

Consider how bad the situation in Korea was only a short time ago. During much of the 1990s, the U.S. intelligence community considered the Korean peninsula the world's number one flash point, constantly perched on the brink of a vicious war that would immediately involve the 37,000 American troops stationed there--as well as the hundreds of thousands of U.S. reinforcements sure to follow.

Until 1994, North Korea was probably on its way to developing a nuclear arsenal. As late as 1998, it launched a three-stage rocket over Japan, raising the fear that not only could it strike that country but that it also might develop an intercontinental missile capable of delivering a nuclear warhead against the United States.

Many Republicans and some hawkish Democrats would have taken a counterproductive approach to this crisis situation. For example, the Bush administration's national security adviser, Brent Scowcroft, and former undersecretary of state Arnold Kanter publicly advocated prompt strikes against North Korean nuclear facilities in 1994 unless Pyongyang immediately and unconditionally accepted "continuous, unfettered" monitoring.

The critics did not relent even after the Clinton administration worked out a deal for monitoring--and in fact shutting down--those facilities in 1994. Known as the Agreed Framework, it was not, as Scowcroft and Kanter had demanded, unconditional. But it was smart just the same. It called for South Korea, Japan and the United States to provide North Korea with heavy fuel oil to replace the energy that the nuclear reactors would have produced, and eventually to build North Korea new nuclear reactors with less capability for contributing to a nuclear weapons program. Yet Republicans in Congress have constantly resisted providing the heavy fuel oil--even though the likely alternative was to see North Korea resume its nuclear program.

Belying the charge of appeasement, the administration never ruled out stern measures toward North Korea. In 1994, Defense Secretary William Perry stated that the United States would not allow North Korea to develop a nuclear arsenal--implicitly threatening strikes against its reactor complex if a negotiated settlement could not be found. There was no talk of reducing U.S. troops in Korea; American weaponry on the peninsula was increased and upgraded; and Tokyo and Washington fashioned an accord to make U.S. bases in Japan more dependable in a Korean crisis.

But while strengthening its deterrent, the administration also held out an olive branch to the inscrutable North Korean regime. In addition to developing the Agreed Framework in conjunction with Seoul and Tokyo, Washington maintained discreet diplomatic contacts with Pyongyang. It teamed with other aid donors to alleviate famine in the North. And it held out the promise of lifting trade sanctions if North Korea would agree to a moratorium on its long-range missile testing.

This balanced approach has clearly worked. Today North Korea's nuclear program remains frozen. The country that assassinated part of the South Korean cabinet and engaged in other barbaric activities in the 1980s continues to refrain from new acts of terrorism, according to U.S. intelligence.

Pyongyang has indeed imposed a moratorium on its long-range missile flight testing. And a highly promising, if still nascent, process of detente is underway between the peninsula's leaders, Kim Dae Jung of South Korea and Kim Jong Il of North Korea.

To be sure, some Republicans have played a constructive role in the U.S.-Korea policy process. And the Clinton administration does not deserve complete credit. Although it ultimately produced an effective Korea policy, it did so in a tentative manner at first.

But the larger message, leaving aside the partisan issues, is that engagement with North Korea has been working. Contrary to Ikle's suggestion, it should clearly be continued. Assuming that visits between divided Korean families on opposite sides of the Demilitarized Zone occur soon, we should then move to an expanded engagement policy. Seoul, Tokyo and Washington should offer North Korea targeted economic aid if Pyongyang agrees to a conventional arms control treaty that might slash weaponry on the peninsula by 50 percent or more.

Unfortunately, such proposals could be stymied by U.S. domestic politics, if those who wrongly charge the Clinton administration with appeasement are allowed to carry the day.

The writer is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.

-------- u.s. nuc facilities

-------- california

Congress and the NIF: Budget Honeymoon May Be Ending

Fri, 7 Jul 2000
by Marylia Kelley - marylia@earthlink.net
from Tri-Valley CAREs' July newsletter, Citizen's Watch

On June 1, 2000, the Dept. of Energy (DOE) missed its Congressionally-mandated deadline to deliver a certified "rebaseline" of the full cost to taxpayers for the problem-plagued National Ignition Facility (NIF), currently under construction at Livermore Lab.

Instead, DOE requested a three-month extension, until mid-September. This conveniently puts off delivery of the NIF rebaseline until after Congress finishes with the Fiscal Year 2001 budget. So, we taxpayers and lawmakers alike are asked to take it on faith that DOE will control NIF's ballooning costs and successfully resolve the mega-laser's various mission, managerial and technical uncertainties.

On June 27, the NIF faced its first serious budget challenge when two conscientious Congressmen, Paul Ryan (R-WI) and Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), offered an amendment to cut $74.1 million from NIF's construction funding.

There would be only 36 hours between the time the Rules Committee allowed their amendment and the vote on the floor of the House.

The two Representatives were gathering substantial support from both parties, momentum was building to cut NIF and, as the public got wind of it, there was an encouraging grassroots response.

Still, it seemed an impossibly short turn around time, and the vote wouldn't actually come to the floor until after 10 PM Tuesday. These factors would hamper the valiant efforts of Ryan and Kucinich to achieve the amendment's passage.

Kudos are in order for the fine speeches made by both Representatives, covering all of the following: the multi-billion dollar cost overruns; schedule slippages of a half-decade or more; scientific uncertainties; the pending GAO report; the missing rebaseline; the myth of NIF's necessity to maintenance of the arsenal; its proliferation risks; its role in promoting a return to full-scale U.S. nuclear testing and more.

Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Oakland) submitted testimony citing NIF's radioactive wastes and stating eloquently that NIF "symbolizes the American failure to lead the way on global arms control."

On the other side, Livermore Lab and DOE pulled out all the stops in order to defeat the amendment. Interestingly, but not unexpectedly, several Reps. who rose to oppose cutting NIF offered arguments taken directly from Livermore Lab's lobbying materials, in some cases reading them word for word off the page.

Leading the charge to oppose the amendment was Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D-Livermore), who relied on the same old fallacies that Livermore Lab has been selling since 1995, namely that NIF is a "cornerstone" of Stockpile Stewardship, and "the best way to ensure the safety and reliability of our nuclear weapons." (See box with quotes from prominent scientists, below.)

The one novel argument Tauscher offered was that the U.S. had already spent nearly a billion on NIF and that in and of itself justified spending more.

The House Appropriations Committee Chair, Ron Packard (R-Oceanside), spoke against the amendment but expressed misgivings about the NIF program. The jury is still out, he said.

All in all, the Ryan-Kucinich NIF amendment made a strong showing, but failed on a voice vote.

Now the budget debate will move to the Senate. Upon its return from the July 4th holiday, the Senate is expected to vote on its Appropriations bill. That vote will specify how big a check the Senate is willing to write for NIF.

If the Senate cuts (or increases) NIF's budget, then any differences between the House and Senate funding levels would be negotiated in committee.

Stay tuned.

--

Scientists on NIF

Experts decry the myth that NIF is needed for maintaining nuclear weapons "safety" & "reliability"

Edward Teller, known as the father of the hydrogen bomb, when asked about the NIF's utility for this task, replied: "None whatsoever." Los Alamos physicist Rod Schultz wrote in a lab publication that NIF's touted importance to the weapons stockpile does "not reflect the technical judgment of the nuclear weapons design community." Sandia Lab's former vice-president Bob Peurifoy called NIF "worthless" for maintenance of the arsenal. In a separate interview with another newspaper, Livermore weapons scientist Seymour Sack called NIF "worse than worthless" for that task. Ray Kidder, another Livermore Lab physicist, said: "As far as maintaining the stockpile is concerned, [NIF] is not necessary." (Sources: Tri-Valley Herald, Contra Costa Times, Albuquerque Tribune & Science Magazine.)

Marylia Kelley Tri-Valley CAREs
(Communities Against a Radioactive Environment)
2582 Old First Street Livermore, CA USA 94550
http://www.igc.org/tvc/ - is our web site, please visit us there!
(925) 443-7148 - is our phone (925) 443-0177 - is our fax

-------- new mexico

Feds Think Lee Used Atomic Data for Resume

NewsMax.com
Saturday, July 7, 2000
UPI
http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/7/7/151826

LOS ANGELES - Recently filed court documents indicate federal investigators may no longer suspect that scientist Wen Ho Lee was acting as a foreign spy when he copied reams of secret nuclear information from the computer system at the Los Alamos National Laboratory but rather may have been simply beefing up his resume.

A two-page document filed in federal court in Albuquerque said that prosecutors believed Lee was "interested in seeking employment abroad" and downloaded a large amount of sensitive nuclear weapons information to show off for potential employers, the Los Angeles Times reported Friday.

The document, filed by U.S. Attorney Norman C. Bay, is the first formal declaration of the prosecution's theories regarding Lee, who faces trial Nov. 6 in Albuquerque on 59 felony counts involving the alleged mishandling of some 400,000 pages of classified documents.

Lee has not been charged with espionage, although the high-profile investigation has centered on the possibility that Lee passed U.S. nuclear secrets on to China or some other foreign government.

Lee, who was employed at Los Alamos for 19 years, has denied any wrongdoing.

Bay said in his filing that Lee had sent out letters seeking employment to universities and private companies in European and Asian nations, including his native Taiwan, in 1993 "at or about the time of the first offenses charged."

Investigators believe Lee wanted to use the vast number of classified pages to prove his knowledge of nuclear research to prospective employers.

The Times said the job-hunting theory surfaced in December after it was learned that Lee had been informed in 1993 that his job could be eliminated because of budget cuts.

Bay, however, reiterated the government's contention that Lee had also made contact with representatives of China's Institute of Applied Physics and Computational Mathematics, which is involved in research into nuclear weapons computer simulations.

The document was still considered a victory by Lee's defense team.

"It's absurd for the government to submit in a written document that it may seek to prove Dr. Lee was assisting countries like Australia and Switzerland," attorney Mark Holscher told the newspaper. "The idea that he is aiding countries that don't even have nuclear programs is bizarre."

A former FBI agent, Paul D. Moore, told the Times that the documents Lee is accused of copying could also give a foreign nation's nuclear program a major boost.

A hearing was scheduled before the trial judge on July 12 on a defense motion that would force prosecutors to disclose the allegedly stolen classified information to the jury.

---

U.S. Names Some Countries Los Alamos Scientist Might Have Tried to Help

New York Times
July 7, 2000
By JAMES STERNGOLD
http://www.nytimes.com/library/national/070700los-alamos-lee.html

LOS ANGELES, July 6 -- After months of resisting, federal prosecutors today identified an array of countries, from Australia to Switzerland to China, as some of the nations that a scientist accused of mishandling nuclear weapons secrets from the Los Alamos National Laboratory might have tried to assist.

Lawyers for the scientist, Wen Ho Lee, immediately ridiculed some entries on the list.

"These are not countries which anyone other than the prosecutors have identified as presenting any kind of nuclear threat to the United States," Mark Holscher, one of the lawyers, said.

But the filing, which came only after Judge James A. Parker of Federal District Court ordered it, reinforced a government theory that Dr. Lee might have improperly downloaded the trove of secret data because he wanted to enhance his job prospects with a foreign agency after being told by the laboratory in the early 1990's that he might be laid off.

Dr. Lee's lawyers flatly rejected the charges. He has pleaded not guilty and is being held without bail. Dr. Lee faces life in prison if convicted at a trial set for November.

In its filing today, the government said that in about 1993, Dr. Lee wrote letters to institutions in Australia, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Singapore, Switzerland and Taiwan seeking employment.

The government also stated that Dr. Lee had made contact with officials from the Institute of Applied Physics and Computational Mathematics in China, though it did not provide a reason.

Patricia Chavez, a spokeswoman for the United States Attorney's office in Albuquerque, where the case is being heard, said prosecutors would not comment beyond the three-page document.

For some time, Dr. Lee's lawyers have demanded that the prosecutors provide a so-called bill of particulars, specifying which countries the government believed Dr. Lee was trying to assist.

Those details are important, because Dr. Lee was charged not just with improperly downloading the data, but doing so with the intention of aiding a foreign country and harming the United States.

George A. Stamboulidis, the assistant United States attorney who is leading the prosecution, tried to walk a legal tightrope in his filing today, leaving the government maximum flexibility by keeping its case vague.

Mr. Stamboulidis argued that Dr. Lee had not necessarily decided which country he intended to assist when he downloaded the weapons data. He also contended that the government need prove only that Dr. Lee intended to harm the United States, and not necessarily that he intended to provide an advantage to another country.

Mr. Stamboulidis also said the government could add names to the list.

Dr. Lee, who is 60, was originally the subject of a sweeping investigation because of concerns that he might have given China the secret to developing a miniaturized American warhead known as the W-88. Because of those concerns, he was fired in March 1999.

But when Dr. Lee was indicted on 59 felony counts in December, it was not for espionage. Instead, he faces charges that he had improperly downloaded the data from a secure to an unsecure computer, then placed the information on portable computer tapes. Seven of those tapes have never been recovered, though Dr. Lee has said that, in keeping with laboratory policy, he destroyed them.

Dr. Lee's lawyers have not disputed that he received a notice saying he might be laid off, or that he contacted some agencies about jobs.

They have said, though, that Dr. Lee's contact with the scientific institute in China was an official trip paid for and sponsored by the laboratory. And they rejected the idea that any downloading Dr. Lee did had anything to do with improving his job prospects.

"To me, the most noteworthy thing about this is that after all those months investigating him and seven months after indicting him, they still don't have a theory on what he was doing or who he was trying to help," Nancy Hollander, another lawyer for Dr. Lee, said.

-------- new york

COMMUNIQUE No. 1 provided exclusively by New York Nuclear Corporation

UraniumOnLine.com
July 7, 2000
http://www.uraniumonline.com/nynco/uol2/UOL_Updates/Communique_1/communique_1.html

July 7, 2000

Great Neck, N.Y. - This is an introductory communiqué from UraniumOnLine that in the future will be published and sent on a regular basis to inform you of the exciting concepts and events at UOL.

A UOL auction facilitates "pure" price competition for uranium because all terms and conditions other than price are fixed. Sellers can compete only with one number, and many of you saw those numbers flicker down on your computer screens during the July 6 auction.

While delivery for this deal will occur this year, UOL can provide the same "pure" price competition for uranium for deliveries further out in time - for deliveries in 2001, 2002, 2003 or beyond.

Regulated utilities focus on paying no more than published prices at the time of delivery and feel comfortable with market related long term contracts. Price risk is passed on to the ratepayers. Deregulated utilities must bear price risk themselves and thus have a need to minimize uncertainty.

How can deregulated buyers be assured of getting the lowest fixed price available? Through a UOL auction of course!

Call us to see how you can lock in the best future prices now. For additional information or if you would like to be removed from our email list, please contact Rebecca T. Battle, rb@nynco.com

-------- washington

Study: Hanford chemical seeping into Columbia doesn't harm salmon

The Oregonian
Friday, July 7, 2000
By Jonathan Brinckman of The Oregonian staff
http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/index.ssf?/news/oregonian/00/07/cu_61plume07.frame

A toxic chemical seeping into the Columbia River from closed nuclear reactors at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation poses no danger to salmon, according to preliminary results of a study released this week.

The findings are important because the Hanford Reach, a 51-mile stretch of the Columbia running past and through the nuclear reservation, is the spawning grounds for 80 percent of the river basin's remaining wild fall chinook. Those fish, whose numbers have exceeded 150,000 in recent years, are the mainstay of the Columbia's sport and tribal fisheries.

The federally funded study found that levels of hexavalent chromium up to 266 parts per billion do not kill salmon eggs or young salmon or cause deformities. Although hexavalent chromium levels as high as 400 parts per billion have been found in a spring seeping into the river, chromium has never been found at levels above 130 parts per billion in the river gravel where salmon spawn.

Although the drinking water standard for chromium is 100 parts per billion and the standard for protecting aquatic organisms is even more stringent, at 11 parts per billion, the study found that the higher levels of chromium did not harm developing salmon. Scientists think that's because chromium affects gills; salmon eggs and newly hatched salmon do not have gills.

Hexavalent chromium is a toxic chemical added to water used to cool reactors. Huge volumes of cooling water were used, and the spent coolant was discharged into the river or into the ground, contaminating the ground water.

Hexavalent chromium is one of the two chemicals or radioactive elements leaking into the Columbia from the site that Hanford managers are most worried about.

The other is strontium-90, a radioactive element that has leaked into cooling water used in nuclear reactors. Hanford officials said that neither has been found at levels that would threaten fish.

But a scientist who works for a Seattle-based advocacy group said thorium, another radioactive element from Hanford, is present in the riverbed at levels high enough to threaten fish.

Norm Buske, a physicist consulting for the group Government Accountability Project, said Wednesday that he has found elements from the decay of radioactive thorium at dangerously high levels for fish. Buske, a longtime Hanford watchdog, made headlines in 1990 when he mailed strontium-contaminated mulberry jam made from mulberries picked at Hanford to the U.S. energy secretary and the governor of Washington.

Although neither strontium nor chromium poses an immediate threat, Buske said, thorium is worrisome. "We don't see anything in the springs that is a public health problem or environmental hazard at this time," he said. "It looks like the biggie is thorium."

However, Michael Thompson, acting manager of the U.S. Department of Energy's groundwater cleanup project at Hanford, said Buske is wrong about thorium. "We haven't found thorium in the environment at levels of concern," Thompson said. "He's brought this issue up before, and it doesn't hold water."

Hanford was established in 1943 to produce plutonium for the first nuclear weapons used in World War II. It is the most contaminated of the Energy Department's nuclear weapons complexes, with 60 percent of the nation's high-level nuclear waste and 80 percent of its spent fuel rods for nuclear reactors.

Waste disposal practices through the 1970s were poor. Water contaminated with toxic chemicals or radioactive elements, for example, was usually discharged into trenches called "cribs" and allowed to seep into the ground untreated.

Now, the ground water beneath 100 square miles of the 560-square-mile Hanford site is contaminated by toxic chemicals or radioactive elements at levels higher than permitted in drinking water.

The cleanup program at Hanford costs about $1 billion a year. Of that, $7 million is being spent to pump and treat contaminated ground water. The Energy Department monitors contamination seeping into the Columbia.

"We are finding some localized areas of concerns where we have treatment systems in place," Thompson said. "The focus of my energy today is what has not reached the ground water yet. We have to get our hands around that."

Two radioactive elements are detected in the river at higher levels downstream from the Hanford site than upstream, but Hanford managers said neither poses a risk to human health or to wildlife.

Tritium is found in river water at 75 picocuries per liter to 100 picocuries per liter at Richland, below Hanford. That compares with 25 picocuries per liter to 40 picocuries per liter at Priest Rapids Dam, above Hanford. Tritium is permitted in drinking water at levels up to 20,000 picocuries per liter. A picocurie is one-trillionth of a curie, the unit used in measuring radioactivity.

Iodine-129 is also found in river water at slightly higher concentrations at Richland compared to levels at Priest Rapids Dam. But concentrations are extremely low, far below the water quality standard.

Further information about these contaminants in Hanford ground water and the Columbia River can be found at two Web sites: http://hanford.pnl.gov/groundwater and http://hanford.pnl.gov/envreport.

You can reach Jonathan Brinckman at 503-221-8190 or by e-mail at jbrinckman@news.oregonian.com.

-------- us nuc politics

Delay missile shield
Whether it works is just one of the questions

Bergen Record
Tuesday, July 11, 2000
http://www.bergen.com/editorials/miss20000711.htm

THE LATEST TEST of the controversial missile defense shield was an unexpected, embarrassing failure. Yet President Clinton is apparently still intent on deciding in the next few weeks whether to begin actual deployment of the shield. That would be a huge and costly mistake.

The $100 million test over the weekend was a disaster. The "interceptor," which was supposed to target and destroy another missile, never separated from its booster rocket. This failure of one of the most elementary parts of the technology meant the actual ability of the rocket to intercept the target was never tested. So after three tests of the system, two of which have failed, we have no clear sense of whether it could work.

Clearly, far more testing is needed. But this big question mark has not stopped proponents of the missile shield from pressuring the White House to move forward anyway. They want the president to sign off on construction next spring of a radar station in Alaska, which would be the first phase of the missile shield, designed to be working by 2005.

But even preliminary construction on the radar station site would cause grave problems. Relations with Russia, China, and our European allies are already strained over the shield. Deploying it would violate the 1972 Antiballistic Missile Treaty with Russia, and Russian officials strongly oppose amending the treaty, despite intense pressure from the United States. They correctly point out that U.S. action on the shield could destabilize international relations and start another arms race.

In fact, disagreement over the shield has already threatened talks with Russia on nuclear arsenal reductions. It is incredibly foolhardy to jeopardize world peace for a defense system that may not even work.

The missile shield is supposed to protect the United States from "rogue" missiles fired by North Korea, Iran, or Iraq. Defense specialists say North Korea could have long-range capability by 2005, but as of now, that nation is observing a moratorium on missile testing.

Is a missile shield even necessary? There is vast disagreement over whether a system that would cost as much as $60 billion is too much protection or not enough. George W. Bush and many Republicans in Congress want a much wider shield that would protect against all-out nuclear attack. Al Gore says he will wait and see what Mr. Clinton decides.

The president, who does not want to appear soft on defense for Mr. Gore's sake, has the choice of either giving the Alaska radar station the green light or leaving the decision to the next president. Given the large number of questions that surround the missile defense shield, the best decision -- for both Mr. Clinton and his successor -- is to wait, and to explore strategic alternatives that involve cooperation with other nations, ones that would be far less likely to threaten world balance.

---

Greenpeace Urges Protest of Star Wars Test

NewsMax.com
Friday, July 7, 2000
UPI
http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/7/7/94134

BANGKOK, Thailand - The international environmental watchdog and anti-nuclear group Greenpeace urged Southeast Asian governments to oppose a scheduled test of the U.S. Star Wars missile defense program Friday.

