Archive By Date | Today's Links to Search By
Activists' News | Nuclear | Depleted Uranium | Military | Police
Alternative Energy Etc. | From Subscribers
NUCLEAR
Fuel Rod Pieces Missing at Vt. Nuke Plant
Britain cuts emissions from Sellafield nuclear plant
Green group doubtful at plan to end emissions from British nuclear plant
IRAN FAILS TO STEM LEAKS OF NUKE SECRETS
Iran 'Will Be Dealt With,' Bush Says
Speaking for Europe, Chirac Warns Iran on Inspections
Envirocare's big plan: Operation Iraqi waste
Amid fog of secrecy, Israel makes progress on nukes
Vanunu release spurs nuke talk
Nuclear Spy, Icon Released In Israel Vanunu Exposed Weapons Program
Vanunu, Disdaining Israel, Is Freed to Chants vs. Cheers
Kim agrees to nuke dialogue
North Korean Ends 'Candid' China Visit
North Korean Leader Tells China He's Committed to Nuclear Talks
S.Korea Sees Progress at Next Atomic Talks - Minister
Stockpile handling questioned by IG
Nuclear Freeze
Recently Issued Significant Enforcement Actions
Yucca Mountain's Nuclear Future in Question
ENERGY DEPARTMENT NUCLEAR FUEL PINS
Audit cites delays at Pantex, other labs
Vt. Nuclear Plant Looks for Missing Parts
Hanford Contractor Alters Safety Orders
Safety steps for Hanford cleanup workers
House OKs Speedy Elections if Attacked
U.S. Aimed for Hussein as War Began
Ballooning U.S. Government Feels Just a Tiny Contraction
MILITARY
Reports of Massive Blast Emerge From Secretive North Korea
Violence in Iraq Forces 2 Big Contractors to Curb Work
U.S. Cautions Taiwan on Independence
Spain Plans to Hasten Withdrawal of Troops
Blasts at Iraqi Police Facilities
U.S. Moves to Rehire Some From Baath Party, Military
U.S. Threatens Falluja Assault After Limited Arms Handover
Fighting Resumes in Falluja;
Limited Iraqi Sovereignty Planned
9 Palestinians Die in Gaza Clash
Sharon Said to Press Ahead on Gaza Plan
Pakistan Leads Opposition on Terrorist Arms Ban
Occupation imposes Washington-style "democracy"
Development of Advanced Radioisotope Power Systems
Corruption Allegations at U.N. Put Annan on the Defensive
Military Renews Bid for Environmental Law Exemptions
Hagel Seeking Broad Debate on Draft Issue
Rumsfeld Sees No Need for Military Draft
House Approves Tax Relief for Troops
Troops for Iraq to cost $700 million
Stahl of '60 Minutes' says she regrets Iraq WMD stories
Kerry's DLC versus the Pirates
Pentagon Angered by Photos of War Dead
Why the White House likes Bob Woodward's book
White House Is Engaged in Patriot Act Misinformation
POLICE / PRISONERS / COURTS / JUSTICE
Guantanamo prisoners
Leave Medical Marijuana Group Alone, Judge Tells Government
Gorelick allowed to draft report
FBI Checking Crop - Dusting Planes, Pilots
Europeans Seek Court Review of Data-Sharing Plan
Bush Seeks Delays on High-Tech Passports
Bombing in Saudi Capital Kills at Least 4, Injures 148
ENERGY AND OTHER
Canadian firm delivers less polluting bio-fuel
10 personal actions that can make a difference for the environment
Federal Neglect Drove 114 U.S. Species to Extinction
Study Says SARS Virus Can Spread Through Air
ACTIVISTS
Vanunu to petition court against restrictions placed on him
Freed Vanunu urges nuclear inspections
Vanunu leaves jail whistling the same anti-nuclear tune
Filipino Activists Hail Vanunu's Bravery
For A Global Glasnost
A Polite Encounter Outside World Bank
A Call to Arms by Abortion Rights Groups
-------- NUCLEAR
-------- accidents and safety
Fuel Rod Pieces Missing at Vt. Nuke Plant
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
April 22, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Nuclear-Fuel-Missing.html http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NucNews/pending?view=1&msg=10422
MONTPELIER, Vt. (AP) -- Two pieces of a highly radioactive fuel rod are missing from a Vermont nuclear plant, and engineers planned to search onsite for the nuclear material, officials said Wednesday.
The fuel rod was removed in 1979 from the Vermont Yankee reactor, which is currently shut down for refueling and maintenance. Remote-control cameras will be used to search a spent fuel pool on the property, officials said.
``We do not think there is a threat to the public at this point. The great probability is this material is still somewhere in the pool,'' said Nuclear Regulatory Commission spokesman Neil Sheehan.
But Sheehan said it was possible the spent fuel was mixed in with a shipment of low-level nuclear waste and ended up at a repository in South Carolina, or a facility in Washington state. He said it was also possible it was taken to a nuclear testing facility run by General Electric, which designed the plant.
The material would be fatal to anyone who came in contact with it without being properly shielded, Sheehan said. Spent nuclear fuel also could be used by terrorists to construct so-called dirty bombs that would spread deadly radiation with conventional explosives.
The NRC is helping plant officials in the search. The rod was part of the fuel assembly used to power the reactor. One of the missing pieces is about the size of a pencil. The other piece is about the thickness of a pencil and 17 inches long.
``It would be very difficult to remove this material from the site without somebody knowing about it,'' Sheehan said. ``It would set off radiation monitors.''
Sheehan cited the heightened awareness of the need to control nuclear material that followed the Sept. 11 terror attacks. ``We don't want this falling into the wrong hands,'' he said. ``This is something we would never take lightly.''
Gov. James Douglas, after speaking Wednesday afternoon with the head of the NRC, said he was ``very concerned'' about the missing fuel at the plant, run by Entergy Nuclear.
``This situation is intolerable,'' he said in a statement.
In 2002 a Connecticut nuclear plant was fined $288,000 after a similar loss. That fuel was never accounted for.
Vermont Yankee is located in the southeastern town of Vernon, on the border with Massachusetts and New Hampshire.
The state's Public Safety Department and Homeland Security Unit also were notified of the missing fuel.
-------- britain
Britain cuts emissions from Sellafield nuclear plant
Thursday, April 22, 2004
By Associated Press
http://www.enn.com/news/2004-04-22/s_23085.asp
LONDON - A new chemical treatment will cut emissions of a radioactive contaminant from the Sellafield nuclear reprocessing plant by 90 percent, Britain's Environment Agency said Wednesday.
Plant operator British Nuclear Fuels said the new waste-treatment process would slash emissions of technetium-99, a byproduct of reprocessing spent nuclear fuel. It said a treatment involving the chemical tetraphenylphosphonium bromide allowed most technetium-99 to be stored as solid waste rather than discharged as a liquid into the sea.
Several of Britain's maritime neighbors, including Ireland and Norway, have expressed fears that the 57-year-old nuclear complex is polluting the oceans from its position on the northwest coast of England, on the narrow Irish Sea.
Last month the European Union ordered Britain to clean up the plant, complaining that current conditions prevented E.U. safety inspectors from carrying out proper checks.
Norwegian Prime Minister Kjell Magne Bondevik said he was happy with Britain's announcement.
"The most important thing is that we now will see an end to radioactive emissions, which assures the purity of our common food source in the years to come," he said. "That means a great deal to Norway as a coastal nation, because many local communities depend on harvesting from the sea."
Sellafield opened in 1947 and is responsible for reprocessing spent fuel from British nuclear power stations.
----
Green group doubtful at plan to end emissions from British nuclear plant
LONDON (AFP)
Apr 22, 2004
http://www.terradaily.com/2004/040422155231.pid7rhv9.html
Plans by a British nuclear plant to end its controversial policy of pumping a radioactive waste product into the Irish Sea were condemned by green campaigners Thursday as "too little too late".
Although British Nuclear Fuels Ltd (BNFL) was ending emissions of one waste product from its Sellafield reprocessing centre in Cumbria, northwest England, other radioactive materials were still being pumped into the sea, Greenpeace said.
"The shellfish industry has to worry about the high levels of plutonium off the coast in Cumbria," said Pete Roach, a nuclear consultant at the environmental group.
BNFL announced on Wednesday that it was ending emissions of a radioactive by-product called technetium-99, or Tc-99, and would instead put the waste through newly-devised treatment and storage plants.
Although BNFL always insisted the process of pumping waste was totally safe, fishing groups in Britain, Ireland and Norway complained that livelihoods had been ruined by the bad publicity.
"It almost completely destroyed the lobster industry in the Solway Firth, because there's no-one who wants to buy the lobsters any more," said Roach, referring to the body of water bordering Cumbria and the far southwest of Scotland.
Sellafield officials say they have spent 12 million pounds (18 million euros, 21 million dollars) developing the technology to process TC-99, which is produced when fuel is burnt in a nuclear reactor.
"Now, instead of discharging Tc-99, we can extract that radioactivity and store virtually all of it here in concrete within steel drums," Sellafield spokesman James Reid told AFP.
While Norway had made some "particularly pointed" objections to the emission of Tc-99, the change of policy was not an admission that the previous process was harmful, Reid insisted.
"At no stage has this ever posed a threat to human health or the marine environment -- that's widely recognised by international scientific opinion in the UK, Scandinavia, Northern Ireland and elsewhere," Reid said.
But Greenpeace's Roach said that other radioactive materials such as plutonium were still being pumped into the sea at Sellafield.
"It's too little too late," he said of the new policy.
While emissions of Tc-99 were ending, "all the other radioactivity continues to be pumped into the Irish Sea, probably at an increased rate", he said.
He added: "They should end reprocessing altogether. It's perfectly feasible to store spent nuclear fuel, it doesn't have to be reprocessed, and it's cheaper."
-------- iran
IRAN FAILS TO STEM LEAKS OF NUKE SECRETS
[MENL]
22 Apr 2004
http://menewsline.com/stories/2004/april/04_23_1.html
NICOSIA -- For the first time, Iran has acknowledged that government experts disclosed classified information on the nation's nuclear program.
Iranian sources have reported high-level concern in Teheran over a series of defections by Iranian nuclear scientists and the transfer of information on Iran's nuclear weapons program to the United States and the International Atomic Energy Agency. So far, the sources said, authorities have arrested at least two employees of the Iranian Atomic Energy Organization.
The Iranian regime-aligned newspaper, Ya Lesarat, reported that two nuclear experts were arrested for relaying secret material to foreigners. The weekly, published on Wednesday, did not elaborate.
"The two nuclear experts, who were transferring classified information abroad, were arrested by security agents after an extensive investigation," Ya Lesarat, published by supporters of the Iranian regime, said.
----
Iran 'Will Be Dealt With,' Bush Says
Bid to Start at U.N., President Says
By Mike Allen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, April 22, 2004; Page A06
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A32542-2004Apr21?language=printer
President Bush told newspaper editors in Washington yesterday that Iran "will be dealt with, starting through the United Nations" if it does not stop developing nuclear weapons and begin total cooperation with international inspectors.
Bush said he will encourage allies to insist to the Iranians that they live up to commitments to cooperate with U.N. inspectors and end any enriching and reprocessing of uranium.
"The Iranians need to feel the pressure from the world that any nuclear weapons program will be uniformly condemned -- it's essential that they hear that message," he said. "The development of a nuclear weapon in Iran is intolerable, and a program is intolerable. . . . Otherwise, they will be dealt with, starting through the United Nations."
Earlier this month, Iran pledged to speed up cooperation with the United Nations' International Atomic Energy Agency, but called for an end of inspections by June.
The language was reminiscent of comments Bush made about Iraq long before the war, and to admonitions he has issued to Syria. Iran, along with Iraq and North Korea, was part of the "axis of evil" in his State of the Union address in 2002.
Bush said last July that Iran and Syria "will be held accountable" if they failed to cooperate more fully with the administration's campaign against terrorism.
Administration officials said they have no plans to attack Iran, and that Bush's policy on Tehran had not changed. But the remarks offered a window into Bush's long-range view of relations with Tehran. He usually speaks from a text but aides said he wanted to speak yesterday without a script, using just a list of topics he wanted to cover. The administration said in October it was not pursuing a policy of government change in Tehran. But the White House has alternated between a confrontational and conciliatory stance, and Bush's comment could inflame relations with Iran.
Bush, speaking at an Associated Press luncheon during a Newspaper Association of America convention, said he believes that the war with Iraq will eventually result in a safer Middle East. He said he has no intention of backing away, despite rising casualties among U.S. troops. He said the people of Iraq are "looking at America and saying, 'Are we going to cut and run again?'
"That's what they're thinking, as well -- and we're not going to cut and run if I'm in the Oval Office. We will do our job. I believe that people yearn to be free," he said. "I believe freedom in the heart of the Middle East is an historic opportunity to change the world."
Bush warned the editors that the United States "is a battlefield in the war on terror" and said he can understand public fears of a terrorist attack before the November election. "This is a hard country to defend," he said. "Our intelligence is good. It's just never perfect, is the problem. We are disrupting some cells here in America. We're chasing people down. But it is a -- we've got a big country."
On Tuesday evening, Bush told Republican congressional leaders during a meeting at the White House that it was all but certain that terrorists would attempt a major attack on the United States before the election, according to a congressional aide. The leaders were struck by Bush's definitiveness and gravity, the aide said.
Still, Bush told the editors, the administration is "making good progress in the defense of America."
"If al Qaeda were a board of directors, the chairman and vice chairman might still be out there, but the middle management is gone," he said.
Bush was asked about an AP poll released yesterday showing that two-thirds of the 1,001 adults surveyed thought it was likely that a terrorist attack would be carried out in the country before the election. In answering, he referred to last month's train bombings just days before Spain's national election. The blasts killed 191 people and injured more than 2,000, and were blamed for the ruling party's loss of power.
"I can understand why they think they're going to get hit again," he said. "They saw what happened in Madrid. This is a hard country to defend."
The president's sober assessment stood in contrast to his usual practice of stressing progress in the war on terrorism, and reflected the rising chaos that viewers see on their television screens from Iraq and elsewhere.
Bush reminded the editors in his opening remarks that the nation is fighting "a war that is different because it's hard to really see the enemy."
"The thing that's interesting and different about this -- well, it's not interesting, it's frightening -- about this war, is America is a battlefield in the war on terror," he said. "That's what's changed. We're now a target."
Bush was asked during the 44-minute appearance about yesterday's suicide bombing at Saudi Arabia's national police headquarters, and called the attack "a reminder that there are people that would like -- I don't want to guess their intentions. I think they'd like to overthrow the ruling government."
"There's no negotiations with these terrorists," he said. "You know, you don't sign a treaty with people who are -- who don't believe in rules, people who don't have a conscience."
Before turning to serious topics during the question period, Bush began by telling the editors that the nation was enjoying growing prosperity, and jokingly opened by addressing them as "members of the Politburo." He cut off a question about Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), saying, "I'm not going to talk about my opponent here."
Staff writer Robin Wright contributed to this report.
----
Speaking for Europe, Chirac Warns Iran on Inspections
April 22, 2004
New York Times
By ELAINE SCIOLINO
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/22/international/europe/22iran.html
PARIS, April 21 - In a hardening of Europe's position toward Iran's nuclear activities, President Jacques Chirac of France criticized Iran on Wednesday for failing to comply fully with international inspections of its nuclear sites, and suggested that Iran had violated the spirit of an agreement with France, Germany and Britain to curtail its nuclear programs, senior French officials said.
In a 45-minute meeting at Élysée Palace with Foreign Minister Kamal Kharazi of Iran, Mr. Chirac also warned Tehran that unless it met the demands of the United Nations' weapons inspection agency before that group gathers in June for what he called a "decisive" meeting, it ran the risk that international goodwill would be eroded.
Mr. Chirac's tough remarks resulted from mounting suspicions in Europe and the United States that Iran is determined to develop nuclear weapons and is cheating on a much-heralded agreement in October with France, Britain and Germany to allow stricter inspections of nuclear sites and to suspend production of enriched uranium, which can be used to develop nuclear weapons.
"We are seeing a pattern of Iran making promises and then trying to find ways around them," said one senior French official. "The Iranians are fighting us trench by trench. They are very clever cheaters."
Mr. Chirac even got into some highly technical aspects of Iran's nuclear program, ticking off a list of specific things Iran must do. They included the signing of additional restrictions under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and explaining why it did not report a program for an advanced uranium- enrichment centrifuge.
Last month the International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations' watchdog agency, passed a resolution deploring that omission in the Iranian report, which was supposed to be the complete history of Iran's past and present nuclear activities. The agency director, Mohamed ElBaradei, described the omission as a "great setback."
Mr. Kharazi, for his part, told Mr. Chirac that Iran was fully complying with the agency's demands and pledged to give it a fuller report in mid-May. The Iranian also turned the tables, blaming the Europeans for breaking their promise to give Iran the advanced technology as they pledged to do under the October agreement.
"We have been trying to fulfill whatever we are committed to do," Mr. Kharazi said in an interview this evening. "Contrary to that, the European side has not exercised all its commitments. Still, our cooperation continues." Although the positions of the United States on the one side and Britain, France and Germany on the other over Iran's nuclear intentions have moved closer during the past year, the three European governments remain committed to negotiating with Iran in an attempt to moderate its behavior, while some members of the Bush administration favor punishing Iran with a Security Council resolution.
Both the Europeans and the Americans know that they have little leverage over Iran's nuclear activities and that Iran can play a positive role, or at least a neutral one, in Iraq. Iran shares a 730-mile border with Iraq and, as Mr. Kharazi made clear today, has "traditional relations and some influence" with its Shiite and Kurdish populations and with the Shiite religious leadership.
"This influence can be used to help Iraqis get united and collectively solve their problems," he said.
He confirmed reports that the Bush administration had asked Iran to help bring stability to Iraq.
"They know Iran is playing a positive role in Iraq and they have asked us to continue to play this positive role," he said. There was no American request for Iranian mediation, he said, but he added that Iran was a force that had to be reckoned with.
"No one," he said, "can deny that Iran is a regional player."
Mr. Kharazi dispatched a top Foreign Ministry official, Hossein Sadeghi, to Iraq last week on what Mr. Kharazi called a fact-finding mission with members of the Iraqi Governing Council and Iraqi clerics. Iran favors the plan to transfer authority to the Iraqis as soon as possible and has called for all foreign troops to be put under the United Nations flag.
Mr. Kharazi also insisted that Iran is determined to help preserve the territorial integrity of Iraq "by any means." Its partition, he added, would create "all sorts of problems for the whole region in terms of security, refugees."
As for the nuclear issue, early this month the foreign ministries of the three European countries issued identical statements sharply criticizing Iran's decision to start up a uranium conversion plant in Isfahan, saying it "sends the wrong signal" about Iran's pledge to suspend uranium enrichment.
The statement said the decision would make it more difficult for Iran to regain the trust of the international community and called on Iran to explain its intentions.
Some members of the Bush administration seem eager to show that the European agreement with Iran was a sham. In testimony before a House committee late last month, John Bolton, the under secretary of state for arms control and international security, said there was "no reason to believe that Iran has made a strategic decision to abandon its nuclear weapons program."
Mr. Bolton said the recent discovery that Iran is developing and testing advanced uranium-enrichment centrifuges proved his point, and accused Iran of a "pattern of repeatedly lying to and providing false reports" to the inspection agency.
-------- iraq / inspections
Envirocare's big plan: Operation Iraqi waste
By Robert Gehrke - rgehrke@sltrib.com
April 22, 2004
Salt Lake Tribune
http://www.sltrib.com/2004/Apr/04222004/utah/159579.asp
WASHINGTON -- Envirocare of Utah is exploring the possibility of building a low-level nuclear waste dump in the Iraqi desert to store uranium-tipped munitions and tank hulls and rubble contaminated by radioactive shells used by the United States.
But the plan is on hold for now because of unrest in the war-torn nation.
"Because of events in Iraq, it's obviously not real safe for civilians to be over there right now," Tim Barney, senior vice president for Envirocare, said Wednesday. "It's hard to predict when or if the situation will stabilize to the point where that can become a reality. It could be years down the road."
The mutilation of American contractors earlier this year by an Iraqi mob and kidnapping of other civilian workers have heightened concerns about safety in the region. Halliburton, a major contractor in Iraq, has lost 33 employees since the war started.
Hundreds of tons of weapons equipped with depleted uranium were fired at Iraqi tanks during the two Gulf Wars. The depleted uranium is a byproduct of nuclear reactors and weapons refinement and is 40 percent less radioactive than normal uranium.
The munitions are either large uranium-tipped bullets or rods of the depleted uranium that are inside special tank-killer munitions. Rather than losing shape like normal shells, the uranium's density keeps its shape as it pierces tank armor. As it passes through the armor the uranium also throws off sparks that can ignite fuels or ammunition inside the targeted tank.
Veterans of the first Gulf War have expressed concern that exposure to the depleted uranium may be to blame for illnesses they now suffer.
"Going clear back to the first Gulf War, there's low-level material that needs to be cleaned up, primarily depleted uranium," Barney said. "We thought it was protective of the public health there to centralize that in a disposal facility, to get it out of the neighborhoods."
After the first war, 23 U.S. vehicles were recovered and shipped back to the United States for disposal while wrecked hulls of other burned-out tanks were piled in a "boneyard" in Kuwait.
Envirocare envisions a smaller version of the facility it operates in Clive, Utah, where it could seal contaminated material in thick cells buried underground.
The company has hired former Idaho Rep. Larry LaRocco and his firm to lobby Congress for the project. Company representatives have met with military officials and members of Congress to discuss funding the cleanup, although talks are preliminary.
Envirocare officers and the company's political action committee have contributed to political campaigns $107,125 since 1998, according to Federal Election Committee records, with most of it going to Republican candidates. Khosrow Semnani, the president and founder of the company, was born in Iran, Iraq's neighbor to the east.
Barney said it is hard to know the extent of the contamination problem, but expects the price tag for the work would be in "the millions, not the hundred millions."
Last month, Michael Kilpatrick, deputy director of Deployment Health Support, said about 127 tons of depleted-uranium munitions had been used by the Army and Air Force with an unknown amount used by Marines.
More than 320 tons of depleted-uranium shells were used in the first Gulf War, the Defense Department has said.
A study by the World Health Organization said that depleted uranium "has the potential to have chemical and radiological effects on health" if exposures were high enough and recommended that heavily exposed areas should be cordoned off and cleaned up and the waste disposed of in accordance with international standards.
Steve Robinson of the National Gulf War Resource Center, which assists veterans of both Iraq wars, said the Defense Department owes it to veterans to conduct thorough studies of the health effects and it is a good idea to clean up the uranium penetrators and damaged vehicles.
"I don't know if the government is going to want to get involved in what is clearly turning out to be a problem in Iraq," he said. "If we have to start being responsible for things that we shoot up around the world it could be pretty cost-prohibitive over time."
The major health concern is the chemical toxicity of the depleted uranium, rather than exposure to radiation. Fine particles created when the ordinance strikes the tank or in a resulting fire can also be inhaled by soldiers in the immediate area, according to Defense Department studies.
Last year, a Pentagon report said that there is no evidence that depleted uranium has caused adverse health effects in troops, including 90 soldiers exposed to the material in friendly fire incidents.
Col. James Naughton of the Army Material Command said at the time that the weapons give the U.S. troops an advantage they don't want to lose.
-------- israel
Amid fog of secrecy, Israel makes progress on nukes
Reuters
22 Apr 2004
http://www.khilafah.com/home/category.php?DocumentID=9414&TagID=2
DIMONA: Israel's nuclear secrets were once so well hidden that the world could only guess whether it had a "bomb in the basement" of its Dimona atomic reactor. But 18 years after Mordechai Vanunu blew the whistle on the Jewish state as an undeclared nuclear power, the question is how far it has advanced from an underground programme to the ability to launch atomic weapons from land, air and beneath the sea.
Foreign-based experts who track Israel's murky nuclear developments say it is still forging ahead despite a sharp reduction in strategic threats from hostile neighbours since the US-led invasion of Iraq a year ago.
Whatever danger Iraq posed faded with the fall of Saddam Hussein. Libya, another longtime foe, is voluntarily scrapping its weapons of mass destruction. Even Iran, seen by Israel as the greatest threat to its existence, has agreed to UN inspection of its nuclear plants.
But Israel, which maintains a policy of "strategic ambiguity", never admitting or denying possession of nuclear weapons, has been unmoved. "Israel lives in a tough neighbourhood," said John Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.org, a Washington think tank. "It will take time to digest shifts in the security landscape."
Nonetheless, with the swirl of publicity surrounding Vanunu's release from prison on Wednesday, Israel could face increased pressure to come clean about a nuclear capability that foreign diplomats and intelligence services have long described as a "bomb in the basement".
MORE AT STAKE?: Outside experts believe Israel has more at stake now than in 1986 when Vanunu, a former Dimona technician, leaked to Britain's Sunday Times photos and details of what he said was a nuclear bomb factory built deep underground in the Negev desert.
The secrets he spilled led to projections Israel had amassed 100 to 200 warheads, making it the fifth or sixth largest member of the nuclear club. More recent US intelligence estimates put the number at about 80 bombs.
The United States has tacitly accepted its ally's nuclear status and has not pushed it to sign the non-proliferation treaty, keeping Dimona exempt from international inspections.
But since Vanunu's disclosures, Israel has been anything but idle. "They have worked to make their deterrent more survivable, to modernise delivery systems," said Wade Boese, research director at the Arms Control Association, a US watchdog group.
Analysts say Israel's nuclear air command consists of U.S.-made F-16 and F-4 fighter jets dubbed "Black Squadrons", on 24-hour alert at the Tel Nof airbase in central Israel.
In addition, they say, Israel has dozens of nuclear missiles, with its longer-range Jericho-2's capable of striking targets 1,500 km away, bringing Iran within reach.
Experts say satellite images show many are hidden in caves southeast of Tel Aviv. A spy satellite launch in 2002 was seen as a warning signal of Israel's ballistic missile advances.
As Iran's long-range missiles have fuelled Israel's fears about vulnerability of its land arsenal, analysts believe the Jewish state has also made strides towards arming its three Dolphin-class submarines with modified nuclear missiles.
Shimmering behind razor-wire fences, Dimona - which Israel once tried to pass off as a textile factory - is thought to remain the country's sole source of weapons-grade plutonium.
With Vanunu's whistle-blowing as the last major security breach at the plant, experts are increasingly concerned about safety conditions there after more than 40 years in operation.
Arab and Muslim states accuse the United States of applying a double standard, tolerating Israel's presumed weapons of mass destruction but insisting other Middle East states disarm.
UN nuclear chief Mohammed ElBaradei recently voiced fears Israel's refusal to come out of the nuclear closet would serve as an incentive to others in the region to match its arsenal. But an Israeli official said: "Ambiguity keeps our foes off balance, preventing the arms race from getting out of control."
Israel has apparently abstained from nuclear testing but, according to published reports, it used a veiled threat of nuclear retaliation against Syria and Egypt during the 1973 Middle East war to pressure the United States to airlift arms.
Public debate on nuclear weapons remains muted in Israel, where most people view them as a last line of defence for a tiny country surrounded by enemies and an insurance policy against a repeat of the Nazi Holocaust.
But Israeli scholar Avner Cohen, author of "Israel and the Bomb", thinks the "don't ask, don't tell" policy is anachronistic and that Israel must find a way to calm international nerves while retaining a nuclear deterrent. "It's Israel's last taboo and its worst-kept secret," he said.
----
Vanunu release spurs nuke talk
April 22, 2004
By Susanna Loof
ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20040421-094316-5053r.htm
VIENNA, Austria - Israel continues to produce atomic weapons and already has hundreds of nuclear warheads, researchers said as Israeli officials released a man imprisoned for 18 years for leaking some of the country's most sensitive nuclear secrets.
Because Israel is not party to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has no power to look into its nuclear program.
The U.N. watchdog agency, however, is seeking contacts with Israel, and IAEA Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei repeatedly has called for talks on eliminating all weapons of mass destruction from the Middle East.
Israeli authorities yesterday freed Mordechai Vanunu, jailed for leaking details and pictures of Israel's nuclear-weapons program to a British newspaper in 1986.
Israel neither confirms nor denies it has nuclear weapons and refuses to discuss such speculation.
Mr. Vanunu walked out of a prison in Ashkelon and immediately defied Israeli restrictions by speaking with the international press to demand the Jewish state open its nuclear facilities to international inspection.
Friedrich Steinhaeusler, a former IAEA nuclear-safety expert who now is a physics professor at the University of Salzburg, insisted that Israel still has nuclear weapons and is producing more.
The best estimates put the size of the Israeli arsenal at 150 nuclear weapons, Mr. Steinhaeusler said. With air, sea and land-based launching systems, "They have the Middle East under control," he said.
But Avner Cohen, an expert on Israel and nuclear weapons at the Maryland-based Center for International and Security Studies, said, "There is a lot of uncertainty" about the number of weapons held by Israel.
"There are all kind of estimates, from the upper teens on the lower side to over 300 on the higher side," he said.
John Simpson, director of the Mountbatten Center of International Studies at Britain's University of Southampton, estimated the number of atomic weapons held by Israel at no more than 200.
He said his estimate was based on the presumed output of plutonium by a reactor in Dimona and on the number of tunnels in cliffs from which the weapons could be deployed.
IAEA spokesman Mark Gwozdecky declined to comment on Israel, saying the agency has no jurisdiction there.
But Mr. ElBaradei, an Egyptian, in a lecture earlier this month, condemned "this imbalance in the region, [with] Israel sitting on nuclear weapons and everybody else trying to stick to the Nonproliferation Treaty."
However, Mr. ElBaradei said Israel was unlikely to readily change its stance.
He said Israelis think "as long as many people, individuals and groups continue to talk about the destruction of Israel, they just simply cannot afford to give up the nuclear option in the absence of a comprehensive peace accepted by the people of the region."
----
Nuclear Spy, Icon Released In Israel Vanunu Exposed Weapons Program
By John Ward Anderson
Washington Post Foreign Service
Thursday, April 22, 2004
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29858-2004Apr21.html
JERUSALEM, April 21 -- Mordechai Vanunu, convicted of espionage and treason for exposing Israel's nuclear secrets, was released Wednesday after serving an 18-year prison term and launched into a defiant tirade against Israel and its weapons program.
In an impromptu news conference just inside the prison gates that was carried by Israeli television and satellite networks around the world, Vanunu blasted his "very cruel, barbaric treatment" during his incarceration, which included 111/2 years in solitary confinement that he said was designed to drive him insane.
Speaking English rather then Hebrew to protest Israeli restrictions that bar him from talking to foreigners, Vanunu, 49, called on Israel to open its nuclear-reactor and weapons facilities at the Negev Nuclear Research Center, near Dimona -- where he worked for nine years -- to international inspection. He said he had no more secrets to divulge and spoke for the first time about his 1986 abduction in Rome by Israeli agents, who spirited him back to Israel for trial on treason and espionage charges after he leaked information about Israel's weapons program to London's Sunday Times newspaper.
"To all those who are calling me a traitor, I am saying I am proud, I am proud and happy to do what I did," Vanunu, dressed in a new white shirt and dark tie, told reporters just inside the main entrance of Shikma prison in the coastal town of Ashkelon.
"I don't have any more secrets," Vanunu said, denying Israeli claims that he possesses additional top secret information that could damage the state. Citing those concerns, Israeli officials have placed stringent restrictions on Vanunu, prohibiting him from leaving the country, approaching its borders and international ports of entry and talking to foreigners without permission.
"I don't want to harm Israel," Vanunu said. "I want to leave Israel and start a new life" in the United States, where he said he would like to teach, study history and raise a family.
At the time that the Sunday Times published Vanunu's revelations 18 years ago, nuclear experts were estimating that Israel had 10 to 20 primitive nuclear weapons. Vanunu's story, accompanied by photographs the former employee had secretly snapped inside Israel's weapons plant, led experts to name Israel the world's sixth-largest nuclear power.
Then, as today, Israel had a policy known as nuclear ambiguity, and it refused, as it still does, to confirm or deny possession of any nuclear weapons. Recent estimates by the Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Monterey Institute for International Studies place the country's current arsenal at 100 to 200 weapons, which can be delivered by ballistic missiles or aircraft.
Israel is one of four countries that have not signed the 1970 nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, that would have obligated it to open its nuclear facilities to international inspectors. The other countries are India, Pakistan and Cuba. North Korea withdrew from the treaty last year.
During his closed-door trial and later from inside his prison cell, Vanunu gradually became an international cause célèbre and an icon to the anti-nuclear community. At home, however, he was vilified as Israel's worst traitor.
He emerged from the prison building Wednesday at about 11:12 a.m. and raised both arms triumphantly, flashing the V sign with both hands. "I am Mordechai Vanunu, the man behind the Sunday Times article from October 5, 1986," he told a group of reporters.
Israeli officials helped organize the news conference inside the prison after heated exchanges between pro- and anti-Vanunu protesters caused concern about security, according to Israeli government spokesman Daniel Seaman. Some Vanunu opponents reportedly were calling for his death.
The government knew in advance that Vanunu intended to talk to the international media, Seaman said, and so under the circumstances he did not violate a prohibition against talking to foreign reporters.
Seaman said Vanunu's release was "similar to a parole agreement," and that he would be monitored to ensure that he abides the "guidelines" imposed on him. If Vanunu violates them, Seaman said, a review board could send him back to jail for six months.
"I will continue to speak against all kinds of nuclear weapons, against all the world's nuclear weapons," Vanunu said as his brother and most vocal supporter, Meir Vanunu, tried unsuccessfully to coax him into a waiting car and stop talking.
--------
Vanunu, Disdaining Israel, Is Freed to Chants vs. Cheers
By GREG MYRE
April 22, 2004
New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/22/international/middleeast/22vanu.html
ASHKELON, Israel, April 21 - Angry Israelis chanted, "Shut up, atomic spy!" and "Death to traitors!" as a defiant Mordechai Vanunu headed out of prison on Wednesday after 18 years, flashing the victory sign and declaring he was proud of what he had done.
Mr. Vanunu, 49, appears to be as widely reviled today as he was in 1986, when he was kidnapped by Israel's intelligence service in Rome after giving a detailed interview on Israel's clandestine nuclear program to The Sunday Times of London.
A former nuclear technician, he faces a list of restrictions that bar him from leaving the country for a year or speaking with foreigners. He must tell the authorities in advance before traveling inside Israel.
Yet he held an impromptu news conference in the Shikma Prison courtyard before reaching the street, where dozens of supporters, mostly American and British, cheered him as a hero of the anti-nuclear cause, while several hundred Israelis denounced him as a spy and a traitor.
"To all those calling me a traitor, I'm proud and happy to do what I did," he said. Israel's justice minister, Yosef Lapid, said Mr. Vanunu would be closely monitored because the government believed he could divulge more nuclear information.
"This is the treatment he deserved even if the radical left turns him into a hero," Mr. Lapid told army radio. "He betrayed Israel."
But Mr. Vanunu said he had spilled all his secrets in the Sunday Times interview, where he provided photos and described his nine years working at Israel's nuclear complex in Dimona, in the Negev Desert.
"My secret is dead," he said, refusing to speak Hebrew and speaking to reporters in English. "My case is dead. Everything was published."
"I am not harming Israel," he added. "I'm not interested in Israel."
Mr. Vanunu, who converted to Christianity, said he wanted to move to the United States, get married and study history.
Even before he spoke out, it was widely assumed that Israel had nuclear arms. But to this day, it refuses to confirm or deny that, under its policy of "nuclear ambiguity."
Based on Mr. Vanunu's information, nuclear experts estimated that Israel had between 100 and 200 nuclear weapons at that time. More recent estimates are in a similar range.
Mr. Vanunu said Israel did not "need the nuclear arms, especially now when all the Middle East is free from nuclear weapons."
He also complained of "cruel and barbaric treatment" in prison, where he was in solitary confinement for more than 11 years.
As he reached the front of the prison, he stuck one arm through the gate and gave the victory sign. He wanted to walk out, but the police would not permit it because of the mostly hostile crowd.
Instead, he staged the news conference inside the gate. The authorities made no attempt to stop him, and after nearly half an hour, his brother Meir Vanunu guided him into a car.
Supporters threw roses on the vehicle, which was surrounded by the police as it inched through the crowd.
"I felt enormous elation," said Susannah York, the British actress who was among the foreign supporters who came for the release.
But angry Israelis began pounding on the car with their fists and screaming at him until the police escort was able to clear a path. Others held up up blackened roses as a symbol of their opposition.
-------- korea
Kim agrees to nuke dialogue
April 22, 2004
By Stephanie Hoo
ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20040421-094319-5303r.htm
BEIJING - North Korea's leader told Chinese officials he is committed to ending a nuclear dispute through dialogue, China said yesterday, in what observers saw as a sign of progress in resolving the standoff with the United States and its allies.
After top-level meetings in Beijing, North Korean leader Kim Jong-il and China agreed to continue six-nation talks on defusing the crisis, the official Xinhua News Agency reported.
The report, issued after the secretive Mr. Kim left the Chinese capital earlier in the day, was China's first public confirmation of his three-day visit.
Mr. Kim's trip followed Vice President Dick Cheney's visit to Beijing last week. During that visit, Mr. Cheney urged Chinese leaders to press North Korea to reach a settlement.
Washington insists on a "complete, verifiable and irreversible dismantling" of North Korea's nuclear facilities. North Korea says it would only give up its program in exchange for aid for its decrepit economy and a written promise from the United States that it won't attack.
Mr. Kim's trip to longtime ally China this week was his first since the nuclear dispute flared in October 2002, when U.S. officials said North Korea admitted running a secret nuclear weapons program in violation of international agreements.
Meeting with President Hu Jintao, Mr. Kim said North Korea "sticks to the final nuclear-weapon-free goal and its basic position on seeking a peaceful solution through dialogue has not changed," Xinhua reported.
The last round of six-nation talks - involving China, the two Koreas, the United States, Japan and Russia - ended in February in Beijing without a settlement.
Mr. Kim also met former President Jiang Zemin, who remains head of the powerful commission that runs China's military. In addition, he met Prime Minister Wen Jiabao, Vice President Zeng Qinghong and Wu Bangguo, the No. 2 leader of China's Communist Party.
Chinese media had been silent about Mr. Kim's trip, though it was widely reported in the South Korean media. Following his departure, Chinese state television showed footage of him hugging each of the leaders. He was shown dressed either in a Mao-style buttoned tunic or in his favored tan zip-up jacket with matching pants - while the Chinese leaders wore Western-style suits and ties.
North Korea's worsening economy makes it more likely Mr. Kim will pay heed to China's calls for him to soften his position, observers said.
"He's losing Chinese political and economic support more and more every day," said Park Joon-young, a political science professor at Ewha Women's University in Seoul. "Everybody is expecting something good out of this [meeting], because Kim Jong-il made a new move and came out of his den."
In the end, it is North Korea that suffers the most if the standoff continues, analysts said.
--------
North Korean Ends 'Candid' China Visit
Beijing Said to Urge Dialogue on Nuclear Arms
By Edward Cody and Anthony Faiola
Washington Post Foreign Service
Thursday, April 22, 2004; Page A22
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A30385-2004Apr21.html
BEIJING, April 21 -- China announced Wednesday that the North Korean leader, Kim Jong Il, had reached a "broad common understanding" with the Chinese government during three days of talks in Beijing on the crisis over his country's nuclear weapons program and will make his "own contributions" to resolving the dispute.
The announcement, relayed by China's official media, stopped short of describing what, if anything, had been decided on how to settle the standoff over North Korea's nuclear weapons program and U.S. demands that it be completely and permanently dismantled. But official reports were framed to convey the impression that Kim and the Chinese leadership were not at odds during their secret discussions and that progress had been made.
