------- Index of Articles

NUCLEAR
U.S. Supports U.N. Anti-Nukes Push
Northrop Grumman Takes Newport News
US, China Talk Nuclear Proliferation
U.S. to Ask China Again: Halt Pakistan Missile Aid
Czech, Austria Mull Nuclear Plant
U.N. snubs Iraq over depleted-uranium study
Going Backwards US Wins Defeat of Depleted Uranium Study
Saddam would attack Israel with non-conventional weapons
Israel's Sharon Travels to U.S.
Mideast Envoy Aims for Peace Talks
Pentagon to Launch Missile Test
Russia Hails UN ABM Treaty Support
No Russia Strategic Arms Concessions to US
Russia Hails UN ABM Treaty Support
N-Power Plants Need Fed Security Force
Feds Favor Maryland Co. for Uranium
GAO Challenges Plans for Storage Of Nuclear Waste
Delay urged on nuclear waste dump decision
Bush Defends Secret Tribunals for Terrorism Suspects
Powell Denies Rumors of a New War on Iraq
Egypt Minister Discusses Bush Policy

MILITARY
Troops on Call
Today in History - Nov. 30
Captured Taliban lined up and shot
US 'hero' may have triggered Mazar revolt
The Castle of Death
Powell defends missile deal with Egypt
Egypt's story
U.S. Military Aid Arrives in Manila
Ames Strain Of Anthrax Limited to Few Labs
Experts Sure Iraq Has Bio-Weapons
Chemical Weapons Linked to bin Laden
After the bloodbath: how Sharon wove a web of lies
Ex-Axis Powers Recast Foreign Military Roles
U.S. Military Aid Arrives in Manila
53 journalists killed in 2001
Vieques
Navy supremacy

POLICE / PRISONERS
Journalists assaulted in L.A. protest settle with police
Police Sentenced in S. Africa
Questions for Mr. Ashcroft
D.C. cameras bring woes others avoided

ENERGY AND OTHER
GENERATING RENEWABLE ENERGY ON PUBLIC LANDS ENCOURAGED
NEW DEVICE COULD AID PRODUCTION OF ELECTRICITY
Utility Seeks Operations Transfer
Commonwealth backs plan for $10 million traditional medicine hub
Smallpox Vaccine Plan Called Lacking

ACTIVISTS
URGENT
ACTION ALERT - CITIZEN INSPECTION
Arms Trade Resource Center Reports
Students walk out to protest Pennsylvania takeover plans
TAKE ACTION: EarthNet Special Report
To stop a nuclear terrorist the West must give up its nuclear weapons



-------- NUCLEAR

U.S. Supports U.N. Anti-Nukes Push

By Vanessa Gera
Associated Press Writer
Friday, November 30, 2001; 9:32 AM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A38633-2001Nov30?language=printer
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Attacks-Nuclear.html?searchpv=aponline

VIENNA, Austria -- Warning anew of the threat of nuclear-related terrorism, the United States on Friday pledged to support the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency's efforts to stop terrorists from obtaining nuclear material.

Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham said the U.S. government is giving the International Atomic Energy Agency $1.2 million for the anti-terrorism effort while Washington discusses increasing its funding for the agency.

U.S. contributions now make up roughly 25 percent of the agency's $300 million annual budget, IAEA spokeswoman Melissa Fleming said.

Speaking to the agency's board of governors in Vienna, Abraham praised the organization's efforts to help countries increase security at nuclear facilities, calling its work "vital to the global war on terrorism."

"The work the agency does to deny nuclear material and radioactive sources to terrorists and state sponsors of terrorism is an integral part of our effort to stem the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction," Abraham said.

After Sept. 11, the agency's director general, Mohamed ElBaradei, warned that terrorists could next try to attack nuclear plants or build radioactive bombs.

Nuclear experts have warned that the collapse of the Soviet Union created a political vacuum that left some nuclear material unaccounted for.

On Friday, ElBaradei asked the IAEA's wealthier members to increase the agency's budget by $30 million to $50 million annually so it can expand its efforts to help countries safeguard nuclear material.

ElBaradei said the 133-member agency would use the money to help governments prevent theft of radioactive materials and increase border controls in order to prevent the smuggling of such material.

"We have the solutions," ElBaradei said. "Now governments have to come up with the resources."

The agency, which sets international standards for radiation protection, said it has evidence of 175 cases of trafficking in nuclear materials since 1993.

-------- business

Northrop Grumman Takes Newport News

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
November 30, 2001
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/business/AP-Northrop-Newport-News.html?searchpv=aponline
also
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A39697-2001Nov30?language=printer

NEWPORT NEWS, Va. (AP) -- Newport News Shipbuilding Inc., the nation's only builder of nuclear aircraft carriers, became part of Northrop Grumman Corp. on Friday.

The Los Angeles-based defense conglomerate took possession of its third shipyard a little more than three weeks after the Newport News board agreed to the $2.1 billion takeover.

``As we look ahead as one company, Northrop Grumman is enthusiastically embracing the business of building and maintaining ships -- and we are in this business for the long haul,'' Kent Kresa, Northrop Grumman's chief executive, said during a news conference at the shipyard.

About 100 corporate employees at Newport News will be laid off as a result of the takeover, said Thomas Schievelbein, who became president of the new Northrop Grumman-Newport News. He said hourly jobs will not be affected.

The Newport News yard has about 17,800 employees.

Northrop Grumman won a bidding war with rival shipbuilder General Dynamics Corp. Northrop argued that the General Dynamics bid would eliminate competition and endanger national security. General Dynamics and Newport News are the nation's only nuclear submarine builders.

Support for the General Dynamics bid evaporated after the Justice Department said it would challenge such a merger on antitrust grounds. The Pentagon also supported the Northrop bid.

The Newport News yard initially will operate as a subsidiary of Northrop with Schievelbein replacing William Fricks at the helm of Newport News. Fricks' retirement took effect Thursday.

Newport News eventually will be managed by Northrop's ship systems sector, which already includes the Avondale and Ingalls shipyards in Louisiana and Mississippi.

Nuclear shipwork will continue to be done at Newport News while non-nuclear work be done at the other yards.

-------- china

US, China Talk Nuclear Proliferation

The Associated Press
Friday, November 30, 2001; 9:48 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A42096-2001Nov30?language=printer

WASHINGTON -- U.S. and Chinese officials held productive talks on American concerns over Chinese compliance with an agreement on curbing the spread of nuclear technology, the State Department said Friday night.

Undersecretary of State John Bolton conducted the discussions with Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Wang Guangya.

Bolton reiterated the emphasis on nonproliferation as a critical aspect of the war on terrorism, the State Department said.

The two sides also discussed a broader range of arms control issues. The Chinese delegation also met with other officials to discuss regional and counterterrorism issues.

Three months ago, the administration accused the China Metallurgical Equipment Corp., a government-owned engineering company, of supplying missile-related parts to Pakistan in violation of a November 2000 Sino-American agreement.

For two years, the company will be denied all new U.S. licenses for production of electronics and military equipment and for material used to launch commercial satellites. China has denied the allegation.

----

U.S. to Ask China Again: Halt Pakistan Missile Aid

November 30, 2001
By REUTERS
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/world/international-china-usa.html?searchpv=reuters

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States, underscoring a post-Sept. 11 pledge to defeat terrorism, will hang tough in high-level talks with China Friday and renew a demand that the Chinese curb missile cooperation with Pakistan, a senior U.S. official said.

U.S. Undersecretary of State John Bolton and Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Wang Guangya are expected to hold the most extensive senior-level nonproliferation talks between their countries since President Bush took office in January.

The Sept. 11 attacks on New York and Washington have added urgency to the goal of halting the spread of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons that could fall into the hands of extremists.

Expectations are low, however, that Washington and Beijing can reach an agreement that would justify the lifting of U.S. sanctions that have delayed the export of American communications satellites to China.

China asked for Friday's meeting.

Bush told Chinese President Jiang Zemin in Shanghai last month that ``nonproliferation is a serious issue,'' another official told Reuters. ``'You've got to deal with it. You can't have the kind of relationship with the United States that you want until we deal with it,''' the official said, summarizing Bush's message.

The White House denies any advance knowledge of what Wang may say.

WASHINGTON WILL 'BE LISTENING'

``We don't have any reason to believe the Chinese position has changed,'' the senior official said Thursday, adding: ``But we'll be listening. ... We'll be interested to hear what they say.''

As for the American position, he said: ``We've told them before. We haven't changed in five months. It's still the same.''

If there is time, the United States may also use the meeting to voice its concern about China's biological weapons program.

China's priorities are to talk about lifting the sanctions and to learn the status of U.S. missile defense negotiations with Russia, the senior U.S. official said.

The U.S. preference would be to deal with Beijing's ''proliferation behavior'' across a range of weapons of mass destruction and their delivery systems, he said.

But, ``frankly, if they can't address the missile sanction issue, then there is not a lot of point in talking about other aspects (of proliferation) at this stage,'' he added.

Failure to find common ground would show that the Chinese ''are fundamentally not willing to engage in a common course of conduct'' with the United States and other key countries, the senior official said.

Beijing has impressed Washington with its willingness to support the U.S. anti-terror campaign following the Sept. 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

But discord over transferring missiles and other technology to Pakistan and other countries reflects the limits of this key relationship, which has improved dramatically in recent months.

BACKGROUND OF SANCTIONS

The sanctions were imposed on Sept. 1 on the China Metallurgical Equipment Corp. for allegedly transferring ballistic missile technology to Pakistan in violation of a November 2000 agreement with the United States.

The penalties include a U.S. refusal to issue licenses to U.S. companies to launch satellites on Chinese rockets.

Under the November 2000 accord, China pledged not to assist any country developing ballistic missiles that can be used to deliver nuclear weapons and to abide by the Missile Technology Control Regime, a voluntary international accord that tries to limit missile exports to unstable regions.

China publicly denied breaking the accord, although U.S. officials said it told a different story in private.

In private talks, China argued that sanctions should be waived in return for a new pledge that missile technology transfers will not take place and Beijing will finally carry out an old promise to tighten export controls.

But the administration lost patience. In the past two decades, China has promised six times not to transfer missiles and missile technology, yet has broken each pledge by arming Pakistan, Syria, North Korea and possibly Libya, according to U.S. Senate and intelligence sources.

China has made clear to Washington that it views its ties with Pakistan as long-standing and integral to its security.

Congressional experts said they believed Beijing was committed to a military technology supply relationship with Pakistan despite U.S. objections.

An Asian diplomat said China did not appear to have expanded cooperation with Pakistan since the Afghan war began.

The sanctions issue is particularly awkward because the United States recently lifted proliferation-related sanctions on Pakistan. Pakistan has become America's crucial front-line ally in the war in Afghanistan, where Osama bin Laden, the prime suspect in the U.S. attacks, and his allies are based.

-------- czech republic

Czech, Austria Mull Nuclear Plant

By Paul Ames
Associated Press Writer
Thursday, November 29, 2001; 6:33 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A35511-2001Nov29?language=printer

BRUSSELS, Belgium -- The Czech government agreed Thursday to tighten safety at the Temelin nuclear plant, defusing a dispute with Austria that threatened Czech prospects for an early entry into the European Union.

The EU mediated the deal reached by Austrian Chancellor Wolfgang Schuessel and Czech Prime Minister Milos Zeman.

It would end a long-running dispute between the central European neighbors over the Russian-designed power plant which is just 30 miles from the northern border of nuclear-free Austria.

"In the past, this has complicated relations between Austria and the Czech Republic. Now the skies have cleared," Zeman told reporters.

Under the deal, the Czech's safety commitments will be written into the republic's EU treaty of accession, expected in 2004.

In return, Austria agreed not to block negotiations on its neighbor's entry into the 15-nation Union.

Austria demanded the shutdown of the power plant which is due to become fully operational in 2003 after almost 20 years of construction and testing.

"The EU set out a sensible way forward. This is a fine example of good neighborliness," Schuessel said after the talks.

Based on Soviet design but updated with U.S. technology, the 2,000-megawatt plant has been plagued by technical problems since construction work began in 1986.

Testing of Temelin's reactors resumed Wednesday after a leaking circulation pump caused the latest, month-long, shutdown.


