Army Secretary Resigns
Chief Forced Out Over Walter Reed Scandal; Bush Vows New Probe
By Michael Abramowitz and Steve Vogel
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, March 3, 2007; A01

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates yesterday fired the Army secretary and President Bush vowed to investigate allegations of substandard treatment of wounded soldiers as his administration scrambled to contain fallout from the scandal over squalid housing and bureaucratic delays in outpatient care at Walter Reed Army Medical Center.

The Army named Maj. Gen. Eric B. Schoomaker as the new commander for Walter Reed only a day after picking Lt. Gen. Kevin C. Kiley, who had previously commanded the medical center, as the temporary chief. Kiley's selection had angered soldiers and family groups -- and more importantly, Gates -- because of their belief that he had been aware of problems at the hospital and done little to address them. Kiley is the current Army surgeon general.

Gates made little secret of his dismay when he appeared before reporters yesterday to announce the resignation of Army Secretary Francis J. Harvey. Pentagon officials indicated that Harvey was forced to resign because Gates was angry with how the Army handled allegations of poor care detailed in a series of Washington Post stories. The facility's commander, Maj. Gen. George W. Weightman, was dismissed this week, and a captain and several lower-level soldiers were reassigned.

"I am disappointed that some in the Army have not adequately appreciated the seriousness of the situation pertaining to outpatient care at Walter Reed," Gates said. "Some have shown too much defensiveness and have not shown enough focus on digging into and addressing the problems."

Later, in an interview, an emotional Harvey appeared both apologetic and defensive. "It's unexcusable to have soldiers in that type of building," he said, explaining why he resigned.

But he also said the Post stories lacked balance. "Where's the other side of the story?" he asked, his voice rising. "Two articles in your paper have ruined the career of General Weightman, who is a very decent man, and then a captain . . . and the secretary of the Army. If that satisfies the populace, maybe this will stop further dismissals."

In a sign of the seriousness with which Bush takes the situation, the White House announced that he will soon name a commission to look into whether there are similar problems at other military and veterans hospitals. Administration officials took the unusual step of releasing early the text of Bush's regular Saturday radio address, in which the president will vow to ensure that the government meets the physical and mental health needs of soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.

"Most of the people working at Walter Reed are dedicated professionals," Bush will say, according to the text. "Yet some of our troops at Walter Reed have experienced bureaucratic delays and living conditions that are less than they deserve. This is unacceptable to me, it is unacceptable to our country, and it's not going to continue."

Taken together, the developments yesterday highlighted the anger at the highest levels of the administration over the problems at Walter Reed, as well as the political danger for the White House. Veterans groups remain among the few strong supporters of the war and have been an important part of the president's political base, yet they -- along with military families -- have been outraged since the problems first became public two weeks ago.

Joe Davis, a spokesman for the Veterans of Foreign Wars, said that the reports had angered members across the country and that the group hopes Vice President Cheney will address the issue when he speaks to its legislative conference Monday. "Nobody would believe the military would do this to their wounded," Davis said. "We want accountability."

Democrats in Congress, meanwhile, have strongly denounced the administration for what they call insufficient attention to the needs of returning soldiers. At least two committees are mobilizing to investigate the Walter Reed situation. The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform issued a subpoena yesterday to compel Weightman to testify at a congressional hearing Monday.

The committee also released an internal Army memorandum reportedly written last September in which the Walter Reed garrison commander, Col. Peter Garibaldi, warned Weightman that "patient care services are at risk of mission failure" because of staff shortages brought on by privatization of the hospital's support workforce.

Rep. James P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.), a member of the House Appropriations Defense Subcommittee and a close ally of leading war critic Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.), said Bush's new commission is too little too late. "He's the executive," Moran said. "This has been six years, and now six years later, after an awful lot of neglect, he's going to get around to putting a commission together, a study to tell him what to do. . . . I think he's feeling politically desperate."

White House officials said politics played no role in their decision to form the commission, saying that Bush is genuinely outraged by the conditions at Walter Reed and that he learned about them from the recent news reports. "Once the Walter Reed stories ran, there was a collective feeling in the building, and certainly from the president, that whatever reasons or excuses, it was unacceptable," said Tony Fratto, deputy White House press secretary.

Eleven national volunteer organizations that help the wounded were called to the White House to meet with Bush on Wednesday, a meeting that White House officials said was planned before the Walter Reed stories broke. Cindy McGrew, founder of Operation Second Chance, a Maryland-based group that deals primarily with the wounded at Walter Reed, attended and said the "president wants to do all he can to help."

But the director of another organization, who asked not to be identified so as not to anger the administration, called the event a "missed opportunity to ask people who have day-to-day interaction with the wounded to provide insight into how to fix this situation."

Anthony J. Principi, who served Bush as his first secretary of veterans affairs, said he was not sure Walter Reed is a political problem for the president but indicated that veterans groups are watching the situation carefully. "Veterans organizations have been very supportive of the president -- they respect and admire that he is stepping out on the issue and will hold people accountable. The president needs their support," he said.

The new commander for Walter Reed is Schoomaker, 58, currently commander of the U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command at Fort Detrick, Md., home to biological weapon defense research. He is the younger brother of Gen. Peter J. Schoomaker, the Army chief of staff.

It appears he has his work cut out for him. Yesterday, soldiers living in Building 18, the site of the worst problems, were told to pack their things so that Walter Reed could properly renovate the dank structure besieged by mold, leaks and rot. Some of the wounded were moved to another building on the post, and others were driven to a hotel in Silver Spring.

One soldier who had been living in Building 18 for 16 months, waiting to be treated for back problems, was told to report to barracks in Fort Meade, Md., according to his father. The soldier arrived at Fort Meade yesterday afternoon with his gear but was unable to move into his new accommodations -- the building had no elevator, and the soldier could not climb the stairs.

Staff writers Anne Hull, Dana Priest and Ann Scott Tyson contributed to this report.

Post a Comment

March 2, 2007
Op-Ed Columnist
The Silence That Kills

By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
On Feb. 20, The A.P. reported from Afghanistan that a suicide attacker disguised as a health worker blew himself up near “a crowd of about 150 people who had gathered for a ribbon-cutting ceremony to open an emergency ward at the main government hospital in the city of Khost.” A few days later, at a Baghdad college, a female Sunni suicide bomber blew herself up amid students who were ready to sit for exams, killing 40 people.

Stop and think for a moment how sick this is. Then stop for another moment and listen to the silence. The Bush team is mute. It says nothing, because it has no moral authority. No one would listen. Mr. Bush is losing a P.R. war to people who blow up emergency wards. Europeans are mute, lost in their delusion that this is all George Bush’s and Tony Blair’s fault.

But worst of all, Muslims, the very people whose future is being killed, are also mute. No surge can work in Iraq unless we have a “moral surge,” a counternihilism strategy that delegitimizes suicide bombers. The most important restraints are cultural, societal and religious. It takes a village — but the Arab-Muslim village today is largely silent. The best are indifferent or intimidated; the worst quietly applaud the Sunnis who kill Shiites.

