Archive By Date | Today's Links to Search By
Activists' News | Nuclear | Depleted Uranium | Military | Police
Alternative Energy Etc. | From Subscribers
NUCLEAR
Revealed: the huge mountain of 'unofficial' nuclear waste
China bucks U.S. over U.N. action
French nuclear shipment heads towards Germany after protest
Anti-nuclear protester killed by waste train
India still wary of China despite better ties
Preliminary Pact Reached on Iran Nukes
Envoys Report Progress in Iran Talks
Nuclear Talks With Iranians Said to Progress
Missing Antiaircraft Missiles Alarm Aides
PM says Japan military must contribute to global safety
Love her or hate her...
S. Korea Urges U.S. To Push for Arms Talks
Terrorists trying to get their hands on nuclear weapons, Australia warns
Court Rejects Early Decision on Radioactive Sludge Tanks
MILITARY
US defies protests to poison Afghan poppies
Afghan Militants Hold Talks on Hostages, but No Deal Yet
Eritrean authorities deny reports 20 died in prison "incidents"
Ivory Coast erupts in attacks on French
Exercise Displays Japan's Ambitions
PM says Japan military must contribute to global safety
As Falluja Waits in Despair, Rebels Attack in Samarra
US warplanes hammer Iraq's rebel-held Fallujah overnight
Terrorists kill dozens in Iraq attacks
52 Killed In Spate Of Attacks
U.S. Forces Begin Moving Into Falluja
Bickering Iraqis Strive to Build Voting Coalition
Arafat's No. 2 Is Set to Assume Leadership
Philippine defense minister leaves for China
Russians Mark Revolution Day With Protests
US ready to put weapons in space
Officer Who Says She Was Raped at Base Is Classified as AWOL
POLICE / PRISONERS / COURTS / JUSTICE
Trial postponed for terror suspect
Supreme Court Proceeds, but With Uncertainty
US defies protests to poison Afghan poppies
Unrivaled Security Planned for Inauguration
POLITICS
Four More Years Attributed to Rove's Strategy
Rumsfeld signals he won't 'fade away'
Domestic Issues on the Front Burner
White House's Iraq policy director to step down
President Signals No Major Shift In Foreign Policy
Voting Problems in Ohio Set Off an Alarm
ACTIVISTS
Anti-nuclear protester killed by waste train
Love her or hate her...
-------- NUCLEAR
-------- britain
Revealed: the huge mountain of 'unofficial' nuclear waste
Contamination nine times worse than admitted
sundayherald
By Rob Edwards
07 November 2004
http://www.sundayherald.com/45831
The mountain of radioactive waste that will be left by Britain's nuclear programme is at least nine times higher than previously admitted, a new report by government advisers has revealed.
A massive 18 million cubic metres of soil and rubble is now known to have been con taminated by leaks, spills and discharges at 30 nuclear sites across the country over the past 60 years. That figure could double to 36 million cubic metres when the full extent of the problem is revealed. Only 1.9 million cubic metres of low-level radio active waste has been declared in the official inventory.
The news follows revelations in the Sunday Herald last week that a large area of land around the Hunterston nuclear power station in North Ayrshire had been contaminated .
The latest report, by the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM), which advises the Scottish Executive, warns that there is currently "no solution" for dealing with the waste.
"This report reveals the vastness of the problem ," said Dr David Lowry, consultant editor of the land contamination newsletter, Brownfield Briefing. "It is extraordinary to learn that such large volumes are not included in the official UK inventory of nuclear waste."
CoRWM's report, released last week, is the most comprehensive assessment to date of Britain's legacy of radioactive rubbish. The waste comes from defunct and operating nuclear power plants, military nuclear bases and medical radioisotope factories.
In Scotland, the waste has been generated at six sites: Hunterston, Dounreay in Caithness, Torness in East Lothian, Chapelcross in Dumfries and Galloway, Rosyth in Fife and the Clyde naval base, near Helensburgh.
CoRWM concludes that there are 2000 cubic metres of high-level radioactive waste, 349,000 cubic metres of medium-level waste and 1.93 million cubic metres of low-level waste. But it adds that there will also be a huge volume of contaminated soil, rubble and other wastes from cleaning up the nuclear sites over the next century.
It estimates this will amount to 18 million cubic metres - enough to fill 200,000 double-decker buses. This is a "rough figure", CoRWM says, which may end up being two times too low, or two times too high.
The figure includes the 81,000 cubic metres of contaminated land at Hunterston . It also includes an estimated one million cubic metres of contamination from the Sellafield nuclear plant in Cumbria.
At Dounreay, the UK Atomic Energy Authority says that 7500 square metres of land is contaminated - 5% of the open ground on the site. The amount of radioactive soil, rubble and other "low-activity" wastes planned for disposal over the next 30 years is between 26,000 and 45,000 cubic metres.
All these wastes - low in radioactivity but high in volume - pose a dilemma. While regulatory agencies say they might need to be buried at special sites with other radioactive waste, the nuclear industry would like to leave them where they are.
"Owing to the increase in future volumes of site clearance waste, it will be necessary to review the scale of, and arrangements for dealing with, these wastes," says CoRWM.
Green MSP for the South of Scotland Chris Ballance, who was instrumental in uncovering the contamination at Hunterston, accused the nuclear industry of " playing Russian roulette with public health, public money and the environment" .
It also raised questions about nuclear secrecy, and suggested that there may be other radiation leaks which have been covered up, he argued. "The cost to the taxpayer of cleaning this up - if that can be done - is anybody's guess."
The Green Party will next week be questioning ministers on how much contamination has been found around Hunterston, Dounreay, Torness and Chapelcross. And last week, party co-leader, Robin Harper, quizzed First Minister Jack McConnell on the Hunterston contamination.
CoRWM was set up by ministers in Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland in 2003 to recommend what should be done with nuclear waste. It includes 13 experts from universities and consultancies and has promised to make its final recommendations in July 2006.
CoRWM's chairman Gordon MacKerron pointed out that low-level wastes were not part of its remit, which is restricted to medium and high-level wastes. But another government group which had been looking at low-level wastes, the Radioactive Waste Management Advisory Committee (RWMAC), had been suspended.
"Government has no source of independent advice on the low and very low-level waste," MacKerron said. "CoRWM cannot make credible recommendations to government without looking at the whole picture and that includes low and very low-level waste." David Lowry said that RWMAC had flagged up the looming problem of high- volume decommissioning wastes a year ago. "But it seems that the Executive and the ministries in Westminster have paid no heed," he said.
The Executive said it was aware of the nuclear industry's legacy. "We do not accept that putting a figure on the amount of low-level nuclear waste adds any risk to human health or the environment," said a spokesman. "The scale and scope of the issue is being reviewed. Proposals on how these wastes can best be managed for the long term will be brought forward shortly."
The British Nuclear Group, which runs 10 nuclear plants in the UK, including Hunterston A and Chapelcross, said that "no firm decisions" had been taken on what to do with the waste. Most of it would probably be left where it is for the moment, and would be dealt with in the future by the government's Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, which starts up next year.
British Energy, which runs Hunterston B and Torness, accepted that there could be 18 million cubic metres of site clearance waste. "We have contributed to that figure and we are totally supportive of CoRWM," a spokeswoman said.
Friends of the Earth, however, dismissed suggestions that there was nothing to worry about. "This latest revelation of the problems of nuclear power should act as a warning to all those who think building new nuclear power stations is a smart idea," said the environmental group's chief executive, Duncan McLaren.
-------- china
China bucks U.S. over U.N. action
November 07, 2004
By Laurent Lozano
AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20041106-112313-6587r.htm
TEHRAN - China gave Iran crucial backing yesterday in its standoff with the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog, with Beijing saying it opposed U.S. efforts to have the Islamic republic referred to the United Nations Security Council.
The comments from Chinese Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing came as officials from Britain, France and Germany were trying to persuade Iran to limit its sensitive nuclear activities or risk possible international sanctions.
"There is no reason to send the issue to the Security Council," Mr. Li said at a press conference with his Iranian counterpart, Kamal Kharrazi.
"It would only make the issue more complicated and difficult to work out," Mr. Li said, contradicting Washington by saying "the Iranian government is having a very positive attitude in its cooperation" with the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
Mr. Li refused to speculate on whether China would use its veto in the Security Council in the event of Iran's case being sent there.
He did say he had told U.S. Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw "that China supports a solution in framework of the IAEA."
The United States accuses Iran of secretly trying to develop nuclear weapons under cover of its civilian atomic energy program. It wants the IAEA to refer the dispute to the Security Council when the IAEA board meets in Vienna, Austria, on Nov. 25.
Tehran denies the charges, insisting it only wants to generate electricity.
Russia, another permanent and veto-wielding Security Council member, has also voiced its strong opposition to Iran's case being referred to the United Nations. Moscow is helping Iran build its first nuclear power plant in a deal worth some $800 million.
Mr. Li's comments added yet another layer of diplomatic difficulty for the European Union, which is using a "carrot and stick" approach with Iran in a bid to get it to suspend uranium enrichment.
In Paris, the meeting between Iran and the big European powers - France, Britain and Germany - is taking place behind closed doors, under a news blackout.
Enrichment is the sensitive part of the fuel cycle because it makes fuel for civilian reactors but it can also be used to manufacture the material for the explosive core of atomic weapons.
Tehran has until now resisted Europe's demand for an indefinite suspension, arguing that it would infringe on its right to maintain a civilian nuclear power program.
Enrichment is permitted under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) - the treaty overseen by the IAEA and to which Iran is a signatory - if for peaceful purposes.
The three European powers are offering Iran nuclear technology, including access to nuclear fuel, increased trade and help with Tehran's regional security concerns if the Islamic republic halts enrichment.
-------- europe
French nuclear shipment heads towards Germany after protest
(AFP)
Nov 07, 2004
http://www.spacewar.com/2004/041107143123.9yxysyx5.html
NANCY, France - A train carrying a shipment of highly radioactive waste was on its way to a German storage dump on Sunday, after being delayed for two hours by anti-nuclear protestors in eastern France.
The train left Laneuveville-devant-Nancy at 1:23 pm (1223 GMT) in the direction of Gorleben in northern Germany, after police removed two protestors who had chained themselves to the railway lines.
"Two militants, a boy and a young girl, chained themselves to the railway track, around 300 metres from a chemical factory, which obliged the dangerous convoy to stop at around 11:20 am (1020 GMT), one of the 15-strong group of protestors, Daniel Michel, told AFP.
The waste left the plant in La Hague in northern France late on Saturday and was expected to cross the French-German border on Sunday and to reach the German town of Dannenberg 24 hours later, where it is expected to be loaded on to trucks to cover the last few kilometres (miles) to the Gorleben dump.
On Saturday thousands of demonstrators had demonstrated in the northern German town to protest the imminent arrival.
More than 12,000 police were deployed last year for similar convoys in one of the largest security operations of its kind ever mounted in Germany.
Anti-nuclear and environmental campaigners say the shipments are dangerous and that the waste will contaminate the water table at Gorleben.
Germany, which has no treatment facilities of its own, sends spent fuel rods for reprocessing at the La Hague plant before they are returned here for storage.
-----
Anti-nuclear protester killed by waste train
(AFP)
Nov 07, 2004
http://www.spacewar.com/2004/041107211828.o8bde6zr.html
STRASBOURG, France - An anti-nuclear protester died in northeastern France Sunday after being run over by a train carrying nuclear waste from France to Germany, regional authorities said.
The 21-year-old man, who had chained himself to the railway near the city of Nancy, lost a leg after he was crushed by the train and died despite receiving emergency treatment at the scene.
The authorities said the accident happened in the early afternoon in the town of Avricourt after a group of eight people gathered near the main Paris to Strasbourg line, on which the nuclear transport train was travelling.
"After coming out of a corner at reduced speed, the train was apparently confronted with the group, which moved out of the way with the exception of one person, who was hit," a police statement said.
"Despite the arrival of the emergency services at the scene, the young man died of his injuries," the statement said.
The police did not reveal the man's identity, but said he was aged 21, was "probably" from the Meuse region in eastern France and was part of a group of activists.
Nancy state prosecutor Michel Senthille said that one of the man's legs had been cut off in the incident, contradicting an earlier statement by the regional authorities who had said that both the man's legs had been sectioned.
Earlier the train, which was carrying treated nuclear waste from the French plant at La Hague to Gorleben in northern Germany, was delayed for two hours near Nancy as police removed two protestors who had also chained themselves to the railway lines.
Senthille said that the man who died was not thought to have had links with this group.
The train, which left the retreatment plant at La Hague on Saturday evening, crossed on to German soil at 8:35 pm (1935GMT) Sunday, almost exactly 24 hours later.
It carries 12 containers of spent fuel and is the seventh such consignment to be sent back to Germany since 1996.
A member of protest group Nuclear Out, Gilbert Poirot, said about a dozen protesters had been involved, all of them French nationals.
"It appears that the demonstrators had not put in place safety measures destined to warn the convoy of their presence," he said.
The German Greens Party, which forms part of the German governing coalition, said it was stunned by the death of the demonstrator.
"We deeply regret this tragic death," a spokesman said, adding that he expected a thorough investigation be carried out into the incident.
It called on demonstrators not to risk their lives, an appeal echoed by another anti-nuclear group.
At Hitzacker, 30 kilometres (18 miles) from Gorleben, several hundred people gathered with candles and lanterns in a spontaneous tribute to the dead man.
A spokesman from French nuclear energy firm COGEMA, which manages La Hague nuclear plant said the incident was "a tragedy" and that officials organising the convoy had been "extremely shocked".
On Saturday thousands of anti-nuclear protestors had gathered in northern Germany to protest at the imminent arrival of the shipment.
After demonstrating in Danneberg market square on Saturday, protestors gathered at the railway station and also temporarily blocked the tracks to be used by the train.
From Dannenberg the consignment will be taken by road to Gorleben.
Anti-nuclear and environmental campaigners say the shipments are dangerous and that the waste will contaminate the water table at Gorleben.
Germany, which has no treatment facilities of its own, sends spent fuel rods for reprocessing at the La Hague plant before they are returned here for storage.
-------- india / pakistan
India still wary of China despite better ties
The News International
November 07, 2004
http://jang.com.pk/thenews/nov2004-daily/07-11-2004/world/w3.htm
NEW DELHI: The Indian defence ministry remains wary of its giant nuclear-armed neighbour China despite a recent improvement in ties. In its annual report issued late on Friday, the defence ministry said both countries had "stepped up efforts to build mutual trust and confidence" and were trying to resolve a long-running Himalayan border dispute. But it also noted India's long-standing concern about China's close alliance with arch-rival Pakistan, adding that Beijing had helped Islamabad develop its own nuclear missile programme.
"At the same time, China's close defence relationships with, and regular military assistance to, Pakistan, ... its build-up in the Tibet Autonomous Region, its military modernisation, its nuclear and missile arsenals and its continental and maritime aspirations, require observations," the ministry said. China and India agreed in March to strengthen ties between their armed forces, which fought a brief border war in 1962. The two sides also held "friendly" talks in July as part of an ongoing effort to demarcate their 3,500-km border. Each side claims the other is occupying parts of its land at opposite ends of their Himalayan border. But they are thought to be close to a deal to resolve the dispute. In another sign of warming ties between the world's two most populous countries, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao is expected to visit New Delhi early next year.
In the report, the defence ministry said Pakistan remained a source of "infiltration, cross-border terrorism, military adventurism, nuclear and missile posturing and threats" and was the main threat to peace and stability in the region.
It also defended India's need for an independent nuclear deterrent since the country was a not a member of any military alliance or strategic grouping, and faced a wide-spectrum of security challenges from terrorism to possible nuclear attack.
-------- iran
Preliminary Pact Reached on Iran Nukes
November 7, 2004
By ALI AKBAR DAREINI
Associated Press Writer
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/I/IRAN_NUCLEAR?SITE=DCTMS&SECTION=HOME
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) -- Hoping to avoid a U.N. showdown, Iran and the European Union's three big powers reached a preliminary agreement over Tehran's nuclear program, Iran's chief negotiator said Sunday.
Meanwhile, lawmakers in Iran's conservative-dominated parliament pushed for a bill banning the production of nuclear weapons in a gesture of building more international trust.
The preliminary agreement worked out in Paris with Britain, France and Germany could be finalized in the next few days, chief Iranian negotiator Hossein Mousavian told state-run Iranian television from the French capital, where talks wrapped up Saturday.
If approved, the deal would be a major breakthrough after months of threats and negotiations and could spare Iran from being taken before the U.N. Security Council, where the United States has warned it would seek to impose economic sanctions unless Tehran gives up all uranium enrichment activities, a technology that can produce nuclear fuel or atomic weapons.
Diplomats in Austria familiar with the talks outcome declined to discuss details. "One or two points remain outstanding, and they hope to resolve those outstanding points by Wednesday," one diplomat in Austria told The Associated Press.
In proposals to Iran last month, Britain, Germany and France offered a trade deal and peaceful nuclear technology - including a light-water research reactor - if Iran pledged to indefinitely suspend uranium enrichment and related activities such as reprocessing uranium and building centrifuges used to enrich it.
Europe and Washington fear Iran is trying to build nuclear weapons, but Tehran denies such claims, saying its atomic program has peaceful aims, including energy production.
"We had 22 hours of negotiations ... They were very difficult and complicated negotiations but we reached a preliminary agreement at the expert level," Mousavian said. He said the four countries must now ask their governments to approve the accord.
The preliminary agreement appeared to mark a dramatic breakthrough, since Iranian officials have resisted indefinite or long-term suspension of nuclear enrichment, a process that Iran is permitted to pursue under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, which Tehran has signed.
While not being in breach of the treaty, Iran is under heavy international pressure to drop such plans as a good faith gesture.
"If this is approved by all four parties, we will witness an important change in Iran's relations with Europe and much of the international community in (the) not-too-distant future," Mousavian said without elaborating on the agreement.
The Europeans had warned Iran that they will back Washington's threat to refer the Islamic republic to the U.N. Security Council for possible sanctions unless it gives up all uranium enrichment activities before a Nov. 25 meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna.
Tehran suspended uranium enrichment last year but has refused to stop other related activities such as reprocessing uranium or building centrifuges, insisting its program is intended purely for the production of fuel for nuclear power generation.
Meanwhile, lawmakers "are collecting support for a draft bill banning the production of nuclear weapons," legislator Mohmoud Mohammadi told The Associated Press.
Mohammadi, a former Foreign Ministry spokesman, said the bill could be presented to the parliament next week, adding that the draft was prompted by a religious verdict by Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
Khamenei, who has the final say on all state matters, has said that production, stockpiling and using nuclear weapons was un-Islamic and against human interests.
"Ayatollah Khamenei's verdict is clear," Mohammadi said. "So why not make the production of nuclear weapons illegal under Iranian law?"
--------
Envoys Report Progress in Iran Talks
Europeans Say Tehran Must Act Soon to Avoid U.N. Action on Nuclear Program
By Robin Wright and Dafna Linzer
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, November 7, 2004; Page A23
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A31048-2004Nov6.html
TEHRAN, Nov. 6 -- Two days of talks in Paris between Iranian and European delegations about Iran's nuclear program ended late Saturday without a formal agreement, but diplomats said progress had been made.
"After two days of very difficult discussions, we have made significant progress toward a provisional agreement," a senior Iranian envoy involved in the negotiations said on condition of anonymity in a telephone interview from Paris. "We all agree after these difficult talks on a common approach to the problem. . . . An agreement is attainable."
Chinese Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing, left, talks to Iranian President Mohammad Khatami in Tehran. China is increasing its trade with Iran. (Raheb Homavandi -- Reuters)
A nearly identical statement from the French Foreign Ministry, issued after 20 hours of intense negotiations, also noted "considerable progress."
The European delegation -- with members from Britain, France and Germany -- and the Iranians will consult with officials in their capitals over the next few days and then provide formal responses. No further meetings are envisioned, the Iranian envoy said. European envoys stressed that Iran must answer by the time the International Atomic Energy Agency takes the issue up Nov. 25.
The Europeans are trying to persuade Iran to suspend its uranium enrichment program indefinitely as a way to ensure that it does not use the technology to produce a nuclear weapon. Iran has insisted that the suspension be no longer than six months and on assurances that it would not be asked to permanently revoke its right to have a nuclear energy program, according to European envoys.
Iran has said its uranium enrichment facility is part of a peaceful nuclear fuel program. But the scale of its efforts, conducted in secret over 18 years, has left U.S., European and Israeli officials suspicious that Iran is ultimately seeking to produce a nuclear weapon.
The Europeans have offered Iran diplomatic and economic incentives to suspend nuclear work that could lead to producing a bomb. If no agreement is reached, the Europeans will join the United States in referring Iran to the U.N. Security Council, which could impose economic sanctions.
Throughout the negotiations, the Europeans have faced pressure from the Bush administration, which has made clear its preference to take the issue to the Security Council.
China signaled Saturday that it opposed any U.S. effort to take Iran to the council, a potential blow to the Bush administration's goal of pressuring Iran.
The Chinese foreign minister, Li Zhaoxing, on a two-day visit to Iran, said at a news conference in Tehran that he had informed Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw that confronting Iran at the United Nations would complicate efforts to find a solution.
China, which last month signed a multibillion-dollar gas deal with Iran, instead wants the issue settled at a lower level by the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. nuclear watchdog, Li said.
"I told all my colleagues that China supports a solution to this issue within the framework of the International Atomic Energy Agency," Li told reporters. Taking it to the Security Council "would only make the issue more complicated and difficult to work out," he said.
China, one of five members of the Security Council that wield veto power, holds a critical card in the looming debate about Iran's nuclear program. Iran and China have developed increasingly close ties, and China now receives about 17 percent of its oil from Iran and is rapidly becoming one of its largest trading partners.
Linzer reported from New York. Correspondent Glenn Frankel in Paris contributed to this report.
--------
Nuclear Talks With Iranians Said to Progress
November 7, 2004
By ELAINE SCIOLINO
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/07/international/middleeast/07iran.html?pagewanted=all
PARIS, Nov. 6 - Two days of negotiations between Iranian and European officials to curb Iran's uranium enrichment program made progress but ended Saturday without a formal agreement, European officials close to the discussion said.
The French foreign ministry spokesman, Hervé Ladsous, reported "considerable progress in reaching a provisional agreement" under which France, Britain, Germany and the European Union would provide economic, technological and political incentives in exchange for Iran's halting production of enriched uranium.
But officials stressed that the agreement had not been formally accepted by Iran and that the Iranian delegation would return home to Tehran for consultation on the issue.
The United Nations nuclear agency has given Iran a deadline of Nov. 25 to suspend its uranium enrichment program or have its case sent to the Security Council, where it could face economic penalties.
Iran has refused to suspend its uranium enrichment program for longer than six months and insists on its right to produce its own fuel.
It has said that its nuclear program will be used to generate electricity, though the United States contends that it could be used to produce nuclear weapons.
"The negotiations are complicated and difficult, but both sides are determined to continue the talks,'' Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi of Iran said Saturday at a news conference in Tehran. "We'll have to see where they will lead.
"It is in the interests of both sides that the issue be resolved in a way that Iran retains its legitimate right to use peaceful nuclear technology, and others are assured that Iran is not seeking nuclear weapons," he said.
In Tehran, Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing of China said Saturday that Beijing would oppose efforts to send the issue of Iran's nuclear program to the Security Council.
The move strengthened Iran's position in its dispute with the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Nazila Fathi contributed reporting from Tehran for this article.
