***************************************************************** 12/08/01 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 9.289 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POWER CONTENTS 1 Low Radiation Hurts Bystander Cells: 2 WKU gets 10-day delay 3 KEDO seeks protocol on indemnity for accidents 4 Ministers' MOX fight to continue 5 Anti-Sellafield demonstrations at Trafalgar Square ended 6 NATIONAL NEWS: Nuclear fuel ruling upheld on appeal 7 Sellafield: Eco-Nightmare Or Smart Power? 8 University must reply to state’s neutron citation by Christmas Eve 9 Nuclear waste body names new chairman 10 Temelin pact may face new obstacle 11 KEDO seeks protocol on indemnity for accidents 12 Libya denies attempts to get Uranium 13 Hearing set in Reno on Yucca dump 14 Where I Stand -- Brian Greenspun: Beyond the bottom line 15 Editorial: It's no wonder why they're getting antsy 16 "Nuclear Power Nears Peak" 17 NATIONAL NEWS: Nuclear industry cautioned 18 Sloppy modifications said behind N-plant blast 19 Nuclear plant appeal is lost 20 German leader speaks on Ukraine's EU prospects 21 Russia determined to build more nuclear plants abroad 22 Indian Point Faces Scrutiny After Some Crews Fail Tests NUCLEAR WEAPONS CONTENTS 1 Fwd: [DU Information List] US used nuclear waste 2 Bell tolls for FAS and US freedom of information on the Afghan war 3 Mobsters nabbed trying to sell off uranium in cafe 4 Pentagon Presses for a Radiation Drug 5 Reactor dome to be razed by 2003 6 Energy: Top Lab Chief to Step Down 7 Fallout Shelters Rise in Popularity 8 Uranium theft raises nuclear fears 9 Holding North Korea Accountable 10 People of Pensacola already suffering a chemical assault 11 British nuclear submarine arrives in Gibraltar 12 Foreign Policy Association - Resource Library ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POWER ARTICLES ***************************************************************** 1 Low Radiation Hurts Bystander Cells: Science News Online, Dec. 8, 2001 Week of Dec. 8, 2001; Vol. 160, No. 23 Ben Harder Particles that radiate from decaying radon atoms can ravage the living cells they strike and increase the likelihood that those cells will later become cancerous. Researchers have now directly demonstrated that neighboring cells not suffering direct hits can be harmed, too. They've also taken a step toward showing how this type of radiation, called alpha particles, indirectly hurts those bystanders. Alpha particles struck the nuclei (blue) of some cells while missing other cells (red). Abnormalities (arrows) in unirradiated cells indicate that the DNA of these bystanders suffered indirect damage. C. Geard/Columbia University Radon derives from the decay of uranium and seeps naturally into the air from the ground. It's the primary environmental source of alpha particles, which contribute to cancer risk by causing aberrations in DNA. Alpha particles from inhaled radon are second only to smoking as a cause of lung cancer (SN: 3/7/98, p. 159). Because a person's exposure to alpha particles typically is low, researchers have had to estimate public health threats from radon by extrapolating from the effects of higher doses of alpha radiation. Such data comes primarily from studies of survivors of the atomic bombs that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan. The customary extrapolation, called the linear no-threshold model, assumes that cancer risk is proportional to the dose of radiation even at low doses. According to a team of scientists led by Tom K. Hei of Columbia University, that model underestimates the risks from low-dose radiation. In the Dec. 4 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the researchers demonstrate more clearly than before that alpha particles striking and damaging the nuclei of a small fraction of the cells in a population can do enough indirect damage to nearby cells to increase cancer risk almost as much as if all the cells had been hit. The researchers used a precision microbeam device to fire alpha particles into nuclei of human-hamster hybrid cells in petri dishes. When the researchers irradiated all the nuclei with exactly one alpha particle each, 98 mutations of a certain gene occurred per 100,000 surviving cells. Zapping only 5 percent of the nuclei produced 57 such mutations per 100,000 cells, rather than the 5 mutations that a linear model predicts. Irradiating 20 percent of the nuclei produced more than 80 mutations, almost as many as resulted from 100 percent irradiation. Those data "suggest the need to reconsider the validity of the linear extrapolation," the researchers say. Cell-to-cell communication channels called gap junctions appear to play a role in causing mutations in bystander cells. When the researchers bathed cells in a chemical that inhibits gap-junction communication and then irradiated the nuclei, they found fewer mutations among bystanders. Almost no bystanders were damaged in another experiment in which the cells lacked gap junctions. "It's unequivocal that there's a bystander effect," says Eric J. Hall, the director of radiation research at Columbia, who wasn't an author on the paper. "The beauty of the microbeam technique is that you know which cells have been hit" and can observe mutations in nontargeted cells, he says. Previous studies using other techniques have found a bystander effect, but this is the first to directly demonstrate mutations, which are a cancer risk. Philippe Duport, a radiation researcher at the University of Ottawa in Ontario, calls the study "very well designed and conducted," but sees "reasons to doubt" that risks are disproportionately high at low doses. Radiation's effects in cell cultures don't necessarily reflect what happens in "a whole organism, with its full range of defense-repair mechanisms," says Duport. Processes such as DNA repair and cell death triggered by radiation damage could cancel the effect on bystander cells observed in the lab, he suggests. Furthermore, while a bystander effect can contribute to cancer, other cell-to-cell interactions in living tissues "may mitigate against increased risk," says Barry D. Michael, a radiation biophysicist at the Gray Cancer Institute in Northwood, England. One of these interactions halts cell division and hence cancer. "The jury is still out on whether [cell-to-cell] effects lead to a greater or lower risk," Michael says. References: Zhou, H., T.K. Hei, et al. 2001. Radiation risk to low fluences of a particles may be greater than we thought. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 98(Dec. 4):14410-14415. Abstract available at http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/98/25/14410. Further Readings: Helmuth, L. 1999. More than one way to mutate a cell's DNA. Science News 155(May 1):278. Raloff, J. 1998. Radon—lung cancer risk high for smokers. Science News 153(March 7):159. Sources: Philippe Duport International Center for Low Dose Radiation Research Institute of the Environment University of Ottawa 555 King Edward Avenue Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5 Canada Eric J. Hall Center for Radiological Research Columbia University 630 West 168th Street New York, NY 10032-3702 Barry D. Michael Gray Cancer Institute Mount Vernon Hospital Northwood, Middlesex HA6 2JR United Kingdom From Science News, Vol. 160, No. 23, Dec. 8, 2001, p. 356. Copyright ©2001 Science Service. All rights reserved. 1719 N St., NW, Washington, DC 20036 | 202-785-2255 | scinews@sciserv.org ***************************************************************** 2 WKU gets 10-day delay DAILY NEWS ONLINE - Bowling Green, Ky. Thursday, December 06, 2001 Select an area --Subscribing-- University must reply to state's neutron citation by Christmas Eve By Deborah Highland, dhighland@bgdailynews.com -- 270-783-3242 Western Kentucky University has received a 10-day extension from the state Cabinet for Health Services to reply to the state’s citation for operating a neutron generator in an unauthorized location. Last month the state issued a cease and desist order to Western to stop all activities involving the use of neutron generators and to secure all radioactive material in the physics department. The state alleges in its order that Western used a neutron generator in the parking lot of the Applied Physics Institute on Nashville Road on Nov. 2. Neutron generators emit radiation when turned on and because of that, uses and locations of use are regulated by the state, state Cabinet for Health Services spokeswoman Gwenda Bond said. The university’s radiation safety committee is investigating the matter but has not made a determination about how much radiation, if any, was emitted, university spokesman Bob Skipper said. Anyone using a neutron generator would have worn a radiation badge to detect exposure levels, Skipper said. "We have not received the readings back on the radiation badges," he said, prompting the university asked for the 10-day extension, which gives Western until Dec. 24 to respond. Western is licensed to use the generators, but was not given the OK by the state to use a neutron generator outside. In addition, when Western applied for permission to use a neutron generator outdoors, state health officials denied the request, according to the order. The outcome of the investigation could affect the university’s radioactive materials license. The state investigated a similar incident at Western in 1994, Bond said. The basic outcome of that investigation was there was nothing found that warranted a formal citation from the state,” Bond said. Physics professor George Vourvopoulos, who was named in the 1994 incident and again in the Nov. 2 incident, declined to comment on the most recent allegations. However, he did say that he expects the university to wrap up its investigation within the next few days, at which point it will respond to the state. ***************************************************************** 3 KEDO seeks protocol on indemnity for accidents welcome to Korea Herald!!_National http://www.koreaherald.com Sunday, December 9, 2001 The Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO) will try to conclude a protocol with North Korea next year on indemnity for nuclear accidents, KEDO officials said yesterday. In its executive board meeting held in Seoul, KEDO also decided to extend the European Union's executive board membership for another five years, as the EU intended to increase its annual contribution from 15 million euros to 20 million euros, they said. "We also plan to negotiate with North Korea to conclude another protocol on the North's repayment of reactor construction costs starting in the first half of next year," said a KEDO official, who asked not to be named. The official said the Seoul meeting also discussed the 2002 KEDO budget bill, under which KEDO executive members - South Korea, the United States, Japan and the EU - will shoulder the financial burden for the project. "The KEDO budget bill will be discussed until the first half of next year and the budget will be finalized around next June or July, through ongoing discussion," he said. At the two-day executive board meeting, the official said KEDO also discussed labor affairs involving North Korean workers at the light-water reactor construction site. KEDO has been funding the light-water reactor project under a 1994 agreement between North Korea and the United States, which saw the North agree not to develop nuclear weapons in exchange for the construction of two nuclear reactors for nonmilitary use. KEDO Executive Director Charles Kartman arrived in Seoul Tuesday for the meeting, following his four-day visit to Pyongyang. While in the North, Karman reportedly discussed with North Korean officials the establishment of a satellite telecommunications network in the reactor construction site in Sinpo, and other issues involving the work force there. (sjkang@koreaherald.co.kr 2001.12.08 (C) Copyright 2000 Digital Korea Herald ***************************************************************** 4 Ministers' MOX fight to continue The Irish Independent GOVERNMENT ministers reacted with disappointment to the failure of a British High Court appeal against the MOX nuclear reprocessing plant in Sellafield, but vowed to continue fighting Ireland's case internationally. Environment minister Noel Dempsey said he was disap pointed at the failure of the Greenpeace/Friends of the Earth challenge to the plant on economic grounds. "It's disappointing but the Government will vigourously pursue our case at the International Tribunal of the Law of the Sea on 17th December," he said. The Government would again ask the UK not to go ahead with the plant on December 20 and "to behave like a good neighbour, by consulting us on their next move," he said. The minister with responsi bility for nuclear safety Joe Jacob also said he was disappointed at yesterday's result. His department's legal team had maintained a watching brief at the court case in London and the economic arguments used may form part of our case at the tri bunal, a spokesperson for the minister said. Ireland and the UK have until 17th December three days before the MOX plant is due to open to come up with measures to prevent pollution of the Irish Sea, and failing that this country can apply for further relief. Green Party leader Trevor Sargent said the British government and nuclear company BNFL were using "voodoo economics" to justify the opening of the MOX plant, which will see armed shipments of spent nuclear fuel brought to the plant. Aideen Sheehan © Copyright Unison ***************************************************************** 5 Anti-Sellafield demonstrations at Trafalgar Square ended The Norway Post - Doorway to Norway 7. Desember 2001 Two members of the Norwegian environmentalist group Bellona scaled the Norwegian Christmas tree on Trafalgar Square Friday, displaying banners protesting against the radioactive emissions from the nuclear reposession plant at Sellafield. Other Bellona members distributed anti-Sellafield pamphlets to passers-by. Belona ended the demonstration Friday night. The Norwegian government has repeatedly protested against the nuclear pollution from the Sellafield plant. Traces of radioactive pollutants have been found along the coast of Norway. (NRK) Rolleiv Solholm ***************************************************************** 6 NATIONAL NEWS: Nuclear fuel ruling upheld on appeal Financial Times; Dec 8, 2001 By MATTHEW JONES Environmentalists have lost their appeal against the opening of a controversial nuclear fuel recycling plant in Sellafield, Cumbria. Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace had urged the Court of Appeal to overturn a High Court ruling last month that ministers had made "no error in law" in approving the Sellafield mox plant, which combines reprocessed plutonium with uranium. But Lords Justices Simon Brown, Waller and Dyson yesterday unanimously rejected the appeal, saying the government was "entitled to decide these cases in the real world". Greenpeace and FoE argued that ministers took a distorted view of the economics of the plant by writing off its Pounds 470m cost. Under European Union law, the economic, social and other benefits of new atomic investments have to be demonstrated before being given the go-ahead. The groups claimed a partial victory because future nuclear projects in Britain will have to take account of the construction and other capital costs before they are approved. British Nuclear Fuels, which owns the mox plant, said the verdict supported its position that the plant was viable. It still faces two separate international legal actions from Ireland, which is concerned that the plant could pollute the Irish Sea and that the risk of a terrorist attack on the plant or shipments of mox fuel present an unacceptable risk to the environment. Dublin earlier this week failed to win an injunction preventing BNFL from commissioning the plant on December 20. But Joe Jacob, the Irish minister responsible for nuclear safety, said he would continue the legal actions and was considering a further challenge before the European Court of Justice on the UK's decision that the plant was economically justified. Copyright: The Financial Times Limited 1995-1998 ***************************************************************** 7 Sellafield: Eco-Nightmare Or Smart Power? Headline news from Sky News - Witness the event [http://www.sky.com] Nuclear Plant: Step Forward Environmental groups have lost the latest round of their battle to block the opening of a controversial nuclear reprocessing plant. Three Court of Appeal judges have rejected an appeal brought by Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace. The two groups were fighting a High Court decision last month on a complicated legal point. The High Court had ruled the government had made "no error of law" in giving the go-ahead for the opening of the mixed plutonium and uranium oxide (Mox) facility at Sellafield in Cumbria. But the objectors argued the government had taken a "distorted" view by saying the introduction of Mox was economically justified under European Union law. 