A Good Read

Just finished reading a book on the Iran Hostage crisis - "Guests of the Ayatullah" by Mark Bowden. An excellent read.

Apart from the suffering of the hostages, what comes across in the book, is the fact these hostages where nothing but pawns in the bigger picture. They were used as bait by Khomeini and his cronies to get a control on power in Iran. Here they not only used the hostages but also the students who took the hostages. In a sense the students were hostages in their own country.

The other thing that comes across is how helpless the Carter Administration was. Carter lost his re-election bid because of the hostage crisis. The media and the opposition kept hounding him for inaction but no-one offered any credible solution. When he dared to take the risk of sending in a rescue mission fraught with risks up the wazoo... and failed; he was taken to task for it as well. After reading the book I felt the Carter administration was unfairly judged for their role in the Iran hostage crisis. As a matter of fact, you come away thinking they demonstrated extremely good judgement in the way it was handled.

24hr news cycles had just begun at the time. The medias desire to feed the news put enormous amounts of pressure on the administration. It gave the students a medium to make their revolution larger than it deserved credit for. This 24hr news cycles continue to this day. There seems to be a desire to discuss and report every minuscule dramatic event happening in the world. But no conclusions are derived... no lessons learned. The news channels use catchy phrases to describe the news ... "War on Terror!" is such an ambiguous phrase and is liberally applied to everything.

Then they move on to the next big thing.... We will never solve this terrorism issue until we stay on the subject and identify the underlying causes and give enough time to our policy makers to debate the issue and come up with appropriate solutions which will inevitably be much longer term implementation plans that will not suit the 24hr news cycles......

On Terms and Conditions

We just got back from a trip where we had some bad experiences with the Airline and our travel company. For every screwup they just kept pointing to their terms and conditions. Seat assignments not honored.... there is a term&condition (t&c) which says there is no guarantee that your seat requests will be honored. Meal requests not met there is a t&c for that.

Have you ever read any of these t&cs before signing up for a trip or a purchase in detail. You are told it is just legal stuff... cya for the companies till you are affected by it. These t&cs only get longer and longer.

So it got me wondering why can't I as a consumer have my own term and conditions under which I accept their service. For example: if I make a seat request and the airline cannot honor it I am notified about this right away & not at the airport. Else they bump me up to business class (free of charge of course!) or give me a partial refund.

I wonder why lawyers out there are not promoting consumer terms and conditions. We can also have boiler plate t&cs for the consumers which if not honored by these companies will not have the privilage of serving me :-)

Energy Independence

So Mr Bush finally is saying those magical words about Energy Independence with some vigor; at least in rhetoric. His state of the union spent some time discussing this. Some sections of the press have attribute this to mean that White House is finally agreeing to the public opinion on Global Warming. However I think White House policy on Energy Independence has nothing to do with Global Warming.

If one looks at the pressure on oil, it is clear that it is on the rise. China and India are competing with US for this. Though China and India consume significantly less than US, their rates of increase are significant. Also new oil finds are becoming fewer by the year. And last if one looks at the nations with any significant oil reserves, apart from Saudi Arabia and Iraq (long term relations of Iraq with US are uncertain), none of the other nations (including Iran, Russia, Venezuela) have anything like a friendly relationship with US. Also China is on the move where the US dreads to thread in places like Sudan, where China is building relations with these countries; completely ignoring their human rights record.

So it makes perfect sense for the US to start thinking Energy Independence. However the emphasis is on Bio-Diesel rather than other natural resources. I am not sure how this pans out. This would mean that US may start becoming more dependent on corn and soy imports from places like Brazil and Mexico and guess what; this would mean bringing more land under cultivation in places like Brazil, as growing soy becomes more lucrative, putting more pressure on already dwindling rain forests.