-------- iraq / inspections
Missing Antiaircraft Missiles Alarm Aides
By Dana Priest and Bradley Graham
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, November 7, 2004; Page A24
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A31050-2004Nov6.html
Several thousand shoulder-fired missiles -- the kind that could be used to shoot down aircraft -- are missing in Iraq, and their disappearance has prompted U.S. military and intelligence analysts to increase sharply their estimate of the number of such weapons that may be at large, administration officials said yesterday.
Some U.S. analysts figure that as many as 4,000 surface-to-air missiles once under the control of Saddam Hussein's government remain unaccounted for. That would raise the number of such missiles outside government hands worldwide to about 6,000.
But a senior defense official said yesterday that military intelligence analysts are having difficulty estimating just how many of the portable missiles may have vanished and how many of those may be in working order and therefore a threat to U.S. and other aircraft.
"We don't have a good estimate," the official said. "Some have put forward some figures, but there is none that the Defense Intelligence Agency has confidence in."
Another official said government analysts could not say with any certainty whether the missing weapons remain in Iraq or have been smuggled outside the country. "There is no evidence that they have left the country," he said.
Still, other government officials said the threat that the Iraqi missiles could be used to target military or civilian aircraft remains a very real one. Concern about the Iraqi missiles was raised during a conference on aviation threats last week at the DIA's Missile and Space Intelligence Center in Huntsville, Ala. The new estimates, based on analysis done by the DIA and with the proliferation section of the CIA, were first reported yesterday by the New York Times.
The U.S.-led invasion forces did not secure all weapons depots in Iraq, and hundreds of thousands of tons of munitions were looted. U.S. officials fear that the shoulder-launched missiles were among the items carried off by groups willing to sell them on the black market to terrorist organizations.
Western intelligence officials have repeatedly warned of al Qaeda's desire to acquire the missiles for use against American and other airliners. The weapons are easy to hide and cost relatively little -- from less than $1,000 to $100,000 each.
In 2002, terrorists launched two Russian-made SA-7 missiles at a commercial airliner taking off from Mombasa, Kenya. The State Department estimated in 2003 that more than 40 aircraft have been struck by portable missiles since the 1970s, causing at least 24 crashes and more than 600 deaths worldwide.
U.S. officials have said thousands of antiaircraft missiles, most of them SA-7s, were looted from Iraqi army stockpiles and remain unaccounted for. The U.S. military initiated a buyback program for surface-to-air missiles in August 2003, paying as much as $500 apiece. Although hundreds were acquired, military officials have said that thousands remain in circulation.
Three months after the start of the buyback program, in November 2003, a U.S. Army CH-47 Chinook transport helicopter packed with soldiers was hit by a missile west of Baghdad, killing 16 soldiers and wounding 20. At the time, the attack marked the deadliest single assault on U.S. forces since the invasion of Iraq in March 2003.
Since the 1950s, 20 countries have developed or produced more than 30 different types of portable missiles, with between 500,000 and 750,000 weapons believed to be in the worldwide inventory today, according to a report in May by the General Accounting Office, now known as the Government Accountability Office.
The report, "Nonproliferation: Further Improvements Needed in U.S. Efforts to Counter Threats from Man-Portable Air Defense Systems," cited official U.S. figures estimating a few thousand manually portable missiles outside government control.
But, the report added, the government "estimates that thousands more under government controls may be vulnerable to theft and possible transfer to terrorist groups because they are not subject to stringent national export standards nor do they have adequate physical security or inventory controls."
Researcher Meg Smith contributed to this report.
-------- japan
PM says Japan military must contribute to global safety
TOKYO (AFP)
Nov 07, 2004
http://www.spacewar.com/2004/041107071021.f81gf3ry.html
Japan's armed forces must contribute to global peace to secure safety at home, Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi said Sunday amid signs his government will extend an unpopular military deployment in Iraq.
"(The Self-Defense Forces') international contributions have come to be highly praised both at home and abroad," Koizumi said in a speech at a military parade.
"From now on, to secure our own country's safety and prosperity, it is necessary to positively contribute to the peace and stability of the international community," said Koizumi, a fervent supporter of the US-led "war on terror."
The beheading last month of a Japanese hostage in Iraq, after Koizumi rejected demands to withdraw Japanese troops, has fuelled a debate about whether the soldiers should extend their mission past December 14.
A recent Asahi Shimbun poll showed 63 percent of Japanese oppose extending the troop's one-year mission beyond next month.
Around 550 Japanese troops on a non-combat humanitarian mission are based in the southern Iraqi city of Samawa, Japan's first military deployment since World War II to a country where there is active fighting.
The chief of Japan's Defense Agency, Director-General Yoshinori Ono, told a morning television program that a decision on the mission would be made with "the security situation and prospect for Iraq's reconstruction" in mind.
He suggested troops could stay in Iraq until the end of next year.
"The multinational forces' term in Iraq ends at the end of next year according to UN Security Council resolution 1546," Ono said.
"By then, nation-building should be clear. That is the most important thing. That is why the new year's elections in Iraq must be made to succeed."
Main opposition leader Katsuya Okada of the Democratic Party of Japan renewed a call for the soldiers to be withdrawn.
"We have said the SDF should withdraw, even before December 14, and have opposed the dispatch. That has not changed," Okada told the same program.
The parade featuring 4,200 troops in red scarves and camouflage fatigues, along with 230 military vehicles and 60 aircraft, was held at the SDF's Asaka base just northwest of Tokyo.
Before Koizumi's arrival a sound similar to that of a gunshot was heard close to the base, police said.
Police began investigating whether the firing was the work of extremists after finding two metal tubes and a fuse in a wooded area pointed at the base, Jiji Press reported. No one was apparently injured, it said.
Police said they found a five centimeter (two-inch) diameter metal-like object less than a kilometer (0.6 miles) south of the base.
"We are looking into whether this object was fired," said Saitama police spokesman Yasuo Kazama.
Japan's military is called the Self-Defense Forces because its pacifist constitution rejects the use of force. The forces turned 50 years old on July 1 this year.
--------
Love her or hate her...
One woman's single-handed efforts to make the world a better place are an inspiration to many.
But when she faced execution as a hostage in Iraq, her fellow Japanese overwhelmingly heaped scorn and derision upon her
The Japan Times
By Nao Shimoyachi
Nov. 7, 2004
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/getarticle.pl5?fl20041107x1.htm
Nahoko Takato became famous on the night of April 8 this year, when the Arab satellite broadcaster Al-Jazeera aired video footage of her and two other Japanese held blindfolded at gunpoint in Iraq.
The 34-year-old volunteer worker had been captured in Fallujah -- along with photojournalist Soichiro Koriyama and freelance writer Noriaki Imai -- by militiamen who demanded the withdrawal of Japan's Self-Defense Force troops from Iraq as a condition of their release.
With public opinion in Japan already split down the middle by the dispatch of those troops in February, the plight of the three civilian hostages took center stage in a renewed national debate over the government's decision to contribute to U.S. President George W. Bush's "coalition of the willing.''
However, despite the Japanese government rejecting the captors' demand, the hostages were released unharmed after being held for nine days. During that time, Takato repeatedly pleaded that she had been working to help Iraqi children and was not an enemy of the Iraqi people.
Her release, though, was not to be the end of Takato's ordeal. After returning to Japan, she suffered severe stress disorder caused not so much by having been a captive, but more because of harsh public criticism that the three had been irresponsible to enter Iraq despite a Japanese government warning to civilians not to do so.
A native of Chitose in Hokkaido -- the home base for most of the initial contingent of troops sent to Iraq -- Takato grew up in an environment where, in her 40-student elementary-school class, "all but two were from SDF families." Four years ago, at age 30, she quit her job running a karaoke shop and went to Calcutta in India to do volunteer work with the Missionaries of Charity founded by the late Mother Teresa. She also spent time at hospices for AIDS patients in Thailand and Cambodia.
Takato went to Iraq for the first time in May 2003. Since then, she has worked with local people to organize the provision of medical supplies to hospitals in cities such as Fallujah and Ramadi, and has also helped street children in Baghdad. It was during her fourth stay in Iraq that she was taken hostage.
Takato has recently resumed her work for Iraqi people, using some of the 8 million yen left from money sent to the three former hostages from people across Japan. Although the volatile security situation now prevents her entering Iraq itself, she spent both August and October in Amman, Jordan, coordinating her new projects to rebuild schools in Fallujah and provide job training for street children in Baghdad.
While now being deeply wary of the Japanese media, Takato granted The Japan Times this exclusive interview before flying out once more to Jordan in late September. This week, she also responded by telephone to comment on last weekend's execution of the 24-year-old Japanese hostage Shosei Koda in Iraq.
It is roughly six months since you were taken hostage in Iraq. How do you feel now about your time in captivity?
Before that, I was always asking myself what I could do. But now, I feel more like, "You have to do this." I feel more obligations. Even if I get a job here in Japan, or go back to India, or wherever I go, the experience of having been taken hostage will never leave me.
I was derided by the Japanese people. I was told, "You are sticking your nose into something you have not been asked to do." But if I tried to avoid such criticism in the future, I would never be able to move on, never feel at ease, never get back to my normal life. I can't even fall in love in this state. Things are different now.
Are you still struggling with all that?
The incident had a huge impact and made me aware of a lot of things. One is how Japanese regard people who work for other countries. Yes, I had been told that I was neglecting domestic issues. There is that kind of a culture here. But even when I helped to make Braille books and read out aloud for blind people in Japan, I was told -- in a sarcastic tone -- "How admirable!"
I have also become more aware of the value of human life. I knew about other people's deaths: those of friends and AIDS sufferers. Then, that became about my life too, and I have started thinking about human life through my own life. When I grasped the hands of those dying whom I cared for in India, Thailand and Cambodia, I could feel that human souls never die even if their bodies do.
This feeling has become stronger after the [kidnapping] incident because I might well have been killed. But we -- Imai, Koriyama and I -- all knew too well that our captors had suffered a lot in the past year, too.
Is that what you were thinking when you were being held? Weren't you scared?
Of course I was scared. I couldn't stay rational when I was captured. I froze. When you are in real shock, you can't do anything. The most horrible part was the video shoot. Before that, we [three hostages and our Iraqi captors] were in a good mood, talking about local restaurants and other stuff. I had a hope that we might be able to get out soon. Then, heavily armed men came in and they were so angry! I was scared, but I had known Iraqis were in a terrible situation since before I entered Iraq.
When I learned in an Internet cafe that two Japanese diplomats were killed in Tikrit last November, I cried a lot and Iraqis in the cafe asked me why I was crying. When I told them why, they asked me back, "Do you know how many Spanish were killed on the same day? What about Iraqis? Americans?" They told me that's what a war is about. I was ashamed of myself because that reminded me I was acting like a foreigner, even after I had witnessed so many Iraqis dying terrible deaths.
You avoided appearing in the media very much, and stayed at home for months after the incident. What were you thinking during that period?
The only people I could share my feelings with were those who knew Iraq, who had been there. When I started talking about Iraq, I couldn't control myself. I kept talking about what was happening in Fallujah and how many died in Fallujah, things like that.
There was a critical information gap. Fallujah is seen as a den of vice by the rest of the world. I wanted Japanese people to know what was really happening there.
Fallujah was the first city I visited when I went to Iraq for the first time in May 2003. There, I heard from Iraqis who had been marching peacefully in protest against Americans occupying a local elementary school, about their being shot at by American troops. About 18 people were killed. How can Americans do that? I have American friends. I could not believe what I saw at the hospital there.
What I most wanted to convey during the period when I largely shut myself away at home was why the hostage-taking happened: the background to it. People kept asking me about the incident, but I wanted to talk more about why it happened.
Hostage-taking continues in Iraq, and some hostages have been killed, including Shosei Koda who was beheaded last weekend. What is your view on this, and what do you think of the hostage-takers?
I never met Shosei Koda. I don't know how and with what feelings he entered Iraq. So, I can't comment on that. When I was captured, many different people -- old friends I hadn't seen for ages, and people I had never even met -- spoke about me. The result is a totally different Nahoko Takato. I don't want to do the same thing to other people myself.
What I believe is that there are no national boundaries where human life is concerned. You can't say which life is good and which life is bad. This is an issue of human life.
As for the hostage-taking in general, it isn't known who is really behind it. I guess our case was one of a few, including the one in April involving Junpei Yasuda and Nobutaka Watanabe, that were the result of pure resistance -- I mean resistance movements by local Iraqis. In the cases after that period, such as the killing of South Korean Kim Sun Il in June, I think foreign fighters were playing no small part. Things are getting complicated.
Let me make this clear. Fallujah was the first place where, as early as April, people stood up against American occupation after the fall of Baghdad. I guess foreign fighters crept in around that time, taking advantage of the mess and lack of international attention.
Why do you think the situation in Iraq has become so bad?
That's because all foreigners -- the occupation forces, the foreign radicals and people like me -- just haven't cared enough about the condition of postwar Iraq. We should have noticed that the situation never improved after the war. A faint sign was there early on, but no one paid attention. Information has been very limited and international opinion stands by the aggressors: the Japanese, the Americans, the British, all of them.
I blame myself for not having made enough effort to let people know the facts. I was shocked that some reporters did not know the name of Fallujah until the hostage incident, whereas the city had always been at the center of the Iraq problem.
Why did you start volunteer work?
From being young, I never had a clear image of any profession I wanted to follow. They always ask you what you want to become when you grow up, you know. I had a clear image of what I wanted to be, but that was not connected to a particular profession. I have great respect for Seiho Tajiri [head of the Japanese-African American Society in Atlanta, Ga., who had been living in the U.S. for 40 years when, in 1993, Takato says she "learned how to live" by following him around "carrying his bag" for a year] and Mother Teresa, whose ways of life do not fall into a certain category of profession. I was also interested in Buddha, not the religious Buddha but the private Buddha when he was still Siddhartha: how he agonized over people's suffering, poverty and illness and forsook everything he had to search for the meaning of life. I wanted to find an ideal way of life rather than live for a profession.
Why did you choose to go to India?
I had several other options. I wanted to go to Africa very much, and I was interested in Vietnam, too. When I quit my job at 30, I made up my mind that I would stay someplace for at least a year. Then I saw a video of Mother Teresa, which greatly inspired me. Plus, her organization accepts all people regardless of religion. If you want to work there, all you have to do is turn up and give your name and address. Of course, you have to listen to what they have to say before starting your work, though (laughs).
What motivates you to offer your own time, money and effort to other people?
In the end, it is all for myself and, perhaps, for my family. We never went a day without quarrels. My parents and I were very bad at expressing love. We can't be honest about our feelings when we are close. When we are apart, I think about my parents and write letters to them. Things go smoothly.
In Japan, I was wearing "armor," especially when I was running the karaoke shop. I was in fighting mode because, you know, I had to make a profit (laughs). I got really tired of controlling my feelings in such a way, and I started wanting to be alone.
I stopped wearing that armor when I went to India. When you are with lovely orphans and see people dying, you can't control your feelings. Lots of feelings just poured out of me: I wanted to love those kids, I felt sad, I felt lonely. And I didn't have to control those feelings. I finally found myself at ease.
But it was more than that this time [after her captors released her and Takato returned to Japan]. I have never cried so hard before.
What do you mean?
I had a lot of feelings swirling around inside me. I cried when thinking about the people in Fallujah. I was very frustrated and sad. I felt powerless. I also felt sorry for my family. I was sad when Japanese people spurned me. I cried and cried. I didn't know anyone could cry as much as I did. The only memories I have about that time are of me crying. I don't remember what I was doing or where I was sleeping at home. I don't even remember that Imai came to see me. There is an SDF drill site just across from my house and the sounds of the SDF exercises and shells brought back what happened in Iraq. I would pull a duvet over me to try to shut out the noises.
How else were you affected by the criticism you faced in Japan?
I can't help feeling powerless when I think of people in Fallujah. I survived while thousands of people died. I survived, but I had been shutting myself away at home. I blame myself when I read news reports about Fallujah.
I fell into a cycle of self-disgust and started feeling that the people who accused me were right. All I had done in Iraq felt meaningless. My soul was completely destroyed. I wondered why I had to live. I was nothing more than a physical object in which blood was circulating.
How did you recover from that state?
I received a lot of letters of encouragement, not only from Japan but from abroad. There were Americans who even asked me to come over to their homes for a change. But the biggest factor was when I opened my e-mail inbox for the first time in a while and found e-mails from Iraqis.
Why do you act as an individual rather than participating in a group?
People often say they can't help because they can't speak English, because they don't belong to an NGO, because they don't have nursing qualifications. I was labeled as a "volunteer activist" by the media. What is that? "Volunteer" and "activist" have totally different meanings. When I saw those news articles, I was afraid people might think I was doing that kind of stuff because I am an activist. I hated it. Our daily lives are connected with international society: Every action, from drinking juice to eating a hamburger. After they had killed 1.5 million people, the United Nations recently lifted the economic sanctions imposed on Iraq. Who are the member states? It's us. Even if you are not a doctor, nurse or NGO member, there should be something you can do. I wanted to be sure and show that there was something I could do.
Do you think an individual can make a difference?
Individuals run organizations. An organization involves "dry" parts, such as fundraising and info-collection. Take a humanitarian operation -- you can't do anything with that dry part alone. When you don't have a tractor and need one, you might have to negotiate with local people. There are a lot of "wet" parts. And I think those wet parts are very important.
The same can be said of a nation. The government thinks from the point of view of the national interest. But at the same time, it shouldn't neglect individuals. A nation is not only about a flag. It has to include individuals.
What do you think of the Japanese government deploying the SDF troops in Iraq?
There is no doubt that Iraqis need international assistance. But I feel the military side is too prominent in delivering humanitarian assistance in Iraq. For Iraqis, a military force is a military force. When a U.S. Humvee arrived at a local school to deliver notebooks, kids stepped back. Teachers and staff members went home. The American soldiers were not going to kill them, they were doing humanitarian work. But, still, they were scary. The same can be said of Iraqis. I saw Iraqi girls shrink away when they saw Mujahedeens holding guns. Men in military fatigues with guns are scary for Iraqis because they have had so many horrible experiences due to the military.
So, what do you think Japan should do?
I think there are a lot of things Japan can do as the sole victim nation of atomic bombs. My friends asked Iraqi students about depleted uranium, and 90 percent of those asked knew about it: that it causes diseases and that it affects farm products that harm our bodies if we eat them. As the only nation to have experienced the horror of atomic bombs, Japan should help to study the situation, find out ways to solve the problems and clear the contamination all over the land -- if the SDF has that ability.
What are you going to do in Jordan?
I have two projects. One is to rebuild schools in Fallujah. I wanted to do something at the place where I was taken hostage and where, at the same time, a lot of people were being killed. This is a kind of tribute project to the people of Fallujah. But we can't enter Fallujah. The situation is getting worse and worse. The aerial bombing never stops and Iraqi friends tell me half the population has fled and now live in poultry sheds and suburban resort hotels. We were scheduled to start work on a school on Aug. 31, but we could not. One of the important purposes of this project is to create jobs and stop young Iraqis from becoming fighters in the war. So I didn't want our project to be stalled. As a result, we are thinking of rebuilding a school in Ramadi where the situation looks calm now. And when the situation improves in Fallujah, we will move there and rebuild schools there.
The other project is giving vocational training to street children in Baghdad. Our job-training programs for them have taken off -- at a barber's shop, a carpenter's shop, a steel factory and a blacksmith's workshop. Some are learning how to cook.
Do you want to go back to Iraq someday?
Yes. I do very much because I have such a strong tie to Iraqis now. This is more than sympathy for Iraqis. It was a fatal encounter. If I look at the hostage incident in a positive way, I think I was shaken by Iraqis who said, "You saw the tragedy of Fallujah. You heard the tragedy of Fallujah. Now it is time for you to understand it with your body."
My connection with Fallujah is such that I can never ever say goodbye just because security is bad in Iraq. My dream is to attend the weddings of the boys [street children she has cared for]. I really want to be there when they get married.
What are your long-term plans?
Other than Iraq? My mind is now preoccupied with Iraq. But I think I will live in Japan in the future. It's just that I am not strong enough to live in Japan now. I don't get complained about in India and Iraq for what I do. But in Japan I can't bear it when people keep asking me, "Why do you have to go abroad?" "Are you crazy working in a dangerous country like Iraq?" "What is volunteer work?"
What would you like to do in Japan? I want to open a free school for drug users and dropouts. Then, I want to do agriculture and farming. I don't mean commercial agriculture, but growing some vegetables and milking cows in a field near my house. This is to do with my own experiences. I think I must consider why I needed glue-sniffing and pills and why it was that I was able to quit them.
When did you take drugs?
I started when I was a sixth-grader. I quit when I was 16. At my junior high school many of the boys belonged to motorcycle gangs and girls started working or got married soon after graduation. I was among the few who went to high school. I was angry at everything around me: parents, teachers and society. I realized that when I saw street boys in Baghdad yelling, "There is nothing interesting in the world!" I was able to get out of that game when I found something interesting other than sniffing glue. It was a music band I joined at high school. A natural high makes you far happier than using drugs.
Is that what you tell the street children in Baghdad?
No way! Hopped-up boys would never listen to a story like that. I don't get mad if I catch them sniffing glue. But I blow up when I catch them wasting food or breaking a promise. I overdo it, using broken Iraqi, because I believe it's important to make them understand that I am angry.
But you are trying to straighten those Iraqi boys out, aren't you?
I didn't set out to help them directly. I just showed them there is an exit. The first step was to win their trust. I visited the boys every day, sitting next to them, listening to their stories, smoking and singing together. I had to show that I wasn't going to abandon them. That seriousness and devotion was necessary. Then I rented a house and invited them over to have them take a shower. I told them to wash their clothes, fold them and wear them again. When you live in the streets, you don't wash your clothes. You throw away things easily. I tried to get them to understand a rehabilitation process through washing. When they clean themselves up, they become interested in fashion. They go to the market to find nice clothes. Adults see them differently, which gives the boys confidence. As a result, they now spend less time sniffing glue.
What would you do if you were captured in Iraq again? How would you want your family and the government to act?
I will probably be dead next time. But even if I was killed, I think my family would happily tell you that they had no complaint about that because Nahoko knew what she was doing.
-------- korea
S. Korea Urges U.S. To Push for Arms Talks
Reuters
Sunday, November 7, 2004; Page A23
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A31049-2004Nov6.html
SEOUL, Nov 6 -- South Korean President Roh Moo Hyun telephoned President Bush to propose that solving the nuclear crisis involving North Korea be a priority for Bush's second term in office.
Bush agreed on the need to push forward with stalled six-party talks on ending North Korea's nuclear weapons programs, the Blue House, South Korea's executive quarters, said in a statement.
"President Roh proposed making the North's nuclear problem a joint project to solve with close cooperation and to lay the groundwork for peace on the Korean Peninsula and in the world," it said.
"The two leaders agreed to strengthen efforts to hold the six-way talks as soon as possible," the statement added.
China, the United States, North and South Korea, Japan and Russia agreed in June to hold a fourth round of six-way talks in September involving senior diplomats to try to end the North's nuclear programs.
The discussions never took place, with Pyongyang appearing to stall while it waited for the outcome of the U.S. presidential election.
-------- terrorism
Terrorists trying to get their hands on nuclear weapons, Australia warns
SYDNEY (AFP)
Nov 07, 2004
http://www.spacewar.com/2004/041107022608.c7v6lke0.html
Terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda and Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) are trying to obtain nuclear weapons and will not hesitate to use them, Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer warned Sunday.
