NucNews - September 29, 2005 -------- NUCLEAR -------- britain British Energy Calls on Blair to Give Nuclear Go-Ahead Next Year By Michael Harrison Business Editor UK Independent OUTLOOK, PAGE 61 Thursday, 29 September 2005 http://www.rednova.com/news/science/255208/british_energy_calls_on_blair_to_give_nuclear_goahead_next/index.html?source=r_science Tony Blair must give the go-ahead for a new generation of nuclear power stations by the end of next year if the Government is to meet its climate- change targets and safeguard security of supply, the chief executive of British Energy, Bill Coley, said yesterday. His comments follow the Prime Minister's announcement at the Labour conference this week of a wide-ranging review of Britain's energy needs which would assess 'all options, including civil nuclear power'. Mr Coley said that even if British Energy, the country's main nuclear electricity generator, extended the lives of most of its stations, the contribution from nuclear energy would dip sharply by 2020, making the UK more reliant on imported gas and jeopardising its targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions. 'It is going to take 10 years from the point when a decision is made to get new nuclear capacity built and operating so the sooner there is a decision, the better,' said Mr Coley. Asked whether that meant by 2007 or 2008, he replied: 'It really needs to be earlier.' Mr Coley added that it would be possible to build a new generation of nuclear stations without direct financial support from government, because of the increased efficiency and lower cost of new reactor designs. Including financing and construction costs, new nuclear stations were capable of earning a 8-10 per cent rate of return, making them competitive with combined cycle gas-fired plant. But he indicated the Government would have to provide some kind of guarantees to those financing and developing new stations, such as long-term supply contracts for the baseload power they produce. He also said the Government would have to address the issue of nuclear waste disposal, for which there is still no agreed policy much less an agreed site where the waste could be stored, although British Nuclear Fuel's Sellafield plant in Cumbria is seen by many as the obvious location. Mr Coley was speaking as British Energy unveiled a turnaround in its financial performance since last January's capital reconstruction of the business which transferred pounds 4bn in historic liabilities to the taxpayer and wiped out pounds 1bn of debt. The company returned to the black for the three months to 3 July, recording a pounds 64m pre-tax profit compared with losses the year before. The improvement was due, in large part, to soaring wholesale electricity prices and increased output which lifted British Energy's revenues during the period by 7 per cent to pounds 521m. The company said it now fixed 85 per cent of its planned output for the year to next March at an average price of 31.8p a unit. However, British Energy cautioned that unplanned shutdowns of its Hartlepool and Heysham 1 reactors, would increase the amount of lost output to 1.5 terrawatt hours. As a result of the government-backed bail-out, the taxpayer took just under 65 per cent of British Energy's free cash-flow for the period and the company reiterated that it did not intend to resume dividend payments to shareholders until after March, 2007. ---- Nuclear Generator Boosted By Sky-High Prices By BEN GRIFFITHS Glasgow Herald (UK) Thursday, 29 September 2005 http://www.rednova.com/news/science/255200/nuclear_generator_boosted_by_skyhigh_prices/index.html?source=r_science BRITISH Energy, the nuclear power generator, has emerged from the shadows of its controversial government-sponsored rescue deal by announcing a move back into profit thanks to soaring power prices. The company, which supplies around a fifth of the UK's energy needs, posted first-quarter profits of GBP64m, having relisted its shares in January. The figures, which showed revenues of GBP521m in the three-month period, are the first to come from British Energy since its restructuring was completed earlier this year following a debt-for-equity swop deal which wiped GBP1bn off its balance sheet. In a statement, British Energy explained the results ref lected the underlying improvement in its performance as a result of ongoing changes. Bill Coley, chief executive, said: "The company's improved profitability and positive cash contribution in the first quarter reflects higher realised prices for summer power contracts and underlines our confidence in British Energy's prospects." British Energy has fixed 85-per cent of its planned output for the year to March 31, 2006, at an average contract price of GBP31.80 a megawatt hour. It maintained its forecast for 63 terrawatt hours of nuclear output for the next two years but conceded this goal was "more challenging" after raising its expected output loss from the Hartlepool and Heysham 1 power plants. The group, which was saved from the brink of insolvency by a government loan, said it had achieved prices 37-per cent higher than in 2004 at GBP24.70 per megawatt hour. However, British Energy warned the recent shutdown of reactors at Heysham in Lancashire and Hartlepool could affect the level of output at fixed prices. The two reactors were expected to resume service in the middle of October, following work undertaken in the wake of inspections to boiler closure units. The firm has an estate of eight nuclear stations with a capacity of 10,000 megawatts. British Energy was hammered by a collapse in wholesale power prices during 2003 and needed a government-based restructuring to survive, which saw banks and bondholders write off around GBP1.3bn in debt in return for control of the group. The Livingston-based group also has sites at Hinkley Point, Somerset; Hunterston, Ayrshire; Sizewell, Suffolk; and Torness, East Lothian. City analysts welcomed the results but remained cautious on the output forecasts. In a research note, UBS said: "The impact of results above expectations will be dampened by the increased loss of output from the current outages." The shares fell 6p to 478p. ---- PM puts nuclear issue to the fore Published on 29/09/2005 By David Siddall http://www.whitehaven-news.co.uk/news/viewarticle.aspx?id=286507 PRIME Minister Tony Blair used his keynote speech to the Labour party conference to push the nuclear energy issue higher up the agenda. Copeland MP Jamie Reed seized on the Premier’s remarks as showing support for new nuclear reactors. Mr Blair told the conference in Brighton: “For how much longer can countries like ours allow the security of our energy supply to be dependent on some of the most unstable parts of the world?” Commenting on the Prime Minister’s intention to reappraise nuclear power as part of a new energy policy scheduled to appear in 2006, Mr Reed said: “The case for civil nuclear power for Britain in the modern world is irrefutable. There is obviously significant potential for the enhanced development of Copeland and West Cumbria with any new energy policy. The Prime Minister’s announcement is a bold one – but it is the right one.” West Lakes Regeneration manager Alan Smith said: “We see this as a good sign that the Government is prepared to re-open the debate on building new nuclear stations.” But Jean McSorley of Greenpeace said: “Tony Blair’s enthusiasm for nuclear power is not shared by everyone in Cumbria and we should be aware that it would not automatically mean a new station would be at Sellafield.” -------- canada Liberals abandon long-held nuclear policy JAMES TRAVERS Sep. 29, 2005 Toronto Star http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1127902678962&call_pageid=968256290204&col=968350116795 In diplomacy, principles are like gas: Governments hold them as long as they can before letting them go as quietly as they can. That odious comparison between international affairs and anatomical control pretty well explains the near silence surrounding Canada's sudden shift on the spread of nuclear weapons. Just months after a tortured foreign policy review confirmed non-proliferation as a "key initiative," and only days after Prime Minister Paul Martin spoke eloquently of the rising Asia challenge without mentioning arms control, this country is discreetly rewriting a policy that guided it for more than 40 years. Following Washington's summer lead, the Liberal administration announced without prior warning or public debate that it will again transfer to India dual-use civilian and military nuclear technology and may try to sell it reactors. Time may prove that embracing reality rather than clinging to aging treaties is good sense as well as good business and good politics. Meanwhile, the decision comes loaded with concerns. On one end of that list is Liberal confidence that the public and press, distracted and entertained by gossamer things, including a vivacious new governor general, wouldn't worry much about more substantive matters. On the other is that, 60 years after Hiroshima, the international effort to stigmatize the use of nuclear weapons is losing its energy. That Canada until this week had a place in that effort's vanguard is less important than what its decline means for the spread of the weapons of mass destruction that George W. Bush said he went to Iraq to neuter. Along with effectively rewarding India for thumbing its nose at arms protocols, giving a now more mature New Delhi access to the most sophisticated technology is the most dramatic new feature of a rapidly changing nuclear landscape. In this post-Cold War universe, the brinkmanship of the MAD (mutually assured destruction) doctrine is no longer the primary worry. What matters now is keeping catastrophic weapons away from terrorists and convincing generals that battlefield nuclear weapons are not legitimate parts of their arsenals. Despite India's promise to transparently isolate nuclear power production from arms development, it's a long leap of faith to assume the result won't be more doomsday weapons drifting around the world's roughest, most unstable neighbourhoods. Worse still, India's alleged experiments with "low-yield" weapons mirrors Washington's renewed spending on a range of sci-fi horrors that, despite their misleading name, promise to be more powerful and deadly than the bombs dropped on Japan. What frets those worried that this century will finally host Armageddon is that the U.S. is on course to become more, rather than less, dependent on nuclear weapons. The failure of history's most powerful military to counter insurgencies from Vietnam to Iraq and the increasing reluctance of ordinary Americans to die for their leader's rhetoric are increasing military interest in weapons that, theoretically, could win wars with minimal loss of U.S. lives. Those are still only worries and are far out of scale with concerns about the new willingness in Ottawa and Washington to forgive and forget India's past nuclear betrayals. Apart from ignoring how it illegitimately used '70s Canadian technology to build its first nuke and tested much more sophisticated bombs as recently as 1998, this new easygoing policy makes the informed guess that countries now standing on the nuclear threshold won't conclude they too can have it both ways — world-class power generation and weapons programs. That assumption may ultimately prove right. But there is plenty wrong with using nuclear technology as a prize to draw India closer to North America and further away from China. As much as it recognizes the world as it is rather than how we would like it to be, Ottawa's nuclear reversal also pulls back from the multilateralism that offers Canada the best protection from its neighbour's determined pursuit of self-interest. Stripped to metal, it accepts that Washington now writes and enforces the rules. That's an awfully large principle to let go so quietly. James Travers's national affairs column appears Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday. jtraver@thestar.ca. -------- depleted uranium Killing our own with depleted uranium The United States has no business employing such weapon September 29, 2005 Minnesota Daily http://www.mndaily.com/articles/2005/09/28/65337 Imagine a weapon equivalent to Agent Orange combined with a nuclear bomb. Such weapons exists — and are in regular use. They are depleted-uranium weapons, made from the waste products of nuclear power plants and weapons facilities. U.S. forces are using them in Iraq, even after horrific side effects of their use surfaced during the 1991 Gulf war. The United States has no business employing such cruel weapons. The United Nations classifies depleted-uranium ammunition as an illegal weapons of mass destruction because of their long-term impacts on the land over which they explode and the long-term health problems they cause when people are exposed to them. Apparently, the United States is hypocritical enough to disregard a plea not to use weapons of mass destruction. Hundreds of thousands of U.S. soldiers suffer from Gulf war syndrome and have had children with severe birth defects after being exposed to depleted uranium; other health risks include cancer and radiation sickness-like syndromes. Enough studies have confirmed these harmful effects of radiation and heavy metal toxicity. It is not just U.S. soldiers who will feel the effects this time. While much of the depleted uranium use in the Gulf war occurred over desert, in Iraq the weapons are exploding over heavily populated civilian areas. Iraqis will feel the effects of the radiation and uranium years after the United States leaves the scene — U.S. forces are poisoning the very population they are supposedly seeking to liberate. And while U.S. citizens and Iraqis are dying, the Pentagon insists depleted uranium is “safe” for U.S. troops. This blatant disregard for