Therefore I think energy independence while good doesnot necessarily mean supportive policies on global warming. One needs to be careful at arriving at these conclusions. While the carbon footprint may reduce by switching from Oil to Bio-diesel I wonder if this takes land usage into account if one replaces Oil. There has to be a balance between Bio-Diesel and other forms of energy (Solar, Wind etc). Also what about policies in China and India, and how will US influence their policies, for if the US is serious about Global Warming then it needs to take a leadership role and influence policies in those countries for measures against Global Warming to be truely effective.

Mortality

These days human mortality is very much on my mind. Seeing the suffering of my dad is very difficult for me. He has always been a vision of strength for me, alway sure of what he wants and how he wants to get there. However ever since he was diagnosed with Cancer he has been a very different person.

People change when affected with cancer. Cancer is unlike anyother disease that I have encountered. Cancer is a disease of probabilities and uncertainities. It is a disease that requires decisions and asks hard questions. Is quality of life more important than length of life? I have grappled with these questions as I try and put myself in my dads shoes. There are no easy answers.

Human life is full of predicaments. We enter this world with a processor and an empty memory. But when we are ready to leave it the memory is full and unfortunately the dying processor is thriving on that memory! That is why I think an infant facing death is oblivious of this than an old man.

But unfortunately human life has a certain mortality associated with it. But why? Why is human life mortal.... I donot know. Maybe so that we can value it.

China makes moves

China is on the move! Two big moves in 2 weeks. First they convinced (or arm twisted?) North Korea to restart the six party talks. Now they have held a conference soliciting relations with the most ignored but resource endowed continent; Africa.

We can discuss North Korea separately. However the moves on Africa is interest according to me. It is interesting that China has chosen Africa at this time. America is caught up in a struggle in middle east. Pressure on natural resources is increasing day by day. The fight has begun. While American policy is to go after the top of list of countries endowed with natural resources (Saudi Arabia, Iraq), China seems to be approaching it differently. It is going after areas which might have good sources of these resources but are politically risky.

Africa is a continent engulfed with complexities. For America, exploitation of the resources in the continent, requires a compromise with its foreign policy principles of democracy. Also America is militarily caught up in another area of the world - Iraq and no matter what the rhetoric, that fight is also tied to the fact of ensuring resources for the future; it is just a different approach- the belief that democracy in these countries will make the countries strong allies of America in the future.

China on the other hand has no such scruples. It is purely interested in accessing the resources, the political situation in these countries are of minimal interest to it as far as it does not interfere with its original goal. So this conference in China. Where with promises of loans and debt relief, China is seen as a champion of the African nations. There is no talk of human rights abuses or the requirement of reforming the continent either in terms of economic reform or political reform (as would have been the case had America hosted such a conference). The African leadership is more than eager to therefore work with China as it can go on about its business and enrich themselves without any commitment to reforming their countries.

However I feel once America gets out of its Imbroglio in Iraq and if Africa delivers on its natural resources, the next foreign policy battle ground could be Africa.

Cancer and Me!

It seems like I have been surrounded by cancer of late! For the last two years I have had people close to me suffer with cancer and suffer because of it!

My wife had to suffer three people because of cancer. Both her parents have suffered cancer. She lost he father because of cancer (liver). Her mother is currently undergoing treatment for breast cancer. The third person she had to suffer is me and my emotions. I have tried to be supportive of her but I know I have been abusive rather than supportive. But I never really wanted to......

My father was also diagonized with oesphagal cancern. He has undergone surgery and treatment. But now it is upto faith and prayer.......

People change under pressure. I know I have but I hope I have changed for the better....

Knowing Faith

I have been a aethist all my life. Bowing to god only to please people I love. The last couple of years has taught me and made me think about faith.

Near and dear ones to me have suffered from various illnesses, including life threatening ones. Cancer is has been one of the main ones. Progress in science regarding Cancer has been incredible but not curable. If one were to talk to doctors about the curability of a particular treatment, they only speak in terms of statistics: "If one were to take this treatment then the probability of a 5yr life is 30% but if you are in the 30% then your probability is 100% if not it is 0%". What is one to make of these numbers?

