NucNews - July 27, 2005 -------- NUCLEAR -------- accidents and safety Groups to study VY radiation emissions By CAROLYN LORIé Brattleboro Reformer Staff Wednesday, July 27, 2005 http://www.reformer.com/Stories/0,1413,102~8860~2983201,00.html BRATTLEBORO -- At the behest of local organizations, the Radiation and Public Health Project will be examining the levels of Strontium-90 in baby teeth belonging to children living within a 50-mile radius of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear reactor in Vernon. Strontium-90 is one of the many radioactive byproducts of nuclear fission believed to cause cancer. Its release from power plants is monitored by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The project is being organized by the Citizens Awareness Network and Traprock Peace Center of Deerfield, Mass., with financial support from the New England Coalition. All three groups oppose nuclear power and have been active in efforts to shut down Vermont Yankee. At a press conference on Tuesday, Agnes Reynolds, a registered nurse and a research associate with the Radiation and Public Health Project, announced preliminary results of the study. Since December 2004, 26 baby teeth have been collected from counties all over Vermont and New Hampshire. Nine of those teeth belonged to children living in Windham County or Cheshire County in New Hampshire, while 17 where from elsewhere. According to Reynolds, the teeth from Windham and Cheshire counties showed levels of Strontium-90 that were 61 percent higher than the others. Because the sample was so small, Reynolds said the early findings are not statistically significant. The project hopes to collect at least 100 teeth from Vermont, Massachusetts and New Hampshire. Baby teeth would have the highest concentration of the radioactive isotope, as not enough time has passed for it to decay. Strontium-90 has a half-life of about 28 years. It can be carried in wind and rain and enters the body through contaminated food and cow's milk. Once in the body, it mimics calcium and gets deposited in bones and teeth. The Radiation and Public Health Project is a New York based non-profit founded by scientists and physicians. The group has been collecting baby teeth from around the country since 1998, the majority of them from children living near nuclear power plants. More than 4,400 teeth have been tested for Strontium-90 levels. According to the project's Web site, baby teeth belonging to children living within 100 miles of a nuclear power plant have significantly higher levels and that the overall levels have been climbing throughout the country since the 1980s. Those findings, however, have been disputed. In July, 2004, the Nuclear Energy Institute, a Washington, D.C.-based policy organization for the nuclear industry, issued a report claiming that Strontium-90 releases from power plants are so low they can hardly be detected. The radioactive isotope is present in the environment, the group claims, because of nuclear bomb tests carried out during the Cold War. Information posted at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Web site, supports that claim. The federal regulator also states that the second largest release of Strontium-90 occurred during the 1986 accident at the Chernobyl nuclear reactor in the Ukraine, which could also account for elevated levels found in baby teeth since then. Robert Stirewalt, public information officer at the Vermont Department of Health, said department staff were reviewing material from the Radiation and Public Health Project and would state their position today. Tuesday's press conference was attended by state Sens. Roderick Gander, D-Windham, and Jeanette White, D-Windham, and Rep. Steve Darrow, D-Putney. White said she hoped the Department of Health would at least help get the word out about the study, through its various state-wide programs. --- Entergy, NRC slam teeth study July 27, 2005 By Susan Smallheer Rutland Herald Staff http://www.rutlandherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050727/NEWS/507270389/1003 BRATTLEBORO — Entergy Nuclear and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission both said Tuesday that a proposed study looking for a radioactive element in baby teeth would rely on flawed science and selective methodology. NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan said tests conducted by both the federal government and Entergy showed that the radioactivity released by the Vermont Yankee nuclear reactor in Vernon did not pose a health risk to people nearby. He was critical of the baby-teeth study proposed by an antinuclear watchdog group. "We have found they slice and dice the data to suit their own purposes — and it's not subjected to independent peer review," Sheehan said. But he had no explanation for why preliminary results showed the baby teeth of some children living near the plant had elevated levels of strontium 90, a bone-seeking radioactive element produced only by nuclear power plants or nuclear weapons testing. The strontium 90 that has showed up in the children's tests could come from three things, Sheehan said — fallout from nuclear weapons testing, fallout from the Chernobyl nuclear accident in 1986, and from nuclear power plants. The elevated levels could also come from food raised in areas with fallout, he said. A very small sample showed a 61 percent increase of strontium-90 in the baby teeth of children whose mothers lived near Vermont Yankee while pregnant. Entergy spokesman Robert Williams said the proposed baby-teeth study relied on faulty science, did not pass professional muster with scientists and unfairly alarmed the public. The Radiation and Public Health Project — joined by the Citizens Awareness Network, Physicians for Social Responsibility and the Traprock Peace Center — have launched what they call "The Tooth Fairy Project" in hopes of collecting at least 100 baby teeth from children who were born and raised around the Vermont Yankee reactor. The larger sample of baby teeth could give them more accurate data, they said. The groups said preliminary tests on nine baby teeth from Windham County and Cheshire County in New Hampshire showed highly elevated levels of strontium-90. The groups held a late-morning press conference Tuesday at the Gibson RiverGarden in downtown Brattleboro to drum up support for the Tooth Fairy Project. They said their concerns were being ignored by the federal government, which discontinued testing of children's teeth after atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons ended in the United States in the 1960s. The groups said Entergy's drive to boost power production by 20 percent at one of the country's oldest nuclear reactors put children at risk because the increased power meant increased radiological releases. Entergy has said it expects it will release more radioactivity into the environment as a result of the power boost, but it said it will meet the fence-line dose of 20 millirems exposure per year set by the Vermont Department of Health decades ago. The federal standard is 25 millirems. Agnes Reynolds, a registered nurse at Hartford (Conn.) Hospital and a research associate with the Radiation and Public Health Project, said at the press conference that citizen testing was necessary because the federal government was turning its back on its citizens. Sheehan of the NRC said that wasn't the case and the Tooth Fairy Project, which has been conducted at several other nuclear power plants around the country, used selective and inherently flawed methodology. "We have some concerns about the methodology," he said. "They don't have control populations, they don't examine other risk factors, they have small sample sizes, they don't perform environment tests. They're just looking at the teeth in isolation." Sheehan said each nuclear plant is required to do its own monitoring of discharges. "We do independent inspections, and we do our own sampling," he said. Reynolds said that so far, 26 baby teeth have been analyzed from around Vermont Yankee, but only nine have come from Windham and Cheshire counties. She said baby teeth from children who live within 100 miles of Vermont Yankee would be valuable to the study. Of the nine baby teeth from children living close to the plant, the level of strontium-90 was 61 percent higher than the national average. Reynolds said other health statistics show that Windham County has elevated rates of breast cancer. And while cancer death rates have fallen in the state since 1988, they have risen in Windham County, she said. Reynolds also said that between 1970 and 1987, the amount of radiation released by Vermont Yankee ranked it the 17th-worst polluting nuclear reactor in the country. Reynolds said mothers were reluctant to give up their children's baby teeth, and when they did they wanted the individual results for their children's teeth. Deb Katz, executive director of the Citizens Awareness Network based in Shelburne Falls, Mass., said Massachusetts has funded health studies revealing cancer clusters of "statistical significance" and other health defects, such as Down Syndrome, in the small rural communities surrounding the now-closed Yankee Rowe nuclear power plant in Massachusetts. So far, most of the information about health problems in the communities surrounding Vermont Yankee is anecdotal, Katz said. The Tooth Fairy Project, which will send the baby teeth to be analyzed by a laboratory in Canada, will give people information it isn't getting from the nuclear industry or the government, she said. Sunny Miller of the Traprock Peace Center urged Vermont residents to look for help from the Vermont Legislature. Attending the press conference Tuesday were Sen. Jeannette White, D-Windham, and Sen. Roderick Gander, D-Windham, as well as Rep. Steve Darrow, D-Putney. With the tests costing $72 per tooth, White said she thought funding for 100 teeth could be found, and she suggested the Entergy-funded radiological emergency planning fund. Contact Susan Smallheer at susan.smallheer@rutlandherald.com. ---- Yankee experienced `catastrophic failure' in electrical yard July 27, 2005 Associated Press http://www.boston.com/news/local/vermont/articles/2005/07/27/yankee_experienced_catastrophic_failure_in_electrical_yard?mode=PF BRATTLEBORO, Vt. --Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant suffered what its owners have described to federal regulators as a "catastrophic failure" in its electrical switchyard, but the emergency shutdown of the Vernon reactor that followed went according to the plant's design. Because of the quick shutdown, at one point on Monday the water level inside the reactor core dropped 7 feet, leaving another 7 feet to keep the nuclear fuel cool. Emergency cooling systems and pumps worked properly to restore the water, according to a report filed by Yankee owner Entergy Nuclear with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Robert Williams, spokesman for Entergy Nuclear, owner of the plant, said Wednesday the water level drop was expected in a boiling water reactor such as Vermont Yankee. "Anytime there's an automatic shutdown, there's a drop in water level. That's not a problem," Williams said. The plant's systems restored the water level. The 540-megawatt reactor remained off-line Wednesday but in "hot" shutdown mode, which usually is an indication the plant can be quickly repaired. It is easier and safer to bring back up to power than from a "cold" shutdown. A roughly 8-foot-tall electrical insulator atop a high-voltage transformer, which is the component in the switchyard that suffered the catastrophic failure, was sent to a laboratory for testing, Williams said. He disputed a characterization by NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan that the plant's "fast transfer" -- in which the reactor gets electrical power from the New England power grid to operate during an emergency even as it goes off-line itself -- didn't occur as it was supposed to. "They looked at the timing of that transfer and it was appropriate," Williams said. "The delay is designed into the equipment." Backup generators switched on after the brief delay and kept power flowing to the plant itself, Williams said. David Lochbaum, a scientist with the Union of Concerned Scientists in Washington, said it appeared that "an aging piece of equipment blew up." He was referring to the 8-foot insulator. The fluctuating water levels in the reactor were "pretty much expected" under such an emergency shutdown, Lochbaum. "They drop very quickly, but they recovered very quickly," he said. -------- asia Investors Invited to Generate Nuclear Power in Indonesia Wednesday July 27, 2005 5:28 PM Asia Pulse http://asia.news.yahoo.com/050727/4/24n8i.html JAKARTA, July 27 - Indonesian state-owned electricity company PLN said investors are invited to generate nuclear power with an acceptable price in the country. PLN Transmission and Distribution Director Herman Darnel Ibrahim said nuclear power is not yet included in PLN's development program until 2015, but if any investor is interested in generating nuclear power and offers a good price, we will be eager to have serious discussion. Herman said PLN no longer has plan to build its own power generating plants, but it will continue the monopoly in transmission and distribution. He said nuclear power is expected to be generated by private investors and PLN will buy the output if the price is cheaper than power from coal and gas fired power plants. Earlier leading legislator Dradjat Wibowo said Indonesia should start studying plan to develop clean alternative energy sources such as geothermal and nuclear power. Dradjat said it is difficult for the country to effectively economize on fuel because of the faster growth of the economy, adding energy requirement will increase with economic expansion. -------- australia ISP 'censored' anti-war email By Sam Varghese July 27, 2005 - 10:30AM, Sydney Morning Herald http://fairuse.1accesshost.com/news2/smh65.html A US broadband provider and a security services company have been accused of blocking emails relating to an anti-Iraq war protest. American online activist David Swanson says the provider, Comcast, and security services company Symantec, blocked emails drawing attention to the so-called Downing Street memo, which activists have seized on as further proof that the Iraq war was planned well in advance. The leaked memo was first published in Britain's The Times newspaper. Swanson, the founder of the AfterDowningStreet.org website, claims emails sent to and from his subscribers were blocked for a week as he tried to co-ordinate events around the United States. He said the events would have had a far bigger turn-out had the block not been in place. "We didn't know it, but for the past week, anyone using Comcast has been unable to receive any Email with "www.afterdowningstreet.org" in the body of the Email," Swanson wrote on his website. "Comcast said that ... Symantec refused to lift the block, because they had supposedly received 46,000 complaints about Emails with our URL in them. Forty-six thousand! ...Could we see two or three, or even one, of those 46,000 complaints? No..." Swanson said he was trying to raise awareness about the memo and get Americans to lobby the US Congress to inquire into whether President George W. Bush had lied about the reasons for the Iraq war. He said that once one of the activists involved in the campaign posted Symantec's phone numbers on his site, and Symantec's communications department received complaints, the block was removed. Antoinette Trovato, a Symantec spokeswoman in Australia, said the company's US office had advised that a spam rule was created due to an increase in email traffic identified by the Symantec Probe Network. "The rule was determined to be too broad and has since been turned off," she said. ---- Catchment at no risk from nuclear dump: Govt No extra risk: DEST says it has taken the hydrogeology of the area into account. By Anna Salleh, ABC Science Online Wednesday, July 27, 2005. 7:26pm (AEST) http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200507/s1423884.htm The Federal Government has defended its inclusion of a high rainfall site in its short-list of possible locations for a nuclear waste dump. Earlier this week there were concerns that a radioactive leak from a dump at Fishers Ridge in the Northern Territory could put at risk pristine catchments used for drinking and other purposes. The concerns were expressed by Peter Jolly of the Northern Territory's Environment Department, who helped to prepare a Northern Territory Government report on the hydro-geology of the area. The short-list of sites was based on preliminary assessment by the Department of Education, Science and Training (DEST). DEST says that the design of the facility, an environmental impact statement and licensing from the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency will ensure the facility does not present a hazard to the community or the environment. It says it based its assessment on Geoscience Australia's Hydrogeology of Australia publication, which indicates the region has extensive, highly productive aquifers. "This does not automatically make the Fishers Ridge site unsuitable for a radioactive waste storage facility," a DEST statement said. "The design of the Commonwealth radioactive waste management facility will apply the defence in depth principle which ensures multiple barriers between the waste and the environment." DEST says it is possible to ensure protection even if the waste is disposed below ground, rather than stored above ground. "A shallow water table does not preclude the siting of a disposal facility provided properly engineered barriers are in place, as has been demonstrated, for example, at the Drigg low-level waste facility in the UK," the statement said. DEST also says that all radioactive waste will be solid, thus minimising the risk of radioactive material moving from the facility site in the event of an incident. Engineering may be flawed Mr Jolly, who is a civil engineer as well as a hydro-geologist, says overseas experience has shown that a radioactive storage facility built to the best engineering principles was found to be flawed decades later. "The understanding is among engineers and some scientists is that you can engineer a facility anywhere that won't leak and nothing will move off site," he said. "But experience has shown through the world that this isn't the case...accidents do happen." He says he would be concerned with storage of even low-level waste at the site because of the need to transport the waste through sensitive areas to get there. "There are too many sites of significance around there," he said. In other developments: * A hydro-geologist says a radioactive leak at one of the sites short-listed as a nuclear waste dump in the Northern Territory could contaminate drinking water. (Full Story) ---- Environment centre rejects Govt's nuclear support Wednesday, July 27, 2005. 7:21am (AEST) Australian Broadcasting http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200507/s1423071.htm The Northern Territory Environment Centre has described the Federal Government's support for nuclear power to slow climate change as absurd. Environment Minister Ian Campbell launched a report yesterday that shows climate change is inevitable over the next 30 years. Senator Campbell is urging more uranium exports to China and India to ensure they use nuclear power instead of oil and coal. But the Environment Centre coordinator Peter Robertson says the Government knows nuclear power is not a viable replacement. "That is their number one priority is to constantly deflect and defer and delay and make sure that the sorts of changes that are required to the fossil fuel industry do not eventuate," he said. "So part of their strategy is to throw up these spurious alternatives such as nuclear energy." The centre says climate change could have a devastating impact on remote Top End communities, starting with more intense cyclones more often. Mr Robertson says the risk of tropical diseases will increase, but the impact on ecosystems and people's way of life will be immeasurable. "Every aspect of life that you look at for communities across the Territory has the potential to be absolutely devastated by global warming if it continues on its current trend, if the Howard Government continues to ignore the problem and make large cuts in its greenhouse gas emissions," he said. -------- canada Ontario pays towns to take nuclear waste Lake Huron municipalities to get $35M, told not to criticize plan April Lindgren The Ottawa Citizen Wednesday, July 27, 2005 http://www.canada.com/ottawa/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=43e95097-c795-4ddf-a108-630b9b5e3358 TORONTO - Government-owned Ontario Power Generation paid more than $3 million to municipalities on the shores of Lake Huron this spring as part of a deal clearing the way for construction of North America's first deep rock nuclear waste storage facility. The cash, which some critics have decried as hush money aimed at silencing opposition, is the first instalment of a "hosting agreement" that will see the utility pay the Ontario communities of Kincardine, Saugeen Shores, Huron-Kinloss, Arran-Elderslie and Brockton $35.7 million over the next 30 years. In return, the five municipal councils have embraced OPG's plan to store low- and intermediate-level nuclear waste in a deep rock geologic repository at the Bruce nuclear plant in picturesque Kincardine. The plan for the repository includes digging 660 metres down into limestone and carving out 38 caverns, each as long as a football field, up to eight metres wide and 6.6 metres high. While the project is massive and involves radioactive waste that will remain contaminated for thousands of years, the proposal has attracted scant attention in a province that was in an uproar five years ago over Toronto's plans to dump city garbage into an old iron ore mine in Northern Ontario. "Our municipal council volunteered us as the site for this, which is almost unheard of in the world," says Jennifer Heisz, a critic of the scheme who lives one kilometre from the Bruce station. "OPG has not based this on health and safety considerations or the suitability of the site. It's based on our councillors volunteering the site in exchange for $35 million." Ms. Heisz questioned whether it was appropriate for OPG to pay for municipal council members to visit nuclear waste storage sites in Europe and the United States. She says many council members are less-than-objective decision-makers because they have relatives who work for the Bruce nuclear station or are themselves current or former employees or contractors who did business with the facility. She insists there should have been a formal referendum on a matter that will affect the community for years to come. And she railed against provisions in the formal agreement that allow OPG to cancel payments to the municipalities if there is any opposition to the deal. "The gag order aspect of this is terrible," Ms. Heisz said. "It stifles open debate. It has intimidated a lot of public representatives into not being able to represent the public for fear the town will lose the money." The 20-page agreement states early on that payments to Kincardine and the neighbouring communities can be halted if any or all of them "have failed to exercise best efforts to support the construction of (the) deep geologic repository." High-level waste -- used nuclear fuel -- is stored at the nuclear power station where it is generated and that will continue, said OPG spokesman John Earl. The Bruce station, however, has been the storage site for low- and intermediate-level waste from all of Ontario's reactors since 1974. Low-level waste, made up of minimally radioactive materials such as mop heads, protective clothing and floor sweepings, is placed in above-ground concrete warehouse-type structures. Intermediate-level waste, such as used reactor components, resins and filters, is stored mainly in steel-lined concrete containers that have been set into the ground. Mr. Earl said the Bruce site has been selected for the repository because "the community came and asked us to look at what the options are for the future and to look at deep geologic repository as the one that they considered to be the best technology available." The utility, he insisted, will "work diligently to meet the needs and satisfy the concerns of the community as we move this forward." Kincardine Mayor Glenn Sutton also makes no apologies for the money-for-waste deal he and the council signed with OPG last fall. "There has been extensive consultation," including a public opinion survey that found 60 per cent of residents support the project, Mr. Sutton noted. Seventy per cent of Kincardine's approximately 8,319 adult residents were contacted for the poll. When respondents who were neutral or refused to answer were excluded from the total, the approval rating climbed to 73 per cent. As the actual host community for the OPG project, Kincardine will receive the lion's share of the OPG money over the next three decades. The $2.94 million paid earlier this year has been used for park projects and a reserve fund for a possible hospital expansion. Mr. Sutton rejects suggestions the community has been bought off. "We did a survey of other jurisdictions across the world and the amounts paid as a hosting fee are consistent with other jurisdictions in Western Europe and the United States." He also disputes suggestions that becoming a major nuclear waste repository will put off the tourists and cottagers who flock to Lake Huron's beaches each year. "We've had a low-level waste storage site for the Bruce and Pickering and other nuclear plants for more than 30 years and it's been a very safe storage procedure and we've had basically no reaction." Indeed, OPG is currently seeking permission to triple the size of its current surface storage facility for low and intermediate nuclear waste to accommodate contaminated materials generated by the refurbishment of its aging nuclear reactors. About 60,000 cubic metres are stored at the Bruce site, which is equipped to handle 72,000 cubic metres. OPG wants to begin site preparation in December to expand that capacity to 212,000 cubic metres. The schedule for the deep geologic repository is also ambitious. The utility aims to launch an environmental assessment of the proposal by 2007 and to complete that process by 2010. The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission would then be asked to issue the necessary licences so construction could begin by 2013. The goal is to begin storing waste in the caverns beginning in 2017. William Fyfe, a retired University of Western Ontario professor who is Canada's foremost Earth scientist and an international consultant on nuclear waste issues, attacked OPG's plans yesterday. "You do not put nuclear waste near things like the Great Lakes or the great rivers in case there's a leakage that you haven't expected," he said. "The Earth changes ... and nuclear waste is dangerous for at least one million years. "It wasn't that many thousands of years ago when we had ice on top of southern Ontario. That could happen again and when that happens, you get all sorts of new cracks and things formed." Mr. Fyfe, who has been a consultant to Switzerland and Sweden on nuclear waste, said it should be buried in areas where naturally occurring materials that are easily corroded or soluble have survived unscathed for millions of years. This indicates the geology is stable. "In Canada, we have a lot of these in old mining areas," he said, citing Sudbury as one example. Mr. Fyfe said OPG should consult experts, including the Swedes, who are burying their nuclear waste deep under the Baltic Sea, before pushing ahead with the Bruce project. The Swedes "are going underground more than a kilometre and if there ever was leakage, before the stuff gets into the sea, it has to go through a lot of clay sediments and things that accumulate from erosion on the ocean bottom that is very good at absorbing stuff. It is a perfect barrier." Norm Rubin, the director of nuclear research for the watchdog group Energy Probe, suggested that the number of jobs and economic activity generated in the Kincardine area by the Bruce station are factors in how the story is unfolding. "If you start making decisions during a short-term period when everybody and their brother-in-law is working for the company, and you make decisions that are irreversible, then you stand a really good chance of making a really regrettable decision. -------- china China's Nuclear industry to seek foreign help 2005-07-27 08:30:34 (Source: China Daily) http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-07/27/content_3272057.htm BEIJING, July 27 -- China's ambitious plans to build some 30 nuclear reactors within the next 15 years will provide vast opportunities