When Outlaws Get The Bomb


BILL POWELL

Kim Jong Il's crude blast punctuates a scary reality: the law of the jungle now governs the race for nuclear arms.

The tremor out of the far north of the People's Democratic Republic of Korea was unremarkable. It registered a magnitude 4.2, a light earthquake. Its significance had to be declared by its perpetrator, the unpredictable regime of Kim Jong Il. North Korea, one of the poorest and most hermetic nations on earth, was claiming a successful underground nuclear bomb test and entry into the once exclusive club of nuclear powers as member No. 9. "More fizzle than pop," said a U.S. intelligence source dismissively, though he conceded the blast was likely to have been nuclear. A sniffer plane would later pick up hints of radiation in the atmosphere. Days of diplomatic consternation ensued at Pyongyang's announcement, and after stops and starts, the U.N. Security Council imposed sanctions on North Korea, demanding that it dismantle its nuclear-arms program. It also banned the sale of conventional weaponry and luxury goods to the country. Pointing at Washington as its nemesis, Pyongyang said any increased American military pressure would be deemed a declaration of war.

Welcome to the bad new world. As crude as the North Korean blast was, it punctuated a scary fact: the rules that governed the nuclear road during the cold war and its immediate aftermath have become irrelevant, replaced by the law of the jungle--every state, rogue or otherwise, for itself. The risk now, says former Clinton Administration Defense Department official Graham Allison, is the emergence of a more dangerous nuclear age. Pyongyang's test, says Allison, threatens to set off a "cascade" of nations seeking the ultimate weapon. "The North Korean test blew a hole in the nonproliferation regime of Northeast Asia," says Allison. "I think this is bad news for the country, bad news for the region, bad news for the world."

What we have now is not a tight club of nuclear powers with interlocking interests and an appreciation for the brutal doctrine of "mutually assured destruction" but an unpredictable host of potential Bomb throwers: a Stalinist Bomb out of unstable North Korea; a Shi'ite Bomb out of Iran; a Sunni Bomb out of Pakistan; and, down the road, possibly out of Egypt and Saudi Arabia as well; and, of course, an al-Qaeda Bomb out of nowhere. Israel is a nuclear power already. And Turkey may just decide it had better be too. Even Japan and South Korea could eventually move toward the Bomb, if they feel the U.S. nuclear umbrella begins to fray in East Asia. What are the consequences for the U.S. and the rest of the world? Are we in an era of barely controlled proliferation, in which countless nations must at least consider the possibility of going nuclear? Or are those fears, in the wake of the North Korean test, overblown? Is there still time to manage the situation?

THE CASCADE STARTS HERE

The North Korean incident impetus to what appears to be a determined push by Iran to acquire the capability to produce its own nuclear bomb. Tehran insists it is interested only in a civilian nuclear program for energy purposes. The main outside players--the U.S., the European Union, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)--are increasingly skeptical about those claims but thus far have been powerless to do much about it. Western intelligence agencies assume Iran could become the next nuclear power if it proceeds undeterred with its clandestine program. Like North Korea, Iran is a signatory to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), the diplomatic edifice erected in 1970 precisely to deter countries from going nuclear. (Pyongyang formally withdrew from the NPT in 2003.) The North Korean test, says General Giora Eiland, Israel's former National Security Adviser, means "Iran will reach the obvious conclusion--that nobody will stop them."

"If Iran goes nuclear militarily," says an Egyptian official, "others will not sit idly by." The official says Turkey would think seriously about going nuclear, and if "Iran, Israel and Turkey are all nuclear, the Arab states would feel they have no choice but to follow. Forget about eradicating poverty, all efforts will go into acquiring nuclear technology." In a private memo he wrote on May 1, which was reported in a Bob Woodward article in the Washington Post on Oct. 8, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld noted that at least two Middle Eastern states--which he did not name--have been thinking about developing nuclear weapons. In all likelihood, he was referring to Egypt--which has a civilian nuclear program for its energy needs--and Saudi Arabia. The leaders in the Arab world have made due note of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's success in using the pursuit of nuclear power as a way to rally popular support.

When Pyongyang declared the success of its test, Japan swore it would continue to abjure nuclear arms. At a minimum, however, the incident will surely spur Japan's efforts to develop a missile-defense system in cooperation with the U.S. That, in turn, is bound to anger China and could push Beijing to spend more on nuclear weapons to ensure that Japan doesn't feel invulnerable. An icy East Asian cold war and a very hot arms race between Japan and China are a greater prospect now than they were a week ago.

And while Tokyo seems sincere about not going nuclear now--the antinuclear sentiment in that country, for obvious reasons, runs strong and deep--there are limits to how secure Japan may come to feel under the U.S. nuclear umbrella. If North Korea proves capable of putting a nuclear warhead on a missile that can reach the U.S.--it already has short-range missiles capable of reaching Tokyo--the strategic game changes. If North Korea could nuke Japan, or blackmail it, while credibly threatening to strike the U.S. with a nuclear warhead, would Japanese officials truly believe the U.S. would retaliate against Pyongyang--and risk a North Korean nuke landing in Honolulu? The day may come when Tokyo will have to make that precise calculation.

WHAT ABOUT AL-QAEDA?

Ashton Carter, a counterproliferation expert at Harvard, believes the risk of nuclear proliferation out the back door of a rogue state is increasing. North Korea or Iran could conceivably sell a bomb to a terrorist group, and Osama bin Laden is unlikely to be put off by traditional methods of deterring a nuclear attack. That means plugging the source. Says Derek D. Smith, author of Deterring America: Rogue States and the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction: "If you can't deter the terrorist organizations, you'd better be sure to deter whoever is supplying them."

Reacting to the blast, President Bush said, "The transfer of nuclear weapons or material by North Korea to states or nonstate entities would be considered a grave threat to the United States, and we would hold North Korea fully accountable of the consequences of such action." That was an explicit embrace of Graham Allison's concept of "nuclear accountability." Thus, according to Allison, if Kim Jong Il were to sell a weapon to bin Laden and that weapon were used against the U.S. or one of its allies, then the principle would require the U.S. to "treat this precisely like a nuclear-tipped-missile attack" and retaliate against Pyongyang. "That danger [of North Korean proliferation] has always been there," says Michael Green, until last year a senior staff member on the National Security Council. "But North Korea has a mailing address, and they know it. If there was a nuclear explosion somewhere, it would probably be traced back to them, and their country would be destroyed. That's a deterrent."

The Pentagon and the IAEA both devote considerable resources to the task of identifying the source of any bomb that is tested. Still, tracking the source of nuclear material is a complex, difficult endeavor--one that is hardly guaranteed success. To this day, there are questions about the origins of the material that Pakistani nuclear scientist A.Q. Khan sold to Libya. Among the material that Libya turned over after it abandoned its program was a precursor to highly enriched uranium--uranium hexafluoride. U.S. intelligence agencies believed it came from North Korea but spent months trying to prove it. They still haven't.

THE CASE FOR STAYING CALM

It is perhaps surprising at a moment when one of the world's most isolated and despotic regimes says it has gone nuclear that some current and former security strategists view Kim Jong Il's move as far less than a disaster. No one, to be sure, regards it as a good thing. But it is possible to view the test--and the state of play in the nuclear world more broadly--in more apocalyptic terms than is warranted. Many question, for example, Allison's argument that North Korea will unleash a sort of nuclear domino effect--with one country after another scrambling to get nukes. Take, for example, the nonnuclear countries in East Asia closest to North Korea: South Korea, Japan and Taiwan. All are wealthy, technologically sophisticated countries that could go nuclear in a heartbeat. (South Korea had a clandestine nuclear-arms program in the mid-1970s.) But all reside snugly under the so-called U.S. nuclear umbrella--any attack by Pyongyang would bring the full destructive force of the U.S. military in response. And last week all swore off any notion that North Korea's test would make them rethink their policy of eschewing nukes.

Indeed, since the end of the cold war in 1991, not all the news on the nuclear front has been bad. South Africa, Ukraine and, more recently, Libya all willingly gave up nuclear weapons or the pursuit of them. Brazil and Argentina formally abandoned any thought of going nuclear. "I would also disagree with the basic premise that the pressure is all in the direction of going nuclear," says Mark Fitzpatrick, a proliferation expert at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London. The North Korea test, he says, will have only marginal effects on how other countries view their own security and the role nukes should play in them.

And some are dusting off the cold war theory that nukes are inherently stabilizing. "Nuclear weapons increase the international responsibility of every state that has acquired them," says a British general. Even Pakistan, roundly condemned as a rogue for its nuclear test in 1998 (conducted in response to India's tests held a couple of weeks earlier), is now viewed, as Fitzpatrick puts it, as a "responsible" nuclear state. It has not gone to war with India, its archrival, and--precisely because war now brings risk of nuclear annihilation on both sides--that prospect is less likely than it was before Pakistan joined India. Deterrence worked during the cold war, and it can work now.