'Partial victory' They fear the Sellafield scheme could lead to pollution and become a target for thieves and/or terrorists. After the ruling the two groups claimed they had won a "partial victory". They said: "The Court of Appeal's decision means that in future, before any new nuclear project can go ahead, the construction and other capital costs will have to be taken into account when deciding if the practice is economically beneficial. "But we are angry that this pointless, dangerous and uneconomic Mox plant is still on course to open." ***************************************************************** 8 University must reply to state’s neutron citation by Christmas Eve DAILY NEWS ONLINE - Bowling Green, Ky. December 06, 2001 By Deborah Highland, dhighland@bgdailynews.com -- 270-783-3242 Western Kentucky University has received a 10-day extension from the state Cabinet for Health Services to reply to the state’s citation for operating a neutron generator in an unauthorized location. Last month the state issued a cease and desist order to Western to stop all activities involving the use of neutron generators and to secure all radioactive material in the physics department. The state alleges in its order that Western used a neutron generator in the parking lot of the Applied Physics Institute on Nashville Road on Nov. 2. Neutron generators emit radiation when turned on and because of that, uses and locations of use are regulated by the state, state Cabinet for Health Services spokeswoman Gwenda Bond said. The university’s radiation safety committee is investigating the matter but has not made a determination about how much radiation, if any, was emitted, university spokesman Bob Skipper said. Anyone using a neutron generator would have worn a radiation badge to detect exposure levels, Skipper said. “We have not received the readings back on the radiation badges,” he said, prompting the university asked for the 10-day extension, which gives Western until Dec. 24 to respond. Western is licensed to use the generators, but was not given the OK by the state to use a neutron generator outside. In addition, when Western applied for permission to use a neutron generator outdoors, state health officials denied the request, according to the order. The outcome of the investigation could affect the university’s radioactive materials license. The state investigated a similar incident at Western in 1994, Bond said. “The basic outcome of that investigation was there was nothing found that warranted a formal citation from the state,” Bond said. Physics professor George Vourvopoulos, who was named in the 1994 incident and again in the Nov. 2 incident, declined to comment on the most recent allegations. However, he did say that he expects the university to wrap up its investigation within the next few days, at which point it will respond to the state. [http://www.bgdailynews.com ***************************************************************** 9 Nuclear waste body names new chairman By Matthew Jones Published: December 7 2001 09:07 | Last Updated: December 7 2001 09:38 Sir Ken Jackson, general secretary of the AEEU electrical and engineering union, has become chairman of Nirex, the UK nuclear waste body, in a move seen as improving transparency in the industry. Sir Ken replaces David Bonser, an executive director of British Nuclear Fuels, who has been chairman for the past four years. Sources said his appointment on Thursday afternoon was likely to be a prelude to wholesale reforms in Nirex that would transfer its ownership from the atomic industry to an independent body. "You can see the way policy is moving. The ownership and independence of Nirex is becoming a real issue and we need a safe pair of hands to guide us through the next few years," said one official. Nirex is 75 per cent owned by BNFL, 15 per cent by the UK Atomic Energy Authority and 11 per cent by British Energy, the privatised nuclear power producer. Environmentalists argue this presents a conflict of interests because commercial companies are likely to push for the cheapest, rather than the safest, storage options. Ministers in September launched a five-year consultation on dealing with Britain's nuclear waste stockpile, which is set to grow from 10,000 tonnes to at least 500,000 tonnes over the next century. Plans for an underground waste repository near Sellafield in Cumbria were widely criticised by the public and scrapped by the Conservative government just before the general election in 1997. Michael Meacher, environment minister, said another underground repository is the most likely solution but that the consultation process should be more transparent this time to win over public opinion. Sir Ken, regarded as a moderniser and Tony Blair's favourite union chief, is expected to take a more hands-on role than Mr Bonser in helping to gain support for long-term storage but will continue his work with the AEEU. The Nirex reforms would run in parallel to proposals by the government last week to create a new state-owned authority to oversee billions of pounds of historic nuclear liabilities owned by BNFL and the UK Atomic Energy Authority. More open consultations on nuclear waste helped Finland gain approval for a repository and earlier this week a Swedish municipality approved investigations for a repository in the Forsmark area. ***************************************************************** 10 Temelin pact may face new obstacle The Prague Post Online Austrian nationalist party to ignore Brussels agreement By Kate Swoger [kswoger@praguepost.cz] and Christopher P. Winner [cpwinner@praguepost.cz] STAFF WRITERS nationalist Freedom Party has tempered optimism in the wake of a compromise agreement between the Czech Republic and Austria over the disputed nuclear power station at Temelin. On Nov. 29, the two nations appeared to find a long-awaited middle ground on plant safety, clearing a major obstacle to this country's efforts to join the European Union. TEMELIN TIMELINE • Oct. 2000 Austrian anti-nuclear activists stage border protests. • Dec. 2000 Melk agreement to study plant safety and environmental impact • May 2001 Turbine rotor defect provokes four-month shutdown. Minor non-nuclear glitches follow. • Oct. 2001 Austrian referendum is set for January. Voters will be asked if they want the government to block Czech EU entry • Nov. 2001 Brussels compromise reached. Text of Czech-Austrian Brussels agreement on Temelin Temelin, a hybrid of 1980s Soviet technology and recent Western upgrades, is 60 kilometers (37 miles) from the northern border of nuclear-free Austria. A deal hammered out between Prime Minister Milos Zeman and Austrian Chancellor Wolfgang Schussel in Brussels called for the Czech Republic to modify the plant in accordance with the wishes of Austrian officials. Zeman placed the cost of the alterations at about 100 million Kc ($2.6 million). In return, Austria agreed to withdraw its objections to the Czech Republic's admittance to the union, a necessary move if Prague is to successfully place its energy laws in line with EU requirements. Both Zeman and Schussel hailed the agreement as a diplomatic success. But the day after the lengthy negotiations, Austrian Deputy Chancellor Susanne Riess-Passer, a Freedom Party member, said her party considered the pact to be a unilateral act by Schussel. She said Austrian government decisions "could only be made jointly" and warned that an EU veto was still possible. All 15 EU member states must approve the entry of new candidates. The Czech Republic hopes to join the union in 2004, when a group of Eastern European states is admitted. "I cannot imagine that operating Temelin is more important to the Czechs than joining the EU," said Riess-Passer, whose party wants Prague to shut the plant in exchange for EU membership. The Freedom Party has the same number of parliamentary seats as the Schussel-led People's Party. A falling out between the two parties could cause the collapse of Austria's center-right coalition. "Without the Freedom Party, the Czech Republic cannot join the EU. And the Freedom Party will not approve Temelin," said Peter Westenthaler, the party's parliamentary leader. The Freedom Party move appeared to delay any Czech-Austrian rapprochement until after a nonbinding January referendum in which Austrians will be asked if they want their government to debate blocking Czech entry into the EU over the Temelin issue. That vote is scheduled the week of Jan. 14-20. Support for the referendum could give momentum to the Freedom Party and to Austria's strong anti-nuclear lobby. Westenthaler said the referendum was now "even more important than it originally seemed." Until the Freedom Party's statement, the Nov. 29 meeting appeared to provide a happy ending to Brussels-brokered bilateral talks that began almost a year ago at Melk, Austria. "The winner is clearly Mr. Schussel and the losers are the [Freedom Party] and [its former leader Jorg] Haider," said University of Vienna political scientist Hans-Georg Heinrich. The Brussels deal was legally binding on the Czech Republic, a key point for the Austrian side. But it is a strictly bilateral agreement that will not influence the management of nuclear power plants in EU countries, said Jean-Christophe Filori, a spokesman for the European Commission, the EU's executive arm. The EU has no uniform nuclear safety standards and some of its members feared a deal on Temelin would affect their plants. Temelin has been plagued by minor glitches since its reactor was first activated in October 2000. Plant officials and Czech leaders have defended the plant without reservation, suggesting Austrian criticisms were a biased challenge to Czech sovereignty. The agreement is expected to clear the way for Prague to wrap up talks on the so-called "energy chapter" Dec. 12. Energy is one of 31 areas in which the country must bring its laws in line with EU norms. The ongoing disagreement with Austria has plagued this country's efforts on several fronts, including the operation of the plant itself, the EU negotiations and efforts to privatize the energy sector. Environmental leaders, meanwhile, expressed mixed feelings about the Brussels pact. "I'm happy that ... the Czech government has opened half of one eye to the problems of Temelin," said Jan Haverkamp, a Greenpeace spokesman. "I still hope it will open the other one and a half." Plant director Frantisek Hezoucky said the agreement was "a political paper that shows the extreme good will of the Czech government." Asked if the accord would silence critics of the plant, he said, "Unfortunately, no." -- With wire reports. The writes may be reached at news@praguepost.cz [news@praguepost.cz] The Prague Post, a weekly newspaper published in the Czech Republic. ***************************************************************** 11 KEDO seeks protocol on indemnity for accidents http://www.koreaherald.com The Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO) will try to conclude a protocol with North Korea next year on indemnity for nuclear accidents, KEDO officials said yesterday. In its executive board meeting held in Seoul, KEDO also decided to extend the European Union's executive board membership for another five years, as the EU intended to increase its annual contribution from 15 million euros to 20 million euros, they said. "We also plan to negotiate with North Korea to conclude another protocol on the North's repayment of reactor construction costs starting in the first half of next year," said a KEDO official, who asked not to be named. The official said the Seoul meeting also discussed the 2002 KEDO budget bill, under which KEDO executive members - South Korea, the United States, Japan and the EU - will shoulder the financial burden for the project. "The KEDO budget bill will be discussed until the first half of next year and the budget will be finalized around next June or July, through ongoing discussion," he said. At the two-day executive board meeting, the official said KEDO also discussed labor affairs involving North Korean workers at the light-water reactor construction site. KEDO has been funding the light-water reactor project under a 1994 agreement between North Korea and the United States, which saw the North agree not to develop nuclear weapons in exchange for the construction of two nuclear reactors for nonmilitary use. KEDO Executive Director Charles Kartman arrived in Seoul Tuesday for the meeting, following his four-day visit to Pyongyang. While in the North, Karman reportedly discussed with North Korean officials the establishment of a satellite telecommunications network in the reactor construction site in Sinpo, and other issues involving the work force there. (sjkang@koreaherald.co.kr 2001.12.08 (C) Copyright 2000 Digital Korea Herald. ***************************************************************** 12 Libya denies attempts to get Uranium Libya, Politics, 12/7/2001 Libya on Tuesday denied its attempt to get an amount of Uranium, the main component to manufacture the nuclear bomb. Libya has also refuted African media reports which talked about the involvement of prominent officials in the Democratic Congo republic in selling and leaking an declared amount of Uranium to the Libyan authority. In a statement issued in Tripoli on Tuesday, the people's committee for African unity in Libya said that these information are totally groundless and promoting them means just a propaganda for fabricated intelligence information to include the name of Libya in the service of certain forces. In the first official Libyan comment on these reports, the people's committee for African unity said that " Libya's name was involved in such news on a futile base." Copyright © 1995-2001 Arabic News.com, All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 13 Hearing set in Reno on Yucca dump [RENO GAZETTE-JOURNAL] Staff Reports [] 12/7/2001 08:26 The public is invited to a hearing in Reno today to comment on a proposal to build a nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain in southern Nevada. The hearing, hosted by the U.S. Department of Energy, follows the release of new documents related to the plan. The hearing is scheduled from 11 a.m. to 8 p.m. today in meeting room B3 at the Reno-Sparks Convention Center, 4590 S. Virginia St. Those who can’t attend the meeting have until Dec. 14 to send comments to Carol Hanlon, Yucca Mountain Site Characterization Office, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, U.S. Department of Energy, m/s 025, P.O. Box 364629, North Las Vegas, 89036-8629. © Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a Gannett ***************************************************************** 14 Where I Stand -- Brian Greenspun: Beyond the bottom line Las Vegas SUN December 07, 2001 Brian Greenspun is editor of the Las Vegas Sun. --- IT IS NOT ABOUT science, it is about the science of money. What other possible motivation could there be for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to jump so far out front and center in the federal government's effort to shove the country's high-level nuclear waste down our Yucca Mountain? There is something to be said for consistency, I suppose, and in that regard we should hardly be surprised that a national group representing business interests across the country would be looking at the bottom line and not the moral, ethical and humanitarian lines that define our civilization. What we can be, though, is disgusted that a group which cares not one whit about people, only money, would inject itself into an issue that threatens the destruction of so many -- their health, safety and, yes, their businesses. The good news, if there is any, is that our local Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce found the gumption to tell its colleagues across the country to go pound salt. That's because the national group never even called to solicit the Las Vegas group's opinion on the matter and because, perhaps for the first time, our local businessmen finally understood that there is something more important than profits. I know that's saying a whole lot about people who like to be known for their