NucNews July 9, 2006 -------- NUCLEAR Revealed: G8 plan for global nuclear expansion By Rob Edwards Environment Editor Sunday Herald - 09 July 2006 http://www.sundayherald.com/56617 World leaders are planning a massive expansion of nuclear power in their own countries and across the developing world, according to documents drawn up for the G8 summit and leaked to the Sunday Herald. An action plan for “global energy security” to be agreed in St Petersburg next weekend envisages a network of nuclear fuel plants in G8 countries combined with the widespread sale of reactors to developing countries – as long as they promise not to use them for making nuclear bombs. G8 leaders also want to resurrect fast breeder reactors, which are highly controversial because they “breed” plutonium, a nuclear explosive. It was this type of reactor that was pioneered, and abandoned, at Dounreay on the north coast of Scotland. Environmentalists accuse leaders of “double standards and dangerous hypocrisy”. But the G8’s nuclear plans are likely to be backed by Prime Minister Tony Blair, whose own much-heralded energy review favouring new nuclear stations in the UK is due to be launched this week. The G8 summit is due to take place in St Petersburg between July 15 and 17, just over a year after the leaders of the world’s eight most powerful countries met at Gleneagles in Scotland. This time it will be led by Russian president Vladimir Putin, who has put global energy security at the top of the agenda. Confidential drafts of the energy “plan of action” drawn up by the “sherpas”, the senior G8 officials who guide prime ministers and presidents towards the summit, have been passed to the Sunday Herald. One of the plan’s main aims is to spread nuclear power stations around the globe. The latest version of the action plan says: “Those of us who have plans relating to the use and/or expansion of nuclear energy believe that its development will promote prosperity and global energy security, while simultaneously offering a positive contribution to the climate change challenge.” Improving the economic com petitiveness of nuclear power will “benefit all nations”, the plan argues. But nuclear expansion has to be based, it says, “on a robust regime for assuring nuclear non-proliferation and a reliable safety and security system for nuclear materials and facilities”. The idea is to keep the more sensitive nuclear facilities that can be easily diverted for making bombs within the G8. Other countries would not be allowed to enrich uranium fuel, or to reprocess spent fuel to extract plutonium. They will be permitted to run reactors to generate electricity but will have to buy fuel enrichment and reprocessing services from G8 countries. “Participation of developing countries in a ‘shared nuclear energy system’ through developing the network of international centres providing nuclear fuel services could be a viable option for reducing their energy poverty and bridging the energy gap,” the plan says. At the same time, G8 leaders are proposing to bring back fast breeder reactors, which were scrapped in Germany, France and the UK in the 1990s because they were too expensive. They are designed to create and burn plutonium and are much less reliant on imports of uranium. The leaked action plan says: “A significant step in promotion of self- sustainable nuclear power would be attained through the development of innovative nuclear power systems based on closed nuclear fuel cycles with fast neutron reactors.” This is a dramatic change, since fast reactors have been off the political agenda in Western countries for at least a decade. And it will run into fierce opposition because of the risks it poses for international efforts to control the spread of nuclear weapons. “We’ve come to expect double standards and dangerous hypocrisy from the G8 but this year they are set to surpass themselves,” said Shaun Burnie of Greenpeace International. “On the one hand we have the endorsement and promotion of the most dangerous nuclear technology ever conceived – plutonium fast breeder reactors and reprocessing – while at the same time condemning the nuclear proliferation threat from Iran and North Korea.” WWF Scotland director Dr Richard Dixon added: “Incredibly, this rich boys’ club seems on course to peddle reactors to the Earth’s poorer nations, at the same time as they are warning us how terribly dangerous the world is.” Among the G8 countries, only Italy and Germany are sceptical of the nuclear future. Russia, the US, Japan, Canada, France and the UK are all enthusiasts and see great potential for increasing nuclear business. Two versions of the G8 global energy security plan of action have been leaked, one dated March 6 and the other May 12. On nuclear energy their wording is similar in substance and there are no sections in brackets, suggesting the text is not in dispute. The drive for nuclear power is being led by Putin, who is keen to maximise Russia’s technology expertise. He has a plan for mass producing reactors, installing them on barges and selling them around the world as “floating nuclear power plants”. -------- asia Nuclear waste a challenge in Asia (AP) Updated: 2006-07-09 15:37 http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2006-07/09/content_636956.htm With royal tombs and a history dating back 1,000 years to the Shilla Kingdom, Gyeongju is a cradle of Korean civilization. But it's about to get a tomb of a different type. A hillside bunker overlooking the Sea of Japan is to become one of Asia's first permanent nuclear dump sites, ending South Korea's 19-year quest to deal with low- and medium-level waste such as contaminated clothing and old parts from its 20 nuclear power plants. It's costing the government nearly US$320 million in subsidies to the town of 300,000 for voting to accept the dump, and it doesn't even begin to address the country's real problem, 6,500 tons of spent nuclear fuel with hundreds of thousands of years to live and nowhere to go. As Asia goes nuclear in a big way to feed its appetite for energy, environmentalists are warning that the growing stockpiles could either be stolen by terrorists and used to make a bomb, or end up polluting the environment. The nuclear industry says a permanent solution will eventually be found and that the waste issue will not slow the growth of nuclear power in Asia. Temporary sites, they said, are safe. But only the United States and Finland have come up with permanent sites, and the one at Yucca Mountain in Nevada is years behind schedule and mired in legal disputes. One solution is to recycle spent fuel by extracting its plutonium and combining it with uranium. But the plutonium is weapons-grade and could fall into terrorist hands, warns the US-based Union of Concerned Scientists. Australia, has no nuclear plants but has struggled for 15 years to find a permanent site for low-level nuclear waste from its medical, industrial and research facilities. It settled in 2004 on three potential sites in the Northern Territory, which is home to Aborigine communities as well as world-famous Ayers Rock, or Uluru. Authorities expect to choose a final site by 2007 and open it in 2011. "People are outraged," said Michaela Stubbs of Friends of the Earth Australia. -------- britain Blair Risks Public Nuclear Power Backlash, U.K. Lawmakers Say Mark Deen in London July 9, 2006 19:11 EDT (Bloomberg) http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601102&sid=aOFJ79zIb6YE July 10 -- Prime Minister Tony Blair risks a public backlash against plans for a new generation of U.K. nuclear power stations unless he offers support for wind-driven turbines and other renewable sources as well, lawmakers said. Blair's stated backing of nuclear power has undermined the government's energy review, to be published this week, the Trade and Industry Committee of lawmakers said today. Public confidence may fall further if nuclear power were to receive financial support to the detriment of other types of energy, the committee said. The energy review ``risks being seen as little more than a rubber-stamping exercise for a decision the prime minister took some time ago,'' Peter Luff, the Conservative lawmaker who chairs the committee, said in a statement. A fifth of Britain's energy comes from 23 nuclear plants, 18 of which will close in the next decade. Blair said July 4 that he finds it ``difficult'' to see how Britain can meet its energy needs and satisfy pledges to reduce carbon dioxide output without replacing them. The government shouldn't explicitly support nuclear power, the committee said. Instead, it should offer incentives for all forms of power generation that limit emissions of carbon dioxide, which is blamed for altering the earth's climate. Wind-driven turbines, for instance, would also benefit from such a plan. ``We were told very clearly by the nuclear industry that they neither needed nor wanted public subsidy,'' Luff said. ``The only things required to encourage the private sector to invest in new nuclear power stations were a long-term framework for carbon and streamlining of the planning and licensing regime.'' Polls indicate voters want renewable forms of energy such as wind, solar and tidal power to generate electricity in the future. Seventy-eight percent of adults favor renewable energy and more conservation measures to nuclear power, according to a survey of 1,491 people by Ipsos-Mori Ltd. between Oct. 1 and Nov. 6, 2005. About 54 percent say they would accept nuclear power if it mitigates damage to the environment. The survey had a margin of error of 2.5 percentage points. ---- Call for reaction to nuclear plan Sunday, 9 July 2006 BBC http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/jersey/5162376.stm People in Jersey are being asked what they think about plans to build a third nuclear reactor 30 miles (48km) off the coast of the Channel Islands. The planned third nuclear reactor could be built at Flamanville but, before any go-ahead, a French public enquiry will be held and include views from Jersey. Anyone with any comments or views is asked to respond in writing to the States before 15 August. A summary of responses will go to the commission for the enquiry in France. The reactor plans have been put forward by electricity provider EDF. Guernsey's Home Department has raised objections to the proposed plant based on concerns raised by Greenpeace about a new nuclear reactor becoming a terrorist target. It will advise its States against the plan in a debate at the end of July. -------- depleted uranium Uranium bombing in Iraq contaminates Europe Bob Nichols July 9, 2006 http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article.php/20060708064938448 http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m24494&l=i&size=1&hd=0 (San Francisco) - Nine days after the start of the American president's 2003 "shock and awe" uranium bombing campaign in Baghdad, an invisible radioactive uranium oxide gas cloud swept through Britain's towns and countryside and throughout Europe. Respected scientists reported on the unrevealed gas cloud after conducting research on specialized high volume air filters in England. Dr. Chris Busby and Saoirse Morgan stunned Europe in a Sunday Times of London article on Feb. 19, 2006. Their scientific paper, released March 1st, 2006, [1] proved the event. With all the vigor of delusional drunkards, British nuclear and military spokesmen predictably denied the reality of an invisible radioactive cloud. The military claimed that a Chernobyl-like event in the area was probably responsible, but no explosive meltdowns of operating reactor cores have been reported or observed in 2006 anywhere in the world. Evidence of the truth of the gas cloud panicked the military into frantic, irrational, ludicrous denials. The military spin was later refined and the new Chernobyl claim quietly dropped. In America, lightweight wannabe spin doctor Dan Fahey issued the cover up talking points. [2] The "nuke sycophants" will take up these siren call lies as per instructions. Bush's radioactive "shock and awe" gas cloud descended on Britain and Europe like a warm, deadly ticking blanket and stayed throughout the American and British shock and awe bombing campaign in 2003. Bush's radioactive cloud lasted more than five weeks at high radioactive particle concentration levels. There is no gas mask filter fine enough to trap this radioactive gas and protect humans. At Aldermaston, England, where the data was collected and where the British Atomic Weapons Establishment, complete with air monitoring facilities, is located, the deadly uranium oxide gas measured about 48,000 radioactive particles per square meter. The average radioactive dose, according to official government index based calculations, was about 23 million radioactive particles for the average adult male in Britain and Europe. Yes, people breathed this poison gas, absolutely. People throughout England and presumably throughout Europe breathed in large quantities of this radioactive uranium poison gas. What are the effects of the poison gas cloud? After a steady decline for 41 years, the infant death rate has started inching up, many researchers think because of the Central Asian nuclear wars. The infant death rate is the most sensitive measure of the health of the human race. Like the proverbial canaries in a coal mine, the tiniest babies die first. George W. Bush, as the current appointed manager of the senior American political and military establishments, oversees a vast empire that knows exactly what the effect of millions of pounds of deadly weaponized radioactive ceramic uranium oxide gas and tiny aerosols are on the health of people throughout the world. They used uranium munitions in Iraq anyway. The American political and military leaders wanted to use genocidal weapons. You might even say the U.S. military went out of their way to use these radiation-based genocidal weapons in Iraq. Lots of them, too. Indeed, the American permanent war establishment has known the effect of poisonous uranium oxide gas since 1943. A declassified World War II memo to Gen. Leslie Groves, director of the ultra-secretive Manhattan Project to make atomic bombs, listed two reasons to use radioactive gas: One was to kill people, and the other was to contaminate their land. [3] A British newspaper quotes Dr. Busby, a government adviser on radiation, as saying: "This research shows that rather than remaining near the target, as claimed by the military, depleted uranium weapons contaminate both locals and whole populations hundreds to thousands of miles away." [4] There were and are laws in England that require notification of the government when levels of radioactivity are reached around the nuclear weapons complex at Aldermaston. No notification was made. When the records were requested, the clearly labeled "shock and awe" time frame data was omitted. The Defense Procurement Agency in Bristol supplied the missing data to scientists Busby and Morgan. The real British patriots are the ones who provided the deleted incriminating data to Busby and Morgan. Bush and his faithful followers, the neocon fascists, will be remembered as securing their place in history by exposing hundreds of millions of people to high levels of internal radiation poisoning. Make no mistake about it; this is real radioactive uranium gas. The Americans used this genetics changing and killing weapon on men, women and children. It made no difference to the Americans. The citizen opposition liberal groups in America who only stand on the street corners with signs are misdirecting legitimate citizen outrage and protest. These groups are more than just not effective; they contribute to the protection of the multi-national corporations, senior political and military leaders involved in these pre-planned war crimes. About ineffective protests, the famous author Ward Churchill says: "(N)o one really cares a whit that a sector of the beneficiary population (American protesters) has chosen to bear a sort of perpetual 'moral witness' to the crimes committed against the Third World. What they do care about is whether such witnesses translate their 'professions of outrage' into whatever kinds of actions may be necessary to actually put an end to the horror." [14] When will the protesters awaken and take action to put an end to this horror? Never? Sometime? When? A well planned effort The American military is nothing if not well planned. When the decision was made to go nuclear in conventional warfare with the promiscuous use of radiation dispersing uranium weapons, including land mines, bullets, shells, missiles and bombs, the proper and correct Army rules and regulations for radiological clean-up were created as well. These rules have the force of American law throughout the world. However, the same government that adopted these rules is not following them, even in the United States. Army Rules and Regulations on Radiation Poisoning (AR 700-48 and TB 9-1300-278) [15] unambiguously specify that U.S. troops and local civilians exposed to radiation poisoning will be treated. Radiation casualties exist, and provisions are made for their care as best as can be done for a non-curable bystander affliction: radiation poisoning. Clean and treat rules also apply; they are just not obeyed. In short, the regulations say that if the U.S. military is going to use radioactive weapons, then it must clean up the radiological contamination and treat the casualties. It is consistent with the philosophy of some "if you break it, fix it" former U.S. military leaders. The applicable rules and regulations are a common sense approach and the only responsible radiological warfare position for the only superpower on the planet. The rules are not followed even in the United States itself [5] but are buried away in their mountains of paperwork. Why has this approach been rejected by the senior U.S. political leadership? http://tinyurl.com/bk2yn Marion Fulk, a consultant physicist at the Lawrence Livermore Nuclear Weapons Lab, is one of the original Manhattan Project scientists. When asked if the main purpose for using depleted uranium was for destroying things and killing people, Fulk was more specific: "I would say that it is the perfect weapon for killing lots of people." [6] Dr. Rosalie Bertell, a respected scientist who serves on a variety of Pentagon committees, says about 1.3 billion people have already been killed, maimed or diseased since the nuclear age started. [7] Is this the Pentagon's purpose for using uranium munitions and rejecting the legally mandated task to treat and clean? Most reasonable people would agree that racking up 1.3 billion people killed or maimed since the beginning of the nuclear age and the American uranium bombing tragedy spreading the gas cloud to Europe and Britain is not the "treat and clean" approach to radioactive warfare set out in the regulations. On the contrary, the Bush radioactive gas cloud is just the opposite. The plain purpose of exposing hundreds of millions of people would seem to be to kill and sicken more people. As a rare Pentagon admission said, "The properties of uranium do not change." Famed former Lawrence Livermore Nuclear Weapons Lab scientist Leuren Moret has spoken about the dangers of so-called "depleted uranium" in 42 countries. In "Exotic Weapons," the author, radio and film celebrity states, "Since 1991, the continued U.S. military use of dirty bombs, dirty missiles and dirty bullets threatens humanity and all living things ... and is turning Planet Earth into a death star." [8] [12] Massive carpet bombing of whole countries with uranium bombs appears to be the current war fighting plan of the U.S. military. Unfortunately, U.S. troops are the first to be sacrificed on the altar of the neocon warfare plan for total global domination. As former U.S. Secretary of State and National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger said, "Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy." [9] American political and military leaders never asked the "pawns" or troops if that was OK. In the authoritative World Affairs Journal, Moret states: "The Korea Times reported on Dec. 23, 2005, that the U.S. military has 2.7 million depleted uranium bombs [pre-positioned] in South Korea. It is understandable why North Korea wants nuclear weapons." [10] North Korea is just slightly smaller than the American state of Mississippi. Two million seven hundred uranium bombs is enough to carpet bomb with workhorse Air Force B-52s at the rate of 10 bombs per square mile. Some researchers believe that grid bombing with uranium bombs was used in the American war in the former Yugoslavia. There is clear circumstantial evidence that carpet bombing with genocidal weapons is the preferred response of the American military to local resistance efforts. The San Francisco-based humanitarian and war crimes lawyer Karen Parker states unequivocally that the use of depleted uranium in American/U.K. weapons in Iraq, Afghanistan and the former Yugoslavia is a war crime. War crimes are punishable by imprisonment or execution, typically by hanging or a firing squad. America's war criminal class of senior politicians and military leaders has a powerful reason to lie about using genocidal weapons for at least 15 years in Central Asia - their very lives depend on it. In Johnny's Dad's words, the senior leaders are "filthy rotten scum." [16] Upcoming war crimes trial The chief Nuremberg war crimes prosecutor speaks knowingly and directly