-------- NUCLEAR (by country)
Russia: Moscow Conference Explores Possible New 'Strategic Partnership'
Radio Free Europe
07-09-00
By Sophie Lambroschini
http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/2000/09/F.RU.000907140958.html
A Moscow conference sponsored by the U.S. Free Congress Foundation and the Democratic Choice of Russia party yesterday assembled specialists of both countries to discuss ways of reviving a U.S.-Russian strategic partnership. RFE/RL correspondent Sophie Lambroschini reports on the discussions.
Moscow, 7 September 2000 (RFE/RL) -- The one-day meeting addressed in particular the question of how to revive a U.S.-Russian strategic partnership turned dormant after almost two years of cool relations. The period was marked, on Russia's part, by sharp criticism of NATO's intervention in Kosovo last spring and by an equally sharp rejection of U.S plans for a national missile defense, or NMD, shield. On the U.S. side, Russia's second bloody war in the breakaway republic of Chechnya has been the chief factor in the cooling-off.
The roundtable was organized by the U.S. Free Congress Foundation, the American University in Moscow and the Democratic Choice of Russia party. Most participants from both countries said that the resolution of major bilateral political and economic differences was a condition for re-establishing a partnership in the strategic and disarmament spheres.
Some speakers noted that even 10 years after the end of Cold War, new bilateral relations had not really been worked out. Washington-based Heritage Foundation political analyst Yevgeny Volk said: "The Russian-American partnership is still heavily guided by the Cold War paradigm. But," he asked, "are the political elites of both countries ready to change it? No," he said, citing a number of reasons -- but especially the political views of Russia's elite which, he said, have not adapted to Russia's new geopolitical place.
"The idea of a superpower which is mainly based on [its] nuclear potential rather than on economic might and on political stability is still capturing the mentality of the Russian political elite, which acts or tries to act as a superpower equal to the United States. In fact, this legacy of the Cold war is very strongly influencing Russian foreign- policy decision-making -- and especially it was seen under [former Foreign Minister Yevgeny] Primakov, with his concept of a multipolar world."
Volk added that he believed Russian President Vladimir Putin was seeking to continue this policy.
Free Congress Foundation member Bill Lind criticized both countries for approaching defense issues from a Cold War perspective. Instead of concerning themselves with missile shields, Lind said that both Russia and the United States should cooperate in combating what he regards as the world's current major threat -- the use of biological weapons by terrorist groups. Lind said: "It is far more likely that the weapon of mass destruction will come by shipping container or Federal Express than by missile and is more likely to be a genetically engineered biological weapon [than a nuclear one]."
But Fritz Ermarth, a former CIA and National Security Council official, said that missiles remained a threat because they are so widespread. He allowed, however, that in the post-Cold War era, the main question is: "Why do we need nuclear missiles?"
"We can imagine saying that this [nuclear deterrent] is a positive legacy [from the Cold War, but] that is undesirable forever. So let it last for 10 years, 15 years, 20 years -- but then we should have a transition to a situation in which no civilized country need or can base its national security on weapons of mass destruction." Other participants called attention to a long list of obstacles in cooperation between the two countries. U.S. speakers criticized the strong support given by the Clinton administration to Russia despite its obvious democratic failings. Russian speakers, in turn, spoke of NATO's "hasty" expansion to the east which they saw as unnecessarily creating a rift between alliance members and non-members.
One participant, Yuri Ossipyan -- a physicist from the Russian academy of Science and a former adviser to Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev -- said that the West had missed a unique opportunity to secure a partnership with Russia by underestimating its technical and scientific potential. That potential, he said, could have been put to use in common projects such as laser and other high technology.
Some U.S. participants advocated a tougher attitude toward Russia, saying that its democratic development should be a prerequisite to further cooperation between the two countries. Ermarth said that for a broader strategic partnership to prosper, it was imperative that Russia develop "a stable, genuinely democratic, law-governed state."
---
'China provided n-aid to Pak. continuously'
Russia Today
Thursday, September 07, 2000
http://www.indiaserver.com/thehindu/2000/09/07/stories/03070002.htm
WASHINGTON, SEPT. 6. Despite China's persistent denial that it did not encourage nuclear proliferation, a recent study by a U.S. think tank has indicated that Beijing has been a constant supplier of a variety of nuclear products and services to Pakistan, ranging from uranium enrichment technology to research and power reactors.
The study published by the Centre for Non- proliferation Studies at the Monterey Institute of International Studies has come up with fresh details about how China helped Pakistan become a significant nuclear and missile power in South Asia.
The agencies said the study had reported, as early as 1983, that Beijing had by then transferred a complete nuclear weapon design to Islamabad, along with enough weapons-grade uranium for two nuclear weapons. In 1986, China concluded a comprehensive nuclear cooperation agreement with Pakistan and in the same year, it began assisting Islamabad with the enrichment of weapons-grade uranium. China also reportedly transferred enough tritium gas to Pakistan for 10 nuclear weapons.
In 1989, China allegedly involved Pakistani scientists in a nuclear test at its Lop Nur test site. In 1994-95 China sold ring magnets to A. Q. Khan Research Lab at Kahuta which were used in gas centrifuges to make weapons-grade enriched uranium.
The destination of the magnets, the research lab, is not subject to International Atomic Energy Association(IAEA) safeguards and is believed to be involved with Pakistan's nuclear weapons programme.
---
Putin And Clinton Agree To Preserve Key ABM Weapons Treaty
Russia Today
Sep 7, 2000
http://www.russiatoday.com/news.php3?id=196807§ion=default
UNITED NATIONS -- (Agence France Presse) U.S. President Bill Clinton and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin reaffirmed their commitment Wednesday to the cornerstone 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM).
The ABM agreement has been at the heart of a raging debate about controversial U.S. plans to develop a nation-wide nuclear defense shield.
Such a program would overstep the ABM, which allows both countries to build only one small missile defense system under the premise that fear of "mutually assured destruction" was the safest mechanism for averting a nuclear war.
The United States has been lobbying Russia to amend, but still preserve, the ABM treaty.
However those negotiations have made little headway, with Putin earlier this year threatening to abandon all nuclear agreements should Washington encroach on the ABM treaty.
Wednesday's agreement and previous similar initiatives "establish a constructive basis for progress in further reducing nuclear weapons arsenals, preserving and strengthening the ABM treaty, and confronting new challenges to international security," the joint statement signed by Putin and Clinton says.
"The United States and Russia reaffirm their commitment to the ABM Treaty as a cornerstone of strategic stability," it said.
However, the statement stressed that both sides have been holding intensive talks on ABM "with a view to initiate negotiations expediently."
The wording suggested that Washington had not abandoned hope that Russia would eventually agree to some ABM changes.
The issue, however, lost some urgency when Clinton last week said the missile shield was not yet properly developed, and that his presidential successor should make the final decision on whether to deploy it.
Among other agreements Wednesday, the two sides vowed to set up within one year an early warning center in Moscow that will help avert nuclear missile launches caused by erroneous missile attack warnings.
The United States government also reaffirmed its commitment to the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, which was rejected by the U.S. Senate last year, then hastily approved by Russia's parliament.
And Moscow and Washington vowed to speed up their efforts to draft a new START III treaty that slashes each side's nuclear warheads well below the 3,000-3,500 ceiling set in the current agreement. (Agence France Presse)
---
Missile defense continues to divide U.S., Russia
Florida Today
September 7, 2000
By Terence Hunt Associated Press White House Correspondent
http://www.flatoday.com/space/explore/stories/2000b/090700h.htm
NEW YORK (AP) - With both sides refusing to budge, President Bill Clinton and Russian President Vladimir Putin remained at odds Wednesday about an American program to build an anti-missile defense system. Raising the stakes, the United States said it would not discuss deeper cuts in nuclear arsenals until Moscow agrees to negotiations on strategic defense.
Beginning a three-day marathon of diplomacy, Clinton met with Putin on the sidelines of the United Nations' Millennium Summit, a gathering of about 160 presidents, kings and prime ministers.
In what he said was his farewell U.N. address, Clinton urged world leaders to intensify their support for peacekeeping efforts. He said that bloodshed in Sierra Leone and East Timor demonstrated the need for more effective peacekeeping. "In both cases," Clinton said, "the U.N. did not have the tools to finish the job."
Meanwhile, national security adviser Sandy Berger, during a meeting with his Russian counterpart, Security Council Secretary Sergei Ivanov, turned over unspecified information on what the United States knew about the sinking of the Russian submarine Kursk, a State Department official said.
The official, who asked not to be identified, said the Russians had asked for the information.
Meeting for the third time in three months, now in a 35h-floor hotel suite in midtown Manhattan, Clinton and Putin registered stubborn differences about anti-missile defense systems.
Clinton last week decided not to authorize deployment of a missile shield, deferring the decision to his successor. Russia adamantly opposes such a system, saying it would wreck arms-control agreements and trigger a new nuclear arms race. China opposes it, too.
Clinton said his decision to put off deployment of a missile shield created the opportunity for Putin and the next American president "to reach a common position. And I hope they can," Clinton added, "because I think it's very important for the future that we continue to work together.
"When we work together," said Clinton, "we can destroy thousands of tons of nuclear materials and lots of nuclear weapons, and work together in the Balkans for peace."
Putin, in his own address to the United Nations, signaled that Russia would continue to press the United States to abandon its missile defense ambitions.
Putin urged world leaders to come to Moscow for a conferences to ban the militarization of space. He described the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty as a foundation of the entire nuclear arms control system.
Republican presidential nominee George W. Bush favors building a robust missile defense system, seeking Russia's agreement to amend the ABM treaty but proceeding if necessary without such agreement. Democratic presidential nominee Al Gore favors developing technology for a limited missile defense while seeking Russia's agreement to amend the ABM.
The United States said it was prepared to open talks on deeper arms reductions -- but only if they proceed "in parallel with meaningful and productive discussions on strategic defenses. And ... we're not there yet with the Russians," said Strobe Talbott, deputy secretary of state.
He said Russia needs to recognize that amendments will be necessary in the ABM "probably sooner rather than later."
Talbott said that starting formal negotiations on arms cuts -- a START III agreement -- "is going to have to wait until Russia is prepared to join us in formal negotiations on strategic defense."
---
U.S. Is Reported to Hand Russia Secret Details on Sub That Sank
New York Times
September 07, 2000
By STEVEN LEE MYERS
http://www.nytimes.com/2000/09/07/world/07KURS.html
WASHINGTON, Sept. 6 - President Clinton's national security adviser, Samuel R. Berger, has provided his Russian counterpart with a written summary of what American naval and intelligence officials believe caused the nuclear-powered submarine Kursk to sink last month in the Barents Sea, officials said today.
The summary, based on acoustic recordings and other information gathered by two American submarines and a surface vessel in the Barents at the time, included evidence that American officials have said contradicts assertions by some Russian officials that the Kursk sank after a collision with another sub or a World War II-era mine.
Mr. Berger provided the information, at the Russians' request, in a meeting on Monday with Sergei Ivanov, head of the Russian Security Council and a close aide to President Vladimir V. Putin.
The information could help Mr. Putin's government sort out which of several accounts was the most likely explanation for the sinking on Aug. 12, which killed all 118 crew members.
"In response to a request from the Russian government, Mr. Berger provided some information to Mr. Ivanov on our knowledge regarding the tragedy," said P. J. Crowley, a spokesman for the National Security Council.
Mr. Clinton opened his meeting with Mr. Putin today in New York with a discussion of the Kursk's sinking. The men were at the world leaders' meeting at the United Nations.
"President Clinton expressed his regret and his sympathies to the families, of course," Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott said afterward. "And President Putin talked a bit about the episode itself and what it revealed and how he had coped with it. There was some further discussion on that."
The decision to share information on the Kursk was unusual, given that it was gathered by one of the most secretive parts of the American military, the submarine fleet. Mr. Crowley declined to discuss what information was shared, except to say that it was in an unclassified form.
But Itar-Tass, the Russian news agency, quoted Mr. Ivanov as saying the information included technical details on "the exact times, to the second, of two explosions" that wrecked the Kursk.
American officials have said the explosions - recorded by the Memphis, another American sub reported to be the Toledo and a surveillance ship, the Loyal - strongly suggest that the Kursk sank after a catastrophic accident in its hull and not because of a collision.
