NucNews - March 20, 2005 -------- NUCLEAR Giggling at the Apocalypse Sunday, March 20, 2005 Washington Post Book World; Page BW06 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A45469-2005Mar17?language=printer In 1961, Amitai Etzioni said that Herman Kahn "does for nuclear arms what free-love advocates did for sex: he speaks candidly of acts about which others whisper behind closed doors." Kahn, one of the nuclear analysts whom the RAND Corporation paid to think about the unthinkable, did not just stand out from his cold-blooded brethren; he ballooned out from them. This "artless, sweaty man," wheezing and gulping down water, was almost cartoonishly fat, a rotund prophet giggling at the apocalypse. Sharon Ghamari-Tabrizi's suitably macabre The Worlds of Herman Kahn: The Intuitive Science of Thermonuclear War (Harvard Univ., $26.95, forthcoming in April) shows us both the clownish appearance and the deadly serious mind. "I can be funny on the subject of thermonuclear war," he once told a reporter. Much of Kahn's fame and notoriety came from his 1960 book On Thermonuclear War, which Ghamari-Tabrizi notes was "the first widely circulated study that dramatized how a nuclear war might begin, be fought, and be survived." Kahn wrote that prewar preparations could decisively shape a post-nuclear-war world. Like Thomas C. Schelling, Bernard Brodie and the rest of RAND's wizards of Armageddon, Kahn argued that the best way to deter a nuclear war was "to look willing" to fight one -- and that the easiest way to look willing to fight one was "to be willing" to fight one. The reviews were uniformly passionate and decidedly mixed: The future Kennedy and Johnson aide Adam Yarmolinsky admitted that he and other Pentagon officials were living off Kahn's "intellectual capital," while Bertrand Russell raged that the book should shock British politicians into outright neutralism. "Is there really a Herman Kahn?" James Newman famously wrote in Scientific American. "It is hard to believe. Doubts cross one's mind from the first page of this deplorable book: no one could write like this; no one could think like this." Kahn joked that he had gained 10 more pounds to prove that he was real. Kahn expected to see a world awash with some 50,000 missiles by the mid-1970s, and he found it hard to believe that "an occasional button will not get pressed. . . . We may just be going to live in a world in which every now and then a city or town is destroyed." Three decades later, in a world in which the Bush administration and Russia deem it acceptable to wait until some time beyond 2008 to finish securing the nuclear weapons of the former Soviet Union from the grasping hands of al Qaeda, Kahn may seem monstrous, but he does not sound mad. -- Warren Bass ---- Destroyer of Worlds Reviewed by George Perkovich Sunday, March 20, 2005 Washington Post Book World; Page BW07 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A45472-2005Mar17?language=printer THE BOMB: A Life By Gerard J. DeGroot. Harvard Univ. 397 pp. $27.95 Nearly 20 years have passed since nuclear Armageddon draped American dreams. Once Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev pulled the curtain back and let in the light, people escaped dark thoughts of total, planet-annihilating nuclear war. Although Sept. 11 sparked new fears of nuclear terrorism, Congresses come and go from Washington now with little knowledge of the nuclear enterprise, as do reporters, pundits, bloggers, legislative aides and more. Our post-Sept. 11 country should find The Bomb's story enlightening. Gerard J. DeGroot has done more than write the best single-volume history of the bomb's early life in the original nuclear family: the United States, the Soviet Union, and their British, French and Chinese offspring. He has also narrated themes that run through this generation and perhaps the next. As characters move across the page -- Oppenheimer, Teller, Sakharov, Truman, Churchill, Stalin, de Gaulle, Mao, LeMay, Reagan and Gorbachev -- one sees that the dangers these men created and confronted resemble the current dramas of terrorism, proliferation and military intervention. Intelligence failures contributed to some of the most dramatic nuclear episodes of the Cold War, as they did in Iraq. Washington underestimated how long it would take the Soviets to get atomic and hydrogen bombs, then famously overestimated the "missile gap" in 1960. Both failures killed any prospect of limiting the arms race or taming competitive paranoia. Faulty intelligence kept U.S. officials from seeing the full extent of the nuclear danger during the 1962 Cuban missile crisis, and in the 1980s caused Soviet leaders to overestimate the threat of nuclear attack by the Reagan administration. Nor is the American embrace of preventive war new. In 1947, U.S. war planners concluded "it is necessary that, while adhering in the future to our historic policy of non-aggression, we revise past definitions of what constitutes aggression." With this rethinking, "the mere manufacture of nuclear weapons by another power, or even the procurement of fissile materials, might constitute grounds for action." The United States, according to a 1947 Joint Chiefs study, must act "before a potential enemy can inflict significant damage on us." It took 56 years for an American president to employ this strategy; Washington may feel liberated by its escape from being deterred, but the history of the bomb suggests that other, smaller powers will react. Another story appears repeatedly in The Bomb and is being told again on Capitol Hill: Lab directors exclaim that their latest nuclear gizmo will not only work better and more cheaply than anything devised before, but it will also save American liberty from otherwise certain peril. The device's critics are portrayed as naive softies, the public has no idea what's going on, and Congress logrolls. Finally the weapon gets built, driving other nuclear powers to make their own versions. Decades later, this type of weapon is deemed inadequate -- indeed, morally suspect -- and must be replaced by something much more suitable, thereby starting the whole process over again. Today, Rep. David Hobson (R-Ohio) and a few Democrats are trying to block R&D funding for a new nuclear warhead that the laboratories say would be great for burrowing underground and destroying bunkers. To see how the story will turn out, read The Bomb. The most troubling part of the nuclear story is the way leaders rationalize their willingness to use doomsday weapons -- and to blur the just-war distinction between legitimate military targets and innocent civilians. In 1945, President Truman reluctantly agreed to allow an "Interim Committee" of a handful of wise men to consider how the bomb should be used. The committee, DeGroot notes, "pretended that the bomb would be used on a military target, but widened the definition of such to include workers' houses. The legitimacy of a target had been stretched to accommodate the power of the bomb. In other words, the committee had approved terror bombing but called it something else." The allies had been fire-bombing Japanese cities for years before 1945, of course, but Truman was tormented by the reality of the civilian toll of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. He therefore always pretended that the bomb had been dropped "on a military base . . . because we wished in this first attack to avoid, insofar as possible, the killing of civilians." By 1950, Truman was truer to his words and refused military advice to use atomic bombs in the Korean War. Leaders of other states with nuclear weapons have been even more reluctant to make nuclear threats. But the possessors of nuclear weapons still don't face up to their own readiness to kill -- on a disproportionate and even a first-strike basis -- hundreds of thousands or indeed millions of innocents. We -- Americans, Russians, Chinese, Israelis, Indians, Pakistanis -- do so now while waging war against terrorism, often defined as the politically motivated targeting of civilians by nonstate groups. We rightly consider it nonsense when Osama bin Laden says, "The September 11 attacks were not targeted at women and children. The real targets were America's icons of military and economic power," which could, he argues, legitimately be struck in reprisal for U.S.-backed attacks on Muslims in Palestine, Chechnya, Kashmir and Iraq. But if the intentional killing of noncombatants cannot be justified, shouldn't the nuclear powers do much more to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in their policies? DeGroot tells his story fairly and fluently, but it is the story of a bygone nuclear era. One of that period's pillars, the Soviet Union, has broken down, and the new nuclear powers are not sure what rules to follow. Profit and greed now drive the drama as much as budgetary politics. Terrorists feel no responsibility to protect territory and regimes from nuclear retaliation; deterrence is less relevant than moving urgently to keep nuclear materials out of their hands. Racial and religious identity conflicts roil many of the smaller nuclear-armed countries, while one dominant, unchecked power stands above the fray, rejecting family therapy for the discipline of the belt. Knowing how we got this way may help us get over it. • George Perkovich is vice president for studies of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and the author of "India's Nuclear Bomb." -------- china Taiwan defies safety warnings and installs reactor at nuclear power plant KUNGLIAO, Taiwan (AFP) Mar 20, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050320080558.nri8lpz2.html A core reactor at Taiwan's controversial fourth nuclear power plant was installed Sunday despite safety warnings from conservationists. After two days' delay, the reactor was installed at the power plant of the state-run Taiwan Power Co. (Taipower) in northern coastal town of Kungliao, a Taipower spokesman said. Taipower Chairman Lin Ching-chi says this would be a "milestone development" in the project, which is almost 60 percent completed but behind schedule. The Japanese-built 1,000-tonne reactor has been on site since June 2002, the first of two planned. However, Wu Wen-tung, head of a Kungliao group opposing the nuclear power plant, issued a stern warning against the project, which he said "could become Taiwan's largest nightmare in the future". "We've repeatedly called attention to the flaws of the power plant -- the civil engineering construction and the rust of the reactor. But the government has turned a blind eye to our warnings," he said. The project has been mired in controversy for years and became a campaign point in the 2000 presidential elections which brought Chen Shui-bian of the opposition Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) to power. In October 2000, the DPP scrapped the partly built 5.6 billion US dollar plant without consulting parliament, as required by Taiwan's constitution, plunging the island into months of political crisis. The DPP government opposed nuclear power on grounds of safety and difficulty in disposing of the waste, but reinstated the project in February Because of the delay, Taipower is estimated to need another 1.3 billion US for the project, with the extra spending awaiting parliament's approval. The first nuclear reactor had been scheduled to begin operation in July 2006 and the second in July 2007, with a total capacity of 2,770 megawatts. Since Taiwan's first nuclear plant became operational in 1987, nuclear power has generated at least 180,000 drums of low-radiation waste. Taipower had planned to ship the waste to North Korea but was forced to halt the scheme under pressure from South Korea and international conservationists. -------- depleted uranium Australasia - Troops ready to go now-commander Sunday, March 20, 2005 Australian http://seven.com.au/news/nationalnews/171267 http://www.keralanext.com/news/indexread.asp?id=156663 Australia's latest troops for Iraq were ready but would not ship out for a few more weeks, their commander said on Sunday. Most of the 450 troop deployment have spent the past two days undergoing intensive live ammunitions training at the Mt Bundey range in the humid Australian outback. Commander of the Al Muthanna Training Group (AMTG) Roger Noble said the soldiers were prepared and ready to leave now, but would spend the next few weeks training ahead of their departure. The mostly 21- and 22-year-old soldiers, predominantly from Darwin's 1st Brigade, would leave Australia in stages by sea and air for southern Iraq between mid-April and mid-May, Lieutenant Colonel Noble said. The troops would be based in camps at Al Muthanna province, where they would protect Japanese troops rebuilding the province, and help train the Iraqi army. "We have got enough time, the prime minister gave 10 weeks and we are going to fit as much extra as we can into that to get ready. "But we are ready to go now." As well as facing the threat of attack, the Australian troops faced the added danger of the presence of depleted uranium in southern Iraq, Lt Col Noble said. However, he was confident the defence forces would deal with the risk appropriately. "We know the risk is pretty small and we tend to know the places where we might come across it. "We have got procedures that basically keep soldiers away from those sort of sites." Other concerns is the extreme heat in Iraq, with temperatures set to climb to 50 degrees Celsius during the northern summer. In Iraq, Australia's troops will stay in a series of camps, formerly occupied by the Dutch forces whom they will replace - complete with a gym and coffee shop. "It's basically a walled compound in the desert, the walls are made out of dirt, guarded and protected by the coalition. "Inside it's basic but it's got the essential things that we need, an area to fix vehicles, it's got a gym ... place for soldiers to sleep. "It even has a coffee shop." Lt Col Noble, who recently returned from a reconnaissance mission to southern Iraq, described the situation in Al Muthanna as "stable", compared to other places in the Middle East country. "It's still dangerous but it's not like Baghdad," he said. Australia's troops will take a whole suite of weapons and upgraded ASLAVs (Australian Secured Light Armoured Vehicles), which Lt Col Noble praised as the best such vehicles in Iraq even before the added protection. He said the troops - a third of whom have been deployed to Iraq before - were highly motivated and keen to deploy to Iraq. "They are happy as Larry," the 39-year-old Queenslander said. "Most of them are very keen to go and do their job. "The problem for us is more people want to go than actually are going." ---- Depleted uranium: A death sentence here and abroad Sunday 20th March 2005 (19h23) Bellaciao by Leuren Moret http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=5556 “Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy.” - Henry Kissinger, quoted in “Kiss the Boys Goodbye: How the United States Betrayed Its Own POW’s in Vietnam” Vietnam was a chemical war for oil, permanently contaminating large regions and countries downriver with Agent Orange, and environmentally the most devastating war in world history. But since 1991, the U.S. has staged four nuclear wars using depleted uranium weaponry, which, like Agent Orange, meets the U.S. government definition of Weapons of Mass Destruction. Vast regions in the Middle East and Central Asia have been permanently contaminated with radiation. And what about our soldiers? Terry Jemison of the Department of Veterans Affairs reported this week to the American Free Press that “Gulf-era veterans” now on medical disability since 1991 number 518,739, with only 7,035 reported wounded in Iraq in that same 14-year period. This week the American Free Press dropped a “dirty bomb” on the Pentagon by reporting that eight out of 20 men who served in one unit in the 2003 U.S. military offensive in Iraq now have malignancies. That means that 40 percent of the soldiers in that unit have developed malignancies in just 16 months. Since these soldiers were exposed to vaccines and depleted uranium (DU) only, this is strong evidence for researchers and scientists working on this issue, that DU is the definitive cause of Gulf War Syndrome. Vaccines are not known to cause cancer. One of the first published researchers on Gulf War Syndrome, who also served in 1991 in Iraq, Dr. Andras Korényi-Both, is in agreement with Barbara Goodno from the Department of Defense’s Deployment Health Support Directorate, that in this war soldiers were not exposed to chemicals, pesticides, bioagents or other suspect causes this time to confuse the issue. This powerful new evidence is blowing holes in the cover-up perpetrated by the Pentagon and three presidential administrations ever since DU was first used in 1991 in the Persian Gulf War. Fourteen years after the introduction of DU on the battlefield in 1991, the long-term effects have revealed that DU is a death sentence and very nasty stuff. Scientists studying the biological effects of uranium in the 1960s reported that it targets the DNA. Marion Fulk, a nuclear physical chemist retired from the Livermore Nuclear Weapons Lab and formerly involved with the Manhattan Project, interprets the new and rapid malignancies in soldiers from the 2003 war as “spectacular ... and a matter of concern.” This evidence shows that of the three effects which DU has on biological systems - radiation, chemical and particulate - the particulate effect from nano-size particles is the most dominant one immediately after exposure and targets the Master Code in the DNA. This is bad news, but it explains why DU causes a myriad of diseases which are difficult to define. In simple words, DU “trashes the body.” When asked if the main purpose for using it was for destroying things and killing people, Fulk was more specific: “I would say that it is the perfect weapon for killing lots of people.” Soldiers developing malignancies so quickly since 2003 can be expected to develop multiple cancers from independent causes. This phenomenon has been reported by doctors in hospitals treating civilians following NATO bombing with DU in Yugoslavia in 1998-1999 and the U.S. military invasion of Iraq using DU for the first time in 1991. Medical experts report that this phenomenon of multiple malignancies from unrelated causes has been unknown until now and is a new syndrome associated with internal DU exposure. Just 467 U.S. personnel were wounded in the three-week Persian Gulf War in 1990-1991. Out of 580,400 soldiers who served in Gulf War I, 11,000 are dead, and by 2000 there were 325,000 on permanent medical disability. This astounding number of disabled vets means that a decade later, 56 percent of those soldiers who served now have medical problems. The number of disabled vets reported up to 2000 has been increasing by 43,000 every year. Brad Flohr of the Department of Veterans Affairs told American Free Press that he believes there are more disabled vets now than even after World War II. They brought it home Not only were soldiers exposed to DU on and off the battlefields, but they brought it home. DU in the semen of soldiers internally contaminated their wives, partners and girlfriends. Tragically, some women in their 20s and 30s who were sexual partners of exposed soldiers developed endometriosis and were forced to have hysterectomies because of health problems. In a group of 251 soldiers from a study group in Mississippi who had all had normal babies before the Gulf War, 67 percent of their post-war babies were born with severe birth defects. They were born with missing legs, arms, organs or eyes or had immune system and blood diseases. In some veterans’ families now, the only normal or healthy members of the family are the children born before the war. The Department of Veterans Affairs has stated that they do not keep records of birth defects occurring in families of veterans. How did they hide it? Before a new weapons system can be used, it must be fully tested. The blueprint for depleted uranium weapons is a 1943 declassified document from the Manhattan Project. Harvard President and physicist James B. Conant, who developed poison gas in World War I, was brought into the Manhattan Project by the father of presidential candidate John Kerry. Kerry’s father served at a high level in the Manhattan Project and was a CIA agent. Conant was chair of the S-1 Poison Gas Committee, which recommended developing poison gas weapons from the radioactive trash of the atomic bomb project in World War II. At that time, it was known that radioactive materials dispersed in bombs from the air, from land vehicles or on the battlefield produced very fine radioactive dust which would penetrate all protective clothing, any gas mask or filter or the skin. By contaminating the lungs and blood, it could kill or cause illness very quickly. They also recommended it as a permanent terrain contaminant, which could be used to destroy populations by contaminating water supplies and agricultural land with the radioactive dust. The first DU weapons system was developed for the Navy in 1968, and DU weapons were given to and used by Israel in 1973 under U.S. supervision in the Yom Kippur war against the Arabs. The Phalanx weapons system, using DU, was tested on the USS Bigelow out of Hunters Point Naval Shipyard in 1977, and DU weapons have been sold by the U.S. to 29 countries. Military research report summaries detail the testing of DU from 1974-1999 at military testing grounds, bombing and gunnery ranges and at civilian labs under contract. Today 42 states are contaminated with DU from manufacture, testing and deployment. Women living around these facilities have reported increases in endometriosis, birth defects in babies, leukemia in children and cancers and other diseases in adults. Thousands of tons of DU weapons tested for decades by the Navy on four bombing and gunnery ranges around Fallon, Nevada, is no doubt the cause of the fastest growing leukemia cluster in the U.S. over the past decade. The military denies that DU is the cause. The medical profession has been active in the cover-up - just as they were in hiding the effects from the American public - of low level radiation from atmospheric testing and nuclear power plants. A medical doctor in Northern California reported being trained by the Pentagon with other doctors, months before the 2003 war started, to diagnose and treat soldiers returning from the 2003 war for mental problems only. Medical professionals in hospitals and facilities treating returning soldiers were threatened with $10,000 fines if they talked about the soldiers or their medical problems. They were also threatened with jail. Reporters have also been prevented access to more than 14,000 medically evacuated soldiers flown nightly since the 2003 war in C-150s from Germany who are brought to Walter Reed Hospital near Washington, D.C. Dr. Robert Gould, former president of the Bay Area chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR), has contacted three medical doctors since February 2004, after I had been invited to speak about DU. Dr. Katharine Thomasson, president of the Oregon chapter of the PSR, informed me that Dr. Gould had contacted her and tried to convince her to cancel her invitation for me to speak about DU at Portland State University on April 12. Although I was able to do a presentation, Dr. Thomasson told me I could only talk about DU in Oregon “and nothing overseas ... nothing political.” Dr. Gould also contacted and discouraged Dr. Ross Wilcox in Toronto, Canada, from inviting me to speak to Physicians for Global Survival (PGS), the Canadian equivalent of PSR, several months later. When that didn’t work, he contacted Dr. Allan Connoly, the Canadian national president of PGS, who was able to cancel my invitation and nearly succeeded in preventing Dr. Wilcox, his own member, from showing photos and presenting details on civilians suffering from DU exposure and cancer provided to him by doctors in southern Iraq. Dr. Janette Sherman, a former and long-standing member of PSR, reported that she finally quit some time after being invited to lunch by a new PSR executive administrator. After the woman had pumped Dr. Sherman for information all through lunch about her position on key issues, the woman informed Dr. Sherman that her