------- Index of Articles

NUCLEAR
CHERNOBYL SCIENTIST/POLITICAL PRISONER
Babies' bones removed for nuclear research
Bulgaria gets aid for nuclear reactors shutdown
Putin's China Card
Depleted Uranium radioactivity in KOSOVO
Military muscle gap of European Union
Pakistan Appeals for Sanction Curbs
Report: Iraq Bought Weapon Material
Powell Seeks Less Okinawa Resentment
North Korea Dismisses Offer by the U.S. to Resume Talks
US Rejects NKorea Compensation
Study Says Russia Might Keep Missiles in Face of U.S. Shield
Sad Tales of the Pacific Islands
Putin displeased with peacekeepers
Russia: No Nuclear Help to Iran
A Promising Start With Russia
Highlights of Putin's Interview
Clinton appointee to help with sick nuclear workers program
A Good Week's Work . . .
. . . From a No-Wobble Bush
Author to Sue U.S. Over Book on China's Nuclear Advances
Ex - Nuclear Official Sues Over Book
Bush's Warmth Toward Russian Leader Stirs Skeptics
PLANS READY FOR SHIPMENT OF SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL

MILITARY
Revelations Of Torture No Surprise
Tech firms fight for 'star wars' trade
Taiwan Denies Developing Medium - Range Missile
Yugoslavia Wants Arms Embargo Ended
Colombian Indians Resist an Encroaching War
Military muscle gap of European Union
U.S. Scales Back Iraq Mission
U.N. Sanctions Didn't Stop Iraq From Buying Weapons
U.S. Scales Back Iraq Mission
Sharon Flatly Rejects Proposal for Peres-Arafat Meeting
Syrian Troops Quit Beirut
New Zealand Aims to Scrap Air Defense
Vieques, the Island Paradise
When the Bombing Ends
Pentagon's No. 2: Let others take up peacekeeping
Air Force general top pick for Joint Chiefs chair

OTHER
Solar-powered jail helps California county save money
Ban on Execution of the Retarded Is Vetoed in Texas
Bush to Back FERC Energy Price Limits
G.M. Will Oppose Efforts to Tighten Fuel Efficiency
PROTEIN HELPS PLANTS HOLD WATER
What I Like and Don't Like About Bush's Energy Policy
ENGINEERED CROPS THREATEN FARMERS, ENVIRONMENT
Homeopathic Metals May Cure All Manner of Ailments
New Imaging Combo Could Improve Cancer Treatment
Supreme Court Upholds Use of Force in Guarding Vice President
Fed Control Ends in Texas Prisons
Russian Scientist Allegedly Sold Satellite Secrets to China
Taliban invalidates bin Laden's orders
High court sides with police

ACTIVISTS
June 21 call-in day to oppose National Ignition Facility
NO STAR WARS:
Published paper on internal resistance against atom bomb development
US CAMPAIGN TO ABOLISH NUCLEAR WEAPONS
Protesters Break Into Vieques Range
Indonesia Students Protest Fuel Hike
Vieques Advocate Turns From Violence of Her Past


-------- NUCLEAR

CHERNOBYL SCIENTIST/POLITICAL PRISONER
Bandazhevsky condemned to 8 years of prison [for reporting on Chernobyl victims]

De : solange <s.m.fernex@wanadoo.fr>
Date : Mon, 18 Jun 2001 16:07:46 +0300

Dear Colleagues

The Military Court in Gomel has, a few moments ago, condemned Professor Yuri, I. Bandazhevsky, former Dean of the Medical Institute in Gomel to 8 years of prison.

There is no possible appeal against a verdict of the Military Court, only the Presidential Grace an international solidarity campaign will be launched soon.

This verdict was issued, although Bandazhevsky has always denied the corruption charges raised against him, and the accusers have declared to the Court that they had testified against him under constraint (menaces against their families, against them, drugs in their beverage).

Prof. Bandazhevsky showed the organic, anatomic and histological health damages caused by incorporated Cs137 in the Chernobyl victims, especially children living in the contaminated zones.

As the UNSCEAR maintains (May 2000) that the only consequences of Chernobyl are 1800 thyroïd cancers in children and teenagers, Bandazhevsky's findings were not politically correct and he had to be suppressed. Chernobyl happens to revive the Galileo Galilei tragedy

We are very sorry, Please, spread the news and help !
Michel Fernex, PSR/IPPNW Switzerland solange Fernex, WILPF France

-------- britain

Babies' bones removed for nuclear research

Monday, June 18, 2001
Irish Times
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/world/2001/0618/wor17.htm

SCOTLAND: Thousands of dead babies had their thigh bones secretly removed from their bodies during the 1960s in Scotland as part of a scientific study into the dangers of radiation from nuclear weapons tests.

Leading medical researchers at Yorkhill Sick Children's Hospital in Glasgow reduced femur samples from more than 2,100 children between 1959 and 1970 to ashes so they could be analysed for radioactive contamination.

Operators of the Dounreay nuclear plant in Caithness, the UK Atomic Energy Authority, which initiated the research, and the Medical Research Council, which oversaw it, have admitted that parents were not asked for their consent.

A report in the Sunday Herald newspaper said that more than half the children who had femur samples removed were stillborn, and that most others died before they reached the age of five.

Every year, between 100 and 200 thigh bones of children who died in west central Scotland were removed or sampled at post mortem examinations at York hill.

A handful came from Perthshire, Orkney, and Ross and Cromarty and Sutherland in the Scottish Highlands.

After being incinerated, the femurs were analysed for the radioactive isotope strontium-90, which was being spread around the world by atmospheric nuclear tests.

Doctors feared that because it was contaminating milk, it could be building up to dangerous levels in children's bones.

The only permission ever requested from the bereaved parents in the 12 years of analysing bones was for routine post mortem examinations, the newspaper reported.

Health minister Susan Deacon said last night the findings were very disturbing and merited further investigation.

She will ask the independent review group set up after the Alder Hey scandal in Liverpool to look at the findings.

"While these events took place some time ago, they will still be very disturbing to the families concerned," she said.

"I have made it clear that the paternalism of the past has no place in a 21st-century health service and parents must be kept involved in any decision affecting their children."

She believed the findings would strengthen the review group's determination to make sure such things never happened again. - (PA)

-------- bulgaria

Bulgaria gets aid for nuclear reactors shutdown

BULGARIA: June 18, 2001
REUTERS
http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=11223&newsDate=18-Jun-2001

LONDON - Bulgaria agreed on Friday the terms of a 100-million-euro, internationally-backed fund to support the decommissioning of ageing reactors at its Kozloduy nuclear power station.

The fund, administered by the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), is supported by the European Union, Denmark, Greece, Ireland, the Netherlands, Switzerland and the UK.

"The Bulgarian energy sector still needs support but it has now started on a very good course," Matthias Ruete, director of enlargement, directorate general at the European Commission, the EU's executive arm, said during a signing ceremony in London.

Kozloduy, which has a total capacity of 3,760 megawatts, supplies nearly half Bulgaria's power.

After starting talks on joining the European Union in March last year, Bulgaria has agreed to shut the plant's two oldest 440-megawatt reactors by 2003.

A decision on the closure of another two 440-megawatt units is expected next year.

EBRD said in a statement it expected significant additional contributions to the decommissioning fund after the agreement of a final date for the shutdown of the other two reactors.

-------- china

Putin's China Card

New York Times
June 18, 2001
By WILLIAM SAFIRE
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/18/opinion/18SAFI.html?searchpv=nytToday

WASHINGTON - "I like Old Joe," said F.D.R. about Joseph Stalin. Carrying on that self- deluding tradition of snap judgments, George W. Bush looked into the eyes of Vladimir Putin, announced, "I was able to get a sense of his soul," and after two heady hours concluded he was "straightforward" and "trustworthy."

Ever since the K.G.B. man emerged as the Russian oligarchs' choice, President Putin has shown himself to be duplicitous (ask the Chechens), anti-democratic (ask the remains of Russia's free press) and untrustworthy (ask the exiled oligarchs). We can hope that the Bush gush was flattery intended to show the U.S. president to be nonthreatening as his administration presses ahead with a missile defense.

The American gave the Russian what he most needs: public deference that salves Russia's wounded pride, and respect to its leader abroad as Putin methodically chokes off opposition at home. Bush topped this off with a pre-emptive concession: agreement to exchange warm ranch-and-home visits, for which Putin was eager, even before any progress was shown in agreement to scrap the old ABM treaty.

The Russian partly reciprocated, as Bush hoped, by accepting the American formulation of "a new architecture of security in the world" and by hinting that "we might have a very constructive development here in this area." That public optimism from Russia takes a little of the steam out of alarmist Franco-German protests that America, in defending its cities from rogue missiles, was starting "a new arms race."

At home, Putin has cracked down on the new freedoms without curbing the old corruption. Example of the rule of lawlessness: his Duma passed a bill last week to make Russia the world's nuclear waste dump, generating $20 billion over the next decade.

That would be the most dangerous boondoggle in history, with little control over 2,000 tons of radioactive garbage yearly. "One hundred million Russian citizens are against it," says Grigory Yavlinsky, one of the few reformers left standing in the Duma, "and only 500 people are for it - 300 members sitting here and 200 bureaucrats who will be getting the money." (Fortunately for the world, the U.S. won't bury our nuclear waste in Russia, where it could be reprocessed and sold to Iran for weapons production.)

Well aware of the weakness of his hand, Putin is emulating Nixon strategy by playing the China card. Pointedly, just before meeting with Bush, Putin traveled to Shanghai to set up a regional cooperation semi-alliance with Jiang Zemin and some of his Asian fellow travelers.

That deft maneuver puts European leaders on notice that Russia - despite all the talk of becoming a "partner" in Europe - knows that the center of America's strategic concern in the coming generation will be Asia.

Putin is signaling Bush: European leaders may resent your economic competition and appeal to their voters by complaining about pollution, but that's merely bickering within the Western alliance. A future recombination of China and Russia, however, would challenge America's status as the world's sole superpower. Therefore, you'd better prop up our Russian economy - with none of your human- rights lectures and expansion of NATO to our borders - lest we undermine your hegemony with a Beijing- Moscow axis.

I wonder if Bush and his advisers are catching that signal. If so, they don't seem to have let Putin's China card affect U.S. policy. In a strong and thoughtful speech in Warsaw, Bush sent a signal of his own: "No more Munichs, no more Yaltas."

That means no more appeasement of threats of aggression (as at Munich just before World War II, or about Taiwan today) and no more carving up of the world into spheres of influence (as at Yalta at that war's end, or blocking the entry of the Baltic nations into NATO today). I read that to mean we will support the entry of Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania vigorously, despite Putin's phony worry about NATO being "a military organization . . . moving toward our border."

With the strongest hand any American ever held, Bush comported himself well. But he should remember Reagan's "trust but verify." When the manipulative Russian comes to visit at the Texas ranch this fall, I would hate to hear "I like ol' Vlad."

-------- depleted uranium

Inquiry re: Depleted Uranium radioactivity in KOSOVO

Date sent: Mon, 18 Jun 2001
From: Fayolle Andre <fayollea@yahoo.co.uk>

Right now I am planned to go back home in Uganda reaching there on July first. However, I wish to know which laboratory, possibly independant from NATO and UN, in Zurich, in Rome, in France and why not in Amsterdam, can test me to know wether I have ingested Ceramic insoluble DU and also sulble DU, at what dose and if there is any danger.

I arrived for the first time in my life in Eastern Europe on May 01 2001, in Kosovo, without being aware of this DU business.

Please if you know, give contacts of such laboratory. Possibly what type of test should be carried out on me, how long does it take, what cost, and why not if the French social security could reimbursed ? I am not telling my boss that I am trying to do that. I do not trust so much the UNEP report dated early 2001.

Indeed Kind Regards Andre

-------- europe

Military muscle gap of European Union

Washington Times
June 18, 2001
Austin Bay
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20010618-7637909.htm

"Royal Air Force may recruit Luftwaffe pilots." No, the London Times´ report isn´t a joke employment ad intended to boggle Battle of Britain survivors.

The RAF´s talent search, however, exemplifies Europe´s general decline in military effectiveness and European NATO members´ specific failure to meet modernization commitments. Ultimately, it offers insight into the European Union´s chronic case of collective political weakness, illustrating why even the most sanctimonious of Washington-taunting Euro-promoters secretly rely on U.S. leadership.

Facing a pilot shortage, the RAF is scouring the globe for hi-Mach skills. This spring, when New Zealand´s irresponsible little government decided to defund its own air force, the RAF immediately approached unemployed Kiwi jet jockeys.

But recruiting from the Luftwaffe was too ironic for the press to ignore. In the six decades since the London Blitz, both history and Hollywood have kept alive the memory of Spitfires and Messerschmidts tangling high above the Thames.

Don´t confuse hiring German pilots as indicative of increasing European cooperation. It´s poaching indicative of desperation on the part of the RAF and disenchantment on the part of Luftwaffe pilots disgruntled by Germany´s aging air fleet and declining training time.

Euro politicos have decided their militaries can shrink and make-do with old equipment. The Soviet threat is kaput, and economic prosperity is what really binds Europe, right?

This political decision, however, abrogates NATO´s 1999 "force goals" agreement, forged after the Kosovo War revealed a growing gap between U.S. and European military capabilities. Europeans agreed to improve in five areas: logistics, command and control, survivability of forces and infrastructure, mobility, and "effective engagement" a buzzword for precision-guided weapons.

But the goals simply haven´t been met. Actually, Britain deserves credit for attempting to meet its commitments. Germany has faltered. France, as usual, has invested more in anti-Washington invective than in modernization.

At last week´s NATO defense ministers conference, Secretary General Lord Robertson assayed the failure to pursue military reform. "Elections are rarely won or lost on questions of defense policy," he said. "These are complex and sometimes dry issues . . . hard to package in a sound bite." While globalization offers "our societies the opportunity to become . . . more prosperous, it also makes them more vulnerable," particularly to "states developing weapons of mass destruction."

Lord Robertson warned Europeans, "If crisis comes along, the capability won´t be there." If Europe doesn´t deliver, the result will be a "trans-Atlantic capability gap and a European credibility gap."

The Eurocorps, the "go it alone" force some Americans perceive as a threat to undermine NATO, looks like another Euro-tout turned to Euro-flop. Lack of funding is one reason, European rivalries another. Greece rejected Turkish participation in a joint European defense force. On June 8, Irish voters rejected EU expansion. Like other Western Europeans, many Irish believe an enlarged EU costs them too much money. More than a few also fear that EU "institutional reforms" would require Ireland to participate in the EU´s military force, compromising Irish neutrality. Europe already suffers from other credibility gaps. The euro´s decline against the U.S. dollar was the free market´s comment on Europe´s economic weaknesses. Though Europeans recognize the need for structural and social reform, the will to tackle vested interests and embedded problems is utterly lacking. While crack German pilots may jump to the RAF, ask a Greek engineer about intra-EU labor mobility if he applies for a job in Munich.

American liberals chatter about European "credibility" on environmental issues. That´s another hoo-hah. Romania remains the only European nation to ratify the flawed Kyoto Treaty. However, hammering President Bush about the Kyoto Treaty shields European leaders from the wrath of their domestic greens. Germany´s left-wing government is making extensive use of this bit of guerrilla theater the eco-freaks generate great sound bites and satirizing Mr. Bush deflects attention from the deterioration of the Luftwaffe.

Lord Robertson understands, as do other European defense specialists, that emerging threats require modernization and preparation. However, among key European leaders, only British Prime Minister Tony Blair has publicly acknowledged the merit of the Bush administration´s missile defense proposals, new approaches to arms control and new "strategic framework" for collective defense.

But don´t tell that to the crowds of protesters greeting Mr. Bush´s European tour. Check their posters it´s all sound bites, adolescent angst and smug duplicity. The United States is the bogey man, faulted for Middle East conundrums, energy policy, environmental degradation and incredibly impoverishing Cuba. Apparently, some European socialists still can´t criticize communism.

If the defense of the Free World is to remain credible, the United States has to lead it´s all too obvious Europe can´t.

Austin Bay is a nationally syndicated columnist.

-------- india / pakistan

Pakistan Appeals for Sanction Curbs

New York Times
June 18, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-US-Pakistan.html?searchpv=aponline

WASHINGTON (AP) -- With Pakistan staggering under severe drought, Foreign Minister Abdul Sattar hinted Monday that his country might be forced to rely on nuclear weapons for its defense if U.S. sanctions are not eased.

Sattar, speaking at a conference on the spread of dangerous technology, said the restrictions have haunted Pakistan for more than a decade.

``The sanctions deny Pakistan not merely economic assistance and military sales, but even spare parts for the equipment we purchased,'' Sattar said.

The risk, the Pakistani minister said, is that if nations cannot depend on conventional weapons to deter attack there is a ``consequent increase in reliance on strategic deterrence.''

Pakistan, and its historic rival, India, have fought three wars. Both have exploded nuclear devices and tested ballistic missiles.

Former President Bill Clinton called South Asia the most dangerous part of the world, a view shared by many analysts.

Sanctions against India and Pakistan are under the Bush administration's review, a senior U.S. official said Monday.

There is an inclination to lift some of the sanctions against the two countries sometime soon, but the fact that Pakistan is under military rule and has supported Taliban militia in Afghanistan may slow relief for Pakistan, said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Severe drought has damaged Pakistan's agricultural sector over the past year, setting back the country's other successes in stabilizing its battered economy, Finance Minister Sahukat Aziz said recently.

The economy grew 2.6 percent in the fiscal year ending June 30, down from 3.9 percent growth the previous year, he said.

Sattar met with Condoleezza Rice, President Bush's national security adviser, on Monday and is scheduled to see Secretary of State Colin Powell on Tuesday.

A U.S. official said afterward that Rice told the foreign minister the administration was committed to building a good relationship with his country and was looking forward to a return to democracy that would permit fully normal relations.

Sattar told the conference, held by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, that over the last year Pakistan had strengthened control of strategic weapons. He declared Pakistan would not be the first in the region to resume nuclear testing.

The Pakistan government is concentrating on economic revival and strengthening democracy, he said, and ``cannot afford a distraction.''

-------- iraq

Report: Iraq Bought Weapon Material

New York Times
June 18, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-UN-Iraq.html?searchpv=aponline

UNITED NATIONS (AP) -- Iraq evaded U.N. sanctions in the 1990s, importing military equipment to build missiles and nuclear weapons from companies in Eastern Europe and Russia, according to unpublished U.N. weapons inspection reports.

The American arms control researchers who obtained the reports conclude that Saddam Hussein's shopping spree is likely to intensify as the enforcement of sanctions wanes and Iraq's revenue from illegally smuggled oil grows.

The findings by Gary Milhollin, director of the Washington-based Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control, a nonprofit watchdog group, and researcher Kelly Motz, are being published in the July-August issue of Commentary magazine.

The unpublished U.N. weapons inspection reports were obtained by sources outside the United Nations, according to Motz. Their release comes at a time when the U.N. Security Council is engaged in tough negotiations on a U.S.-British proposal to toughen enforcement of a decade-old arms embargo on Iraq.

``The new proposal -- whether adopted by the U.N. or not -- has little hope of stopping the Iraqis from sneaking in what they need to rebuild their weapons sites and sneaking out the oil to pay for it,'' they wrote in the article made available Monday. ``Even when the U.N. inspection regime was in place, the Iraqis had already figured out how to do just that.''

A British diplomat disagreed. ``The new resolution will set in place arrangements to monitor the flow of goods into Iraq and to crack down on illegal oil smuggling. So it's not right to claim that it will make no difference,'' the diplomat said, speaking on condition of anonymity. There were no immediate comments from U.S. officials on the report.

The Security Council imposed sanctions on Iraq after its 1990 invasion of Kuwait. The sanctions cannot be lifted until U.N. weapons inspectors certify that Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs have been dismantled along with its long-range missile program.

But inspectors with the U.N. Special Commission, known as UNSCOM, left Iraq after seven years in December 1998 ahead of U.S. and British missile strikes launched to punish the country for not cooperating with inspectors. For the last 2 1/2 years, the Iraqi government has barred U.N. inspectors from returning, demanding instead that sanctions be lifted immediately.

The two experts from the Wisconsin Project quote an UNSCOM assessment before the inspectors left in 1998 which said that throughout the 1990s Iraq imported goods from at least 20 different countries.

On Iraq's purchase list were ``full-sized production lines, industrial know-how, high-tech spare parts and raw materials,'' the UNSCOM report was quoted as saying. The reports cited have never been made public by the United Nations.

The contraband cargo was almost always flown or shipped to Jordan and then transported by truck across the border into Iraq, the researchers found.

According to the report, Iraq decided in the early 1990s to target Eastern Europe, following the collapse of the Soviet empire, which spurred a wholesale weapons market. In the Commentary article, the experts describe trips by high-level Iraqi delegations to companies in Belarus, Ukraine, Romania and Russia. The only other company mentioned in the article is one based in Taiwan.

Ewen Buchanan, spokesman for UNSCOM's successor agency, the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission, said UNSCOM informed the Security Council over the years of evidence of ongoing efforts by Iraq to buy a variety of items, particularly in the missile area, though it didn't name any countries involved.

The report published by Milhollin and Motz ``showed sanctions didn't do what they were supposed to do because Iraq got hold of some banned items, but it also showed the value of inspections in that we uncovered some of this stuff,'' Buchanan said.

The two researchers said the only way to shut down Iraq's smuggling network would be to control all cargo coming into Iraq and the oil going out -- something the U.S.-British sanctions proposal before the Security Council tries to do.

This would require cooperation of Iraq's neighbors, especially Jordan and Syria. But Jordan's Prime Minister Ali Abu-Ragheb said in a letter to U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan circulated Monday that the U.S.-British plan would threaten the tiny kingdom's national security and stability.