across more than 50 years to resolutely instruct American citizens on exactly what our duty is today, right now: "Individuals have international duties which transcend the national obligations of obedience … therefore have the duty to violate domestic laws to prevent crimes against peace and humanity from occurring." [11] The statement was affirmed by the Nuremberg Tribunal and is now international law and, by extension, American law. It is our duty as Americans to prevent crimes against peace and humanity. The fascist administration now controlling America and the U.S. military cannot be allowed to continue these crimes. The world and international law holds us all accountable, and the price is dear. It is time to impeach and imprison members of our government for their war crimes commensurate with their degree of complicity and guilt. If the House will not impeach and the Senate will not put them on trial; then we, all 300 million Americans, have a problem. We all are citizens of this country and the world, and, as such, we must acknowledge the incontrovertible evidence of war crimes by the leaders of the American Expeditionary Forces in Iraq with the use of genocidal weapons. Bush and others crossed the line long ago when they lied to get us into the Iraq War. They continue to lie about the damage being done with uranium weapons. One of the comforts history provides us is a road map out of unthinkable situations, to a more or less tenable, workable future. The injured and maimed and families of the dead are due treatment and/or compensation, the cleanup must be initiated and whole countries rebuilt. That is the true legacy of the neocons, the new American Nazis. What people can do Every single day thousands of American military and government workers handle thousands of "sensitive" papers that "prove" the War Crimes of the American Government's senior political and military leaders. These thousands of people could, if they wanted to, create havoc in the fascist administration by providing these incriminating papers and the "smoking guns" of innumerable crimes they hold to the public: A "paper blizzard" to teach a whole new generation that what's right is right. About 40 years ago, it was thousands of pages of the "Pentagon Papers" that did the trick with the illegal Viet Nam War and President Nixon. Thousands more pages are needed now. The neocon or neolib papers like the disgraced New York Times or the conservative phantom Washington Post no longer will do the right thing. The timid NYT took almost a year to publish the proof of illegal NSA government spying on American citizens. Bush then bragged about the illegal spying on network prime time television. We do not need "timid" now. Far less than that forced Nixon to leave the president's office. Do what you think best To follow up on these ideas, the following Speaker's Group and individuals are presented to you for your important events. Speaker's fees are required. Writers & Warriors Speakers Group Contact Bob Nichols at bob.bobnichols@gmail.com for college distinguished lecture series speakers, commencement speakers, people's events and rallies. Available speakers include Leuren Moret, Dr. Doug Rokke, Dennis Kyne, Karen Parker and Bob Nichols. Topics generally include those of interest in building a positive culture in the midst of a militarized society and items of interest in nuclear warfare. A well known video, "The 14 Characteristics of Fascism," from Dr. Lawrence Britt, Ph.D., Mike Malloy and Eric Bumrich is a great, short video. See http://www.bushflash.com/14.html. It is only a few minutes long but goes a long way in telling why American leaders embrace the rampant use of genocidal weapons. The "14 Points" video is a great way to start a meeting. The following documents were consulted in the preparation of this essay. 1. Dr. Chris Busby and Saoirse Morgan, "Did the use of uranium weapons in Gulf War 2 result in contamination of Europe?" March 1, 2006, "European Biology and Bioelectromagnetics." http://www.llrc.org/du/subtopic/aldermastonrept.htm 2. Dan Fahey's instructions to his secretary, Jack Cohen, for distribution, du-list@yahoogroups, Feb. 26, 2006, 11:52 p.m. 3. Letter to Congessman McDermott, Attachment 2. Declassified memo to general L.R. Groves, director of the Manhattan Project, Oct. 30, 1943. http://tinyurl.com/93eq9 4. The Sunday Times, Britain, Feb. 19, 2006, "UK radiation jump blamed on Iraq shells," quoting Dr. Chris Busby. 5. Bob Nichols, "Radioactive Tank No. 9 comes limping home," San Francisco Bay View newspaper. http://tinyurl.com/bk2yn 6. Marion Fulk quoted in the San Francisco Bay View newspaper by Leuren Moret in "Depleted uranium: Dirty bombs, dirty missiles, dirty bullets - A death sentence here and abroad," Aug 18, 2004. http://www.sfbayview.com/081804/Depleteduranium081804.shtml 7. Rosalie Bertell, Ph.D., "Planet Earth: The Latest Weapon of War." http://tinyurl.com/gf9dj 8. Leuren Moret, "Planet Earth as a Weapon and Target," World Affairs Journal, Vol. 9, No. 4, Winter 2005. http://tinyurl.com/e6d8v 9. Kissinger's quote regarding military men comes from Chapter 14, which extensively discusses Al Haig, Kissinger and other Nixon staff advisors' negotiations and differences over national security issues during the 1969-1974 period. The exact, direct quote marks begin with the word 'dumb' and terminate after the word 'used.' Source: Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, "The Final Days," second Touchstone paperback edition (1994), chapter 14, pp. 194-195. 10. Leuren Moret. 11. War Crimes Watch, http://tinyurl.com/k6xb3 12. Documentary "Beyond Treason" with Moret, Rokke and Dennis Kyne. http://www.beyondtreason.com/ Documentary "Blowin' in the Wind" with Moret and Rokke. http://www.bsharp.net.au/ 13. Dissent Voice, Bob Nichols. "There Are No Words: Radiation in Iraq equals 250,000 Nagasaki Bombs ...." http://tinyurl.com/yqxoe 14. Ward Churchill, "The Ghosts of 9-1-1: Reflections on History, Justice and Roosting Chickens," Alternative Press Review http://tinyurl.com/fvhzn 15. Army Regulation 700-48 and Technical Bulletin 9-1300-278 can be found easily at the Traprock Peace Site. http://tinyurl.com/erjue and http://tinyurl.com/pzcrm And the regulations themselves, http://tinyurl.com/kl2r2 and http://tinyurl.com/jzha8 Adobe .pdf versions are also available for download from Traprock Peace Center. 16. "Johnny Got a Gun - Protest Song" by Johnny's Dad. Uranium Weapon Anthem. Distribute freely: http://tinyurl.com/k2zze This author won a prized Project Censored Award for an article on depleted uranium munitions in October 2004. The article was titled "There Are No Words." http://tinyurl.com/yqxoe (headlined in the Bay View "Radiation in Iraq equals 250,000 Nagasaki bombs," http://www.sfbayview.com/041404/radiationiniraq041404.shtml. [13] Turns out that story was but Part One, a thing I never suspected would be so. This article is Part Two and serves as an update for the war fighting activities of the senior American political and military leaders. Bob Nichols is a Project Censored Award Winner. He is a correspondent for the San Francisco Bay View newspaper and a frequent contributor to various on line publications. Nichols is completing a book based on 15 years of nuclear war in Central Asia. Nichols is a former employee of the McAlester Army Ammunition Plant. Nichols can be reached by email. You are encouraged to write bob.bobnichols@gmail.com "I think it's important to always carry enough technology to restart civilization, should it be necessary." Mark Tilden -------- india India’s special circumstances Sunday, 9th July, 2006 New Vision (Uganda) By Gwynne Dyer http://www.newvision.co.ug/D/8/20/508452 "The deal we made with India was under special circumstances,” said US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in Pakistan on June 28, dodging a question about why Washington is absolving India of its nuclear sins while leaving its old ally Pakistan unshriven. After all, India and Pakistan both tested their nuclear weapons in the same month in 1998. What did Rice mean, “special circumstances”? She meant that India is America’s new ally in the region, and much more important in US strategy nowadays than Pakistan. The military agreement signed by India and the United States in June of last year is the “special circumstances” that make it necessary to exempt India from US anti-proliferation law. The new alliance will be crippled if it doesn’t, so the Bush administration also signed a nuclear deal with India last July and promised to push it through Congress. Existing US law bans the American government from exporting nuclear technology to countries that have not put their own nuclear facilities under full-scope anti-proliferation safeguards. India, like Pakistan, has never signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and has openly tested nuclear weapons, so it falls under that ban — and the prohibition goes much wider than just nuclear reactor parts and fuel. It covers “dual-use” technology that could be used either with conventional weapons or with nuclear ones. As a senior official in the Indian Ministry of External Affairs explained this week, there is so much “dual-use” technology in modern American weaponry that almost any weapon India wants to buy from the US might fall victim to the ban. So if the alliance is to prosper, India must be exempted from the US law. As for Pakistan — well, the circumstances there are not so special. That alliance was concluded a long time ago, and anyway, Pakistan is less important to America’s long-term strategy. All last week, as the law that makes India an exception made its way through the International Relations Committee of the US House of Representatives and the Foreign Relations Committee of the Senate, the Indian media gave breathless, play-by-play reports on its progress, because almost the entire Indian elite believes that becoming America’s primary ally on the Asian mainland will speed the country’s emergence as a great power. With the White House strongly backing the bill and the influential Indo-American community lobbying hard, it passed both committees easily, and its passage by the full House and Senate seems certain. US anti-proliferation activists feel that they have lost a crucial battle, but they haven’t, really. American law was never going to stop India from getting its own nukes, especially when Pakistan was getting nuclear weapons technology from China. The US has been pretty inconsistent in applying the law anyway: it never tries to enforce it against Israel, which has nukes coming out of its ears and has also never signed the NPT. If the battle against proliferation has been lost, it was not lost on this field. What is being lost here is the opportunity