MANAGING THE NEW RISK

What, then, can be done to rein in countries like North Korea? Pyongyang is especially prickly and dangerous, and already holds 10 million residents in the South Korean capital as virtual hostages. Seoul is only 30 miles from the border and has always lived under the threat of immediate destruction from North Korean firepower. Says a senior U.S. military officer: "[It is] within easy and rapid range of perhaps 10,000 artillery tubes with a 57-second flight time. That can cause World War II--size casualties." And that's without nuclear weapons. Now, unless the U.S. goes back to the bargaining table and somehow entices North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons--something most experts believe is unlikely--deterrence and containment become even more important. "The tactical game with North Korea--trying to get them to stand down their nuclear program--is now pretty much over," says Henry Sokolski, a former Defense Department nonproliferation expert in George H.W. Bush's Administration. "Now it's a strategic game, containing them and waiting for the regime to collapse."

The international community can also make it difficult for rogue nuclear states to make a buck off their new technology. To its credit, the Bush Administration has implemented the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI), a program now involving about 80 countries. They work to interdict material and equipment they believe is headed for use in the production of weapons of mass destruction. The U.S. and its allies credit improved intelligence sharing and cooperation for successes like the October 2003 interdiction of the German-owned ship BBC China, which was intercepted carrying centrifuge components to Libya. But there are still huge gaps. The PSI relies on "actionable" intelligence, and Representative Pete Hoekstra, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, acknowledges that U.S. human-intelligence assets in "hard targets" like North Korea are sorely lacking. Says Derek Smith: "It really comes down to having the intelligence capability to be able to determine which modes of transferral are going to be used, so you know which ship to go after. Certainly, we're not going to be able to put a blockade in place on air, sea and land all around North Korea."

China, which has not signed on to the PSI, has been a valuable partner. This summer North Korea conducted conventional- missile tests--in defiance of its chief patron Beijing and the rest of the world. And now China, which has sold conventional missiles to Iran in the past, is stepping up efforts to deter Pyongyang from moving missile and missile-related technology to Iran. A high-ranking diplomat in East Asia tells TIME that China has denied overflight rights to North Korean aircraft bound for Tehran.

Overshadowing everything is the reality that this is a different world from the one that existed during the cold war--and the established powers are at sea in trying to cope with it. Defense intellectuals like Thérèse Delpech, director of strategic affairs at the Atomic Energy Commission in France, reject classic deterrence theory as a model for today's nuclear age. "The new actors, such as Ahmadinejad or Kim, are much more prone to act [impulsively] rather than like the United States or the Soviet Union" during the cold war, she asserts. And even if that's not true--Iran's Ayatullahs and Kim may want nukes primarily to secure their hold on power--there is little question that the world faces big problems dealing with the new nuclear challenges. "The United Nations keeps pushing back deadlines, and the matters at hand get more and more serious," says Delpech. "There has to be the will among the principle powers to recognize that proliferation has to be viewed in a way that goes beyond parochial national interests."

Is there that will? The Bush Administration insists there is, and that cooperation among the Western allies will ultimately rein in North Korea and deter future nuclear wannabes like Iran. Yet that may be more hope than reality. Says Delpech: "We're now facing two very grave cases of proliferation at the same time, and we have to use this moment of condemnation to pull the [established world] powers together." But considering how long it took for the Security Council to ban the sale of luxury goods to Pyongyang, time does not appear to be on our side. [This article contains a diagram. Please see hardcopy or pdf.] NUCLEAR WORLD

North Korea is defiantly rushing to become the ninth country on earth to have the Bomb. President Bush has said the U.S. "will not tolerate" a nuclear North Korea, but containment may be the only viable option remaining

•Countries with nuclear weapons; Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) signatories

•Countries with the ability to develop nuclear weapons

•Countries with nuclear weapons; not NPT signatories •Argentina, Brazil, Chile

•South Africa

France

Britain Israel Unconfirmed arsenal Iran Suspected program Pakistan Russia

China

North Korea Testing weapons

India

•Indonesia, Australia The U.S. and Russia control most of the world's nuclear warheads. Those stockpiles are shrinking, but other countries are pursuing nuclear weapons Deployed nuclear weapons, in thousands 1950-2000 U.S. U.S.S.R/Russia Others

Estimated nuclear stockpiles, 2005

Russia 8,800 inactive 7,200 deployed U.S. 10,315

Est. warheads

China 410 France 350 Britain 200 Israel 100-170 India 75-110 Pakistan 50-110 North Korea Unknown

Russia has about 8,800 warheads in reserve or awaiting dismantling

In addition to the known nuclear powers, North Korea says it has nuclear weapons. Iran could be next

Sources: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace; Natural Resources Defense Council

With reporting by With reporting by Aryn Baker/ Islamabad, Timothy J. Burger, SALLY B. DONNELLY, Elaine Shannon/Washington, Simon Elegant/Beijing, James Graff/Paris, Ghulam Hasnain/Karachi, Scott MacLeod/Cairo, J.F.O. McAllister/London, Tim McGirk/Jerusalem, Andrew Purvis/Vienna, Simon Robinson/New Delhi, Jennifer Veale/Seoul, Bryan Walsh/Tokyo

Sphere: Related Content

0 comments

Would Defeat in Iraq Be So Bad?


LESLIE GELB

After Vietnam, the dominoes did not fall. What that tells us about this war.

To me, the relentless mud slide of insurgency and civil war in Iraq is leading to unacceptable strategic disaster for the U.S. There appear to be no viable paths to follow in order to avoid it. Neither "staying the course"--whatever that Bush strategy now means--nor the Democrats' idea of exiting by timetables offers a semblance of success. Both approaches produce only nightmares: general chaos; Iraq's center taken over by terrorists emboldened by victory over America, their pockets bulging with Iraqi oil money; southern Iraq controlled by pro-Iranians or Iran itself; and Iraq's neighbors picking at the nation's carcass until regional war erupts and prompts oil prices to hit $150 a barrel.

But while those fears have a real hold on me, I can't help transporting myself back more than 30 years to that day in Vietnam when I felt certain the dominoes would fall throughout Asia and destroy America's strategic position there and elsewhere. I was wrong about those dominoes, as were almost all foreign-policy experts.

It was April 28, 1975. The last U.S. officials scrambled aboard helicopters, bound for home, heralding defeat as North Vietnamese troops tramped into the South Vietnamese capital. And it was the most ignominious kind of defeat, one that came after a decades-long war, after tens of thousands of Americans and Vietnamese had been killed, after our Presidents had pledged it would never come to that.

We expected China and the Soviet Union would be ascendant, that allies like Japan and South Korea would doubt our resolve and reposition themselves, and that North Vietnam would claim the rest of Indochina. Almost none of that happened.

Three years later, the standing and power of the U.S. in Asia were greater than at any other time since the end of World War II. Our friends and allies in the region were worried about communist ascendancy, as we were, and they all rallied behind us. They understood clearly that their security depended on our presence and power in Asia. And so the dominoes never fell.

Could the consequences of defeat in Iraq not be as bad as we imagine? In the first place, the Arab jihadi terrorists will be more difficult to handle than the North Vietnamese. Hanoi's leaders ran a disciplined country with ambitions limited to Indochina. The jihadi terrorists in Iraq can't be bargained with, and their hatred runs global. Victory in Iraq would embolden them.

But we are not without ways to check their victory, even as we might exit Iraq. We have allies at the ready (the Kurds, the Saudis, the Turks, the Jordanians, etc.) who fear the jihadis as much as we do and potential allies (the Baathists and the Sunni tribal leaders) who want to rule their own piece of Iraq and also fear and despise the jihadis. As we gradually withdraw, we and others could provide Baathists the wherewithal to crush the terrorists. Without a large U.S. military presence, they probably would do a better job of it.

As for Iran's hold on southern Iraq, the risk looms large. But we easily forget that Iraqi Shi'ites are Arabs, not Persians. They have their own pride, traditions and interests. We should stand ready to help these Shi'ites as well.

All logic could prove illusory if Iraq's neighbors plunge the region into war. But they, including Iran, desire to avoid the abyss that engulfs their oil production (their only source of funds) and subjects them to internal rebellions. Washington has the diplomatic power to help shape this concern, starting now and including Iran.

To be sure, Arabs don't succumb readily to being herded in one direction, even where common interests dictate. All could bolt for the door, appease the terrorists and just raise oil prices. But we don't know until we try hard.

And we had better try--and soon. Although the last thing Americans want is a defeat in Iraq, events may be sliding in that direction and we need to shrink the fallout. The nightmare scenario could begin now, or in the next two years as troops are withdrawn, or thereafter, abruptly or slowly. To speak of defeat is not to advocate it but to prepare to minimize it.

While the Ford and Carter administrations worked hard to cushion the falling dominoes, the Asian dominoes moved quickly to save themselves by buttressing our power. We can't expect to be as lucky with the denizens of the gulf region. And we certainly wouldn't make our luck by staying the course and hiding behind Bush's fears of Middle East dominoes. We need him to unstrap America's still muscular diplomacy to seed the antiterrorist soil within Iraq, to structure a regional peace among states that cringe from regional war, to blunt the disasters of chaos and defeat--and perhaps even to snatch successes beforehand.

Sphere: Related Content

0 comments

A Revolt of the Generals?


J.F.O. MCALLISTER AND SALLY B. DONNELLY

A top British commander speaks candidly about the grim outlook in Iraq. But will his more reticent American peers follow his lead?