-------- japan

Powell Seeks Less Okinawa Resentment

New York Times
June 18, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-US-Japan.html?searchpv=aponline

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Secretary of State Colin Powell and Japanese Foreign Minister Makiko Tanaka on Monday discussed possible U.S. steps to ease resentment in Okinawa about the American troop presence there, officials said.

The first meeting between the Powell and Tanaka came amid uncertainty about security in East Asia and how the United States and Japan, treaty allies, should respond. Part of Tanaka's mission here was to lay the groundwork for a meeting this month between President Bush and Japan's new Prime Minister, Junichiro Koizumi.

A Japanese Foreign Ministry spokesman, speaking to reporters on condition of anonymity, said Tanaka asked Powell about the possibility of shifting Marine Corps training exercises to other locations and relocating

``Powell said the U.S. presence is important and so are the military exercises,'' the official said, ``but he would pass on to Secretary of Defense (Donald H.) Rumsfeld Japan's concerns about base-related issues.'' That account was confirmed by a State Department official.

State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said Powell made clear to Tanaka that the U.S. goal is to have the smallest presence possible given the security needs of the region.

Another official said the Pentagon is looking at sites elsewhere in Asia to which some training activities could be relocated.

Okinawa's governor, Keiichi Inamine, has urged U.S. officials to cut military forces on his southern Japanese island, following a recent series of crimes and embarrassing remarks by U.S. troops and officers stationed there.

Okinawa is home to about half of the 47,000 U.S. military forces stationed in Japan.

Japan is undertaking a comprehensive security review, part of which involves a parliamentary analysis of constitutional issues. This could give rise to an expanded role for the country's defense forces.

Tanaka told Powell that Japan needs to find its own role on defense issues. U.S. and Japanese sources said Powell and Tanaka discussed the constitutional issue but that Powell took no position.

Tanaka met first with National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice at the White House. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney dropped by, and new ambassador to Japan Howard Baker also took part.

The official said Tanaka told Bush and the other U.S. officials that after 50 years of cooperation on security issues, Japan would like ``to look carefully at the benefits and burdens because we have reached a milestone.''

During the meeting at the State Department, Powell talked to Tanaka about the administration's rationale for going ahead with a missile defense program.

Boucher said Tanaka reaffirmed that Japan understands the reasons why the U.S. is eager to push ahead with the program.

At the end of the meeting, Boucher quoted Powell as telling Tanaka, ``You should always remember that the best friend of Japan is the United States.''

-------- korea

North Korea Dismisses Offer by the U.S. to Resume Talks

New York Times
June 18, 2001
By HOWARD W. FRENCH
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/18/world/18CND-KOREA.html?searchpv=nytToday

TOKYO, June 18 - In its first official reaction to American proposals to resume bilateral talks, North Korea has dismissed a Bush administration request that the issue of conventional forces be included along with nuclear and ballistic missile control questions.

In a statement read on state radio Sunday, a North Korean Foreign Ministry spokesman accused President Bush of unilaterally setting the agenda for the talks. The statement said that the United States must remove its 37,000 troops from South Korea before any discussion of North Korean troop deployments would be possible.

The North Korean spokesman said that, with the American request to include conventional arms in the talks, "We cannot construe this otherwise than an attempt of the U.S. to disarm" North Korea "through negotiations."

When Mr. Bush came into office he said that he would not continue President Clinton's talks with North Korea and that negotiations would not resume anytime soon. He said he wanted time to review the talks and United States policy.

Then on June 6 Mr. Bush announced that the United States would restart negotiations with North Korea on a broad range of issues, including that nation's production and exporting of missiles and its stationing of soldiers on the border with South Korea.

The apparent North Korean rejection of talks on conventional troop issues came a day after a conference held on the South Korean island of Cheju marking the first anniversary of the first summit meeting between leaders of North and South Korea.

At the conference, the southern leader, Kim Dae Jung, said that the most important achievement in last year's rapprochement was the North's acceptance of the American military presence in South Korea. "The continued presence of U.S. forces on the Korean peninsula serves the interest of the Korean people," Mr. Kim said he was told by his counterpart in the North.

But when describing North Korea's position, it is often necessary to say "apparent," not only because the country still remains largely closed and secretive but because the announcements of the state news media and even official spokesman often matter little in the end. Major decisions are invariably made at the top, and without high-level contacts it is often impossible to gauge the true disposition of the leadership.

The Bush administration proposal to discuss conventional troop deployments in its talks with North Korea marks a significant departure from the policy of the Clinton administration. The previous efforts focused almost exclusively on eliminating the threat of nuclear weapons production in the North and ending the testing and sale of North Korean ballistic missiles.

In one of her final trips abroad as secretary of state, Madeleine K. Albright visited the North Korean capital, Pyongyang. There she met with the North Korean leader, Kim Jong Il, trying to secure final agreement over controls on the country's nuclear and missile technology and paving the way for a normalization of relations.

Mr. Bush suspended talks with North Korea almost immediately after taking office, ordering a complete review of policy toward the country. But in announcing that he would resume talks, he promised that if North Korea "responds affirmatively" to American proposals, the United States would increase its efforts to help the North Korean people, ease sanctions and take other political steps.

The American announcement that it was prepared to resume talks was made on the eve of a visit to Washington by Foreign Minister Han Seung Soo of South Korea. The South Korea president, Kim Dae Jung, has made his "sunshine policy" of improving relations with the North central to his government, and the American decision to halt talks put a damper on Mr. Kim's policy.

The United States' decision to move ahead with talks was made after the completion of a policy review that pitted hard-line skeptics on North Korea at the Pentagon and the National Security Council against more pragmatic officials at the State Department.

Mr. Bush said that he had directed officials to undertake serious talks with a broad agenda that included "verifiable constraints on North Korea's missile programs and a ban on its missile exports, and a less threatening conventional military posture."

The Bush administration's policy toward North Korea had been awaited by American allies in Asia and Europe because of the perception that Washington was using the threat of North Korea's long-range missiles as a justification to develop a missile defense. In late 1998 North Korea sent a long-range unarmed missile toward Japan.

The American contacts with North Korea began in 1993 over concern that it was using material from nuclear power plants for weapons. During the Clinton administration, a former defense secretary, William J. Perry, laid out a strategy for talks and other actions to try to ease North Korea out of its long-term isolation.

North Korea has an estimated 700,000 troops out of its 1.17 million-member army stationed near the border with the South. The North also keeps thousands of artillery pieces stationed in forward positions, where they threaten the southern capital, Seoul. In recent Congressional testimony, American military officials have described the North Korean conventional threat as growing, largely as a result of increased readiness drills.

North Korea has always maintained that its troops are stationed there as a defensive measure, aimed at warding off an attack by better trained and armed American and South Korean combat aircraft stationed close to the border.

The North Korean spokesman said bilateral talks held during the Clinton administration were "in conformity with the interests of both sides" and produced results helpful to improving relations. "In this sense," he added "we cannot but interpret the U.S. administration's `proposal for resuming dialogue' as unilateral and conditional in its nature and hostile in its intention."

--------

US Rejects NKorea Compensation

New York Times
June 18, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-US-North-Korea.html?searchpv=aponline

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The United States on Monday rejected a North Korean demand for compensation for delays in the completion of two light water reactors planned under a 1994 agreement.

``We don't see any particular basis for compensation,'' State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said.

North Korea made the demand in its first response to President Bush's proposal two weeks ago that bilateral talks resume for the first time since last fall.

The response was offered by an unidentified North Korean Foreign Ministry spokesman in a radio broadcast. His comments made clear that two sides are far apart on both procedural and substantive issues.

Bush wants discussions on the large North Korean troop presence near the South Korean border, but the North Korean said talks should focus on the alleged U.S. failure to keep its end of a 1994 agreement under which the North froze its suspected nuclear weapons program.

The agreement requires a U.S.-led international consortium to provide North Korea with two power-generating light-water nuclear reactors by 2003. However, the $4.6 billion project has been delayed by financing and political tensions on the Korean Peninsula.

Claiming that the delay is causing it a huge electricity loss, North Korea demanded compensation.

``The electricity loss from the delay in building light-water reactors should be taken up as a priority agenda in the talks,'' the spokesman said.

The administration insists 2003 was a target date, not a contractual date. In addition, officials say there is no contractual provision for the extra compensation demanded by Pyongyang.

``We have met and will continue to meet our obligations,'' Boucher said.

The North Korean spokesman also complained that Washington unilaterally set the agenda despite saying the proposed talks have no conditions attached.

``We cannot but evaluate the U.S. proposal as unilateral and conditional in its nature and hostile in its intentions,'' the spokesman said. ``The U.S.-proposed agenda concerns our nuclear, missile and conventional armaments and this all is nothing but an attempt to disarm us.''

The spokesman said any reduction or re-redeployment of North Korea's 1.1-million-member military cannot be discussed before the United States withdraws its 37,000-member military presence in South Korea.

-------- missile defense

Study Says Russia Might Keep Missiles in Face of U.S. Shield

By Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, June 18, 2001; Page A04
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A10688-2001Jun16?language=printer

If efforts by the United States to build missile defenses lead Russia to stop reducing its long-range missiles, Moscow could end up in 2010 with 3,500 strategic warheads, three times the number now projected for the end of the decade, according to the directors of a new study of Russian nuclear weapons.

The "Nuclear Status Report on the Former Soviet Union," due for release today, is a nearly 200-page compendium of data on Russia's nuclear arsenal and the state of security at dozens of former Soviet nuclear plants. It was compiled by researchers at two think tanks, the Monterey Institute of International Studies in Monterey, Calif., and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington.

If current trends continue and U.S.-Russian relations remain stable, they project that Russia's long-range missile and bomber forces will shrink dramatically, from nearly 6,000 warheads today to between 1,086 and 1,546 warheads by the end of the decade.

The authors do not take a position on whether President Bush's missile defense plan will prompt Moscow to reverse that course, or whether the Russian government could come up with enough money to do so. The report does, however, describe some steps that Russian leaders would be likely to take if they decided to begin rebuilding their arsenal.

"The Bush policy counts on Russia going down to 1,000 warheads no matter what the U.S. does, but missile defense may force them to make their deterrent secure by putting more warheads on missiles and stepping up production of new ones," said Joseph Cirincione, director of the nonproliferation project at Carnegie.

The report notes that only 20 of Russia's newest SS-27 ballistic missiles, each of which carries a single warhead, have been deployed since they became operational in 1999. Production has been "greatly lagging behind projections, fewer than 10 missiles per year instead of the planned 30-40," it says. Moreover, although the missile is designed to be mobile, all those deployed are in fixed silos, the report says.

At the current production rate, Russia would have only 100 SS-27s by the end of 2007. But if Moscow is determined to be able to overwhelm a U.S. missile defense, it could increase funding to produce 20 a year and could easily modify the SS-27 to carry three or four warheads each, giving Russia 600 to 800 warheads on 200 advanced, land-based ICBMs by 2010, the report says.

The SS-18, granddaddy of all big missiles with 10 warheads on each launcher, originally was deployed by the Soviet Union in 1975. About 180 remain at four locations in Russia. But because the SS-18 was designed and built in Ukraine, new ones are not available, and under the START II agreement, the existing ones are to be eliminated by 2007.

According to the report, the Russians could extend their lives and keep 90 missiles (with a total of 900 warheads) operational -- if Moscow follows through on its threats to stop adhering to the START II treaty should the United States pursue missile defenses and withdraw from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.

"That shows there is a real national security cost to be paid for missile defense," Cirincione said.

To encourage Russia to continue reducing its nuclear forces, Bush has held out the prospect that the United States will unilaterally cut its own arsenal, although he has not proposed any specific reductions.

The report credits U.S.-Russian cooperative programs, funded by more than $3 billion from the U.S. government over the past decade, with helping Russia to dismantle and destroy 258 intercontinental ballistic missiles, at least 50 ICBM silos, 42 strategic bombers and 17 nuclear-powered submarines containing 256 ballistic missile launchers.

In the next few years, the cooperative programs are expected to eliminate an additional 700 Russian land- and submarine-based ICBMs, including Moscow's largest, the SS-18s and SS-24s that each carry 10 warheads.

The new study also credits U.S.-Russian cooperative programs with improving security over Moscow's nuclear storage sites, which contain both warheads and materials such as plutonium and highly enriched uranium. Although more than 45 sites with weapons-usable materials have been secured, at least 24 remain untouched, in part because the Russians have refused to provide U.S. experts direct access to those facilities.

For example, the reports says, security upgrades have not begun at the nuclear warhead assembly and disassembly plant at Sarov. Although U.S.-supplied monitoring devices and other security equipment were delivered in 1998, installation has been delayed because of the access issue.

Jon B. Wolfsthal, one of the report's three principal authors, said that "tens to hundreds of tons of Russian nuclear materials" remain in facilities without upgraded security. He also noted that this is one of several Energy Department programs whose funds are slated to be cut in Bush's fiscal 2002 budget.

Another Energy program facing a deep budget cut provides aid to Russian scientists who formerly worked on nuclear weapons in closed cities. A National Security Council study of several U.S.-Russia programs is underway, one part of which is to review charges by some members of Congress that the so-called Nuclear Cities program has not been successful in developing nonmilitary businesses and instead has provided support to scientists who still work on Russian military programs.

In a news conference Saturday after his meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Bush said Russia "has got a resource that's invaluable in this new era, and that's brain power." Without mentioning the U.S. budget cuts, Bush added that "Russia has got great mathematicians and engineers who can just as easily participate in the high-tech world as American engineers and American mathematicians. That's an area of great interest to me. . . . It's an area where we can begin fruitful dialogue."

Another program that is under review calls for each country to dispose of 34 metric tons of excess, weapons-grade plutonium -- enough to build thousands of warheads. A multibillion-dollar plan to turn the weapons material into fuel for nuclear reactors, signed in June 2000, has been stalled, partly for lack of funds.

-------
-------- pacific

Sad Tales of the Pacific Islands

New York Times
June 18, 2001
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/18/opinion/L18ATOL.html?searchpv=nytToday

To the Editor:

Re "Dark Side of Security Quest: Squalor on an Atoll" (news article, June 11):

My family lived for a number of years on Kwajalein Atoll, and I myself was born there. We have wonderful memories of the place, but these are tempered by a firsthand knowledge of the cost of American defense activities to the people of the Marshall Islands.

These islands were given to the United States as a trust territory by the United Nations. There is no doubt whatsoever that we violated that trust, and the trust of the inhabitants. We used a land not our own to test and develop the deadliest devices known to history, and the people of the Marshalls continue to bear the cost, and will do so for thousands of years.

The United States could improve the situation for the people of these islands for a small amount of money, yet we continue to oppose doing so. It remains to be seen whether we will ever redeem the trust we violated. PAUL C. GRAVES

New York, June 11, 2001

To the Editor:
Re "Dark Side of Security Quest: Squalor on an Atoll" (news article, June 11):

As a Navy pilot who landed a Coronado seaplane at Kwajalein in 1944 while the smoke and stench of victory still hovered over the secured atoll, and as one who made the devastated tropical paradise my home for several months along with my squadron mates while we patrolled Pacific waters to prepare for the next island conquests, I now feel shame instead of pride.

Now that the results of our cruel colonialist policy have been exposed, what will our government do about it? Our missile defense is certainly a priority, but so is our moral obligation to the human beings swept aside into the radiation-polluted pockets of disease and squalor.

ROBERT E. A. LEE
Baldwin, N.Y., June 11, 2001

•To the Editor:
Re "Dark Side of Security Quest: Squalor on an Atoll" (news article, June 11):

In the mid-1950's, as a medical officer in the Navy, I participated with a team from the Brookhaven National Laboratory in examining inhabitants of an atoll who were irradiated by fallout from a poorly planned nuclear test that left their island uninhabitable. Less well known is the occurrence of a severe outbreak of polio in the islands in the late 1950's. This outbreak occurred several years after the mass vaccination of our own population.

Despite being a United Nations trust territory under United States control, the Marshall Island natives never received the polio vaccine. And despite my inquiries to the Department of the Interior at that time, no explanation for this inexcusable health oversight was given.

It is sad to note that some 45 years later, our un-benign neglect of the Micronesians continues.

JAMES P. NOLAN, M.D.
Buffalo, June 12, 2001
The writer is a professor of medicine, SUNY, Buffalo.

-------- russia

Putin displeased with peacekeepers

By Fisnik Abrashi
June 18, 2001
ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20010618-103725.htm

PRISTINA, Yugoslavia -- Russian President Vladimir Putin, heading home after his first meeting with President Bush, made an unscheduled stop yesterday in Kosovo, where he harshly criticized NATO commanders who call the shots for some 3,000 Russian peacekeeping troops.

The first Russian president to visit Yugoslavia since the 1991 breakup of the Soviet Union, Mr. Putin was balancing a desire to reassert Russia´s interests in the Balkans with his professed willingness to work with the Western alliance.

"We came here to see what kind of cooperation exists, what kinds of problems exist here and how to address and resolve those problems," he said in brief comments before departing for Moscow.

Mr. Putin arrived in Yugoslavia late Saturday direct from his summit in neighboring Slovenia with Mr. Bush. Although he and Mr. Bush discussed the region´s problems broadly, Mr. Putin said, "We did not touch in detail on any specific issues."

That was not the case in Belgrade, where Mr. Putin and Yugoslavia´s new pro-democracy leader, President Vojislav Kostunica, criticized NATO and the U.N. administrators who have run Kosovo since NATO´s 1999 bombing campaign drove Yugoslav authorities out.

"Wrong moves" by the international community have "destabilized the entire region," Mr. Kostunica said.

Instead of then flying back to Moscow as announced, Mr. Putin went to Kosovo, where he handed out medals to Russian peacekeepers and met with Danish Lt. Gen. Thorstein Skiaker, the commander of the NATO-led force, and U.N. officials.

His flight was announced at the last minute because of security concerns in the province, where ethnic Albanians view Russia as pro-Serbian because of historic ties between the two Slavic nations.

A source who was at the meeting, speaking on the condition of anonymity, described Mr. Putin as "very critical" of the 45,000-strong peacekeeping force´s performance.

Russia has been pushing for NATO to do more to disarm ethnic Albanian extremists who have been attacking the remaining Serbs in Kosovo and contributing to clashes with government troops in neighboring Macedonia.

"We discussed with him in quite frank terms ... should we be confident in going forward because some things are going wrong, or should we be confident in going forward because some things are going right," said Jeremy Greenstock, British ambassador to the United Nations.

Since taking office, Mr. Putin has sought to strengthen Russia´s role in areas of former influence like the Balkans, where the West holds increasing sway through the presence of NATO troops.

But the assertiveness sometimes bumps against a desire not to be left out.

Even though he voiced deep apprehension at his summit with Mr. Bush over NATO expanding toward Russia´s borders, Mr. Putin recently revived Russian participation in its Partnership for Peace program.

Although Russia has cultural, religious and historic ties to Yugoslavia´s Serbian and Montenegrin populations, it was critical of former President Slobodan Milosevic´s "ethnic cleansing" campaign against ethnic Albanians in Kosovo.

Russia opposed the 1999 NATO bombing campaign yet played a large diplomatic role in persuading Mr. Milosevic to accept the terms of the U.N. resolution ending it.

Once the bombs stopped in June 1999, the Russians then flew into Kosovo before any NATO troops and quickly took control of the airport near Pristina.

After days of negotiations, Russian and U.S. representatives reached a compromise that allowed them to keep control of the airport and have some flexibility in defining their mission but not their own sector to patrol, as they had wanted.

--------

Russia: No Nuclear Help to Iran

New York Times
June 18, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-US-Russia-Nuclear.html?searchpv=aponline

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A top aide to Russian President Vladimir Putin denied that Russia was helping Iran's nuclear weapons program. He called on the United States Monday to respond to Russia's proposal for negotiations to reduce U.S. and Russian nuclear arsenals.

Igor Sergeyev, who advises Putin on strategic issues, said the technology Russia provides to Iran is for use in a light water reactor, much like technology the United States is giving to North Korea under an agreement to freeze that country's nuclear weapons program.

``To obtain weapons from the light water reactor in Iran is impossible,'' he said at a conference on proliferation problems held by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Sergeyev acknowledged that controls on technology exports beyond the range of the Russian government had been a ``headache'' in the early 1990s.

But he said the list of prohibited materials for export has grown through the years.

At the same time, Sergeyev said the United States had failed to respond to proposals by Putin to place a ceiling of 1,500 on U.S. and Russian long-range nuclear warheads.

``It's paramount to start negotiations immediately,'' he said.

The Russian official said he found hope in a general willingness of the Bush administration to reduce stockpiles.

At the same time, he defended the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, which Bush wants to abandon to make way for a U.S. shield against missiles.

The spread of sophisticated technology has become more dangerous, he said.

``The world may be entering a phase in which the use of nuclear weapons is more likely than before,'' the former Russian defense minister said.

In fact, he said, Russia is more vulnerable than the United States to theft of nuclear technology and accidental launches of missiles by other nations.

``We are hoping to improve our export control,'' he said. ``It is one of the best control systems.''

--------

A Promising Start With Russia

New York Times
June 18, 2001
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/18/opinion/18MON1.html?searchpv=nytToday

The quick rapport struck between President Bush and Russia's president, Vladimir Putin, during their initial meeting Saturday exceeded even optimistic expectations, all the more so considering the rhetorical chill that briefly crept over relations between Washington and Moscow earlier this year. On Saturday, Mr. Bush seemed genial and at ease, although his comment that he had looked Mr. Putin in the eye and found him an "honest, straightforward man," whom Americans can trust, struck some observers as naïve. Even so, Mr. Putin, whose usual steely demeanor recalls his long years as a Soviet K.G.B. operative, visibly warmed to the personal chemistry of the occasion.

To be sure, there should be no underestimating of the difficulty of the problems that could potentially divide America and Russia over the next four years. These include American missile defense plans, the next round of NATO expansion and Russia's problematic sales of nuclear material and technology to Iran. But if the two leaders stay committed to their vision of Washington and Moscow as potential partners, even the hardest problems can be constructively resolved.