to hold a public debate in the United States about the advisability of concluding what amounts to a military alliance with India. Close friendship, strong trade links, all sorts of cooperation between the world’s two largest democracies are undoubtedly good things and much to be desired, but a military alliance is a quite different thing and not so obviously desirable. A military alliance between the world’s sole superpower and one of Asia’s two rising giants cannot fail to be seen as directed against the other Asian giant, China, though almost everybody in New Delhi and many people in Washington strenuously deny it. The risk here is of self-fulfiling prophecy: that by defining China as the potential enemy and taking steps to “contain” it, you convince the Chinese that you are their enemy. Verbal declarations that the alliance is not aimed at China may speak less loudly than arms sales, joint exercises and formal military agreements which suggest that it is. Maybe it is harmless. Maybe the Chinese are ultra-sophisticated people with very steady nerves who will understand that this is merely a precaution in case they turn out to be dangerous when they grow more powerful. But maybe China (like India or America) is run by ordinary people who have great difficulty in seeing the world through someone else’s eyes, in which case they may see the Indian-US alliance as a grave threat. Indians take a hard line on this, pointing out that it is actually India that has been “contained” by China for decades. China gives nuclear weapons and missiles to Pakistan, it maintains close ties with the Burmese military regime, and it supplies Chinese arms practically free to all of India’s other neighbours — all with the goal of pinning India to its own South Asian region and preventing it from playing a wider role in Asia. It largely succeeded until recently, but now it is Beijing’s turn to have to be grown-up about things. Tough. India has behaved quite responsibly over the years, so you can understand why Indians are impatient with such worries. But the US Congress, fixated by the non-proliferation issue, is sleep-walking into a de facto alliance that may end up drawing America and all of Asia into a decades-long strategic confrontation without ever really debating that larger question. Since the ten-year military agreement is not a formal alliance, it will never come before Congress, so this is the only chance. ---- India test-fires nuclear-capable missile Updated 7/9/2006 (AP) http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-07-09-india-missile_x.htm NEW DELHI — India test-fired its new nuclear-capable Agni III missile on Sunday, a news report said. The launch took place at India's main missile testing center in Orissa state in eastern India, Press Trust of India news agency reported. A person who answered the phone at the Defense Ministry said no one was available to comment because the officials involved were all at the test site. The launch of the missile, with a range of 1,865 miles, is seen as a routine test, and not saber-rattling with India's nuclear-armed archrival Pakistan. New Delhi and Islamabad regularly test-fire missiles, but normally only give each other prior notice for long-range launches. It was not immediately clear whether India informed Pakistan ahead of Sunday's test. Indian Defense Minister Pranab Mukherjee was at the launch complex, on Wheeler Island off the Orissa coast, to witness the launch of the missile, PTI reported. The missile was launched at 11:05 Indian time and splashed down near the Nicobar islands in the Bay of Bengal, PTI, quoted defense officials as saying. ---- Facts about India's Agni-III missile NEW DELHI (AFP) Jul 09, 2006 http://www.spacewar.com/2006/060709114656.63ygivgp.html India Sunday successfully carried out a first test of its nuclear-capable Agni-III ballistic missile with a range of 4,000 kilometres (2,480 miles). The Agni, which is Hindi for fire, is one of five missiles being developed by India's Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) under its Integrated Guided Missile Development Programme launched in 1983. DESCRIPTION: Agni-III is a surface-to-surface, two-stage missile. Both the stages are powered by solid propellants. RANGE: 4,000 kilometers (2,480 miles), according to defence ministry officials, and capable of striking targets deep inside China. WARHEAD: Agni-III supports a wide range of warheads, conventional and nuclear, with a payload ranging from 600 to 1,800 kilogrammes (1,320 to 3,960 points) including decoys and other anti-ballistic counter-measures. OTHER FEATURES: The missile can be deployed using rail or road mobile launch vehicles. Is said to have a high degree of accuracy with a medium to large nuclear payload, most likely a 200 to 300 kilotonne warhead. THE AGNI SERIES: The short-range Agni-I was first test-fired in 1989. India last tested the intermediate range Agni-II on August 29, 2004. ---- IDPD Seminar Demands Scrapping of Indo-US Nuclear Deal suklasen From: Sukla Sen Date: 9th July 2006 IDPD SEMINAR DEMANDS SCRAPPING OF INDO-US NUCLEAR DEAL Scrap the Indo – US Nuclear Deal, as this has legitimized the possession of nuclear weapons, added to the nuclear arms race, has made us a puppet of the US imperialism in its designs to dominate the world and will push us towards unending threat of radiations in the name of generating electricity through nuclear energy –which is neither safe nor economical, was the consensual opinion at the seminar organized by the Indian Doctors for Peace and Development (IDPD) and Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament and Peace (CNDP) jointly on 9th July at Ludhiana on Indo – US Nuclear Deal in Whose Benefit in conjunction with the National Coordination Committee meeting of the CNDP on 8- 9 July. The seminar deliberated on various aspects of the India United States nuclear cooperation deal initialed a year ago and during President George Bush’s, visit to India and further debated in the US congress recently. The seminar came to the consensual conclusion that the nuclear deal is undesirable from the point of view of Indian politics as well as the cause of world peace and security. We oppose this deal because precisely it legitimizes nuclear weapons and sets back the prospects of global nuclear abolition on urgent, equitable and non-discriminatory basis. Delivering the main speech, Admiral Ramdas-former chief of Indian Navy, said the essence of the deal lies in making an unprecedented special exception for one country in respect of the global nuclear order by legitimizing its nuclear weapons. Under the agreement India will be allowed to keep 8 out of 22 nuclear reactors out of the civilian category and thus the scope of inspections (safeguards) of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). In addition, all military-nuclear facilities as the Dhruv Plutonium Reactor as well as fast breeder reactors will be exempt from safeguards. This will enable India to considerably develop and produce fissile material for nuclear weapon use. Since this legitimizes India’s nuclear armament, it sets wholly negative example to other countries including Pakistan and North Korea and weakens the case of non-proliferation. Sh.Achin Vanaik a renowned peace activist pointed out that the nuclear deal and the Indo-US defense agreement reinforce the US-India strategic partnership which is itself Washington’s strategy of building a system of alliances to achieve global domination and hegemony. It thus signifies India’s complete abandonment of commitments of non-alignment. This strategic partnership also erodes India’s sovereignty in various forms, the glaring example being India’s recent IAEA vote against Iran. He further said that the only beneficiaries of the deal would be the nuclear lobby in the US and its allies as also the elite in India who will get huge business in this deal. The struggle against the global designs of the nuclear lobby has to be therefore combined with the struggle against the Indian elite and for a just and equitable society. Speaking on the occasion Sh.Praful Bidwai a renowned journalist said that the deal cannot be justified in the name of energy sustainability and countering global warming. This will promote nuclear power – an expensive, hazardous and economically nonviable source, which have become discredited and is being phased out in several parts of the world. India’s experience with the nuclear power has not been a happy one. This will further lead to exposure of our people to the nuclear waste as there is no foolproof method for its management. Nuclear power has not be shown to be an answer to global warming. This will be done at the cost of developing renewable and environmentally sound energy sources despite their proven viability. Dr L.S.Chawla, President IDPD, pointed out that concerned with the health of people, we as doctors are opposed to development of any such methods and technologies which will harm the health and life of our population and the life around. We believe the development and possession of nuclear weapons as evil, immoral and illegal. Therefore it is our duty to oppose any such strategies, which promote these weapons. It is by now a well-researched and proven fact that there is no medical remedy to nuclear fallout. Dr Arun Mitra, General Secretary IDPD, said that we are pained that India which was for long an ardent advocate of disarmament has abandoned this agenda to pursue strategic relationship with a power that is addicted to nuclear weapons. The seminar was attended by a large number of people from all walks of life including doctors and medical students. Several persons participated in the interactive session that followed main speeches and took exception to the role of media in projecting only one-sided rosy picture contrary to the facts. The participants in the discussion wanted information about arms race vs health should be imparted at school level. Dr Arun Mitra General Secretary -------- japan New U.S. warship sails to Japan amid N. Korean missile standoff Updated 7/9/2006 6:01 AM ET (AP) http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-07-08-missile-ship_x.htm TOKYO — A new U.S. guided missile destroyer docked in Japan on Saturday amid tensions over North Korea's missile tests, but the military said the arrival was routine and had been planned months ago. The USS Mustin sailed into the port of Yokosuka, home to the Navy's 7th Fleet, with a crew of 300 for permanent assignment to the region, fleet spokeswoman Hanako Tomizuka said. The Mustin, commissioned in 2003, is one of the most advanced in the fleet. The 509-foot ship carries surface-to-air missiles and Tomahawk cruise missiles. Its deployment to Yokosuka was previously planned and not