NucNews - December 18, 2004 -------- NUCLEAR Energy companies donate to Bush inauguration fund 12/18/2004 7:50 AM (AP) http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-12-18-bush-fund_x.htm WASHINGTON — More than $4.5 million from the corporate world has flowed to President Bush's inauguration fund, much of it from the energy industry and some of its executives in contributions of $250,000 each. Outside the energy sector, New Orleans Saints football team owner Tom Benson gave $50,000 and his companies gave $200,000, the fund reported Friday. Northrop Grumman Corp., the world's largest shipbuilder and second-largest U.S. defense contractor, donated $100,000. Michael Dell, chairman of Dell Inc., the world's largest personal computer maker, gave $250,000. So did United Technologies, maker products ranging from escalators to aircraft engines. Investment banking firm Stephens Group Inc. of Little Rock, gave $250,000. And the education loan firm Sallie Mae gave $250,000. Occidental Petroleum Corp., whose business stands to benefit from the president's actions concerning Libya, donated $250,000, as did Exxon Mobil, the world's largest publicly traded oil company. Exxon Mobil reported record third-quarter profits, thanks to higher prices for oil and natural gas. In April, Bush took steps to restore normal trade and investment ties with Libya, enabling four American oil companies, including Occidental, to resume commercial activities there after an 18-year absence. Bush's action was a reward to Moammar Gadhafi for eliminating his most destructive weapons programs. Other donors from the energy sector included Texas oilman T. Boone Pickens, who gave $250,000; and former Enron President Richard Kinder, who left the firm five years before it collapsed and now is CEO of one of the largest energy transportation and storage companies in the country. Kinder also gave $250,000. Energy provider Southern Co., which owns utility companies in Alabama, Florida, Georgia and Mississippi, gave $250,000. The Nuclear Energy Institute, the policy organization of the nuclear industry, gave $100,000. -------- india / pakistan Nuclear war a real fear in South Asia By ANWAR IQBAL, Dec. 18, 2004 (UPI) http://fairuse.1accesshost.com/news2/upi-south-asia.html WASHINGTON -- No conventional war between India and Pakistan will remain limited for long and will gradually lead to a full-scale war and ultimately to a nuclear conflict, warns a study by a Pakistani defense official. The study, presented recently at a Washington think-tank, looks at various scenarios that could lead to an all-out war between the two South Asian neighbors, which conducted a series of nuclear tests in May 1998 and also possess nuclear-capable missiles. India and Pakistan have fought three wars since their independence from Britain in 1947 and are still engaged in 57-year-old conflict in the Himalayan valley of Kashmir which caused two of these three wars. Most of the possible war scenarios discussed in this study also focus on Kashmir where most international observers believe even a small conflict has the potential of escalating into a full-fledged war. Recently, both India and Pakistan have agreed to resolve their differences through dialogue and have taken several steps lessen tensions. The study by the Pakistani defense official envisages possible Pakistani response to a various proposals being discussed in India's defense circles for dealing with the Kashmir insurgency, which India blames on Pakistan-backed militants. The author, who wished not to be identified, argues that recently India has put forward the concept of a limited conventional war aimed at achieving a specific political objective, such as putting down the uprising in Kashmir. But the author warns that what India may see as "a limited conventional war," may not be accepted to Pakistan as such. "Similarly, what India defines as limited political perspective, may have a different implication for Pakistan," he adds. The author points out that most Western analysts and scholars are not comfortable with India's limited war doctrine and they also believe that "a limited war between India and Pakistan cannot remain limited for long." Comparing nuclear policies of the two countries, the author says that the central theme of Pakistan's nuclear policy guidelines is to act in a responsible manner and to exercise restraint in conduct of its deterrence policy. Pakistan, he said, also wants to ensure that its nuclear capability does not pose any threat to non-nuclear weapon states in the region. "Pakistan's nuclear capability is very clear for deterrence of aggression and defense of its sovereignty," the author said. India's declared nuclear doctrine, he said, is based on a posture of no first use of nuclear weapons. India, however, retains the option of using nuclear weapons in retaliation against a nuclear, biological or chemical attack on Indian territory or on Indian forces anywhere. "India's doctrine contains an inbuilt offensive design. The most dangerous aspect of this policy is that it keeps the option open for a conventional war against Pakistan," according to the author. Asked why Pakistan had used the option of a limited conventional war in Kargil in 1999, the author said Kargil is part of Siachen sector where limited battles have continued since 1984. Kargil, he said, was a continuation of the same ongoing skirmishes between India and Pakistan. The author then explains various options India may exercise for launching a limited conventional war against Pakistan. These include: -- Surgical strikes conducted along the Line of Control in Kashmir against Pakistani troops and jihadi camps, which India says Pakistan is running on its side of Kashmir. The Indians have already attacked along the LoC to prevent Kashmiri fighters from crossing into Indian Kashmir but never succeeded in acquiring the desired results. So far, India only uses artillery for launching these surgical strikes into Pakistani Kashmir but under the new strategy they will also use air strikes for hitting targets across the LoC. -- Hot pursuits that include physically crossing the LoC and battling envisaged jihadi camps or capturing certain areas. "It is an open option, says the author. "In any war scenario, India can use it." "But if they do so, Pakistan is not going to sit quiet. It will be an act of war which will not remain limited and it can escalate to a full-scale war and ultimately it can lead to a nuclear conflict if Pakistan's national interests are threatened," the author warns. -- Cold start strategy for which India has been raising eight to 10 combat groups to implement this new strategy. Each group will include forces from the army and the air force and, if required, from the navy. Each combat group will have a hard-hitting force of 3,000-4,000 troops and it should be able to achieve its objective in 72 hours, before Pakistan reacts or approaches the international community. The author says that Pakistan will not view an attack by this new force as a limited war. "For us it will be a full-scale war, and Pakistan will respond with full resources, and if we fail to contain the Indians, the nuclear factor will definitely come in." Explaining how a conventional war can lead to a nuclear conflict, the author says: "In a full conventional war, India has the potential to create impact. And if it does so, it will force Pakistan to use its nuclear option." Before the two countries acquired nuclear capability, India's strategy was to invade Pakistan and divide it into north and south. By severing all links between the two parts of the country, India hoped to force Pakistan to negotiate peace on New Delhi's terms. The Indians, the author said, also are considering a number of other options for launching a fast but effective incursion into Pakistan without causing a full-scale war. "But in the final analysis," he said, "all options to initiate war by India may look independent and workable but ultimately will lead to the same destination which both sides would like to avoid as responsible nuclear states." -------- korea North Korea preparing material for more nuclear weapons By Satoshi Ogawa The Sekai Nippo Published December 18, 2004 http://www.wpherald.com/storyview.php?StoryID=20041217-054402-3443r VIENNA -- Claiming to be frustrated by a lack of change in the Bush administration's "hostile policy," a senior North Korean diplomat said his country is working to strengthen its nuclear weapons capability. "My country had informal contact with the United States in New York, but unfortunately we found no change in the Bush administration's hostile policy toward us," Son Mun-san, North Korea's Councilor to the International Atomic Energy Agency, stated in a telephone interview with Sekai Nippo on December 16. "Because of this, the crisis on the Korean Peninsula is intensifying," he said. "My country has no choice other than to enhance our nuclear deterrent force for the secure maintenance of our sovereignty," Son said. Son said that the 5 megawatt nuclear reactor in Yongbyon is currently in full operation. If true, it would mean that North Korea has replaced all 8,000 nuclear fuel rods since the summer of 2003, when it declared that it had completed the reprocessing of all spent nuclear fuel rods from the same facility. According to an IAEA official, nuclear fuel rods that have been placed in a reactor and used for one year can be reprocessed, although some variables depend on how the reactor is operated. Noting that more than a year had passed since North Korea claimed to have completed the reprocessing of all spent fuel rods, the IAEA official said, "North Korea must be ready to begin at any time to reprocess [a new set of 8,000] spent fuel rods at the Radiochemistry Laboratory [North Korea's reprocessing facility] and extract new weapons-grade plutonium." North Korea's claim that its 5 