The most pressing disagreement between the two countries right now concerns missile defense. Mr. Bush has talked of renouncing the 1972 Antiballistic Missile Treaty so that he can quickly build a missile shield against unpredictable countries like North Korea. He has offered Russia incentives to accept this course, including military aid, joint antimissile exercises and the purchase of Russian surface-to-air missiles. Moscow has resisted, concerned that abandoning the ABM Treaty would allow America to test advanced defensive technology that could one day blunt Russia's nuclear missile force.

On Saturday, Mr. Putin again warned that if Washington developed a missile shield without some understanding with Russia, it could severely complicate relations. But he emphasized his hope that some form of agreement could be reached. Secretary of State Colin Powell and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld will begin a series of meetings with their Russian counterparts on these and other issues in the coming weeks.

On NATO expansion, Mr. Bush last week called for the eventual inclusion of all European democracies, including the three Baltic nations that once formed part of the Soviet Union, a step strongly opposed by Russia. But in the same speech, Mr. Bush stressed that "NATO, even as it grows, is no enemy of Russia," a stance welcomed on Saturday. Russia should not have a veto over future NATO members, but further expansion must be handled in ways that do not appear provocative or threatening.

No visible progress was made on Russian arms sales to Iran or Moscow's assistance to the Iranian nuclear power industry, which Washington fears could speed Tehran's development of nuclear weapons. Further discussion of this issue will be needed when General Powell and Mr. Rumsfeld meet with Russian officials and when Mr. Bush meets again with Mr. Putin at next month's economic summit meeting of industrial nations in Italy. Mr. Putin also accepted an invitation to visit Mr. Bush's Texas ranch this fall and will host President Bush in Russia at a date still to be determined. The closer engagement signaled by Mr. Bush and Mr. Putin is a healthy development.

--------

Highlights of Putin's Interview

New York Times
June 18, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Russia-US-Highlights.html?searchpv=aponline

Russian President Vladimir Putin met with American journalists Monday to discuss his summit with President Bush. Here are some highlights:

--BUSH: Putin describes Bush as a ``very attentive'' listener and says the two leaders had achieved ``a high level of trust.''

--MISSILE DEFENSE: Russia and the United States do not agree on the nature of the threats each country faces, Putin says. He proposes joint efforts by U.S and Russian secret services to help identify threats.

--IRAN: Putin says Russia does not provide weapons to Iran, which the United States and Israel consider a threat. He denies that Russia spreads weapons of mass destruction.

--NORTH KOREA: Putin says North Korean missile technology is antiquated and couldn't pose a threat to U.S. security.

--CHECHNYA: Putin says he is tired of explaining Russia's campaign to end rebel efforts to break away from Russia. He says Russia will not allow Chechnya to be a launching ground for terrorist attacks against the United States.

--FREEDOM OF THE PRESS: Putin says he favors a free media but that it must serve society.

--KGB: Putin says the KGB helped him learn to work with people, to absorb large amounts of information, and to love his country.

--ENGLISH: Putin says Bush put up with his attempts to speak English: ``I attempted to say a few words to President Bush in English.''

``He was extremely nice about it. He pretended to understand what I was talking about.''

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

Clinton appointee to help with sick nuclear workers program

June 18, 2001
Las Vegas Sun
http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/text/2001/jun/18/061810654.html

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Bush administration has tapped a Clinton appointee to help administer a program to compensate sick Cold War-era nuclear weapons workers.

Labor Secretary Elaine Chao announced Monday that she had hired former Assistant Secretary of Energy David Michaels as a consultant.

"I am honored that Secretary Chao has asked me to help the Department of Labor implement this very important program," Michaels said. "These workers were harmed in the service of their country."

The program approved last year by Congress offers lifetime medical care and $150,000 to ailing workers who were employed in the nuclear weapons complex, at factories that worked for the Energy Department, or at nuclear test sites in Alaska and Nevada.

Lawmakers who represent districts with Cold War-era weapons plants urged the administration to bring Michaels on board.

"I have worked closely with Dr. Michaels over the last two years in creating this historic compensation program and have a great deal of respect for his dedication and attention to detail," said Rep. Ed Whitfield, R-Ky.

Chao also filled several other positions that are expected to help get the compensation program up and running by the end of July.

The program is limited to those with cancer associated with radiation, silicosis or chronic beryllium disease. Eligibility rules for some workers have been set by law, and the Labor Department must work out qualification guidelines for the rest.

-------- us nuc politics

A Good Week's Work . . .

Washington Post
By Robert Kagan
Monday, June 18, 2001; Page A17
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A12839-2001Jun17?language=printer

You'd never know it from the "Backslapping Bush Achieves Nada" headlines, but the president actually accomplished a lot in Europe last week. No, he didn't single-handedly bridge the transatlantic culture gap. But European flapping over the "toxic Texan" got more press play than it deserves.

Don't worry about a transatlantic crisis: European leaders don't have time for one. When Americans aren't around, they live in a trance of Euro-solipsism. And when Bush left the continent last week, they went right back to jousting and jostling over their favorite obsession: themselves, or (more formally) the future of the European Union. The American president, on the other hand, did what they couldn't do: He laid out some big ideas for the next decade of transatlantic policy. He was even -- dare one say it? -- visionary.

Ironically, the same Bush portrayed in the European press as a knuckle-dragger did well precisely because he ignored the advice of conservative supporters both inside and outside his administration. Hardy Bush boosters such as my colleague Charles Krauthammer tried to fit the president out with a new "Bush doctrine" of "humble" American unilateralism, designed to "maintain, augment and exploit" American predominance. How the United States can maintain global predominance without a healthy set of alliances, or how we can purport to lead those alliances while proclaiming a policy of unilateralism, "humble" or otherwise, Krauthammer did not explain. Nor did he explain how we could build an effective missile defense against Iraq and Iran without allied cooperation and access to allied territory.

But no matter. Bush rejected Krauthammer's friendly suggestion. "I am not a unilateralist," Bush declared in Europe. He wanted to prove that the United States is a "loyal ally and friend."

And he did prove it, with more than words. In fact, Bush left NATO a lot healthier than he found it last week because he rejected the counsel of some of his advisers that the United States start pulling its troops out of the Balkans soon, with or without the allies. The "no-more-peacekeeping" doctrine of the Republican Congress had been pushed during the campaign by Condoleezza Rice, with her call for a military "division of labor" within the alliance, and more recently by Donald Rumsfeld, with his premature declaration that the American military mission in Bosnia was over.

Last week Bush deep-sixed those bad ideas and sided with Colin Powell, who's been doggedly trying to repair the damage done in Europe by his colleagues. "We went in together and we will leave together," Bush said, "and I swear to you again today that I will keep that promise." Bush didn't rule out the possibility that NATO forces might be needed in Macedonia.

Bush dodged another conservative folly when he refused to treat the European Union as America's newest and most dangerous enemy. American and British conservatives have gone ballistic over the EU's meager efforts to put together a minuscule "Rapid Reaction Force." You'd think this force of 60,000 troops, which still exists only in European imaginations, was about to drive the United States off the continent.

Andrew Sullivan, the New Republic's in-house Bush fan, recently suggested, in a bout of geopolitical dementia, that the EU could become America's "most formidable competitor since the Soviet Union." But Bush eschewed hyperpower hyperventilation. The "United States would welcome a European force" that was "properly integrated" with NATO, Bush said, assuming EU members spend the money to build "real capabilities." No panic, no hostility, just appropriate skepticism about a European "air-ball," as Powell recently put it.

And for all the headlines suggesting otherwise, Bush really did make progress on missile defense. Britain's Tony Blair all but endorsed it, declaring that "there are highly unstable states developing nuclear arsenals, and we have to look at all ways, including missile-defense systems, of countering that threat." Bush won support from Italy, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Turkey and some other European governments -- and, yes, they count, too.

Even French and German grumbling hardly amounted to the kind of defiance American journalists trumpeted. Did anyone think France's Jacques Chirac would publicly endorse any American plan on any subject? Bush even found a surprisingly open-minded Russian president in Slovenia on Saturday -- which makes Chirac's opinions irrelevant. The truth is, missile defense faces a smoother ride in Europe than in the Democratic-controlled American Senate. Last week's trip may have been a turning point in the selling of Bush's missile defense system -- assuming Rumsfeld's Pentagon actually can make the thing work.

Even more historic, however, was Bush's ambitious outline for the future of NATO enlargement. Anyone who wondered whether Bush was thinking big can stop wondering. In a Reaganesque speech in Warsaw, Bush announced that "All of Europe's new democracies, from the Baltic to the Black Sea . . . should have the same chance for security and freedom" that the current members of NATO have: "No more Munichs. No more Yaltas."

Champagne corks were popping in Riga, Tallinn and Vilnius, and rightly so. Bush all but endorsed Baltic membership in the next round of enlargement. This from a president whose Cabinet contains not a single passionate devotee of NATO enlargement. All in all, it was a good week's work -- heavy lifting, as State Department types like to say. Strange as it may seem given this president's limited experience and, until now, limited interest in Europe, Bush actually has offered both Europeans and Americans a vision of a different political and strategic future. And it's not a future where the United States goes it alone.

The writer, a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, writes a monthly column for The Post.

---

. . . From a No-Wobble Bush

By Charles Krauthammer
Monday, June 18, 2001; Page A17
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A12848-2001Jun17?language=printer

"Remember George, this is no time to go wobbly." So said Margaret Thatcher to the first President Bush just days after Saddam Hussein attacked Kuwait. Bush did not go wobbly. He invaded.

A decade later, the second George Bush came into office and immediately began a radical reorientation of U.S. foreign policy. Now, however, the conventional wisdom is that in the face of criticism from domestic opponents and foreign allies, Bush is backing down.

Has W. gone wobbly? In his first days, he offered a new American nuclear policy that scraps the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, builds defenses against ballistic missile attack and unilaterally cuts U.S. offensive nuclear forces without wrangling with the Russians over arms control, the way of the past 30 years. He then summarily rejected the Kyoto protocol on climate control, which would have forced the United States to undertake a ruinous 30 percent cut in CO2 emissions while permitting China, India and most of humanity to pollute at will.

Bush's assertion of American freedom of action outraged those -- U.S. Democrats, Europeans, Russians -- who prefer to see the world's only superpower bound and restrained by treaty constraints, whether bipolar (ABM) or multipolar (Kyoto), in the name of good international citizenship.

The word now, however, is that Bush has gone soft. He sends Secretary of State Colin Powell to Europe to try to get agreement on missile defenses. He tries, reports the New York Times in high scoop mode, to cook an ABM deal with the Russians -- shades of the old days. He then concedes there is global warming and promises action. "When President Bush announces . . . that he will seek millions of dollars for new research into the causes of global warming," reported the Times just one week ago, ". . . it will mark yet another example of how global and domestic politics have forced him to back away from the hard-line pronouncements of his first five months in the White House."

The Bush administration, explained Newsweek, began by "playing the bully." But then "the Bushies began to see that they could not simply impose their agenda on a balky and complex world."

The alleged cave has been greeted with smug satisfaction from those on the left who see Bush returning, after a brief flirtation with the mad-dog ideological right, to the basic soundness of post-Cold War foreign policy as established by the Clinton administration.

Dream on.

Has Bush gone wobbly? Not at all.

Ask yourself: If you really wanted to reassert American unilateralism, to get rid of the cobwebs of the bipolar era and the myriad Clinton-era treaty strings tying Gulliver down, what would you do? No need for in-your-face arrogance. No need to humiliate. No need to proclaim that you will ignore nattering allies and nervous ex-enemies.

Journalists can talk like that because the truth is clarifying. Governments cannot talk like that because the truth is scary. The trick to unilateralism -- doing what you think is right, regardless of what others think -- is to pretend you are not acting unilaterally at all. Thus if you really want to junk the ABM Treaty, and the Europeans and Russians and Chinese start screaming bloody murder, the trick is to send Colin Powell to smooth and soothe and schmooze every foreign leader in sight, have Condoleezza Rice talk about how much we value allied input, have President Bush in Europe stress how missile defense will help the security of everybody. And then go ahead and junk the ABM Treaty regardless. Make nice, then carry on.

Or, say, you want to kill the Kyoto protocol (which the Senate rejected 95-0 and which not a single EU country has ratified) and the Europeans hypocritically complain. The trick is to have the president go to Europe to stress, both sincerely and correctly, that the United States wants to be in the forefront of using science and technology to attack the problem -- but make absolutely clear that you'll accept no mandatory cuts and tolerate no treaty that penalizes the United States and lets China, India and the Third World off the hook.

Be nice, but be undeterred. The best unilateralism is velvet-glove unilateralism.

At the end of the day, for all the rhetorical bows to Russian, European and liberal sensibilities, look at how Bush returns from Europe: Kyoto is dead. The ABM Treaty is history. Missile defense is on. NATO expansion is relaunched. And just to italicize the new turn in American foreign policy, the number of those annual, vaporous U.S.-EU summits has been cut from two to one.

Might the administration yet bend to the critics and abandon the new unilateralism? Perhaps. But the crowing of the Washington foreign-policy establishment that this has already occurred is wishful thinking.

Will he wobble? Everything is possible. But anyone who has watched Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, read Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz, known Vice President Cheney or listened to President Bush would be wise to place his bet at the "no wobble" window.

--------

Author to Sue U.S. Over Book on China's Nuclear Advances

New York Times
June 18, 2001
By WILLIAM J. BROAD
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/18/world/18BOOK.html?searchpv=nytToday

An American expert on China's nuclear arms establishment plans to sue the United States government today to end its 18-month delay on publication of his 500-page memoir, which the government says contains federal secrets.

The case is attracting attention because the expert, Danny B. Stillman, concludes that China made its nuclear breakthroughs on its own, contrary to accusations by the United States that China used stolen American secrets to make its advances. Mr. Stillman contends that the government may be blocking publication of the book, "Inside China's Nuclear Weapons Program," for reasons of politics rather than national security.

Mr. Stillman once directed intelligence at the Los Alamos nuclear laboratory in New Mexico and worked there for 28 years before retiring in 1993. He made nine trips to China between 1990 and 1999 as a federal analyst and as a private citizen. He met top officials, toured nuclear institutes, and compiled a detailed history of China's program. His book includes information on its 46 nuclear tests and more than 2,000 Chinese scientists who have had major involvement in the program.

In January 2000, Mr. Stillman gave the government his manuscript, which he was required to do as a condition of his having obtained a secret clearance, and it has languished at federal agencies ever since. Yesterday, Mr. Stillman's lawyer said he would file a suit in federal district court in Washington today, charging that the government is wrongfully blocking the book's publication and Mr. Stillman's freedom of speech.

The suit names the Department of Defense, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Department of Energy and the Central Intelligence Agency as the parties involved in blocking the book.

"Danny's got a white hat on," said Mark S. Zaid, his lawyer. "He's not threatening to go public with classified information. He's willing to work with them, whatever the concerns. But from Day 1, the government has refused to allow the manuscript to be published."

Glenn E. Flood, a spokesman for the Defense Department, said it was still reviewing the manuscript to see if it contained secrets.

"We haven't reached a decision," he said. "There's a lot of staff work involved in this." He said that any lawsuit would be handled by the Justice Department and that he had no idea when the manuscript review might be completed.

Among other things, Mr. Stillman said in an interview, the book describes a tirade delivered to American visitors in May 1999 by Hu Side, a weapons designer and former chief scientist director of China's bomb- makers. "He chastised us for calling them spies," Mr. Stillman said. Dr. Hu described how Chinese arms builders had been hampered not by a shortage of insights that necessitated espionage but by a lack of powerful computers for design computations.

After acquiring the computers, Mr. Stillman said, China was able to make a breakthrough in miniaturizing their hydrogen bombs. It occurred on Sept. 25, 1992, in a nuclear test in China's western desert.

Dr. Hu said the Chinese had come up with the breakthrough idea on their own in the 1970's. But it was only in that 1992 test, Mr. Stillman said, recalling Dr. Hu's claims, "that it went out and worked perfectly."

Experts say the book, if it sheds light on that explosive test, could be central to resolving a major controversy over whether China made its scientific advances as a result of stealing nuclear secrets from the United States.

Mr. Stillman said his long investigations had led him to concur with the Chinese claim. "I think they did it on their own," he said of China's scientific advances. "I don't think it was espionage."

Monitored by the United States, the 1992 Chinese advance led American intelligence officials to charge that China had stolen secrets for the W-88, America's most advanced nuclear warhead, which Los Alamos had designed. By 1995, suspicions of espionage centered on Wen Ho Lee, a Taiwan-born scientist at Los Alamos who had a history of contact with Chinese scientists. After a limited investigation, Dr. Lee was jailed in December 1999, shortly before Mr. Stillman submitted his manuscript for review.

But prosecutors never proved the charge. They discovered that Dr. Lee had downloaded much weapons information, but he was freed in September 2000 after pleading guilty to one felony count of mishandling secrets. Dr. Lee's backers say racial bias lay behind the case.

Weapons experts say Mr. Stillman's book promises to give the most authoritative view of China's side of the W-88 story.

--------

Ex - Nuclear Official Sues Over Book

New York Times
June 18, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Scientist-China-Book.html?searchpv=aponline

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A retired Los Alamos nuclear security official filed a lawsuit Monday to try to force the government to allow the release of his book on the Chinese nuclear weapons program.

For the last 18 months the government has blocked the publication of Danny Stillman's book while various agencies scrutinize each line to decide if it divulges national security secrets, according to his attorney, Mark Zaid.

``We're not threatening to release classified information,'' Zaid said. ``We're challenging the government to prove their case and we don't think they're going to be able to do it.''

The suit against the Defense Department, Energy Department, Defense Intelligence Agency and CIA was filed in U.S. District Court in Washington. It alleges the agencies have violated their own rules for classifying material and Stillman's constitutional right to publish the book.

Defense Department spokesman Glenn Flood said the review of the manuscript is continuing.

``We plan to do a thorough job. We're not going to rush it,'' he said.

Stillman worked for 28 years at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, 14 as the head of the intelligence division. He retired in 1993.

Between 1990 and 1999, Stillman made nine trips to China, visiting a nuclear test site and a nuclear lab, meeting with scientists and attending lectures.

None of the trips was taken at the request of the U.S. government, although he was voluntarily debriefed by government officials when he returned.

Stillman took notes of his trips and compiled them into a 500-page manuscript entitled ``Inside China's Nuclear Weapons Program.'' In January 2000, Stillman turned over the manuscript to the government for a security review -- a prepublication condition imposed on any government worker granted security clearance.

Since then, Stillman and his attorneys have pressed the Energy Department and Defense Department to finish the review.

A Defense Department memo from last September said the Pentagon objects to publication of any portion of the manuscript because of security concerns. The memo also said publication could ``damage American foreign relations with China,'' according to the lawsuit.

Zaid said that argument is absurd, since the Chinese scientists and other officials in the program gave Stillman all of the information for the book.

``This can't embarrass China, because the Chinese expected this information to get (out),'' Zaid said.

In his book, Stillman argues that the Chinese weapons advances were made without the benefit of espionage.

About the time Stillman finished his manuscript, Wen Ho Lee, a Taiwanese-born Los Alamos scientist, was arrested amid fears of Chinese espionage.

Lee was charged with 59 counts of illegally downloading nuclear secrets, not espionage, and eventually pleaded guilty to one count of mishandling information. A judge apologized for the nine months Lee spent in solitary confinement, saying he had been misled by prosecutors.

Steven Aftergood, a government secrecy specialist with the Federation of American Scientists, said national security is not a blanket excuse to limit free speech rights.

``It would be one thing that if they said there is this or that detail that needs to be modified in the interest of national security, but it is completely implausible to claim the entire manuscript needs to be suppressed,'' he said.

-------

Bush's Warmth Toward Russian Leader Stirs Skeptics

New York Times
June 18, 2001
By JANE PERLEZ
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/18/world/18DIPL.html?searchpv=nytToday

WASHINGTON, June 17 - The warm rapport shown between President Bush and the Russian president, just one day after Mr. Bush declared that he wanted NATO to expand up to Russia's border, represented a significant achievement for the Americans, a senior official who helped plan the Bush trip said today.

But critics on Capitol Hill said Mr. Bush was too willing to pronounce the Russian, Vladimir V. Putin, to be trustworthy after the two met on Saturday in Slovenia for the first time.

In Europe, the administration official said, ``the president saying one day that NATO was expanding - and this meant everyone - and the next day it was all smiles with Putin, was supposedly impossible.''

He was referring to the unexpected reference in Mr. Bush's speech in Warsaw on Friday that NATO should try to include Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia - a position Russia has held anathema - and the juxtaposition of the two men's genial encounter the next day.

On Capitol Hill, where the Democrats in the Senate are now in a position to put a brake on Mr. Bush's foreign policy agenda, particularly missile programs, there were expressions of relief that the initial overseas journey for a relative foreign policy novice did not go badly.

But there was criticism that Mr. Bush had gone too far.

The chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Joseph R. Biden Jr., Democrat of Delaware, said Mr. Bush's mission with Mr. Putin was made easier by the fact that the Russian, like Mr. Bush, wanted good news at home, too. ``I'm just happy the president went and didn't make things worse,'' Senator Biden said of the meetings with European leaders.

The public display of warmth by Mr. Bush seemed in marked contrast to the chilly attitude toward Russia in the first months of the administration, when Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld lambasted Moscow, and the national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, warned European diplomats that Russia only respected toughness.

Senator Biden, who met President Bush at the White House just before he left for Europe, questioned whether trust was the right word to use about Mr. Putin, a former operative of the K.G.B., the Soviet intelligence service, and former head of Russia's domestic intelligence service. At their news conference in Slovenia, Mr. Bush said of Mr. Putin: ``I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straightforward and trustworthy. We had a very good dialogue. I was able to get a sense of his soul.''

Senator Biden said that for his part, ``I don't trust Mr. Putin; hopefully the president was being stylistic rather than substantive.''