single-minded commitment to the bottom line -- we can talk about tax avoidance strategies at a later date -- but it was a big step for the locals to take. And it was a very welcome one, too. But, now that they have severed relations with the nationals, it seems that the U.S. Chamber has dropped all pretense of consideration for Nevada business people and jumped to the head of the pack yapping for a high-level solution to the nuclear waste issue. That solution, of course, is to get it out of their collective back yards and into ours as soon as possible. So now, besides the United States Congress, the president, the nuclear power industry and most of the high-paid lobbyists inside the Beltway to fight, we can add the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to the list of mortal enemies. Yes, I said mortal because I believe that what they are messing with is our lives and the lives of our children and grandchildren. On a lesser note, they are also messing around with our livelihood, a fact that should have had the U.S. Chamber running to our side to help, not behind our backs to stab us into generations of nothing but nightmares. But that would ignore the fact that the power companies -- the guys who make, sell and pocket huge profits from nuclear energy -- are the real powers that be in the chamber. They call the shots and the other members jump to the tune. I suspect that had the nuke waste issue been in someone else's back yard instead of ours, the Las Vegas members would have acquiesced to the power companies' might just as their brethren did when it was our head on the chopping block. Enough about the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. They haven't been on the right side of an issue involving people as long as I can remember. Neither have the local affiliates for that matter. (Remember that tax issue I mentioned earlier?) Let's focus on the local chambers of commerce, who were once proud to be members of the national group and who now stand alone. Bet they never thought that would happen! There is a lesson to learn in this mess. Life isn't always about bottom-line profits. That's what the national folks believe. But that can no longer be what the locals think because they have just been victimized by short-term, narrow-minded thinkers who believe that profits are the only answer to every problem. Now that we've got that straight, I have a question for my local capitalistic friends. The story I read said that the members were going to donate the $3,000 they save in national dues to the anti-Yucca fight. That's admirable, but not even close. If you really believe that Yucca Mountain isn't good for children, plants and other living things -- including a viable bottom line -- then the numbers you contribute to the fight should be in the millions, not thousands. That's what it is going to take to win this fight. All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 15 Editorial: It's no wonder why they're getting antsy Las Vegas SUN December 07, 2001 Last week a U.S. Chamber of Commerce business coalition stepped up its pressure on the Bush administration to make a decision on the Yucca Mountain Project. The group, fronting for the nuclear power industry, said that within 30 days Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham should recommend to President Bush that nuclear waste be stored in Nevada's Yucca Mountain. In light of the events a week ago it's not surprising that the nuclear power industry and its friends in the U.S. Chamber of Commerce would want a quick decision. After all, a draft report from the General Accounting Office said the Yucca Mountain Project should be delayed indefinitely due to the Energy Department's flawed scientific investigation. In more bad news, a law firm working for the Energy Department's Yucca Mountain Project canceled its contract with the department because of a conflict of interest: The Winston &Strawn law firm also had a lobbying contract with a nuclear power industry trade group. Yes, we can see why supporters of a nuclear waste dump want the administration to act fast: They're afraid that the longer this drags out, even more damaging information will be revealed that could doom the dump's fate. If anything, the Bush administration should immediately stop the work at Yucca Mountain considering how badly this project has been bungled. All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 16 "Nuclear Power Nears Peak" A Worldwatch Institute Press Briefing - Nuclear Power FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE March 5, 1999 As the 20th Anniversary of Three Mile Island Approaches, the Nuclear Industry Faces Slow Slide to Oblivion Christopher Flavin and Nicholas Lenssen Two decades after the world's first major nuclear accident at Three Mile Island, the nuclear industry is experiencing a meltdown of historic proportions. After growing more than 700 percent in the 1970s, and 140 percent in the 1980s, nuclear generating capacity has increased less than 5 percent during the 1990s so far. [http://www.worldwatch.org/alerts/990304a.html] In the last decade, nuclear power has gone from being the world's fastest growing energy source to its slowest, trailing well behind oil and even coal. In 1998, world nuclear generating capacity fell by 175 megawatts. As the world approaches the 20th anniversary of the Three Mile Island accident on March 28, global nuclear capacity stands at 343,086 megawatts, providing just under 17 percent of the world's electricity. Both of these figures will likely turn out to be close to the all-time historical peak-and less than one-tenth the 4,500,000 megawatts that the International Atomic Energy Agency predicted back in 1974. The Worldwatch Institute projects that global nuclear capacity will begin a sustained decline by 2002 at the latest, and the U.S. Department of Energy projects that it will fall by half in the next two decades. Nuclear power's biggest problems are economic: it is simply no longer competitive with other, newer forms of power generation. The final 20 U.S. reactors cost $3 to $4 billion to build, or some $3,000 to $4,000 per kilowatt of capacity. By contrast, new gas-fired combined cycle plants using the latest jet engine technology cost $400-$600 per kilowatt, and wind turbines are being installed at less than $1,000 per kilowatt. Even France, which gets more than three-quarters of its electricity from nuclear power, now has a moratorium on nuclear plant construction, and other European countries are debating how quickly to shut their plants down. The only countries still building nuclear power plants are nations such as China, Japan, and possibly Iran, where the electric power industry is still a government sanctioned monopoly that is protected from competition. By the end of 1998, 429 nuclear reactors were operating worldwide, one less than five years earlier. Construction is taking place at 33 new reactors. Of these, seven are likely to be completed by the year 2001, while another fourteen may never be completed. Although global capacity is likely to rise for another year or two, it will almost certainly decline precipitously in the following years as the construction pipeline dries up, and the closure of older, uneconomic, or unsafe reactors accelerates. In the aftermath of the 1979 Three Mile Island accident, the U.S. nuclear market was the first to deteriorate. No new nuclear plants have been ordered since then, and nuclear generating capacity is now lower than it was a decade ago. Not only have U.S. power companies stopped building nuclear power plants, they have closed six reactors since 1996 that had become too expensive to operate. Meanwhile, seven of Canada's 21 reactors have been "laid up" due to safety concerns and are unlikely to operate again. For North American nuclear power, though, the worst may be yet to come. Wall Street analysts and the Washington International Energy Group project that as many as one-third of US and Canadian reactors are vulnerable to shut down in the next five years. The main reason is cost: nuclear energy cannot compete in increasingly competitive power markets. Western Europe stayed with its nuclear expansion plans longer than the U.S. did, but since the 1986 explosion at Chernobyl sent a cloud of radioactive dust across Europe, the public has turned against nuclear power. Since then, construction has started on only three new reactors. France, long known as the most pro-nuclear country, now has a moratorium on nuclear plant construction, and the Environment Minister, Dominique Voynet, has called for making the ban permanent. A December 1998 poll found that only 7 percent of French citizens thought that nuclear power should be the top energy priority, compared to more than 60 percent who said the priority is renewable energy. The state-owned utility, Electricite de France, which has in the past put virtually all its efforts into nuclear power, has begun to invest in "pint-size" microturbines, and in the development of wind power, both in France and in Morocco. In Germany, the discussion is not over whether to build more nuclear plants, but on how quickly to shut down the existing reactors. While the previous German government shut down all the nuclear power plants in eastern Germany, the Social Democrat/Green government elected in October 1998 plans to phase out the 19 remaining reactors that produce 30 percent of the country's power. As of February 1999, the Government had agreed that the first reactor will be closed by 2002, though the country's electric utilities are still fighting the plan. Asia remains the last stronghold for the nuclear power industry, with 88 reactors operating and 26 under construction, though even there, a slowdown is evident. Japan, which obtains 35 percent of its electricity from the atom, only has two reactors under construction, with work starting on one of them in 1998. In fact, the plant at Higashidori in Aomori was the first new one approved in ten years. Citizens groups have nearly stopped construction of new plants, and some communities have passed referenda prohibiting additional units. Although the government plans to add some 20 new reactors by 2010, officials acknowledge privately that the plans are unrealistic. South Korea, meanwhile, has six additional plants still under construction, but there too, the nuclear industry faces growing public opposition. China has the world's most ambitious nuclear program today, with plans to go from the three reactors it operates now to more than 50 reactors by the year 2020. The country currently has six reactors under construction, with plans to add four more. Whether the Chinese government will achieve these ambitious aims is uncertain, given the high foreign exchange requirements of imported reactors and the lack of a sizable indigenous industry. Moreover, China is likely to face growing pressure to make its power industry more competitive, which would likely complicate nuclear development efforts. Efforts to develop nuclear industries in Indonesia, Thailand, and Vietnam have all been abandoned in the last few years. Around the world, it is nuclear power's high cost that has most damaged its market prospects. Most nuclear power plants have been built by monopoly utilities, and the costs were passed through to consumers, regardless of how high they were. But with governments around the world now opening electric power markets to the winds of competition for the first time, nuclear power must stand on its own. This development is the final blow to the nuclear industry. It is only in the few remaining protected power markets-mainly in the Far East-that any additional plants are being ordered. One indication of nuclear power's economic status is the price it has been commanding on the open market. The Pilgrim plant in Massachusetts was sold for $80 million, though $67 million of that was for fuel. Also last year, CBS decided to sell what was once the world's largest nuclear company, Westinghouse Nuclear. The company sold for just $1.2 billion. By contrast, Exxon is valued at $172 billion, and Microsoft at $278 billion. Orders for new reactors have largely dried up. [http://www.worldwatch.org/alerts/990304b.html] The few remaining nuclear companies, including France's Framatome and Germany's Siemens, are surviving on maintenance work, and government-sponsored contracts to refurbish Eastern Europe's decrepit reactors. If new business does not turn up soon, there may be little nuclear construction capacity left. In light of the long lead times in nuclear construction, the decline of nuclear power in the early decades of the new century has become virtually inevitable. The U.S. Department of Energy, successor-agency to the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, now projects a sharp decline in nuclear power generation in the next two decades. Nuclear industry supporters argue that given recently heightened concern about fossil fuel-induced climate change, the timing is tragically ironic. Existing nuclear plants do displace the emission of large quantities of greenhouse gases from coal-fired plants, but few governments are seriously considering nuclear power as an alternative to fossil fuels. Instead, they have responded to climate change by investing in new energy technologies such as solar energy and wind power. As a result, renewable energy sources are now expanding rapidly. Last year, while nuclear capacity fell, wind power capacity rose by 2,100 megawatts. These provide tiny amounts of power today, but are already growing at the kind of double-digit rates that nuclear power enjoyed in the 1970s. And the new technologies are not threatened by the kind of physical or economic meltdowns that have done in the nuclear power industry. FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT: Worldwatch Institute 1776 Massachusetts Ave NW Washington, DC 20036 telephone: 202 452-1999 fax: 202 296-7365 e-mail [worldwatch@worldwatch.org] or check our website [http://www.worldwatch.org/] ***************************************************************** 17 NATIONAL NEWS: Nuclear industry cautioned Financial Times; Dec 7, 2001 By DAVID BUCHAN Brian Wilson, the energy minister, yesterday cautioned the nuclear industry - and energy lobbies in general - not to expect too much from the government's forthcoming energy review. He told an audience of nuclear executives the government could only "create the context" for industry to propose new nuclear, or other power stations. The nuclear industry has lobbied the Cabinet Office Performance and Innovation Unit, which is conducting the review, for schemes to be on apar with renewable energy producers as, like them, it does not generate carbon gases. But, "supposing the PIU recommended acceptance of the nuclear industry's entire shopping list, it would not guarantee the building of a single new nuclear station", Mr Wilson told a conference sponsored by the British Nuclear Industry Forum and the British Nuclear Energy Society. Mr Wilson hit at Callum McCarthy, the Ofgem regulator, for warning MPs about the cost of generating renewables in windier, but remoter, parts of the UK. "It is perfectly proper for him to be cost-conscious", Mr Wilson said, but it was "equally necessary" to avoid "over-emphasis on what is superficially cheapest at this moment in time, particularly if there is a potential conflict". Copyright: The Financial Times Limited 1995-1998 ***************************************************************** 18 Sloppy modifications said behind N-plant blast Daily Yomiuri On-Line Yomiuri Shimbun Negligence on the part of Chubu Electric Power Co. in making changes to pipes in the emergency core cooling system (ECCS) in the Hamaoka Nuclear Power Plant's No. 1 reactor is believed to have caused an explosion that ruptured one of the pipes, sources close to the nuclear power plant said Thursday. The change, which was carried out by copying other reactors without conducting technical studies, created a structure prone to accumulate hydrogen gas, which is strongly believed to be the cause of the explosion, the sources said. Seven reactors across the country made similar changes. Because there is no legal requirement to notify the government of such changes or to subject the changes to safety examinations, some nuclear power plants made the changes just because others had done so, the sources said. However, they did not consider measures to deal with hydrogen gas produced in the main system, including the turbine, the sources said. The design changes affected cooling pipes that carried steam away from the turbines, cooling it and condensing it into water. Hydrogen gas also passes through these pipes. Originally, the pipes were bent at a 90-degree angle the sources said. In 1991, Tokyo Electric Power Co. was the first to change the shape of the ECCS pipe--at the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant's No. 3 reactor--at the suggestion of a pipe manufacturer. The change turned the shape of the pipe into an inverted U, inadvertently allowing hydrogen gas to accumulate in the bend, the sources said. Other factors contributing to the explosion are believed to be the size of the pipe and special conditions in materials that moderated the change of temperatures. Investigators hope to experimentally recreate the accident to determine whether other modified pipes are at risk of exploding. Copyright 2001 The Yomiuri Shimbun ***************************************************************** 19 Nuclear plant appeal is lost Belfast Telegraph; Dec 7, 2001 ENVIRONMENTAL groups today lost the latest round of their legal battle to block the opening of a controversial nuclear reprocessing plant at Sellafield. Three Court of Appeal judges rejected an appeal brought by Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace over a High Court ruling on November 15 that the Government had made "no error of law" in giving the go-ahead for the opening of the mixed plutonium and uranium oxide (MOX) plant at Sellafield in Cumbria. Lords Justices Simon Brown, Waller and Dyson unanimously dismissed the appeal at a hearing in London. Objectors argue that the Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Secretary of State for Health, took a "distorted" view last month when they decided that allowing the introduction of MOX was "economically justified" under European Union law. Environmental groups fear the Sellafield scheme could lead to pollution, and also become a target for terrorists or theft of nuclear materials. After the ruling, the groups said they had won a "partial victory". They said: "Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace have overturned an important part of last month's controversial High Court ruling that the Government had lawfully given the Sellafield MOX plant the green light." 