scientific, medical proof that these weapons are damaging is a crime against humanity — some justifiably label it a war crime. Just as Agent Orange still affects Vietnam veterans and radiation sickness remains in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, depleted uranium-related illnesses will haunt thousands of soldiers and civilians for years to come. And the number of those affected will steadily increase the longer these weapons remain in use in Iraq. The U.S. armed forces must cease their use and regain an iota of compassion for human suffering. -------- iran Imposing Nuclear Discrimination Jihad El Khazen Al-Hayat - 29/09/05// http://www.j-khazen.blogspot.com The United States has succeeded in submitting the Iranian to the UN Security Council on charges of “not implementing or violating its commitments,” although this success has had a price. The US can’t issue a resolution right away; the matter has been left for the future, as Russia and China strongly object to the move. The resolution by the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna was adopted by the European Union, although it’s obvious that the US stands behind it, with considerable support from the UK. Frankly, I don’t understand the wisdom in insisting on this resolution, since there is a loss whether or not the Security Council punishes Iran. The first possibility is the China or Russia will use its veto, and their positions during the negotiations in Vienna make this a strong possibility. If a resolution is issued by the Security Council, the loss of the US and UK will be greater, since the US is facing an increase in oil prices as it works desperately to stop it. Iran can easily gain revenge against both countries in Iraq, and we have seen the hands of Iran in the recent events in Basra. Iran’s partisans are prepared to mobilize the street and undertake armed operations if Tehran asks. This is the situation expressed by the US Ambassador to the IAEA, Greg Schulte, who said that Iran’s deception and hiding regarding its nuclear program “worries the international community.” We are part of this community and what worries us is Israel’s nuclear weapons. I wish the US had sought to make the Middle East a nuclear-free zone, which would have been wise, as opposed to singling out Iran and neglecting Israel. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadi Nejad, due to his post, is the best person to lay out the Iranian position. His strong address at the UN reflected his piousness and self-confidence, and the firmness of the Iranian position in the face of the US campaign. He attacked as much as he was defensive; in the end he did not offer anything new, as many expected. His sole proposal, which I found to be new, was Iran’s readiness to cooperate with public and private sector companies around the world in enriching uranium, to reassure those suspicious about Iran’s intentions. However, it’s clear that the US wasn’t reassured, or that it didn’t want to be reassured. If we ignore the religious aspects of the address, we find that the remainder was divided equally between an attack on the US and its policies and a defense of Iran’s right to acquire nuclear technology for peaceful purposes. President Ahmadi Nejad reminded his audience that the Shah of Iran came to power in a military coup whose backers are well-known. He said also that Saddam Hussein used chemical weapons in his eight-year war with Iran, those who provided him with the arms argue today that they oppose the spread of nuclear weapons, while they acquire thousands of nuclear weapons and conduct more nuclear tests and experiments; they have created a climate of repression and rule by “the war machine.” In another reference to the US, the Iranian president discussed the only country to use nuclear weapons, one that continues to develop and acquire them. This country has used depleted uranium in bombs and bullets that struck thousands of Kuwaitis, Iraqis and its own soldiers. The Iranian president also noted that the US helped the Taliban in Afghanistan and said he was surprised by the huge intelligence agencies’ failure to anticipate what was being planned for 11 September 2001. Ahmadi Nejad rejected the notion that some countries have more rights than others when it comes to possessing nuclear technology. He said that Saddam Hussein and the Taliban were the work of forces that claim today they want peace and security in the region; he insisted on the withdrawal of US forces from Iraq and Afghanistan and turning over power to the people in both countries. Referring to Israel as the “Zionist entity,” Ahmadi Nejad said that peace would only be possible through justice, the end of discrimination against Palestinians and the occupation of their land, the return of refugees and the establishment of an independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital. Iranian President mentioned discrimination several times when discussing nuclear technology, as he accused the US of trying to impose nuclear discrimination or “apartheid,” and insisted on his country’s right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes. He repeated several times that Islam forbids the acquisition of nuclear weapons or their use. President Mahmoud Ahmadi Nejad looks like an old-school revolutionary and after his address, he sat with the Iranian delegation and did not go out into the hall, to receive the customary congratulations. Since the Lebanese and Iranian delegations sat near each other, I went to him and congratulated him on his address, telling him it was better than some of the Arab speeches. I told the Iranian president, through an interpreter, that it was Iran’s right to acquire nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, but as a citizen from the Middle East, I’d like to see a completely nuclear-free zone. If Israel alone possess a nuclear arsenal and the means to deliver bombs to their targets, then I ask Iran, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and every country that can to seek to possess nuclear weapons, in order to stand up to Israel and its extremist government. President Ahmadi Nejad smiled as I spoke and appeared to agree, without saying so. At the end, I asked him which Quranic verse contains a prohibition on nuclear weapons acquisition. Perhaps the interpreter made an error, because the President replied, “Thank you, Thank you.” Perhaps Ahmadi Nejad relied on the verse that speaks of killing a person being tantamount to killing all of humanity, and that saving a life means saving all of humanity. The Iranian President delivered a combative address and I believe he means what he says. I hope that caution wins out over Israel’s desires when it comes to dealing with the issue. ---- Iran committed to NPT for time being: top negotiator TEHRAN (AFP) Sep 29, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050929131219.g5r5sfvq.html Iran will stay in the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) but that could change if the country is forced to give up its nuclear fuel programme, the Islamic republic's top negotiator was quoted as saying Thursday. "Currently there is no reason to get out of the NPT," Ali Larijani said in a speech to clerics in the holy city of Qom. "But if they want to force us to do what they want, then we will think otherwise. If the NPT is implemented well, it is good, but if it used to deprive others of nuclear technology we will never accept it," the student news agency ISNA quoted him as saying. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on Saturday adopted a resolution that finds Iran in "non-compliance" with nuclear proliferation safeguards -- an automatic trigger for taking the matter to the Security Council. The United States and European Union want Iran to abandon all work related to uranium enrichment, arguing Iran cannot be trusted with such sensitive technology, but also offering incentives in return. Tensions worsened in August when Iran, which insists its nuclear programme is strictly peaceful, formally rejected any such demands and ended a freeze on uranium conversion -- a precursor to enrichment, which in turn can be diverted to military uses. The resolution said Iran could avoid penalties by halting conversion, fully cooperating with IAEA inspectors and returning to the EU talks. Iran has so far refused to do so, arguing that nuclear fuel for peaceful purposes is a "right" enshrined by the NPT and saying that offers of nuclear fuel from abroad cannot be relied upon. "Internationally there is no guarantee that we can get nuclear fuel. In the past 18 years Iranian scientists have worked on nuclear technology and it is a big achievement," Larijani was quoted as saying. "The issue the United States has with us is not only about the nuclear issue. It is a war and if we give in to it, tomorrow it will be about human rights, then Hezbollah, democracy and other issues they will use as pretext," Larijani argued. Iran has already threatened to respond to the resolution by ending compliance with the NPT's additional protocol -- which gives the IAEA more inspection powers -- and resuming enrichment. -------- japan Draft Guideline Says Japan to Stick to Nuclear Fuel Recycling Policy Text of report in English by Japanese news agency Kyodo Source: BBC Monitoring Asia Pacific, 29 September 2005 http://www.rednova.com/news/science/255201/draft_guideline_says_japan_to_stick_to_nuclear_fuel_recycling/index.html?source=r_science Tokyo: A panel of the government's Atomic Energy Commission on Thursday [29 September] drafted a guideline for Japan's nuclear energy policies for the next 10 years which states that Japan will adhere to the policy of reprocessing spent nuclear fuel, commission officials said. The guideline, to be adopted by the commission in October, includes for the first time a comparative study on the costs and risks if the government were to change course and adopt a policy of disposing of the fuel instead of reprocessing it. Based on the research results, the guideline says the government will for the time being continue the nuclear fuel cycle via the "pluthermal" approach in place of employing a fast-breeder reactor. The pluthermal method burns plutonium-uranium mixed oxide fuel made with plutonium reprocessed from spent fuel at light-water reactors. However, in order to be able to respond to changing circumstances in the future, the guideline also says the government will engage in research into technologies to dispose of spent fuel without reprocessing it. Japan will aim to continue generating 30-40 per cent of its electricity through nuclear power even after 2030, the guideline says. The government will therefore need to allocate new sites for nuclear reactors and modify existing nuclear reactors into new light-water reactor models. It will then aim to introduce fast- breeder reactors from around 2050 to produce more plutonium, according to the guideline. In order to minimize the need to shut down reactors for safety inspections, utility companies are expected to develop and introduce new technologies that will enable them to conduct regular safety checks less frequently. Currently, the inspections are done once every 13 months. The commission panel began deliberations in June last year. The draft guideline completed Thursday included opinions from the general public gathered since July this year. ---- Panel recommends greater use of nuclear fuel September 29, 2005 (Mainichi) http://mdn.mainichi-msn.co.jp/national/news/20050929p2a00m0na017000c.html An expert panel from the governmental Atomic Energy Commission on Thursday announced guidelines for Japan's nuclear energy policies that state the country should reprocess spent nuclear fuel. The nuclear energy policy guidelines also state that fast-breeder reactors (FBRs) should be put into operation sometime around 2050. Use of FBRs has been suspended in Japan since the Monju reactor in Tsuruga, Fukui Prefecture, was shut down in 1995 because of a sodium leakage accident. The use of FBRs has been deemed a key process for Japan's nuclear fuel recycling program. "Japan aims to operate FBRs on a commercial basis sometime around 2050 under the premise that certain economic conditions are met," the guidelines said. The guidelines also state that power generation based on nuclear energy should continue to be Japan's main source of power after 2030, adding that the amount of electricity generated by nuclear power plants should be maintained at 30 to 40 percent of the total. ---- Coolant water leakage detected at Mihama nuclear plant (Kyodo) Thursday September 29, 11:32 PM http://asia.news.yahoo.com/050929/kyodo/d8cu0i3o1.html A coolant water leakage was detected at the No. 1 reactor of a nuclear power plant in Mihama, Fukui Prefecture, on Thursday night. Kansai Electric Power Co. has been making a test run of the pressurized-water reactor since late August. ---- U.S.-Japan Alliance Evolving To Meet New Threats Assistant secretary of state calls alliance "a model" for other countries 29 September 2005 U.S. State Department http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=washfile-english&y=2005&m=September&x=20050929171558ajesrom0.7759821&t=livefeeds/wf-latest.html The U.S.-Japan alliance is evolving from its Cold War beginnings to a force capable of facing challenges ranging from terrorism to tsunami relief efforts to HIV/AIDS, says Christopher Hill, assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific affairs. Hill provided an overview of U.S.