*****************************************************************
08/18/06 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 14.196
*****************************************************************
RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE
*****************************************************************
Send News Stories to news@energy-net.org with title on subject
line and first line of body
NUCLEAR POLICY
1 Intelligence officials doubt Iran uranium claims, say Cheney receivi
2 [NYTr] Iran & Uranium: Cheney Is Drinking the Kool Aid Again
3 AFP: Top Iranian cleric warns US over nuclear standoff -
4 AFP: Top Iranian cleric warns US over nuclear standoff
5 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Warns Against N. Korean Nuke Test
6 AFP: South Korea, Russia cautious on North Korea nuclear report -
7 AFP: Bush warns North Korea not to pursue nuclear testing
8 UPI: Seoul: No evidence of NorKor test prep
9 Guardian Unlimited: S. Korea: No Evidence of North Nuke Test
10 Hankyoreh: N.K. nuclear test would only remind world of the country'
11 N.K.¡¯s nuclear capabilites still a matter of speculation :
12 Hankyoreh: [Analysis] The North's nuclear test card
13 US: How Many and Where Were the Nukes? What the U.S. Government No L
14 US: [NYTr] Cold War Nukes: What the US Govt Doesn't Want You to Know
15 IPS-English POLITICS-INDIA: Nuclear Deal With US Clears
16 BBC: Allies and scientists laud Singh
17 AFP: Diffident Indian PM hailed for speech on nuke deal
18 Gulfnews: US in Lebanon: Dumb and dumber
NUCLEAR REACTORS
19 Daily Yomiuri: Agencies seeking 14 bil. yen to study new N-reactor
20 US: OC Register: San Onofre reactor added to list
21 The Australian: Labor vote to force N-policy showdown
22 Hamilton Spectator: Bruce Power seeks new reactor approval
23 US: Los Angeles Times: Radioactive Leak Reaches Nuclear Plant's Grou
24 Zee News: India's nuclear energy programme safest - Govt
25 US: theday.com: Dominion Touts Handling Of Safety Issues
NUCLEAR SECURITY
NUCLEAR SAFETY
26 US: CounterPunch: Divine Strike in the Bible Belt
27 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Indiana resisting site for Divine Strake
28 US: NRC: STP Nuclear Operating Company; Notice of Withdrawal of
29 US: NRC: Denial of Petition
30 US: NRC: Regulatory Guide and Associated Review Plan; Withdrawal of
31 US: Las Vegas Business Press: Nevada Test Site revamped to combat te
32 Viet Nam News: Scientists want strict control over radioactive subst
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
33 Las Vegas SUN: DOE Inspector General report faults quality assurance
34 RIA Novosti: Kyrgyzstan announces tender for uranium enrichment plan
35 RIA Novosti: Experts to examine nuclear waste buried in Russia Arcti
36 Pahrump Valley Times: Air Force and DOE consider flyovers of Yucca
37 US: Albuquerque Tribune: Hobbs nuclear plant challenged in court
38 edie news centre: Giant crane speeds up clean up at nuclear site
39 US: AU ABC: Physicist talks up uranium potential.
PEACE
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
40 Hanford News: Hanford cleanup czar plans to visit Tri-Cities
41 Hanford News: Cantwell campaigning
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 Intelligence officials doubt Iran uranium claims, say Cheney receiving suspect briefings
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 22:43:08 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY
August 18th 2006
Raw Story
www.rawstory.com
Intelligence officials doubt Iran uranium claims, say Cheney receiving
suspect briefings
Filed by Larisa Alexandrovna
The Bush administration continues to bypass standard intelligence channels
and use what some believe to be propaganda tactics to create a compelling
case for war with Iran, US foreign policy experts and former US intelligence
officials tell RAW STORY.
One former senior intelligence official is particularly concerned by private
briefings that Vice President Dick Cheney is getting from former Office of
Special Plans (OSP) Director, Abram Shulsky.
"Vice President Cheney is relying on personal briefings from Shulsky for
current intelligence on Iran," said this intelligence official.
Shulsky, a leading Neoconservative and member of the Project for the New
American Century (PNAC), headed the shadowy and secretive Department of
Defense's OSP in the lead-up to the Iraq war -- helping to locate
intelligence that would support the Bush administration's case for war with
Iraq.
In an earlier report by Raw Story on an OSP spin-off dubbed the Iranian
Directorate (ID), Lt. Col. Barry E. Venable -- a spokesman for the Pentagon
-- confirmed that Shulsky was consulting for this new initiative as well.
"Mr. Shulsky continues in his position as Senior Advisor to the USD,
focusing on Mid-East regional issues and the [global war on terror]," stated
Venable.
Several foreign policy experts, who wish to remain anonymous, have expressed
serious concern that much like the OSP, the ID is manipulating, cherry
picking, and perhaps even -- as some suspect -- cooking intelligence to lead
the U.S. into another conflict, this time with Iran.
"Cheney distrusts the information being disseminated by CIA on Iran," said
one former senior intelligence official. "The reports assembled by the
Iranian Directorate at the Pentagon differ significantly from the analysis
produced by the Intelligence Community. The Pentagon Iranian Directorate
relies on thin and unsupported reporting from foreign sources."
In the build-up to the Iraq war, Cheney relied on intelligence almost
exclusively from the OSP, which leveled allegations that Iraq possessed
weapons of mass destruction. This was later debunked, but no OSP or DOD
officials were held accountable for what many believe was a "deliberate
effort" to mislead the nation into war.
New Uranium Allegations:
Adding to the similarities between the pre-war build up to Iraq, new
allegations of Uranium transactions began aggressively circulating earlier
this month. For example, in an August 6th Sunday Times of London article
entitled "Iran's plot to mine uranium in Africa," Iran is alleged to have
purchased Uranium from the Democratic Republic of Congo.
"A United Nations report, dated July 18, said there was 'no doubt' that a
huge shipment of smuggled uranium 238, uncovered by customs officials in
Tanzania, was transported from the Lubumbashi mines in the Congo.
"Tanzanian customs officials told The Sunday Times it was destined for the
Iranian port of Bandar Abbas, and was stopped on October 22 last year during
a routine check."
The UN report, however, does not mention Iran. It is only the Tanzanian
official who does.
The article also quotes the Tanzanian official on his description of the
uranium amounts found in each container and how it was located.
"This one was very radioactive. When we opened the container it was full of
drums of coltan. Each drum contains about 50kg of ore. When the first and
second rows were removed, the ones after that were found to be drums of
uranium."
Experts familiar with both African mining and atomic energy have expressed
serious concern about these allegations, which have been circulating for
some time.
According to a source close to the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA), the story is "highly unlikely" and "not well researched."
This source, who wished to remain anonymous given the nature of the subject,
explained that the main concern in the Congolese mines is environmental
waste and how it affects workers and villages near the areas where the
mining is done.
A former senior US official with experience in the region also finds the
story improbable, in this case regarding the Tanzanian interception of a
Congo- to- Iran based shipment and the amount transferred.
"My understanding is that the Congolese mines were closed years ago and that
any mining now is purely artisanal," said this official.
"[It] would take a lot of labor to produce the volume of uranium they are
talking about. The reduction ratio of rock to ore is roughly one hundred to
one in the Niger mines. I can't imagine the vein is any richer in the
Congo."
Still other experts took issue with the description of the uranium and its
suggested purpose, including the sentiment that u-238 is "highly
radioactive."
Steven Aftergood, senior research analyst at the Federation of American
Scientists (FAS), an organization that was formed in 1945 by atomic
scientists from the Manhattan Project, is doubtful. "U-238 is one of the
isotopic forms of uranium. Another isotopic form, [for example], U-235, is
used in fission bombs," explained Aftergood.