Nobody in the Arab world “has the guts to say that what is happening in Iraq is wrong — that killing schoolkids is wrong,” said Mamoun Fandy, director of the Middle East program at the International Institute for Strategic Studies. “People somehow think that killing Iraqis is good because it will stick it to the Americans, so Arabs are undermining the American project in Iraq by killing themselves.”

The world worries about highly enriched uranium, but “the real danger is highly enriched Islam,” Mr. Fandy added. That is, “highly enriched Sunnism” and “highly enriched Shiism” that eats away at the Muslim state, the way Hezbollah is trying to do in Lebanon or the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt or Al Qaeda everywhere.

One result: there’s no legitimate, decent, accepted source of Arab-Muslim authority today, no center of gravity “for people to anchor their souls in,” Mr. Fandy said. In this welter of confusion, the suicide bombers go uncondemned or subtly extolled.

Arab nationalist media like Al Jazeera “practically tell bin Laden and his followers, ‘Bravo,’ ” Mr. Fandy said. “The message sent to bin Laden is that ‘You are doing to the West what we want done, but we can’t do it.’ This is the hidden message that the West is not privy to. Unless extreme pressure is applied on Muslims all over the world to come up with counter-fatwas and pronounce these men as pariahs, very little will happen in fighting terrorism.”

“The battleground in the Arab world today is not in Palestine or Lebanon, but in the classrooms and newsrooms,” Mr. Fandy concluded. That’s where “the software programmers” reside who create symbolic images and language glorifying suicide bombers and make their depraved acts look legitimate. Only other Arab-Muslim programmers can defeat them.

Occasionally an honest voice rises, giving you a glimmer of hope that others will stand up. The MEMRI translation Web site (memri.org) just posted a poem called “When,” from a Saudi author, Wajeha al-Huwaider, that was posted on Arab reform sites like www.aafaq.org.

When you cannot find a single garden in your city, but there is a mosque on every corner — you know that you are in an Arab country.

When you see people living in the past with all the trappings of modernity — do not be surprised, you are in an Arab country.

When religion has control over science — you can be sure that you are in an Arab country.

When clerics are referred to as “scholars” — don’t be astonished, you are in an Arab country.

When you see the ruler transformed into a demigod who never dies or relinquishes his power, and nobody is permitted to criticize — do not be too upset, you are in an Arab country.

When you find that the large majority of people oppose freedom and find joy in slavery — do not be too distressed, you are in an Arab country.

When you hear the clerics saying that democracy is heresy, but seizing every opportunity provided by democracy to grab high positions — do not be surprised, you are in an Arab country. ...

When you discover that a woman is worth half of what a man is worth, or less — do not be surprised, you are in an Arab country. ...

When land is more important than human beings — you are in an Arab country. ...

When fear constantly lives in the eyes of the people — you can be certain you are in an Arab country.”

Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

~~ Hybrid Cars Newsletter: Issue No. 0029 ~~~
Moderator: Bradley Berman [brad@hybridcars.com]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

IN THIS ISSUE:

Hybrid Electrocution: Responding to the Chevy Volt Concept
The car that created the biggest buzz at this year's Detroit Auto Show was the Chevy Volt, a series hybrid concept from General Motors. Some say the concept will jolt the industry; others say it’s short-circuited. I spoke with GM’s Bob Lutz to get his take.

I’m a Hybrid, You’re Not
Three short years ago, just three vehicles comprised the hybrid market. At that time, the term “hybrid car” could be described without much trouble. The quadrupling of the hybrid market—11 vehicles are sold today; 10 more are set for release this year—has brought, unfortunately, a similarly savage market in the area of hybrid lexicon.

Plug-in Hybrids and the Battery Question
In a contemporary high-tech version of Waiting for Godot, carmakers are hoping that lithium ion batteries will arrive to one day to save the day. Dr. Menahem Anderman, a world expert on auto batteries, thinks the wait might be longer than most expect. (HybridCars.com visitors don’t agree.)

Lawmakers Get Hybrid Fever
Bush’s new fuel proposals follow a flurry of bills from Capitol Hill and California aiming to reduce gas consumption, oil dependence, and the emission of greenhouse gases from automobiles. “The amount of activity is overwhelming,” said Therese Langer, transportation program director for the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy.

Nissan Altima Hybrid: The Eight-State Hybrid
If you’ve been intrigued by the fuel savings and advanced technology of a hybrid, but find the Toyota Prius’s shape unappealing or a lack of styling in other hybrid offerings, then the Nissan Altima Hybrid might be the hybrid that puts you behind the wheel of a gas-electric vehicle. If you live in the right state, that is.

Hybrids on Detroit Roads
Vehicles that Detroit auto executives see on their morning commutes and in their neighbors’ driveways influence their perceptions of what is popular and what is not. Six years after the launch of hybrids in the United States, auto executives in Michigan still have almost no exposure to hybrids.

Saturn Vue Green Line: Coming and Going
Six months after the launch of the Saturn Vue Green Line, General Motors will halt production of the vehicle. What’s up with that?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Greetings, Hybrid Car Enthusiasts,
In the past two months, the hybrid world has gone the way of Salvador Dali. General Motors has unveiled a plug-in hybrid, but they say it isn’t a hybrid. President Bush, U.S. Senator Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, and California’s Republican Governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, all proposed plans to address our energy problems – yet none is likely to become law. Nissan introduced its first hybrid, but you can’t buy it in most states. And GM has temporarily halted production of its first hybrid, which was introduced just six months ago. Are we coming or going? In this issue of our newsletter, we try to understand what’s real and what’s phantasmagoria.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

HYBRID ELECTROCUTION: RESPONDING TO THE CHEVY VOLT CONCEPT
http://www.hybridcars.com/concept-hybrids/chevy-volt-concept.html
The big hybrid buzz from this year's Detroit Auto Show was the Chevy Volt, a series hybrid concept from General Motors. The Volt concept promises all-electric, gas-free driving for 40 miles, extended driving range up to 600 mile, and use of a so-called "eflex" system to allow a full range of fuel sources, including gasoline, hydrogen, and biofuels. The Volt would put much greater emphasis on the electric part of the gas-electric combination than today's hybrid offerings.

The Chevy Volt concept announcement, like GM's recent announcement about producing a plug-in hybrid version of the Saturn Vue Green Line, is earning praise from environmentalists and advocates of electric cars and plug-in hybrids. But some, such as Walter McManus of the University of Michigan, see subterfuge. “GM has come up with another future magical technology that isn't quite ready yet. They will tell you they are doing everything they can to improve the internal combustion engine. I don't buy it."

I ran into Bob Lutz, GM’s product guru, and asked him about the key questions regarding the Volt.

Availability of next-generation batteries: “I think we can get the batteries relatively soon that will demonstrate the proof of concept to where we can put people in the car and demonstrate it to the press and make it do all the things we say it's going to do.”

Likelihood of delivering the Volt: "You can't be sure when you are dealing with advanced technology. Let me put it this way, we would not be doing this, if we weren't confident that it could be done."