Following that theory, a rocket-propelled torpedo being loaded or launched as part of an exercise misfired, with its engine or its fuel exploding. Two minutes and 15 seconds later, a larger explosion of the torpedo warhead tore a gaping hole in the sub's bow.
---
Germany Refuses to Help Siemens Sell Plutonium Plant to Russia
Russia Today
Sep 7, 2000
http://www.russiatoday.com/news.php3?id=196810
BERLIN -- (Agence France Presse) German Economics Minister Werner Mueller has refused financial aid to the German group Siemens in its bid to sell a plutonium processing plant to Russia, the daily Suddeutsche Zeitung said Thursday.
"I will not agree to granting credit for the export of this factory, licensed by the public institute Hermes," he told the daily.
"Financing this project is Siemens' problem," he said.
The plant, built in the central German town of Hanau, has never been used.
It produces a fuel which contains uranium and plutonium oxides, which save on natural uranium and burns plutonium, whose storage is a problem. It is used in conjunction with enriched uranium in nuclear power stations.
Siemens recently asked for authorization to export the facility to push the government into providing financial support.
Mueller said he would review the situation if there were a common initiative of the G8 countries -- Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia and the United States -- to finance the processing of plutonium in such a factory. (Agence France Presse)
---
Putin, Clinton Still Divided
Associated Press
September 07, 2000 Filed at 6:44 p.m. ET
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Clinton-Putin.html
NEW YORK (AP) -- With both sides refusing to budge, President Clinton and Russian President Vladimir Putin remained at odds Wednesday about an American program to build an anti-missile defense system. Raising the stakes, the United States said it would not discuss deeper cuts in nuclear arsenals until Moscow agrees to negotiations on strategic defense.
Beginning a three-day marathon of diplomacy, Clinton met with Putin on the sidelines of the United Nations' Millennium Summit, a gathering of about 160 presidents, kings and prime ministers.
In what he said was his farewell U.N. address, Clinton urged world leaders to intensify their support for peacekeeping efforts. He said that bloodshed in Sierra Leone and East Timor demonstrated the need for more effective peacekeeping. ``In both cases,'' Clinton said, ``the U.N. did not have the tools to finish the job.''
Meanwhile, national security adviser Sandy Berger, during a meeting with his Russian counterpart, Security Council Secretary Sergei Ivanov, turned over unspecified information on what the United States knew about the sinking of the Russian submarine Kursk, a State Department official said.
The official, who asked not to be identified, said the Russians had asked for the information.
Meeting for the third time in three months, now in a 35h-floor hotel suite in midtown Manhattan, Clinton and Putin registered stubborn differences about anti-missile defense systems.
Clinton last week decided not to authorize deployment of a missile shield, deferring the decision to his successor. Russia adamantly opposes such a system, saying it would wreck arms-control agreements and trigger a new nuclear arms race. China opposes it, too.
Clinton said his decision to put off deployment of a missile shield created the opportunity for Putin and the next American president ``to reach a common position. And I hope they can,'' Clinton added, ``because I think it's very important for the future that we continue to work together.
``When we work together,'' said Clinton, ``we can destroy thousands of tons of nuclear materials and lots of nuclear weapons, and work together in the Balkans for peace.''
Putin, in his own address to the United Nations, signaled that Russia would continue to press the United States to abandon its missile defense ambitions.
Putin urged world leaders to come to Moscow for a conferences to ban the militarization of space. He described the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty as a foundation of the entire nuclear arms control system.
Republican presidential nominee George W. Bush favors building a robust missile defense system, seeking Russia's agreement to amend the ABM treaty but proceeding if necessary without such agreement. Democratic presidential nominee Al Gore favors developing technology for a limited missile defense while seeking Russia's agreement to amend the ABM.
The United States said it was prepared to open talks on deeper arms reductions -- but only if they proceed ``in parallel with meaningful and productive discussions on strategic defenses. And ... we're not there yet with the Russians,'' said Strobe Talbott, deputy secretary of state.
He said Russia needs to recognize that amendments will be necessary in the ABM ``probably sooner rather than later.''
Talbott said that starting formal negotiations on arms cuts -- a START III agreement -- ``is going to have to wait until Russia is prepared to join us in formal negotiations on strategic defense.''
Seeking areas of compromise, Clinton and Putin signed a statement on strategic stability cooperation. It commits both countries to finishing an accord on pre-notification of launches of ballistic missiles. Talbott said the statement ``puts more flesh on the bones'' of accords signed by Clinton and Putin in June in Moscow and in July in Japan.
Clinton and Putin also discussed prospects for democracy in the Balkans, peacekeeping in Kosovo, U.S. objections to the transfer of Russian missile and nuclear weaponry technology to Iran, and Iraq's defiance of U.N. weapons inspection demands.
Clinton also raised the case of Edmund Pope, an American businessman jailed by Russian authorities since April 3 on espionage charges. Talbott said that Putin ``certainly understands the importance that President Clinton attaches to that.''
---
Sub Crews Learn Sound of Rescue
Associated Press
September 07, 2000 Filed at 6:09 a.m. ET
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-NATO-Submarine-Rescue.html
ABOARD THE TCG HIZIRREIS (AP) -- The sailors freeze, the music shuts down in the officers' hall, the kitchen comes to a standstill upon the order of ``Silence!'' from the control room of the sunken submarine.
``A light vehicle at 1,000 yards, approaching!'' Petty Officer Orhan Koksal yells in the microphone, after the chief sonar operator detects the welcome sound of a rescue vehicle amid the noises of the Mediterranean Sea.
Had the Turkish submarine TCG Hizirreis truly been stranded 255 feet deep, the noise registering on the sonar would have been the sailors' first indication they had a chance of survival.
The TCG Hizirreis, formerly the USS Gudgeon, played the role of a distressed submarine Wednesday in the Sorbet Royal 2000 exercise, billed as the largest NATO submarine rescue exercise ever.
The maneuvers were scheduled long before Russia's Kursk submarine plunged to the bottom of the Barents Sea on Aug. 12, killing 118 seamen, after two explosions that tore the hull.
The crew of the TCG Hizirreis say they were deeply shaken by the catastrophe, which reminded them of the serious risks they take during each dive.
``We followed it hour by hour,'' said chief engineer Lt. Hasan Cankaya.
``We face the same risks, we are submariners,'' said Koksal, who oversees operations in a cramped sonar room filled with monitors and four technicians in headphones.
Rear Admiral Rob Stevens, top commander of NATO's submarine operations, said Thursday he hoped if there were any lessons to be learned from the Kursk disaster, Russian authorities would pass the information on to NATO.
The TCG Hizirreis, a Tang-class fast-attack submarine, is designed to detect enemy ships and destroy them. It is loaded with torpedoes. It can stay submerged for 50 days, and food is the only limitation.
A drill Monday by the U.S. minisub Mystic to lock on to the TCG Hizirreis' hatch failed when its mother submarine, the USS Dallas, called off the attempt, Turkish officers said.
``At least, I recorded its noise in my memory,'' said Koksal of the Mystic, one of NATO's most advanced deep submergence rescue vehicles. It is essential for sonar operators to be able to recognize the sounds of rescue vehicles to be able to alert the control room for possible contact with rescuers.
The recordings of the Mystic, which has an operating depth of 5,000 feet, will be studied by young Turkish sonar operators. It was about 3,000 yards away from the TCG Hizirreis when the USS Dallas called off the operation.
The Mystic suffered a mechanical failure in the control room and was forced to return to the USS Dallas. Capt. Clare Bill Hanson of Warren, Pa., second ranking commander of NATO's submarine operations, said Thursday the Mystic would not be able to participate in the maneuvers until Sunday.
Along with the nuclear-powered submarine USS Dallas, four other submarines from Turkey and Italy are participating. Israel, Argentina, Chile, Singapore and Sweden are sending observers.
The Sorbet Royal 2000, the fourth exercise of its kind, hopes to mark progress in carrying out the rapid and timely rescue of disabled submarines.
The Turks discovered the difficulties of making contact with a rescue minisub in strong currents and low visibility.
At the end of the exercise, the submarine smoothly rose from the bottom with a crew member yelling the attained depths, eyes locked on round dials that marking the steady rise.
``Surface, surface, surface!,'' the crew yelled.
---
Clinton Focuses on Asia, Cyprus
Associated Press
September 07, 2000 Filed at 2:32 p.m. ET
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Clinton-UN.html
NEW YORK (AP) -- President Clinton praised the South Korean leader Thursday for pressing unification with the North, which Clinton said would benefit all of Asia.
``He has done a brave and a good thing for the stability of the whole region,'' Clinton said before beginning a meeting with South Korean President Kim Dae-jung.
Kim is one in a parade of world leaders sitting down with Clinton this week in conjunction with the U.N. Millennium Summit.
Clinton met for about 40 minutes with Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer for discussions about U.S. support for Turkey's eventual entry into the European Union and Turkey's relationship with Greece. Clinton told the Turkish leader he is encouraged by the pace of U.N. peace talks for Cyprus, said White House spokesman P.J. Crowley.
Later, at a reception for African leaders and business officials, Clinton said: ``I believe America is moving inexorably to be a much better partner over the long run for Africa. ... And I am more convinced today that it is not an act of charity. It is an act of enlightened self-interest for the world that we should be building together.''
In an address to the Security Council, Clinton said the United Nations will have to deal with challenges such as poverty, disease and environmental threats along with security risks like wars and other conflicts.
``Until we confront the iron link between deprivation, disease and war, we will never be able to create the peace that the founders of the United Nations dreamed of,'' the president said. ``I hope the United States will always be willing to do its part and I hope the Security Council increasingly will have a 21st century vision of security that we can all embrace and pursue.''
The United Nations is sponsoring peace talks aimed at reunifying Cyprus. The Mediterranean island has been split into a Greek Cypriot-controlled south and a Turkish-occupied north since Turkey invaded in July 1974, following a short-lived coup by supporters of union with Greece. The northern Turkish state is recognized only by Turkey, which maintains 35,000 troops there.
Greek-Turkish relations have rarely been better than they are now. Cautious overtures for dialogue were greatly accelerated by deadly earthquakes that struck both countries last year, bringing aid and goodwill initiatives from both sides that helped ease decades of mistrust.
Clinton's meeting with the Korean leader comes less than a week after he left to his successor a decision on whether to construct a U.S. national missile shield.
``There are a number of bilateral and regional issues that will be on the agenda, including North Korea and the discussions that we have had with them on both missiles and security,'' White House spokesman Joe Lockhart said Wednesday.
The unfinished missile defense business hung over Clinton's summit meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Wednesday.
The shield would be designed in part to counter potential nuclear aggression by North Korea.
North Korea's leader, Kim Jong Il, skipped the gathering of about 160 heads of state.
China and Russia vigorously oppose any U.S. move to build a missile shield or even to plan for it in detail. The United States is already veering close to violating a key arms control agreement, those countries claim.
Before his session with Putin, Clinton said his decision to put off deployment of a missile shield created the opportunity for Putin and the next American president ``to reach a common position. And I hope they can,'' Clinton added, ``because I think it's very important for the future that we continue to work together.''
Putin, in his own address to the United Nations, signaled that Russia would continue to press the United States to abandon its missile defense ambitions.
-------- depleted uranium
Primex is a lead producer of DU munitions...
Tara Thornton duorganizer@miltoxproj.org
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 09:15:07 -0400
In the Primex 1999 annual report there is an interesting paragraph, "A number of foreign countries will not buy ammunition containing depleted uranium, and the US government limits the export of DU ammunition to NATO and certain other friendly foreign governments. To improve its opportunities to sell tank ammunition to foreign buyers, the Company, in association with the foreign company that was the original developer of 120mm tank ammunition, has developed an advanced 120mm kinetic energy round with a tungsten alloy penetrator. In February 1999, the company was awarded a 31.3 million dollar contract for production of advanced kinetic energy tungsten penetrator rounds for a foreign customer."
It would be nice to know who the foreign countries are that won't buy DU munitions and who the foreign customer is.
