NucNews - February 22, 2005 -------- NUCLEAR Declaration of power North Korea's announcement that it has nuclear weapons escalates its dispute with the US. Lyndsey Turner suggests ways to stimulate classroom discussion on a new kind of cold war Tuesday February 22, 2005 The Guardian http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/learn/story/0,14122,1419390,00.html The nuclear arms race has entered a new phase. With North Korea declaring itself a nuclear power and Iran's repudiation of President Bush's "ban" on the development of new nuclear capabilities, it seems that the political map of the world is set to change. Once again, all roads lead to the US: North Korea has suspended its participation in disarmament talks, it claims, as a direct response to America's increased hostility. Iran's plans come in the wake of fears that a US military "adventure" in the country is planned for later this year. Well-rehearsed arguments justifying the stockpiling of warheads are once more doing the rounds. These weapons, the arguments run, are a means of ensuring homeland security, a "beware of the dog" sign writ in letters so large as to be visible from a US spy satellite. American attempts to curb the proliferation of nuclear capacity have met with accusations of double standards from the international community: why can some countries be trusted to mine uranium for the purposes of domestic energy production when others are banned from importing it in any form? Commentators have long suspected that North Korea has been developing nuclear weapons. It joins a list of countries, including Israel, India and Pakistan, engaged in a new kind of cold war. A lesson on the nuclear arms race asks us to confront the diplomacy of the past in an attempt to understand our present situation: it is, perhaps, time to find out whether history teaches us anything worth learning. Internationally-accredited TESOL Certificate courses in ... teflcourse.com No nukes is good nukes? Study the work of the CND by presenting students with the organisation's mission statement (available at www.cnduk.org) and asking the class to summarise its aims and achievements to date. Use the CND website to investigate the arguments used by groups in favour of unilateral disarmament. Ask groups of students to focus on various campaigns (scrap Trident, stop the plutonium trade, etc), researching facts and figures, and compiling an information briefing sheet, which can then be presented to the rest of the class. Take the opportunity to examine the work of diplomacy and peaceful negotiation in international politics, focusing on the role of Nato and the UN in "policing" the world. After presenting the class with some topical newspaper articles on North Korea's declaration ( http://guardian.co.uk ), set up a role-play scenario that allows students to develop empathy for the positions of the various countries concerned. One of the most common arguments for the retention of a nuclear arsenal is the "deterrent" argument, which runs: "If you want your home to be safe, keep a gun at home." Encourage a class debate in which students argue for or against the use of nuclear weapons as a self-defence measure. Who's got what? Help students to plot the nuclear capabilities of various nations on a map of world (sites such as http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~nuclear/map.php and www.armscontrol.org are useful here). Examine the disparity in numbers between Pakistan's arsenal (presumed to be around 40 warheads) and the capabilities of the US (about 9,000 warheads) - is it fair to say that the US is "winning" the arms race? Challenge students to construct a history of nuclear power and to turn this history into a dynamic presentation. Present pupils with the raw information to complete this task ( http://www.cnduk.org and http://web.em.doe.gov/timeline ) and encourage them to choose the most relevant incidents and experiments to include in their finished assignment. Find out about North Korea by browsing the Guardian's special report on the country ( http://www.guardian.co.uk/korea, the timeline and the interactive history are particularly useful here). Ask students to imagine that they have been asked to compile a dossier on the country for a government minister wishing to meet with representatives of the nation. What does he or she need to know about the population, the method of government, industry and international relations? Science fiction, science fact When Oppenheimer watched the first successful test of his bomb, he was reputed to have commented: "I am become death, destroyer of worlds." Learn more about Oppenheimer's life and work by visiting http://www.nuclearfiles.org/rebios/oppenheimerjulius.html , before using this statement as the basis of a piece of creative writing that seeks to understand the scientist's mixed reactions to his own discovery. In the science classroom, encourage the investigation of the possible impact of a nuclear attack ( http://www.nuclearterror.org ). Alternatively, look at the advice given during the cold war on surviving a nuclear attack - a discussion of tips ranging from "wear stout shoes" to "hide in the cellar" makes a good starting point for the consideration of the capability of a nuclear weapon. Citizens of the UK could be forgiven for believing that the acceleration of the nuclear arms race is somebody else's problem. Help students to find out more about Britain's nuclear reserves by visiting http://www.tridentploughshares.org . Ask pupils to investigate the Trident project, reporting back to the class on the UK's nuclear testing sites and the government's policy on the use and development of a nuclear arsenal. Curriculum links and guidance This lesson is written for key stage 3 (age 11-14) but can be adapted for other ages. Key stage 2 The ins and outs of international hostility are likely to be beyond the understanding of key stage 2 students. Focus instead on the subject of conflict resolution by asking students to list some of the reasons why arguments break out among friends. Discuss ways of resolving these conflicts and encourage the class to consider which methods are the most appropriate. Weigh up the benefits of using violence as opposed to dialogue (or force versus diplomacy), and help pupils to make links between their own experiences and the problems facing nations in conflict with one another. As part of a science lesson, focus on the way energy is produced from wind, fossil fuels and solar power. Take the opportunity to explain how nuclear energy uses different processes to generate energy and to provide power for household use. Introduce the idea of nuclear bombs by referring to pictures of mushroom clouds. Ask students to brainstorm their responses to these pictures, and answer any questions that arise about the composition and effects of these clouds. Help students to turn these initial observations into a piece of creative writing (a story or a poem). Alternatively, use an art lesson to explore collage-making (beginning with pictures of mushroom clouds, ban the bomb icons and imagery used in the opening sequence of The Simpsons). Key stage 4 Discuss recent developments in the nuclear arms race, examining arguments for weapon retention that centre on "deterrence" and self-defence. Ask students to consider whether it is realistic to hope for unilateral disarmament by introducing them to some of the basic principles of game theory. Although several versions of the "prisoner's dilemma" game are available, the activity posted at http://www.indiana.edu/~econed/pdffiles/summer00/Holt.pdf is easy to recreate in a classroom, providing a neat illustration of what happens when an individual is invited to act in the public interest. As part of the science curriculum, investigate the theory behind nuclear weapons. After explaining the composition of an atom, encourage students to find out more about atomic fission. Introduce students to the reactions that occur in a nuclear bomb (sites such as http://www.cnduk.org provide helpful graphics), and ask groups of students to summarise various moments in the detonation of the bomb in an illustrated flow chart. In the history classroom, examine North Korea's recent declaration in the context of the cold war. Challenge students to construct a history of the arms race (using resources such as the timeline at http://www.cnduk.org) and to think about the practicalities of diplomacy in a nuclear age. Encourage students to compose a piece of analytical writing that seeks to examine the perceived need for nuclear weapons in 2005. -------- accidents and safety Fuel leak narrowly averted at Chalk River Failed valve on nuclear reactor last serviced in 1972; safety device kicked in to prevent radioactive accident Tom Spears The Ottawa Citizen February 22, 2005 http://www.canada.com/ottawa/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=b3002640-f541-4c59-b668-9fed25a6de68 Canada's oldest working nuclear reactor has had an accident at Chalk River, and federal nuclear safety regulators say only an automatic safety system prevented a radioactive leak and possibly melting of the fuel. The aging NRU reactor -- which opened in 1957, and was overdue for retirement -- started losing steam through a badly worn valve after an "inadequate" repair job. Investigators can find no record of any maintenance on the failed valve since 1972, when Paul Henderson's goal beat the Soviet Union in hockey, and Bob Stanfield ran for prime minister. The accident happened in June; full details are just now being released by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, which regulates our nuclear industry. It is Chalk River's first "loss of coolant accident." Far more serious loss of coolant accidents caused the Chernobyl and Three Mile Island meltdowns. An automatic safety system tripped the reactor 13 minutes after a main valve failed, investigators found. If it hadn't, "this event could have led to a fuel failure and a significant release" of radioactive material that would likely have reached the public. This accident, they say, caused "a reduction in the margin of safety" for the reactor. But there was no actual radioactive leak, no injury, and no lasting damage. Now the federal regulators are blasting Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. for "complacency" and lack of written procedures, and say the event was "a serious process failure." AECL is the Crown corporation that operates the Chalk River reactors. But a veteran professor of engineering says the incident wasn't dangerous at all. Terry Rogers, an emeritus professor from Carleton University, said there was only a small loss of steam, and the fact that the reactor shut itself down properly prevented any harm. As well, he questioned whether the valve really had gone without maintenance since 1972. "It's just inconceivable" that the plant operators would ignore this, he said, as all Canadian nuclear plants are forced by the rules of their licences to check and re-check all parts of their high-pressure systems. He believes the records of maintenance are simply missing. AECL wouldn't comment yesterday. It's due to meet the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission officials later this week, and says it will be pleased to discuss the issue publicly after that meeting. The event started with a drip. Workers knew last June that a main flow control valve was leaking a little water and tried to repack it on the overnight shift, but failed to do the job properly. The valve started to leak again after the reactor was cranked up to high power. Staff the following afternoon heard a noise and went to investigate, and were surprised to see "significant quantities of steam" rushing out of the leak. The safety system kicked in properly and there was no radioactive leak. The reactor was operating at 54 million watts -- high power -- at the time of the accident. Reactors need liquid coolant just as car engines do -- to keep the machinery from overheating. If too much coolant escapes, the reactor core can end up like a car engine with an empty radiator: It overheats until the metal changes shape enough to seize up. This can damage the reactor heavily, or even cause more rising temperatures that melt the uranium fuel itself -- a fuel failure. Chalk River's leaky main valve was in a "loop" -- a pressurized tube that's not found in the commercial reactors that produce Ontario's electricity. It can be used for experiments that simulate what happens in a Candu reactor. It runs through the reactor core, but contains its own coolant water at the same temperatures and pressures as the core. Inspectors found specific mistakes including: - "The valve was poorly maintained." - AECL had no scheduled maintenance for the valve that leaked. No technical person was responsible for its maintenance. - The valve was seen to be leaking and repaired by repacking, but the repair job was "inadequate." There were no written procedures for how to do the work properly. - The repair person didn't really know how to do the job. - The valve packing was replaced on the spot, not in a workshop. The nuclear safety commission says AECL has begun to write proper procedures for fixing major flow control valves, and is designing a maintenance schedule. It's the second time in a month that federal regulators have criticized AECL's work at Chalk River. Last month the safety commission blasted the company for dumping low-level radioactive sludge from its sewage into sandy pits instead of using proper radioactive waste disposal. The safety commission staff couldn't find anyone to answer questions yesterday. -------- britain Experts criticise Sellafield’s ‘complacent’ security plans Published on 22/02/2005 http://www.nwemail.co.uk/news/viewarticle.aspx?id=183305 SELLAFIELD security arrangements have been described as “complacent in light of September 11”. Independent experts have said British Nuclear Fuels Limited should review and possibly rewrite its emergency plan to deal with terrorist attacks or major accidents. The report was produced by BNFL’s independent security working group, comprised of nuclear scientists, local residents, green groups and trade unions. It recommends that BNFL and the Office of Civil Nuclear Security should re-evaluate the worst case emergency scenario for both accidents and terrorists attacks and work with local authorities to change plans. The report concludes: “Some of us felt the reference case for the worst credible site accident presented by BNFL and upon which the incident emergency plan is based, creates the impression of complacency in light of September 11.” The group came to its conclusion after a presentation by Cumbria County Council’s emergency planning unit. The authors go on to point out that Chancellor Gordon Brown had allocated extra cash in his 2004 spending review for emergency planning and counter-terrorism measures. It also calls on BNFL to review its funding when it comes to security arrangements.In a list of 60 recommendations the report calls on BNFL to use advanced computer simulation to enhance the realism of scenarios when writing security plans. Much of the recommendations in the 140 page report have been accepted by BNFL. Many of the improvements are to take place from April this year. BNFL stresses it was already working on the report’s recommendations. Last week the nuclear giant came under fire after admitting it had “lost 30 kilos” of plutonium in its annual audit. It stressed the loss was only an accounting error and none of the material had been stolen or was missing. ---- 'Clean' nuclear power? From Mr John Busby February 22, 2005 UK Times http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,59-1494615,00.html Sir, Papers delivered to the World Nuclear Association’s annual symposiums show an industry in crisis in that primary supplies of uranium provide only 55 per cent of the current demand, the balance coming from the so-called secondary sources of ex-weapons material, inventories and reworked mine tailings. The papers indicate that the secondary sources are running down. The 36 reactors under construction (letter, February 17) can only be supplied by the scheduled closing of many of the 430 existing reactors, whose life is in some cases being extended by ignoring the safety implications associated with the deterioration in the materials of their construction as a result of irradiation. Even if nuclear power is “carbon dioxide clean”, which it is not, the contribution it makes to global energy supplies is a mere 2½ per cent. Using the lower grades of uranium ore as the higher grades are depleted leads to even more carbon dioxide being released from the less efficient mining, milling and enrichment involved. Nuclear power offers neither sustainability nor a “clean” overall fuel cycle and cannot contribute to an alleviation of global warming. There is no “nuclear option”. Yours faithfully, JOHN BUSBY, Oakwood, Melford Road, Lawshall, Bury St Edmunds IP29 4PY. February 17. -------- canada Canada - New Brunswick Power hopes for federal money for nuclear plant Canada Broadcast News February 22, 2005 http://www.canada.com/fortstjohn/story.html?id=acded469-ba74-493b-967c-54184502df32 The president of NB Power says the federal government will be a major factor in the future of the Point Lepreau nuclear power plant. David Hay says he needs to see what emission credits Ottawa is willing to set under the Kyoto accord. He says it's a critical piece of the puzzle in determining if the $1.4-billion refurbishment is economic or not. Hay says under U.S. guidelines, the utility would qualify for $400 million. NB Power is negotiating with Ontario-based Bruce Power to become a private partner in the Lepreau project, which would extend the life of the reactor by 25 years. Hay says negotiations are continuing, but the federal government's position is needed before a recommendation to the province is made. The provincial government will make the final decision on whether to proceed with refurbishment. -------- europe Electricite de France prepared to involve Enel in next-generation nuclear plant project - report Tuesday February 22, 06:45 AM http://uk.biz.yahoo.com/050222/323/fcyol.html LONDON (AFX) - Electricite de France is understood to be prepared to involve Enel SpA in its next generation nuclear power plant in a bid to resolve a stalemate over the French company's investment in Edison, the Financial Times reported. People close to EdF told the newspaper the group is 'ready to look at a partnership with Enel' as part of the planned European pressurised water reactor project, launched by the French government late last year and due to start in 2007. The partnership could involve an exchange of technology. ---- (Netherlands) Nuclear plant closure to cost up to EUR 1bn Expatica News 22 February 2005 http://www.expatica.com/source/site_article.asp?subchannel_id=19&story_id=17186&name=Nuclear+plant+closureto+cost+up+to+EUR+1bn AMSTERDAM — Closing the Borssele nuclear reactor in Zeeland could cost up to EUR 1 billion, Environment State Secretary Pieter van Geel told MPs on Monday, further sharpening discussion about the future of nuclear energy in he Netherlands. The revelation comes after state secretary, a member of the Christian Democrat CDA party, said last week that the money spent on closing the plant as scheduled in 2013 could be better used for investment in sustainable energy production. It was agreed in the coalition government accord in 2002 that the nuclear plant should be closed in 2013. The decision represented a continuation of the anti-nuclear stance held by the Dutch government in recent years. But debate flared again last week after Van Geel suggested the high costs of closing the plant meant the planned shutdown should be delayed. Small government party Democrat D66 immediately rejected the proposal. The Liberal VVD has always been in favour of keeping the Borssele plant open, while the CDA is not yet prepared to break the coalition accord. Instead, the CDA wants to weigh up the pros and cons of closing the plant, the last operating nuclear power station in the