NUCLEAR
U.S. intelligence report predicts threats to 2015
Growing risk seen of attack on U.S.
Canada hears Putin's criticism of U.S. missile defense, but not persuaded
Putin in Canada to build image
U.S. plan risky, Putin tells Canada
Pentagon To Look Into Asian Military
Study Looks at Dangers Shaping World of 2015
2015 Outlook: Enough Food, Scarce Water, Porous Borders
Asia Wary of Bush Missile Proposal
Cuba and Russia Abandon Nuclear Plant, an Unfinished Vestige of the Soviet Era
Russian, Canadian Leaders Get Down to Formal Talks
Putin, Chretien discuss nuclear arms
Russia's President Visits Canada
Putin meets with Canadian leader
White House Releases Highlights of U.S.-EU Cooperation
China: Buying a Better Army
China Eager to Work With Bush
Clinton to decide whether he'll visit North Korea
Blast of cold Russian air awaits Bush team
Culture of Cancer
Computer age dawned in a big, bulky way
DOT Paves Way for Atomic Waste/Material in Everyday Items
Rare Isotope Accelerator
Los Alamos Flunks a Security Test
States
First canister moved to dry storage at Hanford
Powell insists defence rests on 'Star Wars'
Bush and Powell proclaim 'uniquely American internationalism'
Bush positions on top campaign issues
Powell commits US to missile shield
A Higher Threshold for U.S. Intervention Means Adjustments Abroad
A Dual Path in Diplomacy
Clinton Considers N. Korea Visit
Woman in the News: Condoleezza Rice
Bush seen likely to be tough on China
Genetics Firm Buys Mammoth IBM Supercomputer
MILITARY
Voters set trends in approach to drugs
Georgia
Beyond acronyms Philip Gold
Consider Putin's priorities
U.N. Recalls Staff From Afghanistan
Deadline looming as Clinton wavers on world court treaty
World applauds Powell, Rice selections
Virginia
Earthquake study center needs home
Rice well-suited for Bush inner circle
Inside the Beltway
OTHER
Is wind power a cheaper option than solar?
Wis. boxcar fire contained
EPA fines United Airlines $68,695
NEWS OF OTHER LIFE FORMS
Mr. Bush's Environmental Choices
A Crucial Decision for the Meadowlands
Help the Everglades
States
Panel wants tighter biotech control
Panel Backs Stronger Rules for Some Food
Engineered Plants
France: Parliament stands up to IMF/WB
Metro Briefing
Indiana
Former prisoner Pope returns home
An American in Russia
Pardoned Pope heads home from Russia
Clemency for Pollard
Terrorists said major U.S. threat
Terrorists seen as threat in coming years
ACTIVISTS
Common Sense Security
ZAP ACTION - White House 11:00 AM Today
Millions for democracy
Polish nurses rally for more pay
MANHATTAN: POE HOUSE ARREST
-------- NUCLEAR
U.S. intelligence report predicts threats to 2015
CNN
December 18, 2000 Web posted at: 7:46 p.m. EST (0046 GMT)
http://www.cnn.com/2000/US/12/18/security.threats.reut/index.html
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- As President-elect George W. Bush prepares to take office, a new intelligence report Monday predicted more sophisticated "terrorist" tactics and a growing threat of missile attack in the next 15 years.
"Between now and 2015 terrorist tactics will become increasingly sophisticated and designed to achieve mass casualties," said the unclassified report, "Global Trends 2015: A Dialogue About the Future With Nongovernment Experts."
"We expect the trend toward greater lethality in terrorist attacks to continue," the report said.
The intelligence community and outside experts teamed up to produce the report which said the threat of "terrorism" sponsored by hostile countries was likely to diminish over 15 years, while the threat from independent operators was likely to increase.
"The trend away from state-supported political terrorism and toward more diverse, free-wheeling, transnational networks -- enabled by information technology -- will continue," the report said.
"Some of the states that actively sponsor terrorism or terrorist groups today may decrease or even cease their support by 2015 as a result of regime changes," the report said.
State-sponsored terrorism was expected to decline partly because Iran, North Korea and Cuba had a significant chance for regime changes by 2015, John Gannon, chairman of the National Intelligence Council which compiled the report, said.
Decisions to deal with the national security environment that may emerge in 15 years would have to be made now by the new administration, he told Reuters in a telephone interview.
Most immediate threat
"The most immediate threat is the weapons of mass destruction," Gannon said, referring to chemical or biological weapons. "There's a growing threat from the small adversary or the non-state actor or the terrorist group in terms of weapons of mass destruction capability," he said.
The potential for "terrorist" groups to use chemical, biological or radiological weapons increases, Gannon said.
"In the information environment we're in they're going to have greater access to general information, to specific technologies on how to build bombs, to finance across borders ... and they're going to be able to cover up what they do more efficiently in this kind of environment," he said.
"They are probably more likely to actually use these weapons than organized states," he added.
The United States was shaken by the October 12 attack on the USS Cole in Yemen in which a small boat exploded alongside the warship, killing 17 U.S. sailors.
U.S. investigators have been trying to determine whether the attack had ties to Saudi-exile Osama bin Laden, whom the United States has blamed for allegedly masterminding the bombing of two U.S. embassies in East Africa in 1998.
"Middle East and Southwest Asian-based terrorists are the most likely to threaten the United States," the report said.
Predicts Palestinian state
The report predicted establishment of a Palestinian state by 2015 and that Israel would have attained "a cold peace" with its neighbors with limited social, economic and cultural ties.
Changing military capabilities would be among the key factors that would determine the risk of war, it said.
In South Asia, for example, "that risk will remain fairly high over the next 15 years," the report said. India and Pakistan are "both prone to miscalculation," it said, and both would continue to build their nuclear and missile forces.
The total Russian force by 2015 would probably be below 2,500 nuclear warheads, the report said.
China by 2015 will have deployed tens to several tens of missiles with nuclear warheads targeted against the United States, and hundreds of shorter-range ballistic and cruise missiles for use in regional conflicts, the report said.
"A unified Korea with a significant U.S. military presence may become a regional military power," the report said.
Without unification, North Korea could cloud regional stability, it said. North Korea probably has one, possibly two, nuclear weapons, and it could have "a few to several" intercontinental ballistic missiles deployed by 2005, the report said.
Iran could test an intercontinental ballistic missile as early as 2001, and Iraq could test one capable of delivering a nuclear weapon to the United States before 2015, the report said.
---
Growing risk seen of attack on U.S.
Chicago Sun-Times
December 18, 2000
BY VERNON LOEB
http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/sec18.html
http://www.accessatlanta.com/partners/ajc/epaper/editions/monday/news_a3d3da05835a71780011.html
http://www.accessatlanta.com/partners/ajc/epaper/editions/monday/news_a3d3da05835a71780011.html
WASHINGTON--The risk of a missile attack against the United States involving chemical, biological or nuclear warheads is greater today than during most of the Cold War and will continue to grow in the next 15 years, according to a new global threat assessment by the National Intelligence Council.
The report, scheduled for release today, also concludes that potential terrorist attacks against the United States through 2015 "will become increasingly sophisticated and designed to achieve mass casualties. We expect the trend toward greater lethality . . . to continue."
Nevertheless, the United States will remain "unparalleled" in its economic, technological, military and diplomatic influence by 2015, the report says, remaining in "the vanguard of the technological revolution from information to biotechnology and beyond."
The 68-page document, "Global Trends 2015: A Dialogue About the Future with Nongovernmental Experts," represents an attempt by the U.S. intelligence community to look beyond its secret sources and involve academia and the private sector in forecasting world trends over the next 15 years.
The 15-member council is based at CIA headquarters under agency Director George J. Tenet and focuses on broad strategic assessments.
"This is the most we have done with outside engagement," council Chairman John Gannon said. "When you get into issues like natural resources, demographics, science and technology, we really had to depend upon a lot of expertise out there."
Gannon said the combined thinking of outside experts and U.S. intelligence has left him generally optimistic about the next 15 years, despite what the report identifies as key uncertainties--including China, Russia, the Middle East, Japan and India.
"The United States is going to be in a very strong position in 2015," Gannon said.
A robust global economy coupled with greater international cooperation could reduce armed conflict and help alleviate the effects of population growth, poverty and water shortages by 2015, the study says.
But in a section that presents alternative scenarios, the study says it is possible that globalization could divide the world into haves and have-nots, fueling "frustrated expectations, inequities, and heightened communal tensions" while triggering the spread of organized crime and biological or nuclear weapons.
Washington Post
---
Canada hears Putin's criticism of U.S. missile defense, but not persuaded
CNN
December 18, 2000
http://www.cnn.com/2000/WORLD/americas/12/18/canada.putin.02.ap/index.html
OTTAWA, Canada (AP) -- Russian President Vladimir Putin got most of what he wanted Monday in Canada -- agreements on closer cooperation, support for joining the World Trade Organization -- but was unable to persuade Prime Minister Jean Chretien to reject a proposed U.S. missile defense plan.
http://www.cnn.com/2000/WORLD/americas/12/18/canada.putin.02.ap/index.html
The two leaders, continuing discussions that began over dinner Sunday night after Putin arrived from Cuba, met for 90 minutes Monday followed by a news conference, then lunch and a state dinner.
Putin's trip completed his agenda of meeting one-on-one with all the other G-8 leaders in his first year in office as he tries to invigorate a struggling economy and recapture some of Russia's Soviet-era status as a world power.
On a crisp, windy day that caused Russian and Canadian flags lining the streets to snap and flutter, Putin mixed the protocol of a state visit with his own diplomatic posturing on major issues confronting his country, Canada, and the neighboring United States.
He made clear that Russia considered the U.S. plan for land-based missiles to intercept incoming missiles a threat to world security because it would alter the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.
"We believe deployment would no doubt damage significantly the established system of international security," Putin said in Russian, later adding: "This would ... absolutely change the balance of power in the international arena, and this itself is a threat."
Putin and Chretien agreed in a joint statement that the ABM treaty was "a cornerstone" of global stability and nuclear nonproliferation that should be preserved and strengthened. Chretien, however, stopped short of matching Putin's opposition to the U.S. missile defense plan, saying it was too soon to tell.
Canada fears the U.S. plan would spark a new round of weapons proliferation. The issue is politically sensitive, due to Canada's status as a NATO ally, northern neighbor and key trading partner of the United States.
Chretien noted Canada was in a "geographic bind" because of its location between the United States to the south and Russia across the North Pole. Questions about whether the system can work and how the incoming U.S. administration of George W. Bush would proceed on the matter must be answered before final decisions can be made, he said.
"Our preoccupation and the preoccupation of everybody is to make sure that the stability that exists at this moment is not undermined by the (U.S.) plan," he said.
The issue dominated a 20-minute news conference that followed the signing of agreements on expanded air services between the countries and increased cooperation between Russian and Canadian provinces and territories. Canada and Russia also issued joint statements on strategic stability, cooperation in the Arctic and northern regions, and Russia's efforts to join the World Trade Organization.
Canada agreed to help Russia develop laws needed for WTO membership and to increase WTO-related training programs for Russian officials.
The statement on the Arctic and northern regions included plans for a Canada-Russia "North-to-North" conference next year to discuss issues and opportunities.
By hosting Putin and a Canadian summit with the European Union on Tuesday, Chretien -- in power since 1993 and recently elected to a third straight term -- is seeking to position Canada as a facilitator between his guests and the United States.
Putin touched on that, saying Canada's physical location made it a natural intermediary on the missile defense issue. Both Putin and Chretien called for continuing discussions with the United States on the issue.
The two leaders also discussed trade, with Putin saying Russian economic reforms including a new tax system and customs duties should improve the trade environment. Since the Russian economic crisis of 1998, Canadian exports to Russia fell to $116 million last year from $ 255 million in 1997.
"The assurances I received from the president is that the situation will be much more normal," Chretien said.
After a state dinner Monday night, Putin was to address a business lunch Tuesday in Toronto before returning to Moscow. Chretien was to host French President Jacques Chirac and European Commission President Romano Prodi on Tuesday for the Canada-EU summit.