Willingness to sell Chevy Volt at a loss: "We haven't thoroughly worked out the economics yet. It is possible initially as we start production, we may not be able to sell the vehicle for full cost recovery…We're probably willing to subsidize the vehicle to the same degree that Toyota subsidized the early hybrid production.”

Skeptics out there probably took note of these phrases: (GM) thinks, (GM) can’t be sure, and (GM) hasn’t worked it out.

I also spoke with Dan Neil, the Pulitzer-Prize winning auto journalist from the Los Angeles Times, to try to get clarity. He was positively giddy about the Volt. When I presented my doubts about GM delivering the Volt anytime soon, he said, “The Volt may be the ultimate electric car c*ck tease.” He said he didn’t think this was the case, and added, “but if GM doesn’t come through on its promise, I will spit on its grave.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I’M A HYBRID, YOU’RE NOT
http://www.hybridcars.com/carmakers/hybrid-not-a-hybrid.html
When GM made the Volt announcement, GM executives assured the media throng that the Volt is not a hybrid, but rather an “electric car with a gas engine range extender.” Score zero for the spin doctors. The press consistently referred to the Volt as a “plug-in series hybrid,” or just—ah, simplicity—a “hybrid.”

Three short years ago, just three vehicles comprised the hybrid market. At that time, the term “hybrid car” could be described without much trouble: a vehicle that uses gas and electricity to get exceptional mileage. The quadrupling of the hybrid market—11 vehicles are sold today; 10 more are set for release this year—has brought, unfortunately, a similarly savage market in the area of hybrid lexicon. I’m a hybrid; you’re not a hybrid. Wouldn’t you like to be a hybrid too?

Consider: Toyota hybrid drivers call their Priuses “full hybrids” and wag their fingers at Honda’s offerings as “mild.” Honda insists that its latest generation Civic Hybrid is actually full, and scoff at the Saturn Vue Green Line as the only mild hybrid. The Union of Concerned Scientists essentially Plutoed Saturn out of the hybrid solar system, dismissing it with the term “hollow hybrid.” Environmentalists decry the high-performance Lexus hybrids and the Honda Accord Hybrid as “muscle hybrids.” And later this year, the most muscular of hybrids, the gas-electric versions of the Chevy Tahoe and GMC Yukon, will introduce the world to GM’s “two-mode” hybrid system. The Tahoe/Yukon boasts the worst gas mileage of any hybrid – an estimated 18 mpg. One can only imagine how flattering the comments will be from other hybrid manufacturers.

Confused yet? Just wait until the launch in two or three years of the Citroen 4, which will combine power from a diesel engine and electric batteries. Or how about when Saab’s E85 biofuel hybrid hits the streets? Or when the Honda’s FCX, a hybrid hydrogen fuel cell lithium battery vehicle, becomes available?

Just remember that these spin skirmishes is just a prelude for the big brawl to come, as automakers try every possible combination of engine, motor, battery, and fuel—and other hybridizations to come—with the goal of making extinct the car that has a petroleum-only internal combustion engine. At that point, all cars will be hybrids, and – if we’re lucky – we’ll know them by one name: cars.

***
Do you think a future in which every car is a hybrid is too far-fetched? Jim Press, president of Toyota Motor North America, doesn’t think so. In a recent story about Toyota in the New York Times Magazine, Press asked, "Is fuel going to be cheaper or more expensive? Is the air going to become cleaner or more polluted? What's the right thing to do to sustain the ability [of Toyota] to sell more cars and trucks?" For Press, the answers all point to hybrids. Press believes that every automobile in the United States will eventually be a hybrid "at some point in the not-too-distant future."
http://www.hybridcars.com/carmakers/toyota.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

PLUG-IN HYBRIDS AND THE BATTERY QUESTION
http://www.hybridcars.com/plug-in-hybrids/battery-expert-doubt-plugin.html
In the quest for a solution to the growing global transportation energy needs, plug-in hybrids have recently taken center stage. Plug-in hybrids, unlike the gas-electric hybrids currently on the market, can travel for extended ranges without using any gasoline. Yet, the emergence of plug-in hybrids depends on the viability of mass-manufactured lithium ion battery technologies. That technology may not be available for a decade or more, according to Dr. Menahem Anderman, a leading expert on advanced automobile batteries.

Speaking at the Society of Automotive Engineers 2007 Hybrid Symposium in San Diego in February, Dr. Anderman said, “The reliability of lithium ion technology for automotive applications is not proven.” In a briefing to the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources in January, Dr. Anderman said the commercialization of plug-in hybrids with a gas-free range of 20 miles faces a long list of obstacles, including battery performance, longevity, reliability, and cost. “Pending significant improvements in battery technology, plug-in hybrids could possibly start making an impact in about 10 years,” he said.

Read the full story about Dr. Anderman’s assessment, and the reply comments by members of the HybridCars.com community:
http://www.hybridcars.com/plug-in-hybrids/battery-expert-doubt-plugin.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

LAWMAKERS GET HYBRID FEVER
http://www.hybridcars.com/legislation/lawmakers-hybrid-fever.html
In his most recent State of the Union address, President Bush proposed a sharp increase in production of alternative fuels and changes in automobile technology, including the use of more gas-electric hybrid cars. His proposal aims to cut gasoline usage in the United States by 20 percent within a decade. One day after delivering the State of the Union speech, Bush signed an executive order requiring federal agencies that operate fleets of at least 20 motor vehicles to reduce petroleum consumption by 2 percent annually through the end of fiscal year 2015. The executive order also requires fleets to use plug-in hybrid vehicles, when plug-ins "are commercially available at a cost reasonably comparable, on the basis of lifecycle cost, to non-plug-in hybrid vehicles."

Bush’s proposals follow a flurry of bills and proposals—from Capitol Hill and California—aiming to reduce gas consumption, oil dependence, and the emission of greenhouse gas from automobiles. “The amount of activity is overwhelming,” said Therese Langer, transportation program director for the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy. Here’s a quick sampling:

California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard
On Jan. 18, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed an executive order, known as the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, requiring fuel suppliers to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide emissions in vehicles by at least 10 percent by 2020. Lower carbon fuels might include ethanol, natural gas, biodiesel, and electricity. California Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata said, “Executive orders are not enforceable laws. Only legislatures can create those.”

DRIVE Act
The DRIVE Act (Dependence Reduction Through Innovation in Vehicles and Energy) in the U.S. Congress is an updated version of last year’s Vehicle and Fuel Choices for American Security Act. Among the steps outlined in the bill is a new vehicle technology requirement, which sets a target for manufacturers that 50 percent of their new vehicles be flexible fuel vehicles (FFV), alternative fueled vehicles, hybrids, plug-in hybrids, or fuel cell vehicles in 2012.

Higher Fuel Economy Standards
In perhaps the most dramatic ideological U-turn on fuel economy, Senator Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, astounded many on Capitol Hill when he introduced legislation that would require passenger cars sold in the U.S. to get an average of 40 miles per gallon within a decade—a 12.5 mpg increase from today's standards. Stevens supports oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and has been a dogged climate-change skeptic.