The appeal came shortly before the U.S. military planned an attempt to shoot down a missile warhead in space fired from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California.

The Minuteman intercontinental missile with a dummy warhead was scheduled to be launched toward the Pacific Marshall Islands. A U.S. "hit-to-kill" weapon was then to be fired from Kwajalein Atoll to intercept the warhead about 120 miles above the Earth. The Pentagon's third and final preliminary test of the system was scheduled for between 0200 GMT and 0600 GMT Saturday.

The test is a key step toward deciding whether to quickly begin building a limited missile defense aimed at foiling attacks by states such as North Korea, Iran and Iraq.

"We reject this proposed Star Wars missile system because it will spark a new nuclear arms race and destroy the international arms control and disarmament regime," said Athena Ballesteros, regional campaigns coordinator for Greenpeace Southeast Asia. Ballesteros urged the ten-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), which supports a nuclear free zone treaty, to express their governments' concerns about the impact of the Star Wars testing on their nuclear non-proliferation efforts.

"We are calling on the Philippines and Thailand, in particular, to urge their ASEAN neighbours to come together and express their opposition to the continued expansion of nuclear weapons by the world's nuclear powers led by the U.S.," she said in a statement.

Greenpeace warned that if the Star Wars plan goes ahead, there will be a reversal of the deep reduction already made in nuclear arsenals around the world as a result of the end of the Cold War. It said one of the most serious consequences will be a collapse of existing arms control and nuclear disarmament treaties such as the U.S.-Russian 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty.

"Let us not forget that a crucial component of nuclear non-proliferation efforts is to develop non-nuclear energy sources instead," Ballesteros said. "Abandoning a reactor program that could have produced plutonium for nuclear weapons would mean more funds for energy alternatives."

---

Activists Try To Stop Missile Test

Associated Press
July 7, 2000 Filed at 8:26 a.m. EDT
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/w/AP-Missile-Defense-Protest.html

VANDENBERG AIR FORCE BASE, Calif. (AP) -- Anti-nuclear activists were hoping to halt Friday evening's test of a national missile defense system by positioning a ship in an area of the Pacific where a rocket stage is expected to splash down.

Greenpeace planned to station a vessel about 110 miles offshore from Vandenberg Air Force Base, said Steve Shallhorn, campaign director for Greenpeace USA.

The Air Force has asked pilots and mariners to avoid the area during the test or risk damage or injury but said the test could continue even with a ship in the zone.

``We think Star Wars is a step in the wrong direction. It's going to make the world a more unstable place,'' Shallhorn said. ``We're sending a message to President Clinton asking him to take a finger off the Star Wars button and cancel the program.''

The $100 million test called for a Minuteman II missile to be launched at 7:01 p.m. PDT and be destroyed over the ocean about 20 minutes later by an interceptor launched from the South Pacific. One previous test succeeded and the other failed.

Critics say the technology is not advanced enough to work and could lead to another arms race. Supporters argue the system, if deployed, could protect all 50 states from long-range nuclear missiles launched by rogue nations such as North Korea.

Clinton has yet to make a decision on whether to deploy the system.

Twenty-three people from more than a dozen nations were aboard Greenpeace's 164-foot Arctic Sunrise, the ship being stationed in the hazard zone in the Pacific.

Air Force Master Sgt. Tyler Foster, a Vandenberg spokesman, said the test could continue even with the vessel there.

``Quite frankly, our launch commander can make the determination to launch even if there is a boat in the zone,'' Foster said.

Greenpeace activists also set up camp outside Vandenberg's main gate, about 180 miles northwest of Los Angeles. And a group of protesters not affiliated with Greenpeace threatened to delay the launch by breaking into the base.

---

Predicting the missile defense fallout Some fear a U.S. plan could fuel worldwide escalation Dr. Jacques Gansler, undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics, meets reporters at the Pentagon on Tuesday.

MSNBC
07/07/00
By Walter Pincus
THE WASHINGTON POST
http://www.msnbc.com/news/429910.asp?cp1=1
http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59882-2000Jul6.html

WASHINGTON, July 7 - On Tuesday morning, in a conference room on the seventh floor of CIA headquarters, Director of Central Intelligence George J. Tenet will convene a meeting of the heads of U.S. intelligence agencies to hash over their differing analyses of how foreign governments might react to a U.S. national missile defense.

'The question is whether (national missile defense) will really make China beef up, or whether they planned to ramp up anyway.' - UNNAMED OFFICIAL

DEEP DISAGREEMENTS have delayed the intelligence community's effort to produce an authoritative, collective assessment, known as a National Intelligence Estimate. Originally scheduled to be delivered to the White House in June, it is now expected to be given to the White House in late July, still in time to play a role in President Clinton's decision whether to proceed with construction of the system.

The NIE is supposed to address some of the toughest, and most important, questions about missile defense: whether it would cause Russia to abandon arms control agreements, sow dissension among NATO allies and prompt China to enlarge its tiny nuclear arsenal, possibly setting off an arms race with India and Pakistan.

ASSESSING THE NEW THREATS

An annex to the document will update last year's intelligence estimate of the missile threat to the United States, the underlying rationale for building a missile shield. New attention, in particular, is being paid to the question of how soon North Korea, Iran and Iraq might possess intercontinental ballistic missiles.

In 1998, a congressionally appointed panel headed by former secretary of defense Donald Rumsfeld selected 2005 as the earliest date by which North Korea might possess a missile capable of hitting the United States. But intelligence officials said that neither last year's intelligence estimate, nor the annex to the new document, adopts that date. Rather, the document says the timetable could vary enormously depending on whether North Korea resumes long-range missile testing and how much help it receives from Russia and China.

Without 2005 as a firm deadline, the pressure on Clinton to move ahead with construction may ease. On the other hand, sources said, proponents of missile defense are likely to argue that North Korea could be ready to fire a missile even before 2005, and that there is always the risk of an accidental missile launch by Russia or China.

Anti-missile test fails

"The NIE may provide more questions than answers," a senior administration official said yesterday, "because all these questions are somewhat imponderables."

Among those who will gather at CIA headquarters Tuesday are the heads of the Defense Intelligence Agency, the electronic intelligence-gathering National Security Agency, the satellite-managing National Reconnaissance Office, the National Imagery and Mapping Agency, the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research, and other active and retired personnel.

SECOND-GUESSING CHINA

At a previous meeting of this so-called National Foreign Intelligence Board last Friday, members argued over the effect of a U.S. missile defense shield on China and Russia as well as on NATO allies such as Britain, France, Germany and Denmark.

In particular, participants disagreed over whether a national missile defense, or NMD, would prompt Beijing to increase its strategic nuclear force from 24 fixed-silo intercontinental missiles to several hundred mobile ones with multiple warheads - or whether China is already planning such a modernization.

"The question is whether NMD will really make China beef up, or whether they planned to ramp up anyway," said one official. Another official familiar with the discussions said Beijing appears to be less concerned with a missile shield covering the 50 states than with the possibility that the Pentagon might someday provide a so-called theater missile defense system to protect Taiwan.

China furious over U.S. missile shield plans

RUSSIAN THREATS

The intelligence community is also divided on how seriously to take Russian threats that if the United States creates a missile defense, Moscow will resume building intermediate-range SS-20 missiles to threaten Europe. One official argued that the threat is hollow because Russia's finances and construction capacity are so limited that it could build either SS-20s or longer-range SS-27s, but not both.

Another bone of contention is NATO allies' opposition to missile defense. The Pentagon's proposed network of interceptor missiles, high-speed computers and advanced radars would require upgrading early-warning radar stations in territory controlled by Britain and Denmark, which have questioned the need for a U.S. missile shield.

China

China has about 20 nuclear missiles capable of reaching the U.S., an arsenal regarded as primarily defensive. However, some believe a limited missile shield would be enough to invalidate China's small arsenal and spur Beijing to launch into a major nuclear weapons buildup.

Source: MSNBC.com and NBC News

---

Critics Asking Clinton to Stop Advancing Missile Plan

New York Times
July 7, 2000
By ELAINE SCIOLINO
http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/global/070700missile-test.html

WASHINGTON, July 6 -- A leading critic of national missile defense, Theodore A. Postol, said in a letter to President Clinton today that Mr. Clinton's advisers had made misleading statements about the proposed shield and urged creating an independent commission of top scientists to evaluate the plan.

Three major science groups also opposed the plan. The American Physical Society, with 42,000 physicists; the Federation of American Scientists; and the Union of Concerned Scientists jointly announced that they urged Mr. Clinton not to deploy a missile defense system, regardless of how its ground-based interceptor performs in a test on Friday night.

An antinuclear organization, Greenpeace, announced that it was sending a Dutch icebreaker, the Arctic Sunrise, to a "hazard zone" designated by the Air Force off the launching site at Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif., to try to stop the test.

"Mr. President, you have the finger on the Star Wars button," Greenpeace wrote in a letter to Mr. Clinton. "We urge you take it off and make the world a safer place."

To the Pentagon, the attacks might look like the revenge of the scientists. Fifty Nobel laureates have said any movement to deploy a missile defense system would be "premature, wasteful and dangerous."

The most relentless and detailed criticism has been from Dr. Postol, a professor of science and national security studies at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He contended in his letter Clinton that Pentagon officials have in recent weeks "made numerous technologically illiterate and highly misleading statements" about the missile proposal.

Dr. Postol said a statement by the under secretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics, Jacques Gansler, at a news conference on June 20 that the system's X-band radar could discriminate between a real target and a decoy was based on faulty science.

Dr. Postol added that the contention at that news conference by Lt. Gen. Ronald T. Kadish of the Air Force, director of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization at the Pentagon, that the decoy to be used on Friday was "representative" of the expected decoy threat was also false.

In statements today, the Pentagon defended the integrity of its program without addressing Dr. Postol's specific statements.

"Dr. Postol has raised issues that the independent review team and the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization are addressing," a spokesman for the Pentagon, Kenneth H. Bacon, said in a statement. "Developing a national missile defense system poses difficult technical challenges."

Defense Secretary William S. Cohen "is confident that his team is following a systematic and reasonable course to solve these problems," Mr. Bacon added.

A spokesman for the National Security Council, P. J. Crowley, said, "We've asked the Pentagon for an analysis of the questions he raises, and the Pentagon is in the process of getting back to us."

The Pentagon said that weather conditions appeared good and that the test on Friday was on schedule.

-------- us nuc waste

Red Chip Review Starts Coverage of American Ecology Corporation Independent Equity Research Firm Specializes in Small-Cap Opportunities

Business Wire
Friday July 7, 5:59 am Eastern Time
Company Press Release
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/000707/id_america.html

BOISE, Idaho--(BUSINESS WIRE)--July 7, 2000--Jack Lemley, chairman, CEO and president of American Ecology Corporation (Nasdaq:ECOL - news), today announced that Red Chip Review has initiated research coverage of the company.

``We are extremely pleased that an independent equity research firm of this caliber has elected to cover American Ecology,'' Lemley stated, adding, ``We are also pleased that the investment community can now access an independent perspective on American Ecology's performance and future business prospects.''

Headquartered in Portland, Oregon, Red Chip Review also has offices in Minneapolis, San Francisco, Los Angeles and New York. Its internet site, www.redchip.com, was recently recognized by Forbes as the ``Best of the Best'' among the top small-cap, financial internet sites.

``The decision by Red Chip Review to initiate stock research coverage is a further indication of increased interest by the investment community in American Ecology Corporation,'' Lemley concluded.

American Ecology Corporation, through its subsidiaries, provides radioactive, PCB, hazardous and non-hazardous waste services to commercial and government customers throughout the United States, such as nuclear power plants, medical and academic institutions, agricultural companies and petro-chemical facilities. The company provides scientific solutions that protect people and the environment from radioactive and hazardous materials. Headquartered in Boise, Idaho, the Company is the oldest radioactive and hazardous waste services company in the United States.

This press release does not and shall not constitute express or implied agreement or endorsement of any statements, analyses, projections or other information provided by Red Chip Review now or in the future. American Ecology has no duty or obligation to update any forward-looking statement made herein. Please refer to American Ecology Corporation's most recent quarterly and annual reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Contact:

American Ecology Corporation Jim Baumgardner, 208/331-8400 info@americanecology.com

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

Watershed For Missile Defense Test Tonight Heralds Big Policy Decisions

By Roberto Suro
Washington Post
Friday, July 7, 2000; Page A01
http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/2000-07/07/184l-070700-idx.html

Sometime between 10 p.m. and 2 a.m. tonight, a dummy warhead is to be borne aloft on a missile fired from the California coast, and about half an hour later an interceptor launched from a South Pacific atoll will try to find the target and slam into it about 140 miles above the Earth.

Regardless of whether it is a hit or a miss, the results of tonight's $100 million flight test will be closely analyzed from Capitol Hill to the Kremlin because it is the last practice run before the Clinton administration decides whether to begin building the controversial National Missile Defense system.

The otherwise routine exercise has taken on extraordinary significance as officials, even within the administration, debate whether a costly, high-tech shield to defend the nation from ballistic missile attacks is necessary, whether it will work as planned and whether the potential diplomatic damage outweighs its benefits.

Advocates, including presidential candidate George W. Bush and many other Republicans, argue that a missile shield is essential to protect the United States and that the administration's plans do not go far enough. Critics, including several prominent scientists and former Clinton defense officials, contend that the system has too many technical problems and that it will set off a new arms race.

Meanwhile, Russia and China complain that if the United States builds its own missile defense, it will negate their countries' strategic deterrents and give America too much power in the world. The European allies quietly grumble that no real threat exists to justify the effort and that the shield could cause Americans to go their own way in foreign policy without sufficient consideration of their allies.

The process of sifting through these issues will go into high gear moments after the "kill vehicle" and the target warhead race toward each other in the night sky at a combined speed of more than 15,000 miles an hour. Within a few weeks the Pentagon will deliver an assessment of the system's technical capabilities.

By the end of the month the nation's top intelligence officers are due to resolve deep differences over the potential threat of ballistic missile attack and the likely reaction of key nations if President Clinton presses ahead.

Tonight's test will be only the third attempt at an actual intercept. Since the score thus far is one hit and one miss, tonight's result will help shape the verdict on feasibility. This also will be the most complete test of the system because in past attempts the interceptor received more help to find its target than it will tonight.

A key aspect of the test is gauging how well the missile carrying the kill vehicle can be guided toward the incoming warhead by computers rapidly processing data from a high-powered X-band radar and other sensors. In the final seconds, infrared sensors aboard the kill vehicle will attempt to distinguish the warhead from a decoy and home in on the target. If it's a direct hit, the 120-pound kill vehicle will destroy the target simply by kinetic energy, not explosives.

"There's not yet enough evidence to show that the system will work, and Friday's test won't change that," said Robert Park of the American Physical Society, who joined representatives of the Federation of American Scientists and the Union of Concerned Scientists in releasing statements yesterday urging Clinton not to make a deployment decision because the system has not proved its feasibility.

Focusing on the foreign policy implications, 50 American Nobel laureates sent the president a letter yesterday arguing that "the system would offer little protection and would do grave harm to this nation's core security interests" by igniting an arms race with China and Russia.

The proposed missile shield is a much smaller version of President Ronald Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative, dubbed "Star Wars" by critics, a system that was never built and quietly faded once the threat of nuclear war diminished with the collapse of the Soviet Union. Interest in missile defense revived after a congressional commission reported in 1998 that North Korea, Iran or Iraq could develop a ballistic missile threat against the United States within five years of deciding to acquire such a capability.

Demanding action from the White House and the Pentagon, a bipartisan majority in Congress enacted legislation last year requiring the creation of a missile shield to cover the 50 states as soon as technically feasible. The administration set a target date of 2005 to have a system operating based on intelligence estimates projecting that North Korea could have a long-range missile capability by then.

While declaring confidence in their ability to create an effective defense eventually, senior Pentagon officials have repeatedly warned that the administration's schedule is highly accelerated and very risky because development and testing of the system will continue even as construction and manufacturing are underway.

"I think one of the things we have to guard against is, if we hit tomorrow night, then there might be a natural tendency for many to throw up their hands and say, 'We did it! It worked just fine,' but such a declaration would be way premature," said Rear Adm. Craig Quigley, a Pentagon spokesman, during a news briefing yesterday.

Whether the kill vehicle slams into the target warhead as planned will be evident immediately tonight, but missile defense officials will assess the data from the test for at least two weeks before reporting to Defense Secretary William S. Cohen on the system's readiness.

"We're going to have to take the time in that next couple of weeks to take a real hard look at the data to see which systems performed as we wanted them to and which performed below par, and take a really hard look to be cautious of being overly optimistic as we take a look at what actually happened tomorrow night," Quigley said.

Clinton has said he will consider Cohen's recommendation on the feasibility of the shield, along with input from the State Department and intelligence agencies on the nature of the ballistic missile threat, as well as assessments of the potential foreign policy implications before deciding whether to authorize the first construction work in Alaska. Given the short building season there, the president must give the go-ahead by late November to keep the project on schedule.

Critics contend that tests of the system, including tonight's planned intercept, are unrealistic because only one simple decoy accompanies the target warhead, while any nation capable of launching a long-range ballistic missile would also be capable of much more challenging countermeasures.

"In essence, the Pentagon is asking the wrong question to get the answer they want," said Lisbeth Gronlund, a research fellow in security studies at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Speaking for the Union of Concerned Scientists at a news conference yesterday, Gronlund said, "they have defined the threat to be less than what it might actually be in the real world."

How the Test Should Work

1. Target missile launches from Vandenberg Air Force base in California.

2. Satellite detects plume from launch and notifies battle management center in Colorado Springs.

3. Center analyzes data and authorizes battle management node in Kwajalein to launch kill vehicle.

4. Kwajalein launches interceptor missile and activates X-band radar.

5. Kill vehicle separates from booster, takes star sightings to determine its coordinates, and receives updated information on the target's location from the X-band and early warning radars.

6. Kill vehicle becomes autonomous and uses on-board electronics to distinguish the target from a decoy and debris and homes in.

Past Tests

Jan. 17, 1997: Booster carrying kill vehicle failed to launch because of communication malfunction.

July 7, 1997: Repeat of Jan. 17 test demonstrated kill vehicle's ability to identify and track objects in space, using infrared sensor.

Jan. 15, 1998: Again tested kill vehicle's ability to identify and track objects in space.

Oct. 2, 1999: Made a hit on target warhead, despite a failure in the star tracker.

Jan. 18, 2000: Missed target after infrared sensors failed on kill vehicle because of a problem with a cooling system.

SOURCE: Ballistic Missile Defense Organization, Federation of American Scientists

----

US to carry out missile test despite protests

Irish Times
Friday, July 7, 2000
From Joe Carroll, in Washington
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/world/2000/0707/wor9.htm

THE US: The results of a rocket test over the Pacific Ocean today may determine if the US will go ahead with a controversial nuclear missile shield. Russia and China have protested to the US that such a system would violate the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty (ABM).

The Chinese Prime Minister, Mr Zhu Rongji, has warned the US that China is "categorically opposed" to a theatre missile defence system which could be used to defend Taiwan. This would be a "blatant interference in Chinese affairs," he said yesterday.

But the US will put forward arguments for a limited anti-missile defence (AMD) against countries such as North Korea when arms control talks resume today between Washington and Beijing. President Clinton is supposed to decide later this year on whether the US will begin deployment of an AMD estimated to cost $60 billion over five years.

The system would involve 100 interceptor missiles and a radar site in Alaska which could detect and destroy a nuclear attack from North Korea and possibly Iraq and Iran.

While the Pentagon is urging the Clinton administration to go ahead with this plan, there is increasing criticism from defence experts that AMD would be a costly failure.

A group of 50 Nobel prize winners has signed an open letter to Mr Clinton urging him to reject AMD as it would "offer little protection and would do grave harm to this nation's core security interests". They say that North Korea has recently taken steps towards reconciliation with South Korea.

The debate on AMD has intensified in the US because of the presidential election. The Republican candidate, Governor George Bush, favours a national missile defence system against attacks from any country and not just the so-called "rogue nations" such as North Korea. At the same time, Mr Bush supports increased nuclear disarmament to be worked out with Russia.

Mr Clinton does not want to leave the Vice-President, Mr Al Gore, exposed to Republican criticism that the Democrats are "soft" on nuclear defence as the election campaign hots up. The President's hands are also tied to some extent as Congress has already voted for a nuclear defence shield but left the timing on deployment to the President.

In the arms control talks in Beijing today and tomorrow, the US is expected to press China on concerns that it is helping Pakistan build nuclear missiles to counter the threat from India. China has transferred nuclearcapable M-11 missiles to Pakistan and is still supplying materials according to US intelligence reports.

The US Congress is now threatening to apply sanctions against China if these reports prove true. The Chinese Foreign Ministry said this week that reports of continued assistance to Pakistan were "unfounded".

Russia has formally confirmed its ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), officials said yesterday, welcoming the move as an "important step" towards the accord's implementation. Russia is the 58th signatory to ratify the treaty and the 29th of a group of the 44 states whose ratification is necessary for the treaty to enter into force - (AFP)

---

Activists mobilize to halt missile defense test

Miami Herald
Friday, July 7, 2000
http://www.herald.com/content/fri/digdocs/022394.htm

VANDENBERG AIR FORCE BASE, Calif. -- (AP) -- Anti-nuclear activists were hoping to halt this evening's test of a national missile defense system by positioning a ship in an area of the Pacific where a rocket stage is expected to splash down.

Greenpeace planned to station a vessel about 110 miles offshore from Vandenberg Air Force Base, said Steve Shallhorn, the group's campaign director.

The Air Force has asked pilots and mariners to avoid the area during the test or risk damage or injury but said the test could continue even with a ship in the zone.

``We think Star Wars is a step in the wrong direction. It's going to make the world a more unstable place,'' Shallhorn said. ``We're sending a message to President Clinton asking him to take a finger off the Star Wars button and cancel the program.''