---
Putin in Canada to build image
Russian leader wants help opposing U.S. missile system
Seattle Post-Intelligencer
Monday, December 18, 2000
By TOM COHEN THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://seattlep-i.nwsource.com/national/putn18.shtml
OTTAWA -- Russian President Vladimir Putin arrived in Canada yesterday for a visit aimed at strengthening his nation's role among world powers and enlisting Ottawa's support in opposing a proposed U.S. missile defense system.
Tomorrow, European Union leaders come to Ottawa for a Canadian-EU summit as Canada finds itself in the diplomatic spotlight this week.
Putin was to meet with Prime Minister Jean Chretien and other Canadian officials today, then address business leaders in Toronto tomorrow before returning to Moscow.
Putin's trip completes his goal of visiting or meeting with every head of state in the G-8 club, which comprises the United States, Russia, Japan, France, Germany, Italy, England and Canada. His diplomacy has helped Russia gain a standing in the group, a crucial step toward rebuilding a struggling economy and trying to offset U.S. dominance.
By playing host to Putin and the EU-Canada summit, Chretien is seeking to position Canada as a facilitator between his guests and the United States.Putin arrived in Canada from Cuba. Although the United States imposes sanctions on Cuba, Canada defies trades and holds full diplomatic relations with Cuba.
Now Putin wants Canada to join Russia in opposing a U.S. proposal for a new North American missile defense system, an idea supported by President-elect Bush.
The missile defense system could provoke Bush's first international dispute. Russia deeply opposes its development, which it says would breach a 28-year-old anti-ballistic missile treaty.
Putin told Canadian journalists in Moscow last week that Canada could help resolve the dispute by joining Russia in opposing the U.S. plan.
"The lower the level of nuclear conflict between the main nuclear states, the better," Putin said. "That's why we call upon the world community and our partners in the nuclear club to act together to ease the nuclear confrontation."
Canada also has expressed concern the U.S. plan could cause a weapons escalation, but has refrained from openly rejecting it.
Putin will try to jump-start Russia-Canada trade, which has tapered off since the 1998 Russian economic crisis.
---
U.S. plan risky, Putin tells Canada
Atlanta Journal-Constitution
MONDAY • December 18, 2000
Tom Cohen - Associated Press Monday, December 18, 2000
http://www.accessatlanta.com/partners/ajc/epaper/editions/monday/news_a3d3da92f60e00041092.html
http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis/web/vortex/display?slug=putin18&date=20001218
http://www.spokesmanreview.com/news-story.asp?date=121800&ID=s897043
Ottawa --- Russian President Vladimir Putin arrived in Canada on Sunday for a state visit aimed at strengthening his nation's role among world powers and enlisting Ottawa's support in opposing a proposed U.S. missile defense system.
Putin is to meet with Prime Minister Jean Chretien and other Canadian officials today, then address business leaders in Toronto on Tuesday before heading back to Moscow.
Also Tuesday, European Union leaders come to Ottawa for a Canadian-EU summit as Canada finds itself in the diplomatic spotlight this week.
Putin's trip to Canada completes his goal of visiting or meeting with every head of state in the G-8 club, which includes the United States, Russia, Japan, France, Germany, Italy, England and Canada. His personal diplomacy has helped Russia gain a standing in the group, a crucial step for Putin's efforts to rebuild a struggling economy and try to offset U.S. dominance in the post-Soviet era.
By hosting Putin and the EU-Canada summit, Chretien --- who will be the longest-serving G-8 leader when President Clinton steps down in January --- is seeking to position Canada as a facilitator between his guests and the United States.
Putin arrived in Canada from Cuba. While the United States maintains sanctions against Cuba, Canada defies its powerful southern neighbor by trading with the Communist island and holding full diplomatic relations.
Now Putin wants Canada to join Russia in opposing a U.S. proposal for a new North American missile defense system, an idea supported by President-elect George W. Bush.
The missile defense system could provoke Bush's first international dispute. Russia is deeply opposed to its development, which it says would breach a 28-year-old anti-ballistic missile treaty. Russian leaders fear it could ignite another arms race, which their beleaguered economy can't afford.
Putin told Canadian journalists in Moscow last week that Canada could help resolve the dispute by joining Russia in opposing the U.S. plan.
''The lower the level of nuclear conflict between the main nuclear states, the better,'' Putin said. ''That's why we call upon the world community and our partners in the nuclear club to act together to ease the nuclear confrontation.''
Canada also has expressed concern the U.S. plan could cause a weapons escalation, but has refrained from openly rejecting it.
Putin will try to jump-start Russia-Canada trade, which has tapered off badly since the 1998 Russian economic crisis.
Trade with Russia comprises less than 1 percent of Canada's total, with Canadian exports to Russia falling to $116 million last year from $255 million in 1997.
A central point of discussion when French President Jacques Chirac and European Commission President Romano Prodi visit Tuesday is expected to be a proposed EU rapid reaction military force.
The EU, stepping into the defense arena for the first time, is creating the 60,000-member force to be used in peacekeeping and humanitarian crises when NATO as a whole does not want to get involved.
The new force would have access to NATO resources, such as planning capacity, intelligence and communications.
Canada, a NATO member, supports the general concept but wants guarantees NATO would be compensated for any of its resources used by the EU force, foreign affairs spokesman Carl Schwenger said.
Canadian Defense Minister Art Eggleton said in a recent speech that the EU must cooperate with NATO instead of trying to set up its own decision-making sphere within the alliance.
''From Canada's point of view, exclusion or marginalization is not an option for the alliance of today or the future,'' Eggleton said. ''Nor is polarization, for a polarization between the U.S. and the EU on security and defense issues would leave Canada caught in the middle.''
---
Pentagon To Look Into Asian Military
New York Times
December 18, 2000 Filed at 6:53 p.m. ET
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-US-China-Taiwan.html
WASHINGTON (AP) -- To better prepare for a potential crisis in the Taiwan Strait, the United States needs more insight into how China and Taiwan view their own military strengths and weaknesses, the Pentagon said Monday.
In a report to Congress, the Pentagon outlined three ``gaps in knowledge'' that affect U.S. planning.
To analyze the most likely scenarios for conflict between Taiwan and China, ``We need to know more about how the authorities in the People's Republic of China and Taiwan view their military and political situation,'' the report said.
It said such knowledge would enable the Pentagon to assess better whether the balance of forces adequately deters China from attacking the island, which the mainland government considers a rebellious province.
``We are unlikely to be able to replicate their precise views on this military balance, but we probably can learn much more about both sides' ideas about statecraft, their approaches to the use of force, their perceived vulnerabilities and their preferred operational methods,'' the report said.
The Pentagon also would like more insight into less visible aspects of the military balance: each sides' training, logistics, doctrine, command and controln and behind-the-lines capabilities. These things, the report said, are harder to assess than numbers of aircraft and ships.
The third gap in knowledge is how China and Taiwan will pursue emerging methods of warfare such as ballistic missiles and information warfare.
The report, required by Congress, was submitted to lawmakers in classified form. The Pentagon released an unclassified summary, which repeated the long-standing policy of the United States to regard as a matter of ``grave concern'' any effort by China to determine the future of Taiwan by nonpeaceful means.
Taiwan split from the mainland after the 1949 communist revolution. Officially, China reserves the right to use force to reunify the country if Taiwan should declare independence; if Taiwan should be occupied by a foreign country; if it should acquire nuclear weapons; or if Taiwan should refuse indefinitely to negotiate a settlement.
The United States is obligated by the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act to provide Taiwan with enough military capability to defend itself, but it has left unclear the circumstances in which it would intervene militarily on Taiwan's behalf.
The report said the United States' goal is to preclude a Chinese attack on Taiwan. If there were to be an attack, the U.S. goal would be that Taiwan defend itself without outside assistance. As a fallback, however, the United States would have Taiwan ``defend itself long enough to permit outside assistance and that the combination of Taiwan and U.S. forces defeat a PLA (People's Liberation Army) attack on Taiwan, should the U.S. decide to intervene.''
---
Study Looks at Dangers Shaping World of 2015
Report: A shift in the balance of power invites instability. Weapons of mass destruction, globalization present major challenges.
Los Angeles Times
Monday, December 18, 2000
By ROBIN WRIGHT, Times Staff Writer
http://www.latimes.com/news/asection/20001218/t000120695.html
WASHINGTON--Communal tensions flaring among indigenous groups from Mexico to the Amazon. Dozens of Chinese nuclear warheads aimed at the United States. Russia's power in serious decline, its population diminished by 16 million. A cold peace in the Mideast, but transcontinental terrorists attempting devastating attacks with weapons of mass destruction.
Welcome to the year 2015, as characterized in chilling detail by a sweeping new U.S. intelligence report to be released today.
As President-elect George W. Bush prepares to take office, the report offers the most specific insight ever provided an incoming administration about the forces shaping global change. It also underscores the enormous challenges facing Bush's new national security team, to be headed by retired Gen. Colin L. Powell and Condoleezza Rice, if it hopes to avert many of the worst-case scenarios.
"Global Trends 2015," the result of an intensive yearlong study involving all branches of the intelligence community as well as many of America's top thinkers, offers sobering predictions about the "drivers," or major forces, that will determine the world of 2015 and beyond.
The dangers are not just from traditional hot spots. Among the report's other predictions: more than 3 billion people, roughly half the world's population, living in "water-stressed" regions, from Southern California to northern China. And while new biotechnology will dramatically lengthen average life spans in rich countries, old diseases will shorten life spans in some African nations by as many as 40 years.
The report was prepared by the National Intelligence Council, the most influential analytic arm of the U.S. intelligence community. The council also produces classified "estimates" on dangers for all branches of the government.
"Global Trends 2015" is being released to launch a "strategic dialogue" within the government to deal with both the challenges and the opportunities ahead, said CIA Director George J. Tenet.
"Grappling with the future is necessarily a work in progress that, I believe, should constantly seek new insights while testing and revising old judgments," he wrote in a letter introducing the report.
The most fundamental shift will be in the world's balance of power, the report predicts.
China and India will be the world's new military powers, based on sheer numbers, growing economic might and technological capabilities.
By 2015, China will have dozens of missiles with nuclear warheads targeting the U.S., along with hundreds of shorter-range ballistic and cruise missiles, some with nuclear warheads, for regional use. It will also have purchased technologies--from the U.S., Russia, Israel, Europe and Japan--to integrate sea and air capabilities against Taiwan and other regional rivals, the report says.
Yet a strong China may not be a serious threat. "China will seek to avoid conflict in the region to promote stable economic growth and to ensure internal stability," the global survey predicts.
Indeed, a weakened China might be more dangerous, opening the way for greater arms proliferation, instability, crime and drug trafficking.
"New leaders will be even more firmly committed to developing the economy as the foundation of national power," the report predicts. "Resources for military capabilities will take a secondary role."
Domestic Challenges for 3 Major Powers
Three of the 20th century's major powers will be increasingly diverted by domestic challenges in the early 21st century, the report says.
Russia's expectations as a world leader will be "dramatically reduced," because by 2015 it still won't be able to fully integrate into the global trading system. Even the best-case scenario would leave it with an economy "less than one-fifth the size of the United States," the report concludes.
Strapped financially, Moscow will have fewer nuclear weapons and missiles than allowed by treaties. It will instead invest in "selected and secretive" weapons of mass destruction.
Japan will have a hard time holding its position as the world's second-largest economy. Tokyo may even need an "external shock" to jolt it into the painful reforms necessary to slow the steady erosion of its leadership role in Asia.
And Europe will be largely peaceful and prosperous but more "inward-looking," the study finds. The region will be challenged by an aging population and low birthrates, which will undermine cohesion and economic health and create chronic shortages of skilled workers and professionals.
Despite the potential benefits of globalization, three blocs will face setbacks, according to the report.
In Latin America, the democratic tide that had spread across the continent by 1990 will suffer reversals because of rampant crime, corruption, narcotics trafficking, local insurgencies and failures by governments to address popular demands. Mexico and Brazil will be the strongest voices in the hemisphere, while the threat of instability will be greatest in Bolivia, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and Paraguay.
Africa will be more marginalized than it is today. "Most African states will miss out on the economic growth engendered elsewhere by globalization and by scientific and technological advances," the study says.
The negative trends will worsen as Europe severs ties and aid to former colonies. Often filling the void will be religious groups, narco-traffickers, mercenaries, crime syndicates and terrorists seeking refuge.