"U-238 is not highly radioactive. On the contrary, it decays very slowly. It
has a half-life of 4.5 billion years. That means that a given quantity of
u-238 would radioactively decay by 50% in 4.5 billion years. So you could
hold it in your hand without any adverse effect. On the other hand, it is a
toxic metal, and you wouldn't want to inhale or ingest uranium dust if you
could avoid it."
But the stories of Iran attempting to purchase uranium from abroad leave
many experts highly concerned.
One official close to the United Nations Security Council explained that
Iran has its own mines, making any allegations of imported uranium from
abroad highly questionable.
"Why would Iran import U-238 when it mines it itself?" The official asked
Raw. "This makes no sense whatsoever."
Several sources suggested that the Iranian Directorate, as did its
predecessor -- the OSP, may be cherry picking, manipulating, and even
planting intelligence abroad that would support a case against Iran in the
minds of the public.
Expressing great frustration, one former high ranking intelligence officer
said "it is all the Neocons." Asked about the allegations of the uranium
transaction from Congo-to-Iran, this source remarked: "Total bullshit."
Wendy Morigi, spokeswoman for U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee
Vice-Chairman Jay Rockefeller, would not confirm or deny that the committee
had received any information regarding the Iran uranium purchase. "We can't
comment on what briefings the committee has received," Morigi stated in an
email response.
Morigi did, however, explain that as with any sensitive information,
"Generally speaking, it's safe to assume that the committee closely follows
everything related to Iran's nuclear program."
---
Related Raw Story articles:
US military, intelligence officials raise concern about possible
preparations for Iran strike
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/US_military_seen_ready_for_Iran_0511.html
Spurious attempt to tie Iran, Iraq to nuclear arms plot bypassed U.S.
intelligence channels
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Backchannels_used_to_bypass_U.S._government_01
11.html
Cheney has tapped Iranian expatriate, arms dealer to surveil discussions
with Iran, officials say
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Cheney_has_tapped_Iranian_expatriate_arms_
0420.html
------
Larisa Alexandrovna is managing investigative news editor for Raw Story and
regularly reports on intelligence and national security stories.
Contact: Larisa@rawstory.com
========
http://www.rawstory.com/printstory.php?story=2949
========
*****************************************************************
2 [NYTr] Iran & Uranium: Cheney Is Drinking the Kool Aid Again
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 00:47:28 -0400 (EDT)
X-Sender-Host-Name: olm.blythe-systems.com
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
sent by Tim Murphy
Raw Story - Aug 18, 2006
http://www.rawstory.com/printstory.php?story=2949
Intelligence officials doubt Iran uranium claims,
say Cheney receiving suspect briefings
by Larisa Alexandrovna
The Bush administration continues to bypass standard intelligence channels
and use what some believe to be propaganda tactics to create a compelling
case for war with Iran, US foreign policy experts and former US intelligence
officials tell RAW STORY.
One former senior intelligence official is particularly concerned by private
briefings that Vice President Dick Cheney is getting from former Office of
Special Plans (OSP) Director, Abram Shulsky.
"Vice President Cheney is relying on personal briefings from Shulsky for
current intelligence on Iran," said this intelligence official.
Shulsky, a leading Neoconservative and member of the Project for the New
American Century (PNAC), headed the shadowy and secretive Department of
Defense's OSP in the lead-up to the Iraq war -- helping to locate
intelligence that would support the Bush administration's case for war with
Iraq.
In an earlier report by Raw Story on an OSP spin-off dubbed the Iranian
Directorate (ID), Lt. Col. Barry E. Venable -- a spokesman for the Pentagon
-- confirmed that Shulsky was consulting for this new initiative as well.
"Mr. Shulsky continues in his position as Senior Advisor to the USD,
focusing on Mid-East regional issues and the [global war on terror]," stated
Venable.
Several foreign policy experts, who wish to remain anonymous, have expressed
serious concern that much like the OSP, the ID is manipulating, cherry
picking, and perhaps even -- as some suspect -- cooking intelligence to lead
the U.S. into another conflict, this time with Iran.
"Cheney distrusts the information being disseminated by CIA on Iran," said
one former senior intelligence official. "The reports assembled by the
Iranian Directorate at the Pentagon differ significantly from the analysis
produced by the Intelligence Community. The Pentagon Iranian Directorate
relies on thin and unsupported reporting from foreign sources."
In the build-up to the Iraq war, Cheney relied on intelligence almost
exclusively from the OSP, which leveled allegations that Iraq possessed
weapons of mass destruction. This was later debunked, but no OSP or DOD
officials were held accountable for what many believe was a "deliberate
effort" to mislead the nation into war.
New Uranium Allegations:
Adding to the similarities between the pre-war build up to Iraq, new
allegations of Uranium transactions began aggressively circulating earlier
this month. For example, in an August 6th Sunday Times of London article
entitled "Iran's plot to mine uranium in Africa," Iran is alleged to have
purchased Uranium from the Democratic Republic of Congo.
"A United Nations report, dated July 18, said there was 'no doubt' that a
huge shipment of smuggled uranium 238, uncovered by customs officials in
Tanzania, was transported from the Lubumbashi mines in the Congo.
"Tanzanian customs officials told The Sunday Times it was destined for the
Iranian port of Bandar Abbas, and was stopped on October 22 last year during
a routine check."
The UN report, however, does not mention Iran. It is only the Tanzanian
official who does.
The article also quotes the Tanzanian official on his description of the
uranium amounts found in each container and how it was located.
"This one was very radioactive. When we opened the container it was full of
drums of coltan. Each drum contains about 50kg of ore. When the first and
second rows were removed, the ones after that were found to be drums of
uranium."
Experts familiar with both African mining and atomic energy have expressed
serious concern about these allegations, which have been circulating for
some time.
According to a source close to the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA), the story is "highly unlikely" and "not well researched."
This source, who wished to remain anonymous given the nature of the subject,
explained that the main concern in the Congolese mines is environmental
waste and how it affects workers and villages near the areas where the
mining is done.
A former senior US official with experience in the region also finds the
story improbable, in this case regarding the Tanzanian interception of a
Congo-to-Iran based shipment and the amount transferred.
"My understanding is that the Congolese mines were closed years ago and that
any mining now is purely artisanal," said this official.
"[It] would take a lot of labor to produce the volume of uranium they are
talking about. The reduction ratio of rock to ore is roughly one hundred to
one in the Niger mines. I can't imagine the vein is any richer in the
Congo."
Still other experts took issue with the description of the uranium and its
suggested purpose, including the sentiment that u-238 is "highly
radioactive."
Steven Aftergood, senior research analyst at the Federation of American
Scientists (FAS), an organization that was formed in 1945 by atomic
scientists from the Manhattan Project, is doubtful. "U-238 is one of the
isotopic forms of uranium. Another isotopic form, [for example], U-235, is
used in fission bombs," explained Aftergood.
"U-238 is not highly radioactive. On the contrary, it decays very slowly. It
has a half-life of 4.5 billion years. That means that a given quantity of
u-238 would radioactively decay by 50% in 4.5 billion years. So you could
hold it in your hand without any adverse effect. On the other hand, it is a
toxic metal, and you wouldn't want to inhale or ingest uranium dust if you
could avoid it."
But the stories of Iran attempting to purchase uranium from abroad leave
many experts highly concerned.
One official close to the United Nations Security Council explained that
Iran has its own mines, making any allegations of imported uranium from
abroad highly questionable.
"Why would Iran import U-238 when it mines it itself?" The official asked
Raw. "This makes no sense whatsoever."
Several sources suggested that the Iranian Directorate, as did its
predecessor -- the OSP, may be cherry picking, manipulating, and even
planting intelligence abroad that would support a case against Iran in the
minds of the public.
Expressing great frustration, one former high ranking intelligence officer
said "it is all the Neocons." Asked about the allegations of the uranium
transaction from Congo-to-Iran, this source remarked: "Total bullshit."