"In a friendly and candid atmosphere, the two countries' leaders informed each other about the situation in their countries and exchanged viewpoints on developing relations between the [Communist] parties and the countries of China and North Korea, on the international and regional situation and on the nuclear crisis on the Korean Peninsula," a government announcement said. "Broad common understanding was made."
Kim was shown on government television shaking hands with and embracing President Hu Jintao, Premier Wen Jiabao, former president Jiang Zemin, who still heads the Communist Party's Central Military Commission, and other smiling government and party leaders.
The Chinese officials wore business suits with fashionable ties while Kim wore an open-collared military-style tunic, symbolizing the gap that has opened between the two countries since China moved away from doctrinaire socialism. Kim, 62, appeared cheerful and energetic, although his scalp was visible beneath his thinning bouffant hairdo. In another gesture of hospitality, Jiang hosted Kim for what was described as a family lunch Tuesday at the traditional Quanjude Peking Duck restaurant near Tiananmen Square in central Beijing, restaurant employees said. Kim is known for appreciating fine food and drink.
The International Department of the Chinese Communist Party said Hu had reminded Kim that China, as a Korean Peninsula neighbor, "has been committed to safeguarding peace and stability on the peninsula, supports a nuclear-weapons-free goal, supports a peaceful solution to the nuclear issue through dialogue and upholds that the Democratic People's Republic of Korea's rational concerns should be addressed."
This was seen as a bow to Kim's insistence that, in return for giving up his nuclear weapons program, North Korea should get formal security guarantees from the United States. But, the reports said, Hu made it clear that getting rid of the nuclear weapons also had to be addressed.
North Korea "will continue to adopt a patient and flexible manner and actively participate in the six-party talks process and make its own contributions to the progress of the talks," the New China News Agency quoted a party spokesman as saying, referring to meetings that have included the United States, Japan, South Korea and Russia, in addition to North Korea and China. The spokesman reported that Kim said North Korea "sticks to the final nuclear-weapons-free goal, and its basic position on seeking a peaceful solution through dialogue has not changed."
The success of Kim's talks here will ultimately be measured by whether North Korea makes significant concessions in the coming weeks and months in the tense nuclear dialogue. For instance, North Korea so far has openly acknowledged only its program of making weapons-grade plutonium; the United States insists it was told by North Korean officials in late 2002 that the country has a second weapons program based on enriched uranium.
"It is unlikely that we will know immediately whether China's diplomacy worked," said In Taek Hyun, president of the International Relations Institute at Seoul's Korea University. "But if we see key movement by Kim in the coming weeks or months on the deadlocked issues, such as the uranium program, we will know that the Chinese have achieved something significant."
The reports on Kim's visit broke three days of official silence since the North Korean leader crossed the border into China on Sunday night in a special train car and rolled into Beijing at midmorning Monday. As the world's press discussed the visit in detail, particularly in South Korea, Chinese officials refused even to confirm his presence and ordered Chinese media to keep silent. Only as Kim's train headed northward Wednesday afternoon, toward the North Korean border about 500 miles northeast of here, were they authorized to break the news to Chinese people.
The Bush administration will be eager to hear an official Chinese account of the discussions. Vice President Cheney, in a visit to Beijing last week, told Hu's government that time was running out on the months-long Chinese effort to broker a diplomatic solution. North Korea has sought security guarantees and economic aid in return for shutting down its nuclear weapons programs, but the United States has insisted the programs must be dismantled before North Korea can expect any benefits.
That effort produced a second round of negotiations at the end of February. But the six-party session, held in Beijing, yielded agreement only to form working groups on various aspects of the crisis and to meet again by midyear.
Since then, according to Chinese and U.S. officials, North Korea has been reluctant to move forward on the working groups. Pyongyang is eager first to nail down guarantees of economic aid in return for an offer to suspend its weapons program pending further negotiations on security guarantees and the U.S. demand for scrapping of the program, they said.
Despite their patient diplomacy, Chinese officials recently have shown signs of growing irritation with Kim, according to a source with access to the thinking of Beijing's leaders. The North Korean nuclear crisis has been an unwelcome distraction for the government in Beijing, which wants to focus on economic development and the danger that Taiwan might declare independence from the mainland.
Zhang Liangui, a North Korea expert at the Communist Party's leadership school, noted that one of Kim's main goals during his visit was to win promises of increased economic aid. China already is North Korea's main benefactor and its lone ally of substance.
With its economy in shambles and millions of people dependent on foreign food aid, North Korea needs all the help it can get. Last year, for instance, North Korea produced only about 4.15 million tons of grains; it requires 5.1 million tons to feed its 22 million people, according to U.N. tallies.
South Korean newspapers, quoting sources in China, said the free-market reforms that have revolutionized China's economy were a subject of discussion during Kim's visit. North Korea has made tentative experiments with free-market rules. But overall, it retains a tightly buckled-up socialist economy of the kind China abandoned as far back as 1979.
Kim on Wednesday morning visited the Hancunhe model village on the outskirts of Beijing as a way to see the results of China's reforms. South Korea's semiofficial Yonhap news agency reported that Chinese police hauled away and briefly detained about 10 South Korean and other foreign journalists trying to cover the visit.
Faiola reported from Seoul. Researcher Jin Ling contributed to this report.
----
North Korean Leader Tells China He's Committed to Nuclear Talks
April 22, 2004
New York Times
By JIM YARDLEY
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/22/international/asia/22kore.html
BEIJING, April 21 - The Chinese government on Wednesday finally acknowledged the secretive visit of the North Korean leader, Kim Jong Il, and announced that he would continue with the six-nation talks organized by China to defuse North Korea's nuclear standoff with the United States.
Until Wednesday, China had refused to confirm that Mr. Kim was even in Beijing, despite various reports and much tangible evidence of his presence. But after Mr. Kim left Beijing by train on Wednesday, the official Chinese media rushed out reports about the "unofficial visit."
The accounts offered few hints of any major breakthroughs but suggested that North Korea was firmly committed to more talks. Mr. Kim told his hosts that he wanted a peaceful resolution to the crisis prompted by his country's nuclear program and that he would be flexible and patient in pursuing the six-nation negotiations, involving North and South Korea, China, Japan, the United States and Russia, the Chinese state media reported.
Reports in the South Korean news media said Chinese officials had urged Mr. Kim to be more flexible in negotiating with the United States. The reports also said Mr. Kim was willing to resolve the nuclear dispute during the next round of talks, scheduled for no later than June, but offered no specifics.
Mr. Kim arrived in Beijing on Monday morning on his personal train and met with the Chinese president, Hu Jintao, at the Great Hall of the People, and attended a banquet with high-level officials. He also met with Prime Minister Wen Jiabao and former President Jiang Zemin, who remains the leader of China's military.
Mr. Kim made a side trip to the city of Tianjin, and the South Korean media reported that he and Mr. Jiang ate Peking duck at a restaurant near Tiananmen Square. He also briefly visited a model farm on the outskirts of Beijing, before his train headed toward northeast China and, ultimately, North Korea. It was unclear when he would arrive in Pyongyang, North Korea's capital, and some reports indicated he might stop in the Chinese city of Shenyang.
On Wednesday, Chinese television viewers, who had previously been given no information about Mr. Kim's visit, were suddenly shown images on state television of Mr. Kim shaking hands with Mr. Hu and embracing other leaders, including Mr. Jiang and Mr. Wen. The evening news dedicated more than 10 minutes of coverage to Mr. Kim, including videotape of him and other leaders at the banquet.
On Mr. Kim's last visit to China, in 2001, a similar news blackout prevailed until he had returned to North Korea. On that trip, Mr. Kim paid a surprise visit to the Shanghai stock exchange. Chinese leaders have urged Mr. Kim to embrace the kind of market-driven economic reforms that have made China the world's fastest-growing economy.
The first two rounds of the six-nation talks produced largely inconclusive results. Plans called for working groups from the nations to have begun their work, but the groups have not met yet. Some analysts said Chinese officials probably pressed Mr. Kim to commit to the working groups. Meanwhile, the United States has also been accused of dragging its feet on the working groups, a point denied by American officials.
"We are ready to move forward with a working group session as soon as all the parties, including North Korea, are ready for a meeting," said an official at the American Embassy in Beijing. "We have long said that we will measure success in the talks through concrete progress."
--------
S.Korea Sees Progress at Next Atomic Talks - Minister
April 22, 2004
By REUTERS
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/international/international-korea-north-minister.html
SEOUL (Reuters) - South Korea believes progress is likely in the next round of talks on North Korea's nuclear weapons ambitions after the communist state's leader visited China this week, a South Korean minister said on Thursday.
Political analysts said there was an increasing sense of urgency about the talks, implied by Kim Jong-il's visit just a week after Vice President Dick Cheney was in China.
On Wednesday, Kim ended his secret three-day visit, which Chinese media said allowed the two sides to reaffirm commitment to the six-party talks that bring the two Koreas, China, Japan, Russia and the United States together to discuss the crisis.
``I believe there is a high possibility of progress in the third round of six-way talks,'' Unification Minister Jeong Se-hyun said.
The assessment, made to a group of unification advisers and confirmed by his ministry, came after the South Korean government said it hoped Kim's visit would help resolve the nuclear problem.
Beijing hosted two rounds of negotiations on how to dismantle the North's nuclear programs but little progress was made in narrowing the differences between Pyongyang and Washington.
In its first comment on the trip, Pyongyang's state media confirmed on Thursday Kim's trip to and meetings with Chinese leaders in Beijing.
The report by the North's official Korea Central News Agency, closely following Chinese state media Xinhua's Wednesday announcement, came hours after Kim was reported by Seoul's media as crossing back into North Korea by train.
South Korea's Unification Ministry and National Intelligence Service could not confirm the report of Kim's return by the South's Yonhap news agency.
``The DPRK side sticks to the final nuclear-free goal and its basic position on seeking a peaceful solution through dialogue has not changed,'' the KCNA news agency quoted Kim as having said in Beijing, using the initials of North Korea's official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
``Kim said the DPRK side will continue to take a patient and flexible manner and actively participate in the six-party talks process,'' KCNA said.
Pyongyang targeted the South with a rant against Seoul's foreign minister. KCNA said remarks from Ban Ki-moon reiterating his call for the North to dismantle its nuclear plans were an attempt to stifle the North.
South Korean authorities are ``raising a terrific outcry over the self-defensive nuclear deterrent force of their fellow countrymen,'' the Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of the Fatherland said, according to KCNA. The committee oversees relations with the South.
SENSE OF URGENCY
South Korea, like the United States, wants the North to halt all nuclear programs as a quick first stage to an eventual irreversible dismantlement preceded and followed by verification by outside inspectors. The North wants security guarantees.
Kim's trip to Beijing came a week after Cheney stopped there to urge China to boost its role in ending the stand-off.
There is urgency reflected in Kim's unannounced visit to his country's last remaining communist ally, analysts said.
A national security expert at Seoul National University, Chang Dal-joong, said dire economic conditions in the North meant China would have wanted to be assured the country could avoid a collapse in the months ahead as the six countries negotiate.
``Kim Jong-il knows it's difficult to expect a breakthrough until the U.S. presidential election in November, and he would have wanted to know if there would be help from China,'' he said.
China is increasingly alarmed about North Korea's nuclear capability and what it might do with it, Chang added.
Ralph Cossa, head of the Pacific Forum CSIS think tank in Hawaii, said China's patience was low when it summoned Kim.
``I think the Chinese are getting a little fed up with the North Korean games,'' which are undermining China's own national security interests, Cossa told reporters in Singapore.
Chang said this month's parliamentary election win by the liberal Uri Party in South Korea could change ties with the North. But Jeong was less optimistic.
``If the North's expectation for the election was high, its demands will be greater,'' he said.
The election result prompted an unusually positive response from the North, leading some analysts to suggest Pyongyang would expect favors for its perceived help in ousting the conservative opposition.
-------- u.s. nuc weapons
Stockpile handling questioned by IG
ROGER SNODGRASS, roger@lamonitor.com,
Los Angeles Monitor Assistant Editor,
April 22, 2004
http://www.lamonitor.com/articles/2004/04/21/headline_news/news03.txt
A program to monitor aging nuclear weapons may be missing a few of its inspections at Los Alamos National Laboratory and two other national laboratories. A report by the inspector general of the Department of Energy said the National Nuclear Security Administration's enhanced surveillance campaign has missed some of its milestones and risks missing more in the future.
"At the time of our review, Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories and the Pantex Plant had not completed critical work in four of the six major technical elements: pits, canned sub-assemblies, high-explosives and non-nuclear materials," it was stated in the IG's report.
Documents indicate that LANL designed five of the seven nuclear weapons that are subject to certification each year.
Jim Danneskiold, a laboratory spokesman, said aging experiments are going on here and at LLNL.
"LANL is meeting the currently approved project schedule," he said. "The LANL alloys were accepted on the first casting."
He said the next milestone is in October and that the lab was confident it would meet that one, too.
The problems identified by the IG were attributed to "weaknesses in program planning." The three laboratories "had not adequately planned for unexpected events that arose, such as safety basis documents which required updating and other improvements; essential facilities which were found to be unavailable when needed; critical equipment failure and a lack of necessary weapons parts."
The report said the problems might impact future plans on weapons work, including decisions related to locating and building a modern plutonium pit facility.
In its response, NNSA said while it generally agreed with the report, "we do not agree with the observation that we are at risk of missing future milestones."
A NNSA official wrote the top-level milestones were on schedule, as were "the vast majority of individual milestones" in the program.
In one example, the IG report faults all three laboratories for missing major technical milestones, having to do with the plutonium pits used as the trigger for a nuclear weapon. A LANL program has been developed to accelerate the aging process in plutonium by spiking the plutonium used in weapons, Pu-239 with the isotope Pu-238, which decays 300 times faster, according to a laboratory announcement in July 2002.
The aging experiments, involving a series of comparisons with unspiked plutonium, are designed to study the effect of time on the properties and characteristics of PU-239, as it ages a virtual 60 years in what is actually four years.
In other criticism that did not specify a laboratory by name, the IG said, "[P]roject plans had not included sufficient time or resources to deal with unexpected events that arose such as: inadequate safety basis documents, unavailable facilities, equipment failure, or lack of necessary weapons parts."
Stockpile stewardship is the primary mission of NNSA and its nuclear weapons laboratories. An annual certification process, involves the secretaries of defense and energy, who are advised by a Nuclear Weapons Council, the directors of the nuclear weapons laboratories and the commander of the U.S. Strategic Command.
If the secretaries are unable to assert a high level of confidence in one of the weapons systems, the President could authorize withdrawal from the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and authorize nuclear testing. The possibility of resuming tests has been prepared for under the Defense Authorization Act, "to achieve an 18-month test readiness posture."
In his written testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, Brooks emphasized, "We have no plan to resume testing." He called the accelerated readiness a "prudent hedge" against unanticipated problems in the stockpile program.
-------- u.s. nuc facilities
Nuclear Freeze
Atomic power promises wonderful benefits, but also some frightening possibilities
by Joe Tarr
MetroPulse • Vol. 14, No. 17
April 22, 2004
http://www.metropulse.com/dir_zine/dir_2004/1417/t_cover.html
There are two visions of what nuclear power could be. One is a dream that it could provide unlimited, cheap power for the world, pollution-free, screeching the brakes on global warming. The other is a nightmare that will lead to nuclear arms proliferation, leave the country vulnerable to catastrophic accidents and terrorist attacks, and leave lethal waste for the next 240,000 years.
As the country's power generation system ages, people are giving the grand experiment with nuclear power a second look. When you fire up your computer, watch a movie, cook or fire up your stereo, the electricity coming into your house is most likely coming from a coal, nuclear or gas power plant that is 30 or 40 years old. The United States is going to have to invest in new sources of power generation.
On the surface, nuclear power is enticing. At a time when air pollution is reaching critical levels and carbon emissions from fossil fuels are accelerating global warming and threatening to cause climate change, many people think nuclear power could offer humans a way out of the power dilemma.
TVA is once again looking at nuclear power as a solution to growing power demand, restarting a reactor at Browns Ferry near Athens, Ala. and contemplating finishing a reactor in Bellefonte, Ala.
But others say nuclear power is not the panacea its supporters think it is. In fact, the concerns with it are so numerous and frightening, it would be a grave mistake to reinvest in nuclear energy.
Here is a cursory look at the key issues. They are vital because the country is on the verge of entering a new nuclear age and much is at stake: billions in tax and utility dollars, human lives, pollution, toxic waste, terrorism threats, nuclear arms proliferation, and human health.
Even if enviromentalists are wrong and it can be done safely, it has to be done well.
"Nuclear power is not necessarily inherently unsafe," says Stephen Smith, executive director of Southern Alliance to Clean Energy, which is against investing in nukes. "But it's inherently unforgiving. If you make a mistake, it's enormous."
History
In 1953, President Dwight Eisenhower delivered a speech to the United Nations about the dreadful age the world had entered, the nuclear era.
Eight years earlier, the United States had dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, killing 240,000 people. Some say the scientists who had helped create such a devastating weapon and the people who decided to use it, were racked with guilt and seeking a way for their discoveries to be used for good.
The former general outlined the apocalypse that nuclear weapons could cause, but then went on to offer what he saw as a way out of the quagmire: Atoms for Peace.
"So my country's purpose is to help us move out of the dark chamber of horrors into the light, to find a way by which the minds of men, the hopes of men, the souls of men everywhere, can move forward toward peace and happiness and well being," Eisenhower told the world's leaders.
His plan was to create an international agency that would share nuclear power generation technology with the world. The United States would enrich the plutonium used in reactors at no cost to participating countries, if they would agree to submit to scrutiny of their plants, to ensure they didn't use them to develop nuclear weapons.
For a while, the country did just that, and the nuclear power boom was on. (President Richard Nixon eventually reneged on the commitment, and other countries began enrichment programs, a policy that caused further proliferation of nuclear weapons.) According to a Greenpeace report, "Fiscal Fission: The Economic Failure of Nuclear Power," from 1950 to 1990, U.S. taxpayers, consumers and investors spent an estimated $492 billion to develop and obtain nuclear power, of which $396 billion was spent by utilities, most of which was paid by utility customers. The government subsidized the rest.
The government subsidizes nuclear power in a number of ways. A lot of money is provided for research and development. And the Price-Anderson Act of 1957 (which has since been revised) provides taxpayer money to insure reactors in the event of a severe accident. (Currently all reactors are required to be insured to $300 million, with all reactors pitching in for a percentage to provide for an extra $95.8 million for an accident at any reactor. The U.S. government will pay for any costs beyond that amount.)
Recent energy bills have proposed low-interest loan guarantees and production tax credits. Of course, power generation is an area that the government has a clear interest in subsidizing. Environmentalists argue it should subsidize more benign power forms, such as renewable energy or cleaner forms of natural gas and coal.
"It's not so much that we're opposed to government involvement in developing energy policy. But nuclear energy is supposed to be a mature energy, but they still can't lose the crutch of the U.S. tax payer," says Paul Gunter, director of the Nuclear Information and Resource Center's Reactor Watchdog Project.
"The nuclear power industry, which grew out of energy policy going back to the mid-'50s, never proved to be economically viable," says Gunter. "From the very beginning and to this day, nuclear power development relies heavily on government assistance. So the industry has failed the market test, in terms of whether it's an economic option for power development."
TVA
The Tennessee Valley Authority was the most gung-ho about nuclear power of all U.S. utilities. In the mid-'60s, the utility announced plans to build 17 nuclear reactors. But the authority grossly over-estimated the demand for electricity, and under-estimated the cost for building the reactors. During this period, TVA's debt swelled. Congress approved increases in the utility's debt ceiling from $1.75 to $30 billion.
But when the energy crisis hit and the expected demand for power never materialized, TVA stopped construction on most of the reactors.
TVA's reputation on nukes is abysmal. In his book, Tritium on Ice, Kenneth D. Bergeron writes: "[TVA's] performance over the years in building and operating nuclear reactors is simply appalling, revealing it to be a fossilized, inefficient, unresponsive bureaucracy that is profoundly deficient in the management skills needed for such a complex and dangerous job."
Bill Baxter admits TVA did a bad job with nuclear reactors early on. "In the '70s and '80s, every one of our reactors were shut down by the [Nuclear Regulatory Commission]," he says. "But all of these plants were brought back on line successfully and are operating at [the highest industry rating].
"Some of our units have set world records for record runs," he adds.
Bergeron is thankful the utility has improved, but isn't impressed. "For [Baxter] to say they've improved isn't saying very much because they were by far the worst managed," he says in a phone interview. Bergeron is a physicist who worked for 25 years at the Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque on safety of commercial and military reactors, and large sections of his book are devoted to TVA. "If they hadn't improved, the NRC would not have let them restart."
TVA began building Brown's Ferry Unit 1 in 1967, and it would not be open until 1974. Unit 2 was opened a year later, and Unit 3 went active in 1977. Both Units 1 and 2 were shut down after a fire at the plant in 1975, which until the Three Mile Island accident in 1979 was the worst incident at a reactor. During this period, all three of the Browns Ferry reactors ran poorly. Unit 1 was shut down in 1983 and has remained idle ever since; and Units 2 and 3 were shutdown in 1985, but were restarted in the early '90s.
Now the TVA is looking at restarting Unit 1. The cost is estimated at $1.8 billion. Baxter says it's on schedule and within budget.
Baxter is a fan of nuclear power, which he sees as a good component for meeting the power needs in the Tennessee Valley.
Right now, TVA's five reactors produce about 20 percent of the utility's energy; its 11 coal plants produce 53 percent; and dams about 12 percent.
TVA is also looking at starting up Bellefonte, a nuclear plant that was never completed. He foresees nuclear power increasing to about 30 percent of its output. So-called green power-wind, solar, methane gas from landfills-is also on the rise, but Baxter says they're too small to meet the growing demand. "Nuclear is coming up, coal is coming down. Those will continue to be our workhorses," he says.
"We're not repeating any of mistakes of the past where we were wildly optimistic and ordered several plants," Baxter adds. "But if we want to consider the eventual closing of any of our coal plants, where is that replacement power going to come from? The only source of low-cost, low-polluting power is nuclear."
Nuclear is ideal, Baxter says, because it's relatively cheap and much cleaner than fossil fuel. "Nuclear is capital intensive on the front end, but cheaper on the outset," Baxter says. "With coal you've got to buy millions of tons of coal every year. Natural gas is a highly volatile, expensive fuel."
The promise of nuclear power is not easily dismissed.
According to the Nuclear Energy Institute, an industry group, nuclear energy saves 550 million tons of carbon emissions, 2.4 million tons of nitrogen oxide, and 5.1 million tons of sulfur dioxide each year in the United States.
But some argue that nuclear plants aren't as environmentally friendly or as cheap as its supporters say.
Numbers
There's a dizzying disparity between the numbers provided by the industry folks and those that environmental activists cite.
Industry claims nuclear power is among the cheapest power sources available, easily beating out coal, natural gas and renewables. Bill Baxter says nuclear costs about 2-1/2 cents per kilowatt-hour, coal is 4-1/2 cents kilowatt-hour, and natural gas is 6-1/2 cents. He says these figures include the cost of building the plants, as well as disposing of the waste (Technically nuclear waste hasn't been disposed of at all, but a fund to pay for the waste has accumulated $20 billion, according to the Nuclear Energy Institute).
Environmentalists take issue with these numbers. "I can promise you that if [nuclear energy was so cheap], people would be building nuclear power plants," Smith says. "Operation and maintenance at any given moment can be low. But it doesn't factor in the capital costs to build the plant. It doesn't factor in the decommission costs or the subsidies."
A 1990 Pace University report entitled "Environmental Costs of Electricity" estimated nuclear power costs 10 to 15 cents per kilowatt hour, compared to 6 to 8.3 cents for coal, 4 to 6 cents for natural gas, 5 to 12 cents for wind, and 8 to 20 cents for solar (fuel costs, especially for natural gas, are likely to have changed since then). With environmental costs factored in-including costs of accidents and decommissioning-nuclear power jumps from 12.9 to 17.9 cents per kilowatt-hour, the study found.
In the United States there are 103 active reactors, producing about 20 percent of the country's electricity. Worldwide there are 441 reactors, which produce about 16 percent of the globe's power. The United States has the most reactors of any country, but as a percentage of its power production, this country is way down the list. France gets 75 percent of its power from nukes.
How They Work, Or Don't
Nuclear power plants operate much like any fossil fuel plant does. Steam is heated to drive turbines. But instead of burning coal or gas as a heat source, an atomic reaction is started inside the reactors, which creates intense heat.
The nuclear industry trumpets the technology as being pollution-free. It's true that reactors emit no air pollution or greenhouse gases, which are accelerating global warming.
"Is it an environmentally benign energy? No way," Smith says. "If you take a snapshot of when a plant is running, it does not have an emission stream like a coal plant."
But reactors do pollute. They release radioactive tritium particles into air, says Michele Boyd, of Public Citizen, a group that advocates for citizen, health and government accountability. Reactors need vast amounts of water to keep the reactors from melting down-that water causes thermal pollution when it's released into rivers, along which most plants are located, disrupting and killing aquatic life and polluting water sources. There's also pollution-and radioactive contamination-where uranium is mined. Perhaps most significantly, there's waste that's produced (more on that later).
What's tricky about nuclear power plants is safety. Bergeron explains in his book that fission products produced from a nuclear reaction are highly radioactive, much moreso than the uranium fuel rods. "Fission products can never be allowed to come into contact with human beings," he writes. These fission products also produce heat within the fuel rods, called decay heat.
"The problem is that the decay heat doesn't shut off when the reactor is shut off," he writes.
"It is decay heat that makes the engineering of nuclear power plants as difficult as it is. The system must be designed to ensure that high-pressure water continues to flow through the core even after shutdown," he writes. "Safety systems must ensure that this flow continues under any plausible set of circumstances, including massive earthquakes, electric grid failures, operator errors, tornados-essentially anything that is reasonably possible over the life of a power plant. If water were to stop flowing in the core, it would be only a matter of hours before the core and all the steel structures holding it in place melted into a red hot liquid that would proceed to melt through the foot-thick-steel pressure vessel in which it is enclosed."
Because the stakes are so high, nuclear reactors are required to have myriad safety systems to make sure the reaction can be shut down and that water flow never stops. These safety features are what make them expensive to operate.
For the most part, they do run safely. There have not been any major accidents in the United States. The Three Mile Island accident in 1979 was the country's worst, but there were no direct casualties.
But the risks are high.
"We know people are going to screw up. You don't need to take that risk when there's more elegant and more environmentally sound technology," Smith says. "We're on the cusp of having to spend billions of dollars for new power generation. So we've got to make some choices. If we choose to go down the nuclear path again...and then there's a problem like Three Mile Island, I can promise you public opinion will turn against [nuclear power]. Then you've potentially wasted billions of dollars. Nuclear power has a fragile public support system. I think that's a huge risk. And I don't think there's a reason to take that risk."
The NRC
Smith calls it the "perfect storm" scenario, a recipe for a nuclear catastrophe that could kill people and contaminate the land.
Many nuclear power reactors are running at the end of their planned 40-year life, but their operators are applying for extensions (12 life extensions have been granted so far, and the NRC has yet to deny an application). These same plants are producing more electricity than they were designed for. And they're being operated at a time when the NRC is loosening its regulations for reactors. To top it off, these reactors are at serious security risk from terrorists.
Critics of the U.S. nuclear energy program say problems began at the start. The original agency overseeing the industry-the Atomic Energy Commission-was in charge of both regulating reactors and promoting nuclear energy. It was eventually split into two groups, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Department of Energy. But it wasn't until the Three-Mile-Island accident that the NRC began to fulfill its regulatory duties.
Critics say there's still a conflict of interest because the NRC gets its funding from the nuclear industry. Citizen and environmental groups say the NRC has slipped back into complacency in recent years, forsaking safety in favor of promotion.
"The industry's efforts to keep nuclear power plants from going under and keeping hope alive of building new ones has revolved around reducing the federal oversight," Gunter says.
A couple of recent incidents demonstrate this point, Gunter says. The NRC allowed the Davis-Besse plant in Ohio to continue operating, despite serious safety concerns that should have forced its shutdown. An emergency shutdown was later required. An investigation by the Office of Inspector General found that the NRC put financial concerns above those of public safety. "NRC appears to have informally established an unreasonably high burden of requiring absolute proof of a safety problem, versus lack of reasonable assurance of maintaining public health and safety, before it will act to shut down a power plant," the OIG report found.
The reactor was idle for two years while repairs were made. When it finally restarted this year, it was shut down after only a day, because of another equipment malfunction.
The second incident involves a regulation that was established after a fire at the Browns Ferry plant in 1975. The fire started when workers were examining shafts of electrical cables, using a candle to check for air leaks-a violation of safety codes, according to Bergeron. The fire burned for seven hours and the standard and backup systems for keeping water flowing were lost. But a meltdown was avoided.
The fire led to new regulations requiring fire barriers around all electric cables, which control the shutdown of the reactors, Gunter says. An NRC report from last June found "there are numerous instances where licensees are relying on 'operator manual actions' that have not been approved by the NRC."
Gunter explains: "Because they were unable to meet that fire code, they have sacrificed that function. Instead they will send somebody-potentially through smoke, fire and maybe even into areas under [terrorist] attack-to manually shut down equipment that was formerly shutdown from the control room," Gunter says. "They have by and large substituted unapproved, inoperable safety shutdown systems. Now what the NRC is proposing to do is codify these illegal systems and make them legal.
"I'm offering this to you as a demonstration of where the nuclear regulation commission is backing away from proscriptive regulation put into law because of an actual accident in Alabama," he adds. "Because the industry is both non-compliant and non-reliant, the NRC is going to change the regulations to a standard the industry is willing to meet. That's happening across the board."
"It's a little like civil disobedience, but we're talking about corporate disobedience to fire safety regulations."
Cutting Slack
Proponents of nuclear power say the NRC's regulations are too stringent. Asked why no one is building new reactors if the power is so cheap, Baxter responds: "Regulatory uncertainty. It's become almost impossible for [utilities] to get all the permits."
The NRC has approved three standardized designs for reactors, which should make them cheaper to build and easier to maintain and regulate.
The NRC and the industry are also pushing for a new streamlined permitting process for new nuclear plants-a process that is now being tested in a pilot program-that will allow operators to get a combined construction and operating license. Thelma Wiggins, a spokeswoman for the Nuclear Energy Institute, says that because there were numerous permitting stages under the old process, construction of reactors could drag on for years, with anti-nuke groups fighting approval at every step of the way.
The new process will allow for all the concerns to be addressed at once, she says. "[Utilities] would go and get started and the process would get impeded and there were major delays. Then you had capital money being lost," she says. "What this process is trying to do is eliminate these delays."
Anti-nuclear groups see the new process as a way of minimizing public comment. "It seems absolutely ridiculous to me. [Under the proposed rules] you can give someone an operating permit before they've even constructed it," says Boyd, of Public Citizen. "They don't even have to say where they're going to build this reactor, they just have to apply for a reactor. How could you possibly evaluate it?"
Public comment on nuclear reactors would be allowed before a company had decided whether to actually construct one, she says, so public awareness would be low. The intent is to shut citizens out of the process, she says.
Wiggins disagrees. "The new process doesn't minimize those issues and concerns [that caused delays]. What it does is address them up front. We want to look at anything pertaining to safety and maintenance-but we want to look at those up front," Wiggins says.
Bergeron says he's seen a disturbing trend at the NRC. "Especially in the last 10 or 15 years, the agency has become too concerned about people feeling good about nuclear energy and not assessing the dangers," he says. "You have to have a government regulator that takes the side of the people. I worry that NRC is becoming less and less obsessed with public safety."
Waste
When nuclear power was born in the 1950s, scientists involved assumed they'd figure out what to do with spent fuel in due time. More than 50 years later, it's an issue that remains unresolved.
On its website, the Nuclear Energy Institute cheerily declares that "high-level nuclear 'waste' is really used nuclear fuel," which is true enough. The problem is that it's highly radioactive, even moreso than the fuel used to create atomic reactions.
Almost all nuclear waste is now being stored at the reactors where it was created. "On the banks of the Tennessee River they've got all this highly radioactive stuff just sitting there, because they don't know what to do with it," Smith says.
The federal government is responsible for dealing with the waste. The current proposal is to send the waste from all the reactors in the country to the Yucca Mountain depository in Nevada. Shipment might start in 2015, but the Nevada government is fighting to stop it. Although it's in a remote area, there are questions as to whether it's a good site, because it's on an earthquake fault. Also, workers tunneling the first five miles were exposed to high levels of silica, which can cause cancer.
Others are worried about the transportation lines necessary to move the waste. Special transportation containers have been designed and are certified by the NRC. "This certification process ensures that shipping containers can withstand accidents more serious than any potential incident without releasing any radioactive material," the Nuclear Energy Institute reports.
One scientist discovered a way to turn waste into a more stable (but still radioactive) glass, which could then be put in steel canisters and more safely stored. But it's an extremely expensive process that would make nuclear power much more costly.
Other countries are contemplating firing waste into the sun, putting it under the Earth's crust, and underneath Antarctic ice sheets. Nuclear waste stays dangerous for an incredibly long time-240,000 years.
"Think about how long 240,000 years is. When did Columbus sail the ocean blue? When was Christ alive? What do we have in any of recorded history that goes back more than 10,000 years?" Smith says. "People don't put that stuff in perspective when we fire up our hairdryer or turn on our TV. We're generating toxic waste that's going to be dangerous for more than recorded time. There's something fundamentally unethical about that."
Terrorism and Missiles
A physicist who worked with nuclear power for 25 years, Bergeron used to be more hopeful about it. "Ten years ago, when I was working on nuclear power safety issues, I felt the promise of nuclear power had been betrayed by its implementers," he says, noting that he's no fan of coal, which has devastated communities where it's mined and causes a great deal of pollution.
"I'm becoming more negative about nuclear. That's because of the whole issue of terrorism and the proliferation of nuclear weapons to small nations or non-state groups," he says.
"There is the possibility of using a power plant as a nuclear weapon. The NRC's official viewpoint on this is it's impossible to calculate the probability of a terrorist attack, therefore we can't consider it," he says. "I think that's unbelievably irresponsible."
The nuclear industry insists the plants are very safe from attack. The reports are mixed. The nuclear industry has gotten high marks for security from The Progressive Policy Institute (an arm of the Democratic Leadership Council), The Washington Post, and the Center for Strategic and International Studies. The Service Employees International Union accused Wackenhut, the security firm contracted to protect many nuclear facilities (it protects the Y-12 facility in Oak Ridge, but not any TVA facilities), with not adequately training its guards and cheating on training drills.
So much information about nuclear plants has become classified since Sept. 11 that it's hard to know exactly what the industry and government have done to protect them. You cannot tour any TVA plants, and the secure areas around each reactor have been expanded.
Even critics admit that security has been tightened. But they say the real danger is from aircraft crashes or short-range explosives, particularly at the cooling pools and waste storage units, which don't have the structural fortification that the reactors have.
"I think there probably have been increases in security," Gunter says. "Our concern is they've not been substantial enough. You can put out all the jersey barriers and cones and upgrade the number of guards, but that's not going to protect against substandard fire protection or structural vulnerabilities to aircraft penetration. Those are the areas the industry continues to stonewall. It's purely out of financial concern."
Others say it's simply impossible to protect so many nuclear reactors from attack. "In a post 9-11 world, we're actually foolish to mess with nuclear power when we've seen what people are capable of," says Smith. "You will never see Al Qaeda run an airplane into a wind turbine. They're not going to break the sun panels on a house. They may try to blow up a nuclear power plant. It's ironic to me that the people who scream loudest about national security are the most supportive of nuclear power."
Another fear among anti-nuclear activists is one of proliferation. Every country that now has the bomb achieved it by developing nuclear power first.
A keystone of the Atoms for Peace program that Eisenhower started was that nuclear energy and weapons functions should be kept separate. It was also a cornerstone of every non-proliferation treaty and the U.S. has always discouraged other countries from using their power plants for bomb production.
But two years ago, the United States broke that taboo by allowing TVA to produce tritium at Watts Bar and Sequoyah for its nuclear missiles, which are now being refurbished.
End Game
The fact remains that the United States is going to have to invest in new power generation. Power use will likely increase by 40 percent by 2025, according to the Energy Information Administration.
"America needs and the world needs all the electricity sources we can get," Wiggins says. "We need nuclear, coal, solar, hydro, wind-we need all of it."
Baxter says there's 200 years worth of coal still in the ground, but further reliance on coal is hardly an attractive prospect.
Smith says the answer isn't so complicated. There needs to be major investment in two things-conservation and renewable energy sources. An aggressive conservation program could cut current energy use by 30 percent, he says.
"Some people want to shut down all nuclear plants," he says. "Our position is you've got about 100 of these things producing 20 percent of the country's power. Don't shut them down, just don't extend the life of them and don't build any more. It was a good experiment."
"If we had no other options maybe we should have a serious conversation about nuclear power. But we have other options and a lot of this is stuff we should be doing anyway," he says.
Bergeron says ultimately people will decide by what they're willing to pay for. They could pay for safer power generation, or take a gamble on nukes.
"Solar sounds like a great idea, but there's a question of do the citizens want to pay the price of two to three times [of what they are paying] for energy," Bergeron says. "Even if the right answer is renewables, if that's not what the people want, that's life. They get to choose."
----
Recently Issued Significant Enforcement Actions
Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
April 22, 2004
http://www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/regulatory/enforcement/current.html#ea
These actions, referred to as "escalated," include Notices of Violation for Severity Level I, II, or III violations; Notices of Violation associated with inspection findings that the Significance Determination Process categorizes as White, Yellow, or Red; civil penalties; and orders.
Escalated Enforcement Actions Issued to:
- Reactor Licensees
- Materials Licensees
- Individuals
- Non-Licensees
Reactor Actions
Entergy Operations, Inc. (Waterford 3) EA-03-230
On April 12, 2004, a Notice of Violation was issued for a violation associated with a White SDP finding involving the failure to establish appropriate instruction and accomplish those instructions for installation of a fuel line for the Train A emergency diesel generator in May 2003.
Duke Energy Corporation (Oconee 1, 2, & 3) EA-04-018
On April 8, 2004, a Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty in the amount of $60,000 was issued for a Severity Level III violation involving the failure to adhere to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.59, in that the licensee made changes to the Oconee facility as described in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report and referenced analyses that involved unreviewed safety questions without obtaining prior NRC approval. In this case, the licensee revised an analysis for high energy line break accidents, which permitted the facility to initiate emergency feedwater up to 30 minutes and initiate high pressure injection up to 8 hours after a high energy line break accident instead of 15 minutes and one hour as was discussed in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report.
Entergy Operations, Inc. (Arkansas Nuclear One) EA-03-016
On April 7, 2004, a Notice of Violation was issued for a violation associated with a White SDP finding involving the use of unapproved operator manual actions for achieving and maintaining hot shutdown conditions in the event of a fire in particular fire zones. The violation cited the licensee's failure to comply with fire protection regulations in 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R, Section III.G.2 requiring that cables and equipment of redundant trains of systems necessary to achieve and maintain hot shutdown conditions remain free of fire damage.
FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (Perry) EA-03-208
On April 1, 2004, a Notice of Violation was issued for a Severity Level III violation involving the willful failure of two key maintenance personnel responsible for testing motor operated valves, a safety-related function, to follow Technical Specification overtime guidelines.
Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation (Ginna) EA-04-003
On March 30, 2004, a Notice of Violation was issued for a Severity Level III violation involving the willful failure to follow procedures by a manager when he manipulated two valves during a plant cooldown without authorization as required by procedure.
Nuclear Management Company, LLC (Point Beach) EA-03-181
On March 17, 2004, a Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty in the amount of $60,000 was issued for a Severity Level III violation involving changes made to the Emergency Action Level scheme that reduced the effectiveness of the Emergency Plan without requesting and receiving prior NRC approval.
