NucNews August 22, 2006 -------- NUCLEAR -------- china First nuclear power project in northeastern China to start constructionnext year August 22. INTERFAX-CHINA http://www.interfax.com/4/186238/news.aspx Shanghai. The China Guangdong Nuclear Power Holding Co., Ltd. (CGNPC) has signed an investment contract with local partners for construction of the Hongyan River nuclear power project in Dalian, Liaoning Province. Li Zhiyuan, a PR official with the CGNPC, told Interfax that the project would apply CPR 1000 PWR technology based on the second-phase of the Ling'ao project in Guangdong Province, and most of the equipment would be made in China. According to state requirements, the project needs to use more domestically-made equipment than the second-phase of Ling'ao, which used 50% and 70% of Chinese technology in its two generators. According to the contract, the main project, including two 1,000-MW generation units over the first phase, will start construction next September and will go into commercial operation in 2012. An office was set up as early as March 2004 to handle the preparatory work for the project. In May, the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) released a notice approving the launch of preparatory construction for the project, the first such nuclear power project to get the NDRC go-ahead during the 2006 to 2010 period. The excavation of two nuclear islands was kicked off at the end of this June. -------- depleted uranium Public comment opens on plan to cleanup Livermore Lab testing pits By Betsy Mason CONTRA COSTA TIMES Tue, Aug. 22, 2006 http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/breaking_news/15334631.htm ALTAMONT HILLS - The public has 30 days to comment on a plan to clean up an area of Lawrence Livermore Laboratory's Site 300 near Tracy used for research and testing of non-nuclear weapons, testing that resulted in the release of contaminants to the environment. The Department of Energy's plan, released Monday, involves cleaning up an area called Pit 7 in the northwestern part of Site 300, which is 13 miles southeast of the main Lawrence Livermore lab facility. The unlined landfill pits there contain debris from 30 years of explosives tests that is contaminated with volatile organic compounds, nitrate, perchlorate, tritium and depleted uranium. The DOE discovered in 1982 that during periods of heavy rainfall, the groundwater level is high enough to reach the bottom of the toxic landfills. Site 300 made the Environmental Protection Agency's list of prioroites for cleanup in 1990. The DOE's proposal includes cleaning tainted groundwater and isolating polluted soil and landfill waste. Drainage diversions would be built, and ground water would be pumped and treated. The DOE estimates it could take 150 years for the ground water to return to acceptable contaminant levels. However, tritium -- one of the worst pollutants in the landfill -- would take only 45 years. Betsy Mason covers science and the national laboratories. Reach her at bmason@cctimes.com or 925-847-2158. WHERE TO SEE THE DOCUMENTS: TO COMMENT ON THE PROPOSAL: • http://www-envirinfo.llnl.gov • Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Discovery Center, located off Greenville Road near Old Patterson Pass Road, Livermore, CA (925) 422-3272. • Tracy Public Library, 20 East Eaton Avenue, Tracy, CA (209)835-2221 • Department of Toxic Substances Control, File Room, 700 Heinz Avenue, Berkeley, CA 94710 (510) 540-3800 WHERE TO SEE THE DOCUMENTS: TO COMMENT ON THE PROPOSAL: Send written comments by Sept. 21 • Claire Holtzapple, National Environmental Policy Act Document Manager U.S. Department of Energy/National Nuclear Security Administration Livermore Site Office M/S L-574, P.O. Box 808, Livermore, CA 94551-0808 • or email Claire.Holtzapple@oak.doe.gov ---- Whose war is it? Hamid Golpira, August 22, 2006 Uruknet http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m26023&l=i&size=1&hd=0 What exactly is happening in Iraq and whose war is it, anyway? Many argue that it is an imperialist war for conquest and control of vast oil reserves, but that does not seem to be the case. The realpolitik of the 21st century is far more sophisticated than the colonialism of the 19th century. Political analysts compare the occupation of Iraq to the Vietnam War. They are correct to make the comparison, but mostly for the wrong reasons. The U.S. military and government lost the Vietnam War. Yet, it is said that some elements in the United States won the Vietnam War. How can that be? The U.S. military-industrial complex earned billions and billions of dollars during the Vietnam War. This was the main objective of the major stockholders, and they didn’t care who won the war on the ground. Now it seems that history is repeating itself, since the U.S. military-industrial complex is earning billions from the war in Iraq, with U.S. taxpayers footing the bill. "No blood for oil" is the slogan of the peace activists, but this war is not about oil. The extraction of oil requires engineers and oil workers. The occupying forces have used over 500 tons of depleted uranium munitions in Iraq. On impact, a certain percentage of the DU fragments into dust, meaning thousands of kilos of uranium dust are blowing in the wind in Iraq, contaminating the people, the land, waterways, and crops and leaving large sections of the country an irradiated wasteland. Very few engineers and oil workers will want to work in such an environment, so how can the war be about oil? Yet, the so-called peace activists keep up the chorus about blood for oil. They do not realize they are being manipulated by forces that seek to neutralize the peace movement. During the Vietnam War, peace activists were tricked into believing the peace movement was a one-issue struggle. Thus, when the war finally ended, most of them thought they had won, since their one issue had been resolved. One day, the U.S. troops and their allies will leave Iraq, and most of the peace activists will retire from the struggle, just like an earlier generation of peace activists did after the Vietnam War, if all goes according to the evil plan. The U.S. military-industrial complex will have made their billions, and those who sought to damage the gene pool of the Iraqi nation will also have attained their goal. In addition, those who sought to neutralize the peace movement will have realized their objective. However, there are still some things that peace activists can do now to prevent this bleak scenario from unfolding. Many U.S. soldiers who served in Iraq have contracted Persian Gulf War Syndrome, a mysterious illness with no known cause, but which is probably caused by exposure to the uranium dust from DU weapons. If a common struggle were to be established uniting the victims of depleted uranium munitions in the East and the West, maybe something could be accomplished. An Iraqi citizen could very well say to a U.S. soldier: "GI Joe, don’t you get it? Wipe that uranium dust out of your eyes and take a good look at what’s happening. The same people who are killing us, are killing you, too." The military-industrial complex killing machine is basically a money-making machine. Therefore, it should be sued for damages. And there could be very many plaintiffs. At the height of the DU bombing, higher levels of radioactivity were even recorded in Britain. Radiation detectors at the Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE) in Aldermaston and four other stations recorded a fourfold increase in uranium levels in the atmosphere within a few weeks after the attack on Iraq began in March 2003. Furthermore, some physicians have put forth the theory that the worldwide rise in diabetes over the past few years is due to the use of depleted uranium weapons on battlefields across the globe, since the wind carried the uranium dust all over the planet. Governments responsible for war crimes like the use of DU weapons and the targeting of civilians should be tried at the International Court of Justice in The Hague. Charges should be filed against government officials and executives of the military-industrial complex involved in these war crimes at the International Criminal Court in The Hague. Corporations that produce depleted uranium and other weapons of mass destruction that have been used against civilians should be sued for damages in national courts that have jurisdiction. This won’t bring back the people who have been killed or cure the people affected by DU weapons or maimed, but it would be an effort to put the military-industrial complex killing machine out of business, which is what the peace activists say they are trying to do in the first place. :: The incoming address of this article is : http://anonyblog.com/archives/002814.html ---- Post-Conflict Assessment Sought for Lebanon BEIRUT, Lebanon, August 22, 2006 (ENS) http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/aug2006/2006-08-22-01.asp The international environmental group Friends of the Earth is appealing to the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) to send a team from its Post-Conflict Branch to Lebanon and Israel to conduct an independent assessment of the environmental impacts of the recent war between Hezbollah and Israel. In the past, the UNEP Post-Conflict Assessment Branch has conducted investigations in Afghanistan, the Balkans, Iraq, Kosovo, Liberia, Macedonia and Albania, the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Serbia, Somalia, and Sudan. Gidon Bromberg, Israeli director of Friends of the Earth Middle East, said, "The Post-Conflict Branch of the United Nations Environmental Programme should send a team to Israel and Lebanon as soon as possible. The environmental damage caused by the Hezbollah-Israel war must be analyzed." "The purpose of such an assessment is to remove politics from the issue of environmental protection," Bromberg said. "Documenting the consequences of war on the shared environment of Israel and Lebanon highlights the loss to both nations, and therefore an impartial UNEP report would contribute to confidence-building in the region." Bromberg is particularly concerned about possible Israeli use of ammunition containing depleted uranium. "Allegations currently made such as those concerning the Israeli use of ammunition with depleted uranium need to be either substantiated or rejected based on a scientific and impartial investigation," he said. The British media reported that U.S. cargo planes filled with depleted uranium munitions had landed at Prestwick airport, near Glasgow, for refuelling before delivering the weapons to the Israeli armed forces. On July 21, Indymedia UK reported that photos taken near the Lebanese border on July 14 by David Silverman showed Israeli soldiers loading depleted uranium shells into tanks. The Lebanese Environment Ministry shares these concerns. In a statement earlier this month on the environmental effects of the conflict, the ministry said, "There has been mention in different sources that Israel has been using artillery that contains depleted uranium. The effects of these weapons, as has happened in Iraq, are long term and impact the human gene pool and spans generations." The ministry is worried about air pollution, saying in a statement