This has what made me realize what is faith. Faith is the confidence that these numbers are true regarding you. It is the faith that you and your dear ones are in the 30% and not in the other 70%. This faith is contagious. If you are confident and exude it, your loved ones suffering from the illness can find the strength in them to fight their illnesses. Also it brings the best in you and gives you a peace of mind and not worry too much about what is not in your control. One needs to hope for the best and prepare for the worst.

Be optimistic always! One has nothing to lose.....

Bashing America.

Well it is too easy to bash America this week. Harriet Miers and Scooter Libbey. And Iraq of course!

However one must remind oneself that this country has a lot more to offer than its present state. If one were to look at the last week or for that matter events this year it is too easy to bash this countries policies. However one should really look at America from a historic perspective and things change.

One is very easily swayed by current events and extrapolate it. However if one were to lump all the negative things that this country has done and weigh it against the good things that have come out of this country; good outweigh the bad by a significant margin.

World Wars I and II were won decisively because of Americas entry. Cold war was won because of America. If one were to ask any average person in the world, not afflicted by any unrealistic passions, where he or she would like to be, the answer would be America. There is a reason for this. America offers opportunity for the ordinary person. Even today. Until this stops America will keep providing the inspiration.

Even countries like India and China, the supposed nations of the future, are using American economic policies. There is a lot to be learned from this country and a lot of admire about it. This country inspite of all its individual leaders will prevail because its individual people have a voice unlike any other nation on the face of the earth.

This country will prevail and will do so in conjunction with countries like China and India because this country is the true place of individual expression where any person can succeed. Unlike India and China where decades/centuries of cultural inertia exists, this country lives in the present!

Iraq, Katrina and No Tax Increase!

Well the deficit is on the rise again. I am surprised that Bush is still adamant about not raising taxes. I wonder how this determination of Bush will impact the future of this country.

Iraq, while avoidable, is a mistake United States will have to live with. This means bearing fiscal responsibility for the rebuilding of Iraq. This is being reflected in the increased budget deficits. Apart from the fiscal responsibility, of course, there is the emotional side which I will not want to touch on.

Katrina, while unavoidable, reflects years of government neglect and poor disaster planning. So now to make up for the poor planning the federal government and congress are bending backwards; making promises of enormous federal aide to rebuild the area. While the area definitely needs rebuilding, the federal deficit while already high is getter higher.

There in come the taxes. Why is the government not increasing the taxes. While I do think increasing the taxes will probably have a small negative impact on the economic growth in the short term, in the longer term the impact will be smaller. Coupled with the increased demand on oil and the increased deficits I wonder if the United States is setting itself up for a double whammy in the coming years. Already spending on education is being impacted (this will have a small short term effect but a huge long term effect especially considering the competition in technology development coming from China and India)

Dependence on oil is only getting worse in this country. The government seems uninterested in doing anything other than making half hearted attempts at reducing dependence on this resource. Half hearted attempts range from no initiatives being made for mass public transport (which will mean increase in taxes again) and increase in gas mileage from automobiles.

Overall I somehow feel this determination not to increase taxes given the situation this country is, is like ignoring a health symptom which can eventually being a major cause for surgery which may threaten the life of the individual!

An Event goes Unnoticed in America!

Well this is the not the first time this has happened nor will it be the last. However the visit by the highest elected official from the worlds largest democracy to the worlds oldest one went largely unnoticed by the American media.

I always find it amazing about how localized the media coverage is in America. Even though America was instrumental in the globalization of the economy, the American media are mostly unaffected by this. The news coverage on countries outside the United States is sparing at best. There has to be a explosion or a tsunami for the media to really report it and even then they do a poor job of this.

Even respected magazines like Newsweek have largely ignored this event. Instead I find articles on Raven (the kid who appeared on Cosby) and why she is not celebrity even though she is a star!!!