2001 Copyright Belfast Telegraph Newspapers Ltd. All rights reserved. World Reporter ***************************************************************** 20 German leader speaks on Ukraine's EU prospects BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Dec 7, 2001 [Presenter] The fourth round of Ukrainian-German top-level consultations have started in Kiev today. The official delegation from the Federal Republic of Germany which arrived in Ukraine is headed by Federal Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder. [Passage omitted: the sides sign an agreement on debt restructuring, Ukraine is ready to negotiate with the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development the terms for the completion of nuclear reactors - reported earlier] [Correspondent] As for European integration, it consists of many steps which cannot be made overnight, as the federal chancellor put it. [Schroeder, in German, fading to Ukrainian translation, processed from the Ukrainian] The Ukrainian way towards the EU with the prospect of membership is a gradual process. It is necessary to draw up a timetable for Ukrainian associate membership in the EU. The first step should be an agreement which is developed by the European Commission. Our cooperation in Euro-Atlantic structures is very positive. I would like to compare the development of our relations with the changes in Kiev: I can see them happen in the short time between my visits here. [Leonid Kuchma, captioned as Ukrainian president] I would like to add something in order to quieten any further discussion of the issue here in Ukraine. Ukraine will not be joining the EU during my presidential term or the next one. But I hope that we will make an attempt to become at least an associate member during my term in office. And I would like to thank Germany and its chancellor once again for their support in this issue. Our way to NATO will go as far as we are allowed in. [Passage omitted: correspondent dwells on Schroeder's promise to support Ukrainian European integration bid] Source: Ukrainian Television First Programme, Kiev, in Ukrainian 1900 gmt 6 Dec 01 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. World Reporter ***************************************************************** 21 Russia determined to build more nuclear plants abroad BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Dec 7, 2001 Text of report in English by Russian news agency ITAR-TASS Moscow, 7 December: Russia hopes to win orders over the next two or three years to build eight or nine units of nuclear power plants abroad for the total sum of at least 10bn dollars. Another 5bn dollars can be netted by deliveries of fuel for these power plants, the managing director of the Atomstroyeksport [nuclear construction export] firm (subsidiary of the Russian Atomic Energy Ministry), Viktor Kozlov, said in an exclusive interview with ITAR-TASS on Friday [7 December]. According to the managing director, the firm was now examining a possibility of building three power blocks in Iran, four in India and four in China. Those will be possibly not direct orders for Russia but international tenders in which Russian specialists will participate. Kozlov claimed that Russia had very high chances to win such tenders since Russian equipment for nuclear power plants was more competitive on the "price-quality" scale than similar Western equipment. Besides, Russia has already occupied its niche in the Asian sector of the world nuclear market. The Atomstroyeksport firm is building two units at the Tianwan nuclear power plant in China, two blocks at the Kudankulam power plant in India and one set at the Bushehr power station in Iran. "Definite changes have taken place in the world nuclear energy market over the past few years: the European sector of the market displays a trend for a sharp reduction in its volume. This generates greater confrontation between leading world exporting firms, scrambling for a place in the market," the managing director noted. "Therefore, the Atomic Energy Ministry did not make a mistake by boosting the geography of its interests in the Asian region," he emphasised. Kozlov also added that from the economic point of view, the Chinese and Indian power equipment markets were among the most spacious, fast-growing and promising in the world. Source: ITAR-TASS news agency, Moscow, in English 1406 gmt 7 Dec 01 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. World Reporter ***************************************************************** 22 Indian Point Faces Scrutiny After Some Crews Fail Tests December 8, 2001 By MATTHEW L. WALD WASHINGTON, Dec. 7 — The Nuclear Regulatory Commission said today that it would immediately increase scrutiny of the Indian Point 2 nuclear reactor because four control room crews had failed to pass their annual requalification tests, signaling "substantial" safety concerns. The crews failed to react properly in four accident drills over the last three months. Two of the drills called for procedures that were also needed in recent accidents at the plant, in Buchanan, N.Y., the N.R.C. said. The tests were administered by the plant owner, Entergy Nuclear, in a control room simulator. But today, the N.R.C. took the unusual step of sending its testers to examine one of the crews itself. N.R.C. specialists will conduct random surveillance in the plant's control room, said a spokesman for the agency, Neil A. Sheehan, and the agency may increase its involvement in other ways. Entergy Nuclear said that two of the crews failed because the company had made the exam tougher. The tests suggest that nuclear plants are not as safe as utilities think they are, said a nuclear engineer familiar with the results. But he added that the lapses were not serious enough to cause a meltdown. The engineer, David Lochbaum, works for the Union of Concerned Scientists, a group that often criticizes nuclear plants as unsafe. "The risk assessments that are done assume that the operators are going to be right 90-something percent of the time, and that they don't make mistakes," Mr. Lochbaum said. Entergy bought the plant on Sept. 6 from Consolidated Edison. Jim Steets, a spokesman for the plant, said some management changes had been made in response to the training problems. In a letter to Entergy dated Wednesday, the commission said, "The deficiencies identified during the exams reflected the potential inability of the crew to take appropriate safety-related actions in response to actual abnormal or emergency conditions." Indian Point 2 has five operating crews, who run the control room in rotating shifts, and two "staff crews," operators who fill in for vacationing or sick employees, Mr. Steets said. In all, 44 operators were tested. The workers who failed the tests, working in teams of five to seven, have since had remedial training, the N.R.C. said. Ten failed as individual operators in addition to their team failures, the agency said. The tests are given in the simulator, a control room with the same screens, switches and gauges as the real one, but connected to a computer instead of a reactor. In one simulated emergency, an equipment failure should have triggered an automatic start of the emergency core cooling system, but it did not do so. The crew failed to manually start the system promptly, the N.R.C. said. In a second simulated emergency, the emergency core cooling system started in response to a major pipe leak. At first, the system draws water from a refueling water storage tank, but before that supply is exhausted, operators are supposed to set up the system to draw from the leaking water collecting in the basement of the reactor building. The crew did not do so, the commission found. In another scenario, some control room instruments lost power. The crew did not restore power fast enough, the N.R.C. said, referring to the incident as a "competency failure." A similar situation occurred at Indian Point 2 in August 1999, when the power supply to some instruments was lost but a battery picked up the load. The operators failed to correct the problem before the battery ran down, hours later. The last scenario involved controlling the pressure in a steam generator, which can be a critical task after a leak in the generator. The plant had such a leak in February 2000 and it kept it shut for a year. In the drill, the crew members being tested took 25 minutes to realize that a valve they thought was open was actually closed. Mr. Lochbaum described the errors as "more steps down the Three Mile Island pathway." That accident, in March 1979, began with a common mechanical failure but was aggravated by controller error, in part because of inadequate training. Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company | Privacy Information ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR WEAPONS ARTICLES ***************************************************************** 1 Fwd: [DU Information List] US used nuclear waste Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 00:14:27 -0800 (PST) Kriss Worhington , Dona Spring , RadiationBulletin , Mary Ratcliff , RedwoodMary , HM Queen Noor , Bill Smirnow , Ernest Sternglass , Ahimsa Sumchai , Janette Sherman , Gaia Hoerner , "David G. Hoffman" , Steve Leeper , Leeps MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii --- davey garland wrote: > To: pandora-project@yahoogroups.com > From: davey garland > Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 15:53:10 +0000 (GMT) > Reply-to: pandora-project-owner@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [DU Information List] US used nuclear waste > > Weekly Independent (Pakistan) > Vol 1, No.23, Regd No CPL-588 > November 29 - December 05, 2001 > Front Page > > US USED NUCLEAR WASTE > > The use of reprocessed nuclear waste in the US air > strikes against > the Taliban poses a serious risk of radiation > poisoning to the human > lives in Afghanistan and Pakistan > > by Sarmad Sufian > > Hard target weapons loaded with reprocessed nuclear > waste have been > used as secret weapons in the US-led air strikes > against the Taliban, > exposing human lives in Afghanistan and the > adjoining > border areas of > Pakistan to a serious risk of radiation poisoning. > Sources in > Pakistan's > military establishment say the first warning about > the > use of > reprocessed > nuclear waste arrived last week in the shape of a > dying Afghan child > which led an Afghan doctor to diagnose that she was > infected with > radioactive or chemical weapons, presumably used by > the US aircraft. > Some > later diagnoses revealed that many of the Taliban > troops and Afghan > civilians have been affected, primarily due to > radiation caused by the > Depleted Uranium (DU), which actually is reprocessed > nuclear waste. The > DU (U238), the mystery metal is being produced by > the > US since 1997. > "It > presents a perpetual health hazard similar to > asbestos > - especially in > the lungs. And there is no known cure for inhaling > Depleted Uranium > dust". The sources say that as these cases were > reported to the aid > agencies conducting relief work in Afghanistan, the > US > military bosses > were quick to refute them as mere speculations. "The > US actually wanted > to hush up the matter. Therefore, a bill has already > been moved before > the US Congress, calling for a total ban on Depleted > Uranium and the > disclosure of the facts about its use in > Afghanistan." > However, in a > recent statement questioning the safety of the US > troops in > Afghanistan, > the American Defense Department spokesperson Kenneth > Bacon indirectly > confirmed the use of nuclear waste "We obviously put > out instructions > about avoiding Depleted Uranium dust. Our troops are > instructed to wear > masks if they're around what they consider to be > atomised or > particle-sized Depleted Uranium", Bacon said. > Estimates by Pakistani > experts show that Afghanistan might have been hit by > the reprocessed > nuclear waste along with several hundred tonnes of > smart bombs and > cruise > missiles used by the allied forces. Experts say that > since the mystery > metal is 50-75 per cent of the weight of the bombs - > up to 1.5 tons in > the GBU- 37 Bunker Buster bombs, the toxic reserves > in > the area could > be > huge and as dangerous as they were in the aftermath > of > the Gulf war. > The > lethal Depleted Uranium oxide is known for > travelling > up to 25 miles by > wind. "Therefore, large areas may be affected by > each > of the American > bombs". The experts say the new generation of hard > target smart bombs > and > cruise missiles being used by the US against > Afghanistan can penetrate > 10 > feet into reinforced concrete before exploding. They > were mostly used > to > attack the Taliban bunkers, caves, command centres, > fuel and ammunition > stores. "The 2 tonne GBU-37 Bunker Busters and 2000 > lb > GBU-24 Pave-way > smart bombs, plus the Boeing AGM-86D, Maverick > AGM-65G > and AGM-145C > hard > target capability cruise missiles all use advanced > unitary penetrators > (AUP-113, AUP-116, P31) or BROACH warheads with the > mystery high > density > metal in alloy casings". Since Depleted Uranium is > basically > reprocessed > nuclear waste, field experts fear that given the > massive bombing, the > amount of hazardous radioactive deposits in the area > might prove > extremely dangerous to tens of thousands of the > human > lives in > Afghanistan and the adjoining border areas of > Pakistan. Reports > emanating > from Afghanistan reveal that after the fall of > Taliban > and the landing > of > the allied forces there, the troops and aid agencies > have been told to > proceed with caution. The Red Cross, Oxfam and other > international aid > agencies have reportedly been cautioned to stay away > from the locations > bombed by the allied forces and use bottled water > only. The sources say > that the post retreat US bombings on the Talliban > militia in > Afghanistan > was not targeted on the military installations but > various channels of > water supply instead. "Water-supply tunnels and > sources were targeted > with bunker-busting bombs, with the intention to > flush > out Osama bin > Laden, his Al-Qaeda group and the Taliban fighters > from the hillside > tunnels that riddle the landscape", said a source > requesting anonymity. > "The already bombed ancient tunnels were a vital > source of water supply > to thousands of the border villages adjoining > Pakistan." Where it is > feared that the US bombardment on Afghanistan could > dramatically > increase > water shortages in the war-torn and drought-stricken > country, experts > estimate the damage could be far more than what is > being expected, > given > the presence of Depleted Uranium in the water > reservoirs. "Not only > will > the water of the Afghan areas become poisoned, but > it > will also be > extended to many parts of Pakistan as many of the > Afghan rivers flow > across the border to the neighbouring Pakistan". > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > stichting Laka > > Laka foundation > documentatie en onderzoeks- > documentation and research > centrum kernenergie centre > on nuclear energy > Ketelhuisplein 43 > Ketelhuisplein 43 > 1054 RD Amsterdam > NL-1054 RD Amsterdam > tel: 020-6168294 > > Netherlands > fax: 020-6892179 > tel: +31-20-6168294 > > fax: +31-20-6892179 > > laka@antenna.nl > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > ________________________________________________________________ > Nokia 5510 looks weird sounds great. > Go to http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/nokia/ discover > and win it! > The competition ends 16 th of December 2001. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > pandora-project-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com ***************************************************************** 2 Bell tolls for FAS and US freedom of information on the Afghan war Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 00:08:43 -0800 (PST) From: "Dai Williams" Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:43:06 -0000 Subject: [du-list] Bell tolls for FAS and US freedom of information on the Afghan war Reply-to: du-list@yahoogroups.com List members may be familiar with the Federation of American Scientists website. Its weapons index and dozens of fact sheets were the prime source for my recent analysis of the new generation of hard target guided weapons (smart bombs and cruise missiles) - all based on advanced penetrators containing dense metal ballast. Unfortunately all the FAS links used in my analysis appear to have been "pulled" in the last 24 hours. The main site still works at www.fas.org . The guided weapons section and other references to DU disappeared last night. The following report from the Los Angeles Times explains the pressures on the FAS webmaster. See extract below and at: ttp://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-000094419nov27.story This our second experience of emergency anti-terrorism measures restricting freedom of information - the first being deletion of the DU list archives. Curiously Yahoo did not re-instate the messages posted while the archives were missing including my analyses from the FAS website in Tip of the Iceberg, UNEP - DU and cruise missiles and DU in the Afghan war. I understand the need to protect data about potentially vulnerable terrorist targets (made on DU-list). But this was data about weapons systems that are being used in Afghanistan, not potential targets in the USA. So why the need for secrecy? Vague descriptions of the weapons systems that I suspect are based on large DU penetrators (1000, 2000 and 4000+ lbs) are available on manufacturers sites e.g. for Raytheon (raytheon.com) who manufacture several of the new generation systems including AGM-65 Maverick, AGM-154 JSOW, and Tomahawk plus AGM-86 CALCM on the Beoing site. These do not give anything like the detail or development history that the FAS fact sheets gave. Raytheon do have slightly clearer descriptions of the Paveway guided bomb family (GBU-24, GBU-28 etc). They don't refer to the GBU 37 upgrade (mentioned on the FAS website until yesterday) of the GBU-28 bunker buster. Instead they indicate that the new BLU-113 advanced penetrator (4000+ lbs of dense metal ballast) is now standard in the GBU-28. It follows that all current bunker buster bombs use the AUP. The vital question for troops and civilians in Afghanistan remains: what is the dense metal (or combination of heavy metals) that is used in all these advanced, hard target penetrators that enable them to double their penetration effect over earlier versions? Since they are the same weight and overall size but double their pentration effect by having half the cross section area (i.e. much thinner) this can only be achieved with metals 2x the mass of the steel used in previous versions. That has to mean DU or Tungsten, or a combination of both. The deletion of the FAS pages is a smart move by US security agencies. The credibility of my concerns about potential large scale use of DU in Afghanistan (at least 400+ tons of hard target munitions have been used now judging by early CDI bombing reports) is much harder for the media and other DU researchers to verify now. Until yesterday all the data was in the public domain and accessible by FAS links from my reports. However, by censoring weapons information that was previously public domain for citizens in US and around the world the security authorities increase suspicions that they have something very serious to hide about US and UK bombing operations in Afghanistan. If you still have copies of FAS pages back them up somewhere. The DU disclosure bill in Congress is even more important now, and even less likely to get full answers. Only yesterday I wrote to another group of the value of the Internet to freedom and democracy in the US and world. The bell is tolling on both now. I am an independent citizen with no political or campaign group membership. But this censorship disturbs me almost as much as the DU issue itself and the terrorist outrages on September 11th. Which is the greater threat to freedom and democracy now - foreign terrorists or our own governments and their security advisers? This is a grim situation that 99% of the public are likely to be unaware of in UK or Europe. It works powerfully in the interests of the nuclear and defence industries, and politicians that have supported them on DU use since it became contraversial after the Gulf War. The truth about suspected DU use in guided weapons since 1989 involves billions of dollars of defence equipment and projects set against the probability of a major cancer and birth defects epidemic in another country - Afghanistan - on a similar scale to that in Iraq. A similar epidemic is probably still developing for civilians and troops assigned to heavility bombed areas in the Balkans (especially Italians, Spanish and Portuguese). If DU was used in guided weapons in the Balkans then Nato's quoted use of 9 tons may need revision to 200+, and in locations that have not been assessed for environmental or medical evidence of DU contamination. The hazards are not limited to US or UK military action. Some of these weapons systems have been exported to 20+ countries around the world. If DU has been used in bunker buster bombs there can be no doubt that these will constitute weapons of indiscriminate effect. These are big stakes. The Internet remains the one way to raise international awareness and government questions about the full extent of DU use - past, present and planned. Please use DU-list to investigate these issues - while we still can. Dai Williams, UK eosuk@btinternet.com ttp://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-000094419nov27.story November 27, 2001 Talk about itE-mail storyPrint Pakistan's Jihad Fervor Replaced by Resentment By DAVID COLKER, TIMES STAFF WRITER Within days of the Sept. 11 attacks, the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry rushed to pull a suddenly sensitive report from its Web site titled "Industrial Chemicals and Terrorism." The agency eliminated all traces of the document and its description of sources for home-brew nerve gases and improvised explosives. But on the World Wide Web, almost nothing truly dies. Indeed, the thorny report currently lives on at several locations, including the site for the Oklahoma City National Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism, a UC Santa Cruz graduate student's Web site and the databanks of the Internet Archive, a nonprofit venture that has electronically stored an estimated 10 billion Web pages in an effort to preserve the Web's history. The Toxic Substances and Disease Registry is one of several agencies--public and private--facing this problem. Contrary to concerns about too much censorship in the wake of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the reality is that some agencies are having a hard time censoring anything that was once published on the Internet. "The Internet is not like a faucet you can turn off and on. It's like a leaky faucet that keeps dripping long after it's turned off," said Gary Bass, executive director of OMB Watch, an organization that strives to cut back on government secrecy. Still scattered across the electronic ether are a host of "erased" documents, including maps of nuclear reactors, pictures of secret spy satellite facilities and a description of a NASA space propulsion project. In many cases, agencies had no idea that their erased documents are still available for anyone with a Web browser and Internet link. Detailed maps from the Energy Department's International Nuclear Safety Center, for example, are still retrievable through the Internet Archive. "I have never heard of the archive," said Jeff Binder, director of the center. "Maybe our guys in cyber-security have." In the electronic battle against terrorism, the Web has become as porous a landscape as the real battlefronts surrounding Kunduz or Kandahar in Afghanistan. That's largely due to a kind of Xerox effect on the Web, where pages and even entire digital sites can be easily copied with a few mouse clicks. Copies of supposedly eradicated reports and documents can be found using common search engines and the Internet Archive's whimsically named Wayback Machine. The "Industrial Chemicals and Terrorism" report can be found in a matter of minutes, even by novices. Until the Sept. 11 attacks, the porousness of the Web was actually a feature celebrated both in and out of government as a way of providing instant global distribution of information. Anti-Secrecy Group Now Pulling Pages For Steven Aftergood, director of the project on government secrecy for the Federation of American Scientists, the Internet has been a primary tool in the organization's efforts to battle what it considers misuses of government secrecy. It collects and disseminates information on nuclear weapons, the "Star Wars" antiballistic missile initiative and other projects. Indeed, the Washington-based group was created after World War II by scientists from the super-secretive Manhattan Project worried that the government was concealing the dangers of building a nuclear arsenal. But since Sept. 11, Aftergood has found himself in the awkward position of following the government's lead in protecting sensitive information. So far, he has removed about 200 pages from the federation's site, mostly concerning intelligence and nuclear weapons facilities. ***************************************************************** 3 Mobsters nabbed trying to sell off uranium in cafe The Irish Independent SEVEN alleged mobsters have been charged with illegal handling of nuclear materials after police broke up an attempt to sell a capsule of weapons-grade uranium at a roadside cafe. Six men were arrested near Balashikha, a small town just southeast of Moscow which has long been known as home to organised crime bosses. The investigation led to another alleged criminal who had further supplies of uranium at his home. More than 2lb of uranium-235 was for sale for about £25,000. Russian officials have repeatedly insisted that there are no known cases of theft involving weapons-grade uranium and President Putin has said that nuclear materials and technology could not possibly fall into terrorist hands from depots and bases. Experts have said that a terrorist such as Osama bin Laden would need about 55lb of highly enriched uranium to make a simple nuclear device. Previous seizures of stolen Russian nuclear materials have involved low-active uranium or caesium, which would be unsuitable for use in manufacturing nuclear weapons. The attempted sale was said to have been between mob groups. Oleg Yelnikov, a spokesman for the Russian Interior Ministry's anti-organised crime department, said: "It looks like they accidentally got their hands on the uranium and were trying to sell it. It's not like they were trying to sell the material to some Afghan terrorists." (The Times, London) Richard Owen in Moscow © Copyright Unison ***************************************************************** 4 Pentagon Presses for a Radiation Drug December 7, 2001 BIOTERRORISM By ANDREW POLLACK Amid concerns that Middle Eastern terrorists might have procured radioactive weapons, the Defense Department is pressing for approval of a novel drug that could help protect people from radiation. As fears of terrorism grow, the drug, known as 5-androstenediol, is receiving increased scrutiny along with other experimental treatments and drugs already on the market. The National Cancer Institute, the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy have invited leading radiation experts to a workshop in Bethesda, Md., on Dec. 17 and 18 to review approaches for protecting people from radiation. The drug is a steroid hormone that appears to strengthen the immune system. It was developed by Dr. Roger M. Loria, a professor at Virginia Commonwealth University, and rights to it are held by Hollis-Eden Pharmaceuticals (news/quote) of San Diego. "This is an area that hasn't gotten a whole lot of attention," said Dr. John E. Moulder, professor of radiation oncology at the Medical College of Wisconsin. "Working on trying to cure patients of cancer gets you more headlines than working on treating people for nuclear accidents that you hope will never occur." So far, the Hollis-Eden drug has been tested as a radiation protectant only in mice. In one test, an injection protected 70 percent of mice from a level of radiation that killed all the mice in the control group. Dr. Thomas M. Seed, leader for radiation casualty management at the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute in Bethesda, said the drug was his institute's leading candidate for something to give to soldiers in advance of possible radiation exposure. Such a drug would also be useful for civilians, including people responding to an accident at a nuclear power plant, he said. Since it would be unethical to expose people to large doses of radiation to test the drug's effectiveness, Dr. Seed said he hoped the Food and Drug Administration would approve it under a new rule allowing tests on monkeys or other animals. American officials have said there is little evidence that Osama bin Laden has obtained nuclear weapons. But some experts have said terrorists might try to make a so-called radiological bomb by combining conventional explosives with radioactive material like spent nuclear fuel. Hollis-Eden has been testing a drug similar to androstenediol as a treatment for AIDS, the idea being to stimulate the patient's own immune system to fight the virus. For defense use, the drug is aimed mainly at preventing death from intense radiation in the short term by restoring various kinds of infection- fighting immune system cells. Radiation can kill the immune system, leaving victims vulnerable to potentially fatal infections. Some radiation experts were cautious, saying the Pentagon, hoping to have soldiers function in a nuclear war, had tried many such compounds without success. In some cases the protection afforded was not enough, and some drugs seemed to protect animals but caused bad side effects in people. The Hollis-Eden drug could have other problems, too. It needs to be injected, which can take time in an emergency. And it would probably not be possible to know of exposure in advance of a terrorist attack. In addition, Dr. Fred Mettler, chairman of radiology at the University of New Mexico, said that just solving the immune system problems might not be enough because people could still die months later from other types of radiation-induced damage, such as to the lungs. Dr. David J. Grdina, professor of radiation oncology at the University of Chicago, said it was more important to develop drugs that protect people against cancer from radiation than against the immediate lethal effects. More people are likely to be exposed to sublethal doses of radiation while cleaning up or standing guard at the site of a radioactive attack than might be exposed to lethal doses in the attack itself, he said. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is moving toward stockpiling millions of potassium iodide pills to prevent thyroid cancer in those exposed to radioactive iodide if a nuclear power plant was attacked. Dr. Grdina is trying to use a drug called amifostine to prevent cancer from radiation. The drug, sold as Ethyol by MedImmune Inc. (news/quote) of Gaithersburg, Md., is already approved to protect the salivary glands from radiation therapy used to treat head and neck cancer. Dr. Moulder has found that two drugs for high blood pressure, ACE (news/quote) inhibitors and A2 blockers, protect animals from the kidney failure and lung damage that can occur months after radiation. Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company | Privacy Information ***************************************************************** 5 Reactor dome to be razed by 2003 AUGUSTA — Kiwanis Club members didn't have to leave the city Thursday to learn how decommissioning is progressing at Maine Yankee, a defunct nuclear power plant located about 25 miles away in Wiscasset. --> Friday, December 7, 2001 By AARON MILLER, Staff Writer Copyright © 2001 Blethen Maine Newspapers Inc. E-mail this story to a friend AUGUSTA — Kiwanis Club members didn't have to leave the city Thursday to learn how decommissioning is progressing at Maine Yankee, a defunct nuclear power plant located about 25 miles away in Wiscasset. Wayne Norton, the company president, spoke to about 60 club members at the Senator Inn and presented a slide show of demolished buildings, nuclear reactors being shipped to Barnwell, S.C., and a new storage facility in Wiscasset that will hold spent fuel rods as decommissioning continues. Norton said he expects the Maine Yankee containment dome to be demolished by 2003, and the cleanup of the site completed by the following year. For Maine Yankee to complete decommissioning, the spent fuel rods must be moved from a wet pool in the containment dome to concrete casks. Norton said the decommissioning process is about 57 percent complete. Norton told club members that about 50 million pounds of waste has already been shipped from the site — that represents 22 percent of the total waste volume. "In the end, this will be a green field," Norton said. One member asked how much radiation will be left after the buildings are completely removed. "25 millirem is the release standard — about what you get when you fly to California to home," he said. The site will be graded and a security building will remain with spent fuel rods stored in dry casks that will sit near the shores of the Sheepscot River. "This is as safe as wet storage," Norton said. "This will be the largest storage facility of spent fuel I know of." Club member Ray Giglio asked why the government can't take the casks filled with nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain in Nevada — a repository where federal officials want to store radioactive material. "That's a good question," Norton said. "The only thing I can tell you is that they won't accept waste until they have a final repository. They won't take it in the interim." He said the federal Department of Energy will not take the waste any sooner than 2010. More studies are needed before the government will accept waste at the proposed storage facility. One member asked how security has been affected at Maine Yankee after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. "As a general matter, we have made significant enhancements driven by Sept. 11," Norton said. Tony Bates, president of Augusta Kiwanis Club, said a variety of speakers attend the meetings. "They inform, educate and entertain us," Bates said. "Every week we try to have someone informative." There are 125 members in the Augusta club, 13,000 international clubs in 79 countries and more than 600,000 members. In addition to attending meetings, members volunteer to assist with club service projects. To reach Aaron Miller Phone: 623-3811, ext. 435 amiller@centralmaine.com [] Copyright © Blethen Maine Newspapers Inc. ***************************************************************** 6 Energy: Top Lab Chief to Step Down Las Vegas SUN December 07, 2001 WASHINGTON (AP) - C. Bruce Tarter will step down early next year as director of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California, one of the government's major defense research labs, the Energy Department said Friday. Tarter, who has worked at the laboratory since 1967, was named its director seven years ago. He led the lab's transition from Cold War-era nuclear weapons development to a wide range of defense- and non-defense-related research. The department said Tarter planned to remain at his job until a new director is named, a process that normally takes several months. A theoretical physicist by training, Tarter gave no reason for his decision to leave. Noting that he became Livermore's director exactly seven years ago, Tarter said in a statement that the anniversary "is an appropriate time to start the transition to my successor." The lab in Livermore, Calif., is managed by the University of California under a contract with the Energy Department. It has had eight directors since it was founded in 1952 as one of the government's premier nuclear weapons research facilities. Livermore has been deeply involved in the government's weapons stockpile stewardship program, including development of mega-computers and a massive laser that will be used to help monitor and maintain nuclear weapons without actual bomb tests. The laser program came under criticism last year because of cost overruns and delays, prompting threats by the Clinton administration to sever ties with the university. However, an agreement was reached last January extending the University of California contract. On the Net: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory: [http://www.llnl.gov/] All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 7 Fallout Shelters Rise in Popularity Las Vegas SUN December 07, 2001 Fearing nuclear terrorism, Americans are building home fallout shelters in numbers unseen since the peak of the Cold War, sometimes even mortgaging homes to cover costs, say shelter makers and designers. Some corporations are giving the shelters to top executives as a perk, one dealer said. Gone are the days when defense experts scoffed and neighbors shook their heads and chuckled. "They're treating me less like a crazy woman than they did before," says Dr. Jane Orient, of Tucson, Ariz., who promotes home shelters as head of Doctors for Disaster Preparedness. Walton McCarthy, president of shelter builder Radius Defense and Engineering in Northwood, N.H., says he is making almost four times as many of his egg-shaped, fiberglass underground shelters since Sept. 11 - roughly one a day. He is planning a bigger factory. Nuclear engineer Sharon Packer says sales have also quadrupled - to more than four a month - at her company, Utah Shelter Systems in Heber, Utah. "People start calling at 5:30 a.m., and I don't go to bed until 11:30 at night," she said. The idea of family fallout shelters is not new or uniquely American. Switzerland has mandated them in new housing. In the early Cold War, thousands of Americans built fallout shelters in backyards and basements. The federal government even put out designs. By the late 1960s, though, a new mindset began taking hold. Elaborate civil defenses, the thinking went, could aggravate tensions by stoking Soviet fears of an American first strike. Besides, how could a personal shelter protect against the apocalypse of nuclear war between superpowers? Shelter builders began to seem like eccentrics, and shelters seemed even more superfluous with the breakup of the Soviet Union. Then came the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Even if countries are rational enough to keep a finger off the nuclear trigger, how about terrorists? "What has happened in the current atmosphere is that our opponent is fanatical. He's not rational," said Ed York, of Kent, Wash., an authority on home shelter design who specialized in hardening targets against attack for Boeing Co. Analysts have warned that terrorists would not need to master the complex technology of a nuclear explosion or intercontinental missile guidance. They could pack radioactive material around a core of conventional explosives for a lesser bang - but lots of contamination. Such a "dirty bomb" attack might well be more survivable with a fallout shelter. "When you had civil defense in the 1960s, that was ridiculous," says physicist Edwin Lyman, who is scientific director at the Nuclear Control Institute, a research group in Washington, D.C. "Now, in the context of the risks associated with a terrorist who might have a small number of ... radiological weapons, it's not necessarily a bad idea to think if there are procedures that would avert casualties." Home shelters vary widely in size, degree of protection, and cost. Nearly everyone agrees they should provide a radiation barrier of 3-to-4 feet of dirt or at least two of concrete. Some dealers supply plans for basement shelters that cost as little as several thousand dollars. For maximum protection against biological, nuclear and chemical threats, prices balloon to $40,000 and higher. Such shelters are equipped with air filtration systems and hand-pump toilets, allowing people to hold out from 30 days to several months. Bill Eckhoff, president of Kleen Air Technologies, in Frisco, Colo., sells a home shelter that comes complete with blast-proof doors, backup diesel generator and decontamination area. The roomy 800-square-foot model can cost more than $300,000. "We believe if you have to sit through a transition period, why not maintain a quality of life?" he says. Sound pricey? He says inquiries have doubled to about 30 a day since Sept. 11. Many analysts believe that other terrorist threats are more likely than a nuclear attack. "I would be more concerned about chemical, biological or gas, because they're more in the range of what these groups can do," said Milton Copulos, a retired Army intelligence officer who is president of the National Defense Council Foundation, a think tank in Alexandria, Va. He keeps a supply of bottled water at home. If someone is still nervous, he suggests not a fallout shelter, but a few emergency provisions for a chemical attack - plastic sheeting, duct tape and bottled oxygen. State and federal authorities are prepared to shelter emergency personnel and government leaders. However, they downplay the value of home shelters. "Maybe there are better ways to protect your family," says Peter Judge, a spokesman for the Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency. "Evacuation is still the primary protective measure in the event of a nuclear incident," adds Don Jacks, a spokesman for the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The new federal Office of Homeland Security is not promoting home fallout shelters either, according to spokesman Gordon Johndroe. Most Americans also remain unconverted. Physicist Marcel Barbier of Herndon, Va., who has consulted with government laboratories on radiation safety, put in his own home shelter in 1985 but says neighbors aren't taking his cue. "The people here need to receive a nuclear bomb on their head before they understand it can happen - and I hope it doesn't happen," he said. On the Net: http://www.oism.org/nwss/ [http://www.oism.org/nwss/] for "Nuclear War Survival Skills," a manual by government civil defense researcher Cresson H. Kearny All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 8 Uranium theft raises nuclear fears BBC News | EUROPE | 7 December, 2001, Russia retains a vast nuclear arsenal Russian police have arrested seven men trying to sell more than one kilogram (2.2 pounds) of suspected weapons-grade uranium. If the material is established to be the high-level enriched variety of uranium-235, this will be the first confirmed case of a theft of this kind in Russia itself. It looks like they accidentally got their hands on the uranium and were trying to sell it Oleg Yelnikov, Interior Ministry Russian Interior Ministry spokesman Oleg Yelnikov said the amount of uranium was too small to make a nuclear device, and that it seemed that the men had got their hands on it by chance. However the incident is likely to increase international concern over the possibility that nuclear material could fall into the hands of militant groups. "It looks like they accidentally got their hands on the uranium and were trying to sell it," Mr Yelnikov told the Associated Press news agency. The gang did not possess enough uranium to create a bomb "It's not like they were trying to sell the material to some Afghan terrorists," he added. Mr Yelnikov said that most of the suspects, arrested outside Moscow overnight on Tuesday, allegedly belonged to the well-known Balashikha criminal gang. They apparently tried to sell the uranium for $30,000 to another gang, but as yet there is no clear indication of how they had obtained the uranium in the first place. Russian nuclear experts are examining the capsule containing the uranium to determine its place of origin and assess it potency. It is thought it could have come from a nuclear research centre or a production plant. Nuclear risk The UN's International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) warned recently that the security and regulation of nuclear material in the former Soviet Union was deficient, and called for greater international efforts to reduce the risk of nuclear smuggling. David Kyd of the IAEA told BBC News Online there had been 175 known cases of attempts to smuggle nuclear material out of former Soviet Republics. The largest confirmed disappearance of weapons-grade uranium from the former Soviet Union was in Georgia, where in July police arrested three men attempting to sell 1.7 kilograms (3.75lbs) of uranium-235 to buyers in Turkey. ***************************************************************** 9 Holding North Korea Accountable National Review Online Get nuclear inspectors into North Korea now. By Henry Sokolski & Victor Gilinsky, executive director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, a nonprofit education organization based in Washington, D.C. & is the author of Best of Intentions: America's Campaign Against Strategic Weapons Proliferation December 7, 2001 8:50 a.m. The press hardly mentioned it, but this week North Korea pretended to live up to its Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) pledges by announcing it would allow international inspectors to visit one of its nuclear-isotope research laboratories. Never mind that the facility is so benign and minor it does not require international nuclear inspections — or that Pyongyang is allowing it only to be "visited" rather than examined. The NPT's inspectorate, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), has already praised the move as a promising sign. What's going on here? Clearly, Pyongyang is feeling the heat after President Bush's November 26 press comments put the spotlight on Iraq and North Korea as international nonproliferation violators who "need to be held accountable." There's plenty of history here. For almost a decade, North Korea has refused to allow international inspectors to check on evidence uncovered in 1992 that it cheated on its commitment not to develop nuclear weapons. At that time, Pyongyang announced that if pressed it would pull out of the Nonproliferation Treaty altogether. The NPT, to which North Korea had adhered in 1985, of course requires members to allow such IAEA inspections. Pyongyang's refusal put it in violation, and still does. In 1994, the Clinton administration, spooked by the possibility that North Korea would get access to far more plutonium for bombs, offered the North two large modern power reactors and a supply of oil, in return for a freeze on its plutonium production and a agreement to eventually comply with the NPT. This, of course, involved glossing over the existing violations. Under the 1994 agreement, the two reactors wouldn't be completed unless the North resolved past violations. But the Clinton administration's diplomatic body language left the North unfazed. Fortunately, the Bush administration has taken the need for nuclear inspections a lot more seriously. This is vital because, after a lot of preliminary negotiation and site preparation, an international consortium known as the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO) has started excavating the promised reactors' foundations. Their plan is to pour concrete next year, and then begin to install equipment. In about three years, the