Speaking ahead of a two-day conference on regional nuclear proliferation starting here Monday, Downer said although JI was yet to get its hands on atomic weapons, it would not give up trying.
"There's absolutely no doubt that terrorists, or at least some terrorists, are endeavouring to get hold of nuclear materials as well as other forms of weapons of mass destruction," he told commercial television.
"We don't have any evidence that for example that Jemaah Islamiyah is trying to do that, but we do in the Middle East that organisations like al-Qaeda are."
Downer said it was clear JI had no problem targeting innocent victims as it had in the Bali bombings which claimed 202 lives, including 88 Australians, in October, 2002.
"Obviously, any organisation that is prepared to wipe people out, young people enjoying themselves, wipe them out in Bali, is an organisation that wouldn't stop short of using at least some sort of more vicious and more dangerous weapons.
"I think in the interests of the region and the interest of humanity we need to make a very big effort to stop the proliferation of these systems." Downer said the conference was a chance to seek common approaches to the treatment of nuclear materials.
The conference, likely to be dominated by questions surrounding North Korea's nuclear ambitions, will be attended by government ministers and the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei.
"This is about getting countries in our region to try to develop common approaches to dealing with questions such as nuclear security, that's the security of nuclear facilities of one kind or another that they themselves have," he said.
It was also about finding ways to stop inappropriate exports of material which could contribute to proliferation.
Downer said questions surrounding nuclear material in North Korea, Iraq and Iran highlighted the need to develop strong and consistent approaches.
"There is absolutely no consensus on how to handle these questions," he said. "There's no consensus in detail how to handle, for example, sensitive exports. There's no consensus on how to handle nuclear materials internally."
-------- u.s. nuc facilities
-------- washington
Court Rejects Early Decision on Radioactive Sludge Tanks
November 7, 2004
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/07/national/07nuke.html?oref=login
YAKIMA, Wash., Nov. 6 (AP) - A federal appeals court ruled Friday that it was too early to decide whether the Energy Department should be allowed to leave radioactive sludge in underground tanks in Washington State instead of shipping it to a central repository.
The court overturned a lower-court ruling favorable to environmental groups and American Indian tribes that had sued to block the Energy Department's plans. The lawsuit claims combining the sludge with concrete grout - as the government plans for Idaho, South Carolina and Washington State - could endanger groundwater and rivers.
The Energy Department says some highly radioactive residue in the waste tanks is too expensive to extract and proposes reclassifying it as less dangerous, combining it with grout and leaving it in place.
Although the lawsuit cites all three states, the ruling affects only Washington because Congress approved a measure this year allowing the reclassification for South Carolina and Idaho.
Friday's ruling overturned one last year by a federal judge in Idaho who barred the Energy Department from reclassifying the waste. Washington and several other states filed briefs with the appellate court, asking it to uphold the Idaho decision.
The appeals court said it was too soon to know if the Energy Department's plans violated the 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act. Waiting would be no greater danger "than the one already imposed by our high-level-waste Frankenstein," said a panel of three judges of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Elliott Negin, spokesman for one of the plaintiffs, the Natural Resources Defense Council, said the group did not regard the ruling as a defeat. "All it said is that the timing is off," Mr. Negin said.
Colleen French, an Energy Department spokeswoman, said the agency was reviewing the ruling and would not comment.
As much as 100 million gallons of nuclear waste were stored over the years in 239 tanks in the three states. Some of it has been removed and processed for permanent disposal, but about 85 million gallons remain to be processed.
Critics said that leaving any waste in those tanks would threaten the Columbia River at the Hanford nuclear reservation as well as the Snake River aquifer under the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory and the groundwater at the Savannah River Site in South Carolina.
About 53 million gallons of highly radioactive waste from World War II and cold-war-era plutonium production is buried in Hanford's 177 aging underground tanks.
An estimated 67 tanks have leaked radioactive brew into the soil, contaminating the aquifer and threatening the Columbia River.
-------- MILITARY
-------- afghanistan
US defies protests to poison Afghan poppies
independent.co.uk
By Nick Meo in Kabul
07 November 2004
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia/story.jsp?story=580336
The US is preparing to destroy Afghanistan's opium poppy crop from the air next spring, before it can be harvested, brushing aside objections from aid agencies.
The operation, modelled on controversial efforts to wipe out cocaine-growing in Colombia, reflects growing concern in Washington that the opium trade is financing al-Qa'ida-linked terrorist groups and posing a grave threat to the region's stability. Hundreds of private security contractors and pilots will be hired to spray herbicides from low-flying aircraft.
Senior American officials barely disguise their impatience with British-led efforts at eradication, which have failed to stop a massive increase in Afghan poppy-growing. An annual UN report out next week will show a 64 per cent increase in the area planted over the past year.
"It's time the stick was wielded and farmers understood there is a risk if they plant opium," said a Western official in Kabul. "Some of them will have a rough time, but there simply has to be enough eradication that farmers see risk attached to this business."
Eradication missions are likely to begin in February or March in the southern province of Helmand, although it has not yet been decided whether to begin with an experiment in one area or launch the operation across the country. An American-led campaign targeting drug barons is also expected to start in the next few weeks, with US officials promising to extradite any who can be linked to heroin smuggled into America.
The Pentagon has over-ridden objections from USAid, the official American aid organisation, as well as Britain's Department for International Development.
US troops have expressed fears of being dragged into a drugs war, in which Britain's 1,700 soldiers in Afghanistan could also be embroiled. Britain is also expected to have a major intelligence role in anti-narcotics operations.
A Colombia-style operation in Afghanistan could spark rural rebellions, increase support for the Taliban's insurgency and perhaps cause damage to the environment and health, according to critics. They fear that destroying a crop on which an estimated two million farmers and their families now depend for their livelihoods could impoverish whole provinces without stopping the massive flow of heroin to Europe.
The herbicide glyphosate, used in Colombia, is reported to have caused severe skin rashes and other illnesses. If it is accidentally sprayed over legitimate crops, innocent farmers could suffer, and local famines might result.
Critics complain that little is being done to warn farmers that their crops will be destroyed, even though it could make them decide against planting poppies this month. "If this is to be effective they should be showing farmers that they are really serious," one agriculture expert said. "The best way to combat poppy cultivation is to dissuade farmers from growing it in the first place.
"The other step is disrupting the smuggling networks and the seven or eight big figures who control the opium smuggling business. Afghans might have more faith in anti-narcotics measures if pressure was put on the big fish."
Many analysts believe Plan Colombia, the US-funded war against the cocaine trade, has proved ineffective. Much of the trade has relocated to neighbouring countries, and the price of cocaine in America has remained the same.
The five-year, $3.3bn campaign provides training, equipment and intelligence in return for the extradition of 120 alleged drug dealers to the US. In Afghanistan, Britain has helped to train counter-narcotics forces, including the much-praised Force 333, which has already destroyed heroin laboratories.
----
Afghan Militants Hold Talks on Hostages, but No Deal Yet
November 7, 2004
By CARLOTTA GALL
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/07/international/asia/07cnd-afgh.html?pagewanted=all
KABUL, Afghanistan, Nov. 7 - Militants holding three foreign United Nations workers in Afghanistan said that they had held negotiations with officials from the Afghan government and the United Nations in southern Afghanistan today, but that the meeting had ended without result.
A senior government security official confirmed that the talks had taken place but that they had ended inconclusively.
The hostages were thought to have been moved from the Kabul area to the region close to the Pakistani border, he said.
A spokesman for the kidnappers told news agencies that his group had handed over a list of 25 prisoners being held in Afghanistan whom they wanted released, and that talks would resume Tuesday. Afghan and United Nations officials had traveled to the meeting with his group, he said.
He added that his group, a splinter group from the Taliban movement called Jaish-e-Muslimeen, or Army of Muslims, may drop its more extreme demands if the government releases the prisoners. The change of tone has led government officials and diplomats to hope that the group is prepared to negotiate a way out and not stage a brutal beheading as militant groups have done in Iraq. One foreign official in Kabul said ransom money was being discussed.
The kidnappers had threatened to kill the three hostages: a British-Irish woman, Annetta Flanigan; a Kosovo Albanian woman, Shqipe Habibi; and a Filipino diplomat, Angelito Nayan, who had been assigned to the United Nations to work on elections in Afghanistan. The three were kidnapped Oct. 28 in broad daylight on a busy Kabul street. A week ago, the militants released a video of the three in captivity.
The militants have called for the withdrawal of the United Nations mission and British and American troops from Afghanistan and the release of all prisoners who express allegiance to the former Taliban rulers of Afghanistan and Al Qaeda being held in Afghanistan and Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.
Senior government and religious leaders have condemned the kidnapping. The minister of the Hajj pilgrimage, Mohammad Amin Naseryar, and Professor Abdul Rasul Sayyaf, leader of one of the mujahedeen parties, both condemned the abduction today, saying it was against Islam to harm people who had come to help bring peace to the country.
The government, together with the local mobile phone company, the Afghan Wireless Communications Company, sent out thousands of text messages urging anyone who had information on the hostages' whereabouts to call a secure phone line.
Senior officials and diplomats said that while they were concerned for the fate of the three hostages, they feared that any deal involving money or release of prisoners would only encourage other criminals to stage similar abductions in the future, endangering all foreigners and prominent Afghans in the country.
-------- africa
Eritrean authorities deny reports 20 died in prison "incidents"
ASMARA (AFP)
Nov 07, 2004
http://www.spacewar.com/2004/041107145025.kwzmv0dx.html
The Eritrean government denied on Sunday reports that many people had been killed early Sunday at a prison where people who have avoided military service are detained.
"I can't say there were no incidents, but to say that some 20 people had died is totally exaggerated," Eritrean Information Minister Ali Abdu told AFP by telephone in Asmara on Sunday.
Earlier on Sunday, a high-ranking diplomat, who asked not to be named, told AFP: "I spoke to a direct witness, who told me 25 people were killed by guards during a prison riot" at Adi Abieto jail near Asmara.
An Eritrean opposition website asmarino.com had earlier reported that "guards had started the shooting, killing over 20 detainees."
"It is natural to have some kind of incident because some of the detainees were gangsters. I don't have the details of the operation," Ali Abdu said.
The roundup on Thursday was aimed at catching "gangsters" in order "to preserve security" in Eritrea, "we found gangsters" who were imprisoned, he added, stressing that it is a "national security affair and it is not other people or diplomats' business."
Eritrean authorities are conducting roundups to "target the very few" who have not done their military service, Ali Abdu told AFP on Thursday, but added on Sunday that the aim was also to find "gangsters".
In Eritrea, "we have a very low crime rate" and "we want to preserve security" in the country, he said.
Several young Eritreans, who asked not to be named, told AFP on Thursday: "These roundups started in 1998. They were severe during the war. Since 2002, they had been declining, but right now they're increasing. Soldiers go into offices, houses, stop cars, taxis, buses, and ask for identity cards." Eritrean authorities are rounding up people who have avoided military service.Weapons of microelectronic destruction
Last of four parts In an age of global terrorism, directed energy may represent the kind of adaptive technology Defence R&D Canada needs. Find out where it might appear outside the military
--------
Ivory Coast erupts in attacks on French
November 07, 2004
By Parfait Kouassi
ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20041107-121425-4653r.htm
ABIDJAN, Ivory Coast - French troops clashed with soldiers and angry mobs yesterday after Ivory Coast warplanes killed at least nine French peacekeepers and an American civilian in an air strike - mayhem that threatened to draw foreign troops deeper into the West African country's escalating civil war.
France hit back, destroying what it said was the entire Ivory Coast air force - two Russian-made Sukhoi jets used in the bombing and five helicopter gunships. France scrambled three Mirage fighter jets to West Africa and ordered about 300 troops to be readied for deployment in Ivory Coast.
Mob violence erupted in Ivory Coast's national commercial capital, Abidjan, after France's retaliation. Thousands of angry loyalists armed with machetes, axes and clubs ran into the streets in fiery rampages in search of French targets.
"French go home," loyalist mobs shouted, as thousands set fire to at least two French schools and tried to storm a French military base, seeking out French civilians as French and Ivory Coast forces briefly traded gunfire.
"Everybody get your Frenchman," young men screamed to each other, swinging machetes.
French Defense Minister Michele Alliot-Marie said Ivory Coast President Laurent Gbagbo would be "held personally responsible by the international community for [maintaining] the public order in Abidjan."
The U.N. Security Council, convening in emergency session, demanded an immediate halt to all military action in Ivory Coast and emphasized that U.N. and French forces here were authorized to use "all necessary means" to keep the peace.
French U.N. Ambassador Jean-Marc de La Sabliere said he will draft a resolution to impose an arms embargo on Ivory Coast. Paris also will seek to impose U.N. sanctions against those blocking the peace process, violating human rights and preventing the disarmament of fighters, he said.
Hard-liners in Ivory Coast's military broke a more than year-old cease-fire, launching surprise air strikes Thursday against rebel positions and vowing to retake the northern part of the country held by rebels since the civil war began in 2002.
Government officials said yesterday's air strike that hit a French peacekeeper position was an accident - but the violence highlighted the nationalist fervor in the pro-government south.
Many there resent the French troops, suspecting them of siding with rebels, even though the peacekeepers have protected government troops in the past. France has about 4,000 troops in Ivory Coast, and a separate U.N. peacekeeping force numbers around 6,000.
A French defense ministry spokesman said on the condition of anonymity that the United States had shown "great understanding about France's concerns in Ivory Coast." But he did not know whether U.S. military assistance had been sought.
The U.N. force includes thousands of West African troops, with the rest coming from an array of contributing nations, none American.
Yesterday's violence began when government warplanes struck French positions at Brobo, near the northern town of Bouake, U.N. military spokesman Philippe Moreux said.
Eight French soldiers were killed and 30 others wounded, French Defense Ministry spokesman Jean-Francois Bureau said in Paris. An American citizen also was killed in the raid, the French presidency said without elaborating.
A ninth French soldier died of his wounds, Mr. de La Sabliere said in New York.
Council diplomats said the American who was killed was believed to have worked for a nongovernmental organization and to have been at the French base.
-------- asia
Exercise Displays Japan's Ambitions
Seeking New International Stature, Government Departs From Pacifist Past
Washington Post
By Anthony Faiola
November 7, 2004
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A31046-2004Nov6?language=printer
YOKOSUKA, Japan -- As salty winds gusted off Tokyo Bay, a crack unit of Japanese commandos ascended the starboard ladder of a ship in a simulated hunt for weapons of mass destruction. They secured and patted down the crew, then searched the docked vessel until they uncovered its hidden cargo -- a mock stash of sarin gas.
The training exercise late last month was all for the cameras. Japan, along with Australia, France and the United States, was showcasing its willingness to prevent the transit of weapons by terrorists and renegade states, particularly North Korea. But for Japan, a country that since World War II has eschewed any impression as an aggressor, the decision to take a leading role in a high-profile military exercise marked a rare display of force. It underscored another mission: to redefine this nation as more than just an economic power.
Seeking a more assertive role on the world stage, the Japanese government is now in the midst of a campaign to win a permanent seat on the U.N. Security Council and transform its Self-Defense Forces into a full military. Key to the changes is a push by the ruling Liberal Democratic Party to alter the country's pacifist constitution, which renounces war. For the last nine months, 600 noncombat Japanese troops have been stationed in Iraq, the country's most dangerous military-related operation since World War II.
At the same time, however, the government is struggling to strike a balance between its new ambition and deep public rejection of the nation's militaristic past. The result has been a delicate, even painful transition away from pacifism. More telling, for instance, than the well-equipped troops running through the maritime interdiction exercises last month were the elements of those drills that were unspoken and unseen.
To limit the impression of aggression, the government insisted that no weapons -- unloaded, fake or otherwise -- be carried by those participating in the drills. It also refused to officially acknowledge that any one nation was the target of the exercises, though U.S. officials have openly stated that the training mission was aimed at sending a message to North Korea.
In the simulated interdiction, officials insisted on having one of their own destroyers flying the Japanese flag masquerade as the targeted ship to avoid any image of confrontation with a foreign power. Even then, citing constitutional limits on the armed forces, the captain of the rogue ship had to give verbal permission before the boarding party could set foot on deck.
"Japan has been changing its role in response to new threats and our desire to contribute more to the stability of the world," said Masashi Nishihara, president of National Defense Academy, the country's elite armed forces training school. "But it is a slow and gradual effort. It may sometimes seem like a contradiction, but this is the way it has to be."
In their own fashion, however, the armed forces are shedding their low profile, analysts say.
With a defense budget larger than Britain's, Japan is preparing to deploy a 600-foot, 13,500-ton helicopter carrier, the first in its fleet. It is almost twice the size of the current Aegis destroyers.
Spurred by the threat of a nuclear-armed North Korea, Japan is co-developing a multibillion-dollar missile defense shield with the United States, designed to enable it to shoot down ballistic missiles launched by North Korea. The joint project is likely to force a lifting of Japan's long-standing ban on exporting weapons.
A defense panel last month recommended the country's most sweeping national security overhaul in a decade, including the beefing up of its intelligence network, something already underway after Japan launched its first spy satellites into space last year.
The Liberal Democratic Party is pressing to redefine the role of the Self-Defense Forces -- created in 1954 strictly for defense of the home islands. The current Iraq mission, for example, required parliamentary approval of special legislation and a pledge by Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi that troops would be deployed in a noncombat zone. But next year, debate is expected to begin on changing Article 9 of the post-World War II constitution drafted by the United States during the American occupation, a move that would give Japan far more flexibility to deploy troops overseas.
"There are expectations that Japan play a greater role in dealing with international conflicts," Foreign Minister Nobutaka Machimura said in an interview. "And I believe that Japan must do so."
To that end, officials are now negotiating with the Pentagon a broad redefinition of the U.S.-Japan alliance, in which the United States is now largely responsible for the defense of Japan. On the table, Japanese officials say, is a new concept of "an alliance in global terms" in which the armed forces would work more closely with the U.S. military, both at home and on missions abroad.
"Japan is changing," U.S. Ambassador Howard H. Baker Jr. told a group of foreign reporters in July in terms that he has since used repeatedly. "I think Japan has decided, 'We're a great, big country, we're the second-largest economy in the world, and we probably have the second-largest navy in the Pacific. We want a seat on the Security Council. We want a role to play in the international arena.' I think all those changes are at work and will continue."
The current campaign to boost Japan's international role dates back more than a decade, when its $14 billion financial contribution to the 1991 Persian Gulf War was dismissed as insignificant next to allied nations that had sent troops. But events in recent years -- the increased threat of North Korea, which test-fired a missile over Japan in 1998, the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks and China's rise as a potential challenger to Japan's economic dominance in Asia -- spurred Japanese officials toward quicker change.
However, the desire for diplomatic clout commensurate with Japan's wealth is testing the limits of the public's willingness to assume greater risks. There is no better example that the mission to Iraq, described by officials as evidence that the Japanese are now willing to do more than dole out cash.
But the mission -- which involves medical support, engineering projects and water purification -- has been widely viewed as being of little strategic consequence while remaining enormously unpopular at home. Koizumi is now facing stiff resistance to extending the mission beyond its scheduled expiration on Dec. 14.
Meanwhile, the mission is becoming more dangerous, and at the same time carries the risk of being labeled a failure. Japan's efforts to provide medical aid and rebuild public facilities in the city of Samawah, about 150 miles south of Baghdad, have largely been halted because the security situation in that once relatively tranquil part of southern Iraq has eroded. Japanese officials had periodically limited troop movements outside their camp. But since a rocket-propelled grenade attack on the base a week ago, troops have been ordered to remain inside their protected perimeter at all times, defense officials in Tokyo said.
No Japanese soldier has been injured, or has fired a single shot in combat. The Japanese have spent $750,000 on ad campaigns in Iraq promoting their forces as a humanitarian group independent of ongoing military operations. But the Japanese received a grisly reminder last week of the consequences accompanying even their modest mission in Iraq. Citing the Japanese military presence in Iraq, Islamic radicals kidnapped and beheaded Shosei Koda, 24, a Japanese backpacker, whose body was recovered in Baghdad wrapped in an American flag.
Katsuya Okada, head of the opposition Democratic Party, blamed the military presence in Iraq for Koda's death and said conditions in Iraq are too dangerous. "We strongly demand the withdrawal of" Japanese troops, he said.
But sources close to Koizumi say the prime minister is likely to extend the Iraq mission, concerned that a withdrawal would be seen as giving in to the radicals who killed Koda, and as a step back inside Japan's shell.
"The mission is not completed," a senior Japanese official said, on condition of anonymity. "We would be sending the wrong massage in many respects if we ended it now."
Special correspondent Sachiko Sakamaki contributed to this report.
-----
PM says Japan military must contribute to global safety
TOKYO (AFP)
Nov 07, 2004
http://www.spacewar.com/2004/041107071021.f81gf3ry.html
Japan's armed forces must contribute to global peace to secure safety at home, Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi said Sunday amid signs his government will extend an unpopular military deployment in Iraq.
"(The Self-Defense Forces') international contributions have come to be highly praised both at home and abroad," Koizumi said in a speech at a military parade.
"From now on, to secure our own country's safety and prosperity, it is necessary to positively contribute to the peace and stability of the international community," said Koizumi, a fervent supporter of the US-led "war on terror."
The beheading last month of a Japanese hostage in Iraq, after Koizumi rejected demands to withdraw Japanese troops, has fuelled a debate about whether the soldiers should extend their mission past December 14.
A recent Asahi Shimbun poll showed 63 percent of Japanese oppose extending the troop's one-year mission beyond next month.
Around 550 Japanese troops on a non-combat humanitarian mission are based in the southern Iraqi city of Samawa, Japan's first military deployment since World War II to a country where there is active fighting.
The chief of Japan's Defense Agency, Director-General Yoshinori Ono, told a morning television program that a decision on the mission would be made with "the security situation and prospect for Iraq's reconstruction" in mind.
He suggested troops could stay in Iraq until the end of next year.
"The multinational forces' term in Iraq ends at the end of next year according to UN Security Council resolution 1546," Ono said.
"By then, nation-building should be clear. That is the most important thing. That is why the new year's elections in Iraq must be made to succeed."
Main opposition leader Katsuya Okada of the Democratic Party of Japan renewed a call for the soldiers to be withdrawn.
"We have said the SDF should withdraw, even before December 14, and have opposed the dispatch. That has not changed," Okada told the same program.
The parade featuring 4,200 troops in red scarves and camouflage fatigues, along with 230 military vehicles and 60 aircraft, was held at the SDF's Asaka base just northwest of Tokyo.
Before Koizumi's arrival a sound similar to that of a gunshot was heard close to the base, police said.
Police began investigating whether the firing was the work of extremists after finding two metal tubes and a fuse in a wooded area pointed at the base, Jiji Press reported. No one was apparently injured, it said.
Police said they found a five centimeter (two-inch) diameter metal-like object less than a kilometer (0.6 miles) south of the base.
"We are looking into whether this object was fired," said Saitama police spokesman Yasuo Kazama.
Japan's military is called the Self-Defense Forces because its pacifist constitution rejects the use of force. The forces turned 50 years old on July 1 this year.
-------- iraq
As Falluja Waits in Despair, Rebels Attack in Samarra
November 7, 2004
By JAMES GLANZ
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/07/international/middleeast/07iraq.html
BAGHDAD, Nov. 6 - Desperation settled over the citizens who remained on Saturday in Falluja, the rebel-held city on the brink of being invaded by thousands of American soldiers and marines, as violence erupted in another Iraqi city that the Americans thought they had secured a month ago.