In the Middle East, increasingly important as a primary energy source, petrodollars will allow the region to resist the forces of reform. With populations due to expand over the next 15 years in most countries--by anywhere from 26% (Algeria) and 39% (Libya) to 56% (Saudi Arabia)--the region's people will be poorer, heavily concentrated in cities that are unable to cope and more disillusioned with their governments. As inequities mount, Islamist movements may come to power.
Although the U.S. will remain the preeminent world power, it will face challenges from a growing array of countries, including China, India, Mexico and Brazil, as well as organizations, such as the European Union, trying to check its leadership.
The way conflicts play out will also change, the report says. Most wars will be within countries--and longer, more vicious, harder to end and more likely to recur. Because of globalization, they could threaten the very stability of the new international system.
Wars between states will be fewer but more deadly because of the lethality of arms, as in South Asia, where both India and Pakistan--the two nations in the world most likely to go to war--will amass larger nuclear and missile arsenals.
Internal problems will exacerbate regional instability. In India, more than half a billion people will live in dire poverty, as the gap between rich and poor widens and sparks domestic strife. In increasingly tumultuous Pakistan, government control will by 2015 be limited to the Punjabi heartland and the commercial capital, Karachi, the report predicts.
U.S. Firms May Be Terrorist Targets
State-sponsored terrorism is likely to decline. But it will be replaced by "freewheeling" terrorism by groups operating across continents with the help of information technology, the National Intelligence Council predicts.
American companies, rather than diplomatic or military facilities, will become targets.
The greatest danger, however, is the spread of weapons of mass destruction. Before 2015, the report warns, Iraq, for example, could test an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of reaching the U.S. with a nuclear-sized payload.
Worldwide, the potential for the use of a missile with chemical or biological weapons will be far greater than during the Cold War. New threats will come from nations with smaller arsenals of weapons that have "far less accuracy, yield, survivability, reliability and range-payload capability" than the Soviet arsenal did, the council says.
The report does contain some good news. Economically, the world will witness the kind of growth rates characteristic of the 1960s and early 1970s. And globalization will ultimately increase political stability--even though the survey predicts that its evolution will be "rocky, marked by chronic financial volatility and a widening economic divide."
---
2015 Outlook: Enough Food, Scarce Water, Porous Borders
New York Times
December 18, 2000
By ELAINE SCIOLINO
http://www.nytimes.com/2000/12/18/world/18THRE.html?pagewanted=all
WASHINGTON, Dec. 17 - In a sweeping projection of what the world will look like in 2015, the intelligence community has concluded that issues like the availability of water and food, changes in population and the spread of information and disease will increasingly affect the national security of the United States.
The assessment, contained in an unclassified report called "Global Trends 2015," also makes a number of predictions about the political landscape of the world.
Russia, for example, will continue to become weaker - economically, militarily and socially, the report predicts. China will be faced by political, economic and social pressures that will "increasingly challenge the regime's legitimacy, and perhaps its survival." And Israel "at best" will conclude a "cold peace" with its adversaries.
In addition, the report lays out a number of what it calls unlikely but nevertheless "possible" scenarios.
One is that strategically important countries like Iran and Nigeria and even strategic allies of the United States like Israel could fall victim to internal religious or ethnic divisions, "and crisis ensues." Another is that China, India and Russia "form a de facto geo-strategic alliance in an attempt to counterbalance U.S. and Western influence."
In terms of global resources, the report concludes that by 2015, nearly half of the world's population - more than three billion people - will be in countries lacking sufficient water, and that even more genetically modified crops or projects to desalt sea water will not substantially help.
The 70-page report is one result of an unusual 15-month collaboration between the National Intelligence Council, a sort of analytical think tank of senior intelligence officials that works alongside the C.I.A., and dozens of outside scientific, diplomatic and corporate experts. It is not a traditional intelligence report based on classical intelligence sources and methods.
"This was a serious effort to provide a context to discuss opportunities as well as threats to the U.S. national security community," said John Gannon, chairman of the National Intelligence Council, in an interview. The purpose, he said, is to get policy makers to focus on long- term global trends and to think beyond the ordinary concerns of the intelligence community.
An advance copy of the report, which will be released on Monday, was made available to The New York Times. Copies of the report were delivered late last week to the White House, other agencies of government and members of the team of President-elect George W. Bush.
Some intelligence officials are concerned that persuading the Bush national security team to look beyond traditional threats will be particularly challenging.
In an article in Foreign Affairs, written during the campaign, Condoleezza Rice, who will be Mr. Bush's national security adviser, argued, for instance, that "national interest" was too often replaced by "humanitarian interest" or the interests of "the international community."
Instead, she suggested, the United States should promote what is in its own interest - democracy or free trade, for example.
But other intelligence officials say a greater problem is that the structure of the national security bureaucracy leads it to look at the world first country by country and then in terms of geographical regions.
"You try to tell people that disease is rising in four out of five continents - well, the regional assistant secretaries have to be persuaded to put it on their agendas first," said one senior intelligence official.
Although the conventional wisdom in Washington, particularly on Capitol Hill, is that China will become more of a regional military threat, the report concludes that modernization of the country's agricultural and national infrastructure will be higher priorities than military investment.
"The evidence strongly suggests" that China's new leaders "will be even more firmly committed to developing the economy as the foundation of national power and that resources for military capabilities will take a secondary role," it says.
Despite all the intelligence resources devoted to China, the report states repeatedly that it cannot say with any certainty what the Chinese state will look like in 15 years.
While most of those taking part in the study concluded that economic growth would continue, the report acknowledges that it will be difficult to meld the openness that growth requires with political control. "Estimates of developments in China over the next 15 years are fraught with unknowables," the report bluntly states.
The outlook for Russia, particularly its economy, is bleak. "Besides a crumbling physical infrastructure, years of environmental neglect are taking a toll on the populations, a toll made worse by such societal costs of transition as alcoholism, cardiac diseases, drugs and a worsening health delivery system."
The Russian population, which will become more sickly, may shrink in size from 146 million to 130 million in 15 years, the report says. Even under a best-case scenario of 5 percent annual economic growth, Russia would attain an economy less than one-fifth the size of the United States'.
In the Middle East, by 2015, there will be a Palestinian state, the report says, but "Israel will have attained a cold peace with its neighbors, with only limited social, economic and cultural ties."
A key driving trend for the Middle East in the next 15 years will be population pressures. Even now, in nearly all of the Middle Eastern countries, more than half of the population is under 20 years of age. "In much of the Middle East, populations will be significantly larger, poorer, more urban and more disillusioned."
The report concludes that the population of the world will grow from the current 6.1 billion to 7.2 billion by 2015. Ninety-five percent of that growth is expected to occur in the developing world, and nearly all of it in rapidly expanding urban areas.
"Megacities" of more than 10 million people will continue to grow, straining or even crippling roads, bridges and sewerage and electrical systems. The population of Jakarta will more than double, from 9.5 million to 21.2 million; Lagos will double from 12.2 million to 24.4 million.
The good news is that there will be enough energy resources in 2015, despite a 50 percent rise in global demand, the report says. It also predicts that there will be enough food to feed the world's growing population, although "poor infrastructure and distribution, political instability and chronic poverty" will lead to malnutrition in parts of sub-Saharan Africa.
The main resource problem will be water, the shortages so acute that they could cause regional instability. Problems could include Turkey's construction of new irrigation projects on the Tigris and Euphrates, which would reduce the water flowing into Syria and Iraq, and ambitious projects in Ethiopia and Sudan that could divert water from the Nile and reduce the flow into Egypt.
In terms of disease, the report underscores earlier intelligence projections that AIDS and tuberculosis are likely to account for the majority of deaths in most developing countries in 15 years. In some African countries, average life spans will be reduced by as much as 30 to 40 years, leaving more than 40 million children orphaned and contributing to poverty, crime and instability.
In many cases the report makes stark predictions without offering specific evidence or footnotes. These are some of its other judgments:
¶Japan will have "difficulty" maintaining its current position as the world's third-largest economy.
¶India "most likely" will expand the size of its nuclear-capable force.
¶Pakistan's nuclear and missile forces will continue to increase.
¶Russia will not join the European Union.
¶The very concept of "belonging" to a particular state will probably erode.
In one of its most sweeping conclusions, the report says governments will have less and less control over flows of information, technology, diseases, migrants, arms and financial transactions, whether legal or illegal, across their borders.
"States with ineffective and incompetent governance not only will fail to benefit from globalization," it says, "but in some instances will spawn conflicts at home and abroad, ensuring an even wider gap between regional winners and losers that exists today."
Globalization, the report said, "will not lift all boats."
---
Asia Wary of Bush Missile Proposal
Associated Press
December 18, 2000 Filed at 1:07 p.m. ET
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/politics/AP-Bush-and-the-World.html
VIENNA, Austria (AP) -- Europe and Asia applauded the foreign policy selections of President-elect Bush on Monday, but cautiously waited for details about missile defense, the Balkans, Taiwan and European defense.
The nominations of retired Gen. Colin Powell as secretary of state and Condoleezza Rice as national security adviser were generally seen as bringing stature and experience to a team whose leader has been ridiculed at home and abroad for lacking foreign policy depth.
``As before with Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter, George W. Bush also has no foreign policy experience,'' Germany's coordinator for U.S. affairs, Karsten Voigt, wrote in the Berliner Morgenpost newspaper. ``He has understood the need to surround himself with a highly qualified adviser team.''
Moscow's Vremya Novostei newspaper praised Rice, who helped negotiate with the Russians at the end of the Cold War, as ``a realist who is capable of gauging the consequences of a careless step.''
But positive reactions were tempered by some concerns, including Powell's strong commitment to a U.S. missile defense system. Many Europeans and Asians fear such a system would sabotage arms control agreements with the Russians and trigger an arms race in Asia.
Bush has said he favors a missile shield because it would protect the United States from attack. In accepting his appointment Saturday, Powell called missile defense ``an essential part of our overall strategic force posture.''
In an editorial entitled, ``Fortress America: Powell's tough new defense plans,'' The Sydney Morning Herald warned that pushing through with a missile defense system could lead to a crisis with China.
Others feared the plan was a sign that America was placing its own interests ahead of the concerns of a world it aspires to lead.
``Like his boss, Gen. Powell seems to be determined to delimit the U.S. world role, to view international obligations through the prism of narrow national interests,'' the left-leaning British newspaper, The Guardian, wrote.
Many Europeans are waiting to see how the Bush team will deal with the European Union plan to develop a 60,000-strong rapid reaction force, which would respond when the United States and NATO do not want to get involved.
Both the Clinton administration and that of President George Bush -- the president-elect's father -- feared such a force would undermine NATO.
``The team that is returning to the White House today still has the same hostility to European defense,'' the French newspaper Le Monde said. ``On the one hand, this team calls for the most rapid withdrawal of American forces from Bosnia and Kosovo. On the other, it wants to prevent Europe from planning operations that the United States doesn't want to participate in any longer. It's one or the other.''
Some South Korean officials fear such a hard-nosed, America-first style could complicate their own efforts to use American support in pursuing reconciliation with communist North Korea.
``The Clinton administration was idealistic, whereas the Bush administration is realistic,'' said Yoon Dong-min of the Institute for Foreign Affairs and National Security. ``That would affect South Korea's policy of seeking quick rapprochement with the communist North.''
In Asia, one of the greatest concerns is the new administration's position on Taiwan. Considered a renegade province by China, Taiwan has enjoyed de facto independence for decades. Some Asians believe a Republican administration would be more supportive of Taiwan.
Taiwanese military expert Chung Chien applauded Powell's appointment, saying his military experience will help him handle the delicate Taiwan-China issue.
China's foreign policy establishment remained uneasy. An administration that backs Taiwan and missile defense -- which China considers a threat -- could find itself in crisis with Beijing.
``There are too many people with a military background'' said Yan Xuetong, an international security expert at Beijing's Tsinghua University.
But in Yugoslavia, the government hope Powell and Rice will push ahead with the goal of removing U.S. troops and turning the peacekeeping burden over to the Europeans. That might lead to a greater role for France, which Belgrade considers a friend.
``The question is when and to what extent will there be an American withdrawal from Kosovo and Bosnia,'' the Belgrade newspaper Vecernje Novosti said.
