------- Index of Articles

NUCLEAR
Strategists predict major shift away from nuclear weapons
CIA uncovers missilemoves by China
Senate Panel Clears Missile Defense Curbs
China Softens Language Over U.S. Missile Defense
Kursk Recovery Effort in Final Stages
Big contract to scrap Russian weapons
Pentagon Wants U.S. To Skip Test Ban Talks
Senators: Bush Plan Shortchanges Downwinders

MILITARY
CIA Says Iran Got New Missile Aid
F-111 veterans win health fight
Shield costs $20m a week
EU Considers Troops To Macedonia
New Phase in Macedonia Peace Effort
Defiant Albanian rebels give more arms to NATO in Macedonia
Colombian drug lord handed over to U.S.
Drug testing sparks BHP strike
Israelis Brief U.S. On Anti-Missile System
Israel strikes Palestinian security offices
6 jailed refusers - 62 future refusers
Bush won't challenge Israel on weapons use
Brazil Lawmakers: Scrap Launch Deal
For the Record
Highlights of Rumsfeld Interview
Rumsfeld Calls Base Closures Necessary
Decaying Ships Cost Govt. Millions

OTHER
GAO eyes lawsuit
Ethical Limits on Stem Cell Research
Racism parley irks overlooked groups
Falun Gong asks Bush for help
Questions Raised in Fiery Standoff
11 Miami Officers Facing U.S. Charges in String of Shootings
Skepticism Follows Court Ruling in Favor of Inmate Procreation
US Sentences Pakistani Brothers in Spy Camera Case



-------- NUCLEAR

Strategists predict major shift away from nuclear weapons

By SCOTT CANON
The Kansas City Star
09/08/01 22:15
http://www.kcstar.com/item/pages/printer.pat,local/3accf552.908,.html

To reduce the number of nuclear weapons in the world, it would help first to count them.

Take Missouri's own B-2 stealth bombers. Each can stuff 16 nuclear bombs into its belly.

Under one arms-cutting deal, each bomber counted as just one bomb. Under terms of the next treaty, 16. Now, a third pact might return to counting each B-2 as one weapon.

Such is the curious calculus of nuclear disarmament more than a half-century after the blinding dawn of the atomic age.

Now President Bush has called for scrapping more warheads, even unilaterally, largely to calm Russian nerves jangled by his dreams of a missile shield.

He must win over the Pentagon and Capitol Hill first.

Still, even as it concedes the complications, America's small fraternity of nuclear strategists sees a real chance for a radical shift in the way the country arms itself.

The Bush administration, in fact, has voiced an attitude about nuclear weapons that would have been unthinkable not so long ago.

"Bush and (Vice President Dick) Cheney are essentially anti-nuclear people. They're pro-high-tech and pro-Star Wars people," said Ray Kidder, a retired physicist who designed nuclear weapons at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, Calif.

"We're getting away from nuclear weapons and pretty much agreeing that they're not usable," he said. "Instead, we're going toward precision weapons and high-tech. The only unknown is how quickly the new will replace the old."

I I I

"A lot of people have reasons to make changes," said Andrew Krepinevich, executive director of the nonpartisan Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, a research institute that focuses on defense planning and investment.

Start with the president.

Bush ran for office pledging to shrink U.S. nuclear forces. Once he was in office, over the protests of congressional Republicans, he quickly slated the silo-based MX missile for the junk pile.

Money saved could free dollars for the national missile defense, which carries a price tag estimated to be between $35 billion and $100 billion.

Think next of the Russians.

They loathe Bush's national missile defense. Even though it is sold as a backstop against lesser powers tossing missiles at the United States, Moscow sees it as a step toward a larger shield that could neutralize its weapons.

The Kremlin also has bills it cannot pay, aircraft it cannot afford to build, submarines it no longer can safely keep at sea. The White House is banking that in the end, President Vladimir Putin will excuse Bush his missile shield -- and its snubbing of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty -- in return for a deal to thin both countries' arsenals significantly.

Finally comes America's generals and politicians.

Already pained by cutbacks, the Air Force is reluctant to give up its nuclear bomber and missile crews, and the Navy treasures its strategic submarine forces. A nuclear assignment brings status to a military branch.

But if Bush orders the target list shaved, it would mean the military could carry on with fewer nuclear weapons. That, in turn, could free money to update the military inventory with such items as new destroyers and fighter jets.

The savings are only a slight incentive, however. Experts say that even drastic warhead cuts might save only $1 billion to $2 billion out of a defense budget topping $300 billion.

Congress only grudgingly gives up even the oldest Navy bases or defense assembly lines. And Capitol Hill remains a roost for defense hawks who say stability comes from convincing enemies that they can be wiped off the map.

"It's easier for a Republican president to make those deep cuts," said Jim Wurst, program director for the Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy, which promotes peace and disarmament through the use of law. "He isn't going to get the criticism from other Republicans the way a Democrat would."

Wurst is fond of saying "the first President Bush did more for arms control in one year than (former President Bill) Clinton did in eight." Now, he said, it's up to the second President Bush to follow through on campaign promises to slash the nuclear arsenal and to take thousands of weapons off quick-launch alert.

Early analyses suggest Bush has taken vital steps toward moving in that direction.

The administration has sent key diplomatic signals to the Russians and the Chinese. Bush even suggested that he would not crab at Beijing for mustering more missiles that can reach U.S. soil -- as long as Beijing stops carping about his missile defense.

In Donald Rumsfeld, he chose a defense secretary determined to reform the military and deploy a missile defense. And, in contrast to Clinton, Bush put the task of studying the country's nuclear war plan into the hands of a relatively small group of influential advisers.

I I I

The nuclear arms race peaked in 1986, when an estimated 70,000 nuclear warheads worldwide were loaded in submarines, silos or aircraft.

Their targets included not only enemies' nuclear weapons, army bases and the bunkers of political leaders, but also small machine shops that supplied steel plants that fed tank assembly plants. And so on.

Then the Soviet Union collapsed, and its corroding nuclear forces retreated into Russia. So scores of targets in the Ukraine, for instance, were targets no more.

Then-President George Bush, with Cheney as his defense secretary, made several moves. Bush halted the constant cruising of nuke-loaded bombers. He killed missile development programs and a plan to put the multiwarhead MX into a game of rail-based hide-and-seek. He ordered nuclear warheads off surface ships and out of artillery units.

In 1993 he inked a START II deal with then-Russian President Boris Yeltsin to bring both sides down to 3,500 warheads by 2007. Clinton followed by teaming with Yeltsin for START III talks, with a goal of lowering the stakes to 2,500 nuclear weapons per side.

Both nations remain on course to meet by Dec. 5 the final stages of the original Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty -- first negotiated in the Reagan years, signed by then-President George Bush and taking effect in the Clinton administration. In the mid-1990s that same treaty yanked Minuteman missiles from the silos that pockmarked Missouri and South Dakota.

START II lacks full ratification from the U.S. Senate, however, and START III talks stalled.

So America's arsenal still holds upward of 6,500 warheads on missiles and airplanes capable of reaching Russia. Russia has a corresponding batch of more than 5,500. Both must scale down to 6,000 by year's end.

Moscow has called for U.S. and Russian forces to drop to 1,500 or even 1,000 nuclear weapons each. Bush has pledged to "cut to the lowest possible number" without suggesting he yet knows what that number is.

Counting warheads always makes for tricky math.

For example, the 6,000-warhead limit applies only to nuclear explosives the United States has matched with a submarine or bomber or intercontinental ballistic missile. It does not cover the 10,000 other nuclear bombs in bunkers -- there, in part, so that the United States would have something to deter another enemy after a shootout with Russia.

America's Minuteman and its Russian equivalent are loaded with one warhead but can easily be converted to carry two more.

How to count reusable bombers has always been a problem.

If the United States should decide to build more B-2s for non-nuclear work, as some have suggested, the Russians might wonder what's to keep them from loading nukes in an emergency.

I I I

The B-2 represents another wrinkle -- high technology. Even if the Air Force eventually dedicates all of its B-2 force to conventional bombs, it still could enter the calculations.

Plans in the 1970s and '80s might have required a nuclear bomb to knock out a hardened bunker or counted on a hydrogen bomb blast to make up for a lack of precision. Today, satellite-guided cruise missiles or laser-steered bombs can achieve with relatively tame explosives what once demanded the splitting of atoms.

"The Russians I talk to are genuinely concerned about this," said nuclear policy analyst Steve Fetter.

Now teaching public policy at the University of Maryland, in 1993 and 1994 Fetter worked in the Clinton Defense Department on the nation's last Nuclear Posture Review.

The discussions can seem crazy, Fetter said, in the way they contemplate how many hydrogen bombs must be dropped on various parts of the Russian industrial complex to gut the country's military power. A recent analysis by the Natural Resources Defense Council, which advocates protection of the environment and wildlife, called the U.S. nuclear war plan overkill that could easily lead to the death and injury of 50 million Russians.

With the Clinton administration, Fetter said, the study grew to include large numbers of people scattered in several committees passing one consensus after another up the line.

"The result was very much status quo," he said. "It was a lost opportunity."

Now Bush is repeating that process of trying to weigh the nuclear needs. A key committee has an October deadline for suggesting to Bush how low he can go.

In contrast to Clinton, Bush set out a charter that repeatedly calls for a plan to find the deterrence "with the lowest nuclear force level compatible with security requirements." He has given that task to a small group, including former CIA chief R. James Woolsey, made up of people sympathetic to national missile defense and warhead reduction.

America's problems with Russian nukes, Woolsey wrote in July, have "nothing to do with the number of their strategic warheads."

Rather, he and others worry about the rickety command and control system of the Russian forces. A 1995 launch of a scientific satellite from Norway, for instance, was mistaken for a few uneasy moments as Americans firing the opening salvo of World War III.

So hawks find common ground with doves such as Thomas B. Cochran, the director of nuclear programs for the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Cochran worries Bush will lead the country to a solo path of arms cutbacks. The cash-strapped Russians might follow, but neither side could count on the nuclear numbers to stay low if they abandon explicit deal-making, he said.

Putin has sworn to forget all arms deals if Bush walks away from the ABM pact.

Cochran and other doves want Bush to stick to existing deals and still go lower, even to an arsenal measured in hundreds instead of thousands. But that is so low, critics contend, that smaller countries might be tempted to jump into the nuclear game.

Yet in the new dynamic of American nuclear policy, Cochran and Woolsey agree that Cold War notions tying firepower to security have gone stale.

"What we worry about today is the accidents," Cochran said. "Us having more nuclear warheads is not going to reduce the chances of the Russians making a mistake."

The Defense Department is waiting for Bush to say that nuclear weapons mean less than they once did, said Owen Cote, associate director of the security studies program at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

"If Bush does, that will kick up a storm in Congress," Cote said. "The right wing won't like it. But if he says the world is different, that the mission has changed, then that opens things up for the (warhead) numbers to go way down."

-------- china

CIA uncovers missilemoves by China

September 8, 2001
By Bill Gertz
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20010908-10756128.htm

China supplied missile technology and related goods to Pakistan, Iran, North Korea and Libya, according to a CIA report made public yesterday.

The CIA report to Congress also identified Russia and North Korea as major exporters of nuclear, chemical and biological weapon-related equipment and missile systems to rogue states and unstable regions of the world.

The semiannual report covers the period from July to December of 2000 and reveals new details of several developing nations' programs to develop weapons of mass destruction.

Release of the report comes a week after the Bush administration slapped economic sanctions on China and Pakistan for violating U.S. laws aimed at halting the spread of missile technology.

The sanctions were applied after China last November agreed not to assist any nations in building up their nuclear missiles.

China's government has denied violating the November pledge and dismissed as "groundless" charges that it supplied missile goods to Pakistan.

"During the reporting period, Chinese entities provided Pakistan with missile-related technical assistance," the report said. "Pakistan has been moving toward domestic serial production of solid-propellent [short-range ballistic missiles] with Chinese help."