-Japan relations at a September 29 hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on East Asia and Pacific Affairs. "Japan is helping us to do the hard work that will create the necessary environment for the expansion of markets, the development of democracy, and the protection of human rights," Hill said. "Japan is, in many ways, a model for what we hope many countries around the world can and will achieve," he continued. As the world's second-largest economy, Japan is also the world's second-largest provider of international assistance and the second-largest contributor to the United Nations, Hill said. The assistant secretary noted that in mid-September Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Japanese Foreign Minister Nobutaka Machimura launched the new Strategic Development Alliance (SDA), intended to strengthen further the coordination between the two countries on international aid and development. Among the first projects the SDA will tackle, he said, are job creation and business climate reform in Indonesia and education and workforce development in Pakistan. (See related article.) Hill said that the United States believes Japan's role in the world, and its significant contributions to United Nations operations, warrant a permanent seat on the U.N. Security Council. (See The United Nations at 60.) Hill noted that Japan is "a vital partner" in the Six-Party Talks aimed at removing the threat of nuclear weapons from the Korean Peninsula. Japan also has provided important assistance in Afghanistan, Iraq and the worldwide fight against terrorism. In scientific areas, Japan and the United States are at the forefront of the effort to monitor avian influenza, also known as bird flu, Hill said. "We are working together in both APEC [the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum] and the International Partnership on Avian and Pandemic Influenza, announced by the president earlier this month, to try to prevent an epidemic among humans from occurring -- and to be ready to combat the disease should an epidemic nevertheless occur," he said. (See Bird Flu.) Regarding climate change, the United States and Japan are founding members of the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate, which was announced by Deputy Secretary Robert Zoellick in July. (See related article.) "In this Partnership, the U.S. and Japan, with fellow members China, India, Korea and Australia, will use our scientific and technological expertise to encourage accelerated deployment of cleaner, more efficient energy technologies to meet national pollution reduction, energy security and climate change concerns," he said. Following is the text of Hill's remarks, as prepared for delivery: (begin text) U.S. Department of State Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs Statement by Assistant Secretary Christopher R. Hill September 29, 2005 Madam Chairman, members of the Subcommittee on East Asia and Pacific Affairs, I am pleased to be with you today to discuss U.S. relations with Japan, our close friend and key ally in Asia and the world. Japan is remarkable for its transformation and development in the 60 years since the end of World War II. We share with Japan a commitment to democracy at home, to the universal principle of human rights and to the promotion of free markets abroad. Through the tremendous efforts of its people, Japan is now the world's second-largest economy, the world's second-largest provider of international assistance and the second-largest contributor to the United Nations. Japan is, in many ways, a model for what we hope many countries around the world can and will achieve. Japan is a key ally of the United States in Asia and around the world. Like us, Japan is dedicated to maintaining regional security and to promoting peace and stability around the globe. But our alliance represents more than a defensive balance of power. It is also a positive force for progress. We now have a historic opportunity to transform our alliance to meet the challenges of the 21st century - including both traditional and new security, economic, and transnational challenges. We are working very closely with the Department of Defense, led by my colleague Richard Lawless, to use this opportunity to transform our alliance to meet those challenges. Our alliance was founded in response to the threat from the Soviet Union. Today, we view our alliance as an opportunity to pool our capabilities in the face of new challenges and opportunities, from terrorism to the tsunami relief efforts to HIV/AIDS to our new Asia Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate. We are working hard to restructure our forces and forge a long-term commitment from both countries and both peoples to allow our alliance to adapt, grow, and meet these and other challenges for the years ahead. Japan faces certain constraints, such as its policy on collective self-defense and Article 9 of the Constitution. These are issues for the Japanese people to work out for themselves, through ongoing public and Diet debate. With continued close consultations and further refinement of shared goals, we intend to do everything we can to keep this alliance as vital and effective over the course of the next 50 years as it has been over the previous 50. Today, Japan stands with us from East Asia to Afghanistan. For example, Japan is a vital partner in the Six-Party Talks and played a key role in the negotiation in Beijing earlier this month of a Joint Statement, in which the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) committed to abandoning all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programs, and returning, at an early date, to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards. Japan joined the U.S. and other parties in making clear that discussion with the DPRK about peaceful nuclear energy could take place only after the DPRK came into full compliance with relevant international agreements, including returning to the NPT and full implementation of IAEA safeguards. The Japanese had direct discussions with their DPRK counterparts on issues of concern such as abductions and human rights. I will give the Committee a full read-out of the discussions in Beijing on October 4. Elsewhere in the world, Japan is helping us to do the hard work that will create the necessary environment for the expansion of markets, the development of democracy, and the protection of human rights. As it works with us, Japan is changing its own role in the international system. It has made essential contributions to Iraq, Afghanistan and the War on Terror. Japan worked side-by-side with us and others to respond to last December's horrific earthquake and tsunami; Japan is working with us today to implement an early warning system for the Indian Ocean. Secretary Rice and Foreign Minister Machimura just launched our new Strategic Development Alliance (SDA), which will further strengthen our coordination in the crucial area of international aid and development. In Iraq, in addition to the nearly $5 billion pledged by Japan and the $1.5 billion it has spent so far on reconstruction, the Japanese Self Defense Force engineering battalion deployed in Samawah has built or rebuilt several water treatments facilities and power stations, repaired hospitals, and provided ambulances, medical equipment and emergency medical supplies. The Iraqi government has made clear its appreciation; we, too, greatly appreciate Japan's steadfast commitment. Japan has also taken a higher profile role in the Middle East Peace Process, aiding the Palestinian people with humanitarian assistance, and helping to reform the Palestinian Authority and implement confidence-building measures. In Afghanistan, Japan has contributed nearly $1 billion in aid and its Overseas Development Assistance (ODA) personnel are working with us and Afghans to rebuild the Kandahar-Herat Ring Road and revitalize infrastructure that has been virtually non-existent for years. Japan has been a significant contributor to the War on Terror, providing at-sea refueling to Coalition vessels from twelve countries performing maritime interdiction operations in the Indian Ocean. Without the 103 million gallons Japan has provided to date - worth about $150 million - some Coalition members would not have been able to participate at all. We applaud the Government of Japan's recently announced intention to seek legislative branch approval to extend that operation for another year. This is the most significant military mission that Japan now undertakes in the war on terror. The new U.S.-Japan Strategic Development Alliance (SDA) will allow us to discuss and better coordinate our assistance priorities and programs in the context of the geopolitical situation, and in accordance with our common views on development. Secretary Rice and Foreign Minister Machimura released a set of shared principles for results-oriented development assistance during the UN General Assembly meetings in New York earlier this month. Yesterday, Under Secretary Shiner and Deputy Foreign Minister Yabunaka held the first meeting under the SDA, discussing job creation and business climate reform in Indonesia and education and workforce development in Pakistan, activities which have the common goal of creating sustainable jobs for the people of these key Asian countries to give their people greater opportunity. Japan's growing global role is evident in many ways. Japan was a core member of the tsunami relief effort and has been at the forefront of nations working to establish an early warning tsunami system in Asia. Japan's global role is also evident at the UN. We believe Japan's role in the world, not to mention its significant contributions to UN operations, warrant a permanent seat on the Council, and we have long supported a permanent seat for Japan. However, as the Secretary said at the General Assembly on September 17, our challenge now is to enact the vital reforms that will make the United Nations more accountable to its members, more suited to new challenges and more faithful to its founding purposes. Real progress on fundamental reforms will prove that the United Nations can tackle even bigger and more complex changes - in particular, the reform of the Security Council, including a seat for Japan and greater representation for developing countries. Closer to home, healthy relations among Japan and its neighbors, particularly China, are essential to stability and prosperity in East Asia, and thus in the interests of all countries in the region and of the U.S. as well. Japan and China are more economically dependent on each other than ever - particularly on the trade front - with China now Japan's largest trading partner; two-way trade between the two countries was over $170 billion in 2004. However, frictions remain, fed by territorial disagreements, including East China Sea energy exploration; historical disputes; and other issues of concern. For its part, Beijing shares with some of its neighbors, including the Republic of Korea, a lingering distrust of Japan's view of its past. Tokyo, in return, is concerned about inaccuracies in and the anti-Japanese tone of textbooks in China and Korea. Given the growing common interests of the nations of Northeast Asia, these differences constitute unfortunate obstacles to taking full advantage of the tremendous opportunities that exist in the region. As Deputy Secretary Zoellick suggested last week, part of the solution is greater dialogue. For our part, we will continue to stress to our allies and partners in the region the importance of finding mutually satisfactory and amicable solutions to these issues. On September 11, 2005, Prime Minister Koizumi won a landslide victory. He has stressed his determination to pursue further reforms, which we hope will include redoubled efforts for economic reform. Much progress has been made, but there are still areas within the Japanese economy that remain heavily regulated. We will continue to support the Japanese effort to make further reforms in sectors such as pharmaceuticals and medical devices, telecommunications and health care, and, of course, we strongly urge Japan to resume beef imports from the United States without further delay. It has been a year since we reached agreement on a framework intended to accomplish that. Despite repeated interventions at the highest-level by the U.S. Government, it has not happened yet. This should change. As you know, it was the defeat of Prime Minister Koizumi's top reform priority, the privatization of Japan Post, that prompted him to call an election; with the large majority now enjoyed by the ruling coalition in the Lower House of the Diet and political momentum behind the Prime Minister, most Japanese observers believe it likely this legislation will pass quickly. Beyond mail services, Japan Post also includes huge banking and insurance operations. We will monitor developments closely; we want to ensure that Japan Post's insurance arm, which is subject to a set of laws and regulations that differ from those governing the private sector, will not be allowed to issue its own new products until a fair and level playing field has been established between it and its private sector competitors, which include a number of large American insurers. We have similar concerns in the express mail and banking sectors. The United States and Japan are also perhaps the world's two most technologically advanced societies - and we are cooperating in this area as well. One example is climate change. The U.S. and Japan are founding members of the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate, announced by Deputy Secretary Zoellick in July. In this Partnership, the U.S. and Japan, with fellow members China, India, Korea and Australia, will use our scientific and technological expertise to encourage accelerated deployment of cleaner, more efficient energy technologies to meet national pollution reduction, energy security and climate change concerns. In another scientific area, Japan and the United States are at the forefront of the effort to monitor avian influenza. We are working together in both APEC and the International Partnership on Avian and Pandemic Influenza, announced by the President