While these proposals are theory, there are a couple of very real updates on HOV lane access for hybrid drivers.

Arizona: On Feb. 9, the Arizona Department of Transportation and Democratic Gov. Janet Napolitano announced that three hybrid models are now permitted to use carpool lanes on freeways in Arizona. The decision clears the way for the estimated 9,000 Toyota Prius, Honda Insight and Honda Civic Hybrid vehicles in Arizona to use the carpool lanes, regardless of the number of passengers.

California: The Department of Motor Vehicles is no longer accepting applications from drivers who own a Toyota Prius, Honda Civic or Honda Insight for carpool stickers. State law allowed the DMV to issue 85,000 stickers, but the agency had 700 applications over that level and no longer wanted motorists to send in an application.

Virginia: Since the mid 1990s, the Virginia General Assembly has allowed clean fuel vehicles bearing clean fuel plates to use the HOV lanes without the required occupancy. Currently, the law is set to expire on July 1. The possible extension of the rule will be decided in the 2007 session of the General Assembly.

http://www.hybridcars.com/local-incentives/carpool-hov-lanes.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

NISSAN’S EIGHT-STATE HYBRID
http://www.hybridcars.com/compacts-sedans/nissan-altima-hybrid-overview.html
If you’ve been intrigued by the fuel savings and advanced technology of a hybrid, but find the Toyota Prius’s shape unappealing or a lack of styling in other hybrid offerings, then the Nissan Altima Hybrid might be the hybrid that puts you behind the wheel of a gas-electric vehicle.

Before we get too far, consider that Nissan is only selling the Altima hybrid in these states: California, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island and Vermont. Nissan was practically forced into the hybrid game in order to comply with stricter emissions standards in California and the other seven states which observe California rules. If it weren’t for their need to reduce their corporate emissions profile, Nissan might have dragged their heels even longer on hybrids. As it stands, it took the company five years between announcing the Altima hybrid in 2002 and actually bringing it to market in 2007.

Now that the Altima Hybrid has arrived, shoppers from outside the designated eight states are figuring out how to game the system. A visitor to HybridCars.com named “Netshopper,” posting to the discussion forum, wrote, “Don't see why I couldn't buy it in California, and then bring it to Arizona.” Justapos99 wrote, “I want one too, but I live in Maryland. Looks like I'll have to go to Jersey.”

See the forum page for the Altima:
http://www.hybridcars.com/forums/pic-info-t1166.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

DETROIT RANKS 53 OF 62 IN HYBRID MARKET
http://www.hybridcars.com/market-dashboard/jan07-overview.html
In the January issue of our hybrid market dashboard, we took a look at the makeup of cars registered in the Detroit area. The streets of Detroit should be a virtual showroom of automotive technology innovation: the area is home to the domestic auto industry and hosts events like the North American International Auto Show that showcase future vehicle designs. But as far as hybrids go, the Detroit area is no leader—car buyers there lag well behind most of the country. In the first 11 months of 2006, residents of metro Detroit bought just over 2,000 hybrids, roughly the same amount that sold in cities half Detroit’s size, such as Raleigh/Durham, N.C. In hybrids per capita, Detroit sits at the bottom of the list of major U.S. metropolitan areas, ranking 53rd out of 62 cities. Statewide, the picture is almost as bad: Michigan ranked 44th out of 50 states for hybrid sales per capita in the first eleven months of 2006.

Certainly one reason for Detroit’s low rates of hybrid adoption is the city’s loyalty to domestic auto brands. But even the domestic brand hybrids (hybrid versions of the Ford Escape, Mercury Mariner, and Saturn Vue) aren’t well-supported in Detroit. Among major metropolitan areas where the Ford Escape hybrid is most popular, Detroit isn’t even in the top 10.

Auto executives base their decision to launch a new vehicle on many factors, including market research collected from consumers across the country. But the vehicles they see on their morning commutes and in their neighbors’ driveways also influence their perceptions of what is popular and what is not. Six years after the launch of hybrids in the United States, auto executives in Michigan still have almost no exposure to hybrids. In contrast, leaders at Toyota and Honda see five times more hybrids on the roads of their home state, California. Until now, hybrids have been out-of sight, out-of-mind for many Big 3 executives. Sales in 2007 could begin to change their views.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

THE SATURN VUE GREEN LINE: COMING AND GOING
http://www.hybridcars.com/suvs-minivans/saturn-vue-green-line.html
Six months after the launch of the Saturn Vue Green Line, General Motors will halt production of the vehicle. In what may be the most bizarre product introduction in auto industry history, GM trumpeted the release of the Vue Green Line last fall—as a sign of the company’s commitment to hybrids and the environment—but will phase out production starting in March, and then start back again in September, replacing the 2007 Vue Green Line with the redesigned 2008 version. This start-stop will leave a six-month gap during which dealers will run out of the Saturn Vue Green Line.

General Motors’ intention to release a hybrid version of the Saturn Vue dates back to the Detroit Auto Show in 2003. At that time, Tom Stephens, GM’s vice president of powertrain, said, “GM will introduce a Saturn Vue with an advance hybrid system in the latter half of the 2005 calendar year.” Stephens indicated that “drivers can expect fuel economy gains of up to 50 percent” with the hybrid Vue. At the 2003 Detroit Show, Rick Wagoner, CEO of General Motors, also said the company “would be capable of providing more than one million hybrid vehicles per year” by 2007. The removal of the Vue Green Line, which provides a 20 percent fuel economy gain over the conventional version, will reduce GM’s expected 2007 annual hybrid sales by approximately 4,000 units—to a number unlikely to exceed six figures for the year.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

WRAP-UP
It looks like we’ve come back full circle to a Detroit auto show with big promises for “game-changing” technology. Whenever you hear that terms—game-changer—put your BS antennae up. And that holds true whether it comes from a carmaker or a lawmaker. The changes that have proven effective in the past have been slow and steady—legislators increasing fuel economy standards in small steps and/or automakers introducing new products and technology for single percentage point improvements in efficiency. Most efficiently, however, consumers like you push the hybrid market ahead one purchase at a time.

Happy Driving,
Bradley Berman
brad@hybridcars.com

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Hybrid Cars Newsletter is a free email-based newsletter discussing the latest news and information in the world of hybrid gas-electric vehicles.

Subscribe and unsubscribe at http://www.hybridcars.com/newsletter.html
Feel free to forward this email in its entirety to anyone you think might be intereste

From www.danielpipes.org | Original article available at: www.danielpipes.org/article/4323

Europe's Stark Options
by Daniel Pipes
National Interest
March-April 2007

[Title and text differ from that published, "Eurabian Nights" can be read at http://www.nationalinterest.org/PrinterFriendly.aspx?id=13710]

Europe's long-term relations with its burgeoning Muslim minority, the continent's most critical issue, will follow one of three paths: harmonious integration, the expulsion of Muslims, or an Islamic takeover. Which of these scenarios will most likely play out?