International coverage is highly biased. America still has a fascination with Britain. The coverage that a few years back when Lady Diana and Mother Teresa passed away was proof enough. Now with the terrorist attacks in London and Eygpt, the media coverage is highly biased. We had to listen to a hour by hour account on the happening in London, but the coverage on Eygpt was very sparse. I know it is probably difficult to get enough information from Eygpt than in London but isn't investigative journalism supposed to thrive in areas like Eygpt or has journalism lost its edge.

So coming back to the topic I started out on. The PM of India visited United States and the event went largely unnoticed. When Mr. Bush visits India later this year I wonder how the media coverage will be!

This large ignorance of the world by the American media and therefore the American public will I fear will play a large part in the eventual downfall of the American power. After all if the American public are not aware of the going on in the world outside then it is bound to take them by suprise (there is a reason why software jobs are headed to India and it is not all cost!)

Terrorist Attacks in London

I and my wife have just been to London on vacation over a month ago. It is indeed sad and devastating to see the tragic events in London.

Our experience in London was one of the best we have had. It is a city full of life. It is melting pot of different cultures. London plays an important part in almost every corner of the world due to British history. People have different feelings about London because of the effect of the British Empire. But a visit to London and the Londoners win you over. A visit to Covent Garden is enough among other thing.

In light of this it was indeed very devastating to hear the news today. Our deepest sympathies go to the Londoners who were victims of this callous act.

So that brings us to the point what do we do about it. When the United States went after the Taliban/Al-Queda in Afghanistan, I felt they were fully justified. I wished they had stayed focused and completed the task. However I feel US got a little of cold feet of tracking down Bin-Laden, considering the backlash from the Islamic world. So instead they went after their second priority Saddam, thinking that they had crippled Bin-Laden. However the bomb blasts in Spain should have been warning enough. But the United States was already engaged with Iraq by that time so it was too late. So the US moved on. Now this.

So I wonder what it will take for the US to refocus on getting Bin-Laden. That is the key, I feel. Till he is alive he will always be a motivating factor for these terrorists. Lets get into Pakistan and get him even if this Pak government doesnot cooperate before more innocent people die! Better him than me!

However I want to conclude this essay with my deepest sympathies to the loss suffered by the individual Londoners. Sometimes we tend to roll up the casualties into statistcs, but this is no statistic to the people who have lost their near and dear ones.

We have to shame them into helping us!

Yep... that is a dialog I heard on the Movie " Hotel Rwanda" and it is the truth.

This is the state of affairs of the western world, I am afaird. It was pathetic that the western world didnot stop the genocide in Rwanda (and I doubt they will stop one in any part of Africa). I would also recommend one to read the book by Philip Gourevitch (We Wish to Inform You That Tomorrow We Will be Killed With Our Families: Stories from Rwanda) if one wants to really hate what the west did in Rwanda.

Foreign Policy is unfortunately dictated by the countries own selfish interests (sometimes I feel rightly so). However the loser in this is the country that is at the receiving end of this like Rwanda. The only realy remedy for this is a strong, unfettered UN force. However the UN today is only shackled by the Western Powers.

If the balance of power shifts from West to East, unfortunately it will not change any of the responsiveness of the UN forces, it will only shift the priorities. The only real way to shift this is to have a completely independent UN Force. Even this needs to be thought through as one needs to ensure that a appropriate response from this independent UN Force is consistently sought.

The only real thought I would like to leave one with this essay is how can humans find this level of evil in them to cause suffering for fellow humans!