AmerGen Energy Company (Oyster Creek) EA-04-033
On March 15, 2004, a Notice of Violation was issued for a violation associated with a White SDP finding involving a power cable insulation breakdown that resulted in a loss of the 4kV emergency bus and forced a plant shutdown. The violation cited the licensee's failure to identify and take prompt and appropriate corrective actions for a significant condition adverse to quality involving power cables.
American Electric Power Company (D.C. Cook 1 & 2) EA-04-006
On March 12, 2004, a Notice of Violation was issued for a violation associated with a White SDP finding involving the failure to properly prepare a package of radioactive material for shipment. The violation cited the licensee's failure to prepare the radioactive material package for shipment so that the radiation level did not exceed 200 millirem per hour at any point on the external surface of the package.
FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (Perry 1) EA-04-020
On March 12, 2004, a Notice of Violation was issued for a violation associated with a White SDP finding involving the air binding of the common low pressure core spray and residual heat removal (RHR) 'A' water leg pump following a loss of offsite power event. The violation cited the failure to establish adequate written procedures to periodically vent the highest point on the discharge of the common low pressure core spray and RHR 'A' water leg pump.
FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station) EA-03-214
On March 8, 2004, an immediately effective Confirmatory Order was issued to confirm certain commitments, as set forth in the Order, that requires annual independent assessments for five years, in the areas of operations, engineering, corrective actions and safety culture and requires inspection of key reactor coolant system pressure boundary components during a mid-cycle outage to ensure effective assessment and sustained safe performance. The Order was issued in conjunction with the NRC's decision to approve the restart of the facility.
FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station) EA-03-172
On March 5, 2004, a Notice of Violation was issued for a violation associated with a White SDP finding involving the potential inability of the high pressure injection (HPI) pumps to perform their safety function under certain accident scenarios due to potential pump degradation. The violation cited the licensee's failure to adequately implement design control measures for verifying the adequacy of the design of the HPI pumps to mitigate all postulated accidents.
TXU Energy (Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station) EA-04-009
On February 13, 2004, a Notice of Violation was issued for a violation associated with a White SDP finding involving a steam generator tube flaw that could have resulted in failure of the tube during postulated initiating events. The violation cited the licensee's failure to promptly identify and correct a condition adverse to quality (a steam generator tube flaw).
Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Peach Bottom 2 & 3) EA-03-224
On February 3, 2004, a Notice of Violation was issued for a violation associated with a White SDP finding involving a performance problem associated with one of the emergency diesel generators. The violation cited the licensee's failure to maintain adequate maintenance procedures and failure to take adequate corrective actions for a condition adverse to quality.
FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (Perry 1) EA-03-197
On January 28, 2004, a Notice of Violation was issued for a violation associated with a White SDP finding involving the failure of the Essential Service Water Pump A shaft on September 1, 2003 due to improper reassembly. The violation cited the licensee's failure to have adequate procedures for assembly of the pump.
FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (Perry 1) EA-03-194
On January 23, 2004, a Notice of Violation was issued for a violation associated with a White SDP finding involving an undue delay in declaring an actual emergency condition on April 24, 200e, when the shift manager did not follow the emergency classification and action level scheme as required by the emergency plan when damage to irradiated fuel caused a high alarm in the fuel handling building ventilation exhaust gaseous radiation monitor. The violation cited the licensee's failure to promptly declare the Alert as a violation of 10 CFR 50.47(b)(4).
Duke Energy Corporation (Oconee 1, 2, 3) EA-03-145
On December 30, 2003, a Notice of Violation was issued for a violation associated with a White SDP finding involving the inability of the pressurizer to perform its intended safety function under certain scenarios. The violation cited the licensee's failure to identify and correct this condition adverse to safety.
Entergy Operations, Inc. (River Bend 1) EA-03-077
On December 29, 2003, a Notice of Violation was issued for a violation associated with a White SDP finding involving a loss of feedwater flow to the reactor. The violation cited the licensee's failure to lock open the Condensate Prefilter Vessel Bypass Flow Control Valve as required by their Technical Specifications.
Nuclear Management Company, LLC (Kewaunee) EA-03-105
On December 30, 2003, a Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty in the amount of $60,000 was issued for a Severity Level III violation involving the licensee's failure to implement effective monitoring procedures to provide reasonable assurance that personnel with access are fit for duty, and the failure to conduct an investigation of the circumstances or evaluate the risk involved in continued unescorted access of an employee after detecting evidence of behavior which may have impaired the job performance of an employee who had unescorted access to the Kewaunee Nuclear Plant.
University of Missouri Research Reactor EA-02-256
On December 19, 2003, an immediately effective Confirmatory Order was issued to confirm certain commitments, as set forth in the Order, and to ensure that processes used at the University of Missouri Research Reactor for addressing employee protection and safety concerns will be adequately enhanced.
Nuclear Management Company, LLC (Point Beach 1 & 2) EA-03-057
On December 11, 2003, a Notice of Violation for a violation associated with a Red SDP finding involving the potential common mode failure of all trains of the auxiliary feedwater (AFW) system. The violation cited the licensee's failure to establish adequate measures to assure that the AFW system design bases were correctly translated into specifications, drawings, procedures, and instructions (modification packages).
All significant enforcement actions issued to reactor licensees
Materials Actions
21st Century Technologies, Inc. (EA-03-187)
On April 13, 2004, a Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty in the amount of $6,000 was issued for a Severity Level III problem which resulted from the licensee's failure to ensure compliance with their NRC exempt distribution license. Specifically, the licensee did not obtain the required NRC authorization prior to distributing tritium-bearing gun sights and other devices that were not authorized by their license.
Department of Veterans Affairs (EA-04-019)
On April 7, 2004, a Notice of Violation was issued for a Severity level III violation involving the failure to secure from unauthorized removal or limit access to licensed material (approximately 150 millicuries of molybdenum-99 in a molybdenum-99/technetium-99m generator, 112 millicuries in four cesium-137 sealed sources, and 117 millicuries in two strontium-90 sealed sources) in a controlled area, and the failure to control and maintain constant surveillance of this licensed material.
Anglin Civil Constructors, Ltd. (EA-04-031)
On April 7, 2004, a Notice of Violation was issued for a Severity Level III violation involving the failure to secure from unauthorized removal or limit access to licensed material (eight millicuries of cesium-137 and 40 millicuries of americium-241 in a nuclear gauge) in a controlled area, and the failure to control and maintain constant surveillance of this licensed material.
Guthrie Healtcare System (EA-04-025)
On March 19, 2004, a Notice of Violation was issued for a Severity Level III violation involving the failure to follow the requirement of the licensee's written Quality Management Plan to develop a second radiation dosimetry plan for 26 out of 30 patients treated with prostate implants.
G. A. Covey Engineering (EA-04-002)
On March 11, 2004, a Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty in the amount of $3,000 was issued for a Severity Level III violation involving the failure to secure from unauthorized removal or limit access to licensed material (approximately 10 millicuries of cesium-137 and 50 millicuries of americium in two portable moisture density gauges) in a controlled area, and failure to control and maintain constant surveillance of this licensed material.
State of Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (EA-03-126)
On March 15, 2004, a Notice of Violation was issued for a Severity Level II violation based on the licensee discriminating against one of its employees for raising safety concerns regarding radiation exposures to other employees. The NRC also issued an immediately effective Confirmatory Order to confirm certain commitments, as set forth in the Order, involving the licensee's internal policies and procedures pertaining to assuring compliance with NRC employee protection requirements.
State of Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (EA-03-190)
On March 15, 2004, a Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalties in the amount of $21,000 was issued for (1) a willful Severity Level II problem ($15,000) involving radiation exposures in excess of NRC 's annual public exposure limit and failure to perform surveys appropriate to demonstrate compliance with NRC dose limits for individual members of the public and (2) a willful Severity Level III violation ($6,000) involving the failure to provide copies of two exposure reports to six affected individuals.
KTL Roudebush Testing (EA-03-177)
On March 11, 2004, an immediately effective Order Suspending License and Demand for Information was issued based on the conclusion that the licensee deliberately violated NRC safety requirements and deliberately provided inaccurate and incomplete information to the NRC.
Hastings Testing Engineers and Environmental (EA-03-175)
On March 4, 2004, a Notice of Violation was issued for a Severity Level III violation involving the failure to secure from unauthorized removal or limit access to licensed material (8 millicuries of cesium-137 and 44 millicuries of americium-241 in each of three portable moisture/density gauges) in a controlled area, and failure to control and maintain constant surveillance of this licensed material. Additionally the licensee failed to lock the gauges, to prevent unauthorized or accidental removal of the sealed source from its shielded position, when not under the direct surveillance of an authorized user.
CTI Consultants, Inc. (EA-03-226)
On March 3, 2004, a Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty in the amount of $3,000 was issued for a Severity Level III violation involving the failure to control and maintain constant surveillance of licensed material (11 millicuries of cesium-137 and 40 millicuries of americium-241 in a portable gauge) in a controlled or restricted area, resulting in the loss of the gauge during transport. Although the civil penalty would have been fully mitigated based on the normal civil penalty assessment process, a base civil penalty was assessed in accordance with Section VII.A.1.g of the Enforcement Policy to reflect the significance of maintaining control of licensed material.
Precision Testing and Inspection (EA-03-220)
On February 25, 2004, a Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty in the amount of $3,000 was issued for a Severity Level III willful problem involving the failure to post radiation areas during radiography operations and failure to provide accurate information to the NRC.
Enviro-Test Laboratories LLC (EA-04-007)
On February 13, 2004, a Notice of Violation was issued for a Severity level III problem involving the failure to: (1) receive prior NRC approval of the decommissioning plan before beginning with decommissioning, (2) maintain security and control of licensable quantities of radioactive material (thorium-230), and (3) provide complete and accurate information to the NRC.
Imaging Subsurface, Inc. (EA-03-223)
On February 6, 2004, a Notice of Violation was issued for a Severity Level III violation involving the failure to secure from unauthorized removal or limit access to licensed material (nominally 8.0 millicuries of cesium-137 and 40 millicuries of americium-241:beryllium in two moisture density gauges) in unrestricted areas at the licensee's facility, and failure to control and maintain constant surveillance of this licensed material.
Union City Diagnostic Center (EA-03-170)
On January 13, 2004, a Notice of Violation was issued for a Severity Level III problem involving: (1) the receipt, possession and use of byproduct material without the supervision of an Authorized User (AU) or a Radiation Safety Officer, and (2) the creation of false records indicating that the AU had ordered licensed material during that period, when in fact, the AU was no longer employed at the facility.
Cooperheat-MQS, Inc. (EA-03-151)
On December 30, 2003, a Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty in the amount of $6,000 was issued for a Severity Level III willful problem involving the failure to conduct required radiographer refresher training and the failure to provide complete and accurate information to the NRC involving radiographer training records.
Westinghouse Electric Company, LLC (Hematite Facility) (EA-03-182)
On December 22, 2003, a Notice of Violation was issued for a Severity Level III violation involving two examples of the failure to follow enhanced work plans for decommissioning activities specific to the preparation of contaminated materials for shipping to a metal recycling facility.
Rice Memorial Hospital (EA-03-205)
On December 15, 2003, a Notice of Violation was issued for a Severity Level III violation involving the failure to secure from unauthorized removal or limit access to licensed material (approximately 145 millicuries of technetium-99m and an approximate aggregate activity of 192 millicuries of gadolinium-153 contained in sealed sources) in controlled areas, and the failure to control and maintain constant surveillance of the licensed material.
Hannibal Testing Laboratories (EA-03-206)
On November 28, 2003, a Notice of Violation was issued for a Severity Level III violation involving the failure to secure from unauthorized removal or limit access to licensed material (nominally 8.0 millicuries of cesium-137 and 40 millicuries of americium-241:beryllium in two moisture density gauges) in unrestricted areas at the licensee's facility, and failure to control and maintain constant surveillance of this licensed material.
ABB, Inc. (EA-03-196)
On November 26, 2003, a Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty in the amount of $3,000 was issued for a Severity Level III problem involving the failure to secure from unauthorized removal or limit access to licensed material (approximately 78 millicuries of strontium-90 in a sealed source capsule) in an unrestricted area, and failure to control and maintain constant surveillance of this licensed material, resulting in the loss of the source into the public domain (most likely the county landfill). Although the civil penalty would have been fully mitigated based on the normal civil penalty assessment process, a base civil penalty was assessed in accordance with Section VII.A.1.g of the Enforcement Policy to reflect the significance of maintaining the control of licensed material.
Mid American Inspection Services, Inc. (EA-03-100)
On November 18, 2003, an Order Imposing Civil Monetary Penalty in the amount of $3,000 was issued. The action was based on a August 12, 2003, a Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty in the amount of $6,000 that was issued for a Severity Level III problem involving the failure to secure from unauthorized removal or maintain constant surveillance of licensed material (a radiography camera), and the failure to ensure that shipping papers are in a vehicle while transporting radioactive material. The licensee's September 8, 2003, response admitted the violations and requested mitigation of the civil penalty. After considering the licensee's response and statements of fact, explanation, and argument for reduction, the NRC decided to reduce the amount of the penalty.
All significant enforcement actions issued to materials licensees
Individual Actions
Brian Flynn (IA-04-005)
On March 30, 2004, a Notice of Violation was issued for a Severity Level III violation involving the individual's deliberate activities while employed at the Ginna Nuclear Power Plant. As an outage manager, the individual deliberately manipulated two valves during a plant cooldown without authorization as required by procedure.
John Peart (IA-03-047)
On February 25, 2004, a Notice of Violation was issued for a Severity Level III violation based on the individual's deliberate misconduct that caused Precision Testing and Inspection to be in violation of 10 CFR 34.53. As Senior Radiation Safety Officer (RSO), the individual deliberately failed to post the industrial radiography work area with danger signs in the work area.
Julio Venegas (IA-03-046)
On February 25, 2004, a Notice of Violation was issued for a Severity Level III violation based on the individual's deliberate activities while employed at Precision Testing and Inspection. As a Radiation Safety Officer (RSO), the individual deliberately provided inaccurate information to the NRC denying that individual was the RSO for Precision Testing and Inspection.
Gary L. Youler (IA-03-036)
On December 30, 2003, a Notice of Violation was issued for a Severity Level III violation based on the individual's deliberate activities while employed at Cooperheat-MQS, Inc. As the facility Radiation Safety Officer, the individual deliberately provided false information to the NRC involving radiographer training records.
Scott P. Wolfe (IA-03-042)
On December 10, 2003, an immediately effective Order prohibiting involvement in NRC-licensed activities for three years from the date of the Order was issued to the individual based on his deliberate activities while employed at the Waterford-3 nuclear power plant. As a licensed operator, the individual tested positive twice for an illegal substance during random fitness-for-duty tests while he held an NRC operator's license.
-------- nevada
Yucca Mountain's Nuclear Future in Question
Thursday, April 22, 2004
Fox News
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,117831,00.html
LAS VEGAS - Many fear an anti-nuclear campaign now underway in Nevada may kill a project that survived five presidents and cost more than $8 billion. About 50 years ago, American scientists recognized they had to do something about the growing problem of nuclear waste. They decided the best place wasn't under the ocean or in ice caps or on rockets sent into space, but underground. And in 1987, the federal government chose Yucca Mountain, 90 miles outside of Las Vegas.
Yucca Mountain was chosen because it is remote, secure and geologically solid, stable and nearly impervious to water.
"Of the places I am familiar with, Yucca Mountain is the best. I haven't seen any qualities of this mountain that would be unfavorable to the safe disposal of nuclear waste here," said David Merritt, a Yucca Mountain geologist.
But critics say they aren't convinced, and are doing what they can to stop the project from moving forward.
"We don't know what kind of poison we are putting into the environment," said Peggy Maze Johnson of Citizen Alert.
In December, the Energy Department will ask the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a license to finish construction - a prerequisite before the commission will even consider industry and administration plans to build new nuclear power plants.
-------- tennessee
ENERGY DEPARTMENT NUCLEAR FUEL PINS SHIPPED TO PROCESSOR
April 22, 2004
Department of Energy
http://www.oakridge.doe.gov/media_releases/2004/r-04-008.htm
OAK RIDGE, Tenn. - More than 9,500 nuclear fuel pins have been removed from the Department of Energy's East Tennessee Technology Park and safely delivered to a private firm in Washington State for processing into fuel to be used by the Tennessee Valley Authority in its nuclear power plants.
The fuel pins were manufactured during the 1950s and were used initially to power an experimental reactor in Lynchburg, Virginia [I would appreciate any info indicating they were actually spent fuel rods - JH]. In the early 1980s, they were brought to the Oak Ridge National Laboratory for additional experimentation and were later stored in the K-25 Gaseous Diffusion building at the East Tennessee Technology Park.
"This action benefits TVA, DOE, and the taxpayer," said Stephen McCracken, DOE Oak Ridge Operations Assistant Manager for Environmental Management. "Without this agreement between DOE and TVA, this material would have eventually been declared waste material and would have been disposed. This way it can be used to generate electricity."
The nine shipments, loaded by DOE's cleanup contractor, Bechtel Jacobs Company, LLC, were made between September 2003 and February 2004 and represented about 11.5 metric tons of low-enriched uranium. The fuel pins ranged in length from five to six feet, and are one-half inch in diameter. They were sent to Framatome ANP, in Richland, Washington, where they will be processed into usable fuel for TVA's nuclear reactors.
The uranium in the fuel pins will have a market value of about $10 million when they are fabricated into fuel assemblies, and will produce about three million megawatt-hours of electricity - enough to power 250,000 homes for a year.
This uranium will be used by TVA at its Brown's Ferry facility as part of the first Blended Low Enriched Uranium or BLEU program reload in the spring of 2005.
"This illustrates that cooperation between federal agencies can benefit not only those agencies, but the American people in general," McCracken said. "These types of initiatives help keep energy prices down and put taxpayer money to good use."
-------- texas
Audit cites delays at Pantex, other labs
Holdups pushing back critical decisions for Energy Department
By JIM McBRIDE jim.mcbride@amarillo.com
The Amarillo Globe-News
Thursday, April 22, 2004
http://www.amarillonet.com/stories/042204/new_pantexaudit.shtml
"I wish the editorial staff at the Globe news would THINK before they commit themselves to an opinion in the paper's editorial pages. Their support of the President's attempts to ammend the constitution to ban gay marriage is LAME at best, and certainly uncaring towards their fellow citizens." - From tjaybob43 [Join this discussion]
Project delays at weapons labs and Pantex Plant are holding up key weapons data the Energy Department needs for major decisions affecting the Modern Pit Facility and nuclear weapons upgrades, a government audit says.
An April audit by the DOE's Office of Inspector General cites delays and missed deadlines in a program that detects manufacturing and aging defects in nuclear weapons.
But National Nuclear Security Administration officials disputed some of the report's findings and said the agency is on schedule to meet deadlines under the Enhanced Surveillance Campaign.
The surveillance program provides advance warning of manufacturing and aging defects that could affect safety or reliability of the U.S. nuclear stockpile.
"The tools, methods and technologies are designed to assist in making stockpile life-extension decisions, determining when or if a new pit facility should be built, and annually certifying the stockpile to the president," the audit says. "In our judgment, operational delays at Los Alamos, Livermore and Pantex may deprive NNSA of the information it needs to make informed decisions on topics such as weapon refurbishment schedules and building a new pit facility."
At the time of the audit, Los Alamos, Lawrence Livermore and Pantex had not completed scheduled critical work in four of six major technical elements in the surveillance program.
"Using NNSA's own schedule as our baseline, the review disclosed that NNSA experienced delays in completing certain Enhanced Surveillance Campaign milestones and is at risk of missing some future milestones," the audit says.
Among other problems, auditors questioned delays in accelerated aging tests needed to estimate the lifetime of plutonium pits in the U.S. stockpile.
The NNSA has cited concerns about pit aging as justification for building the proposed Modern Pit Facility, which will recycle plutonium into new pits. Pantex and five other sites are vying for the plant.
Experts will compare results of accelerated aging tests to naturally aged plutonium in the stockpile. But delays in the program could directly affect decisions on the Modern Pit Facility, the audit says.
"Achieving this milestone is particularly important because an FY 2006 milestone regarding construction of the Modern Pit Facility may be impacted by the results of these tests," auditors concluded.
This year, NNSA announced it will delay picking a proposed site because of congressional concerns about the size of the future U.S. nuclear arsenal and future plutonium needs.
The audit also said Los Alamos National Laboratory, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories and Pantex did not finish critical work on schedule and that delays - some as long as 23 months - were caused by weak project planning.
But investigators praised a Pantex program that tracks specific goals of the weapons surveillance program.
The inspector general's office said NNSA managers contend major program deadlines were not in jeopardy, but NNSA acknowledged challenges in the enhanced surveillance program including funding, competing priorities and personnel retention.
Michael C. Kane, a top NNSA administrator, issued the NNSA's response to the audit in a letter.
"Although NNSA generally agrees with the report, we do not agree with the observation that we are at risk of missing future milestones that are critical to the success of the Enhanced Surveillance Campaign," Kane's letter says. "Over the past two years, NNSA has strengthened project management by identifying and closely monitoring priority milestones."
-------- vermont
Vt. Nuclear Plant Looks for Missing Parts
April 22, 2004
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Nuclear-Fuel-Missing.html
MONTPELIER, Vt. (AP) -- Engineers at a Vermont nuclear plant searched Thursday for two missing pieces of a highly radioactive fuel rod while experts acknowledged they may never be found.
The operators of the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant reported the missing pieces Wednesday, saying they were not where they were supposed to be in the large pool used to store fuel rods.
One of the missing pieces is about the size of a pencil. The other is about as thick but is 17 inches long.
The spent fuel rods are highly radioactive and would be fatal to anyone who came in contact with them without being properly shielded, Nuclear Regulatory Commission spokesman Neil Sheehan said. Spent nuclear fuel could be used by terrorists to construct so-called dirty bombs that would spread deadly radiation with conventional explosives.
``We do not think there is a threat to the public at this point. The great probability is this material is still somewhere in the pool,'' Sheehan said. The pieces could also have been sent years ago to a testing laboratory or a low-level nuclear waste disposal facility.
The pieces were part of a fuel rod that was removed in 1979 from the Vermont Yankee reactor, which is currently shut down for refueling and maintenance.
The pool where used fuel rods are stored is 40 feet deep and contains 2,789 fuel assemblies.
The pencil-thin fuel rods are 12 feet long and filled with uranium pellets. Sheehan said that the missing pieces might have been cut from longer rods for testing or could have broken when they were removed from the fuel assemblies.
The search for the missing pieces was going to include the use of a remote controlled camera in the pool as well as review of the documents dating back decades that cover shipments and movements of radioactive material.
Sheehan cited the heightened awareness of the need to control nuclear material that followed the Sept. 11 terror attacks. ``We don't want this falling into the wrong hands,'' he said. ``This is something we would never take lightly.''
Gov. James Douglas, after speaking Wednesday afternoon with the head of the NRC, said he was ``very concerned'' about the missing fuel at the plant, run by Entergy Nuclear.
``This situation is intolerable,'' he said.
In 2002 a Connecticut nuclear plant was fined $288,000 after a similar loss. That fuel was never accounted for.
Vermont Yankee is located in the southeastern town of Vernon, on the state lines with Massachusetts and New Hampshire.
The state's Public Safety Department and Homeland Security Unit also were notified of the missing fuel.
-------- washington
Hanford Contractor Alters Safety Orders
Workers to Get Clean-Air Equipment
By Blaine Harden
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, April 22, 2004; Page A03
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32746-2004Apr21.html
SEATTLE, April 21 -- As investigators look into alleged failures in workplace safety at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation, the private contractor in charge of cleaning up buried waste there has announced a major overhaul of its safety practices.
CH2M Hill, a Colorado-based engineering firm with a $1.5 billion federal contract to clean up the largest haul of nuclear waste in the Western Hemisphere, said it will now require workers to wear supplied-air breathing apparatus when working near some underground waste tanks.
For more than six months, some workers, union officials at Hanford and a nonprofit watchdog group called the Government Accountability Project have been demanding that the company require use of these breathing devices. Federal and state investigations of the safety records of CH2M Hill and other Hanford contractors began early this year.
CH2M Hill also announced this week that it was hiring at least 10 more on-site safety technicians and will provide workers with wearable devices that can alert them to the presence of dangerous vapors.
"This is about the workers," Dale I. Allen, a senior vice president at CH2M Hill, said in an interview Wednesday. "We want to maintain the confidence of our workers."
At Hanford, CH2M Hill has an accelerated cleanup contract with the Department of Energy, which rewards it with bonuses of as much as $2 million for each underground waste tank it can cleanup by 2006.
Critics of the company have said that it resisted requiring workers to wear supplied-air breathing apparatus because the devices are bulky and could slow the pace of cleanup work, potentially costing the contractor performance-based bonus money. CH2M Hill adamantly denies any such motivation.
There are 177 buried waste tanks at Hanford, more than a third of which have been leaking radioactive and cancer-causing toxins into groundwater for decades. CH2M Hill's job is to keep these poisons out of the nearby Columbia River and help the federal government get out of the cleanup business at Hanford as soon as possible.
A union leader in Richland, Wash., near the Hanford site, welcomed the company's safety announcement, but questioned why it took so long.
"If they are going to send workers into areas without knowing what toxic vapors they will be exposed to and when they will be exposed to them, then this is an absolutely critical safety measure," said Randy Knowles, chief of the Richland local of the Paper, Allied-Industrial, Chemical and Energy Workers Union. "CH2M Hill should have done this as soon as workers brought these exposures to the company's attention more than a year ago."
More than 90 tank farm workers have sought medical care for vapor exposures in the past two years, according to the Government Accountability Project, although CH2M Hill officials say that number is exaggerated.
The watchdog group urged in a report last September that CH2M Hill require supplied-air apparatus for all tank workers. They are hooded devices giving workers a constant supply of clean air.
Supplied-air hoods were standard safety equipment for tank farm workers in the 1990s. The Government Accountability Project's report argued that there was no independent scientific research to justify the decision by cleanup contractors to stop providing these devices to workers.
Last month, at least 10 more tank farm workers reported vapor exposure, according to CH2M Hill.
The company's announcement of new safety procedures was "clearly in response to these latest preventable vapor exposures," said Tom Carpenter, director of the nuclear oversight campaign for the Government Accountability Project.
----
Safety steps for Hanford cleanup workers
Contractor orders use of respirators
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Thursday, April 22, 2004
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/170103_hanford22.html
RICHLAND -- Workers at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation will be required to wear respirators with supplied air tanks when working near some underground tanks holding radioactive waste, a federal contractor says.
The requirement is among several changes announced Tuesday by Colorado-based CH2M Hill, the contractor hired to clean up waste left over from the production of plutonium for nuclear weapons at Hanford. The company has come under fire in recent months amid claims by workers that vapors from the tanks have sickened them.
"We are taking this additional step to address employee concerns while we conduct a more comprehensive review," said Dale Allen, a senior vice president for CH2M Hill. "The health and safety of our workers is our top priority."
The contractor also is field testing several devices aimed at sampling the air around individual workers. They include air sampling pumps worn by employees, organic vapor monitors that employees will be required to wear on their clothing, close to their faces, and badges that change color to indicate the presence of ammonia.
CH2M Hill also has created a new, senior-level position of environmental health director to oversee the industrial hygiene program and is seeking a national expert to fill the position.
The company decided to require respirators with supplied air tanks because of concerns about nitrous oxide vapors from single-shell tanks and double-shell tanks that lack ventilation.
Supplied air will be required because there is no commercially available respirator cartridge that filters nitrous oxide, the company said.
"We have some questions about whether there are additional steps that could or should be taken to give employees a higher level of confidence on this issue. Until we have a chance to fully look at this, we want to provide an additional measure of protection for employees," the company said in a news release.
The action is not in response to a specific vapor exposure report, CH2M Hill said.
State and federal governments are investigating procedures at Hanford's tank farms amid allegations that corners are being cut to speed cleanup of the nation's most contaminated nuclear site.
More than 90 workers have sought medical care for exposure at the tank farms in the past two years, according to data gathered by the Government Accountability Project, a non-profit watchdog group.
For 40 years, the Hanford reservation made plutonium for the nation's nuclear weapons arsenal. Today, work there centers on a $50 billion to $60 billion cleanup to be finished by 2035 under an accelerated schedule pushed by the Bush administration.
The most deadly waste, about 53 million gallons of radioactive liquid, sludge and saltcake, sits in 177 underground tanks less than 10 miles from the Columbia River. Plans call for turning much of that waste into glass logs and burying it at a nuclear waste repository.
Experts have identified as many as 1,200 chemicals, including some known cancer-causing agents, in the tanks. Critics have argued that basic respirators can't protect against all 1,200 chemicals.
CH2M Hill and the Energy Department, which manages the cleanup, say most of the chemicals are diluted and pose no danger to workers. Only three -- ammonia, nitrous oxide and butanol -- have been found in the tanks' air cavities at levels exceeding occupation exposure limits, CH2M Hill said. Workers don't work inside the tanks.
More than 800 people work in the tank farms for CH2M Hill. The total work force at Hanford is about 11,000 people.
-------- us politics
House OKs Speedy Elections if Attacked
April 22, 2004
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Congress-Continuity.html
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Fearing that terrorists might target Congress, the House on Thursday approved a bill to set up speedy special elections if 100 or more of its members are killed.
The House, in a 306-97 vote, put aside for now the larger issue of whether the Constitution should be amended to allow for temporary appointments in the event that an attack caused mass fatalities among lawmakers.
The House, said Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., sponsor of the elections bill and a foe of appointments, ``is rooted in democratic principles and those principles must be preserved at all costs.''
Thursday's vote came two and a half years after the Sept. 11 attacks and the crash in Pennsylvania of United Flight 93, a plane that many believe was destined for the U.S. Capitol.
``Those passengers gave their lives to give us a second chance,'' said Rep. Brian Baird, D-Wash., a supporter of the broader constitutional approach. ``Eternal shame on us if we do not take action'' to protect Congress' survival after a possible attack.
The measure would require special elections within 45 days of the House speaker confirming that a catastrophic event had left at last 100 of the 435 seats vacant. Language was added to ensure that military personnel stationed overseas would have their voting rights protected.
Congress considered but never acted on the continuity question during the Cold War in the 1950s and 1960s, when the fear was that Washington could be obliterated in a nuclear attack.
The current legislation has split the two parties in the House, with many Democrats saying they were not given the chance to offer a constitutional amendment that would allow for temporary appointments until special elections could be held.
The Constitution requires that House vacancies be filled by elections. Senate vacancies can be temporarily filled by appointments made by governors.
The Senate has not taken up the terrorist attack issue, though Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, has proposed a constitutional change giving states the flexibility to come up with their own solutions.
Constitutional amendments require a two-thirds majority in both the House and Senate and ratification by three-fourths of state legislatures.
Sensenbrenner said expedited elections could get the House back on its feet after a disaster without betraying the democratic underpinnings of the chamber.
As for the possibility of a largely appointed House, he asked, ``Is that what the framers of the Constitution had in mind?'' His answer: ``No way.''
Still, in a gesture to Democrats and some in his own party who favor the constitutional approach, Sensenbrenner pledged that his committee would vote on a proposed constitutional amendment in the near future.
Hearings were also scheduled on the issue of incapacitation, or how to define when a member who is still alive is unable to carry out his congressional duties, possibly because of a biological or chemical attack.
Critics of the 45-day election plan said it was both too short a time for some states to prepare for elections and too long to leave Congress in a paralyzed state. Several warned of a martial law condition, with the executive branch taking over legislative authorities such as declaring war during the 45 days that Congress is unable to function.
``A catastrophe that could prevent whole states from being represented for 45 days is at the heart of the concern,'' said Rep. John Larson, D-Conn., another backer of amending the Constitution.
They noted that within days after the Sept. 11 attack Congress passed legislation approving billions in emergency funds to compensate victims and help out airlines. That would not be possible if Congress was unable to meet or raise a quorum, they said.
The constitutional approach is backed by the non-partisan Continuity of Government Commission, formed in the fall of 2002 to study how to keep Congress functioning after a disaster.
The commission's chairs former Sen. Alan Simpson, R-Wyo., and Lloyd Cutler, White House counsel to presidents Carter and Clinton, said in a recent letter that not one of their members went into the task with the desire to amend the Constitution.
``Nevertheless, the evidence we considered led us to conclude that, for the sake of the Constitution itself, the security of our nation and the preservation of the Congress, a constitutional amendment is necessary to provide continuity in the face of a catastrophic attack.''
The Sensenbrenner bill is H.R. 2844.
On the Net:
Congress: http://thomas.loc.gov/
Continuity of Government Commission: http://www.continuityofgovernment.org/
--------
U.S. Aimed for Hussein as War Began
CIA Informants Told of His Suspected Whereabouts
By Bob Woodward
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, April 22, 2004
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A32572-2004Apr21?language=printer
This is the last of five articles adapted from "Plan of Attack," a book by Bob Woodward that is a behind-the-scenes account of how and why President Bush decided to go to war against Iraq.
On the day President Bush led the United States to war in Iraq, he met with the National Security Council in the White House Situation Room, linked by secure video with Gen. Tommy R. Franks and nine of his senior commanders. It was the morning of Wednesday, March 19, 2003.
Franks, who was at Prince Sultan air base in Saudi Arabia, explained that each commander would brief the president.
"Do you have everything you need?" Bush asked Lt. Gen. T. Michael "Buzz" Moseley, the Air Force commander who was running the air operations out of Saudi Arabia. "Can you win?"
"My command and control is all up," Moseley said. "I've received and distributed the rules of engagement. I have no issues. I am in place and ready." He was careful not to promise outright victory. "I have everything we need to win."
"I'm ready," said Lt. Gen. David D. McKiernan, the Army ground commander. "We are moving into forward attack positions. Our logistics are in place. We have everything we need to win."
"Green across the board," said Vice Admiral Timothy J. Keating.
Bush repeated his questions to each of the other commanders. The answers were all affirmative, and got shorter each time.
"The rules of engagement and command and control are in place," Franks said. "The force is ready to go, Mr. President."
"For the peace of the world and the benefit and freedom of the Iraqi people," Bush said, "I hereby give the order to execute Operation Iraqi Freedom. May God bless the troops."
"May God bless America," Franks replied.
"We're ready to go," the president said. "Let's win it." He raised his hand in a salute to his commanders, and then abruptly stood and turned before the others could jump up. Tears welled up in his eyes, and in the eyes of some of the others as Bush left the room. When he reached the Oval Office, he went outside for a walk.
"It was emotional for me," Bush recalled in an interview last December. "I prayed as I walked around the circle. I prayed that our troops be safe, be protected by the Almighty, that there be minimal loss of life." He prayed for all who were to go into harm's way for the country.
"Going into this period, I was praying for strength to do the Lord's will. . . . I'm surely not going to justify war based upon God. Understand that. Nevertheless, in my case I pray that I be as good a messenger of His will as possible. And then, of course, I pray for personal strength and for forgiveness."
After his walk, the president made a series of secure phone calls to leaders of coalition countries saying, in essence, "We're launching!"
At this point, the war plan called for 48 hours of stealth operations, with the first Special Operations teams crossing the border from Jordan into western Iraq to stop any Scud missiles at 9 a.m. Eastern Time, 5 p.m. in Iraq. At the end of that period, at 1 p.m. Washington time on Friday, March 21, nine hours of "shock and awe" bombing and missile strikes would begin, with the major ground incursion scheduled for that night. The president would address the nation sometime Friday to announce that military action had begun.
But there had been a new development that threw some of those plans into doubt -- the opportunity, apparently, to kill Saddam Hussein before the war really even started.
Bush had learned about it the day before, when CIA Director George J. Tenet had come to the White House. He had been keeping Bush updated on the ROCKSTARS, the network of informants inside Iraq that the CIA had developed and cultivated since the previous fall, and how they were getting the CIA closer to locating Hussein. Now, he said, several ROCKSTARS were reporting with increasing detail and granularity the possibility that Hussein or his family was -- or soon would be -- at Dora Farm, a complex southeast of Baghdad on the bank of the Tigris River.
At Bush's intelligence briefing that morning, Tenet said that he might have something really good later on, but that he wasn't going to say anything more. He didn't want to raise expectations on the day the president was going to order the war to begin. It was unusual for Tenet to be so vague, and White House Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card Jr. noticed that Tenet was excited, almost effervescent. Tenet was never undermotivated but this was unusual, Card thought. Very unusual.
10:15 a.m. (6: 15 p.m. in Iraq)
In the mountainous Kurdish-controlled region of northern Iraq, a man named Tim, the head of a CIA paramilitary team, had set up a communications center about 10,000 feet up -- three 1970s trailers and some old Quonset huts wrapped in plastic and tied with ropes. They christened it Jonestown. Tim had 87 ROCKSTARS out there, reporting on the Thuraya satellite phones he had given them, a high-tech 7-by-7-foot screen displaying the exact location of each call coming from inside Iraq. Their calls were taken by two Kurdish brothers recruited by Tim, members of a repressed religious group who had wanted to help the CIA and the United States.
Tim had three of his case officers and two Special Forces guys up there for security, basically living at Jonestown. They listened to the reports coming in Arabic and then relayed them on a secure radio down the mountain to Tim's base camp, where his team was set up in a building painted lime green and known as "Pistachio." They tried to turn the phoned-in reports into intelligence reports as fast as possible for transmission to CIA headquarters in Virginia. Tim always wanted more detail -- clarification, verification.
"Pistachio, Pistachio, this is Jonestown," came yet another call from up the mountain. Jonestown had just received a report from a ROCKSTAR -- a member of Hussein's security force, the SSO, who ran part of the communications links Hussein used as he moved between his palaces and other locations. The source said he had just heard from another ROCKSTAR who had gone to Dora Farm to help with communications and had noticed a significant security detail. They were stocking food and supplies. It looked like a family gathering.
Tim relayed this to Saul, head of the Iraq operations group, at CIA headquarters, who reviewed the latest overhead imagery of Baghdad. Lo and behold, under the palm trees at Dora Farm were 36 frickin' security vehicles! It was a huge number, not for one or two people. The farm was used by Hussein's wife Sajida and Saul knew that Hussein had used it.
About 10:30 a.m., Bush met with Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge and New York City Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg.
"We're on the verge of war," the president said, "and since New York City is a potential top target, it's important we visit." He praised the city's efforts at preparedness, but advised the mayor to focus on the main potential targets of the terrorists. "Keep your eye on tunnels, bridges and the Jewish community."
At 11:30 a.m. Washington time, a second Special Forces commando team launched into Iraq, this one from Saudi Arabia.
1:05 p.m.
The president met with top advisers on energy matters in the Roosevelt Room. The meeting included Vice President Cheney, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice and Card. The questions focused on the international flow of oil. What additional disruptions could take place in the marketplace? Venezuela, which was in political turmoil, had already drastically cut back production. Should the president use the strategic petroleum reserve?
Robert McNally, an energy expert on the White House staff, reported that crude oil prices had fallen from $37 to $31 a barrel. That was good news. A rapid increase in price would raise costs for businesses and consumers across the board.
The Saudis had pledged to stabilize the crude oil market by increasing output and putting crude into tankers that were pre-positioned in the Caribbean or heading there.
When they looked at oil worldwide, McNally said, the crude oversupply was 1.5 million to 1.9 million barrels a day. That dramatic oversupply was driving down the price.
Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham said the Saudis would cover for any loss of oil from Iraq by upping production to 10.5 million barrels a day for 30 days -- an extraordinary pledge. In December, the Saudis had been supplying only 8 million barrels a day, and in February fewer than 9 million.
Commerce Secretary Donald L. Evans said that about two-thirds of the Iraqi oil fields were located close together, and it was not clear from intelligence how many had been wired to explode.