The fact that Rice and Powell are both black did little to assuage African fears that the continent would be overlooked by the Bush administration.
The East African press ignored the appointments, lamenting that Africa will suffer ``benign neglect'' under the new Bush administration.
``Even the appointment of Colin Powell, a black American, as secretary of state, is nothing to cheer about,'' said Dr. Stanley Macebuh, an aide to Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo, adding he felt Powell was ``anti-Africa.''
---
Cuba and Russia Abandon Nuclear Plant, an Unfinished Vestige of the Soviet Era
New York Times
December 18, 2000
By PATRICK E. TYLER
http://www.nytimes.com/2000/12/18/world/18CUBA.html
HAVANA, Dec. 17 - Lacking financing to finish what they started almost two decades ago, Russia and Cuba have agreed to abandon an incomplete nuclear power station at Juragua on the southern coast of the island, Russian officials traveling with President Vladimir V. Putin said during the weekend.
The decision was reached after President Fidel Castro told Mr. Putin during four rounds of talks last week that Cuba was no longer interested in completing the twin 440-megawatt reactor plant that would have provided a significant addition to Cuba's dilapidated electrical power grid.
Separately, Russian officials said Mr. Putin had offered to forgive 70 percent of Cuba's Soviet-era debt, estimated at $20 billion. Mr. Putin was said to have pressed Mr. Castro to recognize even a small portion of the debt and to commit his country to a schedule of payment under the system of the so-called Paris club of creditor nations.
But from all accounts emerging from the talks, Mr. Castro is thus far unwilling to recognize any of his debt to Moscow, claiming instead that the abrupt Soviet and Russian withdrawal from Cuba beginning a decade ago caused billions in dollars of damage to the Cuban economy.
Mr. Putin, who left for a visit to Canada today, appeared to have fared no better in talks on how Russia might recover past investments in Cuba by taking stock positions in Cuban enterprises. Russian officials have concluded that the most profitable of Cuba's industries - oil, nickel, cigar exports and telecommunications - already have sufficient foreign partners.
Still, there are dozens of small and medium-sized state factories in Cuba operating on Russian designs with Russian machinery and Mr. Putin's entourage expressed the hope that this trip had laid the groundwork for a Russian return to the Cuban market, though the Russians were under no illusions about how difficult this might prove to be.
Though neither side has yet publicly announced the decision on the fate of the nuclear power station, it is certain to be welcomed in the United States, where the Clinton administration, members of Congress and a number of environmental groups have expressed concerns about whether the plants could be operated safely by Cuba's state-run electrical authority.
Since 1996, Russia and Cuba have been seeking third-country financing to complete the plant. Its foundations were 90 percent complete when work was halted in 1992, and about 40 percent of the heavy machinery had been installed. Some Russian press reports have said that at least one of the reactors - without nuclear fuel - and its steam turbine set were delivered to Cuba.
The Soviet Union signed the agreement to build the twin reactor plant in 1976. The V.V.E.R. design, which was the most advanced at the time, was the first to be exported by Moscow for use in a tropical climate. It differs from the Chernobyl-style design in that the radioactive core and fuel elements are contained within a pressurized steel vessel.
Work began in 1983, after which Cuban engineers encountered significant problems in meeting construction targets. Russian engineers had taken over the project by the early 1990's.
The decision on what to do with the Juragua plant was a major item of unfinished business between Havana and Moscow after the collapse of the Soviet Union. And Mr. Putin was said to be keen not to announce Russia's desire to back out of the project until Cuban officials first expressed their own desire to walk away. In this manner, the officials said, Moscow felt it would no longer be liable for millions of dollars in costs required to maintain the incomplete installation.
---
Russian, Canadian Leaders Get Down to Formal Talks
Reuters
December 18, 2000 Filed at 3:40 a.m. ET
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/world/international-canada-.html
OTTAWA (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin and Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien get down to formal business on Monday with talks focusing on disarmament, development of Arctic expanses and improving paltry trade levels.
Putin, on a three-day visit to Canada, and his host were due to sign a ``statement on strategic stability issues'' setting down basic security principles as well as accords on developing the two countries' vast polar areas and expanding their commercial air links.
The two men launched their talks informally on Sunday evening at a private dinner organized soon after Putin arrived at the close of a five-day stay in Cuba aimed at restoring close ties with its Soviet-era Caribbean ally.
Talks were expected to dwell on the new U.S. administration of President-elect George W. Bush, particularly on common ground in opposing Bush's proposals to proceed with a national missile defense (NMD) plan.
Both Canada and Russia oppose U.S. proposals to alter the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty that Washington says is required in order to push ahead with the system and guard against missile launches by ``rogue states'' such as North Korea and Iran.
Putin told reporters in Havana that Canada and Russia had points in common -- ``economic like exploration in the north, and also political like maintaining the balance of forces and preserving the system of international security which has been created until now.''
``Our positions are very close.''
Even in the Cold War era, Canada and the Soviet Union enjoyed reasonably good links, thanks in part to late Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau's efforts to cultivate ties with both Moscow and Havana.
POLICY DIFFERENCES WITH U.S.
Canada, a member of NATO and the G7 group of industrialized countries, has also had periodic, if subtle, policy differences with the United States. But Putin made clear in the run-up to the visit that any agreements should not be directed against Washington.
Before Putin's arrival, commentators suggested Chretien should protest to Putin about the alleged extremes of the Kremlin's military campaign against Chechen separatists.
Canadian officials have said they will raise objections but Western denunciations of Russian actions have become less common and more muted as resistance to the military in Chechnya has become confined to pinprick attacks by rebels.
Jewish groups called for fresh pressure to be exerted on Putin to halt legal proceedings against Vladimir Gusinsky, who heads Russia's top independent media group and is a leader of Russia's Jewish community.
Gusinsky was arrested in Spain last week pending an extradition hearing for him to Russia, where he faces fraud charges which liberals see as an attack on post-Soviet press freedoms.
On trade, deputy Russian Prime Minister Viktor Khristenko told reporters after Putin's arrival that both sides were determined to boost this year's projected level of C$1 billion ($600 million), less than the daily level of trade between Moscow and Washington.
Khristenko said trade was diversifying into high-technology goods, away from traditional patterns of Canadian sales of grain and Russian exports of metals.
``The current level does not reflect the possibilities or the similarities between our countries,'' he said. ``Expansion is entirely possible.''
He said Russia intended to complain about anti-dumping legal cases initiated by Canada against Russian companies.
Canada was expected during the talks to offer public support for Russia's rapid entry into the World Trade Organization.
Putin flies on to Toronto on Tuesday to persuade top industrialists that Russia is now a safe and reliable place for their investments amid a recovery from the 1998 financial collapse.
---
Putin, Chretien discuss nuclear arms
Canada stays on the fence on U.S. missile defense plan
12/18/00
MSNBC NEWS SERVICES
http://www.msnbc.com/news/504768.asp?cp1=1
OTTAWA, Dec. 18 - Prime Minister Jean Chretien agreed Monday with visiting Russian President Vladimir Putin that existing nuclear arms accords should be supported and strengthened - but stopped short of joining Putin's opposition to a U.S. missile defense plan.
SPEAKING AT A news conference on the second day of Putin's state visit, Chretien said questions remain about the proposal to build a land-based missile defense program. Russia says the plan would breach the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.
Chretien and Putin agreed in a joint statement that the treaty was "a cornerstone" of global stability and nuclear nonproliferation and should be preserved and strengthened.
The statement sought swift implementation of the 1993 START-2 treaty to cut long-range nuclear weapons, and efforts to clinch a START-3 pact to reduce warhead levels further.
It also stressed the importance of the Conventional Forces in Europe pact, revised last year to take account of Russia's troop deployment on its southern flank, where it has been engaged in a campaign to crush Chechen separatists.
Putin paid tribute to the outgoing Clinton administration's efforts on disarmament issues for clinching an agreement last week on exchanging information on missile launches.
"I want to welcome the active nature of the outgoing administration...Like players in the National Hockey League, they keep going until the final whistle," he said.
CANADA'S 'COMPLICATED POSITION'
Asked if Canada joined Russia in opposing the missile defense plan, Chretien said it was too soon to tell.
Canada is in a "complicated position," Chretien said, with the United States to the south and Russia across the North Pole. Questions about whether the missile defense system will work and how the incoming administration of President-elect Bush will proceed on the matter must be answered before final decisions can be made, Chretien said.
"We don't want anything to happen to destabilize what we have at this moment," he said. "It's a question of wait-and-see."
Canada has expressed concern that a U.S. missile-defense system could hurt arms control efforts, but has not openly opposed it.
Putin made his opinion clear: Russia considers the plan a threat to world stability. Putin told Canadian journalists in Moscow last week that Canada could help resolve the dispute by opposing the plan.
"We believe deployment would no doubt damage significantly the established system of international security," Putin said in Russian, later adding: "This would ... absolutely change the balance of power in the international arena, and this itself is a threat."
HELP WITH WTO
The issue dominated a 20-minute news conference that followed the signing of agreements on expanded air services between Russia and Canada. The two countries also issued joint statements on cooperation in the Arctic and other northern regions they share and on Russia's efforts to join the World Trade Organization.
Canada said in the joint statement it would help Russia develop laws that conform to WTO legislation in other member countries and increase training programs for Russian officials in WTO-related areas.
With the three-day Canada trip that began Sunday night, Putin achieved his goal of visiting or meeting with every other head of state in the G-8 club of leading industrialized nations. Members are the United States, Canada, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and Russia.
By playing host to Putin and a Canadian summit with the European Union on Tuesday, Chretien is seeking to position Canada as a facilitator between his guests and the United States. The Canadian leader has been in power since 1993 and was recently re-elected.
Putin noted that because of of its location, Canada is a natural intermediary on the missile defense issue. He noted the U.S. motivation for the plan was to intercept missiles that might be fired by rogue states, and said Russia and the United States should assess that threat together.
The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report.
---
Russia's President Visits Canada
Associated Press
December 18, 2000 Filed at 4:32 p.m. ET
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Canada-Putin.html
http://www.cnn.com/2000/WORLD/americas/12/18/canada.putin.ap/index.html
OTTAWA (AP) -- Prime Minister Jean Chretien agreed Monday with visiting Russian President Vladimir Putin that existing nuclear arms accords should be supported and strengthened -- but stopped short of joining Putin's opposition to a U.S. missile defense plan.
Speaking at a news conference on the second day of Putin's state visit, Chretien said questions remain about the proposal to build a land-based missile defense program. Russia says the plan would breach the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.
Chretien and Putin agreed in a joint statement that the treaty was ``a cornerstone'' of global stability and nuclear nonproliferation and should be preserved and strengthened. Asked if Canada joined Russia in opposing the missile defense plan, Chretien said it was too soon to tell.
Canada is in a ``complicated position,'' Chretien said, with the United States to the south and Russia across the North Pole. Questions about whether the missile defense system will work and how the incoming administration of President-elect Bush will proceed on the matter must be answered before final decisions can be made, Chretien said.
``We don't want anything to happen to destabilize what we have at this moment,'' he said. ``It's a question of wait-and-see.''
Putin made his opinion clear: Russia considers the plan a threat to world stability.
``We believe deployment would no doubt damage significantly the established system of international security,'' Putin said in Russian, later adding: ``This would ... absolutely change the balance of power in the international arena, and this itself is a threat.''
The issue dominated a 20-minute news conference that followed the signing of agreements on expanded air services between Russia and Canada. The two countries also issued joint statements on cooperation in the Arctic and other northern regions they share and on Russia's efforts to join the World Trade Organization.
Canada said in the joint statement it would help Russia develop laws that conform to WTO legislation in other member countries and increase training programs for Russian officials in WTO-related areas.
With the three-day Canada trip that began Sunday night, Putin achieved his goal of visiting or meeting with every other head of state in the G-8 club of leading industrialized nations. Members are the United States, Canada, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and Russia.
By playing host to Putin and a Canadian summit with the European Union on Tuesday, Chretien is seeking to position Canada as a facilitator between his guests and the United States. The Canadian leader has been in power since 1993 and was recently re-elected.
Putin noted that because of of its location, Canada is a natural intermediary on the missile defense issue. He noted the U.S. motivation for the plan was to intercept missiles that might be fired by rogue states, and said Russia and the United States should assess that threat together.