in response to North Korea's missile tests, the Navy said. "The Mustin is replacing the USS Vandegrift as part of the Navy's long-range plan to routinely replace older ships in its forward-deployed naval force with newer, more capable surface combatants," said Lt. Trey Brown, a Navy spokesman at the Pentagon. "It's routine. We do this all the time." Pyongyang stunned the region Wednesday by test-firing seven missiles. In August, Yokosuka also will welcome the USS Shiloh, which last month demonstrated its ability to shoot down missile warheads in a landmark test off Hawaii. The Shiloh is replacing the USS Chancellorsville. Both the Mustin and the Shiloh are equipped with radar systems that employ Aegis technology, which is geared toward tracking and shooting down enemy missiles. The system was instrumental in identifying and assessing Wednesday's launchings in which all the missiles apparently fell into the Sea of Japan. At least one of those missiles was believed capable of reaching the U.S. mainland. The U.S. Navy now has eight Aegis-equipped vessels at Yokosuka. -------- korea Bush bristles at claim he's failed on nuclear threat Peter Wallsten, Peter Spiegel, Chicago LOS ANGELES TIMES, REUTERS July 9, 2006 The Age (Australia) http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/bush-bristles-at-claim-hes-failed-on-nuclear-threat/2006/07/08/1152240538236.html US PRESIDENT George Bush has defended his policies on North Korea, questioning claims the communist country had become a greater threat since he entered the White House, even before it test-fired seven missiles. Mr Bush said he still did not know if one of the rockets, a long-range missile, was aimed at the US or if it could have travelled that far. But he said the controversial US missile defence system offered a "reasonable" chance of shooting down the missile had it become necessary. Mr Bush grew testy when asked why, if his policies were working, North Korea appeared to be enhancing its nuclear capabilities and growing more aggressive. "These problems didn't arise overnight, and they don't get solved overnight. It takes a while," he said. Mr Bush held an unusual news conference outside of Washington as diplomats continued working at the United Nations on ways to pressure North Korea to turn away from its drive for nuclear weapons and rejoin stalled international talks. Japan and the US are pressing the Security Council to vote tomorrow on sanctions targeting North Korea's missile program, despite opposition from veto-holding members China and Russia. Japan has formally introduced a resolution that would impose sanctions. China's UN ambassador Wang Guangya said if the draft were put to a vote, "there would be no unity" in the council. But he did not say whether China would use its veto to kill the resolution or abstain and let the measure go through. "All possibilities are on the table," he said. The draft resolution comes after North Korea launched at least six missiles early last Wednesday and fired a seventh 12 hours later. The missiles included a long-range Taepodong-2, which some experts said could hit Alaska. US officials said it flew for less than a minute and fell into the sea west of Japan. Japan's revised draft, co-sponsored by the US, Britain and France, says no nation can procure missiles or missile-related "items, materials goods and technology" from North Korea, or transfer financial resources to the isolated communist country's dangerous weapons programs. At his news conference, Mr Bush took pains to counter a question based on intelligence information that North Korea had expanded its nuclear weapons capability in recent years. When a reporter cited such reports, Mr Bush declined to dispute the basis of the question, but challenged the reporter: "Can you verify that? "We don't know — maybe you know more than I do — about increasing the number of nuclear weapons." In a series of congressional hearings last year, top US intelligence officials testified that North Korea's nuclear capability had increased since 2002, when intelligence assessments estimated it possessed one or two nuclear weapons. The issue of North Korea's missiles is contributing to questions about Mr Bush's foreign policy record and his ability to curb nuclear threats. It comes in an election year in which the Republicans have decided they will again campaign on national security and the economy. Mr Bush conceded that the anti-missile system shielding the US from an attack was "modest" and unproven. But he said it was ready for use to shoot down one of the Korean missiles if needed. -------- russia US to dangle nuclear deal in exchange for Russia's help on Iran by Maxim Kniazkov Sun Jul 9, 2006 (AFP) http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060709/wl_afp/usrussianuclear_060709201618 http://www.forbes.com/business/feeds/afx/2006/07/09/afx2866024.html WASHINGTON - The United States said it is beginning negotiations with Russia on a potentially lucrative nuclear energy accord, but made clear any deal would be conditional on Moscow's full cooperation in US attempts to block Iranian nuclear ambitions. Russia and China have been a key impediment to efforts by the United States to rally members of the UN Security Council behind its plan to slap international sanctions on Tehran in order to force it to halt uranium enrichment. The issue is expected to be front and center in negotiations between President George W. Bush and his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, at a Group of Eight summit in St. Petersburg next weekend. Although details of the proposed deal have not been released, it is seen as an attempt by the Bush administration to soften Russia's recalcitrance ahead of the Bush-Putin talks and bring Moscow firmly into the US camp. "We are initiating negotiations on a peaceful nuclear cooperation agreement with Russia," White House spokesman Peter Watkins told AFP on Saturday. "Such an agreement would benefit both the United States and Russia and indeed the world by enabling advances in greater use of nuclear energy." He did not say when the talks would formally begin, but another official speaking on condition of anonymity said a formal announcement could be expected at the G8 summit. The White House official, however, was adamant in linking the deal to Russia's approach to Iran and its readiness to cooperate with the Bush administration in halting what it sees as Iran's secret nuclear weapons program. "We have made clear to Russia that for an agreement on peaceful nuclear cooperation with the United States to go forward, we will need Russia's active cooperation in blocking Iran's attempts to obtain nuclear weapons," Watkins said. "Our policy on assistance to Iran's nuclear program has not changed," he added. Under the proposed deal, Russia could become a key international repository of spent nuclear fuel, including from countries that use US-supplied nuclear reactors, a lucrative arrangement that may also pave the way for it becoming a leading supplier of nuclear technology and fuel around the world, US media reports said. The US government had opposed such cooperation up to now in part because of Russia's assistance to Iran in building a nuclear power plant in Bushehr, a project opposed by the United States. A change in procedures for handling nuclear waste coming from US-built reactors operating overseas will require congressional approval, and there were indications Saturday it may not come easy. Democratic Representative Edward Markey (news, bio, voting record), who co-chairs the Bipartisan Task Force on Nonproliferation, was quoted by The New York Times as saying turning Russia into a nuclear waste dump would create "one-stop shopping for nuclear terrorists and would-be proliferators." Nevertheless, Watkins indicated the deal would be in line with Bush vision for expanded reliance on peaceful nuclear power around the world, provided all the safeguards required by the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty were strictly observed. "The president has said that states that comply with their obligations under the NPT have a right to peacefully use their nuclear energy," he said. The proposed deal, experts said, was also aimed at allaying concerns in Russia that economic sanctions against Iran, a major trading partner, would boomerang against it. Bush hinted at his willingness to address the issue Friday when he told reporters in Chicago that he was determined to bring doubters to America's side. "Some nations are more comfortable with sanctions than other nations, and part of the issue we face in some of these countries is that they've got economic interests," he said. "And part of our objective is to make sure that national security interests, security of the world interests trump economic interests." ---- Russia offered to help N. Korea By Michael Hirst LONDON SUNDAY TELEGRAPH Published July 9, 2006 http://www.washingtontimes.com/functions/print.php?StoryID=20060709-122650-1820r LONDON -- Russia secretly offered to sell North Korea technology that could help the rogue state protect nuclear stockpiles and safeguard weapons secrets from international scrutiny, but officials backed off after the arms flirtation was publicized. Russian officials touted the equipment to the communist regime at an information technology exhibition in Pyongyang late last month -- just days before North Korea sparked international alarm by launching a salvo of short- and long-range missiles into the sea between the Korean Peninsula and Japan. Aleksei Grigoriev, deputy director of Russia's Federal Information Technologies Agency, told a reporter for the Itar-Tass news agency that North Korea planned to buy equipment for the safe storage and transportation of nuclear materials. One of Russia's state-controlled defense companies developed the equipment. The company, Atlas, also drew interest from the North Koreans in security systems and encryption technology, neither of which were on display at the exhibition for security reasons. Word of secret Russian dealings with North Korea's nuclear program presents a potential obstacle to Bush administration plans to share civilian nuclear technology with Moscow. The Washington Post reported yesterday that President Bush intends to announce extensive U.S. civilian nuclear cooperation with Russia in a deal that could be worth billions of dollars. "Such an agreement would benefit both the United States and Russia and indeed the world by enabling advances in and greater use of nuclear energy," White House spokesman Peter Watkins told Reuters news agency in confirming the report. Mr. Grigoriev told Itar-Tass that the main purpose of the June 28 exhibition in Pyongyang was "establishing contacts with the Korean side and discussing