last job had been with the CIA. How was the truth about DU hidden from military personnel serving in successive DU wars? Before his tragic death, Sen. Paul Wellstone informed Joyce Riley, R.N., B.S.N., executive director of the American Gulf War Veterans Association, that 95 percent of Gulf War veterans had been recycled out of the military by 1995. Any of those continuing in military service were isolated from each other, preventing critical information being transferred to new troops. The “next DU war” had already been planned, and those planning it wanted “no skunk at the garden party.” The US has a dirty (DU) little (CIA) secret A new book just published at the American Free Press by Michael Collins Piper, “The High Priests of War: The Secret History of How America’s Neo-Conservative Trotskyites Came to Power and Orchestrated the War Against Iraq as the First Step in Their Drive for Global Empire,” details the early plans for a war against the Arab world by Henry Kissinger and the neo-cons in the late 1960s and early 1970s. That just happens to coincide with getting the DU “show on the road” and the oil crisis in the Middle East, which caused concern not only to President Nixon. The British had been plotting and scheming for control of the oil in Iraq for decades since first using poison gas on the Iraqis and Kurds in 1912. The book details the creation of the neo-cons by their “godfather” and Trotsky lover Irving Kristol, who pushed for a “war against terrorism” long before 9/11 and was lavishly funded for years by the CIA. His son, William Kristol, is one of the most influential men in the United States. Both are public relations men for the Israeli lobby’s neo-conservative network, with strong ties to Rupert Murdoch. Kissinger also has ties to this network and the Carlyle Group, who, one could say, have facilitated these omnicidal wars beginning from the time former President Bush took office. It would be easy to say that we are recycling World Wars I and II, with the same faces. When I asked Vietnam Special Ops Green Beret Capt. John McCarthy, who could have devised this omnicidal plan to use DU to destroy the genetic code and genetic future of large populations of Arabs and Moslems in the Middle East and Central Asia - just coincidentally the areas where most of the world’s oil deposits are located - he replied: “It has all the handprints of Henry Kissinger.” In Zbignew Brzezinski’s book “The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives,” the map of the Eurasian chessboard includes four regions strategic to U.S. foreign policy. The “South” region corresponds precisely to the regions now contaminated permanently with radiation from U.S. bombs, missiles and bullets made with thousands of tons of DU. A Japanese professor, Dr. K. Yagasaki, has calculated that 800 tons of DU is the atomicity equivalent of 83,000 Nagasaki bombs. The U.S. has used more DU since 1991 than the atomicity equivalent of 400,000 Nagasaki bombs. Four nuclear wars indeed, and 10 times the amount of radiation released into the atmosphere from atmospheric testing! No wonder our soldiers, their families and the people of the Middle East, Yugoslavia and Central Asia are sick. But as Henry Kissinger said after Vietnam when our soldiers came home ill from Agent Orange, “Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used for foreign policy.” Unfortunately, more and more of those soldiers are men and women with brown skin. And unfortunately, the DU radioactive dust will be carried around the world and deposited in our environments just as the “smog of war” from the 1991 Gulf War was found in deposits in South America, the Himalayas and Hawaii. In June 2003, the World Health Organization announced in a press release that global cancer rates will increase 50 percent by 2020. What else do they know that they aren’t telling us? I know that depleted uranium is a death sentence ... for all of us. We will all die in silent ways. http://www.sfbayview.com/081804/Depleteduranium081804.shtml by : Leuren Moret Sunday 20th March 2005 Post a Comment http://bellaciao.org/en/forum.php3?id_article=5556&retour=article.php3%3Fid_article%3D5556 Comments > Depleted uranium: Hawaii too 20th March 2005 - 23h13 The U.S. military which occupies large areas in Hawaii is using D.U. ammunition on the Big Island of Hawaii. Congressmen like Inoye, Ed Case and Akaka support the military efforts and the sacrifice of irretrieveable natural resources for their cause: bribes. Meanwhile an innocent and not knowing population is consumes plutonium polluted water. Here in Hawaii as everywhere we already know there is no difference in behavior of republicans or democrats. Reply to this message http://bellaciao.org/en/forum.php3?id_article=5556&id_forum=13163&retour=article.php3%3Fid_article%3D5556#forum -------- iran Iran to set up secret nuclear faculty: intelligence source VIENNA (AFP) Mar 20, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050320184721.j7g0py58.html Iran is to establish a secret nuclear engineering faculty within a year to provide engineers for what the United States claims is a covert project to develop atomic weapons, a Western intelligence source told AFP. "This is a very significant step towards training an Iranian nuclear cadre," the source, who asked not to be named, said in a recent interview. The Sunday Telegraph newspaper reported in London Sunday that Iran has approved a secret nuclear research center to train scientists in atomic technology. Iranian officials, questioned by AFP recently, have so far declined to comment on this matter. "The declared purpose for establishing the faculty is to create a source of skilled and professional manpower to promote Iran's military nuclear project, whose activity is increasing," the source told AFP. "By setting up this installation, the Iranians are trying to make sure they have trained people whom the West doesn't even know about," the source said. The allegation comes despite growing pressure on Iran from the United States and the European Union to guarantee that it will not use its atomic energy programme to acquire nuclear weapons. Washington claims Iran is secretly developing nuclear weapons but says its nuclear programme is a peaceful project to generate electricity for civilian use. "The Atomic Energy Organisation of Iran (AEOI) has received approval from the regime for the ministry of education to establish a secret faculty of applied nuclear engineering and materials engineering," the source said. "The faculty will concentrate only on nuclear topics and will build and train a new generation of engineers, who will be able to immediately work on highly secret projects as soon as they complete their studies." Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), said earlier this month that the IAEA has not found weapons work in Iran after two years of investigations but that "the jury is still out" on whether the Islamic Republic's nuclear intentions are peaceful. The IAEA has discovered that Iran hid sensitive atomic activities for almost two decades until the agency investigation began. AFP's source said Iran would seek to protect the faculty from IAEA scrutiny. "Since it is new the faculty will be compartmentalised and undeclared. It will not be under IAEA inspection," the source said. "In practice the faculty is to be set up within a year. It will operate as a branch of one of the leading universities in Iran in nuclear science and its activity will be mainly classified." At present most Iranian students are required to travel abroad for advanced studies in nuclear technology, where they can be monitored by Western intelligence agencies, the sources said. "Anyone abroad, someone is writing his name down, that this is an Iranian nuclear scientist," the source said. The source said Iran does not have enough nuclear engineers for a programme which is seeking to mine uranium, convert it into a gas that can be processed and finally make enriched uranium. Enriched uranium can be fuel for civilian nuclear reactors but also in highly refined form the explosive core of atom bombs. The source said "universities in Iran, including the classified military universities" focus "mainly on theoretical nuclear education and only touch on the applied aspect of nuclear science." The secret faculty would "operate as a branch of one of the leading universities in Iran" such as Sharif University of Technology or the University of Tehran, the source said. "It will be situated on the site of the AEOI in Tehran since its activity will be mainly classified," the source said. ---- Nuclear spat boosts critics of US in Iran poll By Gareth Smyth in Tehran Published: March 20 2005 21:56 Financial Times http://news.ft.com/cms/s/763c55e4-998a-11d9-ae69-00000e2511c8.html The agreement by Washington and the European Union to seek joint diplomatic means to curtail Tehran's nuclear programme has added spice to Iran's presidential election in June, emboldening conservative Islamists eager to confront the “Great Satan”. Most Iranians aware the US encouraged the Shah's nuclear programme before the 1979 Islamic Revolution believe their government should not give up uranium enrichment, even though the US and EU are threatening to refer Iran to the UN Security Council if it does not do so. “The nuclear issue is one where the people are ahead of us,” says an Iranian diplomat. But differences over how to respond to international pressure are playing a growing role in the run-up to the election, when Mohammad Khatami, the reformist president, stands down. “US pressure benefits the conservatives here, not those who want change,” said Mostafa Tajzadeh, a leading official in Mosharekat, the main reformist party. “I'm not sure if the US realises this but my assumption is that they do. It's to the benefit of the warmongers in Washington that the conservatives are in power here.” The main conservative caucus, the Council for Co-ordinating the Islamic Revolution's Forces, this week endorsed Ali Larijani, as its presidential nominee. Mr Larijani is the representative of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's supreme leader, on the Supreme National Security Council, and has criticised the 18-month-old negotiations with the EU. He said in November that Iran had “given a diamond and received a candy” by suspending uranium enrichment in return for promises of technology transfer and trade opportunities. Europe's apparent acceptance of the US demand that Iran permanently give up enrichment has been seized on by conservatives as proof of the irrelevance of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty that allows signatories, such as Iran, to have peaceful nuclear energy and of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), whose inspections in Iran have not found evidence of the nuclear weapons programme. The Kayhan newspaper said this week events confirmed Washington's “brimming bile” and its plan for regime change in Iran. But behind the scenes, more careful calculations are being made. Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, the powerful head of the Expediency Council and former president, this week gave the clearest indication he would stand in the presidential election, telling newspaper editors “the responsibility is getting heavier”. Allies of Mr Rafsanjani, who share his brand of pragmatic Islamic conservatism, have conducted the negotiations with the EU, and Mr Rafsanjani used a recent interview with USA Today, the American tabloid, to call for dialogue with Washington once, he stressed, the US showed “positive signs so that we can believe they are sincere”. Throughout negotiations with the EU, Iranian officials have pledged they would never abandon uranium enrichment in the long-term. But some now suggest privately that Tehran's offer of “objective guarantees” as to the peaceful nature of its nuclear programme could entail a limit in its number of centrifuges, the central enrichment device. “The minimum is a certain number, let's say 500 out of the 7,000-8,000, for enrichment, and then the Europeans can build up economically viable power plants [in Iran] and give us fuel,” said a senior official. “It's clear Iran will be attacked if it doesn't give up the fuel cycle,” said a second senior official. But both officials stressed how difficult compromise or retreat would be. -------- korea US has no intention of attacking North Korea, says Rice SEOUL (AFP) Mar 20, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050320023000.byjzcnut.html US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Sunday Washington had no intention of attacking North Korea, and urged the communist state to drop its nuclear weapons ambitions. "We have absolutely no desire to attack North Korea," Rice said in a round-table discussion with Internet-based South Korean journalists, which was broadcast live by Internet Portal Media Daum. "We understand that North Korea is a sovereign state ... North Korea does not need to worry the United States intends to attack it," she said. The US secretary of state urged North Korea to make a "strategic choice" to abandon its nuclear ambitions and return to six-nation nuclear talks. "They need to come and say we have decided that our interests, North Koreans' interests, are best served by an end to a nuclear weapons program," she said. Rice arrived in South Korea from Japan on Saturday as a part of her six-nation tour of Asia, with her agenda here focusing on bringing defiant North Korea back to the dialogue table. On Sunday she meets South Korean President Roh Moo-Hyun, Unification Minister Chung Dong-Young and Foreign Minister Ban Ki-Moon. Seoul is the fifth leg of Rice's Asian trip. She already visited India, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Japan and was scheduled to leave for China later in the day. In Tokyo Rice made a similar call for the North to return to stalled negotiations on its disarmament that involve the United States, Japan, Russia, China and the two Koreas. The talks aim to persuade the North to give up its nuclear weapons program in exchange for diplomatic and economic benefits. North Korea last took part in the talks in June 2004. It declared on February 10 that it has nuclear weapons and that it was indefinitely suspending its participation in the dialogue. Pyongyang has demanded that Rice apologize for calling it an "outpost of tyranny" but the top US diplomat has refused to do so. Rice's meeting with Internet-based journalists at a Seoul hotel was disrupted by a lone protestor opposed to North Korea's Stalinist regime. Norbert Vollertsen, a German doctor turned human rights activist, brandished as poster demanding freedom and an end to oppression in North Korea and called for more aid to the nation's people. "These people are dying. They are crying for your help," he shouted before being escorted out of the meeting by security guards. Rice's arrival in Seoul coincided with the start of major annual US-South Korean military exercises which North Korea claims are a prelude to war. Some 32,500 US troops are stationed in South Korea under a mutual defense treaty aimed at deterring possible aggression from the North. Rice flew by helicopter to a bunker on the southern outskirts of Seoul Saturday, the command post for the exercises involving some 17,000 US troops and an unspecified number of South Korean troops. "Thank you for what you do every day in the front line of freedom," Rice told some 300 people including US and South Korean soldiers at the bunker. The aircraft carrier USS Kitty Hawk and its battle group arrived at the southeastern port of Busan a week before the drills with 5,200 sailors and 60 aircraft, including F-18 Super Hornets. A US Striker unit -- a rapid task force with armored vehicles -- is also taking part. The drill focuses on a mock battle aimed at evaluating joint command capabilities to receive US forces from abroad with US-South Korean troops mobilized for anti-commando operations and computer war games. North Korea has reacted nervously. "The projected exercises are extremely dangerous nuclear war drills to mount a preemptive attack on the DPRK (North Korea)," the North's official mouthpiece Korean Central News Agency said on Friday. ---- U.S. Misled Allies About Nuclear Export North Korea Sent Material To Pakistan, Not to Libya By Dafna Linzer Washington Post Staff Writer Sunday, March 20, 2005; Page A01 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A50241-2005Mar19?language=printer In an effort to increase pressure on North Korea, the Bush administration told its Asian allies in briefings earlier this year that Pyongyang had exported nuclear material to Libya. That was a significant new charge, the first allegation that North Korea was helping to create a new nuclear weapons state. But that is not what U.S. intelligence reported, according to two officials with detailed knowledge of the transaction. North Korea, according to the intelligence, had supplied uranium hexafluoride -- which can be enriched to weapons-grade uranium -- to Pakistan. It was Pakistan, a key U.S. ally with its own nuclear arsenal, that sold the material to Libya. The U.S. government had no evidence, the officials said, that North Korea knew of the second transaction. Pakistan's role as both the buyer and the seller was concealed to cover up the part played by Washington's partner in the hunt for al Qaeda leaders, according to the officials, who discussed the issue on the condition of anonymity. In addition, a North Korea-Pakistan transfer would not have been news to the U.S. allies, which have known of such transfers for years and viewed them as a business matter between sovereign states. The Bush administration's approach, intended to isolate North Korea, instead left allies increasingly doubtful as they began to learn that the briefings omitted essential details about the transaction, U.S. officials and foreign diplomats said in interviews. North Korea responded to public reports last month about the briefings by withdrawing from talks with its neighbors and the United States. In an effort to repair the damage, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is traveling through East Asia this weekend trying to get the six-nation talks back on track. The impasse was expected to dominate talks today in Seoul and then Beijing, which wields the greatest influence with North Korea. The new details follow a string of controversies concerning the Bush administration's use of intelligence on weapons of mass destruction. In the run-up to the Iraq invasion in March 2003, the White House offered a public case against Iraq that concealed dissent on nearly every element of intelligence and included interpretations unsupported by the evidence. A presidential commission studying U.S. intelligence is reviewing the case, as well as judgments on Iran and North Korea. The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence also is reviewing evidence on nuclear, chemical and biological programs suspected in Iran and North Korea. The United States briefed allies on North Korea in late January and early February. Shortly afterward, administration officials, speaking to The Washington Post on the condition of anonymity, said North Korea had sold uranium hexafluoride to Libya. The officials said the briefing was arranged to share the information with China, South Korea and Japan ahead of a new round of hoped-for negotiations on North Korea's nuclear program. But in recent days, two other U.S. officials said the briefings were hastily arranged after China and South Korea indicated they were considering bolting from six-party talks on North Korea. The talks have been seen as largely ineffectual, but the Bush administration, which refuses to meet bilaterally with Pyongyang, insists they are critical to curbing North Korea's nuclear program. The White House declined to offer an official to comment by name about the new details concerning Pakistan. A prepared response attributed to a senior administration official said that the U.S. government "has provided allies with an accurate account of North Korea's nuclear proliferation activities." Although the briefings did not mention Pakistan by name, the official said they made it clear that the sale went through the illicit network operated by Pakistan's top nuclear scientist, Abdel Qadeer Khan. But the briefings gave no indication that U.S. intelligence believes that the material had been bought by Pakistan and transferred there from North Korea in a container owned by the Pakistani government. They also gave no indication that the uranium was then shipped via a Pakistani company to Dubai in the United Arab Emirates and on to Libya. Those findings match assessments by the International Atomic Energy Agency, which is investigating Libya separately. Libya gave up its nuclear weapons program in December 2003. Since Pakistan became a key U.S. ally in the hunt for al Qaeda leaders, the administration has not held President Pervez Musharraf accountable for actions taken by Khan while he was a member of Musharraf's cabinet and in charge of nuclear cooperation for the government. "The administration is giving Pakistan a free ride when they don't deserve it and hurting U.S. interests at the same time," said Charles L. Pritchard, who was the Bush administration's special envoy for the North Korea talks until August 2003. "As our allies get the full picture, it doesn't help our credibility with them," he said. Pritchard, now a Brookings Institution fellow, and others had initially raised questions about the Libya connection when it became public last month. No one in the administration has been willing to discuss the uranium sale publicly. In testimony to Congress last month, CIA Director Porter J. Goss spoke extensively about North Korea's nuclear arsenal and capabilities. But he gave no indication the intelligence community believed that North Korea had supplied nuclear materials to Libya, that it was capable of producing uranium hexafluoride or that it was a member of the nuclear black market. Two years ago, U.S. officials told allies that North Korea was trying to assemble an enrichment facility that would turn uranium hexafluoride into bomb-grade material. But China and South Korea, in particular, have been skeptical of those assertions and are becoming increasingly wary of pressuring North Korea. The National Security Council briefings in late January and early February, by senior NSC officials Michael J. Green and William Tobey, were intended to do just that by keeping the spotlight solely on North Korea. Pakistan was mentioned only once in the briefing paper, and in a context that emphasized Pyongyang's guilt. "Pakistani press reports have said the uranium came from North Korea," according to the briefing paper, which was read to The Post. After initial press reports about the briefing appeared last month, Pyongyang announced that it possessed nuclear weapons and would not return to the six-party talks. Pritchard said North Korea's reaction was "absolutely linked" to the Green-Tobey trip. The United States tried to persuade North Korea to return to the talks, but without success. The North Korean leadership responded with a list of conditions, including a demand that Rice apologize for calling it an "outpost of tyranny." During the first stop on her Asian tour, Rice used noticeably softer language on North Korea, telling a Tokyo audience that the U.S. offer was open to negotiation, and that North Korean leader Kim Jong Il should grab the opportunity. Staff writer Glenn Kessler contributed to this report from Seoul. -------- pakistan U.S. misled allies about nuclear export N. Korean material landed in Pakistan, instead of Libya By Dafna Linzer 03/20/05 Washington Post http://207.44.245.159/article8314.htm In an effort to increase pressure on North Korea, the Bush administration told its Asian allies in briefings earlier this year that Pyongyang had exported nuclear material to Libya. That was a significant new charge, the first allegation that North Korea was helping to create a new nuclear weapons state. But that is not what U.S. intelligence reported, according to two officials with detailed knowledge of the transaction. North Korea, according to the intelligence, had supplied uranium hexafluoride -- which can be enriched to weapons-grade uranium -- to Pakistan. It was Pakistan, a key U.S. ally with