The president, displaying technical knowledge gained from his earlier career in the oil business, said that if explosives were rigged on the top of the well, the fire would be relatively easy to extinguish, but if an explosion were set off deep down in the pipes it could take forever to put out those fires. "If they blow up their oil fields, it will be more than one month. If they really blow them, it will be years."
Sometime after 12:30 p.m. (8:30 p.m. in Iraq), Tim received a report that Rokan, a ROCKSTAR source who ran security at Dora Farm, had seen Hussein, who had left the farm about eight hours earlier to attend meetings but would be back to sleep at Dora along with his sons Qusay and Uday. It was 100 percent sure that Hussein "must" be returning. Tim knew that in the context the "must" meant maybe, but he had to report what he had been told.
At 1 p.m., at least 31 teams of Special Operations forces entered Iraq in the west and north.
"They're on the ground; they're in," Card said in an aside to the president.
It was almost too quiet. Bush and Card were eager to see whether al-Jazeera or CNN or any news organization had picked up some movement.
At 1:45 p.m., the president spoke with Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar for 20 minutes.
"We have to kind of speak in code," Bush said on the secure line. "Things are changing. You may not see much but it's a different pace."
Just after 2 p.m., there was still no leak.
Card checked with the Situation Room.
"The Poles are in," he reported to the president. "They've got the platform." A Polish special forces team had gone in early and captured one of the key targets -- an oil platform in the south.
Bush spoke briefly with the Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski.
"The Aussies are in," Card reported. An Australian commando team had moved into the west.
3:15 p.m.
Tenet, CIA Deputy Director John E. McLaughlin, Saul and several other CIA operatives had raced over to the Pentagon with Tim's intelligence report and satellite photos to meet with Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. Rumsfeld had been following the ROCKSTAR intelligence and thought it merited the attention of the president. The odds were that the group was not being duplicitous; people were putting their lives at risk. But like most intelligence, it was imperfect. Rumsfeld talked with Franks, who thought Dora Farm was a good target, and the secretary asked that he make sure they were ready to attack it.
Rumsfeld called Card. "We've got some developments, and I want to come over and talk about them," he told Card, who passed on the request to the president.
Tenet, meanwhile, phoned Stephen J. Hadley, the deputy national security adviser. "I'm coming," Tenet said cryptically, "I'm not going to say a word on the phone. I want to do it with Don in the presence of the president. Nothing before that."
Rumsfeld, McLaughlin, Tenet, Saul and two other CIA men soon arrived in the Oval Office and went into the president's dining room.
"We've got two guys close to Saddam," Tenet said. He quickly summarized about the security guy, Rokan, at Dora, and then the other ROCKSTAR who had gone down to help with communications. Tenet produced satellite photos that showed the location of the farm near Baghdad at a bend in the Tigris River. There were several houses on the farm. "Saddam and the two boys have been here, and might come back if they're still not there." The CIA was in direct communication with both sources.
Bush questioned them about the sources. Who were they? How good were they?
Saul explained that a key to the ROCKSTAR network was the Special Security Organization officer in communications who worked with the two eyes-on sources at Dora. The SSO man's contacts and recruits into the network had turned out to be very good. In terms of Iraqi sources we are running, Saul told the president, we judge him to be one of the better, more reliable sources. "This is really good," the president said. "This sounds good."
"Well," Saul said, "we'll never get 100 percent confidence but the organization has proven reliable." At this point, they had one source, Rokan, on the specifics of Hussein's being there or about to return. "Right now," Saul said, "it's about 75 percent certain."
A decapitation strike on the top regime leaders now appeared possible. They contemplated the impact of taking out Hussein and his sons. Who would make the decisions inside Iraq? Everyone was so used to directions from the highest level. The best-case scenario was that it might even break the regime, make war unnecessary. That was unlikely but possible.
What kind of weapons would you use? the president asked.
Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who had joined the group, said Tomahawk cruise missiles, and he proposed a strike package of 15 to 17.
Bush was skeptical. He asked, Who is in which building? Where would Hussein stay? Do the sons have kids? Where is the wife? Is Hussein with his wife? Are we sure it is not just where he put all of the kids to stay?
Waiting for Hussein
In northern Iraq, Tim threw a blazer over his long underwear and put on his muddy boots. It was the ritual of respectability with the Kurds. No matter how grubby, the brothers up at Jonestown would be in coat and tie. He hopped in his Cherokee and drove himself up the treacherous three miles from Pistachio to Jonestown to be on the scene where the ROCKSTAR reports were coming in. The atmosphere at Jonestown was frantic with the brothers screaming, "Don't hang up! Stay on, stay on the phone! Don't hang up!" Click. Tim decided the best thing to do was scream back at them.
"The fate of your nation hangs on you," Tim yelled, "and I'm going to pull it all away from you, and if you let me down now, you're not going to get the seat at the table in a new Iraqi government."
The principal source phoned in a report cobbled together from what his two subsources at Dora Farm were telling him: Hussein's sons were at the farm for sure, and Hussein was expected back about 2:30 a.m. or 3 a.m. Iraqi time. The sources on the scene also reported details about the houses. Additionally there was a manzul on the compound, the report said. Manzul could be translated as "place of refuge" or "bunker." Tim chose bunker. The report provided some details about the bunker -- distances from the main houses, and its thickness in so many meters of concrete under so many meters of earth. Tim frantically took this and sent back to CIA headquarters a flash message summarizing the information.
The president had more questions. "Is it going to disrupt Tommy's plan?" he asked. They had spent more than a year on that plan. What would be the impact? Would it blow the whole element of surprise? The Special Operations forces that had gone in already were supposed to be covert. Would this expose them? "Go ask Tommy," he directed Rumsfeld.
Myers eventually reached Franks.
"What do you think about taking a shot at this Dora Farm target?" Myers asked.
Franks had been watching the time-sensitive targets carefully and he had known the night before that the CIA had been getting closer to Hussein, perhaps at Dora Farm. It looked like a target for a Tomahawk cruise missile, and Franks had ordered the Navy to program some missiles on the target. But it was still during the 48-hour ultimatum period the president had given Hussein and his sons to leave. Franks felt pretty strongly, and had counseled Rumsfeld, that they not take a shot during that period. It was a kind of grace period.
Can you do it in two hours? Myers asked next.
Franks said they could. The Tomahawks were ready to go.
Sometime After 4 p.m.
The latest ROCKSTAR report arrived in the Situation Room and was taken immediately to the Oval Office.
"They say they're with him right now! Both of the sons are there," Tenet said. Their wives were there. The families were there also. Hussein was expected back at 2:30 to 3 a.m. Iraq time -- in less than two hours. There was a bunker and one of the ROCKSTARS had paced off where it was, had gone inside and taken rough measurements.
Hadley asked Saul, "Can you show me where the bunker is?" Saul wasn't sure, but they took the overhead photos and Hadley tried to draw a sketch. McLaughlin was soon doing an improved amateur engineer drawing.
Powell was the only principal missing, and about 5:15 p.m. the president told Rice, "You better call Colin."
"Colin, get to the White House!" she said, reaching Powell at the State Department. She was abrupt and offered no explanation. When Powell arrived in minutes, they summarized for him. "If we've got a chance to decapitate them, it's worth it," he finally said.
Rumsfeld strongly recommended a strike, and Cheney agreed, though he seemed to be holding back. Bush filled the time with questions, at one point asking: Were they really sure what they were looking at was what they thought they were looking at?
"It's as good as it gets," Tenet said. "I can't give you 100 percent assurance, but this is as good as it gets."
Bush was still worrying about the women and children. This could be a kind of baby milk factory, he said, recalling an incident from the 1991 Persian Gulf War when the Iraqis had claimed a suspected biological weapons plant that was bombed was really for the production of baby milk. "They would bring out dead women and children," Bush said, "and the first pictures would be of civilian casualties on a massive scale of some kind."
Could Iraq use this as a public relations exercise? he asked. It could engender sympathy for Hussein. Dead babies, children and women would be a nightmare. That sure would get things off on the wrong foot.
Rumsfeld and Myers said it probably didn't matter what they hit in the first strike, because the Iraqi propaganda machine was going to say that the United States killed a number of women and children anyway. And if necessary the Iraqis would execute women and children and say the United States did it.
That was indeed the downside. But the others -- Cheney, Rumsfeld, Tenet, even Powell -- seemed taken with the upside, a shortcut to victory.
Myers raised a serious problem. If there were a bunker at the Dora compound as they now suspected, the cruise missiles would not penetrate. They would need the bunker-busting 2,000-pound bombs to get that deep. Myers was sent off to talk to Franks.
For a moment, the group weighed the downsides. They had promised to defend Israel, and the full defense of Israel was not ready. What were the other consequences? Suppose the Iraqis used a strike as a pretext to set the oil wells ablaze? Suppose they fired Scud missiles into Israel or Saudi Arabia? The consequences of an early attack were immense. The plan called for the air campaign to begin in two days.
Bush went around the room and asked: Would you do it?
"I would do it, Mr. President," Card said. It was too good a chance not to take. Rumsfeld, too, was strongly in favor.
Powell thought it was a hell of a lot of very specific information that seemed not bad, though it was a little curious that the CIA sources on the other end of the satellite phones could have acquired so much.
"If we've got a chance to decapitate them, it's worth it," Powell recommended again.
Rice and Hadley had some more questions about the sources, but both favored an attack.
Myers reached Franks on a secure phone. Could he load up a stealth fighter with a pair of EGBU-27 bombs, the bunker-busters, for the attack?
"Absolutely not," Franks said. "We don't have the F-117 ready to go." The F-117A Nighthawk, the stealth single-seat fighter jet, typically carried two of the bombs when fully loaded.
Franks checked further. The Air Force had been following the intelligence and the night before had readied one F-117. The Air Force squadron in Qatar had received word that day that the bombs could be dropped in pairs safely, though it had never been tried before.
Franks asked what the probability was of a single F-117 getting through and delivering its pair of bombs. Though stealthy and radar-evading, the F-117 would have to go in before the suppression of Iraqi air defense, weak as that was. The plane would be going in cold. The answer came back that the Air Force could only say there was a 50 percent chance of success.
Prepare two bombers, Franks ordered, figuring that would improve the chances.
In Qatar, the Air Force squadron was able to load a second F-117.
Franks sent word to the Oval Office that it would be possible, but that he needed a final decision to go by about 7:15 p.m. in order to get the F-117s in and out of Iraqi airspace well before dawn.
Rumsfeld, Myers and CIA men were running in and out of the Oval Office to find secure phones at West Wing locations. Card was concerned that the window of opportunity was closing. Did they really understand the intelligence? Was it necessary to change the weapons? Myers was trying to find out how long it would take the F-117s to be loaded, take off, then fly from Doha to Baghdad and back. How many tankers do they have to have to refuel the planes?
Another question arose. If it was approved, should the president go on television that night and make his speech announcing the beginning of the war -- a speech now scheduled for Friday?
"Look, this is an ongoing operation," Cheney said. "We didn't announce that the Special Forces were going in. We didn't announce the Poles were taking over the platform. We didn't announce the Australians were heading toward the dam. We don't have to announce it yet. You don't announce it until you are ready to announce it."
Rumsfeld seemed to half agree. "If someone should go, maybe it should be me," he said, but he then added, indicating Bush, "Or maybe it could be you."
Powell raised the CNN effect. The attack would be seen instantly. Reporters stationed at the Rashid Hotel in Baghdad were close enough possibly to see it or hear it. Dozens of cruise missiles and bunker-buster bombs. The media were spring-loaded to proclaim, "It started! It started!" Antiaircraft fire and tracers would be flying all around. The war was going to begin with this event.
"If lives are in jeopardy," the president said, "I've got to go announce it."
Cheney reminded him that lives were already in danger and that there had been no announcement.
Should he wait until the next morning? the president asked. That would give Franks an additional 12 hours before any announcement.
Bush called in his two main communications advisers, Karen Hughes and Dan Bartlett, to the Oval Office. He told Saul to sum up the intelligence.
Then, the president said he was probably going to order the attack. "How do we do this?" he asked Hughes and Bartlett. "Do I go on television?" Should he inform the public before, during or after? Should the secretary of defense do it? Everyone turned to Hughes. They knew how much Bush relied on her.
"No, you need to do it, Mr. President," she said. "The American people shouldn't hear it from the press; they shouldn't hear it from somebody else. They should hear it from you. And you should tell them what and why." If they hit civilians or women and children, the president had to be ahead of the curve. She added her trademark observation, "We can't sort of be catching up."
Bartlett agreed with Hughes, but Cheney still had reservations. What would this mean for Israel, Turkey, Saudi Arabia? Do we have our defenses ready for Israel? Tommy's plan has a defense, but the plan wasn't fully implemented yet.
Powell could not understand that they would start a war and not get out front with a presidential announcement.
"I promised people I'd let them know when the war begins," Bush said. "And if lives -- the war is beginning tonight, lives will be in jeopardy, I have to tell the American people that I've committed American forces to war."
Cheney didn't seem happy.
"They have to hear it from me," Bush said. "I'm doing it." This would be starting the war, he said. "Let's not kid ourselves."
6 p.m.
Card called Bush speechwriter Michael Gerson. "Is it ready?" Card asked. There was only one speech left to give.
"In about five minutes I can have it ready," Gerson said.
"I want you to meet me outside the Oval Office at 6:30 with several copies of the speech."
Gerson went down to the Oval Office and sat in one of the two chairs outside. Card soon emerged. "We'll be with you soon enough. Just wait," he told him. Card took the copies of the speech, leaving Gerson to cool his heels. Obviously something was up, but Gerson had no idea what. Tenet and his people were running in and out making secure calls.
Inside the Oval Office, the president went around the room again, asking if all the principals agreed, almost pushing each to the wall. They did.
Bush turned to Saul. "Well, what do you think?"
Saul's head was spinning. He had never been involved in a discussion like this, let alone been asked his opinion. He was worried about the pilots of the F-117s. His intelligence was now going to put American lives directly at risk. The planes would be going in with no electronic countermeasures, no fighter escort, no advance suppression of Iraqi air defense. "I have to apologize that we have to present you with this very tough decision," Saul said to the president. "I really feel sorry for you having to make it."
"Don't," Bush said. "That's what I do. I'll make the decision."
"Well, sir," Saul said, "then I would say launch."
The president kicked everyone out of the Oval Office but Cheney.
What do you think, Dick?
"This is the best intelligence we've had yet on where Saddam's located," Cheney replied. "If we get him, it may save a lot of lives and shorten the war. And even if we don't, we're going to rattle his cage pretty seriously, and maybe disrupt the chain of command. That's well worth the effort in and of itself." Now he was unequivocal. "I think we ought to go for it."
7:12 p.m.
The others came back in. Finally, the president said, "Let's go." It was three minutes before Franks's deadline.
Powell noted silently that things didn't really get decided until the president had met with Cheney alone.
Myers went to the secure phone to inform Franks.
Rumsfeld emerged from the Oval Office and saw Gerson. "I was just butchering your speech," he said.
The president called out, "Gerson, come on in." Hughes and Bartlett were standing there.
"We're going after them," Bush explained.
"I don't understand," Gerson said.
"The intelligence is good," Bush replied, explaining that it showed they had a shot at Hussein and his sons. "Let's hope we're right," he added, choking up.
Rumsfeld's "butchery" of the speech was simple. He wanted the president to say that this was the "early stages" of military operations, and again in the second paragraph refer to the "opening stages" of war.
"I want to see you over in the residence when you're ready," Bush said to Gerson and Hughes, directing that the changes be made.
The two went up to Gerson's second-floor office and made the changes in a few minutes. Gerson was glad they were going to restore a line that had been cut from Monday's ultimatum speech. Referring to Hussein and his alleged weapons of mass destruction, the line now read: "We meet that threat now, with our Army, Air Force, Navy, Coast Guard and Marines so that we do not have to meet it later with armies of firefighters and police and doctors on the streets of our cities." Gerson thought it was the most vivid way to put it. The implication of avoiding another 9/11 would be clear.
Rumsfeld read the speech word for word to Franks over a secure phone to make sure he had no objections or suggestions. He had none.
Rice placed a quick call at 7:30 p.m. to Israeli Finance Minister Binyamin Netanyahu about another matter. He said he already knew about the war and wished it would be fast and "bloodless."
She woke up David Manning, the British national security adviser.
"David, there's a little change in plans. And I'm sorry to say this, but I think you better wake the prime minister and tell him."
The President Prepares
Bush went to the residence. Card sat with him in the Yellow Room. Are you comfortable? the chief of staff asked. Are you ready to give the speech? He wanted to separate the two -- the decision to go after Hussein and the speech.
Yes, the president said, he was ready on both counts. Though he had asked all in the war cabinet, including Card, if they would do this, and each had said yes, he asked again. "You would do this?"
"Yes," Card said, "this is the right thing to do. Absolutely. Take this chance."
How long have the F-117s been up? the president asked. When do they get there?
The next report said they were in Iraqi airspace. There would be no more preliminary reports because they would be on radio silence over Iraq.
Hughes, Bartlett and Gerson went over to the residence. Unsure whether the president wanted to see them or just receive the speech, they asked the usher to check. If Bush was having dinner, they did not want to interrupt. The usher soon came back and escorted them up to the Treaty Room, Bush's private office. Gerson thought Bush was subdued and a little pale. For the first time he looked to Gerson a little bit burdened by all of this. The president took the speech and began to read it aloud: "My fellow citizens, at this hour . . .
"American and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm Iraq, to free its people and to defend the world from grave danger."
He read through the 10 paragraphs and said it was fine. He had no changes. He walked them to the elevator.
Quietly, as if to reassure himself, Bush said again, "The intelligence is good."
'God Help Us All'
Rice called Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the Saudi ambassador. "Can I see you at 7:45?" she asked.
"Condi," Bandar said, "we have to stop meeting like this -- this hour. People will talk."
Normally any meeting after 6:30 p.m. was a kind of code word, meaning that Bandar would be seeing the president. Bandar had booked an entire small Arabian restaurant in Georgetown that night to dine with his wife, family and some friends. He told his wife to go ahead. He arrived in the West Wing lobby and noticed a photographer. Odd. When he was finally ushered in at 8:28 p.m., Rice stepped to her outer office to greet him. Flash!
Bandar jumped, saying, "I hope he works for you."
"Yes, yes, don't worry."
The photographer snapped again as they were about to sit down, and a third time after they sat.
"The president has " Rice began.
" . . . asked me to tell you," Bandar interrupted, completing her sentence, "that we are going to war."
It was obvious -- the ultimatum's expiration and the photographer. "I've been meeting you in this office for two years and I've never had a photographer in here. I'm not retiring to take goodbye photos. You're not retiring."
About 9 p.m., hell will break loose, Rice said. "And your friend, the president, insisted that you be informed immediately."
"Where is the president now?" Bandar asked.
"He is having dinner right now with the first lady and then he decided he wants to be alone." "Tell him he will be in our prayers and hearts," Bandar said. "God help us all."
Rice's phone rang at 8:29 p.m.
"Yes, yes, Mr. President," she said. "No, I told him. . . . He's here. . . . Yes, he is with me. I told him. Well, he said you're in his prayers."
"He said thank you," Rice reported after hanging up. "Just keep praying."
Bandar excused himself and left. The walk from the West Wing to his car outside seemed 1,000 miles. Cool air hit his face and he suddenly began to sweat, then there was a little shiver.
He had arranged a code to alert Crown Prince Abdullah if he learned early -- a reference to the Roda, an oasis outside Riyadh.
"Tonight the forecast is there will be heavy rain in the Roda," Bandar said from his car phone to Saudi Arabia.
"Oh, I see," the crown prince said. "I see. Are you sure?"
"I am very sure," he replied, adding that the Americans had great capabilities, satellites and so forth, to predict the weather.
"Tell me again."
Bandar repeated.
The crown prince took a deep breath. "May God decide what is good for all of us." Then he asked loudly, "Do you know how soon the storm is going to hit?"
"Sir," Bandar said, potentially blowing operational security if any foreign embassy or anyone else with the capability was listening in, "I don't know, but watch TV."
Preparing to Inform the Nation
In his interview last December, Bush recalled the moment. "It's been a very long day. I get upstairs, and I can't sleep. Because I've got about an hour and a half now." He didn't want to speak until the bombers were off their targets. "I was trying to take a little nap."
Once more, he called Rice. No news.
He tried to sleep or read or find something to do and couldn't so he called Rice again.
"Mr. President, we've just got a report from the person on the ground. A convoy has pulled into the complex."
"Is that convoy full of kids?" Bush asked. It hit him that there was no turning back now. The bombers were going in first, followed immediately by 36 cruise missiles. They had doubled the Tomahawk attack package. The Tomahawk cruise missiles, which had been launched to the Dora Farm target more than an hour earlier, had no self-destruct mechanism so they were going in no matter what.
"No," Rice replied, "he thinks that it looks like the kind of convoy that would bring Saddam Hussein."
About an hour later, the president came down to the Oval Office and did a read-through, then went to his study off the Oval Office.
Normally at the end of the day press secretary Ari Fleischer would put a "lid" on, telling the White House reporters that there would be no more news that night. But Fleischer knew that the extraordinarily long Oval Office meeting meant something, especially with all the running around by the principals and the presence of even a few unfamiliar faces. So he was going to be careful. Finally, Card took Fleischer into his corner office.
It's going to start tonight, Card said. These are the early stages. We have a target of opportunity and are sending a stealth fighter to go after it.
"Are we sending anything else in?"
"I told you everything you need to know," Card replied. The attack would be south of Baghdad. Iraqi antiaircraft batteries would soon be going off.
Rice, Card, Bartlett and Fleischer gathered around the TV in Rice's office. At 9:30 p.m. reports came that air raid sirens had gone off in Baghdad. Antiaircraft fire soon followed.
"Go out," Rice told Fleischer.
Fleischer was at the podium at 9:45: "The opening stages of the disarmament of the Iraqi regime have begun. The president will address the nation at 10:15."
Myers reported to Hadley that the F-117s had successfully dropped their bombs, but the pilots were not yet out of hostile territory. Hadley went to the study off the Oval Office where the president was getting his makeup, and relayed the report to Bush and Rice.
"Let's pray for the pilots," Bush said.
10:16 p.m.
The president appeared on television, the stock flags and family photos in the background. He said the "early stages" of the military campaign against Hussein had begun, without offering any details. "More than 35 countries are giving crucial support," he said. "A campaign on the harsh terrain of a nation as large as California could be longer and more difficult than some predict." It was a time of "grave danger" and "peril."
"Our forces will be coming home as soon as their work is done," he said. "This will not be a campaign of half-measures."
When he was done, he asked Rice how the speech had gone. One of the better ones, she told him.
Hadley called Myers, who reported about 11 p.m. that the pilots were out of hostile airspace and on the approach to land. Rice called the president.
"The pilots are out of harm's way," she said.
"Well, thank God for that."
A few minutes before midnight in Washington (8 a.m. Iraqi time), Tim sent a report saying that the principal ROCKSTAR reported that Hussein and his sons were at Dora Farm when the bombs and missiles hit, but he did not know their status. Tim did not want to report again until he was pretty sure they had gotten Hussein.
Before dawn in Washington (about noon in Iraq), he sent another cable. Again he had to report what the ROCKSTARS said, but he was uncertain because he was just getting snatches from ROCKSTARS fleeing the scene. Rokan, their source, had been killed by a cruise missile. One of Hussein's sons, it was unclear which, had come out shouting, "We've been betrayed" and shot another of the ROCKSTARS in the knee. The other son had emerged from the rubble bloody and disoriented but it wasn't clear whether it was his blood or someone else's. Hussein had been injured, according to a ROCKSTAR witness, and had to be dug out of the rubble. He was blue. He was gray. He was being given oxygen. He had been put on a stretcher and loaded into the back of an ambulance, which then did not move for half an hour before departing the farm across a bridge.
About 4:30 a.m. Tenet called the Situation Room and told the duty officer, "Tell the president we got the son of a bitch."
They didn't wake the president. And by the time Bush arrived at the Oval Office about 6:30 a.m. Thursday, March 20, they weren't so sure. It looked as though Hussein may have survived.
Epilogue
On March 24, 2003, five days after the start of the war, Tim made his way down to Dora Farm. It looked like the remnants of a flea market, people were still carting stuff away. There were craters and clearly the place had been attacked. He searched everywhere. There was no bunker or any hint of one. He found a subterranean pantry for food storage attached to the main house. Perhaps that was what his ROCKSTAR agents had been referring to. It was baffling and mysterious. Was it possible that manzul was neither a place of refuge nor a bunker, but a pantry?
Tim eventually tracked down some of the ROCKSTAR agents who had reported that night. Two said their wives had been captured by Hussein's agents and had their fingernails pulled out. Another maintained that his house had been bulldozed. There was some evidence to support these claims, but Tim was unsure.
Soon Tim was reassigned to CIA headquarters to work undercover on other issues. Saul and other superiors asked him and the team members to put down the sequence of events of the day and night of March 19 to 20, 2003. They wanted a very briefable, immaculate package. The more Tim searched his memory and the few documents, he realized that much was cloudy. Everyone had been stressed. The ROCKSTARS on the ground had not wanted to disappoint, and had obviously been worried about being captured or killed.
Tim made a series of efforts to write down in a meaningful way what had happened. He tried a version. Did he have 40 percent? Or 62 percent? Or 83 percent? he wondered. What percentage of the truth was available? What had slipped away? What had been untrue? He tried several more times. It wasn't black or white, and it certainly wasn't a straight line. Was he getting closer or further from the truth?
He never produced a definitive version. The biggest unanswered question was whether Saddam Hussein and his entourage had really been there that night.
Mark Malseed contributed to this report.
--------
Ballooning U.S. Government Feels Just a Tiny Contraction
Worker Rolls Dipped for First Time Since Bush Took Office
By Christopher Lee
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, April 22, 2004; Page A29
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32398-2004Apr21.html
By one yardstick, the federal government is getting smaller -- but just a little bit.
The number of employees fell last year for the first time since George W. Bush took office in January 2001, according to new data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
After swelling by 97,000 employees in the first two years of Bush's term, the ranks of civil servants shrank by 29,000 last year, to 1.929 million workers. That is still higher than the 1.861 million employees the BLS says were on the payroll when Bush won the presidency. (The figures do not include employees of the U.S. Postal Service.)
The Office of Personnel Management showed a similar but smaller decline, of about 8,500 federal workers. According to the OPM, 1.835 million civilian workers were on the payroll at the end of 2003, down from more than 1.843 million the previous year.
The OPM and the Labor Department have different methods of counting heads. OPM figures show that the number of employees actually fell by 4,473 during Bush's first year in office and then climbed by 85,507 employees before dipping again last year.
"Our focus isn't on whether the number of federal employees has briefly risen or dipped, but whether we are producing the best results for taxpayers and doing it as efficiently as we can," said Chad Kolton, a spokesman for the Office of Management and Budget.
Bush took office promising to make government run more like a business. During his tenure the ranks of employees have grown, partly because of increases in defense spending and anti-terrorism efforts, such as the hiring of 45,000 airport screeners by the new Transportation Security Administration.
But Bush's controversial "competitive sourcing" initiative may result in a reduction in employees in the long run. It requires hundreds of thousands of civil servants to prove they can do their jobs better and more cheaply than private contractors, or risk seeing the work outsourced.
Bush says the competition promotes efficiency. Federal labor unions have criticized the initiative as anti-civil servant and an attempt to reward private contractors for their political support of the president.
Regardless, the initiative is still young and appears unlikely to explain the decline in federal employment in 2003. A recent General Accounting Office study of competitive sourcing, for instance, found that only a few thousand jobs had been taken over by contractors in the past two fiscal years.
By other measures, of course, the government is expanding, not shrinking.
Bush sent Congress a $2.4 trillion proposed budget this year -- compared with a budget of about $1.9 trillion when he took office. Some analysts and employee union leaders point to the growing ranks of contractors as proof the true size of government is increasing every year.
According to a study last year by the Brookings Institution, about 12.1 million people worked for the federal government in 2002, more than at any other time since 1990. The majority, 8 million, worked for government contractors and organizations that received government grants.
Colleen M. Kelley, president of the National Treasury Employees Union, said many employees are deciding to retire sooner than they had planned, in part because they believe their work is not valued by the White House and agency executives.
The federal workplace "is just not somewhere they want to be any longer than they have to," Kelley said. "I travel a lot and meet with front-line employees. I can tell you anecdotally that more employees than ever before tell me that they'll be retiring on or close to their retirement date."
Rachel Krantz, a Labor Department economist who helped analyze the new statistics, which were reported in the March issue of the department's Monthly Labor Review, said data were not immediately available to determine which federal agencies lost jobs last year and why. Attrition was one possibility, she said, and retirement another.
Julie Hatch, another Labor Department economist, said the BLS survey provides few clues about where the jobs went.
"It's not like it's one agency that's really standing out with the job losses," she said.
-------- MILITARY
-------- asia
Reports of Massive Blast Emerge From Secretive North Korea
April 22, 2004
By JAMES BROOKE
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/22/international/asia/22CND-KORE.html?hp
SEOUL, South Korea, Friday, April 23 - Hundreds of people were killed and injured when two trains loaded with fuel collided and exploded in a North Korean railroad station on Thursday, only hours after North Korea's leader, Kim Jong Il, had passed by, according to reports in South Korean news media.
The cable television network YTN estimated that up to 3,000 people had been killed or injured in huge explosions that followed the collision of a train carrying gasoline and a second carrying liquefied petroleum gas.
"We've obtained the information that there was a large explosion near Ryongchon Station," a South Korean Defense Ministry official who was not identified told the Yonhap news agency.
North Korea is such a secretive and unconventional society - Kim Il Sung, Kim Jong Il's father, is still the head of state a decade after his death - that it is not expected to issue news of the train wreck any time soon.
Train wrecks with large numbers of fatalities are rare in North Korea, largely because trains creak slowly along rails that were first laid during the Japanese occupation, more than 60 years ago.
The explosion took place on North Korea's busiest rail line, on the route from Pyongyang to China. A lifeline for the impoverished nation, the route brings in food and fuel from China, the North's leading trading partner and a major source of aid.
The blast took place around noon, near the time when North Korea's state-controlled news media first informed its people that Mr. Kim, the nation's leader, had made a rare trip abroad to China. Mr. Kim, who leaves the country only in a specially armored rail car, a gift to his father by Stalin, had secretly passed through Ryongchon station shortly before dawn, nine hours before the blast. Mr. Kim, known as the "Dear Leader," does not travel by airplane.
It was Mr. Kim's first trip to China in three years. The blast undoubtedly will shake the leadership of North Korea, a suspicious elite that maintains a personality cult around Mr. Kim, whose decade in power has coincided with the nation's impoverishment.
North Korea declared a state of alert in the area of the explosion and cut some international telephone links, Yonhap reported.
"The station was destroyed as if hit by a bombardment and debris flew high into the sky," the South Korean news agency reported, quoting unidentified Chinese officials. Ryongchon is on flat coastal land, 30 miles south of the North's border with China.
North Korea's official announcement on Thursday of Mr. Kim's three-day trip to Beijing seemed to signal that he had returned safely to Pyongyang.
Reuters reported that residents of Pyongyang reached by telephone had said that there was nothing unusual in the capital. North Korean television was broadcasting military songs and music - standard evening fare.
-------- business
Violence in Iraq Forces 2 Big Contractors to Curb Work
April 22, 2004
By JAMES GLANZ
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/22/international/middleeast/22REBU.html?pagewanted=all&position=
The insurgency in Iraq has driven two major contractors, General Electric and Siemens, to suspend most of their operations there, raising new doubts about the American-led effort to rebuild the country as hostilities continue.
Spokesmen for the contractors declined to discuss their operations in Iraq, citing security concerns, but the shutdowns were confirmed by officials at the Iraqi Ministry of Electricity, the Coalition Provisional Authority and other companies working directly with G.E. and Siemens in Iraq.
"Between the G.E. lockdown and the inability to get materials moved up the major supply routes, about everything is being affected in one way or another," said Jim Hicks, a senior adviser for electricity at the provisional authority.
The suspensions and travel restrictions are delaying work on about two dozen power plants as occupying forces press to meet an expected surge in demand for electricity before the summer. Mr. Hicks said plants that had been expected to produce power by late April or early May might not be operating until June 1.
"While it's being affected, it's not shutting down," he said of the work. "I think we're still in good shape as far as getting our equipment back up before the summer really hits us."
Several government and company officials said reconstruction work had rebounded recently after the intense violence of the past few weeks, but experts said they were concerned the delays might affect ordinary Iraqis.
"What worries me is that, are the insurgents, the terrorists, are they winning the battle this way?" asked Isam al Khafaji, an Iraqi who is director of Iraq Revenue Watch, an initiative of the Open Society Institute, an organization backed by the billionaire George Soros.
Electricity, he added, "is the most important sector for the Iraqis after security."
"This will be affecting, really, people's everyday lives," he said.
The Coalition Provisional Authority regards the rehabilitation of the Iraq's water, sewage, transportation, oil and electrical infrastructure as a linchpin in the effort to create a functioning democracy and convince Iraqis of America's good will.
A spokeswoman for the authority said discussions involving security issues with General Electric had led to an agreement that could result in a resumption of operations. The spokeswoman said Siemens and the authority were "working out their differences," but she said she had no information about whether the company would resume work.
General Electric booked $450 million in orders in 2003 in Iraq, mostly for subcontracts to the large primary contractors in Iraq, said Gary Sheffer, a company spokesman.
Neither General Electric nor other companies working in Iraq would say how many employees they had in the country, citing security concerns.
Mr. Sheffer said that the company intended to fulfill its contractual obligations and was committed to rebuilding the country. "We are working with our customers to mitigate the impacts of the security measures that have been implemented recently," he wrote in an e-mail message.
Paula Davis, a Siemens spokeswoman, said her company also was committed to the reconstruction but declined to provide further information on work in Iraq.
Two companies with much larger contracts in Iraq, Bechtel and Halliburton, said they had curtailed travel by their employees but were not considering halting their work or pulling out of the country.
"While some travel has been temporarily limited to mission-critical tasks, we are in constant communication with the military, and these restricted movements and increased security measures will not impact getting supplies to soldiers," said Wendy Hall, a spokeswoman for Halliburton, which delivers drinking water, food and fuel used by the American occupation force.
Halliburton said in a statement on Tuesday that three of four bodies found near an attack on a fuel convoy in Iraq this month were its employees. A captive Halliburton employee, Thomas Hamill, has been shown in a video distributed by his captors.
A major private security provider in Iraq with access to intelligence information said that Halliburton had "been slowed down in terms of the number of routes and convoys they can run" and said the firm was having a difficult time hiring truck drivers to work in Iraq. He estimated that the overall number of Halliburton convoys was down by 35 percent.
Despite the delays, several government and private officials in Iraq remained optimistic about the long term.
"Yes, you have to be careful, take prudent measures to reduce your risk," said Tom Wheelock, director of infrastructure programs for the United States Agency for International Development, which oversees some $3 billion in rebuilding contracts. "And with that context, with those kinds of guidelines, you can have success."
Admiral David J. Nash is the director of the Coalition Provisional Authority's program management office, which is awarding $9 billion in new rebuilding contracts. "What they all understand this to be is a gift from the people of the United States to the people of Iraq," he said. "I think it's vital."
He estimated that during the most intense days of the insurgency in early April, about 25 percent of Iraqi workers hired for his office's projects actually arrived for work. Last week, attendance was back up to about 50 percent, or an average of 3,517 workers, said Steven Susens, a spokesman for the authority.
Several major companies said that despite the insurgency, they had been able to continue with nearly all of their projects. In some cases, the work continued within secure perimeters, where non-Iraqi workers remained outside Baghdad until their companies decided that travel was safe. In other cases, projects were left to Iraqi subcontractors, who communicated with managers in Baghdad by phone and e-mail.
"We are still working in all the sectors in which we have active work orders," said Howard Menaker, a spokesman for Bechtel, which has nearly $3 billion in contracts in Iraq. "Overall we think we will stay on schedule and complete the contracts."
But the lockdowns by General Electric in particular have led to delays on power projects that involved its huge turbine power generators, in some cases forcing other companies to slow or stop work.
The delays are slowing work on a $50 million project to refurbish a large power plant north of Baghdad, said Robert Spaulding, an operations vice president for Fluor, a major contractor in Iraq.
About 70 Iraqis and a dozen non-Iraqi managers are taking apart three General Electric turbines, but G.E. has declined to send technical advisers and has been slow to ship new parts, Mr. Spaulding said. He said he might be forced to seek technical help from other companies that have experience with the G.E. units.
"Tell me what's different about having an American construction superintendent at this site," Mr. Spaulding said, referring to his own employees there, "but G.E. won't send an American tech guy?"
-------- china
U.S. Cautions Taiwan on Independence
President Is Warned Not to Provoke China
By Glenn Kessler
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, April 22, 2004; Page A22
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32750-2004Apr21.html
The Bush administration, in its first broad response to vows by Taiwan's recently reelected president to craft a constitution, warned Taiwan yesterday that unilateral moves toward independence could prompt a Chinese military response "that could destroy much of what Taiwan has built and crush its hopes for the future."
Assistant Secretary of State James A. Kelly said in congressional testimony that such military action by China would be "a dangerous, objectionable and foolish response." But he said, "While we strongly disagree with [China's] approach . . . it would be irresponsible of us and of Taiwan's leaders to treat these statements as empty threats."
Kelly's lengthy statement, which had been approved by Bush's senior foreign policy advisers, was a stern signal to Taiwan's leadership, especially after President Chen Shui-bian's razor-thin victory last month, to back off from its aggressive stance on independence, particularly in light of the rapid military buildup by China on the other side of the Taiwan straits. It also represented a further evolution in the administration's pro-Taiwan stance.
"I see his statement as a pretty significant first draft of the administration's rethinking of its Taiwan policy," said John J. Tkacik Jr., a China specialist at the Heritage Foundation.
The administration originally was deeply skeptical of Chinese intentions on many issues. But since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, relations with the Beijing government have improved because of China's assistance on counterterrorism, especially in intelligence sharing, and its growing importance in trying to resolve the North Korean nuclear crisis.
In a recent interview with The Washington Post, Chen said his narrow victory had given him a mandate to press ahead with his plans to develop Taiwan as an "independent, sovereign country." A senior Chinese official later condemned Chen's remarks as a provocation and said it was clear that Chen's plans to write a new constitution for the island by 2006 was "virtually a timetable for Taiwan independence" -- a red line that China says would prompt military action.
In large part, the administration appears to be trying to tell the Taiwanese that moves toward independence will not bring worthwhile benefits -- while at the same time telling China that mere declarations will not change Taiwan's status in the world and are not worthy of war. An administration official, speaking on the condition of anonymity , said officials felt it necessary to show broad support for Taiwan's thriving democracy but Chen needed to be told that he should not overreach.
"A unilateral move towards independence will avail Taiwan of nothing it does not already enjoy in terms of democratic freedom, autonomy, prosperity and security," Kelly said. "We look to President Chen to exercise the kind of responsible, democratic and restrained leadership that will be necessary to ensure a peaceful and prosperous future for Taiwan."
But in remarks broadcast on Taiwanese television yesterday, Chen said Beijing's "one China" policy -- which declares that Taiwan is part of China -- is a "political myth" and "the Chinese Communist regime is a traditional autocratic empire that will definitely die one day." He said he would not be deterred from putting a constitution to a vote in 2006.
In a debate over diplomatic nuance, some U.S. officials had sought to put the administration on record as "opposing" Taiwan independence. But in the end, the administration settled on restating its position that the United States "does not support independence."
The Taiwan issue figured prominently in Vice President Cheney's discussions last week with Chinese leaders in Beijing. Cheney told the Chinese that any efforts by Beijing to thwart democracy in Hong Kong would be likely to reinforce the budding movement in Taiwan to formally separate from China.