earlier this month, to try to prevent an epidemic among humans from occurring - and to be ready to combat the disease should an epidemic nevertheless occur. We look forward to continued close cooperation with Japan, as both nations realize that we can accomplish so much more when working together and complementing each other's efforts. This relationship is strong, broad and deep, and we seek to make it even more so while adapting it to the new challenges of a new era. From the hundreds of thousands of visitors from Japan each year, to the success of exchanges that bring Americans to live and work in Japan, we have a relationship that goes well beyond the meetings of our leaders and government officials. We will build on this human dimension as we work together to secure peace, stability and prosperity in Asia and around the world. (Distributed by the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov) -------- pakistan Pakistan says N. Korea nuclear ties 'closed chapter' By Jon Herskovitz Thu Sep 29, 2005 12:36 AM ET (Reuters) http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050929/wl_nm/korea_north_pakistan_dc_1 SEOUL - Pakistan has given South Korea all the information it has about suspected exchanges of nuclear technology with North Korea and considers the issue "a closed chapter," Pakistan's prime minister said on Thursday. Pakistan has been at the center of investigations into a nuclear black market that is suspected of skirting international sanctions and providing sensitive technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea. "As regards to any relationship or interaction with North Korea, we have none any more," Shaukat Aziz told a news briefing in Seoul, ahead of meetings with South Korean officials. "Whatever information we have, we have shared with our friends in South Korea," Aziz said. "This is a closed chapter." U.S. officials have charged that the nuclear black market network run by disgraced nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan, the father of Pakistan's atom bomb program, supplied North Korea with technology to produce highly enriched uranium (HEU) for nuclear bombs. Although Khan is under house arrest, neither U.S. officials nor inspectors from the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) have been allowed to question him on the extent of the nuclear black market. The issue is critical because the United States has demanded at six-country talks that North Korea dismantle all of its nuclear activities, including the uranium enrichment program. North Korea has denied having any such program. In a report on its official KCNA news agency on September 13, Pyongyang called Washington's charges about the uranium program "false propaganda" and "a very insolent act seeking a sinister political purpose." The chief U.S. envoy to the North Korean nuclear talks Christopher Hill said on Wednesday Pyongyang needed to come clean on all of its nuclear programs which officials have said would include its declared plutonium-based program and the suspected HEU program. The next round of talks among the two Koreas, China, Japan, Russia and the United States is scheduled for November, with envoys looking to draw up a road map for Pyongyang to dismantle its nuclear programs in return for aid, security guarantees and increased diplomatic recognition. INDIA AND IRAN Aziz reiterated that Pakistan, the only Islamic country with nuclear weapons, was opposed to the use of force against Iran to resolve the standoff over its nuclear program. Iran threatened on Tuesday to use trade to punish countries that voted to report it to the U.N. Security Council for possible sanctions, after Tehran failed to convince the world its nuclear program was peaceful. "We also believe that the current situation vis a vis Iran and the nuclear program ought to be handled through the IAEA and ought to be handled in a way which settles the matter peacefully," Aziz said. -------- security Rise in N-trafficking: IAEA United Nations, PTI: September 29, 2005 http://www.deccanherald.com/deccanherald/sep292005/foreign1632192005928.asp If terrorists laid their hands on radioactive material, they could trigger a dirty war, warned the UN agency. In a development that could cause worldwide concern, the United Nations atomic watchdog agency has reported a “substantial” increase in illicit trafficking and unauthorised activities in nuclear and other radioactive materials in 2003-2004. Countries reported 121 incidents to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in 2004, according to new statistics from the agency's Illicit Trafficking Database (ITDB). One case, the Vienna-based agency said, involved weapon-grade material. Conceding that the majority of the incidents reported by states showed no criminal activity, the IAEA warned that in the hands of terrorists or criminals, some radioactive sources could be used for malicious purposes, for example in a radiological dispersal device or “dirty war”. The case involving fissile material — highly enriched uranium (HEU) or plutonium — needed to make a nuclear weapon, occurred in June 2003 when an individual was arrested in possession of 170 grams of HEU, attempting to illegally transport it across the border from Georgia. The increased number of incidents during 2003-2004 could in part be due to improved reporting, IDTB said. Since IDTB started in 1993, there have been 18 confirmed cases of trafficking in HEU and plutonium. A few of these involved kilogram quantities of weapons-usable nuclear material but most involved very small quantities. In some cases, the material was allegedly a sample of larger quantities available for illegal sale or at risk of theft. In the past 12 years, 220 incidents involved nuclear materials, mainly low-grade and mostly reactor fuel pellets, natural uranium, depleted uranium and thorium. While the quantities were rather small to be significant for nuclear proliferation or use in a terrorist bomb, they indicate gaps in control and security of nuclear material and facilities. Criminal activity The majority of confirmed nuclear incidents during 1993-2004 involved criminal activity, such as theft, illegal possession, illegal transfer or transaction. Where data on motives is available, it indicates profit seeking as the principal goal. In the 12-year period, 424 incidents were reported involving other radioactive materials, mostly radioactive sources, which are used worldwide in a host of legitimate applications, such as radiography. Measures to protect and control their use, storage or disposal are much less strict than those applied toward nuclear materials. Apart from possible terrorist use, radioactive sources have the potential to harm human health or the environment. Unlawfully discarded or disposed of radioactive sources, when melted at scrap metal recycle plants, may lead to severe environmental and economic consequences, the agency said. Activity levels of the majority of these sources were too low to pose serious radiological risk if used for malicious purposes, but some 50 incidents involved high-risk “dangerous” radioactive sources, presenting considerable radiological danger if so used. The overwhelming majority of such cases were reported over the last six years. -------- u.s. nuc facilities Model shows safer, more efficient nuclear fuel 29 September 2005 Instrumentation, Systems, and Automation Society http://www.isa.org/Template.cfm?Section=Professionals_and_Practitioners&template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=46575 A more efficient nuclear fuel would last longer and burn more economically, said researchers now working on a mathematical model to further develop the technology. Current nuclear fuel is made of a material called uranium dioxide with a small percentage of a uranium isotope, called uranium-235, which is essential to induce the nuclear fission reactions inside current reactors. "Although today's oxide fuels are very stable and safe, a major problem is that they do not conduct heat well, limiting the power and causing fuel pellets to crack and degrade prematurely, necessitating replacement before the fuel has been entirely used," said Alvin A. Solomon, a professor of nuclear engineering at Purdue University and an author of a paper on the subject. The other authors are: Shripad Revankar, a Purdue University associate professor of nuclear engineering, and former graduate student Ryan Latta, an engineer at Brookhaven National Laboratory. Researchers developed a process to mix the uranium oxide with a material called beryllium oxide. Pellets of uranium oxide undergo processing to interlace with beryllium oxide, or BeO, which conducts heat far more readily than the uranium dioxide. This "skeleton" of beryllium oxide enables the nuclear fuel to conduct heat at least 50% better than conventional fuels. "The beryllium oxide is like a heat pipe that sucks the heat out and helps to more efficiently cool the fuel pellet," Solomon said. A mathematical model developed by Revankar and Latta can accurately predict the performance of the experimental fuel, Revankar said. Pellets of nuclear fuel remain within the fuel rods of nuclear fission reactors. Metal tubes, or "cladding," surround the rods, which prevents the escape of radioactive material. Because uranium oxide does not conduct heat well, during a reactor's operation there is a large temperature difference between the center of the pellets and their surface, causing the center of the fuel pellets to become very hot. The heat must constantly move out by a reactor cooling system because overheating could cause the fuel rods to melt, which could lead to a catastrophic nuclear accident and release of radiation. "If you add this high-conductivity phase beryllium oxide, the thermal conductivity is increased by about 50%, so the difference in temperature from the center to the surface of these pellets turns out to be remarkably lower," Solomon said. Revankar said the experimental fuel promises to be safer than conventional fuels, while lasting longer and potentially saving millions of dollars annually. "We can actually enhance the performance of the fuel, especially during an accident, because this fuel heats up less than current fuel, which decreases the possibility of a catastrophic accident due to melting," Revankar said. "The experimental fuel also would not have to be replaced as often as the current fuel pellets. "Currently, the nuclear fuel has to be replaced every three years or so because of the temperature-related degradation of the fuel, as well as consumption of the U-235,” Revankar said. “If the fuel can be left longer, there is more power produced and less waste generated. If you can operate at a lower temperature, you can use the fuel pellets for a longer time, burning up more of the fuel, which is very important from an economic point of view. Lower temperatures also mean safer, more flexible reactor operation." Solomon said a 50% increase in thermal conductivity represents a significant increase in performance for the 103 commercial nuclear reactors currently operating in the U.S. "Just a 5 to 10% increase would be pretty significant, so a 50% increase would be quite an improvement," Solomon said. The next step in the research is to test the new fuel inside a nuclear reactor to make sure it stands up to the extreme conditions inside reactors over its entire lifetime. "We know it holds up well to very high temperatures, and now we are at the point where we want to irradiate this material and see what it does," Solomon said. The U.S. Department of Energy is funding the research. For related information, go to www.isa.org/manufacturing_automation. -------- utah Bill blocking Utah waste site not introduced N.S. Nokkentved Provo, Utah, DAILY HERALD Thursday, September 29, 2005 - 12:00 AM http://www.harktheherald.