1 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 31, 1986
Eavesdroppers who heard the guilty secrets / Covert nuclear tests by the US and Britain detected
BYLINE: By JEREMY LEGGET
LENGTH: 1269 words
Three days after Christmas, and three days before the Soviet nuclear testing moratorium was due to expire, another underground nuclear explosion rocked the surface of the Nevada desert. This, the latest in an accelerated series of American atomic bomb tests, sent shock waves reverberating through the Earth's crust, disturbing the delicate poise of seismic recorders the world over. As is usual after such events, news of the signals received by the seismic array at the Hagfors Observatory in Sweden was relayed to the Swedish Peace and Arbitration Society. Within days telexes sent from the office of the SPAAS had alerted Governments, organisations, and individual peace workers in many countries to the new development. Sweden takes nuclear weapons testing seriously.
The American and British Governments also take it seriously, but for different reasons. The signatory states of the Non-Proliferation Treaty had in September called in desperation on the US, USSR, and UK to re-open Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty negotiations before 1985 drew to a close.
As we entered 1986, President Reagan's Administration gave up the search for excuses as to why this was not possible: George Schulz stated openly in the New Year that US national security interests were best served by continued testing and developing of nuclear weapons. This at least cleared the air, and lets everyone know where they stand.
In the UK, however, Mrs Thatcher's Administration clings doggedly to the argument that, much as they want to re-open negotions, their fears over the adequacy of verification measures stand in the way.
Military significance, I am told by sources close to the Ministry of Defence, is widely thought to accrue only at above the 1 kiloton level. (The trigger mechanism of a modern strategic missile - the essential item to test - needs to be 10-15 kilotons or thereabouts. For comparison, the tiny Hiroshima bomb was 20 kilotons. The largest American test, underground, was 5,000 kilotons: equivalent to the instantaneous detonation of all the munitions used in World War Two. The biggest ever test, by an unbelievably irresponsible Russian Government in 1961, in the atmosphere, was a staggering 58,000 kilotons).
More recently it has become clear that secrecy on the subject of nuclear weapons tests is no less prevalent in America than it is in Britain: it simply extends in other directions. The Washington-based Natural Resources Defence Council published a report on January 15, the implications of which may be profound in the months to come.
The US Government, they discovered, had conducted at least a dozen and possibly as many as 19 secret nuclear weapons tests during the five years from 1980 to 1984. Furthermore, at least five of the unannounced tests had been detected as far away as Sweden. Only the smallest of the tests, those below about 2-3 kilotons, had escaped detection. The implication is clear: with a world-wide network of seismic stations, many of them much closer to potential test sites than Sweden is to Nevada, and specifically designed to detect weapons tests, the threshold of detection would evidently be well below the level of military significance.
The NRDC is an environmental organisation established 15 years ago, and has 55,000 members and 130 staff. Its scientists became interested in the testing issue when under the Freedom of Information Act the council obtained a copy of an April 1982 memorandum affirming the Reagan Administration's policy of not disclosing all nuclear tests. Analysis of statistical data released by the Lawrence Livermore weapons laboratory on the explosive power, or yield, of tests conducted between 1980 and 1984 showed up the discrepancy between those announced by the Administration and those which actually took place.
Eighty-two tests, including eight for Britain, were announced between 1980 and 1984: a level of testing about one third higher than that under the Carter Administration. US Department of Energy figures cite 44 tests of 'less than 20 kilotons.' 35 tests of ' .. 20-150 kilotons ..' and, somewhat reticently, 3 of 'less than 150 kilotons'. Dr Thomas Cochran and three of his colleagues of the NRDC point to Livermore statistics which show that ' ..38 per cent of all tests were 20 kilotons or greater.'
Allowing for uncertainties over the magnitude values (from which the yield is calculated) of two of the three tests over whose size the DoE felt the need to be reticent, the total number of actual tests must be between 94 and 101 .. 12-19 more than the figure announced by the Reagan Administration.
Cochran and his colleagues went to published sources of seismic shocks to see if the unannounced tests could be tracked down. It was then that they found that five of them had registered in Sweden. They also went to those of the US Geological Survey seismograph records which are available publicly. USGS instruments not specifically designed to monitor testing activity had picked up the five secret tests which registered in Sweden, and three more of the 12-19 unammounced tests.
The Lawrence Livermore Laboratory statistics showed further that 5 per cent of the 1980-1984 Nevada tests were of yields lower than the one kiloton level of military significance. Critically, some were as low as less than 0.05 kilotons (a few tens of tons of TNT equivalent), a power which would only register on seismometers close to the test site.
These blasts, likely to be tests of nuclear artillery shells or mines, may well include the 4-11 unannounced tests which went undetected. If not, and some of the 4-11 unannouced and undetected tests were indeed of militarily significant size, it is stretching the imagination to think that they could have evaded detection by a global network of specially designed sentry seismometers, both within and outside the United States, such as the one which would be installed in the event of a Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty coming to fruition. The same would apply to the Soviet Union.
Such empirical evidence of the resolving power of seismology, in a field much clouded by 'worst-case' hypotheses, is likely to have a strong impact when the UN Conference on Disarmament opens in Geneva on February 4. The Russian testing moratorium has been extended until March, and international pressure on the US and UK to re-open Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty negotiations has never been stronger. The British Government will find it difficult to continue maintaining that there are problems with adequately verifying a Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, and that these are the only reasons why they cannot agree to negotiations.
Mrs Thatcher's Administration may be forced to join the Americans in an open stance that, in spite of all the favourable portents of Geneva, they wish to continue testing and developing new weapons. Were they to do so they would be irresponsibly flying in the face of a concerted and unanimous plea from the entire world to stop testing. The depth of concern by the Non Proliferation Treaty signatory states, some 80% of the United Nations, shows that many of the world's most influential citizens believe that if we cannot draw a halt to the nuclear arms race now we may never get the chance again. The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty is the way to do this. It is the first and most logical step towards balanced multilateral nuclear disarmament. And we do not even have to trust the Russians in order to achieve it.
Dr Jeremy Legget is the National Co-ordinator for Vertic, the Verification Technology Information Centre.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
2 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 31, 1986
Third World Column: Uganda tries again / National Resistance Movement takes power
BYLINE: By VICTORIA BRITTAIN
LENGTH: 663 words
This week's takeover of power by the National Resistance Movement in Uganda is a new political phenomenon in Africa which has little in common with the familiar musical chairs of military coups. Instability is the most notorious product of Africa's two decades of coups, and from 1981, when Yoweri Museveni's response to Milton Obote's rigged election was to start guerrilla war, he declared himself against 'short-cuts like assassinations or coups.'
The 'protracted people's war from a liberated area' which he talked of then seemed like a romantic dream in the real world of East Africa's harsh power politics where under both Amin and Obote all popular participation in politics was cowed for years by detentions, killings, harassment, bribery or even the buying back of exiled opponents from the Kenyan authorities.
It is measure of the degradation of Uganda's government under Amin and Obote that for the last decade some of the best minds in the university community chose an armed peasant's life in the bush under Museveni rather than the traditional African elite's life of perks, prestige and power in government or business under the patronage of the military.
For a decade and a half Museveni's group, first in Fronasa and then in the National Resistance Army, has attracted a broad spectrum of Ugandans who refused to accept that corruption and dictatorship were the political norms of their country. All over Africa intellectuals are in exile for similar reasons. Museveni, and his university contemporary, Colonel John Garang in Southern Sudan's guerrilla movement, have challenged the old authority from the inside with the gun rather than from the outside with the pen.
In Nairobi, during the 'peace talks' which preceded the collapse of the Okello regime, Museveni's rare public appearances were the occasion for enormous popular acclamation.
The NRA has gone out of its way to publicly thank President Moi of Kenya for this contribution towards peace. They need his goodwill.
The old order in Uganda still has powerful foreign friends and is not giving up without fighting diplomatic and economic rearguard actions even after the hopeless street battles have taken their huge toll.
Foreign interests have played a deeply destructive role in Uganda ever since independence. In particular, Britain's complicity with Amin's and Obote's death-dealing regimes will never be lived down. Six months ago Obote fled Uganda still able to keep a retinue of 150 people in exile in Lusaka.
Over the last five months a great deal of material and moral support was made available to try to turn the doomed junta into a government which could coopt the NRA as a junior partner. Among the countries involved were close allies of the United States such as Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Zaire.
Last week, as the NRA commanders planned the move on Kampala and the junta was hoping for the arrival of Israeli crack units to hold the capital and Entebbe, the Reagan Administration had invited Yoweri Museveni to be in Washington for what US officials called a 'get acquainted' visit. If the NRA leader had made that visit the history of the last week might have been rather different with the junta still clinging to power and Israel having diplomatic recognition from one more African country.
The new broad-based government which Museveni has promised for Uganda will need massive support from Ugandans and goodwill from the outside world. Every carpet-bagger in East Africa turned up in Kampala to 'aid' Uganda in 1979 when Amin fell. International bureaucrats were in the finance and planning ministries within days telling the UNLF government how to get Western aid.
The NRA ran Western Uganda with its own local leaders. The powerful Western aid industry would do well to listen more humbly than usual before treating Uganda as a helpless victim again and creating another opportunity for the vultures to settle on Kampala.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
3 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 31, 1986
Third World Review: A bad bisnes in Managua / Nicaragua's black economy
BYLINE: By RICHARD LAPPER
LENGTH: 1007 words
On the wall of the shabby administrative building by the entrance to Managua's 'Eastern Market' government officials have pinned a small cardboard sign for the attention of the thousands of traders who sell there. 'Don't think,' it reads, 'that just because we have been flexible and moderate in the past that we can't be tough. The hand that we have extended towards you in friendship could suddenly become a fist.' Modest though the sign is, it is nevertheless symbolic of the Sandinista government's determination to control a market which has become the centre of Nicaragua's informal or 'black' economy - a network of legal and semi-legal trading activities that Nicaraguans call 'bisnes.' The black economy is now growing so quickly that it is undermining the government's ability to manage, let alone to plan, the economy.
In the last three years thousands of Nicaraguans have left jobs in the government and private sectors to trade on the market and elsewhere, an activity from which even modest profits bring rewards far greater than available from waged work. Managua, Nicaragua's capital and the centre of 'bisnes,' abounds with stories of skilled workers who earn ten times the average manual wage by doing odd jobs for householders in the middle-class suburbs of Pancasan and Altamira or of women from the slums who by selling homemade coconut sweets from ramshackle stalls can earn up to 60,000 cordobas a month, twice Nicaragua's maximum legal wage earned among others by the nine commandantes of the Sandinista Front.
Basic to the black economy is the dual rate of which Nicaragua's currency - the cordoba - exchanges against Latin America's major international currency, the US dollar. At an average official rate of 40 to the dollar, the government buys imports - such as oil - essential both for the war effort and continued agricultural production. The government has relatively few dollars remaining but it makes these available much more expensively for what are considered 'inessential' imports - electrical goods like mixers, fashionable clothes and foreign travel.
For purchases such as these dollars can be bought at nearly 20 times more than the official rate on a 'legal parallel market,' which is close to the black market rate. The Sandinista Government originally conceived of this strategy as a means of keeping down the prices of basic goods while at the same time conceding to some middle class consumer demands. While the poor's need for cheap food, clothes and transport was a major goal of government policy, the dual exchange rate and the 'black' economy functioned as a safety valve to quieten middle class discontent with austerity and stem the exodus of middle class professionals to the United States.
However, in the last 18 months, the Contra war and US economic boycott have seriously hit production, aggravated shortages of foreign exchange and pushed up the price of the free market dollar. The gap between the two exchange rates is now so wide that it is seriously distorting the economy. Nicaraguans are effectively presented with two markets where the prices of all goods and services including labour, reflect the different exchange rates. On the official market a limited range of goods are, when available, cheap. On the black market you can get anything but prices are astronomical.
In theory most basic goods - rice, beans, maize, soap, milk and sugar as well as domestically produced clothes - should be available at rock-bottom prices in the government's own stores and in private shops. However, the State distribution system has been plagued by inefficiencies and corruption and this, together with war-related and other production difficulties, has led to frequent shortages.
Nicaraguan wage levels have been barely adequate to meet needs at official prices though this week wages were doubled for most categories of worker. Many Nicaraguans, particularly in the countryside, are growing their own food and families with relatives abroad are especially anxious to receive regular remittances of dollars, however small the amount.
However, it is the tendency of Nicaraguans to quit the formal sector altogether to take up jobs in the black economy which is the most worrying trend for the government.
The attractions of employment in the black economy have aggravated shortages of professionals - such as teachers, doctors and nurses - who are vital to the government's social programmes, as well as skilled labour and middle management whose contribution is necessary if production and economic growth are to be sustained. At another level with the contra war already pushing people away from the countryside the possibility of employment in the black economy has made Managua a magnet for peasants from the war zones. Managua's population has doubled to 900,000 since 1979.
Some economic measures, including a devaluation of the cordoba, were taken in 1985 and these have helped slow down the pace of growth of the black market but the market continues to grow. Now the government is taking more direct measures. As part of a campaign to rein in the 'Eastern Market' some 50 Ministry of Internal Trade inspectors have been despatched there to establish a new system in which traders are to be licensed and prices rigorously controlled. The physical size of the market is to be reduced by over a half and the number of traders is to be cut from 25,000 to 4,500.
However, there are already disturbing signs that once pushed out of the 'Eastern Market' traders are simply setting up business elsewhere. The only alternative may be to take much more drastic action against the private sector in general and the trading community in particular, measures which could destroy the Sandinistas' alliance with the middle class and badly dent the revolution's international image. On the other hand continuing chaos on the labour market will undermine not only the economy but also the government's so far relatively successful social programmes.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
4 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 31, 1986
Financial News in Brief / British Government support for ICI Alcan tax case in California
LENGTH: 60 words
The British Government and 15 other governments yesterday filed statements in the United States supporting the ICI-Alcan case against the state of California on unitary taxation. California is the most important practitioner of a tax system which means that foreign companies can pay double taxes if they operate in so-called 'unitary tax' states.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
5 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 31, 1986
Minister predicts downturn in Singaporean economy
BYLINE: By MICHAEL SIMMONS
LENGTH: 401 words
Singapore already has a higher per capita income than Spain and Italy and could overtake Britain if there is a further cut in world oil prices, according to General Lee Hsien Loong, the country's Economics and Defence Minister.
At the same time, he said in London yesterday, the country is now likely to see growth rates fall by more than half, cuts in wages, and a general decline in living standards. This in turn meant that political 'styles' would have to change to keep pace with the changing aspirations of the population.
General Lee, son and presumed heir apparent of Mr Lee Kuan Yew, who had been Singapore's Prime Minister since 1959, told a business conference at the Commonwealth Institute that Singapore's period of 'easy growth' - and annual average of 9 per cent since the mid-1960s - was now over. Increased costs meant that Singapore's downturn was more serious that that of Hong Kong, South Korea, and Taiwan.
'The critical thing is for people to understand that we are facing difficult times and that sacrifices will have to be made,' he added.
Reasons for Singapore's downturn, he went on, included an excessive dependence on US investors, an 'increasingly hostile' trading environment, as well as a drop in demand for key products and commodities. Singapore had reached a developed country's income level before it had become a completely developed country.
'Whatever happens to Hong Kong, by the 1990s South Korea and Taiwan will have developed into considerable industrial powers,' he said. 'Unless we move ahead, we will be overtaken and cast aside.'
General Lee declared that his government could only continue to function if there was 'political stability.' If people were reluctant to make adjustments in life style, including cuts in their wage packets, then the best-designed institutions would 'ossify and fail.' Failure would not mean 'gently decay,' but 'total oblivion.'
Questioned at a press conference afterwards, General Lee said: 'We live in a part of the world where problems of Communism are far from over. You never know what may happen if economic conditions are not good.'
Defence spending would be maintained at about 6 per cent of GDP, he went on, 'but we have reserves to spend if an emergency arises. The threat is in the medium to longer term.' Meanwhile only one political detainee was being held in a Singapore prison.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
6 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 31, 1986
Aid appeal get cool reception / US Administration's proposals to increase the foreign aid budget flounder
BYLINE: From MARK TRAN
LENGTH: 350 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
Administration proposals to increase the foreign aid budget for next year have received a frosty reception on Capitol Hill. The influential chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Mr Richard Lugar (Republican, Indiana) warned US officials that the White House was inviting 'catastrophe' for the entire aid programme if it seeks aid increases across the board for 1987.
In the opening shot of the yearly tug of war over foreign aid - now complicated by the Gramm-Rudman Balanced budget law which requires a phased elimination of the deficit by 1991 - the Administration is seeking a 12.5 per cent increase over the present foreign aid budget to a total of dollars 16.3 billion.
Mr Lugar's counterpart in the house, Mr Dante Fascell (Democrat, Florida) gave a similar warning. A substantial foreign aid increase, he said, 'is going to have a rough sledding. It's going to be impossible to consider it. It circumvents the process of Gramm-Rudman, it circumvents the whole process of deficit reduction.'
The two men were responsible for shepherding through Congress the first foreign aid bil passed in several years - a feat considered all the more exceptional since it was their first year as chairmen of their respective committees. It earned them respect from their colleagues and the White House.
In the absence of a separate foreign aid bil, Congress has passed an omnibus spending bill allowing for small increases but little opportunity for reallocating funds from one counry to another.
There will be much give and take in the months ahead. The Administration has put forward figures in the full expectation of seeing them cut eventually.
The dollars 103 million military aid request for the Philippines is a prime candidate for the axe.
Should President Marcos win the February 7 elections there will be overwhelming reluctance to go along with the Administration request. In other requests, Egypt is earmarked for dollars 2.3 billion and Israel dollars 3 billion, about the same amounts as last year although they can also be expected to be cut.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
7 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 31, 1986
Revolt against Duvalier spreads / Haitian unrest
BYLINE: From GREG CHAMBERLAIN
LENGTH: 348 words
DATELINE: GONAIVES
The revolt against Haiti's President-for-Life, Jean-Claude Duvalier, spread to this northern town yesterday. Thousands of demonstrators advanced on the headquarters of the Duvaliers' hated Tontons Macoutes militia here, but troops intervened to disarm the militiamen and prevent bloodshed.
Three young people desperate for food, died on Wednesday after 40,000 people marched through Cap Haitien, the second city, in the biggest demonstration seen in the 28 years since the Duvalier family came to power. Troops fired teargas but otherwise made no serious attempt to stop the protesters, some of whom waved American flags.
Slum-dwellers then stormed the warehouses of the US aid organisation Care, smashing holes in the concrete walls to get at 700 tons of grain and drums of cooking oil. Three children aged 13, 15 and 16 were crushed to death by falling stacks of wheat while others fought over the booty.
Since the Government closed all the country's schools three weeks ago in an attempt to stamp out protests against the regime, children have been without the food that Care delivers to the schools.
Troops in riot gear patrolled the streets of Cap Haitien yesterday, some guarding a car showroom belonging to the President's wealthy father-in-law. Mr Ernest Bennett, which was badly damaged by the demonstrators. They also destroyed the houses of some members of the Tontons Macoutes.
All shops were closed for the fourth successive day. Protests also broke out in the south western town f Les Cayes, where food warehouses were looted, as well as a nearby Protestant missionary settlement, Cite Lumiere.
In Washington, the Reagan Administration announced that it was cutting dollars 7 million of its annual dollars 55 million economic aid to Haiti. Washington has warned President Duvalier that the aid would depend on human rights performance.
In the capital, Port-au-Prince, Mr Sylvio Claude, one of several clandestine opposition leaders, called for the immediate formation of a military-civilian government and the departure of the Duvaliers.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
8 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 31, 1986
Mitterrand makes his position clear / President publishes book 'Reflections on French Foreign Policy'
BYLINE: From CAMPBELL PAGE
LENGTH: 407 words
DATELINE: PARIS
President Mitterrand yesterday set out his ideas on foreign policy in a 442-page book which will influence attitudes to the functions of the presidency after the National Assembly election in March.
The volume, a collection of 25 speeches with a recently composed preface of 135 pages, appeared only six weeks before the President may have to exercise his constitutional role as guarantor of national independence, territorial integrity, and treaties and as head of the armed forces in the presence of a rightwing majority in the National Assembly.
In the book Reflections on French Foreign Policy, the President refers to the pact linking the sovereign people and a president chosen by direct popular election. That pact concerned, above all, France's external security.
Mr Mitterrand has previously expressed his figorous view of the special areas reserved to the presidency and his intention of exercising his powers if cohabitation - co-existence of a president and a prime minister of different political persuasions - arises after the election.
Yesterday the book was being interpreted as a warning to any future prime minister about what he could expect from the presidency in the area of foreign policy.
In his preface, the president noted the wide national agreement on foreign policy which was based on a few simple ideas - national independence, the balance between military blocks, the right of peoples to self-determination and the development of poor countries.
In 1978, he wrote, the Socialist Party had ended its opposition to the Gaullists' nuclear deterrent. Although France had no wish to rival the arsenal of the superpowers, 'I have reserved our country's ability to decide itself and for itself.'
He explained France's refusal to participate in the development of the United States Strategic Defence Initiative, and pointed to the danger that two separate and uneven defence systems, one American and one European, would be created. The Eureka project, launched by France in the interest of European technological cooperation, was an opportunity for Europe to invent, construct, and sell its products.
Up to 15,000 members of the Communist-led trade union CGT marched yesterday during a day of action in Paris against the Government's proposals to introduce more flexible working hours. Mr Henri Krasucki, the general secretary of the CGT, described the bill as 'bad and dangerous.'
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
9 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 31, 1986
Westland close to stalemate / Deadlock over rescue of troubled helicopter company
BYLINE: By MICHAEL SMITH and DAVID SIMPSON
LENGTH: 490 words
The Government may be forced to intervene openly to resolve the stalemate at the Westland company.
There is now a growing realisation that the rival American and four-nation European consortiums are close to cancelling out each other's rescue packages, and that only a clear-cut government initiative will be enough to settle the deadlock.
A direct government bail-out of Westland, involving up to pounds 100 million of taxpayers' money, is almost certainly politically impossible after the recent turmoil of two resignations from the Cabinet. The Prime Minister has personally ruled out nationalisation.
However, Conservatives acknowledge that if both rescue plans collapse the public would place the blame for any subsequent Westland failure, and the loss of 11,000 jobs, firmly at the door of the Cabinet.
The most likely options are for the Government to guarantee Westland loans to the main yanks, or to provide the helicopter company with short-term commercial loans to see it through its immediate cash crisis.
The Government has made it clear that Westland, a key defence equipment supplier, will not be permitted to sink into receivership. Earlier this week the Aerospace Minister, Mr Geoffrey Pattie, emphasised the point to an all-party Commons committee.
Mr Pattie has also agreed to write off pounds 40 million of taxpayers' money spent developing the new Westland 30 helicopter, without which neither the American nor European rescue would have been needed in the first place.
A stalemate has developed after Wednesday's move by the European consortium to make a pounds 16.4 million tender offer, largely to Westland's small shareholders. It is now accepted in the Westland camp that this manoeuvre will give the four-nation consortium a large enough shareholding to block the American attempt to secure a 50.1 per cent majority of votes for its rescue proposals.
The US combine, United Technologies was yesterday involved in a last-ditch attempt to stave off embarrassing defeat by making a cash offer of 140p to Westland share holders prepared to sell through the stock market. The European tender offer is pitched at 130p. But under City regulations United Technologies will lose any voting powers if its share stake goes above 10 per cent. At present it owns 9.4 per cent.
The European consortium will also be barred from voting in favour of any reconstruction at Westland if it succeeds in defeating the American deal. Under its tender offer, the Europeans are aiming for a 21.3 per cent stake in Westland, more than twice the trigger point for being disenfranchised.
Westland said in a statement last night that the European offer could frustrate its plans to link with United Technologies. Sir John Cuckney, the Westland chairman, said: 'It seems a wholly obstructive manoeuvre which could jeopardise the board's crucial proposals for the recapitalisation of the company.'
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
10 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 30, 1986
The Markets: Shares slip as oil price slides again / Various market results
LENGTH: 639 words
Stock markets paused for breath yesterday as the spot oil price sank to below dollars 18 a barrel, bringing the pound down in sympathy.
Trading began with a flourish following Wall Street's fresh overnight advance behind Japan's cut in the discount rate. However, after hitting a new peak of 1160.6 15 minutes after the opening, prices began slipping on the advices from Rotterdam and the FT Index was showing a net fall of 7.5 by midday.
However selling was at a minimum, and although buyers were reluctant to take advantage of the cheaper levels, most sectors were edging off the bottom as Wall Street opened firmer in early trading. So leading shares were mixed, with some internationals attracting support from America.
Reductions in government stocks were confined to a quarter, but stores dropped back 5p to 13p on profit-taking and oil shares took a similar knock. In contrast properties made further modest progress and buildings also attracted fresh support.
Speculators were still on the prowl looking for likely bid candidates. Second-thoughts on the Racal figures left electricals looking a little jaded, and hitech stocks ran back after their recent rallying burst. However, Amstrad remained in demand, up 12p to 244p (a new high) helped by a survey which puts the company at the top of the list for home computer sales.
Rumours that another large stake had changed hands well above the market price on Tuesday evening prompted a 13p recovery in Westland at 116. Jaguar remained on the buying lists of US investors. The shares closed 10p higher at 389p, after touching 394p.
In firm papers and packaging United News stood out with a 12p rise to 325p as investors took encouragement from the money-saving technological changes in Fleet Street. Newspaper distributors WH Smith A chipped in with pre-tax profits well above expectations at pounds 21.2 million, up 26 per cent. The shares added 4p to 264p in an otherwise gloomy stores sector.
Rank Organisation, reporting full-year results today gave back 9p to 440p. Dealers are hoping for pre-tax profits of between pounds 125 million and pounds 130 million. News that Kuala Lumpur is to trade in limited volumes of tin did little for the shares concerned. Gold mines slipped dollars 1 to dollars 2.
Beecham, on the bid denials, finished 4p lower at 361p, while P & O, reflecting profit-taking, retreated 10p at 450p. For the same reason smaller losses were showing for BTR 7p lower at 396p GKN 5p off at 295p, and Vickers showing a fall of the same amount at 323p. Lucas staged a recovery 10p higher at 506p, with Glaxo making the same progress at 877p on US buying.
British Aerospace climbed 10p to 451p, on Airbus sales expansion hopes. In builders MJ Gleeson following the agm hardened 2p at 264p.
Main changes: Westland 116p up 13p, Amstrad 244p up 12p, Jaguar 389p up 10p, United News 325p up 12p, WH Smith 264p up 4p, Rank Org 440p dn 9p, Brit Aerospace 451p up 10p, BP 575p dn 13p.
Equity turnover for January 28 was: bargains 26,318, value pounds 661.094 million.
PARIS - Stocks closed higher in active trading. Banking and portfolio issues led the market, which was spurred by foreign demand. The general market indicator finished with a gain of .0.68 per cent. Advancing issues outnumbered declines 98 to 78.
FRANKFURT - Share prices were mixed after extremely thin dealings, and brokers said the market lacked a firm direction. The Commerzbank index rose 6.0 points to 2003.2.
TOKYO - Share prices fell back on very large volume. Selected selling in the electrical sector was largely responsible for the fall off, traders said. Nikkei index: 12,957.14 (12,993.69).
HONG KONG - Heavy selling by overseas investors pushed most share prices lower in moderate trading. Hang Seng index: 1736.35 (1754.38).
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
11 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 30, 1986
Company Briefing: High rates hit Union Discount / Annual results
BYLINE: Edited by TONY MAY
LENGTH: 350 words
Union Discount has been at the heart of the chaos and uncertainty in the money markets over the last year, because it is one of the elite band which deals directly with the Bank of England. A slump in profits last year to pounds 1.127 million from pounds 7.941 million after tax was mainly due to an unprecedently long period when it was running a trading loss in its bill dealings because interest rates refused to head downwards as fast as everybody expected.
The result disappointed the City, despite a maintained 37p dividend (on a larger equity base) and the fact that for once the results were real - there was no transfer in or out of secret reserves. The shares were marked down 5p to 623p.
The running loss on bills reflected the almost permanent expectation in the markets that interest rates would decline, which drove down the interest rates on bills. But as the Chancellor found to his cost, interest rates did not in practice go down nearly as much as expected, and for much of the time Union was earning less on its bills than the cost of the money to finance its dealings.
Fortunately, says managing director Mr Graeme Gilchrist, Union was able to offset the losses by profits from its US dollar portfolio, helped by a close and long lasting relationship with Discount Corporation of New York.
Union also made some profits in certificates of deposit, gilts and other operations. A loss in the first half was turned into a second half profit and Union also appears to have been pretty fleet of foot in mitigating potential sasters.
Indeed, Mr Gilchrist is able to report a small profit this month, the first of its new financial year, despite the extraordinary gyrations of the markets. The profit was largely due to anticipating the sudden rise in interest rates early in January, when others said rates would drop, and to correctly assuming that the government would win its fight last week to restrain base rates.
Mr Gilchrist was pleased with the gilts profit which he said was a good augury for the firm's intention to become a gilts market maker.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
12 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 30, 1986
Alternatives: Ecology - industry's senior partner / Conflict between conservation and development
BYLINE: By HARFORD THOMAS
LENGTH: 1131 words
Consider this as a declaration of intent for the second half of the 1980s: 'With the growth of environmentalism as a dynamic political and moral philosophy throughout the world, conflict between conservation and development interests is frequent and sometimes damaging. Our aim is to replace conflict with productive partnership.'
It is part of the founders' description of the UK Centre for Economic and Environmental Development, CEED. It was founded in 1984 in a coming together of top level businessmen, economists, environmentalists, administrators and academics.
CEED commits itself to such economic progress as is necessary for social progress. For this the needs of business and industry have to be reconciled with 'the overriding imperative of conserving our irreplaceable natural resources and the ecological life support systems on which we all depend.'
Its ultimate goal is 'the integration of economic and environmental policies at government, industry and individual enterprise level.'
CEED is the offspring of the World Conservation Strategy launched in 1980 as a joint undertaking by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, the United Nations Environment Programme and the World Wildlife Fund. This called for the preparation of a national conservation strategy.
Here in the UK, in a formidable exercise in collaboration, some 180 people were involved in the preparation of a 500-page Conservation and Development Programme which was published in July, 1983. This was a non-governmental report. There was no requirement on a government, then notoriously lukewarm about environmental issues, to take any notice at all.
What next? The concluding recommendation was to set up a Centre for a National Conservation Strategy. This was taken up by the most dedicated and indefatigable of British environmentalists, Max Nicholson, then in his eightieth year, who persuaded Sir Arthur Norman, chairman of De La Rue and a former president of the CBI, to back the idea, Sir Arthur was until last year chairman of the World Wildlife Fund UK.
As the first chairman of CEED, Sir Arthur had a big say in determining the title of the centre, which by its name, is intended to make partners of economic development and the environment. CEED now has a small London headquarters, with a director, Michael Bown, who combines environmental sympathies with high-level business experience in the UK and the US. CEED set up a two-day conference last summer to look at sustainable development in an industrial economy. This was its first public appearance, so to speak.
If, as it begins to seem, we are all environmentalists now, then there is new scope for the central CEED philosophy of 'productive partnership between conservation and development interests.' Here I must admit my own doubts about the prevailing notions of the infallibility of market-place criteria for development. Let-it-rip economics is probably the biggest single threat to the environment. And marketplace values, necessarily expressed in balance sheet money terms, do not measure poverty or the quality of life. Nor are they a good guide to environmental costs.
Sir Arthur, in his introduction to CEED's first conference last year, quoted the view of the Chinese delegation at the Stockholm world conference on the environment that poverty is the greatest pollutant of all, and in environmental terms a mightily destructive force.
This led him to point out that poverty emphasised the importance of economic development. For environmentalists the question should be 'how the imperative of economic growth is achieved.' From this stand-point, developers and conservationists need not be polarised, but can agree on sustainable economic development within the limits of the ecological imperative.
The first of EED's 1986 seminars brought together some two dozen practitioners in industrial and housing development, local government, community development, town planning and development finance to spend a day considering inner city regeneration. That could be expected to be an issue in which the development imperative took precedence, though there were some references to the 'total approach' philosophy.
The discussion produced some general if fairly obvious conclusions. One was to make more effective use of local resources - among these abandoned derelict land which awaits re-development if the investment can be found; and how to regenerate by mobilising the full potential of local people, local trade and industry, backed by local finance.
One began to see that a number of themes were frequently repeated. One was the insensitive centralism of government, big business and banking. Whitehall departments and their ministers increasingly treat local authorities with disdain: local authorities respond with distrust and resentment.
The mood of big business and banking, however, has been changing quite fast. There is increasing involvement in community affairs, it was said. No more than half-a-dozen big companies mentioned community involvement in their annual reports in 1981, but now hundreds do, and some at length. But there is still too little power of discretion for local branches of big businesses, banks and building societies to help directly with urban regeneration.
What is missing is enabling help, at the local level, both in money and expertise, to get regeneration on the move. Still the seminar heard case histories of local authorities, local private development and local voluntary organisations which have been working successfully together, though two of the most noteworthy of these stories came from abroad.
There was the renewal of the port of Baltimore, not so long ago in as deep a state of decline as Liverpool. It was achieved by a decision-sharing collaboration of federal government, state government and private business, with adequate finance from all three.
Then there was the case of once-loved Paris suburbs in decline. Two architects got to President Mitterrand himself to put up a plan. The President agreed, and had access to discretionary funds which enabled him to get the plan off the ground.
Enabling is a key concept. Urban regeneration, by far the most urgent problem of the industrialised countries, is frustrated in the UK by the rigidities and ideological hang-ups of over-centralised systems of government and finance. What would help would be a lot more discretionary decision-making backed up with a lot of discretionary funds.
The UK Centre for Economic and Environmental Development is at 10 Belgrave Square, London, SW1X 8PH. Its report, Sustainable Development in an Industrial Economy (price pounds 9.80) and its other publications can be obtained at that address.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
13 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 30, 1986
Oil price fall prompts Mexico-Venezuela summit
BYLINE: From PETER CHAPMAN
LENGTH: 510 words
DATELINE: MEXICO CITY
President Miguel de la Madrid of Mexico, and the Venezuelan leader, President Jaime Lusinchi, meet in the Mexican resort of Cancun today in a hastily prepared summit following the dramatic fall in international oil prices.
Sources here say that the Mexican leader - whose statements in the past week have loudly deplored the failure of oil producing nations to cooperate - will propose that the two countries cut their oil exports by 20 per cent, in an effort to boost prices.
Reports both here and from Caracas indicate the growing alarm in government banking circles over the affects of the oil price fall on the country's ability to maintain foreign repayments.
Mexico currently owes about dollars 97 billion and recent negotiations with foreign bankers have been marked by increasing strain between the two sides, prompted by Mexico's inability to meet public expenditure reduction targets.
Venezuela - 95 per cent of whose export income comes from oil - was on the point of signing a dollars 21 billion debt rescheduling deal with its creditors next month. Bankers in Caracas say, however, that with debt service payments due this year of dollars 5.2 billion and oil revenue expected to be down by more than a quarter from a forecast dollars 13 billion, Venezuela will have to seek new terms on the deal if the oil market does not firm.
The alarm bells went haywire in Mexico City last week on the news of the fall of North Sea Brent crude prices to below dollars 20. Brent acts as an important indicator for Mexico's lighter Isthmus crude.
Talk in the US of oil prices reaching as low as dollars 14 or dollars 15 a barrel would bring little short of disaster, say oil market analysts and banking sources here.
'Even a fall below dollars 20 in the Mexican price would mean they're in big trouble,' said one consultant, noting that this year's already austere Mexican budget assumed an average annual oil price of dollars 22.50.
The budget, which projects a fourth year of sharp cuts in public expenditure following the now concluded 1982-85 IMF austerity programme, was drawn up to help negotiations with both the fund and Mexico's creditors, and aimed at securing further commercial loans this year of between dollars 2.5 billion and dollars 4 billion.
Even under favourable oil market conditions, about 60 per cent of Mexico's oil revenue goes on debt service payments alone, and the credit needed by Mexico this year, bankers say, could now be nearer dollars 7 billion. The commercial banks, however, are likely to be very reluctant to meet such a figure.
Mexico's proposal for a 20 per cent cut in its current oil production level of 1.5 million barrels a day and Venezuela's 1.4 million would be aimed at giving a lead to other producers, and especially Opec, with which Mexico (officially a non-member) has been in close cooperation for several years. Both Mexico and Venezuela at present are losing an annual average of dollars 500 million to dollars 550 million for every dollar fall in the oil price.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
14 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 30, 1986
Wellcome to bow in at 1.011 billion pounds / Share issue by pharmaceuticals group
BYLINE: By JAMES ERLICHMAN, Chemicals Correspondent
LENGTH: 320 words
The Wellcome Foundation drug company will be worth exactly pounds 1.011 billion when it becomes the largest private company ever to go public on the Stock Exchange on February 14.
The value was determined yesterday when bankers acting for the Wellcome Trust announced that they will sell off 20 per cent of the new Wellcome plc at 120p a share. The trust, which devotes all of its money to funding academic medical research, will get pounds 195 million from the share sale. Since Wellcome plc will simultaneously issue new shares to raise pounds 45 million for funding of its drugs business, the trusts's remaining share in the company will fall to just under 75 per cent.
There is every reason to believe that the Wellcome flotation will be heavily subscribed. In City terms the asking price is not particularly demanding and all the institutions will want to widen their pharmaceuticals portfolio. The exclusion of US investors from applying for the shares is likely to attract quick-profit seeking 'stags' who believe the shares will go on sale at a healthy premium to the 120p offer price.
The chairman of the Wellcome Trust, Sir David Steel, revealed yesterday that he had been strenuously 'encouraged' by the Charity Commissioners to widen its portfolio by offering some of its Wellcome shares for sale. The terms of Sir Henry Wellcome's will only permit share disposals in 'exceptional circumstances.'
Dr Peter Williams, The Trusts's director, said that the share sale would enable the trust to increase its support of academic medical research from around pounds 20 million to pounds 35 million a year. He bitterly attacked government cuts in medical research and said that the trusts's increased support 'will transform the medical research scene in this country.'
Sir David said that the trust would exclude companies with tobacco interests from its new portfolio of investments.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
15 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 30, 1986
Making the world sound an interesting place / Interview with Murray Bookchin, Vermont professor and ecologist
BYLINE: By RICHARD BOSTON
LENGTH: 1129 words
The twelve mighty volumes of the Oxford English Dictionary do not contain the word 'ecology,' though it did make it in the 1930 supplement. Although the word was coined by Ernst Haeckel more than a century ago, it is scarcely ten years since it left the vocabulary of a few specialists and entered the general language as a result of the growth of the environmental or Green movement.
The beginning of the Green movement is usually dated from the publication of Rachel Carson's The Silent Spring in 1962. The book caused a huge controversy at the time, but proved enormously influential. Rachel Carson's name is now so respectable that a postage stamp with her portrait on it has been issued in the United States.
Some months before The Silent Spring, Murray Bookchin published Our Synthetic Environment. Whereas Carson's book was concerned almost exclusively with pesticides, Bookchin's also looked into air and water pollution, chemicals in food and agriculture, radiation, and nuclear energy, and discussed such subjects as holistic medicine and decentralisation. Without denigrating Carson's book, one must say that Bookchin's was far more comprehensive, far more challenging and far more radical. Doubtless this is why it was so widely ignored.
Bookchin did not only identify far more problems than Carson. He also pointed to their causes and he offered solutions. These involved not just tinkering with a bit of legislation here and there, but changing the whole political system and the entire way in which we look at the planet, our society and ourselves. He found the answers in the anarchist tradition of Tolstoy, Kropotkin, Thoreau, and Morris.
A major British publisher recently considered bringing out his works but decided against, on the grounds that he is not well-known enough. Of all the fatuous, self-defeating, circular arguments, this one surely deserves the biscuit. Here is a writer with an international reputation. EF Schumacher quoted him with enthusiasm in Small Is Beautiful. Theodore Roszak ranks him among American philosophers with Thoreau, Lewis Mumford and Paul Goodman. Maurice Cranston says that whether you agree with him or not his writing has an eloquence that recalls that of Camus. Robin Clarke in the New Scientist says that Bookchin is to Marx what Einstein is to Newton. Will one of the British publishers at the back of the class please wake up?
Bookchin's parents left Russia in 1910, not so much because they were jews as that they were socialists. The immigration officer at Ellis Island couldn't cope with the name Buktchin and called them Bookchin. Murray was born in the Bronx in 1921. He was a friend of Norman Mailer. His father was a hatter. Into one's mind instantly comes the image of other Bronx Jews as SJ Perelman and the Marx Brothers.
Like Perelman and Groucho he has a moustache, but to start with his Marxism was less of the Groucho tendency than that of Karl. Working in his youth as a foundryman in the 1930s he was politically active as a Communist trade union organiser, but became disenchanted with the Communist party after the Spanish Civil war, the party's support for Roosevelt, and the Moscow trials and executions of his childhood heroes. In 1939 he was expelled from the party.
He was in the US army during the war, most of the time in Fort Knox. It is rather a delicious irony that this anarchist should have been employed in protecting the biggest armoury and the biggest accumulation of gold in the world.
After the war came the City College of New York and then a steady stream of articles and books. His politics quickly changed from red to green. As early as 1952 he wrote an article about the problems of chemical in food. At the same time much of his writing came from his quarrel with Marxism, and he still retains some of the linguistic tics of communism, such as starting a sentence in which two unrelated facts are preceded by the words 'It is no accident that ..' And when he writes on an abstract level, Bookchin is easily as incomprehensible as Adorno, Marcuse and the other masters of the Frankfurt school.
Fortunately he is lucidity itself when he writes about the real world, as in his standard work on the Spanish anarchists, or in his splendid essay on the opportunities for freedom offered by technology.
Bookchin is a Professor of Environmental Studies, as well as founder and director of the Institute for Social Ecology in Vermont, which is where he has lived since 1970. He was attracted to Vermont not only by its beauty but also because, he says, it is the most libertarian state in the Union. It was an independent republic for 12 years before becoming the fourteenth state in 1791. It led the world in abolishing slavery, and abolishing the property requirement for franchise.
In Vermont the political structure is based on town meetings, and in theory a standing army is illegal. The largest town in the state, Burlington, has the only socialist mayor in the US, and the Governor is a Swiss-born Jewish woman Democrat in a state that is Republican (though, Bookchin says, republican rather then Republican, and not Reaganite). He says they have had boycotts of McDonald's hamburgers. All in all he makes Vermont sound a pretty interesting place.
Indeed he makes the world sound a pretty interesting place. Certainly he has alarming things to say about this 'lousy bourgeois system' and about what we are doing to the planet, but he is not just the doom and gloom merchant that many ecologists and environmentalists present themselves as. Furthermore, as an anarchist he is not of the bomb-throwing kind (it is governments that throw bombs) but in the tradition of William Morris, Tolstoy, Thoreau, and Kropotkin, believing in decentralisation, minimal government, self-sufficiency, mutual aid and other ideas which are as far from those of Reagan and Thatcher as they are from those of Marx, Lenin, and Mao.
What he calls for instead is a 'stateless, classless, decent, decentralised society in which the splits created by propertied society are transcended by new, unalienated relationships.' A society that is diversified, balanced and harmonious. Where human behaviour is dictated not by laws but by a basic sense of decency.
Like other anarchists of his ilk he is accused of being Utopian. He answers the charge by agreeing readily. You have to be Utopian, he says. The way things are going, there'll be a catastrophe. It's not the Utopians who are unrealistic. They are the only realists. Things are coming to a cross-road. 'If we don't achieve Utopia,' Bookchin says, 'then we will destroy ourselves and our planet.' His track record suggests that it might be very well worth listening to what he has to say.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
16 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 30, 1986
Jet inquiry sparks row / Air India jumbo-jet crash inquiry
LENGTH: 201 words
DATELINE: NEW DELHI
An inquiry into the Air India plane crash off Ireland last June yesterday threatened to develop into a row between Air India and the Canadian Government.
Air India Counsel, Mr Lalit Bhasin, subjected the Canadian Aviation Safety Board investigator, Mr Art Laflamme to fierce cross-examination of a CASB report which called into question Air India's security precautions at Toronto airport.
Most evidence submitted by Indian, British, and US experts has pointed to a bomb on the Boeing 747 flight from Toronto to Bombay which crashed last June 23, killing all 329 people on board.
The CASB report submitted to the court came to the same conclusion, but also pointed out that the Canadian Government requires foreign airlines to take security responsibility for passenger and baggage checks at its airports.
Mr Bhasin produced a letter dated May last year from Air India to the Canadian Royal Mounted Police requesting tightened security for Air India during the month of June.
The Canadian Government counsel, Mr IG Whitehall, interrupted Mr Bhasin to say: 'Air India may have requested increased security, but the Canadian Government had no obligation to meet the request.'
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
17 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 30, 1986
US hints oil firms must leave Angola
BYLINE: From MARK TRAN
LENGTH: 378 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
The US rolled out the red carpet yesterday for the rebel Angolan leader, Mr Jonas Savimbi, as the State Department suggested that it was time for the Chevron oil company, a Gulf Corporation subsidiary, to get out of Angola.
On the eve of Mr Savimbi's talks with the Secretary of State, Mr George Shultz, the department's top official for African affairs, Dr Chester Crocker, said that Gulf's presence in the country had not accelerated peace negotiations.
Referring to US oil companies operating in Angola, he added: 'They are in the middle of a war zone .. they are also in the middle of a rather hot political debate in this country, and they should be thinking about US national interests as well as their own corporate interests as they make their decisions.'
The Administration has been coming under heavy pressure from conservative groups to put the squeeze on US oil companies. The groups, which include the Conservative Caucus led by Mr Howard Phillips, are emulating leftwing groups seeking a boycott of Shell products because of its involvement in South Africa.
Dr Crocker stopped short of agreeing with Mr Phillips' desire to close down the Chevron operation, but there was no mistaking the thrust of his remarks. The State Department said later that most of the hard currency earned by Angola with the help of the oil companies went on importing military equipment and paying Cuban troops.
The US has previously looked favourably on the work of Gulf, which has a 49 per cent stake in the Cabinda Gulf Company, which produces most of Angola's dollars 2 billion worth of oil a year. Gulf has operated in Angola for 30 years and remained after independence from Portugal in 1975, despite the lack of diplomatic relations between Angola and the US.
The US reacted angrily last year when it emerged that South Africa commandos were seized in Angola on their way to attack Gulf plants.
Chevron said yesterday that Mr Phillips and his organisation had embarked on an irresponsible crusade.
The Administration has broached the idea of giving around dollars 15 million in covert military aid - more as a last resort - to Mr Savimbi's Unita guerrillas with congressional intelligence committees, but it did not go down well.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
18 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 30, 1986
Haitian mobs loot church depots
BYLINE: From GREG CHAMBERLAIN
LENGTH: 480 words
DATELINE: CAP HAITIEN
Thousands of angry demonstrators paralysed Haiti's second city yesterday, in a new and violent protest against the killing of two children by security forces last weekend.
Troops looked on approvingly as the crowds, however, shouted support for the army. The implication was that the army should end the Duvalier family's long rule.
Demonstrators also praised the Roman Catholic Church for its opposition to the regime.
In Leogane, near the capital Port-au-Prince, three people were trampled to death when troops broke up protests against conditions of government recruitment of thousands of labourers to cut sugar cane in the neighbouring Dominican Republic.
In the south-western town of Les Cayes, demonstrators looted shops as well as six food warehouses belonging to Catholic and Protestant aid organisations.
Mobs also looted missionary orphanages, hospitals, schools and stores, a US missionary said.
The missionary gave this report after arriving in Port-au-Prince with his family yesterday. 'I brought my family here for their safety,' he said.
He said the looting erupted following a protest march in the centre of Les Cayes, a town of about 50,000.
Telephone communications between Port-au-Prince and Les Cayes were disrupted yesterday morning.
The Les Cayes troubles come following two days of protests against President Jean-Claude Duvalier that left three dead and at least 30 injured in Cap Haitien, in the north. More demonstrations were also reported in the town of Gonaives, a coastal town north of the capital.
Hundreds of students took to the streets here on Sunday and Monday, shouting anti-government slogans and throwing stones at security forces. Soldiers used clubs and teargas to rout demonstrators on Sunday and witnesses said that troops fired automatic weapons into the crowd on Monday.
A mob also set fire to the ciVil court in Gonaives - Haiti's fourth-largest city - on Monday night.
The Government has announced that an army captain and two militiamen were charged with murdering three students during a demonstration in Gonaives in November. The deaths touched off anti-government protests in more than a dozen towns.
Student protests that erupted again when classes reopened on January 7 led the Government to close all schools. There has been no word on when they might reopen.
Mr Duvalier on Sunday announced a major shake-up in the military leadership, in which he replaced the commanders of the navy, air force, presidential guard and the army's counter-insurgency force. He also said he accepted the resignations of 11 high-ranking army officers.
The president of Haitian Human Rights League, Mr Gerard Gourgue, meanwhile welcomed President Duvalier's abolition of his secret police and called on the regime to free all political prisoners and to turn off 'the faucets of blood.'
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
19 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 30, 1986
Europe space plans for mini-shuttle may now take off / Aftermath of US space shuttle Challenger explosion
BYLINE: By ANTHONY TUCKER, Science Correspondent
LENGTH: 829 words
Space experts in Europe and the US are already reading the shuttle disaster as the trigger for the fast take-off of large new programmes which, until now, have been held back by shuttle commitments.
Heading the list are the European mini-shuttle known as Hermes, and the US military hypersonic space plane, a viable future alternative to the shuttle that could also serve as a civil airliner.
On the European list, with Hermes, is a British proposal for an air-breathing space plane called Hotoli - which has already been discussed at ministerial level as a potential part of the European space programme.
The French Government has been arguing for almost a decade that a small, manned space-plane is essential if Europe is ever to become a world-class space power. It has criticised the shuttle as an elephant of a machine that was mistakenly designed to do everything.
Mr Frederick d'Allest, the director of the French National Centre for Space Studies, where Hermes was conceived in the 1970s, has argued that the European approach should be very different because 'specialised systems are inherently far more efficient than any multipurpose system such as the shuttle.'
Hermes, in one form costing about pounds 1 billion, would be boosted into orbit as a strap-on system for the uprated Ariane V rocket, but it also exists as a design with its own recoverable booster, just like a mini-shuttle.
In either version it is a selfpowered reusable spare vehicle that is capable of carrying a crew of six into a wide range of orbits. It is designed, however, only for those activities which require the presence of men in space. It would not be used for the launching of satellites, either civil or military, a task which European engineers (like the US military) see as best left to old-fashioned rockets.
The main uses of Hermes would lie in providing a platfarm for space experiments lasting up to three months; in giving men access to satellites and other space vehicles in orbits up to 800 miles above the earth; and in ferrying crews out to orbiting space platforms, whatever their nationality.
These proposals, which have been canvassed vigorously in Europe over the past three years, have so far fallen on barren ground, mainly because of Europe's commitment to Spacelab (the European component of the shuttle), because of the embryonic commitment to Columbus (the European component of the US space station).
These commitments may no longer restrain a full-blooded investigation of Hermes and other possibilities.
The first serious investments in the design and evaluation of major components, such as the Hermes engine, are already under way. Even if the French Government goes it alone, as it often has in the past, West Germany is almost certain to fall into line to keep up with the know-how - and Britain could not then afford to be far behind.
France is already nominating its own main contractors, and Hermes, like the US spaceplane proposal, is based on current tehnology and therefore requires a relatively short development programme. Optimists say that, given a firm decision now, Hermes could be in orbit early in the 1990s.
Hotol, the British contender, is in a different category. Its use of a single air-breathing propulsion system carrying it from the ground into orbit is unproven and therefore of uncertain development time.
The French view - give or take some Hermes-buyers - is that Hotol could not reach orbit until the next century, even if its engineering philosophy turned out to be both right and practical. At British Aerospace, where the Hotol's proposed propulsion system is being kept under tight security wraps, the view is that the elegance of the Hotol philosophy will carry space technology into a new era.
This is something that must be followed up if Europe is at all serious about its future in this technology. If CNES is an indicator, Europe is still very serious indeed.
In the US, where the military have long been sceptical about the shuttle's ability to meet all the demands placed on it, there are very powerful pressures on Nasa and on Darpa (the Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency) to pick up a hot potato left by George Keyworth, President Reagan's former science adviser. This takes the form of a small space-plane seen as the essential launcher for the orbital devices in the Strategic Defence Initiative.
All the sums done by the President's science office, the Pentagon, and the US aerospace industry, have shown that unless launching costs can be cut to about a tenth of those of the shuttle, SDI can never get off the ground.
Keyworth presented his answer to the US Government in the form of a proposal for a scramjet machine that could be built now, serve the military, and perhaps also lead the way to hypersonic civil flight at five times the speed of Concorde. Its launch costs would be only a fraction of those of the shuttle, he claimed.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
20 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 30, 1986
Thursday People: Nasa's power scuffle / James Beggs, Nasa administrator
BYLINE: Edited by STEPHEN COOK and STUART WAVELL
LENGTH: 435 words
A little-remarked cloud hung over the space programme before Tuesday's 'major malfunction.' This was fall-out from the suspension last month of Nasa administrator James Beggs pending his trial on charges of defrauding the US Government, for which he could face five years in prison.
The affair was obscured by the simultaneous resignation of another top government official, Robert McFarlane, the national security adviser.
At a dual press conference President Reagan said of Beggs: 'I don't know of anyone who could have done a finer job than he has done.'
Beggs, who proclaimed his innocence and refused to resign, is accused with three others of plotting to conceal losses of dollars 7.5 million while he was an executive with General Dynamics before 1981, during contract work on the infamous Sgt York anti-aircraft gun. Despite 10 years' development costing dollars 1.8 billion, the gun remained incapable of hitting a helicopter, although in a notable test it homed in on a fan in a portable lavatory.
At Begg's arraignment General Dynamics pleaded for an early trial (in April) because the Pentagon has suspended most contracts with the company until the matter is resolved. 'This company could be literally .. put out of business,' said GD's lawyer.
Beggs took over Nasa in 1981, three months after the space shuttle's first flight, when the programme was two years behind schedule and more than dollars 1 billion over cost. He is credited with restoring its trim, and with gearing up to make 1986 Nasa's busiest year ever.
He has been 'temporarily' replaced by his new deputy, William Graham - appointed against his advice by Reagan only days before Beggs hurriedly requested 'leave of absence.' Beggs and senior Nasa staff claimed that Graham was unqualified. Another fear was that Graham's extensive background in defence could affect Nasa's civilian character.
But the Pentagon has a close interest in the shuttle, with military flights planned later this year from the top secret new spaceport at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. Graham spent six years as chairman of the President's advisory committee on arms control and disarmament, and has researched the survivability of strategic systems.
Beggs attempted to bypass Graham's succession by putting a veteran Nasa official, Philip Cuthbertson, in charge of day-to-day operations. Cuthbertson, aged 60, has been planning the construction of an dollars 8 billion permanent space station as early as 1992. It would be surprising if the explosion does not send tremors through this power structure.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
21 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 30, 1986
America mourns its space heroes / US space shuttle Challenger explosion
BYLINE: From ALEX BRUMMER
LENGTH: 970 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
The United States yesterday went into official mourning for the loss of the space shuttle Challenger and its crew of seven as the grim search for debris stretched over a 7,200 square-mile area of the Atlantic.
Early speculation on the cause of the accident is focusing on the craft's large external fuel tank carrying some 385,000 gallons of liquid hydrogen and 140,000 gallons of oxygen at takeoff.
But at a news conference from Cape Canaveral last night Nasa officials refused to give credence to any particular theories and put the stress on the search for debris and the gathering of data from the sophisticated computer tape and telemetry which controlled Challenger's fate.
One danger area which is being openly discussed here was the so-called 'intertank' which separated the liquid oxygen tank from the liquid hydrogen tank. A rupture or leak in the pipes of the intertank could have mixed the two fuels, making them highly volatile and turning Challenger into an enormous bomb. It is possible that the sub-zero temperatures at Cape Canaveral before the launch could have played a part.
It emerged last night that Rockwell International, one of the main shuttle contractors, had raised questions in the hours before the launch about the effect of the low temperatures on safety. Nasa said yesterday that its technicians and outside contractors, had discussed this point but decided, on examining the data, that everything was fine. The possibility of a sharp object such as a blade, bolt or other fragment puncturing the external fuel tanks has also been discussed.
Two solid rockets were deliberately destroyed after separating from the fireball left by the Challenger explosion. An air force officer transmitted a radio signal to explosive packages aboard the boosters. A Nasa official said: 'There was an indication that one of the solids was heading for a populated area and he took the correct action.' The signal to destroy the solid booster rockets came 30 seconds after the Challenger explosion.
The discussion of the causes of the Challenger catastrophe was conducted in the same sober terms as the national remembrance of what had been lost in terms of lives, material and the future of the shuttle programme. President Reagan ordered all flags to be flown at half-mast on government buildings and military outposts around the world as the Nasa board of inquiry and preparations for extensive Senate and House investigatory hearings began.
At a morning church service in Concord, New Hampshire, the home town of the teacher-astronaut Christa McAuliffe, 300 scholchildren described their feelings. The sombre mood was seen as reminiscent of America in the days after the assassinations of John F Kennedy and Martin Luther King in the 1960s.
President and Mrs Reagan will lead the memorial service for the seven lost American heroes when they travel to Houston, home of Mission Control, tomorrow. The dead astronauts were a profile of Americans in the mid-1980s: the commander, Francis Scobee, and the pilot, Michael Smith, were Vietnam veterans: Judith Resnik was the single professional woman working as mission specialist: Ellison Onizuka a Japanese-American and mission specialist: Ronald McNair, a black and mission specialist: Gregory Jarvis, of Hughes Aircraft, the aerospace scientist, and Christa McAuliffe, the instant darling of the country's children.
At a Cape Canaveral press conference yesterday the acting Nasa administrator, Mr William Graham, made it plain that space flight had to go on. 'While we grieve for our lost colleagues and families left behind, the Nasa team is dedicated to understanding very thoroughly what happened yesterday; we're dedicated to pressing on.'
But Mr Graham all but acknowledged that it could be months, if not years, before the shuttle programme - which was to have carried out 14 missions this year - will be back at work.
Even after the evidence has been assembled from the huge sea and air search yesterday, it could be a long time before the volumes of impounded material can be analysed and the causes of Challenger's end determined. There could be no flights of the shuttle until this task was completed and until the necessary modifications had been made to the three other shuttles in the fleet.
If the Apollo I disaster experience of 17 years ago provides a model, large-scale modifications will be required and even a total redesign of the shuttle could become necessary.
Eight Coast Guard and navy ships were involved in yesterday's search of the Atlantic, recovering debris up to 10 feet long from Challenger. 'We will search until darkness and then will evaluate what's been done,' said Commander Jim Simpson of the US Coast Guard. The search area has been extended into the ocean for about 60 miles, an indication of the full impact of the detonation for Challenger.
The debris collected is being impounded at Patrick air force base and will only be available to the board of inquiry. Some 10 US aircraft were involved in the hunt for evidence. But the real clues should be in the extensive computer and telemetry monitoring system maintained by Nasa.
However, there were some indications yesterday that this may not provide the clear statement of what happened which had been hoped for. According to Nasa sources quoted here, ' on first glance there was no anomalous data at all,' from the on-board IBM computers. In this area of investigation, attention is being focused on a strip of magnetised tape with thousands of instrument readings sent from the shuttle which, like an air craft's black box, ought to contain the answers.
Nevertheless, the absence of early warnings from the shuttle's processors and the complex web of sensors attached to them is a cause of some worry.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
22 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 29, 1986
The Markets: Sharp recovery in sterling as City shows new buoyancy / Various market reports
LENGTH: 757 words
Stock markets celebrated the Prime Minister's strong performance in the emergency Westland debate, which itself (together with firmer oil prices), prompted a sharp recovery in Sterling, by closing at an all-time high as measured by the FT Index of 'top thirty' shares.
Gilts set the trend at the opening by Climbing a full-point, helping the Government Broker to exhaust the new partly paid Treasury 10 per cent 'tap' at pounds 35 5/8. Although best levels were not held, gains to three-quarters were still to be found among the high-coupon longs.
Equities soon followed suit with stores, properties, buildings and foods all showing gains well into double-figures. Engineers were in demand again, the rather cautious CBI survey hinting at a slowdown in growth making little impression. Dealers were Cheered by the pounds 125 million trade surplus for December, but investment interest tended to fade during the lunch-time lull. However, 30 minutes before the official close US buyers came in for leading internationals to bring most sectors to a strong finish.
Beecham rallied well to end 15p higher at 370p on talk of a bid from Revlon. P & O reflected a buoyant property sector, up 18p to 458p, with European Ferries 8p higher at 151p in sympathy. Stores had WH Smith A at 260p, up 18p, ahead of interim figures today. Dealers are looking for pre-tax profits of around pounds 19.5 million against pounds 16.8 million.
Jaguar were in demand again as investors talked of big orders at the US motor show and lower petrol prices, which will also help sales. The shares closed at a new high of 383p, up 17p.
In engineers long-term takeover favourite Birmid Qualcast did well at 97p, up 5 1/2p. Dealers were looking for good figures in a few weeks time, which may put the shares on a higher rating. There was also a rumour that a large stake had Changed hands. Last week the company sold a loss-making subsidiary.
Banks shrugged off initial caution caused by a gloomy press article. All insurance sectors made useful headway with rises to 15p. New merger developments helped some breweries. An optimistic statement from Racal strengthened electricals. Gold shares receded but falls were rarely above 50 cents.
Among leaders Thorn EMI jumped 15p at 392p, while Racal 10p higher at 180p gleaned encouragement from the statement about future prospects. Glaxo reflected US demand 32p higher at B62p, with ICI good for this reason 5p improved at 799p. Other smart rises were seen for Vickers 10p up at 328p, BOC 8p improved at 290p, and Tate & Lyle 10p better at 540p.
Against the trend Distillers reflected Monopoly worries falling 7p to 563p. Lucas too, ran into profit-taking easing 12p to 496p. There were several good gains for builders. Tarmac led the way 16p up at 372p, on Channel Tunnel prospects. Turner & Newall continued to draw strength from the recent reduction of asbestos claims 8p higher at 140p. Blue Circle added Sp at 546p, and Marley rose 4p at 106p or Payless sale hopes. The Canadian acquisition boosted Burgess 20p to 160p.
Recovery prospects for computers directed investors to this sector. Amstrad climbed another 14p to 232p, while Acorn in a thin market added 9p at 105p. The good figures and rights issue proposals gave a 13p fillip to Cray Electronics at 293p.
Main changes were: Beecham 370p up 15p; P&O 458p up 18p; Racal 180p up 10p; Birmid 97p up 5 1/2p; Jaguar 383p up 17p; WH Smith 'A' 260p up 18p; Euro Ferries 151p up 8p; Lucas 496p down 12p.
FRANKFURT - Equity prices tumbled sharply lower active trading and brokers said the market may be entering phase of volatile price swings. The Commerzbank Index slit 71.4 points to 1997.2.
PARIS - Share prices finished mixed in active trading in - the absence of any market-affecting news. The market indicator was practically unchanged at the closing bell and declines outnumbered advances by 92 to 78.
HONG KONG - Most share prices rose on as utility shares resumed their uptrend and recent worries about a local bank subsided. Hang Seng Index: 1754.38 (1744.11).
TOKYO - Share prices continued to move higher on growing volume. Nikkei Index: 12,993.69 (12,983.14).
Porter Chadburn is paying up to pounds 3.4 million for a distributor of German textile finishing equipment. The initial purchase cost will be covered by a rights issue of pounds 2 million of 8 per cent Convertible cumulative preference shares. GM Firth, which owns 65 per cent of Porter will be subscribing for over half of its entitlement.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
23 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 29, 1986
BAe seeks aid for Airbus programme
BYLINE: By MICHAEL SMITH, Industrial Editor
LENGTH: 243 words
British Aerospace is expected to seek up to pounds 350 million in government aid to help it participate in the launch of two European-built Airbus jets.
BAe, which is currently at the centre of the battle for European control of Westland helicopters, is a 20 per cent shareholder in the four-nation Airbus Industrie consortium.
Airbus, which makes the A300, A310 and A320 jets, wants to spend dollars 2.5 billion (pounds 1.85 billion) to develop two new passenger jets to challenge the dominance of the American planemaker, Boeing.
Airbus is planning to make a four-engined 260-seater jet, the A340, for long distance flights that will compete directly against Boeing's hugely successful 747 jumbo jet. The planned new A330 is a twin-engined wide-bodied jet designed to carry 310 passengers.
A final decision to launch both will be taken before the year end, and Airbus says the new aircraft are expected to fly in the early 1990s. The A330 and A340 jets will help complete the Airbus' family' of aircraft and intensify its challenge to the US aerospace giants, Boeing and McDonnel Douglas.
Airbus, launched in the 1970s, has struck hard at the traditional American domination of the world's aircraft building industry. The French German, Spanish and British consortium has sold over 470 aircraft. But the programme has required government support running into billions and sparked off furious threats of American retaliation.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
24 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 29, 1986
Opec plans won't work, says BP chief / Cartel's attempts to force oil production cut
BYLINE: By JOHN HOOPER, Energy Correspondent
LENGTH: 256 words
The chairman of BP, Sir Peter Walters, said yesterday that he did not believe Opec would succeed in its efforts to force non-Opec producers to agree to cut back their output. But, unless oil producers' revenues were to go on falling, cutbacks would have to be made somehow. 'My analysis is that this can and will only be done by Opec,' said Sir Peter.
Speaking to journalists in London, Sir Peter put forward two reasons why Opec's plans would not work. The first was that a scheme for concerted output reduction could not succeed unless the two biggest producers, the United States and the Soviet Union, took part in it, and 'I do not see the US or USSR collaborating,' he said. The second was that there was no international mechanism available through which such a pact could be negotiated and not enough time in which to set one up.
Sir Peter said it would not surprise him if Opec changed tack in the course of its forthcoming meetings and there was a 'stabilising of the current price and a very necessary increase in the spring.'
The government yesterday gave the go-ahead for the development of two small North Sea oil fields operated by the American company, Amerada Hess. The Ivanhoe and Rob Roy fields, which are close together in the northern North Sea, have combined recoverable reserves estimated at 88 million barrels and a life of about 10 years each. The first oil is expected to be produced in summer 1988 with peak production from the two reservoirs expected to reach about 50,000 barrels a day.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
25 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 29, 1986
Financial Notebook: New wheezes / Mexico and the US Baker debt plan
BYLINE: By HAMISH MCRAE
LENGTH: 434 words
Mexico is about to ask for financial support in 1986 equal to about half of the total available in the first year of the celebrated Baker plan for bailing out the big debtors. Yet the plan, put forward at the IMF annual meeting by US Treasury secretary Mr James Baker, is supposed to help 15 major debtors, not just a handful. You do not need much more evidence than this to back the comment by Mexico's finance minister Mr Jesus Silva-Herzog at a conference in London that the plan is 'insufficient', especially as the actual cash has been slow to materialise since the announcement last September.
Mexico is shortly to start formal talks in New York with its bankers and is expected to ask for a total financial package of dollars 6.5 billion to dollars 7 billion from governments, international agencies and the commercial banks, rather than the dollars 4 billion it wanted before the latest oil price collapse. Chief bank negotiator Mr Bill Rhodes of Citibank said yesterday (at the same conference) that Mexico's plans 'are highly dependent on oil and we are concerned obviously over the effects of the recent sharp drop in prices.' He still has not been told exactly how much the Mexicans need, mainly because the numbers are still being crunched.
Mr Rhodes, like almost everybody at the London conference on Latin America, wants lower inflation and interest rates and sustained real growth to back the Baker plan. He wants governments to do more to reschedule debts over longer periods through their 'Paris Club,' which has so far managed only one multi-year restructuring.
Commercial banks are also thinking up new wheezes to encourage lending, including mutual funds (like unit trusts) which Mr Rhodes said could be used to encourage the return of capital that has fled from Mexico and other countries.
But the unanimous view from the debtors seems to be that the three-year dollars 40 billion Baker plan is simply too small in scale and needs far greater direct involvement by governments if it is to succeed in the face of current levels of dollar interest rates and world economic growth. There is also a lot of scepticism about whether banks will lend nearly as much as Mexico requires, given the uncertainty posed by oil prices.
Mr Silva-Herzog made conciliatory noises about how Mexico would press ahead with its current economic and financial plans. But it is not just other Latin American countries which are wondering whether the appalling new financial pressures will force Mexico to impose a new moratorium on debt repayments. Banks are deeply worried too.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
26 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 29, 1986
The man who fell to earth with a bump / Obituary of L Ron Hubbard, the founder of Scientology
BYLINE: By CHRISTOPHER REED
LENGTH: 817 words
In 1949 a moderately successful pulp science fiction writer called L Ron Hubbard, gave a lecture in which he said: 'Writing for a penny a word is ridiculous. If a man really wants to make a million, the best way would be to start a religion.'
A year later he was well on his may. Now, more than three decades and several hundred million dollars later, the founder of Scientology has died, aged 74. His last years were as bizarre as his own cult, But despite prolonged investigation in several countries into alleged criminal activities by Mr Hubbard and his followers, the 'Commodore', as he was known, remained beyond the law to the end.
He is now presumably on his return visit to heaven - he claimed to have been there before - but what he leaves behind is closer to the title of his last book: Battlefield Earth. The 'Church' is beset by legal battles, accused of fraud, by the FBI and US tax authorities, riven by jealousies, and split by defectors. More court cases can be expected. Tax authorities will be pursuing what they believe can be millions of dollars taken from the much and put into Mr Hubbard's private accounts abroad.
Although a Scientology spokesman said its leader had died from a stroke on Friday, on a farm in California, that the body had been cremated and the ashes scattered at sea, the public still only has the church's word for it. Mr Hubbard a st appeared in public in 1976 and disappeared completely in 1980. He was said to be writing and pondering spiritual matters in seclusion.
In 1983 during a case brought by his estranged son, a court accepted that Mr Hubbard was alive, although he refused the judge's challenge to appear personality and did not even speak on the telephone. His publishers accepted that he was still alive when they received a million word manuscript - rather more than most ghost writers are prepared for.
Lafayette Ronald Hubbard. was born in a small town in the Nabraskan plains. After his hack writing in the 1940s he achieved fame in 1950 with the publication of 'Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health. 'It was the 'bible' of Scientology, a 'religion' with no God which somehow became established under America's indulgent laws granting tax exemption to churches.
The book explained that man's path to religious freedom had been obstructed by negative thoughts accumulated over millions of years through a process of 'auditing' with a machine called an E-meter - much like a modern lie detector - disciples could achieve a 'clear state'.
Using this technique millions of followers over the years subjected themselves to hours of 'auditing' in which they often divulged intimate secrets as well as parting with thousands of dollars each. It has been claimed in court that these confessions were used to prise more money out of the disciples.
It was another kind of auditing which challenged the cult in the 1970s. Tax officials suspected that Scientology was not entitled to exemption and a protracted battle began. Mr Hubbard had been floating around the world in his seagoing HQ, the converted English Channel steamer. Apollo. But allegations of cult brain washing and suspicions of monetary fraud caused authorities in Britain, W Germany and elsewhere to bar him.
In 1979, his third wife Mary Sue was convicted with ten disciples of breaking into government offices and stealing documents in an attempt to thwart the investigations. The next year US tax officials claimed dollars 1.4 million in unpaid income tax. Mr Hubbard came ashore and disappeared.
Documents confiscated by the authorities showed that the cult's anti-government campaign, called 'Snow White,' had been directed from Scientology's British 'HQ in East Grinstead. Mr Hubbard believed that the UK was a central part of a mysterious agency, intent on destroying his church, and that two British-based mental health organisations were involved.
It is significant that the theme of mental health occurred so often in Mr Hubbard's career. According to court documents he himself worried about his own mental health, before he wrote his best seller. In his first divorce his ex-wife said she believed he suffered from paranoid - schizophrenia.
What has become clear is his own fraudulence about his personal history. He claimed to have been a war hero in the US Navy. The records show that he was removed as commander of his escort vessel when he fired on what he claimed was a Japanese submarine off the coast of Oregon. It turned out to be a log. He then sailed south and opened fire on Mexico.
One epitaph for him was written in 1984 in a California court by Judge Paul Breckenridge. 'The evidence,' he said, 'portrays a man who has been virtually a pathological liar when it comes to his history, background and achievements .. he was gripped by egoism, greed, avarice, lust for power, and vindictiveness.'
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
27 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 29, 1986
Bridging the class divide / Nationalism and the Philippines presidential election
BYLINE: By MICHAEL WHITE
LENGTH: 1321 words
The rule of thumb seems to be: the more wretched the slum the more frenzied is its profusion of red, white and blue posters urging the re-election of President Marcos. Yellow, the colour of Mrs Cory Aquino's opposition forces, is much easier to spot in the prosperous suburbs and university campuses of the reformist middle class.
But appearances may be deceptive. In the slums north of Manila's Pasag River, visitors are always shown the facade of shop fronts which the Marcos regime erected. in the manner of a Hollywood film set, slap in front of a ghetto it wished to hide from the eyes of the Pope.
In 1986 the cracks in the red white and blue facade are there to be spotted down the maze of narrow alleys. This is a city whose slums are often hidden behind white walls. But they make themselves shown on polling day. Even in the dubious parliamentary election of 1984 the opposition easily carried Manila.
This time the Marcos family and the local precinct bosses - the barangay captains - of its KBL political machine are doing their best to reverse that verdict. Election fraud is harder in the cities, but the barangay captains have their resources of intimidation and patronage - 'takop' and 'hakop' in the Tagalog language of the region. A 50 pesos note to attend a rally, worth pounds 2 where average daily pay for those with work is 40 pesos. Free transport, free food, perhaps a Marcos T-shirt for those who co-operate, trouble for those who don't. The poor are vulnerable and the barangay captain, whom everyone believes is getting 1,500 pesos sweetners throughout the campaign, has the incentive of a little 'takop' of his own. Their jobs are on the line, the captains were told at a recent pop talk.
Yet in the alleys teeming with children, animals and washing, the improvised shacks of wood and corrugated iron betray small signs of defiance which link the slum dwellers in greater measure of courage to the affluent suburbs. The signs are yellow, sometimes mixed with green, posters proclaiming support for 'cory' o 'sobra na - tamana': enough is enough.
'Not made in one factory, like Marcos's' explains a scornful Sister Christine Tan, 'but home-made, the produce of poverty, sacrifice and creativity.' It is a new 'selflessness and sacrifice' among her fellow-countrymen, a willingness to walk to Aquino rallies and take their own food, which gives her hope. If not for February 7 (she fears the worst) then later, though what 'The Devil' in the Malacanang Palace has done in 20 years will take decades to reverse.
Sister Christine, whose Order of the Good Shepherds also has an outpost in Finchley, is a famous figure in Leveriza. A tightly-packed district of 25,000 people in 15 barangays it lies must behind the sea-front hotels whose workers come in from elsewhere-leaving Leveriza to live on its wits, family networks and what it can extract from the regime. People like Sister Christine tell the poor it is their money anyway.
She has been here for years, sharing a tiny well-scrubbed shack with three colleagues and a small courtyard with six families. For her, speaking with slow deliberate anger, the prime villain is not 68-year-old Mr Marcos, but the United States which sustained his martial law dictatorship. 'The US created a Frankenstein in Marcos. Now that Frankenstein is uncontrollable, even by the US,' she says.
It follows that Sister Christine is less worried by the Communist NPA insurgency in the mountains and by the party's reported infiltration of the church (much exaggerated, she insists) than by the American presence, syrnbolised in its former colony by its military bases: 'Let us alone for a while. Let us make our own mistakes.'
Elsewhere in Manila the radical Left, the Bayan movement and the Militant trade unionists of the KMU (the official TUC is split), are struggling against the tide to sustain a boycott of February 7's 'sham poll' with marches, rallies at the US Embassy and next week a 'people's strike.' But even among Bayan's leaders the temptation is clearly there to participate, if only to transform the moderate opposition's anti-autocratic and anti-fascist strivings into genuine struggles and foreign and feudal rule.'
In the meantime this election has become a bid, possibly the last chance before a fateful polarisation takes place, to restore a version of the comparatively respectable pre-Marcos politics by the old political elite, its own discontent with the 'crony-capitalism' of the Marcos clan harnessed to the wider discontents produced by the dramatic decline of the Philippine economy into 'the sick man of Asia.' A 3.5 per cent decline in 1985 alone.
In Leveriza that tactical alliance of rich and poor in support of ' Cory'- widow of the murdered opposition leader - is symbolised in Mrs Marie-Teresa Lopa, wife of a businessman. Actively involved in a philanthropic group she buys sacks of sugar wholesale and brings them to Sister Christine's network. Seated in the luxurious eight-by-ten front room of a Leveriza mother whose husband sends her dollars 150 a month from Saudi-Arabia she chats happily about politics in Tagalog and English (English, not Spanish, is the lingua franca here) with women who make 40 or 50 pesos a day selling food - or 40 pesos a week sewing.
They are, they say, all for Cory. But Mrs Lopa's world, barely a mile away, is a very different one from theirs. The Lopa family compound, with its high wall and armed guard, contains six houses and a communal pool larger than Sister Christine's courtyard. Typical of the Filipino Mestizo elite the Lopa family mingles the blood of Chinese merchants with that of errant Spanish friars. And, since everyone is related to someone in the elite, Cory Aquino is a sister-in-law.
Like many of their class the Lopas now acknowledge guilt about the elite's acquiescence in the Marcos martial law of 1972. Now they desperately want reform and hope it will be moderate and gradual. Mrs Lopa is proud that her husband, Manuel, an MIT graduate, overrode his managers and encouraged his workers to join a real union. 'We know we will have to move towards social democracy, but let us do it in stages,' she explains.
Earlier Sister Christine had sharply noted that the murder in 1983 of Senator Benigno Aquino with the eyes of the world upon his return from exile had been a catalyst only for the rich. The poor were already mobilising against the dictatorship - subject to the pressures of Hakot and Takop. Manuel Lopa effectively confirms this, recalling that the flight of foreign capital which the killing precipitated was a factor as much as the feeling that no one was now safe.
In 1984 bourgeois families like the Lopas with children in college split over the boycott tactic. Not this time. Across the compound wives, children, even the 82-year-old matriarch, are busy improvising opposition posters using old newspapers and silkscreening the candidate's homely facing on donated, second-hand T-shirts (preferably yellow). Both devices are intended to underline which candidate has the key to the central bank.
There is a touch of high comedy to the scene. But this is deeply-serious. Even in affluent compounds there is an understanding that liberty, property and life are at stake in this election. Some businessmen believe that the inexperienced Mrs Aquino is too great a risk, Mr Marcos indispensable to saving the economy and beating the guerrillas. Others, like the Lopas, feel exactly the opposite.
For Washington which havers between the two impulses, there is a further link which unites Leveriza with the compound at Pasay, with Catholic intellectuals and leftwing trade unionists. Sister Christine calls it 'a new kind of nationalism' in which the great US bases at Subic Bay and Clark Field will have no place. It remains a minority sentiment, as its adherents acknowledge. But it is growing.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
28 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 29, 1986
Leading Article: Don't forget the basic issue / The Westland helicopters affair
LENGTH: 598 words
Mr Heseltine has resigned. Mr Brittan has resigned. The Prime Minister has seemingly avoided a similar fate by the breadth of a chopper blade. But the issue which triggered a collapse of confidence in the Government - who should save an insolvent Yeovil helicopter company? - lies stranded in swaddled bathos, as unresolved as ever. It will, as Mrs Thatcher has reminded us umpteem times, eventually be decided by market forces. But market forces or brute forces? What started off as a simple decision for shareholders has degenerated into a fractious game of Monopoly with the dominant players stitching up private deals to shut the others out. Mr Brittan, a protagonist of market forces (as long as he was one of them) has gone, leaving the European consortium and supporters of the United Technologies offer to slug it out.
Round one went to the Euro consortium when Westland failed by an unexpectedly high margin to win the required 75 per cent of the votes necessary to secure the American rescue. Westland responded by getting the rules changed so that at the next meeting the company will need only a simple majority for the Sikorsky link to be approved. Westland remains resolutely against forging links with the European consortium.
Both sides have been paying far over the current stock exchange or 'market' price to snap up Westland shares in advance of the next vote. United Technologies has itself bought the maximum permitted 10 per cent of Westland shares and has fixed up a mysterious deal to buy an extra 4 per cent after the shareholders' meeting at an estimated price of 150p. This compares with an official market price of 103p and indicates the extent to which a two tier market has developed. One for the big guns and one for Mrs Thatcher's hapless small shareholders who were supposed to be deciding this issue but whose voice (and potential profits) have been shut out by the orchestrated block votes of the big battalions with motives other than value for money at stake.
There is still an issue, a real issue, beneath the scrummage. It is whether Britain should allow her only sizeable manufacturer of helicopters to become an associate of Sikorsky or whether it at least tries to link up with other European companies. We have strongly supported Mr Heseltine's belated attempt to create a European consortium: not out of anti-American sentiment but because it is in Europe's - and ultimately America's - long term interest to create a European capability in advanced technology to provide an effective third force to Japan and the US. The basis of partnership. An eleventh hour cobbling together of helicopter companies around the Continent may not be the ideal place to begin.
But a start must be made somewhere to prevent the ludicrous duplication of research and development across 12 countries. What is needed is the creation of new pan European companies aided by pan European fiscal subsidies, right across the range of high technology products, to propel Europe, and Britain, back into the race which otherwise will have only two runners. Unless Europe gets its act together (as it has done with the successful airbus), it can never hope to compete with the advantages which concentrated r and d and public procurement policies bestow on the US and Japan. If nothing else, Mr Heseltine's intervention has proved that the will to collaborate is there. It just needs someone to take the initiative. It is this which will make the fate of Westland a symbolic event long after the resignations of ministers have faded from memory.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
29 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 29, 1986
Questions begin on civilians / The explosion of US space shuttle Challenger
BYLINE: From ALEX BRUMMER
LENGTH: 363 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
The death of schoolteacher Sharon Christa McAuliffe aboard the space shuttle Challenger led to immediate questions last night as to whether Nasa should have been allowed to send civilians into space on a programme which is still basically experimental.
The idea that a schoolteacher should be sent into space had originally come from President Reagan, but had been leapt upon by Nasa officials as an opportunity to dramatise the work of the space shuttle. Nasa, like other US government agencies, is in constant dispute with Congress about the amount of funding for its work.
By putting civilians into space the space agency clearly hoped to build support in the country at large and on Capitol Hill for space travel. Mrs McAuliffe was the first woman civilian to go into space and the first person without any direct connection to Nasa's work. It had been planned that her mission would be followed later this year by a journey into space for a member of the news media.
When the competition for journalists was announced, hundreds of reporters from around the country filled applications in the hope of being the first person to ply a writer's or broadcaster's skills in the heavens.
Among those entering the competition were such veterans of the news business as the former CBS newscaster, Mr Walter Cronkite, and ABC's cantankerous White House correspondent, Mr Sam Donaldson - the sort of person who might have been thought of as immune to such blandishments is a scoop from space.
These civilians had been preceded by representatives from Capitol Hill. The first Senator in space was Jake Garn, a Republican from Utah, who was particularly suited to the mission from his former role as a test pilot.
Last night, at a Capitol Hill news conference, Senator Garn was visibly shaken and on the verge of tears as he discussed the disaster at the Cape.
But despite the explosion he said the space programme should go on. 'I would go again tomorrow.'
Another Senator with space experience, before he arrived in the capital, Senator John Glenn, who was the first American to orbit the earth, said he was 'surprised and shocked and saddened.'
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
30 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 29, 1986
New missions delayed / Aftermath of the US Challenger space shuttle explosion
BYLINE: From CHRISTOPHER REED
LENGTH: 167 words
DATELINE: SAN FRANCISCO
The Challenger disaster jeopardises what was to have been the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration's busiest year.
Four civilian space missions may now not take place, as well as secret ones planned by the military. 'We cannot make a launch until we understand exactly what happened to Challenger,' a Nasa spokesman said, 'and that could take months.'
The next civilian launch was to have been in a few weeks' time when three US astronomers mere due to fly in the Shuttle to observe Halley Comet. That will have to be cancelled. the scientists believe.
In May the European Space Agency was to have launched a satellite as the last part of the joint US-European plan to study the sun's polar regions.
Later in May the shuttle was to have been employed in the launch of the Galileo spacecraft's journey to Jupiter.
In the summer space launches from Cape Canaveral were to be transferred to Vandenberg airforce station in California, partly for military reasons.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
31 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 29, 1986
Space safety tested by new demands / Explosion of US space shuttle Challenger
BYLINE: By ANTHONY TUCKER, Science Correspondent
LENGTH: 415 words
The US Defence Department has imposed new demands on the shuttle programme for higher performance and a more rapid turnaround which may have narrowed the margin for safety. The programme has also been short of funds from the start.
The project has been under engineering pressures far tougher than anything experienced by its predecessor, the well-heeled Apollo moon shot programme. Severe inspection problems are created when - as the military has demanded - a craft has to go back into orbit within a few weeks.
Even though more highly concentrated than Apollo's, the present manned flight programme is part of a smaller overall space effort. Within this, the shelf life and expected working life of many components has steadily increased, while shuttle teams have been disbanded.
During the past two years, the shuttle programme - already ailing, despite its success in international collaboration - has come under increasing pressure from the US military. It was planned to become the main military launch and retrieval system for the US throughout the 1990s and beyond.
The problems of swift turnaround become more serious when modifications have to be made to meet changes in military and civil uses.
The team of shuttles is already smaller than Nasa wanted. Under current plans, however, there are to be a further 16 shuttle launches this year because Nasa has to demonstrate that it can operate with no more than a fortnight between flights. This was and is, one of the military's minimum specifications.
A large re-useable space vehicle, does not seem all that different from a re-usable aircraft. But, in engineering, the margins during launch and reentry are very much smaller. They are reduced further when systems are stretched to increase payload or performance, as has been the case with the shuttle; the systems are more complex and more vulnerable than those of aircraft, as they have to cope with such problems as extreme thermal stress because of the space environment and the fuels used.
Eighteen months ago, the Defence Department, in what was seen as a vote of no confidence in Nasa's ability to keep the shuttle up to scratch, began to commission studies for traditional space launches for its special payloads. Engineers said then that it was almost inevitable that the shuttle would run into disaster.
Since the shuttle's future depends very largely on continued support from the Defence Department, Nasa's outlook seems bleak.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
32 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 29, 1986
US warship challenges Gadafy in disputed gulf / US Navy manoeuvres off the coast of Libya
BYLINE: By ALEX BRUMMER
LENGTH: 632 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
The US was said yesterday to be ready to step up the war of nerves with the Libyan leader Colonel Muammar Gadafy, by ordering the cruiser Yorktown to break away from the American carrier task force in the central Mediterranean and enter the Gulf of Sidra, which is claimed by Libya.
Colonel Gadafy's claim that the gulf and its airspace are Libyan territory is challenged by the US. If the warship moves into the Gulf fo Sidra, it will go beyond what Colonel Gadafy calls the 'line of death.'
The latest manoeuvres in the Mediterranean came as the Deputy Secretary of State, Mr Jorn Whitehead, said that the Administration would consider military action against Libya if US sanctions fail to produce the desired response. President Reagan 'reserved the right' to use force, he said.
Since a 21-ship US task force began operations off the Libyan coast last week, US fighters have scrambled from the decks of the carriers Coral Sea and Saratoga, reportedly to intercept Libyan MiGs and chase them off, at least 14 times. As far as is known the American planes did not open fire, and the Libyan planes pulled away when approached and headed back towards the coast.
The US describes the manoeuvres as a demonstration of its resolve to continue operations in international airspace - and has shrugged off threats of retaliation by Colonel Gadafy. The Libyan leader boarded a patrol boat in the Gulf of Sidra on Sunday and threatened to challenge the US armada. The US fighter-bombers and fighters have been flying in an area 170 miles wide north of the Gulf of Sidra. US officials say that the US fighters have come 'within eyeball' range of the Soviet-built Libyan fighters.
Colonel Gadafy, apparently seeking a strong Algerian declaration of support for his confrontation with the US, yesterday met President Chadli Benjedid of Algeria deep in the Sahara.
But diplomats said that Colonel Chadli was unlikely to go out on a limb for his unpredictable neighbour. The summit, 30 miles from the Libyan border, was their first since August, 1984, when Libya angered Algeria by joining Morocco in a federation. Relations have been cool - often hostile - ever since.
Algeria agreed to the meeting six weeks ago, but Colonel Chadli's enthusiasm for it has cooled since the Rome and Vienna airport bombings and he seems reluctant to be too closely identified with Libya.
Derek Brown adds from Brussels: In the wake of a calculated EEC snub to Washington over the US ban on trade with Libya, a delegation of Belgian businessmen will fly to Tripoli tomorrow hoping to open new business links with the Gadafy regime.
The 15-member delegation, including bankers and representatives of engineering and chemical firms, is aiming to pick up contracts which US firms have been forced to abandon.
The Belgian Government has distanced itself from the enterprise, saying that it is an entirely private sector affair. Government officials due to travel with the trade mission have been pulled out.
Mr Whitehead, has voiced disappointment about the trip. His mission to Europe last week failed to convince EEC countries that a trade boycott would be an effective way to break Libya's alleged links with terrorism.
On Monday night, EEC for eign ministers struggled to find a consensus on the issue. They settled for a generally worded declaration condemning terrorism, and resolving to ban arms sales to countries which supported violence.
But the declaration conspicuously failed to mention Libya by name. All references to it were removed on the insistence of the Community's Mediterreanean countries - Greece, Italy, Spain, and France.
The statement also pledged the EEC to dissuade people and companies from seeking any commercial advantage from boycotts.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
33 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 28, 1986
Open Space: Birth control / Obstetrician Wendy Savage and the womens' birth rights controversy
BYLINE: From DANAE BROOK
LENGTH: 1513 words
85 per cent of Tower Hamlets GPs have called for Ms Savage's reinstatement
The national perinatal rate is 10.4 in 1,000 births. Ms Savage's mortality rate is lower than many of her colleagues
Ms Savage believes that births by Caesarean section have quadrupled in the past 20 years. Who does this benefit? she asks.
The public inquiry into the handling by the obstetrician, Wendy Savage, of five maternity cases in which malpractice is alleged starts on Monday. Wendy Savage was suspended in June by the Tower Hamlets health authority, whose counsel quoted 'expert' assertions of consistent aberration of clinical judgment and gross mismanagement.
The case has stirred up feelings which already run high in the subject of birth rights, polarising opinion between those for and those against natural birth, focusing the split within the medical profession itself.
Wendy Savage stands for women's right to choose the obstetric care they want. She runs a community health service in Tower Hamlets promoting natural birth, home birth, GP units and midwife assisted deliveries. She is the only female consultant at the London Hospital and one of the 12 per cent of women obstetricians countrywide.
The cases of alleged malpractice for which she has been suspended from work for three months now, hinge around 'different' births. Four were breeches, three late Caesarean sections.
The first to highlight the dissatisfaction with Ms Savage was that of a Muslim couple who complained to the community health council when their baby died eight days after delivery. Their religion forbade an autopsy or inquest. The exact cause of death has not been ascertained. One other child died. In all the other cases the babies are well. The cases go back over two years.
'Sadly, all obstetricians have babies that die,' says Ms Savage. The perinatal mortality rate in this country is 10.4 in 1,000 births. Ironically, her own mortality rate at the London is said to be the lowest amongst her colleagues.
Now the row has reached warlike proportions. At her suspension, 85 per cent of the Tower Hamlets GPs signed a petition calling for her reinstatement. The women of the district were so furious they marched with prams and toddlers in protest. And there is a Wendy Savage Support Campaign whose members wear badges proclaiming their loyalty. Patients, midwives and nurses gathered for protest at a DHA meeting, supposedly open to the public, held at the London. When it came to the issue of Wendy Savage the matter was described as 'confidential' and the doors closed.
'When the DHA sent the cases out for independent medical opinion, all the opinions differed,' says Beverly Beech, chairwoman of the Wendy Savage Support Campaign.
After six weeks of deadlock, the DHA finally went back to Wendy Savage, proposing that she be reinstated but only if she would go away quietly and as far as possible for at least six months. Glasgow and Oxford were suggested as alternatives to her normal London practice. Her home is in the East End and although most of her children are now away, one still lives with her and is at the crucial O level stage.
'Their terms were totally unacceptable,' says Ms Savage. 'They say they have suspended me because of allegations of incompetence, and that my practice was 'unsafe'.'
The allegation that she endangers life by allowing women too great a say over their own birth process is extremely damaging in every way to an obstetrician, and particularly jeopardises the position of women obstetricians, since seven out of eight consultants in this country are men.
Ms Savage has a policy of performing late Caesarean section because she believes the current rate in this country is too high. She maintains it has 'quadrupled in the last 20 years' until it now runs at between 12 per cent and 20 per cent. In some hospitals it is thought to be as high as 30 per cent.
Sometimes Caesareans are performed for superficial reasons, either cosmetic, or because women have been led to believe their sexual powers might be lessened by childbirth, as a long labour in a natural delivery could 'affect pelvic muscle tone.'
A World Health Organisation paper recently stated there was no reason for the rate to go above 10 per cent. There is little doubt that general anaesthetics and forceps deliveries affect the child's entrance into the world and, some believe, the mother's relationship with the baby.
In the US they consider that every 1 per cent rise in the Caesarean rate adds another dollars 63 millions a year to health costs. In terms of hard cash, the cost of a Caesarean in this country can be as high as pounds 1,000 to the patient. Medical insurance schemes like BUPA do not cover 'natural births,' but do cover 'instrument deliveries.' Ms Savage is the only consultant at the London who has no private patients.
Every since Wendy Savage started at the London she has been at odds with the medical establishment. Although she was first hired by Professor Peter Huntingford, renowned for his humanitarian approach to women in childbirth, Huntingford left the London to practise in Maidstone. The consultants who remained were very 'keen on high-technology birth,' according to nurses who work there.
But Ms Savage encourages women to have their babies at home and started what is called the 'domino' system by which women are attended by a midwife throughout pregnancy. The midwife then goes into the hospital for delivery and out again with mother and baby afterwards. It is comforting for mothers, but does not fit in with the Government's policy of 100 per cent hospitalisation of births.
She ran a community health centre at Mile End and was the only consultant at the Abortion Day Care Clinic.
It is a highly unusual situation. If the Wendy Savage inquiry is based on the evidence that two babies of mothers in her care have died, then why does this not happen more often? If she perinatal mortality rate is as high as 10.4 in 1,000 births, can all other consultants claim a free conscience?
Is the crux of the matter, as she believes, 'a difference of approach to caring for pregnant women?' Are the Tower Hamlets women, Wendy Savage in particular, the victims of political game-playing?
Professor Peter Huntingford, who started out as her champion, has been somewhat irritated by the notoriety of this case. He believes that Wendy Savage's supporters are doing her harm by their radical, fanatical approach, and he believes the issues have been distorted. Nonetheless, 'the people accusing her are getting at Wendy Savage,' he says, 'not dealing with the issue of birth rights. They couldn't care less about women or their rights. They want to get rid of Wendy Savage.'
Maria O'Shea, a nurse who worked with her in obstetrics and gynaecology, although not technically a midwife, says: 'She's jumped on an anti-establishment bandwagon and upset things at the London.
'The other consultants here are very much in favour of high technology childbirth. Obviously they don't approve of her. Wendy is a difficult person to work with. She's nice to the patients but not to nurses. I think she feels we're not her intellectual equivalent and we don't work hard enough, so she's a hard taskmaster. But what is important is that she's the only consultant who is prepared to provide care in the community, to supervise home births, to stick up for midwives. The midwives are very angry because they feel this is a violation of people's right to choose the obstetric care they want. Except for those who are treated by Wendy Savage, women here are not listened to at all.'
The problem seems to be that a strong-willed outspoken mother of four sees the job of consultant obstetrician as a support system for women, rather than a takeover bid for birth.
Wendy Savage has made so many waves it is quite possible that somebody, somewhere, thought it advisable to remove the source of the problem.
But this is the 20th century, not the Middle Ages, and it is a long time since the Hammer of Witches called for the wholesale slaughter of women healers, including our traditional birth attendants - midwives. Although this kind of curtailment of women's power existed for centuries, this case must surely call into question our entire system of health care for birth, of DHSS maternity care, particularly community care.
Yet the whole issue of birth rights is much broader and deeper than any one individual case. But if Wendy Savage were forced into a convenient disappearing act, then none of the questions concerning women's choice community health and maternity care will ever be correctly and honestly addressed.
There is more at stake here than a witch. Ask the women of Tower Hamlets why they wear badges with Wendy is Best. Investigate the Rest scrawled across them. It certainly isn't because she is the best politician.
The public inquiry will be held at the headquarters of the North End Thames Regional Health Authority, Addison House, Chart Street, London N1.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
34 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 28, 1986
Mexico hit by falling oil price
BYLINE: By PETER RODGERS
LENGTH: 497 words
The drop in oil prices could easily cost Mexico dollars 3 billion in loss of export income, Mexican finance minister Mr Jesus Silva-Herzog said yesterday at a conference of bankers in London where there was widespread concern at the effect of cheaper oil on the country's financial survival.
He warned that Latin American countries were going through an emergency which 'if not acted upon with speed and wisdom could make the summer of 1982 (when the debt crisis broke) look relatively calm and quiet.'
At the same London conference the governor of the Bank of England, Mr Robin Leigh-Pemberton said that between 1981 and 1984 dollars 80 billion of capital had 'fled' from Latin America, equivalent to all the borrowings of the region during those four years.
He said that British banks, while supporting the new plan by US Treasury Secretary Mr James Baker for financing Latin America, 'are hoping that more will be done to prevent new loans merely facilitating the flight of capital.' The minimum needed was more realistic exchange and interest rate policies.
Answering questions earlier, Mr Silva-Herzog said that although there had been an upsurge in capital flight from Mexico in mid-1985 it was '' now at a very modest level.'
Because of the severe impact of the oil price fall Mexico last week called off talks in New York on its debts while it counts the cost. Mr Silva-Herzog is meeting commercial bankers and the Bank of England during talks in London this week.
Speaking at the International Herald Tribune and Inter-American Development Bank conference on debt, he said: 'This drastic drop in the price of oil presents very serious additional problems in the management of economic policy, and not only in foreign exchange receipts. We receive 70 per cent of our exports from oil but also a little over 45 per cent of fiscal revenue directly or indirectly from the oil sector.'
Mr Silva-Herzog said talks with creditors would be stopped up in the coming weeks, but Mexico would find a way of accommodating the problem which was 'responsible, constructive and prudent.'
Mexico asked before the latest oil price collapse for about dollars 4 billion in 1986 of which dollars 2.7 billion would be from commercial banks.
Mr Silva-Herzog called for a new trade, finance and interest rate deal. When asked whether the Cartagena group of debtors was the Opec of Latin America he said: 'I think it will have a better future.'
The Baker plan was insufficient and could only work with interest rates two or three points lower, he said.
Brazil's central bank governor Mr Fenao Bracher insisted that the country's economic programme for 1986 had been sent to the International Monetary Fund, whose managing director Mr Jacques de Larosiere had sent his comments on it. This is part of an effort to reassure bankers that Brazil has not completely broken with the IMF, contrary to the political stance adopted by the government at home.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
35 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 28, 1986
Marcos under pressure to hold credible election / US expresses concern over forthcoming Philippines presidential election
BYLINE: From MICHAEL WHITE and GREGG JONES
LENGTH: 673 words
DATELINE: MANILA
The Reagan Administration last night intensified its near-desperate pressure on the Marcos regime to hold a credible presidential election next month, and directly criticised aspects of the campaign so far.
But the uncertain note which the Administration has struck continued. As the US ambassador in Manila, Mr Stephen Bosworth, delivered a tough speech to local businessmen, the White House chief of staff, Mr Donald Regan, said on US television that it would proceed as usual in its dealings with President Marcos if he won by fraud.' We'd condemn the fraud. If its a duly elected government, so certified, you'd have to do business with it,' he said.
But in a speech which ostentatiously paraded Washington's 'completely non-partisan stance' in Manila, Mr Bosworth said: 'Incidents of campaign-related violence appear to be increasing ... It cannot be excused and is to be deplored. There are innumerable rumours of irregular election activities - alleged bribery of poll watchers and inspectors, of attempts at vote-buying, and armed persons intimidating.'
In a manner which underlines the extraordinary relationship between the US and its former Philippines colony, Mr Bosworth proceeded to itemise complaints. These included the need for opposition as well as government observers to do their job in the polling stations 'without impediment,' the need for a quick resolution of the opposition's demands for equal time on government-controlled television and the urgent need to fill two critical vacancies on the Government's Supervisory Commission on elections (Comelec) or a 'significant confidence-building step. But time is drawing short.'
Coming on top of vigorous efforts by liberal congressmen and some US newspapers to expose Mr Marcos for corruption and an inflated record as a war hero, the latest Bosworth non-intervention is certain to intensify the current paradox of increasingly strident anti-American sentiment by pro-Marcos newspapers and ministers, one of whom yesterday accused 'certain hawks' in Washington of trying to destabilise the regime. Newspapers complained of America's 'self-annointed custodianship of democracy. They can do this only to a democratic country. They are afraid of enemies, cruel to friends.'
The renewed US concern came as further disquiet emerged about the conduct of the February 7 election. The Government has decided to close schools and colleges in preparation for their use as polling stations from today, a full 10 days before the vote, a move which has aroused intense suspicion that the president wishes to disperse the students of Manila either because they represent a potent organisational force for the c position standard bearer, Mrs Corazon Aquino, or because of their likely reaction to the possible re-imposition of martial law. All the signs point to a huge and potentially intimidatory deployment of troops next week.
It was also learned that Marcos appointees on comelec were poised to obtain a majority for using the government-controlled National Computer Centre (it is located inside a military camp) to conduct the crucial 'quick count' after polls close. This device is intended to prevent blatant miscounting but the comelec simultaneously rejected a bid to do its own quick count by Namfrel, the citizens' watchdog body.
In the southern city of Davaom, Western diplomats and opposition leaders have also been alarmed to discover the temporary reassignment to a conference in Hawaii on counter-insurgency of a Filipino colonel who is highly regarded by local residents, even on the left, for his commitment to a fair poll and his professionalism. Marine Colonel Rodolfo Biazon may not return to his post, though his efforts to engage local dissidents in dialogue rather than in military action was locally respected in a region hit by Communist and Muslim insurgency.
A foreign diplomat said the move 'really smells. Just with Colonel Biazon's presence here, this guy could cause people to think twice before cheating.'
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
36 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 28, 1986
Haitians abolish secret police as unrest grows
BYLINE: From GREG CHAMBERLAIN
LENGTH: 501 words
DATELINE: PORT-AU-PRINCE
President Jean-Claude Duvalier of Haiti has announced the formal abolition of his regime's secret police in a new effort to satisfy Washington's image-makers and appease his domestic critics.