megawatt reactor is in full operation would appear to further cloud the prospects for resuming six-party talks with the United States, Japan, China, Russia, and South Korea. Referring to IAEA Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei's statement in a recent interview with The New York Times that North Korea had already secured enough weapons-grade plutonium for four to six nuclear weapons, Son said, "[ElBaradei's] statement is based on fact." He thus appeared to confirm ElBaradei's assessment. This article was translated from the original Japanese and edited by World Peace Herald. The original text is available at http://www.worldtimes.co.jp/news/world/kiji/041218-170518.html ---- S Korea, Japan urge North to resume nuclear talks Saturday, December 18, 2004. Reuters http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200412/s1268092.htm Leaders of Japan and South Korea have strongly urged North Korea to return to talks aimed at ending its nuclear weapons program. Speaking to reporters following their meeting in southern Japan, Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi and South Korean South Korean President Roh Moo-Hyun agreed that it was important not to hastily impose economic sanctions on North Korea. Calls have been growing in Japan to take the drastic step since Tokyo said last week that bones Pyongyang had handed over as those of Japanese abducted by North Korea decades ago were from other people. "We strongly urge North Korea to return to the negotiating table as soon as possible," Mr Roh told a news conference through an interpreter. "I am not saying I am opposed to sanctions or that they are impossible, but even if they are to be carried out, the decision should be made cautiously and calmly," he said. Mr Roh added that it was his hope that such measures would not have a detrimental effect on the six-party talks or Japan's efforts to normalise ties with North Korea. The leaders held talks in the southern Japanese spa resort of Ibusuki, their second "no-necktie" meeting following one in July on the South Korean resort island of Cheju. Lingering differences from the countries' colonial past, dating back to the early 20th century, have sometimes marred otherwise prospering ties. Japan ruled South Korea for 35 years until its defeat in World War Two. Dozens of trucks belonging to Japanese right-wing groups lined the road leading to Ibusuki, many of them blaring out calls via loudspeaker for Tokyo to take a harder line on Pyongyang. North Korea has warned Japan that it would treat economic sanctions as a "declaration of war" and threatened to try to exclude Tokyo from the six-party nuclear talks. -------- mideast Syria pulls back more troops in Lebanon amid pressure for full withdrawal BEIRUT (AFP) Dec 18, 2004 http://www.spacewar.com/2004/041218195851.nvk0mgno.html The Syrian army announced Saturday another limited pullback of troops in Lebanon, amid mounting international pressure on Damascus to pull out all of its forces and end interference in its smaller neighbor. Syrian army intelligence troops pulled out of their positions at Beirut airport, the southern suburbs of the capital and in the northern coastal town of Batrun, a Lebanese army source told AFP on condition of anonymity late Saturday. A Lebanese army command statement earlier confirmed that "under the directives of Lebanese president Emile Lahoud and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad... a redeployment of Syrian (army) intelligence posts has been decided." The Syrian army intelligence office at the Beirut International Airport would be closed as well as that of Beirut's southern suburbs and Batrun, it said. The measure came "in line with the joint coordination pertaining to the redeployment" of the thousands of Syrian army troops and intelligence forces in Lebanon, it added. "Syrian intelligence bases at Beirut International Airport, near the Bourj al-Barajneh Palestinian camp (in the south) and Batrun are closed and their staff have returned to Syria," said the Lebanese army source. He refused to say how many Syrian personnel were involved. On Saturday afternoon, Syrian army intelligence forces still manned their post in Beirut's southern suburbs, a stronghold of the Lebanese Shiite Muslim militant group Hezbollah, according to an AFP correspondent. The decision to shut the Syrian intelligence posts comes amid growing international pressure for Damascus to end its political and military domination of its tiny neighbor. In September, Damascus evacuated a few army positions south of Beirut, the sixth Syrian troop pullback operation in three years, that has brought down the number of Syrian troops in Lebanon from 35,000 to about 14,000. Syria redeployed its forces in June 2001, again in April 2002 and then twice in 2003, withdrawing the bulk of its troops from Beirut and the surrounding areas into the eastern Bekaa valley. The latest redeployment, 28 years after Syria first sent in troops a year after the outbreak of the 1975-1990 Lebanese civil war, comes after the United Nations, the United States and the European Union ratcheted up the pressure on Damascus over its role in Lebanon. UN Security Council Resolution 1559, passed on September 2, called for the withdrawal of foreign troops from Lebanon and an end to interference in its politics, in a clear message to Syria. It also called for the disarmament of militias, in reference to the Lebanese Shiite Muslim militant Hezbollah and Palestinian camps across the country. And just a day after the resolution was adopted, Lebanon's parliament passed a Syrian-inspired constitutional amendment that extended the term of Damascus protege Lebanese President Emile Lahoud for another three years. Lebanon and Syria both objected to Resolution 1559, considering it an interference in their internal affairs. Last month, Lebanese Information Minister Elie Ferzli said implementing Resolution 1559 too quickly would result in "internal disorder," as Syria's "security cover... is a factor in Lebanon's internal stability." Ferzli also said the disarmament of Hezbollah, which still controls large parts of southern Lebanon after Israeli forces ended their 22-year occupation there in 2000, would be impossible without "overall regional peace." Syria's clout in Lebanon has also raised concerns internally, particularly among Christian leaders who believe Syrian troops should have pulled back years ago. The 1989 Taef national reconciliation agreement, which led to the end of the Lebanese civil war, called for a Syrian army pullback to the eastern Bekaa Valley, but did not set a date for the full pullout. ---- Bin Laden urges oil attacks December 18, 2004 By Shaun Waterman UNITED PRESS INTERNATIONAL http://www.washtimes.com/world/20041217-101527-2437r.htm Terror leader Osama bin Laden, in an hourlong audio recording posted on an Islamist Web site, has urged his followers to attack oil facilities in Iraq and the Persian Gulf, apparently seeking to drive up global oil prices in his war against the West. "One of the most important reasons that our enemies control our land is the pilfering of our oil," bin Laden said and urged his followers to "prevent them from getting the oil and conduct your operations accordingly, particularly in Iraq and the Gulf," according to a U.S. government translation obtained by United Press International. "Targeting America in Iraq in terms of economy and loss of life is a golden and unique opportunity," bin Laden said. Michael Shanahan, spokesman for the American Petroleum Institute declined to comment directly on bin Laden's call, but said there were many factors that could influence the price of crude oil, including concern about the possibility of future terrorist attacks. "If the oil markets believe that there is a threat to the supply, that could have an effect on the price," he said. "We're already paying a 'fear premium' on oil," said al Qaeda analyst and author Peter Bergen. "There's some debate about how much it is, but there is one." "Raising the price of oil does appear to be one of bin Laden's strategic goals," a U.S. official said. Global oil prices rose sharply yesterday on fear of tight U.S. winter fuel supplies and bin Laden's call for attacks on Gulf oil supplies. Light, sweet crude for January delivery climbed $2.10 to settle at $46.28 per barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange. This is not the first time that bin Laden has called for attacks on U.S. and Western economic targets. One such call was followed shortly by an attack on the French oil tanker Limburg off the coast of Yemen in October 2002. U.S. intelligence quickly concluded the recording was of bin Laden, and said it was the first ever to be posted directly to the Web rather than sent to a television channel or other broadcast outlet first. Aimee Ibrahim, an analyst with homeland security consultants DFI International told a conference in Washington earlier this month that al Qaeda has warned Al Jazeera television — which has received the majority of bin Laden messages since September 11, 2001 — against editing its videotapes. A spokesman for the al-Sahab Institute, which produces al Qaeda's videos, told the TV network that if it did not play the tapes in full they would no longer be sent to them. Al Jazeera and most other TV stations generally air only portions of the bin Laden tapes deemed newsworthy, but post the entire transcripts on their Web sites later. "There's been a big debate about the role of Al Jazeera," said Mr. Bergen, noting that the station had been accused of incitement for playing even excerpts of the bin Laden recordings. "That looks like it's basically over now." Al Qaeda has made extensive use of the Internet, posting claims of responsibility for attacks and political statements, and even publishing a magazine, Muaskar al-Battar, online. Mr. Bergen and the U.S. official also