future cooperation." He quickly retracted his remarks after they became public. Russia along with China last week opposed a draft U.N. Security Council resolution, proposed by Japan and backed by the United States, that would bar missile-related financial and technology transactions with North Korea because of the Fourth of July missile launches. U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill yesterday expressed support for a Chinese proposal to hold informal six-nation talks on the North Korean nuclear threat and offered to meet bilaterally with the North on the sidelines, the Associated Press reported from Seoul. "As many of you know, the Chinese have talked about putting together a six-party informal, and we both support that and we think that all countries are prepared to come to that informal meeting," Mr. Hill told reporters after meeting with Chun Young-woo, South Korea's top nuclear negotiator. Asked about the possibility of a bilateral meeting with the North, he said: "Within the informal six-party talks, yes, I can. I just can't do it when they are boycotting the six-party talks." The talks involve the two Koreas, the United States, China, Japan and Russia. Mr. Hill was in Seoul as part of a regional tour to coordinate the international response to the North's missile launches. The USS Mustin, an ultramodern destroyer equipped with Aegis missile-tracking technology for tracking and shooting down enemy missiles, docked yesterday at Yokosuka, Japan, home port to the Navy's 7th Fleet. Arrival of the high-tech destroyer had been planned for months, a Navy spokesman said, and was not a direct U.S. reaction to North Korea's missile tests. Sources close to the proposed sale of Russian equipment to the North for civil and military uses said it was evidence of Russia's secret support for its Soviet-era ally, once a bulwark against Chinese influence in the Far East. North Korean military interest in the exhibition reportedly stemmed from the dual purpose of many of the products and technologies on display. After the show, which led to plans for further meetings between the Russian and North Korean delegations, Mr. Grigoriev said Pyongyang's primary interest in buying the equipment was to combat the "threat posed by international terrorism." However, the Russian Embassy in Pyongyang immediately denied the report, saying it was "disinformation." Mr. Grigoriev subsequently denied having spoken to the Itar-Tass reporter. Disclosures of a possible deal are at odds with official Russian policy toward North Korea's nuclear program. On June 22, North Korea's ambassador to Russia, Park Yi-joon, was summoned to the foreign ministry in Moscow and informed that Russia "strongly objects to any actions that can negatively influence regional stability and worsen [the] nuclear crisis on the Korean Peninsula." Western analysts said they would not be surprised if the two countries are discussing sensitive military deals. Nicholas Eberstadt, a North Korea specialist at the American Enterprise Institute, a think tank in Washington, said Russian policy toward North Korea long has been influenced by the desire to restore its Cold War-era influence. "Russia often seems more ambitious to restore that influence than to play a positive role in international affairs," Mr. Eberstadt said. "We've got no reason to doubt that Moscow is playing a double game with North Korea." • A special correspondent in Pyongyang contributed to this report. -------- treaties Non-proliferation policy full of inconsistencies, critics say By Stephen J. Hedges Chicago Tribune Sun, Jul. 09, 2006 http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/newssentinel/news/editorial/15002371.htm WASHINGTON - Even as it condemns North Korea and Iran over nuclear proliferation, the Bush administration, with the help of Congress, may soon extend an unusual package of nuclear aid to India, a nation engaged in its own volatile arms race with Pakistan. Last week key Senate and House committees approved legislation, sponsored in part by Rep. Henry Hyde, R-Ill., that would give India nuclear technology and nearly 150 tons annually of enriched U.S. uranium, in addition to the 300 tons that India produces on its own each year. The measure still requires full House and Senate approval. The administration is promoting the legislation as a means of keeping India on its roster of important allies, though critics say the measure will promote India's efforts to improve its nuclear weapons. With the committee approvals, the bill is now more likely to win full congressional approval. India has not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, a required step among nations seeking U.N. respectability while pursuing nuclear technology. It exploded a bomb in 1974 and has made no secret of its nuclear capabilities, especially in its tense border standoff with Pakistan. On Sunday, India announced a test-firing of its longest-range missile capable of carrying a nuclear warhead. "There's a lot of mixed feelings about the Indian deal," said a U.S. government official familiar with the issue. "The issue is that we want to recognize India as a major country, as a major democracy and as a possible counterfoil to growing Chinese power. But this is a fairly controversial policy within the government." Complicating matters further is that the U.S. considers rivals India and Pakistan to be key allies in the global war on terror; Washington has provided millions in military aid and sales to each since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Is the administration's Indian uranium deal a bit of clever brinkmanship in an increasingly nuclear Asia? Or does it send a mixed message to terror-war ally Pakistan, and to nuclear aspirants Iran and North Korea, with which the U.S. is taking a harder diplomatic line? There aren't ready answers to those questions, which critics say reflect the uncertainty and internal contradictions in the Bush administration's non-proliferation policy. It also may reflect the difficulty in crafting a consistent international nuclear policy at a time when an increasing number of smaller nations, not just world powers, are developing nuclear weapons. As if to underscore the complexity of the Bush non-proliferation policy, the White House has acknowledged Bush is considering reversing a long-standing prohibition against nuclear cooperation with Russia. The deal would allow Russia to import spent nuclear fuel from U.S.-made power reactors operating in third countries. "There do seem to be some contradictions," said Nicholas Eberstadt, a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute who has written on negotiating with North Korea. "My impression is that the U.S. government does not have a North Korea policy, or for that matter, an Iran policy. We've got an attitude, but we don't have any coherent approach to connect that attitude to results." That became evident last week, when North Korea test-fired seven missiles July 4 and 5. The test flights included the long-range Taepodong-2 missile, which apparently failed within a minute of its launch. Bush consulted with North Korea's neighbor states, including China and South Korea, and urged unified condemnation of the tests. A U.N. Security Council resolution condemning the tests is also likely, although it may be not as strongly worded as the Bush administration wants. But those steps stand in contrast to the hard line that Bush and his non-proliferation team took with North Korea just a few years ago. After declaring a decade of negotiations a failure, Bush's negotiators in October 2002 exposed Pyongyang's clandestine nuclear enrichment activities. The president bundled North Korea into his "axis of evil" speech, which also labeled Iran and Iraq as rogue states. Since then, however, efforts to negotiate a solution with North Korea have settled into a game of international name-calling. Pursuing a strategy that also engaged North Korea's four influential neighbors - China, South Korea, Japan and Russia - the administration has worked through three years of talks with little to show for it. After the diplomatic uproar over its tests last week, North Korea defiantly threatened to conduct more missile tests. One of the administration's most aggressive hawks on the North Korea issue, John Bolton, is now U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. But Bolton's move to the U.N. may have undermined those who insist that tough action, such as airstrikes, must be taken against North Korea now to prevent a nuclear threat later. During his visit to Chicago on Friday, Bush said, "Part of our strategy, as you know, has been to have others at the table, to say as clearly as possible to the North Koreans, `Get rid of your weapons and there's a better way forward.'" Nicholas Burns, the under secretary of state, said Sunday that the U.S. is counting on help from China when it comes to curbing North Korea's missile and nuclear programs. "Frankly, we think it's time for China to use its influence with North Korea," Burns said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "The Chinese have influence, certainly more than the United States, and the other members of the international community dealing with this problem." Japan hopes to get a vote Monday on its proposed Security Council resolution calling for sanctions against North Korea. But South Korea said Japan may be overreacting to the missile tests. "There is no reason to fuss over this from the break of dawn like Japan, but every reason to do the opposite," said a statement from President Roh Moo-hyun's office. Some arms control analysts counsel against a rush to judgment on North Korea. The tests, they argue, may be as much a political necessity inside North Korea, where leader Kim Jong Il remains heavily dependent on his million-man military. "He's anchored on the military," said Lawrence Scheinman, an arms control negotiator during the Clinton administration who now teaches at the Monterey Institute in Washington. "Without the military, there's not Kim Jong Il. They need each other." Flexing the missile muscle, Scheinman said, is a way for the mercurial Kim to keep his military leaders happy while shoring up his own power base. Recognizing that internal dynamic is one reason some counsel against a harsh response to the North Korean tests, he said. But talks alone don't resolve the inconsistencies in the administration's non-proliferation policy. Scheinman recently co-wrote a paper urging the administration to recognize the nuclear weapons programs of Israel, India and Pakistan, none of which has signed the non-proliferation treaty. The Bush administration last spring backed the India uranium deal, despite the fact that India already produces enough uranium