Europe's future has vast importance not just for its residents. During a half-millennium, 1450-1950, this 7 percent of the world's landmass drove world history; its creativity and vigor invented modernity. The region may have already lost that critical position sixty years ago, but it remains vitally important in economic, political, and intellectual terms. Which direction it goes in, therefore, has huge implications for the rest of humanity, and especially for its daughter countries, such as the United States, which historically have looked to Europe as a source of ideas, people, and goods.

Here is an assessment about the likelihood of each scenario.

I. Muslims Rule

The late Oriana Fallaci observed that, with the passage of time, "Europe becomes more and more a province of Islam, a colony of Islam." The historian Bat Ye'or has dubbed this colony "Eurabia." Walter Laqueur predicts in his forthcoming Last Days of Europe that Europe as we know it is bound to change. Mark Steyn, in America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It, goes further and argues that much of the Western world "will not survive the twenty-first century, and much of it will effectively disappear within our lifetimes, including many if not most European countries." Three factors – faith, demography, and a sense of heritage – argue for Europe being Islamized.

Faith: An extreme secularism predominates in Europe, especially among its elites, to the point that believing Christians (such as George W. Bush) are seen as mentally unbalanced and unfit for public office. In 2005, Rocco Buttiliglione, a distinguished Italian politician and Catholic believer, was denied a position as Italy's European Union commissioner because of his views on such issues as homosexuality. Entrenched secularism also means empty churches: in London, researchers estimate, more Muslims attend mosques on Friday than do Christians churches on Sunday, although the city is home to roughly 7 times more born-Christians than born-Muslims. As Christianity fades, Islam beckons; Prince Charles exemplifies the fascination of many Europeans with Islam. Many conversions could be in Europe's future, for as the saying is ascribed to G.K. Chesterton, "When men stop believing in God they don't believe in nothing; they believe in anything."

Europe's secularism shapes its discourse in ways quite unfamiliar to Americans. Hugh Fitzgerald, formerly vice president of JihadWatch.org, illustrates one dimension of this difference:

The most memorable utterances of American presidents have almost always included recognizable Biblical phrases. … This source of rhetorical strength was on display this past February [2003] when the Columbia shuttle blew up. Had it not been an American but a French shuttle that had blown up, and were Jacques Chirac having to give such a speech, he might well have used the fact that there were seven astronauts, and evoked an image of the Pleiades first named in pagan antiquity. The American President, at a solemn national ceremony that began and ended with Biblical Hebrew, did things differently. He took his text from Isaiah 40:26, which led to a seamless transition from mingled wonder and awe at the heavenly hosts brought forth by the Creator, to consolation for the earthly loss of the crew.

The buoyant faith of Muslims, with its attendant jihadi sensibility and Islamic supremacism, could not differ more from that of lapsed European Christians. This contrast leads many Muslims to see Europe as a continent ripe for conversion and domination. Outrageous supremacist claims result, such as the statement of Omar Bakri Mohammed, "I want Britain to become an Islamic state. I want to see the flag of Islam raised in 10 Downing Street." Or the prediction of a Belgium-based imam: "Soon we will take power in this country. Those who criticize us now, will regret it. They will have to serve us. Prepare, for the hour is near."[1]

Population: Demographic collapse also points to Europe being Islamized. The total fertility rate in Europe today averages about 1.4 per woman, whereas sustaining one's population requires just over two children per couple, or 2.1 children per woman. The existing rate is just two-thirds of what it needs to be; one-third of the requisite population is simply not being born.

To avoid a severe diminution of population, with all the woes that implies – and specifically, an absence of workers to fund generous pension plans – Europe needs immigrants – lots of them. That imported third of the population tends to be Muslim, in part because Muslims are close by – it's only thirteen kilometers from Morocco to Spain, only a couple of hundred to Italy from Albania or Libya; in part because colonial ties continue to bind South Asia to Britain or the Maghrib to France; and in part because of the violence, tyranny, and poverty so prevalent in the Muslim world today, which prompts wave after wave of emigration.

Likewise, the high fertility of Muslims complements the paucity of children among indigenous Christians. Although the Muslim fertility rate is falling, it remains significantly higher than that of Europe's indigenous population. No doubt, the high birth rates have something to do with the premodern circumstances in which many Muslim women of Europe find themselves. In Brussels, "Muhammad" has for some years been the most popular name given to infant boys, while Amsterdam and Rotterdam are on track to be, by about 2015, the first major European cities with majority Muslim populations. The French analyst Michel Gurfinkiel estimates an ethnic street war in France would find the children of indigènes and of immigrants in a roughly one-to-one ratio. Current predictions see a Muslim majority in Russia's army by 2015 and in the country as a whole by about 2050.

Sense of heritage: What often is depicted as Europe's political correctness reflects what I believe is a deeper phenomenon, namely, the alienation of many Europeans from their civilization, a sense that their historic culture is not worth fighting for or even saving. It's striking to note differences within Europe in this regard. Perhaps the country least prone to this alienation is France, where traditional nationalism still holds sway and the French take pride in their identity. Britain is the most alienated country, as symbolized by the plaintive government program, "ICONS - A Portrait of England," that lamely hopes to rekindle patriotism by connecting Britons to their "national treasures," such as Winnie-the-Pooh and the miniskirt.

This diffidence has had direct and adverse implications for Muslim immigrants, as Aatish Taseer explained in Prospect magazine.

Britishness is the most nominal aspect of identity to many young British Pakistanis. … If you denigrate your own culture you face the risk of your newer arrivals looking for one elsewhere. So far afield in this case, that for many second-generation British Pakistanis, the desert culture of the Arabs held more appeal than either British or subcontinental culture. Three times removed from a durable sense of identity, the energised extra-national worldview of radical Islam became one available identity for second-generation Pakistanis.

Immigrant Muslims widely disdain Western civilization, and especially its sexuality (pornography, divorce, homosexuality). Nowhere in Europe are Muslims being assimilated, rarely does intermarriage take place. Here is one colorful example, from Canada: The mother of the notorious Khadr brood, known as the country's first family of terrorism, returned to Canada from Afghanistan and Pakistan in April 2004 with one of her sons. Despite her seeking refuge in Canada, she publicly insisted just a month earlier that Al-Qaeda-sponsored training camps were the best place for her children. "Would you like me to raise my child in Canada to be, by the time he's 12 or 13 years old, to be on drugs or having some homosexual relationship? Is it better?"

(Ironically, in centuries past, as the historian Norman Daniel has documented, Christian Europeans looked down at Muslims with their multiple wives and harems as overly-sexualized, and therefore felt morally superior.)

To sum up: this first argument holds that Europe will be Islamized, quietly submitting to the dhimmi status or converting to Islam, because the yin of Europe and yang of Muslims fit so well: low and high religiosity, low and high fertility, low and high cultural confidence.[2] Europe is an open door through which Muslims are walking.