confirmed that the latest recording had what Mr. Bergen called "the fastest turnaround" of any previous bin Laden message: it referred to an event that took place only 10 days ago. The recording, posted on a Web site called al-Qal'ah, or "the fortress," praises the Dec. 6 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Jidda, Saudi Arabia. "We pray to Allah to welcome the souls of the mujahideen who attacked the American consulate in Jidda," the speaker said about the assault that left nine dead, including four attackers. -------- missile defense Missile defense deadline scrapped Los Angeles Times Dec. 18, 2004 12:00 AM http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/1218missile18.html WASHINGTON - After the Pentagon's national missile defense system failed a key test this week, the Bush administration has dropped its plans to activate the system by the end of the year. A spokesman for the military's U.S. Northern Command said Friday that the missile system would not become operational until early 2005 at the soonest, meaning the Pentagon will miss a goal advanced by President Bush. The delay in the system followed the failure of an $85 million test undertaken on Wednesday - the second major test in two years to fail - but officials at the Northern Command said the timing of the announcement was unrelated to the failure. Instead, they said a "shakedown" of the system has not been completed. The delay marks an embarrassment for the administration after Bush vowed during the campaign to act against the threat of enemy missiles. "We say to tyrants who believe they can blackmail America and the free world, 'You fire, we're going to shoot it down,' " Bush said Aug. 17. Top military officials also have predicted that the system would be operational this year. "By the end of this year we expect to have a limited operational capability against incoming ballistic missiles," Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said in August. -------- u.s. nuc facilities -------- colorado Plan calls for some public use at former Rocky Flats weapons site Saturday, December 18, 2004 5:56 PM CST (AP) http://www.picayuneitem.com/articles/2004/12/18/news/17nukes.txt http://www.billingsgazette.com/index.php?id=1&display=rednews/2004/12/18/build/nation/80-rocky-flats.inc http://www.gazettetimes.com/articles/2004/12/18/news/the_west/satwes01.txt DENVER - The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on Friday endorsed hiking, hunting and other public use of the former Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant after it is cleaned up and converted to a wildlife refuge. The agency released its draft management plan and environmental impact statement for the 6,240-acre site outside Denver where the government once made plutonium triggers for nuclear warheads. The plan outlines uses for the site after the $7 billion cleanup, scheduled to be complete in 2006. The agency's preferred option includes hiking, cycling, horseback riding and some hunting. It includes about 16 miles of trails, a visitor center and parking. Most of the trails would use existing roads. The possibility of lingering contamination worries some. "It's really unwise to allow public recreation on a site that's still contaminated with some levels of plutonium and toxic materials," said LeRoy Moore, a consultant for the Boulder-based Rocky Mountain Peace and Justice Center. Weapons manufacturing at Rocky Flats was shut down in 1992 because of safety concerns and because of the end of the Cold War. Parts of the complex will become the Rocky Flats National Wildlife Refuge under the control of the Fish and Wildlife Service. The agency's preferred plan includes warning signs and fences around areas that would remain under Energy Department control. On the Net: http://rockyflats.fws.gov -------- tennessee Low performers won't get raise at Y-12 nuclear plant December 18, 2004 (AP) http://www.wate.com/Global/story.asp?S=2710297 OAK RIDGE -- About ten percent of salaried employees at the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant in Oak Ridge won't get raises this year. It's a new policy designed to get poor performing employees to improve or leave. Dennis Ruddy is the president and general manager of BWXT Y-12, the government's contractor at the plant. He says a small percentage of Y-Twelve employees don't work hard enough, and he wants them to be faced with a decision: shape up or ship out. The Y-12 National Security Complex employs 4,700 workers at its facility about 20 miles west of Knoxville. It's the nation's primary storehouse for highly enriched uranium. The plant also makes the second stage of nuclear warheads. -------- MILITARY -------- africa Central African states set up defense command BRAZZAVILLE (AFP) Dec 18, 2004 http://www.spacewar.com/2004/041218212826.jl2rxgfa.html Concerned about growing tension in the tinderbox eastern forests of the Democratic Republic of Congo, central African defense ministers Saturday set up a new military command for the region and called for respect for national frontiers. The move followed suspected incursions by Rwandan troops into the eastern Congo in search of the Hutu rebel fighters that have been accused of staging incursions into Rwanda. An official said this week that the UN mission in the DR Congo was certain that there had been incursions, but was unable to confirm these had been by Rwandan soldiers. The defense ministers from eight countries of the Economic Community of Central African States, meeting for the first time, did not specifically mention Rwanda, but called on all countries to respect international agreements on security, stability, peace and democracy in the Great Lakes region. They urged regional government chiefs to take reciprocal measures to ensure respect for existing frontiers inherited from the colonial era, while giving no indication of what these measures should be. The ministers announced plans to create a general staff for security in the region, with a chief of staff and five deputies responsible for operations, training, logistics, finance and communications. The staff would have the task of directing a 2,400-man regional force that the African Union plans to create for fire-fighting missions in central Africa. The ministers agreed that the first exercises of the new force would be held next year in Chad. The meeting in Brazzaville, the capital of the DRC's neighbor brought together ministers from Angola, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea and Gabon. Rwanda and its violence-torn southern neighbor Burundi were not represented. -------- arms U.S.-Pakistani arms deal tests good will of Indians December 18, 2004 By Desikan Thirunarayanapuram THE WASHINGTON TIMES http://www.washtimes.com/world/20041217-101530-6134r.htm Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, during a visit to India last week, said Washington plans to seek stronger military ties with New Delhi. But it was an impending arms deal with archrival Pakistan that dominated the attention of the Indian leaders, who warned the plan would affect peace talks in the region and the good will for the United States in India. "The defense relationship [with India] is a strong one and something we intend to see is further knitted together as we go forward in the months and years ahead," Mr. Rumsfeld said during the first visit by a senior U.S. official since President Bush's re-election last month. Mr. Rumsfeld avoided any comment on Washington's proposal to sell Pakistan military equipment worth more than $1.2 billion and, more important, on reports that the United States is close to a decision to sell up to 25 F-16 fighter jets to that country. The Pentagon notified Congress last month of the administration's plan to sell Pakistan P-3C Orion surveillance aircraft, TOW-2A missiles and Phalanx guns for ships. This month Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf discussed the purchase of F-16s when he met Mr. Bush in Washington. Hours before Mr. Rumsfeld arrived in New Delhi, India warned the United States the weapons sale would have a negative effect on U.S.-Indian relations. "We have pointed out that the supply of arms to Pakistan, at a time when the India-Pakistan dialogue is at a sensitive stage, would have a negative impact," Indian Foreign Minister Natwar Singh told Parliament. Mr. Singh also said New Delhi has "cautioned" Washington against supplying F-16s to Pakistan, saying it would affect "the good will the U.S. enjoys in India, particularly as a sister democracy." On Capitol Hill, the strong Congressional Caucus on India and Indian Americans made its own effort this week to dissuade the Bush administration from selling advanced weapons and fighter jets to Pakistan. Rep. Gary L. Ackerman, New York Democrat and co-chairman of the caucus, and Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Florida Republican, have urged congressional colleagues to sign a letter urging Mr. Bush to stop the sale of F-16s to Pakistan. "We firmly believe that such a sale would undermine our long-term strategic interests in South Asia and urge you not to grant a license for such a sale," the letter said. Pakistan termed the proposed arms purchase "modest," and called New Delhi's objections "disturbing." "We do not want to match India gun for gun, missile for missile, aircraft for aircraft," a Pakistani government spokesman said this week. On Monday, the U.S. ambassador to India, David Mulford, sought to allay Indian concerns about the arms sale to Pakistan and went a step further, offering high-range weapons to India as well. "We would like to have a very important economic and military relationship with India. We would like to be a big supplier of military equipment to India," Mr. Mulford told reporters. "I don't think any one of [the arms being sold to Pakistan] would change anything in the overall relations between India