Another senior Democratic Senator, Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, who serves on the Armed Services Committee and backs a limited missile defense, said he was struck by Mr. Bush's ``very conclusively positive'' statement about Mr. Putin after a ``first two-hour meeting.''

It appeared that the White House had decided to extend that warmth in a determined effort to reassure European allies that Washington was serious about trying to get Moscow's blessing for its missile program, said Michael A. McFaul, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

European leaders have stressed to Mr. Bush that in their own strategic and political calculations on the missile proposal, it was important that Russia not be hostile to the idea.

But Mr. Bush may well have sent the wrong signal to the hard-line political elites surrounding Mr. Putin, Mr. McFaul said, by allowing them to think the United States is interested almost exclusively in missile defense and not in human rights, press freedom and the Russian Army's behavior in Chechnya.

`'I can understand the strategy on rapport, but it went too far,'' said Mr. McFaul. ``I think there is plenty of good reason not to trust President Putin. This is a man who was trained to lie.''

Mr. McFaul, who was invited to brief Mr. Bush on Russia before his trip, said he doubted that Mr. Bush had casually chosen the word ``trust.'' All the same, he said, it seemed ``like a rookie mistake, saying in his first meeting that he was `trustworthy.'''

One of the most clear-cut policy developments came in Mr. Bush's forward-leaning speech in Warsaw, where he declared that the ``new democracies, from the Baltic to the Black Sea and all that lie between,'' should have the same chance to ``join the institutions of Europe.''

That theme expressed the behind- the-scenes work of a bipartisan group, the United States Committee on NATO, some of whose members now hold senior positions in the administration, including the deputy secretary of defense, Paul D. Wolfowitz, and the deputy national security adviser, Stephen J. Hadley.

``It couldn't have been improved,'' Bruce Jackson, the president of the committee, said of the speech in Warsaw. ``The president expressed his vision of a unified Europe, and we can anticipate a major step at Prague,'' the site of the NATO summit meeting in November 2002, when new members will be invited to join the alliance.

Mr. Jackson said the three Baltic nations, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, along with Slovakia, Slovenia and ``one or two countries from southeastern Europe'' were now frontrunners for membership.

While Mr. Putin did not let the NATO proposal undermine the meeting with Mr. Bush, he did express his strong opposition to it. At the news conference, he said of NATO: ``Look, this is a military organization. It's moving toward our border. Why?''

On the outcome of Mr. Bush's meetings with other leaders, there was some uncertainty about what would emerge in the longer term.

``The objectives were modest,'' said Senator Chuck Hagel, Republican of Nebraska and a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, who said he sat next to Mr. Bush at a baseball game in Omaha discussing foreign policy just before the trip.

`'He wanted to lay down a foundation with the other leaders in Europe,'' Mr. Hagel said, and he knew that on the most pressing issues of missile defense and the environment he was not going to get instant accommodation. ``Now we will have to see how the leaders in Europe respond on policy.''

In further detailing Mr. Bush's session with Mr. Putin, a senior administration official said no one subject dominated.

In the longer 90-minute meeting, where the presidents were accompanied by their national security advisers, Ms. Rice and Vladimir B. Rushaylo, Mr. Bush raised three broad issues: the future of the United States-Russia relationship; missile defense and the role of an expanded NATO. In a 20-minute session, a larger number of aides on both sides attended.

The agenda also included press freedoms and Chechyna, two issues of interest to Republicans.

An earlier Russian proposal to establish two committees of American and Russian experts to discuss offensive and defensive weapons had been replaced by an American proposal to have officials from the State Department and the Pentagon talk to their counterparts about the issues, the official said. It is not clear when those talks would begin.

-------- us nuc waste

PLANS READY FOR SHIPMENT OF SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL

June 18, 2001
ENS
http://ens-news.com/ens/jun2001/2001L-06-18-09.html

WASHINGTON, DC, The Department of Energy (DOE) has completed its plan for the cross country transportation of spent nuclear fuel from foreign research reactors by the end of June 2001.

This will be the 20th shipment under the Foreign Research Reactor Spent Nuclear Fuel Acceptance Program, a national non-proliferation program. Spent fuel eligible for shipment contains uranium that was enriched and provided to European reactors by the U.S.

Under this program, up to 20 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel from research reactors in 41 countries may be shipped to the U.S. through 2009 for disposition. The U.S. accepts the spent fuel to prevent its use in nuclear weapons or other dangerous applications.

The next shipment will include nine casks - or storage containers - from Europe.

The spent fuel will be delivered to the DOE's Savannah River Site in South Carolina. Six casks will be unloaded and stored at the Savannah River Site, and three casks will be sent by truck to the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory.

These two DOE sites manage the disposition of spent fuel based on type.

Under Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations, spent fuel is shipped on interstate highway routes that offer a limited time in transit. Routes are selected through a peer reviewed selection process.

Satellite tracking will monitor the shipment. Specific safety measures agreed to by the state of Missouri and the DOE will govern the Missouri leg of the shipment.

Missouri officials have undergone special safety training, including a Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance inspection training course completed by members of the Missouri Highway Patrol on June 7. Other states have completed similar training.

Missouri will be allowed to track movement of the nuclear shipments via controlled computer access.

More information is available at: http://www.nsc.org/ehc/rad/frrsf.htm

-------- MILITARY

-------- africa

Revelations Of Torture No Surprise
In Algeria France Faces a Dark Past that Victims Never Forgot

By Keith B. Richburg
Washington Post Foreign Service
Monday, June 18, 2001; Page A13
http://washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A12868-2001Jun17?language=printer

ALGIERS -- France is astir with an aging general's disclosures that he and his men routinely tortured and executed people in Algeria during that country's war for independence four decades ago. But here at the scene of the crime, it's difficult to elicit any response.

The Algerian government has had almost nothing to say. "The political class is very timid on this question," said Toufik Chellal, spokesman for the Committee Against Torture and Disappearances During the National Liberation War. "Until now, there has not been an official reaction."

"France effectively institutionalized torture in our country," he said. "It's difficult to understand why the state is silent." The likely reason, he said, is that the current government is accused of torturing people in its campaign against Islamic insurgents and street protests. "Everybody knows that, so they are afraid of the question," he said.

As for the relatives of torture victims, the attitude seems to be: For us, this is no revelation. "These are things that were well known," said a former cabinet minister who is a veteran of the independence struggle. "Most of these things were put in documents in the 1950s and given to the U.N. human rights commission."

The disclosures came in "Special Services, Algeria 1955-57," the memoir of former Gen. Paul Aussaresses, 83. It followed publication of "The Dirty War," written by a former Algerian special forces officer who detailed assassinations and torture against Islamic extremists in recent years.

Some people in the Algerian power structure take the close proximity of the publication of these two books as a sign of a French effort to destabilize the current government. "They say it's a provocation, to interfere in Algerian affairs," said one European diplomat.

Yacef Saadi, a top figure in the independence movement, knew Aussaresses "indirectly," mostly by reputation as "Commandant O," Saadi recalled in a May interview at his seaside villa on the outskirts of Algiers. "Torture was institutionalized," said Saadi, and Aussaresses "was a specialist in inventing things for torture."

In his book, Aussaresses maligned Saadi as a turncoat who, after being arrested during the 1954-62 war, told French commandos the whereabouts of another top independence leader, Ali la Pointe. "He spoke spontaneously, in order to save his life" after his arrest, Aussaresses wrote of Saadi. He implied that Saadi was jealous of la Pointe's popularity within the movement.

Saadi said the Aussaresses book was mostly fiction. "Why did he wait 40 years?" Saadi asked. "Who is he playing for? Is he playing to affect [a recent] election in France? . . . Maybe he is senile. Maybe he has nightmares and cannot sleep at night. What is the reason?"

Saadi, who helped produce the award-winning film "The Battle of Algiers," has written his own history of the struggle by the same name, with historical citations and documents. Aussaresses, he said, offered no proof to substantiate most of his statements, and Saadi refuses to engage the general in long-distance debate. "Enough," he said. "My conscience is clear."

In France, reverberations continue. This month, the government expelled the retired general from the military reserves. "The retiring of Gen. Aussaresses was motivated by his repeated statements defending unjustifiable behavior and presenting it as legitimate during the Algerian conflict," said the defense minister, Alain Richard.

The sanction is largely symbolic, meaning only that Aussaresses will no longer be allowed to wear his uniform. But along with calls for a parliamentary hearing and a criminal investigation, it is a measure of the emotion he has unleashed concerning a period that France has not examined closely.

-------- arms sales

Tech firms fight for 'star wars' trade
Fabrice Bregier: important to get involved in star wars programe

By the BBC's John Terrett at the Paris Air Show.
Monday, 18 June, 2001, 17:12 GMT 18:12 UK
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/business/newsid_1395000/1395314.stm

Necks may be craned upwards to watch the flying, but on the ground at the Paris Air Show, other issues dominate the agenda.

First, there are reports that EU regulators have effectively shot down plans by US giants GE and Honeywell to merge, by demanding concessions that the firms say are just too great.

Le Bourget airport is awash with rumours and speculation about the outcome of the EU probe, and the impact it will have on the aerospace industry.

John Weston, chief executive of BAE Systems, says he is watching events closely.

"Clearly for all of us as industrialists... there are some significant issues for us if we end up in a situation where the European and US regulators look at these things in a different way," he said.

Jockeying for position

And the other hot topic is the proposal by US president, George Bush, for a stars wars-style nuclear missile protection shield.

Analysts say Mr Bush got a better reaction than expected from European government heads at the weekend.

And the region's leading edge defence firms are already jockeying for position hoping for a serious payday.

Tri-national defence conglomerate MBDA is one enterprise anxious to be involved.

It will be very improtant for us to join it," Fabrice Bregier, managing director of MBDA, said.

"It will be extremely important to develop new technologies, to maintain key skills and jobs in Europe."

Defence analysts say behind closed boardroom doors, missile makers can hardly believe their good fortune.

Independent analysts Paul Beaver said:

"The European companies... are already knocking on the door of the Pentagon and saying 'look, we have existing systems.

"'Even if you do not use us for your American national system, for theatre missile defence, you really should look at the technologies that we have got'."

But others are more cautious questioning whether 'Son of Star Wars' will fly.

"Defence companies are experts at following the money," Jon Kutler, chief executive at Quarterdeck Investment Partners

"Right now they are being told that this is where the money is, so they are trying to position themselves to take advantage of it."

But while there may be short term gains for firms involved in research and development, the programme may eventually be crippled by it expense, he added.

"By the time the programme gets rolling, it probably will die as being prohibitively expensive when there are substantial other places to spend money in today's environment."

-------- asia

Taiwan Denies Developing Medium - Range Missile

New York Times
June 18, 2001
By REUTERS
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/world/international-arms-ta.html?searchpv=reuters

TAIPEI (Reuters) - Taiwan, ever sensitive to relations with China, issued a statement on Monday denying a newspaper report that it was secretly developing a medium-range ballistic missile to counter China's growing missile threat.

The mass circulation United Daily News quoted sources as saying the missile, with a range of 620-1,240 miles was under development by the military's Chungshan Institute of Science and Technology.

``The media report is not true. The military has never conducted any related research plan,'' the Ministry of National Defense said in a statement.

Taiwan leaders have warned of an ever-growing battery of missiles on the Chinese coast where up to 500 missiles have been deployed within easy range of Taiwan's main political, economic and military facilities.

Over Beijing's objection, Washington agreed in 1993 to sell Taiwan the Patriot Advanced Capability, or PAC-2, anti-missile system. Taiwan has said it would test-fire its Patriot missiles this month but has given no details.

PAC-2 is deployed only in northern Taiwan to protect the Taipei area, the island's political and economic center.

China views Taiwan as a breakaway province and has vowed to attack if the island declares independence or drags its feet indefinitely on unification talks.

-------- arms sales

Yugoslavia Wants Arms Embargo Ended

New York Times
June 18, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-UN-Yugoslavia.html

UNITED NATIONS (AP) -- Yugoslavia has asked the U.N. Security Council to lift a three-year-old arms embargo imposed because of the campaign to clear the Serb province of Kosovo of its ethnic Albanian population.

In a letter to the Security Council made available on Monday, Yugoslav Ambassador Dejan Sahovic argued that his nation has undergone a major leadership change and is complying with the U.N. resolutions.

It was unclear when or how the Security Council, currently on a mission to Kosovo and the Yugoslav capital, Belgrade, may respond to the request.

The arms embargo was imposed in March 1998, almost a year before NATO began 78 days of bombing to end then-President Slobodan Milosevic's crackdown on ethnic Albanians in Kosovo and drive his forces from the province.

It called for a ban on the sale and supply of arms and established a committee to monitor the embargo.

The United States and European nations imposed their own economic sanctions against Yugoslavia but began to lift those once Milosevic was voted out of power in October elections.

The letter noted that international peacekeepers now in Kosovo work to prevent illegal arms shipments to the province and said Yugoslavia will do the same ``in compliance with assumed international obligations.''

-------- colombia

Colombian Indians Resist an Encroaching War
Indigenous People Join To Search for Leader

By Scott Wilson
Washington Post Foreign Service
Monday, June 18, 2001; Page A10
http://washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A12765-2001Jun17?language=printer

TIERRALTA, Colombia -- For the past several days, they have been arriving on airplanes and in caravans of cramped buses and wooden rafts, filling the central square of this frontier town with garish hammocks, tarps and the acrid smell of campfire smoke.

More than 1,000 of Colombia's indigenous people have traveled to Tierralta, where the country's northern plains give way to lush mountains, to protest a war that is consuming their land, language and people.

Their stand has taken the form of a largely symbolic search for Kimy Pernia Domico, a leader of the Embera Katio tribe that controls strategic stretches of northwestern Colombia. Domico was seized here June 2 by three gunmen presumed to be members of the right-wing paramilitary United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC). He has not been seen since.

The Indians gathered in the cluttered square -- their faces and legs marked with ritual tattoos, walking on bare, broad feet, speaking in languages that predate the Spanish colonization -- hold out little hope that Domico will be found alive. But in the coming days, without government sanction and with little security, they will venture onto the cattle ranches of Cordoba province, whose owners help fund the AUC, and seek the return of a man who tried to keep war and economic interests from overwhelming tribal land.

"We want him given back to us -- dead or alive," said Luis Ondino Duave, 23, a student and Embera Katio member who traveled three days by bus from Choco province along the Pacific Coast. "We may be here for weeks, it all depends. If God permits, we will find him."

As Colombia's decades-old civil war has expanded in recent years, so has the threat to the country's 700,000 Indians, who belong to 84 tribes and speak 64 languages. They live on more than 50 million acres of land granted to them by the government, much of it located in strategic, resource-rich regions coveted by the armed groups.

In recent years, the government has signed accords with the Indians ensuring their autonomy and human rights, but tribal members say those agreements have been largely ignored as the war has sprawled into virtually every corner of the country.

"The objective of this search is a call to the state to respect our autonomy and territory," said an Embera Katio leader who said he feared being identified by name. "The government must comply with these accords."

The Latin American Association for Human Rights says that half of Colombia's indigenous tribes face extinction because of the encroaching violence. Displacement is fracturing families and diluting tribal languages, and forced recruitment into guerrilla ranks and selective assassinations by paramilitary forces are scattering tribes like the Embera Katio that have lived along Colombia's swift rivers and thick jungles for centuries.

In southern Amazonas province, the leftist guerrilla army, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) requires each indigenous family to provide two people to its ranks, according to the human rights group. FARC seeks recruits as young as 14 who are prized for their knowledge of jungle terrain. In past three years, more than 1,500 Indians have been forced into guerrilla ranks, the human rights group said.

Domico's disappearance followed a rash of violence against indigenous leaders by paramilitary forces and the FARC. The AUC, especially here in northern Colombia, has chosen to eliminate powerful tribal leaders who resist the right-wing group's territorial ambitions. At least 10 leaders of the Embera Katio and Zenu tribes in Cordoba, and neighboring Antioquia and Choco provinces, have been killed by the AUC in the past three years, according to the human rights association. Embera Katio leaders say 16 tribal members have been killed over that period, half by the paramilitary forces and half by the FARC.

"For these groups, it is dangerous to have a leader who is much listened to by his people, someone who says, 'This is our territory, not yours,' " said an adviser to the two Embera Katio leaders who oversee tribal land between the Sinu and Verde rivers southwest of here. "We have come here to look for [Domico] in [the paramilitary forces'] house."

Domico's plight is in some ways similar to that of the thousands of Colombians trying to remain neutral during the intensifying civil conflict, which is fueled by the vast profits the armed groups receive from the drug trade. Tribal members say that in recent months, Domico was resisting pressure from the AUC to begin growing coca -- the raw material used to make cocaine -- on tribal land.

Tierralta sits on a volatile border between the two military forces, and in the past 18 months drug crops have sprung up on land once used to grow bananas, rice and timber. Last month, FARC forces operating along the Sinu River slaughtered more than two dozen farmers, sometimes using machetes, who were allegedly working AUC-controlled coca fields.

At the same time, Domico was continuing a long battle against the government and international corporations over a dam erected against the tribe's will in Embera territory. After decades of study, a corporation comprising Canadian and Swedish interests began building the Urra Dam on the Sinu River six years ago. The tribe won a brief injunction suspending construction, but subsequent legal rulings resulted in the 1998 flooding of a fertile valley filled with the tribe's banana plantations.

For the first time in their history, many of the 142 Embera Katio families living between the Sinu and Verde rivers were going hungry after the flooding devastated the fishing stock. Domico had been leading the crusade for government compensation, angering many powerful business interests.

Colombian officials have shown little interest in the Domico case. Col. Henry Caicedo, Cordoba's police chief, said without offering any evidence that Domico's disappearance was related to involvement in the drug trade. He retracted his comments, but only after Abadio Green of the Indigenous Organization of Antioquia said: "If they kill Kimy [or] any other of our colleagues, the colonel will be responsible."

Then, Cordoba Gov. Jesus Maria Lopez prohibited the indigenous caravan from entering his state on the grounds that it could interfere with a national ranching festival. He said he would do nothing to stop the procession, but offered no security.

So those who arrived here did so under less than safe circumstances, and remain vulnerable during what could be a weeks-long demonstration. The main square, strung with hammocks and draped with scraps of plastic that serve as tents, offers the Indians little protection from paramilitary or guerrilla forces.

A few army patrols stand guard as dozens of children, barefoot and dirty, play ball and tag in the streets. Around each person's neck hangs a laminated picture of Domico on a string, a crude credential meant to identify participants.

Three hundred people arrived by raft from Alto Sinu, the Embera Katio region that is Domico's home, including Rigoberto Domico, a member of the tribe, his wife and 6-month-old son. "He was our leader, and we will stay until we find him," he said. "How long it takes is not important."

Hundreds more arrived in a caravan of buses from Medellin to the south, braving perhaps the most contested stretch of highway in Colombia with little protection.

"The government should be looking for Kimy's killers and arresting these paramilitaries," said Jennifer Harbury, an American lawyer who has accused the CIA of complicity in the 1992 death of her husband, a Guatemalan guerrilla. She made the trip from her home in Texas to search for Kimy, whom she showed around Washington two years ago. "These people should not have to risk their lives for this."

-------- europe

Military muscle gap of European Union

June 18, 2001
Austin Bay
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20010618-7637909.htm

"Royal Air Force may recruit Luftwaffe pilots." No, the London Times´ report isn´t a joke employment ad intended to boggle Battle of Britain survivors.

The RAF´s talent search, however, exemplifies Europe´s general decline in military effectiveness and European NATO members´ specific failure to meet modernization commitments. Ultimately, it offers insight into the European Union´s chronic case of collective political weakness, illustrating why even the most sanctimonious of Washington-taunting Euro-promoters secretly rely on U.S. leadership.

Facing a pilot shortage, the RAF is scouring the globe for hi-Mach skills. This spring, when New Zealand´s irresponsible little government decided to defund its own air force, the RAF immediately approached unemployed Kiwi jet jockeys.

But recruiting from the Luftwaffe was too ironic for the press to ignore. In the six decades since the London Blitz, both history and Hollywood have kept alive the memory of Spitfires and Messerschmidts tangling high above the Thames.

Don´t confuse hiring German pilots as indicative of increasing European cooperation. It´s poaching indicative of desperation on the part of the RAF and disenchantment on the part of Luftwaffe pilots disgruntled by Germany´s aging air fleet and declining training time.

Euro politicos have decided their militaries can shrink and make-do with old equipment. The Soviet threat is kaput, and economic prosperity is what really binds Europe, right?

This political decision, however, abrogates NATO´s 1999 "force goals" agreement, forged after the Kosovo War revealed a growing gap between U.S. and European military capabilities. Europeans agreed to improve in five areas: logistics, command and control, survivability of forces and infrastructure, mobility, and "effective engagement" a buzzword for precision-guided weapons.

But the goals simply haven´t been met. Actually, Britain deserves credit for attempting to meet its commitments. Germany has faltered. France, as usual, has invested more in anti-Washington invective than in modernization.

At last week´s NATO defense ministers conference, Secretary General Lord Robertson assayed the failure to pursue military reform. "Elections are rarely won or lost on questions of defense policy," he said. "These are complex and sometimes dry issues . . . hard to package in a sound bite." While globalization offers "our societies the opportunity to become . . . more prosperous, it also makes them more vulnerable," particularly to "states developing weapons of mass destruction."

Lord Robertson warned Europeans, "If crisis comes along, the capability won´t be there." If Europe doesn´t deliver, the result will be a "trans-Atlantic capability gap and a European credibility gap."

The Eurocorps, the "go it alone" force some Americans perceive as a threat to undermine NATO, looks like another Euro-tout turned to Euro-flop. Lack of funding is one reason, European rivalries another. Greece rejected Turkish participation in a joint European defense force. On June 8, Irish voters rejected EU expansion. Like other Western Europeans, many Irish believe an enlarged EU costs them too much money. More than a few also fear that EU "institutional reforms" would require Ireland to participate in the EU´s military force, compromising Irish neutrality.