Wendy Morigi, spokeswoman for U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee
Vice-Chairman Jay Rockefeller, would not confirm or deny that the committee
had received any information regarding the Iran uranium purchase. "We can't
comment on what briefings the committee has received," Morigi stated in an
email response.
Morigi did, however, explain that as with any sensitive information,
"Generally speaking, it's safe to assume that the committee closely follows
everything related to Iran's nuclear program."
Related Raw Story articles:
US military, intelligence officials raise concern about possible
preparations for Iran strike
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/US_military_seen_ready_for_Iran_0511.html
Spurious attempt to tie Iran, Iraq to nuclear arms plot bypassed U.S.
intelligence channels
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Backchannels_used_to_bypass_U.S._government_0111.html
Cheney has tapped Iranian expatriate, arms dealer to surveil discussions
with Iran, officials say
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Cheney_has_tapped_Iranian_expatriate_arms_0420.html
[Larisa Alexandrovna is managing investigative news editor for Raw Story and
regularly reports on intelligence and national security stories.]
*
================================================================
.NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems
. Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us .
.339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org
.List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
.Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
================================================================
*****************************************************************
3 AFP: Top Iranian cleric warns US over nuclear standoff -
Fri Aug 18, 9:39 AM ET
TEHRAN (AFP) - Top Iranian cleric Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani warned
the United States not to seek confrontation with Tehran over its
nuclear program and to learn from the war in Lebanon.
"We expect America to have learned enough (from the Israel" />
Israel-Hezbollah war) not to enter another game and upset the
security of the region," Rafsanjani said in his Friday prayer
sermon carried live on state radio.
The former president said the United States would be wise to try
and resolve its nuclear standoff with Iran" /> Iranthrough
negotiations.
Washington said Thursday it will move quickly for UN Security
Council action on sanctions against Iran if Tehran refuses to
halt its sensitive uranium enrichment work by August 31, as
demanded by a UN resolution.
The United States and other Western countries suspect that Iran
is enriching uranium to use in nuclear weapons. Iran insists the
program is to make fuel for civilian reactors.
The US administration has never ruled out military option against
Iran to resolve the standoff.
Iran has said it will reply by August 22 to a package of
incentives offered by the five permanent members of the UN
Security Council plus Germany to halt its uranium enrichment
program.
Iran, as well as Syria" /> Syria, stands accused of channeling
arms to the Lebanese Shiite militia Hezbollah, which was involved
in a month-long deadly conflict with Israel.
Tehran denies the allegation, saying it only provides "moral
support".
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
4 AFP: Top Iranian cleric warns US over nuclear standoff
Fri Aug 18, 6:38 AM ET
TEHRAN (AFP) - Top Iranian cleric Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani warned
the United States not to seek confrontation with Tehran over its
nuclear program and to learn from the war in Lebanon.
"We expect America to have learned enough (from the Israel" />
Israel-Hezbollah war) not to enter another game and upset the
security of the region," Rafsanjani said in his Friday prayer
sermon carried live on state radio.
The former president said the United States would be wise to try
and resolve its nuclear standoff with Iran" /> Iranthrough
negotiations.
Washington said Thursday it will move quickly for UN Security
Council action on sanctions against Iran if Tehran refuses to
halt its sensitive uranium enrichment work by August 31, as
demanded by a UN resolution.
The United States and other Western countries suspect that Iran
is enriching uranium to use in nuclear weapons. Iran insists the
program is to make fuel for civilian reactors.
The US administration has never ruled out military option
against Iran to resolve the standoff.
Iran has said it will reply by August 22 to a package of
incentives offered by the five permanent members of the UN
Security Council plus Germany to halt its uranium enrichment
program.
Iran, as well as Syria" /> Syria, stands accused of channeling
arms to the Lebanese Shiite militia Hezbollah, which was
involved in a month-long deadly conflict with Israel.
Tehran denies the allegation, saying it only provides "moral
support".
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
5 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Warns Against N. Korean Nuke Test
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Friday August 18, 2006 6:46 AM
By DEB RIECHMANN
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - The White House said Thursday that a nuclear
weapons test by North Korea would be an ``extremely
provocative'' act that would be denounced around the globe.
The White House was reacting to an ABC News report that the
communist nation may be preparing for an underground test of a
nuclear bomb.
ABC on Thursday quoted an unidentified senior State Department
official as saying, ``It is the view of the intelligence
community that a test is a real possibility.''
ABC also quoted an unidentified senior military official as
saying that a U.S. intelligence agency recently had observed
``suspicious vehicle movement'' at a suspected North Korean test
site. The activity involved the unloading of reels of cable
outside an underground facility in northeast North Korea.
According to ABC, information about the cables, which can be
used to link an underground test site to remote monitoring
equipment, was brought to the attention of the White House last
week.
White House officials declined to confirm the report.
Asked about the report, two U.S. officials said there was no
evidence to suggest that an underground nuclear weapons test by
North Korea was imminent. The officials spoke on condition of
anonymity because of the classified nature of the subject.
The Japanese Defense Agency in Tokyo also said it had not
received any information or reports about any such preparations
or unusual activities.
Lee Yong-joon, head of the South Korean Foreign Ministry's task
force on the North Korea nuclear issue, told The Associated
Press: ``We are monitoring movements in North Korea in
preparation for any possibility of a nuclear test.'' He declined
to comment on the ABC report, citing protocol.
The United States and South Korea ``share all intelligence and
evaluations'' related to North Korean movements, Lee said.
South Korea's spy agency, the National Intelligence Service,
also declined to comment directly on the report.
``We cannot specifically confirm the report as it is an
intelligence matter,'' a spokesman said on condition of
anonymity, citing policy.
The United States has been concerned for some time that
Pyongyang would seek to conduct a nuclear test, particularly
given its public statements about its nuclear ambitions.
Last year, the United States warned allies that North Korea
might be ready to carry out an underground nuclear test. In
April 2005, diplomats in Vienna, Austria, said information about
a possible underground nuclear test came in part from satellite
imagery.
An official, who declined to be identified, said the White House
position was that a ``North Korean nuclear test would be an
extremely provocative action that would draw universal
condemnation from the international community.''
The United States has urged North Korea to return to stalled
six-party talks involving the Koreas, Russia, China and Japan.
The nuclear talks were last held in November, when negotiators
made no progress toward implementing an agreement in which North
Korea agreed to give up its nuclear program in exchange for aid
and security guarantees.
North Korea has refused to return to the negotiations until
Washington lifts financial restrictions it imposed on the
communist regime for alleged illegal activity, such as
counterfeiting. The United States says the North should return
to the talks without conditions.
In early July, North Korea test-fired seven missiles, including
a new long-range model believed capable of reaching the U.S.
that failed shortly after takeoff. The move violated the
country's self-imposed moratorium on long-range missile
launches.
The launches prompted the U.N. Security Council to unanimously
pass a resolution sanctioning the North, which Pyongyang has
rejected as an infringement on its sovereign right to conduct
missile launches.
---
Associated Press writers Lolita Baldor and Katherine Shrader
contributed to this report.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
6 AFP: South Korea, Russia cautious on North Korea nuclear report -
Fri Aug 18, 4:59 AM ET
SEOUL (AFP) - South Korean officials have reacted cautiously to a
US news report that North Korea" /> North Koreamay be preparing
to conduct an underground nuclear bomb test.
A senior South Korean foreign ministry official said that "in
cooperation with the United States, we always keep a close watch
on North Korea's nuclear and missile activities" but declined to
comment on the US report.
A spokesman for the National Intelligence Service, South Korea"
/> South Korea's version of the CIA" /> CIA, also declined to
comment on the report.