----
Gulf War and Health:
Volume 1. Depleted Uranium, Sarin, Pyridostigmine Bromide, and Vaccines, National Academy Press (2000)
Illnesses in Gulf War Veterans, pp. 33- 56
Methodology, pp. 57- 72
Depleted Uranium, pp. 73-134
Sarin, pp. 135-164
Pyridostigmine Bromide, pp. 165-214
Vaccines, pp. 215-264
Research Recommendations, pp. 265-272
Appendix A: Scientific Workshop Ag..., pp. 273-276
Appendix B: Public Meeting Agendas..., pp. 277-280
Apendix C: Methods of Literature C..., pp. 281-284
Appendix D: Gulf War Illnesses and..., pp. 285-304
Appendix E: Effects of Long-Term E..., pp. 305-314
Appendix F: Acronyms and Abbreviat..., pp. 315-318
Order info: http://books.nap.edu/catalog/9953.html View: http://www.nap.edu/books/030907178X/html/
WISE Uranium Project http://www.antenna.nl/wise/uranium Peter Diehl E-Mail: peter.diehl@sz-online.de Am Schwedenteich 4, D-01477 Arnsdorf, Germany Phone: +49-35200-20737
----
Gulf War soldiers may have 'inhaled uranium'
CNN
September 3, 2000
http://www.cnn.com/2000/WORLD/europe/09/03/france.gulf/index.html
PARIS, France -- A former U.S. army doctor claims that many Gulf War veterans suffered from renal and other diseases as a result of inhaling particles of depleted uranium used in anti-tank shells.
Dr Asaf Durakovic said he had treated many patients still suffering from diseases as a result of being exposed to the toxic material while fighting in the Gulf War.
"According to some estimates, 320 tons of depleted uranium were exploded during the (1991) Gulf War," Dr. Durakovic told reporters after speaking at a conference of the European Association of Nuclear Medicine.
Durakovic said depleted uranium was used as a coat on shells to ease penetration of thick armour.
When the shells hit their intended target, the uranium coating exploded into multiple particles, which, he said, "became part of atmospheric dust."
He said: "Because of the omnipresence of small sub-micron radioactive dust in the Persian Gulf, uranium that was liberated by impact (with tanks)...evaporated at temperatures higher than several thousand degrees centigrade.
"Some of those particles were inhaled and stayed in the lungs...where they can cause cancer, and some entered into the bloodstream and affected kidneys and bones."
A spokesman for the UK's Ministry of Defence (MoD) told CNN.com it was aware of independent tests which showed that veterans are excreting unusually high levels of uranium in their urine.
But the spokesman said the evidence so far was "inadequate" to be able to draw a conclusion about depleted uranium exposure on Gulf War veterans.
'Political pressure to halt research'
Durakovic, who held the rank of colonel, is now with the department of Nuclear Medicine at Georgetown University Medical School in Washington.
He said that he had come under "political pressure" from U.S. authorities to halt his research shortly after the Gulf War, when the U.S. military first challenged the notion that a mysterious 'syndrome' was affecting the health of returning veterans.
Some medical studies have linked Gulf War syndrome, whose symptoms range from flu to chronic fatigue and asthma, to the multiple vaccines given soldiers during the war to counter possible Iraqi chemical weapons attacks.
Both the U.S. and British governments have resisted claims by Gulf War veterans that such a syndrome exists and are conducting their own studies.
"I don't claim uranium contamination is the (main) cause of the Gulf War syndrome," Durakovic said, "but the veterans show high levels of depleted uranium in their bodies and studies about this must be intensified."
The MoD spokesman said: "We are aware of suggestions that independent tests have indicated that UK Gulf War veterans are excreting unusually high levels of uranium in their urine.
"We are very keen to see scientific, robust and properly validated, peer-reviwed hypotheses, methodology and full results from depleted uranium work."
So far, the spokesman said, no such material had been made available to the MoD although they had requested it.
"But the bottom line is we welcome any additional evidence," he added.
---
What Caused Gulf War Syndrome? Experts Can't Say
Yahoo News
Thursday September 7
By Maggie Fox, Health and Science Correspondent
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20000907/ts/health_gulfwar_dc_2.html
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Scientists asked to report on whether drugs, vaccines, uranium or poison gas caused the vague collection of illnesses in thousands of veterans known as Gulf War Syndrome said on Thursday they simply cannot tell.
There is not enough evidence to say whether symptoms suffered by veterans of the 1991 war against Iraq were caused by exposure to any agents in the field or vaccines given before they went, said a committee of the Institute of Medicine, which advises the U.S. government on health matters.
``We'd like to give veterans and their families definitive answers, but the evidence simply is not strong enough,'' Dr. Harold Sox, chairman of the department of medicine at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center in Lebanon, New Hampshire, told a news conference.
``Without data on the levels of exposure in the Persian Gulf theater, answers will remain elusive,'' added Sox, who chaired the committee.
``Clearly we found that the evidence wasn't strong enough to rule out health effects of any of these exposures.''
For most of the vaccines, drugs and for sarin nerve gas, the question remains, he said. But for depleted uranium, he said he felt the study had cast considerable doubt on whether it was linked with kidney disease or cancer.
Congress and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs commissioned the study -- and several to follow -- after thousands of veterans complained of symptoms ranging from fatigue and malaise to dizziness, headaches and rashes.
Members of the committee studied abstracts, or short summaries, of 10,000 studies involving exposure to the poison gas sarin, pyridostigmine bromide (PB) -- a drug used to help protect against nerve agents -- depleted uranium and vaccines, against anthrax and botulism.
They also looked at 1,000 full reports. Most of the studies did not involve actual Gulf War veterans, because few studies have been done on veterans.
Instead, they looked at Japanese victims of a sarin gas attack, studies on occupational exposures to various agents such as veterinarians who get anthrax vaccinations, and reports about patients with an immune system disorder called myasthenia gravis, which is treated with PB.
One big problem was a lack of information about how much of each chemical or agent any serviceman or woman was exposed to. Therefore, the committee said, their report cannot say much.
``At most, it found limited evidence from three studies that might suggest a link between long-term health effects and exposure to the nerve agent sarin at levels great enough to cause an immediate, intense reaction,'' the Institute, one of the National Academies of Sciences, said in a statement.
``On the other hand, the committee found limited, suggestive evidence of no link between exposure to uranium and kidney disease or, at low exposure levels, lung cancer.''
The committee, which conducted no direct research itself, recommended more study and urged the U.S. government to do a better job of keeping track of what agents soldiers, airmen and sailors are exposed to.
``In order to study the health effects on veterans, we are going to have to study veterans,'' Sox said. ``We have got to try to do a better job of recording what happened to soldiers next time.''
He noted that reports and documentation of combat-related illnesses go back at least to the U.S. Civil War.
Sox noted that the committee was not asked to judge whether Gulf War Syndrome exists. ``My personal opinion, unrelated to the committee, is that yes, there are Gulf War-related illnesses,'' Sox said.
The scientists on the committee said they hoped that some people would draw ``some comfort'' from the report. ``We actually learned a fair amount about the health effects of these agents,'' Sox said.
``Our study by no means drew a blank,'' he added. ``We certainly don't think that this is a waste of time.''
---
Despite Study, Final Word on Gulf War Syndrome Is Elusive
New York Times
September 07, 2000
By PHILIP J. HILTS
http://www.nytimes.com/2000/09/07/continuous/08GULF.html
The question of what has caused the array of symptoms called Gulf War Syndrome was muddy before, and a report from the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences released today did little to clear the waters.
There is not enough reliable data to say whether exposure to sarin nerve gas or vaccination against germ warfare agents could or could not be the cause of the Gulf War Syndrome, the committee concluded officially. The committee said there was a lack of data about the effects of the chemicals in question and of information on the exposure to them that gulf war veterans may have received.
Concluding a news conference today on the report, Dr. Kenneth I. Shine, president of the Institute of Medicine, summed up the frustration of committee members and those prodding for more definitive conclusions: "We would love to come up with remarkable new conclusions, but after careful analysis, if the data isn't there, we can't draw any conclusions from it."
The committee recommended both more research and that the military try to do a better job monitoring what happens to soldiers and their environment during war.
Richard Weidman and William Frasure, of the Vietnam Veterans of America, who have tracked the debate over gulf war syndrome over several years, said they sympathized with the institute scientists who found scant data, and said what is needed is a thorough study of not only the scientific literature, but of classified records and medical records of veterans, carried out not by military officials as investigations of the past have been, but by independent scientists.
After Congress mandated further study, the Department of Veterans Affairs asked the Institute of Medicine to convene a panel of impartial experts to look at a list of 33 different agents and try to find out whether any might be the cause of, or at least associated with, Gulf War Syndrome. The committee of 18 reported on the first four of those agents in a report and press conference today.
For two agents, sarin and vaccination, the committee report offered verbally tortured conclusions. For example, on sarin: "There is inadequate/insufficient evidence to determine whether an association does or does not exist between exposure to sarin at low doses ... and subsequent long term adverse health effects." The wording was identical for anthrax and botulinum vaccination.
On two other agents - depleted uranium and the chemical pyridostigmine bromide - the committee felt there was at least some evidence that they were unlikely to be the cause of the syndrome, although again, there was not enough evidence to be sure: "There is limited/suggestive evidence of no association between exposure to uranium and lung cancer at" very low doses.
Dr. Harold S. Sox, Jr., chairman of the committee, said he felt that the committee's review did not "move the needle" toward any new conclusions on sarin and vaccines. But on PB and uranium, he said, "We did move the needle," and it now seems less likely that either will be found to be a cause of the syndrome. But again, the study could not rule them out.
The committee accepted that there is something called "Gulf War Syndrome," as evidenced by the increase in a variety of symptoms among the veterans returning from the gulf war - chiefly fatigue, rashes, headache, muscle and joint pain, and memory loss. Based on that assumption, it reviewed the published, peer-reviewed scientific studies on four substances to try to determine if there is any indication that any of them might be a cause of the syndrome.
Sarin is suspected as a cause because it is a potent nerve toxin used in chemical weapons, some of which were destroyed during the gulf war, thus exposing soldiers to small doses of the agent. Vaccines became suspect because soldiers received two of them - one against anthrax and one against botulinum toxin - before serving in the gulf. Pyridostigmine bromide is a drug used as a treatment for myasthenia gravis, but also could blunt the effects of nerve gas, and so some soldiers were given doses of it prophylactically in the war. Depleted uranium came under suspicion because this low-radiation form of uranium is used as a layer in the armor of tanks to increase protection, and is used in some ammunition rounds. Cleanup of damaged tanks and munitions from "friendly-fire" exposed soldiers to some of the substance.
Overriding all their tentative conclusions, however, was the constant refrain expressed at the press conference today by the institute panel members that there was very little evidence of the kind needed to make conclusions on two points - whether low doses of any of the agents might cause long-term illness, and just how much exposure to the agents any veteran received.
Chairman Sox thus said it is essential that in the future, the military keep better records about what substances soldiers are exposed to, and where and for how long. In addition, the committee said it had no access to classified information held by the military, and so urged defense scientists to publish anything they have so that it might be included in further work on the question of whether and how to compensate veterans for their exposure.
---
Study fails to find cause of Gulf illness
USA Today
09/07/00- Updated 02:20 PM ET
Sept. 7, 2000
http://www.usatoday.com/life/health/general/lhgen078.htm
WASHINGTON (AP) - A comprehensive new report on the chronic illnesses suffered by some Gulf War veterans was unable to link their problems to a specific cause.
The Institute of Medicine studied the research done on several possible causes for the veterans' syndrome: the toxic nerve agent sarin; a drug used to pretreat against exposure to nerve gas; depleted uranium; and vaccines to prevent anthrax and botulism.
But the scientists said Thursday they could not find enough evidence to link the illnesses to any single cause.
''We'd like to give veterans and their families definitive answers, but the evidence simply is not strong enough,'' said Harold C. Sox Jr., chairman of the committee that did the research. Sox heads the department of medicine at the Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center in Lebanon, N.H.
The Defense Department says an estimated 90,000 troops who served in the Gulf War complain of illnesses such as fatigue, skin rashes, headaches and muscle and joint pain.
The Pentagon requested the study by the institute, an arm of the National Academy of Sciences, an independent agency chartered by Congress to provide scientific advice to the government.
A study published in May in the British Medical Journal suggested a link between multiple vaccines given to soldiers deployed in the Persian Gulf War and the unexplained illnesses. That report was based on 923 British Gulf War veterans.
The study by the Institute of Medicine noted that British research has provided ''limited evidence of an association'' with multiple vaccinations. But it noted that 99 workers at Fort Detrick, Md., who received multiple vaccinations had been studied for 25 years with no clinical symptoms.
Overall, the institute said, the available evidence is insufficient to show whether the multiple vaccinations have an effect on long-term health.