The $100 million test called for a Minuteman II missile to be launched at 7:01 p.m. PDT and be destroyed over the ocean about 20 minutes later by an interceptor launched from the South Pacific. One previous test succeeded and the other failed.

Critics say the technology is not advanced enough to work and could lead to another arms race. Supporters argue the system, if deployed, could protect all 50 states from long-range nuclear missiles launched by rogue nations such as North Korea.

Clinton has yet to make a decision on whether to deploy the system.

Twenty-three people from more than a dozen nations were aboard Greenpeace's 164-foot Arctic Sunrise, the ship being stationed in the hazard zone in the Pacific.

Air Force Master Sgt. Tyler Foster, a Vandenberg spokesman, said the test could continue even with the vessel there.

``Quite frankly, our launch commander can make the determination to launch even if there is a boat in the zone,'' Foster said.

Greenpeace activists also set up camp outside Vandenberg's main gate, about 180 miles northwest of Los Angeles. And a group of protesters not affiliated with Greenpeace threatened to delay the launch by breaking into the base.

---

It's missile-test time

CNN
July 7, 2000
By Tony Karon
http://www.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/07/07/missile7_7.a.tm/index.html

(TIME.com) -- It would make President Clinton's life a lot easier if the damned thing would just miss.... The president has delayed green-lighting construction of the controversial National Missile Defense scheme pending the completion of three field tests, the third of which takes place Friday night somewhere over the Pacific. While the first test arguably succeeded, the second failed, leaving the third test as some kind of tie-breaker on the technical viability of the scheme.

If the test succeeds, the president faces the tough decision of whether to go ahead with the program; if it fails, he punts the problem to the next occupant of the Oval Office. Critics have pointed out that the tests are primed to succeed, and claim that the system has an inherent inability, in battlefield conditions, to distinguish an enemy warhead from cheap decoys that would be deployed to distract it. Advocates counter that they're simply trying to establish whether the system can walk before trying to make it run.

But it's not only the scientific viability of the $60 billion system that's hotly contested between advocates and critics. For one thing, there is sharp disagreement over the extent of the supposed threat to America's cities. Advocates, led by hawkish Republicans and their allies in the military and the arms industry, insist that North Korea could be in a position to drop warheads on your home town by 2005; critics, ranging from State Department and intelligence officials to Russia and European NATO members, pooh-pooh this timetable.

And even if Pyongyang, whose missile program has been dormant for the past two years, could muster the technical wherewithal to develop such long-range missiles, the naysayers argue, there are a growing number of political and economic factors militating against North Korea's pursuing this course.

Then there are the consequences: Building the system would violate the 1972 Antiballistic Missile Treaty, and Moscow has not only shown no interest in renegotiating the pact to allow Washington to go ahead, it has also warned that if the U.S. withdraws from the treaty all other arms-control agreements are null and void. The reason for Moscow's hostility is that they see the system as a precursor of a larger umbrella that could eventually neutralize the deterrent value of Russia's own nuclear arsenal.

And its fears are well grounded -- while President Clinton is considering a limited system involving some 20 interceptors to guard against one or two missiles fired by "rogue states," candidate George W. Bush has committed himself to a comprehensive, "Star Wars"-like anti-missile shield that would eliminate all threats.

And, needless to say, the Chinese, whose long-range nuclear fleet comprises only about 20 single-warhead missiles, is taking the matter personally, because its own nuclear deterrent might be eliminated by even President Clinton's limited defense. Beijing has warned that if Washington goes ahead it will be forced to expand its own missile fleet, which might prompt India to do the same in response, triggering a similar response from Pakistan.

Despite the depth of opposition, though, the pressure on President Clinton to give the go-ahead may prove compelling. Missile defense remains overwhelmingly popular on Capitol Hill, and the Republicans would pounce on any caution by the administration to proclaim candidate Gore as soft on security. So whether the third test succeeds or fails, look for the President to create a very Clintonesque fudge that allows the system to proceed far enough to cover Gore, but not far enough to cross the line drawn by the Russians and Chinese.

---

The end of a defense doctrine Tonight's missile-shield test is an indication that the idea of deterrence no longer guides America's nuclear policy.

Christian Science Monitor
FRIDAY, JULY 7, 2000
Peter Grier (grierp@csps.com)

WASHINGTON, If the United States proceeds with construction of a national missile defense, it could mean the end of an era - the age of mutually assured destruction.

For 40 years, MAD has been the foundation of US security strategy. The Pentagon has structured its nuclear arsenal around the belief that the best way to deter an atomic attack is to ensure that any such blow would be followed by a blistering response in kind.

That cold-war approach won't work as well against the threats of the 21st century, according to defense proponents. They believe that North Korea and other so-called states of concern aren't as predictable, or logical, as the old Soviet leadership.

Critics say that such thinking simply demonizes states that Americans don't understand. If North Korea is irrational, why has the US been negotiating with it for six years to ensure its nuclear program is peaceful?

"Nobody has said that these people don't understand survival," says Jack Mendelsohn, executive director of the Lawyers Alliance for National Security.

The US missile defense effort as a whole faces a crucial test this week. Tonight the Pentagon will launch a mock warhead from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. Minutes later, it will fire a 130 pound "exoatmospheric kill vehicle" from an atoll in the Pacific about 4,300 miles away. The kill vehicle is supposed to pick out the warhead from a decoy and steer towards a collision. If everything works, a flash in the sky will mark the warhead's destruction and a successful experiment.

If the test goes as planned, President Clinton may order construction to begin on the first phase of a planned $60 billion National Missile Defense (NMD) system. If it fails, NMD critics will surely heighten their criticism - in particular, the charge that with current technology it's almost impossible for the kill vehicle to discriminate a warhead from a decoy.

"The system would offer little protection and would do grave harm to this nation's core security interests," wrote a group of Nobel laureates in a letter to Mr. Clinton this week.

But whether NMD is feasible is only part of the debate about the system that is now roiling the national-security establishment.

In an age when the threat from nuclear-armed superpowers has greatly diminished, and the capabilities of a rocket science have greatly advanced, the deliberate vulnerability that underlies nuclear deterrence has become both avoidable and immoral, say some.

Deterrence worked in the past because we understood much about those we were deterring, retired Air Force General Larry Welch told a Senate hearing last week. The US knew what the Soviet leadership valued. US commanders had high confidence that they could hold those assets at risk - and the Soviets knew it.

Such mutual understanding doesn't exist between the US and North Korea, or the US and Iraq, or the US and Iran. If these states of concern (formerly called "rogue states" by the State Department) develop nuclear missiles capable of reaching the US, traditional deterrence may not stop them from pushing the button. "I simply do not know what deters those particular kinds of threats," said Welch.

Even lawmakers critical of the rush toward NMD agreed with Welch that there is an unknowable factor regarding US relations with North Korea or Iran. US intelligence understands little about what motivates their leaders or about their geopolitical goals.

But that doesn't mean deterrence will not keep them in check, said these senators. To call them "undeterrable" is to label them suicidal, madmen, unpeople. "I have no confidence in North Korea either ... all I'm saying is you can't throw out deterrence as a factor even though you don't have as much certainty that it would work with a North Korea...," said Sen. Carl Levin (D) of Michigan.

Pentagon officials deny that NMD, as planned, is aimed at shielding the US entirely from Russia's nuclear arsenal, or even the smaller stockpile of China. For these states, the MAD theory would still hold, they say.

But both Chinese and Russian leaders say they worry any US missile shield would eventually become robust enough to protect the US from their more numerous warheads. From their viewpoint, that would mean the end of MAD - and perhaps a growing fear that the US could strike them with impunity. They warn they would stockpile additional nuclear warheads, perhaps restarting an arms race.

http://www.csmonitor.com/durable/2000/07/07/fp1s1-csm.shtml

---

Missile Test Rigged, Scientists Gripe

NewsMax.com
Friday, July 7, 2000
UPI
http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/7/6/193409

WASHINGTON - Arguing that the Pentagon has rigged today's test of a proposed $30 billion missile defense system to ensure success, a coalition of scientists urged President Clinton on Thursday to delay the decision over whether to deploy such a system.

"The danger here is that you're making the decision on the basis of these very simple tests," said Henry Kelly, president of the Federation of American Scientists. "To me it's sort of like, you know, the guy that comes up and is applying to the Atlanta Braves and says, 'I've been able to get on base with a game of T-ball, but don't worry about it, with big league pitching, I'll practice.' "

Today's test calls for military officials stationed on a tiny Pacific atoll to shoot down a dummy warhead launched roughly 4,800 miles away from an Air Force Base just north of Los Angeles. According to the General Accounting Office, only four of 14 similar tests have succeeded.

According to a Pentagon timeline, the 120-pound intercept vehicle will be launched roughly 20 minutes after liftoff of the "enemy" missile. After the missile and warhead separate, satellite and ground-based "X-band" radar stations will be used to pinpoint the warhead's location. Using a variety of sensors, the interceptor "sees" the warhead and attempts to put itself on a collision course.

If all goes well, the interceptor should collide with the warhead approximately 10 minutes after launch. Closing speed between the interceptor and the warhead will top 12,000 miles an hour.

A similar test failed in January. The cause of the failure, according to the Pentagon, was a problem with the cooling lines that are designed to allow the interceptors' infrared sensors to distinguish a warhead from decoys. A successful but more limited test was conducted in October 1999.

Secretary of Defense William Cohen is calling today's test "our most demanding trial to date." But critics point to a number of factors that call the test results into question. Pentagon officials already know the specifications, launch time and trajectory of the enemy missile, and the decoy is a large, shiny balloon.

This test "does seem rather designed to get a certain result," said Robert Park, director of the Washington office of the American Physical Society. "The problem is that, having done this test, we will be in no position to make a better judgment than we are now."

While acknowledging that a functional missile defense system could be developed, Park said that deploying it would only encourage the use of other delivery systems.

"This isn't the only way to deliver weapons," Park said. "Ryder rental trucks have proven equally effective.

"Building a missile defense is a politically popular thing to do. If you stop a person on the street and ask them if we should have a system that protects us against missiles, of course they are going to say yes."

While Clinton is weighing the deployment of a limited missile defense - 20 interceptors by 2005 and an additional 80 by 2007 - Republicans, led by Texas Gov. George W. Bush, are hinting they would support a much more expansive system.

While Pentagon planners say that threats from rogue states such as Iran and North Korea are the primary reason they're pushing for a missile defense system, experts worry that deploying such a system would trigger further nuclear buildups by Russia and China.

"It would be difficult to persuade Russia or China that the United States is [spending] tens of billion of dollars on such a system [when] small states are unlikely to launch a missile attack on the United States," said the Federation of American Scientists in a letter to Clinton on Thursday.

"[They] would likely conclude that the presently planned system is a stage in developing a bigger system directed against them [and] respond by restarting an arms race."

---

Missile shield has considerable fallout risks The president must make a decision. Foreign relations, domestic politics, economics must all be considered.

USA Today
07/07/00 Page 8A
By Bill Nichols USA TODAY
http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/20000707/2436164s.htm

WASHINGTON -- Just six months before leaving office, President Clinton faces one of his most far-reaching foreign policy decisions: whether to move ahead with a missile defense shield for the United States.

The Pentagon has scheduled a final test of its missile-intercept systems today to determine whether the technology behind a defense shield works.

Assuming the test results are positive, Clinton will face a critical choice that could have a major impact on U.S. national security, Vice President Gore's presidential hopes and relations with U.S. allies.

Should Clinton decide to order construction of a radar tracking station and base for 100 interceptor missiles in Alaska's Aleutian Islands chain, he risks antagonizing Russia, China and even close U.S. allies in Europe. Clinton's position on a missile defense also will highlight one of the few stark foreign policy differences between Gore, the expected Democratic presidential nominee, and Texas Gov. George W. Bush, the presumptive GOP nominee.

Gore favors Clinton's approach of a limited missile defense.

Bush has called for a more comprehensive system that might include a space-based shield akin to the ''star wars'' concept raised by former president Ronald Reagan.

While the future design of a missile defense remains up in the air, one thing seems likely: The debate over the system is unlikely to be resolved anytime soon.

''If there were a contest to name a foreign policy issue that just won't go away, national missile defense would surely be a top contender,'' Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., said in a recent speech on the Senate floor.

A decision this summer

Clinton is required by law to decide this year whether to go ahead with a defense designed to meet the threat of missile attacks from countries such as Iran or North Korea. The price tag for such a system would be as much as $60 billion. Defense experts predict that Clinton will authorize the Pentagon merely to take only the first steps toward building new radar installations. That would leave larger decisions to the next president. In an interview this week, national security adviser Samuel Berger said Clinton is still weighing his options.

''The president has made no decision,'' Berger said. ''He's obviously been following this closely and will evaluate all the information he gets and then make a judgement sometime later in the summer.''

Whatever his decision, even one that punts the issue to Gore or Bush, Clinton will stir up significant controversy in every major world capital.

Resistance from Russia

The major opposition comes from Russia, where President Vladimir Putin remains vehemently opposed to a missile shield. Russian military leaders believe the shield ultimately will be enlarged to cover the entire United States, despite assurances to the contrary from Washington.

Since 1972, Washington and Moscow have been bound by the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty. The ABM accord outlaws any national missile defense system in favor of the Cold War doctrine known as MAD -- ''mutually assured destruction.''

That philosophy holds that by barring nuclear defenses, each nation could blackmail the other into peaceful co-existence because if one side launched a first strike, the other would respond with a counterattack, and both would be obliterated.

Clinton has talked to Putin about amending ABM to permit a limited missile shield, but so far those talks have gone nowhere.

For that matter, Clinton hasn't been able to win over any allies on the issue.

The Chinese government has warned that it would ratchet up its nuclear arms production if the United States built a missile shield. Last week, 45 American experts on China urged Clinton to delay his decision for fear that development of a missile defense could harm security and economic relations with Beijing.

If China were to beef up its nuclear forces, it almost certainly would trigger a domino effect in Asia, defense authorities say. India, China's longtime Asian nemesis, would respond in kind, and that would prompt Pakistan, India's archrival, to strengthen its fledgling nuclear program.

A new arms race?

Even within NATO, officials have grumbled that the U.S. system would leave European allies vulnerable to nuclear attack, lead to a new arms race and send a bad signal that Washington is backing away from an era of global arms control.

''Neither economically nor politically can we afford a new round of the arms race,'' German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder said recently. ''No one can dispute the Americans' right to develop what they believe is right for national defense. On the other hand, we are partners in a common alliance.''

On home soil, the controversy over a missile defense hasn't emerged as a major issue in the presidential campaign even though Gore's and Bush's positions illustrate a significant difference between two men often criticized for having similar views.

Missile defense ''is the one rather clear area in which they have both made major statements, have major differences and from where there will be major repercussions,'' James Woolsey, a former CIA director, said at a recent seminar at the American Enterprise Institute, a Washington think tank.

Bush vs. Gore
The candidates' positions:

* Bush, in an address on missile defenses May 23, said he would explore deploying a larger system that could include sea- and space-based defenses as well as ground interceptors. Bush has not put a price tag on such a system, but critics say it could cost three times the $60 billion for Clinton's plan. ''America must build effective missile defenses based on the best available options at the earliest possible date,'' Bush said. ''Our missile defense must be designed to protect all 50 states and our friends and allies and deployed forces overseas from missile attacks by rogue nations or accidental launches.''

Bush said he is willing to break the ABM treaty if necessary to build a missile defense shield.

To make a missile defense system more palatable to Russia, the Texas governor said he would reduce U.S. nuclear weapons stockpiles below the levels mandated by the 1993 START II treaty, even if he had to act unilaterally. But Bush gave no specifics about the size of the reductions. START II, ratified this year by the Russian Parliament, calls for Russia and the United States to slash their arsenals from 6,000 long-range missiles to 3,000-3,500 each.

* Gore supports a limited system that is based on current technologies and could be in place by 2005, when the administration projects North Korea could have the capability to launch a long-range missile. The vice president contends that Bush's more ambitious plan is technologically ''implausible.''

Gore also says he prefers negotiating with Russia on ABM treaty changes that would allow missile defenses. But he won't rule out the possibility of breaking out of the treaty if he thought that was essential for U.S. national security.

In addition, Gore, who has been given broad authority by Clinton to manage U.S.-Russian relations, favors further cuts in both nations' nuclear arsenals, but only through negotiations with Moscow.

In an interview May 25, Gore described Bush as an arms control foe who might fuel an arms race. Gore said he favors a ''limited and affordable system,'' while Bush wants a ''multibillion-dollar 'star wars' program, not only for us but for many other nations around the world, at our expense.'' A failure to compromise, he said, would prompt Russians to ''increase their offensive arsenal just to hedge their bets that there might be some realistic chance it would ever be built.''

---

Cost of Missile Defense Debated

Associated Press
July 7, 2000
By The Associated Press
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/w/AP-Missile-Defense-Cost.html

Like nearly every other aspect of the proposed national missile defense, its cost is hotly debated.

The Pentagon is still working on an estimate, but its most recent estimate last spring put the tally at $36 billion for a system with 100 missile interceptors at a single site, in Alaska.

---

The Missile Shield Test

July 7, 2000
http://www.nytimes.com/00/07/07/letters/l07mis.html

To the Editor:

Whether or not the latest test for a national missile defense system "succeeds" (news article, July 6) -- and considering that the conditions for this test have been so modified from real-world conditions that such success is a near certainty -- is beside the point.

The reality is that the United States does not need the proposed system. As history has shown, new "advances" like this one -- even when they are designed well enough to function properly -- do nothing more than open up a new (and costly) arms race, with the result that the new system is obsolete practically before it is put into operation.

The missile system would waste billions and billions of dollars, while at the same time undermining existing and pending treaties that actually do what the system would fail to do: make the world a safer place.

CRAIG BUTLER New York, July 6, 2000 The writer is executive director, Fund for New Priorities in America. The figure covers the building and operating of the system for its expected life of 20 years.

The General Accounting Office, the auditing arm of Congress, estimates it will cost $60 billion if -- as many missile defense proponents urge -- the system is expanded to two interceptor sites, each with 100 interceptors.

----

Missile defense test tonight

Chicago Sun-Times
July 7, 2000
BY PAUL RICHTER LOS ANGELES TIMES
http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/miss07.html

The Clinton administration's missile defense program gets a critical test tonight when the Pentagon is scheduled to launch a Minuteman missile from California's Vandenberg Air Force Base in the third of 19 planned flight tests.

If all goes as planned, the missile will be detected by defense satellites, which will send tracking data to a "battle management" center, which in turn will launch an interceptor missile from Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands in the central Pacific. Less than a half-hour later, a 40-pound "kill vehicle" should break free from the nose of the interceptor and maneuver to collide with a dummy warhead released by the target missile.

The $100 million test is designed to evaluate, among other issues, whether the components of the system can work together smoothly and whether the "kill vehicle" can maneuver itself into the path of the dummy warhead.

Pentagon officials have played down the chances of a direct collision, or "kill." They say they may declare the flight test a success even without an intercept, provided other aspects of the system perform suitably.

A satisfactory result would clear the way for President Clinton to keep the program alive but defer the critical decisions to the next president.

For more than seven years, Clinton's blueprint for building a limited, land-based missile shield has been the focus of intense planning and debate. It was the administration's carefully calibrated response to growing concern about a possible small-scale missile attack by a rogue state such as North Korea, and the momentum behind it seemed to be building.

But in recent months, Clinton's plan has come under blistering attack from both left and right. Advocates from both camps now say it is increasingly regarded as a political "orphan" that may be quickly cast aside after a new administration takes office next year.

The implications of the shift are substantial. At the least, it could delay deployment of a system beyond 2005, when U.S. officials believe North Korea may become capable of hitting the United States with a long-range missile. And it could open the door to development of a different kind of missile shield.

Republican candidate George W. Bush has said he wants a missile shield "as soon as possible." But he also wants to thoroughly research alternative technologies, including sea-based and space-based components that are not as fully developed as the components of Clinton's land-based plan.

Al Gore, the expected Democratic nominee, has said that he, too, generally favors a missile defense program, but he has stopped short of offering specifics on what kind of system he would advocate.

Gore presumably would be more eager to preserve the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with Russia, which bans any kind of national missile system in an effort to avoid a greater arms race. The Clinton administration has been pressing the Russians--so far without success--to rewrite the treaty to permit a limited missile defense system. Moscow instead is advocating development of a "boost-phase" system that would shoot down missiles shortly after they are launched but would not affect the U.S.-Russia nuclear balance.

----

Missile Test To Be No. 5

July 7, 2000
By The Associated Press
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/w/AP-Missile-Defense-Tests.html

Friday's test of the proposed missile defense system is the fifth one. The first two were ``fly by'' tests, meaning the interceptor was launched and gathered technical data in flight, but there was no attempt to intercept a target.

The first attempted intercept, last October, succeeded. Some critics contend it was a lucky hit.

The second attempt, in January, failed. The Pentagon asserts the test validated many of its technologies other than the intercept rocket.

More than a dozen additional tests are planned over the next few years.

----

We Can't Tell the Missiles From the Mylar

New York Times
July 7, 2000
By THEODORE A. POSTOL and GEORGE N. LEWIS
http://www.nytimes.com/00/07/07/oped/07post.html

CAMBRIDGE , Mass. -- A success in today's well-publicized test of a missile defense weapon system, the Clinton administration claims, will establish that national missile defense technology is ready for deployment. But unfortunately, bagging the sort of precooked and strapped-down chicken of a target that is being used today will do nothing of the sort. If Americans want a real test of the Pentagon's missile defense system, they should insist that it be designed by someone other than the Pentagon.

The Defense Department discovered a program-stopping flaw in its system in tests three years ago: The system can easily be fooled by decoys nearly as simple as the traffic cones we encounter on the street or the Mylar balloons that are so popular at the zoo.