Russia also has no information that would confirm a US news
report that North Korea might be preparing an underground nuclear
bomb test, the foreign ministry said, criticising what it called
attempts to "inflame" the situation.
"At the moment we have no information that would confirm such
reports," a spokesman at Russia's foreign ministry said.
"Such information appears regularly in the foreign media but so
far no reports of this kind have been confirmed," the spokesman
told AFP.
Analysts here said the reclusive communist state might pretend to
prepare a nuclear test to bluff the United States into looking
afresh at stalled negotiations over North Korea's nuclear
programme.
Baek Seung-Joo, the chief of the North Korea Research Team at the
Korea Institute for Defence Analyses, said North Korea might be
trying to press Washington to soften its stance toward Pyongyang.
"It is one thing that North Korea might be tempted to leverage
concerns over its nuclear drive to wrest concessions from the
United States by pretending to carry out a nuclear bomb test, but
it is another that it actually carries it out," he said.
"The current situation is simply too unfavorable for the North to
do it," he added.
He noted that Pyongyang has sought to mend ties with Beijing
following North Korea's missile launches in July, which provoked
international anger and condemnation resulting in a UN Security
Council resolution endorsed even by China, its top ally.
"Testing a nuclear bomb means Pyongyang will have to go back on
these diplomatic efforts to improve ties with Beijing. It will
also have to risk facing unbearable consequences including
military sanctions," Baek said.
"Pyongyang may like brinkmanship but it does not want to fall
over a brink," he said.
ABC television network said Thursday that the communist state may
be preparing an underground nuclear test, quoting US officials.
"It is the view of the intelligence community that a test is a
real possibility," the network quoted a senior US State
Department official as saying.
A senior military official told ABC that an unidentified US
intelligence agency had recently observed "suspicious vehicle
movement" at a suspected North Korean test site.
The activity included the unloading of large reels of cable
outside an underground facility called Pungyee-yok in northeast
North Korea, it said.
ABC said cables can be used in nuclear testing to connect an
underground test site to observation equipment.
It said the intelligence had been brought to the attention of the
White House last week but cautioned that it was "not conclusive."
An imminent nuclear test was predicted in North Korea last year
but no test occurred.
ABC said underground nuclear tests are "notoriously difficult"
to detect ahead of time and noted that the United States had
failed to predict nuclear tests by India and Pakistan in 1998.
North Korea claims to have built nuclear weapons and sparked
international alarm last month by test-firing seven ballistic
missiles.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
7 AFP: Bush warns North Korea not to pursue nuclear testing
Fri Aug 18, 2:02 PM ET
CAMP DAVID, United States (AFP) - US President George W. Bush" />
warned North Korea" /> against nuclear testing but would not say
whether he had information confirming that preparations for such
a test were under way.
"It's a hypothetical question," Bush told reporters. "And you're
asking me to divulge intelligence information I have. I'm not
going to do that, as you know."
But he added: "If North Korea were to conduct a test, it's just
a constant reminder for people in the neighborhood, in
particular, that North Korea poses a threat."
The US television network ABC reported on Thursday that North
Korea may be preparing to conduct an underground test of a
nuclear bomb.
"It is the view of the intelligence community that a test is
real possibility," the network quoted a senior US State
Department official as saying.
A senior military official told ABC that an unidentified US
intelligence agency had recently observed "suspicious vehicle
movement" at a suspected North Korean test site.
The activity included the unloading of large reels of cable
outside an underground facility called Pungyee-yok in northeast
North Korea, it said.
ABC said cables can be used in nuclear testing to connect an
underground test site to observation equipment.
It said the intelligence had been brought to the attention of
the White House last week but cautioned that it was "not
conclusive."
An imminent nuclear test was predicted in North Korea last year
but no test occurred.
ABC said underground nuclear tests are "notoriously difficult"
to detect ahead of time and noted that the United States had
failed to predict nuclear tests by India and Pakistan in 1998.
North Korea claims to have built nuclear weapons and sparked
international alarm last month by test-firing seven ballistic
missiles.
In Huntsville, Alabama on Tuesday the head of the US missile
defense agency said he expects to make recommendations in a
matter of months on where to position interceptor missiles and
radar in Europe to best protect against the threat of Iranian
missiles.
The European site would be the first expansion outside of the
United States of an unproven US missile defense system that
currently is aimed at thwarting a limited long-range missile
attack by North Korea.
"We are facing a real threat," General Henry Obering said in a
speech in Huntsville. "It is one that is growing. It is one that
I consider to be one of the preeminent threats we'll face in the
21st century."
Obering's comments came just weeks after North Korea test fired
a long-range Taepo-dong 2 missile and six shorter range Nodong
and Scud-type missiles.
Although the long-range missile test failed early in flight, the
others were successful.
"And so we have to be careful that we don't jump to the wrong
conclusions about it. Even though they had a failure in a long
range test does not mean they don't have capability," Obering
said.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
8 UPI: Seoul: No evidence of NorKor test prep
United Press International - Security &Terrorism -
8/18/2006 5:45:00 PM -0400
SEOUL, Aug. 18 (UPI) -- South Korea says there is no evidence
supporting a news report that North Korea may be preparing to
test a nuclear weapon.
"Although (North Korea testing a nuclear weapon) is logically
possible, no activity has been detected," a government official,
speaking on condition of anonymity, told The Korea Herald.
The official, quoted Friday, added that Seoul was sharing its
intelligence information with Washington.
ABC News Thursday reported that U.S. intelligence had detected
suspicious vehicle movements near a suspected nuclear testing
area in North Korea. An unidentified, senior State Department
reportedly added that a nuclear test was a possibility.
The report prompted President Bush to comment that any such
action would underline the threat the Pyongyang regime poses to
the world.
North Korea last month, in defiance of international pressure,
tested seven missiles, including a long-range ballistic missile
theoretically capable of hitting parts of the western United
States.
The United States, with regional allies, has been attempting
unsuccessfully to convince North Korea to abandon its nuclear
weapons programs.
Story Tools: --> Del.icio.us | Digg it | RSS
© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
*****************************************************************
9 Guardian Unlimited: S. Korea: No Evidence of North Nuke Test
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Friday August 18, 2006 12:01 PM
AP Photo SEL106
By BO-MI LIM
Associated Press Writer
SEOUL, South Korea (AP) - South Korea said Friday it has no
clear evidence that communist North Korea is preparing for a
nuclear test, responding to a news report citing a U.S. official
saying intelligence showed possible signs of an upcoming test.
``I haven't heard that we have confirmed clear evidence that
North Korea is pursuing a nuclear test,'' Unification Minister
Lee Jong-seok told lawmakers at a committee hearing.
Lee said there is frequent speculation about the North's nuclear
program, but that not all of it turns out to be true.
``We are closely monitoring North Korea's activities related to
the nuclear program and missiles,'' he said.
Lee Yong-joon, head of the South Korean Foreign Ministry's task
force on the North Korea nuclear issue, said South Korea was
monitoring movements in North Korea in close cooperation with
the United States. He declined to comment directly on the report
about a possible test, citing protocol.
The United States and South Korea ``share all intelligence and
evaluations'' related to North Korean movements, Lee told The
Associated Press.
South Korea's spy agency, the National Intelligence Service,
also declined to comment directly on the report.
``We cannot specifically confirm the report as it is an
intelligence matter,'' a spokesman said on condition of
anonymity, citing policy.
The comments came after ABC News quoted an unidentified State
Department official as saying a North Korean nuclear test was
``a real possibility.''
The report also cited an unidentified senior U.S. military
official as saying that a U.S. intelligence agency recently had
seen ``suspicious vehicle movement'' at a suspected test site,
including the unloading of reels of cable outside an underground
facility in northeast North Korea.
Such cables are connected to outside monitoring equipment and
could be a possible sign of an upcoming test. The report said
the White House was told about the intelligence last week.