Frankly, Europe already suffers from other credibility gaps. The euro´s decline against the U.S. dollar was the free market´s comment on Europe´s economic weaknesses. Though Europeans recognize the need for structural and social reform, the will to tackle vested interests and embedded problems is utterly lacking. While crack German pilots may jump to the RAF, ask a Greek engineer about intra-EU labor mobility if he applies for a job in Munich.

American liberals chatter about European "credibility" on environmental issues. That´s another hoo-hah. Romania remains the only European nation to ratify the flawed Kyoto Treaty. However, hammering President Bush about the Kyoto Treaty shields European leaders from the wrath of their domestic greens. Germany´s left-wing government is making extensive use of this bit of guerrilla theater the eco-freaks generate great sound bites and satirizing Mr. Bush deflects attention from the deterioration of the Luftwaffe.

Lord Robertson understands, as do other European defense specialists, that emerging threats require modernization and preparation. However, among key European leaders, only British Prime Minister Tony Blair has publicly acknowledged the merit of the Bush administration´s missile defense proposals, new approaches to arms control and new "strategic framework" for collective defense.

But don´t tell that to the crowds of protesters greeting Mr. Bush´s European tour. Check their posters it´s all sound bites, adolescent angst and smug duplicity. The United States is the bogey man, faulted for Middle East conundrums, energy policy, environmental degradation and incredibly impoverishing Cuba. Apparently, some European socialists still can´t criticize communism.

If the defense of the Free World is to remain credible, the United States has to lead it´s all too obvious Europe can´t.

Austin Bay is a nationally syndicated columnist.

-------- iraq

U.S. Scales Back Iraq Mission

Associated Press
June 18, 2001 at 9:16:59 p.m.
http://www.jsonline.com/news/intl/ap/jun01/ap-patrolling-iraq061801.asp

INCIRLIK AIR BASE, Turkey - U.S. warplanes have significantly reduced their bombings of northern Iraq this year, with pilots concerned that Saddam Hussein is hiding his guns in civilian areas and could shoot down an American plane.

Recently, Iraqi gunners have opened fire almost every day, according to American pilots, and experts say Saddam has beefed up his missile forces with Chinese and possibly Yugoslav help.

Nearly six months into this year, U.S. warplanes patrolling a no-fly zone over northern Iraq struck at targets just seven times, despite Iraq's having opened fire on the aircraft 48 times. The United States struck 47 times in all of last year.

The dangers and the estimated $1 billion cost have led officials in Washington to question a mission that has sent more than 200,000 flights over Iraq during the past decade.

``With every day that goes by, the odds ... of losing an aircraft go up,'' said Col. Maury Forsyth, the U.S. officer who draws up the allied flight plans for the northern no-fly zone. He spoke from his concrete command bunker in Incirlik air base in southern Turkey.

Saddam ``is doing everything he can to shoot us down,'' Forsyth added.

Forsyth said the Iraqis have continuously been shooting during his 22 months in command of the aircraft. Saddam recently has been hiding some of the anti-aircraft guns in civilian areas.

``I prefer to ... stay away rather than endanger the civilian population,'' Forsyth said. ``That may account for some of the decrease'' in U.S. strikes.

Pilots say the shooting is constant.

``It seems like you see a gunner almost everywhere in the no-fly zone,'' said Navy Cmdr. Tom Tack of Allen Park, Mich.

Iraq has apparently ordered its gunners to shoot as much as possible to down an American aircraft, according to experts.

``It would be an enormous propaganda victory,'' said Nick Cook of Jane's Defense Weekly.

Experts say Iraq apparently hired Chinese workers to use fiber-optic cables to link up its radar systems - an allegation noted by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld on a visit to Incirlik this month, but denied by the Chinese government.

``We've been very fortunate that we've not had a loss,'' Rumsfeld said at the time. ``The risk grows to the extent that other nations assist Iraq in strengthening its military capabilities, its air defense capabilities.''

The radar network would give Iraqi commanders an overall picture of the allied flights and help them direct anti-aircraft fire. The surveillance radar that watches planes is located outside the no-fly zone.

Other reports say Slobodan Milosevic, while president of Yugoslavia, dispatched air defense experts to advise the Iraqis on how to improve their anti-aircraft capabilities.

During the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999, anti-aircraft missiles and artillery scored a number of hits on U.S. and allied planes, bringing down an F-117 stealth bomber and an F-16 Fighting Falcon, and damaging others. The Yugoslav defenses forced NATO to order its pilots to remain at altitudes of over 16,400 feet, from which it proved difficult to strike entrenched troops in Kosovo.

Some of the squads in NATO's Yugoslav campaign now operate over northern Iraq.

The no-fly zone was set up in 1991 after the Gulf War to protect rebellious Iraqi Kurds from Saddam's forces. A similar zone was set up over southern Iraq a year later and is also patrolled by U.S. and British aircraft.

The job of patrolling the zones became more dangerous in December 1998, when Iraqi gunners began routinely firing on the aircraft.

On Monday, some 40 aircraft streaked down the runway at Incirlik air base toward northern Iraq. U.S. F-15 fighters armed with air-to-air-missiles flew first and were quickly backed up by F-16 fighters carrying anti-radar missiles.

Radar jamming aircraft and planes carrying laser-guided bombs also joined the mission. The bombers are there to attack any site that opens fire on the other planes.

Pilots said that although Iraqi gunners fire often, their chances of hitting an aircraft are slim.

``I think the threat is fairly minimal, but there is always the threat of a lucky shot,'' said Tack, who flies an EA6-B Prowler, an aircraft designed to jam enemy radar.

The Iraqis are so afraid of U.S. anti-radar missiles that they usually fire their missiles without turning on their short-range targeting radar, giving them little chance of hitting an aircraft, pilots say. Unlike the surveillance radar, the targeting radar is located within the no-fly zone and is therefore vulnerable to U.S. attack.

Although the volume of Iraqi firings appear to have increased, pilots say Iraqi gunners with heavy machine guns usually fire only short bursts.

``It's almost like the gunner fires and runs away,'' said Tack. ``We never see more than a single or two air burst explosion.''

The success of the mission is clear.

More than 200,000 flights have been flown without a single plane damaged. No Iraqi plane has violated the northern zone since November, 1999, a violation that ended without incident.

``From the military perspective, it has worked,'' Tack said. ``We've kept him in his little military box that we let him play in.''

But with the dangers growing, Washington is reconsidering the mission.

According to some experts, that could include phasing out the daily patrols, but ordering aircraft to respond immediately if Iraqi forces threaten the northern Kurdish enclave.

----

U.N. Sanctions Didn't Stop Iraq From Buying Weapons

New York Times
June 18, 2001
By BARBARA CROSSETTE
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/18/world/18IRAQ.html?searchpv=nytToday

UNITED NATIONS, June 15 - Two American arms control experts, combing through unpublished reports by a disbanded arms inspection commission, say they found evidence that Iraq continued to buy prohibited weapons or parts long after United Nations sanctions were imposed in 1990.

Many of the purchases appear to have been made in Central and Eastern Europe, the experts, Gary Milhollin, director of the Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control in Washington, and Kelly Motz, a project researcher, say in a new independent report. They found documents concerning illegal sales or potential sales by companies in Ukraine, Belarus and Romania. Among the purchases made by the government of Saddam Hussein were missile components and high- technology machine tools.

In the past, United Nations arms inspectors for Iraq had been reluctant to identify countries in public reports, in part because there have also been suspicions of illegal trading by companies in Russia, a powerful member of the Security Council.

The report by the Wisconsin Project, to be published on Wednesday in the magazine Commentary, appears as the United Nations Security Council is debating a new "oil for food" program for Iraq that would lift most restrictions on sales of civilian goods to Iraq.

The Council is stymied over American insistence that, given Iraq's past subterfuges in acquiring weapons of mass destruction, the plan must include an extensive list of items that could only be sold after a review to make sure they were not intended for military use.

"What this shows is that Saddam's procurement network is alive and well and has been working steadily despite the sanctions," Mr. Milhollin said in an interview on Thursday. "To stop it, we need to do better.

"There are a lot of companies out there willing to break the embargo, and they're also going to be willing to take advantages of weaknesses in this list, which means the list ought to be as strong as we can make it. Given his proclivities to divert things and to stop selling oil for his people in order to leverage us out of controlling his money, if there are going to be mistakes made, we ought to make them on the side of being more careful about what he is allowed to buy."

The sanctions were imposed on Iraq in 1990, after it invaded Kuwait. The oil for food program allows Iraq to sell oil to alleviate suffering of the civilian population under the sanctions. The United Nations monitors expenditure of the profits, with part going to Kurds in the north and reparations for the Persian Gulf war.

France, Russia and China are objecting to the American list of items that would have to be reviewed under the broadened program.

They contend that some items, beyond clearly prohibited arms, are unnecessarily restrictive and will prolong hardships in Iraq that the new oil-sales plan was intended to alleviate.

Some independent experts say United States intelligence agencies are trying to keep certain items out of Iraq that it could use to make American eavesdropping harder, if not impossible.

In negotiations this week in Paris and New York, the Americans agreed to trim the list somewhat, diplomats said. But continuing disagreements over its scope it could cause the Council to miss another deadline, July 3, for establishing the new oil-sales program.

In their article, Mr. Milhollin and Dr. Motz dismiss the debate over the new plan as largely irrelevant. "The new proposal - whether adopted by the U.N. or not - has little hope of stopping the Iraqis from sneaking in what they need to rebuild their weapons sites and sneaking out the oil to pay for it," they wrote. "For the truth is that even when the U.N. inspections regime was in place, the Iraqis had figured out how to do just that."

Iraq continues to argue that it has disarmed as required by the Security Council and that sanctions should be lifted without further preconditions. Russia and France, the Council members with the closest ties to Iraq, say that while an automatic lifting of sanctions is not possible, Iraq should be told clearly what it still needs to do so that sanctions can at least be suspended as soon as possible.

A United Nations commission was set up after the gulf war to monitor Iraq's weapons, but the inspectors were withdrawn in late 1998, in advance of American and British bombing of Iraq. It was that commission's documents that Mr. Milhollin and Dr. Motz reviewed.

A new arms inspection system was established, but this week its director, Hans Blix of Sweden, told the Security Council again that inspectors from his new United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission must go to Iraq before a suspension can be considered. Mr. Hussein has barred them.

"The completion of both the inventory of unresolved disarmament issues and the identification of the key remaining disarmament tasks," he wrote in a report to the Council, "will only be possible after the commission's experts have commenced work in Iraq and have been able to assess what changes may have occurred during the almost two-and-a- half years when there have been no on-site inspections or monitoring in Iraq."

Among the examples drawn from the documents of the now defunct United Nations Special Commission was a case that began in 1995 when a delegation of Iraqi specialists from the Badr State Establishment, which made sophisticated machine tools, arrived in Belarus with a shopping list that included diamond-cutting tools. They can be used for making precision parts for nuclear weapons and long-range missiles. Those tools and other materials were bought outside United Nations rules, the authors say, and shipped to Iraq by way of the Jordanian free-trade port of Aqaba.

As late as 1998, before arms inspectors were withdrawn from Iraq, the Wisconsin Project article says, United Nations experts saw high- technology lens-making machinery from Belarus being unloaded in Iraq. In Ukraine, the Iraqis wanted to acquire whole laboratories, with training assistance and computer software. The Iraqis say they never made the purchases, and United Nations inspectors never found evidence of them at missile sites or other places.

Ukraine continues to be publicly active in Iraq, however. This year, according to news reports from Kiev, more than 100 Ukrainian companies, some selling space and aviation equipment, exhibited their goods at a Baghdad trade fair.

--------

U.S. Scales Back Iraq Mission

New York Times
June 18, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Patrolling-Iraq.html?searchpv=aponline

INCIRLIK AIR BASE, Turkey (AP) -- U.S. warplanes have significantly reduced their bombings of northern Iraq this year, with pilots concerned that Saddam Hussein is hiding his guns in civilian areas and could shoot down an American plane.

Recently, Iraqi gunners have opened fire almost every day, according to American pilots, and experts say Saddam has beefed up his missile forces with Chinese and possibly Yugoslav help.

Nearly six months into this year, U.S. warplanes patrolling a no-fly zone over northern Iraq struck at targets just seven times, despite Iraq's having opened fire on the aircraft 48 times. The United States struck 47 times in all of last year.

The dangers and the estimated $1 billion cost have led officials in Washington to question a mission that has sent more than 200,000 flights over Iraq during the past decade.

``With every day that goes by, the odds ... of losing an aircraft go up,'' said Col. Maury Forsyth, the U.S. officer who draws up the allied flight plans for the northern no-fly zone. He spoke from his concrete command bunker in Incirlik air base in southern Turkey.

Saddam ``is doing everything he can to shoot us down,'' Forsyth added.

Forsyth said the Iraqis have continuously been shooting during his 22 months in command of the aircraft. Saddam recently has been hiding some of the anti-aircraft guns in civilian areas.

``I prefer to ... stay away rather than endanger the civilian population,'' Forsyth said. ``That may account for some of the decrease'' in U.S. strikes.

Pilots say the shooting is constant.

``It seems like you see a gunner almost everywhere in the no-fly zone,'' said Navy Cmdr. Tom Tack of Allen Park, Mich.

Iraq has apparently ordered its gunners to shoot as much as possible to down an American aircraft, according to experts.

``It would be an enormous propaganda victory,'' said Nick Cook of Jane's Defense Weekly.

Experts say Iraq apparently hired Chinese workers to use fiber-optic cables to link up its radar systems -- an allegation noted by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld on a visit to Incirlik this month, but denied by the Chinese government.

``We've been very fortunate that we've not had a loss,'' Rumsfeld said at the time. ``The risk grows to the extent that other nations assist Iraq in strengthening its military capabilities, its air defense capabilities.''

The radar network would give Iraqi commanders an overall picture of the allied flights and help them direct anti-aircraft fire. The surveillance radar that watches planes is located outside the no-fly zone.

Other reports say Slobodan Milosevic, while president of Yugoslavia, dispatched air defense experts to advise the Iraqis on how to improve their anti-aircraft capabilities.

During the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999, anti-aircraft missiles and artillery scored a number of hits on U.S. and allied planes, bringing down an F-117 stealth bomber and an F-16 Fighting Falcon, and damaging others. The Yugoslav defenses forced NATO to order its pilots to remain at altitudes of over 16,400 feet, from which it proved difficult to strike entrenched troops in Kosovo.

Some of the squads in NATO's Yugoslav campaign now operate over northern Iraq.

The no-fly zone was set up in 1991 after the Gulf War to protect rebellious Iraqi Kurds from Saddam's forces. A similar zone was set up over southern Iraq a year later and is also patrolled by U.S. and British aircraft.

The job of patrolling the zones became more dangerous in December 1998, when Iraqi gunners began routinely firing on the aircraft.

On Monday, some 40 aircraft streaked down the runway at Incirlik air base toward northern Iraq. U.S. F-15 fighters armed with air-to-air-missiles flew first and were quickly backed up by F-16 fighters carrying anti-radar missiles.

Radar jamming aircraft and planes carrying laser-guided bombs also joined the mission. The bombers are there to attack any site that opens fire on the other planes.

Pilots said that although Iraqi gunners fire often, their chances of hitting an aircraft are slim.

``I think the threat is fairly minimal, but there is always the threat of a lucky shot,'' said Tack, who flies an EA6-B Prowler, an aircraft designed to jam enemy radar.

The Iraqis are so afraid of U.S. anti-radar missiles that they usually fire their missiles without turning on their short-range targeting radar, giving them little chance of hitting an aircraft, pilots say. Unlike the surveillance radar, the targeting radar is located within the no-fly zone and is therefore vulnerable to U.S. attack.

Although the volume of Iraqi firings appear to have increased, pilots say Iraqi gunners with heavy machine guns usually fire only short bursts.

``It's almost like the gunner fires and runs away,'' said Tack. ``We never see more than a single or two air burst explosion.''

The success of the mission is clear.

More than 200,000 flights have been flown without a single plane damaged. No Iraqi plane has violated the northern zone since November, 1999, a violation that ended without incident.

``From the military perspective, it has worked,'' Tack said. ``We've kept him in his little military box that we let him play in.''

But with the dangers growing, Washington is reconsidering the mission.

According to some experts, that could include phasing out the daily patrols, but ordering aircraft to respond immediately if Iraqi forces threaten the northern Kurdish enclave.

-------- israel

Sharon Flatly Rejects Proposal for Peres-Arafat Meeting

Associated Press
Monday, June 18, 2001; Page A13
http://washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A12889-2001Jun17?language=printer

JERUSALEM, June 17 -- Prime Minister Ariel Sharon today rejected a proposal for his foreign minister to meet with the Palestinian leader, Yasser Arafat, saying there could be no negotiations without a complete halt to violence. That goal proved elusive again today as a Palestinian boy was killed when Israeli soldiers fired on demonstrators at a refugee camp in the Gaza Strip.

The idea of the meeting came from U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan, diplomats said, insisting on anonymity. It sparked an angry exchange between Sharon and Foreign Minister Shimon Peres, an ideological rival of Sharon whose close collaboration with the hawkish prime minister in recent months has been considered central to reducing more than eight months of renewed Israeli-Palestinian bloodshed.

An Israeli television station reported that Sharon called the peace process a total failure and banned Peres from meeting Arafat for now. It said Peres retorted that he does not take orders from Sharon. Israeli officials would not confirm the report.

Despite a marked reduction of hostilities between Israel and the Palestinians, sporadic violence continued as the two sides traded accusations of noncompliance with a truce agreement mediated last week by CIA Director George J. Tenet.

A 12-year-old Palestinian boy was killed when Israeli soldiers fired on demonstrators in the Khan Younis refugee camp, Palestinian doctors said. The Israeli army said soldiers fired at the legs of two Palestinians leading a group that had charged a fence separating the camp from Jewish settlements. It said the shots were fired after tear gas failed to disperse the protesters.

Also, Palestinians set off two bombs near Israeli soldiers in the West Bank and Gaza; the militant group Islamic Jihad took credit for one. The Israeli military said no one was injured in either attack.

In signs of cooperation, Israeli tanks and armored vehicles pulled back from sensitive points in Gaza, and Israeli and Palestinian commanders inspected a key junction together for the first time in months.

The meeting Sharon rejected was to have involved Peres, Arafat and Annan in the West Bank town of Ramallah. Peres, whose peace efforts won him a share of the 1994 Nobel Peace Prize, favors continued contacts with Arafat. Sharon, a former general, insists there can be no peace negotiations until all violence ceases.

-------- lebanon

Syrian Troops Quit Beirut

From News Services
Monday, June 18, 2001; Page A14
http://washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A12900-2001Jun17?language=printer

BEIRUT, June 18 (Monday) -- Syrian troops withdrew from strategic positions in and around Beirut today, continuing a redeployment out of the Lebanese capital, which the Syrian military had dominated for years.

Witnesses said dozens of Syrian tanks had crossed Lebanon's eastern border and returned to Syria over the weekend, but it was not clear how many troops would actually leave the country.

Lebanese security sources, however, said Sunday that all Syrian troops would withdraw from Beirut within 48 hours.

In the first official Syrian comment on the redeployment, parliament speaker Abdel-Qader Qaddourah called it a sign of harmony between Beirut and Damascus, which he said had helped save Lebanon from itself during the country's civil war.

Ras Beirut, a prime waterfront area in the capital's Muslim section where the American University of Beirut is located, was left with no Syrian soldiers after they evacuated four positions Sunday.

Syria has maintained about 30,000 troops in Lebanon since 1976.

Under the 1989 Taif Accord that ended the 1975-90 civil war, the Syrian army should have already withdrawn from Beirut and surrounding areas to the central mountains.

The Syrians came to Lebanon as peacekeepers to quell the civil war, but as the conflict dragged on for 15 years, they were drawn in on the side of the Muslims.

-------- new zealand

New Zealand Aims to Scrap Air Defense

New York Times
June 18, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Quietly-Disarming.html?searchpv=aponline

WELLINGTON, New Zealand (AP) -- When it comes to military matters, New Zealanders are more likely to hear from the minister of disarmament than the minister of defense these days.

Having angered the United States and other allies in the 1980s by banning visits by nuclear-powered or armed warships, New Zealand now has opted to be the first advanced nation to virtually scrap its air defenses.

The left-of-center government announced last month that it is junking the air force's combat jets, turning it into a transport service. The small army, meanwhile, is being remade into a peacekeeping force and the navy cut to just two oceangoing warships.

The army also has been instructed to do a feasibility study on setting up a peace school at which soldiers would sit in seminars with aid workers and peace campaigners to discuss methodology and share experiences.

New Zealand may be small and far away from just about everywhere, but the Labor Party government believes it can set an example to the world on defense.

Opponents of the cutbacks contend the government is really pursuing total disarmament by stealth, cloaking its true aim with talk about peacekeeping because most New Zealanders want a strong defense.

``These are peaceniks trying to run the armed forces,'' said defense commentator Graeme Hunt. ``Every other center-left government in the world -- except New Zealand -- is spending more on defense.''

``We have a naive belief that if we run down our armed forces, others will too,'' Hunt said.

Prime Minister Helen Clark insists the changes are justified because there is virtually no chance of New Zealand being attacked. She denies she is leaving the country almost defenseless, and she rejects the notion the government wants to withdraw into isolationism.

New Zealand is investing in the army to carry out peacekeeping missions with the United Nations and other world bodies, she said. ``This defense strategy is the very opposite of being isolationist.''

While the government is buying new vehicles and other equipment for the army, defense analysts say little of the money is going for weapons or front-line combat gear despite an urgent need for such items.

``The army is an orphan army now ... and they're deeply concerned about their combat viability,'' said David Dickens, director of the independent Institute for Strategic Studies.