August 5, "The particulate air matter that are emitted by the bombing of buildings and infrastructure and that are carried by the air can cause breathing problems." Piles of decomposing solid waste on roads and pathways are producing methane and volatile organic compounds. "Due to the war, the evacuation of the workers that were integral to the collection of the solid waste led to the piling up of the waste in the streets which has started to decompose due to the heat and has caused the spread of bad smells and can lead to the spread of diseases, insects and vermin," the ministry said. Pollutants in the air can cause an increase in respiratory illnesses such as asthma and allergies. In addition, the bombardments have caused an increase in acid rain and in the emission of greenhouse gases that will impact climate change, the ministry said. Most of the hundreds of thousands of Lebanese who fled the month long conflict have gone back to their homes since the UN Security Council mandated ceasefire, only to face shortages of clean water and shelter, according to UN agencies. “I have never seen destruction like this,” said UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) water and sanitation specialist Branislav Jekic, after the agency conducted preliminary assessments in southern Lebanon. “Wherever we go, we ask people what they need most and the answer is always the same - water.” "People want to move back to their communities. But whether they stay or not will depend on the availability of water," said Jekic. UNICEF says that in 10 out of 12 war affected communities visited by agency personnel, underground pipes and other water infrastructure has been seriously damaged or destroyed. The Israeli bombardment of the Jiyyah power plant south of Beirut in mid-July spilled 10,000 to 15,000 metric tons of heavy fuel into the sea. Winds and currents have pushed the oil north to Tartous in Syria. The pollution from the oil spill has effected private and public rocky and sandy beaches as well as private and public ports and marinas and fishermen’s wharves. Aerial surveys, by helicopter and by plane are now underway to determine the extent of the spill since the Israeli Environment Minister Monday gave assurance of safe passage for surveillance planes. Speaking in Brussels, Fouad Hamdan, director of Friends of the Earth Europe, said, "Local environmental groups in Lebanon are ready to send hundreds of volunteers to the beaches to start massive cleanup operations. But they need basic materials like boots, shovels and buckets. This is where the EU can help without bureaucratic hurdles so that cleanup work can finally move from the stage of planning to implementation." "The more we wait, the more irreversible damage there will be along the Lebanese and Syrian coasts. The EU should swiftly send boats to the region that can suck oil from the water surface," Hamdan said. "Friends of the Earth Middle East and Friends of the Earth Europe are ready to contribute in any possible way," he offered. In addition to the oil catastrophe, Hezbollah missiles and Israeli bombing led to hundreds of fires destroying large forest areas in both countries. In Israel, more then half a million trees have been burned in about 500 fires. Planning for sustainable reforestation should now begin both in Israel and in Lebanon, environmental groups advise. A team from the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, UNIFIL, today destroyed more unexploded ordnance in the south of the country in a controlled explosion, the mission said today. UNIFIL is conducting humanitarian work for Lebanese civilians and also coordinates troop movements as part of the international agreement signed August 14 that ended the recent fighting. Unexploded ordnance litters many areas in the south of Lebanon and will take months to clear, the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) said yesterday, warning that de-mining will take up to six months in the region of Nabatiye alone. UN agencies now are working with the government on a public awareness campaign on the dangers posed by the unexploded ordnance. Since the beginning of the crisis on July 12, more than a quarter of a million liters of bottled water have been sent to some of the worst-hit communities including Bint Jubail, Ait el Shaab and Tibnin. UNICEF says that around 50,000 liters a week are being sent south by truck, but this quantity will more than double by the weekend. UNIFIL said it is keeping up its distribution of clean water to villages in the south, handing out 45,000 liters of drinking water in El Khiam, Kafer Kela and Ebel Es Saqi. The lead UN agency for the logistics of transporting humanitarian aid to and within Lebanon, the World Food Programme has launched a three month US$8.9 million emergency operation to feed over 300,000 people in Lebanon and Syria. ---- Lebanese Scientist: Israeli Bomb Contained Radioactive Materials Tuesday, August 22nd, 2006 Headlines Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/08/22/1421201 The Daily Star of Beirut is reporting a leading Lebanese scientist has discovered a crater caused by an Israeli bomb that contains a high degree of unidentified radioactive materials. The bomb landed in the Lebanese town of Khiam. It caused a crater 10 feet deep and 30 feet wide. The National Council for Scientific Research is planning to test samples from the site. -------- iran Iran says it seeks fresh nuclear talks with West Tue Aug 22, 2006 10:33 AM ET (Reuters) By Edmund Blair http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2006-08-22T143251Z_01_BLA127291_RTRUKOC_0_US-NUCLEAR-IRAN.xml&src=082206_1044_TOPSTORY_iran_seeks_fresh_talks TEHRAN - Iran said on Tuesday it hoped its response to an incentives package from world powers would lead to fresh negotiations on its nuclear dispute but gave no sign of heeding a key U.N. demand that it freeze uranium enrichment. No details of Iran's reply, delivered to foreign envoys in Tehran, were immediately available but Western diplomats said they were expecting an "ambiguous" response. The world's fourth largest oil exporter insists it will not abandon what it calls its right to enrich uranium for use in nuclear power stations. Western countries fear Iran wants to master enrichment to give it the ability to make atomic bombs. The U.N. Security Council -- frustrated with Iran's slow response to the incentives offer made by Britain, Germany, France, China, the United States and Russia in June -- has given it to August 31 to freeze enrichment or face possible sanctions. Iran has called the deadline illegal and worthless. In New York, John Bolton, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, said Washington was prepared to move quickly on a resolution seeking economic sanctions on Iran should Tehran reject the offer of incentives, but it was unclear how speedily other council members wanted to move. "It really is a test for the council and we will see how it responds," Bolton told reporters at U.N. headquarters. Chief nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani delivered Iran's response to foreign envoys representing the six co-sponsors of the package in Tehran, his office said. The United States, without an embassy in Iran since 1980, was represented by the Swiss embassy. "EXCEPTIONAL CHANCE" Iranian officials said the reply would pave the way to renewed talks over a nuclear dispute which erupted four years ago with revelations that Iran had been building an advanced atomic program in secret for almost two decades. "Iran's response will provide the West with an exceptional chance for an understanding and a return to talks," Mohammad Saeedi, deputy head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization told the ISNA students news agency. Iran has said its reply to the offer will be "multi-dimensional", suggesting no simple 'yes' or 'no'. The five Security Council permanent members plus Germany have offered Iran a range of economic, political and security incentives to halt work that could be used to make atomic bombs. But Iran's "multi-dimensional" reply could lay bare divisions in the Council where the United States, France and Britain back sanctions but Russia and China, both key trade partners of Iran, oppose them. "If they reject suspension (of enrichment), that's rejection of the package (for Western capitals)," said a Western diplomat. He added that Russia and China might take a different view. "If they said suspension was negotiable, there would be pressure on (the six powers) to think about it." Analysts say Iran is probably calculating that any move toward sanctions would start with modest steps, such as travel bans on officials or asset freezes, which it could tolerate because the country's coffers are brimming with petrodollars. Washington says it wants a diplomatic solution to the standoff but has refused to rule out military action. Diplomats close to the U.N. nuclear watchdog said its inspectors were recently denied access to an underground site under construction where Iran plans industrial- scale production of enriched uranium. A senior diplomat said blocking inspectors this way could be a violation of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Iran denied hindering access to the Natanz facility. (Additional reporting by Parisa Hafezi, Alireza Ronaghi in Tehran, Mark Heinrich in Vienna, Rebecca Harrison in Johannesburg, Irwin Arieff in New York) ---- Ambiguous Iran Reply In Nuclear Showdown Could Split West Say Analysts by Staff Writers Washington (AFP) Aug 22, 2006 http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Ambiguous_Iran_Reply_In_Nuclear_Showdown_Could_Split_West_Say_Analysts_999.html Despite a call from Iran Tuesday for further negotiations on its suspect nuclear program, Washington seemed as intent as ever on pressing for UN sanctions that some analysts see as a slippery slope towards military confrontation. Iran's nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani said Tehran was ready "for serious talks" with countries leading demands that it suspend a uranium enrichment program which could help it produce nuclear arms. Larijani provided no other details of a written response given Tuesday to an incentives package offered by the United States and five other powers to entice Iran to give up uranium enrichment and other suspect nuclear activities. Even before the full content of the Iranian response was known, senior US officials were reaffirming their position that only a total cessation of Iran's uranium enrichment by a UN Security Council deadline of August 31 would avert sanctions. "We will obviously study the Iranian response carefully, but we are also prepared, if it does not meet the terms set, to proceed here in the Security Council ... with economic sanctions," said the US embassador to the United Nations, John Bolton. "I think we will be prepared to submit elements of a resolution in the council very quickly," he said. Most observers had expected Iran on Tuesday to avoid a direct rejection of the enrichment suspension demand while at the same time refusing to give in to the UN requirement it abandon the program as a precondition for further talks. "The Iranians will likely agree to negotiations that may lead to at least a temporary