II. Muslims Rejected

Or will the door be shut in their face? American columnist Ralph Peters dismisses the first scenario: "Far from enjoying the prospect of taking over Europe by having babies, Europe's Muslims are living on borrowed time. … predictions of a Muslim takeover of Europe … ignore history and Europe's ineradicable viciousness." Instead, depicting Europe as the place "that perfected genocide and ethnic cleansing," he predicts its Muslims "will be lucky just to be deported," and not killed. Claire Berlinski, in Menace in Europe: Why the Continent's Crisis Is America's, Too, implicitly agrees, pointing to the "ancient conflicts and patterns … now shambling out of the mists of European history" which could well trigger violence.

This scenario has indigenous Europeans – who do still constitute 95 percent of the continent's population – waking up one day and asserting themselves. "Basta!" they will say, and reclaim their historic order. This is not so remote; a chafing among Europeans, less among elites than the masses, loudly protests changes already underway. Illustrations of that resentment include the anti-hijab legislation in France, irritation over the restrictions of national flags and Christian symbols, and the insistence on serving wine at state dinners. A movement spontaneously developed in several French cities in early 2006 to serve pork soup to the poor, thus intentionally excluding Muslims.

These are minor issues, to be sure, but insurgent anti-immigrant parties have already emerged in many countries and are beginning to demand not just effective control of borders but the expulsion of illegal immigrants. A nativist movement throughout Europe is forming largely unnoticed beneath our eyes. However meager its record so far, it has huge potential. Parties opposed to immigration and Islam generally have neo-fascist backgrounds but are growing more respectable over time, shedding their antisemitic origins and their dubious economic theories, focusing instead on the questions of faith, demography, and identity, and learning about Islam and Muslims. The British National Party and Belgium's Vlaamse Belang offer two examples of such a move toward respectability, which may one day be followed by electability. The presidential race in France in 2002 came down to a contest between Jacques Chirac and the neo-fascist Jean-Marie Le Pen.

Other parties have already tasted power. Jörg Haider and the Freiheits Partei Österreich were briefly in office. The Lega Nord in Italy was for years part of the ruling coalition. They will likely grow stronger because their anti-Islamist and often anti-Islamic messages resonate, and mainstream parties will partially adopt their messages. (Denmark's Conservative Party offers a model; after 72 years in the wilderness, it returned to power in 2001 due basically to anger concerning immigration.) These parties will likely benefit when immigration to Europe surges uncontrollably to ever-higher levels, including perhaps a mass exodus from Africa, as many indications suggest will happen.

Once in power, nationalist parties will reject multiculturalism and try to re-establish traditional values and mores. One can only speculate about their means and about the Muslim reaction. Peters dwells on the fascistic and violent aspects of some groups and expects an anti-Muslim backlash to take ominous forms. He even sketches a scenario in which "U.S. Navy ships are at anchor and U.S. Marines have gone ashore at Brest, Bremerhaven or Bari to guarantee the safe evacuation of Europe's Muslims."

For years, Muslims have worried about just such incarceration and brutalization, followed by expulsion or even massacres. Already in the late 1980s, the late Kalim Siddiqui, director of London's Muslim Institute, raised the specter of "Hitler-style gas chambers for Muslims." Shabbir Akhtar warned in his 1989 book, Be Careful With Muhammad that "the next time there are gas chambers in Europe, there is no doubt concerning who'll be inside them," meaning Muslims. A character in Hanif Kureishi's 1991 novel, The Buddha of Suburbia, prepares the guerilla war that he expects will follow after "the whites finally turned on the blacks and Asians and tried to force us into gas chambers."

But it is more likely that European efforts at reclamation will be initiated peaceably and legally, with Muslims – in keeping with recent patterns of intimidation and terrorism – being the ones to initiate violence. Multiple polls confirm that about 5 percent of British Muslims endorse the 7/7 bombings, suggesting a general readiness to resort to force.

However it happens, a European reassertion cannot be assumed to take place cooperatively.

III. Muslims Integrated

In the happiest scenario, autochthonous Europeans and Muslim immigrants find a modus vivendi and live together harmoniously. Perhaps the classic statement of this optimistic expectation was a 1991 study, La France, une chance pour l'Islam ("France, an Opportunity for Islam") by Jeanne-Hélène and Pierre Patrick Kaltenbach. "For the first time in history," they wrote, "Islam is offered the chance to waken in a democratic, rich, laic, and peaceable country." That hopefulness lives on. An Economist leader from mid-2006 asserts that "for the moment at least, the prospect of Eurabia looks like scaremongering." Also at that time, Jocelyne Cesari, associate professor of Islamic studies at the Harvard Divinity School, claimed a balance exists: just as "Islam is changing Europe," she said, "Europe is changing Islam." She finds that "Muslims in Europe do not want to change the nature of European states" and expects them to adapt themselves into the European context.

Such optimism, unfortunately, has little foundation. Europeans could yet rediscover their Christian faith, have more babies, and cherish their own heritage. They could encourage non-Muslim immigration or acculturate the Muslims already among them. But such changes are not now underway, nor are their prospects good. Instead, Muslims are cultivating grievances and ambitions at odds with their indigenous neighbors. Worryingly, each generation appears more alienated than its predecessor. Canadian novelist Hugh MacLennan dubbed his country's English-French split the "Two Solitudes"; one sees something similar, but far more pronounced, developing in Europe. Those polls of British Muslims for example, find that a majority of them perceive a conflict between their British and Muslim identities and want Islamic law instituted.

The possibility of Muslims accepting the confines of historic Europe and smoothly integrating within it can virtually be dismissed from consideration. Even Bassam Tibi, professor at the University of Göttingen, who has often warned that "Either Islam gets Europeanized, or Europe gets Islamized," has personally given up on the continent. Recently, he announced that he is leaving Germany after 44 years' residence there, to move to Cornell University in the United States.

Conclusion

As the American columnist Dennis Prager sums them up, "It is difficult to imagine any other future scenario for Western Europe than its becoming Islamicized or having a civil war." Indeed, these two deeply unattractive alternative paths appear to define Europe's choices, with powerful forces pull in the contrary directions of Muslims taking over or Muslims rejected, Europe an extension of North Africa or in a state of quasi-civil war.

Which will it be? The decisive events that will resolve this question have yet to take place, so one cannot yet make the call. Decision-time is fast approaching, however. Within the next decade or so, today's flux will end, the Europe-Islam equation will harden, and the continent's future course should become apparent.

Correctly anticipating that course is the more difficult for being historically unprecedented. No large territory has ever shifted from one civilization to another by virtue of a collapsed population, faith, and identity; nor has a people risen on so grand a scale to reclaim its patrimony. The novelty and magnitude of Europe's predicament make it difficult to understand, tempting to overlook, and nearly impossible to predict. Europe marches us all into terra incognita.

Mr. Pipes (www.DanielPipes.org) is director of the Middle East Forum and visiting professor at Pepperdine University. This article is adapted from a talk for a Woodrow Wilson Center conference on "Euro-Islam: The Dynamics of Effective Integration."