its own nuclear arsenal, that sold the material to Libya. The U.S. government had no evidence, the officials said, that North Korea knew of the second transaction. Key details omitted Pakistan's role as both the buyer and the seller was concealed to cover up the part played by Washington's partner in the hunt for al Qaeda leaders, according to the officials, who discussed the issue on the condition of anonymity. In addition, a North Korea-Pakistan transfer would not have been news to the U.S. allies, which have known of such transfers for years and viewed them as a business matter between sovereign states. The Bush administration's approach, intended to isolate North Korea, instead left allies increasingly doubtful as they began to learn that the briefings omitted essential details about the transaction, U.S. officials and foreign diplomats said in interviews. North Korea responded to public reports last month about the briefings by withdrawing from talks with its neighbors and the United States. In an effort to repair the damage, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is traveling through East Asia this weekend trying to get the six-nation talks back on track. The impasse was expected to dominate talks today in Seoul and then Beijing, which wields the greatest influence with North Korea. The new details follow a string of controversies concerning the Bush administration's use of intelligence on weapons of mass destruction. In the run-up to the Iraq invasion in March 2003, the White House offered a public case against Iraq that concealed dissent on nearly every element of intelligence and included interpretations unsupported by the evidence. A presidential commission studying U.S. intelligence is reviewing the case, as well as judgments on Iran and North Korea. The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence also is reviewing evidence on nuclear, chemical and biological programs suspected in Iran and North Korea. Allies, press briefed The United States briefed allies on North Korea in late January and early February. Shortly afterward, administration officials, speaking to The Washington Post on the condition of anonymity, said North Korea had sold uranium hexafluoride to Libya. The officials said the briefing was arranged to share the information with China, South Korea and Japan ahead of a new round of hoped-for negotiations on North Korea's nuclear program. But in recent days, two other U.S. officials said the briefings were hastily arranged after China and South Korea indicated they were considering bolting from six-party talks on North Korea. The talks have been seen as largely ineffectual, but the Bush administration, which refuses to meet bilaterally with Pyongyang, insists they are critical to curbing North Korea's nuclear program. The White House declined to offer an official to comment by name about the new details concerning Pakistan. A prepared response attributed to a senior administration official said that the U.S. government "has provided allies with an accurate account of North Korea's nuclear proliferation activities." Although the briefings did not mention Pakistan by name, the official said they made it clear that the sale went through the illicit network operated by Pakistan's top nuclear scientist, Abdel Qadeer Khan. But the briefings gave no indication that U.S. intelligence believes that the material had been bought by Pakistan and transferred there from North Korea in a container owned by the Pakistani government. Ally not held accountable They also gave no indication that the uranium was then shipped via a Pakistani company to Dubai in the United Arab Emirates and on to Libya. Those findings match assessments by the International Atomic Energy Agency, which is investigating Libya separately. Libya gave up its nuclear weapons program in December 2003. Since Pakistan became a key U.S. ally in the hunt for al Qaeda leaders, the administration has not held President Pervez Musharraf accountable for actions taken by Khan while he was a member of Musharraf's cabinet and in charge of nuclear cooperation for the government. "The administration is giving Pakistan a free ride when they don't deserve it and hurting U.S. interests at the same time," said Charles L. Pritchard, who was the Bush administration's special envoy for the North Korea talks until August 2003. "As our allies get the full picture, it doesn't help our credibility with them," he said. Pritchard, now a Brookings Institution fellow, and others had initially raised questions about the Libya connection when it became public last month. No one in the administration has been willing to discuss the uranium sale publicly. In testimony to Congress last month, CIA Director Porter J. Goss spoke extensively about North Korea's nuclear arsenal and capabilities. But he gave no indication the intelligence community believed that North Korea had supplied nuclear materials to Libya, that it was capable of producing uranium hexafluoride or that it was a member of the nuclear black market. Focus on N. Korea Two years ago, U.S. officials told allies that North Korea was trying to assemble an enrichment facility that would turn uranium hexafluoride to bomb-grade material. But China and South Korea, in particular, have been skeptical of those assertions and are becoming increasingly wary of pressuring North Korea. The National Security Council briefings in late January and early February, by senior NSC officials Michael J. Green and William Tobey, were intended to do just that by keeping the spotlight solely on North Korea. Pakistan was mentioned only once in the briefing paper, and in a context that emphasized Pyongyang's guilt. "Pakistani press reports have said the uranium came from North Korea," according to the briefing paper, which was read to The Post. After initial press reports about the briefing appeared last month, Pyongyang announced that it possessed nuclear weapons and would not return to the six-party talks. Pritchard said North Korea's reaction was "absolutely linked" to the Green-Tobey trip. The United States tried to persuade North Korea to return to the talks, but without success. The North Korean leadership responded with a list of conditions, including a demand that Rice apologize for calling it an "outpost of tyranny." During the first stop on her Asian tour, Rice used noticeably softer language on North Korea, telling a Tokyo audience that the U.S. offer was open to negotiation, and that North Korean leader Kim Jong Il should grab the opportunity. Staff writer Glenn Kessler contributed to this report from Seoul. -------- treaties Arms and the Man Reviewed by Rich Lowry Sunday, March 20, 2005; Page BW06 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A45470-2005Mar17?language=printer RONALD REAGAN AND HIS QUEST TO ABOLISH NUCLEAR WEAPONS By Paul Lettow. Random House. 327 pp. $25.95 Paul Lettow has found the purloined letter of the Reagan presidency: the fact that much of his Cold War policy was driven by a desire to eliminate all nuclear weapons. This aspect of Reagan is part of the public record but has so far been hidden in plain view because it doesn't seem to fit his conservatism and seems so otherwise outlandish. Lettow, a first-time author whose book resulted from his work on an Oxford doctorate, demonstrates that Reagan had acquired his fundamental beliefs in this area by the 1960s. He wanted to do away with nuclear weapons entirely, perhaps because he thought the biblical story of Armageddon foretold a nuclear war. He believed that the Soviet economy would buckle under the pressure of stiff competition in the arms race. And he supported missile defense as a technological and moral alternative to the doctrine of mutually assured destruction. Lettow follows this constellation of beliefs into the White House. In 1982, Reagan signed a presidential directive known as NSDD-32, which said that the United States would muster all aspects of national power to pressure the Soviets and seek to reverse the expansion of its power. The weak Soviet economy was considered the key point of leverage. Onto this hard-line policy Reagan grafted his goal of abolishing all nukes. Many of Reagan's aides were appalled by his "ridiculous" nuclear abolitionism. Such advisers as Secretary of State Alexander Haig and U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency Director Kenneth Adelman occasionally tried to dissuade him from it or at the very least keep him from airing it publicly (both to no avail). Reagan's nuclear aversion ran so deep that his aides got the sense that, incredibly, he didn't even know if he would retaliate against a Soviet first strike. Missile defense was a key part of Reagan's anti-nuclear worldview. He schemed to make the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) administration policy, cutting out bureaucratic naysayers and then springing his idea on the world in his 1983 "Star Wars" speech. He argued that SDI would cast into doubt the success of a ballistic missile attack, thus undermining the usefulness of the missiles and spurring negotiations toward the elimination of all nuclear weapons. The United States could then share missile-defense technology with the rest of the world as an insurance policy against any stray nukes. This view was idiosyncratic, to say the least. As Lettow writes, "Not a single individual within his administration subscribed fully to [this] concept." But in the U.S.-Soviet dialogue that had begun in earnest by 1985, the Soviets proved obsessed with ending SDI, affirming the administration's belief that Moscow feared not being able to keep up technologically. Reagan loved a political cartoon that showed a husband and wife watching a news report on how SDI would never work. The wife turns to the husband and asks, "Well, then why don't the Russians want us to have it?" In an exchange with Reagan at their 1985 summit in Geneva, Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev said that Reagan's vision of a nuclear-free world guaranteed by SDI "contained many emotional elements, elements which were part of one man's dream." He was right. But Reagan was adamant, and Gorbachev had to accommodate him. In 1986, he wrote Reagan a letter proposing the elimination of all nuclear weapons by 2000 in exchange for the end of SDI. Reagan aides countered. Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger proposed abolishing all ballistic missiles as part of a deal to share missile-defense technology. Reagan loved the idea, but only as a step toward the achievement of his ultimate dream. All this set the stage for the storied 1986 Reykjavik summit. Reagan and Gorbachev quickly began an ever-escalating negotiation that produced a proposal to eliminate all nuclear weapons. The sticking point was Gorbachev's insistence that the deal restrict SDI to the laboratory. But Reagan wouldn't budge on his devotion to SDI and walked away. According to Adelman, the president was "madder than hell" and believed that Gorbachev's objective all along had been just to kill SDI. Some of Reagan's aides, especially National Security Adviser John Poindexter, tried to suppress the magnitude of what had been discussed. They were shocked by Reagan's willingness to go to zero. Still, many Reagan officials believed that a powerful good came out of Reykjavik: Having failed to get the Soviet Union out of its economic predicament by controlling the arms race and killing SDI, Gorbachev would have to scale back Soviet defense expenditures and attempt economic reforms. In this effort, of course, the Soviet Union unraveled. And so Reagan achieved no small measure of vindication. His long-held belief that the Soviet economy was Moscow's weak point -- and could be exploited by an American arms buildup -- proved correct. Missile defense did not, of course, lead to the end of all nuclear arms, but by contributing to the Soviet crack-up it helped achieve the next best thing: the end of the nuclear balance of terror as we had known it for 40 years. Lettow's book gives the reader an odd appreciation for impracticality. It was Reagan's utopian belief in the possibility of eliminating nuclear arms that spurred his creativity. That belief prompted his policy to cross ideological boundaries, making for a yeasty, original mix. But the most important ingredients to his success were the most intangible: intuition and imagination. Working off newly declassified documents and extensive interviews with the key players, Lettow conveys this extraordinary story crisply and convincingly. Although his sympathy for Reagan is obvious, he gives a straightforward historical account that will challenge the assumptions of Reagan admirers and detractors alike. He has made a significant addition to our understanding of Reagan and the endgame of the Cold War. Score one for dreamers. • Rich Lowry is the editor of National Review. ---- Dealing (or not) with the world’s doomsday arsenal By Louis Charbonneau, (Reuters) Sun March 20, 2005 http://www.reuters.co.in/locales/c_newsArticle.jsp;:423d1209:e582ee7dc86cbf57?type=worldNews&localeKey=en_IN&storyID=7951491 VIENNA - In 1961, U.S. President John F. Kennedy warned that the human race could exterminate itself at any moment. "Every man, woman and child lives under a nuclear sword of Damocles, hanging by the slenderest of threads, capable of being cut at any moment by accident, or miscalculation, or by madness. The weapons of war must be abolished before they abolish us," Kennedy told the United Nations General Assembly. That General Assembly adopted an Irish draft resolution which resulted in the 1968 nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the global pact to halt the spread of atomic weapons which required the five nuclear powers to take steps to disarm. The NPT came into force in 1970, but the sword still hangs. Nine countries possess some 30,000 atomic weapons -- enough to destroy the planet many times over -- and dozens more could build a bomb if they wanted to. With this in mind, the 189 countries which signed the NPT meet in New York in May to review its strengths and loopholes. Mohamed ElBaradei, the Egyptian who heads the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), says there are three reasons why the treaty is in urgent need of review. "They are the emergence of a nuclear black market, the determined efforts by more countries to acquire technology to produce the fissile material useable in nuclear weapons and the clear desire of terrorists to acquire weapons of mass destruction," ElBaradei wrote in an article in February. Despite the increasing threat of a nuclear holocaust, Gary Samore, a security expert at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, said NPT signatories were now too divided to agree on anything that would improve the situation. Some want the conference to pass a resolution calling for universal acceptance of a tougher regime of IAEA inspections, created after the 1991 discovery of Saddam Hussein's covert atom bomb programme in Iraq. But Samore said this was unlikely. "The problem is there's not an international consensus," said Samore. "I predict sound and fury signifying nothing. The NPT review conference is not going to produce a positive result." NPT UNDER PRESSURE The situation does not look good for the NPT. Four countries -- India, Israel, Pakistan and North Korea -- are outside the pact. The NPT's five nuclear powers -- the United States, Russia, France, Britain and China -- have yet to scrap their arsenals, and Washington and Moscow are exploring new weapons. This, experts say, encourages other countries to go for the bomb. Making matters worse, the IAEA is still trying to stamp out a global nuclear black market linked to Abdul Qadeer Khan, the disgraced engineer who built Pakistan's nuclear weapons programme. Khan supplied Libya, Iran and North Korea with centrifuge technology used to make atomic fuel for power plants or bombs. ElBaradei has described this network as a virtual "supermarket" for states interested in getting the bomb. Khan is under house arrest and much of his network has been dismantled. But U.N. diplomats and nuclear experts say that Pakistan has developed new illicit channels to upgrade its own uranium enrichment programme, raising concerns that rogue nations and terrorist groups can still acquire bomb technology. Pakistan denies this, saying its equipment is all home made. Analysts say Islamabad's denials lack credibility. Some non-U.S. diplomats accuse Washington of turning a blind eye to Pakistan, which has never allowed either the IAEA or U.S. authorities to interrogate Khan to find out exactly what and who was supplied by his network over the last two decades. While Khan may no longer be running it, Joe Cirincione of the U.S. think-tank, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said the nuclear black market was still active. "The network hasn't been shut down," he said. "It's just gotten quieter. Perhaps it's gone a little deeper underground." TESTING THE NPT: NORTH KOREA AND IRAN ElBaradei says nuclear-armed North Korea is the greatest proliferation threat facing the world. The reclusive Stalinist state recently suspended participation in the six-party talks aimed at persuading it to abandon its atomic arsenal in exchange for economic aid and security guarantees. "This has been a pending issue for 12 years, and frankly it is getting worse," ElBaradei said. Two years ago, North Korea became the first country to withdraw from the NPT. Analysts and U.N. experts say that if another country were to do the same, the treaty might collapse. U.S. President George W. Bush has called for a radical reinterpretation of the NPT that would divide its members into two groups -- those who can be trusted with technology that produces nuclear fuel and those who cannot be trusted. "We cannot allow rogue states that violate their commitments and defy the international community to undermine the NPT's fundamental role in strengthening international security," Bush said. "We must, therefore, close the loopholes that allow states to produce nuclear materials that can be used to build bombs under the cover of civilian nuclear programmes. Diplomats from many countries dislike Bush's plan, saying the trusted would be U.S. allies, suspect states U.S. enemies. ElBaradei proposed a different solution -- a global moratorium on the creation of new enrichment and plutonium reprocessing facilities for making atomic fuel. His plan has met with fierce opposition from Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Iran, Japan and the United States. Without mentioning it by name, Bush was referring to Iran, which concealed its enrichment programme from the IAEA for nearly two decades in violation of NPT safeguards obligations. Bush believes Iran wants the bomb, a charge Tehran denies. The EU, with Bush's backing, has asked Iran to give up enrichment forever for economic and political incentives. For its part, Washington has announced a major policy shift that brings it close to the negotiating table with Tehran for the first time in 25 years. It has promised to stop blocking Iran's entrance into the World Trade Organization (WTO) and sell it spare aircraft parts if Tehran abandons enrichment. Iran dismissed the U.S. offer as "too insignificant to comment about". But the European Union said that if Iran rejected the EU offer, it would back a referral to the U.N. Security Council for possible economic sanctions. Failure to end enrichment could lead to military action by Israel or the United States, analysts say. Or the world may decide it would be easier to try to live with an Iranian bomb and allow the number of nuclear powers to reach double digits. -------- u.n. Kofi Annan warns of nuclear security crisis UNITED NATIONS (AFP) Mar 20, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050320211347.tbof3baz.html With specific nods to threats posed by North Korea and transnational terrorist networks, UN chief Kofi Annan warned Sunday of a "crisis of confidence" affecting global nuclear security. Unveiling a blueprint for a fundamental reform of the United Nations, the secretary general said nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation efforts were being hampered by "dysfunctional decision-making procedures and the paralysis that accompanies them." The spread of nuclear know-how, Annan said, had exacerbated long-standing tensions within the nuclear regime, arising from the fact that the technology required for civilian nuclear fuel can also be used to develop nuclear weapons. In his report, Annan proposed guaranteeing supplies of nuclear fuel for civilian use to non-nuclear weapon states, as an incentive to prevent them developing their own unranium-enrichment and plutonium-separation capacities. As well as beefing up the verification authority of the UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Annan said measures were needed to strengthen the 35-year-old Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). "The treaty has suffered the first withdrawal of a party ... and faces a crisis of confidence and compliance born of a growing strain on verification and enforcement," he said. North Korea kicked IAEA inspectors out in December 2002 and withdrew from the NPT the following month. The NPT prohibits the transfer of nuclear weapons, and the technology to make them, between the 188 signatories. Signatory nations include the five main nuclear powers -- Britain, France, China, Russia and the United States -- but not emerging nuclear states India, Pakistan or Israel. Calling for a swift resolution of negotiations on a fissile material cut-off treaty, Annan also called on UN member states to reaffirm their commitment to a moratorium on nuclear test explosions and the eventual enforcement of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. At the same time, he argued for the urgent conclusion of a convention on nuclear terrorism. Underlining the threat posed by transnational terrorist networks with a global reach, Annan warned of the catastrophic consequences that would result from their acquisition and use of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons. "Even one such attack and the chain of events it might set off would change our world forever," he said. ---- Annan Lays Out Sweeping Changes to U.N. Sunday March 20, 2005 10:16 PM By EDITH M. LEDERER Associated Press Writer http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-4879864,00.html UNITED NATIONS (AP) - Secretary-General Kofi Annan called on world leaders Sunday to approve the most sweeping changes to the United Nations since it was founded 60 years ago, so it can tackle conflicts and terrorism, fight poverty and put human rights at the forefront of its work in the 21st century. After a year of scandals over corruption in the U.N. oil-for-food program in Iraq and sex abuse by U.N. peacekeepers in Congo, Annan's report also sets out plans to make the world body more efficient, open, and accountable - including strengthening the independence of the U.N.'s internal watchdog. The report to the 191 members of the U.N. General Assembly was released six months before world leaders meet at U.N. headquarters for a summit called by Annan. In its introduction, he urged the leaders to ``act boldly'' and adopt ``the most far-reaching reforms in the history of the United Nations.'' ``We will not enjoy development without security, we will not enjoy security without development, and we will not enjoy either without respect for human rights,'' Annan said. ``Unless all these causes are advanced, none will succeed.'' One of the major proposals calls for the creation of a Human Rights Council - possibly as a principal organ of the United Nations like the Security Council or the General Assembly - to replace the Geneva-based Commission on Human Rights. It has long faced criticism for allowing the worst-offending countries to use their membership to protect each other from condemnation. One of the most hotly awaited parts of the report was Annan's recommendation for changes to the 15-member Security Council, the most powerful U.N. body now dominated by post-World War II powers - the United States, Russia, China, Britain and France, who all have veto power. The report calls for an expanded, more representative Security Council, but Annan did not endorse a specific plan, instead backing two options proposed in December by a high-level panel. One would add six new permanent members and the other would create a new tier of eight semi-permanent members: two each from Asia, Africa, Europe and the Americas. The Security Council's use of force has also been an issue. It refused to authorize the U.S.