In a multifaceted and highly organized attack, insurgents detonated four car bombs in Samarra and attacked three police stations in the surrounding province, said Col. Adnan al-Jouburi, a spokesman for the Iraqi Interior Ministry. Samarra is the northern city where the military seemingly crushed all resistance during a siege in early October.
The car bombs were part of a full-fledged ambush in which either rockets or mortars and small-arms fire accompanied the explosions. "There was a coordinated attack," said Tech. Sgt. Eric M. Grill, a military spokesman.
Asked if the resurgence of violence in Samarra cast doubt on the American military's strategy of laying siege to insurgent-held cities, Colonel Jouburi said Iraq was no different from Afghanistan, where there has also been violence - albeit at a much lower level - since the end of major military conflict there.
"You cannot stop the terrorists completely, because they attack and retreat," he said.
Colonel Jouburi said at least some of the police officers fought back with the assistance of an Iraqi quick-reaction force. The total number of dead in the Samarra attacks was about 40, Reuters reported. In the past, the Iraqi police have been severely criticized, even ridiculed, for abandoning their posts at the first sign of an attack.
A roadside bomb also exploded at 11 a.m. in Kufa, south of Baghdad, in an attack that appeared to be aimed at Abdul al-Muslim al-Kufa, the chief of a heavily armed security team in Najaf, where the American military fought another battle in August. A local security official, Abu Safa, said that Mr. Kufa had been wounded on his right arm and that four of his escorts had been wounded.
The American military suffered its own casualties in the gathering storm around Falluja. Sixteen Army soldiers were wounded Saturday when a bomb inside an Iraqi police car exploded in eastern Ramadi, according to a report on the incident by marines.
As a military convoy passed, lights on the police car were flashing as if it were directing traffic. The car let several vehicles in the convoy pass, then drove toward a truck carrying the troops and exploded.
Shortly before 3 p.m. Saturday, three Army soldiers were wounded when a car bomb blew up next to a military convoy in western Baghdad, a statement released by the American military said. "Initial reports from the scene of the attack indicate one Iraqi bystander was killed by the blast and another seriously wounded," the statement said.
The marines and soldiers encircling Falluja made preparations and conducted drills on Saturday for what appeared to be an impending, all-out assault. Military aircraft dropped leaflets saying that the last open road into and out of Falluja - the one running west toward Ramadi - would be closed on Sunday afternoon, said Muhammad Allawi Jumaili, a resident of the city.
Residents inside the city expressed increasing dread concerning the confrontation and said that conditions had already become dire.
The main hosptial in Falluja was suffering from shortages of doctors, nurses and supplies. Many doctors and hospital officials have already fled the city, and American checkpoints are gradually closing access roads to the city, said Thamer Abdulla, a medic.
Rockets struck a brand new hospital in Falluja that was ready to open its doors, destroying it on Saturday. Jassim Muhammad, a resident who witnessed the attack, said he did not believe that anyone was inside at the time. Mr. Muhammad said American aircraft passed twice over the area during the attack. There was no immediate information from the American military on whether they had fired on the hospital.
Fewer than a third of the city's employees are now showing up for work, said Ahmad Awad, who works for the municipality. Khalil Ebrahim, a shop owner, called the situation in the city "truly terrifying."
"It is unbearable now," Mr. Ebrahim said, describing a once-bustling city that is now a ghost town at night, where only the sounds of shelling and circling aircraft are heard. Having held out this long, Mr. Ebrahim said he was now planning to leave.
A Falluja police chief appeared on the Arab satellite television network Al Jazeera, along with his men at their station. On television, he claimed that the American military had detained some of his officers and calling on the Americans to release them. There was no confirmation of the incidents from the Americans.
"Despair has defeated our hope," said Abu Khalil, a resident who has already left.
Robert F. Worth contributed reporting from near Falluja for this article, and Iraqi employees of The New York Times contributedfrom Falluja, Najaf and Baghdad.
--------
US warplanes hammer Iraq's rebel-held Fallujah overnight: military
(AFP)
Nov 07, 2004
http://www.spacewar.com/2004/041107043922.qezqqvzm.html
NEAR FALLUJAH, Iraq - The US military said Sunday it unleashed seven air strikes in 24 hours on suspected weapons hideouts in rebel-held Fallujah, as thousands of troops camped outside geared for possible action.
The onslaught came as a marine spokesman said the number of US soldiers wounded in action on Saturday in the neighbouring Sunni Muslim bastion of Ramadi had been 16 rather than 20 as he had earlier reported.
The first two air raids, part of an intensifying campaign in recent weeks of near nightly strikes, were before dawn on Saturday and the other five came in close succession from 10:45 pm (1945 GMT) until 11:55 pm, the military said.
Each bombardment targeted a weapons cache, but the military provided no further information as to whereabouts in the city it hit.
"First Marine Expeditionary Force employed US Marine Corps aviation assets to deliver precision munitions to destroy preplanned targets in Fallujah," it said in a brief statement.
The aeriel pounding was accopmanied by artillery fire from the ground, an AFP reporter embedded with the marines near Fallujah, 50 kilometres (30 miles) west of Baghdad, said.
Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi has issued an ultimatum to the city to surrender its rebel fighters, believed to include those loyal to Al-Qaeda's frontman in Iraq Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, or face attack.
The US-backed premier is desperate to crush pockets of resistance in Iraq ahead of national elections promised by January.
In a worrying challenge to the effectiveness of using brute force to achieve this goal, a torrent of car bombs and clashes left at least 33 people dead and 48 wounded in the Sunni Muslim stronghold of Samarra on Saturday.
US and Iraqi troops stormed the city, 125 kilometres (80 miles) north of Baghdad, at the start of October to wrest it from rebel hands in what was at the time heralded as a successful campaign.
It marked the first major joint offensive to reclaim a Sunni area ahead of the landmark elections.
Gearing up for what might be their hardest fight since last year's US-led invasion, US marines on Saturday reassembled weapons, counted ammunition and loaded vehicles at their camps outside Fallujah, while inside the rebel enclave, insurgents said they had unified their military command.
Rebels have transformed Fallujah into their fiefdom since a marine assault on the city in April ended in stalemate.
Several thousand US and Iraqi troops have massed around Fallujah since mid-October, while the US military is doubling its manpower in Ramadi to 2,000 amid expectations of an imminent two-pronged attack.
--------
Terrorists kill dozens in Iraq attacks
November 07, 2004
By Robert H. Reid
ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20041107-121414-9069r.htm
BAGHDAD - Facing a major assault in Fallujah, terrorists struck back yesterday with suicide car bombs, mortars and rockets across a wide swath of central Iraq, killing more than 30 people and wounding more than 60, including nearly two dozen Americans.
The attacks appeared aimed at relieving pressure on Fallujah, where about 10,000 American troops are massing for a major assault. U.S. jets pounded Fallujah early yesterday in the heaviest air strikes in six months - including five 500-pound bombs dropped on terrorist targets.
The deadliest attacks by the terrorists yesterday occurred in Samarra, a city 60 miles north of Baghdad that U.S. and Iraqi commanders have touted as a model for pacifying restive Sunni Muslim areas of the country.
Militants in Samarra stormed a police station, triggered at least two suicide car bombs and fired mortars at government installations. One of the car bombs, targeting the mayor's office, used a stolen Iraqi police vehicle, the U.S. military said.
Twenty-nine persons, 17 police and 12 Iraqi civilians, were killed throughout the city, the U.S. military said. Arabic language television stations said more than 30 died as gangs of militants roamed the city, clashing with American and Iraqi forces.
The dead included the local Iraqi national guard commander, Abdel Razeq Shaker al-Garmali, hospital officials said. Another 40 persons, including 17 policemen, were injured, the military said.
U.S. military vehicles roamed through the besieged city using loudspeakers to announce an indefinite curfew starting at 2 p.m. yesterday. American warplanes and helicopters roamed the skies.
Elsewhere, 16 American soldiers were wounded yesterday when a suicide bomber using an Iraqi police car rammed their convoy in Ramadi, a major city in the volatile Sunni Triangle, U.S. officials said. They gave no further details, citing security.
Three other Americans were wounded when a car bomb exploded near the entrance to Baghdad International Airport. One Iraqi was killed and another injured, the U.S. military said. Three Humvees were heavily damaged, witnesses said.
Two Marines were injured by a car bomb near a Fallujah checkpoint, and a U.S. soldier was wounded when a roadside bomb exploded south of Fallujah.
Samarra, an ancient city of gold-domed mosques that once served as the capital of a Muslim empire extending from Spain to India, was recaptured from Sunni Muslim rebels in September and was touted as a model for restoring government control to other areas formerly under guerrilla domination.
U.S. and Iraqi forces hope to use the same techniques if they drive Sunni militants from Fallujah. American commanders have assembled a force of Marines, soldiers and U.S.-trained Iraqi fighters around Fallujah, a major rebel base 40 miles west of Baghdad.
They are awaiting orders from Prime Minister Iyad Allawi to launch an all-out assault.
However, the violence in Samarra underscored the difficulty of maintaining civilian authority in Sunni areas even after the worst of the fighting ebbs.
"I cannot claim that entering Fallujah will end the terrorist attacks in Iraq," Iraq's national security adviser, Qassem Dawoud, told Al Arabiya television.
"But I can say that we will deal with a very big pocket of terrorism in Iraq and we will uproot it. This pocket forms the backbone and the center for terrorists in other areas in Iraq."
Elsewhere, gunmen killed a former official of Saddam Hussein's intelligence service in Baqouba, 35 miles northeast of Baghdad, police said. The assailants stopped a car carrying former Lt. Col. Abdul Sattar al-Luheibi, ordered him out of the car and gunned him down in front of his 13-year-old son.
U.S. and Iraqi authorities hope to curb the insurgency so that national elections can be held by the end of January.
The influential Sunni clerical Association of Muslim Scholars has threatened to call a boycott if Fallujah is attacked. A public outcry over civilian casualties prompted the Bush administration to call off a siege in April, after which Fallujah fell under control of radical clerics.
Meanwhile, in an open letter to the Iraqi people posted yesterday on the Internet, 26 Saudi scholars and religious leaders said that armed resistance against American troops and their Iraqi allies was a "legitimate right." The scholars issued a fatwa, or religious edict, prohibiting Iraqis from offering any support for military operations carried out by U.S. forces against militant strongholds.
"Fighting the occupiers is a duty for all those who are able," said the letter dated Friday. "It is a jihad to push back the assailants. ... Resistance is a legitimate right. A Muslim must not inflict harm on any resistance man or inform about them. Instead, they should be supported and protected."
Military planners believe there are about 1,200 hard-core fighters in Fallujah - at least half of them Iraqis. They are bolstered by cells with up to 2,000 fighters in the surrounding towns and countryside.
Iraqi authorities have closed a border crossing point with Syria, and U.S. troops have sealed the main highway into Fallujah.
--------
52 Killed In Spate Of Attacks
In Iraq U.S. Forces, Insurgents Gird for Fallujah Battle
By Jackie Spinner
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, November 7, 2004; Page A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A30508-2004Nov6?language=printer
NEAR FALLUJAH, Iraq, Nov. 7 -- More than 30 people were killed and more than 60 wounded in a rash of suicide bombings and mortar and rocket attacks in the Sunni Triangle on Saturday, as U.S. Marines and soldiers prepared for a possible assault on the rebel-held city of Fallujah.
The wounded included at least 16 U.S. soldiers injured when a suicide bomber rammed a car into their convoy in Ramadi, 60 miles west of Baghdad, U.S. officials said.
[On Sunday, insurgents launched deadly attacks against police stations in western Anbar province killing at least 22 more people, police and hospital officials said, the Associated Press reported.]
The deadliest violence occurred Saturday morning in Samarra, a city about 65 miles north of Baghdad that U.S. and Iraqi forces retook from insurgents early last month. A series of closely coordinated attacks killed about 30 people, according to tallies by news services, which canvassed hospitals. More than half of the casualties were Iraqi police officers killed in mortar attacks or ground assaults on police stations.
At 9:30 a.m. in Samarra, a car bomb hidden in a stolen Iraqi police truck exploded after U.S. soldiers fired on it as it approached the office of the mayor, who was installed with the backing of U.S. troops last month. One American and four Iraqi soldiers were wounded, the military said.
A half-hour later, a car bomb detonated near a U.S.-Iraqi patrol on the east side of Samarra and a mortar shell hit an outdoor market.
A military spokesman said he could not confirm an Associated Press report quoting a hospital official as saying the fatalities included an Iraqi National Guard commander, Abdel Razeq Shaker Garmali.
"There was an attempt by the insurgents to conduct a coordinated attack, but many of their attempts were ineffective," said Capt. Bill Coppernoll, a spokesman for the 1st Infantry Division. The division issued a statement calling the attacks "desperate" and declaring that its forces, along with at least two battalions of Iraqi forces, remained in firm control of the city of 250,000.
But Samarra residents said the violence threw the city into turmoil. Helicopters roared overhead, gunfire echoed through much of the day and U.S. forces imposed a curfew starting at noon. U.S. and Iraqi forces also closed down the main bridge leading into the city, firing toward boats that attempted to cross the Tigris River.
Hours after the attacks began, Fallujah's mujaheddin shura, or council of holy warriors, which governs the city, issued a statement in which it threatened to "launch wide military operations within the first hours of the U.S. attack on Fallujah, to open several fronts at the same time." The statement said insurgents were standing by in the cities of Baghdad, Kirkuk, Basra and Samarra.
In Baghdad, at least one Iraqi civilian was killed when a roadside bomb exploded near a military convoy in the western part of the city, the military said. Three U.S. soldiers were wounded in the attack.
Explosions echoed across the capital after dark, and residents said they were bracing for insurgent attacks when the U.S. assault on Fallujah begins.
The U.S. military has stepped up operations around Fallujah in advance of an expected offensive to retake the city, which has been controlled by insurgents since April. U.S. warplanes pounded enemy positions and stockpiles of weapons in the city Friday night and into Saturday, while Marine and Army units on the outskirts of the city staged a moonlit battle rehearsal that one Army officer described as a "boxing match" to see what kind of punch the insurgents would throw back.
The U.S. military cordoned off the city and threatened to arrest anyone younger than 45 who tried to flee.
Commanders have said they would not enter Fallujah until Iraq's interim prime minister, Ayad Allawi, gave the word. Allawi, who returned to the country Friday night from a diplomatic trip, was scheduled to give a news conference in Baghdad on Sunday.
"We're here in support of the Iraqi security forces," said 1st Lt. Lyle Gilbert, a spokesman for the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force. "We would make no move without the direction of the interim Iraqi government."
Allawi's government has been negotiating with leaders in Fallujah in an attempt to avert what will likely be an offensive with heavy casualties on both sides. But sources close to the government said Friday that the negotiations had been called off.
[Early Sunday morning, the sound of tanks firing from Fallujah could be heard in a distant but thunderous bass. Helicopters hovered overhead and planes roared across a cloudless sky. The clap of artillery echoed from a Marine outpost near the city in what was shaping up to be another noisy night.]
A delegation from Fallujah headed to Baghdad on Saturday to try to revive negotiations with members of the Iraqi National Assembly, which had requested an effort to end the crisis peacefully. Members of the delegation said the attempt was the last chance before an assault.
"It might be useful that we try. We don't want to blame ourselves when the attack happens," said Maky Nazal, the head of the delegation. "Although the attack is approaching, we have to pay every effort we can to prevent it."
The six-member delegation, four members of the Iraqi Islamic Party and two tribal leaders, were stopped on the way out of the city at a checkpoint set up by the shura council, which has prevented residents from negotiating without its permission.
"But we told them we have to go, at least we try," said a member of the delegation, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "Maybe we can prevent the offensive."
Abdul-Hamid Jadou, a member of the negotiating group, said neither the fighters nor the government were willing to resolve the problem.
"We, the delegation members, were like a soccer ball," Jadou said. "Everyone kicks it to the other.
Correspondent Karl Vick in Baghdad and special correspondent Omar Fekeiki contributed to this report.
--------
U.S. Forces Begin Moving Into Falluja
November 7, 2004
The New York Times
By RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr. and ROBERT F. WORTH
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/07/international/middleeast/07cnd-iraq.html?ei=5094&en=3eb8ca737af5890f&hp=&ex=1099890000&partner=homepage&pagewanted=all&position=
FALLUJA, Iraq, Monday, Nov. 8 - Explosions and heavy gunfire thundered through the outskirts of Falluja on Sunday night and early Monday as American soldiers and marines swept toward strategic bridges, hospitals and other objectives in what appeared to be the first stage of a long-expected invasion of the city.
Hours earlier, Prime Minister Ayad Allawi, faced with an outbreak of insurgent violence across the country, declared emergency law for 60 days across most of Iraq. The proclamation gave him broad powers that allow him to impose curfews, order house-to-house searches and detain suspected criminals and insurgents.
"We declared it today and we are going to implement it whenever and wherever it is necessary," Dr. Allawi told pool reporters inside the fortified compound that houses the headquarters of the interim Iraqi government. "This will send a very powerful message that we are serious."
Troops were on the move by 9 p.m. to the west and south of Falluja, just across the Euphrates River, and after two hours of steady pounding by American guns, tanks, Bradley armored vehicles, artillery and AC-130 gunships, at least one objective - a hospital less than a mile from downtown Falluja - had been secured by American special forces and the Iraqi 36th commando battalion.
Tracer fire lighted up the sky as the operation began, helicopters crisscrossed the battlefield, and at least one American vehicle was fired upon with a rocket-propelled grenade as American and Iraqi forces converged on the hospital, called Al-Falluja. Shortly before midnight, American forces were exchaning gunfire across a strategic bridge near the hospital with four to five insurgent positions on the other side.
"There has been extensive gunfire going across the river," said the American commander of the special forces operation at the hospital, which officials called a crucial early objective. "Bradleys have been shooting over to the east of us, and there has been extensive machine-gun fire to the southwest of us," the commander said.
Dr. Allawi said he would hold a news conference on Monday to provide more details about the state of emergency. Once it becomes clear what exactly Dr. Allawi wants to put into effect, American-led forces will be deployed to help enforce the law, a senior American military official said on Sunday in an interview in Baghdad. That could include operating more checkpoints and increasing patrols.
Though Dr. Allawi has tried hard to cast himself as a strongman since taking office, Iraqi confidence in the interim government has plummeted in recent months as the insurgency in Falluja and elsewhere has gained in strength and lethality. Dr. Allawi's declaration of emergency law is as much intended to be a show of force in these days of uncertainty as it is to extend to his government and the United States-led forces broader powers to combat the guerrillas. Dr. Allawi said he had imposed the state of emergency only after getting the approval of his cabinet and the office of the president, Sheik Ghazi al-Yawar.
With only three months to go until the country's first democratic elections, American and Iraqi officials are grasping for any tool at their command to bring the insurgency under control. Guerrillas staged brazen attacks on Sunday that left at least 37 people dead across the country, showing they could seize the initiative even as American-led forces geared up for their major offensive in Falluja and the neighboring city of Ramadi.
At dawn, insurgents armed with bombs and Kalashnikov rifles raided three police stations and killed at least 21 people in the far west of rebellious Anbar Province, which encompasses those two volatile cities, said Col. Adnan Abdul-Rahman, an Interior Ministry spokesman. In an attack south of Baghdad, he said, guerrillas gunned down three officials from Diyala Province as those officials were driving to the funeral of a colleague who had been assassinated.
Insurgents dressed as police officers abducted a dozen Iraqi National Guardsmen on their way home to the southern holy city of Najaf and murdered them all, The Associated Press reported, citing an official in a prominent Shiite political party. In a similar attack last month, guerrillas in police uniform stopped three minibuses carrying 49 freshly trained Iraqi army soldiers who were going on leave. The guerrillas gunned down the soldiers, most with shots to their heads as they kneeled or lay on the ground.
Several powerful explosions shook the capital on Sunday afternoon. One came from a car bomb that detonated near the downtown home of the finance minister, Adil Abdel-Mehdi, killing one of his guards and shattering storefronts along the street, said Haithem al-Hassani, an aide in the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, a Shiite political party to which Mr. Abdel-Mehdi belongs. A suicide car bomb near a Catholic church killed an Iraqi bystander and wounded a second, while two others in the western Baghdad area aimed at separate military convoys killed two American soldiers and wounded five others, the military said.
That brought to at least 1,125 the number of American troops who have died in the war.
The wave of attacks came a day after insurgents launched coordinated bomb and mortar attacks in Samarra and the surrounding area, killing at least 30 people, many of them Iraqi police officers. Those strikes demonstrated that a major American-led offensive last month in Samarra, a "no go" zone for the Americans during much of the summer, had failed to rid the city of insurgents or secure key parts of town. The senior American military official said that a "resurgence" of the insurgency had taken place because there was "a lag in providing sufficient Iraqi police."
"The challenge with police has been an ongoing one," he said.
On Sunday, American troops began enforcing a round-the-clock curfew aimed at keeping all Iraqis off the streets of Samarra.
Before the move into Falluja, about 10,000 American troops, mostly marines, amassed outside the city. Early Sunday and again Sunday night, American forces continued heavy aerial bombardments and artillery shelling of parts of Falluja, with explosions lighting up the night sky. The attacks were intended to weaken the defenses that the guerrillas had built up, the senior military official said.
Edward Wong provided reporting from Baghdad for this article. Iraqi employees of The New York Times also contributed reporting.
--------
Bickering Iraqis Strive to Build Voting Coalition
November 7, 2004
By EDWARD WONG
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/07/international/middleeast/07election.html?ei=5094&en=4f72f03927ada0aa&hp=&ex=1099890000&partner=homepage&pagewanted=all&position=
BAGHDAD, Iraq, Nov. 6 - With three months to go until Iraq's first democratic elections, established Shiite parties and powerful upstarts are feuding, prompting the leading Shiite cleric to try to pull them together to make sure that they clearly dominate the new government.
The cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, is determined to work out a power balance before the election and to keep rivalries from weakening the Shiites' position.
The two main religious Shiite parties in the interim Iraqi government have already banded together. But they face a formidable challenge to their prominence from an unlikely and possibly anti-American alliance that is looming between Ahmad Chalabi, the former exile and Pentagon favorite, and Moktada al-Sadr, the firebrand cleric who ignited two deadly uprisings against the Americans and the interim government.
After falling out with the Americans last spring, Mr. Chalabi has recast himself as a pious Shiite and is pursuing a coalition with Mr. Sadr, who has a zealous following. An anti-American platform would have widespread support.
Shiite Arabs, who are the majority, crave the power that has long been denied them, most recently during the era of Saddam Hussein. Making up at least 60 percent of the population, they could easily dominate the elections, marginalizing the Sunni Arabs, who have governed the region since the Ottoman Empire.
But internal rifts could allow other parties, including the secular party of the interim prime minister, Ayad Allawi, to win voters who otherwise support the religious Shiites.
The stakes are high, especially given the increasingly lethal Sunni-led insurgency, which on Saturday made bomb and mortar attacks that killed at least 30 people around Samarra, where the Allawi government and American forces had thought they held control.
For months, Ayatollah Sistani has been demanding that all the Shiite parties form a single coalition dominated by religious parties. The biggest stumbling block to a single slate is that election law dictates that the groups determine before the vote how to share power afterward.
If they are unable to agree, the main Shiite elements could split. Anxious to herd them together, Ayatollah Sistani has formed a commission to broker deals, once again selectively intervening in post-invasion politics.
"Maybe the dialogue will come up with a unified list," said Adnan Ali, a deputy in the Dawa Islamic Party, a top Shiite religious party. "There's an intention to see one list."