But new anti-Government demonstrations erupted in several towns at the weekend, including the country's second city, Cap Haitien, where heavily-armed troops fired teargas at several thousand stone-throwing protesters. Many took refuge in the local cathedral which was then surrounded by the troops.
The city's prefect was physically attacked as demonstrators surged through the narrow streets, spraying anti-regime slogans on walls. They called on the President to resign and urged the army to help them overthrow the Government.
Most of Cap Haitien shops were shut yesterday after the demonstrators threatened to burn them down.
The demonstrations coincided with the arrival at nearby Labadie of 1,200 holiday-makers for the delayed inauguration of a much-criticised tourist project. The local press has described the scheme - under which a Cayman Islands registered firm linked to the US-Norwegian company, Royal Caribbean Cruise Line, has been granted a 20-year concession at minimal rates - as 'scandalous' and demanded its cancellation 'in the national interest.'
The project replaced an earlier one by a French-Haitian consortium which would have provided 400 permanent jobs and extensive benefits for the local economy. The new scheme, with only a few dozen jobs, has been denounced as 'apartheid,' and Haitans have pointed a finger at the recently disgraced and dismissed finance minister, Mr Frantz Merceron, under whom the contract was signed.
Other demonstrations broke out at the weekend at Limbe, where there has been severe flooding, and at Petit Goave, where government buildings were burned down three weeks ago.
The abolition of the secret police, which many Haitians greeted with scepticism, was part of an extensive military reshuffle, involving the retirement of 12 senior officers. These included the commanders of the Casernes Dessalines battalion, the Leopards anti-Subversion force, and the small air force and navy.
The changes were seen as an effort to head off possible military coup, feared by the Duvaliers as protests against them have grown in the past two months.
Also among those dismissed were the two colonels, Albert 'ti boule' (burning spear) Pierre and Emmanuel Orcel, who have headed the secret police for the past seven years and have featured prominently in Amnesty International reports on repression.
Col. Pierre was dismissed last month as the capital's police chief.
The US Administration has been pushing for such changes, pointing out to the Duvaliers that Congress is likely to cut aid to Haiti if the regime continues its present policies.
A delegation of US Roman Catholic bishops will arrive here next week on a fact-finding visit which is expected to increase opposition to the regime by local church leaders.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
37 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 28, 1986
NZ minister accuses army of disloyalty / New Zealand Defence Minister O'Flynn in new controversy
BYLINE: From IAN TEMPLETON
LENGTH: 631 words
DATELINE: WELLINGTON
New Zealand's Minister of Defence, Mr Frank O'Flynn, has triggered a serious row with the country's armed forces by accusing some officers of being 'disloyal.' He has also charged the army with disregard for ministerial authority in a dispute between himself and top-ranking army officers over the posting of a colonel to the Canadian National Defence College.
Mr O'Flynn has been at the centre of controversy since he was appointed Minister of Defence. At one point he advocated that the best way of defending New Zealand was to 'blow up bridges and tunnels' and use guerrilla tactics against any invading enemy. His statement yesterday brought into the open the behind-the-scenes bickering between the minister and his senior advisers who have serious reservations about the Government's anti-nuclear policy which has led to the United States declaring the Anzus treaty 'inoperative.'
The Prime Minister, Mr David Lange, who earlier branded as 'geriatric generals' those retired defence chiefs who criticised the Government's defence policy, fuelled the controversy stirred up by Mr O'Flynn by saying that he too believed there were 'disloyal' officers in the Ministry of Defence. However, he declined to say how he proposed to deal with the potentially damaging situation in the country's armed forces.
Mr O'Flynn, who had refused to be interviewed, communicates his views through long press statements. Yesterday he issued a 12-page communique detailing the verbal salvoes he and his defence advisers have been exchanging for several months. He accused some officials of leaking material to newspapers with the aim of discrediting the Government and its defence policy. He said the 'disloyal' people who had engaged in this conduct must learn that neither he nor the Government would give way to blackmail involving publicity in newspapers.
The minister said that the last 18 months had been momentous for defence and there had been changes and upheavals, unwelcome to many. 'The real difficulty is that from the first, the Government's policy of not allowing nuclear weapons into New Zealand even temporarily on visiting ships was unpalatable to the defence establishment generally. Distaste turned in many cases to opposition when the US vowing retaliation, progressively cut off all the forms of conventional defence cooperation with New Zealand that had become traditional, over 30 years or more.
'Long cherished illusions were dispelled and practices that had become congenial were stopped. It is greatly to the credit of the ministry that the vast majority of the military and civilian staff have continued to serve the government loyally. Unfortunately a few disloyal officers and staff have continued to leak information, often wrong or distorted, to opposition MPs and to the media, aimed at the discrediting of the policy and the government,' Mr O'Flynn said.
He noted that it was always hard to deal effectively and fairly with this situation.
Mr O'Flynn's outburst was prompted by revelations in a Wellington newspaper that the Prime Minister had overruled a decision of his not to approve an army proposal to send a senior army officer to a course at the Canadian National Defence College.
The chief of the general staff, Major General John Mace, used his authority to appeal to the Prime Minister after the Canadians reacted strongly to the ministerial rejection. Mr O'Flynn said that he had not accepted that the morale of senior army officers would be affected as claimed by the chief of the general staff. 'I think courses at lower levels applicable to far more officers would do much more for morale than the present system which is restricted to not more than two or three officers of colonel or equivalent rank each year.'
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
38 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 28, 1986
Salvador forces peasants to leave homes / Armed forces launch counter-insurgency operation in Guazapa
BYLINE: From CATHERINE MATHESON
LENGTH: 677 words
DATELINE: SAN SALVADOR
The armed forces in El Salvador are trying out a big counter insurgency operation to remove the civilian peasant population from an area where leftwing guerrillas have a persistent presence: the extinct volcano of Guazapa, about 20 miles north of the capital, San Salvador.
The campaign, which involves thousands of troops, is part of Operation Phoenix, the latest attempt begun on January 9 to dislodge the guerrillas and those the army describes as 'masas' - their civilian supporters from the hill. It s known as 'draining the sea to catch the fish.'
Journalists who were taken in an army helicopter to witness one evacuation saw a group of 73 people cowering against a stone wall near the hamlet of Mirandilla on the north-west side of the hill.
Thirty-seven were children, including a baby born the night before, all showing signs of serious malnourishment. Few had shoes and all were covered in dirt. They had been hiding in a ravine in the woods for some days. One woman, with six children, said: 'You don't know from one minute to the next, when the bombs are going to come.'
The bombing during Operation Phoenix has been so heavy it has shaken the windows of houses in San Salvador.
The auxilliary bishop of San Salvador, Monsignor Rosa Chavez, said in his sermon on Sunday that about 1,000 civilians were being encircled by the crack rapid reaction battalions, the Bracamonte and Atlacatl in the cantons of Delicias and Plantanares. He called on the authorities to respect' the physical integrity and above all the lives of these Salvadoreans.'
Reporters who accompanied a unit of the Atlacatl on a search for these people watched 35 more from the hamlet of Haciendita arriving on a hilltop to be evacuated. One six-year-old girl was carried up by a soldier.
They were told to sit down in a clearing in the woods where Lieutenant Colonel Rene Majano gave them a talk. He said the armed forces had come 'to reincorporate them as brother Salvadoreans into the democratic life of El salvador.' He said he knew some had been forced to support the guerrillas, while others had done it of their own free will.
Colonel Majano singled out one woman, less tired-looking than the others, with a five-year-old daughter and asked her where her husband was. 'He belongs to the guerrillas, doesn't he?'
A wrinkled old woman over 60 was asked by a sergeant which organisation she had belonged to: Fapu perhaps, the popular organisation of the National Resistance, one of the main guerrilla groups in the FMLN military coalition?
She told me her name was Marea Garcia and that she had not belonged to any organisation. 'I'm old,' she said, 'What could I do?' There were six families living in Haciendita, she said, they had all been born there and had suffered there. She wanted to leave because of the bombings.
The army also produced a notebook which they said had been found near Birandilla, dog-eared and dated March, 1984, it contained notes about FMLN plans for the area, including popular local government organisations (PPLs). Colonel Mauricio Hernandez said: 'This proves these people are subversives.'
The people were forced to leave all their belongings behind, except clothes they could carry. The army said helicopter pilots were afraid that someone would carry explosive aboard and burnt the little piles of rags.
The thousands of troops taking part in Operation Phoenix include three crack rapid reaction battalions, the First Brigade based in San Salvador and the Fifth Detachment.
Journalists also talked to a group of 109 people who had been in an army clearing centre near Guazapa for 16 days. They had been given talks by women 'social workers' in array uniform, who are an increasingly important part of the Salvadorean army's Psychological Operation. United States advisers helped to draw up the programme.
The army said those evacuated would be handed over to relatives or the International Red Cross, although the Red Cross itself has no facilities for dealing with displaced people.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
39 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 28, 1986
Swedish conference close to arms pact / Disarmament in Europe conference enters third year of negotiations in Stockholm
BYLINE: By HELLA PICK, Diplomatic Correspondent
LENGTH: 577 words
The 35-nation conference on disarmament in Europe, entering its third year of negotiations in Stockholm today, is within reach of an agreement on military confidence-building measures. This will be coupled to a formal reaffirmation of the commitment to non-aggression.
In a second negotiating forum, the Vienna talks of Force Reductions in Europe (MBFR), due to resume tomorrow, there is, for the first time in more than 11 years of negotiations, a glimmer of hope that Warsaw Pact and Nato countries are moving towards agreement on a token withdrawal of US and Soviet forces from Central Europe.
The Vienna and the Stockholm negotiations are peripheral to the central issue of nuclear and space arms, which is being handled by the two superpowers on their own, in Geneva. But the indications of movement on confidence-building measures, and perhaps also on force reductions, are widely seen as an encouraging sign that the two superpowers are determined to build on the 'spirit of Geneva', and are looking for devices to strengthen mutual confidence, while they grope for progress in Geneva.
The Stockholm conference, an offshoot of the Helsinki Declaration on Security and Co-operation in Europe, has until late summer to come up with binding agreements, designed to reduce significantly the risk of accidental war in Europe.
After the Christmas recess, the 35 participating countries - comprising all of Europe, with the exception of Albania, but including the two North American Nato Allies, the US and Canada - will now begin the vital work of drafting texts that must be adopted by consensus.
Underlying the political significance of the progress that now seems possible, the West German Foreign Minister, Mr Hans Dietrich Genscher, and his French counterpart, Mr Roland Dumas, will address the Stockholm conference this morning. This is the first time that such senior ministers have attended the conference since it was opened at foreign ministerial level, in January, 1984.
President Reagan has already expressed satisfaction with the prospects for agreement at Stockholm, declaring last week that this would have 'important implications' for 'lowering the barriers which now divide Europe artificially East from West.'
Optimism in Stockholm stems from the fact that the Soviet Union, after dogged opposition, has now agreed to negotiate specific agreements on military 'transparency,' including advance notification of military activities and manoeuvres, sending observers to big military exercises.
In return, Nato countries, after initially dismissing it as a propaganda effort, have agreed to meet Moscow's insistence on non-agression pacts, at least to the point where they are willing to draft a formal declaration on non-agression, designed to reafirm and strengthen the commitments already made in the UN charter.
Mr Mikhail Gorbachev, in his arms control policy statement, made two weeks ago, to coincide with the resumption of the Geneva negotiations indicated that the Soviet Union was ready to lift two further obstacles to agreement in Stockholm. He emphasised that he now supported the principle of notifying military manoeuvres, involving even relatively small numbers of troops. In addition, he declared his readiness to meet Western demands that for the time being at least, notification of military exercises should be limited to ground and air forces, and not also be extended to naval moves.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
40 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 28, 1986
Carter plans to help African farmers grow more food / Former US president speaks at US embassy in London
BYLINE: By JONATHAN STEELE
LENGTH: 328 words
Jimmy Carter's goals are more modest nowadays, but as he talked in London yesterday of his new plan to help small farmers in Africa grow more food, the echoes of the determination which won him the Presidency in 1976 sounded again.
'Our goal is to be very careful not to fail,' he said with the sudden burst of that well-known smile. 'We anticipate disappointments but we will stick it out.'
In front of him as he spoke at the US Embassy was Andrew Young, the former ambassador to the UN and now mayor of Atlanta, who is one of the few political associates to have remained close to the man that Mr Reagan beat. The two men have just returned from visits to the Sudan, Tanzania, Zambia, and Ghana.
Under the aegis of a new organisation with the ambitious title, Global 2,000 they aim to give drought- and disease-resistant seeds to selected farmers, as well as help them to obtain credit.
The money is coming from a wealthy Japanese philanthropist, Ryoichi Sasakawa; the expertise is coming from Norman Borlaug, the American who won the Nobel Peace prize for launching the so-called Green Revolution in India, and the manpower from young agronomists trained in the Third World.
Mr Carter's role is to open the door to political leaders since, he said, it was vital for governments to encourage the free marketing of grain if the project was to succeed.
'In many countries the markets have been tightly controlled by governments and this has been one of the impediments,' he said. Sudan, Tanzania, Zambia, and Ghana were chosen because the countries had to 'be in desperate need.
Global 2000 was not working with cooperatives, since their productivity was already much higher - '4 1/2 tons per hectare in Zambia, for example, compared with one ton per hectare on small farms, and 75 to 80 per cent of the agriculture is done by private farmers.
In addition to his new project, Mr Carter teaches politics at a university in Georgia.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
41 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 28, 1986
Tutu defends his attitude to ANC / South African bishop justifies his support for outlawed guerrilla movement
BYLINE: From our Correspondent in Johannesburg
LENGTH: 364 words
Bishop Desmond Tutu, the Anglican Bishop of Johannesburg and Nobel Peace prize winner, yesterday defended his statement in the US that he hoped to hear Western leaders say that they sided with the outlawed African Congress.
The statement provoked intense controversy here and sparked speculation that action might be taken against him on his return, particularly after it drew the condemnation of the Minister of Constitutional Development and Planning, Mr Chris Heunis.
'The South African Government is shocked by this call by the Bishop, who has been internationally honoured for contribution to peace,' Mr Heunis said: 'For a man of the cloth, his backing of a terrorist organisation can only be described as deplorable.'
Addressing a news conference within hours of his return from a three-week tour of the US. Bishop Tutu reaffirmed his support for ANC aims - a united, democratic, and non-racial South Africa - but repeated his opposition to its violent methods, as well as to the violence of apartheid.
His remarks in the American city of Atlanta were directed mainly at the US Vice President, Mr George Bush, Bishop Tutu said. Mr Bush was seated just behind him and his purpose was to question US foreign policy which backed the Contra guerrillas against the Sandinistas in Nicaragua but refused to back the ANC against South Africa's Government.
The bishop wanted to know why it was justifiable for the US to back one guerrilla movement seeking to overthrow a government by force but not another - particularly as the ANC had first sought to change an 'unjust system peacefully, non-violently.'
Asked whether his statement would strengthen the ANC in its resolve to overthrow the Government and lead to further deaths. Bishop Tutu wanted to know what lives the journalist was talking about.
The bishop defined himself as a peace-lover, not an absolute pacifist. He subscribed to the doctrine of the just war and believed that there were times when the use of violence to end greater violence was justified. He cited the war against Nazism.
But, Bishop Tutu added, he did not think that situation had been reached in South Africa yet.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
42 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 28, 1986
PM 'on trial' should tell full facts or go - Kinnock / Labour leader's speech on the Westland helicopters affair
LENGTH: 2157 words
Mr Neil Kinnock, the Labour leader, opening the debate demanded that the Prime Minister tell the full facts of the Westland affair and if she could not tell the truth she should go. He added that the first person to say he was going to 'tough it out' had been the disgraced former US President, Richard Nixon.
Mr Kinnock's speech ran into early trouble. He began by saying that the Westland affair had grown in size because of the actions and attitudes of Mrs Thatcher and her cabinet. If Mr Heseltine hadn't kicked over a can of worms by resigning, the country would not have known, yet it would have still taken place.
He said the events concerned all took place three days and more before Mr Heseltine resigned. 'Evasions and manoeuvrings, falsehoods and defeats, have nurtured this comparatively small thing until it became an overwhelmingly large thing. It was turned from an issue, into a crisis by dishonesty by people in this administration.
'That dishonesty infected the government's whole approach to Westlands. There was basic duplicity of the government policy of being publicly dispassionate and privately partisan about the bids for Heseltine.'
Mr Kinnock's mistake of saying Heseltine instead of Westlands brought gales of laughter from the Tory benches.
Mr Kinnock retorted: 'I think that that may be the last occasion the Conservative MPs have cause to be amused. Their cavalier attitude towards dishonesty ..' but before he could finish his sentence, Tory MPs were on their feet demanding that the charge be withdrawn. Mr Kinnock said he would only withdraw allegations if the cap did not fit. But after two demands from the Speaker to withdraw, he did retract his allegation.
After that victory, Conservative MPs kept up a barrage of heckling which destroyed the impact of Mr Kinnock's speech. Labour MPs claimed it was part of a conspiracy to silence him.
The Labour leader said the Prime Minister had to answer questions when she found out about the decision to leak, how it was done and who was to do it, that she had suspiciously failed to answer six times last Thursday.
He demanded she explain her claim that she did not know what action was being taken.
He asked whether she established an inquiry in response to the justifiable outrage of two law officers who felt that their integrity was abused or compromised, or was there an additional reason.
Mr Kinnock said the Prime Minister should make no mistake, she was on trial, with the main testimony against her provided by herself.
'How could it be that a Prime Minister who prides herself so earnestly on her involvement in detail, on her knowledge of the minutiae of her administration, and on her deep engagement in the Westland issue, did not know of a supremely important decision taken by those so very close to her to manipulate events on January 6?'
He said it was unbelievable that the PM never even asked her associates to guess the identity of those involved in the leak, despite the endless hours of contacts and days of discussion the Prime Minister was stumbling on in blissful ignorance of the January 6 actions. 'Who would expect us to believe any of that? Well, obviously the Prime Minister does.'
He said that the protest that there were just too many facts to be absorbed didn't carry any weight either. 'Only one fact really mattered, the fact that it was the secretary of state for trade and industry and her office who had conceived, organised and executed the leak. That was the fact that mattered.
'That was the fact she was forced to admit last Thursday. That was the fact, that she says was kept from her for over a fortnight.' Mr Kinnock said the people who had kept the facts from her were her closest, most senior office staff. The Prime Minister has said her office did not seek her agreement.
'If her office didn't tell her why didn't they tell her?' Mr Kinnock claimed this was either because they didn't want her to be contaminated by the guilt, or they felt the PM did not need to be involved.
'What if they said to each other 'there is no need to bother the PM. We know what she thinks about Westlands, we know what she thinks about the turbulent secretary of state for defence and his campaign and we know that she wouldn't mind us using dirty tricks to fight him.'
'But were the people in the PM's office right? Do they really know the PM? Either they do and they think of her as someone who will stoop to conquer, no matter how low. Or they are totally mistaken and she is not the woman that they think.' Whilst the Prime Minister was only yards away in 10 Downing Street, the officials were outrageously miscalculating her attitude towards 'the correct method' of putting matters into the public domain.
Having made that miscalculation, they apparently compounded their fault by letting her set up an inquiry into a leak which they themselves had authorised.
If they had been so wrong, said Mr Kinnock, they should have gone, but they hadn't and the reason was possibly because of complicity by the Prime Minister. Mr Kinnock said he would withhold his judgment while she spoke. 'We want the full facts and we want them now. If the Prime Minister cannot tell that truth, she cannot stay. If she will not tell that truth, she must go.'
During Mrs Thatcher's speech, she faced mounting interventions from the Labour benches trying to pin her down on her exact involvement in the leak of the Solicitor-General's letter.
It began with Mr Alan Williams, an Opposition legal spokesman, who said that on the day following the actual leak, she had received a letter from him. 'Why on earth has she not said whether she knew the facts of the leak at the time she received that letter?' Mrs Thatcher, despite shouts of 'answer, answer' from Labour MPs, said she was dealing with the setting up of the inquiry.
She said that if she had refused to have the inquiry, the opposition parties would have had just cause to criticise, but she had agreed to the request from Mr Williams.
Mr Tam Dalyell (Labour, Linlithgow) recalled that when Mr Cranley Onslow (Con, Woking) had asked a question in relation putting the Solicitor-General's letter into the public domain, the Prime Minister had replied, 'I gave my consent.' Mr Dalyell asked what MPs were to derive from those words. Mrs Thatcher said she gave her consent to an inquiry. She had not given her consent to the disclosure and it was not sought.
After Mrs Thatcher had blamed the affair on a misunderstanding between the DTI and her office, Mr Kinnock rose to ask what could have prompted the officials to breach the Official Secrets Act and in the words of the Solicitor-General, flagrantly violate an important rule, without any form of consultation from the Prime Minister. 'Will she now tell the House what she knew?'
Mrs Thatcher said she set out what her officials believed and what the DTI believed. 'You will not accept that there was a difference of understanding. That happens nearly every day in normal life and you try to deny it. The officials have a right to be heard and not to be castigated.'
Later, Mr Michael Foot, the former Labour leader, intervened to ask: 'Is the Prime Minister telling us that on the day after the leak until the day the inquiry reported, Mr Brittan did not make any effort whatsoever to tell you he had authorised the leak? If so, do you think he is fit to be a member of any Cabinet, let alone yours?' Mrs Thatcher said she had indicated what the facts were. 'I had given the answers after strenuous efforts to check them with the officials concerned.'
Mrs Thatcher accused the opposition of staging the debate to play politics with people's jobs. Mr Kinnock again intervened to tell her that they wanted the debate to find out the truth. 'The House is not satisfied that she has given the full details. When did she know and why did her officials not tell her? Can she expect us to believe that Leon Brittan did not tell her exactly what was going on?'
Mrs Thatcher said Mr Kinnock could not understand that she had given him the facts. 'The party opposite has blown this out of all proportion. This debate is part of a massive diversionary tactic by the opposition from extremism in his own party.'
Dr David Owen, the SDP leader, said the Prime Minister had left her chief press secretary, Mr Bernard Ingham, and her private secretary, Mr Charles Powell, with no alternative but to resign.
He said they would be subjected to the normal disciplinary procedures which covered the Civil Service and it was inconceivable that they could continue to advise the Prime Minister.
Mr Ingham had ruled the information office with a rod of iron for seven years and had played a more dominant role than any other Downing Street press officer in this century. It was extraordinary, said Dr Owen, that Colette Bowe at the Department of Trade and Industry should be told that Mr Ingham was giving her the authority of Number 10.
But Dr Owen said the Prime Minister, by her general demeanour had given a steer and guidance to Mr Ingham and Mr Powell.
Dr Owen said the Prime Minister must have hoped the debate would end the whole affair, but it would not. 'The Prime Minister has revealed, both today and on former days, that she is not worthy of holding high office.'
Mr Michael Heseltine (Henley), the former defence secretary, said he had not originally intended to take part in the debate, but he believed that in saying she deeply regretted that the letter to him from the Solicitor-General had been leaked, had been a difficult but very brave thing for the Prime Minister to say in the circumstances.
He said the Solicitor-General's behaviour had been exemplary throughout, but reasserted his belief that the European option was the best for Westland.
However, Mr Heseltine said: 'As far as the politics are concerned, I believe that what the Prime Minister has said today brings the politics of the matter to an end.'
Any further questions that should be asked should be raised by the Commons select committees, he said. Labour MPs jeered Mr Heseltine and shouted 'you're after votes.'
Mr Heseltine retorted: 'This Tory Party is after votes because we heard the speech of the leader of the Opposition .. I do not believe this House has listened in a decade to a worse parliamentary performance than that one.
'Of course it is the constitutional duty of the Opposition to exploit the difficulties of the government and they cannot even make a decent job of that.'
Tory MPs cheered, but Mr Foot caused laughter when he said: 'I listened to his contribution and I had just a twinge of sympathy for the Cabinet and what they had to put up with.'
He added: 'The Prime Minister's speech was an extremely important speech in the history of this Parliament and her own life, but I must say to her she didn't answer many of the questions which have been put and these questions will continue to be put until we get the answers.'
Mr Leon Brittan, the former trade and industry secretary, said that with regard to the facts to his knowledge, the Prime Minister's account was correct.
'I made it clear to officials at the DTI that subject to the agreement of number 10, I was giving authority to the disclosure of the Solicitor-General's letter .. I therefore accept full responsibility for the fact and form of that disclosure.'
He said he regretted in retrospect the way the disclosure had taken place and said: 'Officials at the DTI at all times acted in accordance with me and what they did with my full authority. They are not to be blamed.'
Mr John Biffen, the Leader of the House, winding up for the Government, said that Mr Heseltine had given the clearest possible indication that he returned with tremendous enthusiasm for the Conservative Party.
'His speech indicates that for the Conservative Party, today is not its parliamentary Dunkirk, but rather a parliamentary Alamein.'
Mr Biffen went on to reaffirm the Government's belief of the doctrine of collective responsibility being the foundation of good government.
He said Conservative MPs should see this afternoon's debate not as a relentless search for truth but as a major political assault. The Solicitor-General's letter had been subject to critical comment but the opposition had elevated it out of all proportions.
'It was a situation that contains many situations where things could have been done better, but to pretend that this is a moral crusade is to disregard what happens in the real world.'
Mr Morris tried once again to demand when the Prime Minister knew about the leak, but Mr Biffen said all the points had been dealt with. He sat down to shouts of 'No, no, no' from the opposition benches.
The opposition motion on the adjournment of the House was defeated by 219 votes to 379, a Government majority of 160.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
43 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 27, 1986
American Financial Notebook: Uncle Sam is being persuaded that Thatcher-type privatisation is the way to go / US economists respond favourably to Britain's privatisation programme
BYLINE: By ALEX BRUMMER
LENGTH: 1124 words
Despite Mrs Thatcher's strict adherence to monetary and fiscal policies the true Reaganauts have been less than impressed with Britain's economic progress under her stewardship. If the government (in their view) had put as much energy into supply-side reforms as into financial orthodoxy then economic success, as measured by higher growth and lower unemployment, would have been markedly greater. Lowering and simplifying taxes and removing the heavy hand of government from the economy are seen as the key to sustained recovery in both the developed and less developed world.
Nevertheless, one aspect of Mrs Thatcher's economic strategy has excited the theorists in Washington: its large scale privatisation programme which has so far netted dollars 28 billion for the UK Exchequer.
For much of the last three years the US economy has managed to thrive despite (or perhaps because) of its large public sector borrowing. But now as a result of an overvalued dollar and a worsening balance of trade the US is being forced to tackle the domestic budget deficit. The iron grip of the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings balanced budget law has led to some rapid thinking at the White House and on Capitol Hill.
One idea proven and tested in the fields of conservatism is privatisation. The British blueprint has demonstrated (to the Americans at least) that it can be a useful short-term tool in reducing the pressure of Government borrowing while at the same time contributing to the market economy.
Using the British experience as a model the Heritage Foundation, the new right think-tank, has apparantly persuaded the White House that Thatcher-type privatisation is the way to go.
While the US has no ready-made car firms like Jaguar to sell off or no airlines like British Airways it does have a vast range of assets which might be marketable from power companies to government loans. In the US's sophisticated capital markets where investors will put money into pork bellies or inflation futures contracts. If they think there is a buck to be made, any asset is seen as a disposable commodity.
The architect of the Administration's conversion on privatisation is a British-born economist Stuart Butler, aged 33, whose book 'Privatising Federal Spending: A Strategy to Eliminate the Federal Deficit' could soon become the new bible of Reaganomics. It may well take up the cause where George Gilder's supply-side manual' Wealth and Poverty' - the economic creed of the first term - left off.
In the last days and weeks as the Office of Management and Budget has put together its plans for 1987 fiscal year to be sent to Congress next weekend) it has seemed at times as if the whole Federal government is up for sale. A popular joke doing the rounds at Washington dinner parties has the liberal American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) making a formal takeover offer for the Justice Department on the grounds that the ACLU is already enforcing most civil rights and liberties in the Reagan era.
There is of course no real effort to turn the Justice Department over to the private sector, Attorney General Edwin Meese not withstanding. Even so some surprising components of the US government could be put up for sale. The US postal service, just emerging from a big financial loss and the public sacking of the postmaster general, is seen to be ripe for going to the market. Unlike the UK post the American mail has no monopoly and struggles against a series of thrusting rapid letter services like Federal Express, with its own fleet of planes and guaranteed overnight delivery.
In reality selling off the postal service, with an estimated value of dollars 6.3 billion, is unlikely. Although bits of it including express mail and the parcel post, the crown jewels of the enterprise, could be offloaded.
Judging from what has been seen so far there is no reason to believe that selling any Federal asset will be easy. In the US's highly pluralistic political system opponents are able to wield a great deal more power than Her Majesty's Opposition. Thus efforts, for instance, to sell the Bonneville Power System in the Pacific North-West (worth some dollars 3.7 billion) is under fire from politicians in the region who fear the result of the divestiture will be higher energy prices for consumers.
Indeed, the record of US privatisation so far has been far from impressive. Despite the US's reputation as a free enterprise society it has a great deal of difficulty turning public assets over to the private sector. It was in 1982 that the then budget director David Stockman announced a grand scheme to sell-off some dollars 9 billion of 'unneeded' public land over three years. Thus far the operation has yielded a mere dollars 422.6 million - or about one-tenth of the Pentagon's intended spending on Star Wars in 1987.
In another clumsy divestment effort the Federal government has undertaken to sell off Washington's two Federally owned airports National and Dulles to regional authorities for the grand sum of dollars 80 million - the amount of money the US originally put in. Yet if Dulles were to be put on the open market it would be worth dollars 750 million alone.
Similarly, the Department of Transport's desire to allocate airport landing rights and slots in the market place looks like a huge mistake. It is potentially giving the country's two most prosperous airlines, with the most slots, a windfall of some dollars 475 million. The government and the public will get nothing.
Perhaps the final straw maybe is Wall Street's cool response to a proposal to sell off stacks of Federal credits which range from farm mortgages to student grants. Asked if such a move would introduce private sector surveillance and discipline into government a top merchant banker Robert Dahl of Morgan Stanley said: 'l think that's a dream. The government's probably a better banker for these kind of support programmes.'
None of this is terribly encouraging. However, an Administration staring at a deficit of dollars 212 billion this year and a legal requirement to bring it down to dollars 184 billion next year is clearly willing to try anything.
There is no reason to believe however that the American public wants to invest in student loans or even the difficult to manage strategic petroleum reserve (during an oil glut) any more than it was interested in government wasteland. A power station here or there may be an attractive investment for the public and give the Treasury some temporary liquidity.
But selling a tightly regulated utility to investors will make it no more or less competitive than selling British Telecom to its subscribers. And it will be almost politically impossible.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
44 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 27, 1986
Code of conduct / GCHQ controversy continues
BYLINE: By RICHARD NORTON-TAYLOR
LENGTH: 771 words
The Government has replied to a request by the European Commission of Human Rights for details of the damage it has alleged trade unions caused at GCHQ. It is the latest development in a dispute provoked by the government's decision two years ago to ban unions at its intelligence-gathering centre based in Cheltenham and closely linked to the US National Security Agency.
That decision, and the way it was taken, for the first time led many of the Government's own supporters to question Mrs Thatcher's judgment and style of government. The Government itself appears to be having second thoughts: despite several warnings of dismissal, a solid core of about 70 GCHQ staff have refused to give in to government pressure. Members of this small group - GCHQ employs a total of about 7,000 civilians - have had to forego promotion, overseas postings, salary increases, and training courses. It is not clear whether they will be given immunity from prosecution under the Official Secrets Act to enable them to counter the Government's allegations in Europe.
But the decision has not only caused political damage. This group of 70 includes specialists which GCHQ management says it badly needs - computer operators, experienced cypher and radio officers, and a leading expert in Chinese dialects.
A former member of the group, Alexander Hamilton, a brilliant mathematician and linguist, decided to retire early because of the union ban. He is one of the best cryptanalysts on either side of the Atlantic and code-breaking systems have been named after him. The US intelligence community - which originally welcomed the ban - has expressed astonishment at the way GCHQ management let him, and others, go.
Mrs Thatcher told the Cabinet Secretary, Sir Robert Armstrong, to prepare the GCHQ union ban a few days before Christmas 1983.
Just before she went on holiday in early August last year she again ordered Sir Robert to tell GCHQ officials who continued to ignore the ban that they faced imminent dismissal. Sir Robert's letter to Civil Service unions, supremely ill-timed from the Government's point of view, was seized on by the TUC which now had an issue on which it could unite. And it is Mr Eric Hammond, general secretary of the electricians's union, the EETPU sharply attacked by his TUC colleagues on other matters, who is at the forefront of contingency plans for strikes in the power industry if a GCHQ union member is dismissed.
Sir Brian Tovey, the former director of GCHQ who negotiated a job with Plessey before he asked for early retirement in 1983, says he proposed the union ban to Whitehall in 1981, shortly after there was industrial action throughout the Civil Service in protest against the Government's unilateral decision to abandon the Civil Service 25-year-old pay system. Sir Brian said that the ban could not have been imposed earlier than January 1984 since the fact that GCHQ was involved in intelligence was not officially 'avowed' until May 1983 in the wake of the Geoffrey Prime spy affair.
GCHQ's role had in fact been avowed many times, notably during the 1977 ABC secrets trial.
Nearly three years elapsed between the time the alleged damage was caused by union members at GCHQ and the ban. And the Government has not published any evidence to back up its suggestion that industrial action in any way damaged GCHQ's intelligence-gathering function - a function that is directed at private and commercial communications as well as military and diplomatic ones.
The Law Lords did not ask the Government for evidence and ruled against the unions simply on grounds of national security - an argument that was introduced by the Government only after it lost its case in the High Court. The Government is now under pressure from the European Commission for Human Rights to supply such evidence.
The Government has not won what is now amounting to a war of attrition against those who have refused to resign their union membership. The shortage of staff in some sections has reached crisis proportions and morale has not been helped by the continuing, though apparently diminishing, threat that the Government intends to introduce the polygraph, or lie-detector at GCHQ. Opponents of the controversial machine, including many non-union staff, were delighted when George Shultz, the US Secretary of State, said last December that lie detectors were not reliable.
One former senior official, Dennis Mitchell, described the union as the only watchdog against possible excesses which would outrage the British public if they were allowed to know about them.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
45 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 27, 1986
Michael rocks the gunship / Response of US Pentagon to the Westland helicopter affair
BYLINE: By ALEX BRUMMER
LENGTH: 1346 words
The US government's low public profile as the Westland affair has played out in Britain should not in any way be mistaken for indifference. The helicopter row is seen by political and defence analysts within the Reagan Administration as a seminal event which could determine the shape of the Western military/aerospace industry and the NATO procurement relationships for years to come.
The anti-American backlash against the Sikorsky rescue is seen at the highest planning levels in the Pentagon as a return to the bad old days of 'exclusionary' European military consortia and a betrayal of US efforts to develop a 'two-way street' in arms collaboration across the Atlantic.
The defence debate has been accompanied by increasing alarm within the State Department over the public crumbling of the Thatcher government. The diplomatic cables from the US embassy in Grosvenor Square are being scrutinised more intensely each day; there is concern that the political support the US has received in the Thatcher era - on issues ranging from Unesco to Star Wars - could be jeopardised if Mrs Thatcher were to follow Messrs Heseltine and Brittan to the back benches.
When Sikorsky, the helicopter subsidiary of the industrial giant United Technologies Corporation (UTC), made its original dollars 100 million rescue offer for a stake in Westland, the issue caused scarcely a ripple at the US Defence Department.
The link between Sikorsky, the US's biggest helicopter maker which is building some 5,000 Black Hawks and its variants for the US forces, and Westland was seen as acceptable 'as a normal commercial transaction.' But there was no immediate effort to encourage the deal. To the contrary: there was some worry about the Fiat involvement in the Sikorsky bid because of the Italian firm's links with Colonel Gadafy's Libya.
For the Pentagon and US diplomacy the turning point in the Westland affair came when the former Defence Secretary Mr Michael Heseltine publicly produced a European rival consortium just hours before the Sikorsky-Westland deal was to be consummated. It was at this point that the Reagan Administration became an earnest lobbyist for the American link through the regular diplomatic channels.
The blunt confrontational terms which Mr Hesletine used to rubbish the Sikorsky deal were a red rag to a bull within the US defence establishment. Suggestions that it was in Britain's national interest to co-operate with the Europeans rather than accept the American offer were seen as highly offensive. The fires of anti-Americanism which Mr Heseltine had lit - with talk of 'tin bashing' and other emotive terms - were reminiscent of the French at their worst under De Gaulle and Giscard.
'We had occasionally heard that from the French,' a well placed Pentagon anaylist noted. 'That point of view is essentially an exclusionary policy. Two years of efforts at international cooperation were being sacrificed to self-indulgence by that man (Heseltine),' the analyst said.
Mr Heseltine's vigorous public campaign, conducted through every channel available and tinged with raw political ambition, changed the role of the American authorities from innocent bystanders to partisan campaigners on behalf of United Technologies. While UTC's powerful pro-European consultant General Alexander Haig, made the Sikorsky case privately to shareholders, US government officials were making their strong views known through diplomatic channels.
Any public US role was apparently deemed impossible. It would be misconstrued as meddlesome at a time of crises for the Conservative Government. Nevertheless it was seen as essential that the British Government understand the longer term consequences of an exclusionary defence posture. The firm American attitude, passed on by US officials, may well have been an important factor in stiffening the spine of a Prime Minister who was already well disposed to the American link.
On at least one occasion the political pressures which the US was exerting sprung into the public domain. This was when the Trade Secretary Mr Leon Brittan, then fighting (unsuccessfully it turns out) for his political life, told an interviewer that the US had threatened to keep the European airbus out of the American market. Although the trade context of the airbus threat was different, it demonstrated clearly the Reagan Administrations willingness to bowl bouncers, if need should arise, to preserve the Sikorsky deal.
The US's sensitivity to Mr Heseltine's exclusionary policy largely stems from the Herculean efforts inside Congress and the Administration to promote a 'two-way street' in arms procurement across the Atlantic. The goal has been to close the gap and increase the collaboration between the US and Europe in this arms trade. Just two years ago the gap was seven to one in America's favour but as a result of a Pentagon buying spree abroad this has now been reduced to just over three to one.
Britain, oddly enough, has been a major beneficiary of the opening of the American markets to foreign military contractors. Four major foreign aircraft have been bought abroad by the US military - the British Hawk as a US navy trainer, the AV-8B British Harrier for the marine corps's close air support, the Short Brothers C-23 Sherpa for the US air force's European logistical support and the Israel Kfir fighter for the navy's adversary training programme.
The AV-8B Harrier is seen as a prime example in the US of why there must be a healthy European aerospace industry. Despite 25 years of extensive research and development in the US on vertical takeoff technology, only the British product works successfully. In buying into Westland, US defence analysts argue, United Technologies is buying some of the best rotary wing aircraft research and development and manufacturing capacity in the world and not tinbashing as has been claimed.
Mr Edward Luttwak, a strategic expert who acts as a consultant to the Pentagon and State Department, says that Westland is 'a typical British aerospace company. It has lots of talent and is OK at manufacturing, but is terrible at marketing.' Mr Luttwak, a renowned expert and writer on America's defences, argues that the Sikorsky-Fiat link would provide Westland with the management and financial muscle it desperately needs.
It would also be consistent with the new spirit of the two-way street at a time when the Defence Secretary, Mr Caspar Weinberger, the Secretary of State, Mr George Shultz, and Congress - through the work of Senator Sam Nunn (Democrat, Georgia) - have been working hard to develop an increasing range of collaborative projects with Nato. The US Congress had allocated some dollars 250 million (two-and-a-half-times the proposed UTC investment in Sikorsky) to these tasks to include counter-air attack systems, command, control communications and intelligence and maritime defences.
The importance the US attaches to collaborative efforts is emphasised by two recent actions. On December 3, according to informed US sources, Mr Weinberger offered opposite numbers from the UK, France, West Germany and Italy and avionics system for the new European Fighter Aircraft - even though it will eventually be a formidable international successor and rival for the F-15's and F-16's which are currently European defence staples.
Mr Shultz, for his part, prepared carefully for a December 12 Nato meeting during which he emphasised the American willingness to improve Nato arms co-operation. It is in the face of such conciliatory moves as these - after years of American military/industrial imperialism in Europe - that the Heseltine attack seemed like a stab in the back.
With Westland's chairman, Sir John Cuckney, still apparently married to the Sikorsky deal and American threats and complaints ringing in the ears of Mrs Thatcher and Whitehall mandarins, the trans-Atlantic relationship in helicopters may live on. But the shock Mr Heseltine gave the Pentagon will not be quickly forgotten in Washington.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
46 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 27, 1986
Agenda: Labour ducks Atlanticist challenge / Alternatives to Britain's relationships with the US
BYLINE: By FRANCES MORRELL
LENGTH: 1285 words
Atlanticism is the political consensus of our time, replacing the distinctively European democratic socialist consensus of the 1940s and the 1950s. Institutionalised and buttressed by patronage, its beneficiaries occupy virtually all the ruling positions in our society. So by resigning from Mrs Thatcher's Cabinet on the issue that he did, Michael Heseltine threw down a challenge to the Atlanticists in all the major political parties.
Mrs Thatcher is the principal public exponent of Atlanticism - a philosophy which gives absolute priority to Britain's relationship with the United States. The organisation of our defence system and manufacturing industry is integrated with that of the Americans and conducted along similar free market principles. She has been wonderfully successful.
Even as late as the early 1970s it was generally believed that the government had a responsibility to ensure the continued existence of a healthy economy and manufacturing base. Today, ten years later, the proposition that it is not possible for government to intervene and bring about re-industrialisation is scarcely challenged.
The restoration of our manufacturing base is today considered by many to be a positively undesirable goal. Britain's future, runs the argument, will be secured by the profit from capital investment in other more successful economies - like the United States itself. If we sell anything it should be services not only of a financial character, at which we excel, but also education services and health services at which we are also skilled.
Any manufacturing that takes place here should be the result of such inward investment under free market conditions that the United States or Japanese choose to make. They have demonstrated managerial abilities in this direction that we lack. They can provide the capital, take the responsibility, have access to our markets, and repatriate the profits. We benefit from the jobs provided. Certainly, so the Atlanticist argument goes, this strategy will not provide full employment and public services, but it is the best we can do. There is no alternative.
Plainly, we do need an alternative to Atlanticism, if manufacturing industry is to survive, not just in the United Kingdom but in Western Europe as a whole. Tories like Edward Heath, Sir Ian Gilmour, and Peter Walker know this perfectly well. Heseltine must be particularly conscious of the scale to which the national interest is being betrayed by Mrs Thatcher's servility to President Reagan. He had, after all, just been forced to sign the humiliating Star Wars deal. No wonder he had been contemplating resignation for months.
His support for the Westland Euro-option had wider implications than for that single firm. His plan revealed in microcosm his support for a Conservative version of an interventionist European economic strategy and a joint defence strategy. This is a genuine alternative to laissez-faire Thatcherism and could split the Tory Party.
If the Tory Party were to shift towards a Heseltine view, then the consequences within western capitalism could be profound. An Atlanticist Tory government may talk of its free market, non-interventionist philosophy. That simply means a refusal to protect our private sector domestic industry and market against American and Japanese multinationals. Where public sector industrial contracts are involved, the government, at ministerial and official level, is consistently and determinedly pro-American.
The assumption that those who support British membership of the EEC are automatically pro-European is quite false: many are Atlanticists who see EEC membership as the best way of maintaining the Atlanticist hegemony. David Owen, William Rodgers and David Steel are in that category. That is why they have been so silent in this row.
What matters to Labour is the reason for the prolonged silence on the Labour front bench as the Westland dispute developed. It is a fascinating subject for speculation.
The row raged for several weeks before Heseltine's resignation. We learned that Mrs Thatcher, Sir John Cuckney, the Westland workers and Leon Brittan supported the American-led deal. We knew that Michael Heseltine, the West German and Dutch governments, and Ken Gill, General Secretary of Tass, supported the five-firm European consortium. What did Labour think and when would it be revealed?
Charitable friends to whom I put this very question over Christmas explained that the silence of the Labour front bench was almost certainly masterly inactivity. At a shrewdly chosen moment, Labour spokespersons would exploit the divisions within the Tory cabinet and pull off a propaganda triumph, leaving Mrs Thatcher and her ministers squirming. If it was true that a spectacular assault was in secret preparation all the time, then the shadow cabinet should be congratulated on its collective resolve: it must have taken nerves of steel to hold back eager troops from an offensive when the disorganised enemy offered such a tempting target.
It is still, however, not clear what Labour's view is.
Traditionally Labour would have favoured taking Westland Helicopters into public ownership: some of the firms in the European consortium are publicly owned and quite rightly, since they are exclusively clients of the public sector. Perhaps the party has now abandoned public ownership as a policy weapon: if so, this is rather a pity since without public investment it is impossible to mount the reindustrialisation programme which is theoretically at the heart of Labour's plans.
Perhaps Labour's policymakers do not believe that Britain should maintain an ability to manufacture helicopters: this, too, would be rather a surprise since our disarmament policies involve a major strengthening of conventional forces. The most interesting aspect of this whole affair is that no backbenchers in the Parliamentary Labour Party rushed into the breach before Heseltine's resignation. The backbench critics of the parliamentary leadership tend to be opposed to our membership of the European Economic Community and, by extension, suspicious of all things European.
They would oppose the take-over of a British manufacturing capability in the defence sector by a United States company, but would be instinctively unhappy with membership of a European consortium. This backbench vision of democratic socialism in one country, based on an independent manufacturing sector strong enough to compete with the United states and Japan in world markets. is widely shared within the party itself. It is called the Alternative Economic Strategy, and we are no longer strong enough to deliver it - nor brave enough to say so. We need an alternative European economic strategy, but we cannot know what it is until we break our silence and discuss it. Labour's true problem is the absence of a thought-out, anti-Atlanticist position which reflects democratic socialist values.
The true political divide in the west is between the democratic socialist forces within Europe and elsewhere, and the Atlanticist hegemony. Labour needs an alternative European strategy in response. Such a strategy would effectively involve a realignment of Britain's position within the west, in alliance with democratic social forces within Europe. We will need the support of some, at least, of the European trade unions, and democratic parties to carry it through. We should think again about our attitude to Europe. Isolationism is not enough.
This is an edited extract from an article in the current issue of the New Socialist. Frances Morrell is Labour leader of the Inner London Education Authority.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
47 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 27, 1986
Haiti holds militia chief over murders / Tonton Macoute leader Ceres Saint-Phard arrested
BYLINE: From GREG CHAMBERLAIN
LENGTH: 342 words
DATELINE: PORT-AU-PRINCE
Haiti's embattled government has given in to strong foreign and domestic pressure and arrested a leading Tonton Macoute militia chieftan accused of helping to kill three schoolchildren during an anti-government demonstration.
The murder, in the northern town of Gonaives two months ago, set off a wave of protests which have rocked the 28-year-old dictatorship of the President-for-life Jean-Claude Duvalier, and his family. The US has threatened to cut aid to Haiti if the killers are not punished.
An army captain and another militiaman were arrested along with the Tonton Macoute leader, Mr Ceres Saint-Phard, who is regional commander of Gonaives, where sporadic new protests broke out at the weekend.
More than 100 teachers and headmasters meanwhile declared their support for demonstrators' calls for 'more food, justice and freedom' and warned the regime that it would not be able to safely reopen the nation's schools it closed three weeks ago until 'the demands of the Haitian people' were met.
Mr Gregoire Eugene, the leader of the only legal opposition group, the Social Christian Party, accused the government media of 'insulting all Haitians' by attacking the Roman Catholic church's Radio Soleil, the country's most popular and daring station.
Haiti's main weekly, Le Petit Samedi Soir, said the church was now leading the country and had been adopted by Haitians as the only institution they still believed in.
The church's most militant bishop, Monsignor Willy Romelus, meanwhile called the regime 'a ripe fruit, ready to fall, but oddly still on the tree.'
In an interview in his diocese in the remote south western town of Jeremie, he said he saw no way out of the crisis for the president. 'What can he do now? What can he give? It's too late.'
The quietly spoken 55-year-old bishop, who is seen as the driving force behind the slow revolt against the Duvaliers, said he was against violence but that Haiti had 'lived a fiasco' for 28 years. Young people were determined to hold out, he said.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
48 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 27, 1986
Gadafy returns to base unscathed / 'Symbolic' actions of the Libyan leader confronting the US Sixth Fleet
LENGTH: 346 words
DATELINE: MISURATA
The Libyan leader, Colonel Gadafy, returned unscathed to Misurata the same day as he departed to confront 'to the death' the US Sixth Fleet, Libyan state television reported yesterday.
A film showed Colonel Gadafy stepping ashore at Misurata Harbour on Saturday, hours after he departed on a missile-laden patrol boat with much dash and bravado. He returned to the cheers of Libyan sailors.
A Western ambassador in Tripoli said: 'Like he often does, Gadafy probably intended his gesture of sailing out to confront the Sixth Fleet to be taken symbolically, rather than literally.
'To him, the symbol he exhibits to his people is more important than the reality of his action.'
The day after the Sixth Fleet announced weeklong air exercises above what Colonel Gadafy regards as Libyan waters, he had a group of foreign reporters flown the 125 miles to the naval base of Misurata to watch his gesture of defiance.
Wearing a green-and-blue ski outfit and an admiral's cap, he announced that he was sailing the 300 miles to Benghazi at the eastern side of the Gulf of Sidra 'to prove to the Americans that we are here.'
In Rome the head of the Arab League yesterday urged the United States to reconsider its staging of military exercises in the southern Mediterranean, to avoid provoking Libya.
'There is in the Mediterranean an American military demonstration destined perhaps to exercise pressure or create a climate of tension,' said Mr Chadli Klibi.
'This is regrettable. We hope that the United States of America reconsiders its position toward this intention, to avoid any demonstration of force that could constitute a threat or a provocation. We want the Mediterranean Sea to remain a sea of peace, and that, if there are tensions, problems, or conflicts of interest, that dialogue will be the means to resolve the difficulties that can spring up.'
Colonel Gadafy has meanwhile threatened to strike at US military bases in the Mediterranean in the event of an American attack on Libya, a Greek left-wing newspaper reported yesterday.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
49 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 27, 1986
US to demonstrate support for Unita / Reagan administration's support for the Angolan rebel group
BYLINE: From MARK TRAN
LENGTH: 514 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
The Reagan Administration will seize the opportunity of tomorrow's visit to the United States by the Angolan rebel leader, Mr Jonas Savimbi, to demonstrate its strong moral and political support for his Unita group with perhaps financial aid to follow later.
Apart from meetings with President Reagan and the Secretary of State, Mr George Shultz, Mr Savimbi is scheduled to give private briefing to the National Security Council on his war effort against the Government in Luanda, he will officials in a closed door meeting.
The Reagan Administration is coming under strong pressure from some congressional elements to provide aid for Mr Savimbi. Although there is unease over being tarred with the South African brush because of Pretoria's backing for Unita, the State Department is positioning itself to give aid.
It raised eyebrows last week by referring to Unita as a legitimate nationalist movement. The White House has begun discussing with the congressional committees on intelligence on an intitial plan for dollars 10 to dollars 15 million in clandestine military aid to be funnelled through the CIA.
Mr Reagan has also widened the stakes by arguing that American success at this year's scheduled summit meeting in the US with Mr Gorbachev will depend partly on Soviet perception of US resolve as demonstrated for US support for anti-Communist guerrillas around the world.
The head of the Savimbi campaign is Representative Mark Siljander, who has gathered 10 co-sponsors for a bill that would provide Unita with dollars 27 million in above the board military aid.
But Mr Shultz, in an interview with the New York Times, voiced reservations about the idea. But agreed with it in principle. 'If Congress expressed itself in a general way, without any particular precise commitment, but just in the general nature of what they support - including support for seeing a sensible settlement of the whole matter, including Namibia,' a congressional resolution along these lines is strongly on the cards while Mr Savimbi is here.
Mr Shultz has conducted a rearguard action to prevent the Administration to provide aid to Unita, and if forced to do so would rather do it covertly. Mr Shultz indicated that a negotiated settlement definitely remained possible. 'It's a long hard process .. and I don't want to give away any impression that we're about to find a solution. But the process is alive, and the exchanges are of such a nature that movement is discernible.'
The US has been trying to broke a settlement through its constructive engagement policy of getting the South Africans to withdraw from Namibia in return for a pull-out from Angola of 30,000 Cuban troops. The top State Department official for African affairs, Mr Chester Crocker, recently returned from another round of talks with Angolan and South African leaders, but there was still deadlock over the Cuban troop withdrawal. Angola has offered to send some Cubans home and move the rest away from the South African border but the US and South Africa want a complete pull-out.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
50 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 27, 1986
Tutu returns as 'critical' week begins in S Africa
BYLINE: From DAVID BERESFORD
LENGTH: 637 words
DATELINE: JOHANNESBURG
At the beginning of what may prove a critical week for South Africa, attention today is on the expected arrival at Johannesburg of the 1985 Nobel peace price winner, Bishop Desmond Tutu, returning from the US to heated controversy over appeals to the West for help in overthrowing the Pretoria government.
There is no indication yet that the Government is planning action against the bishop. After a three-week visit to the US, Bishop Tutu has reinforced his image as white South Africa's favourite domestic bogeyman following reports that during his whistle-stop tour he had raised the spectre of black maids delivering poison to their employees with morning coffee and of the Government nuking the black population.
During his absence he has been subjected to attack by cabinet ministers and the state run South African Broadcasting Corporation. They have been helped in their denunciations by criticism of the bishop from the US Vice-President, George Bush, who reportedly suggested that he was hardly living up to the Nobel award.
The attacks have centred mainly on a comment the Anglican Bishop of Johannesburg made in Atlanta, Georgia - when receiving the Martin Luther King Jr non-violence prize - that he hoped the West would eventually come to support the African National Congress, which had sought to change an unjust society peacefully and non-violently, only to be forced into armed struggle by South African state violence. The statement is, at least historically, less open to challenge than others he has made.
The prospect of a new Church-state confrontation in the near future is being raised not only by Bishop Tutu's utterances, but also by a threatened challenge to Pretoria by the Roman Catholic hierarchy. which is in the middle of its annual conference of Southern African Catholic Bishops.
After a memorial service yesterday in Mamelodi township, near Pretoria, for 13 people killed last November in clashes with the security forces, the Catholic Archbishop of Durban, the Rt Rev Denis Hurley, said that his Church was 'about to introduce a change of attitude in answer to what is happening in South Africa,' adding: 'We have to talk much more directly now to the black liberation movement.'
During the service, called to show Church solidarity with victims of apartheid, Sjamboks, rubber bullets, teargas canisters, petrol bombs, and rocks were displayed as symbols of the violence in the townships and dumped in a refuse bin as a gesture of support for the abandonment of violence.
Church controversies are expected to be overtaken in the public attention this week, however, by the build-up to the speech to be delivered by the State President, Mr PW Botha, at the opening of Parliament in Cape Town on Friday. It is being dubbed 'Rubicon 2' in derisive reference to the anti-climatic speech delivered by the state President last August when he grandly declared that South Africa had crossed the Rubicon of reform, but failed to disclose what lay on the other side.
The speech was widely blamed, domestically, for the subsequent collapse of the South African currency in foreign exchange markets. With inflation now rocketing towards the 20 per cent mark, largely as a result of the Rand's collapse, there are widespread fears among whites that the currency's recent recovery will be aborted by another dismal performance from Mr Botha.
Unlike Rubicon 1, the speech is being played down in advance by the Government, although this is having little effect on the sense of anticipation. Public figures ranging from the Swiss banker Mr Fritz Leutwiler, who is currently negotiating South Africa's debt problem, to Chief Buthelezi and the leader of the opposition, Dr Frederik van Zyl Slabbert, are heralding it as one of necessarily historic importance.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
51 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 27, 1986
CND seeks nuclear bunker inquiry after security guards are accused / Controversy over Carmathen district council's decision to build a nuclear bunker
BYLINE: By TONY HEATH
LENGTH: 339 words
The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament is asking a parliamentary committee to investigate the building of a controversial nuclear bunker by Carmarthen district council.
CND's approach to the select committee on Welsh affairs has been prompted by the activities of security guards hired by the council to patrol the site, which is surrounded by a spiked 12-foot high steel fence topped with barbed wire.
The site, a council-owned car park, has been the scene of a number of demonstrations stretching back more than six months.
Earlier this month, Ms Sue Pitman, treasurer of CND in Wales, had a finger torn off when security men dragged her from the fence. At earlier protests, two campaigners and a local councillor claimed that they were bitten by the guards' dogs.
The security men belong to Pritchard Security Services, one of some 30 companies in the Pritchard Services Group which has interests stretching from the United States to Saudi Arabia. The group is a leading provider of privatised services to the NHS and local authorities.
Facing mounting public protests, the council last week passed a resolution supporting the security company despite a warning by a Liberal councillor, Mr David Nam, that the authority should not condone actions which, he claimed, could endanger life.
The Chief Constable of Dyfed-Powys, Mr Richard Thomas, has confirmed that his officers are investigating the incident in which Ms Pitman was injured.
Mr Keith Jones, the council secretary, said the estimated cost of the work, originally pounds 60,000 had risen to pounds 142,000, of which pounds 91,300 was for security,' evictions and legal actions to deal with the peace campaigners.
Under the government's civil defence regulations the Home Office agreed to meet 75 per cent of the cost when the project was first mooted.
The council's chief executive, Mr Vaughan Williams, says that the building will be used as an emergency control centre to deal with eventualities such as floods or heavy snowfalls.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
52 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 27, 1986
More people is no excuse for less jobs / 'Charter for Jobs' Economic Report published
BYLINE: By our Economic Staff
LENGTH: 232 words
The Government is wrong to claim that the main reason why unemployment has increased is due to more people coming onto the jobs market, according to the Economic Report of 'Charter for Jobs' published today.
The report from the campaigning arm of the Employment Institute says that official statistics show that the main reason for the rise in unemployment since 1979 has been a net loss of 1.1 million jobs. Between 1979 and 1984, Britain lost almost twice as many jobs as the rest of the European Community put together, the report written by ex-Treasury economist Jon Shields says.
Though the number of people looking for work in Britain has recently been rising quite fast, similar episodes in the past have not been accompanied by rising unemployment. The United States is currently experiencing a rapidly expanding labour supply at the same time as falling unemployment.
Though labour supply is likely to rise less fast in Britain over the next few years, a much faster rate of job creation - particularly in full-time jobs - will be needed to bring down unemployment substantially, the report argues.
It cites evidence that even a cut in the published unemployment total of 1.25 million to a level of 2 million would require 2.3 million extra jobs since many would be taken by those not previously counted as unemployed because not entitled to claim benefits.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
53 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 25, 1986
Union Carbide sets up Bhopal special reserve / US company sets aside cash to cover legal costs over Indian plant disaster
BYLINE: From ALEX BRUMMER
LENGTH: 253 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
The chemical group Union Carbide has set aside a special reserve of dollars 99.9 million to cover legal costs associated with the Bhopal disaster in India. The new reserve together with restructuring costs associated with its fight to stay independent resulted in a large loss of dollars 582 million for the full year.
Union Carbide's decision to set up a Bhopal reserve is its first public admission of liability in the disaster. The company is currently engaged in a court battle with lawyers representing the Government of India and Bhopal victims who want the case to be heard in the US courts. Union Carbide favours a damages trial in the Indian courts.
Mr Warren Anderson chief Executive of Union Carbide said that the company had established the reserve to demonstrate its 'willingness' to settle the Bhopal compensation cases. Carbide's best offer so far to the victims is reportedly in the order of dollars 240 million against the dollars 500-600 million being asked for by lawyers representing the Bhopal victims and their families. Some 1,750 people died in the Bhopal disaster and tens of thousands of others were injured.
There was speculation here yesterday that Carbide's accountants would have been required to qualify its annual report if the company had neglected to make a formal provision against the claims. In addition to the special reserve Carbide is understood to have some dollars 200 million in liability insurance which it can draw upon when the claims a settled.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
54 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 25, 1986
SIB chief takes a drop in pay / Sir Kenneth Berrill to take up post as head of securities and investment board
BYLINE: By MARGARETA PAGANO
LENGTH: 289 words
Sir Kenneth Berrill, the former chairman of stockbrockers Vickers da Costa, is to be paid pounds 110,000 a year for his full-time post as head of the City's new watchdog, the Securities and Investment Board.
Sir Kenneth took on the job last March without knowing the terms of employment or pay, but his new salary is almost certainly well below what he received as head of Vickers. It sold out to the US Citibank, on of the world's largest banks, in a pounds 20 million package soon after the government gave Stock Exchange firms the go-ahead to allow outsiders to take control.
The Bank of England, which appoints the SIB directors with the Department of Trade and Industry, has set the pay scale which has to be at competitive rates to attract top practitioners out of their lucrative posts, in the City.
Sir Martin Jacomb, who turned down the SIB chairmanship and is now chairman of the new Barclays de Zoete Wedd investment houses, is to be paid pounds 12,560 for his part-time role as deputy chairman. All the other SIB directors - part time - are to be paid pounds 8,606 a year.
The SIB board and its executive and admnistrative staff, 'will be entirely funded by the City. One of the most pressing problems facing the SIB is how it will draw up a levy system on the new self-regulatory organisations which it will control.
Each SRO is to draw up its own plans on how it will levy the costs of day-to-day administration and its contribution to SIB's running costs.
At present it is estimated that the SIB will eventually need a total staff of about 100. So far it is recruiting a hard core of legal and accountancy staff to beef up its executive, which will probably number about two dozen staff.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
55 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 25, 1986
Financial Notebook: Anything that comes out of Whitehall will be recorded and misused in evidence / Government non-intervention policy in the money markets
BYLINE: By PETER RODGERS
LENGTH: 458 words
Almost exactly a year ago, the government shot itself in the foot through careless briefings on interest rate and foreign exchange policy. The markets were wrongly informed by an official spokesman, talking to the Parliamentary lobby, that the Prime Minister was prepared to let sterling go. The result was the huge January rise in base rates, as the government corrected the blunder and propped up the pound.
The same unfortunate Downing Street people responsible for the miffed brief- ings of lobby correspondents were busy shooting themselves in their other feet this week, in the Westland leaks affair. Does this account for what - cross fingers - might just prove to be a successful handling of the latest interest rate and sterling crisis?
The secret, as it were, seems to have been to say nothing. This must be on the theory anything that comes out of Whitehall will be taken down by the markets and misused in evidence, The other part of the trick has been to keep the actual intervention in the money markets as low key as possible. The clearing banks, have been left to stew in uncertainty.
After an exceptionally strong indication to the markets over a week ago that interest rates ought not to go up, this week's response to even stronger pressure for a rise has been for the Bank of England to stick to the existing dealing rates while avoiding showy displays of muscle.
Nobody in the Treasury or the Bank is yet relaxed enough to uncross fingers, because it is in the nature of the money markets to take a breather between two or three day bouts of fury.
The oil price may go on down to Sheikh Yamani's dollars 15 a barrel and the pound may fall, US interest rates may rise again, the Leon Brittan resignation could make Mrs Thatcher's reign look much less secure by Monday afternoon - and it is impossible to overlook the fact that the money market rates are still putting strong technical pressure on the clearing banks to raise their base lending rates.
It could all look very different next week. But if you are worried about your mortgage over the weekend, the plus side is that there has been a 27 per cent oil price slide in three weeks, a 4.6 per cent exchange rate drop yet only 1 per cent on base rates, and that over a fortnight ago, before the real oil panic began.
Considering the sheer size of the oil collapse the other changes are not as dramatic as they might have been. The Treasury must be praying that the markets continue to believe the claim that the effect of oil price falls on the economy is neutral. Given how much more awful it could have been, Treasury officials will probably be sleeping soundly for a couple of nights. They may need the rest, to cope with next week.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
56 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 25, 1986
Britannia sails regally into steamy Djibouti chaos / Evacuation from South Yemen
BYLINE: From IAN BLACK
LENGTH: 758 words
DATELINE: DJIBOUTI
It was well after 1 am when the royal yacht, Britannia, came steaming grandly into Djibouti harbour yesterday - lights blazing from stern to bow and the Royal Marine band on the upper deck booming out Land of Hope and Glory into the hot African night.
Officers in bow ties, white tails and silk cummerbunds stood stiffly to attention next to their haggard Indian and Bangladeshi passengers as the gang plank was lowered. On the quayside below, Her Majesty's honorary Consul scurried about for his sixth consecutive night without sleep arranging disembarkation for the 440 hapless evacuees brought to safety from the fighting in South Yemen.
Britannia's arrival was just another bizarre scene in a week of extraordinary events that have shaken the tiny republic of Djibouti out of its normal sun-drenched somnolence and catapulted its 350,000 people into the centre of world attention.
Hundreds of journalists, from Los Angeles to Tokyo, have been competing with the Yemen evacuees for places in the town's few hotels. Local taxi drivers, quietly chewing huge wads of qat, the leafy narcotic sold in handy, plastic-wrapped bundles, have been raking in undreamed of profits for pre-dawn trips down to the port to see the refugee boats come in.
In these strange times, half-naked Somali stevedores load hump-backed cattle into wooden dhows berthed alongside huge Soviet freighters and British and French warships.
The city itself is normally a quiet tourist haven laid out in faded French colonial elegance, with white colonnades, passable cafe au lait, and policemen complete with kepis and neatly-pressed khaki shorts. There is one government newspaper, a few souvenir shops and a lot of cripples.
The biggest excitement is usually watching the presidential motorcade and its fleet of motor cycle outriders go by in their sparkling white and green-piped gear. For visitors, the sultry nights are given over to gambling, heavy drinking, and steamy encounters between burly French foreign legionnaires and exotic, expensive whores.
Out in the Red Sea, there have been other more unusual forms of international cooperation, with the Soviet liaison officer on the Britannia talking to the Russian Embassy in Aden and French and British frigates saluting each other in the 180 miles between South Yemen and Djibouti.
But it has not all been smooth, and the entente cordiale has taken a severe battering ever since the French Ambassador here went out of his way to announce that HMS Jupiter had been sunk by a missile off Aden harbour.
Happily, it was not true, and the Jupiter, together with HMS Newcastle, was doing sterling work on Thursday ferrying visitors out to the Britannia on its nippy little Lynx helicopter. But when the captain said that the evacuated French Ambassador to Aden had dined on board the Britannia, a French journalist thought he said ' died' aboard the Royal Yacht.
The Djiboutians - a half-African, half-Arab people, whose country was once called French Somaliland or worse, in an extreme example of unashamedly colonial nomenclature, as the Territory of the Afars and Issas - have been taking all this activity in their stride. The President, Mr Hassan Gouled Aptidon has appealed ineffectually from his heavily- guarded seafront palace for an end to the Yemen fighting and no outside intervention.
The local diplomatic community, however, has been feeling the strain. The resident South Yemen watcher at the American Embassy has been besieged with requests for information about the fighting, but will say only that he has no idea what is happening. Unusually, journalists tend to believe this.
Mr Christopher Reddington, the honorary British Consul, whose main job is manager of the local branch of the British Bank if the Middle East, has emerged as something of a local hero for his efforts in dealing with the evacuation.
Short of demanding that he remain undisturbed in normal siesta hours, Mr Reddington has gone out of his way to cope with the trying circumstances. His portly figure and fine command of French - coming straight, it is generally agreed, out of a Graham Greene novel - have brought a measure of ordered, if idiosyncratic, sanity to the reigning chaos.
The Russians, meanwhile, looked just like all other evacuees, tired and thread-bare at the international airport as they waited to board two giant Ilyushin transport planes. 'It is nice,' one veteran US newspaper correspondent snarled, 'to see the Soviets in a no-win situation for a change.'
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
57 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 25, 1986
US steps up action in Gulf of Sidra / Manoeuvres off Libyan coast
BYLINE: From ALEX BRUMMER
LENGTH: 327 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
US naval aircraft yesterday commenced fLying operations in the region of the Gulf of Sidra, as the State Department emphasised America's resolve to conduct manoeuvres in what it considers international waters. The operations began despite Colonel Gadafy's warning that the US is 'playing with fire.'
Colonel Gadafy said yesterday he had placed his navy and air force in a state of 'total alert' following the announcement of US air and naval operations off the Libyan coast. He said he had ordered Libyan aircraft out over the Gulf of Sidra 'to defend Libya's territorial waters.'
The stepped-up military operations in the region, involving two aircraft carrier groups came as it was disclosed here that President Reagan has also ordered that more CIA man power and money be directed at covert operations against Libya. US envoys have also been dispatched to Egypt discussions with President Mubarak of future military operation in the region.
The Reagan Administration appears determined to keep 'war of nerves' against Colonel Gadafy's Libya at a high level, in response to its alleged role in the Rome and Vienna airport attacks, although US officials say that any military action directly against Libya would be unlikely unless he was found responsible for any future terrorist attacks.
The US carriers were yesterday reported by Pentagon sources to be in the central Mediterranean, due north of Libya, which put them around 70 miles from the Libyan coast. The Libyan Government claims the whole of the Gulf of Sidra and its airspace as national territory, while the US recognises territorial waters as extending just 12 miles from the coast.
'These operations are intended to demonstrate once again US resolve to operate in international waters and air space throughout the world,' the State Department spokes. man, Mr Bernard Kalb, said last night. Mr Kalb pointed out that similar operations had been carried out by US forces.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
58 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 25, 1986
Why angry Haitians killed a peace offering of pigs / Focus on resistance to the Duvalier government
BYLINE: By GREG CHAMERLAIN
LENGTH: 966 words
The thousands of tiny red and black paper flags with President Jean-Claude Duvalier's picture, which are strung across the streets of every large Haitian town, have been ripped down by the angry citizens here.
Destroyed too are the smiling portraits of the presidential couple which once hung in every government office in this dusty town - Haiti's fourth largest - on the edge of a searingly-hot cactus plain. Even the pigs, sent by the regime as gifts to appease the 70,000 inhabitants, have been killed as symbols of a hated government.
If Haitians have a holy town, Gonaives is it. Jean-Jacques Dessalines proclaimed the world's first independent black republic here in 1804 after a bloody war against the French slave owners. Nearly a century ago, self-styled generals would set out with their followers to march the 100 miles south to the capital, Port-au-Prince, and seize the Presidency.
It is here, on a day which may prove to have changed Haitian history, that the Duvaliers' troops shot three teenagers two months ago and set off the first important protests against the brutal dynasty which has ruled Haiti for the last 25 years.
Gonaives boasts one factory. It employs a few dozen people and makes matches. The last big industry - a Canadian copper mine in the denuded mountains nearby - closed 15 years ago, and 1,000 jobs were lost. About 80 per cent of the working-aged population is unemployed.
The President recently sent Colonel Abel Jerome - famed for his alleged role years ago in a massacre of the regime's opponents - to the town with orders to distribute dollar bills to the poor. In another effort to deal with the fractious townspeople, troops reportedly pulled a young man off a passing bicycle, forced him to stand neck deep in a sewer, and then beat him senseless.
'This place is the reef on which the regime will founder,' one young Gonaivian said. 'During the demonstrations in recent weeks. We have gone to kneel before the statue of Dessalines. We are ready to do 1804 all over again. We are ready for civil war if necessary.'
Down in the wretched slums of Raboteau and Lot Bo Kanal, a stone's throw from the main street and not far from the ochre-painted barracks housing 150 troops of the regime's anti-subversion force - the Leopards, Delinois, aged 23, says: 'There is nothing here, nothing. Why don't the Americans help us? We might as well try the Cubans. Conditions here are worse than Communism.'
Bitterness against the US and its long support for the Duvaliers is not hard to find, especially among the more educated. The hundreds of Gonaives boat people - picked up by the US coast guard on illegal journeys to a promised land and returned to the likes of Raboteau - are also bitter.
'We're occupied,' said Gasner, who spent a year in Canada. ' They pay everyone in the regime. Where else could the money come from?, We are in misery because they send us millions of dollars. North of Gonaives, life looks a little better. Just a few miles away, over the mountains, there is water in the river beds and lush vegetation. Last week there was even a flood.
But the same anger prevails. On a government hoarding, lauding the President, the 'for life' part of his title has been removed.
Several miles to the west is the family estate of the President's father-in-law. Ernest Bennett, in the village of La Borgne (the one-eyed man). Enraged peasants recently chopped down trees and blocked roads when he tried to help himself to some of their land. The President obligingly sent in some troops to settle the matter.
Near the northern city of Cap Haitien, huge old stone gateposts are the only traces left of the French sugar plantations razed by Dessalines and his men to the cry of 'koupe tet, bwule kay' (cut off heads, burn the houses).
In Cap Haitien, which has the mixed fortune of an intelligent, easy-going military commander and a fawning and ineffectual prefect. The Government pays the road sweepers dollars 5 a week to keep their eyes and ears open for hints of subversion as they move up and down the narrow streets of old wooden houses.
A travel agent, Auguste Robinson, was dismissed as the city's prefect last year after opposing the President's suggestion that government agents visit a Belgian priest to persuade him to 'correct' the reporting on his local church radio station.
Mr Robinson, however, presents himself as a militant Duvalierist. Rut his yearning for the firmer, less corrupt, if more terrifying days when Francois 'Papa Doc' Duvalier ruled the land illustrates the present crisis.
'The Jean-Claudistes have ruined everything,' he said. 'The people must eat, but the Government does nothing.' He blames the President's three most senior ministers, purged three weeks ago, who, he says, pillaged the treasury for four years and produced the present 'very explosive' situation.
Back in Port-au-Prince, Clovis Desinor, a cabinet minister for 13 years under Papa Doc, sits amid the expensive furnishings of his sumptuous suburban villa and deplores the 'money everywhere and the lining of pockets.'
He boasts of the 'stable budgets' he served up as finance minister. Now 70, he issues communiques criticising the Government and says that the regime's policies are 'an insult to misery.'
As the poor demonstrated for food and work across the country a fortnight ago, the President's energetic wife threw a lavish caviar and champagne reception in the cool hills above the capital for her friend, Princess Ashraf, sister of the late Shah and one of the world's richest women.
The regime's next test is a carnival in two weeks' time. It is not clear whether there will be riots or dancing. 'If we have a good carnival, we're clear,' a government official said.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
59 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 25, 1986
Paisley fears for economy under Dublin and predicts social services as casualty / Ulster Unionist leader forecasts economic difficulties under United Ireland
LENGTH: 530 words
The Reverend Ian Paisley this week provided an imaginative account of the harsh economic climate that, would envelop Northern Ireland if Dublin rule was extended across the border.
Firing the final salvoes in the present phase of the Unionists' battle against the Anglo-Irish agreement, he said that old age pensions, sickness and unemployment benefits would be lower.
Standards of education would slip 10 years behind those in the United Kingdom. A pound would be worth only 80p and higher VAT would put pounds 1 on a gallon of petrol and pounds 1,000 on the cost of a new car. Even postage stamps would be dearer.
The Democratic Unionist leader avoided mentioning the massive dependency of the north's economy on increasing public spending.
Total government spending in Northern Ireland this year is set at pounds 4,520 million an increase of pounds 250 million on 1985. Public spending today provides 75 per cent of the north's gross domestic products and 45 per cent of its jobs.
By far the largest item is social security payments, with 121,822 of Northern Ireland's population of 1.5 million claiming benefits. Unemployment across the province is 21 per cent and as high as 40 per cent in some parts of Londonderry and Strabane.
The two largest employers, the aircraft and missile producers Shorts Brothers and the Shipbuilders Harland and Wolff, are heavily dependent on government contracts and funding.
Harland and Wolff's Belfast yard, which made pounds 27.9 million trading loss in 1985, is to receive pounds 36.5 million in support from the Government this year about pounds 7,000 per head for each of its 5,200 employees.
With such a massive dependency on government spending, it is not surprising that Unionist leaders like Mr Paisley have reacted angrily to charges that their implacable hostility to the Anglo-Irish agreements can only end in Loyalists declaring some form of unilateral independence.
They know that the fiscal link between the mainland and Ulster is as vital to their supporters as the political union which Mr Paisley claims is under threat. On its own, the province would go bust in under a week.
Unionist leaders in the months ahead will come under increasing pressure to consider the consequences of continuing their determination to wreck the London-Dublin accord.
A spin-off of the deal is United States investment in industry and commerce north and south of the border. That, too, would fail to materialise if Loyalists achieved their stated aim of forcing the Government to pull out of the agreement.
Unionist leaders, this week sent a depressing message around the chambers of commerce when they began talking about a consumer boycott of firms whose owners had declared themselves in favour of giving the agreement a chance.
The situation cannot continue indefinitely, the authoritative Ulster management consultants, Coopers and Lybrand, warned in their annual review of the province's economy published earlier this month.
But as long as terrorism and more damaging for investment - political instability persist, the province will continue to be a huge drain on the Exchequer.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
60 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 24, 1986
Futures: How foreign Legions invade / British research into Legionnaires' disease
BYLINE: By ANTONY TUCKER
LENGTH: 1712 words
During the decade since Legionnaires' disease struck down a group of US veterans in Philadelphia, in an epidemic so local and intense that it was first thought to be food poisoning, scientists have been trying to unravel the mysterious behaviour of the bug that causes the infection Legionella pneumophila. Said to be common in the environment, especially in soil, the Legionnaires' bacterium only becomes a public health problem when it is associated in some way with warm water, especially warm water which is reaching the atmosphere in the form of fine droplets.
The simple explanation, that the bacteria become airborne on droplets or particles and are inhaled, does not explain why epidemics are relatively rare, unconnected and local. We are surrounded by cooling towers, air-conditioning outlets, and a living environment throbbing with microbes (the vast majority of whose members are decidedly beneficial), so how is that an organism as common and pathogenic as L pneumophila only crops up here and there? And when local epidemics occur, how is it that there is seldom any direct relationship between the length of time people have spent in the region of a suspected infective source, and the incidence of infection? More important, perhaps, than these questions, is how is the pathogen normally controlled in the environment? The answer is a necessary key to adequate public health measures.
Logically connected answers to all these questions are now crystallising around the past three years of research carried out at the Leeds Public Health Laboratory and in laboratories in the US. At Leeds, Dr Tim Rowbotham, working rather against the tide of conventional opinion, has demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt that the major environmental reservoir of the Legionnaires' bug is a very small and ubiquitous species of amoeba for which it is normally no more than a snippet of grub.
Amoebae and other protozoa, whether we like it or not, are invisibly present in their myriads around us and, most of the time, are being extremely useful by gobbling up bacteria including those which might be pathogenic. Because we come into contact with many amoebae in soil, water and in the air we breathe, we develop resistance against those which might be invasive, much as we develop resistance against bacteria and other smaller disease organisms.
In evolutionary terms we emerged on an earth already long-colonised by the 'simple' unicellular creatures and thus our development, like that of all the complex plants and animals, depended on an ability to cohabit with existing life forms. It does still.
Less obvious, but more pertinent to the Legionnaires' problem, is the fact that some of the cells of our bodies - and their machinery - have remarkable similarities to the microbes which first inherited the earth. Many of our component cells contain organelles which seem to be modified, enslaved bacteria, working away for our benefit through gene-based biotechnology that has been operating throughout the mists of time.
Among, the most important of our defensive mechanisms, are cells called macrophages which roam around our tissues gobbling up invading bacteria or other foreign proteins like an organised police squad dealing with a local riot. These have an unexplained ability to communicate and, when a bacterial invasion occurs, they come sliding in en-masse to help keep things under control.
They are, in fact, very like the smaller amoebae which inhabit the earth around us and which, in normal conditions, keep bacterial growth under control. It was this similarity which led public health investigators to look at the context of Legionnaires' outbreaks in terms of amoebae.
One distinctive characteristic of the Legionnaires' bug is that, once in the body, it disables and then multiplies within our cellular policemen - our macrophages - when these are below par, as in the elderly, in heavy smokers, or during an existing infection. A weary macrophage will gobble up a bacteria in the normal way but, overwhelmed by the effects of the bacterial toxin, it then ceases to function and becomes instead an encapsulated bacterial farm, swelling up as the bacteria multiply. Eventually it disrupts, releasing a new horde of bacteria to invade other mobile cells.
The connection made by Dr Rowbotham and confirmed, paradoxically, in the recent Legionnaires' outbreak at Lincoln Police Headquarters, is between the amoeboid macrophages invaded during infection, and their bacteria-eating counterparts in the environment. One of the most elegant aspects of the living world at this microbial level is the fastidious nature of the diets of different species of even closely related organisms. The question asked by the research workers was whether, among the many hundreds of different types of amoebae around us, there are some which have a special relationship with the Legionnaires' bug.
It has turned out that the commonest infective form of the Legionnaires' organism (known as serogroup 1) also readily infects the Acanthamoebae - probably the commonest and most widespread genus - which turn up in all soils, most surface water and which, in rare circumstances, are themselves capable of causing disease. Like most amoebae, these mobile bacteria-eating cells have the ability to transform into thick-walled protective cysts when life gets difficult for them. In their encysted form they are very tough and can certainly survive the levels of chlorination common in public supply water.
In normal circumstances, the Acanthamoebae graze on the bacterial flora around them and, among other things, keep pace with the rate of bacterial multiplication. But, at a critical temperature - in the range of between 30C and 55C - the situation becomes inverted. The amoebae can no longer cope. In a direct parallel with the process of infection, the Legionella bugs become able to multiply within a very specific and narrow group of amoebae.
Each serotype of the Legionnaires' organism (there are now four) appears to be fastidious in its choice, becoming specifically attracted to only a few species. In the laboratory the bacteria are seen to cluster around the points at which the amoeba's food vacuoles empty. Then they invade. Once inside they multiply rapidly, either filling it to bursting point or forming one or more balloon-like internal vesicles which swell until the host bursts.
Each vesicle contains hundreds or thousands of Legionella bugs. On release these are attracted neither to dread amoebae nor to most other common amoebae, only to specific hosts. These sometimes encyst with Legionella bugs inside them, forming a robust natural disease reservoir.
So the Legionnaires' bug can grow to large colonies only where Acanthamoebae or its other hosts exist in colonies whose condition is such that abnormal invasive behaviour is encouraged. We are talking about things which occupy very little space. A gramme of moist soil will probably contain about a billion bacteria of one kind or another, and about half a million amoebae, including many cysts. Tiny though these creatures are it is always worth remembering that they can multiply with incredible rapidity.
It was Professor John Postgate who pointed out that a single bacterium of the most rapidly dividing kind - given the food and the right conditions - could reach a mass equal to that of the earth in 48 hours. Impossible, fortunately, but it warns us of their power.
If the Legionnaires' bug exists as a disease reservoir in amoebic cysts and the water supplies contain viable cysts of the appropriate species, the disease loop is poised for completion wherever the right conditions are created. The final step is the carriage in an aerosol droplet, or as a membrane covered packet, of a Legionella-stuffed vesicle or amoeba.
Research has shown that it takes about a thousand Legionella organisms in a droplet to infect experimental animals. The amoebic vesicles may contain several thousand. If human infection were by a single packet of bugs, then you would expect the disease to develop first in one lobe of the lungs. It does. Further, since a single vesicle could cause infection, only one exposure in the locality of an infected aerosol could produce disease. This explains the apparent lack of correlation between disease incidence and the length of time exposed people spend in an area where a source of infection is shown to exist.
The 'right conditions,' of course, are all man-made, in cooling towers, mixer-taps, and the cosily warm regions of water systems. Dr Rowbotham has found that he can culture Acanthamoebae and other amoebae shown to carry the Legionella bug from virtually any tap in the country, as others have now found in the US. Further, the serotype of the disease that crops up in a particular region appears linked to specific species of amoebae.
This is not something to worry about except, of course, to avoid creating the conditions in which the amoebae lose control of the situation. Stepping water temperature up to 55deg. Centigrade to kill the Legionnaires' bug is no solution if it also involves mixer taps. For in any unswept few millimetres of volume between hot and cold streams the Legionnaires' bug may get the upper hand.
One of the most important facets of these discoveries is that they open up, as of great potential importance, the environmental and ecological relationships of the bacteria and the protozoa, of which the amoebae form only a small part. Although the protozoa are all around us, their general study - much neglected in microbiology - is now almost extinct in Britain at an international professional level, a situation that in itself is deplorable.
Yet, in the chaos of random and vandalistic Government cuts, Britain's single key nucleus of wide erudition - the Culture Centre for Algae and Protozoa at Cambridge, run by the so-called Natural Environment Research Council - is at this moment being destroyed. Quite apart from the industrial importance which these groups of microbes will increasingly gather in the years ahead, the public health implications make it imperative that such centres should be built up, not wantonly fragmented.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
61 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 24, 1986
Small Business: The first step is to spot the winner / Economic decline and the creation of new jobs
BYLINE: By DAVID STOREY
LENGTH: 1004 words
For many years I have argued that attempting so create new jobs in the small business sector is not a solution either to Britain's long term economic decline or to its relatively recent increase in unemployment. This is partly because of the slow process of job creation in the small business sector in any economy, and partly because the British central government is pressing inappropriate policies.
Too much emphasis is given to encouraging the start-up of new businesses with a view to establishing the so-called 'enterprise culture,' when failure rates of new firms are very high. Furthermore policies to 'review' health and safety regulations or abolish wages councils benefit all small firms, yet as we know perhaps 40 per cent of firms born today will not exist in three to four years' time and the vast majority of those who survive for 10 years will still be small firms with few jobs. At the end of a decade less than 4 per cent of those firms which started will have created 33 per cent of the new jobs.
In a sentence, because of the enormous diversity of performance of the small firm sector the only way to create significant numbers of jobs in the small firm sector is to facilitate more rapid growth in expanding and growing businesses. In a word - 'selectivity.'
These views have been persistently rejected by central government and many local governments who continue to prefer to support lame ducklings. They argue that selectivity effectively means picking the winners and that the public sector has a bad record in picking winners - so why not let the market pick them? Furthermore, supporting the winners is fruitless since, by definition, such businesses will succeed without assistance. Finally, selectively is not equitable since it means helping some firms but not helping many more.
Such selective policies have, however, been a major source of new jobs in the US, according to John Sower, senior director of the National Development Council based in Washington, DC.
Sower's not-for-profit organisation was set up in the 1960s after the New York riots in order to increase the prosperity of those living in the ghetto areas.
It dabbled in the type of new business creation information, advice and premises provision initiatives currently being tried by many British local authorities until its staff, which was comprised primarily of ex-bankers, realised that selectivity was the best way of getting the most jobs per dollar.
'Forget start-ups,' says Sower. 'If you spend your time chasing start-ups you find your portfolio of clients have disappeared within a few years.' Instead Sower visits all the organisations in a locality who might know about growing business - accountants, banks, chambers of commerce, local authorities - even academics. He then goes to visit the firms concerned and tries to find out whether that firm has expansion plans and if so whether they are in any way constrained by a shortage of finance. Note that he goes to visit the firm since the owners of growing firms do not have the time to visit advice agencies.
If a firm wishes to expand, but is financially constrained, Sower asks to see audited accounts for the past three years, and his bankers training enables him to decide whether he can sell the expansion package to a bank. In many cases a study of the balance sheet and profit and loss account is sufficient to convince him that the proposition is 'unbankable' but in many cases it is worth following up.
Sower then visits the banks, making it clear to those who do not know him that he is an ex-banker. He may visit a dozen banks in order to obtain the best deal but his golden rule is 'Don't argue with the bank manager.' He claims it is fruitless to attempt to alter the manager's judgment of the riskiness of the deal.
In most circumstances Sower will only be able to get a proportion of the deal funded by the commercial sector and so he then sets out to obtain the remainder from public sector sources of finance. This requires a detailed knowledge of the forms of financial assistance available from state governments, local governments, federal and other sources. According to Sower it is essential to have a detailed knowledge of all these pots of public money.
'I go in and tell the state bureaucrats that if they want 100 new jobs in their area they had better finance 30 per cent of the deal' he says. This go-between process thus enables a deal to be sewn up, and expansions to take place.
The National Development Council is financed by many state governments in the US to create jobs but nowadays devotes much of its resources to training state officials to undertake these go-between functions. Sower claims that the strategy has created thousands of real jobs in the US, mainly in businesses outside the flashy high tech sectors. 'Out there' he says 'there are thousands of businesses eager to expand but who simply don't have the time or skills to sew together a financial package of public and private assistance. It is our job to find the businesses and do it for them.'
Sower is scathing about agencies who try to offer advice to small businesses. He regards the businessman himself as the best judge of what is going on in his business and company accounts as the best indicator of whether or not the business is successful. Hence he views with amusement publicly funded advice agencies.
John Sower believes that his US successes could be repeated here. Indeed he is intending to start a UK operation in the near future because he observes that there is considerable public money available at a local and national level which, if marshalled correctly, could be much more effective in creating jobs than the present policies. In his brash American manner he waved his finger at me and said 'I could create thousands of jobs in your city of Newcastle by my methods.' In my view he could well be right.
Dr David Storey is principal research associate at Newcastle University.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
62 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 24, 1986
Third World Review (Third World): Zia's Kabul cover-up / US involvement in Pakistan's policy towards Afghanistan
BYLINE: By HELLA PICK
LENGTH: 682 words
Afraid of anti-American rhetoric, and of public calls for direct negotiations between Pakistan and the government of Babrak karmal of Afghanistan, President Zia successfully neutered the Parliamentary debate on foreign policy that was held in Islamabad immediately before martial law was lifted at the end of last month.
Initially there was talk of closed debate, with press and diplomats kept out of the chamber. But after nine years without a foreign policy debate, this was too much even for the largely pro-government, non-party Parliamentarians, elected last year as part of President Zia's slow return to controlled democracy.
Instead, Zia settled for an intimate, predebate chat in the Parliamentary cafeteria, warning his MPs to say nothing that might offered the brooding, conspicuous US ambassador to Pakistan, Dean Hinton, whose previous post was El Salvador.
The ploy worked. Few of the politicians' concerns over US manipulation of Pakistan's policy towards Afghanistan were expressed.
In their summing up both the Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister remained unchallenged as they blandly asserted that Pakistan was a text-book example of non-alignment, and that, magically, the US Administration was pouring billions of dollars of aid into Pakistan without extracting any kind of quid pro quo from General Zia's government.
Hardly anybody in Pakistan's highly politicised elite takes such assertions at their face value. Pakistan has few illusions that it has become caught up in the geo-political struggle between the two super-powers. The only realistic question is how far General Zia has sold out to the United States.
A US dollars 3.2 billions economic and military aid package is running out at the end of this year, and President Zia is already deep into negotiations to double that aid package over the next five years. Unless he oversteps the nuclear line, and tests a Pakistani bomb, Zia seems set to obtain much of his aid target.
Pakistan is already one of the largest US aid recipients; in the same class as those other countries of key strategic interest to the US: Philippines, Egypt and E1 Salvador. Such largesse simply cannot be obtained without strings.
In one respect this may work to the Pakistanis' advantage: it is widely assumed in Pakistan that the Reagan Administration propelled President Zia into last year's Parliamentary elections, and more recently, into the lifting of martial law. The US Congress had to be mollified. But Zia's commitment to democracy has yet to be proved.
And, meanwhile, most thoughtful Pakistanis are obsessed with the negative aspects of American string pulling. It is not unusual to hear references to Dean Hinton as the US pro-consul. Certainly, for all of President Reagan's professed interest in a negotiated settlement in Afghanistan, Zia's friends and foes alike suspect that Washington is not all that unhappy to see Soviet troops pinned down in Afghanistan.
Up in Peshawar, the turbulent city just a few miles from the Khyber pass, frustration over Pakistan's impotence in coming to terms with Kabul, is even more tangible.
This is where many of the Afghan refugee camps are concentrated.
Few of the political potentates in Peshawar any longer believe that it makes sense to refuse direct talks with Babrak Karmal. After all, Pakistan has never broken off diplomatic relations with Afghanistan, and the regime has a charge d'affaires in Islamabad.
While the Americans say that direct talks would confer legitimacy on Moscow's puppet, responsible Pakistanis contend that this pales in importance beside the prospect of guarantees for the safe return of Afghan refugees, and even a partial Soviet troop withdrawal.
The West insists on a 'neutral,' independent regime in Kabul. Pakistanis, more realistic, believe that Moscow must be assured of a 'friendly' government in Kabul, and, very likely, will expect to retain military bases in Afghanistan. But this is anathema to Washington; and Zia counts for little, as the superpowers manoeuvre for position.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
63 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 24, 1986
Third World Review: A poll at the mercy of Marcos / Philippines presidential elections
BYLINE: By ERIK GUYOT
LENGTH: 981 words
In the months ahead the major foreign policy crisis facing the US in the Third World is likely to be in America's only former colony: the Philippines. The Reagan Administration is enmeshed in a deepening crisis there and believes that the coming presidential election can restore democracy and stability, thereby protecting considerable US military and economic interests.
The election, on February 7, is portrayed by the media as a clash between good and evil: Corazon Aquino, the quiet yet strong-willed widow of the late Senator Benigno Aquino, against President Ferdinand Marcos, a shrewd and brutal strongman who has held power for far too long. From this perspective, good at least has a fighting chance against evil. In reality, however, it is far from certain that the elections will bring about democracy and resolve the crisis of political legitimacy. Allegations of fraud may even lead to the opposite of what the White House wants - sharpening public frustration and greater political polarisation.
While Corazon Aquino and her running mate, Salvador Laurel, are certainly more popular than Marcos - drawing crowds of up to 90,000 as compared to 10,000 - few Filipinos believe that they will actually win in the vote counting. Always the consummate tactician, Marcos has kept his electoral opponents off balance by keeping the election rules vague and continually changing them.
The opposition, meanwhile, has had barely two months to patch up a bitter clash between Aquino and Laurel and put together an alliance between her charisma and his traditional style political machine.
Stacked against them is what exiled politicians call the 'three Ms - money, machine, and military.' As in past campaigns, Marcos is expected to raid the public coffers to outspend his opponents.
Marcos's ruling KBL (New Society) party is the only traditional political party with an extensive network to distribute this patronage throughout a country of 54 million. Alongside this impressive machinery the Commission on Elections, which runs the election and counts the votes, is controlled by KBL stalwarts in six of its nine top positions.
According to a bipartisan team of US election experts sent by the Senate to the Philippines in December the role of the Philippine military will be crucial in determining whether there is extensive voter intimidation or fraud. In the 1984 parliamentary elections the military was heavily involved in vote fraud; recently Marcos has transferred military commanders who are known for their ability to 'deliver the vote' to key opposition strongholds. And if the present trend of police and paramilitary units firing on unarmed demonstrators is any indication - 28 were killed in one incident last September - election time violence is expected.
Not surprisingly, the fact- finding delegation predicts that vote fraud will be 'wholesale rather than retail.'
The impetus for Marcos to hold snap presidential elections ahead of their scheduled date in 1987 came not from the Philippine opposition, but from the US. In fact, the idea first came up when CIA director, William Casey, visited the Philippines last spring the suggested that Marcos hold early elections as a means of restoring confidence in his government.
Now Marcos has acceded to US pressure for elections, but on his own terms and in an electoral process which is tilted in his favour. In recent Senate hearings Senator Christopher Dodd asked, 'aren't we really deceiving ourselves' that 'the Senate Foreign Relations Committee can browbeat President Marcos into having a fair election.' The election was being held only because of the danger that Marcos might lose some military aid, said Dodd.
Some in the Philippine opposition say that the Reagan Administration's intentions in pushing for elections which the opposition cannot win have little to do with furthering democracy. Rather, the elections are meant to stabilise a turbulent political situation.
The US hopes to woo moderates away from participating in massive urban protests and to counter a widespread rural insurgency. According to Assistant Secretary of State, Paul Wolfowitz, one of the main benefits of a 'fair and credible' election is that it 'can serve as the corner-stone of an effective counter-insurgency programme' by generating public support.
But it is a 'very high stakes gamble,' says Congressman Stephen Solarz, a liberal congressional leader who supports the administration's policy. If the elections are perceived as fraudulent and Filipinos tire of seeking political change through repeated electoral exercises there could develop what he calls 'a wall to wall coalition' of all opposition groups in which moderates join with the rebel New People's Army. Faced with this possibility, the State Department now says that a fraudulent election 'would be a disaster of undefined proportions.'
In spite of the risks, there is an extraordinary bipartisan consensus in the US Congress that intervening in Philippine politics for these elections is right. Even those who are often critical of the Reagan administration's political intervention abroad speak of a moral imperative to intervene and restore the model of American-style democracy in America's former colony. Republican Congressman Jim Leach, who argued strongly against US support for the Cambodian anti-communist resistance, says that while the push for elections 'is American intervention in the Philippines,' it is 'worthy of taking the risk.'
But however well intentioned such action is, some critics are concerned that if the electoral solution fails thus spurring the growth of the insurgency, there may be the temptation for further measures to put the lid on an extremely volatile situation.
Erik Guyot is a freelance journalist who spent over three months in the Philippines last year.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
64 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 24, 1986
Third World Review: Learning to live without apartheid / SADCC efforts to end economic reliance on South Africa
BYLINE: By ANDREW MELDRUM
LENGTH: 1264 words
SADCC
Members: Angola, Botswana, Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Swaziland, Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe.
Projects: to improve the region's transport and communication links, industrial base, energy production and agricultural output.
Funding: SADCC has presented projects which require foreign funding to the extent of dollars 4 billions.
Beira, the central Mozambican port on the Indian Ocean, is gradually becoming a showcase for regional cooperation in Southern Africa. There is a new oil-handling terminal. Improved dock equipment and rail links have quickened the movement of freight to landlocked Zimbabwe and Zambia. The harbour has been dredged sos that larger ships can now use the port.
Most important, some 12,000 Zimbabwean troops deployed in central Mozambique have, with the Mozambican army, safe-guarded the roads, railway and oil pipeline connections to the port from Mozambique's South African-backed rebels, the Mozambique National Resistance (MNR).
Now Beira is handling 1.5 million tons of freight annually and is expected to increase its capacity to three million tons this year. 'Work has been going on to improve Beira for a couple of years now, but I feel there is a new sense of urgency on the projects. Mozambican and foreign aid workers alike know they must get their jobs done quickly,' said an international aid official who visited Beira recently. 'With sanctions against South Africa looming closer and closer, Beira port is seen as the economic lifeline for black Southern Africa.
That sense of urgency about Beira highlights the ambitious plans and daunting problems faced by the Southern African Development Coordination Conference (SADCC), the group of nine majority-ruled countries working together to end South Africa's economic control over the region SADCC has sponsored most of the Beira projects as well as others of rail, road, communications, mining and agricultural development projects throughout black Southern Africa since its founding in 1980.
Sanctions against South Africa and Pretoria's announced intentions of retaliating against its black-ruled neighbours are expected to be the focus for the fifth annual SADCC consultative conference, to be held in Harare at the end of next week.
SADCC was formed by the region's black-ruled countries at the time of Zimbabwe's independence in order 'to liberate our economies from their dependence on South Africa' and has won considerable international backing, significantly Western support, as a peaceful way to reduce apartheid's economic grip.
Pretoria's response to SADCC's plans has been extraordinarily violent South African attacks and sabotage have cost SADCC's member states more than US dollars 10 billions in the past five years - more than all foreign aid received by the countries in the same period and more than a third of the region's total export earnings, according to a report to be distributed at the Harare conference. SADCC experts say South Africa's destabilisation by overt military aggression in Angola and by proxy forces in Mozambique, Lesotho and Zimbabwe and concentrated on hitting vital transportation routes and many SADCC projects.
The report about South African aggression will be especially timely as South Africa'ss squeeze on Lesotho contributed to the government's fall.
Despite, the SADCC countries' economic dependence upon South Africa, the organisation has repeatedly appealed for international sanctions against South Africa.
SADCC officials explain that South Africa's destabilisation plots are directly linked to the SADCC countries' call for sanctions. 'The very existence of SADCC threatens South Africa's economic stranglehold on the region. If the SADCC states were free to use the most convenient and cheapest ports and railways, and free to buy fuel and other goods on the world market, their dependence on South Africa would be sharply reduced. Sanctions would then not hurt the neighbouring states so much. So South Africa destabilises its neighbours to keep them dependent.' The report suggests that the cost of sanctions is not so much when it is calculated that even before sanctions the region has suffered so much unprovoked destabilisation by South Africa.
The SADCC report states that even if the cost of the region for its support for sanctions is high, 'If it accelerates the end of Apartheid, it would be well worth the additional cost.'
With sanctions a possibility in the coming year, SADCC must redouble its efforts to become at least minimally independent from South Africa. The Harare conference has as its theme: 'SADCC, strategies for the next five years'. Transport routes to the sea and seaports are strategically vital. The work at Beira and the rehabilitation of the Tazara Railway linking Zambia to Tanzania's Dar es Salaam port are both high priority projects under discussion at the conference.
Angola's ports, Lobito and Luanda, are not used by other SADCC countries because the railways to them are regularly sabotaged by South African-backed Unita guerrillas. Mozambique's Nacala port, in the north, and Maputo, in the south, are similarly hamstrung by rebel attacks on their access railways.
As a result, it is estimated that Zimbabwe, Zambia and Malawi send more than 80 per cent of their import and export traffic through South African ports.
Military experts in Harare say the Beira corridor is effectively guarded by the joint Mozambican-Zimbabwean force against any land-based attack. But they say a South African airstrike on the port or transport links could knock Beira out of action. SADCC officials are, therefore, pleased at the recent American aid to the Beira project in the form of a five million dollar grant to improve railway engines. The Americans join the Dutch, Swedes, Germans and Danes, who have also sponsored SADCC projects at Beira. South Africa will have to think twice, say SADCC officials, before striking an American-funded project.
The American aid is valued, but the Reagan, Administration's regional policy is seen as against SADCC's interests. The SADCC heads of state summit in July last year issued a statement attacking the US policy of constructive engagement with South Africa, saying it 'has not only failed to achieve progress in resolving the problems of apartheid in South Africa and the illegal occupation of Namibia, it even failed in its more limited objective of reducing cross border violence. South Africa has interpreted constructive engagement as recognition of its right to practise state terrorism' against its neighbours.
The Harare conference will certainly see similar salvoes fired against the Reagan administration's Southern African policy, even as the US is thanked for its considerable aid to the SADCC region, which US officials say total dollars 1.2 billions since 1980.
Britain and the World Bank are two other important Western backers of SADCC's regional development plans, Britain has not been one of SADCC's biggest donors, but has recently improved Malawi's road link to Tanzania's roads, at a cost of US dollars 1.3 millions.