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=65289 Legislation that Sen. Orrin Hatch says would block shipments of highly radioactive spent reactor from rolling through Utah County has not actually been introduced. "The draft of the bill that we received from Legislative Counsel did not reflect what we intended for the bill," Hatch spokesman Peter Carr said in an e-mail Wednesday. "We are still working with them to ensure that the bill's language is correct before we introduce the bill." Hatch's office last week said he introduced the legislation the day after Sen. Bob Bennett announced that he had dropped his support for a proposed federal waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nev. Bennett's announcement made Hatch's more timely, and he had planned to introduce the bill anyway, Carr said last week. But the bill was never introduced, Carr said Wednesday. The legislation would block sending spent fuel from commercial nuclear reactors to private sites such as one proposed on the Goshute Indian Reservation in Skull Valley. Much of the waste going to that facility would roll through Utah County. Hatch declined to join Bennett in opposing Yucca Mountain, saying doing so would alienate the Bush administration and others who are in a position to block the proposed spent fuel storage facility in the Skull Valley. On Sept. 9, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission approved the license for the project that would bring 44,000 tons of spent fuel to Utah -- over the objections of Utah officials. The project, proposed by the Minnesota-based Private Fuel Storage LLC, still needs the approval of the Bureau of Land Management and the Bureau of Indian Affairs -- agencies under the authority of the Bush administration. Hatch's proposed bill also calls for a study of alternatives to disposal such as reprocessing, storing the waste on site, and storing the waste at existing federally-owned sites. It also calls for a study of reprocessing spent fuel, an expensive process that extracts still usable uranium and plutonium from spent fuel. N.S. Nokkentved can be reached at 344-2930 or at nnokkentved@heraldextra.com. -------- MILITARY -------- arms Syrian army chief mulls Russian arms purchases MOSCOW (AFP) Sep 29, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050929141933.o8dx5p2o.html The Syrian army's chief-of-staff General Ali Habib left Russia Thursday after a four-day visit aimed at upgrading his country's weapons arsenal and strengthening defence cooperation between Moscow and Damascus. Habib met Russian Defence Minister Sergei Ivanov on Wednesday to discuss "maintenance and modernisation of Syrian military equipment by Russian experts, the training of Syrian military in Russian military academies and potential purchases of Russian weapons," a Russian defence ministry statement said. The Syrian general agreed to buy ammunition and increase the number of Syrian servicemen studying in Russia from 30 to more than 50, Interfax news agency quoted an unnamed Russian defence ministry official as saying. The Syrian general on Tuesday also visited a weapons factory specialising in high-precision anti-tank rockets in Tula region south of Moscow on Tuesday. The factory is Russia's seventh largest arms exporter and produces small arms, "active armoured" systems and Kornet-E anti-tank missiles. Habib, who met his Russian counterpart Yury Baluyevsky on Tuesday, was also scheduled to meet represenatives of Rosoboronexport, the official Russian body charged with arms exports. Russia, one of Syria's main arms suppliers, sold short-range surface to air missiles to Damacus earlier this year, unleashing protests from Israel. -------- business U.S. slapping more sanctions on Chinese defense companies By Tim Johnson Knight Ridder Newspapers Thu, Sep. 29, 2005 http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/12774946.htm WASHINGTON - Until recently, U.S. consumers who wanted an el cheapo hunting rifle could've shopped at Wal-Mart or Kmart for a low-cost model made by North China Industries Corp. But that company and other Chinese defense companies are in the penalty box with the Bush administration for selling weapons to nations that are considered rogue states. Since it came to office, the Bush administration has slapped sanctions on Chinese companies or individuals 62 times for illegal arms proliferation. That follows a nearly three-year period in the Clinton administration in which not a single sanction was imposed. The huge increase in sanctions raises questions: Do the sanctions push China toward better behavior? Are individual Chinese defense companies deterred? Why are some sanctions imposed on Chinese subsidiaries, letting parent companies off the hook? China complains bitterly about the U.S. sanctions, asserting that it has new laws in place to curb arms sales and has reined in state-run companies that had been operating somewhat independently. "Their response is generally to say, `It's outrageous! The sanctions are unfair. Show us proof,'" said Matthew Godsey, a research associate in Washington at the Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control, a disarmament advocacy group. U.S. officials say the evidence comes from intelligence sources from various federal agencies that can't be divulged publicly. Many of the sanctions have been imposed on just a few state-run Chinese companies. For example, North China Industries Corp., commonly known as Norinco, has received six sanctions since May 2003, all for missile-related exports to Iran. A state-run conglomerate based in Beijing, Norinco has won hundreds of millions of dollars in trade with Iran, including expanding a mass transit system in Tehran, and it considers Iran a major market. The company manufactures everything from ordnance and tanks to auto parts and rugs. Officials from the company declined interview requests, instead sending an unsigned response to written questions. "It is unreasonable and extremely wrong that the U.S. government has imposed many sanctions on our company in the name of nonproliferation," the statement said. "Norinco is a responsible company managed according to law." Other U.S.-sanctioned companies in China include Precision Machinery Import/Export Corp., Wha Cheong Tai Company Ltd., Zibo Chemical Equipment Plant, and China Great Wall Industry Corp. The sanctions even reach down to individuals. One Chinese national, Q.C. Chen, an arms broker, has been sanctioned four times since 2002. The U.S. sanctions vary in severity, ranging from a ban on soliciting U.S. government contracts to a wholesale prohibition of exporting goods to the United States. Experts inside and outside the Bush administration assert that the sharp increase in sanctions has made Chinese defense companies cautious about wholesale proliferation but hasn't halted the flow of missile and chemical weapons technology abroad. "They really don't transfer complete platforms anymore, complete missiles and things like that. They are into the murkier world of components," said James Mulvenon, a specialist on the Chinese defense industry at the Center for Intelligence Research and Analysis, a consultancy in Washington. "They've become a more sophisticated manipulator of the system. They are still engaged in bad behavior." Much of the tougher stance toward Chinese defense companies came while John Bolton, a conservative whom President Bush recently installed as ambassador to the United Nations, served as the State Department's point man on arms control and nonproliferation, leading a team that pushed for sanctions. "They've been taking a far less tolerant attitude toward the Chinese than in previous years," said Tai Ming Cheung, author of "China's Entrepreneurial Army," a book about the nation's military industries. Much of what the Chinese defense firms sell abroad is permitted under Chinese law, but not American law, and the U.S. sanctions have barely slowed the companies down. "If you look at their corporate performances, they continue to grow rather robustly. They've all been doing extremely well in the past few years," Tai said. But U.S. officials say they can't seem to get China's attention on weapons proliferation matters unless they target a specific company, such as Zibo Chemical, which is accused of selling glass-lined chemical vessels to an Iranian company linked to chemical weapons production. In many cases the sanctions have few teeth, targeted at subsidiaries of parent Chinese companies that have poor track records, but that may have ties to U.S. trade. "We're so afraid, so concerned, that U.S. companies might lose business that the laws are almost impotent," said Godsey, the anti-proliferation advocate at the Wisconsin Project. "We don't see any indication that it (the sanctions) has changed behavior." Godsey said a company like Norinco "has shrugged these off because it figures it can still make money" in Iran even if it loses up to $200 million in U.S. business. A Norinco official, in the faxed response to Knight Ridder, said U.S. companies are hurt by the sanctions against the company. "My company has conducted extensive business cooperation with American companies," the response said, adding: "We strongly demand that the U.S. government lift all the sanctions against us ... and let our business cooperation with U.S. companies recover and develop." In some cases, Chinese companies have listed their firms on overseas stock exchanges in Hong Kong and elsewhere even as their subsidiaries stand accused by Washington of proliferating to nations such as Iran and Pakistan. "Sanctions are often imposed on a subsidiary of a large Chinese enterprise, but there is no impact on the parent company, even if it is 100 percent owned," said Roger W. Robinson, vice chairman of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, a congressionally mandated body. Robinson said he was particularly concerned about the case of Sinopec, a state-run oil company that began selling shares to foreign investors in 2000 even as two subsidiaries, Jiangsu Yongli Chemical Engineering and Nanjing Chemical Industries Group, were sanctioned for proliferation to Iran. Robinson said he believes U.S. sanctions have brought "significant progress" with China but that the nation "remains part of the problem in proliferation worldwide." -------- iraq Retired general: Iraq invasion was 'strategic disaster' The Lowell, Massachusetts, Sun, September 29, 2005 http://www.lowellsun.com/ci_3072005 WASHINGTON -- The invasion of Iraq was the “greatest strategic disaster in United States history,” a retired Army general said yesterday, strengthening an effort in Congress to force an American withdrawal beginning next year., Retired Army Lt. Gen. William Odom, a Vietnam veteran, said the invasion of Iraq alienated America's Middle East allies, making it harder to prosecute a war against terrorists. The U.S. should withdraw from Iraq, he said, and reposition its military forces along the Afghan-Pakistani border to capture Osama bin Laden and crush al Qaeda cells. “The invasion of Iraq I believe will turn out to be the greatest strategic disaster in U.S. history,” said Odom, now a scholar with the Hudson Institute. Homeward Bound, a bipartisan resolution with 60 House co-sponsors, including Lowell Rep. Marty Meehan, requests President Bush to announce plans for a draw-down by December, and begin withdrawing troops by October 2006. The measure has not been voted on, nor has the House Republican leadership scheduled hearings. But supporters were encouraged yesterday, pointing to growing support among moderate conservatives and the public's rising dissatisfaction with the war. Meehan, one of the first to propose a tiered exit strategy in January, when few of his Democratic colleagues dared wade into the controversial debate, pointed to “enormous progress.” “Talking about this issue, having hearings on this issue, getting more Americans to focus on it will result in a change of policy,” Meehan told The Sun. “The generals and commanders on the field in Iraq overwhelmingly are saying we need less in terms of occupation and more Iraqis up front, and that's the only strategy I think that will result in getting American troops back home.” -- EVAN LEHMANN -------- nato Latvia preparing to host next NATO summit RIGA (AFP) Sep 29, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050929175347.43475c26.html The Baltic state of Latvia has set aside five million lats (7.2 million euros) in the 2006 budget to cover the possibility that the capital Riga will be selected to host the next NATO summit, the draft budget showed. The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) has not yet decided if the next summit will be held in Latvia, a former Soviet republic. According to NATO officials in Brussels, the next summit could be held in November 2006, and will focus on how to modernise the alliance, which has had difficulty re-establishing its identity since the end of the Cold War and break-up of the Soviet Union. NATO has already held a summit in a former communist bloc country when the alliance met in the Czech capital Prague in 2002. The last NATO summit was held in Istanbul, Turkey. The organisation does not have a hard-and-fast calendar for holding summits, but usually meets every two years. NATO has 26 member states. Latvia and its two Baltic neighbours Estonia and Lithuania joined the alliance in 2003. -------- puerto rico FBI Killing of Puerto Rican Independence Leader Filiberto Ojeda Rios Sparks Outpouring of Anti-US Sentiment Thursday, September 29th, 2005 Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/09/29/1348227 We continue our look at the FBI killing of Puerto Rican independence leader Filiberto Ojeda Rios. His killing has sparked an outpouring of anti-U.S. sentiment in Puerto Rico and fears that the Bush administration will launch a new crackdown on the Puerto Rican independence movement. We go to Puerto Rico to speak with a spokesperson for the Puerto Rican Socialist Front and an independent political analyst. [includes rush transcript] We continue our look at the FBI killing of Puerto Rican independence leader Filiberto Ojeda Rios. Nearly a week has passed since FBI agents surrounded his house, resulting in a shootout that left Ojeda Rios dead and an FBI agent wounded. His killing has sparked an outpouring of anti-U.S. sentiment in Puerto Rico and fears that the Bush administration will launch a new crackdown on the Puerto Rican independence movement. Earlier this week tens of thousands attended his funeral making it one of the largest funerals in Puerto Rican history. Puerto Ricans of all political stripes have questioned the FBI's actions, especially because the shooting took place on Sept. 23 - the anniversary of an 1868 uprising against Spanish rule. The FBI considered Ojeda Rios a fugitive from justice and the head of a domestic terrorist group - the militant Puerto Rican independence group Los Macheteros. But in Puerto Rico he has long been viewed as a leader of the independence movement. Now many see him as a martyr who was killed at the hands of U.S. agents. Puerto Rican officials and Amnesty International are calling for an independent probe into his death. Amnesty said that the killing should be considered an extra-judicial execution if the FBI deliberately killed Ojeda Ríos or deliberately left him to die, when they could have arrested him. Although FBI agents shot him Friday afternoon at his home they waited 20 hours before entering the house. Autopsy reports show that he bled to death from a gunshot wound to his shoulder. * Jorge Farinacci, spokesperson for the Puerto Rican Socialist Front, and friend of Filiberto Ojeda. * Juan-Manuel Garcia-Passalacqua, a Harvard-eductaed attorney and independent political analyst in Puerto Rico. He hosts one of the islands most popular radio programs on Noti Uno. RUSH TRANSCRIPT AMY GOODMAN: We go now to Puerto Rico to speak with