-------- depleted uranium

U.N. snubs Iraq over depleted-uranium study

Friday, November 30, 2001
By Irwin Arieff,
Reuters
http://www.enn.com/news/wire-stories/2001/11/11302001/s_45735.asp

UNITED NATIONS - After lobbying by Washington, the General Assembly on Thursday rejected an Iraqi proposal that the United Nations study the effects of the depleted-uranium shells used by U.S.-led forces in the Gulf War.

Baghdad has insisted for years that there is a link between the depleted uranium used in armor-piercing weapons during the 1991 war and an increase in the number of Iraqis with leukemia and other kinds of cancer. Iraq's Health Ministry has said cancer cases rose to 10,931 in 1997 from 6,555 in 1989, especially in areas bombed during the war, in which a U.S.-led coalition drove Iraq out of Kuwait after it invaded its oil-rich neighbor.

The 189-nation General Assembly voted down the Iraqi plan 45-54, with 45 abstentions.

The assembly's committee on disarmament and international security had approved the plan earlier this month 49-45. Diplomats credited a lobbying campaign by Washington for the turnaround.

Acting at Baghdad's request, the World Health Organization this year began an in-depth study of the health impact of depleted-uranium use in Iraq. Baghdad has cited studies saying that coalition forces used 944,000 depleted-uranium shells against it during the Gulf War.

A resolution drafted by Iraq said the shells had spread radioactive particles and chemical dust over large areas and contaminated "animal and plant life and the soil.'' It asked Secretary-General Kofi Annan to survey U.N. member nations and relevant outside groups "on all aspects of the effects of the use of depleted-uranimum armaments'' and submit a report to the assembly next year on his findings.

The use of ammunition containing depleted uranium sparked a furor across Europe earlier this year after some allied peacekeepers in Bosnia and Kosovo said they had developed leukemia because of exposure to the material.

NATO and many health officials have denied that the munitions cause cancer. A study commissioned by the Atlantic alliance concluded that soldiers who served as peacekeepers in the NATO-led missions in Bosnia and Kosovo, where U.S. aircraft fired some 40,000 depleted-uranium shells, were no sicker than those who had not.

----

Going Backwards US Wins Defeat of Depleted Uranium Study

by Irwin Arieff
Friday, November 30, 2001
by Reuters
http://commondreams.org/headlines01/1130-01.htm

UNITED NATIONS - After lobbying by Washington, the General Assembly rejected yesterday an Iraqi proposal that the UN study the effects of the depleted-uranium shells used by US-led forces in the Gulf War.

Baghdad has insisted for years that there is a link between the depleted uranium used in armor-piercing weapons during the 1991 war and an increase in the number of Iraqis with leukemia and other kinds of cancer.

Iraq's Health Ministry has said that cancer cases rose to 10,931 in 1997 from 6,555 in 1989, especially in areas bombed during the war, in which a US-led coalition drove Iraq out of Kuwait after it invaded its oil-rich neighbor.

The 189-nation General Assembly voted down the Iraqi plan 45-54, with 45 abstentions. The assembly's committee on disarmament and international security had approved the plan earlier this month, 49-45.

Diplomats credited a lobbying campaign by Washington for the turnaround.

Acting at Baghdad's request, the World Health Organization began an in-depth study this year of the health impact of depleted-uranium munitions used in Iraq. Baghdad has cited studies saying that coalition forces used 944,000 depleted-uranium shells against Iraq during the Gulf War.

A resolution drafted by Iraq said the shells had spread radioactive particles and chemical dust over large areas and contaminated ''animal and plant life and the soil.''

It asked UN Secretary General Kofi Annan to survey UN member nations and relevant outside groups ''on all aspects of the effects of the use of depleted-uranimum armaments'' and submit a report on his findings to the assembly next year.

The use of ammunition containing depleted uranium sparked a furor across Europe earlier this year, after some allied peacekeepers in Bosnia and Kosovo said they had developed leukemia because of exposure to the material.

NATO and many health officials have denied that the munitions cause cancer.

-------- israel

Expert: Saddam would attack Israel with non-conventional weapons

By David Rudge,
November, 30 2001
Jerusalem Post
http://cgis.jpost.com/cgi-bin/General/printarticle.cgi?article=/Editions/2001/11/30/News/News.39093.html

HAIFA (November 30) - Iraqi President Saddam Hussein would almost certainly give the order to hit Israel with non-conventional weapons if he felt his regime was in imminent danger of destruction in the event of a major US attack, according to Iraqi affairs expert Prof. Amatzia Baram.

Baram, of the University of Haifa, acted as an adviser on Iraq to senior officials of the American administration while on sabbatical in the US two years ago.

He stressed, however, that the threat of an Iraqi retaliation could be reduced to virtually zero if the US and Israel were to adopt a series of measures, which he declined to discuss for security reasons.

According to Baram, director of the university's Jewish-Arab Center and the Gustav-Heinemann Institute of Middle Eastern Studies, Iraq is believed to have between six to 50 ballistic missiles and a few mobile launchers.

There is also the possibility of Saddam using drones or suicide pilots as a means for conveying some of his arsenal of biological and chemical agents and even nuclear waste to Israel's shores.

Baram noted that the radioactive material would be extremely difficult to load into bombs or missile warheads, and would be as dangerous to the attackers as to the people in the intended target area.

It was more likely, therefore, that Saddam would try to use his remaining missiles fitted with biological or chemical agents - even though these have never been field-tested properly and could malfunction by burning out when re-entering the atmosphere or become unbalanced and go out of control.

Baram revealed that Saddam had given prior orders to his missile commanders to launch Scuds with non-conventional warheads at Israel during the 1991 Gulf War in the event that Baghdad was surrounded and about to fall, and communications with himself were cut.

The orders - never published or even publicly acknowledged - were gleaned by members of the UN's special commission to supervise Iraqi weapons of mass destruction from interviews with leading Iraqi officials.

"I believe the reports of these orders, based on what we already know, my own studies, and interviews and from overt sources, to be very solid and this gives us further data about Saddam and his way of thinking," said Baram, who expounded on the issue in a recently published article in the highly-respected US magazine, the Monterey-based Non-Proliferation Review.

On this basis, Baram is convinced that Saddam would be prepared to sacrifice Baghdad and all its citizens, believing that a non-conventional strike on Israel would result in a nuclear retaliation by the latter on Iraq's capital.

"This is the Iraqi perception of Israel's likely response to a non-conventional Iraqi attack on its territory, although nobody can know for certain how Israel would react.

"Saddam's theory, apparently, is that such massive destruction and loss of life certainly in Iraq and possibly in Israel would put an end to any war being waged against Iraq by America and its allies.

"He seems to believe that he personally and most of his elite would be able to survive the devastation by remaining in their underground nuclear shelters scattered all around Iraq, and that after the dust and fallout settled would emerge and declare victory.

"It should be stressed, however, that Saddam is not a suicidal type and would only give the orders for non-conventional attacks on Israel if he felt his regime was in imminent danger of collapse either from non-stop US bombing attacks or a massive offensive involving also the use of ground forces," Baram said.

Baram maintained it was less likely that Saddam would order the launch of conventional missiles against Israel in the event of a limited US assault because this would expose the continued existence of such weapons, and give America a powerful diplomatic tool to press for indefinite sanctions against Iraq and the need for renewed UN supervision.

He also noted that Israel a decade after the Gulf War is in a much better position to protect itself against missile attacks of any kind through the Arrow and vastly improved Patriot anti-missile systems.

"Given this and other measures that could and should be adopted, including applying psychological pressure on the Iraqi army and particularly missile unit commanders, there is an excellent prospect of averting the Armageddon scenario completely," said Baram.

"Certainly, in my opinion, the dangers do not constitute sufficient reasons for the US to refrain from trying to topple a regime that poses such a danger to stability in the region and the world in general. On the contrary, it seems to me that the US will have to eliminate Saddam's regime while using the measures and means which I cannot elaborate upon to minimize the risks," Baram added.

----

Israel's Sharon Travels to U.S.

By Steve Weizman
Associated Press Writer
Friday, November 30, 2001; 8:43 AM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A38477-2001Nov30?language=printer

NEW YORK -- Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon began a five-day visit to the United States on Friday, despite calls for him to stay home after a surge of attacks on Israelis by Palestinians militants.

Israel army radio quoted members of Sharon's entourage as saying he ordered retaliatory attacks in response to a suicide bombing on a bus late Thursday. Three passengers and the assailant were killed, and the Palestinian militant group Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility.

Sharon briefed U.S. envoy Anthony Zinni about his plans to strike back, the report said. Zinni, a retired Marine Corps general, is in the region to try to revive a truce plan and restart peace talks.

Zinni said Friday that new violence would not deter him and that he would stay until his mission is completed. Since he arrived earlier this week, seven Israelis have been killed in Palestinian attacks. Five assailants have also been killed, in addition to three Palestinians fatally shot by Israeli troops in other incidents.

The explosion on the bus came just before Sharon left late Thursday for the United States. He considered canceling the trip but decided to go ahead, aides said.

The decision drew some criticism in Israel. Sharon left "with blood, fire and pillars of smoke in the background, and all this without any plans to do anything of importance over the weekend in New York," wrote Ben Caspit, who covers the prime minister for the Maariv daily.

After his arrival Friday, Sharon was to tour the ruins of the World Trade Center with New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani. He had no public engagements planned over the Jewish Sabbath, which runs from sundown Friday to sundown Saturday.

Sharon is scheduled to fly to Washington on Sunday and meet with President Bush on Monday. He said before his departure that he expects a commitment from Bush that Israel will receive an early warning if American forces launch an attack on Iraq.

"We definitely have things to coordinate together because this kind of activity can really have an effect on us," Sharon said Thursday, adding that Washington tipped him off more than 48 hours before the U.S. military operations in Afghanistan began Oct. 7.

Iraq - a potential target in the U.S.-led war against terrorism - has asserted it would repulse a U.S. attack and hinted that in the event of such a strike it could fire missiles at Israel, as it did during the 1991 Gulf War.

"Iraq is a state which is exceptionally dangerous for Israel, a state with the potential and knowledge for weapons of mass destruction," Sharon said. "It may be that within a short time they will have nuclear weapons."

But he said he would not press for a U.S. strike against Baghdad. "I have no intention of suggesting to the Americans whether they should or should not attack," he said.

High on the agenda at the meeting with Bush will be how to end the 14-month conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, which has killed more than 770 people have been killed on the Palestinian side and more than 200 on the Israeli side.

Sharon said before his departure that he would not budge from a demand for a week without Palestinian attacks as a condition for carrying out a U.S.-backed truce deal. "It will be seven days, not one hour less," he said.

U.S. officials have not come out publicly in support of Sharon's condition. Paul Pattin, spokesman for the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv, said Washington's main concern was to see a drop in the violence. "Why argue about seven days when you can't even get one day?" he said.

Pattin said Bush wants to hear from Sharon a renewed commitment to implement recommendations of a panel headed by former Sen. George Mitchell.

The recommendations include a freeze on housing construction for Jewish settlers on the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Powell, who will also meet with Sharon, has accused Israel of crippling peace prospects with settlement activity.

----

Mideast Envoy Aims for Peace Talks

By Jason Keyser
Associated Press Writer
Friday, November 30, 2001; 9:20 AM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A38601-2001Nov30?language=printer

JERUSALEM -- U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell's special Mideast envoy said Friday that violence will not derail his mission of restoring calm and restarting peace talks, and that he will stay in the region "as long as it takes to make that happen."

The mediator, retired Marine Corps Gen. Anthony Zinni, spoke a day after three Israeli bus passengers were killed in a suicide bombing by Islamic militants, an Israeli soldier was killed by a Palestinian gunman, and two Palestinians were shot dead by Israeli troops at a West Bank checkpoint.

Zinni's remarks marked the first time he talked about the length of his mission. Since his arrival Monday, he has met with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat and security officials on both sides.

The general spent Thursday evening closeted with Palestinian security officials and negotiators, talking about ways to implement a truce.

During the meet e militant Islamic Jihad group claimed responsibility. The bomber was identified as Samer Abu Suleiman, 32, from the West Bank village of Silet al-Harthiyeh near Jenin. The assailant had explosives strapped to his body and detonated them on the bus.

After meeting with Israeli President Moshe Katsav on Friday, Zinni condemned the attack. "I want to say that I, in the most strongest sense, condemn this violence. The groups that do this are clearly trying to make my mission fail," Zinni said. "It did not succeed."