It is becoming clear that the elections, to be held in late January, will be contested along established ethnic and religious lines, though the Americans are counting on a national assembly united enough to allow the government to address the country's profound challenges.
Much of the success of the elections will also depend on whether the American and Iraqi forces can subdue the insurgency raging in Falluja, a Sunni city. Officials say they must break the insurgency there so people feel safe enough to vote, but must do so without inflaming Sunni anger. If Sunnis boycott the election, the guerrilla war could intensify or even turn into a full-fledged civil war with a Shiite ruling class.
Iraqis are to elect members of a 275-seat national assembly in late January, which will then install an executive government and write a constitution. Elections for a full-term government are planned for the end of 2005.
In the political jostling, the two main religious Shiite parties have agreed to form a coalition to run in the elections and are favorites for the support of Ayatollah Sistani, say officials of both groups, the Dawa Islamic Party and the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, better known as Sciri. The two parties want the ayatollah's commission to endorse the parties as the main body of a unified Shiite slate.
But so does Mr. Chalabi, who leads a rival faction called the Shiite Council, which consists of 42 smaller parties, including Mr. Chalabi's Iraqi National Congress. Mr. Chalabi is competing for the commission's endorsement and a guarantee of a significant share of any assembly seats won by the Shiites, at the expense of the more established parties.
Seen as a carpetbagger by many Iraqis, Mr. Chalabi is trying to draw the popular Mr. Sadr into a coalition to strengthen his credibility. Senior officials in the groups of the two men have discussed how they would divide assembly seats if they were to run together. An organizer of the Shiite Council, Ali Faisal al-Lami, recently traveled to Mosul with Ali Smesim, Mr. Sadr's top aide, to speak to Sunni tribal leaders about their possibly joining a predominantly Shiite coalition led by Mr. Sadr or Mr. Chalabi or both.
"It's not about competition of parties and division of spoils," Mr. Chalabi said of the Shiite talks. "There are no spoils to divide, only disaster to share at this time."
Ayatollah Sistani favors an umbrella Shiite slate that includes not just the two major parties but also independent politicians, mostly from the south. The aim is to minimize friction among the Shiites and show the world that the religious Shiites are organized enough to govern.
While the Shiites bicker, the main Kurdish parties, the Kurdistan Democratic Party and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, both players in the interim government, have agreed to put forward a unified national slate. "The core group will be Kurdish elements," said Hoshyar Zebari, the foreign minister and a senior official of the Kurdistan Democratic Party. "The Shia house has a similar approach."
The Sunni Arabs are divided about even taking part in the elections. Some groups like the Iraqi Islamic Party, which sat on the Iraqi Governing Council and is part of the interim government, say they will field candidates. Other powerful groups like the Muslim Scholars Association, a group of Sunni clerics that claims to represent 3,000 mosques, have said they will not take part and have threatened to call for a boycott if the Americans invade Falluja.
If politicians emphasize ethnic and religious differences during campaigning, or insist their groups are entitled to certain seats, tension could grow. At the least, the new assembly might be too weak to confront the country's vast problems. At the worst, a Yugoslav-style dissolution into chaos could ensue.
A Western diplomat said American officials had noticed the divisions and had advised parties to form more diverse coalitions. Otherwise, the political splits "could create acrimony," he said. "We don't need more acrimony."
But some scholars are more hopeful, saying it is natural for the parties to align along religious and ethnic lines. Once elected, the parties might paper over their differences. "Sectarianism is now the organizing principle of Iraqi politics," said Yitzhak Nakash, a professor of Middle East studies at Brandeis University and author of "The Shi'is of Iraq" (Princeton University Press, 2003). "Political campaigning along sectarian lines is natural at this stage."
For the American government, the best outcome is for parties that "support democracy" to win seats in the assembly, an American diplomat said, and for the assembly to be inclusive enough so many groups feel they have a stake.
The Iraqi National Accord Party of Dr. Allawi, a Shiite, is expected to run in January but is at risk politically. It is a secular party with many Sunnis from the former ruling Baath Party, and so stands outside the main blocs of Iraqi politics. Support for the interim government has plummeted, and whatever political capital Dr. Allawi has left could be wiped out if he orders an invasion of Falluja. So the party might well need a strong partner to do well in the elections, but does not have one yet.
Another dark prospect for the Americans is the possibility that the loose alliance between Mr. Chalabi, whom the Americans accuse of giving intelligence secrets to Iran, and Mr. Sadr, the young cleric who commands a thousands-strong militia, could gel and emerge as the dominant Shiite coalition. "There's an arrest warrant out for him right now, and I don't think you'll see us shaking his hand anytime soon," a diplomat said of Mr. Sadr.
Mr. Sadr may be drawn more to Mr. Chalabi than to Dawa and Sciri because of longstanding feuds between Mr. Sadr's prominent religious family and that of Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, a leader of Sciri. Both men are among the Iraq's most popular politicians, according to a recent American-financed poll conducted by the International Republican Institute. "We have some reservations and problems about sharing a slate with them," Mr. Smesim, Mr. Sadr's chief aide, said of Dawa and Sciri.
As for the Shiite Council led by Mr. Chalabi, "we have a very good relationship with them," Mr. Smesim said. "We don't mind if they join our national slate."
Parties are joining coalitions to present broad slates that will be able to attract the most votes. They will need about 30,000 votes to win one assembly seat. If all the Shiite parties contend the elections under a single umbrella dominated by the major religious parties, Shiite voters would overwhelmingly back that slate, allowing the religious Shiites to win a majority of the 275 seats.
If Shiite parties put up separate candidates, Shiite voters may split their votes, possibly denying the religious parties favored by Ayatollah Sistani a majority, said Prof. Juan Cole, an expert on Shiite Islam at the University of Michigan. "The more party lists," he said, "the more likelihood that some Shiite votes will be siphoned off."
In fact, the Western diplomat said, the main Kurdish parties have already begun setting up small offices in the southern Shiite heartland to campaign for votes there.
-------- israel / palestine
Arafat's No. 2 Is Set to Assume Leadership
November 7, 2004
By STEVEN ERLANGER
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/07/international/middleeast/07abbas.html?pagewanted=all&position=
JERUSALEM, Nov. 6 - Mahmoud Abbas wears a business suit, not a military uniform and kaffiyeh. He is a former elementary school teacher - studious, gracious, pragmatic and opposed to terrorism. He is also tough enough to have been Yasir Arafat's No. 2 for many years in the Palestine Liberation Organization, now becoming his probable successor.
In many ways, he was a crucial Arafat adviser, one of the few Palestinians who studied Israeli history and politics, even as some regarded him as a traitor for doing so. "He studies issues intellectually and then tries to draw political conclusions," said Yossi Beilin, an Israeli politician who negotiated with Mr. Abbas on the draft of a peace treaty.
Mr. Abbas has criticized this latest intifada openly as "a complete destruction of everything we built," having said in June, "We call upon all factions to end the attacks as we wish to take the path toward negotiation. We seek a dialogue that will bring calm."
Reluctantly, in March 2003, he accepted the new post of prime minister of the Palestinian Authority because Mr. Arafat and the United States wanted him to - a vain effort by outsiders to dilute Mr. Arafat's power. Mr. Arafat, never a fool when power is at stake, undermined Mr. Abbas from the start, helped by the Israeli prime minister, Ariel Sharon, and Mr. Abbas quit in disgust four months later. He even quit the central committee of Fatah, Mr. Arafat's faction in the Palestine Liberation Organization.
A joke at the time has Mr. Arafat and Mr. Abbas in a car, and Mr. Arafat keeps warning him, "Watch out!" Finally, Mr. Abbas complains: "But you're driving!"
Now Mr. Arafat is apparently on his deathbed, and Mr. Abbas, who is also known as Abu Mazen, is moving into the driver's seat. He is placing the current prime minister, Ahmed Qurei, or Abu Ala, next to him.
It will be an enormous test for both, but it is Mr. Abbas, 69, who will be the most visible Palestinian leader - and the one with the most clout, once he takes over, as expected, as the chairman of the P.L.O. and Fatah, its largest faction.
As decent and thoughtful as he is, Mr. Beilin warned, Mr. Abbas has strong views about the right of the Palestinians to share Jerusalem and about the fair treatment of Palestinian refugees from 1948. To secure his position, Mr. Abbas cannot appear to be weaker than Mr. Arafat on central questions of Palestinian identity and self-respect. "Abu Mazen is good for the peace camps on both sides," Mr. Beilin said, "but don't expect him to be 'a moderate Palestinian' - he's a pragmatic one."
Mr. Beilin says that Mr. Abbas will manage to secure stability. "He can work with people, his coalition with Abu Ala is very important as a coalition of the veterans," said Mr. Beilin, who met with Mr. Abbas recently. "They understand that if they don't unite, there will be big problems, so they invested in their ability to work together. It might look like a leadership for a short time, but who knows?"
Equally important, Mr. Abbas has his own channels to militant groups, especially Hamas, which is powerful in Gaza. When he was prime minister, he worked out a short-lived cease-fire with them and the Israelis. "Hamas respects Abu Mazen," Mr. Beilin said.
But Hamas has its own demands in the new collective leadership. It has been asking, at least in Gaza, for a monopoly on the education system, for a requirement that women wear veils and for autonomy in the mosques, so that the Palestinian Authority can no longer replace imams.
Those are the kinds of internal issues that Mr. Abbas will face, Western hopes for final peace settlements aside, and how he responds to them will be watched very closely by Palestinians and Israelis. Mr. Abbas is not a natural politician, however. He is described by associates as easily offended, one reason that he stayed away from Palestinian politics, never becoming a legislator or a minister before the job of prime minister was invented and became his. It is also why he has no wider political or local base among ordinary Palestinians. He is respected as one of the founders of the Palestine Liberation Organization, even though, as some say, he came a little late - "the fifth of four."
Mr. Abbas was an early Palestinian voice advocating negotiations with Israel and an eventual recognition of it. He initiated dialogue with Jewish and pacifist movements in the 1970's, pushed for a two-state solution, coordinated negotiations at the Madrid conference and headed the Palestinian delegation in secret talks with the Israelis and Mr. Beilin that led to the 1993 Oslo accords.
In fact, Mr. Abbas was the Palestinian who signed the accords on behalf of the P.L.O., as well as an interim agreement with Israel in 1995. He and Mr. Beilin also drafted a framework for a final status agreement in October 1995, although its existence was denied for five years.
He returned to the Palestinian territories in 1995 after 48 years in exile. Born in Safed, a town that is now part of northern Israel, on March 26, 1935, he left as a refugee in 1948 for Syria and became a teacher. He has a law degree from Damascus University and a Ph.D. in history from the Oriental College in Moscow. It was there that he studied the contacts between the Zionist movement and the Nazis, and later published the view, since recanted, that the Nazis killed "only a few hundred thousand Jews."
Mr. Abbas is married and had three grown sons, though the eldest, Mazen, died of a heart attack at age 42. Mr. Abbas himself has survived a bout with prostate cancer.
As prime minister, he was undermined by Mr. Arafat, who refused, as he has to this day, to hand over control of the various Palestinian security services to the prime minister or to allow them to be reorganized.
Mr. Abbas was also undermined by Mr. Sharon, who negotiated slowly with him over confidence-building measures like the release of Palestinian prisoners. In the end, Mr. Sharon carried out a prisoner swap with Hezbollah, the militant group based in Lebanon, and its leader, Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, who is sworn to Israel's destruction, that dwarfed anything Mr. Abbas achieved and created significant bitterness in the Palestinian leadership.
"Had Israel given Abu Mazen, on the issue of prisoners, what it gave its sworn enemy, Hezbollah, many things might have looked different," Zeev Schiff wrote Friday in Haaretz. Had Mr. Sharon given Mr. Abbas, "as a gesture, part of what he is willing to give away free of charge perhaps to Hamas, in the Gaza disengagement plan, that would have breathed life into Abu Mazen's chances," Mr. Schiff continued.
Only three months ago, Mr. Beilin said, Mr. Abbas told him, "Had he gotten the number of prisoners and the quality that Nasrallah got from Sharon, and had the idea of Gaza withdrawal been suggested to him, he would have remained prime minister."
Mr. Beilin said, "A lot depends on the good will of Israel, and whether we want to help the moderate leadership or not. We didn't before." The point is not to embrace Mr. Abbas and Mr. Qurei, which would damage them, but to talk to them in public, something Mr. Sharon has always refused to do with Mr. Arafat.
Mr. Sharon's adviser, Raanan Gissin, said Israel is aware of the opportunities. "Down the road at least there's some reason for hope," he said. "We won't do anything to hamper or torpedo any emerging leader who wants to change the course. A new Palestinian leadership must begin to deal with terrorism. Terrorists can't continue to rule the streets, and this tiger has to be put back into a cage. If a new leadership can make even a partial effort, we can resume dialogue, both on Gaza withdrawal and on the road map," which lays out steps for a peaceful settlement.
"We will give a new leadership more than a period of grace," Mr. Gissin added. "We will show restraint, and we believe they'll respond in kind. But they need to make a departure from the heritage of Arafat, of terrorism, of hatred and incitement that leads to suicide bombers. They have to extract the poison. It's a process, and slow, but it has to start."
As for Mr. Abbas's complaints about Mr. Sharon, Mr. Gissin said, "Well, it's easier to put the blame on Israel than on the one who delegitimized him, Arafat."
Hisham Ahmad, a political scientist at Bir Zeit University, is skeptical about Mr. Abbas's ability to win credibility from Palestinians. "Arafat was down-to-earth, a people's leader, and while there are many other talented Palestinians, talent is not sufficient for leadership." Whatever Mr. Abbas and Mr. Qurei try to project, Mr. Ahmad said, "none of them can fill a modicum of the role he played internally, in the region and in the world at large." As for the Israelis, "they will realize that whether they liked Arafat or not, no other Palestinian leader even in the medium term can deliver a balanced solution as Arafat could have done."
-------- philippines
Philippine defense minister leaves for China
MANILA (AFP)
Nov 07, 2004
http://www.spacewar.com/2004/041107050325.jntcc2ub.html
Philippine Defense Secretary Avelino Cruz left for China on Sunday to discuss setting up an annual security dialogue between the two countries.
Cruz will meet his Chinese counterpart Cao Guangchuan to consider the possibility of pursuing such a dialogue and other areas of cooperative exchange, a Defense Department statement said.
He will call on Premier Wen Jiabao during the week-long trip, the statement added.
China, the Philippines, Brunei, Malaysia, Taiwan and Vietnam claim in whole or in part the Spratlys chain of islands and atolls in the South China Sea.
-------- russia / chechnya
Russians Mark Revolution Day With Protests
Nov 7, 2004
By MARA D. BELLABY
Associated Press Writer
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/R/RUSSIA_REVOLUTION_DAY?SITE=DCTMS&SECTION=HOME
MOSCOW (AP) -- Carrying the Soviet hammer-and-sickle flag and singing as they marched, Russians marked the anniversary of the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution on Sunday in both a celebration of Soviet times and a protest against a parliamentary proposal to scrap a once-revered Soviet holiday.
At least 8,000 Communist Party backers and members of the ultra-nationalist National Bolshevik party gathered at a square once named for Vladimir Lenin and marched across Moscow toward a statue of Karl Marx. They bore a giant portrait of Lenin and banners proclaiming "U.S.S.R. - our Homeland."
In Red Square, aging veterans wearing long, belted World War II military coats marched in formation, retracing the steps they took in 1941 when Soviets defiantly celebrated Revolution Day in spite of the Nazi forces massed 33 miles outside Moscow.
Some pro-Kremlin lawmakers have proposed replacing the Nov. 7 holiday with a new holiday on Nov. 4 to be called National Unity Day. Russia's lower house of parliament, the State Duma, is expected to consider the measure Wednesday in the first of three required votes.
"This day was and will be a landmark event, and its celebration cannot be abolished," Communist Party leader Gennady Zyuganov said, according to the ITAR-Tass news agency. "People suffered for this holiday, and no one has the right to trample on our history."
Criticism of President Vladimir Putin's government, changes to social benefits and complaints about inequality dominated the speeches.
But some also chanted, "America, hands off Lukashenko!" a show of support for the authoritarian leader of neighboring Belarus, Alexander Lukashenko, who has resurrected Soviet-era symbols and institutions and honored now-disgraced Soviet-era officials. The United States has accused Lukashenko of human rights violations and threatened Belarus with sanctions.
Young protesters, wearing masks, stomped on the flag of the pro-Kremlin United Russia party and tried to burn it in Chelyabinsk, about 950 miles east of Moscow, Russia's NTV television reported. Police arrested several of the protesters, NTV said.
In the Siberian city of Tomsk, Communist Party members carried posters reading, "Hands off Nov. 7!" the Interfax news agency reported.
A poll of 1,500 Russians by Romir polling agency found that 77 percent opposed scrapping the Nov. 7 holiday. The poll had a margin of error of 3 percent.
The holiday was also marked in other former Soviet republics. Three hundred elderly people rallied in Bishkek, the capital of Kyrgyzstan, the only country in former Soviet Central Asia that has preserved both the holiday and a statue of Lenin on one of the capital's main squares.
About 1,000 Ukrainians also marked the Soviet holiday, but some bystanders were cynical.
"Those who make revolutions don't like to work," said Oksana Levina, a businesswoman in Kiev. "The principle of equality kills all initiative."
-------- space
US ready to put weapons in space
Defence expert says America is likely to ignore treaty ban
The Guardian
Mark Townsend
November 7, 2004
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1345380,00.html
America has begun preparing its next military objective - space. Documents reveal that the US Air Force has for the first time adopted a doctrine to establish 'space superiority'.
The new doctrine means that pre-emptive strikes against enemy satellites would become 'crucial steps in any military operation'. This week defence experts will attend a conference in London amid warnings that President Bush's re-election will pave the way to the arming of space.
Internal USAF documents reveal that seizing control of the 'final frontier' is deemed essential for modern warfare. Counterspace Operations reveals that destroying enemy satellites would improve the chance of victory. It states: 'Space superiority provides freedom to attack as well as freedom from attack. Space and air superiority are crucial first steps in any military operation.'
Theresa Hitchens, vice-president of a Washington-based independent think-tank, the Centre for Defence Information, said: 'These documents show that they are taking space control seriously.'
This week's meeting, held by the British-American Security Information Council (Basic), will also discuss whether Britain can restrain a US administration intent on strategic control of space.
Next year's budget for the US Missile Defence Agency includes funding for research into the development of 'space-based interceptors'. Although the funding allocated to develop lightweight ballistic missile parts is only Ł7.5m, further details have emerged of a more ambitious programme to site weapons in space.
Plans for a 'thin constellation of three to six spacecraft' in orbit, which would target enemy missiles as they took off or landed, are planned, according to Hitchens. The document, said Hitchens, signals that the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, which outlaws the use of weapons in orbit, will be ignored.
Of equal concern to some UK defence experts is Britain's agreement in principle to station US interceptor missiles at RAF Fylingdales, North Yorkshire. Participation in the missile defence programme means that Britain is already 'locked into' a programme that could ultimately include space warfare, say those who are monitoring developments.
'If the UK government tries to argue that it is participating in missile defence, but not in the weaponisation of space, either officials have been duped or they are being disingenuous,' said Hitchens.
Suggestions of a deepening relationship between Britain and America over missile defence surfaced again last week. A parliamentary statement from Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon to Labour MP Llew Smith conceded that the MoD has sent two experts to work at the US Missile Defence Agency. Another two will be sent next year.
In a separate debate last week, defence minister Lord Bach admitted that the US was encouraging Britain to become involved in its missile programme. 'The US has offered to extend coverage and make missile defence capabilities available to the UK and other allies, should we require them,' he said.
-------- us
Officer Who Says She Was Raped at Base Is Classified as AWOL for Failing to Return
November 7, 2004
By ALAN FEUER
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/07/nyregion/07AWOL.html
A lieutenant in the New Jersey National Guard has been accused of going AWOL because she has refused for the last two months to return to an Army base in Mississippi where, she says, a fellow officer raped her.
The lieutenant, Jennifer Dyer, 26, says she was raped by a colleague on Aug. 8 while training for deployment to Iraq at Camp Shelby in Hattiesburg, Miss., her fiancé, Edward Ottepka, said yesterday. Lieutenant Dyer would not discuss the case herself, Mr. Ottepka said, and is living in seclusion "close to people who are offering her care and support."
Mr. Ottepka, a police officer and a former marine, said the Army granted Lieutenant Dyer a two-week convalescent leave after the attack, but then demanded that she return to Camp Shelby. Although she submitted several reports to the Army stating that "her mental health would suffer" if she returned - and even offered to complete her tour at another post in New Jersey - the Army classified her as AWOL when she failed to report for duty in Mississippi on Aug. 30, Mr. Ottepka said.
"She was presented with a choice of abandoning her sanity or taking a stand and taking care of herself," he said. "She's chosen to hopefully become a productive member of society, but it's made her an outlaw."
Maj. Rhonda Kiesman, a public affairs officer for Camp Shelby, confirmed that the Army had classified Lieutenant Dyer as AWOL but refused to discuss the details of the case, which was reported yesterday in The Star-Ledger of Newark. Staff Sgt. Robert Stephenson, a public affairs officer for the New Jersey National Guard, said the Guard had not had jurisdiction over LieutenantDyer since March when she was called up by the Army.
Mr. Ottepka directed a reporter to a statement posted by Lieutenant Dyer at the Web site for the Project for the Old American Century (oldamericancentury.org), a grass-roots liberal organization. In it, the lieutenant, a police officer in civilian life and a member of the 250th Signal Battalion, who was attached last spring to the 278th Regimental Combat Team, describes her struggles with the military.
After the attack, Lieutenant Dyer wrote, Army investigators secluded her in a motel room on Camp Shelby where she was interrogated for at least five hours. "I was made to feel," she wrote, "as if I should have never reported the incident at all and that I was the offending party as opposed to the victim in this case."
A few days later, she wrote, Mr. Ottepka flew to Mississippi and helped her get a blood test. In her statement, Lieutenant Dyer said the test "confirmed the presence of herpes type 2."
Then, on convalescent leave, she returned to New Jersey, where she visited the Atlantic County Women's Center, a private psychiatrist and a private doctor - all of whom counseled her not to return to Mississippi, she wrote. Mr. Ottepka said she gave her commanding officers these reports, which "stated clearly that going back would be absolutely disastrous to her short- and long-term mental health."
But the officers ignored the reports, Lieutenant Dyer wrote, and ordered her to return to Camp Shelby or face prosecution. One officer, Lieutenant Dyer wrote, told her "that two weeks was a generous amount of time for leave and that it is enough time for a victim of such a crime to be recovered and returned to duty."
Another, she wrote, told her "that it was time that I 'face my fear' and return to Camp Shelby."
Mr. Ottepka said that he was disgusted by the way the military had treated his fiancée, and that she - is looking for "compassion and respect," not to embarrass the Army.
"I've been a police officer for 21 years, and I know how potentially devastating crimes like this can be," he said. "To treat any woman like the Army has treated Jennifer is the most caveman mentality I think I've witnessed in my life."
For the meantime, Mr. Ottepka said, Lieutenant Dyer is living near her loved ones, hoping to resolve her troubles with the military and return to working as a police officer.
"She's a strong girl, and I give her lots of credit for dealing with an extremely difficult position," he said. "Ultimately, she chose her own well-being over the Army's mandate."