Russia fears the missile system would spark a new arms race that would overwhelm its struggling economy. Canada also has expressed concern that the U.S. plan could hurt arms control efforts.
------
Putin meets with Canadian leader
USA Today
12/18/00- Updated 12:04 PM ET
http://usatoday.com/news/world/nwsmon08.htm
OTTAWA (AP) - Russian President Vladimir Putin met with Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien on Monday to sign economic agreements, discuss security issues and perhaps cement a personal relationship.
Russia and Canada have much in common: Both are vast countries with Arctic territory and big mineral industries. Harnessed together, Putin thinks they can do more to help each other and prevent the United States from dominating world affairs.
With the three-day Canada trip, Putin achieves his goal of visiting or meeting with every head of state in the G-8 club of leading industrialized nations, which comprises the United States, Canada, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and Russia.
In less than a year as president, Putin's personal diplomacy has helped Russia secure its footing in the group, a crucial step for his efforts to rebuild a struggling economy and try to offset U.S. dominance in the post-Soviet era.
''The global challenges of today, and the realities of the 21st century, call for us to pool our efforts and to work in close coordination - both in the bilateral format and in the international arena,'' Putin said at a welcoming ceremony at the residence of Gov. Gen. Adrienne Clarkson.
Putin and Chretien dined together Sunday night and met again Monday morning before the planned signing of agreements involving air service in each other's territory and contracts between Russian regions and Canadian provinces, according to Russian Deputy Prime Minister Viktor Khristenko.
He said Putin also wanted to talk about Russia's admission to the World Trade Organization and would seek Canadian help in adapting its laws to conform to those of WTO member nations. In addition, the parties expected a joint statement on cooperation in the Arctic and other northern regions shared by Canada and Russia.
By playing host to Putin and a Canadian summit with the European Union on Tuesday, Chretien - in power since 1993 and recently elected to a third straight term - is seeking to position Canada as a facilitator between his guests and the United States.
Putin arrived Sunday from Cuba. While the United States imposes sanctions on Cuba, Canada defies its powerful neighbor by trading with the communist island and holding full diplomatic relations.
Putin wants that kind of Canadian independence to help prevent the incoming Bush administration from forcing its will on major issues. One topic of conversation will be a proposed new North American missile defense system, an idea supported by Bush.
Russia vehemently opposes the development of such a system, saying it would breach a 28-year-old anti-ballistic missile treaty and could spark a new arms race that Russia cannot afford. Putin told Canadian journalists in Moscow last week that Canada could help resolve the dispute by opposing the plan.
Canada has expressed concern that a U.S. missile-defense system could hurt arms control efforts, but has not openly opposed it.
---
White House Releases Highlights of U.S.-EU Cooperation
U.S. Newswire
18 Dec 19:59
White House Releases Highlights of U.S.-EU Cooperation Under the New Transatlantic Agenda
To: National Desk
Contact: White House Press Office, 202-347-2770
http://www.usnewswire.com/topnews/Current_Releases/1218-145.html
WASHINGTON, Dec. 18 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The following was released today by the White House:
HIGHLIGHTS OF U.S.-EU COOPERATION UNDER THE NEW TRANSATLANTIC AGENDA Washington, December 18, 2000
The United States and the European Union have worked during the six months of the French Presidency to realize the goals of the New Transatlantic Agenda: promoting peace, democracy and development throughout the world; expanding world trade; responding to global challenges; and building bridges across the Atlantic.
Foremost was our close and successful cooperation in supporting the advance of peace and democracy in South East Europe, described in our separate statement.
Concerned at the lack of progress in the Middle East Peace Process and the ongoing violence, we have urged both sides to comply fully and without delay with the commitments undertaken at the Sharm-el-Sheikh Summit and to relaunch negotiations. To this end, we will continue to support the Fact-Finding Committee.
We have supported Russian reforms to strengthen democracy, the rule of law and market economy. We have called for a political solution in Chechnya, the return of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) and accountability for reports of humanitarian abuses.
The United States welcomes the results of the Nice European Council, which marked a very important step in the development of European security and defense policy. In particular, the commitments made by the EU member states concerning military capabilities will, as they are implemented, strengthen both the EU and the European pillar of the Atlantic alliance. The U.S. also welcomes the proposed arrangements for consultation and cooperation with NATO adopted at Nice, which received a positive response at last week's North Atlantic Council. The U.S. and the EU commit themselves to work together and with all Alliance members to implement and complete these arrangements and thereby forge a strategic partnership between the two organizations in the management of crisis. In this regard, the U.S. notes with appreciation the arrangements offered by the EU for its relationship with NATO European allies. The U.S. looks forward to working with a European Union playing its full role and assuming its full responsibilities on the international scene.
We have issued a joint statement on the responsibilities of States and on transparency regarding arms exports.
In Ukraine, we provided approximately $900 million or 1 billion euros to help close the Chornobyl nuclear power plant. The power plant ceased operations on December 15.
We have continued, as agreed at our last summit in Queluz, to address the full range of issues of concern in biotechnology. We have intensified our cooperation on regulatory and other issues, including making progress on means to facilitate trade flows for conventional and biotech (genetically-modified) crop varieties approved in both the U.S. and the EU. We also invited twenty eminent, independent experts from a broad cross-section of our societies to work together in the U.S.-EU Biotechnology Consultative Forum to examine the wide range of issues related to food and agricultural biotechnology. We welcome the report that the Forum has just submitted and will give it careful consideration. We thank the members for their hard work.
As agreed at our last summit, we have worked together in many African countries to improve and accelerate the fight against HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis, described in our separate statement.
The U.S. and EU enjoy the largest bilateral trade and investment relationship in the world. While disputes concern a small proportion of U.S.-EU trade, their resolution has been a high priority for us. In this light, we continued our discussions on the various disputes currently before us, either in the context of formal WTO dispute settlement proceedings or through other channels.
We have worked to reduce barriers to trade while maintaining high standards for public health and safety, and the environment. Under the Transatlantic Economic Partnership (TEP), we adopted a plan for cooperation in the area of metrology to facilitate trade and made progress on establishing guidelines and principles for regulatory cooperation and transparency. We have made substantial progress on an agreed text for a mutual recognition agreement (MRA) on marine equipment, which we aim to finalize in early 2001. Under the U.S.-EU MRA, we implemented the sectoral annexes on recreational craft, telecommunications equipment and electromagnetic compatibility, and pursued implementation of the medical devices annex. We discussed the MRAs in the electrical-safety and pharmaceutical sectors with a view toward their full and timely implementation.
We agreed to intensify contacts and cooperation on energy-related issues by re-establishing regular U.S.-EU consultations.
Following the Queluz Summit, we have worked extensively through expert- and political-level meetings to expand transatlantic cooperation in the information society. We have agreed on a joint statement on building consumer confidence in e-commerce and the role of alternative dispute resolution. We are jointly working on high-speed scientific research networking. We have also identified a number of other key areas in which to focus our future efforts such as: enhancing electronic government, combating high-tech crime, measuring the digital economy, researching the societal benefits of information technology and reducing the digital divide.
To minimize the impact of maritime disasters, we have begun sharing information about vessel safety through the European EQUASIS system, a database that contains lists of all ships, records of inspections and safety violations. We have joined in support of a proposal in the International Maritime Organization to phase out all single-hulled tankers in favor of double-hulled tankers.
We agreed to a common approach to the final negotiations of a global UN Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, which contributed to their successful conclusion in Johannesburg on December 10.
We renewed the U.S.-EU Higher Education and Training Agreement that established a framework for educational exchanges and joint projects and agreed to promote joint research on on-line education.
We strengthened our science and technology cooperation in the areas of climate change research, including the ARGO project (a system to monitor changes to the temperature in the world's oceans), nanotechnology, biotechnology, e-learning and the mitigation of natural and man-made disasters through disaster information networking. We agreed to intensify scientific cooperation in non-nuclear energy and to explore research proposals on prions. We also upgraded our respective science and technology websites to offer more complete information on possibilities for cooperation and exchanges.
Together we contributed to the successful negotiations on the UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and its related Protocols.
As we look forward to the Swedish Presidency of the EU, we will continue to pursue this broad agenda. Specific priorities will include the resolution of outstanding trade disputes, and stability and economic renewal in Southeast Europe. We will help Russia implement its non-proliferation and disarmament commitments, in particular the destruction of its chemical weapons and the disposition and management of its excess weapons plutonium. We will strive for an early conclusion of the Agreement on the Multilateral Nuclear Environmental Program in the Russian Federation (MNEPR). We will continue to look for other ways to further enhance our cooperation on non-proliferation and counterterrorism, including implementation of UN sanctions on the Taliban and relevant UN Conventions. We will also focus on development, environment protection and health in the northern regions, in line with the EU?s Northern Dimension, and the U.S. Northern Europe Initiative. We will also jointly work for stability and economic reconstruction in Moldova and Southern Caucasus. We will continue to support the efforts towards further normalizing the relations between North and South Korea. We will also intensify our dialogue on the peace process in Colombia.
We will continue to work together to support the efforts of the UN Secretary General to achieve a comprehensive settlement on Cyprus consistent with relevant UNSC Resolutions.
We remain committed to the various understandings and agreements reached at the May 18, 1998 London Summit and, conscious of their importance, will continue to attach a high priority to the effective and prompt implementation of all their aspects.
Global climate change is one of the biggest environmental challenges. We will continue to take steps to bring the Kyoto Protocol into force as soon as possible, including working to reach an agreement at the resumed session of COP VI in May/June 2001 in Bonn.
We will continue to work together in the fight against money laundering to bring an end to harmful practices identified by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF). We will also reinforce international standards in this fight and involve new professions, e.g. lawyers, accountants and other professionals.
We will cooperate on Justice and Home Affairs issues, including the fight against illegal synthetic narcotics and other illicit drugs, trafficking in human beings and high-tech crime. We will continue our cooperation to combat child pornography on the Internet. Another priority is to continue the on-going dialogue on asylum and migration issues with a view to reporting to the U.S.-EU Summit in June 2001. To ensure continuity on Justice and Home Affairs issues of common interest, we will work towards a multi-annual approach within existing structures.
We will continue to work together to build consensus for the launch of a new trade round in the WTO at the earliest opportunity. A new Round should address the interest of all WTO members, in particular the poorer countries, and should strengthen and develop the rules-based system of the WTO. We agree that securing the launch of an inclusive and balanced Round during 2001 is of the highest priority. We will continue to work to this end and to seek to narrow differences that remain between us on the agenda of the Round.
-------- china
China: Buying a Better Army
Beijing has turned to an old strategic rival-Russia-to help modernize its military
MSNBC
12/18/00
By Kevin Platt and Melinda Liu
NEWSWEEK INTERNATIONAL
http://www.msnbc.com/news/501203.asp?cp1=1
Dec. 18 issue - At a recent aerospace exposition in the southern Chinese city of Zhuhai, the stars of the show were Russian. Military personnel and businessmen from Russia attended the exposition in force. Russian pilots drew the loudest applause for their aerial acrobatics.
"We've brought our best [jet] fighters and our best pilots to the air show" - COL. ALEKSANDR ERMOLENKO Russian Knights
RUSSIAN ARMS PEDDLERS drew the most visitors to their booths. Russian brass sometimes outnumbered their Chinese hosts at the banquets and vodka-soaked happy hours that punctuated the 10-day aerofest. "We've brought our best [jet] fighters and our best pilots to the air show," bragged Col. Aleksandr Ermolenko, trainer for the world-renowned Russian Knights, Moscow's jet-flying team. That wasn't exactly true. The Russians didn't take their most advanced weaponry to China. For weeks Russian generals had debated whether to allow a cutting-edge MiG-31 interceptor to be flown to Zhuhai. In the end Moscow's Defense Ministry decided against the idea. Instead, it sent a miniature dummy of the jet to the exhibition, accompanied by a vague list of technical specifications.