China has deployed an estimated 500 short-range ballistic missiles across the strait that separates Taiwan from the mainland. The Bush administration has cited the Chinese missiles as a reason for selling radar and military equipment to Taiwan, pointing out that the U.S. government is legally obligated to assist in the island's defense. Cheney rejected Chinese complaints that U.S. arms sales to Taiwan were destabilizing, making it clear that the administration believes the sales were a direct consequence of China's missile buildup aimed at Taiwan.
China's buildup and its threat to use force "are uncomfortable realities, yet they are facts with which we must grapple," Kelly told lawmakers. "As Taiwan proceeds with efforts to deepen democracy, we will speak clearly and bluntly if we feel as though those efforts carry the potential to adversely impact U.S. security interests or have the potential to undermine Taiwan's own security."
Peter W. Rodman, assistant secretary of defense, who appeared with Kelly, said China also faces a choice. "We all know that China is an emerging economic powerhouse, and its economic power is enabling it to accelerate a military modernization that is certainly threatening to Taiwan," Rodman said, adding China must decide whether it will resort to diplomacy or force to settle problems.
-------- europe
Spain Plans to Hasten Withdrawal of Troops
U.S. Officials Say Move Could Cost Lives
By Robin Wright and Bradley Graham
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, April 22, 2004
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32541-2004Apr21.html
After announcing its decision last weekend to withdraw forces from Iraq, Spain has raised further ire in Washington by giving notice of plans to pull out faster than expected, a move that Bush administration officials said yesterday is complicating military operations in Iraq and could put lives in danger. Initially, officials here had expected the withdrawal to start in a month or two and be carefully coordinated with U.S. military commanders in Iraq. But the Pentagon received word earlier this week that about half of Spain's 1,300 troops would be leaving in the next 10 days and the rest within 20 days after that.
"We completely respect their political decision to remove their forces, but the way they're doing it is a big disappointment," said a senior administration official who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue. "They did not coordinate with the commanders on the ground. It's causing us to have to scramble to backfill those very important positions. And it could unnecessarily jeopardize operations and lives.
"This is just not the way that allies should treat each other," the official went on. "It's disappointing and it's unprofessional."
Such unusually blunt and angry language reflected the depth of the official irritation generated by Spain's plan and undercut efforts yesterday by Spain's top diplomat to smooth over the episode.
After talks here with Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, Spanish Foreign Minister Miguel Angel Moratinos denied any new tensions in relations since the government of Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero was installed last weekend and announced the troop pullout.
"We are looking to the future. The decision to return the troops is a decision of yesterday," Moratinos told reporters. "We have a strong friendship with the United States. And the determination of both administrations is to work together in areas that are the common challenge for all of us -- first and mainly, the fight against terror."
At the White House, however, spokesman Scott McClellan expressed U.S. regrets over the Spanish decision.
"This is a time of testing," he told reporters. "It's important that we stay the course and help the Iraqi people as we work to transfer sovereignty and build a free and democratic future for the Iraqi people."
Pentagon officials said the significance of Spain's withdrawal extends beyond the simple loss of its troops.
"It's also the fact that the Spanish were the headquarters for some of the other forces," Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the House Armed Services Committee yesterday.
Following Spain's lead, two other countries whose forces have operated under the Spanish headquarters also have announced plans to end their involvement in Iraq. Honduras is withdrawing 370 soldiers, and the Dominican Republic 300.
To replace the forces, who have been responsible for securing areas in south-central Iraq, U.S. commanders have shifted 1st Armored Division troops who had been based in the vicinity of Baghdad. The division, which had been scheduled to leave Iraq this month after a year of combat duty, had its stay extended by 90 days last week.
Britain also may provide a new headquarters unit to take the place of Spain's, a senior U.S. official said.
Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz, who testified with Myers, acknowledged that the pullouts pose "a real concern" to the administration. He said the withdrawals are prompting U.S. commanders "to readjust how we deploy our forces" in Iraq.
"Many of our allies have done extremely well, and it's worth mentioning the Salvadorans have been particularly commended by our people for their toughness in the last couple of weeks," Wolfowitz added. "And most of our allies seem to be sticking with us. But this is very tough duty, it's not peacekeeping."
Eager to show that the coalition of international forces is holding, U.S. officials have cited statements of continued support from Britain, Japan, Portugal and others. Italy announced yesterday that it will keep its 2,500 troops in Iraq beyond June 30, the scheduled date for the official transfer of authority to an Iraqi government.
But Polish Prime Minister Leszek Miller, whose country has been a key U.S. ally in Iraq, caused a stir by suggesting that his government was reviewing its position. He added, however, that Poland will "not make any rash" moves.
A controversy bubbled in Italy over reports that the government had paid a ransom for three Italian captives in Iraq. A television station owned by Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi said it had paid, attributing the information to the Italian administrator in southern Iraq, Barbara Contini. But Contini and Berlusconi denied the report.
-------- iraq
Blasts at Iraqi Police Facilities
Kill 68 Suicide Attacks in Basra Claim Many Children; Fallujah Erupts Again
Thursday, April 22, 2004
By Pamela Constable and Khalid Saffar
Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A32540-2004Apr21?language=printer
BAGHDAD, April 21 -- Five car bombs exploded nearly simultaneously in suicide attacks outside four police facilities in the southern city of Basra on Wednesday, killing 68 people, including children being driven to school, and wounding at least 200, authorities said.
The attacks were the worst to hit the largely Shiite Muslim city near the Persian Gulf since the U.S.-led occupation of Iraq began more than a year ago.
In the central city of Fallujah, meanwhile, heavily armed Iraqi insurgents attacked U.S. Marine forces, setting off a three-hour battle that shook a two-day-old political agreement aimed at ending the conflict there. The clash, in which at least nine Iraqis were killed, according to a military statement, also halted the return of thousands of civilian refugees. Eight attackers died during fighting in Fallujah on Tuesday, the Marines said.
Iraqi officials in the capital said the Basra attacks bore the hallmarks of similar terrorist bombings in other cities, including the Shiite holy city of Karbala and the northern Kurdish city of Irbil, over the past several months. Iraqi officials in Basra, Iraq's second-largest city, said they believed al Qaeda militants were to blame.
Witnesses described horrific scenes outside the police stations, especially the Saudia station, where vans carrying schoolchildren were hit by the blast during the morning rush hour. The burned bodies of several children were removed from the wreckage.
"I was chatting with my friends in the van when suddenly I felt shrapnel hitting my face," said Ban Gurghis, 13, as she lay in a bed at the Basra General Teaching Hospital on Wednesday afternoon. "It was very hot, and there was blood on my face and my clothes. I wanted to jump out the window." A second teenage girl lay unconscious on another bed, her face swathed in bandages.
Police officers from the Saudia station, where several people were killed or wounded, said they had been lured outside by the sound of an earlier explosion at another station when a white sedan sped by and detonated. The blast left a huge crater in the road, and witnesses said car parts and bodies flew through the air.
"I was in my room asleep when the first explosion happened, and the cupboard fell on top of me," said officer Muhammed Sami Ahmed, 23. "I was bleeding, but I went outside to see what had happened. I saw lots of smoke and cars on fire and bodies all over the place."
Shopkeeper Emad Hassan, 35, said he had been standing about 60 feet from the blast, which knocked him to the ground. "There was smoke and dust everywhere," he said. "I saw one body thrown toward me, and they found another body on the roof of my neighbor's house."
The Iraqi interior minister, Samir Shakir Mahmoud Sumaidy, blamed the attacks on terrorists who want to destroy the country. He said the blasts carried the "fingerprints of the parties" who were behind the previous bombings in Irbil and Karbala. Police in Basra said the cars were packed with missiles and dynamite.
"Every child who was lost today was part of Iraq's future, which the terrorists want to destroy so they can gradually drive us into darkness," Sumaidy told journalists here. "The Iraqi government condemns these criminal acts, and it is determined to end this cancer. Terrorism will not succeed in stopping our efforts to rebuild and resettle the country."
On streets near the blasts, cars were turned into towers of flame, storefronts were blown in and brick walls were crumbled. Rescuers bundled the injured and the dead into makeshift stretchers made of blankets.
Officials in Basra said that as many as 16 children and nine police officers were killed, and that of about 200 wounded, 168 were in critical condition. Four British soldiers were among those injured.
Angry Basra residents threw stones at British troops who rushed to the police stations to assist. Several thousand British soldiers have been stationed in Basra for the past year, and they have maintained mostly peaceful relations with residents.
British officials in London said they did not believe the Basra Shiite population would turn against the troops. "The Shias have broadly accepted the British presence in Basra, and I do not think this has changed," a senior official told reporters at a briefing, conducted under the condition he not be named.
"Al Qaeda-type elements or former regime loyalists" were responsible for the bombings, the official asserted.
Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said Britain remained committed to turning over political authority to Iraq on June 30. "It has been plain for some weeks that there are insurgents who are trying to disrupt the handover of sovereignty to the Iraqi people," Straw said at a news conference in London. "Many will be asking what is the point of such a strategy. The answer to that is that it is not a strategy at all. It is simply designed to cause disruption and mayhem, and it will not succeed."
The British have about 8,700 soldiers in Iraq, down from about 40,000 during the war. Unlike their U.S. counterparts to the north, British forces have maintained stable relations with Shiite leaders, and British casualties generally have been light.
"The area has been mercifully quiet up to now, but we were always aware of the possibilities of insurgency and terror of this kind," Straw said.
The British privately have been critical of U.S. military tactics, complaining of American heavy-handedness. While U.S. forces emphasize troop protection and require soldiers to wear helmets and body armor even when engaged in peacekeeping activities, British troops quickly change to berets when leaving their vehicles and seek to be more accessible to the civilian population.
Gen. Mike Jackson, head of the British army, told the House of Commons Defense Committee on Tuesday that there had been "potential friction" between British and U.S. forces.
"We must be able to fight with the Americans," he told the panel. "That doesn't mean we have to fight as the Americans."
Gen. Michael Walker, chief of the defense staff, cautioned against exaggerating the differences. "Please interpret friction in a military sense," he said. "It doesn't mean that we are permanently arguing."
The explosions in Basra struck three police stations and the police academy just after 7 a.m., officials said. One hour later, the police academy was hit a second time. Many previous terrorist attacks in Iraq have been aimed at police facilities or other targets where Iraqis who work with the occupation forces live or work.
"This is a total and utter outrage," said Tim Smith, the British administrator of Basra. "The people who do this kind of thing have no interest whatsoever in stability." Other British officials in Iraq said that similar violence could be expected before the planned June 30 handover of power from occupation officials to Iraqi authorities, but that such attacks must not scuttle the transition.
In Fallujah, about two dozen insurgents attacked Marines early Wednesday with gunfire and rocket-propelled grenades, and the Marines responded with fire from tanks and helicopter gunships. The assaults followed a pair of attacks overnight Tuesday on a Marine squad and a building housing U.S. officials. They were the first serious incidents of fighting since political negotiations began Friday between U.S. officials and Fallujah civic leaders aimed at ending the two-week conflict there. Marine officials said nine insurgents were killed and three Marines were wounded in the fighting Wednesday.
The attacks raised concerns that the agreement reached by the negotiators Monday might collapse, and in response the Marines halted their initial processing of refugees trying to return to the city. Hundreds of people swarmed military checkposts outside the city limits, but the troops allowed only 10 families through and then said no others could enter.
U.S. military officials in Fallujah said they did not think the attacks would destroy the agreement. They said they were more worried about a different problem: whether the insurgents will begin surrendering their heavy weapons as required under the pact. Police and government officials in Fallujah said the collection of weapons had begun, but Marine commanders in the city said the arms were almost all useless.
Also on Wednesday, the Danish Foreign Ministry said that a Dane missing in Iraq for more than a week had been found dead, news services reported. The ministry did not name the man, but Danish news media have identified him as Henrik Frandsen, 35, who was in Iraq to set up a sewerage business and was kidnapped during a highway robbery outside Baghdad.
"The ministry was informed last night by the Coalition Provisional Authority that a Danish citizen had been found by the Iraqi police on April 12. The time of death was not revealed," the ministry said in a statement.
Special correspondent Saffar reported from Basra. Correspondent Glenn Frankel in London contributed to this report.
--------
U.S. Moves to Rehire Some From Baath Party, Military
By Robin Wright
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, April 22, 2004; Page A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32562-2004Apr21.html
The United States is moving to rehire former members of Iraq's ruling Baath Party and senior Iraqi military officers fired after the ouster of Saddam Hussein, in an effort to undo the damage of its two most controversial policies in Iraq, according to U.S. officials.
The U.S. administrator of Iraq, L. Paul Bremer, proposed the policy shifts to broaden the strategy to entice the powerful Sunni minority back into the political fold and weaken support for the insurgency in the volatile Sunni Triangle, two of the most persistent challenges for the U.S.-led occupation, the officials say. Both policies are at the heart of national reconciliation, increasingly important as the occupation nears an end.
"Iraq has a highly marginalized Sunni minority, and the more that people of standing can be taken off the pariah list, the more that community will become involved politically," said a senior envoy from a country in the U.S.-led coalition.
The Bush administration is fleshing out details, which it hopes to conclude this week. But the United States, backed by Britain, has decided in principle to, as officials variously characterized it, "fix" or "soften" rigid rules that led to the firing of Iraqis in the Baath Party from top government positions and jobs in such fields as teaching and medicine.
The U.S.-led coalition is already bringing back senior military officers to provide leadership to the fragile new Iraqi army, with more than half a dozen generals from Hussein's military appointed to top jobs in the past week alone, U.S. officials said. Army Gen. John P. Abizaid, chief of Central Command, is working to identify other commanders to bring back, officials added.
"The decisions made a year ago have bedeviled the situation on the ground ever since. Walking back these policies is a triumph of the view in the field over policies originally crafted in Washington," said a senior U.S. official involved in Iraq policy. Ironically, the two policies were the first actions taken by Bremer, who brought them from Washington, when he arrived in Baghdad to assume leadership of the U.S-led occupation last May.
The administration says neither move is a reversal, but foreign policy experts said it will appear that way in practice to Iraqis. "We are reviewing implementation of policies to look at how to better balance the desire to employ resident expertise with the need for justice," said National Security Council spokesman Sean McCormack.
The first move to revise policy on former Baathists will be to reinstate about 11,000 teachers and hundreds of professors fired after Hussein's demise last year, U.S. officials said. "These are many of the people who were treated unfairly by the system. Their Baathist status did not reflect their role in the party," said a senior official in the Coalition Provisional Authority.
By eventually getting thousands of other well-trained Sunnis back in jobs critical to Iraq's revival, the long-term goal is to incorporate Sunnis in post-Hussein Iraq. "More broadly, [this strategy] is again reaching out to the Sunnis and making them feel part of the process and investing them in the process while also not alienating the rest of Iraq, particularly the Shiites and the Kurds," said a senior administration official familiar with the discussions.
Baathists in the top four levels of the party were fired and the military was dismantled because they were seen as the primary instruments of Hussein's Sunni-dominated government and their continued presence as a threat to the transition, even though vast numbers of Iraqis joined largely to ensure employment or even survival, U.S. officials now concede. They were allowed to appeal for job reinstatement, a process that has proved slow and unwieldy -- and has alienated vast numbers of Sunnis who are the main targets, U.S. officials say.
The administration is considering a range of options, such as a proactive approach that would identify other groups of Sunni professionals to reinstate, or expediting the current process by creating a new commission to adjudicate the appeals. The committee charged with "de-Baathification" is headed by Ahmed Chalabi, a Shiite Muslim and controversial politician on the Governing Council.
The administration has not decided how far up the four top layers of the Baath Party to go. But the U.S.-led occupation authority wants only Iraqis who have clean records to be reinstated in government jobs or military positions, U.S. and occupation authority officials said.
The two policies have been under fire inside and outside the administration for months.
"Those policies should never have been put in place because there wasn't enough information on the Baath Party from the outset, and the effort to dismantle the party was ill-conceived and based on ignorance, even though it was clear something had to be done. The CPA went about it willy-nilly," said Timothy Carney, a former U.S. ambassador who served in Iraq in the first months after the occupation. "Dismantling the military was done in haste as well."
The escalating confrontation between U.S. troops and Sunni insurgents around Fallujah over the past month has accelerated the debate within the administration, a senior State Department official said. The administration wants to balance military pressure with political and economic incentives to ensure alienation among Sunnis does not deepen, he said.
The biggest concern and unknown is how Iraq's Shiite majority, historically repressed by the Sunni minority, will react to the two moves, U.S. officials said. As the United States brings back military officers, it is paying special attention to the balance among ethnic and religious factions. The first three former generals reinstated this week included a Sunni Muslim, a Shiite and a Kurd.
-------
U.S. Threatens Falluja Assault After Limited Arms Handover
April 22, 2004
By IAN FISHER and KIRK SEMPLE
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/22/international/middleeast/22CND-IRAQ.html
BAGHDAD, Iraq, April 22 - The limited handover of weapons this week by rebels in the embattled town of Falluja was not a demonstration of serious intent to achieve a brokered peace there, a top American military official said today. The official, Brig Gen. Mark Kimmitt, warned that should insurgents not surrender "a large field full of heavy weapons" in a matter of days, American troops would launch an all-out attack on the town.
People in Falluja handed in a small pile of weapons, some of them rusted and inoperable, as part of an agreement signed by town leaders and American officials intended to lead to an end to a standoff that has lasted more than two weeks and killed dozens of Americans and hundreds of Iraqis.
But General Kimmitt, said during a news conference here today that officials were unimpressed with the haul.
"These types of weapons are not a serious demonstration that they want peace," he said. "This is not a serious offer that they have come back to us and shown us that they want peace inside Falluja."
In answer to a reporter's question about how many weapons would satisfy the Americans enough to halt offensive operations, General Kimmitt responded: "A large field full of the heavy weapons that have been used against the people in Falluja and been used against the coalition forces in Falluja. That's the minimum."
In Basra, to the south, a spokesman for British forces there, Capt. Hisham Halawi, told The Associated Press that the death toll from suicide bombings there on Wednesday had been lowered to 50, including 20 children, after a check with hospitals. Officials in Basra had initially put the toll at 68 dead, 23 of them children. More than 100 people, among them four British soldiers, were wounded in five explosions.
The Basra attacks shattered a week of relative calm in Iraq, bringing anger, mourning and upheaval to a mostly Shiite city that had been spared the worst of the violence in the yearlong American occupation.
In new violence in Baghdad today, a South African security officer working for the Coalition Provisional Authority was fatally shot as he was getting into a car after leaving a supermarket, said Dan Senor, a spokesman for the American-led civilian administration. The South African had a Spanish-sounding last name, which led to initial confusion over his nationality.
The South African's interpreter was wounded and taken to a hospital.
The shooting took place in the northern neighborhood of Azimiyah, where gunmen have been active in past weeks.
American officials said today that they still did not know who had carried out the suicide attacks in Basra.
"As to who did it, we don't have any information and no group has yet claimed responsibility," General Kimmitt said. But he added that the attacks bore the hallmarks of a terrorist network, and that the chief suspect was the organization of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a Jordanian militant with Al Qaeda ties. American officials believe that Mr. Zarqawi was inside Falluja this month.
United States officials have accused Mr. Zarqawi in connection with two suicide bombings at Shiite shrines in Baghdad and Falluja on March 2 in which at least 181 people died.
The well-coordinated Basra attacks, aimed at Iraqi police buildings during the morning rush hour, punctuated the bloodiest month of the occupation with images of charred children in a school bus and British soldiers being shoved away from twisted and burning cars by mobs angry that foreign troops could not protect the city. At least nine police officers were killed.
After a surge of violence this month settled into military standoffs west and south of the capital in the past week, one American military official ventured on Tuesday that Iraq had become "relatively stable." But the bombings prompted L. Paul Bremer III, the top occupation official here, to repeat his fear that such violence is likely to get worse as the June 30 deadline nears for returning sovereignty to Iraqis.
"Let's not give the terrorists a victory by being able to derail the process that was agreed to," he told Iraqi scientists here.
The attacks, he said, "showed that once again terrorists are willing to kill as many people as they can, indiscriminately."
"They seem to have killed quite a number of schoolchildren in addition to policemen," he continued. "They have a very warped view of the future of Iraq."
Foreign Minister Jack Straw of Britain, whose troops are responsible for Basra, echoed Mr. Bremer.
"My message to the terrorists is clear: We will not allow you to derail the process of transition to a sovereign and democratic Iraq," he told reporters in London.
The American command braced itself on Wednesday for a possible military confrontation in the flashpoint city of Falluja. Military officials said that a plan agreed to two days ago to end peacefully a standoff there showed signs of unraveling.
Marines in Falluja engaged in what was described as a heavy battle on Wednesday involving fighter jets and helicopters, in which a military spokesman said nine insurgents had been killed and three marines had been wounded.
The top Marine Corps general in Iraq said an American attack against insurgents in Falluja was "inevitable" within days unless the militants there immediately surrendered their heavy weapons and ammunition, as called for in the agreement. Soldiers in Falluja said that demand was complied with only half-heartedly: A pickup truck was delivered only partly full of weapons that were largely rusty and unserviceable.
"This is an insult," said one of the soldiers at the weapons delivery said.
What American soldiers saw as a lack of compliance with the terms of the deal prompted them to break a promise in turn: they stopped the return - required under the deal - of the hundreds of Falluja families pushed from their homes by fighting that began after the killing and mutilation of four American security guards on March 31.
Large numbers of American troops have also been occupied in Najaf, where a rebel Shiite Muslim cleric, Moktada al-Sadr, has defied American demands that he surrender and disband his militia after leading a broad uprising this month. On another front, troops are battling to contain violence on the main supply roads from the countries neighboring Iraq.
Earlier this week, some 2,500 American troops around the adjacent cities of Najaf and Kufa began drawing down to only 500, after an American decision not to risk further angering Shiites by chasing Mr. Sadr down in his hiding place in Najaf, a city held holy by Shiites.
Rather than a risky military operation, American officials have been hoping to isolate Mr. Sadr among his fellow Shiites. There was at least one sign of that disaffection in a letter made public on Wednesday and signed by 30 sheiks asking Mr. Sadr not to fight inside Najaf.
"Now, when the negotiations are not a success, we ask you in the name of Islam to keep our city hallowed," the letter read.
With the violence only expected to intensify as the June 30 handover nears, American forces, already stretched thin, also faced the challenge of reshuffling with the expected departure of more than 2,000 Spanish, Honduran and Dominican troops.
Poland, one of America's cornerstone allies, whose 2,500 troops lead the multinational command south of Baghdad, also sent conflicting signs about its commitment to keep troops in Iraq. Prime Minister Leszek Miller, who is stepping down next month, told the Polish news agency PAP on Wednesday that Poland could not "turn a blind eye to the fact that Spain and others are leaving Iraq."
The withdrawal of Poland, whose public strongly opposes having its troops in Iraq despite its general pro-American tilt, would be a deep blow to the American operation here, both in numbers of troops and for the Bush administration's efforts to portray the venture here as an international one.
Later in the day, a spokesman for the Polish government was quoted as saying that Poland "has not and is not considering a troop withdrawal." Mr. Miller, the spokesman said, had meant to say that Poland would not send additional troops to Iraq.
The attacks in Basra occurred just after 7 a.m., when four car bombs exploded nearly simultaneously around the city, three at police stations and one at a police academy in the suburb of Zuhair. The academy was hit an hour later by another bomb.
Police stations have been a frequent target of attack by insurgents, as part of what American officials say is a campaign to keep Iraq unstable and to scare Iraqis from working in a new civil structure assembled by the United States.
The explosions detonated on streets thick with people going to work and school, blasting through a school bus at the Saudia police station and killing what officials said later were 16 schoolgirls in a bus. The streets convulsed in chaos and fire, with residents angrily pushing away British soldiers and blaming the bombs on an American or British missile strike.
Alaa Mohammad, 14, a student at the Amjaad secondary school, said she had just left her house to walk to the bus when one of the bombs went off. She said she heard a boom and then was lifted off her feet by the force of the explosion.
"I was so scared," she said in a hospital bed. "I tried to escape. I tried to run back into my house. There were many cars blown up, and the bus was blown up too."
Raghad Majid, 32, a computer programmer, said, "This attack is a message that Iraq will never be quiet for the next two months because terrorists will stop the turnover of power to Iraqis."
Iraqi politicians condemned the killings - especially of the children - strongly.
"The terrorists want to lead Iraq down the path of darkness and chaos," Samir Sumaitey, the interior minister, told reporters in Baghdad. "The Iraqi government condemns this and is determined to find these people and bring them to justice and bring an end to this cancer that is invading the body of Iraq."
"Every child that has been lost represents the future of Iraq," he said.
Waei Abdul Latif, the governor of Basra and a member of the American-appointed Governing Council, said two suicide bombers had been captured alive. Noting the use of multiple bombs detonating at the same time, he blamed Al Qaeda for the attack.
"The attacks have the hallmarks of Al Qaeda," he told reporters in Basra.
The last major suicide attack in Iraq was on March 17, at the Mount Lebanon Hotel in Baghdad, not long before fighting in Falluja sealed off that city. The lack of attacks since then led to some speculation by American officials that Falluja, now cut off, was a center for such bombings.
Amid a spate of kidnappings of foreigners, the Danish Foreign Ministry reported Wednesday that a Danish businessman missing in Iraq for a week had been found dead. The man was identified by Danish news media as Henrik Frandsen, 35. He had not been heard from since an incident that the Danish media said was a highway robbery north of Baghdad near the town of Taji.
Kirk Semple contributed reporting from New York for this article.
-------
COMBAT
Fighting Resumes in Falluja;
Return of Families Is Halted
April 22, 2004
By JOHN KIFNER and CHRISTINE HAUSER
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/22/international/middleeast/22FALL.html
FALLUJA, Iraq, April 21 - The fragile peace effort here threatened to collapse Wednesday as insurgents fired mortars and battled with the marines, forcing the American military to stop the return of families who had fled the fighting. At the same time, a crucial part of the peace deal - the insurgents' promise to surrender their heavy weapons - got off to an almost comically slow start.
The battle on Wednesday, which left as many as 20 Iraqis dead and 3 marines wounded, began with an ambush of the marines by a band of 13 insurgents, Lt. Col. Brennan Byrne told The Associated Press. The insurgents were then reinforced by as many as three dozen more fighters.
As American snipers sent round after round into the insurgents' hiding place, helicopter gunships hovered overhead, firing machine guns and cannons. The battle ended after the marines called in warplanes that dropped two 500-pound bombs, Colonel Byrne said.
Earlier in the day, a huge crowd of families, including black-shrouded women and children, had gathered along the highway trying to get back to their homes. Roughly a third of the city of 200,000 people are said to have fled during the fighting. Ten families were reportedly able to get into the city through another checkpoint early in the morning before all passage was ordered stopped.
But at the front of the line, sweating American soldiers were shouting "Go! Go! Go!" and making pushing motions. There was no sign of the Iraqi police, who were expected to man the checkpoint and vet families, although about 300 policemen have now signed up to get their old jobs back.
"The I.P. did not want to help, the I.C.D.C. didn't want to help," said Lt. Joe Cotterino of the Pennsylvania National Guard, using the initials for the police and the civil defense corps trained by the Americans.
The first mortar round sounded at 8:28 a.m., and Army National Guard troops manning the main checkpoint near the cloverleaf on the highway leading west from Baghdad soon began taking down the welcoming signs and stretching a spiked barrier and coils of razor wire across the road.
Shortly before 10 a.m., an exasperated Lt. Col. Michael J. Lee ordered over a field telephone that no Iraqi families be allowed into the city. With that, a crowd of several thousand began drifting, then retreating eastward.
"We had a setback today," Colonel Lee, the second in command of the First Marines, who have drawn a cordon around the city after two weeks of bitter street fighting touched off by the gruesome ambush and killing of four American contractors.
The effort to persuade the insurgents to hand over their heavy weapons, a core American demand, fared little better. Throughout the day, said an Iraqi policeman, Muhammad Khalaf, mujahedeen fighters pulled up to a mosque and unloaded various pieces of guns and other weapons from their car. But the haul of weapons barely filled the bed of a small Mitsubishi pickup truck.
To the marines who watched the pickup truck bounce into their camp on the edge of the city, it was far from clear that the weapons surrendered would satisfy American demands.
"This is one of those tests to see how stupid we are," muttered one marine, watching the Iraqis pick through the ordnance and arrange each piece neatly in rows to be counted and examined.
"This is an insult," said another.
"It's not serviceable stuff," said a third. "It's junk. It's rusty. This is not frontline stuff."
But in a town that has been a hotbed of anti-American resistance throughout the yearlong occupation, the question of when the insurgents will have surrendered all their firepower was unlikely to be answered in one day.
"This is probably not even a drop in the ocean in Falluja," said Capt. Phil Cushman. "But it is a start. Whether it is an honest step to peace, I do not know."
Judging by some of the improvised arms turned in Wednesday, even the formal surrender of existing weapons is not likely to keep any enterprising military man unarmed for long.
There was an explosive device made out of a car shock absorber, and taped over with wires sticking out for the detonator. There were improvised mortar launching tubes. An antiaircraft gun was adapted to be mounted on the back of a vehicle. Some ordnance was modified for a longer range.
"These guys were amazing in their ability," Capt. Steve Coast said, surveying the homemade devices.
A meeting between the marines and Falluja's mayor, Mahmoud Ibrahim, also went poorly.
The mayor told Colonel Lee that three sections of the city were beyond his control, and that the American-sponsored Iraqi police and security forces were afraid to go in. The untamed sectors - Jolan, Hayal Askeri and Shuhada - seemed to make up roughly half the city.
Privately, several Marine officers who have dealt with Mayor Ibrahim said he was heartily disliked by much of the public, although they gave him credit for courage in trying to resolve the situation. He had been mayor for the last few years under Saddam Hussein's government. The officers were somewhat uncertain how he had remained mayor, saying he seemed to have been chosen at some sort of a council.
-------
Limited Iraqi Sovereignty Planned
Coalition Troops Won't Answer to Interim Government, Wolfowitz Says
By Josh White and Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, April 22, 2004; Page A25
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A32753-2004Apr21?language=printer
The new Iraqi interim government scheduled to take control on July 1 will have only "limited sovereignty" over the country and no authority over U.S. and coalition military forces already there, senior State and Defense officials told Congress this week.
In testimony before the Senate and the House Armed Services committees, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz and Undersecretary of State Marc Grossman said the United States will operate under the transitional law approved by the Iraqi Governing Council and a resolution approved by the U.N. Security Council last October. Both those provisions give control of the country's security to U.S. military commanders.
Whereas in the past the turnover was described as granting total sovereignty to the appointed Iraqi government, Grossman yesterday termed it "limited sovereignty" because "it is limited by the transitional law . . . and the U.N. resolution."
Under the current plan, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan's special adviser, Lakhdar Brahimi, will appoint a temporary government that will run Iraqi government agencies for six months and prepare the way for January 2005 elections of an assembly that will select a second, temporary government and write a constitution.
Wolfowitz described the July 1 government as "purely temporary" and there to "run ministries . . . but most importantly, they'll be setting up elections." In addition he said, the government will run the police force "but in coordination with Centcom [the U.S. Central Command], because this is not a normal police situation."
"So we transfer sovereignty, but the military decisions continue to reside indefinitely in the control of the American commander. Is that correct?" Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.) asked the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Richard B. Myers, on Tuesday. "That's correct," Myers replied.
"Sovereignty is not something we can, or want, to take back," Wolfowitz said yesterday, outlining efforts to develop a large, new armed force there. "The security of Iraq . . . will be part of a multinational force under U.S. command, including Iraqi forces."
Wolfowitz's comments came as he and Myers conceded that war costs in Iraq are rising, and senior House Republicans pledged to give the military more money this year, whether or not the Bush administration asks for it.
Wolfowitz, under questioning before the House committee, said that as of January, the United States was spending $4.7 billion a month, and he noted that "there may be a bump up" because of the 20,000 more troops currently there. Myers told the panel that intense combat, higher-than-expected troop levels and depleted military hardware "are going to cost us more money."
About $700 million in added troop costs have been identified, and Myers said the service chiefs have identified a $4 billion shortfall.
"We thought we could get through all of August," Myers said. "We'd have to figure out how to do September. . . . We are working those estimates right now."
"And we've got to take a look and see if we have the wherewithal inside the [Defense Department] budget," he added.
Armed Services Chairman Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) replied, "The committee, I think, General, is inclined to help you perhaps more than has been suggested by the Pentagon."
But military officials, defense contractors and lawmakers from both political parties say an emergency infusion of cash will be needed far sooner -- perhaps by midsummer. Members of Congress pleaded yesterday with the administration to be more forthcoming.
"The administration would be well served here to come forward now, be honest about this, because the continuity and the confidence in this policy is going to be required to sustain it," Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) said.
Strains on the war-fighting budget put the White House on the defensive, with administration spokesman Scott McClellan insisting yesterday that the troops have the necessary resources even as he left open the possibility that more money might be coming this year. President Bush's budget for the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1 contains no money for military operations in Iraq, and his budget director has said a request for additional funds will not come until January at the earliest.
McClellan said the White House has "assurances from Pentagon officials that the resources they have at this time are more than enough to meet their needs." Bush has said that troops in Iraq will get all the resources and support they need.
Myers focused for the first time on a dilemma the occupation authority created by pushing creation of a 40,000-member Iraqi army, without realizing that it should not be used for meeting the security problem. "We don't want to go back to the old ways of the Iraqi army where they were used for internal security and some of the atrocities," Myers said.
Therefore, he said, some money for further army spending is being transferred to police, border security and the Iraqi Civil Defense Corps. It was one brigade of the new Iraq army that refused to join U.S. Marines fighting in Fallujah.
Wolfowitz noted that the Iraqi police appear to be doing better, but the example he used also shows the weaknesses. He said that during the uprising in Baghdad's Sadr City area last month about 140 AK-47s were taken from the newly trained police and "all but 62 have been recovered."
He also reported that at one police station in a better part of Baghdad "a majority have performed reasonably well" except when faced with "overwhelming force." In that case, he said, "some significant fraction just took off."
Grossman said it will cost State almost $1 billion to staff and protect the new U.S. Embassy in Baghdad that will take over for the CPA on July 1. Grossman noted that his department plans for 1,000 Americans in the embassy and not 3,000, as had been projected.
Staff writer Walter Pincus contributed to this report.
-------- israel / palestine
9 Palestinians Die in Gaza Clash
Israel Says Drive Is Aimed at Protecting Nearby Settlements
By Molly Moore
Washington Post Foreign Service
Thursday, April 22, 2004; Page A27
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32453-2004Apr21.html
JERUSALEM, April 21 -- Israeli forces killed nine Palestinians in a day-long skirmish Wednesday in which 60-ton Israeli tanks and AH-64 Apache helicopters confronted rock-throwing teenagers and gunmen armed with homemade rockets and explosives in the northern Gaza Strip, according to Palestinian medical officials and witnesses.
An Israel Defense Forces spokesman said the operation was aimed at preventing Palestinians from firing Qassam rockets from the northern Gaza community of Beit Lahiya at Jewish settlements inside Gaza and Israeli towns and villages.
"We're trying to find out whether there were armed men or unarmed men among the deaths," an Israeli military spokeswoman said. "There were lots of riots and demonstrations. Also children and youth were throwing stones and rocks and firebombs and explosive devices, and gunmen were shooting forces with antitank missiles."
Palestinian medical authorities said most of those killed were teenagers, including one 13-year-old boy. Doctors at Gaza City's Shifa Hospital said about 40 other Palestinians were treated for injuries.
The fighting raised the death toll in the two-day operation to 13 Palestinians. No Israeli soldier has been reported killed.
An Israeli military spokesman said the operation began Tuesday after Palestinian militants fired 15 Qassam rockets over a three-day period following the Israeli assassination Saturday of Abdel Aziz Rantisi, the top Hamas leader in Gaza. The helicopter missile attack on Rantisi came barely a month after he was named to replace Sheik Ahmed Yassin, the militant organization's spiritual leader and co-founder, who was killed in an Israeli missile strike March 22.
An Israeli military spokeswoman said one Israeli was moderately injured and eight others were treated for shock and light abrasions from the Palestinian rocket attacks.
The fighting occurred in a dusty area near several Palestinian government buildings close to Gaza's northern border with Israel.
Palestinian rage against Israel and the United States has escalated since the assassination of Rantisi and President Bush's endorsement three days earlier of an Israeli plan to retain large Jewish settlements in the West Bank and maintain control of Gaza Strip borders.
Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmed Qureia said he wrote a letter to Bush on Wednesday asking the president to reconsider his position on the Israeli plan. Qureia told the Reuters news agency that the Palestinian cabinet was considering a mass resignation to express its dismay with the U.S. policy shift. Such a move would give greater power to the Palestinian leader, Yasser Arafat, which he said would likely make the U.S. administration uncomfortable.
--------
Sharon Said to Press Ahead on Gaza Plan
April 22, 2004
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Israel-Sharon.html
JERUSALEM (AP) -- Prime Minister Ariel Sharon will press ahead with his Gaza withdrawal plan regardless of the outcome of an upcoming Likud Party referendum on the proposal, an Israeli official said Thursday.
But Sharon aide Asaf Shariv contradicted the official and insisted that if Likud rejects the plan, Sharon would not proceed with it.
In introducing the idea of a Likud referendum last month, Sharon said he would be bound by the vote among 200,000 party members. It is scheduled for May 2.
A senior Israeli official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Thursday that the vote would only be an ``advisory referendum.''
``If worse comes to worse and the referendum is not approved, he will still try to push his plan through,'' the official said.
In a speech to lawmakers earlier Thursday, Sharon hinted that he would not be bound by the referendum. He called the vote ``a public and moral duty, not a legal or binding duty.''
Polls indicate Likud is about evenly divided on the pullout.
-------- pakistan / india
Pakistan Leads Opposition on Terrorist Arms Ban
April 22, 2004
By REUTERS
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/international/international-arms-un-terrorists.html
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Pakistan led the opposition on Thursday to a key U.S.-drafted resolution banning the transfer of unconventional weapons to terrorists, saying the measure could be used to justify military action.
Ambassador Munir Akram, whose country has been accused of proliferation, also said the U.N. Security Council was not the ``most appropriate body'' to oversee nonproliferation because its five permanent members all retained nuclear arms.
At issue is a resolution, the United States, Britain, France, Russia and China, permanent council members, hashed out over the past five months. It would compel nations to adopt and enforce laws prohibiting a terrorist or ``non-state actor'' from getting weapons of mass destruction.
No vote is expected until the end of April but the United States, which wants a unified council, may have to consider amendments to the draft that seeks to fill a gap in international nonproliferation treaties.
A target of the resolution could be A.Q. Khan, the Pakistani scientist who smuggled nuclear secrets to North Korea, Iran and Libya, and is now under house arrest.
Siding with Pakistan were numerous nonaligned nations, including Malaysia and Indonesia, which participated in the debate. Among council members, Algeria raised several objections and Brazil proposed amendments so the resolution would not overlap with numerous nonproliferation treaties.
Germany's U.N. ambassador, Gunter Pleuger, said the resolution should include references to disarmament as a whole and make sure that any enforcement action would be subject to another ``specific decision'' by the council.
The draft invokes Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter, a provision that makes the resolution mandatory for all 191 U.N. members. Chapter 7 also allows for the eventuality of sanctions and military force.
But British envoy, Adam Thomson, said in this case neither applied. ``Any enforcement action would require a new Council decision,'' Thomson said.
However, Pakistan's Akram said, ``A legitimate fear arises that the use of Chapter 7 ... would imply the pre-authorization of the coercive actions.''
The draft, sponsored by the United States, Britain, France, Romania, Russia and Spain, calls on governments to penalize those helping terrorists obtain weapons, but does not provide any sanctions if the states do not comply.