Jorge Farinacci. He is the spokesperson for the Puerto Rican Socialist Front and friend of Filiberto Ojeda Rios. He's on the phone from San Juan. Juan? JUAN GONZALEZ: Welcome to Democracy Now!, Jorge. JORGE FARINACCI: Yes, good morning, and good morning to all of your audience. JUAN GONZALEZ: Could you talk a little bit about the demonstration yesterday and the reactions in the last couple of days to the events of last week? JORGE FARINACCI: Well, it's incredible the way the Puerto Rican people have gone out to the streets. Since the night of the murder, that night, three or four hours after everybody knew what was happening, although it was not official that he had been murdered, but everybody knew that something strange and fishy was happening. Thousands of people poured to the streets, mainly called by the student movement in Puerto Rico. They brought -- the students put barricades in the streets. They started marching around the San Juan area, and since that day, the island has been in a turmoil. JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, I know that the three Puerto Rican Congress members in the United States, Luis Gutierrez, Jose Serrano, and Nydia Velazquez, immediately issued a statement over the weekend demanding an investigation. And the FBI has now said that it is looking into what occurred, but what's been the reaction of the political leaders in Puerto Rico? It would obviously be expected that the supporters of independence who saw Ojeda Rios as a hero would rally and protest, but also there's been lots of concern expressed by Populares and those who are in favor of statehood, as well. Could you talk about that? JORGE FARINACCI: Yes, that is correct, and I think the reason for that is that the people of Puerto Rico, notwithstanding their political positions, understood clearly that this was a murder, that it was an arrogant [inaudible] and vengeful event planned by the FBI, and even though there are many differences within the Puerto Rican community regarding our future, there's a lot of national pride. And Puerto Ricans don't like to be pushed, don't like to be harassed, don't like to be -- our leaders could be murdered in cold blood without any kind of response. I think that the dignity of the Puerto Rican people was hurt very badly by this planned murder by the FBI. JUAN GONZALEZ: Talk about the significance of the actual date that they chose to try to arrest him. He had been a fugitive for more than 15 years, and yet – and he was also -- customarily, he would issue interviews or statements on September 23, El Grito de Lares. Could you talk about the significance of that date and obviously that the FBI knew that -- the significance of that date, as well? JORGE FARINACCI: Well, that is correct. El Grito de Lares is more or less like the Fourth of July for Americans. It's the day that we proclaimed our independence from Spain, although that revolution was crushed via the resistance. The flame, the desire for independence is always present in Puerto Rico for the last 150 years. And there's a commemoration of that date every year in Puerto Rico in the town of Lares. This time this year, thousands of thousands of Puerto Ricans, we gather in Lares to not only commemorate the Grito de Lares, but also to reaffirm our rights to self-determination, our right to independence, and a call for the end of the colonization that the United States have imposed on Puerto Rico. Since the last years, Filiberto Ojeda has constantly been one of the present in Lares through video messages or audio messages that are -- that when they come to the audience, everybody is silent to hear his message. His message this year was a message of unity, was a message of national reconciliation and was a very positive message to the Puerto Rican people. And it's ironic that at the same time that that message was being made to be addressed to the public there, the FBI had 200 agents surrounding his house and preparing to murder him. AMY GOODMAN: We're talking to Jorge Farinacci, spokesperson for the Puerto Rican Socialist Front, friend of Filiberto Ojeda Rios. And also, joining us on the line now, also from Puerto Rico, Juan-Manuel Garcia-Passalacqua, who is an independent political analyst in Puerto Rico, hosts one of the island's most popular radio programs on Noti Uno. Juan? JUAN GONZALEZ: Welcome, Juan-Manuel, to the program. JUAN-MANUEL GARCIA-PASSALACQUA: Welcome, my friend, and thanks for having me, and my regards to Jorge. JUAN GONZALEZ: Juan-Manuel, your perspective -- we have been talking about the events of the past few days, the massive protest that occurred yesterday, as well as the statements of many Puerto Rican leaders, both on the island and in the United States, demanding an investigation into the events. Your perspective on what's happened in the past few days? JUAN-MANUEL GARCIA-PASSALACQUA: Yes, I have no doubt whatsoever that a political assassination occurred in Puerto Rico by a special team with a special rifle against Filiberto Ojeda Rios, who was left to bleed to death and killed, in effect, murdered by a team from the United States. And the investigation will show that. And I don't have any doubt whatsoever that the government of Puerto Rico contributed to that event by turning off the lights in the barrio where Filiberto Ojeda Rios lived. 200 houses were left without lights in the evening so that the sharpshooter with his laser and special rifle could kill Filiberto. So that's the story. That's the truth. And I am sure it will have to come out in the investigation by inspector general of the United States. AMY GOODMAN: Juan-Manuel, you had met with Ojeda Rios a number of times, interviewing him both, as you described, at the courthouse, but also when he was underground, that -- JUAN-MANUEL GARCIA-PASSALACQUA: Yes. JUAN GONZALEZ: How did you meet with him, known as a gardener of roses for many years to the people in his community? JUAN-MANUEL GARCIA-PASSALACQUA: Well, persons that knew us both put us in contact. And I obviously was not privy to observe how I got there or where I was, but I am convinced, again, that he had never abandoned his fight for independence and that he was living with his wife in a house in the mountains, as I said, gardening roses and reading. We just got today a picture of the books. And we got also pictures of the more than 100 rounds that were shot at his home on the September 23rd intervention. AMY GOODMAN: Do you think it's fair to say he died in a shootout? JUAN-MANUEL GARCIA-PASSALACQUA: No, he did not die in a shootout. He was attacked in his home with 100 shots. He responded with ten shots. The ten. He was killed by a single bullet shot by a sharpshooter from high ground or -- well, high ground. Let's put it that way. And the single bullet went through his clavicle and wounded him. He fell against the floor and tried to prevent bleeding, but he was left there bleeding for hours until he died. JUAN GONZALEZ: Now, to what extent did the local police officials in Puerto Rico participate or know about this? You mentioned the lights being turned out, but some of the statements from the superintendent of police, Pedro Toledo, have suggested that they knew very little about what was going on. JUAN-MANUEL GARCIA-PASSALACQUA: The problem with that theory, Juan, is that there is no way that the lights could have been turned off in the barrio, in the 200 houses in the barrio without an expressed authorization of the electrical governmental company, and that order must have come, I have said here, from the Fortaleza. AMY GOODMAN: Jorge Farinacci, I wanted to ask you about the statement of Los Macheteros, vowing to avenge Ojeda Rios's death, in a statement that was read to mourners at the funeral, saying, “Yankees, murderers, your days are numbered. The fight will continue now and until the Yankees leave our soil.” It was read -- it was signed by Commander Guasabara “from somewhere on the island.” The significance of this statement? JORGE FARINACCI: Well, it’s very obvious that that's some kind of feeling of revenge is in the Puerto Rican people, but I would urge our movement to restrain from that. We think that the proper response to this is the mobilization, to strengthen our movement and continue the struggles. Right now, we are in a position that we have gained a lot with our people. This murder has shown very clearly to all Puerto Ricans and many people around Latin America and the United States the real character of the relation of Puerto Rico with the United States. And I think that we should take Filiberto's death and have an advantage in the next months and years. So, I just don't think revenge at this time would be the proper way to advance our struggle and honor our hero and our martyr. AMY GOODMAN: Jorge Farinacci, I want to thank you for being with us, spokesperson for the Puerto Rican Socialist Front, friend of Filiberto Ojeda Rios; and Juan-Manuel Garcia-Passalacqua, political analyst, host of one of the island's most popular radio programs on Noti Uno. Thank you so much, both. -------- us Pentagon keeps soldiers waiting for body armor reimbursements (Capitol Hill-AP) September 29, 2005 http://www.wistv.com/global/story.asp?s=3914769&ClientType=Printable It's been almost a year since Congress told the Defense Department to reimburse troops who buy their own body armor. By law they have until February 25th to come up with regulations for reimbursements and Defense officials they're "in the final stages" of putting the program together. Democratic Senator Christopher Dodd says he's trying to impose measures on the defense spending bill to take funding control from Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and give it to commanders in the field. Soldiers and parents are spending hundreds or thousands of dollars for armor they say the military won't provide. One former Marine spent nearly a-thousand dollars on body armor for his son in Fallujah. He says he doesn't support the "idea of going to war with what you have, not what you want." He says "You don't go to war until you are prepared." Posted 8:33am by Bryce Mursch -------- uzbekistan EU to slap arms embargo on Uzbekistan BRUSSELS (AFP) Sep 29, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050929143632.bx49fwz6.html The European Union is to impose an arms embargo on Uzbekistan for refusing to launch an independent inquiry into a massacre in May, according to a draft document seen by AFP on Thursday. The embargo, to be announced by EU foreign ministers when they meet in Luxembourg on Monday, will be accompanied by other measures, including visa restrictions against unnamed Uzbek officials. According to Uzbek President Islam Karimov's administration, 187 people died in the May 13 violence in Andijan province, all due to the actions of insurgents who took over the main city there. The trial of 15 men accused over the massacre started on September 20, with the suspects pleading "fully guilty" to all charges on the first day. But rights activists say the defendants were tortured and that it was soldiers who actually killed hundreds of unarmed civilians involved in anti-government protests. The EU has repeatedly condemned the Uzbek authorities for failing to allow an independent international probe, and has threatened for months to take action. According to the draft text, the union will impose an "embargo on arms, military equipment and other equipment that might be useful in internal repression." It said the action was necessary "in light of the use of an excessive, disproportionate and indiscriminate" use of force against civilians. The EU "has also decided to implement restrictions in admission aimed at these individuals" implicated in the repression, the text said. A list of those concerned would be drawn up at a later date. All technical level talks with Uzbekistan, under a partnership agreement by which Brussels provides aid to the country, will also be suspended. -------- POLICE / PRISONERS / COURTS / JUSTICE -------- immigration / refugees Florida governor calls for change in immigration policy 9/29/2005 1:04 PM (AP) http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-09-29-jeb-immigration_x.htm CORAL GABLES, Fla. — Gov. Jeb Bush urged the federal government to change its visa and immigration policies on Thursday, saying the country needs to avoid stifling international travel and commerce. The governor said he recognized that the country had to tighten security after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, but said a better balance was needed. "Now it's important to look at where we are and to make the necessary adjustments so that we don't choke off international travel. So that we don't choke off international commerce," he said during The Miami Herald's annual Americas Conference. Florida especially understands that immigrants play an important role in renewing the country, he said. "It is a good thing to have people who want to come to set up their business, to invest here, to use this as a platform for the expansion of their business, whether they're from Venezuela, Colombia, Brazil or Texas." Bush, a brother of President Bush, said he gets a lot of e-mails from frustrated people who go through Miami International Airport. He also said the federal government should expand scholarship programs for residents in Latin America, the Caribbean and other regions to come study in the U.S. "The United States has actually pulled back after Sept. 11 with providing visas for foreign students," he said. -------- POLITICS -------- propaganda wars Reuters Protests 'Long Parade' of Media Deaths in Iraq Thursday, September 29th, 2005 Headlines Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/09/29/1348204 The Reuters News Agency says the conduct of U.S. troops in Iraq, including increasing detention and accidental shootings of journalists, is preventing full coverage of the