The most important backers of SADCC are the Scandinavian countries, which have committed themselves to the Southern African group as a continuation of their earlier support for the liberation movements in Zimbabwe and Mozambique and as a part of their anti-apartheid effort. The five Nordic countries - Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark and Iceland - are expected to significantly increase their involvement in SADCC at the conference.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
65 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 24, 1986
Financial Notebook: Stop worrying about base rates - think about the boost to the world economy / Effect of declining oil prices on British rates
BYLINE: By HAMISH MCRAE
LENGTH: 311 words
The 'panic later' school won. Given the effect of the statement of Sheik Yamani on the oil market and hence the exchanges, that is no bad thing. There really does seem little point in trying to cope with an oil-induced sterling slide until the end of the fall of the oil price is in sight.
So while at some stage we will surely see higher base rates, there are some tactical advantages in delay. At some level they will have to try and stop the fall of the pound, but you can certainly argue that it would be better to wait until the oil situation (and indeed the political one) is a touch clearer.
Meanwhile, we should realise that we are getting a taste of what life might have been like in Britain without North Sea oil. There is the direct impact on government revenues, which are looking sicker by the hour. There is the reduction of the level of sterling to a rate which even the most 'bare knuckle' inclined element of the CBI must accept as reasonable.
And, of course, cheaper oil worldwide will help reverse some of the damaging effects of the oil shock of the late 1970s.
We are not quite going to see the 1960's boom again, but if the oil price does go to the mid-teens we shall be back much more to the sort of global economic conditions which ruled then, with low inflation worldwide, and perhaps even reasonable growth. For just as sudden rises in the price of oil clobber the world economy, so sudden falls give it a boost.
So while the fall in the price reduces our relative advantage in the world economy - and that was reflected yesterday by the fall of the pound - it should make for a healthier world economy as a whole. There will be particular areas of pain, not just in Britain. Consider the condition of banks in the US which have lent heavily on oil-related projects. But the patient as a whole should thrive.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
66 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 24, 1986
Cruise test failure raises fears among Canadians / Concern as US missile goes out of control
BYLINE: From CLYDE SANGER
LENGTH: 448 words
DATELINE: OTTAWA
Canadians are showing heightened concern about this series of cruise missile tests over northern Canada, after the first one went out of control and landed off target on Wednesday.
A second test of the air-launched missile was originally scheduled for today. United States air force officers were meeting at the Cold Lake weapons range in Alberta yesterday to decide whether it should go ahead as planned, or be delayed until it was known precisely what had gone wrong with Wednesday's test.
This is the second year in which, under an umbrella agreement between the two governments to test a range of American weapons in Canada, cruise missiles are launched from a B52 bomber over the Beaufort Sea, and fly south up the Mackenzie River and turn east to land by parachute at the Cold Lake range after flying 1,600 miles.
Last winter, three tests were carried out, this year four may be scheduled. Northern Canada was chosen because, US authorities explain, the snow-covered terrain resembles that of northern Russia.
On Wednesday, several mishaps seemed to occur. The launch was delayed an hour because of heavy cloud over the Cold Lake recovery area. Then the community of Wandering Valley, Alberta, reported that a missile passed within two miles at less than 1,000 feet when it should not have come within five miles of them.
Finally, when it reached the weapons range it was programmed to do two wide loops to burn off excess fuel (as other missiles did last year) before dropping to the ground with the help of a parachute. But sometime during these loops it plunged to the ground in almost inaccessible territory.
According to Major Fred Harrop, of the US Strategic Air Command, it was not until nearly dusk - about three hours later - that the missile was spotted by a helicopter.
Two CF18 Hornet fighters had taken off from Cold Lake to practise interception, but it is not known whether the Canadian pilots or the crew of the US air force Boeing 707, which monitored the four-hour flight, saw the crash.
This is said to be the fifteenth cruise missile to suffer a mishap during testing. In is the first one on Canadian soil. Police arrested for obstruction four members of a small Greenpeace group who protested against the test at the entrance to Cold Lake.
The Greenpeace spokesman in Toronto, Mr Dan McDemnott, said yesterday: 'This is a double obscenity. They should not be testing in the first place and now they cannot even get that right.'
He said that Greenpeace would not stage further anti-cruise demonstrations. It had used a missile test to focus on a larger issue - the need for Canada to become a nuclear weapon-free zone.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
67 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 24, 1986
Tribes stream into Aden to support President / South Yemen civil war
BYLINE: From KATHRYN DAVIES
LENGTH: 588 words
DATELINE: CAIRO
Heavy fighting erupted in Oden again yesterday as mountain tribesmen loyal to President Ali Nasser Mohammed reinforced troops besieged by rebels in the northeast of the capital.
The tribesmen streamed towards Aden from the President's last remaining stronghold at Abyan, 100 miles east of the capital, informed sources in Sanaa said. The death toll is believed to have risen to more than 12,000.
The President's bid to regain a firm foothold in Aden threatened to plunge the country, where personal and tribal loyalities count higher than political ideology, into all-out civil war, diplomats said.
At least four of the country's six provinces are believed to have gone over to the hardline Marxist rebels fighting to overthrow Mr Mohammed, they said.
Aden was largely devastated after 11 days of fighting involving tanks, rockets, gunboats and artillery.
Yesterday's temporary truce supervised by rebels at Aden's jetties allowed more than 2,000 foreigners to be evacuated by British and Soviet ships, and was claimed by rebels as evidence that they now control the South Yemeni capital.
Radio Aden, which for the past three days has been in the hands of the President's opponents, said that the country's international airport, scene of some of the bitterest fighting, had been reopened during daylight hours.
Members of the ruling Yemeni Socialist Party's central committee have visited the airport and inspected telephone installations to see if they could be repaired. Some estimates of the damage to the country's public utilities and residential buildings have been put as high as pounds 2 billion.
The Beirut-based newspaper, An Nahar, quoted diplomats as saying that only a few pockets of pro-Mohammed resistance were left in Aden's old quarters. The rest of the city was held by opposition forces.
Other reports said that former president, Abdul Fatah Ismail, had 'disappeared' on January 13, the day Radio Aden announced he had been executed. Brigadier Ali Antar was killed in inter-factional fighting on the same day and a former foreign minister, Salem Saleh Mohammed, is now believed to be leading the rebellion.
In Washington, the US State Department said that the US had warned the Soviet Union not to intervene in South Yemen. Officials said that there had been indications of Soviet participation in the fighting on the side of the rebels.
In Moscow, foreign embassies said they had been told that the Soviet Union would not intervene in the fighting between the rival Marxist groups. The Russians also urged other countries not to supply either side with fresh weapons or ammunition.
The Soviet Union was trying to establish a peace committee, to include the South Yemeni Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister who are in Moscow, diplomats said. The opposition, which has indicated its willingness to take part in principle, is believed to want total military victory over President Mohammed before going to the negotiating table.
One of President Mohammed's closest aides, Mr Anis Yahya, a former economics minister, arrived in Damascus yesterday to brief President Assad on the latest situation. Syria and Libya are South Yemen's closest regional allies and both have indicated their support for President Mohammed.
The opposition also broadcast what it said was a confession from a veteran Socialst Party member, Mr Ali Ahmed Nasser, admitting that President Mohammed had planned to move against his political adversaries as long ago as last May.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
68 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 24, 1986
Peres may negotiate without King / Israeli Premier meeting US and British officials on Middle East peace hopes
BYLINE: By HELLA PICK, Diplomatic Correspondent
LENGTH: 693 words
The Israeli Prime Minister, Mr Shimon Peres, engaged in intense diplomacy with US as well as British officials during his visit to London, is optimistic that King Hussein of Jordan may be on the verge of 'an historic decision' to negotiate directly with Israel, leading a joint Jordanian-Palestinian delegation that would exclude the PLO.
But if the King does not move within the next few months, Mr Peres may try to force the pace by unilateral action, moving to negotiate 'Palestinian self-expression' and autonomy for the West Bank and Gaza directly with Palestinian representatives drawn from the occupied territories.
There was a hint of such a unilateral move, if King Hussein fails to activate direct negotiations, in the Israeli Prime Minister's speech at the Royal Institute of International Relations on Tuesday. But yesterday, Mr Peres concentrated on 'the little bit of progress' made in discussing the modalities of direct negotiations between Israel and King Hussein.
Mr Peres said yesterday that he expected King Hussein to make one more attempt to secure Mr Yasser Arafat's agreement to renounce terrorism, recognise Israel's right to exist, and his willingness to sit down and negotiate face-to-face with Israel.
But if Mr Arafat continued to prevaricate, as Israel anticipates, then the King seemed set to look for an alternative to PLO participation in negotiations with Israel.
'There is growing scepticisms,' Mr Peres said, 'about the participation ofthe PLO in the negotiations; and the feeling that prevails is that no matter what happens the door should be kept open for an alternative.'
The Israeli Prime Minister made these comments after extensive talks with Mr Richard Murphy, the US Assistant Secretary'of State for Middle East Affairs, who has been shuttling between King Hussein and Mr Peres, and is looking for ways of launching an international conference to provide an umbrella for direct negotiations between Israel and Arab partners.
Enough progress has apparently been made for Mr Murphy to postpone his return to Washington yesterday, and stay in London for further talks with Mr Peres today.
The Israeli Prime Minister's spokesman, Mr Uri Savir, claimed yesterday that 50 per cent of the oustanding problems in setting up negotiating machinery had been settled; the remaining problems no longer seemed insurmountable.
Mr Peres and Mr Murphy 'had been agonising' about the international forum and the direct negotiations. But they had brought out a 'rich amount of ideas.'
Plainly, Mr Peres is also satisfied with his exchanges with Mrs Thatcher. Whitehall has made plain that she, too, believes that Mr Peres is in genuine search of peace, and, moreover, is a man in a hurry, anxious to set a peace process in motion that cannot be reversed by Mr Ytzhak Shamir, the Likud coalition partner, who is due to take over as Prime Minister this autumn.
Mrs Thatcher has accepted an invitation to visit Israel, and is planning to go during the Easter recess, probably in April.
The Israelis hope that Mrs Thatcher, in common with other West European leaders, will reinforce US efforts to facilitate direct negotiations between Israel and King Hussein. But they are not interested in European blueprints for a Middle East peace settlement.
Mr Peres, who goes to Bonn on Sunday, has concluded that the recent terrorist outrages have generated disillusion with the PLO. But in any case, he argues that the Europeans should no longer invest their energies in Yasser Arafat.
A senior Israeli source expressed the belief yesterday that King Hussein was 'approaching the crunch.' Mr Arafat had let him down time and again. Certainly, President Assad of Syria wanted nothing to do with Mr Arafat, and would discourage the King from further dealing with him.
The Political Affairs Committee of the European Parliament has passed a resolution urging that the PLO be allowed to take part in Middle-East peace negotiations. By a vote of 34 to nil, with five abstentions, the panel called the February, 1985, Jordanian-Palestinian peace initiative a 'step in the right direction.'
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
69 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 24, 1986
Marcos's war record claim denied by American paper / Philippines presidential election campaigns
BYLINE: From MICHAEL WHITE
LENGTH: 650 words
DATELINE: MANILA
The pace of the Philippines presidential election quickened last night after the opposition candidate, Mrs Corazon Aquino, announced that she would use the dictatorial powers created by President Marcos only to sweep away those powers, and accused Mr Marcos directly of being a thief, liar, and murderer.
Mrs Aquino's charges, rapturously received during her first big speech in Manila after a six-day provincial tour, came at a highly sensitive moment just as reports reached Manila that US and Australian newspapers had unearthed fresh evidence undermining the 68-year-old President's claims to a war record in the Filipino resistance to the Japanese occupation of 1942-45.
It is hard to overstate the importance of his guerrilla exploits to Mr Marcos's 20-year rule. Forty years later the President constantly refers to them in his campaign speeches, embraces conveniently-placed old comrades, and explains away his ailments in terms of war wounds. Comic strips glorify his deeds and a magazine which cast doubt on them was temporarily closed.
But according to postwar records unearthed by an Australian historian and published in yesterday's New York Times, much of what Mr Marcos claimed for his guerrilla unit, the MGA Maharlika, was 'exaggerated,' 'fraudulent,' 'preposterous' and bordering upon 'malicious criminal acts.'
Contrary to assertions in an authorised 1982 biography that General Douglas MacArthur, when pinning on Mr Marcos's' chest one of his 22 claimed medals, praised him for prolonging the vital American defence of Bataan in 1942 by no less than three months, a 1948 reports in US army records concluded that Mr Marcos's unit made no material contribution to the defeat of the enemy. Some of his men were linked with civillian atrocities and collaboration instead.
The Pentagon has previously refused to divulge its version of Mr Marcos's war record.
Last night the President merely observed: 'Our opponents say that Marcos was not a true gerrilla fighter, that he was not in that thick of the fight. The veterans should answer that accusation.' Though some veterans currently nurse a grievance over pension rights, that should easily be arranged.
As for his frequently shaky appearance, the President said: 'They say I am limping because I am sick and dying. I limp because I got wounded in my left knee during the war. They laugh because they never knew what it is like to be wounded in war.'
Mrs Aquino has evidently decided to go for the political jugular. Calling the President 'an evil genius' who had debauched the Constitution, she tackled the question of her political inexperience with the words: 'I admit I have no experience in cheating, stealing, lying, or assassinating political opponents,' - a clear reference to her murdered husband, Benigno, and possibly many others.
But yesterday's speech was not confined to abuse. Having issued the opposition's plans for economic and social reform in recent speeches, Mrs Aquino outlined her plan to restore political democracy. She said that the sweeping powers in what is known as amendment 6 to detain opponents and legislate by decree 'must be eliminated immediately.' But since Parliament would still be controlled by the Marcos KBL if she won on February 7, she would 'use amendment 6 only as a last resort and only to destroy itself,' if Parliament refused.
Among other urgent reforms were the restoration of habeas corpus, an independent judiciary, Parliament, press, and central bank, and the removal of presidential immunity from prosecution and a limit to his or her tenure.
On the highly sensitive issue of the Communist insurgency Mrs Aquino urged an amnesty for all political offenders who renounce violence coupled with a six-month ceasefire during which her Government would 'seek to redress the grievances of those who have resorted to armed struggle.'
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
70 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 24, 1986
Friday People: Doctor in the middle / Profile of Brian Mawhinney, Under-Secretary of State in Ulster office
BYLINE: Edited by STEPHEN COOK
LENGTH: 424 words
What will the hard-line Unionists make of Dr Brian Mawhinney, the first Ulsterborn politician to hold a government post in Northern Ireland since direct rule in 1972? His appointment yesterday as Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State in the Northern Ireland Office seems designed to make them stop and think.
He is a Protestant church elder and lay preacher with rightwing views on social issues like pornography, and he is committed to the union in conventional Conservative terms. There seems little doubt that one of his roles will be to coax the Unionist parties back into dialogue with the Government, although his formal portfolio is education.
He is also a calm, good-humoured and inventive man who is on record that God is not necessarily a Conservative - too liberal a Unionist. to get much of a hearing from the more extreme Protestants. His proposals for a Northern Ireland Assembly in 1980 have been seen as the inspiration of James Prior's rolling devolution plan of two years later.
In his blueprint, however, Mawhinney insisted on 'some degree of accommodation' with the Republic. The removal of this element from Prior's set-up was attributed to the Prime Minister, who has now, ironically, gone much further in the Anglo-Irish accord.
Mawhinney could have stayed away from such tangles. Born in Belfast 45 years ago he went to school and to Queen's University in the city. Then he was off the Michigan University - his mother was American - to study radiation biology, before moving to London University for his Ph D
There followed a career as a medical lecturer, including two more years in the US before he stood for Parliament in 1974, opposing William Rodgers in Stockton. Then Peterborough took him on, and he won it back from Labour in 1979. He has been Parliamentary Private Secretary for Barney Hayhoe and Tom King, his boss in Ulster.
Apart from his 1980 blueprint and the occasional constructive interventions on Ulster, his political career has been marked by strong views on tobacco and alcohol - he suggested addicts should pay their own medical bills - and on pornography. He has been vocal on NHS waste, and is a director of a firm providing ancillary medical services.
'One of us - but not quite,' could be the Unionist's answer as he raises his nose from the byelection results to study the genial, baldine Mawhinney. If the Unionist parties decide to lift their boycott on talking to ministers, they will find him more interested and informed than many of his predecessors.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
71 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 23, 1986
Books: Hitler's legacy / Review of 'Hitler's Apocalyse - Jews and the Nazi Legacy' by Robert Wistrich and 'The Abandonment of the Jews - America and the Holocaust 1941-1945' by David S Wyman
BYLINE: By W J FISHMAN
LENGTH: 493 words
Hitler's Apocalypse: Jews and the Nazi Legacy, by Robert Wistrich (Weidenfeld, pounds 18.95).
The Abandonment of the Jews: America and the Holocaust 1941-1945, by David S Wyman (Columbus Books, pounds 16.95).
Dr Wistrich, in a penetrating analysis of the fundamental basis of Nazi ideology, claims that Hitler's 'greatest abomination - the destruction of the Jew - is never seriously confronted', and thereby challenges the foundations of previous historiography.
He musters a formidable array of evidence to posit the argument that it was Hitler's virulent anti-Semitism, his pathological fear and foathing of the Jew, which dominated his power politics in action within and without Germany. ('Hitler preceived the spread of Jew hatred as the key to his strategy of undermining opponents, spreading German influence and acquiring a power base abroad.') Certainly the attack on, and the attempted destruction of his major foe, Bolshevik Russia, was, in his distorted vision, synonymous with the annihilation of the Jew. And he almost succeeded in both.
With Zionism and Arab Nationalism in brutal confrontation with each other, the torch of Hitler's anti-Semitism would be handed on to his Arab successors. Wistrich cites the incidence of anti-British sentiment over Palestine as the potential building block of German-Arab friendship. It was the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem who offered the Fuhrer his support as leader of a broad Islamic-Arab national movement which would 'liberate' Palestine in the wake of the successful Axis armies. When Rommel failed he concentrated his efforts in mobilising a Muslim volunteer force in the Balkans for the Nazis, and helping to prevent the rescue of Jews from the Eurpean holocaust.
The particular attraction of Syrian youth and radical groups to Hitler's militant nationalism would explain the long term effect of planting Syria at the head of Israel's implacable enemies. With the severing of Soviet relationships with Israel, the Zionist 'conspiracy' myth perpetuated by their new Arab allies, has been absorbed into the Russian anti-Israel demonology.
Wistrich concludes that anti-Semitism is far from being a relic of the Nazi era. Its continuing vitality suggests that 'all historically post-Holocaust forms of anti-Jewishness are posthumous victories for Hitler.'
Not only posthumous. While the exterminations were proceeding, the virus of anti-Semitism was well implanted in the Allied corpus. Dr David Wyman, a non-Jewish academic with no axe to grind, reveals the paucity of US efforts - virtually an abandonment of stricken European jewry. After years of painstaking research into governmental sources, hitherto untapped, he exposes the almost criminal neglect of the US administration in failing to rescue the victims. It is a sordid tale, no one is spared in this terrible indictment, least of all Roosevelt.
And the toxic bacillus of anti-Semitism is still with us.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
72 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 23, 1986
Counting cost of losses, scandals and closures / Crisis in US banking system
BYLINE: By CHISTOPHER REED
LENGTH: 945 words
DATELINE: SAN FRANSISCO
Last year an internal confidential memo went to the Bank of America's senior vice president for corporate communications, Ron Rhody, detailing' potential sources of negative publicity.' An enclosed list contained 27 headings.
These included: Hiring crooks; Closing branches; Violations of Bank Secrecy Act; Loan Losses; and Management not in control. Not mentioned but high on any 'negative' list of the bank's thousands of customers might have been: Appalling service, longer queues, and higher charges.
The plight of what was once America's strongest financial institution, and is still its second biggest bank, worsened in 1985. In the first nine months its loan losses rose to just over dollars 1 billion. Second quarter losses were dollars 338 million, the second biggest ever by a US bank (top was Continental Illinois's dollars 1.16 billion in July, 1984).
BofA, as it is widely known, managed a pre-tax profit in the third quarter of dollars 85 million, but only through the dollars 660 million sale of its world headquarters, a 52 storey monster of shiny brown granite occupying a whole block of San Francisco's financial district.
And this week came the news that the group is passing its dividend. The fourth quarter loss was higher than expected at dollars 178 million. The shares fell to a new low of dollars 12.25 after the announcement.
As well as massive losses over five years in four loan areas, property, farming, shipping, and overseas credits, the bank has been the subject of a series of embarrassing court cases, federal inquiries, and financial scandals. From its height in the late 1970s as the largest and most profitable of the world's commercial banks, BofA is now near the bottom of the top 20 US banks in financial performance over the last five years. How did it happen?
The causes go back to the previous president, AW Clausen, now head of the World Bank. In the late 1970s he launched an active loans policy based on what seemed to be the prevailing US economic climate. He and his board assessed inflation as a continuing source of repayments even if cash flow faltered. This left the bank vulnerable to recession, high interest, and deflation, all of which were precisely what happened.
From 1977 to 1981 BofA nearly doubled fixed-rate home mortgage loans to dollars 14.8 billion, becoming in effect the nation's largest building society. Farm loans also doubled to dollars 1.7 billion, another dollars 2.8 billion went to construction in a five-fold increase, and the Third World took dollars 9 billion in loans considered even riskier than usual.
The thousands of small loans made in this period were not scrutinised sufficiently but passed by often incompetent or inexperienced lower management. A crippling corporate bureaucracy also required 100 committees to examine larger credits.
It was worse abroad where BofA often sent poorly trained executives. In 1981 it bought Argentina's Banco Internacional in a sealed-bid government auction for dollars 150 million - three times more than the next bid.
When the domestic recessions of 1980 and 1982 hit, the bank began to report loan losses worse than any other equivalent in the world. For the past four years these have totalled about dollars 2.5 billion. Total assets assessed by federal examiners as questionable are estimated to exceed dollars 6.5 billion
Banking de-regulation, which began in 1980, increased competition by permitting building societies to compete for consumer loans. Deflation also hit bank loan earnings at the same time.
In California property loans tend to outstrip corporate ones and BofA has thousands of fixed-rate mortgages agreed a few years earlier. Then, its executives had assumed that continued rising prices would reduce debtors' liabilities in real terms because money they owed would be worth relatively less while their assets increased in value. But the process faltered, with no increase in the fixed-rate payments. While this was happening service declined badly. The bank had failed to install new technology and surveys showed a doubling of customers' account errors. Dissatisfaction with the bank has increased as 170 branches have been closed or reduced since 1980 with the elimination of 10,000 jobs.
Worst of all have been the scandals. The most recent case was a fraud in overvalued properties last spring in which the bank took a dollars 95 million write-off. Seven employees involved with two convicted felons in the case were fired.
Still awaiting an appeal ruling is a 1982 judgment of 101 million against the bank for misusing tax and insurance prepayments by mortgage holders to earn profits of dollars 350 million. The judge castigated the bank for 'willful, calculated and deceitful conduct (which was) malicious, fraudulent and oppressive.'
In another case this year a jury awarded dollars 46 million to two apple farmers who claimed the BofA drove them bankrupt. And in a suit yet to be heard, Hoopa Indians are claiming dollars 15 million for 'negligent' handling of their assets.
Finally the US Treasury has announced a fine of dollars 4.75 million on the bank for failing to report cash transactions over dollars 10,000 - a requirement to prevent 'laundering' of illegal drug profits. Crocker Bank, the Midland's California subsidiary, was recently fined dollars 2.25 million for this offence.
Through all this, BofA president, Sam Armacost, has hung on, introducing tough internal reforms and increasing earnings. The next six months will be critical. No doubt more 'negative perception' memos are heading the way of Mr Rhody, the beleaguered PR chief.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
73 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 23, 1986
Financial Notebook: Why should the Bank panic now when there's a chance for it to panic later? / Prospects for a rise in interest rates
BYLINE: By HAMISH McRAE
LENGTH: 509 words
It is really a question of tactics: when should the British authorities panic: now, or later?
Yesterday the markets were convinced that they would panic this morning. This would entail the Bank of England signalling that the fall of sterling had gone far enough, and that bank base rates should rise to 14 per cent. That would certainly stop the fall of sterling before it gets completely out of control and seriously undermines the government's anti-inflationary aims. Put it would mean higher mortgage rates; it would be seen as a blow to the government; and it would increase industrial financing costs.
Besides, real interest rates (that is, adjusting for inflation) of nearly 10 per cent really cannot be right on any long-term view. It distorts the relationship between borrower and saver by too large a margin. And what on earth is wrong in Britain, if we have to have higher interest rates than any other developed country bar Italy?
The balance of probability is that the 'panic now' camp will win. It is what the markets want the authorities to do and they usually get their way.
It is, however, just possible that the authorities will decide to panic later and in saying that you have to acknowledge the small possibility that they might not have to panic at all. If the Bank does not signal a rise in interest rates today, it has to be clever. It has two broad options.
One is to do nothing much on interest rates but to defend the exchange rate by a combination of intervention (starting in the Far East) and something else. That something else could have been an announcement of a cut in North Sea oil production to help shore up the oil market, except that they said yesterday they would not do so. Or it could just possibly be some external piece of news, like a hint of lower US interest rates following the soft figures of economic growth in America yesterday.
The second 'panic later' option would be to let the exchange rate move down quite a bit, say to the 71 level on the sterling index, then ambush the exchanges with heavy intervention, and maybe at that stage the rise in interest rates. This has some attractions, but would require quite a bit of nerve and probably a higher degree of mutual confidence than now exists between the Bank and the Treasury.
On balance, the obvious outcome looks overwhelmingly the most likely: 14 per cent base rates today. If that is so, then we should all - either as companies or as private individuals - do the rational thing and try to take advantage of these high real interest rates while they last. Anyone with cash should think about high-yielding investments with a long maturity date. Any company that gets a good cash offer for a division it does - not want should sell it and pay off the bank.
And of course the more the country responds to high interest rates by trying to borrow less and save more, the less those interest rates will be needed to hold savings in this country. For even with present interest rates Britain is a savers' paradise.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
74 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 23, 1986
Leading Article: Mr Peres seeks peace / Israeli Premier seeks to revive Middle East peace process
LENGTH: 495 words
Mr Shimon Peres would dearly like a peace settlement with Arab neighbours and would bargain to achieve it. That much seems certain. He will have made the fair point to Mrs Thatcher and Sir Geoffrey Howe yesterday that the obstacles are not now being raised by Israel but reflect the internal politics of the Arab countries and the PLO, which more than ever resemble a game of three-dimensional chess. Whether, when it came to the point, Mr Peres would be able to carry the country with him in a deal which gave genuine Palestinian autonomy over the West Bank (or the major part of it) and Gaza is much more debatable; but the question has not yet arisen and it made in the next few months before Mr Yitshak Shamir resumes the Premiership.
A large part of Mr Peres's purpose on his current visit to Europe is to re-establish his country's credentials, which took so severe a battering in the Lebanon and must remain suspect as long as the occupied territories remain under Israel control. To some extent he had succeeded in that purpose before he set off. He has pulled out of most of Lebanon, which was not an easy exercise, and his carefully modulated peace feelers towards Jordan (which must imply at least some territorial surrender by Israel) have not prevented the Israeli opinion polls from giving him a growing endorsement. But the PLO, in its various manifestations, has done a large part of the job for him. Not only does it lack any coherence but no single unit of it at present enjoys much credibility.
The sufferers from this continuing indecision and factionalism are not for the most part the Palestinians in exile, although those in the Beirut refugee camps have only the bleakest of futures to contemplate. Certainly the sufferers are not the men who obstruct King Hussein's attempts to start negotiations, or the Abu Nidals who could have no place in a state of their own if they got one. The sufferers are the Palestinians who live in the West Bank and Gaza. All the American efforts to establish talks, which though unavailing have not been negligible, have had these people in mind.
Of the current options a reconvening of the long-adjourned Geneva conference, under joint US and Soviet chairmanship, has become the most attractive. That could not come about without a resumption of diplomatic relations between Moscow and Tel Aviv, which in itself would signal to the PLO radicals that the days of rejectionism have gone for good and that UN Resolution 242, recognising Israel's borders, has the positive support of the Soviet Union whether they like it or not. A conference under the guidance of the superpowers is not a novel idea. Until Sadat changed the whole course of events it was agreed Soviet and US policy. Since Camp David the region could well have seen more ominous forms of superpower rivalry than it has done. It might now benefit from the broader cooperation which the two superpower loaders claim to envisage.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
75 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 23, 1986
Reagan adds force to Contra aid bid / US President urges congress to provide military aid to Nicaraguan and Angolan rebels
BYLINE: From our correspondent
LENGTH: 480 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
President Reagan has stepped up the pressure on Congress to provide military aid to Nicaraguan and Angolan rebels by linking these issues to US/Soviet relations.
Mr Reagan told Republican senators that Soviet perception of US strength and resolve in the next year depended largely on congressional moves regarding aid to the Contras, the rebels in Angola and US defence spending.
Congressional aides said yesterday that they expected the Administration to ask Congress to approve a dollars 100 million aid package for the Contras. They said the request should arrive on Capitol Hill in early February with the military component being put at anywhere between dollars 30 to dollars 60 million.
With his eye very much on the scheduled visit to the US by the Soviet leader, Mr Mikhail Gorbachev, the President said: 'Make no mistake about it .. the ability to succeed in that meeting will be directly affected by Gorbachev's perception of our global position and internal solidarity.'
The influential chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Mr Richard Lugar, said after the meeting that Mr Reagan was in no doubt that the White House would ask for military aid for the Contras. 'No doubt about it.' He also said that Mr Reagan expected a substantial battle over it.
The issue of aid for the anti-Sandinista rebels had produced clashes between the White House and Capitol Hill. Congress cut off military aid in 1984, but last year approve dollars 27 million in humanitarian aid. The White House line is that there is growing sentiment in Congress for military aid to the anti-Sandinista rebels. However, an aide to one of the leading opponents of aid, Representative Dave McCurdy, a Democrat, indicated that the Administration was deluding itself.
He said that the House remained opposed to military aid to the Contras unless the Administration had been taking soundings of members over the recess, a hard thing to do because since so many congressmen were travelling around the world.
Assessments of the contra effort here vary. The top State Department official concerned with Latin American affairs, Mr Elliot Abrams, has asserted that the Contras have done better militarily in the past two months 'than they've ever done before.' But this does not seem to be the prevailing opinion. A more gloomy assessment came from a retired army general, John Singlaub, who has been at the forefront in drumming up private aid efforts. He says the FDN group is in a 'very desperate situation.'
Honduras, the incoming administration is expected to lift the current ban on most deliveries of US assistance for Nicaraguan rebels after the President-elect, Jose Azcona, takes office next Monday, according to a variety of well-placed sources.
Delivery of the boots, ponchos, uniforms and other supplies would be a big boost for the guerrillas.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
76 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 23, 1986
British satellite battle in the air / Defence ministry to decide whether to use US or European military communications satellite
BYLINE: By DAVID FAIRHALL, Defence Correspondent
LENGTH: 399 words
Another test of whether the Defence Ministry intends looking towards Europe or the US is looming, this time over military communications satellites.
Britain's first two Skynet 4 satellites are already booked for launching by the US space shuttle, both accompanied by a payload specialist or technician. But the French, against the background of the Westland helicopter affair, are now putting on pressure for the third in the satellite series to be put into orbit by the Ariane rocket.
The first Skynet is to go up in June.
The Defence Ministry said last night that the Ariane launch would be cheaper, even allowing for the cost of converting Skynet. This suggests that France is offering the use of its rocket at a bargain price to attract its first military customer; it would probably cost about pounds 10 million to adapt the pounds 45 million satellite to fit inside Ariane and to test its ability to withstand the tougher rocket launch.
But it means that ministry officials are now weighing the money saved against the advantages of having a man in space to monitor the final launch, and perhaps perform military experiments up there.
Another factor for the new Defence Secretary, Mr George Younger, to consider is the political desirability of doing the French a favour at American expense - a particularly sensitive issue, with the Westland row still raging.
The French Ambassador, Mr Jacques Viot, is believed to be seeking a meeting with Mr Younger, but although defence sources suggest that it is imminent, the embassy would not say when. The French envoy is likely to take the line during the talks that, as commercial satellite organisations spread custom between the US and Europe, the same should apply with Skynet.
The main contractor for the Skynet-4 series is British Aerospace, supported by Marconi Space Systems. The British company is remaining neutral.
Skynet-4 was originally designed to be launched either by the shuttle or by Ariane, but was developed to match the former when the Defence Ministry decided to go American.
The space shuttle Columbia left California a day early yesterday after technicians worked feverishly to get it ready for its return to Florida for a new flight in March.
The shuttle, mounted atop a Boeing 747, left Edwards Air Force base, where it landed on Saturday because of bad weather in Florida.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
77 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 23, 1986
Fighting sets back Soviet interests in Middle East / Civil war in South Yemen
BYLINE: By HELLA PICK, Diplomatic Correspondent
LENGTH: 485 words
International attention on South Yemen is on the unusual harmony and cooperation that the Soviet Union has shown in helping to organise the exodus of all nationalities from Aden.
It is an historic first for the royal yacht Britannia to have on board a Soviet liaison officer keeping in touch with the severely damaged Soviet embassy in Aden, where some people, waiting to be evacuated, have sheltered.
But when the fighting stops the Soviet Union will want to restore its massive presence in the country. The conflict has been a severe setback to Soviet interests; all the more serious since the Kremlin may, indirectly, and certainly involuntarily, have contributed to the crisis.
Its decision, earlier this year to encourage the former South Yemen president, Abdul Fattah Ismail, to return there after a five-year exile in Moscow and Sofia almost certainly led to conflicts within the ruling Communist party.
Abdul Fattah Ismail is a Stalinist, yet Moscow apparently did not foresee that his return would provoke a clash with the more pragmatic President Ali Nasser Mohammed, who is believed to have lost to the rebels.
The Soviet Union has so far failed in its attempts to secure a ceasefire and it is doubtful whether it knows any more than other countries do, whether the rebel forces are united around Abdul Fattah Ismail, or whether the fighting has now degenerated into tribal conflicts. Such tribal conflicts are the very thing that the Soviet Union, seeking to increase its hold on South Yemen, has always sought to prevent.
Most Western analysts predict that another Marxist regime will emerge in South Yemen and that the Soviet Union should be able to restore its presence there.
None the less, there is a possibility that the insurrection will develop into a setback for Soviet interests in the area. For one thing, the tribal differences having now erupted, will not be easily settled, and the country may be unstable for a long time.
In the wider context of the Soviet effort to extend its influence in the Middle East, a Marxist regime in South Yemen, perhaps led by Abdul Fattah Ismail, will compound the Kremlin's difficulties in building ties with Oman, Kuwait and other moderate administrations in the Arabian peninsula.
South Yemen, with its strategic position, has become an invaluable asset to the Soviet Union. Alone in the Middle East, the country has had Marxist governments since independence from Britain in 1967.
In 1979, South Yemen signed a friendship treaty with the Soviet Union. Although this did not apparently allow the Soviet Union to build a major military base in the country, it has developed important refuelling and communications facilities. This became more important after the political debacle in Somalia, when the regime there changed sides and turned to the US breaking its friendship treaty with the Soviet Union.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
78 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 23, 1986
The Day in Politics: Black Hawk stance stays unchanged / House of Commons Defence committee considers purchase of US-made helicopter
BYLINE: By DAVID FAIRHALL
LENGTH: 449 words
The departure of Mr Michael Heseltine from the Ministry of Defence has not changed his department's position on the Sikorsky Black Hawk helicopter Westland will be building if it accepts the US company's rescue offer. That is, in the former Defence Secretary's words, that there are 'neither funds nor requirement' for the American machine.
This week's hearings of the House of Commons defence committee, which is investigating the defence implications of the Westland affair, have established that the relevant air staff target has been in abeyance since the spring of last year while the army decides what kind of support helicopter it really wants.
The answer will not be available until the end of this year. But it turns on whether Rhine Army wants to carry a complete platoon of about 30 troops in one lift. Neither the Black Hawk nor the Westland 30 could do this, but an army version of the Anglo-Italian EH 101 which Westland is building with Agusta would have the capacity, as defence officials pointed out to the committee.
When members of the allparty committee expressed concern that Westland's difficulties may have been compounded by the army's 'vacillation' over what type of helicopter it wanted, the leader of the ministry team at Tuesday's hearing, Air Marshal Sir Donald Hall, Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff (Systems), replied that, on the contrary, this was a responsible and legitimate review - 'a fundamental and comprehensive appraisal of the roles of support helicopters in airmobile and amphibious operations, as well as 'out of area.'
Rhine Army's 6th Airmobile Brigade had been carrying out a series of trials and exercises which would not be completed until 1987, a member of his team explained.
At yesterday's hearing MPs tried to pursue other questions about Westland's possible future as an associate of a large US helicopter manufacturer - Sikorsky - trying to exist in a collaborative European environment. Would the European defence ministers' 1978 declaration of principles, or the national armament directors' more recent recommendation to 'buy European' prevent the British forces buying later versions of the Westland Sea King, they wanted to know.
Sir David Perry, Britain's national armaments director, replied that the buy European recommendation - which has not been endorsed by the Government - was intended to apply to new helicopters like the EH 101 and the NH 90. under development for the 1990s. But, whatever happened to Westland, the Government hoped that some degree of European collaboration would continue. The Anglo-Italian EH 101, he pointed out, was already under full development by Westland and Agusta.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
79 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 23, 1986
UK News in Brief: Ferranti wins star wars deal / British company signs US SDI contract
BYLINE: By EDWARD VULLIAMY
LENGTH: 149 words
The first British company to win a Star Wars contract has signed it after dealing directly with the Pentagon, bypassing the special Ministry of Defence office set up to arrange such contracts, writes Edward Vulliamy.
The military equipment company Ferranti signed the dollars 1 million deal two weeks ago, but the special office set up last month by the then Defence Secretary, Mr Michael Heseltine, and the US Defence Secretary, Mr Caspar Weinberger, was not told. Mr Heseltine had described the office as a 'focal point for British participation' in Star Wars.
Ferranti's decision to bypass the MoD is revealed in the New Scientist magazine, published today. A Ferranti source told the magazine that the ministry was made aware that a deal was on the cards, but appeared to be delaying contracts 'until a clutch of contracts could be announced in a blaze of publicity.'
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
80 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 23, 1986
Peres renews appeal for Jordan talks / Israeli premier calls for talks with King Hussein on the Palestinian problem
BYLINE: By HELLA PICK, Diplomatic Correspondent
LENGTH: 363 words
The Israeli Prime Minister, Mr Shimon Peres, yesterday renewed his appeal to King Hussein of jordan for direct negotiations towards a peace treaty with Israel, to be coupled with 'the resolution of the Palestinian problem.'
Speaking in London during his official visit, Mr Peres said he believed that King Hussein was firmly committed to the principle of such negotiations, and had accepted that an international forum could not serve as a substitute for direct negotiations.
However, diplomats in London indicated yesterday that the King remains reluctant to drop Yasser Arafat, despite disenchantment about the PLO leader's indecision. The King had not so far agreed to search for other Palestinian leaders to represent Palestinian interests in eventual negotiations.
Mr Peres, speaking at the Royal Institute of International Relations, ruled out PLO participation in negotiations and the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.
He asserted that the Arab states, naming Syria as well as Jordan, no longer supported the creation of an independent Palestinian entity, and claimed that the Soviet Union was now 'alone in carrying the Palestinian fiag.'
Mr Peres called on the US and Western Europe to help to launch a Marshall plan for economic development of the Middle East.
Mr Peres later held his second nocturnal meeting this week with the US Assistant Secretary of State, Mr Richard Murphy.
The US diplomat has been shuttling between Mr Peres and King Hussein of Jordan in an effort to narrow differences about negotiating machinery and the selection of a Jordanian-Palestinian negotiating group acceptable to Israel, the King, and the Palestinians.
Mr Peres's audience at the Royal Institute for International Affairs included several Arabs, who later asked questions. The Israeli leader warned that the 'opportunity for peace this year may never return.'
Indicating that his efforts to show moderation might not survive after he hands over the Prime Minister's office to the more hard-line Likud coalition, Mr Peres said that if the present peace effort runs into an impasse Israeli diplomacy might again be paralysed.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
81 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 22, 1986
The Markets: Bank signal helps to bring late rally / Various Market Reports
LENGTH: 554 words
Stock markets were much steadier yesterday after a Bank of England signal to money markets to hold rates down. The underlying mood was still cautious, and gilts and equities waited until the afternoon session before attempting a decent recovery.
This was largely sparked off by a rally in North Sea crude prices due to reported Japanese purchases and US buying of selective UK blue chips. Government stocks recouped half of Monday's losses of over a point, having opened three-eighths lower.
Leading industrials ended mixed, although falls were still in a narrow majority. Stores, foods, properties and buildings continued to show concern with the prospect of higher interest rates.
Oils rebounded behind the lead of BP, 13p higher at 556p. ICI attracted American support, helped by vague rumours of the possible acquisition of Uniroyal. ICI added 6p to 752p. In tobaccos buyers returned to Imperial Group on hopes that the current talks between the chairmen of Imps and Hanson will lead to higher terms. Shares of Imps advanced 8p to 257p, some 25p above the current Hanson terms.
Sears Group also came in for speculative support after a press article hinting at a possible offer from acquisitive-minded Bat Industries. In a generally dull sector, Sears rose 5 1/2p to 112 1/2p.
Andrew Lloyd Webber's investment vehicle Really Useful Group staged a bright debut in spite of the uncertain market conditions. Many dealers had predicted a small discount after the rather disappointing applications. The shares opened at 366p, slipped back to 328p but closed at 338p, a premium of 8p over the 330p tender striking price.
Recently firm computer companies succumbed to profit-taking. The troubles of Goldcrest films overshadowed parent company Pearson Group, down 12p to 408p. Tins were under pressure again as the council failed to find a solution to the current crisis.
Golds improved 25 to 50 cents in quiet trading.
Main changes: ICI 752p, up 6p; BP 556p, up 13p; Imperial Group 257p, up 8p; Pearson 408p down 12p; Really Useful Group 338p (new striking price 330p); Sears 112 1/2p, up 5 1/2p; Beecham 328p, up 8p; GKN 278p, up 7p.
Turnover for Monday, January 20, was: bargains: 22,926; value pounds 476.664 million.
FRANKFURT - Shares tumbled in quiet dealings as the market continued to react to dampened hopes for lower interest rates. The Commerzbank index plunged 63.2 points to 2,076.1.
PARIS - Profit-taking left french stocks narrowly lower in active trading. Declining issues outnumbered advances 108 to 57.
TOKYO - Shares fell in moderate trading, largely as a result of lower share prices in New York. Nikkei index: 12,881.50 (12,952.05).
HONG KONG - Shares finished mixed in moderate trading. Hang Seng index: 1776.19 (1755.82).
Money markets: Having come back from the morning's high points, period rates were not showing much change overall from Monday's closing positions. The market remained highly sensitive to oil prices and the health of sterling, and found no reason for anything but concern on either score at the end of the day. Without improvement in these two areas, few market operators were prepared to give much for the chances of the Bank of England's being able to hold the existing level of interest rates beyond another day or two.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
82 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 22, 1986
Economic Agenda: Towards long-term recovery in Ulster / Northern Ireland's economic crisis
BYLINE: By DAVID CANNING, BARRY MOORE and JOHN RHODES
LENGTH: 1341 words
Since the imposition of direct rule in 1972 Northern Ireland has become increasingly dependent, both politically and economically, on Great Britain.
It is easy to assume that no improvement in its economy can be hoped for until the troubles end. This view is not only wrong, it is dangerous.
Without a successful economic strategy a solution of Northern Ireland's political difficulties is next to impossible. High absolute unemployment rates, over 25 per cent for males, and perhaps more importantly the large unemployment rate differential between Catholics and Protestants - 39 per cent as opposed to 19 per cent - are bound to cause some disaffection in any political framework. Moreover the annual net transfer of pounds 1.5 billion from Britain implies o either on continued dependence on outside funding or acceptance of an even worse economic condition.
The long-term recovery requires a new approach. During the 1960s Northern Ireland had an effective industrial policy, which led to a faster rate of employment growth than in the rest of the UK.
This regional policy has been much less successful during the 1970s and early 1980s; the impact has more than halved and it now costs on average more than pounds 100,000 per job created. In spite of policy, 75,000 jobs (40 per cent) have been lost in manufacturing, only about half of which can be attributed to the troubles.
The virtual bankruptcy of traditional policies aimed at the private sector and the crisis in manufacturing has, until now, been masked by public sector expansion. The imposition of direct rule in 1972 led to increased pressures to bring levels of public service provision in the province up to British standards.
This catching up process has led both to the fiscal transfer and to the creation of 67,000 jobs in Northern Ireland, which together with an additional 25,000 jobs in the security services due to the troubles, has more than offset the decline in manufacturing. However, public service standards have now been equalised. No further expansion here can be expected.
Yet keeping the unemployment rate constant in Northern Ireland requires jobs for 8,000 new workers who come into the labour force each year.
If the public sector is not expanding and the private sector is allowed to stagnate or contract, these 8,000 will be added to the unemployment pool until employment prospects are so poor that this inflow is matched by an outflow of 8,000 workers (usually the most skilled) who emigrate in search of jobs. Outward migration thus alleviates the symptom of high unemployment but does little to promote long-term recovery. A new positive approach is needed.
An effective economic strategy has to secure three objectives. The main objective must be the growth of output and productivity in the private sector. The restructuring of manufacturing industry in Northern Ireland must provide a base for long-term economic growth.
The second objective is a substantial increase in employment, reducing the average unemployment rate to a level comparable with that in Great Britain. Thirdly, a large proportion of the additional jobs and income must be targeted to those groups whose needs are greatest: unskilled male manual workers, Catholics and those living in rural areas.
The first objective, that of creating a solid base for long-term economic growth in traded goods and services, is now pursued by the Department of Economic Development (DED), the Industrial Development Board (IDB) and other agencies. These have made imaginative proposals to adapt their policies to the extremely difficult conditions, moving away from passive automatic grants to a more intervenionist discretionary approach. But it is unlikely that they will have the capacity, in particular the specialist staff, to have a major impact.
In addition, the achievement of this first objective is hampered because these agencies continue to be burdened with the task of new jab creation in the province.
The emphasis on short-term job creation has led to support for almost any large project, whatever the cost or prospect of long-term viability. It is quite likely that the right policies for promoting economic growth in the private sector will lead, in the short term, to job loss, with rationalisation, the introduction of more productive techniques, and the ending of support for those industries with no long-term future.
The imposition of two conflicting objectives on these agencies, long-term economic growth and short-term job creation, is bound to prove divisive.
With fewer than 100,000 people in manufacturing industry the time has come for one agency - the IDB - to assume executive responsibility for long-run private sector development. In addition to this single objective it should also be given the means and the powers to use whatever methods it thinks most appropriate.
In the short to medium term, the main burden of job creation in Northern Ireland must continue to fall on the public sector. At present regional public sector expenditure is based on the concept of broad equalisation of public service provision -in relation to needs. This is both unjust and inefficient.
It fails to recognise that public sector expenditure is a major source of employment in addition to its role of service provision. If we accept the principle of equality of employment opportunities across regions, the impact of public expenditure on a region's unemployment must also be taken into account.
It is unjust that those regions which suffer in industrial restructuring - restructuring which is essentially for the benefit of national efficiency and competitiveness - should bear all the costs while the betteroff regions share the benefits. Given that some transfer of jobs to the depressed regions is desirable during the transitional restructuring process it is sensible to make this transfer in the most efficient way possible.
Public sector jobs are now much cheaper to create in Northern Ireland than private sector jobs.
Public sector job creation could easily be targeted to achieve our third objective, creating jobs for the most disadvantaged groups within the provinces. For example, a policy of increased house building could be used both to increase employment amongst such groups and go some way to bringing housing up to British standards.
How much would it cost to pursue such an economic strategy? A revised industrial policy aimed at securing a successful industrial base in 20 years' time could be carried out within the existing budget for industry and employment. The expense of enough public sector jobs to bring the unemployment rate down to British levels need not be very large.
Over the next ten years about 100,000 public sector jobs will be needed and this would involve an extra fiscal transfer building up by pounds 100 million each year.
After ten years the transfer might peak at pounds 1 billion, equivalent to a diversion of only 3/4 of 1 per cent of total UK public expenditure or about pounds 44 extra per year for each British taxpayer. Thereafter the successful restructuring of the private sector will remove the need for both this temporary transfer and the existing transfer.
The prospect of American aid creates a further dimension to this strategy. The most effective way for the US to help the Northern Ireland economy might be to permit Northern Ireland firms to bid for government contracts on the same basis as American firms.
The aid could then be used to install capacity to enable Northern Ireland to compete effectively and provide the catalyst for a new growth industry of significant proportions. Access to a new market is a much more powerful way of stimulating economic growth than subsidies aimed at reducing costs.
David Canning, Barry Moore, and John Rhodes are fellows respectively of Pembroke. Downing and Wolfson in the University of Cambridge. This article is based on an ESRC project at the Department of Applied Economics.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
83 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 22, 1986
Bank wants securities safeguard / Bank of England calls for worldwide coordinating committee
BYLINE: By PETER RODGERS, City Editor
LENGTH: 483 words
The Bank of England would like securities markets worldwide to set up a coordinating committee so that malpractices and mistakes do not slip between competing policing systems.
The idea is to establish a securities market equivalent of the Basle Committee, which coordinates the supervision of banks worldwide. Any new body might need a permanent secretariat.
A strong hint of the proposal was given yesterday by the Governor of the Bank, Mr Robin Leigh-Pemberton, who told the American Chamber of Commerce in London that it was 'vital that workable relationships are established between the securities markets regulators of different countries.'
He also expressed concern at US claims that its laws extend to other countries. 'It is daunting to contemplate the extent to which US official bodies claim to exercise authority outside US territory.'
In what appears to be a shot across the bows of the Americans, he called for a 'workable compromise on the limits of our respective jurisdictions' and said it would be a pity if the markets moved to less regulated places because governments had failed to reach the necessary understandings which would allow links between well regulated exchanges.
He cited the growing number of securities that are being traded simultaneously around the world as a reason for international cooperation. It was difficult to know in such cases whether an orderly market was being maintained.
Similarly, there was interest in formal trading links between different stock exchanges, such as London and the various US exchanges. 'Such linkages will have to be backed by explicit agreements on exchanges of regulatory information.' He welcomed planned US-UK talks.
Mr Leigh-Pemberton warned his American audience not to grab for their lawyers - as they do at home - whenever there was a problem under the new British system of securities supervision. The unavoidable contact between British and US regulation, once there were links between exchanges, would bring the two legal systems 'face to face.'
In London markets, the Securities and Investments Board has firmly settled on five rather than the proposed seven self-regulatory organisations, said Sir Kenneth Berrill, head of the new Securities and Investments Board.
He has asked for mergers of IMRO, the investment management organisation, and LAUTRO, the life assurance organisation, into one body, and for a similar merger between the securities dealers of NASDIM and the proposed unit trust regulatory body, LUTIRO.
He also emphasised the importance of a single compensation scheme for all markets, and revealed that the new conduct of business rules would ban certain types of customer transactions altogether, setting 'a standard to which even the elite do not at present aspire.' He repeated his objections to the inclusion of Lloyd's in the financial services bill.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
84 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 22, 1986
Dark forces / Alleged Soviet agents at Greenham common women's peace camp
BYLINE: By DAVID FAIRHALL
LENGTH: 564 words
Stories about spies and 'special forces' are easy to write, given a bit of imagination, but are difficult to substantiate and almost impossible to disprove. We all know that the SAS, and no doubt their Soviet counterparts the Spetsnaz, sometimes perform military feats or spectacular ingenuity. Philby and Blunt demonstrate that KGB spies can nestle right at the heart of the British establishment. Such things are possible.
But this week's report in Jane's Defence Weekly about women members of the Spetsnaz having 'infiltrated' the Greenham women's protest camps at the US nuclear cruise missile base in Berkshire has understandably been greeted with a mixture of scepticism and outrage.
The Ministry of Defence certainly takes the military threat posed by the Spetsnaz seriously. Last year's big home defence exercise, Brave Defender, was designed to practise the protection of vital installations in the UK - nuclear power stations and communications centres, as well as nuclear missile sites - against sabotage at the outbreak of war. But the Ministry would make no comment yesterday on internal security at the Berkshire base in peacetime.
First reaction from the women of Greenham was angry disbelief. 'We are absolutely amazed,' said one, 'that such a ludicrous, unsubstantiated slur could be made upon us.'
The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament also expressed its amazement. Vice-chairman Ms Joan Ruddock said: 'I would have thought the military secrets the Soviets might obtain about cruise could be obtained in much more obvious ways, such as by satellite surveillance.'
It is at this practical level that an unconfirmable allegation of this kind has to be assessed. Jane's correspondent writes that 'although the agents are not now outside the perimeter wire, the Soviet Union still maintains a presence in the area which can be mobilised at short notice.' The female agents initial purpose is 'to incite protesters to mount protests and demonstrations to test the defending forces' reaction times and to monitor security arrangements and timings of cruise missile convoys leaving Greenham.' The report also mentions the possibility of Soviet agents placing radio homing devices on the base to guide bombers or nuclear cruise missiles.
In an East-West war, or the run up to war, both the Spetsnaz and the SAS would no doubt try all sorts of tricks, and any Russians, who turned up at Greenham would find security a good deal more aggressive than it is today. But Spetsnaz are soldiers, training to fight as saboteurs, not spies trying to elicit information. Soviet military intelligence obviously wants to know as much as possible about Greenham and how the base would operate in war (the security of the silos would not be much of a problem at that time, incidentally, because the cruise missile crews are not planning to be there).
As a matter of practical politics, any agents provocateurs sitting around the Greenham camp fires are more likely to have been from the Special Branch or the CIA, or just journalists looking for an inside story, than Communist assassins trained in the Urals. No one can be sure and it hardly matters either way. The women arrived at the gates long before there were any missiles to protect, and their dogged protest represents a current of political feeling running far deeper than any war game scenario.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
85 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 22, 1986
Rioters kill two white policemen / South Africa
BYLINE: From our Correspondent
LENGTH: 402 words
DATELINE: JOHANNESBURG
Five-hundred black miners rioting west of Johannesburg last night killed two white policemen with knives and clubs.
The miners took handguns and shotguns from the two-man police patrol, then used the weapons on police reinforcements.
It was the worst single incident involving white police fatalities since the present cycle of unrest, which has claimed more than 1,060 lives, began in February, 1984.
The Federated Chamber of Industries yesterday said that the black majority should have the vote and share in power 'up to the highest level'.
The FCI statement, which was delivered only 10 days before the opening address to Parliament by President PW Botha, also warned of the urgent need for the Government to 'increase substantially its currently low domestic and international credibility'.
The statement is seen as a sign of nervousness by organised industry that Mr Botha's address - in which he will spell out his reform programme for 1986 - may evoke the same disappointment as his 'Rubicon' speech last August. The disenchantment then with Mr Botha as a reformist helped provoke the fall of the rand to an all-time low against the US dollar.
But yesterday's FCI statement was at the same time an attempt to persuade Mr Botha to take appropriate action to overcome the air of suspicion or, at the least, scepticism, about his intentions.
'The process of political round-table bargaining cannot, and will not start, until all parties are convinced that government is genuinely willing to negotiate a new constitutional dispensation based on power-sharing up to the highest level,' the FCI said. 'There are important credibility gaps which render effective negotiation at present very difficult, if not impossible.'
The FCI which represents English and Afrikaans-speaking industrialists, stressed that business should play a 'catalytic role' in helping to create the essential conditions for negotiations about power-sharing between all South Africans.
The FCI also wants a government commitment to abolish racially discriminatory laws, power-sharing at central government level within a 'single institution' (an implicit rejection of the idea favoured in government circles of creating separate structures for blacks), abolition of influx control and compulsory residential segregation, lifting of the state of emergency and the release of all political prisoners.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
86 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 22, 1986
Marcos defies US to keep on Ver for presidential poll / Philippines President to retain controversial army chief of staff
BYLINE: From MICHAEL WHITE
LENGTH: 682 words
DATELINE: MANILA
President Ferdinand Marcos yesterday made a fresh gesture of calculated defiance towards the US by virtually confirming that he will not be sending his controversial army chief of staff, General Fabian Ver, into retirement before the presidential election next month.
The fate of General Ver, a loyal Marcos ally, has acquired double significance for Washington because he is not only widely suspected of complicity in the 1983 murder of the opposition leader, Benigno Aquino, but is seen as an obstacle to the military reforms judged necessary to defeat the Philippines' growing Communist insurgency.
President Reagan's friend, Senator Paul Laxalt, is said to have warned Mr Marcus during a mission here last summer of Washington's likely displeasure if General Ver was reinstated following his disputed acquittal in the Aquino conspiracy trial. When President Marcos did exactly that, it was presented as a face-saving and temporary move.
Until the weekend, Mr Marcos appeared to be planning to release General Ver, his former chauffeur, and promote his rival, General Fidel Ramos, a West Point graduate in whom Washington has greater military confidence. But at a businessman's lunch yesterday, during which he pledged not to raise taxes if re-elected, the President backed away.
'Many people do not understand, and these include some foreign observers and friends, that you do not just relieve a chief of staff whose leave of absence has caused some difficulty in reorganising the armed forces,' he said.
Speculation here suggests that the long-term favourite to succeed General Ver, aged 66, may be the navy chief, Commodore Brillante Ochoco. The keeping of General Ver may reflect Mr Marcos' desire to have a totally trustworthy henchman in charge during the elections.
In the tussle to have 'clean and honest' elections - to which Mr Marcos and the opposition are officially committed - the Government's election commission has acknowledged that no less than 800 districts are potential election trouble spots.
But demands of citizens' groups to conduct their own count as polls close, to deter ballot rigging have been rejected. Nor will foreign observers, including US congressmen and hundreds of reporters, be allowed within 50 yards of a polling station during voting.
This is partly a matter of national pride, since US 'interference' in Filipino affairs, is a sentiment which Mr Marcos and his ruling New Society Movement machine exploits. It was also confirmed by the US embassy yesterday that foreigners will be able to inspect the count, deterring traditional fraud tactics. These range from simple' stuffing' of ballot boxes - glass windows have been introduced this time - to the wholesale theft of returns.
With Mr Marcos and Aquino's widow, Mrs Corazon Aquino, campaigning hard, the violence which is increasingly frequent on both sides of the rural insurgency has crept closer to the election. On Sunday night, in the southern city of Zamboanga, a grenade was thrown near the rally Mrs Aquino was addressing.
But, potentially even more ominous, President Marcos has begun to warn his own audiences that the opposition may start staging violent acts to gain sympathy - even to the point of a mock-kidnapping of Mrs Aquino.
The President's claims surprised even General Ramos alarming opponents who recall that similar talk and an election bombing had preceded, and helped justify, martial law imposed for nine years in 1972. Fears of a repetition of this if Mrs Aquino continues to do well dog the campaign as do charges of inexperience and 'softness' on communism against her.
Opponents of President Marcos yesterday reported another political killing, an assassination attempt and the machine-gunning of one of their local offices.
Mrs Aquino's spokesman disclosed three previously unreported incidents. In one, a village leader was shot dead and a colleague seriously wounded. It was the sixth reported election killing.
The spokesman also reported an attack on a mayor during an Aquino rally north of Manila.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
87 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 22, 1986
Washington meets more resistance / West Germany reluctant to back US sanctions against Libya
BYLINE: From ANNA TOMFORDE
LENGTH: 337 words
DATELINE: BONN
Government officials reacted coolly yesterday to US calls for Bonn to cut oil imports from Libya, and to keep a closer watch on the Libyan mission here.
They 'noted with interest' suggestions made by the US Deputy Secretary of State, Mr John Whitehead, in talks here with the Foreign Minister, Mr Hans-Dietrich Genscher, and the Economics Minister, Mr Martin Bangemann.
The US also wants Bonn to reduce technology exports to Tripoli and to review air links with Arab States.
However, after the talks, the ministers reiterated West Germany's refusal to impose economic sanctions against Libya, but said that Bonn was prepared to improve international cooperation in fighting terrorism.
Both ministries stressed that oil imports and overall trade links with Libya had been significantly reduced over the past few years. Officials also said that Bonn had adopted a strict arms export policy towards Tripoli, and that no 'sensitive technology' was being sold to Arab states.
But they said that the American proposals, including the call for re-examining diplomatic and aviation links, would be considered.
Informed sources said no concrete measures were expected, in response to Mr Whitehead's appeal, but that West German industry had promised not to replace US firms withdrawing from Libya.
Mr Whitehead said that he had shown the Government 'incontrovertible evidence' that Libya was behind the attacks on Rome and Vienna airports last month. But a West German official described the material as a summary of statements by the Libyan leader, Colonel Muammar Gadafy, that would 'not stand up as conclusive evidence in a legal sense.'
Mr Whitehead, who is touring eight European capitals to explain the US sanctions against Tripoli, said that Washington was 'not twisting the West Germans' arms,' but wanted Bonn to see if more could be done to penalise Libya for its alleged backing of international terrorism.
He hoped that the Germans would still change their minds on sanctions.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
88 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 22, 1986
US makes clear it wants no superpower role in Aden / Washington to stay out of South Yemen civil war
BYLINE: From ALEX BRUMMER
LENGTH: 450 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
The United States is making it known to the Soviet Union that there can be no case for superpower involvement in the battle for control of South Yemen, Administration officials said last night.
This emerged as the State Department said that the fighting in South Yemen was 'still inconclusive.' While US officials describe both the defending government of Mr Ali Nasser Mohammed and the opposing rebel forces as pro-Soviet there is some worry within the Administration that the regime which emerges from the fighting will be more radical than its predecessor.
Although South Yemen has long been regarded by the Americans as a destabilising influence in the Gulf of Aden and the wider region, it was noted that in recent years it has been less of a problem than in the late 1970s and early 1980s when its hostile activities were at their height. During this period South Yemen was seen to be threatening to bo its neighbours to the north and the oil strategically important sheikhdom of Oman.
American analysts, however, were reluctant last night to draw any parallel to the current fighting between pro-Soviet forces in the South Yemen and the battle for control in Afghanistan which preceded the Russian invasion. It was noted that in Afghanistan the opposition forces had historically been non-Communist and anti-Soviet - two conditions not existing in the current conflict. Nevertheless any direct involvement of Russian forces would clearly be strongly resisted in Washington.
The US, which has had no diplomatic relations or representation with South Yemen since 1969, is apparently relieved for the moment that there is a conflict in the Middle East in which it is not directly or indirectly involved. There were just two US citizens in South Yemen before the fighting broke out and both of these have been rescued by the British.
As a result of the low level of US involvement in the South Yemen there have been no special naval or other military movements. US naval vessels have been on heightened alert in both the Gulf and the eastern and central Mediterranean in recent weeks as a result of the dispute with Libya and boarding of ships by Iran.
The dramatic British and ing foreign nationals from South Yemen has received little attention in the US. American officials appeared unimpressed by Sir Geoffrey Howe's comments noting the extent of Anglo-Soviet military cooperation.
'This is an embarrassment for the Soviet Union,' argued Dr Joyce Starr, the director of the near east programme at the Georgetown Centre for Strategic Studies. 'The State Department must be sitting back and laughing.' There could be no Afghanistan in South Yemen', she argued.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
89 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 22, 1986
US provides diversion as Libya's ills reach the shop floor / Focus on domestic and military difficulties in Libya
BYLINE: From DAVID HIRST
LENGTH: 1173 words
DATELINE: TRIPOLI
It is easy to understand how at least two died recently in a scramble for a new shipload of Nicaraguan bananas. Just go to the Jamahirivah supermarket, in the centre of Tripoli, at 8.30 in the morning.
Well before the doors open the customers have gathered outside, without necessarily knowing what they might buy. But one morning last week the bounty that awaited them was washing powder. And it was more than welcome. For the past few months it had been all but unobtainable, generating a run on ordinary toilet soap which in its turn kept drying up. So the multitude took the place by storm. Ignoring the endless rows of tinned milk, apparently in temporary surplus, which was virtually the only other product on display, they went in singleminded pursuit of the washing powder, and seizing two or three giant cartons, they fought their way past barriers of vigilantes assigned to control them. As they approached the counter, they fended off latecomers protesting against this un-revolutionary practice.
Such is the chaos that reigns in one part of Colonel Gadafy's utopia. The system which produced it, and the 'masses' who have to endure it, now face the danger of a military collision with the United States. Would Colonel Gadafy's new model army and popular militias perform much better than his supermarkets?
Most foreign observers, rigorously denied the means to observe, tend to the sceptical view. That he has a vast and growing arsenal of the most up-to-date Soviet weaponry is a long-established fact.
It is a legitimate assumption, rather than an established fact, that the Libyans lack the skills to operate the T-72 tanks and the MiG-25 fighters at anything like their full efficiency. Diplomats tell tales of tanks bumping into each other as inexperienced drivers practised for the annual parade which, last year, had to be cancelled.
But does it really matter all that much? Leaving aside such far from immaterial considerations as the attitude of the Soviet Union - and Colonel Gadafy is obviously pleased with it - President Reagan, in whose court the ball now is, has the ticklish problem, if the worst comes to the worst, of deciding what target to hit.
His humiliating experience with Syria over Lebanon must have taught him that sabre rattling and an occasional skirmish, in the absence of a demonstrated readiness to escalate towards full-scale conflict, achieves less than nothing.
President Reagan might begin with a punitive strike on terrorist bases. but their very existence, as distinct entities, is controversial. 'There aren't any,' said a Palestinian guerrilla leader here last week. 'We get at least 75 per cent of our arms and money from Gadafy. We always have. And Abu Nidal does not need training for his kind of activities.' The likelihood is that such raids would hit irrelevant targets, and that they would inflict no great military and still less political, pain.
They would greatly enhance his own sense of importance on the world stage, while casting him in the sympathetic role of David and Goliath.
If anything is sure, it is that the moment the US attacked, Colonel Gadafy would send his own followers on the kind of terrorist operations, in Europe or America, for which only Palestinians, with or without Libyan backing, have so far been responsible. The fanaticism is only waiting to be tapped: ' We are now setting up special forces for suicide operations,' said Major Jallud, Colonel Gadafy's number two.
In other words, punitive strikes would merely aggravate the plague that Mr Reagan is trying to stamp out, and there by push him towards that choice which, over Lebanon, took him out of the hornet's nest altogether, but which, this time would be more likely to drag him further in.
Colonel Gadafy's greatest fear appears to be that, profiting from the disputed status of the Gulf of Sirte, the American fleet will lure him into losing aerial combat 'hundreds of miles from shore.' So it is he who must drag in the Americans.
'The best way to deal with a man like Gadafy,' said a European diplomat, 'is to ignore him.' It is a widely-held view. That he delights in the world attention which he and his not particularly important country manage to attract is apparent from the royal style which this self-styled son of the desert, who supposedly yearns to return to his bedouin tent, increasingly assumes. He attracts attention with his meticulous grooming, his elaborate wardrobes, his calvalcades, and the enormous retinue of aides, henchmen, cheerleaders, which fills at least three aircraft when he descends on countries he wants to impress or intimidate.
The attention also serves his political aims in that wider Arab arena where, like Nasser his idol, he deems himself a hero waiting for his predestined role. He knows that the Arab kings and presidents are less than sincere in their messages of support and solidarity, but he also knows that they send them because they are afraid of the indignation which an 'imperialist' assault on a member of the Arab family, however eccentric and unloved, would arouse at home.
The Libyan people cannot but concede that Colonel Gadafy has really put them on the map. They seem to suffer from a national inferiority complex: he massages it. The crisis certainly diverts attention from domestic problems.
Although more than halved in recent years, Libya still has oil revenues of about dollars 9 billion a year to play with. Yet, thanks largely to arms purchases, it now owes Western Europe about dollars 4 billion and the Soviet Union an estimated dollars 5 billion. The Libyan people, on whom, in the early years, Colonel Gadafy lavished an ever-growing bounty, are now expected to pay for this extravagance with an evergrowing austerity.
He clearly thinks it is good for them. Indeed, he is openly contemptuous, telling them that the time to complain will be when there are no queues at all, because there is nothing to buy. And the people's congresses, with their built in propensity to out-do the leadership, have 'spontaneously' called for further drastic cuts in imports.
How much more of this the Libyans can take is, after the confrontation with the US, the second most important talking-point in Tripoli. No one expects a popular uprising, but Colonel Gadafy is creating general conditions which could encourage conspirators, most likely within the army, to act.
Its commanders have not hidden their visceral dislike of endless, often mindless, revolutionary turmoil. Its own supermarkets are said to be as empty as the rest. Mystery surrounds the recent killing of Colonel Gadafy's cousin and close confidant, Colonel Hassan Ishkal, the commander of the key Sirte region. But it bears the outward hallmarks of the most ominous episode yet in that perpetual struggle between the established, albeit basically loyal, institutions of the state and the new revolutionary forces which are bent, with his encouragement, on subordinating them to' people's power.'
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
90 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 22, 1986
The Day in Politics: Let drug profits go to help the victims call / Proposal to use traffiker assets to rehabilitate drug addicts
BYLINE: By our Political Staff
LENGTH: 569 words
The assets confiscated from drug traffickers under a bill given an unopposed second reading in the Commons last night should go into a trust fund to pay for the treatment of drug addicts, the Labour Home Affairs spokesman, Mr Robin Corbett, said last night.
He argued that it would be sweet justice if the proceeds of Britain's fastest growing industry were used to rehabilitate the victims from whom the drug traffickers had made part of their fortune.
'To mention just one current case, what would happen if Blenheim Palace was confiscated? There are no possible circumstances where the Treasury by any stretch of its vast imagination could make any possible legitimate case to grab the loot.' said Mr Corbett.
Mr Douglas Hurd, the Home Secretary, moving the second reading of the Drug Trafficking Offences Bill, said it represented a sharp new weapon in the fight against drug smuggling.
The bill provides new powers for tracing and freezing the proceeds of drug trafficking, and for a confiscation order to be imposed on a person convicted of a drug trafficking offence.
It also creates new offences of assisting another person to retain the proceeds of drug trafficking and disclosing information likely to prejudice a drug trafficking investigation. The bill has all-party support.
The Home Secretary said there were encouraging signs in the Government's campaign, but the situation remained serious.
'I would be quite wrong if I did not warn that the drugs problem in the UK could well continue for a while to get worse before it gets better,' he said. 'The world is awash with drugs, and we may well see an increase in the number of traffickers and misusers. We can reasonably expect price and purity levels to remain fairly static.'
Heroin would remain the main problem, but there were signs that, as Pakistan succeeded in cracking down on traffickers, the principal source for smuggling heroin into the UK would shift to south-west Asia.
Mr Hurd said the forecast cocaine explosion had not materialised but massive quantities of the opiate were still being produced in Latin America. He also warned about the scale of manufacture and import of amphetamines. '' Fortunately, the ' designer' and synthetic drugs which have appeared in the US are still virtually unknown in the UK, although LSD is becoming more common.'
Mr Corbett welcomed the bill but he attacked the Government for cutting the number of Customs officers at British ports. He argued that in practice there had been a 30 per cent cut relative to increase in work and against the background since 1979 of a tenfold increase in heroin smuggling and a threefold increase in cocaine smuggling.
Mr David Mellor, the Home Office Minister, winding up for the Government, said that large sums of money had gone on the campaign against drugs and the Chancellor should not be begrudged the money that would be confiscated under the bill.
He went on to give a broad hint that the Government is considering extending the principle of confiscation of assets to the wider criminal fraternity. He told one Conservative MP who wanted the principle applied to pimps and those who lived off immoral earnings that his plea had not fallen on deaf ears.
The minister added that such an extension of the principle would be included in a new Criminal Justice Bin possibly in the next session of Parliament.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
91 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 21, 1986
Few takers for an exotic hedge / Consumer Prices Index futures trading at the US Coffee, Sugar and Cocoa Exchange
BYLINE: From ALEX BRUMMER
LENGTH: 467 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
When the New York Coffee, Sugar and Cocoa Exchange decided to enter the booming market for financial futures with a contract which seeks to hedge against inflation it seemed like a great idea. Chicago could keep its pork bellies and foreign currency futures; New York would go one better - a contract in the consumer prices index (CPI).
But the Coffee, Sugar and Cocoa Exchange's move into the big time of futures trading has been less than a success. While investors continue to scramble for a share of the action in Chicago the CPI contract remains a lonely piece of financial exotica. In January, a tumultuous month on the financial markets, there was not even one deal struck. Indeed, since the CPI contract was invented seven months ago, only 1,324 have been snapped up.
The frustrated entrepreneurs at the coffee exchange will not, however, be beaten. Anyone who has the courage to invest in a CPI contract will be given a bonus of dollars 5 a day for each contract dealt in up to the first 20 contracts. There will be an additional dollars 50,000 award to be shared among those market operators who make more than 20 contract trades a day. The scheme could be compared to the free hotel rooms given to Las Vegas's big rollers or the plastic toy buried in the Rice Crispies.
The vice-president of the exchange, Mr James Bowie, is enthusiastic about the move, saying it is like 'jump-starting a motor cycle.' He adds: 'Everybody's waiting for someone else to drum up some liquidity.' Paine Webber, which will be taking part in the programme, told Dow Jones that once the daily dealing rate is up to 500 or 1,000 contracts a day it will 'roll along on its own.'
One of the problems with the CPI futures contract is that it is so exotic it may be difficult for even sophisticated investors to understand. The inflation futures which the market is peddling is tied to the US government's monthly CPI index - the broad equivalent of Britain's retail prices index. The idea is that investors such as big insurance companies and pension funds buy the contracts as a hedge against a decline in the long-term value of their policies.
If the CPI contract were to take off, there would be little coffee and sugar traded on the exchange. Instead, it could become a roaring market in government statistics. The exchange is considering constructing a new contract based on such economic indicators as housing, company earnings and, of course, car sales. In essence it will become a kind of betting tent for government indices.
Analysts predicting America's economic future will be able to put their money where their mouth is. Who knows, the whole world of economic forecasting could be in for its biggest upheaval since the invention of econometrics and the computer model.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
92 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 21, 1986
Writ 'no threat to BA sell-off' / More US legal action over alleged involement in Laker Airways collapse
BYLINE: By DAVID SIMPSON
LENGTH: 406 words
British Airways was adamant yesterday that its planned pounds 1 billion June privatisation has not been jeopardised by the latest action for damages filed against it in the US over the company's alleged part in forcing Laker Airways out of business.
Yesterday the state-owned airline was served with details of a multi-million dollar suit which has been lodged against it by a Los Angeles travel agent.
The action by Ambassador International Travel is also being brought against the two other carriers which were in competition with Laker Atlantic routes, TWA and Pan-American.
The Ambassador case claims that it suffered losses because Laker Airways, one of its most substantial sources of revenues, was forced into receiver ship by the three plaintiffs, in violation of US anti-trust laws.
A BA spokesman said yesterday that it intends to fight the action and that it has been advised by counsel that the case 'presents no impediment to privatisation'.
The airline's chief executive, Mr Colin Marshall, added, 'Both the government and the company have the strongest commitment to privatisation at the earliest possible opportunity.'
But despite the insistance that the latest action poses no threat to the timing of the BA flotation, it is clear that the problems arising out of the Laker collapse are not yet resolved.
BA, together with TWA and PanAm, is currently collecting details of travellers who used either of the three carriers on former Skytrain routes in the two years following the Laker collapse, to make compensation payments which could total dollars 30 million (pounds 21 million).
This manoeuvre, expected to be completed by the end of March, has been undertaken to satisfy class actions by individual passengers who claimed the Laker demise forced up the cost of Atlantic air fares.
The three companies are also facing the danger of claims from former Laker employees, co-ordinated by US lawyer Mr Bob Beckman, who acted for the liquidator of Laker in the damages action settled out of court last August at a cost of dollars 64 million.
One problem for BA, and indeed for TWA and PanAm, is that while the three airlines have never admitted any liability in the Laker collapse, their willingness to agree any out-of-court settlement with the Laker liquidator, and their subsequent agreement to pay off passengers, has left them open to further anti-trust claims in the US.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
93 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 21, 1986
The opposition should win the election, but will it win the count? / Philippines presidential election campaign
BYLINE: By MICHAEL WHITE
LENGTH: 1405 words
In downtown Manila a bustling Dickensian informality reigns over the proceedings of Comelec, the body charged with the considerable task of overseeing what may well be Ferdinand Marcos's last brush with the Philippine electorate. Behind closed curtains, ancient air-conditioning humming noisily, Mr Jose Concepcion is vigorously applying white spirit and a yellow toothbrush to a sample of blue ink on the finger of a government party lawyer.
Mr Concepcion, chairman of a citizens' group prudently established to oversee the overseers, is trying to prove that none of the inks intended to prevent double voting on February 7 is indelible enough to withstand the systematic fraud which he anticipates. The presiding Commissioner, Mr Jaime Opinion, agrees and genially orders the three firms contracting to provide 100,000 bottles each (one per polling station), the rival parties, and a public-spirited chemist, to get together and try harder.
It is an impressively conscientious moment. But illusion and reality are hard to disentangle in this election. Sceptics insist that even if Comelec was manned entirely by saints instead of Marcos-appointees it would be unable to prevent election-stealing tricks in the rural areas where 75 per cent of the 25 million voters live. If an ink were eventually found to satisfy Mr Concepcion, that ink would not necessarily be the one applied to fingers in polling booths throughout the 7,000-island archipelago.
And yet foreign critics who denounce a 'demonstration election' to placate a fretful ally in Washington find their assumptions under pressure, as does the communist New People's Army (NPA) which controls an increasing amount of rural territory. Among the voters the feeling grows that the snap poll announced on American TV one Sunday morning may be turning into the very thing Mr Marcos least had in mind: a genuine verdict on his increasingly dictatorial rule over what is the US's strategic South East Asian frontier, and was once its 'showcase of democracy in Asia' too.
In which case, the opposition confidently asserts, he would lose resoundingly: the exercise in illusion to bolster his declining years would have become reality as it did for Indira Gandhi after her complaisant appeal for electoral vindication after a far lesser usurpation. Filipinos who believe passionately in the candidacy of Mrs Corazon 'Cory' Aquino, whose homely bespectacled face beams from yellow posters, nonetheless falter when they try to look beyond February 7 and envisage a peaceful end to the Marcos era.
'How would he leave the Malacanang palace ..?' an elderly opponent mused yesterday in an Aquino office where they train workers to spot ballot fraud 'He'd have to be dead or drugged'. An aide reports that the phones are not working. 'Perhaps we have martial law already', he jokes. In a rumour-laden atmosphere anything is possible. News has even reached Manila of a mysterious 500 passenger liner, fiying the Filipino flag and lurking in Hong Kong waters. Officially named 'President' it has been nicknamed here 'the scape boat'.
Many speak nervously of a military coup or the restoration of martial law, imposed in 1971 as Marcos neared the end of his last year term of office and technically lifted only in 1981 when it was followed by a fixed election. 'We love your adherence to democracy', noted Vice-President Bush at the time. The chief of the armed forces, General Fabian Ver, the Marcos crony acquitted of complicity in a plot to kill Mrs Aquino's exiled husband Benigno as he stepped back on to Philippine soil in August 1983, is expected to step down sometimes before the election, to allow the more reputable General Fidel Ramos to take over. But the armed forces, hugely expanded and Marcos-dominated, like the government machine, remains a potent political force even as it fails to contain the NPA.
In Manila there exists a curious air of normality about this stage of the election, notwithstanding the city's widening gulf of wealth and poverty, beggars camped outside the big hotels and 20,000 child prostitutes according to one weekend estimate - as many as London a century ago. Yet campaign headquarters are full of volunteers.
If TV and radio (more important in a country where a TV set can cost a year's wages) are government dominated, the press is lively and diverse though only slightly less government dominated. 'FM and FL World Class Grafters' screams the Opposition paper, Malaya, on the strength of a US congressman's renewed charge against the salted-away billions of Mr Marcos and his FL - First Lady, Imelda, whose face is tactfully not on her husband's posters this time. 'FM ill - bleeds' says The Inquirer. Their circulations are puny (Malaya claims 60,000) but in Latin America, with which frequent comparisons are made, they might be closed or worse. After February 7, General Ver hints, 'Communists' will be dealt with.
What the Opposition has in spontaneous enthusiasm and small yellow 'Cory' stickers, the 68-year-old President compensates for with large displays, sometimes on family-owned property of which there is plenty, like the posh Manila Hotel. Comelec says that some Marcos posters exceed the stated size limit (8 feet by 3) and wants them removed. Appearances are very proper. 'Now More Than Ever' is the Marcos slogan.
Alas, a harsh reality keeps intruding in the same papers which berate each other's candidate ('Opposition Dared: Condemn NPA Activities') and expose official machinations (some uniforms never delivered to the army at a cost of pounds 5,000 are traced by Malaya to a marine colonel). Daily they report killings in both town and countryside. 'Guns, goons and gold' are an old election weakness here, but the NPA insurgency is both a reality and an excuse. Last week Jeremias de Jesus, an Aquino organiser in Tarlac, and his driver, were gunned down. A personal grudge, possibly an NPA killing, says the government. An intimidatory murder, says Mrs Aquino.
What has given this contest more vigour than Michael Foot or Fritz mondale ever managed to inject into their ordained defeats is a surge of hope. 'What I find inspiring in this country,' an intellectual said the other day. 'Is the loss of fear.' More than that the opposition has done far better than it - or Mr Marcos - could have expected: united instead of running rival tickets, and finding that Aquino's politically inexperienced widow had drawn huge and enthusiastic crowds. She is learning fast.
In contrast to her energetic tour, more than half the 73 provinces visited already, Mr Marcos sounds bad and look worse. When he collapsed during a rally on Thursday night aides insisted that he merely fell. On TV he is seen jogging, but only on TV. The old rumours of an incurable kidney condition are back on the front page. If that was not enough his security men nearly crashed a light aircraft into him on Saturday. No one would have believed that was an accident, though it would have been. If anyone is going to get bumped off, say the Manila wits, it is the expendable Marcos running mate Arturo Tolentino, so that FM can justify imposing martial law.
It may just be that the most significant psychological blow was delivered yesterday by the one organisation which FM cannot easily touch and which can alone rival his own machine: the Catholic Church. Not the Liberation theology priests this time, but the pastoral letter, A Call To Conscience issued to every pulpit by Cardinal Jaime Sin himself. Ostensibly neutral the language is actually anything but. It denounces 'undue pressure', 'evil tactics', and 'black propaganda', and calls for 'a new beginning'. On a practical note the Cardinal declares that accepting a bribe and then voting with one's conscience is not a sin. In a regime as tainted as this one, this could release a lot of votes.
Belatedly pressed by Washington to clean up his act and share a little power, President Marcus called the US bluff by saying 'all or nothing'. It is just possible that the voters may call his in sufficient numbers to make it very hard to cheat enough to win. As he introduced a new defector from the Marcos camp the other day (actually the PL's nephew), Beningno Aquino's brother Butz put it this way. 'I have not doubt right now that we have the people's vote. Ninety per cent of our energy today must be to make sure their votes count.'
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
94 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 21, 1986
King for a day / The status of blacks in the US
BYLINE: By LESLIE GOFFE
LENGTH: 656 words
Black people in the US in the 1980's have shuttled to the moon, won the Miss America beauty pageant, the boards of America's largest corporations, and taken the highest seats of government in some of the country's largest cities.
But on this Monday, the first observance of the national holiday to commemorate the birthday of the civil rights activist, Dr Martin Luther King, many blacks say that despite some improvements, changes have been largely cosmetic. 18 years after the assassination of Dr King in 1968, black unemployment is still twice that of white. Black median income has suffered an 8 per cent drop over the last 18 years, according to the US census bureau.
Among those who believe that there has been only cosmetic change is Les Payne, assistant managing editor at Newsday newspaper. 'Since Dr King's death we have had a black mayor in Atlanta, Chicago, and in Birmingham, Alabama' - once the most segregated city in America. 'At that time, this was unthinkable. But as far as delivering economically for the black majority there has been no improvement. I think the black condition to this very hour is about economic exploitation.' It has been so from slavery to post-slavery.
When Payne arrived at Newsday as a reporter in the 1960s, there were only seven other blacks in editorial. Today there are 40. Payne says that it would be simplistic to credit Dr King's efforts alone. He points out that the riots that came after King, and the other activists - like Malcolm X - were major contributors as well.
'People often only remember King's 'I have a dream' speech,' says Payne, who himself did some of the major reporting on Dr King. But they only remember 'what serves to misrepresent him, and misunderstand him'.
Dr Betty Shabazz is the widow of Malcolm X She teaches at a college in New York named after another murdered civil rights activist, Medgar Evers. She says that she does not expect that a national holiday will ever be granted for Malcolm X, who was often considered the militant thread in Dr King's non violent campaigns.
'There is a King day, because there was a Malcolm X', she says. 'There have always been attempts to put King out in front of Malcolm. Martin Luther King is a better example for the dominant group's purposes. Malcolm was a better example for blacks.'
Mayor Ronald Blackwood of Mount Vernon, New York, is the first black mayor of the city. He thinks that blacks have to make their own opportunities. 'We are still depending on whites to provide the opportunities for us. Until we go into business for ourselves we are not going to see real change. It is going to take perhaps a generation, maybe two generations, for this to become obvious to people.'
Black students, especially, are feeling the effects of the roll back. Kevin Brown, 25, is an economics undergraduate. He says that because his fees are paid by a scholarship created out of the civil rights struggles, he feels an obligation to steer others towards the opportunities that were made available to him.
'I think a lot of students are in a race against time. We are all trying to finish our education before the funds are cut,' he says. Brown thinks that affirmative action was 'retroactive payment' for black people's time and labour in America. 'Reversing the programme is like starting afresh. They are trying to forget the past, but this country was built on the past.'
'Blacks at University now are more concerned with what salary they are going to get than with making sure the black community as a whole benefits,' Leavis says. 'They do not talk about contributing any more. The dedication to those ideals have gone.'
Leavis thinks that the national holiday to commemorate Dr King's birthday is more a symbol than anything else. 'It shows that Martin Luther King Jnr's life, and the life of the many others that marched, and died with him, were not a complete waste.'
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
95 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 21, 1986
Foreigners banned in Manila poll / Philippine presidential elections
LENGTH: 223 words
DATELINE: MANILA
Philippine election officials yesterday banned all foreigners from polling stations in next month's presidential elections - including teams of US observers invited to watch for cheating.
The ban involves hundreds of foreign observers and correspondents. Officials said they could be gaoled and deported if they went within 50 yards of any of the 90,000 polling stations on election day, February 7.
Mr Marcos, fighting for re-election after 20 years in power, has invited foreign - and especially US - observers to watch on polling day to see that voting is 'clean, fair and honest.'
The election commission chairman, Mr Victorino Savellano, released a set of election rules laying down a maximum penalty of six years' gaol and deportation for violating the order.
The ban was announced amid growing irritation in the pro-government press over the degree of US attention to the election.
Several columnists commented on the timing of a congressional investigation into alleged multi-million-dollar property investments in the US.
One of them, Jesus Bigornia, said in the Bulletin Today newspaper: 'Intervention is a many-headed hydra. Applied to the Philippines it has assumed the form of subtle threats to reduce, even cut off entirely, assistance if the wishes of the intervening power are not heeded.'
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
96 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 21, 1986
Pakistan press savours its fresh taste of freedom
BYLINE: From ERIC SILVER
LENGTH: 845 words
DATELINE: ISLAMABAD
The front page of last week's Friday Magazine in the Muslim, Pakistan's most independent-minded English daily. featured 'the Bhutto factor in Pakistan's politics,' complete with three-column picture of Benazir Bhutto, and a single column of her father, the former prime minister, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. There was also another, of the man who sent him to the gallows, President Zia ul-Haq.
The paper justly claimed that the half-page article, a critical assessment of both Mr Bhutto and President Zia by Maleeha Lodhi, of the London School of Economics, was a landmark. Even if the article had sneaked by before martial law was lifted three weeks ago, the illustrations certainly would not. Images of the Bhuttos were taboo.
But a sharp-eyed reader would also have spotted a white space half an inch deep near the top of column seven. It might just have passed as a printing error, but the Muslim's editor, Mr Mushahid Hussain Sayed, admitted that they had had cold feet at the last minute. A sentence questioning the independence of the Supreme Court, which confirmed Mr Bhutto's death sentence was taken out.
'We covered our flanks from the legal point of view,' the editor said. He insisted, however, that there has been no overt threat. 'Nobody outside saw the article. The Government is not that efficient.'
The Pakistani press, like the opposition parties, is testing the waters. Democracy has been restored, but it remains a controlled democracy. President Zia is still chief of the armed forces; the generals are still pulling the strings. Editors deem it prudent not to provoke.
In the Punjabi capital, Lahore, last week an anti-American demonstration ended with crowds chanting 'Zia is a dog.' After reporting at length on the 'Long live Gadafy' placards and photographs of Mr Bhutto and the Ayatolla Khomeini, the Muslim added: 'The participants also raised slogans against some national leaders.'
Dawn, another paper with some claim to independence, played safer. 'The processionists were chanting slogans against the US President and Israel,' it recorded. The reporter on the spot had been less diffident.
The government retains a variety of levers for keeping the press within bounds. Under the press and publication ordinance, which has not been repealed, newspapers and magazine must be licensed by the Government. Licences can be withdrawn.
The Federal Law Minister, Mr Iqbal Ahmed Khan, said last week that the Government was examining demands to cancel the ordinance. 'We shall take this decision in an open-minded way,' the minister added, arguing that the ordinance had no effect.
That is not how editors and publishers see it. Over the last decade the decision to licence or not to licence had been more politically motivated, Mr Mazhar Ali Khan, editor of the left-wing weekly Viewpoint, contended, and licensing had been backed by an armoury of weapons.
'There is a long list of things you cannot do in the fields of national security.' The veteran campaigner explained. 'The Government can ask for a security deposit. If you misbehave they can confiscate it or ask for a bigger amount. They can cancel your licence and even seize your press. But the quickest means of pressure is to cut off public-sector advertisements.'
These advertisements placed or withheld not only by the Government but by the nationalised banks, insurance companies and the state airline PIA, represent about 70 per cent of available newspaper advertising. Pro-government papers get most of the advertisements, regardless of their circulation. Non-conforming papers are squeezed.
Dawn, for example, now receives only 60 per cent of public-sector adverts. The Muslim gets about 50 per cent. Viewpoint has had none at all for the past six years. The Urdu-language press complains of similar discrimination.
The Ministry of Information also circulates 'advice' to editors on stories the Government would prefer not to see published. They were asked last Wednesday, for example, not to mention that the civilian Prime Minister, Mr Mohammad Khan Junejo, was sulking in his home town.
The Muslim, like most other papers, complied.
The editor conceded, however, that the press felt more free now than before martial law was lifted at the end of December. 'The environment has changed, and government policy operates in that framework. You have an elected parliament, limited restoration of political activities, relative freedom of saying what you want to say. It affects us too.'
The Muslim, he claimed, had already raised the threshold of government tolerance. It had always been critical of President Zia's pro-American foreign policy.
'The tone and content of our news coverage of domestic politics is a bit more harsh now. We report the more strident criticism of the army and Zia by opposition politicians. Until now you couldn't be critical of the referendum (confirming Zia in power for another five years). It was one of the holy cows. We used to call it suspect. Now we are calling it a fraud or a farce.'
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
97 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 21, 1986
Peres in London on peace campaign / Israeli Premier visits Britain
BYLINE: By HELLA PICK, Diplomatic Correspondent
LENGTH: 295 words
Israel's Prime Minister, Mr Shimon Peres, arrives in London this afternoon for a five-day visit during which he will seek to persuade Mrs Thatcher and her government to drop further attempts to bring Mr Yassir Arafat and the PLO into the Middle fast peace process.
But he will also use his crowded London visit as a platform to advance proposals for an international conference to include a Jordanian-Palestinian delegation, which, he believes could act as a catalyst for peace negotiations
Mr Peres is on a 12-day West European tour, seen as a major effort to rally support for his peace initiative before he has to step down later in the year to hand over the premiership to his more hard-line Likud coalition partner.
But speculation that Mr Peres would have secret talks with Jordan's King Hussein was dashed yesterday, when it was confirmed that the King, who is in Britain on a private visit, was leaving this morning.
However, the US Assistant Secretary of State for Middle East Affairs, Mr Richard Murphy, has been acting as a quiet intermediary. He is known to have met King Hussein in London on Saturday, and then flown to the Hague, where he had a long discussion on Sunday evening with the Israeli Prime Minister. Yesterday, Mr Murphy was back in London.
Even though the Reagan Administration is again intensifying its diplomatic activity in the Middle East, Western diplomats, as well as Mr Peres's spokesman, are discounting any expectation of a breakthrough that might lead to acceptance, even in principle, of an international conference on the Middle East.
Officials in London yesterday insisted that the various parties are still far apart in their concept of such a conference and what its terms of reference would be.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
98 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 21, 1986
The Day in Politics: No. 10 and the media / Westland helicopter affair
LENGTH: 171 words
The Prime Minister's press office has a regular two-way exchange with producers of a number of radio and television programmes, Mrs Thatcher said in a written Commons answer last night.
She said the objective was to 'establish the subjects the producers intend to pursue and the members of the Government they wish, or have arranged, to take part.' Her reply indicated that the exchanges took place to 'amplify the information contained in the Radio Times and the TV Times.'
The question, from Mr David Winnick, the Labour MP for Walsall North followed the allegatoin made by Mr Michael Heseltine, the former Defence Secretary, that the Prime Minister's office had attempted to sabotage interviews with himself and Mr Leon Brittan, the Trade and Industry Secretary, for the BBC Radio 4 World This Weekend programme on December 22.
The Prime Minister also said she was not aware of any advice or view offered by the United States Government in relation to the position of Westland during the affair.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
99 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 21, 1986
Russia 'has agents at Greenham Common' / US Defence Department consultant alleges infiltration among anti-nuclear protestors
BYLINE: By EDWARD VULLIAMY
LENGTH: 240 words
Soviet agents have infiltrated the peace camp at Greenham Common since 1983, a military magazine claims today.
An article in Jane's Defence Weekly, by a consultant to the US Pentagon, Mr Yossef Bodansky, quotes un-named defectors from the Eastern bloc. They say that between three and six trained agents from Western European and Warsaw Pact countries, including Britain, have been at the camp, 'at all times' since cruise missiles were deployed in December, 1983.
Their main purpose, says the magazine, is to monitor security arrangements and to keep a watch on cruise convoys leaving the base. They are also intended to incite protests to test security at the base.
The women agents, says Jane's, come from the Spetsnaz forces, the Soviet equivalent of the SAS, but are controlled in the West by Soviet Military Intelligence, the GRU.
The magazine's informants say that the agents, who rotate, would have been trained in the USSR to attack missile sites during a pre-emptive strike and would act as 'beacons' for Soviet troops seeking to strike at the base.
The article speculates that the agents may have miniature radio homing devices which could be attached to missile convoys and activated by Soviet bombers.
The allegations were greeted with laughter and disbelief among the women at Greenham. One said: 'We are absolutely amazed that such a ludicrous, unsubstantiated slur could be made upon us.'
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
100 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 20, 1986
Motoring: Hope in Odense springs eternal / Denmark's revolutionary 'Hope Whisper' electric car
BYLINE: By ROY HARRY
LENGTH: 749 words
The scene was all set - almost one thousand VIPs led by the Prime Minister had gathered in the Copenhagen Forum for the launching of what was seen to be a 'revolutionary' new car concept. The car was scheduled to arrive amid a trumpeted fanfare and drive a few circuits of the display area.
After just fifteen metres, it hit a wooden stock and was almost completely destroyed. Premier Poul Schluter was said to be more than a little angry as he led the exodus of the guests, and the television pictures beamed around the world provoked more laughter.
The Hope Whisper had been billed as the Danish 'miracle car' though the claim that hundreds of thousands of units had gained advanced sales in the United States did not prove a reality. Now the company has tried again with a Mark 2 version of the Whisper and not without a touch of irony it was revealed in Odense - the birthplace of Hans Christian Andersen.
Hope vigorously deny that the Whisper is anything of a fairytale but that it is a rolling - at speeds of up to fifty miles per hour - fact. The first, 200 vehicles are now coming off the West Berlin production lines of KKI Werke, the firm responsible for the Mark 2 Whisper, and there are plans for a 500 annual output in a factory in the Jutland town of Hadsund.
In an environmentally conscious nation such as Denmark, an electrically powered car has much appeal. The Government imposes no purchase tax or VAT so that the Whisper can be priced at 65,000 Danish crowns - about pounds 4,700 - roughly half that of a VW Golf and about the same as the SOviet-built Lada.
Whisper 2 is a front-wheel drive hatchback with a glass-fibre body. It has just about enough room for four people and has a total weight of 2,800lb.
And, after the fiasco of the debut which led to many Danes talking of the 'No Hope,' the company is changing its name to Whisper Motors. The current whisper now is 'Some Hope.'
European car sales last year hit new peaks - only those in West Germany and Switzerland declined and Norwegian registrations soared to almost 50 per cent above those of 1984. Danish sales were the highest for ten years and, with no home-based industry (apart from the Whisper), it is a happy hunting ground for the Japanese who take more than 40 per cent of the new car market and overwhelmingly dominate the light van sector.
Brazilian cars vie with those from Eastern European manufacturers, with Fords and Fiats from that county neck and neck with Lada and Skoda. GM/Opel are the market leaders followed closely by Ford with Toyota and Mazda not far behind.
Only a handful separates the Toyota Corolla and Opel Kadett to head the top ten with the Escort in third place and the Mazada 626 fourth and 323 fifth. No British car gets into even the twenty-five best sellers: Austin Rover sales of a few hundred look derisory, and Jaguar comes close to outselling the Metro.
At least the Danish car of the year jury seems to be more open-minded than the car buyers - it voted the Ford Scorpio/Granada into the national title, the 323 as runner-up, and the MG Montego third. The points were 133, 108, and 55.
A Danish traffic police officer heads a protest movement against new speed limits launched late last year and many thousands of drivers have signed a protest petition. The new rules fix the urban maximum at 50 km/h - approximately our thirty curb - a reduction of ten kilometres. And at no time must trucks exceed 45 mph.
Danish newspapers are filled with angry letters at the restrictions, which came at a time when there was a move afoot to increase the motorway limit from 60 to 75 mph.
Some local authorities have found a means of bypassing the levels by enacting local bylaws though the cost for such district signs is put as high as pounds 30 millions. Bus operators and taxi drivers say that fares will go up since the lower speed will curb their income during a given working day.
The laws went through by just a single vote on a day when half of the Parliament members were absent. The Bill was introduced by an MP, Jimmy Stahr, who has no driving licence but is a nationally known bicyclist: in a few minutes he manoeuvred a debate on higher motorway speeds into a favourable vote reducing urban speeds and a curb on all trucks and buses.
Opinion polls, not surprisingly, show that 80 per cent drivers do not approve of the limits. And, in any case, the police say that they do not have the manpower to impose them.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
101 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 20, 1986
West split on bid to toughen GATT rules / US calls for tougher disputes procedure
BYLINE: By JOHN HOOPER, Trade Correspondent
LENGTH: 389 words
Representatives from the US, Canada, Japan and the European Community meeting in California to agree a common approach to the forthcoming world trade talks were yesterday trying to resolve an open split among the industrialised nations over demands for a tougher disputes procedure under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.
The United States wants disputes taken before the Geneva-based GATT secretariat to be resolved more speedily and with binding verdicts. Last week, in his first speech on multi-lateral trade issues, the British Trade and Industry Secretary, Mr Leon Brittan, threw his weight behind the American demand.
But in an interview on Saturday the Common Market's Vice-President for External Relations, Mr Willy Declercq, said, 'We do not believe in transforming GATT into a tribunal like the United States wants. It simply will not work. GATT is built upon a consensus.'
The talks, which began at Coronado on Friday, have produced a tentative agreement to fight for tougher international rules to protect intellectual property rights during the new round of international negotiations expected to begin later this year. Trade officials in the richer nations have long been concerned about the breach of copyrights and patents, particularly by developing and newly-industrialised nations.
Mr Declercq also suggested that there was now a greater determination among the leading industrialised countries to give the poorer nations a bigger role in the negotiation of trade liberalisation measures. A number of Third World governments - in particular those of India and Brazil - have been resisting a new GATT round on the grounds that the representatives of richer nations like the US will hold the whip hand and give priority to their interests.
The president of the European Commission, Mr Jacques Delors, flies to Tokyo today for talks on Japan's massive trade surplus with the Community. At the end of last week, he got the backing of the European Parliament to take a tough stance.
Commission officials said Delors would tell Japanese leaders they must take concrete steps to boost their imports or risk restrictions on their exports. All the major political groups at Strasbourg supported a motion urging the commission to take Japan before GATT for unfair trade practices.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
102 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 20, 1986
Financial Notebook: The industrial strategy that dare not speak its name - fouling up the markets / Monetarism and the Westland helicopters dispute
BYLINE: By VICTOR KEEGAN
LENGTH: 1130 words
It is time someone sprang to the defence of the government in the Westland affair against some quite unjust accusations. The impression is being left that the government, in a momentary aberration, has departed from its hallowed principles of leaving decisions like this to the magic of market forces.
This is untrue, or at least, it is no aberration. Mrs Thatcher is abandoning her faith in markets all over the shop. Worse than that, there appears to be a principle of perverse effect at work. Because in some of the areas where she has become intervention it would really be much better if she left it (at least at the moment) to the markets.
The most glaring example is the exchange rate where government policy is to keep interest rates much higher than market forces would dictate in order to attract international money into the country and so keep the value of sterling high.
It is easy to see why this is being done. After all, the money supply (as measured by cash and bank deposits for Sterling M3) has gone through the roof and been abandoned. The reduction of sterling M3 was the government's chosen way of bringing inflation down. It is the main reason why we had to suffer so much unemployment.
Now that monetarism in its familiar form is a busted flush, all that remains to the government to preserve its counter-inflation thrust is to force interest rates up (against the pull of market forces) so the pound remains high, thereby reducing the cost of imports and so keeping inflation law.
This is good for savers, who can earn unprecedented returns on their investment (thereby, incidentally, inflating the bank deposit constituent of the money supply still further) but bad for industry: companies suffer from higher borrowing rates and the strength of the pound makes them less competitive against foreign competition at home and abroad.
What on earth have we got to fear from lower interest rates if they reduce industrial costs and make imports more expensive? If that results in inflation slightly higher than otherwise, so what? We have to find natural ways of reducing inflation (like lowering wage increases) rather than forcing an artificial and probably insustainable inflation reduction through manipulation of interest rates.
It is one thing to intervene to bring the exchange rate down when it has gone bananas (which the government failed to do in the period 1979/81) but quite another to intervene to bring about an artificially high rate just because the chosen way of reducing inflation failed.
Another vital area where the government has been digging a hole for itself by abandoning market forces is public sector pay. By intervening to prevent, for example, the pay of teachers from roughly following what was happening in the private sector - or for that matter the private education sector at home or abroad - the government has brought about a situation in which teachers have fallen very substantially behind other comparable groups. Unless the government thought the teachers in 1979 deserved a 20 to 30 per cent pay reduction (which no minister even hinted at the time), then it is crass to make them suffer just because wages in the private sector moved ahead far more strongly than anyone envisaged six years ago.