Other findings in the study:
Sarin: Low-level exposure to this nerve gas may have occurred among troops when U.S. soldiers destroyed Iraqi munitions stockpiles.
A survey of 20,000 troops within 50 miles of the stockpiles showed 99% reported no serious nerve illnesses, the report noted. It said that while high doses of the chemical are known to be dangerous, there is not enough information available on low doses to reach any conclusion.
Pyridostigmine bromide is a drug used as a pretreatment for exposure to nerve agents. It was provided to about 250,000 soldiers, but records don't indicate if they all took the pills.
There were some cases of poisoning from taking high doses of the pills, but the committee was unable to find evidence of long-term effects from the amount normally used.
Depleted uranium, which has less radioactivity than naturally occurring uranium, is used in tank armor and some ammunition.
The committee said there were indications that the levels of uranium involved in the war do not lead to lung cancer or kidney damage. There was not enough evidence to determine if the uranium could be linked to other diseases.
Anthrax vaccine was given to thousands of service members during the Gulf War because of the fear that Iraq would launch a biological attack. A later decision to give the vaccine to all U.S. military personnel has provoked controversy, with some resisting the vaccinations.
The typical vaccination reactions of redness, swelling and occasional fever were found, but the committee said there have not been enough scientific studies done to determine if there is any long-term adverse effect from the vaccine.
Botulinum vaccine is under investigation as a way to block the dangerous toxins of the form of food poisoning known as botulism. Again, the committee said there have not been sufficient studies to determine any long-term hazard.
-------- israel
Vanunu sues Yedioth Ahronoth for libel
Haaretz Breaking News,
September 7, 2000
From: Irit Katriel <iritka@internet-zahav.net.il
Mordechai Vanunu submitted a NIS 30 million libel suit against Yedioth Ahronoth daily newspaper at the Tel Aviv District Court on Thursday. No defense has been submitted yet.
Vanunu claimes that on November 25, 1999, the paper published a false report about him, saying that he had given fellow prisoners who were also members of Hamas men information about manufacturing bombs. The story appeared on the second page of the paper under the headline "He did it again."
The report claimed that Vanunu delivered notes containing information about bomb manufacturing to prisoners who were members of the Palestinian terrorist organization.
Vanunu's attorney, Avigdor Feldman, said that the story was published without asking for a comment from Vanunu and without asking the Prisons Authority to confirm the information. In his suit, Vanunu added that the Prisons Authority commissioner denied the facts the day after the story was published.
Vanunu said that the story gave the impression that he was aiding enemies of the state and terror organizations to act against innocent civilians, whereas he has always insisted that he acted with his conscience as a pacifist who objected to nuclear armament and he never intended to cause harm to Israel.
Vanunu believes that the defendants should pay him a large sum in compensation because of the newspaper's high circulation and because the defendants did not follow journalistic ethics concerning the fact that he is a prisoner. Vanunu is serving an 18-year sentence in the Shikma prison, Ashkelon for revealing Israel's nuclear secrets to the British Sunday Times. (Agencies)
-------- japan
Japan to go ahead with missile plans
The Hindu
Thursday, September 07, 2000
By F.J. Khergamvala
http://www.indiaserver.com/thehindu/2000/09/07/stories/0307000c.htm
TOKYO, SEPT. 6. Irrespective of the Clinton administration's intentions on building a missile defence system, Japan is not going to interrupt its own ``research'' on the Theatre Missile Defence (TMD) system. The Defence Agency's requirement specific to this research for fiscal 2001 is set at $34 million plus.
At the Millennium Summit in New York, the Chinese President, Mr. Jiang Zemin is expected to lead the global chorus against the U.S. plans to build an anti-missile defence. Japan is the only country other than the U.S. that is going ahead with a form of wider missile defence. It will be intriguing to see how its Prime Minister, Mr. Yoshiro Mori balances Japan's support for the U.S. with Tokyo's intention of gaining support for a permanent seat at the United Nations Security Council by wooing nations opposed to the anti missile defence.
In December 1999, the U.N. General Assembly voted 80-4 in favour of a non-binding resolution to strengthen the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM) and asked the parties to the ABM Treaty ``to refrain from the deployment of anti-missile systems for the defence of the territory of their country and not to provide a base for such a defence.'' The resolution also urged the non- transfer to other States or extra-territorial deployment of anti- ballistic missile systems or its components.
Japan was one of the 68 member-nations that abstained. It is likely that Japan will again keep the same international posture but in reality it has decided to go ahead with a long-term plan to develop the Theatre Missile Defence, which Japan prefers to label as BMD, or Ballistic Missile Defence. The TMD is both independent of, yet morally, strategically and legally linked to the ABM Treaty and the Clinton Administration's recent announcement to leave to the next U.S. President the decision to build a National Missile Defence.
Mr. Bill Clinton's decision does not close the door on the TMD, or the Navy Theatre Wide Defence (NTWD) system for Japan. After much dithering for years, Japan undertook to partner the U.S. in the TMD within a month of North Korea's three-stage Taepodong missile launch on August 31, 1998. Japan had long agonised about how to ready a defensive deterrent against China. Pyongyang's action provided Japan the perfect public relations pretext to do that. Therefore, irrespective of Japan's diplomatic posture, the plans for a TMD have been made, on the realistic assumption that China too will increase its nuclear missile capability, irrespective of what the U.S. decides. For diplomatic reasons Japan emphasises that this is still a research programme, with a flexible deadline of fiscal 2003-2004, with the tentative estimates set at between $150 million and $220 million for a five-year period. The official explanation includes making a distinction between the missiles to be targeted for destruction by the U.S.' NMD and the joint U.S.-Japan TMD.
The U.S. has asked Japan to do research into light weight materials, because primarily Japan and the U.S. have decided that the U.S. made Aegis class platforms will carry the Light weight Exo-Atmospheric Projectile. Therefore, the TMD as planned for Japan will provide a sea based defence that should provide a cover not only for Japan but also for the minimum 100,000 U.S. troops based in the Far East.
The 1972 ABM Treaty cannot possibly obstruct the U.S. from getting a shield for its own forces, but it can ask some serious questions of Japan's commitment to non-proliferation and disarmament. First, it definitely violates the ABM provisions and the purpose of the ABM, to limit the defence capabilities of both the then superpowers so that neither is tempted to launch a first strike.
Much of Japan's anxiety would be relieved should Mr. George Bush come to the Oval Office and is able to carry through his campaign pledges. The Republican Presidential contender has promised ``effective missile defences to protect all 50 States and our friends and allies.'' If the friends and allies include Taiwan, in addition to Japan, then Mr. Jiang will have much more to say beyond his Millennium Summit speech.
-------- korea
Clinton, S.Korea Discuss N.Korea Missile Program
Yahoo News
Thursday September 7
By Steve Holland
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20000907/pl/summit_clinton_dc_3.html
NEW YORK (Reuters) - President Clinton talked to South Korean President Kim Dae-jung on Thursday about the possibility that North Korea might agree to end its missile program, a U.S. official said.
Clinton and Kim spoke mainly about issues related to North Korea in a 35-minute meeting on the sidelines of the U.N. Millennium Summit.
``The president indicated that we were very interested in finding out more about North Korea's interest in perhaps gaining access to commercial launching facilities outside North Korea in return for ending their missile program,'' said P.J. Crowley, spokesman for the National Security Council.
``Obviously that remains one of our primary policy goals with North Korea, to see an end to their missile program.''
In talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin in July, North Korean leader Kim Jong-il was reported to have offered to scrap his country's missile program if the United States agreed to launch North Korean satellites.
A South Korean newspaper later quoted Kim as saying the offer was just a joke, but Crowley said on Thursday Washington took it seriously.
Asked about the South Korean report, Crowley said: ``We believe it was a serious mention that he, Kim Jong-il, made to President Putin. We are very interested in it.''
North Korea's missile program is a key reason for U.S. pursuit of a national missile defense system to protect itself against the threat of ballistic missiles fired by so-called rogue states.
Clinton announced last week he would not take steps to go further with the program but would let his successor determine if it can be technologically feasible and try to resolve opposition to it led by Russia and China.
In a photo session with South Korea's Kim, Clinton said he strongly supported his work toward Korean reunification, including his unprecedented summit in Pyongyang last June with the North Korean president.
``I think he has done a brave and a good thing, not only for the people of his country and North Korea, but for the whole stability of the region by taking this initiative,'' Clinton said.
Kim appealed on Wednesday for U.N. backing in his bid to unite the two Koreas.
He had been due to hold talks with designated North Korean head of state Kim Yong-nam but the prospect of a meeting vanished when North Korea's delegation flew home before reaching New York, complaining of ``rude'' body searches by U.S. airline staff in Frankfurt.
The two Koreas remain at war as an armed truce they entered into in 1953 has never been replaced with a formal peace pact.
Clinton Meets Sezer, Urges Cyprus Solution
Using the world's largest gathering of heads of state as a chance to press the cause of peace, Clinton also met Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer on Thursday.
The talks included a lengthy discussion on Cyprus, which has been virtually partitioned since 1974 when troops from Turkey occupied the north of the island in response to a coup in Nicosia instigated by the junta then ruling Greece.
``The president encouraged President Sezer to use his influence to try to help push the Turkish Cypriots to engage in real negotiations on the future of the island,'' Crowley said, adding that all parties would be better off if a settlement could be reached.
Clinton also offered his support for Turkey's efforts to join the European Union, and urged Sezer to continue working for rapprochement with Greece.
``We think this is a very important dialogue between our allies and NATO partners and certainly encourage President Sezer to keep that momentum going,'' Crowley said.
Later at a reception for African leaders, Clinton pledged continued U.S. efforts to help fight poverty and infectious diseases in Africa.
``We're committed for the long run. We want to take on the great human challenges; we want to take on the great political challenges,'' he said. ``I believe America is moving inexorably to be a much better partner over the long run for Africa.''
-------- russia
Putin: Ban militarization of space
Florida Today
September 7, 2000
By Vladimir Isachenkov Associated Press Writer
http://www.flatoday.com/space/explore/stories/2000b/090700g.htm
UNITED NATIONS (AP) -- Russian President Vladimir Putin on Wednesday called upon world leaders to come to Moscow for a conference to ban the militarization of space -- a challenge to any American plan to build an anti-missile defense system.
Addressing the Millennium Summit at the United Nations, Putin described the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty as a "foundation" of the entire nuclear arms control system.
"Particularly alarming are the plans for the militarization of space," Putin said.
Noting that the next year will see the 40th anniversary of Russia sending the first man into space, Putin said that Moscow will be the "most proper place for such a conference."
He did not mention the United States in his address. But his statement came as the latest signal that Russia would continue pushing the United States to fully abandon its plans to deploy defenses against missile threats from rogue nations, such as North Korea.
Putin has welcomed President Clinton's announcement that he would leave the final decision on whether to deploy the missile system to the next administration.
In his speech Wednesday, Putin also proposed to bar the use of enriched uranium and pure plutonium in the world atomic energy production. "Incineration of plutonium and other radioactive elements creates prerequisites for the final solution of the radioactive residues problem," Putin said.
The Russian leader followed up on his speech with a marathon series of meetings with world leaders including Chinese President Jiang Zemin, German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, Iranian President Mohammad Khatami and Indonesian President Abdurrahman Wahid.
He keeps up his busy diplomatic rounds on Thursday, when he is scheduled to meet Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Barak and British Prime Minister Tony Blair, among other leaders.
The meeting with Jiang gave Russia and China another chance to speak against the "unipolar world" -- their favorite term to describe the alleged U.S. domination of global affairs.
"We stand for the United Nations playing a stronger role in global affairs," Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov told reporters after Putin's meeting with Jiang. "We favor a multipolar world based on respect for international law."
The meeting with Schroeder mostly focused on economic issues, and the two leaders agreed that the chancellor would soon visit Moscow, probably as early as this month.
Schroeder and Putin said they would discuss Germany's bid to become a permanent member of the United Nations' Security Council. Ivanov said after the talks that Moscow was ready to support it.
Putin is on his first trip to the United States as Russian president.
---
Putin Warns of 'Militarization' of Space
NewsMax.com
Thursday September 7, 2000
UPI
http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/9/7/03649
UNITED NATIONS - Russian President Vladimir Putin called on world leaders Wednesday to start working to "prevent the militarization of outer space" at a proposed gathering next year in Moscow.