Netherlands. CDA Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende subsequently laid down the ground rules of the debate for Cabinet ministers last week. Confirming that the government will for the time being stick to its decision to close the plant in 2013, he said discussion around the future of nuclear energy was welcome. Van Geel has since told MPs that the owner of the nuclear plant, EPZ, is refusing to co-operate with the 2013 closure. He has sought legal advice from the government attorney and policy research institute ECN Beleidsstudies over the legal and financial consequences of EPZ's stance. The government attorney says that payment of compensation to the electricity company — which has an unrestricted permit — would be "inescapable" in the event of a forced closure. ECN estimates the subsequent financial loss for EPZ would range from several hundred million euros up to EUR 1 billion, newspaper De Volkskrant reported on Tuesday. Opposition party Labour PvdA is now concerned that EPZ will lodge a higher claim for compensation, news service NOS reported. Diederik Samsom accused Van Geel of trying to sabotage the closure of the plant by giving away the government's bargaining position. Environmental lobby group Greenpeace is also accusing Van Geel of driving the compensation bill higher by giving EPZ approval for further investment in its plant. The coalition's decision to close the nuclear plant in 2013 can only be overturned if all three government parties agree to the change in policy. The Lower House of Parliament, Tweede Kamer, will hold an emergency debate about the matter later this week. -------- iran US Military Not Conducting Spy Flights Over Iran: Pentagon Washington (AFP) Feb 22, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/news/uav-05q.html The US military is not conducting spy flights over Iran and "to the best of our knowlege" neither are other elements of the US government, a Pentagon spokesman said Tuesday, denying Iranian and US reports to the contrary. "It's not happening," Lawrence DiRita, the chief Pentagon spokesman, told reporters. DiRita said he could not speak for the US government as a whole, but he said the Defense Department was not flying reconnaissance missions over Iran and he was satisfied they were not being flown by others in the government, an allusion to the US intelligence agencies. "Nothing I'm saying here is meant to leave any other impression than it's not happening in the Department of Defense and to the best of our knowledge it isn't happening period," he said. The Washington Post reported earlier this month that US drones have been overflying Iran since April 2004, gathering intelligence on Iran's nuclear program and probing for weaknesses in Iran's air defenses. Iran's intelligence minister Ali Younessi said last week that the United States has been spying on Iran from the sky for a long time. The reported spy flights have raised concerns about US military preparations for possible strikes on suspected Iranian nuclear weapons sites. US President George W. Bush has refused to rule out a military option, but during a visit to Europe sought to allay fears of an attack. "This notion that the United States is getting ready to attack Iran is simply ridiculous," Bush told reporters at the end of a summit in Brussels with European Union (EU) leaders. "Having said that, all options are on the table," he added. ---- Nuclear Iran not acceptable: Bush Warns Tehran over its support to terrorism; demands end to Syria’s occupation of Lebanon; backs ‘free Palestine’ Tuesday February 22, 2005 News International, Pakistan http://jang.com.pk/thenews/feb2005-daily/22-02-2005/main/main2.htm BRUSSELS: US President George W Bush urged Iran on Monday to end its support for terrorism, warning that Tehran cannot be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. "In Iran, the free world shares a common goal for the sake of peace," Bush said in a keynote speech in Brussels, where he is seeking to bury the hatchet with Europe over the Iraq war. "The Iranian regime must end support for terrorism and must not develop nuclear weapons," he said in the Belgian capital, where he arrived on Sunday on his first stop in a three-country European trip. Washington has alleged that the Islamic Republic is seeking to build nuclear weapons, a charge that Tehran vehemently denies, saying that its nuclear programme is completely peaceful. European nations, led by France, Britain and Germany, have been seeking to persuade Iran to comply with international obligations in return for a lucrative package of trade deals. But Washington has been pressing for Iran to be brought before the UN Security Council, which could choose to impose sanctions. And fears have mounted that Washington could resort to military strikes against suspected Iranian nuclear plants. "In safeguarding the security of free nations no option can be taken permanently off the table," Bush told the crowd of European dignitaries. "Iran however is different from Iraq," he assured the audience, referring to Washington’s unilateral decision to invade Iraq in March 2003. "We’re in the early stages of diplomacy. ... We’re working closely with Britain, France and Germany, as they oppose Iran’s nuclear ambitions and as they insist that Iran comply with international law." The UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has called on the United States to join the European effort. Its head, Mohamed ElBaradei, said the European efforts can succeed only "if the United States joins in and throws its weight behind it. "Progress is difficult to conceive without Washington," ElBaradei told the weekly Der Spiegel, adding, "We need a common front." But Bush warned: "The results of this approach now depend largely on Iran." He added: "We also look to Iran to finally deliver on promised reform. The time has arrived for the Iranian regime to listen to the Iranian people and respect their rights and join in the movement toward liberty that is taking place all around them." Bush demanded an end to Syria’s "occupation" of Lebanon, saying the country’s people "have the right to be free". He said that Lebanon, which is reeling after the assassination of former prime minister Rafiq Hariri last week, was "a once thriving country that now suffers under the influence of an oppressive neighbour". Bush underlined that Syria must take stronger action to stop those who support violence in Iraq and "end its support for terrorist groups seeking to destroy the hope of peace between Israelis and Palestinians". "Syria must also end its occupation of Lebanon. The Lebanese people have the right to be free, and the United States and Europe share an interest in an democratic, independent Lebanon," he said. Recalling recent elections in Afghanistan, the Palestinian territories and Iraq, he said: "Without Syrian interference, Lebanon’s parliamentary elections in the spring can be another milestone of liberty." Bush also pledged support for Israeli-Palestinian peace efforts and for Palestinian reform, which he said would give momentum to changes throughout the Middle East. "Our greatest opportunity, and our immediate goal, is peace in the Middle East," Bush said. Bush devoted much of a speech at the outset of a visit to the European Union and Nato alliance to the Middle East and the improved prospects for peace with the new Palestinian leadership that took over after the death of Yasser Arafat in November. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has "an opportunity to put together a strategy of reform," Bush said. "I hope he will seize the moment," Bush said. The US leader said he would send Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to an international conference in London March 1 designed to help the Palestinian authority reform its finances and security system. But Bush cautioned that reforms cannot happen all at once. "We seek peace between Israel and Palestine for its own sake," said Bush, who supports a separate Palestinian state alongside Israel. "We also know that a free and peaceful Palestine can add to the momentum of reform throughout the broader Middle East." Bush pledged to "raise the flag of a free Palestine," and said: "The world must not rest until there is a just and lasting resolution to this conflict." US President Bush prodded Russia not turn its back on democratic advances. "In a new century, the alliance of America and Europe is the main pillar of our security," he said. He uses the word "alliance" 12 times in the speech to underscore his aim to repair relations with Europe that were frayed over the war in Iraq. But not all his speech was conciliatory. "We recognise that reform will not happen overnight," Bush said, just three days before he meets with Putin in Slovakia. "We must always remind Russia that our alliance stands for a free press, a vital opposition, the sharing of power and the rule of law. The United States should place democratic reform at the heart of their dialogue with Russia." The president also had pointed advice for two pivotal US allies in the Middle East: Saudi Arabia and Egypt. "The government of Saudi Arabia can demonstrate its leadership in the region by expanding the role of its people in determining their future," Bush said, urging greater move toward giving Saudi more political freedom. "The great and proud nation of Egypt, which showed the way toward peace in the Middle East, can now show the way toward democracy in the Middle East," Bush said. "Some Europeans joined the fight to liberate Iraq, while others did not," Bush said. "All nations now have an interest in the success of a free and democratic Iraq, which will fight terror, which will be a beacon of freedom and which will be a source of true stability in the region." ---- Iran finds allies against U.N. atomic plan - diplomats Tue February 22, 2005 11:08 PM GMT+05:30 By Louis Charbonneau (Reuters) http://www.reuters.co.in/locales/c_newsArticle.jsp;:421b8354:4c33eb6bd7cbdbb?type=worldNews&localeKey=en_IN&storyID=7700698 http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L22608852.htm VIENNA - A plan by the U.N.'s atomic watchdog aimed partly at helping to persuade Iran to forsake its nuclear ambitions is opposed not only by Tehran but a group of countries including Japan and Brazil, diplomats said. Even the United States, which accuses Iran of trying to make an atomic bomb under the guise of a civilian nuclear programme, has reservations about the proposed five-year moratorium on new nuclear production facilities, they added. Major uranium suppliers Canada and Australia also have objections. Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), proposed the plan last year, hoping a global moratorium would give the world time to patch up loopholes in the nuclear non-proliferation regime. The scheme also offered Iran a way of saving face while acceding to a European Union demand that it scrap its uranium enrichment programme, the U.N. diplomats said. "The idea is that it would be easier for Iran to give up enrichment as part of an international movement," a diplomat involved in EU discussions with Iran on its atomic fuel programme told Reuters on condition of anonymity. Iran, which denies seeking to make an atomic bomb and says its programme is peaceful to generate electricity, has rejected both the EU demand and the moratorium. ElBaradei will not have an easy time selling his plan for a moratorium on the creation of new uranium enrichment and plutonium reprocessing facilities ahead of a nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) review conference in May. EXCESS OF ENRICHMENT CAPACITY Tariq Rauf, head of the IAEA's Verification and Security Policy Office, told a news conference on the future of nuclear fuel supply that there was currently a global excess of enrichment capacity and new multinational alternatives to national enrichment programmes were needed to reduce proliferation risks. "Clearly it's not in the interest of the world to have 30 or 40 countries, each having a national plutonium reprocessing or uranium enrichment capability, because this does lead for the potential for going to the next step -- making nuclear weapons." The moratorium has only partial support from Washington, which nevertheless sees such a plan as a way of isolating and increasing pressure on Iran to give up its enriched-uranium fuel projects, the diplomats said. Iran and other states which would be affected by the moratorium strongly oppose it, fearing it will become permanent. Tehran also rejects the idea of such a moratorium as tantamount to granting a virtual monopoly to European, Russian and other existing producers of enriched-uranium nuclear fuel. Enrichment is a process of purifying uranium for use as fuel in nuclear power plants or, when very highly enriched, in bombs. While the EU supports the moratorium, Iran has some powerful allies against it -- including Japan, Argentina, Brazil and Pakistan, diplomats from several IAEA member countries said. "Some countries are worried that the moratorium would eventually become compulsory, especially countries that would be affected by it," a diplomat close to the IAEA said. "They don't want to limit their options for the future." Despite this opposition, the diplomat said ElBaradei's moratorium proposal was "still on the table" and would be a major topic of discussion at the NPT review conference in May. Countries like Canada and Australia -- which have ample uranium but do not enrich it -- have reservations about closing doors on their own future nuclear fuel options, diplomats said. Japan, they said, opposes the moratorium because it fears its own plutonium-based atomic activities might be curtailed. The United States only supports the idea of a moratorium for countries which lack an atomic fuel production capacity. In this case, U.S. plans for new enrichment facilities would be exempt from the moratorium while Iranian facilities would be covered. Diplomats close to the IAEA say this would be unfair. "It wouldn't be worth it unless all the 'have' countries, not just the 'have nots', also agree to a moratorium on new enrichment and reprocessing facilities," a Western diplomat close to the IAEA said. "This is where it gets tricky." -------- korea North Korean Said to Be Willing to Resume Talks February 22, 2005 By JIM YARDLEY The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/22/international/asia/22talks.html BEIJING, Tuesday, Feb. 22 - North Korea's leader, Kim Jong Il, has told a Chinese envoy that he would be willing to resume diplomatic negotiations over his country's nuclear program, but only when "conditions are ripe," according to state media reports in China and North Korea. Mr. Kim also said North Korea would return to the talks only if the United States showed "sincerity." Mr. Kim's seemingly softer stance, if characteristically vague and open ended, was taken after North Korea jolted diplomatic efforts this month by announcing for the first time that it already possessed nuclear weapons and would not return to disarmament talks. In a meeting on Monday with a senior Chinese official dispatched to Pyongyang, Mr. Kim reportedly said North Korea remained committed to the continuing six-nation negotiations organized by China to defuse the nuclear crisis. "The D.P.R.K. has never opposed the six-party talks, nor will it withdraw from the talks," Mr. Kim said, referring to the acronym for the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. His comments, reported Tuesday morning in China's and North Korea's official media, were made in discussions with Wang Jiarui, a senior Chinese envoy. Mr. Wang also brought a personal message from President Hu Jintao emphasizing the need for a peaceful solution to the nuclear problem and a resumption of talks. The unpredictable behavior of the North has put China in a difficult position, as it remains North Korea's principal ally and economic sponsor yet also wants a nuclear-free and stable Korean peninsula. The previous rounds of the six-nation talks, for which China has been the host, have brought little tangible progress. Earlier this month, North Korea's announcement that it would not return to the talks surprised American officials. Two delegations of American lawmakers visited North Korea in January and said they believed that the country was ready to resume negotiations. Perhaps signaling that North Korea was now more amenable to returning to the table, Mr. Kim reportedly told Mr. Wang that he favored a nuclear-free Korean peninsula. "He said that the D.P.R.K. would as ever stand for the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula and its position to seek a peaceful solution to the issue through dialogue remains unchanged," Mr. Kim said, according to the North's official Korea Central News Agency. The official report added that North Korea "has never opposed" the six-nation talks organized by China. "We will go to the negotiating table anytime if there are mature conditions for the six-party talks," he said, adding that he hoped "the United States would show trustworthy sincerity," according to a text released by the North Korean news agency. Left unclear is what North Korea considers to be evidence of American sincerity. North Korea has repeatedly accused the United States of hostile behavior, even as the Bush administration has softened its language in recent months. -------- missile defense Ottawa embarrassed over anti-missile shield comment OTTAWA (AFP) Feb 22, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050222220603.qd2ye3pd.html Comments by Canada's ambassador-designate to the United States, Frank McKenna, have led to embarrassment for Ottawa, after he said Canada already took part in the controversial US anti-missile shield. The Canadian government, which last August accepted an amendment to the Norad agreement to allow its alert systems to be used as part of the shield program, however made it abundantly clear it has made no final decision on the issue of participation. "There's no doubt, in looking back, that the Norad amendment has given, has created, part -- in fact a great deal -- of what the United States means in terms of being able to get the input for defensive weaponry," McKenna told reporters. He explained that Ottawa's agreement to a Norad amendment "allows our American partners in security in North America to obtain the threat assessments and the information they need to make decisions to deploy missiles or other forms of defence." Asked whether Canada was participating in the US project, he replied: "We are. We are part of it now, and the question is, what more do we need?" His comments contradict the official position of the Liberal government of Prime Minister Paul Martin. During House of Commons question time, the government did its best to put the error right without disowning McKenna. Defense Minister Bill Graham emphasised that the Norad amendment had been constructed to "help" the United States. "We still have yet to make any decisions in terms of ballistic missile defence," Graham said. The government is divided on the question of a missile shield, as is public opinion which is mostly hostile to it. -------- russia Threat From Unaccounted-For Russian Nuclear Material Equal to North Korean Program, U.S. Senator Says By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire February 22, 2005 http://www.nti.org/d_newswire/issues/2005_2_22.html#B5958D02 WASHINGTON — The threat posed by quantities of Russian nuclear materials whose whereabouts are unknown is equal to or greater than that posed by North Korea’s nuclear efforts, the top Democrat on the Senate intelligence committee said Sunday (see GSN, Feb. 17). “I think you can legitimately look at North Korea and the unaccounted-for nuclear weapons parts in Russia and have a real debate as to which is more threatening to the world right now,” Senator Jay Rockefeller (W.Va.) said on FOX News Sunday. Last week, CIA Director Porter Goss testified before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that there was enough missing Russian nuclear material to develop a nuclear weapon. Goss also testified that he could not be certain that some of that material had not been obtained by terrorists. Senior Russian officials, however, have denied allegations of stolen nuclear weapons or weapon-grade materials. The issue is likely to be a key topic of discussion during Thursday’s scheduled meeting between U.S. President George W. Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin in the Slovakian capital of Bratislava. A report prepared last fall by a CIA in-house think tank, obtained last week by Global Security Newswire, also warns of “undetected smuggling” of Russian nuclear materials. “We are concerned about the total amount of material that could have been diverted or stolen in the last 13 years,” says the November report, prepared by the National Intelligence Council. Congress has directed the director of central intelligence to submit an annual report on the safety and security of Russian nuclear facilities and military forces. The November report updates information submitted to lawmakers in 2002. The CIA last week declined to comment on the report. Continued progress has been made on improving security enhancements at Russian civilian institutes and naval sites that house nuclear materials, according to the report. While Russia has made improvements in its own nuclear material, protection, control and accounting practices, “risks of undetected theft remain,” the report says. Rockefeller on Sunday questioned Russia’s ability to guard nuclear materials. “The point is that a lot of those people who protect those places can be bribed,” he said. Concerns also still exist that a lack of U.S. access to sensitive materials at Russian nuclear weapons sites has hindered security enhancement efforts, the CIA report says. It also warns that Russia may not be able to maintain security upgrades the United States has helped to install. “We are concerned that Russia may not be able to sustain U.S.-provided security upgrades of facilities over the long-term given the cost and technical sophistication of at least some of the equipment involved,” the report says. The U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration, which conducts a number of projects to upgrade security at Russian sites, did not return calls for comment. “The key question” on whether Russia can sustain U.S.-installed security upgrades is Moscow’s own commitment to doing so, Matthew Bunn of Harvard University’s Managing the Atom project said today. While Russia has a growing economy, a budget surplus and personnel with experience in managing modern safeguards systems, he said, there is also a lack of dedicated budget line items for security at nuclear sites and lack of regulation on the types of terrorist threats sites should be able to defend against. In addition to technical issues, Russian nuclear facilities also need personnel who have high levels of integrity and are competent to manage installed safeguards, said Bill Hoehn, Washington office director for the Russian American Nuclear Security Advisory Council. “It’s a very serious issue,” Hoehn said today, referring to sustainability concerns. The National Intelligence Council report says that the threat of an unauthorized launch or accidental use of a Russian nuclear weapon “is highly unlikely as long as current technical and procedural safeguards built into the command and control system remain in place and are effectively enforced.” It warns, though, that despite increased security, Russian nuclear power plants “almost certainly will remain vulnerable to a well-planned and executed terrorist attack.” -------- terrorism Expert Group Releases Findings on Multilateral Nuclear Approaches IAEA Staff Report 22 February 2005 http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/News/2005/fuelcycle.html An international Expert Group has released the findings of its extensive look at the world's civil nuclear fuel cycle, citing five approaches to strengthen controls over sensitive nuclear materials and technologies of proliferation concern. At a press briefing in Vienna today, Mr. Bruno Pellaud, the Group's Chairman and former Head of IAEA Safeguards, said multilateral approaches are "setting the nuclear agenda" and urged concerted action among governments. "Such approaches are needed and worth pursuing, on both security and economic grounds," he said, in summing up the Group's consensus. “A joint nuclear facility with multinational staff puts all participants under a greater scrutiny from peers and partners, a fact that strengthens non-proliferation and security…Moreover, they have the potential to facilitate the continued use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes." He noted that multilateral approaches already are followed in Europe, for example, and said they merit close consideration in South Asia and other regions. The Group's report -- Multilateral Approaches to the Nuclear Fuel Cycle -- was commissioned by IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei in June 2004, following his suggestion that wide dissemination of the most proliferation sensitive parts of the nuclear fuel cycle could be the "Achilles’ heel" of the nuclear non-proliferation regime. The report outlines five approaches to strengthen controls over fuel enrichment, reprocessing, spent fuel repositories and spent fuel storage. They are: 1. Reinforcing existing commercial market mechanisms on a case-by-case basis through long-term contracts and transparent suppliers’ arrangements with government backing. Examples would be: fuel leasing and fuel take-back offers, commercial offers to store and dispose of spent fuel, as well as commercial fuel banks; 2. Developing and implementing international supply guarantees with IAEA participation. Different models should be investigated, notably with the IAEA as guarantor of service supplies, e.g. as administrator of a fuel bank; 3. Promoting voluntary conversion of existing facilities to multilateral nuclear approaches MNA), and pursuing them as confidence-building measures, with the participation of NPT non-nuclear- weapon States and nuclear-weapon States, and non-NPT States; 4. Creating, through voluntary agreements and contracts, multinational, and in particular regional, MNAs for new facilities based on joint ownership, drawing rights or co-management for front-end and back-end nuclear facilities, such as uranium enrichment; fuel reprocessing; disposal and storage of spent fuel (and combinations thereof). Integrated nuclear power parks would also serve this objective; and 5. The scenario of a further expansion of nuclear energy around the world might call for the development of a nuclear fuel cycle with stronger multilateral arrangements - by region or by continent - and for broader cooperation, involving the IAEA and the international community. The Expert Group included representatives from 26 countries who examined the nuclear fuel cycle and multinational approaches at meetings convened during a seven month period. The Group's report has been sent to the IAEA's 138 Member States and will be more widely circulated for discussion, including to the May 2005 Review Conference of 189 States party to the global Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). See Story Resources for more information and background. -------- u.s. nuc facilities NRC PROPOSES TO AMEND LICENSING, INSPECTION AND ANNUAL FEES RULE E-mail: opa@nrc.gov NRC NEWS Last revised Tuesday, February 22, 2005 http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/news/2005/05-032.html The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is proposing to amend its regulations for the licensing, inspection and annual fees it charges applicants and licensees for fiscal year (FY) 2005. The agency is required by Congress to recover for the Treasury nearly all of its annual appropriated budget through two types of fees. One is for specific NRC services, such as licensing and inspection activities, that apply to a specific license; this fee is calculated using an hourly rate. The other is an annual fee paid by all licensees, which recovers generic regulatory expenses and other costs not recovered through fees for specific services. These fees are contained in NRC regulations 10 CFR Part 170 (fees for licensing and inspection services) and 10 CFR Part 171 (annual fees). These fees are paid to the U.S. Treasury and go into the general fund. By law, the NRC must recover 90 percent of its budget for FY 2005 (Oct. 1, 2004 - Sept. 30, 2005) from fees, less the amount ($68.5 million) appropriated from the Nuclear Waste Fund for high-level waste activities. The total amount to be recovered in FY 2005 is $540.7 million, about $4.6 million less than last year, when the mandate was to recover 92 percent of the agency’s budget. After accounting for carryover and billing adjustments, the net amount to be recovered is approximately $538 million. Under the proposed rule, the hourly rates used to assess Part 170 fees would change to allow the funds recovered to reflect more accurately the resources NRC expends providing licensee-specific services. The proposal also reflects higher salaries and benefits resulting from the Government-wide pay raise. The new hourly rates ($205 for the Nuclear Reactor Safety Program and $198 for the Nuclear Materials and Waste Safety Program) would not alter the total amount of fees recovered from licensees, though it would change the apportionment of fees charged to Part 170 and Part 171. Fees not recovered under Part 170 would still be recovered under Part 171 to collect the 90 percent of the budget for FY 2005. Annual fees for FY 2005 have been determined under the “re-baselining” method because of the magnitude of budget changes for certain classes of licensees. Re-baselining fees would result in decreased annual fees compared to FY 2004 for five classes of licenses (power reactors, test and research reactors, spent fuel storage/reactor decommissioning, rare earth mills, and transportation), and increased annual fees for two classes (fuel facilities and uranium recovery). Most materials users would have increased annual fees. The proposed FY 2005 annual fees include the following: Class/category of licenses - FY 2005 Annual fee Operating Power Reactors (including Spent Fuel Storage/Reactor Decommissioning annual fee) - $3,067,000 Spent Fuel Storage/Reactor Decommissioning - $164,000 Test and Research Reactors (Nonpower Reactors) - $54,400 High Enriched Uranium Fuel Facility - $5,383,000 Low Enriched Uranium Fuel Facility - $1,612,000 UF6 Conversion Facility - $691,000 Rare Earth Mills - $71,000 Transportation: Users/Fabricators - $80,200 Users Only - $4,300 Typical Materials Users: Radiographers - $12,800 Well Loggers - $4,100 Gauge Users (Category 3P) - $2,500 The proposed rule was published today in the Federal Register. Written comments on the proposed fee changes should be received by March 24. They should be addressed to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff. Comments may also be e-mailed to SECY@nrc.gov, faxed to (301) 415-1011, or submitted online via the NRC’s rulemaking Web site at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov. -------- massachusetts Nuclear committee does a fast fade; Membership down to 1 after recent resignations By TAMARA RACE Tuesday, February 22, 2005 Patriot Ledger http://ledger.southofboston.com/articles/2005/02/22/news/news06.txt A nuclear watchdog committee charged with advising Plymouth selectmen on matters involving the Pilgrim nuclear power plant has all but ceased to exist. Six of seven members have resigned in the last several weeks., leaving just one member on a committee that was short two members to begin with, Town Clerk Laurence Pizer said. The meltdown of the nuclear matters committee comes as the plant's owner, Entergy Corp., begins the process of seeking a 20-year relicensing of the plant, and it has some people thinking about having a regional committee or no committee at all. Selectmen pulled the committee back from the brink of collapse last spring, when several members wanted to resign because of a lack of support and direction. The appointment of Marie Fehlow to the committee last spring was intended to shore up membership, but it sparked the wave of resignations. Fehlow quit two weeks ago after an argument with Entergy spokesman David Tarantino over coastline security issues. Fehlow says she asked Tarantino for information on who was responsible for guarding the shoreline next to the plant after Coast Guard officials told her that the Coast Guard plays almost no role in guarding the plant. ‘‘I thought it was a legitimate question, but he became very defensive and rude,'' Fehlow said. Her fellow committee members walked out of the room, leaving her alone with Tarantino, Fehlow said. She said the committee was practically non-functional before she resigned; meetings rarely drew a quorum, and the committee did not take the lead on dealing with any pertinent issues. Previous run-ins with Tarantino had compromised her working relationship, she said. Former committee member John Glover, who was among those who have resigned recently, says the selectmen's efforts to rejuvenate the committee failed and that the friction between Fehlow and Tarantino was troublesome. ‘‘They (selectmen) never came to us for advice,'' Glover said. ‘‘It seems like they wanted to run the show for themselves. This committee doesn't serve any useful purpose in town. Our charge is vague and there is nothing to act upon.'' ‘‘I'm sorry it didn't work out, but I'm not sorry I left,'' Glover said. ‘‘Maybe this will trigger a change.'' With so much federal oversight of the nuclear power industry, Glover doubts that a local committee can effect change. Tarantino could not be reached for comment. The five resignations that followed Fehlow's left Jeff Berger the only person on the committee. Selectman Christopher Lombard likes the idea of a regional nuclear matters committee with members from towns within the emergency management zone. Selectmen Chairman Kenneth Tavares is open to the idea of a regional committee, but he thinks a town committee could be effective. ‘‘I'd like to see them work on the evacuation plan and nuclear-waste issues,'' Tavares said. Tavares and Lombard said having a balanced committee - one with a good mix of pro- and anti-nuclear-power members - is important. ‘‘I don't have a problem with a Pilgrim employee on the committee,'' Lombard said, referring to the committee's former chairman, Robert Walulik, who resigned. He said he also did not object to the presence of an anti-nuclear person - Fehlow - on the committee.. ‘‘I want to hear both sides when it comes to relicensing,'' he said. Pilgrim's license expires in 2012. Entergy officials have notified the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that they intend to apply for relicensing, which is the first step inthe relicensing process. Completing the relicensing process and retooling the plant for future operation would take several years. Anti-nuclear activists are gearing up to oppose the relicensing. Town officials are leaning toward supporting the application, saying the 33-year-old plant and its radioactive waste will be in town for some time even if Pilgrim shuts down, and that Plymouth could use the tax revenue. Selectmen have not formally voted on the relicensing issue. Tamara Race may be reached at trace@ledger.com. CONTACT US The Patriot Ledger, 400 Crown Colony Drive P.O. Box 699159, Quincy, MA 02269-9159 Telephone: (617) 786-7000 -------- nebraska Nebraska nuclear plant has one of its best refuelings BY NANCY GAARDER STAFF WRITER February 22, 2005 Omaha World-Herald http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_np=0&u_pg=1638&u_sid=1342613 In yet another indication that Cooper Nuclear Station is rebounding, the plant has completed one of the best refueling and maintenance shutdowns in its history. Cooper Nuclear Power Station A refueling shutdown is a real-life measure of competence at a nuclear plant. During a shutdown, a nuclear plant's work force doubles as hundreds of specialists are brought in to help swap out fuel and tackle more than 1,700 maintenance tasks. Planning takes more than a year because a poorly executed outage can cost a utility millions of dollars in replacement power. So important are outages that they're counted in minutes - this one was completed in 34 days, 22 hours and 33 minutes - the fourth best in Cooper's approximately 30-year history and the best since 1979. "The safe, timely completion of the refueling outage . . . is a major accomplishment," said Bill Fehrman, head of the Nebraska Public Power District, which owns Cooper. After struggling for years, Cooper was recently removed from a federal watch list for troubled plants. This was the first outage done under Entergy, a national utility that is helping to manage Cooper. Cooper's success directly affects the pocketbooks of Nebraskans. The plant provides NPPD with more than 20 percent of its electricity. The outage cost about $70 million. Some of the new equipment that was installed during the outage is intended to keep the plant running for almost 30 more years. -------- nevada YUCCA MOUNTAIN: Sandoval says project doomed Attorney general addresses lawmakers By BRENDAN RILEY THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Tuesday, February 22, 2005 http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2005/Feb-22-Tue-2005/news/25911007.html CARSON CITY -- Lawmakers were told Monday that a proposed federal nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain will never open because of major problems, including its creation over time of "the world's largest septic field" of radioactive material. Attorney General Brian Sandoval said proposed tanks in which the waste would be stored probably would fail within 100 years, causing the high-level waste material to leach into groundwater. Sandoval said he was surprised to hear repository advocates tell lawmakers last week that the project in the Southern Nevada desert is inevitable. The advocates included former Gov. Bob List, a strong repository opponent while in office but now a Nuclear Energy Institute consultant and lobbyist. The repository's location, about 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, is "literally a volcano that sits on an earthquake fault, above an aquifer, next to the Nevada Test Site, next to one of the nation's largest organic farms, next to the state's largest dairy, adjacent to ... the United States' fastest growing metropolitan area, next to one of the busiest Air Force bases in the country," Sandoval said. "If you could choose a worse place to store nuclear waste, I really challenge you to do so," he said. "My best analysis is that it's a matter of time before this project fails," Sandoval told the Senate Finance Committee, adding that it's behind schedule, funding from Congress and the Bush administration has been cut, and Nevada won a key legal battle over required radiation standards. While Sandoval said he had heard rumors of a possible attempt in Congress to legislate a new standard, he was "very confident with the strength of our congressional delegation" and its ability to stop such an effort. The five-member delegation includes Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. State Sen. Bob Coffin, D-Las Vegas, praised Sandoval for his legal efforts against the plan to bring some 77,000 metric tons of waste from U.S. reactors, adding, "We have to keep the full-court press right up to the last buzzer." "They didn't know what was underground until they started digging," Coffin said. "If our people hadn't kept them honest, they would have just blown it right by us -- just like they did the nuclear tests above ground that threw radiation everywhere." Sandoval said there's proven technology for recycling radioactive wastes, adding, "I can't think of a more primitive way to deal with this waste ... than to dig a hole in the ground and cover it up." List told the state Senate Judiciary Committee last week that "the likelihood of this project is greater than it has ever been" despite a valiant fight by state officials and the state's congressional delegation. List