And it is no excuse Sir Keith Joseph saying there are still teachers coming to take employment at the lower levels of pay. This is true of practically every job at a time of high unemployment and, taken to extreme, would not justify any increases in pay in the private sector.
I wonder how far Sir Keith would have to reduce the salary of the Secretary of State for Education before no one came forward to take the job. Even the Channel tunnel is not quite the free enterprise triumph the Prime Ministers trumpets. If it were, presumably the Government would sit back and let one, two, three or more consortiums build their own competing tunnels and bridges, allowing the consumer freedom of choice. But, no. Instead the civil servants (who in Thatcherite ideology have no expertise to do this sort of thing) are beavering away in an absurdly short period of time to evaluate the scheme to be announced (for totally political reasons) today in Lille by an electioneering President Mitterrand. And what are they announcing? Why, the right to build a monopoly fixed-link under the Channel whose profits will depend critically (as those bastions of free enterprise, the Channel ferries) on the right to sell duty free liquor in transit.
The irony is that while the Government has been pushing for a Channel tunnel it has been simultaneously trying to undermine the success of a British Aerospace and GEC Euro consortium of helicopter manufacturers which would have given an industrial reality to the Prime Minister-s new-found Europeanism.
The art of industrial strategy is to know when to leave it to market forces and when to supplement them. Where market forces most obviously need supplementing now is in the field of advanced technology where Britain, indeed Europe, is being taken to the cleaners by Japan and the United States. Mrs Thatcher is spearheading the fight back by cutting spending on science and education, by withdrawing industrial subsidies and by imposing a surcharge (in the form of an artificially high exchange rate) on companies wishing to make a go of it.
And instead of locking the Government in to industry's future plans as in Japan (or using state and military spending as in the US) the Government is making a virtue out of telling companies that they are on their own.
It is a strategy of a sort. If the Westland saga proves nothing else, it shows that the Government cannot not have a strategy. It operates one of the biggest barrows in the market place. By raising or not raising interest rates, by' pointing out' or not pointing out to British Aerospace the error of its ways, it is affecting events.
Had the Government not made the fatal flaw of pretending that it was leaving everything to market forces, no one would have been in the least surprised that it had a view on the desirablity of the Westland bids. That is what governments are there for, especially when they are major customers.
The importance of Westland is that it has become a symbol of whether, after years of dithering, we are ever to get out technological act together in Europe. What does not make sense, is at the same time, to be building the Channel tunnel while scuppering attempts to gather together Europe's scattered efforts at research and development. Unless something happens soon to rebuild Britain's industrial base, the Chunnel will merely be a quicker way to get imports into this country. Maybe that is why the French are so keen on it.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
103 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 20, 1986
Gadafy's children of wrath / Meeting with a young Libyan 'suicide' squad
BYLINE: From DAVID HIRST
LENGTH: 1218 words
DATELINE: TRIPOLI
They call themselves the Generation of Wrath. They are the Gadafy youth - those who have grown up in the 17 years since the revolution. It is a strange, naive, exalted and disturbing world in which, with the Green Book as their second Koran, they forecast, the Arabs - indeed the rest of humanity - - will in due course join them. They are under the spell of a prophetic revelation and are so persuaded of its inner truth that they would commit suicide for it, for Palestine, for the Arabs, for you and me. After speaking to them, I have little doubt that some, at least, are ready to practice what they preach; that they would start doing so in fact the moment the United States takes any military action against Libya - and quite possibly before.
Having asked to meet one of those 'suicide' squads which, since the crisis with the US began, Gadafy has been threatening to unleash on the world, I found myself confronted with about 25 teenagers, selected by a process that was not explained, but who arrived, in groups, from various schools in Tripoli. 'Barracks' I should say, for in the curious nomenclature of the Jamahiriyah that is what schools are now called. Under 'people's power' and 'direct democracy' that higher state of human civilisation which it is the aim of the Jamahiriyah to achieve, the people must bring three things - authority, resources, and arms - under their complete control, and it is in pursuit of the third that Libya is becoming one of the most militarised societies on earth. In addition to a regular academic director - who in the revolutionary jargon 'emerges' through consultation among staff and pupils - every 'barracks' has a military director who is nominated by the army.
'We are waiting for America to attack,' said a student from Cordoba Barracks, 'then we shall strike in America itself.' This was automatic and inevitable. 'We shall not be able to control ourselves. In 'barracks' throughout the country, he said, pupils had already drawn up lists of candidates for 'martyrdom'. According to official statistics, one and a half million of people are at school or university; all start basic training at the age of 14 with the handling of light arms. By the time they graduate from secondary school or university they are fully specialised in one field or another of modern warfare. Women suffer no discrimination in this process; they are said to pilot Mig 25s and ground to ground missiles have all-female crews.
'No,' interrupted a comrade, 'We cannot just wait for America to attack. It is already provoking us all the time, with its ships offshore and satellites overhead, we cannot remain on the defensive.' Whereupon one of the half dozen girls - from the Martyrs of Damur Barracks, raised her hand. They were mostly a well behaved class who said 'sir' and patiently awaited their turn to speak. In fact there was something disconcertingly nice and normal about some of these would-be human bombs whose great dream is to blow up what they call the Black House in Washington.
It was this girl's opinion that America should be given a chance, that it should be reasoned with. Yes, she agreed, that America was a 'terrorist state' an octopus and a blood sucker; its fleet should not merely be expelled from Libyan waters but from the whole Mediterranean; and its European bases should be closed down. But Libyans must never appear to be the aggressor. After all, they were sacrificing themselves for a higher, a universal principle, not just for their own country, Palestine, and the Arabs.
Nor was America necessarily the only villain. 'We must penetrate all the bases of terrorism, even in the Soviet Union if they are there; it is for peace and freedom that we blow ourselves up. It is our duty, our spontaneous duty.' She wore earrings and bangles peeping out from her headscarf and modestly long sleeves. Her grandfather had been 'martyred' during the Italian colonial conquest. Indeed, most of the group had lost at least one forebear. 'The Italians' said one. 'killed 250,000 people (out of some 700,000) so we know something about fighting.'
The peace and freedom of which the girl spoke were to be attained through spreading the principles of the Third Universal Theory, first to the Arabs and then to the rest of the world. Rulers everywhere had to be got rid of; they were all the same, no difference between King Fahad of Saudi Arabia, Shazli ben Jadid of Algeria, Mrs Thatcher or Mr Gorbachev. In the Jamaharia every individual was 'master of himself.' No one had authority over everyone else. Gadafy was leader, guide, thinker, 'guardian' of the revolution; but he was definitely not a ruler. for he did not cling to his seat through parties, cliques, or tribes, through any of the bureaucratic aberrations of the modern state, or, most typically in the Third World. through the army.
True, a conventional army still exists in Libya. But, they explained, it is on the way out. Indeed, it is actually dissolving itself, quite voluntarily, by furnishing its professional skills to train the alternative, and replacement - 'people under arms.' When this process is complete the entire able-bodied population will be both soldiers and producers interchangeably; since it is a basic tenet of 'people's power' that no-one should permanently 'represent' anyone else, a standing force will be maintained by a system of continuous rotation under which everyone will serve for a short period every year.
Devolution will also be carried to great, seemingly anarchic lengths, every major town and district having its own autonomous militia and command structure controlled by its own congresses and committees. A higher military committee - replacing the defunct army's general staff - will serve in a central liaison capacity between them all. Thus will coup d'etat and military adventurism be banished for ever. The process is already well advanced. These young men were evidence of that; they were already receiving advanced training, but, unlike their predecessors, without having to be conscripted into a regular army that is going to wither away.
Were any of them actually members of suicide squads already formed and ready to act? It appeared not. Could they band together spontaneously, as they walked out of the door, and besides, there and then, on an operation, its timing, target and method? That caused some confusion. In principle, of course, they had every right to do so, for they were 'masters of themselves,' but the consensus seemed to be that, to avoid 'chaos,' direction would have to come from the congresses and committees.
The seminar continued until the eldest of the group, who seemed to have 'emerged' as their spokesman, called it to a close. 'Excuse me, sir' he said, 'but some of us have homework to do.' As they left, one of the quieter types who had been sitting at the back of the room came forward with a note. 'We could not,' he had written, 'wring the neck of a chicken, but we can trample over the corpses of millions of terrorists to bring about the peace of the world.'
'These are the mild ones,' confided the official of a radical Palestinian guerrilla organisation which had persuaded the Libyan authorities to arrange this encounter. 'You should see the extremists.'
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
104 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 20, 1986
Commentary: The politics of Tory loyalty played in a one way street / Commons select committees and the Westland helicopters dispute
BYLINE: By IAN AITKEN
LENGTH: 1273 words
As a member of the Fleet Street wolf pack which has been howling at the heels of the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry these past two weeks, I have to say in all humility that Leon Brittan's performance on Brian Walden's Weekend World television show yesterday was admirable. If he had managed anything half as good on any of his four appearances in the Commons chamber last week he would by now have been home and dry.
Rarely before has a victim of Mr Waldens' forensic techniques put up such a spirited and effective self-defence. He would not allow himself to be intimidated by the constant interruptions, yet managed throughout to maintain at least an appearance of good humour.
Mr Walden's techniques, of course, tend to vary according to the standing of his interlocutor. Prime Ministers - and particularly this Prime Minister - are treated with exaggerated respect. Other ministers and politicians have to take pot luck, and those who for one reason or the other are already hanging on the ropes can expect a heavy pounding.
Mr Brittan fell into the last category yesterday, and Mr Walden duly went for him. But he bounced off the ropes still punching, and by the end of the 40-minute bout he was not just on his feet: he was looking a good deal better than at the beginning.
But Mr Brittan's bruising contest with Mr Walden rates a mention here for more important reasons than his recovery of his self-confidence, impressive though it was. The content of the exchanges were also significant, not least as an illustration of the difficulties MPs can now expect to face in uncovering the ultimate truth. Above all, it contains an important warning for any select committee seeking to probe the matter.
Briefly summarised, Mr Brittan's defence against many of the charges against him yesterday (and most notably Mr Heseltines allegation that the cabinet had originally supported a European solution to the Westland crisis) was that the minutes of various Cabinet committee meetings, and the text of at least one memorandum, would prove that it was he who was telling the truth and not Mr Heseltine.
But under Mr Walden's persistent questioning Mr Brittan was forced to admit by stages that it would do his ministerial reputation a lot of good if these documents were published: that the present rules of Cabinet secrecy stood in the way of their publication; and finally that the rules were almost certainly going to prevail over his own personal needs.
Under further questioning, it became increasingly apparent that Mr Brittan had indeed pressed Mrs Thatcher to break the rules and to publish the papers in his defence; that Mrs Thatcher had turned down this request; and, finally, that although Mr Brittan had perforce to accept this ruling, he was none too pleased about it.
Those facts in themselves speak volumes for Mrs Thatcher's interpretation of the concept of personal loyalty - namely, that it is a one way quality when the going is tough. But in this respect she does not greatly differ from most of her predecessors. The 'unflappable' Harold Macmillan was once accused of laying down his friends for his life when he sacked a third of his cabinet in a single night.
Not even Mrs Thatcher has yet managed to equal that bloody record in Cabinet butchery. But even so, her attitude to the whole Westland affair threatens to go much further than Mr Brittan personally; it now threatens to do damage to Parliament itself. At stake is the credibility of the complex network of Commons select committees which were set up amid a fanfare of trumpets soon after she came to office.
To be sure, the original prospectus for these committees was more ambitious than a mere investigative function, even in murky waters like the Westland affair. With each committee specifically designed to keep watch on one or other Whitehall department, it was suggested that their privileged members would be able to work in a creative partnership with ministers and civil servants in the actual preparation of policy.
If any such function was ever really intended, it quickly came to grief as the committees increasingly found themselves differing sharply with ministers about policy matters. One after another, committees have delivered themselves of reports which are highly critical of various aspects of government policy, ranging from the economy to the conduct of the Falklands crisis.
Virtually all such reports were either totally ignored by the Government, or became the subject of public rebuttals. In either case, the impact on ministerial conduct was minimal.
That might look like a record of failure, and there are some MPs who originally opposed the creation of the new committee system who continue to argue that it has been a total flop. But it is doubtful if the ordinary voter ever paid much attention to the idea that backbench MPs needed a role in policy creation; what the public had been taught to expect from a committee system was some incisive probing into what they see as the Whitehall muckheap.
Such expectations arose largely from memories of the triumphant role of US congressional committees in the destruction, first of Senator Joe McCarthy, and then of President Nixon. And by those dramatic standards our fish and chip version of an investigative legislature has been disappointing, to say the least.
That may have something to do with the fact that our political system has so far not thrown up a Senator McCarthy or a President Nixon. But it also has something to do with the way our party system works at Westminster. With their eyes half on the whips and half on Tory Central Office, Conservative MPs are markedly more party orientated, and therefore more timid, than US senators and congressmen.
Thus in spite of possessing theoretical powers to send for persons and papers which are at least as powerful as those of the United States Congress, committees of the British House of Commons are almost always prepared to cave in when ministers either refuse to attend themselves or refuse to allow their civil servants to be questioned. And they know that there would be little point in going to the full House of Commons for authority to force attendance in the name of the High Court of Parliament, where the overwhelming government majority rules the lobbies.
The case of the Westland affair, however, is exactly the sort of aromatic ministerial brouhaha which perfectly fits the public conception of suitable subject for committee investigation, with fearless MPs under a fearless chairman insisting on their (and the public's) right to know the truth. And indeed we already have two such committees in the field.
They are the Commons Defence Committee under Sir Humphrey Atkins and the Trade and Industry Committee under Mr Kenneth Warren. Each has a clear departmental foothold in the subject, and a high reputation for probity.
In spite of their existence, however, there is now some high level speculation that neither of these groups (let alone both of them in tandem) is really equipped to do the job. It is being suggested that an ad hoc committee of Privy Councillors would be better armed to take on Mrs Thatcher and her ministers.
But whatever happens, it is already clear that a refusal by the Prime Minister to provide such a committee with the essential facts would be a far more serious constitutional outrage than a mere breach of Cabinet secrecy. If she persists in her present attitude she could land in the history books as the Prime Minister who first created select committees and then destroyed them.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
105 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 20, 1986
Agenda: Dirty tricks that link Dublin and Westland / The US, the Anglo-Irish accord and the dispute over Britain's troubled helicopter company
BYLINE: By ENOCH POWELL
LENGTH: 820 words
Who would have thought that the Westland Helicopter affair would turn up precisely during the Ulster byelections to cast a shaft of light upon the Anglo-Irish Agreement? In the immortal words of Tess of the D'Urbervilles 'Tis just the same.' The identity emerges from certain American warnings and recriminations which have been conveniently leaking out.
If Sikorsky was not to be the choice for Westland, all kinds of lucrative defence contracts that might otherwise have come to Britain would be withheld. So the pretty little picture builds up. The Prime Minister was blackmailed by the Americans into promising that Sikorsky should be the Westland choice. She dared not, however, disclose, even to the Cabinet, let alone to the public, under what duress she was interfering in the decision of a private company: it would be too humiliating for the Queen's Chief Minister to confess that she and the Government are manipulated by American blackmail.
There had therefore to be a cover story for public consumption: true to the pure principles of capitalism, the Government would not interfere with the decision of the shareholders. But, meanwhile, a luckless Minister, not fully into the secret of the blackmail, must be entrusted with the task of browbeating the Board of the company in private with vague talk about the national interest. The dodge could have worked, and very nearly did; only that the Secretary of State for Defence was not made, or not made early enough, a party to the plot, and went and got himself up to the knees in a European alternative.
So what relevance has this to the miserable event at Hillsborough on November 15, when the Prime Minister with as much relish as if she had been eating wormwood signed an agreement to give the Irish Republic an unprecedented role in the internal government of a part of the United Kingdom?
It so happens that the Americans have also been threatening the Irish government with dire punishment unless it joins Reagan in imposing sanctions on Libya. The punishment is noteworthy. The Republic will not be given its share of the large American grant promised to what are called 'both parts of Ireland' in consideration of the Anglo-Irish Agreement.
So the Agreement was made in pursuance of a deal by the British and Irish governments with the USA under which, if they made an agreement about Ulster satisfactory to America, a handsome bribe, dressed up as economic aid, should be forthcoming for each of them. They made the Agreement all right. And now comes the United States and tries to blackmail the Republic into imposing sanctions on Libya by threatening to withhold the promised bribe. That may well be the dirtiest trick since Wotan tried to cheat the giants who built Valhalla for him; but, dirty or not, it is deeply instructive.
First, it proves that the motivation for Britain's capitulation at Hillsborough was the desire to gain American favour or escape American sanctions. The deal was procured by American bribery and American blackmail. All that business about reconciling what are called 'the two communities' in Ulster and combating terrorism was simply a cover story to amuse the innocent lobby fodder in the House of Commons and give the Press something sentimental to scribble. We have not of course necessarily learnt what other bribes were offered nor the nature of the blackmail exerted over Britain by the United States.
The second lesson for us in this little episode is that there is not necessarily any direct connection between the means of extortion which America employs and the objectives which they are used to extort.
The American blackmail used to extort the Anglo-Irish Agreement and thus, so the US imagines, open the way to an Ireland in the Western Alliance need not have had anything to do with Ulster itself: they could have involved quite other areas in which America can squeeze or frighten Britain - just as Star Wars contracts can be used to further the American helicopter industry, just as economic aid to the Irish Republic can be withheld to secure sanctions against Libya. The brutal cynicism of the United States is not particular about the choice of weapons.
There is a current mood for demanding candour from Her Majesty's Government. When the critics have got tired of hunting the Sikorsky trail, they could do worse than turn the same pack of hounds on to a bigger quarry. What, we are entitled to be told, was the nature of the inducements or the threats, or both, which constrains Mrs Thatcher to assist the United States, if I may use an apt formulation of a recent press report from Dublin, in 'buying our Eire neutrality at the expense of Ulster'? The answer could be quite important.
Enoch Powell is the Official Unionist candidate in the Down, South by-election on January 23. This is an extract from a speech in Newcastle, County Down, on Friday.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
106 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 20, 1986
US may start to hijack terrorists
BYLINE: From ALEX BRUMMER
LENGTH: 406 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
As part of its effort to challenge terrorism. the Reagan Administration is said to be considering abducting terrorists who harm American citizens and bringing them back to the United States to stand trial.
This emerged yesterday as the United States moved to revive the peace process in the Middle East. The Assistant Secretary of State, Mr Richard Murphy, has been sent for talks with King Hussein and the Israeli Prime Minister, Mr Peres. The US is anxious that the progress made last year should not be expunged by radical Arab groups.
The US's determination to confront terrorism was underlined by the State Department's chief legal advisor, Abraham Sofaer, in an interview in yesterday's New York Times. He said that the department was prepared to support the 'seizure' of fugitives in other countries if the chances of success were reasonable.
'We don't like the idea of people being able to murder Americans and simply laugh about it and go living as if nothing has happened,' Sofaer said.
After a series of American Administration is struggling to find a policy which will confront terrorism. In addition to economic sanctions against Libya, it has been loudly debating the use of military force in retaliation, and other responses such as the seizure of known and wanted terrorists.
The National Security Council has reportedly debated the proposal on several occasions, but has rejected it, despite the Secretary of State Mr George Shultz's keenness for a tougher line.
The Justice Department has taken a series of steps, including issuing arrest warrants for the hijackers of a TWA jet last summer: during the incident a US naval diver, Mr Robert Dean Stethem, was killed.
It was noted, however, that American efforts to seize terrorists could set dangerous legal precedents, as well as cause problems with European allies. There are fears also that the abduction efforts could go wrong, leading perhaps to unnecessary loss of life.
The active discussion of the issue, despite the legal and operational uncertainties, is, however, a mark of the frustration felt in the US at its inability to confront those who have taken American lives.
Concern about terrorist attacks led to a great deal of secrecy when Mr Murphy travelled to Europe this weekend.
American officials believe that 1986 will be a critical year if there is to be any chance of a breakthrough in the Middle East.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
107 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 20, 1986
Threat to boycott UK cars / Controversy over Britain's delay in accepting EEC exhaust controls
BYLINE: By JOHN ARDILL, Environment Correspondent
LENGTH: 294 words
Environment campaigners in Europe may boycott British cars, and possibly even smash them in protest at the Government's delay in adopting an EEC directive on exhaust emissions.
Groups in Germany, Sweden and Denmark have been angered by the refusal of Environment Minister, Mr William Waldegrave, to say in the Commons last week when and how he would enforce the restricitions.
A boycott would be an extension of a campaign launched last year by Friends of the Earth International and other groups. They tried to persuade Europeans not to holiday in Britain - the 'dirty man of Europe' - until the Government joined the '30 per cent club' of nations pledged to reduce sulphur dioxide emissions from power stations.
The Government has kept its options open because of concern about the economic effect on British car manufacturers. Mr Waldegrave said that the industry, which is searching for more cost-effective technology, would in due course be able to improve standards without incurring severe economic penalties.
Last summer Mr Waldegrave and fellow EEC ministers negotiated exhaust limits less rigid than those wanted by the Germans and Scandinavians. The directive is being blocked by the Danes, who want higher standards, and the Greeks. Its adoption is not mandatory.
The only certainty is that Britain will not enforce the three-way catalytic converter needed to meet standards for cars over 2 litres. The Government says the device, fitted in the US and Japan, where tighter limits prevail, is expensive and reduces fuel efficiency. Friends of the Earth (FoE) say it is needed to reduce air pollution.
In small and medium cars the Government believes EEC standards can be met by the fuel efficient 'lean burn' engines.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
108 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 20, 1986
Britain foils interest rates deal / Group of Five industrial countries' meeting in London
BYLINE: By PETER RODGERS, City Editor
LENGTH: 439 words
Britain helped to thwart pressure for a concerted international effort to bring down interest rates at a meeting of finance ministers of the Group of Five industrial countries at Downing Street, over the weekend.
The Americans and the West Germans also objected to the idea, backed by France and Japan, which is no longer on the table.
The prospect of lower international interest rates ha cheered financial markets towards the end of last week and lack of progress will cause concern when they reopen this morning, particularly in the case of Britain because of renewed pressure on oil prices.
The British side was encouraged by agreement that an oil price collapse is in nobody's interest because of the effect on debtor countries such as Mexico, Venezuela and Indonesia. The United States position has not always been so clear, but British sources said the meeting thought nothing could be done about oil prices anyway.
The only concrete progress was in moves to forestall the pounds 500 million tin crisis which threatens a collapse in London's commodity markets unless European Community governments join a rescue of the 22-nation International Tin Council.
There was a consensus that the concerted attempt to lower the dollar on the foreign exchanges, agreed at a Group of Five meeting in September, had produced a big enough adjustment for now. Ministers agreed they would intervene jointly again if it rose.
British sources denied that any ministers had seriously considered concerted intervention on interest rates, but the Japanese and the French said at the end of last week that they favoured the idea.
The meeting had felt that falling inflation would help reduce interest rates over the year.
The US Treasury Secretary, Mr James Baker, and the Federal Reserve chairman, Mr Paul Volcker, returned to the US at the end of yesterday's morning session at 11 Downing Street, the Chancellor's official residence.
There was apparently no serious concern at the possibility of general increase in interest rates and little discussion of the latest rise in British bank base lending rates.
Mr Volcker opposed an early cut in US rates at a time when the country's economy is showing signs of renewed rapid growth. Mr Baker is believed to have been less firmly against a reduction and gave a reassuring picture of progress towards cutting the US budget deficit.
The French and Japanese, and the Dutch - who were not at the meeting - have agreed something must be done to solve the problems of the International Tin Council, which is owned by 22 governments, including EEC countries.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
109 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 20, 1986
Heseltine misled public, Brittan claims / Westland helicopter affair
BYLINE: By JOHN CARVEL, Political Correspondent
LENGTH: 754 words
Mr Leon Brittan yesterday accused his former cabinet colleague, Mr Michael Heseltine, of persistently flouting cabinet decisions and misleading the public in his determination to pursue the European consortium's proposals for Westland Helicopters.
The Trade and Industry Secretary's explanations served to whet the appetite of his Tory critics on the Commons defence committee, who will this week redouble their efforts to gain access to official documents on the affair. Mrs Thatcher was reported to be well pleased with his first lengthy interview since Mr Heseltine resigned.
Mr Heseltine's supporters claimed that Mr Brittan had let slip the true reason for that they allege was his switch towards unacceptable support for the American Sikorsky deal.
He said on the London Weekend Television programme, Weekend World, that he had met Mr Jim Prior, chairman of GEC, and Sir Raymond Lygo, chief executive of British Aerospace, to discuss the way they were pursuing the European consortium's case because of US pressure against Britain's pounds 250 million launch aid for the European Airbus.
He had been faced with the Americans saying: 'This is not fair; it's unfair competition and we're going to stop the Airbus coming into America if you don't do something about it.'
Given this pressure, it was 'doing violence to reality' to argue that he had breached cabinet neutrality over Westland by pointing out to British Aerospace to watch the tone of its statements.
Mr Heseltine did not comment on Mr Brittan's remarks but his supporters argued that the admission of the Airbus threats was a damaging revelation. One senior MP suggested that cabinet ministers would have told the Americans to get lost if they had known of the unwarranted interference.
'This is one of the main points that the defence select committee will have to look at. It explains the inexplicable: why the Department of Trade and Industry did a 180 degree about-turn from full support for the European option to arguing that it was against the national interest,' he said.
The committee will take evidence from Ministry of Defence officials tomorrow, from the Westland board on Wednesday, and from Mr Brittan a week later.
A formal request has been sent to government departments for relevant official papers and a serious constitutional row is likely if the Prime Minister decides, as expected, that the papers should not be divulged.
Mr Brittan said that he was against publication of the memorandum and minute setting out the Government's position in October even though it would justify his statement that he had not expressed an earlier preference for the European option.
'It is a rule of cabinet government that documents of that kind are not published. It would be quite wrong that they should be published because it happens to suit me.'
Mr Heseltine's supporters argued that Mr Brittan's stance was unconvincing. They pointed out that if the defence select committee could read the 'crown jewels' during an in camera session of its Ponting investigation it could surely be afforded at least the same access to this less sensitive matter.
They also claimed yesterday that British pressure on other European governments to avoid support for the European consortium proposal had not been confined to Italy. The Foreign Office acknowledged that the UK's permanent representative at the EEC had spoken in similar terms to the EEC commission and that Britain had 'been in touch with some other European governments to explain its position.
'Mr Brittan said the tragedy had been that Mr Heseltine felt so strongly in favour of the European option that he was not prepared to abide by collective cabinet responsibility. The revelations about his talks with Mr Prior were 'the dirty tricks department scraping the bottom of the barrel.' He denied that any pressure had been put on Mr Prior.
Mr Brittan acknowledged that one of his DTI officials had contacted Mr Winston Churchill, a member of the defence committee, but he denied that this was to promote the Sikorsky case.
Richard Norton-Taylor adds: Civil servants are furious at suggestions that they were the source of the leak of the Solicitor-General's letter accusing Mr Michael Heseltine of 'material inaccuracies' before he resigned.
Officials who work for the Solicitor-General, Sir Patrick Mayhew, are particularly angry at the way the Government's law officers' department appears to have been used for political purposes.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
110 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 20, 1986
Airbus may face US embargo
BYLINE: From ALEX BRUMMER
LENGTH: 238 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
The US is considering imposing an embargo on importing the European Airbus, diplomatic sources diclosed last night.
A task force headed by the Commerce Secretary, Mr Malcolm Baldridge, has reportedly recommended that the Airbus should be considered an example of an unfair trading practice. President Reagan asked Mr Baldridge to review potential examples of unfair trading practices in an attempt to head off rising protectionist feelings in Congress.
However, officials say that the Secretary of State, Mr George Shultz, would oppose any move which would prevent sales of the succesful Airbus in the US. He apparently said that this would damage Nato and might spark EEC retaliation.
Diplomats said that if the US were to take a hard line against the Airbus they would consider complaining about US government help for aerospace companies, particularly Boeing.
The diplomats were surprised at the specific US complaint about the British subsidy mentioned by the Industry Secretary, Mr Leon Brittan, in an interview yesterday. However, it was possible that the Airbus was brought up when Mr Brittan had trade talks in Washington last year.
Even if Mr Baldridge recommended action against the Airbus it would have to be decided at the White House. President Reagan is obliged to take allegations of unfair trading seriously, otherwise he could face another onslaught of protectionist legislation.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
111 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 18, 1986
Where image is all / The non-coverage on US television of the 48th International PEN writers' congress
BYLINE: By WJ WEATHERBY
LENGTH: 693 words
The only mention of the 48th International PEN Congress on American television has been a one-liner from the speech of George Shultz, the US Secretary of State: 'Ronald Reagan and I are on your side.' This was reported in an obvious state of stock by EL Doctorow, the American novelist, who had opposed Mr Shultz's appareance at such a non-political gathering.
It meant that as far as American TV was concerned, the millions of words exchanged by over 700 PEN delegates from more than 40 countries were a non-event. The hard reality that had to be faced was that in the world of American TV, where everything from politics to sport is transformed into show-business, the intellectual confrontations of such distinguished writers as Gunter Grass and Saul Bellow were judged not to have sufficient interest for the mass audience.
One TV executive I talked to was trying hard to find some combination of writers that would have 'visual personality appeal,' but after attending a session on the dangers of Utopia, he gave up. Not even PEN president Norman Mailer's attempts to transform the congress into a melodramatic event - part of a living theatre of literary duelling-interested the TV observer.
A session on American censorship, described as mainly taking place in some local schools and libraries, was dismissed; so was a rebellion by women writers who insisted they should have been better represented on the panels. Betty Freidan, author of The Feminine Mystique, led the revolt backed by a statement point out that nearly half the PEN delegates were women, whereas only 20 of them were among the 140 panellists.
President Mailer said several leading women writers had been unable to attend and then he argued that as more men were intellectuals first, poets and novelists second, than women, 'so there was a certain natural tendency to pick more men than women.' As this aroused the women protesters again, he hastily added that was not a way of saying women were incapable of high discussion.
But even this row between the sexes didn't made it big on TV. Heiner Muller, the East German playwright and poet, commented wryly 'The American dream seems as far from reality as my Communist dream. Your faith is money and mine is politics, so we both have our burden.'
For him the American dream was summed up by the movie Fantasia in which you had to listen to great music accompanied by the images of Walt Disney. Western civilisation was becoming more and more a civilisation of 'spectacle, he said. Words could no longer kill in America but images could. In his country, words alone were still capable of killing.
Playwright Arthur Miller argued that what was offered in American art today was 'a parody of life and death' rather than reality. Some of the delegates suggested the ceiling mirror in the conference room that showed them upside down was the only view that would interest TV - an image of shock rather than edify.
The most prominent writers at the congress were those from countries were politics and literature were often at war, ranging from the Soviet bloc to South Africa. But Judith Herzberg, the Dutch-Israeli writer, argued that life in a country in turmoil was often more boring for a writer than in a peaceful country which was often dismissed as dull but was really closer to the spiritual concerns of real writing. 'Politically relevant writing with a cause is easier than any other kind,' she said in the tone of a contemporary Jane Austen.
It was left to Arthur Miller to sum up what had become the prime concern of most of the writers. Television's images were too simplified and selective, he said, and its broad, obvious humour was mere slapstick. 'When I started writing I was under the illusion I was addressing the whole American people,' he said. Now even the American theatre had lost its mass character to movies and TV.
Just as at the start of the congress repressive governments had seemed to be the villains to most writers, now at the end it seemed to be television that was the villain with its show-business view of the world - and its censoring of the PEN Congress.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
112 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 18, 1986
Personal Investment (Outlook): Get the currency right too / Investment for beginners
BYLINE: By HAMISH MCRAE
LENGTH: 1187 words
A friend who makes his living by managing millions in the City once remarked that the trick is to identify what is the consensus thought and do the opposite.
Others have different approaches. The large pension funds and life assurance companies are essentially bureaucratic institutions which hope slightly to overperform the market. The best do; the worst don't. But because they are so large the speed at which they can change their investments is limited. After all, if too many of them start selling at the same time, the price plunges.
There are, of course, many specialised funds which aim to invest in a particular type of company or market, and which should provide a reasonable reflection of what is happening in that market. And there are few professional investors who operate with principles all of their own.
But there is no Holy Grail. Indeed, one of the fascinating things about the whole art of investment is that individuals can do just as well as professionals. The level of information they have is, of course, much lower: private individuals do not have the battery of television screens linked up to the Stock Exchange that grace the desk of every fund manager in the City.
But the very hot-house atmosphere of the City can militate against good investment. Picking individual shares is in many ways less important than identifying broad trends in the market. If the market is rising as a whole the shares of even badly run companies will do well. Better, the companies may be taken over, for strong stock markets are usually associated with a rash of takeover bids as we are seeing at the present moment.
But in weak markets even the best companies find the value of their shares languishing. It is small comfort to have lost only 10 per cent of the value of a share when the market as a whole has gone down by 20 per cent. Better to have had the money in a building society.
And then there is the currency question. Take a look at the graphs. The graph showing what has happened in London over the last year demonstrates that it was a good year for investors in British shares: people ought to have made somewhere between 10 and 15 per cent on their investments, quite aside from any dividends which they will have received.
Now look at what happened on Wall Street. As the top line shows, the Dow Jones Index also performed strongly, so American investors should be feeling as pleased as their British counterparts. But anyone in Britain would find it hard to cheer at this performance, because the dollar itself has fallen so far against sterling. Indeed, the fall of the dollar would have wiped out roughly the entire gain, as the second line on the graph, which corrects the changes in the index for changes in the value of the currency against sterling, demonstrate.
For British investors, then, Wall Street's boom has been a bit of a disaster.
This may seem obvious, and it is. But how often do you read about booming Wall Street and fail to be reminded of the impact of the fall of the dollar?
Now look at the index for German shares. The Frankfurt stock market's boom has been one of the more spectacular features of last year, and sterling's performance against the German mark has slightly reinforced this performance for British investors. But a year ago the fashionable thin to read about the European economies was the disease of 'Eurosclerosis,' as evidenced by the fact that the US and Japan were leading the world in all the hitech industries and poor Europe was beset with strikes in its motor industry and had only a small stake in the booming personal computer market.
The point of printing these graphs is to remind people of three things. The first is that broad financial trends are much more important than individual share movements. Even mediocre German companies would have seen their shares rise by more than jolly good American ones.
The second is that professional, qualified advice - the sort of thing that the stockbrokers circular's produce - may be right as to the prospects of individual companies. But the professionals are not able to give much of a guide to these broad trends.
And the third is that even people who are not prepared to make judgments about individual shares still have to make investment judgments of some sort or other. Even if you are buying a unit trust, your decision whether to buy one which specialises in, say, European companies, or British hitech ones, is terribly important.
How should people reach that sort of decision?
Let's set out here one basic rule, and one trick.
The basic rule is to spread risk. As anyone who has ever bought any investment will know, however brilliant any investor is, he or she will make a large number of mistakes. (One leading life assurance company, Legal and General, actually makes a feature of its mistakes in its television advertising.) You therefore have to assume that whatever you do, there is a good probability that you will be wrong. The only way to combat this particular and inevitable feature variety of different types of investment.
This does not just mean buying the shares of different companies or even the unit trusts of different management groups. It means not having all your savings in the stock market for a start. One of the great problems of most investment institutions is that they offer only a limited range of products. A stockbroker can at present really only sell stocks and shares: you are hardly going to be told to forget about shares that year and stuff the money in the building society.
Building societies similarly may sell a range of savings schemes, but they are not going to try to persuade their savers to put a bit of money instead into the commodity markets.
And so it goes on. Bullion dealers tell you to buy gold, silver or platinum. De Beers tells you to buy diamonds. And the government tells you to put the money into National Savings.
This may change as the country develops financial supermarkets, but each supermarket will only be selling its own 'own-label' products. The way to resist the clamour is to do a bit of several things-to spread risk.
And the trick? The trick is not to believe the share tips that seem nowadays to sprout from the most unlikely places. We would subscribe to the maxim of Sir Gordon Newton, the former editor of the Financial Times, who remarked that in a bull market (when share prices are rising) every tip is a good one and in a bear market (when they are falling) every tip is a bad one.
The trick is to be aware that sometimes markets go nuts. It is not very difficult to see it even at the time (it is very easy afterwards) It was easy to see that the dollar bubble would burst early last year. When everyone is utterly euphoric, or utterly in despair, as a result a whole market gets carried away with itself. There are then genuine investment opportunities which are worth grabbing.
We will try to give some thoughts on these, together with a perspective on the current state of financial markets, in the weeks and months ahead.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
113 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 18, 1986
Retail prices inch up to end year at 5.7 pc / Department of Employment figures
BYLINE: By CHRISTOPHER HUHNE, Economics Editor
LENGTH: 489 words
The rise in prices over the year to December was 5.7 per cent compared with 5.5 per cent in November, the Department of Employment announced yesterday. The higher inflation rate was described as a 'temporary blip' by Lord Young, the Employment Secretary.
Prices rose by only 0.1 per cent in December but the annual rate rose slightly because there had been a fall in retail prices of 0.1 per cent the previous December due to mortgage rate cuts.
The rise in prices over the year to the fourth quarter of 1985, as measured by the Retail Price Index, was 5.5 per cent, exactly in line with the Treasury's most recent (November) forecast but above the 5 per cent forecast at the time of the budget and the 4.5 per cent forecast in November 1984.
The latest Treasury forecast projects an inflation rate of 3.75 per cent over the year to the fourth quarter of 1986. The forecasting consensus is for a slowdown in inflation though the Treasury is at the optimistic end on its size.
Recent figures for factory output prices and input costs point to some decline in retail inflation, under the influence of the rebound in sterling at the beginning of last year ad the continued weakness of world commodity prices including oil.
There is, though, no sign of a weakening in domestic cost pressures either in a slowdown in earnings growth, which was 7.5 per cent over the year to November, or in unit wage costs which were up 4.6 per cent over the year to the first three quarters.
Lord Young, the Employment Secretary, yesterday drew attention to the slow rise in prices in December and said that the government was determined to get inflation down still lower this year. 'With the lower price increases seen over the last few months we appear to be on course towards achieving the Chancellor's forecast,' he said.
The annual average inflation rate in 1985-the rise in prices between the whole of 1984 and 1985-is 6.1 per cent, up from a 5 per cent rate in 1984 and a 4.6 per cent rate in 1983.
The rise in the Tax and Price Index-the figure which measures what people need to keep living standards stable in real terms after allowing for both price and tax changes - was 4.6 per cent, suggesting that underlying real earnings grew by around 3 per cent.
Ministers have recently appeared to be in two minds about whether to take the credit for the rise in real earnings or admonish wage bargainers for making it more difficult to cut unemployment.
The latest international comparisons show that Britain's 5.5 per cent inflation rate in November was the second highest of the big seven industrial countries after Italy where the rate was 8.9 per cent.
The inflation rates elsewhere were: United States 3.6 per cent: Japan 1.9 per cent: West Germany 1.8 per cent; France 4.8 per cent; and Canada 4 per cent, the big seven average was 3.7 per cent and the industrial country average was 4.5 per cent.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
114 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 18, 1986
Financial Notebook: Euro defence
BYLINE: Edited by HAMISH McRAE
LENGTH: 208 words
It is an official, properly minuted, properly cleared through Cabinet Office policy statement: Mr Leon Brittan said yesterday that he was not opposed to cooperative defence projects in Europe as long as they did not result in an international cartel which cost the taxpayer money and deprived people of choice.
He accepted that there were advantages on the European side as an alternative to cooperation with the United States. Mr Brittan was addressing a meeting at the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London to mark the publication of a book commissioned by the DTI called Protection and Industrial Policy in Europe (Routledge and Kegan Paul, pounds 16).
Unless European governments become interventionist the development of a European industrial base will be a matter for firms rather than governments, the book argues. It says that the government is actively in favour of joint European ventures, but warns against the dangers of individual countries bidding against each other for foreign investment like the Nissan car factory.
One small point: publishers' deadlines being what they are this book will have been written and indeed printed when Westland's problems were a tiny cloud on a distant horizon.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
115 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 18, 1986
Shultz refuses to talk to Nicaragua / US Secretary of State rejects latest central American peace initiative from Contadora group
BYLINE: From DOYLE MCMANUS
LENGTH: 293 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
Eight Latin American countries have urged the US to re-open direct peace talks with Nicaragua, but the Secretary of State, Mr George Shultz, rejected their appeal.
Ambassadors from the countries of the Contadora negotiating group presented a new diplomatic initiative to Mr Shultz, saying that US talks with Nicaragua's Sandinista regime 'would contribute' to a peaceful settlement of Central America's problems.
But a State Department spokesman said that Mr Shultz and the Assistant Secretary of State, Mr Elliott Abrams, turned down the request. 'Our position has not changed,' a spokesman said.
Mr Shultz and other Administration officials have said that the Nicaraguans are seeking a separate peace pact with the US as a way of avoiding talks with their Central American neighbours through the Contadora group.
The Contadora countries have protested several times that they would welcome US. Nicaraguan talks, but to no avail.
The US and Nicaragua conducted direct negotiations from June, 1984, until January, 1985, when the US broke off the talks.
Instead, President Reagan declared that the Sandinistas should negotiate with US- funded Nicaraguan rebels to arrange new elections that would give the rebels, known as contras, a chance of winning power. The Sandinistas have rejected that idea.
The US yesterday welcomed the revival of the Central American peace process and said that a special US envoy will soon visit all key participants in the deliberations, except Nicaragua.
Meanwhile, in Nicaragua, at least two army officers were wounded and two helicopters were 'seriously damaged' yesterday in an artillery attack by anti-government rebels from inside neighbouring Costa Rica, the Foreign Ministry said.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
116 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 18, 1986
Russian stance dashes hopes / Soviet delegation at Geneva arms talks insists that US abandon 'Star Wars' SDI
BYLINE: From HELLA PICK
LENGTH: 621 words
DATELINE: GENEVA
The Soviet Union has told the United States and its allies that agreements to cut back on nuclear arsenals would only be possible if the Reagan Administration abandoned all aspects of the Strategic Defence Initiative, including research into space weapons.
Hopes of fruitful discussion on the implications of missile space defence systems have now been dashed.
The Soviet leader, Mr Mikhail Gorbachev, had not mentioned research when he launched his timetable for the elimination of nuclear weapons by the end of the twentieth century. He spoke only of the need to prevent the development, testing and deployment of space weapons.
Briefly, it was though that the omission might have the kernels of an opening for discussion between the United States and the Soviet Union on the implications of missile space defence systems.
The US Secretary of Defence, Mr Caspar Weinberger, registering his deep reservations about the Soviet initiative has already pointed out that he sees it as a new device to kill SDI.
The Soviet Union is thought to be calculating that the shift in position that Mr Gorbachev's proposal shows on medium-range nuclear missiles will trigger pressure on the United States, from Britain and other West European members of Nato to show maximum flexibility, and give up SDI.
After resisting it for years, the Soviet Union has for the first time offered to cut back its SS-20s in Europe without insisting that it retains a number of these medium-range missiles to match the British and French independent nuclear deterrent.
The Americans are still saying that they are only interested in global cuts of SS20s. But it is inevitable that Western Europe will hope that, at last, the Russians have offered the elements of a feasible interim agreement on medium-range missile cuts.
If reached quickly enough, such an accord could still allow the Netherlands to cancel the controversial deployment of cruise missiles. It would also reinforce arguments against the construction of a second missile base in Britain. West German politicians would be certain to encourage anything that lifts the threat of SS20s, and enables them to remove the Pershing-2 and cruise missiles already deployed under the Nato modernisation programme.
But under Mr Gorbachev's proposal, it seems that such an agreement, intended to be reached during the first phase of the programme to eliminate nuclear weapons, could be realised only if the United States gives up its Star Wars project.
During this first phase, before 1990, Britain and France would be expected to undertake not a increase their nuclear arsenals - a demand that Britain as well as France would be reluctant to meet and would more likely oppose.
But, during the first phase of Mr Gorbachev's timetable, the prime goal for the United States and the Soviet Union would be to sign a pact to cut strategic missiles by 50 per cent.
The cuts would be completed during the early part of the second phase, beginning in 1990. At that stage, Mr Gorbachev proposes that other nuclear powers. Britain and France and presumably China, begin to cut their nuclear arsenals.
This phasing is undoubtedly designed to meet the undertaking given by Mrs Thatcher and Sir Geoffrey Howe that the Government would agree to negotiate the reduction of its independent nuclear deterrent once the superpowers had achieved substantial cutbacks in the nuclear arsenal.
Britain will have an opportunity to question a senior Soviet official, the deputy Foreign Minister, Mr Nikolai Ryzkov, on this and other aspects of the Gorbachev plans when he visits London on Monday for talks with Mr Derek Thomas, the political director at the Foreign Office.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
117 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 17, 1986
Third World Review Column: Vote farce / Comment on recent elections in Guyana
BYLINE: By ANDAIYE
LENGTH: 708 words
The conduct of the elections in Guyana last month was no surprise, since in free and fair elections, the ruling People's National Congress (PNC) would have lost the power to which it has clung for 21 years. The surprise for many was that the elections were again blatantly rigged in conditions where it would have been better for the PNC if they had seemed credible.
The final report of the fact-finding mission into political freedom in Guyana, headed by Lord Chitnis, documented 'the historical record of the Guyanese electoral system, showing how, since 1964, that system has been undermined and brought under the control of the ruling PNC.' It was this undermined system into which Desmond Hoyte introduced minor reforms when he became President following the death of Forbes Burnham last August.
If the December elections were to be credible, those minor reforms had to be followed by the appearance of fairness during the voting, with the fraud being carried out discreetly between the vote and the count; to facilitate this, Mr Hoyte had refused to consider the main demand of the Working People's Alliance and other forces that a preliminary count of ballots be made at individual polling stations. In the event, the PNC dispensed with the need to appear fair: instead, in the full view of all, the military wing of the civilian/military regime hijacked the ballot boxes and bore them away for the 'count.' The result: PNC, 42 seats; People's Progressive Party, 8 seats; the pro-business United Force,2 seats; and the WPA, 1 seat.
During 1979-80, Walter Rodney often spoke of what he called the 'Haitianisation' of Guyana - a process of economic, social, and political degeneration of a country that is both product and producer of a massive alienation and dispersal of the working people. In Guyana that process is well advanced.
According to a Caribbean development bank report, Guyana has the highest inflation rate, and the highest mortality rate in the English-speaking Caribbean; in the region as a whole, only Haiti's per capita income is lower. Guyanese working people are being dispersed from jobs into hustling and out of Guana everywhere: out of a total population of 800,000, 100,000 Guyanese are estimated to be in Canada. In 1984, Guyanese made more applications for refugee status in Canada than did the citizens of any other country, including Haiti.
The PNC seems to believe this situation can be reversed if the economy is fixed, and that the economy can be fixed by large-scale external economic aid. It is reported to be working for better relations with the US, negotiating 'reasonable re-scheduling terms' with the IMF,: and to have accepted a World Bank proposal for 'economic liberalisation' to bring dollars 730m (US) into the economy.
But in Guyana as in the Philippines, donors and investors want a guarantee of a stable climate; they want workers who are not alienated; they want workers to be pacified. And in Guyana as in the Philippines, it is an error to disconnect the economic and social from the political conditions as products and producers of workers' alienation.
During the pre-election period in Guyana, Mr Hoyte, for his own purposes, offered a brief, minor relaxation of the normal conditions of the dictatorship which the WPA was able to use to work among the people in a way that is not usually possible. Those 'normal conditions' were fully restored on election day and within eight days the homes of leading members of the WPA, the PPP and the Church were being searched for arms and ammunition in the context of renewed threats of 'containment.' The Burnham peace has already been succeeded by the Hoyte peace.
In a recent TV programme in the UK, the South African Ambassador to the UK tried to deflect Sir Shridath Ramphal's criticisms of South Africa by reminding him that the US State Department had defined both South Africa and Guyana as 'partly free', as he knew, the Commonwealth Secretary-General is a former Minister in a PNC Government in Guyana.
But Guyana is not South Africa: apartheid is a uniquely anti-human system. The Guyanese people have the same right to a Government of their choice; the same duty to struggle until they win it.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
118 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 17, 1986
Jobs loss blamed on Whitehall / US GD Searle drugs company loses High Wycombe plant
BYLINE: By JAMES ERLICHMAN
LENGTH: 230 words
GD Searle, the US drug company now owned by Monsanto, announced last night that it is closing its basic research facilities at High Wycombe with the loss of 300 jobs.
The closure comes as part of a worldwide decision by Monsanto, which bought Searle for dollars 2.8 billion last year, to concentrate all of its basic drug research at two existing centres in the United States. About 100 research jobs have been axed in Belgium and smaller installations will close in France and Canada.
But the ending of basic research at High Wycombe, which was Searle's showpiece biotechnology centre, marks the first time that any international drug company has made good its threat of cutting research in Britain because of the government's 'hostile' attitude to the drugs industry.
Mr Brian Tempest, Searle's managing director for UK operations, said last night that profit cutbacks imposed by the Department of Health had been an 'important factor' in the decision to retrench. 'We have been given no credit for the pounds 20 million we invested at our Morpeth factory, and the government has told us we have excess R&D expenditure in Britain.'
The other 200 employees at High Wycombe who are engaged in clinical drug work are not affected by the closure.
In recent weeks two US drug firms, AH Robins and Warner Lambert, have announced UK manufacturing cutbacks.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
119 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 17, 1986
A new term begins, but will it ever end? / Possible impact on Geneva talks of Soviet leader Gorbachev's latest arms control proposals
BYLINE: By HELLA PICK
LENGTH: 860 words
Mikhail Gorbachev has certainly enlivened the new term at Geneva. The Soviet leader has provided the US and Soviet arms control negotiators with grandiose proposals for eliminating nuclear weapons by the year 2000, provided the United States gives up its quest for space weapons.
He has also thrown bones to Britain and France, telling them that under his scheme they can keep their present nuclear arsenals - but not increase them - during a first stage, while the superpowers halve their strategic arsenals and take their SS20s and their cruise and Pershing missiles out of Europe altogether.
For good measure, Mr Gorbachev has indicated a number of apparent concessions towards a ban on chemical weapons, and, in Europe, a reduction in conventional forces and agreement on military confidence-building measures.
All of this came as a surprise, and no one in Geneva or in Western capitals was quite sure what to make of it. When the negotiators assembled yesterday in the Soviet mission, gone was the brouhaha of last November's Geneva summit. The city is no longer an armed encampment, and the huge media circus has been reduced to a few of the faithful.
Gone too is the Soviet effort to woo the Western press. Far from seeking to explain Mr Gorbachev's ambitious timetable for a nuclear-free world, the Soviet press attache did not even have a text of his leader's speech and firmly shut the gates of the mission against eager enquirers.
Max Kampelman and his massive US negotiating team wore their best poker faces. If they felt they had been outsmarted by Mr Gorbachev, they were not ready to show it. During the minutes while the cameras were allowed into the negotiating room, Victor Karpov, the Soviet negotiator, virtually monopolised the stage.
Finally, Mr Kampelman managed to get a word in edgeways - 'anxious to find accommodation, and eager for the day when the nuclear threat can be removed.' There was a petulant remonstrance from the US negotiator when Mr Karpov moved on without waiting for the American's golden words to be translated into Russian for the benefit of Soviet television.
The new US-Soviet round of nuclear and space arms talks is supposed to last six weeks, taking them beyond the important Soviet party congress in February when Mr Gorbachev will command the world stage as he amplifies his quest for an international order without nuclear or space weapons. There will be at least one more round of talks before the Soviet leader meets President Reagan for the second of the three summits they have undertaken to hold.
The Americans, busy cautioning against raised expectation of a breakthrough in time for the next summit, want Mr Gorbachev to visit the United States in June. This would be impossibly soon for major progress on the immensely difficult technical issues raised in these negotiations. The Soviet leader is pressing for a later date, September, or even after the US Congressional elections in November.
The Soviet leader may believe that this will allow enough time to translate his timetable for nuclear disarmament into an agreed framework for negotiation, but Gorbachev may want the later date so that he can blame the United States if there is no palpable progress.
But is it realistic to assume that the superpowers can come up with agreements to dismantle even part of the nuclear overkill that both have assembled? And it is vital for international order to reach such agreements? Might it not be more sensible to look to natural erosion, through the reductions of defence budgets increasingly forced on both East and West by budget deficits and the needs of the domestic economy? Mr Gorbachev's latest declaration leaves little doubt that he sees arms control agreements as the litmus test of East-West relations and believes that such agreements can also pave the way for greater stability worldwide.
The Americans have less faith in the arms control process. Increasingly, a growing number of Americans are doubtful that the often acrimonious process of arms control negotiations is an effective way of reducing East-West tension. The tortoise-like process dashes raised expectations of a safer world.
President Reagan and his advisers continue to argue that Soviet expansionism in the Third World is more of a tinderbox than nuclear stockpiles. And US officials remain adamant that Mr Reagan rejects any notion of abandoning his Star Wars programme against trade-offs in other areas.
Mr Reagan's logic dictates that an effective strategic defence - the object of his Star Wars initiative - will lead to a natural elimination of nuclear weapons. Mr Gorbachev, who rejects spaced weapons outright, maintains there is a short cut to a nuclear weapons-free world. In his declaration on Thursday he said, 'Instead of wasting the next ten to 15 years by developing new, extremely dangerous weapons in space - allegedly designed to make nuclear arms useless - would it not be more sensible to start elimination of those arms and finally bring them down to zero.'
The Soviet argument sounds logical enough, but arms negotiations are about policies.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
120 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 17, 1986
Leading Article: Words count in the balance of fear / US-Soviet nuclear arms control
LENGTH: 673 words
No arms control plan can be judged by a declaratory statement such as Mr Gorbachev's on Wednesday. The negotiators need to look at timetables and missile inventories. But they have been doing that since the 1950s with the net result that both sides have accumulated stocks of armaments which, they recognise, would be laughably superfluous were they not tragically so. Nevertheless the Gorbachev aim is close enough to that proclaimed by President Reagan to ensure that the negotiators are given some common ground. Have they been given enough? That is more doubtful.
Arms control is not an end in itself. It is a means to creating greater security. Moreover, it is only one such means. Security would be greater with each side armed to the teeth but not suspecting the other, than with one tenth of its arsenal and living in fear of a first strike. Thus the Reagan-Gorbachev summit did more for international security than any event since the signing of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 1972. And every Red Star editorial about the warlike designs of the imperialist aggressors, and every similar outpouring from a right-wing think-tank in the United States, does more harm to security than another dozen missiles placed on site. Unless there is an immediate cause of tension, say a regional crisis, the rhetoric determines the mood. The mood has much improved since Mr Reagan moderated his former extravagances and Mr Gorbachev brought a new and serious purpose to the Kremlin.
Yet the state of arms control remains one key indicator of superpower relations, which is why the session which resumed in Geneva yesterday is of peculiar importance. Despite the superficial similarities between the two sides' proposals for reducing nuclear stockpiles the gap remains as wide as ever on the US Strategic Defence Initiative.
Since one of the laws of military strategy states that what can be done will be done, it will not be possible to prevent the miltarisation of space. The process began long ago with the launch of communications and surveillance satellites, the effect of which has been to increase security by opening up forbidden territory to inspection and improving the chances of crisis management and damage limitation if events turn nasty. The point about the SDI is that whereas not many people, including those working on it, believe it can achieve its stated objective, it has become a technological imperative for the US and probably for the Soviet Union as well. If there is an empty strategic niche it will be filled. The filling of it, however, is a destabilising business. It is inevitable that with superior technology the Americans will pull ahead and that (since defensive and offensive systems serve the same strategic purpose) the Russians will feel the existing balance slipping away from them. That is a formula for renewed insecurity because it increases mutual suspicion - mutual because the Russians will fear an American breakthrough and the Americans will fear a Russian pre-emptive strike before the breakthrough occurs. Though both fears would be misplaced they would be bound to find expression in hostile attitudes.
The trick is to give neither side more cause for fear than it already has, and to maintain balance at every stage of an arms control process. President Reagan has said that SDI is not designed to give the US a strategic advantage and has repeated that he would offer the total package to the Russians in exchange for the abolition of nuclear weapons. If the Russians are to regard such an unlooked-for gesture as more than a sop to public opinion then the cooperation should start not when the system is complete but while it is being developed. If scientists and technologists cooperated in laboratories at the research stage the SDI could be seen as a genuine attempt to end the nuclear threat. The cost would remain apalling, but the Nato and neutral misgivings would at least abate if both sides were seen to be retaining their rough strategic parity.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
121 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 17, 1986
Fleet exercise 'routine' / US official insists Mediterranean manoeuvres not part of build-up against Libya
BYLINE: By SEUMAS MILNE
LENGTH: 244 words
The US Deputy Secretary of State, Mr John Whitehead, last night: insisted that US fleet manoeuvres in the Mediterranean were routine and not part of the military build-up against Libya.
He discounted Soviet suggestions that the manoeuvres were similar to those that preceded the US invasion of Grenada in 1983, and said armed intervention against Libya was not at present under consideration. However, President Reagan had reserved the option of military action in the future.
Mr Whitehead was speaking in London after a Meeting with the British Foreign Minister, Sir Geoffrey Howe, and the Home Secretary, Mr Douglas Hurd, on the second leg of a tour of Western European capitals aimed at increasing Nato sanctions against Libya.
Mr Whitehead welcomed Britain's pledge to press fellow EEC members to follow its lead in imposing control on the entry of Libyan nationals and shutting down diplomatic relations,
He claimed that Colonel Gadafy was 'behind most of the terrorist acts' around the world
In Bonn, a senior West German official said investigators lacked proof that Libya was involved in the attacks at the Rome and Vienna airports, according to a press report.
Mr Juergen Moellemann, an undersecretary of state at the Bonn Foreign Ministry, was quoted as saying that the Italian and Austrian governments reported that there is 'until now no suficient evidence' that Libya took part in the attacks, in which 19 people died.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
122 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 17, 1986
Aquino calls on rebels to talk / Philippines opposition presidential candidate makes appeal to guerrilla leaders
BYLINE: From GREGG JONES
LENGTH: 382 words
DATELINE: DAVAO
PHILIPPINES - The opposition presidential candidate, Mrs Corazon Aquino, campaigning yesterday on the southern island of Mindanao, made an appeal to Communist guerrilla leaders. If she is elected president in February she wants them to 'lay down your arms and talk to me for the good of the country.'
Davao is the country's third largest city and a stronghold for guerrillas of the Communist led New People's Army. It has been nicknamed 'murder city' because of the violent deaths of 900 people in 1985, most of them at the hands of government forces or guerrillas.
Thousands of supporters shouting 'Cory, Cory' - Mrs Aquino's nickname - lined the road as she drove to Davao del Norte province for rallies at a banana plantation, the provincial capital of Tagum, and the town of Panabo.
Mrs Aquino's call for talks with guerrilla leaders came a day after she vowed to fight the rebels if they refused to lay down their arms. She said she would declare a six-month ceasefire and negotiate with their leaders.
The NPA guerrillas control large parts of Mindanao island, including the rural areas of Davao and neighbouring Davao del Norte province. Mr Jose Ayala, administrator of a large banana plantation near Tagum where Mrs Aquino stopped for a brief rally, said guerrillas had killed 30 of his workers
She continued to parry President Marcos's persistent accusations that she is a Communist or Communist sympathiser.
Mark Tran adds from Washington: Congressional investigations into alleged huge purchases of US property by President Marcos and his wife, Imelda are picking up steam. Congressional aides said that the house subcommittee on Asian and Pacific affairs has found evidence that a Philippine banker, said to handle the personal finances of Mr Marcos, played a key role in the acquisition of property in the US worth hundreds of millions of dollars.
The panel is on the point of serving a subpoena for Mr Roland Gapud a Manila banker. Congressional aides sa:d that officials and documents from the Security Pacific National Bank in Los Angeles show that Mr Gapud was a leading figure behind the scenes in the buying up of properties, sometimes as an adviser, at other times as someone with a financial stake in the property or control over it.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
123 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 17, 1986
Kuwaits look to Russian arms / Soviet Deputy Defence Minister Govorov concludes talks with government and armed forces
BYLINE: From IAN BLACK
LENGTH: 681 words
DATELINE: KUWAIT
Security was tight, the food exquisite and the conversation animated when senior members of the Kuwaiti Government and armed forces gathered in the Hilton Hotel here on Wednesday to say goodbye to their Soviet friends.
It was no ordinary diplomatic reception. Resplendent in his medals and gold braid among his hosts' flowing dishdashas, the guest of honour, the Deputy Soviet Defence Minister, General Vladimir Govorov, had just completed five days of talks that marked the high point of Moscow's diplomatic offensive in the conservative Arab states of the Gulf.
As he left Kuwait yesterday General Govorov declined to say if fresh arm-sales were likely.
He and his men, who formed the most high-ranking Soviet military delegation ever to visit Kuwait, went home after an unusually high-profile stay reported to have produced a dollars 230 million arms deal on top of previous sales totalling over dollars 300 million.
Soviet-Kuwait ties are nothing new. There have been full diplomatic relations since independence in the early 1960s and arms sales have been going on since 1977: in recent months though, the Soviet embassy here has become a springboard for Moscow's attempts to increase its influence all over the region.
Experts are divided on whether there is any Soviet grand strategy at work. But they all agree that as American prestige declines, largely 'as a result of Washington's almost unqualified support for Israel and its refusal' for example, to sell missiles to Kuwait, it is the Russians who are benefiting.
Kuwati isolation ended last September when the fiercely-conservative and pro-Western Sultanate of Oman announced that it would establish relations with Moscow although officials in Muscat said this week that they were in no hurry to see the Russians arrive. In November, the United Arab Emirates followed suit, and Bahrain is widely tipped as the next to take the plunge.
Much of the success is credited to the popular Soviet Ambassador to Kuwait, Mr Pogov Akopov, a voluble Armenian economist and veteran diplomat whose fluent Arabic and long experience in the Middle East have given him considerable standing here.
Different factors in different Gulf countries have helped the Russian effort. Omani officials cite the recent rapprochement with neighbouring Soviet-backed South Yemen as the main reason for their decision. Western observers, however, attribute Sultan Qaboos's move more to a desire to display his independence from the British expatriate advisers who surround his throne.
The UAE is interested in trade and its imminent membership of the UN Security Council. In the pinch of the current recession, all six members of the Gulf Cooperation Council are aware of the crucial question of Soviet energy needs and even those who do not accept the CIA's famous estimate that there will soon be a shortfall in Soviet oil production acknowledge that commercial factors must play a role in Moscow's policies in the area.
All, perhaps most importantly, feel more threatened by the ayatollahs across the water in Iran and by the Russians in Afghanistan.
'The Kuwaitis,' argues one diplomat here, 'are sceptical of the United States and are constantly finding excuses to say that the Americans don't meet their commitments or that they are so overwhelmingly pro-Israel that they don't even see their own interests. Their relationship with Moscow is in part a way of displaying displeasure with Washington.'
Soviet conquests of the junior members of the GCC are causing some discomfort in the Saudi Arabian capital Riyadh, where, in some quarters, communism is still seen as synonymous with Zionism. The press there has recently been highlighting reports of an imminent wave of Soviet Jewish emigration to Israel.
The Saudis who tend to suffer from a stiffness and lack of confidence in their foreign policy despite their great wealth, are also aware that their lack of relations with Moscow does not square with the broad Arab support for an international peace conference on the Arab-Israeli dispute.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
124 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 17, 1986
Haitian old guard take command / New regime in Port au Prince
BYLINE: From GREG CHAMBERLAIN
LENGTH: 372 words
DATELINE: PORT-AU-PRINCE
Luckner Cambronne, one of the late president Francois Papa Dox Duvalier's most notorious aides, has emerged as a powerful figure in his son's embattled regime in Haiti, dealing a blow to Washington's hopes of a smooth military takeover to end the Duvalier family's 28-year-old dictatorship.
Although he holds no official position, he and other members of the Duvalier old guard known as 'the dinosaurs,' led by the new Information Minister, Mr Adrien Raymond, have in the past two weeks taken over the Government of President Duvalier, who has been facing a student and Church-led revolt and the prospect of a US-backed military coup.
The Interior and Defence Minister, the elderly General Pierre Merceron, and the Education Minister, Mr Jean Montes, did not sign recent decrees closing schools and warning that security forces would crush all demonstrations. They regarded the measures as provocative, a high-level government source said.
Mr Cambronne, who ran Haiti as interior and defence minister for nearly two years after Papa Doc's death in 1971, organised a large rally of Tomtons Macoutes militiamen and women and die-hard Duvalier supporters at the presidential palace at the weekend. A few days ago, he helped to force members of the country's important Arab business community to pledge loyalty to the President after other leading businessmen for the first time publicly denounced the regime's repression.
Mr Cambronne, who was deposed, raised money 20 years ago to build the small town of Duvalierville in honour of his master. Mr Raymond was once foreign minister.
'The dinosaurs are making their last stand,' one official said. 'They ultimately cannot win and when they are defeated, they will go out with violence, especially towards the Roman Catholic Church,' he said.
The Church, meanwhile, renewed its attacks on the regime, accusing troops and Tontons Macoutes of trying to break up church services and of arresting seven members of one congregation for allegedly possessing leaflets calling for a general strike.
The Church radio yesterday reported the death from torture of a cobbler arrested in the town of Petit Goave, where protestors burned down government buildings.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
125 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 17, 1986
Anger at Kennedy security lapse / US accuses Chile over senator's visit to Santiago
BYLINE: From MARK TRAN
LENGTH: 343 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
The US yesterday voiced its displeasure at the Chilean Government for its failure to take adequate security precautions for Senator Edward Kennedy's visit to Santiago. Mr Kennedy, who is on a Latin American tour, was forced to leave Santiago airport by police helicopter after dozens of pro-government protesters blocked his route.
The State Department said: 'Security measures at the airport were clearly inadequate. Chilean security forces did not clear the relatively small group of demonstrators from the road and there are reports that police on the scene failed to intervene to stop protesters assaulting cars leaving the area.'
What has irked the US, whose relations with the Chilean Government are already cool because of General Pinochet's desire to cling to power, was that the US Embassy in Santiago gave the authorities advance warning. The State Department said yesterday that the Chilean Government turned a blind eye to the demonstrators.
'Our understanding,' said the US, 'is that the protesters represented an organisation with close ties to the Chilean Government.' The demonstration was organised by a pro-government party, the Independent Democratic Union.
The US has suspended military aid to Chile because of its human rights abuses, and Senator Kennedy, in his airport statement, said he would be the first to support renewed aid if 'Chile were once again to respect basic human rights.' The senator met political leaders who recently signed a US-supported agreement - rejected by General Pinochet - that calls for a return to democracy there.
President Pinochet refused to see Senator Kennedy, calling him an 'enemy of the people' because of his sponsorship of a 1976 amendment banning military aid and his strong criticism of Chile.
After meeting Chile's moderate opposition leaders, Senator Kennedy told reporters that the United States should heed their advice and vote against all World Bank and Inter-American Development Bank loans to Chile that do not provide humanitarian aid to the country.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
126 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 17, 1986
The Day in Politics: Sir Raymond Lygo's notes at the DTI / Extracts from BAe chairman's meeting with Trade and Industry Secretary Brittan on the Westland helicopter affair
LENGTH: 882 words
The following key extracts from Sir Raymond Lygo's minutes of his meeting with Mr Leon Brittan on January 8 were released on Wednesday night and printed in the later editions of yesterday's Guardian:
Mr Brittan started by thanking me for coming in to see him and telling me that he wanted to take this opportunity to express his concern at the way events were turning in the Westland saga, that up to quite recently British Aerospace had been taking a low profile within the consortium arrangements but it had now become more vocal and upfront and he wanted to express to me his concern of the effect our campaign might have on UK business with the United States.
He said that it placed him in a difficult position in that, when he was required to negotiate, as he had recently, increased steel quotas, it was imperative that there were no implications of discriminating against the US or actions that could be construed as anti-American.
Part of his job was to defend British industry. He wondered whether we had given consideration of the effects that our action might have on Airbus A320 sales in North America. for example.
I said that we were very conscious of the difficulties that he was talking about through British Aerospace .. I had suggested to the Ministry of Defence that the original way in which the national armaments directors' agreement had been worded was not conducive to free trade. It implied that they would only buy their helicopters from Europe. He interrupted me at this point to say that the national armaments directors' agreement had never been ratified, and that I was quite wrong to believe that it had been ratified. It had never been made government policy.
I in turn said I understood this to be so, but was I not correct in saying that the armament directors had in fact signed such a document since I'd seen it? 'No, No' he said. 'I could show you the Cabinet minutes, it has never been agreed, it has never been agreed.' I passed on, since there didn't seem to be much relevance in this conversation.
I said that he had to realise that not only was our major customer the Ministry of Defence, but also that we had very important contracts, Airbus, Tornado, European fighter aircraft, Trigat, etc., which all involved the same partners that we were dealing with in the consortium. He said that he understood this but that sometimes one had to disagree with one's major customer if it was in the long-term interest of the company, and he reminded me that the DTI was our sponsoring department and that he thought we should have discussed the matter with him and with the Department of Trade and Industry before we had proceeded to join the consortium. I made no comment.
He went on to say that when we had first become members of the consortium we had kept a fairly low profile, but now we appeared to be coming up-front and taking the lead, and he thought that this was not in our best interest. At this point I said that his own permanent under-secretary, to whom I had reported all our actions on Monday, had congratulated me on the way in which I was attempting to cool the debate and keep it on commercial grounds. He made no comnent.
I said that the Europeans naturally expected the British company which was most experienced in aerospace business to take the lead .. It was our view that a strong and United Western Europe with a strong defence industry was of great importance to the United States and it was very much in the interests of the United States that this should be so, so that Europe could make a greater contribution to its own defence. I said also that the reverse was true, so that therefore it was quite wrong to suggest that because in this instance we were being European this was anti-American.
He said that he thought this continuing campaign was against the national interest, he believed we should have stayed in the background and he would like us to withdraw. I was so stunned by this that I turned to the assembled company and said, 'Are you writing all this down?' to which the Secretary of State replied, 'They understand what I am saying better than I do, probably.' I said that I was now confused because only that morning I had been told by another great department of state that what we were doing was in the national interest. He replied, 'Yes, I can understand, I can imagine which department that was, but I have to tell you that in my opinion what you are doing could be extremely damaging to you and your business.'
'He said he fully supported the attempt to put together a European solution but that the decision should be left to shareholders. I said we were fully in agreement with that, provided they were in possess:on of all the facts. I said that we realised that we were on a tightrope between two departments of state and between trusted friends and collaborators on both sides of the Atlantic. Nevertheless, we firmly believed that the way ahead for the aerospace industry of the UK was primarily through collaborative arrangements with the Europeans. We parted on this note and with a final reminder, looking at me fixedly, that the DTI was our sponsoring department. The whole meeting was conducted in what I can only describe as an unpleasant atmosphere.'
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
127 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 17, 1986
The Day in Politics: Brittan acted like mafia - Kinnock / Westland helicopter affair
BYLINE: By ALAN TRAVIS
LENGTH: 794 words
Mr Leon Brittan, the Trade Secretary, had acted more like the mafia than a minister in his meeting with Sir Raymond Lygo, the chief executive of British Aerospace, Mr Neil Kinnock, the Labour leader, claimed at Prime Minister's question time in the Commons yesterday.
The Government tried to divert further attacks over the Westland affair at Westminster yesterday by saying that there had been a misunderstanding and a genuine difference of recollection over the crucial meeting on January 8. At the meeting it is alleged that Mr Brittan told Mr Raymond Lygo that British Aerospace should withdraw from the European consortium as it was against the national interest, a charge which the Government denies.
There was also a further open clash at question time yesterday between Mrs. Thatcher and Mr Michael Heseltine as he struggled with the new constraints of being a backbencher in his attempt to prise further information about cabinet committees and Westland from the Prime Minister.
The Prime Minister then faced a question from Mr Heseltine (C Henley). He asked her if, after Mr Brittan's comments on Wednesday night about his support for a European minority shareholding in Westland on October 17, would it now be in order, as Mr Brittan had quoted from the minutes of the meeting on October 4 and 17, for him to add a few words of his own?
Mrs Thatcher replied that matters of order were not for her. She said she was not certain whether Mr Brittan had quoted directly from the document.' He gave the gist and I am not certain whether he quoted directly.' It is the convention of the Commons that if a minister quotes from a document - in this case a cabinet minute - that the full document is published.
Mr Heseltine tried to ask the question again, apparently unaware that backbenchers only get one chance during question time.
Mr Kinnock concentrated his attention on the meeting between Mr Brittan and Sir Raymond Lygo.' Given the closeness and the frequency of the contacts between Sir Raymond Lygo and the US aerospace industry does she not think he was the last to be advised by Leon Brittan?' he asked.
'Does that not make the excuse offered by him a bit thin? Was not the real purpose of this meeting not to advise but to menace?'
Mrs Thatcher said that nobody would ever accuse Sir Raymond Lygo of being anti-American in any way. Mr Brittan had given his own account and she had nothing to add to it.
Mr Kinnock asked: 'Will she answer the question evaded yesterday by both her and Leon Brittan? Can she think of any possible reason whatsoever why Sir Raymond Lygo should falsify the words of their meeting on January 8. Is there a feasible reason why Sir Raymond Lygo should be told by Leon Brittan that 'what you are doing is extremely damaging to your business?' Is that not more mafia than ministerial?'
Mrs Thatcher said that nobody on the government side was accusing anybody of falsifying any document.
Mr Kinnock said: 'We know that the stock in trade of this Government today is to suggest that there has been a misunderstanding. The quotes from Sir Raymond Lygo are so extensive and so detailed as to forbid the idea that any of this arises from a misunderstanding. Sir Raymond Lygo, within minutes of his departure, retold the story in full detail to the board of British Aerospace.'
Mrs Thatcher replied: Both accounts are out. I fully accept the account of my Rt Hon friend as the correct version of the meeting. It is not impossible for there to be genuine differences of recollection.'
Mr Michael Foot (Lab. Blaenau Gwent) asked about the 'notorious letter' sent by the Solicitor-General, Sir Patrick Mayhew to the former Defence Secretary. 'It does seem to involve the pursuit of a most vicious vendetta,' he said. Will she give an undertakin; that she will make a full report to the House when she discovers the culprit?'
Mrs Thatcher refused to give such an undertaking. 'The custom with regard to leak inquiries is that their outcome is not announced. That has been the traditional custom over the years.' she said.
Mr Heseltine, who had been meanwhile boiling over at his frustration of not getting his question answered, then rose on a point of order. He told the Speaker that he believed that Mrs Thatcher had misunderstood It is question and would it be possible for it to be answered now? 'It is relevant and it is urgent because events are taking place which could be influenced by the Prime Minister's reply.'
Mr Heseltine tried several times to plead for his question to be answered, but each time the Speaker refused, suggesting that he put his question at next Tuesday's question time or submit a written question which would be answered this morning.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
128 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 17, 1986
Europe best for Westland, say Tory MEPs / European Parliament votes for 'compromise' motion on troubled British helicopter maker
BYLINE: From DEREK BROWN
LENGTH: 307 words
DATELINE: STRASBOURG
Conservative Euro-MPs yesterday ignored the government line on the Westland crisis and voted overwhelmingly for the European rescue option.
Despite heavy pressure from Downing Street, only one Tory, Mr Bryan Cassidy, voted against. Two other noted supporters of Mrs Thatcher, Mr John Marshall and Mrs Sheila Faith, abstained.
Thirty-one Conservatives followed their pro-Community instincts and voted for the European Parliament 'compromise' motion backed by a range of parties, including Communists and Socialists.
The British Labour group, which on Wednesday derided the Conservatives for their alleged last minute wavering and kow-towing to the Government, was hopelessly split by the vote.
Eight Labour MEPs voted for the compromise motion, 14 against, and five abstained. The group leader, Mr Alf Lomas, claimed that there was no time to establish a common position on the compromise text, and that he had decided on a free vote. In fact, the text was being passed round the Strasbourg parliament press room on Tuesday.
Mr Lomas said that many members were deeply opposed to any EEC involvement in defence matters.
The European Parliament approved the compromise motion on Westland by a predictably handsome margin: 180 for, 20 against, and 17 abstentions.
The resolution strays deeply into defence and security issues which are outside the competence of the EEC. It notes that 'the Community's security depends on there being a strong European pillar as well as an American pillar of the Atlantic alliance' and calls for 'increasing independence from US industrial control.'
Several Conservatives had been disquieted by the implied anti-US bias of the latter phrase. But they followed the line taken by several speakers in the debate, that to be pro-European was not necessarily to be anti-American.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
129 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 16, 1986
Computer Guardian: Floating off into the sunrise / US Espex floating marketing project for technology
BYLINE: By GORDON BLACK
LENGTH: 514 words
American technology will be exhibited aboard a former West German cruise ship to embark on a tour of developing countries later this year. The 300 foot ship has been renamed MS Expex, and refitted ready for a planned summer departure from Los Angeles. During an 18-month voyage the vessel will call at 50 ports in South America, Africa, Southern Europe and the Middle East.
Although floating exhibition halls are nothing new, the ship is only a part of Project Expex dreamed up by an Iranian-born businessman, Dr Javid Jalali. He claims the project will provide access to an export market of dollars 250 billion for many small and medium-sized US concerns, as well as help equip less sophisticated countries.
Emphasis for the privately-financed venture is on technology appropriate to users in such countries as Venezuela. Ghana, Turkey and Egypt. No military equipment will be featured.
'The products we have were designed and chosen to help those countries develop,' says Jalali, project president. 'It is high technology - but it will help them become more efficient.'
The aim is to lay foundations for future exports through the establishment of distribution channels rather than capture quick sales. No products will be sold directly from the ship, but sales, service and technical training will be provided by Expex staff.
Total capital behind the venture is dollars 25 millions, according to Jalali, who has been planning the export mission for five years. Each port visit will be six to eight weeks, with the flexibility of extending the itinerary.
The range of products to be carried aboard will encompass agriculture, transport, food processing, telecommunications, machine tools and electronic office equipment. No competing products will be carried. One result of not permitting competitors on board is that Osborne Computer Corporation, the outfit created following the collapse of the one formed by Englishman Adam Osborne, has teamed up with two other manufacturers. The joint venture - and expected outright merger - of Osborne with Sona Computers Inc, and Colby computer, will provide a range of products compatible with most systems, including IBM and Apple.
Typical cost of taking part in Expex is dollars 40 per port, although Osborne and its partners expect to pay dollars 150,000.
'Over 50 ports of call that is a particularly low amount,' says Osborne president Ron Brown, who believes the venture offers 'tremendous potential.'
So far around 35 companies have signed, but the trip will only become viable when there are 150 participants. Currently talks involve companies from South Korea, China, and Britain, as well as further US manufacturers.
The US Department of Commerce has endorsed the project, pledging embassy help at the various ports of call. Last year the project won the Islamic Trade Award given by the Madrid-based Centre Africano, Sales generated by the ship will continue to be routed through the project's offices in Long Beach, California, yielding a commission of between 7.5 and 20 per cent.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
130 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 16, 1986
Computer Guardian: Hot air alone will not keep European computing alive / The Eureka project and the information technology industry
BYLINE: By RALPH CORNES
LENGTH: 1350 words
The Eureka project, initiated by the French, is primarily intended to do something about the European technology gap. Eighteen countries, including the members of the EEC, are supposed to produce joint high-tech products to compete with the US and Japan. But because Eureka is still in a state of flux, it is worthwhile making constructive points about how it might relate to Information Technology.
The very first point is that to fund innovation which is not focused on a specific objective is a waste of time and scarce resources. The research must be a means to an end, and the end must be defined.
The Americans in the SDI project have an end in view, and everything in the R & D sphere must work towards it. As far as IT in Europe is concerned, there also needs to be a series of concrete final objectives towards which the projects should progress. Broad waffly statements about making Europe competitive in technology serve no purpose at all, and this is the first worry.
Listening to talk about Eureka by some of the people directly involved, one wonders if they see any difference between delimiting hard objectives and issuing large statements about marching hand-in-hand to a marvellous technological future.
Is it intended that Europe should enter the super-computer game? Do we want a European chip manufacturing industry? Is it desirable that Europe should be an innovator in office automation and personal computing? Are we to have a policy on electronic publishing? The list of questions is lengthy but finite and changeable, so that it needs constant updating. But it must be updated because, without a statement of intent which gives some indication of future markets, the field will be left to those organisations who know the game of subsidised research and cost-plus contacts.
A second cause for concern, as regards IT, is the emphasis on the subsidising of costs of research. The failure to see that an assured market for the final product is also essential, and sometimes all that is necessary. Some of the areas now designated for research in Eureka are areas where research was carried out years ago in Britain, usually just before the Americans stepped in and scooped the pot (flexible manufacturing, medical diagnostic kits, laser technology, vector computers). There is nothing in our genes or our stars which stops us commercialising technology successfully just the lack of an assured market.
In America SDI research will lead either to SDI projects or to SDI spin-offs, so that American firms know that their research will very probably produce a saleable commodity. The British delegates apparently have emphasised the importance of the market in Eureka meetings but, it seems, solely from the point of view of raising finance.
This is a second-class accountants' view of the function of the market, and while it is sometimes valid, it is only part of the story. If they had been the only people around a couple of hundred years ago the Industrial Revolution would never have happened. The economists' views, best expressed by Friedman and Hayek, is that the market also indicates priorities and potential. Additionally, classical economics tells you all about equilibriums but not very much about how they are reached, which is what Keynes had in mind when he remarked that in the long run we are all dead. Perhaps Keith Joseph should have required his civil servants to read about Gaming Theory as well as Hayek when he was at the DoI.
Innovation in the States may or may not be initially financed by the market (a large chunk rides on the back of defence contracts), but it is always judged by the market. If it falls it dies, and conversely if it succeeds it makes a fortune.
As a result, this market is used in America to guide and select the lines of innovation to be followed. Which is basically why they corner the market in new technology.
So, rather than merely preach about the need for market forces to operate in IT, the need is for the British Government to lay the basis for an assured market for the products of the research. This it can do by placing orders. If you want Britain to have the best text-editing software in the world in 1986, you have only to announce that the Inland Revenue will be purchasing pounds 5 million of text-editing software by open tender in 1987 with at least a 60 per cent British content. The British Government should propose the establishing of a European-wide market, and most importantly the placing of assured orders in that market by the public sectors of the eighteen countries involved.
We must also insist on a mechanism for enforcing standards, especially in the various public sectors. IT needs European market which it can get only if there are common standards operating across Europe.
It standards are both technical and legal. We cannot have a single European market when the laws for data protection, privacy, the status of value added services, competition with State services, and so on, vary across Europe. One would like to see a british initiative in introducing a set of homogenous legal standards. Politicians should take policy decisions, that is what they are there for. And legal standards will arrive in order of magnitude quicker if there is a top-down statement of intent to have them operational by a particular date.
As regards technical standards, we return to the idea of an assured market for the results of the research. There should be a statement by the governments of all 18 participating countries that they will permit purchase in the public sector only of those products that meet European standards. And a good place to start is with the proposed education standards in the Olivetti, Acorn, Thompson project for microcomputers.
A further standards requirement should be to stipulate that all equipment and products be transparent to all other equipment. That means, in plain English, that one should be able to take information from one computer and process it automatically on another, and likewise one should be able to run all programs on any computer that is big enough to take them. The degree to which this is feasible is a matter for the technical experts to thrash out among themselves. The statement of intent, however, is concerned with policy and is therefore a matter for the politicians.
The objects of this rule is twofold. First, it is a highly desirable objective in itself, which the market will never implement on its own (incidentally as illustrated by gaming theory). Secondly, it ensures that in any European market the European supplier is operating on equal terms with foreign competition. The Americans can no longer set de facto standards merely because of their size, and thus they lose advantages of size.
The one completely negative impression obtained from the list of initial Eureka projects was the small scale of British involvement. The list of participants and their relative involvement is certainly an eye-opener to anyone who still fondly imagines that Britain is at the forefront of European engineering and technology. We have one tiny project in medicine, one small project in micro-computers, probably by the grace of Olivetti and one medium project where we form part of a 15 member project drawn from across Europe.
It may be that the entry fee to Eureka is that price Britain will have to pay if we are to have an IT industry in the 1990s. One of today's shocking facts is how quickly our undisputed pre-eminence in Europe in hardware and software has been eroded. We are still with the leaders, but will not be for much longer unless we hop on to the European bus. We are already making the transition from state-of-the-art to body-shopping for much of our foreign work, and unless we take care we will shortly become the programming coolies of Europe.
The original Eureka was when a single man of genius went running down the street surrounded by a shower of drips. Hopefully the choice of name for this technology programme was unfortunate rather than prophetic.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
131 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 16, 1986
The Markets: Shares steady but business kept in check / Various market reports
LENGTH: 603 words
Stock markets gave a steadier performance. The Financial Times Ordinary Share index managed to recover a handful of the 25 points it had lost over the first two days of the account when prices had been smitten by interest rate paranoia. The swiftness and determination of the Bank of England's move on Tuesday to dispel the immediate base rate panic had convinced the market that at least there would be no rise in rates this side of next weekend's meeting of the Group of Five finance ministers.
Nevertheless, trading rates in the money markets continued to reflect concern that a considerable upside risk remains for the days and weeks ahead. This contributed to a fairly tight rein maintained on general investment activity. Another major constraint upon volume of business was the unremitting threat to the Cabinet from the Westland affair and the latest exchange of letters with British Aerospace. With apparent stalemate between the contending share stakes ahead of Friday's postponed meeting of Westland shareholders, the price of Westland shares came off 4p to 94p.
Gilt-edged securities had tried to stage a modest rally in the early part of the day. This was undermined as the revelations of the British Aerospace letters made the situation look even more menacing for Mr Leon Brittan's position in the government. By the close of the 'house,' few gilt-edged loans retained more than 1/8 of rises that had at one stage stretched to around 3/8.
Back among equities, oils edged a little higher when crude prices appeared less unstable in the morning, but as spot markets started to slip again, share prices lost their firmness. Many industrial and commercial sectors were highlighted by speculative features.
In tobaccos, for instance, the possibility that Hanson Trust will put in a bigger bid and sabotage the United Biscuits merger prodded the Imperial Group price up to 250p, a gain of 8p. Among electronics, the risk of a monopolies reference for the General Electric bid clipped 6p from Plessey at 162p.
Drinks, textiles, and engineerings were other sectors where bid speculation induced eye-catching movements. Leisure shares found buyers going for some of the holiday package companies.
Main changes: GKN 266p up 7p; BP 545p up 7p; Imperial Group 250p up 8p; Metal Box 563p up 13p; Plessey 162p dn 6p; Traf. House 322p up 4p; Westland 91p dn 4p; TI Group 369p up 16p.
Turnover for January 14 was: Number of bargains 21,562 equity value pounds 520,142 million.
TOKYO - Closed.
HONG KONG - Share prices rallied from their intraday lows to close mixed in moderate trading. Brokers said the market lacked real incentives. A series of minor rumours, including one about the health of chinese leader Deng Xiaoping, swept through the market but were quickly dismissed. Hang Seng Index: 1783.66 (1782.23).
FRANKFURT - Share prices rose sharply Wednesday on the Frankfurt Stock Exchange as West German stocks extended their record rally. The Commerzbank index rose 55.7 points from Tuesday's record reading to a new high water mark of 2,161.8.
PARIS - French stocks closed higher in active trading. The general market indicator finished the session at its intraday high, up 0.95 per cent from Tuesday. Advances led declines 111 to 59, with 19 French stocks unchanged.
Money markets: Period rates, after a few nervous twitches, finished on an easier note, still responding to the Bank of England's move yesterday to stabilise the market, and helped finally by US Treasury Secretary Bakers' call to the G-5 nations to consider a coordinated cut in interest rates.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
132 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 16, 1986
Nader tries to force Lloyd's out of US / Campaign by American consumer advocate
BYLINE: By PETER RODGERS, City Editor
LENGTH: 639 words
A campaign to force Lloyd's out 0f the American reinsurance market by 1990 was launched in London yesterday by American consumer advocate Mr Ralph Nader.
Mr Nader fiercely criticised the present standards of regulation and disclosure at Lloyd's, an attack which comes in the middle of a political row in the Commons over whether the insurance market should be brought within the financial services bill and only days after an inquiry was set up by the government to look into the workings of the 1982 act which now governs Lloyd's.
Mr Nader accused Lloyd's of using its powerful role in the reinsurance market to help push up US insurance rates by as much as 1,000 per cent and to deny cover to organisations ranging from city governments to day care centres and fishing fleets, forcing some out of business.
The Lloyd's objective, Mr Nadar claimed, was to stampede the US into making a 'draconian reduction in the rights of injured people in our country. They are particularly focusing on toxic waste exposure and they want to secure a curtailment of the rights of victims.'
He added that it was 'territorial imperialism by Lloyd's that is offensive almost beyond the power of words to describe,' and it was also 'highly provocative, highly insulting to our country.'
Mr Nader accused Lloyd's of being virtually unregulated and said that 'if the British Government wants to maintain the balance of payments contribution to invisible exports of Lloyd's of London it had better start regulating it and it had better begin to require more disclosure to the public of information, because the 1982 act is not working for insurers in the USA.'
Lloyd's deputy chairman Mr Murray Lawrence fought back in a speech in New York in which he said that Lloyd's broke even or made a profit on eight of its nine accounts, but made an underwriting loss of dollars 425 million on income of only dollars 346 million on the ninth, the vast majority of which was US business.
Names had made considerable losses and removed support from underwriters of syndicates who were forced to cease trading. 'Ask them if it Has all some form of sick joke that backfired,' said Mr Murray, who also dismissed as wrong the allegation that Lloyd's was unregulated in the US.
He added that 'no one in a free country can be forced to write business he does not want to' and many names at Lloyd's were asking why they should continue with general liability insurance. Lloyd's was trying to solve a desperate problem, he said.
In recent years, due 'in no small part' to the internal scandals that have plagued Lloyd's, its role had become more of a 'funny money game,' said Mr Nader. He was launching the campaign at a press conference in London alongside Mr Robert Hunter, head of the US National Insurance Consumer Organisation and a former Federal Insurance Administrator under Presidents Ford and Carter, who said he had made a complaint to the US Justice Department about Lloyd's.
Mr Hunter also said that the US Federal Trade Commission was doing a study of Lloyd's. A Lloyd's spokesman was adamant last night that the FTC had said that there was no investigation.
Mr Hunter, who compared Lloyd's with the Opec oil producers' organisation in the way it 'controlled the flow to America of reinsurance,' said that the campaign called for insurance independence by 1990 'in which we will phase Lloyd's and other reinsurers, if not out, down to a manageable level.'
He called for a programme of federal reinsurance for distress cases and for tax incentives for American-regulated American insurance firms to take up the business.
Suspended Lloyd's underwriter Mr Ian Posgate has been given until January 29 to make further representations to Lloyd's about why he should be accepted again as an active underwriter.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
133 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 16, 1986
Financial Notebook: When Congress's blood is up, worldwide interest rates could be in for a fall
BYLINE: Edited By HAMISH McRAE
LENGTH: 804 words
Just at the moment our own interest rates are going up it seems that there might be a coordinated fall in interest rates world-wide.
Or at least that is apparently what the American Treasury will seek at the forthcoming Group of Five meeting which takes place in London next Sunday. The source is the German Economics Minister, Martin Bangemann, who let this particular cat out of the bag yesterday following a meeting in Washington with the US Treasury Secretary, James Baker. Secretary Baker 'is very much interested in having everybody lower interest rates. He wants that to be discussed and possibly decided' at the G5 meeting, he said.
Mr Bangemann went on to say that such an effort might succeed if the US were to take additional steps to reduce her own interest rates by reducing her budget deficit.
There was no official confirmation yesterday from the US Treasury that it was thinking on these lines, and here in London the official position remains that the finance ministers want to get back to the informal get togethers that they used to have before last year, rather than have another of the high-profile meetings, followed by public statements, like the Plaza accord last September.
But German assessment of the US position fits. Official US forecasts of interest rates do point to a further fall in rates there. And the mood towards the US budget deficit has changed radically in the last couple of months.
By coincidence yesterday we had some new information on the US economy, the new budget document produced jointly by the US Budget Office and the US Congressional Budget Office. Both sets of forecasts are relatively optimistic about US economic growth this year, with the Administration's version forecasting 4 per cent growth through the first three quarters of the year.
But they are also relatively optimistic about interest rates, with the Treasury version expecting the three month treasury bill rate at 7.3 per cent average for the fiscal year (to November). At present the rate is a touch under 8 per cent so to meet the forecast there is clearly some way to go.
So the official stance is very much to call for some further fall in rates - something which is completely consistent with the Baker view as reported by the German.
But that is the Treasury view. What about the view of the Federal Reserve? Here there is no doubt that its chairman, Paul Volcker is in a tight position, under pressure both from some fellow board members and from the Administration. It is an election year in the US which always increases the pressure on the Fed not to do anything which might rock the political boat.
What about the third creature in the US interest rate jungle, the perception of the financial markets, in particular towards the budget deficit?
Perhaps all that is needed is a conviction that something has changed. Has it? It depends on whether you look at the reality of the deficit or the action being taken. The reality is not just as bad as ever: it is worse. Yesterday the new budget deficit forecast for this fiscal year to November was revised upwards to dollars 220 billion.
But the action is equally impressive. The new Gramm-Rudman amendment, just passed by Congress, and which charts a path to a a balanced budget, has just led to the first round of mandatory spending cuts. These have been imposed across the board, thus cutting everything from the MX missile appropriation to military pensions for widows in New Hampshire. Observers feel that the rigour of these cuts is really quite remarkable. Congress's blood is up.
If the feeling grows, not just in US financial markets, but worldwide, that some sort of path towards much lower deficits is in place, then worldwide interest rate disarmament does become possible, even if the current numbers continue to look as they surely.
Where does this leave the group of five meeting? It does not really matter very much what they say after the meeting or indeed whether they say anything at all. The markets are sophisticated enough to seek action rather than words. But trying to establish some global path towards lower interest rates would give the finance ministers something to aim at.
They do not want too rapid a fall of the dollar at the moment, for varying reasons, even though on an 18-month view they would probably agree that the dollar is still some 15 per cent too high.
Looking at yesterday's sterling interest rates on the money market, it seems a bit absurd to be talking of a sharp downward break in global interest rates later this year. But sentiment can change very quickly, and the fact that some G5 members are openly talking about lower interest rates will of itself help change people's perceptions of What is a sensible interest rate and what is not.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
134 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 16, 1986
Lygo notes at DTI / Extracts from British Aerospace chief executive's minutes on Westand meeting with Trade and Industry Secretary Brittan
LENGTH: 802 words
Mr Brittan started thanking me for coming in to see him and telling me that he wanted to take this opportunity to express his concern at the way events were turning in the Westland saga, that up to quite recently British Aerospace had been taking a low profile within the Consortium arrangements but it had now become more vocal and up-front and he wanted to express to me his concern of the effect our campaign might have on UK business with the United States. He said that it placed him in a difficult position in that, when he was required to negotiate, as he had recently, increased steel quotas, it was imperitive that there were no implications of discriminating against the US or actions that could be construed as anti-American. Part of his job was to defend British industry. He wondered whether we had given consideration of the effects that our action might have on Airbus A320 sales in North America for example.
I said that we were very conscious of the difficulties that he was talking about through British Aerospace ... I had suggested to the Ministry of Defence that the original way in which the National Armaments Director's Agreement had been worded, was not conducive to free trade. It implied that they would only buy their helicopters from Europe. He interrupted me at this point to say that the National
Armaments Directors' Agreement had never been ratified, and that I was quite wrong to believe that it had been gratified. It had never been made Government policy.
I in turn said I understood this to be so, but was I not correct in saying that the Armament Directors had in fact signed such a document since I'd seen it? 'No, no' he said, 'I could show you the Cabinet minutes. It has never been agreed, it has never been agreed,' I passed on, Since there didn't seem to be much relevance in this conversation.
I said that he had to realise that not only was our major customer the Ministry of Defence, but also that we had very important contracts, Airbus, Tornado, European Fighter Aircraft, Trigat, etc., which all involved the same partners that we were dealing with in the Consortium. He said that he understood this but that sometimes one had to disagree with one's major customer if it was in the long term interest of the company, and he reminded me that the DTI was our sponsoring department and that he thought we should have discussed the matter with him and with the Department of Trade and Industry before we had proceeded to join the Consortium. I made no comment.
He went on to say that, when we had first become members of the Consortium, we had kept a fairly low profile, but now we appeared to be coming up-front and taking the lead, and he thought that this was not in our best interest. At this point I said that his own Permanent Under-Secretary, to whom I had reported all our actions on Monday, had congratulated me on the way in which I was attempting to cool the debate and keep it on commercial grounds. He made no comment.
I said that the Europeans naturally expected the British company, which was most experienced in aerospace business, to take the lead .. It was our view that a strong and united Western Europe with a strong defence industry was of great importance to the United States and it Was very much in the interests of the United States that this should be so, so that Europe could make a greater contribution to it's own defence. I said also that the reverse was true, so that therefore it was quite wrong to suggest that because in this instance we were being European, this was anti-American.
He said that he thought this continuing campaign was against the national interest. He believed we should have stayed in the background and he would like us to withdraw. I was so stunned by this that I turned to the assembled company and said: 'Are you writing all this down?' to which the Secretary of State replied: 'They understand what I am saying better than I do probably.' I said that I was now confused because only that morning I had been told by another great Department of State that what we were doing was in the national interest. He replied: 'Yes, I can understand, I can imagine which department that was, but I have to tell you that in my opinion what you are doing could be extremely damaging to you and your business.' He said he fully supported the attempt to put together a European solution but that the derision Should be left to shareholders. I said we were fully in agreement with that provided they were in possession of all the facts. I said that we realised that we were on a tightrope between two Departments of State and between trusted friends and collaborators on both sides of the Atlantic. The whole meeting was conducted in what I can only describe as an unpleasant atmosphere.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
135 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 16, 1986
The Westland dossier in full / Texts of letters and statements in the controversy over Britain's troubled helicopter maker
LENGTH: 3013 words
January 6: Letter from Sir Patrick Mayhew, Solicitor General, to Mr Michael Heseltine, Secretary of State for Defence. The leaking of this letter has been blamed on Mr Brittan or his officials?
I saw in the Times on Saturday the text of a letter you are reported to have sent to the Managing Director of Lloyd's Merchant Bank. In the course of your answer to the third question asked by Mr Horne, concerning the indications received by Her Majesty's Government from 'European governments and companies' as to the project which 'may be lost to Westland if the United Technologies / Fiat proposals are accepted,' you state:
'There are indications available to HMG from both the other governments and the companies concerned that a Westland link with Sikorsky/Fiat would be incompatible with participation by the company on behalf of the UK in the collaborative battlefield helicopter and NH90 projects.'
This sentence, when read with the rest of the paragraph (in which the defence ministers of four governments apart from the UK are referred to), necessarily implies that all the governments and all the companies involved in the collaborative battlefield helicopter and NH90 projects have given this indication to HMG.
The telegrams of December 17 from the Hague and of December 5 from Rome, and the record of your meeting with the West German Defence Minister in November which were available to me when I gave advice on December 31 to the Prime Minister on the text of her reply to Sir John Cuckney, do not seem to me to support a statement that all the governments and all the companies have indicated that a Westland link with Sikorsky/Fiat would be incompatible with participation by that company in the projects. The documents I have seen contain evidence that the Netherlands' Defence Secretary, the German Defence Minister and the Chairman of Agusta have commented to the knowledge of HMG in various ways on adverse consequences which may flow from a decision to accept the Sikorsky offer. (In addition to Agusta, the documents disclose that Aerospatiale and MBB are additionally involved in the projects).
It is foreseeable that your letter will be relied upon by the Westland board and its shareholders. Consistently with the advice I gave to the Prime Minister on December 31, the Government in such circumstances is under a duty not to give information which is incomplete or inaccurate in any material particular.
On the basis of the information contained in the documents to which I have referred, which I emphasise are all that I have seen, the sentence in your letter to Mr Horne does in my opinion contain material inaccuracies in the respects I have mentioned, and I therefore must advise that you should write again to Mr Horne correcting the inaccuracies.
I am copying this letter to the Prime Minister and to the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, Secretary of State for Trade and Industry and the Chief Secretary of the Treasury.
January 10: Department of Trade and Industry record of the meeting between Sir Raymond Lygo, Chief Executive of British Aerospace, and Mr Leon Brittan, Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, as sent from Mr Brittan's Private Secretary to the Private Secretary of Mr Geoffrey Pattie, Minister for Information Technology.
On January 8 the Secretary of State took the opportunity of Sir Raymond Lygo's meeting with your Minister to have a few words with Sir Raymond. Your Minister, Mr Macdonald and Mr Michell were present.
2. The Secretary of State began by saying that there had been one aspect of the Westland issue that had been of particular concern to him as the sponsoring Minister. This concerned the impact on potential sales to the US of the A320. The Secretary of State said that whilst the Government's position was that it was a matter for the company to decide what course to follow, he himself had no view on the merits of the two offers. However, the nature of the campaigning and the overtones of anti-American sentiment were, in the Secretary of State's view, particularly damaging and potentially could fuel protectionist sentiment in the US. Had such views been expressed earlier they would undoubtedly have hindered the Secretary of State's efforts in the difficult and complex negotiations with the United States Trade Representative concerning semifinished steel products.
3. Sir Raymond understood the Secretary of State's concern. British Aerospace's interest was to ensure that Westland remained a potential purchaser of material from his company. In response to Sir Raymond's comment that the National Armaments Directors recommendation remained on the table the Secretary of State said that the Government's decision was clear. Unless the European offer had been acceptable to the Westland board by December 13, the Government was not bound by the NAD recommendation. This was now the position and had been made perfectly clear in the Secretary of State's statement to the House.
4. The Secretary of State said that it might have been helpful if British Aerospace had spoken to him initially. However having not done so and, British Aerospace having taken a commercial decision to participate in the European Consortium, the Secretary of State took no view on that position. Nonetheless he hoped the way in which the negotiations were conducted would not damage British Aerospace's wider commercial interest especially in the US. For example any challenge Which implied that acceptance of the Sikorsky/Fiat proposal would result in a loss of independent design capability at Westland raised the profile of the discussions and implied an anti-US attitude.
5. Sir Raymond said that he hoped that discussions with Westland that evening would be on a true commercial basis. An attempt would be made by both sides to lower the temperature at this meeting. Indeed Sir Brian Hayes had himself congratulated Sir Raymond on his success in lowering the temperature at previous meetings. At the discussion later that evening British Aerospace would probably make a further improvement in the European offer. In order to resolve a shortage of engineering capability at British Aerospace some 100 engineers work per annum could be made available to Westland. Such an offer from British Aerospace would only be made if Westland had the capability to undertake the high quality work involved.