for foreign architecture & engineering (A&E) companies to cash in on the expanding clean energy sector, industry authorities said. "The gigantic project, which means building approximately two reactors each year, will see a great demand for professional services in fuel resources procurement, project management & consulting, as well as infrastructure engineering," said Zhao Chengkun, senior advisor with the preparatory office of State Nuclear Power Technology Corp of China (SNPTC). He was speaking yesterday at a nuclear forum in Beijing. China, the world's second largest energy consumer after the United States, now has a policy of "actively promoting nuclear power construction." In an effort to satiate the country's surging power demands, China aims to have a total nuclear installed capacity of 40 gigawatts by 2020, which will make up 4 per cent of the nation's aggregate power generation, from the current 2.3 per cent. When building nuclear plants in previous years, nuclear research institutes were responsible for the research and design of a whole project, which lacked an integrated chain for A&E services. "But the old system only applied to small-scale nuclear plant construction, and does not suit the country's (new) scheme to massively drive the nuclear power generation," SNPTC's Zhao said on the sidelines of the forum. Zhao thought the establishment of joint-ventures by Chinese and foreign firms would be one way of introducing professional A&E services. China's nuclear industry has actually already begun to try and enhance the A&E ability of the country's existing nuclear project research institutes, noted Zhao. "For example, the nuclear industry engineering research and design institute in Shanghai has improved the overall strength of its A&E arm," Zhao said. Another concern relevant to China's aspirations to accelerate its nuclear plant construction regards the supply of the fuel source uranium. According to Pan Ziqiang, director of the science & technology commission of the China National Nuclear Corporation, China has little in the way of uranium although more unproven reserves have yet to be explored. "The country will beef up investment in exploring fuel resources for the growing number of nuclear power plants across the nation," Pan said yesterday at the forum. He said that in recent years, the country has found a host of potential reserves of nuclear plant fuel, but did not elaborate. Furthermore, around one third of the country has not yet been checked for uranium reserves, and areas that have been looked into are only tapped down to a depth of 500 metres. "Places below 500 metres are believed to also be rich in uranium reserves," Pan added. -------- europe IAEA director general to appraise prospects of Armenian nuclear power plant July 27 2005 (RIA Novosti, Gamlet Matevosyan) http://en.rian.ru/world/20050727/40982589.html YEREVAN - Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Mohamed ElBaradei arrived in Yerevan, the Armenian capital, Wednesday. The Armenian Foreign Ministry said he was scheduled to meet with Armenian leaders and visit Armenia's nuclear power plant. The plant was put into commission in 1980 and closed in March 1989 for political reasons. The plant was reopened in November 1995 following the power crisis in the independent republic. The plant's second unit has a first generation Russian reactor and produces 30%-40% of the country's power. Experts say the plant can function until 2016. In September 2003, the plant came under the trust management of INTER RAO UES, a subsidiary of Rosenergoatom and Russia's RAO UES electricity monopoly. The European Union has insisted on the plant's conservation and is ready to allocate 100 million euros for this purpose. However, Armenian experts say that some 1 billion euros are needed to create alternative energy sources in Armenia. -------- india Doomed If They Do, Doomed If They Don't: The Indian Nuclear Menace May Get Worse S. P. Udayakumar July 27, 2005 Asian Tribune http://www.asiantribune.com/show_news.php?id=15173 Part I Since the issue at hand is so complicated and steeped in strategic considerations and nucular, sorry, nuclear jargons, let us try to understand the situation with the help of an allegory, “The Largest Singh Meets the Longest Sam, A True Sad Story.” There have been living a largest democracy (aka The Largest Singh) and a longest democracy (also known as (aka) The Longest Sam) in our strange political world. The longest Sam who has always ignored the largest Singh suddenly decides to discover the latter. There is a background to this discovery. The largest Sam has been seeing a dragon-like apparition for sometime now. This stubborn ghost keeps coming and coming (especially after the ‘iron curtain’ was removed and the ‘rising sun’ went into recession). So the longest Sam desperately tries to find an exorcist, who could deal with this ghost locally and stop it from coming to his shores. Finally, the longest Sam finds an exorcist, the largest Singh with many a trick under his turban and with all the potentials (and even some vague aspirations) to be able to ‘come’ himself at some distant future point. So the longest Sam designs a strategy! Tie up the stubborn apparition and the supple exorcist together. So neither of them will be coming! At least for sometime! The largest Singh (exorcist) has indeed had a confrontation with this dragon-like apparition once before and still fosters some ill-will. However, he is more worried about the next-door sorcerer, Hush-Mush-Sharaf who keeps directing little demons and devils to his door. So the largest Singh creates a few blood-sucking parasitic vampires called Bomb-Iyers. Not to be let down in the tussle, Hush-Mush-Sharaf, the sorcerer, creates his own killer conman, Bomb-Sell Khan. Strangely enough, BS Khan has the blessings of the dragon-ghost while his necromancer boss keeps in touch with the longest Sam. So our largest Singh is caught up in a mess now: Bomb-Sell Khan bobs round and round And the dragon dances all around. The longest Sam’s watching on the WH-mount ; And the Bomb-Iyers nag and nag for more amount. The Bomb-Iyers have been promising radically big and radiantly (or radioactively?) bright things that could stop the BS Khans, scare away the Beijing ghost, make the largest Singh look like the longest Sam, and even secure him a place in history, in future, in the history of future, in the future of history, and all at the same time. Alas, Bomb-Iyers turn out to be idle extortionists. They keep asking for more money, more time, more secrecy, and more laws, more (foreign) help, more patience, more waste, more, more, more. In the meantime, the demons still keep coming (albeit in smaller numbers) and the dragon continues to haunt. As the going gets tough in CD (Capital Delhi), the largest Singh goes to DC. In DC, the longest Sam plots a strategy: Hmm…how about I give the largest Singh the technology vampire Just as my good ol’ Brit cousins threw his textile knowledge into bonfire. That will certainly pull the rug under the feet of Bomb-Iyers And give me complete control to tie ‘em all up with just one coir. The longest Sam screams at the top of his voice: “Now clear…Now clear…New Clear …Nucular!” Sam beckons Singh; Singh obliges Sam. The largest democracy and the longest democracy meet! In a totally undemocratic manner, of course! The largest Singh had not taken his people into confidence before giving up his independence in important policy matters. Similarly, the longest Sam has had no consultations with his people or policymakers or foreign friends (and fiends). Having agreed upon something (only portions of which have been shared with their respective popular and representative constituencies), the longest Sam and the largest Singh are going back to work - to make the deal democratic. With hands around each other, they mutter in unison: “Strange workings of the democratic spirit!” And the people in the largest Singh’s native land who have been trying to get rid of the parasitic Bomb-Iyers and their ‘vegetarian’ and ‘non-vegetarian’ nuclear diets look all worried. Do Singh and Sam do something about this nuclear menace? The largest Singh and the longest Sam swing their bottoms crooning: “Doomed If We Do, Doomed If We Don’t.” The Energy Carrot and the China Stick In a paper entitled “India as a New Global Power: An Action Agenda for the United States” (2005), Ashley J. Tellis, a US-India relations specialist at Carnegie Endowment, identifies three constraints on India’s rapid economic growth and on the emergence as a great power: insufficient access to energy, shortage of foreign investment and infrastructural weakness. Suggesting the creation of an energy dialogue as a means to jump-start the US-India relations, Tellis points out that India’s energy challenges cut across multiple realms such as foreign policy, geopolitics, environmental concerns and proliferation. Discussing in detail the different aspects of India’s civilian nuclear power program and its strengths and weaknesses, such as the Department of Atomic Energy’s (DAE) three-stage program and its implications, India’s shortage of natural uranium, the rich thorium reserves etc., Tellis insists that Washington should satisfy New Delhi’s need for nuclear energy. To circumvent the problem of integrating India into the global nonproliferation order, he comes up with five illustrative options the United States has and envisions six end-states of integrating India into the Global Nuclear Regime. However, two considerations weigh heavily in the analysis of Tellis that reflect the concerns of his Washington masters. One, the US should increase India’s access to civilian nuclear energy that implies integration with the global regime, “because this course of action alone provides the best guarantee that New Delhi will scrupulously control its national capabilities permanently and thus choke off the only real security threat emanating from India to the United States.” Two, integrating India into the nonproliferation order at the cost of capping the size of its nuclear deterrent could “place New Delhi at a severe disadvantage vis-à-vis Beijing, a situation that could not only undermine Indian security but also U.S. interests in Asia in the face of the prospective rise of Chinese power over the long term.” In other words, Tellis, who is a close confidant of Robert Blackwill, the former American ambassador to India, who has brokered this current US-India deal proposes that the US should help India with the civilian nuclear program and get a foothold in Indian affairs and policies and also advocates closer bilateral relations that is steeped in American military sales and support for India’s growing nuclear weapons program Thus the so-called India nuclear deal, as the American media have christened, comprises of ‘the energy carrot and the China stick’ that the United States will employ to drive India into subservience. According to the “Indo-US Joint Statement,” the Indian nuclear establishment will have to identify and separate civilian and military nuclear facilities and programs “in a phased manner” and file a declaration regarding the civilian facilities with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). It should take a decision to ”place voluntarily its civilian nuclear facilities under IAEA safeguards” and should also sign and adhere “to an Additional Protocol with respect to civilian nuclear facilities.” India will continue the “unilateral” moratorium on nuclear testing and persist with the non-proliferation export control policies. India will also work with the US on concluding the Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT) and adhere to the guidelines of the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) and the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG). Interestingly enough, nobody knows what these “phased manner,” “declaration,” voluntary placement, IAEA safeguards, and the “Additional Protocol” all mean or will consist of. The “Indo-US Joint Statement” is also vague about its nuclear fuel commitments. It says that the US administration will work with the US Congress and their friends and allies in order to “adjust” the national laws and policies and the international regimes “to enable full civil nuclear energy cooperation and trade with India, including but not limited to expeditious consideration of fuel supplies for safeguarded nuclear reactors at Tarapur.” So nuclear fuel for Tarapur plants are promised even without talking about the four-decade-old plants’ continued viability or the decommissioning aspects. Similarly, the US “will encourage its partners” to consider the fuel request expeditiously. Although this is a rather clumsy and vague undertaking, countries like Russia, who have been constrained by the NSG commitments and hence reluctant to supply the fuel for Tarapur and construct additional nuclear plants in India, may jump at this opportunity and go berserk. The deal also talks about the United States’ willingness to “consult with its partners…with a view toward India’s inclusion” in the ITER and Generation IV International Forum. The International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) is a project in which six countries are experimenting under the aegis of IAEA with a hydrogen plasma torus to design and build nuclear fusion power plants. Generation IV is a project undertaken by ten countries under the US Department of Energy’s Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology to examine concepts that may bring about economical, safe, proliferation-resistant and less-waste-producing nuclear reactors. New Delhi along with its ‘big-on-words-and-small-on-action’ Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) is embarking upon a highly ambitious plan of producing 20,000 MW power from nuclear power plants by the year 2020 and increasing that ceiling to 40,000 MW eventually. For such a grand plan to fructify, India needs lots and lots of natural or enriched uranium fuel. Although the DAE has been talking about fast breeder reactors, using thorium as fuel, and constructing advanced heavy water reactors (AHWRs), New Delhi seems to have realized that the only way to get so much nuclear fuel and generate more power is through some kind of an arrangement with external sources. For such a thing to happen, the Nuclear Suppliers Group should relax its strict regime and make exceptions for India. And that could happen only with the blessings of the United States. However, the current US Non-proliferation Act prevents India and other countries that have not signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty from acquiring a wide range of US military technology that included components that could be used for nuclear programs. Although the current deal promises assistance with civilian nuclear program, it all remains to be seen if the US Congress will be willing to change the nonproliferation act that bars American nuclear energy aid to nuclear weapons states or if the NSG will be ready to bend its rules for India. It will also be interesting to see if the US, that has not built a new nuclear power station since 1996, will resume constructing nuclear power projects. After all, the American public is not enthusiastic about this. For instance, when the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant came up for re-licensing in the state of New Jersey last summer (2004), the entire civil society was up in arms against the move and stopped it. The United States has specific goals to achieve in signing the current deal. It wants to accelerate India’s rise as a global power only to place it as a regional counterweight to China. Interestingly, a Pentagon report on China’s military strength, released when Dr. Manmohan Singh was in the US, argues that China is increasing its nuclear arsenal and that the Chinese missiles can strike India, Russia, and all of the United States. As a country that thrives on the sale of weapons and military technologies, the United States also has business plans in mind. According to the Indo-US Joint Statement, President Bush has said, “as a responsible state with advanced nuclear technology, India should acquire the same benefits and advantages as other such states.” These “benefits and advantages” would be India’s purchasing $ 5 billion worth of conventional military equipment from the US including anti-submarine patrol aircraft that could spot Chinese submarines in the Indian Ocean, and Aegis radars that could help the Indian destroyers operating in the strategic Strait of Malacca monitor the Chinese military. It is also speculated that India may be allowed to buy the Arrow Missile System developed by Israel with American technology. Some analysts have pointed out that the US may also try to sell the AP-1000 reactors made by Westinghouse. It is important to note that the Bush administration tried to sell the same to China with the largest-ever loan granted by the U.S. Export-Import Bank. Strangely enough, these “benefits and advantages” that India may be bestowed with for its responsibility, democracy and all of that do not include even a simple acknowledgement of India’s aspirations for a seat in the UN Security Council, or its recognition as a nuclear power with a seat in the NSG. In return for the American promises (most of which are vague and unpromising), India seems to have given some important security, energy and foreign policy concessions to the United States. For example, right after signing the deal, the Indian Prime Minister remarked to The Washington Post that the $7.4 billion India-Pakistan-Iran gas pipeline project was fraught with risks and difficulties. The United States is opposed to this project and their objection emanates from the fact that the project could generate much needed hard currency for Iran and from the fear that it could be used for Tehran’s nuclear program. The joint statement is also completely silent about the traditional principles and values that India has consistently voiced in the international arena such as nuclear disarmament, total abolition of weapons of mass destruction and so forth. Instead, the deal simply mentions the American welcome of “the adoption by India of legislation on WMD (Prevention of Unlawful Activities Bill).” Just as the WMD Bill was hurriedly passed before the prime minister’s trip to the US, the Atomic Energy Act of 1962 is also being amended to facilitate private investment in nuclear power generation. Dr. Singh’s call for investment may prod US companies to jump into nuclear energy production with serious repercussions to our strategic interests, national security, sovereignty, independence and freedom. The claim that opening up our civilian nuclear power plants for international inspection will curtail India’s diverting the spent uranium fuel to be reprocessed into weapons-grade plutonium is also misplaced. It is important to remember that the plutonium for the 1974 test came from the safeguarded Tarapur plant after all. Moreover, there will always be research reactors, and underhanded methods that are not altogether unknown in the field of nuclear science and in the military-industrial complex. Most importantly, the agreement is deliberately silent about India not producing weapons-grade plutonium or not expanding the country’s nuclear arsenal. It is highly unlikely that the United States will ensure the strict implementation of the IAEA safeguard procedures and hold the DAE accountable for all its commissions and omissions. First, a complete and thorough stocktaking is very hard to do since it will be the DAE that will be guiding the IAEA authorities. Second, since the American interests weigh heavily in the whole scheme and they want India to do the dirty job of containing the Chinese, they may turn a blind eye to the whole process. Washington will certainly poke its nose into the Indian nuclear program for espionage and business purposes and to monitor the growth of the Indian advanced technology sector. After all, the US has expressed its willingness to “adjust U.S. laws and policies” and to “work” with friends and allies to “adjust international regimes” to accomplish the current deal. This “adjustment” culture is not an expedient measure but a time-tested oft-repeated ‘wink and nod’ practice in the political-diplomatic world. So, one would be thoroughly mistaken if one were to think that the specified safeguard measures mentioned in the deal would finally bring some kind of transparency, accountability and popular participation (TAPs) to the workings of the DAE. In fact, the Indian Foreign Secretary, Shyam Saran, has already indicated that they would not agree to any discriminatory safeguards, meaning India would object to obligations that discriminated between nuclear weapons states and non-nuclear weapons states. In other words, the IAEA team could do in India what it would do in the United States and other nuclear powers and nothing more. If this “India nuclear deal” somehow goes through, the non-proliferation efforts of humanity will take a severe beating as it will justify all the clandestine nuclear programs around the world. In fact, the Chinese premier has already talked about enhancing bilateral nuclear cooperation between his country and Pakistan by selling the latter two more nuclear reactors. The legal and policy “adjustments” that the US administration promises to India will expose Washington’s hypocrisy and double-standards and seriously undercut their efforts to confront North Korea, Iran and other countries. In the international arena, clandestine nuclear program may even become a tool to win the major powers’ attention and other incentives. If India wins Western patronage and pampering through the nuclear route, next in line may be Brazil, South Africa, South Korea, Taiwan and others who are capable of producing nuclear weapons. The one and only silver lining in this dark and gloomy cloud is that the international safeguards and verification may finally call the DAE bluff, and expose their stale and sordid science and copycat Chandni-Chowk-type technology. Quite understandably, the Indian nuclear establishment is very much worked up about the likely chances of subjecting their civilian nuclear facilities to international safeguards and verification. It is not that they have invented anything new or original or valuable that may be prematurely exposed to the outside world and thus it would curtail their scientific prowess or advancement. Having gobbled up unlimited amount of public money and national resources for more than five decades, the DAE produces less electricity than what the rickety windmills generate with little attention or support from the government. The latest nuclear accomplishment in India is going bananas. The Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) scientists have developed the technology to extract the juice from banana. According to these scientists, as much as 60 per cent of the total soluble material in a banana can be extracted and the leftover pulp can be used as an additive in confectioneries, milk shakes and baby food. How wonderful! A simple cost-benefit analysis of the “India nuclear deal” would reveal the nasty picture that is emerging. We will have Uncle Sam sitting in our living room poking his imperialistic nose into every sphere of our national life constantly calculating his selfish gains and cunningly pushing us into our neighbor’s yard. We would be doing the dirty job of confronting China at the cost of jeopardizing our (relatively) good neighborly relations. The already anti-democratic and anti-people money-guzzling Indian nuclear establishment will continue with its lackadaisical performance and gain considerably from the newly found international legitimacy. The nuclear expenditure will increase exponentially; there will ensue militarism, arms race with China, insecurity and underdevelopment. The ordinary Indian citizen will scrape along in poverty and misery as he has always been. - Asian Tribune - Dr. S. P. Udayakumar, one of the Coordinators of the People’s Movement Against Nuclear Energy (PMANE), is a freelance writer based in Nagercoil, Tamil Nadu. He submitted this article to Asian Tribune. ---- A power less exotic Bring hard-nosed commercial considerations to bear on nuclear electricity ILA PATNAIK Indian Express, Wednesday, July 27, 2005 http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=75132 If India sets out to build nuclear reactors that could generate 20,000 megawatts (MW) or 40,000 MW of electricity, this could be a large-scale effort, involving perhaps $40 billion of imported equipment. Eventually, this could be a way to “use foreign exchange reserves” to build infrastructure. But it is important to be sure that these big decisions are made wisely. The nuclear energy agreement with the US commits India to separate military and civilian nuclear facilities, like nuclear weapon states do. India will provide the International Atomic Energy Agency with a list of civilian facilities and allow inspection of these facilities, placing them under safeguards. In return, India gets access to nuclear technology, equipment and fuel. The time it will take to achieve this gives us breathing space to address domestic issues. It is time for us to separate nuclear weapons work from the task of nuclear reactors as a tool for electricity generation. Currently, nuclear power is generated by the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL) under the Department of Atomic Energy. The Atomic Energy Regulatory Board deals with nuclear safety. Nuclear energy generation is similar to hydel generation in having high fixed costs and low marginal costs. French data for 2003 shows the cost of construction of a nuclear plant as being 30 per cent higher than that of a comparable coal-fired plant. NPCIL data — which probably do not show all costs associated with the Indian nuclear effort — suggest an apparent price of Rs 6 crore per MW for nuclear capacity. A lot has been said about the role of nuclear energy in a world with high oil prices. However, the viability of nuclear power is not obvious. It depends on interest rates. At high interest rates and low oil prices, nuclear generation is not competitive. It is only if a generator can count on low interest rates and high oil prices, over the coming 25 years, that nuclear generation becomes commercially viable. So far, India has run a special programme for nuclear power, where nuclear weapons and nuclear reactors were mixed up. But once it becomes a technology available to the power industry, our attitude, and its exotic status, needs to change. We need to start thinking of a nuclear plant that makes electricity as a factory, run on commercial principles. The availability of the nuclear option should then be treated as another option for the electricity generation industry. Instead of a separate nuclear power programme that has to be pursued regardless of viability, nuclear generation should be a choice analysed by all power generation companies. Nuclear generation was once an end. Now nuclear generation should be treated as a means. It must be pursued when, and only when, it is cheaper than alternatives for electricity generation. We might assume that government ownership ensures safety, but Chernobyl was state-owned. The last thing India needs is a nuclear accident. That will shut down our nuclear power programme for decades to come. We must remember that industrial safety is a public good. The government must play a much more active role in ensuring safety if nuclear power is going to expand. Under the new agreements which may come about, international inspectors will be in Indian nuclear thermal plants, with a focus on non-proliferation issues. In addition, an Indian regulatory effort should focus on safety of fissile materials through the full fuel cycle, safety of the reactor, potential terrorist attacks, etc. How can the nuclear industry in India be organised, with a separation of weapons and electricity generation? Currently, both civilian and military uses of nuclear power are under the Department of Atomic Energy. The following proposals would help improve focus, transparency and incentives. One, the nuclear weapons effort should be shifted into the ministry of defence. It would make sense to identify the labs, personnel and facilities which are devoted to weapons, and move them into the defence establishment. Two, the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board should be shifted to the ministry of power, to set safety standards and monitor civilian nuclear electricity generation, focusing on safety. Its task should be broadened to take full responsibility for the nuclear cycle, selling fuel to power utilities, and taking waste out of the utilities. Three, an “Energy Research Mission”, under the ministry of power, needs to be set up, to fund R&D at universities into new generation technologies such as thorium-based and