for use in its nuclear-power industry. Shipments of U.S. uranium to India, critics of the deal argue, could be diverted to Indian efforts to build a smaller, lighter nuclear warhead. As for international scrutiny, it will be limited to India's 14 civilian nuclear facilities if the U.S. aid deal goes through. India isn't an NPT signatory, and might have to renounce the production of nuclear weapons if it were to sign up today. -------- MILITARY -------- us Court Allows Sonar in RIMPAC War Games With New Restrictions LOS ANGELES, California, July 9, 2006 (ENS) http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jul2006/2006-07-09-01.asp The U.S. Navy will be permitted to use mid-frequency sonar during the eight nation Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) military exercises now taking place in the waters near Hawaii. The federal judge who last week issued a temporary restraining order against the sonar, which is known to injure and kill whales and dolphins, has approved a settlement between the Navy and conservation groups that permits sonar training. The Navy filed an emergency motion with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco Wednesday seeking to reinstate active sonar use. The settlement agreement, approved Friday by Judge Florence-Marie Cooper of the U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, requires new safeguards, including a 25 nautical mile sonar-free buffer zone around the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands Marine National Monument created in June by President George W. Bush. It also provides for increases in monitoring for marine mammals during all sonar drills. The month long exercise off the coast of Hawaii involves more than 19,000 military members from eight nations. Sonar training starts this week. Navy officials say mid-range active sonar is the most effective tool for hunting submarines. "This settlement confirms that measures to protect our oceans can and must be part of the Navy’s training for submarine defense," said Joel Reynolds, a senior attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and director of its Marine Mammal Protection Project. The NRDC was one of the plaintiff groups whose lawsuit against the Navy led to the temporary restraining order issued by Judge Cooper July 3. Other plaintiffs were the International Fund for Animal Welfare, the Cetacean Society International, the Ocean Futures Society (OFS), and (OFS) founder and director Jean-Michel Cousteau. The settlement requires all Navy personnel listening through underwater detection microphones to monitor for marine mammals and report the detection of any marine mammal to the appropriate watch station for action. It requires aerial surveillance for marine mammals during sonar drills and the reporting of sightings to a marine mammal response officer. The Navy is required to have at least one dedicated and three non-dedicated marine mammal observers on every surface sonar vessel during all sonar drills, and to add an additional dedicated marine mammal observer during the three exercises occurring in channels between the islands. The Navy also is required to publicize in the local Hawaii media a hotline for reporting marine mammal incidents. "We are pleased that the highest leadership in the U.S. Navy hierarchy has agreed to protective measures never before included in RIMPAC exercises," said Richard Kendall, a senior litigation partner at the Los Angeles law firm of Irell & Manella, co-counsel with NRDC in the lawsuit. "This is a significant step forward in the protection of our oceans." "We work very closely with people to explain to them all the mitigation procedures that we already have in effect," said Vice Admiral Barry Costello, RIMPAC 2006 coalition task force commander. "The additional lookout training, the additional aerial surveillance … if we sight any marine mammals we decrease the power of our sonars or turn them off, depending on the situation," he said. RIMPAC is the world's largest biennial maritime exercise. Conducted in the waters off Hawaii, RIMPAC brings together military forces from Australia, Canada, Chile, Japan, Peru, South Korea, the United Kingdom and the United States. RIMPAC has been going on for 35 years," said Admiral Costello. "We've done 20 of these [exercises]. We've been good stewards of the environment and we intend fully to continue to be that way." The Department of Defense has authorized a six month national defense exemption from requirements of the Marine Mammal Protection Act for naval activity involving mid-frequency active sonar use during major training exercises and on established ranges and operating areas. The U.S. Navy says it sought the exemption in response to the conservationists' lawsuit. Reynolds said, "Military readiness does not require, and our laws do not allow, our natural resources to be sacrificed in the name of national defense. That is a false choice, and this lawsuit has vindicated the essential principle that none of us, including the Navy, is above the law." Whales exposed to high-intensity mid-frequency sonar have stranded themselves and died on beaches around the world. During the last RIMPAC exercises in 2004, 150 melon-headed whales beached themselves in Hanalei Bay on the island of Kauai after sonar was used in the area. Other marine mammal strandings in Washington state, North Carolina and the Bahamas have been linked to sonar blasts. Whales and dolphins have beached with bleeding around the brain and in the ears and severe lesions in their organ tissue. One of the best-documented incidents took place in the Bahamas, in March 2000, when 16 whales of four species stranded along 150 miles of shoreline as ships blasted the area with sonar. The U.S. Navy later acknowledged in an official report that its use of sonar was the likely cause of the stranding. The Bahamas stranding incident was the first case in which researchers were able to collect fresh specimens from whale carcasses to allow research to investigate the causes of these whale strandings. Necropsy results revealed internal bleedings around ear organs and brains. During the last RIMPAC exercise in 2004, there was a mass stranding of more than 150 melon-headed whales in Kauai. A federal government investigation concluded that the Navy’s sonar use was the "plausible, if not likely" cause of the stranding. At lower intensities, the loud sonar can interfere with the ability of marine mammals to navigate, avoid predators, find food, and care for their young. Friday's settlement has no bearing on the lawsuit brought by NRDC and other groups last October over the Navy’s use of mid-frequency sonar in other training exercises. That lawsuit is still pending in federal court in Los Angeles. -------- POLITICS -------- propaganda wars 'Axis of Evil:' Times Call For Diplomacy -- But From Whom? by Joseph L. Galloway Sunday, July 9, 2006 by the Miami Herald http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0709-24.htm It was 4 ½ years ago, in his first State of the Union speech, that President Bush declared that North Korea, Iran and Iraq constituted an ''axis of evil'' arming themselves to threaten the peace of the world. At that moment North Korea was the only one of the three rogue nations that was thought to have one or more nuclear weapons. Iran even then had nuclear ambitions and, of the three, was the only one with confirmed ties to international terrorist groups that posed a direct threat to the United States. So what did this president do? He took direct aim at the least dangerous of the three -- Iraq -- and marched us off into the swamps of an unending war that revealed the weaknesses of both our target and ourselves. The more threatening of the three -- Iran and North Korea -- were treated to years of benign neglect by Washington while our focus and national efforts were on toppling Saddam Hussein's brutal government and an amateurish quest to plant Jeffersonian democracy in some of the most infertile soil in the Middle East. The United States has declared its anti-missile missile system is ready for use, but it hasn't been fully tested yet -- meaning it hasn't proved capable of intercepting and killing any missile in real-world conditions. North Korea tested a long-range missile on Tuesday -- a provocation even if the missile did flop in less than 40 seconds. And Iran is continuing its program to enrich uranium, a process that could be used to make material for weapons if the processing is done at high enough levels. For 4 ½ years the Bush administration steered clear of diplomacy, leaving negotiations over Iran's nuclear ambitions in the hands of European countries, which have their own economic interests in Iran. And the six-nation talks on ending North Korea's nuclear programs haven't yielded much. So let's review the bidding in this situation. We threaten to use our unproved missile defense system against a nonworking North Korean long-range missile even as we demand that Iran first shut down its uranium enrichment facilities before negotiations on the problem can begin. Over in the Pentagon they are doing contingency planning for air strikes to knock out the Iranian nuke facilities. Air Force planners, singing a song almost as old as the one about the wild blue yonder, tell their bosses that they could knock out 85 percent of the Iranian facilities with pinpoint bombing. Or they could (if they knew where all of them were located) -- and by the way, would we mind if they used small nuclear bombs on those targets? Wiser heads among the senior military leaders have cautioned that we would do well to consider the fallout, nuclear weapons aside, from such an attack on Iran. The Iranians could: • Shut off their oil exports and kick the price of a barrel of oil more than $100 a barrel overnight. • Sink a supertanker or two in the Persian Gulf and kick that price far higher. • Intervene in Iraq, directly or indirectly through their Shiite brothers, and give our already hard-pressed soldiers and Marines a real nightmare situation to deal with on the ground. • Signal their terrorist clients to launch all-out attacks on American interests wherever possible. One would think that Bush and his people might have learned something in their time in power about the real world and the very real consequences of making threats and acting precipitously, and thinking about it later, if at all. We have come upon perilous times, and they call for smart, skillful diplomacy of a sort that hasn't exactly been the strongest suit of those who are in charge of our fate and future. Joseph L. Galloway is former senior military correspondent for Knight Ridder Newspapers. -------- voting Contender Alleges Mexico Vote Was Rigged Populist's Plan for Legal Challenge Ignites