[1] De Morgen, Oct. 5, 1994. Cited in Koenraad Elst, "The Rushdie Rules", Middle East Quarterly, June 1998.
[2] It's striking to note that in these three way, Europe and the United States were much more similar 25 years ago than today. This suggests that their bifurcation results less from historical patterns going back centuries and more from developments in the 1960s. However deeply that decade affected the United States, it had a far deeper impact on Europe.

From www.danielpipes.org | Original article available at: www.danielpipes.org/article/4323

South Africa

The long journey of a young democracy
Mar 1st 2007 | JOHANNESBURG
From The Economist print edition

Africa's richest country, not yet free of demons, is facing a year of decision

Corbis

Get article background

THE township of Soweto, Johannesburg's largest, was once a byword for violence and black deprivation. Look at it now. In the Diepkloof neighbourhood, shiny new cars are parked next to elegant houses protected by security systems. Shopping malls are planned, banks have opened and tourists are coming. New bars and restaurants stay open all night, drawing in the rich blacks who now live, during the week, in quiet suburbs of Johannesburg that used to be all-white.

Even the poorest corners of South Africa now look better. Roads are being paved. People who were left in the dark and cold by the apartheid regime, which ended in 1994, now have lights, a roof over their heads and access to fresh water. Flush toilets are replacing buckets. Black South Africans are pushing up property prices and propelling the economy in general; black economic empowerment, brought in to redress the injustices of apartheid, has spurred the creation of a small but wealthy black business elite.

The economy is now growing steadily, at almost 5% last year; inflation has been tamed; investment is looking up; trade has been liberalised; and public debt has been cut by half since 1999. In his budget last week Trevor Manuel, the finance minister, announced a surplus for the first time in history. Another is expected in the coming year. A whopping 2 trillion rand ($285 billion) will be spent in the next three years, mainly on social services and infrastructure, and a social security system will be set up, all being well, by 2010.

South Africa now has an efficient constitutional court, a free press and active watchdogs—from a vocal (if small) political opposition to a crowd of think-tanks, campaigning groups and civic organisations. Flushed with virtue, the country that used to be an international pariah has become a mediator of conflicts in such cockpits as Burundi and Congo. President Thabo Mbeki was a driving force behind the creation of the African Union and the New Partnership for Africa's Development, which (if only it were brave enough to challenge Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe) is meant to foster an African renaissance.

The country's influence extends beyond politics. Large South African companies, once corralled by international sanctions, have turned into proper multinationals. South Africa, which has 6% of sub-Saharan Africa's people but accounts for more than a third of its GDP, has a diversified economy and first-world financial services. Nigeria's economy, the next-largest in sub-Saharan Africa, is three times smaller.

The reaction to Mr Mbeki's state-of-the-nation address last month, however, was not as upbeat as all that. This is a young, vulnerable democracy, and democratic ways still need to grow much deeper roots. The next general election is in 2009, but much of the country's future will be decided this year: the ruling African National Congress (ANC) will thrash out policies in June and almost certainly choose its next leader in December.

A good economic performance has failed to make much difference to the lives of millions of South Africans. Although half a million jobs are being created every year, unemployment remains stubbornly high at 25%—or, on a broader definition, close to 40%. Almost half the population are poor; around a quarter get government handouts. The Congress of South African Trade Unions (Cosatu) and the Communist Party, the ANC's allies, argue that the government's economic policy has been far too business-friendly.

The government has also come under fire both at home and abroad for its catastrophic handling of HIV/AIDS. The virus now infects 5.5m people, affects many millions more and kills close to 1,000 people every day. Failure to see disaster coming in the mid-1990s was later compounded by Mr Mbeki's blinkered views of the disease—and he still cannot bring himself to say that HIV causes AIDS. The health minister, Manto Tshabalala-Msimang—a fan of beetroot, garlic and traditional medicine—was temporarily replaced this week as a strange lung infection confined her once again to hospital. She too has been attacked for giving muddled advice about anti-retroviral drugs.

Under much pressure, the government has now made anti-retrovirals available to around 250,000 people. Although campaigners argue that this roll-out is far too slow, two people—the dynamic deputy president, Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka, and the straight-talking deputy health minister, Nozizwe Madlala-Routledge, are breathing new life into the official response. Activists and the government talk to each other these days, though new AIDS infections show little sign of abating.

Crime also remains a serious worry. In Soweto recently Thato Radebe, a 14-year-old schoolgirl, was raped, stabbed and stoned to death near her home. Her body was found in the veld with condoms, bottles and sticks around it; the whole community was shocked. Ever more government money is being thrown at crimefighting, to little effect. Though official numbers, now almost a year old, show a slow improvement in most crime rates, violent crime remains among the worst in the world, with more than 50 people killed every day and a serious assault every two minutes. Armed robberies have spiked dramatically over the past year.

The government's generally respectable policies, backed by a plump budget, are often defeated by weaknesses in the civil service. It inherited a fragmented administration whose main purpose was to deliver superior public services to the white minority, while keeping other South Africans under the apartheid boot. The democratic government tried to create a unified, efficient bureaucracy that would reflect the new political dispensation. In the process, many experienced white civil servants left or were pushed out.

AP

Shrewd, but blinkered, Mbeki

This has changed the face of the administration, but severely hurt its ability to deliver at every level. Ministries, hospitals and schools are struggling to hire enough skilled people; many prefer the better salaries and working conditions of the private sector, or are going abroad. Municipalities, half of which are in serious trouble, are finding it harder to deliver basic services, let alone to expand provision of water, sanitation and electricity.

Angry demonstrations last year made it clear that the poor are frustrated. The left wants a change of economic direction and more government intervention, and to some extent this is occurring. A plan to accelerate economic growth and share wealth was announced last year. The government and various state-owned enterprises have embarked on a programme to spruce up infrastructure, not least in time for the football World Cup in 2010 for which South Africa, to its delight, is host nation. The final will be played in Soccer City on the outskirts of Soweto, where the country's biggest stadium is being rebuilt and roofed to take the crowds.

The real ticket out of poverty, however, is education. One of the worst legacies of apartheid has been inferior schooling for South Africa's black majority. Plenty of government money has been pumped in, but with slim results. Although enrolment is up, the schools fall far short of what is needed. One international survey ranked South Africa last of 45 countries in science scores, behind Ghana and Botswana.

Power tends to corrupt
The government's frustration is evident in the way it handles criticism. Critics are often denounced as racists or “coconuts”—black on the outside but white on the inside. People who “whinge” about crime are told that they should leave the country; those who do leave are called traitors. Debate feels more stifled than a decade ago.

The increasing centralisation of power is also disturbing. The president—who leads both the country and the ANC—now chooses not only his own ministers, but also provincial premiers and mayors of large cities where the ANC has won a majority of the votes. That used to be the job of the local party. Parliament needs to put on some muscle to become a better check on the executive. As it is, state institutions risk becoming extensions of the ruling party. Political pressures on the South African Broadcasting Corporation are undermining its independence.

Fighting within the ANC may also be weakening institutions. The National Intelligence Agency has been racked by a scandal involving unauthorised surveillance and allegedly fake e-mails suggesting a political conspiracy to prevent Jacob Zuma, the former deputy president, from getting the top job. The agency's head has lost his job but is fighting back; the whole mess smells of political dirty tricks.