6. Sir Raymond returned to the question of anti-American sentiment. British Aerospace Inc. (their US subsidiary had expressed great concern about their US business being harmed. The Secretary of State responded by saying that he was ready to act immediately in defending British Aerospace's interest. He repeated, however, that, in his view, it was much more effective if the current round of discussions was not interpreted as being anti-American in sentiment.
7. Sir Raymond commented that the Ministry of Defence was British Aerospace's biggest single customer. He also emphasised that British Aerospace was considerably committed to collaborate venture with MBB and Aerospatiale. Someone had needed to take the lead in establishing the European Consortium and British Aerospace would have been regarded as letting down their European collaborators if they had not done so. Sir Raymond was fully aware of the dangers and hoped that he was capable of managing this delicate balancing act.
8. The Secretary of State commented that customers could not dictate the extent of the enthusiasm with which any particular case might be put. British Aerospace had relations with this department also. Sir Raymond took this point.
9. The Secretary of State said that it was not in the national interest that the present uncertainty involving Westland should drag on. Sir Raymond said that he had heard the same message elsewhere but questioned what was the national interest. Shareholders needed to have full information on which to base their decisions.
10. The meeting concluded with Sir Raymond observing that notes had been taken of the discussion.
January 13: Letter from Sir Austin Pearce, Chairman of British Aerospace, to the Prime Minister.
You should be aware that while visiting Mr Pattie to discuss Airbus business on Wednesday, January 8, preparatory to meeting in Munich on January 9, Sir Raymond Lygo, my Chief Executive, had an impromptu meeting with Mr Leon Brittan in the Department of Trade and Industry at 1700 hrs. The meeting was at the Secretary of State's request, in the presence of Mr Geoffrey Pattie, Mr Macdonald, department, as well as his Private Secretary.
Sir Raymond returned directly to a special board meeting of British Aerospace which was in progress and made a full report of his conversation to the board. He also wrote down all the salient points that had been made to him. His report stated that the following points were specifically covered by the Secretary of State:
1. Expressed a view that as the Department of Trade and Industry were our sponsoring department we should have consulted with his department before we entered the consortium.
2. To inquire whether we had fully considered the effect our actions might have on our American business and in particular on the A320 and his concern about the effect on Anglo-American business that our actions might be having.
3. His concern at the consortium leadership role we appeared to be adopting.
4. That the decision should be left to the shareholders alone.
5. That the agreement of the National Armaments Directors had never been endorsed by Government and that he could prove this by showing Sir Raymond the minutes of the meetings which discussed it.
6. That what we were doing was not in the national interest.
7. That we should withdraw.
A full transcript of Sir Raymond's account of the proceedings is available if you would wish to see it. At the end of his board statement, Sir Raymond asked that he be accorded the protection of the board since the matter in which he had been nominated as the spokesman was becoming personalised and he was most unhappy with the situation. You should be aware that in his verbal reply to the Secretary of State, Sir Raymond made the following points:
1. That the board had considered fully the implications of the effects on our American trade; that we had actually suggested that some of the words originally used in the National Armament Directors' agreement be amended to avoid implying that the action was protectionist.
2. That Sir Raymond had gone out of his way at the consortium's press conference to make a lengthy statement to one of the American correspondents there to the effect that he wished that the debate would not be trivialised to the extent of portraying the European Consortium as being anti-American because it was not in the interests of the US to have a weak defence industry in Europe; quite the reverse, and to be Pro-European did not mean that one had to be anti-American. In fact, the reverse was true.
3. That in his own case he was married to an American, had spent many happy years' in the US and served in the US Navy which he suspects was a greater involvement in the US than anybody present : that meeting, and the last person that could be accused of being anti-American, in his view, was himself.
4. That he found the reference to the national interest confusing, since we had been told by another great department of state that what British Aerospace were doing was in the national interest.
5. That our European partners had a natural expectation that British Aerospace, the most experienced, should lead their consortium in the attempt to persuade the shareholders of Westlands that their proposals were genuine and better.
6. That British Aerospace and the consortium were very content to let the shareholders decide, so long as they were given the facts.
7. That the Ministry of Defence was British Aerospace's largest customer and that the partners involved in the consortium were the same partners in our most important programmes, Airbus, the European Fighter programme, the Trigat programme and Tornado.
In view of the serious nature of the complaints that had been made against the attitude of British Aerospace, it was considered important that our British partner GEC should be informed of what had taken place. Also, since one of the conditions precedent set before we joined the consortium was being questioned, i. e. the agreement of the National Armaments Directors, that the Department of Defence, through the Permanent Under-Secretary should be approached to learn whether, understand was correct. At no time was any discussion about the meeting held with Mr Michael Heseltine.
You should also be aware that on December 11, I was approached by Mr Macdonald of the Department of Trade and Industry who expressed the Department's concern that British Aerospace had not consulted the sponsoring department, the DTI, before getting involved with the European Consortium. I reminded him of the meetings with Sir Basil Blackwell former (Chairman of Westland! on May 15 and Sir John Cuckney $ Chairman of Westland! on July 15 when British Aerospace had stated its interest in ensuring the survival of Westlands and that these conversations had been reported to Mr Tebbit, Mr Pattie and Sir Brian Hayes $ Joint Permanent Secretary, DTI!. It was indicated to me that Mr Brittan was very concerned at the developments and I therefore requested a meeting with him which was held on December 13 at which I stated that British Aerospace as a fully privatised company had considered the consortium proposal on a commercial basis and since the DTI had not responded in any way to British Aerospace's expressed interest in the Westland survival, that British Aerospace should proceed on the basis of its commercial interests and these took into account the US relationships for both British Aerospace and Airbus Industrie.
This discussion covered some of the facts as mentioned above but not as pointedly as were made to Sir Raymond. We were thus aware of the arguments being made by the DTI, but believed that the shareholders of Westlands should decide. That is still our position.
I have no doubt that Sir Raymond's account of the events so fresh in his memory and recounted to the board so soon after the event with the assistance of notes made immediately after that meeting was substantially correct, and are borne out by much other information that is coming to light. So far we have refused to make any public comment.
The meeting took place immediately following a discussion Sir Raymond was having with Mr Pattie on Airbus Industrie's proposals for a new programme. The connection is worrying to say the least. Whatever the words used were meant to convey, the message was perfectly clear. I would therefore ask you to take this letter into account in any further exchanges that might take place, or in any further statements that might be made by the Government, in order to avoid further embarrassment.
Please be assured that we have absolutely no desire to embarrass you, and much regret that you have become involved in what should have been a purely commercial discussion and decision-making process. Nevertheless, I think it is important that you should understand the position of British Aerospace.
This letter is addressed to you and is not being copied to any other party. January 15: Prime Minister's reply to Sir Austin Pearce
Thank you for your letter of January 13 about the meeting at the Department of Trade and Industry on January 8.
You will have read Leon Brittan's statement in the House on Monday in which he gave his recollection, which was shared by the Ministers and officials present, of that meeting. You were kind enough to send me a copy of Sir Raymond's account of the proceedings (which I understand that you are not prepared to have published) and I am sending you with this letter a copy of the record of the meeting taken by the Department of Trade and Industry, which will be published.
Let me emphasise that we are pleased that the Westland Board has enjoyed a choice of offer. As I have told the House of Commons, Westland is a private sector public limited company and the company's decision on its future is a matter of commercial judgment for its directors, and ultimately its shareholders. That remains our policy.
Finally, let me assure you, as I assured Sir John Cuckney in my published letter of January 1, that whichever of the two proposals currently under consideration the company chooses to accept, the Government would continue to support Westland's wish to participate in European collaborative projects and would resist to the best of its ability attempts by others to discriminate against Westlands.
Thank you for agreeing that your letter can be published since it has become a public issue. I am publishing this reply.
January 15: Sir Austin Pearce to the Prime Minister
It is evident that there are two different recollections of what was said at the meetings. It is our hope that we will now be able to concentrate on the important issues concerning the future of Westland plc.
January 15: Statement by Mr Geoffrey Pattie, Minister for Information Technology present at the Lygo-Brittan meeting
I agree that the official record represents an accurate account of what happened at the meeting between the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry and Sir Raymond Lygo on Wednesday, January 8.
Referring to Sir Raymond Lygo's account of the meeting he said: On point seven, at no time in the meeting was it said that British Aerospace should withdraw from the European Consortium. On point six, it was not said that British Aerospace's involvement in either consortium was not in the national interest, but that a continuation of the uncertainty over Westland's future was not in the national interest, particularly where sales by British Aerospace and others to the US were concerned.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
136 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 16, 1986
Japan and Russia in quarrel over armaments
BYLINE: From ROBERT WHYMANT
LENGTH: 596 words
DATELINE: TOKYO
The foreign ministers of Japan and the Soviet Union cancelled the speeches they were to have given at a banquet last night, after talks in which each rejected the other's position of armaments.
A spokesman for Japan's Foreign Ministry did not say why Mr Eduard Shevardnadze and Mr Shintaro Abe did not speak at the welcoming dinner for the visitor from Moscow, But he said they did exchange toasts.
The banquet followed 2 1/2 hours of talks, and violence by ultra-rightists protesting against the first top-level dialogue between the two countries since Moscow sent forces to Afghanistan in 1979.
Earlier, Mr Shevardnadze had warned Japan to beware of joining the US strategic defence initiative, which he denounced as an extension of the arms race.
Mr Abe told Mr Shevardnadze that his government was studying whether to join in the research phase of SDI and would make up its mind independently.
During their first round of talks, the foreign ministers also discussed overall, East-West relations, including arms control. Mr Abe requested the Soviet Union to reduce its military arsenal in the Far East as a step to reducing tension.
The long-postponed talks began on a genial note, with Mr Shevardnadze remarking that it was 'coming of age' holiday in Japan on Wednesday, and congratulating those young people attaining adulthood. In an arrival statement he said that he came to Tokyo with strong hopes for the two countries to become good neighbours, and that a 'wind of change' would emerge.
Officials here are cautiously refraining from forecasting any substantial progress, pointing out that Mr Shevardnadze's trip is in itself the most important development in Japanese-Soviet relations for many years.
The key matter in the renewed dialogue is whether the two countries can agree to proceed with talks on the conclusion of a peace treaty. This should become clear in today's talks, when Mr Abe is certain to raise the territorial issue, officials said. The disputed islands - Etorofu, Kunashiri, Habomai, and Shikotan - were annexed by the Soviet Union after the second world war and control the approaches to Vladivostok and Russia's outlet to the Pacific, so it is clearly unrealistic for Japan, which provides forward bases for the Pentagon, to expect Moscow to hand them back.
The Soviet Union remains the only one of the Second World War allies with which Japan has not signed a peace treaty, though hostilities were formally ended by a joint declaration in 1956. Japan insists that a peace treaty cannot be signed unless Moscow returns the islands seized in the closing days of the war.
Japan waived its rights to the islands in the 1951 San Francisco peace treaty, but later sought to redefine the boundaries of the Kurile Islands, which it had renounced in the peace treaty. Moscow did make a concession in 1956, agreeing to return Habomai and Shikotan when a peace treaty was signed. But, under American pressure, Japan rejected the Soviet offer, and insisted on the return of all the disputed islands.
If Mr Shevardnadze is willing to discuss the issue at all, that would be in itself a hopeful sign. For a decade the Russians have refused to recognise that a territorial issue exists.
Japan's strongest card is its ability to supply the Soviet Union with the capital and high technology which it needs. Officials here say that Mr Shevardnadze will try to use the visit to rebuild Moscow's economic ties with Japan.
The foreign ministers met amid tight security, with 6,000 riot police on full alert.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
137 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 16, 1986
Contadora peace plan revived / Plan to end central American conflict
BYLINE: From KATHRINE MATHESON
LENGTH: 207 words
DATELINE: GUATEMALA CITY
The Cantadora initiative by Latin American countries to end the conflict in Central America has been revived after long being given up for dead.
Latin American leaders meeting in Guatemala City for the inauguration of the new civilian President, Mr Vinicio Cerezo, took advantage of the gathering to talk about the region's problems.
The countries of Central America have approved what they call the Declaration of Guatemala, a document laying out peace proposals from the contadora plan proposes an end to foreign military involvement in Central America, this would include United States military support to El Salvador and rightwing Nicaraguan guerrillas, while Cuba would end its support for the Government of Nicaragua.
The revival of contadora after three years of seemingly fruitless discussions was given new impetus by a proposal from the new Guatemalan Christian Democrat Government to set up a Central American parliament for settling regional problems. President Cerezo has declared he will maintain his country's neutrality towards Nicaragua, a policy supported by the Guatemalan armed forces.
The President of Nicaragua, Mr Daniel Ortega, again called on the US to join in the contadora discussions.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
138 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 16, 1986
Contras may get extra finance / US President Reagan plans extra aid for Nicaraguan rebels
BYLINE: From DIANA PAGE
LENGTH: 353 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
President Reagan plans to send extra military aid to the rebels fighting the Nicaraguan Government if he can persuade Congress to agree.
White House officials are floating figures as high as dollars 100 million in preparation for their campaign on Capitol Hill after Congress reconvenes next week.
The last time unrestricted funds were channelled to the contra rebels in 1984 they received dollars 24 million and in 1985 Congress barely agreed to dollars 27 million in the category of humanitarian aid after Nicaragua's president, Mr Daniel Ortega made a sudden trip to Moscow.
It is estimated that the Soviet Union provided dollars 100 million in military aid to Nicaragua last year. The Reagan Administration believes Congress has turned further against the Nicaragua Government and will be swayed by the argument that tents, shoes, medicines and other non-lethal supplies are not enough to stop the spread of Marxism in Central America.
The State Department maintained that no decision has been made yet on renewing military aid, but a spokesman reiterated that the President ' has been consistent in supporting assistance to the democratic resistance in Nicaragua.'
When Congress insisted on humanitarian aid, the distribution of that aid was also taken out of the hands of the CIA and turned over to the State Department. The new package would be both overt and covert, with military aid going through the CIA.
The contra leader, Adolfo Calero, has told the Administration his men need dollars 100 million to carry on their fight against the Sandinista Government. The increase would be less substantial if, as Administration sources suggested, the proposal could be stretched out over two years and include the humanitarian aid within that figure.
The aim of new military aid appears to be keeping the contra forces in the field rather than gaining any ground against the Sandinista forces. Peace efforts in the region have stalled and barring any new initiative, the US policy seems to be to hammer away at the Sandinista Government, keeping the cost of its survival very high.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
139 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 16, 1986
Mediterranean tensions rise as carrier moves in / US aircraft carrier joins naval force off Libya
BYLINE: From ALEX BRUMMER
LENGTH: 455 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
Superpower tensions were rising in the Mediterranean yesterday as the US aircraft carrier Saratoga was ordered to join the Coral Sea battle group which has been conducting operations off the coast of Libya. At the same time the US let it be known that it is considering providing military escorts to US merchant ships in the Gulf.
This was accompanied by some new bellicose talk from the Secretary of State, Mr George Shultz, who said the US must have 'the stomach' to strike back at terrorism.
Sending the Saratoga from the Indian Ocean to the Mediterranean came in response to a build up of the Russian naval presence in the region. The Pentagon reported that several Soviet vessels 'are in radar picket and early warning stations in the central and eastern Mediterranean' in what the US perceives as an effort by Moscow to provide detailed information to the Libyan Government about the US military posture in the region.
Commenting on the naval movements, the Secretary of State, Mr Shultz said yesterday: 'As conditions tend to become a little more tense, we want to be sure we have adequate forces on hand.' The posturing by the US and Soviet navy's follows President Reagan's efforts to isolate Libya from the international community both economically and politically because of its alleged role in the terror campaign being conducted by Abu Nidal and other groups.
The first military confrontation between the US and Libya during the present bout of antagonism occurred on Monday when two Libyan MIG25 fighters intercepted a US navy surveillance aircraft conducting operations in the Mediterranean. The MIG's flew within 200 feet of the American plane before it called on assistance from US F-18 fighters scrambled from the Coral Sea.
The Pentagon said that the US navy EA-3 intelligence plane was flying a mission some 140 miles north of Libya when the incident occurred.
American defence officials say that Tripoli has been able to pinpoint American defence movements through the heightened intelligence support being provided by the Soviet Union. The flagship of the Russian fleet has reportedly been at dock in Tripoli.
The Saratoga was ordered to sail for the Mediterranean last week according to US officials. This movement was kept secret so as not to encourage speculation that the US was still contemplating a reprisal raid against Libya for its role in the Rome and Vienna airport attacks. The Saratoga, which is equipped with a range of modern missiles including Sea Sparrow and rockets, carries some 70 reconnaissance and attack aircraft. Together with the squadrons of planes aboard the Coral Sea, the US will soon have a large floating air force base in the Mediterranean.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
140 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 16, 1986
Star Wars cash is safe as Reagan slashes budget / US defence spending cuts
BYLINE: From our own Correspondent
LENGTH: 790 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
The Reagan administration disclosed last night that the Strategic Defence Initiative would be the only military expenditure programme left intact as a result of sweeping defence and other public spending cuts announced yesterday.
The usual January package of dollars 11.7 billion of public spending cuts was forced on the administration by the Gramm-Rudman balanced budget which will automatically force Congress and the White House to eliminate the US budget deficit by 1991. The enormity of that task was evident in new figures released yesterday by the White House which showed the 1986 deficit at dollars 220.9 billion.
Last night's cuts come less than a month before President Reagan sends Congress his budget for the 1987 financial year beginning in October. This is expected to outline some dollars 54 billion more of spending cuts, but to seek almost a doubling of spending on Star Wars. President Reagan appears determined that his investment in defensive weapons systems is not interrupted in the face of pressure from the Soviet Union.
The first round of Gramm-Rudman cuts is to be split between defence and domestic spending. This means that dollars 5.9 billion has been hacked from military spending plans ranging from pensions, to the MX Intercontinental Missile to research development and testing programmes.
Amid all this budgetary carnage, the only programme preserved in its entirety is Star Wars, where spending will be maintained at dollars 2.7 billion in 1986. Other defence spending programmes will have to take the brunt of the dollars 5.1 billion in defence cuts. The Air Force with dollars 1.8 billion cuts on everything from the strategic B-1B bomber to the F-18 Hornet fighter/bomber. The Navy will absorb dollars 1.6 billion in reductions and the Army, dollars 1.5 billion.
Funds will also be reduced for co-operative allied defence efforts. The biggest savings will come under the heading of operations and management, a change which is likely to lead to some loss of readiness of the American Forces. However, research, development and testing is also chopped by just under dollars 1 billion, with the notable exception of SDI.
On the domestic front there are cuts in a number of key social programmes - this includes a reduction in spending on health care for the elderly, a dollars 1.26 billion reduction in funding for the hard-pressed American farm industry, as well as new cuts in student grants.
The Internal Revenue Service, which had been seeking new funds to make the collection of taxes more efficient, will lose dollars 136.9 million. Foreign aid will be trimmed back with the exception of Israel which escapes because it received its dollars 1.2 billion in economic assistance at the start of the 1986 financial year in a lump sum - and it will be virtually impossible to claw any of this back.
Yesterday's document issued jointly by the Congressional Budget Office and the Office of Management and Budget, also contains a new series of economic forecasts for the US. It predicts that in the current three-month period the US economy will grow at a 4 per cent annual rate, unchanged from previous administration figures. However, the Congressional Budget Office sees some slippage in growth as the year progresses with the rate dropping to 3.3 per cent in the second quarter but turning up again to 3.4 per cent in the July to September period.
Inflation will remain under tight control during the year, rising just 3.3 per cent as measured by the consumer prices index. Unemployment will average some 6.9 per cent of the workforce which suggests there will be little drop from current levels despite continued economic expansion.
Details of the administration's plans for meeting the Gramm-Rudman targets were printed in yesterday's Federal Register.
Meanwhile, United Nations officials are gearing up for potentially sweeping austerity measures following cuts in US payments for the UN.
The immediate worry of UN officials is that they will not recover much of the dollars 35 million the US has withheld from its 1985 dues in preparation for the scheduled cuts.
In the extreme, the Secretary-General, Mr Perez de Cuellar, may have to call a special session of the General Assembly within the next two months to get approval for drastic budget cuts, according to the organisation's controller, Mr Richard Foran.
'The UN has had chronic financial difficulties but it has limped along. What was unexpected this year was the magnitude of this.' Mr Foran said
'If the cutbacks are large, then it will be very dramatic. What's going to happen in this organisation is that member states will have to come to grips very soon with how to manage.'
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
141 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 16, 1986
The Day in Politics: New Heseltine attacks against Thatcher / Westland helicopter affair
BYLINE: By ALAN TRAVIS
LENGTH: 4430 words
Mr Michael Heseltine renewed his attack on Mrs Thatcher yesterday in the House of Commons with fresh allegations of how the Government attempted to undermine his support as Defence Secretary for the European Consortium bid for Westland Helicopters.
Mr Heseltine told MPs that efforts were made to try and stop him appearing on the BBC radio World This Weekend programme on Sunday, December 21, to prevent him replying to attacks made upon him by Mr Leon Brittan, the Trade and Industry Secretary.
He said the Foreign Office had instructed the British ambassador in Rome to stop the Italian government sending any more letters in support of the European Consortium.
Mr Neil Kinnock, the Labour leader, who opened the Opposition-initiated debate, moved Labour's resolution calling for a committee of the Commons to be set up to establish a truthful record of the events surrounding Westland. He said the debate was about truth and the effect of Mrs Thatcher's domineering attitude in a system of Cabinet Government in a democratic country. He could not see how Mr Leon Brittan could bring himself to remain as Trade Secretary. 'The Prime Minister sits next to him as she did on Monday. Is he her agent or has he been acting on his own? That is the question which he must answer now.'
He said that in a system of Cabinet Government in a democratic country, it was 'simply not possible to dominate absolutely and continually by merit of argument, because there will be other good arguments.
'It is not possible to dominate always by patronage or even by petulance. To dominate absolutely it is obviously necessary for the domineering to employ other techniques. And plainly they include tactics which go beyond the bounds of clever politics and become systematic connivance against Cabinet colleagues.
'When those people will not concede to domination, when bullying will not make them back down they must be undermined, isolated, by-passed.
'Mrs Thatcher has had some success with this system of rule by over-rule because she has taken some pains to surround herself with rather jelloid colleagues. But sooner or later someone was bound to resist even to the point of resignation.
Mr Kinnock told MPs: 'And that day came last Thursday. In the course of that resignation, Mr Heseltine made some very serious charges about the conduct and course of the Government. These charges must be answered in detail by the Prime Minister today.'
Later Mr Kinnock claimed Mrs Thatcher 'set the Law Officers' upon Mr Heseltine when he decided to communicate with Lloyd's Merchant Bank.
'And then someone made sure that the Solicitor General's letter became public knowledge by leaking extracts. All activities which range from the extremely unconventional to the highly disreputable.
'The most flagrant breach of all was the leak of a letter from the Solicitor-General damaging to Heseltine's case. Again it stretches credulity to believe this was an accident and not authorised at a high level. Will Mrs Thatcher act against the culprit - or does she have one rule for top people and another for clerks?'
Mr Kinnock demanded that Mrs Thatcher answer the detailed charges made by Mr Heseltine and prove the truth by publishing the minutes of the meetings of October 4 and 18. He asked why the Prime Minister opposed so strongly the European Consortium and the recommendations of the European National Armaments Directors.
He asked whether or not the NAD's recommendation in favour of European helicopter procurement was merely not endorsed, 'as Downing Street would have one believe' or deliberately shelved, as Mr Heseltine argued. 'How was it adopted without the benefit of collective decision. How does the practice in the privacy of government match with the public declarations to this House and to the country?'
Mr Kinnock asked whether the Committee meeting of December 9 was inconclusive and meant that there should be further consideration of Westlands on December 13, or was it a conclusive meeting which resolved policy and merely set a deadline of December 13?
Mr Kinnock detailed other specific questions which he believed a committee of the House should examine for their truth.
But his speech centred on the letter from British Aerospace to Mrs Thatcher which substantiated claims, he said, that Mr Brittan had put heavy pressure on British Aerospace to withdraw from the European Consortium.
The letter, published yesterday lunchtime, said Mr Kinnock showed that Mr Brittan had done so on Monday, when he said that it would have been 'wholly artificial' if he did not see BAe chief executive Sir Raymond Lygo.
'I'll tell you what was wholly artificial, and that was the resume of events provided by the Secretary of State for Industry. That's what's artificial.' said the Labour leader.
Mr Kinnock read extracts from the British Aerospace letter and said that the Prime Minister's claim to share the recollections of the Trade Secretary meant that the chief executive of British Aerospace had fabricated his recollection of the meeting.
'Can anyone imagine a single plausible reason why Admiral Sir Raymond Lygo should fabricate those details? Can anyone imagine that a man of his known character and chief executive of a corporation that sells 80 per cent of its produce to the Government would leave the Department of Industry and minutes later bear false witness to his board in Pall Mall.'
The Labour leader said, 'Far be it from me to save the Secretary of State's career by calling for his resignation but frankly I say to him I cannot see how he can bring himself to stay. Only one question remains in my mind: is Mr Brittan a culprit or is he a victim?
'Mrs Thatcher sits next to him as she did on Monday. Is h e her agent or has he been acting on his own? That's the question which she must answer now.'
The Prime Minister said that she regretted that was a different recollection of what took place in the meeting between Mr Brittan and British Aerospace.
She reiterated that Mr Brittan had said he had no view on the merits of the two offers for Westland and it was in the national interest that the present uncertainty should not drag on.
Mrs Thatcher said Mr Heseltine, who had served in the Cabinet for over six-and-a-half years, had made accusations about what he considered to be the breakdown of constitutional government.
But before she answered that charge, Mrs Thatcher stated the principles on which she believed the Government had based its policy. 'The company and the Government's approach to it have been the subject of the most thorough collective consideration by ministers.' She said the Government gave full weight to defence implications of the company's future.
Mrs Thatcher then traced a chronology dating back 18 months of the conduct of the Westland affair. She said at the end of two Cabinet subcommittee meetings on the 5th and 6th of December a majority of ministers were ready to decide that the Government should reject the recommendation from the National Armaments Directors to leave Westland free to reach its own decision.
'But because a minority of ministers - including Mr Heseltine - felt very strongly about the matter, I decided that a further discussion must be held in Cabinet committee, namely in the economic sub-committee for which a full paper should be prepared.'
The sub-committee met on December 9 with Sir John Cuckney, the Westland chairman, in attendance for part of the time. Mrs Thatcher said it was decided that unless a viable European package was in place by 4 pm on December 13 the Government would make it clear the country was not bound by the NAD recommendations. Mrs Thatcher said that if the NAD agreement had been made Westlands could not have brought forward the Sikorsky initiative.
The Prime Minister said that following that meeting it was unnecessary to hold a further one. It was recognised however that the timetable would allow for another meeting on December 13 if unforeseen developments required one. But no decision to hold such a meeting was taken or recorded.
Mrs Thatcher continued with her chronology emphasising that in her view the Government had acted all the time in the best interests of Westland whose financial future was in doubt. 'There have been suggestions that the Government did not discuss the issues in sufficient depth or in a timely way.
'The account I have given shows that such an allegation is absurd. There have been innumerable discussions of Westland's affairs between departments and with the company over a period of 15 months. The company's future was the subject of collective discussions between ministers on nine occasions.
'There can be no doubt that the problems have been considered properly and responsibly. Colleagues in the Government, particularly those most concerned, were given ample opportunity to express their views and did so and seek to persuade other colleagues before the policy was decided.'
Mrs Thatcher in particular charged Mr Heseltine with having been prepared to acknowledge the advantages of collective Cabinet responsibility without being prepared to accept the discipline it required. 'That the rest of the Cabinet should not accept. It would be a denial of the collective responsibility on which our system of constitutional government depends. Cabinet heard his decision to resign with great regret. They recognised and I recognised his service to government over six-and-a-half years in office, but the decision was his, and his alone.'
Mrs Thatcher rejected the demands for an inquiry saying that she believed both sets of proposals put to Westlands could achieve the objectives the Government have laid out. 'I hope shareholders will be able to take their final decision very shortly.'
Earlier, Mrs Thatcher's insistence that the Trade and Industry Department's account of the meeting between Mr Brittan and Sir Raymond Lygo was fair and accurate was questioned by Tory backbencher Mr John Gorst (Hendon North).
In an intervention, he suggested the minutes were 'remarkably skimpy and short.' And pointing out that the Government's account was dated two days after the meeting, he asked Mrs Thatcher: 'Would you say whether you are quite certain that that wasn't a rather belated and hindsighted record?'
But Mrs Thatcher retorted angrily: 'Ministers and civil servants will have occasion deeply to resent what you have said.' She insisted: 'the record was taken contemporaneously. . . I do not find it sparse. It is a full account of what happened.'
In another intervention, Labour MP Mr Jack Straw questioned the Prime Minister on the alleged leak of a letter from Solicitor-General Sir Patrick Mayhew to Mr Heseltine.
'Are you yet satisfied that the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry had nothing whatever to do with that leak?' he demanded.
But Mrs Thatcher insisted that she had already made clear that 'an internal inquiry had been instituted.'
The Liberal leader, Mr David Steel, said that Mr Heseltine's resignation showed that the Prime Minister's style of government was dangerous to democracy.
'When last did a Government sit in this House with so many ex-Cabinet colleagues out on their ears, not through old age or incompetence, but through deviation from the given line?
'A Cabinet room which increasingly becomes converted to an echo-chamber to one person's views is a danger to democratic government,' he warned.
He said that Nato 'cannot operate if one of its pillars gradually acquires for itself the bulk of the technology and manufacturing capability for our defence equipment.'
He said the affair also showed the need for revision of the Official Secrets Act. Referring to the leaking of the Solicitor-General's letter, he challenged the Prime Minister 'can there be one law for the rulers and the ex-rulers and another for the ruled?'
Mr Heseltine, (C Henley) began his speech with an apology saying much of what he had to say he would have preferred to tell the Commons first but circumstances had not made that possible.
At the heart of the matter lay two issues. Firstly the relationship of Britain with its European and American allies within the Atlantic Alliance and secondly the role, if there was any role, that the British Government should play in its relations with the industrial companies seeking to enhance and protect the defence industrial base of this country.
Mr Heseltine said that if unchecked in the legitimate pursuit of American corporate ambitions the US would buy its way through sector after sector of the world's advanced economy.
He warned that the longer Britain went on preserving an uncoordinated European industrial base the longer the relative decline compared to the United States would continue. He said that the 'small helicopter company in the west of England' was more important for those reasons. 'My position has always been that if the end there is only one way to save Westlands on reasonable terms I would back Sikorsky. My own belief is that, at the critical moment the Government had a clear preference for Europe, that for reasons I fail to understand. Sir John Cuckney, the Westland chairman, set his face against any reasonable exposure of that European preference to his shareholders.
'I simply fail to understand his statement yesterday that come what may, he will not put the firm, financially better, technologically more advanced, British European offer to his shareholders.'
The former Defence Secretary, to loud Labour cheers, said he did not believe that even the most laissez-faire of his colleagues would have intended that leaving the choice to Westland would result in unidentifiable financial groups slogging it out behind the closed doors of City institutions 'as though we are selling one of Britain's defence contractors in job lots to the highest bidder.'
Mr Heseltine then proceeded to renew his personal attacks upon the Prime Minister. He first said that her account of the letters from Westland of the 4th and 18th October did not tally with his reading of those letters. The letters would show Sir John Cuckney recognised a European preference and that Mr Brittan also displayed a European preference at that stage. Mr Heseltine demanded their publication.
Mr Heseltine then proceeded to reiterate his chronology of the Westland affair which materially differed in several aspects from that given only minutes before by the Prime Minister.
Mr Heseltine then detailed his fresh allegations about Mrs Thatcher's attempts to undermine his campaign for the European consortium.
At a Cabinet meeting on December 9 he put forward his new proposals and he claims the majority supported them. He said there was a clear understanding to meet the following Friday at 3:0 pm. 'The Cabinet officials recorded my words. They are not in the minutes but I believe them to be in the notebooks that the official prepared. It was no surprise to me when those Cabinet officials arranged the meeting for Friday at 3.0 pm. It was a devastating surprise when they subsequently cancelled the meeting.' Mr Heseltine said he was told not to raise the matter in Cabinet again but he refused to be silent and he protested that the Cabinet minutes did not include his protest.
He said the opportunity to put forward the full proposals of the European Consortium to the Cabinet for collective agreement had been denied him. On the following Sunday Leon Brittan appeared on the BBC World This Weekend radio programme. The BBC informed Mr Heseltine and he agreed to respond on the programme.
'Efforts were made to stop the programme and I was told that whatever the Secretary of State for Trade did I was not to appear. I could not accept such one-sided treatment.'
Mr Heseltine said he would not withdraw one word of what he had said about the Prime Minister's reply to Sir John Cuckney on December 31. He claimed that a different reply existed and had been sent to the DTI and not the MoD and there was an intervention by the Law Officers which materially changed the sense of the reply proposed.
Mr Heseltine also alleged that the Foreign Office instructed the Italian Government not to send any more letters in support of the letters in support of the European consortium.
Mr Heseltine said he could not accept that all his statements had to be vetted by the Cabinet Secretary and so he had left the Cabinet. He said if there was to be an inquiry then he would expect to be called to account for everything he had said and he would be willing do so.
The former Labour Prime Minister, Mr James Callaghan (Cardiff S and Penarth), said: 'The Prime Minister cannot be proud of the way which she and her colleagues have handled the future of Westland. If the Sikorsky agreement is accepted it will be the wrong decision, wrong for this country, wrong for European cooperation, and wrong for European and American relations.
'What has happened shows a readiness to ignore the lessons of the past, a failure to examine the European option seriously, an attempt to deceive by saying one thing in public and doing another thing in private, and perhaps, most dangerously, a lack of understanding of the way to handle her colleagues in order to get them to work as a team.'
Mr Callaghan said: 'The moral is that the Secretary of State should not be so timorous in pressurising British Aerospace to withdraw because he is so afraid of American displeasure.'
Mr Brittan then leapt to the despatch box, visibly angry. He said: 'I at no stage asked British Aerospace to withdraw from the European bid.'
Mr Callaghan said he still did not know the truth of what had happened, but Mr Heseltine's version was more convincing. 'Contrasted with the wholly turgid recycling of dates we had from the Prime Minister I have no doubt who so far has had the best of this argument.'
MPs were entitled to ask what other Cabinet members had done to resolve the dispute. 'If they act like doormats, they must expect that the Prime Minister will trample all over them.'
Attacking the American bid, he said: 'Sikorsky will dominate the future of Westlands. It will use it as a useful tool to attack the rest of the European helicopter industry.'
He called for an inquiry to be set up not only to investigate the handling of the Westlands affair, but to examine defence procurement policy.
The chairman of the influential Tory backbench 1922 committee, Mr Cranley Onslow, appealed to MPs to give Mr Brittan 'an absolutely fair hearing' when he wound up the debate. Mr Onslow expressed regret at Mr Heseltine's resignation. But he added: 'Not all of us, nor even a majority of us, may think that the course of action which he took was the right one, or that his resignation was made for the right reasons.'
He protested that the Westland affair had been 'turned into a melodrama' by the media and described Monday's Commons uproar over the British Aerospace letter as 'a storm in a tea cup.' But on Mr Brittan's performance, he conceded: 'With hindsight he could have done better.'
Former Tory Defence Minister, Sir Adam Butler, cast doubt on Sir Raymond Lygo's version of his meeting with Mr Brittan. 'Sir Raymond is an honourable man. I know him well. He is also a wilful man. And I know that on these occasions people will hear what they wish to hear.
'I prefer to accept that there was a misunderstanding on this matter in good faith and in no way has the Trade Secretary misled or sought to mislead.'
Mr Paddy Ashdown (L, Yeovil), attacking Mr Heseltine, said Westland first approached Mr Heseltine in October 1984 - not last year as he had said - mentioning the possibility of collaboration with the Europeans. 'The ex Secretary of State declined to show any interest whatsoever.'
After taking the company over, Sir John Cuckney had also approached Mr Heseltine.' He was told that Westland was a private firm which should seek a private solution to its problems.'
Westland had also approached members of Mr Heseltine's European consortium who in the summer and autumn of last year had 'simply turned their backs,' said Mr Ashdown.
Sikorsky had been Westland's 'old and thoroughly reliable partner' for 38 years. Mr Ashdown said Yeovil people could not understand how Mr Heseltine 'can now make a principle out of a firm he was prepared to see go to the receiver only seven months ago.'
MR LEON BRITTAN, the Trade Secretary, in a 30-minute wind-up to the debate began by reiterating the apology he had made to the Commons on Monday if he had given the impression of misleading MPs.
Since then, he said, Sir Austin Pearce had given perMission for the British Aerospace letter to be published. Its account is of course substantially different to that taken by my official and confirmed by my recollection and others, although closer scrutiny will show there is a considerable amount of similarity in the accounts but there are material points than are different.
Mr Brittan again denied that he had said at the meeting that British Aerospace should withdraw from the consortium because it was against the national interest.
He said there were six people present in the room, three civil servants, Mr Geoffrey Pattie, the Industry Minister, and Sir Raymond Lygo. Mr Brittan relied heavily on the account written by his private secretary two days after the meeting. 'Anyone that says that I was telling a lie about that meeting is saying the same about five people, including three distinguished civil servants who have served both governments.'
He told MPs: 'I would be perfectly happy to give an account of that meeting to a select committee of the House and I have no objections to doing so whatsoever.'
He added that he had not raised the issue at two previous meetings with Sir Raymond. 'I very much regret if Sir Raymond Lygo had a different understanding and I regret that he is not prepared to have his own account made public.
Mr Brittan then accused Mr Heseltine of over-simplifying the issue, saying it was not a clear Choice between a European or a translantic solution. He confirmed that he had warned Sir Raymond of the danger to the European consortium presented by talking about the issue in a way that stimulated protectionist feelings in the United States.
Earlier, Mr John Smith, the Shadow Trade Secretary, had protested that the Civil Servant's version had been written two days after the meeting and only when the sensitivity of it had become clear.
Mr Brittan said he was aware that the minute was not written up until later but said it had been taken from notes which had been made contemporaneously. It was no fantasy that there was a threat of American protectionism, British Aerospace's own US subsidiary had expressed great concern. 'The anxieties are very real,' said Mr Brittan.
He explained that on the fourth of October it had been alleged he had expressed a preference for the European solution. 'I did not express any preference on that occasion,' said Mr Brittan.
On October 17, Sir John Cuckney, the Westland chairman, referred to what he described as the Government's preference for a European consortium. Mr Brittan said that a European minority shareholding was in the commercial and political interest of the Government, but that was against the background that Sikorsky required at that time an element of government underwriting of their project. Fiat had not as yet joined that consortium
Mr Heseltine intervened to challenge Mr Brittan on this point- 'I think I heard my right honourable friend for the first time say that at the meeting on October 17 he held the view that a European minority shareholder was in the commercial and industrial interest of Westland. That I think, is a preference.'
Mr Brittan stressed he was talking about a European minority shareholder that emerged and that was Fiat. He was not expressing support for the European consortium.
Mr Brittan then moved on to the law officers' letter. He said it was written after Mr Heseltine wrote to Lloyds Bank on January 3. 'The directors of Westland noticed that the terms of his letter were different from those in a letter from the Prime Minister and raised the matter with the Department of Trade. Mr Brittan consulted the law officers and they subsequently wrote the letter that has been the subject of controversy. 'I did not see it before it was written,' but before Mr Brittan could move on to the question of who leaked the letter, the debate came to an end and the vote taken.
Earlier, Mr John Smith, winding up for Labour, said the leak of the letter was not just 'dirty tricks' but was a 'habit inimical to good government.' The rumour was that a DTI official had been the culprit. Mr Smith detailed the allegation that a BBC programme had been subjected to a government attempt to suppress an interview with Mr Heseltine.
He said on Sunday, January 5,the World This Weekend radio programme interviewed Mr Brittan. Later that morning a telephone call was made from No. 10 informing the producers that No. 10 was withdrawing permission for the interview to be used. The BBC informed No. 10, greatly to its credit, that it would not cooperate. The BBC later offered Mr Brittan a chance to do the interview all over again and meanwhile down in Oxford, Mr Heseltine had left his garden to go to a local studio to take part live in that very programme.
'I am informed that while in the studio waiting to start the interview another telephone call from No. 10 to the BBC came saying that the Secretary of State for Defence had no permission to appear. At the very best it is at least even-handed. Neither Secretary of State could be trusted to appear on the same programme.' Mr Smith said that was not all the manipulation and also detailed the allegation that Sir Geoffrey Howe had instructed the British ambassador in Rome to tell the Italian Government to stop sending telegrams to the British Defence Secretary.
The whole affair, said Mr Smith to loud cheers from Labour benches demonstrated how this Government had sacrificed the public interest to its ideological obsessions.
Labour's motion calling for the establishment of a special Commons committee to investigate the affair was defeated by 370 votes to 217, (Government majority 153).
A government amendment endorsing its handling of the issue was then carried by 367 votes to 217 (Government majority 150).
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
142 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 15, 1986
The Markets: New rate rise fear holds down gilts and equities / Various market reports
LENGTH: 858 words
Stock market confidence was severely tested again yesterday as fears of higher interest rates, due in part to falling oil prices and the government's handling of the Westland affair, knocked both gilts and equities sharply.
Not even moves by the Bank of England to prevent a further rise in base rates by a technical intervention in money markets failed to stop the rot, and after a brief rally prices soon began slipping again.
Government stocks were worst hit but managed to claw back half of their initial losses of 1 1/4 points.
Stores came in for another heavy drubbing, not helped by a rather disappointing set of provisional retail sales for last month, proving that the preChristmas spending boom had peaked earlier than expected. Although retailers were confident that January would see sales climbing again, there were few signs of any support by investors at the cheaper levels.
Burton Group tumbled 27p to 501p after the AGM statement which confirmed weekend reports that Debenham sales had fallen short of forecasts. Dixon Group were another weak spot at 892p, down 20p, ahead of today's interim.
Dealers are hoping for record profits for the six months of over pounds 29 million, against pounds 12.5 million last time. Leading industrials registered falls of between 2p and 8p in the main, but recently buoyant Lucas was a heavier casualty at 476p, down 20p.
In dull breweries Guinness gave up 7p to 298p although profits exceeded expectations by some pounds 2 million. Granada at 232p, down 6p and Ladbroke 312p, down 11p reflected disappointment with the disclosure that the merger talks would not lead to an outright bid for Granada.
Among the new firm spots Westland hardened 3p more to 96p as the mystery buyer who bought 9 per cent of the shares on Monday increased his holding to just under 15 per cent.
Foods, properties and buildings turned sour again. Banks and insurances recorded losses into double figures. Electricals were unsettled by the groving antipathy between GEC and Plessey. Only gold shares continued to glister with gains to two dollars. Rubbers were also supported, but tins were concerned with the unresolved crisis.
Among the heaviest falls in leading industrials were Blue Circle, 10p down at 558p, Tate & Lyle showing a 13p decline at 520p, and British Aero - still influenced by the Westland affair - 13p easier at 435p. The spirited resistance to the GEC bid left Plessey 6p down at 168p, with GEC showing a similar fall at 168p.
P & 0 gave up at 430p, along with Thorn-EMI at 391p. Ahead of results, Trust Houses lost a penny at 153p. Distillers awaiting development retreated 4p at 531p, while elsewhere in the drink sector profit-taking after their speculative run trimmed Vaux 13p at 380p.
The profits recovery lifted MS International 4p at 74p. RMC too staged a rally 6p higher at 456p, but Magnet Southerns were none too happy awaiting the interim, down 6p at 138p. Bid hopes continued to stimulate Crystalate up another 7p at 170p, while speculative buying was good for 4p on Group Lotus up at 121p, and for 5p on Wood Relations up at 133p.
Gomme meanwhile, responded with a 24p jump to 83p on the agreed bid from Millmine. Demand in a very thin market boosted Manchester Ship 85p to 588p. The proposed sale of US retail interests lifted Bat Industries 5p at 328p, but Reuters, which reports trading news next month, gave up 8p at 360p.
The Wagan Finance acquisition took further toll of MAI, another 15p down at 330p, and Applied Holographics were depressed by the losses at half-time tumbling 20p to 230p
In oils, British Benzol climbed 4p at 73p, but Goal, in the absence of any bid news, lost 4p at 54p.
Main changes: Lucas 476p down 20p; Westland 96p up 3p; Granada 232p down 6p; Ladbroke 312p down 11p; Guinness 298p down 7p; Dixons 982p down 20p; Burton 501p down 27p; BAT Ind 328p up 5p.
Stock exchange turnover for January 13: number of bargains: 22,589; Value: pounds 375,468 million.
PARIS - Shares closed mostly lower in a less active session than in recent weeks. The market indicator was off 0.3 per cent at the closing bell, and declines led advances in a ratio of two to one. Observers said that a rise of 1/8 of a percentage point in the call money rate to 9 per cent was partly responsible for the easier tone.
FRANKFURT - Prices surged to record levels in heavy trading as rumours that the insurance giant, Allianz AG, is acquiring control of Bayerische Hypotheken Und Wechsel Bank AG, drove bank shares up sharply. The Commerzbank index rose to a record of 2106.1, up 42.2 points from Monday's reading. The previous record of 2098.8 was set January 8.
TOKYO - Shares continued to fall for the third session in a row on small volume. Traders said there were few incentives to buy and as in the previous session, share prices were able to move lower with only light selling pressure due to the lack of volume. Nikkei index: 12,928.60 (12,977.02).
HONG KONG - Rumours of troubles at a medium-size bank sparked a sell-off and most share prices finished broadly lower. Hang Seng index: 1782.23 (1799.61).
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
143 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 15, 1986
Economics Agenda: Trapped in a bubble on the exchange rates whirlpool / The foreign exchange market
BYLINE: By CLIFF PRATTEN
LENGTH: 1481 words
Keynes wrote that 'speculators may do no harm as bubbles on a steady stream of enterprise. But the position is serious when enterprise becomes the bubble on a whirlpool of speculation.' His description fits the foreign exchange market of 1985 rather well, as the Chancellor once again discovered last week when he raised interest rates to defend sterling.
There have been many violent movements of exchange rates since they were floated in 1971. The fashionable wisdom is that these fluctuations are a consequence of the forex market being 'driven by capital rather than trade flows, and (that) currencies have become commodities whose value depends more on the buyers' expectation of their resale value, than on underlying economic developments.'
This sounds remarkably close to the 'battle of wits (among professional investors) to anticipate the basis of conventional valuation a few months hence, rather than the prospective yield of an investment over a long term of years' which Keynes described. This suggests the forex market is a 'whirlpool of speculation' and that the exchange rate for the pound, and British industry whose competitiveness is affected by the exchange rate, are in 'the bubble.'
A recent article claimed that 'less than 5 per cent, perhaps as little as 1 or 2 per cent of forex turnover mirrors equivalent transactions in goods and services.' It is these comparisons which have led to claims that the forex market is driven by capital rather than trade flows. These comparisons, however, are exaggerated. The fantastic forex turnover is not quite as daunting to the prospects of intervention as it seems.
Facts concerning the forex market are elusive. A recent study has estimated that in 1984 turnover in the world forex market was dollars 150 billion a day. World exports of goods in 1984 were about dollars 7 billion a day, very roughly 5 per cent of turnover in forex markets.
However, these figures underestimate the importance of trade-related transactions for several reasons.
First, the figure given for exports excludes international trade in services, and cross border payments of interest and dividends. Inclusion of these transactions would raise the percentage of income, or current account, transactions to total forex turnover from about 5 per cent to about 8 per cent. However, in the opposite direction, not all current account transactions give rise to a foreign exchange transaction.
Second, some trades lead to additional trades. A deal to sell French francs
for Swedish kroner may lead to two deals, a sale of francs for American
dollars and a purchase of kroner with the dollars. A forward transaction -
an agreement to exchange currencies at or by a future date at a fixed price
- results in three additional transactions, as the bank that does the deal
enters into two consequential deals to swap the currencies and a spot market
transaction. If the duplicate transactions are excluded from total turnover,
about 15 per cent of transactions may originate from current accounts
transactions.
Third, many deals are between banks and balance out over a short period. About 95 per cent of the forex deals in terms of value which major UK banks enter into are between banks, not with external non-bank customers. One explanation for this inter-bank dealing is that bank dealers take a view of the market and back their views. For example, If a dealer believes the pound is about to fall against the dollar, he will sell pounds and buy dollars.
Often, dealers hold such a position - in this example holding dollars and a deficit in sterling - for only a few hours. More than half, and for some banks most, of the positions their dealers take are reversed within a day. Even very large banks get their foreign currency dealing positions near to balance at the end of each day. Generally a major bank's dealing exposure, or open position, at the end of a day is less than pounds 50 million, and the open dealing positions of most smaller banks would be less.
The dealers in the forex market buy and sell to each other. In many markets this does not happen. For example, in a vegetable market, the traders do not buy and sell to each other. They buy from producers and sell to retailers or consumers. Dealing between traders, as in the forex market, leads to uniform, or very similar prices being charged by all the traders in a market, but it does not necessarily affect the level of prices other than in the very short term.
As many of the deals between banks cancel out within a short time, there is a case for ignoring them when assessing the importance of other classes of turnover. Excluding deals between banks which are balanced during the day raises the percentage of turnover originating with current account transactions from 15 per cent to perhaps 30 per cent or more of forex turnover.
The remainder of the turnover orginates with long and short-term capital movements including deals for open positions by banks which are not closed within a day. The long-term capital movements to finance new overseas investment and purchases of securities represent only a small part of the remaining turnover, so a substantial part of the turnover of the forex market involves shortterm capital flows.
Although the estimates given in this article suggest that capital flows are less important than was indicated by some earlier estimates, they are still formidable. In the sense that it can be moved rapidly between currencies, much of capital involved in the short-term capital flows may be speculative.
Instability of exchange rates does not merely reflect speculation. In the short term many of the flows through the exchanges are not very responsive to changes in exchange rates, and some are perverse. Normally a fall in prices increases demand and reduces supply in a market. But in the forex market volumes of exports and imports do not change rapidly to balance supply and demand for currencies, in response to changes in exchange rates.
One reason for this slow response is that businessmen average out exchange rates and do not base their decisions on the rate in force at one point in time.
Another feature of the forex market is that a fall in an exchange rate sometimes leads to additional sales of the currency and to a further fall. Where it is difficult to estimate the underlying equilibrium for a price determined by economic forces, traders and other participants in a market are tempted to use rules of thumb, or extrapolate past movements. The fact that the volume of trading increases at times when exchange rates move is consistent with such effects.
Dealing in foreign exchange is not controlled; the unlimited extent to which businessmen and investors can take positions in foreign exchange markets to hedge (protect their position against the possibiity of changes in exchange rates) engenders instability.
For example, the finance director of a UK company who expects the dollar to fall against sterling may sell dollars for sterling forward to protect the dollar profits in sterling terms, and he may enter into a forward sale of dollars to protect the sterling value of his company's net assets in the US.
If a fall in an exchange rate suggests a further fall, such hedging transactions can become destabilising even though their motivation is to avoid losses and protect values, rather than to make speculative profits.
A further cause of instability is the vacillating exchange rate policies of governments. For example, at times Mrs Thatcher has left the exchange rate of the pound to be fixed by the market and at others has maintained high real interest rates to draw in and hold funds to support a high exchange rate. Furthermore, some currencies are dependent on commodities whose prices change. Changes in the price of oil can affect Britain's exports, and hence sterling, dramatically.
A final factor causing instability in forex markets is the low level of reserves held by governments. At the end of 1984 Britain's gold and foreign exchange reserves were dollars 16 billion, about 10 per cent of the daily turnover of world forex markets. The reserves are not large in relation to the cash and near cash assets held by some companies. For example, at the end of 1983 IBM held cash and marketable securities of dollars 5 1/2 billion, and Daimler Benz dollars 2 billion.
Only with international collaboration, which a British government cannot summon up at will, is official intervention alone likely to be successful in halting a major speculative run on sterling.
Until the framework within which the markets operate is changed, the fate of the Government's economic policy will not lie in its own hands.
Cliff Pratten works at the Department of Applied Economics at the University of Cambridge.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
144 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 15, 1986
Ecuador wins US approval / First country to benefit from Baker plan for debtor nations
BYLINE: From DIANA PAGE
LENGTH: 306 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
President Leon Febres Cordero of Ecuador received a warm welcome from President Reagan yesterday, sweetened by the loans that marked his country as the first to benefit from the Baker plan for debtor nations.
Ecuador won Washington's blessing for reducing government intervention in its economy and promoting the private sector efforts favoured by the Reagan administration.
President Febres Cordero will sign loan agreements for dollars 106 million from the World Bank and dollars 150 million from the Inter-American Development Bank during his visit, and meet commercial bankers to discuss another dollars 400 to dollars 500 million.
Mr William Camposano, vice-president of Lloyds Bank, which heads the steering group of Ecuador's 268 bank creditors, said that Ecuador was regarded as a 'model debtor,' but it would be premature to assume that the loans were assured.
The US Treasury Secretary, Mr James Baker, launched the initiative to deal with the world debt crisis at the Seoul meeting of the IMF and World Bank by calling for commercial banks to increase their lending to debtor countries by dollars 20 billion.
Mr Baker and the Secretary of State, George Shultz, will join the IMF director, Jacques de Larosiere, the acting World Bank president, Ernest Stern, and the US Federal Reserve chairman, Paul Volcker, for talks with the Ecuadoran president.
Ecuador's debt is under dollars 10 billion, but as an oil-exporting nation its economic turnaround is seen as an example for Mexico and other countries. Ecuador's neighbour, Peru, has taken the opposite tack of defying international financial institutions and the Reagan preference for private sector growth policies.
Ecuador earned special favour from Washington by becoming the first country to break relations with Nicaragua last October.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
145 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 15, 1986
Financial Notebook: The markets are jittery and maybe the Bank's firm hand will not calm them / Interest rate rises
BYLINE: By HAMISH McRAE
LENGTH: 230 words
The Bank of England was right to clamp down on interest rates yesterday, but whether it will get away with it is another matter.
If the Bank had not acted firmly yesterday we would in all probability have another one per cent on base rates this morning. The market has got itself into one of its periodic moods where it presses on and on in one direction until someone tells it to stop. Yesterday the mood was for higher sterling interest rates and the Bank's job was to thump the market out of it.
ln the short term it worked. Interest rates came back down and the gilt market managed a decent recovery. But you would expect that. Part at least of the gloomy mood was a reaction to Mr Brittan's little local difficulties in the House, and it is hard to see more than a tenious logical connection between Mr Brittan's political future and the mortgage rate.
But the Bank and indeed the government will need a measure of good luck over the next week or so to get away without the interest rate rise. A slight hardening of interest rates in the US; a softening of the oil price; some adverse speculation (whether justified or not) following the group of five meeting this weekend; all these could unseat the Bank's strategy.
There is, for the moment, no rational reason for a further rise in interest rates. But the markets are in no mood to be rational.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
146 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 15, 1986
Commentary: Year Six - dawn of reactive government / The US administration
BYLINE: By MICHAEL WHITE
LENGTH: 1131 words
What this Administration really lacks as it enters Year Six this weekend is a Michael Heseltine to dramatise its political mortality with a blatant leap for the lifeboat. Not that there's been a shortage of issues as good as Westland. But Bud McFarlane chose not to rock the boat and Agriculture's hapless John Block couldn't if he tried. Nor could the soon-to-depart Sam Pierce, the Cabinet's solitary gesture towards racial quotas.
Still evidence that the Reagan Administration will finally get its long-predicted comeuppance in 1986 is plentiful. On a host of issues - the budget, the Russians, the response to terrorist attack - the void between the rhetoric and reality is filled only by the remarkable 68 per cent popularity of the President himself.
As the unpopularity of so many of his policies shows, it is personal. Mr Reagan may see himself as Rocky LXXIV. The public seems to prefer him as easy-going James Stewart playing Mr Deedes come to town. In reality a once robustly reactionary government has been reduced to a reactive one, its reflexes atrophied by its year in office.
Abroad the US deploys selective indignation from Tripoli to Managua. But many of its most pressing embarrassments come from its supposed friends in places like Pretoria and Manila. In any event it acts cautiously according to its own national interest, so Damascus can relax. Yet it is genuinely puzzled when its allies do the same. The mood is one of ill-concealed resentment from which not even ' Maggie' is exempt. Few of the irritants are actually communist.
On the great issue of East-West relations the Administration is as divided as ever. It drifts towards rapprochement with Moscow, albeit un-graciously - a process which Richard Nixon (back in fashion) approvingly dubs 'hard-headed detente.'
Yet as the Administration drifts towards an undefined accommodation, so the Defence Secretary, Caspar Weinberger, the self-same Weinberger who counsels caution in the use of military force against terrorism, noisily drags his heels through the snow opposing arms control and demanding more defence dollars. He seems to want the hardware, but not to get it scratched.
By way of contrast Mr Shultz wants military action against terrorists (the economist in him does not believe in sanctions) but greater flexibility towards the Soviet Union. The Chiefs of Staff prudently split the difference: they want all the dollars going, but none of the shooting wars unless it be to defend their pensions from the budget-cutting chain saw known here as the Gramm-Rudman Act.
Moscow, which has no midterm elections to worry about in 1986, may pardonably be confused by what it sees and hears. But as so often with America's actions abroad, the key may lie with its domestic preoccupations. Now that it has decided that the President will ring both teams before African football's imminent cup final instead of afterwards when they're hot and sweaty (and half of them are losers), the Reagan Administration's current priority is that budget crisis.
What with Congress refusing to cut domestic spending as the White House wishes, and the White House refusing to tax as most of Congress wishes, they have settled for an act of wishful thinking - the Gramm-Rudman mechanism with its automatic cuts across those portions of the board not electorally cordoned off. Like pensions. As an exercise to get the dollars 220 billion deficit painlessly down to zilch without hard choices by 1991 it is the financial equivalent of Star Wars - an exotic X-ray laser, splendid on the drawing board, a nightmare in reality. Even the President is hedging his bets by half-encouraging legal challenges to its constitutional propriety.
Today administration and congressional accountants will draw the first blood a dollars 11.7 billion or 4.3 per cent cut in the 1986 budget to bring it back on target, 50: 50 from domestic and defence spending according to the rules, although advance publicity has the White House trying to swing the ratio 80: 20 away from the Pentagon back of the Potomac River.
That alone will cause squeals enough. But it will be nothing compared with the battle over the 1987 budget, due to be published on February 3 with some dollars 50 billion to be excised from current 'fat.' Suddenly the awful, familiar word 'privatisation' is in the headlines as the US Treasury looks, Lawson-like, for family silver to sell off. More important, faced with congressional enthusiasm for domestic programmes, will the President and his supply-side allies (many of them pro-defence) finally concede some tax increases even if it means posthumous vindication of Walter Mondale?
Some commentators detected a softening of Reagan's adamancy at last week's four monthly press conference. Unnamed Treasury officials have begun to talk of its inevitability.
Among the doom-laden scenarios for poor Mr Weinberger's budget now circulating (cuts of dollars 80 billion by 1987?) is one which must impress. Mr Gorbachev with its ironies. The word is going around that having spent its first four years pushing for a new generation of landbased intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMS) to help close the famous 'window of vulnerability' to a Soviet first strike. the Administration has now decided not to protect them all against Gramm-Rudman cuts.
Before the Geneva Summit it offered to ban mobile ICBMS like the forthcoming MX and the Midgetman as part of its response to Moscow's 50 per cent cuts formula, an offer assumed at the time to have been foisted upon his more innocent colleagues by the Pentagon's Richard Perle, because he knew it would be unacceptable to the Russians who already have mobile SS-25s of their own.
Now the buzz is that the military is going off the Midgetman project anyway, which patriotic (and now indignant) pro-defence Democrats expended so much political capital to support. The rationales offered are various: that more bombers and cruise missiles will do just as well after all; or (more sophisticated) that ground-based lasers, a less exotic 'Star wars' cousin of the X-ray laser, would make 'vulnerable' fixed silos less vulnerable, cheaper and sooner.
But in the arcane word of weapons theology old hands can invent rationales as easily as they can Cuban helicopter pilots in Nicaragua. The bottom line is money. If Midgetman competes for suddenly shrinking funds with Star Wars research then the Pentagon and the White House would prefer Star Wars. Anxious to improve conventional capabilities Congress will grow more wary of space-based exotica.
And the Administration which threatened to outspend Mr Gorbachev into bankruptcy to make him 'see sense' may itself be forced by unanswerable arithmetic to see some itself.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
147 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 15, 1986
Nato's math overkill / The US nuclear missile base at Molesworth, Cambridgeshire
BYLINE: By DAVID FAIRHALL
LENGTH: 754 words
Work began in earnest this month on a second base for NATO's American nuclear cruise missiles, at Molesworth in Cambridgeshire, which will cost about pounds 45 million over the next three years. The British taxpayer will only have to contribute perhaps pounds 7-8 million of this, the rest coming either from the US Air Force, which will operate the base, or from other members of NATO.
But before the concrete sets, and another 64 nuclear missiles arrive, each with an explosive yield about 20 times that of the Hiroshima bomb, it is worth considering that President Reagan's Administration has meanwhile offered to reduce NATO's force of intermediate range missiles in Europe (that is ground launched cruise and Pershing II ballistic missiles) to 140 launchers if the Kremlin will reduce its SS-20 ballistic missile force to the same number, also measured in launchers. So do we really need a second missile base in the UK?
Ask the Ministry of Defence or the Foreign Office for the official government line and the answer is an emphatic Yes. For negotiating reasons if nothing else, it is argued, the complete Nato programme must go ahead firmly as planned. This involves the UK accepting 160 cruise missiles (on 40 mobile launchers each carrying four missiles), Germany 96 cruise plus 108 Pershing II (24 + 108=132 launchers), Italy 112 cruise (28 launchers), Belgium 48 cruise (12 launchers) and Holland 48 cruise (12 launchers). That adds up to 572 Single warhead missiles on 224 launchers.
But the fact remains that if the Americans can do a deal with Moscow, they are prepared to cut these numbers on Nato's behalf. Their important stipulation, which makes the arithmetic quite complicated, is that the remaining Nato force, assumed to consist of a mix of cruise and Pershing II, should be roughly equivalent in destructive power to the suggested force of 140 Soviet SS-20s, each with three independently targeted warheads.
So although the US arms control proposal is expressed in terms of launchers, it is really driven by the assumption that the Russians would have 420 warheads targeted on Europe (140 x3). The Americans talk about Nato retaining 420-450 warheads, a total which is believed to be based on two possible mixes - 45 Pershing IIs plus 96 cruise (dollars 9 warheads) or 36 P IIs plus 104 cruise (452). The numbers do not work out neatly because groundlaunched cruise missiles come in units, or flights, of 16 and Pershing IIs in flights of nine.
In earlier negotiations - the so called 'walk in the woods' - the Americans came close to abandoning the Pershing II altogether, which is almost certainly what the Kremlin would prefer, but in making calculations about Molesworth, the more difficult mixed launcher case has to be assumed.
Washington chose 140 because that was the number of Nato launchers actually deployed on December 31, 1985, including 24 launch vehicles with 96 missiles at Greenham Common - the full number planned for the Berkshire base. So one way of implementing the US proposal might seem to be leaving the situation just as it is now - 108 Pershing II launchers in Germany, 24 cruise in the UK, four in Italy and four in Belgium. But although this already makes up the suggested launcher total, only 236 missiles and warheads have been deployed, well short of the 240-450 the Americans require. Nor would freezing deployment exactly as it is meet the political requirement, or at least preference, to have the weapons spread round all five countries which originally agreed to take them.
On this five-nation basis there are hundreds if not thousands of possible permutations. Leaving the 96 cruise missiles in place at Greenham, giving the Germans 172 (the 108 Pershing IIs already there plus 64 of their 96 cruise), the Italians 64 of their planned 112, and the Belgians and the Dutch their originally planned 48 each (on the assumption that this was considered a minimum), would produce a suitable number of warheads and missiles - that is 428 - but unfortunately the equivalent launcher total is 188, which would allow the Russians more SS-20 warheads than Nato wants.
A few seconds' work on a pocket calculator will produce other solutions. The basic point is that Nato now has as many launchers as the Americans say it wants, and Greenham has its full planned complement of missiles. If an arms control deal can be done in Geneva, now is the moment to pause before committing this country to the development of a second big nuclear base.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
148 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 15, 1986
Overseas News in Brief: US 'held secret N-tests' / Natural Resources Defence Council report
LENGTH: 105 words
The US conducted up to 19 secret nuclear weapons tests between 1982 and 1984, raising questions about abilities to detect cheating on a proposed test ban treaty, according to a study released yesterday in Washington.
The report by the Natural Resources Defence Council, a lobby group, was the first indication of the scope of secret underground tests by the Administration. The secret test programme has received little publicity.
The MRDX released a 1982 government document stating that a programme, known as 'Operation Anvil' called for keeping certain US nuclear tests secret in the 'national interest'.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
149 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 15, 1986
America firm on Hormuz / US reiterates Carter Doctrine to keep straits open
BYLINE: From DIANA PAGE
LENGTH: 133 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
The Administration, angered by Iranian ship-boarding incidents, last night reiterated the Carter Doctrine which pledges to keep the Hormuz Straits open to navigation.
A state Department spokesman, Mr Charles Redman, said that the Carter Doctrine, which regards free navigation in the Persian Gulf as a vital national interest, was still in effect.
'Regardless of the legality of the Iranian action, we regard the practice as inherently dangerous,' Mr Redman said. But he backed away from the term 'piracy' used by the captain of the US ship, President Taylor, which was held by the Iranians for 105 minutes on Sunday. 'The captain is not a US government official,' he said.
US naval vessels were ready if a boarding incident became 'prolonged or aggravated,' Mr Redman said.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
150 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 15, 1986
Britain condemns border 'coercion' / Call for lifting of South African blockade on Lesotho
BYLINE: By HELLA PICK
LENGTH: 186 words
Britain and the US have called on the South African authorities to lift the blockade on Lesotho, and to resolve its differences by dialogue.
Responding to a personal appeal from the Prime Minister, Chief Leabua Jonathan, Mrs Margaret Thatcher has ordered Britain's Ambassador, Sir Patrick Moberley, to make representations to the South African Government.
A Foreign Office spokesman confirmed a message had been received by Mrs Thatcher and that a formal reply would be sent to Chief Jonathan.
The spokesman said the restriction on border traffic 'is a matter we view very seriously.'
'We do not believe the problems between South Africa and Lesotho can be resolved by coercion.'
He added the Government hoped the restrictions would be lifted, with both sides embarking on a dialogue to resolve their differences.
Mr Chester Crocker, the US Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, who has been in South Africa this week, is also believed to have told the South African authorities that their action is unjustified, and is certain to tarnish South Africa's image even further.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
151 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 15, 1986
Leaders held as Lesotho 'blockade' takes effect / Opposition politicians accused of conspiracy with South Africa
BYLINE: From DAVID BERESFORD and MIKE PITSO
LENGTH: 500 words
DATELINE: JOHANNESBURG and MASERU
The Lesotho Government yesterday detained opposition leaders after their return from Pretoria where they had been holding talks on South Africa's economic blockade of their country.
The detentions came as Lesotho announced sweeping measures to conserve petrol. A fuel crisis has begun to develop resulting from South African restrictions on the movement of traffic across the border.
The Lesotho Government has appealed to President Reagan and Mrs Thatcher to intervene in the crisis.
The Lesotho detentions came after the local radio station had accused the politicians of conspiring with South Africa to overthrow the Government by means of the blockade.
The detainees include one of the most well-known public figures in Lesotho, Mr Bennet Khaketla.
The 70-year-old novelist, playwright, and scholar, who has translated the Bible into Sesotho, is leader of the Freedom Party.
Also detained were Mr Gerard Ramoreboli, the former Minister of Justice and 'internal' leader of the main opposition group, the Basutolanc Congress party, Mr Charles Mofeli, the leader of the United Democratic Party and former Minister of Water, Energy and Mining; Mr S Noojane, the leader of the Basuto Democratic Alliance and Mr CD Molapo, a former foreign minister, reputed to be a personal friend of the South African President, Mr PW Botha.
Mr Molapo resigned from the Lesotho Cabinet in 1983 in protest at the Government's decision to allow the Russians, Chinese, and North Koreans to set up embassies in Maseru.
The politicians had gone to Pretoria last week for talks, returning on Monday night. They were detained before reporters could question them on the outcome of the trip.
Petrol rationing in Lesotho, a South African enclave, is expected shortly. Steps are being taken to reserve supplies for essential government services, including the security forces and ambulance services, and other government vehicles are being taken off the roads.
One of the two main fuel depots, supplying Shell, BP and Caltex, has run out of petrol and diesel.
The Mobil depot is down to 50,000 litres of petrol, according to local oil industry sources.
Seventeen rail tankers containing petrol, diesel and paraffin were reportedly sent back to the South African city of Bloemfontein after failing to get through the Maseru border post.
The appeal to the US and Britain for help follows a similar, limited blockade of the former British Protectorate by South Africa in 1983.
But the South African Foreign Minister, Mr Pik Botha, has denied any blockade. At a press conference in Cape Town the minister said: 'We are not boycotting Lesotho.
'The South African Government does not believe in economic boycotts. We believe in trading with all countries in the world'.
Mr Botha said he was unaware of any government decision enforcing an oil boycott in Lesotho.
'Whether something went wrong with the channel through which oil is delivered, I can't tell you,' he said.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
152 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 15, 1986
The Day in Politics: Call to Pretoria / Lesotho
LENGTH: 114 words
Britain is calling on the South African government to lift its blockade of neighbouring Lesotho.
Mrs Lynda Chalker told the Commons yesterday in her first appearance at the Despatch box as Foreign Office Minister, that the Government viewed the matter 'very seriously indeed' and was in close contact with the United States over an appeal from the Prime Minister of Lesotho, Chief Jonathan, for help in getting essential provisions into his country, she said.
'We are making known to the South African government our concern that the restrictions on border traffic should now be lifted and that both sides embark on a dialogue to resolve their differences.' she said.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
153 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 15, 1986
Officers angry at inaction over Gulf boarding / Merchant navy union concerned over government response to illegal ship search by Iran
BYLINE: By GARETH PARRY
LENGTH: 550 words
A union representing British merchant navy officers said yesterday that it was appalled the Government was not protesting to Iran over the illegal boarding of an unarmed British ship in the Gulf of Oman. It accused the Government of not caring about the British merchant fleet sailing in the Iraq-Iran war zone, which is nicknamed Exocet Alley.
The Foreign Office said later, however, that Britain would be asking Iran why its navy stopped the ship.
The 21,747-ton Barber Perseus was boarded by armed Iranian marines on Monday, after first being stopped by a warship in international waters. The marines sealed off the radio room and examined the manifest, apparently searching for war material which could be used by Iraq.
Sir Geoffrery Howe, the Foreign Secretary, has expressed his concern about the boarding, but said the incident would have to be studied before any changes in orders to British naval patrols, allowing them to escort British merchantmen, could be considered.
Britain's aproach to the Iranians is being made through the British-interest section at the Swedish embassy in Tehran.
While British policy attached great importance to the general principle of freedom of navigation in international waters, a Foreign Office spokesman said, it was recognised that 'in certain circumstances' a state engaged in armed conflict might stop and search a merchant ship on the high seas. The immediate British response was to seek an explanation rather than to lodge a protest.
Mr John Newman, deputy general secretary of the National Union of Maritime, Aviation and Shipping Transport Officers, who has complained before about British Government inaction over such incidents, said yesterday: 'Civilian seafarers are virtually sitting ducks for the Iranians or the Iraqis as targets.
'The Iranians claim, and there is no means of gauging the accuracy of it, that they stop and search at least one ship a day. We want the Government to give the sort of advice it regularly gives to civilians in areas where there are degrees of danger.'
His union, Mr Newman said. also believed the Government should help bring about a convention whereby civilian seafarers would not be required to sail to war areas - - or, if they refused to go to such areas, would not be in breach of contract and dismissed as a result.
There have been 163 attacks on foreign shipping in the Gulf since the Iran-Iraq war began six years ago. Fourteen merchant ships have been arrested and escorted to Iranian ports. A ship under the Kuwaiti flag, with five British officers aboard, has been detained in Bandar Abbas for six weeks.
Captain Colin Sandy, of the Barber Perseus, said yesterday that once the Iranians were satisfied his ship was on purely commercial business, they apologised and left.
The Barber Perseus is the first British-owned ship to have been boarded during the Gulf war. Only a few hours later, an American merchant ship, the President Taylor, was also boarded by the Iranians for the first time.
The United States, which has a powerful fleet in the vicinity, has now ordered its warships to escort all American merchantmen approaching the area. Britain has one frigate and one destroyer in the region, but both were in Mombasa for repairs at the time.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
154 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 15, 1986
US warms to cash aid for Ulster / British and Irish representitives meet with State Department officials
BYLINE: From ALEX BRUMMER
LENGTH: 239 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
A high level team of British and Irish officials. the first of its kind to conduct a diplomatic mission to the United States, received a 'sympathetic' hearing from top American officials during talks on aid for Ulster which ended yesterday.
Although no specific figures were mentioned during the session at the State Department, congressional sources said last night that the speaker of the house, Mr Tip O'Neill, was ready to support American aid of up to pounds 350 million. His ambition might however be curtailed by limits on US government spending.
Despite the Loyalist opposition to the Anglo-Irish agreement, State Department officials said last night they were encouraged that most of the opposition was taking a 'very constitutional form and that the outbreaks of violence had been limited.' The officials said it was part of a process which could lead to a bill being introduced in Congress next month.
The British and Irish delegation included ambassador. from both countries and the head of the Northern Ireland Office, Mr Ken Bloomfield.
It discussed ways of establishing a fund for Northern Ireland with the US assistant secretary of state, Ms Rozanne Ridgeway, the US ambassador to Ireland, Mrs Margaret Heckler, and other officials.
The Reagan Administration prefers aid directed at the private sector and improving economic conditions.
The US assistance would form part of a larger fund
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
155 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 14, 1986
The Portuguese ponder the nuclear option / British firms may build nuclear reactors for Portugal
BYLINE: From JILL JOLLIFFE
LENGTH: 645 words
Planners from Portugal's uranium industry are examining the possibilities of joint ventures with British and Canadian firms to build nuclear reactors to meet Portugal's energy needs. They are dependent, however, on approval of a national energy plan which has been under consideration since 1983.
A delegation of industry officials recently started a study mission to Britain at the invitation of George Wimpey International. Wimpey, and Atomic Energy of Canada, have a viability study underway Which they will present to the Portuguese Government early next year. French, German and American campanies have also presented projects.
Government instability since the 1974 revolution has meant that Portugal has constantly postponed making a decision on nuclear power. The authorities are also concerned about the initial cost of a nuclear project, given that Portugal would have to import 40 per cent of the necessary technology and equipment.
Portugal is Western Europe's fourth uranium producer behind France, Denmark and Spain) but uses none of its output for domestic purposes, unlike neighbouring Spain. Depressed uranium prices and government indecision about Portugal's energy future have resulted in a stockpile of 700 tonnes.
With the use of second-generation nuclear reactors which will drastically reduce international demand for uranium by the next century, Portugal must decide quickly if it will go nuclear and put its uranium to domestic use, and - independently of this - - whether or not to open new mines at Nisa, in the upper Alentejo district. If the Nisa project is approved next year, as planners from the Department of Energy hope, it will be ready to begin production by 1990.
According to Mr Albuquerque e Castro, director of the state-run Empressa Nacional de Uranio (ENU), production for last year reached 140 tonnes of oxide of uranium, up from 104 tonnes in 1983. If the Nisa plant goes ahead, national output will reach 370 tonnes by the year 2000.
The mines at Urgeirica in the pine forests of central Portugal, have a long and interesting history in terms of this young industry. The current headquarters of ENU, the Urgeirica mines supplied radon to Madame Curie, and for much of this century were controlled by the British-owned Portuguese Radium Company.
During the war, Urgeirica was a focus of avid interest for intelligence agents from boths sides concerned that the strategic mineral might fall into the wrong hands, despite Portugal's neutrality. A monumental hotel built by the British a few hundred yards from the mines bears silent witness to its unusual guests of those years.
The main mine at Urgeirica has now been exhausted, although there are several other small workings in the area, both open-cut and shaft mines. Urgeirica also has a chemical treatment plant which converts ore into uranium oxide, or 'yellowcake,' which is then transported overland to European buyers or shipped from Leixoes port at the northern capital of Oporto.
Portgaul's largest sales in recent years have been to Iraq (138.1 tonnes in 1980, 148.3 tonnes in 1982); the United States (167.1 tonnes in 1982); France 115.9 tonnes in 1982); and West Germany (67.5 tonnes in 1981), and EEC membership will not change this pattern.
Both EEC and local officials have stressed that restrictions will not be placed on sales unless there is a shortfall of uranium supplies within the Community, in which case Portugal will sell to them first. This is unlikely to be a restriction in the near future, given world over-production.
The sale of yellowcake to Iraq is motivated by Portugal's dependence on oil imports, but became controversial in 1981 when Israel bombed an Iraqi nuclear reactor fuelled by Portuguese yellowcake near Baghdad, on the grounds that it was being used to manufacture nuclear weapons.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
156 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 14, 1986
Base rate could rise another 1 per cent
BYLINE: By PETER RODGERS and CHRISTOPHER HUHNE
LENGTH: 536 words
Base rates were once again under upward pressure yesterday as interest rates in the London money markets moved back to last Thursday's levels, in response to renewed falls in the pound and weaker oil prices. There was talk once again in the City that the government could be forced into another base rate rise, following the 1 per cent increase to 12.5 per cent last week.
Sterling dropped 1.57 cents to dollars 1.4405, though it held up well against the German mark, while the price of North Sea crude for delivery next month slipped a further 40 cents, in light trading.
But there was good news for the government's hopes of a declining inflation rate this year when official figures showed only modest price rises in December for factory inputs and outputs. Input costs are down over the year by more than at any time since the fifties and output prices showed the lowest rise over a year since 1968.
The sharp rise in short-term interest rates to over 13 per cent puts them at a level which could easily justify a further half point rise in base lending rates to 13 per cent, although in the City any further increase to protect the pound was expected to be at least a full percentage point. Shares in London dropped sharply in the gloomy atmosphere, with the FT 30 index down 11 at 1108.8.
Dealers said that interest rates were reacting to every move of sterling, although in fact the day's movements were mainly due to a stronger dollar, which gained just as much against the German mark. The pound's Bank of England index value ended 0.5 down at 78.1 per cent of its 1975 value.
The dollar was recovering because the market now expects strong US interest rates and because fears of an Arab sell-off as a result of President Reagan's Libyan embargo have evaporated.
The broad trends in input costs and output prices reflect the rebound in sterling at the beginning of last year, which reduced import prices, together with the weakness in the world prices of most major commodities including oil.
The price index for fuels and raw materials purchased by manufacturers rose by 2.2 per cent between November and December, mainly because of the winter rise in electricity prices for industrial users.
Because the rise was less than the 3 per cent increase in the same month a year ago, the decline in input costs over the year reached 6.1 per cent, down further from the 5.3 per cent drop over the year to November. At this time last year, input costs had risen over the year by 9 per cent. There was then a steady month-to-month fall in input costs from March to October.
Factory gate output prices have been less responsive to the pound because the largest element in costs is earnings, which have continued to grow rapidly. Nevertheless, the rise in output prices was only 0.2 per cent in December to bring the annual rate down to 5 per cent from 5.1 per cent in November and 6 per cent in December 1984.
The Treasury's most recent forecast is of 33 per cent retail price inflation by the fourth quarter of this year, compared with 5.5 per cent in the most recent figures. The rise in interest rate last week will, however, make the forecast more difficult to meet.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
157 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 14, 1986
The left, the write and the poisoned PEN / International writers' conference in New York
BYLINE: By W J WEATHERBY
LENGTH: 1009 words
Welcoming ceremonies at international conferences are usually bland, formal occasions, but the opening of the 48th International PEN Congress in New York was so temptestuous that it has made the real business of the congress - some weighty sessions on the relationship between writers and the state - seem like an anticlimax.
A storm of protests arose over president Norman Mailer's invitation to George Shultz, the US Secretary of State, to welcome foreign writers. On his arrival Mr Shultz was handed a letter decribing his appearance as 'inappropriate' at such a non-political literary gathering.
It was signed by 65 writers and editors, including Nadine Gordimer, a vicepresident from South Africa, former presidents, Galway Kinnell, Richard Howard and Richard Gilman, and novelists John Irving and EL Doctorow.
The letter told Mr Shultz: 'Your administration supports governments that silence, imprison and even torture their citizens for their beliefs,' and EL Doctorow added in a statement published in the New York Times that the American PEN, as the host 'has put itself in the position of a bunch of writers union hacks in Eastern Europe who have gathered for a pat on the head by the minister of culture.'
Mailer, who had invited Shultz without consulting other PEN officials said: 'It seems self-evident that the PEN Congress would be dignified by the presence of an American Secretary of State' and he apologised to Shultz 'for the silly bad manners exhibited tonight.'
Several PEN members walked out as Shultz began to speak and there were booes and hisses as he enlarged on his theme that serious writers and the Reagan administration had a lot of philosophical interests in common.
PEN is always a hotbed of political and literary intrigues and this incident brought out many hidden animosities that kept souring some of the working sessions. Press seats were at the rear of the noisy delegates - some 700 from over 40 countries. So some of the subtleties of the biting exchanges may have been lost, but certainly it was clear that Mailer's action had turned part of the congress into a rebellious faction.
The theme, 'The Writer's Imagination and the Imagination of the State', which had Mailer's complete approval, was dismissed as meaningless by several writers as the first chairman yesterday Monday, Mr Mario Vargas Llosa, the Peruvian novelist, acknowledged. Some writers, in fact, would not even accept the term 'state' but wished to substitute 'society'.
You could almost guess where a writer came from by his or her interpretation of what was meant by 'The Imagination of the State'. Perhaps anticipating such a political disagreement, the Soviet writers invited as guests of honour, declined to attend.
Under the calm surface of speakers going on too long, of walkie-talkie translations in several languages, of photographers flash-bulbing celebrity faces before the orations began, the Shulz now began to erupt again William Gaddis, the American novelist, made a scathing reference to Mr Shultz's conclusion that 'Ronald Reagan and I are on your side' and this seemed to typify for him the state's flight from reality.
Wang Meng, of China, stressed that a writer lived both in the world of his own imagination and 'the factual world of the people.' He compared the relationship of the people and the state to water and a boat, for water could capsize a boat. This Chinese simile was still being given complex interpretations at the e nd of the session.
Nadine Gordimer, with the authority of coming from a dominating state - South Africa - said firmly: 'The state has no imagination,' and was loudly applauded. The state had a collective vision, she said, and its product was social engineering. In her own country there was a total travesty where the state fantasised - which was not the same as imagining - about having a democratic process although the majority of the people had no vote.
What alienated the writer from the state was that the state thought it was always right, whereas the writer acknowledged uncertanties. The state wanted reinforcement from the writer as to the conditions it imposed on its citizens and for this reason often tried to control the imagination by imprisoning the writer.
Gunter Grass from West Germany, who seemed depressed by the prospect of attending yet another writers' congress, said he came from a divided country which he likened to the division between committed literature and a free private imagination. We have seen what happens to utopias from Thomas More to Marx, he said, when the state puts fences around earthly paradises.
Referring to the bankruptcy of both communism and capitalism, Grass said whoever still thought the American way was still a solution must be a hypocrite, ignoring the slums and poverty and racism. Nobody applauded that, but there were some titters when he said religions was equally bankrupt. Kobo Abe, of Japan, saw the state as a terminus point for the imagination which put him in full agreement with Miss Gordimer but opposed to president Mailer.
The Shultz row still rumbles and the congress faces another controversial appearance today, when AmadouMahtar M'Bow of Senegal, the director-general of Unesco, will speak and answer questions. The US and British governments have resigned from Unesco because of the policies he espouses and some ten members have already protested against inviting such a political figure.
But even with these seething divisions it must be admitted a most common topic overheard has been the news over the weekend that the New York publishers, Morrow & Avon, are giving James Clavell, the highest advance ever, dollars 5 million, for North American hard-cover and paperback rights to his new novel, Whirlwind.
Many PEN delegates forced to subsidise their distinguished writing with nineto-five jobs are understandably green with envy. As one American delegate observed sardonically, 'Economics is still far more important to writers than politics.'
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
158 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 14, 1986
Leading Article: Mr Botha's grey cloud / Prospects for political reform in South Africa
LENGTH: 481 words
Rather wispier than last time, puffs of smoke are rising once again over the Cape of Good Hope to signal impending reform. Dr Fritz Leutwiler, the Swiss mediator between South Africa and its creditors among foreign banks, emerges from a weekend meeting with President Botha to say that positive changes are in the offing. Dr Chester Crocker, Assistant Secretary of State for Africa, spends yesterday morning with Mr Botha after delivering a private letter from President Reagan. So far there has been no attempt by South African ministers and officials to stoke up expectations as was done so disastrously before last August's pathetic 'Rubicon' speech by Mr Botha. On the other hand, attention is inevitably beginning to focus on the President's next speaking engagement, the opening of Parliament later this month.
But only last week six members of the US House of Representatives came out of a fraught session with Mr Botha 'quite pessimistic' about the prospects of real changes and saying he had been both 'rude' and 'coarse' with them. Unless the President underwent a complete change of heart in 72 hours, it boils down to whether one believes the Swiss intermediary or the American legislators.
There is, however, no need to rely on the subjective impressions of foreign visitors about Mr Botha's attitude when recent actions by his government speak for themselves. Among the few specific undertakings Mr Botha gave last year were promises that all would have a say in decisions affecting their interests, that forced removals of blacks would end and that they would not have to lose their South African citizenship as a result of the 'homeland' programme. But plans are pressing ahead to give 'independence' to the KwaNdebele 'homeland' this year - and as part of this purblind extension of 'grand apartheid,' 120,000 North Sotho people are being forced to join the Ndebele group, with which they have little in common, in the new statelet. The result has been some thoroughly nasty inter-tribal fighting which the whites naturally attribute to African instability rather than their own blithe mishandling and provocation.
Mr Botha stands accused by his critics of vagueness, lacking a sense of urgency, and authoritarianism in his response to protest. The KwaNdebele affair however looks like rank hypocrisy. So does the siege of hapless Lesotho, the former British protectorate completely surrounded by South African territory. Pretoria claims to be looking for guerrillas, but such people are hardly likely to come through the main border post. The real motive must be to force the helpless hostage-state to sign one of those security accords which the experience of Mozambique has shown to be not worth the paper they are written on. No doubt Mr Botha will have much to say on opening-day. The only question is whether anyone will take him seriously.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
159 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 14, 1986
Leading Article: Dead bat, but the ball keeps turning / Trade and Industry Secretary Brittan and the Westland helicopter affair
LENGTH: 543 words
After what seemed like an eternity - but was in fact only four days - Mr Leon Brittan, our Secretary for Trade and Industry, yesterday broke silence to give his answer to Mr Michael Heseltine's allegations about the Westland saga. The Government's strategy now is to cool the whole affair down (if only to avoid getting bogged down in an unseemly beggar-my-neighbour escalation of disclosures with Parliament's newest backbencher). So Mr Brittan yesterday played it as boringly downbeat as possible. Did he try to put undue influence on Sir Raymond Lygo of British Aerospace when he mentioned possible US trade retaliation if Westland was snatched for Europe from the jaws of Sikorsky? Not he. Had he received a letter from Sir Raymond as Mr Heseltine (in his only question as a humble backbencher) had suggested? Not he. (That was Mrs T). Had he departed from the Cabinet's pre-Christmas decision to be evenhanded and not take sides? Not he. This is all very well, but not very reassuring. Every answer begets a fresh question. If Mrs Thatcher wants to damp down the speculation in every pub in the land (as Mr David Steel claimed yesterday) then she will have to do better in the Opposition debate tomorrow. There are still several important questions to be answered about the role of the Secretary of State for Industry before Mrs Thatcher defends her own record.
For a start Mr Brittan says that he spoke last Wednesday to Sir Raymond who had come to the Department to see the Minister of State, Mr Geoffrey Pattie, about another matter. Why? Because it would have been 'wholly artificial' if he had not done so. Maybe. He denies Mr Heseltine's claim that he had urged BAe to withdraw from the consortium on the grounds that it was against the national interest. AH that he had said was that the European option would inflame protectionist pressures in the US where BAe had interests and so endanger commercial prospects for the European airbus to which the Government was committed to the tune of pounds 2 miliion in launch aid. Mr Brittan claimed that BAe's US subsidiary had also warned them of this. He says that his version has since been contirmed by officials present. A note had been taken, though it is not clear whether it was taken at the time of the meeting or a few days later when the controversial nature of it became apparent. Either way, having referred to that note, Mr Brittan ought to allow it to be published. At best Mr Brittan's intervention was indiscreet. At worst it was an interference which breached the non-intervention agreement in a shameless manner. And there seems a caveruous gap between the Brittan testimony and the Lygo impression of what went on.
Also, there has been much innuendo about leaking from the Heseltine camp in breach of the Cabinet's 'evenhanded' approach. It is always difficult for newspapers subject to understandings about confidentiality to comment. But could Mr Brittan honestly stand up and say that his camp has not given briefings pushing the US line to countervail what is alleged to have come from the other side? Mr Brittan will have to do better than this to dispel the view that, far from leaving it to market forces, he was juggling in the thick of them himself.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
160 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 14, 1986
Contadora plea to Washington / Latin America group launches peace campaign
BYLINE: From MERRILL COLLETT
LENGTH: 551 words
DATELINE: CARABALLEDA
The Contadora Group, determined to prove that its peace efforts have not failed, has launched an international campaign aimed at pushing the United States and Nicaragua to the bargaining table and cooling East-West tensions in Central America.
Eight Latin American Foreign Ministers meeting in Gautamala City today will lobby envoys from Nicaragua and the United States to reopen talks around the 10 peace principles worked out by the Contadora group here this weekend.
Reflecting a new mood of realism, the two-day Contadora meeting in this seaside resort 20 miles from Caracas put the US-Nicaragua conflict at the centre of the group's 36-month long search for peace in Central America.
'The best diplomacy is the art of speaking the truth although it appears a little harsh,' the Colombian Foreign Minister, Mr Augusto Ramirez Ocampo, told reporters.
While re-stating the familiar Contadora principles of arms control and respect for territorial integrity, the nine-page document issued at the end of the two-day meeting, makes demands likely to rankle governments in both Washington and Managua. The document urges both countries to renew the bilateral talks cancelled by the United States in the middle of last year.
The group now wants the end of 'foreign support for irregular forces that operate in the region' and the 'suspension of international military manoeuvres.'
The United States Government and private American citizens' groups sustain the 15,000 right-wing contras fighting the left-wing Nicaraguan Government, while as many as 30,000 US troops have been deployed on war games in the region.
The document also establishes as a 'permanent basis for peace' the need for 'pluralist government' in the region, a lightly veiled reference to the growing evidence that the Sandinistas want a one-party state.
According to diplomatic sources, the document was drawn up by the Argentine contingent. Argentina's Foreign Minister, Mr Dante Caputo, had warned before leaving Buenos Aires on Friday that Latin America would not back a 'Marxist-Leninist regime.'
Argentina, along with Brazil, Uruguay and Peru formed a Contadora support group last August. It was apparent here that the support group has now merged fully with the original four nations of Colombia, Venezuela, Panama and Mexico. The group takes its name from the Panamanian island where it first met on January 9, 1983.
Some diplomats expressed concern privately here that the 'pluralistic democracy' could make Contadora vulnerable to charges of meddling in domestic politics, but the ministers appeared determined to take whatever steps might be necessary to head off the growing threat of a bloody US-Soviet struggle in Central America.
The goal, Mr Caputo said, is to 'avoid the tongs of the East-West conflict, that would choke the countries of Latin America.'
Contaora decided here that it needs allies. To gain international support, the foreign ministries of the eight countries are now delivering the just completed document to not only the Central American governments but also those in the United States, Canada and Cuba as well as various international organisations, including the European Community, the Venezuelan Foreign Minister, Mr Simon Alberto Consalvi, announced.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
161 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 14, 1986
US spending cuts bite as deficit hits new levels / From defence to taxation, axe falls in a capricious manner
BYLINE: From ALEX BRUMMER
LENGTH: 523 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
With new estimates showing the federal budget deficit soaring to dollars 212 billion in the current financial year, government departments are being forced to get to grips with the first automatic cuts in spending required by the Gramm-Rudman balanced budget law.
The Office of Management and Budget has ordered all domestic departments to reduce spending on their operations by 4.3 per cent while Mr Caspar Weinberger's Pentagon is being forced to take a 4.9 per cent cut in spending. Among the projects which could be affected are a new construction plant for the B-lB strategic bomber in Kansas, as well as improvements to Clark air force base in the Philippines.
The Gramm-Rudman cuts, which are mandatory under the balanced budget law, appear to be totally capricious in their impact. It was noted yesterday that the US would be required to cut some dollars 2 millions from an account which pays interest on bonds which built the Washington subway system: potentially putting the system into default and requiring a far more expensive refunding operation.
While President Reagan said during last week's press conference that his administration would be seeking changes in the way the axe would fall, the law requires this first round of cuts to take place before he has had a chance to seek the amendments.
The Internal Revenue Service, for instance, is facing a dollars 156 million cut which will hinder its ability to collect the taxes efficiently at a time when they are urgently needed to trim the budget deficit.
The White House has its pet ideas for where the cuts should come. Among its targets are so called middle-class subsidies or the Amtrak railway system which Mr Reagan believes, in good populist style, plies the East Coast filled aith Yuppies travelling at government expense. Similarly, the President wants Gramm-Rudman to hit at military pensions not strategic projects such as the Bl-B bomber, one of his favourite hi-tech weapons systems.
While the damage from this first round of automatic cuts will be fairly limited, a cut of dollars 11.7 billion is required from the deficit of dollars 220 billion, it becomes a far more draconian measure in the next financial year when some dollars 50 billion will have to be hacked from government programmes to meet the target for 1987. The new budget, giving the White House version of events, will be sent to Congress early in February.
The current problems over spending this year stem from a runaway deficit which is turning out far higher than expected. According to the latest office of Management and Budget projections it will be dollars 215 billion to dollars 220 billion, some dollars 40 billion higher than was envisaged when Gramm-Rudman was drawn up.
By the time the next few months are over, Mr Reagan may find himself warming to the action being brought in the courts by Congressman Mike Synar (Democrat, Oklahoma) who is challenging the constitutionality of Grafm-Rudman. 'Synar is tapping a coalition of discontent on this thing,' argues a spokesman for the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Mr Tip O'Neill.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
162 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 14, 1986
Pakistani Shi'as mob Khamenei / State visit by Iranian President
BYLINE: From ALEX BRODIE
LENGTH: 238 words
DATELINE: ISLAMABAD
Thousands of Pakistani Shias turned out to greet President Khamenei of Iran yesterday at the start of his state visit to Pakistan, the first by an Iranian leader since Tehran's 1979 Islamic revolution.
Carrying portraits of Ayatollah Khomeini and chanting 'Death to America,' the crowd mobbed the limousine taking the Iranian President and his host, President Zia, from the welcoming reception at Islamabad airport.
General Zia looked uneasy as the crowd surged around the car. President Khamenei waved and smiled. Eventually the motorcade managed to force its way through, much to the relief of the security men.
The show of pro-Iranian sentiment mounted by the Shias - who form between 15 and 30 per cent of Pakistan's mainly Sunni Muslim population - dramatised the main foreign policy difference between the two Islamic neighbours. To the Iranian regime, the United States is still 'enemy number one.' To Pakistan it is a close ally supplying considerable economic and military aid.
Six American-supplied F16 fighters flew past at the end of a 21-gun salute. President Khomenei was given a full state welcome at the airport.
At the unofficial welcome outside, slogans like 'Neither East nor West' - Ayatollah Khomeini's foreign policy tenet - and anti-American placards and chants were much in evidence.
It was one of the biggest spontaneous welcomes Pakistani journalists could remember.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
163 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 14, 1986
The Day in Politics: Lloyd's men will be difficult to bring back to UK / Insurance market scandals
BYLINE: By our Political Staff
LENGTH: 275 words
The Attorney General yesterday gave a clear indication that he has little hope of bringing back to Britain to face charges those at the centre of the Lloyd's insurance scandals. The difficulties facing the Government's law officers over extradition of those suspected of fraud from Costa Rica, Switzerland and United States will heighten Opposition criticism today when Parliament debates the Financial Services Bill of the Government's lack of action to combat City fraud.
Sir Michael Havers, the Attorney General, said that the Government faced great difficulties in its investigation of the Lloyd's scandals.
Tracing the funds involved to establish the ultimate beneficiaries involved several foreign countries and Swiss banks.
He said that Mr Peter Cameron. Webb, whose insurance syndicate was alleged to be involved in a pounds 130 million fraud, was believed to be in Costa' Rica, with which Britain has no extradition treaty.
He said that if either Mr Cameron Webb or Mr Peter Dixon, who has been fined pounds 1 million in absentia by Lloyd's were in the US there were still considerable difficulties as the extradition process with the United States was a lengthy business.
The Attorney-General said Mr Kenneth Grob, the chairman of Alexander Howdens', now believed to be in Switzerland, held dual nationality and had Swiss and British citizen ship. Sir Michael said the Swiss did not extradite their own nationals.
Mr Dennis Skinner (Lab, Bolsover) had asked the Attorney-General for an unequivocal statement that those involved in the insurance frauds would be brought back to this country to face charges.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
164 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 14, 1986
The Day in Politics: Brittan gets in spin over BAe letter / Westland helicopter affair
BYLINE: By ALAN TRAVIS
LENGTH: 1896 words
The Trade and Industry Secretary, Mr Leon Brittan last night apologised to the Commons for having earlier given a misleading impression to MPs that the Government had not received a letter from British Aerospace on the Westland affair.
Mr Brittan, in a late night statement, said that he had been asked earlier in the day when he was making a statement to the House whether the Government had received a letter from British Aerospace concerning a meeting which took place between Cir Raymond Lygo, the chief executive of British Aerospace, and him self on January 8.
'I replied that I had not done so. There has since been an announcement by 10 Downing Street that the Prime Minister received a letter around noon today, not from Sir Raymond Lygo but from Sir Austin Pearce, the chairman of British Aerospace which was marked 'Private and Strictly Confidential.'
Mr Brittan said that although he was told of the letter minutes before he came to the Commons to make the statement at 3 30 pm he had not been told of its contents, nor did he know whether the Chairman of British Aerospace was prepared for its existence to be made public.
Mr Brittan said he unreservedly apologised if it was thought that he had in any way misled the Commons over a letter, which Sir Austin Pearce had in the meantime indicated could be disclosed.
Mr Brittan's explanation failed to satisfy the packed Opposition benches, which bayed for his resignation. Mr John Smith, the Shadow Trade Secretary, said that during his afternoon statement Mr Brittain had deliberately not told the House of the letter despite direct questioning from MPs.
'Throughout the whole performance the Prime Minister sat there beside him and she had more knowledge than any other member of the Commons because she was the recipient of that letter and no doubt had read it. Why did the Prime Minister not even lean across to the Secretary of State and correct him? She should come to the House and apologise.'
Mr Brittan said he had apologised for misleading the House. 'At least give me credit for that.' He insisted that the contents of the letter remained strictly confidential.
Mr Alan Beith, the Liberal chief whip, asked how Mr Brittain could claim that it was not his intention to mislead the Commons when he gave his answers earlier in the day when he did not wish to acknowledge the existence of the letter. 'It has been his intention to conceal the letter from the House. Was he given guidance from the Prime Minister before the exchanges?'
Mr Brittan replied that he had tried to tread the narrow path between the confidentiality of the British Aerospace chairman and answering questions accurately.
The extraordinary turn of events last evening stemmed from yesterday's afternoon session when Mr Brittan made a statement on the Westland affair and was closely questioned by MPs.
He denied that when he first met Sir Raymond Lygo he had told him that the company's continued presence in the European consortium bidding for Westland would be against the national interest.
He also denied on several occasions that he or anyone in the Government had received any letter from Sir Raymond about the meeting they had.
But Mr Brittan did confirm that he had expressed concern to Sir Raymond that the anti-American tone of the European consortium's campaign could damage future sales of British Aerospace airbuses to the United States.
Mr Neil Kinnock, the Labour leader, accused the Prime Minister of a 'craven evasion' of her duty to the Commons in sending Mr Brittan to make a statement to MPs instead of explaining her role herself. Labour repeatedly pressed for the minutes of the meeting between Mr Brittan and the chief executive of British Aerospace to be made public.
During the questions on the statement made by Mr Brittan, Mr Michael Heseltine, the former Defence Secretary, made only one brief intervention from the back benches, which was heard in total silence. With the former Cabinet Minister, Sir Ian Gilmour, by his side he challenged Mr Brittan to state whether 'the Government has received any letters from British Aerospace giving their view on the meeting.'
His former Cabinet colleague hesitated and then replied, 'I have not received any such letters.'
After being pressed several times by MPs, Mr Brittan expanded this to say that no member of the Government has received any letter from Sir Raymond.
The Westland statement was preceded by a point of order from Mr Kinnock when he demanded that the Prime Minister make a statement instead of Mr Brittan. He announced that the Opposition would use its day of debate tomorrow to raise the Westland affair and in that debate Mr Kinnock said he would be demanding that the Prime Minister personally accounts for 'her role and her conduct in the matter of such national importance.'
'The Prime Minister can run but she cannot hide'.
Mr Kinnock said that the implications of the affair were grave. 'One thing has been said in private, at least that is the allegation, and another in this House. The implications for this House are very serious. They are that someone has been telling the truth and that someone has not been telling the truth.'
Mr David Steel, the Liberal Leader, also demanded that Mrs Thatcher make a statement on the wider issues of Cabinet responsibility and asked for an undertaking that the Prime Minister would take part in tomorrow's debate.
Mr John Biffen, Leader of the House, said he would be surprised if Mr Steel were to be disappointed.
In his short statement Mr Brittan said that the Government had encouraged Westland to explore fully in addition to the Sikorsky offer the possibility of an alternative European-based proposal.
He said that on December 16 the Westland board had recommended the Sikorsky offer and he explained that the Government was not bound by the recommendation of the European armament directors for certain helicopter requirements to be met by helicopters designed and built in Europe. Mr Brittan said that remained the situation and at no stage did the Government collectively determine on a preference for a particular solution.
'At its meeting on December 19 the Cabinet confirmed the policy I had previously announced. It was also decided that no minister was entitled to lobby in favour of one proposal rather than another. That decision was unanimously approved by the members of the Cabinet.'
Mr John Smith, the Shadow Trade and Industry Secretary, said that Mr Brittan's statement added very little to what was already known. He repeated that it should have been the Prime Minister who made the statement.