and Pakistan," he said. Mr. Mulford said India should "de-hyphenate" its relations with the United States from Pakistan. "It is important for both countries not to view all developments through the prism of the other country." Pakistan received its first 40 F-16 fighter jets between 1983 and 1987, largely in return for its help in fighting the Soviet occupation of neighboring Afghanistan. In the following years Pakistan contracted to buy 71 more F-16s and paid $658 million for 28 jets that were ready for delivery, but the sale was stalled by the Clinton administration over Pakistan's plans to develop a nuclear bomb. After the Cold War, U.S. strategic interests in the region shifted. And when the dust settled following nuclear weapons tests by India and Pakistan in 1998, Washington accepted New Delhi as a strategic long-term ally in the region, leaving Pakistan in the lurch. That policy changed after the September 11, 2001, attacks brought world attention back to Afghanistan, whose Taliban rulers had harbored Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda terrorists. Pressed by the United States, Pakistan agreed to end its support for the Taliban. It has since worked with Washington in fighting and capturing al Qaeda terrorists. The new round of cooperation from Pakistan triggered a huge increase in economic and military aid to Islamabad. During a visit there in March, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell announced that Washington planned to designate Pakistan a "major non-NATO ally for the purposes of our future military-to-military relations." Meanwhile, the strategic military ties with India have been growing through joint training, intelligence sharing and high-technology transfers. The United States agreed in May 2003 to allow Israel to sell the advanced Phalcon airborne reconnaissance system to India in a deal worth $1 billion. Washington is also believed to be close to approving Israel's transfer of the Arrow anti-missile system to India. Upgraded Patriot missile systems could be next on New Delhi's wish list. Privately, Indian officials say the new weapons for Pakistan will not substantially upset the military balance in the region. "We can deal with them," an official said. What worries New Delhi more, they say, is the effect of increased weapons supply on the U.S. plans to promote freedom, democracy and moderation and rid the region of Islamist terrorism. They say the weapons being sold will not be useful in fighting terrorism but will strengthen the military rulers in Islamabad. "What Pakistan needs is more educational and economic aid to help remove the root causes of Islamist extremism, not more weapons," said a senior Indian official who requested anonymity. Indian officials and South Asia watchers say the Bush administration's short-term plans to reward and bolster Gen. Musharraf in reward for his help in fighting terrorism in Afghanistan could produce long-term damage. "Short-term tactical considerations are all right, but they should not undermine long-term strategic objectives," one official said. Ashley J. Tellis, a South Asia analyst at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, who worked as an adviser to former U.S. Ambassador to India Robert Blackwill and on Mr. Bush's National Security Council, says the administration's view is that the F-16s would form part of a package designed to simultaneously thank Gen. Musharraf and to encourage him to continue prosecuting the war on terrorism. "That objective is understandable, but the strategy of arming Pakistan to achieve that objective is risky, because it could end up reinforcing the very Pakistani behaviors that we would like see changed — sheltering the Taliban, no progress towards democracy, supporting terrorism against India." Mr. Tellis said the consequences of the arms sales for India-Pakistan relations will be serious. But "the real danger is that Musharraf will view the military aid component as a thank you for great things done, not as an incentive for him to make the hard decisions necessary down the line," he said. ---- Swedish PM faces backlash after support for lifting China arms embargo STOCKHOLM (AFP) Dec 18, 2004 http://www.spacewar.com/2004/041218194747.os3bjs96.html Swedish Prime Minister Goeran Persson faced criticism in parliament on Saturday for his support for a possible lifting of an EU arms embargo on China. Swedish lawmakers were unhappy that the Scandinavian country was abandoning its traditional firm stance regarding respect for human rights in China. "What means of pressure remain?" asked opposition Centrist lawmaker Asa Torstensson from the right-leaning Centrist party, quoted by Swedish news agency TT. European Union leaders on Friday declared their "political will" to lift an arms embargo on China, possibly by next June, while stressing that Beijing must respect human rights and regional stability. "The government had an opportunity to pursue a policy in which human rights are a priority," said another opposition deputy, Cecilia Wistroem of the Liberals. Gustav Fridolin of the Green party, which backs the ruling Social Democrats in parliament, asked why Persson had not called for a stricter monitoring of the arms. Persson said he had called Fredrik Reinfeldt, the leader of the Conservatives, the largest opposition party, from the summit in Brussels to ask him his view on the issue. "I called him and asked him if he thought it was right that we should be the last" to support the embargo, he told TT. "We agreed it would not be an intelligent policy," he said. Reinfeldt stressed the importance to Swedish companies of the Chinese export market. "A policy of symbols without any real effect should not a be a priority," he said. China has never expressed regret for the 1989 massacre of pro-democracy protestors in central Beijing. -------- britain Scots demonstrate against army regiment shake-up LONDON (AFP) Dec 18, 2004 http://www.spacewar.com/2004/041218153552.ykzqoz4y.html Some 2,000 people demonstrated in the icy cold in the streets of Edinburgh on Saturday against plans to merge Britain's Black Watch army regiment, which lost seven soldiers during a recent mission in Iraq, with other units as part of a major military overhaul. The demonstrators, including several former soldiers clad in Scotland's traditional kilt, shouted "no amalgamations! No cuts! No surrender", to demand the survival of their 400-year-old regiment. Britain's Defence Minister Geoff Hoon announced on Thursday the move to scrap the Black Watch -- whose official name is the Royal Highland Regiment -- as a separate entity. The changes form part of a wide-ranging army shake-up which will see other famous units, such as the English-based Queen's Lancashire Regiment, which also served in Iraq, amalgamated. Hoon announced that six Scottish regiments, including the Black Watch -- in existence since 1715, would be merged to form a new "super regiment" called the Royal Regiment of Scotland. The head of the Scottish National Party (SNP) Alex Salmond told Sky News on Saturday the move was "a stab in the back...you can restructure the army without destroying regiments." Five of the Black Watch regiment were killed during the final month in Iraq, after Britain consented to a US request for the regiment to move temporarily from the southern city of Basra to the region around Baghdad nicknamed "the triangle of death". The Black Watch was formed during unrest following the first Jacobite rebellion in 1715, an unsuccessful attempt to restore the Stuart dynasty to the English and Scottish throne, and has been deployed in virtually every other conflict involving Britain ever since. It fought in the Napoleonic wars, in Crimea, the west and south of Africa and the northwest frontier of India during the days of the British empire, and during World Wars I and II. The name Black Watch comes from the combination of its original role -- to "watch" the Highlands of Scotland -- and the very dark tartan of its uniform. -------- business Warning on Russian Didn't Reach Defense Staff State Department sent out a list of firms tied to Viktor Bout, but word didn't get to the military By Stephen Braun and Judy Pasternak Los Angeles Times Staff Writers December 18, 2004 http://fairuse.1accesshost.com/news2/latimes456.html WASHINGTON — The State Department circulated a list of nine air companies linked to reputed arms trafficker Victor Bout in June, warning diplomatic posts against hiring the firms. But the Defense Department, which oversees most of the massive military contracts in Iraq, made no similar effort to warn its agencies, officials said Friday. Planes flown by four firms suspected of ties to the Russian businessman's aviation network landed in Baghdad at least 195 times over the last year, government documents show. The flights operated under military contracts. Defense officials took action against two of the firms in August, but freighters owned by those firms still flew into Iraq as late as November under contracts with other defense agencies, U.S. officials and an executive of one of the firms said. The State Department list was the only known action taken by a U.S. government agency to warn contracting officials against using specific air cargo firms tied to Bout. Critics asked why the Defense Department had not circulated its own list and expressed concern about an apparent lack of coordination between the State and Defense departments. The Treasury Department, meanwhile, publicly targeted Bout in July by ordering his assets frozen, but did not name any of his companies. Bout's aviation network has been accused by United Nations and U.S. officials of arms embargo violations in Africa and also reportedly aided the Taliban in Afghanistan. Defense officials acknowledged Friday that the department had made no broad attempt to duplicate State's warning list or to share it with military