An Interesting read on perception of Hinduism in America

M. Vijaykar

Remembering World War II

Today was the 60th Anniversary for the completion of the European version of World War II. A lot things come of mind to write about this: - First I would like to see if the world celebrates the 60th Anniversary of the completion of the Pacific version of World War II. This will indicate if this was really a western war or not (atleast as far as reminiscing the war is concerned). The only real dominant eastern power involved in the war was Japan, otherwise this was really a western world war. All the eastern countries involved in the war were really involved as they were colonies of the western powers. - Second thing I would be interested in would be how the current western powers acknowledge the eastern nations contributions to the war. While I suspect this to be a minimum I would atleast expect some verbal acknowledgement from someone like Tony Blair, current leader of the dominant western power at the time. The only article I have seen is on BBC (See Link at Bottom of the Article) At the same time I don't want to understate the contributions of the western powers. A lot of people fought bravely during this time. Western leaders in America and Britain correctly assessed the negative impact Hitler would have had and made courageous decisions to win this war. Not only that, and I feel, they made more courageous decisions in post war planning (no doubt considering the impact Russia would have had). It is indeed a day to celebrate and remember the contributions made by countless people to the state of the world today. My hats off to them and I bow my head to them in respect. Link:http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/4521947.stm

Health Issues Take 2

Well I was so little informed when I wrote the last blog on Health. Since then I read the book on Genome. This is a very fascinating book I would readily recommend to anyone who wants to understand the Human Genome, get an idea how it has evolved and what it does as well as the potential in terms of the potential cures that may be possible for some of the human diseases.

There is so much I learned after reading the book that it would be almost impossible to cover this in the blog. Also at the same time if I do attempt at writing something along these lines it would reveal how ignorant I am about this subject. So I will not write what I learned about the genome but rather the impression it left on me.

First and foremost I want to convey the difficult and tedious history of how the genome was discovered. It seems to me like it is like first finding a book, one of a kind, in a library which has no catalogue of billions of book. Then discovering that the book has been written in a language unknown to anyone, trying to learn the language. Then after understanding the language we have been able to read the book but now we don't what the books message is. We know only some part of the message. So that is where we are!

Second thing I want to convey is the potential this understanding of the genome has on human diseases and other human concerns like aging. Manipulating genes though a major ethical concern could make major revolutions in cures possible. I would recommend the funding of such research. Some of the debate on the gene therapy I feel is hypocritical. Lets take the example of genetically altered seeds (agriculture). Humans have been doing genetically alteration of different agricultural plants since prehistoric times (Actually I would argue agriculture is nothing but genetic alteration). However now suddenly genetic altered agriculture is suddenly an issue. I agree certain precautions should be taken but other than that I feel that the current debate is just unjust!

Third thing I want to convey is my ignorance. This subject is so vast and complex that I have to admit my incomprehensibility. I have so many questions and I will and try and get an answer to this. One good website I encountered is the webpage on the NIH Website: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/omim . This is a wonderful website that lists all the known diseases due to mutations in genes on certain chromosome. Remember always: GENES DON'T CAUSE DISEASES. It is the issues due to mutation of the genes that cause the diseases.

Apart from this there are other issues that have left an imprint on me. However I don't want to cover these as these are trivial compared to the above three. I will try and update the blog as and when I read more about this subject.

Health Issues

Health has been a thought, these past few months, on my mind. We have personally faced the ugly face of bad health this past year. This has got me thinking why there seems to be a prevalence of "incurable" diseases in the world today. Was it always like this in the past.

I believe humankinds' war against disease has always been part of our history. We have always tried to conquer the germs. But so far I would say that the battle is far from won (by either side). For every germ and disease that is conquered there seems to be a more challenging disease ahead.

I think there are two types of diseases. One is caused by humankinds fight with the germs. AIDs, Influenza, Cancer (Maybe) fall into this category. Here the war is against another living organism which can mutate rather rapidly defeating our various treatment options. It is really a survival of the fitest kind of struggle. For this war sometimes humans have the upper hand and some times the viruses. Here we are dependent on the scientific brains to come up various vaccines to protect us against these.

The other type of disease is what are called chronic diseases like heart disease, diabetes etc. Here the battle I feel is with ourselves. I feel that these diseases represent what is a gap in technological evoluation and the human evolution. Human ingenuity has significantly improved our lives. For example transportation has significantly improved travel but has also reduced physical exercise for humans. The inability of the human body to cope with these technological advances especially the pace of these advances I feel has resulted in chronic diseases. We can definitely improve our chances of fighting these diseases by maintaining a level of physical activity and healthy diet to over come the gap between this pace of technological advance and the pace of evolution.

