NucNews - December 20, 2004 -------- NUCLEAR Weapons-Grade Paranoia by Gordon Prather Antiwar.com December 20, 2004 http://www.antiwar.com/prather/?articleid=4187 According to Undersecretary of State John Bolton, "[T]he United States strongly believes that Iran has a clandestine program to produce nuclear weapons, and has been warning publicly about Tehran's weapons ambitions for over a decade." Now, having nuke ambitions is one thing. Having the fissile material – plutonium-239 or uranium-235 – needed to produce nukes is quite another. The key to preventing nuke proliferation is the international control of the production, processing, transformation, and disposition of certain nuclear materials. In return for a promise to not acquire or seek to acquire nukes, the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons recognizes the "inalienable right" of all signatories to enjoy the peaceful benefits of nuclear energy. But all NPT-proscribed nuclear materials – as well as the facilities in which they are stored, processed, transformed, or consumed – have to be made subject to an International Atomic Energy Agency Safeguards Agreement. More than a year ago, Iran signed an Additional Protocol to its Safeguards Agreement, vastly expanding the authority of IAEA inspectors to go anywhere and see anything. Director General Mohamed ElBaradei has just reported to the IAEA Board of Governors that after a year-long exhaustive and intrusive inspection he has found no evidence yet that Iran has (or ever has had) a nuke program. So, perhaps what Bolton should have said is that the United States strongly believes – despite all evidence to the contrary – that Iran has a clandestine program to produce nuclear weapons. Take, for example, the nuclear power plant under construction at Bushehr, Iran. Siemens began construction in the 1970s of two plants at Bushehr and had nearly finished one of them when both were practically destroyed during the Iran-Iraq War. Until 1995, the U.S. effectively prohibited any Western-based engineering firm from resuming construction. But then, Russia overrode U.S. objections and agreed – in return for about $800 million in hard currency – to build a conventional, Soviet-designed 1,000-MWe nuclear power plant at Bushehr. Now scheduled for completion in 2006, it will, of course, be made subject to Iran's Safeguards Agreement. Anti-nuclear activists charge that the Iranians can and will produce nukes from plutonium they recover from the reactor's spent fuel. That's nonsense, of course, but the neo-crazies have echoed that charge. You see, as the fissile U-235 isotope in uranium fuel is "burned" in a nuclear reactor, a small amount of plutonium is bred. Initially, the fissile Pu-239 isotope is produced. But as more fuel is burned, more and more fissile and non-fissile plutonium isotopes will be produced. All plutonium atoms have the same chemical properties. Therefore, the plutonium atoms can be chemically separated out. But weapons-grade plutonium must be about 90 percent Pu-239. So, there is a definite limit to the length of time – much less than a year – the fuel can be allowed to remain in the operating reactor if weapons-grade plutonium is to be produced. But the IAEA will see to it that the Russian-owned fuel will remain – on average – in the Safeguarded Iranian reactor for more than four years. Hence, the plutonium eventually recovered (after it has been sent back to Russia) from the Russian-owned spent fuel will be less than 60 percent Pu-239 and definitely not weapons-grade. Bolton and the neo-crazies know that. So, they argue that as soon as Bushehr has operated for a few months, Iran will withdraw from the NPT, throw out the IAEA and the Russians, and proceed to separate out enough weapons-grade plutonium to make a few nukes. Therefore, the neo-crazies argue, we must never allow Bushehr to begin operating. Well, to Bolton's consternation, the European Union has rejected his arguments and has made a deal, endorsed by China and Russia, with Iran. If – in addition to adhering to the IAEA Additional Protocol – Iran will suspend its uranium-enrichment activities, they'll see to it that nuclear power plants are just the beginning of the benefits Iran will receive. Iran's wish list includes fuel for Iranian power plants at market prices, the resumption of EU-Iran Trade and Cooperation Agreement negotiations, and EU support for Iran's application for World Trade Organization membership. So, what do the neo-crazies intend to do about the clandestine nuke program that spy satellites in space and IAEA inspectors on the ground can't find? Well, when The New Republic's Franklin Foer asked Bolton at a recent conference at the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs if the use of military force was still an option, Bolton replied, "No options are off the table." -------- accidents and safety Radioactive water leaks from Czech nuclear plant PRAGUE (AFP) Dec 20, 2004 http://www.spacewar.com/2004/041220180723.269p63bq.html Around 20,000 liters (5,200 gallons) of radioactive water on Monday leaked out of the troubled Temelin nuclear power plant in the southwest of the Czech Republic, a spokesman said. The leak, caused by a water-level measuring problem in a reservoir, was contained within a limited area and did not pose a risk to the environment or to workers' health, according to the spokesman Milan Nebesar. The problem occurred inside the plant's second block, which had been reconnected to the national grid early Monday after a four-day interruption to allow work to be carried out on a cooling system, Nebesar said. The European Union had dispatched a team of experts to the Temelin site after 3,000 litres radioactive water leaked from the same block in June this year. Located just 60 kilometres (40 miles) from the Austrian border, the Temelin plant has been a source of controversy ever since its launch in 2000, with nuclear-free Austria campaigning for its closure. Its opponents say the plant, which was launched in the mid-1980s under the communist regime, is not safe because it combines Soviet design with Western fuel and safety technology. ----- SecureUSA Helps Six Nuclear Facilities Meet NRC Security Deadline Press Release December 20, 2004 http://www.prweb.com/releases/2004/12/prwexml189723.php SecureUSA, Inc., a provider of perimeter protection design, consulting, and installation announced that it has successfully helped six nuclear facilities in the Southeast meet the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC) security deadline. Cumming, GA (PRWEB) December 20, 2004 -- In April of 2003 the NRC released three orders concerning security measures at nuclear facilities. The second of the measures was the Design Basis Threat Order, which covered perimeter security and vehicle bomb threats. Over the past year SecureUSA has worked with each facility to provide a perimeter protection solution in order for the facility to comply with the NRC mandate. SecureUSA was able to complete the projects on schedule successfully helping nuclear facilities meet the October 29 deadline. SecureUSA provided each nuclear plant with a unique perimeter security solution to meet the specific needs and requirements of the facility. SecureUSA installed the industry’s latest crash tested equipment providing maximum protection to the facility’s physical structure. The completion of these projects underscores SecureUSA’s ability to meet the industry’s standards and provide solutions that meets the customers’ needs and objectives in a timely fashion. About SecureUSA SecureUSA is a complete turnkey solution provider for the prevention of vehicular intrusion into “at risk” private and government facilities. SecureUSA offers risk assessment, design and engineering, consulting services, equipment sourcing, and installation services. This is followed by ongoing service and maintenance contracts to ensure continued trouble free operation of the client’s perimeter security system. For further information visit the SecureUSA website at www.secureUSA.net. ; Contact Information: Brandon Morgan SecureUSA Phone: 770.205.0789 Fax: 770.889.7939 http://www.SecureUSA.net -------- depleted uranium Art Exhibition Launches Anti-Depleted Uranium Campaign Posted: 12/20/04 Mathaba.net From: Another Iraq http://mathaba.net/x.htm?http://mathaba.net/0_index.shtml?x=90596 Map of global DU use and storage: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/dayart/20021112/DepletedUrnaiumMap.gif Why would an art exhibition be used to launch a campaign against the use of depleted uranium? Because one of Iraq's leading artists, Nuha al-Radi, blamed the 1991 DU use in Iraq for the leukaemia that killed her. The exhibition was a tribute to Al-Radi, acclaimed artist, painter, ceramicist, sculputress and writer whose life spanned many worlds. Her work has been exhibited all over, including the British Museum. Her background was an international as the recognition she drew. Maya Askari of the International Network for Contemporary Iraqi Artists was determined to pay a positive tribute to Al-Radi. She launched Internationally with Iraq stop Depleted Uranium at her London residence on December 19th with an exhibition of the works of contemporary Iraqi artists. Depleted Uranium, a chemical and radiological toxic substance is almost twice as heavy as lead. Used in ammunition, bombs and missiles, it aerosolises on contact contaminating the air and groundwater and is insoluble. It has a 4.5 billion year half life. Wherever it has been used, exposed ground troops and populations from Iraq, the Balkans and Afghanistan report health problems and fatalities. DU attacks the DNA mastercode. It is illegal under existing international law and US Military Law which classifies it as a weapon of mass destruction. "The (the Americans) have broken their own laws" pointed out artists Rashad Salim who took part in the exhibition. The works of Maysaloun Faraj, Leila Kubba, Jannane el-Ani, Carol Fulton, Hanna MalAllah, and other Iraqi and Western artists were on display. International with Iraq Stop Depleted Uranium aims to: * Organise events, exhibitions and workshops; * Affiliate with the international campaign against DU; * Help fund and promote documentaries; * Target special interest groups; *Facilitate links and networking with professionals in Iraq and the international community; * Develop and implement programmes of action; *Raise awareness. For further information contact: iandixdu@yahoo.co.uk -------- Uranium arrives at new Japanese plant Yomiuri Shimbun, December 20, 2004 http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/newse/20041221wo03.htm About 31 tons of depleted uranium was delivered to a spent nuclear fuel reprocessing plant in Rokkashomura, Aomori Prefecture, on Monday. The uranium arrived at the village's Mutsuogawara Port aboard the Hokushin Maru freighter earlier in the day from a nuclear facility in Tokaimura, Ibaraki Prefecture. The radioactive material will be used from Tuesday to produce a depleted uranium solution, according to Japan Nuclear Fuel Ltd. (JNFL), which operates the reprocessing plant currently under construction. JNFL said it would start running tests using the solution at the reprocessing plant Tuesday. The test run will check the performance of equipment and detect any technical faults. The plant is the first commercial installation of its kind that can separate and extract plutonium and uranium from spent nuclear fuel. JNFL plans to start operating the plant officially in July 2006. -------- europe Italian Government Plans to Send Nuclear Waste Abroad for Treatment, Official Says December 20, 2004 — By Associated Press http://www.enn.com/today.html?id=634 ROME — The Italian government plans to send most of the country's nuclear waste abroad for treatment and storage, an official was quoted as saying. Giancarlo Bolognini, an executive with Sogin, the state-run company that handles Italy's nuclear waste, was quoted Saturday by the ANSA news agency as saying that officials have signed a decree to send the waste abroad. News reports said it could be sent either to France or to Britain. Bolognini was quoted as saying the waste would be returned to Italy in about 20 years, once Italy prepares a site for it. Italy banned nuclear reactors for energy in the 1980s, but the issue of what to do with nuclear waste has remained controversial. Last year, the government backed off on a plan to put a nuclear dump in a small southern town in the Basilicata region, giving in to weeks of protest marches and highway blockades by citizens. -------- india / pakistan Murky politics around India's nuclear plans IANS [ MONDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2004 01:10:17 AM ] http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/964343.cms NEW DELHI: The controversy over external affairs minister K Natwar Singh’s statement in Seoul that the question of regretting India’s 1998 nuclear tests did not arise since “it is now out of the tube and you can’t put it back” is unlikely to be set at rest by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s clarification that it wasn’t a policy statement. The reason why the contentious issue cannot be easily put aside is not merely the observation by a Marxist MP that there had been a “great divide across the polity” after the tests but also the earlier differences over nuclear policy between the Congress and the BJP. The gap between the two parties has recently been bridged because both have had to accept the fact of the tests. This is undoubtedly what Natwar Singh had in mind when he said that the matter “is now out of the tube”. But what is undeniable is that while the BJP always wanted India to become an overt nuclear power, the Congress’ approach was nuanced. The latter wanted to pursue a policy of ambiguity by maintaining the country’s right to keep the nuclear option open while refraining from conducting tests after the first “implosion” of 1974 at Pokhran. In some respects, this policy of not becoming an acknowledged nuclear power while giving the impression that it may do so if there was a perceptible security threat is not unlike Israel’s. The latter, too, is not a power like US, Russia, China, France and Britain, but the world suspects that has a bomb or two in the