Putin, on his first-ever visit to the United States, joined a record number of leaders who gave speeches at the opening of the three-day U.N. Millennium Summit. In remarks that largely consisted of praise for the United Nations as a vehicle for enforcing international law, the Russian president briefly but pointedly, said global efforts at disarmament must include space-based weapons systems.
Without specifying the U.S. plan for a system to intercept and deploy, from space, incoming enemy missiles -- President Clinton last week said he was leaving a final decision on deploying the system to his successor -- Putin effectively repeated the opposition of Russian and other nuclear powers to a program they say would give Washington an unfair advantage in the strategic balance of power. Underpinning Russian objections is the fact the U.S. national missile defense, or NMD, would violate the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty between the Soviet Union and the United States.
The 21st century "must become a period of real disarmament," Putin said. "Today, we have already succeeding in creating an efficient mechanism for disarmament: Its foundation includes the 1972 ABM treaty; it includes regimes for the nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and the means for their delivery; and dozens of the most important agreements on the limitation and reduction of different armaments.
"We must reliably block ways for the spread of nuclear weapons," he said, describing the most important effort in that regard as keeping space free of weapons.
"Particularly alarming are plans for the militarization of outer space," Putin said. "In the spring of 2001 we shall be celebrating the 40th anniversary of the first flight of man to outer space. That man was our compatriot (Soviet cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin), and we are suggesting the organization on that date, under the aegis of the United Nations, of an international conference on the prevention of the militarization of outer space. And, if you, distinguished colleagues, agree, then the place for holding that conference could be Moscow."
Reaction to Putin's proposal was muted, at least publicly, as leaders at the U.N. summit spent the day between the official speeches and informal talks on the sidelines.
U.N. spokesman Fred Eckhard issued a statement saying only that, "The United Nations would like to see the establishment of more multilateral norms for preventing an arms race in outer space."
Elsewhere in New York, Putin and Clinton, who earlier shook hands and sat at the same table at the official summit luncheon, discussed a series of bilateral issues, but disarmament was not a major part of their 90-minute talk, a senior U.S. official said.
"NMD (and) START did not figure very much in this discussion," Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott said in a statement released to reporters. "
Putin also met for summit-sideline talks Wednesday with Chinese President Jiang Zemin, and the two leaders again expressed their shared objective for creating a "multipolar world" in which the United States is less dominant, Russian news agencies reported.]
In his speech, Putin also called for a ban on the production of enriched uranium and pure plutonium in nuclear power generation. He said Russia is ready to work with the United Nations' nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, in drafting measures to enforce such a prohibition.
---
A Watch, a Shoe and a Cold War Tale
Los Angeles Times
Thursday, September 7, 2000
By NINA KHRUSHCHEVA
http://www.latimes.com/news/comment/20000907/t000084132.html
"Khrushchev? The one who banged a shoe?" Not again! I wish it had never happened, I thought for the thousandth time when I was asked for the thousandth time if I had seen pictures of the U.N. shoe incident.
I hadn't and didn't want to. For all these years, I was slightly embarrassed by my grandfather's uncivilized behavior, exposed the world over.
In fact, my whole family was, so we never talked about it. Besides, Nikita S. Khrushchev's name was not officially mentioned in the Soviet Union for 20 years after he was dismissed as premier in 1964; as far as the authorities were concerned, the incident had never happened, nor had Khrushchev. But after 40 years, during the U.N. Millennium Summit, I decided it was time to face the truth.
Surprisingly, however, the books I found on international and Soviet politics were inconsistent about the causes and timing of the event. This made me suspicious. Why are the versions so different? Were there pictures? What if it had never happened? What if it was just an anecdote created by public demand, consistent with political needs of the socialist-capitalist division?
A scandalous shoe-banging so conveniently fit the general mode of Khrushchev's behavior. He was well known for interrupting speakers, banging his fists on the table in protest, pounding his feet, even whistling in disagreement. None of this, however, was enough to be transformed into a physical symbol of the Cold War. The shoe, on the other hand, fit right in: Its lowly place had boldly been moved up to the table (tough revolutionaries and manners don't go together) in order to "stamp its foot," signifying the oppressive character of socialism. The sound of a shoe pounding the table was a distinctive Cold War feature, as much as the sound of a gun firing denotes a "hot" war.
The shoe-banging incident conveyed, for the West, a convenient ideological message: Our enemy is ridiculous and uncivilized, therefore he is capable of everything. We too then have to be prepared for anything.
Studying old newspapers as the best record of contemporary events, I felt as if I was in New York that fall of 1960. Fifteen years had elapsed since the end of World War II. Humanity had survived, and East and West were now fighting another war of words and ideologies. Cuba's Fidel Castro was making a big stir. "Hurricane Nikita" used every opportunity to be difficult. President Eisenhower did not try to defuse tensions.
On Oct. 12, 1960, there it was on the front page of all national newspapers: the picture I was looking for so persistently and yet so dreaded seeing. The head of the Philippine delegation to the U.N., Lorenzo Sumulong, was surprised at the Soviet Union's concerns over Western imperialism, since the Soviets had swallowed the whole of Eastern Europe. Khrushchev's reply was angry. He called Sumulong "a jerk, a stooge and a lackey of imperialism," put his shoe on the desk and banged it.
When Khrushchev left the U.S. the next day, he was done with the incident. And when I read about it, I was done with feeling ashamed. In trying unsuccessfully to rehabilitate my grandfather in the world's eyes, I rehabilitated him in my own eyes by understanding his behavior. He felt that the Soviet Union was mistreated by the Western powers: Spy planes flew over Russia; the U.S. imposed an embargo on Cuba; the West rejected the Soviet Union's new disarmament plan.
Capitalists thought of him as a vaudeville character. Fine, he would use the United Nations' stage to show them that he should be taken seriously as a worthy opponent. But he would do it in a manner different from the polite hypocrites of the West with their appropriate words, false niceties and calculated deeds. A provokingly dramatic (or tragi-comic) act of shoe-banging was supposed to separate two worlds, not only in terms of their titles and their politics but also in their means of making diplomacy.
As a good performer, Khrushchev needed a strong, convincing exit from the U.N. and the U.S. In the excitement of fist-banging at the Filipino's words, his watch fell off. Meanwhile his shoes, made of durable Soviet leather, were too new and too tight, and he removed them. He bent down to pick up the watch and saw an empty shoe. These insights I learned from my family. Since the 40-year spell of embarrassment was broken, we were finally ready to talk about those times.
I still think that, had the shoe-banging not happened, it would have been invented. The best anecdote is always the one that truly reflects the morality and character of certain times. The shoe incident became a real symbol of the Cold War, probably the only war in which fear and humor peacefully coexisted.
Today it is old hat--or old shoe. The old U.N. stage has new leaders and new wars and fears. But I find it comforting to know that at times, history gives us a chance to replace a horrifying reality with a funny anecdote.
-
Nina Khrushcheva Is Senior Fellow at the World Policy Institute in New York
---
Russian Navy To Inspect Stricken Sub
Associated Press
September 07, 2000 Filed at 9:21 a.m. ET
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Russia-Nuclear-Submarine.html
MOSCOW (AP) -- The Russian navy will deploy two remote-controlled submersibles to inspect the hull of the nuclear submarine Kursk, which sank last month, killing all 118 on board, officials said Thursday.
The two Rapan submersibles will try to assess the damage to the shattered hull, navy spokesman Igor Dygalo said. The accident that sank the Kursk tore a large hole in its front end.
Close examination of the submarine's hull will likely help determine the cause of the accident, which occurred Aug. 12 during military exercises in the Barents Sea. Russian officials have speculated that the Kursk collided with another vessel, while U.S. officials say they believe a torpedo misfire caused the tragedy.
The unmanned submersibles, which will be operated from the surface with cables, are equipped with special live television cameras, Dygalo said. He did not say when they would be put to work.
Meanwhile, Russian officials were considering sending an observer to watch submarine rescue exercises being conducted by the United States, Italy and Turkey in the Mediterranean Sea, the ITAR-Tass news agency reported Thursday.
Russia was criticized for misinformation about the Kursk accident and delayed rescue attempts. The government eventually accepted offers of help from Britain and Norway because it didn't have the equipment and staff needed to pull off a rescue.
---
Gorbachev Chides Putin on Submarine
Associated Press
September 07, 2000 Filed at 2:51 a.m. ET
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Gorbachev-on-Putin.html
NEW YORK (AP) -- Looking relaxed, Mikhail Gorbachev joked that he could only take one question at a time because he is 69. He then launched into a warts-and-all assessment of Vladimir Putin, criticizing the Russian president's ``mistakes of style.''
Among Putin's missteps, Gorbachev said Wednesday, was waiting four days to comment on the Kursk submarine tragedy and failing to interrupt his vacation until a week after the sea disaster that killed all 118 seamen aboard.
Gorbachev, who himself was criticized for waiting several days before commenting on the explosion at the Chernobyl nuclear power station on April 26, 1986, said Putin's initial response to the Kursk's sinking was ``inadequate.''
``He made a mistake,'' the former Soviet leader said.
Gorbachev, who set the Soviet Union on the road to democracy, also said Putin failed to explain to the people his economic policies and legislative reforms to bolster governors as the dominant leaders in Russia's regions.
The former leader said he had pointed out these missteps to Putin. An aide said Gorbachev met several times with Putin, with one meeting lasting three hours.
Gorbachev said earlier that the loss of the Kursk was part of an ``acute August crisis'' that also included a bombing at Moscow's Pushkin Square that killed 12 people and a fire that roared through Moscow's giant TV tower, leaving three people dead.
``The cause of the crisis was that the authorities showed a lack of understanding of the need for informing the people -- of glasnost,'' said Gorbachev, using the Russian word for ``openness'' that characterized his six years as the last Soviet communist president.
But Gorbachev, who was in New York to launch a Foundation for the Development of Democracy and World Peace, said Putin's errors were ``mostly mistakes of style'' and that the leader was sensitive to criticism and ``recovered quickly.''
``We need to support the president ... despite the mistakes,'' Gorbachev said.
He praised the Russian press for insisting authorities give the facts about the crippled submarine, but bristled at what he said was the Western press's ``lumping'' of his handling of the Chernobyl explosion and Putin's slow response to the loss of the Kursk. ``The coverage in the West smacked of the Cold War,'' he said.
Gorbachev won the Nobel Peace Prize for his policies that effectively ended the Cold War. He resigned on Dec. 25, 1991, when the Soviet Union broke up, and was succeeded by Boris Yeltsin. Yeltsin stepped down at the end of 1999 and was replaced by Putin.
---
Putin Seeks Meeting in Moscow To Ban Weapons in Outer Space
Washington Post
Thursday , September 7, 2000 ; A21
By Steven Mufson Washington Post Staff Writer
http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A25210-2000Sep6.html
NEW YORK, Sept. 6 -- Russian President Vladimir Putin today urged world leaders at the United Nations to hold an international conference in Moscow to ban weapons in outer space, a prohibition that could clash with a possible U.S. national missile defense system.
Though President Clinton recently postponed any decision on the deployment of a national missile defense until the next administration, Putin kept pressure on the United States by saying in his speech that "particularly alarming are plans for the militarization of outer space."
Later in the morning, Putin met with Clinton separately, and Clinton old him that further progress on Russian-sought cuts in strategic nuclear arsenals is linked to making progress on an acceptable missile defense program.
"We the United States are prepared to proceed vigorously with START III, including deeper reductions in strategic weaponry, but that will have to be in parallel with meaningful and productive discussions on strategic defenses," said Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott, who attended the talks.
Before heading into his meeting with Putin, Clinton said his move to postpone a decision on a national missile defense deployment "will create an opportunity for President Putin and the next American president to reach a common position, and I hope they can because it is very important that we continue to work together."
Another State Department official said that while there are differences over national missile defense, Russia and the United States will cooperate on theater missile defense and will make a joint assessment of missile threats from small emerging nuclear powers.
The two leaders signed two agreements on nuclear weapons. The two sides committed themselves for the first time to finishing an accord on advance notification of launches of ballistic missiles and agreed on a number of specific steps for implementing by next year the much-discussed shared facility for early warning of missile launches.
Clinton pressed Putin to make more of an effort to stop Russian transfers of ballistic missile and nuclear weapons technology to Iran. Talbott said Clinton "reiterated . . . the extent to which this issue . . . is an obstacle to our ability to cooperate together in other areas." Russia has said that its policy is to block such transfers, but that some individuals and companies have acted on their own.