-led war against Iraq and the war in Kosovo against the forces of former Yugoslav leader Slobodan Milosevic - decisions which angered some countries. The report said the Security Council already has the authority under the U.N. Charter to use military force, even preventively, but it needs to work more effectively and use specific criteria to make its decisions. In cases of genocide, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity, Annan urged all states to accept that there is a ``responsibility to protect'' those being killed which requires collective action. On the issue of combating terrorism, Annan proposed a comprehensive strategy and backed the definition of terrorism in the high-level panel's report, saying it should break the impasse on adoption of a comprehensive convention against terrorism which should be approved by September 2006. The report said the Security Council's decisions on whether to use force should be guided by a set of clear principles, and it urged all states to accept that in cases of genocide, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity, there is a ``responsibility to protect'' which requires collective action. Annan proposed a comprehensive anti-terrorism strategy, urging world leaders to unite behind a definition of terrorism and adopt a comprehensive convention against terrorism by September 2006. He also called for swift adoption of a global treaty against nuclear terrorism and swift negotiations on a treaty to halt the spread of the highly enriched uranium and plutonium needed to make nuclear weapons. In the area of development, the secretary-general urged all rich countries to establish a timetable to reach the goal set 35 years ago of earmarking 0.7 percent of gross national product for development assistance by 2015, starting with a significant increase by 2006. The United States currently has one of the lowest levels - about 0.15 percent. At the same time, the report calls on developing countries to adopt a program by 2006 to cut extreme poverty in half, ensure primary education for all children, improve health care, and halt and reverse the AIDS pandemic, all by 2015. Mark Malloch Brown, Annan's chief of staff, dismissed media comments that the report was ``a panicked response'' to the U.N.'s problems, noting that it is based in part on the conclusions of two U.N.-commissioned panels on meeting global security threats and on achieving goals to reduce poverty and disease adopted at the last U.N. summit in 2000. Its release comes ahead of a report by former U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker, expected later this month, on his investigation into the activities of Annan and his son, Kojo, who worked in Africa for a company that had an oil-for-food contract. Asked why the United Nations did not wait for the Volcker report's release, Malloch Brown said the reform proposals were promised to world leaders in March. -------- u.s. nuc weapons Nuclear Options By WILLIAM SAFIRE NY TIMES March 20, 2005 http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/20/magazine/20ONLANGUAGE.html?pagewanted=print&position= ON LANGUAGE Aides who think they can con their boss into deciding an issue their way employ a sneaky maneuver known around the White House as ''the Option 3 trick.'' You submit a memo presenting a range of five choices: the top one amounts to Abject Surrender and the bottom one to Nuclear Strike. In this way, the chief executive is induced to choose the one in the middle -- Option 3, the most sensible, or at least the most centrist, choice. I tried to get away with the Option 3 trick once with President Nixon, but his chief of staff, Bob Haldeman, intercepted my decision memo and panicked me by musing, ''Interesting you should bring up the nuclear option.'' That was the first time I heard that phrase, now on the tips of wagging worried tongues in Washington, as an extended metaphor. In its original, horrific sense, the phrase was coined in the March 1962 issue of The American Political Science Review: ''The strategic nuclear option was a policy for which both the weapons and a doctrine existed.'' Ten years later, President Nixon charged that the defense policy of his opponent, George McGovern, would strip the U.S. of conventional forces and would leave us ''with only a nuclear option.'' Now the term is used to mean ''an action that invites a really bitter battle.'' In March 2003, the Mississippi Republican Trent Lott was troubled by the Democrats' use of the threat of a filibuster, or Senate-stopping ''extended debate,'' which prevented a vote on some of President Bush's judicial nominees. Charles Hurt of The Washington Times wrote that Lott told him of a plan that might allow Republicans to confirm a judge with a simple 51-vote majority -- rather than the 60 votes needed under the present rules to ''break'' a filibuster. Lott ''declined to elaborate, warning that his idea is 'nuclear.' '' This led Michael Crowley of The New Republic to ask rhetorically: ''What might Lott's 'nuclear' option be?'' It might be to change Senate rules to allow cloture (thereby ending debate) with a majority of 51 on judicial nominations, though not on legislation, on the theory that the Constitution's requirement that the Senate ''advise and consent'' on a nomination calls for a vote that the minority should not block. Opponents cite recent precedents to the contrary. (This column, straining mightily to be nonpartisan, focuses on the phrase that has caught on, as political confrontation looms.) Both sides are girding loins for the judicial jousting. ''If we have a nuclear option,'' said the Senate Judiciary chairman, Arlen Specter, ''the Senate will be in turmoil, and the Judiciary Committee will be hell.'' The Democrat Charles Schumer said it would turn the Senate ''into a nuclear waste -- into a legislative wasteland.'' (The New York senator drew back from a further extension of the scary metaphor.) Through the centuries, those in the minority have thought of the filibuster as the Senate's barrier to the tyranny of the majority, while those in the majority think of it as a subversion of democracy's majority rule. I asked Senator Lott if he was indeed the coiner of this year's most radioactive phrase, and he demurred: ''I don't recall being the first to use the word 'nuclear.' This is a matter of the rules of the Senate, which sets its own rules. I prefer calling it the constitutional option. The other side is acting like we're going to blow the place up.'' Thus we have a clear lexical signal to show voters which side the speaker is on. In the Social Security debate, supporters of individual retirement accounts call them personal, and opponents call them private; in the coming senatorial cloturekrieg, the majoritarians say constitutional option and the minoritarians prefer nuclear option. THE NUKULAR OPTION Why is it that President Eisenhower pronounced the word nukular, as does Bush II (and President Carter nu-kyir), when most educated speakers know that the word is pronounced NU-klee-er? It can't be ignorance; they were each corrected a thousand times. Is it some mysterious force in the air of the Oval Office -- or does the linguistic area of presidential brains create a synapse that snaps differently from most of us? We are dealing here with a phenomenon called metathesis (pronounced mih-TATH-uh-sis), the switching of two adjacent sounds within a word. Many of us replace an unfamiliar sequence of phonemes (the smallest units of speech sounds) with a familiar one. The only other common English word that rhymes with nuclear is the unfamiliar cochlear. But in our spectacular language, there are dozens of words like secular, vascular, jocular and molecular, and our brains are tempted to make nuclear fit that familiar pattern. (I can even hear a variant ''cochular option.'') The Harvard cognitive scientist Steven Pinker informs me that ''a person mishears a sonorant consonant (like l or r or y) followed by a vowel as a vowel followed by a consonant. This can happen because the two sounds are acoustically similar -- they literally look alike on an oscilloscope. Presumably the respective neural patterns that arise when a person hears them are similar as well.'' (I'll have to test this on my home magnetoencephalograph.) Pinker says he thinks that the brain may represent the ''set'' of speech sounds separately from their ''order.'' Sometimes that order gets lost. ''When this happens in the production of speech (as opposed to comprehension),'' he points out, ''the result is a Spoonerism such as 'It is now kisstomary to cuss the bride.' '' That's what caused a radio announcer to introduce President Coolidge's successor as ''Hoobert Heever.'' ''When it happens consistently in comprehension,'' Pinker notes, ''the person might file away in his mental dictionary an incorrectly ordered pronunciation for the word: nuky'lr instead of nukly'r. He will then consistently pronounce the word with the alternative order of phonemes.'' The way to straighten out your mental dictionary, if you have this ''nukular'' problem, is to train your brain to think of the word not as three syllables but as two words: new and clear. Or you can wait until they bring back atomic. Send comments and suggestions to: safireonlanguage@nytimes.com. -------- u.s. nuc facilities -------- alaska Nuclear Power for Galena, Alaska Atomic Insights March 20, 2005 http://www.atomicinsights.com/AI_03-20-05print.html http://www.atomicinsights.com/AI_03-20-05.html Galena, Alaska has a problem that may be solved with an innovative application of nuclear power. The remote village in Western Alaska is a long way from the grid that supplies electricity to more densely populated regions. It is a fly-in village with only local roads. The energy supply is limited to fossil fuels transported on river barges, but the river is choked with ice 8-9 months per year. The long winters without large volume transport requires the town to maintain very large fuel tanks - the total storage capacity is more than 3 million gallons between the town and the airport, which equates to more than 4,000 gallons for every resident. Fuel purchase, transportation, storage, and financing costs drive the cost of electricity to more than $0.30 per kilowatt-hour - making it more than 4 times as expensive as the electricity in my home area. The town leaders determined several years ago that this situation was harmful to the town's existing and future population - and that was when the price of distillate fuel was about half of the current price. Because electricity is so expensive, consumers avoid using it if possible. Electricity and tanked gas each supply less than 4% of the town's heat, fuel oil or kerosene heaters supply 62% and wood supplies 31%. All of the heat sources have significants costs and limitations, but heat is vital for survival in this town where temperatures can sink as low as minus 60 Fahrenheit. With the help of the state of Alaska, the town leaders commissioned a study to determine if there was any available technology that could meet their energy needs at a lower cost. The study looked at improved diesel engines, coal fired steam plants, windmills, solar panels, in stream hydro, and nuclear power. For the nuclear power option, the town focused on a plant offered by a partnership that includes Toshiba and the Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry (CRIEPI) of Japan. The study provided some logical conclusions. New diesel engines offered about 5-8% improvement in cost and environmental impact over the existing machines; coal would require large investments in mining, fuel transportation, and transmission wires and would have a negative effect on air and water quality; windmills were vulnerable to icing and required diesel engine back-up; solar panels would be useless for much of the winter; in-stream hydro was limited by the low available head (large but slow moving river) and by ice formation; and the nuclear option seemed worth further investigation. As currently envisioned, the Toshiba 4S (Super Safe, Small and Simple) nuclear power system would be able to supply about 10 MW of electrical power for 30 years without any new fuel. It could be transported in modules by barge and installed in a building measuring 22 meters by 16 meters by 11 meters with an excavation for the reactor core and primary cooling system of about 30 meters deep. (Nishi Feb 2005) Compared to the alternatives, the small nuclear plant would almost disappear into the background and would have little effect on the environment. Depending on a variety of assumptions, the cost for power could range as low as 6 cents per kilowatt hour. Unfortunately, there are scenarios where the cost per kilowatt hour could approach infinity. If all goes well, the Toshiba 4S could be providing Galena with abundant power by about 2012. Not only would it supply all of the electricity that the village needs, but there would be enough low cost energy capacity left over to produce hydrogen from water and district heat from the waste heat released from the plant. Galena could experience a mini-boom as it becomes a hub of regional energy and innovation. If certain hurdles are not overcome, however, a large amount of money and time can be consumed without producing any new power capacity at all. Technical description of Toshiba 4S The Toshiba 4S has been described in some promotional articles as a nuclear battery, but as attractive as the plant is, that is too simplistic a description. The plant is a small, sodium cooled fast reactor with a rather technologically advanced, compact steam turbine secondary system. Though it is based on sound engineering design work dating back to 1988, there are some areas where the designers and manufacturers will be pressing the edges of the known in terms of chemistry, materials, equipment reliability and fluid flow. If history is any guide, the system will require a significant number of design modifications and operating procedure refinements as more is learned by actual construction and operation. If there is sufficient patience and dedication, the system could prove to be a reliable power producer. The core heat source for this plant is quite compact; it is only about 0.7 meters in diameter and about 2 meters tall. This section of the plant would be at the bottom of the 30 meter deep excavation inside a sealed cylinder, a location that helps to provide the driving force needed for natural circulation cooling and that provides an impressive level of nuclear material security. The active core material is a metallic alloy of uranium, plutonium and zirconium. The material has been extensively tested but it has not been commercially produced and used as a reactor fuel. The 30 year lifetime for the core is achieved through a variety of mechanisms. The core is a metallic alloy cooled by sodium and the overall reactivity is controlled through the use of a moveable reflector instead of neutron absorbing control rods. Because of these features, which differ from those of conventional water cooled reactor technology, more of the neutrons that are released by fission either cause a fission or are absorbed by fertile materials like uranium 238. When fertile materials absorb neutrons, they become fissile and useful as fuel the next time that they are struck by a neutron. It is unclear from available technical materials whether or not the 4S actually produces more fuel than it uses - that is, whether or not it is a breeder reactor - but it is clear that the efficient use of neutrons for converting non fuel materials into fuel materials helps to increase its projected lifetime. The safety of the plant is achieved by maintaining a negative temperature coefficient of reactivity throughout the life of the core, and by providing sufficient natural circulation and heat removal capabilities to prevent overheating the core. Though it is a long, technical sounding name that tends to make non techies respond with rolling eyeballs, the fact that the system has a "negative temperature coefficient of reactivity" simply means that an increase in core temperature will cause a decrease in core power. If the temperature increases too much, the core will shut down. However, a shutdown reactor still produces heat from the decay of radioactive materials, so there must be some mechanism provided to remove the generated heat. That is the job of the natural circulation and heat removal characteristics. The use of sodium cooling contributes to the heat removal ability because it is a liquid over a wide range of temperatures, even if the cooling system is kept at atmospheric pressure. In water cooled reactors, which are often required to maintain pressures of 2000 PSI, a loss of pressure can be a problem because the cooling medium will change from a liquid to a gas, which has a much lower ability to remove heat. Since the major possible cause of a pressure loss is a cooling system leak, the hot high pressure water also implies the need for a very strong and pressure tight secondary containment system. The need to maintain a high pressure drives many of the design features and operating procedures for light water reactors; liquid metal cooling changes the equation and shifts some of the concern away from pressure maintenance. Liquid sodium cooling also allows the 4S system to produce higher quality steam than is available in a light water reactor because higher coolant temperatures are readily achievable. The system will produce steam temperatures on the order of 500 C (932 F) which is considerably higher than the 260 C (500 F) temperatures available in conventional water cooled reactors. Higher temperature steam improves thermodynamic efficiency and allows the production of more power per unit size of machine. Challenges Faced by Toshiba 4S The major hurdles for the success of the Toshiba 4S are shared by any small nuclear power system using technology other than light water reactors. The fact is that the nuclear regulatory system currently in place in the United States assumes that all nuclear power plants will produce roughly 1000 MW of electrical power and they will all use similar light water reactor technology. Smaller plants - especially those in the size category of the 4S - are severely handicapped by the fact that NRC licensing cost tables are computed on a per plant basis, without any discounting for reduced size or complexity. Innovative ideas are also handicapped by the fact that Nuclear Regulatory Commission expertise is decidedly specialized in light water reactors and the current approach is for any owner of a new idea to be responsible for paying NRC employees approximately $200 per hour each to learn something new. The final major hurdle imposed by the NRC is the fact that their new, streamlined licensing timeline imposes a 42-60 month delay from the time that the application is filed until it is approved. Very few businesses can afford to finance projects that require almost five years of frequent government interaction - at an ever inflating rate of $200 per bureaucrat hour - before they are even allowed to break ground to build their revenue generation equipment. The only way that even enormous companies like General Electric or Westinghouse have been able to do it is to obtain Department of Energy grants to pay Nuclear Regulatory Commission fees. Small reactor producers also face a prejudice that they will be vulnerable to attack and possible misappropriation for nefarious purposes. That is one reason why Toshiba is proposing to bury their reactor nearly 100 feet (30 meters) under ground in a sealed container that cannot be lifted by any equipment available in the local area. The reality is that even very small nuclear reactors will be surrounded by strong layers of steel, lead, and concrete in order to protect their operators from excessive radiation levels. These containers are at least as strong and certainly far better protected than most bank vaults. They are less likely to be attacked because, unlike a bank vault, they surround radioactive material that is quite good at protecting itself from human beings. Small nuclear plants like the 4S certainly will contribute to nuclear proliferation of the very best kind. They will enable nuclear power benefits to reach a much larger and needy audience and they will not contribute to the uncontrolled spread of nuclear weapons. They are machines that Ike would like very much; they meet the objectives of his Atoms for Peace initiative rather nicely. Small nuclear power plants can be terrific boons to the populations in remote areas, but I have some reservations about the specific technology proposed for Galena. (Disclosure: Adams Atomic Engines, Inc. the sponsor of this web site, has developed designs for closed cycle nuclear gas turbine systems that may someday compete in the same markets as the Toshiba 4S.) Though sodium has some attractive characteristics as a reactor coolant, there are some tradeoffs that have limited its use to a very small portion of the world's nuclear reactors. These include the challenge of keeping the material warm enough to be a liquid under all reactor conditions - including long term maintenance, the challenges posed by chemistry and materials, the challenges posed by neutron interactions with sodium, and the challenges posed by the need to pump a rather dense fluid reliably through a variety of heat exchangers. Another obstacle limiting sodium's use is the cost and availability of the material. Sodium is far more expensive than water, and it would experience significant price increases if there was a sudden large increase in sodium demand. The quantity of material needed for each reactor might be reasonably small, but the aggregate demand from filling the cooling systems of even a moderate number of the plants like the 4S could cause major market disruptions until sufficient production capacity is built. As is the case for all commodities, if there is more demand for the material than the market can supply, the price will increase substantially. The 4S is a very nice reactor system, but my reading of all available materials indicate that only passing attention has been paid to the secondary (steam) side of the plant. As is common among plant design documents produced by nuclear engineers, there are dozens to hundreds of pages of details about the reactor system and a few paragraphs about the "balance of plant" (BoP). Though steam is an old and well understood technology, it is not particularly simple or cheap. There is a reason why there are few steam plants being produced today, the plants tend to be labor intensive, heavy, and relatively expensive compared to alternatives like diesel engines or gas turbines. I spent a lot of time early in my career supervising the operation and maintenance of a steam plant that was almost exactly the same capacity as the one proposed for Galena. I will admit that it was a rather venerable and well worn system by the time I arrived, but I am pretty sure that many of the maintenance issues that made for some long days have not disappeared. Steel steam piping still rusts, packing around valves still wears out, condensers still need periodic cleaning and inspection, steam leaks are still potentially deadly for operators, steam generators still require careful chemistry control and monitoring, water purification systems are still a must, and turbine bearing lubrication oil systems still require careful attention. Nothing in that list is earth shattering or really difficult; the main reason I point them out is to try to get them out into the open so that the customers are not disappointed when their "nuclear battery" requires more operators and more talent than they initially assumed. We might have been a bit overmanned, but the plants that I was associated with had a crew of about 20 people directly associated with the steam plant and associated electrical equipment. The other consideration is the fact that the proposals floated so far mention only one 4S for the village and do not describe the backup power system that will be required during certain maintenance