NucNews - November 18, 2005 -------- NUCLEAR -------- india India’s attempts at a military menage-a-trois puts US nuclear deal in jeopardy Issues and Questions on July 18 Proposal for Nuclear Cooperation with India November 18, 2005 United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C. 20515 http://deshcalling.blogspot.com/2005/12/indias-attempts-at-military-menage.html Dear Member of Congress, We are writing to urge you and your colleagues to critically examine the July 18 proposal to allow for “full” U.S.-Indian civilian nuclear cooperation, which would require significant changes to U.S. nonproliferation laws and longstanding international nonproliferation policy that have been supported and advanced by past Republican and Democratic administrations. We believe that the United States and India can and should expand their ties and common interests as free democracies through expanded cooperation in trade and human development, scientific and medical research, energy technology, humanitarian relief, and military-to-military contacts. In addition, both the United States and India have a vital interest in reducing the global dangers posed by nuclear weapons through effective nonproliferation and disarmament endeavors. Unfortunately, the proposal for civil nuclear cooperation with India poses far-reaching and potentially adverse implications for U.S. nuclear nonproliferation objectives and promises to do little in the long-run to bring India into closer alignment with other U.S. strategic objectives. President Bush pledged to seek changes in the Atomic Energy Act (AEA) of 1954 as amended by the 1978 Nonproliferation Act, which bars civilian nuclear cooperation with non-nuclear-weapon states as defined by the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) that do not allow full-scope IAEA safeguards. This includes India. The President also pledged to seek changes to relevant Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) guidelines, which make full-scope safeguards a condition of civil nuclear cooperation with non-nuclear-weapon states as defined by the NPT—a U.S. policy objective adopted by NSG consensus during the George H. W. Bush administration… We have read the statements of the President and administration officials concerning the proposed agreement, but key details needed to help the Congress fully understand the implications of the proposal, in our view, have not yet been provided. Accordingly, we urge that before any action is taken on any legislation sent up by the administration to implement the proposal, Congress should obtain detailed answers to a number of questions… Based on what is known, the nonproliferation benefits of the July 18 proposal are vastly overstated by its proponents and the damage to the nonproliferation regime is potentially very high. Contrary to assertions by the administration, the current proposal would not bring India sufficiently into conformance with nonproliferation behavior expected of responsible states. So far, India has pledged only to accept voluntary safeguards over “civilian” nuclear facilities of its choosing. This could allow India to withdraw any nuclear facility from (IAEA) safeguards for national security reasons. Such an arrangement would be purely symbolic and would do nothing to prevent the continued production of fissile material for weapons by India. The supply of nuclear fuel to India would free-up its existing stockpile and capacity to produce highly enriched uranium and plutonium for weapons. To help ensure that U.S. civilian nuclear cooperation is not in any way advancing India’s weapons program, it would be essential to apply permanent, facility-specific safeguards on a mutually agreed and broad list of current and future Indian nuclear facilities involved in civilian activities and electricity production in combination with a cutoff of Indian fissile material production for weapons. Unfortunately, the communiqué does not call for any additional measures that would constrain India’s nuclear arsenal. Specifically, civilian nuclear assistance should not be extended to India until it implements a cessation of the production of fissile material for weapons, which has been adopted by the five original nuclear-weapon states. In the July 18 communiqué India also pledged to a set of export control measures that it had already committed to or is obligated to pursue under UN Security Council Resolution 1540. The proposed arrangement could also trigger a significant erosion of the guidelines of the 45-member NSG, which are an important barrier against the transfer of nuclear material, equipment, and technologies for weapons purposes. No civilian assistance should be extended to India without the full concurrence of the NSG and approval of India’s safeguards agreement with the IAEA. Non-nuclear weapon states have for decades remained true to the original NPT bargain and forsworn nuclear weapons and accepted full-scope IAEA safeguards in return for access to peaceful nuclear technology under strict and verifiable control. Many of these states made this choice despite strong pressure to spurn the NPT and pursue the nuclear weapons path. They might make a different choice in the future if non-NPT members receive civil nuclear assistance under less rigorous terms. The proposed civil nuclear cooperation arrangement may also undermine our ability to win necessary international support for persuading Iran to abandon its fuel cycle plans and to make its nuclear program fully transparent to the IAEA. On balance, India’s commitments under the current terms of the proposed arrangement do not justify making far-reaching exceptions to U.S. law and international nonproliferation norms. We urge you to consider the full implications of the proposed agreement for cooperation between the United States and India, and pursue additional stipulations that might result in a positive outcome to U.S. and international security. Congress must also ensure it retains the authority to review whether the terms of any such arrangement are being implemented and take appropriate action if they are not. Building upon the already strong U.S.-Indian partnership is an important goal, and we remain convinced that it can be achieved without undermining the U.S. leadership efforts to prevent the proliferation of the world’s most dangerous weapons. Sincerely, Hal Bengelsdorf, Consultant, and former Director of the Office for Nonproliferation Policy at the EnergyDepartment and former Office Director for Nuclear Affairs at the State Department Amb. George Bunn, Consulting Professor, Stanford University Center for International Security and Cooperation,*first General Counsel for the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency and negotiator of the NPT Joseph Cirincione, Senior Associate and Director of the Nonproliferation Project, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Robert J. Einhorn, Senior Adviser, Center for Strategic and International Studies* and former Assistant Secretary of State for Nonproliferation Lt. Gen. Robert Gard, USA (Ret.), Senior Military Fellow, Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation Victor Gilinsky, Energy Consultant, and former U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissioner Amb. Thomas Graham Jr. Chairman, Cypress Fund for Peace and Security, and former Acting Director of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency Amb. Robert Grey, Director, Bipartisan Security Working Group, and former U.S. Representative to the Conference on Disarmament John Holum, former Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Affairs and former director of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency Daryl G. Kimball, Executive Director, Arms Control Association Lawrence Korb, enior Fellow, Center for American Progress,* and Former Asst. Secretary of Defense for Manpower, Reserve Affairs, Installations and Logistics Paul Leventhal, Founding President of the Nuclear Control Institute Fred McGoldrick, Consultant, and former Director of Nonproliferation and Export Policy at the State Department Kelly Motz, Associate Director, Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control Henry S. Rowen, Professor of Public Policy and Management emeritus, Graduate School of Business, Senior Fellow, the Hoover Institution Stanford University,* and former Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs Lawrence Scheinman, Distinguished Professor at the Center for Nonproliferation Studies, and former Assistant Director of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency Henry Sokolski, President, Nonproliferation Education Policy Center, and former Deputy for Nonproliferation Policy in the Office of the Secretary of Defense Len Weiss, Consultant and former Staff Director of the U.S. Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs http://www.armscontrol.org/pdf/20051118_ India_Ltr_Congress.pdf RELATED ISSUE – No missile deal with US: Pranab http://www.southasianmedia.net/index_story.cfm?id=256182&category=Frontend&Country=INDIA . US Congress threatens to throw out India N-deal http://www.dawn.com/2005/12/08/top11.htm . U.S. looks to India as new global ally http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=reutersEdge&storyID=2005-12-08T115844Z_01_NOA842944_RTRUKOC_0_ANALYSIS-US-INDIA.xml Indo-US Nuclear Deal: A New Strategic Partnership http://www.ipcs.org/whatsNewArticle1.jsp?action=showView&kValue=1909&status=article&mod=b --------- iran Implementation of the NPT Safeguards Agreement in the Islamic Republic of Iran Report by the IAEA Director General Date: 18 November 2005 Restricted Distribution Original: English http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Board/2005/gov2005-87.pdf 1. On 24 September 2005, the Board of Governors adopted a resolution (GOV/2005/77) in which, inter alia, it urged the Islamic Republic of Iran (hereinafter referred to as Iran), in order to help the Director General to resolve outstanding questions and provide the necessary assurances: *To implement transparency measures, as requested by the Director General in his report, which extend beyond the formal requirements of the Safeguards Agreement and Additional Protocol, and include access to individuals, documentation relating to procurement, dual use equipment, certain military owned workshops and research and development locations; *To re-establish full and sustained suspension of all enrichment-related activity, as in GOV/2005/64, and reprocessing activity; *To reconsider the construction of a research reactor moderated by heavy water; *Promptly to ratify and implement in full the Additional Protocol; *Pending completion of the ratification of the Additional Protocol to continue to act in accordance with the provisions of the Additional Protocol, which Iran signed on 18 December 2003. 2. This progress report builds on the previous reports 1 of the Director General to the Board of Governors on issues related to the implementation of the Agreement between Iran and the Agency for __________________________________________________________________________________ the Application of Safeguards in connection with the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (the Safeguards Agreement 2 ). A. Developments since September 2005 A.1. Contamination 3. The Agency is continuing to analyse the source(s) of low enriched uranium (LEU) particles, and some high enriched uranium (HEU) particles, which were found in Iran with a view to assessing the correctness and completeness of Iran's declarations concerning its enrichment activities (see paras 9 and 10 of GOV/2005/67). The analysis of the environmental samples collected at a location in another Member State where, according to Iran, the centrifuge components had been stored by the procurement network in the mid-1990s prior to their shipment to Iran (see para. 11 of GOV/2005/67), did not indicate any traces of nuclear material. A.2. Enrichment Programme 4. In October and November 2005, a number of meetings took place during which further documentation said to have been provided to Iran by the procurement network was made available to the Agency, and the Agency was able to interview two individuals (not previously available to the Agency) who had been involved in Iran's discussions with the procurement network. A.2.1. The 1987 offer 5. As previously reported to the Board, in January 2005 Iran showed to the Agency a copy of a hand-written one-page document reflecting an offer said to have been made to Iran in 1987 by a foreign intermediary for certain components and equipment (see paras 14 and 15 of GOV/2005/67).3 Iran stated that only some components of one or two disassembled centrifuges, and supporting drawings and specifications, were delivered by the procurement network, and that a number of other items of equipment referred to in the document were purchased directly from other suppliers. Most of these components and items were included in the October 2003 declaration by Iran to the Agency. 6. The documents recently made available to the Agency related mainly to the 1987 offer; many of them dated from the late 1970s and early to mid-1980s. The documents included: detailed drawings of the P-1 centrifuge components and assemblies; technical specifications supporting component manufacture and centrifuge assembly; and technical documents relating to centrifuge operational performance. In addition, they included cascade schematic drawings for various sizes of research and development (R&D) cascades, together with the equipment needed for cascade operation (e.g. cooling water circuit needs and special valve consoles). The documents also included a drawing showing a cascade layout for 6 cascades of 168 machines each and a small plant of 2000 centrifuges arranged in the same hall. Also among the documents was one related to the procedural requirements for the reduction of UF6 to metal in small quantities, and on the casting and machining of enriched, natural and depleted uranium metal into hemispherical forms, with respect to which Iran stated that it hadbeen provided on the initiative of the procurement network, and not at the request of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI). 7. The Agency is assessing all the documentation referred to above and comparing it with, inter alia, documentation from other sources. A.2.2. Genesis of the mid-1990s offer 8. Very little new information has been made available regarding the events preceding the mid-1990s offer. Iran has maintained that no documentation on the offer exists apart from the shipping documents confirming the delivery of the P-1 components during the 1994-1995 period. Iran has provided no additional information or documentation to support its statement that it did not pursue any work on the P-2 design between 1995 and 2002. 9. As indicated in earlier reports to the Board, Iran has stated that, between 2002 and 2003, a contracting company had briefly carried out some R&D work on a modified P-2 design, but that this had been terminated in July 2003. Iran re-confirmed that, as part of this R&D work, the contractor had purchased some magnets suitable for the P-2 centrifuge design, and made some additional inquiries regarding magnets. Since September 2005, Iran has provided documentation concerning purchases by the contractor of copper aluminium and by the P-1 team of maraging steel and special oil which were also made available to the contractor. The Agency's assessment of these purchases, and the quantities delivered, is continuing with the assistance of Member States. A.2.3. Shipping documents and other documentation 10. In addition to the documentation referred to above, since the last report to the Board, Iran also provided the Agency with access to a substantial amount of information and documentation relevant to its procurement efforts in the late 1980s and early 1990s, along with more details on the 1994-1995 deliveries. This information, taken together with information obtained through the interviews held in Iran, the Agency's findings and other information supplied to the Agency thus far, seems to be consistent with Iran's declarations of what had been procured in the late 1980s and early 1990s for the first stage of the P-1 R&D programme of the AEOI. Iran has been asked to provide some additional procurement documents in order to enable the Agency to complete its assessment in this regard. A.2.4. Technical discussions between Iran and the intermediaries 11. Iran has maintained that, after the meetings leading to the 1987 offer and the actual receipt of components and documentation, no contacts were made between Iranian officials and the procurement network before 1993. Iran reiterated that the contact for the mid-1990s offer had been an initiative by the network, and not by Iran. 12. Iran has previously confirmed that, following the mid-1990s offer, up to ten meetings were held with the intermediaries during the period 1996 to 1999. Information supporting this statement was supplied by one of the individuals interviewed by the Agency. Iran has stated that these meetings were all related to discussions about the poor quality of many of the P-1 components that had been supplied to Iran and to obtaining answers to specific technical questions arising from Iran's efforts to operate the P-1 centrifuges. Iran has maintained that at no time during this period did it discuss the P-2 centrifuge design, nor did Iran discuss the possible supply of P-2 centrifuge components, sub-assemblies or rotors. A.3. Other Implementation Issues 13. With reference to the other aspects of Iran's past nuclear programme, as identified in para. 48 of GOV/2005/67, there are no new developments to report with respect to Iran's uranium mining activities (see paras 26-31 of GOV/2005/67) or with respect to Iran's activities involving polonium and beryllium (see para. 34 of GOV/2005/67). 