basement. Besides, like India, Israel is not a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). The reason for India’s decision to stay out of the NPT is simple. It refuses to accept the patently discriminatory practice of dividing the world between the nuclear “haves” and “have-nots” which allows some countries to retain their nuclear arsenal while denying it to others. The discrimination is all the more blatant since the five nuclear “haves” showed no interest in a key clause of the treaty which called upon them to “pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to the cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament”. It was on the basis of this assurance that the “have-nots” decided to forgo their nuclear option. But India - as well as Israel and Pakistan - did not do so because they evidently believed that they lived in too dangerous a neighbourhood. It was for this reason, too, that India refused to sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) since it would have prevented it from conducting tests while the more advanced Big Five - and especially the US - could continue to simulate such exercises in the laboratories because of their technological capabilities. Although the Indira Gandhi and Narasimha Rao regimes maintained they were only keeping the option open, they came close to conducting open tests in 1983 and 1995. The two years are significant because they tend to show how politics, rather than the strict requirements of security, guided their action. In a way, even the 1974 test may have had a political purpose since it boosted then prime minister Indira Gandhi’s image, which had declined sharply after her widely acclaimed role in the liberation of Bangladesh in 1971. It is necessary to remember that a year after the 1974 test, she had to impose the draconian emergency rule to stay in power. Similarly, when she felt her political stock declining again in the early 1980s, she is believed to have decided on conducting a nuclear test in 1983, for which then defence minister R Venkataraman (who later became president) surveyed the testing site in Rajasthan. A year later, Indira Gandhi was assassinated. -------- iran Weapons-Grade Paranoia by Gordon Prather, December 20, 2004 Antiwar.com http://www.antiwar.com/prather/?articleid=4187 According to Undersecretary of State John Bolton, "[T]he United States strongly believes that Iran has a clandestine program to produce nuclear weapons, and has been warning publicly about Tehran's weapons ambitions for over a decade." Now, having nuke ambitions is one thing. Having the fissile material – plutonium-239 or uranium-235 – needed to produce nukes is quite another. The key to preventing nuke proliferation is the international control of the production, processing, transformation, and disposition of certain nuclear materials. In return for a promise to not acquire or seek to acquire nukes, the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons recognizes the "inalienable right" of all signatories to enjoy the peaceful benefits of nuclear energy. But all NPT-proscribed nuclear materials – as well as the facilities in which they are stored, processed, transformed, or consumed – have to be made subject to an International Atomic Energy Agency Safeguards Agreement. More than a year ago, Iran signed an Additional Protocol to its Safeguards Agreement, vastly expanding the authority of IAEA inspectors to go anywhere and see anything. Director General Mohamed ElBaradei has just reported to the IAEA Board of Governors that after a year-long exhaustive and intrusive inspection he has found no evidence yet that Iran has (or ever has had) a nuke program. So, perhaps what Bolton should have said is that the United States strongly believes – despite all evidence to the contrary – that Iran has a clandestine program to produce nuclear weapons. Take, for example, the nuclear power plant under construction at Bushehr, Iran. Siemens began construction in the 1970s of two plants at Bushehr and had nearly finished one of them when both were practically destroyed during the Iran-Iraq War. Until 1995, the U.S. effectively prohibited any Western-based engineering firm from resuming construction. But then, Russia overrode U.S. objections and agreed – in return for about $800 million in hard currency – to build a conventional, Soviet-designed 1,000-MWe nuclear power plant at Bushehr. Now scheduled for completion in 2006, it will, of course, be made subject to Iran's Safeguards Agreement. Anti-nuclear activists charge that the Iranians can and will produce nukes from plutonium they recover from the reactor's spent fuel. That's nonsense, of course, but the neo-crazies have echoed that charge. You see, as the fissile U-235 isotope in uranium fuel is "burned" in a nuclear reactor, a small amount of plutonium is bred. Initially, the fissile Pu-239 isotope is produced. But as more fuel is burned, more and more fissile and non-fissile plutonium isotopes will be produced. All plutonium atoms have the same chemical properties. Therefore, the plutonium atoms can be chemically separated out. But weapons-grade plutonium must be about 90 percent Pu-239. So, there is a definite limit to the length of time – much less than a year – the fuel can be allowed to remain in the operating reactor if weapons-grade plutonium is to be produced. But the IAEA will see to it that the Russian-owned fuel will remain – on average – in the Safeguarded Iranian reactor for more than four years. Hence, the plutonium eventually recovered (after it has been sent back to Russia) from the Russian-owned spent fuel will be less than 60 percent Pu-239 and definitely not weapons-grade. Bolton and the neo-crazies know that. So, they argue that as soon as Bushehr has operated for a few months, Iran will withdraw from the NPT, throw out the IAEA and the Russians, and proceed to separate out enough weapons-grade plutonium to make a few nukes. Therefore, the neo-crazies argue, we must never allow Bushehr to begin operating. Well, to Bolton's consternation, the European Union has rejected his arguments and has made a deal, endorsed by China and Russia, with Iran. If – in addition to adhering to the IAEA Additional Protocol – Iran will suspend its uranium-enrichment activities, they'll see to it that nuclear power plants are just the beginning of the benefits Iran will receive. Iran's wish list includes fuel for Iranian power plants at market prices, the resumption of EU-Iran Trade and Cooperation Agreement negotiations, and EU support for Iran's application for World Trade Organization membership. So, what do the neo-crazies intend to do about the clandestine nuke program that spy satellites in space and IAEA inspectors on the ground can't find? Well, when The New Republic's Franklin Foer asked Bolton at a recent conference at the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs if the use of military force was still an option, Bolton replied, "No options are off the table." -------- japan Japan vows no backing down to EU pressure on pioneering nuclear project TOKYO (AFP) Dec 20, 2004 http://www.spacewar.com/2004/041220030916.6bm056dn.html Japan will not budge in talks to choose the site of a revolutionary nuclear reactor, a top negotiator said, accusing the European Union of causing the deadlock by its stubborn support for France over Japan. Talks among the six parties building the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) have failed to decide who will host the project billed as a test bed for a safe, inexhaustible energy source of the future. While the United States and South Korea support Japan's offer to build ITER in Rokkasho-mura, a northern village near the Pacific Ocean, the EU, China and Russia back France's bid for the project in Cadarache, southern France. The EU, which hopes to reach a definitive accord by mid-2005, has threatened to press ahead with the construction of ITER in Cadarache if Japan did not agree to a deal soon. "If the EU believes Japan will give in by their haughty negotiation tactics, they are making a big mistake," Toichi Sakata, a top Japanese negotiator for ITER, told AFP. "If the EU wants to press ahead without Japan, go ahead. It won't rattle us. It won't rattle Japan, the United States or South Korea either," said Sakata, director-general of the research and development bureau at the science and technology ministry. "The reason we have yet to find a breakthrough is the EU's persistent support for Cadarache. We believe whoever produces a better proposal should win ITER and Japan's proposal is better than the EU's counter-proposal," he said. The site for ITER, one of the most exciting ventures in international science, must be decided by consensus, partly because all parties will be required to fund the multibillion-dollar project. Sakata said the EU negotiators were "stuck-up and overbearing." "After seeing the EU's negotiation style, our strong supporter, the United States, is having doubts over whether the EU is really capable of carrying out ITER," he said. Sakata said Japan was continuing talks with the EU but felt no rush to seal an unfavorable deal. "For Japan, there is no deadline and we are not going to compromise. Why do we need to reach an agreement quickly? ITER won't be ready for the next 50 years. It is not like ITER would collapse if we fail to strike a deal within the next few months," he said. ITER, which would emulate the sun's nuclear fusion, is not expected to generate inexhaustible supplies of electricity before 2050. The budget for ITER is projected to be 10 billion euros (13 billion dollars) over the next 30 years, including 4.7 billion euros to build the reactor alone. If ITER goes to Rokkasho-mura in Aomori prefecture, some 600 kilometers (370 miles) north of Tokyo, it would bring at least 1.2 trillion yenbillion dollars) to the Aomori, a prefectual official said. The EU argues that the project would get off the ground faster in Cadarache as the town is the hub of France's nuclear research and has 400 fusion experts among 3,500 scientists. But Sakata insisted Rokkasho-mura was better qualified than Cadarache in terms of safety, financial commitment from the government and Japan's high-level scientific research. "To build ITER, you have to ship hundreds of super-heavy items. Some containers can weigh as much as 1,000 tons. But Rokkasho-mura is just five kilometers away from a port whereas Cadarache is located 100 kilometers from a port, posing serious risks for transportation," he said. "Also Japan's financial commitment for ITER is very clear. But honestly speaking, I must say the EU's financial commitment is not clear. Without a clear financial commitment, how can we be sure if we can complete the construction of ITER?" The EU has called on other nations to join the ITER project, but Sakata said such a move could only complicate already bogged-down negotiations. "Bringing new members is unrealistic because the six parties have yet to solve the most difficult problem," he said. -------- korea Us To Deploy New Missiles In S.Korea To Destroy WMD In N.Korea Asia Pulse 12/20/04 http://207.44.245.159/article7548.htm WASHINGTON, Dec 20 Asia Pulse - The United States will deploy missiles to South Korea in 2005 with the aim of destroying underground facilities for weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in North Korea, a U.S. think tank said. "The (U.S. President George W.) Bush administration plans to deploy a new set of missiles to South Korea next year that are designed to destroy the underground installations where the North Koreans are storing their WMDs," the Center for American Progress (CAP) said in a report carried on its Web site (http://www.americanprogress.org). The report said such a "move will only make negotiations more difficult" as North Korea and other countries tended to accelerate their efforts to develop WMDs when they are threatened. The report, "The Road to Nuclear Security," said the U.S. rhetoric that it will not bargain with North Korea until its nuclear weapons program is terminated has been scaled back in recent months following pressure from China and South Korea. The report assumed that North Korea possesses at least eight nuclear weapons. The assumption is within the range of two to nine nuclear bombs that the South Korean and U.S. governments and think tanks estimate the North to have. (Yonhap) -------- missile defense Rethink missile defense plan Most Americans would agree that the country faces multiple threats. Posted 12/20/2004 9:36 PM USA Today Editorial http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2004-12-20-our-view_x.htm Osama bin Laden remains at large. North Korea is pressing ahead with its nuclear program, and Iran is likely to become the newest member of the nuclear club. In Iraq, the stubborn insurgency takes a daily toll on American forces and has stretched the Army thin. Refusing to set priorities in this dangerous world would qualify as the "failure of imagination" the 9/11 Commission warned about. And yet that's what the White House and Congress are showing as they rush to deploy a faulty missile defense system against a threat that, for now, is relatively low. That's not to say that missile defense is without future value or that the threat is nonexistent. Intelligence sources say North Korea may have an untested missile that could reach the United States, and in time, other countries will acquire that capability. But deploying a missile defense program before it's proven won't deter enemies, and it drains funds from more urgent priorities. Even if last week's $85 million test of an interceptor missile had worked — which it didn't — the White House would still fall short in its rationale for spending $11 billion a year on the system. That's double what the Clinton administration spent on its policy of "robust research and development" of missile defense, and it comes at a time when the federal deficit is out of control. The system being developed would rely on interceptor missiles in California and Alaska and aboard ships to attack enemy missiles at liftoff. Airborne lasers would fire at warheads re-entering the atmosphere. As Ronald Reagan learned from his "Star Wars" proposal, a missile defense system wouldn't stop a massive attack from a super