Instead U.S. officials said they relied mainly on ``name and shame'' pressures.
``The goal of this resolution is to halt dangerous traffic by directing member states to make illegal the unauthorized trade in these weapons, their means of delivery and the plans, technology and materials needed to develop and build them,'' said U.S. deputy ambassador James Cunningham.
``Terrorist groups such as al Qaeda have shown their willingness to kill thousands and they do not hide their desire to acquire weapons of mass destruction,'' Cunningham said.
He too emphasized that the mention of Chapter 7 did not mean the resolution was ``about enforcement.''
But Indonesia's Ambassador Rezlan Ishar Jenie said the Security Council should not enact global legislation requiring members to alter national laws. Only signatories to treaties could do that.
-------- prisoners of war
Occupation imposes Washington-style "democracy"
18,000 Iraqis illegally held in jails and prison camps
22 April 2004
By Richard Phillips
World Socialist Web Site
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/apr2004/jail-a22.shtml
On April 8, Condoleezza Rice shamelessly declared that the Bush administration and its allies were "helping the people of Iraq and Afghanistan to build free societies...to spread the blessings of liberty and democracy as alternatives to instability and terror."
Recent statements by human rights groups and news reports provide further evidence that Washington's version of "liberty and democracy" in Iraq is a Nazi-style reign of terror aimed at suppressing all opposition to its illegal neocolonial occupation. In fact, the eruption of a nationwide insurgency against US and coalition forces over the past three weeks came after a year of escalating violence and military provocations, with midnight-to-dawn raids, torture, assassinations, mass detentions and other breaches of the Geneva Conventions an everyday occurrence.
According to the Baghdad-based Organisation for Human Rights, at least 18,000 Iraqis are now being illegally held in jails and prison camps. In a country of only 25 million, these figures are staggering and represent the incarceration of 1 in every 1,380 Iraqi citizens. Moreover, during December, American troops were arresting 100 Iraqis per day-a rate that will have increased dramatically during the past month as operations intensified against the local population.
Referred to as "security detainees" by the US military, the prisoners are held without charge and denied access to lawyers, family and friends for months on end. Most of those incarcerated have been arrested during raids by coalition troops who storm houses, smashing down doors and windows and trashing household furnishings, televisions and other property. In many cases, armoured vehicles and Humvees or troops using high-powered ammunition or explosives seriously damage the homes.
After "securing" the raided property, troops generally handcuff and hood all men and boys before transporting them to the nearest military base for preliminary interrogations. The detainees are then taken to the nearest US-controlled prison. These include Abu Ghraib, infamous for torture and executions under Saddam Hussein; Camp Cropper at Baghdad International Airport; al-Shaab Stadium; Camp Bucca, near Un Qasr in southern Iraq; and other jails in Habbaniyah, Nasariya, Tikrit and Baquba.
The US-based Christian Peacemaker Teams (CPT), a human rights organisation, has confirmed these Nazi-style techniques.
CPT released a report last month based on the testimony of 72 detainees and their families. It revealed that most of the detentions involved acts of violence, such as: "[H]ouse raids using excessive force against unarmed civilians; theft and destruction of personal property; lack of legal representation or clear judicial process for detainees; mistreatment, including torture of detainees during interrogation and in prison camps; withholding of information about detainees' whereabouts and well-being from the detainees' families and/or Iraqi and international human rights organisations."
Like those held by the US in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, the jails have been described as legal and physical black holes where prisoners are not formally charged with any offence and can be held indefinitely. Some of those arrested had previously been jailed for opposing Hussein's Baathist regime; others kidnapped by US forces have simply disappeared.
Sixty-five-year-old Amal Salim Madi told Agence France-Presse that US soldiers arrested her three sons in October. "The Americans said they were taking my sons off for an hour of questioning. We have not seen them since."
In a typical incident, US soldiers raided a home in Al Ewadiyah, a Baghdad suburb, last December. The inhabitants-the mother and brother and sister of the home owner-were forced to stand in the street in their bed clothes for five-and-a-half hours while 20 soldiers ransacked the house looking for weapons and resistance members. Nothing was found, but the brother was arrested.
The next day, soldiers returned, admitted that they had been given incorrect information but demanded to know the whereabouts of the owner's brother-in-law. Unable to find him, they seized the owner's sister. Iraq's Coalition Provisional Authority and US military commanders claim to have no information on the whereabouts of those detained.
Last month, Mahmoud Khodair told the media that American soldiers kidnapped him after smashing into his basement apartment. He was accused of supporting Iraqi resistance fighters and held without charge for six months before being released. He has never been given any explanation why he was arrested or released.
Khodair, a 55-year-old cafe owner and released detainee, was forced to sit on his knees in the sun for 10 hours before his first interrogation. He claims that 14 million Iraqi dinars (about $10,000) was stolen from his home during his arrest. "Nothing has changed since Saddam," he said. "Before, the Mukhabarat [Hussein's secret police] would take us away, and at least they wouldn't blow down the door. Now, some informant fingers you and gets $100 even if you're innocent."
Although the US refuses to provide detailed information on the conditions inside its network of prisons, interviews with those fortunate enough to have been released reveal a nightmarish world where intimidation, death threats and torture are routine.
According to a March 21 Newsday article, Sadik Hamid al-Marsumim, a 26-year-old Baghdad construction worker, was beaten and forced to stay on his hands and knees for two hours while his guard used his back as a chess table. Al-Marsumim was then ordered to transfer sewage with a tablespoon from a full barrel to an empty one.
"The Americans said they were going to build a new Iraq, full of freedom and dignity," he said. "Where is the respect for human rights in what they did?" Al-Marsumim was incarcerated for five-and-a-half months without charge before being released.
Newsday also reported the case of Abdul Kahar Mehdi, a 30-year-old assistant engineering teacher. US soldiers shot the family dog during a December raid on his village and then killed his 70-year-old father.
"After bursting through the door, Mehdi said, soldiers handcuffed him, a brother and his father, Mehdi Jamal al-Duraj, a retired government land surveyor. They thrust plastic bags over their heads and tightened them around their necks," the newspaper reported.
"Within seconds, Mehdi said, he heard his father gasping for air. 'My father was screaming, "I can't breathe! Help me!" and I was begging them to loosen the bag,' said Mehdi, who said he addressed the soldiers in English. 'But the soldiers responded, "Shut the ..... up," and hit me in the chest with the butt of their weapon.'
"After several minutes, Mehdi said, he could no longer hear his father breathe or move. 'I heard a soldier call on a radio and say, "The .... old man may be dead." US military officials apologised for his father's death and in February gave Mehdi a letter stating they were investigating," the newspaper said.
Last month, the US Army admitted that six soldiers have been charged with dereliction of duty, cruelty and maltreatment, and assault and indecent acts with another-the military's term for sexual abuse-at Abu Ghraib prison. They are among 17 soldiers from the 800th Military Police Brigade, including a battalion commander and a company commander, suspended from duties over incidents that occurred in November and December.
A week before Washington announced that the six MPs were being investigated, the US Army recommended that a marine reservist accused of killing an Iraqi prisoner not face charges or any military hearing. A second officer involved in the death is alleged to have punched, karate-kicked and dragged by the throat a prisoner in his custody.
Though the Army has refused to provide any details about the six MPs currently under investigation, it is believed that the incidents occurred some time during or after prisoners began rioting at Abu Ghraib on November 24. Three Iraqi prisoners were killed and eight seriously injured during the riots.
The soldiers face an Article 32 hearing that will decide whether the military will prosecute. It is unlikely, however, that the case will see any serious action taken against the soldiers. American troops cannot be tried in civil courts for killing civilians in Iraq. Local courts are forbidden from hearing cases against US soldiers or other foreign forces after the US-controlled governing body in Baghdad issued a directive last June.
Several human rights groups have compared conditions in US-controlled Iraqi prisons with Guantanamo Bay. In fact, Major General Geoffrey Miller, the former head of Guantanamo Bay, has recently been appointed deputy commander for detainee operations in Iraq.
-------- space
NASA Notice:
National Environmental Policy Act;
Development of Advanced Radioisotope Power Systems
Thursday, April 22, 2004
Source: NASA HQ
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=12637
[Federal Register: April 22, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 78)] [Notices] [Page 21867-21868] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr22ap04-92]
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
[Notice 04-053]
National Environmental Policy Act; Development of Advanced Radioisotope Power Systems
AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare a Tier I Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and to conduct scoping for the development of advanced Radioisotope Power Systems.
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), and NASA's policy and procedures (14 CFR subpart 1216.3), NASA intends to conduct scoping and to prepare a Tier I EIS for the development of advanced Radioisotope Power Systems (RPSs). NASA, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), proposes to develop in the near-term two types of advanced RPSs to satisfy a wide of range of future space exploration mission requirements. These advanced RPSs would both be capable of functioning in the vacuum of space and in the environments encountered on the surfaces of planets, moons and other solar system bodies. These new power systems would be based upon a modified version of the General Purpose Heat Source (GPHS) previously developed by DOE and used in the Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators (RTGs) for NASA's Galileo, Ulysses, and Cassini missions. This modification would add additional graphite material to the graphite aeroshell. The GPHS-based advanced RPSs would be capable of providing long-term, reliable electrical power to spacecraft across the range of conditions encountered in space and planetary surface missions.
The Tier 1 EIS will also address in general terms the development and qualification for flight of advanced RPSs that use passive or dynamic systems to convert the heat generated from the decay of plutonium to electrical energy, and related long-term research and development of technologies that could further enhance the capability of future RPS systems. The Multi-Mission Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator (MMRTG) and Stirling Radioisotope Generator (SRG) development activity would include, but not necessarily be limited to: (1) New power conversion technologies to more efficiently use the heat energy from the GPHS module, and (2) improving the versatility of the RPS so that it would be capable of operating for extended periods in the vacuum of space and in planetary atmospheres. Specific future developments of a new generation of space qualified RPSs (e.g., more efficient systems than the proposed MMRTG or SRG, or systems with smaller electrical power output) would be the subject of separate Tier II environmental documentation.
DOE will be a cooperating agency in the preparation of this Tier 1 EIS.
DATES: Interested parties are invited to submit comments on environmental concerns in writing on or before June 7, 2004, to assure full consideration during the scoping process.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to Dr. George Schmidt, NASA Headquarters, Code S, Washington, DC 20546-0001. While hardcopy comments are preferred, comments may be sent by electronic mail to: rpseis@nasa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. George Schmidt, NASA Headquarters, Code S, Washington, DC 20546-0001, by telephone at 202-358-0113, or by electronic mail at rpseis@nasa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NASA's future scientific exploration of the solar system is planned to include missions throughout the solar system and potential missions to the surfaces of planets, moons and other planetary bodies. Many of these missions cannot be accomplished with current energy production and storage technologies available to NASA, such as batteries, solar arrays, fuel cells, and the existing radioisotope power system (the GPHS RTG). To enable this broad range of missions, NASA is proposing to develop in the near-term, two types of RPSs capable of functioning both in the vacuum of space and in the environments encountered on the surfaces of planets, moons and other planetary bodies.
NASA proposes to develop these advanced RPSs to enable missions with substantial longevity, flexibility, and greater scientific exploration capability. Some possibilities are:
- Comprehensive and detailed planetary investigations and creating comparative data sets of the outer planets--Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto and their moons. The knowledge gained with these data sets would be vital to understanding other recently discovered planetary systems and general principles of planetary formation.
- Comprehensive exploration of the surfaces and interiors of comets, possibly including returned samples to better understand the building blocks of our solar system and ingredients contributing to the origin of life.
- Expanded capabilities for surface and on-orbit exploration, and sample return missions to Mars and other planetary bodies (including the Earth's moon) to greatly improve our understanding of planetary processes, particularly those affecting the potential for life.
The current DOE radioisotope power system, the GPHS RTG, does not meet these new or evolving mission requirements. The heat-to- electricity converter for the existing RTG produces about 285 watts of electrical power, but it is not designed to perform for an extended period in planetary atmospheres such as that on Mars. The two new proposed types of RPSs would be developed to meet the diverse needs of future NASA space exploration missions.
Near-term advanced RPS development would focus on two power systems, the MMRTG and the SRG. The MMRTG would build upon the spaceflight-proven passive thermoelectric power conversion technology incorporating improvements to allow extended operation in planetary atmospheres. For the SRG, NASA would develop a new space-qualified dynamic power conversion system, a Stirling engine, that would more efficiently convert the heat from the decay of plutonium into electrical power and therefore use less plutonium to generate comparable amounts of electrical power. Both of these systems would provide up to about 100 watts of electric power and would be capable of functioning both in the vacuum of space and in the environments encountered on the surfaces of the planets, moons and other bodies. Differences in SRG and MMRTG mechanical and thermal interfaces would allow a broad range of mission specific spacecraft designs. More than one MMRTG or SRG could be integrated with a
spacecraft to provide power levels exceeding 100 watts electrical. This Tier I EIS will address in broad terms the technology development activities of NASA, DOE, and the industrial contractors involved in:
- Development and testing of advanced RPSs through final design, testing, and fabrication of flight qualified SRGs and MMRTGs, and
- Long-term research and development of technologies that could enhance the capabilities of future radioisotope power systems (e.g., systems that convert heat into electricity more efficiently and smaller systems).
It is anticipated that development and test activities involving use of radioisotopes would be performed at existing DOE sites that currently perform similar activities. Fuel processing and fabrication would likely occur at existing facilities at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) in Los Alamos, New Mexico, which are currently used for the fabrication of the fuel for the GPHS modules. Advanced RPS assembly and testing would likely be performed at Argonne National Laboratory--West (west of Idaho Falls, Idaho). These activities were previously carried out at DOE's Mound, Ohio facility. Additional safety testing of an integrated advanced RPS could be performed at one or more of several existing facilities; including DOE facilities such as LANL and Sandia National Laboratory (Albuquerque, New Mexico) or the U.S. Army's Aberdeen Proving Grounds (Aberdeen, Maryland). Activities associated with the development, testing, and verification of the power conversion systems could be performed at several existing facilities including some NASA facilities (Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field, Cleveland, Ohio; and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, California) and several commercial facilities (Boeing Rocketdyne, Canoga Park, California; Teledyne Energy Systems, Hunt Valley, Maryland; Stirling Technology Corporation, Kennewick, Washington; and Lockheed Martin, Valley Forge, Pennsylvania).
NASA plans to address the environmental impacts of the development and use of Advanced RPSs through a two-tiered NEPA process. This Tier I EIS will address the proposed development, overall purpose and need for the development of advanced RPSs, development, testing and fabrication of the MMRTG and SRG. This Tier 1 EIS will also address proposed research and development work regarding technologies that could further enhance the capabilities of future RPSs. Specific future developments of a new generation of space qualified RPSs (e.g., more efficient systems than the proposed MMRTG or SRG, or systems with smaller electrical power output) would be the subject of separate Tier II environmental documentation, as appropriate, using the most pertinent data and analysis directly related to those developments. Mission- specific use of any of these RPSs would be subject to separate environmental documentation.
Alternatives to be considered in this Tier I EIS will include, but will not necessarily be limited to the No Action Alternative, by which NASA would not pursue development of advanced RPSs.
Written public input and comments on alternatives and environmental impacts, and concerns associated with the development of advanced RPSs are hereby requested.
Jeffrey E. Sutton, Assistant Administrator for Institutional and Corporate Management. [FR Doc. 04-9131 Filed 4-21-04; 8:45 am]
-------- un
Corruption Allegations at U.N. Put Annan on the Defensive
April 22, 2004
By WARREN HOGE
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/22/international/middleeast/22CND-NATI.html
UNITED NATIONS, April 22 - Secretary General Kofi Annan struck back today at critics of the United Nations and his leadership, saying they were treating unproven charges as facts and ignoring the good that the oil-for- food program had done for individual Iraqis despite its scandal-ridden management.
The allegations of corruption have battered the United Nations at a time when it is being given the lead role in shaping the new interim government in Iraq. Mr. Annan has responded by appointing a three-man panel to investigate them, headed by former United States Federal Reserve chairman Paul A. Volcker.
Several Congressional committees, saying they distrust the United Nations's willingness to examine itself, are looking into the charges. United Nations detractors have seized on the scandal reports to call into question the organization's work in the Iraqi transition and Mr. Annan's fitness to remain in office.
"I think it is unfortunate that there have been so many allegations, and some of it is being handled as if they were facts, and that is why we need to have this investigation done," Mr. Annan said today.
"And in all this," he said, "what has been lost is the fact that the oil-for-food program did provide relief to the Iraqi population, every household was touched."
He said that the distribution system that the United Nations set up was so reliable that some Iraqis suggested it be used to register voters for the elections planned next year.
The Security Council began the program in 1996 to enable Iraq to sell oil and devote the proceeds to humanitarian purchases as a way of easing the impact on Iraqis of the sanctions imposed after the Persian Gulf war of 1991. According to the General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of the United States Congress, Saddam Hussein's government skimmed $10.1 billion from the $67 billion program.
Mr. Annan said he had met Wednesday with Benon V. Sevan, the former head of the program, and that Mr. Sevan had promised to cooperate with the investigation. Mr. Sevan's name was allegedly discovered on an Iraqi trade ministry document saying he had received an illegal oil allotment himself worth up to $3.5 million. Mr. Annan said Mr. Sevan in the meeting repeated his past denials of the charge and insisted on his innocence.
The 15-member Security Council unanimously passed a resolution Wednesday endorsing the inquiry and calling on all 191 United Nations member states to cooperate with it.
Joining Mr. Volcker, 76, on the panel are Richard J. Goldstone, 65, a South African judge who served as prosecutor for the International Criminal Tribunals for Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia, and Mark Pieth, 50, a Swiss law professor with expertise in tracking money laundering.
Mr. Volcker took charge of the inquiry Wednesday at United Nations and told reporters that his first task would be to see if any United Nations officials were involved in the corruption. He said he hoped to have preliminary conclusions within three months.
The charges, even if unsubstantiated, he said, were damaging the United Nations, and he prescribed a quick remedy. "If there is substance," he said, "get it out there, get it out in a hurry and cauterize the wound."
-------- us
Military Renews Bid for Environmental Law Exemptions
WASHINGTON, DC, (ENS)
April 22, 2004
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/apr2004/2004-04-22-09.asp
Despite opposition from 39 state attorneys general, the Bush administration has again asked the U.S. Congress to exempt the Department of Defense from major federal environmental laws.
Last year Congress granted the administration's request for partial exemptions for the military from the Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal Protection Act.
But President George W. Bush has renewed his bid for exemptions for the Pentagon from provisions of the Clean Air Act and the two primary federal toxic waste cleanup laws - the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA).
Among other changes, the proposal would change the definition of "solid waste" under RCRA to exclude explosives, munitions, munitions fragments and other toxic material, including chemical weapons.
The proposal would ease the military's requirement to comply with CERCLA, which is also known as the Superfund law and holds polluters responsible for the release and clean up costs of their pollution, would remove its obligation.
With regards to the Clean Air Act, the proposal would grant the military 3 year exemptions for many activities and would require the federal government to approve a state's air pollution plan regardless of the plan's failures to compensate for the excess pollution produced by military activities.
Bush administration officials told Congress that the military needs flexibility under the laws in order to better train and prepare its troops and weapons systems, but environmentalists are skeptical - and Congress denied the requests last year.
Heather Taylor, deputy legislative director of the Natural Resources Defense Council, asked "whose interest is the Pentagon really serving by trying to get Congress to relieve the military of its duty to comply with federal health safeguards?"
"Certainly not our troops, their families and the millions of other Americans who would be left living in contaminated communities," Taylor said.
--------
Hagel Seeking Broad Debate on Draft Issue
By Helen Dewar
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, April 22, 2004; Page A25
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32752-2004Apr21.html
Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.), a Vietnam War veteran and an influential member of the Foreign Relations Committee, wants the United States to consider reviving the draft as part of a broader effort to ensure that all Americans "bear some responsibility" and "pay some price" in defending the nation's interests.
At a committee hearing Tuesday and in subsequent interviews, Hagel said he is not advocating reinstatement of the draft, although he added that he is "not so sure that isn't a bad idea."
His main interest, he said, is to make sure that some kind of mandatory national service is considered so "the privileged, the rich" as well as the less affluent bear the burden of fighting wars of the future.
Hagel said he does not expect to see action on such a bill this year but wanted to spark debate that will "bring some reality to our policy-making" about future military needs. With American forces stretched thinner than they have been at any time since Vietnam and with wartime needs likely to continue indefinitely, "this is a steam engine coming right down the track at us," he said.
Appearing with Hagel on NBC's "Today" show, Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (Del.), ranking Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, agreed with Hagel's goal of shared sacrifice and did not rule out a draft. But "I don't think it's necessary now," Biden said. The "whole notion of a shared burden is something we should be talking about well beyond the issue of just the draft," he said.
Legislation has been introduced in both chambers to revive the draft, which was ended in 1973 as the Vietnam War wound down and subsequently was replaced by an all-volunteer army. The bills are sponsored by Sen. Ernest F. Hollings (D-S.C.) and Rep. Charles B. Rangel (D-N.Y.). No action has been scheduled on either measure.
Hagel, an independent-minded conservative with a penchant for provocative comments, supported the war in Iraq but has criticized many aspects of the administration's postwar operations. Rarely, however, has he taken on a more controversial subject than the draft.
"My colleagues are running away from this as fast as they can," he said. But "there isn't a one of them who doesn't understand what I'm doing," he added.
President Bush is right that the country is engaged in a long-term war, Hagel said, and the country is "making commitments for future years that we cannot fulfill" in fighting terrorism and trying to rid the world of weapons of mass destruction. Already 40 percent of the ground troops in Iraq come from the National Guard and reserves, and recruitment and retention will be a problem, he said.
Moreover, he said, all Americans should be asked to "share the sacrifice" of protecting their country. "It's unfair to ask only a few people to bear the burden of fighting and dying," he said.
Also, a mandatory national service requirement for civilian as well as military work could help meet many needs at home at the same time that it is providing personnel for the armed forces, Hagel said.
--------
Rumsfeld Sees No Need for Military Draft
April 22, 2004
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Rumsfeld-Draft.html
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Bush administration sees no need to reinstate the military draft, but it is pushing for improved Pentagon management of the 1.4 million-strong force in order to meet wartime needs, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said Thursday.
``I don't know anyone in the executive branch of the government who believes it would be appropriate or necessary to reinstitute the draft,'' Rumsfeld told the Newspaper Association of America's annual convention.
Some in Congress have questioned whether the long-term nature of the global war on terrorism might require a return to the system of military conscription that was abandoned in 1973.
Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., on Wednesday raised the possibility that compulsory military service might be necessary. The nation is engaged ``in a generational war here against terrorism,'' Hagel said. ``It's going to require resources.''
``Should we continue to burden the middle class who represents most all of our soldiers, and the lower-middle class?'' Hagel said. ``Should we burden them with the fighting and the dying if in fact this is a generational -- probably 25-year -- war?''
Rumsfeld did not address the issue of burden-sharing, except to say the old system of conscription had ``a lot of difficulties,'' including loopholes that permitted many to avoid being drafted.
He said the military simply does not need to abandon its all-volunteer approach.
``We have a relatively small military. We have been very successful in recruiting and retaining the people we need,'' he said. Although the military is strained by its commitments in Iraq and elsewhere, it is working on ways to get more combat power out of the existing force, he said.
The Army, for example, is reorganizing to increase the number of combat brigades from 33 to as many as 48 over the next several years. And the Pentagon is finding ways to pull troops out of jobs that could be done by civilian Defense Department workers or government contractors, thus freeing more troops for combat-related duties.
--------
House Approves Tax Relief for Troops
April 22, 2004
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/22/politics/22RETI.html
WASHINGTON, April 21 - The House voted unanimously Wednesday to let National Guard and Reserve troops who are suffering financially tap into retirement savings without penalty. Some Democrats, however, called for more support for the troops.
The House voted 415 to 0 to waive the 10 percent penalty imposed on early withdrawals from retirement accounts and pensions for troops activated between Sept. 11, 2001, and Sept. 12, 2005, and deployed six months or longer. They would be given two years after returning to civilian life to replenish the accounts.
Employers are not required to pay workers activated to duty, nor do they have to continue providing health insurance and other benefits. Employers are required to give the same or equal job to the soldier when active duty ends.
Democrats pushed for better child tax credits and access to health insurance.
--------
Troops for Iraq to cost $700 million
April 22, 2004
By Bill Gertz
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040421-104329-3795r.htm
Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, yesterday told a House committee initial estimates for keeping additional troops in Iraq through July for security reasons will cost about $700 million.
The money could be taken from other Pentagon accounts. "We're in the middle of that analysis right now," Gen. Myers said in testimony before the House Armed Services Committee.
The Pentagon plans to keep an additional 20,000 troops in Iraq because of anticipated attacks by insurgents in the weeks leading up to the June 30 deadline for returning partial sovereignty to a new Iraqi government.
Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, appearing with Gen. Myers, countered critics of the Iraq war at yesterday's hearing.
"Some say we have no plan. We have a plan," Mr. Wolfowitz said. On Tuesday, Mr. Wolfowitz introduced a three-phased plan to set up a constitutional democracy in Iraq by 2006.
As for providing more troops in Iraq if necessary, Mr. Wolfowitz said: "We are going to have to dig very deep if we have to add more."
The comments came as car bombs in Basra, in southern Iraq, killed at least 68 persons and fighting continued in the central Iraqi city of Fallujah.
At the White House, Press Secretary Scott McClellan said the $87 billion supplemental spending bill passed last year should be enough for military operations in Iraq.
"If they need additional resources, as the president has said, they will get those resources," Mr. McClellan told reporters.
Mr. McClellan said the president has "received assurances from Pentagon officials that the resources they have at this time are more than enough to meet their needs."
Additional funding will be determined by commanders based on circumstances on the ground, he said.
Mr. Wolfowitz, at the House hearing, said the military is spending about $4.7 billion a month for operations in Iraq.
Rep. John M. Spratt Jr., South Carolina Democrat, said the current military budget is insufficient and that the military could require as much as $50 billion more.
On Syria, Mr. McClellan said Damascus must do more to stop foreign fighters and extremists from crossing the Syrian border into Iraq.
"We've made very clear to the Syrian government that it must better control borders to prevent Syria from serving as a transit point for foreign fighters and extremists," Mr. McClellan said.
"Syria has a responsibility to prevent the transit of foreign fighters into Iraq and to play a constructive role in helping the Iraqi people build a brighter and better future for themselves. We've made very clear to them and we will continue to make very clear to them that there is more to do."
Defense officials have told The Washington Times that Syria is facilitating the movement of foreign fighters into Iraq and is supplying them with arms and equipment.
-------- propaganda wars
Stahl of '60 Minutes' says she regrets Iraq WMD stories
By KATE WILTROUT,
The Virginian-Pilot
April 22, 2004
http://home.hamptonroads.com/stories/print.cfm?story=69322&ran=122315
VIRGINIA BEACH - Lesley Stahl has had her share of journalistic triumphs in the 14 years she has traveled the world interviewing newsmakers for "60 Minutes."
But Wednesday night, the CBS news correspondent and "60 Minutes" co-editor also talked about work she's less proud of: two pre-Iraq war reports casting doubt on Saddam Hussein's claim to have rid Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction.
"I look on those two stories as mistakes, journalistic mistakes," Stahl told a crowd of about 1,000 gathered in the Princess Anne High School auditorium. "I made them, and I regret it."
Stahl described a trip to Iraq in October 2001 , where she interviewed Iraqi officials, military leaders and scientists. They told her that Saddam had no ties to Osama bin Laden, that their secular Muslim country was just as much his enemy as the United States.
Stahl said she believed that.
They also told her that the country had gotten rid of its weapons of mass destruction - the continued possession of such weapons was later cited by President Bush as justification for a pre-emptive war.
Stahl didn't buy the Iraqis' claims. Her instincts, she said, told her they were lying. "I didn't believe anything the Iraqis were telling me about weapons of mass destruction," Stahl said. "Nobody believed their denials."
Stahl said she double- and triple-checked with lots of other sources.
No one had any doubts the weapons existed, she said - something she agonizes about now, but doesn't know what she could have done differently.
In her speech to the Virginia Beach Forum, co-sponsored by the Jewish Community Center Forum, Stahl touched on many of the biggest Washington stories of the past 30 years or more. She started at CBS's Washington bureau in 1972 on a story none of the "big boys" wanted to cover, involving a burglary at the Watergate hotel.
For 10 years , she was the network's White House correspondent, reporting on the Carter, Reagan and first Bush administrations.
George W. Bush reminds her of an earlier occupant of the White House. "I'm hearing echoes, not of his father's presidency, but of Ronald Reagan's," Stahl said.
Both convinced the nation they were "staying the course" even as they changed their positions, she said, citing Reagan's six tax hikes despite a pledge not to and now Bush's emphasis that the U.N. help out in Iraq.
Stahl said come November, Bush might be haunted by last year's appearance in a flight suit on an aircraft carrier, when he declared the end of major combat in Iraq. But it's way too soon to predict who will win the election, Stahl said.
In response to audience questions, the newswoman guessed that presumptive Democratic nominee John Kerry might choose North Carolina Sen. John Edwards as his running mate.
Stahl fended off a question about for whom she would vote for president.
"You do know that news reporters have their opinions surgically removed," Stahl said. "I don't go there."
Reach Kate Wiltrout at 222-5108 or kate.wiltrout@pilotonline.com
----
Kerry's DLC versus the Pirates
April 22, 2004
Black Commentator
http://www.blackcommentator.com/87/87_cover_kerry.html
Let's be clear about the choices available to American voters in November. History - most notably the historical weakness of the U.S. Left - has dealt the cards. Yet a fraction of those who claim to be progressives - misreading history and oblivious to the evidence of their senses - pretend that there is no overarching reason to do everything humanly possible to defeat George Bush in 2004. They claim there is "no difference" between the contenders: it's Tweedledum Bush or Tweedledee Kerry, and "nothing will change" whether one wins or the other.
Corporate media labor mightily to obscure the Bush Pirates' historic departure from past methods of Rich Men's Rule. It is their job to make what is singularly horrific, palatable to the public, as if nothing radically different has been happening in the nation and the world these past three years. Republicans also profit from the voices of those who willfully fail to recognize the uniquely rabid nature of the Bush regime. By proclaiming that there is no difference between the ineffectual, dishonest John Kerry and the Republicans, they are in practice preaching the futility of resistance to Bush.
The Bush men and Kerry's crew are profoundly different.
The Bush-Cheney regime is a criminal enterprise following a blueprint for world conquest and bent on liquidating what remains of the public sector and the domestic social contract in the United States. Its core electoral support is derived from the most racist and fascist-minded elements of society.
The Democratic Leadership Council, which now writes John Kerry's scripts, is the corporate-financed faction of the Democratic Party, conceived as a mechanism to diminish Black and labor influence and to slow the defection of southern whites to the GOP. The DLC blunts the party's ability to act as a counterweight to corporate power, domestically, and cultivates a mass base for "American" business objectives abroad. Through its role as dispenser of corporate (and corporate media) favor, the DLC wields decisive influence far beyond its membership.
After three years of Republican rule, it is madness to say that John Kerry's DLC rump of the Democratic Party is even remotely equivalent to the rampaging Bush regime. The Bush men have a plan to "change the world"; the DLC have none. The Bush men are driven by a triumphalist ideology; the DLC have their hands out. The DLC attempts to obstruct and co-opt progressive ideas and movements within the Democratic Party; the Bush men are determined to snuff out all who oppose the absolute rule of capital on the Planet Earth, the U.S. included.
The Bush administration is a unique danger to human survival. There can be no more compelling call to action than that. They have also shown themselves to be fully prepared, if not eager, to abort the process that has passed for electoral democracy in the United States - thereby definitively mooting the Tweedledum versus Tweedledee conversation.
The more vocal elements of the "no difference" crowd objectively aid the Republicans. They assist the GOP's voter suppression strategy, channeling white voters to Ralph Nader, a man with no party, and encouraging African Americans not to vote at all. (This is the real aim of GOP media campaigns targeting Blacks, which focus on white Democrats' failures and "betrayals" rather than Republican policies.)
Just as destructively, the false analysis (or non-analysis) that equates the DLC with the Bush cabal - as if they are the same people, operating on the same imperatives - discourages discussion of what Blacks and progressives face if Kerry succeeds in capturing the White House. Our job is both to defeat Bush and to prevent Kerry from taking us where he wants to go - back to the Clinton era. There must be an opposition in place in January of next year, and no honeymoon. We must anticipate the political lay of the land under a Kerry administration, and quickly move towards a strategy for dismantling as much as possible of both the George Bush and Bill Clinton legacies.
That's a mountain of work - too much for the "no difference" crowd to contemplate.
Clinton's limits
Although President Jimmy Carter's betrayals of Blacks and the cities opened the door to Ronald Reagan, and Bill Clinton's corporate feast laid much of the groundwork for George Bush, Carter was not Reagan and Clinton was not Bush. Under both Carter and Clinton, African Americans and their allies allowed themselves to be first seduced, then neutered. Therefore, when we anticipate a Kerry administration, we must remember the Clinton years. Here's how we described Clinton's terms in our September 25, 2003 issue:
Bill Clinton humiliated, abused, bamboozled and, finally, eviscerated the base of the Democratic Party in the Nineties. His biggest victories were NAFTA and welfare reform, both achieved with overwhelming Republican support. Clinton's tenure marked the triumph of the Democratic Leadership Council, the southern-born, white male-pandering, union-bashing, corporate wing of the Party. Republicans did a great service to Clinton and his Vice President, Al Gore, by labeling them "liberals" - perversely confirming that the DLC had succeeded in moving the national Democratic Party rightward. Clinton unleashed the dogs of Wall Street to inflate the speculative bubble that obligingly waited for him to leave office before bursting - a legacy of corporate mayhem, a marauding World Trade Organization, massive de-industrialization, merger madness, and obscene growth in CEO compensation that George Bush eagerly builds upon.
Yet we can be reasonably sure that Bill Clinton would not have invaded Iraq because, unlike George Bush, he had no plans to do so. The Bush Pirates had been plotting to begin their global conquest with the takeover of Iraq since before Bush Sr.'s defeat. There is a difference.
The Clinton administration was content to shackle Jean-Bertrand Aristide's government in Haiti, but would not have toppled it in favor of a menagerie of criminals. That would have reflected badly on Clinton's previous decision to bring Aristide out of exile in 1994. The Bush crew included the same people who overthrew Aristide in 1991. They simply reinstated their plan, which fit nicely with global conquest. There is a difference.
We can also assume that Clinton would not have transformed a huge federal surplus into an astronomical deficit. This is a safe bet, not only because Clinton amassed the surplus, but because the far-right wing of the Republican Party has for decades maintained that the only way to permanently prevent the growth of the people-serving public sector was to cripple the government's ability to pay for it. The resulting tax bonanza for the rich was gravy. They had a long-standing plan. There is a difference.
Clinton weakened the political underpinnings of affirmative action with his equivocating "mend, not end" it position. However, it is inconceivable that he would have opposed the University of Michigan Law School program before the U.S. Supreme Court, because that would have shattered his base. Bush took the action because his base is "derived from the most racist and fascist-minded elements of society." There is a difference.
Rightward, Ho!
Until he was assassinated by the corporate media, Howard Dean seemed poised to destroy the DLC's corporate stranglehold on the national Democratic Party. Progressives (including ) focused their attentions on Connecticut Senator Joseph Lieberman, the DLC's most ideologically outspoken candidate. Kerry and North Carolina Senator John Edwards kept the DLC at a distance - in Edward's case, almost in the closet. Now Kerry is flaming, as the Boston Globe reported, April 17:
''Fear not, I am not somebody who wants to go back and make the mistakes of the Democratic party of 20, 25 years ago," Kerry declared on Thursday, adding that he is not a ''redistributive Democrat," even though his $30 billion National Service plan had been regularly invoked in the Democratic primaries to trump a similar but less-generous tuition plan offered by Senator John Edwards of North Carolina.
Kerry's decision to place deficit reduction at the heart of his campaign seems to settle the debate over whether the Democratic Party would ''change" for this election, reaffirming its progressive roots and moving away from Clinton's centrism. During the primaries, former Vermont Governor Howard Dean attacked the Democratic Leadership Council as ''GOP lite."
Yesterday, DLC president Bruce Reed declared, ''I think that Kerry has always been a reform Democrat and he's running a solid New Democrat campaign. The country's in desperate need for a return to fiscal discipline." As Freedom Rider columnist Margaret Kimberley wrote on April 15, Kerry "declared in a speech on economic policy that he would eliminate portions of his own domestic agenda in order to have a balanced budget." Thus, seven months before the election, Kerry falls into the GOP's well-laid budget deficit trap. But he did not methodically set the trap; it was not part of any master plan, because he has none. A President Kerry might be pressured to change course, if progressives organize effectively. A second Bush term would advance the Hard Right agenda still further - if the world survives it. There is a difference.
A Kerry presidency poses particular challenges to the integrity and cohesion of Black politics. At a hastily arranged talk to Howard University students Kerry dismissed reparations for slavery ("I personally do not believe that America is going to advance if we go backwards and look to reparations in the way that some people are defining them.") and shamelessly abandoned his initial opposition to the coup against the democratically elected President of Haiti. "I think Aristide went astray. He was no picnic, but what we should have done was held him accountable. ... I will fight for democracy, but not a particular leader," Kerry said, unaware of the glaring contradiction.
Kerry apparently believes he is insulated from Black Democratic wrath by his best "friends" in the Congressional Black Caucus: Gregory Meeks (NY), James Clyburn (SC) and Harold Ford Jr. (TN). Kerry dropped their names in an April 7 session with members of the Black press. All three are members of the DLC, as is Black Los Angeles Congresswoman Juanita Millender-McDonald, who also endorsed Kerry during the campaign. (The only other Caucus member to support Kerry was Georgia Rep. John Lewis.)
Under a Kerry presidency, this faction would become the Black "go-to" guys on Capitol Hill - a daunting challenge to the future solidarity and effectiveness of the Caucus as a progressive force and, ironically, a boon to corporate influence in Black electoral politics that could not be duplicated under Republican George Bush. However, a Bush second term would allow the Pirates to complete their transformation of the federal government into the paymaster of a new class of bribed Black preachers, through subsidized Faith-Based Initiatives - just one item among the myriad Republican assaults against the Black body politic. There is a difference.
The biggest threat from the DLC at present is that its hold on Kerry may cause a second term to be delivered to George Bush, without the necessity of theft.
Readers may be surprised to learn that we are not overly concerned about Kerry's vague promise to send even more troops to Iraq. Kerry is no more capable than Bush of sustaining the doomed U.S. occupation. The Iraqi people will shape their own future, independent of the American electorate, who have no right to a say in the matter. However, Americans do have it in their power to disconnect the Pirates from the reins of power in Washington. That would make a world of difference.
--------
Pentagon Angered by Photos of War Dead
April 22, 2004
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Mortuary-Photos.html
DOVER, Del. (AP) -- A Web site published dozens of photographs of American war dead arriving at the nation's largest military mortuary, prompting the Pentagon to order an information clampdown Thursday.
The photographs were released last week to First Amendment activist Russ Kick, who had filed a Freedom of Information Act request to receive the images. Air Force officials initially denied the request but decided to release the photos after Kick appealed their decision.
After Kick posted more than 350 photographs on his Web site, the Defense Department barred the further release of the photographs to media outlets.
``They're not happy with the release of the photos,'' Dover Air Force base spokesman Col. Jon Anderson said.
The photos were taken at the Dover base -- home to the mortuary -- and most of the images are of flag-draped coffins.
Defense Department rules prohibit media coverage of human remains arriving at Dover, and Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. Gary Keck said release of the mortuary photos appears to be in conflict with department policy.