suspension, but not agree to this as a precondition," said Trita Parsi, a writer who has had extensive contacts with the Iranian leadership. "As disappointing as this response may be for Washington, it should not be seen as the end of the negotiating track," said Parsi, author of the forthcoming book "Treacherous Triangle -- The Secret Dealings of Iran, Israel and the United States". Iran's conditional response to the UN ultimatum is expected to prompt renewed debate in the US administration between those seeking dialogue with Iran, as promoted in the past by some in the State Department, and hardliners identified with Vice President Dick Cheney. Parsi and other experts warned that a win by proponents of immediate sanctions carried grave risks. "Doing so would put the US on the slippery slope towards military action, because none of America's allies believe that UN sanctions will be effective," said Parsi. James Marsh, director of the Security Studies program at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, agreed and said a US rush to impose sanctions could also split the fragile alliance built up over the issue among the permanent UN Security Council members -- Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States. "You can tell by Iran's comments in advance of this response that they are seeking to divide the Europeans and the Americans," Marsh said. "Any appearance on the part of Iran that it is willing to be serious about negotiations will give the Chinese, the Russians and to some extent the Europeans reason to want to avoid escalating the political crisis, and that means at this point voting for sanctions," he said. US officials have been reluctant to spell out exactly what sanctions Washington will seek at the UN if Iran fails to meet the August 31 deadline. A senior State Department official would only say it would be a "multi-stage process" beginning with "targetted sanctions". These are expected to include relatively minor actions like bans on travel by Iranian nuclear or other officials and restrictions on government contracts with Iranian enterprises. But the UN has the authority to impose more wide-ranging trade sanctions that could have a significant impact on the Iranian economy. Fuller sanctions will also impact on European and other economies which have extensive trade relations with Iran, either as exporters to the Islamic republic or importers of its oil. "The Iranians have been preparing themselves for sanctions, calculating that they won't be very harsh and they will be just as costly, if not more costly, to the Europeans," Parsi said. "Sooner or later the Europeans will break ranks," he said. ---- Iran: Response should clear path for talks Updated 8/22/2006 By David J. Lynch, USA TODAY http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-08-22-iran-nuclear_x.htm TEHRAN, Iran — Iran has responded "positively" to a joint U.S.-European offer aimed at resolving a long-running crisis over the country's nuclear research program, government-controlled media reported Tuesday. "Where there were ambiguities in the proposal, we tried to interpret it positively and logically to pave the way for fair negotiations," state television quoted Ali Larijani, the country's top nuclear negotiator, as saying. Larijani, Iran's top nuclear negotiator, delivered the country's answer in a personal meeting with ambassadors from the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Russia, China and Switzerland, which represents American interests here. The USA broke off diplomatic relations with Iran during the 1979-1981 hostage crisis. The USA and its European allies proposed a package of economic and security incentives for Iran to abandon research activities that could lead to development of nuclear weapons. The United Nations Security Council passed a July 31 resolution threatening economic sanctions on Iran if the country would not halt its uranium enrichment program by the end of August. Iran's government released no details of its response Tuesday, but in recent days, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei had insisted defiantly that Iran would not halt its enrichment effort. Iran rejected calls to suspend "nuclear activities" — or uranium enrichment — and "instead has offered a new formula to resolve the issues through dialogue," said the semi-official Fars news agency. Tuesday's response, which had been awaited for several weeks, criticized the UN resolution as lacking "legal justification." But state television quoted Larijani as saying, "Iran is ready to seriously pursue negotiations from August 23, despite the fact that the other side has breached its promises." Larijani called on the United States, its European allies, Russia and China to "immediately return to the negotiating table." The Western package must be clarified in talks, Mohammed Saeedi, deputy head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, said in comments published Tuesday. Incentives offered by the West don't mention the part of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty that affirms signatories' right to pursue nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, Saeedi said. "One ambiguity is the deliberate failure to mention Article 4 of the NPT in the package. Instead, it has repeatedly referred to other parts of the treaty that are mainly deterrent. Why Article 4 has not been mentioned?" Saeedi asked. Analysts here said the Iranian government is looking for a face-saving way out of the nuclear standoff through technical negotiations over precisely what type of enrichment work would be prohibited. "I do believe, at the end, Iran would accept the proposal with minimum modifications," said Davoud Bavand, a professor of international law at Alameh University in Tehran. "Iran's response needs a "detailed and careful analysis," European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana said. In a statement, Solana said he would remain "in open contact" with Larijani. The White House deferred comment on the Iranian government's response. At U.N. headquarters in New York, U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said the United States is prepared to quickly submit elements of a new Security Council resolution that would impose economic sanctions on Iran if it does not accept "the very, very generous offer." "We will obviously study the Iranian response carefully, but we are also prepared if it does not meet the terms set by the permanent five foreign ministers to proceed here in the Security Council, as ministers have agreed, with economic sanctions," he said. "If, on the other hand, the Iranians have chosen the path of cooperation, as we've said repeatedly, then a different relationship with the United States and the rest of the world is now possible," he said. Iran hasn't shown any signs of backing down from its position so far. The country on Monday turned away International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors from an underground site meant to shelter its uranium enrichment program from attack. Military exercises are continuing in the country's south. State television broadcast footage Tuesday of tanks, infantry troops and tracked vehicles. Ahmadinejad also was shown criticizing "the arrogant powers" for trying to impose "their way of thinking on the rest of the world." -------- israel Minister says Israel must be ready for any Iranian attack By Reuters 22/08/2006 http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/753483.html A week after the end of the war with Hezbollah, Minister Rafi Eitan warned Tuesday that Israel should prepare for the possibility of a missile attack from Iran. "We are liable to face an Iranian missile attack. The Iranians have said very clearly that if they come under attack, their primary target would be Israel," Eitan, a member of the decision-making security cabinet, told Israel Radio. Iran could fire missiles at Israel "therefore we must prepare for what could come, and prepare the entire country for a missile strike attack, to prepare all the civilian systems so they are ready for this," Eitan said. The radio said Eitan, a former spymaster, meant that Israel should prepare its bomb shelters to protect against a possible Iranian attack. It quoted Eitan as alluding to the current international standoff with Iran over its uranium enrichment, saying if the situation deteriorates, Israel would be the first to come under attack. Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called for Israel to be "wiped off the map." He has said Israel "should not assume" its cease-fire with Iranian-backed Hezbollah guerrillas last week means an end to the crisis. Hezbollah fired 4,000 rockets on northern Israel during the war. Iranian cleric Amad Khatami has said that Iran would hit Tel Aviv with medium-ranged missiles if it came under attack. Arms experts say Iran's Shahab-3 missiles are capable of striking Israel. Eitan's remarks also came as tensions rose between Iran and six world powers led by the United States, who have sought to persuade Tehran to halt its uranium enrichment program, with an August 31 deadline for Tehran to face possible sanctions from the United Nations. -------- korea North Korea protests military exercises Posted 8/22/2006 (AP) http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-08-22-north-korea_x.htm SEOUL — North Korea lashed out Tuesday at ongoing U.S.-South Korean military drills and warned that it could take retaliatory action amid renewed concern that the communist nation may be preparing to test a nuclear bomb. The North's latest rhetorical salvo came after President Bush spoke Monday with Chinese President Hu Jintao about how to persuade the North to return to deadlocked international talks on its nuclear weapons program. The U.S. and South Korea launched the annual joint military exercises on Monday, which the North had previously said would be considered a declaration of war. Some 29,500 U.S. troops remain in South Korea as a legacy of the 1950-53 Korean War that ended in a cease-fire that has never been replaced by a peace treaty. The North's military said Tuesday it "would not be bound to the (armistice agreement) in taking on its own initiative military measures for protecting the security and sovereignty of the country in the future. It called the exercises a "war action declaring the (armistice) null and void." The North Korean military "reserves the right to undertake a pre-emptive action for self-defense against the enemy at a crucial time it deems necessary to defend itself," the North's army outpost at the truce village of Panmunjom said in the statement carried by the official Korean Central News Agency. The U.S. military has said the exercises — mostly simulation-driven drills that run through Sept. 1 and include some 17,000 troops — are defensive in nature and not a provocation. The North's threats weren't new but followed a report last week which cited U.S. officials as saying the country was making suspicious moves at a possible underground nuclear test site. South Korea's Defense Ministry said Sunday it was dispatching personnel to a scientific institute to monitor seismic tremors that could indicate movement caused by a nuclear explosion. In its statement Tuesday, the