Mr Smith challenged Mr Brittan about his meeting with Sir Raymond Lygo: 'If it was the decision of the Government that ministers should keep out of this matter and leave it for the shareholders to decide why did you decide to speak to Sir Raymond at all?'
He asked why Mr Brittan has raised the question of whether British Aerospace involvement in the European consortium would damage the prospects for orders for the British Aerospace airbus.
'What was its purpose, if not to influence him in one direction or another? Unless you give a very full account indeed of what was said to Sir Raymond Lygo the impression will continue to circulate in this country that you will say one thing in Parliament and do another thing in practice.'
Mr Brittan said that the meeting was a routine one organised by Mr Norman Lamont, the Minister of State, with Sir Raymond to discuss the airbus project. It would have been 'wholly artificial' if he had not seen Sir Raymond as well.
' lt is quite untrue that in the course of the meeting I made a suggestion that British Aerospace should withdraw from the European consortium or that their participation was contrary to the national interest.'
'I said the nature and tone of some of the campaigning on behalf of the European consortium could fuel protectionist sentiments in the US and damage the commercial interests of British Aerospace and its European partners, especially in the United States.
'Sir Raymond himself said that British Aerospace's American subsidiary had expressed great concern about their US business being harmed. I said it was not in the national interest that the present uncertainty should drag on. If others give differing interpretations I should naturally regret it.'
He said he thought it appropriate to raise the matter as the Government had committed pounds 250 million in launch aid for the airbus project. The recovery of all but pounds 50 million was dependent upon airbus sales. 'I was naturally concerned that airbus sales would be made more difficult - not by the participation of Sir Raymond Lygo in the consortium but by the tone of the things said.'
Mr Brittan said that he had checked the recollections of the ministers and the civil servants who were at the meeting and they had agreed with his account.
Mr Paddy Ashdown (L Yeovil), whose constituency includes a Westland factory, said the vast majority of the Westland workforce and small shareholders back the Sikorsky option. He said neither of the two options before shareholders today could threaten Westland's position as the British Government's representative on future European collaborative projects.
Several MPs pressed Mr Brittan about the letter from British Aerospace. Mr Tony Beaumont Dark (C Selly Oak) asked whether any other member of the Government had received letters from Sir Raymond Lygo.
Mr Brittan replied 'I can only speak for myself.'
Mr Tam Dalyell (Lab. Linlithgow) asked Mr Brittain to be more candid, saying that if he did not receive a letter perhaps the Prime Minister had.
Mr Brittan said that he had given his account of the meeting and he had nothing more to add.
Mr Merlyn Rees, the former Labour Home Secretary, asked Mr Brittan about the leaked letter from the Solicitor-General in which he accused Mr Heseltine of publishing a material inaccuracy. 'Was the correcting letter from the law officers to the Defence Secretary seen by you or your department before it was sent to MoD'
Mr Brittan said he saw it after it had been sent.
Sir Peter Tapsell (C Lindsey E) asked how, 'In view of the important national defence interests involved, it was possible for the Government of the day not to have a view on which bid is better for this country?'
The Industry Secretary replied: 'The security of supply for the armed forces of helicopters is assured and that is, therefore, not a problem.' He added that United Technologies had assured the Westland board that it wished the company to retain its own helicopter design and research capability.
Later Mr Smith interrupted the Public Order Bill debate to demand that Mr Brittan rome back to the Commons and explain his 'remarkable conduct' in giving the Commons the impression that British Aerospace had not sent any letter to anybody in the Government.
Mr Smith said that at 12 noon a letter was delivered by hand from Sir Austin Pearce, the chairman of British Aerospace to the Prime Minister. The content of the letter related to Mr Brittan's meeting with Sir Raymond Lygo.
Mr Smith said that almost 3 1/2 hours elapsed between the letter being delivered and the statement given by Mr Brittain to the Commons.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
165 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 14, 1986
Westland affair 'shows need for free information act' / Labour leader Kinnock comments on government secrecy over helicopter company
BYLINE: By RICHARD NORTON-TAYLOR
LENGTH: 390 words
The Westland affair has provided 'the greatest ever audio - visual aid' to the supporters of a freedom of information act, Mr Neil Kinnock, the Labour leader, said last night.
'The need for such a law is particularly pressing,' he said, 'when government combines shop-front secrecy with a chronic tendency for under-the-counter leaking and manipulation.'
'A freedom of information act - to which the Liberal and Social Democratic leadership is also pledged - would provide a public right of access to information held by government while safeguarding material genuinely relating to national security, the national interest, and individual privacy.' Mr Kinnock said.
In the row over the future of the Westland helicopter company central issues of government policy on defence procurement had not been openly and fully debated. 'Instead we have had leaks from the Solicitor-General, inspired interviews from one Cabinet minister's supporters, extensive briefings from another Cabinet minister's friends,' he said.
Almost daily, there had been unattributable briefings from the Prime Minister's unnamed press secretary about her state of mind, or lack of it, he said. To cap it all, Mr Heseltine had provided televised accounts of Cabinet discussions.
Mr Kinnock made his plea for more open and coherent debate in a speech to the Freedom of Information Campaign when he presented an award to Mr Ralph Nader, the American consumer watchdog and advocate of open government.
Also honoured were Mr Robin Squire, Tory MP for Hornchurch, who sponsored the Local Government (Access to Information) Act; Prue Stevenson, who resigned from her job as art teacher at Holloway prison to protest at conditions there; Leeds City Council; Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council; Granada Television's World in Action programme; and Mr David Leigh of the Observer for campaigning against abuses of the Contempt of Court Act.
Mr Nader recalled that the US, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand now had freedom of information legislation. 'The mother country persists with an attitude which would breed ridicule an satire anywhere else,' he said.
The campaign is holding an all-party rally tonight to mark the 75th anniversary of the official Secrets Act, which passed through the Commons in little more than half an hour.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
166 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 14, 1986
Court upholds Soweto ban on Winnie Mandela / Black activist banned from township home by South African court
BYLINE: From PATRICK LAURENCE
LENGTH: 544 words
DATELINE: JOHANNESBURG
An urgent application to the Rand supreme court to set aside an order banishing the black nationalist leader, Mrs Winnie Mandela, from h er Soweto home was yesterday dismissed with costs by Mr Justice Le Grange.
The judge, however, granted Mrs Mandela, wife of the gaoled African Nationalist Congress leader, Mr Nelson Mandela, leave to appeal 'The personal freedom of an individual is an important principle and I am therefore inclined to grant leave to appeal,' the judge said.
Mrs Mandela was served with an order on December 21, banishing her from the magisterial areas of Johannesburg and Roodepoort, into which the sprawling township of Soweto falls. She was twice physically removed from Soweto and later intercepted on a busy motorway while allegedly going home to the township.
The December 21 order revised an earlier decree, issued in July, 1983, confining Mrs Mandela to the magisterial district of Brandfort in the Orange Free State. The latest order permitted her to live anywhere in South Africa, except Johannesburg and Roodepoort.
Mrs Mandela was living in Soweto when the revised order was served on her because her house in Brandfort's black township of Phatakahle was burnt down by unknown assailants in August last year.
Counsel for Mrs Mandela, Mr Sydney Kentridge, contended that the revised December order meant, by implication, that the original 1983 decree had lapsed.
He further argued that as the December order was not accompanied by written reasons it did not comply with the statute.
As the new order took effect immediately, Mrs Mandela was not given time to make alternative arrangements, Mr Kentridge said. He described the new order as unreasonable and inhuman.
Counsel for the Minister of Law and Order, Mr Louis le Grange, Mr Johann Smit, contended that the December order was a relaxation of the 1983 decree and did nor imply that the original edict had lapsed or expired.
The minister did not accept that the 1983 decree had lapsed when Mrs Mandela moved to Soweto in definace of the requirement that she lived in Brandfort, Mr Smit said. Mr Le Grange had given the police instructions to investigate the matter with a view to criminal prosecution, indicating that he did not condone Mrs Mandela's presence in Soweto, Mr Smit added.
Mr Justice Le Grange found that the 1983 order had not lapsed, that the 1985 amendment to it was valid, and that the police had not acted unlawfully in arresting her. Mrs Mandela, who was not in oourt when he gave his judgment, is due to appear in court again next week on charges of contravening the order prohibiting her from entering Johannesburg.
Meanwhile, the US Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, Dr Chester Crocker, yesterday met the President, Mr PW Botha, the Foreign Minister, Mr Pik Botha, the Minister of Defence, General Magnus Malan, and the chief of the defence force, General Jannie Geldenhuys.
Dr Crocker, who arrived here after holding talks with Angolan government officials, handed a letter to President Botha from President Reagan. The talks with the South Africans are believed to have concerned Dr Crocker's latest attempt to revive the stalled US initiative to settle the protracted Namibian dispute.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
167 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 13, 1986
Commodities: Shortage fears bring havoc to coffee market
BYLINE: By ROBIN STAINER
LENGTH: 837 words
The International Coffee Organisation faces a difficult - some reckon impossible - job when it meets in London shortly to consider measures to restore order to the market.
Prices have risen dramatically over the past few months, with the London market moving above pounds 3,000 a tonne last week to its highest for nearly nine years, despite everything the ICO has so far done to check the advance. There is only one more weapon in its armoury - the suspension of all remaining limits on the volume its 50 producer members can export.
The 75-nation ICO, which regulates the annual dollars 10 billion trade in the product to keep the price stable within the dollars 1.20-1.40 a pound band agreed by its member governments, has already increased the 1985-6 global export quota by five million bags to its maximum of 63 million. But the price is now 60 cents above the ceiling, tending to support the view that the ICO is powerless to influence the market.
Prices have been pushed up by very heavy speculative and trade buying, triggered by fears of an acute shortage within the next few months, because of serious losses to the drought-hit Brazilian crop, the source of about a third of the world's supplies. Any shortage will coincide with the onset of the Brazilian winter and, as usual, fears of frost damage to the 1987 crop there.
According to the first official Brazilian estimate, the upcoming harvest, which begins in about four months, is likely to be only 16.75 million bags of 60 kilos, compared with last year's 30 million. Many independent analysts, however, put it even lower - possibly no bigger than 10 million bags, which would put it roughly on a par with the harvest after the catastrophic frosts of 1975.
The concern over future supplies had been accentuated by crop problems elsewhere and by the fact that Brazil's stocks are very low indeed. A considerable proportion of the inventories held by other producing countries, meanwhile, is thought unlikely to be of top export quality. For instance, Colombia - the second biggest producer - has stocks of 12 million bags, more than a year's output, yet some local experts believe that about only two-thirds may be good enough to export.
Colombia, which relies on coffee as an export earner much more heavily than Brazil, is extremely concerned about the threat posed by high prices to the ICO's chances of survival as an effective force. ICO consuming countries - in particular, the US, the biggest - have become increasingly disenchanted with the body, and its latest failure to contain the rise in prices may prove to be the final straw.
Many would probably prefer a free market over the long term, even if this could only be achieved at the cost of very high prices now.
The coffee pact, run by the ICO, is one of only two commodity price-control agreements still operating. Colombia has called on other producing countries to work with it in defending the accord rather than sit back idly enjoying the present windfall. For, over the longer term, what goes up is bound to come down, and, when that happens, a safety net will be needed.
After the 1975 Brazilian frost disaster, the price rose to a record of more than pounds 4,000 in early 1977. Four years later it was barely pounds 700. That it recovered from this low was almost entirely thanks to the ICO.
Colombia has suggested to other leading producers that they should all back the lifting of the remaining restrictions on export when the ICO meets next week, rather than wait for this to be automatically triggered.
Under ICO rules, all quotas are suspended if the average price remains above dollars 1.50 for 45 consecutive market days. This period will be up in a month's time.
Whether the immediate suspension of quotas would take the steam out of the market is doubtful, according to analysis. However, it would allow Colombia to offer its stocked coffee for sale and would also give traders a chance to release to the market several million bags of coffee bought at under dollars 1 a pound ostensibly for sale to non-ICO members.
For producer, the suspension of quotas is not something to be viewed lightly - because of the likely difficulty of reimposing them eventually when prices are falling and consuming countries still smarting over the increase. Nonetheless, to do this earlier than absolutely necessary - even if the tangible effects on prices would probably be slight - would be a clear political signal to consuming countries of the producers' concern.
Eventually, the current high prices and the likely even higher ones to come must be passed on to the domestic consumer. Although demand for coffee is not normally responsive to price movements, ED& F Man said in its latest monthly market report that this cannot be true when they are too inconsistent with those of competing beverages.
'In the modern world we fear that adherents lost to coffee will be more difficult to win back than before,' it concluded gloomily.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
168 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 13, 1986
Financial Notebook: Volcker has won junk bond skirmish, but how will policy control battle go? / US stock markets and Federal Reserve Board policy
BYLINE: By ALEX BRUMMER
LENGTH: 1152 words
The two most powerful figures in American finance, the Federal Reserve chairman, Paul Volcker, and Salomon Brothers' guru, Henry Kaufman, were responsible for last week's abrupt reversal on Wall Street and stock markets around the world. Their respective views and actions are likely to strongly influence movements on the equity and bond markets during the first half of 1986 at least.
As luck would have it they were given a little help by Colonel Gadafy of Libya. In response to President Reagan's announcement of an economic embargo on Wednesday, Tripoli responded decisively, pulling its assets out of New York. By the time the US Treasury realised what was happening some dollars 100 millions - of the Libyan assets of up to dollars 1 billion - had already left American shores.
Word of the outflow through the New York foreign exchanges reached equity markets which were already in full retreat adding to the momentum of the fall. By the time it was all over the Dow Jones industrial average had outdone itself: recording its largest one-day loss since the Great Depression.
In reality, however, Colonel Gadafy is an aberration. The damage he can inflict on the US economy and markets is limited particularly during an oil glut. Libyan assets in the US (now frozen) are minimal compared with the dollars 12 billion of Iranian assets frozen during the 1979-80 hostage affair.
Nevertheless, there will always be an outside chance that in a display of Arab solidarity, or perhaps fear, other Opec countries will run down their extensive holdings in the US.
All this skirts around the underlying reasons for the sudden end to a bull market. The dozens of investment bankers, stockbrokers, lobbyists and correspondents who crowded into the marbled halls of the Federal Reserve to listen to the extraordinary public debate on junk bonds would clearly interpret things differently. What was witnessed was not simply a debate about takeover finance but a debate about the future leadership of the central bank itself.
Clearly, the narrow 3-2 vote against junk bonds, however tightly the American regulations are drawn, is a blow to the mega-mergers. While the new regulations still allow high yielding debt securities to be used (for instance in an agreed merger or when corporate guarantees are involved) they are encompassing enough to affect market behaviour.
The idea of the Federal Reserve, acting like America's very own takeover panel, will be a disincentive to the cowboys like T Boone Pickens and Carl Icahn. The knowledge that these corporate raiders are curtailed, if not out of the game completely, has already removed some of the froth from the top of the heady brew. Although the sharp rise in Merrill Lynch's share price of late - on persistent takeover rumours - shows that mega-mergers may not yet be over despite Mr Volcker's efforts.
But as important as the junk bond decision itself was the open board meeting which directly let in the public on the schism inside the Federal Reserve. What was seen was hardly likely to inspire confidence in the future. Mr Volcker was his usual phlegmatic self: leaning back in his chair, champing on his cigar and challenging the Fed's staff to clarify the impact of his new interpretation of margin rules governing share purchases which date back to 1934.
His deputy, Preston Martin, a Reagan appointee who has consistently followed the White House lead, was unimpressive in his attempt to defeat the junk bond rule. He looked continuously flustered as he sought to probe weaknesses in the interpretation and eventually settled on a bureaucratic rather than an intellectual attack on the change, arguing that as the Fed was informally ruling on margin stock all the time, why bother to change the system?
If Mr Martin had been so inclined there were far more substantive financial points to be made. The foreign loophole, which the vice-chairman alluded to in his closing statement, was not fully explored. Furthermore, the rules do not appear to deal satisfactorily with a small operating company, such as GAF, seeking to take over one ten times its size such as Union Carbide. While GAF can offer corporate guarantees to the shell company created to issue the junk bonds, what worth are those guarantees if they are not covered by assets?
Mr Martin's feeble performance, together with the crude questioning from Martha Seger (the other Reagan appointee) does not speak volumes for the skills of the governors being assembled at the White House. When Mr Reagan's two new appointees, Mr Manuel Johnson and Mr Wayne Angell, join the board, not only will there be the risk of a deep split over monetary policy but the quality of leadership will have been diluted too.
This battle for policy control at the Fed, which was brought into sharp focus by the junk bond issue, must be considered a long-term confidence problem for the central bank. Despite the immediate junk bond victory Volcker has been weakened by the skirmish with the White House and that cannot be good for Wall Street confidence.
But Volcker was only half of the reason for the violent adjustment which has taken place on the bond and share markets. As was the case when Wall Street roared upwards in the summer of 1982, it is Dr Henry Kaufman and his pre-eminent Wall Street firm of Salomon Brothers who bear a great deal of responsibility for the change in mood.
Kaufman's prediction that interest rates would not fall any further unless there was evidence of the economy was weakening was immediately borne out. The yields on government bonds adjusted sharply and the federal funds or market rate moved close to 8 per cent, where all hopes of an early 1986 cut in the discount rate were dashed.
But Dr Kaufman's power is not just the power of sage predictions. He carries with him one of the most important portfolios on Wall Street. So at the moment his views were being disseminated, Salomon Brothers was dumping what the Wall Street Journal called 'massive futures,' feeding the rush out of equities. Other firms, in traditional lemming fashion, followed.
Whatever the ethics of Salomon Brothers' antics they send an unmistakable message to the markets. The unadorned bullishness which pushed the Dow to a record high, 24-hours before its biggest fall, quickly dissipated. It is was not that surprising in a market so frenzied that share options in Pennzoil could soar to just under 30 times their opening trading value in one day.
The sharp decline in the bond and share markets occurred when speculation came face to face with economic and financial reality. With great uncertainties still remaining about the course of interest rates. The Gramm-Rudman attack on the US budget deficit, growth in 1986, and the leadership at the Fed, the markets will be far more cautious in the months ahead. The jolt should be healthy.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
169 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 13, 1986
Agenda: A question no shareholder should have to face / The Westland helicopter affair
BYLINE: By KEN GILL
LENGTH: 1016 words
The future of Westland Helicopters is too important to be left to the shareholders. And yet Mrs Thatcher, with breathtaking disdain for the national interest, seems prepared to watch overseas interests conduct an unsavoury auction for a vital sector of British manufacturing central to Britain's defence interests. This is hardly the firm smack of government, the proud proclamation of patriotism we have come to expect from a Thatcher-led government.
Fundamentally, the Westland saga illustrates a deep split within Toryism about the future of British manufacturing industry. Mr Heseltine's resignation flows from this, not from personal pique or emotion. Capitalism is changing rapidly. We see a merger boom allied to rapid changes in technology and production methods. In the advanced manufacturing sector companies are forced to invest huge resources in research and development, in new products and new production methods to stay in world markets. This has forced even the market leaders into collaborative deals with competitors, leading to joint funding of research and development, and common sourcing of components. In most countries this has led to a bigger role for government in negotiating contracts, providing finance, and using its purchasing power to favour its own national companies. Nowhere is this process more evident than in the defence industries. Here we see a bitter battle between companies based in the United States, which start with a considerable lead in most areas of technology and market share, and West European companies with a smaller national and international base.
Left simply to market forces it is clear that the Americans could move fairly quickly to a position of almost total dominance in a number of important strategic industries. Paradoxically, leaving it to the market will ensure that competition is destroyed in the defence industry.
All European governments understand this - apart from the British. Whatever Mr Heseltine's personal motives, he did the country a service by taking some of these arguments into the Cabinet - and bringing them into the realm of public debate. The reality is that Mrs Thatcher's policies have devastated British industry, reducing us to a second rate manufacturing country. Output is 10 per cent lower than in 1979, and 6 per cent lower than in 1973. Two million jobs have been lost since 1979.
This is the background to the Westland debate. There are, however, a number of specifically Westland factors. The Ministry of Defence (MoD), it must be said, is a rather late convert to the cause. The company's crisis owes much to MoD prevarication about helicopter orders. For a decade Westland had been developing a replacement for the ageing aircraft currently used by the Armed Forces. And for most of this time the trade unions, led by TASS, the biggest union in the company, have been lobbying ministers and MPs to secure jobs and viability by ordering the new W30/300. We are convinced that such orders could have secured the immediate future and left Westland in reasonable shape to win export orders in the civil and military fields. We are also sure that it was the MoD's lack of confidence in Westland which led to the delay in securing the Indian order. Who, after all, would buy helicopters from a company which has failed to convince its own government of the quality of its product.
Equally important are developments in the world market. Current estimates suggest that this market will begin to expand again in the 1990s with a big increase in civil helicopter demand. And it is precisely in civil helicopters, after years of shameful neglect by the management, that Westland has invested considerable research, development and engineering' resources.
The shareholders are now being asked to weigh up the American and British European bids. Mrs Thatcher has apparently abdicated. In reality she has chosen American. This is in line with her overall strategy which is to establish Britain as the premier junior partner to the strategic and industrial interests of the American administration. European governments watch from the side lines unable to comprehend that vital national interests can be left to a handful of bankers and a few thousand investors.
The British/European solution, with the involvement of GEC and British Aerospace, guarantees the retention of a British design and development capacity. The so-called American option offers nothing but sub-contract work, welding together American components to American designs. Within the British/ European consortium, Westland will be a major partner guaranteed a major market. Under Sikorsky, Westland will be very much the expendable junior partner.
The shareholders are being faced with questions they should not have been asked. It is hoped that they will not be taken in by Mrs Thatcher's assurance that the British Government 'would resist to the best of its ability attempts by others to discriminate against Westland' This may have reassured Sir John Cuckney who gives every impression of refusing to be confused by the facts. But the French and Italians have made it clear that Westland will be discriminated against if it provides a European nest for the Sikorsky cuckoo. Mrs Thatcher knows this - and so did Mr Heseltine. Her intervention is an exercise in cynicism, giving assurances which guarantee nothing, while acting like a disinterested spectator watching thousands of jobs being put at risk. The best solution now is for tomorrow's shareholders meeting to be adjourned, allowing time for rational debate and consideration of all current options.
Sanity demands Government intervention. At some stage a British Government will be forced to intervene, to restructure the British aerospace industry so that it is accountable to the British people. Only this can guarantee future viability and jobs in what can be a highly profitable industry producing a wide range of advanced products for civil and military world markets.
Ken Gill is chairman of the TUC and general secretary of TASS.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
170 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 13, 1986
Ghanaians go ahead with big devaluation
LENGTH: 210 words
DATELINE: ACCRA
The Government yesterday announced that it was devaluing the cedi by one-third and increasing its minimum daily wage by 28.5 per cent.
A Finance Ministry statement said that the new exchange rate would be 90 cedi to the US dollar. The old rate was 60.
The statement, signed by the Finance Minister, Mr Kwesi Botchwey, said that the adjustment was in line with the West African state's flexible exchange rate policy and aimed to ensure profitable exports and more efficiency in domestic production.
The minimum daily wage rose to 90 cedi from 70 cedi while personal taxation was reduced and some allowances were increased by 5 per cent of annual gross salary.
The statement said that Ghanaian development expenditure during the first three months of 1986 was estimated at 2.5 billion cedis (pounds 19 million at the new exchange rate).
Accra radio quoted Mr Botchwey as saying that the devaluation was also aimed at encouraging Ghanaians living abroad to send home remittances through the country's banking system instead of the black market and at promoting greater domestic purchases of Ghanaian goods.
Mr Botchwey recently announced a sharp drop in Ghana's annual inflation to 12 per cent last year from 40 per cent in 1984.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
171 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 13, 1986
SA to build electric fence on Zimbabwe frontier / South Africa reacts to cross-border attacks by ANC rebels
BYLINE: From PATRICK LAURENCE
LENGTH: 510 words
DATELINE: JOHANNESBURG
South Africa is planning to build a high-voltage electrified fence along its border with Zimbabwe, to prevent incursions by African National Congress guerrillas, the Afrikaans Sunday newspaper, Rapport said yesterday.
The decision to build the fence, described by Rapport as an inpenetrable 'wall of death,' comes after landmine explosions along South Africa's northern frontier in the past two months have claimed the lives of nine people - eight of them white farmers and their relatives.
Violence meanwhile continued among black communities hundreds of miles from the border. Among those reported killed was Mr Ampie Mayisa, aged 58, a community leader from Leandra, 74 miles east of here. He disappeared after his home was petrol-bombed on Saturday night. Friends fear that he was kidnapped and murdered by vigilantes who have carried out a series of attacks on black radicals in recent weeks.
Mr Mayisa was due to hold talks with the US Assistant Secretary for State for African Affairs, Dr Chester Crocker, yesterday. Dr Crocker is in South Africa for talks with the Foreign Minister, Mr Pik Botha, after holding meetings with Angolan leaders in an attempt to revive the stalled US initiative to end the Namibian dispute.
South Africa already has a 10-mile electrified fence along a section of the border with Zimbabwe, but its main purpose is to keep out illegal immigrants rather than guerrillas. The projected new fence will cost millions of rand, stretch for scores of miles, and be charged with 20,000 volts instead of the 4,000 volts in the present one.
Disclosure of plans to build the fence came within a few days of last week's announcement by the president of the outlawed African National Congress, Mr Oliver Tambo, of plans by the military wing, Umkhonto we Sizwe (Spear of the Nation), to step up its guerrilla war. Mr Tambo defended the planting of landmines, insisting that the border farms were integrated into South Africa's defence system.
The farmers have reacted angrily to the deaths and resolved to resist ANC guerrillas and South African politicians who urge negotiations with the ANC.
The South African Defence Force has proclaimed that it will give the highest priority to protection of frontier farmers. The Minister of Defence, General Magnus Malan, told Rapport that the farmers and the SADF 'belonged to the same family.'
Two soldiers have already been posted to help to guard every border farm, and white farmers are already part of the commando system. Women from the farms are being integrated into local commandos and given instruction in the handling of semi-automatic weapons. Landmine-proof vehicles are also being used to take farm children to school.
Meanwhile, weekend violence in the black township of Alexandra threatened to spill into neighbouring white suburbs in Johannesburg and Sandton. Three black youths were injured when they stoned officials of the local administration board and a policeman was badly burnt when a petrol bomb was thrown into an armoured vehicle.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
172 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 11, 1986
Grassroots: Gumshoe and moonshine / Soviet religious dissidents
BYLINE: From DAVID BAILLIE
LENGTH: 1439 words
The GUM department store on Moscow's Red Square is a ghetto for Western tourists. It's the ideal place for prejudiced capitalists to sneer at the relative paucity of Soviet consumer goods. The more abstract positive achievements of the Revolution, such as health care, education, and culture, are conveniently out of sight and beyond the closed minds of the Nikon brigades.
But there are Soviet citizens for whom that prejudice is as much an attraction as GUM's coffee, cosmetics, and kitsch. GUM offers the Moscow refusnik the chance of sympathetic contact with visitors from the 'Free World' of their and President Reagan's dreams.
It's a simple system. A lone Western traveller is approached by a dissident in the naive clandestine sidle so beloved of a downmarket Le Carre. For a chess-playing nation the opening gambit is surprisingly unsubtle. 'We are being harassed by the KGB; please will you take this letter to the British Embassy for me?'
It's an introduction not normally included in the Berlitz Russian phrase book. It does, however, explain the presence of a near-by Leviclad figure studiously pretending to read his Agent's Manual on how to look natural reading a book in public.
When this happened to me, I'd only entered GUM for a packet of tea, yet I found myself leaving with two Baptist dissidents and their denim shadow. It turned out to be GUM's intellectual bargain of the month.
Over the next few days our conversation together would sweep away any simplistic analysis of religious dissent in the USSR. It would also identify the little recognised role of Western propaganda broadcasts in inflicting further psychological abuse on a minority group already suffering from the paranoia of their own government.
We wandered out of Red Square, with Yuri and Anna, father and daughter, explaining their difficulty in emigrating to France where they wished to join a Baptist community. Approaching a subway entrance Anna indicated a tourist aiming his Zenit telephoto at the Kremlin Wall; as we passed, the lens swung round and the KGB file increased by one more photograph.
It fortunately didn't take long for our natural preconceptions to collapse. My agnosticism and qualified admiration for many of the achievements of Soviet society was as much a disappointment to them as their unqualified admiration of Western capitalism was to me. We both wanted to expose the contradictions we saw in each other's analysis and the task created an ironic bond of friendship. Although we failed to come politically any closer, it was perhaps a small price to pay for the depth of any affection that transcends the Iron Curtain.
Understanding the world of the Soviet dissident is a process of sifting reality and paranoia. The reality was the pair of KGB Levis never more than an oppressive glance away. The paranoia was moving tables three times in a cafe 'to confuse the listeners.' Given the nature of the reality, a degree of paranoia is perhaps understandable.
It is also perhaps arrogant for an outsider to make such distinctions, but intuition demands a certain discretion. I'd already spent several days with members of the unofficial peace movement, the Group for Trust, and knew full well the process of silently exchanging information on a child's magic slate while in a bugged flat. Wiring up every restaurant table in Moscow, however, seemed an altogether different proposition.
After the paranoia comes the paradox. Despite incurring considerable official displeasure, this sad and lonely pair had still managed to retain ownership of their family dacha or country cottage. Legal moves by the authorities to end their lease had regularly failed, and the 60km rail journey from Moscow also proved too much for our new Wrangler-clad minder who caught the first train back on our arrival.
Temporarily if unnervingly relieved of Soviet harassment, we quietly weeded the extensive garden. But the presence of more subtle political abuse became apparent in their perceptions of the West they so longed to reach. Anna's flawless English conveyed an image of Western society straight from the rhetoric of Reagan or Thatcher. Only her undoubted sincerity could distinguish it from the original, 'President Reagan is the world's real peacemaker' .. 'We want you to have cruise missiles since they make us feel safer' .. 'We sometimes get copies of the Daily Mail from your embassy - it is good to read unbiased world news.' I continue taking notes verbatim as I prompt them with other issues, and opinion dissolves into fantasy.
'But the black do have the vote in South Africa' .. 'Those American nuns were shot in El Salvador because they had been drugged into terrorism by the Nicaraguans.' It was a bizarre conversation which continued through a supper of fresh picked fruit and to the sound of a nearby folk dance. With their faith in the Soviet system understandably shattered by the prohibition of their religious practice, they had made the black and white analysis of superpower politics that disables any real international understanding.
If the Soviet system is partly bad, it is all bad. If the Soviet system is all bad, then the US system is all good. Therefore the world view of the US is to be trusted. When you are lost and frightened in the contradictions of state oppression, such simplistic hopes may be your only stability. There are no greys in the Cold War.
Ironically, in the middle of the USSR, the world view of the US is not in short supply. It pours effortlessly out of the radios of thousands of disillusioned Soviet citizens. True to Western free market philosophy, one can choose between either Voice of America or the CIA's own Voice of Freedom. It is a choice between the rhetoric of Reagan on the former, or Jesse Helms on the latter. It is hardly a choice to inflict on a minority already disaffected by the dogmatism of their own regime.
The British Government plays the dissident game as well. It gently nurtures the confusion and despair of square pegs in round Soviet holes. Yuri and Anna showed me some invitations to evening film shows from Our Man in Moscow. It's a cruel exploitation of dissent. Usually the invitees are denied access at the embassy gate by the Soviet guards. If they are allowed in, they are rewarded with a commercial for the Western way of life in the form of a Bond movie. The Advertising Standards Authority would be unlikely to approve. It's a wooden spoon diplomacy in a bowl of hypocrisy. When did the British Embassy in Pretoria ever invite Steve Biko to see You Only Live Twice?
Against my better judgment I agreed to deliver a letter from Anna to a new attache at the Embassy who had taken over from their previous contact. It was an interesting excursion. At the gates your British credentials are checked by the Soviet sentries. You then walk a few metres past the red stars and the Kalashnikovs, and you are in England - twee, pretentious, middle class, middle England.
The wives and daughters of the predictable male diplomats are playing tennis in the garden; Ford Sierras litter the drive; and the air hangs heavy with public-school arrogance. My meeting with the attache is short and sweet. I hand over the letter taking care not to give any oral tibits to the electronic eavesdroppers outside. We exchange a few meaningless pleasantries, and almost with relief I recross the Iron Curtain.
I never met Yuri and Anna again. I'd planned to meet them at the dacha on my last day in the capital. They were to give me contacts with members of Moscow's eclectic and fragile network of dissenters. When I reached their rambling wooden cottage it was deserted except for a hastily escaping team of apple scrumpers. In the evening Anna phoned me at my hotel.
'I'm sorry Dave, but we couldn't get to the dacha. We had many problems.'
'What problems? Shall we meet this evening in Moscow?'
'No ..I .'
Click.
I was left with two images in my mind. The first was of a KGB telephonist wearily pulling out a jack plug somewhere in subterranean Moscow.
The second was a reflection of the confusion I'd seen created in sad and lonely people by stereo superpower propaganda. I knew how desperately Anna needed to believe in the wholesale evil of the Soviet Union, and in the consuming hope of escape to a benign if mythical West. I also knew how desperately she needed to make me believe that too, in order that I shouldn't cause any ambiguity in her already frail world view.
I still see her own hand on the telephone cradle, and I despise both power blocks for the image.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
173 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 11, 1986
Finance 'five' to debate currency changes / Ministers from US, Japan, Germany, France and Britain to meet in London
BYLINE: By our Financial Staff
LENGTH: 358 words
Finance ministers of the Group of Five will meet in London next weekend to discuss the currency changes which have taken place since last autumn.
The group of five - the US, Japan, Germany, France and Britain - called in September for the dollar to fall substantially on the foreign exchanges. Since then the markets have pulled the dollar down by 15 per cent, and the meeting next weekend is a regular one to review this progress.
The finance ministers are loathe to give any target zones for exchange rates, and will not make any public statement after their next meeting. But it is expected that they will be quite satisfied by the fall of the dollar which has taken place so far. It is thought that they would like to see a further fall in the dollar, perhaps by about another 15 per cent, over the course of the next year. But they are equally concerned that there should be no sudden plunge, which would add to US inflationary pressures.
Meanwhile the foreign exchanges yesterday saw a recovery by sterling against both the dollar and the continental currencies, following the rise in base rates to 12 1/2 per cent on Wednesday. Against the dollar the pound closed up 70 cents at dollars 1.4562, while on the sterling index it was up 0.4 to 78.6.
Money market rates settled down at around 12 3/4 per cent. a rate which validates the rise in bank base rates, and which does not of itself create pressure for any further movement of rates.
The dollar continued to fall on the foreign exchanges yesterday morning following rumours that Arab bankers would pull funds out of the dollar because of the US sanctions imposed on Libya. It recovered slightly in the afternoon to close slightly down on the day against the German mark at DM 2.4510.
The London Stock Exchange staged a good recovery yesterday after the falls earlier in the week. The FT 30 share index closed up 13.7 points at 1119.8, leaving it 11.2 points up on the account. Government stocks also recovered. The markets were encouraged by the evidence that the one per cent rise in base rates might not have to be followed by further rises next week.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
174 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 11, 1986
Leading Article: Mr Leon Brittan's version of non-intervention / The Trade and Industry Secretary and the Westland helicopter affair
LENGTH: 695 words
It has been an inauspicious start to Industry Year. Kirst interest rates go up, then the Secretary for Defence resigns because the Government wants to mortgage a key defence contractor to the Americans. It is ironic that Mr Heseltine resigned at a time when, unbeknown to him, Mr Alan Bristow, the helicopter operator, had bought enough shares (10.5 per cent) to make it unlikely that the offer by United Technologies for Westland will muster the required 75 per cent of the votes necessary for success. Yesterday United Scientific swung another 4.9 per cent behind the Euro-option. And with Mr Heseltine, freed from Cabinet constraints, now publicly urging shareholders to reject the Sikorsky link at next Tuesday's meeting of shareholders (a course we strongly endorse) the prospect of the Westland board securing the desired 75 per cent is withering on the blade. Of course, seeing the writing on the wall, United Technologies may drop its present scheme (which is merely a capital reconstruction) in favour of a full-blooded take-over bid which the Euro-consortium would have either to match or withdraw. If UT doesn't make a full bid and fails to get the required majority on Tuesday then the man of the day will be Mr Bristow whose 10.5 per cent stake could be used to force the directors to take a vote on the Heseltine option. If that is rejected then Westland would be staring receivership in the face which may - irony of ironies - force the government to pick up the pieces of its own misjudgment.
Yet for Britain, if not yet for Brittan, the issue should be clear. This country's interests are best served by joining in with partners in Europe to avoid the absurd squandering of research and development among 12 competing nations. Far better to harness the enormous EEC public purchasing power to develop advanced technology corporations capable of providing a third force alternative to the United States and Japan. Such an approach offends two of Mrs Thatcher's most deeply held views - that industrial strategy is a heresy and that everything must be left to market forces.
Market forces? But what market forces? If nothing else the Westland fracas shows how deeply the Government is involved even when it says it is leaving it to the market. In defence, governments are the market. And in this respect Mr Brittan has a most serious allegation to refute. Mr Heseltine claims, and claimed again yesterday, from, he says, two sources, that on Wednesday night Mr Brittan, as Secretary for Industry, in the presence of another minister in his department and officials, told Sir Raymond Lygo of British Aerospace that the role which BAe was taking in the Euro-consortium was against the national interest and that BAe should withdraw. If this is true - and it has not yet been denied - then it means that while saying in public that everything should be left to market forces and the decision of Westland shareholders the Secretary of State for Industry was privately putting pressure on one of the key participants to pull out. If this is a false allegation then Mr Heseltine should apologise forthwith. If it is substantially true then Mr Brittan should himself resign for misleading the public and not carrying out the policy of the Cabinet. And what is this 'national interest' he appeals to? Does this mean that Mr Brittan is not a market man at all and that at heart he is guided by some higher industrial strategy?
According to a Department of Industry briefing yesterday Mr Brittan had indeed spoken to Sir Raymond and advised him to look carefully at his involvement with the Euro-consortium on the grounds that BAe was heavily dependent on its workload from the US. Even this is unacceptable behaviour from a minister supposed to be leaving it to shareholders. In any case who is Mr Brittan to be giving advice? One of the main reasons for privatisation advocated by the Government was that this was the only way to get Whitehall off the back of industry. Yet here is the Secretary for Trade and Industry giving what amounts to a directive to a newly privatised corporation. It is time for Mr Brittan to give some answers.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
175 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 11, 1986
Haitian protests dwindle
BYLINE: From GREG CHAMBERLAIN
LENGTH: 251 words
DATELINE: PORT-AU-PRINCE
Tension remained high throughout Haiti yesterday as opponents of President Jean-Claude Duvalier appeared to have called a temporary halt to demonstrations during which they briefly took control of some towns and demanded his resignation.
The unarmed protesters yielded before hundreds of arrests and beatings by the militia, the Tontons Macoutes, a hasty 10 per cent cut in the price of five basic commodities, including diesel fuel flour, and cooking oil, and the absence of any leadership from opposition politicians in the capital.
Roman Catholic bishops, however, in a message to 'young people and the poor,' said they could 'count on' the Church in their fight for their 'just demands,' adding, 'we count on you.' The government has closed all schools and will be severely tested when it allows them to reopen.
The church-run Radio Soleil continued to encourage the opposition yesterday with broadcasts about liberation and justice, carefully insulated with scriptural references.
A government official said the regime had survived because there had been no serious protests in the capital. Once they erupted there, he said, ministers could pack and 'take the plane' into exile.
The main dissident paper, the weekly Le Petit Samedi Soir, whose most daring columnist, Cassandre Kalim, has been arrested, said it was 'very alarmed' about demonstrators who had waved US and French flags during the protests and also about the presence of US navy ships off the Haitian coast.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
176 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 11, 1986
Reagan plans meeting of leaders in Grenada / US President to visit Caribbean island
BYLINE: From ALEX BRUMMER
LENGTH: 459 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
Putting the political frustrations of Libya behind him, President Reagan is planning next month to go to Grenada, the scene of his greatest foreign policy triumph. By all accounts Mr Reagan is a highly popular figure on the island and should receive a rapturous reception.
During his visit to the island, the President is expected to host a meeting of Caribbean leaders with whom the Administration has developed strong ties since the Grenada adventure.
It will be the President's first visit to the Caribbean island since US forces overthrew the Marxist regime led by Mr Bernard Coard and General Hudson Austin. The military action, in which tens of thousands of American troops surrounded the island, was regarded as a success for the Reagan Administration's policy of forcefully confronting Communists and restoring democracy.
The President's visit on February 20 comes just five months after the Queen addressed the parliamentary chamber in the capital of St George's. Nevertheless, the royal visit was reportedly a flat occasion, with the people of Grenada cool to a head of Commonwealth who was seen to have let them down in their hour of need.
The Reagan visit had been timed to coincide with an upturn in the Grenada economy. As well as its thriving traditional spices industry, Grenada benefitting from a tourist recovery boosted by the completion of the Cuban-built Port Salines airport and American winter package tours.
Mr Reagan was invited to visit the island by the Prime Minister Mr Herbert Blaize, who was in the United States in October. While Mr Blaize, was democratically elected, there have been questions recently about a deterioration in human rights conditions on the island.
The Washington-based pressure group, the Council on Hemispheric Affairs, noted in its 1985 report that 'human rights conditions in Grenada are fast becoming among the worst in the English-speaking Caribbean'. It relayed reports of prisoners being beaten, denied medical attention and detained for long periods without access to lawyers.
In particular, the report expressed concern about a US attempt to extradite Mr Chester Humphrey, a union leader, on charges stemming from the supply of guns to the late prime minister, Maurice Bishops's New Jewel movement in 1979.
The Reagan Administration couched the reasons for its Grenada intervention in terms of the safety of students after the radical Bernard Coard-Hudson Austin Wing of Maurice Bishop's New Jewel movement deposed Mr Bishop and killed him in a bloody gun battle in the centre of the city. The administration was also concerned that Mr Bishop's regime was turning the island into a Cuban military base - a charge which has never been fully documented.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
177 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 11, 1986
Defiant Gadafy thrives on US challenge / Libyan leader dismisses 'crazy and face-saving' sanctions
BYLINE: From DAVID HIRST
LENGTH: 513 words
DATELINE: TRIPOLI
An ebullient Colonel Gadafy seems confident that he will not only survive, but prosper, on the challenge which President Reagan has thrown down. Clearly thriving on all the publicity, he does not hide his belief that differences between Europe and America are his strongest card and that he should play it for all it is worth.
At a press conference on Thursday evening, the third in a week, again in an interview granted exclusively to five women journalists and at a meeting with West European ambassadors, he mocked President Reagan, calling him a weak man and a 'useless actor' who is anti-Semitic towards the Arabs, racist and hostile to Islam'. And his country was dominated by a 'crusader spirit'.
As for US sanctions, they were 'crazy and face-saving' 'a silly and emotional' response (to his own conduct) which would do no harm to Libya. He said that Americans working in Libya were safe, would be granted asylum if they wanted it; even if they decided to leave they would easily be replaced by European or Eastern bloc nationals.
However, if the worst came to the worst and war did break out - he reportedly warned the West European ambassadors - 'we shall drag West Europe into it.'
'Unless West European countries stop the Americans from using bases against Libya, Libya will be forced to destroy bases, ports, towns. We will act with suicide squads against towns, ports - wherever the threat comes from.' That, according to one of the ambassadors - 'we shall threat.
But there was also the blandishment: 'My country has contracts with various West Europan companies totalling dollars 13 billion. We shall need West Europe to help us with those contracts which will (eventually) total about dollars 39 billion.
At his news conference, Colonel Gadafy called on Europeans and Arabs to rid the Mediterranean of the US military presence. He would 'support' in unspecified ways West European movements such as the Greens opposed to US bases and missiles on their soil.
Another peril Gadafy dwelt on - in his interview with the women journalists - was that continued American enmity might push Libya, despite itself, into the Soviet embrace. 'There will be more cooperation between Libya and the Soviet Union,' he said; it was even 'possible that Libya could turn into a Communist state.'
That was what the US ha forced on Fidel Castro, who had not been a Communist. 'This is dangerous for you - to create a Communist country by your own policy.'
As for his supposed involvement in international terrorism - the official reason for the US blockade - he took refuge in imprecision. 'Libya will not hesitate to supply what the Palestinian resistance needs to liberate Palestine.' But 'Libya is not responsible for individual suicide actions.' So long as the Palestine problem remains unsolved 'the world must expect acts of violence from the Palestinian people.
Although he did not 'approve' of the Rome and Vienna airport massacres, and even said that they harmed the Palestinian cause, he would not condemn them as 'terrorism.'
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
178 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 11, 1986
Reagan appeals to EEC not to foil sanctions / US President asks Europeans not to undercut action against Libya
BYLINE: From ALEX BRUMMER, MICHAEL WHITE and HELLA PICK
LENGTH: 660 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON and LONDON
President Reagan last night personally appealed to Mrs Thatcher and other European leaders not to undercut the wide-ranging embargo against Colonel Gadafy's regime in Libya.
The messages went out as Mrs Thatcher was telling American correspondents at Downing Street that sanctions against Libya would not work.
The US maintained its diplomatic offensive yesterday in an interview granted to European correspondents by President Reagan in the Oval Office and indirectly through the White House spokesman, Mr Larry Speakes. This comes on the heels of the announcement that Mr John Whitehead, the deputy-secretary of state would be consulting in Allied capitals next week.
In his interview with five European newspapers, including the Times, Mr Reagan insisted that the friendship between America and Western Europe was too strong to cause differences over Libyan sanctions 'to make us turn on them.' During a 30-minute discussion dominated by the sanctions issue the President stressed that it was a moral issue, notwithstanding Europe's understandable concern for its Libyan oil.
He said: 'I am hopeful that as they continue to consider this we may find that we can come together, isolating this outlaw in the world's nations.' Soon after he spoke, the White House gave Italy a pat on the back for imposing an arms embargo and drew further encouragment from France's request for more information about Libya's links with the Abu Nidal terrorist group with a view to joining the US sanctions.
For his part, President Reagan: said that Soviet involvement in Libya was 'very close' and - given the years of stockpiling Soviet arms there - could not become much greater than it already was. But this consideration should not deflect US determination to isolate Libya 'as long as Gadafy insists on backing terrorism the way he is.'
In London yesterday, the Prime Minister bluntly warned the Administration that Britain would not join in economic sanctions, and was strongly opposed to military retaliation to stem terrorism.
Mrs Thatcher, reinforcing diplomatic messages already dispatched to Washington, addressed herself to US journalists in London to ensure that the US public was made aware of Britain's refusal to support the drive against Colonel Gadafy.
She told them that sanctions against Libya would not work, any more than they would work against South Africa. 'Materials would always be supplied by other countries'.
She was even more forceful about military retaliation. 'You don't have to tell me anything about Libyan terrorism. 'But I must warn you that I do not believe in retaliatory strikes, which are against international law.'
The British Government hopes that Mr Whitehead will instead concentrate on discussing the long-term effort to secure maximum co-operation in measures against terrorism. Mrs Thatcher believes that there will now be no need to waste time in arguments about sanctions or military strikes.
British officials say that President Reagan was left under no illusions about Mrs Thatcher's views during a telephone conversation with her last week. Later, when the US ambassador to Britain, Mr Charles Price, called on Sir Geoffrey Howe he limited himself to informing Britain of the US measures against Libya, and the desire for European support, but made no specific requests for British action.
The latest flurry of White House moves came as Mr Speakes disclosed that the US imposed an assets freeze against Libya after Tripoli had withdrawn some dollars 100 million of deposits from American banks in the aftermath of the US order on economic sanctions.
The withdrawal of the dollars 100 million and speculation that other Arab countries were moving dollars out of New York had contributed to a high state of nervousness of the US financial markets with the dollar falling against the currencies of other European countries and the stock market plummeting for three days.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
179 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 11, 1986
Brittan's role dents Westland policy / The Trade and Industry Secretary and the controversy over rival rescue bids for helicopter company
BYLINE: By MICHAEL SMITH, JAMES NAUGHTIE, and COLIN BROWN
LENGTH: 959 words
Fresh damage was being inflicted on Mrs Thatcher's government last night by the growing acceptance in Whitehall and industry that the Trade and Industry Secretary, Mr Leon Brittan, did intervene in the Westland affair on the eve of Michael Heseltine's spectacular resignation.
Mr Brittan, according to the outgoing Defence Secretary in his resignation speech on Thursday, had personally told Sir Raymond Lygo, managing director of British Aerospace, that the European rescue operation for Westland was 'against the national interest.'
Mr Brittan's apparent remark is potentially very damaging because it contrasts starkly with his publicly declared opinion, fully endorsed by Cabinet, that the Government would not intervene in the Westland affair and that shareholders alone must decide the firm's future. British Aerospace is leading the four-nation European consortium against America's United Technologies in trying to rescue Westland.
Mr Brittan's intervention was made on Wednesday evening at a meeting between Sir Raymond and Mr Geoffrey Pattie, the DTI Minister directly responsible for aerospace affairs, to discuss the Airbus jet project.
The Trade and Industry Secretary's embarrassing remarks, it emerged last night, were passed on to Mr Heseltine from two separate sources in Whitehall who had each spoken to Sir Raymond and Mr Pattie. At least one of the Heseltine sources was a government minister.
Last night Sir Raymond was not available for comment, but it is reliably understood that he had not spoken to Mr Heseltine before Thursday's Cabinet meeting.
Officials at the DTI confirmed that the meeting had taken place and that Mr Brittan had stressed that it was entirely a matter for British Aerospace to join the European consortium. But Mr Brittan, officials explained, had been concerned about the nature of statements which could have been deemed anti-American and damaging to British Aerospace.
Mr Heseltine refused point blank yesterday to discuss Mr Brittan's comments. But on Thursday he commented: 'So much for the wish of the sponsoring department (the DTI) to leave the matter to the shareholders.'
Mrs Thatcher told five American journalists during an annual conference for the US press that the Cabinet Mad agreed the process of central coordination of answers on Westland, and Mr Heseltine had been the only dissenter. 'Every other person in the Cabinet agreed that, save Mr Heseltine, who found himself unable to accept that procedure and so left the Cabinet, and I expressed my regret.
'I am not going any further. The matter is over. We now have to go forward. I am not in the business of recriminations. I regretted the decision, but it is his decision,' Mrs Thatcher said.
The Prime Minister, who denied that she had supported Sikorsky, was also asked about Mr Heseltine's allegations of cancelled meetings and omissions from Cabinet minute. She said: 'We have a style of great discussion and great debate. That has always been characteristic of my handling of government.'
Mrs Thatcher faces a stormy session of Prime Minister's questions in the House on Tuesday, which will be made more difficult by her expected refusal of the demand by Labour leader, Mr Neil Kinnock, for a statement on Monday when the Commons resumes business. Mr Heseltine's successor, Mr George Younger, must also answer defence questions on Wednesday, and the Opposition is expected to use its full day for debate on Wednesday to pursue the affair.
All Opposition parties were preparing to secure the maximum political advantage when the Commons returns next week after the lengthy Christmas recess. The hurried preparations for attack contrasted with moves by Cabinet ministers yesterday to close ranks behind Mrs Thatcher in a damage-limitation exercise.
A phalanx of ministers appeared on television and radio to reject Mr Heseltine's account of events.
Sir Geoffrey Howe, the Foreign Secretary, accused Mr Heseltine of providing a 'highly exaggerated and misleading picture' of Mrs Thatcher's style of leadership, while Lord Young, the Employment Secretary, said the former Defence Secretary had been in a minority of one against a Cabinet of 20.
Downing Street officials repudiated five charges by Mr Heseltine. They denied that a crucial Cabinet meeting on Friday December 13 had been cancelled on the grounds that no firm commitment for the meeting had been made; and that Cabinet minutes had omitted a protest by Mr Heseltine at the Cabinet on December 12 that the Prime Minister had refused to allow the Westland issue to be raised - the record had been corrected.
They also denied that Mrs Thatcher and Mr Brittan had rejected the recommendation of the European National Armaments directive supporting the European consortium - NADS recommendations were 'not binding'; that the Prime Minister's line on a letter from Sir John Cuckney of Westland 'had been materially misleading' - they said that agreement on a reply was reached with Mr Heseltine. They also denied that the PM's requirement that Mr Heseltine's future statements should first be cleared through the Cabinet Office would inevitably lead to his resignation - there was nothing new in the procedure.
While Mr Heseltine refused to be drawn on any political matters, he took opportunity to call a press conference voicing full support for the European option to rescue Westland. ironically, the conference was held in the same building where shareholders will next Tuesday hold their special meeting.
Mr Heseltine, sticking solely to the industrial issues, doubted whether there was logic in the Westland-United Technologies tie up, and wondered where the market was for American Sikorsky helicopters.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
180 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 10, 1986
Financial Books: More sympathy for women / Review of books on women and business
BYLINE: Edited by CLIVE WOODCOCK
LENGTH: 944 words
Financial institutions need to be more generous in their offers of finance to women and more willing to ignore risk-avoiding 'track records' in commerce and trade, say the authors of a new book on women in business.
The usual requirements for collateral and financial security may often have to be waived for women. State agencies also need to develop programmes of 'affirmative action' similar to those which operate in the United States, which ensure that a certain proportion of Government contracts are allocated to business enterprises owned by women.
Without such forms of positive discrimination a large number of women will be unable to take advantage of small business opportunities during the coming decade, say Robert Goffee and Richard Scase in Women in Charge (George Allen and Unwin, pounds 12.50, pounds 5.50 paper).
Among all the policies geared to the formation and growth of small businesses in recent years, there have been none which recognise the particular problems which women face when they start firms, they say.
Start-up courses which teach the basic techniques of book-keeping, management and marketing need to be supplemented with methods for improving women's individual assertiveness, self-presentation and interpersonal negotiating skills.
The opinions expressed by Scase and Goffee are based on a series of interviews they carried out with 54 women business owners over a period of two years, investigating their experiences, attitudes, and life-styles.
They emphasise that it is important for small business policies to recognise that there are different types of businesswomen with striking contrasts in their needs.
They see the real potential for the growth of small businesses are being among those women they describe as innovators and radicals. Innovator proprietors were normally more aware of the available market opportunities.
'Their willingness to compromise with the male business world and to sacrifice personal and family relationships for the sake of their enterprises enables them to overcome many of the obstacles which many women face.'
Goffee and Scase say that more radical proprietors are often highly aware of the different sources of funds and advice available for business start-ups in addition to those from conventional banking. They often needed, however, to acquire skills in developing appropriate legal forms of co-ownership and satisfactory techniques in such areas as breakeven analysis, cash flow projections and budgetary control.
Their book is an interesting and often controversial look at the role of women as business proprietors, complementing their earlier books which looked at the male proprietor and the supportive role played by women.
It is, however, rather short for detailed analysis of the evidence which must have emerged from their interviews but is a useful addition to an area in which little research work has been done, especially research which is relevant to policymaking.
Another minority business area, but one which has been growing rapidly in recent years and with increasing success, is that of workers' co-operatives. It is an area in which there has been considerable growth, however, in the amount of help and advice available, through organisations such as local co-operative development agencies and the regional enterprise boards, such as in the West Midlands and Greater London.
Even so there is still room for a book which not only looks at the historical background but provides some practical help for the burgeoning co-operative and some ideas for future development.
Just such a book has recently been published by PA Management Consultants in association with the Co-operative Bank called Workers Co-operatives; Past, Present and Future (PA Management Consultants, St James's House, Charlotte Street, Manchester M1 4DZ, at pounds 20 plus pounds 1 p&p).
The historical background is of interest but throws little new light on the movement. It looks at the large so-called 'co-operatives' of the 1970s, KME, Meriden, and the Scottish Daily News and the mistakes which were made there.
But it is when it moves on to the new case studies of more recent workers' co-operatives and their successes and failure in some detail that it becomes a useful tool, highlighting the pitfalls for the unwary new co-operator. Indeed many of the lessons it draws could equally apply to more conventionally structured businesses.
In looking at the way forward the book suggests that a first essential is that co-operative members should be persuaded to accept the importance of good management and that they should be provided with proper training, pointing out that marketing and financial skills are most needed.
External, non-executive advisers should also be invited to join the management committee. On finance the book says that by removing the rule restricting equity holdings to members it could be possible to attract investment from sources such as the local community, trade unions, major suppliers and others.
Any co-operative looking for help in the marketing area will find excellent value in the handbook produced by the Industrial Common Ownership Movement, Marketing for Co-ops, by Gerry Finnegan (ICOM CO-Publications, pounds 3.95).
This is the second in ICOM's series on running a workers' co-operative and examines marketing in the context of the business and social objectives of worker co-ops. It covers in a clear, practical way the marketing environment, market research, developing products and services, packaging, pricing, promotion, and performance evaluation. The Guardian
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
181 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 10, 1986
Third World Review: Three peaks to climb / Problems facing Jean-Pierre Hocke, the new Swiss head of UNHCR
BYLINE: By MARTIN BARBER
LENGTH: 889 words
This week the United Nations acquired a new High Commissioner for Refugees. Jean-Pierre Hocke, the Swiss Director of Operations in the International Committee of the Red Cross, comes with one important advantage over his predecessors; he already knows the major refugee situations around the world in great detail. The ICRC has taken him regularly to Indochina, the Horn of Africa, Pakistan and Central America. He knows the people in the provinces as well as in the capital cities.
But Mr Hocke faces an awesome challenge. If his tenure is to be counted a success he will have to make progress on three fronts. First he must disentangle UNHCR from the longstanding programmes, where UNHCR's bottomless assistance funds have provided an excuse for not finding a solution. Ten years after the change of governments 'boat people' are still leaving Vietnam, 'land people' still escape from Laos and Cambodia. They have to be maintained in expensive camps in Hong Kong, Malaysia, Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand. Even the US government is seriously worried whether the people involved can any longer be described as 'refugees.' UNHCR plans to spend some dollars 53.5 millions on helping these people in 1986.
In Pakistan, 2.3 million Afghans will cost UNHCR dollars 51.5 millions next year. Most of them have been in camps since 1980. Another 1.8 million Afghans in Iran will cost dollars 11.3 millions, and 7,500 in India will cost dollars 3.5 millions. Nowhere is a political solution which would allow most of these refugees to go home more urgent.
Mr Hocke's in-depth knowledge will be particularly welcome in countries like Somalia where there are said to be 700,000 refugees from Ethiopia in camps. Yet the Ethiopians say 300,000 have gone home. Others say that most of the people in the camps is Somalia are now actually poor Somalis and that the UNHCR will be paying dollars 23 million in 1986 for what is largely a relief operation for Somalia's own drought victims.
So, these three programmes alone will cost dollars 143 million in 1986, 53 per cent of a total budget of dollars 270 million for UNHCR's work in all countries of the world.
A second major area for Mr Hocke to tackle, if he is to maintain the credibility of his new office, is that of double standards. In 1984 the US paid dollars 112 million to UNHCR's budget, EEC countries dollars 99 million and Japan dollars 43 million. These governments are happy for UNHCR to turn a blind eye to the fact that Afghan refugee camps in Pakistan make convenient bases for the families of guerrillas fighting the Russian troops in their home country. But any suggestion that the camps for 20,000 Salvadoreans in Honduras might be fulfilling a similar function produces urgent pressure for the camps to be moved.
During 1985 UNHCR clearly told several European governments that they must not force Tamil refugees back to Sri Lanka but made no protest at continuing US expulsions of Salvadoreans and Haitians. Mr Hocke was the US candidate for his new job. He will have to show the rest of the world quickly that he is not their puppet, and he will have to remind Mr Reagan that UNHCR's mandate is worldwide.
European governments, throroughly miffed at the UN Secretary-General for imposing Mr Hocke on them, will be mollified if the new man can make progress in what for them is now UNHCR's major task: how to impose some order on the arrival of refugees from Third World countries seeking asylum in Western Europe. European governments believe they are being much more generous than their critics give them credit for.
All this comes at a time when public opinion demands severe restrictions on the rights even of their own citizens or permanent residents to bring their close relatives from abroad to live with them. European governments are forced to accept these new refugees because there is no effective help for them in their own parts of the world.
Palestinian migrant workers are being laid off in several Middle East countries as the oil boom winds down. They have no homeland to return to. There are no programmes anywhere in Africa which cater for city dwellers from Ghana or Zaire who find themselves out of favour with the present regimes in Accra or Kinshasa.
The UNHCR needs to recognise that European governments are not being unreasonable in asking for concerted international action to provide help for these refugees in the regions where they come from. This would allow Europe to respond with greater humanity to those refugees who do indeed have established links with European countries: students from Iran whom the Khomeini regime believes have been polluted by decadent Western society; Tamils whose close family members are established residents in Europe; Ugandan students at Europe's universities whose home villages have been destroyed in the civil war.
Mr Hocke inherits an organisation which has no money and where staff morale is low. Governments and his staff will give him the usual 100 days in which to work miracles. He cannot possibly achieve anything substantive in that time. But if he has demonstrated by then a willingness and ability to confront these three major problems and to tackle them with imagination and enthusiasm, then the money will flow in and the staff will warm to him.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
182 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 10, 1986
Third World Review: No end of trouble for the general / Anti-government protests in Chile
BYLINE: From MALCOLM COAD
LENGTH: 1154 words
DATELINE: SANTIAGO
After a year in which Chile reached the top of the Latin American unemployment league, political bombing became an almost daily event, and opposition parties formed a political pact broader than any in the country's history. President Augusto Pinochet ended 1985 in characteristic style - by flatly rejecting Church attempts at mediation between his government and an increasingly threatening opposition.
His decision was delivered personally to the Archbishop of Santiago, Cardinal Juan Francisco Fresno, at a brief audience granted to the cardinal on Christmas Eve. The media razzamatazz laid on for the event - Pinochet's embrace of the cardinal, television focus on the general's smiles, the gift to the prelate of a lapis lazuli cross - belied its tensions. Msgr. Fresno wanted rapprochement over the 'national accord for a return to full democracy,' the pact he sponsored in August between 11 parties ranging from socialists to right-wing government supporters.
When General Pinochet dismissed the accord with a curt, 'Let's change the subject,' the cardinal was, said his advisers later, 'desolate'.
Erswhile government supporters were furious. 'Pinochet will be to blame for the polarisation that will come now,' said Pedro Correa, a leader of the Right-wing National Party. Former military junta member, air force General Gustavo Leigh, said: 'Pinochet has thrown away the only lifebelt on offer. He'll have to be dragged by force to he negotiating table, and mass mobilisation is the only way to do it.'
Such mobilisation is what the Opposition is now planning. By rejecting any dialogue over the accord - which proposes elections and the lifting of emergency measures, but without explicitly rejecting the military's controversial constitution - Pinochet removed at a stroke the main point of difference between those in the Opposition who favour intensifying such action against the regime, and others who have succeeded recently in holding it back in the hope of talks. Parties from centre-right to revolutionary left are now talking of a General Strike 'at the latest by April or May.'
General Pinochet's stance will also cause problems in his main remaining base of support - the military. The accord was viewed sympathetically by a significant group of generals as signalling a way out of a situation which they know threatens to become unmanageable. In December military junta member and air force Commander General Fernando Matthei said, 'If the accord didn't exist, perhaps we would have to help create it.' In November President Pinochet sacked his own representative on the junta, army General Raul Benavides in part, it is thought, for harbouring similar views.
General Benavides's departure was the second blow to the junta since August, when police chief general Cessar Mendoza went, after evidence of involvement by his men in death-squad activity. That affair brought the military face-to-face with the public revulsion accumulated over 12 years of often brutal military rule, and triggered inter-service friction which led to the first coup rumours since the 1973 'pronounciamiento.'
High among the fears of both the military and the political right is the increased presence of the Left, blamed by many on General Pinochet's intransigence. The semi-clandestine Popular Democratic Movement (MDP), made up of communists, socialists and the Cuban-orientated Movement of the Revolutionary Left (MIR) is riding high in many student and trade unions, generally behind the country's main political force, the centrist Christian Democrats, but first in many of the former.
In city slums, now experiencing poverty unknown in decades, the MDP is the main organised political force - though its leaders admit that the slums' thousands of militant youth are finally an explosive law into themselves. Through the communists and the MIR the MDP is also linked to the armed groups responsible for hundreds of bombings last year, the deaths of several police, sabotage of power lines and even propaganda raids on military and secret police targets.
According to sources close to the military, an increasing number of generals now favour isolating the left through an opening to other parties. The national accord was seen as offering this, and damaged General Pinochet's rhetoric of 'me or chaos' by proving that the much-maligned 'politicos' were capable of agreement.
Further encouragement comes from the overt support of the accord shown by the US, EEC, and regional governments, and the Vatican - which wants progress to democracy before the Papal visit planned for March, 1987. In particular, the Pentagon, formerly a Pinochet mainstay, now supports the view of George Shultz's State Department that regional security requires a change in Chile, and is making this clear to its Chilean allies. President Alfonsin, fearful for Agentina's stability if tensions continue in its neighbour, is also believed to have made soundings aimed at a truce between Pinochet and the opposition.
Sources also say that studies carried out by individual services have raised technical doubts over aspects of the planned 'protected democracy', in which Marxism would be banned and the military would maintain a powerful overseeing role. There is particular concern over the practicality of the procedure by which Pinochet could be ratified in power for a further eight years, prior to the opening of a partially elected congress in 1990. His current term ends in 1989.
It is impossible to know how far such doubts have spread in Chile's rigidly hierarchical armed forces. But right-wing parties hope that, in spite of Pinochet's intransigence, the military can be persuaded to drop formal support for him in 1989, back open elections and return definitively to barracks. Other aspects of the current Constitution, such parties either agree with or would leave for later negotiation.
But is here that other group, from the MDP to most Christian Democrats, violently disagree. 'The problem is not just Pinochet, but his Constitution and everything he stands for,' says Luis Maira, pounds leader of the Christian Left Party, which supports the accord but also has close links with the MDP. 'You can't have democracy in Chile with most of the Left excluded. Nor can we wait four more years.'
After General Pinochet's rebuff to Cardinal Fresno, such groups are even more determined not to be 'blackmailed' by the right into holding back the mass mobilisation which, says Socialist MDP leader German Correa, 'is the only way to break this regime's legitimacy once and for all and oblige the armed forces to fulfil their duty and restore our democracy.' The Christian Democrat-dominated Democratic Alliance coalition has said it will now campaign for 'an elected congress in 1986.'
And what of General Pinochet himself? So far he seems determined to stay on until after 1989.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
183 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 10, 1986
Commercial involvement / French earth-resources satellite surveillance project
BYLINE: By ANTHONY TUCKER, Scottish Correspondent
LENGTH: 217 words
In the first commercial involvement of a Government financed agency in the exploitation of spaceflight, the National Remote Sensing Centre at the Royal Aircraft Establishment, Farnborough, is to become salesman to a French earth-resources satellite surveillance project.
The Farnborough unit, and NPA (Nigel Press Associates) if Kent, are to be the two British outlets for commercial data returned by Spot-1 - the French commercial answer to the US Landsat-5 - which is to be launched from Kourou in French Guyana at the weekend.
Like Pandsat, the Spot-1 satel lite will provide land surveys and its intended customers are the international development agencies, the oil companies and Governments needing detailed land surface and agricultural information. If it works as planned the Spot satellite, built and financed by a French industrial consortium - will provide pictures in both infra-red and visible frequencies able to reveal more details than its American rival.
Landsat-5 will produce pictures whose ground resolution is about 25 metres, and the satellite rephotographs the same area once every 18 days. The expected resolution of ground detail from the French satellite is about 10 metres and it will be able to bring pictures up to date every two-and-a-half days.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
184 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 10, 1986
Financial Notebook: Shifting cash / Arab assets in the US
BYLINE: By HAMISH McRAE
LENGTH: 413 words
There is a further unstable element in the marketplace which at this stage is extremely difficult to assess, but of which people ought to be aware.
It is the possibility of some portfolio shift by the Arab nations out of the United States, following the freezing of Libyan Government assets there. If other Arab nations now feel uncomfortable about holding a large portion of their assets in the US, they have a number of options open to them. But you have to be careful to distinguish between the different options and their effects.
First, Arab nations could move their liquid balances out of New York banks, and place them in non-US banks either in New York, or more probably in London. As the deposits matured the balances could be transferred without cost to the holders. The London international banks could mop up the funds without too much difficulty. These banks would, of course, then immediately reinvest the funds on the inter-bank market, and the US banks would then buy them back. But the Us banks would lose the turn they make.
Second, the funds could be in addition switched out of dollars into other currencies. This could have a much more dramatic effect, coming as it does at a time when the dollar is perceived to be weakening. In as far as these funds were put into sterling they would push the pound up against the dollar, thereby reducing British oil revenues.
This might be seen as a neat way of killing two birds with one stone: punishing the US by taking money away, and punishing the Brits for pumping too much oil out of the North Sea. But since the Americans want a lower dollar, and we at this particular moment would rather like a higher pound, it would be wrong to stress the punishment element in the transfer. But such a move - to some extent - may take place.
Third, there could be a shift of portfolio investment out of the US and into other markets. Problem here is that the US securities market is so massively bigger than the rest of the world's markets, that any such shift would take time to execute. Obviously, though, in as far as finds are shifted out of US markets, they would depress Wall Street and push prices on other exchanges up.
At the moment, this is just rumour and conjecture. But at the time of the seizure of Iranian assets, there was some diversification of Middle Eastern funds out of the US. Nothing, as the late President Peron of Argentina once remarked, is as cowardly as money.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
185 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 10, 1986
Financial Notebook: All the markets needed was an excuse to tumble now they have it in spades / The Wall Street slump and the London Stock Exchange
BYLINE: By HAMISH McRAE
LENGTH: 636 words
One of the modest side effects of the Heseltine Memorial Exit was to give the poor stockmarket a further boot on the way down.
Not that it needed much encouragement to do so. The market has been hunting around for reasons to be glum and the combination of the rise in base rates and the fall on Wall Street have fully supplied the required quota of bad news. Wall Street in particular is important, not just because stockmarkets around the world all tend to move together but because what is happening on Wall street marks a change in attitude by the authorities there towards the securities business.
As is pointed out on the opposite page, you have only to go back a year and corporate raiders were the darlings of the US Administration. How they got their money to support their raids was neither here nor there. Some of that insouciant attitude remains in the US, but not enough to scupper the plan of the Fed to stop junk bonds.
But junk bonds are just one device of many. It is perfectly possible that the Euromarket, unfettered by US regulations, will start to see junk bonds issued here. Viewed objectively it is hard to rate the so-called junk bonds below a large number of regular bonds which happen to be issued by sovereign governments. Would you rather lend money to a substantial US company to finance a takeover, or to lend to some third world dictatorship where the incumbant may be booted out in the next few months?
In fact, the reaction to the Fed move is almost more important than the move itself. When markets are moving suddenly they are moving because of an important change of perception by investors. This is a general proposition, applicable not just to London yesterday or New York the day before. What is that change of perception?
Try this. For several months now everyone has been saying that the bull market in shares was getting stale. But while everyone was happy to say this, no-one was particularly anxious to act upon his or her own advice. To do so was plainly wrong, with the market in general still moving upwards, and a string of substantial takeovers creating conditions for the fleet of foot to make additional trading profits.
But anyone with any experience of bull markets is always looking for signs that the froth is about to be blown away; that the bubble is about to burst. The more excitable the market becomes, the more the rumour machine generates sudden runs in share prices, the more cautious the experienced become.
It is against that background that our own rise in interest rates (which will presumably be followed by another) or the Fed decision should be seen. They do not necessarily signal the end of the bull market. But they give a reason for their caution.
The change of perception that is taking place is not simply that the cautious have suddenly got the upper hand. Rather it is people of whatever persuasion, optimists or pessimists, are coming to accept that there are dangers and contraditions in the riproaring. 'if it moves buy it' markets we have seen of late.
When they get a negative signal from the Fed, or see a bout of jitters on the foreign exchanges, it makes them stop.
None of this means that the stockmarkets around the world are about to plunge. There is still a good fundamental demand for securities market products, and that underlying demand in Britain at least will be fostered by things like the Stock Exchange's new advertising campaign to boost share ownership. The move away from banking instruments and towards securities markets to allocate savings is still running strongly.
But markets which rise without apparent hinderence are unhealthy. They need periodic shakeouts to keep them sweet. See yesterday's rather glum trading as a necessary condition for long term health.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
186 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 10, 1986
The otherwise dutiful servant / Michael Heseltine's record as Defence Secretary
BYLINE: By DAVID FAIRHALL
LENGTH: 796 words
Michael Heseltine's contribution to our defence was to make it more businesslike. He approached his vast department - part Civil Service, part armed forces, with an pounds 18 billion budget - almost as if it were just another business in need of some sound management. And in one sense no one could deny he was right. It did desperately need a more commercial competitive approach and it was only here, strangely, that he seemed to see his job in terms of issues and principles. One of them - that Britain should collaborate more closely with the Europeans in Nato to provide an efficient alternative source of arms supply to the United States - finally led to his clash with Mrs Thatcher.
Yet in dealing with what most other people might regard as the defence issues of the day - nuclear disarmament, the future of the Royal Navy, the Greenham women's cruise missile protest, the reform of Nato's outdated strategy, Trident and Star Wars - his approach was one of political calculation. The passion with which he has been defending the need for a European solution to Westland's crisis was notably lacking. Instead, he dutifully carried out whatever the Prime Minister or Cabinet decreed.
Take Star Wars, President Reagan's Strategic Defence Initiative. Heseltine apparently shared the deep scepticism with which the President's expensive dream was generally regarded in Whitehall. But it was the Foreign Secretary, Sir Geoffrey Howe, who publicly voiced those doubts, and acquired a lot of credit with other European statesmen or doing so.
The Defence Secretary by contrast, simply repeated the party line laid down by Mrs Thatcher: that research into space defences was entirely acceptable as long as the decision on deployment was considered separately at a later date. And when the Prime Minister told Heseltine that she wanted to sign up as a member of the Reagan Star Wars team before Christmas, he went off to strike the best deal for British industry and British science that he could.
In the process he discovered that there were some strategic issues at stake even within this commercial approach. His department felt that Britain could not afford to be left behind by the US in key technologies like high speed computing and lasers that were already needed in other weapons systems. And he ended up signing what will probably turn out to be the best damage limitation agreement we could have got.
Or turn back to the beginning of Heseltine's spell as Defence Secretary, when he claimed to have defeated the anti-nuclear movement, the 'one-sided disarmers' as he called them. Whatever his final judgment, one might have expected a man identified as a 'wet' on social and economic issues to be more aware of how deeply people are disturbed by their government's failure to put any brake on the nuclear arms race, and to acknowledge that much of the Nato military establishment, from the Supreme Commander Europe downwards, also believes that our defence is too dependent on nuclear weapons.
Yet the focus of Heseltine's approach seemed to be the political appreciation that whatever the polls might indicate, nuclear disarmament was not an election winner. He led a skilfully managed campaign to discredit CND and Greenham women, while granting them their right to protest. He allowed Sarah Tisdall to be tracked down and imprisoned for leaking one of his memos on the arrival of the first cruise missile. Clive Ponting followed her, but not to prison.
You might think his managerial instinct would be engaged by controversy over the wisdom of spending pounds 10 billion or so on the Trident nuclear deterrent force. But again this seems to have been treated as just another given programme that had to be fitted into the long term costings - not worth a Cabinet row.
It sometimes struck me that Heseltine's approach was merely a personal expression of the general truth that many of our fundamental defence problems are beyond the scope of one government to solve, let alone one defence minister; so basically you get down to managing the programme you inherit and hide the skeletons away.
I have never known a politician prepared to pause so painfully long before answering a policy question on which he might be quoted. His Westland outburst seems to be the product of a quite different personality. The most spontaneous press briefing I remember as Defence Secretary was on the fringes of a Nato meeting when he grabbed a piece of paper and started drawing graphs to prove that under his system of management the defence budget could never get out of control. I was inclined to believe him. It is one of the challenges for his successor not to let that particular skeleton out of the cupboard before the next election.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
187 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 10, 1986
Debt mediator arrives as SA economy lifts / Fritz Leutwiler to meet with South African Foreign Minister Pik Botha
BYLINE: From DAVID BERESFORD
LENGTH: 386 words
DATELINE: JOHANNESBURG
With gold prices booming on foreign markets, a resurgence in diamond sales, the Johanesburg Stock Exchange reaching record levels, and local currency making a slow recovery, white South Africa is anxiously awaiting the arrival of Mr Fritz Leutwiler, the former Swiss banker mediating the country's debt problems.
Mr Leutwiler is due to arrive today for talks with the Foreign Minister, Mr Pik Botha. The slight resurgence of hope in the recent economic gloom here has little to do with the political factors which precipitated the crisis last year.
Frenetic trading on the stock exchange this week - which steadied yesterday - was due largely to a rush to invest as a hedge against inflation. This is expected to rocket later this year as last year's collapse of the rand and its impact on imports begins to affect consumer prices.
The rand rose through the 40 cent barrier against the US dollar to touch 41 cents yesterday. This is attributed to the recent fall in the dollar and to local reserve bank intervention.
A little hope goes a long way in South Africa at the moment, particularly as the Government seems intent on destroying whatever goodwill it gained by last year's reforms. A fact-finding tour by six American congressmen which ends today has become something of a disaster, with one of the delegation describing President PW Botha as rude and course. There is now speculation that the visit will result in increased congressional pressure for sanctions.
The schizophrenic approach of the Government to reforms was demonstrated yesterday with an extraordinary attempt by the Department of Education and Culture to persuade the public that an announcement earlier this week of an end to racial restrictions on admission to white universities was not an end to such restrictions.
The department said that the media had given 'the wrong impression' of the decision, but failed to explain how. Later, a departmental spokesman said: 'The intention was not to say the press created the wrong impression, but that some members of the public came to the wrong conclusion.'
The US Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, Dr Chester Crocker, is to arrive for a two-day visit on Sunday, during which he will hold talks with government leaders on Namibia and Angola.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
188 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 10, 1986
S Africa 'raids Angolan village' / South African troops reportedly attack hamlet of Mupa
BYLINE: By VICTORIA BRITTAIN
LENGTH: 281 words
South African troops penetrated 95 miles inside Angola and raided the hamlet of Mupa in Cunene province this week, kidnapping two Angolan militiamen, according to military sources in Luanda.
The claim coincides with a visit to Luanda by Dr Chester Crocker, the US Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs. Dr Crocker's policy of 'constructive engagement' with the South African regime has been repeatedly criticised by the Angolans for its tacit encouragement to Pretoria to continue its undeclared war against Angola.
President Jose Eduardo Dos Santos of Angola met the US envoy and strongly criticised the Reagan Administration's intensified support for the Unita rebel leader, Dr Jonas Savimbi, whose forces are supported by the South African army. Dr Savimbi is expected to visit Washington shortly.
President Dos Santos said: 'We still cannot understand whether Savimbi's visit and the military and other aid which the United States intends to give him should be considered as a form of pressure on Angola or as a declaration of war by the US.'
Since the repeal of the Clark Amendment prohibiting US aid to dissident groups in Angola last July, the Administration has made it clear that open and covert aid to Unita is planned this year. Although Dr Crocker has said he does not personally favour giving aid to Unita, his close relations with the South African Government and his frequent meetings with Dr Savimbi have alienated Luanda.
Meetings between US and Angolan government representatives were halted by the Angolans last year after South Africa attempted to sabotage oil installations in Cabinda and the Clark Amendment was repealed.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
189 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 10, 1986
Kohl is confident of SDI accord / West German Chancellor says agreement near with US on participation in 'Star Wars' programme
BYLINE: From ANNA TOMFORDE
LENGTH: 320 words
DATELINE: BONN
Chancellor Helmut Kohl said yesterday he had no doubts that Bonn would reach an agreement with Washington in the next few months on West German participation in the Star Wars project.
At the end of the negotiations, due to begin next week, there would be an umbrella agreement on technological cooperation, embracing the Strategic Defence Initiative, he said. This would be sealed by an exchange of letters.
His statement, ahead of the mission is likely to annoy the junior Liberal coalition partner, the Free Democrats, who have stubbornly refused to commit themselves to a formal SDI agreement.
Economic Ministry officials said yesterday that the first round of talks - the delegation will be led by the Economics Minister, Mr Martin Bangemann - would almost certainly not lead to concrete results. Star Wars was a subsidiary issue in broad talks on technological cooperation, a spokesman said.
In contrast, the Christian Democrats' defence expert, Mr Juergen Todenhoefer, warned against further delays in negotiating an SDI agreement.
'If we put technology transfer and economic questions above issues of security policy, the priorities of West German policy are turned upside down,' he said. Too much time had already been lost because of the FDP's foot-dragging.
A colleague, Mr Alfred Dregger, urged the Economics Minister, who is leader of the Free Democrats, 'to represent government policy in Washington and not the policy of his own party.'
Meanwhile, Defence sources confirmed yesterday that the first of the 96 US cruise missiles to be deployed in West Germany have arrived at a US Air Force base at Hahn, south of Bonn.
The missiles are part of 572 cruise and Pershing missiles being installed in five Nato countries to counter Soviet missiles aimed at the West. Nato's missile programme has sparked widespread opposition among West Germans, especially young people.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
190 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 10, 1986
Weinberger campaigns for increased arms budget / US Defence Secretary alleges increased Soviet deployment of treaty-breaching SS-25 missiles
BYLINE: From MICHAEL WHITE
LENGTH: 586 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
The US Defence Secretary, Mr Caspar Weinberger, last night coupled a renewed demand for increased US defence spending next year with the accusation that the Russians have now deployed 45 of their new treaty-breaching SS-25 mobile intercontinental missiles, an increase of 18 since December. He insisted that Moscow would only negotiate arms cuts of US strength gave it 'incentives'.
As the beleaguered Defence Secretary Mr Weinberger stressed the importance of maintaining a consistent level of spending to avoid confusing friend and foe alike about US determination, it was reported yesterday that the White House has agreed on its tactics for next month's request to Congress for the 1987 Pentagon budget. It will seek dollars 311 billion compared with the dollars 289 million tentatively agreed after many cuts for 1986, less than the dollars 314 billion proposed by Mr Weinberger, but enough to let him claim that represents three per cent growth on top of inflation.
Mr Weinberger is facing an uphill struggle to sustain his budget targets against growing pressure to tackle the dollars 200 billion deficit and to maintain hawkish suspicion of arms control agreements which have dominated top civilian thinking at the Pentagon during his tenure.
Last night's speech to liberal critics in the 'lion's den' of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace came just as secret congressional testimony was released which undermined his frequent claims that 'the Soviets always cheat'.
Lieutenant General John Chain, the former head of the rival State Department's Bureau of Political and Military Affairs told the Senate armed services committee last year that while there were examples of Soviet non-compliance with existing arms control agreements 'if you take the bodies of the treaties in a macro-sense, they have complied with the large majority of the treaties.'
General Chain, who has since been promoted to Chief of Staff to all US forces in Europe, insisted that cheating and compliance had to be 'kept in balance,' a view not universally shared within the Administration, though one which appears to be regaining strength in the post-summit climate. Other expert witnesses have made similar points though Pentagon hawks dispute it.
Mr Weinberger himself renewed the hawks' position on any future deal with the Soviet Union. He demanded 'real reductions' which produced superpower parity at a lower level of weaponry which was also verifiable - 'not a treaty that the Soviets can violate with impunity.' And he insisted on the right to continue Star Wars research.
In last night's speech the Defence Secretary admitted that America had outspent the Soviet Union by 50 per cent every year between 1950 and 1970, but that this trend had been reversed in the 1970s with disastrous results, notably during the Carter Administration's dovish early years.
Ignoring the complex technicalities of how rouble spending is realistically converted into dollar purchasing power, he claimed that oven the Pentagon's 1986 budget - facing more cuts in Congress - 'would only redress the balance to 'about 90 cents for each Soviet dollar's worth of investment.'
The SS-25 is presented by moscow as an updating of the older SS-13, something most Western experts dispute, while stressing that it represents a 'qualitative' rather than quantitative violation of the Salt agreements. The extent to which Soviet 'cheating' is militarily significant remains an issue of hot dispute.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
191 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 10, 1986
Quest for revenge limits Reagan options / Focus on US decision to impose economic sanctions against Libya
BYLINE: From ALEX BRUMMER
LENGTH: 878 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
The Administration, having failed to find a consensus for military retaliation against Libya, has again been obliged to wield the awkward tool of economic sanctions.
However, its need to satisfy a domestic thirst for revenge against the deaths of five Americans at Rome and Vienna - including 11-year old Natasha Simpson - has forced it into a policy option which cannot succeed.
The White House was addressing a domestic policy need rather than sensibly weighing the international complications of its moves and is once again getting the thumbs down from its Allies. Its heavy-handed military moves in the Meditterranean have had the effect of producing a 45-0 vote in favour of Colonel Gadafy from the Islamic Conference Organisation, which normally has difficulty agreeing on the Koran, let along Arab politics.
As so often in the past, the US has mishandled its diplomacy. Instead of carrying out the quiet diplomacy it has so often advocated in South Africa and Central America, it has appealed over the heads of governments to the news media. Normal practice under these circumstances would be to send a cable to allies informing them of actions under consideration, giving the governments a chance to prepare a reply.
But the Reagan Administration's need to be seen to be doing something against a regime it detests precluded this. For more than a week the authorities here have been talking in progressively stronger terms about economic sanctions and the need for the Allies to join. But the counterterrorism experts at the Foreign Office in Whitehall had received no formal notification by early this week of American plans.
Although the Administration has been assiduous in consulting the Allies on East-West relations and arms control, it has rarely shown such diplomatic skill in pursuit of what it considers outlaw governments. This week's exhibition of disinterest by Allied governments, including those in London and Bonn, is essentially a replay of what happened in 1981 when the US tried to isolate Libya and in 1982 when it punished Moscow for the clampdown in Poland.
On that occasion, the then National Security Adviser, Judge William Clark, picked a convenient Friday afternoon when the Secretary of State, Mr Haig, was out of town and proceeded to bully the Allies. He slapped sanctions on European companies, such as John Brown on Clydeside, doing business with Moscow.
This time, the Secretary of State, Mr George Shultz - who personally takes a dim view of the efficacy of economic embargos - has restrained the White House from attacking British subsidiaries of American firms, such as Brown and Root, which are conducting business in Libya. While the President has said that the American people will take a poor view of European governments who step into American shoes in Libya - there is little it can do.
There are lingering questions as to whether Mr Reagan can even enforce his sanctions against his own citizens. The decision to impose an embargo on the several hundred million dollars of Libyan assets still inside the US may help. If, as expected, Colonel Gadafy seizes control of the oil assets of Occidental, Conoco, Marathon, and other oil operators in Libya, US citizens still working in the oilfields may feel it is time to get out.
But the idea that the renegade Americans - many of them older oil men unable to find work at home - will find themselves in gaol is fanciful. During America's protracted hostage dispute with Iran in 1979-80, prosecution of an individual was only once threatened and that against the radical former US attorney-general, Mr Ramsey Clark. President Reagan attempted to take civil action in respect of the money spent by citizens travelling to Cuba, on the grounds that it would be used to support anti-American activities. But the Supreme Court refused to uphold similar criminal convictions under the 1926 Passport Act in the 1960s. The judiciary has granted the executive less power over individual American citizens than the White House appears to think.
Despite the problems with the Allies and sanctions, Mr Robin Oakley, the Administration's combative counter terrorism chief, was confident last night that the US could turn the Allies around. 'The US is not engaging in a campaign against Europe or moderate Arabs,' he told European correspondents.
The US had provided the Europeans with information connecting Libya with the Abu Nidal terrorist group in September, he said, and would be providing further intelligence in the coming days. He sharply rejected criticism of the vague nature of the State Department's white paper on the Libyan connection to Abu Nidal.
A leading article in yesterday's New York Times, for instance, said: 'The real complaint about Mr Reagan is that, though his language is strident, his indictment of Libya is vague.' Guns found in Libyan People's Bureau in London provide a trail to Tripoli, but not to Abu Nidal.
The State Department's presentation has done nothing to enhance its cause in the chanceries of Europe. Having released satellite pictures in the past showing Soviet-backed military facilities in Cuba and Nicaragua, the Administration has failed so far to come up with the goods this time.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
192 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 10, 1986
Shultz deputy will try to rally Allies / US Secretary of State urges Western Europe to support sanctions against Libya
BYLINE: From ALEX BRUMMER and MICHAEL WHITE
LENGTH: 510 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
The Secretary of State, Mr Shultz, announced last night that he is sending his deputy, Mr John Whitehead, to European capitals to convince the Allies to change their view on economic sanctions against Libya.
Mr Shultz said: 'If there were real European movement, it could have a dramatic effect' on Libya and the fund it allegedly raises to support terrorism.
Mr Shultz dismissed Colonel Gadafy's promises in Tripoli to join the fight against terrorism. ' This rhetoric doesn't do anything,' Mr Shultz said. He said that the passports carried by the Abu Nidal terrorists who are suspected of the Rome and Vienna outrages, could be traced directly back to Libya. He also accused Colonel Gadafy of using his diplomatic missions around the world as depositories for 'weapons and explosives which hand them out to those terrorists who request them'.
The rather belated decision to send Mr Whitehead to Europe for consultations with the Allies comes almost a week after the US first signalled that it wanted economic sanctions and after many of the Allied countries had rejected the notion.
Mr Shultz did, however, praise the Government of Mr Craxi in Italy, for the effort it was putting into its antiterrorism campaign and the consideration it was giving to the US request.
Mr Shultz also urged that Congress to pass the much delayed Anglo-American extradition bill which is meeting objections on Capitol Hill because of its attempt to include political prisoners - including IRA sympathisers.
The Administration last night threatened to extend its Libyan economic embargo to Syria unless it 'changes its pattern of support' for the Abu Nidal terrorist group.
'We haven't forgotten Syria,' said Mr Robert Oakley, the head of the State Department's counter-terrorist group.
With the Administration still unable to produce what one senior official called 'the smoking gun' linking Colonel Gadafy with Abu Nidal - the prime suspect for the airport massacres in Rome and Vienna - the White House was still defiantly whistling in the dark about the effectiveness of its retaliatory policies.
Mr Oakley defended the widely-criticised decision not to include satellite photos of 12 alleged terrorist camps inside Libya on the grounds that hazy reconnaissance pictures of tents in the desert would have invited media derision.
However, Mr Oakley said: 'I wouldn't take the initial public statements by officials or others in either Europe or the other moderate Arab countries as representing what their final position is, or as representing what they think even now privately, and what they're saying privately.'
Last night, US firms and individuals affected by the total embargo on all economic links between the two countries were studying the legal small print and officials cast around for ways of making it effective. The director of the US Information Agency, Mr Charles Wick, revealed that appeals to expatriate Americans working in Libya's oil industry would be beamed into the country on Voice of America radio.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
193 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 10, 1986
Israel is ready for Star Wars / Participation in US SDI programme
BYLINE: From DAVID LANDAU
LENGTH: 238 words
DATELINE: JERUSALEM
Israel is on the brink of joining Britain in agreeing to take part in the US Star Wars programme.
Officials said yesterday that the Defence Minister, Mr Yitzhak Rabin, would be writing to the US Defence Secretary, Mr Caspar Weinberger, accepting the offer 'not imminently, but soon.'
Mr Rabin's letter, will be made public. Originally, Israel had wanted to show its interest in the research project without making an official announcement, as there are strong feelings in the defence establishment here that all steps should be taken to avoid annoying the Soviet Union.
The same feelings last year produced a sluggish and reluctant Israeli response to President Reagan's request that powerful relay stations for the Voice of America be sited in the Negev Desert.
But the Prime Minister, Mr Shimon Peres, and Mr Rabin have now agreed to the transmitters, and are also prepared to jettison their earlier caution on Star Wars.
Informed sources say pressure was put on them by leading Israeli companies which had applied to take part in the project but found that formal Government agreement was necessary.
Meanwhile, the 15-month-old National Unity Government is once again teetering on the verge of collapse after a five hour session yesterday of the inner cabinet on the disputed Red Sea Taba strip and relations with Egypt. The 10 ministers - five Labour and five Likud - meet again on Sunday.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
194 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 10, 1986
'No place for me in such a Cabinet' / Resignation statement by Defence Secretary Heseltine
LENGTH: 2974 words
I have today tendered my resignation from the government, not because of the discussion at today's Cabinet but because of the way in which the reconstruction of Westland Plc has been handled over a period of months. This has raised profound issues about defence procurement and Britian's future as a technologically advanced country, issues that, however, have never been properly addressed by the Government. Indeed, as I shall show, a deliberate attempt has been made to avoid addressing them. This is not a proper way to carry on government and ultimately not an approach for which I can share responsibility.
The background to the government's policy on helicopter procurement is the 1978 declaration of principles agreed by France, Germany, Italy, and the United Kingdom. This provided that each country would make every effort to meet their needs with helicopters developed jointly in Europe. That policy has thus far been followed through in our future planning. It is entirely consistent with the wider approach to defence procurement set out in the 1985 statement on the defence estimates which emphasised the importance of Europe coming together in an equal partmership with the United States within the North Atlantic Alliance. My own commitment to that alliance and to the strongest and most friendly relations with the United States on a basis of equality could not be clearer.
When Westland Plc ran into financial difficulties, partially because of their failure on the civil market, this was not my immediate ministerial responsibility. I am not the sponsoring minister for the helicopter industry. It would have been quite wrong for me to try to take the lead role in what was a DTI responsibility. It would have been wrong also for the Ministry of Defence alone to bail out the company with orders for which there was not an approved military requirement. I did, however, make clear throughout that the helicopter capability provided by Westland was essential in some form to our defence needs.
When Sir John Cuckney, who had become the chairman of Westland with my full support and encourage Government about its attitude to potential partners for Westland, there was a close identity of view between the Ministry of Defence and the Department of Trade and Industry. In view of this identity of view, it was still unnecessary for me to take any direct initiative. It was recognised that with a Sikorsky shareholding Westland might tend to become little more than a production facility for Sikorsky and to lose its own helicopter design and development capacity, that a link with European companies would fit better into the developing pattern of european collaboration and that, in many ways, British Aerospace would be the most welcome partner.
The need to explore urgently the European option was recommended by the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry on October 4. When, on October 17, Sir John Cuckney met the Secretary of State and Trade and Industry he said that he was well aware of the Government's preference for a European minority shareholder in Westland and attached weight to that preference. The problem was how to bring this about in a timely way.
Over the following weeks there were a number of discussions involving both the European companies and Westland and contacts between European ministers. I kept in close touch with these and with the financial position of the company. At one stage I intervened to direct that the MoD's accounting officer should make a payment of pounds 6 million to Westland that was correctly being withheld from them on grounds of prudent government accounting but that I was satisfied should be made because of the wider issues involved. As time went on I became increasingly concerned about progress in the discussions, particularly at a company level. On November 26, I met Sir John Cuckney and discussed with him where matters stood. He explained the need for urgent action and the attractions of participation by Sikorsky. However, he did not rule out other options, provided that they had as much to offer as the Sikorsky alternative. His problem was that he lacked the management resources himself to explore them. I asked if I could help, having already agreed with the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry and that this was acceptable. He welcomed my proposal that I should assist in this process.
The lessons of the negotiations over the European fighter aircraft were in my view clear: without ministerial involvement it would be very difficult to achieve timely success. I was not prepared to seek the support of my European ministerial colleagues, unless their efforts would be fairly and properly treated.
Since Sir John Cuckney had in no way ruled out the European alternative and welcomed my offer to explore it, I discussed it with Dr Woerner the following day and arranged that national armaments directors of the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy and France should meet on November 29, and that the companies involved should also come together that day. The national armaments directors reached provisional agreement on the way forward, including a recommendation that, in an extension of the 1978 agreement their needs within the main helicopter classes should be covered solely in the future by helicopters designed and built in Europe. They also agreed to complete the rationalisation of their requirement for helicopters, carrying forward the objectives set out in 1978. As soon as this agreement had been reached I personally gave a copy to Sir John Cuckney.
Sir John Cuckney's response was that the agreement that had now been reached would effectively preclude Westland from proceeding with a tie-up with Sikorsky. The subsequent ministerial discussions took place only in the context of this issue, rather than the wider dimension of the Government's approach to the ownership of a major defence capability.
There were three ministerial meetings chaired by the Prime Minister at the beginning of December, two of them ad hoc groups on December 4 and 5, and finally a discussion in the ministerial sub-committee on economic strategy on December 9. The Prime Minister attempted at all three meetings to remove the recommendation of the national armaments directors and thus leave the way clear for the Sikorsky deal.
The ad hoc meetings were both ill-tempered attempts to overcome the refusal of some colleagues to thus close off the European option.
The Prime Minister, failing to secure that preference, called a meeting of the subcommittee on economic strategy on Monday, December 9. I proposed delay until the following Friday to give the Europeans time to come forward with a proper proposal. If they failed, I said that I would back Sikorsky.
Virtually every colleague who attended the enlarged meeting and thus came fresh to the arguments supported me, despite the fact that Sir John Cuckney had been invited to put his views to the meeting.
That meeting concluded that the sub-committee were not yet ready to reject the Nads' (national armaments directors) recommendation and a number of ministers would have a clear preference for the European alternative to a Sikorsky deal if it could be developed into a form which Westland would regard as preferable to the Sikorsky arrangement.
Time was limited and, as I have said, I was given to the following Friday to come up with such a proposal. The Prime Minister clearly stated on that Monday that ministers would meet again to consider the result on Friday at 3 pm after the Stock Exchange had closed. There would thus be a further opportunity for colleagues to consider the outcome and to inform the board of their views if they wished. I was content. There was time. There would be further collective discussions.
The Cabinet Office subsequently began arrangements for that meeting and a number of Whitehall departments were contacted about the availability of their minister. These arrangements were, however, cancelled on the instructions of the Prime Minister. Having lost three times, there was to be no question of risking a fourth discussion. As a result the meeting on December 9 represents the only occasion on which there was a collective discussion of the issues involved, as opposed simply to the question of their public handling by the Government. By December 13 I produced proposals for ministeria: agreements. A complementary offer by the companies concerned to participate in the reconstruction of Westland was also made that day. They were not ad dressed collectively, but I circulated them to colleagues.
Following the decision not to proceed with the meeting on December 13, I sought on a number of occasions to have the issues properly addressed. The first attempt had been at the Cabinet on Thursday December 12. The Prime Minister refused to allow a discussion in Cabinet that day. I insisted that the Cabinet Secretary should record my protest in the Cabinet minutes. When the minutes were circulated there was no reference to any discussion about Westland and consequently no record of my protest. Before the next Cabinet meeting I complained to the Secretary of the Cabinet. He explained that the item had been omitted from the minutes as the result of an error and he subsequently circulated an addendum in the form of a brief note of the discussion. Such an error and correctior was unprecedented in my experience. The minutes, as finally issued, still did not record my protest and I have since informed the Secretary of the Cabinet that I am still not content with the way in which this discussion was recorded.
The world is aware that on December 13 the board of Westland rejected, after the briefest discussion, the proposals put forward by a consortium which now included Britain's leading aerospace company, British Aerospace PLC.
On December 16 the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry made a statement to the House that, since the Westland board had rejected the British/European consortium proposals, the Government was not bound by the Nads recommendation. Effectively he thereby left the way clear for the Sikorsky/Fiat bid.
There followed increasing concern over the defence implications of this decision. The officers of the backbench Defence Committee of the Conservative Party put out a statement in support of the approach I was taking. I did not solicit that statement. Subsequently on December 18 the House of Commons Defence Committee, following a private meeting with me, also drew attention to the defence implications. At the Cabinet discussion on December 19, there was again no attempt to address these fundamental issues.
lt was laid down that it was the policy of the Government that it was for Westland to decide what was the best course to follow in the best interests of the company and its employees; that no minister was entitled to lobby in favour of one proposal rather than another; and that major issues of defence procurement were for collective decision. Information about the implications of defence procurement for Westlands workload should be made equally available to both groups as well as to Westland.
I explicitly explained at that meeting that, as the ministry of defence was the major customer of Westland, I was bound to answer questions whether from UT/Fiat or from the European consortium about defence procurement aspects. I also drew attention to the fact that I believed that on the following day events would unfold that demanded collective judgment. I knew at the time, but could not prove, that the British/European proposals would appear next day. I therefore told the Cabinet that, while it was acceptable that Thursday for the Government to adopt an apparently neutral approach, events would shortly unfold which would demand collective judgment.
Events did so unfold - The following day, December 20, the British/European consortium put forward an offer to Westland that was widely described as superior in every way to the Sikorsky/Fiat alternative. It was rejected out of hand by the Westland board.
I wrote on December 23 to my colleagues setting out my views on the implications of both offers and their comparative merits and asking that the Government should exercise its proper responsibility on so important a matter of defence industrial policy. I explicitly recognised that the holiday period was a difficult time for such a judgment. But before the directors came out with a final recommendation last Sunday it would still have been possible for the Government to meet and to restate the preferences so clearly expressed at the outset. My request for a meeting was refused by the Prime Minister.
Two further events must be recorded. Sir John Cuckney wrote on December 30 to the Prime Minister, seeking assurances about the position of the company should they proceed with a Sikorsky/Fiat link. These assurances were sought directly in relation to a letter sent by the Ministry of Defence at my direction to the company. The fundamental issue raised by Sir John Cuckney related to defence procurement issues for which I was the Secretary of State with the individual ministerial responsibility.
In the proper conduct of government business Sir John's letter would have been referred to my department for advice and a draft reply. In this case the Prime Minister's private secretary sent the letter to the Department of Trade and Industry and asked for a draft reply, cleared as appropriate with other departments and the law officers. He asked for it to be submitted by 4 pm the following day. The letter from 10 Downing Street set out the line which the Prime Minister proposed to take.
When I received my copy of the letter the following morning I pointed out that these were matters within my ministerial responsibility but the letter was not transferred to my department for answer. I also pointed out that the line which the Prime Minister proposed to take was materially misleading. The department of Trade and industry prepared a draft reply which was referred to the law officers only at my express request. A reply with which all concerned could live was eventually hammered out at about 10 pm on New Year's Eve.
I subsequently amplified those parts of the reply that sought to hide the reality of Westland's position in relation to potential European partners and prospects for orders from the Ministry of Defence in the medium term. in a letter of January 3 to Lloyds Merchant Bank, which I copied to Sir John Cuckney.
I was informed the following day by the Solicitor-General that on the basis of the evidence which he had thus far seen my letter contained material inaccuracies. He wrote to me in this sense on Monday January 6. Within two hours of my receiving his letter damaging selective passages had been leaked to the Press Association. I cannot comment on the source of these leaks, on which there will no doubt be a full inquiry in the normal way. No one can doubt their purpose. I subsequently on January 6 set out to the Solicitor-General some of the further evidence at my disposal about the attitude of other governments and other companies and informed Lloyds merchant bank by letter on that day that my answer needed no correction.