The two leaders discussed regional issues. Clinton raised concerns about the fairness of the coming elections in Serbia and the possibility of Serbian efforts to destabilize Montenegro, the other republic in the Yugoslav federation.
And Clinton urged Russia to support the sanctions on Iraq that limit its oil exports and its use of oil revenue.
"President Clinton made a very strong push against the notion that Saddam Hussein should be rewarded in any fashion for his continuing pursuit of [weapons of mass destruction] capacity," Talbott said. Many countries have advocated easing the sanctions on Iraq, saying that the sanctions have caused suffering among ordinary Iraqis without bringing down the Iraqi leader.
Clinton also urged Putin to free Edmund Pope, an American jailed on suspicion that he is a U.S. spy. The United States has denied the allegation and has expressed its concern about Pope's deteriorating medical condition.
The meeting opened with a discussion of the sinking of the Russian submarine Kursk and the deaths of its crew members. The Associated Press reported that Clinton's national security adviser, Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger, provided some information yesterday to his Russian counterpart, Security Council Secretary Sergei Ivanov, during a meeting in New York.
Also, the news agency reported that the Navy's top officer, Adm. Vernon Clark, sent a note to his Russian counterpart providing detailed information based on acoustical data collected by U.S. ships on the day of the incident.
---
Putin urges ban on missile shield
Washington Times
September 7, 2000
By Betsy Pisik
http://208.246.212.80/world/default-200097224723.htm
NEW YORK - Russian President Vladimir Putin, in a pre-emptive strike against U.S. plans for a missile-defense shield, called yesterday for the United Nations to convene a conference against the militarization of outer space.
The beginning of a new millennium "must go down in history as a period of real disarmament," Mr. Putin told some 170 heads of state and government assembled at the United Nations for three days of speeches marking the start of the 21st century.
However, in an apparent reference to the U.S. missile-defense program, he said, "particularly alarming are plans for the militarization of outer space."
Mr. Putin noted that next spring will mark the 40th anniversary of the first flight of man in outer space, the Russian cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin on April 12, 1961.
"We are suggesting the organization on that date under the aegis of the United Nations of an international conference on the prevention of militarization of outer space," Mr. Putin said, offering to host the conference in Moscow.
President Clinton, who as leader of the host nation was the first to address the unprecedented gathering of presidents, prime ministers and kings, announced last week that he would leave the decision whether to go ahead with a missile-defense system to the next president.
Asked about Mr. Putin's proposal before a private meeting with the Russian leader, Mr. Clinton did not indicate whether he would accept or object to the idea of a space conference.
"We have worked together on nuclear issues very closely for virtually the whole time I've been in office, and actually, for quite a long time before that, before I became president," Mr. Clinton said.
"The decision that I made last week on our missile defense will create an opportunity for President Putin and the next American president to reach a common position. And I hope they can, because I think it's very important for the future that we continue to work together."
Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott said later that Washington was prepared to open talks on deeper arms reductions - but only if they proceed "parallel with meaningful and productive discussion on strategic defenses."
A total of 66 world leaders representing countries as varied as Russia, China, Israel and Pakistan addressed the opening day of the summit yesterday, speaking on issues ranging from global to intensely local concerns.
But the air of excitement and good feeling was marred by the news that three U.N. workers, including one American, had been fatally stabbed and burned overnight in West Timor, Indonesia, a horror that was denounced by several of the speakers.
Mr. Clinton turned the tragedy into a pitch for more U.N. support. He told the audience, which included Indonesian President Abdurrahman Wahid, that the bloodshed in Sierra Leone and East Timor illustrated how the international organization "did not have the tools to finish the job."
"I regret we have to start our proceedings on a somber note," said U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, who began the Millennium Summit with a moment of silence.
Mr. Annan pointedly held his powerful audience accountable for improving the lives of their citizens.
"You, ladies and gentlemen, are the leaders to whom the world's peoples have entrusted their destiny. They look to you to protect them from the great dangers of our time, and to ensure that all of them can share in its great achievements.
"In this age when human beings have learned the code of human life, and can transmit their knowledge in seconds from one continent to another, no mother in the world can understand why her child should be left to die of malnutrition or preventable disease," he said.
Cuban leader Fidel Castro made similar arguments in his address yesterday afternoon.
But he focused on the responsibilities of a "hegemonic superpower" and other rich nations to their poor neighbors and former colonies.
"Today, it is their moral obligation to compensate our nations for the harm done to them over the centuries," said Mr. Castro, who also lamented that "nature is being devastated before our eyes" and the "trillions of dollars squandered on luxury goods."
Upon arriving at the podium, the Cuban leader took out a white handkerchief and covered the light warning speakers that they are approaching the limit of time allotted. Mr. Castro, famed for speeches that have run for eight hours or longer, drew laughter from his audience. In the end, he adhered to the seven-minute limit.
British Prime Minister Tony Blair called for nations to make peacekeeping efforts more "robust" and demanded that the Burmese government end its house arrest of opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi.
Chinese President Jiang Zemin told the world it must lose its old-style Cold War mentality but kept notably silent about a planned U.S. missile-shield plan, which Beijing strongly opposes.
South Korean President Kim Dae-jung asked the special U.N. summit to continue backing his bid to unite the two Koreas but made no mention of Pyongyang's decision to boycott the occasion after an airport frisking.
African leaders lamented poverty, the scourge of HIV/AIDS and festering conflicts across Africa, the world's poorest continent, and made impassioned appeals for global help.
President Sam Nujoma of Namibia, who is chairing the summit, and Kenyan leader Daniel arap Moi said Africa deserved international assistance.
"We cannot celebrate our remarkable achievements in science, technology and other areas of human endeavor while millions of our fellow human beings continue to live in a world of deprivation and even starvation," Mr. Nujoma said.
Rwandan President Paul Kagame dismissed the usual excuses for failure to prevent conflict by saying that nations must recognize that every conflict is unique.
As leader of the host country, the president of the United States is always given the first speaking slot at formal U.N. assemblies. After that, positions are awarded by lottery.
This can create apparent incongruities. For example, Mr. Clinton was followed by Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo, the president of Equatorial Guinea.
Status is also important, with heads of state trumping mere foreign ministers for morning podium time.
But horse trading abounds, as when Nicaragua quietly traded its coveted slot yesterday morning to Iranian President Mohammed Khatami. And Iraq postponed Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz's address until today so that Chinese President Jiang Zemin could speak on the first day, within moments of Mr. Clinton.
-------- u.s. nuc facilities
Better accounting of U.S. weapons program needed, officials say
CNN
September 7, 2000
http://www.cnn.com/2000/US/09/07/nuclear.workers.ap/index.html
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Energy Department officials said Wednesday that there is a need to better catalog the use of civilian industrial sites in the production of America's nuclear arsenal during the Cold War.
Officials, however, did cite documents showing that the use of private companies in the weapons program had been acknowledged and been the subject of government reviews as early as the 1970s.
A report on Wednesday in USA Today said that voluminous government records filed away for decades document how the government relied on hundreds of private companies during the 1940s and 1950s to handle dangerous materials used to make nuclear weapons, exposing thousands of workers to potential health risks.
While some of the most dramatic cases involving private companies had been reported, USA Today said it has documented for the first time the scope of the programs.
Energy Secretary Bill Richardson said in a statement that the department "has been candid and honest with our current and former workers" about health risks posed by past work on weapons programs. He said this "was especially the case" last year when he personally apologized to Cold War workers put at risk as part of their defense work at certain government nuclear weapons production facilities.
Richardson wants to create a central, computerized database of all facilities -- including private plants and businesses -- that were involved in weapons work.
Officials said it was acknowledged as early as the 1970s that these sites should be evaluated to determine the risks posed to workers and the environment, and that some of these sites have been part of the department's weapons complex cleanup program. One report in 1980 summarized the scope of the review involving 74 sites, according to the department.
In a series of three stories beginning on Wednesday, USA Today reported on material gleaned from a review of 100,000 pages of government records, many of which it said were only recently declassified.
Reporters found the government relied on a vast network of private plants, mills and shops to build the early U.S. nuclear arsenal, with grave health and environmental consequences for thousands of workers and dozens of communities.
Among the major findings:
• The government hired about 300 private companies during World War II to process and produce material used in nuclear weapons production, with at least a third of them handling large amounts of radioactive and toxic material even if they did not have the proper equipment or knowledge to protect workers.
• The government regularly documented worker health risks at many private facilities, producing highly classified reports that detailed radiation exposure rates hundreds of times above safety standards.
• Dozens of private companies contaminated the surrounding air, soil and water with toxic and radioactive waste.
• Both the government and private executives at the companies hid the health and environmental problems.
---
Few health studies targeted private sites
USA Today
09/07/00
By Peter Eisler USA TODAY
http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/20000907/2620251s.htm
Academics and federal scientists have done dozens of studies on illnesses and deaths among workers employed at federal weapons plants.
But there has been virtually no research on people who had often-similar jobs at commercial facilities that the government secretly hired to do weapons work in the years before the government plants were built.
Some of the studies of federal workers found significant increases in the rates of cancer, kidney disease and pulmonary problems linked to radioactive and toxic exposures.
But USA TODAY found only two health studies that focused directly on workers at private contracting sites and one that touched on them tangentially.
A rundown:
* A study of workers at Mallinckrodt Chemical Works, begun after a 1987 series in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch detailed the company's role in early nuclear weapons production, concluded in 1998 that workers had a 10% higher death rate from all types of cancer than the general population.
The rate for lymphatic, esophageal and rectal cancers, however, was 40% above the norm. The study also found a 218% higher rate of kidney illnesses among Mallinckrodt workers.
* A 1987 study of workers at Linde Air Products in Tonawanda, N.Y., one of the weapons program's big uranium refining operations in the '40s, found that workers died of cancer at a rate 18% higher than the general population.
The study, done in response to legal pressure from the union representing Linde employees, also found that workers in the uranium operation suffered respiratory illnesses at rates up to 200% above the U.S. average.
* A study of workers at the government's Mound polonium plant near Dayton, Ohio, noted that workers at Monsanto's Dayton contracting operation in the years before the federal plant was built suffered significant increases in death rates from lung, rectal and other cancers. The study also found that death rates from respiratory diseases were notably higher than the national average.
In 1983, researchers hired by the government to do the Linde study proposed that they also look at workers employed at other private contracting sites, including Harshaw in Cleveland and ElectroMet in Niagara Falls, N.Y. But the proposal was rejected because it would be difficult -- and expensive -- to track all the workers.
---
Entergy Buying Nuke Specialist
Associated Press
September 07, 2000
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/business/AP-Entergy-TLG-Services.html
NEW ORLEANS (AP) -- Entergy Corp. agreed Thursday to buy TLG Services Inc., which specializes in the decommissioning of nuclear power plants, for an undisclosed price.
Entergy said the purchase of the Bridgewater, Conn.-based company would reduce the risk of taking apart its existing nuclear plants and plants it may acquire in the future after the active life of the plants.
Already the owner of five nuclear power reactors at four sites in Louisiana, Mississippi and Arkansas, New Orleans-based Entergy bought the Pilgrim Station nuclear plant at Plymouth, Mass. in 1999. The company also has pending purchases of the Indian Point 3 plant and the FitzPatrick plant from the New York Power Authority.
Entergy also is managing the decommissioning of two nuclear power plants: Maine Yankee at Wiscasset, Maine, and the Millstone Unit I at Waterford, Conn.
Founded in 1982, TLG has prepared engineering and cost studies for the decommissioning of 128 nuclear power units and about 200 fossil-fueled units.
TLG's president, Thomas LaGuardia, will remain as president after the company becomes an Entergy operating unit, the companies said.
If Entergy's pending merger with FPL Group Inc. is approved, the new company will be the largest utility in terms of customers, surpassing Columbus, Ohio-based American Electric Power Co., which has 4.8 million customers. Entergy had 1999 sales of $8.8 billion.
Shares of Entergy were up 43.7 cents to close at $33.63 on the New York Stock Exchange
----
US nuclear workers may have had Soviet-level risks
By Deborah Zabarenko,
Reuters, 14:32
09-07-00
From: Ndunlks@aol.com
WASHINGTON, Sept 7 (Reuters) - American nuclear weapons workers may have been exposed to as much potentially deadly radiation as their Soviet counterparts in the early Cold War, and without knowing the risks they ran, a new report said on Thursday.