contractors. A spokesman said the Pentagon did not supervise the dozens of air cargo and passenger subcontractors that have been hired by the U.S. military to transport supplies and reconstruction materiel. "We don't track the subcontractors," said Glenn Flood, a Defense spokesman. "That's why we wouldn't have a list." Defense moved against suspected Bout firms Air Bas and British Gulf International in August, rescinding government credentials they had used to obtain fuel at military installations in Iraq. In September, the Air Force pressed Federal Express to stop using Air Bas for cargo flights, and it agreed. Bout, contacted by phone this week in Moscow, declined to respond in detail to questions about his relations with the firms. "You are not dealing with facts. You are dealing with allegations," he said. Senior State Department officials and spokesman Jay Greer declined to comment on the warning list circulated in June. But other U.S. officials confirmed its contents. U.S. officials said the list was compiled by the State Department's Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs and the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control, then cabled to State's "procurement executives" in diplomatic posts around the world. The officials said they did not know whether State had offered its list to other agencies, but added that Defense could easily have devised its own by drawing from internal intelligence and information from other agencies. "There was a lot floating around on these companies," one official said. Former officials of the U.S.-led Coalition Provisional Authority, which governed Iraq until this summer, told The Times they did not see any list of air firms suspected of ties to Bout until May. The CIA had raised suspicion about the flights six months earlier. The State Department made the decision to circulate its warning list after Deputy Secretary of State Richard L. Armitage and Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul D. Wolfowitz were questioned about possible dealings with Bout firms by Sen. Russell D. Feingold (D-Wis.) during a May 18 hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. A State official acknowledged to Feingold in a letter two weeks later that the department had "inadvertently" contracted with "air charter services believed to be connected with … Bout." Wolfowitz did not answer Feingold's questions until November, when he confirmed the use of suspected Bout air firms in a classified response, sources said. Feingold said this week that the "apparent lack of Defense supervision over its subcontractors is a real concern." Lee Wolosky, a former White House National Security official who tracked Bout for the Clinton and current Bush administrations, said the fact that the Pentagon had not devised "an integrated watch list speaks to a lack of communication within the government." In addition to Air Bas and Irbis, the State Department's warning list named seven suspected Bout-linked firms and cited Bout and three of his aides. Air Bas and Irbis have been cited in U.N. reports as "fronts" for Bout's arms transport network. The list also names Air Cess, a United Arab Emirates firm that operated out of the office that now houses Air Bas. The Times reported in 2002 that Air Cess was one of several suspected Bout-linked firms that supplied cargo planes to the Taliban. Government records show that Air Bas and Irbis flew for the Air Force, Army and Army Corps of Engineers, as well as Federal Express and KBR, the latter as late as October. KBR is a subsidiary of Halliburton Co. The State warning list also named Jetline, an air firm that flew for KBR and also ferried armored cars into Iraq for the British government. The State list did not mention British Gulf International, which had come under scrutiny by the CPA. There is no evidence that any firms on the State list other than Air Bas, Irbis and Jetline have operated flights into Iraq. At least one charter subcontractor who hired Air Bas planes at $60,000 per flight complained Friday that the U.S. had failed to provide proper guidance. Dinu Kabiwar, manager of Frames International Travel in Middlesex, Britain, said he had hired Air Bas "three or four times" to fly personnel from Bombay, India, to Baghdad for KEC International, an Indian power company working for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. "They should have stipulated in any contract not to use these Russians," Kabiwar said. Times staff writer T. Christian Miller contributed to this report. -------- iraq Agencies warn Bush that U.S. isn't defeating Iraq insurgents Saturday, December 18, 2004 By Knight Ridder Newspapers http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002123501_iraq18.html WASHINGTON — The CIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency and the State Department have warned President Bush that the United States and its Iraqi allies aren't winning the battle against Iraqi insurgents who are trying to derail the country's Jan. 30 elections, according to administration officials. The officials, who agreed to speak only on condition of anonymity because intelligence estimates are classified, said, however, that the battle in Iraq wasn't lost and that successful elections might yet be held next month. But they said the warnings — including one delivered this week to Bush by CIA Director Porter Goss — indicated that U.S. forces hadn't been able to stop the insurgents' intimidation of Iraqi voters, candidates and others who want to participate in the elections. "We don't have an answer to the intimidation," one senior official said. Nor have the United States and interim Iraqi government been able to find any divisions they can exploit to divide and conquer the Sunni Muslim insurgency, the intelligence reports say. The elections are key to U.S. strategy in Iraq, and Bush and his team have insisted that they proceed as scheduled. Bush and other top White House officials have steadfastly predicted the insurgency will fail, even as they have acknowledged lately that violence is rising. "The terrorists will do all they can to delay and disrupt free elections in Iraq, and they will fail," Bush told cheering Marines last week in Camp Pendleton, Calif. But several of the officials said a vital effort to woo Sunnis, who held privileged status under Saddam Hussein and are now leading the insurgency, hasn't borne fruit. "It all boils down to the aura of the former regime. I think there are a lot of people sitting on the fence. They don't want to be seen as collaborating," one defense official said. -------- spies Bush OKs intelligence bill December 18, 2004 By Joseph Curl THE WASHINGTON TIMES http://www.washtimes.com/national/20041217-114549-4735r.htm President Bush yesterday signed into law sweeping legislation to overhaul the U.S. intelligence community and to create a new director of national intelligence to coordinate efforts to prevent another terrorist attack like September 11. "Under this new law, our vast intelligence enterprise will become more unified, coordinated and effective," the president said in a ceremony that included members of Congress and September 11 victims' families. "It will enable us to better do our duty, which is to protect the American people," he said. "The key lesson of September 11, 2001, is that America's intelligence agencies must work together as a single unified enterprise." The bill signing marked the first time the nation's intelligence capabilities have been reformed since President Truman signed the National Security Act of 1947, which created the CIA. The new intelligence director, recommended by the September 11 commission that investigated the causes of the terrorist attacks that killed more than 3,000 people, will oversee 15 federal intelligence agencies, and will be the principal intelligence adviser to the president. The legislation creates a national counterterrorism center to plan and help oversee security operations, and includes a host of anti-terrorism provisions, such as letting officials wiretap "lone wolf" terrorists and improving airline baggage screening procedures. It also increases the number of full-time border patrol agents by 2,000 per year for five years and imposes new federal standards on information that driver's licenses must contain. "The many reforms in this act have a single goal: to ensure that the people in government responsible for defending America have the best possible information to make the best possible decisions," the president said. "America in this new century again faces new threats. Instead of massed armies, we face stateless networks. We face killers who hide in our own cities. We must confront deadly technologies." Many of the law's features resulted from the September 11 commission, which found "deep institutional failings" and missed opportunities to thwart the hijackings by al Qaeda operatives, who crashed planes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Congressional leaders, some of whom attended the bill-signing ceremony praised the new law, which passed both congressional chambers after a rancorous debate. "Bringing together 15 agencies under one command structure will reduce the chance that critical clues about the terrorists will fall through the cracks, as they did on 9/11," said California Rep. Jane Harman, ranking Democrat on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. "Legislation alone won't make us safer. We also need effective leadership. The president should pick a strong manager who will speak truth to power," said Mrs. Harman, one of the bill's chief negotiators. Mr. Bush was joined at the signing ceremony by CIA Director Porter Goss, FBI Director Robert Mueller, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist,Tennessee Republican; House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert, Illinois Republican; Sen. Joe