Many legislators in the governing party were deeply influenced by the opposition to New Zealand's military involvement in the Vietnam War in the 1960s and the movement in the 1980s against nuclear weapons and power.

Matt Robson, the government's minister for disarmament, said disarmament and arms control are ``just as important'' as what the country does with the armed forces. Outsiders who say the country is isolationist ``are misleading their people and misleading the world,'' he said.

Robson has sharply criticized the country's traditional allies, deriding Australia as a lackey of the United States and calling Washington's foreign policy a disaster.

``It does seem to be an attitude of `We're the top dog on the block, we'll make the rules,''' he said of the United States earlier this year.

Green Party legislator Keith Locke, a pacifist who proposed the peace school for the army and is dubbed the party's ``Un-armed Forces'' spokesman, insists New Zealanders support the defense cuts.

``I've always said ... when the dust settled a significant majority of people would be behind the defense changes and I think that is coming to pass,'' he said.

But opinion polls indicate that just under 60 percent of New Zealanders believe the country needs strong defenses and must play a full role in defense alliances with the United States and Australia.

New Zealand has a long and proud military tradition, having sent troops to aid Britain during the two world wars and taking part in the Korean and Vietnam wars.

Military analysts and former defense chiefs argue the government's policy will leave New Zealand defenseless and alienate allies.

``We're really becoming a passive onlooker, and they (allied nations) will conclude we have no plans to work on collective security in a time of trouble,'' said Gerald Hensley, a retired senior defense official.

-------- puerto rico

Vieques, the Island Paradise

Washington Post
By Al Kamen
Monday, June 18, 2001; Page A15
http://washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A12873-2001Jun17?language=printer

There's been much dismay among Republicans over the Bush administration's surprise decision to halt Navy bombing on the Puerto Rican island of Vieques. Some folks suggest White House counselor Karl Rove pushed the move with an eye on the increasingly important Hispanic vote.

But Republican Rep. James V. Hansen (Utah), a member of the House Armed Services Committee, says the Navy needs Vieques for training and doesn't have an alternate site.

"I don't know," Hansen told National Public Radio's Steve Inskeep on Thursday. "I come down to the idea where I don't see where Puerto Rico should get any favorite treatment over the rest of these people. Now what have they done to get it? They sit down there on welfare and very few of them paying taxes, got a sweetheart deal. I just don't really see the equity in it, but maybe I don't understand it."

Inskeep said Hansen, who chairs the House Resources Committee, "suggested he might make things difficult for Puerto Rico." Worse than bombing?

Back to the drawing board, Karl.

--------

When the Bombing Ends

New York Times
June 18, 2001
IN AMERICA
By BOB HERBERT
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/18/opinion/18HERB.html?searchpv=nytToday

There was always a disconnect between the serene beauty of the island of Vieques and the stunning violence of the bombardment that would pound parts of the island when the Navy practiced its combat maneuvers.

The eruptions - the ear-splitting bombing and ship-to-shore shelling - would occur both in the daytime and at night. The maneuvers, complete with low-flying planes and helicopters, would take place a few miles from inhabited areas, but they were profoundly disruptive nevertheless. War games that were close enough to make school buildings tremble were also close enough to fill students with a sense of unease, if not dread.

There is something very strange about the U.S. military waging mock warfare for more than half a century on a small island inhabited by United States citizens. In October 1993 a plane accidentally dropped five quarter-ton bombs just a mile from Isabel Segunda, the island's largest town. Four of the bombs exploded, but no one was hurt. Two years ago a civilian guard was killed when two bombs missed their target and destroyed an observation post.

Such incidents were nerve-racking, to say the least, and have angered local residents. But Vieques, we were told, perfectly suited the Navy's purposes.

No doubt. Most of the 9,000 or so people on the island were dreadfully poor. Nearly three-quarters were below the official poverty line. These were folks the Navy could push around. If we were talking about an island of fat cats, the surf and the turf of 9,000 wealthy and well-educated Americans, do we think the Navy could have gotten away with the argument that there was no other place anywhere that was suitable for these war games?

President Bush has ordered the Navy to clear out of Vieques over the next two years. But that's not enough. Someone has to address the incredible mess the Navy will be leaving behind.

Six decades of bombing and shelling and other efforts to perfect the Navy's destructive capacity have done lasting damage to the health of Vieques residents and the physical environment of the island. A federal lawsuit brought by environmental groups and residents of Vieques accuses the Navy of causing "more damage than any other single actor in the history of Puerto Rico."

The suit alleges that much of the eastern portion of the island, where the training exercises take place, has been contaminated with a wide range of toxic substances that resulted from bombs, other explosive devices, and the use of such materials as Agent Orange, napalm and, in at least one instance, depleted uranium.

A report to the governor of Puerto Rico two years ago quoted one man as saying, "The people of Vieques have been breathing and drinking explosives for the last 50 years."

Environmentalists have long complained that the contaminants produced by the naval exercises have spread though the air, the water and the constantly exploding soil to other parts of the island. Toxic levels of heavy metals, including lead, arsenic, selenium, mercury and zinc, have been found in several species of fish.

The lawsuit noted that local residents "use many of these same species of fish as a source of food."

Puerto Rican officials have said that Vieques has the highest rate of cancer, the highest infant mortality rate and the highest overall mortality rate of any municipality in the commonwealth. And, according to one government study, a large number of the island's residents suffer from a rare heart disorder associated with exposure to sonic booms.

As the Navy prepares to leave Vieques, the federal government has an obligation to determine the effect it has had on the public's health and the environment.

"I do believe that people on that island are sicker because of the naval bombardment," said Robert F. Kennedy Jr., president of the Waterkeeper Alliance and lead counsel of the Natural Resources Defense Council. Both groups are plaintiffs in the lawsuit.

Mr. Kennedy noted that Vieques had been a pristine island that was kissed daily by the trade winds of the Caribbean. There is no industry on the island. To the extent that its environment has been soiled and the health of its residents endangered, the Navy is responsible.

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

Pentagon's No. 2: Let others take up peacekeeping

06/18/2001
By Andrea Stone,
USA TODAY
http://usatoday.com/news/washdc/2001-06-19-peacekeeping.htm

WASHINGTON - U.S. military forces should focus on fighting wars and leave peacekeeping duties to Norway, Canada and other nations with a "long tradition" of carrying out humanitarian missions, the Pentagon's No. 2 official says. "We want to get the military out of non-military functions," Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz said in an interview. U.S. troops have played "an indispensable role in peacekeeping" in the Balkans, but "let's figure out how we can play our part within reason," he said.

Though U.S. military participation in peacekeeping missions had strong backing from President Clinton, President Bush has vowed to reduce the military's overseas commitments. However, during his trip to Europe last week, Bush reassured allies that he would not unilaterally withdraw 9,800 U.S. troops stationed in the Balkans. "We came in together, we will leave together," he said.

Wolfowitz said the United States is the only nation that brings significant military capabilities" in a crisis, and "if we are also picking up (peacekeeping) tasks that other people can do, I think we've got it wrong."

He said a U.N. peacekeeping mission in East Timor in 1999 is a model for the U.S. role: The Pentagon provided logistical support but let Australian troops restore order in the former Indonesian province.

The trouble with peacekeeping commitments is that they never seem to end, Wolfowitz said. He cited the United States' longest-running peacekeeping mission, a nearly two-decade presence in the Sinai.

A multinational force of 1,900 peacekeepers, including 865 U.S. troops, has rarely reported a border violation between Israel and Egypt since the mission began in 1982.

The Pentagon wants to withdraw half its troops and replace them with surveillance satellites and unmanned aerial vehicles. But Israel and Egypt, which can veto a pullout, are unlikely to agree in light of increased violence in the region.

Ivo Daalder, an analyst at The Brookings Institution, calls Wolfowitz's view "shortsighted." U.S. peacekeepers provide "political reassurance, not military reassurance," he says. "To argue that the military is only for war fighting is to lose sight of the military as a tool in our larger foreign policy. If things go wrong, we have the ability to set things right."

----

Air Force general top pick for Joint Chiefs chair

06/18/2001
By Andrea Stone,
USA TODAY
http://usatoday.com/news/washdc/2001-06-19-eberhart.htm

WASHINGTON - The general in charge of the Pentagon's computer warfare operations is a leading candidate to succeed Gen. Henry Shelton as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff this fall. Air Force Gen. Ralph "Ed" Eberhart, 54, is on a short list of favorites to become the Pentagon's top military officer and principal uniformed adviser to the president on Sept. 30, when Shelton's second 2-year term expires.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who will recommend a candidate to President Bush in July, says his top priorities include developing computer warfare capabilities, a missile defense shield and protections for military satellites. All are the responsibility of the U.S. Space Command, which Eberhart runs.

Military officials say the Vietnam combat pilot also benefits from a widely held Pentagon view that it's the Air Force's turn to take charge. The last airman to serve as chairman was Gen. David Jones in 1982.

The past three chairmen have been Army generals: Shelton, John Shalikashvili and Colin Powell. The Senate must confirm Bush's choice.

A law from 1986 limits the selection to the vice chairman of the joint chiefs, the four service chiefs and nine top-ranking commanders. The president can choose from beyond that group only if "necessary in the national interest."

Other top candidates:

Navy Adm. Dennis Blair, 54, head of U.S. Pacific Command. His knowledge of Asia would help Rumsfeld fulfill his promise to place more emphasis on the Pacific.

Blair gets praise inside the Pentagon for his handling of the collision of a Navy surveillance plane with a Chinese fighter jet in April and the USS Greeneville submarine's fatal crash into a Japanese fishing trawler in February.

Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Jones, 57, who would be the first Marine to serve as chairman. Jones was the front-runner until safety problems were discovered with the tilt-rotor Osprey aircraft sought by the Marines.

Air Force Gen. Richard Myers, 59, the joint chiefs vice chairman, has a close working relationship with Rumsfeld, but he is nearing retirement and might be limited in how long he could serve.

-------- OTHER

-------- alternative energy

Solar-powered jail helps California county save money

Monday, June 18, 2001
By Environmental News Network
http://enn.com/news/enn-stories/2001/06/06182001/solarjail_44026.asp

DUBLIN, Calif. -- The nation's largest roof mounted solar array, being installed atop Alameda County's Santa Rita Jail in Dublin, California, was previewed this week by Alameda County's Supervisors and the county's General Services Agency.

The solar deployment, together with energy efficiency improvements, was commissioned to help Alameda County reduce and stabilize future energy costs. Once the Santa Rita project is complete, it will reduce the jail's use of grid generated electricity by about 20 percent through solar power generation and energy conservation.

Clean energy will be generated through a giant 500 kilowatt solar installation consisting of 4,000 roof tiles. The solar panels will help the county weather the state energy crisis by reducing the jail's monthly electric bill and replacing pollution-generating electricity with clean, on-site solar power.

The overall need for electricity at the facility will be cut by a combination of added insulation from the solar roof tiles and an upgrade of the jail's central plant with state of the art cooling equipment and controls.

The solar array is already partially up and running. When completed in late July, it will generate over 650,000 kilowatt-hours of clean energy annually, and reduce the jail's yearly electrical need by 890,000 kWh. This project is the first of many solar installations planned for Alameda County buildings.

"Over the past several years, Alameda County has reduced electricity use by more than 30 percent, and we save more than $4 million every year by doing so," said Alameda County Supervisor Scott Haggerty, president of the Board of Supervisors.

The Santa Rita jail houses male and female prisoners from communities on the eastern side of San Francisco Bay in more than 900 cells and several dormitory units.

"We estimate that Alameda County will save millions of dollars in electricity costs as a result of adopting solar power," said Alameda County General Services Agency Director Aki Nakao as he toured the partly completed facility.

"It's great to be part of a project that's environmentally friendly and saves taxpayers money. When it's completed, the Santa Rita project will be the largest rooftop solar electric installation in the United States, and, we believe, in the entire Western Hemisphere," said Tom Dinwoodie, CEO of PowerLight Corporation of Berkeley, the company that designed, manufactured and installed the solar array.

"Alameda County is taking a leadership role in energy conservation," said Haggerty. "We are extremely committed to adopting smart, innovative technologies to reduce our energy consumption and save taxpayer dollars. Deploying solar power and making county facilities more energy efficient are key components of our overall energy strategy."

-------- death penalty

Ban on Execution of the Retarded Is Vetoed in Texas

New York Times
June 18, 2001
By RAYMOND BONNER
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/18/national/18DEAT.html

WASHINGTON, June 17 - Gov. Rick Perry of Texas today vetoed legislation that would have banned the execution of the mentally retarded, a move that runs counter to a trend among states that have the death penalty.

The governor explained his action by saying that there were already judicial safeguards for mentally retarded defendants in capital cases and that Texas had not executed a mentally retarded person. This echoed what President Bush said last week on the eve of his departure for Europe: that the mentally retarded should never be executed and that the court system protects against that happening.

Governor Perry's action, on the day that was the deadline for him to decide whether to veto the bill or let it become law, is certain to subject the United States to sharp criticism from abroad. It came as President Bush returned from Europe, where he faced protests from death penalty opponents.

At home, there has been a steady movement among states with the death penalty to pass laws that prohibit the execution of the mentally retarded. Last week, Gov. Jeb Bush of Florida signed such legislation. After years of being defeated in the Legislature, the bill passed the Florida House, 110 to 1.

The federal government bars such executions, as do 15 states, including New York, as well as Arizona, where the governor, a Republican, signed the legislation in April. The other states are Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Nebraska, New Mexico, South Dakota, Tennessee and Washington. The governors of Connecticut and Missouri have similar legislation on their desks.

While Mr. Bush and Mr. Perry say Texas has not executed anyone who was mentally retarded, supporters of the legislation say six inmates with I.Q.'s of 70 or below have been executed since 1990. People with I.Q.'s that low are generally considered retarded.

In the fall, the Supreme Court will address the question of whether the Constitution bars the execution of the mentally retarded in the case of Ernest P. McCarver, who has an I.Q. of 67 and is on death row in North Carolina.

The debate over whether specific legislation is needed to protect the mentally retarded was confused by President Bush's statement last week. The president said, "We should never execute anybody who is retarded." He then added that "our court system protects people who don't understand the nature of the crime they've committed."

This is similar to what Governor Perry said today.

But someone who does not understand the nature of his crime is considered legally insane, not retarded. Such people may be found not guilty by reason of insanity, as was John W. Hinckley Jr., the man who tried to assassinate President Ronald Reagan.

Most mentally retarded people are not considered insane. Advocates of laws to ban the execution of the mentally retarded do not argue that a retarded person should not be held accountable for his crime but say it is morally unacceptable to sentence him to death, just as it would be to execute a 10-year-old.

Until the Supreme Court ruling in the McCarver case, no mentally retarded person is likely to be executed.

The decision in Texas today came as the federal government prepared to go ahead with the scheduled execution of Juan Raul Garza on Tuesday morning.

Mr. Garza, who was convicted by a federal court in Brownsville, Tex., in 1993, of three drug-related murders, will be executed unless the Supreme Court grants a last-minute stay. He will be only the second person executed by the federal government in nearly 40 years; the first was Timothy J. McVeigh, who was executed last week.

On Friday, the Bush administration rejected an appeal from the Organization of American States that it spare Mr. Garza's life. In a letter to Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, the organization's human rights commission argued that Mr. Garza had been sentenced in violation of the rights guaranteed by the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, which the United States has signed and that his execution would violate international law.

In a four-paragraph reply, the State Department called those assertions "manifestly groundless." A spokesman also said the department would not intercede with the White House to urge a postponement of Mr. Garza's execution, which the State Department's human rights bureau did last December, saying going ahead with the execution would give other countries a basis to question the United States' commitment to international law.

Mr. Garza has not denied committing the murders, but his lawyers have argued that in sentencing him to death, the jury was improperly allowed to hear testimony that he had been responsible for four other murders in Mexico - even though he was never convicted, prosecuted or even charged for those murders.

Mr. Garza's lawyers and supporters have also argued that the federal death penalty system, as it has been applied, is marked by glaring racial discrimination. Of the 19 men on federal death row, 14 are African- American and 3 are Hispanic.

A Justice Department review of the federal death penalty cases, begun under President Bill Clinton and expanded by the Bush administration, has found that in more than 75 percent of cases in which a United States attorney made an initial determination to seek the death penalty, the defendant was a member minority, and in half of them the defendant was an African-American.

Attorney General John Ashcroft said there was no evidence of intentional racial bias. But he also agreed last week to conduct further study.

Last December, when Mr. Clinton was considering postponing Mr. Garza's execution, the State Department's human rights bureau urged him to grant a delay, pending the completion of a Justice Department study into the fairness of the application of the federal death penalty.

"If Garza is executed before the United States government completes its study regarding whether race plays an impermissible role in the federal death penalty, other nations could have strong grounds to question U.S. adherence to the spirit of our obligations under international law," the head of the human rights bureau, Harold Hongju Koh, wrote the White House.

The State Department said the human rights bureau would not be taking a similar action this time.

-------- energy

Bush to Back FERC Energy Price Limits
Proposed Restraints Would Affect 11 States

By Mike Allen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, June 18, 2001
http://washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A12662-2001Jun17?language=printer

President Bush, who has argued against price caps on California electricity, plans to support less stringent price limits by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, administration officials said yesterday.

The commission will meet today to consider new restraints on the wholesale price of electricity in California. An aide to California Gov. Gray Davis (D) said the governor considers the commission's leading proposal to be "too little, too late."

Administration officials said they will argue that Bush can support new FERC limits that are based on market factors, and will contend that the president has not changed his position.

Nevertheless, the willingness to embrace new limits could temper the anxiety of some congressional Republicans, who fear Bush has handled the matter callously. Rep. Anna G. Eshoo (D-Calif.) said Vice President Cheney rankled some members of the California delegation during a Capitol Hill meeting last week.

"He lectured us about markets," Eshoo said yesterday on a conference call with reporters organized by Davis's office. "When I reminded him that our market was dysfunctional and that in a healthy market there's competition, he looked at his watch."

FERC, an independent agency with commissioners appointed by the president, has limits on wholesale electricity prices in California that are in effect only during emergency power shortages. FERC sets a target price based on the costs of the least efficient producer, and companies have to explain in writing if they exceed that target.

At a special meeting today to deal with California energy issues, the commissioners will consider a proposal supported by congressional Republicans that would extend those restraints around the clock during the next year, and to 10 other Western states, federal officials said.

Davis plans to use a Capitol Hill appearance this week to reiterate his request for the federal government to order electricity generators to refund billions of dollars to his state, an aide said.

Power producers are planning television ads in California that Democratic officials consider to be anti-Davis, and the governor plans to point to those campaigns as evidence that generators have made excessive profits during the state's power crunch, the aide said.

One of California's leading electricity generators, Reliant Energy Inc. of Houston, said it is considering television ads in California but has not made them yet. Richard N. Wheatley, the firm's director of corporate communications, said the ads would be "educational, talking about the supply-demand imbalance in California."

Asked about Davis's planned comments about the ad spending, Wheatley said, "There's been a tremendous amount of misinformation coming out of Sacramento, so I'm not surprised by the tenor of the remarks."

Time magazine reported that Republican consultants hope to raise $25 million to run an anti-Davis ad in California beginning today under the name of the American Taxpayers Alliance.

Davis will make his request for refunds at a hearing Wednesday called by Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (D-Conn.), the new chairman of the Governmental Affairs Committee. Lieberman held his first hearing on energy regulation last week and said the commission had done too little to carry out its mandate to ensure "just and reasonable" wholesale energy rates following deregulation in California.

Lieberman's hearings are an example of the benefits to Democrats of controlling the Senate. But Senate Majority Leader Thomas A. Daschle (D-S.D.) doused some Democratic officials' desires for investiga- tions of financial dealings of Bush administration officials.

"Democrats want to legislate, not investigate," Daschle said on "Fox News Sunday." "We're not going to engage in payback. There's plenty of temptation to do that, but we're not going to do that."

Staff writer Peter Behr contributed to this report.

--------

G.M. Will Oppose Efforts to Tighten Fuel Efficiency

New York Times
June 18, 2001
By KEITH BRADSHER
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/18/business/18AUTO.html

DETROIT, June 17 - General Motors is taking a stand against efforts to raise federal fuel-economy standards.

G.M.'s chief executive, Rick Wagoner, said on Friday that the company would oppose not only any move to increase fuel-economy standards for automobiles, but also any effort to tighten the definition under which vehicles are considered light trucks, which qualify for more lenient gas- mileage standards than cars.

Mr. Wagoner said in an interview with reporters that federal regulation of automotive fuel economy had been a failure and should be scrapped, not reworked. "Suffice it to say, it hasn't worked and, in our view, it won't work," he said.

He argued that Americans would not want fuel-efficient vehicles as long as gasoline prices remain very low in the United States, at least by international standards.

The fuel-economy rules are receiving considerable attention in Congress now because gasoline prices rose during the spring, although they have fallen back slightly the last two weeks and still remain far below the $5 or more a gallon charged in Europe. Automobiles also emit large quantities of global-warming gases with each gallon of gasoline they burn, so their efficiency has become controversial as President Bush has sought to redefine American policy on global warming.

The fuel efficiency of all the cars sold by each automaker must average at least 27.5 miles a gallon. But the standard is 20.7 miles a gallon for light trucks, a category that includes minivans, pickup trucks and traditional sport utility vehicles, which are based on pickup truck underbodies instead of car designs.

Because automakers are classifying more and more vehicles as light trucks, the overall fuel economy of vehicles on the road has fallen to 24.5 miles a gallon, the lowest level since 1980, after peaking at 26.2 miles a gallon in 1987. Moreover, all of these averages are calculated using special rules that allow automakers to add an extra 18 percent to the actual mileage figures that appear on window stickers.

Crossover utility vehicles, which are mostly high-roofed, all-wheel- drive vehicles that use the mechanical underpinnings of cars, are the fastest-growing segment of the auto industry, with sales more than doubling in the first five months of this year, to 6 percent of the auto market. They include models like the Toyota Highlander, Ford Escape and Chrysler PT Cruiser, and virtually all of them are classified as light trucks by the automakers.