The first response to this discovery was to try to conceal it. Then the Defense Department dumbed down all the development tests planned for the missile defense program so the somewhat different version of the so-called "kill vehicle" that is now being used would never have to be tested against competently designed, simple decoys.

In the near-vacuum of space where the missile defense would operate, there is no air drag to cause light decoys to move differently from heavy warheads, so it is relatively easy to create cheap impostors. The Pentagon has stated that for the 100-interceptor defense system that President Clinton is likely to recommend, the kill vehicle -- the interceptor that "shoots down" the incoming missile -- will have the primary responsibility for picking out the warhead. Since all the objects the kill vehicle will see are far away, they will appear as points of light -- like stars in the night sky -- all moving in about the same way.

Instead of the 10 objects that confounded the kill vehicle in the first test, in 1997, today's test, like the two before it, will use only a single mock warhead and a large balloon. The balloon has been carefully designed to be nearly 10 times brighter than the warhead, and the kill vehicle will be programmed to home on the dimmer of the two targets.

The Pentagon claims that the warhead and the ineffective large balloon decoy it is testing against are representative of the missile threat from an idealized imagined adversary -- an adversary presumed to be capable of building intercontinental range ballistic missiles, and nuclear warheads that are sufficiently light and compact to be mounted on such missiles, but at the same time so bungling as to be unable to hide the warhead inside a Mylar balloon decoy released along with empty balloons or to build warhead-shaped cone decoys.

A recent technical study by the Union of Concerned Scientists and the M.I.T. Security Studies Program showed that the same simple countermeasures that can defeat the kill vehicle could also defeat all of the other sensors envisioned in the Clinton administration plan.

If every one of the currently planned national missile defense tests proved to be an unqualified success, we would be still stuck with a defense system that had not been realistically tested and would have no hope of performing successfully in a real-world attack.

What the country needs, and what the president should give us, is an independent commission of accomplished scientists who are not connected to the Pentagon to look into the claims being made about this ill-conceived national missile defense system. Before forking over $60 billion to pay for such a system, Americans deserve an answer to the obvious question as to whether it will work.

Theodore A. Postol is professor of science, technology, and national security policy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. George N. Lewis is associate director of the institute's Security Studies Program.

---

Critics Asking Clinton to Stop Advancing Missile Plan

New York Times
July 7, 2000
By ELAINE SCIOLINO
http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/global/070700missile-test.html

WASHINGTON, July 6 -- A leading critic of national missile defense, Theodore A. Postol, said in a letter to President Clinton today that Mr. Clinton's advisers had made misleading statements about the proposed shield and urged creating an independent commission of top scientists to evaluate the plan.

Three major science groups also opposed the plan. The American Physical Society, with 42,000 physicists; the Federation of American Scientists; and the Union of Concerned Scientists jointly announced that they urged Mr. Clinton not to deploy a missile defense system, regardless of how its ground-based interceptor performs in a test on Friday night.

An antinuclear organization, Greenpeace, announced that it was sending a Dutch icebreaker, the Arctic Sunrise, to a "hazard zone" designated by the Air Force off the launching site at Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif., to try to stop the test.

"Mr. President, you have the finger on the Star Wars button," Greenpeace wrote in a letter to Mr. Clinton. "We urge you take it off and make the world a safer place."

To the Pentagon, the attacks might look like the revenge of the scientists. Fifty Nobel laureates have said any movement to deploy a missile defense system would be "premature, wasteful and dangerous."

The most relentless and detailed criticism has been from Dr. Postol, a professor of science and national security studies at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He contended in his letter Clinton that Pentagon officials have in recent weeks "made numerous technologically illiterate and highly misleading statements" about the missile proposal.

Dr. Postol said a statement by the under secretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics, Jacques Gansler, at a news conference on June 20 that the system's X-band radar could discriminate between a real target and a decoy was based on faulty science.

Dr. Postol added that the contention at that news conference by Lt. Gen. Ronald T. Kadish of the Air Force, director of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization at the Pentagon, that the decoy to be used on Friday was "representative" of the expected decoy threat was also false.

In statements today, the Pentagon defended the integrity of its program without addressing Dr. Postol's specific statements.

"Dr. Postol has raised issues that the independent review team and the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization are addressing," a spokesman for the Pentagon, Kenneth H. Bacon, said in a statement. "Developing a national missile defense system poses difficult technical challenges."

Defense Secretary William S. Cohen "is confident that his team is following a systematic and reasonable course to solve these problems," Mr. Bacon added.

A spokesman for the National Security Council, P. J. Crowley, said, "We've asked the Pentagon for an analysis of the questions he raises, and the Pentagon is in the process of getting back to us."

The Pentagon said that weather conditions appeared good and that the test on Friday was on schedule.

----

Pentagon Prepares for Missile Defense Test

New York Times
July 7, 2000
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/00/07/07/late/07missile-defense.html

WASHINGTON -- The Pentagon is counting down to a rocket launch Friday night that could change the course of U.S. defense policy and present the next president with one of the most contentious international arms control debates in decades.

Although much is riding on the outcome the test of a national missile defense, Defense Secretary William Cohen is trying to tamp down expectations by saying it is not a make-or-break event.

In a sense, some missile defense critics agree. Regardless of the outcome, they believe President Clinton will move forward with building a nationwide shield against missiles.

Cohen stressed that the test, the last before Clinton makes his decision, is only one in a series of more than a dozen that will ultimately determine the feasibility of defending all 50 states against a limited attack of ballistic missiles.

"We are trying to take it step by step because it's very, very difficult technology we are trying," Cohen told reporters Thursday in Tampa, Fla., where he presided over a change of command ceremony at U.S. Central Command.

The goal of the missile defense system is to destroy a hostile warhead in space by ramming it head-on with an interceptor missile.

"We are trying to hit a bullet with a bullet," Cohen said.

Many critics believe the technology is not feasible and that the Pentagon's testing methods are fatally flawed. Other critics say that even if it worked the weapon would not be worth the international outcry against it -- most notably Russia's threat to unravel other arms control treaties.

"Recent statements by Defense Secretary William Cohen indicate that the Clinton administration is on a path toward approval regardless of allied skepticism," the British American Security Information Council said Thursday.

Meanwhile, anti-nuclear activists were hoping to halt the test by positioning a ship in an area of the Pacific where a rocket stage is expected to splash down. Greenpeace planned to station a vessel about 110 miles offshore from Vandenberg Air Force Base, said Steve Shallhorn, the group's campaign director.

The Air Force has asked pilots and mariners to avoid the area during the test or risk damage or injury but said the test could continue even with a ship in the zone.

Greenpeace also set up camp outside Vandenberg's main gate, about 180 miles northwest of Los Angeles. And a group of protesters not affiliated with Greenpeace threatened to delay the launch by breaking into the base

The scenario for Friday's test is similar to that of the last, unsuccessful test in January: a target missile -- a Minuteman intercontinental ballistic missile with a dummy warhead -- launches from Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif. Twenty minutes later, the interceptor rocket takes off from Kwajalein Atoll in the remote Marshall Islands in the Pacific Ocean. If it works as designed, a "kill vehicle" will detach from the interceptor rocket and guide itself into the path of the dummy warhead, destroying it by force of impact 144 miles above the earth.

The test, scheduled for as early as 10 p.m. EDT, depending on weather, has drawn unusually close attention around the world because it could set the stage for Clinton to give the go-ahead for building a full-scale missile defense. The one being tested uses prototype interceptors and radars.

Clinton has said he will await Cohen's recommendation, several weeks after the test, based on the Pentagon's assessment of the technical feasibility and cost of the project. The Pentagon has said a system using 100 interceptor missiles would cost about $36 billion, but a more robust system with multiple intercept bases and additional missile detection capabilities would run tens of billions more.

An independent panel of retired military officers and weapons experts told the Pentagon in a report last month that it believes missile defense is technologically feasible, but that the Pentagon may not be able to have a reliable system in place by 2005, the target date. The date is significant because the CIA has said it believes North Korea could have a long-range missile capable of reaching U.S. soil within five years.

Vice President Al Gore, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, favors Clinton's go-slow approach to missile defense, whereas his Republican challenger, Texas Gov. George W. Bush, says he would push for the earliest possible deployment of an even broader missile defense system, even if it meant abandoning the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty, which prohibits national missile defense.

In Tampa, Cohen said he plans to discuss the U.S. plan with China's leaders when he travels to Beijing next week. China and Russia are outspoken opponents of the project. Both argue that deploying a U.S. missile defense would trigger a renewed arms race and undermine global stability.

Vladimir Yakovlev, the head of Russia's Strategic Rocket Forces, was quoted by the Interfax news agency Friday as saying the tests "are the first step toward global nuclear instability."

A U.S. missile defense system, he said, would "lead directly to nuclear anarchy."

Cohen said Clinton will take China's views into account when he makes his decision this summer or fall.

"Ultimately I think any president has to look at this situation and say, 'Can I afford to let the American people go undefended?"' Cohen said. The United States now has no way of stopping a long-range missile in flight.

Throughout the Cold War, the United States assumed that the Soviet Union would not launch a missile attack because it knew the United States would retaliate.

Now, the concern is that a smaller state like communist North Korea might launch a small number of missiles at the United States. The administration fears that North Korea -- and possibly Iraq and Iran at some point -- would be less rational than Soviet leaders were in considering the likelihood of U.S. retaliation.

----

Clock Ticking for U.S. Anti-Missile Test

Reuters
July 7, 2000 Filed at 12:57 p.m. ET
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/international/international-usa-mis.html

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Defense Department said all systems were ready on Friday for the crucial $100 million third test of a planned U.S. National Missile Defense system that is bitterly opposed by Russia and China.

Despite an attempt by the anti-nuclear group Greenpeace to disrupt the test in California, Pentagon officials said the countdown was moving toward a four-hour launch ``window'' beginning at 7 p.m. California time on Friday for a 30-minute attempt to shoot down a missile with a missile high over the Pacific Ocean.

One such previous U.S. test was successful in October 1999, but a subsequent second test in January failed.

The results of Friday's attempt to ``hit a bullet with a bullet'' 144 miles high in space will weigh heavily in President Clinton's planned decision in the coming months on whether to begin building a limited National Missile Defense (NMD) based in Alaska next year for use beginning in 2005.

Clinton is caught between opposition from Moscow and Beijing, who fear that a mature and successful anti-missile system could neutralize their nuclear arsenals, and pressure from the U.S. Congress for rapid deployment of limited protection against threats from such states as North Korea, Iran and Iraq.

Clinton's national security decision, expected by November, will be based partly on advice from Defense Secretary William Cohen in coming weeks on technology and cost and partly on implications for ties with Russia, China and America's skeptical European allies.

White House spokesman P.J. Crowley cautioned reporters on Friday that the results of the third test would not automatically signal Clinton's decision.

Despite calls by critics for Clinton to pass any decision off to his successor, who will be elected in November and take office next January, Crowley said ``the election is not a factor in the president's decision-making process.''

``I would say a hit doesn't automatically suggest success, nor does a failure automatically come with a miss tonight,'' Crowley said. ``I think everyone needs to understand that this is going to be a process that unfolds over many weeks...''.

Scientific groups and many former U.S. government officials say ``NMD'' technology is deeply flawed. And Europe fears nuclear arms control could unravel and a new arms race begin if the United States breaks the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty by building even a limited system.

Weather permitting, a Minuteman intercontinental missile with a dummy warhead on top was scheduled to be launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base, California, toward the Pacific Marshall Islands sometime during the four-hour test window.

A U.S. ``hit-to-kill'' weapon would be fired atop its own rocket from Kwajalein Atoll 4,300 miles away about 20 minutes after the Vandenberg launch in an attempt to maneuver, intercept and smash into the ``enemy'' warhead.

The 121-pound weapon, built by Raytheon Co. (RTN.N), is designed to hit and smash the target into space dust at a speed of 15,000 mph in a flash that would be captured by long-range cameras.

The environmental group Greenpeace said it sent several protesters into the Vandenberg Air Force Base in California in a move to prevent the test. ``According to the Air Force's own safety procedures the missile cannot be launched with people in that part of the base,'' said Greenpeace spokeswoman Mary Macnutt.

The environmental and anti-nuclear group also sailed a Dutch ship on Thursday toward an area declared off-limits, in another effort to block the test.

But the Pentagon said all systems were go.

``Everything is fine so far. There are some high cirrus clouds in the California launch area, but they present no problem,'' Air Force Lt. Col. Rick Leonard, a missile defense spokesman, told Reuters on Friday.

``It will be immediately obvious whether we were successful or not,'' Rear Adm. Craig Quigley, a Pentagon spokesman, told reporters at a briefing on Thursday.

The test will be closely monitored by Raytheon and Boeing Co. (BA.N), integrator of the proposed NMD system.

On Thursday 50 American winners of the Nobel prize sent a letter to Clinton warning him that any movement toward deployment of a ballistic missile system would be ``premature, wasteful and dangerous.''

Clinton is expected to decide by November at least whether to issue contracts for pouring concrete on wind-swept Shemya Island off Alaska, where a new X-Band radar guidance system for the first phase of NMD would be built. Anti-missile weapons would be based elsewhere in Alaska.

Pentagon officials say that because of extremely harsh winter conditions on the island, barges must begin ferrying equipment there next spring if the radar is to be completed by 2005.

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

-------- fiji

Some Fiji Rebel Supporters Leave Parliament

Yahoo News
Friday July 7 4:50 AM ET
By James Regan
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20000707/wl/fiji_leadall_dc_80.html

SUVA (Reuters) - Nearly half the supporters of Fijian rebels holding deposed prime minister Mahendra Chaudhry and most of his cabinet hostage left parliament on Friday ahead of a midnight deadline to clear the area and free the captives.

``Most of them (the deserting rebel supporters) said they were tired of living in the complex,'' said Captain Eroni Volavola, adding 80 rebel supporters had left.

Rebel leader George Speight, his gunmen and the rest of some 200 supporters remained inside parliament. A military exclusion zone around the complex, which comes into full force at midnight, was deserted.

The military, which has warned it might cut electricity and other services to the compound, has said anyone left inside after the deadline would be charged once the crisis ends.

Speight and his gunmen stormed parliament on May 19 in the name of indigenous rights, demanding ethnic Indians, 44 percent of the 800,000 population, be stripped of political power.

The military announced a new indigenous government on Monday, but has said it will retain executive power until the hostages are freed.

Volavola said rebels were demanding that the military dissolve its new government,claiming it did not have the political will to protect indigenous rights, and appoint their candidate for president, Ratu Josefa Iloilo -- Fiji's deputy president before the attempted coup.

But the military is standing behind Fiji's new indigenous prime minister Laisenia Qarase, appointed to rule for two years ahead of fresh elections, and has rejected Iloilo as president.

The capital, Suva, was quiet on Friday, but New Zealand warned civil war between tribal chiefs was a possibility if someone did not emerge to unite the South Pacific nation.

New Zealand Foreign Minister Phil Goff said the crisis was no longer a racial issue between Indians and indigenous Fijians, but a brawl between tribal chiefs.

``Taken to the extreme you could even see civil war,'' Goff told Australian radio. ``Not civil war between the indigenous and the Indo-Fijian population, but rather a civil war between the conflicting factions within the indigenous population.

``I have to say first of all that I think civil war is not the most likely outcome, though it cannot be ruled out.''

Tensions in Fiji have mounted mounting following the wounding of five rebel supporters in a shootout with the military on Tuesday.

Indigenous protests have erupted around Fiji in recent days, with the capital Suva plunged into darkness on Thursday when landowners took over an electricity supply station.

Earlier on Friday the military tried to get Fiji's Great Council of Chiefs to mediate talks between rebels and the military, but Speight refused such talks.

-------- iran

Iran Flaunts New Missile Sites

NewsMax.com
Thursday, July 6, 2000
http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/7/6/83815

Strengthening ties with Russia and Communist North Korea and China, Iran is boasting ballistic-missile launchers that rank it among the region's major military powers.

According to the World Tribune:

Gen. Rahim Safawi, commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, has announced that five launching pads for ballistic missiles have been completed.

Although he did not specify the type of missiles to be used on the launchers, Western intelligence sources say they include the Shihab-3 missile, with a range capable of striking Saudi Arabia and Israel.

They expect Iran will soon test the Shihab-3, based on the North Korean No-Dong missile and improved by Russia and China, all of which countries have been collaborating with Iran's military build-up.

Safawi told the official Islamic Republic News Agency that these new launch sites "substantially increased Iran's defensive capacity, and the country now ranks among the leading military powers of the region."

Col. Gen. Leonid Ivashov, chief of the Russian Defense Ministry's international military-cooperation department, said his visit to Tehran last month was meant "to determine the common menace to the security of our two states and methods for its neutralization."

-------- solomon islands

Solomons PM Proposes Amnesty, Compensation Deal

Yahoo News
Friday July 7 1:13 AM ET
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20000707/wl/solomons_leadall_dc_13.html

HONIARA (Reuters) - The Solomon Islands government said on Friday it aimed to provide a multi-million dollar compensation package for warring ethnic militias and would consider an amnesty for combatants as part of a peace deal.

Newly-elected Prime Minister Mannasseh Sogavare said he hoped to offer compensation worth $1.8 million to rival militias from Guadalcanal and Malaita islands but said his government had no money.

``The priority is to have a cease-fire agreement in place which will pave the way for amnesty to be considered for the members of the two groups in conflict,'' Sogavare said in a national address marking the 22nd independence anniversary of the strife-torn Pacific nation.

``This should lead to the laying down and surrendering of arms,'' he said.

The two militias have struggled since last year for dominance on the main island of Guadalcanal. Fresh fighting exploded a month ago when the Malaita Eagles Force (MEF) took over the capital Honiara in an attempted coup which led to the resignation of former Prime Minister Bartholomew Ulufa'alu.

About 60 people have since been killed in fighting with rival militia, the Isatabu Freedom Movement.

The ethnic dispute in the former British colony, located about 1,000 miles northeast of Australia, has simmered for decades. People on Guadalcanal resent migrants from Malaita taking top jobs in the capital Honiara.

No Money

Both sides have demanded compensation for lost land and damaged property.

Sogavare, who was elected at an emergency parliamentary sitting a week ago, said he would also consider blood money for the relatives of those missing and presumed dead.

Sogavare , said the details of the compensation package would be negotiated in talks aboard the Australian navy ship HMAS Tobruk, anchored off Honiara, later on Friday.

The Isatabu militia rejected Sogavare's election last week, triggering the collapse of a tentative cease-fire and fresh clashes with the MEF.

Sogavare detailed a litany of social and economic problems caused by the conflict in the country of 408,000 people.

``The Solomon Islands government has no money,'' he said.

``Foreign investment is now virtually invisible. Services in provinces have been badly affected...the clinics have run short of medical supplies and there is a likelihood that schools might not start on time,'' he said.

Sogavare said after coming to power that aid donors like Australia should ``put their money where their mouth is'' and said his government was working on ways to fund the compensation plan.

``The government is currently working on amnesty and is vigorously pursuing procuring funds to meet compensation for lost and abandoned properties as a result of the Guadalcanal social unrest,'' he said.

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

Military May Change Anthrax Program

NewsMax.com
Friday, July 7, 2000
UPI
http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/7/6/235355

WASHINGTON - With supplies of anthrax vaccine running low, Secretary of Defense William Cohen soon will decide whether to "restructure" the compulsory inoculation program.

At a news briefing Thursday, Rear Adm. Craig Quigley would not rule out suspending the program as one of Cohen's options. The secretary will base his decision on a briefing by a team that will include members from the Pentagon's departments of Health Affairs, Personnel and Readiness, and Reserve Affairs, among others, Quigley said. Cohen is expected to make his decision before he leaves Monday on a trip to China.

BioPort, the Michigan company that is sole supplier of the vaccine, is still working to meet Food and Drug Administration standards, Quigley said. The admiral referred to the more than 30 "shortcomings" discovered during an FDA inspection last November. "We've been in an 'anthrax tight' ... environment for some time," he told reporters.

In April, the Pentagon awarded the troubled manufacturer $12 million to help its new laboratory pass FDA inspection. That money came on top of the $40 million it gave BioPort to bail the company out of financial trouble last fall.

"So we don't have a new supply of vaccine on hand yet, and won't have for probably many months to come. ... It's been a very cautious management of the available stocks," Quigley said.

In February, the Pentagon categorically rejected a call from the House Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on National Security to suspend its mandatory anthrax immunization program. Rep. Christopher Shays, R-Conn., subcommittee chairman, had released a report calling for the program to be halted until the effects of the vaccine are more closely studied. Some 350 military personnel have refused to take the vaccine out of safety fears.

But this number is dwarfed by the 4,500 doses that are administered daily and the 455,000 service members who have received at least one shot.

About 10 countries, including Iraq and North Korea, are believed to have "weaponized" anthrax, and more are working on developing Anthrax-based weapons. The anthrax spore is a stable one. It can be used as an aerosol and still maintain its lethality.

---

Okinawa curfew after sex charges

BBC
Friday, 7 July, 2000, 13:26 GMT 14:26 UK
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/asia-pacific/newsid_823000/823365.stm

Protests against US bases in Japan are not uncommon

The US military said it would impose a midnight curfew and drinking ban on marines on the Japanese island of Okinawa after a serviceman was charged with sexually molesting a 14-year-old girl in her bedroom.

But the restrictions have prompted criticism as they will only apply for a few days before and during the summit of the Group of Eight (G8) countries, which is being held on the island in a fortnight's time.

The alleged molestation case has cast a shadow over President Clinton's plans to attend the 21-23 July summit and has prompted a flurry of activity from top officials.

On Friday, the chief aide of Japanese Prime Minister Yoshiro Mori flew to Okinawa to soothe mounting local anger, while the top US military official on the island made an unprecedented apology on Thursday.

Okinawa's prefectural and city assembly, as well as the assembly of Nago City which will host the G8 summit, have passed resolutions demanding compensation and calling for measures to prevent such incidents.