14. The Agency is awaiting from IAEA network laboratories the results of the analyses of plutonium samples taken in August 2005 to complete its final assessment of Iran's plutonium experiments (see paras 21-25 of GOV/2005/67). A.4. Implementation of the Additional Protocol 15. As undertaken in its letter to the Agency of 10 November 2003, Iran has continued to act as if its Additional Protocol were in force. Since September 2005 the Agency has conducted three complementary accesses. A.5. Transparency Visits and Discussions 16. On 1 November 2005, following a meeting held on 30 October 2005 between Mr. Larijani, the Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council of Iran, and the Deputy Director General for Safeguards (DDG-SG), the Agency was given access to the buildings requested within the area of interest at Parchin (see para. 41 of GOV/2005/67), in the course of which environmental samples were taken. The Agency did not observe any unusual activities in the buildings visited. Its final assessment is pending the results of the environmental sample analysis. There have been no new developments with regard to questions and access related to the Lavisan-Shian site (see paras 37-40 of GOV/2005/67). A.6. Suspension 17. The Agency has continued to monitor installations related to the uranium gas centrifuge and laser enrichment programmes, and has not observed any inconsistency with Iran's voluntary undertaking not to carry out any enrichment activities. 18. On 24 October 2005, Iran informed the Agency that the uranium conversion campaign begun in August 2005 at the Uranium Conversion Facility (UCF) would end around 1 November 2005, and that another campaign with 150 drums would start after a one-week maintenance period (GOV/INF/2005/13). Feeding of yellow cake to process started on 16 November 2005. All UF6 so far produced at UCF has remained under Agency containment and surveillance measures. 19. In November 2005, the Agency carried out a design information verification visit at the Iran Nuclear Research Reactor (IR-40) at Arak, during which it was noted that the civil engineering construction of the reactor building was continuing. B. Current overall assessment 20. In the September 2005 report to the Board of Governors, it was noted that, in light of the difficulty of establishing a definitive conclusion with respect to all of the contamination, it was important to make progress on the issue of the scope and chronology of Iran's P-1 and P-2 programmes (see paras 44-47 of GOV/2005/67). Since that time, Iran has been more forthcoming in providing access to additional documentation related to the 1987 offer and permitting interviews with individuals who had been involved in discussions with the procurement network. However, there still remain issues to be resolved in connection with the genesis of the mid-1990s offer. The Agency is stillseeking additional assurance that no P-2 programme was conducted between 1995 and 2002. The Agency is currently reviewing the new information provided by Iran on the P-1 and P-2 enrichment programmes and has emphasized to Iran the importance of providing the additional requested supporting documentation. 21. As also noted in the previous report to the Board, in order to clarify some of the outstanding issues related to Iran's enrichment programme, Iran's full transparency is indispensable and overdue. Transparency measures should include the provision of information and documentation related to the procurement of dual use equipment, and permitting visits to relevant military owned workshops and R&D locations associated with the Physics Research Centre and the Lavisan-Shian site. In this regard, the Agency welcomes the access provided to the Parchin site. The Agency, however, is still awaiting additional information and permission to undertake additional visits. These should also include interviews on the acquisition of certain dual use materials and equipment, and the taking of environmental samples from the above locations. 22. The Secretariat will continue its investigation of all relevant information available to it as well as of outstanding issues pertaining to Iran's nuclear programme. The Director General will continue to report to the Board as appropriate. -------- israel Vanunu held after West Bank visit Mordechai Vanunu says he has averted a nuclear holocaust in the region Friday, 18 November 2005 (BBC) http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4450004.stm Israeli ex-nuclear technician Mordechai Vanunu has been held for allegedly violating restrictions imposed after his release from prison in 2004. Police said he was held at the al-Ram checkpoint north of Jerusalem as he was returning by bus from the West Bank. The former nuclear scientist is barred from leaving Israel and is not allowed to visit the Palestinian territories. He was jailed in 1986 for 18 years after discussing his work at the Dimona nuclear reactor with a UK newspaper. "He (Mr Vanunu) has been taken to our International Crimes Unit for questioning," Israeli police spokesman Mickey Rosenfeld was quoted as saying by Reuters news agency. Mr Vanunu flashed a victory sign before being taken away in a police vehicle. Asked what he had done to prompt the arrest, he said: "Nothing. They just want to arrest me again. They don't want me to enjoy freedom." Christianity convert Mr Vanunu served most of his jail term in solitary confinement. He was released in April 2004 under strict conditions. Mr Vanunu has not been allowed to have a passport, is forbidden to approach ports and airports, and is banned from talking to foreigners without permission. Israel insists Mr Vanunu - who has converted to Christianity - still poses a security threat. In March, he was charged with violating the terms of his release from jail by giving interviews to the foreign media. Mr Vanunu says his action in revealing Israel's nuclear secrets aimed to avert a nuclear holocaust in the region. Many Israelis view him as a traitor. -------- MILITARY -------- balkans Facts about Bosnia SARAJEVO (AFP) Nov 18, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/051118023128.jzwdpdcj.html The republic of Bosnia-Hercegovina, which on November 21 marks the 10th anniversary of the peace deal that ended its 1992-95 war among Croats, Muslims and Serbs, consists of two semi-independent entities -- the Muslim-Croat Federation and the Serbs' Republika Srpska. Key facts about Bosnia-Hercegovina: GEOGRAPHY: Bosnia-Hercegovina is a mountainous Balkan republic which, apart from a 20-kilometre (12-mile) coastline, is landlocked. Ridges of the Dinaric Alps rising to more than 1,800 metres (6,000 feet) occupy most of the territory, with restricted lowland valleys in the north. It has a continental climate, though Hercegovina in the south is more Mediterranean. The country is bordered by Croatia in the north and west, and by Serbia-Montenegro to the east. AREA: 51,129 square kilometres (19,741 square miles). POPULATION: 3.8 million. Muslim: 40 percent, Serb (Orthodox): 31 percent, Croat (Catholic): around 10 percent. According to UN estimates about one million Bosnians remain displaced by the war, with about two-thirds located inside the country. CAPITAL: Sarajevo, now almost completely populated by Muslims. LANGUAGE: Serbo-Croat, with two written forms: Roman alphabet is used among the Muslims (Bosniaks) and Croats, Cyrillic script among the Serbs. RELIGION: Sunni Islam 40 percent, Serbian Orthodox 31 percent, Roman Catholic 10 percent, with a Protestant minority. RECENT HISTORY: In March 1992, following the break-up of the former Yugoslavia, a referendum boycotted by the Serbs voted in favour of independence. The Serbs, encouraged and supplied by Serbia, seized around 70 percent of the country, killing or expelling Muslims and Croats in a campaign of "ethnic cleansing" despite the deployment of UN peacekeepers. In early 1994 the Muslims and Croats agreed under US pressure to federate, and in October 1995 a ceasefire with the Serbs came into effect. The US-brokered