power. It's intended, instead, to stop a very small number of missiles from rogue nations such as North Korea or Iran. But weigh the program against other threats that compete with it for funding: •Loose warheads. A terrorist group obtaining nuclear warheads or chemical and biological weapons from the former Soviet Union's tattered arsenal could strike the United States by smuggling a bomb across our porous borders. A rogue state might also prefer that method of attack since, unlike a missile, a suitcase bomb leaves no "return address." •New threats. The military has a term for the new threats it faces: asymmetric warfare. Building a military with the size, speed and flexibility to defeat new enemies means restraining spending on old threats such as Cold War-era ballistic missiles. •Short-range missiles. The threat from short-range missiles fired by Iran or North Korea is very real, as the Israelis and Japanese well know. But the missile defense program does little to protect U.S. allies or troops stationed abroad. As for the ballistic missile threat from rogue nations, the potential danger is real enough to warrant continued research but not premature deployment. Deploying a system that repeatedly fails sends a message that missile defense is more about politics than protection. This is not the time for a lapse in imagination. -------- russia U.S. Signs Contract As Part of Effort to Permanently Shut Down Plutonium Production Reactors in Russia 12/20/2004 4:39:00 PM US Newswire http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=40930 To: National and International desks, Energy Reporter Contact: Bryan Wilkes of the U.S. Department of Energy, 202-586-7371 WASHINGTON, Dec. 20 /U.S. Newswire/ -- As part of its effort to permanently shut down the last three weapons-grade plutonium production reactors in Russia, the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) signed a $285 million contract with the Washington Group International, Inc. (WGI) to refurbish electric power generating facilities in the closed city of Seversk, Russia. The refurbishment of these facilities will allow for the permanent shutdown of the two reactors located at Seversk. The agreement is a major milestone in the NNSA Elimination of Weapons Grade Plutonium Production (EWGPP) Program and a key element to NNSA's overall efforts to reduce the risk of nuclear proliferation by providing improved security of nuclear materials, disposing of existing material, and halting the production of new weapons-grade plutonium. "I am pleased we have reached the point where a contract is now in place for the refurbishment of electric power generating facilities which will allow us to shut down the plutonium production plants in Seversk, Russia. The continued operation of these plutonium production plants causes both nonproliferation and nuclear safety concerns, and when shut down will be two less sources of nuclear weapons grade plutonium. I look forward to the continued cooperation with our Russian partners on worldwide nonproliferation issues," NNSA Administrator Linton F. Brooks said. EWGPP's goal in Seversk, a nuclear weapons site near Tomsk, Russia, is to permanently shut down the two plutonium production reactors and replace their capacity with that from a refurbished coal-fired heat and electricity plant. The two reactors, which produce heat and electricity for surrounding communities, also produce enough plutonium to make a few bombs per week. The project at Seversk will involve refurbishing or replacing existing coal-fired boilers, providing one new high-pressure coal-fired boiler, replacing turbine generators, completing construction of the fuel supply system, and refurbishing the industrial heating unit and ancillary systems. NNSA and its Russian counterpart, the Federal Atomic Energy Agency (Rosatom), will work cooperatively with WGI, a U.S. contractor, and Rosatomstroi, the Russian integrating contractor, to procure equipment and manage construction. The project is scheduled for completion in December 2008. Another equally important part of the EWGPP mission is to shut down the third plutonium production reactor near Zheleznogorsk, another nuclear weapon site in Russia. Deputy Secretary of Energy Kyle McSlarrow recently approved the cost and schedule range for this project, which will help facilitate the permanent shutdown of the remaining plutonium production reactor. --------- Nuclear tension outlives Cold War By Mark McDonald Mon, Dec. 20, 2004 Philadelphia Inquirer Foreign Staff http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/front/10456513.htm Just after midnight, in a secret bunker outside Moscow, the warning sirens began to blare. A simple, ominous message flashed on the bunker's main control panel: MISSILE ATTACK! It was no drill. A Soviet satellite had detected five inbound U.S. nuclear missiles. The control computer ordered a counterstrike, but the bunker commander, a tech-savvy lieutenant colonel named Stanislav Petrov, acted on an informed hunch and overrode the computer, telling his Kremlin superiors it was a false alarm. The Soviet brass quickly stood down, saving tens of millions of Americans from nuclear incineration. This brush with Armageddon happened more than two decades ago, but nuclear missiles are still on hair-trigger alert in Russia and the United States. Today, they may be even more vulnerable to an accidental or renegade launch than they were in Petrov's day. "The security of both nations should not be dependent on the heroic act or good judgment of a single individual," said Sam Nunn, the former senator from Georgia. Long active in antiproliferation efforts such as the Nuclear Threat Initiative, Nunn is leading a campaign to persuade U.S. and Russian leaders to take their thousands of strategic nuclear warheads off hair-trigger alert. "The chances of a premeditated, deliberate nuclear attack have fallen dramatically," Nunn said in an interview. "But the chances of an accidental, mistaken or unauthorized nuclear attack might actually be increasing." In his 2000 election campaign, President Bush called the hair-trigger status "another unnecessary vestige of Cold War confrontation" that creates "unacceptable risks." The first Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, which took effect 10 years ago this month, does not address hair-triggering. Nor does the Treaty of Moscow, which Bush signed with Russian President Vladimir V. Putin in 2002 to reduce the size of the U.S. and Russian strategic nuclear arsenals. Nunn believes the hair-trigger status has become "the most dangerous element of our force posture." Hair-trigger status means missiles are launched, from land or sea, within about 15 minutes of a confirmed warning of an attack. In theory, the assurance that a retaliatory attack would be launched before the missiles could be destroyed would deter either country from trying a nuclear sneak attack. "This is the logic of the Cold War - mutual assured destruction," said Daniil O. Kobyakov, a nuclear expert at the PIR Center, a Moscow policy studies institute. "De-alerting requires a change in rationale. There's still a certain inertia on both sides." Nunn and others see that inertia in the Bush administration's refusal to consider the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, and in its request - since defeated in the Senate - for $500 million for research on a "bunker buster" nuclear weapon and low-yield "mini-nukes." Russia, too, has Cold War inertia to overcome. Putin proudly announced last month that Russia was testing "the newest nuclear missile systems... that other nuclear states do not have." He offered no details. A number of political analysts believe Putin's comments - which were unprepared remarks made to a group of senior commanders at the Ministry of Defense - were intended to boost military morale and for domestic political consumption. "I'm sure it was nothing surprising to the U.S.," said Kobyakov, noting that the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty obliges each side to provide technical data on any new nuclear weapons. Kobyakov and others believe Putin probably was referring to the Topol-M missile, which has long been in the pipeline, and a sea-launched missile that is being developed. There are rumors in Moscow military circles that the new missile could be maneuvered in flight, unlike current ballistic missiles, to foil the Bush administration's planned national missile defense system. One senior Russian general cryptically called it "a hypersonic flying vehicle." Government officials in both countries are keen to point out that they have stopped targeting each other with nuclear missiles, though experts call this "de-targeting" political hokum. The old targeting data and missile trajectories are stored in command computers, Kobyakov said. And missiles can be re-targeted in a matter of seconds: A couple of mouse clicks would put Washington, Miami or Moscow back in the nuclear crosshairs. But it is the danger of accidental or maverick launches that most concerns atomic experts. That danger is heightened, in part, by the decrepit state of Russian defenses, which is likely to have made the Russians even more skittish than before. "The Russian Early Warning System is essentially useless," said Theodore Postol, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and an expert on early-warning issues and technology. Holes in Russia's satellite and radar networks, he said, mean U.S. submarines in the North Atlantic can strike Moscow with only a two- or three-minute warning for the Russian capital. Launches from the North Pacific could hit with no warning at all. Postol also said a new Prognoz satellite warning system "may never be in place." Petrov, the bunker commander who averted catastrophe back in 1983, nodded his head sadly when told of Postol's assessment. "That's right, not enough satellites," he said. "We never had enough." -------- terrorism Nuclear Security Monday, December 20, 2004 WNYC The Leonard Lopate Show http://www.wnyc.org/shows/lopate/episodes/12202004 The US-Russian pact governing the safeguarding of Russia's nuclear weapons expires in June 2006. What happens after that? The US and Russia still have nuclear weapons on hair-trigger status aimed at each other. We'll find out what's at stake, and look into why each side feels that keeping nuclear weapons in Cold War positions is justified. Ken Luongo, executive director of the Russian-American Nuclear Security Advisory Council (RANSAC), and Laura Holgate, vice president for Russia/New Independent States Programs at the Nuclear Threat Initiative, discuss post Cold War security threats. Music: "Escalator," by Bang on a Can All-Stars "Fallout," by Euphone "Wax Off," by Kodo Listen: http://www.wnyc.org/stream/ram.py?file=/lopate/lopate122004a.ra -------- u.s. nuc weapons Face the reality of nuclear arms December 20, 2004 Jacksonville, North Carolina Daily News http://www.jdnews.com/SiteProcessor.cfm?Template=/GlobalTemplates/Details.cfm&StoryID=28218&Section=Opinion [Respond to the editor at the bottom of the original page.] Reports that Russia is on the verge of fielding its first new nuclear weapon system since the end of the Soviet era - and could possibly be testing a maneuverable warhead designed to overcome anti-missile defenses - is a reminder that a global nuclear arms race is probably bound to go on whether or not the United States chooses to participate. This isn't something most of us have wanted to think much about since the end of the Cold War, except in reference to rogue states or terror groups getting their hands on the world's most deadly weapons. But think about it we must. "We have not only conducted tests of the latest nuclear rocket systems, I am sure that in the coming years we will deploy them," Russian President Vladimir Putin recently said at a meeting of his top military brass. "Moreover, these will be things which do not exist and are unlikely to exist in other nuclear powers." Putin also vowed that Russia "will continue to persistently develop our armed forces on the whole, including its nuclear arsenal potential." Some might dismiss such statements as mere bravado, meant, like so much of what Putin does, to recover some of the country's lost prestige. But Putin's statement should shake Americans awake about the dormant status of U.S. nuclear programs, and spur debate about the wisdom of complying with a nuclear test ban treaty, never ratified, that limits our ability to modernize an aging nuclear stockpile. Without testing weapons in real world conditions, the United States must rely on computer simulations and other less-than-definitive means of monitoring their reliability and safety. The U.S. hasn't fielded a new nuclear warhead since the late 1980s. It hasn't conducted a nuclear test since 1992, in deference to a never-ratified treaty with a questionable record of curtailing nuclear proliferation. Many of the warheads and delivery systems in the U.S. stockpile are beyond their design life expectancy. And while a "stockpile stewardship" program strives to ensure that an essentially moth-balled arsenal remains a safe and credible deterrent, its success is far from assured. Yet many in Congress remain in denial about the need to maintain an active nuclear weapons program. The same week Putin was bragging about Russia's next generation of nukes, Congress eliminated from the fiscal 2005 budget all funding for research into a new generation of U.S. nuclear weapons. Targeted by the cuts was a low-yield, earth-penetrating, bunker-busting warhead proposed by the Bush administration. California Sen. Dianne Feinstein called the funding cut a "victory for those of us who believe the United States sends the wrong signal to the rest of the world by reopening the nuclear door." But the "nuclear door" never really closed and a global arms race continues, whether or not Feinstein accepts it. Particularly reckless was Congress' cutting of $7 million for studying the site of a new facility for manufacturing "plutonium pits," which serve as the trigger for nuclear weapons. Because plutonium decays rapidly, questions remain about whether the older pits now in the stockpile will continue to function as designed. But the government closed its primary pit manufacturing facility