war from reaching the American public. In a letter to Virginia Republican Sen. John Warner, head of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Reuters said U.S. forces were limiting the ability of independent journalists to operate. The letter from the agency's Global Managing Editor David Schlesinger called on Warner to raise these issues with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who is due to testify to the committee on Thursday. Schlesinger referred to "a long parade of disturbing incidents whereby professional journalists have been killed, wrongfully detained, and/or illegally abused by U.S. forces in Iraq." At least 66 journalists and media workers, most of them Iraqis, have been killed in Iraq since March 2003. U.S. forces acknowledge killing three Reuters journalists, most recently soundman Waleed Khaled who was shot by American soldiers on Aug. 28 while on assignment in Baghdad. The Pentagon says the soldiers were justified in opening fire. Reuters believes a fourth Reuters journalist, who died in Ramadi last year, was killed by a U.S. sniper. Schlesinger said the Pentagon has refused to conduct independent and transparent investigations into the deaths of the journalists, relying instead on inquiries by officers from the units responsible, who had exonerated their soldiers. ---- Pow-wow With God by Anwaar Hussain September 29, 2005 Baltimore Chronicle http://baltimorechronicle.com/2005/092905Hussain.shtml Bush said “God instructed me to strike at Saddam.” The current President of the United States finds himself in God’s company more often than any other modern American President. We’ve been hearing about President George W. Bush's close encounters with God for years now. We have all heard about how God talks to the President, giving him instructions on how to conduct foreign policy (particularly, which countries to invade). Quite evidently, he did a good job following orders, because he got re-elected to a second term. President Bush has never disputed the story, recounted in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, that he told the Palestinian leadership, "God told me to strike at al Qaida and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam." Then we have a similar account, courtesy of The Globe and Mail, of the President telling the Canadian Prime Minister he was carrying out divine commands. As recently as Wednesday the 21st of September, while speaking at a luncheon for the Republican Jewish Coalition’s 20th anniversary, Mr. Bush said he had been "thinking a lot" and came to the conclusion that "they [the terrorists] are the kind of people who look at Katrina and wish they had caused it." As there is no way of knowing what other people have in their minds, it can be safely assumed that it is once again God talking to President Bush. This Scribe has a few concerns about these God-Bush Summit meetings. Firstly, God does not tell Bush the whole thing, only part thereof. God did not tell the President that it was not okay to play guitar and eat cake while people were drowning. In the case of the Katrina disaster, for example, God did not tell him that countries like Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Jordan and Yemen—‘terrorist breeding grounds’ all—have offered hundreds of millions of dollars in aid, along with a whole range of other humanitarian assistance, with the full blessings of their peoples. God also did not tell him that Iran, his next target in the ‘axis of evil’, has offered to send an extra 20 million barrels of oil on the side. However, the US State Department, which relies more on diplomatic correspondence, was well aware of these facts. God also did not inform the President that while he was bogged down in Iraq, God would hit America with terrible hurricanes one after another, and the resultant damage and cost of rebuilding the Gulf Coast would make impossible demands on the non-existent dinero in his treasury. Further, when God sent Hurricane Katrina, he did not tell the President that it was not okay to play guitar and eat cake while people were drowning. He also did not tell him not to hire heck-of-a-job-Brownie two years earlier. Secondly—and this is more ironic—the President claims that all peoples worship the same God. He told the visiting leader of Turkey that they both believe in "the Almighty." Answering a British reporter’s question about the God of Islam being the same as the God of Christianity, President Bush replied: "I believe we worship the same God." Then, in an October 26, 2004, "Good Morning America" interview with Charles Gibson, he was asked: "Do we all worship the same God, Christian and Muslim?" His reply: "I think we do." If true, this means two things. One, President Bush, the Taliban and Bin Laden all pray to the same God. Two, all the killing and dying is done in His name. The only difference is that George Bush strikes and they retaliate. He invades their countries in God’s name, they resist in God’s name. He kills in God’s name, they die in God’s name. George Bush eliminates a few ‘terrorists’ in God’s name, scores come forward to take their place in God’s name. There are more ‘terrorists’ now fighting America in God’s name than there ever were before. If his God is different, then his God is unique. His God orders him to kill other Gods' children. Especially if those children are of a different color and are found in the vicinity of a liquid called oil. That, to say the least, is being very vengeful. Next, President Bush’s God does not forbid him from lying. That is very disturbing, because one hears Gods do not take kindly to liars. Take, for example, the case of the Iraq war. God told him to make war on Iraq but forgot to tell him not to tell humongous lies in the process. Had He informed the President that lies don’t travel far for the simple fact that they don't have legs, or had He shown the President the full future, Bush would have been saved a number of huge embarrassments: his own September 11 Commission officially acknowledging that Iraq was not involved in the terrorist attacks on America; the US Military giving up the search for the non-existent WMDs; and having to shift shamefully to ‘freedom’ as the current war cry. He also did not tell the President that the Iraq war was going to kill hundreds of thousands of God's other children, including thousands of newborns. God also did not tell the President that his use of depleted uranium in Iraq would cause the birth of hideously deformed babies—babies that were otherwise supposed to be the same God's most beautiful creations. God did no tell him that Iraq war would become unwinnable not only because the sandal-clad Iraqis would give his troops a sound beating but also because there would be no more moolah in the state exchequer to sustain the billion-dollar-a-week war. The strangest aspect of George’s communion with God remains the fact that he is always told to bring ‘freedom’ to those of God’s people who are in close proximity to oil. The strangest aspect of George’s communion with God remains the fact that he is always told to bring ‘freedom’ to those of God’s people who are in close proximity to oil. God does not tell him to strike the North Koreans, for example, whose rulers are not only Godless, but have repeatedly declared their intention to build WMDs and whose malnourished people are in most urgent need of freedom. No oil? President Bush’s God is not interested. Very ungodly, one must say. Unless, in the Presidential dictionary, God is actually a code name for Halliburton, the Carlyle group, Enron and Bechtel. Then all the mysterious omissions and strange consequences of these Presidential pow-wows with God become instantly clear. But seriously, the President does say he talks to God on a regular basis, prays frequently and trusts the guidance that God gives him. This, apparently, would make him God's choice. So if President Bush really does talk with God, and he really believes that he is on God's mission, then we are witnessing history being made by the almighty interpreter of Almighty God. All this killing, all this bloodshed, all this rape, loot and plunder must be what God wants. God also, it appears, does not like the Iraqi people. First He sent Saddam to kill them in the thousands. Not satisfied, He next sent in George Bush to kill them in the hundreds of thousands. Is this why they say “Strange are God’s ways”? By all accounts, a whopping 40% of Americans still believe this cock and bull story about Bush’s godly pow-wows. Are these Americans really so gullible? Do they not know that human history is replete with unhinged dictators with a God complex, conceited leaders with a talent for exploitation, self-righteous and egotistical political elites and bigoted religious leaders who would go to any length to perpetuate their rule? Do they need to be informed of the supporting cast of bloodsuckers, moneygrubbers and human lowlifes, with their gaudy show of sadism, trickery and revolting absurdity? Given a few moments on the center stage of the world, these charlatans are capable of destroying the lives of millions. Do they need reminders that when the curtain finally comes down on these hideous acts, the stage is invariably full of blood and gore and that the dead of this show never rise again? Do they want to give these creatures more time? Manuel Noriega, the former Panamanian dictator and American stooge, declined an interview on the grounds that, as he put it in a letter to the interviewer, he was by no means yet in the category of forgotten dictators. “God,” he explained, “has not yet written the last word on Manuel A. Noriega!” Even the devil, it seems, can quote scriptures. ---- Rumsfeld to address reporters' safety in Iraq By Alan Elsner Thu Sep 29, 2005 3:39 PM ET (Reuters) http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050929/ts_nm/iraq_reporters_dc_1 WASHINGTON - A senior Republican lawmaker won a commitment on Thursday from Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to address concerns about the increased detentions and accidental shootings by U.S. forces of reporters trying to cover the Iraq conflict. Virginia Republican Sen. John Warner (news, bio, voting record), chairman of the Senate armed services committee, raised the issue at a hearing with Rumsfeld and top U.S. generals after receiving letters from Reuters and the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) and a telephone call from Paul Steiger, CPJ chairman and managing editor of The Wall Street Journal. "I raised the question of the safety of the press in Iraq and their ability to carry out the very important function of reporting to the American people," Warner told reporters after the hearing. "I've discussed it with the secretary. He's going to take it under immediate consideration," he said. In a letter to Warner earlier this week, Reuters Global Managing Editor David Schlesinger referred to "a long parade of disturbing incidents whereby professional journalists have been killed, wrongfully detained, and/or illegally abused by U.S. forces in Iraq." He urged Warner to demand that Rumsfeld address and resolve these issues "in a way that best balances the legitimate security interests of the U.S. forces in Iraq and the equally legitimate rights of journalists in conflict zones under international law." Responding to Warner during the hearing, Gen. George Casey, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, said: "It's an issue that we take very seriously. And what I will do when I get back to Baghdad is I'll get a few of the local journalists together and work through some of their concerns with them." SHOULD GO FURTHER Warner responded that the Pentagon should go further by directly communicating with the media organizations that had written to him, as well as convening a representative group of reporters in Iraq to get their views. At least 66 journalists and media workers, most of them Iraqis, have been killed covering Iraq since March 2003. U.S. forces acknowledge killing three Reuters journalists, most recently soundman Waleed Khaled who was shot by American soldiers on August 28 while on assignment in Baghdad. But the military say the soldiers were justified in opening fire. Reuters also believes a fourth journalist who died in Ramadi last year while working for the agency was killed by a U.S. sniper. In a letter to Rumsfeld sent on Wednesday, CPJ executive director Ann Cooper said the indefinite detentions of reporters in Iraq on unsubstantiated evidence was an unacceptable interference in the work of media professionals. "They threaten to undermine the ability of the media to report on events in Iraq, especially as international news organizations rely heavily on Iraqi journalists to work in frontline newsgathering," she said. At least seven Iraqi journalists were detained this year, with at least three documented detentions lasting more than 100 days while others spanned many weeks, the New York-based group said in a letter to Rumsfeld on Wednesday. At least four detainees remain in U.S. custody, including three Reuters employees and one from CBS News. Additionally, the arrests sent the message to Iraq that the U.S. commitment to democracy and human rights was not sincere. Schlesinger said the U.S. military had refused to conduct independent and transparent investigations into the deaths of the Reuters journalists, relying instead on inquiries by officers from the units responsible, who had exonerated their soldiers. -------- ENERGY House Republicans Scorn Environment in Favor of Oil and Gas By J.R. Pegg WASHINGTON, DC, September 29, 2005 (ENS) http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/sep2005/2005-09-29-10.asp Two House committees on Wednesday advanced post-hurricane legislation that relaxes environmental regulations on oil refineries and opens much of the nation’s coast