The government, in its official position, has sought to suggest that it has adopted an even-handed approach between the viable offers. In practice throughout the attempt has been made to remove any obstacles to the offer by Sikorsky/Fiat even to the extent to changing existing government policy. Although, as I explained earlier, at the outset there was a clear recognition of the attractions of involvement by British Aerospace, I understand that last night the Secretary for Trade and Industry, in the presence of another minister in his department and his officials, told Sir Raymond Lygo of British Aerospace that the role which British Aerospace were taking in the European consortium was against the national interest and that British Aerospace should withdraw. So much for the wish of the sponsoring department to leave the matter to the shareholders on the basis of the most attractive choice available to them.
Finally, we come to today's Cabinet. It was suggested that any questions in connection with the competing offers for Westland should be referred by all ministers to the Cabinet Office to be handled by them in the first instance. To have done so would have been to imply doubt and delay in any and every part of the assurances I had publicly given on behalf of my ministry and of my European colleagues. Such a procedure would have allowed the advocates of the Sikorsky proposals to make mayhem over what is now the superior British/European offer. While I agreed that all new policy issues could be referred to the Cabinet Office, I refused to abandon or qualify in any way assurances I have given or my right as the responsible minister to answer questions on defence procurement issues in line with policies my colleagues have not contradicted.
The Prime Minister properly summed up the view of Cabinet that all answers should be referred for collective clearance. I could not accept that constraint in the critical few days before the Westland shareholders decide. I had no choice but to accept or to resign. I left the Cabinet.
To be Secretary of State for Defence in a Tory Government is one of the highest distinctions one can achieve.
To serve as a member of a Tory Cabinet within the constitutional understanding and practices of a system under which the Prime Minister is primus inter pares is a memory I will always treasure.
But if the basis of trust between the Prime minister and her Defence Secretary no longer exists, there is no place for me with honour in such a Cabinet.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
195 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 9, 1986
Investment: Shying away from sterling
BYLINE: By ROBIN STODDART
LENGTH: 1191 words
While it may be more immediately obvious to the Middle Eastern billionaire than to the Home Counties bank depositor, holding surplus cash in a strong currency is a first priority for successful saving. The freedom to convert sterling funds into other currencies was one of the earliest and most important of the measures brought in by Mrs Thatcher's reforming administration. Although she has had little more success than most of her predecessors in maintaining the purchasing power of the pound, relative to the performance of other industrial countries at the same time, the wider choice given to investors is real enough.
Partly because of their lower rate of inflation, the stock markets of most other advanced countries have been booming while in London share prices have lost momentum and fixed interest stocks have faltered. Gilts are suffering from another bout of concern as interest rates rise, rather than fall in line with the international trend. Although there is an unusually strong consensus that the economy will continue to grow fairly fast this year - always a danger signal for the stock market it is now being outweighed by fears that the Government is losing its grip not only over the money supply and industrial output but even as regards the cohesion of the inner cabinet circle.
The defence of the pound has been a heavy drain on the country's reserves of foreign currency recently. And suddenly the belief that inflation is under tight control has weakened. If sterling had gone into steeper decline the effect on prices in the second half of the year would have been enough to dash hopes of steadily declining inflation. As it is, some commodity prices, mainly coffee and other breakfast table items are rebounding from the very low levels of a few months ago. Pay rates never submitted to the restraints that the Government thought it was imposing through monetarist or market forces.
Higher interest rates are a confession of failure as well as an addition to living costs. The upward pressure on prices should be offset by lower petrol prices, but cold weather in much of the northern hemisphere has stopped the oil price from falling as quickly as might have been expected in view of the glut and pressure to produce in many countries with large debts or high expenditure.
Industry would mostly benefit from lower oil prices, but the exchequer would lose heavily and the trade surplus would rapidly diminish. When economic growth has come mainly from a combination of higher North Sea output and a sustained rise in consumer spending it is plain for all the world to see that Britain is as vulnerable to the charge of living beyond her long-term means as ever in the past.
There is, however, no likelihood of an early crisis similar to that in the years when Britain was dependent on oil imports and beset by strikes or other factors afflicting the means of paying for them. The only real immediate danger is that the Government, for electoral or other reasons, will fail to respond to the needs of the moment, which do not really allow of any further boost to consumption such as broad income tax cuts would bring. Although non-oil exports appear to have risen ahead of imports last year, such an event is too rare to be relied on to continue.
Although exports of textiles, cars and another old standby that had shown signs of posing its potency - whisky, were well up last year, there was no diminution of the import penetration of most major items. Foreign cars again accounted for well over half of the market and the trend in commercial vehicles was the same way. No other country is experiencing such an eclipse of its basic engineering sector. If new electronics products were replacing old machinery lines all might be well, but job losses in this area have mounted over the last year.
There is also considerable doubt over the level of training and skills that the new generation is imbibing. Unlike the situation in other advanced countries, rising incomes and profit have not led to greater expenditure in this crucial area. Furthermore, consumption has some extent gained at the expense of a rundown in the infrastructure. New building is of more permanent benefit usually than the availability of computer games or other electronic equipment in most households.
More austere policies are now paying off elsewhere, particularly on the Continent where the benefits of falling oil prices are most apparent. The United States and Japan have reduced their reliance on imported oil, like most industrial countries, but the trade imbalance between them remains a problem. Nevertheless, the prospect of sustained expansion, boosted by lower interest rates, is almost universal. If Britain becomes the odd-man-out, the political backlash could be savage.
Whether the shake-out in the bid-inflated service sector need extend to the decimated, but convalescent and mostly more confident areas of basic manufacturing is by no means obvious. Relative values are no longer out of line after the doubling of share prices on the European Bourses, with some leaders in Germany, Italy and elsewhere performing even better than that last year. Comparisons can never be very close, especially where there is a tradition of longterm banking finance and/or close family control, as still countries. Nevertheless, such evaluation is essential to successful performance in both direct industrial and portfolio investment.
Britain no longer has motor or heavy engineering giant to compare with the top German, French or Italian groups, but in Imperial Chemical Industries we still have a close competitor with the three German manufacturers that dominate Continental business and are prime operators on the world scene. Their shares have been prominent in the recent record-breaking run on the German exchanges. Yet ICl's shares are well below past peaks.
ICI's stock market valuation, at nearly pounds 5 million still exceeds that of its three German rivals in absolute terms and in relation to its sales, which at around pounds 11 billion are slightly below those of Hoechst now that the German mark has strengthened and well below BASF's following the latter's big US acquisitions in synthetic fibres. If the shares of the German leaders, all three of whom are capitalised at around pounds 4 billion, apart from debt, and whose profits are now each approaching pounds 1 billion a year, before tax, passing ICI's, keep on rising ICI could look the better buy. The weak pound menas that its profits should start rising again while those of most of the big German exporters tend to level off.
It will be a long time, however, before the huge trade surplus that Germany is enjoying falls back so that the inherent strength of the mark and associated Continental currencies and potential weakness of the pound are balanced out. Likewise, German, Swiss and Dutch bonds may appear to offer yields of not much more than half those available on gilts, but after allowing for inflation the difference is quite small and the Continental issues are clearly superior in terms of safety.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
196 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 9, 1986
BAe scoops 200 million pounds in air orders
LENGTH: 334 words
British Aerospace yesterday announced a series of new aircraft orders worth more than pounds 200 million.
'We are writing a success story,' said BAe's chief, Sir Raymond Lygo, who is also leading the European consortium battle to rescue the ailing helicopter company, Westland. Referring to the Westland saga, he added: 'It can't be bad to be touched by British Aerospace.'
One order, from Pacific Southwest, of California, is for four 146 regional airliners and is worth dollars 65 million.
The airline already operates 20 146s, the world's quietest jet airliner which is built at Gatfield, Hertfordshire.
Another is for 20 Jetstream 31 turbo-prop aircraft worth dollars 70 million from three US operators.
The Jetstream, built at Prestwick, Scotland, has been ordered by Republic Express airlines, which want 10, the US commuter airline, CC Air, which has asked for five, and Metro Express, which also wants five.
Sir Raymond said another 11 146s have also been ordered by various operators, who would be announcing their purchases soon.
The additional 11 orders take the total value to more than pounds 200 million. The sales mean that BAe has sold a total of 120 aircraft in 1985 worth almost pounds 600 million.
The company has also benefited from sales in 1985 of 85 airbuses, built by the European Airbus Industrie consortium, in which BAe has a 20 per cent stake.
Sir Raymond said the value of the airbus order to BAe was about dollars 800 million last year.
BAe is also holding talks with the government about obtaining launch aid for two new airbuses, which the consortium hopes to build.
They are the four-engined TA11 and the two-engined TA9 - both basically the same aircraft designed to operate in different roles and to carry up to 300 passengers.
BAe would need a repayable loan from the government of about pounds 500 million to take part in the project. But government officials have so far appeared reluctant to provide the cash.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
197 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 9, 1986
Nasser's disciple and the lessons for the West / The strength of Libyan leader Gadafy
BYLINE: By ANTHONY PARSONS
LENGTH: 674 words
I have never accepted the theory that Colonel Gadafy is a lunatic. His personal style may be on the bizarre side, but he has managed to stay in power in Libya for 16 years and has successfully driven off all his competitors. It was his oil policy which, at the beginning of the 1970s broke through the control over pricing exercised by the international oil companies. His extravagant foreign policies may drive the West, particularly the United States, to distraction, but he generally has the shrewdness to draw back before exposing his country to total disaster.
All in all, the colonel is a far cry from the likes of ex-President Idi Amin of Uganda or ex-Emperor Bokassa of the Central African Republic, President Nasser of Egypt was Gaday's hero and I see him as a kind of provincial extreme version of Nasser. Like his hero, he is implacably opposed to Zionism and imperialism, that is to say, Israel and the West, particularly the United States. Like Nasser, he is an ardent apostle of Arab unity - on his own terms. Like Nasser, he has ambitions in sub-Saharan Africa. Like Nasser, he is disposed to operate on the twin principles that 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend and the friend of my enemy is my enemy.'
The West painfully learned the lesson that Nasser's prestige grew in direct proportion to the strength of Western reaction to his policies, also that the Soviet Union was waiting in the wings to take advantage of Western attempts to cut him down to size. I cannot help feeling that the lessons of the Nasser experience have relevance to the question of dealing with Gadafy.
In the early seventies Britain had plenty of trouble with the Libyan leader, but we operated in a low key with minimal publicity and sometimes succeeded in persuading him to change course, generally by unobtusively denying him something which he really wanted. This 'softly-softly' approach is unfashionable these days. More direct methods, noisily advertisied, are in vogue.
And yet I wonder. Many questions come to my mind. Which side has gained more from the regular exchanges of rhetorical buffets between Gadafy and the Reagan administration? Is the Soviet Union more or less firmly entrenched in Libya than it was five years ago? when the Americans shot down the two Libyan aircraft over the Gulf of Sidre in 1981, which party attracted the more sympathy world-wide? Has Gadafy moderated his policies as a result of American invective and pressure? If he is as guilty of aiding and promoting Palestinian terrorism as the United States claim, it would appear not.
In the present crisis the United States must be careful not to risk over-reaching, embarrassing its allies and stimulating a wave of sympathy and support for Gadafy. I gather, for example, that the Americans are urging the Europeans to adopt economic sanctions against Libya. The British government for one must look askance at such a proposition. It has already denounced sanctions as being counter-productive in the context of South Africa. Why then should they be effective against Libya? And American military action, with or without the Israelis would be as difficult to justify as the Anglo-French adventure at Suez nearly 30 years ago.
The short-term answer to terrorism must lie in good advance intelligence and rigorous security precautions at vulnerable points. For terrorism in the Middle East is only a symptom, arising from frustration among the growing number of Palestinians who despair of recovering and part of their homeland. This is the disease, not the policies of any particular Arab government. And so long as this disease lingers on, there will always be people ready and able to perpetrate acts of terrorism, with or without Gadafy. Meanwhile, let us do nothing to help Gadafy to inflate his own balloon.
Sir Anthony Parsons, a former British Ambassador to the United Nations, special advisor on Foreign Affairs to the Prime Minister. This article was broadcast on the BBC World Service Commentary programme this week.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
198 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 9, 1986
Uprising puts Duvalier under siege / Haitian dissidents reportedly cut off capital Port-au-Prince
BYLINE: By GREG CHAMBERLAIN
LENGTH: 240 words
Haitian dissidents were reported yesterday to be cutting off the capital, Port-au-Prince, from the rest of the country as the President-for-life Jean-Claude Duvalier appeared to be losing control of an uprising against his family's 25-year-long rule.
Twelve people were reported to have been killed by security forces in the northern town of Gonaives and the headquarters of the Duvaliers' security militia, the Tontons Macoutes, were destroyed by angry crowds in several other towns.
The Tontons Macoutes were obliged to discard their uniforms and join the protests. Some demonstrators waved American flags.
The protesters set up barricades on the country's two main roads, leading north and west of the capital. In Petit Goave, stronghold of a leading opposition figure, Mr Huberto de Ronceray, three government buildings, including the prefecture, were burnt down.
All schools were shut in large towns as the pupils joined the movement to bring capital businessmen closed their shops.
Three senior officers were believed to be considering a move against the president to end the crisis quickly. They included the chief-of-staff, General Henri Namphy, the commander of the Leopards, an anti-subversion force, Lieut-Col Raymond Cabrol, and the chief of the military academy, Col William Regala.
The US Coastguard, meanwhile, returned 188 Haitian boat people it intercepted as they sailed towards Florida.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
199 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 9, 1986
Washington hawks facing defeat on arms control: US likely to hold to Salt and ABM treaty terms
BYLINE: From MICHAEL WHITE
LENGTH: 470 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
The Defence Secretary, Mr Caspar Weinberger, appears to be fighting a losing battle to persuade the White House to adopt 'proportionate responses' to alleged Soviet violations of arms control agreements which would themselves be indeniable violations.
The result could be a face-saving compromise in which the US chooses to deploy more decoys, so-called 'penetration aids' which enable missiles to get past supposedly improved enemy defences. Together with other more modest gestures, it would constitute an alternative to deliberately defying the limits agreed on missile numbers by announcing that it would not dismantle two more of its Posiedon submarines when the latest Trident submarine begins sea trials in the spring.
The Pentagon's long-awaited report on the Soviet violations of which the Reagan Administration has made so much has been with the President since before Christmas. But the high hopes which civilian hawks like Mr Weinberger and his key aide, Assistant Secretary, Richard Perle, entertained of 'breaking out' of the restrictive Salt II and ABM treaties are now jeopardised on two fronts, military as well as political.
On the one hand, those forces within the Administration which persuaded President Reagan not to repudiate Salt II last summer and held him to the letter, if not the spirit, of the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) treaty, have been strengthened by the summiteering momentum generated in Geneva. A second summit in Washington is currently being negotiated for later this year, despite attempts to muddy the waters evident by the leaking of the 'Weinberger letter' just before Geneva - itself a hawkish trailer of the full report now on the President's desk.
Potentially even more potent is money. The Gramm-Rudman 'balanced budget' amendment is squeezing all spending, though the President again proclaimed his commitment to a 3 per cent increase for the Pentagon in 1987 during Tuesday night's press conference.
Many are now predicting big cuts for defence spending, whatever he says.
According to some accounts of the internal Pentagon battle over the violations report, known as RSVP for 'Responding to Soviet Violations Policy Study,' the joint chiefs actually vetoed no less than 34 items in the civilians' first draft. Their scepticism about the marginal military significance of the Soviet infringements of the Salt and ABM treaties is enhanced by a fear that some of Mr Weinberger's expensive recommendations will drain money away from other projects.
The Defence Secretary is also said to favour more research on chemical and biological weapons, also a response to alleged Soviet misconduct, and deploying an extra 60 Minuteman 3 missiles (with 3 warheads each) to replace single warhead Minuteman 2s - further exceeding treaty limits.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
200 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 9, 1986
West could deal crippling blow / US call for sanctions against Libya
BYLINE: By JOHN HOOPER, Trade Correspondent
LENGTH: 603 words
For President Reagan and his advisers, the most galling aspect of this whole affair must be the knowledge that, if the Western Europeans were to agree to sanctions and enforce them rigorously, they could deal a crippling blow to Libya's economy without inflicting any serious harm on themselves.
Over 90 per cent of Libya's export earnings derive from sales of crude oil and more than 80 per cent of that oil goes to Western Europe. This is to some extent a reflection of the growing 'regionalisation' of the world oil trade which has been a feature of recent years.
But in Libya's case, her dependence on neighbouring markets has been greatly intensified by the ban imposed by President Reagan in March, 1982 on imports of Libyan crude. Up till then, the US had been Tripoli's best customer, taking more than a third of the countrys output.
The effects of that ban are still being felt today - Libyan crudes sell on the open market at around 30 cents a barrel less than equivalent Nigerian blends because traders know that the Libyans have a smaller market open to them.
According to estimates prepared by the Paris-based International Energy Agency for the first half of last year, Libya produced about 1 million barrels a day. Of this, it is reckoned that 140,000 barrels are needed for domestic consumption, leaving 860,000 barrels for export.
The most comprehensive and authoritative figures on international oil trading are prepared by a British firm, Energy Economics Research. Their latest bulletin shows that 717,000 barrels of Colonel Gadafy's crude found their way to Western Europe.
The principal customers were Italy and Germany which bought around 250,000 and 200,000 barrels a day respectively. The Western European country most dependent on Tripoli was Switzerland, 38 per cent of whose crude imports came from Libya.
But in view of the continuing glut in world oil supplies, no one doubts that, if push came to shove, even the Swiss could make up their supplies from elsewhere. In fact, with Opec hinting at a price war to grab back its share of the market, an embargo on one of the organisation's members would be welcomed by Britain and Norway - the two countries which will find themselves under the greatest pressure if Opec goes on the offensive.
A ban on Western European exports to Libya would also cut deep, especially if coupled with a similar embargo by the US. In particular, the Libyans would find it difficult to acquire much of the equipment they need to run their oil fields.
The country with the most to lose is Italy, which sells over pounds 1 billion a year worth of goods there - almost twice as much as the next most important exporter, West Germany. Even for Italy, though, Libya represents no more than two per cent of total overseas sales. In the words of a British trader, Libya is 'a useful market rather than a significant one.'
Italy would, however, find a severing of commercial relations difficult in other ways. As the recent disclosure of the Tripoli government's stake in Fiat showed, the two countries' economies have become progressively entwined.
More significantly from the point of view of a possible embargo, it was learnt earlier this week that Libya had bought a controlling 70 per cent stake in Tamoil, an Italian-based company, once part of the multinational Amoco empire, which runs a big oil refinery and owns a network of petrol stations. Ownership of Tamoil would give Colonel Gadafy a pipeline to the outside world. But by itself it could not process and sell enough oil to save the Libyan economy from ruin.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
201 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 9, 1986
Libya says boycott call is 'like declaration of war' / Response to announcement by US President Reagan
LENGTH: 576 words
DATELINE: TRIPOLI AND FRANKFURT
Libya yesterday described President Reagan's call for an international boycott of Libya as 'tantamount politically to a declaration of war.'
'The American president has treated the Libyan people with a barbarism which exceeds anything we had become accustomed to from past American administrations,' Libyan radio said.
It was the first official comment on Mr Reagan's announcement of sweeping economic sanctions against Libya, including a total ban on trade and commercial activity, in response to what he called Libyan support for terrorism.
'What matters is the end result, which is certainly not subject to the will of the US President,' the radio said.
Mr Reagan's past attempts to isolate Libya economically had failed to bring it to its knees, it added.
On Mr Reagan's call for the estimated 1,500 Americans, mainly oil workers, in Libya to leave or face possible prosecution, the radio said: 'They are well aware from having worked there for years that Libya is different from the way Reagan tries to portray it, so they will be the first to see through the lies and allegations of the president.
'Thus nothing remains for Reagan but war, of which his press conference has been a declaration,' the radio said.
'Reagan may know what he wants, which is to strike at Libya any way he can, but he does not know the result of this war which, were it to break out, would upset all existing formulas in the region, starting with that of American influence.'
Mr Reagan said Colonel Gadafy's 'long-standing involvement in terrorism' was well documented, and there was 'irrefutable evidence' of his role in attacks at Rome and Vienna airports on December 27 in which 19 people, including five Americans, died.
Calling Libya an outcast nation led by a barbarian, he described Colonel Gadafy as irrational and 'flaky' (unstable).
Colonel Gadafy was reported to have initiated telephone calls to other Arab heads of state. The Bahrain-based Gulf News Agency said he called the Emir of Bahrain, Sheikh Isa Ibn Sulman al Khaligah, and the President of South Yemen, Ali Nasser Mohammed.
The South Yemeni President assured Colonel Gadafy of support against 'the US provocations,' the agency said.
Last night Libya reopened its air space and Tripoli airport to foreign flights after an unexplained closure lasting several hours, a spokesman for the West German airline Lufthansa said.
Reacting to President Reagan's order to Americans to quit, Libya yesterday gave assurances to those who wished to do so would have no problem leaving.
The Libya state radio denounced economic sanctions as a plan to topple Colonel Gadafy's government. Western diplomats predicted that President Reagan's harsh words will only boost the Libyan leader's popularity at home.
The state-run media have reported that Colonel Gadafy's Muslim fundamentalist government has called up reservists and is ready for any military strike by the US or Israel.
US and Israeli officials have accused Colonel Gadafy of supporting the Palestinian faction they believe carried out the twin terrorist attacks on Rome and Vienna airports on December 27.
Meanwhile, at the Islamic Conference Organisation meeting in Fez. Morocco, the Libyan Foreign Minister Mr Ali Abdessalen Ireiki, was holding bilateral meetings outside the conference hall. 'The Americans are making a damned good hero out of Libya,' one source in the secretariat said.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
202 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 9, 1986
Reagan steps up pressure on allies / US urges trade embargo against Libya
BYLINE: From MICHAEL WHITE and ALEX BRUMMER
LENGTH: 448 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
The US Administration yesterday intensified pressure on its allies to join the American trade embargo, after its disclosure of - 'evidence' implicating Libya in acts of terrorism, pointing out that international terrorism had already cost their economies at least dollars 1 billion in lost tourist traffic.
The White House press spokesman, Mr Larry Speakes said:' It is essential that we make Gadafy and others pay a premium if they continue to instigate terrorism'.
'The State Department spokesman, Mr Bernard Kalb, warned that it would be 'a very serious mistake to misread our determination to confront international terrorism'. With or without allied help the US would' press forward regardless' with what he called 'a graduated course' of retaliation.
Mr Speakes refused to take the West German and British rejection of further economic sanctions as the last word, thought it was noted that the Administration was leaving its efforts to squeeze its European allies into line to its diplomats on the spot, for the time being at least. Mr Reagan's personal hot-line to his friends, Margaret Thatcher and Helmut Kohl, was not in use before the President's press conference yesterday, or its immediate aftermath. Spokesmen refused to be downhearted about 'premature' rejection in London and Bonn.
In its report, the State Department listed at length details of Libyan and Abu Nidal terrorist incidents, including several attempts to kill exiles inside the US which were thwarted by the FBI. As recently as May, 1984 the FBI arrested two Libyans near Philadelphia for trying to buy two silenced handguns 'the usual Libyan assassination weapon.' A year later a Libyan diplomat was expelled from the UN after being linked to a plot to kill Libyan dissidents in four US states. In his press conference Mr Reagan put the number of plots foiled worldwide at 126.
In theory the US military option is still open. Naval vessels remain on alert off the Libyan coast, including the carrier task force led by the USS Coral Sea and six naval surveillance planes - 'prowlers' are in position in Sicily to pinpoint prospective targets on Libyan soil. But officials are acknowledging the limits on such action, the possibility of diplomatic fall-out among Arab moderates, hostage-taking and the Soviet Sam-5 missiles which could even up the contest over Libya and drag in Moscow.
Scepticism about the seriousness of US intentions also focused in part on its commercial sanctions and its willingness to force its expatriate citizens home from their lucrative jobs in Libya's oilfields.
Most firms approached yesterday said they would comply with their Presidents order.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
203 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 9, 1986
Moscow attacks gunboat tactics / Soviet Union vows support for Libya against US
BYLINE: From MARTIN WALKER
LENGTH: 318 words
DATELINE: MOSCOW
The Soviet Union will continue to support Libya in it's resistance to American gunboat diplomacy, the Deputy Foreign Minister, Mr Mikhail Kapitsa, said in Moscow yesterday, while the Soviet press chorused their denunciation of 'American-Israeli blackmail.'
Mr Kapitsa followed the example of other Soviet spokesmen in refusing to spell out the nature or the extent of Soviet support of Colonel Gadafy, while denouncing American military and economic pressure on Libya.
'The US Administration arrogates unto itself the right to judge and condemn others, while it is itself the first and foremost proponent of international terrorism,' Mr Kapitsa said. 'The policy of Israel and the US towards Libya is a graphic example of the new globalism, the determination to dominate the whole planet, which characterises American strategy.'
The Soviet press warned yesterday that vital Soviet interests were at stake in the Libyan crisis.
'Our policy in that region is determined by the fact that the Soviet Union, being a Black Sea power, has a vital interest in the maintenance of peace in the Mediterranean,' Izvestia said yesterday in an editorial.
'The idea that the world is a happy hunting ground is deeply ingrained in the mentality of certain circles in Washington,' Tass commented.
'Only countries which unconditionally follow US policy and adhere to American standards have the right existence. All others are summarily blacklisted by Washington, which then decides what punishment, economic blockade, aggression or the physical removal of their leaders, could be meted out.'
'We have supported and will support - our friends have supported and will support - Libya in every respect against such crude, imperialist pressure from the United States,' M Kapitsa said.
Tass also said the measures ordered by Mr Reagan yesterday were in violation if the United Nations charter.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
204 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 9, 1986
Geldof's new plea on Sudan / Live Aid organiser warns of worsening famine situation
BYLINE: By SEUMAS MILNE and ANDREW RAWNSLEY
LENGTH: 437 words
Two and a half million people in western Sudan will run out of food tomorrow, Bob Geldof warned yesterday. The situation is now as bad as in Ethiopia in October 1984 when BBC news reports led to the launch of his band Aid project, he told journalists in London.
The EEC was doing nothing and the US government was pulling out for political reasons, he said when launching a glossy book about his recent trip to famine-blighted regions of Africa.
His organisation and other aid agencies were having to divert resources to cope with the immediate hunger crisis, which was the job of the multilateral bodies, rather than with longterm development.
Oxfam and Save the Children said yesterday that the lives of 4 million famine victims in the Sudan were being put unnecessarily at risk because of failures and foul-ups in the international aid pipeline.
In a Telex to the United Nations, the EEC, the British Government, and other agencies controlling the supply of relief, the charities said that the'grave situation' in Sudan had been created not just by lack of food but as much by lack of money and the will to move it where it was needed.
With only four months to go before the May rains make what roads there are impassable, Oxfam and Save the Children called upon donor governments to take immediate steps to avert a crisis for the third year running. The charities demanded release of sufficient money to distribute 100,000 tonnes of grain, already sent by the US government but sitting in Port Sudan. They also want a further dollars 33.5 million to pay for transport for another 268,000 tonnes of grain pledged by various donors.
Even then, say the charities, there will be a food shortfall, estimated at over 130,000 tonnes,
Mr Nick Winer, who has just returned from four years in the Sudan, two of them as Oxfam field director in Khartoum, said: 'There has been some improvement on 1985, in one sense - we're now talking about 4 million people starving rather than 7 million.
The report calls on western and Arab governments to allow Sudan easier terms on the repayment of its crippling dollars 9 billion international debts. But only the Sudanese government, the report says, can solve one of the country's most pressing problems, the 'enormously wasteful' civil war which is estimated to cost the country dollars 100 million a year.
Commenting on his omission from the New Year Honours list, Bob Geldof said he was not personally bothered, but he thought the decision had been a 'serious mistake and a cock-up' by government officials 'who didn't have their PR together.'
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
205 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 9, 1986
Accusations fly in tunnel camps / Dispute over proposed fixed Channel link between England and France
BYLINE: By ANDREW CORNELIUS, PAUL WEBSTER and JAMES NAUGHTIE
LENGTH: 637 words
A furious row broke out yesterday over the proposed fixed Channel link between England and France as pressure grew from the British Government for rival groups to join in to provide a compromise road and rail scheme.
The demand for the rival groups to reconcile their differences came after a Downing Street meeting of the powerful Cabinet economic committee, which is chaired by Mrs Thatcher. The Channel link is on the agenda again today at a full meeting of the Cabinet. But a final British decision is unlikely until late next week, a matter of days before the planned announcement of the winning scheme in Lille, northern France, on January 20.
The latest manoeuvres by the British Government in run-up to a final decision on a link led to a fresh outbreak of the fierce public relations war between rival construction groups. Mr James Sherwood, who heads the Sealink ferries group, said that he was confident of victory. He claimed that Mr Nicholas Ridley, the Transport Secretary, had earlier this week asked him to fly to London from the US to discuss the project.
Mr Sherwood suggested that Expressway - the road and rail tunnel consortium - would ultimately join forces with members of rival groups to provide the scheme the Government wants. He suggested that Expressway would almost certainly be chosen if this was achieved and further assurances were provided on the novel arrangements for ventilating Expressway's proposed 31-mile road tunnels.
Rival contenders Channel Tunnel Group, with its rail-only tunnel scheme, and EuroRoute, with its road and rail bridge and tunnel project immediately hit back, claiming that the Expressway scheme was a 'non-runner.' Both groups said that there was no question of joining forces with Expressway before January 20. 'If he wants to talk about joining us after we are announced as winners, that is a different matter,' a EuroRoute spokesman said.
Fearing that politicians would be swayed by Mr Sherwood's arguments in favour of the Expressway scheme, EuroRoute prepared a seven-point critique of Expressway. Titled The Unanswered Questions, it warns that the real cost of Expressway is double the estimate, that Expressway cannot adequately cope with carbon monoxide emissions in a road tunnel, and that a 31-mile tunnel poses 'immense and untried' safety problems.
EuroRoute warns that if Expressway is chosen and these problems are left unresolved the scheme will have to be abandoned, leaving Mr Sherwood's Sealink ferries group with no fresh competition on its cross-Channel routes.
EuroRoute also accused Mr Sherwood of attempting to 'unstitch' its consortium by approaching the various partners in the scheme. CTG joined the attack on Expressway by claiming that the cost estimates were too low and releasing a report which warns of ventilation problems in the Expressway road tunnel.
Mr Sherwood insisted that his new French partner. the SCREG construction group, had checked costings and found them accurate. Expressway would be cheaper than rival projects because it would not involve expenditure of around pounds 1 billion on rail terminal facilities and rolling stock.
The fierce lobbying continued with a warning to Mrs Thatcher from Conservative backbench MPs that they might vote against the Government if it opted for a rail-only option. Mr Robert McCrind MP for Brentwood and Ongar, described the rail-only scheme as timid and said he feared that Mrs Thatcher was going to 'funk it.'
Confusion over the final outcome of the Channel link debate was heightened by reports from Paris that there was a clash between Mrs Thatcher and Mr Ridley over the preterred scheme. According to French sources, Mr Ridley has come down in favour of the CTG rail tunnel scheme, while Mrs Thatcher wants the EuroRoute project.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
206 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 9, 1986
Westland rejects Euro-offer / Proposed rescue of troubled helicopter manufacturer
BYLINE: By MICHAEL SMITH and JAMES NAUGHTIE
LENGTH: 807 words
Westland, the helicopter firm, yesterday flatly rejected the improved rescue package put forward by the Defence Secretary, Mr Michael Heseltine's consortium of European aerospace interests.
The unequivocal rejection, which was made known on the eve of today's Cabinet meeting, came amid calls that next Tuesday's crucial meeting of shareholders should be adjourned.
At the same time, the West German and Dutch governments announced their support for Mr Heseltine's initiative but the main trade union at Westland, the white-collar union, Tass, backed the Sikorsky-Fiat deal against the advice of Mr Ken Gill, its general secretary. Westland announced that unions representing production staff at the biggest plant, in Yeovil, Somerset, had agreed to cast their proxy vote as shareholders in favour of the American package.
Mr Albert Kingsmill, a member of the Tass negotiating committee at Yeovil, said that the vote by his union 'was 1,500 in favour of Sikorsky to one against.'
Mr Gill had come down firmly in favour of the European consortium. He said a US deal would probably lead to Westland losing its ability to design helicopters A European deal would guarantee Westland a major European market, while the Sikorsky package would not.
Westland management were unmoved by pleas from supporters of the European offer to delay the shareholders meeting. The firm dismissed the new European proposals in three short sentences and 'strongly and unanimously' urged shareholders to accept the partnership deal from United Technologies of America and Fiat of Italy.
In their brief statement Westland's directors said they had considered the new pounds 75 million terms from the Europeans but had concluded that the financial details had been only 'marginally changed.'
The commercial logic of the American deal 'weighed heavily' with the directors and this remained 'unaffected and reaffirmed.'
However, Westland's chairman, Sir John Cuckney, held out an olive branch to the Europeans by inviting the British Aerospace chairman, Sir Austin Peace, and other representatives for further talks, 'if you believe there are other aspects of your proposal which you wish to explain.'
Westland also employed an outside firm to telephone the 10,500 private shareholders at their homes, urging them to support the board. Institutional shareholders are being seen during the day.
A company spokesman said it wanted to ensure that shareholders had got the latest documents, which in some cases appeared to have been delayed in the post, and to ensure that proxy forms were filled in backing the board. The two-day phone-round should be completed by tonight.
Westland's blunt dismissal of the European proposals underlined the suspicions harboured by the board about the quality of the partnership and working arrangements with the European offer.
At present, the American deal offers two million manhours of sub-contracting work spread over five years, compared with 1.8 million over three years from the Europeans.
However, the West German and Dutch governments have now confirmed that they support Mr Heseltine's European initiative. Holland's deputy defence minister, Mr Jan van Houwelingen, said that Westland would be excluded from the planned European project to develop a new Nato helicopter for the 1990s if the American deal went ahead.
Dr Manfred Worner, West German defence minister, said in a letter to Mr Heseltine that he was reluctant to take sides in a competition for a British firm, but went on: 'Our common interests would be well served by your approach for a European solution for Westland.'
Mr Worner's letter cites past co-operative projects in Europe, and includes a pointed reference to previous American efforts to extend influence in Europe.
'You may know that Sikorsky, without success, also tried to get a foothold in our helicopter market,' the letter says.
Lord Gregson, leader of Britain's defence industry, warned yesterday that many European industries would be under threat if the US wins the battle for Westland.
Lord Gregson, president of the Defence Manufacturers' Association, representing 400 British companies, said that as the home helicopter technology base eroded, markets in Europe and elsewhere would be denied to Britain and weak European industries would topple one by one to the Americans.
The European consortium proposals would allow collaborative projects to go forward with British companies as full partners - not just licence holders - and would preserve within Europe helicopter design
Sir Raymond Lygo, the managing director at BAe and front man for the European consortium, said that Westland shareholders and people at large were beginning to realise that there was more at stake than might at first have proved apparent.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
207 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 9, 1986
Biggest Wall Street slump since 1929 / US Dow Jones industrial average falls
BYLINE: From ALEX BRUMMER
LENGTH: 479 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
Wall Street's surging bull market ground to an abrupt halt last night, when the Dow Jones industrial average plummeted 39.22 points - the biggest one-day fall in the history of the New York Stock Exchange.
The decline was the sharpest since October, 1929, when the crash on Wall Street signalled the end of the Roaring Twenties and the start of the Great Depression. Yesterday's big fall came against a background of rising interest rates and the first signs that the mega-merger boom in the United States is falling apart.
In Washington, the Federal Reserve Board, the US central bank, yesterday voted 3-2 to clamp down on the freely available finance for large-scale mergers known as 'junk bonds.' Its decision came as two major takeovers between the oil giants Texaco and Pennzoil and the chemical groups GAF and Union Carbide were called off, frustrating speculators who had been hoping to make big killings in the shares.
The trigger for reversal in the Dow Jones index - which had hit a peak of 1,565.71 24 hours earlier - was a reversal in the trend of short-term interest rates. Hopes of an early cut in the Federal Reserve's discount rate - America's key measure of the cost of money - were dashed when the US Government reported earlier yesterday that unemployment had dropped 0.1 per cent to 6.9 per cent.
While this was theoretically good news for those in the dole queues and for President Reagan, it caused concern on the financial markets, where they fear that the recent rapid growth in credit, together with the near full capacity of the American economy, could lead to overheating and a new burst of inflation.
The Wall Street guru, Dr Henry Kaufman, of Salomor Brothers, gave voice to these fears when he said yesterday: 'It is unlikely that the Fed will cut the discount rate in the near future.'
There has been speculation for some weeks that the Federal Reserve would lower the discount rate - which stands at 7.5 per cent - in an effort to lower the value of the dollar on the foreign exchange markets and keep the fragile American economic recovery moving along for a third year of recovery. The Reagan Administration is looking for at least 3 per sent growth this year - a target which will be difficult to achieve without further reductions in interest rates.
The big fall in the Dow Jones yesterday came in late trading. After dropping 15 points - soon before 3 pm - it went into a headlong dive in late trading and had fallen just under 40 points before the close of business at 4 pm.
Although in absolute terms yesterday's drop in the Dow Jones was the largest on record, in percentage terms it represented a far smaller decline than on Black Tuesday, because the market has hit a series of new records in recent months. Yesterday's loss was just 2.5 per cent, against 12.8 per cent on October 28, 1929.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
208 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 9, 1986
Reagan freezes Libya's assets in the US / American President steps up confrontation with Colonel Gadafy
BYLINE: By MICHAEL WHITE, ALEX BRUMMER and MICHAEL SIMMONS
LENGTH: 854 words
President Reagan last night dramatically stepped up the confrontation with Colonel Gadafy by freezing all Libyan government assets in the United States as a precaution against Libyan seizure of American oil assets.
The President's use of his emergency powers just 24 hours after he had declared a total economic embargo against the 'terrorist' state covered all money, property and interests belonging to Libyan government agencies and was justified in the name of Libya's 'threat to the national security and foreign policy of the US.'
The move echoes President Carter's much-criticised freezing of Iranian assets during the 1979 hostage crisis, which led to such a legal tangle that it is still in the US courts. Officials predicted that the Libyan leader Would retaliate by seizing the remaining US oil assets in Libya, worth about dollars 400m, a move which could be used to justify further US reprisals for Libya's involvement in recent terrorist attacks. Military action has not been entirely ruled out.
The freezing of Libyan assets was the most serious move yet in a policy which scepticism for its lack of substance.
After the US declaration of sanctions against Libya - a proposal not supported by Europe, despite US pressure - the State Department issued a 20-page document which the Administration presented as its 'irrefutable proof' of Libyan complicity in the Rome and Vienna airport attacks, and terrorism in general
But the document contained none of the raw intelligence material from CIA or satellite photo sources which officials had been trumpeting for days.
It amounted to little more than a rehash of well-publicised cases of Libya's terrorist tactics abroad including the badly stated claims that Tripoli provided the Abud Ni-dal airport attack squads with their passports. It said that Colonel Gadafy's 'commitment of political, economic, and military resources in support of anti-Western activities worldwide may be surpassed only by the Soviet Union.'
West European governments were emphatic last night, and apparently unanimous, that there should be no economic sanctions against Libya until conclusive proof is advanced of Libya's direct involvement in the airport massacres of two weeks ago.
In most capitals there was a clear unwillingness to accept President Reagan's view that Colonel Gadafy be declared 'a pariah in the world community.' Despite the Italian Foreign Minister, Mr Giulio Andreotti, calling for an immediate meeting of Common Market foreign ministers to co-ordinate thinking, the EEC is unlikely to take concerted action.
In Bonn, where the cabinet met in special session to discuss Libya, officials said last night that West Germany would not join a US boycott. 'It is our experience until now that economic sanctions do not lead to the desired results,' a spokesman said.
In London, the view remained as it was last week - and as it has been throughout the anti-South Africa debate -that sanctions do not work.
At the Foreign Office last night the issue was thrashed out for three quarters of an hour by Sir Geoffrey Howe when he received the US ambassador, Mr Charles Price. He gave an assurance that 'Britain would not take any steps which would undercut the US measures,' and said that Britain, too, had suffered at the hands of Libyan terrorists with the shooting of WPC Fletcher.
Britain was therefore fully sympathetic with any action that might be taken to combat terrorism, he said, and would keep in close touch with its European partners on this and related issues.
The EEC will take no concerted action to back the US boycott, according to diplomatic sources in Brussels. Middle East specialists from the 12 foreign ministries of the EEC met in the Hague yesterday. On the agenda was a Greek request for urgent high-level talks on the buildup of tension in the Medi terranean. The Athens Government is strongly opposed to sanctions.
The European rebuff will hurt President Reagan more than it hurts Colonel Gadafy. Undoubtedly, trade with Europe - and especially with Italy and West Germany, where Libya is a major oil supplier - is important. Colonel Gadafy is heavily dependent on European contractors for the infrastructure which forms the material basis for his own brand of Islam.
The first countries to reject the American plea for support were the EEC's newest members, Spain and Portugal. In Dublin, where meat sales in the region of pounds 30 million a year to Libya are of critical importance, a government spokesman said that 'careful consideration' would be given to US pleas. It seems very unlikely however, that the Irish would rock the European boat. Japan said it was studying US Proposals, but that it had, and by implication wanted to maintain, a good relationship with Libya. Australia and Canada were keeping their options open.
Dr David Owen, the leader of the SDP, yesterday called on Britain and its European partners to support the United States. He assumed that there was clear evidence of Libyan involvement in the airport massacres and that economic sanctions should follow.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
209 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 8, 1986
Society Tomorrow: The curse of designer genes / Profile of Jeremy Rifkin, campaigner against genetic engineering
BYLINE: By ALEX BRUMMER
LENGTH: 1409 words
Simply getting into Jeremy Rifkin's office is hard enough, After negotiating what is probably the most dangerous life in the world it is necessary to squeeze through a stuffy, crowded ante-room where stacks of Rifkin press cuttings hang bountifully off the walls.
But if this trip seems difficult, interviewing the man is even tougher. Not because he isn't available. Like most activists, he relishes publicity as the lifeline of his business.
Mr Rifkin is difficult because he talks in the breakneck manner of a fairground huckster. The words and concepts come tumbling out. Scientific, historical and philosophical terms trip off his lips in unexpected combinations. At first it all sounds like intellectual quackery.
'Four hundred years ago,' he says, 'the orthodoxy was contained in church doctrine and if you dared to challenge any of that doctrine it was considered heresy. I think the church today is the scientific world view .. Bacon, Descartes, Isaac Newton.'
Science, in Mr Rifkin's view, has created 'a rather narrow lens' to look at the world. In his latest book, Declaration Of A Heretic, he seeks to explain the philosophy behind the legal and political activism which has cast him as the enemy of the scientific community. 'It is possible to be in favour of science and still be opposed to the kind of science we have pursued .. It is possible to be in favour of technological development and still be opposed to the whole genre of technology we have developed.'
Rifkin is beginning to make some sense. He may not be a 'prophet' as has been grandly suggested. But his brand of activism, challenging science's push towards the biological and genetic frontiers, seems as relevant today as Ralph Nader's attacks on the Corvair and Citi-bank seemed a couple of decades back. Rifkin preaches a new breed of consumerism which casts the research community and government as the forces to be controlled and regulated.
His message becomes more relevant by the day. The US Government's Environmental Protection Agency recently approved the release of a living genetically engineered microbe into the atmosphere for the first time, in an effort to counter frost damage on a Californian strawberry patch. Business Week Magazine, the bible of corporate America, has argued in a recent cover story that 'genetic engineering could confer enormous benefit by eliminating many fatal or serious genetic diseases.' It would help the prospects and shares of the fast growing biotech industry too.
Mr Rifkin's campaign against genetic engineering is rooted in what he believes is a new approach to knowledge among people in his own age group - late thirties - who received their education in the turbulent 1960s and 1970s. 'Instead of the old adage that knowledge is power, power is control, control is security, they are saying knowledge is empathy with the environment, empathy is a means of developing participation in the community, and we become secure by investing ourselves in community.'
In his book, Rifkin argues for instance, that an architect from the old school would build a National Westminster type tower 'a skyscraper - power, control, a fortress that definitely is in charge of its environment,' down to the energy it uses each day - enough for a city of 140,000 people. But the new architects now teaching at universities would argue for a solar (passive) design which 'would be so elegant and unobtrusive that you could barely distingquish where the building left off and the major rhythms begin.' For the new architect knowledge is empathy and participation in the community. 'It is possible to be in favour of the mind expanding into new areas and still not be a Luddite.'
Rifkin and his supporters believe that two technologies - the split atom and engineered genes - have put man out of sync with nature. He came on the scene rather too late to do much about nuclear technology, where the genie has long been out of the bottle. But through his self-funded Foundation on Economic Trends, he has become the scourge of the biotechnologists.
Like Nader before him, Rifkin has used the expensive but easily accessible American court system and publicity to push back the frontiers of commercialism and unregulated experiment. With the help of a common front of environment leaders he has managed to postpone legally, several times, the nation's first experiments with genetically modified micro-organisms.
He has persuaded arms control experts such as Paul Warnke to join him in a so far unsuccessful attempt to block a military medical experiment until its relationship with biological warfare could be assessed. And he was responsible for putting together a coalition of 60 religious groups ranging from liberal Catholic and Jewish organisations to the right-wing moral majority fundamentalists, which is encouraging Congress to ban genetic engineering of human reproductive cells.
In his latest court escapade, Rifkin sued the US Department of Agriculture in November for failing to protect its precious seed bank. 'The United States and the multinationals are gobbling up the rare genetic resources of the planet, most of them in the southern hemisphere,' Mr Rifkin charges angrily. 'They then control it in gene banks and modify it to the patenting process and then make the whole world buy our stuff.'
Yet, in spite of his successes, Rifkin appears to be fighting against an overwhelming tide. It is hard to make the case against eugencies when it appears to offer a solution to genetic diseases such as cystic fibrosis, which alone costs victims and taxpayers some dollars 200 millions annually.
In his view, though, it is the duty of the scientific and medical community to look beyond the short-term benefits, however remarkable they may seem. 'We all want healthy babies, more efficient plants and animals, better GNP - there is no evil cabal here,' he says. But over the longer-term, say 500 years, as man becomes the architect of the genetic code, he believes that there will be a fundamental problem: who will set the criteria for 'good' and 'bad' genes?
This is by no means just an obscure debate among scientists and philosophers. By some Wall Street estimates, some 70 per cent of the US's GNP could be touched by genetic-related technologies in one way and another by the year 2010. Whereas the computer is simply a speedier way of passing on and working with information, genetics potentially could set off an industrial revolution.
The scenario has Rifkin apopletic. It is if 'somebody came to earth and said 'we like the human species, but you are top damn scrawny. We want to put a special growth hormone into you so that all of your progeny will grow to sexual maturity at six rather than twelve. And they will go twice as big.' no one has a right to do that.'
The examples from his knapsak of biological experiments do not make for encouraging reading. 'Eighty per cent of our cows in this country are Holsteins. They have eliminated all others. Now the Holstein is very efficient. It is a big milk producer.' But like many scientific breakthroughs this one had its downside: The Holstein is also disease-susceptible, requiring special feed and equipment to support it. 'It is a very susceptible genetic breed.' - and maybe soon the only one left in the US.
So what does Rifkin see as the alternative? In farming, it is biodynamic agriculture. Farmers, he says, are using natural pest enemies and organic manuring and cycling crop rotation to produce the same kind of efficiency gains as genetics while maintaining 'the long-term viability of the system.'
He believes that 'reproductive technologies,' like those being pursued in some British hospitals, are 'companions down the line to genetic engineering.' If you ask why infertility is rising, his answer is that 'inhumane contraception is scarring female organs,' and he asks whether this is better redressed by improved nutrition, hygiene and sanitation, or the new reproductive technologies.
Rifkin certainly makes people question current values. His arguments have been powerful enough to make the American courts, churches and Congress think too. But in the US, he is up against a powerful industrial complex. And historically, that has been able to bulldoze the lone protester aside.
Declaration of a Heretic, by Jeremy Rifkin, is published by Routledge and Kegan Paul, pounds 7.95.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
210 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 8, 1986
First Person: The partisan approach / Interview with Jane Gabriel, writer and producer of Channel 4's programme 'Greece-The Hidden War'
BYLINE: By HELEN CHAPPELL
LENGTH: 1069 words
'The women struck me as though but they also had colossal heart. They would weep at the same time as laugh when they told us what happened. Once they started talking you could see they had gone back 40 years. They were warm and sensitive but at the same time I got the feeling these were women you could push only so far.'
Jane Gabriel, writer and producer of three television documentaries, has a special reason for admiring the women of Greece. She believes her series - Greece: The Hidden War - is the first attempt to tell the real story of the Greek civil war of 1947-1949 on British television. It is story in which women played a vital role.
The reason for the 30 years silence about such a painful episode in Greek history seems puzzling at first. British hoildaymakers clearly feel great affection for the country. But what is not always realised is how great a part Britain (and later the US) played in provoking and prolonging the internal strife and oppression there.
'Until recently the civil war has been a taboo subject,' says Jane Gabriel, 'not just in Britain but in Greece itself. Until the right-wing military regime of the colonels fell, the official policy was to pretend it never happened. The socialist partisans were dismissed as gangsters.' In 1981, when the new socialist government Pasok declared a general amnesty for those who had been exiled, there were still 100,000 ex-partisan Greeks living in Eastern Europe. Most have now returned and the party they played in the resistance during the Second World War and later in the civil war is finally being recognised and debated.
In 1943, the socialist-led ant-Nazi resistance movement EAM and its military wing Elas controlled most of Greece apart from the large cities. Women were granted unheared-of privileges - the right to vote, the right to choose where they lived, the right to equal child custody, the right to choose a profession, and to divorce.
But this new deal was soon threatened by the British-backed royalist forces, anxious to avoid a Stalinist-controlled Communist take over. Having tasted freedom briefly, however, the women fought as ferociously as the men to hang on to it.
One 70-year-old woman interviewed for the film described the horror which followed: 'As soon as it got dark we went down the mountain and worked through the night building defences. We used spades and shovels. As daylight broke the bombs started .. bam boom Smoke everywhere. We were shouting and crying. Virgin Mary Aeroplanes, artillery, shells, automatic weapons - it was the end of the world.'
After 1945 the partisans were in the mood to give in. Power sharing had failed to materialise and the royalist government had broken its promise of an amnesty for all political crimes and to remove from the police force all Greeks who had collaborated with the Germans during the Nazi occupation. Instead, the ELAS supporters faced mass arrest and whole villages were terrorised by right-wing gangs. The rebels regrouped in the mountains. Many peasants who had previously been apolitical joined them just to avoid official persecution: 'A lot of them had no choice. It became safer to join the democratic army than stay in the village to be accused of being an informer and be beaten up or arrested.'
The result was a two-year drift into a civil war in which 25,000 partisans harassed an organised government army of 263,000 until final defeat four years later. Whole villages were 'relocated' to eliminate support for the guerrilla forces and napalm was used on American instructions, allegedly for the first time in any war. As usual, women were in the thick of things, 'I was impressed by the way they talked about being handed sten guns and told to use them,' says Jane Gabriel. 'They were never kept in reserve. It was such chaos towards the end of the conflict that it no longer mattered whether you were a man or a women.' Captured women partisans or suspected sympathisers were hanged or sent to concentration camps like the women-only settlement on the island of Trikeri. One of the prisoners there described the regime: 'We were woken up very early in the morning and taken to the theatre to hear speeches and they said, 'now we are going to kill you, you have to sign' (a recantation of their socialist beliefs) 'or you die.''
These camps were still in operation in the early fifties. Peasant women and Athenian intellectuals were interned together, even those whose only offence had been reluctantly to give food to members of the ELAS army. Ages ranged from children to women in their seventies.
Although they lived under brutal conditions, according to Jane Gabriel their morale was high. 'Even though they were under pressure the whole time to deny their beliefs, they at least knew why they were there. That helped them to be strong.' Journals kept by the women internees describing their torture and intimidation have only recently begun to be published.
Since Pasok cam to power in 1980 the official emphasis has been on national reconciliation. Jane Gabriel found people eager to report how bitter national divisions had now been healed, but ambivalent about discussing the past: 'People seemed torn. They were unwilling to talk to us at first, but once they started they just couldn't stop. It seemed like a relief.
'Although the films are primarily about a war and not about women, I think if there had not been so many women in our crew, fewer Greek women would have been asked to speak. They may even have been more reluctant to discuss things like how the war affected their children. Families were split right down the middle - fathers killed sons husbands and wives fought on opposing sides. I had a Greek woman interviewer and a female interpreter with me and two women edited the film. As a result I think the women's side of things is forceful and compelling.'
The views of academics, authority figures and expert observers have been deliberately kept to minimum in the film commentary, in favour of the voices of ordinary, often uneducated people who actually suffered in the fighting. That - and an editorial stance undeniably critical of British and American involvement - may well attract criticism. But any response that breaks a 30 year silence will be very welcome.
The first in the series Greece - The Hidden War was screened on Channel Four on Monday.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
211 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 8, 1986
Soledad murder trial recalls angry sixties / Trial of Stephen Bingham for 1971 US killing
BYLINE: From CHRISTOPHER REED
LENGTH: 443 words
DATELINE: SAN FRANCISCO
George Jackson, the 'Soledad Brother', and Steve Bingham - symbols of the angry politics of the late sixties and early seventies - have been largely erased from memory by today's conservative climate in America.
But these names, and their connections to a horrifying incident, will be minutely rehearsed in a California court case expected to last perhaps six months. Even jury selection, which began on Monday, could last weeks.
In the dock is Stephen Bingham, aged 43 and greying, a fugtive from the FBI for 13 years until his sudden reappearance in July 1984 to face his accusers. He is being tried on murder charges which could get him life imprisonment. He is pleading not guilty and says he is confident of an acquittal.
Three prison guards, two 'trustees' and George Jackson died in the shottings and stabbings at California's San Quentin prison on a sunny Saturday afternoon in August 1971. Prosecutors say the episode happened because Mr Bingham smuggled a pistol into the prison and gave it to Mr Jackson as part of an escape plan.
The question of why Mr Bingham, scion of a distinguished American family and educated at Yale, was in the prison visiting Mr Jackson, is part of a retrospective journey the jury will be asked to make. It will be a mental time trip to the dying days of the prison 'movement' which attracted affluent, educated white young people to the aid of black convicts who often had violent records.
Blacks, whether hardened criminals or not, were seen as working-class victims of a racist society. Encouraged by their well-heeled and guilt-ridden admirers, these 'political prisoners' elevated themselves to revolutionary heroes.
None believed their overheated rhetoric more than the forces of law. The FBI infiltrated groups such as the Black Panthers in organised subversion to destroy their political base.
Mr Bingham was a young lawyer acting for Mr Jackson, 'Field Marshal' of the Black Panthers and author of 'Soledad Brothers', a book acclaimed as a political tour de force at the time. Although Mr Jackson was originally imprisoned for petty robbery, the Prison Movement ignored his 1970 murder of a 'fish bull', (a new white prison guard) and his history of crime.
However, the prosecution case contains serious weaknesses. The defence will argue that officials conspired to provoke Mr Jackson into escaping so they could shoot him down in revenge for the murder. Mr Bingham's plea that the fled because he thought he too would be a victim may receive jury sympathy in view of evidence since then about US Government misconduct against its opponents. That, at least, is his hope.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
212 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 8, 1986
Haitian army threatens to overthrow Duvalier
BYLINE: By GREG CHAMBERLAIN
LENGTH: 444 words
Haiti's 7,000-man army has warned President Jean-Claude Duvalier that it may turn against him unless he solves the country's worsening political crisis.
According to sources in Port-au-Prince, troops were flown to the arid northern town of Gonaives on Monday after new demonstrations by thousands of young Haitians. Soldiers killed three teenagers during a demonstration in Gonaives five weeks ago but stood by during many protests in other towns, apparently responding to shouts of 'long live the army'.
Such inaction has allowed the unrest to become the most serious threat to the Duvaliers' 28-year rule.
The army, long cowed by the ruling family, gave its unprecedented warning last weekend, after earlier refusing to carry out command transfers requested by the President-for Life, the sources said. A dozen soldiers have already been arrested on suspicion of having ranks with a guerrilla leader shot dead in a suburb of the capital three months ago.
The Duvaliers last week named the elderly General Pierre Merceron, who retired as army chief 23 years ago, as Interior and Defence Minister in an apparent sop to the Israeli-armed. US-trained military.
US officials and Haitian politicians of all shades now talk of a military coup as a way out of the crisis. Ordinary Haitians at last seem to have lost their fear of the Duvaliers and their secret police.
The regime was seriously weakened last week by the resignation of its four most senior ministers after US threats to cut aid in protest against repression and corruption. The reshuffle gave more power to Mr Duvalier's elder sister and his aged mother at the expense of his wife, Miehele, who was seen by many as Haiti's real ruler.
Also at US insistence, a leading opposition figure and former minister, Mr Hubert de Ronceray, was freed last weekend and plans to try him were dropped.
Mr Duvalier promised Haitians a rosy future in a new year message and said that he would work for an understanding with the country's youth during the next decade. Meanwhile, the business community, exasperated at the regime's economic mismanagement, has tacitly hacked the demonstrators.
In any takeover, the armed forces and its elite anti-subversion arm, the Leopards, will be up against the Duvaliers' National Security Volunteers militia (the Tontons Macoutes). Commanded by the formidable Rosalie Adolphe (Madame Max). The militia outnumbers the army, and relations between the two are tense.
The Duvaliers have systematically purged army officers who became too powerful. Two police chiefs, Colonel Jean Valme and Colonel Albert Pierre were dismissed last week.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
213 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 8, 1986
Congressmen barred from visiting Mandela in prison / US politicians visit South Africa
BYLINE: From DAVID BERESFORD
LENGTH: 565 words
DATELINE: JOHANNESBURG
Six members of the US Congress on a fact-finding mission in South Africa will not be allowed to see the gaoled black nationalist leader, Nelson Mandela, the Prisons Service said yesterday.
A spokesman declined to say why the six were being refused a visit to Mr Mandela, still recognised as leader of the outlawed African National congress (ANC) after more than 20 years in gaol.
The spokesman said their application to see Mr Mandela in Cape Town's Pollsmoor maximum security gaol had been received. 'The answer is no,' he said.
The delegation, led by Mr William Gray, received a lukewarm reception from a black trade union leader yesterday. Mr James Mndaweni, president of the black consciousness council of Unions of South Africa, told the six to commit themselves to full sanctions against Pretoria.
'We want your commitment for a full sanctions programme and we want a deadline as to when you think you will be able to achieve such a programme,' he said.
'We want immediate action against the South African Government. We are impatient,' Mr Mndaweni, head of the 190,000-strong grouping of 12 unions, added.
Educationists in South Africa are bracing themselves for another possible confrontation between two million black children and the authorities over the opening of schools planned for today.
The deputy Minister of Education, Mr Sam de Beer, yesterday gave a qualified rejection to appeals to postpone the new term until January 28 to facilitate a return to normality at black schools which were badly hit by student boycotts last year.
The appeal for a postponement was made by the Soweto parents' crisis committee last week. The decision to encourage children back to school on the 28th was regarded as a significant breakthrough following reports of plans to stage a year-long boycott of classes in South Africa's biggest black township - likely to be followed nationally - to mark the 10th anniversary of the Soweto uprising.
The deputy minister struck a conciliatory note in yesterday's statement by saying that his department would 'exercise flexibility' to pupils who failed to return within the normal 10-day period of grace. There are fears, however, that the rejection of the Soweto appeal will create a mood of confrontation at the beginning of the new academic year.
A suspected ANC guerrilla was shot dead near East London yesterday and a large quantity of arms recovered. According to a police statement, the incident took place when two security branch men stopped a vehicle on the road to King William's Town. The driver got out and threw a handgrenade before running off into the bush.
Racial restrictions on admission to South Africa's 10 white residential universities have been effectively ended by the Government. The decision has been made by ministerial direction and the powers to impose racial quotas on universities remains on the statute books.
In 1983 the University Amendment Act, giving the minister powers to impose racial quotas, was met with a storm of protest from academics who accused the Government of trying to force the universities to police themselves on a racial basis. The Government did not implement the quotas, but the universities were required to obtain ministerial approval for the admission of blacks - as opposed to Coloured or Indian - undergraduates in specified faculties.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
214 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 8, 1986
Vietnam steps up search / US servicemen missing in war
BYLINE: From NICHOLAS CUMMING-BRUCE
LENGTH: 296 words
DATELINE: BANGKOK
Vietnam has agreed to accelerate the search for nearly 1,800 American servicemen missing in action in the war in an attempt to solve the problem in two years or less and will investigate reports that Americans are still being held prisoner.
The US Assistant Defence Secretary, Mr Richard Armitage, announced the accord yesterday after leading the most senior US team to Vietnam since the end of the war for two days of talks which he said focused exclusively on humanitarian issues.
Mr Armitage said that Vietnam had denied that any American prisoners were held under government control, but offered to investigate any information on such cases supplied by the US.
Speaking on arrival in Bangkok from Hanoi, Mr Armitage also repudiated charges levelled on Monday against the State Department, Pentagon, and the CIA that they had suppressed evidence of dozens of Americans still held captive in Vietnam and Laos.
'I think those reports are specious. Allegations of a cover-up are absurd,' he said. The Administration view of the matter, he added, was that 'thus far we have (not) been able to prove that there are Americans held against their will in Indo-China, but information in our possession precludes us from ruling out that possibility.'
'So we act under the assumption that there are at least some Americans held against their will and live sighting reports receive and will continue to receive the highest national priority in the attempt to resolve this issue.'
Mr Armitage welcomed the prospects for 'significantly increased progress' in the search for MIA, announcing that technical discussions will start in Hanoi next month when the US will present data on aircraft crash sites and explore the possibility of multiple excavations.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
215 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 8, 1986
Austria considering anti-terror sanctions
BYLINE: From LIZ NASH
LENGTH: 299 words
DATELINE: VIENNA
Austria said yesterday it would consider sanctions and other measures against countries giving shelter and support to terrorists. The Foreign Minister, Mr Leopold Gratz, told journalists: 'We don't accept the principle of friendly relations with any state who supports terrorists of the kind who carried out this murderous attack on Vienna airport.
Speaking after the first Cabinet meeting since last month's attack at the airport in which three people died, Mr Gratz said: 'In the field of sanctions we have to be convinced which state gave shelter or support to terrorists, and if we are convinced of that, Austria will decide autonomously on its reactions - maybe sanctions, maybe other actions.'
In Bonn, the West German Deputy Foreign Minister, Mr Juergen Moellemann, called yesterday for the creation of an international anti-terrorist force.
In a statement calling for calm and reason in responding to the Vienna attack and another at Rome airport which killed 16 people, Mr Moellemann rejected both military and economic measures against Libya, which Washington has accused of harbouring the alleged organiser, breakaway Palestinian guerrilla chief Abu Nidal. 'At the moment it is important to keep a clear head and avoid creating new conflicts,' Mr Moellemann said.
In Ottawa, an External Affairs Department spokesman said Canada would not join the United States in imposing economic sanctions against Libya. The Government believes any Canadian sanctions would have little impact because of the limited trade between the two countries, she said.
In Athens, the Government spoke out strongly against military or economic retaliation against any country, and made clear it would not allow American bases in Greece to be used for operations against Libya.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
216 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 8, 1986
RAF crew eject as jet crashes / Yorkshire
BYLINE: By a Correspondent
LENGTH: 204 words
The two-man crew of an RAF Phantom ejected seconds before the aircraft crashed yesterday in a remote valley in the Yorkshire Dales.
They were taken in helicopters to the Duchess of Kent Military Hospital at Catterick, where the navigator was said to be serious but not critical with both legs broken, head and back injuries. The pilot, who suffered a broken arm and leg, was said to be comfortable.
The aircraft crashed in good visibility at Walden Head, five miles from the village of West Burton in Wensleydale.
Police sealed off Walden Valley for several hours until an RAF team secured the wreckage. A farmhouse was commandeered for the operation.
A spokesman at the RAF's rescue coordination centre at Petreavie in Scotland said that the aircraft - which came down a mile from the nearest road - was one of a flight of four.
The crash renewed concern at the increase in low flying in the area. Six years ago a US Air Force Phantom crashed at Lealholm on the North York Moors, narrowly missing a school.
In October, 1985, a West German F1-11 crashed after hitting trees in Northumberland shortly after an RAF admission that some pilots were not sticking to the 250ft minimun altitude.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
217 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 8, 1986
Reagan tells Americans to leave Libya / US President announces total break in economic relations
BYLINE: From ALEX BRUMMER
LENGTH: 471 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
President Reagan last night announced a total break in all economic relations with Libya and threatened to prosecute all US citizens working in the country who refused to leave.
Speaking on national television, he accused Colonel Gadafy's regime of committing 'armed aggression' against the US, and he urged America's European allies to join the US in a 'total ban' on all import and export trade with Libya.
He said that the American people would take a dim view if the Europeans thought to take advantage of the US's total withdrawal from Libya.
The President's hard-line statement on the need for the Europeans to go along with his sanctions against Col. Gadafy appears certain to open a rift with the allies, who continue to do extensive business with Libya and have large business communities operating in Tripoli and throughout the country. Mr Reagan announced a series of specific actions 'designed to punish Libya for its backing of the Abu Nidal terrorist groups.
These include a total ban on import and export trade with Libya and an end to all travel by Americans to Libya. He also called on the 1,500 American nationals still present in Libya to leave immediately and said he would hold Col. Gadafy responsible should any harm come to these Americans in their efforts to leave the country.
Those US citizens who do not leave Libya will be subjected to criminal penalties in the US.
Despite Mr Reagan's language last night's measures fell far short of the military retaliation which the 'Mite House has been threatening since December 27 when terrorists killed 16 people, including five Americans, at Rome and Vienna airports. However, the president made it clear that the US would hold Libya fully responsible for the fate of those Americans within Libya and would strike against it militarily should any harm come to them.
Mr Reagan said that the US had 'irrefutable evidence' that Abu Nidal had the backing of Col. Gadafy's regime.
He said that extensive terrorist training had taken place on Libyan soil and that the passports confiscated from the terrorists in Vienna were in the names of Tunisians who had been expelled from Libya last year.
Mr Reagan also charged that the Gadafy regime was using its diplomatic missions to provide logistical assistance to Abu Nidal's terrorists.
In answer to questions suggesting that his administration was all talk and no action, Mr Reagan replied that it had been active in dealing with international terrorism. He claimed that 'the US has aborted 126 terrorist missions, some of them in the US' during his period at the White House.
At one point Mr Reagan said that Col. Gadafy was 'not only a barbarian but a little bit flakey.' He was responding to Libyan threats to send suicide squads to the streets of Washington DC.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
218 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 7, 1986
The people's judge / Profile of Lord Scarman, retiring senior Law Lord
LENGTH: 691 words
Lord Scarman the best known judge in Britain since the retirement of Lord Denning, retired yesterday. He reached the pinnacle of his profession by being appointed the senior Law Lord last year, but it was in his non-judicial role as chairman of four commissions into social and public disorder that he became such a familiar figure.
In each of the four commissions - Northern Ireland in 1969, the 1974 Red Lion Square riot, the 1977 Grunwick dispute, and the 1981 Brixton disorders - his charm, courtesy, and common touch were able to win the confidence of even the most alienated witnesses.
He was an ideal chairman for the highly sensitive political issues he was asked to examine not least because of the trust with which he was held by the public. In the words of a friend he had become Britain's answer to Walter Cronkite, the US television news anchorman.
His popularity stemmed partly from his lack of pomposity and his refusal to follow judicial protocol. He refused to restrict his Brixton report to what was said in the inquiry room but went to see for himself, walking the streets, visiting clubs and dropping in unannounced at the local police station.
Three years later he went back with a Granada Television documentary team to look at what had happened since the publication of his report. His ability to communicate and his flair for publicity created jealousies on the bench, but for the last 20 years he was always ready to speak out.
This began with his appointment as the first chairman of the Law Commission in 1965. The Commission was set up by the Labour Lord Chancellor, Lord Gardiner, to advise the Government on law reform. His seven year term spanned most of the Heath government years as well and led to some 27 statutes being wholly or partly based on the Commission's work.
It involved clashes with civil servants and led him to campaign as president of the Royal Institute for Public Administration for politicians and civil servants to place more trust in judges.
He believed legislation had became too detailed in an attempt to make it 'judge proof.' He accepted that judicial attitudes would also have to change, not least in their insistence that nobody, not even Parliament, could tell a judge how to interpret a statute.
He recognised the dangers of judges 'acquiring the addictive taste of policymaking' with the growth of judicial review of government decisions and accepted that judges should not impose their own policy ideas but concentrate on eliciting the policy intentions.
But he remains a passionate advocate of a Bill of Rights, which he first set out in his 1974 Hamlyn lecture series. He has continued to campaign for the reform as President of the Centre for Constitutional Reform. His early retirement from the bench will allow him to play an ever more prominent role in pushing the bill now before the House of Lords which would incorporate the European Convention on Human Rights, into UK law.
His judicial office never deterred him from playing an active role in criminal justice legislation in the Lords, but he could not get involved in other social policy areas. In the face of stiff Government opposition he successfully moved an amendment to the Police and Criminal Evidence Bill which makes racial discrimination by police officers a disciplinary offence.
He was brought up in Streatham only a mile away from Brixton. He went to Oxford as a classical scholar and was called to the Bar in 1936. He became a judge in 1961, an Appeal court judge in 1973 and a Law Lord in 1977.
He lives with his wife in Knightsbridge and enjoys walking in Chelsea and Hyde Park. In a recent interview he spoke of the importance of solitude. He explained: 'I have always been a loner. My wife understands that and how much I value my moments of retreat at home. It is so important to have time to think.'
He added: 'The public dinner is a menace to men in public life. It's heavy, it's tedious, and it's tiring. Too much to eat and too much to drink. I do enjoy dinners associated with the Middle Temple, though, because then one is among one's own.'
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
219 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 7, 1986
Exit a Party man / Profile of Sir Oliver Wright, departing British Ambassador to the US
BYLINE: From ALEX BRUMMER
LENGTH: 1165 words
When the departing British Ambassador to Washington, Sir Oliver Wright, was asked to name the highlights of his tenure at the elegant Lutyens residence on Massachusetts Avenue he immediately mentioned the Queen's tour of the West Coast in 1983 and last November's glitzy visit to Washington by the Prince and Princess of Wales.
These decorous social occasions showed Sir Oliver at his most comfortable. As a ramrod tall man with distinctive arched eyebrows and a penchant for brightly coloured shirts he seemed very much the gentleman diplomat who lived up to the American stereotype of Britain. He was photographed in full evening dress dancing in great style with a Washington socialite on the cover of the gossipy Washington Dossier magazine and was as well known in the capital of the Western world for his amateur dramatics as his diplomatic skills.
Sir Oliver was almost garrulous when given the opportunity to hold forth on the excitement of the Queen's west Coast tour when the Royals forded rampaging mountain streams to make a lunch with President Reagan at his ranch high up in the hills above Santa Barbara. But he appeared at his least comfortable and convincing when having to deal with the more mundane realities of the special relationship, from Grenada, to military contracts and unitary taxation. So much so that the regular press briefings - a feature of his precessor's period here - collapsed soon after Sir Oliver's arrival.
This is not to discount the importance of the social occasion. The British Embassy remains the most sought after invitation in Washington - after the White House - and even before it when the Royals are present. This means that the British Ambassador is able to cultivate a range of top administration officials and future American leaders far more prestigious than most of his counterparts. The embassy dinner during the visit of Prince Charles and Princes Diana symbolised this.
Present were not only the leading lights of the Reagan team from Vice-President Bush downwards but the next generation of American leaders from Democratic front runner Gary Hart - who had a good chat with the Prince - to Representative Jack Kemp of New York, one of the outstanding Republican hopefuls. The occasion was dubbed by some as the British Embassy primary.
But such high level contacts in the Administration and across the political spectrum are only really useful if the embassy can deliver the goods. Certainly Britain's establishment in the United States has the manpower. Some 500 people work at the United Kingdom mission making it the largest in the American capital. In addition the country is dotted with consulates from Boston to Houston, from New York to Atlanta, yet, more often than not the British Embassy appears to stand on the fringe when the big issues are at stake.
Even as the Foreign Secretary Sir Geoffrey Howe stood up in the House of Commons to brush aside questions about an American invasion of a Commonwealth country - Grenada - in October 1983, the first American forces were landing on the island. Even though a Commonwealth Prime Minister, Ms Eugenie Charles, from the tiny island of Dominica had been kept informed - indeed was flown to Washington for the occasion - it all came as a great surprise in the British Chancery.
Similarly, Britain seemed totally unprepared for the American effort to impose sanctions on allied companies supplying equipment for the trans-Siberian gas pipeline and the US conversion of its contribution to the multinational peace force in the Lebanon into an active unit firing its guns in support of the Gemayel forces. When it comes to important geopolitical decisions the large diplomatic presence and the special relationship more often than not appear to count for little.
One problem for the diplomats over the last five years or so has been the strong personal relationship between the Prime Minister Mrs Thatcher and President Reagan. It must be hard for the ambassador to maintain control of events when the PM is constantly on the phone to the White House and meets the President personally three or four times a year. It was at just such tetes-a-tetes between Maggie and Ronnie that such critical policy directions as the Camp David accord on Star Wars and the American prodding for a new political approach in Northern Ireland were made.
At times it seems that the really important questions hearing on the Anglo-American relationship barely touch the ground here. If Mrs Thatcher and Mr Heseltine, between them, decide that it would be a good idea for Britain to get in on the ground floor of Star Wars then it happens: the embassy becomes no more than a conduit for messages, a motel with Turners, for visiting scientific and military teams. The Unesco pullout decision, which followed President Reagan's lead, was very much the Prime Minister's own and certainly not one which would have found much support within the diplomatic service whatever may be seen as the benefits in be seen as the benefits in Anglo-American relations.
Those benefits are often hard to discern. The famous Ptarmigan Contract - a battle communications system for the American army - fell to the French in spite of Mrs Thatcher's personal pleas. The special relationship is no substitute for the Pentagon's competitive bidding system. On a series of lesser transatlantic issues from unitary taxation to the new Anglo-Irish extradition treaty progress has been notoriously slow.
Although Sir Oliver is well liked within his vast diplomatic establishment because, as one diplomat put it, 'he doesn't interfere .. he is not an activist', the man who sacrificed the job of Master of Christ's College, Cambridge, for a last term at diplomacy (after Bonn and Copenhagen) has not astounded his staff with his intellectual abilities. The ambassador's habit of picking up American phrases, from 'different ball of wax' to 'getting the cow off the ice', and then hammering them to death in speeches and staff meetings, is regarded with mild amusement.
As a cheerleader for Mrs Thatcher, Sir Oliver has certainly been a Champion. Guests at his luncheon table have been amazed by the ambassador's praise for Mrs Thatcher's brand of Reagonomics despite the fallout in unemployment and riots. When questioned once on the Prime Minister's falling popularity he came up with the standard politician's reply: 'The only poll which counts is that on election day.'
As a political appointee Sir Oliver may have felt he had such freedom. The new man Antony Acland will be the first career civil servant - taking a step on the ladder - to hold the post since Peter Ramsbotham was unceremoniously removed by Dr David Owen and Jim Callaghan to make way for Peter Jay. It may well be that Downing Street has decided' that putting on the style is alright but what is really required is a better understanding of what is going on within an enigmatic administration in Washington.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
220 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 7, 1986
Leading Article: The arrival of the three wise men / Governmentappointment of new Law Lords
LENGTH: 494 words
If this was the United States, then yesterday's Government appointment of three new members of the nation's highest court of law would be treated as a political event of immense moment. There would be banner headlines. There would be in-depth features. The new men's voting records in the lower courts would be minutely scrutinised. The event, in short, would be an incontestable matter of public interest and debate.
But we are not America. The result, therefore, is that Mrs Thatcher's choice yesterday of three new Law Lords (not to mention three new appointments to the lower tier Court of Appeal) raises scarcely a murmur and certainly very little in the way of detailed assessment. Yet in any rational view of the way that power in this country operates, these appointments should surely merit real scrutiny. Partly, this is because these are prime ministerial appointments and, even allowing for this PM's readiness to follow her Lord Chancellor's recommendations, Mrs Thatcher has shown herself consistently eager to use her patronage powers to instal politically sympathetic candidates in every manner of office.
But it is partly also because, even in this country, where the public uncontroversiality of senior judges is a well-entrenched tradition, the composition of the team of Law Lords is something which directly affects the development of public policy and individual rights in innumerable ways. Just as, on the other side of the Atlantic, it actually matters what new nominees to the Supreme Court think about deregulation, about positive discrimination, about abortion, gun control, gay rights or whatever, so on this side it matters too (though less publicly, of course) to know how M'Luds Ackner, Goff and Oliver look at the world and the law. Mrs Thatcher will want to know how they stand on the unions, on board and lodgings rules, on the TSB or on lorry bans (all matters over which the Law Lords have recently been exercised). Likewise, Mrs Victoria Gillick will have more than a passing interest in their views on family matters; the South Wales NUM in their attitude to manslaughter; and every journalist in the land in their approach to defamation or contempt of court.
As it happens, early soundings from the Bar seem harmoniously agreed that the new trio are well balanced and deserving, that Lord Ackner is a suitably tough successor to Lord Diplock, Lord Goff a suitably thorough replacement for Lord Roskill, and Lord Oliver a suitably creative act to follow Lord Scarman. Perhaps so and perhaps not. The reality is that most of us are spectacularly in the dark about these newly influential Law Lords, that we too easily assume that the Government's choices are motivated by an undiluted respect for the even-handedness of the law, and that we have only ourselves to blame if, by not now asking questions about those who will judge for us, we later squeal about the kind of justice that they hand down.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
221 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 7, 1986
Moscow attacks globalism / Soviets criticise US action against Libya
BYLINE: From MARTIN WALKER
LENGTH: 374 words
DATELINE: MOSCOW
The Soviet Union was taking all necessary steps to resolve the confrontation over Libya through peaceful means, a Foreign Ministry spokesman, Mr Vladimir Lomeiko, said in Moscow yesterday.
'All our thoughts and actions are based on the need to prevent conflict,' Mr Lomeiko said. 'But we condemn the militarist hysteria which has been developed against Libya in the form of America's new globalism.
'This neo-globalism is an expression of the policies, ideology and philosophy of the most aggressive circles, the ones who look for military supremacy, who seek to increase the American military presence around the world.
'These are the people who bring more petrol to old fires,' he said, 'Peoples who want to use all internal conflicts around the world to justify American intervention.'
Mr Lomeiko refused to answer questions about Soviet intentions if the US took military action against Libya, nor would he say that the Libyan crisis endangered the spirit of Geneva.
'The whole policy of neo-globalism reflects an imperial mode of thinking, based on dreams of military supremacy, and that was condemned at the Geneva summit, where the principle of parity between the superpowers was stressed,' he said.
Mr Lomeiko's answers implied that the spirit of Geneva was too important for Moscow to risk it over a crisis which still looks peripheral. The post-Geneva improvement of Soviet-American relations is so important that Soviet spokesmen and media are being careful not to blame President Reagan or his Administration for policies which Moscow finds offensive.
The 'military-industrial complex' has previously been blamed but Mr Lomeiko has seized upon 'neo-globalism' to condemn American policies, if not their author.
The latest combination of American pressure on Libya and Israeli threats against Syria were 'a concrete illustration of this neo-globalism in action,' Mr Lomeiko said. 'Even though Libya denies any part in the Vienna and Rome bombings, and has condemned those acts, the US is seeking to punish a small country, in violation of international law and of the UN charter.
'There are possibilities of peaceful settlement of regional disputes, as was agreed at Geneva,' Mr Lomeiko said.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
222 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 7, 1986
US 'backs off' armed strike against Libya
BYLINE: From ALEX BRUMMER
LENGTH: 605 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
President Reagan yesterday held a special session with his National Security Council on Libya and terrorism, amid signs that the White House is backing away from a direct military retaliation for the attacks on Rome and Vienna airports.
While the Secretary of State, Mr George Shultz, has been actively promoting a strong military response, the Pentagon, preparing for such action, has drawn up a list of objections.
Intelligence has failed to locate Abu Nidal, there are fears of American losses in such a raid and the US is worried about reprisals against the 1,000-1,500 Americans on Libyan soil.
The White House said last night, however, that the US will be pursuing the issues of economic sanctions with the Western Allies. 'We would think our European allies would be more likely now than ever to join us in some sort of economic isolation,' President Reagan's spokesman, Mr Larry Speakes, said.' We will be consulting with our European allies and others regarding the possibility of a concerted effort.'
With most of the European Allies, including Britain and West Germany, apparently rejecting the calls for tighter economic sanctions, the US could be heading for a collision within the Alliance. It will be particularly important for the President to put on a show of activity if, as it appears, the military options are to be played down, for the time being at least.
The White House yesterday responded forcefully to threats and statements made by the Libyan leader, Colonel Gadafy, in his bizarre tractor interview on American television on Sunday. Mr Speakes said it was 'patently untrue' that there were no terrorist training camps in Libya, as Colonel Gadafy claimed. He also said that there had been' no contact' between US diplomats and the colonel, as the Libyan leader has stated.
'We do say that Abu Nidal is a frequent visitor to Libya' Mr Speakes said, and 'has remained there over a period of time ... There has been support of the Nidal group from the Libyan Government.'
The White House also acknowledged that it was taking Colonel Gadafy's threat to bring the terrorist war to US streets with suicide squads seriously. Mr Speakes said that the US' was always vigilant,' although he refused to be drawn into discussion of any special security measures being taken.
Despite the apparent retreat of the military option the Administration is keen to sustain the psychological pressure on the Libyans and any terorrists they may be harbouring. 'I think those who are responsible should be kept guessing and not sleep well at night, as far as what the United States Government response will be.'
The American response to the airport attacks has been partly delayed by continued differences raging inside the Administration. Mr Shultz has been pressing for an attack on terrorist bases even inside Libya. But the Secretary of Defence, Mr Caspar Weinberger, despite his reputation as a hardliner, was once again urging restraint, as he so often has in the Middle East.
Apart from the military difficulties, the Pentagon was reportedly worried that an attack would create sympathy for Libya and might weaken the US's already tense relationships in the Arab world.
According to Newsweek magazine, the most likely military option - if the President decides on some forceful retaliation - would be an attack by F18 fighter-bombers launched from the carrier, Coral Sea, which has been moved to off the Libyan coast. It could provoke an incident by flying into Libyan airspace or directly head for obvious targets, such as military installations or economic facilities.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
223 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 6, 1986
Texaco tries to settle dispute / US oil company's legal battle with Pennzoil
BYLINE: From ALEX BRUMMER
LENGTH: 440 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
Executives of Texaco and Pennzoil are due to meet today in a last ditch effort to hammer out a settlement of their dollars 11.1 billion legal dispute which seriously threatens the future of Texaco - the US's fifth largest company.
Today's session, which will take place at a secret location and behind closed doors, is seen as evidence that Pennzoil is now willing to reach a settlement rather than allow the matter to be settled in the courts. The dollars 11 billion damages case is scheduled to return to court as soon as Thursday if no understanding between the two sides is reached.
The dispute between Texaco, now based in New York, and Texas-based Pennzoil arises from Texaco's purchase of the Getty Oil Company for dollars 10.1 billion two years ago. The Texaco bid was made after Pennzoil and Getty had shaken hands on a deal. This Pennzoil-Getty transaction was upheld by a Texas judge and jury which awarded dollars 10.53 billion in damages (dollars 11.1 billion with interest) against Texaco - in the largest compensation award in legal history.
If there is no settlement Texaco has arranged to appear before Judge Charles Brieant in the federal district court in White Plains, New York, on Thursday. Texaco is asking Judge Brieant for protection from the Texas judgment which could otherwise force the oil giant into bankruptcy, sending shock waves through the US and international oil industries.
Because of the current vulnerability of Texaco the US government has delayed bringing its own overcharging case against the company, which has been prepared by officials at the Department of Energy. According to sources in Washington the US is prepared to bring its dollars 1 billion case as soon as the Pennzoil dispute is resolved.
Representatives of Texaco and Pennzoil have met three times since December 20, 1985.
Despite the extensive talks, the shape of the settlement is still unclear. Among the ideas said to be under discussion are an exchange of cash or oil properties between the two companies in an attempt to compensate Pennzoil without dismantling Texaco.
But more creative schemes are also said to be under discussion for resolving the affair. Among the options would be what is being termed a 'tax-free restructuring' under which assets from both companies are injected into a new jointly-owned company and in which Pennzoil shareholders would get the larger stake.
In case the settlement talks should flounder, Texaco lawyers are said to be preparing new motions attacking the four-month trial in Texas where local prejudices are said to have played a part in the outcome.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
224 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 6, 1986
Payload on a European whirybird / Strategic implications of dispute over Westland helicopter manufacturer
BYLINE: By DAVID FAIRHALL
LENGTH: 1089 words
Is there really a defence issue at the bottom of the Westland Helicopters affair? The question is worth asking at this stage because what started as a relatively straightforward argument about where and by whom Britain's future military helicopters should be built has long since been swamped in politics. A European solution to Westland's financial crisis is now seen by some political commentators as a platform from which Mr Michael Heseltine may eventually launch a bid for the prime minister's job.
Yet his case for rejecting the American Sikorsky rescue offer is still supposedly based on Britain's strategic interests.
The first level at which the outcome matters to the military is that of the three European helicopter projects which could be at risk - at least as far as Britain is concerned - if Westland turned to the United States. These are: the Anglo-Italian EH101 anti-submarine helicopter already under full development by Westland and Agusta; the NH-90, a potential competitor to the Sikorsky Black Hawk army combat assault helicopter still at the stage of feasibility studies amongst the Europeans; and a small anti-tank machine to be developed - if the European deal goes ahead - from the Franco-German PAH-2 and the Italian A-129.
Until the weekend it had generally been assumed that the EH-101 was so far down the road, with initial production scheduled for 1990, that there would be no turning back whatever Westland chose to do. That still sounds like industrial common sense. But in a letter to the British-led European rescue consortium on Friday, Heseltine referred to 'indications' that Agusta might look for another partner. That would certainly be a serious matter for Westland.
The whole thrust of the rival rescue bids has been to offer guaranteed work packages that would bridge the gap between now and 1990 when the EH-101 goes into production. Whether it would also make difficulties for the Royal Navy depends on how any new partnership chose to complete the development.
For the Royal Navy suddenly to be deprived of the EH-101 altogether - something that has not yet been suggested - would be a severe embarrassment. Its planning for anti-submarine warfare in the 1990s and beyond has been based on the availability of the tailor-made Anglo-Italian machine as a replacement for the Westland-Sikorsky Sea King on its anti-submarine carriers and mated in particular with the new Type-23 anti-submarine frigate.
As far as the RAF and the British Army are concerned, the NH-90 is an eventual replacement for the French designed Puma - a medium-sized troop-carrier. Heseltine has warned that his department has 'neither funds nor requirements' for the Sikorsky Black Hawk, which Westland would build under licence as part of the US rescue deal.
The implication is that the British forces are prepared to make do with the Puma until a European successor comes along sometime in the 1990s. What they do with it then depends on the outcome of Rhine army's experiments with a US-style airborne brigade and what funds they have to put their ideas into practice.
The British Army's future requirements for anti-tank helicopters have not been clarified. At present it uses the Westland Lynx, equipped with American TOW missiles.
All told, the Heseltine camp claims that something like pounds 1,000 million of European helicopter business will be at risk if Westland seeks financial salvation in the United States. But the Americans make excellent helicopters and apart from the vague threats to the future of the EH-101, there is a lot to be said from the armed forces' point of view for being able to buy machines off the shelf when they need them.
Another way in which Westland's choice could be strategically important is the long-term effect on its ability to design and build helicopters from scratch. Could Britain lose this independent capability and become dependant in a military crisis on suppliers located either on the other side of the Atlantic or in European countries already at war?
This is difficult to answer except by pointing out that although Britain retains a remarkably wide range of military capabilities - many would say wider than her economic strength can nowadays sustain - there are few areas in which we are truly independent of our Nato allies. The Falklands adventure apart, this is seen to matter less than it would have done because of the cataclysmic nature of any future war in Europe and the extent to which Nato's military efficiency increasingly depends on collaboration and specialisation. One must add, however, that Sikorsky's strategic interest in Westland is as a European agent, not as an independent source of competitive designs.
The Europeans understand our instinctive chauvinism in this respect. That is why they have been such awkward partners in the past.
The real strategic issue behind the Westland affair lies neither in the hardware nor in our purely national interests. It concerns the need to create a substantial European identity within Nato, to turn the Alliance into an evolving trans-Atlantic partnership instead of simply an extension of American power.
Successive US administrations have been ambivalent about the prospect of a less one-sided dialogue, but not at all hostile. One thing or the other, they suggest. Either the Europeans should sort out their domestic squabbles and exert some collective political and industrial muscle, or they should stop whingeing, accept their humble status as clients of the US military industrial complex and do what they are told.
Heseltine understands this pervasive issue and after dodging it on several occasions - for example by refusing to identify himself with the widespread call for the reform of Nato's nuclear strategy and by not publicly arguing the case against President Reagan's Star Wars - he has made amends by seizing opportunities to promote European collaboration on arms production. Earlier last year he led the efforts, to involve France as well as Germany in a new European fighter aircraft, and came close to pulling it off.
Now he has seen in Westland's plight a unique opportunity to hustle the awkward Europeans into a joint rescue bid that would leave their respective governments committed to buying military helicopters from their own collective sources at least until the end of the century.
The fact that this objective coincides with his own personal political ambitions does not make it any less desirable.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
225 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 6, 1986
Agenda: Now is the hour for Europe's peace people to strike
BYLINE: By JOHN PALMER
LENGTH: 987 words
Between them President Reagan's Star Wars initiative and the row over the future of Westland Helicopters have thrown Britain's long term defence strategy into question more sharply than at any time since the decision to buy Trident. The Westland bunfight is not just pitching the cabinet's wets and dries, interventionists and free marketeers, Atlanticists and Europeans against one another - it is being rightly regarded as a fight all and sundry can join in.
The debate over Star Wars has even created some entirely new sets of protagonists; some of them bizarre opponents. Some have attacked SDI by upholding the unalloyed doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) deterrance, while others (notably in some of the European Nato states) have expressed fears that an attempt to erect a so-called 'shield' against nuclear attack will actually encourage eventual United States 'uncoupling' from its European allies.
Quite suddenly the Westland furore has exposed the pretence that the Thatcher Government has resolved the basic dilemma facing all the Western European Nato states; how far to rupture the relationship off dependence on US leadership in the interests of greater West European self-sufficiency and autonomy in defence and security policy. Foreign policy and high-tech development point to the path of greater European autonomy while free market commercial logic and concern for the ideological cohesion of Nato argue for resigned acceptance of Europe's client status vis a vis the US.
To date the debate has been enjoined primarily by western governments and military establishments and factions thereof, One party distinguished by its virtual abstention from the controversy has been the peace movement, although it has, arguably, a greater interest than most of the other disputants in influencing the eventual outcome.
Apart from the heroic efforts of individual peace campaigners in CND and END (above all EP Thompson) to be heard above the brouhaha of the generals, the chairmen of the armaments firms and the politicians, the peace movement as such has not found a collective voice. The resulting danger is that it will come to seem that there are only two sensible policy choices: docile acceptance of Western Europe providing increased conventional arms muscle and manpower to fill a post Star Wars American partial disengagement or attempting to duplicate US arms capacity first in the conventional sphere and subsequently (via the Eureka programme? with a European version of SDI.
If the British and European peace movement does show signs of nervous exhaustion this is hardly surprising. It has been demoralised and to some extent disoriented first by its failure to prevent the effective installation of Cruise and Pershing missiles by those European Nato states who agreed to take them in the first place and secondly by the tangible swing to the right in the political atmosphere generally in Europe. The subtle rhetoric of the Star Warriors, with its emphasis on the defensive and war abolishing character of the space lasers, may also save confused some sympathisers, if not the activists, around the peace movement.
Yet, as the timely series of essays edited by EP Thompson (Star Wars - a Penguin Special) graphically illustrates, SDI may well provo an astronomically expensive but disastrously de-stabilising chimera for the 1990s. Barring a miracle at Geneva the chilling scenario sketched out by William E Borrows of New York University could come to pass: 'American fighting mirror, laser battle stations, space planes and manned attack platforms will sooner or later co-habit the heavens with their Soviet counterparts.
'Orbiting lasers made in California will be closely followed by space mines made in Yaroslav . . . It will therefore be deemed imperative to develop space weapons that can attack the mines before they attack the lasers that are supposed to attack the ICBMs that are launched to attack the cities and the silos . . . The earth itself will have been turned into a gigantic orbiting bomb.' Little wonder that even the closest of Presient Reagan's ideological groupies in Europe have blanched at the prospect fearful of the Continent becoming an' unshielded' nuclear bear pit.
That has not stopped Mrs Thatcher and Herr Kohl pitching for any industrial crumbs from the Star Wars high-tech contracts table. The meagre likely results - given that the US military/ industrial complex sees SDI not least as a way of being propelled by Pentagon subsidy into renewed global high-tech leadership - has stiffened the will of European defence ministries to push for greater European arms self-sufficiency in helicopters and elsewhere.
Apart from the nightmarish impetus both SDI and the new European defence industry riposte will give to the east/west arms race, there will be grotesque resulting diversion of scarce scientific and technological resources to the production of new means of production. And, contrary to the claims of Pentagon SDI propagandists, all the evidence paints to a diminishing relative high-tech spin-off bonus for the productive economies of the West from Star War generation arms spending.
The hour has surely struck for the European peace movement to recover its voice and make its influence felt in the current policy turmoil. It can make the case for a different species of European independence of Reaganism, based on nonalignment and a strategy for harnessing the potential of European scientific and technological ingenuity to help solve more pressing needs such as world hunger and disease and the recreation of full employment.
END is making a start with a public meeting on Star Wars to be held at London's Conway Hall on January 16. It may mark the beginning of the end of the peace movement's hibernation.
John Palmer is Director of Information at the Greater London Enterprise Board.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
226 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 6, 1986
Agenda: Gorbachev speaks, we must listen / Soviet leader's proposal for moratorium on nuclear testing
BYLINE: By SADRUDDIN AGA KHAN
LENGTH: 1092 words
Mikhail Gorbachev must be taken seriously. His offer to extend the Soviet moratorium on nuclear testing, which was scheduled to expire at the beginning of the year, and to try to improve the offer in American eyes by allowing verification procedures to be set up at each other's sites, must not be brushed off.
After a year of the two sides trading disarmament offers, whose authorship sometimes seemed to owe more to their public relations department than their arms experts, it is easy to be jaded about this proposal too. And indeed if the White House chooses to bat the ball back without pausing to treat the offer seriously then we may be in for another year of phoney arms talks largely for the cameras.
The Soviet offer is the culmination of one of the subplots of arms control in 1985 - non-proliferation. Like so much else is has been eclipsed by the Star Wars debate. In August in Geneva there was the five yearly meeting for the 131 states who have signed the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Many of these are increasingly impatient while others who have a potential nuclear military capability, like India and Pakistan, have not signed the treaty at all. Nor have France and China.
Yet signatories and nonsignatories look to one aspect of the treaty above all else as a test of whether it has a future and of whether we, as a world, have a future without a giddy increase in the number of states with nuclear weapons. That key to longer life is the negotiation of a comprehensive test ban treaty.
Despite its drawbacks, and there are several, this is seen as the single most important step the world could take to roll back the steady nuclearisation of our arsenals. It would make it far more difficult for would-be nuclear weapons states to get away diplomatically with testing and to avoid detection if they tried.
The pretence that nuclear powers have the right to go on building better and better nuclear weapons, while the rest of the world obeys some self-denying ordinance and sticks to a lower non-nuclear order of weapons systems, cannot be kept up for ever. A comprehensive test ban treaty has many friends. In fact at the third non-proliferation review conference its only two opponents were the United States and Britain. The Soviet Union which had just completed a series of tests was conveniently able to embark on its well-timed moratorium on testing. Although the conference was saved by diplomats from countries like Egypt, Sri Lanka, Australia and Sweden - the last two of whom have long since foresworn the nuclear weapons that their present levels of technology would allow them - there was no doubting which two countries allowed themselves to be put in the dock.
It is all the sadder because Britain and the United States had honourable early parts in putting together this multilateral frame-work to try and avoid a spread of nuclear weapons. That regret is compounded by the fact that neither Ronald Reagan nor Margaret Thatcher seeks to make the world a less safe place. Yet both balk at the one step which might turn the corner of the nuclear arms race: a comprehensive test ban treaty.
This may be the moment for Britain to return to a position of leadership on nuclear issues. Its spokesmen have insisted that their principal objection to a test ban treaty is the difficulty of verification: are the Russians to be trusted? Maybe. Gorbachev appears to be meeting this concern with his newest offer. Until now the Russians had resisted onsite inspection, which experts agree will, together with recent improvements in scismic monitoring, enable both sides to build a system of verification with a high degree of accuracy.
If this indeed is the British concern then Mrs Thatcher should grab the initiative and respond positively to the Russian offer. Let the British be the ones to find out if the Russians are really serious and will allow adequate unhindered onsite inspection.
The United States, however, has now fallen back on a second argument, which it has never disguised but which until now was given less pronvinence than that of verification. Maintaining an effecient up-to-date nuclear arsenal requires a testing programme, both to ensure that the existing stockpile still works and to develop new weapons systems. It is reported that parts of the SDI Star Wars defence system will be nuclear-fired.
But this latter argument, keeping a free hand to build even better weapons, is a moment of truth for all of us who live in the shadow of this monstrous arms buildup. Did the smiles and handshakes of the Geneva summit mean anything? Either Mr Gorbachev is a man the West can do business with, to borrow Mrs Thatcher's memorable phrase, in which case there is no better Russian concession to match than a moratorium on testing followed by negotiations for a comprehensive test ban treaty, or he is not, and the arms race enters a new and dangerous stage - where the argument that the purpose of arms reduction talks is eventual nuclear disarmament is recognised to be a myth. It could also become an increasingly global free for-all as the international foundations of non-proliferation are discredited.
In Europe it is easy to be star-struck by SDI. Elsewhere a test ban is seen as the real test of would-be peacemakers. On nuclear matters, the American administration has given the impression of taking a well earned rest after successfully navigating the public relations shoals of the Geneva summit. However, the 1986 summit in Washington will be judged on real progress on the arms issue. That should mean a serious response to Mr Gorbachev not an off-the-cuff rejection.
The Americans may feel unable to interrupt their present series of tests. But they could offer to have Russian scientists at the ringside: give a firm date from which a moratorium will be honoured: and make it clear that the maintenance of the moratorium and the negotiations of a proper test ban treaty is tied to progress on the wider range of arms reduction talks.
In other words, nobody would be getting an open cheque which would let them put aside negotiations on cutting the size of existing weapons piles. A test ban is a beginning not an end of arms control. It would be a clear signal to a nervous world that both Washington and Moscow want the substance as well as the gestures of peace.
Sadruddin Aga Khan is the farmer UN High Commissioner for Refugees, and is the President of the Groupe de Bellem-ve - a Geneva based environmental and nuclear issues group.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
227 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 6, 1986
US team in Hanoi for talks on missing men / Delegation arrives in Vietnam
BYLINE: From our Correspondent
LENGTH: 278 words
DATELINE: BANGKOK
The most high-powered US delegation to visit Vietnam since the end of the war arrives in Hanoi today for talks on resolving the problem of more than 2,400 American servicemen missing in action. The Assistant Defence Secretary, Mr Richard Armitage, will lead the US team, which also includes the Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, Mr Paul Wolfowitz. They are expected to meet the Vietnamese Foreign Minister, Mr Nguyen Co Thach, and his deputy, Mr Hoach Bin Son.
Both sides have emphasised that the talks will deal only with the search for the 1,797 missing servicemen, which has marred relations between the two countries for the past decade.
In the past year, Vietnam has announced its intention of working towards an early resolution of the matter at the start of a process it clearly hopes will lead to normalisation of relations with the US and an end to diplomatic isolation which also keeps Vietnam deprived of Western development aid.
The talks today are expected to cover the possibility of the US opening a liaison office in Hanoi to accelerate the work on tracking down the missing men. The US had emphasised that such a move would not represent diplomatic recognition of Vietnam.
The US has made clear that normalisation of relations could not take place without a resolution of the missing men problem.
A separate US mission returned from Laos at the weekend after making preliminary surveys of the crash site of a US Air Force plane shot down during the war, as part of an accelerating programme of searches approved by the Laotian Government. The US identifies 576 servicemen as missing in Laos.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
228 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 6, 1986
Son Sann will seek support against breakaway group / Kampuchean Premier to meet with US congressman Solarz
BYLINE: From NICHOLAS CUMMING-BRUCE
LENGTH: 415 words
DATELINE: BANGKOK
The Prime Minister of Kampuchea's anti-Vietnamese resistance coalition, Mr Son Sann, will meet US congressman, Mr Stephen Solarz, today, to seek help in ending an internal rift that has paralysed his guerrilla group, the Khmer Peoples National Liberation Front.
Mr Solarz arrived in Bangkok yesterday to canvass the views of Thai and resistance officials on the best means of channelling dollars 5 million worth aid the US is supplying to the two non-communist groups in the coalition - Mr Son Sann's and Prince Sihanouk's.
He will also be meeting the breakaway faction of the KPNLF which announced last week that it had taken control of the organisation after strongly attacking Mr Son Sann's leadership. Leaders of the faction said they would accept him in future only as an honorary president abroad.
A State Department official expressed concern at the weekend over the effects of the leadership rift on the KPNLF, the bigger of the two non-communist groups claiming to have 15,000 guerrillas. An official said that the US backed the resistance, not individuals or factions within it, and had stressed the need for unity.
In a weekend interview. Mr Son Sann rejected the dissidents' claim to be in control, and said he had banned their self-proclaimed 'provisional committee'
'They have destroyed the image of the front, that's not an advantage for them,' he commented bitterly. 'They have no future.'
He said he was still prepared to 'discuss a family solution,' but acknowledged that contacts with the dissidents had reached an impasse and indicated he was now turning to governments supporting the coalition for a solution.
Mr Son Sann stressed he was still recognised by Prince Sihanouk, the leader of the coalition, and claimed the support of foreign governments, including China and members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. been gravely embarrassed by having to postpone a visit to ICPNLF follower; on the Thai-Campuchean border, apparently because of refusal by the Thai authorities to allow him access.
Sources say that Singapore has also supported the dissident provisional committee, which includes the KPNLF's military chief, Mr Sak Sutsakhan, chief of staff, Mr Dienz Del, spokesman, Mr Abdul-Ghaffar Pengmeath, and head of civilian affairs, Mr Hing Kunthon.