was joined by Michael Bauser, associate general counsel for the Nuclear Energy Institute, which sets policy for the nuclear industry and includes companies that operate nuclear power plants and nuclear fuel suppliers. Bauser said that out of 13 legal cases, nine of which were initiated by the state, all but one of the challenges were rejected. The successful challenge involved the Environmental Protection Agency's radiation standard. A federal appeals court found the standard inconsistent with a National Academy of Science recommendation and told the EPA that it can either revise its regulations or go to Congress for legislation to clear up the matter. While that will take time, Bauser said the Department of Energy still plans to submit its application for a repository license sometime this year. Bauser also said holdups on the project -- the DOE is putting the opening date at 2012, two years later than originally scheduled -- have nothing to do with the litigation and are results of the "inability of DOE to complete tasks in a timely fashion." -------- new mexico Los Alamos National Laboratory: Electron-like particles better than X-rays By Charles Q. Choi UNITED PRESS INTERNATIONAL Published February 22, 2005 http://www.wpherald.com/storyview.php?StoryID=20050222-110436-3836r WASHINGTON -- Electron-like particles called muons that rain down naturally from the sky are helping scientists to peer inside Mexican pyramids for royal chambers, Japanese volcanoes for hints of erupting magma, and cargo inbound to the United States for illicit nuclear materials. "We're all familiar with the use of X-rays in medical applications to take pictures inside bodies," researcher Rick Chartrand of Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico told United Press International. "(But X-rays) are not so well-suited for going through large amounts of rock and metal. Now we can use a natural source of radiation that's completely harmless to do so." Several teams of scientists are investigating muons, particles that in every way resemble electrons except they are 207 times more massive. They are formed when cosmic rays from deep-space sources collide with Earth's upper atmosphere. Roughly 10,000 muons shower every square meter of the planet's surface every minute, and though they can pass through large volumes of rock and metal with ease, their electrical charge makes them easy to track. Advances in electronics now make muon detectors practical, Los Alamos researcher Christopher Morris told UPI at the American Association for the Advancement of Science annual meeting. Detecting how muons are deflected or absorbed can reveal the presence of chambers or the makeup of materials. Arturo Menchaca-Rocha, director of the physics institute at the National Autonomous University of Mexico, is deploying muon detectors in a tunnel 26 feet below the base of the Pyramid of the Sun in Teotihuacan, some 30 miles northeast of Mexico City. The 2,000-year-old pyramid was built by an unknown people thought to be contemporaries of the Mayans. "Archaeologists have speculated an important person is buried somewhere inside," Menchaca-Rocha told UPI. "Our aim is to try and locate empty space -- a royal cavity." He said his team expects to finish building the muon detectors by the end of summer, and begin collecting data on the pyramid's interior, which is expected to take a year. The tunnel predates the pyramid, Menchaca-Rocha noted. The pyramid group's detector measures only about three feet square, it still can image nearly all of the interior of the 215-foot-tall pyramid, which is 740 feet long on each side. "You can use a very small eye to see a large spot," Menchaca-Rocha said. Meanwhile, Kanetada Nagamine of the KEK Muon Science Laboratory in Tsukuba, Japan, and his group are using muons to image the innards of volcanoes to look for hints of eruptions. Instead of placing detectors under volcanoes and waiting for muons to rain down, Nagamine and colleagues space detectors around volcanoes, taking advantage of the fact that some muons travel almost horizontally when they reach the Earth's surface. "We have successfully observed two active volcanoes in Japan," Nagamine told UPI. At Los Alamos, scientists are conducting perhaps the most urgent work with muon detectors. There, they are developing large-scale devices to scan shipping containers at border points. Existing X-ray machines cannot readily penetrate a well-shielded cache of nuclear material. Two inches of shielding can make 5 kilograms of uranium practically invisible to X-rays from three feet away. On the other hand, more-dense metals -- such as weapons-grade uranium and plutonium -- deflect muons more than less-dense substances, and efforts to shield nuclear-weapon components with metals such as lead only make such objects easier to image with muons. Most muons can penetrate about six feet of lead, the scientists explained, and any attempt to deflect them electrically would be fruitless, because cosmic-ray muons each pack billions of electron volts of energy. The Los Alamos team envisions cavernous detectors into which shipping containers could proceed on conveyor belts with minimal delay. "We estimate it should take 20 seconds to two minutes to detect kilogram-quantities of uranium and plutonium," Morris said. Chartrand estimated the cost of a portside muon detector at about $2 million. Charles Choi covers research and technology for UPI Science News. E-mail: sciencemail@upi.com ---- Residents of New Mexico desert town stake their future on uranium By PETER BARNES, Associated Press Writer (Chillicothe Gazette Staff Writer Daniel Prazer contributed to this story.) Tuesday, February 22, 2005 http://www.chillicothegazette.com/news/stories/20050222/localnews/2015289.html EUNICE, N.M. -- Like many others in this former boomtown, Mayor James Brown knows more about isotopes, centrifuges and uranium-235 than your average college student. Brown's recent crash course in nuclear physics was a prerequisite: Many of his constituents are counting on the jobs and economic trickle-down that are being promised if a $1.3 billion uranium enrichment plant that would make fuel for nuclear power plants comes to town. Critics say the proposed National Enrichment Facility could pollute the environment, guzzle scarce water and leave this oil-producing town with tons of radioactive waste and nowhere to put it. But the mayor warns that without the plant, Eunice faces extinction. "We have to have something else in place or communities like Eunice and Jal will just disappear," he said. "The oil industry won't be able to support our economy 20 or 30 years from now." The project is racing with United States Enrichment Corp., who's American Centrifuge plant in Piketon is slated to go online at roughly the same time. Whichever company gets its plant up and running first would have the first privately operated uranium enrichment plant in the United States and the first U.S. installation to use centrifuge technology. The old technology, still being used by USEC at a plant in Paducah, Ky., is essentially a filtering process known as gaseous diffusion that has been around since the Manhattan Project of World War II. Piketon's gaseous diffusion plant was mothballed in 2001. Finally found a home? Louisiana Energy Services, the international consortium behind the plant, wanted to build the project in rural Louisiana, but backed out in 1998 after opponents accused it of targeting a predominantly poor and black parish. Then it pulled out of Hartsville, Tenn., in 2003 after running into opposition from former Vice President Al Gore and others. The new proposed site is in the flat, scrub-covered desert 340 miles from Albuquerque in the southeastern corner of the state, close to the Texas line. LES has promised the plant would employ 400 workers during the construction phase and, once it is up and running, 210 people, with a payroll of more than $10 million and an average salary of $50,000. Last week, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Atomic Safety and Licensing Board held public meetings on the LES plan. At one, Lea County Commissioner Darrold Stephenson made his point by flipping the lights off. If the project is turned down, "this is what we're passing on to our future generations: nothing," the 70-year-old commissioner said later. One resource replaces another Oil and natural gas have been the region's lifeblood for decades. Today, bobbing oil pumps and high-pressure gas lines are woven into Eunice's modest street grid. But many oil-related jobs are disappearing because of new labor-saving technology, and companies have discovered more lucrative oil fields elsewhere. Since 1985, Eunice's population has fallen by a third, to 2,500. The uranium enrichment plant would be the biggest commercial nuclear project in the United States in years. The nuclear industry is watching the project's fate closely, said Marshall Cohen, an LES spokesman. "If it's a good, steady, on-track process, that's encouraging to others who might want to look at nuclear-related construction. Because it's very expensive -- the amount of money spent on obtaining the license is serious money," he said. Opinions vary in Eunice Townspeople in Eunice overwhelmingly support the project. Some have grown tired of environmentalists and other out-of-towners preaching doom, and many note that they have lived with industrial hazards all their lives. "Don't tell me how dangerous this is when I grew up in this oil field," said Fay Thompson, owner of The Bakery and More restaurant on Main Street. Compared to working with oil, the plant is a "walk in the park," Thompson said. Her husband, she said, died 40 years ago of cancer related to benzene, a petroleum byproduct. Still, a few in town are skeptical. "We're such a gullible lot here, what can I say?" said Rose Gardner, owner of Desert Rose Flowers and Gifts. "The whole world knows the negative side, but Lea County doesn't seem to know it." Environmentalists worry that radioactive material could seep into the groundwater and the air. Moreover, they say, uranium processing generates a type of waste that currently cannot be dumped anywhere in the United States. With processing, it could be sent to a low-level nuclear waste dump. Currently, no U.S. processing facility can do that. A French company has offered to build such a plant in this country, but it will be years before it even applies for a license. Construction is already underway on a waste-processing plant in Piketon, owned by Uranium Disposition Services, to handle the leftovers of USEC Inc.'s planned centrifuge enrichment plant. Where does waste go? Gov. Bill Richardson, who was energy secretary in the Clinton administration, has indicated his support for the project is contingent on an assurance the waste will be sent out of the state. Mike Sheehan, an economist hired by Nuclear Information and Resource Service, an anti-nuclear group, also said the new plant would undercut financially an anti-proliferation government-to-government program between Russia and the United States that takes Russian weapons-grade uranium and turns it into power plant fuel. In the United States, that program, Megatons-to-Megawatts, is run by USEC; the Russian weapons-grade uranium is downblended for use in reactors in Russian, then shipped to USEC's Paducah plant to be readied for commercial use. Other critics point out that the United States discourages the same kind of plants in places like Iran, which might use them to produce uranium for nuclear weapons. -------- ohio Where does Piketon stand? The Chillicothe Gazette staff, Tuesday, February 22, 2005 http://www.chillicothegazette.com/news/stories/20050222/localnews/2015290.html As Louisiana Energy Services pushes forward on its centrifuge uranium enrichment plant in New Mexico, the U.S. Enrichment Corp. already has the buildings in place for its version, the American Centrifuge. USEC is building a facility of 240 centrifuge machines, called a lead cascade, to demonstrate the technology. It's scheduled to go online near the end of this year. The lead cascade is the basic building block of an enrichment plant, according to the company, but it isn't designed to produce enriched uranium. Instead, it generates data on costs, schedules and performance, in part to help attract investors. USEC began testing a single centrifuge machine in January in Oak Ridge, Tenn. The full-sized enrichment plant is expected to cost about $1.5 billion and employ as many as 500 full-time workers. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is in the process of doing a detailed review of USEC's license application for the American Centrifuge -- slated to be hitting its initial production capacity by 2010. In July 2004, government officials broke ground on a plant owned by a separate company, Uranium Disposition Services, that will convert leftovers from the enrichment process that fill thousands of cylinders, some dating back to the 1950s. The waste will be chemically split into two more stable compounds. Once that plant goes online, sometime near the end of 2006 or the beginning of 2007, it will employ about 150 people for at least the 18 years it's expected to take to work through the existing cylinders. -- Daniel Prazer -------- MILITARY -------- arms EU seeks to appease US over ending China arms ban BRUSSELS (AFP) Feb 22, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050222194823.f2inrz4v.html US President George W. Bush voiced "deep concern" Tuesday at European plans to lift a 15-year arms embargo on China, as it emerged the EU is drafting a plan to try to allay Washington's fears. "There is deep concern in our country that a transfer of weapons would be a transfer of technology to China which would change the balance of relations in between China and Taiwan," Bush said. Talks on the issue in Brussels with European leaders had been "constructive and open," he said, but signalled Washington might take punitive steps against the EU if it ends the ban. Although he said he was open to EU efforts to draw up a plan to make lifting the 15-year-old embargo more palatable to Washington, he added sceptically: "Whether they can or not, we'll see." The European Union imposed a ban on exports of military hardware to China in 1989, to protest a brutal crackdown on weeks of pro-democracy protests against the Communist leadership. There was international outrage as tanks moved in on the vast Tiananmen Square in the heart of the Beijing to quell the protests, leaving hundreds dead, possibly up to 1,000, dead. But now the EU wants to lift the embargo with an eye firmly on the booming Chinese economy, as China continues its moves to open up to the West, which have already seen it win a seat on the World Trade Organisation. In December, at an EU-China summit in The Hague, Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao urged the scrapping of the embargo, calling it a relic of the Cold War and saying it was inconsistent with the state of EU-China relations. EU leaders have indicated that the arms embargo is likely to be lifted under the bloc's current Luxembourg president, which ends in June. But the United States says this will give China access to hi-tech military know-how and firepower that would threaten Taiwan, seen by Beijing as a renegade province, and shift the strategic balance in East Asia. A US Congress resolution passed earlier this month warned that lifting the ban would "place European security policy in direct conflict with United States security interests and with the security interests of United States friends and allies in the Asia and Pacific region." It warned of "limitations and constraints" on government and industrial relations between the United States and Europe if the ban is lifted. French President Jacques Chirac -- whose nation boasts a large defence industry -- repeated a call to lift the arms ban, but added the conditions for doing so should be worked out between the EU and the United States. Chirac said the ban "is no longer justified" but that it should be lifted "under conditions that Europe and the United States define together". Luxembourg Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker, whose country holds the rotating EU presidency, told journalists: "This is a question which is being examined. We still haven't reached a final result." One possible compromise would be to strength the EU's voluntary code of conduct for arms exports, aimed at keeping weapons out of the hands of repressive regimes or international aggressors. So far much of China's efforts to modernise its military -- one of the largest in the world with up to 1.5 million soldiers -- has relied on Russian technology. But German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder reiterated his confidence that the EU would lift the embargo despite US opposition, saying he hoped the US Congress could be swayed. "We believe it is justified to trust in the new (Chinese) leadership and give them this possibility," he told reporters. Bush said that any EU agreement to end the ban would have to be politically acceptable to the US Congress. Earlier a spokesman for British Prime Minister Tony Blair said Britain and other EU members were striving to allay the US jitters. "On China, we recognise that the United States has concerns, and along with our European partners we are working to address those concerns," he said. ---- Bush Voices Concern on Plan to Lift China Arms Embargo By ELISABETH BUMILLER New Yorm Times Published: February 22, 2005 http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/22/international/europe/22cnd-prexy.html?hp&ex=1109134800&en=e3f89a990d275c56&ei=5094&partner=homepage BRUSSELS, Feb. 22 - President Bush said today that there was "deep concern" in the United States that if the European Union lifts an arms embargo against China it would change the balance of relations between China and Taiwan, but he said he was still willing to listen to European views on the issue. In his most explicit public argument against lifting the embargo, which has become a major topic of disagreement between the United States and Europe, Mr. Bush said that he was concerned that lifting the ban would be seen as a transfer of technology to the Chinese. The Bush administration fears that such technology would allow China to modernize its military and upset the military balance of power in Asia. The European Union is almost certain to lift the 15-year-old embargo by June, and has tried to quell American fears by saying it will limit the transfer of sensitive high technology to the Chinese by developing a tough new "code of conduct," or protocol, for arms exports. Mr. Bush said that he was interested in looking at that code of conduct, and went so far to say on his second day of a four-day goodwill trip to Belgium, Germany and Slovakia that he was on a "listening tour." But he expressed skepticism about the ability of the Europeans to come up with a proposal for curbing the transfer of technology to the Chinese that would satisfy the United States. "There is deep concern in our country that a transfer of weapons would be a transfer of technology to China, which would change the balance of relations between China and Taiwan, and that's of concern," Mr. Bush said at a joint news conference at NATO headquarters with Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer. "And they, to a person, said, well, they think they can develop a protocol that isn't that shouldn't concern the United States." Mr. Bush added: "Now, whether they can or not, we'll see." Despite the relatively diplomatic words from Mr. Bush, the issue showed signs of opening a new strain with Europeans during a trip that was promoted on both sides as a critical make-up session after the transatlantic quarrel over the war in Iraq. There appeared little negotiating room on either side. President Jacques Chirac of France, in responding to Mr. Bush's comments later in the day, said that while security guarantees could be worked out, Europe remains steadfast in its desire to end the ban. "We intend to lift the last obstacles in our relations" with China, Mr. Chirac