Defense officials said the purpose of the policy is to protect the privacy of the soldiers' families -- not to circumvent or violate the Freedom of Information Act or any other law.
``Quite frankly, we don't want the remains of our servicemembers who have made the ultimate sacrifice to be the subject of any kind of attention that is unwarranted or undignified,'' said John Molino, a deputy undersecretary of defense.
At a rally in Dover last month, war protesters criticized President Bush for continuing the practice of previous administrations of not allowing the public or media to witness the arrival of remains at the base.
``We need to stop hiding the deaths of our young; we need to be open about their deaths;,'' said Jane Bright of West Hills, Calif., whose 24-year-old son, Evan Ashcraft, was killed in combat in July.
Telephone and e-mail messages to Kick were not immediately returned Thursday.
In a related incident, a cargo worker was fired Wednesday by a military contractor after her photograph of flag-draped coffins bearing the remains of U.S. soldiers was published on the front page of Sunday editions of The Seattle Times.
Tami Silicio, 50, was fired by Maytag Aircraft Corp. after military officials raised concerns about the photograph taken in Kuwait, said William L. Silva, Maytag president.
Silicio took the photograph in a cargo plane about to depart from Kuwait International Airport earlier this month. She sent the photo to a stateside friend who provided it to the newspaper, which then obtained permission from Silicio to publish it.
On the Net:
Kick's Web site: http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/coffin--photos/dover/
Seattle Times: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/home/
--------
Why the White House likes Bob Woodward's book
BY DANIEL SNEIDER
Thu, Apr. 22, 2004
Knight Ridder Newspapers
http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/newssentinel/news/editorial/8493692.htm
(KRT) - Here's an interesting question. Why is the White House actively promoting Bob Woodward's latest book, "Plan of Attack," offering his behind-the-scenes account of the decision to go to war in Iraq?
On the surface, the book is hardly flattering to President Bush. It makes it clear that planning for war began within weeks of Sept. 11, when the war in Afghanistan had barely begun. It reveals that the Saudi ambassador, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, was given access to top-secret war plans and told that the war was a go on Jan. 11, 2003. This was before Secretary of State Colin Powell was told. And it was while the president was still assuring the nation and the world that he hoped diplomacy would work.
What the White House likes - and why Bush in fact collaborated with Woodward - is that the book portrays Bush as the man in charge, as a resolute and decisive leader. It continues the portrait Woodward drew in a previous tome, "Bush at War," about the response to Sept. 11. In this election year, Woodward's book, despite some damaging revelations, is almost a campaign biography.
Woodward counters a more damning and widely held image of the Bush administration: that when it comes to foreign policy and national security, Vice President Dick Cheney runs the show.
The book does conclude that Cheney was a driving force for war with Iraq. It details the battle between Cheney, with Defense Secretary Don Rumsfeld at his side, and Powell, who warned against war. But Woodward insists that ultimately, the president made the really tough calls.
This is a view shared by Ivo Daalder, a former Clinton national security adviser and co-author of "America Unbound," an excellent book on Bush's foreign policy.
"There is only one guy in control here," he says. Bush "is closely aligned with Cheney but is not captured by him."
This perception is not shared by many foreign governments, or by some Beltway insiders. One senior administration official voiced the counterview to me this way:
"The real president's name is Cheney. The vice president's name is Rumsfeld. Powell goes in and out of issues because he has some prestige to offer. But in the end, he's a staff loyalist. And (CIA Director George) Tenet is a cheerleader. Fundamentally, the people with the strongest views overwhelm the president."
What is the truth? I don't think anyone, other than Bush and Cheney, really knows. But it is clear that Cheney enjoys unprecedented power over foreign policy and national security. He is the first vice president to sit in the National Security Council's principals meeting, the gathering of the senior officials in charge of those areas. He has built his own staff to parallel that of the NSC.
At every key decision point, Cheney pops up next to Bush. When Bush, for example, had to decide on launching the missile strike that started the war, he kicked everyone out of the room except Cheney. It is strange, but not surprising, that Bush insists on going before the Sept. 11 commission accompanied by Cheney.
"Bush looks to no one else," says Daalder. "He doesn't look to (national security adviser Condoleezza) Rice. He doesn't look to Powell. He doesn't look to his dad."
And when he "looks" to Cheney, what does Bush see?
Cheney is an extreme conservative, a realist who believes first and foremost in the exercise of American power to pre-empt potential enemies. He has little use for diplomacy, even less for the complications of alliances. Cheney also has, according to Woodward, an "unhealthy fixation" on the still unproven belief that Iraq was tied to Al-Qaeda.
Cheney does not, however, share the neo-conservative vision of democratizing the Middle East that the president so ardently embraced. Former senior defense official Henry Rowen, now a Stanford professor, recounts a conversation with then-Defense Secretary Cheney during the planning for the Persian Gulf War, in 1991. "I said, `We could create a democracy in Iraq.' He said, to my surprise, `The Saudis wouldn't like that.' I could think of a lot of reasons for not going to Baghdad, but that wasn't one of them."
This gulf war is Dick Cheney's war. The president surely believes in the cause, but I can't help thinking that without Cheney, this war may not have happened.
ABOUT THE WRITER
Daniel Sneider is foreign affairs columnist for the San Jose Mercury News. Readers may write to him at: San Jose Mercury News, 750 Ridder Park Drive, San Jose, Calif. 95190-0001, or e-mail him at dsneider@mercurynews.com.
--------
ACLU Says White House Is Engaged in Patriot Act Misinformation Campaign;
Releases Point-By-Point Response to Bush Falsehoods
April 22, 2004
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Media@dcaclu.org
http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFree/SafeandFree.cfm?ID=15525&c=206&MX=1212&H=1
WASHINGTON - The American Civil Liberties Union today released an item-by-item rebuttal to a slew of false claims that President Bush made in Buffalo this week about the controversial USA Patriot Act.
"The president's speech was misinformation, pure and simple," said Anthony D. Romero, ACLU Executive Director. "The administration is making a series of deliberate misstatements to deceive the American public."
In response to the president's new campaign to remove the Patriot Act's sunsets, the ACLU said it would prepare and release periodic detailed rebuttals on White House misinformation. Romero noted that the ACLU has taken similar issue with information presented by Attorney General John Ashcroft and produced a report, "Seeking Truth From Justice: The Justice Department's Campaign to Mislead The Public About the USA PATRIOT Act."
Point-by-Point Rebuttal
The President:
"By the way, the reason I bring up the Patriot Act, it's set to expire next year. I'm starting a campaign to make it clear to members of Congress that it shouldn't expire. It shouldn't expire for the security of our country."
The Truth:
Less that 10 percent of the Patriot Act expires; most of the law is permanent and those portions that do sunset will not do so until December 31, 2005.
The President:
"And that changed, the law changed on- roving wiretaps were available for chasing down drug lords. They weren't available for chasing down terrorists, see?"
The Truth:
Roving wiretaps were available prior to 9/11 against drug lords and terrorists. Prior to the law, the FBI could get a roving wiretap against both when it had probable cause of crime for a wiretap eligible offense. What the Patriot Act did is make roving wiretaps available in intelligence investigations supervised by the secret intelligence court without the judicial safeguards of the criminal wiretap statute.
The President:
"... see, I'm not a lawyer, so it's kind of hard for me to kind of get bogged down in the law. (Applause). I'm not going to play like one, either. (Laughter.) The way I viewed it, if I can just put it in simple terms, is that one part of the FBI couldn't tell the other part of the FBI vital information because of the law. And the CIA and the FBI couldn't talk."
The Truth:
The CIA and the FBI could talk and did. As Janet Reno wrote in prepared testimony before the 9/11 commission, "There are simply no walls or restrictions on sharing the vast majority of counterterrorism information. There are no legal restrictions at all on the ability of the members of the intelligence community to share intelligence information with each other.
"With respect to sharing between intelligence investigators and criminal investigators, information learned as a result of a physical surveillance or from a confidential informant can be legally shared without restriction.
"While there were restrictions placed on information gathered by criminal investigators as a result of grand jury investigations or Title III wire taps, in practice they did not prove to be a serious impediment since there was very little significant information that could not be shared."
The President:
"Thirdly, to give you an example of what we're talking about, there's something called delayed-notification search warrants. ... We couldn't use these against terrorists [before the Patriot Act], but we could use against gangs."
The Truth:
Delayed-notification - or so-called sneak-and-peek search warrants - were never limited to gangs. The circuit courts that had authorized them in limited circumstances prior to the Patriot Act did not limit the warrants to the investigation of gangs. In fact, terrorism or espionage investigators did not necessarily have to go through the criminal courts for a covert search - they could do so with even fewer safeguards against abuse by going to a top secret foreign intelligence court in Washington.
For criminal sneak-and-peek warrants, the Patriot Act added a catch-all argument for prosecutors - if notice would delay prosecution or jeopardize an investigation - which makes these secret search warrants much easier to obtain.
The president's sneak-and-peek misstatement clearly demonstrates that the Patriot Act is not limited to terrorism. In fact, many of the law's expanded authorities can clearly be used outside the war on terrorism.
The President:
"Judges need greater authority to deny bail to terrorists."
The Truth:
The new presumptive detention that the president is proposing takes judicial authority away from the bail process. The presumption would take away the prosecution's burden of showing that the accused is a danger or flight risk and instead puts it on the accused.
"Presidential recklessness with the facts is deeply troubling," Romero said. "We'll be watching the president and his statements very closely during this campaign. He is clearly fighting a losing, defensive battle for the Patriot Act."
"President Bush clearly is attempting to silence his critics within the Republican Party, who believe that the Patriot Act went too far, too fast," Romero added.
-------- POLICE / PRISONERS / COURTS / JUSTICE
-------- courts
Guantanamo prisoners
Case tests our respect for the rule of law
April 22, 2004
Durango Herald
http://www.durangoherald.com/asp-bin/article_generation.asp?article_type=opin&article_path=/opinion/opin040422.htm
The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments Tuesday in a case that could set limits on the Bush administration's efforts in the "war on terrorism." That would be appropriate. If we are to instill respect for individual liberty and the rule of law in places like Afghanistan and Iraq, we would be well advised first to practice what we preach.
The United States is holding some 600 men from 44 countries at the U.S Navy's base at Guantanamo, Cuba. They may as well be on the moon. Not only is Guantanamo a close approximation of nowhere, the government also insists that the men held there exist in a legal no-man's-land.
At issue is whether those prisoners can contest their detention in federal courts through writs of habeas corpus. A federal appeals court ruled last year that as foreign nationals outside the United States they had no such right.
In part, that hinges on where they are. Guantanamo is a U.S. naval base on the island of Cuba. It exists under a 1903 treaty that grants the United States a perpetual lease and "complete jurisdiction and control." But the treaty also says Cuba retains sovereignty. So, are the detainees in a foreign country, or are they in what is functionally U.S. territory?
That goes to a 1950 ruling that arose out of World War II. In that case the high court rejected the appeals of German civilians who had been caught spying for Japan in China. Whether the court denied those appeals on their merits or because U.S. law lacked jurisdiction was debated Tuesday.
But beyond the legal esoterica the argument was straightforward: Can the president do whatever he wants, unrestrained by any law, so long as what happens is not in the United States?
The Bush administration essentially says yes. It calls the Guantanamo detainees "enemy combatants," not prisoners of war, and considers them outside the provisions of the Geneva Convention, the international agreement mandating humane treatment of prisoners.
The government's assertion amounts to the creation of a non-person status. It is not treating the detainees as criminals. It says they are not prisoners of war. And, they are being held in a place the U.S. both completely controls and says is foreign territory.
That is a level of legalistic sophistry unbecoming the United States.
The men held at Guantanamo were rounded up in Afghanistan and Pakistan as part of the U.S. campaign against al-Qaida and its Taliban hosts. It is likely that some are innocent of any wrongdoing. It is also probable that many or even most of them are al-Qaida or Taliban members or supporters. No one is suggesting that they simply be released.
At the same time, they are not U.S. citizens, nor were they apprehended on American soil. There is no reason that they should be read their Miranda rights or provided with attorneys.
It is a tough situation. Calling them prisoners of war raises questions about the undefined nature of the "war on terrorism" and U.S. action in the Middle East.
But for the administration to suggest that they are outside any legal framework is to assert that the president can officially act outside of the Constitution and apart from any checks and balances. For anyone who respects the rule of law, that is simply wrong.
-------- drug war
Leave Medical Marijuana Group Alone, Judge Tells Government
April 22, 2004
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/22/national/22MARI.html
SAN FRANCISCO, April 21 (AP) - A judge ordered the federal government on Wednesday not to raid or prosecute a California group that grows and distributes marijuana for its sick members.
The decision, by Judge Jeremy Fogel of Federal District Court in San Jose, was the first interpretation of an appeals court's ruling in December that federal prosecutions of medical marijuana users were unconstitutional if the marijuana was not sold, transported across state lines or used for nonmedicinal purposes.
Nine states, including California, allow medical marijuana use, but the Justice Department contends that federal drug laws take precedence.
Judge Fogel ruled that the government could not raid or prosecute the 250 members of the Wo/Men's Alliance for Medical Marijuana, which sued the government after the Drug Enforcement Administration raided its growing operation in Santa Cruz County in 2002 and seized 167 marijuana plants.
The group's director, Valerie Corral, said the group had been receiving and growing marijuana in secret since the raid for fear of being prosecuted. But with Judge Fogel's decision, the group plans to plant hundreds of plants on Ms. Corral's one-acre property in the Santa Cruz hills.
`You better believe it we're going to plant," said Ms. Corral, who uses marijuana to alleviate epileptic seizures.
A Justice Department spokesman, Charles Miller, said the government was reviewing the decision.
The marijuana group asked Judge Fogel to issue the injunction after the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ordered the government in December not to prosecute a sick Oakland woman who smoked marijuana with a doctor's recommendation.
The court, ruling 2 to 1, wrote that it was unconstitutional to use 1970 federal law to prosecute sick people with medical recommendations in states with medical marijuana laws..
"The intrastate, noncommercial cultivation, possession and use of marijuana for personal medical purposes on the advice of a physician is, in fact, different in kind from drug trafficking," Judge Harry Pregerson wrote for the court.
The court added, "This limited use is clearly distinct from the broader illicit drug market, as well as any broader commercial market for medical marijuana, insofar as the medical marijuana at issue in this case is not intended for, nor does it enter, the stream of commerce."
That decision was a blow to the Justice Department, which argued that state medical marijuana laws were trumped by the Controlled Substances Act, which outlawed marijuana, heroin and other drugs nationwide. The department appealed that Ninth Circuit decision on Tuesday to the Supreme Court.
The Controlled Substances Act, as applied to the Santa Cruz cooperative, Judge Fogel wrote, "is an unconstitutional exercise" of federal intervention.
Judge Fogel's decision furthers the conflict between federal law and California's 1996 medical marijuana law, which allows people to grow, smoke or obtain marijuana for medical needs with a doctor's recommendation.
Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, Oregon and Washington State have laws similar to California's statute, which has been the focus of federal drug interdiction efforts. Agents have raided and shut down several clubs that grow medical marijuana.
The Ninth Circuit has jurisdiction over all those states except Colorado and Maine.
-------- investigations
Gorelick allowed to draft report
April 22, 2004
By Stephen Dinan and Charles Hurt
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040422-121826-9517r.htm
September 11 commission member Jamie S. Gorelick, who recused herself from questioning some Clinton administration officials last week, still can help draft parts of the board's final report on the "wall" between intelligence and law enforcement that she defended while in the Clinton Justice Department.
Al Felzenberg, spokesman for the commission, said Ms. Gorelick's recusal applies to the time she was deputy attorney general at the Justice Department, so she is free to take part in the investigation and drafting of the report for anything that happened after she left.
That, he said, includes the legal barrier known as "the wall," which prevented the sharing of information between law-enforcement and intelligence officials.
"The wall as it existed after she left, the wall as it existed in the beginning of the Bush administration, she's perfectly free to ask questions about," Mr. Felzenberg said.
Faced with her refusal to resign and what some of them have called a "circus" atmosphere at recent commission meetings, Republicans in the House, just back from a two-week recess, are stepping up their criticism.
At the weekly meeting of the House Republican Conference yesterday, Majority Leader Tom DeLay of Texas urged his colleagues to take the case to the public. And many of them already are doing that.
"The commission findings need to have truth and credibility, and with her remaining on the commission, that will not be the end result," said Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite, Florida Republican. "For her to recuse herself on several issues still does not answer what I think most Americans want to know - and that is what she knows."
And Rep. Jack Kingston, Georgia Republican, said the commission's members haven't impressed anyone.
"The commission is a reunion of political has-beens who haven't had face time since 'Seinfeld' was a weekly show," he said. "In their scramble to make the evening news, they've turned this grave matter into a get-even-for-Monica investigation - a switch the American people see right through."
Attorney General John Ashcroft last week released a memo that Ms. Gorelick wrote in 1995, which he said showed she was responsible for bolstering the wall, which he said was a critical problem that led to the September 11 terrorist attacks.
Republicans in Congress immediately began calling for her to step down entirely.
Ms. Gorelick, the panel's Republican chairman and its Democratic vice chairman have rejected those calls, saying her recusals are enough.
"Commissioners should not be investigating or judging themselves. Nor, should they be looking back and judging any decisions that were made during their time in government by the agency where they worked. I plan to adhere to that policy," she said.
The commission's policy calls on members and staff not to lead interviews of former supervisors or employees that they supervised. It also calls on them to recuse themselves when they have a financial interest at stake and "from investigating work they performed in prior government service."
So far, Ms. Gorelick's recusal publicly has meant not questioning her boss at the Justice Department from 1994 to 1997, former Attorney General Janet Reno, or former FBI Director Louis J. Freeh.
Mr. Felzenberg said she probably will be able to help draft the report's recommendations concerning the "wall," although he said it's probably two months too early to address that question.
"I don't see how a conflict, if it's not a financial nature, affects the future," he said.
Mark R. Levin, president of the Landmark Legal Foundation, which called for Ms. Gorelick's resignation even before the most recent revelations, said that's not enough.
"The fact that Jamie Gorelick recuses herself from a handful of cases doesn't remove her influence," he said. "No number of recusals - whether recusals from questioning witnesses or from subject areas - can save her from her conflict."
And Andrew C. McCarthy, a former federal prosecutor who has written several articles critiquing Ms. Gorelick's role on the commission, said her conflict is more about what she was involved in than the time she was there.
"Issues, I think, transcend time frames," he said.
Rep. Peter Hoekstra, Michigan Republican, said he was surprised that Ms. Gorelick was on the commission in the first place because of her role in the Clinton administration.
"Obviously, she's got a vested interest in this to make sure this commission clearly comes out and blames somebody in some organization other [than] - and some policies other than - the ones she was integral in formulating," he said.
He said partisanship on the commission means members are in danger of squandering a chance to contribute to the discussion of domestic intelligence gathering and whether there should be a Cabinet-level position coordinating all intelligence.
But key Democrats, asked to what extent she should recuse herself, said none at all.
"Zero," said House Minority Whip Steny H. Hoyer, Maryland Democrat, and Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, South Dakota Democrat, said, "None."
"I don't think there is a member on there who hasn't made some statements about national security," Mr. Hoyer said. "And Ms. Gorelick is obviously a very capable individual. And her experience clearly adds something to the mix."
Paul C. Light, a senior fellow in governance studies at the Brookings Institution, said at this point, she should participate in everything.
"The decision to put her on the commission was the key decision. Once she's on the commission, I don't see why she shouldn't participate in all the decisions," Mr. Light said.
-------- homeland security
FBI Checking Crop - Dusting Planes, Pilots
April 22, 2004
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Terrorism-Crop-Dusters.html
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The FBI has questioned more than 3,000 pilots and aircraft owners, most of them in the past year, amid persistent concerns that terrorists might use crop-dusting planes to mount a biological or chemical attack, newly released documents show.
The interviews have not produced any arrests, according to a senior law enforcement official who spoke on condition of anonymity, but have resulted in terrorism investigations that are still under way.
The effort, outlined in documents submitted to the commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks, is more extensive than previously disclosed and underscores how seriously the threat is viewed by U.S. authorities.
The level of overall terrorist threats against the United States remains extremely high, Attorney General John Ashcroft told reporters Thursday. He echoed the assessments of other top Bush administration officials that the summer months present a number of opportunities for attacks, ranging from the Olympics in Greece to the presidential nominating conventions in Boston and New York.
``There is without a doubt in my mind a very serious level of activity in terrorism which concerns me greatly,'' Ashcroft said at the Justice Department.
Most of the crop-duster interviews were conducted after the March 2003 start of the war in Iraq, which triggered new concerns about terrorists acquiring and using weapons of mass destruction. The law enforcement official who described the initiative, known as the Agricultural Aviation Threat Project, said it was continuing.
The official declined to provide details, but Andrew Moore, executive director of the National Agricultural Aviation Association, said some of the FBI agents had asked whether any of the pilots and owners knew about attempts by foreigners or interests to purchase crop dusters.
``We were a little surprised,'' said Moore, whose group represents the crop-dusting industry. ``Our question was, `Why are you doing it now because you did it after 9/11?'''
Crop dusters were grounded nationwide on two occasions after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks. Interrogations of al-Qaida suspects, documents found in Afghanistan and actions by some of the Sept. 11 conspirators pointed to an interest by the terror group in using such planes for an attack.
Mohamed Atta, who piloted one of the planes that struck the World Trade Center, and some associates repeatedly visited a fertilizer company in Belle Glade, Fla., to ask questions about crop dusters, investigators have said. Authorities also found information about crop dusters and dispersal of chemicals on the computer of Zacarias Moussaoui, the only person charged in the United States in connection with the Sept. 11 attacks.
In addition, the capture last year of al-Qaida senior leader Khalid Shaikh Mohammed in Rawalpindi, Pakistan, turned up information on computer hard drives and in handwritten notes about the toxin that causes botulism and about salmonella bacteria and cyanide. Other al-Qaida documents have discussed anthrax and how to make the toxin ricin from castor beans.
The FBI reviewed a list of some 11,000 agricultural aircraft provided by the Federal Aviation Administration, according to documents provided to the Sept. 11 commission. Working from that list, agents interviewed and did background checks on 3,028 operators and owners of the planes.
The initiative was part of a broader FBI effort known as ``Operation Tripwire'' that is intended to bolster the intelligence database with a goal of ``identifying potential terrorist sleeper cells within the United States'' and detecting any pre-attack preparations. The FBI also sought to learn about crop duster capabilities, the law enforcement official said.
Moore said, ``We want to do whatever we can to alleviate concerns.''
The government has also urged the industry to adopt stringent measures, such as storing aircraft in locked hangars, installing hidden switches to prevent aircraft thefts and securing fertilizer, pesticides and other chemicals.
There remain questions about how successful a crop duster would be for a chemical or biological attack. At a minimum, the dispersal devices would have to be modified, Moore said.
In addition, crop dusters are difficult to fly, are barred from operating in urban areas and would have to be loaded with large quantities of a toxic substance -- requiring expertise and the necessary equipment -- to be effective, he said.
Crop dusters could be used in attacks on the U.S. food supply, however.
Mark Wheelis, a microbiologist at the University of California-Davis, said in a recent paper on the subject that a large-scale attack on crops or animal herds would require a large stockpile of toxic substances and would entail a great risk of detection or capture.
A smaller-scale attack, however, could have the effect of sowing fear and destabilizing markets even if the actual damage done was rather small, Wheelis said.
On the Net:
FBI: www.fbi.gov
National Agricultural Aviation Association: http://www.agaviation.org
--------
Europeans Seek Court Review of Data-Sharing Plan
By Sara Kehaulani Goo
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, April 22, 2004; Page A26
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32910-2004Apr21.html
The Department of Homeland Security hit a snag in its effort to get European countries to cooperate with U.S. airport security measures, with the European Parliament voting yesterday to send an agreement brokered by the United States and European Union to court for review.
The agency worked out an agreement last year with the EU to allow U.S. officials to inspect airline passenger records for U.S.-bound flights to screen for wanted criminals and suspected terrorists prior to their arrival. The European Parliament, an elected body of representatives that has lawmaking ability, said the deal violated EU privacy laws and voted 276-260 to ask the European Court of Justice to decide whether the agreement is valid.
The review places international carriers in a bind between the laws on either side of the Atlantic. The United States requires European airlines to provide U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials with passenger records, which typically include names, addresses, credit card numbers and meal preferences. But neither U.S. nor European carriers want to violate European laws in doing so.
"This issue must be resolved so that international airlines are not the punching bag in this conflict of government regulations," said Giovanni Bisignani, director general and chief executive of International Air Transport Association, which represents more than 270 carriers, in a statement. "When governments cooperate on security, the system grows stronger. When they do not, airlines are caught in the middle and it is the system that suffers."
Asa Hutchinson, undersecretary for border and transportation security at the Department of Homeland Security, said he was "somewhat disappointed" by the vote but was not sure whether the court will take up the matter. Hutchinson plans to visit EU officials in Brussels next week, in part to discuss the issue.
-------- immigration / refugees
Bush Seeks Delays on High-Tech Passports
April 22, 2004
By MICHAEL JANOFSKY
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/22/politics/22IMMI.html
WASHINGTON, April 21 - The Bush administration sent two of its top officials to Congress on Wednesday to argue for giving 27 allies more time to develop high-technology passports for security screening, rather than forcing their citizens to apply for United States visas until the new passports are available.
Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge told the House Judiciary Committee that most of the countries needed two more years to develop the passports that have computer chips to provide facial recognition, fingerprints and biographical information. They said that moving the deadline to Nov. 20, 2006, from Oct. 26 this year would also enable the United States to install the scanning equipment at points of entry and give the country more time to develop its own high-tech passports.
"Rushing a solution to meet the current deadline virtually guarantees that we will have systems that are not operable," Mr. Powell said. "Such a result may undercut international acceptance of this new technology as well as compound rather than ease our overall challenge."
With only a few committee members expressing concerns about the request, Jeff E. Lungren, a committee spokesman, said he expected legislation that would extend the deadline to be introduced "in the near future."
Under current law, citizens of 22 European nations, as well as Australia, Brunei, Japan, New Zealand and Singapore, can enter the United States without a visa for up to 90 days under the Visa Waiver Program, which was begun in 1986 for countries judged to pose little security risk. Citizens from other countries must have visas, which are applied for at United States embassies and consulates abroad and can take days or even weeks to obtain.
With heightened threat levels since the 2001 terrorist attacks and weaknesses in the program exposed by such people as Zacarias Moussaoui, a confessed member of Al Qaeda who entered the country on a valid French passport, Congress began passing measures to enhance screening for people with links to terrorism or with criminal backgrounds. One was passed in 2002, calling for the new passports.
Another, known as U.S.-Visit, began as a pilot program in January, tracking the entry and exit of foreign visitors at 115 airports and 14 seaports by using electronically scanned fingerprints and photographs.
Mr. Ridge assured the committee that screenings under the U.S.-Visit program - more than three million since January, he said - added "a layer of security" during the two-year extension and would remain in place thereafter as a safeguard.
He and Mr. Powell outlined other reasons for seeking the extension, including the impact the current deadline would have on the American tourism industry and on consular staff offices suddenly facing a surge in visa requests. Mr. Powell said failure to move the deadline would lead to five million additional applications, a 70 percent increase in demand for nonimmigrant visas and certain delays in processing that would discourage people from visiting the United States. Travel groups were quick to express support for the deadline extension. William S. Norman, president and chief executive of the Travel Industry Association of America, said imposing the current deadline could cost thousands of jobs in the travel industry.
Representative Ric Keller, a Florida Republican whose district includes Disney World, was one of several members who urged granting the extension, saying for his constituents, it was "a life and death issue."
But some committee members were troubled by aspects of the waiver program. Representative Melvin Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, suggested that the government applied the waiver unevenly, asking if any South American or African nations were exempt from visa requirements. They are not, Mr. Powell said.
Representative Maxine Waters, Democrat of California, said the United States should have "zero tolerance" for any foreign visitors. "We don't know who they are," she said.
-------- terrorism
Bombing in Saudi Capital Kills at Least 4, Injures 148
By Scott Wilson
Washington Post Foreign Service
Thursday, April 22, 2004; Page A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A29948-2004Apr21?language=printer
AMMAN, Jordan, April 21 -- A suicide bomber detonated explosives packed in a car Wednesday in front of a heavily guarded building housing the security police in the Saudi Arabian capital of Riyadh, killing at least four people and wounding 148.
U.S. and Saudi officials said they suspected the powerful explosion that sheared off the facade of the five-story building was carried out by al Qaeda.
"They appear to be striking back at Saudi authorities who have launched a number of raids over the past weeks," said a senior U.S. counterterrorism official in Washington, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
If it was carried out by al Qaeda, the bombing would signal a new level of audacity and operational success in Saudi Arabia for the group, whose leader, Osama bin Laden, a native of the kingdom, has declared his intent to wage war against the ruling Saud family.
The assailants "are not who they claim to be: people of Islam," said Prince Nayef, the interior minister, as he toured a Riyadh hospital where victims of the bombing were taken. "They are criminals. Every Saudi citizen should be a security person. For the criminals, they should turn themselves in. The right hand will catch them, today or tomorrow."
Saudi officials offered differing accounts of how the bomber was able to come within 100 feet of the General Security building, headquarters of police forces that investigate common crimes, traffic accidents and other minor offenses. One Saudi official described the building as the kingdom's equivalent of the department of motor vehicles.
The bombing took place in the Nassiriyah neighborhood, which contains government buildings, including the Foreign Ministry, and private homes and businesses.
The bomber tried to ram a car through a security barricade when it was fired on by police officers, a Saudi official said. The bomb detonated soon after, about 100 feet from the building's entrance.
The Saudi government said the attacker killed four people: two security officers, a civilian and an 11-year-old Syrian girl. The remains of the bomber were found in the charred vehicle.
Throughout the day, Arab satellite television channels broadcast images of wounded and crying civilians at the scene. Witnesses said cars parked within a 100-foot radius were smashed by the force of the blast.
The attack, which left a section of downtown Riyadh a smoldering mess, brought the Islamic militants' campaign against the Saudi government to the heart of the capital, posing a new challenge to an authoritarian government that relies on the appearance of invincibility to maintain a firm grip on the country's 24 million people.
Twice last year Islamic militants with ties to al Qaeda struck targets around the Saudi capital. In May, an attack on housing compounds where Americans and other Westerners lived killed 25 civilians. Six months later, in November, a truck bomb exploded outside another housing complex occupied by foreigners, killing 17 people.
Although no large-scale attacks have occurred since November, Saudi officials have reported an increase in planning by militants. Saudi domestic security services have clashed several times in recent weeks with Islamic gunmen. Four police officers were killed last week in a gun battle in Riyadh. In the past week, Saudi officials, acting on intelligence leads, defused five truck bombs in the capital and arrested at least eight suspected al Qaeda members.
The royal family has long maintained a public friendship with the United States, an alliance that has been tested recently by the Bush administration's calls for democracy in the Middle East. The country is the third-largest oil exporter to the United States, making it an indispensable ally, even though some U.S. officials have questioned its commitment to fighting terrorism.
President Bush, speaking to a group of newspaper executives Wednesday, said the attacks had bolstered the Saudi government's commitment to fight terrorism. "This is a place when they got attacked a year ago that helped change their attitude toward chasing down al Qaeda types within their country," Bush said. "And the attack again today on Riyadh was a reminder that there are people that would like, I don't want to guess their intentions, I think they would like to overthrow the ruling government. They certainly want to frighten everybody and kill as many as they can."
Last week, the U.S. Embassy in Riyadh ordered all families and non-emergency personnel to leave Saudi Arabia, citing mounting evidence of a possible terrorist strike. Carol Kalin, an embassy spokeswoman, said that there were no reports of American citizens injured in the attack and that the process of moving out personnel was continuing.
"People are departing," Kalin said. "We have not taken the step to go to an evacuation scenario."
The attack coincided with a visit to Saudi Arabia by Deputy Secretary of State Richard L. Armitage. Before departing, Armitage expressed his condolences to the Saudi people and said the U.S. and Saudi governments shared intelligence in recent weeks on possible terrorist activity. "We made a decision that we needed to draw down our embassy," Armitage said. "I think the terrible bombing here in Riyadh today showed the wisdom of that decision."
Daniel Benjamin, a terrorism specialist at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, said Wednesday's attack showed that a crackdown touted by the Saudi government and praised by the United States was not as far advanced as Saudi officials had asserted.
"This suggests they were being overly optimistic. The Saudis clearly have a serious and enduring problem on their hands," said Benjamin, who served on the Clinton administration's National Security Council.
Unlike recent bombings of soft targets -- the three housing complexes attacked in May and a neighborhood assaulted in November -- Wednesday's attack struck a guarded, high-value objective with significant symbolic importance, he added.
In the months before the November attack, Saudi authorities arrested more than 600 suspects and seized large quantities of explosives and weapons.
Some Saudis said the midafternoon attack, timed to coincide with the end of the workday and the start of the Saudi weekend, would bring the government more popular support because of the death and damage it caused. But it was difficult to assess those views given that public criticism of the Saudi government is often met with punishment.
"This is too easy to say that it is a result of Saudi Arabia supporting terrorism, as the Western media often says. This is not true; we are suffering from terror," said Talaat Wafa, former editor of the state-run Riyadh Daily newspaper. "All Saudi people have solidarity with the government, we are all in this same boat. This is not Islam. This is a crime."
Staff writers Walter Pincus and Peter Slevin in Washington contributed to this report.
-------- ENERGY AND OTHER
-------- alternative energy
Canadian firm delivers less polluting bio-fuel
Thursday, April 22, 2004
By Amran Abocar,
Reuters
http://www.enn.com/news/2004-04-22/s_23089.asp
TORONTO - Canada's Iogen Corp. made its first commercial delivery of cellulose ethanol Wednesday, moving the company a step closer to larger-scale production of the alternative fuel, which has fewer harmful emissions than either gasoline or conventional ethanol.
Privately held Iogen said the demonstration delivery makes it the world's first supplier of cellulose ethanol, which is made from agricultural waste such as wheat straw and corn stalks.
Cellulose ethanol differs from conventional grain-based ethanol, which is already commonly used in fuel blends, in that it uses crop residues and not actual food products such as corn.
Iogen said the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from cellulose ethanol are three times greater than those from grain-based ethanol on a life cycle basis.
Wednesday's modest delivery is to a Petro-Canada refinery in Montreal, where it will be blended with gasoline and sold at several gas stations.
Ottawa-based Iogen said all vehicles can use a blend of up to 10 percent cellulose ethanol mixed with regular gasoline, without making any changes to engines.
The next step is to open commercial plants to produce more of the fuel, it said. To date, the company has poured about C$110 million (US$81 million) into research and development, supported by partners including Petro-Canada, Royal Dutch/Shell Group, and the Canadian government.
Industry watchers say the global market for bio-fuels such as cellulose ethanol could top C$10 billion by 2012.
But Greenpeace energy campaigner Steven Guilbeault said while the technology is promising, it is still about a decade away from full commercialization.
"To fight climate change we need all the technological improvements that we can get, and I think cellulose is one of them, but we have to be realistic," he said from Montreal. "It may be more than a niche, but I doubt that it will ever play a significant role. We shouldn't think this will solve our transportation problem because it won't."
Iogen plans to decide by year-end where to locate a new C$300 million plant, which will need about 700,000 tons of straw to produce about 200 million liters (53 million U.S. gallons) of cellulose ethanol a year - a figure some said is unrealistic.
Earlier this month, Iogen canvassed farmers on the Canadian prairies about the possibility of their committing thousands of hectares of straw to supply the new plant if it was built in the region.
"It means new cash flow, between C$30 million and C$50 million a year," for farmers in the area, said Rick Verspeek, who heads a community group trying to lure the Iogen plant to Killarnay, Manitoba.
But some skeptics said the scale of the plant may be too big.
"The size of the operation is much too large. I just think they're pushing it in volume," said Bill Ridgeway, president of the Manitoba Straw Producers Coop in Grosse Isle, Manitoba. "The area they're going to have to cover to get that amount of straw is probably the size of southern Manitoba."
-------- energy
10 personal actions that can make a difference for the environment
Thursday, April 22, 2004
By Earth Day Network
1. Get a home energy audit and follow the recommendations.
Energy audits are a great way to see where the energy and energy expenditures in your house are going. Your local power company may have an energy-audit program, or you can do one yourself with the Home Energy Checkup Guide from the Alliance to Save Energy.
2. Insulate and caulk your home.
Insulation keeps warm air warm and cool air cool. Caulking and weather stripping are a good start. Insulating your attic, walls, and crawl spaces will also make a huge difference. Window-mounted air conditioning units may also be leaking out of poorly insulated windows. Check for drafts by wetting your finger and running it around the window edges.
3. Set your water heater to a lower temperature and insulate it and replace wasteful showerheads.
Insulating your water heater decreases the energy needed to heat it up. Jackets are available at hardware stores and sometimes given away free with a new water heater. Also, you should keep the heater on low, or at no more 120 degrees Fahrenheit, which is adequate to meet all home needs. And replace your showerheads with energy-efficient models. A recent study showed that making the switch could save 27 cents a day on water and 51 cents on electricity. They'll pay for themselves in just two months.
4. Turn off lights, replace your incandescent bulbs with compact fluorescents, and use timers.
It's elementary to say, turn off lights and appliances when you leave a room. Indeed, lighting accounts for 25 percent of home energy use. Another no-brainer way to cut lighting use and costs is to use compact fluorescent light bulbs in place of traditional incandescent bulbs. Not to be mistaken for the harsh white lights still found in many offices, compact fluorescents emit pleasing warm light. And although they are more expensive than incandescent bulbs, they will last ages longer and slash your energy bill. Also, invest in timers or motion-sensitive switches for both inside and outside lights. You'll never walk into a dark house and your power bills will drop.
5. Wash bigger loads in the clothes washer and turn the refrigerator down.
To save energy in the laundry, wash only full loads in short cycles. And use the air-dry setting or turn the dishwasher off after the final rinse and open the door.
Your refrigerator also uses a great deal of energy, as much as 25 percent of a home energy bill in some cities. The temperature should be38 to 42 degrees Fahrenheit, and the freezer should be between zero and five degrees. Check the seals for cracks, and keep the condenser coils clean. If you're in the market for a new one, consider whether a smaller fridge might suit your needs.
In shopping for any major appliance, look for the Energy Star label, awarded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Energy to products that are ahead of the curve on energy efficiency.
6. Close blinds and drapes in warm weather and turn off the AC.
A little air conditioning can go a long way during the day if you close the blinds or drapes so that the sun can't get in and warm up the house. If you're going to be gone for a while, turn the AC off. Do the same as soon as the temperature cools down outside, and then open the windows so you get a cross breeze. Also air conditioners work better when they are cool themselves, so if your air conditioner is outside under any direct sun, build a screen. While you're at it, check the filter. An air conditioner with a clogged filter will use5 percent more energy than one with a clean filter.
7. Curb your car, carpool, and take public transit.
Take public or mass transit as much as you can. When you do, your energy use is 25 times less than if you had used your car. If you absolutely need your car, see if you can give someone else a lift too. Think of ways you can cut down on the use of your car: Make fewer trips, carpool, or bus it once a week. Try riding your bike to the grocery store or to work if it's not too far. Every little bit counts.
8. Tune up your car ... and do you really need a Hummer?
A tune-up on your car will improve its fuel economy by6 to 9 percent and save you repair costs in the long run. And don't be a speed demon: For every mile per hour slower you drive than 65, you improve your car's fuel efficiency by about 2percent. And keep your tires filled to capacity: Soft tires make the engine work harder, making your car more wasteful.
When shopping for a new car, don't forget to factor in fuel efficiency. You'll reduce your gasoline costs, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and reduce the damage being done to the atmosphere. If everyone in the United States bought the most efficient vehicle in the class they'd ordinarily buy, the total savings would be 1.47 billion gallons of gasoline every year.