"I am not committed to work for words, I am committed to work for action on the ground, and I will be here as long as it takes to make that happen," Zinni said.

Sharon charged that Arafat was "directly responsible for the acts of murder and terrorism" that have surged upward in the five days since Zinni arrived.

Sharon, addressing reporters before his departure for the United States late Thursday, said that Israel "will not undertake negotiations in any form until there is quiet and until Arafat fights terror."

Sharon arrived in New York on Friday morning to start a five-day visit during which he was to meet with President Bush and other senior U.S. officials.

In the West Bank town of Nablus, Palestinian police arrested three Islamic Jihad activists on Friday, security officials said. In the town of Hebron, Israeli troops entered Palestinian-controlled territory and arrested three members of the group.

A senior Palestinian official read a statement to reporters "condemning all the terror attacks that target civilians from both sides" and pledging to arrest those who violate the decision to implement a cease-fire. The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the statement was issued in the name of the Palestinian leadership, and that the Palestinian Cabinet was to release its own statement later Friday.

In the Palestinian refugee camp in Jenin, home to several previous suicide bombers, about 3,000 people marched and celebrated after the bus attack, witnesses said. They chanted, "Sharon, prepare the body bags."

At a rally in memory of Mahmoud Abu Hanoud, the leader of the Hamas military wing killed in an Israeli missile attack last week, a Hamas leader in Nablus told a crowd of about 3,000 the group would carry out more attacks.

"I am telling Sharon, 'you can kill our fighters, but the colleagues of Abu Hanoud avenged him in Hadera, and tomorrow in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv," Yasser Mansour said.

The suicide bomber made a videotape before blowing himself up. He said he was avenging Israeli killings of suspected militants and protesting the "international conspiracy against Palestinian rights."

In two other incidents Thursday, two Palestinians and an Israeli soldier were killed. The Palestinians died when Israeli soldiers fired on a car at a checkpoint. The Israeli military said the car tried to run over soldiers, while Palestinian witnesses said the car was driving away from the roadblock when the shots were fired. The soldiers killed the driver and a bystander, the military said, expressing regret for the death of the second Palestinian.

At another checkpoint, Palestinian gunmen in a passing car fired at soldiers, killing one and wounding another, the military said.

Since fighting broke out on Sept. 28, 2000, 777 people have been killed on the Palestinian side and 205 people have been killed on the Israeli side.

Trying to cement a truce, Zinni talked about a timetable with Palestinian officials in Ramallah, Palestinians said. Earlier, Sharon repeated his insistence on a seven-day period with no Palestinian attacks before moving toward other truce steps, like removing Israeli roadblocks and withdrawing troops from Palestinian population centers.

In Washington, asked if the United States backs Sharon's demand, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher replied, "I don't think we have ever said that."

-------- missile defense

Pentagon to Launch Missile Test

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
November 30, 2001
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Missile-Defense.html?searchpv=aponline

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A successful test this weekend of part of the Pentagon's missile defense program would lead to more complicated and realistic tests soon, the head of the program said Friday.

If an interceptor rocket succeeds in shooting a dummy missile out of the sky Saturday, the next tests would include more complications, such as defensive measures designed to confuse the interceptor, said Lt. Gen. Ronald Kadish, director of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization.

Saturday's test, in which the dummy warhead and the ``kill vehicle'' are expected to collide 144 miles above the South Pacific, is the fifth in a series of about 20 planned for the missile defense system.

The Bush administration says America needs a way to shoot down long-range missiles fired by ``rogue states.''

Russia opposes the U.S. missile defense drive, saying the project will violate the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty. Missile-defense backers say the treaty is a Cold War relic which should be discarded. President Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin failed to agree on scrapping or changing the ABM treaty during their summit earlier this month.

The latest test will not violate the ABM treaty, Kadish said. Three planned parts of the test, such as using ship-based Aegis radar to track the dummy warhead, have been dropped because of concerns about violating the treaty.

Saturday's test is nearly identical to one performed in July, in which the interceptor destroyed a dummy warhead. If the interceptor misses, as happened with two previous tests, this test will not be regarded as a failure, Kadish said.

``We are testing to learn,'' he told reporters at a Pentagon news briefing Friday. ``We are not testing as pass/fail.''

Critics of the program say the tests have been so tightly scripted that they don't prove the anti-missile system will work. Kadish said such criticism misses the point of the tests, which are designed to test various key parts of the system so they can be perfected before final, realistic tests are done.

----

Russia Hails UN ABM Treaty Support

By Deborah Seward
Associated Press Writer
Friday, November 30, 2001; 11:46 AM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A39249-2001Nov30?language=printer

MOSCOW -- Russia on Friday welcomed a U.N. vote supporting the Anti-ballistic Missile treaty and said it was evidence of growing international support in the 29-year-old pact, the focus of a persistent dispute between Russia and the United States.

The U.N. General Assembly on Thursday voted 84-5 with 62 abstentions in favor of maintaining the 1972 U.S.-Soviet treaty, which governs American and Russian missile defenses.

The United States voted against the nonbinding resolution, which calls on Washington and Moscow to exert renewed efforts to preserve and strengthen the treaty through strict compliance and says any measure undermining the pact could threaten world peace.

The United States claims it faces a threat from ballistic missiles that could be launched from so-called "rogue states" and wants to test missile-defense technologies that the ABM treaty bans. Russia insists that the treaty is a cornerstone of international security and opposes changes.

"The results of the vote testify to the growing support in the world for this treaty and a striving not to allow its destruction," Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Yakovenko said in a statement.

The statement said Russia would continue to aim to "adhere to this unique treaty, which it said helps ensure strategic stability in the world while allowing for cuts in nuclear weapons.

The United States plans this weekend to test part of its missile defense program by trying to shoot a mock warhead out of the sky with an interceptor rocket. The Pentagon says the test is designed to stay within the limits of the ABM treaty.

The Interfax news agency quoted a senior Russian military official as saying Friday that Russia believed the United States may abandon the ABM treaty and that Russia was prepared to take reciprocal action. He did not specify how Russia might respond.

"We are inclined to continue consultations with the United States on ABM, but I do not rule out that Washington could unilaterally leave this document," said Yuri Baluyevsky, first deputy head of the Russian General Staff.

But he said he had no reason to believe the United States intends to take actions that would violate the treaty in the immediate future.

President Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin failed to reach an agreement in their dispute over ABM treaty during a summit in the United States in mid-November.

Bush has said that unless he reaches an arrangement with Russia that accommodates his missile defense program, the United States will withdraw from the treaty, which it is permitted to do with six months' notice.

-------- russia

General: No Russia Strategic Arms Concessions to US

November 30, 2001
By REUTERS
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/world/international-arms-russia.html?searchpv=reuters

MOSCOW (Reuters) - A senior member of the Russian military ruled out Friday any basic concessions by Moscow to the United States on strategic arms, Interfax news agency said.

Speaking to journalists, Colonel-General Yuri Baluyevsky, first deputy head of the Russian general staff, said: ``From the Russian side, there are no concessions, there have been none and there will not be any, on the question of anti-missile defense and strategic arms.''

Baluyevsky spoke two weeks after a U.S.-Russian summit in the United States at which President Bush said Washington would reduce the number of its strategic weapons but made clear it would press ahead with plans to develop an anti-missile defense system opposed by Russia.

-------- treaties

Russia Hails UN ABM Treaty Support

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
November 30, 2001
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Russia-Missile-Defense.html?searchpv=aponline

MOSCOW (AP) -- Russia on Friday welcomed a U.N. vote supporting the Anti-ballistic Missile treaty and said it was evidence of growing international support in the 29-year-old pact, the focus of a persistent dispute between Russia and the United States.

The U.N. General Assembly on Thursday voted 84-5 with 62 abstentions in favor of maintaining the 1972 U.S.-Soviet treaty, which governs American and Russian missile defenses.

The United States voted against the nonbinding resolution, which calls on Washington and Moscow to exert renewed efforts to preserve and strengthen the treaty through strict compliance and says any measure undermining the pact could threaten world peace.

The United States claims it faces a threat from ballistic missiles that could be launched from so-called ``rogue states'' and wants to test missile-defense technologies that the ABM treaty bans. Russia insists that the treaty is a cornerstone of international security and opposes changes.

``The results of the vote testify to the growing support in the world for this treaty and a striving not to allow its destruction,'' Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Yakovenko said in a statement.

The statement said Russia would continue to aim to ``adhere to this unique treaty, which it said helps ensure strategic stability in the world while allowing for cuts in nuclear weapons.

The United States plans this weekend to test part of its missile defense program by trying to shoot a mock warhead out of the sky with an interceptor rocket. The Pentagon says the test is designed to stay within the limits of the ABM treaty.

The Interfax news agency quoted a senior Russian military official as saying Friday that Russia believed the United States may abandon the ABM treaty and that Russia was prepared to take reciprocal action. He did not specify how Russia might respond.

``We are inclined to continue consultations with the United States on ABM, but I do not rule out that Washington could unilaterally leave this document,'' said Yuri Baluyevsky, first deputy head of the Russian General Staff.

But he said he had no reason to believe the United States intends to take actions that would violate the treaty in the immediate future.

President Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin failed to reach an agreement in their dispute over ABM treaty during a summit in the United States in mid-November.

Bush has said that unless he reaches an arrangement with Russia that accommodates his missile defense program, the United States will withdraw from the treaty, which it is permitted to do with six months' notice.

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

Senators: N-Power Plants Need Fed Security Force

Friday, November 30, 2001,
BY ERIN KELLY
GANNETT NEWS SERVICE
http://www.sltrib.com/11302001/nation_w/153577.htm

WASHINGTON -- The nation's 103 nuclear power plants remain vulnerable to terrorist attack and should be protected by a new federal security force, key Democratic senators urged Thursday.

"Because of their clear and harrowing potential as terrorist targets, nuclear plants must be protected . . . so that we are not tragica

Lieberman, Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Jim Jeffords, I-Vt., introduced the "Nuclear Security Act" to replace private security workers at the plants with federal employees -- echoing a move already under way at the nation's airports.

The bill would also require federal officials to stockpile potassium iodide at schools and community centers within a 50-mile radius of a nuclear plant. Potassium iodide minimizes the potentially fatal effects of radiation exposure if taken within a few hours of a disaster.

The legislation, sponsored in the House by Democratic Reps. Nita Lowey of New York and Ed Markey of Massachusetts, would force nuclear plants to meet higher security standards that take new terrorist threats into account.

In past tests by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, security guards at nuclear facilities failed to defend their plants nearly half the time in mock terrorist attacks, Reid said. And those tests were based on less sophisticated forms of terrorism than those used Sept. 11, Markey said.

Clinton, who lives near the Indian Point nuclear power plant in Buchanan -- 24 miles north of New York City -- said stepped-up security at that plant and others after Sept. 11 did not reassure her or her constituents. Lieberman expressed similar concerns about the Millstone 2 and 3 plants in Connecticut.

Security standards vary from plant to plant. In some states, security guards are not even allowed to carry automatic weapons, Clinton said. She and the other lawmakers advocate national standards.

"We need to take the offensive," Clinton said. "We don't want [terrorists] to turn power plants into nuclear weapons."

Supporters of the bill face strong opposition from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the nuclear industry, which would have to pay for the estimated $1 billion cost of a federal security force.

Reid said the industry is already paying a great deal for its "rent-a-cops" and should be able to afford the federal force. But industry spokesmen say federal agents aren't needed.

"Security forces at nuclear power plants are qualified, trained and deployed in accordance with federal standards," said a statement issued by the Nuclear Energy Institute. "There would be little benefit in replacing proven security forces at U.S. nuclear power plants with federal security employees."

Since Sept. 11, New York Gov. George Pataki and the owners of Indian Point have beefed up security, dispatching the National Guard, police and the U.S. Coast Guard to protect the site.

"While these decisions were prudent and wise, not every state or nuclear plant has taken similar steps," Lowey said. "That's why we must establish a seamless approach to security at our nuclear power plants."

-------- maryland

Feds Favor Maryland Co. for Uranium

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
November 30, 2001
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/business/AP-Uranium-Deal.html?searchpv=aponline also http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A39883-2001Nov30.html

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Bush administration is leaning toward allowing a U.S. company to continue as the government's only purchaser of uranium fuel from Russia, running the ``megatons to megawatts'' program designed to keep bomb-grade uranium out of the hands of terrorists.