The report said Pakistan also needs continued support from China for its Shaheen-2 medium-range missile.

"In addition, firms in China have provided dual-use missile-related items, raw materials, and/or assistance to several other countries of proliferation concern such as Iran, North Korea, and Libya," the report said.

China's support for Pakistan's missile program was disclosed last month by The Washington Times. U.S. intelligence officials said China sold missile goods for Pakistan's Shaheen-1 and Shaheen-2 missiles both of which are judged to be nuclear-weapons delivery systems.

The CIA report also said there are indications China has continued to assist Pakistan in developing nuclear weapons in violation of a 1996 pledge to the United States not to do so.

In addition, China appears to have violated another pledge not to provide new assistance to Iran's nuclear program, which the CIA believes will be used to build nuclear arms.

The report said there are questions about continued Chinese nuclear cooperation with Iran in violation of its pledge and "the administration is seeking to address these questions with appropriate Chinese authorities."

Iran also sought Chinese assistance for its chemical-weapons program, although the CIA said it is "unclear" whether the efforts were successful.

China also supplied advanced conventional arms to Pakistan, Iran, Sudan and other nations.

Russia and North Korea, along with China, were identified in the report as "key suppliers" of missiles and weapons of mass destruction to unstable areas around the world.

"During the second half of 2000, entities in Russia, North Korea and China continued to supply crucial ballistic missile-related equipment, technology and expertise to Iran," the report said.

Russian firms "continued to supply a variety of ballistic missile-related goods and technical know-how to countries such as Iran, India, China and Libya."

Russian missile assistance helped Iran in particular to accelerate its medium-range Shahab-3 missile development. The missile has been flight tested three times, the report said.

The report concludes that continuing Russian missile assistance "likely supports Iranian efforts to develop new missiles and increase Tehran's self-sufficiency in missile production."

The report said Iran is building long-range Shahab-4 and Shahab-5 missiles.

Russia also is supplying nuclear reactors for both China's and India's naval-propulsion systems, the report said, adding that India has discussed leasing nuclear-powered attack submarines from Moscow.

North Korea was identified as a supplier of missile goods to nations in the Middle East, South Asia and North Africa.

The CIA report was produced by the Director of Central Intelligence Weapons Intelligence, Nonproliferation and Arms Control Center, known as WINPAC. The report is a censored version of a more detailed report required by the 1997 Intelligence Authorization Act.

Other highlights of the report include:

• Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein is rebuilding a nuclear-weapons program, and in September, called for "nuclear mujahideen" -- holy warriors -- to "defeat the enemy."

• Iran has a biological-weapons program and "limited capability for [biological-weapons] deployment."

• Iraq is converting Czech-made L29 jet trainers into unmanned aerial vehicles, which have the capability to deliver chemical and biological weapons.

• North Korea last year sought to purchase nuclear weapons-related technology

• Libya is building missiles with help from Yugoslavia, India, North Korea and China and may build a medium-range missile in the future.

-------- missile defense

Senate Panel Clears Missile Defense Curbs

By Vernon Loeb
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, September 8, 2001; Page A11
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A60157-2001Sep7?language=printer

All 13 Democrats on the Senate Armed Services Committee voted yesterday to cut $1.3 billion in missile defense funds and prohibit President Bush from conducting tests that would violate the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty without congressional consent.

The action on a bill funding the Defense Department in the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1 set the stage for a major Senate fight over missile defense, which Bush has made the centerpiece of his administration's military strategy.

The partisan divide over missile defense became so bitter that the committee's 12 Republicans voted against the defense authorization bill even though it included the full $328.9 billion requested by the administration and represents the largest defense increase since the mid-1980s. The total represents a 7 percent increase over this year's budget in real terms, after inflation.

Sen. John W. Warner (Va.), the committee's ranking Republican, said the Democrats' language would block the administration from conducting missile defense tests prohibited by the 1972 ABM Treaty without congressional approval, even if the president formally withdraws from the arms control pact, as he has promised to do.

"This language will not become the law of the land, as surely as I'm standing here," Warner told reporters, distributing a letter he received Thursday in which Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said he would recommend a veto of any bill that contained the provision.

"If such language were to become law," Rumsfeld said, "it would send a signal to the Russians and other countries that may prefer that the U.S. remain vulnerable to ballistic missiles that they can wait us out."

Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.), the committee's chairman, countered that Congress cannot be asked to approve funding for missile defense testing without being told whether any of the money would be used for tests -- such as those involving ship-based radars -- that would violate a major arms control treaty.

Levin acknowledged that his language would serve to keep provisions of the ABM Treaty in place even if Bush withdraws from the pact. "The issue here is the impact of a unilateral withdrawal on the security of the United States of America," Levin said. "We have a responsibility for appropriating funds when the issues are that important -- to have the information which has not been provided to us as to whether or not, in fact, these activities for which funding is being sought conflict with that treaty."

Under the provision, drafted by Levin and Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Bush would have to notify Congress before spending money on any type of test that would violate the ABM Treaty, which permits some forms of missile defense testing and research but prohibits deployment of a national missile defense system. Both houses of Congress would be required to vote on whether to approve the test within 30 days.

Levin said he was "disappointed" that Warner and the other Republicans chose to draw battle lines over the provision and the $1.3 billion cut in Bush's request for missile defense. He noted that $7 billion remaining in the bill for missile defense represents a 37 percent increase over the current year.

Levin also said the bill, using the $1.3 billion cut from missile defense and another $1.8 billion in savings achieved by budget efficiencies, commits an additional $3.1 billion to military pay raises and housing allowances, readiness accounts, modernization and "transformational" new technologies. Future savings of as much as $6 billion a year, Levin said, could be achieved through a provision added to the bill authorizing a single round of base closings in fiscal 2003.

--------

China Softens Language Over U.S. Missile Defense

September 8, 2001
By REUTERS
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/world/international-arms-china.html?searchpv=reuters

BEIJING (Reuters) - Using unusually mild language, China has called on the United States to act cautiously on its missile defense plans.

Comments by Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhu Bangzao published late Friday appeared to be a departure from previous assertions of outright opposition to U.S. missile defense plans.

``China hopes that the U.S. act cautiously regarding the MDS (missile defense system) issue,'' state-run Xinhua quoted Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhu Bangzao as saying.

Zhu said U.S. plans to develop its missile defense system was bound to damage the international strategic balance and stability and harm the common security of all countries, according to Xinhua.

The missile system is one of a string of issues still clouding steadily improving China-U.S. relations ahead of a summit in China between President Jiang Zemin and President Bush next month.

Zhu also noted contradictions in media reports and official U.S. government comments last week, according to Xinhua.

Last Sunday, the New York Times reported the Bush administration intended to tell Chinese leaders it had no objection to China's plans to build up its nuclear missile arsenal in a bid to overcome Chinese opposition to U.S. missile defense plans.

A White House spokesman denied the report on the same day.

In a request for comments on the issue, Zhu said China had always called for the complete prohibition and thorough destruction of nuclear weapons and never participated in the nuclear arms race, according to Xinhua.

Beijing had always exerted the utmost restraint in developing nuclear weapons which were aimed at self-defense, he was quoted as saying.

Last Sunday, the Whitehouse spokesman also said that the United States would brief China on its plans to test a new missile defense system in a bid to win Beijing's acceptance.

An editorial on the Web site of the official China Daily on Wednesday welcomed the proposal, saying it showed the United States was finally taking China's concerns about missile defense seriously.

Zhu had told a news conference Thursday that the United States had yet to officially propose the talks.

-------- russia

Kursk Recovery Effort in Final Stages

September 8, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Raising-the-Kursk.html?searchpv=aponline

SEVERODVINSK, Russia (AP) -- With pride, Timur Amirov pointed at the giant hall at the Arctic Sevmash shipyard where workers assembled a pontoon to help lift the wrecked nuclear submarine Kursk from the sea.

``We launched the Kursk along the same rails here, and I was in charge of its construction,'' said Amirov, a senior engineer at the yard. ``It was a real beauty, a state-of-the-art submarine packed with sophisticated equipment.''

He squinted at the cold northern sun, and his voice grew tight. ``For us, it was like a child, and its sinking was a personal tragedy.''

The Kursk, one of Russia's largest and most modern submarines, sank when explosions shattered its front section during naval maneuvers in the Barents Sea on Aug. 12, 2000.

All 118 crew members died, most of them instantly, but some survived a few hours in sealed-off compartments, knowing as their air ran out that rescue was impossible as the sub lay on the ocean floor in frigid waters 356 feet below the surface.

The catastrophe shook the nation and dented the prestige of President Vladimir Putin's new government, which refused foreign aid for days while bungling its own rescue effort.

Seeking to soothe public anger over the loss, to solve the mystery of what caused the sinking and to remove a potential radiation threat from Arctic waters, Russia is conducting a costly and precarious effort to hoist the 18,000-ton submarine to the surface. The target for bringing the sub up is next Saturday, but officials indicated Friday that the operation could take longer.

The salvage effort being conducted by two Dutch companies is pressed for time because the weather will worsen, making the sea increasingly rough. Some foreign experts are skeptical the operation can be completed this year.

``We are asking the Almighty for good weather,'' said the Russian navy chief, Adm. Vladimir Kuroyedov.

Shortly after the disaster, Putin promised the victims' families that the submarine would be raised this year, but it took the government until May to negotiate a contract with the Dutch company Mammoet.

Mammoet, a specialist in heavy lifting equipment with no experience in sea salvage operations, later formed a joint venture with another Dutch firm, Smit International. The two started work in July to prepare for the lifting, an operation estimated to cost around $65 million.

The Kursk's mangled front section is now being cut away because of worries that it could break off during the raising and jeopardize the operation. The Russian navy was also concerned the bow might contain unexploded torpedoes that could be a hazard to the salvage effort.

Once the nose section is cut loose, the plan calls for the rest of the Kursk to be raised by steel cables attached to 26 holes that divers drilled in the submarine's double hull.

The Kursk sank deep into the silt, and engineers say the most challenging part of the effort may be tearing the boat from the mud -- a process they say could take up to five hours. Once the suction is overcome, it will take eight hours to lift the sub to the surface in a computer-controlled operation that will require calm seas.

Attached to a barge, the submarine will be towed to a dry dock near the Russian port of Murmansk, where officials will remove its 22 Granite cruise missiles and crew remains.

Experts insist that neither the missiles nor the Kursk's two nuclear reactors could threaten the rescue effort. The reactors automatically shut down when the submarine exploded and constant monitoring by Russian and foreign experts has detected no radiation leak.

``Even if we make a fantastic assumption that the submarine overturns during the lifting, the reactors would pose no danger,'' said Igor Spassky, chief of the Rubin submarine design bureau.

According to the official investigation, the Kursk sank because a practice torpedo exploded, triggering the detonation of regular torpedoes in the bow. The blast sent a fireball through the submarine's pressurized hull. All but a few crewmen died instantly, according to letters found when divers entered the sub last fall and recovered 12 bodies.

The government says it remains unclear whether the explosion was caused by a flaw in the practice torpedo -- the theory shared by most independent experts -- or a collision with another vessel, possibly a Western submarine, as the Russian navy claimed after the disaster.

Amirov, the Kursk's builder, scoffs at the latter theory, saying such a collision would have left a foreign submarine on the seabed because the Kursk had a much greater weight and a far stronger, double hull.

``All this talk about collision is utter nonsense,'' he said.

Many experts predict the cause will remain a mystery because the answers can be found only in the shattered front section that is being left on the sea bottom.

--------

Big contract to scrap Russian weapons

Saturday, 8 September, 2001,
BBC News
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/americas/newsid_1532000/1532212.stm

The Defence Department in Washington has awarded several American companies a contract worth $5bn to dismantle Russian nuclear weapons.

The engineering and management firms have until 2006 to eliminate the weapons and store their nuclear warheads safely.