said. But a senior Bush administration official who briefed reporters on Monday night was equally steadfast in opposition. "I want to be very, very clear: Our opposition to the embargo remains," the official said. "We remain concerned. I should not leave you in any way with the impression that we have changed our view. We have merely heard out the Europeans. I expect that a dialogue - a friendly, serious dialogue about these issues will continue." In his news conference at NATO, the president told the Europeans that when they settle on their new code of conduct, they need to "sell it to the United States Congress." The president was alluding to rising concern from both Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill about Europe's plans to lift the embargo it imposed on China in 1989 after the crushing of demonstrations at Tiananmen Square in Beijing. As recently as Friday, Senator Richard Lugar, the Indiana Republican who is chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said in an interview in The Financial Times that he would support limits of American sales of advanced military technology to Europe unless there were strong assurances that such technology would not be diverted to China when the arms embargo is lifted. Mr. Lugar said if lifting the embargo were to result in such a diversion, he would support restrictions on the sales of American weapons technology to Europe. Earlier this month, the House of Representatives passed a resolution by 411-3 that condemned the European Union plans. At a second news conference of the day, this one at the headquarters of the European Union, Mr. Bush reiterated that the United States was not on the verge of war with Iran, although he did not rule out, as he never has, military action. "This notion that the United States is getting ready to attack Iran is simply ridiculous," Mr. Bush said, then added, to some laughter, "having said that all options are on the table." ---- Lockheed Martin Begins Testing Of Aegis Weapon System With SPY-1F Radar Moorestown NJ (SPX) Jan 22, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/news/missiles-05o.html IZAR and Lockheed Martin successfully performed initial activation of the first Aegis Weapon System equipped with the new SPY-1F radar aboard the Norwegian frigate Fridtjof Nansen (F-310) at IZAR's shipyard in Ferrol, Spain. This signifies the beginning of Integrated Weapon System (IWS) testing for the first of Norway's five new Aegis-equipped frigates. "Successful completion of this important milestone for the Norwegian Navy is a tribute to the adaptability, scalability and flexibility of the multi- mission Aegis Weapon System," said Orlando Carvalho, vice president of Surface Systems at Lockheed Martin Maritime Systems & Sensors. "We have now installed Aegis on five ship classes for four different Navy customers around the world, all delivered on-schedule and on-budget." The SPY-1F is a modified version of the AN/SPY-1D radar system designed to provide highly robust performance with Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile and Standard Missile-2 capability. Lockheed Martin is responsible for system integration of all IWS elements - including sensors, communications and weapons - for the Fridtjof Nansen class frigates. "All the technical milestones are being achieved and we are fully confident that the frigates will exceed all expectations," said Angel Recaman, director of IZAR's Ferrol shipyard. The Aegis Weapon System includes the SPY-1 radar, the world's most advanced computer-controlled radar system. When paired with the MK 41 Vertical Launching System, it is capable of delivering missiles for every mission and threat environment in naval warfare. The Aegis Weapon System is currently deployed on more than 75 ships around the world, with 30 more ships planned. In addition to the U.S. and Norway, Aegis is the weapon system of choice for Japan, Korea and Spain. Recently, Australia selected the Aegis Weapon System for its Air Warfare Destroyer program. ---- Ukraine missiles go missing in Crimea naval base KIEV (AFP) Feb 22, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050222200343.btoszb22.html Two anti-aircraft missiles and a launch system have gone missing from a Ukrainian naval base in the Crimean peninsula, the defence ministry said here Tuesday. Guards came across two unidentified persons breaking into a weapons depot near Chernomorskoye, western Crimea, early Tuesday morning, a statement said. The two escaped, but guards then discovered a depot with a forced padlock from which two missiles stored in containers and a launch system for the Strela-3M portable air defence missile system were missing. Police were searching for the thieves and a special commission headed by the deputy head of Ukraine's navy, Igor Matviyenko, had gone to the scene to investigate, the defence ministry said. -------- mideast Syria Pledges Pullout Again Amid Protests by Lebanese February 22, 2005 By HASSAN M. FATTAH The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/22/international/middleeast/22lebanon.html? BEIRUT, Lebanon, Feb. 21 - Syria repeated longstanding promises on Monday to withdraw its troops from Lebanon, as tens of thousands of people marched through the streets of Beirut in the largest anti-Syrian protests since the killing a week earlier of Rafik Hariri, the former prime minister. Syria's president, Bashar al-Assad, made the pledge in a meeting in Damascus with Amr Moussa, the secretary general of the Arab League, but political analysts were quick to dismiss the offer as little more than wordplay. Mr. Moussa emerged from a meeting with Mr. Assad to say the president had affirmed his intention to begin "soon" the process of withdrawing its army from Lebanese areas in accordance with the 1989 Taif agreement that ended Lebanon's 15-year civil war. The agreement, signed by Lebanon's warring factions in Taif, Saudi Arabia, required Syrian forces to withdraw to the eastern Bekaa region, close to the Syrian border, within two years. That never happened, though Syria periodically redeployed its troops, which now number 14,000, down from a maximum of about 35,000. Damascus did withdraw 3,000 troops from Beirut last year amid great fanfare, but few of them went home. Most, analysts say, went to the Bekaa. "Assad stressed more than once his firm determination to go on with implementing the Taif agreement and achieve Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon in accordance with this agreement," Mr. Moussa told reporters. Yet hours after Mr. Moussa's comments, the Syrian government sought to minimize their effects. Syria's information minister, Mehdi Dakhlallah, said the statements simply re-emphasize established Syrian policy, while the country's official news service, SANA, did even not report the pronouncement. "There is nothing new here," Mr. Dakhlallah said. "There is a joint Lebanese-Syrian policy that has been made. We are ready to withdraw in five minutes if the Lebanese government asks us to." Syria's control over Lebanon stretches far beyond military affairs to the political and economic spheres. With such a tight leash over the country, Syria can easily make promises like the one on Monday without fear of ever having to make good on them, opposition figures say. Still, many in the opposition see a silver lining in Mr. Assad's reported offer, saying it could represent a softening of hard-line policies in Syria and even the Lebanese government about Syria's presence in the country. Opposition leaders have demanded an international investigation into the Hariri assassination, for which they blame Syria, as well as the dissolution of the current government and the withdrawal of Syrian troops before Lebanon's elections in May. On Monday, the Parliament speaker, Nabih al-Berri, announced plans for an open parliamentary session to discuss the demands. "These are simply signals of a change, that Syria is ready to go into dialogue," said Assem Salam, a leader in the opposition movement. But he added that with Lebanon's elections approaching, public confidence in the government ebbing and the opposition movement not yet in control, this was not a good time for negotiations. In the week after a bomb exploded on Mr. Hariri's motorcade, killing him and at least 17 others, the opposition movement and some Western governments, particularly France and the United States, have worked to keep the issue of Syria's withdrawal at the center of public debate. Once considered a taboo, the subject has received open discussion in the Lebanese news media and in living rooms throughout the country. The political furor over Syria's possible complicity in the assassination reached a fevered pitch on Monday as protesters thronged Beirut, chanting "Syria Out! Let's Go!" and "Bashar, you bastard, get your dogs out of Beirut!" "This is the beginning of something important," said Gibran Tuweini, an opposition leader and publisher of the Lebanese daily An Nahar. "It's the first time in Lebanon you have Muslims, Christians and Druse asking for the same thing." People gathered at the scene of the bombing as Lebanese security and military units stood in full force, complete with armored personnel carriers and riot gear. The peaceful demonstrators observed a moment of silence at 12:55 p.m., the time when Mr. Hariri's motorcade was bombed last Monday, then marched through the city past the offices of the current prime minister, Omar Karami, and on to Martyrs Square, adjacent to Mr. Hariri's burial place. They sang Lebanon's national anthem and carried banners announcing "resistance till freedom" and "Syria Out!" The crowd stood out most for its diversity, representing a broad cross section of Lebanese society. Muslims, Christians, Druse and others gathered near the blast site, in one of the most public outcries over Syria's presence ever. Many like Samar Eid and her three sisters came to have their voices heard for the first time, still fearing the repercussions of speaking out in public. Mrs. Eid and her sisters came to the demonstration from different parts of the country to express their anger over the assassination and government's mishandling of the matter. "The Syrians came here and sucked our blood," said Mrs. Eid, noting the unity she has felt in the country ever since Mr. Hariri was killed. "We want our identity and that identity was embodied by Hariri." ---- -------- nato Bush Praises Modest Pledge From NATO on Training Iraqi Forces February 22, 2005 By ELISABETH BUMILLER The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/22/international/europe/22cnd-prex.html?pagewanted=all&position= BRUSSELS, Feb. 22 - President Bush met with NATO leaders today about the alliance's future role in Iraq and was rewarded with a modest plan to train and equip Iraq's new Army and police . ``The NATO training mission is an important mission, because after all, the success of Iraq depends upon the capacity and the willingness of the Iraqis to defend their own selves against terrorists," Mr. Bush said at NATO headquarters here. "The Iraqis have defied the terrorists and showed the world they want to live in a free society, and we're there to help them," he said. However, countries that opposed the Iraq war such as France and Germany indicated they would not send instructors there but rather would work outside the framework of this agreement to contribute toward the training of Iraqis. The president spoke after a breakfast meeting with Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain and later met with Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi of Italy and Viktor A. Yushchenko, the new president of Ukraine. Mr. Bush's meetings came after he warned Russia on Monday that it "must renew a commitment to democracy and the rule of law," but said he believed that the nation's future lay "within the family of Europe and the trans-Atlantic community." The president's words opened his first trip across the Atlantic since his re-election and were part of a speech aimed at building a new relationship with Europe after the dispute over the American-led invasion of Iraq. Mr. Bush's 31-minute speech in the grand setting of Concert Noble, a 19th-century hall, declared that in a "new era of trans-Atlantic unity," the United States and Europe must work together to rebuild Iraq, seek peace between the Israelis and Palestinians, insist that Iran not develop nuclear weapons and demand that Syria end its occupation of Lebanon. But the speech, the start of a journey to Belgium, Germany and Slovakia, was most striking for his toughest words yet about President Vladimir V. Putin's rollback of democratic reforms and crackdown on dissent in Russia. Mr. Bush is to meet with Mr. Putin on Thursday in Slovakia's capital, Bratislava. "We recognize that reform will not happen overnight," Mr. Bush said. "We must always remind Russia, however, that our alliance stands for a free press, a vital opposition, the sharing of power and the rule of law - and the United States and all European countries should place democratic reform at the heart of their dialogue with Russia." In the evening, the president had a small dinner for his old nemesis, President Jacques Chirac of France, and appeared comfortable next to the man who had infuriated him by aggressively opposing the invasion of Iraq. But when a French reporter asked Mr. Bush if relations had improved enough for him to ask Mr. Chirac to his ranch, the president did not offer an invitation, and instead joked, "I'm looking for a good cowboy." He added that "this is my first dinner since I've been re-elected on European soil, and it's with Jacques Chirac, and that ought to say something." American officials said they expected Mr. Chirac to visit Washington sometime in the next year. After the dinner, at the home of Tom C. Korologos, the American ambassador to Belgium, a senior Bush administration official said Mr. Chirac and the president had discussed Iraq, Iran, the Israeli-Palestinian situation and American opposition to the European Union's plans to lift an arms embargo on China. The official said that "there will be more discussion" on the arms embargo, but neither side appeared to have budged on that issue, or any other. Overall, the official said, the dinner was positive. "If I say frank, that's the wrong word, because it's usually the euphemism for bad," the official said. "I would use the word productive." In his speech at Concert Noble, Mr. Bush offered an elaboration of American policy on Israel and the Palestinians, emphasizing that a new nation of Palestine must be made up of "contiguous territory" on the West Bank and that "a state of scattered territories will not work." He emphatically said that Syria must withdraw its troops from Lebanon, and that "without Syrian interference, Lebanon's parliamentary elections in the spring can be another milestone of liberty." On Iran, he said that the government must end its support of terrorism and not develop nuclear weapons, and that in American dealings with the country, "no option can be taken permanently off the table." But in the next sentence he stepped back from the threat of military force and said that Iran was different from Iraq and that "we're in the early stages of diplomacy." White House officials had promoted the speech as a major embrace of European unity, and had released excerpts on Sunday night suggesting that the president would extensively support the idea of the 25-member European Union as a partner rather as a rival to the United States. But he did not devote more than a few sentences to those ideas, and cast his support for a new European unity in the context of his goal of advancing liberty. "America supports Europe's democratic unity for the same reason we support the spread of democracy in the Middle East - because freedom leads to peace," Mr. Bush said. "And America supports a strong Europe because we need a strong partner in the hard work of advancing freedom in the world." On the Kyoto Treaty on global warming, which the Europeans support and the Bush administration opposes, he said that each side had expressed its views and that "now we must work together on the way forward." He said all countries could develop technologies like hydrogen-powered cars and clean-coal programs to slow the growth of greenhouse gases. Although Mr. Bush delivered his speech in the heart of the new Europe, Brussels, the headquarters of NATO and the European Union, the setting chosen by the White House was very much old Europe. He spoke to an audience of some 300 European officials, business leaders and academics under five enormous crystal chandeliers and a domed ceiling, and was framed by a gilt-edged doorway draped with luxurious folds of crimson silk. Before his arrival, the sounds of Beethoven's Sixth Symphony filled the room. The president received warm but not enthusiastic applause, a response that two senior Bush administration officials insisted was typical of the restrained European response to politicians' speeches. But some in the audience said Europeans would be disappointed by Mr. Bush's words. "This is not yet the breakthrough speech they would have hoped for," said Timothy Garton Ash, a professor of European studies at St. Antony's College at Oxford University who attended the speech. "That speech would have needed much more recognition and support of the E.U." The president, Mr. Garton Ash added, was doing all the right things in his visit to the headquarters of the European Union on Tuesday, but "he's walking the walk and not talking the talk." But Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt of Belgium, Mr. Bush's host, praised the speech. "He came to Europe with a very good mood," Mr. Verhofstadt said in an interview. "You have seen that in the speech. He was very open; he was very positive. He was listening to what we have said. It was not business as usual." Mr. Bush himself alluded to what he expected to be a cool European reception when he quoted John Adams, although not by name, on Benjamin Franklin's service as American ambassador to Paris more than two centuries ago. "His reputation was more universal than Leibniz or Newton, Frederick or Voltaire, and his character more beloved and esteemed than any or all of them," Mr. Bush quoted Adams on Franklin. Adams went on to say, the president said, that "there was scarcely a peasant or a citizen" who "did not consider him as a friend to humankind." Referring to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Mr. Bush then said to laughter that "I have been hoping for a similar reception, but Secretary Rice told me I should be a realist." Europeans appeared so eager to have the president embrace the idea of a new European federation that Mr. Verhofstadt went so far as to bring up the history of one of Europe's biggest failures in his remarks introducing him. "Ten years ago, Europe failed to intervene in the civil war in the former Yugoslavia, even though that war was raging just a few hours from here," he said. "We had to wait for you, the United States, to put an end to it. Europe itself hesitated and was too divided to take action." Mr. Verhofstadt added: "That was the ultimate proof that Europe can do little or nothing unless it is united and cooperates. To paraphrase my illustrious predecessor, Paul Henri Spaak, Europe consists solely of small countries. There are some who know it. And there are some who are now beginning to understand - just like James Madison and George Washington understood in 1787 in Philadelphia - that a loose confederation must be forged into a strong union." Mr. Bush met with Mr. Verhofstadt on Monday morning for more than an hour, twice as long as scheduled. In an interview afterward, the prime minister said the two had spent little time on Iraq. Mr. Verhofstadt said his message to Mr. Bush was "O.K., we still differ on Iraq so let's not continue to talk about that issue." Belgium, which bitterly opposed the war in Iraq and has refused to send any military or police forces on the ground there in training missions, recently agreed to help in military training of Iraqis in Jordan, to join Germany's training effort