Dayton accords called for one country divided into Muslim-Croat and Serb entities, overseen by an international meditor. More than 200,000 people are believed to have been killed during the three and a half years of fighting. The Muslim-Croat Federation was allotted 51 percent of Bosnian territory, with 49 percent going to the Serb entity of Republika Srpska. NATO-led troops took over from UN forces to police the agreement. In December 2004 they were replaced by the European Union peacekeeping force (EUFOR) numbering around 7,000 troops. POLITICAL SITUATION: The UN High Representative for Bosnia, responsible for overseeing civil affairs under the Dayton peace accord, has considerable powers including the right to impose legislation by decree. The office is currently held by Paddy Ashdown of Britain. The country has a tripartite presidency, whose members rotate in eight-month terms as chairman. Croat Ivo Miro Jovic is currently serving as chairman. The two other members are Muslim Sulejman Tihic and Serb Borislav Paravac. Under a reform accord agreed in 2002 each of the three communities is guaranteed fair representation in the institutions of both entities. ECONOMY: Following the economic devastation of the war the country remains one of the poorest in the Balkans, with average per capita income of 1,100 dollars (1,000 euros) in 2004. The official unemployment rate is around 40 percent, but is probably around 20 percent if unreported activities are taken into account, according to economists. The economy remains dependent on foreign aid, of which about 5.7 billion euros have been received since 1995. CURRENCY: A national currency, known as the konvertibilna marka, went into circulation in 1998, pegged at par with the former German mark. DEFENCE: The country has a total about 18,600 soldiers. The Republika Srpska has some 6,000 troops and the Muslim-Croat Federation around 12,600. In July the country's Croat, Muslim and Serb leaders agreed to establish a single army by 2007. In October Bosnian Serb MPs approved unification of police forces, paving the way for opening of talks on a stabilisation agreement with the European Union, seen as the first step towards membership in the bloc. ---- Richard Holbrooke, the 'Kissinger of the Balkans' WASHINGTON (AFP) Nov 18, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/051118022328.1o24pt40.html Richard Holbrooke, chief architect of the November 21, 1995 Dayton Peace Accords that ended three years of bloodshed in Bosnia, remains a man of influence in Washington whose name is often bandied about for top jobs. Dubbed the "Kissinger of the Balkans", Holbrooke, 64, is the embodiment of muscular diplomacy and his crowning achievement was brokering the Bosnia peace deal, the 10th anniversay of which is being celebrated this month. Born April 24, 1941 in New York, Holbrooke began his diplomatic career at the tender age of 21 in Vietnam, thanks to his knowledge of the local language. He then quickly moved up the ladder and was assigned to the White House in 1966 to work on Vietnam issues under President Lyndon Johnson. Throughout the 1970s he pursued diplomatic studies at Princeton University, and served as a Peace Corps director in Morocco. In 1977, President Jimmy Carter appointed him assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific Affairs at age 35. Holbrooke was little known outside specialist circles until July 1994 when he was named assistant secretary of state for European and Canadian affairs with special responsibility for Balkans policy, and waded into the Yugoslav conflict. His no-holds-barred negotiating, which insiders said reflected an abrasive nature honed by years of experience at the poker table, saw him shuttling back and forth between rival capitals in the former Yugoslavia, alternately browbeating and cajoling, until the three-and-a-half year conflict ground to a halt. He patched together a peace deal that has held the shaky Bosnian republic together despite the tensions pulling its component communities apart. However Holbrooke's spiky personality has not always endeared him to his colleagues. His blunt approach caused him problems in president Bill Clinton's inner circle, notably with Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. He has been described as egotistical, arrogant and at times a bully, qualities which on the face of it qualified him admirably for an eyeball confrontation with former Yugoslav strongman Slobodan Milosevic. In parallel Holbrooke has conducted a distinguished career in the private sector. During the 1980s Holbrooke earned more than one million dollars a year at the Lehman Brothers brokerage house and served at Credit Suisse First Boston as vice chairman of the US unit, even as he continued to serve as consultant to the White House and the State Department, returning on various occasions after leaving diplomacy to aid in talks in Bosnia. His links with the Swiss bank were the source of difficulties in Congress where the Senate first blocked his appointment in 1999 as ambassador to the UN over alleged misuse of influence. The nomination was stalled for more than a year as Holbrooke faced a federal ethics probe. But while senators wrangled with his confirmation, Holbrooke continued to work in the Balkans, though his bid to settle the conflict in Kosovo and avoid the NATO air campaign against Yugoslavia failed. His name nowadays is still mentioned in Washington circles as a potential successor to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in the event the Democracts win the presidential elections in 2008. Holbrooke, who has two boys, in 1994 married his third wife, Kati Marton, a former journalist who was married to the veteran television anchor Peter Jennings. -------- chemical weapons Japan Struggling to Clear China of WWII Weapons REUTERS JAPAN: November 18, 2005 http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/33531/newsDate/18-Nov-2005/story.htm TOKYO - Japan is pushing ahead with a plan to clear China of chemical weapons left behind by its retreating Imperial army after World War Two, but it may have trouble meeting a 2007 deadline, a government official said on Thursday. Scores of people in China have been injured by dumped poison gas shells in recent years, and the weapons are one of a range of war-related issues fuelling Chinese resentment of Japan. "We are doing everything in our power, but unfortunately that is all we can say at the moment," Akira Takamatsu, director-general of the government's Abandoned Chemical Weapons Office, told reporters when asked whether the deadline would be met. Japan agreed under the 1997 Chemical Weapons Convention to dispose of the weapons by the end of March 2007. China has estimated there may be as many as 2 million weapons to be dealt with, but Japan says there are probably 300,000 to 400,000 weapons buried at Haerbaling in Jilin province, northeast China, while 37,000 have been retrieved elsewhere in the country. Tokyo has no current estimate of total numbers, but officials say Japan faces a mammoth task. Disposal teams are digging up and classifying the weapons, which could explode or leak after being left to rust for 60 years. Japan invaded and occupied parts of China from 1931 to 1945. The two governments are in discussions about building a disposal facility at Haerbaling, where the contents of the weapons -- chemicals such as mustard gas and tear gas -- could be disposed of safely. Tokyo has spent 34 billion yen ($285 million) on the project up to last year and has plans to spend another 42 billion yen. In one of the most serious incidents, a toxic leak killed one man and injured 43 in August 2003 after five canisters of mustard gas were unearthed at a construction site in the northeastern province of Heilongjiang. Japan has agreed to pay 300 million yen in compensation. China has repeatedly called on Japan to deal with the weapons, and Tokyo officials said there might be a mixed reaction if Japan failed to meet the 2007 deadline. "It depends whether you are talking about the government or the Chinese people," Takamatsu said. "The government, at least those involved in this project, have a good understanding of what we are doing. But the Chinese people get very upset when an accident occurs." Relations between Japan and China, long chilly, worsened this year, partly because of Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi's return to Tokyo's Yasukuni shrine, which critics see as a symbol of Japan's past militarism because it honours convicted war criminals along with war dead. Koizumi heads to a meeting of Pacific Rim leaders in South Korea on Friday, but will not hold a