evolutions. There are plenty of nuclear steam plants that operate with limited back up in remote areas, but all of the ones that have been successful have the ability to come back into port so that the grid can provide power while they receive scheduled or corrective maintenance. The 4S is a scaled down version of a 50 MWe power plant that has been on the drawing boards for a number of years, so it might be difficult to produce economically in even smaller sizes. If I lived in Galena, however, I would be more comfortable if the proposed nuclear installation had more redundancy and ability to produce partial load power while part of it was undergoing repair or maintenance. Keeping the existing diesel engines around for back up might work, but their ongoing maintenance costs and the cost of storing sufficient fuel should be included in the overall decision process. -------- nevada E-Mail Shows False Claims About Tests at Nevada Nuclear Site By MATTHEW L. WALD March 20, 2005 NY TIMES http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/20/politics/20yucca.html?pagewanted=print&position= WASHINGTON, March 18 - Internal Energy Department e-mail messages written in preparation for seeking a license to open a nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain in Nevada show that the department made false claims about how it carried out its work. For example, in 2000, James Raleigh, an Energy Department employee, pointed out in one message that records showed some instruments that were apparently used to measure conditions inside the mountain were certified as having been calibrated before the procedure was performed, and even before the equipment was received. Mr. Raleigh wrote that approving the completion of a procedure on a piece of equipment not yet in hand "does not appear appropriate." Other instruments, according to the messages, were used for months without calibration. On Wednesday the energy secretary, Samuel W. Bodman, said an employee of the United States Geological Survey had written e-mail messages indicating that the employee had falsified some of his work and that others might also have falsified work. The messages further hinder the project to develop the repository, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. The Energy Department has not released the U.S.G.S. e-mail messages or said who wrote them. But on Friday, Joseph Egan, a lawyer for the State of Nevada, which opposes the project, provided The New York Times with copies of the messages pointing to problems in documents being prepared for a license application. The problems appear to involve documents on quality control and quality assurance required by regulators to back up studies and conclusions about the suitability of the repository to contain the wastes for eons. Mr. Raleigh, who is based in Las Vegas, wrote long messages to colleagues giving lists of anomalies and omissions. One, written on June 15, 2000, pointed out that for two instruments commonly used in laboratories, a digital multimeter and a mass flow controller, calibration was approved before the calibration occurred or the instrument was delivered. (A multimeter is used to measure voltage or other characteristics of electricity, and is often used to maintain or check the performance of other equipment. A mass flow controller can monitor the flow or content of gases or liquids.) The same e-mail message noted that another document, a record of procurement of equipment, "gives the appearance that it was falsified," because the first part, identifying the equipment, was dated in December 1997, but the next three parts were dated six months earlier. Mr. Raleigh did not respond to a telephone message left on Friday. Anne Womack-Kolton, a spokeswoman at the Energy Department, said that Mr. Raleigh's e-mails were a positive sign. She said that looking for errors was "the kind of quality-assurance procedures one would hope went on all the time." She added that the department would look into the specifics of the messages. Ms. Womack-Kolton said that the investigation into the messages described by Mr. Bodman on Wednesday was still at an early stage. Those messages have not been released. A consultant for Nevada who found Mr. Raleigh's messages, Allen L. Messenger, said in a telephone interview, "This appears to be smoke, and where there's smoke, there's typically fire." "You can't calibrate a meter you don't have," he added. Joseph Egan, a lawyer representing Nevada, said the scientific work now thrown into question had been used in the process of recommending the site to President Bush. Mr. Bush accepted the recommendation and sent it on to Congress, which approved. But the decision may have been based on fraud, Mr. Egan said. On Thursday the attorney general of Nevada, Brian Sandoval, asked the United States attorney general's office to conduct an independent investigation and to secure the scientific database created by the department "to protect it from further manipulation." A spokesman for his office said he had not received a response. At the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Beth Hayden, a spokeswoman, said that the quality-assurance documentation was "supposed to give us confidence in the information." But Ms. Hayden said that her agency had not started evaluating the information because the application was not complete. Even before the announcement Wednesday about the possible falsifications, the Energy Department was having trouble assembling the materials needed to apply for a license. Under law, the department is supposed to apply to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which will decide based on rules created by the Environmental Protection Agency. The department had intended to apply by the end of 2004, but under regulatory commission rules it must post supporting materials on the Internet six months earlier. The department said in mid-2004 that it had done so, but later in the year the commission ruled that it had not. Now the Energy Department says it will finish its application by the end of this year. The delay in applying may not make any difference to the project's timetable, however, because at the moment the regulatory commission has no standards to use in judging the application. The E.P.A. had written standards, but a federal appeals court threw them out last year and sent them back to the agency for re-writing. -------- new mexico N.M. Rich With Nuclear and Space History By Don Laine For the Sunday, March 20, 2005 Albuquerque Journal http://www.abqjournal.com/venue/travel/326089travel03-20-05.htm The high-tech world of rockets, missiles, planes and nuclear weapons has played a major role in the modern history of the United States— and much of that history took place here in New Mexico. Although the development of the atomic bomb in Los Alamos and its testing at Trinity Site near Alamogordo are the best known, there is plenty more to see in New Mexico, from the Age of Flight to the Space Age and beyond. You can examine 65-year-old fighter planes, practically every type of missile and rocket imaginable, as well as space shuttles, space suits, a lunar rover and, of course, moon rocks. There is also information on continuing research, from weapons to nuclear medicine. Especially fascinating is the human side of aerospace and nuclear research, from the rocket tests in an isolated valley near Roswell in the 1930s, to the secret city of Los Alamos during World War II and the site where the first atomic bomb was tested. There are tributes to the pioneers of space travel and nuclear energy research, and you can even see possible evidence that space aliens came calling on New Mexico. Several laboratories continue to do important research, and White Sands Missile Range, a U.S. Army installation, is a back-up landing site for the space shuttle— in March 1982, space shuttle Columbia landed at White Sands after heavy rains created safety problems at the primary landing site in California's Mojave Desert. Today, motorists driving by the missile range, between Alamogordo and Las Cruces, might see missile tests, and traffic is sometimes stopped for short periods during the tests. Here's a look at some of the best places in New Mexico to see the state's role in space and nuclear energy research and development. Albuquerque The National Atomic Museum offers an unvarnished look at the history of atomic energy, with a large exhibit about the creation of the atomic bomb and the first use of the bomb when it was dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan, in 1945. The exhibit doesn't just dish out the pro-nuke line but also includes information on the controversies of the times, here at home and in Japan. The atomic museum also has exhibits on scientists such as Madame Marie Curie and Albert Einstein and the history of arms control, and it continues the story of atomic power from post-World War II to present day, with a look at nuclear medicine, such as the development of X-rays. A variety of video presentations are given in the museum theater. There's a hands-on section for children and a well-stocked gift shop with a number of items you aren't likely to find anywhere else. Los Alamos The community of Los Alamos, created by the U.S. government in 1943 at the site of an isolated school for boys, was the home of the Manhattan Project, the government's top-secret enterprise to develop an atomic bomb. Sites include the Bradbury Science Museum, operated by Los Alamos National Laboratory and containing exhibits on the development of the bomb. It also has some fascinating science displays based on work done at the lab since World War II, including exhibits on some of the lab's current research on the human genome and biomagnetism, nuclear weapons and satellites, and the problems disposing of excess plutonium. The museum has an exhibit on lasers plus displays on supercomputers, including the "historic" Cray 1A supercomputer, which was state of the art in 1977, plus a number of hands-on interactive activities. The Los Alamos Historical Museum, while also containing information on the development of the atomic bomb, puts its emphasis on the human history of Los Alamos and the Manhattan Project. There are exhibits on area geology, the prehistoric people who lived in the area and the Los Alamos Ranch School. However, perhaps the most interesting exhibit is "Life in the Secret City," which deals with the people who were part of the Manhattan Project and what it was like to live and work in a top-secret community where you couldn't even tell your family what you had done at work that day. At the museum you can also pick up a free brochure that takes you on a self-guided walking tour of the town. Alamogordo area On the edge of White Sands Missile Range and home to Holloman Air Force Base, Alamogordo has a definite military and aerospace atmosphere. Those coming here to learn about the history of space research won't be disappointed. Among the state's most popular museums, the New Mexico Museum of Space History can't be missed— head to the east side of town and look for the gleaming gold building and the 90-foot-tall white rocket. The museum has an abundance of displays that trace the history of humanity's efforts to conquer space, from early rockets to sophisticated space stations. The pioneers of space travel are honored in the International Space Hall of Fame, as are the scientists and others who helped make space exploration possible. There is a history of rocketry display, where you'll see— and hear— rocket engines, plus satellites and exhibits detailing New Mexico's role in space research. Ride the elevator to the fourth floor, then journey slowly downward on sloping ramps that lead you past the exhibits, which range from a moon rock to a Russian spacesuit to a lunar exploration vehicle. A state-of-the-art IMAX theater and planetarium offer a variety of movies and programs, and outside is an air and space park where you can see a collection of historic missiles, rockets and other large space-related items. A new outdoor exhibit is the recently restored Daisy Track, which was used to study the human body's tolerance of gravitational forces and restraint systems, technology that has also been used in the seat belts in today's automobiles. No matter what your opinions are of nuclear weapons, there is no doubt that the development of the atomic bomb and its testing at Trinity Site on July 16, 1945, was a significant chapter in the history of the world. The site, in a remote spot in the desert some 60 miles northwest of Alamogordo, is off-limits to the public most of the year, but the military allows visitors on two days— the first Saturdays of April and October. This year the site also will be open on July 16, the 60th anniversary of the test. There's something both eerie and almost sacred about Trinity Site, where a small monument commemorates the event, and trinitite— green rock created by the atomic blast— is scattered on the ground. Nearby, the McDonald House, where the plutonium core of the bomb was assembled, can also be visited, and on those two Saturdays the military sets up exhibits about the test explosion. Trinity Site is on the White Sands Missile Range. Directions, regulations, times and other information can be obtained from the range's public affairs office. Las Cruces area New Mexico's second largest city, Las Cruces is a good base for seeing a variety of air and space craft, from the 1940s to today. Located on White Sands Missile Range, about 23 miles east of Las Cruces, the White Sands Missile Range Museum includes Missile Park, an impressive outdoor display of more than 50 rockets and missiles, including some huge ones, that were tested at White Sands. These include the Pershing II and Patriot missiles, plus some much older ones. Inside, the museum tells the history of the missile range, which was established in 1945, but starts a bit earlier, going back to prehistoric times when hunter-gatherers roamed the area in search of now-extinct mammoths and camel-like animals. Exhibits continue through the arrival of Spanish explorers and the Apache wars to relatively modern times when the missile range was established to test some of the most important weapons of the nuclear age plus various rockets used in space exploration. The history of space exploration is the focus of Space Murals Inc. Museum & Gift Shop, which is in the community of Organ, about 10 miles east of Las Cruces. The museum is named for a large outdoor water tank painted with images of space exploration. Nearby are a Nike Hercules missile, a memorial to the space shuttle Challenger tragedy and a V-2 rocket nose cone and tail. Inside, visitors will find a replica of the space station Freedom, a variety of air and space artifacts and photos, and hands-on exhibits for kids. The gift shop has an extensive selection of space-related items. About 30 miles southeast of Las Cruces, at the Doña Ana County Airport in Santa Teresa, the War Eagles Air Museum takes a somewhat different look at flight with about 30 beautifully restored airplanes from World War II, the Korean conflict and later, and most are in flying condition. There are also exhibits on female aviators, plus more than 40 classic automobiles on display, including a 1908 Oldsmobile, 1935 Auburn Boattail and a 1936 Packard. Roswell Everyone's heard about the purported crash landing of space aliens near Roswell in 1947, but what is less known is that Roswell played an important role in the development of rockets, which have made space travel possible, beginning in 1930. To learn about this side of Roswell's personality, stop at the Roswell Museum and Art Center, which houses historical items relating to space, including the memorabilia of Robert H. Goddard, the first person to test liquid rocket fuels and a pioneer in the U.S. space program. On display are some of Goddard's rockets and a recreation of Goddard's workshop. The museum also displays exhibits on the area's history, from prehistoric peoples into the 20th century. The art center features the works of prominent Southwestern artists, such as Peter Hurd (born in Roswell), Henriette Wyeth, Georgia O'Keeffe and Andrew Dasburg. Adjacent is the Robert Goddard Planetarium, which offers programs for area school children. Did aliens from outer space crash land near Roswell in 1947? The International UFO Museum & Research Center takes a mostly serious look at that possibility. It presents an enormous amount of information— too much to be absorbed in just one visit— about the purported UFO crash, as well as about mysterious sightings and incidents in other areas. In addition it presents information on the government's explanations of these events and views from skeptical scientists. There's also a lot of fun stuff, such as the simulated "alien examination room," alien-related paintings and the sculpture of RALF— Roswell Alien Life Form— the museum mascot. If you go WHAT: Bradbury Science Museum WHEN: 10 a.m.-5 p.m. Tuesdays-Saturdays WHERE: 15th Street and Central Avenue, Los Alamos HOW MUCH: Free INFORMATION: (505) 667-4444, www.lanl.gov/museum WHAT: International UFO Museum & Research Center WHEN: 9 a.m.-5 p.m. daily WHERE: 114 N. Main St., Roswell HOW MUCH: Free INFORMATION: (800) 822-3545, (505) 625-9495, http://www.iufomrc.org WHAT: Los Alamos Historical Museum WHEN: 10 a.m.-4 p.m. Mondays-Saturdays and 1-4 p.m. Sundays (winter); 9:30 a.m.-4:30 p.m. Mondays-Saturdays and 11 a.m.-5 p.m. Sundays (Daylight Saving Time) WHERE: 1921 Juniper St., Los Alamos HOW MUCH: Free INFORMATION: (505) 662-4493, (505) 662-6272, http://www.losalamos.com/historicalsociety WHAT: National Atomic Museum WHEN: 9 a.m.-5 p.m. daily WHERE: 1905 Mountain NW, Albuquerque HOW MUCH: $5 adults (ages 18-59), $4 youths (ages 6-17) and seniors (age 60 and older), free for children age 5 and younger INFORMATION: (505) 245-2137, http://www.atomicmuseum.com WHAT: New Mexico Museum of Space History WHEN: 9 a.m.-5 p.m. daily WHERE: Highway 2001 off Scenic Drive via Indian Wells Road, about 2 miles east of White Sands Boulevard HOW MUCH: Museum $2.50 adults (ages 13-59), $2 children (ages 4-12), $2.25 seniors (age 60 and older) and military (active, retired and dependents), free for children age 3 and younger; one IMAX movie $6 adults (ages 13-59), $4.50 children (ages 4-12), $5.50 seniors (age 60 and older) and military (active, retired and dependents), free for children age 3 and younger; discounts for additional movies and higher rates for evening movies (Fridays and Saturdays only) INFORMATION: (877) 333-6589, (505) 437-2840, http://www.spacefame.org WHAT: Roswell Museum and Art Center WHEN: 9 a.m.-5 p.m. Mondays-Saturdays, 1-5 p.m. Sundays WHERE: Civic Center Plaza, 100 W. 11th St., Roswell HOW MUCH: Free INFORMATION: (505) 624-6744, http://www.roswellmuseum.org WHAT: Space Murals Inc. WHEN: 9 a.m.-5 p.m. Mondays-Saturdays and 10 a.m.-5 p.m. Sundays WHERE: 12450 US Hwy. 70 E., Organ (about 10 miles east of Las Cruces) HOW MUCH: Free INFORMATION: (505) 382-0977; http://www.zianet.com/spacemurals WHAT: Trinity Site WHEN: First Saturdays in April and October each year; also July 16 this year WHERE: White Sands Missile Range, about 60 miles northwest of Alamogordo HOW MUCH: Free INFORMATION: (505) 678-1134; http://www.wsmr.army.mil/ (click on Public Affairs, then Trinity Site) WHAT: War Eagles Air Museum WHEN: 10 a.m.-4 p.m. Tuesdays-Sundays (last entrance 3:30 p.m.) WHERE: Doña Ana County Airport, 8012 Airport Road, Santa Teresa (about 30 miles southeast of Las Cruces off I-10, exit 8) HOW MUCH: $5 adults, $4 seniors (age 65 and older) and military with ID, free for children and students INFORMATION: (505) 589-2000; http://www.war-eagles-air-museum.com WHAT: White Sands Missile Range Museum WHEN: 8 a.m.-4 p.m. Mondays-Fridays, 10 a.m.-3 p.m. Saturdays and Sundays WHERE: White Sands Missile Range, off US 70/82 (about 23 miles east of Las Cruces between mile markers 169 and 170) HOW MUCH: Free, however visitors are required to show their driver's license, vehicle registration, and proof of vehicle insurance INFORMATION: (505) 678-8824; http://www.wsmr-history.org -------- virginia Va. Nuclear Plant's Plans Raise Fears Terror Concerns Complicate Rare Request to Expand By Michelle Boorstein Washington Post Staff Writer Sunday, March 20, 2005; Page C08 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A50420-2005Mar19?language=printer The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission says the North Anna nuclear power plant, 80 miles south of Washington, meets post-Sept. 11 safety standards. That's not enough for Tommy Barlow. "It seems as though it doesn't take anybody too smart to get a hold of a shoulder-mounted missile, with the means terrorists seem to be able to come up with," said Barlow, chairman of the planning commission in Louisa County, home to North Anna. "I definitely think it's an issue." Dominion's nuclear plant has attracted more public attention recently than it has in decades as the power company applies to add two reactors to the two already there. The application is one of only three in the country making its way through the federal system, the first requests for new nuclear reactors in the 25 years after the industry was rocked by an accident at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania. In the past, routine North Anna events such as Dominion's annual "State of the Station" presentation or the company's request for a license renewal have drawn crowds that could be counted on one hand. But last month, an NRC hearing in the town of Mineral on the proposed expansion drew 200 to 300 people, most of them -- by a show of hands -- in opposition. Comments ranged from concern about the consequences for the environment and property values to support for the Bush administration's plan to significantly boost nuclear power, adding the equivalent of 50 reactors to the country's 103 by 2020. But activists say most common these days are concerns about terrorism and security. "Al Qaeda has said they want to attack a nuclear power plant, and this is a sitting radioactive bomb," said Jerry Rosenthal, 56, a farmer and financial consultant who has been in the anti-nuclear movement in Louisa for nearly 30 years. Security concerns have been heightened at plants across the country as underwater pools designed to hold nuclear waste have been filling up and utilities have been putting additional waste in aboveground casks that look like small silos. Although the NRC and Dominion say the concrete and stainless steel casks are secure, even such middle-of-the-road Dominion supporters as Barlow have concerns. In a 7 to 0 vote last month, the planning commission recommended that if Dominion wants an extension of its permit to keep 22 casks outside and permission to build dozens more, it should be required to build a berm "so that somebody can't get a direct line of sight and fire a missile directly at it," Barlow said. Tomorrow, the commission's recommendations will go before the Louisa supervisors, and Dominion plans to oppose them, according to the company's nuclear affairs spokesman, Richard Zuercher. "I'm not going to go into what we'll discuss, but we are in compliance with the NRC," he said, adding that the company has invested three times since the 2001 terrorist attacks in additional security measures required by the regulatory agency. Tomorrow's vote in Louisa, a community largely reliant on recreation revenue from Lake Anna, the 13,000-acre lake created for the plant, is part of the local look at a very current national question: Where is U.S. nuclear waste going to go? First-generation nuclear power plants were built without aboveground, outdoor storage because the federal government had promised to be responsible for the radioactive waste. But the government broke its promise long ago and spent more than $6 billion looking for a place to bury the waste. The deadline to begin burying at Yucca Mountain in Nevada passed in 1998, and early estimates say that the facility is at least a decade away from opening. Environmental groups, including the Washington-based Environmental Working Group, say that even if Yucca opens, it will fill quickly because of waste already generated. This month, Sen. Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) began floating a proposal to have the federal government take ownership of all storage facilities across the country, eliminating liability for states and utilities and also keeping the massive storage debate out of his state. The belief that Yucca will never be built is the reason Barlow said the berm is needed. "I don't think anyone is fooling themselves into thinking the waste is ever going anywhere," he said. As the storage question and U.S. energy policy have become topics of greater interest, Washington area groups for and against nuclear power have poured more effort into North Anna. The North American Young Generation in Nuclear, made up of professionals in the nuclear industry, has recently opened a Washington area chapter. The People's Alliance for Clean Energy, a Charlottesville-based group opposed to the North Anna expansion, sprang up last year. Most of the opposition has come from outside Louisa, where Dominion is the largest employer, with 900 jobs at the plant, which provides $10 million annually in tax revenue. Some residents, however, are questioning the impact of expansion on the lake -- water tables, water levels, water temperature and fish -- and on the recreation economy. Supervisors in nearby Spotsylvania County issued a group statement last month saying they were displeased with the NRC review of the proposed expansion, which they said didn't consider the burgeoning region's future water needs. In addition, Supervisor Emmitt Marshall (I-Berkeley), whose district includes part of Lake Anna, asked: "What happens if a suicide bomber decides to drop a bomb on it or crash a plane into it? The larger the plant, the more likely it is you have an accident." But those concerned about terrorism say storage and expansion issues aren't entirely local. Along with the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant in Calvert County, Md., North Anna is the closest nuclear facility to Washington. Federal emergency guidelines talk about dangers extending as far as 50 miles. "They should hold hearings in Washington and Alexandria and Fredericksburg," said Elena Day, a member of the People's Alliance. "Radiation doesn't stop at the county line." -------- MILITARY -------- asia India's appalling record March 20, 2005 Washington Times Letters to the Editor http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20050319-103447-7906r.htm Sen. Richard Lugar, Indiana Republican, writes that "India's growing global role as a multiethnic, multireligious democracy with a rapidly expanding economy makes partnering with that country a natural step in fortifying democratic values ... " ("Critical mission to South Asia," Commentary, Monday). Yet India is neither democratic nor pro-American nor a rapidly expanding economy. India holds tens of thousands of political prisoners, according to Amnesty International. Among them are more than 52,000 Sikhs, as the Movement Against State Repression (MASR) reported. In January, 35 Sikhs were arrested for raising the Sikh flag in Amritsar on India's Republic Day. They continue to be held and recently were denied bail. The Indian government has murdered more than 250,000 Sikhs since its brutal attack on the Sikh religion's most sacred shrine, the Golden Temple, in June 1984. India has killed more than 300,000 Christians in Nagaland and more than 90,000 Kashmiri Muslims. In addition, tens of thousands of Assamese, Bodos, Dalits, Manipuris, Tamils and other minorities have died at the hands of the Indian government, as well as Christians and Muslims throughout the country. Christian missionary Joseph Cooper was beaten so badly that he had to spend a week in the hospital; then he was expelled from India. Graham Staines and his two young sons were burned to death in their Jeep by a mob of Hindu militants chanting "Victory to Hanuman," a Hindu god. Nuns have been raped, priests have been murdered, churches have been burned, Christian schools and prayer halls have been attacked. In Gujarat, more than 5,000 Muslims were killed in a riot that, according to one of the police officers on the scene, was pre-planned by the government. The government recently admitted that the stated reason for the massacre was fake. India has a long record of anti-Americanism. It has voted against the United States at the United Nations more often than any other country except Cuba. In 1999, the Indian defense minster organized a meeting with the ambassadors from China, Cuba, Iraq, Russia, Yugoslavia and Libya to organize a security alliance "to stop the U.S." India was an ally of the Soviet Union, with which it had a 100-year friendship treaty. It openly supported the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. It has sold oil to Saddam Hussein's regime and heavy water to the Iranian mullahs. Saddam's oil minister described India as "a strategic partner." Half of India's population lives below the international poverty line. Almost two-thirds live on less than $2 per day. Yet India spends 25 percent of its development budget on nuclear development and just 2 percent on health and 2 percent on education. India began the nuclearization of South Asia, so we can clearly see the purpose of its nuclear development program. On Jan. 2, 2002, The Times reported that India sponsors cross-border terrorism in Sindh, a province of Pakistan. The Sikh Nation of Khalistan, the Muslims of Kashmir, the Christians of Nagaland and other minorities suffering under Indian repression are demanding their independence. India promised Kashmir a referendum on its status in 1948 but has never allowed that vote to be held. At the time of Indian independence, Sikhs were to receive independence, and India promised that Sikhs would enjoy "the glow of freedom" in Punjab. Almost immediately, the government issued a memo requiring special scrutiny of Sikhs, who were labeled "a criminal class." Sikhs declared their independence on Oct. 7, 1987, naming their new country Khalistan. No Sikh leader has ever signed the Indian constitution. The time has come to stop American aid to India and to demand self-determination for all the nations and people of South Asia. Self-determination is the essence of democracy. GURMIT SINGH AULAKH President Council of Khalistan Washington -------- un Annan Drafts Changes For U.N. Use of Force, Terrorism Among Issues Targeted By Colum Lynch Washington Post Staff Writer Sunday, March 20, 2005; Page A01 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50149-2005Mar19.html UNITED NATIONS, March 19 -- Secretary General Kofi Annan on Monday will propose establishing new rules for the use of military force, adopting a tough anti-terrorism treaty that would punish suicide bombers, and overhauling the United Nation's discredited human rights commission, according to a confidential draft of a report on U.N. reform. The 63-page draft report represents Annan's most ambitious effort to restore international confidence in an organization that has been traumatized by divisions over the Iraq war and battered by revelations of financial impropriety and sexual misconduct by its personnel. But he faces an uphill battle to secure backing for some of his more controversial proposals from key members, including the United States, which opposes Annan's advocacy of the International Criminal Court. Annan said his proposal provides a unique opportunity to update the 60-year-old organization to address today's most serious challenges. And he said promoting it would be one of his "highest priorities" in the run-up to a September summit at the opening of the General Assembly session. "These are reforms that are within reach," Annan wrote. "If we act boldly -- and if we act together -- we can make people everywhere more secure, more prosperous, and better able to enjoy their fundamental rights." he wrote. Annan's report, titled "In Larger Freedom: Towards Development, Security, and Human Rights For All," calls for expanding the 15-nation Security Council before year's end to ensure more democratic representation on the United Nations' most powerful institution. Its findings were first reported in today's Los Angeles Times. "A change in the council's commission is needed to make it more broadly representative of the international community as a whole," Annan wrote. While Annan said he would leave it to governments to determine the structure of an enlarged council, he backed efforts by India, Brazil, Germany and Japan, which are seeking permanent Security Council seats, to ensure that an agreement cannot be blocked by a single member that opposes their candidacies. "It would be far preferable for member states to take this vital decision by consensus," Annan wrote. "But if they are unable to reach consensus, this must not be an excuse for postponing action." Two proposals are under consideration by states that would increase the membership from 15 to 24. Annan cast his report as an attempt to reconcile the security interests of wealthy countries, which want the world body to focus on combating terrorism and stemming weapons proliferation, and poor nations, which are more concerned with the consequences of poverty and disease. He noted that a catastrophic terrorist act in a major Western city could cripple the economies of poor nations on the other side of the world while an outbreak of disease in a poor region could spread to the developed world. "The rich are vulnerable to the threats that attack the poor, and the strong are vulnerable to the threats that accost the poor," he wrote. "Whatever threatens one threatens all." Annan said that wealthy countries must dramatically increase development aid and debt relief to poor countries that govern responsibly. He also pressed poorer countries to combat corruption aggressively and to promote private-sector investment. "In an era of global abundance, our world has the resources to reduce dramatically the massive divides that persist between rich and poor." The contentious international debate that preceded the Iraq war led to "declining public confidence in the United Nations" by supporters of the war, who believed the organization had failed to enforce its own resolutions, and opponents, who faulted it for failing to stop the war. Annan urged that the Security Council forge agreement on "when and how force can be used." He proposed that it adopt a resolution setting out principles -- including a determination whether the military option is proportional to the threat -- that would guide it in making the decision whether to go to war. U.N. officials said they expected stiff resistance to the proposal from the Bush administration, which has reserved the right to use force unilaterally for national security interests. But they say that Washington appreciates Annan's support in the report for the Bush administration's Proliferation Security Initiative, which was established to halt illicit trafficking of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. The United States is also amenable to Annan's call for an anti-terrorism convention that would define terrorism as any act that is "intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or noncombatants" to intimidate a community, government or international organization. Annan wants such a convention to complete its work next year. Richard Grenell, a spokesman for the U.S. Mission to the United Nations, declined to discuss specifics, saying, "We are looking at the report, and we will give it every consideration." Efforts to adopt an anti-terrorism convention have been stymied by Arab governments, which have resisted labeling anti-Israeli militants, including Islamic Jihad and the al-Aqsa Martyr's Brigade, that have targeted civilians as terrorists. Annan also called for strengthening the office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights. But he said that the Commission on Human Rights, which has recently included countries such as Sudan, Cuba and Libya with histories of rights violations, has "been increasingly undermined by its declining credibility and professionalism." He said that some states have sought membership on the commission "not to strengthen human rights, but to protect themselves against criticism, or to criticize others." In its place, Annan proposed creating a smaller Human Rights Council, whose members would be appointed by the General Assembly. But he said the members "should undertake to abide by the highest human rights standards." -------- us Female GIs hard hit by war syndrome BY KIRSTEN SCHARNBERG Chicago Tribune Sun, Mar. 20, 2005 http://www.sanluisobispo.com/mld/sanluisobispo/news/nation/11186304.htm NEW YORK - (KRT) - On a mission just south of Baghdad over the winter, a young soldier jumped into the gunner's turret of an armored Humvee and took control of the menacing .50-caliber machine gun. She was 19 years old, weighed barely 100 pounds and had a blond ponytail hanging out from under her Kevlar helmet. "This is what is different about this war," Lt. Col. Richard Rael, commander of the 515th Corps Support Battalion, said of the scene at the time. "Women are fighting it. Women under my command have confirmed kills. These little wisps of things are stronger than anyone could ever imagine and taking on more than most Americans could ever know." But today, two years after the start of an Iraq war in which traditional front lines were virtually obliterated and women were tasked to fill lethal combat roles more routinely than in any conflict in U.S. history, the nation may be just beginning to see and feel the effects of such service. Thousands of women, like the male veterans of so many wars before, are returning home emotionally damaged by what they have seen and done. These female troops appear more prone to post-traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD, than their male counterparts. And studies indicate that many of these women suffer from more pronounced and debilitating forms of PTSD than men, a worrisome finding in a nation that remembers how many traumatized troops got back from Vietnam and turned to drugs and violence, alcohol and suicide. One children's book increasingly popular among military families illustrates what the effects of this most recent war might mean for society in the years and even decades to come: "Why Is Mommy Like She Is? A Book for Kids About PTSD." In the wake of such concerns, the Veterans Affairs Department has launched a pioneering $6 million study of PTSD among female veterans. It is the first VA study to focus exclusively on female veterans; 8 percent to 10 percent of active-duty and retired military women suffer from PTSD, a rate nearly twice as high as that among men. "PTSD is a very real problem for women who serve in the military," said Paula Schnurr, one of the study's lead researchers and the deputy executive director of the VA's National Center for PTSD in White River Junction, Vt. "This study is specifically addressing that, and we hope it will not only help us treat women coming home from Iraq, but all those who have ever served and struggled with PTSD in any conflict before." The study's findings are not due until the end of the year, but researchers already have made some startling discoveries that are illustrative of the nature of PTSD among female veterans and of the U.S. military. According to Schnurr, data indicate that female military personnel are far more likely than their male counterparts to have been exposed to some kind of trauma or multiple traumas before joining the military or being deployed in combat. That may include physical assault, sexual abuse or rape. "The speculation is that many of them are joining the military to get away from adverse environments," said Schnurr, also a professor of psychiatry at Dartmouth College, speaking of the nearly 216,000 U.S. women on active duty and the nearly 151,000 who are part of the reserves and National Guard. The implication of such a finding on PTSD research is considered significant. Because most research indicates that a person is at greater risk of developing PTSD - or developing more severe PTSD - when he or she has had past traumas, many female troops are deploying to war zones already heavily predisposed to react adversely to the intense fear, killing and loss routinely encountered there. "The evidence is conclusive," said Rachel MacNair, an expert in the psychological effects of violence and PTSD. "The greater the trauma in your life, the greater the symptoms of PTSD." MacNair, however, focuses on another factor that she believes more acutely affects the rate of PTSD among veterans of Iraq: whether they have killed during their deployment. In 1999, MacNair earned her doctorate at the University of Missouri-Kansas City with a study that analyzed the data from the National Vietnam Veterans Readjustment Study, a landmark congressionally funded project that studied nearly 1,700 veterans. Her findings were stark: Troops who had killed - or believed they had killed - suffered significantly higher rates of PTSD than those who had not. "It is very clear that being shot at is traumatic, or losing your buddy is traumatic, but the act of shooting and killing another human being, something that goes against every instinct we have, is the biggest trauma of all," said MacNair, who calls this kind of PTSD "perpetration-induced traumatic stress." That hypothesis by MacNair, who is strongly critical of the military, is supported by history and by military experts. S.L.A. Marshall, one of the earlier official Army historians, estimated after studying World War II veterans that only 15 percent had fired their weapons during battle. He asserted from his interviews with soldiers that their failure in battle was because they were more afraid of killing than of being killed. Other studies show that even the most poorly treated prisoners of war had lower rates of PTSD than front-line soldiers because the prisoners no longer were in a position where they had to kill. How such findings translate to the Iraq war is clear. Unlike previous conflicts, where women rarely were pulling the triggers or running the weaponry that left enemies dead on the battlefield, they routinely are doing so in Iraq, as Lt. Col. Rael pointed out on that cold December day on the outskirts of Baghdad. On top of that they are being taken prisoner, as was Pvt. Jessica Lynch during the initial invasion; they, like their male counterparts, are being constantly mortared and ambushed by a guerrilla insurgency; and they are watching fellow troops go home grievously wounded or dead in numbers not seen since the war in Vietnam. "It all adds up," said MacNair, "but the act of having killed does seem to be the factor that tips the scales in favor of PTSD." Of the nearly 245,000 veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, almost 12,500 have been to VA counseling centers for readjustment problems and symptoms of PTSD. In addition, a study in The New England Journal of Medicine found that up to 17 percent of troops returning from Iraq were suffering from PTSD or other readjustment problems. So far no statistics have been released detailing how many of these patients are women, but numerous support groups have sprung up specifically for women with PTSD. In one Internet chat group, Sisters Bound by Honor, women struggling with PTSD talk with one another about their experiences. Yet the women who most need counseling to help them deal with what they witnessed in Iraq and Afghanistan - like their male counterparts - are the most unlikely to seek it. A Defense Department study of combat troops returning from Iraq found that soldiers and Marines deeply suffering from PTSD and readjustment problems were not likely to seek help because of the stigma such an act might carry. In the study, 1 in 6 veterans acknowledged symptoms of severe depression and PTSD, but 6 in 10 of those same veterans feared their commanders and fellow troops would treat them differently and lose confidence in them if they sought treatment for their problems. That seems especially true of women, who have fought for years to be assigned positions in the Army that once were off-limits to them. A number of female Iraq war veterans suffering from PTSD declined to be interviewed for this article. Still, former Army Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, who taught psychology at West Point and wrote the book "On Killing," which closely documented the link between killing and PTSD, believes the treatment of PTSD among the veterans of Iraq could be the most effective in combat history. Using an analogy to obesity, he said that after past wars, only those traumatized soldiers "who were 400 pounds overweight got attention or treatment." "But, now," Grossman said, "we are so sensitive to PTSD and its effects that we can notice the person who is the equivalent of just 20 or so pounds overweight, and we can help them then, long before they have the psychiatric equivalent of high blood pressure and heart attack." The study of female veterans suffering from PTSD may be just such a start. The study includes hundreds of women and aims, among other things, to discover which clinical treatments are most effective for women with the disorder. Half of the women will be treated through prolonged exposure therapy, in which each woman will be guided for 10 weeks through vivid remembering of the traumatic event or events until her emotional response decreases through "habituation." Schnurr, one of the study's directors, compares habituation to the way city dwellers grow immune over time to loud noises such as police sirens or car alarms. "The goal is that the memory of the traumatic event is no longer as startling, as terrifying, when it comes," she said. The other half of the women will be treated with what is known as "present-centered therapy," a treatment that focuses on helping a patient deal with her current life challenges rather than the memory of past traumas. "Both therapies are appropriate and helpful to some degree," Schnurr said, "but we expect that the prolonged exposure will be the most effective. If that is the case, I think we will begin using that treatment much more - and more effectively - in the years to come." Although the goal of the study is to determine which therapies work best for women suffering from PTSD, experts agree that if the study is conclusive it eventually may be applied to tens of thousands of Iraq war veterans, male and female alike. "It is our hope that we can find ways to help these women," Schnurr said. "But, more than that, we are hoping to draw some conclusions that can help us in the treatment of PTSD across the board. That means men and women, soldiers and Marines, those who are suffering for reasons having nothing to do with combat at all." -------- US military not conducting spy flights over Iran: Rumsfeld WASHINGTON (AFP) Mar 20, 2005 Agence France-Presse http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050320193525.hyitv9an.html US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on Sunday said he had never authorized sending reconnaisance planes over Iran to spy on the country's alleged nuclear program, contrary to Tehran's assertions. "I checked and I know we had no US aircraft doing what ... Iran was saying," Rumsfeld told ABC television's "This Week" program. "What investigations we've been able to undertake have suggested that the charge was false -- either intentionally or through ignorance, and that it may very well have been Iranian air activity in that country by elements of the government that were not coordinating with other elements of the Iranian government," the defense chief said. Rumsfeld was less categorical in his denial when pressed about whether he had ever authorized any US military overflights of Iran during his tenure as defense secretary. "I don't think I have, but I don't know. I'd have to check. And I don't know that I'd answer it if I did find out that we had, but I don't believe we have," he said. When asked whether any US intelligence agencies might have organized such flights, he responded: "I can't speak for intelligence agencies, but not to my knowledge." Rumsfeld also denied knowing about reports that Iran has protested to the United States about US surveillance flights on their territory and that that protest was forwarded to the Pentagon. "I don't know about the protest," he told ABC. Recent US news reports said 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. The reported spy flights have raised concerns about US military preparations for possible strikes on suspected Iranian nuclear