Boisterous Crowd at Massive Rally in Capital By Manuel Roig-Franzia Washington Post Foreign Service Sunday, July 9, 2006; A01 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/08/AR2006070801010_pf.html MEXICO CITY, July 8 -- Downtown Mexico City swelled Saturday with the accumulated frustration and rage of the poor, who were stoked into a sign-waving, fist-pumping frenzy by new fraud allegations that failed populist candidate Andrés Manuel López Obrador hopes will overturn the results of Mexico's presidential election. López Obrador ignited the smoldering emotions of his followers Saturday morning, alleging for the first time that Mexico's electoral commission had rigged its computers before the July 2 election to ensure the half-percentage-point victory of Felipe Calderón, a champion of free trade. In a news conference before the rally, López Obrador called Calderón "an employee" of Mexico's powerful upper classes and said a victory by his conservative opponent would be "morally impossible." López Obrador added a new layer of complexity to the crisis by saying he not only would challenge the results in the country's special elections court but also would attempt to have the election declared illegal by Mexico's Supreme Court. That strategy presages a constitutional confrontation because according to many legal experts the special elections court is the only body that can hear election challenges. Calderón was declared the winner Thursday and has begun publicly presenting his plans for Mexico, even though López Obrador has refused to concede. European Union election observers have said they found no significant irregularities in the vote, and many Mexicans appeared to accept Calderón as their next president. López Obrador's approach pairs legal maneuvers with mass public pressure. On Saturday, he gave a mega-display of street power, drawing an estimated 280,000 people into the city center on a humid, drizzly afternoon, according to a Mexico City government estimate. The crowd chanted, "Strong, strong!" when López Obrador stepped to the microphone. The former Mexico City mayor then declared that the electoral commission had "played with the hopes" of millions of Mexicans by allegedly rigging the vote total. Thousands chanted back: "You are not alone!" López Obrador also told the crowd that he was organizing a march to the capital Wednesday from all over Mexico, including states hundreds of miles distant. "This is, and will continue to be, a peaceful movement," he said. Seconds later, he announced another mass rally, this one for July 16, at which the crowd raucously yelled back: "What time?" During his 40-minute address, López Obrador stressed Mexico's class divide, accusing "powerful interests" of trying to deny democratic freedoms to "us, the poor." The crowd, which spilled into side streets off the square and may have been the largest of the presidential campaign, chanted, "Presidente, Presidente!" Blaring kazoos competed with the thump and boom of massive speakers blasting salsa rhythms and a Spanish-language homage to López Obrador set to the tune of the American pop song, "Love Is in the Air." López Obrador had called his followers into the large downtown square, the Zocalo, the backdrop for generations of Mexican revolutionary fervor, to lay out his long-shot case for overturning Calderón's apparent presidential victory. But he got more than that: He got a moment of mass catharsis, an outrageously loud, communal venting. "The Mexican people are awakening," said Martín García Trujillo, a farm laborer from the state of Michoacan who had left at midnight for the six-hour bus ride to the capital. "We know Andrés Manuel won. They just won't let it happen. We can't take this anymore." López Obrador wants a vote-by-vote count, which would require opening sealed vote packets from more than 130,000 polling stations. Electoral commission officials have sided with Calderón's strategists, who argue that the law does not allow for the packets to be opened unless tally sheets attached to the packets appear to have been altered. López Obrador said that only 2,600 vote packets were opened Tuesday and Wednesday during a marathon official count, which shrank Calderón's lead from 400,000 votes after a preliminary vote to 230,000. Thousands of López Obrador's supporters, many of whom had marched across the city for hours, chanted "Voto por voto, casilla por casilla" -- vote by vote, polling place by polling place -- as they streamed into the Zocalo on Saturday. Many entered the square waving the yellow flags of López Obrador's Democratic Revolutionary Party, or PRD. Street vendors hawked T-shirts bearing the now-ubiquitous cartoon depiction of López Obrador's face next to the word "Smile." Speakers screamed, "Vote by vote!" as their images flickered across a huge screen suspended above the stage. x "They stole this from us," said Concepción Myen, 68, a lifelong Mexico City resident who is unemployed. "This is the worst thing that can happen to Mexico."x Myen personifies the López Obrador target voter. She is a senior citizen and said she had looked forward to the monthly pensions López Obrador promised. She is also a single mother, who struggled to raise her child alone, and said her life would have been much better if the aid program López Obrador had vowed to give single mothers had existed when she needed it. The anger on display in the square grows from decades of perceived indignities and a sense of persecution by a succession of ruling parties. García Trujillo, the farm worker from Michoacan, recalled feeling the same anguish in 1988 when the PRD candidate, Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas, lost a presidential race that many international observers have said was stolen by the Institutional Revolutionary Party, or PRI. He said he felt the same rage two years ago when outgoing President Vicente Fox's administration unsuccessfully attempted to impeach López Obrador, who was then the mayor of Mexico City. Now García Trujillo's anger is directed at another institutional power, Mexico's Federal Electoral Institute, which has a stellar international reputation but is accused by López Obrador of "manipulating" the results. The electoral institute will cede control of the election to Mexico's special elections court, which has until Sept. 6 to decide whether to certify the results. Calderón has not waited for the elections court, and neither have world leaders. He accepted congratulatory calls on Friday from President Bush and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper. But López Obrador cautioned against such formalities, saying, "Right now, there is no president-elect." After López Obrador left the stage Saturday, the crowd lingered. Someone started singing the national anthem, and countless voices joined in its rallying cry: "Mexicans, to the shout of war!" -------- ACTIVISTS Wisconsin Green Party and Libertarian Party of Wisconsin Call for Impeachment of George W. Bush Wisconsin Green Party July 9th, 2006 http://www.gp.org/press/states/wi_2006_07_09b.shtml Contacts: Bob Poeschl, Co-chair, Wisconsin Green Party, 920-312-0529, carpepax@riseup.net Ruth Weill, Co-chair, Wisconsin Green Party, 414-350-2107, moondog@execpc.com Rolf Lindgren, Libertarian Party; 608-279-5889 or RolfL@tds.net MADISON -- Today the Wisconsin Green Party and Libertarian Party of Wisconsin issued a joint called for Congress to initiate the impeachment of George W. Bush. The grounds for impeachment include: * President George Bush made false statements to Congress, the American people, and the world to win support for actions by the United States government and military forces in violation of the U.S. Constitution, Charter of the United Nations, and other international laws. Evidence has emerged that the intelligence agencies of the United States had repeatedly informed the President that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction or means to threaten the United States, and that alleged evidence produced by the administration was fraudulent. * President George Bush violated the U.S. Constitution by seizing military powers reserved to the U.S. Congress. Our Founding Fathers made it very clear in the text of the Constitution that the decision to declare war must be debated by the People, through their representatives in Congress, before such an important decision can be made. * President George Bush authorized warrant-less searches of U.S. citizens, not authorized by the U.S. Constitution. The Bush administration defended warrant-less searches by deeming them an emergency power of the Commander-in-Chief, however President Bush had no such powers as Commander-in-Chief since there was no Congressional declaration of war. * President Bush authorized the denial of due process, extraordinary rendition, secret detention centers, and torture at various sites, including Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay, thus violating U.S. and international law. Other war crimes, which require impeachment if based on White House orders, include the military targeting of journalists, individual reporters as well as television stations (Al Jazeera and Abu Dhabi), and looting of hospitals, museums, and private homes. In addition both parties call for the investigation into whether President George Bush authorized the use of depleted uranium and cluster bombs in the preemptive invasion of Iraq, and whether the military targeting of journalists, individual reporters and television stations (Al Jazeera and Abu Dhabi), and the looting of hospitals, museums and private homes were based upon White House orders. The High Crimes of President George Bush have lead to: * Thousands of deaths of U.S. citizens * Millions of U.S. citizens have had their privacy violated by their own government * Billions of tax dollars wasted The Wisconsin Green Party is an affiliate of the Green Party of the United States, which passed a resolution calling for the impeachment of George W. Bush at its annual meeting in July, 2003. The Libertarian Party of Wisconsin made a decision to call for impeachment at their June, 2006 meeting. Together, we call for the 117th U.S. Congress to begin impeachment Proceedings against President George Bush. For more information visit: The Wisconsin Green Party www.wisconsingreenparty.org The Libertarian Party of Wisconsin http://www.lpwi.org/pws/ Release of Green Party of the United States calling for impeachment http://www.gp.org/press/pr_07_21_03.html Libertarian Federal Candidate: Dave Redick for U.S. Senate www.redick2006.com Wisconsin Green Party Federal Candidates: Rae Vogeler for U.S. Senate www.voterae.org Bob Levis for U.S. Congress, 5th CD www.boblevis.org Mike Miles for U.S. Congress, 7th CD www.milesforcongress.org