bilateral meeting there with Chinese President Hu Jintao. ($US1=119.15 Yen) -------- europe Parliament Backs New EU Law on Toxic Chemicals November 18, 2005 — By Reuters http://www.enn.com/today.html?id=9282 STRASBOURG, France — The European Parliament, seeking to protect the public from toxic substances, backed a landmark new law on Thursday that has pitted Europe's chemicals industry against environmental groups for years. Lawmakers voted in favour of an amended bill on Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals (REACH), designed to make companies prove that substances in everyday products such as cars, computers or paint are safe. The properties of roughly 30,000 chemicals produced or imported in the European Union would have to be registered with a central agency. Those of highest concern, such as carcinogens, would require testing and authorisation to be used. The EU legislature voted 407-155 for the legislation with 41 abstentions. The rules must still be agreed by EU member states and may come back to parliament before they can become a law. The amendments approved included a compromise that largely reduced the number of chemicals requiring testing. Lawmakers also supported a measure that would force firms to substitute safe chemicals for hazardous ones when alternatives are available. Germany, Europe's largest chemicals producer with giants like BASF and Bayer, successfully delayed a decision by member states scheduled for later this month, but Britain, which holds the EU presidency, wants a deal this year. The European Commission, original author of REACH, forecasts it will cost the chemical industry 2.3 billion euros ($2.68 billion) over 11 years. Total costs to industry -- including sectors like metals, textiles, electronics and cars -- are estimated between 2.8 billion and 5.2 billion euros. The United States and African nations have said REACH would disrupt trade and hurt their industries. -------- prisoners of war U.S. and Iraq To Probe Detention Facilities Friday, November 18th, 2005 Headlines Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/18/1534256 U.S. and Iraqi officials have announced a broad inquiry into prison conditions at detention centers across the country. The announcement follows the discovery Sunday of over 170 prisoners in the basement of an Interior Ministry compound. Iraqi officials insisted Thursday no more than seven detainees showed signs of torture. But the US government-run Voice of America broadcast service says at least a third of the detainees: "appeared severely emaciated and many showed cuts and bruises on their faces, arms and legs." One man was taken out of the compound on a stretcher because he was unable to walk. The detainees were transferred to the US-run Abu Ghraib prison. -------- spies Foreign Network at Front of CIA's Terror Fight Joint Facilities in Two Dozen Countries Account for Bulk of Agency's Post-9/11 Successes By Dana Priest Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, November 18, 2005; A01 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/17/AR2005111702070_pf.html The CIA has established joint operation centers in more than two dozen countries where U.S. and foreign intelligence officers work side by side to track and capture suspected terrorists and to destroy or penetrate their networks, according to current and former American and foreign intelligence officials. The secret Counterterrorist Intelligence Centers are financed mostly by the agency and employ some of the best espionage technology the CIA has to offer, including secure communications gear, computers linked to the CIA's central databases, and access to highly classified intercepts once shared only with the nation's closest Western allies. The Americans and their counterparts at the centers, known as CTICs, make daily decisions on when and how to apprehend suspects, whether to whisk them off to other countries for interrogation and detention, and how to disrupt al Qaeda's logistical and financial support. The network of centers reflects what has become the CIA's central and most successful strategy in combating terrorism abroad: persuading and empowering foreign security services to help. Virtually every capture or killing of a suspected terrorist outside Iraq since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks -- more than 3,000 in all -- was a result of foreign intelligence services' work alongside the agency, the CIA deputy director of operations told a congressional committee in a closed-door session earlier this year. The initial tip about where an al Qaeda figure is hiding may come from the CIA, but the actual operation to pick him up is usually organized by one of the joint centers and conducted by a local security service, with the CIA nowhere in sight. "The vast majority of successes involved our CTICs," one former counterterrorism official said. "The boot that went through the door was foreign." The centers are also part of a fundamental, continuing shift in the CIA's mission that began shortly after the 2001 attacks. No longer is the agency's primary goal to recruit military attaches, diplomats and intelligence operatives to steal secrets from their own countries. Today's CIA is desperately seeking ways to join forces with other governments it once reproached or ignored to undo a common enemy. George J. Tenet orchestrated the shift during his tenure as CIA director, working with the agency's station chiefs abroad and officers in the Counterterrorist Center at headquarters to bring about an exponential deepening of intelligence ties worldwide after Sept. 11. Beneath the surface of visible diplomacy, the cooperative efforts, known as liaison relationships, are recasting U.S. dealings abroad. The White House has stepped up its criticism of Uzbek President Islam Karimov in the past year for his authoritarian rule and repression of dissidents. But joint counterterrorism efforts with Tashkent continued until recently. In Indonesia, as the State Department doled out tiny amounts of assistance to the military when it made progress on corruption and human rights, the CIA was pouring money into Jakarta and developing intelligence ties there after years of tension. In Paris, as U.S.-French acrimony peaked over the Iraq invasion in 2003, the CIA and French intelligence services were creating the agency's only multinational operations center and executing worldwide sting operations. The CIA has operated the joint intelligence centers in Europe, the Middle East and Asia, according to current and former intelligence officials. In addition, the multinational center in Paris, codenamed Alliance Base, includes representatives from Britain, France, Germany, Canada and Australia. "CTICs were a step forward in codifying, organizing liaison relationships that elsewhere would be more ad hoc," a former CIA counterterrorism official said. "It's one tool in the liaison tool kit." The CIA declined to comment for this article. The Washington Post interviewed more than two dozen current and former intelligence officials and more than a dozen senior foreign intelligence officials as well as diplomatic and congressional sources. Most of them spoke on the condition that they not be named because they are not authorized to speak publicly or because of the sensitive nature of the subject. The CTICs are entirely separate from the covert prisons, known in classified documents as "black sites," that the CIA has run at various times in eight countries. Legal experts and intelligence officials have said that the prisons -- whose existence was disclosed in a Washington Post report earlier this month -- would be considered illegal under the laws of several host countries. The CTICs, by contrast, are an expansion of the hidden intelligence cooperation that has been a staple of foreign policy for decades. Deepening Ties The intelligence centers were modeled on the CIA's counternarcotics centers in Latin America and Asia. Faced with corrupt local police and intelligence services, in the 1980s the CIA persuaded the leaders of these countries to let it select individuals for the assignment, pay them and keep them physically separate from their own institutions. Officers from the host nations serving in the newer CTICs are vetted through background checks and polygraphs. They are usually supervised by the CIA's chief of station and augmented by officers sent from the Counterterrorist Center at Langley. Such daily interaction with U.S. personnel, say intelligence officials, helps keep the foreign service focused. The first two CTICs were established in the late 1990s to watch and capture Islamic militants traveling from Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Egypt and Chechnya to join the fighting in Bosnia and other parts of the former Yugoslavia, two former intelligence officers said. Days after the Sept. 11 attacks, Tenet outlined a global campaign against terrorism to President Bush. It included invading Afghanistan to wipe out al Qaeda's main base of operations as well as a "Worldwide Attack Matrix" detailing operations against terrorists in 80 countries. The matrix also listed priority countries where al Qaeda leaders in Afghanistan were likely to flee during a U.S. invasion. "If you brought a big hammer down on Afghanistan," as a former CIA official described it, "there weren't too many areas where people could squirt out" and hide. The most likely were Yemen, Saudi Arabia, urban areas of Pakistan, and Indonesia. On Sept. 17, 2001, Bush signed a classified Presidential Finding that authorized an unprecedented range of covert operations. The overall counterterrorism program included authorization of lethal measures against terrorists and the expenditure of vast funds to coax foreign intelligence services into a new era of cooperation with the CIA, current and former intelligence officials said. To beef up operations in the priority countries and elsewhere, the agency dispatched officers from its proliferation, counternarcotics, Europe, Africa, Asia and Middle East divisions, said several current and former intelligence officials. It sent paramilitary teams from its tiny Special Activities Division and enlisted the military's Special Operations Forces to augment the teams. But agency officials knew that a surge of hundreds of CIA officers would not be adequate to solidify the new worldwide infrastructure that Tenet and his top aides envisioned. The agency quickly turned to dozens of sometimes reluctant foreign intelligence services, which had much more intimate knowledge of local terrorist groups and their supporters. The agency had extensive inducements to offer foreign services once Congress opened the spigot, which it quickly did. "The money was just flowing," said one CIA case officer. In fact, the budget for the CIA's operations increased in the first two years by 2 1/2 times what it had been before Sept. 11, according to two government experts. The Counterterrorist Center at CIA headquarters, which manages the CTICs and all other counterterrorism efforts, bought its friends SUVs, night-vision equipment, automatic weapons and push-to-talk radios for countries where intelligence services were starved for even basic material. It sent instructors in surveillance, data analysis and military Special Forces tactics to teach hostage rescue, VIP protection and counterterrorist assault. Foreign countries sent officers to the CIA's training school for weeks-long courses in counterterrorism operations and analysis. The new cooperative ventures depended as well on loosening U.S. rules for sharing electronic eavesdropping and other precious "signals intelligence," which experts estimate provides 80 to 90 percent of the information the United States gathers about terrorist networks. Tenet ordered streamlined regulations. The National Security Agency, which manages, analyzes and distributes electronic intercepts, quickly became a new partner in the joint centers, and established a Foreign Affairs Directorate that now handles sharing information and equipment with 40 countries. Tenet Courts Yemen Persuading foreign presidents and intelligence chiefs to begin or deepen relationships with the CIA often took the personal intervention of Bush, Vice President Cheney and the secretary of state. But closing a deal was left to the CIA's chiefs of station, other top officials, and foremost, Tenet, "the master of liaison," as one longtime intelligence officer dubbed him. Gregarious and comfortable in foreign settings, Tenet by Sept. 11 had earned a reputation among Muslim countries as an honest broker in the Arab-Israeli dispute and for his role in training Palestinian security forces. He was a natural at bonding with foreign chiefs of service, current and former intelligence officials said. Once, during a dinner for a foreign service chief, the guests asked Tenet about Bush, whom Tenet briefed every morning. "He would tell them what time he gets up. He'd say, 'The president calls me Jorge.' It was really human-being-to-human-being," said a former intelligence official. "He didn't give away anything classified, but they felt important and could go back to their president and say, 'The president calls him Jorge.' " "George Tenet is a charming man, but also a very tough cookie," said a senior French official. Yemen, with its terrorist training camps and al Qaeda presence, was one of Tenet's most significant successes. Its president, Ali Abdullah Saleh, had little control over the northern border with Saudi Arabia, which had turned into a haven for extremists, and even less over his violent rivals. Faris Sanabani, a Yemeni presidential adviser, said Tenet's trips to Yemen after Sept. 11 helped persuade Saleh to work with the CIA in a way that would have been unthinkable before. "He made an effort to reach out when people were really scared of Yemen," said Sanabani, who sat in on meetings between Tenet and Saleh. "He's the kind of person who doesn't work from a report or from behind the office desk." In the wake of the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan, Saleh thought Yemen was next on the target list, said one current and one former intelligence official. Tenet did not disabuse him of this idea, they said. "You don't take anything off the table," one said. At the same time, Tenet "listened to him, took his views seriously and did not rebuke him. He sought to meet Saleh's needs," he said. Tenet provided millions of dollars for Yemen's cooperation. He gave helicopters, eavesdropping equipment, weapons and bulletproof vests. He brought in 100 Army Special Forces trainers to help Yemen create an antiterrorism unit. Tenet also won Saleh's approval to fly Predator drones armed with Hellfire missiles over the country to hunt and kill al Qaeda figures. In November 2002, the CIA killed six al Qaeda operatives driving in the desert, including Abu Ali al-Harithi, suspected mastermind of the 2000 attack on the USS Cole. "All of the sudden our enemy became common," Sanabani said. "That's why Yemen and the United States reached out to one other." Indonesia Countering terrorism has overshadowed just about all other foreign policy concerns, including "making friends with the sorts of characters you would not have been in the same room with before," one former foreign intelligence official said. In Indonesia, the most populous Muslim country and the center of gravity for an al Qaeda affiliate, Jemaah Islamiyah, that meant befriending Lt. Gen. Abdullah Hendropriyono, then head of the intelligence service. Sporting black hair lacquered with hairspray and colorful jackets with matching ties and socks, Hendropriyono was more flamboyant than most chiefs. A former Indonesian special forces commander trained at the U.S. Army Command and General Staff School at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., Hendropriyono was accused by human rights activists of ordering attacks that killed more than 100 unarmed villagers in 1989, according to Associated Press and other published reports. In 2004, he threatened action against foreign humanitarian groups monitoring human rights issues, published reports said. Hendropriyono replaced an intelligence chief who had conducted surveillance against U.S. and Australian officials, according to U.S. and Australian sources. Al Qaeda leader Omar Farouq had the U.S. Embassy under surveillance and U.S. Ambassador Robert S. Gelbard believed that the Indonesians had purposely blown an operation meant to capture a bombing team targeting the U.S. compound in Jakarta. In August 2001, Hendropriyono was "a breath of fresh air," said one CIA officer who worked with him. "He was focused, very controversial, but very dynamic." Unlike his predecessor, he was willing to work with the Americans, at a price. Besides phone calls and office visits, Tenet worked hard on Hendropriyono's requests for goods and services. "These guys had 1970s technology," the CIA officer said. "They were dying for equipment, surveillance, wiretaps." Tenet came through on two of Hendropriyono's personal requests as well: to provide seed money for a regional intelligence school, the International Institute of Intelligence on Batam Island, and to get a relative of Hendropriyono's into a top-rated American university. When his grades proved an obstacle, the CIA director