years ago, and a planned $4 billion replacement has yet to materialize. A shortage of reliable pits could eventually force the United States to remove weapons from the stockpile, leading to a sort of disarmament by default. Americans can continue to bury their heads in the sand, assuming that weapons designed and deployed 15, 25 or 35 years ago will provide a safe and credible deterrent forever, and will never need modernization. Or we can snap out of it, accept reality and begin thinking again about the unthinkable. -------- u.s. nuc facilities NRC Move to Make Nuke Plant Licensing Hearing Secret is Illegal, Irresponsible Staff of Nuclear Industry Regulator Seeks to Shut Out Public in Wake of Agency's Security Lockdown Nuclear Information and Resource Service Public Citizen For Immediate Release: Contact: Michael Mariotte, nirsnet@nirs.org NIRS (202) 328-0002 Dec. 20, 2004 Michele Boyd, PC (202) 454-5134 WASHINGTON, D.C. - The staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) today asked an adjudicatory board to conduct a licensing hearing for a proposed nuclear fuel refinery under a "protective order" which, if approved, would effectively make the entire proceeding secret and closed to the public, said Public Citizen and the Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS). "This proposal is an affront to the principles of citizen participation guaranteed by law," said Wenonah Hauter, director of Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program. NIRS/PC have contested the application of Louisiana Energy Services (LES), a multinational consortium led by the European firm Urenco, which is seeking a permit to construct and operate a uranium enrichment plant in southeastern New Mexico. The groups charge that the company's plans fail to meet regulatory standards in the areas of radioactive waste disposal and need for the plant, among other things. The NRC says its motion is a remedy to a situation that has made it impossible for parties in this case to meaningfully participate: On October 25, the NRC unilaterally blocked public access to virtually all of the electronic documents posted on its Web site pending a security review "to ensure that documents which might provide assistance to terrorists will be inaccessible." Most of these documents remain unavailable to the public. Without access to essential documents, such as communications between the applicant and the NRC, parties to the proceeding-including the State of New Mexico-are left operating in the dark, unable to file timely and complete motions, briefs, and testimony in order to present their case before the ASLB. Pre-filed testimony is due Dec. 30, and the hearing is scheduled to begin Feb. 7, 2005. The NRC Staff's rationale for making this entire licensing case secret is that in order to meet deadlines in the context of the NRC security review, parties to the proceeding must enter into a non-disclosure agreement that would allow them access to essential documents while agreeing to keep these potentially "sensitive" materials-and thus the entire proceeding in which they are considered-closed to the public. "A real solution to the problem would be to suspend the schedule of the hearing until access to NRC files is restored, as NIRS and Public Citizen have asked the Board," said Michael Mariotte, executive director of NIRS. "Shutting the public out of the licensing process would violate NRC regulations, which require public hearings. It also would violate the public trust, which is served by open and transparent nuclear licensing proceedings. Such hearings are the major way the public can learn about the issues-such as radioactive waste disposal-that arise from the proposed construction of nuclear facilities." Counsel for NIRS/PC issued a formal plea to the ASLB on Dec. 15 to suspend the schedule of the hearing until access to the hearing file is restored; formal responses to this motion are due today, but the NRC staff has filed a concurrent motion to make the case confidential. "It is inexcusable that the NRC is attempting to circumvent public scrutiny in this case, and it sets a poor precedent for future licensing actions," added Michele Boyd, legislative director for Public Citizen. "This unjust and inappropriate request ought to be rejected outright by the ASLB." To read the motions of the NRC staff, as well as earlier motions by NIRS/PC, please go to http://www.citizen.org/cmep or http://www.nirs.org/> . ### Don't forget to sign the Petition for a Sustainable Energy Future, at NIRS' website, http://www.nirs.org/ . Congress will be considering a new energy bill next year, and we expect it to be loaded with favors-and your tax dollars-for the nuclear power industry. Let's let Congress know the basics of what an energy policy should look like: energy efficiency, renewables, increased mileage standards-and no nuclear power! After you've signed, please use the "Send to a friend" feature, and encourage your friends and colleagues to sign too. Thanks for your help, and have a wonderful holiday season! Michael Mariotte Executive Director Nuclear Information and Resource Service This is the NIRS E-Mail Alert list. You are on this list because you signed up on our website, at a NIRS table at a concert, on a petition, or directly to NIRS. Your name and address are never sold, rented, or traded with anyone for any reason. For address changes or to unsubscribe, just send an e-mail to nirsnet@nirs.org. If you have friends or colleagues who would like to be on this list, have them send a note to nirsnet@nirs.org -------- colorado Plutonium Weapons Factory to Become Wildlife Refuge GOLDEN, Colorado, December 20, 2004 (ENS) http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/dec2004/2004-12-20-09.asp#anchor2 The Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Impact Statement for the Rocky Flats National Wildlife Refuge are available for public review and comment, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said Friday. For 40 years from 1953 to 1992, components for nuclear weapons were made at Rocky Flats using radioactive and hazardous materials, including plutonium, uranium and beryllium. A legacy of contaminated facilities, soils and ground water was left behind. Rocky Flats is located 15 miles northwest of Denver and within 50 miles of 2.5 million people. The site consists of more than 800 structures located on a 385 acre Industrial Area and surrounded by 6,000 acres of controlled open space called the Buffer Zone. Current plans call for all of the 805 structures and facilitites at the site to be dismantled and removed. But first the buildings, many of which contain radioactive and/or chemical contamination, must be cleaned up. The site had many tons of radioactive plutonium and uranium which was put into a safe form, consolidated to reduce costs, repackaged into long term packaging and then sent offsite for storage or disposal. In July, workers demolished Building 771. Dubbed the most dangerous building in America, it had a 50 year legacy of plutonium leaks and spills, and a major fire occurred there in 1957. In 1995, the Department of Energy concluded that Building 771 was its greatest vulnerability and was dubbed by the national media as “the most dangerous building in America.” In late September, workers at Rocky Flats removed the last of the largest source of soil contamination at Rocky Flats. Cleanup of the 36 acre wind blown area located on the east edge of the Industrial Area included the removal and packaging of 97,800 tons of plutonium contaminated soils. A major part of the work to be done to close Rocky Flats involves restoration of the environment. When cleanup of Rocky Flats commenced, the extent of environmental contamination was thoroughly investigated including groundwater, surface water, soil and air monitoring and sampling. Any area remotely suspected of being contaminated was identified as a potential cleanup site. In all, 360 potential areas of contamination were identified and 274 have been addressed. These investigations resulted in removal action and remediation of ground water in place. Past and current exposures to site-related contaminants "do not pose harmful health effects for residents near the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology site," says the public health assessment released for public comment by the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry said in September. The Final EIS describes the Fish and Wildlife Service's proposal for management of Rocky Flats as a National Wildlife Refuge for 15 years, starting at the time the Refuge is established sometime between 2006 and 2008. Four alternatives for management of the Refuge are considered in the final plan and Environmental Impact Statement. Issues addressed in the final plan include vegetation management, wildlife management, public use, cultural resources, property, infrastructure, and refuge operations. All four alternatives outline specific management objectives and strategies related to wildlife and habitat management; public use, education, and interpretation; safety; open and effective communication; working with others; and refuge operations. Alternative B, the Service's Preferred Alternative, emphasizes wildlife and habitat conservation with a moderate amount of wildlife dependent public use. Visitor use facilities would include about 16 miles of trails, a seasonally staffed visitor contact station, trailheads with parking, and developed overlooks. Most of the trails would use existing roads and public access would be by foot, bicycle, horse, or car. A limited public hunting program would be developed under the Preferred Alternative. The Service received over 5,000 public comments during the planning process. Some of the changes that resulted from public comments included changes to trail alignments, more flexible trail implementation, changes to the types of weaponry allowed for hunting, more discussion about issues related to cleanup and contamination, and additional discussion about potential impacts from transportation improvements. View the EIS at: http://rockyflats.fws.gov -------- south carolina Aiken business owners fear ripple effect of SRS layoffs By SAMMY FRETWELL, Staff Writer Mon, Dec. 20, 2004 The Statesman (SC) http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/10457426.htm AIKEN —- Landscaping stones, palmetto trees and small shrubs await buyers at Rick Catts’ curb market, a Whiskey Road plant shop with a new economic challenge. The Savannah River Site is expected to lay off up to 2,000 people in the next two years, raising fears that it will hurt businesses in this quaint town near the Georgia border. No one is expecting an economic meltdown, but for places like Rick’s Produce, the layoffs can’t be ignored. Many SRS workers live in Aiken and frequent stores near their homes. Catts on Sunday said he figures his produce business will remain steady, while sales of landscaping materials will suffer. “I don’t think they’ll spend the money they do on the non-necessary stuff,” said Catts, who estimates that 20 percent of his customers either work at SRS or are relatives of site employees. “They’ll be buying produce, but they’re not going to be buying all the big plants. They drop a bunch of money on that now.” Valerie Antaki, who works at Honeybaked Ham Co., near Catts’ market, said she would expect a drop in business at the Whiskey Road restaurant if SRS loses 2,000 jobs, as projected last week by site managers. Honeybaked Ham delivers lunches to SRS employees and often serves workers in the restaurant’s dining room. “It will hurt us because there just won’t be as much money to spend,” said Antaki, whose father moved to Aiken 15 years ago to work at SRS. The Savannah River Site, a 300-square-mile complex, once produced plutonium and tritium for use in nuclear weapons. But when the Cold War ended, the U.S. government began winding down many missions at the site. Today, much of the work at the more than 50-year-old site is on environmental cleanup. Last week, the facility’s contractor said it would seek to cut some 2,000 jobs in the next two years as more production winds down. Several business people said that the government should work more aggressively for new missions at the Savannah River Site or spend more cleaning up contamination. In either case, it would create more jobs, they said. At Aiken Drug, a fixture at the corner of Laurens and Richland streets, store clerk Stephen Rabon frowned when he thought about the SRS layoffs. Rabon’s father works at the site, and he worries about his future there. Rabon said a bolder cleanup program could produce more work at SRS. “I just don’t get it,” Rabon said, adding that the government is “probably more concerned about saving money than cleaning it up. I’d like to see more done about keeping jobs out there than putting people out on the street.” As it is, Rabon said he thinks the entire business community will feel some impact of SRS layoffs. Not everyone is as concerned. Longtime Aiken residents Michael Enloe and David Sacks said SRS has weathered job fluctuations before —- and the economy has always survived. Both Enloe and Sacks own businesses in Aiken. “Aiken seems to continue to thrive,” said Enloe, who runs Plum Puddings, a gourmet kitchen shop on Laurens Street. Both said Aiken is becoming more dependent on revenue from retirees than from SRS. The community has a long history as a place for retired workers from across the country. At its peak, SRS employed more than 20,000 people. The SRS work force has been cut by about half since the government began wrapping up nuclear weapons production in the late 1980s. “There’s enough of a retirement community here to support” business, said Sacks, who runs the Newberry Hall catering business and banquet facility. “There have always been cycles out there.” Long term, Sacks said he favors new missions for SRS, such as a mixed oxide (MOX) fuel facility. The U.S. Department of Energy has pledged to open a MOX facility at SRS that could result in more than 1,200 jobs, but the plant construction is about a year behind schedule because of a dispute with Russia. Russia is supposed to build a companion plant as part of an arms agreement but hasn’t gotten the facility off the ground. Energy department