Despite that minor snub, Russian arms makers and the Chinese military have lately developed a very cozy relationship-one built on mutual need. The Russians badly need export earnings, while the Chinese need modern weapons-or at least arms more advanced than those in their creaky arsenal. Beijing's 1989 Tiananmen crackdown triggered a boycott of Western arms sales to China, leaving that country desperate for dependable suppliers. Russia has stepped into the breach, and it is now the biggest seller of big-ticket military hardware to China. Beijing has recently bought everything from Russian aircraft to advanced destroyers to diesel-powered patrol submarines, suited for use in the Taiwan Strait. Last month in Zhuhai, the Russians delivered the first of 45 SU-30 multirole fighter aircraft purchased by Beijing for about $2 billion. More lucrative arms deals are under discussion-ranging from Russian AWACS-type radar systems to attack helicopters. Prime Minister Zhu Rongji recently said that relations between China and Russia were "enjoying their best period ever."
"Much of this is a hard-nosed business relationship-a marriage of convenience." - FOREIGN DEFENSE ATTACHE IN BEIJING
That doesn't mean that China and Russia have become fast friends. The countries have long been strategic rivals and share lots of historical baggage. Mao Zedong was openly offended by Nikita Khrushchev's 1959 hint that Moscow would like a submarine-refueling base in China. A year later Khrushchev refused to assist China's nuclear program-and called Mao "a worn-out galosh." The two sides fought a border war in 1963. Relations have certainly improved since then. The 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union diluted Chinese fears of Russian expansionism. But for all the contracts being inked (and all the vodka being guzzled), there's an unmistakable sense of watch-your-back caution on both sides. "There's not a lot of trust between the two," says one foreign Defense attache in Beijing. "Much of this is a hard-nosed business relationship-a marriage of convenience."
That was evident last Nov. 25, when proud Chinese naval officers took delivery of the second of two Sovremenny-class destroyers at a dock in St. Petersburg. Dozens of workers from the Severnaya Verg construction company, along with a Russian naval crew that had been testing the destroyer, looked on sadly as the Russian Navy's blue and white St. Andrews flag was lowered. The Chinese flag was already flying atop the ship. Sergei Lakhin, commander of the Russian crew, could not conceal his emotions as he marched his sailors and officers away from the vessel. "It was so sad to see a foreign crew take over what could have made Russian naval commanders jump for joy, if they could have had this ship," said Svetlana Yemolayeva, a spokeswoman for the shipbuilding company. Russia's top naval brass did not attend the ceremony. The demise of the Soviet Union has shrunk Russian arms-procurement budgets, as well as demand for weapons. If Beijing had not bought the destroyers, their hulls might have been cut up for scrap.
Beijing is moving in the opposite direction. The government's push to modernize the People's Liberation Army is driven primarily by one objective-to intimidate Taiwan. Chinese authorities hope to boost the credibility of their warnings to the prosperous renegade island-namely, that any move toward independence would spark a Chinese invasion. Beyond that, China aims to deter the United States from supporting Taiwan in the event of a military conflict. Chinese strategists were sobered by U.S. high-tech wizardry during the gulf war, and more recently by NATO's intervention in Kosovo. "[In it] the Chinese leadership saw a dangerous precedent that could be used to oppose Beijing's control of Taiwan and dissident ethnic-minority areas [in Central Asia]," says June Teufel Dreyer, a professor at the University of Miami.
Despite its Russian arms-buying spree, the PLA is still in no shape to invade Taiwan. "It will take the PLA another 10 years or so to complete reinforcement of its forces deployed against Taiwan," says Konstantin Makienko, deputy head of the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies in Moscow. He believes the Chinese can change the military balance only after their fighter fleet is upgraded to acquire land- attack capabilities, and after the Navy commissions vessels equipped with powerful anti-ship missiles like the Russian Yakhont. And as other experts point out, it will take years for the PLA to learn to use Russian weapons. "It's taken the Chinese longer than expected to absorb some new technologies," says a foreign Defense attache in Beijing. "It's one thing to buy a new toy-and another thing to know how to play with it."
No doubt, many Moscow arms manufacturers would like to push bilateral cooperation as far as it can go. Russia's opinion makers may feel the same way. According to a survey of Russian politicians, journalists and business leaders released last week, more than half of 650 respondents said they viewed China as Russia's most important strategic partner. The poll, conducted by ROMIR (a member of the U.S.-based Gallup polling group), showed that China edged out Belarus (second), Germany (third) and the United States (sixth).
The handshakes and toasts are not confined to hardware sales. Moscow and Beijing are working on a new 15-year Military Cooperation Plan. Already, Beijing is sending pilots and weapons designers to Moscow for training. Russian weapons experts are helping Beijing with its nuclear arsenal and cruise-missile programs, many Western analysts assert. In addition, the two defense establishments are mulling closer ties as they study joint security initiatives against Islamic extremists in Central Asia. "There are a lot of factors bringing Russia and China closer together militarily," says Dru Gladney of the University of Hawaii, who studies China's Muslim minority groups.
But like most strategic partnerships, cooperation between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese leader Jiang Zemin has its limits. Experts don't foresee a formal military alliance between the two, like the one Russia and China forged in 1950 to fight U.S. hegemony and to promote communism. "There's a good deal of unease in the Russian Army about selling weapons to China," says Dreyer. Both sides realize that, one day, the two countries could find themselves on a competitive trajectory once again. "Some Russians are saying, 'We're selling China the weapons it could someday use against us', " says Dreyer. She attributes such cautionary attitudes to the fact that "Russia is a declining power and China is a rising one." Ironically, both now seek to reclaim their former glory by doing business with the other.
With Kevin Doyle in Phnom Penh
---
China Eager to Work With Bush
Associated Press
December 18, 2000 Filed at 10:40 a.m. ET
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-China-Another-Bush.html
http://www.infobeat.com/cgi-bin/WebObjects/IBFrontEnd.woa/wa/fullStory?article=405393696
BEIJING - The Chinese call him "Xiao Bu-shi," Little Bush, and remember him as a young visitor in the mid-1970's when his father was the chief American diplomat in a China just beginning to break out of its communist cocoon.
Now that Little Bush is about to become President George W. Bush, they are uneasy.
While campaigning, George W. Bush and his foreign policy advisers asserted U.S. interests in ways China finds threatening. They called for bolstering rival Taiwan, and for stronger alliances with Japan, South Korea, Australia and others, raising Chinese concerns about encirclement.
Then there are the perennial issues of human rights, trade and Chinese weapons sales to regimes Washington doesn't like.
The good news is that both sides have signaled an eagerness to get to know each other quickly.
China is one of the few foreign nations Bush has traveled to, visiting when he was about 30 years old during his father's 1974-75 term as head of the U.S. liaison office in Beijing. The office laid the groundwork for official diplomatic ties established in 1979.
Bush ``has to consider having strategic cooperation with China. Without it, it will be impossible to preserve stability in the Asia-Pacific region,'' said Yan Xuetong, an international security specialist at Beijing's Tsinghua University.
Although the communist government stayed carefully neutral during the election campaign, Beijing has telegraphed its worries about Bush in recent weeks. Officials and scholars in the foreign policy establishment have probed likely Bush policies and expressed misgivings in meetings with visiting U.S. officials.
For instance, they wonder whether Bush, 54, weakened by his slim electoral victory and a divided Congress, will try to rally conservatives with provocative shows of support for Taiwan.
As has been the case with every U.S. president since Harry Truman, Taiwan lies at the heart of Chinese concerns about Bush. The island split from China 51 years ago amid civil war. Beijing considers unification a sacred mission, but knows that Washington stands in its way. The United States once kept troops on the island to deter Beijing and is obligated by law to aid Taiwan's defense.
Candidate Bush called for building up military ties with Taiwan and vowed to defend the island if China attacked. That was a more explicit pledge than his recent predecessors made, although President Clinton did send an armada to the Taiwan Straits in 1996 to head off Chinese missile threats.
Chinese Foreign Minister Tang Jiaxuan on Friday told Lawrence Eagleburger, a foreign policy elder in Bush's Republican Party, that Taiwan remained ``the most important, sensitive core issue in China-U.S. relations.'' Tang urged Bush to seek the constructive ties backed by six U.S. presidents, both Republican and Democrat.
Most disconcerting for Beijing is Bush's support for the weapons to blunt China's growing missile arsenal in a possible attack on Taiwan. He has backed a U.S. national anti-missile defense that Clinton postponed approving and supported giving Taiwan a more limited version.
Those systems could allow Taiwan to stop some incoming missiles and give the United States, if it intervenes, an edge in weathering a possible Chinese missile strike on U.S. territory -- something a leading Chinese general once threatened to do.
``These (systems) will be too disadvantageous to China,'' said Yan, the Tsinghua scholar.
An early indication of Bush's intentions may come during annual arms sales talks with Taiwan in April. Another would be if Congress revives a bill to increase military coordination with Taiwan. Bush has said he supports it.
``These are two possible conflicts in front of our eyes,'' said Jin Canrong, a U.S. watcher at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. ``But they can be controlled through hard work.''
Chinese leaders, especially President Jiang Zemin in his dealings with Clinton, managed to keep the troubled relationship on track by giving it concerted high-level attention, and early indications are that this won't change.
Jiang, Foreign Minister Tang and members of the Bush camp have expressed a desire to forge a working relationship. At least one Bush adviser has traveled to Beijing to gauge misgivings among Chinese officials.
Now that the long electoral deadlock is over, the Chinese seem willing to put a positive face on Bush's victory. The final outcome was front-page news in the state media, and the China Youth Daily ran a lengthy portrait linking Bush closely with his father, who is well liked by Chinese.
-------- korea
Clinton to decide whether he'll visit North Korea
USA Today
12/18/00- Updated 03:21 PM ET
http://usatoday.com/news/washdc/ncsmon04.htm
WASHINGTON (AP) - The White House said Monday it wasn't seeking permission, but was talking with advisers to President-elect Bush about whether President Clinton should visit communist North Korea before he leaves office.
Clinton, who expects to make his decision before Christmas, will likely talk about the possible trip during his meeting with Bush Tuesday at the White House, said press secretary Jake Siewert. But Siewert stressed it would be Clinton's decision.
''The president will make that decision based on his own assessment of whether a trip will be useful in advancing America's national interest,'' Siewert said.
Siewert said a possible Clinton trip to North Korea also would likely surface in a meeting Monday between Clinton's national security adviser Sandy Berger and Bush's national security adviser Condoleezza Rice.
''We're consulting and have been consulting with the president-elect's team on this and those consultations will continue,'' Siewert said.
Secretary of State Madeleine Albright met with North Korea's Kim Jong Il in October to try to pave the way for a possible Clinton visit. Follow-up missile talks were held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, but no agreements were reached.
The United States is concerned about North Korean exports to Pakistan, Iran and other countries. The North Korean leader has indicated a willingness to curb missile development and missile exports in exchange for economic ties with the United States.
-------- russia
Blast of cold Russian air awaits Bush team
USA Today
12/18/00- Updated 02:38 AM ET
http://usatoday.com/news/comment/nceditf.htm
When President-elect Bush's newly appointed foreign-policy team of Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice turns attention to Russia next month, it's likely to find the political climate like the Moscow weather: Just when things seem to be on the mild side, out comes a blast of cold.
Consider what's happened since the closing days of the election:
No sooner had the Russian leadership pardoned ailing U.S. businessman Edmund Pope, convicted on dubious espionage charges, than it renewed efforts to take into custody exiled media oligarch Vladimir Gusinsky, persecuted for his TV station's outspoken political views. On Saturday, Mikhail Gorbachev, who began Russia's push toward openness, warned that all democratic achievements of the past 15 years were now at risk.
No sooner had the State Department touted the success of a 1995 U.S.-Russia deal to restrain arms sales to Iran, than President Vladimir Putin's government announced plans to resume the sales, threatening Persian Gulf stability.
And just when it seemed Russia was cozying up to the Western Europeans with cooperation on energy, trade and other matters, the Duma took a giant leap backward by readopting the music from its Stalin-era anthem and the red military flag - symbols of tyranny and expansionism to millions of Russia's East European neighbors opposed by Putin's populist predecessor, Boris Yeltsin.
This muscle flexing might look a little milder to the outside world if Putin had a positive track record of domestic reform since he inherited the presidency from Yeltsin, who resigned last January. He'd be able to reassure the United States and others he's strengthening the state, his secret police and the symbols of state power precisely in order to tackle domestic problems.