and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas development. Republican leaders said the impact of Hurricanes Rita and Katrina on energy prices exposed the need to boost domestic energy supplies and ease regulation of the nation’s energy infrastructure, despite the recent passage of a $16 billion energy bill. "We cannot stop hurricanes, but we can mitigate some of the adverse impacts on our energy infrastructure and our economy that hurricanes can cause," said House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Joe Barton, a Texas Republican. Critics said the new energy legislation does little to help consumers with rising energy costs and rolls back regulations that protect public health and the environment. The legislation is "a hastily crafted, minimally reviewed bill of dubious virtue," that does nothing to address the nation’s growing demand for energy, said Representative John Dingell, a Michigan Democrat and ranking member of the Energy and Commerce Committee. The two bills will be combined and considered by the full House next week. Democrats blasted Republicans for pushing through the new energy legislation with limited debate and discussion – the bills were written early this week. Dingell said the rush to move forward with the bills reflected "the desire of the Republican leadership of the House to use the hardships and devastation of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita to push various parts of their agenda." Barton’s committee worked all day – some 16 hours - to finish one piece of the new House energy plan, ironing out provisions to encourage oil companies to invest in new refineries and to ease federal air regulations. The bill relaxes parts of the Clean Air Act, including the New Source Review program that require refineries and coal-fired power plants to install new pollution equipment when they expand operations. The changes are in line with revisions proposed by the Bush administration that have been challenged in court by states, environmentalists and public health advocates. In addition, the bill eases federal ozone standards and gives states broader authority to opt out of federal pollution clean up plans. The legislation requires the President to designate sites on federal lands – such as closed military bases – for new refineries and provides risk insurance to companies building new refineries. It gives the U.S. Energy Department oversight of refinery permits and reduces local and state input into siting decisions. "Our country needs more oil refineries because the people who work for a living need gasoline to get to work," Barton said. Proponents note that refinery capacity in the United States has dropped by some 50 percent in the past two decades – and that refineries are currently operating at near 100 percent. The last new refinery was built in the United States in 1976. Representative Sherrod Brown, an Ohio Democrat, said the bill "proposes a fix for a problem that simply doesn’t exist." Oil companies have shut refineries – and expanded capacity at some facilities – in order to take advantage of a very tight market for gasoline and do not need more help in the wake of record profits, Democrats said. The legislation perpetuates "a very serious fraud that the reason we have these high prices is that we like clean air and clean water," said Representative Jay Inslee, a Washingon Democrat. The Barton legislation has attracted support of industry groups, but has run into broad opposition from environmentalists and public health advocates as well as state and local officials. In a statement released Wednesday, United States Conference of Mayors Executive Director Tom Cochran said his organization is "appalled and shocked" by the legislation. "While we support Congress' efforts to address the nation's energy challenges, we adamantly oppose at this critical time in the nation's history any move to strip state and local governments of their authority," Cochran said. A companion bill approved Wednesday by the House Resources Committee takes aim at the production of raw energy from domestic sources, including the Outer Continental Shelf and the Arctic refuge. "This is not emergency legislation it just comes at a time when an emergency many of us have predicted has come true," said House Resources Committee Chairman Richard Pombo, a California Republican. "We are taking steps to update regulations that unnecessarily suffocate safe energy production here at home," Pombo said. "This legislation will lead to increased and more diverse U.S. energy supplies to prevent disruptions and to bring future price relief." Representative Nick Rahall, a West Virginia Democrat and ranking member of the committee, noted that many of the provisions in the bill have been passed previously by the House but rejected by the Senate. Rahall called the legislation "an accumulation of the losers." "It lacks any and all budgetary sanity," he told colleagues. The bill lifts the moratorium on oil and gas development along much of the nation’s coast, immediately opening the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) to natural gas drilling and giving states to opt out of the moratorium to allow oil development. States would share in the royalties from offshore drilling. The issue of high natural gas prices is "a greater threat to America than terrorism," said Pennsylvania Republican John Peterson, who called the OCS is "the safest place" to drill for natural gas and oil. "You have less environmental degradation, less wildlife habitat destruction," Peterson said. "We are going to do this … it is just a matter of when." Lifting the moratorium will do little to ease natural gas prices, critics say, and will harm tourism and coastal environments. According to the U.S. Minerals Management Service 80 percent of the nation's undiscovered, economically recoverable OCS gas is located in the Central and Western part of the Gulf of Mexico, which is currently not subject to the moratorium. The legislation opens ANWR to oil drilling – one of the most contentious energy issues in Congress. Proponents say the refuge, which is believed to hold some 5.7 to 16 billion barrels of oil, must be tapped to reduce the nation’s dependence on foreign oil. But opponents say the refuge is an ecological treasure that should be protected and cast doubt that its oil will make much impact on the nation’s energy supply. Representative George Miller, a California Democrat said "it is a fool’s bargain" to believe the United States can drill its way to energy security. The nation holds about three percent of the world’s known oil resources and three percent of known natural gas. "This bill does not deal with reality," Miller said. Pombo said the time could be ripe to finally open the refuge - the Senate, which has repeatedly defeated attempts to open ANWR, voted 51-49 in May to approve drilling by including leasing revenues in the budget resolution. "There are signs of stirring in the other body," Pombo said, "as though they are finally beginning to understand that our current course of benign neglect toward developing more of our own energy is ruinous." The legislation also boosts incentives for development from deposits of oil shales and limits eases environmental review of energy projects on public land. One provision streamlines the process under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for renewable energy projects on federal lands by eliminating the requirement that alternatives are considered. It also cuts the comment period on proposed projects to 20 days. Democrats say the provision is unnecessary and guts one of the nation’s landmark environmental laws. "The kind of wholesale exemptions in this bill we are talking about today are not needed," said Representative Tom Udall, a New Mexico Democrat. "It completely does away with NEPA." -------- alternative energy Dutch Solar Car Wins Australian Outback Race September 29, 2005 — By Reuters http://www.enn.com/today.html?id=8912 SYDNEY — Dutch team Nuon won the eighth World Solar Challenge on Wednesday, piloting their bug-shaped car in record time across the vast, inhospitable Australian outback. Nuon's Nuna 3 car beat 21 other entrants from around the world over the gruelling 3,000 kilometres (1,860 miles) race from the tropical northern city of Darwin to Adelaide in South Australia state. Using nothing but the power of the sun, Nuna 3 appeared to have broken its 2003 record of 30 hours and 54 minutes. Race director Chris Selwood said timings were yet to be made official but it seemed likely that Nuna 3 had set a new race record. "It's great, it's fantastic," Nuon team member Anne-Marie Rasschaert told Reuters. The race began on Sunday and Nuna 3 averaged about 100 kmh (62 mph). Overcast, rainy weather was expected to slow the progress of the rest of the field. Rasschaert said cutting-edge engineering and team work had secured Nuon's third consecutive race win. Nuon's 11 team members are engineering students aged 21-25. "Nuna 3 is lightweight, it has good aerodynamics...it's the best car in the world," she said. The race was devised as a challenge to design and build solar-powered cars using the most innovative application of alternative energy and transport technologies. This year's cars were built by corporations and universities from around the world, including Japan's Ashiya University, Iran's University of Tehran and Queens University in Canada. -------- ACTIVISTS New opera explores birth of atomic bomb By Victoria Looseleaf Thu Sep 29, 8:12 AM ET (Reuters) http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050929/us_nm/arts_opera_bomb_dc_3 LOS ANGELES - An opera is not supposed to be over until the fat lady sings. Or, in the case of a new work being premiered this week, until an atomic bomb explodes. Pulitzer Prize-winning composer John Adams's latest opera ends with the biggest bang of all -- the detonation of the first A-bomb in the New Mexican desert in a test that changed the world. Adams, who has a reputation for writing works "ripped from the headlines," has taken on his biggest challenge yet in "Doctor Atomic," a tale of the conflicts Manhattan Project head J. Robert Oppenheimer suffered as he oversaw the creation of the atomic bomb. The 2-1/2-hour work premieres on Saturday at the San Francisco Opera and it has become one of the opera world's most hotly anticipated events. Adams' previous two operas -- "Nixon in China" and "The Death of Klinghoffer" -- stirred political controversy, especially the latter work, about the hijacking of the Italian cruise ship Achille Lauro which outraged both Palestinian and Jewish groups. Adams denies that he is a political composer and said in an interview, "Maybe the reason people use the term political is that I draw my stories from contemporary American life. I'm frankly surprised more people don't do that. If I were a filmmaker or novelist, I would be expected to do that." He said he was expecting a mixed reception because many opera lovers just want to see famous singers in familiar works by Puccini, Straus, Mozart and Verdi. "Doctor Atomic," in its capacity to challenge people to think about nuclear weapons and the potential of their destroying the planet, is definitely not "Madame Butterfly," he said. "That's something that may be new for opera audiences. Some people greet it warmly and with great appreciation. Others roll their eyeballs and wish it would go away." FALLOUT SHELTERS Adams, 58, who worked five years on the opera said he saw it as a chance to explore a highly charged and, well, explosive topic. "I grew up during the worst part of the cold war. My first memories as a kid certainly included images of the distinct possibility of a nuclear war with Russia and fallout shelters and rehearsals at school as to what to do if a bomb was dropped on us," he said. "When Pamela Rosenberg, the general director of the San Francisco Opera, suggested the story to me, I realized it was something that fit hand and glove with my artistic concerns and also my personal historical concerns," he added. The title, says Adams, who won the 2003 Pulitzer for music for his "On the Transmigration of Souls," a commemoration of those who died on September 11, is both a nod to sci-fi movies of the 1940s and, "a backdoor reference on my part to 'Doctor Faustus,"' the man who does a deal with the devil in order to obtain ultimate knowledge. Director Peter Sellars, the composer's longtime collaborator, wrote the libretto from original sources and even has a choir singing from declassified government secrets as well as poems by Muriel Rukeyser, John Donne, Baudelaire and the Hindu spiritual text the Bhagavad Gita. "You collect all this material and at a certain moment passages start speaking with other passages," says Sellars of the libretto. "A conversation that goes along with individual source material just takes off, and things start ricocheting and having surprising connections or counterbalances. You're always looking for yin and yang so the drama thrives on contrasts and contradictions." The issues and concerns raised in "Doctor Atomic" are grave ones, and as with past Adams/Sellars' collaborations, the work doesn't pull any punches. The second act, which includes the 20-minute-to-zero countdown, instead of being treated in real time onstage, lasts twice as long. "It's an amazing, amazing work of art that extracts and exacts every drop of blood," Sellars said. "It demands and pushes you past ... endurance, which is what art is supposed to do. This is just not another day at the mall. It's really asking the biggest questions and demanding very real answers." Sellars added that the opera is scheduled to be performed in London, Tokyo, Chicago and Amsterdam after its San Francisco opening and, if it's anything like its predecessors, "Doctor Atomic" is sure to have legs. "Maybe hairy legs," Adams quipped, "but at least legs."