North also described the U.N. Security Council resolution adopted last month after it test-fired seven missiles as tantamount to a declaration of war that the U.S. pushed through "by wire-pulling its followers." However, key North Korean allies China and Russia also signed off on the resolution, which bans U.N. member countries from missile-related dealings with the North, but hasn't resulted in any further actions or relaxation of tension in the region. The North has set the region on edge with its nuclear ambitions and stoked tensions further by test-firing the missiles last month, drawing U.N. Security Council sanctions. But Pyongyang has refused to return to arms talks in anger over the U.S.'s blacklisting of a bank because of its complicity in North Korea's alleged illegal activities, including the counterfeiting of U.S. dollars. Washington insists the financial issue is unrelated to the nuclear standoff — a position Bush stuck to in his call with the Chinese leader. "Counterfeiting U.S. dollars is an issue that every president ought to be concerned about. When you catch people counterfeiting your money, you need to do something about it," Bush said. ---- South Korea Monitors North Korea After Nuclear Test Report By Heejin Koo Last Updated: August 22, 2006 (Bloomberg) http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601080&sid=aayEV2JxFQTk Aug. 23 -- South Korea is monitoring North Korea's activities after a report in the U.S. last week that the communist nation may be planning an underground nuclear test, South Korean Foreign Minister Ban Ki Moon said. ``The South Korea government is cooperating with relevant nations and is closely monitoring North Korea's activities through various channels,'' Ban told reporters today in Seoul. ``We are trying to gather as much information as we can.'' A U.S. intelligence agency detected ``suspicious vehicle movement'' near a suspected test site in North Korea, U.S.-based ABC News reported on Aug. 17, citing U.S. officials it didn't identify. The activity included reels of cable unloaded outside an underground base in the country's northeast, ABC said. North Korean government officials told a delegation of U.S. lawmakers visiting in January the country had developed nuclear weapons as a deterrent. Ban reiterated comments by Unification Minister Lee Jong Seok, who told lawmakers Aug. 18 he wasn't aware of any new evidence to support the ABC report. North Korea may have produced as many as 6 nuclear weapons from spent fuel, U.S. officials estimated in 2004, according to a Congressional Research Service report dated May 25 this year. North Korea may have enough plutonium to make as many as 13 nuclear weapons, the Institute for Science and International Security said in a June 26 report. Missile Tests The country drew international condemnation when it tested seven missiles on July 5, including a Taepodong-2, which U.S. officials have said may be able to reach Alaska. The UN Security Council on July 15 condemned the tests and barred the country from acquiring or selling missile technology and materials related to weapons of mass destruction. ``If North Korea tests a nuclear weapon, it would have a far more serious consequence compared with last month's missile tests,'' Ban said. ``North Korea would further isolate itself from the international community. We are trying to prevent that from happening.'' The U.S., along with South Korea, China, Japan and Russia, is trying to persuade North Korea to return to talks on abandoning its nuclear weapons program. North Korea is refusing to attend the six-nation talks until the U.S. lifts economic sanctions it imposed. The U.S. Treasury Department in October identified eight North Korean companies it implicated in helping the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and froze their U.S. assets. The last round of six-nation talks ended in November without agreement after the parties signed a declaration in September 2005 calling for a nuclear-free Korean peninsula. North Korea on July 6 vowed to continue missile tests. U.S. President George W. Bush two days ago asked China's President Hu Jintao to put pressure on North Korea's Kim Jong Il to agree to return to the talks. The U.S. and China need ``to continue to work together to send a clear message to the North Korean leader that there is a better choice for him than to continue to develop a nuclear weapon,'' Bush said in Washington. To contact the reporter on this story: Heejin Koo in Seoul at hjkoo@bloomberg.net -------- u.s. nuc facilities U.S. push for atomic power gets slow start By Matthew L. Wald The New York Times Published: August 22, 2006 http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/08/22/business/nukes.php WASHINGTON Nobody in the United States has started building a nuclear power plant in more than three decades. Mayo Shattuck 3rd could be the first. As the chief executive of Constellation Energy, a utility holding company in Baltimore that already operates five nuclear reactors, Shattuck is convinced that nuclear power is on the verge of a renaissance, ready to provide reliable electricity at a competitive price. He has already taken the first steps toward that goal, moving this month to order critical parts for a new reactor. But Constellation's neighbor, PPL, takes a different view. Even though PPL has successfully operated two reactors since 1983, its chairman and chief executive, William Hecht, has avoided putting even a toe in the water on a new nuclear project and is investing in coal technology instead. When nuclear reactors were first commercialized almost half a century ago, every self-respecting electric utility wanted one. They were encouraged by a U.S. government that saw nuclear energy as a peaceful, redemptive byproduct of the deadly power unleashed at Hiroshima. The American official in charge of promoting nuclear energy said it would produce electricity "too cheap to meter." It has never given consumers anything like that. But with the industry now consolidated so that most reactors are in the hands of a comparatively few operators, utility executives are sharply divided over whether nuclear power offers an attractive choice as they seek to satisfy growing demand for electricity. For them, the question comes down not so much to safety and environmental impact but to whether the potential reward is worth the financial risk. And those who already operate several reactors are prone to want more. The debate within the utility industry over reviving nuclear power has taken on added importance, though, because this energy source, unlike coal and other fossil fuels, does not produce gases that contribute to global warming. That is a key point as well in Europe, which has signed up for the Kyoto Protocol, the agreement that requires measurable reductions in emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. With a legal imperative to cut emissions by up to a fifth within the next six years, European power companies face a clearer challenge than those in non-Kyoto countries, like the United States and China. Britain's prime minister, Tony Blair, who once opposed nuclear power, last month introduced an energy plan for the next 50 years that says nuclear power could make a "significant contribution." The issue remains a live political topic even in countries that are phasing out their nuclear plants, like Germany and Belgium. While the debate continues in Europe, Washington is encouraging U.S. utilities to push ahead. Energy legislation last summer offered a generous production tax credit, insurance against regulatory delays and loan guarantees. Earlier legislation gave the industry money to help plan new plants. And they continue to enjoy a ceiling on liability damages in case of an accident. Despite its promise as a clean energy source that could hold down emissions of global warming gases, most environmentalists are skeptical of the latest claims of nuclear power's advocates. In the United States, they say, utilities, at best, will move ahead with a handful of plants that will receive lavish incentives from the government. But the risks of nuclear power are still so high, they argue, that no utility will be willing to put its own money into building a new plant unless the federal government subsidizes it. "What dismays me about the present situation is the extent to which the Congress and the administration, and now an occasional state legislature, have rushed to anoint it as the solution to climate change," said Peter Bradford, a former member of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and former chairman of the public service commissions of Maine and New York. If nuclear plants cannot compete without subsidies, he said, they should not be built. Today, nuclear power supplies just under 20 percent of the electricity used in the United States - roughly the same as in Britain or Spain, but far behind France, where nuclear accounts for 78 percent of energy production, or Sweden, with 50 percent. With the price of natural gas increasing, coal has emerged once again as the most popular way to generate electricity, a trend that - if it continues - is expected to lead to a significant rise in emissions of carbon dioxide. The utility sector emits about one-third of the carbon dioxide produced in the United States, nearly all of that from coal. Adding dozens of nuclear reactors to that mix could reverse the rise in carbon dioxide from the electricity generating system, but nuclear power would also run up against certain limits. Nuclear plants cannot replace all of the fossil fuel used in power generation, because current nuclear designs do not easily alter their power output. Plants running on natural gas and coal, by contrast, can adjust their output over the course of a day to match demand. For a long time, utilities' underlying confidence in nuclear technology was moot because the economics would not support a new reactor; all those ordered after 1973 in the United States were canceled. But now, because of high prices for natural gas and uncertainty about how emissions from coal plants will be regulated in future decades, the nuclear industry is moving from near death to the prospect that perhaps a handful of new plants will be ordered within the next few years. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission in Washington counts 27 potential reactors under consideration; 103 are now operable in the United States. Still, there is much skepticism within the utility industry. PPL, for example, has successfully operated two reactors in Berwick, Pennsylvania, for 23 years. But while some utilities around the country are making preliminary moves or joining consortiums to explore new designs, PPL is not. There are better places to put his shareholders' money, Hecht, PPL's chief executive, said. At the moment, he sees an advantage in cleaning up his coal-fired plants, investing $1.5 billion to scrub out most of the sulfur dioxide. That would not only benefit the environment but would also generate pollution credits that PPL can profitably sell. That decision was "dull and basic," Hecht said, but adheres to a paramount goal - maximizing shareholder returns. He would not rule out nuclear plants forever, Hecht said during an interview, but the business case would have to be a lot clearer than it is now. By contrast, Constellation Energy, the Baltimore company, not only wants to build reactors for itself; it has also formed a partnership with a reactor manufacturer to build and operate them for other utilities. Its decision has implications beyond the corporate bottom line. There are also arguments over nuclear waste and the risk of accidents. In the New York area, especially, there is concern over reactors as terrorist targets. But the risk that really matters to utility executives is financial. Among the companies that would actually build these plants, executives focus more on uncertain factors like the future price of power in the market, the cost of producing competing fuels, and the cost of cleaning up coal plants to meet standards for the pollutants that Washington does regulate - sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and soot. At this point U.S. companies do not face any constraints on carbon emissions. Those that want to build - among them Entergy, Dominion and Duke Energy - talk about new designs intended to further reduce the risk of an accident and their ability to manage nuclear waste until the government eventually opens a national waste repository. Companies that do not want to build say they are not particularly worried about those factors, either. But they have other reasons to hold back. When PPL builds a power plant, it usually sells the power first and uses the signed contracts to reassure the investors and bankers from whom it is seeking financing. "I'm not going to build any large generation unhedged," Hecht said. But this is not easy with a nuclear plant. For one thing, Hecht said, no one could be sure when it would be finished. And despite the industry's efforts to shorten the time between order and completion, it could still be 10 years, he said. Constellation, which doubled its nuclear bet in the 1990s by buying more reactors as the utility industry restructured, believes it has demonstrated one marketable skill - running reactors profitably - and that it could quickly follow a new plant with a copycat, building both on time and on budget. Constellation proposes a fleet of plants, identical down to the "carpeting and wallpaper," Shattuck said, reducing the design costs on subsequent reactors to near zero. Operating processes would be identical, and operators could be shuffled among the plants, something that is often impossible today even with adjacent reactors. The company wants partners who would offer either equity or operating skills. Constellation has a partnership, called Unistar Nuclear, with Areva, the French-German company, comprising Framatome and Siemens, to build a model. One is already under construction on the island of Olkiluoto in Finland. -------- new jersey Oyster Creek nuclear plant operators seek extension By Tina Seeley Bloomberg News Tue, Aug. 22, 200 http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/local/15330191.htm?source=rss&channel=inquirer_local Exelon Corp. can operate its Oyster Creek nuclear power plant in New Jersey for 20 more years if it resolves certain issues, regulatory staff said. Chicago-based Exelon is seeking permission from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to extend the operating life of Oyster Creek, the nation's oldest operating reactor. The 636-megawatt reactor, in Ocean County, has been operating since 1969 under a 40-year license that expires in April 2009. The relicensing request has drawn criticism from environmental groups and from Gov. Corzine. Protesters have raised questions about corrosion of the reactor's "drywell," a steel structure that prevents radioactive steam from escaping during an accident. The commission's staff is asking Exelon for more information and further testing of the drywell liner, which is between half an inch and more than 21/2 inches thick, Neil Sheehan, spokesman for the commission, said in a telephone interview yesterday. "By and large, we've determined that the plant can safely operate for an additional 20 years; however, they first have to deal with these items we consider unresolved," Sheehan said. "We would like them to go back and test more than they were planning on testing," including using "ultrasound to test the thickness of the drywell liner," he said. The commission said in a staff evaluation report it also needed a "better understanding of how they're able to validate that corrosion is not an issue," Sheehan said. "From what we see, there were no surprises," said Pete Resler, spokesman for Exelon, parent of Philadelphia's Peco Energy Co. "There were some open items in there that we've been working with NRC to close." Resler said the company expected to be able to resolve the issues in time for the issuance of the final safety report before the end of the year. A commission decision on the application is expected in 2007 or early in 2008. -------- MILITARY -------- afghanistan UK's NATO troops to withdraw from Afghan highlands 22 Aug 2006 (Reuters) By Peter Graff http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L22470365.htm LONDON, Aug 22 - Britain's NATO troops in southern Afghanistan are pulling back from mountain redoubts to focus on safeguarding reconstruction in lowland valleys, a senior British commander said on Tuesday. The change in tactics follows months of unexpectedly bitter fighting in the mountains of Helmand province, which the commander said had dealt a big blow to Taliban guerrillas. "They have blended into the hills a little bit, and their leadership has gone to have a rethink," said the commander, who was authorised to speak to reporters under condition he not be named. "It is not in our campaign interest to get focused on head-to-head tactical contact with the Taliban, but it has been necessary in recent weeks." The commander said the battles were necessary to prove to locals that British forces could take on the Taliban, but were a distraction from the main mission of providing security for reconstruction in "development zones". A new unit of Afghanistan's national army has been assembled ahead of schedule and was now ready to take control of forward bases in the mountain towns, with British troops in the lowlands on standby to support them as needed. "We've got to reposture in order to deliver what we want to do," he said. "It isn't a question of withdrawal, it's a question of replacement." FOREIGN FORCE Britain sent the first large foreign force to Helmand, Afghanistan's biggest drug-producing province in the south, this year as part of an expanding NATO peacekeeping mission. Western commanders now say leaving large parts of the country such as Helmand empty of international troops after the Taliban government fell in 2001 allowed guerrillas to regroup and mount a threat to President Hamid Karzai's government. Over the past few months British troops moved into remote mountain towns such as Sangin, Musa Qala, Nawzad and Kajaki, where they came under attack from Taliban groups. Commanders have acknowledged the fighting was heavier than they expected. Britain has already had to increase its initial force in the area by about 1,000 troops to 4,500. The British military has little slack for further reinforcements for Afghanistan while it also keeps 7,000 men in Iraq. The NATO commander in Kabul, David Richards, who is also a British general, has said he would be able to operate more quickly and efficiently if he had extra backup troops and aircraft. The British commander in London denied NATO was abandoning the mountain towns in Helmand because it lacked the forces needed to hold them while still securing the lowlands. "That is factually inaccurate," he said. "If we had infinite forces we would be able to do lots of things concurrently, but very few military commanders have ever approached that sort of military Nirvana." -------- europe Germany may block new EU members David Gow in Brussels Tuesday August 22, 2006 Guardian Unlimited http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1855937,00.html?gusrc=rss Germany and Austria are among the EU countries most afflicted by 'enlargement fatigue' Germany is threatening to derail the planned entry of Bulgaria and Romania to the EU on January 1, forcing its postponement for a year as fears grow over Europe's capacity to absorb new members. Yesterday Horst Köhler, the German president, urged the two countries to overcome clear deficits in their judicial systems and in the fight against corruption ahead of a final "monitoring" report by the European commission next month on their progress towards meeting the political criteria for entry. Germany, along with Belgium, Denmark, France and Ireland, has so far failed to ratify the accession treaty for Bulgaria and Romania and Mr Köhler indicated it would wait until after the commission report on September 26 to start the parliamentary process. Ratification is due by December 31 at the latest. The commission is expected to express reservations about the two countries' progress but could give approval for entry to take place on January 1, swelling the EU's members to 27. But sources conceded that this could be overturned by the 25 governments - especially Germany. Germany and its neighbour Austria are among the EU countries most afflicted by "enlargement fatigue", notably concerns that entry of new members from poor countries in the Balkans - and Turkey - would bring an unmanageable influx of migrant workers. The two are the only member states left applying the full seven-year transitional arrangements or restrictions on the free movement of labour from the 10 new members, mainly from eastern Europe, that joined in May 2004. These concerns, highlighted by today's Home Office figures showing 427,000 eastern Europeans working in Britain, have meant that only Finland has said it will fully open its labour market to Bulgarians and Romanians. The commission plans to issue a strategy paper on enlargement or "absorption capacity" on October 24 - the same day it publishes progress reports on would-be members Croatia, Turkey, Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Macedonia, Serbia and Montenegro/Kosovo. Olli Rehn, the enlargement commissioner, who has warned of a pending "train wreck" in accession talks with Turkey, has responded to calls from German and Austrian Christian Democrats for a definition of Europe's borders by insisting that any European country respecting democratic values and the rule of law may apply. "This does not mean that all European countries must apply or that the EU must accept all applications," he said last month. "But it means we should not draw in Indian ink some thick 'faultline' according to some notional historical borders between civilisations and thus construct a kind of velvet curtain only a few years after we got rid of the iron curtain." His report on Turkey is expected to underline a significant lack of progress since accession talks began in October 2005 - largely because of the unresolved issue of the Ankara government's refusal to implement a customs union protocol obliging Turkey to open its ports and airports to Cypriot ships and planes. -------- israel / palestine IDF: We screwed up Deputy army chief admits army made mistakes in way it sent reserve troops into battle Ilan Marciano Ynet 8.22.06 http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3294527,00.html Errors were made in the way the Israel Defense Forces sent reserve troops into battle, Deputy Chief of Staff Moshe Kaplinsky admitted Tuesday during a discussion by the reservists' lobby at the Knesset. "There were errors and flaws in equipment and at emergency warehouses," he said. Kaplinsky vowed to ensure reserve soldiers are better prepared for active duty and noted that a training program will be introduced to that end. During the session, reservists expressed their anger over the many shortcomings that emerged during the war and demanded to be told when the current state of high alert would be over, so they can return home. Meanwhile, representatives of reservists' families complained they had no address to turn to during the fighting to find out information about their loved ones and therefore lost touch with them during the war. Kaplinsky said the army will do everything to release all reserve troops by the weekend. 