The alcohol ban will be in force for four days as the summit takes place, while the late-night curfew is in force from July 14 until July 24.

'Indecent attack'

The 19-year-old marine is accused of unlawfully entering the girl's apartment - which was unlocked, as is common on the island - early on Monday morning.

The girl's screaming alerted her mother, who said she found the drunk, half-naked marine on top of her daughter, kissing and fondling her.

The woman took her daughter from the room and called the police, who charged the marine with indecency and unlawful entry.

The marine, from the Futenma Air Base in Ginowan could face up to seven years in prison if convicted.

Protests in Okinawa

The people of Okinawa, who have held protests and rallies over the incident this week, have long resented the presence of US troops on the island.

There have been numerous cases of US troops misbehaving sexually or violently.

In the most prominent case in 1995, which drew massive protests from local people, three US servicemen were convicted of raping a 12-year-old schoolgirl.

In the closing months of World War II, when Okinawa was the site of a fierce battle, American troops were reported to have raped thousands of local women.

The apology for Monday's incident by the marine commander, Lieutenant General Earl B Hailston, who visited the governor of Okinawa Keiichi Inamine and made a bow of contrition, underscores the seriousness of the incident.

The apology was the first from a senior US military official for such an incident and was also remarkable for the fact that it was made before the marine had been charged.

---

U.S. General Apologizes for Soldier's Behavior

US NewsMax
Thursday, July 6, 2000
UPI
http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/7/6/90554

TOKYO - U.S. Marine Corps Bases Japan Commanding General Earl B. Hailston apologized to Okinawa Governor Keiichi Inamine Thursday for the alleged indecent behavior by a U.S. Marine Corps soldier toward a Japanese schoolgirl. The incident has outraged people on Okinawa, where the G-8 summit is going to take place this month.

According to the Okinawa police, a 19-year-old U.S. Marine Corps soldier stationed at Okinawa's Futenma Air Station entered an unlocked apartment house in Okinawa City early Monday morning and fondled a 14-year-old Japanese schoolgirl who was asleep in a room. He was arrested just after being detected.

The Japanese government immediately protested.

The Okinawa assembly unanimously agreed to protest against both the Japanese government and the U.S. government and called for an apology from the U.S. government. The Nago municipal assembly also unanimously agreed to seek an apology to Okinawans Thursday, saying, "That incident shows how the U.S. forces have lost their ethics and friendships to people in Okinawa in such an important moment prior to the scheduled G-8 summit here."

The Okinawa governor, who approves the presence of the U.S. forces on Okinawa, has been in a fury over the incident, saying, "It is a grave problem linked to the basics of human society."

---

Japan PM Condemns Alleged Molesting by U.S. Marine

Yahoo News
Friday July 7 7:19 AM ET
By Linda Sieg

TOKYO (Reuters) - Japanese Prime Minister Yoshiro Mori on Friday angrily condemned the alleged molesting of a young girl by a drunken U.S. Marine on Okinawa, site of this month's summit of President Clinton and other world leaders.

``Basically, this is outrageous,'' Mori told reporters on Friday evening. ``It's no excuse to say that (the marine) was young. They need to be educated about this.''

The incident, in which a drunken 19-year-old Marine allegedly entered the 14-year-old Japanese girl's apartment in the early hours of Monday morning and fondled her as she slept, has revived unpleasant memories of the 1995 rape of a school girl by three U.S. servicemen that jolted U.S.-Japan ties.

It also threatens to cast a cloud over Clinton's trip to Okinawa during the July 21-23 Group of Eight (G8) summit, the first visit by a U.S. president since 1972 when the island was returned to Japan.

The U.S. forces on Okinawa said on Friday they would institute a late night curfew from July 14 until July 24 and ban drinking both on and off the bases from July 20-24.

``While we demand and enforce a high level of conduct at all times, it is especially important during the summit -- when the eyes of the world are upon us -- that we put our best foot forward and make our corps and our country proud of who we are and what we do,'' Marine Corps Lieutenant General Earl Hailston said in a statement.

The step follows a rare apology on Thursday by Hailston, the top U.S. military official in Okinawa, to Okinawa Governor Keiichi Inamine for the incident.

Nerve Hit

``These Marines are my sons and daughters. That is why it hurts me deeply when any of my Marines appear to fall short of the standard I have set and demand,'' Hailston said in a statement. ``It hurts me, as it hurts you, my neighbors.''

Hailston instructed his commanding generals ``to personally speak to their Marines, to outline and reinforce the standards of conduct we demand,'' a Marine Corps spokesman said.

The incident prompted the Okinawa Prefectural Assembly, the Okinawa City Assembly and the assembly of Nago City, where the summit will be held, to pass resolutions protesting against the incident and urging steps to prevent recurrences.

``What these resolutions are saying isn't 'get rid of the U.S. bases', but 'do something to prevent crimes by the U.S. military here','' said the editor of an Okinawa newspaper.

``Crimes by U.S. military personnel, which had decreased after the 1995 incident, are on the rise again this year,'' he added.

But anti-base activists said the incident simply proved their point that the bases must go.

``Every time these incidents happen, the Americans apologize and the Japanese government apologizes and the prefecture protests. They take steps and promise it won't happen again, but it just keeps happening,'' said Zenko Nakamura of the Council for Opposing Offshore Base Construction.

U.S. Footprint

Nakamura's group is battling a plan, approved by Japan's central government and the prefecture, to shift a heliport facility from Futenma Air Station in central Okinawa to near Nago City in the north.

In 1996, the United States and Japan signed an agreement to close or reduce by about 20 percent 11 U.S. facilities covering some 12,000 acres -- about nine percent of Okinawa's land mass.

The centerpiece of the deal was shutting Futenma in five to seven years, provided a replacement facility could be found on Okinawa.

About 26,000 of the 48,000 U.S. military personnel in Japan are stationed in Okinawa. Residents of the island have long argued that with less than one percent of Japan's land and one percent of its population, they bear an unfair burden.

In an another case of bad timing this week, Japan's defense minister was forced to withdraw controversial remarks he made about the planned U.S. heliport move.

Defense Agency chief Kazuo Torashima had told reporters on Wednesday it would be impossible to limit the use of the heliport to 15 years -- a time frame the local authority wants but Washington sees as too short -- as it was hard to forecast the region's security situation so far ahead.

---

Marines Apologize to Okinawa Over Sex Case

New York Times
July 7, 2000
By CALVIN SIMS
http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/asia/070700japan-g7.html

TOKYO, July 6 -- With a summit meeting of the world's industrial powers opening in Okinawa in just two weeks, the United States was taking no chances that demonstrations against the marines there would mar the event.

So even though no charges have been filed against a 19-year-old marine accused of molesting a 14-year-old girl in Okinawa on Monday, the top United States military official on the Japanese island apologized to its governor today.

He bowed. He expressed regret. And he tried, once more, to smooth relations with the people of Okinawa, where fear and concern are widespread over crimes by American soldiers, who have been accused of numerous cases of violence and sexual misconduct over the years.

The official, Lt. Gen. Earl B. Hailston, visited Okinawa's governor, Keiichi Inamine, at the prefecture government's office to make the formal apology, which included a bow of Japanese contrition. He was accompanied by the United States consul general of Okinawa, Robert Luke. General Hailson is the regional coordinator for American military forces in Okinawa, where two-thirds of the 47,000 American troops stationed in Japan are based.

"I want to express to the family involved, as well as to the people of Okinawa," General Hailston said, "my sincerest apology and most profound regret for the incident and for the anxiety it has created."

General Hailston's apology was not the first by an American official. In 1995, Defense Secretary William J. Perry apologized on behalf of the United States and three servicemen charged with raping a 12-year-old Japanese girl. His apology, like General Hailston's, came just before a summit meeting in Japan. The servicemen were later convicted.

In his apology today, General Hailston said: "The relationship of a Marine leader to his subordinate marines is like the relationship of a father to his children -- these marines are my sons and daughters. That is why it hurts me deeply when any of my marines appears to fall short of the standard I have set and demand. It hurts me, as it hurts you, my neighbors."

Japanese and Western historians have said that in the aftermath of World War II, American troops raped thousands of Okinawan women without reprisals. The historians said that while hundreds of rape cases have been documented, most have gone unreported for fear of retaliation and shame.

This latest incident unfolded on Monday after a woman told the police that her daughter had been molested. The authorities accused the marine, 19, of breaking into the girl's home and touching her body while she slept. The marine, who is stationed at the Futenma Air Station in Ginowan, was arrested on suspicion of trespassing and conducting an indecent act against a minor.

Law enforcement officials said the marine was drunk during the incident and that he told the police he meant to visit a friend's house but entered the girl's residence by mistake. They said the door to the home was unlocked, as is the custom of many Okinawans. The police officials said the marine has denied molesting the girl. Evening newspapers in Okinawa reported today that the girl told the police that the soldier touched her face and body and climbed on top of her.

Since Monday's arrest, labor unions, peace activists, women's rights groups, and human rights organizations have rallied near United States bases and sent angry letters of protest to the prefectural government.

The general's comments appear to have done little to quell growing outrage in Okinawa over the incident, which could prove extremely embarrassing to President Clinton, who is scheduled to attend the summit meeting July 21 to 23 for the Group of 7 industrialized nations and Russia.

---

U.S. Air Force Selects ComTeq to Provide $2 Million Storage Area Network--
SAN--Solution

Yahoo News
Friday July 7, 7:00 pm Eastern Time
Company Press Release
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/000707/rpt_md_pc_.html

ROCKVILLE, Md.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--July 7, 2000--ComTeq Federal, Inc. (www.comteq.com), a wholly-owned subsidiary of PC Connection, Inc. (NASDAQ: PCCC - news), announced that they have been selected to provide a comprehensive Storage Area Network (SAN) solution for the U.S Air Force Headquarters. The contract with the Air Force is valued at nearly $2 million.

The high-bandwidth, automated data protection and recovery system provided by ComTeq will support more than 200 Windows NT servers located in the Pentagon and four other Air Force Headquarter sites in the greater Washington, D.C. area. ComTeq worked with Air Force officials to help evaluate the agency's storage needs, and partnered with Advanced Digital Information Corporation (ADIC) and Veritas Software to develop the SAN solution.

``ComTeq successfully met the Air Force's data storage requirements by leveraging our strong relationships with key hardware and software vendors, and by serving as a one-stop shop for a complete SAN solution,'' said Stan Weintraub, a Vice President at ComTeq. ``Today, more and more digitized information must be easily and simultaneously accessed, shared, and backed up within secure environments. This contract demonstrates ComTeq's expertise in developing and sourcing comprehensive solutions that address today's data storage needs.''

ComTeq is a leading supplier of computer and networking equipment and services to Federal Government agencies. The Company, which is based in Rockville, Maryland, holds a General Services Administration (GSA) Schedule, a National Institutes of Health (NIH) Electronic Computer Store II contract, and a NASA Scientific and Engineering Workstation Procurement (SEWP) Compaq authorization. ComTeq also holds active Blanket Purchasing Agreements with several Federal Government agencies, including the United States Navy, the FDIC, the National Security Agency and the Internal Revenue Service.

ComTeq was acquired by PC Connection (www.pcconnection.com) in June of 1999 to expand the parent company's ability to serve the computing needs of the Federal Government. Founded in 1993, ComTeq focuses on high-end computer products, including servers and networking hardware, software, and installation and support services. In June of 2000, ComTeq premiered on Washington Technology magazine's list of the top federal prime contractors in Information Technology, demonstrating the Company's strong growth and success in working with the federal procurement process.

PC Connection, Inc. is a rapid-response provider of information technology products and solutions. The Company offers more than 100,000 brand-name products through its staff of technically-trained outbound sales account managers and catalog telesales representatives, its comprehensive web sites at www.pcconnection.com, www.macconnection.com and www.comteq.com, and its catalogs PC Connection (1-800-800-5555) and MacConnection (1-800-800-2222). Through its full-service Distribution and Custom-Configuration Center, PC Connection can deliver custom-configured computer systems overnight. For the year 2000, PC Connection was ranked number 7 in Business Week's annual listing of the world's leading information technology companies. Yahoo! Internet Life recently named PC Connection ``the best place to shop for computers,'' and listed the Company's web sites among the 100 Best Sites on the Internet. PC Connection was listed as one of the 100 most influential companies in the computer industry in PC Magazine's special issue titled ``100 Technology Companies That Are Changing The World.'' In addition, PC Connection has won PC World magazine's prestigious ``World Class Award'' nine times over the past 11 years, including 2000.

-------- OTHER

-------- spying

Lee May Have Shared Copied Data With 8 Nations, U.S. Says

By Vernon Loeb and Walter Pincus
Washington Post
Friday, July 7, 2000; Page A05
http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/2000-07/07/118l-070700-idx.html

Federal prosecutors argued this week that former Los Alamos scientist Wen Ho Lee may have copied nuclear secrets onto portable tapes either to help mainland China or to impress prospective employers in Taiwan, Australia, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Singapore or Switzerland.

In a document filed Wednesday night in U.S. District Court in Albuquerque, U.S. Attorney Norman C. Bay said Lee "need not have decided on a particular foreign nation at the time" he downloaded a trove of nuclear data from computers at Los Alamos National Laboratory to the tapes, seven of which are missing.

Bay also argued that the government does not have to show that Lee planned to give nuclear secrets to a particular nation, but merely that he copied the secrets "with the intent to injure the United States."

The filing came in response to an order last week from U.S. District Judge James A. Parker, who directed prosecutors to disclose which country or countries they think Lee intended to help. Parker ruled after Lee's attorney, Mark Holscher, argued that he could not prepare a defense without knowing which foreign nation Lee was accused of trying to assist.

"The government has detained Wen Ho Lee for seven months on the ridiculous, false allegation that he may have given information to the People's Republic of China," Holscher said yesterday. "Now we're given notice that it could be the country of Switzerland, which shows the government had no basis to claim that Wen Ho Lee had any intention to aid any foreign country. It's ludicrous to name countries like Singapore, Switzerland and Australia."

Lee, 60, a naturalized U.S. citizen born on Taiwan, was fired from Los Alamos in March 1999 for security violations and was arrested last December. He was subsequently indicted on 59 felony counts, including 39 counts of violating the Atomic Energy Act, charges that could result in a life sentence if the government can prove that he was not merely careless but intended to harm the United States.

Lee, who is being held in a segregated cell at a Santa Fe, N.M., detention center, has pleaded not guilty. Prosecutors have not charged him with actually passing U.S. secrets to any foreign country, and he has not publicly explained why he copied the nuclear data from computers at Los Alamos, where he had worked for almost 20 years.

With the exception of China, the prosecution's filing lists nations where Lee had expressed interest in going to work in 1993, at a time when he feared he might lose his job at Los Alamos, according to testimony in pretrial hearings. One prosecution theory is that Lee copied the data as a kind of employment insurance policy, a guarantee that he would always be able to find work in a nuclear research institute overseas.

----

Swiss Court Gives Mossad Spy Suspended Sentence

Yahoo News
Friday July 7 6:01 AM ET
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20000707/wl/swiss_israel_dc_2.html

LAUSANNE, Switzerland (Reuters) - Switzerland's highest court on Friday sentenced a confessed Israeli spy to a one-year suspended prison sentence for his role in a bungled 1998 wiretap attempt by the Mossad secret service.

The Federal Court also barred the man from entering the country for five years after finding him guilty of political espionage, illegal acts for a foreign state and entering the country under a false name.

``The crimes were considerable. Switzerland's sovereignty was violated in a callous way,'' presiding judge Hans Wipraechtiger said in handing down the sentence.

The spy, who was allowed to stand trial under the alias Issac Bental, had confessed to the charges.

Bental was arrested in an apartment complex near the capital Berne in February 1998 while trying to tap the phone of a naturalized Lebanese-born car dealer who Mossad thought had links with Hizbollah (Party of God) Shi'ite Muslim guerillas.

----

Stonewalling

Inside the Ring
Bill Gertz and Rowan Scarborough Notes from the Pentagon.
July 7, 2000
Washington Times
http://www.washtimes.com/national/inring-20007721163.htm

The stone wall of silence erected around the House investigation of John Millis, the late staff director of the House Intelligence Committee, has claimed its first victim. She is Jennifer Millerwise, press spokeswoman for Rep. Porter J. Goss, Florida Republican and the committee chairman.

Miss Millerwise abruptly resigned a week ago and the committee staff has been unable to reach her, according to staff aides to Mr. Goss. She had been assigned the odious task of refusing to answer repeated queries on the Millis investigation when questioned by The Washington Times.

Miss Millerwise told us earlier that she, like one CIA spokesman, did not want to know any details of the circumstances surrounding the House Intelligence Committee probe of Mr. Millis.

Mr. Millis committed suicide in a Fairfax, Va., motel on June 4 after he had called a friend and said he was distraught over being placed on administrative leave by Mr. Goss. Both Mr. Millis and Mr. Goss are former CIA operations officers. Mr. Millis, as the staff director, knew just about every secret there is to keep in the U.S. intelligence community.

Rumors circulated widely in intelligence circles that Mr. Millis' suicide was linked to unauthorized disclosures related to former CIA Director John Deutch's mishandling of CIA secrets. Mr. Millis was not a fan of Mr. Deutch and had expressed his opinions in a speech earlier this year.

Senior U.S. intelligence officials, however, told us the death was the result of a "personal tragedy" and not related in any way to Mr. Deutch, the CIA, intelligence information or U.S. national security.

The focus of the probe by the House Intelligence Committee has not been disclosed by either Mr. Goss or the House panel.

Xinhua's connections

How many directors of government-run news agencies hold high-level security clearances and regularly read classified intelligence reports?

According to well-placed Pentagon sources, the top editor in Washington for China's official Xinhua News Agency periodically visits the seventh floor of the Chinese Embassy on Connecticut Avenue to do just that.

That's where the embassy has set up a secure room for top officials to read secret intelligence reports sent by cable from Beijing. The Xinhua director uses the reports to direct the agency's news reports. They also help Xinhua in its covert mission: providing secret reports to top Chinese leaders.

Xinhua is one of three major intelligence arms of the Chinese government that provide classified reports on the United States. The others are the Ministry of State Security (MSS), comparable to the former Soviet Union's KGB, and the People's Liberation Army Second Department, the military spy service.

Xinhua often beats its two rivals to the punch on intelligence reports, we are told. The competition is likely to fuel suspicion inside the Chinese government that the disclosure of Xinhua's illegal purchase of the Pentagon Ridge apartment building was a deliberate action by jealous MSS or Second Department agents.

The State Department forced Xinhua to put the building back on the market, rather than use it as a Washington headquarters, after reading of the purchase in The Washington Times.

-------- terrorism

FBI Intervenes in Planned Sale Of Internet Service to Japanese

By John Schwartz Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, July 7, 2000; Page E04
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/2000-07/07/063l-070700-idx.html

The FBI is raising national security concerns about a Japanese telecommunications giant's planned acquisition of a U.S. Internet company, as the agency seeks to maintain its ability to track criminals and terrorists in the digital age.

According to sources familiar with its action, the FBI has intervened in the announced $5.5 billion acquisition of Englewood, Colo.-based Verio Inc. by NTT Communications, a subsidiary of Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Corp., which in turn is more than half-owned by the Japanese government. Verio is a major provider of Internet services to corporations. NTT Communications provides telecommunications services in more than 200 countries.

On June 30, NTT Communications announced that it had received notice from the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), an interagency committee chaired by the Treasury secretary that examines foreign investment deals.

"NTT Communications believes that the proposed transaction does not raise national security concerns," the company said in a statement.

Neither the FBI nor the Treasury Department would comment on the matter, nor would spokesmen officially acknowledge that an investigation had been launched. Share prices of Verio dropped $1.62 1/2 yesterday, closing at $54.25.

Sources familiar with the FBI move say the agency is not trying to scuttle the merger but has concerns that its ability to enforce wiretap laws in the online world could be compromised by foreign ownership of Internet service providers.

"The sense I get is it's more needing to assuage concerns rather than trying to kill the deal," said Brett Lambert, an analyst at the Washington consulting firm DFI International. "There are some legitimate concerns. They felt NTT had not addressed them in a manner that was sufficient to give them a pass."

The FBI has the authority to raise such concerns under laws protecting Americans against risks of direct foreign investment. President Gerald Ford created CFIUS by executive order in 1975 to monitor overseas investment in U.S. companies. In 1988, Congress gave the president the power to block mergers that threatened national security in the Exon-Florio Amendment to the Defense Production Act of 1950.

Under the Exon-Florio provisions, an investigation can go on for as long as 45 days; after that time, the case goes to the president for final action within 15 days.

Stewart Baker, a former counsel to the National Security Agency who specializes in telecommunications regulations, suggested that the FBI was simply trying to put pressure on NTT and Verio to sign off on Internet wiretap concessions by threatening to hold up the merger. He noted that the FBI was given broad powers by Congress in 1994 to demand the ability to wiretap emerging telecommunications networks but the agency has not had notable success in getting Internet companies to toe that line.

"For the first time, the FBI has found a handle on the Internet and Internet wiretap," said Baker, who called the tactic "wickedly effective."

Baker, who said he has no direct tie to the case but is monitoring it for some of his clients, said the FBI move raises uncomfortable ironies, occurring at the same time that American trade officials are pressuring Japan to open its own telecommunications markets.

"We aren't very good at living up to the standards we expect from the rest of the world," Baker said.

David Farber, an Internet pioneer who serves on the board of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, warned that the FBI action "could start a trade war."

Farber, the chief technologist for the Federal Communications Commission, noted that he was speaking only for himself. But he said that the nation's law enforcement authorities' continued demands for ready access to communications weakens privacy and security protections.