It is the latest step in an effort to dispose of weapons designated for destruction in arms reduction treaties.

From the newsroom of the BBC World Service

-------- us nuc politics

Pentagon Wants U.S. To Skip Test Ban Talks

WASHINGTON IN BRIEF
Saturday, September 8, 2001; Page A09
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A60160-2001Sep7?language=printer

In an effort to hasten the death of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, the Pentagon wants the United States to boycott a U.N. conference on the nuclear pact later this month, administration officials said.

But the State Department wants to send a low-level delegation to the meeting and delay an international fight on the issue, the officials said.

President Bush and his advisers worry that without underground nuclear testing, which is banned by the treaty, they can not ensure the safety and reliability of the U.S. nuclear deterrent. Critics say computers and other technology allow simulated testing that is sufficient.

----

Senators: Bush Plan Shortchanges Downwinders,
President seeks year-to-year funds for ailing workers

Saturday, September 8, 2001
BY ROBERT GEHRKE
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.sltrib.com/09082001/nation_w/130188.htm

WASHINGTON -- A shift by the Bush administration could leave a program to compensate miners and others sickened by radiation in Cold War weapons programs broke by Christmas, according to two Senate Democrats.

The administration had supported making the compensation payments an entitlement similar to Social Security or Medicare payments, meaning qualifying claimants would get paid regardless of the cost. But a dwindling budget surplus forced the White House to backtrack and propose funding the program on a year-to-year basis.

"This dramatic reversal is unfortunate and tragic," Sen. Jeff Bingaman wrote in a letter to the president on Friday. "While we cannot reverse the progress of the diseases many of these workers suffer . . . the federal government can and must live up to its commitment to provide a compassionate program of compensation."

The letter also was signed by Assistant Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

The Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA) was passed in 1990 to make lump payments to uranium miners and those known as "Downwinders" who were exposed to fallout from nuclear weapons tests and contracted cancer and other illnesses because of the exposure.

The program offers $100,000 checks for miners and $50,000 for Downwinders.

But for the past several years, the program has been underfunded. Beginning in May 2000, the Justice Department, which administers the program, was forced to issue IOUs to qualifying claimants.

Many died while awaiting payment.

A one-time infusion of money earlier this year will pay off outstanding IOUs. But by not making the program mandatory, the program could again run out of money.

The House has approved $10.7 million for RECA next year, and a Senate bill scheduled for debate Monday includes the same amount. That is also the same amount dedicated to the program last year. It was quickly used up and left $84 million in unpaid IOUs.

Bingaman said that next year the program will be $110 million short if the $10.7 million figure survives. The only reason RECA supporters agreed to having the low figure in the bill was because of the understanding that the program would be made mandatory, Bingaman said.

Hazel Merritt, president of the Utah Navajo Downwinders, criticized the Bush administration's stance.

"Our compassionate conservative is delaying legislation to constituents least able to fight back," she said in a statement. "I guess this compassion is only reserved for the corporations."


-------- MILITARY

-------- arms sales

CIA Says Iran Got New Missile Aid

WASHINGTON IN BRIEF
Saturday, September 8, 2001; Page A09
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A60160-2001Sep7?language=printer

Russian, North Korean and Chinese "entities" supplied fresh ballistic missile- related equipment and know-how to Iran last year, moving it toward self-sufficiency in long-range missile production, CIA Director George J. Tenet told Congress yesterday.

In an unclassified version of a report mandated by law, Tenet said Iran remained one of the most active seekers of foreign technology for developing and delivering weapons of mass destruction.

During the period covered by the report -- July 1 to Dec. 31, 2000 -- Tehran was described as pressing ahead with an effort to develop a domestic capability to build chemical, biological and nuclear weapons plus their delivery systems.

The U.S. intelligence community predicts that Iran probably will be able to threaten the United States with intercontinental ballistic missiles within 15 years.

-------- australia

F-111 veterans win health fight

By KEVIN MEADE
08sep01
The Australian
http://news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,2798739%5E2%5E%5Enbv,00.html

THE Australian Defence Force offered free medical care to F-111 maintenance veterans yesterday after releasing a scathing report on the aircraft's notorious fuel-tank repair programs.

The report, based on the findings of Australia's most expensive military inquiry, found that more than 400 former fuel-tank workers had suffered long-term damage to their health.

The $7.2 million inquiry's principal finding was that a range of serious health problems reported by veterans -- including neurological disorders, cancer, memory loss, and skin rashes -- were "reasonably attributable" to their exposure to toxic chemicals used in what was known as the F-111 "deseal-reseal" process.

The inquiry into working conditions at the F-111 maintenance facility at Amberley RAAF Base, west of Brisbane, between 1973 and early last year found the workers' health problems had been caused by a range of "systemic failures" plaguing the operation. Nothing was done about the problems until late 1999, when a senior non-commissioned officer in the fuel-tank maintenance unit noticed workers suffering headaches, nausea, short-term memory loss, mood swings and skin disorders.

The inquiry blamed the unit's problems on a range of "systemic failures" in the RAAF.

The RAAF medical service was seen as failing, in particular through a low priority given to occupational medicine.

Another cause was the "relative powerless of maintenance workers", whose complaints were "effectively ignored".

The inquiry found workers had suffered from exposure to the chemicals as the RAAF relied totally on personal protective equipment to protect them from the many hazards involved in working with toxic substances in confined spaces.

The clothing was often inappropraite or unavailable and some workers failed to wear it.

The most fundamental failure was found in the chain of command.

"Senior NCOs put up with a variety of inadequacies in (personal protective equipment), equipment failures and ventilation problems without raising them through the chain of command.

"There was also a particular weak link in the chain of command between the senior NCOs and junior engineering officers, who had too broad a span of responsibilities."

The inquiry found senior officers were suffering extreme work overload, particularly during the latest spray seal program.

"As a consequence, senior officers had little understanding of what was occurring on the hangar floor."

Chain-of-command weaknesses also stemmed from federal government policy decisions that had affected workforce numbers, and a reliance on support from outside contractors.

Veterans spokesman Ian Fraser welcomed the findings, saying they confirmed what many RAAF workers had been saying for a long time.

"But while we appreciate what has finally been done, it is sad to know that many former workers will continue to suffer serious health problems and will die as a result of them."

--------

Shield costs $20m a week By NATHAN VASS 09sep01

The Sunday Times
http://news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,2804472%255E421,00.html

AUSTRALIA'S coastal defence shield against boat people sailing from Indonesia is costing an estimated $20 million a week.

Prime Minister John Howard has refused to disclose the cost of the operation.

But new figures compiled by senior defence experts show it would cost $1 billion a year to maintain the Fortress Australia defence shield permanently off the North-West coast.

The Howard Government has committed to maintaining the shield for three weeks before reviewing the situation.

Senior defence sources have calculated the total full cost of the defence shield for three weeks to be $56.5 million, or about $18.8 million a week.

The shield consists of the guided missile frigate HMAS Newcastle with two Seahawk helicopters; the ANZAC frigates Arunta and Warramunga; the supply ship HMAS Westralia; and three Orion P3C aircraft.

The defence experts based the cost estimates on official Government information relating to the documented cost of major sea operations such as the 1994 rescue of French yachtswoman Isabelle Autissier.

A spokesman for Defence Minister Peter Reith said he could not give a "ballpark estimate" of the costs of the operation.

"The cost isn't the primary consideration," the spokesman said.

"It's about ways of combating what has become a major problem for Australia, and that is people-smuggling into this country."

But he pointed to costs cited in the Federal Court last week for the initial military operation at Christmas Island during the stand-off with the Norwegian freighter MS Tampa.

Documents tendered in court said the Christmas Island operation, much smaller than the war-footing defence shield, cost $3 million a day.

Defence sources insisted their estimates for the cost of Fortress Australia were conservative.

"This is a highly expensive exercise. These are fully manned warships," one expert said.

"The Navy people are annoyed because they see this as a political issue, not a matter of national security, yet the cost is coming out of their budget."

Mr Reith's spokesman confirmed the Navy was receiving no additional funding to mount Fortress Australia.

-------- balkans

EU Considers Troops To Macedonia

September 8, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-EU-Foreign-Ministers.html

GENVAL, Belgium (AP) -- The European Union, worried that a security vacuum will develop in Macedonia after NATO's 4,500-member brigade pulls out later this month, began deliberations Saturday on sending its own force to protect civilian observers.

Troubles in Macedonia and the Middle East topped the agenda of an informal EU foreign ministers meeting over the weekend in the Belgian village of Genval, south of Brussels.

``We have to avoid a security vacuum after the NATO mandate,'' Javier Solana, the EU's chief of foreign and security policy, said of the Macedonia situation.

NATO was invited by the Macedonian government to send troops to collect weapons from ethnic Albanian rebels under a peace agreement signed last month.

NATO insists, however, that its 30-day mission ends Sept. 26 and that it will not undertake a new one. Many fear that without an international military presence the security situation in Macedonia will disintegrate. Nonetheless, Macedonia has not indicated it wants any more foreign troops.

Francis Leotard of France, the EU's envoy to Macedonia, has suggested the EU deploy a 1,500-man force to provide security for civilian observers from the EU and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.

EU, NATO and American officials say a continued international presence is needed to prevent violence that could destabilize the entire region. Exactly what kind of presence is still being discussed.

``We will probably have our troops in Macedonia for two or three more months,'' said Spanish Foreign Minister Josep Pique. ``It is important for Europe to stabilize the whole region.''

Any EU commitment should have the blessing of the U.N. Security Council, said Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer of Germany.

An EU military deployment would be a significant first. The 15-nation bloc is developing its own military arm and plans to be able to field a 60,000-man rapid reaction corps by 2003. EU defense officials have said they hope to have a small force ready for action by the end of this year.

The idea of the force is to enable the EU to take joint military action when NATO as a whole does not want to get involved.

--------

New Phase in Macedonia Peace Effort

September 8, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Macedonia.html

SKOPJE, Macedonia (AP) -- Macedonia's president underscored the significance of the fragile step-by-step peace accord with ethnic Albanians on Saturday and urged top officials to disperse fears among Macedonians weary of the deal.

Macedonia's peace process is edging on through a potentially hazardous phase with NATO collecting more weapons from ethnic Albanian rebels in return for lawmakers' promises to grant more minority rights.

``Macedonia's political leadership must show courage and explain to the people that there is no reason to fear the agreement,'' President Boris Trajkovski told state radio Saturday.

The peace deal envisages rebels of the National Liberation Army handing over their weapons to NATO in three separate phases, followed by parliament passing new legislation to upgrade ethnic Albanian rights.

NATO's mission in Macedonia, dubbed Operation Essential Harvest, is meant to prevent further conflict.

Rebels launched their insurgency in February, battling Macedonian government troops, claiming to fight for more rights for the ethnic Albanian minority that comprises a third of the country's 2 million people.

The alliance has already completed the first phase and collected more than a third of the 3,300-piece rebel arsenal. This was followed by an overwhelming vote in parliament on Thursday in favor of changing the constitution.

Now in the second phase, NATO will collect another third of rebel weapons, or about 1,100 arms. The new constitution is only to be enacted once NATO, whose rigid timetable expects the mission to end by Sept. 26, has collected all rebel weapons.

On Friday, Trajkovski stressed the accord's benefits in a speech delivered ahead of Saturday's national holiday marking a decade of Macedonian independence from the former six-state Yugoslav federation.

``Time will show whether this peace plan passes the test of history, but in it, we have pledged to safeguard Macedonia as our sovereign state, its territorial integrity and borders preserved,'' he said.

The president, however, promised that if the ethnic Albanian insurgents continue their armed struggle once the Western-engineered peace accord is implemented, the ``terrorists shall be destroyed.''

Singing ``We are Albanian heroes,'' about 200 rebel fighters gathered in the northern village of Radusa, near the border with Kosovo, to hand in their arms Friday.