project could be ready to install key nuclear equipment. But the 1994 agreement says that the North can't get them until IAEA inspectors have determined that Pyongyang is out of the nuclear bomb-making business, and has not hidden nuclear explosives. This is not a simple sign-off. The IAEA estimates that it would need at least three years after it gained full access to North Korea's nuclear sites to be able to make such a determination. In other words, North Korea needs to open up to IAEA inspectors now to comply with the l994 deal. The l994 agreement says North Korea "will come into full compliance" with its IAEA when a "substantial portion" of the reactor project is completed. And "substantial portion" is defined to be the point the project is now expected to reach in — about three years. Not surprisingly, Pyongyang does not share this view. Its officials insist that "substantial portion" designates only the point at which they have to begin to talk about IAEA inspections. That doesn't sound like the response of someone with nothing to hide. Pyongyang is obviously trying to drag out the process, in the hope that we'll let the nuclear inspection issue go rather than risk provoking a crisis. North Korea's refusal to acknowledge the inspection issue also involves violation of the power-reactor supply contract it signed with KEDO. Under the terms of that agreement, a reactor construction schedule — including all of the nuclear-inspection requirements of the l994 deal — must be agreed to by all parties involved in the reactors' construction. The sticking point here is the scheduling of inspections. KEDO's way around this has been simply to ignore the requirement, and hope nobody notices. All of this suggests the need for a tougher approach to securing North Korea's compliance with its NPT obligations — to hold up further work on the reactors until it does comply. After all, North Korea is bound to the terms of the NPT and to its IAEA agreements, with or without the reactor deal the U.S. cut with Pyongyang. In addition, proceeding without full inspections is risky. Incredibly, our negotiators did not realize that the new reactors are so large that each could produce some 50 bombs' worth of essentially weapons-grade plutonium during the first 15 months of operation. If we can't get the North Koreans to open up as they should now, how can we trust them with such machines later? It seems only sensible to hold up construction until North Korea meets all of its NPT commitments. Certainly this much is clear: What's needed — and what President Bush is now calling for — is far more than what Pyongyang is offering. Henry Sokolski directs the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center in Washington and is the author of Best of Intentions: America's Campaign Against Strategic Weapons Proliferation Victor Gilinsky is an energy consultant and former U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissioner. ***************************************************************** 10 People of Pensacola already suffering a chemical assault PensacolaNewsJournal.com PUBLISHED SATURDAY, DECEMBER 8, 2001 Letters to the editor A headline Nov. 14 reads, "Military doctor prepares county for the worst" regarding biological and chemical warfare. Extensive efforts are going to be implemented in educating and protecting physicians who may come into contact with anthrax and smallpox. I find this ironic considering Pensacola has been confirmed one of the most toxic areas in the nation. For the past 10 years, our area has had the highest asthma and childhood cancer rates in the nation. A statement from Dr. Lanza maintains, "It is every physician's responsibility to learn about biological and chemical terrorism." Yet, our local medical providers are not trained to recognize chemical toxicity, much less to treat it. Educating public providers to recognize anthrax and smallpox is merely the tip of the iceberg. Most people would be surprised to find that the mercury, lead, arsenic, benzene, aluminum, thallium, radium, uranium, fluoride, asbestos and thousands more substances found in our soil, water, plant and animal life, are also in our own cells. We must not allow our people and environment to suffer any longer. We must stop the chemical assault we endure everyday. Then we would have stronger defenses against all toxic invasion. - Penny deSimone, Pensacola Not sect of Islam On Nov. 30, an illustration titled "Varied &Diverse" mentioned the Bah'i Muslims. This would be incorrect to associate the Baha'i Faith as a sect of Islam. It has its own beliefs and laws laid down by Mirza Husayn Ali, also known to Baha'is as "Baha'u'allah" (Glory of God). Some of its basic tenets stand in stark contrast with Islam, such as the "equality of men and women" and "individual search of truth (no clergy)." The Bahai's are no more a sect of Islam than Christians are of Judaism. - Christian Mills, Pensacola A fair price I may only be 16, but this letter caught my attention ("Paid too much," Letters, Nov. 28). This letter says that a man who runs a worldwide company for the needy should do so for free. Well, this man is obviously business smart, so would you rather him just go start his own software business and make millions? I think we should congratulate the president of the Red Cross for all of the lives he has saved. Think of all of the people who may not be living today and how many families around the world who would have lost their fathers, moms, sons and daughters if it wasn't for this man running this company successfully. At least he decided to use his intelligence for the good of mankind. - Robert Calvin Taylor, Seminole, Ala. How much? How noble of Ian Miller ("Love and dedication must come before money for teachers," Letters, Nov. 11), to be so professionally dedicated as to give 150 percent of himself to his career employment regardless of the "offered wage." That certainly qualifies him as a model nonpareil to all those money-grasping teachers who fight for a living wage. I find only one fault with Mr. Miller's self-serving mantra: He forgot to mention the size of his salary. - Peter Jaeger, Pensacola Fly the colors Where were all the American flags that we see today, flying? Where were all the patriotic songs we hear now, sung? Where were the words "God bless America," heard? Where were our pledges of allegiances, said? Where were our flags on the Fourth, Memorial and Veterans Day, flying? Where were our salutes to the flag at parades? Where are the banners with a star to show a family member is in the service that hung in windows during World War II? And where were all of today's Americans? Aren't we Americans 365 days of the year? So, fly the colors and be proud! - Lorraine Kennedy, Gulf Breeze We'll use masks Many people I have talked to were trying to figure out what was being constructed at Palafox Pier. Could it be a parking place for fisherman? Lovely little shops for people with moderate incomes? Many of us thought this was public property since we had parked there for years. Fortunately for us, the uninformed, we were enlightened by the News Journal, the development will be expensive condominiums. Never mind, I'm certain the city will furnish gas masks for all of us frequenting the Trillium property. - Tina Davey, Gulf Breeze Mercy killing abuses After one news article, one editorial and one column attacking Attorney General Ashcroft's announcement that he would uphold existing federal narcotics laws to prevent abuses connected with mercy killing, it is time to speak up. The News Journal devoted much space criticizing Ashcroft for remaining true to his oath of office to uniformly apply the laws of the land, but no space criticizing former Attorney General Reno for selectively failing to enforce those same laws. Legal issues aside, however, consider the following. The Netherlands has probably the most "liberal" mercy killing laws. Recently, the government's own commission on euthanasia found: In over 1,000 cases per year, physicians actively caused or hastened patient death without either the request or the consent of the patient. Virtually every quideline established by the government to govern euthanasia was routinely violated. Recent examinations of the "Oregon experience" with euthanasia demonstrate that most patients requesting "death with dignity" are suffering from depression, not terminal illness. As hospice physicians report, pain control is possible for the most extreme illnesses and a patient's dignity and autonomy can be respected to the natural end of life without rushing things. - Peter H. Dohms, Pensacola Pensacola connection Maybe some people will be interested in the fact that a local company was a supplier to the builders of the World Trade Center. My husband, Bill Zimmern, had a business called The Pensacola Tool and Supply. As part of their business they manufactured products used in the erection of steel. They manufactured a product called drift pins. This is steel forged and hammered into the shape of pins. These pins are used to erect steel by aligning the beams together and holding them in place until they are riveted. The process is much the same as a dressmaker uses pins before sewing material together. The difference, of course, is that these are huge steel beams. I am filled with shock and sorrow for the people who lost their lives at the World Trade Center. I feel great sadness when I see the twisted steel at "Ground Zero." - Corinne Zimmern Speer, Pensacola By His authority It is the authority of God Almighty seen in these words of Thomas Jefferson: "We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness." Here, Jefferson acknowledges the Creator as the authority by which we are endowed. In short, God Almighty, not mankind, grants these rights. We who proclaim to hold these truths to be self-evident can only do so by acknowledging the Creator's authority over mankind. The words "all men are created equal" are words that many give Abraham Lincoln credit for through the Gettysburg Address, where Lincoln finally acknowledged the organic law he had formally proclaimed "legally void." They're words Martin Luther King Jr. professes as our very creed. King proclaimed, "Thank God Almighty we're free at last," for, like Jefferson and Lincoln, he acknowledged the Creator's authority by which these rights are endowed and these truths are held self-evident. Truths that have provoked us to proclaim, "in God we trust." Why God? Well, because it's by His authority that these truths are held self-evident that have made us free. - Woodrow King Jr., Century Good job, Mark Mark O'Brien is to be commended for his recent columns calling for upgrading our city's library system and for more mature, responsible behavior by the Escambia County Commission. When I moved to Pensacola 39 years ago, the library was adequate. Not great, but adequate. Very little has been done over the years to improve the system, especially the main branch downtown. It is understaffed, under- equipped and under-funded. Considering these handicaps, the staff does a very good job. Pensacola will not be a first- class community in all respects until it has a first-class public library to offer its citizens. The interest, as Mr. O'Brien pointed out, is here. Unfortunately, as he also pointed out, nothing much will be done about it until we have a first-class County Commission and city leaders who actually care. I wonder how many of our public officials have been to the library lately. Perhaps they should go. They might learn something. - Marian Green, Cantonment Copyright © 1997-2001 The Pensacola News Journal, Pensacola, ***************************************************************** 11 British nuclear submarine arrives in Gibraltar BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Dec 8, 2001 Cadiz: The British nuclear submarine Superb moored in the port of Gibraltar yesterday, where it is due to stay for two days, coinciding with the departure of the US nuclear submarine Sea Wolf... The Spanish authorities were informed in a timely manner of the arrival of this further British nuclear submarine, following the controversy generated by the Tireless. They have raised no objections to the visit of vessels to waters close to Spain because they are on manoeuvres... Source: ABC web site, Madrid, in Spanish 8 Dec 01 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. World Reporter All Material Subject to ***************************************************************** 12 Foreign Policy Association - Resource Library Global Q & A: Behind Closed Doors in Iraq Source: FPA Author: Former UNSCOM Political Advisor Tim Trevan discusses Iraq's weapons program after three years in the dark. interviewed by Robert Nolan of FPA About Tim Trevan: Global Q/A presents Mr. Tim Trevan, a British specialist on weapons of mass destruction, and former advisor to the United Nations Special Commission sent into Iraq after the Gulf War to investigate Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction program. He is also author of Saddam's Secrets, The Hunt for Iraq's Secret Weapons. The Transcript Follows: FPA: Hello, and welcome to Global Q & A. Today we are speaking with Mr. Tim Trevan, a British specialist on weapons of mass destruction, and former advisor to the United Nations Special Commission sent into Iraq after the Gulf War to investigate Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction program. “He is also author of Saddam's Secrets, The Hunt for Iraq's Secret Weapons.” Thanks for being with us today Mr. Trevan. TT: My pleasure. FPA: After the Gulf War, Secretary of Defense and now Vice President Dick Cheney declared that Saddam was nuclear free. You worked as an advisor to UNSCOM during this time, and the agency quickly discovered that this was not the case. Could you tell us what it was like being part of the team sent in to uncover Saddam's secrets? TT: Well, basically the task we had was to first ascertain what Iraq's weapons levels were, and then to set up a program first for destroying the weapons and the capabilities for making them, and then to monitor their civil industry to ensure they didn't rebuild them. The assumption of course was that Iraq would make declarations at the very outset that would be accurate as to their weapons holdings and that we would simply go ahead with destroying the weapons. The reason why that assumption was made was that first of all, that is the assumption of all arms control agreements, and secondly, because all sanctions on Iraq, particularly their oil exports, were linked to their compliance with the weapons prohibitions. So the initial assumption was that they were going to tell us what they actually had. We were never confident that we even had the full picture, the extent, of the biological weapons program. There were huge amounts, huge quantities of complex mediums unaccounted for. FPA: And that proved not to be the case…. TT: From the very first inspections that turned out not to be the case. They declared they had no nuclear programs at all initially. Within a couple of inspections they had to admit that they had programs to isolate uranium. They claimed that it was for civilian purposes, and it wasn't for quite some time that they actually admitted that there was a weaponization program. Nuclear bombs. FPA: How does Saddam keep his weapons of mass destruction program so secretive? TT: Basically the bigger programs are harder to keep secret, so with something like nuclear weapons it is very hard to hide the physical facilities used to build a bomb. For chemical weapons it is obviously a lot easier, because you can use what are called dual- purpose facilities. These are facilities that are used to make fertilizers or other things like that, which could be used part time to make chemical weapons. It can be very difficult to track down a facility for making biological weapons because the physical plant for making them can be very small, or can even be mobile, or certain components of it can be made mobile. So the real thing that you have to go after is the knowledge base. Who are the scientists with the knowledge to make these things, and where are they working? FPA: So when you were initially sent into Iraq were you able to access these people to find out who they were? Or was that also kept secret? TT: Obviously, Iraq went to great lengths to keep secret who were the top scientists involved. They presented certain people, obviously they had to, because they were known to have a chemical weapons program, and also they had to present someone who knew something about the program. But on the biological program we were never convinced