The White House declined to confirm the report, but an official
there who refused to be identified said Washington's position
was that a ``North Korean nuclear test would be an extremely
provocative action that would draw universal condemnation from
the international community.''
North Korea claims to have nuclear weapons but has not conducted
any known test that would confirm that assertion. A June report
from the Washington-based Institute for Science and
International Security said the North had enough radioactive
material to build between four and 13 bombs.
U.S. officials said in May 2005 that they detected possible
signs of a nuclear test, citing construction of a tunnel and a
reviewing stand, but nothing more happened at that time.
The North test-fired seven missiles last month over
international objections, drawing U.N. Security Council
sanctions. No progress has been made since then on the impasse,
and the North has refused to return to international talks on
its nuclear programs that have been stalled since November.
A researcher with links to the South Korean intelligence
community said Friday that ``caution is needed'' when dealing
with observations of activity inside North Korea because their
intentions are often unclear, declining to comment directly on
the latest report.
He said it was too early to say whether a test was imminent from
a single piece of information, noting that equipment to measure
radioactivity and seismic activity, as well as excavators, would
have to be in place for a nuclear test.
Also, people would have to be evacuated from near the possible
test site, he said, speaking on condition of anonymity because
of the sensitivity of his position.
---
Associated Press reporter Kwang-tae Kim contributed to this
report.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
10 Hankyoreh: N.K. nuclear test would only remind world of the country's dangers - Bush
North Korea would again be reminding the world that it is a
global threat if it were to conduct a nuclear test as suggested
by press reports, U.S. President George W. Bush said Friday.
Neither the president nor administration officials would comment
on the validity of the reports, saying they are intelligence
matters that cannot be publicly shared. But they emphasized that
a test would prompt the international community to take action.
"You are asking me to divulge any intelligence information I
have, and I am not going to do that," Bush told reporters.
"If North Korea were to conduct a test, it's just a constant
reminder, for people in the neighborhood in particular, that
North Korea poses a threat," he said.
"And we expect our friends and those sitting around the table
with us to act in such a manner as to help rid the world of the
threat."
ABC News, quoting senior State Department officials, reported
Thursday about new signs that North Korea may be preparing for an
underground nuclear test.
One official was quoted as saying that such a test as "is a real
possibility."
In Seoul, Unification Minister Lee Jong-seok dismissed the
reports, saying South Korea and the U.S. have been closely
monitoring North Korea and have not discerned such signs.
Assessments vary, but widely accepted belief puts North Korea's
nuclear stockpile at between two and half a dozen bombs.
Pyongyang declared in February last year that it has nuclear
weapons, but there have not yet been any tests.
Six-nation talks, involving South and North Korea, the U.S.,
China, Russia and Japan, aimed at persuading the communist state
to give up its nuclear ambitions, have been in hiatus since
November.
State Department spokesman Tom Casey, also refusing to go into
intelligence matters, said there was a "tremendous difference"
between estimates put out by the intelligence community and
"unnamed officials speculating about intelligence matters."
"All of you certainly know that we've expressed repeatedly our
concerns about North Korea's nuclear program," he said at the
daily briefing.
There is a way forward in dealing with the situation, he said,
which is through the six-party talks.
"That's still what we are looking for North Korea to do," he
said.
"There's no benefit to the North Koreans in taking steps that
only serve to further isolate them from the rest of the
international community."
Seoul's dismissal of reports of a possible North Korean nuclear
test does not indicate a discrepancy with Washington, Casey said.
"The South Koreans are strong partners with us in the six-party
talks. We are all in agreement on the way forward," he said.
Washington, Aug. 18 (Yonhap News)
© 2006 The Hankyoreh Media Company. All rights reserved.
copyright The Hankyoreh
*****************************************************************
11 N.K.¡¯s nuclear capabilites still a matter of speculation :
International : Home
+
-->
Home > International 
-->
All
Editorial & Opinion
National
International
Business
Art & Entertainment
N.K.¡¯s nuclear capabilites still a matter of speculation
Material is there, experts say, but progress unclear
¡¡
North Korea declared it possesses nuclear weapons in a foreign
ministry statement on February 10, 2005, but its true nuclear
capabilities remain for the most part unknown. What is clear is
that Pyongyang continues to build up its nuclear capabilities.
By 2002, U.S. intelligence officials assumed that Pyongyang had
enough material to make two nuclear bombs. Now they place the
figure around 12. Non-governmental researchers say the number is
even higher.
In a research paper titled "The North Korean Plutonium Stock
Mid-2006" issued in June by the Institute for International
Science and Security, David Albright writes that the North has
produced between 43 and 61 kilograms of plutonium, and of that,
it has reprocessed between 20 and 53 kilograms to a grade that
can be used in the manufacture of nuclear weapons. That is
enough to produce between 4 and 13 nuclear warheads. In addition
to its plutonium extraction activities, the North¡¯s uranium
enrichment program continues to be of interest, ever since it
became the subject of the "second nuclear crisis" of 2002.
The North is believed to have performed over 100 "high
explosive" tests since the 1980s. Such tests are an essential
step in the process of developing nuclear weapons. There were
aproximately 70 high explosive tests between 1983 and 1993 in
the Yongbyon area, and three or four in Kusong, North Pyongan
Province. Intelligence experts say the tests have continued
since then at Kilchu.
However, as of yet no evidence has been discovered that
indicates the North has succeeded at reducing its nuclear
technology into something the size of a warhead that could be
loaded onto one of its long range Taepodong-2 missiles.
Posted at : Aug.19,2006 11:07 KST
© 2006 The Hankyoreh Media Company. All rights reserved.
No part of this material may be reproduced, stored in a
retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means,
electronic, mechanical, mimeographical, in recorded form or
otherwise for commercial use, without the
permission of the Hankyoreh Media Company.
--> Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About Cheese
-->
Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About Cheese
-->
copyright The Hankyoreh
*****************************************************************
12 Hankyoreh: [Analysis] The North's nuclear test card
It has always been a question of timing, and it has been
expected. The experts predicted it would be the next step in
Pyongyang¡¯s playbook. In a North Korean foreign ministry
statement on July 16, it responded to the United Nations Security
Council¡¯s resolution by declaring it would use "all means and
methods" to strengthen its "war deterrent," reconfirming its
intention to take what it has previously called "stronger
physical action" if the U.S. and others attempt to pressure it
over its missile tests.
A similar warning of what could come happened on July 5, local
time, when the missile test took place.
In its statement on June 1, Pyongyang¡¯s foreign ministry said
that it would take "unavoidable, extremely strong measures" if
the U.S. intensifies what the North calls hostility and pressure.
In that sense, the current activity involving vehicles and large
reels of cable at Punggye-ri, Kilchu-gun, North Hamgyong
Province, when compared to the first signs Pyongyang would
attempt a missile launch, make it seem like the North might
eventually follow through with a nuclear test.
Movement in the mountainous area of Kilchu-gun that could be
related to a nuclear test is nothing new. In April 2003, U.S.
State Department spokesman Richard Boucher, referring to
activity there, said that moves towards a nuclear test are a
"serious concern for the international community." It was the
first time the U.S. officially suggested the possibility of
North Korean nuclear test. Movement suspected of being
potentially related to a nuclear test have been spotted in the
Kilchu area sporadically since the summer of 2004. According to
U.S. intelligence officials, the North was at one point making a
deliberate effort to engage in "all activities" related to a
test, including the building of an observation platform and the
filling in of the entrance to a tunnel. That activity stopped in
June 2005, perhaps because of the U.S.-South Korea summit on
June 10, the meeting between Kim Jong-il and Chung Dong-young on
June 17, and the resumption of the six-party talks.