Critics say the company, USEC Inc. (news/quote ) of Bethesda, Md., overcharges U.S. utilities for the Russian uranium. And they question the wisdom of placing the future of a key U.S.-Russian agreement with a company that has had a dismal financial record recently.

USEC is the world's leading supplier of uranium fuel for commercial nuclear power plants; its subsidiary, the United States Enrichment Corporation, is the only uranium enrichment company in America. USEC acts as middleman for sales of uranium recycled from former Soviet warheads, which accounts for about half the enriched uranium used by U.S. nuclear plants.

USEC faced heavy criticism last year when it announced it would close one of its two uranium enrichment plants, forcing hundreds out of jobs. Its credit rating was reduced to junk-bond level and its stock price plummeted.

Some utilities want to purchase uranium directly from the Russians, saying it would reduce the cost of producing electricity and lower power bills for consumers.

The Bush administration has been studying whether to keep USEC as the government's purchaser of Russian uranium. Multiple sources say the administration is close to keeping USEC, but with certain conditions.

Among them: a promise by USEC to build a more efficient enrichment plant than its 50-year-old facility in Paducah, Ky., but to keep that plant operational until the new one opens. If USEC fails to keep the plant open, the government wants to run it.

A senior Bush administration official who spoke on condition of anonymity said the administration has three goals: getting the uranium out of Russia so it doesn't fall into enemy hands; ensuring there is a domestic supplier of enriched uranium; and seeing that U.S. utilities have a reliable and affordable source of nuclear fuel.

John Longenecker, a consultant specializing in nuclear energy who previously managed the government's uranium enrichment business, said those goals work to USEC's advantage.

``Today USEC has a gun to Congress' and the administration's head, and obviously are indicating if they don't receive a subsidy of some kind they may go out of business, and we may be highly dependent on foreign sources,'' he said.

A pricing agreement between USEC and its Russian counterpart, Tenex, expires at the end of the year. USEC wants a long-term deal with a lower purchase price, which would bolster its bottom line. The U.S. and Russian governments must approve any agreement, and analysts say the Russians may be unwilling to agree to the lower price.

Calls to Tenex officials were not returned.

If a new pricing agreement is not in place by Jan. 1, the current contract can be rolled over for another year. But USEC says it is committed to securing a better price. The company would probably have more leverage if the Bush administration publicly stated that USEC would remain the sole U.S. purchaser.

USEC executives argue they should be able to continue as the sole agent because the program is running smoothly. ``It's working, and it's working very well,'' said USEC Chief Operating Officer Dennis Spurgeon.

Company executives say the program has eliminated the equivalent of more than 5,400 nuclear warheads, and they say USEC always meets its delivery deadlines.

But utilities such as North Carolina-based Duke Energy Corp. (news/quote) say the monopoly setup allows USEC to overcharge, inflating the cost of nuclear power.

``I don't believe any utilities are looking to put USEC out of business. What we're looking for is competition in the marketplace,'' said David Culp, Duke's manager of nuclear fuel management.

USEC is a former government enterprise that was spun off in 1998 in a $1.9 billion stock deal. Since going public, USEC has seen its stock price drop by nearly half. The company made a $41 million profit in the fiscal year that ended in June, down more than 60 percent from the previous year.

Thomas Neff, a senior researcher at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who came up with the idea of the megatons-to-megawatts program, said he thinks it might be time for a change.

He thinks utilities should buy the Russian uranium on their own or through a nonprofit consortium. Utilities say they could pay the Russians more than USEC and still reduce the cost of producing power by not having to pay a middleman.

``It minimizes the cost of fuel and it stabilizes the (uranium) agreement,'' Neff said. ``The Russians and the U.S. utilities both benefit.''

-------- nevada

GAO Challenges Plans for Storage Of Nuclear Waste
Report Urges Bush Administration To Delay Decision on Nevada Project

By Eric Pianin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, November 30, 2001; Page A03
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A36269-2001Nov29?language=printer

The General Accounting Office is urging the Bush administration to indefinitely postpone a decision on whether to build a huge, permanent and centralized nuclear waste storage site in the Nevada desert and is raising serious questions about whether it could ever be built as currently conceived.

The remote site beneath Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, has been eyed by Congress and the Energy Department for the past 20 years as the only candidate for the storage of all nuclear waste generated in the United States. The newly reenergized nuclear power industry, championed by the Bush administration, recently has been predicting that the site could be opened as soon as 2010.

But according to a GAO draft report obtained by The Washington Post, the Energy Department "is unlikely to achieve its goal of opening a repository at Yucca Mountain by 2010 and has no reliable estimate of when, and at what cost, such a repository could be opened."

The report presents a challenge to the administration's aggressive schedule, which calls for Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham to recommend to President Bush this winter whether to formally designate Yucca Mountain as the site for 78,000 tons of radioactive waste.

Abraham is certain to urge Bush to move ahead with the project, according to government officials and industry sources. But the GAO study has greatly complicated the administration's efforts, particularly because it reflects the views of Bechtel SAIC Co., the private contractor hired by the Energy Department to oversee the project.

The study said Bechtel SAIC recently told the DOE that it would take until January 2006 to complete the detailed research and cost estimates and to resolve hundreds of outstanding issues before the administration could responsibly designate the site and then begin the lengthy process of seeking a license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. "DOE is not ready to make a site recommendation because it does not yet have all of the technical information needed for a recommendation and a subsequent license application," the study said.

The GAO also warned that the plans for Yucca Mountain that officials have been showing to lawmakers and Nevada residents "may not describe the facilities that DOE would actually develop."

Controversy over the proposed underground storage site has persisted for nearly two decades as the nation gropes for a way to dispose the radioactive waste from nuclear power plants and weapons facilities. Having no access to a centralized storage facility, plant owners are holding about 40,000 metric tons of spent fuel in temporary storage at 72 plant sites in 36 states.

With so much uncertainty over the fate of the project, the report said, the administration is considering, as a fallback position, temporarily storing nuclear waste above ground at the site beginning in 2010.

The project is widely unpopular in Nevada and has drawn strong opposition from lawmakers and state officials, including Gov. Kenny Guinn (R), Senate Majority Whip Harry M. Reid (D) and Rep. Shelley Berkley (D). The state is prepared to file a formal protest against the project if Bush decides to seek a license for Yucca Mountain -- a dispute that eventually would have to be resolved by majorities in the House and the Senate.

With Reid and Senate Majority Leader Thomas A. Daschle (D-S.D.) vowing to block the project in the Senate, the prospects for passage appear bleak as long as the Democrats are in control. However, with conflicting concerns about the need for increased sources of energy and the importance of tightening controls over nuclear waste, experts say it is impossible to predict how Congress will eventually resolve the controversy.

Reid, who commissioned the GAO study, said yesterday that the findings will provide him and other opponents with powerful ammunition in the effort to defeat a project that has already cost the federal government $8 billion.

"I think it's the beginning of the end of Yucca Mountain," he said. "This report is a damning indictment of a process Americans relied upon to protect their health and safety."

But Energy Department officials indicated that they will not be deterred by the GAO study and that by law the administration is entitled to make a decision on the site long before it completes all the studies and research necessary to apply for a license.

"We're perplexed how GAO could find any technical or legal basis to support their conclusion in their draft report," said Joe Davis, a spokesman for the department. As for Bechtel SAIC's assertion that it will take years to complete the preliminary research necessary to decide whether to go forward, Davis said: "We don't agree."

The Bush administration has embraced the project as vital to the president's plan to address the nation's long-term energy needs partly by expanding the use of nuclear power plants. In the wake of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, some industry officials have pleaded for fast action on the project to relieve them of responsibility for nuclear waste that could be targeted by terrorists.

In June, the administration unveiled the final health and safety standards for the proposed depository that officials had hoped would allow construction of the project to proceed. With the new standards regulating all potential sources of radiation exposure from ground water, air and soil, administration officials said they hope they have overcome a difficult political obstacle.

But the GAO report said the Energy Department is still gathering and analyzing technical information on nearly 300 separate issues. These include the expected lifetime of engineered barriers and waste containers, the physical properties of the site and the mathematical models used to evaluate the performance of the planned project.

--------

Delay urged on nuclear waste dump decision

USA TODAY
11/30/2001
The Associated Press
http://usatoday.com/news/washdc/nov01/2001-11-30-nuclear-waste.htm
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A41289-2001Nov30?language=printer

WASHINGTON (AP) - Congressional investigators recommend that the Bush administration indefinitely postpone a decision on whether to build a nuclear waste dump in Nevada, saying it may be years before some of the technical issues are worked out, according to a draft report.

The finding by the General Accounting Office was the latest blow to the Yucca Mountain nuclear project, which is considered essential to the nuclear industry. The industry wants to bury 78,000 tons of used reactor fuel there.

Separately on Friday, a law firm hired by the Energy Department to help guide the project through its federal licensing process, announced it was withdrawing from the program. The department acknowledged recently that the firm, while advising on licensing, also had been lobbying Congress on behalf of the nuclear industry. The firm, Chicago-based Winston & Strawn, denied any conflict of interest.

The GAO report, a draft copy of which was obtained by The Associated Press, concludes that the Energy Department "is not ready to make a site recommendation" on a waste dump with at least 293 unresolved technical issues.

The report said the general contractor for the project, Bechtel SAIC Co., told GAO investigators that some of the issues are not likely to be settled until 2006, long after the department plans to seek a license for the dump from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

"Making a site recommendation at this time is premature," concludes the report by the GAO, which is the nonpartisan investigative agency of Congress. It said that the department is unlikely to achieve its goal of opening the waste repository by 2010 in any case.

Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, in a letter to the GAO, called the report's conclusions "fatally flawed" and maintained that "it was assembled to support a predetermined conclusion."

A department spokesman, Joe Davis, said that the department still plans to send a recommendation to the president this winter. "We believe we have enough information ... to decide whether the site is suitable for a long-term repository," said Davis.

The GAO review, first reported Friday by the Washington Post, had been requested by Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., one of the most outspoken critics on Capitol Hill of the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste project.

Nevada officials - both Democrats and Republicans - have loudly opposed the dump, which has been a focus of controversy for years. They have accused the Energy Department of pushing to get the site built at the expense of a thorough scientific review.

Of the GAO findings, Reid said in an interview Friday: "It's a damning indictment of the whole process and it strikes at the heart of what they're trying to do scientifically."

"It's becoming increasingly obvious that the Yucca Mountain project is doomed to failure," said Nevada Republican Gov. Kenny Quick, whose state has built a $5.5 million war chest to fight the waste dump.

Federal project officials for several years have said they have found no "show stoppers" and called the Yucca Mountain site 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas the most geologically and scientifically studied piece of land on earth.

Still, the future of the site is far from settled. Earlier this year, a scientific advisory board told the Energy Department it remains concerned about the design of the facility, worried about the intense heat the buried waste will generate. In response, a new, cooler design is being studied.

The GAO report said that the department, in fact, is considering a fallback proposal that envisions a temporary above-ground waste storage area if construction of the underground facility is delayed. Reid noted that President Bush, while campaigning for president in Nevada, said he would veto any legislation for a temporary storage facility in the state.

Congress in 1987 designated the Yucca Mountain site as the only location to be considered for long-term storage of the thousands of tons of highly radioactive used reactor fuel now kept at nuclear power plants in 31 states.

The Energy Department proposal calls for putting the waste in containers and keeping them in a repository 600 feet below the surface where the waste would remain highly radioactive for more than 10,000 years.

Currently there are about 40,000 tons of such waste at reactor sites. The waste site would have enough capacity for 78,000 tons.

AP writer Ken Ritter in Las Vegas contributed to this report.

-------- us politics

Bush Defends Secret Tribunals for Terrorism Suspects

By Mike Allen and Susan Schmidt
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, November 30, 2001; Page A28
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A36292-2001Nov29?language=printer

President Bush told federal prosecutors yesterday that secret military trials for some foreign terrorism suspects could help prevent U.S. legal protections from being used to undermine national security.

Bush is facing complaints from Capitol Hill that he is seizing too much power by establishing the military tribunals and installing himself as the sole arbiter of who will be tried under that system.

"We're an open society, but we're at war," Bush told a conference of U.S. attorneys. "The enemy has declared war on us, and we must not let foreign enemies use the forums of liberty to destroy liberty itself. Foreign terrorists and agents must never again be allowed to use our freedoms against us."