Soldiers are supposed to follow orders. But top generals are also supposed to guide their political masters so the orders make sense — and in the end, to object if they don't. So, in the face of mounting casualties and political chaos in Iraq and no clear strategy for victory, it was only a matter of time before active military commanders on the ground would start publicly voicing their contrary opinions.

That's just what happened this week, though it took a British and not an American general to start the dialogue. The straight-talking chief of the British Army, Gen. Richard Dannatt, gave interviews to the London Daily Mail and the BBC that had 10 Downing Street scrambling. Though he pointed out that British troops had made enough progress to turn over control of two southern provinces to Iraqi forces, he also noted that they weren't invited in at the outset and are widely unpopular.

"It's an absolute fact that in some parts of the country, the fact that we are there causes people to attack us, and in that sense, our presence exacerbates violence," he said. The original hope of installing a liberal democratic government is out of reach and might have been "na�ve." "We should aim for a lower ambition," he argued — just keeping Iraq a unitary state. He has "much more optimism we can get it right in Afghanistan" than in Iraq. Though the British army "doesn't do surrender," he said he wanted its 7,000 troops out "sometime soon" because "time is not our friend -- we can't be here forever at this level. I have an army to look after, which is going to be successful in current operations, but I want an army in five years' time, ten years' time; I don't want to break it on this one."

When officials working for Tony Blair got first reports of Dannatt's newspaper interview they were baffled and wondered why he had taken the army's top job if he disagreed with its principal mission. When the full text arrived, they determined he was not frontally criticizing Blair's current policy, which also favors an exit from Iraq as soon as Iraqi forces can take over, but instead was sticking up for his beloved army in a way someone more media-savvy might have done without leaving so many hostages to tabloid fortune. At a press conference, in fact, Blair tried to put a good spin on it all by saying he agreed with "every word" of Dannatt's statements.

Nevertheless, while the general's views may not technically diverge from Blair's policy, they certainly remind the public in a way that embarrasses Downing St.— as well as Washington — how difficult if not impossible that policy will be to achieve. Blair would never state that his ambitions for Iraq might have been na�ve, that British troops are a magnet for attack or should leave soon. The fact that Dannatt's views are widely shared among senior officers only intensifies the awkwardness> for the Prime Minister.

In Washington, even though Coalition forces have been fighting in Iraq longer than Americans fought the Axis during World War II, serving officers have been more circumspect. Recent criticism of U.S. strategy and tactics is easy to find from retired officers, such as Marine Gen. Tony Zinni, former head of the Central Command, which has responsibility for Iraq and Afghanistan, who recently called the U.S. approach "bankrupt." But whatever blunt talk may be uttered in the Pentagon gets sanded down by the time it reaches the outside world.

Ambitious officers remember the fate of Army Chief of Staff Eric Shinseki, who was frozen out by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld after testifying in 2003 that an occupation force of "several hundred thousand" would be required in Iraq — which contradicted Rumsfeld's conviction that a much smaller force would be sufficient. Shinseki was right, but Rumsfeld is still in charge. No senior U.S. officer has been fired or disciplined for mistakes or incompetent execution in Iraq, including Army Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, the general in command in Iraq at the time of Abu Ghraib, who was allowed to retire quietly.

Nor has Gen. John Abizaid, the Centcom commander who has been a key decision maker, been openly criticized or sharply questioned by Congress about his strategy. The get-along, go-along culture of the top brass creates tensions with officers in Iraq, who complain that their requests for more troops are often ignored because senior officers do not want to deliver more bad news to the Pentagon. A sharp contrast is provided by the Israeli military, which started an inquiry into its own failures in Lebanon last summer even before the fighting ended. "The Israelis demand accountability for poor performance, but the U.S. military and political establishment are not willing to raise questions about their own failures and the fact that nearly 3,000 Americans have now lost their lives," says a former senior U.S. military officer.

Surviving the slippery slopes of power may be hard for generals, and of course it is right that they respect civilian control by not wading into political debates. But with lives are at stake, Dannatt felt compelled to speak: "Honesty is what it is all about. The truth will out. We have got to speak the truth."

Sphere: Related Content

0 comments

How Iran's Revolution Created 'Muslim Lite'

About five days before the start of Ramadan, in anticipation of a long month of abstinence, my upstairs neighbor's kid threw a house party. Car after car unloaded young men with spiky, gelled hair, and young women in tight jeans and spiky heels. The sound system, I believe, must have been imported from an Ibiza nightclub, because no household stereo could produce such volume. Of course by 11 p.m., plainclothes police officers — well, we at least like to assume that the men in street clothes who raid parties and take bribes are actual agents of the law — had arrived and broken up the terrified crowd. But that's not the interesting part. Once the month of fasting began, I spotted many of these very same young people around the neighborhood, piously reincarnated with austere hairstyles and headscarves. I recognized one of the girls at the local square, as we stood in a pre-iftar [the Ramadan evening meal] line for halim, and asked her if the was actually observant, or just happened to like the seasonal wheat and turkey stew. "Oh, I adore fasting!" she said, as though professing to love truffles or the beach.

source

Tags: unloaded | terrified | spiky | plainclothes | piously | gelled | volume | upstairs | threw | stereo | raid | police | OFFICERS | observing | nightclub | jeans | IMPORTED | Household | heels | days | clothes | bribes | assume | arrived | anticipation | Agents | Actual | abstinence | Revolution | Ramadan | Muslim | LITE | Iran | Ibiza | created

Sphere: Related Content

0 comments

Today in history - Oct. 16


The Associated Press

Today is Monday, Oct. 16, the 289th day of 2006. There are 76 days left in the year.

Today's Highlight in History:

On Oct. 16, 1978, the College of Cardinals of the Roman Catholic Church chose Cardinal Karol Wojtyla to be the new pope; he took the name John Paul II.

On this date:

In 1793, during the French Revolution, Marie Antoinette, the queen of France, was beheaded.

In 1859, abolitionist John Brown led a group of about 20 men in a raid on Harper's Ferry, Va.

In 1916, Margaret Sanger opened the first birth control clinic, in New York City. (The clinic ended up being raided by police and Sanger was arrested.)

In 1946, 10 Nazi war criminals condemned during the Nuremberg trials were hanged.

In 1962, the Cuban missile crisis began as President Kennedy was informed that reconnaissance photographs had revealed the presence of missile bases in Cuba.

In 1964, Harold Wilson of the Labor Party assumed office as prime minister of Britain, succeeding Conservative Sir Alec Douglas-Home.

In 1964, China set off its first atomic bomb, code-named "596," on the Lop Nur Test Ground.

In 1981, Israeli war hero Moshe Dayan died in Tel Aviv at age 66.

In 1987, a 58 1/2 hour drama in Midland, Texas, ended happily as rescuers freed Jessica McClure, an 18-month-old girl trapped in an abandoned well.

In 1991, a deadly shooting rampage took place in Killeen, Texas, as George Hennard crashed his pickup truck into a Luby's Cafeteria and opened fire, killing 23 people before taking his own life.

Ten years ago: Republican Bob Dole challenged President Clinton's ethics and honesty in their final debate. Soccer fans trying to squeeze into Mateo Flores National Stadium in Guatemala City stampeded, killing 84 people.

Five years ago: U.S. bombs struck the Red Cross compound in Afghanistan, injuring a guard. Twelve Senate offices were closed as hundreds of staffers underwent anthrax tests. Jazz vocalist Etta Jones died in New York at age 72.

One year ago: Polish television broadcast a recorded interview with Pope Benedict XVI, who said that he planned to visit Poland, the homeland of his predecessor, John Paul II (it's believed to be the first TV interview by a pope). The Chicago White Sox beat the Los Angeles Angels 6-3 to win the American League Championship Series in five games, their first pennant since 1959. Elmer "Len" Dresslar Jr., the booming voice of the Jolly Green Giant, died at age 80.

Today's Birthdays: Actress Angela Lansbury is 81. Author Gunter Grass is 79. Former presidential adviser Charles W. Colson is 75. Actor-producer Tony Anthony is 69. Actor Barry Corbin is 66. Rock musician C.F. Turner (Bachman-Turner Overdrive) is 63. Actress Suzanne Somers is 60. Rock singer-musician Bob Weir (The Dead) is 59. Producer-director David Zucker is 59. Record company executive Jim Ed Norman is 58. Actor Daniel Gerroll is 55. Actor-director Tim Robbins is 48. Actor-musician Gary Kemp is 47. Singer-musician Bob Mould is 46. Actor Randy Vasquez is 45. Rock musician Flea (Red Hot Chili Peppers) is 44. Jazz musician Roy Hargrove is 37. Actress Terri J. Vaughn is 37. Singer Wendy Wilson (Wilson Phillips) is 37. Rapper B-Rock (B-Rock and the Bizz) is 35. Actress Kellie Martin is 31. Singer John Mayer is 29. Actor Jeremy Jackson is 26.

Thought for Today: "One learns in life to keep silent and draw one's own confusions." — Cornelia Otis Skinner, American actress and author (1901-1979).

Sphere: Related Content

0 comments

U.S. population set to hit 300M on Tues.