Four More Years

So the verdict is in... and its four more years. Only this time it is with a mandate! Mr. Bush has made it clear that he will reach out to people who support his ideas! So what will 4 more years look like? I believe this will be more divisive than any other presidency this country has seen. All the so-called reforms that could not be passed in the first four years will be implemented.

First will be the continued retreat on environmental reforms. Drilling in Alaska will be pursued with determination. Emissions standards will be degraded. Second will be the social security reform. By giving control of the social security to the people while in some ways good, I believe in the end will only be detrimental. Investing in todays global market requires some understanding of the global markets. If the common Joe takes over this I fear we will see a problem with retirement savings being badly mismanaged.

Third is the foreign policy. This will be continued push for the American Hegemony in the Middle East. Policies to "impose" democracy in various unfriendly states in Middle East will be continued. After Iraq, I believe it will be Iran and Syria's turn. While I donot think there will be an allout war in either of these countries, atleast not while US is engaged in Iraq, there will be significant international pressure brought to bear on these countries. However countries like Saudi, Egypt etc whose governments are on friendly terms with the US will basically be allowed to govern without any major changes though we might hear reform rhetoric once in a while. Also Israel will be essentially allowed a free hand to conduct its policy in the region (The death of Yaseer Arafat should it happen will probably be to Israels advantage in the short term, but that is the subject of whole new topic). However I feel while the US gets bogged down in the Iraq, the next threat to US hegemony is probably taking shape in the form of China and to a lesser extent India. But I donot think the next four years will see any new strategy towards these countries other than more of the same. US will rudely awaken one day to the new reality and it will probably occur in the next decade.

The last will be the tax reform. Everytime some one has touched the tax code it has only got more complicated. So we will see what Bush does. But one thing is sure, if you are rich (earn more than $200K/yr) relax you will definitely stand to benefit.

So that is my prediction. There are going to be record number to protest rallies in the capital of US. More truths about the Iraq campaign will come to light. Some of the administrations moderates will quit (Colin Powell), the neocons will take center stage. In the republican party itself there will be a fight between the neocons and the conservatives. And I have not even touched the so called moral values; abortion rights etc... So let the games begin.

The World of Nuclear Weapons: A Response

RESPONSE TO THE NEW YORK TIMES EDITORIAL "The World of Nuclear Weapons" (See Next Post to read the article)

Dear Editor:

The Nuclear Weapons issue is a very complicated issue. While the aspect of the threat this poses to the United States is quite well captured in the article, what the article doesnot explain is some of the complexity behind the reasons why each of these states try to acquire this technology.

The reasons for North Korea to acquire nuclear weapons is completely different from the reason for Iran to acquire them. Similarly the reason India acquired this technology is very different from why Pakistan exploded theirs. Regional power struggle issues are in some cases the drivers for these countries to acquire nuclear weapons.

US policy, I feel, focuses mainly on the threat these weapons pose to US. While this is a valid concern it only focuses on one aspect of the issue. There seems no efforts by current US administration to satisfy other legitimate concerns of these states. Also in the case of Iran and North Korea, Nuclear Weapons issue is, but one issue, part of a complex relationship with the US that needs to be addressed by this countries policy towards these countries.

The threat posed by terrorists acquiring these weapons is another aspect of this. Here fits Russia, Pakistan and other countries which possess this technology but donot have enough controls in place to ensure that these weapons donot fall into the wrong hands.

Unfortunately since 9/11 and the "with us or against us" rhetoric some of the complexity of these issues have been couched in highly simplistic terms without addressing the underlying problems.