46 reserve soldiers killed during war Meanwhile, Brigadier General Avi Zamir of the IDF Personnel Directorate said a special call center has been set up for reservists who served in the war, and added that all reserve troops will receive brochures detailing their rights. Army officials also announced they are working to secure a special bonus for reserve soldiers. "The calculation method is being examined at this time through dialogue with the Treasury, and we expect agreement as early as tomorrow," one IDF official said. During the war, a total of 46 reserve soldiers were killed and 233 were wounded, with 144 of them released from hospital by now. Infantry Petition 'We won't do reserve duty anymore' / Hanan Greenberg Reservists' protest steps it up: Soldiers in Galilee division of reserve company write to their brigade commander with 'shaking hands': 'Following difficult sense of deprivation and lack of consideration by our senior commanders – we are announcing that we don't intend to continue serving as reserve soldiers and request that we not be called up for active reserve duty' ---- Israel Helicopters, Tanks Move Into Gaza - Tuesday, August 22, 2006 (AP) http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/n/a/2006/08/22/international/i002007D28.DTL&type=printable GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip (08-22-06) -- http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/n/a/2006/08/22/international/i002007D28.DTL Israeli soldiers backed by helicopter gunships, tanks and armored personnel carriers, moved into Palestinian-controlled areas near the main Israel-Gaza cargo crossing on Tuesday, conducting house-to-house searches and arrests. Five Palestinians were wounded moderately, including three Hamas militants, medical officials said. Three Palestinians were arrested, security officials said. The military confirmed an operation near the Karni crossing but wouldn't divulge its objectives. In the past, Israeli troops have searched for tunnels being dug by militants near the crossing. "They took two of my cousins and asked them about fighters, tunnels and many other issues," said farmer Ahmed Helles, 65, whose olive trees were being uprooted by Israeli military bulldozers as part of the operation. "I was waiting for the harvest, which was to start next month, to pay for the marriage of my grandson, but the bulldozers are destroying my hopes," Helles said. Separately, in southern Gaza, the Israeli army moved into farmlands near the town of Khan Younis, firing machine guns into the fields after calling on farmers to evacuate the area, Palestinian security officials said. Cameramen filming the operation said they came under fire but were not wounded. The army had no immediate comment. ---- Media watch group: Arab-Israeli lawmakers support Hezbollah By Nadav Shragai Tue., August 22, 2006 Haaretz http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/752732.html "While many parts of the Arab-Israeli public 'made do' with accusing Israel of starting and prolonging the war, the political and public leadership of Israel's Arabs didn't stop there, and made extremist statements that went as far as expressing support for Hezbollah," said Itamar Marcus, the head of Palestinian Media Watch. His remarks coincided with the publication of a report by the group that documents what appears to be expressions of support for Hezbollah on the part of Arab-Israeli political leaders. According to PMW's Web site, the organization "document[s] the contradictions between the image the Palestinians present to the world in English and the messages to their own people in Arabic." The report quotes Balad Party chairman MK Azmi Bishara as making the following statement in Al-Hayat Al-Jadida: "Solidarity with these heroes [Hezbollah and Palestinian terrorists] is the least [we can do]." An article in Al-Ayyam from two weeks ago quoted him as saying, "The Palestinian and Lebanese resistance returned the confidence to the Arab-Islamic identity after years of defeats." Another Balad MK, Wasil Taha, told Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, "Resistance is not terror but it is a moral value. As for terror, the state [Israel] carries it out." Sheikh Raed Salah, Head of the Islamic Movement in Israel, told Al-Ayyam, "A look at the region in which we live teaches that the two biggest liars are Ehud Olmert and George Bush, who lead the world to carnage, destruction and massacres." He called on the peoples of the world "to expose the lies of those who burn children," continuing, "The Palestinian people and the people of Lebanon are the winners because they have justice, whereas Bush and Olmert are the losers because they have falsehood." -------- un UN permits wide use of force in Lebanon Tue Aug 22, 2006 (Reuters) By Evelyn Leopold http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=worldNews&storyID=2006-08-23T001154Z_01_N22282296_RTRUKOC_0_US-MIDEAST-UN-FORCE.xml&src=082206_2130_TOPSTORY_un_troops_allowed_wide_use_of_force UNITED NATIONS - New rules of engagement for U.N. troops in Lebanon permit soldiers to shoot in self-defense, use force to protect civilians and resist armed attempts to interfere with their duties, a U.N. document says. The 21 pages of rules, obtained by Reuters on Tuesday, adhere to the mandate laid down by the U.N. Security Council in an August 11 resolution and drafted by France and the United States. That did not call on the U.N. force, known as UNIFIL, to carry out large-scale disarmament of Hizbollah guerrillas in a southern Lebanon buffer zone. The rules, given to potential troop contributors last week for approval, have been generally accepted, said Vijay Nambiar, a special adviser to Secretary-General Kofi Annan. "We have not received any major requests for any change," Nambiar told a news conference in Jerusalem on Tuesday, "We assume that we will be able to finalize them imminently." In an attempt to enforce a fragile cease-fire after Hizbollah's monthlong war with Israel, the United Nations wants 3,500 new peacekeepers in Lebanon by September 2 and up to 15,000 there by November, including the 2,000 on the ground now in UNIFIL. The current UNIFIL, the U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon, established in 1978, also had the right to self-defense but was mainly an observer mission. Specifically, the new rules of engagement, marked "U.N. Restricted," permit the right of self-defense and "preemptive self-defense" against an anticipated attack. But in many cases, a senior officer has to approve force if U.N. troops are not under attack. The soldiers can also use force against anyone preventing UNIFIL from carrying out its duties and to ensure the security and freedom of movement of U.N. personnel and humanitarian workers and to protect civilians under imminent threat, the rules say. The use of force, "including deadly force," is also authorized to defend the Lebanese armed forces that a U.N. unit may be assigned to accompany, providing the threatening group or person is armed. Force must be commensurate with the level of the threat. But the level of response may have to be higher in order to minimize U.N. or civilian casualties, the rules say. DISARMING HIZBOLLAH? The mandate, approved by the Security Council on August 11, calls on UNIFIL to assist the Lebanese armed forces in establishing a buffer zone free of unauthorized weapons. According to Mark Malloch Brown, the deputy U.N. secretary-general, the mandate made clear UNIFIL was not to carry out large-scale disarmament. But he said peacekeepers could respond if small groups did not disarm voluntarily when confronted with U.N. troops. "If they try to forcefully resist disarmament, then we will indeed employ force ourselves to disarm them," Malloch Brown told reporters after chairing a troop contributors meeting last week. European Union officials are to meet in Brussels on Wednesday to discuss troop contributions, in preparation for a foreign ministers meeting on Friday that Annan is expected to attend. France has said it would only contribute 200 soldiers in addition to the 200 already with UNIFIL, although it may make another announcement before Friday. Italy has volunteered to lead the force, now under a French general. -------- us Marines to issue involuntary call-ups Corps faces shortage of volunteers for deployments to Iraq, Afghanistan Aug 22, 2006 Associated Press http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14468245/ WASHINGTON - The U.S. Marine Corps said Tuesday it has been authorized to recall thousands of Marines to active duty, primarily because of a shortage of volunteers for duty in Iraq and Afghanistan. Up to 2,500 Marines will be brought back at any one time, but there is no cap on the total number of Marines who may be forced back into service in the coming years as the military battles the war on terror. The call-ups will begin in the next several months. This is the first time the Marines have had to use the involuntary recall since the early days of the Iraq combat. The Army has ordered back about 14,000 soldiers since the start of the war. Marine Col. Guy A. Stratton, head of the manpower mobilization section, estimated that there is a current shortfall of about 1,200 Marines needed to fill positions in upcoming unit deployments. The call-up affects Marines in the Individual Ready Reserve, a segment of the reserves that consists mainly of those who left active duty but still have time remaining on their eight-year military obligation. Generally, Marines enlist for four years, then serve the other four years either in the regular Reserves, where they are paid and train periodically, or they may elect to go into the IRR. Marines in the IRR are only obligated to report one day a year but can be involuntarily recalled to active duty. According to Stratton, there are about 59,000 Marines in the IRR, but the Corps has decided to exempt from the call-up those who are either in their first year or last year of the reserve status. As a result, the pool of available Marines is about 35,000. Up to two years on duty The deployments can last up to two years, but on average would be 12 to 18 months, Stratton said. And each Marine who is being