Reports of conflicts of interest or outright corruption surface regularly. This shows that the country's watchdogs are alive and barking, but also that public office is too often seen as a way to get rich. Some politicians and government officials move into business with worrying speed. Black economic empowerment (BEE), which, among other things, encourages companies to hive off a slice of equity to blacks, has been accused of mainly helping a lucky, well-connected few, rather than nurturing entrepreneurs and creating jobs. Revised rules, which should spread the benefits more broadly through procurement, employment and social programmes, are at least some improvement on how things have been done in the past.

Mr Mbeki deplores what he sees as the relentless pursuit of personal enrichment. The ANC is making new rules to clarify the fuzzy line between party and government jobs on the one hand and business interests on the other. The sacking in 2005 of Mr Zuma when his financial adviser, Schabir Shaik, was convicted of fraud and corruption was generally applauded. Yet many South Africans feel that the fight against wrongdoing is not even-handed.

The main opposition party, the Democratic Alliance (DA), has largely failed to capitalise on these shortcomings. It has built its base by appealing to the white and Coloured minorities. So far, only one-tenth of its electorate is black. Until it reaches black voters, who make up 80% of South Africa's 47m people, the DA—which is to choose a new leader this year—has no prospect of coming to power.

The main opposition comes from the left-wing ranks of the ruling alliance itself. (No doubt the ANC's leaders think with horror of Zimbabwe or Zambia, where the opposition to liberation movements ultimately emerged from trade-union ranks.) The Communist Party has been making noises about running its own election campaigns. The ANC's trade-union allies have criticised the government's handling of Zimbabwe, HIV/AIDS and BEE. Both complain that they have been sidelined by Mr Mbeki's centralising rule. But for all their posturing, and despite lively rumours, neither group is likely to part company with the ANC for some time yet.

Unless the lot of the poor improves faster, pressure from the left will become ever harder to resist. Calls for a more pro-poor, pro-labour stance strike a strong chord with the party's rank and file. The battle should come to a head in June, when the ANC debates a policy platform ahead of the party elections in December. Since the party dominates South African politics—with 70% of the vote at the last general election—its next boss is more or less guaranteed to become president in 2009.

The coming leader
Disagreements over economic policy and leadership style have now crystallised around the political succession—and Mr Zuma, who remains the ANC's number two. He was cleared of rape last year, and charges of financial shenanigans were kicked out of court in September. Mr Zuma's most ardent supporters, mainly within the left-leaning ranks of the ruling alliance, maintain that these trials were political devices to prevent him from becoming South Africa's next president.

Mr Zuma's chances rest on three things: a court case, support within the ANC, and the alternatives. The National Prosecuting Authority has not ruled out reviving the corruption charges. This would kill his chances only if he is found guilty; otherwise, perceptions of victimisation would probably boost his popularity.

His standing within the party is hard to gauge. ANC leaders in KwaZulu Natal, his home province, have said he is their presidential candidate. So has the ANC Youth League. Elsewhere, it is a toss-up. Party branches—and, after them, the party's regional and provincial outfits—nominate candidates for the top ANC jobs, including the president, and also choose delegates to the party conference that elects them. As many of these branches are revived for the campaign, trench warfare is likely to erupt over the succession.

The support of the party bigwigs is also vital. Traditionally only one candidate is left by the time the presidential vote takes place at the party conference. Potential candidates are not even supposed to say they are up for the job. Recent allegations that Tokyo Sexwale, a prominent businessman and a former provincial premier, has been canvassing for support were slapped down by party leaders. Even Mr Zuma, known for his loud singing, has been rather quiet lately.

He is charismatic, charming, and can stir up a crowd—especially a Zulu crowd—like no one else. Yet many people, both inside and outside the ANC, are aghast at the thought that he might be president. The cloud of suspicion related to the fraud and corruption charges has not yet faded, and he has shown serious lapses of judgment (including believing that a quick shower could protect him from HIV infection). A pragmatist to the core—or perhaps shameless populist would be closer to it—Mr Zuma seems much cleverer at saying whatever people want to hear than at formulating a policy and sticking to it. This makes him a skilled negotiator and peacemaker, as he showed when he intervened in the early 1990s in KwaZulu Natal, then on the brink of civil war. But according to Raenette Taljaard of the Helen Suzman Foundation, a local think-tank, he would be “a malleable, pliable president”—and one who might be too inclined to endorse the interventionism the left is pleading for.

Other names are also mentioned. The party's secretary-general, Kgalema Motlanthe, is considered a potential compromise candidate, but his name has been linked—rightly or wrongly—to the trouble at the National Intelligence Agency. Cyril Ramaphosa, a former trade unionist turned businessman and a key negotiator in the democratic transition, could make a political comeback, but may not please the left. The deputy president, Ms Mlambo-Ngcuka, is mentioned; but she owes her political fortunes to Mr Mbeki, and probably does not have enough standing of her own within the party.

Lastly, not impossibly, the shrewd and technocratic Mr Mbeki might stay. The ANC leadership in the Eastern Cape has called for him to seek a third term as party leader. Mr Mbeki, who has to step down as president after two terms, may be tempted to remain in the party post, which has no time limit.

Nurturing the rainbow
Whoever he or she turns out to be, the next president will have to rebuild bridges not only within the party, but also within the country. The warm and generous feelings of Nelson Mandela's time have receded, and Mr Mbeki has failed to paint a vision to inspire South Africans of every creed and colour. Both the government and the opposition have played the race card when it suits them. Pieter Mulder, the leader of an opposition group called Freedom Front Plus, recently remarked: “We do not know each other and do not debate with each other.”

South Africa's democracy is young, and its institutions still need to be nurtured, protected and shaped. The space for debate needs to be broadened, and race relations handled with care. Racial fractures did not disappear with apartheid, and the followers of political parties can still largely be divided into black and white. Fewer Indians and Coloureds have been showing up to vote, indicating that many have not found a political home.

The astounding success of a recent song about Koos de la Rey, a famous Boer general during the war against the British, is raising many eyebrows. Some fear that the old-fashioned nationalism of the Afrikaners (whites of European descent) is raising its head again. But Tim du Plessis, the editor of an Afrikaans newspaper, argues that Afrikaners are merely migrating to a new space, between dead-end radicalism and ANC co-option. He points to a young, post-apartheid generation of Afrikaners reclaiming and reinventing their identity, unburdened by their parents' guilt.

In his candid speech last month, Mr Mbeki appealed to South Africans to help eradicate “all that is ugly and repulsive in human society”. He regretted that South Africa's ability to unite in pursuit of a “commonly defined national agenda” was still in question. But solving the problems of crime, AIDS and unemployment requires just such unity, as well as a fresh approach, and the government needs to get better at bringing everyone on board. It is with this daunting task in mind that the ANC must choose its next president.

Copyright © 2007 The Economist Newspaper and The Economist Group. All rights reserved.