Bush used his 18 minutes of remarks to offer a forceful defense of administration policies being challenged on the grounds that they abridge civil liberties. Bush put himself firmly behind the techniques of his Justice Department, which is using immigration laws to detain and question noncitizens, some of whom have peripheral and nonexistent ties to the Sept. 11 attacks.

The president declared that laws "are being enforced fairly and in full," adding, "We will act with fairness, and we will deliver justice, which is far more than the terrorists ever grant to their innocent victims."

Administration officials said Bush's fiery remarks were designed partly as a signal to lawmakers that when they attack Attorney General John D. Ashcroft, they are attacking the president.

Bush's executive order on military tribunals, signed Nov. 13, allows secret trials for foreigners who are charged with committing, threatening or aiding terrorist acts. He said yesterday that "non-U.S. citizens who plan and/or commit mass murder are more than criminal suspects."

"They are unlawful combatants who seek to destroy our country and our way of life," Bush said. "And if I determine that it is in the national security interest of our great land to try by military commission those who make war on America, then we will do so." The prosecutors applauded.

The Defense Department's General Counsel's Office, with help from the White House and the Justice Department, has been working through thorny legal and practical questions to develop tribunal procedures.

Until now, questions about the tribunals and civil liberties concerns raised by some members of Congress have been put to the attorney general. But the administration is now having the Defense Department take the lead on issues surrounding the tribunals, because the Pentagon will prosecute any cases.

The procedures being developed remain closely held. Appearing before an American Bar Association conference yesterday, Pentagon General Counsel William J. Haynes said the Pentagon's 6,000 lawyers were inundated with new issues after the terror attacks and the war in Afghanistan, but he said little about how the tribunals might be conducted.

"The regulations will flesh out a lot more what the legal authorities of the commissions will be," said White House National Security Council lawyer John Bellinger at the same legal gathering. He said that critics have been reading too much into the president's order and that he expects the tribunals to be used sparingly.

"They are still thinking their way through it," said one lawyer familiar with the legal issues.

Among the key issues is how to define the crimes themselves: Will the military have to prove specific war crimes by an al Qaeda member? Or will mere knowing membership and participation in a terror organization be sufficient for conviction?

Pentagon lawyers will have to devise ways to protect the safety of witnesses, judges and prosecutors from revenge from terrorist groups affiliated with the accused. Doing so may involve shielding some of their identities not only from the public, but also perhaps from the defendants themselves, something not done in civilian courts, lawyers familiar with the issues said. At the same time, they said, defendants must be given enough information to be able to challenge the evidence.

The Pentagon attorneys must also consider where tribunals would be held. For security reasons, government lawyers have considered conducting them aboard aircraft carriers, or at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

While the lawyers wrestle with questions of logistics, safety and fairness to defendants, it is the president who will decide the most basic issue: who will face tribunals.

Bush will decide whether tribunals will be used only to try people captured abroad, or whether they will also be used to try suspected terrorists apprehended here, something that has already raised concern among civil liberties groups. Bush may have to weigh constitutional concerns against the need to subject like cases and defendants to the same justice.

----

Powell Denies Rumors of a New War on Iraq
Secretary Seeks to Allay Fears in Arab World

Compiled by Our Staff
From Dispatches AP, Reuters
Friday, November 30, 2001
http://www.iht.com/articles/40522.htm

WASHINGTON Secretary of State Colin Powell, reacting to concern in the Arab world and among U.S. allies in Europe, said Thursday that speculation that the United States was preparing for an imminent attack on Iraq is unfounded.

"This suggestion out of the media right now that something is on the verge of happening has no particular underpinning substance to it," Secretary Powell said in an interview with a small group of reporters at the State Department.

"I think it is highly inappropriate and speculative and hypothetical of me to talk about a war that nobody has declared," he said.

Speculation about a U.S. attack on Iraq has increased since Monday when President George W. Bush appeared to hint that Washington was planning to expand its anti-terrorism war to include Iraq's president, Saddam Hussein.

General Powell, who met earlier Thursday with the Egyptian foreign minister, Ahmed Maher, said the United States was keenly aware of the concerns being expressed, especially in the Middle East.

"I don't know what people think is about to happen," he said in the interview. "We are in constant touch with our friends in the region."

After his meeting with Secretary Powell, Mr. Maher said that Egypt was satisfied that the United States understood the concerns about expanding the war on terrorism to Iraq.

"Among friends we had frank discussions about this matter and the secretary said that some friends and allies of the United States are advising caution. I think we have been heard," Mr. Maher said.

General Powell, standing next to Mr. Maher, said the United States and Egypt had a common position on Iraq but acknowledged that some U.S. allies were extremely nervous about the possibility that Washington might target Baghdad next after Afghanistan.

"We understand the cautions that some of our friends have given us with respect to possible future actions and we will stay in close touch and have consultations with our friends," Secretary Powell said.

But, he noted that many of the countries expressing concern, including Egypt, shared with the United States the belief that UN Security Council resolutions requiring Iraq to give up its weapons of mass destruction program had to be enforced.

Secretary Powell said that both the United States and Egypt have "a common understanding of the nature of that regime and what a danger that regime presents to the region and to the world."

"We all want to keep Iraq contained," he added.

On Monday, Mr. Bush demanded that Mr. Saddam accept the return of UN weapons inspectors to Iraq to prove that he is not trying to acquire weapons of mass destruction. Asked what would happen if Mr. Saddam did not allow inspectors in, Mr. Bush replied: "He'll find out."

That comment led to renewed fears that military action against Iraq is being planned.

Egypt's economic downturn, marked by a huge falloff of tourism, was among other concerns discussed Thursday by Mr. Maher and Secretary Powell. Secretary Powell did not say what he had in mind to help Egypt, but the State Department spokesman, Richard Boucher, said later: "We would see if there is something we can do for them."

At the same time, Mr. Boucher confirmed that the administration plans to sell Egypt 53 advanced anti-ship Harpoon missiles to help Egypt protect shipping in the Suez Canal despite some objections in the U.S. Congress.

Mr. Boucher said there was nothing inconsistent in Egypt's paying for new weapons while the administration seeks ways to assist the country beyond the $2 billion a year in assistance it receives from the United States.

----

Egypt Minister Discusses Bush Policy

By Barry Schweid
AP Diplomatic Writer
Thursday, November 29, 2001; 8:16 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A36025-2001Nov29?language=printer

WASHINGTON -- Egypt's foreign minister said Thursday the Bush administration is shifting from a pro-Israel policy to a more balanced one.

Ahmed Maher, at a news conference, said Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon "will not be happy with everything he hears" when he holds talks next week with President Bush and Secretary of State Colin Powell.

Maher was upbeat about his own visit. "It was a success," he said. "I was met with a very positive atmosphere."

The minister praised Powell for calling Israel an occupier of Arab lands in a speech last week.

Also, Powell assured him he would try to accelerate U.S. aid payments to help Egypt's economy. Powell said he would consider Arab objections to any military attack on Iraq in the U.S.-led campaign against international terror.

Also on Thursday, the State Department confirmed it intended to sell Egypt 53 advanced Harpoon anti-ship missiles for $400 million.

State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said the missiles would help Egypt protect shipping in the Suez Canal. Critics in Congress, taking note the missiles have a far greater range than the span of the canal, have questioned its potential impact on Israel.

Maher, meanwhile, condemned Sharon for "acts of oppression against the Palestinians" and said the prime minister was defying the United States in targeting militants for assassination.

Support for Israel in Congress is strong, the former ambassador to Washington said, but "we have enough friends to stand by us and to support a strong Egypt."

Maher then went on to say the United States has had a pro-Israel bias in its Middle East policy. But, he said, the Bush administration "has moved to a more evenhanded, just position."

"This is not something to the liking of Mr. Sharon," he said.

Earlier, Powell said he understood and was considering Arab objections to any U.S. military action against Iraq. He also promised to look for ways to help Egypt out of its economic slump.

"For now, this is nothing for us to disagree on," Powell said after a half-hour meeting with Maher, who reflected the worry of Arab governments that President Bush might strike Iraq over its refusal to admit U.N. weapons inspectors.

"I think he heard us," Maher said at a joint news conference at the entrance to the State Department.

Powell, at his side, said, "We understand the caution of some of our friends."

On Egypt's economic downturn, marked by a huge falloff in tourism, Powell did not say what he had in mind. "We would see if there is something we can do for them," spokesman Boucher said later.

On another front, Powell and Maher agreed Middle East peacemaking has taken on new momentum. Powell said it was up to Israel and the Palestinians, not the Bush administration, to set the pace.

As evening fell, Powell was host at an Iftar dinner for about 100 Muslims, mostly Americans, in a lavish State Department dining room. The Iftar meal ends Muslims' daytime fasting during the Islamic holy month Ramadan.

Powell singled out three "quiet heroes" of the Sept. 11 terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in New York. One was Imam El M. Pasha, the Muslim chaplain of New York City's police department. The others, also Muslims, are a police intelligence officer and a fire department emergency medical technician.

An African-American, Powell told them he knows what it means to be a member of a minority. "There remains much ignorance and confusion about Islam," he said and encouraged Muslims to explain their religion to Christians and Jews.


-------- MILITARY

THE ALLIES
Troops on Call

November 30, 2001
New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/30/international/30TROO.html?searchpv=nytToday

Some nations' military commitments to the international fight against terrorism:

BRITAIN The second-largest contributor of personnel and equipment after the United States. Has deployed a dozen ships, including an aircraft carrier, an assault ship, a frigate, a destroyer and three nuclear submarines. Also, 15 aircraft in the region, for refueling and reconnaissance. There are 150 Royal Marines and British commandos north of Kabul.

GERMANY Up to 3,900 troops, including a unit to detect chemical, biological and radioactive contamination, another to evacuate wounded troops, Special Forces, transport aircraft and marines to help protect ship traffic.

CANADA Four ships in the North Arabian Sea, one transport plane operating in Europe, three C-130 transport aircraft and two maritime patrol planes awaiting orders, 1,000 infantry troops and Special Forces on standby.

AUSTRALIA Warships and aircraft with 150 Special Forces and 1,400 other troops. ITALY A thousand troops, including an armored regiment, explosives experts, fighter jets for reconnaissance, four warships, transport aircraft and experts and special vehicles to deal with nuclear, bacteriological and chemical weapons.

FRANCE Two thousand troops, including naval and air force personnel and intelligence officers in Afghanistan. Oil tanker and frigate in the Arabian Sea. Special ground forces, if requested. A 60-member advance party of French troops is in southern Uzbekistan. Also likely to send eight Mirage 2000 fighter jets to Tajikistan or Kyrgyzstan.

NEW ZEALAND Special Forces, medics, engineers and transport for relief efforts.

TURKEY Ninety Special Forces troops trained in antiguerrilla mountain warfare.

JAPAN Up to 1,500 troops, a flotilla of warships and a small squadron of planes. Forces include three destroyers, two supply ships, a minesweeper, six transport planes and two multipurpose planes.

JORDAN A field hospital in Mazar-i-Sharif.

BELGIUM Two Airbus transport planes that have flown relief supplies to Tajikistan, a 50-person medical unit.

CZECH REPUBLIC Chemical warfare unit of 300 troops.

POLAND Offered Special Forces, if needed.

Sources: Associated Press, allied military officials.

-------

Today in History - Nov. 30

The Associated Press
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A35652-2001Nov29?language=printer

Today is Friday, Nov. 30, the 334th day of 2001. There are 31 days left in the year.

Today's Highlight in History:

On Nov. 30, 1782, the United States and Britain signed preliminary peace articles in Paris, ending the Revolutionary War.

In 1981, the United States and the Soviet Union opened negotiations in Geneva aimed at reducing nuclear weapons in Europe.

[It took them ten years to achieve a limited step in the right direction. Women Strike For Peace began protesting nuclear weapons 50 years ago. A vigil for global nuclear disarmament has been outside the White House for 20 years (http://prop1.org). A bill to abolish nuclear weapons has been consistently before the U.S. Congress for seven years (http://prop1.org/hr2503.htm). The World Court agreed with arguments made six years ago that it is illegal to threaten or use nuclear weapons. People were awakened to the real possibility of nuclear terrorism eleven weeks ago. Time's a'wasting. et - prop1@prop1.org]

-------- afghanistan

Captured Taliban lined up and shot

By Mark Baker,
Sydney Morning Herald Correspondent in Quetta,
Friday, November 30, 2001
http://www.smh.com.au/news/0111/30/world/world1.html

Opposition forces battling Taliban resistance near the southern Afghan city of Kandahar are reported to have massacred up to 160 captured Taliban fighters in the presence of United States military personnel.