-------- activists

Greenpeace activists infiltrate Star Wars Test Site

Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 10:43:05 -0400
From: "bruce hall" bruce.hall@diala.greenpeace.org

GREENPEACE OCCUPIES SITE FOR STAR WARS MISSILE LAUNCH

VANDENBERG AIR FORCE BASE, CALIFORNIA, July 7, 2000 (6:00 am PST) - The international anti-nuclear organization Greenpeace has just announced a team of activists has entered Vandenberg Air Force base where the Pentagon is scheduled to test its proposed Star Wars missile system later today. The activists, moving on foot, entered the base near the launch pad for a Minuteman II, scheduled for blast off at 19:01 this evening.

With people in this part of the base the missile cannot be launched. Equipped with survival gear and supplies for several days, they intend to stay inside the area as long as possible.

Meanwhile the MV Arctic Sunrise continues its course towards waters offshore from Vandenberg Air Force base. The captain and its crew are prepared to enter one of five hazard zones designated in a Notice to Mariners (NOTAM) on Tuesday. Reuters news agency report the US Air Force as saying that approaching vessel will be "dealt with".

In 1989 a U.S. navy ship rammed the MV Greenpeace off the coast of Florida when it was challenging a Trident missile test.

"Under the Law of the Sea Greenpeace has the right to peacefully protest the complete irresponsibility of the Star Wars program," said John Sprange aboard the Arctic Sunrise. "We will continue to use every non-violent means to convince President Clinton to Stop Star Wars."

Should it proceed, the Star Wars program will destroy existing nuclear disarmament treaties. It will also provide additional justification to Russia and China to retain their existing nuclear arsenals, while developing new nuclear weapons that can penetrate any future missile shield.

NOTE TO EDITORS: The Greenpeace activists inside the base are currently attempting to transmit footage and photos from their location inside the base. These will be offered to international news agencies.

Russian anti-nuclear camp 2000

From: "Alisa Nikoulina" aln@glasnet.ru
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 21:28:32 +0400

ANTI-NUCLEAR CAMP NEAR "MAYAK"
11th annual public opposition to dangerous industrial projects
July 23 - August 5, 2000

For more information on previous anti-nuclear camps in Russia and public opposition to nuclear power in regions of Russia visit the website of The SEU Anti-nuclear campaign http://www.ecoline.ru/antinuclear

THE international environmental camp near the "Mayak" nuclear reprocessing plant (Chelyabinsk region, close to the Ural Mountains of Russia) begins on July 23, 2000. THE camp is organized by ECODEFENSE!, Anti-nuclear campaign of the Socio-Ecological Union, Planet of Hope (Ozyorsk), Techa, Pravosoznanie and Ecofront (Chelyabinsk), Environmental Students' Inspection (Tomsk), Siberian Scientists for Global Responsibility (Novosibirsk), with participation of the Movement for Nuclear Safety (Chelyabinsk).

Goals of the anti-nuclear campaigners organizing this camp are: 1. To prevent the import of nuclear waste, including spent nuclear fuel to Russia (to the region of Chelyabinsk with the "Mayak" facility).

2. To introduce the legal status of the 30 km zone around the "Mayak" facility , which would improve the social benefits of the population affected by radioactive contamination.

3. To stop the construction of the South-Ural nuclear plant. 75% of THE local citizens voted against this plant in a referendum on March 17, 1991. This public decision can not be changed unless the authorities organize another referendum. But the Ministry of atomic power (Minatom) included the South-Ural nuclear plant into its new "strategy of atomic development of Russia for 2000-2050" and will get the money for this illegal project. Implementation of this project could result in widespread plutonium contamination of the Chelyabinsk region.

Situation in the Chelyabinsk region: problems that can not be ignored

Since 1950, "Mayak" has produced weapon-grade plutonium. In 1976, The RT-1, which reprocesses spent nuclear fuel, was opened. The facility is capable of reprocessing spent fuel from VVER-440, BN-350 and BN-600 reactors, and also from research reactors and nuclear submarines. Every ton of reprocessed fuel creates additional waste with about 600 Ci of radioactivity. Since 1951, medium-level radioactive waste has been dumped into lake Karachay.

The territory around "Mayak" is contaminated with large quantities of cesium-137, strontium-90, and plutonium-239, -238, and -241. The level of contamination in several parts of Chelyabinsk region is legally equivalent to a environmental disaster zone. Paying no attention to existing problems, the nuclear industry plans to build more facilities at the "Mayak" site.

Blood diseases among children in "nuclear" cities are twice as prevalent than in relatively uncontaminated areas. In the Argayash region (next to the "Mayak" facility), the adult population was found to have a large percentage of nervous system deseases - 72 % of the population, diseases related to digestion - almost 50 %, blood diseases - 38 %. Every fifth inhabitant of the area is an invalid. Health studies of the population show, first, that the population is receiving high doses of radiation, and second, that their health is affected by internal irradiation. Local citizens are carrying plutonium inside of their bodies.

New Minatom projects include the import of nuclear waste and plutonium to MOX-fuel. Positions of the organizers of camp:

1. The Ministry of atomic energy (Minatom) and the authorities of the Chelyabinsk region plan to use "Mayak" as a place for storing and, potentially, dumping foreign nuclear waste. We act for Russia against Minatom's irresponsible and offensive plan.

According to the strategy for the nuclear development of Russia for 2000-2050, approved by the government on May 25, 2000, Minatom is going to stop reprocessing nuclear waste (spent nuclear fuel). We welcome this step because it will halt the most dangerous operation of the nuclear-fuel cycle. At the same time, the lack of planing for the social and economic impacts (such as lack of new jobs for ex-"Mayak" workers and specialists) illustrates Minatom's criminal indifference for the industry employees. Such an irresponsible policy may result in social instability within the region, an increase of the crime rate, and an increase of the threat of nuclear proliferation.

2. Minatom plans to use "Mayak" for producing MOX fuel (mixed uranium-plutonium oxide fuel). Implementation of the MOX plan may increase the rate of nuclear accidents and widespread plutonium contamination throughout the Chelyabinsk region and in other regions of Russia.

3. Both Minatom and "Mayak" officials intend to build the South-Ural nuclear power plant with 3 breeder reactors (BN-800 design) and are trying to include the expenses of this project in the state budget of Russia, as well as in the local budget of Chelyabinsk region. It is immoral and anti-democratic to ignore the will of people, which was expressed in the referendum in 1991 when 75% of residents voted "NO to the nuclear plant".

Today, the Russian nuclear industry can not provide enough funds for elementary efforts aimed at normal maintenance of nuclear reactors. This industry was always funded by large governmental donations. But the government and Minatom are no longer capable of funding reactor safety programs, even on the lowest acceptable level. Given this situation, the necessary funds must be urgently allocated for the development of safe, renewable, non-nuclear energy sources and energy efficiency.

The necessary funds must also be allocated for fairly compensating those people already injured by the nuclear industry, such as the many inhabitants in the Chelyabinsk region. Funds also must be made available for phasing out old nuclear reactors. Instead of creating new problems, the nuclear industry must first solve the already existing problems.

The funds that are urgently needed for developing a sustainable energy system can be obtained through: a) energy-efficiency measures, which may reduce up to one-third of the national electricity comsumption; b) international donors from developed countries, by changing their funding priorities from supporting nuclear power to the development of non-nuclear energy alternatives.

Rules and Additional information

The camp will organize seminars, press-conferences, and actions to protect the environment and public health. The camp will use only non-violent methods in its work. The camp is not funded by any political organization, state or commercial company. The camp does not support any political organizations. The camp does not descriminate on a racial, national, or sexual basis. The camp welcomes participants with their own tents, sleeping bags, or any other tourist and climbing equipment.

For more information, please contact central organizing committee: +7 (095) 2784642, 7766546, 7766281, e-mail: anc@ecoline.ru http://www.ecoline.ru/antinuclear

Regional coordinators: for Central Russia - Anti-nuclear campaign of the Socio-Ecological Union, Moscow (tel (095) 2784642, 7766546, aln@glasnet.ru); for Noth-West of Russia - ECODEFENSE!, Kaliningrad (tel (0112) 448443, galina@ecodefense.kaliningrad.ru); for Ural region - Techa, Chelyabinsk (tel (3512) 28 8493, techa@chel.surnet.ru); for Siberia - Siberian scientists for global responsibility, Novosibirsk (tel (3832) 329181, pashenko@ecolog.nsk.ru

ANTINUCLEAR CAMPAIGN in x-USSR

t/f +7 095 278 4642 t. +7 095 776 6546 aln@glasnet.ru anc@cci.glasnet.ru www.ecoline.ru/antinuclear

----

Dear Friends,

Below are two sample letters to the editor on tonight's Star Wars test. Please feel free to sign and send as is to your local paper, or make whatever changes you deem necessary.

Kevin Martin Director, Project Abolition kmartin@fourthfreedom.org Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2000 16:50:49 -0500

Letter #1

(May need modification depending on the outcome of Friday's test.)

To the editor:

Friday night the military launched another test of Star Wars, the proposed missile defense system that weapons contractors have been toying with for the past several years. "Toying" is the only way to describe efforts to deploy a modified version of Ronald Reagan's 1980's vision of a national missile defense. The Pentagon's Star Wars testing scheme cannot be taken seriously -- it is clearly rigged.

A recent Time magazine article outlined the toy-like quality of the test, which was unrealistic in the extreme compared to an actual nuclear attack. Technicians launching the interceptor rocket for the test knew the proportions and dimensions of the missile ­ they knew how fast it would travel, how large it was, how powerful it was, that there was only one, and even the time that it was launched. Yes, our Star Wars experts actually listened to the countdown of the missile launch.

We can only hope our future enemies might be so gracious as to allow us the same knowledge about their nuclear missiles before they launch them at us. It's as if our Pentagon officials know that the system won't work and are therefore carefully rigging their own tests.

Our political system is equally rigged. The four top Star Wars contractors, Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, TRW, and Boeing, have been toying with our politicians for decades. Over the last 3 1/2 years, those four contractors spent $40 million on campaign contributions and congressional lobbying to ensure increased Pentagon spending and contracting. No wonder our senators and representatives are in favor of a missile defense system that will not work, will waste billions of dollars, and will start a new global arms race.

President Clinton is also toying with the idea of leaving a presidential legacy, and it looks like he might see Star Wars, whether or not it works, as his big chance to lay down something impressive in the next generation of history books. No matter what Clinton or Pentagon officials they say about the test, don't be fooled. Star Wars is rigged for disaster.

Sincerely,
Jane B. Activist Local Peace Group

Letter #2
On Friday night, the U.S. conducted the third test of the Star Wars missile defense system. Many critics of Star Wars cite the system's exorbitant cost (at least $60 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office) and threat to nuclear arms control in voicing opposition to the plan.

Let's say we're willing to pay the economic and international political costs of moving ahead with Star Wars. The question then becomes will the system work? To know that, one must first ask does the Pentagon have in place a rigorous testing program to determine whether it will work?

Judging from Friday's test and those planned over the next four years, the answer is no.

The $100 million test ­ that's right, one hundred million dollars -- was conducted under ridiculously easy conditions akin to lobbing a baseball underhand to Mark McGwire, watching him hit the ball out of the park, and calling it a success. The test tells us more about the political power of the major weapons contractors -- Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and TRW, all of which stand to make a killing off Star Wars -- than it does about whether the system will work or not.

President Clinton, who is to decide whether to move ahead with Star Wars this fall, should listen to the 50 Nobel laureates, independent physicists, the international community, and the American people and decide against deploying Star Wars. If he instead listens to Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and TRW, his legacy will be re-starting the nuclear arms race.

Sincerely,
Joan Q. Public Your Peace Group

----

Iran tries peaceful revolution

Christian Science Monitor
FRIDAY, JULY 7, 2000 WORLD
http://www.csmonitor.com/durable/2000/07/07/fp1s3-csm.shtml

On Saturday, Iran's students plan to deny hard-liners' their wish: a violent street fight. Scott Peterson Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

TEHRAN, IRAN, Violence often defines pivotal moments in the Middle East, and events marking their memory have a history of turning violent, too.

But Iranian students - the same group that one year ago became embroiled in the worst street violence in 20 years - are turning to flower power.

"We will confront fists with flowers," declares student leader Ibrahim Sheikh, describing anniversary plans for Saturday for a mass distribution of blooms.

This weekend's effort to stage a nonviolent memorial is part of Iran's tense struggle over who will control the speed of political change in the Islamic Republic. This past year has witnessed an intensification of a vicious tug-of-war between hard-line conservative clerics and popular reformists who back the moderate President Mohamad Khatami.

The protest ironically borrows a page from history. "The Shah [pro-West Reza Pahlavi, overthrown in 1979] was really brought down with flowers," says Reza Alavi, an Iranian analyst who is a former editor of the Harvard Middle Eastern and Islamic Review. "I was at the front of the first march against him, and everyone came out with flowers and put them in the barrels of police guns."

Ahead of this weekend's memorial, students say they want no right-wing backlash - and no more street battles. Last year's protest turned violent when hard-line vigilantes weighed in and provided an excuse for a police crackdown.

"We are soldiers against violence," says student leader Sheikh. "We have our pens and our voices only, and with violence would lose to those people with knives who are more powerful."

During the past year's political battles, both sides catalog a list of victories and defeats. Some 20 reformist newspapers have been shut down since April, and a dozen of the noisiest pro-democracy activists are in prison. But elections in February ushered in a reformist parliament loyal to Mr. Khatami that is bent on changing Draconian restrictions.

The street battles last year were a watershed, analysts say, exposing the risks of violence - and how Iran's political landscape is still evolving. "You can shut down the press, the labor unions, and thwart parliament, but finally it is the students that have brought down regimes around the world," says Mr. Alavi.

Student leaders are the first to note that, unlike two decades ago, their aim is the reform - not the overthrow - of Iran's entrenched Islamic system. But as Iran has begun a democratic, people-driven opening up to the outside world after years of isolation, hardliners are finding that it is difficult to stop at half measures.

"The lesson for the rightists is that you can't have a semifree society," says an Iranian observer who asked not to be named. "It is either free or totalitarian. Now there is the atmosphere of martial law, but the key word for Khatami is caution, so he does not provide an excuse for a crackdown."

Though young Iranians who make up 60 percent of the population are unhappy with what they see as the slow pace of change, there are increasing signs that the reform shift is irreversible.

Besides the presidency, reformists now control the parliament, "so like a bird we now have two wings and can fly," says a student. Other levers of power, however - the judiciary, security forces, broadcast media, the Council of Guardians (which can veto legislation), and the unelected Expediency Council - are still in the grip of hardliners.

FLOWER POWER: A Tehran University student displays a banner calling for greater democracy. Students plan to pass out flowers Saturday to mark the anniversary of their landmark demonstrations. REUTERS/FILE

Even they note the sea change in Iranian politics, however. Just a week before the anniversary date, Iran's supreme religious leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, fired the national police chief, who students accuse of orchestrating the attack on their dormitory last year, which left at least one student dead.

"That shows a nervousness at the top," says a Western diplomat. "The riots created a very big impression that internal stability could be at stake. Now the whole political establishment knows that they would lose with instability."

Last year on July 8, the police moved onto the University of Tehran to attack students who had staged a peaceful protest against the closure of a reformist newspaper, Salam. Students then took their protest to the streets. While a small minority sought violence, in the following days student ranks were infiltrated by hard-line agent provocateurs whose violent acts damage the students' reputation.

"Student tactics ever since have been exhausting to the hardliners," says Mr. Semati. "Because of the imbalance of power, this Gandhi style is working. The whole psyche of the police has changed, because [the students are] no longer a security question. It's psychological warfare, and even the security forces are buying into non-violence."

But on the same day that reformists drew hope from the sacking of the police chief - and the detention on Monday of the police commander who ordered the attack - a court imprisoned a lawyer representing wounded students and another human rights lawyer.

A low-key vigil is planned to mark the dormitory raid tonight, with a poetry reading. A bill to prevent security forces from entering university campuses is now before the new parliament.

And parliament has made it clear, with reformists dominating the 290-seat chamber, that it is ready for business. A far-reaching press bill is on the table that will reverse restrictions.

But analysts say that reformists must chalk up some concrete successes in the coming year - Khatami's last, before new elections - to mollify critics on their own side.

"If the reformists move too slow, they could lose steam," says Semati. "If they go too fast, they could lose everything."

---

DNC Protesters' Approval Rescinded

Washington Post
Friday, July 7, 2000; 10:10 p.m. EDT
By Michelle DeArmond Associated Press Writer
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/aponline/20000707/aponline221020_000.htm

LOS ANGELES -- The Los Angeles City Council on Friday rescinded its earlier approval for demonstrators to use a downtown square during the upcoming Democratic National Convention.

The decision came just two weeks after the council members approved a request to make Pershing Square available to the protesters. One of the council members, Jackie Goldberg had refused to support a request by convention organizers for $4 million unless council members made the square available.

But the council voted 12-1 - with Goldberg casting the only negative vote - to reverse the decision after police and business owners complained that businesses might be vulnerable if the demonstrations turned violent.

Demonstrators may still obtain permits and assemble at Pershing square, but Goldberg had hoped a special designation would create "a cooperative and not a confrontational" atmosphere.

Protesters tied strips of cloth around their mouths as the City Council debated the issue on Friday, although at another point the meeting became raucous as some protesters shouted at council members.

"We feel its a free speech issue," said Brett Doran, a member of the activist coalition Direct Action Network.

Activists have said as many as 50,000 people may engaged in protests during the Democrats' convention Aug 14-17. Some activists already have complained about law enforcement authorities' decision to establish a wide buffer zone around the convention site, keeping protesters far from earshot of delegates.

Activists also have criticized the designation of a parking lot near the Staples Center, site of the convention, as the official protest area, complaining that it is too far from the site and from delegates.

Police have said protesters are free to demonstrate elsewhere, outside the buffer zone, as long as they don't break any laws. A coalition of activists sued the city and Police Department one week ago for greater access to the event site.

The lawsuit seeks an injunction to prevent the city and police from restricting protesters' movement. The suit argues that the designated protest zones are in areas where convention delegates will not see them.

Michael Everett, a protester who attended Friday's meeting and who works with the protesters coalition known as the D2K Network, said the vote would not affect him.

"We will go on with our protest, and we'll march to Staples Center," said Michael Everett, who works with a coalition known as the D2K Network. "Nothing's changed. We're going to be in Pershing Square."

---

Labor Activists Stage Anti-Government Rally in S. Korea

NewsMax.com
Thursday, July 6, 2000
UPI
http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/7/6/113658

SEOUL, South Korea - Thousands of South Korea's unionized workers staged a rally Thursday, denouncing the government for cracking down on labor protests.

Some 4,500 union activists took to the streets to demand an apology from President Kim Dae-jung for using brutal police force to end strikes by workers. Militant activists clashed with baton-wielding riot police during the hours-long march into downtown Seoul, leaving several people injured.

"We will stage an all-out anti-government struggle unless the government accepts our demand," said Dan Byong-ho, head of the Korea Confederation of Trade Unions, which organized the rally.

Protesters chanted, "Stop harassment against weak workers" and "Kim Dae-jung's government, go away."

Last week, riot police armed with smoke bombs stormed Lotte Hotel to end a three-day strike by some 2,000 hotel workers. Dozens of workers were injured as police overpowered the protesters. This was followed by another surprise police attack against 2,600 health insurance workers who staged a sit-in protest.

"The government is exercising indiscriminate use of brutal police force to crack down on unionists," Dan said.

The workers' rally was also attended by a number of bank unionists who demanded the government halt its financial reform drive, which they fear will lead to mass layoffs.

The Korea Financial Industrial Union, an umbrella organization for the nation's 24 bank unions, voted Wednesday to go on strike next week to protest government financial restructuring. Union leaders blasted the government plan to combine banks into financial holding companies as a scheme to merge banks. "We will make utmost efforts against the government plan," KFIU chief Lee Yong-duk said.

The government reacted by warning that it would not tolerate "illegal demonstrations. There will be no compromise on the government proposals," said Lee Yong-keun, head of the country's financial watchdog agency.

"The government will push ahead with the banking reform," said presidential spokesman Park Joon-young. "The reform is designated to give financial institutions the opportunity to raise their international competitiveness," he said.

--------

OneList digest:

1. ACTIVISTS ENTER LAUNCH AREA AT VANDENBERG
From: "Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space" <globalnet@mindspring.com>

2. LONDON STAR WARS PROTEST
From: "Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space" <globalnet@mindspring.com>

3. FW: The coming missile test
From: "Viviane Lerner" <vlerner@interpac.net>

4. Missile "Defense" Failure & Text Of Scientist's NMD Letter To Clinton
From: "Bill Smirnow" <smirnowb@ix.netcom.com>

5. NucNews archives updated to June 30, 2000 at http://prop1.org/nucnews/briefslv.htm
From: Ellen Thomas <prop1@prop1.org>

6. E-PETITIONS We Need YOU To Sign
From: "Bill Smirnow" <smirnowb@ix.netcom.com>

-----------

Message: 1
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 13:00:12 -0400
From: "Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space" <globalnet@mindspring.com>
Subject: ACTIVISTS ENTER LAUNCH AREA AT VANDENBERG

Greenpeace enters U.S. base to block missile test
July 7, 2000
http://news.excite.com/news/r/000707/11/arms-usa-greenpeace

VANDENBERG AIR FORCE BASE, Calif. (Reuters) - The environmental group Greenpeace has sent several protesters into this military base in a move to prevent the $100 million test of a planned U.S. National Missile Defense system scheduled for later Friday.

Greenpeace said several teams of activists were sent to the launch site, where the U.S. military planned to shoot down a dummy missile warhead launched into space.

"According to the Air Force's own safety procedures the missile cannot be launched with people in that part of the base," said Greenpeace spokeswoman Mary Macnutt. Air Force officials were not available to comment.

Greenpeace declined to say how many protesters were in the base or how they entered. The activists were equipped with supplies and prepared to stay in the vicinity for several days.

The environmental and anti-nuclear group also sailed a Dutch ship Thursday toward an area declared off-limits, in another effort to block the test.