When the North simultaneously launched a series of missiles last
month, the experts made two predictions about the North¡¯s
reaction to the U.S.¡¯s policy of "disregarding" Pyongyang and
refusing to have bilateral dialogue. The first prediction was
that it would attempt another launch of its Taepodong 2 missile.
The other was that it would perform a nuclear test. Another
Taepodong launch would require a lot of time, because the last
test was a failure and improvements would involve technical
issues. A nuclear test, on the other hand, is something the
North has been preparing for a long time.
The big question is how destructive such a test would be. If it
goes ahead with a nuclear test, North Korea will hurt relations
with the South and with China and give Japan an excuse to go
nuclear, as well. The domino effect on regional proliferation
would be hard to predict. A test would be crossing that
so-called "red line" even for China and South Korea. The
resulting crisis would be more serious than any resulting from
missile tests.
In its statement on July 16, Pyongyang¡¯s foreign ministry said
that "no one can protect us, not even the U.N." Its relations
with China are not good, because of the passage of the U.N.
Security Council resolution. The situation is such that even
China may not be able to function as a means of controlling what
transpires. Pyongyang might come to believe that it does not
have much to lose in the context of inter-Korean relations,
either.
The North is taking its brinkmanship to the brink of all brinks
over the potential for a nuclear test. But they will likely
avoid going through with it ahead of the U.S.-South Korea summit
scheduled for September 14. South Korea, the U.S., and China
need to come up with a "negotiable answer" to this most
dangerous trouble initiated by North Korea.
Posted at : Aug.19,2006 11:08 KST Modified at :
© 2006 The Hankyoreh Media Company. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
13 How Many and Where Were the Nukes? What the U.S. Government No Longer Wants You to Know about Nuclear Weapons During the Cold War
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 02:55:45 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY
National Security Archive Update, August 18, 2006
How Many and Where Were the Nukes?
What the U.S. Government No Longer Wants You to Know about Nuclear
Weapons During the Cold War
http://www.nsarchive.org
For more information: Dr. William Burr, Thomas Blanton, 202/994-7000
Washington, DC, 18 August 2006 - The Pentagon and the Energy
Department have now stamped as national security secrets the
long-public numbers of U.S. nuclear missiles during the Cold War,
including data from the public reports of the Secretaries of Defense
in 1967 and 1971, according to government documents posted today
on the Web by the National Security Archive
*****************************************************************
14 [NYTr] Cold War Nukes: What the US Govt Doesn't Want You to Know
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 17:38:44 -0400 (EDT)
X-Sender-Host-Name: olm.blythe-systems.com
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
National Security Archive - Aug 18, 2006
http://www.nsarchive.org
How Many and Where Were the Nukes?
What the U.S. Government No Longer Wants You to Know
about Nuclear Weapons During the Cold War
For more information: Dr. William Burr, Thomas Blanton, 202/994-7000
Washington, DC, 18 August 2006 - The Pentagon and the Energy
Department have now stamped as national security secrets the
long-public numbers of U.S. nuclear missiles during the Cold War,
including data from the public reports of the Secretaries of Defense
in 1967 and 1971, according to government documents posted today
on the Web by the National Security Archive
*
================================================================
.NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems
. Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us .
.339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org
.List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
.Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
================================================================
*****************************************************************
15 IPS-English POLITICS-INDIA: Nuclear Deal With US Clears
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 17:49:06 -0700
X-Nohoney: yes white-hard - relay H=adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (borg.energy-net.org) [63.203.231.61]
X-Sender-Host-Address: 63.203.231.61
X-Sender-Host-Name: adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST
ROMAIPS AP NA WD DV IP SC NU=20
POLITICS-INDIA: Nuclear Deal With US Clears Domestic Opposition
Praful Bidwai
NEW DELHI, Aug 18 (IPS) - The controversial United States-India nuclear c=
ooperation agreement has overcome a major domestic obstacle in the form o=
f a threat by India's major opposition parties to press for a Parliamenta=
ry resolution which would have tied the Manmohan Singh government's hands=
in final-stage bargaining with Washington.=20
However, the deal, which legitimises and normalises India's nuclear weapo=
ns and promotes civil nuclear cooperation with it, may have to clear more=
hurdles before it is translated into legal and practical arrangements in=
the U.S. and bodies like the Nuclear Suppliers' Group and the Internatio=
nal Atomic Energy Agency. Yet, the chances of its going through have grea=
tly improved.=20
''This is doubtless a significant, although not unexpected, victory for t=
he Indian government,'' says M.V. Ramana, an independent nuclear analyst =
at the Centre for Interdisciplinary Studies in Environment and Developmen=
t, Bangalore.
The victory was not effortless. On Thursday, Prime Minister Singh made a=
half-emotional 80 minute-long intervention in the Upper House of Parliam=
ent, defending the deal and promising that he would not =94deviate=94 fro=
m agreements inked with President George W. Bush in July 2005 and this pa=
st March.=20
Following this, the bulk of the opposition parties dropped their insisten=
ce on a 'Sense of the House' resolution, although the right-wing ultra-n=
ationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) continued to express reservations=
.=20
The opposition had been pressing for such a motion because it wanted to c=
ounter efforts in the U.S. Congress to impose certain conditions for the =
deal's approval, which go beyond the two Bush-Singh agreements.=20
Last month, the Senate and House of Representative foreign relations comm=
ittees separately finalised two texts of resolutions pertaining to the de=
al after much lobbying and wrangling. The House passed the resolution on =
July 26. The Senate is likely to vote on its text soon.=20
After the vote, the two resolutions will have to be =94reconciled=94 befo=
re the entire Congress can approve a fresh text and grant the U.S. Presid=
ent a special one-time authority to waive certain clauses in U.S. domesti=
c laws that bar nuclear cooperation with any country which has not signed=
the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), or which runs a nuclear weap=
ons programme and or has conducted a nuclear explosion. (India is not an =
NPT signatory and conducted nuclear tests eight years ago.)