recalled will get five months to prepare before having to report for duty. President Bush authorized the recall on July 26. It is the first such recall since early 2003, when about 2,000 Marines were involuntarily activated for the initial ground war in Iraq. “Since this is going to be a long war,” said Stratton, “we thought it was judicious and prudent at this time to be able to use a relatively small portion of those Marines to help us augment our units.” He said the Marines may continue to tap into the IRR for as long as the war on terror continues. Some of the military needs, he said, include engineers, intelligence, military police, and communications. ---- USS Hawaii to stay here (Honolulu) By Gregg K. Kakesako gkakesako@starbulletin.com Tuesday, August 22, 2006 Honolulu Star Bulletin http://starbulletin.com/2006/08/22/news/story09.html Navy Secretary Donald Winter has confirmed that a $2.6 billion stealth Virginia-class nuclear submarine, the USS Hawaii, will be stationed at Pearl Harbor. Winter said the 377-footer Hawaii -- the second Navy warship to be named after the 50th state -- will be commissioned next summer in Connecticut, with Gov. Linda Lingle acting as its sponsor. For several years, Lingle and Rear Adm. John Donnelly, deputy commander of the Pacific Fleet, have said the Hawaii could be berthed here. Lt. Jeff Davis, Pacific Fleet Submarine Forces spokesman, said the Hawaii "will be able to operate quietly in shallow coastal waters, collecting intelligence, inserting SEALs ashore and striking targets hundreds of miles inland." Davis said the Virginia-class submarine differs from other nuclear attack submarines because: » It uses a propulsor instead of a regular propeller. A propulsor is an advanced-design propeller shielded by a duct. » The nuclear reactor is fueled for the life of the ship (30-plus years). » It has a nine-man airlock trunk, enabling an entire SEAL team to lock out together (instead of two at a time now). » It has no periscope, using a photonics mast with a camera instead. Winter also said that the Los Angeles-class submarine USS Buffalo would be sent to Guam next year. The Navy's attack sub force of 53 is split almost evenly now, with 28 in the Atlantic and 25 in the Pacific. By 2010 there will be 31 nuclear-powered attack subs in the Pacific Fleet and 21 assigned to the Atlantic Fleet. USS HAWAII Length: 377 feet Displacement: 7,800 tons Maximum diving depth: Greater than 800 feet Speed: 25-plus knots Cost: About $2.6 billion Crew: 134 officers and enlisted Armament: Tomahawk cruise missiles, Mark 48 torpedoes, four torpedo tubes, advanced mobile mines and unmanned undersea vehicles Source: U.S. Navy -------- POLITICS -------- propaganda wars President Bush Admits Iraq Had No WMDs and 'Nothing' to Do With 9/11 Tuesday, August 22nd, 2006 Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/08/22/1421212 On Monday, President Bush admitted that the Iraq war is "straining the psyche of our country." But he vowed to stay the course. A reporter questioned him about why he opposed withdrawing US troops from Iraq. In his answer, Bush admitted that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction and had "nothing" to do with 9/11. [includes rush transcript] * President Bush, White House press conference, August 21, 2006. [Click for full transcript] RUSH TRANSCRIPT AMY GOODMAN: On Monday, Present Bush admitted the Iraq war is "straining the psyche of our country," but he vowed to stay the course. A reporter questioned him about why he opposed withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq. REPORTER: A lot of the consequences you mentioned for pulling out seem like maybe they never would have been there if we hadn't gone in. How do you square all of that? PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: I square it, because -- imagine a world in which you had Saddam Hussein who had the capacity to make a weapon of mass destruction, who was paying suiciders to kill innocent life, who would -- who had relations with Zarqawi. Imagine what the world would be like with him in power. The idea is to try to help change the Middle East. Now, look, I didn’t -- part of the reason we went into Iraq was -- the main reason we went into Iraq at the time was we thought he had weapons of mass destruction. It turns out he didn't, but he had the capacity to make weapons of mass destruction. But I also talked about the human suffering in Iraq, and I also talked the need to advance a freedom agenda. And so my question -- my answer to your question is, is that -- imagine a world in which Saddam Hussein was there, stirring up even more trouble in a part of the world that had so much resentment and so much hatred that people came and killed 3,000 of our citizens. You know, I've heard this theory about, you know, everything was just fine until we arrived, and then, you know, kind of that we're going to stir up the hornet's nest theory. It just -- just doesn't hold water, as far as I'm concerned. The terrorists attacked us and killed 3,000 of our citizens before we started the freedom agenda in the Middle East. REPORTER: What did Iraq have to do with that? PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: What did Iraq have to do with what? REPORTER: The attack on the World Trade Center? PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: Nothing, except for it's part of -- and nobody has ever suggested in this administration that Saddam Hussein ordered the attack. Iraq was a -- Iraq -- the lesson of September the 11th is, take threats before they fully materialize, Ken. Nobody has ever suggested that the attacks of September the 11th were ordered by Iraq. AMY GOODMAN: President Bush at his news conference yesterday. -------- us politics Bush faces revolt on Iraq by Olivier Knox Tue Aug 22, 2006 (AFP) http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060822/wl_afp/usiraqpoliticsbush_060822170426 WASHINGTON - US President George W. Bush has defiantly reaffirmed his "stay-the-course" message on Iraq, even as some of the unpopular war's strongest defenders have turned critical ahead of key November elections. With just over two months before voters decide who controls the US Congress, Bush took pains on Monday to confront candidates, overwhelmingly opposition Democrats, who want to set a timetable for a US withdrawal. "Any sign that says we're going to leave before the job is done simply emboldens terrorists," he said at a press conference. "We're not leaving, so long as I'm the president. That would be a huge mistake." But more than a few politicians and commentators once firmly in Bush's camp have joined the doubters on the war, which has cost hundreds of billions of dollars and the lives of more than 2,600 US troops. Republican Representative Walter Jones (news, bio, voting record), who once helped rename French fries "freedom fries" in anger at Paris's opposition to the conflict, reversed course in June 2005 and urged Bush to set a withdrawal timetable. Michael Fitzpatrick, another Republican representative who backed the March 2003 invasion, has reportedly branded both his Democratic rival -- a decorated Iraq war veteran who supports a US redeployment -- and Bush as "extreme." "Congressman Fitzpatrick says no to both extremes: No to President Bush's 'stay-the-course' strategy, ... and no to Patrick Murphy's 'cut-and-run' approach," said a Fitzpatrick campaign flier described in the Washington Times. Moderate Republican Christopher Shays, who backed the use of force to oust Saddam Hussein, told the Washington Post last week that he would propose a time frame for a US withdrawal from Iraq. And in one of the most high-profile campaigns, the Democratic Party's Senate primary in Connecticut, a political novice who opposed the war beat a well-established Democratic senator, Joe Lieberman, who strongly supported it. Nor can the president count on many conservative commentators who once offered full-throated defenses of his foreign policy and the Iraq war, in particular, and counted critics as irresponsible defeatists. "The big problem I have is that the US is not winning the war. Staying the course doesn't sound like a solution to the massive sectarian violence going on in Iraq," conservative economist Larry Kudlow said this week. Kudlow's comments, made in a public posting on the Internet site of the National Review magazine, a conservative stronghold, came a bit more than a year after the publication's April 2005 cover story declared "We're Winning." And earlier this month, the magazine's editor warned that "Republicans are seeking to win the midterm elections on national security at the same time they are losing, or at least not obviously winning, a major war" -- Iraq. The column's title recycled a frequently heard charge among Democrats, asking whether the war had become "Bush's Vietnam?" And in one much-publicized case, a former conservative-lawmaker-turned-talk-show-host spent time with his guests discussing whether Bush's "mental weakness" hurt the United States abroad, while the television screen asked the question "Is Bush An Idiot?" While Bush has stood firmly behind his policy, and he and some of his top aides have accused Democrats of actively seeking defeat in Iraq and wanting to "cut and run," there are signs of deep Republican discomfort with the White House strategy -- and its "stay-the-course" sales pitch. "The choice in this election is not between 'stay the course' and 'cut and run.' It's between 'win by adapting' and 'cut and run,'" Republican National Committee chairman Ken Mehlman said last week. -------- ACTIVISTS 'I Fear God Much More Than I Fear Homeland Security' - Chicago Pastor on Why He is Allowing Mexican Mother to Stay in Church to Avoid Deportation Tuesday, August 22nd, 2006 Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/08/22/1421217 A Mexican woman has taken refuge inside a Chicago church in an attempt to defy a government deportation order. Elvira Arellano has been living in the Adalberto United Methodist Church since last Tuesday -- the day she was supposed to surrender to authorities. We go to Chicago to speak with Arellano from inside the church as well as the Rev. Walter Coleman, the pastor of the church. [includes rush transcript] We go now to Chicago, where a battle for immigrant rights is gaining national attention. A Mexican woman has taken refuge inside a Chicago church in an attempt to defy a government deportation order. Elvira Arellano has been living in the Adalberto United Methodist Church since last Tuesday -- the day she was supposed to surrender to authorities. Arellano is president of United Latino Family, a group that lobbies for families that could be split by deportation. She was born in Mexico and came to the country as an undocumented immigrant. Her seven-year-old son, Saul, was born in the United States and is a U.S. citizen. A rally was held Sunday in Chicago to support Elvira. One of those rallying to her cause is immigrant rights activist Emma Lozano of Pueblo Sin Fronteras. * Emma Lozano, immigrant rights activist with Pueblo Sin Fronteras speaking in Chicago. US Immigration and Customs enforcement officials have said Arellano is now considered a fugitive. ICE spokersperson Tim Counts said "We will take action at