NATO refused to release the number of weapons assembled in Radusa, but rebels at the site put the number at about 160.

NATO said it had destroyed one of two T-55 tanks the rebels captured from the Macedonian army and held in Radusa. A large detonation was heard, but journalists were not allowed to see the explosion.

Many Macedonians believe the rebels are only handing in outdated hardware.

Hardline Macedonian legislators have suggested they want to change some of the 36 amendments due to be voted on after the second weapons collection stage. That phase of parliament debate later this month is expected to be the most grueling, with potential to derail the entire peace process if lawmakers oppose or change the draft amendments.

Worried that a security vacuum will develop in Macedonia after NATO's 4,500-member brigade pulls out, the European Union is considering sending its own force to protect civilian observers once NATO completes the weapons collection campaign.

That force could allay widespread concern that without an international military presence Macedonia would disintegrate into an all-out ethnic conflict. So far, Macedonia has not indicated it wants any more foreign troops, only international observers to monitor the implementation of the peace deal.

``We don't need NATO to stay on as guarantor for peace,'' Trajkovski said Saturday. ``Macedonian security troops will be the only true guarantee for peace and loyal ethnic Albanians must understand this.

``If NATO troops stayed on, this would only give us a sense of false security ... and create another Bosnia or Kosovo in the Balkans.''

--------

Defiant Albanian rebels give more arms to NATO in Macedonia

Saturday, September 8
Agence France-Presse
http://english.hk.dailynews.yahoo.com/headlines/world/afp/article.html?s=hke/headlines/010908/world/afp/Defiant_Albanian_rebels_give_more_arms_to_NATO_in_Macedonia.html

RADUSA, Macedonia, Defiant rebels surrendered a tank and other arms to NATO troops near this northwest Macedonian village Friday, a day after parliament approved a peace deal giving more rights to ethnic Albanians.

Up to 200 National Liberation Army (NLA) fighters chanting "We are Albanian heroes" and "there is only one Albania" marched in double file across a bridge to stand beside a football pitch where the NATO operation is taking place.

As the rebels arrived, a loud boom was heard as the captured Macedonian army tank was destroyed by NATO munitions experts, sparking chants of "UCK, UCK, UCK," the Albanian acronym for the NLA, from the assembled ranks.

The column of NLA fighters, most of them uniformed teenagers or men in their early twenties, was followed by an armoured personnel carrier (APC), also captured from the Macedonian army.

Defiant fighters sat atop the damaged APC, which was draped with the red double-headed eagle that has been the symbol of the guerrilla army here, in Kosovo and in southern Serbia.

The rebels carried mostly assault rifles slung over their shoulders, across their chests or hanging from their hands, but a number of machine guns could be seen among the weaponry.

One NLA commander, Ratif Msusi, said his men had brought 160 weapons, besides the armoured vehicles, and a large amount of ammunition.

British NATO military spokesman Major Alex Dick would not confirm the figures but he said that most of the weapons were AK-47 assault rifles and some of them were in "Grade A" condition.

Dick said a number of anti-tank weapons had been handed in and journalists saw tank shells transported to the site on a tractor-drawn trailer.

"It has been a very orderly performance by the NLA. So far it has been a success. We still expect by September 13 to have the next third of weapons."

NATO's Operation Essential Harvest aims to collect 3,300 arms in three phases by September 26. More than 1,200 weapons were gathered in the first phase of the operation last week.

The figure of 160 arms, if confirmed, is low compared to other collections.

"We always thought this would be lower in productivity than other areas," Dick said.

Some 600 British, Dutch, Italian and Norwegian troops were stationed around the collection site as the rebels began surrendering their arms two-by-two to soldiers at a low breeze-block building here.

One rebel "commander", 19-year-old Mevlud Bushi, said the NLA's relationship with NATO was good and that his fighters were happy to talk with them.

When asked whether 3,300 weapons was all the NLA had, Bushi said: "We are giving up every last bullet" but he added, "If we feel concerned at any point we will buy new arms."

Young fighters, including a few boys, pressed in as Bushi, dressed in a black uniform and dark sunglasses, warned of what could happen if the authorities renege on their commitments when NATO pulls out of Macedonia.

"If they don't sign (referring to parliament), it will be war again. If they sign it will be peace," he said.

The weapons site opened at 8:00 am (0600 GMT) and was closed at 4:35 pm, NATO spokesman Major Barry Johnson said.

The Russian-made T-55 tank, one of two seized by the NLA, was destroyed with plastic explosive charges set by British and Norwegian experts.

The tank, by far the heaviest piece of weaponry handed in by the NLA, had been damaged and could fire shells but could not be moved.

The other arms were "bagged, tagged and boxed," in army parlance and were to be flown in a sea container by helicopter to the Krivolak military base in central Macedonia where preparations are being made to destroy them.

Meanwhile, European external affairs commissioner Chris Patten announced that a donors conference would be held for Macedonia in mid-October once parliament has changed the constitution and implemented the August 13 peace agreement.

Patten, who signed a document earlier on Friday for 38.5 million eurosmillion dollars) in funds for Macedonia, said the EU would keep its promises and provide the economic backing for the troubled state's political reforms.

-------- colombia

Colombian drug lord handed over to U.S.

September 8, 2001
By Margarita Martinez
ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20010908-69287970.htm

BOGOTA, Colombia -- Reputed drug kingpin Fabio Ochoa was flown to the United States last night to face prosecution, the highest-profile suspect extradited from Colombia in more than a decade, a senior U.S. official said.

Ochoa, a former top leader of the notorious Medellin cartel, was escorted aboard a U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration plane, which then took off for the United States.

His handover was a victory for U.S. officials, who long have sought extradition of Colombian drug lords for flooding the United States with cocaine and heroin.

"He's on the plane. He's on his way," the U.S. official said on the condition of anonymity.

The move comes four days before Secretary of State Colin L. Powell visits Bogota to discuss anti-drug efforts with President Andres Pastrana, who signed Ochoa's extradition papers last month.

Mr. Pastrana himself was kidnapped by the Medellin cartel in January 1988 when he was running for mayor of Bogota.

Earlier yesterday, a judge lifted her order suspending the extradition.

Ochoa faces a federal indictment from Fort Lauderdale, Fla., charging he was part of a gang that exported 30 tons of cocaine a month to the United States.

His family failed in a bitter fight to stop the extradition.

"Justice did not triumph, and all Colombians have lost," Martha Nieves Ochoa, Fabio Ochoa's sister, told reporters from the family's home in Medellin.

Judge Claudia Merchan had suspended the extradition Aug. 31 on a request from Ochoa's attorney, but ruled yesterday there were no irregularities in Ochoa's extradition that would threaten his rights.

In 1990, Ochoa was the first major Colombian trafficker to surrender in return for a promise that he would not be extradited. But U.S. prosecutors seeking his extradition say Ochoa resumed trafficking cocaine after leaving a Colombian jail in 1996.

Ochoa was arrested in October 1999 along with dozens of other suspected traffickers.

The Medellin cartel was led by Pablo Escobar, who waged a war of bombings and assassinations in the 1980s and early 1990s in order to avoid trial and imprisonment in the United States. Escobar was killed in 1993.

Under the Medellin cartel's pressure, extradition was declared unconstitutional in 1991. Colombia reinstated extradition in December 1997 at the request of the United States.

Ochoa is the best known of three dozen Colombians extradited to the United States since then. Some feared that resuming extradition would prompt a new backlash by Colombia's drug traffickers. Scores of judges, police officers, journalists and even a leading presidential candidate fell to Escobar's reign of terror. But this time around, retaliation has not occurred yet.

Ochoa fought his battle against extradition peacefully with legal appeals, an Internet page outlining his defense and billboards in Bogota and his native Medellin proclaiming: "Yesterday, I made a mistake. Today, I am innocent."

The baby-faced youngest son of a prominent Medellin horse-breeding clan, Ochoa joined Escobar's drug empire along with two older brothers. When they were released from jail in 1996, the three promised never to get involved in the drug business again.

The U.S. extradition request, based largely on bugged conversations between Ochoa and another Colombian suspect, says Ochoa broke his pledge. It claims he contributed his know-how to the exporting ring and helped provide cocaine, airplanes and smuggling routes.

Extradition long has been a top U.S. priority in Colombia. American officials complain that traffickers are able to threaten and bribe their way out of justice.

Despite years of U.S.-backed drug-fighting efforts, Colombia remains the world's leading cocaine-exporting nation and an increasingly important source of the heroin sold in the United States.

-------- drug war

Drug testing sparks BHP strike

The Daily Telegraph
By NATALIE DAVISON
08sep01
http://news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,2795623%5E421%5E%5Enbv,00.html

BHP steelworks operations are at risk after workers staged a snap strike over drug testing at the Port Kembla plant.

More than 1500 workers yesterday voted for a 24-hour strike. Australian Workers Union organiser Andy Gillespie said workers felt the company had abused the drug-testing policy and was using it as a standover tactic.

But BHP said it had implemented the policy in the interests of workplace safety.

The strike caused significant disruption to Port Kembla operations.

The union has said it will hold a plant-wide meeting today, with up to 5000 workers to decide on whether to continue the action.

A plant-wide stoppage could cost BHP up to $1 million in lost production, the company said.

Mr Gillespie said the major gripe among workers was that the drug-testing procedures were flawed.

"Sometimes workers have been tested as a result of mechanical failures, they're trying to blame things on human error," he said.

"The tests are open to contamination, but the worst part is you could be taking Panadeine for a headache or a cold and it comes up like you're on cocaine."

BHP flat products acting president Noel Cornish said the drug and alcohol policy was implemented to ensure safe systems at work.

He said no worker had been dismissed as a result of the policy.

"We are bewildered that the union has decided to incite a strike over a policy that is designed to protect the health and safety of employees," Mr Cornish said.

"It's even more bewildering because the policy is designed to help employees who have perhaps got a drug and alcohol problem rather than a disciplinary approach."

Mr Cornish said the tests were done under the guidance of a system set up under a qualified practitioner with specific drug and alcohol training.

He said workers were only tested if supervisors suspect they are under the influence of narcotics or alcohol or if there is an accident.

Mr Cornish said those who tested positive received random follow-up tests to ensure workers were not placed at risk.

"At the end of the day we are trying to have a place where people don't hurt themselves or hurt other employees," he said.

But Mr Gillespie said the drug testing had become excessive since it was implemented six months ago.

"Unless BHP discontinues what it's doing and the fashion in which it's doing it then there's going to be a problem," he said.

"It could escalate and get worse."

-------- israel

Israelis Brief U.S. On Anti-Missile System

WASHINGTON IN BRIEF
Saturday, September 8, 2001; Page A09
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A60160-2001Sep7?language=printer

Israeli officials said they hoped to cover most of the country with three batteries of Arrow anti-missile installations by the end of the decade.

Here to brief Bush administration officials on a successful Aug. 27 test, the Israelis said they would spend $2 billion to $2.5 billion on the Arrow missile shield in that time frame.

The Bush administration has promised $65 million to support the project this year, but the officials said Israel was seeking an increase to cope with an accelerating missile threat from Iran, Iraq and Syria.

----

Israel strikes Palestinian security offices

USA TODAY
09/08/2001
The Associated Press
http://usatoday.com/news/world/2001/09/08/mideast.htm

RAMALLAH, West Bank (AP) - Israeli helicopters attacked offices of Yasser Arafat's Fatah movement in the West Bank city of Ramallah on Saturday in what the army said was retaliation for recent shooting attacks. No one was injured. The Palestinians accused Israel of trying to kill Muhammed Mansour, the Fatah leader in Ramallah, who had left the building moments earlier. The Israeli army would not comment on the accusation.

Fatah employees meeting with Mansour in the eight-story building said they heard helicopters flying overhead before three missiles struck.