EDITORIAL PUBLISHED IN NEW YORK TIMES
A World of Nuclear Dangers

Published: September 19, 2004

The cold war generation grew up worrying about the bomb, the Russians and World War III. Today's nuclear nightmares are more varied, but no less scary. The list of nuclear-armed states is lengthening alarmingly, and each new entry increases the chances that some nasty regional war could turn nuclear. Nuclear terrorism has emerged as a terrifying new threat. Russia has huge, poorly guarded stockpiles of nuclear bomb fuel and there is a small but increasing possibility that its decaying early warning system could trigger an accidental launch.
President Bush often says he means to halt the nuclear arms programs of North Korea and Iran, although he has yet to produce any workable plans for doing so. In February, he rightly called for tighter controls over nuclear fuel processing, used by several countries to produce bomb ingredients.

As a senator and a candidate, John Kerry has offered constructive proposals addressing almost every aspect of current nuclear dangers. While Mr. Bush has tended to focus narrowly on rogue states like North Korea and Iran, Mr. Kerry wisely favors a more comprehensive approach that would combine crisis diplomacy on these two priority cases with accelerated efforts to protect Russian stockpiles. The North Korean and Iranian nuclear programs are at the top of the nation's agenda. But it is disingenuous to ignore the fact that 95 percent of the nuclear bombs and most of the nuclear weapons fuel are in the hands of Russia and the United States.

Mr. Kerry would also break with Bush policies that unintentionally encourage nuclear proliferation, like the Strangelovian plans for research on unneeded new nuclear weapons.
India and Pakistan tested their first nuclear bombs in 1998. North Korea is close, if not already there. Iran is not very far behind. In the Middle East, the Indian subcontinent and the Korean peninsula, an escalation of conventional conflict into nuclear war has to be treated as a realistic possibility.

The steady spread of these weapons also increases the risks of backdoor sales of nuclear technology, as the worldwide arms bazaar run by A. Q. Khan of Pakistan so chillingly demonstrated. This creeping proliferation has meant the dispersal of nuclear bomb ingredients like highly enriched uranium and plutonium into countries with poor governance, uncertain stability and corrupt officials. That makes it easier for terrorists to acquire such material and try to fashion usable nuclear bombs.

Mr. Bush once lumped Iraq, Iran and North Korea together as an "axis of evil." But his decision to invade Iraq limited the diplomatic and military tools left available to influence North Korea and Iran - which were undoubtedly taught by the Iraq experience that the best protection against a pre-emptive strike is a nuclear arsenal.

In both cases, precious time has been lost while the administration has followed largely unproductive diplomatic strategies. Mr. Bush now wants to ask the United Nations Security Council to impose sanctions on Iran. But many Council members, including major European allies, are not ready to do so. On North Korea, the administration has insisted on discussions including Russia, China, Japan and South Korea as well as North Korea and the United States. These have made no discernible progress, in part because Washington waited until this summer to put its first serious negotiating proposal on the table. With the talks stalled, North Korea has all the time it needs to reprocess its plutonium into several nuclear bombs.

Mr. Kerry would try to jump-start the North Korea talks with a comprehensive new American proposal. He would, like Mr. Bush, insist that Iran renounce all domestic processing of nuclear fuel while promising that it could count on access to reliable imported supplies of civilian reactor fuel in return. Any distinction between the two candidates on Iran rests on Mr. Kerry's contention that he could better line up European support.

If there is still time to dissuade these two countries from going nuclear, there isn't much. North Korea may already have assembled test devices. Iran may soon have all the technology and raw materials needed to proceed. Still, the international community should explore every avenue to persuade both countries that it is not in their best interest to build nuclear weapons. In exchange for a verifiable dismantling of their nuclear programs, Washington and other governments ought to be willing to offer substantial economic, diplomatic and security concessions. If that fails to produce results, international pressure will have to be substantially ratcheted up. Further months of stalemate while nuclear fuel processing work continues is not an acceptable option.

There is nothing secret anymore about how to process uranium or plutonium to the purity needed for bomb-making, nor is it all that hard to acquire the raw ingredients. And every nuclear wannabe has now learned how to disguise the early phases of a nuclear weapons effort as part of a civilian nuclear energy program, a trick pioneered decades ago by India and most recently employed by Iran. Unfortunately, the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty was explicitly intended to encourage such power programs, making it much harder to fend off the emergence of new nuclear weapons states. Obviously, the treaty needs to be toughened.