Lieberman, Connecticut Democrat; and National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, whom Mr. Bush has nominated to replace Colin L. Powell as secretary of state. The ceremony was held at the Andrew W. Mellon Auditorium, where U.S. and European leaders formally announced the NATO military alliance to oppose Soviet aggression shortly after the end of World War II. When Congress approved the reforms two weeks ago, some senators complained that the reforms did not go far enough. They questioned whether the new intelligence director would have sufficient power and independence from the White House to avoid the intelligence failures cited by the commission. Former New Jersey Gov. Tom Kean, a Republican and a chairman of the commission, has been mentioned as a candidate for the new position, as well as Adm. William Studeman, a former CIA director and a member of a commission investigating failures in intelligence used to justify the Iraq war. Others include: Lt. Gen. Michael Hayden, head of the National Security Agency; Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage; and White House homeland security adviser Fran Townsend. Mr. Bush said the new director "will have the authority to order the collection of new intelligence, to ensure the sharing of information among agencies, and to establish common standards for the intelligence community's personnel." The White House said no decision has been made about who will fill the new position. "There's a window of some six months where many of these provisions will be implemented," Bush spokesman Scott McClellan said, adding, "We will move as quickly as possible to put in place a director of national intelligence." ---- Bush Signs Intelligence Reform Bill President Now Must Find an Experienced Hand to Guide 15 Agencies By Peter Baker and Walter Pincus Washington Post Staff Writers Saturday, December 18, 2004; Page A01 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A6861-2004Dec17?language=printer President Bush signed into law yesterday the broadest reorganization of the nation's intelligence community in more than half a century, overhauling a sprawling system that failed to head off devastating terrorist attacks three years ago and then misjudged the threat posed by Iraq a year later. The new law, which grew out of this summer's report by the national commission that investigated the Sept. 11, 2001, strikes on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, erects a new architecture for U.S. intelligence gathering designed to end the bureaucratic infighting and miscommunication that preceded the attacks. Under the new system, the 15 separate intelligence agencies will be brought together under a single command structure headed by a director who will largely control their budgets and report to the president. The measure creates a national counterterrorism center, bolsters border and aviation security, and establishes a civil liberties board to serve as a check on excesses in the fight against terrorism. And it will change such things as the way Americans get driver's licenses and the way foreigners get visas. Bush, who initially opposed creation of the 9/11 commission and later resisted some of its recommendations, hailed the resulting legislation yesterday as a historic step toward heading off future terrorist attacks. "A key lesson of September the 11th, 2001, is that America's intelligence agencies must work together as a single, unified enterprise," he said at a ceremony at the Andrew W. Mellon Auditorium, the same hall where President Harry S. Truman signed the treaty creating NATO in 1949. Bush added, "The many reforms in this act have a single goal: to ensure that the people in government responsible for defending America have the best possible information to make the best possible decision." The president gave no indication whom he might pick to fill the new position of director of national intelligence. Newly installed CIA Director Porter J. Goss, once considered the favorite, has been ruled out, according to senior administration officials, who said he never wanted the new job. Goss probably would have faced tough questioning at confirmation hearings about his conflicts with senior CIA officials who have left the agency rather than work for him. With Goss remaining at Langley, Bush faces the challenge of finding someone of equal or greater public stature with "extensive national security expertise," as required by the law. The measure indicates that Congress wanted either the director or his principal deputy to be an active or retired military officer. Among the names floated are retired Gen. Tommy R. Franks, who commanded troops in Afghanistan and Iraq; Adm. William O. Studeman, a former deputy CIA director now serving on a Bush panel studying the intelligence failures on Iraqi weapons programs; Lt. Gen. Michael V. Hayden, head of the National Security Agency, which handles electronic eavesdropping; Frances Fragos Townsend, the president's homeland security adviser; John F. Lehman, a former Navy secretary who served on the Sept. 11 commission; Richard L. Armitage, outgoing deputy secretary of state; and James R. Clapper Jr., director of the National Geospatial Agency, which does imagery intelligence. The chairman and vice chairman of the 9/11 commission, former New Jersey governor Thomas H. Kean and former congressman Lee H. Hamilton, who were at Bush's side yesterday, have been mentioned as candidates, but Bush advisers noted that they might not have the national security experience required by the statute. "Legislation alone won't make us safer," Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.), one of the chief negotiators of the intelligence bill, said in a statement. "We also need effective leadership. The president should pick a strong manager who will speak truth to power." The president plans other changes to the intelligence structure in coming weeks. Bush plans to replace most of the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board and make it a more "activist" body again, a Bush adviser familiar with thinking in the White House said. The board, while still meeting, has not been asked to undertake new studies since its outgoing chairman, Brent Scowcroft, who was national security adviser for Bush's father, broke with the current president over Iraq. The changes enacted yesterday add up to the most substantial restructuring of U.S. intelligence since Truman signed the National Security Act in 1947. Bush embraced the concept of investing budgetary authority with the new director of national intelligence, an idea he originally did not endorse. And he said the CIA will report only to the new intelligence director. Still, he emphasized that the CIA "will retain its core responsibilities for collecting human intelligence [and] analyzing intelligence from all sources" and will undertake tasks "at the direction of the president," not the new intelligence director. And in a nod to critics who nearly held up the bill out of concern about diminishing the military's ability to use intelligence during wartime, Bush emphasized that the new law "will preserve the existing chain of command" for Pentagon agencies. "Our military commanders," he added, "will continue to have quick access to the intelligence they need to achieve victory on the battlefield." The relatives of Sept. 11 victims who led the effort to push the law through Congress called it a necessary wake-up call to a government that did not protect their loved ones. "It's a sea change," Beverly Eckert, who lost her husband in the World Trade Center, said in an interview after the ceremony. "It's an infusion of oxygen into this really calcified system we have in Washington. If it took our energy and our grief to make it happen, so be it." Others considered the effect of the new law uncertain. James Lewis, who heads the intelligence project at the Center for Strategic & International Studies, said the measure "has a lot of fuzzy language" that can be implemented however Bush wants. By itself, he added, it might simply result in changes in the organization chart. "All the problems Porter Goss faces, the new guy faces," he said. "All it does is shift the responsibility a little bit." Moreover, the legislation left many recommendations of the Sept. 11 commission still unfulfilled, including restructuring congressional oversight as well as broader strategic efforts to prevent proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Nor did it address commission recommendations to rethink U.S. relations with Saudi Arabia or to expand diplomatic efforts to win friends in the Muslim world. In addition to Kean, Hamilton, Harman and Goss, Bush was joined at the ceremony by Republican and Democratic legislators who crafted the bill and relatives of Sept. 11 victims. Among those on hand was Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) but not House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.), who was in Europe for a celebration of the 60th anniversary of the Battle of the Bulge. -------- us Fallujah assault still exacting heavy toll on mental health of US marines Posted: Saturday December 18, 2004 - 09:47:00 am (AFP) http://www.sierratimes.com/rss/newswire.php?article=/afp/20041218/ts_alt_afp/iraqusmilitaryhealth&time=1103392020&feed=iraq NEAR FALLUJAH, Iraq - Nearly six weeks after US marines stormed the rebel enclave of Fallujah, military psychologists are still seeing a steady stream of service personnel traumatised by the long days and nights of ferocious street fighting. In the macho culture of the US Marine Corps, it is sometimes hard for its personnel, male or female, to admit they have a problem and some try to ride out the symptoms, only seeking help after weeks of suffering in silence. The warning signs can range from irritability to extreme apathy, says Lieutenant Erryn Simmons, a trained