The 164-foot Dutch vessel Arctic Sunrise, with 23 passengers aboard, was headed Thursday toward waters designated a "hazard zone" by the U.S. Air Force, which mandates the area be clear of ships prior to the test. The test is part of a U.S. plan to build a limited missile defense system, a move opposed by Russia and China and which has spurred concern from Europe.

Weather permitting, a Minuteman missile with a dummy warhead is scheduled to be launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base toward the Pacific Marshall Islands.

A U.S. "hit-to-kill" weapon will be fired atop its own rocket from Kwajalein Atoll 4,300 miles away about 20 minutes after the Vandenberg launch in an attempt to maneuver, intercept and smash into the "enemy" warhead 144 miles above Earth.

--

Bruce K. Gagnon Coordinator ]\
Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 90083 Gainesville, FL. 32607 (352) 337-9274
http://www.globenet.free-online.co.uk globalnet@mindspring.com

--------

Message: 2 Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 13:14:09 -0400
From: "Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space" <globalnet@mindspring.com>
Subject: LONDON STAR WARS PROTEST

London Region CND and Labour CND

NEWS RELEASE

Event: Protest at the US embassy, Grosvenor Square, London (nearest tube: Bond St)

NO TO STAR WARS, NO TO NUCLEAR ARMS RACE
Friday 7 July 2000, 12 noon to 2pm
Protesters warn: 'today's US anti-missile test threatens new arms race'

Peace campaigners will be protesting at the United States' London embassy today, 12 noon to 2pm, at the prospect of a new nuclear arms race posed by US violations of the Anti-Ballistic Missiles Treaty, which has been the cornerstone of nuclear arms control for almost 30 years.

The demonstration coincides with the US's latest anti-missile test which takes place in the small hours of Saturday morning (GMT) - part of its $60 billion national missile defence system. The 1972 ABM Treaty commits the USA 'not to deploy anti-ballistic missile systems for a defence of the territory of its country'.

This latest US test coincides with the resumption of arms control talks between China and the US, which were frozen last year after NATO bombed the Chinese embassy in Yugoslavia. The US is also planning to deploy so-called 'theatre' missile defences over the Pacific Ocean, on China's doorstep.

Both China and Russia are bitterly opposed to the development by America of a national missile defence programme, and have warned that it could spark a new arms race.

Mathew Pelling, Vice Chair of CND, said:

'The latest American dream of a national missile defence system, is a new global nightmare. The relentless drive of the US government to undermine the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty threatens us all. Fylingdales missile tracking station in Yorkshire is implicated. If you share CND's vision of a millennium world where the right to life and happiness and freedom from fear are truly self evident, then join us in pointing the finger at Fylingdale.'

More information: London Region CND on 0207 607 2302 Labour CND on 0207 820 9709 or 07931 767950

--

Bruce K. Gagnon Coordinator
Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 90083 Gainesville, FL. 32607 (352) 337-9274
http://www.globenet.free-online.co.uk globalnet@mindspring.com

--------

Message: 3
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 14:49:55 +0100
From: "Viviane Lerner" <vlerner@interpac.net>
Subject: FW: The coming missile test

From: owner-mai-not@flora.org [mailto:owner-mai-not@flora.org]
On Behalf Of MichaelP

The previous test in January failed due to a glitch in the final seconds: while the original attempt succeeded, although under less demanding conditions.

<< Test one - last October - was claimed as a success. But subsequent information indicates that the interceptor hit the target largely by chance after a complicated series of mishaps. (http://news6.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/americas/newsid%5F 610000/610244.stm

(14th January 2000 NYT) In the (first) test, the interceptor did hit a mock warhead -- proof, said its backers in the Defense Department, that the idea is workable. But in recent interviews, the Pentagon officials conceded that the interceptor had hit its target only after a series of technical mistakes caused it to drift off course and that it had initially picked up on a decoy balloon rather than the warhead. Critics of antimissile systems say these mistakes show that any such system could easily be fooled.

The decoy was meant to represent the sort of measures that hostile countries might employ to confuse a national missile defense. But without the large, bright balloon, which in this case happened to be drifting near the smaller and dimmer warhead in the interceptor's field of view, the test last October might not have succeeded, these critics say.

"What this says to me is, if that balloon hadn't been there, then they wouldn't have hit the target," said Tom Z. Collina, director of the Arms Control and International Security Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists. "They got lucky.">>

In this third test, the missile fired from California is being tracked all the way, so that whether it drifts of course or not the controllers of the intercepting missile will know second by second where it is and where it is going to be a few seconds later. The aim is to intercept by electronic stalking!!

First quote <A Minuteman rocket will be fired from Vandenberg Air Force Base, near Los Angeles, at around 2am GMT tomorrow. It will also release a fake warhead, a balloon decoy. Fifteen minutes later, a 54in-long 130lb "exoatmospheric kill vehicle" will be launched from Kwajalein Atoll on the other side of the Pacific. It must find the warhead, differentiate it from the decoy, and hit it at a relative speed of up to 16,000 miles per hour, destroying it.>

Second quote < Unless the moment is postponed yet again, a rocket will be launched from Vandenberg air force base, carrying a warhead and a decoy. Five thousand miles away, on Kwajalein Atoll in the Pacific, another rocket will take off a few minutes later, carrying a kill-vehicle to knock the first one out. This won't exactly be a real-life simulation of the scenario it is designed to prepare against, a missile attack on the US from North Korea. The controllers on Kwajalein will be copied into the California countdown. They know exactly what is coming and when, which nobody would know about North Korea. The rockets, figuring out the decoy, are meant to meet at a closing speed of 12,000mph, something which in two earlier tests has failed to happen. If they do, the US national missile defence programme (NMD) will almost certainly be readied for deployment.>

Well I suppose the engineers?techies? in charge know that their next pay-check depends on having the pentagon succeed in persuading more spending on this stuff.

===Cheers MichaelkP

agence france presse
Missile shield poised for test amid din of controversy
US National Missile Defense System. [ AFP ]

WASHINGTON (AFP) - - A US missile shield was poised for a crucial test over the Pacific Friday amid a din of criticism and controversy as activists tried to disrupt the launch of a target missile in California.

An unidentified male was caught entering Vandenberg Air Force Base in California, where a Minuteman II missile is being readied for launch Friday night as the target of an attempted missile interception, a base spokesman said.

Greenpeace claimed that activists had infiltrated the base to try to stop the 100 million dollar test, but base spokesman Major John Cherry said there was no evidence of intruders in the heavily patrolled area around the launch pad.

"Currently we are go for launch," he said. "The weather is good, the booster is good, and security is good. There is no one in any areas that would delay the launch."

A four hour launch window opens at 7:00 p.m. local time (0200 GMT Saturday) and Pentagon officials have said they hope to launch the Minuteman II as soon as weather permits.

Armed with a dummy warhead and a decoy balloon, the missile was to be fired into space and sent on a Pacific trajectory toward the Marshall Islands, where an interceptor missile awaits the command to launch in pursuit.

If all goes according to plan, a network of early warning satellites, ground radars and a high frequency targeting radar will track the target missile and guide the interceptor to a collision at closing speeds of 24,000 kilometers (15,000 miles) per hour.

It is only the third intercept attempt but it is likely to be the last one before President Bill Clinton decides this fall whether to go forward with construction of the first phase of a missile defense system.

Plans call for deployment of a targeting radar and 20 interceptors in Alaska by 2005, when US intelligence estimates that North Korea will have a missile capable of reaching the United States. The system would be expanded to 100 missiles by 2007.

China and Russia have denounced deployment as destabilizing and urged Washington to stick to the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, which would bar the kind of system the Pentagon envisions.

Likened to hitting a bullet with a bullet, the previous intercept attempts resulted in a hit and a miss. The last test in January failed due to a glitch in the final seconds, while the first attempt succeeded, although under less demanding conditions.

Critics, however, charged that Pentagon has rigged the test to succeed.

"A success in today's well publicized test of a missile defense weapon system, the Clinton administration claims, will establish that national missile defense technology is ready for deployment," MIT professor Theodore Postol wrote in Friday's New York Times.

"But unfortunately, bagging the sort of precooked and strapped down chicken of a target that is being used today will do nothing of the sort," he said.

Other critics question the Pentagon's assessment of the missile threat posed by adversaries like North Korea and Iran, and warn that fielding even a limited missile defense system could unravel international arms control regimes and ignite an nuclear arms race.

Greenpeace said it has sent a vessel to waters designated a "hazard zone" by the air force and that activists, moving on foot, had entered Vandenberg base near the Minuteman II launch site.

"With people in this part of the base, the missile cannot be launched," the organization said in a statement. "Equipped with survival gear and supplies for several days, they intend to stay inside the area as long as possible."

--------

Message: 4
Date: Sat, 8 Jul 2000 06:48:44 -0400
From: "Bill Smirnow" <smirnowb@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Missile "Defense" Failure & Text Of Scientist's NMD Letter To Clinton

http://www.news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/monitoring/media_reports/newsid_823000/823196.stm

Text of scientists' anti-missile letter

The full text of the letter from the Federation of American Scientists to President Clinton urging that the National Missile Defence system be abandoned Dear Mr President:

We urge you not to make the decision to deploy an anti-ballistic missile system during the remaining months of your administration.

The system would offer little protection and would do grave harm to this nation's core security interests.

We and other independent scientists have long argued that anti-ballistic missile systems, particularly those attempting to intercept re-entry vehicles in space, will inevitably lose in an arms race of improvements to offensive missiles.

North Korea has taken dramatic steps toward reconciliation with South Korea. Other dangerous states will arise. But what would such a state gain by attacking the United States except its own destruction?

While the benefits of the proposed anti-ballistic missile system are dubious, the dangers created by a decision to deploy are clear.

Arms race

It would be difficult to persuade Russia or China that the United States is wasting tens of billions of dollars on an ineffective missile system against small states that are unlikely to launch a missile attack on the US.

The Russians and Chinese must therefore conclude that the presently planned system is a stage in developing a bigger system directed against them.

They may respond by restarting an arms race in ballistic missiles and having missiles in a dangerous "launch-on-warning" mode.

Even if the next planned test of the proposed anti-ballistic missile system works as planned, any movement toward deployment would be premature, wasteful and dangerous.

Respectfully,

Dr Hans Bethe
On behalf of the Federation of American Scientists

----

Antimissile System Fails Over Pacific, Pentagon Reports

July 8, 2000
http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/global/070800missile-test.html
By ELAINE SCIOLINO

WASHINGTON, Saturday, July 8 -- In a major setback for the Clinton administration's plan to build a missile shield to protect American soil from enemy attack, a missile fired from the Marshall Islands in the Pacific failed to hit a mock warhead launched 4,300 miles away in California.

"We failed to achieve an intercept this evening," said Bryan Whitman, a Pentagon spokesman.

The last test, conducted in January, also ended in failure. In that case, the kill vehicle missed the mock warhead by between 300 to 400 feet after a cooling line clogged and shut down its heat-seeking sensors.

At 12:19 a.m. today, a 37-year-old remodeled Minuteman rocket containing a mock warhead and a decoy balloon thundered aloft over the Pacific Ocean from a tightly guarded launching pad at Vandenberg Air Force Base, 125 miles north of Los Angeles.

Twenty-one minutes after that, a 54-inch, 130-pound "exoatmospheric kill vehicle" was launched from Kwajalein Atoll in the Pacific Ocean. Instead of guiding itself to a collision with the incoming mock warhead in midflight, it missed.

In a press briefing, Air Force Lt. Gen. Ronald T. Kadish, the director of the Pentagon's Ballistic Missile Defense Organization, explained that the problem occurred when the kill vehicle did not separate from its booster in the second stage.

"The kill vehicle failed to do its job," he said.

An aditional malfunction, although one that did not affect the test result, was that the decoy balloon accompanying the mock warhead did not inflate as it was supposed to.

Today's test was counted on to determine whether President Clinton proceeds with a plan to begin development of a $60 billion national missile defense that administration officials contend is crucial to defend against missile attacks from countries like North Korea, Iran and Iraq. But opponents charge that such a system is technically unsound, unnecessary and a waste of money.

Even though some senior Pentagon officials said a decision to move forward was possible even if the test failed, today's miss will make it politically more difficult for Mr. Clinton to move forward with even the most basic decision to issue contracts for pouring concrete for a radar guidance system in the Aleutian Islands. That move is under consideration even though many arms control experts insist that it would violate the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.

Because of harsh winter conditions in that area of Alaska, barges must begin ferrying equipment by next spring if the radar is to be completed by 2005, the date when the administration has concluded North Korea could have a ballistic missile capable of hitting the United States.

The test failure is certain to reinforce calls in Congress that the decision on whether to move forward with a national missile defense program should be left to the next president.

The final analysis of what went wrong in today's test will take about three to four weeks.

In October, the Pentagon initially hailed its first intercept test as a complete success. But it later was forced to acknowledge that the kill vehicle initially had drifted off course and picked out the large bright decoy balloon instead of the mock warhead.

In the second, more complicated intercept test, in January, the kill vehicle missed the mock warhead by between 300 to 400 feet after a cooling line clogged and shut down its heat-seeking sensors.

Not since 1983, when President Reagan envisioned a defense based in space that would render nuclear weapons obsolete, has an issue of military technology seized the imagination of American policymakers and politicians and alarmed America's friends and foes.

The issue has also entered the presidential campaign, with Vice President Al Gore endorsing a limited version of the plan and Gov. George W. Bush backing a more ambitious system that could be deployed in space.

And it has raised a chorus of criticism from a sizable swath of scientists in the United States, some of whom argue that the proposed $60 billion system is not feasible and that the tests are rigged.

The test had been scheduled to take place during a four-hour window that began late Friday night. But a last-minute technical problem set back the launching by about two hours. The problem was related to electronic signals that keep the ground control informed about the missile's flight.

"Hitting a bullet with a bullet" is how a Pentagon official described the hoped-for collision. "Steel on target," another said.

The three tests held so far are part of a series of 19 planned tests.

After the failure of the test in January. a new communications system was added for today's test that transmits information directly to the kill vehicle about the location of the target after it has lifted off. Called a global-positioning-system transmitter, it used the same technology that helps motorists to avoid getting lost.

Even before the failure today, critics said the new test was a misleading guide because it was taking place under conditions that do not reflect a real attack. They said the decoy was not a true decoy but was more like a lure that attracts the kill vehicle to the real target, and that an adversary would use many decoys, not one.

In three or four weeks, Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen is to give Mr. Clinton a formal recommendation of whether building the system is feasible.

Mr. Clinton is expected to decide this fall whether to put America on the road to a national missile defense system by starting construction of the radar in the Aleutian Islands.

Administration lawyers have advised Mr. Clinton that in their view, he could begin building this first phase of the missile defense without violating the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, one of the cornerstones of arms control agreements between Washington and Moscow.

But the administration has been hit by a storm of criticism from prominent scientists, arms control experts, former officials and the General Accounting Office over the cost, technology and effect on relations with other nations.

Lawrence J. Korb of the Council on Foreign Relations called the entire system a "shield of dreams" whose supporters believe that "if you build it, it will work."

Even within the administration, a debate is raging among intelligence and Pentagon officials and policy experts over the nature and extent of the potential threat from countries like North Korea, Iran and Iraq that is the official justification for building a missile shield. Some senior Pentagon officials have warned that the administration's schedule is much too accelerated and therefore risky, because testing would continue even as construction has begun.

Russia and China are adamantly opposed to an American missile defense because they consider it a threat to their ability to defend themselves. European nations are also distressed that the United States would take such a position without regard to Europe's security.

In an attempt to stop the test, Greenpeace, the anti-nuclear organization, said a small team of missile defense opponents entered the grounds of Vandenberg Air Force Base on foot. Equipped with survival gear and supplies for several days, they intended to stay inside the area as long as they could, according to a Greenpeace statement.

In addition, the Dutch vessel Arctic Sunrise threatened to enter one of the hazard zones designated by the Pentagon in the waters off Vandenberg.

An unidentified man was caught entering the base, but a base spokesman, John Cherry, said there was no evidence of intruders in the heavily guarded area around the launching pad.

At a news briefing in Washington on Friday, a group of business leaders and scientists weighed in with 11-hour criticism of both the test and the entire plan.

"Stop this insensate and tortuously rationalized arms race that drains money away from our vital civilian programs," said Alan Kligerman, the chief executive officer of Akpharma Inc., and a board member of Business Leaders for Sensible Priorities, which seeks to cut military spending. He added: "If I would represent my products and sell them with the same shortcomings in the products as regard to what they are supposed to do, I would be indicted. My products would be seized." by the Food and Drug Administration.

Bruce Blair, president of Center for Defense Information, argued at the same briefing that the development of a national missile defense was justifiably seen by Russia as a threat to its nuclear deterrent.

---

Pentagon Says Missile Test Fails

Updated 2:30 AM ET July 8, 2000
By ROBERT BURNS, AP Military Writer
http://www.webcrawler-news.excite.com/news/ap070800missile-defense

WASHINGTON (AP) - A U.S. missile interceptor launched in a burst of flame Saturday from a Pacific island missed its intended target - a dummy warhead gliding through space. Officials blamed a technical failure of the booster rocket which was supposed to release a warhead-busting device called a "kill vehicle."

Because the kill vehicle did not detach from the booster, it never activated the on-board sensors and other high-tech devices that it would use to intercept the warhead, Air Force Lt. Gen. Ronald Kadish said. Kadish is director of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization.

"We failed to achieve an intercept," said Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman.

The test cost $100 million.

Kadish said the kill vehicle - a small, maneuverable device that destroys its target by ramming into it - apparently did not separate from the booster rocket because it did not receive a necessary electronic signal. He said it might take days for Pentagon scientists to understand why the internal booster signal was not received.

Radish said the booster, which was produced by Lockheed Martin Missiles & Space, had been a reliable item and "wasn't even on my list" of potential concerns. The booster had been used in four previous tests without encountering a problem with releasing the kill vehicle.

The failure raised the possibility of a substantial delay in the Pentagon's timetable of having a national anti-missile defense system ready for use by the end of 2005.

It was the third test of the intercept program with two of them having failed.

The next attempted intercept had been scheduled for this fall, but that timetable might now be put back.

If Saturday's test had succeeded, it could have moved the United States a step closer to building a national missile defense that Congress says is urgently needed, but that critics decry as unworkable.

After fixing a last-minute technical glitch that delayed the start of the test by about two hours, a modified Minuteman intercontinental ballistic missile with a dummy warhead atop its third stage rocket blasted off from Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif., at 12:19 a.m. EDT.

The rocket headed toward the central Pacific.

Twenty-one minutes later, at 12:40 a.m. EDT, an interceptor missile carrying a warhead-blasting "kill vehicle" launched from Kwajalein Atoll.

The interceptor was supposed to have collided with the mock warhead after about 10 minutes of flight over the Pacific, but television monitors showed no flash indicating a collision.

Nearly a half hour passed before officials who monitored the flight test from a basement office in the Pentagon reported that the interceptor missile had missed its target.

The "kill vehicle" was programmed to use target data gathered from ground-based radars to maneuver itself into the path of the dummy warhead 140 miles above the Earth. The goal was a 16,000-mile-an-hour collision that would disintegrate the warhead by sheer force of impact.

At stake is the future of a multibillion dollar project that has upset Russia and China and caused many of America's closest European allies to wince at the prospect of a U.S.-only defense against a missile attack.

Although President Clinton says he will decide soon whether to keep the project moving toward an anticipated deployment in 2005, it will be up to his successor to make the final steps to build and deploy it.

This fast-approaching decision deadline for Clinton gave Saturday's test extra urgency and public attention.

The last-minute technical glitch was a weak battery that supplies power to a telemetry system which is needed to help engineers on the ground record the exact point of impact between the dummy warhead and the "kill vehicle." The battery was recharged and all other systems appeared normal prior to liftoff, officials said.

Had Saturday's test worked, Defense Secretary William Cohen had been expected to recommend to Clinton that he take the first steps in a phased building plan that would have the missile defense system ready to use by December 2005.

This was the third in a series of missile intercept tests. The first, last October, succeeded. The second, in January, failed. Saturday's test was delayed more than two months to fix the problem that plagued January's test.

The anti-nuclear activist group Greenpeace had hoped to halt Saturday's test by placing a ship in the Pacific where a rocket stage is expected to splash down about 110 miles offshore from Vandenberg, said Steve Shallhorn, the group's campaign director.

At the White House before Saturday's test, spokesman P.J. Crowley said: "I would say a hit doesn't automatically suggest success, nor does a failure automatically come with a miss tonight."

One of the biggest backers of missile defense in Congress, Sen. Thad Cochran, R-Miss., said in an interview Friday that he believes America can afford a missile defense even though defense dollars are tight.

"Without a doubt, Congress will approve the funding for a missile defense system" so long as U.S. military leaders feel confident it is technologically ready for deployment, Cochran said. Cost estimates range from the Pentagon's $36 billion to the General Accounting Office's $60 billion.

By law, the Pentagon must deploy a national missile defense as soon as it is technologically feasible.

----

Anti-missile system fails test for second time

July 8, 2000 Web posted at: 6:26 a.m. EDT (1026 GMT)
http://www.cnn.com/2000/US/07/08/missile.defense.05/index.html
From staff and wire reports

VANDENBERG AIR FORCE BASE, California -- A controversial U.S. anti-missile system failed a crucial test early Saturday when an interceptor rocket could not find its target high over the Pacific Ocean.

The failure was the second in the missile defense system's history and is certain to be seen as a major setback for the program.

Early indications were that a technical failure prevented separation of the "kill vehicle" from the rocket carrying it, said Lt. Gen. Ronald Kadish of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization.

Kadish said Saturday's test had presented a very challenging job for the missile-defense program. "This is rocket science," he told a news conference Saturday at the Pentagon.

"What it means is that we have more engineering work to do," he said.