fusion-based reactors. So, existing DAE labs should either be shifted into the ministry of defence, for weapons work, or merged into various universities, for electricity work. Four, at present Nuclear Power Corporation of India focuses on nuclear energy regardless of cost. A merger of NPCIL and NTPC would make a unified electricity generation company, which would make calculations about the role of coal versus uranium based purely on commercial considerations. Five, the teams and factories in the DAE establishment which produce reactors should be sold to BHEL, so that BHEL becomes a unified company selling electricity generation equipment, ranging from hydel to coal to uranium based processes. BHEL should aspire to compete in the global market, selling the full range of equipment for electricity generation technologies. In the last 50 years, India’s nuclear establishment has focused on building nuclear reactors as an end in themselves, without any concern for economic viability. If the India-US pact goes through, we would stand at a new frontier of commercial exploitation of nuclear electricity, which could have tremendous ramifications for India’s energy scenario, particularly if global warming becomes a major issue. But this requires that we must de-exoticise nuclear electricity generation. Our goal should be to bring hard-nosed commercial considerations to bear on nuclear electricity, as it does all over the world. Electricity generation companies should make choices between hydel, solar, diesel, coal, gas and uranium routes to electricity based purely on economic viability. This requires us to fully reorganise our nuclear establishment, separating out the three activities of weapons, R&D and electricity. -------- iran Safe from Attack? or Doomed After Next 9/11? Is Iran Being Set Up? By GARY LEUPP, July 27, 2005 Counterpunch http://www.counterpunch.org/leupp07272005.html A recent article by Juan Cole depicts Iran as the real victor in the Iraq War. This is because Iran, which Washington officially designates "evil," has been able to establish warm relations with the government ushered into power by U.S. occupation forces in neighboring Iraq. In his state visit to Iran Prime Minister al-Jaafari was offered electricity, wheat, pipeline projects, use of Iranian ports to transship goods to Iraq. Jaafari paid a pilgrimage to the tomb of Ayatollah Khomeini, one of the most vilified characters in the history of U.S. foreign relations. He blamed the Iran-Iraq War (in which the U.S. backed Baghdad) on Saddam Hussein and accepted Iraqi culpability. He promised that Iraq would not allow any attack on Iran from its soil. Reports about the recent flurry of Iran-Iraq diplomacy must shock the neocons. Things are not going at all according to plan. Neocon ally Chalabi should be in power, hosting the Israeli prime minister's official visit and mapping a common strategy against Iran. Just 30,000 U.S. soldiers should be in Iraq, living on permanent bases. The privatized oil industry should be paying for the nearly completed reconstruction of the country. Instead, devout Shiites who revere Khomeini are in power, Iraq is far from recognizing Israel, 130,000 U.S. forces are bogged down in a guerrilla war, the oil industry hasn't recovered to pre-2001 levels, and the costs of the war and reconstruction fall on the American taxpayer. No, this is not at all what the neocons expected. Not anticipating that Iraqi Shiites would either turn on their "liberators" or feel sympathy towards Iran (with which Iraq fought a long very bloody war in the 1980s), the neocons instead expected (or at least, publicly stated that they expected) a welcoming population that would submit to something like the U.S. occupation of Japan (1945-52). L. Paul Bremer III, heading the "Coalition Provisional Authority" in Iraq, said in June 2003 that while the occupation imposed "no blanket prohibition" against Iraqi self-rule, and he wasn't personally "opposed to it," it had to occur in "a way that takes care of our concerns. Elections that are held too early can be destructive. It's got to be done very carefully" (Washington Post, June 28, 2003). The January 2005 election was held not because the U.S. came with a plan to quickly establish an Iraqi democracy, but because Shiite demonstrators rallied by Ayatollah Sistani demanded both an end to the occupation and free elections early on. Huge demonstrations in early 2004 forced the U.S. to agree to officially "turn over authority" to an interim Iraqi government that summer and hold elections for a new administration in January 2005. Chalabi, fallen from favor in May 2004 due to charges of espionage, was replaced by Iyad Allawi (another CIA operative) as the leader favored by the U.S.; he was appointed prime minister June 1, 2004. He remained the favorite in January 2005, and his party apparently got several times his expected vote due after receiving U.S. funds, advice and maybe stuffed ballot boxes. But the lion's share of the vote (quite a lot lower than expected, suggesting lots of fraud) went to the SCIRI and Dawa religious-based parties. After ages and ages of behind-the-scenes negotiations, the present administration under Jaafari was finally announced in April. Quite contrary to U.S. intentions, it has turned out to be markedly pro-Iranian. Cole concludes with the observation, "The ongoing chaos in Iraq has made it impossible for Bush administration hawks to carry out their long-held dream of overthrowing the Iranian regime, or even of forcing it to end its nuclear ambitions." He implies that both because the U.S. is militarily overextended and because the Iraqi authorities will not approve an attack from their soil. I do want to believe all that! I also want to believe that, following the Shanghai Cooperation Organization's advice, the governments of Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan will request the removal of U.S. bases from their territory. The local rulers of these former Soviet republics in Central Asia were willing to help out against al-Qaeda in Afghanistan but now seem anxious about U.S. use of their soil for an attack on Iran. Russia is heavily invested in Iran's nuclear industry, while China needs its petroleum. But the U.S. is applying pressure. Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said "It looks to me like two very large countries were trying to bully some smaller countries." Rumsfeld has echoed that, stressing that the U.S. makes agreements with nations, not the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. Yesterday Rumsfeld was back in Kyrgyzstan, suddenly, for the second time in four months, obviously concerned about the issue of Manas Air Base. Newly elected president Kurmanbek S. Bakiyev, who while campaigning for office called for an end to the U.S. presence, says his government will "do its best to avoid spoiling relations with Washington." In any case, the U.S. presence in Azerbaijan (not a SCO nation) may be important for war making purposes. Scott Ritter wrote last month that in "Azerbaijan, the US military is preparing a base of operations for a massive military presence that will foretell a major land-based campaign designed to capture Tehran." Meanwhile, my pessimism deepens as I read an online excerpt from an article by Philip Giraldi, in the American Conservative. It indicates that: (1) the U.S. Strategic Command (STRATCOM) has been asked to draw up concrete, short term contingency plans for an attack on Iran, to involve "a large-scale air assault employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons" and (2) that Vice President Cheney's office has specifically told the Pentagon that the military should be prepared for an attack on Iran in the immediate aftermath of "another 9-11." That's "not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States," notes Geraldi. Can it get madder than this? The neocons' plans for a total reorganization of the "Greater Middle East" have been plain for some time now. Many have been warning against the prospect of an expansion of the Iraq War into Syria and Iran. You'd think that reality would smack these guys in the face and they'd call off anything so stupid. But they apparently think that by using conventional and nuclear weapons (first time any nation will do that since Nagasaki); by employing the Mujahadeen Khalq; by activating agents in place to organize demonstrations (as the CIA did so successfully in Iraq in 1953); by attacking from Azerbaijan they can actually pull this off. Do they even realize that southern Iraq and Iran constitute the heartland of historical Shiism, and that an attack on Iran will negate any goodwill among Shiites U.S. forces have acquired in Iraq? Maybe, here and there within the military itself, the madmen meet with quiet resistance. "Several senior Air Force officers involved in the planning," writes Giraldi, "are reportedly appalled at the implications of what they are doing---that Iran is being set up for an unprovoked nuclear attack" That's encouraging, surely. Good that senior Air Force officers should be appalled at their orders. Surely they must ask questions, such as: What do they mean by "another 9-11"? Could any, even small-time terrorist act in the U.S. (say, killing 52 in the Boston subway) be the signal for us to start bombing Iran? Does the Vice President's office anticipate this second 9-11 sometime soon? Would it be moral to attack Iran in the aftermath of a terrorist attack if Iran had nothing to do with it? Actually, why would Iran ever give the U.S. pretext for an attack? Am I going to be complicit in war crimes if I'm involved in this planned attack? What will this do for my long-term reputation? Will our troops in Iraq suffer as a result of the hatred for the U.S. another unprovoked attack is likely to generate? Am I going to be a part of a military project which will have no support anywhere in the world, except maybe in Israel? But the sentence finishes "---but no one is prepared to damage his career by posing any objections." That could change quickly, of course, if the Bush administration starts to sink under the weight of accumulating scandals. But the plan for the Iran attack is for it to come quickly, while the nation is in a state of shock---apparently in some near-future scenario---so that all those brewing scandals get placed on the back burners. The propaganda set-up's already been performed as well as possible. There's a list of charges against Iran, just like there was against Iraq. If they happen, President Bush will explain the Iran attacks as strikes reluctantly undertaken, as a last resort, to protect Americans from terrorist threats emanating out of Iran. The STRATCOM guys will know that's not true, and have to live with the knowledge. Or else they can do what some have apparently done so far: speak out, if anonymously, and just maybe force their commanders to abort this criminal war against Iran. Gary Leupp is Professor of History at Tufts University, and Adjunct Professor of Comparative Religion. He is the author of Servants, Shophands and Laborers in in the Cities of Tokugawa Japan; Male Colors: The Construction of Homosexuality in Tokugawa Japan; and Interracial Intimacy in Japan: Western Men and Japanese Women, 1543-1900. He is also a contributor to CounterPunch's merciless chronicle of the wars on Iraq, Afghanistan and Yugoslavia, Imperial Crusades. He can be reached at: gleupp@granite.tufts.edu ---- Iran Vows to Restart Nuclear Activities By ALI AKBAR DAREINI, Associated Press Writer Wed Jul 27, 2:33 PM ET http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050727/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_nuclear_4 TEHRAN, Iran - Iran said Wednesday it will restart some nuclear activities as soon as August and announced it has developed solid-fuel technology for its ballistic missiles, increasing the accuracy of weapons already able to reach Israel and U.S. forces in the Persian Gulf. The Shahab-3 missile — able to fly up to 1,200 miles, putting the entire Arabian Peninsula and even parts of Greece and Egypt within its range — is capable of carrying a nuclear warhead. Iran, however, insists its controversial nuclear program does not aim to develop weapons. The developments come as new hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad prepares to take office Aug. 6. Some Europeans worry he will take a tougher line in negotiations over Iran's nuclear program. Ahmedinejad has said his country will not pursue atomic weapons, but will also not submit to international pressure to abandon its nuclear program. Iran has decided to resume parts of the program it had frozen under an agreement with the Europeans, outgoing President Mohammad Khatami said Wednesday. The process to be resumed is an early stage in the development of nuclear fuel — the conversion of raw uranium into gas, Khatami said. He said Iran would not resume the next stage, enrichment of the gas. Iran has "no intention to end suspension of uranium enrichment," he said. Enrichment turns the gas into material that can be used either to produce weapons or as fuel for a nuclear reactor to produce energy. In November, Iran suspended all uranium enrichment-related activities to avoid possible U.N. sanctions and build trust in negotiations with the Europeans, who are trying to impose limits on Iran's program and ensure it cannot produce weapons. Iran has repeatedly said the suspension is voluntary and temporary. In May, it agreed to continue the suspension in return for a comprehensive plan by Europeans by early August, including economic incentives. Khatami said that once that plan is produced, it will restart work at the Isfahan conversion facility that reprocesses uranium into gas — whether or not the Europeans consent. "The end of the deadline is (when) the Europeans come up with their comprehensive plan," said Khatami. "It was expected that they will agree to Isfahan restarting activities. We prefer to do it with their agreement. If they don't, then the decision to resume activities in Isfahan has already been taken by the ruling system." Iran has said it does not want to make atomic weapons despite U.S. claims to the contrary, but defends its right to pursue a nuclear program for peaceful purposes. Meanwhile, Defense Minister Ali Shamkhani told The Associated Press that Iran has taken an "important step forward," successfully testing a solid-fuel engine for the Shahab-3 and developing technology to produce solid fuel domestically. "We have fully achieved proficiency in solid-fuel technology in producing missiles," said Shamkhani in Iran's first declaration that it has developed full access to solid-fuel missile technology. This enables the production of solid fuel, which makes missiles more durable and dramatically increases their accuracy. Missiles using liquid fuel are short-lived. Israeli officials would not immediately comment on the announcement. However, retired Israeli army Gen. Isaac Ben-Israel, a weapons expert now on the faculty of Tel Aviv University, said, "It doesn't matter what kind of fuel they use. What matters is how lethal the warhead is." "The solid fuel does not matter, it only helps maintenance. The Shahab-3 can reach Israel, and therefore it poses a threat regardless to the kind of fuel used," Ben-Israel said. Shamkhani said no test flight of a Shahab-3 missile has been carried out using solid fuel. However, he said Iran has used solid fuel with its Fateh-110 short-range missile, although it was unclear if the fuel was made in Iran or came from outside. The Fateh-110 is a surface-to-surface guided missile with a reported range of about 105 miles and is classified among Iran's most efficient missiles. The Shahab — which means "shooting star" in Farsi — was last successfully tested in 2002. Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards were equipped with it in July 2003. ---- EU set to offer Iran limited nuclear incentives Wed Jul 27, 2005 8:28 AM ET (Reuters) By Paul Taylor, European Affairs Editor http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticleSearch.aspx?storyID=214030+27-Jul-2005+RTRS&srch=nuclear BRUSSELS - Three European Union powers plan to offer Iran a limited package of nuclear, economic and political incentives next week to give up suspect nuclear work amid growing pessimism that Tehran's leaders will take the bait. Diplomats from Britain, France and Germany are due to hand over the proposals to the Iranian government after new hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad takes office next Wednesday, but signs are growing that they will get a dismissive reception. Outgoing President Mohammad Khatami said on Wednesday that Iran would resume some work on its nuclear fuel cycle, which the West suspects is part of a clandestine effort to produce a bomb, regardless of what the so-called EU3 group offers. "Our deadline for suspending nuclear work was the EU proposal. We will wait until the first days of August but will restart activities right afterwards," Khatami told reporters. EU diplomats said the European offer was predicated on Iran agreeing to maintain indefinitely its suspension of uranium enrichment, nuclear fuel reprocessing and related activities. Iran regards nuclear fuel cycle activities as a right under the Non-Proliferation Treaty, meant to prevent the spread of atomic weapons while allowing civilian nuclear work, and wants to be allowed to keep at least a pilot enrichment programme. The EU3 remain adamant, with strong U.S. backing, that they will agree to no enrichment or reprocessing activity. EU and Iranian officials say nuclear policy is under the control of Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, so the change of president from a moderate reformist to an Islamic ultra-conservative may alter the tone but not the substance. EMPTY BOX? The EU3 have threatened to report Iran to the United Nations Security Council for possible sanctions if it ends its voluntary suspension of enrichment-related activity. Under the package, the EU would offer a guaranteed supply of fuel for Iran's civilian reactors, provided they were under full supervision of the U.N. nuclear watchdog and spent fuel was returned in full to the supplier, the diplomats said. In addition, the EU3 would agree in principle to European companies building a nuclear power station in Iran besides the Bushehr reactor being completed by Russia, provided Tehran ratified a protocol allowing intrusive spot inspections and complied fully with the International Atomic Energy Agency. The "comprehensive package" will include a political and security dimension and the promise of greater trade and economic cooperation, on which talks conducted by the executive European Commission have been making good progress. The EU3 are also dangling the prospect of civilian aircraft sales. Politically, the EU would offer support for security cooperation in the Gulf region and a regular political dialogue on issues such as energy security, stabilising Iraq and Afghanistan, and fighting terrorism and drugs trafficking. None of this is very new or goes much beyond what the EU3 have been discussing with Iran since last December. One EU official involved said the package would be "a lot of gift-wrapping around a pretty empty box", since the EU could not commit commercial European companies to building power stations in Iran, especially if the United States made its opposition clear. The Bush administration made two gestures to support the EU effort in March. It stopped blocking Iran's application to start talks to join the World Trade Organisation and agreed to consider selling civilian aircraft spare parts. However, Washington is not considering any more carrots now, U.S. officials say. The limited nature of the European incentives on offer reflected the low level of international confidence in Iran's nuclear intentions, a senior EU diplomat said. "Is it going to work? I would bet 'No'," he said. "But it is worth trying, and it gives the Iranians a clear choice." Tehran would have to choose between growing international isolation if it resumed enrichment and the prospect of increasing cooperation with Europe and integration into the global economy if it gave up sensitive nuclear work. "This is like an old game of chicken. Who will swerve first," a senior U.S. official said. "I think what Iran is doing and what the West is doing is just delaying what may be an inevitability, but delay is not such a small thing." -------- japan Hiroshima's A-Bomb Memorial Defaced The Associated Press Wednesday, July 27, 2005; 8:27 AM http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/27/AR2005072700579_pf.html TOKYO -- A suspected right-wing extremist vandalized a memorial for the victims of the atomic bombing in Hiroshima, scraping off a reference to Japan's war effort as a mistake, officials and news reports said Wednesday. The cenotaph for the bomb victims at the center of Hiroshima's Peace Memorial Park was defaced Tuesday night, Hiroshima Mayor Tadatoshi Akiba said. "Such an act not only tramples the hearts and souls of Hiroshima and those wishing for world peace, but also desecrates the spirits of atomic bomb victims," Akiba said in a statement. Kyodo News agency reported that police Wednesday arrested Takeo Shimazu, a member of a right-wing group. Police refused to confirm the report. Shimazu reportedly objected to the criticism of Japan's imperial policies in Asia in the 1930s and '40s. The memorial says: "Let all the souls here rest in peace, as we will never repeat this mistake." "I did not like the word `mistake' part of the memorial," Kyodo quoted Shimazu as telling police. "It was not the Japanese citizens, but the United States who dropped the atomic bomb and made the mistake." Shimazu is accused of using a hammer and chisel to deface the stone memorial, which is a large park near the epicenter of the Aug. 6, 1945, blast that killed 140,000 people. The vandalism came as Japan is readying to mark the 60th anniversary of the bombing, which was followed by another atomic attack by the United States on Nagasaki on Aug. 9. Japan subsequently surrendered to the Allies on Aug. 15, bringing World War II to an end. ---- Rightist destroys reference to Japan's 'mistake' at Hiroshima memorial TOKYO (AFP) Jul 27, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050727025919.s5wqvihv.html An avowed nationalist was arrested Wednesday for vandalising Hiroshima's main memorial to the world's first atomic bombing 60 years ago by chiseling out a reference to Japan's "mistake" of waging war, police said. The activist cut a hole in the granite Memorial Cenotaph dedicated to Hiroshima's 140,000 bomb dead that read, "Let all the souls here rest in peace as we will never repeat this mistake." Takeo Shimazu, an unemployed 27-year-old affiliated with a right-wing group, turned himself in to police before dawn with a hammer and two chisels and told officers he objected to the word "mistake." "Why should the Japanese apologize in a monument they built? It is the Americans who committed a mistake," he was quoted as saying by the police. The vandalism comes less than two weeks before Hiroshima is due to mark the 60th anniversary of the nuclear attack on August 6, 1945. An annual ceremony to mourn the dead is held in the Peace Memorial Park in front of the Memorial Cenotaph, an arch over a coffin with a register of bomb victims' names. The memorial was dedicated in 1952 by then mayor Shinzo Hamai who said the "mistake" referred to Japan's militarism and that visitors to the cenotaph should "pledge never again to repeat the same sin." Current Mayor Tadatoshi Akiba said the defacing of the monument "desecrates the souls of atomic bomb victims." "It is a crime of the most malicious kind that violates the hearts of the people in Hiroshima and the rest of the world who wish for world peace," Akiba said in a statement. "I feel terrible resentment." The cenotaph has been under camera surveillance since 2002 when another vandal dabbed it with paint. The latest vandalism comes amid high tension between Japan and neighboring nations which accuse Tokyo of not showing remorse for atrocities during its conquest of Asia. The United States dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima on August 6 and Nagasaki three days later, killing more than 210,000 people instantly or from horrific burns. Emperor Hirohito surrendered on August 15, ending World War II. ---- Japanese maestro takes baton from Bernstein to pray in Hiroshima, Nagasaki TOKYO (AFP) Jul 27, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050727020927.r1xvnuwq.html When Yukata Sado leads the music on the 60th anniversary of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear bombings, he will not only be praying for peace but taking the baton from his late master Leonard Bernstein. The 44-year-old conductor will lead memorial concerts in Hiroshima on August 6 and Nagasaki three days later, when the two cities separately mourn the more than 200,000 people who died in the world's only atomic attacks. Sado, now one of the world's leading directors, accepted the job because he wanted to stand on the podium where the great US maestro wielded a wand in 1985 to pray for nuclear disarmament and world peace. "Twenty years ago when I was still nobody, I watched television at a dingy little restaurant and saw Leony deliver a message of peace through music from Hiroshima. It moved and stunned me," says Sado, who became one of the closest pupils of Bernstein two years later. "What I learnt from him was that music is a prayer and hope for peace," Sado says in an interview with AFP, recalling his lessons from Bernstein, who died in 1990. Sado will lead a specially formed orchestra for the events, titled "Concert for Peace 2005," drawing top artists including Latvian-born cellist Mischa Maisky to play numbers such as "Make Our Garden Grow," composed by Bernstein. "What music can do may be limited, but music can get to people's heart behind religions, languages, cultures. Music has a wonder power," a smiling and courteous Sado says in his backstage room ahead of a concert in Tokyo. Sado, born in the ancient Japanese capital of Kyoto, took to conducting in his own way. Unlike many young prospective conductors driven since their youth, Sado as a youngster was copying rock stars such as Deep Purple playing keyboard in a band. But enlightened by Bernstein's performance in Hiroshima, he blitzed along to become a serious conductor. He made his global debut in 1989 with the first prize at the 39th Concours International de Jeunes Chefs d'Orchestre in Besancon, France. He is now the principal conductor of the Orchestre de Concerts Lamoureux in Paris and directs other major orchestras in France, Germany, Italy, Switzerland and Japan. Sado, known for his dynamic conducting with full use of his stout body, is often seen as a successor to Seiji Ozawa, a globally acclaimed conductor who is now the music director of the Vienna State Opera. Much like his late master, Sado says he is driven to music in part out of concern for humanity, a feeling reinforced by tragedies such as the July 7 terrorist bombings in London. "Although people in our generation have not experienced the war, it is our duty to deliver an important message of peace to the next generation," Sado says. "But the reality is ... we have yet to achieve peace," Sado says. "Terrorism occurs everywhere in the world. People are forced to live under the threat of violence. Something is wrong," he said. "Something is. No one has a right to take someone else's life." Sado's efforts at peace through music have extended to victims of natural disasters. He has become the director of a new music hall near Kobe which will open later this year marking the 10th anniversary of the western Japanese city's earthquake. He is forming a new orchestra for the Hyogo Performing Arts Center in Nishinomiya, one of the hardest hit areas by the quake that killed more than 6,000 people on January 17, 1995. "In such emergency cases as the Kobe earthquake, the first priority is not music but food and daily necessities," Sado says. "But once the priority has been fulfilled, people naturally seek something that can move them and attract them." Sado will conduct Beethoven's Ninth for the opening of the new concert hall on October 22. In March, he also directed members of top orchestras such as the Berlin Philharmoniker and Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra to mark the opening of World Exposition, an international showcase of Earth-friendly technology in central Japan's Aichi province. -------- korea South Korea Utilities Target $1billion for Renewable Energy REUTERS SOUTH KOREA: July 27, 2005 http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/31799/story.htm SEOUL - South Korean utilities will invest a combined $1.1 billion in developing renewable energy sources over the next three years, amid high oil prices and on concerns about global warming, the energy ministry