psychologist who runs a combat stress management unit in this US base just outside the western Iraqi city. Her colleague Lieutenant Thomas Fearing nods in agreement. "They are coming to us predominantly for sleep-related problems, such as insomnia or nightmares, bad dreams," he says. "After the offensive began, we had a lot of patients, then there was this lull, and it has picked up again recently with people trying to sit on their symptoms." The marines lost more than 50 dead and hundreds wounded, some of them seriously, in the huge assault launched on November 8, the largest since last year's invasion. The US-backed government put rebel losses at more than 2,000, although unit commanders later revealed their troops had orders to shoot all males of fighting age seen on the streets, armed or unarmed, and ruined homes across the city attest to a strategy of overwhelming force. The marines who seek help can be haunted by the sight of appalling injuries, the screams of wounded comrades, the fear of death, or simply the chaotic hell of combat, the psychologists say. "We get mostly enlisted men, because they represent the bulk of our troops, but we also get a few NCOs and officers," says Simmons. "We are here to prevent the combat stress symptoms from turning into post-combat syndrome disorder," she says. "One technique is the listening experience, where we try to make them realise what really happened, how it happened, and why they display symptoms of stress because of this. "We also have relaxation strategies or we can use sleep medication." Fearing says most of those seeking help have been treated successfully through counselling, although one or two have needed more intensive therapy. "All went back to duty, except for a few worst cases... we had a couple of them staying a few days with us," he says. Given the difficulties of getting marines to seek help in the first place, it is perhaps understandable that the corps's press officers refused AFP's requests to interview some of the servicemen and women who were receiving treatment. The marines were the last of the services in the US military to acknowledge that the stresses of the combat could undermine its fighting capacity and to recruit psychologists to provide counselling and other therapies. "You are talking about a very macho, masculine environment, where there is a stigma attached to looking weak or in fear," says Simmons, one of a growing number of women in the corps. "But I guess there's been a real shift to admit that somebody suffering from combat stress is not necessarily deranged or crazy." At the moment the unit is treating five or six patients a day. Most return to active duty after a short series of 45-minute counselling sessions. Simmons says that oddly it is more effective to treat traumatised personnel within their units rather than sending them home to families, who can often struggle to understand what their loved ones have been through. "It's better if we can keep them with us, because we can provide support," she says. "Maybe, it's better for them than to be sent back home, because, for some, their stronger family is here not there." -------- POLICE / PRISONERS / COURTS / JUSTICE -------- homeland security / national intelligence Law Lets Passengers Appeal No-Fly List TSA Required to Improve Watch Lists; Screening Program Set for January Test By Sara Kehaulani Goo Washington Post Staff Writer Saturday, December 18, 2004; Page A21 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A8986-2004Dec17?language=printer Passengers will have a way to appeal if their name turns up on the government's no-fly list, under provisions of the intelligence bill signed into law yesterday. The law requires the Transportation Security Administration to create a system for travelers to correct inaccurate information that has landed them on the no-fly list. It also directs the Department of Homeland Security to create a Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board to ensure that anti-terrorist government actions do not infringe on people's rights. The provisions, among several airline security improvements in the bill, follow a series of embarrassing incidents in which hundreds of private citizens and some members of Congress were initially denied boarding because their names were flagged by a TSA computer security system that maintains the government's watch lists. "People around the country are complaining about being on the list," said Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), who has been stopped dozens of times because his name is confused with another on the TSA's secret no-fly list. Lewis has contacted the TSA to resolve the problem, but he said he still gets singled out occasionally. Lewis said he hoped the new law would help. "I thought [the situation] had improved until a few days ago," he said, when he flew from Atlanta to Florida and got snagged in the system. The law requires the TSA to improve the watch lists, and it outlines a new schedule for developing a much-delayed computer passenger prescreening system known as Secure Flight. Congress directs the TSA to begin testing the new system by Jan. 1 and requires airlines to begin regularly turning over passenger records 180 days after the testing is complete. The law also requires that the system safeguard passengers' privacy. It also directs the TSA to ban butane lighters in carry-on bags. Such lighters and matches are currently allowed on board, to the dismay of Democratic Sens. Ron Wyden (Ore.) and Byron L. Dorgan (N.D.). The airline security provisions also direct the TSA to act on security technologies that have been available for years but have yet to become common at U.S. airports. Congress directs the agency to begin deploying more "sniffers" that can detect explosive residue on travelers' clothing, and it calls for several studies and test programs, including one to evaluate blast-resistant airline cargo containers. Several members of Congress pushed for wider use of biometric technology, such as digital fingerprinting equipment that is already in place for foreign travelers at U.S. airports. Congress also sought broader implementation of eye-scanning machines being tested with frequent fliers at Reagan National Airport. The law calls for the TSA by April 2005 to develop a biometric standard, which could be adopted by other government agencies. "Until TSA and Homeland Security adopt a biometric standard, almost every other agency at the federal, state and local level is left at bay," said Rep. John L. Mica (R-Fla.), chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure's aviation subcommittee. He called it one of the most important provisions in the bill. The measure was intended to prod the TSA and the department, he said, which "have sort of dragged their feet." A Department of Homeland Security spokesman said the agency is reviewing the law. -------- OTHER -------- environment Areas With Dirtiest Air Named D.C., 20 States Must Devise Ways To Reduce Soot By Juliet Eilperin Washington Post Staff Writer Saturday, December 18, 2004; Page A20 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A9029-2004Dec17?language=printer About one-third of all Americans -- including residents of the District of Columbia, large swaths of Maryland and much of northern Virginia -- live in areas with dangerous levels of soot pollution in the air, Environmental Protection Agency officials said yesterday. EPA Administrator Mike Leavitt said yesterday's designations -- which will require 20 states and the District to devise strategies within three years to reduce the level of tiny air particles linked to respiratory illness and premature death -- show that the administration is making progress in protecting public health. "This is not a story about the air getting dirtier; this is a story about higher and more stringent standards and healthier air," Leavitt said. He added that, as of 2003, the average concentration of fine particles in the air nationwide had declined 10 percent since 1999, when the EPA began monitoring it. America's air, he said, is "cleaner than anytime in memory, but we're not done yet." Yesterday's listing identified communities that do not meet the national air quality standard -- established in 1997 under legal pressure from environmentalists -- for particles that are about one-thirtieth the width of an average human hair. This pollution, mainly soot from power plants, automobiles, forest fires and heavy-duty diesel engines, can penetrate the lungs and exacerbate respiratory and heart diseases. EPA officials estimate that if most of the 224 targeted counties and the District can meet the new standard by 2010, at least 15,000 premature deaths would be prevented, along with 75,000 cases of chronic bronchitis and 3.1 million days of missed work. John Bachmann, associate director for science and policy in the EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, called fine particles "the most important pollution we have." He said the benefits of reducing it outweigh the cost by 20 to 1. On the East Coast and in the Midwest, most communities failing to meet the new standard are major cities or counties clustered around power plants, while in Southern California, automobiles account for much of the fine-particle pollution. EPA officials said they based their designations of noncomplying areas -- which included more counties than many states had wanted but fewer than environmentalists had called for -- on such factors as population density, air quality over the past three years, traffic volume and expected future growth. By 2007, every community that fails to meet the fine-particle standard must submit an air-quality plan for federal approval; if they fail to do so, they would face penalties, including the potential loss of highway funding. Federal officials, however, rarely impose that sanction. Many communities resist