An opposition commander said the Taliban who refused to surrender last week during a battle to control the strategic town of Taktha Pul, east of Kandahar, were executed despite attempts by US special forces to intervene.

"We tried our best to persuade [the Taliban] to surrender before we attacked," the unnamed commander told Reuters. "We asked them many times, quoted the Koran and even offered them money.

"They replied with abuse, so we had no choice. We executed around 160 Taliban that were captured. They were made to stand in a long line, and five or six of our fighters used light machine-guns on them."

He confirmed that seven or eight US military personnel, who had been travelling with the opposition forces as advisers and had been filming the battle, tried to stop the executions.

As opposition forces closed in on Kandahar, the Taliban leader, Mullah Mohammad Omar, appealed to his troops to join him in a fight to the death to defend their remaining territory around the city, the movement's spiritual heartland and last stronghold.

"I am sitting in a bunker like you to defend Islam," he said in a message believed to have been broadcast in the Kandahar region on Wednesday. "I am not scared of death, and you should not be scared of death.

"The real fight against the forces of infidels has started now. We were waiting for the American troops. Kill American troops and their agents wherever you find them."

The Taktha Pul executions come amid mounting international protests over the slaughter of hundreds of Taliban prisoners earlier this week when Northern Alliance troops, backed by US and British special forces, crushed a revolt in a fort outside the northern city of Mazar-e-Sharif.

The US suffered its first battlefield fatality of the war during the revolt, with the death of a CIA operative, Johnny Michael Spann, confirmed yesterday.

The two mass killings of Taliban prisoners have increased concerns about the brutal tactics of opposition forces and are likely to complicate allied efforts to persuade Taliban forces to surrender.

Alliance commanders say they now plan to send their forces south of Kabul towards Kandahar, a move that would increase the pressure on the Taliban but would be likely to anger Pakistan, a vital US ally already concerned by its advance across much of the country.

The CBS television network in the US reported growing signs that the Taliban were crumbling, with the defection of senior members, including the head of military intelligence and at least two government ministers, some of whom had crossed into Pakistan.

But as hundreds of US marines continued their build-up at an airfield base south-west of Kandahar, Taliban troops were reported to have regained territory east of the city that was captured by opposition fighters earlier this week. The Taliban also appeared to remain in control of the town of Spin Boldak.

Pentagon officials confirmed that they were now focusing the air campaign against caves and tunnels around Kandahar and the eastern city of Jalalabad, where Osama bin Laden is suspected to be hiding.

----

US 'hero' may have triggered Mazar revolt

RASHMEE Z AHMED,
TIMES NEWS NETWORK,
FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 30, 2001
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow.asp?art_id=2012523207

LONDON: The United Nations has joined human rights groups in demanding an urgent inquiry into the carnage at the Qala-i-Jhangi fort near the northern Afghan city of Mazar-i-Sharif, even as new information is emerging about how it started and the two Pakistani Taliban reported to be the last men alive in the fort, until the violence finally subsided on Wednesday.

Even as the CIA saluted its slain colleague, the first American fatality in Afghanistan, "American hero" Johnny 'Mike' Spann, who died in the prison revolt, British journalists in Mazar-i-Sharif have begun reporting that Spann was less an innocent victim than the one who allegedly provoked the riot.

With allegations of "war crimes" against the US and UK coming in thick and fast for ignoring the Geneva Convention on the treatment of prisoners of war, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Commisioner, Mary Robinson, has echoed Kate Allen, director of the London-based Amnesty International in calling for an urgent inquiry.

Amnesty has said it is willing to send an observer to Afghanistan to monitor an inquiry.

On Wednesday night, the BBC's authoritative domestic television programme Newsnight interviewed Oliver August, correspondent for The Times, London, in Mazar-i-Sharif, who said that Spann and his CIA colleague, Dave, were thought to have set off the violence by aggressively interrogating foreign Taliban prisoners and asking, "Why did you come to Afghanistan?". August said their questions were answered by one prisoner jumping forward and announcing, "We're here to kill you".

The Guardian's Mazar-i-Sharif correspondent said the CIA "operatives had apparently failed on entering the fort to observe the first rule of espionage: keep a low profile".

The Times's August said Spann subsequently pulled his gun and his CIA colleague shot three prisoners dead in cold blood before losing control over the situation.

Spann was then "kicked, beaten and bitten to death," the journalists said, in an account of the ferocity of the violence that lasted four days, leaving more than 500 people dead and the fort littered with "bodies, shrapnel and shell casings".

Meanwhile, graphic reports are appearing of two Pakistani Taliban fighters' final stand in the fort, alongside comments from the Northern Alliance that the dead prisoners were the most hardline of Osama Bin Laden's al-Qaeda recruits.

The revelations, which may be a public relations disaster in the making for the Pakistani establishment, say that the two men, who survived 72 hours of targeted American bombing and missile strikes, were heard speaking Urdu.

Long after hundreds of their comrades were dead, according to one newspaper, the pair, dressed in flimsy salwar-kameezes, remained hidden in a deep basement in the fort and it took several rockets to restore the fort to a "tomb-like silence".

In the aftermath of the bloodbath at Qala-I-Jhangi, the British press has focussed on graphic images, including what they are calling the blatant defiance of the rules of war. One photograph, plastered across several papers, allegedly shows a Northern Alliance fighter using a long metal spike to prise out a dead Taliban soldier's gold tooth. The Independent newspaper sardonically headlined its report, "How our Afghan Allies applied the Geneva Convention" in an indication that the US-led, UK-backed coalition may now be doomed to launch urgent rearguard action to quell public distaste about the conduct of Tony Blair's "just war for a just cause".

Amnesty International has highlighted public concern by demanding an investigation "into the proportionality of the response by the Northern Alliance, US and UK forces".

In a statement released here, it said the enquiry "should make urgent recommendations to ensure that other instances of surrender and holding of prisoners do not lead to similar disorders and loss of life".

----

The Castle of Death
What really happened in Qalai Janghi on Sunday, and in the bloody days that followed?

Justin Huggler tells the full, harrowing story
30 November 2001
UK Independent
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia_china/story.jsp?story=107563

They were still carrying the bodies out yesterday. So many of them were strewn around the old fortress. We saw one go past whose foot had been half-torn off and was hanging from his leg by a shred of flesh. The expression on the face of the dead man was so clear that it was hard to believe he was dead until you saw the gaping red hole in the side of his forehead. The stench of rotting human flesh had become overpowering; at times, it was hard to breathe. But questions remained as they cleared away the bodies of slaughtered foreign Taliban fighters believed to be loyal to Osama bin Laden.

How did US and British special forces come to be involved in the massacre of at least 150 prisoners of war - and maybe as many as 400 - who should have been protected under the Geneva Convention? In terms of numbers, Qalai Janghi could be the worst massacre to have come to light in Afghanistan since the US bombing began. Why did the US quell a prison revolt by bombing the prison from the air? Did American and British special forces call in those air strikes from the ground? And why were the Taliban prisoners allowed to get their hands on an arsenal of weapons large enough to defend the fortress for three days?

Amid the stench of death yesterday, Ghaisuddin, one of the soldiers involved in the massacre at Qalai Janghi, told the story of how the fighting began.

From his first-hand account, those of the International Red Cross workers who were present at the fort when the fighting started, and other sources who asked not to be identified, it is now possible to piece together how the massacre came about. It was, if we are to believe those accounts, an extraordinary series of blunders.

The 400 or so prisoners, among them a large number of Arabs, Pakistanis and Chechens, had surrendered after the fall of the city of Kunduz. Outnumbered and outgunned, the Taliban forces accepted the terms of a surrender apparently brokered by Mullah Fazil, the Taliban commander inside Kunduz, and gave themselves up to General Abdul Rashid Dostum, the feared Uzbek warlord, whose men marched on Kunduz from the west. Bound to one another, the prisoners were taken in pick-up trucks to Qalai Janghi, the 19th-century mud-walled fortress that Dostum had used as his headquarters after the fall of Mazar-i-Sharif to his Northern Alliance forces three weeks previously.

It was on Saturday that what started as the relatively peaceful surrender of the northern Afghan Taliban stronghold of Kunduz suddenly started to go out of control inside the fort. Before the eyes of Western reporters, two foreign Taliban prisoners, in the process of being registered by the Red Cross, detonated hand grenades, killing themselves and two senior aides to General Dostum and slightly injuring the ITN news reporter Andrea Catherwood.

It was not the first time that we had heard of bin Laden's "foreigners" committing suicide rather than be taken alive. The Northern Alliance claimed that a group of around 60 of them jumped into a river and drowned themselves. Another group were found kneeling in positions of prayer, each with a single bullet wound from behind. A Northern Alliance commander alleged that one of them had killed all of the others in a suicide pact before turning the gun on himself.

But there were always fears that the stories might have been invented to cover up Northern Alliance massacres of the foreign fighters. Nor was it the first time that surrendering Taliban had not been properly disarmed. Over the past few weeks, journalists in Afghanistan have watched repeatedly as Taliban who had surrendered were allowed to head into Northern Alliance-held towns, waving their Kalashnikovs and rocket-launchers triumphantly in the air. This time, however, defiance grew into mayhem, culminating in the scenes of trucks piled high with human bodies that we saw heading out of Qalai Janghi yesterday.

The next day, Sunday, the prisoners - many of them with their arms tied behind their backs - were being herded into a room for interrogation before two CIA agents. Did they fear retribution for the previous day's murder of the two Northern Alliance commanders? Or was it, as another account suggests, the mere sight of two Americans - from the foreign fighters' point of view, sworn enemies of bin Laden - that provoked the bloodbath that was to follow?

The incompetence of the Northern Alliance soldiers - who, guided by the US and British special forces, failed to search the prisoners properly and thus allowed them to smuggle in knives and grenades hidden in their clothes - must be seen as a key factor in the disaster. The men were also housed next to the fortress's well-stocked armoury.

Ghaisuddin says that after the two men killed themselves, the commanders in the fortress decided to search all the prisoners thoroughly. Here, two further disastrous errors of judgement came into play.

First, it appears that General Dostum, who had departed for the Kunduz front with most of his troops, had left only a small garrison to guard the prisoners in Qalai Janghi. Some sources said yesterday that there were as few as 50 men guarding up to 400 dangerous prisoners. Second, Qalai Janghi is not only a prison. The 100-year-old fort is General Dostum's main military base outside the key northern city of Mazar-i-Sharif. It was, literally, an arsenal bristling with heavy-duty armaments.

On Sunday morning, a meeting at the fortress between the International Red Cross and local leaders got under way, while the prisoners were being processed. And then shots rang out. Ghaisuddin was on sentry duty at the gate to the inner courtyard when the revolt began. He says the soldiers had brought the prisoners out of the basement of the prison building, which lay in the centre of the courtyard, and into the open light in order to search them. Ghaisuddin says prisoners who had been searched and were found to be clean had their arms tied behind their backs above the elbow with their own black turbans - the state in which some of the bodies were found. "Suddenly the prisoners waiting to be searched attacked our men,'' says Ghaisuddin. "They had knives hidden in their clothes and they killed 14 of our men. We fought back, but even with a gun one man cannot fight off 40, and they just kept coming." This took place at about 11.15am local time.

Another Northern Alliance account suggests that the prisoners launched the battle when an Alliance general went to reassure the prisoners that they would be well treated.

"We tried to treat the prisoners humanely and they took advantage," General Dostum said on Wednesday as he surveyed the carnage. "I gave orders for them to be allowed to wash and pray, but they attacked us."

Another explanation is that the prisoners feared that they were about to be executed.

At this point, elsewhere in the fortress, Olivier Martin of the International Red Cross was in a meeting with General Dostum's deputy, General Fauzi, about gaining access to the prisoners. He describes hearing a few shots, but at first was not unduly alarmed. Gunfire is an almost continuous background noise in Afghanistan. Down in the courtyard, Ghaisuddin continues: "They took the Kalashnikovs from the soldiers they had killed and started firing. We had to flee." Next, Martin describes hearing rocket fire coming from the courtyard where the prisoners were being held. "General Fauzi left the room looking concerned and did not return,'' he says. "We decided we had to find somewhere to hide. We tried the basement but it had no exit route so we went up on the roof. There was incoming fire from the prisoners up there and we had to take shelter with some soldiers who were firing back at them."