Some of the U.S. workers were exposed to far higher levels of radioactivity in the 1940s and 1950s than prevailing standards prescribed -- comparable to tens of thousands of times the radiation from a dental X-ray -- and rather than being warned of the risk, were deceived about it, said the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, an environmental watchdog group.
``There is incontrovertible evidence that the (U.S.) government, putting production first, failed to adequately protect the workers or properly inform them,'' the institute's president, Arjun Makhijani, said at a news conference. ``In fact, there's evidence that they deliberately misled them.''
That exposure meant an increased risk of potentially lethal cancer and kidney damage, the institute said in a report released at the news conference.
In one case, at the Harshaw Chemical Co. in Cleveland, workers were told there was ``no unusual hazard'' to them, even as measurements showed radiation in the plant at up to 200 times the ``most popular figure'' of what could be tolerated, the report said.
At the Electro-Metallurgical plant in Niagara Falls, New York, workers routinely worked in areas with more than 500 times the allowable limit of radioactivity in the air, Makhijani said.
The institute was hired by USAToday newspaper to examine data about three of the approximately 150 privately owned plants that processed radioactive and hazardous materials to produce U.S. nuclear weapons.
Makhijani declined to estimate how many workers might have been affected, but USAToday put the number in the thousands.
WORSE THAN SOVIET UNION?
``Until we performed these calculations, all the work that I had done indicated that working conditions in the Soviet Union in the 1940s and 1950s were far worse than in the United States,'' Makhijani told reporters. ``But the highest doses we found were so huge that this assumption needs to be questioned.''
Without data from that time in the Soviet Union's history, Makhijani made no conclusive statements, but said that was a matter for new investigation by Russia and the United States.
Whatever the comparison with the Soviet risks, working conditions in the plants Makhijani's group studied were ``appalling,'' he said.
``Data from all three factories show that the radiation protection standards of the time were routinely violated,'' he said.
Representative Nick Lampson, a Texas Democrat, called for hearings into the so-called ``forgotten'' nuclear weapons plants, and said he planned to introduce legislation this week to remedy the situation.
``It is atrocious that we would allow -- even if it is for national security -- our own citizens to become in greater jeopardy in order to protect ourselves, particularly when we have the knowledge of ... what the dangers were,'' Lampson said after the news conference.
In a letter to Energy Secretary Bill Richardson, Lampson called for immediate public disclosure of information on the nuclear weapons history of the ``forgotten'' sites and a re-examination of the surrounding areas for possible contamination.
The third plant investigated by the institute was the Simonds Saw and Steel Co. in Lockport, New York.
-------- new mexico
Wen Ho Lee Release to Get Hearing
NewsMax.com
Thursday September 7, 2000
UPI
http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/9/7/04054
ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. - The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will hold a closed-door hearing Monday on a judge's decision to release former Los Alamos scientist Wen Ho Lee from jail until his November trial on charges of mishandling nuclear weapons secrets.
The Denver-based court announced late Wednesday that a three-judge panel would hear the government's appeal of U.S. District Judge James Parker's decision to release the 60-year-old scientist on $1 million bail and house arrest until his Nov. 6 trial.
The 10 a.m. hearing will be closed because of the national security issues involved, the court said.
Lee, a naturalized citizen from Taiwan, was about to be released on bail last Friday when two judges of the Denver appeals court halted the release. The delay was sought by the government which wanted time for an appeal of Parker's decision.
In a filing with the appeals court Tuesday, Lee's defense team argued that the so-called classified nuclear weapons information downloaded by Lee at the Los Alamos National Laboratory could be sent through the U.S. mail because it poses no danger to national security.
"Surely it does not serve the public interest to maintain an imprisonment (of Lee) that erodes the basic sense of fairness that undergirds the Constitution," the lawyers stated. "Nor does the public interest lie in jailing and shackling a 60-year-old scientist who has had no previous involvement with the criminal justice system."
Lee's lawyers also argued that the government used an FBI agent's false testimony to keep Lee in jail for the past nine months and overstated the importance of the data that the scientist downloaded from the Los Alamos computer files.
Parker has also filed a 17-page memorandum with the Denver court explaining why he decided to release Lee from jail after rejecting his requests for bail twice before.
Parker said Lee did not receive a fair hearing after his initial arrest Dec. 19, 1999, and while he still remains "seriously concerned" about some of Lee's actions, the government has never offered "direct evidence" that he intended to harm the United States.
Lee allegedly downloaded classified nuclear weapons data onto an unsecured computer network open to the Internet and onto 10 portable tapes from 1993 to 1997. The FBI says seven of those files are still missing, but his lawyers contend they were destroyed.
Lee is not charged with espionage, but if he is convicted on the federal charges he could face life in prison.
---
Wen Ho Lee
Los Angeles Times
Thursday, September 7, 2000
http://www.latimes.com/news/comment/20000907/t000084128.html
Re "Appeals Court Delays Release of Wen Ho Lee," Sept. 2: The actions of the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals and the government in the Wen Ho Lee case smack of the worst sort of Star Chamber proceedings. Indeed, if a totalitarian state had taken these actions, the United States would have been the first to accuse it of the darkest motivations.
At the very least, the appeals court should have allowed the lower court proceedings to take place and, in a proper time and setting, considered arguments from both sides in open court. This action merely continues what appears to be collusion between the law enforcement arm of the government and the courts in denying Lee his constitutional protections.
The Times, and particularly columnist Robert Scheer, should be commended for the coverage given this case. JAMES LOONEY Santa Ana
---
Court to Consider Bail for Scientist In Secrets Case
New York Times
September 07, 2000
By JAMES STERNGOLD
http://www.nytimes.com/2000/09/07/national/07LEE.html
LOS ANGELES, Sept. 6 - An appeals court announced today that it would hold a hearing on Monday on whether Wen Ho Lee, the former Los Alamos scientist accused of mishandling nuclear weapons secrets, could be released from prison on bail pending trial.
The announcement comes after prosecutors last week persuaded the court to block a federal judge's decision granting Dr. Lee bail after more than eight months in prison.
The three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, in Denver, ordered the hearing closed to the public because it may involve the discussion of classified material.
The court has told the lawyers for the two sides that they should be prepared to make 15-minute presentations. It was unclear when the judges might then render a decision.
Dr. Lee was arrested and indicted last December on charges that he illegally downloaded a complete library of nuclear secrets to portable computer tapes with the intent of harming the United States. James A. Parker, a federal judge in Albuquerque, where the case is being heard, ruled at that time that he could not be released on bail because of government charges that he posed a grave threat to national security.
But at a hearing last month, an F.B.I. agent admitted that he had provided misleading testimony about Dr. Lee in December, and several experts disputed government assertions that the information Dr. Lee downloaded amounted to the "crown jewels" of the nuclear program. Judge Parker ordered Dr. Lee released to a highly restrictive form of home detention on $1 million bail. Prosecutors appealed and sought a stay of the bail decision until the appeal was heard.
The appeals court granted the government a temporary stay on Friday. If the appeals court lifts that stay, Dr. Lee would be released to home detention while the appeal of the bail order worked its way through the legal process, which can take months. Dr. Lee's trial is scheduled to begin on Nov. 6.
-------- new york
Nuclear Power Safety
New York Times
September 07, 2000
http://www.nytimes.com/2000/09/07/opinion/L07NUC.html
To the Editor:
The New York State Public Service Commission, the agency charged with overseeing the restructuring of New York's electric industry, should not rely on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to monitor nuclear safety since that commission was unable to ensure the safe operation of the Indian Point 2 nuclear plant (news article, Sept. 1).
Gov. George E. Pataki should require all relevant state agencies to complete a full public review of nuclear safety before exposing nuclear power to market competition or considering the sale of any of New York's six commercial nuclear power plants.
Just as we regret the hasty construction of nuclear power plants, we will regret hasty electric utility deregulation. New York needs to scrutinize what role, if any, nuclear power should have in the new competitive energy marketplace.
KYLE RABIN
Albany, Sept. 1, 2000
The writer is nuclear energy project director, Environmental Advocates.
-------- us nuc politics
SURVEY OF PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES EXPOSES DIFFERENCES ON NUCLEAR WEAPONS
Bush and Gore Fail to Answer Morality Question
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: Adam Eidinger or Howard Hallman - mupj@igc.org
September 7, 2000
202-986-6186 or 301-896-0013
WASHINGTON, DC On behalf of 48 religious leaders from a cross-section of faith groups, Catholic Bishop Thomas Gumbleton and United Methodist Bishop C. Dale White have released a new ten question survey of presidential candidates on nuclear weapons and disarmament. Replies from George W. Bush, Al Gore, and Ralph Nader reveal policy differences on several issues. Only Nader answered all ten questions of the survey. Neither Reform Party candidate responded. The complete survey results are available online at http://www.umc-gbcs.org/whatsnew.htm .
During a news conference today, the religious leaders expressed concern that neither George W. Bush nor Al Gore answered a question on the morality of possession, threatened use, and actual use of nuclear weapons. "It's disappointing when faith and values are commonly used to describe the guiding philosophy of the major party candidates and neither Bush nor Gore will address the question of the morality of nuclear weapons," said Howard Hallman, coordinator of the survey and chair of Methodists United for Peace with Justice. Nader responded by saying, "Nuclear weapons have no moral or practical use for any purpose except as a deterrent to nuclear threats." Calling the U.S. refusal to adopt a no-first-use policy "political immorality", Nader said that if elected president, the "U.S. will never be the first to use a nuclear weapon in any conflict."
Another question left unanswered by Bush and Gore was how they plan to carry out the obligation under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) to achieve nuclear disarmament. A review of the treaty on its 30th anniversary at the United Nations last May produced the strongest commitment ever to the total elimination of nuclear weapons. Yet the Clinton/Gore Administration has not laid out a plan to achieve this goal. As a presidential campaigner, Vice President Gore has not offered a proposal, nor has Governor Bush. Nader, though, presented a six point plan that over time would meet the goals of the NPT.
Other questions exposed sharp disagreements. Both Gore and Nader favor Senate ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) as an important step to stopping the spread of nuclear weapons. Bush opposes ratification, saying that the treaty "offers only words and false hopes and high intentions."
On the possibility of taking nuclear weapons off hair-trigger alert, Bush and Nader agree that the U.S. should commence de-alerting its nuclear stockpile. Gore emphasized that the U.S. and Russia at this time do not have nuclear weapons targeted at one another. But on the possibility of separating warheads from delivery vehicles, Gore expressed a concern for what might happen in a period of crisis if either side tried to reunite warheads with their delivery systems.
On the START III negotiations the survey reveals a strong commitment by all three candidates to further reductions of the U.S. strategic arsenal, but only Nader specifically said he would be willing to reduce the number of nuclear weapons below the Russian proposed limit of 1,000 warheads For a copy of the survey results please contact Adam Eidinger at 202-986-6186 or Howard Hallman at 301-896-0013.
###
Presidential Candidates Views on Nuclear Disarmament Issues Responses of George W. Bush, Albert Gore, Jr., and Ralph Nader to Ten Questions Posed by 48 Religious Leaders
On August 18, 2000 forty-eight religious leaders from a cross-section of faith groups and geographic areas wrote to the presidential candidates of the Democratic, Green, Reform, and Republican parties, asking a series of questions on nuclear disarmament issues. From the responses of the candidates and their campaign staffs we obtained the views of Governor George W. Bush (Republican), Vice President Albert Gore, Jr. (Democratic), and Mr. Ralph Nader (Green). The two Reform Party candidates declined to respond. The questions and the candidates' answers (and lack of answers) are presented below.
Religious Leaders' Perspective
We look forward to a wholesome debate among the presidential candidates on significant issues that are of great importance to the American people. Among these issues one of the most important is the future of the world's nuclear arsenal. Our own perspective is that the time has come for the United States to provide creative leadership to achieve the global elimination of nuclear weapons
For decades numerous religious denominations, interfaith organizations, and religious leaders have questioned the morality of nuclear weapons and have called for their elimination.
The Sixth Assembly of the World Council of Churches in 1983 stated: "We believe that that the time has come when the churches must unequivocally declare that the production and deployment as well as the use of nuclear weapons are a crime against humanity and that such activities must be condemned on ethical and theological grounds. Furthermore, we appeal for the institution of a universal covenant to this effect so that nuclear weapons and warfare are delegitimized and condemned as violations of international law."