weapons sites. US officials have refused to rule out a military option, but have indicated they are giving international diplomatic efforts a try first. -------- POLICE / PRISONERS / COURTS / JUSTICE -------- propaganda wars Blair was told US 'fixed' case for war March 20, 2005 - 1:54PM AFP / Sydney Morning Herald http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/Blair-was-told-US-fixed-case-for-war/2005/03/20/1111253870275.html?oneclick=true The head of Britain's foreign intelligence agency told the Prime Minister, Tony Blair, that the case for war in Iraq was being "fixed" by Washington to suit US policy, a BBC documentary will claim today. Richard Dearlove, head of MI6, briefed Blair and a group of ministers on the United States' determination to launch the invasion nine months before hostilities began in March 2003, the Sunday Times reported, citing the BBC program, which is due to be aired later in the day. After attending a briefing in Washington, he told the meeting that war was "inevitable", according to the newspaper. "The facts and intelligence" were being "fixed round the policy" by US President George Bush's administration, Dearlove said. The allegations against Blair just weeks before an expected general election are likely to reopen a feud between the Government and the British broadcaster. The two fell out last year over allegations by a BBC reporter that Britain "sexed up" the case for war. The documentary argues that Blair had signed up to follow Bush's plans for regime change in Iraq as early as April 2002, the Sunday Times said. Robin Cook, Britain's former foreign secretary who resigned as leader of the House of Commons over Iraq, claimed that the threat of weapons of mass destruction was not the prime minister's true reason for going to war. "What was propelling the prime minister was a determination that he would be the closest ally to George Bush and they would prove to the United States administration that Britain was their closest ally," Cook tells the program. "His problem is that George Bush's motivation was regime change. It was not disarmament. Tony Blair knew perfectly well what he was doing. "His problem was that he could not be honest about that with either the British people or Labour MPs, hence the stress on disarmament." The documentary, on BBC's Panorama, comes one day after tens of thousands of protesters marched through the centre of London demanding that Blair pull British troops out of Iraq and warning against any more "Bush wars". Meanwhile, Tony Blair faced another challenger in Britain's upcoming elections after the father of a military policeman killed in Iraq pledged to stand against him. Reg Keys, 52, said he would battle Blair in the prime minister's constituency of Sedgefield, northern England, as part of a campaign for justice after the death of his son, Tom, in June 2003. "This isn't a publicity stunt, it's a serious full blown political campaign to take the fight to Tony Blair's doorstep," Keys, who took part in a huge anti-war protest march in London today, told the domestic Press Association. "There will be crackpots standing as independents but I shouldn't be confused with them. I want to make him accountable for his actions in taking us to war," said Keys. The former paramedic from Wales said he would travel to Sedgefield on Monday. "I have got to be confident about this. My full intention is to remove Tony Blair from his seat in Sedgefield and I have to believe I can do that," he said. "It will be a David and Goliath fight, but Goliath was a Philistine and I think that word sums up my opponent." Keys' son Lance Corporal Tom, 20, was one of six military policemen killed by an Iraqi mob as they manned a small police station on June 24, 2003. The bereaved father told AFP at the London rally earlier today that he was demonstrating against government lies. "I stand here a betrayed man by my government who lied to me about the need to send my son to war," he said. Keys' challenge echoes a pledge by a former British spy to stand against Blair in his constituency. David Shayler has lambasted the Prime Minister for his "illegal invasion of Iraq". Shayler, who first made headlines in 1997 as a whistleblower after he disclosed secret MI5 documents to a British newspaper, said he would campaign for Blair's seat. Shayler told The Guardian newspaper yesterday that he would challenge Blair's credibility and ability to lead "in the light of his lies over the war". "If Blair were an American or French president, the electorate would have a chance to remove him from power," said Shayler. "As things stand in Britain's increasingly undemocratic society, only the people of Sedgefield have the opportunity to vote him out of power." The ex-secret agent, who was served time in prison for breaking the Official Secrets Act with his disclosure to the Mail on Sunday newspaper, said he would neither be representing the left nor the right. A general election is widely expected to be called for May 5. · A survey for the Sunday Times newspaper today revealed Labour had a five-point lead over the main opposition Conservative Party. The YouGov survey put Labour comfortably in the lead on 37 per cent of the vote, followed by the Conservatives with 32 per cent and the smaller Liberal Democrats on 23 per cent. -------- ACTIVISTS Vanunu defiant as Israel brings new charges March 20, 2005 Peter Hounam UK Times http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-1533566,00.html THE nuclear whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu reacted defiantly yesterday to criminal charges levelled by the Israeli authorities that could put him back in prison. He vowed to continue flouting orders that prohibit him from speaking to the foreign press because he believes that he has the right to freedom of speech. Speaking through an intermediary from the cathedral in Jerusalem where he has sought sanctuary, Vanunu said he had always believed that the orders were unconstitutional and had therefore decided to ignore them. “This is a human rights issue,” Vanunu said. “I want to work for world peace and the abolition of nuclear weapons. I want the human race to survive.” Vanunu worked as a technician at Israel’s nuclear weapons plant near the town of Dimona, but in 1986 he decided to expose its inner secrets to The Sunday Times. He was kidnapped by Israeli agents in Rome and smuggled home, where he stood trial for treason and espionage. His gruelling 18-year sentence ended last April but restrictions were immediately imposed on him, including bans on leaving the country and speaking to foreigners. He soon began to infuriate the authorities by openly meeting visitors from abroad, including the foreign media. Among 22 indictments filed last Thursday in the Jerusalem district court, Vanunu is accused of violating the restrictions by giving a joint interview to The Sunday Times and the BBC last May, although the interviewer was an Israeli. Another charge says that last July he told a British journalist that he had “photographed a model of a neutron bomb and said he believed Israel had developed a hydrogen bomb”. This is presented in the charge as a revelation, but the Sunday Times articles in 1986 included Vanunu’s photographs of models of these types of weapon with explanatory details. Another indictment said Vanunu had told the Sky television journalist Adam Boulton last December that he was “deliberately violating the restrictions imposed on him in order to make his case”. In another charge Vanunu has been accused of attempting to leave Israel. The incident dates from Christmas Eve when he took a taxi to the West Bank town of Bethlehem with the aim of attending a carol service at the Church of the Nativity. Michael Sfard, one of Vanunu’s lawyers, said: “Vanunu has fully served his sentence for what he did. Now the authorities seem to be trying to punish him all over again.” Yael Lotan, a leading Israeli civil rights campaigner, said that the authorities were seeking to keep Vanunu permanently under their control: “The restrictions on him last year were due to expire in four weeks’ time. Now they can keep him in this country indefinitely. It makes me ashamed to be an Israeli.” John Witherow, editor of The Sunday Times, said: “When we interviewed Vanunu last year we made sure the interview was conducted by an Israeli in compliance with the restrictions. He said nothing new about the Israeli nuclear programme because he knows nothing more. This newspaper published everything in 1986.” BEIRUT BOMB FUELS CRISIS The pro-Syrian president of Lebanon, Emile Lahoud, called for cross-party talks after a car bomb injured nine people in a Christian suburb of Beirut yesterday morning, raising fears of a return to sectarian violence, writes Tom Walker. His appeal failed to halt a spiralling political crisis, however, with Walid Jumblatt, the Druze leader and opposition figurehead, insisting he would not join a new government as long as Lahoud remained in office. The opposition wants a neutral cabinet to make arrangements for elections due in May. It is also demanding the resignation of security chiefs linked to Syria and an international investigation into the assassination of Rafik Hariri, the former prime minister, killed by a bomb on February 14. Lahoud said Lebanon was experiencing “exceptional circumstances” that required “immediate and direct dialogue”. “The doors of the presidential palace will be open at any time to host such a meeting,” he added. -------- Thousands March Against Iraq War Fewer Turn Out for Rallies Than in 2003 By Janelle Stecklein Associated Press Sunday, March 20, 2005; Page A12 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A50250-2005Mar19?language=printer LONDON, March 19 -- Tens of thousands of antiwar protesters demonstrated across Europe on Saturday to mark the second anniversary of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq. In London, the site of perhaps the largest protest, 45,000 people marched from Hyde Park past the U.S. Embassy. In Istanbul, about 15,000 people protested against the U.S. presence in Iraq. But the rallies were nowhere near as big as those in February 2003, just before the war began, when millions marched in cities around the world to urge President Bush and his allies not to attack Iraq. With international forces still facing violent opposition in Iraq, protesters were divided about what to demand from leaders. While some wanted a full troop withdrawal, others argued that it would leave Iraqis in a worse position than before the invasion. "We got the Iraqis into this mess, we need to help them out of it," said Kit MacLean, 29, waiting near Hyde Park's Speaker's Corner before the London march began. Police estimated about 45,000 demonstrators marched from the park past the U.S. Embassy and on to Trafalgar Square. Some protesters worried Bush might be planning another war in the Middle East or elsewhere. "After Iraq -- Iran? Syria? Cuba?" read one placard. "Stop This Man," said another, alongside a picture showing Bush with devil's horns. One man carried fake bombs with American flags painted on them, and a dartboard map of the world showed a U.S. missile sticking out of Iraq. Security was heavy as the demonstrators moved past the U.S. Embassy. Cement barricades and metal fences blocked the building, as they have since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in New York and the Pentagon. Two former British soldiers placed a cardboard coffin bearing the words "100,000 dead" outside the embassy. "George Bush, Uncle Sam, Iraq will be your Vietnam," marchers chanted. In the southern Turkish city of Adana, home to a military base used by U.S. forces, protesters laid a black wreath in front of the U.S. consulate to protest the war, the Anatolia news agency reported. In Athens, about 3,000 protesters brought the city center to a standstill for three hours and painted outlines of bodies outside the U.S. Embassy. Hundreds also turned out in Sweden and Norway. "I think it's important to show that we still care about this," said Linn Majuri, 15, a member of the environmental organization Green Youth in Stockholm. "People have become apathetic about this, it's no longer something they walk around thinking about every day." With music and banners, marchers in Rome demanded the withdrawal of Italian troops from Iraq. "Iraq to the Iraqis!" read one banner. Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi said this week that he intended to begin withdrawing Italian troops in September. ---- Iraq Protest Targets US Embassy in New Zealand 20/03/2005 NewstalkZB http://xtramsn.co.nz/news/0,,11964-4213488,00.html Two women have begun a fast outside the US Embassy in Wellington to show their solidarity with the people of Iraq. Hana Plant and Emma Wills were part of a 150-strong demonstration in the capital on Saturday. Twenty protestors have pitched their tents on the lawn nearby. Hana Plant is the woman who bared her breasts at Prince Charles. Emma Wills was recently arrested at a protest over Wellington's inner city bypass. They say their hunger strike will last until tomorrow. Wills, a 20-year-old political science student, says they are fasting in support of victims of US imperialism everywhere. She is condemning what she calls an appalling situation when police made three arrests at a protest at the ANZ Bank in Auckland yesterday. She says police violently silenced a legitimate protest. Around 300 protesters took to the streets of Auckland yesterday to mark the two-year anniversary of the launch invasion of Iraq. It began on March 20, 2003. Yesterday was an International Day of Action organised by the World Social Forum. Workers Against the War on Terror spokesman Dave Bedggood says the war on Iraq still rankles with many, but especially young people. He says three protesters were arrested after arguments with the police and members of the public outside the ANZ Bank in Victoria Street. He says they targeted the ANZ, because they say it is part of a consortium financing Iraq's trade. He says they believe the bank is complicit with the continued occupation. Protestors also gathered outside the US Embassy in Auckland, and smaller protests were held in several places in the inner city. Police say despite the arrests, they are describing the protests as largely incident-free. The protestors dispersed shortly after midday. ---- Tasmanian protesters rally against Iraq war Sunday, 20 March 2005 Australian Broadcasting http://www.abc.net.au/news/items/200503/1327390.htm?tasmania About 200 people gathered in Hobart yesterday to protest against Australia's continuing military involvement in Iraq. It is two years since large anti-war rallies were held around the country marking the beginning of the war. Tasmania's Peace Coalition organised yesterday's event, which coincided with similar rallies around the world this weekend. Tasmanian Greens leader Peg Putt told the crowd she was concerned more Australian troops would be sent to Iraq as some European countries pull their forces out. "Like the Vietnam War, we are faced with the prospect of a creeping increase of troops in Iraq, dragging us further and further into the conflict that is fuelled by the presence of foreign troops," she said. ---- Anniversary marked by protests 2 years after invasion of Iraq, war's opponents take to streets Rona Marech, Jason B. Johnson and Ryan Kim, San Francisco Chronicle Staff Writers Sunday, March 20, 2005 http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/03/20/PROTEST.TMP Several thousand anti-war protesters chanted slogans and carried signs in a high-spirited, mostly peaceful march Saturday in San Francisco to mark the second anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq. The march from Dolores Park to Civic Center Plaza was one of dozens of protests around the world, from Los Angeles to New York, London and Istanbul. The San Francisco march drew protesters from throughout Northern California who carried mock coffins draped in American flags, images of maimed Iraqi children and umbrellas with peace signs. Drummers marched alongside protesters with signs bearing messages such as "Un-happy Anniversary USA," "Impeach Bush" and "military recruiters lie, our children die." "It's clear that the American public doesn't support this war," said David Mandel, 53, a lawyer from Sacramento. "As far as I'm concerned, there's an undercurrent of real dissatisfaction that hasn't found an outlet." Though some participants fretted that the threat of rain had deterred would-be marchers, others were pleased with the size of the crowd, which snarled city traffic and at times stretched for about 15 blocks. Police did not give a crowd estimate. If the crowd seemed smaller than those at the large protests that occurred at the start of the war, it's because the progressive movement has splintered, Mandel said. "There are lots of small groups involved in their own issues, many of which are important and good, but it feels like there's a lack of overall cohesiveness in uniting for the overall issue of stopping an extremely right-wing government," he said. Ruth Antwerp of Ukiah wore a George W. Bush mask and carried a large "to-do" list. It read: "1. Let 9/11 happen. 2. Devastate Iraq. 3. Destroy Social Security." The first two items had big red check marks next to them. "I'm doing everything I know to do to change my country's foreign policy," Antwerp said. "It's just a small part of what I can do to resist and protest." One group wore masks depicting President Bush, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and danced around a protester dressed to look like a hooded Iraqi prisoner from the now-famous photos of abuse at the Abu Ghraib prison. Another large display had nearly 30 panels covered with the names and photographs of U.S. soldiers and the names and faceless images of Iraqi civilians who have died in the war. About 1,500 U.S. troops and more than 16,000 Iraqis have died in the conflict. Just after the war began in 2003, hundreds of activists were arrested during protests in San Francisco, the site of some of the country's largest and angriest rallies. By contrast, Saturday's protest was mostly peaceful, but late in the afternoon police arrested eight people who were blocking an intersection during a short-lived breakaway march. In New York City, hundreds listened to antiwar speeches at the United Nations, then marched across Manhattan to Times Square. Other contingents gathered at military recruiting stations and demanded that U.S. troops return home. In Los Angeles, 1,500 marched through Hollywood, and in Chicago hundreds of police escorted a thousand protesters as they marched to an afternoon rally at the Federal Plaza there. Demonstrators also gathered in Istanbul, Athens, Stockholm and Rome, as well as in Norway and Poland. At least 45,000 people marched from London's Hyde Park to Trafalgar Square. In San Francisco, a crowd began amassing in Dolores Park around 11 a.m. and headed down 18th Street at noon. Protesters curled through the Mission District and began streaming into Civic Center Plaza to hear speakers shortly after 1 p.m. The park walkways were lined with booths selling peace pendants, pins and T-shirts and promoting various causes. Rebecca Lam, 20, was part of a contingent of 45 immigrants with Asian Immigrant Women Advocates in Oakland. "We want the troops to come home," said Lam, a sophomore at UC Berkeley. "We miss our families. We miss our friends. There's no point being there." Erin Thomas, 31, a firefighter, was driving home from his overnight shift when he came across the marchers heading down Market Street. Unable to proceed, he parked his Audi, leaned against it and watched the noisy crowd parade by. "I though about being annoyed for a second, then I thought I can't be annoyed. This is great," he said. "I wish it would go on for hours. "This city can be looked down on for being so left-wing, and that's unfortunate," he said. People here just aren't as afraid as they are in the rest of the country." At the Civic Center, a couple of dozen people showed up to protest the protesters. The group, which included backers of Bush's foreign policy and a contingent of pro-Israeli demonstrators, gathered in front of City Hall, where they were separated from the rest of the crowd by a line of police officers. Lucia Vandenhof, a San Francisco State student, carried a sign that read "Liberals need to stop bitching! Get a life!!" "I'm here to support the war," said Vandenhof, 21."I think we need to show there's another viewpoint in San Francisco other than the liberal ideology that has a stranglehold on the area.," Just before 3 p.m., some 200 to 300 protesters, some with bandanas covering their faces, broke away from the main group and ran into the streets, circling the area of Market and Van Ness Avenue. Chanting "Whose streets? Our streets?" and "Build the community, smash the state," the group beat on doors and, at times, blocked traffic. On Duboce Avenue, they overturned kitchen equipment that was being delivered to a restaurant and rolled some metal carts in the way of police. Police had corralled them at 14th and Valencia streets when seven men and one woman sat in the intersection, linking arms. At about 4 p.m., they were arrested on charges including obstructing a roadway and were taken in police vans to the Hall of Justice. Chronicle news services contributed to this report. ---- Contentious Anniversary War Protesters March Beth Shayne, March 20, 2005 WILX http://www.wilx.com/news/headlines/1383572.html Two years ago March 19, the U.S. government and its coalition forces began the war in Iraq. It's a date those opposed to that war use as an international day of action. Activists say there were 24 such protests in Michigan on Saturday, over 700 nationwide. The Jackson Interfaith Peacekeepers met in downtown Jackson. They admit they usually wear an anti-war political agenda on their sleeves, but on this anniversary, their protest was more funeral march then demonstration. They carried signs to note the 1,500 Americans dead, and recited the names of each Michigan soldier in a vigil ceremony. "It's terrible when it's some one else's son, but when it's mine...," Marjorie Mackinder said of her fears for her grandson who served, explaining her role in the event. In Lansing, over 100 convened on the Capitol to voice protest. They spoke about the costs of the war, and the international pressure against the U.S. as a result of it. They caravaned in cars and bikes to Michigan State University, and met again with students and faculty to hear speakers. ---- Iraq War Opponents Stage Protest Near Fort Bragg N.C. Demonstration Is Largest of 800 Held Across the U.S. to Mark 2nd Anniversary of Conflict By Jonathan Finer Washington Post Staff Writer Sunday, March 20, 2005; Page A13 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A50251-2005Mar19?language=printer FAYETTEVILLE, N.C., March 19 -- Here at the heart of one of the nation's most deeply rooted military communities, nearly 3,000 peace activists, war veterans and their family members gathered Saturday to call for an end to the Iraq conflict on the second anniversary of the day it began. They marched beating drums and chanting slogans through quiet suburban streets to a wooded park a few miles from Fort Bragg, which is home to the Army's 82nd Airborne Division and the U.S. Special Operations Command. Among the dozens of speakers who declared their opposition to the war, the loudest applause and only standing ovation were for Michael Hoffman, who served as a Marine artilleryman during the invasion of Iraq and who last July founded a group called Iraq Veterans Against the War. "Two years ago today, many of us standing on this stage were ready to wage destruction on Iraq," said Hoffman, 25, wearing the top of his desert camouflage uniform and a pin that said: "Bush lied." "We know that the only solution to the problem that we have created is to end the occupation now," he said. Smaller rallies were held in cities and towns across the country -- a total of about 800 in all 50 states, according to the group United for Peace and Justice, which helps coordinate antiwar activities. In New York, police made more than 30 arrests as a few hundred people gathered for speeches near the United Nations, then marched to Times Square, the Associated Press reported. In Fayetteville, home to a small but