arranged for him to attend the National War College at Fort McNair, four sources said. Hendropriyono proved his willingness to cooperate by arresting Muhammad Saad Iqbal Madni, a Egyptian who the CIA believed was linked to British failed shoe bomber Richard C. Reid. He also agreed to allow the CIA to take Madni to Egypt for interrogation under a process known as "rendition." Hendropriyono agreed to expand the cooperation, and officers arrested a few dozen Indonesians suspected of links to terrorism. He began efforts to close down terrorist financing. Then he secured the approval of his political leadership to apprehend Farouq, believed to be a top al Qaeda figure in Southeast Asia. "He forced [the Indonesian security services ] to work with us and we started picking up the bigger fish," Gelbard said. Attempts to reach Hendropriyono were unsuccessful. The Goss Era Porter J. Goss, who succeeded Tenet as CIA director just over a year ago, could hardly be more different. For all of Tenet's gregariousness, Goss is the picture of reserve. And there are indications that Goss may not place as much emphasis on combining forces with others overseas. When Goss took over, he said he valued these partnerships but announced a goal of improving what he called "unilateral" intelligence collection and operations. "We have gotten more unilateral, though still not as much as I'd like," he told employees in a staff meeting. "It's getting the right kind of people trained in the right places under the right cover against the right targets." There are plans to send more case officers into the field and to increase deep-cover positions that would require officers to spend longer periods, and perhaps their careers, in one country, integrated into the culture and, in some cases, cut off from the traditional embassy-based CIA station. Stories about Goss's reluctance to meet with his foreign counterparts are rife, fueled in part by a cable from headquarters to overseas station chiefs, saying appointments with foreign services should be arranged for Tuesdays or Thursdays. The memo, CIA officials have said, was not meant to discourage such meetings but to assure officers that Goss would set aside time for such important visitors. During a recent trip to the U.S. Special Operations Command base in Qatar, Goss did not meet with the head of the country or Qatar's intelligence chief. Intelligence officials say that is because Goss had met with them recently. Others say Tenet would never had flown so far and missed a chance to schmooze. In any case, current and former intelligence officials predicted that the new, deeper relationships with foreign intelligence agencies will endure because the countries involved have a strong, common interest in confronting terrorism. And they said CIA station chiefs will continue to cultivate and encourage the ties, given the success they've yielded thus far. "Most of these relationships are built on the ground," said a former intelligence official who spent most of his career overseas. Researcher Julie Tate contributed to this report. ---- Report: CIA Runs Joint Intelligence Centers in Several Countries Friday, November 18th, 2005 Headlines Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/18/1534256 The Washington Post is reporting the CIA has set up joint counter-terrorism centers with local intelligence agencies in more than two dozen countries. The Counterterrorist Intelligence Centers, or CTICs, conduct joint operations based on tips mostly provided by American intelligence. The network includes countries that have been criticized by the US for human rights violations, such as Uzbekistan and Indonesia. The revelation comes as public outcry is growing in several countries around the world over the possible use of their airports for the rendition of CIA detainees. Activists Protest CIA Contractor in North Carolina Peace activists in North Carolina are holding a protest against a private airline company. Aero Contractors provides a fleet of chartered jets and pilots to the CIA for transporting detainees to foreign countries that practice torture in a practice the government calls "extraordinary rendition." Pentagon to Review Feith’s Intelligence Activities Congressional officials announced Thursday the Defense Department will investigate the pre-war activities of one of the Iraq war’s key architects. The office of the Pentagon's inspector general says it will comply with a Senate request to review the intelligence activities of former U.S. defense undersecretary Douglas Feith. The investigation will focus on whether Feith gave the White House uncorroborated evidence to support the case for invasion in the lead up to war. -------- us Report: Military Experiencing Shortfall on Recruiting Goals Friday, November 18th, 2005 Headlines Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/18/1534256 The New York Times is reporting a new government study has found the military is falling far behind in recruiting goals for key combat positions in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Government Accountability Office says the military has failed to staff 41 percent of combat and non-combat specialist positions. The report says the shortfall was disguised by the overstaffing of other positions in order to meet overall recruiting goals. Derek Stewart, the G.A.O.’s director of military personnel, commented : "The aggregate recruiting numbers are rather meaningless. For Congress and this nation to truly understand what's happening with the all-volunteer force and its ability to recruit and retain highly qualified people, you have to drill down into occupational specialties. And when you do, it's very revealing." -------- POLITICS -------- us politics Hawkish Democrat Calls For Immediate Troop Withdrawal Friday, November 18th, 2005 Headlines Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/18/1534256 In an important development in the growing Congressional debate over the US occupation of Iraq, a hawkish Democrat who voted to authorize the war has introduced a bill calling for the immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops. Democratic Congressman John Murtha of Pennsylvania said: "It is time for a change in direction. Our military is suffering. The future of our country is at risk. We cannot continue on the present course. It is evident that continued military action in Iraq is not in the best interest of the United States of America, the Iraq people or the Persian Gulf region." Murtha is an army veteran with close ties to military commanders. He’s also the top Democrat on the House Appropriations defense subcommittee, and has visited Iraq several times since the war began. His proposed bill reads in part: "The deployment of US forces in Iraq, by direction of Congress, is hereby terminated and the forces involved are to be redeployed at the earliest practicable date.” The bill marks the first time a resolution has been submitted to Congress calling for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. In response, White House spokesperson Scott McClellan said: "Congressman Murtha is a respected veteran and politician who has a record of supporting a strong America. So it is baffling that he is endorsing the policy positions of Michael Moore and the extreme liberal wing of the Democratic Party." Congressional Democrat Leaders Keep Distance to Troop Pullout Although Murtha joins a growing list of pro-war Democrats that have reversed their positions, Democratic Congressional leaders distanced themselves from Murtha’s stance. House minority leader Nancy Pelosi said: "Mr. Murtha speaks for himself,” while Senate Minority Harry Reid added: "I don't support immediate withdrawal." ---- Congress Approves Budget, Tax Measures Friday, November 18th, 2005 Headlines Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/18/1534256 On Capital Hill earlier today, the House narrowly approved a budget measure that cuts funding for programs for the poor, for college students and for farmers. The $50 billion dollar cost cutting plan passed by just two votes. The Washington Post reports the House measure would cut about 220,000 people off food stamps, allow states to impose new costs on Medicaid beneficiaries, squeeze student lenders, cut aid to state child-support enforcement programs and trim farm supports. Meanwhile, the Senate passed a $60 billion tax bill that includes a $4 billion dollar tax penalty on oil companies. That penalty has drawn the threat of a veto from the White House. Senate Democrats failed to add an amendment that would have imposed a 50 percent tax on certain oil profits if those profits were not reinvested in increasing the country’s energy supplies. -------- OTHER -------- poverty ECONOMIC APARTHEID IN AMERICA By Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman Fri, 18 Nov 2005 15:55:03 -0500 http://lists.essential.org/pipermail/corp-focus/2005/000221.html http://eatthestate.org/10-06/FocusOnCorporation.htm Top executives now make more in a day than the average worker makes in a year. You can have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, or democracy. But you cannot have both. -- Louis Brandeis How wealthy the wealthy are does matter. If we allow great wealth to accumulate in the pockets of a few, then great wealth can set our political agenda and shape our political culture -- and the agenda and the culture that emerge will not welcome efforts to make American work for all Americans. -- Sam Pizzigati Plutocracy: 1. The rule or power of wealth or the wealthy; 2. A government or state in which the wealthy class rules. 