Olivier Martin was not the only Westerner inside the fortress that day. At least one member of British Special Forces was already inside, along with the two CIA agents who were interrogating the Taliban prisoners.

A persistent explanation from a number of sources is that a handful of the prisoners were provoked into launching the rebellion by the sight of the two Americans questioning selected prisoners, possibly for information on the whereabouts of members of bin Laden's al Qaida organisation.

Whatever the reason, it is now clear that one of the CIA agents was beaten to death. A German TV crew at the fort filmed an American man in the compound speaking into a satellite phone borrowed from their reporter. He was saying: "I have seen hundreds of wounded and dead... I think one of us has fallen."

The German crew reported on Sunday that one US "adviser" was killed. Another eyewitness said: "There were two American soldiers inside the fort, one of whom was disarmed and killed and another who was also in trouble. He was out of ammunition." This other man was called Dave. He is said to have shot dead three Taliban before escaping. It would be Wednesday before the CIA spokesman Bill Harlow named the dead agent as 32-year-old Johnnie "Mike" Spann.

What then ensued appears to be something of a shambles. British SAS troops and American Special Forces were deployed to the fortress in large numbers to help the Afghan soldiers who were being overwhelmed by the Taliban, but though the fighting broke out at 11.15am, it was no until well into the afternoon that the Special Forces arrived. In the meantime the Taliban prisoners of war were busy helping themselves to General Dostum's arms stash. They felt able to spurn several shipping containers full of old Second World War Russian machine-guns and stuck to the more up-to-date stuff. They got their hands on scores of rocket launchers, mortars, grenades and Kalashnikovs. The floor of Qalai Janghi is now littered with unexploded mortar shells and grenades that could go off at any moment. According to a source who asked not to be identified, when the Special Forces arrived it was clear that they had not been briefed at all on the conditions under which the prisoners were being held. Up to 400 highly dangerous prisoners were being held in hopelessly insecure conditions and SAS troops based in the same town did not even know the layout of the fortress where the prisoners were being held.

On Sunday, at about 3.30pm, the roar of US fighter jets could be heard, and at least four bombs were dropped from the air on the southern part of the fort. That night, a Pentagon spokesman told reporters in Washington that the prison was in the grip of "an uprising" started when "300 hard-core Taliban" prisoners "smuggled weapons into the prison".

Washington also confirmed that US forces had mounted air strikes on the fort using AC-130 gunships. Alex Perry, a reporter for Time magazine, told his editors from the scene on Sunday night he had seen 12 American and British SAS "running the show" ­ co-ordinating the air strikes from positions inside the fort. "They are also directing the commanders inside where to tell their men to attack"

The Special Forces had been with General Dostum for more than a month just before he captured Mazar-i-Sharif, triggering the collapse of the Taliban across Afghanistan. General Dostum boasted to another Northern Alliance commander down the satellite phone that he had Western military advisers with him who could get him any equipment or assistance from the US that he needed. It now seems certain that the Special Forces quickly provided the co-ordinates for US air strikes on the fortress that went on for about an hour. The Northern Alliance were meanwhile bringing in reinforcements

Later on Sunday night, the Pentagon confirmed that five US personnel had been injured in a "friendly fire" incident when a 500lb bomb went off course and ploughed into the fort's battlements, where Northern Alliance troops were posted, killing at least six of them. The injured Americans were airlifted out to a US military hospital in Germany. A gaping hole in the fort's 20ft outer walls showed where the bomb landed.

On Monday morning, those prisoners not killed by air strikes or by the pounding of the Northern Alliance, were reported to be holding out. A hard core of 100, 30 of them armed with rocket launchers, were holed up inside a crumbling tower. American bombing continued throughout the day and into the night. One hit the armoury and the ammunition store exploded in a burst of fireworks visible eight miles away in Mazar-i-Sharif. Surviving Taliban prisoners made at least two attempts to escape, but were killed as they fled.

Early on Tuesday morning, low-flying American AC-130 gunships pounded the citadel within the fort, but by dawn the Northern Alliance forces on the ground were still taking casualties. It seems that Taliban survivors of the air strikes were able to launch a small counterattack at 8am, despite continuing mortar rocket and gunfire from the Northern Alliance.

The bodies of 10 Northern Alliance soldiers were carried out on stretchers. By now the Alliance had lost at least 50 men with another 100 wounded.

At this stage, some 16 American and British special forces were on the scene again. The British arrived in the compound in two white Land Rovers. The SAS were wearing jeans, jumpers and Afghan-style head dress. The Americans were in khaki fatigues, black fleeces and some in black woolly hats or balaclavas. Some wore dark sunglasses. They took positions just outside the fort's main entrance although, according to one source, "they did not appear to be joining the action to put down the rebellion themselves". Instead, it seems that they were calling in air strikes.

By mid-afternoon on Tuesday, only three of the prisoners ­ armed with a machine-gun and a Kalashnikov ­ were still alive. Asked to surrender, they shouted: "You are American people. We won't surrender to you."

The Northern Alliance ­ on the advice of the US Special Forces and the SAS ­ poured oil into the basement of the building and set fire to it, forcing those remaining prisoners holed up in the lower parts of the fort to move upstairs. The Northern Alliance troops then drove a huge Russian-made tank through the gates of the fortress, crushing the corpses of Pakistani and Arab fighters lying in the courtyard. The tank fired off four rounds aimed at the small building where the remaining Taliban fighters were holding out. The distance was no more than 20 metres, and the building was reduced to rubble in seconds. The three prisoners were dead.

During the three-day stand-off, General Dostum's men repeatedly claimed that the battle was over only to venture into the cauldron of death that the fort's inner courtyard had become and be greeted with a hail of bullets.

Even yesterday, as the Red Cross cleared away the bodies, re-captured Taliban survivors, still armed with concealed weapons, were firing out of the basement and killed one of those trying to recover the bodies. British and US special forces were in action in the fortress again.

Perhaps, even now, the extraordinary, terrible drama of the bloodbath at Qalai Janghi is not yet quite completed. But the end must be very near indeed.

Meanwhile, it will be a long time before the world fully takes in what it all means. When the war in Afghanistan began, we were told the foreign Taliban intended to fight to the death, and many feared a massacre or a bloodbath in Kunduz. But, in the end, bin Laden's warriors staged their last battle in the fortress at Qalai Janghi. If the accounts of the Northern Alliance soldiers are to be believed, 400 defeated men managed to force the United States into taking part in the massacre of prisoners of war.

-------- arms sales

Powell defends missile deal with Egypt

November 30, 2001
By Nicholas Kralev
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
http://www.washingtontimes.com/world/20011130-41390440.htm

The Bush administration said yesterday it plans to follow through with the sale of sophisticated anti-ship missiles to Egypt despite congressional concerns that it could threaten Israel's military advantage in the region.

In addition, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said the administration is trying to "accelerate economic cooperation" with Egypt to help it solve the nation's recent financial problems.

The State Department said the $400 million sale of more than 50 seaborne Harpoon missiles would help Egypt protect the Suez Canal, which would be of "value to shipping generally and to U.S. warships that use this channel."

"The sale of Harpoons is part of an ongoing, long-standing cooperation we've had with the Egyptian military," State Department spokesman Richard Boucher told reporters. "This is a follow-on to a system that they already have.

"There are a variety of reasons for that sale," he said. "We've discussed it with members of Congress, and we'll continue to discuss it with [them]."

Some lawmakers, including Rep. Tom Lantos, a California Democrat and staunch supporter of Israel, expressed concern this week that the sale might jeopardize Israel's military dominance in the Middle East and argued that Egypt faced no external threat.

Visiting Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Maher said yesterday he was confident his country had enough friends in Washington and the sale would go through.

Egypt is the second-largest recipient of U.S. military aid after Israel, getting some $1.3 billion a year.

Mr. Powell announced Washington's intention to help Cairo deal with its economic woes in response to reporters' questions after a meeting yesterday with Mr. Maher at the State Department.

"We are aware that Egypt is having some financial and economic difficulty now, with the drop in tourism, and we are looking at ways that we can accelerate some of our economic cooperation and other programs," he said. "We want to be as responsive as we can."

In spite of a decade of economic reforms to develop an export-driven economy, Egypt ran a trade deficit of $9.35 billion in the last fiscal year, according to the Egyptian central bank. Its recent data showed that exports totaled $7.1 billion, of which $2.6 billion came from oil, while imports totaled $16.4 billion.

Revenue losses by the country's tourism industry and the Suez Canal are expected to increase further as a result of Egypt's foreign currency troubles.

Earlier this week, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak warned that boosting exports was a matter of "life and death" for his country's economy. Mr. Maher said Egypt's problems are a "fallout of an international situation" rather than domestic circumstances.

"Tourism has diminished by almost 60 percent," he complained at a Brookings Institution discussion Wednesday at the National Press Club. "Some insurance companies, for a reason that remains a mystery to us, have declared Egypt a war zone and have raised the premiums of their insurance.

"So we have been suffering from these fallouts of the terrorist acts that took place here in the United States, and we are asking our American friends to help us shoulder this difficulty, not by new money, but showing flexibility in the way our economic cooperation goes," he said.

At the start of their meeting yesterday, Mr. Powell and Mr. Maher signed a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty that would provide for cooperation between the United States and Egypt in fighting terrorism, drug trafficking and financial crime.

Mr. Powell said the pact, initially signed in 1998 but not ratified by the Senate and the Egyptian parliament until this year, was "another sign of how close we are in working together on such matters as legal assistance and the war against terrorism."

---

Egypt's story

November 30, 2001
Embassy Row
James Morrison
http://www.washingtontimes.com/world/20011130-73679088.htm

A delegation of Egyptian business executives is trying to correct an impression in Washington that Egypt is failing in its support for the war against terrorism.

"If you are battling terrorism and if anyone tells you that Egypt is not with you, that is ridiculous," Hamed Fahmy, founder of the Allied Corp. of Egypt, told editors and reporters at The Washington Times yesterday.

Mr. Fahmy and other executives representing the American Chamber of Commerce in Egypt emphasized that Egypt has long been a target of terrorism from some of the same extremists linked to the September 11 attacks on the United States.

He noted that Ayman Zawahiri, a top lieutenant to terrorist leader Osama bin Laden, is the founder of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, which assassinated Egyptian President Anwar Sadat in 1981. The group is also a key component in bin Laden's al Qaeda terrorist network.

Zawahiri fled Egypt and sought refuge for a while in Switzerland, Mr. Fahmy said.

"I cannot get a resident visa in Switzerland, but they gave him political asylum," he said.

Terrorist attacks by Islamic extremists in Egypt have claimed 1,000 lives in the last decade.

Mr. Fahmy, president of TransCentury Associates developers Anis Aclimandos, and Hisham A. Fahmy, the chamber's executive director, have been making the rounds of administration officials, members of Congress, think-tank experts and reporters since they arrived in Washington on Sunday.

Mr. Aclimandos dismissed press reports that implied Egypt was being critical of the war on terrorism.

"If you look at the facts, Egypt took quick action. I would rather have somebody take action rather than give me lip service," he said.

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak was one of the first Arab leaders to strongly condemn the September 11 attacks and offer assistance to the United States.

The three also noted that earlier criticism of the war in the Egyptian press has changed since the rout of the Taliban. Al Akhbar, one of Egypt's leading newspapers, recently printed a large front-page photograph of a smiling U.S. Marine surrounded by Afghan children.

Egypt has suffered economically from the attacks on America, especially its tourist industry. Five million visitors last year boosted tourism to $4.5 billion. The Egyptian pound has also lost 15 percent of its value.

"It has died since September 11," Hisham A. Fahmy said of tourism.

They also tried to explain Egypt's cautious response to President Bush's warning to Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.

"We have to live in the area we are in and deal with our neighbors," Mr. Aclimandos said. "But if it is proven that terrorists have a safe haven in Iraq I don't think Egypt would hesitate to join a coalition against him. We all know he's crazy."