entrenched peace activist community, organizers said the protest was the largest gathering of any kind since 1970, when a few thousand antiwar activists converged in the same park to protest the Vietnam War. The protest leaders -- including representatives of several of the most prominent antiwar groups to emerge since the Iraq conflict began -- said they selected this town along the Cape Fear River because so many of its approximately 125,000 citizens have personally felt the impact of the ongoing conflict. More than 10,000 soldiers from Fort Bragg are serving in Iraq or Afghanistan, and since 2002, about 80 service personnel with ties to the region or its bases have been killed, according to the Fayetteville Observer. "It was important to come here because there is hardly a single family in Fayetteville that does not have some connection to the military," said Lou Plummer, a local activist and veteran of the North Carolina National Guard. "When you're at church, when you're in the grocery store, when you visit your children at school, there will be someone there who is on active duty, or with a family member on active duty, or a veteran of the military." Plummer's son Drew was discharged from the Navy after deserting his unit last year. On Saturday afternoon, both men addressed the crowd, which the Fayetteville Police Department estimated at more than 2,800 people. Across the street were a few dozen demonstrators who objected to the antiwar protest. Some were members of local military families, while others said they had traveled to Fayetteville as part of a group organized by the conservative group Free Republic through its Web site. "You're traitors to our country. Go home! You don't belong in Fayetteville," shouted Tammy Harris, who waved a small American flag, as did her four children, as the demonstrators marched past. Chris Dodds, 36, an Army veteran who lives just outside of town, held a sign that said "Protest policy in D.C. -- Support the military in Fayetteville." "All we are here are families, and they should be supported. There's no policy being made here. They should take the protests somewhere else," Dodds said. Despite a heavy police presence and testy exchanges between the two groups, no arrests had been made as of late Saturday afternoon. The speeches began when the procession reached Rowan Street Park just after midday. Pat Elder, an antiwar activist from Bethesda, laid out 100 cardboard coffins draped in U.S. flags to symbolize the war dead. Another organization distributed dozens of "peace parasols," black umbrellas adorned with painted messages. Earlier, costumed puppeteers danced to drumbeats in a dramatic interpretation of the Pablo Picasso painting, "Guernica," which depicts the Spanish Civil War. Celeste Zappala, 58, of Philadelphia wore a sandwich board with a large photograph of her son, Sherwood Baker, a Pennsylvania National Guard sergeant who was killed in an explosion in Baghdad last April. A co-founder of the group Gold Star Families for Peace, composed of family members of service members killed in Iraq, Zappala said the rallies force the public to pay attention to the human cost of the conflict. "It's really important for people to understand that those who lost children and spouses are devastated, and you can't just turn off the war when you turn off the television," she said. The others who spoke included Daniel Berg, the father of Nicholas Berg, a civilian contractor who was kidnapped and beheaded in Iraq last year, and Camilo Mejia, a deserter who turned himself in to military authorities last March. He said he had served nine months in the brig at Fort Sill in Oklahoma and was discharged last month. Many speakers directed their remarks to soldiers still serving in the military. "There is nothing more important today than building links and giving aid and comfort to the members of the armed forces who are turning against the war in greater numbers," said Thomas Barton, a union organizer from New York and the editor of GI Special, an antiwar e-mail bulletin. "The rebellion in the armed forces of the United States will stop the war," he said. Joshua Despain, who said he deserted his Army unit soon after it returned from Iraq last April, drove 11 hours from Panama City, Fla., to be at the rally. He was discharged from the 82nd Airborne and now works as a security guard. "Basically, after a while, I didn't buy any of it," said Despain, 23, who wore jeans, his uniform top and a red military beret. "I saw the Iraqi people as no threat and couldn't see why people were getting killed for this. I wanted to share what I had been through with the others." Asked for a reaction, Maj. Rich Patterson, spokesman for the XVIII Airborne Corps and Fort Bragg, said: "Some of our fellow citizens are concerned over the conflict in Iraq , and it is important that they be able to peacefully express that concern." ---- For group, rally was just a 'peace train' away BY REBECCA O'HALLORAN NEWSDAY STAFF WRITER March 20, 2005 http://www.newsday.com/news/printedition/longisland/ny-liside204183798mar20,0,3171183.story?coll=ny-linews-print They marched for different personal reasons, but to support the same cause. Yesterday, 22 Stony Brook University students and members of the surrounding community rode what they called a "peace train" into Manhattan to join the anti-war protest. Stony Brook's Social Justice Alliance, a campus group formed after Sept. 11, 2001, organized the gathering. The group traveled from the Stony Brook Long Island Rail Road station to Harlem, where they met up with thousands of fellow protesters marking the second anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq. "I think this is the only way we can voice our opinions at this stage," said SJA member Chris Casucci, a sophomore at the university. "[We are] the next generation of leaders." Since the war in Iraq began two years ago, many of the participants have protested in different ways, such as through lectures and demonstrations. "We're putting so much into this because it's innocent Iraqi civilians who are being killed," said Matt Hegedus, who does outreach programs with the university. Once the group arrived at Harlem's Marcus Garvey Park, the students gathered with fellow protesters around the stage. After listening to speakers at the rally, the protesters walked through barricaded streets down to Central Park. Hegedus said the march began in Harlem because it is an area heavily recruited by the military. "They're not just going into the schools, they're going into economically poorer schools," he said of the recruiters. "This is what the anti-war movement refers to as the 'poverty draft.'" Even as the cry of "Bush Lies!" was being chanted by protesters, the students debated issues, such as whether there should be a draft, as they marched. Some of the group's members have marched all over the world; others have traveled overseas and have returned to America with the goal of spreading the other countries' perspective here. "I consider myself to be a citizen of the world," said Jon Meltzer, a Stony Brook student who has traveled extensively throughout Asia. "I have a responsibility." One professor, Thomas Muench, who teaches economics, accompanied the group to the march. "It's important to see everybody here," he said. "Everybody's going to suffer [from the war's effects]." In Garden City yesterday, a separate and smaller gathering drew about 200 anti-war protesters. "We just decided we wanted to be a presence on Long Island," said Megan O'Handley, director of the Long Island Alliance for Peaceful Alternatives, which organized the demonstration. "A lot of Long Islanders and a lot of people from all over are starting to question the war." ---- Be Proud of What You've Achieved by John Pilger, March 20, 2005 published in March 22, 2005 Antiwar.com http://www.antiwar.com/orig/pilger.php?articleid=5283 The following speech was delivered at an antiwar rally in Sydney's Hyde Park, March 20, 2005. The other day, the Aboriginal filmmaker Richard Frankland said this: "When you've got a voice, you've got freedom, and when you've got freedom, you've got responsibility. Negotiating with politicians doesn't work. You've got to change attitudes." That's the task for all of us here today. It's not an easy one. In fact, many good people in Australia and other countries believe their voice cannot possibly be heard: that the forces of bigotry and violence are far too powerful. And yes, they are powerful. John Howard can lie repeatedly to the Australian people and get away with it – it seems. There is no Labor opposition in federal parliament. They've become a bad joke, to the point where Kevin Rudd, the opposition spokesman on foreign affairs, refuses to say anything critical of the government that is not immersed in crude sophistry. We also know that those who are paid to keep the record straight, who are meant to challenge Howard's lies and uphold our right to freedom of speech, a freedom that is a cornerstone of any true democracy – I refer of course to the media: journalists, broadcasters – we know where they stand. We know that, apart from a few honorable exceptions, they are not merely craven and silent, but occupy a place in this society not dissimilar to the media in the Stalinist regimes of Eastern Europe. Throughout my career I have reported, often undercover, from countries ruled by repressive regimes where dissidents would read me reports in the press that were no more servile and false than the reporting you read every day in the Murdoch papers in this country. In Eastern European states, for example, the papers had tame correspondents in Moscow who would parrot the Kremlin line. Now read the Washington correspondent of the Sydney Morning Herald, Michael Gawenda, and there is no difference. The same parroting of Bush's dangerous absurdities, such as his claims of bringing democracy to the Middle East – when the very opposite is true. Considering this, we might ask: Is there no shame? Is there no shame that, in its annual review of press freedom three years ago, the international media monitoring organization, Reporters Without Borders, placed Australia 41st in the world. Countries with greater press freedom were the following: Lithuania, Bosnia, El Salvador, the Dominican Republic, Bulgaria, Hong Kong. All these countries have either been run by dictatorships, or racked by war or by civil upheaval; yet in 2002 they had greater press freedom than Australia, which was just ahead of autocracies. None of this, or the reasons why, are ever mentioned at the numerous back-scratching awards ceremonies so beloved by the Australian media. Honorable exceptions aside, supine journalists, like cynical opposition politicians, like corporate academics, represent unaccountable, violent power and a corrupt democracy that today offers us no more choice that between a McDonald's and a Hungry Jack's. But they do not represent us. And they don't speak for us. And they don't speak for humanity. And they don't speak for democracy. And they don't speak for all the moral decencies by which most people live their lives. In fact, they speak for the very opposite. I may have first understood this when I reported from repressive Czechoslovakia, with its Stalinist regime, in the 1970s. The dissenters who spoke out in that country seemed so few, yet I wondered why the regime went to such lengths to silence them and attack them and sneer at them, usually via the state press. I put this question to the great protest singer Marta Kubisova, whose thrilling voice sang the anthems of the Prague Spring in 1968. Meeting me in secret, she replied by reading to me the words of one of her most defiant songs, written by a banned Czech group called the Plastic People of the Universe. I have abridged it slightly. "They are afraid of the old for their memory, They are afraid of the young for their innocence They afraid of the graves of their victims in faraway places They are afraid of history. They are afraid of freedom. They are afraid of truth. They are afraid of democracy. So why the hell are we afraid of them? ... For they are afraid of us." What all of you should remember on this second anniversary of the brutal assault on Iraq is that you are not alone: that you are part of a great worldwide movement that refuses to accept the dangers and moral indecencies of Bush and Blair and Howard. Yesterday, all over the world, people like you expressed their defiance and anger at the unprovoked attack on Iraq, a defenseless country, and the killing of more than 100,000 people and the theft of their resources and the poisoning of their land: all of it justified by demonstrable lies. Go back to a speech John Howard made early in February 2003. He spoke for 53 minutes and lied about weapons of mass destruction at least 20 times: 20 lies in less than an hour. Even Bush and Blair would have trouble topping that. Then he sent Australian troops off to take part in an invasion, which, under the universally acknowledged and respected terms of the Nuremberg judgment in 1946, the cornerstone of international law, was "a paramount war crime." That's not my rhetoric, nor is it agit-prop. It's the law of civilized people. And it's our job to help people understand the great crime committed in their name, and how those who claim to speak for us, such as the media, have normalized the unthinkable: as if no crime has been committed, as if thousands of people have not been murdered, as if it was all merely a respectable adjustment of the "world order." My point is, they are not respectable; they may wear the suits of respectability and travel with their fawning courts, but they are prima facie criminals, be assured. The other day, an ABC [Australian Broadcasting Corporation] foreign correspondent was promoting his book of professional adventures in a Sydney bookshop. He told his audience that it was good to be back in a country where politicians at least didn't kill each other. That's true, but what he didn't say was that the same politicians collude in the killing of men, women, and children in other countries: in Fallujah, where the truth remains unreported in the so-called mainstream media in this country – including the ABC, which has allowed itself to be intimidated by the Howard government for giving us, now and then, a glimpse of the truth about Bush's criminal assault on Iraq. The time is long overdue. That time is for journalists to break ranks and speak up. It's time for teachers to write on their blackboards that great truism of Milan Kundera: "The struggle of people against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting." It's time for those who know the dangers, but who say nothing – academics, lawyers, union leaders, even members of Parliament – to break their silence before their own privileges are undermined by the steady assault on centuries-old, hard-won civil rights, vividly expressed in the abandonment of Australians tortured in other countries by their government and the locking up of people in this country indefinitely: indeed, the erosion of the bedrock of our justice system: innocent until proven guilty. Above all, never forget how important and right you are. It is you, in company with millions all over the world, who have taught again the great lesson of democracy. You didn't stop the invasion of Iraq, but you and the millions like you, in Spain and Britain and France and Italy and Brazil and the United States, have alerted the world to the true darkness of the regime in Washington and its collaborators. Never in my lifetime as a journalist have I known ordinary people all over the world to be more aware of the dangers and the issues that face us. Many can't be with us today; but their support is, I believe, a presence. Think back to the popular movement, much of it led by women, that prevented conscription being introduced in Australia during the First World War. Those campaigners also felt rather isolated at times; but they weren't: they were the voice of what was right. Had it not been for you and your movement, I believe Iran and North Korea would have been attacked by now, and in the case of North Korea, nuclear weapons might have been used. Be proud of these achievements: be proud that the seedy, violent power of Bush and Blair and Howard has been exposed by you and that behind their bravado, they are afraid of you, and of the millions like you, so, in the words of the song, why the hell should we be afraid of them? ---- Activists protest Iraq war on anniversary 3/20/2005, 4:44 a.m. CT By SAM DOLNICK The Associated Press http://www.nola.com/newsflash/national/index.ssf?/base/national-41/111127892115190.xml&storylist=national NEW YORK (AP) — Anti-war activists marched in the streets of American cities big and small Saturday, stopping traffic and lying down alongside flag-draped cardboard coffins to mark the second anniversary of the start of the war in Iraq. Some of the demonstrators were arrested in New York as they demanded that U.S. troops be brought home. "This country was founded by acts of civil disobedience," said David McReynolds, 75, of New York, as he marched along 42nd Street. "We have an obligation to make our resistance public and to say as clearly as we can that the war is illegal." In San Francisco, hundreds of protesters rallied in Dolores Park in the city's Mission district, holding up posters with photographs of dead American soldiers. The protesters then marched to City Hall for another rally. One protester dressed up like the hooded Iraqi prisoner in the famous photo taken of detainee abuse at Baghdad's Abu Ghraib prison. The woman was surrounded by others wearing masks of President Bush, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who were dancing to the song "Shout" by the Isley Brothers. "This is a war of aggression," said Ed McManus, 54, a Vietnam War veteran. "Bush has admitted by his actions and his deeds that he is a war criminal." Organizers encouraged civility at rallies in the city, where protests just after the war began were among the most vocal and angry in the country, with thousands of arrests and frequent conflicts between police and demonstrators. Police wearing helmets and armed with batons lined the streets Saturday, but they reported no disturbances. Across Europe, tens of thousands of protesters also packed streets and public parks to protest the war. In England, 45,000 people marched from London's Hyde Park past the American Embassy to Trafalgar Square, while an estimated 15,000 people — some carrying signs reading "Murderer Bush, get out" — marched in Turkey. Hundreds in New York listened to anti-war speeches at the United Nations, then marched along 42nd Street to Times Square, where police penned them in on a sidewalk. A small contingent of protesters then knelt in front of a military recruiting station and lay down on Broadway next to the flag-draped coffins. Traffic was stopped for about five minutes before police moved in and arrested 27 protesters. "It's such a small act in light of over 100,000 Iraqis dead and 1,500 American soldiers dead," Anna Brown, 40, of Jersey City, N.J., said before she was arrested. An anti-war rally organized in part by veterans and military families drew about 3,000 people to a park near Fort Bragg, N.C. — home to more than 40,000 soldiers. Demonstrators said they hoped it would build pressure to bring troops home. "I can't remain silent on these issues, slap a yellow ribbon on my car and call it supporting our troops," said Kara Hollingsworth, the wife of a soldier serving his second tour of duty in Iraq. "I support our troops by making sure they are not put in harm's way unless absolutely necessary." In Chicago, hundreds of police, some in riot gear, escorted about a thousand marchers down Dearborn Avenue to an afternoon rally at the Federal Plaza. Police were trying to avoid a repeat of two years ago when thousands of protesters caused a huge traffic jam during rush hour and hundreds were arrested. Only two arrests were reported Saturday. More than 1,000 people also marched through Pittsburgh, including many who initially supported the war but have since changed their minds, said Tim Vining, a protest organizer. "I think people realize the tide is turning" and that to protest isn't seen as unpatriotic, he said. In the small town of Cottage Grove, Ore., just south of Eugene, about 230 protesters walked two-by-two through the streets, some holding a half-mile-long chain of flags bearing the names of American troops and Iraqi children killed during the war. "The best thing we can do is get out, and get out as fast as we can," said Ron Betts, 58, a disabled Vietnam veteran. About 300 demonstrators also gathered in front of the New Mexico National Guard Armory in Albuquerque, where pieces of paper featuring the names and faces of dead American soldiers were glued to the sidewalk. "That's a whole tsunami worth of people, vanished," said Maureen Small, an Albuquerque physician. Associated Press writers Justin M. Norton in San Francisco, Dan Nephin in Pittsburgh, Peter Barnes in Albuquerque, Valerie Bauman in Fayetteville, N.C., and Niki Sullivan in Cottage Grove, Ore., contributed to this report. ---- Last Century's Nuclear Nightmare Has No Place in Today's World MARCH 21, 2005 Common Dreams (by Greenpeace) http://www.commondreams.org/news2005/0321-01.htm PARIS, FRANCE -- March 21 -- Twenty Greenpeace activists this morning blocked the entrance of the French Ministry of Economics, Finance and Industry, where the international conference of the International Atomic Energy Agency 'Nuclear in the 21st century' is being held through tomorrow. Activists unfurled a large banner that read: 'nuclear free future'. The environmental organisation wants to highlight that nuclear power is expensive, dangerous and proliferates nuclear weapons. It is counter-productive to combat climate change, and everyone genuinely concerned about the environment should reject it. "The simple truth about 'civil' reactors is that one single reactor generates enough plutonium for 30 bombs every year it operates" said Jan van de Putte of Greenpeace International. "Any country with a nuclear reactor is thus able to build nuclear weapons if it has the political will to do so. Those promoting the benefits of nuclear power for the new century are in the same dangerous mindset that created the nuclear nightmare of the last one. We cannot allow them to make same mistakes all over again, its time to move on to real energy security through renewables and massive efficiency," (1). The most imminent threat caused by today's nuclear power sector is the proliferation of nuclear weapons. The UN's High Level Expert Group on Threats stated in December last year that 'We are approaching a (...) cascade of proliferation' (2). The historical role of the IAEA in promoting nuclear projects all over the world has been a key factor in the increased threat of nuclear proliferation. The proliferation and security threat is highlighted by the imminent sea shipment expected in the next 24 hours of a cargo of weapons-grade plutonium MOX from France to the United States. (3) Wind power has already taken the lead and is nowadays far cheaper than nuclear: For the same investment, wind generates twice as much electricity and offers twice as much jobs (4). No surprise it is a booming industry. Over the last years, more than 6,000 MWs have been installed every year in Europe, the equivalent of 2-3 large nuclear power plants. Meanwhile, only one reactor has been built over the last 6 years, and it will take at least another 5 years to build the next one in Finland. "Wasting money on expensive, inefficient and dangerous nuclear power is counter-productive to combat climate change and should be rejected by anyone genuinely concerned about the environment." said Helen Gassin of Greenpeace France. All twenty activists involved in today's protest have been arrested. Notes to Editor: (1) Regarding the IAEA, the conversion time needed to produce plutonium metal for weapons-use from spent fuel is estimated at 1-3months. (1) IAEA, IAEA safeguards Glossary, IAEA/SG/INF/1 (Vienna, IAEA, 1980) p.21. 2) http://www.un.org/secureworld/ (3) see www.stop-plutonium.org for further details. (4) "Eole ou Pluton?" (Wind vs Nuke), A. Bonduelle and M. Lefevre, december 2003 (http://www.greenpeace.org/france_fr/multimedia/download/1/359529/0/Eole_ou_Pluton_VF.pdf)