in Abu Dhabi and to commit money to the joint NATO fund to train Iraqi military and police, Mr. Verhofstadt added. Elaine Sciolino contributed reporting for this article. -------- un U.N. policing itself February 22, 2005 Washington Times Letters to Editor http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20050221-084403-3121r.htm Michelle Malkin's column ("U.N. scandal in the Congo" Commentary, Friday) highlights the unconscionable actions of a relatively small number of U.N. personnel assigned to the U.N. mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo who have sexually exploited and abused some members of the local population. Indeed, sexual exploitation and abuse by U.N. personnel is an ugly stain on a distinguished record of collective achievement and individual sacrifice. It violates our fundamental "duty of care" and casts a shadow over the significant contributions the United Nations has made in helping the Congolese people recover from years of devastating conflict. U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan expressed his personal outrage when reports emerged about the situation in the Congo. He continues to make clear that we cannot tolerate even a single instance of a U.N. peacekeeper victimizing the people whom peacekeepers are sent to protect and serve. Mr. Annan raised this issue with emphatic disgust and alarm in a recent letter to the Security Council. Mrs. Malkin however neglects to mention the measures the United Nations is and will continue to take to confront this deeply disturbing issue. U.N. policy is clear: all forms of sexual exploitation and abuse are prohibited by United Nations Staff Rules and Regulations and Codes of Conduct, which also forbid U.N. staff and peacekeepers from interaction with prostitutes, even if host country law permits it. In the Congo, the U.N. mission is implementing a number of robust measures to combat this problem, including a strict curfew and non-fraternization policy for all military contingents and "off-limits areas" for all U.N. personnel including civilian staff. These measures are being vigorously enforced. The United Nations has dispatched three different teams of investigators to look into all outstanding allegations, and their work has resulted in criminal and disciplinary action in several cases, as well as the creation of improved measures of prevention and enforcement. Reports on 50 military personnel have been sent to their national authorities for action, including prosecution. One civilian is in prison awaiting trial and disciplinary action has been initiated against four others. U.N. officials and a special adviser named by the secretary-general are working with the governments of troop-contributing countries, which are ultimately responsible for the discipline of their personnel, to ensure effective follow-up and to prioritize concrete ways they can assist in combating this serious problem. A number of countries contributing personnel, such as France, Morocco and South Africa, have already begun to take action on this front and have filed criminal charges against individuals alleged to have committed sexual exploitation or abuse while serving with the U.N. mission in the Congo. Morocco recently announced the dismissal of one contingent commander and his assistant and the arrest of six alleged perpetrators of sexual exploitation and abuse. The United Nations will hold accountable those in the chain of command who fail to act decisively in enforcing the "zero tolerance" standard. The secretary-general has asked the Security Council to strengthen the United Nations' capacity in the Congo to conduct self-monitoring and enforcement programs through the provision of 100 additional military police and more investigative resources. U.N. policies are being re-examined, while we are focusing on broad and tangible reforms in enforcement, training, staff welfare and victim support. Much remains to be done in the Congo and in all our peacekeeping missions, and much is at stake. We will work tirelessly, as the secretary-general has said, "to restore United Nations peacekeeping to its rightful place among the world's most noble callings." JANE HOLL LUTE, Assistant Secretary-General Peacekeeping Operations United Nations New York -------- POLICE / PRISONERS / COURTS / JUSTICE -------- homeland security / national intelligence CYBERWARS Wireless Networks: Open To Stealth Attacks by Charles Choi Washington (UPI) Feb 22, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/news/cyberwar-05e.html Wireless networks could link up police on the streets, soldiers in the battlefield and rescue workers in disaster zones, but computer scientists warned they remain dangerously vulnerable to stealth attacks. "An attack might be a terrorist who wants to disconnect emergency crews from each other and make his physical attack more effective, or a criminal who wishes to disconnect members of police in their efforts to chase him," said researcher Markus Jakobsson at Indiana University in Bloomington. Such an attack also "could hijack normal traffic for corporate espionage or identity theft." Jakobsson and colleagues are developing the digital equivalents of magic envelopes and invisible ink that promise to protect cell phones and laptops against these attacks. "We hope to have a version in a few months," Jakobsson told United Press International. Jakobsson discussed wireless-network vulnerability at the American Association for the Advancement of Science annual meeting. The networks are surprisingly easy to attack, he said. "A wired network is like talking in a room with a group of colleagues. You know who they are. In a wireless network, it's more like a phone call from a stranger. You have no idea who they are, where they are (and you) don't know whether to trust them or not." He described one type of attack, called "man in the middle," where an enemy impersonates a friend. "If you go to a wireless access point at Starbucks and do some online banking," Jakobsson explained, "when you come in, my computer can broadcast that it's the Starbucks' wireless access point. You think you're sending securely to the bank, but you're (actually) sending to me. There's a great threat (of) identity theft in wireless networks. We haven't seen it yet, but it's the next thing. In this hijacking attack, you don't know it's taking place." The problem could be worse in the so-called ad-hoc wireless networks expected to become popular in the near future. In such a network, each laptop or cell phone takes on the added responsibility of serving as a relay that forwards data to others. "They're easy to deploy and less dependent on infrastructure such as base stations, which can be pretty expensive," said Susanne Wetzel of the Stevens Institute of Technology in Hoboken, N.J. For example, Wetzel said, "you don't want to send soldiers on a battlefield blind, you want to see what's going on. If we could deploy a ton of sensors, have the sensors report back to base on what the surroundings are (such as) the chemicals in the area, you have the possibility of exploring territory without the risk of sending soldiers in directly." The networks also would prove valuable in search-an d-rescue operations. "You could make use of ad-hoc networks where regular cell-phone networks are not available," said researcher Adrian Perrig of Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh. "You could have an ad-hoc network when you would like to get to a wireless access point too far away, and leverage other intermediate nodes to reach an access point." Perrig told UPI an analogy would be trying to access a cell-phone signal in a tunnel. "You can relay a signal from car to car until you can get a signal outside the tunnel," he said. The biggest problem, he continued, is ad-hoc networks have not yet resolved security issues. "It's a challenge to create an ad-hoc network even without considering security, so they've only considered trustworthy environments where no one cheats - so it becomes trivial to attack," Perrig said. "We have a great opportunity today to deploy secure protocols before ad-hoc net works are widely deployed." System designers worry about how easy ad-hoc networks are to attack. "There are quite serious attacks that are simple to execute that cannot be detected. That's what makes them stealth attacks," Perrig said. In one strategy, called a wormhole attack, an enemy pretends to provide the shortest route between all nodes in the network, thus attracting all data traffic and then suddenly killing communication. The answer is to authenticate as trustworthy the computers or cell-phones with whom one communicates, Jakobsson said. When sending a password, that password should be encased in the digital equivalent of a magic envelope, in which the message it carries can be read only by its intended receiver and any attempt to access it would be revealed. In the computer-network equivalent, Jakobsson explained, if the receiver already knows the password, the receiver can modify the incoming message in an agreed-upon manner via a kind of invisible ink. If the sender is legitimate, the sender will recognize the invisible-ink response as legitimate. If the sender is a hacker, the receiver will not divulge the proper password. The solution must prove compatible with existing systems and look and feel the same to all users, Jakobsson said, adding that his team is working on data packets that resemble software patches, or updates. "People download software patches all the time. A simple patch would make this possible," he explained. Charles Choi covers research and technology for UPI Science News. All rights reserved. © 2005 United Press International. Sections of the information displayed on this page (dispatches, photographs, logos) are protected by intellectual property rights owned by United Press International. As a consequence, you may not copy, reproduce, modify, transmit, publish, display or in any way commercially exploit any of the content of this section without the prior written consent of United Press International. -------- human rights Iraqi women no better off post-Saddam - Amnesty 22 Feb 2005 Reuters By Jeremy Lovell http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L21687827.htm LONDON, Feb 22 (Reuters) - Nearly two years after the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, women there are no better off than under the rule of ousted dictator Saddam Hussein, the human rights group Amnesty International said on Tuesday. In a report entitled "Iraq -- Decades of Suffering," it said that while the systematic repression under Saddam had ended, it had been replaced by increased murders, and sexual abuse -- including by U.S. forces. Washington promised that the overthrow of Saddam would free the Iraqi people from years of oppression and set them on the road to democracy. But Amnesty said post-war insecurity had left women at risk of violence and curtailed their freedoms. "The lawlessness and increased killings, abductions and rapes that followed the overthrow of the government of Saddam Hussein have restricted women's freedom of movement and their ability to go to school or to work," Amnesty said. "Women have been subjected to sexual threats by members of the U.S.-led forces and some women detained by U.S. forces have been sexually abused, possibly raped," it added. Amnesty said several women detained by U.S. troops had spoken in interviews with them of beatings, threats of rape, humiliating treatment and long periods of solitary confinement. The Pentagon said it had not seen the report, but took any allegations of detainee abuse seriously. "We have demonstrated our commitment to ensuring that kind of behaviour is identified and dealt with properly," spokesman Lieutenant-Colonel Joe Richard said in Washington. "With this report, we would like the opportunity to review it and to test the validity of the allegations." Amnesty said women's rights activists and political leaders had also been targeted by armed insurgent groups. Women continued to suffer legal discrimination under laws that granted husbands effective impunity to beat their wives and treated so-called "honour" killers leniently, the group said. "Within their own communities, many women and girls remain at risk of death from male relatives if they are accused of behaviour held to have brought dishonour on the family," Amnesty said, noting some attempts by religious zealots to make the laws even more repressive against women. But on the positive side, the report said several women's rights groups had been formed -- including ones that focused on the protection of women from violence. Amnesty called on the Iraqi authorities and newly elected members of the National Assembly to enshrine the rights of women in the new constitution. This included treating honour killings as murder, outlawing violence within marriage and making sure that the punishment was commensurate with the crime committed. -------- POLITICS -------- us politics Bush warns Russia on the rule of law By Elisabeth Bumiller The New York Times Tuesday, February 22, 2005 http://www.iht.com/bin/print_ipub.php?file=/articles/2005/02/21/news/bush.html BRUSSELS President George W. Bush warned Russia on Monday that it "must renew a commitment to democracy and the rule of law," but he said he believed its future lay "within the family of Europe and the trans-Atlantic community." The president's words, delivered in a major speech on U.S.-European relations at the start of a four-day trip to Belgium, Germany and Slovakia, were his toughest yet about President Vladimir Putin's rollback of democratic reforms in Russia and crackdown on dissent. Bush is to meet with Putin on Thursday in Bratislava, Slovakia. "We recognize that reform will not happen overnight," Bush said in the grand setting of the Concert Noble, a 19th-century hall in Brussels. "We must always remind Russia, however, that our alliance stands for a free press, a vital opposition, the sharing of power and the rule of law - and the United States and all European countries should place democratic reform at the heart of their dialogue with Russia." In the evening, Bush had a small dinner for President Jacques Chirac of France and appeared comfortable next to the man who had infuriated him by aggressively opposing the American-led invasion of Iraq. But when a French reporter asked Bush if relations had improved enough for him to ask Chirac to his ranch, Bush joked, "I'm looking for a good cowboy." Bush did add that "this is my first dinner, since I've been re-elected, on European soil, and it's with Jacques Chirac - and that ought to say something." After the dinner, a senior Bush administration official said that Chirac and Bush had discussed Iraq, Iran, the Middle East and U.S. opposition to the European Union's plans to lift an arms embargo on China. The official said that "there will be more discussion" on the arms embargo, but neither side appeared to have budged in its position. Over all, the official said, the dinner was positive. "If I say frank, that's the wrong word, because it's usually the euphemism for bad," the official said. "I would use the word productive." In his speech at the Concert Noble, Bush offered an elaboration of U.S. policy in the Middle East, emphasizing that a new nation of Palestine must be made up of "contiguous territory" on the West Bank and that "a state of scattered territories will not work." The president said emphatically that Syria must withdraw its troops from Lebanon and that "without Syrian interference, Lebanon's parliamentary elections in the spring can be another milestone of liberty." On Iran, Bush said that the government there must end its support of terrorism and not develop nuclear weapons. He noted that in American dealings with Iran, "no option can be taken permanently off the table." But in the next sentence Bush stepped back from the threat of military force and said that "we're in the early stages of diplomacy." White House officials had promoted Bush's 31-minute speech as a major embrace of European unity and released excerpts on Sunday night suggesting that Bush would extensively support the idea of the 25-member European Union as a partner rather than a rival to the United States. But he did not devote more than a few sentences to those ideas and cast his support for a new European unity in the context of his goal of advancing liberty. "America supports Europe's democratic unity for the same reason we support the spread of democracy in the Middle East - because freedom leads to peace," Bush said. "And America supports a strong Europe because we need a strong partner in the hard work of advancing freedom in the world." Bush spoke to an audience of some 300 European officials, business leaders and academics under five enormous crystal chandeliers and a domed ceiling and was framed by a gilt-edged doorway draped with luxurious folds of crimson silk. Before the president's arrival, the sounds of Beethoven's Sixth Symphony filled the room. He received warm but not enthusiastic applause, a response that two senior Bush administration officials insisted was typical of the restrained European response to politicians' speeches. But some people in the audience said that Europeans would be disappointed by Bush's words. "This is not yet the breakthrough speech they would have hoped for," said Timothy Garton Ash, a professor of European studies at St. Antony's College at Oxford University, who attended the speech. "That speech would have needed much more recognition and support of the EU." The president, Ash added, would be doing all the right things in his visit to the headquarters of the European Union on Tuesday, but "he's walking the walk and not talking the talk." Bush himself alluded to what he expected to be a cool European reception at the start of his speech, when he quoted John Adams, although not by name, on Benjamin Franklin's service as American ambassador to Paris more than two centuries ago. "His reputation was more universal than Leibnitz or Newton, Frederick or Voltaire, and his character more beloved and esteemed than any or all of them," Bush quoted. He noted that Adams went on to say "there was scarcely a peasant or a citizen" who "did not consider him as a friend to humankind." Bush then said to laughter, "I have been hoping for a similar reception, but Secretary Rice told me I should be a realist." Europeans appeared so eager to have the president embrace the idea of a new European federation that the prime minister of Belgium, Guy Verhofstadt, went so far in his remarks introducing Bush as to bring up the history of one of a divided Europe's biggest failures. "Ten years ago, Europe failed to intervene in the civil war in the former Yugoslavia, even though that war was raging just a few hours from here," he said. "We had to wait for you, the United States, to put an end to it. Europe itself hesitated and was too divided to take action. That was the ultimate proof that Europe can do little or nothing unless it is united and cooperates. "To paraphrase my illustrious predecessor, Paul-Henri Spaak, Europe consists solely of small countries. There are some who know it. And there are some who are now beginning to understand - just like James Madison and George Washington understood in 1787 in Philadelphia - that a loose confederation must be forged into a strong union." Bush met with Verhofstadt for more than an hour on Monday. The prime minister said the two spent little time on Iraq. He said his message to Bush was "O.K., we still differ on Iraq so let's not continue to talk about that issue." Elaine Sciolino contributed reporting. ---- Doomed to fail By Scott Ritter Originally published February 22, 2005 http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bal-op.policy22feb22,1,408431.story?coll=bal-oped-headlines&ctrack=3&cset=true NORTH KOREA'S dramatic public revelation that it possesses nuclear weapons represents a stark challenge for the Bush administration. The North Korean claim, if true, underscores the failure of President Bush's nonproliferation policies that since the beginning of his first term had