STEPHEN OHLEMACHER,
Associated Press Writer

America's population is on track to hit 300 million on Tuesday morning, and it's causing a stir among environmentalists.

People in the United States are consuming more than ever — more food, more energy, more natural resources. Open spaces are shrinking and traffic in many areas is dreadful.

But some experts argue that population growth only partly explains America's growing consumption. Just as important, they say, is where people live, what they drive and how far they travel to work.

"The pattern of population growth is really the most crucial thing," said Michael Replogle, transportation director for Environmental Defense, a New York-based advocacy group.

"If the population grows in thriving existing communities, restoring the historic density of older communities, we can easily sustain that growth and create a more efficient economy without sacrificing the environment," Replogle said.

That has not been the American way. Instead, the country has fed its appetite for big houses, big yards, cul-de-sacs and strip malls. In a word: sprawl.

"Because the U.S. has become a suburban nation, sprawl has become the most predominant form of land use," said Vicky Markham, director of the Center for Environment and Population, an advocacy group. "Sprawl is, by definition, more spread out. That of course requires more vehicles and more vehicle miles traveled."

America still has a lot of wide-open spaces, with about 84 people per square mile, compared with about 300 people per square mile in the European Union and almost 900 people per square mile in Japan.

But a little more than half the U.S. population is clustered in counties along the coasts, including those along the Gulf of Mexico and the Great Lakes. Also, much of the population is moving away from large cities to the suburbs and beyond.

The fastest growing county is Flagler County, Fla., north of Daytona Beach; the fastest growing city is Elk Grove, Calif., a suburb of Sacramento; and the fastest growing metropolitan area is Riverside, Calif., about 50 miles east of Los Angeles.

"In New York City, people tend to think of that as an urban jungle, but the environmental impact per capita is quite low," said Carlos Restrepo, a research scientist at New York University. "It tends to be less than it is for someone who lives in the suburbs with a big house where they need more than one car."

The Census Bureau projects that America's population will hit 300 million at 7:46 a.m. EDT Tuesday. The projection is based on estimates for births, deaths and net immigration that add up to one new American every 11 seconds.

The estimated 11 million to 12 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. are included in official population estimates, though many demographers believe they are undercounted.

The population reached its last milestone, 200 million, in 1967. That translates into a 50 percent increase in 39 years.

During the same period, the number of households nearly doubled, the number motor vehicles more than doubled and the miles driven in those vehicles nearly tripled.

The average household size has shrunk from 3.3 people to 2.6 people, and the share of households with only one person has jumped from less than 16 percent to about 27 percent.

"The natural resource base that is required to support each person keeps rising," Replogle said. "We're heating and cooling more space, and the housing units are more spread out than ever before."

The U.S. is the third largest country in the world, behind China and India. The U.S. is the fastest growing of the industrialized nations, adding about 2.8 million people a year, or just under 1 percent. India is growing faster but the United Nations considers it to be a less developed country.

About 40 percent of U.S. population growth comes from immigration, both legal and illegal, according to the Census Bureau. The rest comes from births outnumbering deaths.

"It's not the population, it's the consumption that can do us in," said William Frey, a demographer at the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank. "These are the luxuries we have been able to support until now. But we're not going to be able to do it forever."

Sphere: Related Content

0 comments

Today in history - Oct. 14


The Associated Press

Today is Saturday, Oct. 14, the 287th day of 2006. There are 78 days left in the year.

Today's Highlight in History:

On Oct. 14, 1947, Air Force test pilot Charles E. ("Chuck") Yeager broke the sound barrier as he flew the experimental Bell X-1 rocket plane over Edwards Air Force Base in California.

On this date:

In 1066, Normans under William the Conqueror defeated the English at the Battle of Hastings.

In 1586, Mary, Queen of Scots, went on trial in England, accused of committing treason against Queen Elizabeth the First. (Mary was beheaded in February 1587.)

In 1806, the forces of French Emperor Napoleon I defeated the Prussians in the twin battles of Jena and Auerstadt.

In 1890, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 34th president of the United States, was born in Denison, Texas.

In 1912, Theodore Roosevelt, campaigning for the presidency, was shot in the chest in Milwaukee. Despite the wound, he went ahead with a scheduled speech.

In 1944, German Field Marshal Erwin Rommel committed suicide rather than face execution for allegedly conspiring against Adolf Hitler.

In 1960, the idea of a Peace Corps was first suggested by Democratic presidential candidate John F. Kennedy to an audience of students at the University of Michigan.

In 1964, civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. was named winner of the Nobel Peace Prize.

In 1981, the new president of Egypt, Hosni Mubarak, was sworn in to succeed the assassinated Anwar Sadat. Mubarak pledged loyalty to Sadat's policies.

In 1986, Holocaust survivor and human rights advocate Elie Wiesel was named winner of the Nobel Peace Prize.

Ten years ago: Archer Daniels Midland Co. said it would plead guilty to two charges and pay $100 million dollars to settle a federal price-fixing case. The Dow Jones industrial average closed above 6,000 for the first time, ending the day at 6,010. Madonna gave birth to a daughter, Lourdes Maria Ciccone Leon.

Five years ago: As U.S. jets opened a second week of raids in Afghanistan, President Bush sternly rejected a Taliban offer to discuss handing over Osama bin Laden to a third country, saying, "They must have not heard. There's no negotiations."

One year ago: The Treasury Department reported that the federal deficit hit $319 billion for the budget year just ended, down from the previous year, but still the third highest. Blond, blue-eyed British actor Daniel Craig was named the new James Bond.

Today's Birthdays: Former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop is 90. Actor Roger Moore is 79. Movie director Carroll Ballard is 69. Former White House counsel John W. Dean III is 68. Country singer Melba Montgomery is 68. Fashion designer Ralph Lauren is 67. Singer Cliff Richard is 66. Actor Udo Kier is 62. Singer-musician Justin Hayward (The Moody Blues) is 60. Actor Harry Anderson is 54. Actor Greg Evigan is 53. TV personality Arleen Sorkin is 50. Golf Hall-of-Famer Beth Daniel is 50. Singer-musician Thomas Dolby is 48. Singer Karyn White is 41. Actor Jon Seda is 36. Country musician Doug Virden is 36. Country singer Natalie Maines (The Dixie Chicks) is 32. Actress-singer Shaznay Lewis (All Saints) is 31. Singer Usher is 28. Actor Jordan Brower is 25.

Thought for Today: "To be nobody-but-myself — in a world which is doing its best, night and day, to make you everybody else — means to fight the hardest battle which any human being can fight, and never stop fighting." — E.E. Cummings, American poet, (1894-1962).

Sphere: Related Content

0 comments

Fingering Danny Pearl's Killer


TIMOTHY J. BURGER AND ADAM ZAGORIN

 U.S. officials are now convinced it was Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of 9/11, who murdered the Wall Street Journal reporter.

Who murdered Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl? Since his kidnapping and execution by Islamic militants in Pakistan in 2002, various suspects have been identified. Pakistani authorities initially put the blame on Ahmad Omar Saeed Sheik, a British-born Islamist who was convicted and sentenced to death for the crime in Pakistan in 2003. Three fellow conspirators received jail terms of 25 years.

More recently, a new book by Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf, In the Line of Fire, speculates that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, was "the man who may have actually killed Pearl or at least participated in his butchery." According to Musharraf, "When we later arrested and interrogated him, he admitted his participation." A new HBO documentary, The Journalist and the Jihadi: The Murder of Daniel Pearl, leaves the question unresolved; it focuses on the intersecting lives of Pearl and Sheik, the man convicted of the crime, but also cites unnamed U.S. and Pakistani officials who blame Khalid Sheikh Mohammed for the murder.

Now, several U.S. officials tell TIME that KSM's role in the Pearl murder appears more direct than previously acknowledged — and that the Bush Administration plans to try him for it. The officials tell TIME that KSM confessed under CIA interrogation that he personally committed the murder. Moreover, when he faces a military tribunal at Guantanamo, perhaps as soon as next year, the U.S. plans to charge him not only with the 9/11 plot, but also with direct responsibility for Pearl's death.

Khalid Sheikh Mohammad (KSM) was one of 14 "high value" prisoners recently moved to the U.S. detention camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, from secret CIA prisons overseas. In announcing the transfer on Sept. 6, President Bush also promised to try some of the most important captives in military tribunals, a plan that Congress approved last month.

One former U.S. national security official tells TIME there is no doubt that KSM personally wielded the knife that killed the Wall Street Journal reporter. This official says that Ahmad Omar Saed Sheik insisted under interrogation that taking Pearl ' s life was not at first part of the kidnap plot — though Sheik also told his questioners that Pearl's kidnappers could never have released him because he was Jewish. But as the scheme unfolded, someone senior to him in the al-Qaeda hierarchy, known as " the fat man, " took control of the operation and beheade Pearl.

Sheik never identified KSM as the actual killer, however. The FBI deduced KSM's role only after analyzing a video of the crime, in which only the perpetrator's hands are visible. That video was released by Islamic militants soon after Pearl's murder and then widely shown on Arab television and the Internet. Eventually, the FBI obtained its own version of the original video, as well as the camera used to photograph the murder.