the time and place of our choosing." * Elvira Arellano, she joins us on the line now from the Chicago church where she's taken refuge. * Rev. Walter Coleman, pastor at the Adalberto United Methodist Church in Chicago. RUSH TRANSCRIPT AMY GOODMAN: A rally was held Sunday in Chicago to support Elvira. One of those rallying to her cause is immigrants rights activist Emma Lozano of Pueblo Sin Fronteras. EMMA LOZANO: The deportation of Elvira Arellano is -- to me, it’s just retaliation for all her leadership. She has been at the head of the movement. She’s been like the Rosa Parks of the undocumented, of the movement for legalization. She’s calling for the moratorium. She did the hunger strike for 22 days. She’s like our Rosita Parks, and we should all be rallying around her to make sure they don’t deport her, because it may demoralize the movement. AMY GOODMAN: U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials have said Arellano is now considered a fugitive. ICE spokesperson Tim Counts said, "We will take action at the time and place of our choosing." Elvira Arellano joins us now on the phone from the church where she has taken refuge with her son. Joining us in a studio in Chicago is Rev. Walter Coleman. He’s the pastor at the Adalberto United Methodist Church. We welcome you both to Democracy Now! Elvira, can you talk about why you are in the church right now? And is your son with you? ELVIRA ARELLANO: Hi. Good morning. I am still here. I’m deported in August 15. And I stay here with my son. AMY GOODMAN: And why have you chosen to stay in the church? ELVIRA ARELLANO: I don’t know. I stay here maybe one or two weeks more -- I do not know -- depending the immigration, maybe -- stay here. AMY GOODMAN: Why are you there? ELVIRA ARELLANO: Because the immigration deport me to Mexico. AMY GOODMAN: And why are they saying they will deport you? Elvira? TRANSLATOR: Hello? Good morning. AMY GOODMAN: Hi. This is Amy Goodman from Democracy Now! TRANSLATOR: Yeah. I’m going to translate for her. AMY GOODMAN: Very good. Thank you. TRANSLATOR: You’re welcome, ma’am. I put you on the speakerphone. AMY GOODMAN: Very good. I’m asking Elvira why the government is saying they want to deport her and why she wants to stay in this country with her son. ELVIRA ARELLANO: [translated] Because he is a U.S. citizen, and she wants for them to respect his constitutional rights. AMY GOODMAN: Are you afraid that they will enter the church? ELVIRA ARELLANO: [translated] Yes. AMY GOODMAN: How have you prepared for this? ELVIRA ARELLANO: [translated] I just know that I have to be with my son. AMY GOODMAN: We're also joined in a Chicago studio by Rev. Walter Coleman, the pastor at the church where Elvira has taken refuge, the Adalberto United Methodist Church. Can you talk about your decision to make your church a sanctuary church, Rev. Coleman? REV. WALTER COLEMAN: Certainly. And good morning. First of all, Elvira Arellano is a member of our church and has been a member of our church for three years. And as we approached the final hours and it seems that other options were being exhausted, she had decisions. As she could have any time over the last three years, when she was first arrested, when she was working at the airport, for being undocumented, she could have gone and just disappeared like 12 million other people. She could have accepted the deportation. But she has always said that she would fight what she considers to be an unjust law, so that her son will know that he’s a child of God and not a piece of junk that can be thrown away. So the option of sanctuary when she requested it seemed like a good option to give her a holy space to continue a campaign of civil disobedience against an unfair law that is separating families throughout this country. AMY GOODMAN: Just going through the list of politicians who are supporting Elvira, you have Senator Barack Obama, Congressmember Luis Gutierrez, even Mayor Richard Daley. Can you talk about the congressional action on this issue, Rev. Walter Coleman? REV. WALTER COLEMAN: Right. Because of her leadership really, two private bills have been put in Congress on her behalf, one by Congressman Gutierrez and another by Congressman Bobby Rush. Congressman Rush’s bill includes a group of other families that Elvira actually organized, who are all in the same situation. That is, one or other of the parents is undocumented and facing deportation for doing nothing wrong, except entering this country and working and paying taxes, but their children are U.S. citizens. And Elvira has worked very hard to dramatize this issue. She has led delegations to Washington, large delegations of 100, 150, seven times in the last year, talked to over 120 congressmen and over 40 senators. She has won the support of the Chicago City Council and the mayor, the Cook County board and Cook County president. The state legislature, the state senate have all passed formal resolutions. And the governor of Illinois is supporting it, as well as a wealth of other church and community leaders. And I think, obviously, she has her own particular situation with her son, who she loves and who has a right and a need to stay here with his doctors and in his school. But also she said that she is fighting a fight of principle. And because of that, I think that she has won support throughout the state and really throughout the country. AMY GOODMAN: Elvira Arellano, can you tell us what Saul is suffering from, your son, why he needs medical attention? We're talking to Elvira in the church where she has taken refuge. ELVIRA ARELLANO: [translated] Because my son has HDAD, and because the federal agents, when they entered the house, they came with weapons when they raided the house, and this panicked my son. AMY GOODMAN: How is he getting help in the church right now? Is he getting help? ELVIRA ARELLANO: [translated] He hasn’t gone to the doctor yet. In case of an emergency, his babysitter will bring him to the doctor. AMY GOODMAN: There are conflicting reports of what ICE will do, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The Chicago Tribune has an AP piece that says, “They would apprehend Arellano at a time and place ‘of their choosing’ and that nothing prevented them from going into the church. But on Friday, a government official close to the case said immigration agents have decided against entering the church to remove Arellano. The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because it is against ICE policy to discuss operational matters, said the Arellano case carries ‘no more priority than any of the other 500,000 fugitives nationally.’” Rev. Walter Coleman, what about that, how Elvira's case fits into the national picture? Chicago is a major center of immigrants rights activism, had perhaps the largest immigrants right -- the first large immigrants rights protest in the wave of protests we saw in the last months. REV. WALTER COLEMAN: Well, I think we have to understand the situation generally. It's very hard for me to read the mind of people in immigration. But generally, we have this situation. The President of United States and the Senate have both said that they would like a program that legalizes at least a large part of those who are in this country. The President has spoken out against the separation of families and mothers and children, like Elvira’s family. At the same time, under pressure from House Republican leadership, the U.S. government is doubling and tripling its efforts to deport, arrest, to raid factories and to impose sanctions on employers. We think that this is a contradiction, and part of why we think they are retaliating against Elvira is that she has been so successful in her call for a moratorium on deportations until they fix the law. It’s a contradiction to be deporting and arresting and traumatizing children and torturing children of those who may in a few months or a year be able to legalize. We have a broken law. Everybody recognizes that. So we’re in a very contradictory situation. And when it comes down to the situation locally, there are a lot of people that they could go after. There are millions. There are many that they have already written orders for deportation, who haven’t shown up, who are going on living their lives. They have a lot of choices. They're running around like a bull in a china shop. And when a lot of light is shone, as it has on Elvira’s case, I think there’s -- we pray that they will respect the church and the family and the faith. But, obviously, they are looking at public opinion and fighting really a political battle, which unfortunately families and children are the victims of. So we really don’t know if they’ll choose -- the political winds will grow and they’ll choose to disrespect the church and come to get her or if they’ll do, as their latest spokesperson has said, that they’ll respect the sanctuary of the church. AMY GOODMAN: Rev. Walter Coleman, are you concerned you will face consequences, sanctions for your church being used as a sanctuary? And do you see yourself in the tradition of the sanctuary movement of 20 years ago, where churches in this country and especially along the border from Mexico gave refuge to refugees from political persecution from Guatemala, from Honduras, from El Salvador? REV. WALTER COLEMAN: Right. You know, the sanctuary movement and sanctuary tradition in the church goes a long way, further back than 20 years ago. And certainly we call upon that tradition, that is, that there’s holy ground and that there’s space that should be respected by governments for those who appeal to the law of God in their acts of conscience and in their seeking of safety from oppression. And, you know, we don’t really know what they’ll look at. They’ve said that we are liable; then I’m liable for harboring a fugitive. Elvira Arellano is obviously not a fugitive. She formerly told them where she is. She told the world, and everybody in the world knows where she is, her address and phone number and place. She is committing an act of civil disobedience to protect the rights of her child and to bring forth the issue of the cruel separation of families. If they choose to take whatever action they're going to take, I have no control over that. But I fear God much more than I fear Homeland Security. AMY GOODMAN: Finally, let's turn back to Elvira Arellano in the church with her son at the Adalberto United Methodist Church, a storefront church in Chicago. Do you plan to stay at the church indefinitely? How long do you plan to stay? ELVIRA ARELLANO: [translated] The only thing that I want is to stay with my son. I would like for this to come out good, because I want to take my son to school. I want him to have -- I have worked for him all my life, and I still want to keep working for him all my life. That’s what I want. AMY GOODMAN: Well, I want to thank you both very much for being with us, Reverend Walter Coleman, pastor at the Adalberto United Methodist Church, and Elvira Arellano, undocumented immigrant taking refuge in the Adalberto church. And we will continue to follow this story. She is head of United Latino Family. Her son suffers from attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and she continues to seek medical help for him. He is a U.S. citizen.