-------- POLICE / PRISONERS / COURTS / JUSTICE
-------- courts / tribunals
Trial postponed for terror suspect
November 07, 2004
By Guy Taylor
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20041107-123914-6184r.htm
U.S. NAVAL BASE GUANTANAMO BAY, Cuba - A panel of military officers here has postponed the trial of Australian-born terror suspect David M. Hicks until March to give his defense team more time to review evidence and interview witnesses.
The delay was among several key developments last week at the war-crimes tribunal, which was designed and authorized by the Bush administration after the September 11 attacks as a way to try terror suspects, called "enemy combatants," without using conventional federal courts.
The Defense Department acknowledged abuses of Guantanamo detainees Thursday, and on Friday, the Pentagon-appointed defense lawyer for another suspect charged with conspiracy to commit war crimes announced plans to challenge the constitutionality of the war-crimes tribunal in D.C. federal court.
Air Force Lt. Col. Sharon Shaffer said civilian lawyers in the District will file charges against President Bush, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and several senior military officers on behalf of Ibrahim Ahmed Mahmoud al Qosi, a Sudanese accused of serving as an al Qaeda paymaster.
Col. Shaffer said the tribunal is making "up rules on the fly" and is invalid because the lines between the Pentagon authorities overseeing it and the prosecutors appointed to seek convictions of suspects are "blurred." Further, she said al Qosi has been abused while in U.S. military custody.
Hicks, 29, and al Qosi, 44, are among the 550 detainees held at Guantanamo, the vast majority of whom were captured more than two years ago in Afghanistan during the war to topple the al Qaeda-supporting Taliban regime.
Preliminary motions begin tomorrow in the case of a third suspect, Salim Ahmed Hamdan, 34, a Yemeni who once served as a chauffeur for Osama bin Laden. Proceedings for a fourth, Ali Hamza Ahmad Sulayman al Bahlul, 33, also of Yemen, were delayed after he admitted involvement in al Qaeda and requested to serve as his own lawyer when the tribunals open in August 2005.
The war-crimes tribunals, formally called "military commissions," mark the first time since World War II that the United States has used such a system. Last week's developments focused on preliminary motions in the case of Hicks, a convert to Islam accused of taking up arms against U.S. forces.
The Pentagon says he fought in Bosnia-Herzegovina in the early-1990s and later associated with al Qaeda in Afghanistan, at one point consulting bin Laden about translating terrorist training. He has pleaded not guilty to attempted murder, aiding the enemy and conspiracy to attack civilians, committing terrorism and destroying property.
The three-member panel of officers overseeing the tribunal agreed to postpone its start when Hicks' lawyers said more time was needed to prepare a defense spanning "a huge swath of geography ?? at least 15 years and five continents."
The defense lawyers said time was needed to speak with 43 government investigators who either interviewed Hicks, or were involved in the investigation that led to his charges. They also said prosecutors have agreed to provide a "face book" of other Guantanamo detainees who may have information relevant to the case.
In other motions, prosecutors and defense attorneys argued over what legal precedents, such as those set by U.S. law and by the Geneva Conventions, will apply when the tribunal begins.
Marine Corps Maj. Michael Mori, Hicks' Pentagon-appointed defense attorney, argued that precedents had been set by past international war-crimes tribunals. He said such charges as "conspiracy" to commit terrorism would not stand up in past tribunals.
Prosecutors disagreed, saying terrorism has long been an offense under international law. Prosecutor Marine Lt. Col. Kurt Brubaker also said that while "the United States is bound by the Geneva Conventions ... al Qaeda is not protected by them."
While officers presiding over the case deferred ruling on most motions, remarks made by one member of the panel may shed light on the extent to which international law will carry any weight in the tribunal.
Panel member Air Force Col. Christopher Bogdan told the defense team that its "underlying assumption is that our commission is based on international law."
"What if international laws haven't caught up with the times?" Col. Bogdan asked. "The international laws are based on the past ... based on a time when there were no non-state actors."
The panel also denied motions by the defense to allow experts' testimony on international law.
Human rights advocates called the denial unfortunate and said the panel members not only appeared to lack understanding of international law, but also were dismissive toward it.
"In addition to the commission's apparent confusion with basic legal concepts, the panel [members] were dismissive when the defense team tried to explain the issues," said James Ross, who was at Guantanamo representing New York-based Human Rights Watch.
Hicks wore a blue-gray suit and red tie as he sat calmly in the courtroom through the hours of arguments. He has been called the Australian John Walker Lindh, referring to the young American captured with the Taliban around the same time as Hicks.
However, Lindh's case was resolved in 2002 through a plea deal in U.S. federal court in Alexandria. He is now serving 20 years in federal prison in California.
Hicks was arraigned before the war-crimes tribunal in August. At the time, he was allowed a short personal visit with his father, who made headlines after the visit by announcing his son was tortured while in U.S. custody in Afghanistan before being brought to Guantanamo.
--------
SUPREME COURT MEMO
Supreme Court Proceeds, but With Uncertainty
November 7, 2004
By LINDA GREENHOUSE
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/07/politics/07court.html
WASHINGTON, Nov. 6 - A Supreme Court with an absent and ailing chief justice is very different from a White House with an absent and ailing president. While the president embodies one entire branch of government, the chief justice merely heads another.
In the two weeks that Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, 80, has been treated for a serious form of thyroid cancer, life at the court has proceeded without a sense of crisis. The judicial function is shared by eight other people, with Justice John Paul Stevens, the senior associate justice, presiding over courtroom sessions and the justices' private conferences. The administrative tasks are carried out, as they usually are under the chief justice's direction, by his administrative assistant, Sally M. Rider, a former federal prosecutor and State Department lawyer.
These arrangements can continue almost indefinitely. Nonetheless, as it has become evident that Chief Justice Rehnquist will not be returning soon, a sense of sadness and uncertainty has spread throughout the court and into the wider community of federal judges who have received no more information than the general public about the chief justice's condition and prospects.
Judges have refrained from calling either Chief Justice Rehnquist or Ms. Rider. "I don't have the nerve," one judge who has worked closely with the chief justice said Friday. "The vibes I get just aren't good."
A judge who did call the chief justice's chambers in anticipation of a visit to Washington was steered away from visiting his home in Arlington, Va. The justices have sent notes, but it is not clear whether any have seen or even talked to him.
Information from official channels has been minimal. The court's press office would not say whether the chief justice was present for the justices' regular Friday morning conference, at which they review new cases and decide which to grant. (He was not.) Nor would the press office say whether, if he did not attend, he sent in his votes. (He did.)
The chief justice, it appears, has functioned as his own press officer. Surely a professional would have cautioned him, on the day it was announced that he had just undergone a tracheotomy, against making a public promise to be back at work in a week. Every cancer specialist whom reporters consulted after the announcement found that prediction highly implausible.
And when the chief justice found on Monday that he could not fulfill the promise, he subtly but unmistakably indicated that the error had been his own and not his doctors': "According to my doctors, my plan to return to the office today was too optimistic."
Chief Justice Rehnquist's statement on Monday said that he was receiving radiation and chemotherapy on an outpatient basis. Both the aggressive treatment and the observations of those who have seen him in recent weeks suggest that the disease is advanced and rapidly progressing.
A judge who attended a meeting with him in late September said the chief justice looked well and spoke without the hoarseness that was apparent by the time the court's new term began Oct. 4; a spreading thyroid tumor can impinge on the nerves that control the vocal cords. By mid-October, one court employee who saw the chief justice in his street clothes was struck by his frailty. "That robe can hide a lot," this employee said.
The court will hear arguments in this coming week and then again in the two weeks following the Thanksgiving weekend. It will then go on recess until Jan. 10. During that substantial interval, people at the court now appear to think, the chief justice will have a chance to assess his situation and decide whether to retire.
Although there seems to be widespread public confusion on this point - memories have faded in the 18 years since Chief Justice Rehnquist's contentious confirmation hearing - a chief justice must be separately nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate, even if the person is already sitting on the Supreme Court. If the president wants to choose a sitting justice, he can pick any of them, without regard to seniority.
Historically, promotion from within has been the exception; only 5 of the 16 chief justices previously served as associate justices, including Chief Justice Rehnquist, who spent his first 14 years on the court as an associate before President Ronald Reagan offered him a promotion in 1986.
The timing of his illness, more than two months before the start of the 109th Congress, raises another prospect: that of a recess appointment to the court. The Constitution gives the president the power to make appointments to fill "vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate," although whether and under what circumstances this authority applies to judges is open to some debate.
A case recently appealed to the Supreme Court on which the court could act as early as Monday challenges the validity of President Bush's appointment of William H. Pryor to a federal appeals court during an 11-day Congressional recess last February.
A recess appointment expires at the end of the following session of Congress unless confirmed by the Senate in the interval - in late 2005 for any appointments made in the remaining weeks of 2004, or at the end of the second session of the new Congress, in late 2006, for appointments made after Jan. 1.
While there have been 12 recess appointments to the Supreme Court, 9 of them occurred in the early years of the country. The only 3 recess appointments in modern times, those of Chief Justice Earl Warren and Justices William J. Brennan Jr. and Potter Stewart, were all made by President Eisenhower in the 1950's.
Although the Senate subsequently confirmed those three justices, the experience left many senators uneasy. While some simply resented the exercise of presidential power, others argued also that judicial independence was compromised by the recess-appointed justices' knowledge that they would be confirmed to lifetime appointments only if the Senate was satisfied with their performance.
In 1960, the Senate passed a resolution opposing the practice on a largely party-line vote, with most Democrats voting for the resolution and all the Republicans opposed.
-------- drug war
US defies protests to poison Afghan poppies
independent.co.uk
By Nick Meo in Kabul
07 November 2004
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia/story.jsp?story=580336
The US is preparing to destroy Afghanistan's opium poppy crop from the air next spring, before it can be harvested, brushing aside objections from aid agencies.
The operation, modelled on controversial efforts to wipe out cocaine-growing in Colombia, reflects growing concern in Washington that the opium trade is financing al-Qa'ida-linked terrorist groups and posing a grave threat to the region's stability. Hundreds of private security contractors and pilots will be hired to spray herbicides from low-flying aircraft.
Senior American officials barely disguise their impatience with British-led efforts at eradication, which have failed to stop a massive increase in Afghan poppy-growing. An annual UN report out next week will show a 64 per cent increase in the area planted over the past year.
"It's time the stick was wielded and farmers understood there is a risk if they plant opium," said a Western official in Kabul. "Some of them will have a rough time, but there simply has to be enough eradication that farmers see risk attached to this business."
Eradication missions are likely to begin in February or March in the southern province of Helmand, although it has not yet been decided whether to begin with an experiment in one area or launch the operation across the country. An American-led campaign targeting drug barons is also expected to start in the next few weeks, with US officials promising to extradite any who can be linked to heroin smuggled into America.
The Pentagon has over-ridden objections from USAid, the official American aid organisation, as well as Britain's Department for International Development. US troops have expressed fears of being dragged into a drugs war, in which Britain's 1,700 soldiers in Afghanistan could also be embroiled. Britain is also expected to have a major intelligence role in anti-narcotics operations.
A Colombia-style operation in Afghanistan could spark rural rebellions, increase support for the Taliban's insurgency and perhaps cause damage to the environment and health, according to critics. They fear that destroying a crop on which an estimated two million farmers and their families now depend for their livelihoods could impoverish whole provinces without stopping the massive flow of heroin to Europe.
The herbicide glyphosate, used in Colombia, is reported to have caused severe skin rashes and other illnesses. If it is accidentally sprayed over legitimate crops, innocent farmers could suffer, and local famines might result.
Critics complain that little is being done to warn farmers that their crops will be destroyed, even though it could make them decide against planting poppies this month. "If this is to be effective they should be showing farmers that they are really serious," one agriculture expert said. "The best way to combat poppy cultivation is to dissuade farmers from growing it in the first place.
"The other step is disrupting the smuggling networks and the seven or eight big figures who control the opium smuggling business. Afghans might have more faith in anti-narcotics measures if pressure was put on the big fish."
Many analysts believe Plan Colombia, the US-funded war against the cocaine trade, has proved ineffective. Much of the trade has relocated to neighbouring countries, and the price of cocaine in America has remained the same.
The five-year, $3.3bn campaign provides training, equipment and intelligence in return for the extradition of 120 alleged drug dealers to the US. In Afghanistan, Britain has helped to train counter-narcotics forces, including the much-praised Force 333, which has already destroyed heroin laboratories.
-------- homeland security / national intelligence
Unrivaled Security Planned for Inauguration
Military Muscle, High-Tech Screening Are Features of First Swearing In Since 9/11
By Sari Horwitz and Spencer S. Hsu
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, November 7, 2004; Page A10
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A31016-2004Nov6?language=printer
An unprecedented level of security will frame President Bush's second inauguration, with officials planning to use thousands of police from across the country, new screening technology for inaugural guests and a military contingent that could include a combat brigade of up to 4,000 troops.
Security is always tight on Inauguration Day, but it will be magnified for the first inauguration since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Law enforcement officials have been preparing for months to protect U.S. and world leaders and citizens who attend.
Organizers are planning a traditional inauguration capped by a parade down Pennsylvania Avenue and the usual evening balls. Bush has yet to name his inauguration committee, which will oversee planning of the pageantry and festivities, but law enforcement agencies are in high gear.
As tens of thousands of people come to Washington to watch the Jan. 20 swearing in, the city will be filled with military personnel, FBI agents in full SWAT outfitting, snipers on rooftops and scores of bomb-detecting dogs. The region's air defenses have been strengthened to prevent intruder aircraft, and sensors will be deployed throughout the area to detect biological, chemical or radiological material.
About 2,000 out-of-town officers will help with security and traffic details. Undercover officers will work the crowds, and D.C. police officers will be posted every six to eight feet along the parade route.
Plans call for sturdier barriers and more checkpoints and metal detectors along the parade route than in previous years. Officials also are setting up a higher-security ticketing and credentialing system for some events, to prevent people from using counterfeit materials to get into the balls and more restricted areas.
"There will be far more security and more police than four years ago," said Terrance W. Gainer, chief of the U.S. Capitol Police, the agency charged with protecting the Capitol, where Bush will be sworn in. "Everything has changed since 9/11, so there is a different context in which this inauguration is being planned."
Law enforcement authorities do not have specific information that al Qaeda or another terrorist group is targeting the inauguration. But the events will attract political leaders from throughout the country and the world and will be staged outside symbols of American democracy, officials said.
"The inaugural is a rich, symbolic, highly visible target," said Jim Rice, the FBI supervisory special agent who overseas the National Capital Response Squad. Rice's squad works closely with the Joint Terrorism Task Force in the FBI's Washington field office to monitor and respond to terrorist threats.
This will be the first inauguration since creation of the Homeland Security Department, which also is a central part of the security planning.
The Secret Service is the lead agency for the inauguration because the ceremony and celebrations are considered a National Special Security Event, a designation that brings with it heightened federal planning and resources.
Officials said the inauguration will be the culmination of a series of high-security events, including the summer political conventions, the Sea Island, Ga., summit of leaders from industrialized nations in June and the funeral in Washington that month of former president Ronald Reagan.
In Northern Virginia, a temporary joint command center is being set up in a federal facility. It will include representatives from other law enforcement agencies, including the D.C. police department, U.S. Park Police, Capitol Police and the FBI.
In addition, officials said the new Joint Forces Headquarters-National Capital Region is prepared to pre-deploy 4,000 active-duty combat forces in the District -- a significant departure from past inaugurations.
The military will support civilian authorities, if needed, and officials said they plan to project a much more forceful image than since at least the time of the Vietnam War.
About 2,000 troops, including members of the 82nd Airborne Division, were flown into Washington for Richard M. Nixon's inauguration in 1969, and some were stationed along the parade route. The military also helped protect the parade route for Nixon's second inauguration, in 1973. In recent decades, uniformed guards have played a mostly ceremonial role and specialized response teams stayed backstage.
In addition, the Military District of Washington Engineer Company, which specializes in extracting survivors from building collapses, and the Marine Corps Chemical Biological Incident Response Force will be on alert in the area.
A maritime security force led by the Coast Guard will include FBI and Department of Energy personnel on boats in the Potomac and Anacostia rivers to guard approaches to the city. Similar details were in place for Reagan's funeral.
"The major message is we are a hard target. We're not just sitting and waiting for something to happen," said Army Maj. Gen. Galen B. Jackman, commanding general of Joint Forces Headquarters-National Capital Region and the Military District of Washington.
For months, units in the command have conducted exercises to prepare for the inauguration, mapping staging areas, routes to rescue sites and emergency procedures from its Fort McNair headquarters. The exercises have contemplated a wide range of potential terrorist incidents, including suicide bombs, truck bombs and chemical releases.
"We will respond with the capabilities necessary to accomplish the mission," said Navy Rear Adm. Jan Gaudio, Jackman's deputy commander.
Authorities are building upon other security measures that have been employed for recent inaugurations. These steps have included inspecting miles of underground Metro and sewer tunnels, sealing manhole covers, closing streets and surveying the more than 450 downtown buildings with at least a partial view of the parade route.
D.C. police officials said they have requested help from scores of police departments east of the Mississippi River. Police Chief Charles H. Ramsey said he expects to need 1,600 to 2,500 officers from other jurisdictions.
In 2001, about 1,200 officers from other area departments helped secure the inauguration and balls, D.C. police officials said. At the time, police were mostly concerned about containing angry demonstrators who were protesting the results of the contested 2000 election. Police reported a few arrests and some vandalism.
Demonstrations are likely to be a concern of police this time. Organizers said they will bring thousands into the city again to protest Bush's second inauguration.
International ANSWER, the antiwar, anti-racism coalition that has sponsored some of Washington's biggest demonstrations against the war in Iraq, has been planning a counter-inauguration rally for months.
Another antiwar coalition, United for Peace and Justice, which organized a massive demonstration outside the Republican National Convention in New York in August, is discussing possible actions in Washington and elsewhere. The purpose, spokesman Bill Dobbs said, would be "to keep the heat on the Bush administration about the occupation of Iraq."
Ramsey said police expect the inaugural parade to follow its traditional route and pass a reviewing stand along Pennsylvania Avenue NW on the north side of the White House. That portion of the street has been closed to vehicle traffic since 1995, and planners said they expect security and design work to be completed in time for Bush's swearing in.
Officials said that none of the security measures is meant to keep people from attending the parade or other events.
"Our goal is to provide as safe an environment as possible, so America can enjoy one of its greatest celebrations, which is the inaugural celebration for the president of the United States," said Homeland Security Department spokesman Brian Roehrkasse.
Staff writers Manny Fernandez and Del Quentin Wilber contributed to this report.
-------- POLITICS
-------- propaganda wars
Four More Years Attributed to Rove's Strategy
Despite Moments of Doubt, Adviser's Planning Paid Off
By Dan Balz and Mike Allen
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, November 7, 2004; Page A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A31003-2004Nov6?language=printer
As Air Force One made its final approach to Andrews Air Force Base on Tuesday afternoon, White House senior adviser Karl Rove juggled a telephone, a pen and a piece of paper, anxiously copying down the first wave of exit polls that showed President Bush trailing John F. Kerry.
"I saw this look on his face and then the phone died," said White House communications director Dan Bartlett. "He said, 'Not good.' " It was, Bartlett added, "like a punch in the gut."
At that point, years of planning and preparation appeared in doubt. Skeptics in the Democratic and Republican parties believed the strategy created by Rove and the rest of Bush's team was about to come crashing down.
Had that happened, it would have put Bush in the history books with his father for having been denied a second term after achieving a 90 percent approval rating, and relegated Rove to the long list of strategists whose theories and assumptions have been undone by the voters.
"I was sick," Rove said in an interview as he talked about those moments on the president's plane. "But then angry when I started seeing the numbers. None of them made any sense."
Those exit polls, of course, turned out to be wrong, as many inside the Bush headquarters believed once they began to examine them in detail, and today Rove is celebrated by none other than the president as "the architect" of the reelection victory.
Admired, disparaged, respected and feared, Rove joins an elite cadre of political strategists who can claim two presidential victories. Bush's adviser can now look toward the goal he has pursued since he was an obscure direct-mail specialist in Texas: the creation of a durable Republican majority in Washington and across the country.
Building the Base, Bit by Bit
The reelection strategy was built on the belief that with U.S. forces in Iraq, the outcome there uncertain, and fighting terrorism still at the forefront of Bush's presidency, Bush had to shape and win the debate on national security and still contend with Democratic criticism that he had ignored domestic problems.
It was also designed around a plan to increase members of the electorate calling themselves Republicans. This has been described as a strategy aimed almost exclusively at energizing and mobilizing the GOP's conservative base. While social and religious conservatives played a significant role in the outcome, Bush campaign manager Ken Mehlman said Bush's advisers also believed they could simultaneously "reach out to and expand the base and expand support among ticket-splitting swing voters."
John Weaver, a strategist for Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) who ended a longtime feud with Rove this year when Bush sought McCain's help, said Rove has moved closer to the goal of creating a Republican majority not by seeking one big realigning election, but by recognizing that political change often is incremental and using every election to get a little bit closer.
"He gets three feet here, three feet there, constantly eroding the other side and grabbing turf," Weaver said. "He has proved his point that you can expand the base, and not just among white males, without drifting or modifying either language or policy. I'm not sure it would work with any other candidate, at any other time. But it worked, and he proved the skeptics wrong."
Rove's assessment is that the 2004 election pushed the country away from deadlock, where it had come to rest after the disputed election four years ago. "We now clearly are not the country that was 49-49," he said. "We're now at 51-48 and may be trending to 51-47. It is incremental but small, persistent change. We saw it in 2002, and we saw it again this year. . . . It tells me we may be seeing part of a rolling realignment."
Bush's victory is likely to enlarge the myth of Rove, with all its layers and complexities, but the reality is that Bush's reelection was secured not by the design or execution of a single person but by a team.
That team included Mehlman, who executed the game plan with an extraordinary grasp of attention to detail, and chief strategist Matthew Dowd, who provided a stream of research on the state of the electorate that kept pessimists at bay and the campaign focused on the big picture rather than, as one insider put it, "chasing rabbits." Long ago, Dowd predicted a victory margin of close to three percentage points.
Others who played significant roles were Bartlett, Republican National Committee Chairman Ed Gillespie, campaign communications director Nicolle Devenish, media adviser Mark McKinnon, rapid response chief Steve Schmidt, political director Terry Nelson, vice presidential advisers I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby and Mary Matalin, and presidential confidante Karen Hughes. Many were regular members of a breakfast group at Rove's house where strategy was developed and great quantities of cholesterol consumed.
No small part of the credit, of course, goes to the president, the point man on the campaign trail and, Rove says, the one who established the broad outlines of the reelection strategy during a meeting with his chief adviser in December 2002 at his Texas ranch. The president also continually prodded his team to keep the pressure on Kerry throughout the campaign.
Rove, who turns 54 at the end of the year, has a 30-year friendship and an unbreakable bond with Bush, the two having first met the day before Thanksgiving 1973. Their history put Rove at the center of the operation, serving as the link between the campaign and the White House and between the campaign advisers and the occupant of the Oval Office.
McKinnon once described Rove, in language of the Internet age, as having "more bandwidth" than any political strategist he had ever worked with, able to juggle many balls and capable of thinking strategically while never losing sight of, or interest in, tracking polls, voter registration data or the details of Kerry's health care plan.
After the president's victory, Rove earned praise even from some of those he bested. One Kerry adviser said: "I think Rove is an incredibly bright and effective and capable guy, and they clearly won. The last guy they need lessons from is me, who lost."