Once KSM was taken into custody in March 2003, a comparison of the hands shown in the video and KSM's own hands, along with other evidence, confirmed the FBI's suspicions. Then, under interrogation, KSM confessed, national security officials told TIME, admitting without remorse that he personally severed Pearl ' s head and telling interrogators he had to switch knives after the first one, " got dull. "

KSM was interrogated in secret CIA prisons along with some three dozen other key captives, including alleged terrorists Ramzi Binalshibh and Abu Zubaydah, a close associate of Osama bin Laden. U.S. officials say all were questioned as part of a special CIA program that was in effect before Congress began legislating on interrogation policy, first last December and again in anew bill that President Bush is expected to sign soon. But with their actionable intelligence value largely exhausted in recent months — and the White House under political and legal pressure to alter the CIA's once-secret detention and interrogation system — all the captives have been shipped to Guantanamo or to third countries.

Ahmad Omar Saed Sheik, who was questioned intensively after his capture and conviction in Pakistan, insisted to his interrogators that he was personally opposed to beheading victims, and felt bad about what happened to Pearl. But he also stated that it was sometimes the only way for terrorists to prove — in videos released to the outside world — that a person was, in fact, dead.

Today, Pearl's widow, Marriane Pearl, is raising the couple's son, Adam, who was born four and a half months after his father's death. A non-profit foundation set up by the Pearl family in Daniel Pearl's name promotes interfaith dialogue and attempts to combat the mind-set that led to his murder.

Sphere: Related Content

0 comments

Today in history - Oct. 13


The Associated Press

Today is Friday, Oct. 13, the 286th day of 2006. There are 79 days left in the year.

Today's Highlight in History:

On Oct. 13, 1792, the cornerstone of the executive mansion, later known as the White House, was laid during a ceremony in the District of Columbia.

On this date:

In A.D. 54, Roman emperor Claudius I died, after being poisoned by his wife, Agrippina.

In 1775, the United States Navy had its origins as the Continental Congress ordered the construction of a naval fleet.

In 1843, the Jewish organization B'nai B'rith was founded in New York City.

In 1845, Texas voters ratified a state constitution.

In 1943, Italy declared war on Germany, its one-time Axis partner.

In 1944, American troops entered Aachen, Germany.

In 1960, Richard M. Nixon and John F. Kennedy participated in the third televised debate of their presidential campaign.

In 1962, "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" by Edward Albee opened on Broadway.

In 1974, longtime television host Ed Sullivan died in New York City at age 72.

In 1981, voters in Egypt participated in a referendum to elect Vice President Hosni Mubarak the new president, one week after the assassination of Anwar Sadat.

Ten years ago: House Speaker Newt Gingrich, appearing on CBS' "Face the Nation," called on Congress to investigate campaign contributions made to President Clinton's re-election campaign by the Lippo Group, an Indonesian banking conglomerate. The Yankees won the American League pennant, defeating the Baltimore Orioles.

Five years ago: Ukraine's defense minister and air defense chief offered to resign, conceding that the military was involved in the explosion of a Russian airliner over the Black Sea on Oct. 4 that killed 78 people.

One year ago: British playwright Harold Pinter won the 2005 Nobel Prize in literature. Scores of Islamic militants launch simultaneous attacks on police and government buildings in Nalchik, a city in Russia's turbulent Caucasus region, leaving 139 people dead, including 94 militants.

Today's Birthdays: Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher is 81. Playwright Frank D. Gilroy is 81. Gospel singer Shirley Caesar is 68. Actress Melinda Dillon is 67. Singer-musician Paul Simon is 65. Actress Pamela Tiffin is 64. Musician Robert Lamm (Chicago) is 62. Actor Demond Wilson is 60. Singer-musician Sammy Hagar is 59. Actor John Lone is 54. Model Beverly Johnson is 54. Actor Reggie Theus is 49. Singer Marie Osmond is 47. Rock singer Joey Belladonna (Anthrax) is 46. Actress T'Keyah Crystal Keymah is 44. Actress Kelly Preston is 44. Country singer John Wiggins is 44. Actress Kate Walsh is 39. Actress Tisha Campbell-Martin is 38. Classical singer Carlos Marin (Il Divo) is 38. Olympic silver-medal figure skater Nancy Kerrigan is 37. Country singer Rhett Akins is 37. Actor Sacha Baron Cohen is 35. Rock musician Jan Van Sichem Jr. (K's Choice) is 34. Rhythm-and-blues singers Brandon and Brian Casey (Jagged Edge) are 31. Singer Ashanti is 26. Christian rock singer Jon Micah Sumrall (Kutless) is 26.

Thought for Today: "Children are the true connoisseurs. What's precious to them has no price — only value." — Bel Kaufman, American author and educator.

Sphere: Related Content

0 comments

Today in history - Oct. 12


The Associated Press

Today is Thursday, Oct. 12, the 285th day of 2006. There are 80 days left in the year.

Today's Highlight in History:

On Oct. 12, 1492 (Old Style calendar; Oct. 21 New Style), Christopher Columbus arrived with his expedition in the present-day Bahamas.

On this date:

In 1870, Gen. Robert E. Lee died in Lexington, Va., at age 63.

In 1915, English nurse Edith Cavell was executed by the Germans in occupied Belgium during World War I.

In 1933, bank robber John Dillinger escaped from a jail in Allen County, Ohio, with the help of his gang, who killed the sheriff, Jesse Sarber.

In 1942, President Roosevelt delivered one of his so-called "fireside chats" in which he recommended the drafting of 18- and 19-year-old men.

In 1960, Soviet premier Nikita Khrushchev disrupted a U.N. General Assembly session by pounding his desk with a shoe during a dispute.

In 1968, the summer Games of the 19th Olympiad officially opened in Mexico City.

In 1976, it was announced in China that Hua Guofeng had been named to succeed the late Mao Zedong as chairman of the Communist Party.

In 1986, the superpower meeting in Reykjavik, Iceland, ended in stalemate, with President Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail S. Gorbachev unable to agree on arms control or a date for a full-fledged summit in the United States.

In 2000, 17 sailors were killed in a suicide bomb attack on the U.S. destroyer Cole in Yemen.

In 2002, a bomb blamed on Islamic militants destroyed a nightclub on the Indonesian island of Bali, killing 202 people, many of them foreign tourists.

Ten years ago: President Clinton signed into law the Water Resources Development Act, which authorized federal water projects across the country. Thousands of Hispanic-Americans marched in Washington to push for simplified citizenship procedures and a $7 minimum wage.

Five years ago: NBC announced that an assistant to anchorman Tom Brokaw had contracted the skin form of anthrax after opening a "threatening" letter to her boss that contained a suspicious powder. The United Nations and its secretary-general, Kofi Annan, won the Nobel Peace Prize. Polaroid Corp. filed for bankruptcy protection.

One year ago: China launched its second manned space flight, during which two astronauts orbited Earth for five days. Syria's interior minister, Brigadier General Ghazi Kenaan, committed suicide in his Damascus office. German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder announced he would not participate in Germany's new coalition government, ending seven years in power.

Today's Birthdays: Actress Antonia Rey is 79. Blues singer Nappy Brown is 77. Comedian-activist Dick Gregory is 74. Former Sen. Jake Garn, R-Utah, is 74. Opera singer Luciano Pavarotti is 71. Singer Sam Moore (formerly of Sam and Dave) is 71. Sportscaster Tony Kubek is 70. TV reporter Chris Wallace is 59. Actress-singer Susan Anton is 56. Rock singer-musician Pat DiNizio is 51. Actor Carlos Bernard is 44. Rhythm-and-blues singer Claude McKnight (Take 6) is 44. Rock singer Bob Schneider is 41. Actor Hugh Jackman is 38. Actor Adam Rich is 38. Rhythm-and-blues singer Garfield Bright (Shai) is 37. Country musician Martie Maguire (The Dixie Chicks) is 37. Actor Kirk Cameron is 36. Actor Marcus T. Paulk ("Moesha") is 20.

Thought for Today: "Everyone's quick to blame the alien." — Aeschylus, Greek poet and dramatist (524 B.C.?-456 B.C.?).

Sphere: Related Content

0 comments

Today in history - Oct. 12

Today is Thursday, Oct. 12, the 285th day of 2006. There are 80 days left in the year.


Today's Highlight in History:


On Oct. 12, 1492 (Old Style calendar; Oct. 21 New Style), Christopher Columbus arrived with his expedition in the present-day Bahamas.


On this date:


In 1870, Gen. Robert E. Lee died in Lexington, Va., at age 63.


In 1915, English nurse Edith Cavell was executed by the Germans in occupied Belgium during World War I.


In 1933, bank robber John Dillinger escaped from a jail in Allen County, Ohio, with the help of his gang, who killed the sheriff, Jesse Sarber.

source

Tags: Dillinger | sheriff | robber | present-day | KILLED | Jail | gang | expedition | Escaped | Calendar | arrived | Style | Ohio | oct | lexington | John | Jesse | county | Columbus | Christopher | Belgium | Bahamas | Allen

Sphere: Related Content

0 comments

Today in history - Oct. 11

The Associated Press

Today is Wednesday, Oct. 11, the 284th day of 2006. There are 81 days left in the year.