But from fighting corruption to economic reform, Putin has accomplished little at home. Among initiatives that have been proposed but not implemented:
Putin has vowed he won't perpetuate the Yeltsin-era system of corruption and favoritism. Yet his government has not mounted any significant cleanup campaigns.
Putin's state energy sector has raked in billions in oil sales at a time of high world oil prices. Yet those funds haven't been used to improve the lot of Russia's woeful population, which faces rising unemployment, rising crime, and life expectancy that by last year had plummeted to 65 years.
The Putin government has scrapped the cumbersome old tax code but has done little to strengthen tax collection from the most powerful tax cheats.
Both the Clinton administration and the previous Bush administration, to which Rice and Powell contributed, were patient with Russia's staggering problems. Indeed, ill-timed pressure could have aided Russia's hard-liners.
But what ordinary Russians - and Americans - will need soon from the new administration is a policy to persuade Putin that muzzling and intimidation of opposition voices, arms sales to terrorist nations and nationalist symbolism are preludes to failure.
Selective persecution of political or economic opponents, particularly, prevents Russia from building the openness that both its economy and society need to prosper. It recalls Putin's KGB roots and invites renewed suspicion and confrontation by the West.
True progress would build Russian pride on a foundation of domestic achievement instead of chest-beating for the outside world. In the first year of the Putin regime, such achievement is very hard to find.
-------- ukraine
Culture of Cancer
A health crisis in Ukraine rages almost 15 years after Chornobyl, the world's worst nuclear disaster.
From this week's Westchester Weekly...
By Robert Masterson
With the help of Children of Chornobyl Relief Fund, we sent a reporter to Ukraine to investigate the aftermath of the world's worst nuclear disaster. This week's cover story is the first in a series of stories on the devastating impact Chornobyl has had on public health and the economy of Ukraine.
---
"The Russian radiation is the best radiation in the world. It makes your hair grow thick and the men become more potent."
So say the "liquidators," the firefighters who work at Chornobyl Station. Of course, these are replacement liquidators. Their predecessors, the men who actually fought the fire during the accident of 1986, are all long dead by the thousands, according to Ukraine government figures, and all of them died rather horribly from massive radiation poisoning. During the past decade, approximately 40,000 cleanup workers have died, mostly men in their 30s and 40s. By way of comparison, the U.S. death toll in Vietnam after 12 years of involvement was approximately 50,000. However, say the liquidators with sarcasm, it was the best radiation poisoning in the world.
A rough translation of the Ukrainian national anthem begins, "Ukraine is not dead yet. ..." By all appearances, however, it is moribund. Ukraine's increasingly Third World culture runs rampant in a developed-world, European setting. Feral dogs roam the streets of Kyiv, the nation's capital, and well-dressed middle-aged office workers scrounge through garbage bins on their way to and from work. The sidewalks are lined with elderly women supplementing their minuscule Soviet-era pensions (approximately $10 a month) by selling cigarettes, beer and other sundries brokered to them by gangsters. The streets are clogged with gypsy cab drivers hustling some money on the side maneuvering among the Range Rovers, PT Cruisers, Corvettes, Porches and BMWs of the New Ukrainians, each with a cell phone, a bodyguard and a tarted-up party girl by his side. The only real growth industry seems to be the sex industry; escort services, marriage agencies and pornography are booming as the Ukrainian culture begins to feed upon itself, offering its own flesh as a commodity.
On April 26, 1986, in what was then the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, an explosion and fire within Reactor #4 at the Chornobyl nuclear complex killed 31 people. Commissioned in December 1983, Chornobyl #4 had operated for 865 days (with just 715 of those days deemed "effective," i.e., feeding electricity into Chornobyl Station's massive power grid). The accident -- dubbed "beyond-design-basis," or worse than anyone had anticipated -- destroyed the reactor's nuclear core, its protective safety barriers (such as they were) and all safety systems and released a cloud of radioactive particles, dust and smoke nearly 100 times as large as that kicked up by the atomic bomb detonated over Hiroshima 41 years earlier. Over the following days, as Soviet officials concealed and minimized the nature and scope of the disaster, prevailing winds from the south and the east blew streamers of radioactivity across Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, Poland and the Baltic Sea area.
It has never been determined just how many people have been harmed by exposure to that cloud of contamination. The World Health Organization, relying on information supplied by the Ukrainian government, has estimated a range in the thousands. Unofficially, the damage to the health and environment of Ukraine has been both severe and profound. Estimates of human fatalities, released by health and environmental groups such as Greenpeace, range in the hundreds of thousands. (See accompanying story, below.) According to my Lonely Planet guide to Russia, Belarus and Ukraine, close to 5 million people were affected to some degree by the explosion. According to such stateside anti-nuke groups as the Radiation and Public Health Research Group, the entire world has suffered from the Chornobyl accident. (Though known to the world by its Russian name, Chernobyl, I will defer to Ukraine's independence and use its native spelling.)
This week, on the eve of the 15th anniversary of the worst nuclear accident in history, the last operating nuclear power plant at Chornobyl Station, the aging #3, will be shut down forever. It appears as if a series of meteorological events (the onslaught of another winter) and equipment failures all along the power grid has taken Chornobyl #3 and two other Ukrainian nuclear plants (Reactor #6 at Zaporizhia and Reactor #2 at Yuzhna) off-line and out of the grid.
But the history of the disaster's impact is still being written, with powerful albeit unofficial evidence that its health and environmental impact has been grossly underestimated.
Thyroid cancer among children living near Chornobyl is 80 times higher than normal; birth defects have nearly doubled since 1986 and more than 10,000 Ukrainian children have been treated for leukemia and other illnesses. (For more on the aftereffects of the accident, see accompanying story, "Mopping Up After Chornobyl," below.)
Ukraine also has Europe's highest rate of HIV/AIDS infection, with 35,500 cases officially reported (out of a 1999 population of 50 million, down from 52 million in 1992). According to First Deputy Health Minister Olha Bobyleva, that number is probably low by a factor of 10. With a likely HIV-positive population of more than 350,000, Ukraine can anticipate a quarter of a million HIV-related deaths during the next 15 years. While drugs and treatment are available through the black market, the government has no agenda to address the issue, no educational program for its citizens and no real budget to implement either. Similar situations exist for such diseases as tuberculosis, syphilis, gonorrhea and a composite condition labeled TORCH (toxic plasmosis, rubella, chlamydia and hepatitis).
The links of such epidemics to the nuclear accident are insidious. Certainly, the population's immune systems have been compromised by long-term, constant exposure to radiation. Certainly, the economic bungling that characterizes both the Soviet and independent Ukrainian governments' lack of effective reaction to the accident, subsequent cleanup and health issues contributes to people's overall vulnerability to a host of infections and opportunistic cancers.
Beyond these quantifiable influences, however, there is a cloud of despair that is as devastating to the nation's health as any cloud of radiation has been. As the country's life expectancy drops (to the mid-50s for males), as the birth rate plummets, as cancer and birth defects increase, fewer and fewer people seem to care about their own chances to survive.
Behind the immediate concerns engendered by the Soviet Union's collapse and subsequent economic crises, the constant presence of radiation in the environment concerns the doctors working in such areas of Ukraine as Zhitomir Oblast. (See accompanying story, "Witness to an Autopsy," below.) These doctors see the Chornobyl radiation as a vampire force that saps the strength, weakens the immune systems and twists the chromosomes of the men and women living in areas declared safe.
<Picture: photo>
Traveling with Olena Maslyukivska, the in-country director of the international humanitarian Children of Chornobyl Relief Fund, I visited hospitals across Ukraine and met with administrative staff, directors, doctors and nurses. Fresh from a two-year stint in the United States as a Yale graduate student and an intern with the World Bank, Olena is an energetic (and some would say aggressive) optimist dedicated to rebuilding and healing her ailing homeland. A fundamentalist Christian in a country of atheism, Catholicism and Orthodoxy, she provided, with her unshakable optimism, an almost perfect counterpoint to my gloomy reaction to most situations we confronted together. As I became accustomed to the rhythm and the flow of post-Soviet Ukrainian manners, each impromptu interview, each tour of a ward or a lab or another critical care unit began to meld until the entire country at times appeared as one large cancer ward.
The pediatricians, surgeons and neonatologists we met thought of themselves as "firefighters" on the line, desperately battling a conflagration. More than one doctor used this language to explain his role in dealing with the permanent health crisis, an unending emergency. I began to wonder if there was a pamphlet somewhere explaining the metaphor and its use in interviews.
Everywhere we went, Olena and I were presented with a litany of "firefighting" requirements. They ranged from the most basic tools needed for minimal health care -- bandages, gloves, syringes, antiseptic -- to sophisticated neonatal incubators with which to address the spiraling number of premature births, low-birth-weight infants and infants with multiple birth defects. Anything we might be able to do to help them acquire this crucial material would always be deeply appreciated, we were told time and time again. The doctors especially solicited Olena's attention, hoping to attract her potential munificence, and certainly much of what occurred during our visits was colored by that. Nonetheless, what I saw rarely needed translation.
Statistics in Ukraine are kept with a sort of double-entry code, distinctly divided between public and private numbers. Official and officially certified records are statistically manipulated to minimize Ukraine's negative population growth, plummeting fertility rates, rising infant mortality rates and drops in overall life span. Officially, the quality of life really just isn't that bad in Ukraine.
Unofficially, many doctors have compiled and compared their records of direct observation and treatment. Reluctant to release their numbers to a foreign journalist, many of the doctors I spoke with nonetheless declared that, unofficially, Ukraine seems to be dying.
In Zhitomir, west of Kyiv and south of Chornobyl, we visited the statistical bureau at the Zhitomir Regional Ghildren's [sic] Hospital. While Dr. Alexander Gusak, "the deputy of main doctor in medical work," described the relatively low numbers his area of Ukraine reported for infant mortality, he simultaneously gestured toward the bank of filing cabinets in which his staff stored the hospital's records of miscarriages, stillbirths, fatal birth defects and infant deaths. The 3-by-5 cards used to record this information filled half a drawer for the entire year of 1986, the year of the accident at Chornobyl. Previous years were about the same -- half a drawer. For 1987, however, two complete drawers were full of cards. 1988 through 1991 took roughly two drawers a year. In 1992, a single drawer held the records. But for 1993, it took four full drawers to hold all the cards. For 1994, two drawers; 1995, two drawers; and 1996, another four drawers. And all this while the overall birth rate was dropping by 50 percent. Unofficially.
I asked Dr. Gusak if there was a connection between the decrease in the birth rate and the rise in infant deaths, if either was in any way connected with the release of radioactivity in 1986. He shrugged his shoulders and rolled his eyes. A common form of communication throughout Ukraine, one that needed no translation. This slow shrug of the shoulders accompanied by rolling eyes meant: "Who knows?" or "That's the way it is" or "I really can't say any more about this subject."
"This Zhitomir," he added in English by way of clarification. Our guide, Ludmilla, the young wife of a Ukrainian Army officer, told us this phrase was a common punctuation to explain a hopeless or frustrating or typically confused situation.
"If the bus is late," our guide elaborated, "the people say, 'This Zhitomir.' If the hot water goes out in the apartment, the people say, 'This Zhitomir.' "
"If the babies die?" I asked her.
"This Zhitomir," she replied.
Dr. Gusak smiled and shrugged, rolled his eyes in agreement.
"This Zhitomir," he reiterated.
"This Ukraine," I replied.
The hospital's statistics department hadn't caught up yet to more recent years' numbers. They said they were working on computerizing these new statistics on their new personal computer, a gift from a relief organization. But it was an overwhelming job. So there we were in the hospital with a portly, balding doctor telling us that things were pretty good in Zhitomir, while he gestured with his soft hands toward the hard evidence that told us things were pretty terrible. These contradictions, these hidden meanings and mixed messages, were the norm as I continued to speak with health professionals throughout the country.
Zhitomir is a supposedly safe place, too. It's 100 kilometers away from the reactor. It's well outside the "yellow zone," the more than 2,000-square-kilometer Exclusion Zone evacuated after the accident. It's supposed to be okey-dokey for human habitation.