Speaking for the Holy See, Archbishop Renato Martino in October 1997 told the First Committee of the United Nations General Assembly: "Nuclear weapons are incompatible with the peace we seek for the 21st century. They cannot be justified. They deserve condemnation.... The world must move to the abolition of nuclear weapons through a universal, non-discriminatory ban with intensive inspection by a universal authority."
In a message on January 1, 2000 His Holiness the Dalai Lama called for a step-by-step approach to external disarmament. He stated, "We must first work on the total abolishment of nuclear weapons and gradually work up to total demilitarization throughout the world."
In the United States numerous denominations have called for the elimination of nuclear weapons. Recently 21 heads of communion and other religious leaders joined with 18 retired generals and admirals to point out that "the long-term reliance of nuclear weapons in the arsenals of the nuclear powers, and the ever-present danger of their acquisition by others, is morally untenable and militarily unjustifiable. They constitute a threat to the security of our nation, a peril to world peace, a danger to the whole human family." Therefore, they called for "action leading to the international prohibition of these weapons." Questions to the Candidates and Their Replies
(1) What are your views on the morality of possession, threatened use, and actual use of nuclear weapons? To what extent do you agree or disagree with the broad consensus that has emerged within the faith community on the inherent immorality of nuclear weapons?
Governor Bush: Views unknown.
Vice President Gore: Views unknown.
Mr. Nader: "Nuclear weapons have no moral or practical use for any purpose except as a deterrent to nuclear threats. The U.S. government's refusal to adopt a no-first-use policy is a striking example of political immorality. If elected President, I would immediately adopt a policy that the US will never be the first to use a nuclear weapon in any conflict, and would urge other nuclear powers to do the same.
"More broadly, as the first country to use nuclear weapons, and the perennial leader in new technologies for these horrifying weapons of mass destruction, the United States has a moral obligation to take the lead in working for their elimination. The 1968 Non-Proliferation Treaty gives us a legal obligation to work for elimination, as well. Gen. George Lee Butler, the retired former commander of both the Strategic Air Command and the U.S. Strategic Command has been eloquent in support of abolition."
(2) We are encouraged that the United States has joined with Russia, United Kingdom, France, and China in making a commitment to "an unequivocal undertaking to accomplish the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals." This occurred in the Final Document of the 2000 Review Conference of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). This commitment carries forward the obligation for good faith negotiations on nuclear disarmament as expressed in Article VI of the NPT, an agreement signed by the United States in July 1968 and ratified by the U.S. Senate in March 1969. If elected president, what specifically will you do during your four-year term to fulfill this commitment?
Governor Bush: Views unknown.
Vice President Gore: Views unknown.
Mr. Nader: "I would:
? Take all nuclear missiles off 'hair-trigger' high-alert status, and urge the Russian President to do the same. The greatest danger of a global nuclear disaster is an accidental launch. De-alerting will not undermine the United States' ability to deter a nuclear strike. There are over 3,000 nuclear warheads on American submarines. Enough are at sea and on alert at any time to assure sufficient retaliation capacity even after a massive first strike.
? Adopt a no-first-use policy, and urge other nuclear powers to do the same.
? Stop nuclear testing, including sub-critical and virtual testing. I would make the ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) one of my top legislative priorities.
? Prohibit the deployment of U.S. nuclear weapons outside the United States.
? Push for the ratification of the START II treaty, which Russia has already ratified, work with Congress and the Joint Chiefs of Staff to further reduce the US nuclear arsenal to around 1500 warheads as expeditiously as possible, and begin negotiating a START III agreement that will bring missile levels below 1,000.
? Begin talks with all nuclear nations to develop a framework and a final date for the abolition of nuclear weapons."
(3) For instance, do you favor multilateral negotiations to achieve a global nuclear weapons convention that provides for total elimination of nuclear weapons within a timebound framework with effective verification and enforcement?
Governor Bush: Views unknown.
Vice President Gore: Views unknown.
Mr. Nader: "Yes. Working toward total elimination is the only moral and rational course. The United States, as the sole superpower, has the responsibility to take the lead in such negotiations."
(4) There are interim steps to take in the quest for the elimination of nuclear weapons. For example, the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) provides a means of controlling the spread of nuclear weapons. If elected president, will you seek ratification of the CTBT by the United States Senate?
Governor Bush: "Our nation should continue its moratorium on testing. But in the hard work of halting proliferation, the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty is not the answer. The CTBT does not stop proliferation, especially to renegade regimes. It is not verifiable. It is not enforceable. And it would stop us from ensuring the safety and reliability of our nation's deterrent, should the need arise. On these crucial matters, it offers only words and false hopes and high intentions with no guarantees whatever. We can fight the spread of nuclear weapons, but we cannot wish them away with unwise treaties."
Vice President Gore: "I support ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, and I will continue to fight for its ratification. Because of the Treaty's importance to the long-term national security interests of our country, I intend to take this issue to the American people during my campaign for the Presidency, and if elected, my first act as President will be to put the Treaty back before the Senate with a demand from the American people for its ratification."
Mr. Nader: "Nuclear testing poses a grave threat to the environment and public health, and increases the danger of nuclear war by promoting the development of new nuclear-weapons technology. I would both immediately halt all U.S. nuclear test explosions, including sub-critical and virtual testing, and make the ratification of the CTBT a high priority."
(5) Many experts have pointed out the inherent danger of keeping U.S. and Russian strategic nuclear weapons on hair-trigger alert. If elected president, will you embark upon a de-alerting initiative to take strategic weapons off hair-trigger alert? If so, please provide specifics.
Governor Bush: "The United States should remove as many weapons as possible from high-alert, hair-trigger status -- another unnecessary vestige of Cold War confrontation. Preparation for quick launch -- within minutes after warning or an attack -- was the rule during the era of superpower rivalry. But today, for two nations at peace, keeping so many on high alert may create unacceptable risks of accidental or unauthorized launch. So, as president, I will ask for an assessment of what we can safely do to lower the alert status of our forces."
Vice President Gore: In another questionnaire when asked about Admiral Stansfield Turner's proposal that the U.S. take the initiative to create a reciprocal reduction in nuclear alert status by separating warheads from delivery systems and moving the components hundreds of miles away to a storage sites monitored by verification teams, Vice President Gore responded as follows: "Right now, U.S. nuclear warheads are not targeted against Russian targets, and the Russians are similarly "de-targeted." I have concerns about Admiral Turner's ideas because of the way in which they might work out in a period of crisis if either side tried to reunite warheads with their delivery systems. This issue is one that requires further detailed study."
Mr. Nader: "Due to Russia's collapsing military infrastructure, the danger of an accidental nuclear launch is greater now than it was at any time during the Cold War. I would immediately take all U.S. nuclear missiles off of 'hair-trigger' high-alert status, and strongly urge President Putin to do the same. Again, this will not undermine the country's ability to effectively deter a nuclear strike. Taking nuclear weapons off high-alert status is the single most important step we could take towards preventing a nuclear disaster."
(6) During the past fifteen years progress has been made in reduction of nuclear weapons through treaties between the United States and the Soviet Union, then Russia. Two treaties were negotiated under President Ronald Reagan: the Intermediate Nuclear Force (INF) Treaty to eliminate an entire class of nuclear weapons and the first Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START I). Another treaty, START II, was negotiated under President George Bush. Russian President Vladimir Putin has indicated a willingness to negotiate a START III agreement to reduce the number of deployed strategic warheads to 1,000 on each side. However, we understand that the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff insist upon keeping 2,500 warheads in active service because of the targeting requirements of current U.S. policy. If elected president, will you change U.S. policy so that deeper bilateral cuts in strategic weapons can occur? Will you negotiate a START III agreement with Russia? What level of strategic warheads will you seek?
Governor Bush: "America should rethink the requirements for nuclear deterrence in a new security environment. The premises of Cold War nuclear targeting should no longer dictate the size of our arsenal. As president, I will ask the Secretary of Defense to conduct an assessment of our nuclear force posture and determine how best to meet our security needs. While the exact number of weapons can come only from such an assessment, I will pursue the lowest possible number consistent with national security. It should be possible to reduce the number of American nuclear weapons significantly further than what has already been agreed to under START II, without compromising our security in any way. We should not keep weapons that our military planners do not need. These unneeded weapons are the expensive relics of dead conflicts. And they do nothing to make us more secure."
Vice President Gore: "I believe in the value of nuclear deterrence for the foreseeable future, but I do not think that we need incremental increases in our nuclear arsenal. In fact, I am interested in seeing our nuclear arsenal reduced substantially through arms control. This Administration is working on the entry into force of the START II Treaty, negotiation of a START III Treaty providing for even deeper reduction in weapons pointed at the United States, and an agreement with Russia to adjust the ABM Treaty to make it possible to defend ourselves against rogue states."
Mr. Nader: "I would push for immediate ratification of START II, and immediately begin negotiations of a START III agreement that will bring missile levels below 1,000. Once we have achieved this level of disarmament we would be in a position to begin talks with all nuclear nations for the negotiation of deeper cuts and the eventual abolition of nuclear weapons.
"The Center for Defense Information reports that the Pentagon's remarkably bloated list of targets for nuclear warheads has actually grown since the end of the Cold War. I would provide the presidential leadership that has been lacking to reduce the target list, which is a major technical barrier to the negotiation of a START III agreement."
(7) Complementary to nuclear arms reduction through treaties is the undertaking of reciprocal initiatives through executive action. This was the approach used by President Bush in 1991 when he took unilateral action to deactivate a large number of U.S. strategic weapons and to withdraw most U.S. tactical nuclear weapons stationed outside the United States. A few weeks later Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev reciprocated with similar actions. Would you as president use similar reciprocal initiatives to achieve such objectives as de-alerting and significant reductions in the nuclear arsenal? If so, please provide specifics.
Governor Bush: "These changes to our forces should not require years and years of detailed arms control negotiation. There is a precedent that proves the power of leadership. In 1991, the United States invited the Soviet Union to join it in removing tactical nuclear weapons from the arsenal. Hugh reductions were achieved in a matter of months, making the world much safer, more quickly. Similarly, in the area of strategic nuclear weapons, we should invite the Russian government to accept the new vision I have outlined, and act on it. But the United States should be prepared to lead by example, because it is in our best interest and the best interest of the world."
Vice President Gore: Views unknown.
Mr. Nader: "I would use reciprocal initiatives in parallel with treaty negotiation. In particular, as discussed earlier, I would act immediately to take all nuclear weapons off of high alert, and work to reduce the number of deployed, strategic warheads to 1500. Both of these could safely be done unilaterally, with strong urging that Russia follow suit"
(8) We note that numerous retired generals, admirals, and national security civilian officials have indicated that nuclear weapons have no war-fighting utility. We also know that Presidents Truman and Eisenhower chose not to use nuclear weapons in the Korean War and that Presidents Johnson and Nixon chose not to use nuclear weapons in the Vietnam War. Do you see any utility for nuclear weapons in war? If so, please tell us the categories of targets you as commander-in-chief would consider legitimate to strike with nuclear weapons.
Governor Bush: "Deterrence remains the first line of defense against nuclear attack." Governor Bush's views are unknown on war-fighting utility of nuclear weapons or specific targeting.
Vice President Gore: "America must maintain its nuclear strength, with adequate offensive forces to ensure deterrence." Vice President Gore's views are unknown on war-fighting utility of nuclear weapons or specific targeting.
Mr. Nader: "The only practical use of nuclear weapons is as a deterrent to nuclear threats from other countries. They should not be used for any other purpose whatsoever."
(9) If your reply indicates that nuclear weapons are useful only to deter other nuclear weapons, would not the wisest and safest course of action be to achieve the universal elimination of nuclear weapons through such measures as previously identified?
Governor Bush: No comment. Vice President Gore: No comment.
Mr. Nader: "I agree completely. As I have said above, we should set complete elimination of nuclear weapons as a long-term goal, and immediately begin taking concrete steps to de-alert, deactivate and eliminate nuclear weapons."
(10) Are there other initiatives you plan to undertake for the elimination of nuclear weapons?
Governor Bush: "If elected President, one of my highest foreign policy priorities will be to check the contagious spread of weapons of mass destruction, and the means to deliver them. We must work to constrict the supply of nuclear materials and the means to deliver them by making this a priority with Russia and China. Our nation must cut off the demand for nuclear weapons by addressing the security concerns of those who renounce these weapons. And our nation must diminish the evil attraction of th