officials also have made no decision on whether to build a plutonium pit factory and whether SRS would get the mission, which could create 1,000 jobs. The DOE recently named the site a National Research Laboratory, which Sen. Lindsey Graham has said could create jobs. “At some point, it may affect us years down the road if they don’t get any new missions,” Sacks said. Reach Fretwell at (803) 771-8537 or sfretwell@thestate.com. -------- MILITARY -------- africa U.N. debacle in Congo December 20, 2004 Washington Times http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20041219-095248-1062r.htm Just what is going on at the U.N. mission in Congo? In May, it was alleged that U.N. peacekeepers and bureaucrats had been sexually abusing the local inhabitants in exchange for food and other necessities. An internal U.N. report found, as reported by The Washington Post, that the abuse appeared to be "significant, wide-spread and ongoing," involving more than 150 cases of rape, pedophilia and prostitution. Then, just this week, the paper obtained another U.N. report that found "U.N. peacekeepers threatened U.N. investigators investigating allegations of sexual misconduct to bribe witnesses to change incriminating testimony." When the abuse scandal first broke, the United Nations seemed prepared to investigate its Congo mission with the appropriate diligence. But by the time a second U.N. investigative team arrived at the mission in October, it found procedures implemented immediately following the scandal's relevation "had largely faded away." So far, the United Nations has sent home at least two Tunisian peacekeepers and a French civilian and suspended a senior U.N. official (with pay, no less). For a case that involves 150 allegations of rape, prostitution and pedophilia, with 68 documented, that's not much progress. In one instance, investigators found that Moroccan peacekeepers had "spread the word" that a U.N. child-protection advocate looking into the allegations "had better be careful when she went out at night." Other investigators have received anonymous death threats. The United Nations is limited in that it has no authority over prosecution of foreign troops who serve as peacekeepers. But that doesn't explain how things were allowed to progress to such a tragic point, and were then followed upon with incompetent damage control. From all levels of the United Nations' effort in Congo, there is some explaining to do. This includes the top U.N. peacekeeping official, Jean-Marie Guehenno of France, and Secretary-General Kofi Annan. ---- Sudanese Liberation Army Rebel Asks the World For Help Against Government Campaign of 'Genocide' Monday, December 20th, 2004 Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/12/20/154253 As the crisis and killing continues in Sudan, we go to Darfur to speak with Suleiman Jamous, a coordinator with the Sudanese Liberation Army and we are joined in our firehouse studio by Mark Brecke, documentary photographer and filmmaker who recently returned from a month-long trip to Sudan. [includes rush transcript] The African Union has temporarily suspended all monitoring flights in the Darfur region of western Sudan, after one of its helicopters came under fire. The helicopter was carrying a team of AU observers who were trying to verify compliance with a ceasefire on Sunday. After urgent talks with international envoys, Sudan said it would suspend operations in Darfur. The AU had threatened to refer Sudan and the rebels to the U.N. Security Council if the two sides failed to meet the deadline. Some 70,000 people have been killed and about 2 million displaced since fighting in Darfur began in February 2003. The government and Arab militiamen have tried to suppress the rebellion but are accused of targeting civilians in a campaign of murder, rape and arson. The United States accuses the militiamen of genocide. * Mark Brecke, a documentary photographer and filmmaker who has worked in conflict zones around the world. Late last week, he returned to the U.S. from the Sudan where he spent almost a month in Darfur. * Suleiman Jamous, Humanitarian Affairs Coordinator for the Sudanese Liberation Army. He joins us on the line from Darfur. RUSH TRANSCRIPT AMY GOODMAN: We're joined by Mark Brecke, a documentary photographer and filmmaker, who has worked in conflict zones around the world. Late last week, he rushed to the U.S. from Sudan, where he had spent almost a month in Darfur. We welcome you to Democracy Now! MARK BRECKE: Thank you for having me. AMY GOODMAN: What did you see? MARK BRECKE: I think what's most struck me is the amount of burned out villages and other peoples who are displaced within Darfur. I toured with a Sudanese Liberation Army, and we would go through some towns that were completely burned out, others were partially inhabited, and there are many thousands of people are scattered throughout Darfur, living in trees. I was surprised to see the bombs that the government would drop on the small towns, and some had not exploded, and some were still stuck in the ground. You can see the writing on the fins of the bombs. The government has denied this, and the evidence is all around. I saw open gravesites with 13 men who were brought up to the rocks, and shot. Three bodies were -- they tried to hide and S.L.A. came in to retake this particular town, and ten bodies exposed. They weren't able to hide them in time. I saw hospitals which I visited as recently as two days before I returned. There were farmers who were shot by the Janjaweed in the leg and arm. AMY GOODMAN: Explain who the Janjaweed are? MARK BRECKE: Janjaweed are basically nomadic or of Arab descent. They live in parts of Darfur. They number around 300. The Darfur people themselves, the Sudanese, the black Sudanese started to demand rights. That was almost two or three years ago. From this, the Khartoum government pretty much promised the Janjaweed, if you pushed the Sudanese people off their land, they promised they could take whatever they wanted in the land. They are basically hired by the government. When the uprising started, the government was like, how dare you demand your rights, you demand equality and you demand resources. So, the Janjaweed pretty much have done the dirty work for the Khartoum government. This has been going on, well, for a while, but since 2001. AMY GOODMAN: The S.L.A., who you are they? MARK BRECKE: The Sudanese Liberation Army, some call them rebels, but they're much more than rebels. They're a real people's movement. Extremely organized and very educated. I was with a unit for almost three weeks. I was with some of the top commanders. The commanders come from different varieties of occupations. One was a veterinarian. One was a college professor, one used to work for the government. The younger members of the S.L.A. have left university early to join the movement in Darfur. This is their land. This is where they have come from for generations. This is what they're fighting for. Just equality and not autonomy. AMY GOODMAN: We're joined now by Suleiman Jamous, with the Sudanese Liberation Army. He is speaking to us from Darfur. Welcome to Democracy Now!. SULEIMAN JAMOUS: Thank you. Thank you for all, and I appreciate your attention and call. We are ready to reply to your questions. AMY GOODMAN: What is the situation right now in Darfur? SULEIMAN JAMOUS: The situation now in Darfur is the government is not respecting our agreement of cease-fire, and is violating everywhere, especially in the south Darfur to the east of Niala, and we are speaking to the media that they are respecting the cease-fire agreement, but on the ground, they're preparing themselves, I think, for a bigger war. And I think we may be led to a war which is bigger than the previous one. Our government is using all weapons, gunships and tanks and big artillery against the civilians. And they're avoiding our towns where the S.L.A. groups are counting, and they're burning villages and farms which are ready to cultivate, and scaring all of the citizens who are now fleeing to the areas which are controlled by the S.L.A. This started on the 6th of December, until today, they are doing the same. AMY GOODMAN: Can you tell us why the S.L.A. has decided to take up arms against the Khartoum government? SULEIMAN JAMOUS: Well, we don't know the reason, but we found that the government is trying to work with our area, and by killing or scaring or raping our women and girls everywhere, and they were trying to take us out of the area. This kind of -- they made us some kind of genocide. So we decided to defend ourselves against the government with the Janjaweed, and when we defeated the Janjaweed, government itself came to the field of fighting, and they fought us. So, we started as a defending group to defend our areas against the Janjaweed that were backed by the government. Further on, the government itself participated in the fight with the Janjaweed, and we did not find any way, unless we fight until the government goes out of power. This is, of course, what started the war at first. AMY GOODMAN: We're speaking with the humanitarian coordinator of the Sudanese Liberation Army in Darfur. His name is Suleiman Jamous. What are you demanding of the United Nations, and of the United States? SULEIMAN JAMOUS: What I am calling for is –- those who are here in the field can see more than those who are away, waiting to learn from the media. I think my friend, Mark Brecke was here and he saw at least so many areas, the mass graves and mass killing and some raids, I think, and he saw the recent field of war and how the government is burning our villages and looting our animals to compel to us leave the area, or -- like that. So, what I’m asking the world to do is make come kind of pressure to the government at least to give us our rights and leave us alone to live. And if they are not going to help us with any kind weapons of defending to defend ourselves, so they have to a least help us overthrow this government, and make some kind of a democracy in Sudan with equal rights for all the Sudanese people, and to not leave us to genocide, and to be smashed from the air. AMY GOODMAN: The latest news is the African Union helicopter just came under fire, so they are suspending all flights to Darfur. What does this mean for you? SULEIMAN JAMOUS: I didn’t get the question. Please repeat the question. AMY GOODMAN: The African union was monitoring the situation, and one of their helicopters came under fire over Darfur. Do you know who shot at them? SULEIMAN JAMOUS: This was the Janjaweed who were trying to prevent the African union from seeing their crimes. They shot the helicopter and shot one of the people themselves. About two weeks ago. It was east of Niala in south Darfur. And the African Union itself, the mandate is not killing but to help and assist. I think they can't do anything in front of this government, and the repression of the government is -- these days they are collecting fighters from everywhere to fight against the people who are not afraid about their numbers or their weapons. They are using this helicopters and this scares the citizens. The citizens are very scared from this, and they are fleeing in numbers towards the different parts of the S.L.A. controlled area, and they need to be assisted at least to live. AMY GOODMAN: I want to thank you for being with us. Suleiman Jamous is the spokesperson for the Sudanese liberation army speaking to us from Darfur. Mark Brecke in the studio, documentary photographer and film maker, you have ten seconds for a final comment. MARK BRECKE: Final comment is people must understand that Darfur and Sudan is a complex situation in the south, but what people need to focus on from this complex situation with different rebel groups is that millions of people continue to suffer on a daily basis. AMY GOODMAN: Mark Brecke, thank you for being with us, has just returned from the Darfur region where he spent a month documenting the situation. -------- business Lockheed Martin, Israeli firm Elbit to modernize Bulgarian helicopters SOFIA (AFP) Dec 20, 2004 http://www.spacewar.com/2004/041220154456.7qvdihyg.html Bulgaria has selected a consortium of Israeli firm Elbit Systems and US defence group Lockheed Martin to repair and modernize 18 Bulgarian military helicopters, Defence Minister Nikolay Svinarov said Monday. The order, to be signed in January, concerns 12 Mi-24 attack helicopters and six Mi-17 transport helicopters. Elbit Systems won the order for 57 million euros (74 million dollars) over the other main bidder British company BAE Systems, which had asked for 128 million euros. In the beginning of 2005, Bulgaria is also to receive 12 Cougar transport helicopters from European group EADS's subsidiary Eurocopter as part of the modernization of its armed forces. -------- haiti Freed Haitian Priest Gerard Jean-Juste: Aristide Supporters 'Are Not Only Targeted, We Are Being Chased' Monday, December 20th, 2004 Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/12/20/154247 Haitian priest Father Gerard Jean-Juste joins us in our firehouse studio to talk about his imprisonment, the continuing chaos in Haiti, the role of the U.S. and the international community and much more. Jean-Juste was released Nov. 29 after being imprisoned for seven weeks by the interim Haitian government. We also speak with human rights and immigration lawyer Tom Griffin, who recently traveled to Haiti to document human rights abuses. [includes rush transcript] We take a look at the situation in Haiti where political violence and insecurity continues to rock the Caribbean nation. The interim government has come under fire for human rights abuses ever since assuming power last March. 