Today's Highlight in History:

Oct. 11, 1779, Polish nobleman Casimir Pulaski, fighting for American independence, died two days after being mortally wounded during the Revolutionary War Battle of Savannah, Ga.

On this date:

In 1890, the Daughters of the American Revolution was founded in Washington.

In 1906, the San Francisco Board of Education ordered the city's Asian students segregated in a purely "Oriental" school. (The order was later rescinded at the behest of President Theodore Roosevelt, who promised to curb future Japanese immigration to the United States.)

In 1942, the World War II Battle of Cape Esperance began in the Solomons, resulting in an American victory over the Japanese.

In 1962, Pope John XXIII convened the first session of the Roman Catholic Church's Second Ecumenical Council, also known as Vatican II.

In 1968, Apollo 7, the first manned Apollo mission, was launched with astronauts Wally Schirra, Donn Fulton Eisele and R. Walter Cunningham aboard.

In 1975, "NBC Saturday Night" (later "Saturday Night Live") made its debut with guest host George Carlin.

In 1984, space shuttle Challenger astronaut Kathy Sullivan became the first American woman to walk in space.

In 1986, President Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail S. Gorbachev opened two days of talks concerning arms control and human rights in Reykjavik, Iceland.

In 1991, testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee, law professor Anita Hill accused Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas of sexually harassing her; Thomas re-appeared before the panel to denounce the proceedings as a "high-tech lynching."

In 1991, comedian Redd Foxx died in Los Angeles at age 68.

Ten years ago: Roman Catholic Bishop Carlos Filipe Ximenes Belo and Jose Ramos-Horta of East Timor won the Nobel Peace Prize for their pro-democracy efforts in troubled East Timor.

Five years ago: In his first prime-time news conference since taking office, President Bush offered the Taliban a chance to stop America's punishing assaults on Afghanistan by turning over suspected terror mastermind Osama bin Laden. The FBI warned of possible terrorist attacks in the days to come. Trinidad-born writer V.S. Naipaul won the Nobel Prize in literature.

One year ago: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers said it had finished pumping out the New Orleans metropolitan area, which was flooded by Hurricane Katrina six weeks earlier and then was swamped again by Hurricane Rita. A Russian spacecraft carrying U.S. millionaire Gregory Olsen and a two-man crew landed in Kazakhstan after a seven-day space sojourn.

Today's Birthdays: Author Elmore Leonard is 81. Actor Ron Leibman is 69. Country singer Gene Watson is 63. Singer-musician Daryl Hall is 57. Sen. Patty Murray (news, bio, voting record), D-Wash., is 56. Rhythm-and-blues musician Andrew Woolfolk is 56. Actress-director Catlin Adams is 56. Actor David Morse is 53. Country singer Paulette Carlson is 53. Actor Stephen Spinella is 50. Football Hall of Fame player Steve Young is 45. Actress Joan Cusack is 44. Comedy writer and TV host Michael J. Nelson is 42. Actor Sean Patrick Flanery is 41. Actor Luke Perry is 40. Country singer-songwriter Todd Snider is 40. Actress Jane Krakowski is 38. Rapper U-God (Wu-Tang Clan) is 36. Rapper MC Lyte is 35. Singer NeeNa Lee is 31. Actress Michelle Trachtenberg is 21. Golfer Michelle Wie is 17.

Thought for Today: "Compassion is the basis of all morality." — Arthur Schopenhauer, German philosopher (1788-1860).

Sphere: Related Content

0 comments

The Politics of the Bomb


MIKE ALLEN

North Korea's nuclear test shifts the debate back to national security, still perceived as Bush's strength. But having the world afire on your watch has its drawbacks.

The first of a slew of e-mailed Capitol Hill statements about North Korea's reported nuclear test came at 8:05 a.m. from House Speaker Dennis Hastert, who decried "the desperate act of a criminal regime" and added: "We stand with President Bush and the international community in condemning North Korean Leader Kim Jong-il's reckless decision." Of course, President George W. Bush has been standing by the Speaker lately, and no one could be more relieved than Hastert and his staff to see the news spotlight shifting to somewhere else on the globe.

If Kim Jong-Il thought he was could take advantage of a President who was down politically, he may be in for a surprise. Osama bin Laden's electronic appearance in the closing week of the 2004 campaign didn't do much for John Kerry either. Republicans, while taking care to express appropriate concern about the possibility of an Asian arms race, said they were relieved to see Bush back in the bully pulpit, wearing his commander-in-chief hat and leading the world in pushing for punitive action by the U.N. Security Council. "Once again North Korea has defied the will of the international community, and the international community will respond," Bush said this morning in the Diplomatic Reception Room, where a row of books added gravity. "This was confirmed this morning in conversations I had with leaders of China, and South Korea, Russia, and Japan."

The Republicans' theory is that their party benefits whenever the political dialogue turns to national security. "The whole thing with North Korea makes people realize the benefits of having a strong President like George W. Bush," said Tony Perkins, president of the conservative Family Research Council. "This brings the focus back to the reasons people support the President." Writing Sunday in The Washington Post, Democratic pollster Vic Fingerhut warned his party, "Iraq Is a Loser for Dems, Too," arguing that for nearly 50 years, "poll after poll has shown that the Democrats have very limited credibility with the American public on foreign policy issues — particularly among the swing voters who have a disproportionate say in the outcome of U.S. elections."

White House officials assert that the test helps unite the international community in seeking to put the matter before the Security Council. The action was viewed as an especially sharp rebuke of the Chinese, who had spearheaded the six party talks meant to try to avert just such a test from happening. So the attention has shifted from Iraq to an inarguably dangerous rogue state, which Bush had put in his Axis of Evil in his State of the Union Address in 2002. Michael O'Hanlon, a Brookings Institution senior fellow, predicts that Bush will be boosted by the development, and that advocates of direct engagement with North Korea will now have a much harder time selling that to the American people. "It changes the subject back to national security, where he wins four out of five political debates (even in cases where he shouldn't)," said O'Hanlon in an e-mail, "and it seems to validate his hard-line approach to the unreasonable North Koreans (even though in my judgment it really invalidates his overall record since [North Korea's] nuclear arsenal has grown and now been 'certified' on his watch)."

Of course, having the world afire on your watch has its drawbacks. Joseph Cirincione, senior vice president for national security and international policy at the liberal Center for American Progress, said the test "raises profound questions about the President's competence and wisdom," and could set off a nuclear reaction chain of testing and development by other nations worried that the arms race is back. "Every member of the Axis of Evil is more dangerous to America now than it was when he labeled it," Cirincione said. "The President still gives a great speech, but his policies are killing us." Even some conservatives questioned the President's approach. William Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard, said after Bush's speech that responding only diplomatically was "problematic," and suggested that U.S. could have imposed an embargo, suspended talks or intensified the inspection regime.

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi of California, aware she may become the next Speaker if the Democrats win control of the House in November, took the high road and issued a statement saying the reported test "should be a first priority concern of the world." But Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada went right at Bush, saying the President has made America "less secure" and calling for him "to immediately appoint a senior official to conduct a full review of his Administration's failed North Korea policy." Said O'Hanlon, the Brookings scholar: "I agree with Reid on substance, but on politics, Republicans tend to make hay out of this sort of thing." As they already are.

Sphere: Related Content

0 comments

Illegals in the Line of Fire


BRIAN BENNETT

Thousands of illegal aliens are walking through one of the military's most important live-fire training grounds. Will building a fence stop them?

Viewed from a Black Hawk helicopter 1,000 feet up, there's no sign of the Mexican border in this southwest corner of Arizona's Sonoran Desert. No line in the sand. No fence. Not even a road. Yet it's clear we are flying over a major international thoroughfare. Hundreds of shiny footpaths and tire tracks weave through the desert below, where the temperature on the ground routinely reaches 115� F in the summer. You need to drink a gallon of water an hour to survive in heat like that, and the illegal aliens and smugglers who pounded these paths into the desert had another 80 miles to go before they reached the nearest paved road. But parched terrain wasn't the only peril they faced: these tracks all head smack into a live-fire range where Marine and Air Force pilots practice hitting targets—with very real bombs.

About 95% of all American fighter pilots train here at the 2.7 million-acre Barry M. Goldwater Range, which stretches 37 miles along the U.S.-Mexican border. In recent years, as less dangerous routes into the U.S. have been closed off by fencing, cameras and beefed up Border Patrol, more and more would-be immigrants risk crossing the live-fire zone. In 2005 alone, over 17,000 walked through the range. And that's a problem for the military. Every time an unauthorized person or vehicle is spotted on the range, training sessions are halted. In 2003, 450 training hours were lost to this kind of interference; last year the figure tripled to 1,381 hours, That leaves pilots going into combat with fewer flying hours, and it costs millions in wasted fuel and man-hours. Powerful people are taking note of this little-known price of illegal immigration. "We've had to discontinue something like 15% of the training days," Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld grumbled in May.