been subordinated to a grander vision of regime change. That policy was intended to transform strategically vital regions of the world into Western-style democracies supportive of the United States and the Bush administration's vision of American global dominance. The intermingling of nonproliferation and regime change policies was doomed to fail. One requires skillful multilateral diplomacy based on the principles of uniform application of international law, the other bold application of a unilateral doctrine of aggressive liberation rhetoric backed by the real threat of military power. When blended, as the Bush administration did, unilateralism trumps multilateralism every time. North Korea's announced accession to the nuclear club represents the inevitable result. The end of America's meaningful role as a promoter of global nonproliferation can be traced to decisions made in the 1990s regarding regime change in Saddam Hussein's Iraq. The United Nations had embarked on a bold effort to roll back the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction through disarmament and, despite some initial difficulties, scored a dramatic success. It is now clear that Iraq, under pressure from U.N. weapons inspectors, was disarmed of its WMD by 1991 and had dismantled and destroyed the last vestiges of its weapons programs by 1996. But the United States had, since 1991, committed to a policy of regime change in Iraq, which required economic sanctions-based containment linked to a continued finding of Iraqi noncompliance with its disarmament obligation. Rather than embracing weapons inspections, three successive U.S. administrations denigrated and subverted the work of the inspectors in order to keep the primary policy objective of regime change in Iraq on track. The nail in the coffin of U.S. nonproliferation efforts came when the Bush administration willfully misstated the extent of the Iraqi WMD programs in order to justify its invasion of Iraq. North Korea and Iran concluded from events leading to the U.S. invasion of Iraq that the Bush administration did not regard nonproliferation as an endgame but a tool designed to weaken a target state to the point that it could succumb to the grander U.S. policy objective of regime change. Mr. Bush had stated that the world would be a better place with the regimes in Pyongyang and Tehran removed. Therefore, all diplomatic efforts - whether the six-party framework with North Korea or the European Union-brokered negotiations with Iran - were regarded as disingenuous fronts intended not to facilitate nonproliferation and stability but rather instability and regime change. With Iraq a model of the reality of America's unilateral militaristic approach toward bringing about regime change, North Korea and Iran have embarked on the only path available to either of them - acquisition of an independent nuclear deterrent intended to forestall what they perceive as irresponsible U.S. aggression. The Bush administration has come face to face with the reality of the failure of its policies. Rather than curtailing the proliferation of nuclear weapons, the administration's crusade against global tyranny has served as an accelerant in placing the most dangerous weapons known to man in the hands of xenophobic regimes that have been backed into a corner. But the situation in North Korea and Iran could still be resolved in a way that promotes global nonproliferation objectives. Real and meaningful economic incentives, backed by U.S. and allied willingness to permit North Korea and Iran to possess civilian nuclear programs operated under stringent international monitoring, could succeed in rolling back North Korea's possession of nuclear weapons and provide incentive for Iran to cease and desist in its own program. But the key to any such salvation lies with the willingness of the Bush administration to unlink nonproliferation efforts from regime change. This is highly unlikely, given the reality of the ideological composition of those at the senior decision-making levels of the Bush national security team and the huge political investment Mr. Bush has made in support of his global crusade against tyranny. "Freedom is on the march," Mr. Bush has said. Unfortunately for the United States, North Korea and Iran don't see it that way. And if America keeps marching, it could very well be in the direction of a nuclear apocalypse. Scott Ritter, a former intelligence officer and U.N. weapons inspector in Iraq, is author of the forthcoming Iraq Confidential: The Untold Story of America's Intelligence Conspiracy. -------- ENERGY -------- alternative energy DRIVETIMES Automotive Landscape Explored at Hybrid Symposium February 22, 2005 By BRADLEY BERMAN The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/22/automobiles/22dt-autolog.html n the early years of the automobile, inventors debated which technology -- steam, electric or internal combustion -- would dominate the rising industry. A century and many millions of gasoline engines later, more possibilities than ever are available to auto engineers, as was evident at the recent Hybrid Vehicle Technology Symposium of the Society of Automotive Engineers in Costa Mesa, Calif. The 21st century debate is not about a single system or fuel, but how two or more options can be combined in a single hybrid vehicle. Among the options are full, moderate, mild, power and hydraulic hybrids; energy storage devices include lead-acid, nickel-metal hydride and lithium-ion batteries, and ultracapacitors, which provide very quick bursts of power. Throw in a diverse group of fuels — gasoline, diesel, natural gas, hydrogen and biomass — and the technological means to wring the most energy out of those fuels, including cylinder deactivation and advanced aerodynamics, and the 100 technologists at the symposium had the foundation for a lively discussion. “This emphasis on cataloging the variety of technology elements will never be complete,” said Dr. Michael Tamor, manager of Sustainable Mobility Technologies for Ford. “It’s really just telling us that we are coming into a time of a great variety. As a technologist, that’s very exciting.” Few people were ready to pick a winning technology. “I’m not going to weigh in — I think it’s all good,” said Brian Wynn, president of the Electric Drive Transportation Association. “One way or another, hybrids will continue to accelerate a convergence of technology and learning, and perhaps feed into a future we can’t even see yet.” Robert Larson, director of Argonne National Laboratory’s Center for Transportation Research in Chicago, concurred. “What’s the ultimate solution?” he asked. “Keeping the technology pathways open and thinking about a lot of different hybrid options.” Symposium participants, including government regulators, academics and representatives of the world’s largest automakers, found little agreement on which hybrid systems to pursue, how rapidly hybrids will be accepted, how best to measure fuel economy, even how to define “hybrid car.” But they were unanimous on the importance of their mission: to build the future of clean, sustainable transportation, and thereby reduce global warming, pollution and the economic vulnerability that comes with oil dependence. Casting doubt on that promising but unknown future, Anthony Pratt of J. D. Power & Associates predicted that hybrid cars would account for only a meager 3 percent of new car sales (approximately 500,000 annually) five years from now. He said, “I don’t like the word ‘plateau,’ but by 2010, hybrid sales will slow down.” Mr. Pratt admitted that his forecast was conservative. The forecast is based on a host of assumptions: that gas prices will not exceed $3.50 a gallon in the next five years, that increased production will not reduce the incremental costs for buying a hybrid, that no government subsidies for hybrids will kick in. Mr. Pratt’s forecast favored diesel over hybrids. He projected that diesel engines would reach 10 percent of American sales in the same period but acknowledged that unless diesel can meet stricter emissions regulations, with refiners reducing the fuel’s sulfur content. “We’re betting that they’ll do that,” he said. The symposium audience, which included several automakers that are investing heavily in hybrid technology, questioned the J. D. Power forecast. Dave Hermance, executive engineer for Environmental Engineering at Toyota, responded to the 3 percent forecast by saying, “That’s a low figure, but just how low it is depends on a number of factors.” He said the share could “easily” be doubled to 6 percent. One key factor that could inflate — or deflate — hybrid sales numbers is the availability of smaller but more powerful rechargeable batteries. Dr. Menahem Anderman of Total Battery Consulting, who has spent eight years conducting assessments of battery technologies and energy-storage systems for advanced vehicles, said he could not predict which kind of battery would best serve the needs of hybrid engineers. In fact, he questioned the ability of the contemporary hybrid battery technology, nickel-metal hydride, to last the lifetime of a vehicle. Government regulations and incentives could also play an important role in encouraging the growth of hybrids. Craig Childers of the California Air Resources Board spoke about pending legislation, notably California Assembly Bill 1493, which would require by 2012 a 22 percent reduction in the greenhouse gas emissions in the car fleets of major automakers, and a 30 percent cut by 2016. “When compared to other regulations around the world, it’s very very mild,” Mr. Childers said. “But it’s the first of its kind in the United States.” The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, which includes Toyota, has filed a suit to block the legislation, claiming that carbon dioxide and fuel economy are synonymous, and thus can be regulated only at the federal level. Mr. Hermance of Toyota questioned the effectiveness of putting government pressure on the carmakers. “There needs to be some course to change buyer behavior,” he said. The buying market doesn’t value fuel efficiency. In the business, we don’t think that’s rational.” But putting the burden on manufacturers, he said, is not the way to get accomplish change. In the symposium’s final session, panelists from Ford, Honda, Toyota, and Volkswagen were invited to speculate about the future. Michael Tamor of Ford said: “If you think about the 15- to 20-year timeframe, you could argue that all vehicles are going to be hybrids. It’s just a matter of which power plant is used in the hybrid system.” Bradley Berman is the editor of HybridCars.com -------- ACTIVISTS Defendant Turns His Trial Into a Forum for His Causes February 22, 2005 By SABRINA TAVERNISE The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/22/nyregion/22bench.html Question: What do you do if a talkative defendant representing himself on a trifling charge drags out his own trial for almost a week in your courtroom? Answer: Listen patiently. Such was the dilemma of Judge Anthony J. Ferrara of Manhattan Criminal Court, who from Monday to Thursday of last week presided over the marathon trial of Geoffrey Blank, a lifeguard turned substitute teacher turned activist from Rockaway Park, Queens. Mr. Blank was on trial for refusing to get up from a front row bench in a courtroom. The row, as court enthusiasts know, is reserved for police officers and lawyers. Mr. Blank, however, was representing himself in a case related to a protest and argued that he should be allowed to remain. A court officer disagreed, and Mr. Blank was charged with attempted criminal contempt. Mr. Blank, 30, a gadfly of the city's criminal justice system, is perhaps best known as one of the leaders of discussion sessions held three times a week in Union Square Park. His arrest in the bench dispute and subsequent trial was a chance for him to be heard on some of his favorite topics: police states and higher-power conspiracies. Last week, the court was a reluctant but captive audience. In four full days of trial, Mr. Blank held forth on everything from American settlers to a secret plot by the head judge to destroy him. Judge Ferrara listened, his face strained but his tone polite. It was not easy. "I am faced with a litigant who represents himself, who believes he knows the law and does not observe basic laws of decorum," the judge said in court on Thursday afternoon. "You have decided to prolong this case and to make filibustering tactics," he said to Mr. Blank, speaking in a calm, measured tone, as if to a child. "You took several days to cross-examine the first witness." But for Mr. Blank - whose brother, Jason Blank, sat unchallenged in the front row, slightly hunched, writing notes in a loose-leaf notebook - time never seemed to be an issue. The defendant, his shoulder-length hair tied in a ponytail and his slightly rumpled suit jacket hooked behind a blue plastic comb that poked out of his right back pocket, said, "Judge, bear with me. If I can --" "I will no longer bear with you," the judge said in a controlled tone. "I have been bearing with you for four days. Finish your testimony." At another point, Judge Ferrara rebuked Mr. Blank for "flipping through papers and fumbling and not speaking." But Mr. Blank, who frequently rummaged in a blue canvas bag stuffed with a legal pad, file folders and various plastic bags, absolutely refused to be rushed. "I have case law on this," he said. "It's in my bag. By the time I find it I won't be able to finish my speech. It's called ... Oh, I can't remember." Problems with organization continually dogged Mr. Blank. For example, he was not allowed to call a witness from the audience because he had not gotten her full name. "What is her last name?" Judge Ferrara asked. "Her name is Lauren," Mr. Blank replied. "Lauren what?" the judge asked. "I don't know her last name," Mr. Blank said. "Denied," the judge said. Some of the back and forth was a legal primer. The judge at times instructed Mr. Blank, who had spent hours in a law library in Brooklyn preparing for his case, on procedure. "You can't take it back," Judge Ferrara said, when Mr. Blank wanted to strike something he had said, while being questioned as a witness. "You put it on the record." Mr. Blank attempted another tack: "Well, withdrawn." "You can't withdraw testimony," the judge said. "You are testifying." Mr. Blank argued that the front-row rule was useless, if not simply because it was so erratically applied. He said he had sat in the front row at least 20 times since his arrest. "I want to bring up on May 26 in Part B, I sat in the front row in front of you, Judge Ferrara," he said, looking at the judge. "I saw you in the well. I believe you saw me." But his pièce de résistance came shortly before 4 p.m. on Thursday when he started his closing statement and talked for an hour on the illegality of the first-row rule. Judge Ferrara assumed his listening pose: lips pursed, eyes cast down and hands folded in front of him. Mr. Blank questioned the argument that the front-row rule was for security, to keep unruly defendants and spectators away from the judges and lawyers sitting in the trial area. "If someone was really going to do something, I'm sure the front row wouldn't make a difference," he said. He paced slowly between his defense table and a bench in the trial area, pointing with his left hand like an orchestra conductor as he spoke. "I sat in the front row many times," he said. "I saw the court's face cringe." Then, glancing at the judge, and squatting in the air above the bench with his posterior almost touching it, he asked: "May I, judge?" "No," came the reply. David Cooper, the prosecutor, made a brief closing statement, during which Mr. Blank objected at least 17 times. "Oh Mr. Cooper, I must say, you got two sentences out this time," Judge Ferrara said. When Mr. Cooper became frustrated, Judge Ferrara said sympathetically, "I harbor no expectation at this point in the trial that he'll even listen to me when I speak." Mr. Blank, meanwhile, was hurling objections like hockey pucks. "You've got to give me that one, judge," he said. "Overruled," came the reply. Just before 6 p.m., Judge Ferrara found Mr. Blank guilty on two counts of attempted criminal contempt, which could carry a penalty of up to 90 days in jail. Mr. Blank cheerfully agreed to a sentencing date of April 8. ---- Student political groups protest military recruitment Public Health Student Assoc. find demonstration out of line By Phillip Crivellone Tuesday, February 22, 2005 Chicago Flame http://www.chicagoflame.com/news/2005/02/22/News/Student.Political.Groups.Protest.Military.Recruitment-871465.shtml Protesters from various student organizations battled the cold in front of The School of Public Health Building at 1617 W. Taylor in opposition to an Air Force Recruitment lecture hosted by the Public Health Student Association in an attempt to expose job opportunities in the military field to UIC students with medical backgrounds. Approximately a dozen students from organizations such as the Students for Social Justice (SSJ), Students Without Religious Dogma (SWORD), and the International Socialist Organization worked collectively with large anti-war posters and pamphlets in hand in order to spread their disdain at the persistent military recruitment presence on campus. "I don't think that they should be allowed on campus, recruiting kids to go to war to kill people," said Erika Claich, a fourth year English student and member of Campus Anti-War. Some of the protesters thought that military presence, for whatever reason, do not belong on the UIC campus. Ryan Donnelly, second year psychology student and member of the Students for Social Justice organization believes having military recruiters operating on university grounds is contradictory to what UIC is all about. "This is a poor choice because the university is supposed to be about bettering the quality of life whereas these recruiters represent something totally different." Protesters were concerned that the main reason why such recruitment activities occur on campus is because UIC is a predominantly working class school with a large minority population. The fear is this makes some students susceptible to financial pressures, making job opportunities in the Armed Forces seem all more the enticing. Taking place between noon and 1 p.m. in room 132 of SPH building, three Air Force recruiters spoke on the work of public health officers in the Air Force. Among the topics discussed were amount of time served, pay and benefits, the role of medical personnel in the Air Force, and the potential for educational opportunities. The attendance of PHSA members at the U.S. Air Force Recruitment seminar was sparse. No more than ten students were present in the room at a given time. Some of those present were actually members of the protesting organization who used the time to actively question the three panel members of the recruitment team on U.S. military policy. Topics that protesters bombarded recruiters with included depleted uranium risks, biological engineering concerns, and forced drug usage amongst military personnel. The recruiters stayed clear of directly answering the protesters concerns, saying humbly that they did not know. In response to a student protester's question regarding Abu Grhaib and Guantanamo Bay, one of the recruiters responded, "We don't make the policies; our job as recruiters is to answer any questions that students have about joining the Air Force public health program and its benefits." As such questions were directed at the recruiters, heated discussions ensued. However, the resulting arguments came between students representing the protesting organizations and students representing the PHSA rather than a demonstration aimed to be between protestors and recruiters. "This was obviously not about recruitment but about giving students who might consider joining the Air Force as a job option," said Gus E. Turner, President of the PHSA. "I respect where the protesters are coming from but I still think we should give students all the opportunities are out there and respect