700 political prisoners languish in Haitian jails and pro-democracy demonstrations are held in cities throughout the country. This weekend, the London Observer reported that scores of prisoners were massacred during a prison riot earlier this month. According to official reports, prisoners in a three-story cell block called "Titanic" had rioted, breaking free from their cells, setting fire to mattresses and brandishing water pipes as weapons. Prison guards called in a special police unit to help put down the uprising. Officials later said that seven prisoners had been killed and more than 40 detainees and guards wounded. But according to the London Observer, this is a gross understatement. Witnesses told the paper, the interim Haitian government is concealing a savage bloodbath in which up to 110 prisoners were killed by police and guards. At the time, Secretary of State Colin Powell was visiting interim Haitian President Boniface Alexandre at the national palace. One prisoner told the Observer police opened fire on the detainees, and then went from cell to cell, forcing prisoners into a passageway and methodically executing them. Prisoners and police say the riot was motivated by the decision to transfer some detainees to another penitentiary, combined with growing frustration at the slow progress of their legal cases. Only 17 of around 1,100 prisoners at the national penitentiary have been convicted of a crime, and many detainees have not seen a judge. The day before the prison massacre, Father Gerard Jean-Juste - perhaps Haiti's most famous political prisoner - was released after serving seven weeks in jail. No warrant for his arrest was ever produced, nor was any evidence linking him to any crime. Father Jean-Juste traveled to the U.S. this last week and gave a press conference in New York. He joins us in our firehouse studio. He are also joined by Tom Griffin, a human rights and immigration lawyer who recently traveled to Hatiti to document human rights abuses. * Rev. Gerard Jean-Juste, Roman Catholic priest in Haiti who was recently released from prison. * Thomas Griffin, human rights and immigration lawyer who recently traveled to Haiti to document human rights abuses. RUSH TRANSCRIPT This transcript is available free of charge, however donations help us provide closed captioning for the deaf and hard of hearing on our TV broadcast. Thank you for your generous contribution. Donate - $25, $50, $100, more... AMY GOODMAN: Father Jean-Juste traveled to the US this last week and held a news conference in New York. He joins us in our firehouse studio today, along with Tom Griffin, a human rights and immigration lawyer from Philadelphia, who went to Haiti to document human rights abuses. We welcome you both to Democracy Now! REV. GERARD JEAN-JUSTE: Thank you very much. THOMAS GRIFFIN: Thank you. AMY GOODMAN: Well it's good to see you out of jail, Father Jean-Juste? REV. GERARD JEAN-JUSTE: I am happy and I am very thankful to everyone who has been involved directly or indirectly for this exercise of my human right to be free. AMY GOODMAN: Why were you arrested? REV. GERARD JEAN-JUSTE: There was no motivation that I know that could stand, and I was [inaudible] why I was feeding hundreds of children and young adults. They told me that I am under arrest, while I was inside the rectory at the moment. I told them, no, according to the concord that -- the agreement between Haiti and the church, you cannot arrest me that way. I told them that. They refused to listen. They really grabbed me forcefully, and threw me into their vehicle, and ran away with me, arriving at the police station in Petionville, where I was in jail for over a week. And they told me that -- I saw them writing on the book, arrested for disturbing the public peace. That's what was written at the police station. But what was hurting me the most that day, why some of us in Haiti are trying to help the most desperate people, and they came, the police, the repressive forces from the government, from the de facto government, came and shot at our people. Three children have been shot, one girl and two boys. That's hurt so much. So, I hope that all of us who are trying to appease the communities, to appease the people, I think instead of brutalizing us, instead of arresting us arbitrarily, they could congratulate us for helping them, because I think that by feeding the people, by taking care of the children, by educating them, we are helping the government. We are helping. We are helping the country, and instead, the government is going after those providing basic human needs to the people. This is crazy. AMY GOODMAN: What do you think is the motivation of the government to have you silenced? You were in jail for seven weeks. What ultimately got you out? REV. GERARD JEAN-JUSTE: I went through the court system after a month staying in jail without seeing a judge, and the judge looked at the file, and thought it was frivolous. There was nothing. They said, hey, you have been accused of plotting against the government. I said what? Plotting against the government? Of the state, even worse. I said, what did I do? Where is the proof? There was no proof. I couldn't see any proof. At that time the judge said, hey, I have to order your release. The judge did order my release, and then the commissioner, the one who is responsible for signing -- approving the judge's decision and the commissioner stayed about two weeks before he -- it is supposed to take five days -- he stayed two weeks before accepting the reality that I should be free. So, finally, by November 29, I was freed, while I was arrested on October 13. AMY GOODMAN: When you heard about what happened in the penitentiary right after you were released, what is your response? REV. GERARD JEAN-JUSTE: My response is this: the jails are too overcrowded. While I was at the main penitentiary in Port-au-Prince, there were -- that's a jail that's supposed to take 600 prisoners, and we were over 1,200, not to say 1,400. And it's too much, and detention is high within the jail, and that's the reason why right now I’m appealing to the de facto government to make a humanitarian gesture. Too many people, too many youngsters have been arbitrarily arrested, and forget -- they are being forgotten in jail. Do something. Release them during this holiday season. That's my appeal to them. AMY GOODMAN: We have to break. When we come back, we'll continue speaking with Reverend Gerard Jean-Juste, and Thomas Griffin, who is a human rights and immigration lawyer from Philadelphia, who has recently returned from Haiti with some horrific photographs and documentation of what he saw there. [break] AMY GOODMAN: We're talking about the situation in Haiti right now with Father Gerard Jean-Juste, usually in Haiti. Just came up to the United States for a week, was held in prison at the national penitentiary for seven weeks. There is now a report in the papers of a massacre that took place there on December 1, on the day that Colin Powell, the U.S. Secretary of State, was in Haiti visiting with the president. It was when President Bush was in Canada, meeting with the prime minister in Canada. One of the first issues they talked about, as well, was Haiti. We're also joined by Thomas Griffin, who is a human rights and immigration lawyer who has recently returned from Haiti. Thomas Griffin, can you talk about what you saw in Haiti, and what you documented? THOMAS GRIFFIN: I tried to document as much as I could, just in Port-au-Prince, and my focus was mostly on the poor neighborhoods and that would be what normally are call the slum neighborhoods. That's where everyone lives in Port-au-Prince, which would be City Soleil, La Saline, Bel Air, and Ft. National. Those are the neighborhoods that have been under siege by the Haitian national police almost on a daily basis. And we had known that no reporters were going in. Either they were reluctant to do it or they were actually being blocked from getting in. My main goal was to get in there and document it and photograph what was happening, the violence by the Haitian national police backed by the U.N. civil police forces and the U.N. peacekeeping forces, which are two U.N. units that actually tear into the neighborhoods with their firearms and their tanks. I also tried to get into as many jails as I could, photograph prisoners and the conditions that they're in, and get a sense of whether they had seen a judge yet, or whether they had been beaten during the arrest or while they were in prison. AMY GOODMAN: Let's talk about the context here. I mean, you have President Jean-Bertrand Aristide ousted on February 29 in this bicentennial year of Haiti. He now is in exile with his wife and children in South Africa. And you have the U.S.-backed leader in place, Gerard Latortue. What is he doing about the situation? I also want to ask Father Jean-Juste about this. THOMAS GRIFFIN: I had no sense that he was doing anything but maybe taking directions from outside. Both people in the government, when I was talking to government ministers, they were receiving calls from Canada during my interview of them, and they were complaining that Latortue wasn't strong enough, wasn't taking enough action. I have talked to big business leaders who you would think would be happy with Latortue who are very angry at him because he's not killing fast enough and he’s not getting rid of this problem of the poor people demanding Aristide's return in a fast enough way. A third component is the army, which is coming back. General Ravix -- AMY GOODMAN: The Haitian army, which President Aristide had disbanded. THOMAS GRIFFIN: In 1995. They're back. They're fully armed. They're marching. They're drilling every day right in Port-au-Prince, in the Petionville neighborhood where they're supported by rich residents and businessmen there, who provide them food, clothing, and a place to sleep. They’re in a very big apartment building there during their drills. But General Ravix himself said he's upset at Latortue and during a conference with me in an interview, he said that he gave veiled threats that there might be another coup unless Latortue gets a little bit more heavy-handed with the insecurity problem. AMY GOODMAN: What evidence did you have of U.S. involvement? I mean, President Aristide was very clear. We documented his trip back from the Central African Republic where he had been flown in a U.S. jet when he was put out of the country February 29. He said he was the victim of a modern-day kidnapping, in the service of a coup d’etat backed by the United States. What about the U.S. presence in Haiti? THOMAS GRIFFIN: I didn't go down there exactly to find that out, I was more documenting the human rights abuses. But in the course of my interviews, I was able to uncover that a U.S. foundation paid by U.S.A.I.D., known as IFES, which stands for the International Foundation for Electoral Systems, had basically been in Haiti for almost -- since Aristide was re-elected in 2000, working to undermine the government by coalescing various sectors of society against him by what they called a sensitization program. They started with judges and lawyers, and their program, which was set up with seminars both in the United States and here, was to teach these groups that Aristide had co-opted the judicial system, that he was the reason for the corruption in the judicial system and the reason why people weren't being prosecuted that were committing human rights abuses. So they had sort of many tentacles that went out to different groups. They brought in the media, so that there was a campaign against Aristide in the media. They brought in human rights groups and actually set up a hotline at one of the human rights groups to take only complaints about pro-Aristide violence and that was then publicized in the media, that they had co-opted, and also at the U.S. embassy in and other agencies. So, and that group ultimately, after a couple of years of work, formed what is known as the group of 184, and that became the main opposition force politically in -- for Jean-Bertrand Aristide. AMY GOODMAN: Who heads up IFES? THOMAS GRIFFIN: In the United States, I believe the chairman of the board of directors is a man named Richard Hybl; in Haiti it's a man named Amami Sola* that controls all the programs down there. AMY GOODMAN: And Richard Hybl, what are his connections? THOMAS GRIFFIN: I don't know much. I just did a quick search of his name when I came back from my investigation, and I cannot remember everything. I know he sits on another board of International Republican Institute known as IRI, who has been notorious for trying to undo the Aristide government both, I believe, in the -- during the first coup in 1991 as well as this one. AMY GOODMAN: Father Jean-Juste, what about these connections? REV. GERARD JEAN-JUSTE: I am really sad to see that so many right wing element within the President Bush administration had participated in the coup d’etat against President Aristide on February 29. Also for me having lived in the U.S. for many years where many of us in this country are calling for respect, for democracy, put into practice the principal of democracy, I think it's really very sad to see that in Haiti, while we're trying to make a democracy to take place, we're calling for education of the people. Here we are, and some right wing elements who dislike our President Aristide, and they plot against him, they support of some groups of people, and to go against the will of the people in Haiti and the start our democracy that was an infant at that time. So, I'm calling upon them. It's not too late now to change. It's not too late now to correct the wrong they have done to this black nation. So, I hope that in this second term, President Aristide could come back to Haiti and finish his mandate. His mandate will end by February 7, 2006. So, if we keep acting that way, every time we have an elected official, an elected president, and some other country may not like the president and decide to plot against the president, and get rid of him, so we are killing the democracy everywhere. Killing it in Haiti, it's been that are you killing the democracy in the United States of America, because right now what is happening. Whatever you see take place in any corner of the world can be repeated in any other corner of the world. AMY GOODMAN: In the first coup against President Aristide, when he was first ousted in 1991, to 1994, it turned out the U.S. was very much involved with this. Allan Nairn writing in The Nation magazine exposed the C.I.A./D.I.A. funding for the head of FRAPH, the paramilitary death squad responsible for so many deaths, Emmanuel Constant, on the payroll of the D.I.A. This was a time when the C.I.A. was headed by James Woolsey. It's one of the things that brought him down as director of central intelligence