3. A class for group ruling, or exercising power or influence, by virtue of its wealth. -- Webster's Unabridged Dictionary Of the world's 100 largest economies, 47 are nations, and 53 are corporations. Seventy-five percent of major corporations hire a consultant to stop employees from forming a union. The alarming development and aggressiveness of great capitalists and corporations, unless checked, will inevitably lead to the pauperization and hopeless degradation of the toiling masses. It is imperative, if we desire to enjoy the full blessings of life, that a check be placed upon unjust accumulations and the power for evil of aggravated wealth. -- Constitution of the Knights of Labor, 1869. The Washington monument is 555 feet tall. Say it signifies the 2003 average compensation for CEOs in the Fortune 500. The average worker salary would be only 16 inches tall, representing a ratio of 419 to one. In 1965, the worker's monument was 13 feet six inches tall, representing a ratio of 41 to 1. Inherited economic power is as inconsistent with the ideals of this generation as inherited political power was inconsistent with the ideals of the generation which established our government. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt. Born on home plate -- Forty-two percent of those listed inherited sufficient wealth to rank among the Forbes 400. Examples: J. Paul Getty Jr. inherited the oil fortune from his father. David Rockefeller Sr. ($2.5 billion) is the grandson of the Standard Oil founder John D. Rockefeller. S.I. and Donald Newhouse ($7 billion each) inherited the nation's largest private newspaper chain, plus Conde Nast publications, from their father in 1979. Samuel Curtis Johnson ($1.5 billion) is the great grandson of the flooring salesman who founded the floor wax giant S.C. Johnson and Sons. The United Nations Development Program reported in 1999 that the world's 225 richest people now have a combined wealth of $1 trillion. That's equal to the combined annual income of the world's 2.5 billion poorest people. The richest 10 percent of the world's population receives 49.6 percent of the total world income. The bottom 60 percent receives 13.9 percent of the world's income. The wealth of the world's three most well-to-do individuals now exceeds the combined gross domestic product of the 48 least developed countries. Half of the world's population of six billion live on less than $2 a day, while 1.3 billion get by on less than $1 a day. These are some of things you learn from a new book, just out, titled Economic Apartheid in America: A Primer on Economic Inequality & Insecurity by Chuck Collins and Felice Yeskel with United for a Fair Economy (The New Press, 2005). The book is filled with photos, and charts, and graphs -- that make it a great home schooling tool, for young and old alike. It puts things in perspective. It keeps you on your toes. Read it. Then listen to a little Bill O'Reilly. Then read it some more. Contrast is good. Stretch limousines are longer, yet more people are homeless. Thirty zip codes in America have become fabulously wealthy. Meanwhile, whole urban and rural communities are languishing in unemployment, crumbling infrastructure, growing insecurity and fear. It makes the perfect gift for the holidays. And you probably won't find it Wal-Mart. Or Costco, for that matter. Russell Mokhiber is editor of the Washington, D.C.-based Corporate Crime Reporter, . Robert Weissman is editor of the Washington, D.C.-based Multinational Monitor, . Mokhiber and Weissman are co-authors of On the Rampage: Corporate Predators and the Destruction of Democracy (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press). -------- ACTIVISTS Vanunu held after West Bank visit Mordechai Vanunu says he has averted a nuclear holocaust in the region Friday, 18 November 2005 (BBC) http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4450004.stm Israeli ex-nuclear technician Mordechai Vanunu has been held for allegedly violating restrictions imposed after his release from prison in 2004. Police said he was held at the al-Ram checkpoint north of Jerusalem as he was returning by bus from the West Bank. The former nuclear scientist is barred from leaving Israel and is not allowed to visit the Palestinian territories. He was jailed in 1986 for 18 years after discussing his work at the Dimona nuclear reactor with a UK newspaper. "He (Mr Vanunu) has been taken to our International Crimes Unit for questioning," Israeli police spokesman Mickey Rosenfeld was quoted as saying by Reuters news agency. Mr Vanunu flashed a victory sign before being taken away in a police vehicle. Asked what he had done to prompt the arrest, he said: "Nothing. They just want to arrest me again. They don't want me to enjoy freedom." Christianity convert Mr Vanunu served most of his jail term in solitary confinement. He was released in April 2004 under strict conditions. Mr Vanunu has not been allowed to have a passport, is forbidden to approach ports and airports, and is banned from talking to foreigners without permission. Israel insists Mr Vanunu - who has converted to Christianity - still poses a security threat. In March, he was charged with violating the terms of his release from jail by giving interviews to the foreign media. Mr Vanunu says his action in revealing Israel's nuclear secrets aimed to avert a nuclear holocaust in the region. Many Israelis view him as a traitor. ---- Greenpeace Blocks Ship in Poland, says GMO Aboard Story by Malgorzata Rakowiec REUTERS POLAND: November 18, 2005 http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/33536/newsDate/18-Nov-2005/story.htm GDYNIA - Rough seas on Thursday forced Greenpeace activists to give up a blockade of a ship they say carried 25,000 tonnes of genetically modified (GMO) Argentinian soya to Poland. In part of a campaign for a wider ban on GMO crops, protestors tied themselves and a rubber dinghy to the ship's anchor chain after it moored, preventing it from docking. They were forced to call off the protest after five hours as the weather worsened in the Baltic coast port and temperatures plunged to below zero. "The weather just got too bad and we couldn't risk the lives of the people attached to the anchor," said Polish official Maciej Muskat. "Unless the weather gets any better and we can try again, it seems like the boat will land its cargo." Production of genetically modified crops is banned in Poland but imports are not, and Greenpeace wants firms, including US hog and pork producer Smithfield, to stop feeding pigs with modified soya at its Polish farms. "It cannot be the case that Poles do not have an influence on what they eat," Muskat said. "GMO production harms people and destroys the environment and we must oppose it." Campaigners say gene-altered strains threaten to destroy local ecosystems through cross-pollination, and say they contribute to deforestation and lower soil fertility. The manufacturers say the products are safe. The Warsaw office of US firm Cargill, which Greenpeace identified as the importer of the shipment, had no immediate comment. GMO foods are gaining acceptance around the world, but have run into strong resistance in the European Union where many consumers fear what they view as "Frankenstein" foods. Greenpeace says the import of shipments of modified soya from Argentina to Poland, the largest food producer among the EU's new member states, has risen six-fold in the last five years. Warsaw's new government said last week it wanted to make Poland a "GMO-free" zone. "We are counting on this government, after the prime minister's comments, to be more sympathetic to what we are fighting for," Muskat said. "Certainly it is more so than the last government."