"I was still inside when I heard some helicopters flying very close to the building," said Zaghlool, who escaped uninjured. "One missile entered the room." He managed to get out of the smoke-filled offices through a bathroom window.

The entire floor belonging to the Fatah movement was seriously damaged, but other offices in the structure apparently were not damaged. One missile that struck did not explode, Palestinian police said, and residents in the neighborhood were evacuated for fear it would.

The army said the strike was an answer to repeated shooting attacks in the West Bank in recent days, including a roadside ambush Thursday that killed one soldier. Israel has repeatedly accused the Fatah party of involvement in attacks, and many of its gunmen are wanted by Israel.

Dozens of Palestinians demonstrated in Ramallah after the attack, calling for revenge.

"Our response will be faster and more painful than Israelis can imagine," said Marwan Barghouti, leader of the Tanzim militia, which is affiliated with Fatah.

The strike proves that Arafat should not meet with Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres, Barghouti said. Both sides had been trying to work out a meeting that Peres said would take place next week in the region.

Earlier Saturday, a Palestinian was killed and another seriously injured in an explosion near the border between the Gaza Strip and Egypt, an area known as a flashpoint in the more than 11 months of Israeli-Palestinian fighting.

Izzaldine Issa, 25, was killed by a powerful explosion that went off in the yard of a house used by the Tanzim militia, witnesses said. Issa was a member of Tanzim and served in the Palestinian intelligence services, Tanzim officials said.

Tanzim accused Israel of booby-trapping the premises. The Israeli army said it was not aware of the explosion or of any clashes in the area at the time.

In the fighting, 607 people have been killed on the Palestinian side and 165 on the Israeli side.

Palestinians expressed skepticism over Peres' announcement in Italy that he would meet Arafat next week.

Palestinian Planning Minister Nabil Shaath said more preparation is needed for a meeting between Peres and Arafat. A time and place have not yet been set for such talks, Shaath said.

The Palestinian Cabinet, meeting in Gaza late Friday, said in an official statement that it would not allow talks on a cease-fire without a discussion on the resumption of peace talks.

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has said repeatedly that he will not allow any peace talks to be part of negotiations on a truce. Sharon said in an interview published Saturday in The New York Times that he was skeptical that a Peres-Arafat meeting would be successful.

"Peres believes that he can influence Arafat to stop firing," he said, speaking in English. "I have doubts about that. But I told him, 'If you can do that, of course it's a good thing to meet."'

----

6 jailed refusers - 62 future refusers - high-school letter gets much attention

From: Gush Shalom <info@gush-shalom.org>
Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2001

Yesh Gvul solidarity vigil on Saturday

At this moment 6 conscripts and reservists are in jail for refusal to take part in the oppression of the Palestinians, among them two reserve officers.

Under the title : "Soldier, don't take part in war crimes." Yesh Gvul is holding a vigil in solidarity with Captains (res.) Sefi Sendik and Dan Tamir ,and in honour of all the soldiers who have said "No to the Occupation, No to war crimes."

The vigil will take place on Saturday September 8th at 11:00 on the hill overlooking Military Prison No.6 (Athlit).

TRANSPORTATION: Jerusalem ­ Binyanei Ha'uma, 9:00; Tel Aviv ­ Arlozorov/Namir ­ 10:00

02-6250271, www.yesh-gvul.org

e-mail: peretz: cherryk@zahav.net.il, ram: rahat@isdn.net.il

* - After CO Ariel Levin had been released from prison yesterday (6 Sep.) morning, he immediately was given an order to report at the induction base later on the same day. He came to the induction base, refused to be recruited and was sentenced to another 28 days of imprisonment. He is now again in Military Prison No. 4.

Especially now he needs letters of support to Ariel. His address is:

Ariel Levin (personal number 7204992) Military Prison No. 4 Military Postal Code 02507 IDF - Israel.

This is based on the report from New Profile CO councillor Sergeiy Sandler <sergeiy@bgumail.bgu.ac.il>]

---

- 62 future refusers - high-school letter gets much attention The Israeli media has in the last 24 hours given considerable attention to the 62 high-school pupils who face conscription and who declared already now their intended refusal.

"We are a group of 62 Israeli youths, about to be called to up to service in the IDF.

In protest against the severe violations of human rights carried out by Israel in the occupied territories - be it executions without trials or brutal sieges imposed on the Palestinian population - we just sent a letter to the Israeli PM, Ariel Sharon, in which we inform him that we intend to refuse to take part in the oppressive actions against the Palestinian people. Each of us, in his/her own way, will refuse to cooperate with this horrible occupation - some of us will refuse to enlist altogether, others will not serve in ground units and/or in the occupied territories, and some will prefer to leave the army on a mental-health pretext, in order to avoid service.

We call upon people of our age to join us. During this coming school-year we will put up stands at high-school gates in order to persuade more youths to join us. In addition, we will support the ones who choose to join our cause.

For details and a for copy of the letter:

Haggai Matar - 053-881213
Yair Hilo - 09-7457951
Shani Werner - 055-865422

[here follows the letter - including list of names]

To: Prime Minister Ariel Sharon CC: Minister of Security, Binyamin Ben-Eliezer IDF Chief of Staff, Shaul Mofaz

3.9.01

We the undersigned, youths who grew up and were brought up in Israel, are about to be called to serve in the IDF. We protest before you against the aggressive and racist policy pursued by the Israeli government's and its army, and to inform you that we do not intend to take part in the execution of this policy.

We strongly resist Israel's pounding of human rights. Land expropriation, arrests, executions without a trial, house demolition, closure, torture, and the prevention of health care are only some of the crimes the state of Israel carries out, in blunt violation of international conventions it has ratified.

These actions are not only illegitimate; they do not even achieve their stated goal - increasing the citizens' personal safety. Such safety will be achieved only through a just peace agreement between the Israeli government and the Palestinian people.

Therefore we will obey our conscience and REFUSE to take part in acts of oppression against the Palestinian people, acts that should properly be called terrorist actions. We call upon persons our age, conscripts, soldiers in the standing army, and reserve service soldiers to do the same.

Haggai Matar Amir Melanki Nave Avimor Shani Werner Neta Zalmanson Ya'el Aydan Yair Hilo Ra'anan Forschner Michal Bar-Or Matan Kaminer Guy Arnon Yosi Bartal Reut Katz Rotem Yaniv Yemima Fink A'lmah Yitzhaki Ya'el Skilevski Amir Zemer Asaf Shtul-Trauring Yonathan Zvik May O'mer Spiltzki Lihi Rothchild Yoni Cohen Emily Ya'aqov Nitzan Shlush Uriah Oren Avi Ya'aqov Yigal Rosenberg Tali Lerner A'di Sneider Asher Shechter Uri Brahav A'mit Stark Yuri Ronen Stav Bar-Shani Daniela Freund Gali Rabinovitz Yoni Ben-Dor Shira Gertner Uri Shamgar Itamar Ben-Zaken Roy Golan Ya'el Polak Re'ut Ben-Zur Itay Greenstein Ziv Kraus Alon Elkin Noa Levi Tal Paz Idan Hadash Jacky Levi Tzofit Kommemi Maor Heumann Gil Kremer Elad Or Gilad Itamar Tia Levi Yuval Kojman Fracesca Katz Merav Melamed Alon Kess Aya Michlin

For information about Gush Shalom visit the website: http://www.gush-shalom.org/ (including the "Barak's Generous Proposals" maps, the Boycott List of Products of Settlements and much more) email: info@gush-shalom.org;

----

Bush won't challenge Israel on weapons use
Law says U.S.-supplied arms can be used only for defense

Norman Kempster, Tracy Wilkinson,
Los Angeles Times
Saturday, September 8, 2001
San Francisco Chronicle
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/2001/09/08/MN101125.DTL

Washington -- The Bush administration has decided not to invoke against Israel a U.S.

law that bars military aid to countries that use American arms for purposes other than self-defense, despite controversy over dozens of "targeted killings" of Palestinian militants.

Under the U.S. Arms Export Control Act, countries that obtain weapons from the United States are allowed to use them only for defense. Parallel language is written into sales contracts. The law requires the State Department to assess compliance.

Israel says its policy of killing Palestinians suspected of planning or carrying out terrorist attacks falls within the definition of legitimate defense. State Department lawyers say the act is sufficiently ambiguous that it is impossible to make a clear-cut legal determination to the contrary.

However, a prominent Arab-American organization is considering a court challenge.

By Palestinians' count, 50 to 60 people have died in targeted killings by Israel, many using missiles fired from U.S.-made helicopters. Most were militants suspected in terrorist acts, but Palestinians say about 10 were bystanders, including women and children.

State Department spokesman Richard Boucher made clear this week that the administration will not try to enforce the statute. He chided critics for "pushing this into a legalistic discussion of U.S. law."

But he said Washington has other ways of expressing its opposition to what amounts to extrajudicial execution.

"We have made quite clear that we are opposed to the policy of targeted killings," he said. "We have made quite clear that we are opposed to the use of heavy weaponry . . . in these circumstances, particularly in populated areas where the risk of innocent casualties is very high. We have made clear that we think that the process of escalation and response needs to be broken."

Ziad Asali, president of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, said his group is considering a lawsuit to enforce the statute. In the meantime, he said, the organization is appealing to President Bush and Secretary of State Colin Powell to rein in Israel's use of U.S. weaponry.

In Jerusalem, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's government said it has not received a single formal complaint from the Bush administration about the use of U.S. weapons. But in any case, Israel maintains that its use of Apache gunships and F-16 fighter jets is well within the terms of the law.

"We use these weapons only for self-defense purposes," said Sharon's spokesman, Raanan Gissin.

"We are very careful. We try to kill only those who are coming to kill us. We try to avoid collateral damage. But, there's a war going on," Gissin said. "We are not enthusiastic about using these weapons, but we are left with no choice."

Although the arms export act is little known in the United States, it has become a hot-button topic across the Arab world, where it is cited as proof that Israel's military response to the 11-month-old Palestinian uprising would be impossible without U.S. help.

"The administration ought to be worried about Arab opinion," said Edward Walker, the State Department's top Middle East specialist at the end of the Clinton administration and the start of the Bush administration.

-------- space

Brazil Lawmakers: Scrap Launch Deal

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
September 8, 2001
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Brazil-US-Space.html

BRASILIA, Brazil (AP) -- Worried that the United States wants to control Brazil's space program, nationalists in Brazil's Congress are ready to call off a deal to let U.S. companies use the nation's coveted Alcantara launch site.

In a report to the Foreign Affairs and National Defense Committee, congressman Waldir Pires said the U.S.-Brazil Technology Safeguard Agreement should be rejected because of its ``contempt for national sovereignty.''

The agreement, signed April 18, 2000 and pending ratification by Brazil's Congress, would allow American companies to launch communications and earth observation satellites from the Alcantara Spaceport in the northeastern state of Maranhao, 950 miles northeast of Brasilia.

Alcantara is considered a near-ideal launch site because of its location, just 2.3 degrees south of the equator. The Earth's rotation is faster at the equator, which helps propel rockets into space with less fuel and with heavier payloads.

The committee still must vote on Pires's recommendation, but other committee members have said they agree with his objections, and its decision is usually followed by the full Congress. As an international agreement signed by the executive, the deal can be ratified or rejected by Congress, but not modified.

Supporters of the agreement say it is a key to the future of Brazil's financially strapped space program. An American presence in the base, they say, would bring in some $30 million a year.

Pires said he doesn't object to U.S. companies using the base -- it's the terms the American government wants to impose to allow them to do so.

One clause, he said, prohibits Brazil from using funds from launch fees ``for the acquisition, development, production, testing, deployment or use of rocket or unmanned air vehicle systems.''

``In my opinion, this clause embodies the real purpose of the agreement, which is to render Brazil's Satellite Launch Vehicle project unfeasible,'' Pires said. ``It is an attempt to place the country's space program under the orbit of the strategic interests of the United States.''