Paul Mayberry, deputy undersecretary of defense for readiness, wants to put a stop to the losses by making it more difficult to cross at this already forbidding place. "It's like a water leak," he says, "they take the path of least resistance." But how to make that path more resistant is a matter of some debate. In many ways, the give-and-take over how to secure this essential piece of military real estate reflects two dominant theories on how to secure our border: More walls or more eyes?

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Duncan Hunter, a Republican from California, is a wall man; he wants to fence the southern boundary of the range. More cameras to watch the region might help, he says, but a physical barrier is essential. He hopes to replicate the success of the triple-layered fencing outside San Diego that led to a 70% drop in illegal immigration there. That's why he wrote Rumsfeld personally about fencing the range and co-sponsored the Secure Fence Act, a law on President Bush's desk that requires at least two layers of reinforced fencing to be built from Calexico, Calif. to Douglas, Ariz. — right across the bottom of the Goldwater Range.

But the Border Patrol agents who monitor this vast, remote area from a lone outpost called Camp Desert Grip are skeptical that a fence could be a practical solution here. Speaking before the Secure Fence Act was passed, Stephen Johnson, who runs the place, points out that Hunter's fence will cost at least $37 -million to build and be difficult to maintain. When the fence is cut — and it definitely will be cut, says Johnson — it would be costly to repair, given the absence of roads in the region. Walls are better suited to urban areas, where you only have seconds to stop someone coming over, says Johnson and other agents. In remote areas like the Goldwater Range, where agents have days to track down interlopers, maintaining fences seems wasteful. "People want to take what works in San Diego and apply it out here," Border Patrol Chief David Aguilar said in June. "It won't work."

Agents at Camp Desert Grip favor more eyes: cameras, sensors, ground radar, helicopters and dune buggies, so that word gets out that anyone who comes this way will be arrested. With current sensing equipment, fewer than half of the 11,000 entries detected so far this year were apprehended. More eyes would mean more arrests and at a reasonable cost, says Johnson. A camera tower costs about $600,000 and can see three miles in every direction.

Up in the Black Hawk over the summer, Aguilar had brought his boss, Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Ralph Basham, to see this area for himself. Faced with the vast terrain, Basham seemed convinced a fence was not the answer. But another thought dawned as he looked down on shimmering black lava fields below. "If they're willing to go through 80 miles of desert in this heat, you can't do much to stop them."

Sphere: Related Content

0 comments

Bush Takes on School Shootings

MIKE ALLEN

 The President's conference gives him a chance to connect with disillusioned voters. But one prominent gun control group is crying foul.

When you're President, you get quick action. So once President George W. Bush made clear he wanted something done after a briefing on shootings at schools, Attorney General Albert Gonzales and Education Secretary Margaret Spellings quickly banded together for a day-long, administration-wide "Conference on School Safety," to be held Tuesday at the National 4-H Conference Center in Chevy Chase, Md.

Several Amish officials were invited to participate after their peaceful people were victimized last week by the highest profile school shooting since the 1999 massacre at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colo. They elected not to participate because they stay out of public affairs, an administration official said. Other recent school shootings terrorized pupils in Wisconsin and Colorado. On Monday, as officials were making final preparations for the conference, a 13-year-old in a trench coat shot an assault rifle into the ceiling of his Missouri middle school.

The event, which is the first major undertaking of Bush's new domestic policy director, Karl Zinsmeister, gives the President a chance to connect with suburban moms at a time when polls show many voters are disillusioned with his administration. He will speak to a closing panel on ways schools and communities can work together to keep pupils safer. The administration's most popular official, First Lady Laura Bush, also will attend. Participants include students, administrators, law enforcement officials and crisis management experts. Officials say no new policy or funding will be announced at the event, which will feature panels dubbed "Preventing Violence in Schools," "Prepared Schools and Communities Are Safer," and "Helping Communities Heal and Recover."

It all sounds well-intentioned, but in the current polarized political climate, even a topic like improving school safety can't escape controversy. One prominent group is unhappy about not being included. Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, wrote to Bush to offer help in putting together what the group called a "comprehensive" agenda, including prevention and law enforcement policies. Peter Hamm, the group's communications director, said the group hadn't received a reply. "We haven't oddly enough," he said. "They're certainly having a nice conversation about making sure your child has the support they need after an incident occurs, which is laudable. But the issue of prevention clearly is not on the table for this conference."

What is on the table, according to administration officials who gave TIME an exclusive preview, is that: —Schools need to do more planning for the possibility that their pupils will have to deal with violence. Schools should have an emergency response plan and need to devote more resources to physical security and threat assessments.

—Law enforcement can help prevent incidents with outreach to the community, and by offering schools specialized enforcement expertise. Schools, families and communities need to recognize warning signs of violence.

—After a school is attacked, administrators need to focus not just on returning to a normal routine but also on helping their students deal with post-traumatic stress.

—Schools that have been victimized also need to be wary of what the administration calls "high-stress events such as anniversaries."

Sphere: Related Content

0 comments

Today in history - Oct. 10


The Associated Press

Today is Tuesday, Oct. 10, the 283rd day of 2006. There are 82 days left in the year.

Today's Highlight in History:

On Oct. 10, 1845, the U.S. Naval Academy opened in Annapolis, Md.

On this date:

In 1813, composer Giuseppe Verdi was born in Le Roncole, Italy.

In 1911, revolutionaries under Sun Yat-sen launched their overthrow of China's Manchu dynasty.

In 1935, George Gershwin's opera "Porgy and Bess" opened on Broadway.

In 1938, Germany completed its annexation of Czechoslovakia's Sudetenland.

In 1943, Chiang Kai-shek took the oath of office as president of China.

In 1956, the New York Yankees won the World Series, defeating the Brooklyn Dodgers, 9-0, in Game 7 at Ebbets Field.

In 1964, the 18th Summer Olympic Games opened in Tokyo.

In 1970, Quebec Labor Minister Pierre Laporte was kidnapped by the Quebec Liberation Front, a militant separatist group. (Laporte's body was found a week later.)

In 1973, Vice President Spiro T. Agnew, accused of accepting bribes, pleaded no contest to one count of federal income tax evasion, and resigned his office.

In 1981, funeral services were held in Cairo for Egyptian leader Anwar Sadat, who had been assassinated by Muslim extremists.

Ten years ago: President Clinton joined Vice President Gore in Knoxville, Tenn., where the president moved to broaden the sweep of the Internet at 100 universities, national labs and other federal institutions. Republican presidential nominee Bob Dole hosted a rally in Cincinnati that featured his running mate, Jack Kemp, and retired Gen. Colin Powell.

Five years ago: U.S. jets pounded the Afghan capital of Kabul. President Bush unveiled a list of 22 most-wanted terrorists, including Osama bin Laden and associates. U.S. Rep. Nancy Pelosi (news, bio, voting record) of California won the race for the No. 2 House Democratic leader. Americans George A. Akerlof, A. Michael Spence and Joseph E. Stiglitz won the Nobel Prize in economics; Americans William S. Knowles, K. Barry Sharpless and Japanese Ryoji Noyori won the Nobel Prize in chemistry.

One year ago: Angela Merkel struck a power-sharing deal that made her the first woman and politician from the ex-communist east to serve as Germany's chancellor. President Bush dined in the French Quarter and stayed in a luxury hotel to showcase progress in hurricane-battered New Orleans. Israeli-American Robert J. Aumann and Thomas C. Schelling of the U.S. won the Nobel Memorial Prize for economics. Milton Obote, Uganda's first prime minister, died in Johannesburg, South Africa, at age 80.

Today's Birthdays: Playwright Harold Pinter is 76. Former Illinois Sen. Adlai Stevenson III is 76. Actor Peter Coyote is 64. Entertainer Ben Vereen is 60. Singer John Prine is 60. Actor Charles Dance is 60. Rock singer-musician Cyril Neville (The Neville Brothers) is 58. Actress Jessica Harper is 57. Singer-musician Midge Ure is 53. Country singer Tanya Tucker is 48. Actress Julia Sweeney is 47. Actor Bradley Whitford is 47. Musician Martin Kemp is 45. Rock musician Jim Glennie (James) is 43. Actress Rebecca Pidgeon is 41. Rock musician Mike Malinin (Goo Goo Dolls) is 39. Actor Mario Lopez is 33. Actress Jodi Lyn O'Keefe is 28. Singer Mya is 27. Singer Cherie is 22.

Thought for Today: "An expert is a person who has made all the mistakes that can be made in a very narrow field." — Niels Bohr, Danish physicist (1885-1962).

Sphere: Related Content

0 comments

Can This Guy Run the U.N.?


BRYAN WALSH

How a quiet Korean diplomat became the favorite for Secretary-General

When Ban Ki Moon received word last week that North Korea might be planning to test a nuclear device, he had reason to be anxious. As South Korea's Foreign Minister, Ban is a key player in the six-party talks aimed at finding a diplomatic solution to the dispute over Pyongyang's nuclear program. A test would scuttle those talks and likely lead to a renewed U.S. push for sanctions against North Korea. And so in the middle of Chuseok, the Korean Thanksgiving, Ban, 62, was on the phone to his counterparts in Moscow, Beijing, Washington and Tokyo, building a response to the North Korean announcement. Speaking to TIME between calls, Ban said he was "much worried and troubled" about the possibility of a nuclear test. That's in part because of the impact it could have on the job he may be about to land: Secretary-General of the United Nations. "I hope this situation will not cause any problems to my current candidacy," he says.