said on Tuesday. More and more countries are eyeing alternative fuel sources such as bio fuels and renewable energy, with oil prices at record highs, and after the Kyoto Protocol on curbing air pollution came into effect in February. State-controlled power monopoly Korea Electric Power Corp. (KEPCO) and several other state-run companies agreed to spend a combined 1.1 trillion won ($1.09 billion) on developing renewable energy from 2006 through 2008, the Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Energy said in a statement. "The agreement aims to better cope with the rapidly changing global energy environment amid soaring oil prices and the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol," the ministry said. Energy-deficient South Korea, which is extremely vulnerable to rises in oil prices as it has to import all its crude oil needs, is also joining the move to reduce its oil use and meet tightening global standards on the environment. In 2004, renewable energy including solar and wind energy, hydro-electric power and farm-produced fuel made up just 2.3 percent of South Korea's total energy mix, well below that of oil, gas, coal and nuclear power. Renewable energy accounted for 13 percent of Denmark's mix and 6.2 percent in France, the ministry said. But analysts have said global efforts to boost consumption of alternative fuels have a long way to go before putting a small dent in worldwide demand for fossil fuels. The ministry said the three-year investment was expected to produce 210,000 tonnes of oil equivalent (TOE) renewable energy, equivalent to 1.59 million barrels of crude oil. That figure would account for just 0.2 percent of the country's annual petroleum demand. It added the project should cut emissions of greenhouse gases by a total of 170,000 tonnes over the three years, or 0.12 percent of the country's total emission of the gases last year. Other Korean companies engaged in the project include Korea Water Resources Corp., Korea District Heating Co. and KEPCO's six power generation units, the ministry said. ($US1=1012.7 Won) ---- US sticks with stand North Korea should end all nuclear programs WASHINGTON (AFP) Jul 27, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050727194948.lzrs5sfz.html The United States maintained its stand Wednesday that North Korea should abandon all nuclear programs, including a uranium enrichment scheme that Washington accuses the Stalinist state of developing. "We've talked about this issue in the past in public, and our view is that North Korea would need to give up all of its nuclear programs. That would include plutonium, as well as highly enriched uranium. That still stands," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack told reporters. He was responding to reports suggesting that the North Koreans had denied they have any uranium enrichment capability during the fourth round of six-party nuclear negotiations launched in Beijing on Tuesday. The issue of highly enriched uranium, which can be used to produce nuclear explosive devices, was mentioned in a keynote speech by the United States at the talks. North Korea denied having the secret uranium enrichment program, either for weapons or for peaceful purposes, in a bilateral meeting with the United States on Tuesday, some unconfirmed reports say. North Korea has claimed it already possesses nuclear weapons but has never admitted having a uranium-enrichment program. North Korea abandoned the six-party talks last year, complaining of hostile US policy, but returned to the negotiating table after a 13-month hiatus -- enticed in part by a softer US approach. The stand-off was sparked in October 2002 when Washington said North Korea had admitted operating a nuclear-weapons program based on enriched uranium, in violation of a 1994 agreement to halt the North's weapons program based on plutonium production. ---- China urges all sides to 'seize opportunity' in nuclear talks BEIJING (AFP) Jul 27, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050727071807.fucw7fg1.html China Wednesday urged the United States, North Korea and other parties to show "political courage" and "seize the opportunity" on the second day of talks aimed at ending the North's nuclear weapons program. The nation hosting the six-party talks is looking to build on the momentum of two lengthy bilateral contacts between main protagonists North Korea and the United States as pressure mounts for progress in the three-year standoff. "We are facing challenges and we are also facing difficult-to-come-by opportunities," said Wu Dawei, China's chief delegate to the talks, according to China Central Television. "We should, with the greatest political courage, seize the opportunity to resolve the challenges and jointly chart a better future for Northeast Asia." The second day of talks got under way Wednesday on an optimistic note after what were described as positive contacts Monday and Tuesday between the Stalinist state and the United States. Both have adopted a less confrontational tone than in the previous three rounds. Chief US envoy Christopher Hill told reporters late Tuesday he had "good discussions" with his North Korean counterpart Kim Kye-Gwan on the first day of the talks that also involve China, Japan, Russia and South Korea. "It was very businesslike. We avoided any rhetoric. It was an effort to get all the issues on the table, to make sure we know what is important to each of us, so it was positive in that sense," he said. The two sides discussed the US proposal put forward in June 2004 that required North Korea to give an up-front pledge to dismantle all its plutonium- and uranium-based weapons programmes before receiving any energy or other assistance. North Korea at the time rejected the US offer and instead wanted a step-by-step approach to dismantling its atomic arms programmes. "We talked about the June proposal, talked about the sequencing of the proposal, the importance they attach to the sequencing where they don't want to have to have obligations ahead of other people's obligations," said Hill. This remains a key sticking point and Russia's representative Alexander Alekseyev urged the two sides to be flexible. "We are sure that the nuclear problem on the Korean peninsula can only be resolved in stages, in moving towards each other's position," he told Russian news agency RIA Novosti. "We aim for the US and North Korea to have full and broad flexibility." In an effort to reach a breakthrough, South Korea has offered to provide the North with 500,000 tonnes of rice and some 2,000 megawatts of electricity if it abandons its nuclear ambitions. Convoys of rice began crossing the heavily-fortified Korean border Tuesday. In opening remarks to the talks Tuesday both sides bowed to pressure and adopted a more conciliatory approach. The US told North Korea it views it as a sovereign nation and will not attack it. Pyongyang has long urged the US to establish diplomatic relations and provide assurances of non-aggression if the deadlock is to be broken. For its part, North Korea said it wants to work towards a nuclear-free Korean peninsula. Each delegate Wednesday delivered another short keynote address to a plenary session behind closed doors at the Diaoyutai State Guesthouse before they split into smaller groups. Japan's chief delegate Keinichiro Sasae said the onus was now on North Korea to start making decisions. "Japan is ready to commit itself to providing security guarantees in return for North Korea's commitment to abolishing its nuclear program," he said. "As for energy assistance, Japan welcomes the South Korean government's initiative through its 'important proposal'." North Korea abandoned the six-party talks last year, complaining of a hostile US policy, and has since claimed it already possesses nuclear weapons. But the softer US approach, coupled with a threat to take the issue to the United Nations, enticed it back to the negotiating table and the delegates to the talks say the atmosphere is much better than before. The standoff was sparked in October 2002 when Washington accused the North of operating a nuclear weapons programme based on enriched uranium in violation of a 1994 agreement. ---- China, US call for "substantial results" at Korean nuclear talks WASHINGTON (AFP) Jul 27, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050727173555.6u0jdx7a.html China and the United States want "substantial results" in ongoing multilateral talks to woo North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons program, China's presidential envoy said Wednesday. Speaking to reporters after a lengthy meeting with US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, envoy Tang Jiaxuan said both wanted the current six-party talks in Beijing to "move forward" and "produce substantial results." Tang, a former foreign minister and currently a state councillor in charge of foreign affairs, is Chinese President Hu Jintao's special envoy to North Korea. Tang had held talks with Rice when she visited Beijing earlier this month and then flew to Pyongyang for a rare meeting with North Korea's reclusive leader Kim Jong-Il. China, with its close ties with North Korea, was the key player in the diplomatic efforts to bringing Pyongyang back to six-way talks, which reconvened on Tuesday after being stalled for about a year. Tang, who met Rice for about 70 minutes at her office Wednesday, said they had "very good" talks and that the top US diplomat was "very satisfied" with the discussions. They felt that "hard work" and "cooperation" were essential for diplomatic efforts to achieve a breakthrough in the nuclear talks among China, the two Koreas, the United States, Japan and Russia. After two days of talks in Beijing, fundamental differences remain with North Korea but discussions would continue, a senior US official said in the Chinese capital. North Korea had said it was willing to dismantle its atomic weapons and allow their disposal to be verified in return for a normalisation of ties with the United States, among other conditions. The North has long urged Washington to establish diplomatic relations and provide assurances of non-aggression if the deadlock is to be broken. While the US has said it recognises North Korea's sovereignty and has no intention of attacking it, it has made no commitment to normalising relations. North Korea abandoned the six-party talks last year, complaining of hostile US policy, and has since claimed it already possesses nuclear weapons. But a softer US approach, coupled with a threat to take the issue to the United Nations, enticed it back to the negotiating table. Delegates at the talks say the atmosphere is much better than before. -------- space Space is No Place for Cowboys by Alice Slater Wednesday, July 27, 2005 by MinutemanMedia.org http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0727-29.htm Notwithstanding the CIA evaluation after September 11th that a missile attack on the United States is the least likely threat to our nation, the Bush administration fanned the fears of terror to implement plans to weaponize space under the guise of its so called “missile defense” program. In order to move forward, Mr. Bush trashed the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with Russia. That increased the certainty that the development of anti-ballistic missiles would lead to an arms race and would forestall further efforts for nuclear disarmament. Indeed, as nations met during the subsequent treaty review last month, newspaper headlines trumpeted that the Air Force was already seeking permission to deploy its lethal assortment of space weapons. These included killer satellites, space lasers to hit targets on earth, radio waves to disable enemy communications, and the blasphemously named “rods from God,” 250 pound tungsten bars which can be hurled down from an orbiting platform. Right now, we are in a costly arms race with ourselves. Russia and China repeatedly call on the United Nations to begin negotiations on a treaty to ban weapons in space. Last year, every nation on earth voted to support their resolution except the United States, Israel, and Micronesia. The 1967 Outer Space Treaty prohibits weapons of mass destruction in space, but doesn’t ban the current U.S. space weapons in development. It is folly to assume that the United States can “dominate and control the military use of space,” as the U.S. Space Command proclaims, or that it is "possible to project power through and from space in response to events anywhere in the world.” Just as we were unable to maintain a monopoly in nuclear weapons, we will face a similar challenge in space. Indeed, Russia, which has declared that it will not be the first country to field weapons in space, also announced that it would consider resorting to force were the United States to put a combat weapon out there. And China announced possible plans to develop “parasitic” microsatellites that could attach themselves to U.S. satellites and disrupt and destroy them on ground command. Further, the Bush administration’s fixation on using the heavens as a battleground is sorely affecting our ability to control the proliferation of nuclear weapons here on earth. Air Force Space Command leader, General Lance Lord, defined “space superiority” as “freedom to attack as well as freedom from attack” in space. He described the new Air Force strategy, Global Strike, as giving the United States the ability to bombard the planet with a half-ton of munitions that could destroy targets “anywhere in the world.” Is it any wonder that countries designated by Mr. Bush as the “axis of evil,” like Iran and North Korea, seek nuclear weapons as a hedge against U.S. aggression from space? Or that nuclear disarmament talks are stalled, not only by U.S. abrogation of the ABM Treaty, but by Pentagon assertions that the United States must prevent the use of space by other nations and establish “full spectrum dominance?” President John F. Kennedy in 1962 acknowledged that “space science, like nuclear science and all technology, has no conscience of its own”…and noted, “whether it will become a force for good or ill depends on man…. [O]nly if the United States occupies a position of pre-eminence can we help decide whether this new ocean will be a sea of peace or a new terrifying theater of war.” While acknowledging that we can’t go unprotected “against the hostile misuse of space,” he urged that space “be explored and mastered without feeding the fires of war.” The United States now occupies a position of pre-eminence. The fate of the earth is in our hands. With a world of willing partners, we should negotiate a ban on weapons in space and preserve the use of space for peace. Alice Slater is president of the Global Resource Action Center for the Environment (GRACE) www.gracelinks.org ---- Report: China working on anti-satellite systems 7/27/2005 11:23 AM By Leonard David, Space.com http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/space/2005-07-27-china-satellites_x.htm A recently issued report by the U.S. Office of the Secretary of Defense has cast an eye on China's growing space capability. The annual report — The Military Power of the People's Republic of China 2005 – flatly claims that China is developing and intends to field anti-satellite (ASAT) systems. In assessing China's overall military prowess, the U.S. Defense report stresses that China is "facing a strategic crossroads." Noting that China's emergence has significant implications for the region and the world, the Defense Department assessment stresses that "questions remain" about choices that China's leaders will make regarding its military might as that country's power and influence grow. Expanding launch vehicle industry The Secretary of Defense report to Congress was issued July 19, and is a yearly effort that delves into the current and future military strategy of the People's Republic of China. The report's intent is to address "the current and probable future course of military-technological development on the People's Liberation Army and the tenets and probable development of Chinese grand strategy, security strategy, and military strategy, and of the military organizations and operational concepts, through the next 20 years." Within the report's pages, a number of items are flagged specific to China's space capabilities. The document points out that China's space launch vehicle industry is expanding to support the national emphasis on satellite launch capability and its human spaceflight program. Credible ASAT capability? In the arena of anti-satellite (ASAT) weapons, China is making headway, the report claims. "China is working on, and plans to field, ASAT systems. Beijing has and will continue to enhance its satellite tracking and identification network — the first step in establishing a credible ASAT capability. China can currently destroy or disable satellites only by launching a ballistic missile or space-launch vehicle armed with a nuclear weapon. However, there are many risks associated with this method, and consequences from use of nuclear weapons," the report says. China is also conducting research to develop ground-based laser ASAT weapons. The report cites the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency as believing that Beijing "eventually could develop a laser weapon capable of damaging or destroying satellites." Given this technology — at lower power thresholds – "Chinese researchers may believe that low-energy lasers can 'blind' sensors on low-Earth-orbiting satellites," the report suggests, but whether Beijing has tested such a capability is unclear. No evidence to back up claims Jeffrey Lewis, a Research Fellow at the Center for International and Security Studies at the University of Maryland's School of Public Policy in College Park, Maryland, is skeptical of some of the Pentagon's assertions. The important point to ask, according to Lewis, is how does this report compare to previous years? "In general, the 2005 edition is much more detailed than previous reports. But not when it comes to Chinese ASAT capabilities," Lewis told SPACE.com. "Although the 2005 edition does flatly state—as have previous reports—that China intends to field ASAT systems, the 2005 edition omits most of the evidence cited in previous reports, including discredited claims about the development of a parasite microsatellite and a ground-based direct ascent ASAT that was supposed to be fielded as early as this year." Lewis said that, although the U.S. Department of Defense is still willing to assert that China intends to deploy ASATs, "it's pretty clear they don't have any evidence to back that up." Modernization efforts In a section on China's "Space and Counterspace" activities, the report contends that Beijing has focused on building the infrastructure to develop advanced space-based command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (C4ISR) and targeting capabilities. "Building a modern ISR [Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance] architecture is likely one of the primary drivers behind Beijing's space endeavors and a critical component of its overall C4ISR modernization efforts," the report states. Beijing's ongoing space-based programs with potential military applications include its manned spacecraft activities. The U.S. Secretary of Defense assessment notes that China launched its first manned spacecraft into Earth orbit on October 15, 2003. Furthermore, Chinese press reports indicate that it will send up a two-person crew on a five-day mission in September of this year. Possible military applications Other space-based programs with possible military applications are also discussed in the report: China has two remote-sensing satellite programs known as Ziyuan-1 (ZY-1), also known as the China-Brazil Earth Resources Satellite, and ZY-2. China launched the ZY-1B in October 2003. A third ZY-2 satellite was launched in October 2004. ZY-2 payloads probably are digital imagery reconnaissance satellites and have worldwide coverage. Beijing also tested new film-based imagery satellites and small digital imagery satellites in 2003 and 2004. China is interested in electronic intelligence (ELINT) or signals intelligence (SIGINT) reconnaissance satellites. Although these digital data systems probably will be able to transmit directly to ground sites, China may be developing a system of data relay satellites to support global coverage. Furthermore, Beijing has acquired mobile data reception equipment that could support more rapid data transmission to deployed military forces and units. China is studying and seeking foreign assistance on small satellites. It has launched a number of them, including an oceanographic research satellite, Haiyang (HY)-1, in 2002 with at least two more satellites in this series, HY-2 and -3, expected. Beijing launched four small satellites during 2004; two of these probably have imagery missions and the other two possibly are conducting space environmental research. Other missions for satellites of this class include Earth observation, communications, and navigation. China is developing microsatellites – weighing less than 220 pounds (100 kilograms) – for remote sensing and networks of electro-optical and radar satellites. In April 2004 Beijing launched a microsatellite with a probable imagery mission. A joint venture between China's Tsinghua University and the United Kingdom's University of Surrey is building a constellation of seven mini-satellites. The U.S. Department of Defense report also scopes out various trends in space modernization, including the goal of rapid launch satellites. "With ever-better satellites, China is becoming a peer in quality to the world's leading producers," the report says. Space walks and space stations In human spaceflight, after China's two-person mission scheduled for this fall, the report explains that China hopes to conduct space walks and docking missions with a space lab by 2010, followed by a full space station by 2020. The report observes that in 2004, China placed 10 satellites into orbit, the most of any year, and has a similar schedule through 2006. "It hopes to have more than 100 satellites in orbit by 2010, and launch an additional 100 satellites by 2020." In the next decade, the report continues, Beijing most likely will field radar, ocean surveillance, and improved film-based photo-reconnaissance satellites. "China will eventually deploy advanced imagery, reconnaissance, and Earth resource systems with military applications." In the interim, the report adds, China probably will supplement existing coverage with commercial SPOT (France), LANDSAT (U.S.), RADARSAT (Canada), Ikonos (U.S.), and Russian satellite imagery systems. China: beyond any crossroads John Tkacik, Jr., a Senior Research Fellow in China Policy in the Asian Studies Center at The Heritage Foundation, a Washington, D.C. conservative think tank advised that the Pentagon report deserves a careful reading. Doing so would leave a reader with no doubt that China's "ambitious" weapons modernization and doctrinal reforms are aimed at promoting vast increases in its "comprehensive national power." The compendium of Pentagon facts in the new report describe a China already well past any "crossroads" he stresses in a July 25 press statement from the group. Tkacik notes that China's next steps—disputing the Pentagon's view—is, in his opinion, not hard to forecast. He suggests that the report's view of "current trends" indicate China has already chosen a pathway along which China would emerge to exert dominant influence in an expanding sphere -------- u.s. nuc facilities -------- maryland Calvert Panel Eager For Another Reactor Expansion of Nuclear Plant Supported By Amit R. Paley Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, July 27, 2005; B02 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/26/AR2005072601586_pf.html The Calvert Board of County Commissioners yesterday urged a consortium of electric companies to choose Southern Maryland as the site of what could become the first nuclear power reactor built in the United States in 30 years. The Calvert Cliffs nuclear power plant, 50 miles southeast of Washington, is one of six sites that the consortium, NuStart Energy Development LCC, is considering for a new type of reactor. By a 5 to 0 vote, the commissioners expressed support for the addition of a third reactor to the Lusby plant, which is Calvert's largest taxpayer and private employer. "Supporting the expansion of Calvert Cliffs was not a difficult decision," the commissioners wrote in a letter to NuStart, which includes the nation's largest nuclear power companies. "Calvert Cliffs plays a vital role in the County and State economy." The nuclear plant, which produces 20 percent of Maryland's electricity, attracted national attention last month when President Bush spoke there to urge Congress to pass legislation encouraging the construction of nuclear reactors. Local opposition to the power plant is almost nonexistent. At yesterday's meeting, every commissioner proudly expressed support for Calvert Cliffs, which is owned by Baltimore-based Constellation Energy. No one spoke out against the plant's expansion. "You've been a great neighbor," board President David F. Hale (R-Owings) told Constellation officials. "We hope to keep you forever." The commissioners said the nuclear plant, which went online in 1975, transformed Calvert from one of the state's poorest counties to one of the richest. Calvert Cliffs employs about 1,000 workers and pays about $15.3 million in property taxes. Linda S. Vassallo, director of the county's department of economic development, said the county and state plan to put together a package of financial incentives to encourage NuStart to select Calvert County as a site for a new reactor. The consortium, which includes Constellation, plans to apply to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for licenses to build and operate plants at two of the six sites under consideration. NuStart officials say they expect to select the finalists by October and hope the plants will open by 2014. -------- utah Reid torpedoes Hatch's plan for terrorism study Feud: The Utahn sought a check on the proposed Goshute N-waste site By Robert Gehrke The Salt Lake Tribune 7/27/2005 07:40 AM http://www.sltrib.com/ci_2892924 WASHINGTON - Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid has thwarted Sen. Orrin Hatch's plan to require a terrorism-threat study of a private nuclear waste site proposed for the Utah desert. Hatch's Homeland Security proposal was stopped short Monday night because of objections raised by Reid, D-Nev. It was the latest instance where the nuclear neighbors have been at odds in their fight to keep the waste out of their own backyards. Hatch had planned to amend the Energy bill to require completion of the terrorist study before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission could grant a license to Private Fuel Storage, the group seeking to store 44,000 tons of nuclear waste in the state. But Hatch said Reid threatened to bring down the entire Energy bill if Hatch's amendment was included, prompting Senate Energy Committee Chairman Pete Domenici, R-N.M., to ask Hatch late Monday to drop the effort. "I had the chairmen of both [the House and Senate committees] working with me, and Senator Reid misconstrued it and promised to stop the entire Energy bill if that amendment was attached to it," Hatch said. Reid's spokeswoman, Tessa Hafen, said the senator never threatened to block the entire Energy bill. Reid had concerns about Hatch's amendment, believing it could encourage other amendments affecting plans for a permanent waste dump in Yucca Mountain, Nev., which Reid is committed to stopping, she said. "It could have opened up a can of worms as far as nuclear waste issues go," she said. "His concern has always been about how the waste would be transported, so that's a concern of his, but it needs to be approached the right way," she said. "He just didn't feel that's the right way to do it." It would not be the first time Reid has scuttled efforts by Utah's delegation to stall or halt the PFS site. In the past two Congresses, he was among senators resisting Utah's efforts to designate the Cedar Mountain Wilderness Area near the Skull Valley reservation. The wilderness designation would prevent a rail line from being built across the wilderness area to ship nuclear waste to the proposed PFS site. Some in Utah's congressional delegation have suggested that Reid's opposition was a grudge against Hatch and Sen. Bob Bennett, who voted to send the waste to Yucca Mountain. Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, has once again included the wilderness language in a defense policy bill, which has passed the House and is now before the Senate, but Reid again opposes the measure. "People ask why the Utah delegation doesn't work with Sen. Reid" on nuclear waste issues, Hatch said. "Sen. Reid clearly doesn't have Utah's interests in mind and, in my opinion, America's national security interest, for that matter." Reid has proposed an alternative to both the Goshute facility and Yucca Mountain. He suggests the Energy Department should store nuclear waste at the facilities that generated it, but he has yet to introduce legislation to make such a policy change. The NRC is in the final stages of its review before deciding whether to license the PFS site, which would store nuclear fuel in steel and concrete canisters. A decision could come by the end of the summer. The state has vowed to go to court if the license is granted. Hatch said he would keep working to get the Department of Homeland Security to study the PFS proposal. "I believe if we're concerned about terrorism, then Homeland Security has to be involved in this, and I'm going to see that they are one way or the other," Hatch said. ---- Terrorism Study of Nuclear Waste Site Scrapped GSN, Wednesday, July 27, 2005 http://www.nti.org/d_newswire/issues/2005_7_27.html#4DC7880F U.S. Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) said Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) threatened to block energy legislation being considered in the Senate if Hatch did not drop an amendment requiring a terrorism threat assessment of a planned nuclear waste site in Utah, the Salt Lake Tribune reported today (see GSN, May 26). Hatch’s amendment would have required the assessment before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission could give Private Fuel Storage a license to store 44,000 tons of nuclear waste in the Utah desert. Senate Energy Committee Chairman Pete Domenici (R-N.M.) asked Hatch to drop the amendment when he learned that Reid planned to block the bill, according to the Tribune. “I had the chairmen of both (the House and Senate committees) working with me, and Senator Reid misconstrued it and promised to stop the entire energy bill if that amendment was attached to it,” Hatch said. However, Reid spokeswoman Tessa Hafen said the senator did not threaten to torpedo the bill, but was concerned that the amendment could prompt other amendments regarding the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste site in Nevada. Reid is opposed to the planned facility. “It could have opened up a can of worms as far as nuclear waste issues go,” Hafen said. “His concern has always been about how the waste would be transported, so that's a concern of his, but it needs to be approached the right way. He just didn't feel that's the right way to do it” (Robert Gehrke, Salt Lake Tribune, July 27). -------- vermont Electrical Problem Shuts Down Vermont Yankee Nuclear Plant BRATTLEBORO, Vermont, July 27, 2005 (ENS) http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jul2005/2005-07-27-09.asp#anchor1 The Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant is still shut down today, after a serious electrical problem caused the main generator to automatically trip offline on Monday afternoon. Rob Williams, spokesman at Entergy's 32 year old boiling water reactor, told local media the incident is still under investigation. No radiation was released during the incident and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission classified it as a non-emergency. When the main generator shut off, the power supply reduction caused the two emergency diesel generators to automatically start. The normal water level in the reactor vessel is about 14 feet above the top of the reactor core, explains Dave Lochbaum, a nuclear engineer with the Union of Concerned Scientists. "The collapsing of bubbles when the reactor automatically shut down – similar to the effect of lifting a boiling pan of water off a stove – along with the increased pressure resulting from the closure of the turbine inlet valves, drove the water level down about seven feet to the level where the main steam isolation valves automatically closed to prevent further loss of cooling water," he explained. The Reactor Core Isolation Cooling and High Pressure Coolant Injection systems automatically started, adding enough water to the reactor vessel to raise the level back to normal. The main steam isolation valves were opened and the normal feedwater system was used to keep the reactor vessel water level at the normal level. The emergency diesel generators were then manually turned off. The plant's generator and reactor remain at high temperatures, called a hot shutdown. If the plant remains inactive for an long period, plant operators could be forced to go to a cold shut down, which would make returning to power more costly. ---- Groups to study VY radiation emissions By CAROLYN LORIé Brattleboro Reformer Staff Wednesday, July 27, 2005 - 2:15:47 AM EST http://www.reformer.com/Stories/0,1413,102~8860~2983201,00.html BRATTLEBORO -- At the behest of local organizations, the Radiation and Public Health Project will be examining the levels of Strontium-90 in baby teeth belonging to children living within a 50-mile radius of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear reactor in Vernon. Strontium-90 is one of the many radioactive byproducts of nuclear fission believed to cause cancer. Its release from power plants is monitored by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The project is being organized by the Citizens Awareness Network and Traprock Peace Center of Deerfield, Mass., with financial support from the New England Coalition. All three groups oppose nuclear power and have been active in efforts to shut down Vermont Yankee. At a press conference on Tuesday, Agnes Reynolds, a registered nurse and a research associate with the Radiation and Public Health Project, announced preliminary results of the study. Since December 2004, 26 baby teeth have been collected from counties all over Vermont and New Hampshire. Nine of those teeth belonged to children living in Windham County or Cheshire County in New Hampshire, while 17 where from elsewhere. According to Reynolds, the teeth from Windham and Cheshire counties showed levels of Strontium-90 that were 61 percent higher than the others. Because the sample was so small, Reynolds said the early findings are not statistically significant. The project hopes to collect at least 100 teeth from Vermont, Massachusetts and New Hampshire. Baby teeth would have the highest concentration of the radioactive isotope, as not enough time has passed for it to decay. Strontium-90 has a half-life of about 28 years. It can be carried in wind and rain and enters the body through contaminated food and cow's milk. Once in the body, it mimics calcium and gets deposited in bones and teeth. The Radiation and Public Health Project is a New York based non-profit founded by scientists and physicians. The group has been collecting baby teeth from around the country since 1998, the majority of them from children living near nuclear power plants. More than 4,400 teeth have been tested for Strontium-90 levels. According to the project's Web site, baby teeth belonging to children living within 100 miles of a nuclear power plant have significantly higher levels and that the overall levels have been climbing throughout the country since the 1980s. Those findings, however, have been disputed. In July, 2004, the Nuclear Energy Institute, a Washington, D.C.-based policy organization for the nuclear industry, issued a report claiming that Strontium-90 releases from power plants are so low they can hardly be detected. The radioactive isotope is present in the environment, the group claims, because of nuclear bomb tests carried out during the Cold War. Information posted at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Web site, supports that claim. The federal regulator also states that the second largest release of Strontium-90 occurred during the 1986 accident at the Chernobyl nuclear reactor in the Ukraine, which could also account for elevated levels found in baby teeth since then. Robert Stirewalt, public information officer at the Vermont Department of Health, said department staff were reviewing material from the Radiation and Public Health Project and would state their position today. Tuesday's press conference was attended by state Sens. Roderick Gander, D-Windham, and Jeanette White, D-Windham, and Rep. Steve Darrow, D-Putney. White said she hoped the Department of Health would at least help get the word out about the study, through its various state-wide programs. ---- Yankee still shut down, probe continues By CAROLYN LORIé Brattleboro Reformer Staff Wednesday, July 27, 2005 - 2:15:47 AM EST http://www.reformer.com/Stories/0,1413,102~8860~2983203,00.html BRATTLEBORO -- Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant remains shut down today, after an electrical problem took it offline on Monday afternoon. Rob Williams, spokesman for the plant, said the incident is still under investigation. It is believed that a broken electrical insulator in the plant's switchyard caused the problem. The insulator, said Williams, was sent out for inspection. No radiation was released during the incident and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission classified it as a non-emergency. The plant's generator and reactor remain at high temperatures, which is known as a "hot" shutdown. If the plant remains inactive for an extended period of time, plant operators could be forced to go to a "cold" shut down, which would make returning to power more complex and costly. In the meantime, Vermont's utilities are buying power on the spot market, which is considerably more expensive than power from Vermont Yankee. -------- us nuc waste Ongoing challenges of nuke waste disposal By Andrea R. Mihailescu UPI Energy Correspondent Published July 27, 2005 http://www.wpherald.com/storyview.php?StoryID=20050727-034919-1815r WASHINGTON -- As the United States, Russia and six other states look to construct international storage sites for spent nuclear fuel, risks still surround storage facilities. "Electricity production at nuclear power plants will be up 100 to 200 percent by the middle of the century," according to estimates from the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. nuclear watchdog. Nuclear power plants will emerge in Nigeria, Morocco, Vietnam, Turkey, Poland as well as a number of other countries in the next 15 to 20 years. But properly storing nuclear waste continues to be a challenge. Exelon Chief Executive Officer John Rowe said the United States is unlikely to construct new reactors until the industry has greater security about storage. His firm provided some 15 percent of U.S. nuclear energy. The greater the amount of fuel at a site, greater is the risk of an accident. "For all plants, that risk really doesn't change," David Lochbaum, nuclear safety engineer with the Union of Concern Scientists, a private nonprofit watchdog group, told North Carolina's News & Observer. "You have to store the spent fuel in the pool for the first five years. The consequences, however, are determined by how much spent fuel is in the pool. The more spent fuel, the greater the consequences will be." Wet pool storage is higher risk than dry cask storage since radioactive fire poses greater risks to a spent fuel pool. Fire causes the container for the fuel to break and release radioactivity. "The fire propels that radioactivity far and wide and puts more people in harm's way," said Lochbaum. "The chances of a spent fuel accident are low, but the consequences are high." While a wet pool has a capacity to hold hundreds and in some cases thousands of tons of spent fuel, dry cask hold some 20 tons. If an accident or act of terrorism hits a dry cask, the size of a radioactive cloud coming from a cask is much smaller than that coming from a spent fuel pool. Because equipment is necessary to prevent overheating at a spent fuel pool, it is more likely to have a spent fuel problem than a dry cask accident. Risk is greater when plant owners do not keep spent fuel pools to the minimum level. Lochbaum recommends transferring fuel that came out of a reactor more than five years ago into dry casks, which would reduce the spent fuel risk by maintaining minimum levels. As the House-Senate conference committee negotiates an energy bill that includes several proposals to increase nuclear power plant construction, the lack of proper nuclear waste storage still remains, raising questions about nuclear security. Congress has been planning to store the country's nuclear waste in the Yucca Mountain in Nevada since the 1970s. One interim suggestion raised was to construct a series of dry casket storage facilities that would keep waste safe for some 100 years. But such temporary sites could be unpopular in communities where they would be located. No country really has a long-term solution to nuclear waste disposal. France is looking to store waste for about 100 years in an interim site until deciding on a long-term repository while German plans to build a geological repository but has not yet opened one. IAEA Deputy Director Yuri Sokolov said: "Demand for nuclear power reactors and nuclear fuel supplies is the greatest China, India and Southeast Asia in general." The IAEA warned members about proper safekeeping and recycling of fuel supplies and its repatriation for safekeeping and recycling. "Facilities for the civilized keeping and recycling of spent nuclear fuel should be created at international nuclear centers in the United States, Finland, Russia and some other countries where such technologies have been created and are at the highest level," said Sokolov. Russian Atomic Energy Agency Head Alexander Rumyantsev said: "Such a center may incorporate fresh nuclear fuel storages, from where the fuel might be leaded to the user countries with newly-built nuclear power plants." Rumyantsev argues centers could create an emergency reserve of fresh nuclear fuel in case of a suspension of commercial supplies to the countries whose nuclear power industry is in the development phase. Under a U.S.-Russian agreement, the two sides held training exercises Tuesday to assess preparedness on unexpected potential damage to a facility with nuclear waste in the process of its transshipment from a technological platform to a ground for provisional storage. Observers from the United States, Norway and Sweden were present. Waste will continue to be a problem. Britain uses an expensive process by repossessing its waste. The United States continues to use swimming pools to store fuel. Industry experts say the best alternative is geological storage which is a method of interring waste very deep. After more than 50 years of nuclear power usage, the world has accumulated 200,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel of which, 70,000 tons has been processed while the rest is kept at nuclear power plants. This is fraught with possible risks if they are kept or recycled in incompetently or become available to international terrorists. ---- Reid, Hatch at odds again over nuclear waste storage By ROBERT GEHRKE Salt Lake Tribune 27-JUL-05 Distributed by Scripps-McClatchy Western Service, http://www.shns.com http://www.shns.com/shns/g_index2.cfm?action=detail&pk=WASTE-07-27-05 WASHINGTON -- Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid has thwarted Sen. Orrin Hatch's plan to require a terrorism-threat study of a private nuclear waste site proposed for the Utah desert. Hatch's Homeland Security proposal was stopped short Monday night because of objections raised by Reid, D-Nev. It was the latest instance where the nuclear neighbors have been at odds in their fight to keep the waste out of their own backyards. Hatch had planned to amend the Energy bill to require completion of the terrorist study before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission could grant a license to Private Fuel Storage, the group seeking to store 44,000 tons of nuclear waste in the state. But Hatch said Reid threatened to bring down the entire Energy bill if Hatch's amendment was included, prompting Senate Energy Committee Chairman Pete Domenici, R-N.M., to ask Hatch late Monday to drop the effort. "I had the chairmen of both (the House and Senate committees) working with me, and Senator Reid misconstrued it and promised to stop the entire Energy bill if that amendment was attached to it," Hatch said. Reid's spokeswoman, Tessa Hafen, said the senator never threatened to block the entire Energy bill. Reid had concerns about Hatch's amendment, believing it could encourage other amendments affecting plans for a permanent waste dump in Yucca Mountain, Nev., which Reid is committed to stopping, she said. "It could have opened up a can of worms as far as nuclear waste issues go," she said. "His concern has always been about how the waste would be transported, so that's a concern of his, but it needs to be approached the right way," she said. "He just didn't feel that's the right way to do it." It would not be the first time Reid has scuttled efforts by Utah's delegation to stall or halt the PFS site. In the past two Congresses, he was among senators resisting Utah's efforts to designate the Cedar Mountain Wilderness Area near the Skull Valley reservation. The wilderness designation would prevent a rail line from being built across the wilderness area to ship nuclear waste to the proposed PFS site. Reid has proposed an alternative to both the Utah facility and Yucca Mountain. He suggests the Energy Department should store nuclear waste at the facilities that generated it, but he has yet to introduce legislation to make such a policy change. The NRC is in the final stages of its review before deciding whether to license the PFS site, which would store nuclear fuel in steel and concrete canisters. A decision could come by the end of the summer. The state has vowed to go to court if the license is granted. Hatch said he would keep working to get the Department of Homeland Security to study the PFS proposal. "I believe if we're concerned about terrorism, then Homeland Security has to be involved in this, and I'm going to see that they are one way or the other," Hatch said. ---- Halt to nuclear-waste shipments is upheld July 29, 2005 Salem, OR, Statesman Journal http://www.statesmanjournal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050729/BUSINESS/507290317/1040 YAKIMA-- An initiative that bars the U.S. Department of Energy from sending any more waste to the Hanford nuclear site until all existing waste there is cleaned up can stand even if parts of it later are found to be unconstitutional, the state Supreme Court ruled Thursday. The federal government has sued in U.S. District Court, seeking to overturn Initiative 297 on grounds that it violates federal law governing nuclear waste and interstate commerce. The initiative has not been enforced pending resolution of the lawsuit. Waste shipments to the site already had been halted under another lawsuit. -------- MILITARY -------- chemical weapons Senate Measure Would Undermine CW Bans, Experts Say By David Ruppe Global Security Newswire, Wednesday, July 27, 2005 http://www.nti.org/d_newswire/issues/2005_7_27.html#A8914046 WASHINGTON — A proposed amendment to a major bill before the U.S. Senate advocates using riot control agents in military combat — a policy, experts said, that would violate two chemical weapons treaties (see GSN, April 21, 2004). The amendment’s operative provisions — which require the executive branch to report to Congress on U.S. military use and policies regarding use of riot control agents — are not at issue. What is controversial is the amendment’s opening assertion that “it remains the long-standing policy of the United States” that riot control agents, such as tear gas, may be used by military personnel “in combat and in other situations for defensive purposes to save lives.” Were that description of U.S. policy approved by Congress and signed into law, critics said, it would appear to redefine U.S. policy to allow general combat use of riot control agents. Such use is prohibited by the Chemical Weapons Convention and the 1925 Geneva Protocol prohibiting gas and germ warfare, they said. “It’s a sleight of hand basically,” said Alan Pearson, director of the Biological and Chemical Weapons Control Program at the Center for Arms Control and Nonproliferation in Washington. In a recent analysis, Pearson wrote, “An expansion of U.S. policy in this manner would be likely to severely undermine the Chemical Weapons Convention and the protections it provides for the United States and members of the U.S. Armed Forces.” The amendment to the fiscal 2006 Defense Authorization bill was introduced last week by Senator John Ensign (R-Nev.). In a phone interview yesterday, Ensign spokesman Jack Finn said the senator is pressing for a change, whether to international law or how the law is interpreted, that would allow use of riot control agent in combat. “Through whatever means is most expedient and whatever documents, agreements or treaties need to be altered, it’s the senator’s goal to allow troops access to tear gas in their defense,” he said. Finn said U.S. military personnel are “handcuffed in their inability to use such things as tear gas.” A State Department official, who asked not to be identified, said expanded use of riot control agents is not needed and would create unwanted controversy. Debate and a vote on the amendment, if any, are likely to occur after Labor Day when Congress returns from its August recess. Traditional Interpretation While not technically considered chemical weapons, riot control agents, including irritating or incapacitating chemicals, are restricted under international law from use in warfare. In response to the use of riot control and more toxic gases during World War I, the 1925 Geneva Protocol banned the use “in war of asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and of all analogous liquids, materials or devices.” The United States resisted joining for decades. Before ratifying the protocol in 1975, President Gerald Ford issued the still-standing Executive Order 11850 that makes certain allowances for using riot control agents. It says that the United States “renounces first use of riot control agents in war except in defensive military modes to save lives.” The order lists as examples: riot control situations; situations where civilians are used to mask or screen attacks and civilian casualties can be reduced or avoided; aircraft rescue or prisoner recovery missions in remote areas; and rear echelon areas outside of the zone of immediate combat to protect convoys from civil disturbances, terrorists and paramilitary organizations. The 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention directly bans riot control agent use “as a method of warfare.” The Senate’s 1997 resolution for ratifying that treaty reaffirms the 1975 executive order. It adds that the treaty should not restrict nonwarfare use of riot control agents by U.S. forces, such as during peacekeeping operations or to make peace between parties to a conflict. Neither international agreement, nor the U.S. interpretation of the agreements, permits using riot control agents in combat, wrote Pearson. “By stating that RCAs [riot control agents] may be used not only in defensive modes, but also in combat, [Ensign’s amendment] clearly goes beyond Executive Order 11850 and the Senate resolution of ratification of the CWC,” he wrote. Pearson noted conclusions from a Council on Foreign Relations task force report in 2004 that warned against reinterpreting the requirements of the Chemical Weapons Convention. The task force report said, “To press for an amendment to the CWC or even to assert a right to use RCAs as a method of warfare risks impairing the legitimacy of all NLW [nonlethal weapons]. This would also free others to openly and legitimately conduct focused governmental R&D [research and development] that could more readily yield advanced lethal agents than improved nonlethal capabilities.” Finn said Ensign was aware of criticisms, but said understandings of what is allowable need to be changed. “There’s certainly been some discussion, some disagreement as to what category certain things fall into. It’s the senator’s belief that tear gas is a tool that should be available to the troops and that the definition should be rectified so that they are able to use that tool in their defense,” including in combat operations, he said. Ensign’s amendment would require the Justice Department to report to Congress on “the current legal availability and viability of Executive Order 11850, to include the rationale as to why Executive Order 11850 remains permissible under United States law.” Stirring the Pot The U.S. State Department official said there is ambiguity to the Chemical Weapons Convention’s phrase “as a method of warfare,” as it is not defined in the treaty. “What exactly does that mean?” the official said rhetorically. The official said, though, that the general U.S. interpretation has been that riot control agents may not be used against other combatants by U.S. forces in combat. Riot control agents technically could be used in combat, the official said, but “as long the use is for riot control purposes against noncombatants,” such as against rioting prisoners. Ensign’s amendment, “for no useful purpose that I can see,” blurs such distinctions, and creates unneeded controversy, the official said. “There might be a mistaken notion that commanders in the field are asking to use riot control agents, for whatever reason in Afghanistan or Iraq, and such requests are being denied. Not true. There’s not a commander that we know of that’s been requesting use of riot control agents, or who’s requested, and been denied,” the official said. “This is a pot we’d just as soon not see stirred,” the official said. Ensign spokesman Finn suggested the proposed amendment was not motivated by any particular event or request. “The senator, as you know, is a member of the Armed Services Committee so he is always keeping an eye out for anything he can do to support the folks in the field,” Finn also said. “It’s a common sense thing,” he said. -------- china Experts troubled by China arms buildup Wed Jul 27, 2:29 PM ET (AFP) http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20050727/pl_afp/uschinamilitary_050727182904 WASHINGTON - Experts told a congressional panel that China's weapons buildup poses a major challenge to the United States and its Asian allies, despite administration assurances that Beijing is not considered a threat. The Republican chairman of the House of Representatives Armed Services Committee, Duncan Hunter, said he called the hearing on China's growing military might as US lawmakers increasingly become concerned about Beijing's intentions. "We're holding this hearing because we've all noticed some disturbing trends in the Pacific over the last decade," he said, noting that "since the early 1990s China's military spending has grown faster than its economy." "Naturally, we have to ask ourselves who China expects to use all these weapons against," Hunter said. Experts who testified at the hearing underscored the potential risk from China's military prowess. "There is no question that the Chinese military is a potential adversary of the United States in the Taiwan Strait," said Franklin Kramer, a former assistant secretary of state. In particular, he said China's growing naval might poses a challenge. "Improvements in anti-ship cruise missiles potentially challenge the United States Navy in ways that it has not been since the end of the Cold War," Kramer said. Richard Fisher, vice president of the International Assessment and Strategy Center, agreed. "China is on the cusp of fielding a modern force capable of joint service offensive operations," he said. The hearing was held after a top Chinese general this month warned that China would use nuclear weapons if the US military intervened in Taiwan. A Pentagon report last week said that the said the size and pace of China's weapons acquisitions could threaten the military balance with Taiwan -- which China considers a renegade province -- and pose a threat to other armies in the Asia region. The report estimated China's defence spending at two-three times greater than acknowledged by Beijing, or up to 90 billion dollars this year. The White House said last week however that it did not view China as a threat, saying it hoped to work in a "constructive and cooperative way" with Beijing. -------- iraq Iraqi president signals end to night-time police arrests Wed Jul 27, 3:11 PM ET (AFP) http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20050727/wl_mideast_afp/iraqtalabaniarrests BAGHDAD, July 27 - Iraqi police will detain suspects by day rather than at night, Iraqi President Jalal Talabani said, after a number of people were found murdered after being picked up by men in uniform. Talabani also said that government officials had opened investigations into several cases of alleged police and military abuse, but