The agreement prohibits the transfer of technology to Brazil and restricts access to areas of the launch center to persons authorized by the U.S. government. It does not allow Brazilian officials to inspect sealed containers entering or leaving the base with satellites, launch vehicles or related equipment.

``This means that the United States could, if it wants, launch satellites to spy against countries with which Brazil maintains diplomatic relations,'' Pires pointed out in his report.

Foreign Affairs Minister Celso Lafer, however, said the agreement doesn't put Brazilian sovereignty at risk.

For example, he said, the agreement does not prevent Brazil from allowing other countries to use the spaceport. He cited ongoing negotiations with the Ukraine, Russia and Italy.

``Those countries are waiting to see what happens with this agreement, whose approval is an essential condition for the commercial and economic viability of the base.'' Lafer said.

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

For the Record

WASHINGTON IN BRIEF
Saturday, September 8, 2001; Page A09
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A60160-2001Sep7?language=printer

• The Army will retire about 400 Vietnam-era helicopters from the active-duty force and about 600 from the National Guard and Army Reserve, Brig. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno said. All AH-1 Cobra helicopters will be out of the force by the end of this year and all UH-1 Hueys will be gone by 2004.

----

Highlights of Rumsfeld Interview

September 8, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Rumsfeld-Quotes.html?searchpv=aponline

Highlights of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld's interview with The Associated Press:

On Pentagon need to look for money savings:

``I would characterize us as being under duress. We have enormous needs for funds that are not being met.''

On possible savings from closing more military bases:

``If you can knock out 25 percent or 20 percent of your infrastructure and all the utility costs and all the people costs ... the savings are substantial.''

On difficulty of closing military bases:

``If we do this, it will certainly not benefit President Bush. He'll be gone, and he'll take all the pain and all the political difficulty, and why would he do it? He and I are doing it because it's the right thing to do. Do I know we'll be successful? No. Would I much prefer not to do it? Yes. I think it's a terrible way to spend your day.''

On Russians and missile defense:

``I don't think the Russians are even slightly nervous about what we're doing. We've briefed them extensively. They know what we're doing is research, development and testing.''

On missile defense and the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with Russia:

``The issue is, 'When do you bump up against the treaty?' and that is of more concern to us than it is to anyone else, because I don't want to be in the position where this country breaks a treaty.''

Nuclear review and danger of cutting too many weapons in a non-nuclear testing environment:

``Your worst nightmare is to have the phone ring and someone say 'Gee, Mr. Secretary, this whole category of our nuclear forces are no longer safe, are no longer reliable.'''

On transformation to a more modern military:

``You don't tear down what is -- unless you've got something better ... What we came up with is now, I believe, one can say with a degree of assurance, clearly better.''

On the need for modernization of the forces:

``By golly, that's how you get into the pickle we're in. When we didn't deal with the infrastructure, and didn't modernize, let the airplanes age ... That's the hand we were dealt.''

--------

Rumsfeld Calls Base Closures Necessary

September 8, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Rumsfeld-Interview.html?searchpv=aponline

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The slumping economy may stiffen Congress's resistance to closing military bases, but Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said the changes are necessary to save billions the military needs to spend elsewhere.

In an interview with The Associated Press, Rumsfeld said Americans must understand that if the military is forced to keep open unneeded bases, it will be starved of money it needs to modernize.

Many politicians oppose closing bases because it can hurt local economies. Rumsfeld dismissed their concerns.

``Life's hard,'' he said. ``Yeah, it might'' be more difficult to sell in Congress now that the economic boom is over. ``But first of all, the economy's still growing, it's not in the dumps. And second, national security is darned important.''

Rumsfeld, now 69 and serving as Pentagon chief for the second time, spoke Friday from his office overlooking the Potomac River. His first stint as defense secretary was in 1975-1977 in the Ford administration.

In the 45-minute interview, he acknowledged the Bush administration's difficulties in persuading Russia to ``set aside'' a 1972 arms control treaty prohibiting national missile defense but said high-level talks will continue this fall. He said he plans to discuss it with his Russian counterpart, Igor Ivanov, in Naples, Italy, in late September.

He also disclosed that he intends to announce this week a plan for substantially reducing the Pentagon bureaucracy by combining some of the civilian and military staffs in the armed services, reducing layers of civilian management and making across-the-board cuts in headquarters staffs.

Rumsfeld indicated the reductions would be less than 10 percent. He declined to give a specific figure or estimate how much could be saved.

The across-the-board cutbacks would mirror the ``mindless, crude'' reductions institutions sometimes are compelled to make out of economic necessity, Rumsfeld said. He said he would take special care to ensure that truly vital functions are not eliminated.

``You don't want to simply blindly reduce numbers in an organization where you have a thin veneer of civilian leadership,'' he said.

Rumsfeld is looking at a wide range of ways to reduce the cost of running the Pentagon's far-flung operations, not just because he believes it makes sense but because the political reality is that defense budgets are not going to grow enough to meet all of the military's most critical needs.

``I would characterize us as being in duress,'' he said of the U.S. military. ``We have enormous needs for funds that are not being met in areas that have been neglected over the decade.''

The administration has asked Congress to approve $329 billion in defense spending for the budget year starting Oct. 1 -- $33 billion more than this year. Rumsfeld has said that even that increase -- the largest since the mid-1980s -- is not enough to address all the military's problems.

Rumsfeld said he was encouraged that the Senate Armed Services Committee on Friday voted for a new round of base closures. While acknowledging that the committee traditionally supports Pentagon cost-saving initiatives, he said some members who voted for it this time had opposed it last year.

Winning approval in the House may be more difficult.

In the past, the Pentagon has taken one of two approaches to paring bases: close them and sell the property after investing huge sums to clean up the environmental damage they had incurred in decades of use; or realign them by shifting people from several smaller bases to one large one.

This time, Rumsfeld said, the Pentagon is proposing a wider variety of options, including:

--Mothballing some bases. He called this ``pickling'' -- to stop using the base but keep the property. This avoids the often-enormous expense of environmental cleanup and keeps the base available for use in a national emergency. Taking this approach could save ``a bucket of dollars,'' he said.

--Close only part of a base.

--Mothball part of a base and keep the rest open.

--Move people from high-rent office space onto bases that have extra room.

--Keep a base open but lease part of it rather than selling it.

Whatever the approach, Rumsfeld said, the goal should be to make it as simple and painless as possible.

``Try to do it in a way with the minimal trauma on the community. Get into it, get it over with and don't try to cut off the dog's tail one inch at a time hoping it hurts less,'' he said.

The Pentagon has proposed to Congress that in 2003 an independent commission act on recommendations from the Pentagon on which bases to close or consolidate. Rumsfeld said a single round of cuts could save the Pentagon $3 billion a year, although the savings would not start for several years.

There have been four rounds of base closings, in 1988, 1991, 1993 and 1995, affecting 97 major bases. The first was the work of a one-time commission; the final three were set up by a 1990 law.

Rumsfeld said he felt strongly that despite the political cost of asking Congress to close bases, it is necessary.

``Why the hell would I leave Illinois and Taos, New Mexico, and come down here simply to sit around with my finger in my ear and not do what I think is in the best interest of the country,'' he asked, referring to his hometown of Chicago and his ranch in Taos. ``It seems to me it's the right thing to do. The fact there are people fussing about it ... doesn't surprise me.''

He noted that President Bush fought the Pentagon on closing bases in Texas when he was governor.

-------

Decaying Ships Cost Govt. Millions

September 8, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-No-Longer-Shipshape.html

FORT EUSTIS, Va. (AP) -- At the end of World War II, the cargo ship Wayne Victory ferried equipment to Okinawa. During the Vietnam War, it transported trucks back from Saigon. Now it is engaged in one final campaign -- a losing battle with the elements.

Paint on the 56-year-old ship has surrendered to rust. Holes the size of half dollars poke through the bridge deck. White rope shaped like the string in cat's cradle hangs where a section of the ship's side used to be. Asbestos lines the pipes, PCBs coat the wiring, and lead paint covers the walls.

Visitors must sign a release form before boarding the ship, acknowledging the toxic brew they will be breathing.

Some of the 272 ships in the National Defense Reserve Fleet are in even worse shape.

In a report to Congress, the U.S. Maritime Administration projects it will have to scrap 148 of them, including the Wayne Victory, by 2006 because they no longer will be in shape to carry out their mission of quickly transporting jeeps, tanks and other heavy equipment to U.S. troops overseas.

``These vessels are deteriorating and pose an immediate environmental threat,'' Transportation Department Inspector General Kenneth Mead said.

The fleet is docked at three locations -- Suisun Bay, near Benecia, Calif.; Beaumont, Texas; and Fort Eustis along the James River in Virginia. Ships in the fleet carried tanks, trucks and humvees to U.S. troops during the Korean, Vietnam and Persian Gulf wars.

The government would like to get rid of the decaying vessels, but cannot sell them for scrap because of the hazardous materials on board. Hauling them away and dismantling them would be costly.

The ships are watched around the clock.

Booms trap any fuel oil that leaks, and pollution cleanup companies are on call to help out. Pumps dispose of river water leaking in from the bottom through deteriorated hulls and rainwater coming in from the top through deteriorated decks. Flood alarms sound when water levels get too high.

Two-foot-long painted lines, each a foot apart, adorn the hulls. Patrol boats regularly check the ships, making sure at least two of the lines are visible.

The Maritime Administration has spent more than $2 million in the past three years to clean up spills and remove fuel. Last August, it cost the agency $250,000 to remove from the river 1,000 gallons of oil that leaked from another ship through a hole the size of a quarter.

The agency spent $2.5 million installing new anchor systems after moorings were damaged by Hurricane Floyd in 1999, and an additional $1.5 million to install electrical systems that slow corrosion of the hulls.

Before 1994, the agency disposed of its unwanted ships by selling them abroad to foreign shipyards, where they were dismantled for parts. The practice ended after the Environmental Protection Agency banned PCB exports.

``Everywhere you look around, you're going to find the potential for hazardous materials,'' said M. Nuns Jain, the maritime agency's regional director.

Congress ordered the Maritime Administration to get rid of the decaying ships by 2006. Lawmakers this year agreed to spend $10 million to scrap the ships, and an additional $10 million is in the spending bill for the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1.

It costs an estimated $2 million to dismantle a ship, and the Maritime Administration is looking at alternatives to simply paying someone to scrap a vessel, said James Caponiti, associate administrator for national security.

``We don't know whether there's a solution in the international marketplace,'' Caponiti said. ``There's capacity in the United States to do this but it's going to be expensive. We don't know what we want to do in the long run.''

In the meantime, crews struggle to keep the decaying ships afloat.

Aboard the Wayne Victory, the hull has been patched seven times, but now even the repairs have sprung leaks. One of the tanks recently took on so much water that the ship tilted to one side.

They couldn't pump the water out because there was a hole in the tank, so Robert Rohr, the fleet operations and maintenance officer, reluctantly agreed to pump water into a tank on the other side to straighten out the ship. ``That's a roger,'' he called into his two-way radio to supervisor machinist Arnie Harrison on the ship.

``I don't like putting more water into a ship,'' Rohr said. ``Sooner or later you're going to run out of places to put it.''


-------- OTHER

-------- energy

GAO eyes lawsuit

September 8, 2001
By Bill Sammon
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20010908-6676719.htm

The General Accounting Office yesterday said it is "preparing for possible litigation" against the White House for turning over "clearly inadequate" documentation of an energy task force's work.

The White House refused to budge, saying there is no need to disclose the private deliberations of Vice President Richard B. Cheney, who headed the task force, and other participants in meetings about energy policy.

"The administration believes very strongly that it is not a matter of public purview for each and every meeting, for each and every minute of the president and the vice president, each and every day, to be reported publicly," White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer said. "And they stand on that as a matter of principle."

Comptroller General David M. Walker, who heads the GAO, made clear that he considers full disclosure a matter of principle as well.