the "non-attainment" air-quality label because it can deter new investment, since emitters face stricter pollution curbs in communities that fail to meet the federal standard. Leavitt said his home state of Utah and other communities had prospered economically despite failing to meet earlier federal standards, but the National Association of Manufacturers said companies considering relocation would weigh the higher costs associated with moving to an area with more restrictive emissions rules. "It's a question of how to strike a balance between economic development and environmental standards," NAM spokesman Darren McKinney said. Officials in the District, Maryland and Virginia face the problem of trying to clean the air when much of the area's pollution comes from neighboring states. Virginia fought the non-attainment designation for nine of its counties. Tom Snyder, director of air and radiation management at Maryland's Department of the Environment, said the state is "the victim of significant pollution transport," with 60 percent of its fine-particle concentration coming from the Midwest and the South. Stuart Freudberg, director of environmental programs at the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, said meeting the tougher fine-particle rules by the 2010 deadline is "going to be challenging but doable." The council represents 19 local governments, including the District's. "It's a regional problem, and it needs to be a regional solution," Freudberg said. The new designations come at a time when Congress and the administration are debating how best to reduce harmful pollutants from power plants and other industrial sources. President Bush is pushing legislation titled "Clear Skies" that would reduce nitrogen oxide and sulfur dioxide pollution -- two major contributors to fine-particle contamination -- by 70 percent sometime after 2015. EPA officials said this bill, coupled with an administration rule aimed at cleaning up off-road diesel engines, would bring 90 percent of the communities the agency listed yesterday into compliance with the new air quality standard. But S. William Becker, executive director of the Association of Local Air Pollution Control Officials, said the administration is placing an unfair burden on states and local communities by delaying the new pollution controls on power plants until 2015, even though the affected areas must come into compliance with fine-particle rules five years earlier. "EPA air-quality rules allow industry far more time to reduce its environmental impact than for states to comply with national air quality standards," Becker said. "It's the power plant reductions on which the states are relying on to help." --------- New Panel to Direct U.S. Policy on Oceans Crisis Isn't Being Addressed, Critics Say By Jim VandeHei and Juliet Eilperin Washington Post Staff Writers Saturday, December 18, 2004; Page A20 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A9030-2004Dec17?language=printer President Bush created a White House panel yesterday to consider ways to clean up the world's oceans by better managing fish populations, regulating pollution and more thoroughly examining future threats to ocean life. But some environmentalists charged that Bush is moving too slowly and timidly to address what they called a serious environmental crisis off the coasts of the United States. Responding to recommendations of a presidential commission that spent nearly three years investigating ways to restore the oceans to health, Bush issued an executive order to begin revising the nation's policies through a Cabinet-level Committee on Ocean Policy. The commission, which issued its final report three months ago, said that the nation's fisheries are in trouble and that the federal government must change how it manages the seas and must spend more on ocean research and conservation within the next five years. The United States spends $8 billion on ocean-related activities each year. The new committee will begin reviewing government programs dealing with everything from protecting coral reefs off the Florida coast to managing fisheries, according to James L. Connaughton, chairman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality. Connaughton, who will head the committee, told reporters the president wants "strong management from the top" for the 4.5 million square miles of ocean under U.S. jurisdiction. Connaughton said the White House will act immediately on 40 of the commission's 200-plus recommendations, although most of these actions would not lead to noticeable changes in the nation's oceans policies. The White House did not offer an opinion on some of the most sweeping proposed changes, including creating a $4 billion trust fund for new ocean initiatives. The fund would require congressional approval and would be financed by diverting about 80 percent of the government's oil and gas royalties. Retired Adm. James D. Watkins, who chaired the commission, has warned that it would be a tough sell politically because lawmakers prefer tapping those funds for other programs. The only new funding Connaughton announced was $2.7 million that will be requested in the fiscal 2006 budget for coral reef improvements in Florida and elsewhere. He said it is unclear how much the other 39 changes will cost. "For the president and the administration to recognize there is a crisis in the oceans is an important step," said Leon E. Panetta, a White House chief of staff during the Clinton administration, who has been a strong advocate for a new policy. "One can quarrel with the [details], but I have to look at this as a good first step." Some environmentalists said they are pleased the president has taken initiatives to address the ocean's current plight, but others said the White House is not devoting enough money or attention to the problem. Sarah Chasis, director of water and coastal programs at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said the new commission needs "clear policy direction" from the president and questioned why the administration is not doing more to reform fishery management councils. These councils are often dominated by commercial and recreational fishing interests and often allow bigger catches than many scientists recommend. The administration backs individual fishing quotas that would allow fishermen to buy and trade commercial allowances. "We were looking for bold leadership, and what we've seen today indicates a tepid response with minimal detail," said Ted Morton, federal policy director at Oceana, a conservation group. -------- ACTIVISTS Activists Allege Effort to Limit Inaugural Route Access By Manny Fernandez Washington Post Staff Writer Saturday, December 18, 2004; Page B03 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A9136-2004Dec17?language=printer A coalition of antiwar activists accused inaugural planners yesterday of trying to restrict access to the Pennsylvania Avenue NW parade route to protesters, an allegation that federal authorities denied. Organizers with International ANSWER, an antiwar coalition that has sponsored numerous protests of the U.S. war in Iraq, said at a news conference that a map they received from the National Park Service shows blocks of the avenue taken up by 10- to 42-foot-high bleachers, including many areas where the coalition hoped to stage protests. Brian Becker, the coalition's national coordinator, said the Bush administration, the Park Service and the Presidential Inaugural Committee are attempting to prevent demonstrators who oppose the administration's foreign and domestic policies from assembling near the parade route in large numbers. The administration wants to "marginalize dissent and push free speech to the background," Becker said. Park Service spokesman Bill Line said that the accusation was without merit and that the public and demonstrators will be allowed onto open areas of the Pennsylvania Avenue sidewalks on Jan. 20. ANSWER applied to the Park Service in January for permits to assemble on the avenue and in other downtown areas, including Freedom Plaza. Line said the Park Service expects to issue permits to the coalition for designated portions of the sidewalks. He said that the bleacher plan is not final and that the coalition's request for other spaces is still being evaluated. Line said no determination has yet been made on where protest groups will be allowed to assemble along the parade route, but he emphasized that they will be allowed to assemble there. "Demonstrators of all types, regardless of their message, will be fully allowed access onto Pennsylvania Avenue," he said. Park Service officials and organizers with ANSWER, which stands for Act Now to Stop War and End Racism, plan to meet Monday. The coalition's protest is one of several planned for Inauguration Day, and organizers expect tens of thousands of anti-Bush activists from across the nation. Protesters have established Web sites such as www.counter-inaugural.org, posted ideas and inquiries on e-mail discussion groups and created a loose-knit coordinating body that meets weekly in Washington and includes representatives of several dozen groups. The D.C. Anti-War Network has called for a permitted march from Meridian Hill Park in Columbia Heights to Franklin Square. The group also plans civil disobedience in the form of a "die-in," details of which are still being worked out. Another group has called for a "silent" protest, asking activists to leave their signs and buttons at home, find spots along the route and, at a given signal, turn their backs on Bush. Jet Heiko, 31, national organizer for turnyourbackonbush.org, said 10,000 people are expected to participate. With up to 500 organizers in 39 states involved, he said, that number will grow. Four years ago, thousands of demonstrators filled parts of downtown and lined several blocks of the inaugural parade route.