9. Work at home
Employers are becoming more flexible about what defines a workday. By working four 10-hour days or working from home one day a week, you commute less and become part of the pollution solution. Over a year, that's 50 fewer days you waste in traffic.
10. At the office ...
Computer monitors use the same amount of electricity as a 60-watt light bulb. So rest your screen when you rest your eyes. Don't wait for your screen saver to kick in; if you are going to be away from your computer for more than 10 minutes, turn the monitor off. You can also reduce the energy consumption of your copier: Look for a stand-by button or mode, and make sure that it gets used. Copiers consume a lot of energy sitting there running during times of non-use.
Adapted from "Take Action" on Earth Day Network - http://www.earthday.net/do_good/
-------- environment
Federal Neglect Drove 114 U.S. Species to Extinction
April 22, 2004
By J.R. Pegg
WASHINGTON, DC, (ENS)
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/apr2004/2004-04-22-10.asp
The failure of the federal government to effectively implement the Endangered Species Act (ESA) has contributed to the extinction of at least 114 species since the law was passed in 1973, says a report released Wednesday by the Center for Biological Diversity, an environmental advocacy organization based in Arizona. "If extinction is the ultimate criteria by which to judge agency implementation of the ESA, the failure has been spectacular," the report finds. "In many cases it has been purposeful."
The study identifies all species that became extinct or missing in the first 20 years since the Endangered Species Act took effect. Researchers found that some 77 percent of those species were known to be endangered but never granted protection under the law.
"Virtually all of these species could have been saved if the Endangered Species Act was properly managed, fully funded and shielded from political pressure," said Kieran Suckling, executive director of the Center for Biological Diversity and one of three authors of the paper. "Instead they were sacrificed to bureaucratic inertia, political meddling, and lack of leadership."
The Endangered Species Act was signed by President Richard Nixon on December 28, 1973 after it passed the House by a vote of 355 to 4 and the Senate by 92 to 0.
The law requires the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, along with the National Marine Fisheries Service, to list animal and plant species that are endangered or threatened, designate critical habitat for them, and develop species recovery plans.
Many conservationists consider the law a resounding success. Some 1,250 species are afforded protection by the Endangered Species Act and it has helped save species such as the gray wolf, the American bald eagle and the California sea otter.
But the law is only as good as its implementation, the report's authors say, and a close examination reveals that many species are now extinct due a lack of federal government commitment and attention.
"Reviewers of the ESA listing program, including the U.S. General Accounting Office, the Department of Interior Inspector General, the Congressional Research Service, the U.S. Congress and scientists both inside and outside the agency have repeatedly pointed out that the program has been hampered by underfunding, political intervention and lack of leadership," according to the report.
The report finds 92 species became extinct with no Endangered Species Act protection. The majority of those disappeared because of the lack of legal protection, recovery plans, critical habitat, and recovery funding.
The greatest zones of extinction were the Pacific Islands, the Western United States, and the Southeast. The species that disappeared are flowering plants, amphibians, freshwater mussels and snails and birds.
Hawaii suffered more than half of all the extinctions. Southern tier states including California, New Mexico, Texas, and Florida ranked second highest.
Listing delays, some as long as 20 years, contributed to the extinction of 88 species, including the an Alaskan sparrow, the San Gabriel Mountains blue butterfly, and the Penasco least chipmunk.
The report says 27 species became extinct while waiting on the federal candidate and warrant review list, and 21 species disappeared while the Fish and Wildlife Service "illegally delayed processing of petitions to protect them."
The report alleges that in some cases the agency knew the delay would cause extinction, but chose not to act rather than confront powerful political interests.
"Listing delays and extinctions have plagued the Fish and Wildlife Service for 30 years," said Brian Nowicki, coauthor of the paper, "but the Bush administration has pushed the crisis to an unprecedented level."
Bush administration officials and some Congressional conservatives say the law is "broken" and in need of a major overhaul.
The administration's polices reflect the view held by some developers and many natural resource extraction companies that the law is too rigid, is not working to keep species from becoming imperiled and is being used by environmentalists to challenge development of public lands.
The White House has eliminated the requirement that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency consult with federal wildlife agencies to determine whether pesticides will jeopardize threatened and endangered species
It has removed the obligation of land management agencies - such as the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management - to consult with federal wildlife biologists authorizing, funding or carrying out actions authorized under the National Fire Plan that could harm species or critical habitat protected by the law.
Last year, the administration announced that the Endangered Species Act - in particular the critical habitat provision - does little to protect endangered or threatened species and has caused a slew of lawsuits that is draining the scarce funds that are available to protect endangered species.
Internal reports by the agency find that addressing the backlog of these duties would require some $153 million. Only one third of the 1,250 species on the ESA list have designated critical habitat, and there are 259 species under consideration for listing.
But the Bush administration has only requested $17 million for this year's ESA budget, and the administration is the first in the history of the law not to have listed any species or designated any critical habitat except under court order.
It has listed 25 species since 2001 - by contrast, the Clinton administration averaged 65 species listings per year, the first Bush administration averaged 59 per year and the Reagan administration averaged 32 per year.
Recovery of listed species, the administration says, will not come through regulatory actions such as listing species and designating critical habitat, but through voluntary cooperative partnerships and incentives.
Such partnerships and incentives are important, but argue they are meaningless without the backstop of the Endangered Species Act.
The report calls on the Bush administration and Congress to fully fund the Fish and Wildlife Service's request for $153 million to list all species waiting for protection on the federal candidate list.
It also recommends the administration to immediately propose all candidate species for ESA protection and to develop a five year plan to finalize protection for them all.
There is growing evidence that conservation measures within the United States - and around the world - are failing. The world faces a wave of extinctions triggered by unfettered human growth and development, and scientists estimate the current extinction rate is 100 to 1,000 times the natural level.
A recent study by The Nature Conservancy finds that some 550 species have gone extinct in the United States in the past 200 years and 4,000 known U.S. species face the danger of extinction.
A list of the species documented by the new report can be found here. http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/swcbd/Programs/policy/esa/essa-App-A.pdf
-------- health
Study Says SARS Virus Can Spread Through Air
By Rob Stein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, April 22, 2004; Page A32
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32285-2004Apr21.html
The SARS virus apparently can spread distantly through the air in some circumstances, suggesting the deadly lung infection can be transmitted more easily than had been thought, researchers reported yesterday.
A new analysis of an unusual SARS outbreak in a Hong Kong apartment complex last year concluded the virus probably infected hundreds of people by traveling through one building's air shaft before being carried to neighboring towers by the wind.
"Airborne spread of the virus appears to explain this large community outbreak of SARS, and future efforts at prevention and control must take into consideration the potential for airborne spread of this virus," wrote Ignatius T.S. Yu of Prince of Wales Hospital in Hong Kong and colleagues in today's issue of the New England Journal of Medicine.
Other experts agreed the analysis provided a plausible explanation for the incident at the Amoy Gardens housing complex and could account for several other situations in which numbers of people became infected without close direct contact with a sick person, including outbreaks in a Hong Kong hotel, a Toronto hospital waiting room and at least one on an airplane.
"It's something that's been on our radar as something that's plausible," said Umesh Parashar, lead medical epidemiologist for the SARS task force of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. But Parashar and other experts said last year's outbreak showed that most infections occurred among people who had close physical contact -- primarily family members and medical workers caring for patients.
"It was a peculiar event," Parashar said. "In most instances, you do require close contact with a person with SARS."
Even if SARS can be transmitted through the air, recommendations to quickly isolate victims in the event of a new outbreak would be effective in containing the virus, he said.
The findings do suggest officials might consider shutting down ventilation systems in buildings where outbreaks occur, said Babatunde Olowokure, a medical officer with the World Health Organization's Global Outbreak Alert and Response Network.
More than 8,400 people in 29 countries contracted SARS -- severe acute respiratory syndrome -- and more than 900 died after the previously unknown lung infection emerged in southern China last year. The disease triggered a worldwide health emergency that restricted international travel, shaking the economies of several Asian nations and Canada.
One of the most puzzling and alarming clusters occurred at Amoy Gardens, where more than 300 residents became infected after a sick man used a resident's bathroom.
Some health officials initially speculated that the virus might have been spread by rodents.
A WHO investigation blamed the outbreak primarily on the complex's malfunctioning plumbing system.
In the new research, Yu and his colleagues conducted a detailed computer analysis of the patterns of where and when people became infected, the ventilation and plumbing systems at the complex and air currents in and around the apartment buildings.
The virus probably traveled out of the bathroom the sick man used through an air shaft, infecting people in other apartments in that building, before being wafted by a northeast wind to neighboring buildings, where it entered their air shafts, the researchers concluded.
-------- ACTIVISTS
Vanunu to petition court against restrictions placed on him
By Yossi Melman and Aluf Benn,
Haaretz
22/04/2004
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=417702&contrassID=1&subContrassID=7&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y
The Association for Civil Rights in Israel announced Wednesday it would petition the High Court of Justice in the coming days to remove the limitations the government has placed on nuclear whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu, who was released from prison Wednesday morning after serving 18 years. Vanunu, the Dimona reactor technician who exposed Israel's nuclear program, slammed the State of Israel and its law enforcement agencies immediately upon his release from jail, but said he had no intention of harming the State of Israel.
Vanunu walked out of Ashkelon's Shikma prison a free man around 11 A.M. local time as an 18-year prison term for aggravated espionage came to an end.
Speaking over the cries of reporters, supporters and opponents, Vanunu made a statement in the prison courtyard, flanked by two of his brothers, saying that he had been subjected to cruel and barbaric treatment during his incarceration.
He added that he had no further secrets to divulge, alleging that he suffered for 18 years because he was a Christian rather than a Jew.
A party celebrating Vanunu's release from detention, originally set to be held in Jaffa's Abulafia restaurant Wednesday evening, was moved to a Jerusalem church. Channel One reported that he would spend the night there. Dozens of his supporters and journalists were expected to attend.
"To all those who are calling me traitor, I am saying I am proud, I am proud and happy to do what I did," he said after walking through the prison gates. "I am now ready to start my life."
"I didn't say that there was no need for a Jewish state," he added, "I said Mordechai Vanunu doesn't need the Jewish state."
Vanunu, 49, spoke solely in the English, refusing to respond to any questions in Hebrew.
He said his primary message was a call to open the Dimona nuclear reactor complex to international inspections.
"I said, Israel don't need nuclear arms, especially now that all the Middle East is free from nuclear weapons," he said.
Vanunu said the Mossad spy agency and the Shin Bet security services tried to rob him of his sanity by keeping him in solitary confinement for nearly 12 years. "I said to the Shabak [Shin Bet], the Mossad, you didn't succeed to break me, you didn't succeed to make me crazy."
Asked if he was a hero, he said "all those who are standing behind me, supporting me ... all are heroes."
"I am a symbol of the will of freedom," he said. "You cannot break the human spirit."
Vanunu also alleged that the woman known as `Cindy` who helped ensnare him in September 1989 in Rome on the eve of the Sunday Times expose, was not a Mossad agent, but was working for FBI or CIA.
A brief drama developed about an hour before Vanunu's slated release: media reported that the release was in danger or being postponed after he refused to give the prison a permanent address for the next six months. He later informed the prison that his permanent address would be an Anglican Church in Jerusalem.
Dressed in a simple white-checked shirt, black tie and slacks and carrying a solitary bag, Vanunu flashed victory signs as he walked out of the prison to be greeted by hundreds of supporters.
Over 70 boxes of his personal effects, including letters and newspaper clippings, have already been removed from his prison cell.
After finishing his statement, he was driven away in a convoy of police cars, proponents yelling encouragement from one side of the vehicle, opponents screaming and making rude gestures on the other.
"He won't get out of here alive," opponents screamed as Vanunu's adopted parents, Minnesota couple Nick and Mary Eoloff, arrived at the prison. Vanunu said he hopes to settle in the United States and study history.
His first stop upon release was the St. George's Cathedral in Jerusalem, where he was mobbed by supporters and the media. "I am going to the church to give thanks to my friends and to God," he said as he left Ashkelon.
Upon his arrival in Jerusalem, he was mobbed by reporters as the Anglican bishop of Jerusalem, Riah Abu El-Assal, escorted him into the church. Other clergy members embraced Vanunu, and a tearful Peter Hounam, the journalist who wrote the 1986 article in The Sunday Times of London that led to Vanunu's imprisonment, hugged him.
Inside the church, Vanunu received communion. "He is an Anglican Christian and expressed his desire to offer thanks to God for his release from prison as his first act as a free man," El-Assal said. Fellow Christians, including clergy from England, the United States and Australia, joined the ritual, he added.
"The Eucharist was offered in Thanksgiving for the resurrection of Jesus Christ and in prayers for Mordechai Vanunu, his family and friends, in the hopes that he can live a normal life from now on," El-Assal said.
Vanunu stood in front of an altar inside the church alongside a priest in black robes. Later, Meir Vanunu came out and said his brother would remain inside and would not be answering any more questions. Church officials locked the front gate and told reporters to leave.
The defense establishment has declared Vanunu to be a security risk, and officials have signed orders forbidding him to leave the country for a year and requiring him to obtain official clearance before speaking to foreign nationals or traveling far from his place of residence. Vanunu however told one of his attorneys on Wednesday that he did not recognize any of the restrictions placed upon him.
ACRI came to the decision to appeal the restriction to the High Court after the group's legal adviser met with Vanunu in Jerusalem on Wednesday afternoon.
The petition will be filed after the state prosecution gives ACRI evidentiary material used as the basis to determine the limitations placed on Vanunu. Among other things, Vanunu is not allowed to leave the country or hold a passport for one year, and he is not permitted to have contact with non-Israelis for six months.
The Defense Ministry on Tuesday issued a statement insisting that the former nuclear technician continues to pose a security threat. A spokesperson said officials found in Vanunu's cell diary entries that relate details about his former place of work, and also various sketches.
The spokesperson said: "After 18 years it turns out he has a phenomenal memory." She added the entries suggest an intention to disclose more classified information about the Dimona plant; this being the case, the security establishment has decided to impose restrictions on him, she added. The diary materials have been confiscated, and he will not be allowed to take them with him.
A survey conducted Monday by Haaretz and the Dialog company found that almost half of Israel's public believes Vanunu ought not to be released right now. Just under a quarter of the respondents said Vanunu ought not to be released at all, and another 24 percent said he should not be set free as long as he poses a security threat (as Israel's security establishment currently insists).
Warden: Official curbs unlikely to muzzle him Shikma Prison Warden Yossi Mikdash said he believes that Vanunu will skirt the official restrictions to be placed on him and find a way to speak out.
Mikdash confirmed reports that security authorities had confiscated large quantities of materials from his cell.
But he declined to comment on leaks to Israeli media that the confiscated material contained "documents which describe with astounding detail how Israel ,manufactures nuclear weapons 'down to the last bolt.'
"About a month ago, we carried out a thorough security examination of his cell," Mikdash said, adding that they found "correspondence, copies of letters he wrote, sketches that he made. All the problematic material was taken by security authorities for examination. Questions over this should be directed to them."
Mikdash said he had spoken with Vanunu early Wednesday, and that in recent days the prisoner had been tense. "Between the lines, you could understand from his words that he is very, very bitter about the period in which he has sat in jail, unjustifiably, in his view. He has spoken of the nation as undemocratic for having imprisoned him for this period."
"My assessment is that the limitations to be placed in him will not exactly be kept by him, and he will speak with people."
"That is my impression. He did not express himself [directly], but all of the questions of clarification that he posed to me, security authorities, and legal experts, were aimed at finding the loophole that would allow him to turn to people and speak to them."
----
Freed Vanunu urges nuclear inspections
Thursday, April 22, 2004
By Middle East correspondent Mark Willacy
ABC News (Australia)
http://www.abc.net.au/cgi-bin/common/printfriendly.pl?http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s1092307.htm
Freed Israeli nuclear whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu is calling on Israel to open its nuclear facilities to international inspectors.
Mr Vanunu has walked from prison after serving 18 years for exposing Israel's secret nuclear program.
Greeting supporters and opponents outside the jail with victory signs, Mr Vanunu says he is proud of what he did.
The former technician at Israel's Dimona nuclear plant denies he is a traitor, saying he exposed Israel's secret nuclear program for the good of the world.
"My message today to all the world is open Dimona reactor for inspection," he said.
Mr Vanunu says he has no more nuclear secrets to reveal, adding that all he wants to do now is to start a new life.
He says he has triumphed over all efforts to break him.
"I am a symbol of the will of freedom," he said.
"The human spirit is free. You cannot destroy the human spirit."
However, Israel has banned him from leaving the country for 12 months and he cannot talk to foreigners or the media without prior permission.
--
Vanunu Release - a Good Time for a Middle East Nuclear Weapons Free Zone
Media Release
Tuesday, 20 April 2004
The Medical Association for Prevention of War (Australia) joins with many others around the world in anticipating the release of Mordechai Vanunu tomorrow from Israeli prison. Vanunu has spent 18 years as a political prisoner for disclosing Israel's nuclear weapons status to the world.
On the eve of Vanunu's expected release, MAPW has called for the establishment of a nuclear weapons free zone in the Middle East, as an essential step towards peace in the region.
"There could be no more fitting tribute to the sacrifice that Vanunu has made than the elimination of the scourge of nuclear weapons from the Middle East," stated Dr Sue Wareham, President of the Medical Association for Prevention of War (MAPW) Australia.
Each of Israel's approximately 200 nuclear weapons threaten unimaginable human suffering. Nuclear weapons are the most destructive weapons ever created, and Israel is the only nation in the Middle East to possess them. As protection against suicide bombers, or terrorists generally, nuclear weapons are an absurd irrelevance.
"It is hard to see how Mordechai Vanunu has committed any crime," stated Dr Sue Wareham. "Israel claims that its nuclear weapons are purely for deterrence, yet what good is a deterrent if no-one knows about it? However, having served his full sentence, he must now be allowed full freedom to travel and live where he wishes." Vanunu's desire to see the elimination of the world's 30,000 nuclear weapons is shared by the majority of the world's people. This goal is constantly thwarted by the world's major nuclear powers who claim that nuclear weapons are essential for their own security but too dangerous for others to keep. Their claims are arrogant in the extreme and risk a catastrophic widespread proliferation of nuclear weapons. "The gross double standard that allowed a war on Iraq for non-existent weapons, while Israel's weapons are ignored, is likely to simply inflame terrorists' hatred further," stated Dr Sue Wareham. "This is augmented as both Israel and the US now pressure Iran to forgo nuclear weapons. Iran might be more receptive if Israel and the US were both to practice what they preach."
For further comment: Dr. Sue Wareham
MAPW President 02 6241 6161 (Canberra)
MAPW National Office 03 8344 1637 (Melbourne)
see also: www.mapw.org.au/mediaprofile.html
Dimity Hawkins
Executive Officer
Medical Association for Prevention of War Australia
(MAPW - Australian affiliate of IPPNW)
dimity.hawkins@mapw.org.au
www.mapw.org.au
Ph: +61 (0)3 8344 1637
Fax: +61 (0)3 8344 1638
PO Box 1379
Carlton (Melbourne) VIC 3053
Australia
Medical Association for Prevention of War, Australia (MAPW)
National Office:
P.O. Box 1379, Carlton VIC 3053, Australia
Ph: 03 8344 1637 Fax: 03 8344 1638 Mob: 0431 475 465
www.mapw.org.au mapw@mapw.org.au
Australian affiliate of International Physicians for Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW)
----
Vanunu leaves jail whistling the same anti-nuclear tune
By Sharmila Devi
April 22 2004
Financial Times
http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1079420520958
Mordechai Vanunu,Israel's nuclear whistleblower,who left prison yesterday after serving almost 18 years, vowed to campaign against Israel's officially secret nuclear weapons - to cheers from supporters and louder jeers from opponents.
Mr Vanunu walked into the courtyard of Shikma Prison surrounded by security officers to face a bank of news cameras and journalists. After making the victory sign at the hundreds-strong crowd outside the prison gates, he launched into a denunciation of the Israeli authorities.
"I will continue to speak against all kind of nuclear weapons, against all the world's nuclear weapons," he said. "The time comes to end this silence and secret co-operation by the west."
Such declarations could test the patience of the Israeli authorities, who have imposed sweeping restrictions on the man who leaked photographs and details of Israel's secret Dimona nuclear reactor, where he had worked, to Britain's Sunday Times newspaper in 1986.
After being lured to Rome and abducted to Israel for a a secret trial, he served almost 12 years of his sentence in solitary confinement. Even after release, he is banned from travelling abroad for at least a year, approaching ports or border crossings or speaking to foreigners without permission.
He denied he had more secrets to reveal and accused the security services, Mossad and Shin Bet, known as Shabak, of "cruel and barbaric treatment". He said: "You didn't succeed to break me, to make me crazy. In the last month, the Shabak-Mossad tried to break me. They did a lot of things to try to destroy me. They put me in isolation, like it was 18 years ago."
Mr Vanunu, internationally a cause-célèbre, has been nominated repeatedly for the Nobel Peace Prize. But at home, few Israelis have any time for the convert to Christianity, who has called Judaism a "retarded religion" and questioned the need for a Jewish state.
Outside the prison gates yesterday, hundreds of cheering anti-nuclear campaigners and supporters were outnumbered by Israelis who gathered to boo and villify Mr Vanunu. Cries of "death to spies, death to the traitor" strengthened the fear felt by Mr Vanunu's brothers for his life.
One protester, Itzik Zoar, a shopkeeper from Ashkelon, said: "He should go and live in Europe and say nothing. We don't want him here."
Few in Israel question their country's nuclear policy. Those calling for outside scrutiny, let alone disarmament, are a small minority. Most people believe nuclear weapons are necessary to prevent another Holocaust and keep hostile neighbours at bay. A few even believe Mr Vanunu may have boosted the country's deterrence ability by ensuring that enemy states knew Israel had the bomb.
Israel's nuclear programme was pioneered in the 1950s - with French help
- by ayoung Shimon Peres, former prime minister and now leader of the opposition Labour party.
Using Mr Vanunu's disclosures of plutonium production from Dimona, analysts conclude that Israel could have 100-200 nuclear weapons, though most lean towards lower figures. Israel is thought to have built its first nuclear device in about 1967, making it the sixth of the world's nuclear powers, and may have recently developed a submarine-based "second strike" capability. However, it has never openly tested a nuclear device and maintains a policy of "strategic ambiguity" under which it does not officially admit it has a nuclear weapon.
Gerald Steinberg wrote - for the Jerusalem Centre for Public Affairs - "Israel's nuclear option is credited with forcing Egypt and Syria to limit their attacks in the 1973 war; with bringing [Egypt's President Anwar] Sadat to the realisation that he must make peace with Israel; and with deterring Saddam Hussein from using chemical warheads in the 1991 missile attacks against Israel."
Yet Israel's nuclear capability has been cited as goading Arab regimes and Iran into developing a nuclear response. Libya's abandonment of nuclear weapons last year and the ousting of Saddam Hussein's hostile regime in Iraq raised questions about the value of Israel's deterrent. Iran is also under pressure to refute western claims it has a nuclear arms programme.
Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, has called for Israel to relinquish its nuclear weapons as part of establishing a nuclear free zone in the Middle East.
Mr Vanunu echoed this theme on his release: "Israel doesn't need nuclear arms, especially now all the Middle East is free from nuclear weapons."
----
Filipino Activists Hail Vanunu's Bravery
Emerging from his fortified prison, Vanunu called for opening Israel's Dimona nuclear plant for international inspection.
By Rexcel Sorza, IOL Correspondent,
April 22
(IslamOnline.net)
http://www.islam-online.net/English/News/2004-04/22/article07.shtml
ILOILO CITY - One of the largest groups of Filipino activists lauded Thursday, April22, the bravery of Israeli nuclear whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu and pressed for freeing the world from weapons of mass destruction.
"As the entire world celebrates Earth Day today, the New Patriotic Alliance hails the bravery and heroism of the newly released from prison nuclear whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu," read the group's statement sent to IslamOnline.net.
Emerging from the fortified Shikma prison in southern Israel after serving18 years in prison, Vanunu called Wednesday, April21 , for opening Israel's Dimona nuclear plant for international inspection.
"The Israeli government failed to silence and break down a free human being. Vanunu is a living hope for the peoples of world struggling against the real terrorist - United States imperialism and its many forms of oppression and aggression."
The New Patriotic Alliance also called on people to join hands to free the world "from weapons of mass destruction of Israel" and from the "United State's imperialism!"
The group, which opposes the American invasion of Iraq, criticized the United States anew for condoning Israeli's buildup of its nuclear arsenal.
"While the United States bully and blackmail other nations and wage war against Iraq under the pretext Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, which until now couldn't be found, the secret nuclear weapons program of Israel enjoyed a tacit approval of the United States since the Nixon administration."
In early1968 , the CIA issued a report concluding that Israel had successfully started production of nuclear weapons. (Click here to read the history of Israel's nuclear arsenal.)
The New Patriotic Alliance said "Israel is a vital satellite in the U.S. global militarism and nuclear superiority. The U.S. grants Israel with US$ 3 billion of military aid annually. As a strategic outpost, Israel protects the U.S. neocolonial interests and dominance in the Middle East.
"An enemy to a just and lasting peace in the region, Israel has also waged a brutal war against the legitimate struggle of the Palestinian people to their home and land and for self-determination."
Vanunu, a former Israeli nuclear technician who served an18 -year prison sentence including 11 years in solitary confinement, for blowing the whistle on Israel's secret nuclear weapons program and arsenal in 1986 .
On October5 ,1986 , the London Sunday Times published Vanunu's expose with photographs detailing Israel's secret nuclear facility in Dimona in the Negev Dessert, where he worked for nine years.
The facility also harbored an underground plutonium separation plant operated in the strictest secrecy.
A few days before the Sunday Times published his story, Vanunu was lured from London to Rome where he was kidnapped, drugged and forcibly returned to Israel by the Mossad, Israel's intelligence.
After a secret trial, he was sentenced to 18 years for treason and espionage and was detained at Shikma prison.
Vanunu's expose broke the silence of what was an open secret that tiny Israel has become a major nuclear weapons power making the country the world's6 th nuclear power.
Experts estimate Israel's nuclear weapons production rate on the order of10 nuclear weapons per year and a nuclear arsenal of up to 200 nuclear warheads of advanced design.
Despite his release the government has been Vanunu from leaving the country, approaching any port or airport or making contact with foreigners without prior authorization.
--------
For A Global Glasnost
by Mikhail Gorbachev
Thursday, April 22, 2004
by CommonDreams.org
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0422-14.htm
MOSCOW -- Market-driven globalization tends to enforce the notion, derived from neo-liberal theory, that gross domestic product indicators are the only measure of national wealth and progress. Capital accumulation and individual consumption are given a higher status than social and spiritual values or cultural heritage.
The cumulative results of all the individual decisions based on this logic lead in the long run to unforeseen and dangerous consequences for both the environment and society.
The sponsors of this ideology -- notably the United States --benefit most from its spread across the planet. One often comes across the argument that globalization, as we know it, is a fait accompli, a process entirely outside our control.
Particularly vociferous with this argument, unsurprisingly, are those who want to instill in the public mind the futility and pointlessness of any opposition to globalization.
But globalization, like all other economic regimes, is a political choice. That politics lies behind globalization is unquestionable. In recent years this has been clearly illustrated by the pursuit of an imperialist policy of force by neo-conservatives in the United States who seek to take advantage of globalization to impose their will upon the rest of the world.
Why has the factor of force come to the fore? There are a few simple facts.
Natural resources are finite. Their use has already exceeded a critical point. For a smaller (and decreasing) portion of humanity to capture the lion's share of resources means depriving the rest of the world (and the growing majority) of equal access to those resources and, in many cases, to the essential means of subsistence. By recalling the U.S. signature from the Kyoto Protocol and opening hostilities against Iraq based on false intelligence, in breach of international law and bypassing the U.N. system, President George Bush has demonstrated blatant disregard for world opinion and the interests of others.
In the first two years of his presidency, under the pretext of liberating business growth, Bush made several major changes to national environmental policies that have substantially undermined the central pillars of ecological legislation in America established during the previous four decades. Yet he did not think twice before spending billions (not to mention thousands of human lives) on the war in Iraq.
Such a course of action is fraught with danger, not only for the environment but also because it exacerbates the global conflicts between the North and the South, between the rich and the poor. The terrible events of Sept. 11, 2001, were a graphic display of what can emerge from deep disparity.
Is there any alternative? Yes.
History is not predetermined. There is room for an alternative in any situation. It was this pursuit of an alternative model that led to the elaboration of a sustainable development program for the world back in 1992.
Agenda 21 was supported by the United Nations and endorsed by the heads of state and government of most states in Rio. For the first time in history, the world community managed to map out and agree on a strategic plan designed to address the twin problems of poverty and ecological disruption.
However, serious obstacles emerged as implementation moved forward. By and large, the governments of the industrialized countries chose to retract their commitments, in particular those regarding development aid contributions, in favor of the philosophy of economic liberalism, deregulation and accelerated economic growth. In the meantime, opponents of the sustainable development paradigm have spared no effort in trying to discredit the idea in the public mind. And yet, the interest is still there. The so-called "anti-globalization movement" (in effect, a movement against market-driven fundamentalism) is in favor of an alternative development model. Its motto is "Another World Is Possible!" International social democratic parties, rural slow food and "green" movements worldwide as well as thousands of NGOs (non-governmental organizations) representing millions of members also stand behind the sustainable development principle. Together, these groups and movements are a powerful force whose pressure is being increasingly felt by the ruling elite.
So, what can we do to make a difference? First of all, we need to bridge the gap between our moral consciousness and the challenges of our time. Consumerism and national egocentrism continue to pose a serious threat to achieving sustainable development goals. A turnaround will not be possible unless the gap between the objective need to reverse currently prevalent behavioral patterns and the subjective unwillingness of states, communities and individuals to do so is closed. This turnaround must begin with changes in the human spirit through a reprioritization of our value system.
Today I am convinced that the citizens of the world need a reformulated "glasnost" to invigorate, inform and inspire them to put the staggering resources of our planet and our knowledge to use for the benefit of all. We must not go back to the days of prolific military spending and fear of people whose ways are different from our own. Once they know that they have the power to change it, people cannot long tolerate living on a planet where millions of children have no clean water to drink and go to sleep hungry.
Glasnost could serve as a catchall phrase for all means and methods in the struggle for global awareness. Glasnost is a demanding, long-term process of awakening that inevitably leads to calls for fundamental changes.
Such a process is urgently needed to address the dominance of short-term interests and lack of transparency at the level where the planet's fate is being decided.
I have faith in humankind. It is this faith that has allowed me to remain an active optimist.
Mikhail Gorbachev, the last president of the Soviet Union, was awarded the Nobel Peace prize for helping to bring the Cold War to an end. He is now president of Green Cross International.
--------
A Polite Encounter Outside World Bank
Anti-Globalization Activists Return
By Manny Fernandez
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, April 22, 2004; Page A04
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32891-2004Apr21.html
Protesters marked the 60th anniversary of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank in downtown Washington yesterday with a cordial delivery of nearly 11,000 "birthday" cards to World Bank headquarters.
Unlike previous anti-globalization demonstrations, this one ended not in mass arrests or traffic disruptions, but in a brief, polite discussion with IMF and World Bank representatives. D.C. police officers guarded the World Bank's entrance near 18th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue NW as the two representatives in business suits chatted with several protesters. They accepted the white-mesh bags of cards, which supporters from around the world had signed to call for 100 percent debt cancellation for poor countries.
"We want to find ways to work together," said Katherine Marshall, a bank director and one of the representatives.
Such cordial relations represented a quiet beginning to what has become an April ritual in Washington: protesting at the spring meetings of the IMF and World Bank. Yesterday's rally kicked off five days of teach-ins and demonstrations to protest the institutions, which meet Saturday and Sunday.
Four years ago this month, IMF and World Bank meetings drew roughly 20,000 activists to Washington, disrupted parts of downtown and sparked clashes between police and protesters. But times have changed. This year, organizers have adopted a less radical tone and do not expect the same numbers and intensity as they had in April 2000. They said they have been struggling to compete for activists' energy and time since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
Yesterday, at the "Unhappy Birthday Party," protesters said the small crowd -- estimated at 200 by one organizer -- was not a concern. What did matter, they said, was their cause: debt relief for poor nations. Activists with the Jubilee USA Network, the rally's sponsor, said the African continent alone is spending about $15 billion every year in debt service to Western creditors, including the IMF and World Bank.
"The institutions are a bit like a creditors cartel that protects the interests of the already wealthy nations at the expense of the most impoverished nations," said Marie Clarke, 28, Jubilee's national coordinator. "Their tool of domination is debt."
In 1999, the IMF and World Bank expanded debt relief efforts through the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries initiative. Debt reduction packages have since been approved for 27 countries, 23 in Africa. Those countries' debts will be reduced by more than $50 billion over the next few years, a World Bank spokesman said.
But Clarke and others, who tooted noisemakers and wore yellow cone-shaped party hats in mock celebration of the 60th birthday, said the initiative has failed to do enough. Njoki Njoroge Njehu, director of the 50 Years Is Enough Network, a longtime critic of the IMF and World Bank, described the initiative as "too little debt relief for too few countries" with too many strings attached.
Organizers say they expect a larger turnout for the main event Saturday, an afternoon rally and march from Franklin Square to the IMF and World Bank buildings. The Mobilization for Global Justice, a Washington-based group that helped organize the 2000 demonstrations, is coordinating many of the activities. D.C. police officials said organizers have indicated that as many as 5,000 to 10,000 protesters may turn out Saturday, though the march permit lists only 500 to 1,000.
The demonstrations will take place on the same weekend as the March for Women's Lives, an abortion rights demonstration on the Mall on Sunday. Hundreds of D.C. police officers will be assigned to crowd control, and others will monitor activity on closed-circuit video feeds, said D.C. Police Chief Charles H. Ramsey. The department canceled routine leave for the 3,800-member force to ensure that commanders have enough officers, though Ramsey said he expects peaceful demonstrations both days.
"If something happens, we'll be able to respond quickly," Ramsey said. Police officials also announced several street closings and parking restrictions in the area around the IMF and World Bank buildings. Those restrictions begin tomorrow after rush hour.
Terry Lynch, executive director of the Downtown Cluster of Congregations, sent a letter to Ramsey and other city leaders urging them to make sure that the security perimeter does not prevent worshipers from getting to churches and synagogues this weekend. Ramsey said police were working with churches and other organizations to minimize disruptions.
Staff writer Del Quentin Wilber contributed to this report.
--------
A Call to Arms by Abortion Rights Groups
April 22, 2004
New York Times
By ROBIN TONER
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/22/politics/22MARC.html?pagewanted=all&position=
WASHINGTON, April 21 - For the first time in 12 years, a coalition of abortion rights advocates will hold what they hope will be a major march in Washington on Sunday, trying to return the issue to the forefront of American politics - and to highlight what they contend is the Bush administration's extremism.
They say President Bush has stayed "below the radar" on abortion and reproductive-health issues, as Kate Michelman, president of Naral Pro-Choice America, put it, and are trying to convey their sense of threat to the voters, after several legislative defeats and months of battling a Congress and a White House that are led by allies of the anti-abortion movement.
"We have to march to make people stop and think," Ms. Michelman said Wednesday at a news conference. "There are two facts that don't quite fit together: Most Americans support a woman's right to choose, and yet the most powerful political institutions of our government are in the hands of people who want to take that right to choose away."
The abortion rights movement faces several hurdles, including an election campaign debate dominated by issues of war and the economy, and an anti-abortion movement that has developed a strategy of restricting abortion by incremental and often politically popular steps.
With Republicans in control of Congress and the White House, abortion opponents also have the advantage of allies who can set the legislative agenda and frame the debate. That was underscored Tuesday night, when Vice President Dick Cheney attended an awards dinner for the National Right to Life Committee and hailed it for leading "a great movement of conscience."
Indeed, leaders of the anti-abortion movement said they were not perturbed by the march. "Whatever happens Sunday, it will not shift where most Americans are on this issue," said Olivia Gans, director of American Victims of Abortion, an outreach project of the National Right to Life Committee.
Ms. Gans and other anti-abortion leaders say that most Americans do not support the broad constitutional right to abortion set forth in the Roe v. Wade ruling 31 years ago.
Similarly, Terry Holt, a spokesman for the Bush campaign, said, "The president's policies on family issues are right in the heart of the mainstream." The legislation that Mr. Bush has advanced - like the ban on the procedure that critics call partial-birth abortion - has "overwhelming support" among the American people, Mr. Holt said.
In general, Mr. Bush has a record of opposing most legalized abortion, with exceptions for cases of rape, incest and when the life of the pregnant woman is threatened. He embraced a platform four years ago that calls for an outright ban on abortion, though he says the country is not ready for it. These days, he more typically speaks of building a "culture of life."
Leaders of the abortion rights movement assert that Mr. Bush is actually pursuing an agenda that restricts both abortion and access to family planning and other reproductive health services, at home and abroad. His emphasis on programs that promote abstinence only, for example, is draining money from other family planning services, they say.
"The government's role in reproductive health care should be to ensure access, not to take it away," said Gloria Feldt, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, "not to tell people what to do with their lives, not to put the long arm of the politician into the examining room."
Abortion rights leaders also say that Mr. Bush has nominated some staunch opponents of Roe v. Wade as federal appellate judges, contending that such selections indicate what he would do if a vacancy occurred on the Supreme Court. The winner of the presidential election may get the chance to appoint two or more justices.
In short, many abortion rights leaders say that these rights are more imperiled than they have been since 1992 - the year of the last large-scale abortion rights march, when the Supreme Court was considering a case that could have overturned Roe. The justices eventually affirmed Roe, and President Bill Clinton's election later that year gave advocates of abortion rights a firewall for the rest of the decade.
The "March for Women's Lives" this Sunday will be led by a coalition of seven women's and civil liberties groups. They are the National Organization for Women, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Black Women's Health Imperative, the Feminist Majority, Naral Pro-Choice America, the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health and the Planned Parenthood Federation of America. The march is also endorsed by more than 1,400 other groups, including unions and religious and health care organizations.
The march has a new message intended for a younger and more diverse audience, focusing on privacy and access to a full range of reproductive health services, not just abortion. But the underlying goal is the same as most marches on Washington - to flood the capital with a wide cross-section of Americans and send a powerful message.
"This is, to us, just a beginning," said Eleanor Smeal, president of the Feminist Majority. "We are going to make women's rights, and especially reproductive rights, another third rail of American politics, just like Social Security. This is no longer going to be a political football debated every two or four years."
The marchers are to include a heavy contingent of celebrities, like Ashley Judd, Whoopi Goldberg and Julianne Moore. But organizers were also careful to highlight the more grassroots elements of the coalition.
Tim Butz, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Nebraska, said he would join at least 300 Nebraskans at the march, including many who were coming by bus. "They have to travel over 30 hours on the bus," he said. "That really shows a lot of commitment.`
Susan Hilt, 55, of Lenexa, Kan., also plans to attend. Ms. Hilt, a manager of a storage facility, said, "I'm old enough to remember before Roe v. Wade. I live in fear that they might take that right away from people. It appalls me. Personally, I don't think that's a choice I could make, but it's sure as heck not my business to tell anybody else what they can do."
Christina Kucera, spokeswoman for Planned Parenthood of Louisiana and the Mississippi Delta, said she was playing "mother hen" to three busloads of protesters making the 20-hour trip from New Orleans and Baton Rouge. "This is my first big reproductive rights march," Ms. Kucera said. "I'm incredibly excited."
-------
------- OneList (submissions from subscribers)
------- Depleted Uranium Keeps On Killing!
-----------
Posted
without profit or payment for research and educational
purposes only,
in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107.