At various times throughout our visit, we used Ludmilla's personal radioactivity dosimeter to take readings and got numbers in the 40s at the Zhitomir Regional Children's Hospital. A normal reading is considered 13 or 14; she said she'd gotten readings in the 400s at the city cemetery. The farther north and the closer to the nuclear wasteland we traveled that day as we went to the town of Korosten, the higher the readings went until the dosimeter stopped working by mid-afternoon.
The measurement at the heart of Chornobyl, just outside the containment vessel holding the molten aftermath of the world's most deadly nuclear accident, peaked at 132 millirads.
The causes of death for people who die in Zhitomir, should such deaths ever be reported and recorded, will not be listed as lifelong and constant exposure to radioactive nuclides for deceased parents and grandparents. For an infant or a child whose life was compromised even in utero by that same ambient poison, the cause of death will be tightly focused on the particular infection or the particular birth defect that officially caused mortality. There are no forms to contain unauthorized conclusions regarding the highly toxic environment that truly is modern Ukraine.
Hundreds of miles to the southeast, in the old missile-building city of Dnipropetrovsk, a volunteer effort oversaw the therapy that Chornobyl kids received at that city's Number Three Children's Hospital.
Working in a building almost 100 years old and bearing a shell scar from World War II, chief doctor and physical therapist Lydia Andreena Kulvolchuk monitored the health and therapeutic programs for more than 100 children, about one-third of the kids classified as Dnipropetrovsk's Chornobyl victims. Almost all their families had been relocated to the city after the accident. Kulvolchuk has volunteered her time after her official retirement to organize inpatient, outpatient and home treatment for the children.
The day Olena and I visited Number Three, dozens of kids were in for treatment. Some had come with their parents and some had come alone to receive laser beam therapy to kill infection and tumors, aroma therapy, electro-stimulation and, most oddly, to direct ultra-violet light into their noses from a multi-armed machine. As I was clearly fascinated with the machine, both Kulvolchuk and Olena were fascinated that I had never seen such a device.
"Surely the West has this technology," the doctor declared. "It is very effective in treating infections and bacteria in the sinus and throat areas."
I do remember seeing ultraviolet sterilizers in old-fashioned barber shops as a kid. There would be a pile of combs in a silver tray under a UV tube, but, no, I had never heard of shooting streams of light into anyone's head to kill germs before.
"Well, it works," Kulvolchuk told me, and I could not doubt her.
Kulvolchuk reminded me of a gold-toothed, Eastern European version of The Facts of Life's Mrs. Garrett. She directed her energies to getting the children out of the city, renowned for its industrial toxicity, which is much more dangerous for the already radiation-weakened patients, and to supplying their families with adequate food and clothing. Most of her young patients suffered thyroid and kidney problems, but she could not say if these were actual statistical spikes beyond what was known from the after-effects of the accident, or the outcome of better diagnostics and monitoring.
Kulvolchuk kept her records in a school notebook and held it proudly in her chubby hands. In her spiky Cyrillic writing, she recorded the lives and deaths of the hundreds of children who passed through her clinic.
"What happens to these numbers?" I asked her.
"I send them 'upstairs' until they get to the Ministry of Health," Kulvolchuk replied.
"And then what happens to these numbers?"
She shrugged her shoulders and rolled her eyes.
<Picture: photo>
It was also at Number Three Children's Hospital that Olena and I saw first-hand one of the dirty secrets of the international humanitarian relief community. Hospital director Dr. Igor Makedonsky, proud of the work he has accomplished over the last three years to build a brand-new, four-story facility to replace the hospital's ancient, battle-scarred quarters, is nonetheless dismayed that the new building stands empty.
"We hope to fill this space with new equipment and open within two years," he told us as we toured the vacant wards. I found myself panting at the pace he set while we climbed dark stairways, as we raced through bright hallways still smelling of fresh paint. In his early 40s, Makedonsky came into the position as director of Number Three after his predecessor was caught accepting kickbacks from a medical supply company. That former director, according to Makedonsky, had spent an entire year's equipment budget on disposable hypodermic syringes. After the staff was forced to reuse the inadequately sterilized needles, four patients were accidentally infected with the HIV virus. Although a lawsuit against the hospital was successful and it owes the families of the infected children around $400,000, that corrupt director was merely reprimanded and transferred to another medical center in Dnipropetrovsk.
"And the corruption continues," Makedonsky later told us in his office. The hospital had just received a shipment of much-needed beds from a relief organization. "They are beautiful, these beds. Eight beautiful Dutch hospital beds for our children. And this."
With that, Makedonsky opened a cabinet and pulled out a box. Inside were boxes of medicine and vitamins, all of them water-damaged and moldy and, most disturbingly, out-of-date. Vitamin A, drugs named Lorzaar and Diltalexal, drugs manufactured by companies like Hexal, Lilly and MSD, all bore expiration dates of July 1998, June 1999 and October 1999.
"Do you want to see more?" he asked. "Come on, I will show you."
Makedonsky charged outside to the lot behind the hospital and opened up what looked to be a make-shift garage.
"Oh my God," Olena exclaimed as we saw what was stored there. In tumbled heaps and piles were broken pieces of medical equipment, bags of what appeared to be dirty bandages, boxes of out-of-date medications, rusted surgical instruments, catheter trays with their sterile seals punctured or broken and old-fashioned blood-pressure devices filled with poisonous mercury.
"What am I supposed to do with these things?" Makedonsky asked.
We poked around in this humanitarian relief garbage for a while, marveling at each new outrage. There were rusted instruments designed for artificial insemination, useless cancer drugs and antibiotics, broken glassware and stuff none of us could identify.
"I can't throw these out," Makedonsky said. "This stuff is toxic and dangerous. What if someone found it and tried to use it or sell it on the black market?"
"Have you reported this?" I asked him.
"How can I?" he replied. "This kind of thing always comes bundled with things we need, like Dutch hospital beds. If I make some trouble, will I ever get anything else? I can't risk that."
It was the price he paid for the help he needed to treat the children in his hospital.
"There's got to be a special hell for the people who do this," I suggested. "They should spend an eternity in a hospital they have equipped."
Makedonsky shrugged his shoulders and rolled his eyes.
<Picture: photo>
In a small town north of the regional capital of Zhitomir, one woman exemplified the kind of work being done by private citizens to pick up the slack from the overwhelmed health care providers.
As we spoke in a car parked outside a small restaurant, Olena Kolena-Prestuty (my phonetic approximation of her last name) told me how she began to collect stray children during the early '90s. A widow in her late 50s, Kolena-Prestuty seemed well-suited for her role as surrogate parent and advocate for these cast-off kids. Short and stout, she also seemed made of iron, and her lined face seemed both compassionate and intolerant of those who were not.
"Initially, all the families who were relocated [from the Chornobyl zone] to this area were supposed to receive compensation from the government," she told me. "But, due to economic conditions ... that never happened. Many of these kids were abandoned or orphaned or removed from their homes because of their parents' alcoholism or drug addiction. I realized that nobody was taking care of all those kids. I decided to create this charity to take care of these orphaned and homeless kids."
Calling her single-handed efforts The St. Michael's Charity for Children, Kolena-Prestuty found it enormously difficult to raise funds. Both Ukrainian culture and years of Soviet training, she said, worked against the notion of individual giving.
"I vowed to make a home, a new kind of family, for these children. I first adopted about 20 kids," Kolena-Prestuty explained. As their legal parent, she received about 50 hrivna (a bit less than $10) a month for each child. "I went to the local government and got them to give me a part of an abandoned military base. Now, I have about 150 kids living there and I get a little bit of help from local organizations," businesses and churches, mostly.
In reality, the local government more or less just looked the other way as Kolena-Prestuty moved her enormous brood into the derelict barracks.
"I hope they find a little bit of happiness in their lives," she said. "If I had my own money, I would send them all to another place."
"What are your hopes for these children?" I asked her.
Kolena-Prestuty shrugged and rolled her eyes.
After establishing her orphanage, Kolena-Prestuty turned her attention to abandoned seniors and in much the same way has established a hospice for those elderly citizens who are dying alone and without resources. Coercing local businessmen into donating material and labor, she has overseen the renovation of yet another abandoned facility -- an ancient hospital -- into a clean, quiet shelter where her charges can ease themselves into death with some measure of dignity.
<Picture: photo>
Before dawn one morning, as our train pulled into the Kyiv station after five furious days of touring medical facilities in Zhitomir, Korosten, Lutsk and Lviv, I had a few moments of clarity watching the gray light slowly illuminate the industrial rust belt of the capital city.
A health crisis in Ukraine is raging. Public health care is problematic at best, and nonexistent at worst. The toxicity of both urban and rural environments -- widespread low- and high-level radioactivity, industrial pollution, even unleaded gasoline -- is a background upon which the health problems associated with poverty, ignorance, greed and fear are magnified. To the wealthy, to the foreign community, to the old Russian elite and the newly privileged Ukrainian, premium health care is available for premium prices. Dozens of private hospitals and clinics fill the English-language version of Kyiv's phone book and the pharmaceutical black market deals in everything from Viagra to sophisticated AIDS cocktails for those with the cash to pay.
For everyone else, though, it's stand and wait until they die. For the masses, those workers and peasants for whom communism was designed to relieve oppression, public health care facilities are often capable of providing only minimal treatment. During Soviet times, health care was available and consistent throughout the Union. It was often substandard by Western measures, but it was available and it was free. Now, however, with the loss of central planning and administration, the Ukrainian health care system is fragmented and operating on a catch-as-catch-can basis. More than one small-town clinic's director claimed a lack of even the most basic drugs with which to treat illness and infection or pain. Hospital staffs across the country were often limited to offering nothing more than a hygienic environment, nutritious meals and consistent heat as treatment for their cases. Other than that, they had nothing to offer except, perhaps, a referral to another, better-equipped hospital.
A situation calling for preventive as well as crisis health care measures, as well as medicine and technology, is being handled on an improvised basis by a loose network of women -- mothers, wives and widows, mostly -- working with a handful of overworked, underpaid (if they're paid) doctors.
A community of constant illness, a culture of cancer, has evolved to make do and to get by as best as it is able with little or no help from any government agency or healthy citizen. Ukraine has the highest rate of thyroid cancer in the world. Its citizens are afflicted with esoteric forms of leukemia and soft-tissue cancers well beyond any worldwide norm, and the rates of multiple and fatal birth defects are increasing among the fewer and fewer children actually being born. Yet the Ukrainian government seems to have turned its back on its own people.
While ministers wrangle with the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund and the European Union for billions in economic relief, the people in the villages are dying for lack of pennies' worth of soap and antibiotics. While the gangsters and the biznizmen line their pockets with the loot they skim from enterprises both quasi- and blatantly illegal, the industrial workers and peasant farmers huddle in the freezing dark and pray to candle-lit icons or antique portraits of Lenin.
Comfortable now and safe in the U.S.A., I'm frightened by a lot of what I saw. Often, Ukraine seemed to be nothing so much as a rehearsal for the collapse of Western Civilization. There, at the cusp of Asia, Ukraine appears to be dissolving and there, but for the grace of who knows what, go us all.
To be continued...
-------
Mopping Up After Chornobyl
Chornobyl's full health legacy is yet to be determined.
On April 26, 1986, at 1:23 a.m., reactor No. 4 at the Chornobyl Atomic Energy Station exploded. Subsequent investigations revealed that tests that were being conducted on the operating and backup systems were mismanaged. The plant was immediately shut down. Nonetheless, a large amount of radioactive steam was released into the atmosphere during the explosion. The highest amount of radioactive fallout was registered in the vicinity immediately surrounding Chornobyl.
The atomic energy station and the nearby town of Prypiat are located in northern Ukraine, 90 kilometers north of Kyiv (Kiev), the capital of Ukraine, a city with a population of 2.8 million. At the time, the prevailing winds were directed north to northwest, so that Belarus received the most widespread deposit of radioactive fallout. With subsequent shifts in the direction of the wind, as well as rainfall, northern regions of Ukraine and the southern border of European Russia received radioactive fallout. Soviet authorities neither officially acknowledged the explosion nor warned their citizens until May 2, 1986.
Excessive levels of radiation were recorded in northern Scandinavia, Wales, Ireland, Northern Italy, Greece and coastal Alaska in the first weeks after the explosion.
In Ukraine, more than 4.6 million hectares were contaminated, some of the most productive agricultur