--------

U.S. Military Aid Arrives in Manila

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
November 30, 2001
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Philippines-US-Military.html?searchpv=aponline

MANILA, Philippines (AP) -- A C-130 transport plane, part of a U.S. military aid package for the Philippines, arrived Friday carrying equipment to help troops battling a Muslim extremist group holding an American missionary couple.

The plane, flown from Georgia by U.S. and Filipino pilots, was handed over to the Philippines at a ceremony with President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo at Villamor Air Base outside Manila.

The plane and its cargo are part of promised American help to the Philippines in its battle against the Abu Sayyaf rebel group, which has been linked in the past to Osama bin Laden, chief suspect in the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington.

U.S. charge d'affaires Robert Fitts, who attended the ceremony, said the plane also carried 16,000 pounds of military hardware, including rifles, for the Philippine army and air force.

The Philippine military has had only one operational C-130 aircraft used extensively to transport troops and deliver relief goods to disaster areas.

Fitts also said the United States military plans to conduct more training for a Light Reaction Company for the Philippine military. The first group to get such training has seen action on Basilan island against the Abu Sayyaf, which is holding hostage Martin and Gracia Burnham of Wichita, Kan., and a Philippine nurse.

Last month, about 25 U.S. military advisers spent two weeks in the Philippines to observe how the United States can help against the Abu Sayyaf.

President Bush promised Arroyo about $100 million in military and security aid for 2001-02 when she visited the United States two weeks ago.

Philippine defense officials said other U.S. military hardware also in the pipeline includes a Cyclone-class patrol boat, 30,000 M-16 rifles and 100 army trucks and about eight Huey helicopters plus funds to upgrade them for one of Asia's poorest militaries.

On Saturday, the U.S. Navy guided missile frigate USS Vandergrift will make a four-day port call at the Subic Bay Freeport, a former U.S. naval base west of Manila.

The ship, with 218 officers and men, will come from Singapore and leave Manila for an undisclosed destination on Tuesday, said Elmer Cato, spokesman for a presidential commission on the bilateral Visiting Forces Agreement.

Cato said the visit is a routine call and was not connected to the military operation to rescue the Abu Sayyaf hostages or the U.S. operation in Afghanistan, which is strongly supported by the Arroyo administration.

The Subic port, about 50 miles west of Manila, was converted into an industrial and tourism estate after the U.S. Navy left in 1992.

-------- biological weapons

Ames Strain Of Anthrax Limited to Few Labs

By Steve Fainaru and Joby Warrick
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, November 30, 2001; Page A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A36408-2001Nov29?language=printer

Since the mid-1980s, the U.S. Army laboratory that is the main custodian of the virulent strain of anthrax used in the recent terrorist attacks distributed the bacteria to just five labs in the United States, Canada and England, according to government documents and interviews.

Two of the labs -- both in the private sector -- received the strain this spring, only a few months before letters tainted with anthrax spores were mailed to New York and Washington, the records show.

The documents, obtained by The Washington Post, offer the first official accounting of how the microbes, known as the Ames strain, were originally disseminated. They show that the distribution of Ames was much narrower than recently thought, and a top anthrax researcher said the strain may be limited to a dozen labs.

The five original labs also provide a starting point for investigators trying to determine how the Ames strain fell into the hands of a terrorist or terrorists.

Col. Arthur Friedlander, senior military research scientist at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) at Fort Detrick, Md., said the Ames strain was distributed by the military for research purposes under strict controls to "legitimate workers in the field."

FBI spokesman Mike Kortan said yesterday that the agency's anthrax probe had moved "way beyond" the short list of labs that received the Ames strain from Fort Detrick. A government official who asked not to be named said the five labs were used to guide investigators trying to trace the movements of the strain to other researchers and institutions.

Transfer records obtained by The Post under the Freedom of Information Act show that USAMRIID, which is located in Frederick, shared the Ames strain last March with scientists at the University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, an Albuquerque research institute, and in May and June with the Battelle Memorial Institute, a Columbus, Ohio, corporation involved in anthrax vaccine research.

No records were available before 1997, when a new federal law required researchers to report the transfer of dangerous pathogens to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. But USAMRIID officials said the other labs to receive Ames were the Defence Research Establishment Suffield, a Canadian biodefense institute that received Ames in 1998; the U.S. Army Dugway Proving Ground, a test facility in the Utah desert that received the bacteria in 1992; and the Chemical Defence Establishment at Porton Down, a biodefense institute near Salisbury, England, which received the Ames strain in the mid-1980s.

"This is not a cavalier thing that one does," Friedlander said. "When anyone isolates strains, they are shared through the scientific community. That's how research gets done. It follows a long tradition of collaboration with people that we are well familiar with."

The Ames strain, a virulent form of anthrax bacteria, is named for the Iowa city in which it was originally isolated. It was used in suspected terrorist attacks that have killed five people and infected 13 in Florida, New York, Connecticut and the District, according to investigators.

When the anthrax attacks began in early October, many experts believed that the Ames strain, because of its use in vaccine studies, had been distributed to thousands of researchers worldwide. But that number has been reduced considerably in recent weeks. Friedlander estimated yesterday that the labs in possession of virulent anthrax strains, including Ames, probably numbered "no more than a dozen."

In addition to the five labs that received Ames from USAMRIID, others known to have the Ames strain are Martin E. Hugh-Jones, an anthrax researcher at Louisiana State University, and a lab at Northern Arizona University in Flagstaff. Jones recently said he received the Ames strain in the late 1990s from microbiologist Peter Turnbull, then at Porton Down. Turnbull, confirming the transaction in an interview last week, said Porton Down shared Ames with "very few" researchers, whom he declined to name.

Scientists have identified USAMRIID as the primary distributor of Ames. Much of the history of that distribution since the 1980s is spelled out in a few dozen pages of transfer forms that scientists are required to fill out whenever certain kinds of dangerous microbes change hands.

The records document the delivery of Ames bacteria to at least 10 establishments, but only five received Ames in a virulent form that make people sick.

The first agency reported to have received the Ames strain from Fort Detrick was the Chemical Defence Establishment, which used the bacteria to test vaccines for troops.

Porton Down scientists previously acknowledged sharing the bacteria with the agency's public health branch, the Center for Applied Microbiology and Research. CAMR officials in turn have acknowledged distributing the bacteria to a small number of private researchers.

Fort Detrick's documents record several exchanges of Ames bacteria between USAMRIID and the Dugway Proving Ground, the Pentagon's primary chemical and biological defense testing center, which is located in Utah's Great Salt Lake Desert.

Dugway, the site of several biological weapons tests in the 1950s and 1960s, has continued to use live anthrax spores in experiments that test the durability of military equipment under a simulated biological attack.

Michael Cast, a spokesman for the U.S. Army Developmental Test Command, which oversees Dugway, said the agency could not comment on specific biological agents in its possession. But he described the security measures at the West Desert Test Center, where Dugway scientists test everything from protective suits to armored vehicles, as "very stringent."

In 1998, the Canadian government requested the Ames strain for its Defence Research Establishment Suffield, Ottawa's counterpart to Fort Detrick. According to documents prepared by DRES scientists, Ames was one of 11 strains of Bacillus anthracis bacteria given to Canada by USAMRIID. Among the others was Vollum 1B, the strain used by the Pentagon in its biological weapons program in the 1950s and 1960s.

The Canadians studied Ames in experiments that tested the effectiveness of antibiotics against various bacterial strains, documents showed.

DRES chief scientist Kent Harding said the anthrax spores were closely guarded against theft. "We're talking several locked doors and 24-7 monitoring," he said.

Two research agencies received virulent Ames bacteria from Fort Detrick this year, in shipments that predate the Sept. 11 attacks on New York and Washington. Battelle Corp., a major government contractor that manages Energy Department laboratories and operates the Chemical and Biological Information Analysis Center for the Defense Department, was planning to use the strain in developing vaccines.

Spokeswoman Katy Delaney said she could not comment on Battelle's anthrax research, but she said officials were unaware of security problems at its facilities. "We know of no instances of safety or security breaches in our biodefense research," Delaney said.

The records also show that USAMRIID shared Ames with the University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center last March. The center operates a Pentagon-funded lab that evaluates potential treatments and protections against biological weapons.

A university spokesman declined to comment on the specifics of the research. "As a matter of prudence, we do not discuss which specific organisms we have in our labs," said Sam Giammo, director of public affairs for the Health Science Center.

While initial tests have suggested that the anthrax spores used in the terrorist attacks were of the Ames strain, further genetic testing is needed to establish conclusive proof. Some scientists have suggested the terrorists' strain could be an "Ames-like" variation, unknown until now.

"The evidence suggests it's the same strain," Friedlander said. "But there is the possibility that it is not."

The new documents shed little light on the early history of the Ames strain, which remains somewhat murky despite the recent attention.

The U.S. biological weapons program had been officially dismantled for more than a decade when Fort Detrick received the strain around 1980 from Department of Agriculture researchers in Ames, Iowa. At the time, interest in anthrax was intensifying because of reports that the Soviet Union was secretly developing biological weapons.

"We were requesting strains from different labs, and we received this strain. It wasn't named Ames then," Friedlander said.

Fort Detrick researchers were drawn to the novel strain because it appeared more resistant to vaccines, he said. A vaccine that could protect against Ames would offer the highest protection for troops exposed to deadly germs on the battlefield.

The fact that few labs appear to have worked with Ames could narrow the search for the person or group behind the deadly attacks, Friedlander suggested.

"The world of anthrax researchers is quite small. There isn't a large group of people working with fully virulent strains," he said. "Obviously, if there were 1,000 labs it would be a different order of magnitude than if there were only a handful."

Staff writer Dan Eggen contributed to this report.

----

Experts Sure Iraq Has Bio-Weapons

By Dafna Linzer
Associated Press Writer
Thursday, November 29, 2001; 5:47 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A35282-2001Nov29?language=printer

NEW YORK -- International experts are certain that Saddam Hussein has a biological weapons program but without weapons inspectors on the ground, there is no way to know whether Iraq is resuscitating nuclear or chemical capabilities.

By the time Iraq halted U.N. weapons inspections in 1998, inspectors believed the country's nuclear facilities had been destroyed and chemical materials dumped.

But that was three years ago, and even then, inspectors were convinced that Iraq - which had invaded neighboring Kuwait and fired missiles at Israel and Saudi Arabia - was hiding the truth about its biological weapons program and its plans to build an atomic bomb.

"The biological dossier was the one that raised the largest question mark, and with every year that passes, it is all the more worrisome," said Hans Blix, director of the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission for Iraq.

The Bush administration officials in recent days have accused Iraq of developing a germ warfare program.

National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice called the Iraqi president "a threat to his own people, a threat to the region, and a threat to us because he is determined to acquire weapons of mass destruction."

Asked Monday about Iraq and potential military targets beyond the Afghanistan war, President Bush said: "If they develop weapons of mass destruction that will be used to terrorize nations, they will be held accountable."

Richard Butler, an Australian who ran the U.N. inspection program until it was forced out of Iraq in 1998, criticized the White House's stance and called for a tougher line in dealing with Iraq.

"I fail utterly to understand when the president of the United States says 'If we find they're developing weapons, we'll take action.' It's well established that they have weapons of mass destruction. The question is how much longer the U.N. Security Council will allow this to go on," Butler said.

Security Council resolutions enacted after the 1991 Persian Gulf War mandated that Iraq "unconditionally accept the destruction, removal or rendering harmless," of all chemical and biological weapons, components and manufacturing facilities, and all ballistic missiles capable of reaching beyond Iraq's borders.

The resolutions called for on-site searches of all facilities by U.N. inspectors and members of the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency, which used to be run by Blix.

By the end of the Gulf War, IAEA assessments indicated Saddam was six months away from building an atomic bomb. Inspectors discovered that the oil-rich nation had imported thousands of pounds of uranium, some of which was already refined for weapons use, and had considered two types of nuclear delivery systems.

Over the next six years, inspectors took custody of the uranium, destroyed facilities and chemicals, dismantled over 40 missiles and confiscated thousands of documents and plans.

At the end of 1998, the IAEA wrote that it had "no indications to suggest Iraq was successful in its attempt to produce nuclear weapons," or that there remains "any physical capability for the production of amounts of weapons-usable nuclear material of any practical significance."

Butler's findings, which centered on the biological, chemical and missile capabilities, were not as definitive. Iraq had used chemical weapons twice in