The toughest bargaining between the U.S. and India is expected at the =94=
reconciliation=94 stage. The Bush administration is likely to make a no-h=
olds-barred effort to whittle down the additional conditions placed on th=
e deal by Congress.=20
=94There is an inherent tension between Bush's goal of recruiting India a=
s a strategic partner by offering it this unique nuclear deal, and the co=
nstraints under which Congress works,=94 Raman told IPS. =94Congress will=
emphasise institutional arrangements that are generic, not India-specifi=
c. It will do so by citing U.S. precedents. But Bush wants to do somethin=
g altogether new, beyond precedents.=94
The U.S. and Indian governments have gone out of their way to persuade th=
eir lawmakers to support the deal. In the U.S., Bush officials have downp=
layed India's non-compliance with the NPT, emphasised her non-proliferati=
on record, and stressed the benefits of allying with a rising economic an=
d military power.=20
It is the Bush administration, not the Indian government, which originall=
y proposed the agreement. Bush himself has been keen on it. He told Singh=
on arrival in his first-ever visit to India in March: =94Prime Minister,=
I want that deal.=94=20
The Singh government recruited sections of the media and the =94strategic=
community=94 to campaign for the deal. Several newspapers have run a cru=
sade for it, citing various real or imagined merits, including the indisp=
ensability of nuclear power for India's growth and energy =94independence=
=94, access to uranium (which is running out in India) for weapons, and a=
special relationship with the world's sole superpower.=20
It also orchestrated (partial) opposition to the deal, in particular to i=
ts modification, through serving and retired Atomic Energy Commission off=
icials.=20
On Feb. 6, AEC chairman Anil Kakodkar gave an extraordinary interview to =
an Indian daily, in which he opposed the inclusion of fast-breeder reacto=
rs in the civilian facilities India must place under IAEA inspections. Le=
ss than a month later, the U.S. conceded his demand.=20
Just three days ago, timed on India's Independence Day, eight retired AEC=
officials issued a joint statement directed at parliamentarians, express=
ing strong opposition to U.S. Congress-proposed modifications to the deal=
.=20
This will help Manmohan Singh argue that there must be no change in the =94=
goalposts=94 set by the earlier agreements; such change won't be acceptab=
le to India's democracy.=20
The nuclear scientists' arguments and the opposition's support to them wi=
ll figure prominently in the last-mile bargaining between the two governm=
ents. Singh cited these and similar objections when he met Bush last mont=
h at St Petersburg.=20
During his intervention yesterday, Singh said that any =94deviation=94 fr=
om past agreements =94will not be acceptable to us=E0 There is no questio=
n of our strategic nuclear autonomy being compromised and new and unaccep=
table conditions being introduced.=94 He said =94the central imperative=94=
in India-U.S. discussions is =94to ensure the complete and irreversible =
removal of existing restrictions imposed on India through iniquitous rest=
rictive trading regimes=E0=94=20
It won't be easy for Singh to persuade Bush to drop all the Congress-stip=
ulated conditions. Some of these are =94internal=94 to the U.S., such as =
periodic certifications by the President that India is not diverting uran=
ium to its weapons programme. Some are =94non-binding=94, such as the dem=
and that India join U.S. efforts to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear w=
eapons.=20
However, the Congressional resolutions also impose some special India-spe=
cific obligations, or restrict India's access to uranium enrichment and s=
pent-fuel reprocessing technologies. They mandate a change in the sequenc=
e of steps India must take before Congress fully approves the deal.=20
For instance, India must get advance approval from the 45-nation Nuclear =
Suppliers' Group and sign India-specific safeguards with the IAEA. (Under=
the earlier agreements, these steps would follow Congressional approval.=
)=20
=94India's effort will be directed at finessing these =91external' stipul=
ations,=94 says Ramana. =94There is plenty of scope for doing so. India c=
an sign an IAEA safeguards agreement, but will not enforce it till Congre=
ss approval comes through. It has time till 2008-10. Similarly, India is =
demanding that in return for perpetual safeguards, it must get guaranteed=
uninterrupted supply of nuclear fuel even if the U.S. backs out in case =
India conducts a test.=94=20
Some of these arrangements will depend on the NSG. That remains a bit of =
an unknown. The group includes countries like China, the Nordic states, N=
ew Zealand and Ireland which are sceptical of the deal and oppose special=
exceptions for India in multilateral agreements.=20
=94There is also the possibility that a future U.S. president will demand=
stricter compliance by India with various conditions than Bush,=94 says =
Ramana. =94It's not excluded that the deal could fall through if future p=
olitical circumstances change.=94=20
However, Singh says that he is aware of the risks and has decided to take=
them in India's larger interests. His latest statements have substantial=
ly defused the AEC officials' objections. Singh now enters the last phase=
of negotiations with his hands strengthened.=20
Meanwhile, it is becoming clear that the deal will not contribute to, but=
will detract from, the cause of nuclear disarmament. It will also promot=
e nuclear power, an expensive and hazardous energy path on which there is=
no consensus in India. (END/IPS/AP/WD/NA/IP/NU/DV/SC/PB/RDR/06)=20
=20
=3D 08181547 ORP006
NNNN
*****************************************************************
16 BBC: Allies and scientists laud Singh
Last Updated: Friday, 18 August 2006
[Manmohan Singh]
Mr Singh said India would not accept any pressure from the US
India's top nuclear scientists and Communist parties have
welcomed PM Manmohan Singh's assurances on the controversial
nuclear deal with the US.
Mr Singh said on Thursday that India would not accept any US
pressure to cap its atomic weapons programme.
Some in India fear Washington is trying to change the terms of
the agreement which was signed last year.
The deal gives India access to civilian nuclear technology in
return for having its civilian nuclear sites inspected.
Critics say it will undermine global nuclear security efforts as
India has not signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
'Impressive'
In a heated, often emotional, debate in the upper house of
parliament on Thursday, Mr Singh strongly defended the nuclear
agreement that he signed with President George W Bush.
We again made it clear to t United States that India could not be
expected to take on obligations such as placing its nuclear
facilities under safeguards Indian PM Manmohan Singh
He said India would not accept any move by Washington that would
impede its atomic weapons programme, nor would it allow any
international scrutiny of its military facilities.
And Mr Singh also argued that the deal was in India's interests.
The prime minister has invited the country's top scientists for
further discussion on the subject next week.
MR Srinivasan, former chairman of India's Atomic Energy
Commission (AEC), said scientists were looking forward to the
meeting.
"Unless India makes the US explicitly accept the position that
the prime minister adopted and unless the bilateral agreement is
clearly reflected in black and white, there will be no guarantee
that what is deemed non-binding on India in today's legislation
will not be converted in future to binding clauses by future
administrations in the US," Mr Srinivasan was quoted as saying by
the Press Trust of India news agency.
[Kakrapar nuclear power station, Gujarat] Energy-hungry India
needs nuclear power
Former AEC chairman PK Iyengar echoed the same sentiment.
"The prime minister has made so many commitments to answer the
scientists as well as opposition's concerns and at the same time
he has not left out his commitment related to the American
decision," he said.
India's main Communist parties, who are allies of the ruling
Congress-led federal government, also said they were satisfied
with Mr Singh's assurances.
"The prime minister assured that the government would stick to
the stand based on all the doubts raised by us and he even went
on say that if there was any pressure on part of the US on these
questions or to change the deal, the government would reconsider
the bill," Communist Party of India (Marxist) leader Sitaram
Yechury said.
Indian newspapers and analysts lauded Mr Singh's performance in
parliament.
"The prime minister has finally stood up to defend the
constitutional right of his government to conduct foreign
policy," analyst CR Raja Mohan wrote in the Indian Express
newspaper.
He called Mr Singh's speech "impressive".
"He's gaining in stature and confidence and that's very good
news. He's willing to respond to his political opponents in a
political manner, no longer only in a defensive or a technocratic
manner," Mr Raja Mohan told the AFP news agency.
*****************************************************************
17 AFP: Diffident Indian PM hailed for speech on nuke deal
by Tripti Lahiri Fri Aug 18, 6:30 AM ET
NEW DELHI (AFP) - India's sometimes diffident prime minister was
hailed by the press and analysts for his passionate defence of a
controversial nuclear pact with the United States, but some
critics of the deal remained unconvinced.
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh tried Thursday to calm fears of
India's political and scientific establishments that a historic
civilian nuclear deal with the United States would blunt India's
nuclear weapons program.
Singh, wearing his trademark pale blue turban, spoke for more
than an hour, beginning with a surprisingly emotional preface in
which he promised to "discharge my duties for the country to the
last ounce of my blood".
The prime minister took the offensive with quotes from "The
Prince," Niccolo Machiavelli's medieval treatise on statecraft,
to present himself as a man unafraid to take unpopular political
decisions for the good of the nation.
"It must be considered that there is nothing more difficult to
carry out, nor more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to
handle, than to initiate a new order of things," quoted Singh.
He said the deal was crucial to meet the energy needs of
power-starved India which is aiming to sustain annual economic
growth of eight to 10 percent.
The premier's comments came in response to criticism of the deal
from eight nuclear scientists, opposition groups as well as
Singh's own left-wing legislative allies.
On Friday, the Hindu newspaper applauded his performance before
parliament, saying it indicated a "transformed" man.
"In a way Singh won the day even before he came down to the
specifics of the nuclear deal," political editor Harish Khare
wrote.
Under the pact, India has agreed to open most of its atomic
reactors to international inspection but is allowed to keep
pre-selected military nuclear facilities out of public scrutiny.
In return, India will receive unfettered access to long-denied
US nuclear technology to generate power.