With the 192-nation General Assembly likely to vote on the next head of the U.N. this week, Ban has emerged as the clear favorite to replace outgoing Secretary-General Kofi Annan. If Ban gets the job, he'll have to get used to managing problems beyond the Korean peninsula. With the world confronting conflicts from Darfur to Afghanistan, many people expect the Secretary-General to be a global avatar of peace, as Annan in his best moments sought to be. Just as daunting is the challenge of cleaning house at the U.N., which has been dogged for years by mismanagement, inefficiency and corruption--crystallized in the oil-for-food scandal that tarnished Annan's tenure. Add to that the task of refereeing between the U.S. and countries like Russia and China, which are determined to chart their own course, and you get an idea why Annan calls it "the most impossible job in the world." "It would help if the next Secretary-General was a brilliant, compelling leader," says a U.N. official. "But to actually be chosen for the job, the candidate must be a person who offends no one."

Inoffensiveness is Ban's outstanding quality. He has spent 36 years as a diplomat, almost all of them outside the spotlight. His peers praise his understated "Confucian approach," as one Chinese expert puts it, but some wonder whether Ban has the steel to play a leading role on the international stage--a question that's been sharpened by North Korea's latest provocation. "This will be the first time he's ever been his own boss," says Peter Beck, the Seoul-based director of the International Crisis Group's Northeast Asia project. "Can he really assert himself and stand up to governments that act contrary to the U.N.?" His allies say that it's a mistake to assume that Ban is as diffident as he might sometimes appear. "It's a typical Oriental style," says Yoon Young Kwan, Ban's predecessor as South Korean Foreign Minister. "He is soft-spoken, but inside he has a strong view and strong motivation."

A self-described "country boy," Ban was born in 1944, when South Korea was under Japanese occupation, and spent his childhood in the shadow of the Korean War. He had diplomatic postings in New Delhi and Washington, at the U.N. and in Vienna before becoming South Korea's Foreign Minister in 2004. The years abroad gave him global contacts and helped protect his reputation from the taint of South Korea's toxic political environment. "He doesn't make enemies," says Yan Sun Mook, the chairman of the opposition Democratic Party's international-relations committee. "He makes friends." But Ban can also be tough. In the face of opposition from his own diplomats, Ban reformed Seoul's foreign ministry, replacing a promotion system based on seniority with a meritocratic one. He's an "iron fist in a velvet glove," says an aide.

Pursuing the U.N. job has required Ban to make nice with both the U.S. and China, a challenge even for a diplomat of Ban's skills. The U.S. preferred either Latvian President Vaira Vike-Freiberga or former Afghan Finance Minister Ashraf Ghani, but both were vetoed by other permanent Security Council members. Washington's reluctance was due in part to South Korea's growing coziness with China and by Seoul's "sunshine policy" of engagement with Pyongyang, which some Administration officials say has hindered efforts to get tough with North Korean leader Kim Jong Il. The U.S. is skeptical that Ban, long careful to avoid stepping on toes, would really be willing to challenge the entrenched interests inside the U.N. that are opposed to reform.

Ban dismisses the notion that the U.S. and South Korea have drifted apart: "We are going through a very important transformation period, but our relationship is very sound and healthy." So far, reaction to Pyongyang's announcement of a planned nuclear test has been unified, with even China, the closest country North Korea has to an ally, warning Pyongyang that a test would bring "serious consequences." Ban is so intent on resolving the North Korean dispute that he says he might visit Pyongyang himself as Secretary-General--something Annan never did. "I've gained a deeper experience and understanding into this complex issue," he says. "Having known all the history and background and having known people in both the South and the North, I'm convinced I can do much better than any other person." He may soon get the chance to prove it.

With reporting by With reporting by Susan Jakes/Beijing, Jennifer Veale/ Seoul, Adam Zagorin/ Washington

Sphere: Related Content

0 comments

A New Nuclear World


BILL POWELL

North Korea's nuclear weapons test creates serious problems for the U.S. and its allies in trying to rein in the rogue state—and opens a dangerous new chapter in nuclear proliferation.

At roughly 10:30 Monday morning Pyongyang time, the number of card carrying members of a once exclusive club—those countries armed with nuclear weapons—increased yet again. In a mountainous region 385 km northeast of the North Korean capital, Kim Jong Il's government showed that it was as good as its word when it comes to saber-rattling. After warning last week that it intended to test a nuclear weapon, it did—defying the international community and daring it to do something in response.

Rhetorically, at least, the response was swift. China, typically thought of as the only nation with any influence on North Korea, said the test was "brazen" and that Beijing "resolutely opposed" it. New Japanese leader Shinzo Abe, on his first visit to South Korea as Prime Minister, said in Seoul that a nuclear North posed a "grave danger" to Japan. Meanwhile, South Korea's Prime Minister Roh Moo Hyun said his government would react "calmly, but sternly." All were waiting on an official response from the Bush administration, whose envoy Christopher Hill had said in a speech last week that the US "could not live" with a nuclear North.

But the question Washington woke up to Monday morning was starkly simple: what other choice does it really have? The fact is, the options available to the U.S. and its partners in trying to contain the North Korean nuclear threat are limited. Most analysts believe there is no plausible military option available: any strike on the North's nuclear facilities would give it enough time to launch artillery strikes across the border, to devastating effect in Seoul. Shoichi Nakagawa, policy chief of Japan's ruling Liberal Democratic Party, held out the prospect for further economic sanctions. "We've already imposed financial sanctions, but we'd have to raise the pressure a level by halting imports and exports and conducting inspections of ships" traveling between the two countries.

The U.S. and its partners in East Asia have had a broad array of financial sanctions in place for months—including the closure of accounts in a Macau bank allegedly used by members of Kim's regime to launder tens of millions of dollars—moves which even the Chinese government has supported. Indeed, analysts in Seoul, Beijing and Washington believe Pyongyang's fury over the sanctions was one of the reasons behind its defiant nuclear test. But cutting off North Korea completely—what hawks in the Bush administration have in the past referred to as the "strangulation strategy"—is unlikely, because neither Beijing nor even Seoul are likely to go along. More than anything, China seeks stability on the Korean peninsula; the idea of thousands of economic refugees pouring across the North Korean border and into northeastern China gives Beijing nightmares. Though Beijing provides up to half of North Korea's oil and a substantial amount of its food, "there is a limit as to what they can and will do," says Daniel Pinkston, Director of the East Asia Nonproliferation Program at the Monterey Institute of International Studies.

The grim result is that the world may have to live with a nuclear North Korea—a reality that will likely have ripple effects across the global security landscape. Already, in Japan, advisers close to Prime Minister Abe are calling for Japan to go nuclear itself, despite its so-called "pacifist" constitution. "A missile defense system alone cannot protect Japan from a nuclear attack," Terumasa Nakanishi, an academic and outside adviser to Abe, told TIME Monday. "The only way to repress a North Korean nuclear attack is by possessing nuclear capabilities." Japan—the only country to suffer the effects of an atomic weapon dropped in anger—"will have to rethink it non-nuclear principles," Nakanishi asserts.

North Korea's ability to weaponize its nuclear capability—by placing it atop a missile, for example—and its ability to fire a missile across vast distances now becomes a critical part of the security calculus in northeast Asia. In mid-July, Pyongyang launched a missile potentially able to travel as far as Alaska or Hawaii, but it crashed just minutes after takeoff. But six other shorter-range missiles—all of which could hit Tokyo—were tested successfully. "The United States may be concerned," says Masahiro Sakamoto, vice president at the Japan Forum for Strategic Studies in Tokyo, "but for Japan this is a direct threat."

And the faster North Korea is able to climb the nuclear learning curve, the more acute the dilemma for Washington's allies in the region gets. If Pyongyang could hit Tokyo but could credibly threaten Tacoma, Washington at the same time, would the US respond as vociferously to an attack on Japan? Wouldn't Tokyo—or Seoul—seek its own nuclear deterrent under those circumstances?

The implications of Pyongyang's new nuclear prowess extend beyond Northeast Asia. Iran's ruling Mullahs are no doubt watching carefully, and may well be heartened by the relative lack of leverage the world seems to have to thwart the North's nuclear ambitions. As one former Defense Department official in Washington puts it, "If the world can't summon the will to apply crippling sanctions against an economic basket case like North Korea, what will it do when it comes to the world's third-largest oil exporter?"

If the answer is as it appears—not much—then Oct. 9 may well mark the crossing of a nuclear Rubicon of sorts. In Congressional testimony last year, Jon Brook Wolfsthal, deputy director for Nonproliferation at the Carnegie Endowment for Peace , said "History may well look back at our failed efforts with North Korea as the turning point when the nuclear dam burst and nuclear weapons became widespread and commonplace in the arsenals of scores of countries." Beyond the many voices raised in opposition to the North's test, the world now waits to see whether anyone will actually do anything about it—or whether Wolfsthal's grim prognosis is, in fact, the future.

Sphere: Related Content

0 comments

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)