Mr. Bush has rightly called on other countries to deny nuclear-related exports to any nation that refuses to forgo such fuel processing plants. He should accelerate the process by calling on the four other main nuclear exporting countries to join Washington in an immediate ban.
It is also vital to extend the reach of the nonproliferation treaty with a proposed new fissile materials agreement. Senator Kerry strongly supports this and President Bush says he supports it too, but his administration recently undermined the treaty talks by announcing, perversely, that Washington would insist that the agreement contain no provisions for verification or inspections.

Although the United States and Russia have deactivated thousands of nuclear warheads since the end of the cold war, tens of thousands remain activated or sitting in stockpiles where they can be quickly reassembled. The arms reduction agreement signed by President Bush and President Vladimir Putin in 2002 calls for most of these warheads to be deactivated by 2012, but no reductions are required sooner than that and many of the deactivated warheads will still be retained in stockpiles. America's stored and deactivated weapons are well secured, but many of Russia's are not. In addition, Russia's poorly maintained launch command and early warning systems may be dangerously degrading. At some point, they might conceivably become vulnerable to terrorists. Well over a thousand warheads on each side remain on hair-trigger alert.

Washington is helping Russia upgrade its storage security, but at such a slow rate that hundreds of tons of highly enriched uranium and plutonium will be lying around for many years. Every ton of highly enriched uranium can be used to make more than 100 nuclear bombs. A ton of plutonium can go even further.

The answer is to sharply increase funding for the broad range of American programs intended to secure this material and reduce or eliminate other threats from cold war weapons. This is the most cost-effective defense spending in the federal budget. A bipartisan commission in 2001 recommended tripling spending for these programs, but the Bush administration has failed to follow through. Senator Kerry proposes a significant increase aimed at securing all of Russia's loose bomb fuel in four years.

While Mr. Bush and Mr. Kerry seem to agree on many nuclear proliferation issues, the difference lies in their approach to international problems. Voters will have to decide whether Mr. Kerry's emphasis on diplomacy and international cooperation is the best way to keep a lid on these nuclear threats, or whether Mr. Bush's more unilateral approach to foreign affairs is better. There is no graver subject for their consideration this election year.

A Movie and A Book

This weekend I watched a movie; "Fahrenheit 9-11" and read a book by Robert McNamara; "In Retrospect".

Both have a lot of relevance to what is happening in the world today. The movie while looking at the recent events, does not offer any solutions but rather wants to convey a kind of shock value using some dramatics. I felt the movie could have been made much better as this is a very important topic. However I think Michael Moore focuses too much on the dramatics rather than focus and research the topics at hand.

For example the scene where in he is standing outside the Senate Building asking Senators to sign up their kids for the war. Now this is pure drame; how can a Senator (or for that matter anyone) commit their adult kids. That is something the kids should decide for themselves. However this has a dramatic effect and nothing else.

Also when talking about families who have lost kids in Iraq, he again focuses on one family from Flint Michigan. He doesnot talk to any of the other families. When he talks to people who have lost dear ones in the 9-11 attack again he only talks to one person. No different perspectives are given or additional families are interviewed.

He doesnot cover the search for the WMD or the intelligence issues or how the Bush Administration has changed its message on Iraq over time. So in a way the movie defeats itself as it focuses too much on drama rather than the message. I would classify the movie as a documentary drama.

The book on the other hand is invaluable. It offers a history of how America got involved in Vietnam by one of the key members of the cabinet at the time; Robert McNamara. It shows how intelligent people, because of the circumstances, make decisions without analyzing data or questioning the underlying assumptions. This book should be necessary reading for everyone interested in the Iraq war. The chapter on the lessons from the Vietnam war is just compelling. It is amazing that if one were to ignore that the book is on the Vietnam war one would easily mistake it for the Iraq war. The lessons listed in the book, apparently have not been learned and assimiliated yet by the US Government for over 30years!