Mr. Wagoner made his remarks about fuel economy after saying that sales of crossover vehicles will continue to grow rapidly and will draw people who have been buying cars until now, rather than people who have been buying pickup trucks or traditional sport utilities.

Automakers have enormous discretion to decide what is a car and what is a light truck under rules issued in 1977 by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which is part of the Department of Transportation. Joan Claybrook, the president of Public Citizen, a liberal advocacy group founded by Ralph Nader, was the safety agency's administrator when the rules were issued. She said in a telephone interview that when her staff drafted the lengthy definition of a light truck, it was intended for commercial vehicles, not passenger vehicles.

It would be politically easier now, she said, to narrow the definition of a light truck than to raise the mileage standard for all light trucks to 27.5 miles a gallon, as some in Congress have proposed.

"That is clearly something I think the agency has the authority to change," she said. "It would be harder for the industry to fight and it might be the shrewdest way to push up standards."

-------- environment

PROTEIN HELPS PLANTS HOLD WATER

June 18, 2001
ENS
http://ens-news.com/ens/jun2001/2001L-06-18-09.html

CHAPEL HILL, North Carolina, Researchers at Penn State and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill have discovered that a protein in plant guard cells impacts how well a plant holds water.

Eventual application of the researchers' work could help control the amount of water in a plant and lead to more ecologically friendly, effective and efficient means to raise crop plants.

In response to drought, sunlight, and other stimuli, guard cells control the opening and closing of microscopic pores, or stomata, on leaves of plants through which the plant gives off water vapor and oxygen to the atmosphere and takes in carbon dioxide for photosynthesis. The guard cells moderate the amount of water and carbon dioxide in the plants.

Researchers Sarah Assmann, professor of biology at Penn State, and Xi-Qing Wang, a postdoctoral scholar at Penn State, along with collaborators at the University of North Carolina, discovered that by altering a specific protein in the guard cells those cells had less control over the amount of water lost by the plants through their pores. The research team's results appeared in the June 15 edition of the journal "Science."

"The potential agricultural significance is being able to regulate stomatal apertures," Assmann said. "From a farmer's perspective, finding a way to maximize photosynthesis and yield, and a way to minimize irrigation, which can be expensive, would be important."

The researchers have identified molecules called G proteins, which help guard cells regulate water loss, in crop species such as corn and tomatoes.

"There are ... many potential applications, such as controlling stomates to allow plants like feed corn to dry faster in the field before harvest," Assmann said. "Conversely, if we could control the guard cells to increase plant water retention during the growing season and reduce the need for expensive irrigation, we also would improve the agroenviroment because irrigation increases the amount of salt left behind in the soil and saline soils are toxic to most crop plants."

--------

What I Like and Don't Like About Bush's Energy Policy

By Chandler,
Greenwave Radio,
May 18, 2001
http://www.greenwave.com/commentary/3219

What I like about Bush's Energy Proposal

Of the 100 plus recommendations about 40% of them deal with the environment or conservation. I want to share some of the ones I thought were great.

First, I was struck when the document from the onset said, "We do not accept the false choice between environmental protection and energy production." This energy policy reflects a very thoughtfully woven policy that integrates the environment with energy and visa versa.

Second, the report recommends that the US "enact 'multi-pollutant' legislation to establish flexible, market-based program to significantly reduce and cap emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and mercury from electrical power generators." It also establishes an emission trading system that has proven successful for acid rain, which can be just as successful for other emissions such as mercury and CO2.

Third, the report called Energy Star Program to expand into schools, retail buildings, homes and health care facilities. By partnering with the private sector we have and can continue to increase the efficiency of our homes, our appliances, our computers.

Fourth, the report called for tax credits for hybrid cars such as the Honda Insight or Toyota Prius starting 2002 and going to 2007. The report calls for development of next generation technologies such as fuel cells. It also establishes a Royalties Conservation Fund, using royalties from the Artic Nation Wildlife Refuge to fund land conservation, wind, solar and biomass technologies. Plus, it increases the budget for renewable research by $39 million.

Last but not least, the report calls for an increase our supply infrastructure, such as refining capacity and natural gas pipelines. After reviewing the projections on the rising increase of natural gas consumption in this country we need to do the unpopular thing---build more natural gas pipelines, which after all is needed to spur the growth of fuel cell technology. Drilling in the Artic National Wildlife Refuge for oil and natural gas, coupled with increasing natural gas pipelines backed with financial investments for next generation technologies, like fuel cells; the stage is being constructed for moving an America that is reliant on combustion fuels into a hydrogen marketplace.

What I don't like about Bush's Energy Proposal!

While I completely understand the need to bring more power to market, why nuclear? True, it doesn't emit pollution, but there is the problematic issue of depositing of its waste. This seems like a misstep to me, I don't want nuclear deposits in anyone's backyard.

Second, I do not understand why they did not add CO2 to the caps and trading system. Recently, five huge energy producers including Enron and Calpine came out and ask President Bush to implement a mandatory cap on CO2 as well as a national trading system.

Third, the federal government is the largest consumer of energy in the world. I would love to see them take the half of the $2 billion they earmarked for cleaner coals and divide it up to the states to use for schools to implement renewable and fuel cell technology. The payback would be immediate. Consider this, one school district in Iowa has used two wind turbines to power their entire energy needs. Guess what? They have an extra $120,000 of tax-free money to spend on books, teachers or computers. With the federal government owning over a half a million buildings and millions of acres of land, this could be the start of redefining the debate on reliance. That's what I call real energy/education reform.

All in all, this energy policy put forth by President Bush is earnest. The problem is that special interest groups would rather engage in the politics of "self-preservation" rather than debating the immediate and future needs....

Bush's energy policy can be found online at the following URL: http://www.whitehouse.gov/energy/ http://www.whitehouse.gov/energy/summaries.pdf

-------- genetics

ENGINEERED CROPS THREATEN FARMERS, ENVIRONMENT

ENS AmeriScan,
June 18, 2001
http://ens-news.com/ens/jun2001/2001L-06-18-09.html

WASHINGTON, DC, June 18, 2001 (ENS) - Almost 30,000 field tests of genetically engineered organisms were authorized by the Department of Agriculture between 1987 and 2000, shows a new report by the U.S. Public Interest Research Group (US PIRG) and the Genetically Engineered Food Alert coalition.

These tests pose serious environmental and contamination threats, and inadequate regulations are in place to monitor their impacts, the groups argue.

Their report, "Raising Risk: Field Testing of Genetically Engineered Crops in the US," documents for the first time the extent of field testing of genetically engineered crops in the U.S and highlights the potential risks associated with the release of engineered genes into the environment.

"Our environment is being used as a laboratory for widespread experimentation on genetically engineered organisms with profound risks that, once released, can never be recalled," said Richard Caplan, environmental advocate for US PIRG and report author. "Until proper safeguards are in place, this unchecked experiment should cease."

Experimental field crop plots threaten to contaminate the crops of traditional farmers, who often do not have information about where test plots of genetically engineered crops are growing, the report says.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are investigating StarLink, a genetically engineered corn, not approved for human consumption because it may be a human food allergen. Last year, the Genetically Engineered Food Alert showed that StarLink had contaminated the human food supply, forcing the FDA to recall over 300 food products and costing farmers, food processors and the grain industry millions of dollars in lost profit.

"If any one of the 29,000 experimental test plots has cross pollinated with local agriculture crops they could have the same effect on the U.S. food supply as StarLink has," Caplan said.

Key findings of the report include

More than 60 percent of all field tests conducted in the last year now contain secret genes classified as "Confidential Business Information," which means that the public has no access to information about experiments being conducted in their communities. Between 1987-2000, Monsanto or its subsidiaries applied to conduct almost 2,000 field tests - more than any other company Since 1995, seven of the top 10 companies seeking to conduct field tests have merged into two companies: Monsanto and DuPont.

"Any new technology must be tested, but there are important scientific issues that must be addressed before genetically engineered foods can be released into the environment even in the context of testing," said Paul Muegge, a farmer and Oklahoma state senator. "To conduct field tests before this has been done is both premature and hazardous; it is like carrying out clinical trials of a drug before the laboratory tests are complete."

The report, "Raising Risk: Field Testing of Genetically Engineered Crops in the US," is available at http://www.pirg.org/ge/

GENETICALLY CONTAMINATED CORN TAKEN OFF MARKET

WASHINGTON, DC, June 18, 2001 (ENS) - The Department of Agriculture (USDA) has purchased more than 322,000 hybrid seed corn units containing the StarLink protein Cry9C from 63 small and medium sized seed companies.

A unit is 88,000 kernels a bag, or bushels for bulk seed. Corn containing Cry9C may be fed to animals, but it is not approved for use as food for human consumption.

Last year, tests uncovered Cry9C, marketed as StarLink, in human food products and some bulk corn supplies.

USDA is buying up seed corn, at an estimated cost of $12.9 million, to ensure a safe supply of corn for human use and so that seed companies are not impacted by the presence of Cry9C in their seed corn. Most of the seed corn produced in the U.S. was not affected - the number of seed corn kernels that contained Cry9C was less than one percent of the 2001 supply of hybrid seed corn.

USDA is still reviewing applications from eight companies to have their seed corn purchased. The total additional quantity of hybrid seed units that could be purchased if all of these applications were approved would be about 125,000 units.

To help limit the production of corn containing this protein so that it would not be planted and then later enter the human food supply, USDA announced on March 7 that it would purchase seed corn containing Cry9C and also contacted 288 seed companies. To participate in this purchase, the seller must destroy Cry9C affected seed.

Companies licensed by Aventis, the registrant of StarLink, to grow hybrid seed corn containing Cry9C protein are not eligible to participate in this seed purchase program.

All seed corn companies will continue to follow USDA recommended testing procedures designed to detect the presence of Cry9C.

On June 13, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released the results of its investigation into adverse health effects associated with eating corn products contaminated with Cry9C. CDC concluded that reported allergic reactions among study participants were not a result of allergic reaction to Cry9C.

-------- health

Homeopathic Metals May Cure All Manner of Ailments

New York Times
June 18, 2001
By REUTERS
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/science/science-queen-arsenic.html?searchpv=reuters

LONDON (Reuters) - Before it emerged that Britain's Queen Elizabeth fortifies herself before speeches with a cup of arsenic and onions in water to prevent sneezing, many people may have been unaware of the heavy metal's medicinal benefits.

But arsenic, best known as a handy poison in tales of murder and sleuthing, is also one of the more commonly used remedies in homeopathy.

Homeopathy, seen either as a complement or alternative to orthodox medicine, uses metals from across the Periodic Table and a whole range of other substances from the plant and animal kingdoms. Its basic principle is that ``like cures like'' -- if a substance produces certain symptoms in a healthy individual it can treat those same symptoms.

Homeopathic remedies, normally administered in the form of pills, are designed to kick-start the body's immune and defense

systems and improve a patient's overall health.

THE ROOTS OF HOMEOPATHY

German scientist Samuel Hahnemann, the founder of modern homeopathy some 200 years ago, experimented with metals with a view to rendering safe those used in conventional medicine. At that time mercury was used to treat syphilis but, in its crude form, unfortunately killed the patient. Hahnemann discovered that the more diluted the amount of mercury administered the more effective it became in treating the disease.

As homeopathy developed, it grew to include arsenicum album (white arsenic) among some 30 polycrests -- key remedies. Patients needing this remedy can have symptoms resembling those of arsenic poisoning. They might be anxious that someone is trying to poison them, or take money from them. They may be restless or suffer from nausea and vomiting.

``There is a correlation between what a substance produces in its crude state and what it cures in its homeopathic state,'' said Robert Lawrence, Technical and Training Manager at UK-based Helios Pharmacy.

Homeopaths treat the whole patient -- on the mental, physical and emotional level. Orthodox medicine (allopathy) tends to base prescriptions on one or two specific symptoms and use drugs to block or prevent something from happening in the body rather than curing it.

``Homoeopathic amounts are too small to interfere with biochemical pathways,'' said Dr. Steven Kayne, Consultant Pharmacist at the Glasgow Homeopathic Hospital and Pharmaceutical Dean of the Faculty of Homeopathy.

METALS NOT TOXIC

Meanwhile, the overuse and inappropriate prescription of conventional medicine has meant that stronger and more toxic drugs are being used to combat super-bugs and viruses, which have become resistant to less powerful drugs.

``There is no toxicity (in homeopathic remedies) because there is usually very little and sometimes none of the original substance,'' Lawrence said.

In homeopathy the metal is ground down into a very fine particle state before being taken into a liquid carrier and diluted further still. Kayne noted molecules of the medicine can be found in low potencies below 12c (where one drop is diluted in 100 drops 12 times in a row), but none can be detected in those above 12c due to greater dilution.

With higher potencies Kayne said it could be assumed that there was no toxicity. With lower potencies he said: ``Clinical evidence suggests there is not a problem, but theoretically there might be.''

But he pointed out that arsenicum was frequently prescribed in low potency 6c without any adverse side-effects other than the normal aggravations, which indicated a remedy was working. Indeed, the problem for many critics is that homeopathic medicines can be so diluted that there is nothing identifiable in the final dose except water.

But Lawrence said they still contained a certain essence or dynamic of the substance. ``Logically it doesn't make sense, but even modern nuclear physics doesn't make sense,'' he contested. ''It depends on the mental modeling you use.''

OTHER METAL REMEDIES

Metals are used quite widely in homeopathy, usually in the form of salts, but there is no common theme among them. With some metals, as with other substances, their so-called characteristics can manifest themselves in a patient, according to some homeopaths.

The ``remedy picture'' for aurum (gold), for example, can be for those prone to severe depression. The type may be quite acquisitive and powerful and need to be best at whatever they do (going for gold), but also have a low opinion of themselves.

Such patients might be trading in the stock market, Lawrence said, and the type to jump out of the window were share prices to plummet sharply. Aside from this, aurum can also be used for a whole range of symptoms, including mental exhaustion, digestive problems and heart and vascular disorders.

But Lawrence added that it was by no means always the case that prescribing was so straightforward. ``It would be nice to have a convenient schemata but it doesn't always work that way.'' Meanwhile, Kayne warned against the dangers of self-treatment and stressed that prescribing of remedies was too specialized and could only be done on an individual basis.

WORKING WITH ORTHODOX MEDICINE

Kayne said homeopathy and orthodox medicine can work in tandem and that this approach was adopted by most health professionals. The Homeopathic Hospital of Glasgow is run by the UK's National Health Service and there are three such others in the country. Homeopathy has been part of the NHS since 1948.

Homeopathy's increased popularity in recent years is in part due to a widespread and growing interest in all complementary or alternative therapies. Kayne said this had been partly fueled in the UK by the Patients' Charter, whereby individuals have the right to say how they want to be treated and also through the Internet. He said hits on health care Web sites were second only to those for pornographic sites.

--------

New Imaging Combo Could Improve Cancer Treatment

New York Times
June 18, 2001
By REUTERS
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/health/health-imaging.html?searchpv=reuters

LONDON (Reuters) - British researchers said on Sunday they have developed a new technique that could improve the accuracy and effectiveness of radiotherapy treatments for cancers and reduce harmful side effects.

It combines two widely used scanning techniques, computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), to create computer-generated images of cancerous tumours.

Dr. Peter Hoskin, a clinical oncologist at Mount Vernon Hospital in Middlesex, southern England, who helped to develop the technique, said it will initially be used for radiotherapy for prostate cancer patients, but it could be helpful in treating other tumours, particularly in the pelvis, head and neck.

``It is a generic development that can be applied to other sites,'' he told a news conference.

The technique combines the best of CT, which gives a good location of a tumour in the body, and MRI, which shows plenty of detail. It fixes points on the CT image and relates them exactly to the same points on the MRI to produce enhanced images.

Together they will give the exact size, shape and location of the tumour and allow doctors to concentrate radiation treatment more accurately, thus maximizing the dose to the tumour while avoiding hitting healthy cells or tissue.

``It can be used on any type of tumour where MRI gives a better image than CT,'' Hoskin explained.

``You can define the tumour better and target the radiation.''

Up to half of all cancer patients will undergo radiotherapy sometime during their treatment, so the technique could have wide applications.

Hoskin and his team hope to use it for brachytherapy, a treatment for prostate cancer that involves inserting very fine radioactive ``seeds'' in the walnut-size gland, sometime next year.

Prostate cancer is the second most common cancer in men. Surgery and radiotherapy with beams of ionising radiation or radioactive seeds are used to treat the illness, which afflicts mainly older men.

Because the gland is located so close to the rectum and bladder, the radiotherapy must be very precise so it does not damage the other organs. But it must cover the entire tumour and the pathways through which it can spread to other parts of the body.

``By providing enhanced images of tumours, Hoskin's research could allow doctors to more precisely tailor radiotherapy to the needs of each patient, heralding a brighter future for many people with cancer,'' said Dr. Lesley Walker of Britain's Cancer Research Campaign, which is funding the research.

-------- police

Supreme Court Upholds Use of Force in Guarding Vice President

New York Times
June 18, 2001
By LINDA GREENHOUSE
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/18/national/18CND-SCOTUS.html

WASHINGTON, June 18 - The Supreme Court today added an extra layer of protection for police officers accused in suits for damages of using excessive force.

In a 6 to 3 decision, the court ruled that a lawsuit against a police officer for using excessive force must be dismissed even if the officer's behavior was unreasonable under existing law, as long as a reasonable officer could have made the same mistake under the particular circumstances.

The decision overturned a ruling by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in San Francisco, that grew out of a brief altercation at the Presidio Army Base there in 1994. During an appearance by Al Gore, then the vice president, to mark the conversion of the base to a national park, an animal-rights activist at the front of the crowd started to unfurl a banner objecting to the possible use of an Army hospital there as a site for animal experiments.

Two military police officers quickly dragged the man away and threw him into a nearby van. The man, Elliot Katz, president of a group called In Defense of Animals, was 60 years old at the time and was wearing a leg brace due to a fractured foot. Although he fell to the floor of the van, he was not injured. He sued one of the officers for subjecting him to an unreasonable seizure in violation of the Fourth Amendment.

When any law enforcement officer is sued for a constitutional violation, the question immediately becomes whether the officer is entitled to have the suit dismissed under the doctrine of "qualified immunity." Under this doctrine, as defined by Supreme Court precedents, an officer cannot be found liable for behavior that was objectively reasonable under law that was clearly established at the time. Under this standard, many suits accusing police officers of making illegal searches or arrests are dismissed at the summary judgment stage, without a trial.

The Ninth Circuit, however, viewed excessive force cases in a way that effectively ruled out qualified immunity and sent many of these cases, including this one, to trial. The appeals court concluded that since the issue of reasonableness was at the heart of both the immunity question and of excessive force itself, the two issues merged and should be left to a jury to sort out at trial.

Writing for the majority today, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy said this was the wrong approach because the two issues were really not the same. "The concern of the immunity inquiry is to acknowledge that reasonable mistakes can be made as to the legal constraints on particular police conduct," Justice Kennedy said. Therefore, he said, even police behavior that is objectively unreasonable might be entitled to immunity, as long as the officer's mistake was itself a reasonable one.

--------

Fed Control Ends in Texas Prisons

New York Times
June 18, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Prison-Lawsuit.html

AUSTIN (AP) -- A federal judge Monday ended federal supervision of several state prison programs accused of violating prisoners' rights.

The federal government was granted oversight of the programs as part of a 30-year-old lawsuit against the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.

U.S. District Judge William Wayne Justice said the state had ``vastly improved the system that at one point was incapable of description -- the conditions so pernicious and the inmates' pain and degradation so extensive.''

Under the ruling, the state will regain control of staffing, support services, discipline, access to courts, crowding, health services and death row.

The judge said the federal government should continue to supervise inmate safety, the segregation of inmates from other prisoners, and use of force. He said constitutional violations remained in those areas.

``So long as these conditions persist, this civil action will remain alive,'' Justice wrote.

The ruling stems from a 1972 case filed by inmate David Ruiz, who claimed conditions were so brutal and crowded they amounted to cruel and unusual punishment. Justice agreed in 1981 and the state spent billions of dollars on new prisons and improvements.

Most federal controls were lifted in a 1992 settlement but the judge retained oversight.

Texas Attorney General John Cornyn said the ruling puts Texas one step closer to freedom from federal oversight.

``By his ruling today, Judge Justice correctly relinquished most federal control of the prison system in light of the vast improvements made since this case began 29 years ago,'' Cornyyn said.

``However, I disagree with Judge Justice's finding that certain aspects of our prison system require continued federal intervention. We will appeal that part of his ruling to the Fifth Circuit.''

-------- spying

Russian Scientist Allegedly Sold Satellite Secrets to China

By Interfax
18 April 2001 http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/russia_satellite_spy_010418.html

KRASNOYARSK (Interfax) -- Russia's Federal Security Service (FSB) in the Krasnoyarsk Region (Siberia) accused Krasnoyarsk physicist Valentin Danilov of spying for China.

Danilov, an employee of the Krasnoyarsk State Technical University, signed a contract with a Chinese import-export company for the production of a testbed and software for studying electrical processes.

According to information gathered by investigators, Danilov tried to sell a device that can model the complex effects of outer space on satellites.

The scientist has been kept in custody since February 16.

Danilov's colleagues showed their support for him on Wednesday. Over 20 scientists working at Krasnoyarsk universities and the Siberian department of the Russian Academy of Sciences wrote an open letter to the prosecutor of the Krasnoyarsk Territory in which they asked him to review the case and release Danilov from custody.

The scientists say the secret classification had been lifted from the devices mentioned in Danilov's contract with the Chinese company in 1992. All research under this contract "could have been done on the basis of materials available in open publications," Danilov's colleagues said.