"This is a very serious matter with significant potential implications for GAO, the Congress and the American people," Mr. Walker said in a written statement.

"It involves several fundamental good-government principles, including the right of the Congress to oversee the executive branch, and the need for transparency and accountability in connection with the development and execution of federal government policies that can affect the lives of every American."

He added: "We are finalizing our discussions with key congressional leaders and are preparing for possible litigation."

Congressional Democrats have complained that Mr. Cheney's energy task force was as secretive as former first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton's health care task force, which held closed-door meetings in 1993. They encouraged the GAO to demand documentation of the energy meetings.

Liberal environmentalists have complained they were excluded from the process of developing a comprehensive energy plan for the administration. They accused Bush administration officials of catering to the gas, oil and nuclear industries because the plan calls for increased energy production.

On Thursday, Mr. Cheney's office turned over what the GAO called "a limited amount of information."

"The information received is clearly inadequate in light of GAO's request," the agency said in a news release.

The administration informed the GAO that there were nine meetings of the energy task force, as well as numerous staff meetings with groups that supplied data. The plan itself subsequently was made public, and President Bush gave a major speech explaining its contents.

"The president has shared those thoughts," Mr. Fleischer said yesterday. "In the case of the energy plan, it has all been revealed. All the recommendations are known. All the recommendations are out.

"The recommendations were made after meeting with a variety of groups, some environmental, some business, some experts," he added. "And that's the manner in which the energy-policy decisions were made."

Although he insisted the administration is hiding "absolutely nothing," Mr. Fleischer emphasized that further details should be kept private.

"A good government is a government that is allowed to have a certain level of deliberations in private, that they're allowed to have a certain level of meetings that take place so that ideas can be developed, that thoughts can be given, ideas can be shared," Mr. Fleischer said.

The White House spokesman went on to accuse the GAO of overstepping its investigative authority by demanding the documentation.

"The GAO must operate strictly under the law that authorizes their investigatory powers," he said. "And in the case of the request for each and every person who met with the vice president in each and every minute of his process on the energy package, that, the administration believes, is not, number one, authorized under the law."

Nor does the Bush administration believe it must turn over documents to congressional investigators interested in another topic the decision-making rationale of Justice Department prosecutors assigned to investigate Democratic fund-raising abuses during the Clinton administration.

The White House Counsel's Office is prepared to invoke executive privilege in an effort to withhold that information from Rep. Dan Burton, Indiana Republican, who is chairman of the House Government Reform Committee.

"The administration is prepared to invoke its authority to protect the confidentiality of important communications involving Justice Department officials in matters pertaining to the previous administration," Mr. Fleischer said.

The standoff puts the Bush administration in an awkward position of trying to discourage further probes of Democrats by Mr. Burton, who was long a thorn in the side of the Clinton administration. Yesterday, the White House went so far as to directly criticize Mr. Burton's efforts.

"I have not exactly heard a number of Democrats on the Hill supporting Congressman Burton in this case, so I think there is some question about whether or not this is another fishing expedition, another investigation that Congress has carried out that's going too far," Mr. Fleischer said.

The Government Reform Committee disagreed.

"It is a pity that the White House spokesman does not recognize that this is a serious policy dispute between two co-equal branches of government," said James Wilson, its chief counsel. "I would be surprised if his views were shared by his colleagues at the White House."

-------- genetics

BELIEFS
Ethical Limits on Stem Cell Research

New York Times
September 8, 2001
By PETER STEINFELS
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/08/national/08BELI.html

Nearly a century ago, in the preface to his play ``The Doctor's Dilemma,'' George Bernard Shaw laid down a simple rule that no medical researcher caught up in the current controversies over embryonic stem cells or therapeutic cloning would think to challenge.

Shaw, of course, put the matter in the usual outrageous way he employed to provoke thought. ``No man,'' he wrote, ``is allowed to put his mother into the stove because he desires to know how long an adult woman will survive at a temperature of 500" Fahrenheit, no matter how important or interesting that particular addition to the store of human knowledge may be.''

And just to nail the point down, he added, ``When a man says to Society, `May I torture my mother in pursuit of knowledge?' Society replies `No.'

If he pleads, `What! Not even if I have a chance of finding out how to cure cancer by doing it?' Society still says, `Not even then.'''

Of course, researchers would want to respond, ``But an embryo is not someone's mother, even if it could in principle become someone's mother, and to destroy it in extracting cells for research can hardly be compared to torture.''

But they still would not disagree with the basic point. In fact, scientists and politicians urging more government financing of embryonic stem cell research and fewer government limits on it routinely insist that the promise of medical progress does not override all ethical limits.

The difficulty has been in establishing exactly where these research advocates would place those limits.

If they reject fertilization as the place to draw a moral line, where would they draw it? And, just as important, why?

Not that these questions have gone completely unaddressed. While recognizing that embryonic development is a gradual process, some researchers, politicians and ethicists have highlighted certain milestones in that development as perhaps morally relevant.

One is the stage when embryos would normally implant in a uterus.

Another occurs when embryonic cells are so committed to their eventual body parts that splitting into identical-twin embryos is no longer possible. A third is the roughly simultaneous appearance of the ``primitive streak,'' indicating that twinning is no longer possible and also giving the embryo a new level of organization, presaging the development of organs and a nervous system.

All these ``biological markers'' occur after the period when embryos are destroyed by the extraction of stem cells, the issue now under debate. But those concerned about the long-range trajectory of embryonic research naturally wonder whether such markers, taken singly or in convergence, constitute rationally justifiable limits where society and science could agree in forcefully saying, ``To this point human life can be treated as an experimental object or as raw material for therapy, to this point but no further, not even if a cure for cancer is in the offing.''

In 1984, the committee that set the framework for Britain's regulation of human embryo research recommended limiting such research to 14 days after fertilization. So did the Human Embryo Research Panel that advised the National Institutes of Health in 1994.

Both committees placed heavy emphasis on the appearance of the primitive streak, but they were also influenced by the convergence of several other factors in the developmental process by the 14th day.

To be sure, proponents of protecting human life from the moment of fertilization are not convinced, and they can mount impressive criticisms of these later limits. But a deeper question lurks beneath the debate:

Are ethical limits, to which everyone gives lip service, really based on some inherent and morally significant quality of human life? Or are they strictly provisional dividing lines, like the movable rubber cones

or wooden horses that are used to block off road work or parade routes, handy enough to allay anxiety and ward off conflict for now but easily shifted if the potential benefits of medical research so require?

Of course, physical facts alone do not dictate moral norms. People read physical facts through the lenses of values already held, and a kind of negotiating occurs between facts and values. Is this 5-day-old human embryo deserving only of the somewhat nebulous respect owed

valuable blood and organs, or even

past and future generations? Or is this embryo deserving of the entirely different, higher level of respect accorded the individual human being?

There is a great deal of difference between answering those questions by looking at the embryos themselves and answering them by some external criterion, like whether their destruction may benefit future diabetics or whether they are scheduled to be discarded anyway. It is the tendency to advance such external criteria as decisive that has reinforced the worry that, in the end, adding to the store of knowledge is the one fixed star of scientific and medical research and that, short of roasting mother, everything else is ultimately adjustable.

That worry agitates many serious people who do not otherwise find compelling the case for protecting blastocysts or frozen embryos but who recognize that the precedents established in embryonic stem cell research will have broad and long- lasting consequences for science and human reproduction.

There is no reason that this void in the ethical discussion cannot be filled. Congressional hearings could devote at least as much time to the ethical questions as to whether there are 64 or 24 embryonic stem cell lines usable for research.

-------- human rights

Racism parley irks overlooked groups

September 8, 2001
By Betsy Pisik
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20010908-5595280.htm

DURBAN, South Africa -- As the U.N. racism conference drew to a close, legions of victims' groups, ranging from the untouchables of India to the Turkish immigrants in Germany, fumed.

Arab delegations had stolen the spotlight with a campaign to brand Israel as racist, relegating other causes and grievances to little more than footnotes.

The World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerances had been slated to conclude last night with governments adopting far-reaching agreements to battle intolerance.

Instead, diplomats spent the day resolving a dispute between the Arabs and Europe over how far to go in censuring Israel, again without success.

Both disputes set up the conference for a lackluster ending today and left many participants preparing to return home both exhausted and disappointed.

Arturo Sanchez came here from Mexico to alert nations to the daily indignities faced by youth, particularly those who are "multiple minorities" such as young, black, poor and homosexual.

But he said his youth group had a hard time. "The governments aren't seeing us as a priority, because we are not Palestinian," he said.

Turkish-born Memet Kilic, who has suffered social and economic discrimination for the 11 years he has lived in Germany, appealed for migrant rights and recognition.

With the Middle East dominating the agenda, "we're all in their shadow at the conference, and it's not OK."

Jyothi Raj hasn't eaten since Thursday morning, and says her hunger strike will continue until the Indian government agrees to recognize the Dalits, or "untouchables," as victims of racism.

She said the disputes over the Middle East and the slave trade were distracting. But she found solace in having earned at least a mention in the conference document.

"Getting into the document gives us legal identity," she said. "It is a promise by the United Nations, and you can go to them for help. If you are not in the document, you have nowhere to go."

European negotiators agreed to a compromise over an apology for slavery yesterday, but the U.N. conference on racism remained deadlocked over the Middle East conflict and reparations for slavery.

The anti-Israel tilt of the conference proved too much for the United States, which walked out of the conference early in the week, followed by Israel.

A half-dozen members of the Congressional Black Caucus came to Durban to press for a study of slavery reparations, and to seek an apology for slavery in the strongest language possible.

They declared themselves exasperated and left early.

The Rev. Jesse Jackson stayed behind with television cameras following his every move. Yesterday, he took another shot at the United States for its early departure.

"The United States has been leading from behind," he said. "This administration should be here. They should be showing commitment to issues besides the Middle East."

--------

Falun Gong asks Bush for help

September 8, 2001
By Osamu Tsukimori
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20010908-24166565.htm

American Falun Gong practitioners are calling on the Bush administration to help secure the release of a 38-year-old U.S. member who has been held captive in Beijing since May 2000.

Chunyan Teng, a medical doctor base in New York, was sentenced to a three-year term for passing evidence of psychiatric abuses of Falun Gong members to foreign journalists.

Erping Zhang, president of Falun Gong International Committee For Human Rights is leading efforts to prod the Bush administration to help free Dr. Teng.

However, the Chinese Embassy in Washington has denied that Dr. Teng was ever arrested.

According to Mr. Zhang, she was picked up by Chinese police at the Beijing International Airport and is believed to be the only American Falun Gong member who is currently held in China.

Mr. Zhang, who also runs a consultant business in New York, hopes for Dr. Teng's release before President Bush's expected visit to China next month.

"We call for the U.S. government to take action to secure Dr. Teng's release and freedom," Mr. Zhang said at yesterday's press conference at the National Press Building in Washington.

"The detention of Dr. Chunyan Teng should have never happened. We also call on the American people to join in this cause, to help us rescue a fellow American in need. We continue to call on China's authorities to release Dr. Teng," Mr. Zhang said.

The Falun Gong spokesman said Dr. Teng, disturbed after hearing about the persecution against Falun Gong members since 1999, went to China early last year and videotaped human rights violations in mental hospitals.

"Compelled by her conscience, she courageously decided to travel to China to do something about the injustice," Mr. Zhang said.

Later, Dr. Teng passed some evidence of psychiatric abuses to Western journalists, including an Agence France-Presse reporter. She then left China for a short period and returned to China in May 2000, when she was immediately arrested by Chinese police at the Beijing International Airport.

The Falun Gong spokesman said Dr. Teng was accused of "prying into and illegally providing state information to foreigners" and sentenced to three years in prison after a secret trial in December 2000.

Over tens of thousands of Falun Gong members have been arrested, beaten, tortured and forced into slave labor, human rights groups say.