Mr Son Sann strongly rebutted their criticisms that he had meddled with military affairs and had obstructed efforts to achieve greater military cooperation.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
229 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 6, 1986
Westland slap in face for Heseltine / Cabinet row over rival rescue bids for ailing helicopter firm
BYLINE: By MICHAEL SMITH AND JAMES NAUGHTIE
LENGTH: 970 words
Westland, the helicopter makers, announced late last night that it had accepted an improved rescue package from United Technologies, the United States group, and Fiat.
The agreement, which follows a weekend of intense negotiations in London would he 'strongly recommended 'to shareholders, Westland said.
Details of the new terms, to be formally announced today, are expected to contain a big increase in the amount of work which United Technologies will bring to Westland factories, and a refined set of financial proposals.
The announcement produced a strong reaction from Mr Michael Heseltine, the Defence Secretary, who said he was amazed that an offer made yesterday of a meeting with senior British industrialists to discuss the European counter bid for Westland had been 'so lightly disregarded.'
The pre-emptive strike by the Westland board was aimed at the heart of Mr Heseltine's strategy, which was to win a postponement of the January 14 shareholders' meeting so as to appeal to them over the heads of the board and to mobilise parliamentary opinion for the European option.
The agreement offers strong vindication of the stance adopted by Mr Heseltine's bitter rival, Mr Leon Brittan, the Trade and Industries Secretary.
It also ensures that the five-week controversy over the future of Britain's sole manufacture of helicopters will continue until next week's shareholders' meeting.
Westland will further inflame passions later today by officially announcing that the European scheme will not be submitted to shareholders.
Instead, the Westland chairman, Sir John Cuckney, will provide shareholders only with details of the now recommended American package.
Before last night's dramatic development the initiative had appeared to swing to the European consortium.
It asked for the postponement of the January 14 meeting and asked the Westland board to meet the heads of five powerful companies in the group.
British members of the team are Mr James Prior, Mr Heseltine's former Cabinet colleague, who is chairman of GEC, Lord Weinstock, GEC's chief executive, Sir Austin Pearce, chairman of British Aerospace, and Sir Raymond Lygo, the company's chief executive.
European representatives were expected to be at the same level of seniority.
The outcome of the January 14 meeting remains open to considerable speculation since less than 40 per cent of Westland shares are held by City financial institutions who are normally canvassed by telephone in traditional takeover deals.
Sir John will require the support of holders of 75 per cent of the firm's shares to win acceptance of the United Technologies deal.
But with last night's agreement Westland has ensured that the European firms - which included Augusta of Italy, Aerospatiale of France and MBB of Germany - will be forced to take their rescue package direct to shareholders in a series of curculars this week.
However, the American group - makers of the Sikorsky helicopters - is likely to emphasise the long-term benefits to Westland of their position as the world's biggest helicopter maker when unyeiling the new rescue terms today.
It is expected that Westland factories at Yeovil and Weston-super-Mare will be offered up to 1.8 million man hours of work to match the sub contracting terms on offer from the Europeans.
It was previously offering only a million man hours. A slight change in the financial terms will permit shareholders to contribute much less to the rescue operation.
In his statement last night, Mr Heseltine said: 'I was authorised by my cabinet colleagues to ensure that the board of Westland had before it proposals not just from Sikorski, but also from British industry and its European partners.
'Earlier today some senior British industrialists asked to meet the board of Westland to discuss their proposals with them.
'It is now late at night, not the best time to make a considered judgement. Suffice it to say, that I am amazed that so reasonable a request by such important members of the British industrial community should have been a lightly disregarded. As the Government has made it clear, it is for the shareholders of Westland to make the ultimate judgement.'
Last night's announcement seems to have wrecked Mr Heseltine's hopes of persuading the Westland board to change its mind.
He has failed to have the Cabinet's economic committee reconvene to discuss the matter, but he is likely to have a chance to put his view at the full cabinet meeting on Thursday. Reports that Mrs Thatcher has ruled out a discussion of Westland are incorrect.
However, the sensitivity in Downing Street remains. Although efforts were being made at the weekend to play down talk of Mr Heseltine's resignation or dismissal, Mrs Thatcher has been angered by the dissent produced by the affair.
One colleague said last night: 'He is trying to avoid turning this into a resignation issue but he knows - and he has used these very words - that he is walking on eggshells.'
Mr Heseltine's course now has been set for him by the Westland board. He will have to accuse it of betraying the interests of the shareholders by refusing to meet the European consortium group and taking a hasty decision.
He will argue that jobs could be jeopardised by a Sikorsky-Fiat deal-both in the short term and in longer term European projects in several arms fields - and that Sir John has tried to prevent the shareholders from hearing both sides of the case.
Certainly, last night's statement from the board seemed unlikely to mark the end of the affair.
Mr Heseltine's reaction in the past few weeks to the attempts to get him to calm his campaign suggests that he will not desist now. There would be little political advantage for him in doing so.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
230 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 6, 1986
US condemns allies' sanction rebuff / Washington rebukes Nato allies over failure to take economic measures against Libya
BYLINE: From ALEX BRUMMER
LENGTH: 737 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
European governments yesterday came under sharp fire for their failure to take strong economic measures against Libya as the Reagan Administration continued to keep Colonel Gadafy guessing about future military responses.
Both the State Department and the Pentagon were said to be preparing military options for President Reagan. There was some satisfaction that the US's verbal onslaught and show of firepower was causing Colonel Gadafy to retreat somewhat from his rasher statements in the wake of the attacks on the Rome and Vienna airports in which 16 people - including five Americans - were killed.
Looking like a tractor borne Lawrence of Arabia - in full bedouin gear - Colonel Gadafy yesterday told American television correspondents that the terrorist Abu Nidal was not in Libya, nor were there any terrorist training camps.
This was a point immediately disputed by the former US national security adviser, Mr Robert McFarlane and Israel's Prime Minister, Mr Shimon Peres, appearing on the same television show. Colonel Gadafy was intent on putting as much distance between himself and the terrorists as possible.
The US has taken a series of precautionary military steps aimed at increasing the psychological pressure on Libya. This includes the dispatch of some five navy Prowlers - an advanced seaborne radar plane - to the Nato base at Sagonella in Sicily ready to eavesdrop on communications and if necessary to jam the radar on Soviet supplied anti-aircraft equipment.
Yesterday the emphasis from both the US and Israel appeared to be on the need for the Europeans to join the US in taking economic and political steps to isolate Libya. Mr McFarlane said the European refusal to take economic steps against Libya was 'indefensible'. He said it was time for the US to be a 'little bit more firm' in putting its view across to its allies about sanctions.
He noted that it was 'a slack time in the oil market' and the European countries 'could easily get oil from other sources'. He said it was time the US went beyond asking and being turned down. Mr McFarlane's views appeared to reflect the growing frustration in Washington with European foot dragging about Colonel Gadafy and could lead to a rift across the Atlantic.
American officials appeared hopeful of some general easing of tensions in the Middle East over the next few days as a result of Syria's decision to pull Soviet made surface-to-air missiles from the Lebanon to within its own borders.
The US had been concerned that the Israeli's might use the airport attacks as reason to retaliate against the missile sites. The pull-back was confirmed on American television by Mr Peres who appeared to be taking a cautious line on retaliation against terrorists.
He joined the American call for economic and political actions against Libya but ruled out any attack on Libyan territory although he made it clear that Israel reserved the right to strike against terrorists' facilities inside Libya or anywhere else.
Mr McFarlane speculated that the US delay in retaliating against Libya was due to difficulty in meeting the two criteria within the Reagan Administration for such punitive action. These criteria he said were: 'An association between those guilty of an attack .. and there has to be some proportionality.' He argued that it has been difficult for the White House to meet both those conditions in its response to terrorism.
Mr McFarlane left little doubt however that if he were still at the White House Mr Reagan would be receiving advice to attack.
Certainly the US had put in place enough firepower to cool Colonel Gadafy's rhetoric.
He was notably subdued in his tractor appearance, but emphasised that his country would fight back: turning to Arabic he told his interviewers that there was a full military alert in the country, Libya's Soviet Sam's were ready for use and that there were suicide squads ready in the US to retaliate.
Mr Denzil Davies, Labour's defence spokesman, yesterday demanded an immediate government statement on weekend reports that British-based US F1-11 fighter bombers could be used to launch punitive strikes against Libya.
Mr Davies said: 'The US State Department has made clear that although they would inform Britain if they decided to use these jets, Britain has no power to overrule that decision even though they are based on British soil.'
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
231 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 4, 1986
Commodore to close Corby micro factory
BYLINE: By PETER LARGE, Technology Editor
LENGTH: 321 words
Commodore, the American microcomputer company, is to close its pounds 6 million factory at Corby, making 250 people redundant.
the company may now have to repay some of the government grants it received for creating those jobs in the steel-closure town only 18 months ago. It said then that it expected to create 1,000 jobs within two years.
Mr Thomas Rattigan, Commodore's president, said yesterday that to meet 'the competitive challenge of the next two to three years,' Commodore would increasingly depend on fewer plants using higher technology. 'Corby, being essentially an assembly plant, does not easily fit into this strategy.'
Economic realities had to be faced. Mr Rattigan said, and Mr Nick Bessey, Commodore's UK Chief Executive, had shared in the decision. Sales and support operations would remain at Corby.
Mr Chris Kaday, the company's UK marketing director, confirmed that talks would begin soon with the government on the 'implications' of the grants Commodore had received. He said those grants represented only a small proportion of the total investment at Corby.
Mr Kaday added that Christmas sales of Commodore home computers in Britain 'exceeded our reduced expectations', being only slightly below the 1984 figures. Sales of peripheral equipment had risen, and Commodore was still vying with Sir Clive Sinclair's company for market leadership.
Commodore was one of the first microcomputer companies. It began sales in Britain in 1978 and is still the biggest home computer manufacturer. But it did not set up a factory here until 1984.
Commodore now plans to concentrate manufacture in its more automated factories in the US, the Far East, and West Germany. During the 1984 Christmas rush, Commodore employed about 600 people at Corby, but 100 were made redundant early last year. About 170 sales and support staff will still be employed at the Corby headquarters.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
232 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 4, 1986
Ill wind blows for cargo airline / Government blamed for Tradewinds closure
BYLINE: By DAVID KEYS
LENGTH: 384 words
Britain's largest scheduled all-cargo airline, Tradewinds, ceased trading yesterday - and its parent company Lonrho is blaming the British Government for the closure.
Tradewinds and Lonrho executives yesterday accused the Government of discriminating against UK airlines.
The British Civil Aviation Authority has told Tradewinds that it must fit anti-noise equipment to its Boeing 707 freighter aircraft by July 31 this year, but foreign competitors registered in Third World countries will not have to take similar measures until January 1 1988.
This gives Third World airlines a competitive advantage over Tradewinds, because each item of anti-noise equipment - known in the airline world as hush-kit - costs dollars 2.5 million and Tradewinds would need to recover this through charging higher airfreight rates than its foreign competitors.
'It's a matter of the greatest possible regret that the British Government should be discriminating against British-registered planes,' said a Lonrho main board director, Mr Robert Dunlop.
'In as much as the foreign competitors will be permitted to fly non-hush kitted aircraft into the UK for the next two years, it would be nonsensical for Tradewinds to try to compete,' he said.
The closure of Tradewinds - a Gatwick-based carrier formed in 1968 - will result in the loss of 135 jobs and the passing of an airline which, prior to yesterday's closure, was operating regular or scheduled services to Nigeria, Sudan, the USA, Canada, Muscat and Dubai.
Strenuous efforts were apparently made by Lonrho to persuade the government to ensure that noise regulations applied equally to UK and foreign aircraft. 'One or two officials have shown some measure of sympathy - but the government has not been prepared to change the discriminatory regulations,' Mr Dunlop said.
In its determination not to restrict foreign carriers the government has acted in marked contrast to the United States.
However, custom and practice in the UK Department of Trade - and more recently the Department of Transport - seems to have led Britain to shy away from trying to force foreign airlines and administrations to comply with UK-made regulations. It appears that officials fear that a tougher stance might provoke Third World retaliation.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
233 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 4, 1986
Carbide initiative / Chemical company announces defensive moves against GAF bid
BYLINE: From ALEX BRUMMER
LENGTH: 160 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
The chemical giant, Union Carbide, appears to have improved its chances of staying independent following the announcement of a package of defensive moves including the sale of its prized consumer division which manufactures and markets Eveready batteries in the United States.
The series of moves came in the wake of an improved offer for the company by the tiny building and chemical concern, GAF Corporation, which has raised its bid for Carbide to just over dollars 5 billion. But following Union Carbide's new moves GAF's shares plunged on the New York Stock Exchange, suggesting confidence in Carbide's defensive tactics.
The latest countermoves in the carbide takeover war came as the Government of India and Bhopal victims went to court yesterday in an effort to have their compensation cases heard within US jurisdiction. If the case is decided against Carbide it could have dramatic consequences for the company's financial future.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
234 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 4, 1986
Financial Notebook: The huge potential market for helicopters explains the chase for Westland
BYLINE: By MICHAEL SMITH
LENGTH: 970 words
A knowledgeable Whitehall watcher, observing the Brittan-Heseltine wrangling over the helicopter maker, Westland, said recently: 'I can understand Ministers getting all excited about matters of crucial constitutional importance. But helicopters?'
That same observer, perhaps, ought to have continued the line of thought and further wondered why it is that major UK, European and American aerospace companies are clawing each other's eyes out to form partnerships with Westland.
Westland itself is delighted. Until a few weeks ago, the firm was virtually friendless and gazing into the deep abyss of receivership. Today the company is hot property.
What, then, is the magic ingredient which prompts experienced politicians to gamble with their ministerial futures and encourages leading world aerospace industry firms to enter into an auction for a struggling company?
On the face of it, Britain and Heseltine would seem better off expending their valuable time on more pertinent matters of state, and the UK, European and US combines better employed in more profitable ventures.
Helicopter-making is, after all, an unlikely battleground, being a high-risk, low-return business, requiring increasingly large sums for new developments and progressively steering firms closer together through a complex series of partnerships, collaborative ventures and sub-contracting work.
But helicopters form a strategic part of most nations' defence requirement, and for the manufacturers, are a key chunk of the industrial fabric in the aero-space and electronic sectors. At present there are only eight prominent helicopter makers-four in the US and four in Europe.
But the European helicopter-making industry is generally regarded as being far too small to support four major manufacturers.
At present the Europeans are essentially selling to many helicopters to their own governments, while the American manufacturers not only have the benefit of their own huge domestic market, but they have built up a substantial presence elsewhere in the world.
Westland, by contrast, sells more than half its output to the Ministry of Defence, while Sikorsky alone of the American producers makes more helicopters than the four Europeans put together.
At stake, however, is a huge potential market in helicopter sales in the coming years. Sikorsky, as market leaders, reckon that operators will buy up to 35,000 new helicopters in the next 15 years at a cost of around pounds 50 billion. To meet the rising cost of developing new and advanced technological craft, and ensure that the Americans are kept at bay, the Europeans have been driven closer together in a series of collaborative ventures.
The most notable of these developments from Westland's standpoint is the multi-purpose EH101 craft being built with Augusta of Italy for the 1990s. There are two other potential helicopters, the A129 and NH90 which are being developed as collaborative ventures in European partnerships.
The EH101 is literally Westland's prime piece of hardware for the future and without it the company would find it difficult to remain in the helicopter industry at all.
However, this spirit of co-operation will vanish altogether if, as Westland wishes, the company fixes up a partnership with Sikorsky, Westland would undoubtedly be excluded from development of the NH90 and A129 and there were signs last night that Augusta will rethink the firm's role in the crucial EH101.
In contrast, Westland is being offered a license to make Sikorsky's successful Black Hawk helicopter. The problem is that the biggest potential customers are the nations which have specifically said they will not be buying the Black Hawk - Britain, France, Italy and Germany.
This leaves a Westland Black Hawk sales force sifting through less attractive portions of the European market, like Spain and Scandinavia, where potential sales are much smaller.
However, there is no denying that the Black Hawk is a successful helicopter, Sikorsky having sold more than 700 copies, and greater Westland participation in the manufacture would, it is believed, raise hopes that British avionics firms would sell their products in the Westland-made Black Hawk.
It is the unquestioned strength of the Black Hawk which is prompting the European makers, notably Aerospatiale, to adopt such an aggressive stance in the whole Westland affair.
Westland, on the other hand, sees clearer benefits from the Sikorsky tie-up even though superficially the European package appears more sound. For example, it currently offers Westland more sub-contracting work from the European partners.
But Westland has reservations about the strength of close relationships with State-owned European partners and obviously prefers those links to be at arms length. Ironically the company is probably worried about the impact of political involvement in future partners' affairs.
The doubt about the Sikorsky tie-up, though, is not the immediate one of sub-contracting or licensing work. Instead the crucial point is what guarantees Westland can secure from the Americans that the firm will participate in future helicopter developments. What happens to Westland after the Black Hawk becomes obsolete?
On the face of it, Westland is bucking the general trend in the helicopter industry by turning towards the Americans. New aerospace developments on this side of the Atlantic have increasingly sprung from closer collaboration among European firms. Examples include Airbus jets and the Tornado and EFA fighter project.
Greater harmonisation of defence equipment is a major feature of that industry and the Westland affair undoubtedly means closer collaboration in the manufacturer of helicopters - whether Westland participates or not.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
235 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 4, 1986
Afghan changes backed / Soviet press reaffirms support for internal political reform
BYLINE: From MARTIN WALKER
LENGTH: 434 words
DATELINE: MOSCOW
Pravda yesterday reaffirmed its support for the internal political changes in Afghanistan, claiming that the decision to bring non-Communists into the Government 'has drawn a positive response from the people and is yielding results.' GBP GBP P It now appears that Mr Gorbachev's recent speeches on .he need for a political settlement in Afghanistan were aimed at precisely this 'broadening of the base of the Afghan revolution' rather than any immediate withdrawal of Soviet troops. Such withdrawals, however, are now expected this year, Soviet sources suggest, if the new political compromise in Kabul shows more signs of success.
'Afghanistan needs an atmosphere conductive to positive dialogue between different social and political forces, including those which have so far been critical of the revolution,' Pravda said.
'The overcoming of differences and the achievement of national reconciliation cannot be accomplished unless some compromises are made, the social base of government broadened, and new political allies and friends won over to the side of people's power,' Pravda said.
'It is no secret that the April, 1978 revolution and its essentially progressive reforms drew different responses from various sections of Afghan society. There was not only support, but also misunderstanding, wariness and even rejection.
'It is not surprising for such a backward country where most of the population was illiterate and fettered by age-old traditions, where many people are not yet mature enough for change in their archaic way of life,' Pravda continued, with a tone of cultural way to explaining the resistance that the Afghan revolution has encountered.
Pravda also gave its customary denunciation of 'outside intervention and propaganda, inciting hostility towards the people's power.' Other Soviet newspapers continued to denounce 'America's undeclared war in Afghanistan' and claim that economic life in the country was returning to normal,
So far, there has been no formal approach to the Americans, suggesting that the new order in Kabul might provide the basis for a settlement backed by international guarantee. The likely forum for such a proposal would be the next round of regional talks between US and Soviet diplomats, for which no date has yet been fixed.
The largely cosmetic changes now under way in Kabul are not expected to provide the basis for the 'non-aligned Afghanistan, friendly to the Soviet Union but without Soviet military forces and backed by international guarantee' which seems to be emerging as the formula for settlement.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
236 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 4, 1986
'Rambo' culture irritates Soviet Union / Moscow intellectuals attack the new-style US hero
BYLINE: From MARTIN WALKER
LENGTH: 545 words
DATELINE: MOSCOW
Soviet artists and cultural officials yesterday attacked films like Rambo and the latest Rocky as an expression of 'anti-Russian phobia even more pathological than in the days of McCarthyism.'
'There is a new type of American hero, a professional killer with ideological motives. A man who kills the Reds with a perverted relish,' Mr Georgy Ivanov, the deputy minister of culture said. 'How can we reconcile this with the spirit of Geneva?'
'A new generation of Americans is being brought up to consider that violence is natural and necessary, and that the Reds can only be talked to in the language of force, preferably at the point of a gun.'
A battery of Soviet intellectuals was deployed to echo the deputy minister's attack. Novelist and playwright Genrikh Borovik claimed that 'America's vaunted freedom of expression has led to a serious illness, to pornography. And in the same way, the current selling of hatred in films like Rambo will lead to a new pathology of hatred.'
Borovik himself is the anthor of a spy thriller, Agent Zero-Zero, which is itself hostile to Americans.
Film-maker Stanisiav Rostotsky claimed that on one visit to an American school 'a young girl had trembled with fury when she heard I was from the Soviet Union, and said she hated Russians.'
The fact that two of Rostotsky's films had been nominated for Oscars, but neither had been purchased for American distribution, was 'proof that the Americans do not reciprocate our attempts to create goodwill through cultural exchanges,' Mr Ivanov added.
The only exception to the tirade was the calmer voice of the poet, Yevgeny Yevtushenko, but even he complained of American publishers commissioning from him an anthology of modern Russian poetry, failing to publish it, and then refusing to return his manuscript.
'But this vital area of cultural relations must not be handed over to bureaucracies,' Yevtushenko said, to the evident discomfort of the ministry bureaucrats beside him. 'We need creative people from both sides who are not part of any government establishment and who are not afraid to lose their cosy jobs. They should work together without pay as the moral custodians of cultural relations.'
Yevtushenko went on to defend his pre-Christmas speech to the Writers' Union, which has called for a new cultural freedom and for an end to privileges in food and consumer goods.
'I am surprised if any of you are surprised that a poet should speak out against the bureaucracy,' Yevtushenko said.' The very words are mutually exclusive, what I said in my speech has been reflected in all the poems I have ever written.'
Yevtushenko went on to quote the New York Times which said that 'Mr Gorbachev's new style has found an immediate response among Soviet intellectuals who are fighting the bureaucracy,' to argue that his controversial speech was in fact an expression of the new mood of reform.
The new round of US-Soviet cultural exchanges begins next Monday when an American drama group opens in Moscow's youth theatre and Soviet musicians fly to New York to give a concert with the New York Philharmonic. In February, an exchange of Impressionist paintings is to open in Leningrad's Hermitage and Washington's National Galleries.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
237 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 4, 1986
Libyans set to become Brazil's best arms clients: Joint commission will discuss prospect of increased trade
BYLINE: From JAN ROCHA
LENGTH: 426 words
DATELINE: SAO PAULO
Libya could supplant Iraq as the biggest purchaser of Brazilian arms this year, a spokesman at the Libyan embassy in Brasilia said yesterday.
Mr Khalifa Ladfalla said that in February the Libyan foreign minister will lead a delegation to Brazil for the first meeting of the joint commissions set up by the two countries. The commissions will discuss agricultural, cultural and economic projects as well as the purchase of arms.
In 1981 Libya signed a dollars 250 million contract with Brazil for the purchase of armoured cars, bombs, rockets and launchers. Now they are also believed to be interested in the Brazilian military trainer plane, the T-27 Tucano, the same plane that won an RAF contract in 1985 in the fact of fierce competition.
Relations between Brazil and Libya are only now recovering from the setback they suffered in 1983 when four Libyan planes carrying supplies to Nicaragua which had stopped to refuel here were impounded.
The Brazilian military authorities detained the planes because as well as the medical supplies declared by the Libyan authorities they were also found to be carrying arms. It is believed that Brazilians had turned a blind eye to prevalus shipments, but were under pressure from the Americans.
That was a year and a half ago Brazil eager to help its trade surplus and pay off the foreign debts wants to increase arms sales to dollars 2 billion in 1986 and sees Libya as an attractive customer. Now sixth in the world league of arms suppliers, the increasingly sophisticated Brazilian arms and aviation industry now sells planes and equipment to scores of African, Arab and Latin American countries. But it still has a long way to go before it can catch up with the arms sales of European countries like Britain or France and the US.
It is likely that the Americans will bring added pressure against the sale of arms to Libya as relations between the countries continue to deteriorate.
In Libyan cities yesterday there were huge anti-American demonstrations The rally leaders vowed to defend their country against any attack by the United States or Israel, the state-run Tripoli radio reported.
'We are ready to face any attack by the American Imperialists and Zionists, we are ready to fight and to join suicide squads,' the demonstrators chanted.
The demonstrations followed a fresh overnight appeal by the US for international sanctions against the Government of the Libyan leader Col Gadaffi, following last week's terrorist attacks at the Rome and Vienna airports.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
238 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 4, 1986
Dumping plan reopens battle for N-waste / Nirex to announce three new sites for radioactive disposal
BYLINE: By DAVID FAIRHALL
LENGTH: 935 words
The nuclear industry is bracing itself for a fresh outbreak of environmental guerrilla warfare this year as it prepares to announce three new sites for the disposal of radioactive waste.
The political atmosphere surrounding this dirty end of the nuclear fuel cycle will be heightened by the imminent publication of a report by the Commons environment committee questioning whether much of the reprocessing which produces waste should be allowed.
The announcement of three possible new sites for the burial of low-level and relatively short lived intermediate-level waste - material whose radioactivity is either low to start with or will decay to low levels after about 150 years - will come from the industry's waste disposal company, Nirex.
The Government called for a list of possible sites after loud public protest at the original choice of Elstow, situated on the flat clay lands of the Bedfordshire brick fields. Elstow will stay on the list, though no longer identified as first choice. Two other sites were chosen before Christmas, and another was expected to be confirmed during the parliamentary recess.
The environmental pressure group, Friends of the Earth, has been shadowing the Nirex survey with a view to sabotaging it. The group believes the choice may include land owned by the Central Electricity Generating Board at South Killingholme in an industrial area of Humberside, an old Ministry of Defence storage depot at Arncott in Oxfordshire, a corner of the Atomic Energy Authority's establishment at Harwell, also in Oxfordshire, and a site near Newport Pagnell in Buckinghamshire.
Nirex is not saying which it favours, on the grounds that a local protest group is almost bound to spring up, but it hints at surprises, even though its choice has been narrowed by a large number of criteria.
The ideal site would consist of 300 acres of flat, stable clay land, owned by the Government or one of its agencies, with a small surrounding population, little direct environmental interest, nearby rail and motorway access, and the lowest possible potential for political protest.
Clay is relatively impermeable to water, reducing the chance of radioactive elements being leached away to contaminate local water supplies or agricultural land if the waste material's packaging of steel drums, concrete or resin is eventually breached.
For each site on the short list, Nirex will obtain a special development order to enable detained engineering fieldwork, such as drilling and checking drainage patterns.
That will start in the spring and last about two years. A preferred site will then be chosen with the aim of holding a public inquiry in 1988.
Given the length of some recent nuclear inquiries - the Sizewell record breaker last two years - Nirex will hope to restrict the hearing to the specific issues concerning the site. It accepts that setting the terms of reference is a matter for the environment secretary.
'If they want to talk about God, Life and the Universe, that's up to her people,' said a Nirex spokesman. If planning permission is granted, construction will start in about 1990 and the first waste should be dumped in 1993 - in time 'take the pressure off the present low-level waste dump at Drigg, in Cumbria before it is filled.
But, long before the inquiry opens, the nuclear industry is likely to be forced to reappraise its basic policy of reprocessing spent nuclear power station fuel.
The idea that irradiated fuel elements should automatically be reprocessed to recover some of the material and concentrate the dangerous waste fission products goes back to the early days of Windscale - since renamed Sellafield - when its purpose was to recover pure fissionable plutonium from which to build atomic bombs.
Now the industry is largely concerned with civil power reactors, the highly debatable case for reprocessing turns on the value of recovered uranium fuel relative to the cost and availability of fresh supplies, the future usefulness of lower grade plutonium in the fast breeder reactors the British industry may start building by the end of the century, and the fact that British Nuclear fuels Limited has built up an international business reprocessing the fuel of other countries.
The price of uranium has not risen as expected, and the Central Electricity Generating Board has lost any immediate enthusiasm it may have had for the fast breeder.
A report prepared for Friends of the Earth by Mr Stewart Boyle concludes that reprocessing is uneconomic and will probably remain so until beyond the end of the century. Studies in the United States and West Germany confirm this, the report claims.
While there is no economic benefit from reprocessing, FoE argues, there can be no justification for allowing it to continue at Sellafield - which means pumping some residual radioactivity, however small, into the Irish Sea and increasing the quantity of solid waste that must be disposed of. FoE's recommendation is that work on the THORP plant should stop until the real cost; and benefits have been thoroughly and independently compared.
The same recommendation, with supporting evidence, has been put to the Commons environment committee, whose forthcoming report on the nuclear industry is expected to be highly critical. The MPs are believed to agree that the way in which the British industry has taken the need for reprocessing for granted must now be re-examined. A major shift in policy may be in prospect which would put the search for alternatives to Elstow in an entirely different light.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
239 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 4, 1986
Hospital blood bill goes up 5 million pounds / Price of commercially imported albumin doubled since 1974
BYLINE: By ANDREW VEITCH, Medical Correspondent
LENGTH: 471 words
Hospitals face an extra pounds 5 million bill this year for albumin, the blood protein essential for the treatment of burns victims.
The price of commercially-imported albumin has doubled since 1974 to around pounds 60 a bottle, and the NHS will have to buy up to 160,000 bottles this year because the national Blood Products Laboratory cannot meet the need.
Firms have increased prices because of increased worldwide countries particularly Germany and Japan, and shortages caused by the drop in the supply of blood plasma from which albumin is made.
Aids has caused the lack of raw material. Most of the plasma for the international blood products trade comes from commercial blood collectors in the United States. Some have been denied licences, others have gone out of business, and the survivors are collecting less plasma because of stringent donor-screening.
Imports of contaminated blood products from the United States and the cost of commercial products have prompted the Government to increase funds to the Blood Products Laboratory to make England and Wales self-sufficient.
But the BPL said yesterday that it would not be able to meet health service demand for albumin or Factor 8 for haemophiliacs until 1987 - and then only if the National Blood Transfusion Service was given enough money to provide the necessary raw material. The laboratory will need 450 tons of plasma a year to produce 450,000 bottles of albumin compared with 250 tons now.
There are no fears that imported albumin is contaminated by the Aids virus because the product has always been heat-treated.
A BPL spokesman said: 'We are working at maximum capacity to produce 240,000 bottles of albumin a year in a building designed to produce 90,000. There is no way we can produce more until our new facility is up and running.'
Hospitals get albumin free for the BPL to treat patients suffering from shock, undergoing surgery, and needing intensive care, as well as burns victims.
Antibodies to the Aids virus have been found in American supplies of gammaglobulin, the blood product used in vaccines for measles, rubella, tetanus, and diptheria. The report came in the Lancet from doctors at Rutgers medical school, New Jersey.
The doctors stress that the fact that antibodies have been detected does not mean the virus (HTLV III) itself is present.
MICHAEL MORRIS adds:
The first Aids victim to be confined to hospital under a court order against his will has died in Manchester.
Mr Roger Youd, aged 29, of Levenshulme, Manchester, died peacefully in the isolation unit of Monsall Hospital and was cremated in Wales.
The order detaining him at the hospital was lifted in September after an appeal by the Aids charity, the Terence Higgins Trust. He stayed voluntarily for further treatment.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
240 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 4, 1986
US increases pressure on Libya as ship sails for Mediterranean / Renewed call for Allied economic sanctions following Rome and Vienna terrorist attacks
BYLINE: From ALEX BRUMMER
LENGTH: 589 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
The United States was last night moving to step up the economic and military pressure on Libya, with renewed calls on the Allies to join it in economic sanctions, as an American carrier group left Naples for the Mediterranean.
The Pentagon said that the carrier, Coral Sea, which has been in port in Naples, was being moved back to the Mediterranean. It was also reported that other US vessels were steaming towards the Libyan coast in preparation for any military operations which might be approved by President Reagan.
The US currently has 15 combat vessels in the Mediterranean which form part of a fleet of some 25 ships in the region.
The State Department, which has been at the forefront of the calls for tough retaliation against terrorists, is said to favour increased intelligence and communications surveillance of Libyan territory as a preliminary to any action.
The Libyans meanwhile, have sent a letter to the United Nations denying any part in the attacks on Rome and Vienna which they described as 'deplorable blood outrages.' Immediately following the attacks, the official Libyan news agency, Jana, had praised the terrorists as heroes.
Yesterday, the Foreign Minister, Mr Ali al-Tureiki, in his letter to the UN Secretary-General, Javier Perez de Cuellar; said he hoped the UN would take appropriate measures to see that peace and security in the region were not endangered.
Among the options being actively discussed by the Americans are to move a satellite into position over the country, reconnaissance flights by seaborne Awacs early warning radar planes and eavesdropping by communications ships. Such tactics paid dividends after the Archille Lauro hijacking when the US was able to intercept an Egypt Air plane carrying terrorists.
On the diplomatic front, the US is renewing its efforts to persuade the Allies to join it in economic sanctions. The State Department, apparently rejecting West German reservations about sanctions, said last night that it was necessary for 'the international community to stand up and take some action.'
European diplomats in Washington say that as yet no formal approaches have been made by the Administration. However, State Department officials said that the US was in close consultation with several governments on policy towards Libya. They pointed to the success of the US in reducing its trade with Libya since President Reagan imposed sanctions.
In Bonn, however, the West German Government again said it was opposed to economic sanctions against Libya. A spokesman said they were believed to be 'inappropriate.'
American exports to Libya had been slashed from a peak of dollars 860 million in 1979 to around dollars 200 millions last year. The ban on oil imports had cut back Libyan sales to the US from dollars 9 billion to dollars 5 billion. It was noted here that with the current oil glut there was no real justification for West Germany, Italy and other countries to be so dependent on Libyan energy supplies.
US military options against Libya are severely limited by the continued presence of an estimated 1,500 Americans in the country who are there despite State Department restrictions on travel to the country.
It explained yesterday however that a 'sizeable proportion' of the Americans in Libya may well be dependants or relations of Libyan nationals. This means that they would not be in conflict with American law which provides for penalties of up to dollars 20,000 in fines and five years in prison.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
241 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 3, 1986
Futures: The town that is in for a shock / US earthquake prediction research at Parkfield, California
BYLINE: By PETER J SMITH
LENGTH: 1471 words
Earthquake prediction research has proved to be a depressing business. No one has yet been able to devise a method of predicting even a small proportion of the world's seismic events. It has even been impossible to find a way of anticipating a minority of the earthquakes occurring along the simplest of the three distinct types of boundary between the Earth's lithospheric plates. Worse still, there is no known means of forecasting shocks within a single, well-studied, local seismic zone.
Yet American seismologists are confidently asserting that a moderate earthquake will occur near the California town of Parkfield, about midway between San Francisco and Los Angeles, sometime between now and 1993, most probably in 1988. What's more, they claim to be able to specify the magnitude and location of the impending event with remarkable precision.
The obvious way of trying to discover is to monitor phenomena likely to change in the period leading up to a quake Ground level and tilt, tide and well-water levels, local magnetic fields, the elastic properties of nearby rocks and the rates at which radon gas is emitted from the ground are just a few of the things that have been observed to change before earthquakes. The problem is that such effects do not always occur; and even when they do, they seldom fall into a pattern regular enough to enable the time of the subsequent event to be pinpointed.
There have, of course, been a few isolated exceptions. In 1966 the Japanese managed to predict the peaks of activity in a long series of earthquake swarms at Matsushiro, and in a much more spectacular way the Chinese were able to anticipate the large Haicheng shock of 1975.
But these were unusual achievements aided by the rare beneficence of nature. In each case there happened to be many different precursors and an adequate system (equipment and people) to monitor them. Despite more than 20 years of concentrated research in the United States, the USSR, Japan and China, no one has managed to extend these odd successes into a widely applicable technique.
So in recent years the Americans have retreated to a cruder, but possibly more effective, approach based on earthquake recurrence intervals. The idea is simple, so simple, in fact, that it might hardly be expected to work. It is well known that there are many places at which shocks occur time and time again. If the earthquakes at such sites were to occur at random times, this tendency to repeat would have no predictive value at all, except perhaps to identify potential danger zones. But what if the shocks were to occur at regular intervals?
To see why this is even a theoretical possibility, it is necessary to look at what happens in the simplest form of earthquake. Imagine a vertical fault in the Earth's crust. Stresses exerted from below are trying to force the crustal block on one side of the fault in one direction and the block on the other side in the opposite direction. Nothing happens at first, for the fault is locked by friction. But as the stresses continue, the strain builds up until the friction is overcome. The fault then slips suddenly, producing a seismic shock, and the pent-up strain is released. The whole process the repeats and re-repeats, generating a series of quakes.
Assuming no changes in the underlying stress patterns or in the fault characteristics, earthquakes should recur at regular intervals, in which case prediction becomes simply a matter of adding a certain number of years on to the date of the last shock. The regularity may not be perfect, however, for the Earth invariably turns out to be more complex than any simple model suggests.
Moreover, even if the recurrence interval at a particular location is indeed constant, it could be indeterminable, because historical records may not go back far enough.
Unfortunately, in many parts of California the recurrence intervals seem to be more than 70 years and sometimes more than 150; and so there are too few cycles within the State's recorded history. But near Parkfield, things are different. Earthquakes occured there in 1857, 1881, 1901, 1922, 1934 and 1966, giving a recurrence interval only of 22 plus or minus three years. The 1934 event was slightly early, but the timing of the earthquakes is still remarkably regular.
From a numerical series, seismologists have concluded that the next Parkfield earthquake will strike in 1988 plus or minus five years. And simple though the method may be, the resulting prediction is being taken seriously. The National Earthquake Prediction Evaluation Council (NEPEC), a scientific review panel established by Congress to assess the validity of predictions, has given this one its seal of approval. It is the first endorsement NEPEC has given in its eight years of existence.
As a result, Parkfield, with fewer than 50 inhabitants, is now under siege. Seismometers have been installed to monitor seismicity (including possible foreshocks), laser systems are being used to detect crustal deformation, and dilatometers have been installed in boreholes to measure strain changes. Seismologists hope that now that the broad prediction has been made, they will later be able to make more precise estimates of the timing of the earthquake in the light of data on conventional precursors. At the very least they will be well placed to observe precisely what happens when an earthquakes does take place.
The sociologists and planners have also moved in. The California Governor's Office of Emergency Services has commissioned a firm called Scientific Services Inc. to provide public response plans for the five local counties and for the state as a whole. In fact, a series of plans is being drawn up for warning times ranging from a few years to 15 minutes and for earthquake magnitudes ranging from 6 (which would affect only a few hundred residents) to 7 (in which case more than 150,000 people would be involved). As this is the first scientifically-based prediction to be made public in California, it is the first time that the planning community has been called upon to prepare specific emergency procedures.
Faith in the validity of the prediction, and hence conviction that all the emergency planning is necessary, has been bolstered by the fact that at least the last three Parkfield earthquakes appear to have been similar in magnitude intensity, location, faulting mechanism the fault rupture length. The seismologists concerned have therefore been tempted to be quite precise about the characteristics of the supposed 1988 shock. They expect it to have a magnitude of 5.5-6.0 and a focus within a specific region 25 km long by 5 km wide by 3-8 km deep
All the same, there are sceptics. For example, TR Toppozada of the California Department of Conservation reckons that the 22-year periodicity is unproven. He argues that 19th century records of earthquakes in California are both incomplete and imprecise, throwing doubt on the absence of shocks at Parkfield between 1857 and 1881 and opening up the possibility than an earthquakes recorded in 1885 may have had its epicentre there. He also claims that, far from being characteristic, the last two earthquakes (1934 and 1966) were actually half a magnitude weaker than earlier ones. If Toppozada were proved right on either or both counts, the prediction would lose strength.
And even the scientists at the US Geological Survey admit to one complicating factor. In 1983 a magnitude 6.7 earthquake occured at Coalinga, on a different fault but only 40 km northwest of Parkfield.
This event is known to have affected the pattern of creep along at least one section of the San Andreas fault and to have triggered an unusual swarm of small seismic events just to the southeast of Parkfield. There is no knowing just how this will have influenced the time of the next earthquake at Parkfield itself.
But none of this seems to have dampened the confidence with which the seismologists have gone public with the prediction, a somewhat surprising confidence given the state of the science. Would the scientists concerned have been quite so forthcoming had the expected event been much larger and/or in a metropolitan area rather than near sparsely populated Parkfield? Possibly not, although the risk of appearing foolish has to be taken sometimes, and it's perhaps for the best that it should be taken where only a few hundred people are likely to be involved.
Even so, if the next Parkfield earthquake fails to occur reasonably close to 1988, the seismologists will be in despair. Worse, they will lose credibility with both the public and Government, which could cost them research funds and cooperation in the future.
Dr Peter J Smith is Reader in Earth Sciences at the Open University.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
242 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 3, 1986
Third World Review (North-South): Unesco fiasco goes on
LENGTH: 263 words
The year starts with the British government, like President Reagan's Administration, planning to wind up its National Commission for Unesco. This means, of course, that neither London nor Washington has any serious intention of following the process of reform they helped to initiate in the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation. It also denotes their lack of interest in resuming membership of the global body even if all their demands for improvements are fulfilled.
All member-governments of Unesco are expected to set up National Commissions made up of specialists in education, science and culture who are appointed to monitor developments in the organisation in their fields. In Britain's case the term of office of existing commission members is due to expire on March 31 and although the Overseas Development Administration is saying no decision has yet been taken about the future officials are making it clear that Timothy Raison, the responsible minister, has no plans for extending the life of the commission.
Theoretically commission members have the right to advise the Government on what ought to be done. But Raison demonstrated in December how little the Government feels bound to accept that advice.
On the issue of Britain's withdrawal in December, 33 out of 36 members of the commission voted at a special meeting to stay in Unesco; two voted for withdrawal and one abstained.
In the United States some key commissioners already have resigned in anticipation of a Washington decision to disband the body.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
243 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 3, 1986
Third World Review: Shultz lost in the myth / The real economic strength of east Asia's newly industrialised nations
BYLINE: By AIDAN FOSTER-CARTER
LENGTH: 763 words
George Shultz, the plain-speaking US Secretary of State, was in tough mood when he addressed on Organisation of American States meeting recently. Mr Shultz effectively told Latin America to copy the monetarist model of the fast-growing capitalist economies of Asia. He claimed that 'growth has been hindered by hostility to foreign direct investment, which has shut out the potential benefits from the technology and marketing capabilities of multinational firms.'
Presumably the Asian success stores here being contrasted with Latin America's plight were the familiar East Asian 'gang of four' or 'four little tigers': South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore. The economic performance of these Newly Industrialising Countries (NICS) over the last two decades or so is indeed very striking, and the idea that other Third World countries might learn from them seems sensible. In recent years, moreover, quite a body of scholarship has built up on these countries - much of it done at the Institute of Development Studies, Sussex.
Evidently, however, Mr Shultz (or his speech-writers) have not read any of this work. Or perhaps they have but found it ideologically unpalatable. Of the 'four little tigers,' only Singapore has allowed a major role to direct foreign investment; while only Hong Kong could by any stretch of the imagination be described as monetarist. But these two are city-states, structurally quite unlike most other Third world countries. Taiwan and South Korea, in contrast, are 'little' only in area: with populations of some 20 and 40 million respectively, these are substantial nations. What then is their secret?
Here one can be quite categorical. Mr Shultz simply does not know what he is taking about. South Korea and Taiwan must be among the world's least monetarist economies. On the contrary, they have been and remain two of the most pervasively interventionist state capitalist regimes in the Third World - probably more so, indeed than any Latin American States.
Happily for their economic success, they have been quite unaffected by the ideological nostrums of Milton Friedman. Rather, like their mentors across the water in Japan (which earlier had colonised both of them, a crucial formative experience), theirs has been a thoroughly planned development.
Many examples of this can be cited. The South Korean state until quite recently owned all major banks, and by its credit policies virtually created the dozen or so giant firms (chaebol, like the Japanese Zaibatsu) which now dominate the South Korean economy.
Or again, in agriculture both South Korea and Taiwan had very far-reaching land reforms - a useful tip for Latin America which Mr Schultz omitted, curiously enough, given that this largely took place under US auspices.
But perhaps the biggest myth of all is the one that Mr Shultz directly perpetrates: that transnational corporations (TNCs) are responsible for Seoul and Taipoh's success. Once again, this is simply false. In fact, both countries have been rather hostile to direct foreign investment. Not long ago, the Economist went so far as to bracket South Korea's economic policies hitherto with those of Cuba and China, as 'autarchic.' Indeed, Seoul deliberately went for loans rather than investment in order to maximise its own control over the direction of development.
It is true that this picture is beginning to change. Economic liberalisation is afoot in both Taipeh and Seoul - not on account of any sudden conversion to monetarism, however, but simply because as good Listian economic nationalists they judge that certain domestic industries are now strong enough to stand on their own feet.
All this is on the record. Why then is it so widely ignored? For their part, the South Korean and Taiwanese governments blithely go along with all the ideological nonsense about 'free enterprise.' After all, it keeps the Americans happy to hear that tune.
But why are the likes of George Shultz (by no means lacking in intellect, unlike his President) so self-deceived? Could it be because the USA and the UK are virtually the only countries in the world whose own industrialisation was accomplished without significant State involvement? Nothing else can explain the peculiar current grip of the monetarist delusion.
Latin American would-be industrialisers can indeed learn much from their East Asian counterparts; but the real lessons support skilled state intervention, not mindless monetarism.
Mr Foster-Carter is Senior lecturer in Sociology, University of Leeds.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
244 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 3, 1986
Third World Review: It's a Lao road that has no turning / Laos, ten years after revolution
BYLINE: From CHRIS MULLIN
LENGTH: 1293 words
DATELINE: VIENTIANE
The tenth anniversary of the Lao revolution was marked by two events, both of which illustrate the forces contending for the loyalty of the Lao people.
The first was the festival of That Luang, an annual event at which thousands of devout citizens descend on Vientiane's That Luang pagoda to make offerings to the monks and to invoke the blessing of the Buddha.
It was a chaotic affair; the faithful sat cross-legged around the base of the huge stupa, while monks in orange robes moved among them filling their begging bowls with offerings of sticky rice, fruit, and kip notes in low denominations.
Virtually the entire population of Vientiane attended and many people trekked in from the surrounding areas. Even members of the Politburo were to be seen making offerings.
The second event took place three days later on a parade ground a hundred metres from the That Luang pagoda. It was a parade to which the general public were not invited, except for students and the workers taking part.
For two hours members of the Politburo, flanked by high-level delegations from the Stalinist countries, looked down from a distant podium on unit after unit of goose-stepping soldiers followed by gleaming Soviet-made tanks, artillery, and armoured cars. Even the workers who followed were wearing uniform. They also carried large pictures of Marx and Lenin.
It was a very un-Lao affair (Who would have believed that Lao soldiers could be taught to goose-step with such precision?) And in its way it was impressive. As a means of celebrating the independence of Laos, however, it left a certain amount to be desired.
But appearances can be deceptive. Attempts to impose a foreign ideology on Laos have, by large, failed. Lao people do not make good Stalinists. They have simply discovered, as one ambassador put it, 'that if you hang up pictures of Marx and Lenin, people give you things.'
To say this is not to denigrate the achievements of the Lao revolution which are considerable. For the first time in living memory Laos has a government whose members are dedicated not to self-enrichment but to using the resources of the country for the benefit of their people.
The problems they faced would have daunted any regime. When it came to power in 1975 the Communist party of Laos inherited a devastated country. A quarter of the population were refugees. Much of Laos had been rendered uninhabitable by saturation bombing (the Americans had dropped almost one ton of bombs per citizen).
The towns along the Mekong river valley were utterly dependent on American aid and when in June 1975 this was cut off the urban economy collapsed sending a wave of refugees across the river.
The Lao Communists inherited one of the world's least developed countries. It is about the size and shape of Italy with a population of only three and a half million. Most of the population are subsistence rice farmers living in remote valleys and mountains and many belong to hill tribes.
As if this was not enough the new Lao regime was saddled with another huge burden - a foreign ideology absolutely unsuited to the needs of its people.
The first iron law of that ideology said: 'Private trade is bad.' Private trade was, therefore, banned. The huge central market in Vientiane was closed and trade between provinces forbidden. Result: a wave of refugees across the Mekong and chronic shortages.
It was four years before word of the disaster reached the seven elderly men in the Politburo. In 1980 the ban on private trade was lifted. The markets in Vientiane and other cities re-opened. Party General Secretary Kaysone Phoumvihane spelled out the lessons: 'It is inappropriate, indeed stupid, for any party to forbid its people to exchange goods or to trade Such a policy is suicidal and will lead to bankruptcy.'
Iron Law Number Two says: 'All farmers should be in co-operatives and all surplus rice, vegetables and meat must be sold to the State at low fixed prices.' Attempts to force the farmers into co-operatives were a disaster. To make matters worse the experiments coincided with several years of natural calamity. Result: collapse of agricultural production.
Once again it was about four years before the message got through to the highest levels (Vietnam was learning the same lesson at the same time). Rumour has it that it was the Soviet Premier, Alexei Kosygin, who advised the Lao Communists to abandon the experiment. In July 1979 membership of the co-ops was made voluntary.
In the last five years food production has increased to the point where in 1984, Laos achieved what foreign aid experts call 'marginal self-suffiency.' Even so, Lao planners are still obsessed with persuading everyone to join co-ops.
Iron Law Number Three stated 'All those tainted by the old regime must be re-educated.' This overlooked several stark realities. First, anyone who wants to leave Laos can do so easily since Thailand is just a short swim across the Mekong. Those most urgently in need of re-education had, therefore, already departed by the time the Communists arrived. Secondly, many of those who remained possessed exactly the technical and administrative skills the new regime so badly needed.
Political education remains a serious obstacle to development. Senior officials and even government ministers leave their departments for months at a time to attend long courses in Vietnam and the Soviet Union.
The fourth and final Iron Law of Stalinism is that all decisions, however trivial, must be referred upwards to the highest level which, in Laos, means the Politburo. This, combined with a natural proclivity for avoiding decisions, has induced a state of paralysis throughout most of the Vientiane bureaucracy. Only in the State Planning Department headed by a rising star, Dr Salv Vengkhamsao, is a more businesslike atmosphere said to prevail.
It would be misleading to conclude from this that there has been no progress. On the contrary, the rural uplands have been repopulated. With foreign assistance agriculture, timber and some minerals are being developed as is hydro-electricity, the country's main source of foreign exchange.
With Vietnamese and Soviet assistance a road is being built from the southern city of Savannakhat to the Vietnamese port of Da Nang which will break the Thai stranglehold over the Lao economy. The road will be complete in three or four years but is already taking traffic.
Unlike Vietnam and Campuchea, Laos has not been the subject of a Western aid boycott. In spite of the close alliance with Vietnam and the Soviet Union, the Lao have been pragmatic enough to accept aid from all quarters. With the exception of the United States and Britain (which recently closed its embassy), virtually every major industrial country has an aid programme in Laos.
The biggest shareholders in Laos are, of course, the Russians and the Vietnamese who, besides training the Lao army to goose step, are helping to build roads and to develop timber, agriculture, and deposits of tin, gypsum, and iron ore.
In spite of the heavy dependence on the Soviet block it is far from clear that the Stalinist ideology has much to offer Laos. Compared with Vietnam the needs of Loas are small and a sufficient number of countries are queueing up to offer assistance that it ought to be possible to develop the country without becoming dependent on anyone.
One fairly senior government official in Vientiane has on the wall of his office a picture of the First Secretary of the Lao Communist Party, Kaysone Phoumvihane, that is slightly different from the standard issue. It shows the First Secretary, his hands joined, bowing to a Buddhist monk. The message is clear.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
245 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 3, 1986
GAF raises offer for Carbide / US takeover bid
BYLINE: From ALEX BRUMMER
LENGTH: 413 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
The tiny GAF Corporation yesterday intensified its campaign for control of chemical colossus Union Carbide with a new bid worth some dollars 5.06 billion. The move came as the Carbide board met in emergency session in an effort to step up its defences.
The latest round in the battle for control of Union Carbide came on the eve of a crucial court hearing which is expected to decide whether tens of billions of dollars of claims from the victims of the Bhopal disaster are heard in the US or Indian courts. The Indian government - representing the victims of Bhopal - wants the case heard in the US, while Union Carbide would prefer the case to be dealt with in India.
There was no immediate indication yesterday that efforts by the lawyers representing the Indian government to reach a settlement with Union Carbide had been successful. Although there were some suggestions that the chemical giant might increase its current offer to the victims which has been valued at just under dollars 240 million.
Shares in Union Carbide were suspended in early trading on the New York Stock Exchange yesterday pending an announcement from the company on its latest defensive plans. Instead GAF, a smaller housing, building and chemical concern, returned to the fray with a higher offer of dollars 78 a share against its pre-Christmas bid of dollars 74 a share.
However, GAF's new offer seems to have taken the wind out of Union Carbide's sails, and its announcement was delayed while the board met. Company officials let it be known that Carbide is continuing its defence against GAF's onslaught and has arranged an additional line of dollars 1.5 billion in credit.
It is also selling off a series of enterprises aimed at raising some dollars 1.2 billion in cash. Among the more politically amenable of these divestments is the sale of its chromium interests to its partner, General Mining Union Corporation, for an undisclosed sum. In disposing of assets Carbide appears to be taking some advice from its predator - GAF has undertaken to sell assets to help pay for its acquisition of Union Carbide.
GAF says it will pay for Union Carbide by selling some dollars 3.5 billion of securities to a group of institutional investors. It is not clear whether these securities would be outlawed if the Federal Reserve's anti-junk bond moves are implemented. In addition Marine Midland Bank has arranged some dollars 655 million of cash financing for the offer.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
246 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 3, 1986
A key to the instant grocer / Focus on commercial electronic shopping services
BYLINE: By PETER LARGE
LENGTH: 723 words
Shopping from the home TV screen may at last be outgrowing the gimmick stage.
The tentative evidence comes from the first two weeks' operation of a new London company, Telecard, which claims to run the world's first commercial electronic shopping service and from the three-year progress of a government-subsidised experiment in the Midlands.
Both are aimed at the professional middle-class; both are winning particularly in families where both parents work and want to avoid the weekly big-bang assault on the supermarket; and both use British Telecom's Prestel network, which links TV sets (souped up with a few microchips) to central computers down the phone line.
Telecard is offering home delivery of 3,500 supermarket lines at below store prices. That, the company said yesterday, was not a loss-leader ploy; it was made possible by the lack of overheads.
Until next month it is available only to families which already have Prestel TV sets in Kensington, Chelsea, Westminster, Camden, Hammersmith, Fulham, and Wandsworth. Mr David Cullen, Telecard's managing director, said that that meant about 8,000 potential customers and 250 had signed in over Christmas.
Next month the service is to be expanded through the offer of pounds 100 black boxes which will connect any TV set to all the Prestel services. The average grocery order so far is more than pounds 50 and orders have risen within a week from six a day to more than a dozen.
Customers get a booklet listing the 3,500 items, each with a code number. They order by punching in the numbers on a keypad. The TV screen then displays the day's prices, plus screenfuls of special offers. Orders can be placed throughout the 24 hours, with same-day delivery. The most popular pattern so far is morning ordering and evening delivery. But in the Midlands the ordering rush follows News At Ten.
Telecard uses the Lalani food chain, which has 50 stores in London and holds five per cent of the Telecard shares. Deliveries are made by the vans of another company, Square Moves. Telecard intends to open its own warehouses once the service is generally available across London.
Even though Britain can still claim a lead in this post-industrial business, it has taken a long time to come. Prestel was invented in the old Post Office nearly 15 years ago and government-sponsored trials have been underway for three years.
Club 403, based on the prosperous suburbs of Solihull, Edgbaston and Sutton Coldfield has just run out of its state subsidy and hopes to complete a financial package for wider operation later this month. Just as home banking via Prestel is being used by building societies to compete with the big banks, so operations like Telecard and Club 403 may build on the interest of retail groups wanting to outwit the big national chains.
Club 403 is run by Viewtel, a subsidiary of the Birmingham Post and Mail. Mr Peter Young, Viewtel's managing director, said yesterday that although it was not yet making a profit, Club 403 had had particular success with electronic shopping and local information services.
There are 1,500 customers - including Mr John Butcher, the industry minister responsible for this slice of information technology. The weekly spend on groceries is running at around pounds 5,000. There, too, evening is the popular time for deliveries.
Other state-subsidised experiments have had a worthier basis - helping the old and disabled with their shopping. The first began on Tyneside nearly two years ago.
Internationally, Prestel has not - so far, anyway - suffered from being first in the field. The British way of converting the TV set into a two-way communicator has been bought by 11 countries for their national networks, far ahead of the rival French and Canadian versions.
Nationally, Prestel has more than 60,000 customers, half in business, half in the home. A million pages of information are summoned to those screens every day and 100,000 electronic mail messages are exchanged every week.
Meanwhile, a more mundane introduction of telecommunications to the retail business has brought Harrods dollars 233,000 worth of American orders within three days. Harrods offered US customers toll-free phone calls to order cashmere sales items. By last night there had been 1,625 takers.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
247 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 3, 1986
Leading Article: They don't see the point about Europe / Rescue plan for Britain's Westland helicopter manufacturer
LENGTH: 749 words
There is one absolutely critical - and transcendantly important - issue at the heart of the Westland furore. It has nothing whatsoever to do with Mr Michael Heseltine's political ambitions (though they colour so much of the surface of the row). Nor, in truth, does it have much to do with the specific fate of Westland. But the symbolism of the again is over-riding.
Here languishes yet another high tech manufacturing industry which Britain, by itself, can't support any longer. Beyond even that, though, there is the larger question of what Europe, the continent we consider ourselves an integral part of, can support. And here's the rub. Europe, decade by decade, makes less and less. It has all but bowed out of mainframe computers, relinquishing the field of the future to IBM and the Japanese. Look round in your high street shop for a European made video recorder or music centre: and be prepared to look hard and long. The whole area of consumer electronics (according to no less a dignitary than the chairman of Europe's largest remaining manufacturer) is sliding from our grasp. In ten years it may have gone for good and all. And, in sector after sector, the message is inexorably repeated. Only when the size of the home market (the whole of Europe) can be matched to production runs and research budgets is there a prospect of building an export platform which can begin to match the new giants of world trade. Europe itself, riven by natural jealousies and duplications of effort, is awakening pitifully slowly to the future of cuckoo clocks and guided tours that awaits it. But it is awakening. The Eureka project, for one, finds its foundations in just this analysis. Now Mr Heseltine has made helicopters the test.
The shareholders of Westland today have two choices where, a few weeks ago, they possessed barely a single option. Be rescued by United Technologies of the US and become, over time, a wholly owned American subsidiary, stripped of independent research capability: or join with GEC, British Aerospace, Aerospatiale of France, Agusta of Italy and Messerschmit of Germany in a European consortium which will retain and nurture a European capability to build and export helicopters, because that's what it's there for. Mr Heseltine deserves no heroic status for having brought such competitive joys to Yeovil. He and the Ministry of Defence are substantially to blame for allowing the crisis to develop in the first place. But at least, at the eleventh hour, he has seen the danger and the opportunity. By doing so - and by helping conjure forth an attractive consortium bid - he has made Mr Leon Brittan and the Trade Department look purblind and slothful. Beyond that, though, Mr Heseltine has flushed Mrs Thatcher from her strangely peripheral ante-chamber.
The overwhelming advantage of the European offer - specific bits of business to one side - is that it provides Westland with the chance of an innovative, constructive future. No such future lies along the Sikorsky road. Westland's Sir John Cuckney very reasonably inquired of Downing Street where the British Government's interest lay. Was it true, as the MoD implied, that taking the Sikorsky shilling would see Westland frozen out of the European market? Last night Mrs Thatcher - on the spot - didn't want to answer the question. The small print is that she agrees with Mr Brittan. The larger print says that only Britain, a part of Europe, will fight very hard for whatever is made in Yeovil whoever owns it: a fig leaf of ambivalence.
Simply, they don't grasp what it's all about. Mr Brittan goes on about market forces without realising that the kind of forces that United Technologies represents are those of monopoly and domination. And Mrs Thatcher talks of using 'our best endeavours' as though those purely national efforts had not already seen Westland, as a British enterprise, consigned to the knackers' yard. Over time, treated like this, there will be no European helicopter industry left. Over time the 'market forces' of high tech internationalism will leave France, Germany and Italy, as well as the remnants of Great Britain, bereft. To say that is not for a second to be anti-American: there are plenty in America who don't love United Technologies, any more than they love IBM. The dilemma is more sweeping than that. It is what long term future in big manufacturing one sees for Europe. And our masters and mistresses, alas, don't even see the problem.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
248 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 3, 1986
Whitewashed emperor starts to sparkle / Japan's Emperor Hirohito delivers New Year greeting on 60th anniversary of his reign
BYLINE: From ROBERT WHYMANT
LENGTH: 530 words
DATELINE: TOKYO
Nearly 140,000 people, including ultra-rightists in paramilitary uniforms, flocked to the Imperial Palace in Tokyo yesterday to wave Rising Sun flags and hear Emperor Hirohito, who marks the sixtieth anniversary of his reign this year, deliver a brief new year's greeting.
Dressed in a morning suit, Japan's wartime leader, now 84-years-old emerged for this annual event on to the palace balcony protected by bullet-proof glass. The Empress Kagako was at his side.
He told cheering crowds through a microphone: 'Happy new year I am pleased to see you well and healthy and I hope this will be another good year for all of you.'
Police said the 137,300 wellwishers exceeded last year's figure by 5,200 which may have been because of the exceptionally mild weather, or to the fevour with which the Government is trying to drum up support for the monarchy.
Hirohito ascended the Chrysanthemum Throne on December 25, 1926, the 123rd emperor, and has reigned longer than any other. He has also broken the record for imperial longevity. These are the only achievements worthy of celebration in a reign that has been neither happy nor glorious.
Hirohito, as sovereign and supreme commander-in-chief of the armed forces, directed Japan's war against China in the 1930s, signed the order to attack Pearl Harbour, and led Japan into defeat and the humiliation of foreign occupation for the first time.
The diamond jubilee celebrations are the brain-child of the Prime Minister, Yasuhiro Nakasone, foremost advocate of restoring the Emperor, if not to the divine status he enjoyed before Japan's defeat, then as least to a more exalted level than accorded by the US victors.
The celebrations, reflecting glory on the Prime Minister as well as the royal family, will peak on the Emperor's 85th birthday in April, which the more cynical press suggests would stand Mr Nakasone on good stead should he call a general election in June, cosidered the most logical time.
Whether he risks a general election, Mr Nakasone, despite public protestations, is clinging to the hope of winning a third term when the ruling party meets to choose a leader in the autumn.
Beside promoting the anniversary celebrations, Mr Nakasone is behind the plan to have the Crown Prince visit the US soon after the visit in May to Tokyo of the Prince and Princess of Wales. Mr Nakasone is also encouraging the Crown Prince to visit South Korea.
That would be the first time since the Second World War that a member of the Imperial Family has set foot in Korea, which Hirohito ruled as part of the Japanese Empire until 1945. The Koreans have longer memories of atrocities committed in the Emperor's name than the Americans, who preserved the Imperial Family for realpolitik and overlooked the savagery.
Last month, a former US Army physician said that Hirohito condoned deadly experiments on prisoners of war, to advance Japan's germ warfare techniques. Lieutenant-Colonel Murray Saunders provided evidence that Hirohito aproved horrific experiments on humans, including Americans, and that the US granted immunity to the Japanese involved in return for experimental data.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
249 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 3, 1986
US refuses to dignify Gadafy / Response to Libyan leader's threat against American citizens
BYLINE: From MICHAEL WHITE
LENGTH: 477 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
President Regan last night lashed out at the Libyan leader. Colonel Gadafy of Libya in the wake of his threat to harass American citizens in their own streets.
Mr Reagan said in Los Angeles: 'I don't answer fellows who think it's all right to shoot 11-year-old girls,' Mr Reagan said. The President was referring to the shooting death of Natasha Simpson, the daughter of an American journalist, who was killed during the Rome attack on December 27. Mr Reagan's comment followed harsh words from the State Department earlier in the day.
Under cross-examination at yesterday's routine briefing, the State Department revealed a high degree both of impotence and frustration as it confirmed that no less than 1,500 American citizens remain in Libya as potential targets or government's express request that they leave. Officials involved in US efforts to coordinate counter-terrorist efforts worldwide are also furious that many of the oil industry jobs in Libya vacated by the 6,000 Americans there until 1981, have since been taken by Britons.
A spokesman for the State Department, Mr Charles Redman said of Colonel Gadafy's comment overnight at his Tripoli barracks: 'We particularly abhor Gadafy making excuses for indiscriminate slaughter of innocent men, women and children and rejecting that these are pure acts of terrorism. Beyond that we will not dignify his remarks.'
Agencies have stepped up their attacks on Libyan complicity in what is generally regarded as an Abu Nidal group terrorist venture in killing 18 people in Rome and Vienna last week. The Pentagon has drawn up a fresh list of potential targets for reprisal within Libya, but, despite Israeli complaints, reported here, that they resent being expected to retaliate when other nationals are also victimised, the US is still stressing international retaliation.
Mr Redman cited trade restrictions which have cut US exports from dollars 860 million in 1979 to under dollars 200 million now and - with Libyan crude imports banned - imports from over dollars 5 billion to a mere dollars 9 million. Officials, are, however, publically and privately frustrated by the 1,500 Americans remaining in Libya technically illegally since their passports do not classify them as having officially 'valid reasons' for doing so. As for Europeans working or doing big business with the Gadafy regime, one official said yesterday: 'It's just greed.'
In Vienna, an interior ministry spokesman said yesterday that three Palestinian gunmen were given their final instructions by a fourth man over breakfast in the city's Hilton hotel.
He said the fourth man, who has disappeared, ordered the gunmen to take Israeli hostages, force their way onto a waiting plane of the Israeli airline, El Al, and fly to Tel Aviv.
They were to explode the plane in or over the city, he said.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
250 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 3, 1986
US prepares to bail out indebted Mexico
BYLINE: From ALEX BRUMMER
LENGTH: 475 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
President Reagan will tell President Miguel de la Madrid of Mexico today that the US is prepared to support efforts by the international financial institutions to arrange some dollars 4 billion support in 1986.
The US backing is seen as crucial if Mexico is to meet interest repayments on its dollars 100 billion debt in 1986. The Administration is anxious that Mexico should receive the support it needs at a time of disaffection in the country following the Government's perceived weak response to last September's devastating earthquake in Mexico City.
The Mexican debt package is seen as an important test case for the American initiative aimed at easing the economic and political problems of heavily indebted countries around the world. The US Treasury Secretary, Mr James Baker, who launched the debt plan, will take part in President Reagan's four hours of discussions.
Central America has recently been the dominant subject of discussion between President Reagan and his Mexican counterpart. But when the two leaders meet at Mexicali - just south of the border with California - Mexico's financial problems will be the main item on the agenda. Both the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank are holding talks with the Mexican Government with a view to finalising a package of loans for 1986.
Once the IMF and World Bank have arranged facilities the international banks could be expected to step in with fresh money and the US Government might provide some short term assistance. A serious problem for the Mexican authorities is how to attract fresh private capital to an economy Which has historically been controlled from the centre. This could prove a sticking point for Washington, which is encouraging a stronger private sector as condition for assistance with debt problems.
In the case of Mexico, political considerations may well transcend strict adherence to economic conditions. Washington is known to have been deeply concerned about the impact of last year's earthquake on support for the De la Madrid Government and has been anxious to do all that it can to maintain stability
In specific terms the IMF, expected to make available some dollars 300 million in emergency loans to help cope with he after-effects of the earthquake. Bank sources say it is negotiating a dollars 900 million package which will help release up to dollars 2.5 billion of new commercial bank money.
The World Bank, assuming a higher profile in the debt crisis, is also negotiating structural reforms in the Mexican economy. Officials say that it is working closely with the IMF on this and that the result of the work being done by the IMF. The World Bank and the commercial bank may well have increased confidence that the Baker debt initiative can be useful in resolving the problems of the debtor countries.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
251 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 3, 1986
Grenadians criticised for human rights abuse
BYLINE: From MICHAEL WHITE
LENGTH: 552 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
Human rights in the US-installed regime in Grenada are being harshly criticised in the English-speaking Caribbean, a Washington-based monitoring group claims.
'Reliable accounts are circulating of prisoners being beaten, denied medical attention and confined for long periods without being able to see lawyers. The country's new US-trained police force has acquired a reputation for brutality, arbitrary arrest and abuse of authority,' the group said.
Specifically, the Council on Hemispheric Affairs (Coha) cites the continued detention of a prominent trade unionist, now on hunger strike, and the closure of an offending all-music radio station when the elected Prime Minister, Mr Herbert Blaize, was out of the country. The State Department, sensitive to charges of double standards in Latin America, has rejected the charges, as will Whitehall which judged the situation normal enough two years after the 1983 'rescue' invasion to allow the Queen to pay a visit in October.
Coha's annual survey of human rights abuses south of the Rio Grande, which normally singles out the former British colonies of the West Indies, also warns that Jamaica is heading for trouble as the Government's grip slips but praises Belize's continued 'high standards' despite problems with drug trafficking, refugees and migrants.
Like other Latin American research groups here, Coha is in the 'business of challenging the optimistic accounts of human rights progress among US allies emanating from the Administration.
This year, Coha, which the Administration describes as leftwing, notes again that Cuba's disregard for human rights 'remains absolute.' The group insists that the most murderous abuses continue to occur in El Salvador under the 'weak' civilian government of President Duarte and in Guatemala where a 'whitewashing' UN report on military atrocities produced by Lord Colville is excoriated.
In its most direct snub to the White House, the group regrets the suspension of civil liberties in Nicaragua because of its civil war, but notes that it is still 'relatively unrepressive' by regional standards. By contrast the US-backed contra rebels are described as the bloodiest insurgents, along with the Peruvian Marxists, Shining Path.
Contra killings, Coha claims, rose to 500 last year, compared with 300 in 1984 and 600 in 1983.
In South America, Chile remains 'the worst violator' but 1985 saw Colombia's situation 'turn from hopeful to bleak' as abuses on both sides of the M-19 insurgency slide towards what Coha says may be civil war.
On the credit side, Argentina's prosecution of its generals for human rights abuses in the 1970 'stand out as a beacon-like precedent for other popularly elected leaders attempting to bring their nations out of the darkness of authoritarianism'. Despite considerable progress, Brazil and Uruguay's restored civilian regimes have not followed suit.
In Grenada, Washington is accused of seeking to extradite the imprisoned union leader, Chester Humphrey, on gun-smuggling charges dating from before the New Jewel takeover from the late Maurice Bishop whose murder prompted the US invasion.
Potentially more significant in the long term is Coha's charge that US-trained counter-insurgency forces are eroding civil rights in Grenada.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
252 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 3, 1986
Soviet Union deploys PR in 'year of peace'
BYLINE: From MARTIN WALKER
LENGTH: 753 words
DATELINE: MOSCOW
The Soviet Union will this year intensify its work with the European and American peace movements convinced that the Star Wars issue will be even more contentious in the West than the deployment of cruise and Pershing missiles.
It is giving its full backing to the UN initiative to make 1986 the International Peace Year, and will host the four-day world disarmament conference in the Georgian city of Tbilisi in May.
At a special conference of the Soviet Peace Committee in Moscow just before Christmas, delegates of all 15 republics of the Soviet Union were promised extra funds and told to make extra efforts to invite Western peace campaigners here and 'to redouble your work for peace.'
Writing in the current Novaya Vremya, a director of the International Department of the Central Committee, Vadim Zagladin, announced 'This is the year of the struggle for peace, it is being waged by the biggest mass movement of the late twentieth-century, the international anti-war movement.'
The Soviet media is giving its usual widespread coverage of the peace movement in the West, for example portraying the Greenham Common women this week as 'victims of Western hypocrisy over human rights.'
The Soviet press is also praising the efforts of the New Zealand Government to ban nuclear armed warships and continuing the campaign to establish a nuclear free zone in Scandinavia.
The main thrust of the Soviet peace campaign this year, however, will be against the Strategic Defence Initiative. The influential Soviet commentator, Gennady Gerasimov, in the new year issue of Moskovski Novosti, said that 1986 would be 'the IYTP (International Year of Peace) against the SDI.'
A special commission to coordinate the International Year of Peace has been formed, including official representatives of the Soviet Government and party representatives from non-Government organisations such as the trade unions, the Soviet Peace Committee, the Women's Committee and the Young Communists League.
Demonstrations have already been planned for Moscow, Leningrad, and Volgograd, and a Bike for Peace rally will be held this summer with a core of 500 Russian cyclists heading from Kiev to Prague and then from Montreal to New York, hoping to attract thousands of local cyclists to join in the regional stages.
The Soviet Commission has also planned a co-ordinated attempt to put the Star Wars project at the top of the peace movement's agenda at each of the various international conferences to be held this year.
When the Geneva talks resume in a fortnight, a congress of intellectuals for peace will be held in Warsaw, followed a week later by a peace conference in Geneva itself organised by international non-Government organisations.
Invitations have been sent to women's groups throughout Western Europe to come to a 'peace school', a series of all expenses paid seminars designed to mobilise the women's movement more fully into the peace movement as a whole. In Moscow in September, there will be a further conference of artists for peace, and in October a heavy Soviet presence at the World Congress of Peace Supporters in Copenhagen.
This represents the most intensive peace campaign the Soviet Union has launched since the height of the Cold War in the early 1950s. Russian success in gaining support on international organisations like the World Peace Council then led to such groups being pilloried by Western governments as communist front organisations. This time the Soviet Union is spreading its net far more widely.
It is also planning a rather more politically orthodox campaign, looking at the centre and moderate conservative ground of Western opinion rather than relying on the peace movements alone. This for the Americans to stand by the letter of their treaties and commitments that have been reached.
It was at the Geneva summit that the new sophistication of the Soviet publicity machine was first seen, and this new co-ordinated approach to the peace campaign also points to the growing skills and self confidence of the propaganda departments.
As the UN's International Year of Peace goes on in step with the Geneva negotiations and the next summit in the United States, the Kremlin is convinced that the domestic pressures against Star Wars will continue to build throughout the West. It hopes that public opinion will raise to an unacceptable level the political price President Reagan's Republicans would have to pay to finance his dreams of SDI.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
253 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 3, 1986
PM's Westland pledge favours Brittan's line / Ministerial dispute continues over future of helicopter maker
BYLINE: By DAVID SIMPSON and JOHN CARVEL
LENGTH: 859 words
The Prime Minister yesterday delivered a judgment on the fate of Britain's ailing helicopter group, Westland, which left her two squabbling ministers, Trade and Industry Secretary, Mr Leon Brittan and Defence Secretary, Mr Michael Heseltine, each claiming to have won his case.
But the advantage appears now to lie in Mr Brittan's court, as Westland made clear that Mrs Thatcher's ruling has provided the support it wanted to continue to recommend to its shareholders the rescue package put up by the US-owned United Technologies, parent group of Sikorsky Helicopters, which the DTI favours.
Mr Heseltine, however, refused to concede defeat, and it was made clear that he believes that the Prime Minister has lent some backing at least to his alternative proposal for a European helicopter-making consortium by inserting a late qualification into the letter she sent yesterday to the Westland chairman, Sir John Cuckney.
In her reply to Sir John's letter of December 30, which had sought Downing Street recognition that Westland would continue to receive full British government support, even should Sikorsky take a minority stake in the company Mrs Thatcher made it clear that Westland's status would not be altered by an acceptance of the Sikorsky Plan.
The unremitting conflict between Mr Heseltine and Mr Brittan centres on one crucial paragraph in her letter, concerning the threat from the members of the European consortium to exclude Westland from future joint venture helicopter projects if it links with Sikorsky.
'The Government would wish to see Westland play a full part in existing and future European collaborative projects,' the Prime Minister wrote. 'Some of these are still at a very early stage and all of them require the agreement of the companies and governments - including HMG - concerned.
'In this connection, you should be aware of indications from European governments and companies that they currently take the view that a number of projects in which Westland are expecting to participate in cooperation with other European companies may be lost to Westland if the United Technologies/Fiat proposals are accepted.'
Mr Heseltine appears to believe that the injection of this qualification for which he campaigned late in the day, represents at worst a moral victory.
But the Westland and Brittan camps point out that the threat of a bar from European joint ventures was already explicit in the offer put forward by the European consortium, and that the rest of the Prime Minister's response were of greater substance.
'It is for you to asses the significance of these indications. But of course, British participation is itself an important element in the viability of European collaborative projects,' Mrs Thatcher wrote.
She went on: 'I can assure you that whichever of the two proposals currently under consideration the company choose to accept, the Government would continue to support Westland's wish to participate in these projects and would resist to the best of its ability attempts by others to discriminate against Westland.'
While both sides refused to budge from their mutual conviction that they had won the day, Downing Street sources were adamant that neither had come out ahead, and that the Prime Minister's letter remained strictly neutral between the rival offers.
Mrs Thatcher is believed to be irritated at being drawn yet again into a dispute which she has previously said should be left to Westland shareholders, and which may yet again demand her involvement.
Today, the Westland board meets to consider what to recommend to its shareholders in the light of Mrs Thatcher's response, and there is no doubt that it will reiterate its recommendation that the consortium scheme should be rejected, and the Sikorsky plan, which is also backed by Fiat of Italy, accepted.
The board and Mr Brittan are also expected to receive further backing for their case from Sikorsky itself. Mr Bill Paul, a senior executive of United Technologies, arrived in London yesterday, held a meeting with Westland and will meet the helicopter group's directors again today to discuss increasing the financial terms of the UT offer to better those put forward by the European consortium.
Mr Heseltine, on the other hand, does not yet seem prepared to allow the Westland recommendation even if it claims support from Mrs Thatcher, to go through unchallenged second time round, and will not only continue to press for the debate to be reopened at Cabinet level, but may even seek for the European consortium to improve its own terms.
At the same time, Westland, with the tacit support of the DTI, is expected to seek to further its own cause through retaliatory means against the exclusion threat by its potential European partners.
The main opponent to the Sikorsky merger is the French state helicopter group, Aerospaciale, which has indicated that it will withdraw contract work from Westland if the Sikorsky deal proceeds, but Westland has replied by suggesting that it in turn will cancel the sub-contracts it currently places with Aerospaciale if necessary.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
254 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 2, 1986
Books: Imperial leftovers / Review of 'Outposts' by Simon Winchester
BYLINE: By TERRY COLEMAN
LENGTH: 630 words
George V on his deathbed is reputed to have asked 'How is the Empire?' and then died. That was in 1936. Simon Winchester, during the course of his duties with the Sunday Times, asked himself the same question, and wrote a book.
The Outposts, some 200 islands - from Hong Kong and Gibraltar to the rock of Stoltenhoff and Junk Island - are what remains of the British Expire. The total population is now 5,248,728, though 5,120,000 live in Hong Kong alone, which will not be British for much longer. Over a period of three years Mr Winchester contrived to visit almost every remaining territory. It is a splendid idea, and he is generous enough to admit that it came from his agent, Anthony Sheil. It is an idea which only a journalist of the highest personal resource, and one with a legendary ability to tap to the full the resources of his mighty newspaper, could have carried through, and very well it is done.
The surprise is that there is still so much left. Gibraltar, Bermuda, Hong Kong, even the Falkland Islands since the war, are well enough known, as is the story of Mr Winchester's incarceration as a suspected spy during that war in the Argentine prison at Ushuaia, the most southerly town in the world. It is the little, obscure, unknown places which give us the best parts of this book.
This is because of the very nature of the author. Think of Empire and the mind goes to Jan Morris's moving and elegant trilogy, displaying everywhere a deep sense of history, and of place, and of the English spirit. Mr Winchester offers other things. He may now write mainly for a colour magazine, but he made his name in Northern Ireland and is essentially a hard reporter.
Now that is a damn fine thing to be, and nowhere is this better shown than in his account of his frustrated visit to Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. The story is up to a point familiar. The island was leased to the United States in 1967 for a base - fair enough. The 2,400 inhabitants were then exported to Mauritius or the Seychelles, 1,200 miles away, which is monstrous.
Mr Winchester asks the Foreign Office for permission to go there, but is refused. He gets there all the same in a small schooner and in the company of a young Australian woman. Some friendly American sailors in an ocean-going tug spot them, throw them cans of beer, and help them in. They are then apprehended by a British official, Marshal of the Supreme Court of the Indian Ocean Territory, who asks, quite angrily, 'Why did you disregard the instructions of Her Majesty's Government?'
This is all Gibert and Sullivan, and a God-given opportunity to any reporter, let alone one as good as Mr Winchester. Messages buzz back and forth between Diego Garcia and the Foreign Office, Mr Winchester is at first ordered away immediately but then allowed to stay one night for rest and repair, and that night is spent aboard the schooner which is all the time picked out by searchlights.
Next morning they are seen off, but not before they sail into the lagoon, around the USS Corpus Christi, an atomic submarine, and under the bows of the USS Proteus and the USS Lasalle, and within sight of 14 other American vessels. They might as well have given him a guided tour.
I write as one who has nothing against the American base, but everything against the British subterfuge with which it was established and the fraudulence which deported the inhabitants, and I an delighted to see it all sent up by Mr Winchester. He notes that, in a final act of meanness, the skipper of the American tug was stripped of command and fired for helping him.
So how is the Empire? 'Were the king to ask,' writes Mr Winchester, 'one might fairly reply, 'Lamentable, Your Majesty,' and be fairly right,'
Sad.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
255 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 2, 1986
Financial Notebook: When the going gets tough, the tough get going - but what about the weak links? / Changes in the British securities market
BYLINE: By HAMISH McRAE
LENGTH: 990 words
It is embarrassingly easy to predict now what 1986 will be remembered for in the City. For it is the year of 'big bang', the year in which the present trading system of the London Stock Exchange will be overthrown, and a new and imported system put in its place. But it will also be the year in which a new system of investor protection will be put in place, a system encompassing not just the securities market, but also the commodity markets, the life assurance business, pension funds, and quite possibly Lloyd's of London.
Both involve very large risks: the first that there simply will not be the demand for the products of the new securities market to justify the investment being made in it; the second that it will not work. We may know some of the answers to the first question, but it will be three or four years before we can make much of a judgment about the second.
When thinking about 'big bang' it is important to go back to basics. The stock market may seem a grand casino, where everyone makes a fortune for doing very little more than legalised gambling, but you have to remember that there is a motor which drives the whole merry-go-round. That motor is the demand for the financial services which the stock market, any stock market, provides.
Stock markets are merely mechanisms for allocating savings: drawing them in, parcelling them up into packages, distributing them into investments. It is exactly the same concept as that carried out by a bank or even a building society: money comes in from savers, it is packaged, and then it goes out to borrowers. The chappie in the middle gets paid for putting together the parcel.
So this year the British securities market moves from a cottage industry to a factory production line, from hand-crafted products to mass-produced ones, from batch processing to on-line transactions - describe it how you will. But the change will only work if there is more demand for the end product: securities market financing. Will that happen?
There are two reasons to expect that it will and one that it won't.
The first reason to expect a boost in demand is that the preferred method of international lending of the 1970s has fallen into disrepute. There is nothing wrong with the mechanism of the international bank loan, syndicated amongst many big banks. But the fact that the banks all lent too much money to the wrong counties has put a clamp on this type of financing. The banks can only gradually add to their international debt, because they have too much of it already.
It is into this breach that securities market products will step. In a nutshell banks cannot lend much more money even to good and credit-worthy customers, so the securities markets have to do so instead.
The second reason to suspect that demand for the products of firms involved in 'big-bang' will rise is that people are finding a new thirst for acquiring financial assets. You can see many examples of that in this country: in the response to privatisation, in the boom of other new issues, in the sales of unit trusts, in the expansion of pension schemes. But we are not unusual. In other countries there is a similar process under way.
Japanese savings are flooding into US securities. Germany's stock markets are at all-time record 'highs.' There is a similar boom in the US. Everyone wants to acquire financial market assets, be they individual shares, or government securities or institutional products like unit trusts.
As a result the manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers in the securities industry are making a bomb.
There is however one reason to believe that the demand may not necessarily go on climbing, or at least not by enough to take up all the new products which will come on offer in this year as the new securities factories come on stream.
This is that part of the boom in demand for the products is because those products themselves are booming. Because share prices, not just in Britain but world-wide are very high people want to buy more shares. It is the opposite of the general rule in consumer products, where the lower the price the more people buy. The higher share prices go the more people want to buy shares.
This curious twist of human nature explains the cyclical boom and bust phenomenon which has dominated financial markets at least back to the South Sea Bubble in 1720. To say that is not to predict that the current bubble will burst this year: merely to point out that if prices fall demand will fall too.
A sensible expectation would be for a hiccup in the rise of share prices. If that happens there is a danger that the securities industry will face a similar problem to, say, the home computer industry: sales are still quite high, but competition for business is so cut-throat that the weakest come under great pressure.
And if that happens, pressure will in turn build up on our new system of investor protection, a system which still is only just being put in place.
The purpose of investor protection is not to guarantee that each and every investor will make a fortune, nor even that each investor will make sensible investments. It is rather that he or she will not be sold products in an underhand way, or, as has happened in the commodity markets and Lloyd's, the practitioners will clear off with the money and live it up abroad.
In the early part of this year the party will continue. There are enough large takeover bids and new issues already in the pipeline to ensure that the people who run the securities markets will have a profitable few months. But the thing to look for in the months ahead is rather different. It is whether the new dealing mechanism, and the new controls on the City, look like working in bad times as well as good.
The test of any financial market system is the strength of its weakest link. And weak links snap when the general climate gets tougher.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
256 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 2, 1986
Nigeria announces tough new reforms
BYLINE: From PATRICK SMITH
LENGTH: 248 words
DATELINE: LAGOS
The Nigerian President, Mr Ibrahi Babangida, said yesterday that the military would not stay in power 'a day longer than is required.' At the end of his hour long 1986 budget speech, Mr Babangida announced the establishment of a political bureau to lead a national debate on the type of political system best suited to the country.
He also announced a series of tough economic reforms. Although the Government has broken off negotiations for a dollars 2.5 billion credit from the IMF, the 1986 budget incorporates many of the policy measures under negotiation with the fund previously.
These include the cutting of subsidies on domestic petroleum products - except kerosene - by 80 per cent, the privatisation of several state corporations, the rationalising of the import licensing and customs tariff system, as well as the adoption of 'a realistic exchange rate policy.'
During a recent national debate on the negotiations with the IMF, Nigerians came out strongly against a devaluation of the naira, although in the past two years it has depreciated by about 30 cents and is now almost at parity with the US dollar.
The budget projects a sharp fall in Nigeria's oil earnings in 1986 - down from an estimated dollars 11 billion in 1985 to about dollars 8.5 billion in 1986.
President Babangida said the tighter foreign exchange budget meant the Government would have to keep it's foreign debt repayments down to about 30 per cent of foreign earnings in 1986.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
257 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 2, 1986
Overseas News in Brief: Haiti reshuffle
BYLINE: From GREG CHAMBERLAIN
LENGTH: 75 words
Haiti's President-for-life, Jean-Claude Duvalier, has sacked his four most senior Cabinet ministers and banished them to diplomatic posts abroad in a bid to head off a US threat to cut aid to the regime.
The reshuffle, which also included the dismissal of the feared chief of police, Colonel Albert Pierre, came after a month of country-wide demonstrations set off when troops killed three schoolchildren in an anti-Government protest.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
258 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 2, 1986
Pentagon gives White House list of targets in Libya / US attitudes to the Gadafy regime
BYLINE: From MICHAEL WHITE
LENGTH: 666 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
The Reagan Administration is keeping up the psychological pressure on Colonel Gadafy of Libya, following last week's Palestinian terrorist attacks in Rome and Vienna, but speculation that the US will stage retalitorymilitary action is being discounted.
As the State Department issued a report which blamed the prime suspects - the Abu Nidal breakaway group - for 20 terrorist attacks in 1985 alone, mostly in Western Europe, the Pentagon confirmed it had responded to a White House request for a list of possible targets for military action inside Libya. Libyan complicity has been a dominant US theme.
However the Defence Department played down Cairo-sourced reports that Libya now had 2,000 Soviet military advisers and operational Sam-5 anti-aircraft missiles. If past performance is a guide, US action is more likely to be preceded by silence than by the more familiar sabre-rattling.
Since the double attack which cost 18 lives, including five American dead, the Administration has struck a series of confusing notes. It sought to reiterate its own and Israel's rights to retaliate against terrorism if they can identify the perpetrators, but was concerned not to deepen the Middle East's cycle of violence, thereby threatening the delicate peace process it is trying to sustain.
The confusion has been compounded by Christmas holidays which has meant that key officials have either been on holiday or 3,000 miles apart in Washington or with President Reagan in California. Differences of emphasis, real or apparent, have been amplified by news media short of alternative topics.
Officials are now saying that they never leaned on Israel not to repeat its politically disastrous retaliatory raid on the PLO HQ in Tunis last October this time round - though some clearly conveyed that message. Moreover they are taking comfort that Israel, by publicly naming the elusive Abu Nidal, has seemingly made it less likely that it will simply hit the PLO again. US policy remains, as the White House spokesman, Mr Larry Speakes, put it, that it is 'fine with us' if the culprits can be identified and attacked - but the key qualification is that identification.
Yesterday US television was again full of charts showing the location of units of the Mediterranean Sixth Fleet, the most important elements of which remain in harbour at Naples with only one unnamed frigate a practical 450 miles off the Libyan coast. The reality seems to be, in the words of one top White House official, that the US is 'not undertaking a military operation against Libya.'
However the uncertainty is said to be good for Colonel Gadafy, long a thorn in Washington's side. Some satisfaction was last night being taken at the uncharacteristic distinction being drawn between the Libyan news agency's views of the' heroic action' at the two airports last week and the Libyan Government's.
While the US has broken diplomatic ties with Tripoli and placed oil and other goods under embargo her European allies doing lucrative oil for exports trade have been reluctant to follow suit in the past. In addition there are 1,000 potential US hostages inside Libya. Nonetheless the State Department claims to detect greater European willingness to take steps to curb the terrorist plague.
Its report, published yesterday, presents the Abu Nidal group as probably 'the best organised and most effective' of Palestinian terrorist groups, responsible for more than 60 attacks since 1975. It stresses that the group - with 'several hundred members, often students organised in tight cells' - is increasingly concentrating on Western Europe.
Britain is picked on, it says, because the killing of British diplomats in Nidia and Greece in 1984 and the kidnapping of a journalist in Lebanon in 1985 could help achieve the release of group members imprisoned for the murder attempt on Israel's ambassador outside the Dorchester Hotel in 1982. That incident prompted Israel's march into Lebanon.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
259 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 2, 1986
Memos show Macmillan wit / Cabinet papers for 1955
BYLINE: By RICHARD NORTON-TAYLOR and SEUMAS MILNE
LENGTH: 324 words
Harold Macmillan's fertile and at times cynical mind was reflected in the many memos he sent to his Cabinet colleagues. One, dated August 21 1955, referred to the growing economic crisis. He called it 'dizzy with success' - borrowing the title from an article written by Stalin 25 years earlier.
'Our trouble is that there is too much money bidding for the labour available,' he said. There were two ways of dealing with the situation. 'The first (as in war, seige or socialism) is to restore physical controls, especially on imports, and regulate all production by a government plan. We tried this in 1945 to 51 and, if we want it again, the socialists had better do it. For they like it, since they really regard expansion and increase in wealth as rather immoral.
'The second way (which as Conservatives we must adopt) is to use a variety of methods.
Two months later Macmillan told his colleagues that one advantage of setting up an inquiry into security after the Burgess and Maclean revelations was that 'on the principle of Albert and the Lion, 'Sum one 'ad got to be summoned, so that was decided upon.' The public will feel that something is being inquired into.'
As Minister for Housing and Local Government, Macmillan was inundated with calls for action over pea soup fogs. 'For some reason or another, 'smog' has captured the imagination of the press and people,' he wrote in a memo.
'Ridiculous as it appears at first sight, I would suggest that we form a committee. Committees are the oriflamme of democracy' he went on ('oriflamme' being the ancient banner of the French monarchy).
Eventually, Parliament passed the Clean Air Act.
At the four-power summit held at Geneva in July the Prime Minister, Anthony Eden and Foreign Secretary, Harold Macmillan, were surprised to find the Soviet leaders, Bulganin and Khruschev, more worried about West German rearmament than US military encirclement.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
260 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 2, 1986
Steel offers plan to rescue industry / Liberal leader urges government incentives in 1986
LENGTH: 298 words
This was make or break year for British industry, Mr David Steel said yesterday in an open letter to Mr Leon Brittan, the Trade and Industry Secretary.
The Liberal leader put forward a 10-point plan which he described as the main elements of the Liberal-SDP Alliance industrial strategy.
Mr Steel said: 'I urge the Government to recognise the seriousness of Britain's industrial crisis and the threat which the dangerous decline in our manufacturing and productive industry now poses to our future as a stable and prosperous country.
'There could be no greater mistake in the coming year than complacently to represent as economic recovery a minor consumer boom, fuelled by inflationary wage increases and tax cuts, financed by the once-and-for-all sale of assets and fed by a flow of foreign imports. It is nothing of the kind, as over 3 million of our fellow citizens out of work can testify.'
Mr Steel said the Alliance believed that the role of government 'is to roll up the shirt sleeves and give industry as much practical help as possible - that is what our major European and Japanese competitors have been doing for years.'
His 10-point strategy comprised expansion in education and training to equip young people with industrial skill; incentives to develop new technology; new government involvement in academic research; encouragement for investment through lower interest rates; a pounds 2 billion investment in infrastructure renewal and new housing; a partnership between public and private finance with US-style industrial development bonds; a concerted export assistance programme; a commitment by government to buy British wherever possible; assistance to regional and local enterprise agencies; and incentives for profit-sharing schemes.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
261 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 2, 1986
Peace dominates message from superpower leaders / US Presdient Reagan and Soviet leader Gorbachev deliver simultaneous New Year's address
BYLINE: From MICHAEL WHITE and MARTIN WALKER
LENGTH: 1028 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON and MOSCOW
In an unprecedented television experiment, the leaders of the two superpowers last night addressed each other's people with simultaneous New Year messages in which the dominant theme was the quest for peace.
The five-minute pre-recorded broadcasts by President Reagan and the Soviet general secretary, Mr Mikhail Gorbachev, one tangible outcome of the Geneva summit, were heavier with symbolism than with substance.
Even so, they managed to underline fundamental disagreement over the Star Wars space research programme as well as profound differences in social and political values. Mr Reagan invoked God and the US constitution, Mr Gorbachev used history and the radical writings of the American novelist, John Steinbeck. One spoke of elections, the other of mandates.
As if to emphasise that US-Soviet relations in 1986 will not be governed by well-meaning sentiment alone, the television stand-off occurred as diplomatic exchanges revealed that the Russians are trying to persuade the White House to hold the next summit in September rather than in June the better, so Washington suspects, to harness US public opinion during an election run-up.
Both sides seemed to be acknowledging their determination to maintain the momentum achieved in Geneva. Mr Gorbachev called it 'a meaningful symbol' of mutual determination and the White House later described the first unrestricted appearance by a US president on Soviet television since Richard Nixon's in 1972 'an important event'. Its chief propagandist, the US information agency director, Mr Charles Wick, predicted that the Russian people would think it 'very reassuring that the President of the United States is a nice man' with reassuring body language.
President Reagan's five-minute speech was televised in full and fully and fairly translated into Russian. The President's words could be heard faintly in English, beneath the simultaneous translation.
Nothing new of substance emerged from either speech. Both men spoke of their desire for what Mr Reagan called 'peace, prosperity and good will' between their peoples and of Geneva as, in Mr Gorbachev's phrase, 'a hopeful sign of change.'
In their sharpest direct disagreement, the President predictably spoke of his Strategic Defence Initiative (Star Wars) as possibly meaning freedom for 'us all from the threat of nuclear destruction.' Equally inevitable was Mr Gorbachev's regret that 'it is senseless to seek greater security for oneself through new types of weapons' although, according to Mr Reagan, Russian scientists are working on the same ideas.
Infinitely more rewarding for public and professionals were the small symbolic details of the two broadcasts. Mr Reagan's was shown at 9 pm Moscow time to an estimated 70 million viewers, almost certainly a much better bargain than simultaneous transmission at 1 pm Washington time, squeezed in between the daytime soap operas on the big three networks and cable news television but facing endless competition of countless rival TV stations for those not busy doing something else.
US viewers had one advantage. Whereas Secretary Gorbachev's US broadcast was not shown domestically (the domestic version with references to 'military adventurism' was judged tougher in tone). Both were open to direct comparison at home. Most immediately striking was Mr Reagan's homely props, the flag, family photos and a seasonal poinsettia, contrasting with Mr Gorbachev's impersonal flock wallpaper background.
The translation of Mr Gorbachev's speech broadcast by the American networks contained one phrase with which a pedant might quibble. Mr Gorbachev said that the two superpowers 'can never be at war,' which was translated by the Americans as 'should never be at war.'
The Russians translated in full Mr Reagan's statement that a 'nuclear war can never be won, and must never be fought.'
Mr Reagan's Hollywood techniques on camera were reinforced by what commentators were quick to detect as his deep conviction that if only he could speak directly to the Russian people they would give up communism immediately. He stressed the supremacy of individualism to American belief, his own role as 'elected' representative and described how 'our democratic system is founded on the belief in the sanctity of human life' - freedom of speech, assembly, movement and worship.
If Mr Gorbachev was more the business-like chief executive he had ploys of his own.
The most challenging reference was the Soviet leaders' mention of 'A remarkable work of American literature' John Steinbeck's 1961 re-working of his greatest theme California Grapepickers, into a minor novel, The Winter of our Discontent.
'In that phrase let me substitute hope for discontent,' he said. Last night few literary Americans could readily be found who could claim to have read the book, but they instantly recognised the challenge: not Steinbeck of his last more conservative years, but the 1930's realism of a passionate critic of capitalism in the slump.
Meanwhile in the diplomatic undergrowth the State Department has revealed that its own proposal for a June summit in Washington, after the Tokyo Western economic summit and before the autumn campaign for the mid term elections, has informally been rejected by the veteran Soviet ambassador, Mr Dobryin.
The Russians are said to want to have more time to achieve substantial progress especially in the arms control field, but high officials here suspect them of wanting to exploit the coming US elections to obtain more flexibility from the White House.
It was not clear last night whether September or October would ever be acceptable to the US, in which case the summit will take place a year after Geneva in November, 1986. In an unrelated development yesterday officials reported that the Afghan Government has informally produced a timetable for the gradual withdrawal of the 120,000 Soviet troops in that country, subject to overall agreement.
The move came in UN-led exploratory talks due to resume in February, and are the latest hint that Mr Gorbachev may be seeking to end Moscow's costly involvement.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited
262 of 262 DOCUMENTS
The Guardian (London)
January 2, 1986
Westland force PM to show her hand / Ministerial dispute over future of helicopter company
BYLINE: By JOHN CARVEL and DAVID SIMPSON
LENGTH: 840 words
The Prime Minister will be forced today to declare her hand in the increasingly bitter feud between her Defence Secretary, Mr Michael Heseltine, and her Trade and Industry Secretary, Mr Leon Brittan, over the future of Westland, the struggling British helicopter manufacturer.
The battle has reached a new peak of intensity after Sir John Cuckney, the Westland chairman, sent a letter to Mrs Thatcher asking her to rule whether his company would be banned from future European joint ventures if it rejected Mr Heseltine's proposals for its participation in a European helicopter consortium.
On New Year's Eve Mr Brittan's officials are understood to have advised No. 10 to respond with a fairly bland reply that the Government would of course do its best to back Westland, whether it chose to accept the European deal or whether it linked up with the American Sikorsky consortium.
This triggered a day of vigorous Whitehall in-fighting. The Ministry of Defence believed at first that it was to be frozen out of the Prime Minister's decision. Its officials, however, mobilised support from the Foreign Office and the law officers' departments to ensure that Mrs Thatcher was given the widest possible briefing.
The Foreign Office is understood to have made it clear that future collaborative arrangements with other EEC countries would be much harder to put together if Westland does not back the draft agreement which Mr Heseltine arranged.
The law officers pointed out that the Prime Minister's letter to Sir John would be a semi-public document, in that it would be communicated to Westland shareholders. They argued that it was therefore essential that there be a full and fair disclosure of the relevant facts.
Mr Heseltine believes that this includes the likely unfavourable response of the European manufacturers, Augusta and Aerospatiale, to a Westland acceptance of the American deal.
The manoeuvering continued until about 8 pm on New Year's Eve, when the last boxes of advice were delivered to No. 10.
It was still not clear yesterday how Mrs Thatcher has resolved the issue, which has become increasingly embarrassing to her as her ministers continue the most public dispute in recent British government history. Her reply to Sir John will be delivered to Westland today.
Meanwhile, a team of Sikorsky representatives arrived in Britain yesterday. It was widely expected that they are about to amend the financial terms of their offer to Westland in order to match the European consortium package, which at present offers Westland a slightly larger cash injection.
The view from the Heseltine camp is that the Americans' keenness to stay in the race is proof of the misjudgment of Mr Brittan and the DTI officials, who argued that a deal had to be rushed through for fear that it might founder.
Mr Heseltine has been claiming that the Americans want Westland to gain a foothold in Europe and pressure the British Government to buy Sikorsky Black Hawk helicopters.
The MoD is also encouraging Whitehall to stop referring to Mr Heseltine's rival solution as the 'European' option. They say it should be described as a British bid by GEC and British Aerospace. The European participants have agreed to sell back their shares to British interests if an offer is forthcoming.
Meanwhile, Mr Brittan is reported to be incensed at Mr Heseltine's tactics.
While Mr Heseltine has campaigned uninterruptedly on behalf of the European scheme, which he personally devised, Mr Brittan has recently taken a back seat, although he strongly favours the rival offer put forward by the US group, United Technologies and Fiat of Italy.
Now, however, Mr Brittan is understood to have been angered by what he considers to be misleading information on the terms of the Sikorsky deal being disseminated by its opponents, and by the threats to exclude Westland from future European joint ventures.
He is expected to press Mrs Thatcher to make clear in her reply to Sir John that Westland should still be considered an independent UK company, even if Sikorsky and Fiat take a 29.9 per cent stake in it.
Mr Brittan believes it unacceptable that Westland should be barred from participating in particular in a possible joint venture to produce a European light battlefield helicopter which will not be competing directly with any Sikorsky product.
He is now expected to welcome a renewal of the debate about Westland's future at Cabinet level, despite his previous insistence that the matter should be left to the company's directors and shareholders.
Mr Heseltine wants instead for the issue to be discussed amongst senior ministers ahead of the next scheduled full Cabinet meeting on January 9, although he is understood to have received no encouragement from the Prime Minister.
The European consortium's response to Monday's request a single statement of its offer - previously communicated in five separate letters - is expected to be delivered to the helicopter group today.
LOAD-DATE: June 13, 2000
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
Copyright 1986 Guardian Newspapers Limited