the recruiters who are just doing their jobs." At some points during the seminar PHSA students cautioned attending protesters when they began to ask sensitive questions regarding U.S. Military policies. Darlene Duggan, a member of the PHSA, at one point during an argument, advised that protesters should leave if they continued to pull the seminar in a direction for which it was not intended. "Amongst us [PHSA] we thought it was a good idea to have [recruiters] come so that other students can get the information that they may want," she said after the seminar. "I don't think it was really fair for students from those organizations to come and use this event as a means to vent their frustration." Yet some protesters, like Eric Peters, a non-student, contested that exposing students to job opportunities in the military sector is unjust and hypocritical. "UIC has an anti-discriminatory policy and now they're bringing in employers that have openly discriminatory policy," he said referring to policies such as the "don't ask, don't tell" policy in the U.S. Armed Forces. When confronted with this question from Peters at the seminar Technical Sgt. John Olson, the principal recruiter, readily admitted that the U.S. military is "the most discriminatory employer there is," squashing any further debate. "Programs like this are, in all honesty, solely informational. We're just here to get the word out there and not to pressure anyone into anything that they might not want to do," Sgt. Olson said. When asked about some of the protesters' signs that were being held outside the building saying things like "Travel, Make Friends, Kill Children," Sgt. Olson could only laugh and say: "I've been in the military for 17 years and I've never killed anyone." In a related incident Tuesday, Feb. 15, the same protesters representing what they refer to as a "coalition" stymied an attempt for Army recruiters to set up shop outside of the bookstore in SCE. Using shouting tactics and dispensing anti-recruitment literature they drove off the recruiters in less than an hour. ---- Protesters in Beirut demand Syria ouster February 22, 2005 By P. Mitchell Prothero THE WASHINGTON TIMES http://www.washtimes.com/world/20050222-123838-8177r.htm BEIRUT -- Tens of thousands of protesters -- Muslims, Christians and Druze -- flooded Beirut yesterday in an anti-government demonstration unprecedented in the Middle East but reminiscent of the human waves that toppled governments throughout Eastern Europe. "Syria out. Syria out," they shouted as Arabic pop music blared, amid calls for a "peaceful intifada" or "uprising" against a government that was put into place and remains controlled by neighboring Syria. "We are with the Muslims, the Druze, together for a free Lebanon," said one member of a Christian militia. "Tell America we are waiting for them to invade, all of us." In a display of Christian-Muslim unity and outrage over the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri a week ago, some protesters held up a Koran in one hand and a cross in the other. Just as the protesters who forced out the government of Ukraine in December adopted the color orange as their symbol, yesterday's marchers wore scarves of red and white " the colors of Lebanon's flag. Mr. Hariri's killing has brought together a Lebanese opposition that had been splintered along the same sectarian lines that defined the country during its long civil war. "Our demands are simple. A secular, democratic Lebanon with Syria as a neighbor and not in control of our country," one demonstrator said. "Nothing less will be accepted." Syria, which has long harbored historical claims to Lebanon, sent troops into its neighbor during its civil war in 1976 and kept them there, ostensibly as peacekeepers, when the war ended in 1990. Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa said Syrian President Bashar Assad affirmed during a meeting yesterday in Damascus that his country "soon" will redeploy its troops as required by the 1989 agreement that ended the war. That agreement, brokered in Taif, Saudi Arabia, called for Syria to move its forces to the eastern Bekaa Valley near its border and to negotiate a timetable with Lebanon for their total withdrawal. The U.N. Security Council passed a resolution late last year calling for all foreign troops to leave Lebanon. President Bush renewed that call yesterday in Brussels, saying Syria "must end its occupation of Lebanon." EU foreign ministers yesterday joined the United States and France in calling for an international investigation into the Hariri assassination " a demand the Lebanese government so far has rejected. Many of yesterday's protesters were students from the American University Beirut (AUB) " a bastion of Western-style clothing and American slang " who braved the risk of police violence and the censure of parents to take part in the unheard-of demonstration. "My brother would so kill me if he saw me there," said one young woman when urged to take part. "I don't want to get shot at; he'd be so mad." "We'll protect you, now come on," an organizer cajoled her. Minutes later, she and several girlfriends were making up the front line of the AUB marchers, each carrying a single flower and chanting. By the time the marchers reached the site where Mr. Hariri died, about a mile from the campus, it was clear that the protest would be one of the largest ever seen in the Middle East. Tens of thousands of Lebanese representing every opposition group controlled the streets, defying official warnings that the demonstration would not be tolerated. George Haddad of the Free Patriotic Movement " a mainly Christian organization that advocates a free, secular Lebanon " said the protest organizers hoped to mimic the bloodless uprisings that ended despotic regimes in Georgia in 2003 and Ukraine in 2004. But hesitant opposition leaders ordered their followers not to attempt to storm Lebanon's parliament building " a feat they might have pulled off because the Lebanese army and police, while fitted out in full battle gear, clearly were unwilling to fire on their countrymen to protect Syrian interests. The opposition's greatest weakness is its inability to draw support from the two key Shi'ite Muslim organizations. Shi'ites are a majority in Lebanon, and their largest political groups " Hezbollah and Amal " have close ties to Syria. "Look, the Shi'ites in the south receive far more humanitarian aid and support from Hezbollah than they do from the Lebanese government," said student organizer Anthony Letayf. "Hezbollah relies on Syria for money and support in its fight against Israel. We just cannot reach those people to convince them to help us remove Syria." ---- Peace coalition to assist objectors By KHURRAM SAEED ksaeed@thejournalnews.com THE JOURNAL NEWS (Original publication: February 22, 2005) http://www.thejournalnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050222/NEWS03/502220345/1022/NEWS06 During the Cold War, when Army Lt. Jeff Schutts was stationed in Germany, he used to take part in war games in which the military would kill 30 million people in a day. Gradually, the thought of having a hand in killing other people kept him up at night. Schutts, who joined the ROTC at 18, looked for a way to respect his principles. Describing himself yesterday as a former "superpatriot" from small-town Illinois who was humiliated by the Iran hostage crisis, Schutts discovered he might qualify as a conscientious objector, a right afforded to military personnel. He filed for CO status in 1988 but was denied. Schutts, 40, was discharged in June 1990 and lives in Canada, where he belongs to a group that helps American soldiers who have fled the United States because they were refused CO status or were unaware of their rights. "Nobody in the military is telling you that 'you're a CO, and here's the form to get out,' " said Schutts, who lives in Vancouver. Schutts was one of 30 peace activists from the United States and Canada who spent four days last week at the Fellowship of Reconciliation in Upper Nyack developing strategies to help members of the armed forces who want out on religious or ethical grounds. Ibrahim Ramey, FOR's disarmament coordinator, said some of those who saw the horrors of war in Iraq had experienced a "moral change of heart," and the coalition's goal was to let them know that options were available. The umbrella group plans to launch its "I Will Not Kill" campaign May 15. It will feature a Web site with information, resources and links to groups for would-be conscientious objectors. According to the law, a conscientious objector is a person who is "conscientiously opposed to participation in war in any form." The belief that motivates a person to apply for CO status might come from religion or philosophy, but it cannot be applied selectively. The applicants must oppose all wars, not just those of which they do not approve. Of 92 CO requests filed with the Army, Navy and Marines last year, 41 were approved. The Air Force approved nine applications in 2004 but did not provide the total number of applicants. Some COs ask for discharge, others for noncombatant duties. Joseph Varbaro of Port Chester, who served in the Army during World War II, said COs "are looking to get out and that's not right." "I think they should go to jail," he said. Varbaro was drafted at 18. He said he believed young people today enlisted in the military without properly thinking it through. "Two months later, they want to get out, and the Army sends them out," he said. "I don't know why the Army does that." Arlene Inouye, a Los Angeles teacher and founder of the Coalition Against Militarism in Our Schools, said some young people, particularly the urban poor, who enlisted in the military didn't realize what they were getting into. Some who joined the war on terror later realized they were not prepared to take human life. Oskar Castro, a coordinator for the American Friends Service Committee in Philadelphia, said CO status is different today from the Vietnam War era. Then, applicants weren't deployed until their case was heard by a military board because they were being drafted. An Army spokeswoman said CO applications from active duty personnel generally were processed and forwarded to Army headquarters within 90 days from the date soldiers submitted them to their commanding officers. Applications from reservists are processed within 180 days. Receiving final word on CO status can take much longer. Carlos Emmanuel San Pedro, a 19-year-old from Oxnard, Calif., who attended the FOR conference, spent a year and a half in the Civil Air Patrol, doing drills, flying in Cessnas and completing survival training school. San Pedro, whose father fought in Afghanistan in 2002, thought he would join the Air Force one day. San Pedro's father, a former Marine, told his son to think hard about joining the military and the decisions he might have to make. San Pedro realized he could not support war and instead joined a peace group — Alternative to Military: Options and Resources — to help those in uniform struggling with their beliefs. ---- For Some, a Loss in Iraq Turns Into Antiwar Activism Gold Star Families Band Together to 'Make People Care' By Evelyn Nieves Washington Post Staff Writer Tuesday, February 22, 2005; Page A03 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A42498-2005Feb21?language=printer VACAVILLE, Calif. -- Five minutes after President Bush began his State of the Union address, Cindy Sheehan clicked off her television set. She would read the transcript, watch the salute to the parents of a Marine killed in Fallujah, chew over such words as "ultimate sacrifice" and "fight against tyranny" -- the next morning. But that night, live, in her living room, so close to her son's photos and medals on the foyer wall -- no. It was too much to hear the cheering for the man who had sent her son to Iraq on the premise that Saddam Hussein stockpiled weapons of mass destruction. Casey Sheehan, a former Eagle Scout and altar boy who had joined the Army hoping to serve as a chaplain's assistant, was killed at age 24 in a war he wasn't sure why he was fighting. And more soldiers like him were dying every day. Where was the outrage? Cindy Sheehan found it where she always does: in other families who have lost a loved one in a war they neither believe in nor want to believe will continue, without end, with the nation's acquiescence. They call themselves Gold Star Families for Peace. Organized less than two months ago, it is part support group and part activist organization, with members united by grief and the belief that their loved ones died in a war that did not have to happen. They represent a small percentage of the families that have lost someone in Iraq -- 50 families out of more than 1,450. The fallen soldiers' obituaries indicate that many of their families continue to support the war. But the Gold Star Families say they support the soldiers because their mission is to speak out to help bring them home and minimize the human cost of the war. They include Bill Mitchell of Atascadero, Calif., who lost his son, Mike, 25, in the same April 4 ambush that killed Casey Sheehan, and who also was unable to watch Bush's speech. And Celeste Zappala of Philadelphia, whose eldest son, Sherwood Baker, 30, a National Guardsman, was killed while on the search for weapons of mass destruction. She watched Bush's speech with the sound turned down, "trying to discern some truth amidst the choreography of clapping and fawning." Other Gold Star Families shared the same knot in their stomachs, the same sense of stunned disbelief. They worry that as the war verges on entering its third year, the public seems to be losing interest in it. When Sheehan tells people she lost a son in the war, she said, she is sometimes asked, "Which war?" "It's like the American public can listen to the war news for five minutes, and then they can hear about Michael Jackson," she said. "We're trying really hard to bring it to the forefront, to make people care about what's going on there." The families stumbled upon one another through the Internet and through Military Families Speak Out, an antiwar group for families with loved ones serving in Iraq. With no outreach and little publicity, Gold Star Families for Peace -- the name is a variation on American Gold Star Mothers, a group for mothers of slain soldiers that dates from the 1920s -- gets inquiries from two or three families nearly every day, Sheehan said. They are regular people: teachers, civil servants, stay-at-home moms and hardware-salesman dads. Most are not used to political protests or speechmaking. Their loved ones -- sons, mostly -- had joined the military because they wanted to, usually out of a sense of duty. Patrick McCaffrey, who managed an auto shop in Palo Alto, Calif., joined the National Guard after Sept. 11, 2001. "He wanted to protect the homeland from terrorism," said Nadia McCaffrey of Tracy, Calif., Her only child, 34 years old and with a wife and two children, never dreamed he would be sent abroad to fight. "He would never have signed up if he thought that was a possibility," McCaffrey said. "His family was too important to him." Gold Star Families do speaking engagements or grant interviews on a moment's notice, though they know the risks. Already, some people have written them off as grieving mothers -- most Gold Star members are mothers -- whose judgment has been clouded by emotion. They also know that many military families do not share their views. The couple whom Bush honored during his State of the Union address, Janet and Bill Norwood of Pflugerville, Tex., had written to Bush to express continuing support for the war after their son, a Marine sergeant, was killed last year. The Gold Star Families say they feel the same empathy for families such as the Norwoods as they do for one another. But they say they, too, have written letters and made calls to Bush and to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, "yet there has been no response at all," Zappala said. On Inauguration Day, half a dozen Gold Star Families, letters in hand, tried to gain an audience with Bush and Rumsfeld. They were turned away at the White House by guards. They plan more group events but are not sure what. Many of them will meet in person for the first time when they converge with peace organizations in Fayetteville, N.C., March 19 to mark the second anniversary of the start of the war. Then, they say, they will go full steam ahead in speaking out against the war, together, in ones and twos, and with other peace groups. The most prominent member is Lila Lipscomb of Flint, Mich., who was featured in Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11." The film shows her encouraging her son, Michael Pederson, to join the Army for its career opportunities, only to end up grieving for him two weeks after the war in Iraq began. "I consider being in that movie such a blessing," she said, "because it has given me the opportunity to have an audience." Bill Mitchell said Gold Star Families in general have had no problem capturing a crowd's attention. "When we get together," he said, "it's pretty powerful." For the families, discussions always begin with their loved ones' lives. Mitchell talks about his son, Mike, a high school track star who found time for a run the day he died. He had volunteered for the Army with friends "out of a sense of brotherhood," said his father, a retired corporate manager. After 11 months in Iraq, Mike Mitchell was killed two weeks before he was scheduled to leave. Engaged to marry a German woman who had moved her graduate studies to Southern California in preparation for their life together, he was eager to return home. But he volunteered for one last mission. It was the same mission that Casey Sheehan, in Iraq for two weeks, was on when they were ambushed. A devout Catholic, he had also entered the Army in solidarity with friends. He did not have a steady girlfriend, and had told his mother that he wanted to stay a virgin until he married. After his tour was over, he planned to become an elementary school teacher. "The sons and daughters dying in that war are the most decent people," said Sheehan, who raised four children while her husband worked as a hardware salesman. Vicki Castro's only son, Jonathan, could have gone to college but enlisted in the Army as a combat engineer, almost against his parent's wishes, she said. "We told him, 'Just apply to college and we'll pay for wherever you want to go,' " said Castro, a high school math teacher in Corona, Calif. "But he wanted to learn things most people don't, and experience things you don't when you go from high school to college." He had designed and built scooters with motorcycle parts -- "chopperscooters," he called them. Upon returning from Iraq, he planned to use the Army's small-business loan program to open a shop on the beach and rent them out. He was more than ready to return, but the Army extended his stay one year. He died at age 21 in the Dec. 21 suicide bombing that killed 22 soldiers in a mess tent in Mosul. Diane Santoriello, who teaches troubled elementary school students in Pittsburgh, knew her son would be sent abroad. First Lt. Neil Anthony Santoriello Jr. had joined the Army after high school. "He wanted this as a career from the time he was in fifth grade, though he knew I wasn't crazy about it," she said. Neil had been an Eagle Scout, along with friends who joined the Army with him. "Nine scouts that were with my son are currently in uniform," Santoriello said. "His two best friends are over in Mosul right now." Like other Gold Star families, she recalls that her son began to express disillusionment over Iraq. "Some of his men had to go to civilian Web sites to get boots," she said. "He did not have enough parts for his tanks." Neil, who had married his college sweetheart at 22, was killed on Aug. 13, one month shy of his 25th birthday. "He was very interested in government and politics," his mother said. "We all knew that he was going to change our country in some way. Maybe I consider what I'm doing now a way of carrying on his work."