-------- terrorism

Taliban invalidates bin Laden's orders

June 18, 2001
By Arnaud de Borchgrave
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20010618-38746756.htm

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan -- Any holy decree or "fatwa" issued by Osama bin Laden declaring holy war against the United States and ordering Muslims to kill Americans is "null and void," according to the Taliban´s supreme leader.

Bin Laden, America´s most wanted terror suspect, "is not entitled to issue fatwas as he did not complete the mandatory 12 years of Quranic studies to qualify for the position of mufti," said Mullah Mohammad Omar Akhund, known to every Afghan as amir-ul-mumineen (supreme leader of the faithful).

Mullah Omar made clear that the Islamic Emirate, as the Taliban regime calls itself, would like to "resolve or dissolve" the bin Laden issue. In return, he expects the United States to establish a dialogue that would lead to "an easing and then lifting of U.N. sanctions that are strangling and killing the people of the Emirate."

The two issues are linked, both in Washington and in Kandahar, the nation´s sprawling, dust-choked religious center of 750,000 people where Mullah Omar and his 10-man ruling Shura, or council, have their headquarters.

Mullah Omar, 41, is a soft-spoken man of very few words. He relies on Rahmatullah Hashimi, a 24-year-old multilingual "ambassador-at-large," rumored to be Afghanistan´s next foreign minister, to translate and expand his short, staccato statements.

The one-eyed, 6-foot-6-inch, five-times wounded veteran of the war against the Soviet occupation in the 1980s was also the architect of the Taliban´s victory over the multiple warring factions that followed the Soviet withdrawal in 1989.

Sitting cross-legged on the carpeted mud floor of his spartan adobe house on the west end of town, Mullah Omar´s shrapnel-scarred face, topped by a black turban, shows no emotion as he answers in quick succession a military field telephone, walkie-talkies and a wideband radio.

"We´re still fighting a war," he says impatiently, referring to Ahmed Shah Masood´s guerrilla forces, which still hold 10 percent of Afghan territory in the northeastern part of the country.

According to U.S. intelligence reports, bin Laden has issued instructions that his followers have described as fatwas. But Mullah Omar said, "Only muftis can issue fatwas." Bin Laden "is not a mufti, and therefore any fatwas he may have issued are illegal and null and void."

The Afghan supreme leader also said bin Laden is not allowed any contact with the media or with foreign government representatives.

Afghanistan, according to the amir, has suggested to the United States and to the United Nations that international "monitors" keep bin Laden under observation pending a resolution of the case, "but so far we have received no reply."

Mr. Hashimi, in flawless English, added: "We also notified the United States we were putting bin Laden on trial last September for his alleged crimes and requested that relevant evidence be presented."

He said the court sat for 40 days, but the United States never presented any evidence of suspected crimes by bin Laden, including his suspected involvement in the bombing of two U.S. embassies in Africa, which Mullah Omar agreed were "criminal acts."

"Bin Laden, for his part, swore on the Quran he had nothing to do with those terrorist bombings and that he is not responsible for what others do who claim to know him," Mr. Hashimi said.

On Tuesday, a New York court sentenced one Saudi Arabian to life in prison in connection with the embassy bomb attacks; three more men -- a Tanzanian, a U.S. citizen and a Jordanian -- have also been found guilty and are awaiting sentencing. All claimed to have been acting on orders from bin Laden.

In March, Pakistani leader Gen. Pervez Musharraf told The Washington Times that by demonizing bin Laden, the United States had turned him into a cult figure among Muslim masses and "a hero among Islamist extremists."

Since then, the State Department has played down the importance of bin Laden. Mullah Omar clearly wishes to do the same. But politically, he cannot afford to deport him lest he arouse the wrath of his fellow extremists.

Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the UAE are the only three countries that recognize the Taliban government. Saudi Arabia and the UAE secretly fund the Taliban by paying Pakistan for its logistical support to Afghanistan.

Mr. Hashemi, a highly intelligent high school dropout who toured the United States earlier this year, fielded other questions that Mullah Omar felt had been answered in recent months:

• On the lack of schools for girls: "We don´t even have enough schools for boys. Everything was destroyed in 20 years of fighting. The sooner U.N. sanctions are lifted, the sooner we can finish building schools for both boys and girls."

• On the treatment of women: "You forget that America and the rest of the world are centuries ahead of us. If you introduced your manners and mores suddenly in Afghanistan, society would implode and anarchy would ensue. We don´t interfere with what we consider your decadent lifestyle, so please refrain from interfering with ours."

• On the destruction of TV sets: "Try to imagine what would have happened in 18th- or even 19th-century America or Europe with the overnight introduction of television and all the sex that is now part of programs everywhere except Iran. We are not against television, but against the filth that pollutes the airwaves."

• Distributed by United Press International.

----

High court sides with police

06/18/2001
By Joan Biskupic,
USA TODAY
http://usatoday.com/news/court/2001-06-19-protester.htm

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court sided with law enforcement Monday in a case brought by an animal rights protester who said police used excessive force to arrest him at a speech by then-vice president Al Gore in 1994. The ruling gives police considerable deference in disputes over their tactics.

The case, decided 8-1 against the protester but 6-3 on the legal rationale, tracks the court's usual patterns of shielding police from lawsuits for actions on the streets and of trying to stop litigation before it eats up government resources.

It ends an excessive-force claim brought by Elliot Katz, president of In Defense of Animals. As Gore was speaking at the Presidio Army base in San Francisco to mark its conversion to a national park, Katz walked toward him with a banner that read, "Please Keep Animal Torture Out of Our National Parks." Military police officers grabbed Katz, and one of them shoved him into a police van.

The justices rejected Katz's claim and said lower courts hearing such lawsuits must consider how tense and threatening the scene may have been, as well as officers' need to make "split-second judgments." Six of the justices, led by Anthony Kennedy, adopted a rationale that focuses on the specific situation an officer faces.

Kennedy referred to the "hazy border between excessive and acceptable force" and said an officer should not be liable if he reasonably but mistakenly believes his actions were justified for the circumstances that existed. The Fourth Amendment protects people against force that is objectively unreasonable; the court has long shielded police from such claims when officers legitimately believed they were acting reasonably.

The decision reversed a ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. That ruling, which said Katz's claim could go to trial, was favorable for people claiming brutality.

Three justices (Ruth Bader Ginsburg, John Paul Stevens and Stephen Breyer) agreed with Kennedy that Katz did not have a case, but they rejected the majority's analysis as unnecessarily confusing for lower courts balancing the interests of police and victims.

Justice David Souter agreed with Kennedy's rationale but dissented from the judgment on Katz's case. He said the matter should be returned to the lower court to be tested under the new rationale.

David Williams, Katz's lawyer, criticized the ruling for expanding police immunity and making it harder to take a case to a jury.

The Justice Department, which represented the officer in the case, had no comment. Texas Solicitor General Gregory Coleman, who had written a "friend of the court" brief on behalf of 27 states, praised the decision for acknowledging the difficulties of police work.

-------- activists

June 21 call-in day to oppose National Ignition Facility

The following alert is from our friends at the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability. Please take a few moments Thursday to participate in this important action.

Kevin Martin, Director
Project Abolition kmartin@projectabolition.org

PLEASE FORWARD TO YOUR LOCAL ALERT LISTS!!

Call your Senators and Representative June 21st and ask them to oppose funding for the National Ignition Facility, the biggest boondoggle in the nuclear weapons complex.

You can find the alert (and two PDF versions) on the ANA website at www.ananuclear.org/NIFalert.html.

CUT NIF CALL-IN DAY Thursday, June 21st

Call your U.S. Senators and Representative to oppose funding for the National Ignition Facility, the biggest boondoggle in the U.S. nuclear weapons complex.

Congressional Switchboard: 202-224-3121

On June 21st, tell your legislators:

Ø The NIF is plagued by technical problems and is wasting billions of taxpayer dollars.

Ø The NIF undermines U.S. obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty and may provoke nuclear proliferation around the globe.

Ø The National Ignition Facility is not needed for the safety and reliability of the U.S. nuclear arsenal.

Want to do more?

Ø Share this alert with other groups and local activists

Ø Organize a call-in campaign for your local group

Ø Send letters to the editor of your local paper pointing out the NIF's nuclear proliferation dangers and its massive waste of taxpayer dollars.

For more information, contact the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability in Washington, DC at (202) 833-4668 www.ananuclear.org

This action alert is cosponsored by a wide range of national and grassroots organizations. See back for background and local contact information. Background: The National Ignition Facility (NIF) is a massive experimental laser fusion facility being built with billions of taxpayer dollars at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California as the centerpiece of the Department of Energy's (DOE) Stockpile Stewardship Program, the endeavor to continue nuclear weapons development even without full-scale nuclear testing. The NIF's goal is to create very brief, contained thermonuclear explosions.

The DOE claims the NIF is necessary to maintain the safety and reliability of U.S. nuclear weapons, but the physics experiments planned for the NIF have nothing to do with safety--preventing accidental explosions or leaks in nuclear weapons--and very little to do with how reliably the weapons perform. Safety and reliability are already ensured through ongoing, and much less expensive, DOE operations.

In truth, the NIF is slated to be used for a wide range of applications from training nuclear weapons designers to studying the effects of radiation, heat and blast on weapons components, sensors, communication satellites, and underground structures. NIF weapons effect experiments, including "laser/fireball" tests, may be used in connection with development of low-yield nuclear weapons and missile defense concepts. The mini-fusion explosions planned for NIF, and its capacity for new nuclear weapons design, undermine U.S. obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, and may provoke nuclear proliferation around the globe.

The NIF has been plagued with technical problems and cost overruns. Over a billion dollars has already been wasted on the NIF. Further, if completed, it could cost over $32 billion, according to a new study commissioned by the Livermore-based group Tri-Valley CAREs (www.igc.org/tvc/). The DOE has requested $245 million for NIF construction in 2002 and the Congress will likely be voting on this funding in late June as part of the Energy & Water Appropriations bills in both the House and the Senate.

Local contact:

Susan Gordon, Director
Alliance for Nuclear Accountability www.ananuclear.org
1914 N 34th, Suite #407, Seattle, WA 98103
ph 206-547-3175 fax 206-547-7158

ANA is a national alliance of organizations working to address issues of nuclear weapons production and waste clean-up.

----

NO STAR WARS: No way, No how! June 28 - 29 in Pennsylvania

"Defending the Northeast, the Nation, and America's Allies from Ballistic Missile Attack Conference", sponsored by the Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis at the Radisson Hotel/Valley Forge Convention Complex, N. Gulph Rd. & 1st Ave., Valley Forge, PA. Invited panelists and speakers for the two days include: Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Lt. General Ronald Kadish, Director of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization, and various "Star Wars" Ballistic Missile Defense contractors (Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon).

Ballistic missile defense, national missile defense, theater missile defense - its all Star Wars. And it must be stopped.

Protest Star Wars and the Militarization of Space. Protest the business of Star Wars which protect the profits of the Star Wars' military contractors.

Stand against Bush's policy of Star Wars "inevitability" at this major conference of military, legislative, and corporate Star Warriors.

Protest in front of the Radisson Hotel (a mile from Lockheed Martin's Valley Forge complex): Thursday, June 28, noon - 2pm, prior to the opening keynote address of Congressperson Curt Weldon (R, Delaware Co.) - the Congress' chief advocate and self-described "pit bull" of Stars Wars; Protest again on Friday, June 29, 8am - noon.

Directions: (From Philadelphia) - Take Schuylkill Expressway (Route 76) West to Exit #25. Bear right at first light onto Mall Boulevard. Turn right at next light onto N. Gulph Road and proceed through four lights to First Avenue.

(From PA Turnpike) - Take Turnpike to Exit #24, Valley Forge. Immediately take first right and merge onto N. Gulph Road. Proceed through three lights to First Avenue.

(From Route 202) - Take Pottstown exit, (Route 422 West) to first exit (Bridgeport - Rt. 23 East). Turn right at first light onto Moore Road. Turn right at next light onto First Avenue.

The SEPTA bus #125 stops right in front of the Radisson Hotel/Valley Forge Convention Center.

Check out the web site of the Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis, www.ifpa.org, for a full agenda of this Star Warriors conference. Remember, noon - 2pm, Thursday, June 28; 8am - noon, Friday, June 29, at the Radisson Hotel/Valley Forge Convention Center, N. Gulph Rd. & 1st Ave., Valley Forge, PA

Resist Star Wars!

NO STAR WARS: No Way, No How!

For more information: Brandywine Peace Community Post Office Box 81, Swarthmore, PA 19081 610-544-1818 brandywine@juno.com

----

Published paper on internal resistance against atom bomb development

Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001
Reply-To: "Mel Hunt" <mhunt@northcoast.com>

Please visit my new updated Web site to view a paper on scientists who changed history by offering passive resistance to atom bomb development during and after WWII. Click on http://www.humboldt.edu/~mlh16/arrogat.htm

Peace Through Action, Mel Hunt {=^] mailto:mhunt@northcoast.com
http://www.humboldt.edu/~mlh16
http://www.humboldt.edu/~travel
http://www.northcoast.com/~secrets
http://www.arcatacityhall.org/nukefree

----

US CAMPAIGN TO ABOLISH NUCLEAR WEAPONS
Part of the Abolition 2000 Global Network

NOTICE OF ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING and gathering of the movement for the abolition of nuclear weapons

Friday July 13 in Santa Fe, New Mexico at the College of Santa Fe

Please join us for our 2001 Annual General Meeting at the beautiful College of Santa Fe campus in Santa Fe, New Mexico. In addition to taking care of network business, we'll be sharing our "best practices" and discussing strategies for the future. Immediately following our meeting, on Saturday and Sunday July 14 and 15, we hope you'll stay for Peace Action New Mexico's "LANL 2001 - Action for Abolition Conference." On Monday July 16, the anniversary of the "Trinity" test, the US Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons will join Peace Action New Mexico for a rally, march and nonviolent protest at Los Alamos National Laboratory. We hope you'll be there!

----

Protesters Break Into Vieques Range

JUNE 18, 02:12 EST
By MARCELO BALLVE
Associated Press Writer
http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=CSA&STORYID=APIS7CMPN9O0

VIEQUES, Puerto Rico (AP) - More than 30 protesters reportedly broke onto a U.S. Navy range in an attempt to block new training exercises on Vieques island, saying two years is too long to wait for an end to the bombing.

Navy jets from the USS Theodore Roosevelt aircraft carrier were to begin dropping inert bombs as early as Monday morning, said spokeswoman Lt. Cmdr. Katherine Goode. ``We have no knowledge of anyone who has gotten through security,'' she said, adding that officers were patrolling the area.

President Bush announced last week that the Navy would leave Vieques in two years. But anti-bombing protesters said they would only be satisfied with the Navy's immediate withdrawal.

Jacqueline Jackson, wife of the Rev. Jesse Jackson and co-president of his Rainbow/Push Coalition civil rights group, joined the protests Sunday night, speaking to more than 200 protesters.

``I place myself in your hands,'' she told more than 200 demonstrators. She said she would participate ``however you can use me for your purpose.''

A seven-member delegation of Quakers from the Philadelphia-based American Friends Service Committee also joined the protests but said they would not trespass on the range.

At least 30 protesters already were on the range and others were preparing to follow, said Maria Velazquez, an activist from the community of Mount Carmelo on the edge of U.S. government land.

She said some planned to force a pause by shooting off signal flares when planes began their runs.

``The whole point is to stop the bombing,'' said Abigail Felix, another Mount Carmelo resident. She, her husband, Armando Felix, and four others said they would cut through a fence to enter.

More than 180 people were arrested for trespassing during the last exercises in late April and early May. They included environmental lawyer Robert Kennedy Jr., actor Edward James Olmos and the Rev. Al Sharpton, who has been on a hunger strike in a New York prison since May 29.

The Navy says Vieques' terrain and location make it ideal for lifesaving combat training. The island also is strategically located southeast of the U.S. mainland and off the 22,600-acre Roosevelt Roads Naval Station, the largest in the world in land area, which administers the Vieques exercises.

Opposition to the exercises swelled in 1999 after off-target bombs killed a civilian guard on the bombing range.

Bush's announcement of a withdrawal within two years appeared to pre-empt a planned referendum Nov. 6, when most of the island's 9,100 residents were expected to vote for the Navy to leave in 2003.

But Puerto Rican officials are planning to hold their own nonbinding referendum on Vieques on July 29 asking residents whether the Navy should stay, leave in 2003 or leave immediately.

Puerto Rican Gov. Sila Calderon has demanded an immediate end to the exercises, saying the bombing harms the environment and islanders' health. The Navy denies the charges.

-------

Indonesia Students Protest Fuel Hike

JUNE 18, 06:28 EST
http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=ASIA&STORYID=APIS7CMTFI00

JAKARTA, Indonesia (AP) - Police fired tear gas and warning shots Monday at students who lobbed rocks and burned tires to protest a steep jump in fuel prices, witnesses said.

Hundreds of students blocked a main road with burning tires outside the National Institute for Islamic Studies in south Jakarta, witnesses said. Students also demonstrated outside Indonesian Christian University. No serious injuries were reported.

Meanwhile, public transport drivers in at least eight cities went on strike Monday to protest the gasoline and diesel price hikes, police and news reports said. In some cities, drivers stopped their buses mid-route and forced passengers to walk, the state news agency Antara said.

The strikes follow violent demonstrations over price increases Saturday on Java island, where protesters burned tired, blocked roads and looted petrol supplies.

The government raised gasoline prices Friday by an average of 30 percent, from 38 cents per gallon to 50 cents per gallon.

The hike has already forced companies to boost prices of basic goods such as fruit and vegetables, rice and cooking oil because of increased distribution costs.

The International Monetary Fund and other foreign lenders have long demanded that fuel subsidies be phased out as part of politically tough reforms needed to cut state spending and boost Indonesia's debt-ridden economy.

Previous fuel price increases also led to violent demonstrations, most notably those in May 1998 that helped topple former dictator Suharto.

The price hike comes amid heightened political instability in this Southeast Asian nation.

The National Assembly is scheduled to convene a special session Aug. 1 to impeach President Abdurrahman Wahid over corruption allegations. Wahid is also accused of mismanaging Indonesia's economy and failing to ease rising unrest.

----

Vieques Advocate Turns From Violence of Her Past

New York Times
June 18, 2001
By DAVID GONZALEZ
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/18/national/18VIEQ.html

VIEQUES, P.R., June 17 - A white-haired woman sat at a picnic table at the makeshift village where protesters gather every day to plan strategy against the Navy's military maneuvers here. Not far from her was a sign that spelled out the rules, including "Zero Violence."

The woman agreed with that, even if nearly a half-century ago she symbolized the opposite. On March 1, 1954, the woman, Lolita Lebrón, and three fellow Puerto Rican nationalists went to the visitors' gallery of the United States House of Representatives and opened fire, wounding five congressmen. The nationalists spent 25 years in federal prisons until President Jimmy Carter granted them clemency in 1979.

Though Puerto Rico's independence movement is small, Mrs. Lebrón is a hero for many Puerto Ricans who want the Navy to stop its bombing practice and leave Vieques immediately, not in May 2003, as President Bush announced last week.

Mrs. Lebrón, 82, said in an interview this weekend that she had renounced violence but that she continued to speak out against the role of the United States in Puerto Rico, which was given to the United States as part of the spoils of the Spanish- American War.

"You are talking with a woman of peace," Mrs. Lebrón said. "We were in jail for a quarter-century. We met our obligations. We feel honored to have defended the nation," she said, referring to Puerto Rico. "Yet we have a new strategy for liberation. We are using civil disobedience."

She says she belongs to no political party. "I am an individual," she said. "My choice is God. The people of Puerto Rico regardless of their political ideology are united in getting the Navy out of Vieques, but through civil disobedience."

More than a generation ago, she followed another directive, that of Pedro Albizu Campos, the Harvard- educated leader of the independence party who she said ordered the attack in Congress, which she saw as a last resort to draw attention to Puerto Rico. To Mrs. Lebrón, it was no different than when the 13 colonies declared independence, she said.

"I lifted the gun and shouted `Free Puerto Rico Now!' " she recalled. "At that moment it was free, because we were shooting at what we had to. We did not want to kill anyone. We wanted to destroy those elements that were destroying us." In prison, she said, she reaffirmed her religious beliefs and turned away from violence. She had time to think about what led her to do what she did, and she insisted that her faith in the independence cause was unshaken. The Vieques protests, she said, are another demand for respect.

As she spoke, a woman rushed up and embraced her. "Excuse me," said the woman, María Velásquez. "I came from the mountain to find energy!" Ms. Velásquez said she stopped cooking the moment she heard Mrs. Lebrón was at the camp.

"For me, a hug from her gives me the strength I need," Ms. Velásquez said. "It gives me the spirit and speed to fight for what is mine. She signifies the women who are ready to show off their heart. Nobody can take that away from us."

But Mrs. Lebrón's presence here is seen by some as a sign that the protesters are using the Navy issue as a guise for a leftist political agenda that does not represent the majority of Puerto Ricans. Although a recent poll showed 61 percent of the population was against the Navy's use of Vieques for bombing practice, the independence party in several decades has drawn the support of only 10 percent of the population.

Mrs. Lebrón said the important thing was to be focused on the issue of Vieques first. At the same time, she, like others here, has dissected President Bush's reference to Puerto Rico - whose residents are United States citizens - as the United States' "friend and neighbor."

"We don't want to forget the campaign is for Vieques and we need to have people united in this," Mrs. Lebrón said. "But Bush also said we are friends and neighbors. He did not say we were citizens. We think that is a good step for the Puerto Rican nation. The United States is awakening to a reality it imposed here."

Her own reality, she says, is that of someone who has lived 82 years and not regretted a single day. She knows some people criticize her faith, others her politics and still others her past. She ponders a future where Puerto Rico will be on its own.

"I can't see all of it in my life," she said. "But I will see it because I believe in eternal life. I will see my people."


------- OneList (submissions from subscribers)

------- Depleted Uranium Keeps On Killing!