More than 1,000 practitioners are hospitalized and abused in psychiatric institutions, said Mr. Zhang.

Claiming that 266 believers have been killed in their encounters with Chinese authorities, the Falun Gong spokesman said. He hopes that Dr. Teng would not become the 267th victim.

"She is now subjected to the very same abuses that she sought to document and to end," Mr. Zhang said.

Although Chinese authorities hospitalize practictioners, they refer to such treatment as "re-education," Mr. Zhang said.

Another Falun Gong spokesperson, Gail Rachlin, said Dr. Teng used to teach Falun Gong twice a week to her students.

"We're frightened in terms of torture that she's been put through right now."

Thousands of Chinese and American Falun Gong members also demonstrated at the U.S. Capitol in July to mark the second anniversary of China's ban of the movement and ask the government for help, Mr. Zhang said.

He said that Falun Gong has no political agenda and also prohibits any form of killing people. The reference apparently was to a highly publicized suicide in Beijing that turned some sympathies against the sect. Falun Gong vigorously denied it condones such actions

-------- police / prisoners

Questions Raised in Fiery Standoff

September 8, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Warrant-Shootout.html?searchpv=aponline

LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Federal agents knew for more than a year that a convicted felon had illegally bought thousands of rounds of ammunition, but didn't serve a search warrant until last week, The Los Angeles Times reported Saturday.

The disclosure raises questions about the investigation leading to a deadly standoff that began when officers tried to serve a warrant at the home of James Allen Beck on Aug. 31. Los Angeles County Sheriff's Deputy Hagop ``Jake'' Kuredjian was shot and killed, and Beck barricaded himself in his home and died in an ensuing fire.

Search warrant affidavits unsealed in response to a federal Freedom of Information Act request showed that a federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms agent learned in July 2000 that Beck had bought $1,513.34 worth of ammunition and gun paraphernalia from a Pasadena gun shop.

ATF agents also were told by neighbors that Beck had been stockpiling guns at his home in an upscale Santa Clarita neighborhood, the Times reported.

Bernard J. Zapor, assistant special agent in charge of the ATF's Southern California division, told the Times that he could not discuss why the bureau waited 14 months before conducting its search for illegal weapons. An internal review of the shootout is ongoing, Zapor said, and the agency will not comment until it is completed.

The ATF has said there was no reason to believe that Beck would open fire on law enforcement officers serving the warrant.

The Sheriff's Department is conducting a separate homicide investigation into Kuredjian's death. The investigation has raised questions about whether Kuredjian was shot by Beck or another officer.

Beck, 35, a convicted felon who allegedly impersonated a U.S. marshal and was building a weapons cache, was on parole at the time of the shootout following three convictions for burglary, receiving stolen property and possession of an assault weapon.

--------

11 Miami Officers Facing U.S. Charges in String of Shootings

New York Times
September 8, 2001
By DANA CANEDY
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/08/national/08MIAM.html

MIAMI, Sept. 7 - Nearly a dozen current and former Miami police officers have been charged with planting evidence and covering up their actions in a string of police shootings that killed three people, including a 73-year-old man who died in 1996 in a barrage of 123 bullets, the authorities said today.

A federal grand jury indictment, announced today, charges the 11 officers with multiple counts of misconduct in cases dating back to the mid- 1990's, including stealing evidence, placing guns at crime scenes and lying to avoid prosecution, the authorities said.

Two other retired officers pleaded guilty earlier in the continuing investigation.

More indictments are likely, said Guy Lewis, the United States attorney for the Southern District of Florida, and Hector Pesquera, a special agent in charge with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, at a joint news conference today.

"The lies of the officers, the throw- down weapons used in the shootings, reflect corruption within the circle of officers who conspired together," Mr. Pesquera said. "This circle of officers is not yet closed."

Miami's mayor and police chief welcomed the federal intervention. Calling it a "sad day" for the city, Chief Raul Martinez also announced that he had asked the Justice Department to review the city's practices and procedures related to police shootings. "This is painful," he said at a news conference, "but this is something we have to go through to get better."

At City Hall, Mayor Joe Carollo said he had requested a separate federal investigation into other possible civil-rights violations by officers or police officials. Mr. Carollo said that the accused officers had betrayed the city's trust and that their actions were part of a systemic problem.

"Police officers cannot be judge and jury," the mayor said. "That is not how our system works."

Federal investigations of local police departments have been fiercely resisted by some big-city mayors, most notably Rudolph W. Giuliani in New York, where police shootings and other incidents of brutality have caused public outcries in recent years. But one law enforcement expert said today's developments in Miami were part of an emerging trend, as some cities have welcomed federal involvement to lend credibility to their investigations of wrongdoing.

The investigation of the 1,100- member Miami police force is also notable because of its scope and the number of officers charged, said the expert, Marie Simonetti Rosen, publisher of Law Enforcement News, a publication of John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York.

"Given the size of the department, that's a big number," Ms. Rosen said.

The charges against the officers involve many of the most high-profile shootings in the city's recent history. They include the case of Richard Brown, 73, who died when police fired into his apartment during a drug investigation in 1996, and the 1997 case of a homeless man who was shot while carrying a radio that the police later said was a gun, according to the authorities.

"To carry out this conspiracy, the officers would seize property, including guns, from people in the city of Miami and fail to submit them to the Miami Police Department property room," Mr. Lewis said. "The defendants would later plant the guns on the scene of police-involved shootings."

In the inquiries that followed the shootings, Mr. Lewis said, the officers lied to investigators, prosecutors and judges. Each officer had worked for two specialized units of the department, with specific missions to reduce narcotics and so- called street-level crimes.

Officers Jesus Aguero, Jorge Garcia, Jose Quintero, Israel Gonzalez, Oscar Ronda and Jorge Castello were charged with conspiracy to violate citizens' civil rights and conspiracy to obstruct justice. Each charge carries a penalty of five years in prison and a $250,000 fine. They are also charged with one or more counts of obstruction of justice, punishable by 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine. Officers Garcia and Gonzalez are also charged with committing perjury before the grand jury, which carries the same penalty.

The other officers, Arturo Beguiristain, Jose Acuna, Alejandro Macias, Rafael Fuentes and Eliezer Lopez were initially indicted in March on conspiracy charges related to the shooting of Mr. Brown. But the indictment announced today expanded the charges against some of the original officers to cover three more shootings and named the additional officers as defendants.

The retired officers who pleaded guilty, William Hames and John Mervolion, are awaiting sentencing, the authorities said. They pleaded guilty to the conspiracy charges.

Lawyers for the officers said the charges were unfounded and politically motivated. "This is old, recycled dirty laundry hung out to dry on a new line," said Richard Sharpstein, who represents Officers Beguiristain and Castello. "All of these cases have been reviewed and re-reviewed by homicide detectives, internal affairs, the state attorney's office, but now that the statute of limitations is running out, the U.S. attorney comes out to save the day."

But the authorities said the evidence was overwhelming. "Make no mistake, there was nothing isolated or subtle about the crime these people committed," said Mr. Pesquera of the F.B.I.

The charges date back to the 1995 deaths of two 19-year-old men, who were shot at 37 times by officers from an interstate overpass as they ran away from a robbery scene. The authorities say officers later planted guns near the men's bodies and claimed they had been armed.

In the Brown case, officers entered his apartment in March 1996 on a drug warrant and sprayed his bedroom with 123 bullets. Mr. Brown was hit by nine bullets and died in a closet. His daughter, Janeka, then 14, hid in a bathroom. The officers said Mr. Brown had fired at them, but the authorities say he did not have a gun. Nor were any drugs found, they say. The city settled a lawsuit with Janeka Brown for $2.5 million last year.

In a third case under suspicion, officers chased a purse-snatching suspect and fired three shots at him. One officer then planted a gun under a tree while another reported that he had found a gun at the scene, according to the indictment.

Chief Martinez acknowledged that the indictments were a first step in regaining the public's trust. "For the last few months, the Police Department has publicly acknowledged that we have had a problem in the past," the chief said. "Today is the culmination of dealing with the past, correcting it and moving forward."

--------

Skepticism Follows Court Ruling in Favor of Inmate Procreation

New York Times
September 8, 2001
By WILLIAM GLABERSON
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/08/national/08PRIS.html

A federal appeals court declared this week that male prisoners have a constitutional right to procreate. Yesterday, that ruling drew criticism around the country, with some lawyers predicting it would be overturned by the United States Supreme Court.

The ruling, issued on Wednesday by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco, came in the case of an inmate serving a life sentence who argued that he should be able to ship semen out of prison for the artificial insemination of his 46-year-old wife.

No federal appeals court had previously recognized a prisoner's right to procreation. A dissent ridiculed the majority for inventing a right to procreate "from prison via FedEx."

Some prisons have permitted conjugal visits in the past, but many have not. The 2-to-1 decision said modern techniques for procreation without sexual relations raised new legal issues. Procreation, the court said, is "not inherently inconsistent with one's status as a prisoner."

The criticism reflected skepticism that often meets rulings expanding prisoners' rights, especially by the San Francisco court, which has a reputation for liberal rulings. The court's decisions govern nine states including Alaska, Oregon, Washington and California.

Dora Schriro, a former corrections official who is now a senior policy fellow at the University of Missouri at St. Louis, said the opinion ignored the fact that prisoners lose certain rights, even if they lose them permanently because of life sentences.

"Life means life," Ms. Schriro said, "and some new technology should not affect sentencing and its many ramifications."

Michael Rushford, president of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation, a conservative group in Sacramento, said it was bad policy for the courts to make it easier for prisoners to father children.

The decision had some defenders. Eric Balaban, a lawyer for the National Prison Project of the American Civil Liberties Union, said the courts had recognized that prisoners like the one in this case, William Gerber, did not lose all their rights. "He wasn't sentenced to be sterilized," Mr. Balaban said.

All three judges who participated in Wednesday's decision were appointed by Democratic presidents. The majority opinion was written by Myron H. Bright. Judge Stephen Reinhardt agreed. The dissent was by Judge Barry G. Silverman.

Mr. Gerber is serving a sentence with no possibility of parole on charges of making terrorist threats and discharging a firearm, and narcotics offenses. He offered to pay to send his semen to a sperm bank.

Under the ruling, a trial court is to decide whether there are legitimate prison management issues that would justify a total ban by prison officials on Mr. Gerber's ability to procreate.

-------- spying

US Sentences Pakistani Brothers in Spy Camera Case

September 8, 2001
By REUTERS
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/technology/tech-crime-pakistan-usa.html?searchpv=reuters

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Two Pakistani brothers, one of them a naturalized U.S. citizen, have been sentenced to prison for attempting to illegally ship spy cameras to Pakistan, the U.S. Justice Department said on Friday.

The men, who pleaded guilty earlier this year, were arrested by the U.S. Customs Service in January following a two-month undercover operation. They were trying to export pan tilt-zoom cameras that can be used for military surveillance and reconnaissance when installed in unmanned aerial vehicles known as drones.

Tauquir Khan, 36, a Pakistani citizen who has been in the United States on a student visa at Iowa State University, was sentenced to 30 months imprisonment. He faces two years of supervised release once he leaves prison and most likely will be deported to Pakistan, the Justice Department said.

His brother, Tanzeem Khan, 34, a naturalized U.S. citizen, was sentenced to two years in prison followed by two years of supervised release.

The government will also keep $25,000 paid by the brothers to U.S. Custom Service agents who posed as business people willing to ship the spy cameras out of the country.

In September 2000, the State Department denied a request by Tauquir Khan for an export license for the cameras. The application was turned down because of sanctions imposed on Pakistan after its detonation of a nuclear device in 1998.

The U.S. Customs Service launched its investigation when it learned Khan was still attempting to obtain the cameras from a Maryland firm, the Justice Department said.


------- OneList (submissions from subscribers)

------- Depleted Uranium Keeps On Killing!