that we met the real leaders in the program, or even all of the scientists involved. FPA: Obviously, as of late, a lot of attention has been shifting towards Iraq as a possible next target in the war on terrorism. What does Iraq have in its arsenal right now that we are so afraid of, and what is Saddam capable of? TT: The main worry is of course the intellectual capability. They have spent many years on these programs researching how to build chemical weapons, how to build biological programs, how to build missiles, and how to build nuclear weapons. I think the level of assurance on the nuclear weapons is higher, simply because, as I said, the plants required to build nuclear weapons are much larger and therefore amenable to satellite observation. The big worry in the chemical and biological areas is that we certainly were never comfortable that we found all the raw materials that are used to make the nerve agent VX, which is a very, very potent nerve agent. We were never confident that we even had the full picture, the extent, of the biological weapons program. There were huge amounts, huge quantities of complex mediums unaccounted for. They admitted to have made a lot of anthrax and botulinum toxin, but we never saw any of it, they claim to have destroyed it unilaterally. Now that stock probably is past due date in terms of shelf life, and now the worry is that they probably had raw equipment and materials that we never knew about. They certainly have the intellectual ability to make it. Certainly, as there have been no inspections in Iraq since December '98, when Iraq kicked out the inspectors, they have had close to 3 years now to rebuild efforts, away from the gaze of inspectors. The only trouble in a situation like this is that it takes stamina, and the international community invariably gets distracted with other priorities. FPA: President Bush has again asked that Iraq allow weapons inspectors back in to Iraq. What went wrong in 1998? TT: Well, Iraq always played the game of what we called “cheat and retreat.” Basically they tried to hide as much of their weapons of mass destruction capabilities from us as they could, and only when faced with evidence to the contrary would they then admit to what the evidence said, and maybe a little bit more, but not tell the whole truth. Whenever we got close physically to something that would prove that they were lying, the guns would come out and the inspectors would be blocked. FPA: I'm sorry, did you say guns? TT: The guns would come out. The Iraqis would physically block us under force of arms, from going into a site. The December '98 issue was a combination of UNSCOM's efforts to try and get access anywhere, anytime, which was enshrined in its original mandate, but Iraq, of course, never lived up to that. Because Iraq was not allowing access to certain sites, the U.S. and U.K. bombed for a period, and after that, Iraq basically said no more inspectors. The international community has done nothing about it. FPA: Do you think that the UN and the rest of the international community provided the support that an organization like UNSCOM needed at the time. TT: The international community in the early years was very supportive of UNSCOM. The only trouble in a situation like this is that it takes stamina, and the international community invariably gets distracted with other priorities. Issues like Kosovo come along, and intellectual power of the leadership goes towards these other, more urgent problems. Also, basically a dictator has a bit of an edge over democracy in a struggle of this nature, because they can afford to be ruthless, they can afford to ignore public opinion. Eventually, democracies tend to start worrying about civil populations, the effects of sanctions, and things like that, and of course, of continued bombing. In my view, somewhere in the mid-nineties, the level of support that UNSCOM needed to continue its task effectively in the face of Iraqi obstruction, slipped below a certain threshold, and UNSCOM's fate was doomed from that time onward, with out the international support, particularly of the [UN] Security Council. FPA: When exactly was that again? TT: It started splitting as early as '94 with the French and Russians in particular, wanting sanctions lifted. But it really came to head in '97 or '98. FPA: Some have said that sending arms inspectors back into Iraq would do more harm than good unless accompanied by harder sanctions and military strikes. How would new inspections differ from previous efforts? TT: Well, I havn't really kept pace with what the new organization which succeeded UNSCOM is trying to do. UNMOVIC was created because Iraq basically said that UNSCOM was a nest of spies. And I think that was great error on the international communities' part, to allow Iraq's accusations to stand. FPA: Particularly do you mean spies for Israel? TT: Well, general accusations that every inspector was a spy. I think it is outrageous that the international community acted on Iraq's baseless accusations. Certainly an organization like UNSCOM is amenable to abuse by the sponsors of it, be it the U.S. or Israel or whoever was accused of abusing the system. But by allowing those accusations to stand and creating a new organization rather then controlling the existing organization deemed fit by the international community and not by Iraq, they basically destroyed both the reputation and credibility of the organization. Now, unless this new organization has all the powers of UNSCOM, and has all the will and the dedication to be intrusive that UNSCOM had, then there is a danger that any inspection regime will simply be a carte blanche for Iraq to get signatures saying that they are clean of all weapons of mass destruction, while actually undertaking full-blown programs out of sight of the inspectors. Without full access to everywhere, all the time, as decided by the inspectors, not Iraq, Iraq can always build clandestine facilities, and can go ahead with illegal activities in those facilities. There were obviously skeptics of the Afghan model that has just been implemented so successfully. The fact of the matter is, when you have a hated regime, what people are looking for on the ground is that they are not only going to be helped, but that they are going to be helped until the end of the game. FPA: Do you think that tougher sanctions, and even more prominent military strikes would back such a new effort. TT: I have an ambivalent view on sanctions. Sanctions, in my view, only work when they send a message to the leadership that they are trying to affect that “your position is hopeless – these sanctions are going to be in place forever until you change your policy, and they are going to get worse, until you change your policy.” That has not been the message that Iraqi sanctions have sent to Iraq. The message Iraq has got, right or wrong, and I think probably right is that “we just have to sit out the international communities' will.” The sanctions have been eased over the years, and the Iraqi leadership is now getting sufficient money from the oil sales that it can siphon off enough to maintain the power base through fear and bribery of its corrupt regimes, and its weapons programs. I am not a great believer in sanction on Iraq at this point because Iraq no longer finds them credible. If the sanctions were credible in Iraq's eyes, then I think they would be a useful weapon in changing that regime's policy. What they may achieve in the meantime is to make it more difficult for Iraq to buy the materials for its weapons programs. The cost of the sanctions at this stage is so high in terms of both the civilian pain in Iraq, and in the loss of international support for the West's position on Iraq, that I think a much more effective program would be to go after the regime in a quick and very powerful way, to remove the regime so that a civilized, open and just government can rule the Iraqi people, chosen by the Iraqi people. In other words, exactly the Afghan model. Then we don't have to expand this effort. The Iraqi people don't have to go without because of sanctions. FPA: So you think that military force is the answer to the Saddam problem. TT: There have always been skeptics about whether you can overthrow Saddam. My belief is that if you go in with enough power, you will find allies on the ground who hate the regime, who will rise up against the regime, and overthrow it and do most of the work for you. There were obviously skeptics of the Afghan model that has just been implemented so successfully. The fact of the matter is, when you have a hated regime, what people are looking for on the ground is that they are not only going to be helped, but that they are going to be helped until the end of the game. Because if they are not helped all the way until the regime crumbles, then they are going to be worse off, and they are not going to even start helping. I think the problem with finding suitable allies in Iraq in the past has been the firm belief, and justifiably so, that the West and particularly the U.S. will not go all the way with them. If you send the message that this time, we will go all the way, and then you back it up with impressive air power, then people will start believing you, and then you will find support on the ground, and that is my firm belief. FPA: You just addressed the very thing I was going to ask when you brought up this topic. Given the United States' history in Iraq, a lot of people think that we abandoned the Kurds after the Gulf War, and also with the long-term effects of sanctions effecting mostly the civilian populations, Saddam has been able to use this as a propaganda tool. Do you think, having been in Iraq, do you really think that people would support the United States if we did make that kind of effort. TT: One of the things that always stuck in my mind from my experiences in Iraq is that as a political advisor to the chairman, most of my trips to Iraq were not on inspection trips, but whenever there was a crisis in relations with Iraq, and when military tensions were extremely high, particularly between the U.S. and Iraq. Regularly, when we went in massive demonstrations would be organized against us. However, when we were away from the staged demonstrations, and were driving around in our UN-marked cars, invariably there would be kids and civilians on the streets, of both genders, waving at us, giving us thumbs-up signs, and that was during the period of highest tension, when the bombs could be coming at any minute. So I think that when you have a republic of fear like Iraq, there are always going to be people on the ground who are so full of hatred for the regime, that they will support an external effort to remove that regime and replace it with something just and fair. FPA: Maybe we could talk a bit more about the two different types of sanctions that are currently going into play right now, the “Oil-for-Food” program obviously has been in effect for some time now, and the United States is hoping to change to what they are calling “Smart Sanctions.” They have encountered some problems with Russia on this. Could you talk to us a little bit about that? TT: I am afraid I am not particularly up on the position of the Russians on the smart sanctions. Russia's position earlier was always that sanctions should be lifted, so that they could be repaid the massive debts. They are owed something in the order of $8 billion by Iraq, which of course, to a cash –strapped Russia is a lot of money. Now, basically, Russia these days has only a couple of things it can export in a competitive manner. It has commodities, such as precious metals and oil, and it has weapons. There are 3 sets of sanctions existing on Iraq at the moment. There is a basic ban on them buying any weaponry at all. Russia didn't use to like that. Secondly, there is the ban on Iraq exporting anything, that is, the oil embargo. Thirdly, there is a ban on Iraq importing anything aside from the essentials, and food and medicine. Smart sanctions would basically alleviate the sanctions in the third category, that is, just general civilian sanctions. FPA: You had mentioned you don't feel these sanctions are effective. TT: I don't think so because essentially by easing the sanctions, the oil embargo, and not having sufficient controls of the funds raised through the oil for food program, what we have given Iraq and all of the Iraqi regime the money to pursue its programs. And we are giving them the power to do so. Whenever you have scarcity of resources, and you also have control over the allocation of those resources, you have real power. So we have actually, in some ways, through the sanctions strengthened the Iraqi regime. We've given them money to stay in power, and we've made resources scarce for their population, and we have given the Iraqis power over the allocation of the resources. So it can give food and medicine to its supporters and withhold them from their enemies. Whenever you have scarcity of resources, and you also have control over the allocation of those resources, you have real power. So we have actually, in some ways, through the sanctions strengthened the Iraqi regime FPA: Who profits most from the smuggling of Iraq's oil? TT: The smuggling of oil probably benefits pretty much everyone along the way. If it didn't, then it probably wouldn't occur. Certainly while I was up in the Kurdish region for some time, the economics were something like the Iraqi government sold the oil to the Kurds, their deadly enemies, for five dollars. One set of Kurds sold it to another set of Kurds for about nine or 10 dollars. It would then get sold at the Turkish border to government officials for whatever, 12 or 13 dollars, who would then sell it to the truckers for 15 dollars. They would then sell it to the open market for 20 dollars, which was the world price at the time. So unless everyone on the way actually benefits from a trade like that, then it doesn't occur. Everyone benefits from the smuggling of oil. From the smuggling of goods into the country, Saddam's family and all of his cronies have got most of the rackets sorted out between them. It is rumored that one of Saddam's sons, has pretty much the entire monopoly on smuggled alcohol. FPA: Maybe we could talk a little bit about Bush's demand that Saddam allow weapons inspectors back into the country. What other nations will come into play here and what are the politics between some of the nations involved in Iraq? TT: UNSCOM and its successor UNMOVIC are both organization of the UN Security Council, so the power behind it is the Security Council, which invariably boils down to the five members, obviously the U.S., Russia, the U.K., France and China. FPA: And all of these countries have distinctly different necessities in Iraq. TT: The U.S. and U.K. usually speak with a fairly unified voice. The U.K I guess these days is more reluctant to consider the use of military action against Iraq. France has its own agenda. Clearly it would stand to benefit from arms exports to Iraq in the future, it would stand to benefit from oil exploration, given that they have penciled in a number of very large contracts for oil exploration in the south of Iraq. Russia wants to get its debts repaid, and to open a market with a traditionally friendly ally, and China, basically has its typical Chinese policy, which is the West shouldn't be bothering the rest of the world, and we want to sell long-range missiles to Iraq. So yes, they all have their individual agendas. FPA: So in terms of the United Nations playing any kind of role in a military action, or even supporting any kind of military action in Iraq, it would almost have to be a unilateral action from someone like the United States, would you say so? TT: I would say that effectively, as in Afghanistan it would effectively be an American action, it would have to be unilateral in the case of Iraq as well. They would undoubtedly seek the British by their side in a token manner, and I think they would find it much harder to get British support for an attack on Iraq as they would on Afghanistan, unless of course, there became smoking gun evidence that the anthrax in this country was of Iraqi origin. I think that would change a lot of things. FPA: Well Mr. Trevan, we'd like to thank you so much for speaking with us. We appreciate your time here at the Foreign Policy Association. TT: My pleasure. Copyright 2000 FPA www.fpa.org an iapps site ***************************************************************** NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: *****************************************************************