The anti-missile system has been tested three times so far. A test in October 1999 was successful, but a subsequent test in January this year failed.

Interceptor launched from Pacific atoll The interceptor missile was launched from the Kwajalein Atoll in the Pacific a few minutes after the launch of a Minuteman II target rocket from Vandenberg Air Force Base.

The interceptor carries into space the kill vehicle -- designed to separate from its carrier rocket, crash into an incoming warhead and destroy it.

The intercept was expected to take place about 30 minutes after the 12:18 a.m. launch of the first missile. But the kill vehicle failed to detach from its rocket. That meant it never even activated its sensors to hunt for the approaching target -- a dummy warhead.

The interceptor passed harmlessly by the target, and few of the critical technologies of missile defense were put to the test.

Kadish said he had never had a concern about the booster properly releasing its missile-killing load.

"It wasn't even on my list" of potential problems, he said.

National Missile Defense Director Keith Englander said earlier the anti-missile system was designed to protect "all 50 states from rogue attacks by nations with a handful of missiles."

The anti-nuclear group Greenpeace said it had dispatched a ship carrying 23 protesters into the test's so-called "hazard zone" 110 miles from the seaside base.

Although the air force had asked pilots and mariners to avoid the area, it said the test would be conducted even with a ship in the zone.

Program to protect U.S. mainland The goal of the missile defense system, the Pentagon said, is to protect the U.S. mainland from missiles that might be developed by nations such as North Korea, Iran and Iraq.

The U.S. military has described the strategy as "trying to hit a bullet with a bullet."

The missile test cost $100 million, officials said.

Pentagon officials are still working on cost estimates for a national missile defense program. Most recent estimates, which call for 100 missile interceptors at a single site -- in Alaska -- place the cost at $36 billion for 20 years.

The General Accounting Office, the auditing arm of Congress, estimates the program will cost $60 billion if -- as many missile defense proponents urge -- the system is expanded to two interceptor sites, each with 100 interceptors.

A Minuteman II missile, like this one, was the target for a second "kill vehicle" missile fired 20 minutes later

Technological and strategic concerns An independent panel of retired military officers and weapons experts told the Pentagon in a report last month that it believes missile defense is technologically feasible, but that the Pentagon may not be able to have a reliable system in place by 2005, the target date.

The date is significant because the CIA has said it believes North Korea could have a long-range missile capable of reaching U.S. soil within five years.

Anthony Cordesman, a defense strategist at the private Center for Strategic and International Studies, said in an interview after Saturday's test that, logically, the failure should mean a delay in the Pentagon's fast-track timetable for building a national missile defense.

"Logically, you do regroup after something like this and you~ don't go forward with the existing schedule," Cordesman said, although he added that pressure from Congress might compel the Pentagon to go ahead.

Scientific opposition Many critics say the technology is not feasible and that the Pentagon's testing methods are fatally flawed. Other critics say that even if it worked the weapon would not be worth the international outcry against it -- most notably Russia's threat to unravel the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, which Moscow says the system violates.

Moscow and Beijing both fear that a mature and successful anti-missile system could eliminate the strategic threat of their nuclear arsenals.

Vladimir Yakovlev, the head of Russia's Strategic Rocket Forces, was quoted by the Interfax news agency Friday as saying the tests "are the first step toward global nuclear instability."

A U.S. missile defense system, he said, would "lead directly to nuclear anarchy."

-----

European leaders of Germany and Italy have said they fear the National Missile Defense System could spark a new arms race.

The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report
By Roberto Suro Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, July 8, 2000; Page A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A1497-2000Jul7.html

In a major setback for the Clinton administration's proposed National Missile Defense system, an interceptor failed to hit a target warhead during a flight test 140 miles above the Pacific Ocean early today.

"We failed to achieve intercept," said Bryan Whitman, a Pentagon spokesman.

The $100 million test was designed by the Pentagon to demonstrate that satellite sensors, radars and powerful computers could guide a "kill vehicle" to knock down an incoming warhead in the dark of space. It was the last practice run before President Clinton is scheduled to decide whether to go forward with the missile shield, and the failed intercept is sure to embolden critics who argue that it is scientifically unproven and will have grave diplomatic consequences.

Under a mandate issued by Congress last year, Clinton must field a missile defense system as soon as it is technically feasible. The administration proposes to place 20 interceptor missiles and a powerful X-band tracking radar in Alaska by 2005, the date by which North Korea and possibly Iran could have the ability to hit the United States with long-range missiles, according to controversial intelligence projections. The system would expand to 100 interceptors by 2007.

That timetable is driving a tight construction schedule that requires Clinton to decide by mid-November whether to begin building the missile shield next year, even though important elements are still in the prototype stage. As a result, today's test--just the third attempted intercept in a series planned by the Pentagon--had taken on unusual significance in judging whether the technology is workable.

The Pentagon did not immediately announce the reasons for the intercept's failure, and defense officials said that data from the test might show that most elements of the missile shield functioned as designed. That was the case in a previous test in January, when the interceptor narrowly missed its target because of a faulty cooling system.

The first of the three intercept tests was a success last fall. Supporters of the program have argued that it should not be judged on just a handful of early efforts. But some prominent scientists have contended that the tests are actually far too easy, because they do not include multiple decoys that the scientists believe would fool the system.

The target for this morning's test lifted off from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California shortly after midnight, following a two-hour delay caused by a glitch in a communications system. The exercise called for a surveillance satellite to detect the launch and alert a test base at Kwajalein Atoll in the central Pacific, where an interceptor missile was set.

According to the plan, the interceptor was to be launched about 20 minutes after the target crossed the California coast. Tracking information was to be fed to the interceptor from a radar in Hawaii and a prototype X-band radar in Kwajalein. After a 10-minute flight, the kill vehicle was to have separated from its booster and begun to use its own infrared sensors to find the target.

The two objects, each only about five feet long and weighing a couple of hundred pounds, were supposed to collide at a velocity of 4.6 miles per second.

Even a successful intercept would not have guaranteed a decision to build the system. In addition to its technical feasibility, Clinton has said he will assess the system's costs, estimated at $20 billion by the Pentagon and far more according to watchdog agencies; the seriousness of the ballistic missile threat the United States is likely to face; and the missile shield's potential impact on arms control and diplomatic matters.

The failure of today's test, however, may doom the project at least until next year, when a new administration could revive it, Pentagon officials said. Critics of the proposed shield--both those who want a bigger system and those who want none at all--have mounted extensive campaigns in recent months with television advertisements, news conferences and letters-to-the-president. Neither the White House nor senior political appointees at the Pentagon have mounted a significant counterattack.

Asked to respond to reports of disenchantment with the project among senior administration officials, Defense Secretary William S. Cohen yesterday offered considerably less than an enthusiastic endorsement of the plan. "All of us have worked together, and we are proceeding according to plan," Cohen said in an interview with National Public Radio. "That is to conduct the research and development, and then we will see exactly what the results are and make a prudent recommendation to the president."

The diplomatic costs of the proposed shield have escalated rapidly in recent weeks, with muted protests from European allies and louder complaints from China that the United States would upset the world's strategic balance by making itself the one nation safe from a ballistic missile attack. In addition, signs of moderation from both Iran and North Korea have made those states seem less threatening than when the missile defense plan was conceived. Meanwhile, the newly elected government of President Vladmir Putin in Russia has posed unexpected difficulties.

The White House had hoped to win Russia's agreement to modify the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty to permit construction of the system. The Russians not only declined to go along but threatened to withdraw from other arms control agreements if the United States unilaterally abrogated the ABM Treaty and built the shield. As an alternative, Putin made a vague proposal for joint work on a different kind of system, one that would shoot down missiles shortly after launch.

"I think they clearly are trying to divide the Europeans and to divide the American people in the suggestions they're making," Cohen said.

To defer a confrontation with the Russians, administration officials have developed a plan to begin construction in Alaska next year without declaring a decision on deployment has been reached. The fate of the program would then be up to the next president.

----

Missile intercept test fails to connect

07/08/00- Updated 02:38 AM ET
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washdc/ncssat01.htm

WASHINGTON (AP) - A U.S. missile interceptor launched in a burst of flame Saturday from a Pacific island missed its intended target - a dummy warhead gliding through space. Officials blamed a technical failure of the booster rocket which was supposed to release a warhead-busting device called a ''kill vehicle.''

Because the kill vehicle did not detach from the booster, it never activated the on-board sensors and other high-tech devices that it would use to intercept the warhead, Air Force Lt. Gen. Ronald Kadish said. Kadish is director of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization.

''We failed to achieve an intercept,'' said Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman.

The test cost $100 million.

Kadish said the kill vehicle - a small, maneuverable device that destroys its target by ramming into it - apparently did not separate from the booster rocket because it did not receive a necessary electronic signal. He said it might take days for Pentagon scientists to understand why the internal booster signal was not received.

Radish said the booster, which was produced by Lockheed Martin Missiles & Space, had been a reliable item and ''wasn't even on my list'' of potential concerns. The booster had been used in four previous tests without encountering a problem with releasing the kill vehicle.

The failure raised the possibility of a substantial delay in the Pentagon's timetable of having a national anti-missile defense system ready for use by the end of 2005.

It was the third test of the intercept program with two of them having failed.

The next attempted intercept had been scheduled for this fall, but that timetable might now be put back.

If Saturday's test had succeeded, it could have moved the United States a step closer to building a national missile defense that Congress says is urgently needed, but that critics decry as unworkable.

After fixing a last-minute technical glitch that delayed the start of the test by about two hours, a modified Minuteman intercontinental ballistic missile with a dummy warhead atop its third stage rocket blasted off from Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif., at 12:19 a.m. EDT.

The rocket headed toward the central Pacific.

Twenty-one minutes later, at 12:40 a.m. EDT, an interceptor missile carrying a warhead-blasting ''kill vehicle'' launched from Kwajalein Atoll.

The interceptor was supposed to have collided with the mock warhead after about 10 minutes of flight over the Pacific, but television monitors showed no flash indicating a collision.

Nearly a half hour passed before officials who monitored the flight test from a basement office in the Pentagon reported that the interceptor missile had missed its target.

The ''kill vehicle'' was programmed to use target data gathered from ground-based radars to maneuver itself into the path of the dummy warhead 140 miles above the Earth. The goal was a 16,000-mile-an-hour collision that would disintegrate the warhead by sheer force of impact.

At stake is the future of a multibillion dollar project that has upset Russia and China and caused many of America's closest European allies to wince at the prospect of a U.S.-only defense against a missile attack.

Although President Clinton says he will decide soon whether to keep the project moving toward an anticipated deployment in 2005, it will be up to his successor to make the final steps to build and deploy it.

This fast-approaching decision deadline for Clinton gave Saturday's test extra urgency and public attention.

The last-minute technical glitch was a weak battery that supplies power to a telemetry system which is needed to help engineers on the ground record the exact point of impact between the dummy warhead and the ''kill vehicle.'' The battery was recharged and all other systems appeared normal prior to liftoff, officials said.

Had Saturday's test worked, Defense Secretary William Cohen had been expected to recommend to Clinton that he take the first steps in a phased building plan that would have the missile defense system ready to use by December 2005.

This was the third in a series of missile intercept tests. The first, last October, succeeded. The second, in January, failed. Saturday's test was delayed more than two months to fix the problem that plagued January's test.

The anti-nuclear activist group Greenpeace had hoped to halt Saturday's test by placing a ship in the Pacific where a rocket stage is expected to splash down about 110 miles offshore from Vandenberg, said Steve Shallhorn, the group's campaign director.

At the White House before Saturday's test, spokesman P.J. Crowley said: ''I would say a hit doesn't automatically suggest success, nor does a failure automatically come with a miss tonight.''

One of the biggest backers of missile defense in Congress, Sen. Thad Cochran, R-Miss., said in an interview Friday that he believes America can afford a missile defense even though defense dollars are tight.

''Without a doubt, Congress will approve the funding for a missile defense system'' so long as U.S. military leaders feel confident it is technologically ready for deployment, Cochran said. Cost estimates range from the Pentagon's $36 billion to the General Accounting Office's $60 billion.

By law, the Pentagon must deploy a national missile defense as soon as it is technologically feasible.

------

Message: 5
Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2000 08:02:02 -0400
From: Ellen Thomas <prop1@prop1.org>
Subject: NucNews archives updated to June 30, 2000 at http://prop1.org/nucnews/briefslv.htm

June 25 to 30, 2000 articles have been posted to the Proposition One NucNews archives at http://prop1.org/nucnews/briefslv.htm.

Today's Newspapers and Archives: http://prop1.org/nucnews/briefslv.htm
Interactive Archives (since 6/10/00): http://www.onelist.com/archive/NucNews

Subscribe to NucNews: mailto:prop1@prop1.org (NucNews-Subscribe)
Submit URL/Article: mailto:NucNews@onelist.org
About NucNews: http://prop1.org/nucnews/nucnews.htm

Excellent e-mail news resources:

DOE Watch - doewatch@onelist.com - http://members.aol.com/doewatch
Downwinders - downwinders@onelist.com - http://www.downwinders.org/
EnviroNews - environews@envirolink.org - http://www.envirolink.org/environews
Planet Ark/Reuters - mailto:anna@planetark.org - http://www.planetark.org/news/
Radbull (Radiation Bulletin) mailto:radbull-request@energy-net.org

Quick Route to U.S. Congress:
http://www.senate.gov/senators/index.cfm (Senators' Websites)
http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.html (Representatives' Websites)
http://thomas.loc.gov/ (Pending Legislation - Search)

Presidential Candidates' Websites:
George W. Bush - http://www.georgewbush.com/
Pat Buchanan - http://www.buchananreform.com/index.asp
Al Gore - http://www.algore2000.com/
Ralph Nader - http://www.votenader.org/press.html

Online Petition to Abolish Nuclear Weapons - http://www.PetitionOnline.com/prop1/petition.html
Updates on Current Events Outside the White House - http://prop1.org/currevnt.htm

--------

Message: 6
Date: Sat, 8 Jul 2000 07:51:41 -0400
From: "Bill Smirnow" <smirnowb@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: E-PETITIONS We Need YOU To Sign

1. Clean Energy Petition Web Site/Sign-On By WISE
http://www.antenna.nl/wise/cop6/coeng.html

2. De-Alerting Hair-Triggered Nuclear Weapons Sign-On
http://www.dealert.org

3. Anti-Star Wars/BMD Petition/Sign-On
http://www.PetitionOnline.com/cgi-bin/signed.cgi?BKG

4. Anti-Nuclear Weapons Petition/Sign-On
http://www.PetitionOnline.com/prop1/petition.html

----

I am more than delighted to be able to deliver the following solidarity letter from Germany and Austria to the people vigilizing and demonstrating at Vandenberg AFB:

Greetings from Germany to the Vigilers at Vandenberg AFB

Dear friends, the undersigned individuals and organizations send you their solidarity for the vigil you are holding on July 7.

The US military considers the third NMD test essential to get the "GO" for the construction and deployment of a National Missile Defense system to "protect" US territory against missile threats.

We join you in our opposition against these plans. Rather than trying to protect its territory against vague and unlikely missile threats, the US should increase efforts for cooperation. North Korea for example, frequently named as the main reason for NMD, has long agreed to stop its missile development program - verifiable by the lack of missile tests - in exchange for cooperation and aid. This is the path to go.

We urge the US to - stop any NMD plans immediately - seriously negotiate START III with the Russian government - enter into international negotiations on a Nuclear Weapons Convention - immediately announce a missile test moratorium and enter into negotiations on an international ballistic missile test stop (verifiable by the use of existing space technology) with the eventual goal of a complete ban on ballistic missiles (while commercial and scientific space launches would still be possible) - increase any other means to strengthen security on a global scale by means of cooperation.

In our thoughts, we join you at the gate of Vandenberg AFB on July 7.

In Peace (((signatures)))

Liebe Freunde, die unterzeichnenden Personen und Organisationen schicken Euch solidarische Grüße für Eure Mahnwache am 7. Juli.

Für das US-Militär kommt dem 3. NMD-Test eine entscheidende Bedeutung zu, um mit dem Aufbau und der Stationierung eines NMD-Systems beginnen zu können, das US-amerikanisches Hoheitsgebiet vor Gefahren durch Raketenangriffe "schützen" soll.

Wir sind, wie Ihr, gegen diese Pläne. Anstatt ihr Land vor vagen und unwahrscheinlichen Gefahren durch Raketenangriffe schützen zu wollen, sollten die USA ihre Bemühungen zur Kooperation verstärken. Nord-Korea beispielsweise, das vor allem zur Rechtfertigung von NMD zitiert wird, hat schon vor längerer Zeit zugestimmt, sein Raketenentwicklungsprogramm zu stoppen - ein Beweis dafür ist das Ausbleiben von Raketenstarts - und im Gegenzug Kooperation und Hilfsgüter bekommen. Das ist der richtige Weg.

Wir drängen die USA - sofort jegliche NMD-Pläne zu stoppen - mit der russischen Regierung ernsthaft über START III zu verhandeln - internationale Verhandlungen über eine Nuklearwaffenkonvention aufzunehmen - sofort ein Moratorium für Raketentests anzukündigen und in Verhandlungen über einen internationalen Teststopp für ballistische Raketen einzutreten (überprüfbar, weil Raketentests mit vorhandener Weltraumtechnologie festgestellt werden können) mit dem endgültigen Ziel, ein komplettes Verbot ballistischer Raketen zu erreichen (wobei Raketenstarts für kommerzielle und wissenschaftliche Weltraummissionen weiterhin möglich sein sollen) - durch verstärkte Kooperation die Sicherheit auf der ganzen Welt zu stärken.

In unseren Gedanken sind wir bei Euch am Tor der Luftwaffenbasis Vandenberg.

In Frieden

~ Prof. Dr. Ulrich Albrecht, Freie Universität Berlin
~ Anti Atom International, Oesterreich/Austria
~ Anna Beltinger, Nuernberger Friedensforum, Nuernberg
~ Bernhard Bieniek, Darmstadt
~ Roland Blach, Gewaltfreie Aktion Atomwaffen Abschaffen, Kornwestheim
~ BUKO-Kampagne Stoppt den Rüstungsexport, Bremen
~ Marion Boeker, IFFF/WILPF, Berlin
~ Darmstaedter Friedensforum
~ Deutscher Freidenker-Verband, Verbandsvorstand
~ Erika und Karl Eichwald, Weingarten
~ Dr. Dieter Engels, Hamburger NaturwissenschaftlerInnen-Initiative "Verantwortung für Frieden und Natur"
~ Essener Friedensforum
~ Claudia Friedel und Johannes Philipp, atompfad 99, Berlin
~ Friedens- und Begegnungsstaette Mutlangen
~ Dr. Albert Fuchs, Meckenheim
~ Regina Hagen, Vorstand/Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space, Darmstadt
~ Bernd Hanewald, Arzt, Vorstand/International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, Giessen
~ Klaus Hartmann, Präsident der Weltunion der Freidenker
~ Dr. Corinna Hauswedell, Vorsitzende der Informationsstelle Wissenschaft und Frieden (IWIF) e. V., Bonn
~ Irmgard Heilberger, Koordination Friedensdrehscheibe Bayern
~ Dr. Markus Hoschek, Stadtverordneter/SPD, Darmstadt
~ Dr. Hartwig Hummel, Uni Braunschweig, Mitglied im Vorstand der Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Friedens- und Konfliktforschung (AFK), Koeln/Cologne
~ Dr. Markus Jathe, Frankfurt
~ Dr. Martin Kalinowski, Wien/Österreich
~ Dr. Elke Koller, Cochem
~ Yvonne Konradi, Mitglied der Landesarbeitsgemeinschaft (LAG) Frauenpolitik von Bündnis90/ die Grünen im Landesverband Hamburg
~ Wolfgang Krauss, Deutsches Mennonitisches Friedenskomitee/German Mennonite Peace Committee
~ Elizabeth Lempp, Stuttgart
~ Oberstleutnant a.D.Lothar Liebsch, Darmstaedter Signal, Giessen
~ Anette Merkelbach, Darmstadt
~ NaturwissenschaftlerInnen-Initiative "Verantwortung fuer Frieden und Zukunftsfaehigkeit", Dortmund
~ Netzwerk Friedenskooperative, Bonn
~ Jürgen Nieth, Verantwortlicher Redakteur der interdisziplinaeren Vierteljahreszeitschrift Wissenschaft und Frieden (W&F), Bonn
~ Nuernberger Friedensforum/Nuremberg Peace Movement
~ Monika Nur, Berlin
~ Ohne Ruestung Leben, Stuttgart
~ Erdmute Otto, Hamburg
~ Eva Quistorp, MdEP a.D., Frauen für den Frieden, Berlin
~ Harald Papenfuß, HAPA Media, Erfurt
~ Alexis Passadakis, Berlin
~ Hans J. Patzelt, Nuernberger Friedensforum, Nuernberg
~ Pax Christi, Bistumsstelle Limburg
~ Kai Petzke, Berlin
~ Matthias Reichl, Begegnungszentrum für aktive Gewaltlosigkeit/Center for Encounters and Active Non-Violence, Bad Ischl, Oesterreich/Austria
~ Hans-Peter Richter, Deutscher Friedensrat, Berlin
~ Friedrich Rolly, Darmstadt
~ Clemens Ronnefeldt, Referent für Friedensfragen beim intern. Versöhnungsbund
- deutscher Zweig/Secrtary, Intern. Fellowship of Reconciliation, German branch ~ Wolfgang Schlupp-Hauck, Schwaebisch-Gmuend
~ Guenter Schoenegg, Odernheim/Pfalz
~ Oliver Stoll, Tuebingen
~ Dr. Arno Weber, Nuernberger Friedensforum, Nuernberg
~ Werkhof Darmstadt
~ Clemens Weßelburg, Darmstadt
~ Martin Zint, Muehltal
~ Ewald Ziegler, Nuernberger Friedensforum, Nuernberg