But another Democrat, still digesting a loss that seemed unlikely to Democrats when they first saw the exit polls, called him one of the meanest people in politics. Said Rove: "This is a town that runs on myths. That's one of the myths. The evil Rasputin Rove. There's nothing I can do about it. If you want to rage against the system, blame Rove."
Still, no one suggests that Rove does not play as hard as anyone around. GOP strategists have felt the Rove lash when they were perceived as straying in public from 100 percent support of the president, making them far less willing to talk openly about what they saw as problems with the strategy when the race was in doubt.
But those in the campaign said outsiders rarely see Rove in full, someone they say is generous in giving others credit, willing to listen to ideas and act on them, a cheerleader in times of trouble, able to accept mistakes and move on, and a man with a slightly goofy side.
Reporters traveling with Bush saw that goofy side in the waning days of the campaign. He popped into the press cabin one night wearing a surgical mask. "Dr. Rove is here," he announced. On Halloween night, Rove was among the most gleeful of Bush's senior staff members as they donned camouflage jackets and paraded down the front steps of Air Force One for cameras to poke fun at Kerry's duck-hunting foray.
Targeted GOP Recruitment
Rove said that when he and Bush first talked about a reelection strategy in December 2002, the president, anticipating a race that resembled 2000 in its closeness, laid out a series of requests. He wanted a strategy designed to enlarge GOP majorities in the House and Senate, not what he called a "lonely victory." He wanted more emphasis on grass-roots volunteers. And he told Rove he wanted a campaign about big things and big issues, not "mini ball," and finally said he wanted to leave the Republican Party "stronger, broader and better."
Democrats and others often described Bush's strategy as one designed primarily to energize and mobilize the GOP's conservative base, but Gillespie said, "You had to have energy in your base, but your base doesn't get you to 51 percent."
Mehlman noted that Bush increased his support among various groups: women, Roman Catholics, Latinos (although some people question the accuracy of the exit polls showing Bush with 44 percent of the Hispanic vote). Even among black voters, Bush increased his support by two percentage points.
Bush's advisers said one key to victory was the early decision to change the composition of the electorate by finding and registering more Republicans. "When I went to the RNC in July [2003], I asked Karl what was the most important thing I could do, and he said, 'Close the gap between registered Republicans and registered Democrats,' " Gillespie said. "We registered 3.4 million voters."
Bush's team did not go about this randomly. With considerable assistance from Dowd's research, the Bush operation sniffed out potential voters with precision-guided accuracy, particularly in fast-growing counties beyond the first ring of suburbs of major cities. The campaign used computer models and demographic files to locate probable GOP voters. "They looked at what they read, what they watch, what they spend money on," a party official said.
Once those people were identified, the RNC sought to register them, and the campaign used phone calls, mail and front-porch visits -- all with a message emphasizing the issues about which they cared most -- to encourage them to turn out for Bush. "We got a homogeneous group of new registered voters and stayed on them like dogs," another official said.
That combination -- careful identification of potential Bush voters and continuing contact with the help of a volunteer army that Mehlman said numbered 1.4 million people by Election Day -- helped Bush overcome what Democrats regard as their best-ever get-out-the-vote operation.
Many Democrats have seized on exit polls showing that 22 percent of voters said "moral values" were most important to them as evidence of what brought Bush the victory. But Democratic pollster Geoffrey Garin, in an analysis released yesterday, said he disagrees, noting that Bush had increased his support among nonregular churchgoers more than among churchgoers. "To focus on values misses the crucial point that this was the post-9/11 election, and the war on terror set the stage and the context for the choices many voters were making," Garin wrote.
'Where Real Power Is'
Rove declined to speculate on his next act. He is happily married, dotes on his teenage son and loves Texas. "I serve at the sufferance of the president and with the approval of my wife," he said.
But those around him expect he will stay at Bush's side for the foreseeable future. They note that his interest in policy is as deep as his interest in politics. "Karl sits at the intersection of politics and policy, and that's where real power is exercised in a White House," said a Republican official who works closely with him.
There are still many who question the Bush-Rove strategy, even after the latest success. They say Bush's style of governing from the right, with policies that push the conservative edge of the envelope, puts a ceiling on his and his party's ability to expand significantly more. Others say the Bush model will not survive after he leaves the presidency.
But some of those doubters are chastened by what happened Tuesday. The night before the election, one strategist, who asked for anonymity to be free with his opinions, predicted a Kerry victory. "It's a dumb plan," he said of the Bush campaign strategy. By midnight of election night, as first Florida fell to Bush and then his margin in Ohio mounted, another message arrived. It said, "On second thought . . ."
-------- us politics
Rumsfeld signals he won't 'fade away'
Some think abuse scandal hurt him, wonder whether he'll stay for a second term
MEDIA GENERAL NEWS SERVICE
BY JAMES W. CRAWLEY
Nov 7, 2004
http://www.timesdispatch.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=RTD/MGArticle/RTD_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1031779000047
WASHINGTON - Now that the election is over, the hottest parlor game here will be: "Does Rummy stay, or does he go?"
Rummy, of course, is Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.
In nearly fours years as the Bush administration's point man on defense, Rumsfeld has been a lightning rod. He has pushed transformation of the military into a leaner, meaner fighting machine while fighting terrorists in Afghanistan and mounting a blitzkrieg-style war in Iraq.
Rumsfeld, who also served as defense secretary during the Ford administration, has occupied the Pentagon's top civilian job longer than all but two predecessors - Robert McNamara, defense secretary for Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson; and Caspar Weinberger, President Ronald Reagan's defense chief. Tier 1 Data Center.
In recent months, though, Rumsfeld has been pummeled by critics and senators shocked by the Abu Ghraib prison scandal.
So although no one expects Pentagon policy shifts during a second Bush term, there's a lot of chattering about Rumsfeld's future.
"The $64,000 question becomes what happens to Secretary Rumsfeld," said Thomas Donnelly of the American Enterprise Institute.
Some are not convinced Rumsfeld will leave voluntarily. Asked in September if he intended to "fade away," like Gen. Douglas MacArthur, Rumsfeld said, "I'm old enough to have heard that fellow say that. And I don't intend to say it."
"The job is his as long as [Bush] wants him. Any speculation otherwise is wishful thinking," said John Pike, who heads GlobalSecurity.org, an Alexandria, Va., independent think tank.
Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation analyst Christopher Hellman said Rumsfeld's fate is less clear than that of Secretary of State Colin Powell, who many believe will resign despite public comments to the contrary.
And, if Rumsfeld leaves, who would take his place?
Pentagon Deputy Paul Wolfowitz and Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge have been mentioned. Each has detractors - Wolfowitz because of his neoconservative stances and Ridge for his performance as the nation's anti-terror chief.
Keeping Rumsfeld, one analyst said, may be better than replacing him.
"Sometimes the devil you know is better than the one you don't know," Hellman said.
No major changes are expected to national-security policy over the next four years, analysts said.
"The trajectory is set and they will stay on it," said Jack Spencer, a senior policy analyst at Heritage Foundation, a conservative Washington think tank.
However, among the serious issues that will require decisions, are three: # the impact of continued fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan on military manpower; # whether the Pentagon can transform itself into a more efficient military while fighting a war; # determining which military bases to close or consolidate while the administration develops plans to pull back overseas troops.
Transformation - turning the military into a futuristic fighting force - has been slowed since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, but Rumsfeld still wants it to be his legacy.
"A foundation for transformation has been built, but they haven't built the house yet," Spencer said.
So if bad decisions are made during the next four years, Rumsfeld's initial efforts could collapse, he added.
A new round of base closures is set to begin next year, but critics argue reducing military infrastructure during a war is unwise. With the administration planning to bring thousands of troops back from European bases, some analysts question where those men and women will go if more U.S. bases are shuttered.
Even if Sen. John Kerry had won, analysts said there was little in defense policy a Democratic administration could have changed in the near term.
"When you looked at the security issues, there was not a lot of light between them," said the Center for Arms Control's Hellman.
"There's a limited shopping list of things they can do," he added.
-----
Domestic Issues on the Front Burner
Bush's Legacy May Depend on Policies
By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, November 7, 2004; Page A08
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A30858-2004Nov6?language=printer
After four years of dramatic foreign policy ventures, President Bush has turned his attention to domestic policy, seeking to leave historic stamps on the graduated tax code, the health care system and Social Security, all hallmarks of Democratic rule.
But standing in his way are budget deficits that are, in part, his creation, Democrats bitter over a divisive campaign and the vagueness of his campaign rhetoric.
"It is true the president talked about these things incessantly, but it's like talking about mom and apple pie: Who's opposed to Social Security reform as long as they can imagine whatever they want to think that is?" asked Bruce Bartlett, a conservative economist with the National Center for Policy Analysis. "These are big, controversial issues, and in spite of the Republican majorities [in Congress], you can't ram things like this down people's throats. You have to explain what you're trying to do."
Bush made clear Thursday that he would aggressively pursue adding private investment accounts to Social Security, simplifying the tax code and limiting civil lawsuits. Also on the agenda are expanding domestic energy production, reducing environmental regulations and sweetening tax breaks for individual health insurance policies.
"He wants to be the Republican FDR," said Michael D. Tanner, a Social Security analyst at the Cato Institute, referring to Democratic President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Roosevelt's New Deal policies were adopted in the 1930s to advance economic recovery and social welfare.
All of these upcoming domestic initiatives come against a backdrop of war in Iraq, continued fighting in Afghanistan and tensions around the globe, all costly. The Pentagon is expected to seek an additional $70 billion for Iraqi combat operations early next year, while the transitional costs of a partially privatized Social Security system may range from $100 billion to $150 billion a year for decades. Under those circumstances, Bush could end up not like FDR but like Lyndon B. Johnson, who pursued the guns of Vietnam along with the butter of his war on poverty -- with troublesome economic results.
Each of the issues received consideration in Bush's first term, as well as an airing on the campaign trail. But in most cases, Bush presented only gauzy applause lines, such as allowing younger workers control of some of their Social Security taxes, making the tax code simpler and fairer, and giving people more control over their health care.
Now, he faces the challenge of turning ideas into legislative reality -- and presenting the costs as well as the benefits.
Bush has shied away from such fights before. In November 2001, when he was at the height of his power and popularity, his top economist presented him options for changing Social Security, the benefits and the inevitable costs -- either for beneficiaries who would face cuts, or for the nation, which would face crippling deficits if those cuts were not imposed.
Presented those options, Bush blanched, and the issue slipped into dormancy, as he mobilized the country for war and focused on tax cutting. Now, he is preparing for a fight as he considers his domestic legacy, White House officials say.
"I earned capital in the campaign, political capital," he said Thursday. "And now I intend to spend it."
The legislative road looks long. Bush was not hiding the details of his plans for Social Security and taxes from voters, White House officials and advisers said. They do not exist yet.
With the tax cuts of 2001 and 2003, Bush dictated which taxes to cut and how deeply. With the restructuring of the nation's intelligence apparatus, the White House drafted legislative language. In the case of a prescription drug benefit for Medicare, Bush sent up only a vague set of principles. As for the second-term agenda, White House spokeswoman Claire Buchan said: "We don't know yet. We will talk with members of Congress and others to determine the best way to proceed."
Rep. Charles W. Stenholm (Tex.), perhaps the president's most vocal Democratic supporter on Social Security reform, recalled meeting with Bush's Social Security advisers three months ago. To his surprise, they were not there to explain where Bush was going on the issue but to hear how Stenholm planned to proceed. "It's just been amazing to me," he said. "In four years, there's been so little done at any level, planning for Social Security reform."
After that meeting, Bush and Vice President Cheney personally campaigned for Stenholm's defeat in a redrawn, newly Republican-leaning district. Even Republicans say Stenholm's loss may be Bush's, as he seeks bipartisanship on Social Security. "I hated to lose Charlie," said Rep. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), a champion of fundamental changes in tax policy as well as Social Security private accounts who was just elected to the Senate.
Some of the domestic agenda has been laid out in detail, because the administration was pursuing it during the first term. Bush's top environmental officials said they planned to focus on the policies they had pushed in the past few years, which have been largely hailed by industry as pragmatic and attacked by activists as damaging.
Within months, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Mike Leavitt is planning to issue rules curbing the emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide from power plants in 28 eastern and midwestern states, a proposal restricting mercury pollution from power plants and a regulation setting a stricter standard for fine particle pollution that states must meet. "The mission the president has given me is to increase the velocity of environmental progress -- but do it in a way that maintains our environmental competitiveness," Leavitt said Friday.
In all three cases, environmentalists say the government could go further in curbing pollution from industrial sources.
But on the twin centerpieces of his domestic agenda -- Social Security and tax policy -- much of Washington has been left guessing. This tack -- ambitious ideas with no substantive details -- has sparked concern among some Bush allies and skepticism among independent observers that little will be accomplished.
"The president either has to come up with a specific bill or a very detailed plan," said Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-Ariz.), one of Bush's strongest allies on the partial privatization of Social Security. "A couple of generalities is not going to do it."
Richard Berner, chief U.S. economist at Morgan Stanley, told clients Friday he saw "serious conflicts among the proposals." Simplifying the tax code seems opposed to making the first-term tax cuts and new deductions, such as the $1,000-per-child tax credit, permanent, he said. If such tax breaks are made permanent, he added, it will be far more difficult to lower broad tax rates or implement a national sales tax.
Moreover, record budget deficits created in part by five tax cuts in four years will make it considerably harder to enact an expensive restructuring of Social Security. "Absent other changes to reduce today's sizable deficits and with little time to articulate and sell the details of these proposals, they seem collectively unlikely to pass," Berner concluded.
In his favor, Bush has a slightly larger GOP majority in the House, a considerably larger majority in the Senate and a new crop of conservative senators who championed these issues long before Bush did. But few are under any illusions about the difficulties facing the president. With the budget deficit already at $413 billion, the addition of private investment accounts to Social Security will mean much more government borrowing.
The commission Bush established on Social Security presented three options in December 2001, none of which he would endorse. But the second of those options has received attention at the White House, especially with Bush's Council of Economic Advisers. That option would allow most workers to invest about one-third of their share of Social Security taxes as they choose, but it would also slow the growth of benefits by tying annual increases to inflation instead of the faster growth of wages. It would cost as much as $1.5 trillion over the first 10 years, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.
"It's all nice to propose personal accounts, but then you've got to make the tough choices," Kolbe warned. "You have to accept the short-term transition costs that are going to hit the budget deficit. It's just a matter of being responsible."
To borrow that sum on top of the current deficit would run considerable risk, said Peter R. Orszag, an economist at the Brookings Institution. If international lenders grew tired of U.S. government debt, interest rates could shoot higher, the value of the dollar could decline sharply, and all Americans could face an erosion of their standard of living.
On taxes, Bush has been even more vague. Beyond promising to make the tax code simpler and fairer, he has given only hints that have become a Rorschach test for tax policymakers in Washington.
"At this point, you can imagine infinite variations of tax reform," Bartlett said. "How can you even begin to have a dialogue, do a discussion or have an analysis without more detail?"
Staff writer Juliet Eilperin contributed to this report.
--------
White House's Iraq policy director to step down
November 07, 2004
ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20041107-121427-7482r.htm
The White House's director of postwar policy for Iraq, who was instrumental in helping to set up an interim government to lead that country until elections can be held, is stepping down.
Robert D. Blackwill, a former ambassador to India, has overseen Iraq strategy at the National Security Council since mid-2003. He decided "some time ago" to depart government service after the presidential election, a White House official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said yesterday.
Mr. Blackwill's departure was first reported yesterday in The Washington Post. It was the second report in two days of a ranking official's decision to leave the Bush administration's national security establishment.
On Friday, the State Department confirmed the impending departure of J. Cofer Black, the department's chief counterterrorism official. Like Mr. Blackwill, the former CIA operations officer had told superiors he planned to leave after the elections, and department spokesman Adam Ereli said he will end his 30-year government career in a matter of weeks.
Mr. Blackwill's absence will shorten the list of people reputed to be in the running to replace Condoleezza Rice as President Bush's national security adviser. Miss Rice has told associates she will not stay in the post in the second Bush term and has talked about returning to academic life in California. She was a former provost at Stanford University and was a political science professor.
Mr. Blackwill, whose formal title is coordinator for strategic planning on the NSC, spent months slipping in and out of Baghdad to put a U.S. stamp on a caretaker government in Iraq. The career diplomat was on the shortlist to become ambassador to Iraq in the spring, but Mr. Bush instead chose John Negroponte, former ambassador to the United Nations.
The White House would not comment about any impact of his departure on preparations for the Iraqi elections, scheduled in January, less than three months from now.
Mr. Blackwill worked at the National Security Council in the first Bush presidency. After advising the current president during the 2000 campaign, he spent nearly two years as ambassador in New Delhi. He served at the State Department under Secretaries Henry Kissinger, Alexander Haig and George Shultz and has spent nearly 15 years teaching foreign and defense policy at Harvard University.
--------
President Signals No Major Shift In Foreign Policy
By Glenn Kessler
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, November 7, 2004; Page A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A31002-2004Nov6?language=printer
President Bush faces an array of difficult foreign policy issues in his second term, but he appears unlikely to change the overall direction of an assertive diplomacy that has riled some key allies and led to rising anti-Americanism around the globe, according to administration officials and outside experts.
Administration officials acknowledge that they are considering stylistic shifts and will look for opportunities to reach out to estranged allies. With the election behind them, officials hope policy toward Iraq will not be as politicized, and that nations that have withheld assistance in the hope that Bush would lose will rethink their position.
Some changes will depend on whether key players in Bush's first-term team -- such as fierce rivals Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld -- are replaced. New personnel would lead to a review of policies and, possibly, some shifts in tactics, but the direction would still be set by Bush and Vice President Cheney, a highly influential figure on foreign policy.
"I don't detect any real effort, either within the administration or the broader circles of the Republican Party, to fundamentally change course," said Richard Burt, an assistant secretary of state and ambassador to Germany in the Reagan administration.
"There is an understanding you need to work on repairing relationships but without compromising principles," said an administration official who, like other officials, spoke on the condition of anonymity because of sensitivities during the post-election transition. "There will be a change in tone, perhaps, but on core principles you will not see fundamental shifts."
Strains with Europeans are still apparent. One day after the election, the Bush administration abruptly recognized the Republic of Macedonia, an ally in Iraq, dispensing with a diplomatic fudge adopted 13 years ago to placate Greece, which did not send troops. On Friday, French President Jacques Chirac -- who had sent Bush a handwritten congratulatory note -- left a European summit that included Iraqi interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi early, in what was viewed as a diplomatic snub.
Richard Haass, the State Department's director of policy planning in the first two years of Bush's current term, said that rarely has a president faced such a challenging period in foreign policy. Besides having 135,000 service members engaged in a protracted conflict in Iraq, he said, Bush will need to continue the fight against al Qaeda, confront the prospect that Iran will acquire nuclear weapons and that North Korea will bolster its nuclear arsenal, reassess Arab-Israeli policy to account for Palestinian Authority leader Yasser Arafat's death and find a solution to the genocide in Sudan's Darfur region.
But Haass, now president of the Council on Foreign Relations, said Bush will be constrained in his options, in part because of soaring budget deficits and record borrowing from countries overseas (known as the "current account deficit") and in part because so many U.S. forces are stationed in Iraq. "The war of choice against Iraq has narrowed choices elsewhere for U.S. foreign policy," especially the ability to initiate new wars, Haass said.
President Ronald Reagan was widely disliked overseas in his first term for his tough policies toward the Soviet Union, and then shifted in his second term toward a more conciliatory approach. Some experts have suggested that Bush, interested in establishing a legacy, will be forced to be more pragmatic, especially in light of problems that resulted from the Iraq war.
"I think that the experience of Iraq will have turned out to be a very sobering one for the administration," said James Steinberg, President Bill Clinton's deputy national security adviser. "The notion of [an] ideological set of risk-take, shake-the-table-type moves is much less likely in the second term."
But Philip H. Gordon, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, said he did not see Bush following the Reagan model, in part because he believes Reagan's shift was caused by the rise of a new type of Soviet leader, Mikhail Gorbachev.
"There couldn't be a greater misreading of what to expect of the second term than to believe that somehow, now that's he's been elected, Bush's emphasis is going to be on pursuing a different course," Gordon said. "One thing this president does is what he says he's going to do. He has made very clear what his worldview is, and I don't think anyone should think he would put great priority on changing that worldview for the sake of the relationship of Europe or anything else."
Even during the election, Bush did not moderate his approach, noted Gary Schmitt, director of the Project for the New American Century, a think tank that frequently reflects the views of hard-liners in the administration. "Every chance Bush has had to back away from his agenda in the past year, he hasn't," he said. "In terms of larger policy goals, I don't see much change -- it might be kinder and gentler in some respects, more blunt in other respects."
Bush signaled that he will remain consistent in his post-election news conference last week, during which he focused on a few key foreign-policy issues, such as making sure elections take place in Iraq and promoting his "vision of spreading freedom throughout the greater Middle East." He acknowledged that the invasion of Iraq had caused angst in some parts of the world, and added: "I made the decision I made in order to protect our country, first and foremost. I will continue to do that as the president, but as I do so I will reach out to others and explain why I make the decisions I make."
Some U.S. officials said they expect more cooperation from allies as they adjust to the reality that Bush will be president for another term. "The reality of four more years will change some of their behavior," said an outside adviser who speaks regularly to White House officials. "In the last year, the allies assumed a Bush loss, and that at best froze relations, and at worst they did not want Bush to win."
Gordon, however, noted that Bush is deeply unpopular in Europe and is "demonized in the press," making it harder for leaders to work with the administration.
Two critical issues -- restraining the nuclear ambitions of Iran and North Korea -- do not have good military options and will require close coordination with allies. The possible death of Arafat also provides an opportunity for the administration, which has differed sharply with European allies over whether Arafat was still relevant to the peace process. Bush cut off relations with Arafat, while Europeans still met with him, so his departure would remove that dispute.
During the first Bush term, however, disputes among key officials such as Powell and Rumsfeld made it difficult for the administration to settle on its policy toward Iran, North Korea or the Middle East.
"So much of the administration policy in the first term was characterized by the conflict between Powell and Rumsfeld," said Robert Kagan, an influential foreign-policy analyst who promotes a muscular approach to diplomacy. "That conflict defined and severely hampered policy."
Iran appears to be only two years away from acquiring the ability to produce the key ingredient for nuclear weapons. But the administration has been so divided over whether to confront or engage Iran that it has essentially subcontracted negotiations with Iran to the Europeans, according to Jessica Mathews, president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
"They finished the term just as split as they started," Mathews said. "It is very unusual. To me, the critical question is: Can the president, through the choice of appointments or executive decisions, come down clearly one way or the other on that divide?"
Reflecting the high stakes, Martin Indyk, assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs under Clinton, said Iraq, Iran and the Israeli-Arab conflict hold out the most hope for "a foreign policy legacy of peace, stability and democracy." But, he said, they also "hold out the most danger of it turning into a legacy of bloodshed, instability, high oil prices and exacerbated conflict and terror."
--------
Voting Problems in Ohio Set Off an Alarm
November 7, 2004
By ADAM LIPTAK
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/07/politics/campaign/07elect.html
Voters in Ohio delivered a second term to President Bush by a decisive margin. But the way the vote was conducted there, election law specialists say, exposed a number of weak spots in the nation's election system.
"We dodged a bullet this time, but the problems remain," said Heather K. Gerken, who teaches election law at Harvard. "We have problems with the machines, problems with the patchwork of regulations covering everything from recounts to provisional ballots, and problems with self-interested party officials deciding which votes count."
Had the electoral math been only a little different, lawyers would be examining even closer finishes in other states.