at the time. Now he had been a fierce proponent actually for the invasion of Iraq, James Woolsey. And this is rarely raised about him. But what about why the U.S. continues to be involved in this way? REV. GERARD JEAN-JUSTE: Understand the first coup was taken also under a Republican administration, then the Democratic administration was followed, and they corrected it. And that's now I don't see how they're going to correct it, because we have a Republican administration being followed by same elements, unless there is some change. But I hope that these officials now who now could look. Look what they have done to Haiti, it is broken into pieces. Now we have to collect the pieces, and allow the people to come together, and I don't see any way now unless President Aristide is restored to power and democracy has been corrected. The same way we do it in 1994. AMY GOODMAN: The Prime minister, Yvon Neptune, remains in jail? REV. GERARD JEAN-JUSTE: Yes indeed. The legal prime minister is in jail while the illegal one, the de-facto one, the imposed one, is the one running around and dividing the Haitian society, and being very rude in his speeches. AMY GOODMAN: What is the U.N. doing about this, with the U.N. forces also in Haiti, led by the Brazilians? REV. GERARD JEAN-JUSTE: That's another point. Where the U.N. is supposed to be a respectable institution, international institution, and in that case, we find the U.N. on the side of the repressive government, and the people cannot understand it at all. AMY GOODMAN: What did you find in Haiti with the U.N. forces, what are known as the blue helmets? THOMAS GRIFFIN: Right. There's two groups of U.N. forces there. One is the civilian police, and they're basically police officers from all over the world, who wear their local uniforms, but put on a blue basketball hat not a helmet, usually, unless there's an operation going on. And they shadow the police. Their job is to go down there and provide support and observe them and correct them if they're doing something wrong. That's not happening with them. The other force is the peacekeeping force that goes around in big tanks, which they call armored personnel vehicles. They have mounted automatic firearms on the top of the tank, and you will see the heads, the blue helmets, sticking out and everyone has got firearms. What they do is sort of piggyback and protect the police but they legitimize them. What you have is one of the worst police forces in the world probably untrained and very scared, and whatever they do, the U.N. is just backing them up. So the U.N. is shooting a lot of people because the Haitian police are shooting a lot of people. It has really become a big mess. I talked to one of the civilian police chiefs in Bel Air and he said I came down here to coach, to train, and to observe. He said, all I'm doing is participating in guerrilla warfare every day. I'm scared and where are the reporters? So, it's a mess, and it's sort of covered up because the U.N.'s down there, but I don't see them doing a very good job. AMY GOODMAN: You spent time at the morgue. THOMAS GRIFFIN: Yeah. I snuck into the morgue. They're not letting people into the morgue anymore. Because the bodies have been piling up so much. And so many human rights observers have been seeing the bodies. They don't let people into the morgue. The second part of it is, I talked to some morgue workers, and they said that the police are now even skipping the morgue phase. So when there is what they call an operation in one of the poor neighborhoods and there's a lot of bodies, the police just take the bodies and instead of dumping them at the morgue, bring them to the morgue only to get dump truck, which they load up with the bodies and they head off to a secret burial ground which hasn't been discovered yet. AMY GOODMAN: Father Jean-Juste, what do the people say about this in Haiti, and what is their feeling about the United States, about the U.N.? REV. GERARD JEAN-JUSTE: Not toward, the feeling is not directed toward the United States, because people in Haiti, they have many Haitian-Americans who live here, and they are friendly to many U.S. citizens, and there is a great relationship growing between the people, the U.S. people, and Haiti people. What is wrong, what we understand is wrong is to see that some elements of the Republican administration conducting illegal activities by destroying democracy in a black nation. The things they're doing in Haiti, they won't do in the United States. There would be outrage in the United States by doing what they're doing in the Haiti. AMY GOODMAN: What was U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell doing in Haiti? REV. GERARD JEAN-JUSTE: He visited Haiti, and we have left with the impression that he's strongly backing up the repressive system, the de-facto, the unconstitutional, the illegal government that is now running Haiti. AMY GOODMAN: When President Jean-Bertrand Aristide was flying back, had been brought back by this U.S. delegation led by Congress member Maxine Waters from the Central African Republic, going at that time to Jamaica where the Prime minister had invited him to stay until he decided his next move, ultimately he went to South Africa. As we were flying over the Atlantic, we were documenting this trip, President Aristide was talking about the situation, and as we flew into Barbados and ultimately to Jamaica, we heard that Colin Powell, that Condoleezza Rice, that they were threatening, and Rumsfeld as well, that Aristide was not to return to the western hemisphere, that the U.S. ambassador to Haiti, Foley, was saying that Aristide was not to come within 150 miles of Haiti. Why? REV. GERARD JEAN-JUSTE: This is what I cannot understand. One official, some official, will decide for a nation, and we are talking about democracy in the United States. Can we accept that in the United States? That two or three individuals take a decision and impose the one thing to the people, and make us suffer, and -- for people in the United States not it react? I think that this is abuse of power from some officials of the United States. They are abusing the power and repressing this black nation, and why are we trying to educate people about education, they should come for our help. They should support us in that direction, as we are trying to be free to enjoy democracy, to make the democracy better for all people, and then there we go no, we should stop that. AMY GOODMAN: Do you feel Aristide supporter like yourself are being targeted? REV. GERARD JEAN-JUSTE: Yes. We are not only targeted, we are being chased. We are being chased. And in the jail over half of the population are arbitrarily arrested, and kept in jail, and most of them are Aristide supporters. One day I witnessed why a bloodbath took place. There are about -- I counted at least 12 broken heads. 12 broken heads by my cell. By my cell. You should see the [inaudible] was covered for about many meters, and then among them there was a very young man, a great artist from Bel Air, and he composed two beautiful songs while was in jail. I said, what happened to you? How come they beat you so badly. He said, because I composed this song, these songs are in favor of President Jean-Bertrand Aristide. I still recognize him as the president and they beat him that badly and broke his head. And fractured some of his limbs. AMY GOODMAN: What do you think now needs to be done? REV. GERARD JEAN-JUSTE: What is to be done now is for the U.S. government and for the so-called friends -- the French government and Canadian government to correct the wrongdoing they have done to the Haitian people. Look at it now. Haiti is not -- there is no life. There is no life. People are starving, and we cannot help them. Those of us who can find help to provide, it's very difficult. I was Aristide and I am lucky to get freed. There are many others like me who have been helping the Haitians, particularly the poorest ones, the children and some elderly. These people are still in jail. I have a very good friend I met in jail. He was in Bel Air, known Nono. Nono is a mechanic man, helping people in trade. Helping the young people in other areas. They come in our city because he is helping. That's the way it is. We met many of the persons, great men in Haiti, great citizens who have been helping, and they are now perishing. They are now languishing in jails. AMY GOODMAN: Father Gerard Jean-Juste, I want to thank you very much for being with us, as well Thomas Griffin, human rights and immigration lawyer. We will post the pictures on the website, some we have shown on the TV broadcast of the show. Others we will just place there for people to see. I want to thank you both for -- THOMAS GRIFFIN: Thank you very much. REV. GERARD JEAN-JUSTE: Thank you for your support. Thank you. Thank you, everyone. -------- spies CIA loses bid to keep records secret Agency says abuse investigation not yet completed Updated: 6:13 p.m. ET Dec. 20, 2004 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6739124/ NEW YORK - The U.S. government lost a bid Monday to block civil rights groups from obtaining CIA records of its internal investigation into abuse of detainees held by U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. In a ruling from the bench, U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein denied a government motion aimed at stopping an earlier order to turn over documents. The decision was made in a lawsuit brought against the government by the American Civil Liberties Union and other groups for what they said was the illegal withholding of records about U.S. military abuse of prisoners held in Iraq and at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba and other locations. The suit, filed in U.S. District Court in Manhattan, charged that the CIA and other federal agencies failed to comply with a Freedom of Information Act, or FOIA, request filed by the groups in October 2003 and May 2004. The FOIA allows citizens access to public federal records. “This [ruling] is extremely important,” said Lawrence Lustberg, a lawyer assisting the civil rights groups. “What we’re going to get are the fruits of the CIA’s own internal investigation.” Government lawyers argued that the documents should not be turned over until the CIA completed its internal probe. “What if it is never closed?” Hellerstein asked. The ACLU said it had obtained about 9,000 records from other agencies. “To date, however, the CIA has not provided a meaningful response to the ACLU’s document request and has refused to confirm or deny the existence of specific documents concerning abuses,” the ACLU said. The ACLU, the New York Civil Liberties Union, the Center for Constitutional Rights, Physicians for Human Rights, Veterans for Common Sense and Veterans for Peace filed suit in June. They sought records documenting torture and abuse that they said occurred after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States. In the suit, they said that after they filed their first FOIA request last year, numerous news stories and photographs documented mistreatment of prisoners held in Iraq and Afghanistan. When the groups received no documents, they filed a motion with the court in August seeking an order to force the government to comply with their requests. Hellerstein then ordered the government to start turning over papers. -------- us Pentagon cost-cutting aimed at new gear December 20, 2004 By Rowan Scarborough THE WASHINGTON TIMES http://www.washtimes.com/national/20041220-121155-3453r.htm The Pentagon is scurrying to find cuts in projected defense spending as part of President Bush's deficit-reduction campaign, defense and industry officials say. The cuts would not be in the current budget, which took effect Oct. 1, but in the fiscal 2006 defense appropriation, which goes to Congress early next year. "They have got a major budget drill going on," said a defense industry executive who is trying to protect the company's programs. This source said the White House Office of Management and Budget wants cuts of up to $10 billion a year. The source, like others for this story, spoke on the condition of anonymity. An OMB spokesman said he had no information about such a plan. "The budget process is still under way," the spokesman said. "A lot of decisions still to go." The defense sources said personnel, operations and maintenance accounts are being protected, meaning the decreases must come from procurement. The Air Force, for example, is looking at axing the space-based radar, a system so unpopular on Capitol Hill that lawmakers cut most funding in the fiscal 2005 budget. The Navy is said to be looking at delaying its next-generation destroyer. The budget process is now in the "passback" phase in which OMB sends back the Pentagon's initial proposed budget with suggested changes. Mr. Bush inherited a defense budget of about $300 billion and has increased it dramatically — first to restore combat readiness accounts, then to fight the war on terrorism. In August, he signed a $417 billion defense appropriations bill for 2005. The Pentagon's multiyear plan has called for an increase of about $20 billion in each of the next two years. This does not count emergency budget legislation to fund the global war on terror, including the fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq. Said a senior military officer at the Pentagon, "We have discussed the impacts of reductions or elimination of certain investment and service support programs. Decisions are expected within a few days, in order to get the budget to OMB." A Pentagon official said he knew of no plans to call for an increase in active duty troop levels, or "end strength." The officials said the department has all the emergency powers it needs for that purpose. A backdrop to the budgeting is the Quadrennial Defense Review, which is due to Congress next fall. The QDR is the Pentagon's road map for the next four years. Officials say the QDR could produce further cuts in weapons systems. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has canceled several programs, most notably the Army's future artillery system and attack/scout helicopter. Arthur K. Cebrowski, who directs the Pentagon's office of transformation, issued a paper last week that seemed to suggest that high-priced weapons should be sacrificed in favor of those that are less expensive and more numerous. "The department must develop a comprehensive divestiture strategy so that it can generate growth," Mr. Cebrowski said. "We have to be willing to shed some things." Near the top of Mr. Rumsfeld's list to "shed" is another round of base closings. -------- POLICE / PRISONERS / COURTS / JUSTICE -------- torture FBI E-Mail Refers to Presidential Order Authorizing Inhumane Interrogation Techniques December 20, 2004 http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFree/SafeandFree.cfm?ID=17216&c=206 NEW YORK -- A document released for the first time today by the American Civil Liberties Union suggests that President Bush issued an Executive Order authorizing the use of inhumane interrogation methods against detainees in Iraq. Also released by the ACLU today are a slew of other records including a December 2003 FBI e-mail that characterizes methods used by the Defense Department as "torture" and a June 2004 "Urgent Report" to the Director of the FBI that raises concerns that abuse of detainees is being covered up. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: media@aclu.org Newly Obtained FBI Records Call Defense Department's Methods "Torture," Express Concerns Over "Cover-Up" That May Leave FBI "Holding the Bag" for Abuses NEW YORK -- A document released for the first time today by the American Civil Liberties Union suggests that President Bush issued an Executive Order authorizing the use of inhumane interrogation methods against detainees in Iraq. Also released by the ACLU today are a slew of other records including a December 2003 FBI e-mail that characterizes methods used by the Defense Department as "torture" and a June 2004 "Urgent Report" to the Director of the FBI that raises concerns that abuse of detainees is being covered up. "These documents raise grave questions about where the blame for widespread detainee abuse ultimately rests," said ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero. "Top government officials can no longer hide from public scrutiny by pointing the finger at a few low-ranking soldiers." The documents were obtained after the ACLU and other public interest organizations filed a lawsuit against the government for failing to respond to a Freedom of Information Act request. The two-page e-mail that references an Executive Order states that the President directly authorized interrogation techniques including sleep deprivation, stress positions, the use of military dogs, and "sensory deprivation through the use of hoods, etc." The ACLU is urging the White House to confirm or deny the existence of such an order and immediately to release the order if it exists. The FBI e-mail, which was sent in May 2004 from "On Scene Commander--Baghdad" to a handful of senior FBI officials, notes that the FBI has prohibited its agents from employing the techniques that the President is said to have authorized. Another e-mail, dated December 2003, describes an incident in which Defense Department interrogators at Guantánamo Bay impersonated FBI agents while using "torture techniques" against a detainee. The e-mail concludes "If this detainee is ever released or his story made public in any way, DOD interrogators will not be held accountable because these torture techniques were done [sic] the 'FBI' interrogators. The FBI will [sic] left holding the bag before the public." The document also says that no "intelligence of a threat neutralization nature" was garnered by the "FBI" interrogation, and that the FBI's Criminal Investigation Task Force (CITF) believes that the Defense Department's actions have destroyed any chance of prosecuting the detainee. The e-mail's author writes that he or she is documenting the incident "in order to protect the FBI." "The methods that the Defense Department has adopted are illegal, immoral, and counterproductive," said ACLU staff attorney Jameel Jaffer. "It is astounding that these methods appear to have been adopted as a matter of policy by the highest levels of government." The June 2004 "Urgent Report" addressed to the FBI Director is heavily redacted. The legible portions of the document appear to describe an account given to the FBI's Sacramento Field Office by an FBI agent who had "observed numerous physical abuse incidents of Iraqi civilian detainees," including "strangulation, beatings, [and] placement of lit cigarettes into the detainees ear openings." The document states that "[redacted] was providing this account to the FBI based on his knowledge that [redacted] were engaged in a cover-up of these abuses." The release of these documents follows a federal court order that directed government agencies to comply with a year-old request under the Freedom of Information Act filed by the ACLU, the Center for Constitutional Rights, Physicians for Human Rights, Veterans for Common Sense and Veterans for Peace. The New York Civil Liberties Union is co-counsel in the case. Other documents released by the ACLU today include: a.. An FBI email regarding DOD personnel impersonating FBI officials during interrogations. The e-mail refers to a "ruse" and notes that "all of those [techniques] used in these scenarios" were approved by the Deputy Secretary of Defense. (Jan. 21, 2004) b.. Another FBI agent's account of interrogations at Guantánamo in which detainees were shackled hand and foot in a fetal position on the floor. The agent states that the detainees were kept in that position for 18 to 24 hours at a time and most had "urinated or defacated [sic]" on themselves. On one occasion, the agent reports having seen a detainee left in an unventilated, non-air conditioned room at a temperature "probably well over a hundred degrees." The agent notes: "The detainee was almost unconscious on the floor, with a pile of hair next to him. He had apparently been literally pulling his own hair out throughout the night." (Aug. 2, 2004) c.. An e-mail stating that an Army lawyer "worked hard to cwrite [sic] a legal justification for the type of interrogations they (the Army) want to conduct" at Guantánamo Bay. (Dec. 9, 2002) d.. An e-mail noting the initiation of an FBI investigation into the alleged rape of a juvenile male detainee at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. (July 28, 2004) e.. An FBI agent's account of an interrogation at Guantánamo - an interrogation apparently conducted by Defense Department personnel - in which a detainee was wrapped in an Israeli flag and bombarded with loud music and strobe lights. (July 30, 2004) The ACLU and its allies are scheduled to go to court again this afternoon, where they will seek an order compelling the CIA to turn over records related to an internal investigation into detainee abuse. Although the ACLU has received more than 9,000 documents from other agencies, the CIA refuses to confirm or deny even the existence of many of the records that the ACLU and other plaintiffs have requested. The CIA is reported to have been involved in abusing detainees in Iraq and at secret CIA detention facilities around the globe. The lawsuit is being handled by Lawrence Lustberg and Megan Lewis of the New Jersey-based law firm Gibbons, Del Deo, Dolan, Griffinger & Vecchione, P.C. Other attorneys in the case are Jaffer, Amrit Singh and Judy Rabinovitz of the ACLU; Art Eisenberg and Beth Haroules of the NYCLU; and Barbara Olshansky and Jeff Fogel of CCR. The documents referenced above can be found at: http://www.aclu.org/torturefoia/released/fbi.html More on the lawsuit can be found at: http://www.aclu.org/torturefoia/ ACLU, 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor New York, NY 10004 This is the Web site of the American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU Foundation. Learn more about the distinction between these two components of the ACLU. -------- OTHER -------- environment Living under depleted skies December 20, 2004 By Charles J. Hanley THE ASSOCIATED PRESS http://www.washtimes.com/world/20041219-104731-8382r.htm PUNTA ARENAS, Chile — The worst of the ozone hole has pulled back once more to Antarctica this southern spring, leaving behind a shadow of uncertainty for the people living at the bottom of the Americas. How many will develop skin cancer in years to come? How many more decades must their children live with dangerous ultraviolet rays? Will the global treaty to save the ozone layer survive until then? The people of wind-blown Punta Arenas, like the local evergreens forever bent eastward by westerly gusts, are adjusting to the intense radiation that pours each year through the gap in the ozone layer. At least that is what some say. "People are better informed. They're buying more sunblock and putting it on their children," said pharmacist Gerardo Leal. "They've gotten used to it," taxi driver Rene Bahamonde assured a visitor. But on a "red alert" day when ultraviolet rays could lead to damaged eyes, Mr. Bahamonde's dark glasses sat unused by his side. And local health chief Dr. Lidia Amarales said many of the 150,000 Punta Arenans take few precautions against a damaging sun as they go about their business on the quiet streets that slope downward to the broad, chilly waters of the Strait of Magellan. The reason is simple: It's cool here. "When it's [86 degrees] somewhere, people don't go out into the sun. Here, with [55 degrees], they go outside," Dr. Amarales explained. This is a gray, drizzly corner of South America, but clouds are no protection against ultraviolet rays. The temperature rarely exceeds 70 degrees, and "without the heat, they don't 'feel' the radiation," Dr. Amarales said. "We need to change habits." The stratosphere's layer of ozone, a form of oxygen, filtered out almost all of the sun's cancer-causing ultraviolet-B rays for countless millennia. But in the 1970s, scientists warned that man-made chemicals such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), used in aerosol sprays and refrigerants, were destroying ozone through chain reactions high in the skies. By the 1980s, satellite images showed the world that an "ozone hole" had formed over Antarctica. Air currents and intense cold in the polar region, combined with chlorine from CFCs, created a vast expanse of ozone-thin atmosphere that briefly reached the tip of South America each southern spring. Measured in "Dobson units," ozone here was found in October 1992 to have thinned to 147 units, less than half the normal 333. Ultraviolet radiation, in its most damaging wavelengths, multiplied many times. The world's nations took action in 1987, signing the Montreal Protocol, phasing out some CFCs and other ozone-damaging compounds. As a result, chlorine has declined in the lower atmosphere since the mid-1990s, while the rate of growth of bromine, another targeted chemical, has slowed. It will take decades to purge the atmosphere. Analysts watch year by year for positive signs, and this September's maximum ozone hole, at 8 million square miles, was markedly smaller than the 11-million-square-mile hole last year, though similar in size to the one in 2002. But Dutch climatologist Henk Eskes, a leading ozone analyst, cautioned that climatic changes make it hard to draw conclusions. "It's still very difficult to say that it's really at a turning point. There's a lot of variability from one year to the next, because of wind patterns and dynamical situations," he said by telephone from De Bilt, Netherlands. Punta Arenas' own expert, Claudio Casiccia, is equally noncommittal. "If this trend continues for four, five, six years, then I think that's a sign the ozone is recovering," said the Chilean, who monitors the skies with sophisticated instruments on the roof of his Ozone Laboratory at the University of Magallanes. Computer models suggest the ozone layer may recover globally between 2040 and 2050, Mr. Casiccia said. "But global ozone is one situation" — it was depleted by 6 percent over the United States, for example — "and Antarctica is another situation." Mr. Casiccia and others worry that unforeseen new compounds might damage the ozone shield. And they are troubled by the granting of exemptions from the Montreal Protocol. On Nov. 26, at negotiations in Prague, a dozen nations, including the United States, Canada and some European countries, won continued exemptions for use of methyl bromide, an ozone-depleting agricultural pesticide that was to have been phased out this year. Chemist Mario Molina, who shared a 1995 Nobel prize for identifying the ozone threat, insists that substitutes are available. "Any exemptions for further emissions will delay the recovery of the ozone layer," he said by telephone from Cambridge, Mass. Environmentalists at the Prague meeting worried that continued exceptions for rich countries could undermine the Montreal treaty by discouraging poorer countries from meeting their own later deadlines — to end CFC use by 2010, for example. In Punta Arenas, ozone is a here-and-now concern for Dr. Jaime F. Abarca, the city's sole dermatologist, who with Mr. Casiccia's help conducted the only detailed studies of local sunburns, skin cancer and ultraviolet-B ray levels. Dr. Abarca reported in a British dermatology journal that the incidence of skin cancer leaped from 65 cases recorded between 1987 and 1993, to 108 in the next seven-year period. He said additional research, with international aid, is needed urgently. The annual shrinking of the hole — the area where ozone drops below 220 Dobson units — doesn't mean the danger ends for Punta Arenas. Even in December, below-normal ozone levels combine with a higher-angled, more direct sun to produce "red alert" days, announced via 131 prominent signs posted at schools, office lobbies and other key places, modeled on a traffic light showing five alert levels ranging from green to violet. Still, few residents are seen wearing dark glasses or hats with brims. Fernando Carbacho, 64, wears his $100 ultraviolet-guard sunglasses rain or shine. "But not everyone can afford good glasses," the retired soldier said. Besides, he said, "people are contrary" and resist being told what to do, including his 12-year-old granddaughter, who goes without protection. "They know what the problem is," Mr. Amarales said. "They just haven't changed their habits."