gave no details on the cases. Authorities have decided arrests "should be carried out by certain (police) groups, and according to the law and with judicial approval. And during daytime, not at night," Talabani told reporters. "This procedure will give us the ability to know who the detainees are and how we can deal with them," he added. Talabani cautioned that "some terrorists put on army and police uniforms and they arrest people at their homes." "Sometimes they demand a bribe to release them, other times they execute them," he said. There have been a number of recent reports of men wearing police or police commando uniforms arresting people at night at their homes. The bodies of some victims have turned up a day or two later, abandoned on waste ground in Baghdad, their bodies sometimes mutilated, often shot with bullets to the back of the head. Recent cases include 11 Sunni Arabs who were tortured and each shot in the back of the head after being picked up at night at their homes by men in police commando uniforms, an official for the Waqf Sunni religious organisation said earlier this month. The head of the Waqf, Adnan Al-Dulaimi, called for an official investigation into the case and asked that the results be made public. "This isn't the first time this sort of thing has happened," Dulaimi said in a statement. "We want to know who is responsible for such horrible crimes." Saddam Hussein, is suspected of providing the backbone to the current insurgency. In another recent case, a former general in Saddam's army and his son were found shot dead in the capital after being detained overnight by men wearing police commando uniforms, an interior ministry official told AFP. Akram Ahmed Rasul al-Bayati, a major general in the old regime's disbanded military, was arrested at his east Baghdad along with two of his sons -- Ali, a policeman, and Omar. Omar was later released and one of his uncles offered to pay 7,000 dollars for the release of the other two. The money was handed over, but when the uncle went to a meeting place to pick them up, he saw them taken out of a car and shot to death. A US diplomat acknowledged that the reports were a matter of concern. "We have heard credible allegations. We have raised them with Iraqi authorities at high levels," the diplomat said last week. I do not think you can change that kind of long-standing behaviour in a year. It's going to take a while to change," he said, adding that police in Iraq had long had a history of brutality. Authorities, he added, recently charged a number of officials in at least three different instances related to alleged abuses, giving no details. Senior US military officers have also spoken of concern over the abuse of detainees, especially by Iraqi police. Parliamentary speaker Hajim Al-Hasani this week also said he was worried about the allegations. "There are violations, definitely," he told AFP. "We have certain problems within the security forces. Security forces should abide by the law, even when we have an emergency law," he added. Hussein Ali Kamal, deputy minister for intelligence at the interior ministry, earlier told AFP it was not known who was responsible for the killings. "The minister (Bayan Solagh) has issued orders that nobody be arrested without a warrant," he said. "Every day we find innocent people killed and their bodies dumped in the streets. We don't know who's responsible. The minister has ordered that a special committee be set up to look into this very explosive issue. "There are people who dress up in police or commandos' uniforms to carry out, even at night, horrible attacks which are then blamed on police," Kamal said. There is a overnight curfew in Baghdad from midnight to 5 am. ---- Iraq police accused of torture Sunnis say they are being targeted by the Shia-dominated police force By Richard Galpin BBC News, Baghdad, Wednesday, 27 July, 2005 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4718999.stm Iraq's new police force is facing mounting allegations of systematic abuse and torture of people in detention, as well as allegations of extra-judicial killings. The minority Sunni community in particular claims it is being targeted by the Shia-dominated police force. The traumatised face of Dhai Adnan Saleh stares from the podium at the journalists and cameramen in front of him at a hastily convened news conference in Baghdad. Surrounded by a forest of microphones, this tall, thin, awkward man begins mumbling a statement from notes scribbled on a sheet of paper. No-one can hear him. He tries to compose himself and starts again. This time, he describes the horror of the past 24 hours from memory - a memory which is certain to haunt him for the rest of his life. Dhai Adnan Saleh is both extremely lucky and extremely brave. He is one of very few survivors of a mass killing by police commandos and he has dared to speak publicly about what happened. He and at least nine other relatives - all Sunni Muslims - were detained earlier this month, apparently because they were suspected of being insurgents following a shoot-out in their area. "The police started to beat us, tied our hands and blindfolded us," he said. "We were left from 5.30 that evening inside a kind of container that had no air vents. After one hour, we lost consciousness and some people began to die, the others were dead by one o'clock in the morning." The other survivors who were in a serious condition were treated at Baghdad's main hospital under heavy guard by police commandos. The BBC was not allowed to speak to them and was not allowed to enter the morgue where the bodies were kept. And shortly after the BBC team arrived, the security forces took the survivors away. One hospital doctor who did not want to be named said medical examinations showed signs of suffocation. And he added: "One of the patients told us he complained of electrical shocks, multiple electric shocks." 'Have you seen death?' While the government says it has suspended the police officers believed to be responsible, the BBC has obtained evidence that this was not an isolated incident. Within days of Dhai Adnan Saleh speaking out, we tracked down another man in Baghdad who told us he had just survived a very similar ordeal at the hands of police commandos. The man was too frightened to give his name. As in the earlier case, he told us he was part of a large group of men who were rounded up following an insurgent attack on the security forces in their district. He described how the police sealed off the neighbourhood and broke into their houses, arresting any men they could find even though the body of the insurgent was lying on the road along with his identity cards and mobile phone. After interrogation overnight came the most terrifying part of their ordeal. "We were told to get in the back of a strange vehicle," he said. "It had no air vents at all, no windows. The brigade commander came, insulted us and closed the door. "We became hysterical, kicking the inside and shouting: 'Get us out or we'll die!' They allowed us to suffocate for a few minutes and then opened the door and asked us: 'Have you seen death?' They repeated this more than five times. We were very close to dying." 'Drilling torture' This particular technique of torture and killing is a new one to add to an already long list of other forms of torture of which the new Iraqi police force stands accused. The return to torture and killing by the security forces is another embarrassment for the American and British governments The list compiled by Human Rights Watch includes beating detainees with cables, hanging them from their wrists for long periods and giving electric shocks to sensitive parts of the body. From a video given to the BBC by the Association of Muslim Scholars (a Sunni Muslim organisation), it seems another particularly brutal form of torture can also be added - drilling into the knees, elbows and shoulders of victims. The video shows the body of a Sunni Muslim preacher being washed for burial. His supporters say he had been picked up by police commandos for allegedly being linked to the insurgency. The camera focuses on marks all over his body including what appear to be drill holes. According to Salman al-Faraji, a human rights activist and lawyer, the use of drills is common. "Most cases are quite similar, the same methods are used," he said. "They torture them, breaking hands and legs. They use electric drills to pierce their bodies and then the killing is carried out at close range." We made repeated requests for an interview with the minister of the interior or his subordinates to respond to all these allegations. But no-one would speak to us. In a statement following the first suffocation case, the minister said he would not allow any members of the police involved in human rights violations to walk freely without being punished properly. He also promised that investigations would be swift and comprehensive. But a source inside the ministry dismissed this statement saying the promise of an investigation was "for the media only". The return to torture and killing by the security forces is another embarrassment for the American and British governments, which have partly justified the invasion of Iraq on the grounds of ending the kind of abuses committed by Saddam Hussein's regime. Sectarian danger A senior Western source in Baghdad admitted he was worried about the police commandos who are particularly involved in counter-insurgency operations. "They can be effective," he said, "without torturing or abusing detainees". But he added "it was a big task" to create a clean police force given the nature of the previous regime. What is also a major concern is that the minority Sunni Muslim community who used to control Iraq believe they are now being deliberately targeted by the Shia-dominated police force. The insurgency is led by militant Sunnis whereas the government is now led by the majority Shia. In their brutal campaign of violence, the insurgents have focused their attacks on Shia and members of the Iraqi security forces in order to provoke sectarian conflict. If the security forces respond with torture and extra-judicial killings, it could lead to exactly what the insurgents want - full-blown sectarian war. -------- latin america Latin America's flickering democracy By William Ratliff Wed Jul 27, 2005 4:00 AM ET Christian Science Monitor http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/csm/20050727/cm_csm/yratliff_1 STANFORD, CALIF. - Latin Americans can't seem to make democracy work. Ecuador now has its seventh president in nine years. Bolivian Indians recently overthrew their second president in less than two years. In 2001 the majority Indian population in Peru elected one of its own as president, after his predecessor had fled the country, but as The Economist of London reported last month, he has long been the region's most unpopular president. And that's just the beginning. The decades-long guerrilla/drug war in Colombia rages on and the United Nations reports that drug production is rising in the Andes. President Hugo Chávez increasingly polarizes Venezuela and the region, and uses oil hand-outs to prop up Fidel Castro's decrepit authoritarian regime in Cuba. Costa Rica's long-admired democratic system is torn by presidential scandals, Nicaragua may soon elect a failed Sandinista from the past, and Haiti is a perpetual failure in every way. Even Argentina, the market reform "model" in the 1990s, is on its sixth president in four years, five of them in a fortnight around New Year's Day, 2002. The economic collapse then devastated living standards for the majority and precipitated the largest debt default in world history, which was greeted with cheers in the national congress. Polls show that democracy as a system is popular in the region, but also that most Latin Americans don't believe it works for them. Indeed, international agenciesreport that the region has long had the world's widest rich-poor gap and that living conditions and opportunities for bettering one's lot are few and in most places not increasing. And Latin America is falling ever farther behind the developing countries of Asia. The problem of ineffective or downright failing democracies is far more basic to the region's thinking and governance than politicians in the Americas - including Washington - are aware of or willing to admit. Perhaps the main reason is because most Latin leaders and their cronies don't want to change a system that serves their private interests. And most policymakers in Washington concentrate so narrowly on a few yardsticks like periodic votes and trade agreements that they don't see (or acknowledge) what is really happening to people and why. Instability, which seems so destructive of progress, is nothing new. Thirty years ago it was guerrilla wars, astronomical inflation, military governments, and human rights violations. Five hundred years ago it was conquest, virtual slavery, and mass exploitation under the guise of Catholic paternalism. But that's not the point: Perpetual surface instability is not what causes Latin America's cycles of failure. The real problem is the opposite: excessive stability - the enduring legacy of Iberian colonialism ever modified to serve a new generation of leadership cliques. For more than five centuries ruling cliques that took office - whether by colonial appointment, swords, bullets, or ballots - justified and maintained power with a culture and institutions that treated people as groups and denied most individuals the skills and opportunities to improve their lives. One of the very few things an overwhelming majority of people in all countries agreed on in a 2004 regional poll was that despite elections, power is held by cliques pursuing mainly their own interests. The centuries of failure in Latin America stand in bleak contrast to the development successes in many Asian countries since World War II - and, more recently, even in Spain itself. In Asia, the basic changes in some cases were begun by authoritarian governments that in time became more democratic, as also happened in Chile from 1973 to 1990, when the current foundations of Latin America's most viable state were laid. But very few democrats or others have ever made major permanent changes to benefit the people, and the failures of much-touted reforms in the 1990s laid the groundwork for increasing frustration and demagoguery today. The next few years are not likely to bring a rash of military coups, but mainly more democratic formalities that don't really serve the interests of the people. One of Chile's main Pinochet-era reformers, José Piñera, has remarked that a country doesn't need authoritarianism to undertake basic reforms. And Peruvian analyst Alvaro Vargas Llosa argues the same in a recent book. In short, Latin leaders must want substantive change and understand that the impediments to democracy and development in the past have not been bad individual leaders and their foreign allies but the region's own institutions and their culture. Polls show decisively that Latin Americans want better housing, food, education, opportunities, and democracy. And there are now some democratic and market-oriented leaders who know well what needs to be done. As Mr. Vargas Llosa says, "Reform ultimately involves undoing more than doing." Government must be small, less intrusive, more efficient, more honest. Entrenched and corrupt entitlement programs must be eliminated. There must be greatly improved education for everyone, better healthcare and environmental standards, and legal reforms that guarantee opportunity, property, and other rights to all people. It's up to reform-minded leaders to consolidate popular support for lasting and beneficial changes that will overcome the barriers to democracy and development imbedded in major aspects of Iberian culture and institutions. • William Ratliff is a fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution. He is the author of 'Doing It Wrong and Doing It Right: Education in Latin America and Asia.' -------- spies FLASHBACK: Renegade CIA Officer Phillip Agee Calls Outing of Valerie Plame "Dirty Politics" Wednesday, July 27th, 2005 Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/07/27/1422244 Whoever in the White House exposed Valerie Plame could be charged under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. We rebroadcast an interview with former CIA officer Phillip Agee, for whom, many believe, the Act was written. [includes rush transcript] The Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 made it a felony to knowingly disclose the identity of a covert government agent. Many believe the law was passed in direct response to former CIA officer Philip Agee blowing the whistle on CIA dirty tricks in his book "Inside the Company: CIA Diary." George H.W. Bush, who was vice-president when the law was passed, said some of the criticism of the Agency undermined secret U.S. clandestine operations in foreign countries. So seriously did the Bushes take the crime of exposing CIA operatives that Barbara Bush, in her memoirs, accused Agee of blowing the cover of the CIA Station Chief in Greece, Richard Welch, who was assassinated outside his Athens residence in 1975. Agee sued the former first lady and Mrs. Bush withdrew the statement from additional printings of her book. Still, at a celebration marking the fiftieth anniversary of the CIA, the elder Bush again singled out Agee in his remarks, calling him "a traitor to our country." * Phillip Agee, interviewed on Democracy Now!, October 2, 2003. RUSH TRANSCRIPT AMY GOODMAN: We spoke with Phillip Agee in October of 2003. He was in Cuba. He talked about why George H.W. Bush leveled extreme charges against him and why he denied those charges. PHILLIP AGEE: I was involved with quite a lot of other people in a guerrilla journalism campaign to expose the C.I.A.'s operations and its people, especially in Western Europe at that time. George Bush, father, came in as C.I.A. Director the month following the Welsh assassination. And as Director, he presided over the agency as they mounted a campaign throughout Western Europe, trying to make me appear to be a security threat, a traitor, a Soviet agent, a Cuban agent, all of those sorts of things which led to my expulsion from five different NATO countries in the late 1970s. In fact, it was all based on lies, and to think that -- to think that I was responsible for the death of any C.I.A. people for their exposures is absolutely false, because no one, as far as I know, of all of those people who were exposed as C.I.A. people along with their operations, was ever even harassed or threatened. What happened was their operations were disrupted. And that was the purpose of what we were doing. And we were right to do it then, because the U.S. policy at the time, executed by the C.I.A., was to support murderous dictatorships around the world, as in Vietnam, as in Greece, as in Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, Brazil. And that's only to name a few. We opposed that use of the U.S. intelligence service for those dirty operations. And I'm talking about regimes now that tortured and disappeared people by the thousands. AMY GOODMAN: Phillip Agee, speaking to us from Cuba in October 2003. He then talked about his time in Latin America working for the C.I.A. He left the agency in 1968 and subsequently decided to expose the C.I.A. support of corrupt oligarchies and death squads. Agee goes on to respond to the outing of Valerie Plame. PHILLIP AGEE: Well, first, you have to realize that this law, the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, under which someone in the White House may be indicted, is his father's law. This is a law sought by George Bush, Sr., when he was C.I.A. Director, and later as Vice President. He worked hard to get that law passed. And it's the irony of ironies that the law is violated, I believe for the first time in a serious way, by someone working in the office of his own son. This is simply dirty politics, I believe. The Ambassador, that is Ambassador Wilson, poked a hole in this whole pack of lies that had been concocted to justify the war. And in retaliation, they try to ruin his wife's career, and get even with him. You could say that it's dirty politics as usual, but also one has to wonder what Papa Bush is thinking about the fact that it's his own son's office that has violated the law that he worked so hard to get passed. AMY GOODMAN: What do you think of people saying it's similar to what you did? PHILLIP AGEE: But for a different reasons. My reasons were very clear, and we stated them many times. And as I mentioned earlier, I was not alone in that campaign. I was working with a lot of people from a lot of different countries. And it was a spontaneous campaign because people were opposed to the horrible political repression that the United States, through the C.I.A., was supporting in the 1970s. This current case is totally different. It's simply a dirty, low shot to -- out of revenge, essentially, I believe. AMY GOODMAN: Did you have any dealings with, for example, some of the players we're talking about today: Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, George Bush? PHILLIP AGEE: I have not had dealings with them, but I have followed the political positions of these people since the early 1990s when Wolfowitz first came out with this policy document on a new United States foreign policy based on what would best be called, I think, neo-imperialism. And then later in the Project for a New American Century, the major players in this Bush administration were all signers of that policy statement back in the 1990s. And it called for preemptive wars, it called for the control of the United States of the world, essentially. And in this case, it's a question of control of Middle East oil, among several other reasons, and these lies that were used to justify it have all now been exposed. The world knows that they were all false -- the justifications, that is. And so, the United States has been left alone. Germany is not going to participate. France is not going to participate. Russia is not participating. The United States has been left totally isolated in its intervention in Iraq -- AMY GOODMAN: Do you – PHILLIP AGEE: -- and deservedly so. AMY GOODMAN: Do you condemn the blowing of Valerie Plame's cover? PHILLIP AGEE: I don't have any feelings whether it's the right thing to do or the wrong thing to do. What is wrong is that it's simply dirty politics, whether it was the blowing of her cover or some other action. It's small potatoes, though, compared to the whole scenario of lies that was used to justify the invasion of Iraq and the continued occupation of that country. AMY GOODMAN: Former C.I.A. operative, Phillip Agee, talking from Cuba in October 2003 here on Democracy Now! ---- Rove's Backers Use "CounterSpy Defense" in CIA Leak Case Wednesday, July 27th, 2005 Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/07/27/1422240 We speak with veteran investigative journalist Robert Parry, who writes that Karl Rove's defenders are rebutting accusations about the White House aide's leaking of a CIA officer's identity by using an argument that parallels a rationale cited by leftists who defended CounterSpy after a CIA officer exposed by the magazine in 1975 was gunned down in Greece. [includes rush transcript] More than two dozen Democratic senators on Monday asked Congress to investigate the White House leak of undercover CIA operative Valerie Plame. In a letter, sent to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee and House Speaker Dennis Hastert, senators said the outing of Plame most likely compromised her safety. John Kerry of Massachussetts who authored the letter said, "Can anyone argue with a straight face that Congress has time to look at steroid use in baseball but doesn't have the will to provide congressional oversight of the leak of a CIA agent's name?" The letter cited information reported in the press suggesting that White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove and Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff - Lewis Libby - exposed Plame's identity. * Robert Parry, veteran investigative journalist and author of the book "Secrecy & Privilege: Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq." For years he worked as an investigative reporter for both the Associated Press and Newsweek magazine. His reporting led to the exposure of what is now known as the "Iran-Contra" scandal. His latest piece, on ConsortiumNews.com is called "Rove's Backers Use Counterspy Defense" RUSH TRANSCRIPT AMY GOODMAN: We turn now to investigative journalist, Robert Parry. For years, he has worked as an investigative reporter for both the Associated Press and Newsweek magazine. His reporting led to the expose of what is now known as the Iran-Contra scandal, author of Secrecy and Privilege. Your response, your latest article on ConsortiumNews.com is called “Rove's Backers Use CounterSpy Defense.” ROBERT PARRY: Well, Amy, I think the point I'm making is that the people who have tried to defend Karl Rove have gone to such extraordinary lengths over the past several weeks, almost -- it's almost as remarkable to see how the conservatives and Republicans have tried to protect Rove as Rove's -- the allegations of Rove being involved in the leaking in the first place. There's been an effort to release red herrings to confuse the American people about what's really at stake here. And one of the arguments that has been advanced is that, well, Valerie Plame wasn't really that much undercover as a C.I.A. officer. There may have been previous exposures in the intelligence world that would have led people to know that she was an undercover C.I.A. officer. If the C.I.A. wasn't doing enough to protect her secrecy, that she was working out of headquarters and somehow the resumption would be that it meant she was not that secret. All of these arguments are rather bizarre, because people work at C.I.A. headquarters all the time who are undercover. It's also true that there are times when some information does leak out, but it doesn't mean that anyone's free, then, to use C.I.A. officers' names. Some of these arguments go back to the original law that was put in place in 1982 to protect the identity of C.I.A. officers. And it was response to disclosures that were being made by CounterSpy magazine in the mid 1970s. CounterSpy magazine was trying to disrupt C.I.A. operations that its publishers and people who worked for it felt were immoral. They felt that the C.I.A. Was out of control in the 1970s. And their way of trying to disrupt those activities was to release the name of some of the agents, and thereby make it more difficult for them to carry out operations. That offended a number of people including the then C.I.A. Director, George H.W. Bush, who made it really a cause to try to get a law put in place that would make it a serious crime to disclose the name of C.I.A. officers. That obviously is a law that's now at the center of the issue of whether Rove committed a crime and whether people in the White House were engaged in a conspiracy to commit this crime by leaking the name of Valerie Plame. So, we get to the interesting point now where some of the arguments that were used in the 1970s by the supporters of CounterSpy, to say that, well, there was a case involving a C.I.A. station chief named Richard Welsh in Athens who was exposed and then was gunned down on the street, that the defense for people who were supporting CounterSpy was that Welsh's identity had already been released in other publications and that the C.I.A. had been careless in letting him stay in a house that was known to be a C.I.A. safehouse. So, that was an argument that was used then. It was not considered very acceptable to many people in Congress who went ahead and passed this law. The -- now it turns out that the people trying to defend Karl Rove are essentially asserting the same thing, that Valerie Plame was already somewhat outed, therefore it was no big deal that Karl Rove and others in the White House gave her name to Bob Novak and other journalists. AMY GOODMAN: You also write interestingly about how the Washington Times has covered this, and also specifically the right wing commentator, Tony Blankley, who used to head up the office of Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich. ROBERT PARRY: Right. Well, basically, the Washington Times is one of the papers that has been most aggressive in making these arguments. They did an article that looked back and said, well, that Plame's identity may have been exposed to the Russians in a previous leak that was from a spy that went over there. They have argued that the Cubans may have gotten access to this information, because a cable had been sent to the Swiss intrasection in Havana. They were making these arguments as a way to say, well, you see, this already was known by people, and therefore