"If it was Iowa or New Mexico that held the balance," said Richard L. Hasen, who teaches election law at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, "we would be in litigation now." Mr. Bush won those states by one percentage point; he won Ohio by two.
As it turned out, though, Ohio was the crucible.
The state relies heavily on punch-card balloting machines of the hanging-chad variety. Voting machines in Ohio failed to register votes for president in 92,000 cases over all this year, a number that includes failure to cast a vote, disallowed double votes and possible counting errors. An electronic voting machine added 3,893 votes to President Bush's tally in a suburban Columbus precinct that has only 800 voters.
Officials in Ohio will be able to reject some of the approximately 155,000 provisional ballots cast there, offered to potential voters whose names could not be located on local election rolls, because of the ambiguity of the standards.
There were also long lines at the polls, and it is unclear how many people grew too dispirited to keep waiting and ended up not voting.
"In Ohio," said Edward B. Foley, who teaches election law at Ohio State University, "there is a cloud over the process, even though there is not a cloud over the result."
Democratic lawyers concluded that challenges based on these problems could not bridge the 135,000-vote deficit Senator John Kerry faced on Wednesday morning. A recount of the punch cards would have yielded no more than 20,000 votes, election law specialists said, and there was no reason to think that those votes or the provisional ballots would uniformly favor Mr. Kerry.
Based on the Ohio experience, election law scholars advocate two types of broad reform: more uniformity within states - in registration lists, voting technologies and the distribution of voting machines - and replacing partisans with professionals in election administration.
"Congress has got to try again," Professor Foley said. "We need more money for machines. We need uniform allocation of machines. And Congress has to develop a clearer picture of the process for evaluating provisional ballots."
All these issues might have been before the courts if the vote in Ohio had been a little tighter.
"We had cases ready to be filed," said Daniel J. Hoffheimer, state counsel to the Kerry campaign in Ohio. "If Senator Kerry had decided to really go to the mat on provisional ballots, the Kerry-Edwards legal team would have looked at all the issues out there."
Most scholars and lawyers agree the main problems in Ohio resulted from technical failures and inadequate resources rather than partisan bickering in polling places or intentional disenfranchisement. But they said poor and minority voters may have suffered disproportionately.
"There is a feeling here that the long-line problem was a problem of disparity that fell along socioeconomic lines," Professor Foley said. "There were isolated instances of long lines here in the seven- to nine-hour range, and the common lines were two to three hours. When your line gets to two or three hours, it's system failure."
Even if the waits were comparable in poorer and richer precincts, legal scholars said, they might have had a disproportionate impact. If time is money, a long wait is a sort of poll tax, and the rich may be more able to pay it.
The lines were in any case baffling, Mr. Hoffheimer said.
"Although the turnout was not as large as the secretary of state had predicted," he said, "in quite a widespread number of precincts around the state, lines were horrendously long. At one time, one of them was estimated to be 22 hours."
On Oct. 29, the Ohio secretary of state, J. Kenneth Blackwell, said he expected 72 percent turnout. His office reported that the actual turnout on Nov. 2 was about 70 percent.
Election law scholars say too many decisions about the election process are now made by people who are partisan. Professor Gerken of Harvard took exception to the actions of Mr. Blackwell, a Republican.
"He was making judgment calls that were simply implausible," she said, citing a decision, later rescinded, that registration forms on anything less than 80-pound paper stock should be rejected.
Legal scholars agreed that changes to the system must be made behind what philosophers call the veil of ignorance - without knowing how the change will affect particular outcomes.
For this reason, it is unclear whether the Colorado initiative that would have allocated the state's electoral votes proportionately was defeated on its merits or because it could have immediately changed the outcome of the election. Bush voters confident of victory in the state may have voted against the measure to ensure that their candidate received all nine of the state's electoral votes.
For similar reasons, scholars say that if litigation is needed to clarify election procedures, it should be brought before an election.
The election left many questions unanswered about its most significant innovation: provisional ballots, required by a 2002 federal law intended to restore public confidence after the grueling Florida recount. County election officials in Ohio are now determining whether those ballots should be counted.
That will take some time, and the process has critics. In Ohio, for instance, four-member county election boards, each with two Republicans and two Democrats, will decide, with the approval of three members needed to count the votes. "Party officials should not be deciding who can vote," Professor Gerken said.
-------- ACTIVISTS
Anti-nuclear protester killed by waste train
Sun Nov 7, 2004
(AFP)
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20041107/wl_afp/france_germany_nuclear
STRASBOURG, France (AFP) - An anti-nuclear protester died in northeastern France after being run over by a train carrying nuclear waste from France to Germany, regional authorities said.
The 21-year-old man, who had chained himself to the railway near the city of Nancy, lost a leg after he was crushed by the train and died despite receiving emergency treatment at the scene.
The authorities said the accident happened in the early afternoon in the town of Avricourt after a group of eight people gathered near the main Paris to Strasbourg line, on which the nuclear transport train was travelling.
"After coming out of a corner at reduced speed, the train was apparently confronted with the group, which moved out of the way with the exception of one person, who was hit," a police statement said.
"Despite the arrival of the emergency services at the scene, the young man died of his injuries," the statement said.
The police did not reveal the man's identity, but said he was aged 21, was "probably" from the Meuse region in eastern France and was part of a group of activists.
Nancy state prosecutor Michel Senthille said that one of the man's legs had been cut off in the incident, contradicting an earlier statement by the regional authorities who had said that both the man's legs had been sectioned.
Earlier the train, which was carrying treated nuclear waste from the French plant at La Hague to Gorleben in northern Germany, was delayed for two hours near Nancy as police removed two protestors who had also chained themselves to the railway lines.
Senthille said that the man who died was not thought to have had links with this group.
The train, which left the retreatment plant at La Hague on Saturday evening, crossed on to German soil at 8:35 pm (1935GMT) Sunday, almost exactly 24 hours later.
It carries 12 containers of spent fuel and is the seventh such consignment to be sent back to Germany since 1996.
A member of protest group Nuclear Out, Gilbert Poirot, said about a dozen protesters had been involved, all of them French nationals.
"It appears that the demonstrators had not put in place safety measures destined to warn the convoy of their presence," he said.
The German Greens Party, which forms part of the German governing coalition, said it was stunned by the death of the demonstrator.
"We deeply regret this tragic death," a spokesman said, adding that he expected a thorough investigation be carried out into the incident.
It called on demonstrators not to risk their lives, an appeal echoed by another anti-nuclear group.
At Hitzacker, 30 kilometres (18 miles) from Gorleben, several hundred people gathered with candles and lanterns in a spontaneous tribute to the dead man.
A spokesman from French nuclear energy firm COGEMA, which manages La Hague nuclear plant said the incident was "a tragedy" and that officials organising the convoy had been "extremely shocked".
On Saturday thousands of anti-nuclear protestors had gathered in northern Germany to protest at the imminent arrival of the shipment.
After demonstrating in Danneberg market square on Saturday, protestors gathered at the railway station and also temporarily blocked the tracks to be used by the train.
From Dannenberg the consignment will be taken by road to Gorleben.
Anti-nuclear and environmental campaigners say the shipments are dangerous and that the waste will contaminate the water table at Gorleben.
Germany, which has no treatment facilities of its own, sends spent fuel rods for reprocessing at the La Hague plant before they are returned here for storage.
--------
Love her or hate her...
One woman's single-handed efforts to make the world a better place are an inspiration to many.
But when she faced execution as a hostage in Iraq, her fellow Japanese overwhelmingly heaped scorn and derision upon her
The Japan Times
By Nao Shimoyachi
Nov. 7, 2004
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/getarticle.pl5?fl20041107x1.htm
Nahoko Takato became famous on the night of April 8 this year, when the Arab satellite broadcaster Al-Jazeera aired video footage of her and two other Japanese held blindfolded at gunpoint in Iraq.
The 34-year-old volunteer worker had been captured in Fallujah -- along with photojournalist Soichiro Koriyama and freelance writer Noriaki Imai -- by militiamen who demanded the withdrawal of Japan's Self-Defense Force troops from Iraq as a condition of their release.
With public opinion in Japan already split down the middle by the dispatch of those troops in February, the plight of the three civilian hostages took center stage in a renewed national debate over the government's decision to contribute to U.S. President George W. Bush's "coalition of the willing.''
However, despite the Japanese government rejecting the captors' demand, the hostages were released unharmed after being held for nine days. During that time, Takato repeatedly pleaded that she had been working to help Iraqi children and was not an enemy of the Iraqi people.
Her release, though, was not to be the end of Takato's ordeal. After returning to Japan, she suffered severe stress disorder caused not so much by having been a captive, but more because of harsh public criticism that the three had been irresponsible to enter Iraq despite a Japanese government warning to civilians not to do so.
A native of Chitose in Hokkaido -- the home base for most of the initial contingent of troops sent to Iraq -- Takato grew up in an environment where, in her 40-student elementary-school class, "all but two were from SDF families." Four years ago, at age 30, she quit her job running a karaoke shop and went to Calcutta in India to do volunteer work with the Missionaries of Charity founded by the late Mother Teresa. She also spent time at hospices for AIDS patients in Thailand and Cambodia.
Takato went to Iraq for the first time in May 2003. Since then, she has worked with local people to organize the provision of medical supplies to hospitals in cities such as Fallujah and Ramadi, and has also helped street children in Baghdad. It was during her fourth stay in Iraq that she was taken hostage.
Takato has recently resumed her work for Iraqi people, using some of the 8 million yen left from money sent to the three former hostages from people across Japan. Although the volatile security situation now prevents her entering Iraq itself, she spent both August and October in Amman, Jordan, coordinating her new projects to rebuild schools in Fallujah and provide job training for street children in Baghdad.
While now being deeply wary of the Japanese media, Takato granted The Japan Times this exclusive interview before flying out once more to Jordan in late September. This week, she also responded by telephone to comment on last weekend's execution of the 24-year-old Japanese hostage Shosei Koda in Iraq.
It is roughly six months since you were taken hostage in Iraq. How do you feel now about your time in captivity?
Before that, I was always asking myself what I could do. But now, I feel more like, "You have to do this." I feel more obligations. Even if I get a job here in Japan, or go back to India, or wherever I go, the experience of having been taken hostage will never leave me.
I was derided by the Japanese people. I was told, "You are sticking your nose into something you have not been asked to do." But if I tried to avoid such criticism in the future, I would never be able to move on, never feel at ease, never get back to my normal life. I can't even fall in love in this state. Things are different now.
Are you still struggling with all that?
The incident had a huge impact and made me aware of a lot of things. One is how Japanese regard people who work for other countries. Yes, I had been told that I was neglecting domestic issues. There is that kind of a culture here. But even when I helped to make Braille books and read out aloud for blind people in Japan, I was told -- in a sarcastic tone -- "How admirable!"
I have also become more aware of the value of human life. I knew about other people's deaths: those of friends and AIDS sufferers. Then, that became about my life too, and I have started thinking about human life through my own life. When I grasped the hands of those dying whom I cared for in India, Thailand and Cambodia, I could feel that human souls never die even if their bodies do.
This feeling has become stronger after the [kidnapping] incident because I might well have been killed. But we -- Imai, Koriyama and I -- all knew too well that our captors had suffered a lot in the past year, too.
Is that what you were thinking when you were being held? Weren't you scared?
Of course I was scared. I couldn't stay rational when I was captured. I froze. When you are in real shock, you can't do anything. The most horrible part was the video shoot. Before that, we [three hostages and our Iraqi captors] were in a good mood, talking about local restaurants and other stuff. I had a hope that we might be able to get out soon. Then, heavily armed men came in and they were so angry! I was scared, but I had known Iraqis were in a terrible situation since before I entered Iraq.
When I learned in an Internet cafe that two Japanese diplomats were killed in Tikrit last November, I cried a lot and Iraqis in the cafe asked me why I was crying. When I told them why, they asked me back, "Do you know how many Spanish were killed on the same day? What about Iraqis? Americans?" They told me that's what a war is about. I was ashamed of myself because that reminded me I was acting like a foreigner, even after I had witnessed so many Iraqis dying terrible deaths.
You avoided appearing in the media very much, and stayed at home for months after the incident. What were you thinking during that period?
The only people I could share my feelings with were those who knew Iraq, who had been there. When I started talking about Iraq, I couldn't control myself. I kept talking about what was happening in Fallujah and how many died in Fallujah, things like that.
There was a critical information gap. Fallujah is seen as a den of vice by the rest of the world. I wanted Japanese people to know what was really happening there.
Fallujah was the first city I visited when I went to Iraq for the first time in May 2003. There, I heard from Iraqis who had been marching peacefully in protest against Americans occupying a local elementary school, about their being shot at by American troops. About 18 people were killed. How can Americans do that? I have American friends. I could not believe what I saw at the hospital there.
What I most wanted to convey during the period when I largely shut myself away at home was why the hostage-taking happened: the background to it. People kept asking me about the incident, but I wanted to talk more about why it happened.
Hostage-taking continues in Iraq, and some hostages have been killed, including Shosei Koda who was beheaded last weekend. What is your view on this, and what do you think of the hostage-takers?
I never met Shosei Koda. I don't know how and with what feelings he entered Iraq. So, I can't comment on that. When I was captured, many different people -- old friends I hadn't seen for ages, and people I had never even met -- spoke about me. The result is a totally different Nahoko Takato. I don't want to do the same thing to other people myself.
What I believe is that there are no national boundaries where human life is concerned. You can't say which life is good and which life is bad. This is an issue of human life.
As for the hostage-taking in general, it isn't known who is really behind it. I guess our case was one of a few, including the one in April involving Junpei Yasuda and Nobutaka Watanabe, that were the result of pure resistance -- I mean resistance movements by local Iraqis. In the cases after that period, such as the killing of South Korean Kim Sun Il in June, I think foreign fighters were playing no small part. Things are getting complicated.
Let me make this clear. Fallujah was the first place where, as early as April, people stood up against American occupation after the fall of Baghdad. I guess foreign fighters crept in around that time, taking advantage of the mess and lack of international attention.
Why do you think the situation in Iraq has become so bad?
That's because all foreigners -- the occupation forces, the foreign radicals and people like me -- just haven't cared enough about the condition of postwar Iraq. We should have noticed that the situation never improved after the war. A faint sign was there early on, but no one paid attention. Information has been very limited and international opinion stands by the aggressors: the Japanese, the Americans, the British, all of them.
I blame myself for not having made enough effort to let people know the facts. I was shocked that some reporters did not know the name of Fallujah until the hostage incident, whereas the city had always been at the center of the Iraq problem.
Why did you start volunteer work?
From being young, I never had a clear image of any profession I wanted to follow. They always ask you what you want to become when you grow up, you know. I had a clear image of what I wanted to be, but that was not connected to a particular profession. I have great respect for Seiho Tajiri [head of the Japanese-African American Society in Atlanta, Ga., who had been living in the U.S. for 40 years when, in 1993, Takato says she "learned how to live" by following him around "carrying his bag" for a year] and Mother Teresa, whose ways of life do not fall into a certain category of profession. I was also interested in Buddha, not the religious Buddha but the private Buddha when he was still Siddhartha: how he agonized over people's suffering, poverty and illness and forsook everything he had to search for the meaning of life. I wanted to find an ideal way of life rather than live for a profession.
Why did you choose to go to India?
I had several other options. I wanted to go to Africa very much, and I was interested in Vietnam, too. When I quit my job at 30, I made up my mind that I would stay someplace for at least a year. Then I saw a video of Mother Teresa, which greatly inspired me. Plus, her organization accepts all people regardless of religion. If you want to work there, all you have to do is turn up and give your name and address. Of course, you have to listen to what they have to say before starting your work, though (laughs).
What motivates you to offer your own time, money and effort to other people?
In the end, it is all for myself and, perhaps, for my family. We never went a day without quarrels. My parents and I were very bad at expressing love. We can't be honest about our feelings when we are close. When we are apart, I think about my parents and write letters to them. Things go smoothly.
In Japan, I was wearing "armor," especially when I was running the karaoke shop. I was in fighting mode because, you know, I had to make a profit (laughs). I got really tired of controlling my feelings in such a way, and I started wanting to be alone.
I stopped wearing that armor when I went to India. When you are with lovely orphans and see people dying, you can't control your feelings. Lots of feelings just poured out of me: I wanted to love those kids, I felt sad, I felt lonely. And I didn't have to control those feelings. I finally found myself at ease.
But it was more than that this time [after her captors released her and Takato returned to Japan]. I have never cried so hard before.
What do you mean?
I had a lot of feelings swirling around inside me. I cried when thinking about the people in Fallujah. I was very frustrated and sad. I felt powerless. I also felt sorry for my family. I was sad when Japanese people spurned me. I cried and cried. I didn't know anyone could cry as much as I did. The only memories I have about that time are of me crying. I don't remember what I was doing or where I was sleeping at home. I don't even remember that Imai came to see me. There is an SDF drill site just across from my house and the sounds of the SDF exercises and shells brought back what happened in Iraq. I would pull a duvet over me to try to shut out the noises.
How else were you affected by the criticism you faced in Japan?
I can't help feeling powerless when I think of people in Fallujah. I survived while thousands of people died. I survived, but I had been shutting myself away at home. I blame myself when I read news reports about Fallujah.
I fell into a cycle of self-disgust and started feeling that the people who accused me were right. All I had done in Iraq felt meaningless. My soul was completely destroyed. I wondered why I had to live. I was nothing more than a physical object in which blood was circulating.
How did you recover from that state?
I received a lot of letters of encouragement, not only from Japan but from abroad. There were Americans who even asked me to come over to their homes for a change. But the biggest factor was when I opened my e-mail inbox for the first time in a while and found e-mails from Iraqis.
Why do you act as an individual rather than participating in a group?
People often say they can't help because they can't speak English, because they don't belong to an NGO, because they don't have nursing qualifications. I was labeled as a "volunteer activist" by the media. What is that? "Volunteer" and "activist" have totally different meanings. When I saw those news articles, I was afraid people might think I was doing that kind of stuff because I am an activist. I hated it. Our daily lives are connected with international society: Every action, from drinking juice to eating a hamburger. After they had killed 1.5 million people, the United Nations recently lifted the economic sanctions imposed on Iraq. Who are the member states? It's us. Even if you are not a doctor, nurse or NGO member, there should be something you can do. I wanted to be sure and show that there was something I could do.
Do you think an individual can make a difference?
Individuals run organizations. An organization involves "dry" parts, such as fundraising and info-collection. Take a humanitarian operation -- you can't do anything with that dry part alone. When you don't have a tractor and need one, you might have to negotiate with local people. There are a lot of "wet" parts. And I think those wet parts are very important.
The same can be said of a nation. The government thinks from the point of view of the national interest. But at the same time, it shouldn't neglect individuals. A nation is not only about a flag. It has to include individuals.
What do you think of the Japanese government deploying the SDF troops in Iraq?
There is no doubt that Iraqis need international assistance. But I feel the military side is too prominent in delivering humanitarian assistance in Iraq. For Iraqis, a military force is a military force. When a U.S. Humvee arrived at a local school to deliver notebooks, kids stepped back. Teachers and staff members went home. The American soldiers were not going to kill them, they were doing humanitarian work. But, still, they were scary. The same can be said of Iraqis. I saw Iraqi girls shrink away when they saw Mujahedeens holding guns. Men in military fatigues with guns are scary for Iraqis because they have had so many horrible experiences due to the military.
So, what do you think Japan should do?
I think there are a lot of things Japan can do as the sole victim nation of atomic bombs. My friends asked Iraqi students about depleted uranium, and 90 percent of those asked knew about it: that it causes diseases and that it affects farm products that harm our bodies if we eat them. As the only nation to have experienced the horror of atomic bombs, Japan should help to study the situation, find out ways to solve the problems and clear the contamination all over the land -- if the SDF has that ability.
What are you going to do in Jordan?
I have two projects. One is to rebuild schools in Fallujah. I wanted to do something at the place where I was taken hostage and where, at the same time, a lot of people were being killed. This is a kind of tribute project to the people of Fallujah. But we can't enter Fallujah. The situation is getting worse and worse. The aerial bombing never stops and Iraqi friends tell me half the population has fled and now live in poultry sheds and suburban resort hotels. We were scheduled to start work on a school on Aug. 31, but we could not. One of the important purposes of this project is to create jobs and stop young Iraqis from becoming fighters in the war. So I didn't want our project to be stalled. As a result, we are thinking of rebuilding a school in Ramadi where the situation looks calm now. And when the situation improves in Fallujah, we will move there and rebuild schools there.
The other project is giving vocational training to street children in Baghdad. Our job-training programs for them have taken off -- at a barber's shop, a carpenter's shop, a steel factory and a blacksmith's workshop. Some are learning how to cook.
Do you want to go back to Iraq someday?
Yes. I do very much because I have such a strong tie to Iraqis now. This is more than sympathy for Iraqis. It was a fatal encounter. If I look at the hostage incident in a positive way, I think I was shaken by Iraqis who said, "You saw the tragedy of Fallujah. You heard the tragedy of Fallujah. Now it is time for you to understand it with your body."
My connection with Fallujah is such that I can never ever say goodbye just because security is bad in Iraq. My dream is to attend the weddings of the boys [street children she has cared for]. I really want to be there when they get married.
What are your long-term plans?
Other than Iraq? My mind is now preoccupied with Iraq. But I think I will live in Japan in the future. It's just that I am not strong enough to live in Japan now. I don't get complained about in India and Iraq for what I do. But in Japan I can't bear it when people keep asking me, "Why do you have to go abroad?" "Are you crazy working in a dangerous country like Iraq?" "What is volunteer work?"
What would you like to do in Japan?
I want to open a free school for drug users and dropouts. Then, I want to do agriculture and farming. I don't mean commercial agriculture, but growing some vegetables and milking cows in a field near my house. This is to do with my own experiences. I think I must consider why I needed glue-sniffing and pills and why it was that I was able to quit them.
When did you take drugs?
I started when I was a sixth-grader. I quit when I was 16. At my junior high school many of the boys belonged to motorcycle gangs and girls started working or got married soon after graduation. I was among the few who went to high school. I was angry at everything around me: parents, teachers and society. I realized that when I saw street boys in Baghdad yelling, "There is nothing interesting in the world!" I was able to get out of that game when I found something interesting other than sniffing glue. It was a music band I joined at high school. A natural high makes you far happier than using drugs.
Is that what you tell the street children in Baghdad?
No way! Hopped-up boys would never listen to a story like that. I don't get mad if I catch them sniffing glue. But I blow up when I catch them wasting food or breaking a promise. I overdo it, using broken Iraqi, because I believe it's important to make them understand that I am angry.
But you are trying to straighten those Iraqi boys out, aren't you? I didn't set out to help them directly. I just showed them there is an exit. The first step was to win their trust. I visited the boys every day, sitting next to them, listening to their stories, smoking and singing together. I had to show that I wasn't going to abandon them. That seriousness and devotion was necessary. Then I rented a house and invited them over to have them take a shower. I told them to wash their clothes, fold them and wear them again. When you live in the streets, you don't wash your clothes. You throw away things easily. I tried to get them to understand a rehabilitation process through washing. When they clean themselves up, they become interested in fashion. They go to the market to find nice clothes. Adults see them differently, which gives the boys confidence. As a result, they now spend less time sniffing glue.
What would you do if you were captured in Iraq again? How would you want your family and the government to act?
I will probably be dead next time. But even if I was killed, I think my family would happily tell you that they had no complaint about that because Nahoko knew what she was doing.
-------
------- 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.