Washington has been withholding civilian nuclear know-how from
India since 1974 when New Delhi conducted its first atomic test.
New Delhi conducted more tests in 1998.
The deal, passed by the House of Representatives 359-68, now has
to be approved by the US Senate.
However some US lawmakers are demanding a greater convergence of
views between New Delhi and Washington on foreign policy, most
notably on Iran.
Others have also questioned whether India can be trusted with
critical nuclear secrets and have demanded that more stringent
safeguards be put in place.
Singh assured Indian lawmakers that he would not accept any
fettering of India's strategic program or "shifting of
goalposts".
"We will not accept any conditions that go beyond the July 18
and the March 2 (accords)," Singh said, referring to meetings
between him and US President George W. Bush in Washington and in
New Delhi during which the deal was negotiated.
Strategic analyst C. Raja Mohan called Singh's performance
"impressive".
"He's gaining in stature and confidence and that's very good
news," Raja Mohan told AFP. "He's willing to respond to his
political opponents in a political manner, no longer only in a
defensive or a technocratic manner."
Raja Mohan, who called the technical debate a "pseudo-debate,"
said Singh addressed the larger question of who should control
Indian foreign policy.
"The prime minister has finally stood up to defend the
constitutional right of his government to conduct foreign
policy," Raja Mohan wrote in his column Friday in the Indian
Express newspaper.
Many of the deal's critics said they were reassured by the
speech, but opposition politicians and some strategic experts
said they were unconvinced.
"The fact that he stood his ground and provided assurances of
various kinds was soothing to the ears of many," said Brahma
Chellaney, a professor of strategic studies at the independent
Center for Policy Research in New Delhi.
"(But) if you read his speech very carefully it is short on
specifics and long on platitudes."
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
18 Gulfnews: US in Lebanon: Dumb and dumber
Last updated: 01:47 (GMT+04:00) Saturday, August 19, 2006
By Fawaz Turki, Special to Gulf News
One of this century's most formidable military planners, the
late General Giap of Vietnam, a man whose durable arguments
about guerrilla warfare continue to resonate among insurgents
worldwide, is again pertinent to US foreign policy.
In 1968, soon after the Tet Offensive, Giap was interviewed by
Eric Rouleau of Le Monde and asked how he could possibly claim
victory when the Viet Cong were virtually decimated in that
campaign.
Giap's nonchalant response was this: "It doesn't matter that our
forces were decimated, we won."
The Tet Offensive was a turning point in the US intervention in
Vietnam, for it soured American public opinion against the war,
including the opinion of its most ardent supporters.
It wasn't long after that, in April 1975, when we saw that
iconic photo of escapees on the roof of the American embassy
scrambling to climb aboard the last American helicopter to flee
Saigon.
The moral of the story? War, especially people's war, has a
dialectic all its own. You win by ensuring that the political
goals of your enemy, pursued in this case via military means,
will continue to elude him.
Thwarting US designs
To that extent, we can say that Hezbollah has won the war simply
because it was able to thwart US designs in Lebanon. And lest we
forget, this was an American war fought by it in Lebanon through
its Israeli proxy. It now transpires that there was more to all
this than the eye could see.
According to Seymour Hirsh, the Pulitzer Prize winning
investigative reporter who has access to extensive sources in
Washington with knowledge of the current thinking of both the
Israeli and the US governments, "Israel had devised a plan for
attacking Hezbollah and shared it with Bush Administration
officials well before the July 12th kidnappings [of two Israeli
soldiers]".
He added, in his report in the current issue of The New Yorker,
quoting one of his sources: "It's not that the Israelis had a
trap that Hezbollah walked into, but there was a strong feeling
in the White House that sooner or later the Israelis were going
to do it."
However, Hirsh tells us, President George W. Bush, forever
protective of Israel, was anxious to see that Hezbollah's
missiles were destroyed before his projected assault on Iran,
that third leg of the tripod known as the axis of of evil, whose
nuclear sites he was determined to destroy.
The thinking was that Hezbollah's military capabilities, which
the group could potentially have used in retaliation against
Israel, should be crippled in advance of any action against
Iran.
"The Israelis told us that it would be a cheap war with many
benefits," Hirsh quotes a US government consultant "with close
ties to Israel" as saying.
"Why oppose it? We'll be able to hunt down and bomb missiles,
tunnels and bunkers from the air. It would be a demo for Iran."
Overwhelming task
The cheap war turned expensive for Lebanon, for the Israeli
entity and for the United States. The Lebanese people, with more
than a thousand dead, mostly civilians, a million harrowed and
beaten refugees, a crushed infrastructure and a charred
landscape with 400 miles of roadway destroyed, 35,000 homes
pulverised and a 150 bridges demolished, are left with the
overwhelming task of reconstructing their shattered country.
The Israelis, with more than 160 dead, most of them tellingly
soldiers, got a taste of their own medicine, for the first time
since 1948, as their towns and cities in occupied Palestine were
shelled daily, and their soldiers in Lebanon spent days, often
weeks, to wrest control of a village here and there from
tenacious Hezbollah fighters.
How do you scare people even when you are supported by Merkava
tanks and laser guided missiles who are waging a people's war
against you, a people who are not only unafraid of death but
welcome it as martyrdom, a people who believe that when a man
dies his life ends, but when a martyr dies, his life begins?
And the US, which has great designs on democratising the region
(read, regrouping it in response to its geopolitical interests),
finds that its name in the Arab world, in the Islamic world and
the European world stands for all that is tawdry.
After Lebanon, Washington will discover, to its chagrin, that
gusts of social and political change will indeed blow across the
Middle East, but not those it had anticipated or planned for.
Contrary to its expectations, the Lebanese people did not turn
against Hezbollah, and other Arabs, remembering Condi Rice's
callous observation about how we were witnessing "the birth
pangs of a new Middle East" that she uttered as bombs rained
down on civilians will see nothing but subtle larceny when
Washington invokes the echoes of Jeffersonian principles that it
altruistically wants to "introduce" them to.
How dumb and dumber can you be when, motivated by imperial
hubris, you persist in doing the same thing, all the way from
Iran in 1953 to Chile in 1973, from Vietnam in 1963 to Iraq in
2003, and expect to get different results? A war on the cheap in
Lebanon? Sorry, George. The only cheap thing about that war was
the cheap thrill we all got out of knowing that, in their
designs on that sad land, the tricksters were tricked.
Fawaz Turki is a veteran journalist, lecturer and author of
several books, including The Disinherited: Journal of a
Palestinian Exile. He lives in Washington D.C.
© Al Nisr Publishing LLC 2006. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
19 Daily Yomiuri: Agencies seeking 14 bil. yen to study new N-reactor
The Yomiuri Shimbun
The Education, Science and Technology Ministry and the Economy,
Trade and Industry Ministry's Natural Resources and Energy
Agency are likely to request about 14 billion yen in budgetary
appropriations for fiscal 2007, to further advance their study
of a prototype reactor, according to sources.
The move is designed to complement a government plan to build
and operate a fast-breeder reactor for practical purposes by
2050. The planned budgetary request compares with 500 million
yen in budgetary allocations for similar purposes in fiscal
2006.
Fast-breeder reactors, which are highly efficient in producing
nuclear energy, are expected to play a key role in securing a
stable energy supply in the future. The government has already
decided to construct a prototype reactor by 2025 to confirm the
safety and economy of fast-breeder reactors.
The education ministry will require about 10 billion yen to 11
billion yen and the Natural Resources and Energy Agency 4
billion yen for fiscal 2007. It will be the first time for the
agency to request funding for research on a fast-breeder
reactor. (Aug. 19, 2006)
© The Yomiuri Shimbun.
*****************************************************************
20 OC Register: San Onofre reactor added to list
[OCRegister.com] Friday, August 18, 2006 ![]()
*****************************************************************