was not really a crime by Rove. The problem becomes that there's no reason to believe, necessarily, that those leaks, if they indeed happened, would have helped other people, say al-Qaeda, for instance, get this information about Valerie Plame and the people she was working with on weapons of mass destruction. So, the idea that just because there was some possible exposure of an agent doesn't really justify a much wider exposure of that agent. But the Washington Times has certainly pushed this, and Tony Blankley, who is the editorial page editor of the Washington Times, has also argued in a different set of circumstances that Sy Hersh, who exposed some reconnaissance operations that were occurring by the United States inside of Iran, that Hersh may have violated the Espionage Act. And Blankley not only called for an investigation, but pointed out that this could be punishable by death. So, on one side, the Washington Times has tried to make a big case out of exposure of some secrets which actually might be very much of importance to the public debate about whether we should go to war in a broader way in the Middle East, while trying to defend Karl Rove's release of information that helped expose a C.I.A. officer who was working on weapons of mass destruction. AMY GOODMAN: Well, Robert Parry, I want to thank you very much for being with us. When we come back from our break we're going to hear what Phillip Agee has to say. We talked to him two years ago in Cuba, the former C.I.A. operative on whom many say the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 was based. Robert Parry, thank you for being there. Investigative reporter, speaking to us from Washington, D.C., author of the book, Secrecy and Privilege: Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq. ---- Wife of Guatemalan Rebel Killed by CIA Asset Says CIA Operatives Engaged in Criminal Acts Should be Exposed Wednesday, July 27th, 2005 Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/07/27/1422249 Is it ever justified to blow a CIA operative's cover? We speak with human rights attorney Jennifer Harbury - her husband was a Mayan leader who was killed by a CIA asset in Guatemala. [includes rush transcript] Republicans are defending Karl Rove, one of the people involved in the outing of covert CIA agent Valerie Plame. Karl Rove is one of the most powerful officials in the Bush administration. Ironically it was under another Bush administration - the Reagan/Bush administration - that the Intelligence Identities Protection Act was first passed. This act imposes strict penalties on the outing of covert CIA agents. And it is the Democrats who are insisting that this law be enforced. But there is another side to all of this that has been left out of the discussion. And that is, human rights activists and torture victims have, for years, been harshly critically of the CIA's human rights abuses in among other places, Latin American. And they have called for CIA agents and operatives who have committed crimes to be publicly identified in order to bring them to justice and shed light on CIA support of criminal activity. Jennifer Harbury is one of these people. Her husband was a Mayan guerilla leader in Guatemala who was killed by a CIA operative. * Jennifer Harbury, director of the Unitarian Universalist Service Committee's Stop Torture Permanently campaign. She is a human rights lawyer, author of "Searching for Everardo: A Story of Love, War & the CIA in Guatemala" and the forthcoming "Truth, Torture and the American Way: The History and Consequences of U.S. Involvement in Torture" RUSH TRANSCRIPT AMY GOODMAN: Jennifer Harbury joins us right now in a studio from Boston. Jennifer is a Harvard-trained attorney who has for years spoken out on issues of C.I.A. abuse. Welcome to Democracy Now!, Jennifer. JENNIFER HARBURY: Thank you, Amy. AMY GOODMAN: Can you talk about the side that we rarely see represented right now? JENNIFER HARBURY: Yes, I think people are overlooking the fact that the C.I.A., for decades across Latin America, continuing now with the abuse and torture of the detainees around the world, have been involved in just outright disappearances, extreme use of torture, and eventual extra-judicial executions, even, of persons they consider undesirable or persons from whom they wish to extract information. Certainly, my husband was one case. He was a Mayan resistance leader, as you said, who was tortured in Guatemala in a secret cell for more than two years. Among other things, he was injected with a toxic gas that caused his body to swell until and arm and leg hemorrhaged. He was placed in a full body cast and then either dismembered or thrown from a helicopter. And it turned out that the high level intelligence people in Guatemala who were carrying out that torture during those two years were, in fact, on C.I.A. payroll as informants. So we have ourselves in the posture of the man who hires a hit person to kill his wife in order to obtain the insurance. These are outright crimes. And I think that to the extent that C.I.A. agents anywhere actually aid and abet criminal activity, they should not be shielded at all. It would be much more akin to the F.B.I. agents that work closely with the Mafia in Boston. I think that's where the line must be drawn. AMY GOODMAN: What about this view? I mean, you have Sister Diana Ortiz in Washington with torture survivors who are speaking out on this issue. It's one we rarely get in the mainstream media, and how the whole Plame story has played out. JENNIFER HARBURY: Well, I think we have to remember that there is a sharp divide between whistleblowing activities, where the person is actually trying to expose government wrongdoing, which is, of course, what Mrs. Plame's husband was trying to accomplish. He didn’t want to see us go into Iraq on false premises. And, in fact, of course, now we have thousands of young men and women from our own country risking their lives and perishing in Iraq on false premises, a war that should not have been started. On the other hand, we have C.I.A. operatives actually engaging in illegal activities which are prohibited by the laws and treaties of our own country, and they're being shielded. They're even being shielded for ongoing and very violent criminal acts, such as torture and murder. And I think those people cannot be shielded. Whistleblowers must be shielded. Those who are aiding and abetting murder cannot be shielded. I think the divide is very clear. AMY GOODMAN: Jennifer Harbury is author of the book, Searching for Everardo: A Story of Love, War, and the CIA in Guatemala, Everardo having been her husband. Her forthcoming book is called Truth, Torture and the American Way: The History and Consequences of U.S. Involvement in Torture. And what is your response to those who say if you expose those on the C.I.A. payroll, you're endangering them? JENNIFER HARBURY: I think that persons who actually commit illegal acts in violation of the scope of authority granted the C.I.A. by the United States Congress, people who blatantly run off with an agency basically creating a rogue agency beyond the checks and balances established by our Constitution, I think if people are running away with part of our government, that they cannot deserve secrecy. I think that anyone carrying out, within the legal ambit, intelligence gathering services deserve privacy and secrecy. If they're going to risk their lives we should be protecting them. I think the fact that Ms. Plame was outed, her career destroyed and that she may have her life endangered is very shocking when you think that was in order to silence people who were trying to get the truth to the American public, as the public was weighing the propriety of going to war against Iraq. I think that's very shocking. That's exactly what the whistleblower protections were created to prevent, exactly that situation. We're supposed to know what our government is doing. There's supposed to be transparency. And when people are secretly violating different laws and statutes or engaging in corruption, we're supposed to reward whistleblowers, not punish them. AMY GOODMAN: Jennifer Harbury, you took a case against the U.S. government to the Supreme Court. You fasted endlessly in both Guatemala and the United States to find out what had happened to your husband. Can you talk about what happened in taking on the U.S. government, how ultimately, you found out what happened to Everardo, what happened to your husband Ephraim Bamaca Velasquez? JENNIFER HARBURY: Well, I first, of course, had been told by the Guatemalan military that he had shot himself in combat to avoid being captured alive. Six months later, a young prisoner of war for the first time was able to escape from a Guatemalan military base and explain to me that he had not been killed in combat, he was captured alive, that they had fabricated this story about his combat death in order to torture him long-term for his information. And in fact, they had doctors present -- because of his great intelligence value, they had doctors present to make sure they didn't accidentally kill him. They then opened the grave and found the body of a very different young man, a young soldier who had been killed as a decoy. For the next two-and-a-half years, I carried out efforts with the O.A.S. I went to the United Nations. I went everywhere and got no results. No one was able to force the Guatemalan military or the U.S. State Department to carry out any serious actions. And the Embassy, the U.S. Embassy told me and also sent form letters repeatedly to concerned members all over Capitol Hill, representatives and senators, that there was no information at all about him. After my third hunger strike, it was, of course, disclosed that the C.I.A. had known from the week of his capture that (a) he had been captured, (b) they were faking his death, and (c) they were torturing him. And that memo went straight to the State Department. We also found out that when I first started looking for him and was opening the grave with the State Department and embassy sending people to stand next to me, they knew he was still alive and that so were 350 other prisoners of war in Guatemalan military hands and, in fact, they also knew that he was in the hands of our own paid informants whom we could have, of course, pulled into line. In other words, at that point in time, we could have saved 350 lives, including my husband's. During all of my efforts they continued to tell me and to tell the United States Congress and Amnesty, etc., etc., that there was no information. AMY GOODMAN: Jennifer, we just have 15 seconds. JENNIFER HARBURY: So, I guess I would just want to close with the fact that our C.I.A. officers are very often throughout Latin America and now in the Middle East very involved in torture and murder. That cannot be covered up. Whereas those who are trying to disclose the truth and keep our government transparent and prevent illegal actions, they should be protected under the whistleblower acts. AMY GOODMAN: Jennifer Harbury, I want to thank you for being with us, Director of the Unitarian Universalist Service Committee’s Stop Torture Permanently campaign, author of the forthcoming book, Truth, Torture and the American Way: The History and Consequences of U.S. Involvement in Torture. ---- Iran lawyer's arrest linked to nuclear spying case TEHRAN (AFP) Jul 31, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050731142343.sjbarnu6.html A colleague of Nobel prize-winning Iranian lawyer Shirin Ebadi was arrested at the weekend on suspicion of disclosing information in a nuclear espionage case, the judiciary said on Sunday. Abdolfattah Soltani was arrested Saturday while he holding a sit-in at a Tehran bar building to protest against a search of his house and an arrest warrant issued against him. Until now it was not known why he was arrested. "Based on a comprehensive report by the intelligence ministry, he has talked about confidential issues of nuclear spies inside and outside the country," judiciary spokesman Jamal Karimi Rad told the student agency ISNA. Soltani, a member of Ebadi's centre to defend human rights, represents Iran's highest profile political prisoner, journalist Akbar Ganji, the family of murdered Iranian-Canadian photographer, Zahra Kazemi, and also suspects in the nuclear espionage case. Iran announced in 2004 that it had arrested a dozen people on suspicion of spying on Iran's nuclear programme for US and Israeli intelligence services. Two of them are due to be tried on August 2 and 20, Karimi Rad told AFP. Another has already been sentenced, he said without specifying the details. That case is currently pending for appeal, Karimi Rad said. -------- us US military hits ammunition shortages Wed Jul 27, 2005 4:42 PM ET (AFP) http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/usmilitaryammunition WASHINGTON - The United States cannot keep up with military demand for ammunition which has more than doubled since the war on terrorism and the invasion of Iraq were launched, according to a Congress watchdog report. The report said that the amount of small ammunition needed had increased from about 730 million rounds a year to nearly 1.8 billion. For medium calibre ammunition, the rise had gone from 11.7 million rounds to almost 22 million, said the General Accounting Office. Defence Department purchases of ammunition had reduced after the end of the Cold War and a number of government owned production factories were closed, said the report by the Congress watchdog. The department has spent more than 90 million dollars on improvements at the remaining three main facilities for small and medium calibre bullets in a bid to boost production. But supplies of small sized ammunition is lagging behind demand and the United States is now relying on foreign producers, including from Israel, to help meet its needs. "Unforeseen events such as the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 and subsequent military deployments, make predicting future requirements difficult," said the GAO. "However it is imperative that the warfighter be provided with sufficient ammunition to carry out missions to counter ongoing and emerging threats without amassing wasteful unused stockpiles." -------- POLICE -------- homeland security / national intelligence MTA has a secret film file BY PETE DONOHUE NY DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER Originally published on July 27, 2005 http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/331949p-283661c.html MTA investigators are keeping a secret database of people stopped and questioned for filming or photographing bridges and tunnels as part of the agency's efforts to thwart terror, the Daily News has learned. The information is used to try to determine whether shutterbugs are simply putting together vacation slide shows - or gathering intelligence to plot mayhem, law enforcement sources said. In one instance, a man was questioned for filming on the Verrazano Bridge. He was questioned and released. A few days later, authorities in another state stopped someone filming on a bridge and asked the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's Interagency Counter Terrorism Task Force if it had information about the person, the sources said. It turned out the other state's shutterbug was using the same vehicle as the man who was stopped for filming on the Verrazano, sources said. The sources declined to elaborate on the investigation. But one source noted that in general, if someone pops up twice filming a crossing, "You start to develop a case. "Some may not go to a full-blown case that involves an arrest, but it develops into intelligence where you can establish a trail where you can tie individuals together that otherwise would have gone unknown," the source said. In at least some cases, the film is kept, sources said, and in all cases the images are reviewed. "By reviewing the film you can tell if they are tourists or if they are cluing in, and you can see on certain films they are cluing in on beams, they are cluing in on security checkpoints," one source said. "Those are the ones that appear to be more than just casual filming." Another source said those who were stopped let investigators review their film voluntarily. The source was not aware of anyone refusing. "Most of the time they show us the images right there because they are tourists," the source said. MTA Bridges and Tunnels oversees seven bridges - the Verrazano, Triborough, Throgs Neck, Whitestone, Henry Hudson, Marine Parkway and Cross Bay Veterans Memorial - and two tunnels, the Midtown and the Battery. The crossings are used by 800,000 vehicles a day. -------- torture Torture Policy, Scandal Follow Deputy Attorney General Nominee by Brendan Coyne (bio) Jul 27, 2005 New Standard News http://newstandardnews.net/content/?action=show_item&itemid=2155 http://newstandardnews.net/content/?action=show_item&itemid=2155 President Bush’s nominee to the second highest spot at the Department of Justice has direct ties to the development of the administration’s detainee interrogation policies and is currently vice president and chief legal counsel to a scandal-ridden company, according to Senate testimony and civil rights groups. The nominee, Timothy E. Flanigan, is a former Bush administration legal advisor who appears to have been present at meetings where current interrogation policy was determined, the American Civil Liberties Union noted in a letter calling for the release of a 2002 Justice Department memo on the policy yesterday. The letter cites media reports in the Washington Post, Newsweek and American Prospect that place Flanigan at key meetings where Justice officials crafted legal opinions allowing for a variety of abusive acts to be committed against detainees in the so-called "war on terror." At Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on Flanigan’s nomination yesterday, Pennsylvania Republican and Committee Chair Arlen Specter indicated he had reservations over approving the former White House lawyer’s appointment to the Justice Department post. In the hearings, Flanigan admitted to participating in two meetings with then White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales where interrogations techniques – like "water-boarding," whereby a person is strapped to a board and dunked under water to induce the acute fear of drowning, and utilizing foreign interrogators not bound by US codces were discussed and approved. Responding to questions on Justice’s finding that such practices were legal, Flanigan affirmed his belief that they were, though he did state his disagreement with the administration’s contention that it was within the law to ignore Congressional oversight on the matter, the New York Times reports today. Flanigan left the White House in 2002 to join Tyco International shortly after disgraced chief Dennis Koslowski resigned and just months after the company employed lobbyist Jack Abramoff, the Chicago Tribune reported yesterday. Abramoff is currently the subject of Congressional and Justice Department inquiries. -------- POLITICS -------- us politics 'Universal Democracy' Is the Goal As Congress Eyes New Legislation BY ELI LAKE - Staff Reporter of the NY Sun July 27, 2005 http://www.nysun.com/article/17604 WASHINGTON - When senators return to Washington this September, they will be set to consider new legislation that would commit America to ending tyranny the world over. Tucked inside the House version of a bill that authorizes spending on foreign aid is the language of what is known as the ADVANCE Democracy Act. The act instructs American ambassadors and embassy staffs to draw up democracy transition plans for unfree regimes, with input from nonviolent opposition movements in the various countries. While Congress has passed laws that require America to work with democratic opposition groups for specific countries - such as the 1998 Iraq Liberation Act - never before has it considered a law that would, as ADVANCE proposes, "commit United States foreign policy to the challenge of achieving universal democracy." -------- ENERGY Energy Deal Has Tax Breaks for Companies Wednesday July 27, 2005 10:31 AM By H. JOSEF HEBERT Associated Press Writer http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-5169950,00.html WASHINGTON (AP) - A wide-ranging energy bill expected to move through Congress this week includes more than $8.5 billion in tax incentives and billions of dollars more in loan guarantees and other subsidies for the electricity, coal, nuclear, natural gas and oil industries. Efficiency and conservation programs would get about $1.3 billion of the more than $14.1 billion in total tax breaks over 10 years, according to lawmakers who have been briefed on the legislation worked out in negotiations between the House and Senate. About $3 billion in tax breaks would go for renewable energy source, mostly to subsidize wind energy. Sen. Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, the ranking Senate Democrat participating in the energy negotiations, bemoaned the reduction in support for energy efficiency and conservation programs in the tax package. The Senate had approved more than $3 billion in tax breaks. But he said he will support the bill when it comes before the Senate, possibly as early as Thursday. The House could take up the measure late Wednesday. ``Given the makeup of the Congress today and given the policies of the administration this is as good a bill as I think we could hope to get,'' Bingaman said in a conference call with reporters. Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., who led Senate negotiators, said the measure would help diversify the nation's energy portfolio by spurring development of new technologies to help put in service the next generation of nuclear reactors and find ways to burn coal with less pollution. ``We mandate more conservation and higher efficiency,'' said Domenici, citing among other things new efficiency standards for 14 commercial appliances such as large refrigerators and cooling systems. Still, the bill was criticized by some Democrats in Congress, as well as outside watchdog groups, for funneling billions of dollars to mature energy companies that are cash rich because of soaring oil prices and gasoline that is averaging $2.29 a gallon nationwide. ``The energy bill does little to nothing to reduce our dependence on Middle East oil,'' said Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., who criticized the bill's failure to seriously address automobile fuel efficiency. The nuclear industry, corn farmers and the coal industry did particularly well with the legislation. The bill would require refiners to double the use of ethanol, mostly from corn, as an additive to gasoline to 7.5 billion gallons a year by 2012. A boon to farmers, it also would cost the taxpayer because ethanol gets a substantial tax break compared to gasoline, said Myron Ebel, an energy analyst for the Competitive Enterprise Institute. A last-minute proposal added to the tax package late Wednesday by House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., also would provide a 30 percent tax credit, up to $30,000, for the installation of equipment to sell gasoline consisting of 85 percent ethanol. There are only about 400 such retail outlets, mainly in the farm belt region, and the tax incentive is designed to spur construction of more, according to a Hastert aide. The nuclear industry hailed the legislation. It reaped major benefits, including ``risk insurance'' totaling $2 billion if there are permitting or regulatory delays in construction of the first six new nuclear power reactors. The bill also provides loan guarantees for future reactors and a green light for building a $1.25 billion next-generation nuclear plant that could produce hydrogen as well as electricity. The legislation also boosts the coal industry with loan guarantees and $2.9 billion in tax breaks mostly for development of technology to make coal more environmentally friendly and develop ways to capture climate-changing carbon emissions. Oil and gas producers would get $1.5 billion in tax breaks as well as royalty relief for certain deep-well drilling. A $500 million program, paid for by royalty relief, would help oil companies drill for oil in extremely deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico. Another $1 billion is earmarked for coastal restoration in five states with offshore oil production. As House-Senate conferees worked late into the night this week on the final paragraphs of the legislation, a proposal was made, and approved, to provide $250,000 for a study of ``irradiated fuel'' - although many of the conference participants acknowledged they had no idea what that was. ``Lawmakers let go any financial inhibitions and started spending like a bunch of drunken sailors,'' said Jill Lancelot, president of the watchdog organization Taxpayers for Common Sense. ``This energy bill is filled to the brim with massive giveaways for mega-rich energy companies.'' On the Net: Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee: http://energy.senate.gov/public/ House Energy and Commerce Committee: http://energycommerce.house.gov/ ---- Coal, Nuke Power and Corn Win in Energy Bill Wednesday, July 27, 2005 Associated Press http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,163786,00.html WASHINGTON — A wide-ranging energy bill expected to move through Congress this week includes more than $8.5 billion in tax incentives and billions of dollars more in loan guarantees and other subsidies for the electricity, coal, nuclear, natural gas and oil industries. Efficiency and conservation programs would get about $1.3 billion of the more than $14.1 billion in total tax breaks over 10 years, according to lawmakers who have been briefed on the legislation worked out in negotiations between the House and Senate. About $3 billion in tax breaks would go for renewable energy source, mostly to subsidize wind energy. Sen. Jeff Bingaman (search) of New Mexico, the ranking Senate Democrat participating in the energy negotiations, bemoaned the reduction in support for energy efficiency and conservation programs in the tax package. The Senate had approved more than $3 billion in tax breaks. But he said he will support the bill when it comes before the Senate, possibly as early as Thursday. The House could take up the measure late Wednesday. "Given the makeup of the Congress today and given the policies of the administration this is as good a bill as I think we could hope to get," Bingaman said in a conference call with reporters. Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., who led Senate negotiators, said the measure would help diversify the nation's energy portfolio by spurring development of new technologies to help put in service the next generation of nuclear reactors and find ways to burn coal with less pollution. "We mandate more conservation and higher efficiency," said Domenici, citing among other things new efficiency standards for 14 commercial appliances such as large refrigerators and cooling systems. Still, the bill was criticized by some Democrats in Congress, as well as outside watchdog groups, for funneling billions of dollars to mature energy companies that are cash rich because of soaring oil prices and gasoline that is averaging $2.29 a gallon nationwide. "The energy bill does little to nothing to reduce our dependence on Middle East oil," said Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., who criticized the bill's failure to seriously address automobile fuel efficiency. The nuclear industry, corn farmers and the coal industry did particularly well with the legislation. The bill would require refiners to double the use of ethanol (search), mostly from corn, as an additive to gasoline to 7.5 billion gallons a year by 2012. A boon to farmers, it also would cost the taxpayer because ethanol gets a substantial tax break compared to gasoline, said Myron Ebel, an energy analyst for the Competitive Enterprise Institute. A last-minute proposal added to the tax package late Wednesday by House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., also would provide a 30 percent tax credit, up to $30,000, for the installation of equipment to sell gasoline consisting of 85 percent ethanol. There are only about 400 such retail outlets, mainly in the farm belt region, and the tax incentive is designed to spur construction of more, according to a Hastert aide. The nuclear industry hailed the legislation. It reaped major benefits, including "risk insurance" totaling $2 billion if there are permitting or regulatory delays in construction of the first six new nuclear power reactors. The bill also provides loan guarantees for future reactors and a green light for building a $1.25 billion next-generation nuclear plant that could produce hydrogen as well as electricity. The legislation also boosts the coal industry with loan guarantees and $2.9 billion in tax breaks mostly for development of technology to make coal more environmentally friendly and develop ways to capture climate-changing carbon emissions. Oil and gas producers would get $1.5 billion in tax breaks as well as royalty relief for certain deep-well drilling. A $500 million program, paid for by royalty relief, would help oil companies drill for oil in extremely deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico. Another $1 billion is earmarked for coastal restoration in five states with offshore oil production. As House-Senate conferees worked late into the night this week on the final paragraphs of the legislation, a proposal was made, and approved, to provide $250,000 for a study of "irradiated fuel" -- although many of the conference participants acknowledged they had no idea what that was. "Lawmakers let go any financial inhibitions and started spending like a bunch of drunken sailors," said Jill Lancelot, president of the watchdog organization Taxpayers for Common Sense. "This energy bill is filled to the brim with massive giveaways for mega-rich energy companies." ---- FACTBOX - Details of Final US Energy Bill REUTERS USA: July 27, 2005 http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/31793/story.htm WASHINGTON - Senate and House negotiators were poised to finalize the $11 billion cost of a broad energy bill on Tuesday, clearing the way for votes in each chamber before the end of the week. After the full House and Senate approve the legislation, it will be forwarded to the president to sign into law. The bill focuses on increasing production of oil, natural gas and other energy sources but critics say it does little to encourage more oil conservation or reduce oil imports. The United States now imports 60 percent of the 21 million barrels of oil consumed each day. Key elements included in the energy bill are detailed below, along with several items that were dropped in recent days: COST: * Offers about $11.4 billion in tax breaks and incentives over 10 years, mostly to boost wind and solar power, with lesser amounts going to oil and natural gas production. OIL/GAS: * Requires a delay of at least 141 days in a US government review of the Chinese-government owned CNOOC Ltd oil company's $18.5 billion bid for American-oil giant Unocal . * Offers energy companies royalty relief for drilling in Gulf of Mexico deep waters. * Requires an inventory of offshore oil and natural gas resources, including areas off Florida where drilling is banned. * Gives Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, not the states, exclusive authority to approve LNG import terminals. * Expands Strategic Petroleum Reserve by 300 million barrels to 1 billion barrels. * Bans oil drilling in the Great Lakes. * Dropped language in Senate bill requiring the federal government to find ways to cut US oil demand, or to require better fuel mileage on new sport utility vehicles and other gas-guzzlers. * Dropped language to open the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve to drilling, but this is expected to be added to a separate government funding bill later this year. MOTOR FUEL: * Requires the use of 7.5 billion gallons of ethanol a year as a gasoline additive by 2012, almost double the current use. * Allows parties in liability suits related to contamination from methyl tertiary butyl ether to remove ongoing cases to a federal court. Does not extend liability protection to makers of MTBE, which has contaminated state water supplies. UTILITIES/NUCLEAR: * Repeals a Depression-era law, the Public Utility Holding Company Act, which prevents certain utility mergers. * Offers $2 billion in federal insurance to cover delays in building 6 new nuclear power reactors. * Imposes reliability operating standards on utilities to protect the US electric grid from blackouts. * Extends expiring accident insurance protection for owners of nuclear power plants by 20 years. * Spends $1.3 billion for experimental Idaho reactor that would also produce hydrogen fuel. * Permits power lines across federal public lands, overriding federal agency objections to siting decisions. * Dropped proposal that would have required US utilities to generate 10 percent of their electricity from renewable sources such as windmills by 2020. MISC: * Moves the start of daylight-saving time in 2007 from the first Sunday in April to the second Sunday in March, and extends it by one week to the first Sunday in November. * Increases funding to develop low-emission power plants fueled by coal. * Creates a federal panel to promote technologies that reduce greenhouse gas intensity, but does not mandate specific cuts in US global warming emissions. * Studies the health impacts of people living close to petrochemical and oil refineries. ---- A Nuclear Swindle Wenonah Hauter July 27, 2005 TomPaine.com http://www.tompaine.com/articles/20050727/a_nuclear_swindle.php In one of the biggest taxpayer bailouts in recent years, the energy bill about to pass out of Congress stands on the cusp of providing the nuclear industry and the oil industry, among others, with the sweetest deal that energy executives have seen in the last 50 years. Passage of this costly and flawed bill will prove to the American public that Congress cares more about rewarding business interests than protecting consumers—who will predictably suffer from higher energy bills and corporate abuse enabled by this legislation. Despite cries for reduced foreign oil dependence, lower gas prices, strong global warming provisions and a general need to conserve energy, this bill instead reaches out to reward two industries that don’t deserve the gifts they’re being bestowed: the nuclear and oil industries. These industries serve as an example of how our energy future is being dictated by corporate interests, not common-sense policies that will ensure a healthier environment for generations to come. Like ‘Banana Republic’ officials on the take, Congress has accepted $90 million from these industries since 2001 in exchange for providing them with billions of dollars in subsidies and regulatory rollbacks. To begin, the nuclear industry is on the edge of its seat, hoping to win billions in cradle-to-grave subsidies and incentives to build new nuclear reactors. The conference report thus far includes $7 billion in research, development and construction subsidies, with another $7.3 billion in tax breaks pending in the yet-to-be released tax package. Those dollars aside, the bill contains unlimited taxpayer-backed loan guarantees for the construction of new reactors and extends the industry’s limited liability in the case of an accident to new reactors. This bill contains just about every conceivable taxpayer subsidy and incentive for the 50-year-old nuclear industry to build new reactors. Contrary to the public relations spin coming from the pro-nuclear lobby, nuclear energy is not the answer to climate change or energy independence. Its five fatal flaws are more than enough reason to vote against this dirty and expensive technology: Nuclear power is expensive and relies on massive taxpayer subsidies; heightens proliferation risks; produces radioactive waste that remains dangerous for hundreds of thousands of years; endangers public health and security with the threat of accidents or attacks; and continuously fails to adhere to adequate safety standards. Given the latest revelations about data falsification in analyses of the proposed Yucca Mountain dump site—in addition to other numerous unresolved safety problems at the site—and the reports by the National Academy of Sciences and the Government Accountability Office pointing out security vulnerabilities of the highly radioactive waste stored at reactor sites, the government should not be promoting the construction of new reactors, which will only add to the nuclear waste problem. Not to be outdone, however, is the oil industry, which also stands to gain enormous benefits from the pending energy bill, including a likely buffet of subsidies and tax breaks that are still in last-minute negotiations and haven’t yet been released to the public. One of its newer ventures is in liquefied natural gas, which is natural gas super-cooled into a liquid form. This is done to more easily transport natural gas to the United States from destinations not linked by pipeline. For example, importing natural gas from Canada can be accomplished by sending natural gas through a pipeline; importing natural gas from Indonesia, Nigeria or Norway must be done by transporting LNG by tanker. LNG can pose significant security and environmental hazards, particularly to coastal communities that house these facilities. The energy bill limits the ability of states and local communities to have adequate say in how dangerous, proposed liquefied natural gas facilities are sited. Support for liquefied natural gas facilities on our coastlines is shortsighted because it fails to account for the harm it can do to consumers—both to their wallets and their security. Relying on LNG imports will make the United States more dependent on foreign sources of energy, particularly OPEC, which dominates the global LNG market. This would be a serious mistake at a time when experts warn us of the dangers of relying on other countries for our natural gas. Not only would it make us beholden to OPEC, but it would create a climate ripe for price gouging. Lawmakers have one final opportunity to jettison this bill. This legislation is a poison pill for consumers, the environment and the economy, and lawmakers now have one final opportunity to spit it out. Wenonah Hauter is director of the energy program for Public Citizen http://www.citizen.org/ , a Washington, D.C.-based public interest organization with 150,000 members. -------- alternative energy Energy Department Gives $2.5 Million to Native American Tribes WASHINGTON, DC, July 27, 2005 (ENS) http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jul2005/2005-07-27-09.asp#anchor3 In an effort to increase the use of renewable energy on tribal lands, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has made a total of $2.5 million available in assistance to 18 Native American tribes. “Renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies play a significant role in encouraging tribal self-sufficiency, creating jobs and improving environmental quality,” said Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman. The grants support projects such as the Arizona Hualapai Tribe’s construction of a utility scale wind farm, which will power the tribe’s 9,000 acre tourism facility known as Grand Canyon West. Another tribe, the Citizen Potawatomi Nation, will use its funds to generate electricity for community buildings and a grocery store through geothermal ground source heat pumps connected to Fire Lake on their reservation. This Central Oklahoma tribe - the ninth largest in the nation - also plans to build a greenhouse to conserve previously wasted heat. The heat will then facilitate the growth of vegetables for sale in the reservation’s grocery store. Tribes submitted proposals for the funds, which the DOE granted on the basis of competitive selection criteria, especially project feasibility. Recipient tribes range in size from as small as 50 members to as large as the 100,000 member Navajo tribe. The DOE has kept on file the submissions of tribes not funded this year, in hopes that these projects can perhaps receive funding in the future. “DOE is committed to helping Native American tribes develop their energy resources,” Bodman said. -------- ACTIVISTS 'Raging Grannies' risk US jail in bid to be allowed to fight in Iraq Wed Jul 27, 2005 8:22 PM ET (AFP) http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20050728/ts_alt_afp/usiraqwargrannies LOS ANGELES - Five greying anti-war activists from a group dubbed the "Raging Grannies" face possible jail time after demanding to be enlisted in the US Army to fight in Iraq, one of them said. The women, aged between 57 and 92, were charged with criminal trespass after turning up at an Armed Forces Recruiting Center in the western US state of Arizona demanding they be allowed to join the fighting ranks. "We're very serious about that, we really want to enlist," 74-year-old "Raging Granny" Betty Schroeder told AFP. "We think it would be better if old people were killed at war than young ones," the retired nurse, whose husband and two brothers were killed in battle in other wars, explained. Eight "grannies," including Schroeder, are accused of invading military territory by entering a military recruiting office in the city of Tucson on July 13 to sign up. Military officials asked them to leave and called police who issued charges against five of the grannies after they had left the office. They are charged with trespassing, which could see them jailed for up to five months. The five appeared in court in Tucson on Monday where they pleaded not guilty to the offence and the judge scheduled a preliminary hearing for August 19, according to Schroeder. "Criminal trespass is a misdemeanour," she said. "I think we might be sentenced to five months in prison or a 500 dollar fine," she told AFP by telephone from Tucson. The "Ranging Grannies," formed by members of the Tucson branch of the Womens International League for Peace and Freedom, meet every Wednesday and sing songs set to familiar tunes that protest the US military presence in Iraq and Afghanistan. The maximum age for enlistment in the US Army is 34, while reservists can join up until the age of 39. ---- Wife of Guatemalan Rebel Killed by CIA Asset Says CIA Operatives Engaged in Criminal Acts Should be Exposed Wednesday, July 27th, 2005 Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/07/27/1422249 Is it ever justified to blow a CIA operative's cover? We speak with human rights attorney Jennifer Harbury - her husband was a Mayan leader who was killed by a CIA asset in Guatemala. [includes rush transcript] Republicans are defending Karl Rove, one of the people involved in the outing of covert CIA agent Valerie Plame. Karl Rove is one of the most powerful officials in the Bush administration. Ironically it was under another Bush administration - the Reagan/Bush administration - that the Intelligence Identities Protection Act was first passed. This act imposes strict penalties on the outing of covert CIA agents. And it is the Democrats who are insisting that this law be enforced. But there is another side to all of this that has been left out of the discussion. And that is, human rights activists and torture victims have, for years, been harshly critically of the CIA's human rights abuses in among other places, Latin American. And they have called for CIA agents and operatives who have committed crimes to be publicly identified in order to bring them to justice and shed light on CIA support of criminal activity. Jennifer Harbury is one of these people. Her husband was a Mayan guerilla leader in Guatemala who was killed by a CIA operative. * Jennifer Harbury, director of the Unitarian Universalist Service Committee's Stop Torture Permanently campaign. She is a human rights lawyer, author of "Searching for Everardo: A Story of Love, War & the CIA in Guatemala" and the forthcoming "Truth, Torture and the American Way: The History and Consequences of U.S. Involvement in Torture" RUSH TRANSCRIPT AMY GOODMAN: Jennifer Harbury joins us right now in a studio from Boston. Jennifer is a Harvard-trained attorney who has for years spoken out on issues of C.I.A. abuse. Welcome to Democracy Now!, Jennifer. JENNIFER HARBURY: Thank you, Amy. AMY GOODMAN: Can you talk about the side that we rarely see represented right now? JENNIFER HARBURY: Yes, I think people are overlooking the fact that the C.I.A., for decades across Latin America, continuing now with the abuse and torture of the detainees around the world, have been involved in just outright disappearances, extreme use of torture, and eventual extra-judicial executions, even, of persons they consider undesirable or persons from whom they wish to extract information. Certainly, my husband was one case. He was a Mayan resistance leader, as you said, who was tortured in Guatemala in a secret cell for more than two years. Among other things, he was injected with a toxic gas that caused his body to swell until and arm and leg hemorrhaged. He was placed in a full body cast and then either dismembered or thrown from a helicopter. And it turned out that the high level intelligence people in Guatemala who were carrying out that torture during those two years were, in fact, on C.I.A. payroll as informants. So we have ourselves in the posture of the man who hires a hit person to kill his wife in order to obtain the insurance. These are outright crimes. And I think that to the extent that C.I.A. agents anywhere actually aid and abet criminal activity, they should not be shielded at all. It would be much more akin to the F.B.I. agents that work closely with the Mafia in Boston. I think that's where the line must be drawn. AMY GOODMAN: What about this view? I mean, you have Sister Diana Ortiz in Washington with torture survivors who are speaking out on this issue. It's one we rarely get in the mainstream media, and how the whole Plame story has played out. JENNIFER HARBURY: Well, I think we have to remember that there is a sharp divide between whistleblowing activities, where the person is actually trying to expose government wrongdoing, which is, of course, what Mrs. Plame's husband was trying to accomplish. He didn’t want to see us go into Iraq on false premises. And, in fact, of course, now we have thousands of young men and women from our own country risking their lives and perishing in Iraq on false premises, a war that should not have been started. On the other hand, we have C.I.A. operatives actually engaging in illegal activities which are prohibited by the laws and treaties of our own country, and they're being shielded. They're even being shielded for ongoing and very violent criminal acts, such as torture and murder. And I think those people cannot be shielded. Whistleblowers must be shielded. Those who are aiding and abetting murder cannot be shielded. I think the divide is very clear. AMY GOODMAN: Jennifer Harbury is author of the book, Searching for Everardo: A Story of Love, War, and the CIA in Guatemala, Everardo having been her husband. Her forthcoming book is called Truth, Torture and the American Way: The History and Consequences of U.S. Involvement in Torture. And what is your response to those who say if you expose those on the C.I.A. payroll, you're endangering them? JENNIFER HARBURY: I think that persons who actually commit illegal acts in violation of the scope of authority granted the C.I.A. by the United States Congress, people who blatantly run off with an agency basically creating a rogue agency beyond the checks and balances established by our Constitution, I think if people are running away with part of our government, that they cannot deserve secrecy. I think that anyone carrying out, within the legal ambit, intelligence gathering services deserve privacy and secrecy. If they're going to risk their lives we should be protecting them. I think the fact that Ms. Plame was outed, her career destroyed and that she may have her life endangered is very shocking when you think that was in order to silence people who were trying to get the truth to the American public, as the public was weighing the propriety of going to war against Iraq. I think that's very shocking. That's exactly what the whistleblower protections were created to prevent, exactly that situation. We're supposed to know what our government is doing. There's supposed to be transparency. And when people are secretly violating different laws and statutes or engaging in corruption, we're supposed to reward whistleblowers, not punish them. AMY GOODMAN: Jennifer Harbury, you took a case against the U.S. government to the Supreme Court. You fasted endlessly in both Guatemala and the United States to find out what had happened to your husband. Can you talk about what happened in taking on the U.S. government, how ultimately, you found out what happened to Everardo, what happened to your husband Ephraim Bamaca Velasquez? JENNIFER HARBURY: Well, I first, of course, had been told by the Guatemalan military that he had shot himself in combat to avoid being captured alive. Six months later, a young prisoner of war for the first time was able to escape from a Guatemalan military base and explain to me that he had not been killed in combat, he was captured alive, that they had fabricated this story about his combat death in order to torture him long-term for his information. And in fact, they had doctors present -- because of his great intelligence value, they had doctors present to make sure they didn't accidentally kill him. They then opened the grave and found the body of a very different young man, a young soldier who had been killed as a decoy. For the next two-and-a-half years, I carried out efforts with the O.A.S. I went to the United Nations. I went everywhere and got no results. No one was able to force the Guatemalan military or the U.S. State Department to carry out any serious actions. And the Embassy, the U.S. Embassy told me and also sent form letters repeatedly to concerned members all over Capitol Hill, representatives and senators, that there was no information at all about him. After my third hunger strike, it was, of course, disclosed that the C.I.A. had known from the week of his capture that (a) he had been captured, (b) they were faking his death, and (c) they were torturing him. And that memo went straight to the State Department. We also found out that when I first started looking for him and was opening the grave with the State Department and embassy sending people to stand next to me, they knew he was still alive and that so were 350 other prisoners of war in Guatemalan military hands and, in fact, they also knew that he was in the hands of our own paid informants whom we could have, of course, pulled into line. In other words, at that point in time, we could have saved 350 lives, including my husband's. During all of my efforts they continued to tell me and to tell the United States Congress and Amnesty, etc., etc., that there was no information. AMY GOODMAN: Jennifer, we just have 15 seconds. JENNIFER HARBURY: So, I guess I would just want to close with the fact that our C.I.A. officers are very often throughout Latin America and now in the Middle East very involved in torture and murder. That cannot be covered up. Whereas those who are trying to disclose the truth and keep our government transparent and prevent illegal actions, they should be protected under the whistleblower acts. AMY GOODMAN: Jennifer Harbury, I want to thank you for being with us, Director of the Unitarian Universalist Service Committee’s Stop Torture Permanently campaign, author of the forthcoming book, Truth, Torture and the American Way: The History and Consequences of U.S. Involvement in Torture. ---- Monks walk atomic flame to Trinity Site By Laura Hunt, Staff Writer Jul 27, 2005, 12:57 pm Alamogordo News http://www.alamogordonews.com/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi?archive=585&num=8681 Buddhist monks carrying a lantern lit by embers of the world’s first atomic bomb, which destroyed Hiroshima on the morning of Aug. 6, 1945, are on their way to the birthplace of atomic weapons — Trinity Site, New Mexico. The Japanese monks, joined by other peace protesters and supporters, started walking on July 16, the 60th anniversary of the test at Trinity Site. They have already carried the “atomic flame” from San Francisco, through southern California and part of Nevada. WALK FOR PEACE — Japanese Buddhist monks carry a lantern containing a remnant of the fire from the nuclear attack on Hiroshima on Aug. 6, 1945. They started walking from San Francisco July 16 and will reach Trinity Site, where the first atomic bomb was tested, Aug. 9 after a 25-day, 1,600-mile walk. There, the atomic flame will be extinguished during a televised ceremony. Photo from www.gndf.org After a 25-day, 1,600-mile walk, the flame will be extinguished at the Trinity Site on Aug. 9, the 60th anniversary of the Nagasaki bombing. The ceremony will take place during a television broadcast calling for world peace and an end to nuclear proliferation, said Matt Taylor, Global Nuclear Disarmament Fund co-executive director. Some Alamogordo residents were unaware of the monks’ journey. One resident, William Meadows, was angered by the news. “I’m a veteran of World War II, and I don’t think that these monks got any business coming over here,” he said, “because if it hadn’t been for the A-bomb, there would have been millions of people killed on both sides over there.” After learning about the monks’ plan, Meadows immediately called Congressman Steve Pearce and left a message with someone in his office. “Since when are the Japanese allowed to come down to Trinity Site? That’s what I’m asking the congressman, if he would stop them,” he said to the person on the other line. However, other residents were supportive of the monks. “I certainly understand the feelings of anybody who’s experienced that, like the Japanese,” said Walter Miller. “I’m not really fond of nuclear weapons proliferation myself, and I’d like to see them all stopped... It’s an admirable thing that they’re making that kind of trip.” James Haynes, Alamogordo resident, said the peace protest falls under freedom of speech. “Everyone is entitled to their own opinion,” he said. “You should do what you feel is right, and if these people feel the need to protest, they should be able to.” However, Taylor said the ceremony isn’t political, but humanitarian. “It’s not an anti-war thing,” he said, “and it’s not even an argument as to whether (the atomic bomb) should or shouldn’t have been used. It’s about ending a cycle and starting a new era.” In Zen culture, 60 years is the end of a cycle, Taylor said. “They believe that everything good and bad happens in circles,” he said. “The atomic bomb was born at Trinity Site, then used on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. For 60 years, the world has been living in fear that Nagasaki wouldn’t be the last place it was used. Now we’re living with nuclear terrorism every day, so in order to close this circle in a peaceful way, and not to end it in a destructive way, we’re walking it back to where it was born.” Buddhist monks have taken the flame on many peace walks around the globe, Taylor said, and now, the monks will finally extinguish the flame and end the cycle that started in 1945. “I think it’s really wonderful that Trinity Site will finally be connected to all of humanity,” Taylor said. ---- AFL-CIO Passes Resolution for quick withdrawal of US military forces from Iraq by Brendan Coyne Jul 27, 2005 New Standard http://newstandardnews.net/content/index.cfm/items/2151 At its annual convention yesterday, the nation’s largest labor organization passed resolutions calling for a greater emphasis on organizing and a quick withdrawal of United States military forces from Iraq, according to news accounts and reports from members attending the event. As part of a series of resolutions proposed by the Executive Council of the AFL-CIO, delegates to this week’s convention approved the two resolutions Tuesday, and called for an emergency meeting to discuss the departure of two of the Federation’s largest unions. Labor writer and president emeritus of the National Writers Union Jonathan Tasini first reported that a resolution calling for the US to withdraw troops from Iraq was "rapidly" approved by convention delegates yesterday evening. US Labor Against War (USLAW) released a statement shortly afterward spelling out the terms of the resolution. The resolution on Iraq was amended on the convention floor to include a call for the "rapid end to the Iraq occupation." In addition, the resolution demanded better veteran’s benefits from the government and expressed solidarity with Iraqi workers, the USLAW statement said. The resolution was nearly identical to one approved by the AFL-CIO executive committee prior to the convention. The same day the labor federation passed a resolution calling for a renewed commitment to aggressively organizing US workers, according to press accounts. Reuters reports that the vote approved $22.5 million for the next year’s outreach efforts, double what leaders had previously sought. That vote reportedly came on top of a demand that member unions spend at least 30 percent of their resources on recruiting and mobilizing new members. According to the Associated Press, convention delegates also approved a measure to hold a meeting on how to deal with Monday’s defection by the International Brotherhood of Teamsters and Service Employees International Union, who took 3.2 million members with them and cost the Federation about $18 million in annual membership dues.